What Higher Rates Mean for the AI Buildout and the Tech Trade
Editor's note: Any and all references to time frames longer than one trading day are for purposes of market context only, and not recommendations of any holding time frame. Daily rebalancing ETFs are not meant to be held unmonitored for long periods. If you don't have the resources, time or inclination to constantly monitor and manage your positions, leveraged and inverse ETFs are not for you.
The AI buildout has begun to max out the public capital markets. For example, Oracle Corp. (Ticker: ORCL) earlier this year said it plans to raise $45 billion to $50 billion in 2026 to expand Oracle Cloud Infrastructure, with roughly half expected from debt and half from equity-related financing.¹ The Wall Street Journal reported October 7 that Oracle, Broadcom (Ticker: AVGO), and SpaceX (Ticker: SPCX) are also in negotiations to finance billions of dollars of AI hardware purchases through private debt.²
For traders, rates and the Fed now sit beside chip supply, power access, and cloud demand as variables shaping the AI trade.
The Fed raised its target range by 25 basis points to 3.75%–4.00% on September 16. 16 of 18 officials policymakers subsequently indicated another increase would likely be appropriate by year-end, although future decisions remain dependent on incoming data.³ The U.S. 10-year Treasury yield has climbed above 5%.
Why the Rate Path Matters
Higher yields can make corporate bonds, leases, and project financing more expensive, raising the return a data-center project must earn before it pays off. That pressure can ripple through the AI supply chain, from cloud operators financing new facilities to the chipmakers and equipment suppliers counting on their orders.
Rates alone will not determine which projects get built. Contracted demand, utilization, construction costs, and expected revenue also matter. But when financing becomes more expensive, traders have another question to weigh: Which companies can turn ambitious spending plans into profitable capacity?
The Bull Case: Financing Extends the Buildout
Debt can spread the cost of long-lived infrastructure across the years when that capacity is expected to generate revenue. For AI infrastructure providers, access to financing may help them meet contracted demand without waiting for cash flow to cover each new facility. The bullish interpretation is that borrowing reflects confidence in customers’ future appetite for computing power.
Oracle provides an important test of that argument. Its financing plan is tied to contracted demand from major cloud and AI customers. The company reported $553 billion of remaining performance obligations in March and said much of the quarter’s increase came from large-scale AI contracts. Oracle also said customers were prepaying for graphics processing units or supplying the equipment themselves for many of those contracts.⁴ Such arrangements can reduce Oracle’s upfront capital requirements, though traders still need to assess when contracted demand will translate into revenue and cash flow.
The Bear Case: Debt Raises the Bar
The bearish interpretation is the AI race is becoming increasingly capital intensive. Borrowing adds interest expense before new data centers reach full utilization. If revenue arrives more slowly than infrastructure spending, fixed financing costs could pressure cash flow and margins, even when customer demand looks strong on paper.
There is also a mismatch between the useful lives of different assets. Buildings and power connections can last for decades, while computing hardware can become economically dated much sooner. A company financing capacity today needs to keep that capacity productive as chips improve and customers demand more efficient computing. For traders, disappointing utilization or weaker-than-expected returns could quickly change sentiment against what may be seen as an AI growth story.
Trading the Financing Divide
For traders interested in broader technology-sector exposure as the rate backdrop and AI spending expectations evolve, the Direxion Daily Technology Bull 3X ETF (Ticker: TECL) and Direxion Daily Technology Bear 3X ETF (Ticker: TECS) seek 300%, or 300% of the inverse, before fees and expenses, of the daily performance of the Technology Select Sector Index. The pair offers traders broad exposure to technology companies funding and monetizing AI infrastructure.
The Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X ETF (Ticker: SOXL) and Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bear 3X ETF (Ticker: SOXS) seek 300%, or 300% of the inverse, before fees and expenses, of the daily performance of the NYSE Semiconductor Index, providing ways to express short-term views on shifts in AI-related chip demand.
For traders focused on Oracle’s execution and financing outlook, the Direxion Daily ORCL Bull 2X ETF (Ticker: ORCU) and Direxion Daily ORCL Bear 1X ETF (Ticker: ORCS) offer daily leveraged or inverse exposure, before fees or expenses, to ORCL. The company sits at the center of this financing case, making its earnings, customer commitments, and capital requirements potential catalysts. ORCU and ORCS provide exposure to a single company and are not diversified.
All six funds seek daily objectives and can diverge from their stated daily targets over periods longer than one day.
The Next Test
The FOMC meets October 27–28.5 Its decision could alter the financing backdrop, but company earnings will test the other side of the equation: whether cloud growth, AI revenue, and utilization are advancing quickly enough to justify the capital committed The next phase of the AI trade turns on how profitably companies put new capacity to work. That tension between financing costs and revenue growth could create fresh volatility for traders.
1 Oracle, “Oracle Announces Equity and Debt Financing Plan for Calendar Year 2026,” February 1, 2026. https://www.oracle.com/news/announcement/oracle-announces-equity-and-debt-financing-plan-2026-02-01/
2 Yahoo! Finance, “Broadcom, Oracle, and SpaceX pursue blockbuster debt deals amid AI buildout – WSJ,” October 7, 2026. https://finance.yahoo.com/technology/ai/articles/broadcom-oracle-spacex-pursue-blockbuster-215828392.html
3 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, “Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee, September 15–16, 2026,” October 7, 2026. https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomcminutes20260916.htm
4 Oracle, “Oracle Announces Fiscal Year 2026 Third Quarter Financial Results,” March 10, 2026. https://www.oracle.com/news/announcement/q3fy26-earnings-release-2026-03-10/
5 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, “Meeting Calendars and Information,” Accessed October 2026. https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomccalendars.htm
* Definitions & Index Descriptions
Leveraged and inverse ETFs pursue daily leveraged investment objectives, which means they are riskier than alternatives that do not use leverage. They seek daily goals and should not be expected to track the underlying index over periods longer than one day. They are not suitable for all investors and should be utilized only by sophisticated investors who understand leverage risk and who actively manage their investments.
Investing in the funds involves a high degree of risk. Unlike traditional ETFs, or even other leveraged and/or inverse ETFs, these leveraged and/or inverse single-stock ETFs track the price of a single stock rather than an index, eliminating the benefits of diversification. Leveraged and inverse ETFs pursue daily leveraged investment objectives, which means they are riskier than alternatives which do not use leverage. They seek daily goals and should not be expected to track the underlying stock’s performance over periods longer than one day. They are not suitable for all investors and should be utilized only by investors who understand leverage risk and who actively manage their investments. The Funds will lose money if the underlying stock’s performance is flat, and it is possible that the Bull Fund will lose money even if the underlying stock’s performance increases, and the Bear Fund will lose money even if the underlying stock’s performance decreases, over a period longer than a single day. Investing in the Funds is not equivalent to investing directly in ORCL.
The “Technology Select Sector Index” is a product of S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC (“SPDJI”), and has been licensed for use by Rafferty Asset Management, LLC (“Rafferty”). Standard & Poor’s® and S&P® are registered trademarks of Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC (“S&P”); Dow Jones® is a registered trademark of Dow Jones Trademark Holdings LLC (“Dow Jones”); and these trademarks have been licensed for use by SPDJI and sublicensed for certain purposes by Rafferty. Rafferty’s ETFs are not sponsored, endorsed, sold or promoted by SPDJI, Dow Jones, S&P, their respective affiliates and none of such parties make any representation regarding the advisability of investing in such product(s) nor do they have any liability for any errors, omissions, or interruptions of the Technology Select Sector Index.
Neither Rafferty nor the Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X ETF and the Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bear 3X ETF (the “Financial Products”) are sponsored, endorsed, sold or promoted by Interactive Data Pricing and Reference Data, LLC or its affiliates (“Vendor”). Vendor makes no representation or warranty regarding the advisability of investing in securities generally, in the Financial Products particularly, or the ability of the NYSE Semiconductor Index to track general financial market performance. VENDOR MAKES NO EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, AND HEREBY EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE WITH RESPECT TO THE INDEX OR ANY DATA INCLUDED THEREIN.IN NO EVENT SHALL VENDOR HAVE ANY LIABILITY FOR ANY SPECIAL, PUNITIVE, INDIRECT, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING LOST PROFITS),EVEN IF NOTIFIED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
Oracle Corporation Investing Risk— ORCL faces the risks of difficulties developing and selling new products; artificial intelligence may not operate as expected; inability to execute strategies, especially those related to the cloud structure; inability to secure data center capacity; products and services may not function properly; among other risks.
Information Technology Sector Risk — The value of stocks of information technology companies and companies that rely heavily on technology is particularly vulnerable to rapid changes in technology product cycles, rapid product obsolescence, government regulation, and competition, both domestically and internationally, including competition from competitors with lower production cost.
Software Industry Risk — Companies that develop and implement computer software can face risks associated with intense competition, especially in new product development, deployment and delivery, product obsolescence or saturation, cybersecurity risks as well as changes in regulation especially with respect to consumer or customer data, and risks associated with technology.
Technology Sector Risk — The market prices of technology-related securities tend to exhibit a greater degree of market risk and sharp price fluctuations than other types of securities. These securities may fall in and out of favor with investors rapidly, which may cause sudden selling and dramatically lower market prices.
Semiconductor Industry Risk – Semiconductor companies may face intense competition, both domestically and internationally, may have limited product lines, markets, financial resources or personnel and may face risks related to the availability of materials.