Companies Are Drowning in Too Much AI

Businesses are facing an influx of new artificial-intelligence tools, many of which overlap and cause confusion for employees, as corporate-technology sellers race to capitalise on the generative AI trend.

“Since the ChatGPT excitement, I must have had at least 20 to 25 vendors in my portfolio reach out to me saying, ‘Hey, let us tell you about our generative AI co-pilot strategy,’” said Milind Wagle, chief information officer at Equinix, one of the world’s biggest data-centre landlords.

Generative AI features, which can respond to user prompts by generating images or text, often come in the forms of co-pilots, or virtual assistants that work in tandem with an IT seller’s offerings, sometimes automating certain tasks within that platform. Wagle said Equinix is drowning in a flood of co-pilots—and he is trying to figure out how, if at all, they should coexist.

“I feel like there’s a co-pilot war that needs to sort of happen,” he said, adding that to humanize AI in a meaningful way, there needs to be more coherence in how these tools are deployed.

The co-pilot proliferation is leading to confusion for employees who are looking for a single common interface to accomplish certain tasks, Wagle said. It can also create potential governance risks if there is a possibility that private data from a company that interacts with the co-pilots could make its way into public training models for generative AI tools.

Gartner analyst Arun Chandrasekaran said IT sellers are feeling pressure to move into the generative AI space or risk falling behind, meaning some half-baked features will be rushed out without the proper privacy and security guardrails in place. Established IT sellers also need to consider security concerns, including whether a customer’s data can be fed back to train the model, because this is uncharted territory, he added.

Chandrasekaran estimates that a fifth of independent software vendors have stepped into the generative AI space since ChatGPT was launched about seven months ago—a huge amount of growth in a short time, he said.

“I don’t think I’ve had a partner or vendor meeting this year where I wasn’t pitched a generative AI play,” said Brian Woodring, CIO of Rocket Mortgage, a nonbank mortgage provider.

Rocket Mortgage CIO Brian Woodring PHOTO: ISABELLE BOUSQUETTE / THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Sometimes the co-pilots appear in system updates as a freebie, and sometimes they cost extra, Woodring said. He added that in some cases, the generative AI features are tacked on, despite not being compelling additions or the best tool for the job.

“Everyone’s trying to fit it in everywhere,” he said, adding, “It’s not something you can just spread around like peanut butter. It’s not a coat of paint you put on your product afterwards and say, now it’s AI.”

In other instances, the features are things that Rocket Mortgage could confidently and more cheaply build in house, Woodring said. For example, a number of tools on the market pull and analyse data from phone calls, a feature that Rocket Mortgage was able to build itself, he said.

Tech executives said they are looking critically at new generative AI tools to distinguish between the truly compelling ones and the ones that are just paying lip service to the hype. How well the tools will be able to integrate with each other is another consideration.

“We want clarity on how we can connect every single one,” said Noé Angel, CIO at agriculture company NatureSweet. When tools are too fragmented, it ends up creating more work for those who have to manage them, he said.

Jim Stratton, chief technology officer of Workday, a provider of enterprise cloud applications for finance and human resources, said that longer term, he expects consolidation and clearer winners to emerge when it comes to certain AI capabilities, which could simplify things for companies.

But nearer term, navigating the complexity of the landscape remains a challenge. “There’s still a lot of noise at the moment,” he said.

Reporting season has once again reminded investors that a strong profit does not guarantee a rising share price, and a large loss does not always trigger a sell-off. What matters most is how each result compares with expectations and, increasingly, what management says about the year ahead. During the August 2026 season, companies offering credible turnarounds or unexpectedly strong guidance were rewarded handsomely, while those flagging weaker margins, slowing demand or greater uncertainty were punished.

The following ranking draws on Morningstar’s review of 164 ASX-listed companies and measures each company’s share-price movement on the day it reported. This captures the market’s immediate response to the earnings announcement, before subsequent economic developments, dividends and company-specific news cloud the picture. Here are the five biggest winners, and the five hardest-hit losers, of the season so far.

The five winners

1. Bapcor (ASX:BAP): +41.0%

Bapcor delivered reporting season’s largest relief rally after presenting early evidence that its troubled automotive-parts business was stabilising. Although underlying revenue fell 1.8% to $1.92 billion and underlying NPAT collapsed 85% to $10.8 million, underlying EBITDA of $152.5 million exceeded guidance.

More importantly, working-capital initiatives released $68.5 million in the second half, lifting cash conversion to 109.4% and reducing net debt by 63% to $135 million. The statutory loss was $431.6 million, largely because of non-cash impairments. Investors focused on improving operational momentum, stronger liquidity and management’s expectation of modest FY27 revenue growth.

2. Zip Co (ASX:ZIP): +18.2%

Zip comfortably surpassed its FY26 targets, sending the buy-now-pay-later provider’s shares sharply higher. Transaction volume rose 23% to $16.7 billion, while cash earnings before tax, depreciation and amortisation jumped 58% to a record $268.9 million. Statutory profit climbed 46% to $116.4 million, and the cash operating margin expanded by 4.2 percentage points to 20%.

The strongest signal was guidance for FY27 cash earnings of $340 million—around 26% growth and above analysts’ forecasts. US transaction volume increased 42.5% and now represents three-quarters of group volume, offsetting weaker customer activity in Australia.

3. CSL (ASX:CSL): +17.3%

CSL’s result was hardly spectacular in isolation, but it cleared a market bar that had fallen dramatically following earlier downgrades and restructuring announcements. Underlying NPATA was US$3.1 billion, down 2% in constant-currency terms, while operating cash flow reached US$3.51 billion.

CSL maintained its full-year dividend at US$2.92 per share and completed a A$1 billion buyback. The real catalyst was FY27 guidance for approximately 5% underlying profit growth, compared with market expectations closer to 2%. After an extended period of earnings disappointments, investors interpreted the outlook as evidence that CSL’s core plasma business was approaching a sustainable recovery.

4. Judo Capital (ASX:JDO): +16.9%

Judo Capital demonstrated strong operating leverage as its specialist business-lending franchise expanded. Full-year profit before tax rose 34% to $168.1 million, while pre-provision profit increased 42%. Gross loans and advances grew 18% to $14.7 billion, reaching the top of the bank’s guidance range and comfortably exceeding broader system growth.

Deposits increased 24% to $12.2 billion, return on equity improved by 1.1 percentage points to 6.4%, and earnings per share rose 29% to 9.9 cents. Reaffirmation of the FY27 outlook gave investors confidence that loan growth could continue without sacrificing margins or credit quality.

5. Super Retail Group (ASX:SUL): +15.8%

The owner of Supercheap Auto, rebel, BCF and Macpac reported record sales of $4.2 billion, up 3.2%, despite cautious discretionary spending. Profitability went backwards: normalised profit before tax fell 7% to $306 million and normalised NPAT declined 2.8% to $226 million as transformation spending weighed on margins. Nevertheless, the result exceeded subdued expectations, online sales grew 5.3% and membership across the group’s loyalty programs reached 13.1 million. Investors were also encouraged by positive early FY27 trading, stable gross margins and continued market-share gains. A fully franked 33-cent final dividend added to the appeal.

The five losers

1. Hansen Technologies (ASX:HSN): –21.2%

Hansen’s historic result met expectations, but investors recoiled from its outlook. The utility and communications software provider achieved an underlying EBITDA margin of 31%, exceeding its 30% target, while generating strong cash flow. However, management designated FY27 an “investment and transition year”, signalling a roughly five-percentage-point margin contraction as spending on products, sales capabilities and organisational changes increased.

Revenue had already been broadly flat, leaving investors concerned that the investment program would depress earnings before new growth appeared. Leadership changes, including the chief executive’s departure, added uncertainty. Management expects revenue growth and margins above 30% to return in FY28, but the market was unwilling to wait.

2. Life360 (ASX:360): –19.4%

Life360’s headline growth was impressive: quarterly revenue rose 38% to US$159 million, subscription revenue increased 31%, and adjusted EBITDA climbed 53% to US$31.1 million. Monthly active users reached 102.4 million and paying circles grew 27% to 3.2 million. The sell-off reflected expectations rather than a collapsing business.

Net income fell 18%, the net margin contracted from 6% to 3%, hardware shipments dropped 18%, and full-year EBITDA guidance was merely maintained. After a strong valuation run, investors wanted a larger upgrade and clearer evidence that heavy investment in advertising, international expansion and artificial intelligence would generate additional earnings.

3. PEXA Group (ASX:PXA): –17.0%

PEXA reported a 7% increase in continuing-operations revenue and 12% EBITDA growth to $152 million, accompanied by a two-percentage-point margin expansion. Free cash flow increased 39%, suggesting the core Australian electronic-conveyancing platform remained highly profitable. Investors instead concentrated on management’s warning that property-transfer volumes could decline, alongside regulatory uncertainty surrounding the fees PEXA can charge.

The company is also continuing to invest heavily in its loss-making international expansion. Morningstar considered the market reaction excessive, arguing that structural transfer-volume assumptions had not materially changed, but the combination of softer near-term activity and regulatory risk overwhelmed the respectable headline numbers.

4. SEEK (ASX:SEK): –14.3%

SEEK produced solid FY26 figures, including 10% revenue growth to $1.20 billion, a 15% rise in EBITDA and 28% growth in adjusted earnings per share. It also lifted its fully franked annual dividend by 13% to a record 52 cents. Those achievements were overshadowed by falling paid job-ad volumes and cautious FY27 assumptions.

The statutory accounts included a $201 million loss from the SEEK Growth Fund and $377 million of significant items, making the headline result considerably less attractive. Investors were particularly concerned that economic weakness could limit volumes while the company continued investing in platform integration and artificial-intelligence products.

5. JB Hi-Fi (ASX:JBH): –12.3%

JB Hi-Fi’s full-year result was broadly respectable, with group sales rising 5% to $11.1 billion and underlying earnings per share increasing 6% to $4.48. The damage came from its current-trading update. Australian sales were almost flat during the June quarter and deteriorated further in July, while earnings in the core Australian electronics business fell 3.6%.

Housing-related categories were particularly weak as higher living costs and interest rates constrained household budgets. With JB Hi-Fi entering the season on a demanding valuation, an in-line historic result was not sufficient: the loss of sales momentum prompted investors to rapidly reduce their expectations for FY27.

Overall, the season showed that share prices react less to whether profits rose or fell than to the gap between results and expectations. Bapcor was rewarded for being less troubled than feared, while several fundamentally profitable companies were punished because their outlooks failed to justify elevated valuations.