The TikTok deal has intrigued the markets experts, not just because of its $14 billion price tag but because of what it represents: a rare blend of politics, regulation, and corporate strategy colliding in real time.

For many investors, the deal is less about numbers on a balance sheet and more about the precedent it sets for foreign-owned tech companies under US national security scrutiny.

The valuation, far below industry expectations, has stirred debate over whether political urgency is reshaping how assets are priced and how ownership is negotiated in sensitive industries.

Against this backdrop, Invezz sat down with Mohanad Yakout, Senior Markets Analyst at Scope Markets, to unpack the financial and strategic undercurrents of the transaction.

From data security safeguards to investor sentiment and the deal’s long-term impact on global tech markets, Yakout offers a grounded perspective on what this moment means for Wall Street and beyond.

Excerpts:

Mohanad Yakout, Senior Markets Analyst at Scope Markets

Invezz: Let’s first address the elephant in the room: what do you think is behind the $14 billion valuation, which seems clearly far below estimates?

The $14 billion valuation reflects a forced-sale environment rather than a traditional open-market transaction.

Several factors are driving the lower figure: limited access to TikTok’s proprietary algorithm, significant regulatory pressure, and a narrower pool of qualified buyers due to national security concerns.

Investors are also pricing in long-term operational and compliance costs, plus potential risks to user growth and monetization without ByteDance’s direct support.

In short, this is not a typical valuation; it’s one shaped by political urgency and legal constraints.

Invezz: Will this deal really keep American users’ data safe from China? Do you see any loopholes that Beijing can exploit?

While the deal includes clear intentions to separate US user data from Chinese control, the effectiveness will hinge on implementation.

Loopholes could exist if ByteDance retains any backdoor access to code, algorithm updates, or software infrastructure.

Without strict oversight, such as third-party audits, source code transparency, and real-time regulatory monitoring, data security cannot be fully guaranteed.

China’s cybersecurity and data laws also raise concerns about indirect influence if ByteDance remains financially tied to a US entity.

Invezz: ByteDance will still get about half of TikTok’s US profits. What do you think is behind that dynamic of this deal?

This arrangement reflects the reality that TikTok’s core algorithm and IP were developed by ByteDance and remain central to the platform’s success.

The profit-sharing structure appears to be a compromise that allows US operations to continue leveraging ByteDance’s technology without full ownership.

It also provides ByteDance with ongoing financial incentives while addressing US regulatory demands for operational control. However, it does blur the line between economic separation and strategic dependency.

Invezz: How the TikTok deal could impact future investments and valuations in the US tech sector?

Rather than stifling investment, the TikTok deal demonstrates that even amid complex geopolitical tensions, the US remains committed to providing a clear regulatory path forward.

This outcome shows that foreign-owned tech companies can still operate in the US if they align with national security and data governance standards.

For investors, this signals a more predictable environment where risk can be assessed and managed within a structured framework.

It also highlights the US government’s willingness to find pragmatic solutions, which can ultimately bolster confidence and drive renewed investment in compliant, innovative tech platforms.

Invezz: Could political and regulatory risks exposed by the TikTok deal lead to wider stock market volatility, especially for companies with ties to China?

While geopolitical concerns can create short-term uncertainty, the TikTok deal shows that regulatory hurdles are not insurmountable.

This sets a positive precedent: instead of abrupt bans or shutdowns, companies are being given pathways to remain operational through compliance and structural changes.

Such negotiated outcomes can actually reduce long-term volatility by clarifying expectations and proving that dialogue is possible even in sensitive areas.

In the broader sense, the deal reinforces the idea that regulatory frameworks are evolving, not closing to accommodate global business realities.

Invezz: Does forcing TikTok to sell set a risky example for how America treats global tech companies?

On the contrary, the TikTok deal illustrates that the US is willing to engage in difficult but constructive negotiations to resolve complex national security concerns while still welcoming innovation and foreign investment.

Rather than signaling hostility, it underscores a commitment to safeguarding user data and critical infrastructure without closing the door to global participation.

This case could serve as a blueprint for how countries can balance sovereignty with openness, strengthening the US tech ecosystem by ensuring it is both secure and globally competitive.

The post Interview: TikTok’s $14B sale shows politics, not markets, driving valuations, says analyst Mohanad Yakout appeared first on Invezz