I began my portfolio management career in 2002 as one of three PMs on what we called the Deep Value Team. We were led by one of the unsung great contrarian investors of the era, Warren Spitz. We evolved our moniker from Deep Value to Contrarian Equity to describe a way of thinking as opposed to a location in the Morningstar Style Box. Over the ensuing 23 years, my team, investment process and philosophy adapted as markets became focused on persistent growth and quality, as represented by the great platform companies that define the 21st century. Our portfolios changed to reflect contextual shifts and have performed well, but underlying everything we’ve done has been a dedication to seek a vision of what others don’t see—a commitment to contrarian thinking.
As Artificial Intelligence (AI) increasingly shapes societies' decision-making processes and everyday interactions, the landscape of thought and discourse is evolving—often toward a consensus-driven model. In this environment, the ability to engage in contrarian thinking becomes crucial, emphasizing the necessity of maintaining our capacity for abstract thought and embracing diverse perspectives amidst a burgeoning reliance on AI tools.
AI's capacity to process vast amounts of data enables it to provide insights and recommendations that are compelling and often persuasive. This consensus-driven dynamic can significantly streamline decision-making and reduce conflict in collaborative environments. However, such reliance may inadvertently suppress individual creativity and divergent thinking. The ability to critique ideas naturally and explore the margins of rationality is threatened.
Historically, contrarian investors have played an essential role in identifying opportunities that others overlook or dismiss. They have been critical to the knowledge of the crowd that markets offer. Figures such as Warren Buffett, George Soros, David Dreman and Seth Klarman exemplify the power of thinking differently; they thrived by challenging prevailing assumptions and capitalizing on behavioral or informational inefficiencies. As AI begins to shape consensus, the value of voices like these could diminish, leading to a more homogeneous intellectual landscape where new ideas struggle to gain a foothold and the anti-fragility that comes from diversity could disappear.
In a world dominated by AI consensus, contrarian thinking will take on new forms and challenges. Increasingly, successful contrarian investors will have to rely more on their own insights and consider the emotions, ethics and complex social dynamics that data alone cannot quantify. The challenge will be to articulate these viewpoints compellingly and clearly, distinguishing the nuanced perspectives of human intuition from algorithm-driven recommendations. Patience will also likely be even more critical than it has been among history’s contrarians.
As users grow more dependent on AI-generated suggestions, the skill of critical analysis becomes paramount. Contrarian thinkers will need to interrogate not only whether a recommendation is sound but also why it is presented that way. Understanding the biases that may be embedded within the algorithms and questioning the underlying datasets will be crucial tasks that require a blend of analytical skills, human judgment and uncomfortable creativity.
The push toward AI-enhanced consensus is groupthink, stifling the diverse thought that fosters innovation. Thus, contrarian voices will be essential in creating a culture that values varying viewpoints. Embracing dissent can enhance creativity and lead to more robust decision-making by ensuring that a variety of perspectives are considered, much like how investors such as David Einhorn have found success by swimming against the tide of popular sentiment.
To preserve our ability to think abstractly and cultivate contrarian perspectives, it is essential to encourage intellectual curiosity—and leveraging AI tools to explore marginal ideas more quickly and deeply. Individuals should actively seek knowledge outside their areas of expertise and engage with diverse disciplines, fostering unique connections and novel ideas that counteract the narrowing effects of consensus. Establishing environments—whether in workplaces, academic settings or online platforms—where exploring non-mainstream ideas is welcomed can enhance the presence of contrarian thinking. In such spaces, embracing discomfort and disagreement becomes part of healthy discourse, allowing for growth and innovation. This will require a significant pendulum swing away from current social trends.
Moreover, educational institutions and organizations should focus on teaching critical thinking skills as a foundational component of their curriculums. This empowerment enables individuals to critically analyze AI outputs, question prevailing consensus and derive unique insights from their personal experiences. Building resilience in confronting dominant narratives is also vital; embracing failure and learning from it are key aspects of a contrarian mindset that often clash with consensus culture.
As AI continues to influence our society, nurturing the capacity for contrarian thinking becomes essential. By challenging prevailing narratives, questioning AI outputs and fostering environments of intellectual diversity, we can preserve our ability to think abstractly. A balance must be struck between leveraging AI's strengths and celebrating human creativity—ensuring that even in an increasingly automated world, our capacity for innovation and critical thought remains vibrant. In this way, the future can support both consensus-driven intelligence and the bold voices that challenge it, ultimately leading to richer, more resilient societies.
Important Disclosures & Definitions
AAI001028 11/11/2026
