The market treats them as one thing. They are not.
Por años, siete gigantes tecnológicos estadounidenses concentraron la fe y el capital de los mercados globales, como si su dominio fuera una ley natural. Pero los mercados, como la historia, no respetan narrativas eternas: en el último año, cinco de los siete llamados 'Magníficos' no lograron superar al S&P 500, señal de que la concentración tiene sus límites. Jyotsana Wadera, de Putnam Investments —parte de Franklin Templeton—, advierte a los inversores peruanos que diversificar no es abandonar la tecnología, sino dejar de confundir la fama con el valor. En un mundo donde el ruido es abundante y la paciencia escasa, la disciplina sigue siendo la ventaja más subestimada.
- Solo Nvidia y Google superaron las expectativas del mercado el año pasado, mientras los otros cinco 'Magníficos' quedaron por debajo del S&P 500, quebrando una narrativa que había guiado billones en inversiones.
- La concentración excesiva en mega-caps tecnológicas expone a los inversores a valoraciones infladas: el mercado ya ha descontado su dominio, dejando poco margen para sorpresas positivas.
- Putnam Investments mantiene posiciones infraponderadas en la mayoría de estas empresas y redirige la mirada hacia compañías generadoras de ganancias reales como Oracle, y sectores ignorados como cruceros, hoteles y utilities.
- Para el inversor peruano, cuya economía depende de commodities cíclicos, la renta variable estadounidense ofrece diversificación genuina —pero solo si se evita replicar la concentración que ya existe en el mercado.
- La gestión activa y la disciplina conductual emergen como las herramientas clave: entrar y salir constantemente del mercado es, según Wadera, el error más costoso que puede cometer un inversor.
Durante años, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Meta, Nvidia y Tesla acapararon la atención y el capital de los mercados globales, convertidos en sinónimo de crecimiento e innovación. Pero el año pasado, solo dos de ellos —Nvidia y Google— cumplieron con lo que el mercado esperaba. Los cinco restantes quedaron por debajo del rendimiento del S&P 500. Una grieta en la narrativa que había mantenido el dinero en su lugar.
Jyotsana Wadera, gestora de estrategias de renta variable en Putnam Investments —división de Franklin Templeton—, ve en este quiebre una oportunidad. En diálogo con Gestión, planteó un mensaje claro para los inversores peruanos: tener exposición a las grandes tecnológicas está bien, pero concentrar el portafolio en ellas es un error. El mercado ya ha incorporado su dominio en los precios. Otras empresas ofrecen mejor valor.
El caso de Oracle ilustra el argumento: superó a los Magníficos no por ser más grande ni más conocida, sino porque generó ganancias reales. Putnam no pregunta qué empresa es más famosa, sino dónde está la ventaja en utilidades. Bajo esa lógica, también identifican oportunidades en Lam Research —fabricante de equipos para chips de inteligencia artificial—, en el sector hotelero y de cruceros —golpeado por eventos geopolíticos pero con reservas sostenidas—, y en utilities para inversores con horizonte largo.
Para el inversor peruano, la lógica de diversificarse hacia renta variable estadounidense es sólida: la economía local depende de commodities cíclicos como el cobre y el oro, activos que pueden ser brillantes un año y destructivos al siguiente. Estados Unidos ofrece exposición a sectores que no oscilan con el precio de las materias primas. Pero esa diversificación pierde sentido si se replica dentro de ella la misma concentración que se quiere evitar.
Wadera cerró con una advertencia sobre comportamiento: los inversores que compran y venden constantemente, persiguiendo momentum o huyendo del miedo, son quienes más daño se hacen a sí mismos. La bolsa recompensa la paciencia. El peor movimiento es entrar y salir sin disciplina, cristalizando pérdidas y perdiendo ganancias. El mensaje para quienes invierten desde Lima es tan antiguo como los mercados mismos: diversificar, mantenerse disciplinado, y no confundir el nombre más ruidoso con la mejor oportunidad.
The seven largest technology companies in the United States—Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Meta, Nvidia, and Tesla—have dominated investor attention for years, their names shorthand for growth and innovation. But last year, only two of them delivered what the market expected. Nvidia and Google cleared the bar. The other five fell short of the S&P 500's performance, a crack in the narrative that has held investor money in place.
Jyotsana Wadera, who manages equity strategies for Putnam Investments, a division of the global asset manager Franklin Templeton, sees this shift as an opening. In a conversation with Gestión, she laid out a case for Peruvian investors to step back from the concentration that has defined the market. The advice is straightforward: own the big technology names, but do not bet the portfolio on them. Diversify.
For investors in Peru, the case for U.S. exposure is already strong. Latin America, with few exceptions, lacks homegrown technology and healthcare companies. Peru's economy leans on commodities and natural resources—copper, gold, fish meal. Those assets can be lucrative, but they move in cycles. A commodity that looks brilliant one year can turn destructive the next. U.S. equities offer something Peru cannot generate internally: exposure to sectors that do not rise and fall with the price of raw materials. That diversification matters.
But the Magnificent Seven, as they are called, have become a trap. The market has poured money into them because they lead in artificial intelligence and show solid revenue growth. Yet Wadera's team at Putnam does not overweight them. In fact, they underweight most of them. The distinction matters. Putnam owns shares in these companies—they are not betting against them—but they do not concentrate capital there. The reason is simple: the market has already priced in their dominance. Other companies offer better value.
Take Oracle. Last year it outperformed the Magnificent Seven, not because it is larger or reports bigger revenues, but because it generated profits. That is the lens Putnam uses: where is the earnings advantage? It is a different question than asking which company is most famous or most talked about. Wadera noted that the market treats the seven as a monolith, grouping them together as if they were interchangeable. They are not. Each has different fundamentals, different sources of revenue growth, different risks.
Where does Putnam see opportunity? Lam Research manufactures equipment for artificial intelligence chip production—a play on the infrastructure beneath the hype. The hospitality sector, including cruise lines and hotels, has been overlooked. Cruise operators were battered by geopolitical events in the Middle East and now trade at their lowest valuations in years. Yet bookings have not slowed. Hotels are raising prices to offset higher fuel costs, and customers are still paying. Utilities, too, offer long-term appeal for investors willing to hold through volatility.
Wadera emphasized that this moment calls for active management—a portfolio manager who selects and monitors holdings regularly, not a passive approach that simply tracks an index. She also offered a warning about behavior: investors who constantly buy and sell, chasing momentum or fleeing fear, do themselves the most damage. The stock market rewards patience. Over time, equities generate returns. The worst move is to enter and exit constantly, locking in losses and missing gains. For Peruvian investors accustomed to caution, the message is clear: diversify, stay disciplined, and do not confuse the loudest names with the best opportunities.
Citações Notáveis
The market likes to group these companies together in one bucket, but that is a mistake. They are completely different, with different fundamentals and different drivers of revenue.— Jyotsana Wadera, Putnam Investments
Entering and exiting the market constantly is the worst thing an investor can do.— Jyotsana Wadera, Putnam Investments
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why should a Peruvian investor care about U.S. stocks at all? Doesn't Peru have its own market?
Peru's market is real, but it is built on commodities. When copper prices fall, everything falls. U.S. stocks give you exposure to technology, healthcare, services—sectors that do not move with mining cycles. It is insurance.
But everyone is talking about the Magnificent Seven. If they are so dominant, why not just buy those?
That is exactly the trap. Two of them beat expectations last year. Five did not. The market has already priced in their success. You are paying a premium for a story that may not keep delivering.
So Putnam just avoids them entirely?
No. We own them. But we do not overweight them. We hold them, but we look elsewhere for better returns. Oracle outperformed all seven last year because it actually grew profits, not just revenue.
What about the cruise lines you mentioned? Those seem risky.
They were destroyed by events in Iran, so their stock prices fell hard. But bookings are still strong. Customers are still paying higher prices. The valuation is the lowest it has been. That is when you look.
And you think investors should stay in the market even when it is volatile?
Absolutely. Leaving and re-entering is the worst thing you can do. You lock in losses and miss the rebounds. Time in the market beats timing the market.