In New York this week, the nature of capital itself appeared to fracture. While governments and U.N. agencies met to tackle long-term systemic challenges at a new Global Dialogue on AI Governance and other summits, a more subtle, profit-driven revolution has unfolded across global financial markets, as a new breed of investor quietly remade corporate America.
This growing schism within the investment world was on full display, with two opposing visions of how money should be used to effect change.
As leaders grappled with the future of humanity, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres on Thursday framed the central challenge of the new AI dialogue: "The question is no longer whether AI will transform our world; it already is. The question is whether we will govern this transformation together or let it govern us."
His focus on the future stands in sharp contrast to the immediate concerns of activist investors. The bold, confrontational era of the "corporate raider," personified by figures like T. Boone Pickens and Carl Icahn, has receded into history.
Today, firms led by the likes of Bill Ackman and Chris Hohn manage over $4 trillion in assets and operate less like marauders and more like quiet, data-driven strategists.
The subtle power of quiet influence
The evolution is a direct response to a complex web of legal and regulatory pressures. While activism is governed by a range of laws, including the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Williams Act of 1968 in the U.S. and the Criminal Justice Act 1993 in the U.K., it's also shaped by more subtle constraints, such as the E.U.'s "acting in concert" rule that prevents groups of investors from secretly collaborating.
During the launch of the AI dialogue, Guterres described its goal as creating a system that can “keep pace with the fastest-moving technology in human history.” The new reality means investors and companies must now contend with an increasingly proactive global governance. Research shows this new form of engagement has led to a documented increase in shareholder returns and, in some cases, enhanced corporate innovation.
The shift is also reflected in the global landscape. While the U.S. remains the primary market, its share of campaigns has declined to 47% from 69% a decade ago. Activism expanded into new territory, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region, which, led by Japan, now sees more activity than Europe. In these nations, activists face a different kind of opponent, often a dominant family or state-controlled enterprise, as seen in Norges Bank Investment Management's concerns regarding the VW-Porsche merger.
Corporate leaders also face pressure from forces outside the financial markets. Governments are increasingly moving toward a form of state-managed capitalism, exemplified by the U.S. government's push for equity stakes in companies like Intel and a share of Nvidia's revenue from China.
At the same time, consumers wield new power, using social media and boycotts — like the ones that affected Bud Light and Target — to inflict immediate financial punishment on companies they deem to be acting out of step with their values.
The bifurcation of capital
Perhaps the most significant development, however, is a surprising retreat from ESG-focused campaigns. An issue that once seemed to be at the heart of activist agendas is now in decline. The number of ESG proposals filed in the U.S. plummeted from 735 in 2024 to 530 in the first half of 2025, with average support dropping to a mere 11%. This isn't a moral rejection of ESG but a tactical shift. As the Lazard Half-Year Review of Shareholder Activism for 2025 confirms, activists are now prioritizing issues with a direct impact on financial returns.
The shift is so pronounced that governance-related proposals were the only ones to consistently receive more than 50% support from shareholders. The change in focus is so pronounced that even in the case of Engine No. 1's celebrated campaign against ExxonMobil, the activist-appointed board members later voted to support a major acquisition that propelled oil production to a 140-year high, a reminder of the ultimate priority: profits over politics.
The retreat, however, does not signal a uniform abandonment of global challenges by the financial world. Instead, it underscores a growing bifurcation of capital. Just this week, during PVBLIC Foundation's Partnerships Day at the U.N., a different class of investor, including those from family offices and impact funds, showcased their commitment to sustainable development. While activist investors focus on financial returns from corporate governance, this group builds new architecture to align capital with the U.N.’s goals for systemic, long-term change.
Speakers such as impact investor Terence Keeley and Princess Jahnavi Kumari Mewar, who leads an initiative to bridge private wealth with global policy, emphasized a need for capital to drive systemic, long-term change. Their message highlights that while some financial actors tactically sidestep ESG for profit, others actively build new systems of partnership and capital mobilization that directly align with the U.N.'s goals.
The tools of this new revolution are remarkably effective. The new universal proxy system has empowered activists to get their nominees on corporate boards without a public fight. Public proxy battles have become a relic, as activists now win board seats at a 52% success rate, with 92% of those wins achieved through private, negotiated settlements.
This "quiet power" also coincides with a remarkable rise in executive turnover, as the percentage of S&P 500 CEO resignations occurring during an activist campaign has tripled since 2020. Globally, the most targeted sectors for this new form of activism are industrials, 22%, technology, 20%, and health care, 12%.
The modern activist has truly mastered the art of adaptation. Their power is no longer derived from confrontation but from a sophisticated understanding of data, regulation, and market forces. As the global business landscape continues to evolve, the activist will remain a dynamic force, continuously adjusting its strategy to exploit new opportunities and push for change in the pursuit of financial returns.
