China and Hong Kong stocks fell sharply on Monday, led by technology shares, after Alibaba’s surprise $10.2 billion share placement renewed concerns over the heavy investment required to compete in artificial intelligence, Reuters reported.
The benchmark Shanghai Composite Index declined 0.7% to 3,877.3 points, while the blue-chip CSI 300 Index dropped 1.3%. Technology stocks bore the brunt of the selling, with the ChiNext Composite Index falling 3.5% and Shanghai’s tech-focused STAR50 Index sliding 3.26%.
AI and semiconductor stocks also came under pressure. The CSI AI Index dropped 4.7%, while the CSI Semiconductor Index lost more than 2%. In Hong Kong, the Hang Seng Index fell 2.1%, and the Hang Seng Tech Index declined 3.8%, with the AI sector index tumbling more than 5%.
Alibaba was among the biggest drags on the market. The company’s shares plunged as much as 10.5% to a one-month low after it announced an HK$80 billion ($10.2 billion) share placement. The offering was priced at an 8.4% discount to Alibaba’s Friday closing price, making it the largest-ever primary follow-on offering in Hong Kong.
The proceeds are intended to support Alibaba’s AI-related development, but the size of the fundraising and the discount have raised concerns about potential dilution for existing shareholders. The move has also prompted renewed questions about whether the enormous spending required to compete in AI will generate adequate returns, Reuters reported.
Chinese technology stocks fell amid broader caution across Asian markets. Investors were also monitoring oil prices and developments around threatened US sanctions on Iran, with Washington expected to provide details of new economic measures targeting Iran’s trade partners.
Renewed concerns over AI capital expenditure, potential shareholder dilution, and geopolitical uncertainty weighed on investor sentiment, leaving technology stocks particularly vulnerable at the start of the week.
(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views, and opinions given by experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times.)
