As the art market closed 2025 in a relatively calm and cautious mood, expectations for 2026 rest less on grand promises and more on controlled scenarios. Financial Times seasoned art market writer Melanie Gerlis peers into her crystal ball and shares five predictions for the coming year that quietly break with established narratives. The key takeaway: the market is shifting from growth to recalibration, preparing for strategic adjustment rather than expansion.
To read this cautious landscape correctly, the art market must be understood not only through current data but through its historical systems of support and value formation. As art historian Darius A. Spieth also emphasizes, the art market is the product of a long transformation—from aristocratic monopolies to bourgeois collecting, and from there to global capital networks. Throughout this process, the production and circulation of art were supported first by the state and aristocracy, then by private collectors, and ultimately by global financial actors. For more detailed reflections on these issues, you may look at my recent writings for Sanat Piyasası and the new edition of CI Bloom, where I open a small window onto the world of art fairs.
We have previously discussed how auctions, within this historical transition, became not merely sites of sale but centers where the value of artworks is publicly legitimized. The shift of market centers from Paris to London, then to New York, and today toward the Asia–Middle East axis clearly reveals the geographical mobility of cultural capital. The gradual move away from public support toward a structure increasingly dominated by the market and private capital also forms the basis of today’s fragility. The forecasts for 2026 indicate that we are entering a period in which this historical legacy is being tested once again under contemporary economic and political uncertainty.
A Cautious Recovery Instead of a Thunderous Comeback
Let’s be explicit: a sharp market rebound is not expected in 2026. Ongoing geopolitical tensions, economic uncertainties tied to global politics, a fragile macroeconomic environment, and the potential risk of “bubble capital” driven by artificial intelligence are pushing collectors to tread more carefully than ever. Moreover, it is now more openly acknowledged that the returns art has promised over the past decade as an “alternative investment” have largely failed to meet expectations.
Although 2025 data have not yet fully crystallized, the weak performance of the year’s first half suggests that the lows of 2024 will be exceeded only marginally. This signals that demand is now a greater challenge than supply, setting a tone of caution for 2026. Takeaway: uncertainty persists, and all sides of the market are exercising restraint.
Quality Over Quantity: Modest Works and Sustainability
The intellectual backdrop of this tendency aligns closely with the theme In Minor Keys, set by the late curator Koyo Kouoh for the 2026 Venice Biennale. Grand narratives of expansion are giving way to quieter, more inward-looking, and more sustainable modes of production. This shift manifests itself not only aesthetically but also economically.
Galleries are physically shrinking; the spatial contractions of Sean Kelly, Stephen Friedman, and Almine Rech have become emblematic of this trend. In parallel, artwork sizes are decreasing, and prices are moving into more accessible ranges. According to Artsy data, sales of small-scale works have increased by 66%, and 40% of purchased works measure under 40 inches (approximately 1 m²). This trend signals not just a change in taste but a structural transformation reflecting the purchasing behavior of younger collectors. Rising costs associated with the storage, preservation, and conservation of large-scale works—directly tied to increasing needs for specialized craftsmanship and technical labor—are reshaping collectors perceptions of risk and responsibility. For this reason, the reduction in scale should be read not merely as a shift in aesthetic preference, but as a rational strategy for the sustainability of the art object under current economic conditions.
As spectacular and provocative works recede, domestic scenes, still lifes, and everyday imagery come to the fore. This orientation points to a familiar mood that cannot be explained solely by contemporary market preferences. During the First and Second World Wars, periods of heightened public uncertainty and violence similarly saw artistic focus retreat into interior spaces, the everyday, and controllable imagery. In such moments, the canvas functioned less as a site of political assertion than as a refuge—a mental and emotional shelter against a threatening external reality. Today’s renewed appreciation for domestic scenes and still lifes suggests that, in the face of global crises, economic pressure, and collective fatigue, art is once again leaning toward the “small”, the “close” and the “familiar”. In this sense, current aesthetic tendencies display a striking continuity with visual strategies that emerged during historical periods of trauma. I approach this not as a nostalgic analogy—nostalgia holds little appeal for me—but as part of a historical continuity map showing how image economies contract during crises. As Artsy aptly puts it, “tables and the food upon them have become visual stand-ins for comfort, nostalgia, and the desire for genuine connection.” This aesthetic choice can also be read as the visual projection of the market’s risk-avoidance reflex.
Shifting Fair Dynamics: Frieze Expands While Art Basel Consolidates
Under the leadership of its new owner, Ari Emanuel, Frieze is moving swiftly along a path of expansion. Expectations are high that in 2026, it will incorporate an existing art event into its portfolio. According to whispers circulating among gatekeepers, this new destination may be India rather than the Middle East. This move reflects a desire to tap into new pools of capital, driven by an orientalist impulse within the global art market.
Art Basel, by contrast, is pursuing a different strategy: consolidation rather than growth. Behind this approach lies a special investment relationship with Qatar—one that is difficult to replicate elsewhere. The overall picture is clear: fewer fairs, fewer galleries, more selective participation.
London’s Quiet Return
This forecast is also a wish. London appears to be on its way to once again becoming an attractive cultural hub for artists and institutions. In my article The Economy of Contemporary Art, I discussed how art market balances in central cities are shaped by policy, politics, and interest mechanisms. Looking ahead, while some of the wealth generated by the contemporary art economy has shifted toward Milan, Dubai, and Portugal due to tax advantages, new capital—particularly from those seeking to escape political polarization in the United States—is once again turning toward London. This “neutral” zone may appear to offer breathing space for diverse artistic representations, yet capital remains capital, as always.
The philanthropic activities of Michael Moritz and Harriet Heyman through the Crankstart Foundation go far beyond simple patronage; they represent a form of philanthropy generating global and local impact at the scale of billions of dollars. Julia Rausing’s £150 million support for the National Gallery further solidifies this confidence. From Pale Horse’s apartment exhibitions in Fitzrovia to Hauser & Wirth’s new 18,000 m² space in Mayfair, these investments demonstrate that London’s cultural capital remains robust.
AI Fatigue and the Human Touch
2026 will not be the year in which AI-generated art explodes. On the contrary, interest in hand-crafted works will grow in response to AI anonymity. Ceramics, textiles, drawing, and craft-based practices are becoming increasingly visible. Viewed through rose-tinted glasses, one might interpret this as the market seeking not only aesthetic but also ethical and emotional balance. Yet caution is necessary when drawing historical parallels. To automatically read the turn toward interiority and the everyday during crisis periods as a strategy of “escape” or “innocence” risks romanticizing contemporary production. Those glasses must be consciously removed. Demand for rare, hard-to-find, and labor-intensive works, following modern critiques of kitsch and commodity culture, produces in the contemporary context a new form of fetishization. What appears today as modest scale, calm imagery, or an emphasis on craft does not always signal political retreat; more often, it functions as a strategy of symbolic capital, generating renewed value through rarity, authenticity, and “touchedness.” For this reason, the inward-facing aesthetics of contemporary art are better understood not as natural reflections of historical trauma, but as ways in which supply, demand, and meaning are repackaged under conditions of late capitalism.
Final Thoughts
2026 will be a year not of major explosions, but of slowing down, simplification, and rethinking. This shift affects every stage, from production to circulation, as the market begins to question the notions of speed and scale it has long taken for granted.
The real question is:
“Is art, after a long time, moving away from being an investment vehicle and returning to being a means of constructing meaning?”
Time will tell. What is clear for now is that the market is increasingly struggling to hold these doors shut and to postpone these questions.
Source Framework:
- Melanie Gerlis, Financial Times; Darius A. Spieth, The Art Market: A Global History
