<div id="readability-page-1"><div>Dr. Ozan Ozerk is the founder of OpenPayd. He is a serial entrepreneur with a vested interest in several digital ventures.Software markets have had a wobble. Public SaaS valuations have softened, growth multiples have compressed and the phrase “SaaSpocalypse” has crept into investor vocabulary. The catalyst is clear: agentic AI.In July 2025, I wrote about the evolution of agentic AI in payments. Fast-forward eight months, and Mastercard and Visa have just announced agentic payment pilots. And suddenly, the spotlight is back on CEOs—I've observed in some cases that those who don’t mention agentic road maps are causing investor nervousness.The selloff was extreme—$285 billion wiped off SaaS share prices—but interestingly fairly uniform. This is a true market error, as agentic AI will not impact all SaaS companies equally. What it will reveal is which companies are truly AI-first and which have bolted on AI to their existing product set to appease the investment world. And there will be nowhere to hide.<h2>The Worker-Agentic Shift</h2>The latest well-reported narrative is of Anthropic’s release of an agentic tool, Cowork, in combination with markdown files explicitly emulating sector-specific specialists (lawyers, accountants, sales, marketing, etc.).We know the immediate future, at least as it's often described: Agentic AI turns AI from helpful assistants to executors. They plan multistep workflows, interact with other software, apply rules and escalate only when necessary. They begin to resemble digital colleagues rather than digital tools.In payments, imagine intelligent agents capable of dynamically adjusting fraud controls in real time, rerouting transactions to optimize cost, managing cross-border liquidity positions or resolving disputes within defined compliance guardrails. That is not incremental automation. It is operational redesign.The impact ripples outward.​<h2>Contagion And The Finance Sector</h2>There have been murmurs online of the potential for contagion. If SaaS is at risk, what if it spread to banking-as-a-service?This is where it gets interesting; it hasn’t spread, and in my view, it is extremely unlikely to. And the reason why is actually instrumental to the real catalyst of the SaaS selloff. Rightly or wrongly, the huge drop in SaaS stocks was because of a perceived attack on their revenue base. Most SaaS businesses are priced per seat. That model worked because productivity gains were linked to human users. More employees meant more licenses. More licenses meant predictable recurring revenue.But what happens when 10 AI agents enable one compliance officer to oversee the work previously handled by five people? What happens when reconciliations, reporting and fraud monitoring are executed autonomously?The seat stops being a clean proxy for value.Some software companies have seen this coming and already moved to a consumption model—pay for what you use. But that’s not enough and, ironically, the reason why BaaS is very well insulated.The future is outcome-based pricing—payment for results, not for effort. And the one area where this is already in place? Banking. Almost every contract pays on outcomes: the result of a payment processing, not on the attempts to get there. AI may reduce the cost of implementation of the processing, sure, but as a model, it’s already ahead of its time.The second reason contagion has to be limited is because of the huge infrastructure hurdles new entrants need to overcome to enter the market. Regulatory oversight is mandatory, not a nice-to-have in the banking world, and these barriers to entry slow new entrants into the market.The third reason is scope. It’s one thing to vibe-code a restaurant booking app in an afternoon, quite another to code up serious infrastructure, payment rails, KYC protocols, permissioning, audit trails, etc. This, of course, didn’t stop enterprise SaaS companies from selling off hard, but I believe we’ll see a level of correction here as the same logic applies. Who wants to vibe-code Oracle in their lunch hour? And not least, the sheer cost of implementation and pain of switching keeps the customer base from experimenting with the new kids on the block. Where the pressure will really be felt is in narrow, feature-shaped products whose differentiation is largely interface-driven. Not finance, and not even SaaS as a whole. If an intelligent agent can interpret a workflow, call APIs and orchestrate tasks across systems, the stand-alone interface becomes less defensible.Arthur Mensch, CEO of Mistral, recently remarked that AI is allowing software to be developed “at the speed of light.” When internal tools become dramatically cheaper and faster to build, the long tail of SaaS faces a tougher build-versus-buy calculation.<h2>The Future Of BaaS Versus SaaS​</h2>The fact that there was no contagion from SaaS to BaaS is not just telling, it shows a critical difference in how these industries have evolved. Even though BaaS works with far more constraints than the typical software company, we have collectively not only adopted new technology but are constantly pushing the frontiers of development. Stablecoin payments, crypto exchanges, agentic money-saving experts, shoppers and accountants, to name but a few: all coming to a banking services in the near future. And this has been achieved under the umbrella of intense regulatory scrutiny and the numerous detailed and expensive protocols required for all financial institutions.SaaS companies? Some enterprise companies have been speedy to adopt and redesign around agentic possibilities; others have simply told their shareholders their AI story and failed to make substantive changes.The market is collectively punishing the sector for this lack of mobility—in some cases justified and in others overblown. For those companies addressing this U-turn now, the questions to ask are: How deeply embedded is agentic AI in your workflows? How safely can agents work within your environment? Does your pricing reflect outcomes? Are you designing with regulatory constraints in mind from day one?For BaaS? Almost every single financial institution has been addressing these questions since the advent of AI. There’s no contagion because the very reasons SaaS was punished are the very reasons the fintech sector is still growing. There’s no room to rest on our laurels, but there is vindication for those who not only saw this coming but acted accordingly.​The information provided here is not investment, tax or financial advice. You should consult with a licensed professional for advice concerning your specific situation.<hr/>Forbes Finance Council is an invitation-only organization for executives in successful accounting, financial planning and wealth management firms. Do I qualify?<hr/></div></div>

標普軟件與服務 ETF - SPDR

北美科技軟件股指數 ETF - iShares

雲計算基金 - WisdomTree

萬事達

雲計算股指數 ETF - First Trust

雲計算 ETF - GlobalX

奧贊·奧澤克博士討論了近期公共 SaaS 估值的下滑，稱之為 “SaaSpocalypse”，這一趨勢是由自主 AI 的崛起所推動的。萬事達和 Visa 等主要參與者正在試點自主支付系統，這促使首席執行官們必須應對 AI 戰略，以平息投資者的擔憂。此次拋售導致 SaaS 股票損失了 2850 億美元，揭示了以 AI 為首的公司與僅僅添加 AI 功能的公司之間的分歧。儘管 SaaS 面臨挑戰，但基於銀行的服務（BaaS）由於基於結果的定價模型和監管壁壘而保持相對獨立，表明這兩個領域都在經歷顯著的演變

Agentic AI, SaaSpocalypse And The Contagion Factor

- Dr. Ozan Ozerk 認為 SaaS 市場因 agentic AI 受到壓力，市值大幅下跌。  
- 銀行業務（BaaS）未受到影響，因其發展受到嚴監管限制。  
- 企業需關注 agentic AI 融入工作流程與結果導向定價，以應對市場變動。

Agentic AI、SaaSpocalypse 和傳染因素