SUMMARY
- So far, AI is boosting productivity and profits, not destroying jobs.
- Unit labor costs are moderating, supporting both earnings and lower inflation.
- Research finds no significant AI-driven harm to employment or wages yet.
While that may end up proving true — RiverFront’s value of ‘humility’ is never more relevant than when trying to predict the future — AI adoption has boosted economic output far more than it’s disrupted the jobs market thus far. The April employment report beat expectations, and US employment has increased by a net 304,000 jobs so far this year…well above last year’s 169,000 through April. Meanwhile, job openings held steady, and both layoffs and quits were little changed per the most recent JOLTS data.
Importantly for corporate profits and the stock market, output per hour worked — a proxy for productivity — is skyrocketing. In Q1, non-farm business productivity rose 2.9% year-over-year, well above its long-term trend. Productivity has grown above trend since the release of ChatGPT in fall 2022 (see Chart 1, below), a dynamic we’ve been writing about for some time, with regard to our concept of ‘US Economic Exceptionalism’.
Meanwhile, ‘unit labor costs,’ or an approximation for the hourly compensation required to produce the US’ economic output, is growing less than 2% over the past year. Moderating unit labor costs mean lower pricing power for workers, but the flip side is a tailwind for corporate profits, since wages are one of Corporate America’s largest input costs. This may be one key factor behind Q1’s all-time high corporate profits and cash flow across both public and private companies (see Chart 3, below) — a trend visible in S&P 500 earnings as well, as we discussed in last week’s commentary.
Moderating unit labor costs are also historically linked to lower core inflation, as measured by core PCE (dark blue line, Chart 2 below). This is particularly important for an economy — and a Federal Reserve — trying to manage through a large headline inflation spike caused by the ongoing war in Iran.
This is not to say AI isn’t impacting jobs, particularly in tech — but thus far it looks more like a transition than a collapse, in our opinion. Challenger, Gray & Christmas counted nearly 50,000 AI-linked job cuts announced by US companies so far in 2026, roughly 17% of all announced layoffs. However, in our view, tech managers are likely using AI as a convenient excuse for needed headcount reductions after the sector’s massive COVID-era hiring binge. Supporting this view, non-farm payrolls in the Information industry, while declining, appear to be simply normalizing back to pre-COVID levels.
Recent academic research supports this thesis. The Yale Budget Lab’s monthly econometric analysis comparing AI-exposed and AI-unexposed occupations found no statistically or economically significant impact on either employment or real hourly wages for AI-exposed workers. Similar findings from the Brookings Institution and the New York Fed point to the same conclusion: so far, AI appears to be stabilizing and possibly cooling America’s labor market — not destroying it.
CONCLUSION: So Far, So Good…AI Boosting, Not Breaking the Economy
Despite widespread fears of AI ‘hollowing out’ the labor market, the US economy is experiencing something like the best of both worlds: rising productivity alongside a resilient jobs market. AI adoption is clearly reshaping the economy — from labor to capital — but the net effect on GDP thus far appears positive, not negative. This echoes the pattern of prior industrial revolutions, in which technological innovation ultimately created economic prosperity and opportunity, albeit unevenly — a dynamic we explored more extensively in our November 2025 deep dive into AI’s macro and microeconomic effects also reinforces our continued belief in ‘US Economic Exceptionalism’ and our related conviction to remain invested in US assets.
Risk Discussion: All investments in securities, including the strategies discussed above, include a risk of loss of principal (invested amount) and any profits that have not been realized. Markets fluctuate substantially over time, and have experienced increased volatility in recent years due to global and domestic economic events. Performance of any investment is not guaranteed. In a rising interest rate environment, the value of fixed-income securities generally declines. Diversification does not guarantee a profit or protect against a loss. Investments in international and emerging markets securities include exposure to risks such as currency fluctuations, foreign taxes and regulations, and the potential for illiquid markets and political instability. Please see the end of this publication for more disclosures.
For more news, information, and strategy, visit ETF Trends.
Important Disclosure Information
The comments above refer generally to financial markets and not RiverFront portfolios or any related performance. Opinions expressed are current as of the date shown and are subject to change. Past performance is not indicative of future results and diversification does not ensure a profit or protect against loss. All investments carry some level of risk, including loss of principal. An investment cannot be made directly in an index.
Information or data shown or used in this material was received from sources believed to be reliable, but accuracy is not guaranteed.
This report does not provide recipients with information or advice that is sufficient on which to base an investment decision. This report does not take into account the specific investment objectives, financial situation or need of any particular client and may not be suitable for all types of investors. Recipients should consider the contents of this report as a single factor in making an investment decision. Additional fundamental and other analyses would be required to make an investment decision about any individual security identified in this report.
Chartered Financial Analyst is a professional designation given by the CFA Institute (formerly AIMR) that measures the competence and integrity of financial analysts. Candidates are required to pass three levels of exams covering areas such as accounting, economics, ethics, money management and security analysis. Four years of investment/financial career experience are required before one can become a CFA charterholder. Enrollees in the program must hold a bachelor’s degree.
All charts shown for illustrative purposes only. Technical analysis is based on the study of historical price movements and past trend patterns. There are no assurances that movements or trends can or will be duplicated in the future.
Stocks represent partial ownership of a corporation. If the corporation does well, its value increases, and investors share in the appreciation. However, if it goes bankrupt, or performs poorly, investors can lose their entire initial investment (i.e., the stock price can go to zero). Bonds represent a loan made by an investor to a corporation or government. As such, the investor gets a guaranteed interest rate for a specific period of time and expects to get their original investment back at the end of that time period, along with the interest earned. Investment risk is repayment of the principal (amount invested). In the event of a bankruptcy or other corporate disruption, bonds are senior to stocks. Investors should be aware of these differences prior to investing.
In general, the bond market is volatile, and fixed income securities carry interest rate risk. (As interest rates rise, bond prices usually fall, and vice versa). This effect is usually more pronounced for longer-term securities). Fixed income securities also carry inflation risk, liquidity risk, call risk and credit and default risks for both issuers and counterparties. Lower-quality fixed income securities involve greater risk of default or price changes due to potential changes in the credit quality of the issuer. Foreign investments involve greater risks than U.S. investments, and can decline significantly in response to adverse issuer, political, regulatory, market, and economic risks. Any fixed-income security sold or redeemed prior to maturity may be subject to loss.
Technology and Internet-related stocks, especially of smaller, less-seasoned companies, tend to be more volatile than the overall market.
Artificial intelligence, or AI, refers to the simulation of human intelligence by software-coded heuristics. Nowadays this code is prevalent in everything from cloudbased, enterprise applications to consumer apps and even embedded firmware.
Index Definitions:
Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 500 Index measures the performance of 500 large cap stocks, which together represent about 80% of the total US equities market.
Definitions:
Corporate Profits represents the US National Income Account, Without Inventory Valuation Adjustment and Capital Consumption Adjustment, Profits After Tax Total, Current Prices. Compiled by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce.
The term cash flow refers to the net amount of cash and cash equivalents being transferred in and out of a company. Cash received represents inflows, while money spent represents outflows.
Inflation is a gradual loss of purchasing power, reflected in a broad rise in prices for goods and services over time.
Gross domestic product (GDP) is a monetary measure of the market value of all final goods and services produced in a period (quarterly or yearly) of time.
Personal consumption expenditures (PCE) is the value of goods and services purchased by or for U.S. consumers.
When referring to being “overweight” or “underweight” relative to a market or asset class, RiverFront is referring to our current portfolios’ weightings compared to the composite benchmarks for each portfolio. Asset class weighting discussion refers to our Advantage portfolios.
RiverFront Investment Group, LLC (“RiverFront”), is a registered investment adviser with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Registration as an investment adviser does not imply any level of skill or expertise. Any discussion of specific securities is provided for informational purposes only and should not be deemed as investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any individual security mentioned. RiverFront is affiliated with Robert W. Baird & Co. Incorporated (“Baird”), member FINRA/SIPC, from its minority ownership interest in RiverFront. RiverFront is owned primarily by its employees through RiverFront Investment Holding Group, LLC, the holding company for RiverFront. Baird Financial Corporation (BFC) is a minority owner of RiverFront Investment Holding Group, LLC and therefore an indirect owner of RiverFront. BFC is the parent company of Robert W. Baird & Co. Incorporated, a registered broker/dealer and investment adviser.
To review other risks and more information about RiverFront, please visit the website at riverfrontig.com and the Form ADV, Part 2A. Copyright ©2026 RiverFront Investment Group. All Rights Reserved. [ID 5537247]
Facts Only
U.S. non-farm business productivity increased 2.9% year-over-year in Q1 2026.
Unit labor costs grew less than 2% over the past year.
U.S. employment rose by a net 304,000 jobs in the first four months of 2026.
Job openings, layoffs, and quits showed little change in recent JOLTS data.
Nearly 50,000 AI-linked job cuts were announced by U.S. companies in 2026, accounting for 17% of total layoffs.
Information industry payrolls are declining but remain above pre-COVID levels.
Yale Budget Lab, Brookings Institution, and New York Fed research found no significant AI impact on employment or wages in exposed occupations.
Corporate profits and cash flow reached all-time highs in Q1 2026.
Core PCE inflation is historically linked to moderating unit labor costs.
AI adoption began accelerating after the release of ChatGPT in late 2022.
The Federal Reserve is managing inflation amid geopolitical tensions, including the war in Iran.
RiverFront Investment Group published the analysis in 2026.
Executive Summary
Full Take
This analysis presents a compelling case for AI as a net positive for the U.S. economy, at least in the short term. The strongest version of this narrative—supported by productivity data, employment trends, and academic research—suggests AI is enhancing efficiency without triggering mass job displacement. The steelman holds: productivity gains are real, unit labor costs are moderating, and job growth remains strong. However, the pattern scan reveals potential blind spots. The focus on aggregate data may obscure sector-specific disruptions, particularly in tech, where AI-linked layoffs are framed as "normalization" rather than structural change. This risks a form of **ARC-0024 Ambiguity**, where the broader trend of resilience downplays localized pain points. The root cause paradigm assumes AI’s economic impact will mirror past industrial revolutions—a linear, optimistic view that may underestimate the speed and scale of digital transformation. The implications for human agency are mixed: while AI boosts corporate profits and GDP, the uneven distribution of benefits and costs raises questions about long-term labor market stability. Who benefits? Shareholders and highly skilled workers. Who bears costs? Potentially mid-skilled workers in AI-exposed roles, though the data hasn’t shown this yet. Second-order consequences could include accelerated wage stagnation or a bifurcated labor market if AI adoption outpaces workforce adaptation.
Bridge questions: What if AI’s productivity gains plateau as low-hanging fruit is exhausted? How would a recession test the resilience of this "best of both worlds" scenario? What perspectives are missing from workers in industries not yet studied? The counterstrike scan suggests a clean narrative—no overt manipulation—but the framing leans toward reassurance, which could align with a playbook aimed at calming investor fears about AI disruption. The content doesn’t match a coordinated influence campaign, but the emphasis on macroeconomic benefits over microeconomic risks warrants scrutiny.
Patterns detected: **ARC-0024 Ambiguity** (downplaying sector-specific disruptions within aggregate trends).
Sentinel — Human
The text presents a coherent and well-supported argument rooted in established economic data, exhibiting the analytical depth and specific financial vocabulary typical of human-written expert commentary.
