Individual Economists

Payrolls Paradox: November Jobs Stronger Than Expected But Unemployment Rate Jumps To 4 Year High

Zero Hedge -

Payrolls Paradox: November Jobs Stronger Than Expected But Unemployment Rate Jumps To 4 Year High

Ahead of today's jobs report, Goldman Delta One Head Rich Privorotsky wrote that with the October print backward looking and mostly govt related and irrelevant, "anywhere near consensus for November (+/-25k of 50k) feels like the sweet spot…that said, hard to see the FOMC feeling compelled to halt accommodation or even talk about hiking if labor momentum is still sub-100k on trend. Too cold (<25k or negative) and the pro-cyclical rally we’ve seen has to be questioned. Probably bigger risk to the market narrative is a re-acceleration in labor which is consistent with some of the bonce in open jobs visible in the higher frequency data."

With that in mind, moments ago the the BLS published a very mixed report, with payrolls coming solid, thanks to a big beat in the November print, offset by an unexpected jump in the unemployment rate to 4.6%, above estimates, and the highest since Sept 2021.

Here are the details: in October, the US lost 105K jobs, entirely due to a plunge in government jobs (more below) but this was offset by the November jump of 64K jobs, which came in higher than the 50K expected. 

Naturally, the negative revisions continued: the BLS also reported that the change in total nonfarm payroll employment for August was revised down by 22,000, from -4,000 to -26,000, and the change for September was revised down by 11,000, from +119,000 to +108,000.  With these revisions, employment in August and September combined is 33,000 lower than previously reported. 

Of note, government employment tumbled in November by -6,000. This follows a sharp decline of 162,000 in October, as some federal employees who accepted a deferred resignation offer came off federal payrolls. Federal government employment is down by 271,000 since reaching a peak in January. (Federal employees on furlough during the government shutdown were counted as employed in the establishment survey because they received pay, even if later than usual, for the pay period that included the 12th of the month. Employees on paid leave or receiving ongoing severance pay are counted as employed in the establishment survey.)

But while payrolls were generally solid, the unemployment rate was a problem and is what will likely prompt the Fed to cut more: in November, the unemp rate rose to 4.6% (with October blank), worse than the 4.5% estimate and the highest since Sept 2021.

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rate for teenagers was 16.3% in November, an increase from September. The jobless rates for adult men (4.1 percent), adult women (4.1 percent),  Whites (3.9 percent), Blacks (8.3 percent), Asians (3.6 percent), all rose, and just the unemp rate for Hispanics (5.0 percent) dropped.

Both the labor force participation rate (62.5 percent) and the employment-population ratio (59.6 percent) were little changed from September. These measures showed little or no change over the year. 

In November, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls edged up by 5 cents, or 0.1 percent, to $36.86. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased by 3.5%, lower than the 3.6% expected. The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls edged up by 0.1 hour to 34.3 hours in November. In manufacturing, the average workweek changed little at 40.0 hours, and overtime was unchanged at 2.9 hours. 

Taking a closer look at the report we find the following details:

  • The number of people jobless less than 5 weeks was 2.5 million in November, up by 316,000 from  September. The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) changed little at 1.9 million in November and accounted for 24.3 percent of all unemployed people. 
  • The number of people employed part time for economic reasons was 5.5 million in November, an increase of 909,000 from September. These individuals would have preferred full-time employment but were working part time because their hours had been reduced or they were unable to find full-time jobs. 
  • The number of people not in the labor force who currently want a job, at 6.1 million in November, was little changed from September. These individuals were not counted as unemployed because they were not actively looking for work during the 4 weeks preceding the survey or were unavailable to take a job. 
  • Among those not in the labor force who wanted a job, the number of people marginally attached to the labor force, at 1.8 million in November, was little changed from September. These individuals wanted and were available for work and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months but had not looked for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. The number of discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached who believed that no jobs were available for them, also changed little at 651,000 in November. 

Taking a closer look at the monthly change in jobs, employment rose in health care and construction while federal government employment declined by 6,000, following a loss of 162,000 in October. 

  • In November, health care added 46,000 jobs, in line with the average monthly gain of 39,000 over the prior 12 months. Over the month, job gains occurred in ambulatory health care services (+24,000),  hospitals (+11,000), and nursing and residential care facilities (+11,000).
  • Construction employment grew by 28,000 in November, as nonresidential specialty trade contractors added 19,000 jobs. Construction employment had changed little over the prior 12 months. 
  • Employment in social assistance continued to trend up in November (+18,000), primarily in individual and family services (+13,000). 
  • In November, employment edged down in transportation and warehousing (-18,000), reflecting a job loss in couriers and messengers (-18,000). Transportation and warehousing employment has declined  by 78,000 since reaching a peak in February. 
  • The big outlier was Federal government employment, which continued to decrease in November (-6,000). This follows a sharp  decline of 162,000 in October, as some federal employees who accepted a deferred resignation offer came off federal payrolls. Federal government employment is down by 271,000 since reaching a peak in January. (Federal employees on furlough during the government shutdown were counted as employed in the establishment survey because they received pay, even if later than usual, for the pay period that included the 12th of the month. Employees on paid leave or receiving ongoing severance pay are counted as employed in the establishment survey.)

And visually:

While the quantitative aspects of the report were ok, the qualitative were ugly. In November, the number of full-time workers plunged by 983K from September to 134.17 million. At the same time, in the two months since Sept, the number of part-time workers soared by over 1 million (1.025 million to be precise) to 29.486 million...

... the highest on record while full-time workers tumbled to a 2025 low!

As for the closely watched "immigrant" shift, in November there were no fireworks here, with Native Born workers up 114K, while foreign-born increased by 58.

There was more: the number of people who need more than one job to make ends meet soared by almost 500K in the 2 months since Sept to 9.301 million, the highest on record!

Overall, this jobs report was weaker than it will be spun for political reasons, which however is precisely what the market is looking for because as Morgan Stanley's Mike Wilson put it, "bad news is now good news for stocks."

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 09:02

Hunting Season Opens: 18 Sanctioned Tankers Lurking In Venezuelan Waters

Zero Hedge -

Hunting Season Opens: 18 Sanctioned Tankers Lurking In Venezuelan Waters

President Trump's gunboat diplomacy in the Caribbean, off Venezuela's coast, has the effect of a maritime blockade, disrupting oil flows to Cuba and to global markets via shadow-fleet tankers. The Trump administration calculates that choking off this oil trade could trigger cascading economic stress, first in Cuba and then in Venezuela, ultimately accelerating the end goal of regime change in Caracas.

The latest report from Axios shows that the Trump administration's seizure of a shadow-fleet tanker in the Caribbean is only in the early innings, with 18 sanctioned oil-laden ships currently in Venezuelan waters.

Last week, a US Special Forces unit seized the tanker Skipper, which was carrying crude contracted by Cubametales, Cuba's state-run oil trading firm.

The tanker was part of a dark fleet that shipped crude from Venezuela to Cuba and onward to Asia.

Samir Madani, co-founder of the firm Tanker Trackers, told Axios that of the 18 sanctioned oil-laden ships off the country's coast, eight are classified as "Very Large Crude Carriers" (VLCCs), such as Skipper, which can carry nearly 2 million barrels of Venezuelan crude. "It's quite a buffet for the U.S. to choose from," he said.

Given the unprecedented US naval presence in the Caribbean, mainly offshore of Venezuela in international waters, the Trump administration's theory of gunboat diplomacy centers on cutting off all support to Cuba. To do that, it follows the money, starting with oil flows via dark tanker fleets. Once those oil flows are disrupted, Venezuela falls, and then Cuba follows.

Related:

Axios quoted one Trump adviser as saying, "We have to wait for them to move. They're sitting at the dock. Once they move, we'll go to court, get a warrant, and then get them," adding, "But if they make us wait too long, we might get a warrant to get them there," in Venezuelan waters.

And gunboat diplomacy it is.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 08:55

'K-Shaped' Economy? Core Retail Sales Surged In October

Zero Hedge -

'K-Shaped' Economy? Core Retail Sales Surged In October

Amid the growing specter of a 'k-shaped' economy, BofA's (almost) omniscient analysts forecast strong retail sales for October - considerably stronger than Bloomberg's consensus of a marginal uptick.

BofA was wrong - very wrong - as the headline retail sales was unchanged MoM, which pulled sales down to +3.5% YoY (still relatively strong)...

Source: Bloomberg

However, Ex-Autos, and Ex-Autos and Gas both beat expectations.

The figures indicate consumer spending picked up steam in the early weeks of the holiday-shopping season as shoppers, many worried about their jobs and frustrated by the high cost of living, sought out deals.

Eight out of 13 retail categories posted increases, including solid advances at department stores and online merchants.

Motor vehicles fell 1.6%, held down in part by the expiration of federal tax incentives on electric vehicles. Cheaper gasoline prices held down the value of gas station receipts.

However, there is a silver lining, as the Retail Sales Control Group (which excludes food services, auto dealers, building materials stores and gasoline stations) - which feeds into the GDP calc - surged 0.8% MoM - double expectations and the biggest MoM jump since June...

Source: Bloomberg

That MoM jump leaves sales up a strong 5.1% YoY and while the 'k-shaped' economy continues to weigh on market sentiment, it is not evident in the aggregate data and supports solid Q4 GDP growth.

 

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 08:44

Transcript: MiB: Stephen Cohen, BlackRock’s Chief Product Officer and Head of Global Product Solutions

The Big Picture -

 

 

The transcript from this week’s, MiB: Stephen Cohen, BlackRock’s Chief Product Officer and Head of Global Product Solutions, is below.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, SpotifyYouTube, and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

~~~

This is Masters in Business with Barry Ritholtz on Bloomberg Radio

Barry Ritholtz: This week on the podcast. Another banger, Steve Cohen is BlackRock’s Chief Product Officer and Head of Product Solutions. BlackRock runs three and a half trillion dollars to the world’s largest asset manager. Their iShares ETF division is over $5 trillion. There are a few people in the world better situated to identify what is happening in the world of asset and wealth management than Steve Cohen. Not just fixed income, active index, bitcoin digital assets. They’re also moving into privates and alternatives. Whether that’s an ETF or just part of that platform is something else entirely. I, I thought this conversation was fascinating and I think you will also, with no further ado, BlackRock’s, chief Product Officer and head of Product Solutions, Stephen Cohen.

Stephen Cohen: It’s great to be here.

Barry Ritholtz: We’re gonna talk a lot about what you do at BlackRock and how the company has been growing, but I wanna start with your background degree in economics from Southampton College. Was the plan always to go into investment strategy or what were you thinking back then?

Stephen Cohen: I’m not sure I had a plan. I, I studied economics at school and then at university and I, I was always, I was always very interested in this kind of concept of the markets. I didn’t have any background, no family background in, in markets or investing, but I always found reading up about markets interesting. And, and what kind of got me in, it was a slight fluke. We were talking about flukes before the show. One of my neighbors was a telecoms engineer, and he used to go round to all the banks installing the dealer boards. And he, one day, and I was talking to him and he, one day.

Barry Ritholtz: Various ATMs, automatic tele machines, we call ’em here.

Stephen Cohen: The phone phone systems that, that you use on the trading floors, you know, that come with all  the hoot and holler and all that kind of stuff, I think meant

Barry Ritholtz: Those were the big, at ATM manufacturers way

Stephen Cohen: , they were. And, and he said, so I got talking about em and I mentioned this interest and he said, well, why don’t you do a day’s work experience with me? We’ll go to a bank. So we went to one of the banks, I can’t remember which one it was, and I walked onto this trading floor, you know, for someone who had no experience or never experienced this before, it was amazing. There was people shouting, there was screens and flashing numbers and stuff like that. And I thought, you know what? This, this looks pretty cool. This buzz was, was so the kind of combination of an opportunity to work in something that, that took economics and markets and the world, and then this kind of feeling of a buzzy environment, that was the thing. And so I applied to a number of banks and outta university got an opportunity to go to UBS.

Barry Ritholtz: So that was your first gig right? Outta school you were working with convertibles and fixed income and something similar at ING Barings. Yeah. Tell us about your, your work at UBS and ING. What, what sort of job was it?

Stephen Cohen: So I worked, I originally started in fixed income and, and then, and then went into convertible bonds. And a lot of what I spent my time doing was kind of more market strategist type of roles. So talking to clients about what was going on in the markets, what was going on in the bond markets, trade, I, you know, developing trade ideas for clients. And, and then that’s also how I got involved in spending quite a lot of time on the Japanese markets, which I found, you know, incredibly interesting and really got to understand kinda the Japanese culture and, and the, the way, the way the country operated. And

Barry Ritholtz: Is that what led you to Nomura? Or did Nomura come first and then the Japanese exposure that

Stephen Cohen:  Yeah, it, it did. So getting involved in Japan kind lent me to, to doing, to doing convertible bonds originally at ING and then with a group of us at Namur. And, and that’s where I spent a lot more time on the Japanese markets. And I think it’s all part of how you, you know, I think back to to those days, you know, Japan was very different to what it is kind of now the market, definitely the market at the time was about nine, the nicko was about 9,009, 10,000 given where?

Barry Ritholtz: Down from 39,000.

Stephen Cohen: Yeah. Now we’re back at 46,000. So there’s like a proper v shape of that market,

Barry Ritholtz: Right. Only took three and a half decades,

Stephen Cohen: Only took three and a half decades. And I, and I managed to do the middle bit, which was not necessarily the most exciting bit, I’ve gotta be honest. But I think, you know, again, it was a, what was interesting about it is you learn about kind of an, an economy and therefore a stock market that is in such a different place as it was then to, you know, looking at the US market or the European markets at the time.

Barry Ritholtz: So that raises a really interesting question. How do you think, how do you think about the 1990s, even the two thousands Euro nomura till 2011? How do you think about those decades versus today? It, that world doesn’t seem like it’s that long ago, but it really feels like it was so different.

Stephen Cohen: It feels incredibly different. I think for Japan it’s completely different. And you know, if you go back to, as you say, the late nineties, early two thousands, you know, the banking crisis that was part of the bubble and the collapse had still not been solved. And it was only really in the early, early to mid two thousands that they finally kind of got their arms around the banking system. And one thing you read about history, and unless you can get the banking system operating properly and lending, you really struggle to get an economy going. The second thing that’s really interesting I think is so different is back then you would, every six months, every year there would be a government led fiscal impulse. Right? And, you know, they used to call it the building the roads to nowhere. Right. You know, paving the entire country. Right. Just gotta kind of spend and spend and spend. And the reaction of the market to that was, this is gonna have no impact. The reaction now to fiscal spending is actually this is, you know, great, this is kind of part of the economy. The, the country kinda being back on its feet. You’re now talking about inflation being potentially an issue in Japan. Whereas there, it was all about deflation. So it’s quite amazing how it has turned around. And you’re seeing that in the bond market and just the yields.

Barry Ritholtz: One, one of the things I’m kind of fascinated about following the Japan, Japan bubble popping in 89 and how long it took to recover from that is the concept, and I’m apologies in advance from my mispronunciation of risu, which is the Japanese concept of these vertically integrated companies, manufacturing, retail, banking, like just every sector, if there’s a banking problem, the entire economy seems to run into trouble. ’cause that whole vertical Hmm. Sometimes it’s Mitsubishi, sometimes it’s whatever. Each of these entities are giant. And if the bank has a problem, wow, you’re really doing some damage.

Stephen Cohen: Yeah. ’cause I think if you look back to the history, and again, this is, this is changing and, and, and different to the way we’d think about kinda western markets and companies, but Japan, historically it was a bank lending market. You, you got financing through bank lending, all the stock market. And so banks were just so central to the way the economy operated. And you see parallels to that in Europe, a little bit less here in the US it’s very different now. You know, there’s the, there’s the banking sector, which is obviously very critical to the way companies and financing. But you have this huge kind of private sector. You have private lending, direct lending, things like that. So again, it’s good. I think one of the things I’ve learned over my career and had the opportunity to work in different markets is you start to see these, the way these economies operate is different and therefore the, the impact on the markets and therefore investors is very, very different.

Barry Ritholtz: So you stay at Mura till 2011. How did you, what brought you from Mura to BlackRock?

Stephen Cohen: I had an opportunity, you know, having had a lot of great experiences. You know, 2011 BlackRock was probably 18 months into the integration of the iShares business or the, the indexing business. And really focused on how do we expand this business, particularly how do we expand iShares this, you know, this ETF business. And back in 2011, Europe European ETFs was still a very nascent industry. You know, now it’s like a two and a half trillion dollar industry. I, European iShares is over a trillion dollars. Back then it was very much still the very early days. And you could see what is, what was happening in the states. And so when I was speaking to BlackRock, you could see this really interesting opportunity to, to kind of take all of what I’d done before in terms of the market’s kinda background and the breadth of experience, and then apply it to this thing that was still pretty new.

And the kind of mission was how do you educate people about what an ETF is? How do you help people start to think about how to use an ETF in a portfolio? And by the way, also, what are the ETFs that don’t exist yet that could exist? And again, you always have to, it’s quite hard. You always have to cast a, you know, Barry, you always have to cast your mind back to what it was then versus your perspective of where you are today. It was still fairly, you know, plain vanilla

Barry Ritholtz: So go back to the 1990s, Im pretty sure the Qs were around then, and SPY might’ve been around, but this is before really iShares was still part of Barclays. But no one really thought that ETFs were a giant market waiting to take place, or I should say very few people thought that the ones who did ended up being at the head of a giant wave. What made you realize 15 years ago that, hey, this iShares thing is gonna be big one day?

Stephen Cohen: Honestly, it was talking to the people in iShares. It was having kind of been introduced to them and having been approached to, to go and talk to them. It was, I learned a lot from just sitting down and, and understanding this. I’d sat in banks, we traded ETFs. They were, to be honest, a very, very small component of what we, of what we did. It was only really when I spoke to the people at iShares and the BlackRock and understood the history of how iShares had grown and where it was then. And the, that sense of mission, that sense of kind of the purpose of giving more access to investing to, to people, you know, and creating more transparency that they had lived as they grow in the US business. And they were growing the European business. And that kind of just captured you. And I think frankly in the last 15 years I’ve seen that and been fortunately been part of kind of driving that. But it was very clear that there was a big opportunity to do something different in an industry, an asset management industry that hadn’t really been shaken up. And I think one thing that ETFs have done, and iShares has led this is really shaken up the industry on behalf of end investors in a couple of ways.

Barry Ritholtz: At at the very least they’re very low cost. And it’s raised questions about our do most, not all, but do most active managers actually justify their fees relative to their performance. And then second, helping to move a lot of mom and pop investors, at least having a core as passive indexing as opposed to an allocation that’s nothing but active managers. I mean, iShares has been the biggest driver of that. When you started at BlackRock, what was, what was the first job?

Stephen Cohen: So I started in the iShares business and I actually set up an investment strategy team. And what we did was go out and talk to clients about what was going on in markets. You know, we were part of BlackRock, now I shares was part of BlackRock. And so there’s, you know, a huge pedigree of investing and how do you take that externally to, to our clients and educate them about how ETFs could be used to implement these ideas, build portfolios. I have to say in the early days, a lot of it was just educating people on what, what is an ETF? Like how does it actually work? How, how, what is a creation? What is a redemption? And what do I need to understand and know? Secondly, how do I then think about putting them in a, in a portfolio? And what’s interesting, I remember a couple of years in probably this probably 18 minutes, months into my time at BlackRock, we did a big study on how do you blend active and indexing. And we were very allergic to the word passive, right? Like, because you know, we used to go out and say to people, which we still do, you know, every decision you make is active, right? That’s right.

Barry Ritholtz: If you market cap weighted, I mean, it could have, it’s a decision been equal cap.

Stephen Cohen: Totally. You know, investing in US equities is a decision, it’s an active decision. Then deciding to use an ETF is an active decision. So we would, you know, we would talk to clients about, and what does it mean to use an ETF? How does it fit with, with active management? Which again, go back to, I think it’s pretty well accepted now. I think BlackRock has, and the ETF industry has played a big, big role in this, but the concept of blending, indexing and active managers and alpha in one portfolio is that’s, that’s kind of very accepted. People gonna get that. It’s pretty standard. It wasn’t back then 10, 14 years ago. And in some respects it was slightly religious in terms of indexing or like, you are either passive or you’re active.

Barry Ritholtz: I recall the phrase that was used in the two thousands core and satellite; And, and you don’t hear that all that much anymore. Now it’s, you have a passive core and you’re, you’re decorating it with active choices around it.

Stephen Cohen: Yeah. It’s kinda how do you get the best out of, out of everything. How, how do you say, you know what, actually, here’s an area where I think that we can deliver alpha, which is really what you’re, when you say active, what you’re really saying is like alpha something, alpha something, something beyond the index. And I come back to a point you made earlier, Barry, about how the industry shifted. I think what ETFs did is they sh shone a light on what is, what is performance, right? And you know, if you can get the index through an etf, it’s very efficient. Then as an active manager, you’ve gotta deliver something more. And many, many active managers of BlackRock do deliver more. But I think that that element of the more became a very important component of the industry and component of how for many investors, they could then blend these, these different tools together to create better portfolios. And I think that’s the journey to me in the last kind of 12, you know, 12, 14 years. It’s been so exciting.

Barry Ritholtz: You said when you began, you went out and spoke to a variety of BlackRock clients. Were these mom and pop investors, were these institutional clients? Were they brokers and RIAs that are investing in ETFs on behalf of their clients? Who were the folks that you first reached out to? It

Stephen Cohen: Was pretty broad actually. It, it tended to be wealth managers and it tended to be institutional investors, which would be, you know, primarily pension funds. But what’s interesting is how that has, how that’s expanded over the last, again, the last kind of decade. You know, if I look at, if I look at the breadth of users now is anything from central banks through to, you know, retail investors in 401k plans or the equivalent in Europe. And I think that’s been one of the secrets to the, to, to why ETFs have grown so quickly is that they actually are very much a product or a tool for anybody and everybody. So it started very much with I would say kind of wealth manages and pension funds. But it grew out and out and out and frankly in Europe we learned a lot from the way the US industry had had grown. We talk all, all the time about how the European ETF industry is probably about 10 years behind the us And so there’s a bit of a roadmap there. And you know, I think we’re seeing that happen in real time.

Barry Ritholtz:  When I over at Europe and, and so especially the UK, it seems like index adoption has been very slow. People haven’t quite bought into the concept of, hey, before you go after alpha, at least start with beta. That hasn’t really found a lot of traction there yet. Or are you seeing that start to change in Europe?

Stephen Cohen: We’ve seen that change. It’s definitely behind the US but it is definitely happening. And I think the same forces and drivers that we’ve seen in the US are very much applicable to Europe and ultimately will be to Asia as well, which I think will go on that kind of same journey. So I think it’s just more of a matter of time or timing as to where we are now versus versus versus the US And there are different country dynamics that everywhere in the world play into why different parts of the industry, you know, move quicker or or slower. But I think the direction’s definitely the same.

Barry Ritholtz: Different regulatory regimes, different tax treatment technology. Is the technology really all that different? You would think that adoption maybe some countries on a lag but not 10 years.

Stephen Cohen: Yeah, I think it’s just, so I, I think the last 10 years in the US if we are today in somewhere like Europe, in the ETF industry where the US was 10 years ago, I think the next 10 years in Europe will be faster than the last 10 years in the us. Makes sense. Yeah, it’s ’cause I think that partly because there is a, there is a roadmap that the US has created, it’s different ’cause of regulation, all the things that you, that you mentioned, but I think that everything is happening so much faster now and, and you’re seeing that in ETFs, you’re seeing that in other parts of the industry as well.

Barry Ritholtz: So let’s talk a little bit about what you’ve been doing at BlackRock for almost the past 15 years. You begin in 2011, the growth must have been explosive. What was that like watching this rocket ship take off?

Stephen Cohen: It’s been fantastic. It’s been an amazing experience. You know, the firm has grown so quickly in the last 10, 15 years and not just grown in terms of assets, which is obviously one way to measure growth, but also just the breadth of what BlackRock does for our clients and the breadth of the number of clients that we talk to. What’s, I think, so for, for someone like me, what what’s so been so great is the ability to be involved in lots of different parts of the firm. And, you know, whether that was, again, growing the European iShares business, whether that was running fixed income iShares, which was a fantastic opportunity and time in, or moment in time I should say, in terms of really not just growing fixed income ETFs, but changing the bond market and the impact we’ve had there to now where, again, the breadth of the company with private markets and things like that. So it has been a, a great journey to be on personally, but also to see it from the inside.

Barry Ritholtz: Can you explain what a chief product officer does at a large asset manager? It’s sort of an unusual title in the world of investing.

Stephen Cohen: Yeah, so there are a number of things that, that I look at and my, my team look at. One is how do we continue to make sure that our product range is at the forefront of innovation in terms of where the industry is going. How do we make sure that what our clients are looking for with delivering in whatever format they’re looking at. And I think one of the biggest shifts that we’ve seen in the industry, we talked before about kind of how you blend active indexing kind of together, how that’s become more commonplace and kind of more, more accepted. I think the other thing that is happening is that the way all of our clients are, you know, consuming investments or accessing markets is also shifting. So this concept that, you know, pretty much for the whole time that we were growing the iShares business, when we talked about growing ETFs, we were really talking about, we, we were also talking about growing indexing.

00:21:29 That was very synonymous, right? When you talk about growing ETFs, now you’re not just talking about growing indexing, you’re talking about lots of different things, active ETFs, digital assets. And so I think this concept of how we ensure that as we look across all of the investment capabilities we have as a firm that we want to bring to our clients, that we’re delivering them in a way that works for our clients, that requires us to think a little bit differently to, to the way we’ve had to in the past and the way I think the way the industry has. And so that’s why we’ve brought all this together in, into my role and my, my group. And that includes driving the iShares business and, and the growth of ETFs, making ETFs more central to, to what we do in the firm, but also looking across all of our liquid active business, our private markets businesses with our investment teams and those business leads to, to ensure that our product range, you know, works for our clients. And then helping them, helping our clients actually get the best out of what we have. I started an investment strategy. We spent a lot of time talking to clients about what’s going on in markets, how to build better portfolios, how to get the best out of the tools that they have that we need to build. And then what’s next? What’s, what’s the next trend or theme that’s that’s on people’s minds.

00:22:47 [Speaker Changed] So, so I’m hearing two approaches. One is a top down, Hey, what’s going on in the world? What’s out there that’s interesting that perhaps we’re not addressing and a bottoms up. What are clients asking for? What do they think they want? What do we think they need? What, what’s the key driver of, of new offerings? We could talk a little bit about ibit, which is a unicorn. The, the Bitcoin ETF approaching a hundred billion dollars in assets. I think it could be the fastest ETF to a hundred billion dollars. I don’t even know what’s, what’s close maybe GLD, but that, that was a long time ago. How, how do you think about coming up with new products? How much of it is driven by client demand? And how much of it is driven by just looking from the top down and saying, here’s a hole that we really should fill.

00:23:45 [Speaker Changed] It’s a, it’s a real mixture. It is, you know, we’ll have a, a lot of ideas, we’ll have a lot of ideas that are driven by investment views we have as a firm by our investment teams by working with other people in the industry. And we will combine that with what we’re hearing from clients and where clients are, you know, we we’re engaging with clients all the time around, you know, their portfolios and seeing where are there kind of gaps in a portfolio or where are there, sometimes it’s, sometimes there are investment opportunities, but there isn’t a way to get to it. Again, come back to what ETFs have done. Like how do you give that access to, to something that was new. If you think about Ibit, you know, Bitcoin obviously had grown already to a pretty sizable kind of industry.

00:24:37 [Speaker Changed] I think when Ibit launched, Bitcoin was a little over a trillion dollars, something like that. Roughly

00:24:42 [Speaker Changed] That, yeah. Yeah. And, and so there was a sizable kinda industry already out there, but for many clients or many potential investors, the ease, the comfort, the knowledge understanding of of an ETF wrapper was a great way of allowing them to buy into crypto Bitcoin in this case and make it again, potentially a bigger part of the portfolio. What’s interesting is the number of, you know, in, in that explosive growth that Ibit has had, the number of buyers, investors of Ibit who were already holders of Bitcoin in, you know, other forms was quite notable. And so I think it kind of tests to this idea of actually how do you access different markets sometimes in quite traditional ways and how do you bridge between this kind of traditional world and this decentralized world? And you’re seeing the same thing with ether as well with our ether fund.

00:25:42 [Speaker Changed] So, you know, the, the classic Bitcoin issue is, wait, I have to make sure that this drive doesn’t get damaged. I have to keep in the safe. What’s my password? Hey, this is a lot of money and it’s a bigger pain in the neck to keep track of then the rest of my assets. I can own this in an ETF. Why do I ever wanna own Bitcoin directly? Seems to be what a lot of people are saying. And

00:26:06 [Speaker Changed] That, and that’s what we heard over and over again. Both again from people who had held or hold Bitcoin in digital wallets and felt that this was a kind of a, an easier, better way to hold it.

00:26:19 [Speaker Changed] Especially when you read the numbers. 25% of all coins ever mined. It might even be 30% have been lost. Either the drives were damaged or the passwords were lost, which is,

00:26:29 [Speaker Changed] There’s some great stories out there. Crazy

00:26:31 [Speaker Changed] Guy who went out and bought a landfill ’cause he’s,

00:26:33 [Speaker Changed] Because he was trying to find the

00:26:35 [Speaker Changed] Of $200 million worth of Bitcoin on the drive that was accidentally Yeah. Thrown away. I mean,

00:26:40 [Speaker Changed] So, you know, putting in an I share probably would’ve been a, an at least an easier way of of right of owning a landfill. It,

00:26:49 [Speaker Changed] It’s, it’s kind of amazing, but it raises a question that I’ve been thinking about for a while. Alternatives and privates, whether it’s private equity, private debt, private infrastructure and real assets are probably the fastest growing segment of the market. Are we ever gonna see something like that in an ETF wrapper, an illiquid alt in an ETF,

00:27:17 [Speaker Changed] Possibly? Look, it’s definitely something that a lot of people are looking at, including ourselves. But there are a lot of ways to, I think the biggest story I think people jump towards the kind of private markets and ETFs and the real story is how do you open up access appropriately for more people to access private markets as part of the portfolio. So if we think about a world which we believe in which you are kinda moving from, call it 60 40, you know, the traditional right portfolio to more of a 50, 30, 20 where 20 is private markets and that’s applicable to somebody who owns a defined benefit scheme. In fact, they’ve got that already probably more through the, the way the scheme’s managed. But actually if you then apply that to say to other pension types, like a defined contribution scheme or a wealth investor, that kind of journey towards incorporating more private markets into a portfolio for all of the diversification reasons that, you know, we’ve talked about a lot that how that happens is, is the real work and that may end up requiring an ETF, but I think there are lots of other ways that, you know, that can open up the door to private markets being a bigger part.

00:28:26 Either either a completely new part or, or a bigger part of a portfolio for, you know, an individual retiree or an individual investor. Again, it comes back to what we were saying earlier on about rather than thinking about different product types, an ETF or a mutual fund being associated with one type of strategy, it’s actually saying what are the strategies that we believe would help a client, an investor have a better portfolio for whatever their goals are? And then how do you best put that together?

00:28:58 [Speaker Changed] So it’s less and what unique, less about the product? More about the solution to the, to

00:29:02 [Speaker Changed] Me it’s about the portfolio. Yeah. What, what’s the solution exactly, what are you trying to achieve and what, you know, and if it’s a, you know, long term retirement or retirement income, whatever, whatever it is. And then what does the portfolio need to look like or should look like and how does it evolve over time? And then how do you do it right? And what are the kind of mixture of tools that are most, most appropriate to, to get you there. So that’s the shift in thinking that I think

00:29:24 [Speaker Changed] People, so let’s dive into that a little bit. You know, the advantage of stocks, bonds, convertibles. Hmm. They all come with a CUSIP number. It’s pretty standard in terms of the custodianship, where, where it’s held, what sort of public information is a about available, the due diligence you can do about it, how to get liquid. When you want to get liquid, all those stocks, bonds, and, and put convertibles as sort of a hybrid. Everybody knows how to operate around that. It seems like when we look at privates, they’re all one-offs. The custodian ships are all a single thing. Doing the due diligence is time consuming and expensive. They’re, the hope is they’re, they’re not correlated and you’re giving up liquidity in exchange for the illiquidity premium. Can that ever be standardized enough that as a wealth manager, I could say, Hey Steven, I wanna move 10, 20% of these clients’ assets to a diversified set of equity debt Yeah. And real assets and I want some liquidity. Like is this a pipe dream? Oh, and I don’t want any K ones ’cause they’re a disaster to deal with. Like, if that were something that was turnkey and available, I would think that every wealth manager in America would rush in that direction. How long might it be before privates look something like public markets, or at least the pain points are, are reduced to Yeah. Something tolerable.

00:31:04 [Speaker Changed] I think we’re on a, we’re on a journey and I think that that is about, first of all, developing investment strategies and therefore, and being able to put them in products that work for a wealth manager. Secondly, there’s a big, you know, the operational lift, right? The, the technology development that is happening. And we’re working, we’re working with a number of firms around how can we make sure that, for example, model portfolios can incorporate private markets in a more efficient, kind of easier to use way. It’s gonna be different to public markets, it should be different to public markets because I think the role of a, of a infrastructure, for example, in a, in a, in a portfolio is different to the role of owning stocks or owning bonds. And I think that part of, you know, part of the way we’ve always thought about the role of stocks and bonds as being different as well, you know, bonds as a ballast to a portfolio, stocks as a growth driver for example. I think you’ve gotta

00:31:58 [Speaker Changed] Think about that. I’m enough when bonds actually generated attractive yields.

00:32:03 [Speaker Changed] Maybe that’ll come back, you know, we might need a bit of inflation, but yeah, one day, one day, Barry, will we be back on the podcast too? Absolutely. To cover that off. But I, I think that different role is very important, but there’s a lot of development to that is happening to be able to make that more efficient than it has been historically. And I think that’s, I think we will see a lot of change in the next couple of years.

00:32:27 [Speaker Changed] You, you mentioned technology, let, let’s dive a little deeper into that. BlackRock acquired pre Quinn and acquired E Front and I’m read about some integration into your Aladdin platform. How significant are those tools when it comes to offering private market investments to the public?

00:32:49 [Speaker Changed] Incredibly important. I think that, you know, for anybody who is for a wealth manager who is running a portfolio for a, for a client, the, it’s not just as, you know, it’s not just about buying the different products or doing the asset allocation, it’s also about the risk management of, of what does that portfolio look like? And that’s really what Aladdin is about. And as more and more investors, whether that is a retail investor or wealth wealth investor, or whether that’s a big pension fund, incorporate private markets into portfolios and blend private and public. And, and I think again, if you go back over that 10 15 year journey, we started with indexing on one side of the floor and you know, active on the other side. And we gradually brought those together and that became commonplace to blend. And I think we’re now in that world of starting to blend public markets and private markets, which historically were completely distinct and we’re starting to kinda blend, blend those because, because the industries are crossing over more companies are staying private for longer, et cetera, et cetera.

00:33:52 So as we bring those together, the need to be able to, you know, risk manage and understand those portfolios in different scenarios is incredibly important. That’s what Aladdin is about. With Preco, what is so exciting is that I think over time the private markets will become more transparent. There will be more data available and around and very similar to what, what Aladdin and BlackRock did with public markets will happen in the private markets as well. And that I think will help more and more investors access private markets in the way and understand what it is that, that they have partly of which is again, understanding the different liquidity and, and being comfortable that they’re different for a reason. And you’re not trying to create a one size fit fits all. You’re trying to create a portfolio that delivers the right, the right outcomes. Aladin I think is gonna be critical for that. So

00:34:45 [Speaker Changed] Let’s talk a little bit about product development. Just in the ETF space this year, over a thousand new ETFs have come out, or at least we’re on pace to do that by the end of this year. This sort of hyper development of ETFs, it, everything we’ve talked about seems to be very thoughtful and very measured with a, a really specific approach. Kind of feels like the rest of the industry is just throwing stuff up against the wall to see what sticks, how, how do you look at this?

00:35:18 [Speaker Changed] We can only focus on what we do, so,

00:35:20 [Speaker Changed] But you have to be aware of what you see, but you

00:35:22 [Speaker Changed] Are aware of what’s going on a hundred percent,

00:35:24 [Speaker Changed] Three x inverse bitcoin. Like what, why, why do I want that? Or why does anyone want that?

00:35:31 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, you’ll have to ask them.

00:35:33 [Speaker Changed] I mean I guess it’s, they want to give people an opportunity to make any type of trade and every type of trade. I’m assuming that’s not your approach.

00:35:43 [Speaker Changed] I think there is a lot out there of throwing things out that sticks. Our approach is very much where do we believe that we can develop products, strategies, exposures that are gonna help create better portfolios, right? And if you look at the evolution of the ETF industry and what’s happened is it started, you know, go back 30, 30 plus 20 years ago. It started very much with how do you give access to kind of broad indices and then it was how do you inequities then how do you give access to more granular exposure like sectors or different countries? Then it was how do you move into different asset classes, like fixed income for example. And then more recently it’s been something like digital assets with, with ibit and that’s really been the journey of iisha s right? And I think that’s been therefore the journey of the industry as we’ve, as we’ve led it that I remains very much our view how we think about continuing to expand the iShares platform.

00:36:42 And that includes now using the ETF technology we’ve built to take things like active funds and wrap them into an ETF because the ETF is a more efficient way for many investors to actually own those different strategies. But again, it ha it starts with the strategy and I think that, you know, for us it’s about how do you, what, what is it that you are developing in terms of an exposure or strategy? Why, how does it fit with the world that we see today in terms of where we think the world is going from a market standpoint and a macro standpoint, how does it fit in terms of kind of a portfolio construction standpoint? You’re gonna have waves of innovation. Right now we’re having huge wave of, of of ETF launches and in particular the last two, three years, you know, the ETF is, it’s, it’s gone from being kind of very much on the side of the industry to being very central. We’re excited about that. You know, that’s what we were, that’s what we’ve built at BlackRock and iShares. But it’s also meant that ETFs are very much kinda being used more broadly and you know, that’s gonna be I think part of how the industry evolves. And then you kinda matures,

00:37:45 [Speaker Changed] Especially on the active side where you get all the benefits of mutual ownership without the capital gains penalty that you get in mutual funds. So it makes sense that a lot of active ETFs would develop where they might’ve been active mutual funds. Yeah. What else do you see as changing or in the midst of, of transforming is, is it by asset class? Is it by, you mentioned geography or sector, what is really in flux these days?

00:38:19 [Speaker Changed] So I think that, you know, when you look at, I’ll give you a couple of good examples. So digital assets I think is kind of fairly early days. Ibit is incredibly fast growing. It was the fastest to 20 to 30 to 40 to 50, and now hopefully to a hundred billion as an ETF. And we, you know, we have an Ethereum ETF there. I think there will be more product development in something like that. And again, for us that’s about bridging this kind of defi world with the traditional kind of finance world. That’s one area. The second area is take something like fixed income. You know, we’ve been building out fixed income ETF industry for 20 years. The industry is now two and a half-ish trillion dollars. We think it’s gonna be 6 trillion by kind of 2030. The growth is huge. Less than 2% of bonds in the world are in an ETF. Wow. So it feels, and having been, I can tell you having been on the journey and, and and been out there, you know, kind of pounding the streets on the, the value of fixed income ETFs over the years, it feels like this has become really, really big. And it has, and yet when you think it in the context of the $140 trillion of fixed income out there, you know, ETFs are still a pretty tiny part of the, the market in terms of how people own bonds.

00:39:39 [Speaker Changed] It’s, it’s relatively large compared to what it was, but in absolute terms. But

00:39:43 [Speaker Changed] In absolute terms, they still, you know, we’re still to use in and out the, the, the sports terminology of given it’s the World series, you know, the first inning, maybe the second inning. And then even if you look at e what’s really fascinating is you, if you look at, and we talked about active active ETFs, and again, that’s still very early stages,

00:40:01 [Speaker Changed] But on fixed, fixed income, they actually seem to do very like the broad, the Bloomberg Ag includes everything good, bad, and different. It seems like it’s relatively easy to capture a little bit of fixed income alpha with a handful of screens. You’re taking out the, the lowest credit quality or you’re taking out the riskiest credit that you’re not getting compensated for. Why does fixed income active seem like it’s a better bet or a higher probability bet than active equity?

00:40:37 [Speaker Changed] I think the historically fixed income, I’ll go back to when I started, was very much a, a world of limited transparency and, and kind of understanding, frankly, I think the understanding for most investors of fixed income relative to, I don’t mean, I don’t mean investors who are doing fixed income all, all every day, but for, for most retail investors in particular, I think people have a much more natural affinity to stocks than they do for bonds in terms of kind of the understanding. Bonds feel complicated at times. It feels like an in, it’s a world we don’t quite understand. Whereas equities, you kind of, you, you know, you know, Google or what, what or whatever it is. And so I think there’s always been a a, a sense of kind of outsourcing those decisions kind of more. So. The other thing is that the, the indices, the indexing market in fixed income has been slower to evolve. So you mentioned the ag and people tend to, when they think about fixed income indexing, they automatically go to the ag. Sure, the ag is one index and it’s a very specific index in terms of what it is. It doesn’t have a huge amount of credit in it, for example. But there are

00:41:43 Other indices with Bloomberg for which we have products like Universal that actually are much more representative of fixed income. So part of it also is, is, you know, what are you benchmarking yourself against? And I think we went through that experience with equities and we are going to go through that, or we are going through that experience with, with fixed income. And the other thing we’re seeing with fixed income is that we’re developing and building the more granular strategies in fixed income. So we’re carving up the market in fixed income the way we did in equities through ETFs. So if you want to own zero to three year government bonds own escar, if you want to own long-term treasuries own TLT, if you want to own bits of the cr, different types of credit crossover, you can now do that through ETFs. So, you know, it is an amazing tool.

00:42:29 And what’s fascinating about fixed income ETFs is that some of the fastest growing users are asset managers. So fixed income managers using ETFs as a way to be better at their job. And I think, again, that’s that blending of, of, of indexing. But even in the equity world, you know, equity indices are evolving. We, we were saying if you look back to 2000, you know, the top seven, you know, the whole kinda s and p was worth the equivalent to what the top seven stocks were worth, you know, six months ago. And so you mentioned earlier in the program equal weight s and p we’re seeing a lot of demand right now for things like equal weight or cap indices. We launched a top 20 fund. Top t we did the same thing with nasdaq. You know, even the s and p 500, owning the top 20 stocks versus owning the 500 stocks is a very, very, very different game. And so even something like large cap US equities, you, which you would’ve thought there was nothing else to innovate in, even that has been the area where we’ve probably done more in the last six months than than many other areas because the dynamics of of the US equity market have shifted so much in the last couple of years and, and investors are looking for different things

00:43:43 [Speaker Changed] Coming up. We continue our conversation with Steve Cohen, BlackRock’s Chief Product Officer and head of Global Product Solutions, discussing what goes into product development in finance. I’m Barry Ritholtz, you’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. I am Barry Ritholtz. You are listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. My extra special guest this week is Steve Cohen. He’s BlackRock’s Chief Product Officer and head of Global Product Solutions. He also sits on BlackRock’s global executive committee. Since, since we’ve been talking about technology and you mentioned the top seven I I I’m legally obligated to ask a question about artificial intelligence and ai. What is AI doing to your business of developing new products? How we thinking about either AI as an asset class or actually deploying AI to help build new products?

00:44:55 [Speaker Changed] I think we’re seeing AI in probably three areas. I, the, the first one is obviously AI as an investment theme, which is very well kind of publicized, et cetera. And we’re seeing that through things like data centers, obviously stocks, credit, et cetera. The second one is AI in terms of investment strategy. For example, BlackRock, we’re very fortunate to have a systematic group investment group that is, has a 40 year track record in history of delivering really great performance. And you know, they would argue they were doing AI well before it was called ai when it was called machine learning or whatever it was called before

00:45:38 [Speaker Changed] That. It’s been around, most people think it’s new thing, you know, it’s been around a while. Watson played Jeopardy and I forgot the one, was it Deep Blue played chess

00:45:47 [Speaker Changed] And go,

00:45:48 [Speaker Changed] Those were 30 years ago.

00:45:50 [Speaker Changed] Yeah. So, you know, it’s gone through its iterations and, and so, you know, and they’ve got some fantastic examples of the way they’ve used machine learning stroke now AI, to really understand, you know, every single day they will pass thousands of reports, earnings calls, et cetera, transcripts for for Right, for sentiment. And it, and, and you know, and the result, the investment results of those, of those signals that they create are, are really quite, quite fascinating and, and very lucrative in terms of investment alpha. And so we’re really seeing a huge demand right now for systematic investing. And this is something that historically people were nervous about because it was a black box, they didn’t understand it. And now people are using things like chat, GPT, et cetera, which is a black box, but they’re seeing the value they’re getting. And so what’s interesting is there’s a psychological shift and a greater acceptance of saying actually systematic investing using ai.

00:46:53 That’s really interesting and exciting and we’re so, so I think the second thing is we’re seeing it through using AI to be better investors. And then the third one is product development. And so how can we use the data that we are able to collect and effectively deploy big data and the AI that that we’ve developed in-house that sits on that to identify what are some of those themes that are coming up? What are some of the things that clients are talking about or being picked up in the, in the news or, or, or whatever it is. And be more kind of systematic, I would say, in being able to see what those those are. And also we are able to use it to test and stress test strategies that are new in different market environments. So it’s a really, again, it’s a really exciting time for, for product development because it’s giving us new tools that we didn’t have before.

00:47:45 [Speaker Changed] So, so BlackRock tends to come out with these very well thought out very rational products. And the question that, that I’ve been thinking about when I first started doing my homework for this is, what are some of the crazy ideas that you looked at and said, yeah, no, that’s just a bridge too far. Like what hasn’t come out? ’cause it was just too, either not solving a problem or, or just too wild and and reckless. Oh

00:48:13 [Speaker Changed] There’s a whole treasure trove of Oh really? Yeah, we could do another podcast, I’m sure. But you know, typically what’s interesting about it is there are two reasons why you might end up like that. One is it’s, it’s a crazy idea, but there’s just really no demand for it. Okay. And, and it for for well

00:48:32 [Speaker Changed] That’s an easy business

00:48:33 [Speaker Changed] Decision, which is an easy business decision, right? The second time. Often it’s, you’re just too early and, you know, I mean there

00:48:39 [Speaker Changed] Could have been an ETF for E and Bitcoin 10 years ago if the SEC would’ve allowed it. If

00:48:46 [Speaker Changed] They were allowed. Yeah. Yeah. So sometimes it’s the regulatory, you know, it could be, it could be that the industry, the industry in the broad sense of the word regulators or what whatever aren’t quite ready, you are not, you’re not able to actually build the thing that you’ve got an idea for. It could be that the market is not quite ready. Fixed income ETFs is a good example. We looked at things 10 years ago and decided that actually that the, that the fixed income market wasn’t ready. We weren’t quite ready to be able to do that in an ETFA decade on. And by the way, we launched a bunch of those as well, right? Knowing that it would take a long time. We didn’t expect to launch it and it’d be a, it would take off straight away knowing that it would take time for the, for the kinda market to get there. But we were comfortable we could manage that fund. And so often you end up in a situation where you’re kind of waiting for maybe the liquidity of the market to be, to be broad enough that an ETF works. So you know it’s gonna work in the future. It’s just a little bit early now, so it’ll come with different reasons why that may be the case.

00:49:46 [Speaker Changed] So, so that raises the question, what’s next on the product roadmap? So we’ve, we’ve talked about digital and, and crypto, we’ve talked about fixed income. Mm. And we’ve also talked about privates. What are you seeing as the next 10 years?

00:50:01 [Speaker Changed] It’s really across the whole waterfront of what you just said. I mean obviously with, with HPS and GIP with our new partners, there’s a lot of opportunity we believe to develop in the private credit and the infrastructure space and also the crossover of, of those kind of areas. I think this, this crossover of public and private markets and what does that look like in, in portfolios, whether that’s within a fund or in a, in a portfolio. I, I think is gonna be a big and very interesting theme. And, and the third area I think is we, you know, we constantly, obviously we’re, we we’re always working with our, our active portfolio managers to, to develop better strategies and, and new ideas they have. But we are always, always looking back as well. ’cause I think you can fall into the trap of thinking you’ve done it.

00:50:49 And I mentioned the example of, you know, US large cap equities and indexing and what, why would you ever look at that as an innovation area? Well, ’cause the, these markets keep changing and I think the world we’re, the world we’re in right now and a good example of the last six months, the number of clients around the world, particularly outside the US who are questioning their US dollar exposure is pretty significant. And what does that mean for time? Look at the move in gold. Suddenly that is, you know, the 4,000. Yeah. And so, you know, you see, you have to, I think you have to be willing to question the environment, the macro, the market environment and say actually what does that mean for, for things that we kind of thought we’d done. And I think that creates a lot of opportunity for our, for our clients to, to reinnovate things.

00:51:34 [Speaker Changed] So before I get to my favorite questions, I have one last broad question for you. What do you think investors and clients are not thinking about, talking about overlooking, but perhaps should be aware of? It could be an asset, a geography, a data point of policy. What is below the radar that really should be front and center?

00:52:00 [Speaker Changed] I think there are things that are kind of half on and half off the radar. Like, you know, the impact of what’s happening in demographics and immigration and changes like that and what does that mean for, for inflation, for the different types of income streams that people are going to need is something that’s, it’s kind of talked about but always slightly in the background. I think that’s gonna come more and more to the fore. We, it ties into the fiscal policy kind of, which is very much kind of talked about. I think that’s one thing. I think the second thing is we’re still, we’re still living through a lot of the post COVID impact and you know, we don’t, co COVID is kind of done and we would, it feels like it was many, many years ago, but there are a lot of industries and luxury is a good example, which is still being impacted by what happened then both in terms of the lockdown and then the immediate kind of boom that happened afterwards. There are still a lot of things that are still trying to work their way through the, through the system as it were. And that tends to be something I think people have kind of forgotten. But from an investing standpoint is actually pretty important.

00:53:03 [Speaker Changed] I I completely agree with you. It’s funny, we were just having a conversation the other day about housing and someone asked why are we have such a shortfall of single family homes in the United States? Hmm. Not even talking about affordability of homes. Yeah. Just sheer number. And the answer was that’s a hangover from the financial crisis 15, 16 years ago following that boom and bust a lot of builders shifted over, pivoted over to multifamily houses and apartment buildings. Right. Not single family. So it’s 15 years ago. Yeah. And we’re still still suffering the effects of it. Yeah. It’s, it’s amazing how, how long a tail some of these things happen. It takes a long time. I I don’t have you all day. I know you have a flight to catch tomorrow, so I have to get you out here at a decent hour. Let, let’s run through some of our favorite questions, starting with, tell us about your mentors who helped shape your career.

00:54:00 [Speaker Changed] So I’ve, I think I’ve been very lucky. I’ve, I’ve in, in each stage of my career, I’ve always had I think somebody who has been, whether a manager or a mentor, but, but really helped me think through and frankly just supported me in my career. I think two particularly jump out. One is the person who actually took me to, to ING Barings and who I first worked with there, who sadly is no longer with us, but was just an incredible friend. And, you know, in quite a pivotal time in my career, really helped me think through what do I want to do next? And, and kind of set me on that next kinda journey. And then the other one, I have to say a shout out to someone who was very early in my career, who I worked with, who I kind of looked up to in terms of their success, who became my wife. So that became a kind of a good man. She continues to mentor me in slightly, you know, different, more direct ways

00:54:58 [Speaker Changed] That, that’s a, that’s a nice couple of mentors. Let, let’s talk about books. What are some of your favorites? What are you reading recently?

00:55:06 [Speaker Changed] Big fan of people like Ian McEwen.

00:55:10 [Speaker Changed] I know the name Martin

00:55:11 [Speaker Changed] Martin Amos. They’re just great, great authors.

00:55:15 [Speaker Changed] Gi give us some titles. Mar Martin, Amos and Ian Mc McKeon.

00:55:18 [Speaker Changed] Ian McKeen. Yeah. There’s a great book Ian McKeen called Sweet Tooth, which is all about, it’s got a great twist, which I won’t go into, but it’s no spoilers. It’s about 1950s, 1960s kind of spies in, in, in the uk. And there’s a book by Martin Amos, which is the first, I can’t remember the full title. It’s time something, but it’s written backwards.

00:55:41 [Speaker Changed] I kind of remember my wife reading something like that from Martin a MI don’t remember the title.

00:55:46 [Speaker Changed] It’s fa, it’s fascinating. He, he writes it backwards so everything happens backwards. So the day starts with the character going to bed and it’s the con, it’s written in the, as the consciousness of the the man. And so it’s brilliant. It’s just,

00:56:04 [Speaker Changed] I I, I’ll dig up the,

00:56:05 [Speaker Changed] The title Very cleverly written, huh? Not a good

00:56:08 [Speaker Changed] Story. Actually, not quite inception,

00:56:12 [Speaker Changed] But it’s in that guise of, of trying to think about how time works and Yeah. I won’t spoil it for you. Read it All right. It, but it, it’s the kind of book where even the most simple paragraph, you kind of reread it ’cause you’re trying to get your head around the fact that it’s being written backwards. Huh.

00:56:30 [Speaker Changed] Let, speaking of inception, what, what’s keeping you entertained these days? What are you streaming either watching or listening to?

00:56:37 [Speaker Changed] So, we’ve been on a bit of a marathon recently. We’ve done Yellowstone 18 83, 19 23, and Landman.

00:56:43 [Speaker Changed] That is all on my, in my queue and a heaven star. I saw the first Yellowstone on a plane and I’m like, oh, I gotta drag my wife into this one.

00:56:51 [Speaker Changed] It, it’s good. You need to commit, but it’s well worth it. Very, very, yeah. Very grip. All very different as well.

00:57:00 [Speaker Changed] So you are, you’re a Brit giving me an American Western recommendation. Let let this New Yorker give you an MI five London recommendation. Have you seen the film Black Bag?

00:57:15 [Speaker Changed] I

00:57:15 [Speaker Changed] Have. You have.

00:57:16 [Speaker Changed] I I saw it on a plane. I spent a lot of time on planes. Okay. I actually saw her on a plane. It was very good.

00:57:21 [Speaker Changed] I very clever. All upside surprise. Holy unexpected.

00:57:24 [Speaker Changed] Yeah. Very good. I’d never heard of it.

00:57:25 [Speaker Changed] Yeah. And then, and

00:57:26 [Speaker Changed] I assume you watch slow horses.

00:57:27 [Speaker Changed] I, that’s where I was about to go is so I, I, I had my wife watching through the second season and she kind of tapped out. I’m trying to bring her in for the most recent season.

00:57:37 [Speaker Changed] You’ve gotta get in. We are very much the, we won’t watch it until it’s all out.

00:57:42 [Speaker Changed] We, we’ve made that mistake not doing that with certain things. It’s, we binge it’s incredibly, we binge like, what, what is this? Watching one show a week? What are we living in the nineties? I can’t, like,

00:57:54 [Speaker Changed] I’m a cave. It’s like when an advert appears. Right,

00:57:56 [Speaker Changed] Right. It really is. Final two questions. What sort of advice would you give to a recent college grad interested in a career in fill up, fill in the blanks, investing ETFs, financial product, developing fixed income? What’s your advice for that person?

00:58:15 [Speaker Changed] Go for it. I, this, I think that, I really think this industry is changing so quickly. I think it’s changing faster than I’ve, in my kind of career in terms of what is happening, which I think creates a lot of opportunity for somebody starting out. My advice I always give to all of our analysts who are starting out, and frankly I give it to pretty much all of our team, is you’ve gotta keep learning. Th this is constantly changing. And, and you’ve got to just, you’ve always gotta be on that kind of learning curve. And, and that’s how you get better. It’s also where the opportunities come from a career standpoint.

00:58:52 [Speaker Changed] Make makes a lot of sense. Our final question, what do you know about the world of investing product development ETFs today would’ve been helpful back in the 1990s when you were first getting started?

00:59:05 [Speaker Changed] Well, if I’d known that Bitcoin was gonna be 120,000, I probably would’ve done Well that’s done something differently.

00:59:09 [Speaker Changed] Well, you could say that, you know, back

00:59:11 [Speaker Changed] The truck, say

00:59:11 [Speaker Changed] About everything. Right. Back up the truck on Amazon in 2002. Or Apple. Apple in 98 Completely. Or Microsoft from the IPO.

00:59:18 [Speaker Changed] No, I think one thing it does lend itself to, and it sounds a bit strange for somebody who started out, you know, on a bond trading floor doing bond maths, is, you realize over time, only when you look back the power of compounding. I know everyone writes about compounding and you learn about it, obviously, but it’s only when you have been around for a while and you look back at what compounding actually means as a, both a an investor, you know, you know, managing your own kind of future retirement and wealth. And then, or as a, or as somebody who works with, with clients about managing portfolios, what compounding actually does imply, and I was thinking about that the other day actually.

01:00:00 [Speaker Changed] It, it’s very counterintuitive. Hmm. There’s nothing in the natural world in your ordinary experience as a mammal that would give you any insight into just exactly how exponential it is. Yes. Yeah. It’s really fascinating. Well, well thank you Steven, for being so generous with your time. Thank you. We have been speaking with Steven Cohen. He is BlackRock’s Chief Product Officer and head of Global Solutions. If you enjoy this conversation, check out any of the 586 we’ve done over the prior dozen years. You can find those at iTunes, Spotify, Bloomberg, YouTube, wherever you find your favorite podcast. Be sure and check out my new book, how Not to Invest the ideas, numbers, and behavior that destroys wealth and how to avoid them at your favorite bookstore. Now, I would be remiss if I did not thank the correct team that helps put these conversations together each week. Alexis Noriega is my video producer, Anna Luke is my podcast, produ producer Sage Bauman is the head of podcasts at Bloomberg. Sean Russo is my researcher. I’m Barry Ritholtz. This has been Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

 

~~~

 

 

 

 

The post Transcript: MiB: Stephen Cohen, BlackRock’s Chief Product Officer and Head of Global Product Solutions appeared first on The Big Picture.

November Employment Report: 64 thousand Jobs, 4.6% Unemployment Rate; October Lost 105 thousand Jobs

Calculated Risk -

From the BLS: Employment Situation
Total nonfarm payroll employment changed little in November (+64,000) and has shown little net change since April, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. In November, the unemployment rate, at 4.6 percent, was little changed from September. Employment rose in health care and construction in November, while federal government continued to lose jobs.
...
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for August was revised down by 22,000, from -4,000 to -26,000, and the change for September was revised down by 11,000, from +119,000 to +108,000. With these revisions, employment in August and September combined is 33,000 lower than previously reported. Due to the recent federal government shutdown, this is the first publication of October data and thus there are no revisions for October this month.
emphasis added
Employment per monthClick on graph for larger image.

The first graph shows the jobs added per month since January 2021.

Total payrolls increased by 64 thousand in November.  Private payrolls increased by 697 thousand, and public payrolls decreased 5 thousand (Federal payrolls decreased 6 thousand).

Payrolls for August and September were revised down by 33 thousand, combined.  The economy has only added 100 thousand jobs since April (7 months).
Year-over-year change employment The second graph shows the year-over-year change in total non-farm employment since 1968.

In November, the year-over-year change was 0.03 million jobs.  
Year-over-year employment growth has slowed sharply.



The third graph shows the employment population ratio and the participation rate.

Employment Pop Ratio and participation rate The Labor Force Participation Rate increased to 62.5% in November, from 62.4% in September (no October data). This is the percentage of the working age population in the labor force.

The Employment-Population ratio was decreased to 59.6% from 59.7% in September (blue line).
I'll post the 25 to 54 age group employment-population ratio graph later.



unemployment rateThe fourth graph shows the unemployment rate.

The unemployment rate was increased to 4.6% in November from 4.4% in September.  

This was sligthly above consensus expectations, however, August and September payrolls were revised down by 33,000 combined - and the initial October estimate was -105,000.
Overall another weak report, although there are technical issues that likely make this data less accurate due to government shutdown.
I'll have more later ...

KEVIIIIINNNN!!!

Zero Hedge -

KEVIIIIINNNN!!!

By Stefan Koopman, Senior Macro Strategist at Rabobank

With Christmas approaching, Home Alone offers a fitting image to start this Global Daily: Kate McCallister, flying high in seats that by today’s standards look very comfy, suddenly shrieks “KEVIIIIINNNN” when she realizes she has left her son behind. Kevin Hassett’s fast climb toward the Fed chair resembles such a flight: a strong ascent, apparently some nice tailwinds, and then a moment of doubt as he may have flown too close to the sun.

Just as Icarus overreached, high visibility and scrutiny can bring Kevin Hassett down too. Recent media reports suggest the field is open again, with former Fed governor Kevin Warsh back in the running. The question is whether this Kevin represents an upgrade.

Indeed, Warsh’s record is at odds with the White House’s policy agenda. As governor, he pushed for rate hikes even as the U.S. economy plunged into recession, he opposed key tools to expand the balance sheet to deal with the financial crisis and then he warned of inflation that – if you’re generous – arrived about 13 years late. His critique of the Fed aligns with Friedman’s free-market and limited-government ideals, and also a very narrow interpretation of the Fed’s remit. While this is at least internally consistent, his calls were wrong at nearly every major turning point in the economy.

More problematically, his current fixation on balance-sheet reduction (while the Fed has shifted to an ample reserves framework) should be read less as an intellectually coherent framework and more as political positioning. It offers an easy way to sound hawkish and serious about inflation while providing cover to later advocate for the rate cuts this White House wants. His logic only works if fiscal deficits shrink substantially – and here we can think of Clinton-era Rubinomics – but Trump and Bessent have shown zero interest in deficit reduction.

Perhaps his candidacy is floated simply to make Hassett look better. Either way, everything Warsh says now must also be viewed through the lens of ambition. If appointed, the hard-money man could go soft, not out of conviction, but because doing the president’s bidding becomes part of the job. So if Hassett’s risk is proximity to the sun, Warsh’s risk is opportunism. Markets may conclude that neither choice secures the Fed’s long-term credibility on inflation expectations and central bank independence.

Meanwhile, Governor Miran offered a detailed inflation outlook to explain why he voted for a 50bp cut at last week’s meeting. He sees underlying price pressures closer to the Fed’s 2% target than the headline rate suggests, citing expected deceleration in shelter inflation as the PCE’s lagged metric catches up with flat market rents, and the way portfolio management fees are imputed from rising asset prices. He also argued against blaming tariffs for the rise in core goods inflation. While he wasn’t able to provide alternative facts, he did suggest that goods price inflation may settle at a structurally higher level than pre-pandemic norms, largely driven by efforts to strengthen supply-chain security and resilience.

Helpfully for both Kevins and Stephen, the near-term inflation picture looks more benign. Crude oil fell to a two-month low yesterday, helped by optimism around a potential deal to end the war in Ukraine that would lift restrictions on Russian flows. With WTI at $56.4 per barrel in an oversupplied market, with unemployment rising and wage growth easing, and rental inflation indeed largely flat, outside of tariffs there’s only the AI-boom that looks to keep inflation elevated in 2026. That would mean that the hawkish case to not cut rates at all in 2026 largely rests on the absence of a clear path to deceleration to the 2% target.

Day Ahead

Today is busy in terms of data.

The UK labor market data for October/November kicks off the morning. Conditions have weakened sharply in 2025: vacancies fell first, now employment is declining. Soft demand combined with rising labor supply has pushed unemployment to a four-year high of 5%, slowing private-sector pay growth. This reduces concerns about inflation persistence. If today’s report confirms the trend, the path is clear for further Bank of England easing at this week’s meeting and into early 2026.

In Europe, attention turns to the latest political psychodrama ahead of the Mercosur vote expected later this week. France is reportedly pushing to delay (or possibly derail) the process to revisit its long-standing concerns one more time, while supporters warn that another pause could kill the deal altogether. Also on the agenda this morning are the December PMIs. The Eurozone composite PMI is forecast at 52.6, slightly below November’s 52.8, but that would still indicate that the economy continues to expand modestly despite weak foreign demand. The UK reading may improve from November’s 51.2, partly reflecting the lifting of uncertainty after the Budget. Last Friday’s GDP data suggested the economy stagnated through most of the second half of 2025.

The FOMC meeting a week ago was about as market-friendly as it could reasonably get. Even so, Chair Powell reiterated that policy settings are now close to neutral, raising the bar for additional easing in the near term. Futures still price about a 60% chance of a 25bp cut in March. That stance faces a test this week as today’s November payrolls and Thursday’s CPI highlight the Fed’s conflicting mandate.

Today’s jobs report is unusual. It not only arrives on a Tuesday but also reflects distortions from the longest U.S. government shutdown. The BLS will publish October and November payrolls simultaneously, though markets will probably just focus on November. The unemployment rate, based on the household survey, covers only November. Data collection started after the shutdown’s end on November 12. The BLS warns of slightly increased standard errors due to technical issues with the sample itself, with a lot of first-time survey respondents that typically report higher unemployment rates than more experienced respondents. This suggests a small upward bias and makes the print a bit of a wildcard.

Consensus sees November payrolls slightly below trend at +50k and unemployment at 4.4–4.5%, a just-about-right print that would temper labor concerns while preserving optionality for cuts. A weaker print could spur risk-off moves: equities lower, a softer dollar, and flows into cash and Treasuries.

Finally, October retail sales are expected to rebound, with the control group up 0.4% after September’s 0.1% drop. Tariff-sensitive categories such as autos, electronics, and apparel are under pressure, while service-related spending still looks firm. For October, some retailers flagged a negative impact from the government shutdown, only reinforcing the “K-shaped” narrative Chair Powell talked about in last week’s press conference.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 08:20

Trump Sues BBC For $10 Billion Over Misleading Jan. 6 Edits

Zero Hedge -

Trump Sues BBC For $10 Billion Over Misleading Jan. 6 Edits

Authored by Troy Myers & Joseph Lord via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

President Donald Trump on Monday evening filed a lawsuit against the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) seeking $10 billion in restitution for alleged defamation in a news special that aired last year.

The BBC logo outside the BBC Broadcasting House in London on Nov. 10, 2025. REUTERS/Jack Taylor

The 33-page legal filing accuses the BBC of making “a false, defamatory, deceptive, disparaging, inflammatory, and malicious depiction of President Trump …  that was fabricated and aired by the Defendants one week before the 2024 Presidential Election in a brazen attempt to interfere in and influence the Election’s outcome to President Trump’s  detriment.”

The BBC aired an episode titled “Donald Trump: A Second Chance?” on Oct. 28, 2024—one week before the presidential election.

The suit claims that in its episode, produced by “Panorama,“ the BBC ”intentionally and maliciously sought to fully mislead its viewers“ by ”splicing together” clips of remarks that Trump made ahead of the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol breach.

It asks for $10 billion in damages, citing the value of Trump’s personal brand and “the injury to President Trump’s business and personal reputation inflicted by these Defendants, and their efforts to falsely, maliciously, and defamatorily portray President Trump as a violent insurrectionist.”

The legal action was expected, coming hours after Trump announced from the White House on Dec. 15 that he planned to imminently file a lawsuit over the alleged defamatory edits.

Literally, they put words in my mouth. They had me saying things that I never said coming out. I guess they used AI or something,” Trump said from the Oval Office on Monday.

The edits at issue center around remarks Trump made to his supporters at the Ellipse in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021.

In the BBC program, editors spliced together two clips from the speech, creating the impression that Trump had said, “We’re gonna walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be with you and we fight, we fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not gonna have a country anymore.”

In reality, the clips came from separate portions of the speech, including one in which Trump said, “We’re going to walk down, and I'll be with you … we’re gonna walk down to the Capitol,” and another 54 minutes later, in which he said, “We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

The UK broadcaster said it personally apologized to Trump in a letter to the White House last month, but has said that the issue doesn’t rise to the level of legal action.

“While the BBC sincerely regrets the manner in which the video clip was edited, we strongly disagree there is a basis for a defamation claim,” the broadcaster said in a statement in November.

The BBC also admitted to the misleading edit in its Corrections and Clarifications section. The broadcaster said the episode in question would not be rebroadcast on any BBC platforms.

“We accept that our edit unintentionally created the impression that we were showing a single continuous section of the speech, rather than excerpts from different points in the speech, and that this gave the mistaken impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action,” the BBC wrote on Nov. 13.

The next day, the president made his original threat to sue the BBC for up to $5 billion, saying the apology was not enough.

The BBC’s director-general and CEO of news at the time resigned after the scandal broke, an act that Trump praised on Truth Social a month ago, posting they “are all quitting/FIRED, because they were caught ‘doctoring’ my very good (PERFECT!) speech of January 6th.”

Trump said he planned to raise the issue with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who he said was “very embarrassed” about the scandal.

“This is within one of our great allies, you know, this is supposedly our great ally,” Trump said during a Fox News interview last month.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 08:00

Futures Rebound From Session Lows Ahead Of Long Overdue Jobs Report

Zero Hedge -

Futures Rebound From Session Lows Ahead Of Long Overdue Jobs Report

Stock futures are lower, but well off session lows, as traders await delayed jobs data that will shape the Fed’s next move. As of 7:15am, S&P 500 futures are 0.2% lower while Nasdaq 100 contracts are -0.3% with all Mag 7 names lower premarket; European equities are little changed.Treasuries are lower, pushing 10Y yields up 0.5bps to 4.175%. The Bloomberg dollar index is at session lows. Brent crude dropped 1.6% below $60 a barrel for the first time since May and gold pulled back after five days of gains. Bitcoin sank more than 1% before recovering above $87,000. The non-farm payrolls report, due at 8:30 a.m., will include more uncertainty and quirks than usual. Consensus among economists for November is at 50k, while the whisper number is 22k. On today' calendar, Non-farm payrolls, average hourly earnings and the unemployment rate for November are due at 8:30 a.m. ET. We also get the October retail sales data at that time. December US PMIs for the manufacturing and services industries are due at 9:45 a.m.

In premarket trading, all Mag 7 stocks are lower: Alphabet -0.1%, Apple -0.2%, Amazon -0.2%, Microsoft -0.4%, Nvidia -0.5%, Meta -0.6%, Tesla -1%

  • Accenture (ACN) shares rise 1.9% after Morgan Stanley upgraded to overweight from equal-weight, saying the stock now trades at a compelling valuation following this year’s pullback.
  • Cognex (CGNX) is up 3.7% after being raised to buy from sell at Goldman Sachs, with the broker noting organic growth is at an inflection point and margin recovery is underway after several years of underperformance.
  • Organogenesis (ORGO) climbs 9.5% after the biotech said it plans to begin submitting ReNu, a product to treat knee osteoarthritis pain, to US regulators by the end of 2025.

The non-farm payrolls report, due at 8:30 a.m., will include more uncertainty and quirks than usual. Consensus among economists for November is at 50k,with a range of -20k to 130k, while the whisper number is 22k. The unemployment rate is expected to increase to 4.5%. Bloomberg Economics believes the US economy could have added as many as 130k jobs. The jobs report will also include an estimate of October payrolls — figures that were delayed by the federal shutdown. The stakes are high, but the huge range of estimates suggests no-one really knows what to expect (see our preview here). A print that reinforces the picture of a sluggish economy could put the stock rally back on track by supporting bets for further rate cuts, while a big miss may spook markets.

“The employment numbers would need to surprise materially — either significantly stronger or weaker than expected — to meaningfully shift market expectations,” said Mathieu Racheter, head of equity strategy at Julius Baer.

The setup is cautious going into the today' jobs. There’s rotation out of tech, dollar weakness and declines for oil and copper. Bitcoin dropped below $86,000 for the first time in two weeks, slipping deeper into bear market territory. Still, fund managers in Bank of America’s latest survey aren’t worried — going into the new year, they’re the most bullish they’ve been since 2021.

Rate reductions and robust growth have propelled the MSCI All-Country World Index to a gain of almost 20% in 2025, notching a third straight year of double-digit increases. According to a Bank of America' monthly Fund Managers Survey, money managers are confident about the outlook for 2026. Investor sentiment as measured by cash levels, stock allocation and global growth expectations rose to 7.4 in December on a scale capped at 10, the most bullish survey outcome in four-and-a-half years. 

The improved prospects of a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia are showing up in the equity space, where European defense names underperform. Technology stocks are the worst performers in Europe, tracking a similar trend on Wall Street on Monday and Asia overnight. The Stoxx 600 falls 0.2%, with defense shares lagging while chemical stocks outperform. European defense stocks fell on the speculation around a possible ceasefire, with Germany’s Rheinmetall AG dropping as much as 4.6%, and Italy’s Leonardo SpA falling 4.5%.  Here are some of the biggest movers on Tuesday:

  • IG Group shares jump as much as 5.6% to an all-time high, after the trading platform said it will deliver its medium-term revenue growth targets ahead of schedule in 2026.
  • UBS shares climb as much as 3%, touching their highest level since 2008, after Bank of America analysts said the Swiss lender is set to grow earnings per share at the fastest sequential pace of any bank globally.
  • Raiffeisen Bank International shares rise as much as 2.9%, to the highest level since April 2011, as Oddo BHF starts coverage at outperform and says the Austrian lender’s scope to re-rate is still being overlooked.
  • Aperam shares gain as much as 5.6% after Morgan Stanley says sentiment is turning more constructive on European stainless steel, with policy measures providing a floor.
  • Abivax shares drop as much as 8.7% after the French biotechnology company reported third-quarter financial results that Van Lanschot Kempen analysts called “uneventful.”
  • Saab shares sink as much as 6.6%, leading defense stocks lower, after President Donald Trump said a negotiated end to the war is “closer” than ever.
  • Telefonica shares fall as much as 4.7% after newspaper El Economista reports the firm is set to replace CFO Laura Abasolo.

Earlier, Asian equities fell, with South Korea leading a broad selloff as traders awaited fresh signals on the sustainability of the tech-driven rally toward the end of the year. The MSCI Asia Pacific Index fell 1.4%, the most since Nov. 21, with AI beneficiaries TSMC and Alibaba among the biggest drags. Korea’s KOSPI fell more than 2%, with benchmarks also down more than 1% in Hong Kong, Japan and mainland China. The Hang Seng Index fell 1.5%. Optimism around AI-driven growth is giving way to concerns that valuations have baked in more than companies can deliver. Investors also awaited a report on the US labor market for clues on the health of the world’s largest economy and the outlook for Federal Reserve rate cuts that have provided a further tailwind for global stocks. Uncertainty over China’s economy is also weighing on sentiment, after a lack of strong stimulus measures emerging from recent government meetings. The MSCI China Index fell as much as 2.3% Tuesday, taking its declines from an Oct. 2 high to more than 10%.

In FX, the pound tops the G-10 pile, gaining 0.3% against the greenback which is trading near session lows. 

In rates, treasuries hold small losses in early US trading amid a selloff in gilts after stronger-than-expected December UK PMI readings. US yields are less than 1bp higher on the day, the 10-year near 4.175% with UK counterpart cheaper by an additional 3bp. Treasury curve spreads also are within a basis point of Monday’s closing levels, with recent steepening trend intact The US session features delayed November jobs report as well as October retail sales and S&P Global US PMIs. WTI crude oil futures extend their slide, approaching year’s low as indications grow that supply is outpacing demand. Bunds edge up after euro-area PMI was less encouraging.  Treasury auctions this week include $13 billion 20-year bond reopening Wednesday and $24 billion 5-year TIPS reopening Thursday. 

In commodities, Brent crude futures fall 1.6% to $59.60 a barrel on oversupply concerns and signs that Russia and Ukraine are edging closer to a ceasefire. Spot gold drops $30 to around $4,275/oz. Bitcoin rises 1% to above $87,000.

Looking at today' calendar, US economic calendar includes November employment, October retail sales and December New York Fed services business activity (8:30am), S&P Global US manufacturing and services PMIs (9:45am) and September business inventories (10am). No Fed speakers are scheduled

Market Snapshot

  • S&P 500 mini -0.2%
  • Nasdaq 100 mini -0.3%
  • Russell 2000 mini -0.3%
  • Stoxx Europe 600 little changed
  • DAX -0.3%
  • CAC 40 little changed
  • 10-year Treasury yield little changed at 4.17%
  • VIX +0.5 points at 17.03
  • Bloomberg Dollar Index little changed at 1205.25
  • euro little changed at $1.1758
  • WTI crude -1.9% at $55.75/barrel

Top Overnight News

  • Traders are weighing the prospect of a possible end to Russia’s war in Ukraine, sending oil and defense stocks lower. US negotiators offered more significant security guarantees to Kyiv as part of Trump’s renewed push to end Russia’s war, but the effort still appeared part of a bid to pressure Zelenskiy on territory. BBG
  • Senators in both parties are bracing for another government shutdown next year after Republicans blocked a proposal to extend expiring health insurance subsidies, the issue that triggered the 43-day closure that consumed much of the fall calendar. The Hill
  • US suspended implementing a technology deal it struck with the UK amid growing frustrations in Washington over progress of trade talks with London: FT.
  • Treasury Secretary Bessent reiterated that Congressional stock trading must end.
  • Nasdaq is seeking SEC approval to extend trading to 23 hours during the work week by adding a new session from 9 p.m. to 4 a.m. ET. That would be in addition to existing premarket, regular and postmarket hours. BBG
  • UK flash PMIs come in ahead of expectations, including services at 52.1 (up from 51.3 in Nov and above the consensus at 51.6) and manufacturing at 51.2 (up from 50.2 in Nov and above the consensus at 50.3). S&P
  • Eurozone flash PMIs fall short of expectations, including manufacturing at 49.2 (down from 49.6 in Nov and below the consensus forecast of 49.9) and services at 52.6 (down from 53.6 in Nov and below the consensus forecast of 53.3) while inflationary pressures strengthened. S&P
  • Two days of intense negotiations between Ukraine, the U.S. and European officials resulted in clear progress on security guarantees for Ukraine but left significant gaps on the issue of territory. Axios
  • The U.S. is offering Ukraine security guarantees similar to those it would receive as part of NATO, American officials said Monday. The offer is the strongest and most explicit security pledge the Trump administration has put forward for Ukraine, but it comes with an implicit ultimatum: Take it now or the next iteration won’t be as generous. Politico
  • Washington is preparing to seize more Venezuelan oil tankers as the White House ratchets up pressure on Maduro. Axios
  • The yen outperformed all its major peers ahead of the BOJ’s widely anticipated move to lift its benchmark interest rate this week. BBG
  • NFP Preview from Goldman: "We estimate nonfarm payrolls rose by 10k (70k private) in October and by 55k (50k private) in November, a touch above consensus of +50k in November but below the three-month average of +62k."

Trade/Tariffs

  • US suspended implementing a technology deal it struck with the UK amid growing frustrations in Washington over progress of trade talks with London, according to FT.
  • China's Commerce Ministry said China will charge tariffs of 19.8% on EU pork effective Dec 17th; Tariff range will be from 4.9-19.8%. Adds that investigation found pork products being dumped, harming Chinese producers.

A more detailed look at global markets courtesy of Newsquawk

APAC stocks were mostly lower after the weak lead from Wall Street, as the tech-related pressure rolled over into the region. ASX 200 marginally declined amid underperformance in the tech, energy and resources sectors, while data showed consumer sentiment deteriorated. Nikkei 225 fell beneath the 50,000 level amid a firmer currency, BoJ rate hike expectations and underperformance in tech and electronics stocks. Hang Seng and Shanghai Comp were hit amid the tech woes, with the sector heavily represented in the list of worst-performing stocks in the Hong Kong benchmark.

Top Asian News

  • China Securities Times commentary noted that China should set a positive yet 'pragmatic' 2026 GDP growth target with leeway, while researchers are said to be divided between an around 5% or 4.5%-5.0% growth target for 2026.
  • XPeng (9868 HK) has obtained a Level 3 autonomous driving road test licence in Guangzhou, via Yicai.
  • Japan's FY26 initial draft budget will be in excess of JPY 120tln, via Kyodo.

European bourses (STOXX 600 -0.1%) opened broadly lower, and then some indices gradually clambered into the green, to now display a mixed/mostly lower picture. Initial pressure followed on from a downbeat mood in Asia, which in turn was weighed on by tech-related downside in the US. European sectors opened mixed, but now hold a positive bias. Chemicals leads, followed closely by Autos, whilst Tech  lags. For the autos sector, sentiment has been boosted following comments by an EU Lawmaker who suggested that the EU will have a 90% reduction in CO2 emissions for auto fleet targets from 2035.

Top European News

  • UK financial regulator is considering a revamp of capital requirements for specialist trading firms and sees a real opportunity to make rules more proportionate and boost UK competitiveness, while options on the table include tweaking EU-aligned rules, aligning with the US approach, or allowing trading firms to use internal models.
  • EU Lawmaker Weber said the EU will have a 90% reduction in CO2 emissions for auto fleet targets from 2035.
  • EU Commission to propose extending the carbon border levy to downstream aluminium and steel products, according to Reuters detailing a draft document.
  • The EU is to propose a new fund to support EU industries by using 25% of revenues collect from carbon border levy, according to Reuters citing a draft proposal

FX

  • DXY is flat and trades within narrow 98.17 to 98.32 range, with price action incredibly lacklustre as traders count down their clocks into the US NFP Payrolls figure for October, and the full November jobs report. In brief, the November NFP is expected to show 35k jobs added, while the unemployment rate is seen at 4.4%. November's delayed employment report will incorporate October payrolls, though October's unemployment rate will be absent after the shutdown halted household survey collection. [Full preview in the Newsquawk Research Suite]
  • GBP/USD is firmer against both the EUR and USD after hawkish PMI and LFS reports, the latter which saw wage figures above consensus and the priors subject to upward revisions. Employment figures signalled continued weakening in hiring, with the unemployment rate ticking up in line with expectations and payroll change across public and private sectors remaining in contraction. Currently trading at the upper end of a 1.3356 to 1.3415 range.
  • JPY outperforms vs peers, in continuation of the strength seen in the prior session as markets look towards the BoJ at the end of the week where a 25bps hike is widely expected. Overnight, Japanese PMIs were mixed with surprising strength in manufacturing but weakness in services; metrics ultimately did little to move the yen. USD/JPY trades within a 154.69-155.26 range.
  • EUR/USD is little changed, but did chop surrounding the release of differing PMI reports across the EZ. EUR initially saw marginal strength after French manufacturing PMI surprisingly rose into expansionary territory, with the report citing the robust aviation industry - but earlier strength was then reversed on the weak German report which showed manufacturing slip further into contraction. EUR is flat against the USD in narrow 1.1745-1.1763 parameters. The next level to the upside is Monday's high at 1.1769.

Fixed Income

  • USTs are trading within a narrow sub-5 tick range (112-10+ to 112-14), with price action incredibly lacklustre this morning as traders wait for the US NFP Payrolls figure for October, and the full November jobs report [Full preview in the Newsquawk Research Suite]. In brief, the November NFP is expected to show 35k jobs added, while the unemployment rate is seen at 4.4%. November's delayed employment report will incorporate October payrolls, though October's unemployment rate will be absent after the shutdown halted household survey collection.
  • Bunds have chopped and changed within a 127.49 to 127.65 range, but currently trading just off best levels. Initial action was slightly bearish, following Gilt pressure after the UK’s jobs report (see below). Thereafter, French PMI figures (which were mixed, but Manufacturing surprisingly climbed in expansionary territory), sparked modest pressure in the benchmark to a session low. This then entirely reversed on a poor German report, which missed expectations across the board, taking Bund Mar’26 to a session high. EZ PMI figures also printed below expectations, putting the blame on Germany; the inner report highlighted that “it is clear that price pressure, driven in part by wage increases, is still noticeable”.
  • Gilts opened near enough unchanged from the close yesterday, but then tumbled lower as markets digested the UK’s jobs report. In essence, the unemployment rate ticked higher, in-line with expectations, whilst Employment Chance was a better than feared. Focus is also on the Wages components, which topped expectations. Overall, metrics should not change much for policymakers at the BoE, with something for both the doves (cooling labour market), and the hawks (rising wages); a view also shared by analysts at Pantheon Macro, writing that “today’s data will keep the balance of views on the MPC little changed”. Money markets continue to assign a 91% chance of a 25bps reduction this Thursday. Thereafter, UK paper took another leg lower on the region’s PMI figures, which topped expectations – taking the benchmark below the 91.00 mark to a fresh tough of 90.83 vs current 90.90.
  • UK sells GBP 4.25bln 4.125% 2031 Gilt: b/c 3.23x (prev. 3.01x), average yield 4.093% (prev. 4.088%), tail 0.2bps (prev. 0.6bps)

Commodities

  • Crude benchmarks have continued to sell off with Brent dipping below USD 60/bbl for the first time since May 2025. WTI and Brent traded rangebound in a USD 56.19-56.54/bbl and USD 60.08-60.39/bbl band throughout the APAC session as the markets consolidated following Monday’s selloff. As the European traders entered, benchmarks extended lower, aided by comments from Russia’s Ryabkov stating that a resolution on the Ukraine war is near. WTI and Brent dipped to a trough of USD 55.69/bbl and USD 59.42/bbl before slightly paring back earlier losses. However, Brent continues to trade below USD 60/bbl.
  • Spot XAU has continued to grind lower, dipping below USD 4.3k/oz, but losses remain relatively contained compared to silver and copper. XAU peaked to a high of USD 4318/oz during the APAC session before selling off, with losses accelerating as the yellow metal broke USD 4300/oz to the downside, before buyers stepped in at USD 4272/oz. Thus far, XAU trades in a tight USD 4276-4292/oz band near lows as the European session gets underway.
  • 3M LME Copper fell as the APAC session commenced, and as the stateside risk-off mood rolled over into Asia-Pac equities. The red metal opened at USD 11.64k/t and initially saw slight upside to peak at USD 11.68k/t before falling to a trough of USD 11.53k/t. In the European morning, 3M LME copper continues to trade near USD 11.6k/t as markets await a flurry of US data.

Geopolitics

  • Ukrainian President Zelensky later said there was still no ideal peace plan as of now, and the current draft is a working version, while he added the US wants to proceed quickly to peace and that Ukraine needs to ensure the quality of this peace. Zelensky said there is agreement that security guarantees should be put to a vote in Congress and said they are really close to strong security guarantees, while he hopes to meet with US President Trump when the final framework for peace is ready. He also stated that there will be no free economic zone in Donbas under Russian control and that Ukraine will not recognise Donbas as Russian either de jure or de facto, as well as noted that Ukraine will ask the US for more weapons if Russia rejects the peace plan. Furthermore, he said Ukraine and US negotiators could meet this weekend in the US, and that Ukraine and the US support German Chancellor Merz's idea of a Christmas ceasefire, with an energy ceasefire an option.
  • Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov said certain Ukraine war resolution is near, according to TASS. Ryabkov also said Russia has no understanding of Berlin talks outcome so far, via RIA. They are ready to make efforts to overcome disagreements relating to the Ukraine crisis, via Ria. Not willing to make any concessions re. Crimea, Donbas and Novorossiya. Russia will not agree to the deployment of NATO troops in Ukraine under any circumstances, via RIA.
  • Russia's Kremlin said do not want a ceasefire which will provide a pause for Ukraine to better prepare for continuation of war. On the Ukrainian proposal for Christmas truce, said "depends whether we reach a deal or not.". Did not see the details of the proposals on security guarantees for Ukraine yet.
  • Al Jazeera correspondent reports Israeli airstrikes in areas east of Gaza City.
  • US is preparing to seize more sanctioned oil-filled tankers off Venezuela, according to Axios citing officials. The president has many tools in the toolbox, and "this is a big one". So far, Trump doesn't want to move into Venezuelan waters to seize ships. "But if they make us wait too long, we might get a warrant to get them there," in Venezuelan waters.
  • US military said it carried out strikes on free vessels in international waters, which killed eight people.
  • China's Foreign Ministry on Japan's comments about Chinese defence spending said Japan 'groundlessly accused' China and maliciously smearing China's legitimate national defence building

US Event Calendar

  • 8:30 am: Nov Change in Nonfarm Payrolls, est. 50k
  • 8:30 am: Nov Change in Private Payrolls, est. 50k
  • 8:30 am: Nov Change in Manufact. Payrolls, est. -5k
  • 8:30 am: Nov Average Hourly Earnings MoM, est. 0.3%
  • 8:30 am: Nov Average Hourly Earnings YoY, est. 3.6%
  • 8:30 am: Nov Unemployment Rate, est. 4.5%
  • 8:30 am: Oct Retail Sales Advance MoM, est. 0.1%, prior 0.2%
  • 8:30 am: Oct Retail Sales Ex Auto MoM, est. 0.2%, prior 0.3%
  • 8:30 am: Oct Retail Sales Ex Auto and Gas, est. 0.36%, prior 0.1%
  • 9:45 am: Dec P S&P Global U.S. Manufacturing PMI, est. 52.05, prior 52.2
  • 9:45 am: Dec P S&P Global U.S. Services PMI, est. 54, prior 54.1
  • 9:45 am: Dec P S&P Global U.S. Composite PMI, est. 53.9, prior 54.2
  • 10:00 am: Sep Business Inventories, est. 0.1%, prior 0%

DB's Jim Reid concludes the overnight wrap

Markets have struggled at the start of this week so far ahead of a busy few days. Weak data yesterday led to a bit more concern about the 2026 outlook. So that meant the S&P 500 (-0.16%) fell back for a second day, Treasury yields generally dipped (-1.1bps for 10yr), Brent crude oil closed at a 7-month low of $60.56/bbl, whilst the US 2yr inflation swap (-5.6bps) hit a fresh one-year low. There were more headlines that may ultimately inch us towards a compromise on the war in Ukraine that likely helped oil dip. However, on the other side, Kevin Warsh has emerged as favourite for the Fed Chair for the first time on Polymarket, with Hassett losing this position after being in the lead for virtually all of the last couple of months. S&P (-0.50%) and Nasdaq (-0.74%) futures are extending declines this morning with Asian equities generally down -1.5 to -2%.

The narrative is all subject to change though, as today marks the start of a series of top-tier data releases and central bank decisions. That begins with the US jobs report for November, along with a partial report for October, which is out at 13:30 London time. For context, the shutdown meant that data stopped being collected, so even though we’ll get the payrolls numbers for both October and November, there’s only going to be an unemployment rate for November. When it comes to the data itself, these numbers are likely to be very choppy because of the shutdown, but our US economists expect that payrolls will be down -60k in October, due to early year government buy-outs all coming through this month, followed by a bounce back of +50k in November. By contrast, they think that private payrolls will have a much smoother path of +50k for both months. Meanwhile for unemployment, they see the rate ticking up to a 4-year high of 4.5% in November.

From a market perspective, the most important question is whether the report opens the door for more rate cuts in the early part of next year. As it stands, the Fed have only signalled one further cut for 2026 in the dot plot, but we’ve repeatedly seen in this cycle how a softer labour market has pushed them back in a dovish direction. Indeed, Powell had said in late-October that a December cut was “not a foregone conclusion”, but after the unemployment rate ticked up again, the cut was priced back in, which they delivered last week.

US Treasuries initially rallied ahead of the jobs report, and the move got further momentum because of the latest Empire State manufacturing survey. That fell by more than expected to -3.9 in December (vs. 10.0 expected), which was beneath every economist’s estimate on Bloomberg. So investors priced in more rate cuts for the next few months, with the likelihood of a rate cut by March ticking up to 60%, having been at 54% on Friday. However yields turned back higher late in the European session, with the 10yr (-1.1bps to 4.17%) closing nearly 3bps above the session lows, while 2yr yields were -2.0bps lower on the day to 3.50%.   

The partial reversal in yields came after headlines on the next Fed Chair, as CNBC reported that Kevin Hassett’s candidacy had received some pushback from people close to Trump. The article said this was based more around promoting former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh, rather than criticising Hassett. So that article was seen as confirming the recent momentum behind Warsh, particularly after Trump recently said in a WSJ interview that “I think the two Kevins are great”. Indeed, yesterday marked the first time in nearly 3 weeks that Hassett was no longer the favourite on Polymarket, and as we go to press this morning, Warsh is pulling ahead on 48%, with Hassett behind on 40%. Meanwhile, the latest Fed commentary saw NY Fed President Williams echo Powell’s tone that policy is well positioned into next year, while Boston Fed President Collins said last week’s rate cut was a “close call” given lingering inflation risks.

The backdrop proved to be a headwind for US equities, as the weak data meant investors became more doubtful on the near-term outlook. So after futures were strong before the open, the S&P 500 (-0.16%) ended up building on its losses from last Friday, with tech stocks in the NASDAQ (-0.59%) seeing even bigger declines. That said, it was a mixed story within tech, with Broadcom (-5.59%) and Oracle (-2.66%) extending their declines from last week, but the Magnificent 7 (+0.13%) narrowly advancing, led by a +3.56% gain for Tesla. The challenging tech mood saw Bitcoin fall -2.55% to $86,204, its lowest in three weeks. It wasn’t all bad news however, with most S&P 500 constituents higher on the day, led by defensive sectors such as health care (+1.27%) and utilities (+0.88%).

As discussed at the top, Asian markets are weak this morning. Tech-heavy exchanges are seeing the biggest drops, with the Hang Seng down -2.09%, followed by the KOSPI at -1.85%, and the Nikkei at -1.47%. Chinese markets, including the CSI (-1.41%) and Shanghai Composite (-1.25%), are also falling for a second day after yesterday's weak November activity and real estate data. That's offsetting hopes of fresh stimulus for now. Australia's S&P/ASX 200 is outperforming but still down -0.42%. US Treasuries have dipped down a basis point.  

In earlier economic news, Japan's manufacturing sector showed improvement in December, with the S&P Global flash manufacturing PMI rising to 49.7 from 48.7. This indicates a move closer to expansion, supported by better domestic and international demand for industrial goods and automobiles. Japan's services sector remains strong, with the flash Services PMI at 52.5, slightly down from 53.2 but still showing solid growth driven by domestic consumption and resilient demand in service industries. Elsewhere, Australia's private sector also continued to expand in December, albeit at a slower pace. The S&P Global flash services PMI decreased to 51.0 from 52.8, impacted by increased competition and a more moderate rise in new export business. However, the manufacturing sector proved more resilient, with its preliminary PMI increasing to 52.2 from 51.6, thanks to stronger goods demand and improved export orders.

Earlier in Europe, markets had been more consistently positive, with both equities and bonds advancing. In part, that was supported by headlines on the Ukraine peace talks. Ukrainian officials touted “real progress” from talks in Berlin with US officials reportedly offering “Article-5 like” security guarantees and Trump saying later that “we are closer now than we have been ever” to peace. Further talks are expected in the US this weekend, while the EU leaders’ summit this Thursday will discuss “reparations loans” to fund Ukraine. Peter Sidorov reviews the latest proposals and their implications for European policy in a note this morning.

Those Ukraine headlines put more downward pressure on oil prices and yields on 10yr bunds (-0.4bps), OATs (-1.2bps) and BTPs (-1.5bps) all moved lower. Meanwhile, equities advanced across Europe, with the STOXX 600 (+0.74%) closing just shy of its record high last month, and Spain’s IBEX 35 (+1.22%) hit a fresh record. The euro (+0.11%) posted a fourth consecutive advance against the US dollar to reach its strongest level since September at 1.1753. European equity futures are back down around half a percent this morning given the global overnight sell-off.  

Over in Canada, sovereign bonds outperformed after their latest CPI report was beneath expectations. Specifically, headline inflation was at +2.2% in November (vs. +2.3% expected), and both measures of core CPI followed by the Bank of Canada were at +2.8% (vs +2.9% expected). That meant Canadian bonds outperformed, with 10yr yields down -2.9bps on the day.

To the day ahead now, and data releases include the US jobs report for November, retail sales for October, and the December flash PMIs from the US and Europe. Otherwise from central banks, we’ll hear from the ECB’s Villeroy.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 07:42

Europe Is About To Commit Financial Self-Immolation & Its Leaders Know It

Zero Hedge -

Europe Is About To Commit Financial Self-Immolation & Its Leaders Know It

Authored by Gerry Nolan via The Ron Paul Institute

Italy’s decision to stand with Belgium against the confiscation of Russian sovereign assets is not a diplomatic footnote. It is a moment of clarity breaking through the fog of performative morality that has engulfed Brussels. Strip away the slogans and the truth is unavoidable: the seizure of Russian sovereign reserves will not change the course of the war in Ukraine by a single inch.

This is not about funding Ukraine, it is about whether sovereign property still exists in a Western financial system that has quietly replaced law with cult-like obedience. That is why panic has entered the room.

The European Commission wants to pretend this is a clever workaround, a one-off, an emergency measure wrapped in legal contortions and moral posturing masquerading as hysteria. But finance does not function on intentions, rage, or narratives. It functions on precedent, trust, and enforceability. And once that trust is broken, it does not return.

The modern global financial system rests on a single, unglamorous principle, that State assets held in foreign jurisdictions are legally immune from political confiscation.

via EU Commission 

That principle underwrites reserve currencies, correspondent banking, sovereign debt markets, and cross-border investment. It is why central banks like Russia’s (once) accepted euros instead of bullion shipped under armed guard. It is why settlement systems like Euroclear exist at all. Once that rule is broken, capital does not debate. It reprices risk instantly and it leaves.

Confiscation sends a message to every country outside the Western political orbit: your savings are safe only as long as you remain politically compliant.

That is not a rules-based order. It is a selectively enforced order whose rules change the moment compliance ends. What we have is a compliance cartel, enforcing law upward and punishment downward, depending on who obeys and who resists.

Belgium’s fear is not legalistic. It is actuarial. Hosting Euroclear means hosting systemic risk. If Russia or any future target successfully challenges the seizure, Belgium could be exposed to claims that dwarf the sums being discussed. Belgium is therefore right to be skeptical of Europe’s promise to underwrite such colossal risk, given the bloc’s now shattered credibility. No serious financial actor would treat such guarantees as reliable.

Italy’s hesitation is not ideological. It is mathematical. With one of Europe’s heaviest debt burdens, Rome understands what happens when markets begin questioning the neutrality of reserve currencies and custodians.

Neither country suddenly developed sympathy for Moscow. They simply did the arithmetic before the slogans.

Paris and London, meanwhile, thunder publicly while quietly insulating their own commercial banks’ exposure to Russian sovereign assets, exposure measured not in rhetoric, but in tens of billions. French financial institutions alone hold an estimated €15–20 billion, while UK-linked banks and custodial structures account for roughly £20–25 billion, much of it routed through London’s clearing and custody ecosystem rather than sitting on government balance sheets.

This hypocrisy and cowardice are not accidental. Paris and London sit at the heart of global custodial banking, derivatives clearing, and FX settlement, nodes embedded deep within the plumbing of global finance. Retaliatory seizures or accelerated capital flight would not be symbolic for them; they would be catastrophic.

So the burden is shifted outward. Smaller states are expected to absorb systemic risk while core financial centers preserve deniability, play a double game, and posture as virtuous.

This is anything but European solidarity. It is class defense at the international level.

The increasingly shrill insistence from the Eurocrats that the assets must be seized betrays something far more revealing than hysteria or resolve: the unmasking of a project sustained by delusion and Russophobic dogma, in which moral certainty did not arise from conviction, but functioned as a mechanism for managing cognitive dissonance, a means of avoiding realities that any serious strategy would already have been forced to confront.

Not confidence, but exposure. Exposure of a war Europe never possessed the power to decide, only the capacity to prolong. Exposure of a financial system discovering that money, once stripped of neutrality and weaponized, forfeits its credibility as capital. And exposure of a ruling class confronting the reality that performance, however theatrical, cannot substitute for power that has long since been exhausted – power Europe relinquished decades ago when it outsourced real sovereignty to Washington.

Looting Russian reserves will not shorten the conflict. It will not pressure Moscow into capitulation. It will not meaningfully finance Ukraine’s future. And this is not because Europe has miscalculated, it is because Europe has knowingly abandoned reality.

There is no serious actor in Europe who does not understand how wars are won. They know that Russia’s war effort is driven by industrial throughput, manpower depth, logistics resilience, and continental scale and that on every one of these axes Russia has expanded its advantage while Europe has accelerated its collapse. Russia has retooled its defense-industrial base for sustained output, secured energy and raw materials at scale, reoriented trade beyond Western choke points, and absorbed sanctions as a catalyst for growth. This is not conjecture. It is observable fact.

This move will permanently accelerate reserve diversification away from the euro, expand bilateral settlement, hasten gold repatriation, and entrench non-Western clearing systems, and it will do so immediately.

What is being exposed here is not Russian vulnerability, but Western exhaustion. When economies can no longer compete through production, innovation, or growth, they turn to banditry. Asset seizure is not a sign of strength, but he terminal behavior of a rentier system that has exhausted surplus and begun consuming its own foundations.

This decision does not defend any lingering illusion of Western dominance. It advertises its expiry. The turn toward policing speech in Europe did not happen in a vacuum.

The Digital Services Act, platform intimidation, and the policing of dissent is all about pre-emptive damage control. European elites understand that the consequences of this policy will land squarely on households.

The people who will pay for this are not sitting in Commission buildings, they are the ones whose pensions, currencies, and living standards are being quietly offered up to preserve a collapsing illusion of power.

That is why dissent had to be neutralized before confiscation could be attempted. Not after. Criticism was pre-emptively reclassified as disinformation. Debate was recoded as existential danger. Speech itself was reframed as a security threat.

In their desperation to punish Russia, Europe’s leadership is handing Moscow something far more valuable than €210 billion. They are validating every argument held by the Global Majority about Western hypocrisy, legal nihilism, and financial coercion. They are demonstrating that sovereignty within the Western system is provisional, granted conditionally, revoked politically.

Empires do not collapse because they are challenged. They collapse because they cannibalize the systems that once made them legitimate.

This seizure will not be remembered as a blow against Moscow. It will be remembered as the moment Europe told the world that property rights end where obedience begins.

Once that message is received, there is no reset.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 07:20

Europe Is About To Commit Financial Self-Immolation & Its Leaders Know It

Zero Hedge -

Europe Is About To Commit Financial Self-Immolation & Its Leaders Know It

Authored by Gerry Nolan via The Ron Paul Institute

Italy’s decision to stand with Belgium against the confiscation of Russian sovereign assets is not a diplomatic footnote. It is a moment of clarity breaking through the fog of performative morality that has engulfed Brussels. Strip away the slogans and the truth is unavoidable: the seizure of Russian sovereign reserves will not change the course of the war in Ukraine by a single inch.

This is not about funding Ukraine, it is about whether sovereign property still exists in a Western financial system that has quietly replaced law with cult-like obedience. That is why panic has entered the room.

The European Commission wants to pretend this is a clever workaround, a one-off, an emergency measure wrapped in legal contortions and moral posturing masquerading as hysteria. But finance does not function on intentions, rage, or narratives. It functions on precedent, trust, and enforceability. And once that trust is broken, it does not return.

The modern global financial system rests on a single, unglamorous principle, that State assets held in foreign jurisdictions are legally immune from political confiscation.

via EU Commission 

That principle underwrites reserve currencies, correspondent banking, sovereign debt markets, and cross-border investment. It is why central banks like Russia’s (once) accepted euros instead of bullion shipped under armed guard. It is why settlement systems like Euroclear exist at all. Once that rule is broken, capital does not debate. It reprices risk instantly and it leaves.

Confiscation sends a message to every country outside the Western political orbit: your savings are safe only as long as you remain politically compliant.

That is not a rules-based order. It is a selectively enforced order whose rules change the moment compliance ends. What we have is a compliance cartel, enforcing law upward and punishment downward, depending on who obeys and who resists.

Belgium’s fear is not legalistic. It is actuarial. Hosting Euroclear means hosting systemic risk. If Russia or any future target successfully challenges the seizure, Belgium could be exposed to claims that dwarf the sums being discussed. Belgium is therefore right to be skeptical of Europe’s promise to underwrite such colossal risk, given the bloc’s now shattered credibility. No serious financial actor would treat such guarantees as reliable.

Italy’s hesitation is not ideological. It is mathematical. With one of Europe’s heaviest debt burdens, Rome understands what happens when markets begin questioning the neutrality of reserve currencies and custodians.

Neither country suddenly developed sympathy for Moscow. They simply did the arithmetic before the slogans.

Paris and London, meanwhile, thunder publicly while quietly insulating their own commercial banks’ exposure to Russian sovereign assets, exposure measured not in rhetoric, but in tens of billions. French financial institutions alone hold an estimated €15–20 billion, while UK-linked banks and custodial structures account for roughly £20–25 billion, much of it routed through London’s clearing and custody ecosystem rather than sitting on government balance sheets.

This hypocrisy and cowardice are not accidental. Paris and London sit at the heart of global custodial banking, derivatives clearing, and FX settlement, nodes embedded deep within the plumbing of global finance. Retaliatory seizures or accelerated capital flight would not be symbolic for them; they would be catastrophic.

So the burden is shifted outward. Smaller states are expected to absorb systemic risk while core financial centers preserve deniability, play a double game, and posture as virtuous.

This is anything but European solidarity. It is class defense at the international level.

The increasingly shrill insistence from the Eurocrats that the assets must be seized betrays something far more revealing than hysteria or resolve: the unmasking of a project sustained by delusion and Russophobic dogma, in which moral certainty did not arise from conviction, but functioned as a mechanism for managing cognitive dissonance, a means of avoiding realities that any serious strategy would already have been forced to confront.

Not confidence, but exposure. Exposure of a war Europe never possessed the power to decide, only the capacity to prolong. Exposure of a financial system discovering that money, once stripped of neutrality and weaponized, forfeits its credibility as capital. And exposure of a ruling class confronting the reality that performance, however theatrical, cannot substitute for power that has long since been exhausted – power Europe relinquished decades ago when it outsourced real sovereignty to Washington.

Looting Russian reserves will not shorten the conflict. It will not pressure Moscow into capitulation. It will not meaningfully finance Ukraine’s future. And this is not because Europe has miscalculated, it is because Europe has knowingly abandoned reality.

There is no serious actor in Europe who does not understand how wars are won. They know that Russia’s war effort is driven by industrial throughput, manpower depth, logistics resilience, and continental scale and that on every one of these axes Russia has expanded its advantage while Europe has accelerated its collapse. Russia has retooled its defense-industrial base for sustained output, secured energy and raw materials at scale, reoriented trade beyond Western choke points, and absorbed sanctions as a catalyst for growth. This is not conjecture. It is observable fact.

This move will permanently accelerate reserve diversification away from the euro, expand bilateral settlement, hasten gold repatriation, and entrench non-Western clearing systems, and it will do so immediately.

What is being exposed here is not Russian vulnerability, but Western exhaustion. When economies can no longer compete through production, innovation, or growth, they turn to banditry. Asset seizure is not a sign of strength, but he terminal behavior of a rentier system that has exhausted surplus and begun consuming its own foundations.

This decision does not defend any lingering illusion of Western dominance. It advertises its expiry. The turn toward policing speech in Europe did not happen in a vacuum.

The Digital Services Act, platform intimidation, and the policing of dissent is all about pre-emptive damage control. European elites understand that the consequences of this policy will land squarely on households.

The people who will pay for this are not sitting in Commission buildings, they are the ones whose pensions, currencies, and living standards are being quietly offered up to preserve a collapsing illusion of power.

That is why dissent had to be neutralized before confiscation could be attempted. Not after. Criticism was pre-emptively reclassified as disinformation. Debate was recoded as existential danger. Speech itself was reframed as a security threat.

In their desperation to punish Russia, Europe’s leadership is handing Moscow something far more valuable than €210 billion. They are validating every argument held by the Global Majority about Western hypocrisy, legal nihilism, and financial coercion. They are demonstrating that sovereignty within the Western system is provisional, granted conditionally, revoked politically.

Empires do not collapse because they are challenged. They collapse because they cannibalize the systems that once made them legitimate.

This seizure will not be remembered as a blow against Moscow. It will be remembered as the moment Europe told the world that property rights end where obedience begins.

Once that message is received, there is no reset.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 07:20

Europe Is About To Commit Financial Self-Immolation & Its Leaders Know It

Zero Hedge -

Europe Is About To Commit Financial Self-Immolation & Its Leaders Know It

Authored by Gerry Nolan via The Ron Paul Institute

Italy’s decision to stand with Belgium against the confiscation of Russian sovereign assets is not a diplomatic footnote. It is a moment of clarity breaking through the fog of performative morality that has engulfed Brussels. Strip away the slogans and the truth is unavoidable: the seizure of Russian sovereign reserves will not change the course of the war in Ukraine by a single inch.

This is not about funding Ukraine, it is about whether sovereign property still exists in a Western financial system that has quietly replaced law with cult-like obedience. That is why panic has entered the room.

The European Commission wants to pretend this is a clever workaround, a one-off, an emergency measure wrapped in legal contortions and moral posturing masquerading as hysteria. But finance does not function on intentions, rage, or narratives. It functions on precedent, trust, and enforceability. And once that trust is broken, it does not return.

The modern global financial system rests on a single, unglamorous principle, that State assets held in foreign jurisdictions are legally immune from political confiscation.

via EU Commission 

That principle underwrites reserve currencies, correspondent banking, sovereign debt markets, and cross-border investment. It is why central banks like Russia’s (once) accepted euros instead of bullion shipped under armed guard. It is why settlement systems like Euroclear exist at all. Once that rule is broken, capital does not debate. It reprices risk instantly and it leaves.

Confiscation sends a message to every country outside the Western political orbit: your savings are safe only as long as you remain politically compliant.

That is not a rules-based order. It is a selectively enforced order whose rules change the moment compliance ends. What we have is a compliance cartel, enforcing law upward and punishment downward, depending on who obeys and who resists.

Belgium’s fear is not legalistic. It is actuarial. Hosting Euroclear means hosting systemic risk. If Russia or any future target successfully challenges the seizure, Belgium could be exposed to claims that dwarf the sums being discussed. Belgium is therefore right to be skeptical of Europe’s promise to underwrite such colossal risk, given the bloc’s now shattered credibility. No serious financial actor would treat such guarantees as reliable.

Italy’s hesitation is not ideological. It is mathematical. With one of Europe’s heaviest debt burdens, Rome understands what happens when markets begin questioning the neutrality of reserve currencies and custodians.

Neither country suddenly developed sympathy for Moscow. They simply did the arithmetic before the slogans.

Paris and London, meanwhile, thunder publicly while quietly insulating their own commercial banks’ exposure to Russian sovereign assets, exposure measured not in rhetoric, but in tens of billions. French financial institutions alone hold an estimated €15–20 billion, while UK-linked banks and custodial structures account for roughly £20–25 billion, much of it routed through London’s clearing and custody ecosystem rather than sitting on government balance sheets.

This hypocrisy and cowardice are not accidental. Paris and London sit at the heart of global custodial banking, derivatives clearing, and FX settlement, nodes embedded deep within the plumbing of global finance. Retaliatory seizures or accelerated capital flight would not be symbolic for them; they would be catastrophic.

So the burden is shifted outward. Smaller states are expected to absorb systemic risk while core financial centers preserve deniability, play a double game, and posture as virtuous.

This is anything but European solidarity. It is class defense at the international level.

The increasingly shrill insistence from the Eurocrats that the assets must be seized betrays something far more revealing than hysteria or resolve: the unmasking of a project sustained by delusion and Russophobic dogma, in which moral certainty did not arise from conviction, but functioned as a mechanism for managing cognitive dissonance, a means of avoiding realities that any serious strategy would already have been forced to confront.

Not confidence, but exposure. Exposure of a war Europe never possessed the power to decide, only the capacity to prolong. Exposure of a financial system discovering that money, once stripped of neutrality and weaponized, forfeits its credibility as capital. And exposure of a ruling class confronting the reality that performance, however theatrical, cannot substitute for power that has long since been exhausted – power Europe relinquished decades ago when it outsourced real sovereignty to Washington.

Looting Russian reserves will not shorten the conflict. It will not pressure Moscow into capitulation. It will not meaningfully finance Ukraine’s future. And this is not because Europe has miscalculated, it is because Europe has knowingly abandoned reality.

There is no serious actor in Europe who does not understand how wars are won. They know that Russia’s war effort is driven by industrial throughput, manpower depth, logistics resilience, and continental scale and that on every one of these axes Russia has expanded its advantage while Europe has accelerated its collapse. Russia has retooled its defense-industrial base for sustained output, secured energy and raw materials at scale, reoriented trade beyond Western choke points, and absorbed sanctions as a catalyst for growth. This is not conjecture. It is observable fact.

This move will permanently accelerate reserve diversification away from the euro, expand bilateral settlement, hasten gold repatriation, and entrench non-Western clearing systems, and it will do so immediately.

What is being exposed here is not Russian vulnerability, but Western exhaustion. When economies can no longer compete through production, innovation, or growth, they turn to banditry. Asset seizure is not a sign of strength, but he terminal behavior of a rentier system that has exhausted surplus and begun consuming its own foundations.

This decision does not defend any lingering illusion of Western dominance. It advertises its expiry. The turn toward policing speech in Europe did not happen in a vacuum.

The Digital Services Act, platform intimidation, and the policing of dissent is all about pre-emptive damage control. European elites understand that the consequences of this policy will land squarely on households.

The people who will pay for this are not sitting in Commission buildings, they are the ones whose pensions, currencies, and living standards are being quietly offered up to preserve a collapsing illusion of power.

That is why dissent had to be neutralized before confiscation could be attempted. Not after. Criticism was pre-emptively reclassified as disinformation. Debate was recoded as existential danger. Speech itself was reframed as a security threat.

In their desperation to punish Russia, Europe’s leadership is handing Moscow something far more valuable than €210 billion. They are validating every argument held by the Global Majority about Western hypocrisy, legal nihilism, and financial coercion. They are demonstrating that sovereignty within the Western system is provisional, granted conditionally, revoked politically.

Empires do not collapse because they are challenged. They collapse because they cannibalize the systems that once made them legitimate.

This seizure will not be remembered as a blow against Moscow. It will be remembered as the moment Europe told the world that property rights end where obedience begins.

Once that message is received, there is no reset.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 07:20

Ford Takes Record $19.5 Billion Charge As EV Bet Implodes, Pivots To Grid Batteries

Zero Hedge -

Ford Takes Record $19.5 Billion Charge As EV Bet Implodes, Pivots To Grid Batteries

Shares of Ford in New York have yet to hit a new high since the debut of the all-electric F-150 Lightning in April 2022. What was pitched as a flagship EV push has since devolved into an epic miscalculation, with the automaker now preparing to take $19.5 billion in charges, mostly in the fourth quarter, as it unwinds and overhauls its electric vehicle strategy.

Ford is overhauling its entire electrification roadmap. The reset includes the cancellation of three future EV programs, the termination of the current F-150 Lightning, and a shift toward new offerings across multiple powertrains, including a future extended-range hybrid vehicle variant of the F-Series.

The pivot also entails a complete restructuring of battery operations, highlighted by the breakup of its partnership with South Korean battery maker SK On. The next chapter of Ford's strategy is a pivot toward grid-scale energy storage systems.

We've explained to readers that lithium prices are on the rise as EV battery makers pivot to energy storage systems:

Last year, Ford lost a staggering $5.1 billion in its EV division and expects this year to be even worse. The pivot puts the struggling automaker's EV division on track for profitability by the end of the decade.

Here are the key highlights of the pivot:

  • Offers broad choice with gas, hybrids, and EVs: Ford will offer a range of hybrids to complement efficient gas engines. The Universal EV Platform will underpin multiple models. By 2030, about 50% of Ford's global volume will be hybrids, extended-range EVs, and electric vehicles, versus 17% today.

  • Fills U.S. plants with affordable new models: New Built Ford Tough pickups will be assembled at BlueOval City in Tennessee, and a new gas and hybrid van will be produced at the Ohio Assembly Plant. Ford plans to hire thousands of new employees in the U.S. in the next few years.

  • Launches battery energy storage business: Ford will leverage wholly owned plants in Kentucky and Michigan and leading LFP technology to provide solutions for energy infrastructure and growing data center demand. Ford plans to begin shipping BESS systems in 2027 with 20 GWh of annual capacity.

  • Improves profitability: Actions are expected to drive accretive returns and accelerate margin improvements across Ford Model e, Ford Pro, and Ford Blue. Ford Model e is now expected to reach profitability by 2029, with improvements beginning in 2026.

  • Rationalizes U.S. EV-related assets and product roadmap: Ford expects to record about $19.5 billion in special items, with the majority in the fourth quarter. The company expects about $5.5 billion in cash effects, with most paid in 2026 and the remainder in 2027.

  • Raises guidance: The company raised 2025 adjusted EBIT guidance to about $7 billion, citing continued underlying business strength and cost improvements. It reaffirmed adjusted free cash flow guidance, trending toward the high end of the $2 billion to $3 billion range.

Goldman analysts led by Mark Delaney offered clients their first take on the restructuring of Ford's EV unit:

We believe the realignment and restructuring actions will help improve the P&L as Ford reduces Model e losses and increases production of more profitable Blue and Pro vehicles. Over the longer term, we expect a key debate will center on how these actions impact Ford's ability to reach Model e profitability, particularly as it increasingly competes with Chinese OEMs outside of China. We think successful execution on the UEV platform and EREV technology, as well as software and digital services, will be key factors. On the ESS business, industry participants have historically seen varied margins, and we believe costs and the company's ability to deliver a full solution will be important determinants of long-term profitability.

On capital allocation:

We do not expect these charges to affect Ford's dividend. Recall that Ford's dividend target is based on 40% to 50% of adjusted free cash flow, and we believe these charges will be excluded from the adjusted FCF calculation. In addition, the company has a strong cash position on the balance sheet, in our view.

Goldman maintained a Neutral rating on the stock, raised EPS estimates to $1.16, $1.65, and $1.80 for 2025, 2026, and 2027, respectively, and lifted its 12-month price target to $14 from $13, based on an unchanged 8x multiple on normalized EPS.

Ford shares have yet to recover since the F-150 EV debuted in April 2022.

In November, we reported that Ford mulled scrapping the EV truck:

The F-150 EV is shaping up to be America's first major EV casualty. Henry Ford would likely be turning over in his grave after such a massive miscalculation in chasing the "green" narrative. The question now is whether the board will hold management accountable for drinking the green Kool-Aid.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 06:59

Ford Takes Record $19.5 Billion Charge As EV Bet Implodes, Pivots To Grid Batteries

Zero Hedge -

Ford Takes Record $19.5 Billion Charge As EV Bet Implodes, Pivots To Grid Batteries

Shares of Ford in New York have yet to hit a new high since the debut of the all-electric F-150 Lightning in April 2022. What was pitched as a flagship EV push has since devolved into an epic miscalculation, with the automaker now preparing to take $19.5 billion in charges, mostly in the fourth quarter, as it unwinds and overhauls its electric vehicle strategy.

Ford is overhauling its entire electrification roadmap. The reset includes the cancellation of three future EV programs, the termination of the current F-150 Lightning, and a shift toward new offerings across multiple powertrains, including a future extended-range hybrid vehicle variant of the F-Series.

The pivot also entails a complete restructuring of battery operations, highlighted by the breakup of its partnership with South Korean battery maker SK On. The next chapter of Ford's strategy is a pivot toward grid-scale energy storage systems.

We've explained to readers that lithium prices are on the rise as EV battery makers pivot to energy storage systems:

Last year, Ford lost a staggering $5.1 billion in its EV division and expects this year to be even worse. The pivot puts the struggling automaker's EV division on track for profitability by the end of the decade.

Here are the key highlights of the pivot:

  • Offers broad choice with gas, hybrids, and EVs: Ford will offer a range of hybrids to complement efficient gas engines. The Universal EV Platform will underpin multiple models. By 2030, about 50% of Ford's global volume will be hybrids, extended-range EVs, and electric vehicles, versus 17% today.

  • Fills U.S. plants with affordable new models: New Built Ford Tough pickups will be assembled at BlueOval City in Tennessee, and a new gas and hybrid van will be produced at the Ohio Assembly Plant. Ford plans to hire thousands of new employees in the U.S. in the next few years.

  • Launches battery energy storage business: Ford will leverage wholly owned plants in Kentucky and Michigan and leading LFP technology to provide solutions for energy infrastructure and growing data center demand. Ford plans to begin shipping BESS systems in 2027 with 20 GWh of annual capacity.

  • Improves profitability: Actions are expected to drive accretive returns and accelerate margin improvements across Ford Model e, Ford Pro, and Ford Blue. Ford Model e is now expected to reach profitability by 2029, with improvements beginning in 2026.

  • Rationalizes U.S. EV-related assets and product roadmap: Ford expects to record about $19.5 billion in special items, with the majority in the fourth quarter. The company expects about $5.5 billion in cash effects, with most paid in 2026 and the remainder in 2027.

  • Raises guidance: The company raised 2025 adjusted EBIT guidance to about $7 billion, citing continued underlying business strength and cost improvements. It reaffirmed adjusted free cash flow guidance, trending toward the high end of the $2 billion to $3 billion range.

Goldman analysts led by Mark Delaney offered clients their first take on the restructuring of Ford's EV unit:

We believe the realignment and restructuring actions will help improve the P&L as Ford reduces Model e losses and increases production of more profitable Blue and Pro vehicles. Over the longer term, we expect a key debate will center on how these actions impact Ford's ability to reach Model e profitability, particularly as it increasingly competes with Chinese OEMs outside of China. We think successful execution on the UEV platform and EREV technology, as well as software and digital services, will be key factors. On the ESS business, industry participants have historically seen varied margins, and we believe costs and the company's ability to deliver a full solution will be important determinants of long-term profitability.

On capital allocation:

We do not expect these charges to affect Ford's dividend. Recall that Ford's dividend target is based on 40% to 50% of adjusted free cash flow, and we believe these charges will be excluded from the adjusted FCF calculation. In addition, the company has a strong cash position on the balance sheet, in our view.

Goldman maintained a Neutral rating on the stock, raised EPS estimates to $1.16, $1.65, and $1.80 for 2025, 2026, and 2027, respectively, and lifted its 12-month price target to $14 from $13, based on an unchanged 8x multiple on normalized EPS.

Ford shares have yet to recover since the F-150 EV debuted in April 2022.

In November, we reported that Ford mulled scrapping the EV truck:

The F-150 EV is shaping up to be America's first major EV casualty. Henry Ford would likely be turning over in his grave after such a massive miscalculation in chasing the "green" narrative. The question now is whether the board will hold management accountable for drinking the green Kool-Aid.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 06:59

Porsche To Ferrari: The EVs Drawing The Most Attention Ahead Of 2026

Zero Hedge -

Porsche To Ferrari: The EVs Drawing The Most Attention Ahead Of 2026

A December 2025 study of the electric vehicle market names the 2026 Porsche Cayenne Electric as the most anticipated EV set to launch next year. Conducted by B2B automotive platform eCarsTrade, the research analyzed more than 20 upcoming electric models and ranked them based on global search interest related to pricing, specifications, range, and release timing.

The Cayenne Electric stands out clearly, attracting around 911,000 monthly searches worldwide. Buyers across North America, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia are closely following the model, which is expected to deliver up to 1,139 horsepower in its Turbo version—making it the most powerful production Porsche ever—and feature an 800-volt system capable of charging at up to 400 kilowatts.

Close behind, the MG Cyberster has generated more than 800,000 searches, drawing attention as one of the first mass-market electric roadsters, with a starting price near $73,000 in Europe, China, and the UK.

(View the full study here)

Audi also features prominently in the rankings. The Q6 e-tron, which shares its platform and charging technology with the Porsche Macan Electric, has attracted roughly 793,000 potential buyers at a starting price of $63,800, while the Audi A6 e-tron Sportback adds to the brand’s strong presence.

Volkswagen’s ID.7, positioned as the electric successor to the Passat, has also drawn significant interest from fleet and company-car buyers, with more than 700,000 people researching the $50,000 sedan for its long-range highway capability.

Family-focused electric SUVs are another area of strong demand. Hyundai’s three-row Ioniq 9, offering seating for seven and a 300-mile range at a $60,600 starting price, has recorded 665,000 searches as buyers look for practical electric alternatives to traditional large SUVs.

The study also notes growing curiosity around high-end models, including Ferrari’s first electric vehicle, the Ferrari Elettrica, which has generated more than 300,000 searches despite an estimated starting price above $535,000.

According to eCarsTrade, interest in these models reflects broader market momentum, with electric vehicles expected to account for about 27% of all new car sales in 2026. The findings suggest that established automakers such as Porsche, Audi, Volkswagen, and Hyundai are gaining ground in the EV space, driven by demand from both fleet buyers and individual consumers who place greater trust in familiar brands when making major purchases.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 05:45

Porsche To Ferrari: The EVs Drawing The Most Attention Ahead Of 2026

Zero Hedge -

Porsche To Ferrari: The EVs Drawing The Most Attention Ahead Of 2026

A December 2025 study of the electric vehicle market names the 2026 Porsche Cayenne Electric as the most anticipated EV set to launch next year. Conducted by B2B automotive platform eCarsTrade, the research analyzed more than 20 upcoming electric models and ranked them based on global search interest related to pricing, specifications, range, and release timing.

The Cayenne Electric stands out clearly, attracting around 911,000 monthly searches worldwide. Buyers across North America, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia are closely following the model, which is expected to deliver up to 1,139 horsepower in its Turbo version—making it the most powerful production Porsche ever—and feature an 800-volt system capable of charging at up to 400 kilowatts.

Close behind, the MG Cyberster has generated more than 800,000 searches, drawing attention as one of the first mass-market electric roadsters, with a starting price near $73,000 in Europe, China, and the UK.

(View the full study here)

Audi also features prominently in the rankings. The Q6 e-tron, which shares its platform and charging technology with the Porsche Macan Electric, has attracted roughly 793,000 potential buyers at a starting price of $63,800, while the Audi A6 e-tron Sportback adds to the brand’s strong presence.

Volkswagen’s ID.7, positioned as the electric successor to the Passat, has also drawn significant interest from fleet and company-car buyers, with more than 700,000 people researching the $50,000 sedan for its long-range highway capability.

Family-focused electric SUVs are another area of strong demand. Hyundai’s three-row Ioniq 9, offering seating for seven and a 300-mile range at a $60,600 starting price, has recorded 665,000 searches as buyers look for practical electric alternatives to traditional large SUVs.

The study also notes growing curiosity around high-end models, including Ferrari’s first electric vehicle, the Ferrari Elettrica, which has generated more than 300,000 searches despite an estimated starting price above $535,000.

According to eCarsTrade, interest in these models reflects broader market momentum, with electric vehicles expected to account for about 27% of all new car sales in 2026. The findings suggest that established automakers such as Porsche, Audi, Volkswagen, and Hyundai are gaining ground in the EV space, driven by demand from both fleet buyers and individual consumers who place greater trust in familiar brands when making major purchases.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 05:45

Britain's New Spy Chief Warns Of 'Aggressive, Expansionist, And Revisionist' Russia

Zero Hedge -

Britain's New Spy Chief Warns Of 'Aggressive, Expansionist, And Revisionist' Russia

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

Britain’s new intelligence chief warned on Dec. 15 that the UK is operating in an era when “the front line is everywhere,” as she set out an assessment of global threats and described Russia as an “aggressive, expansionist, and revisionist” power determined to export instability across Europe and beyond.

Blaise Metreweli, who recently became head of the Secret Intelligence Service—commonly known as MI6—said that Russia’s campaign against Ukraine and its wider hybrid operations pose an acute and enduring danger to Britain and its allies, according to a preview of her first public speech released by the British government.

“The export of chaos is a feature, not a bug in the Russian approach to international engagement, and we should be ready for this to continue until Putin is forced to change his calculus,” Metreweli said.

‘The Front Line Is Everywhere’

Speaking from MI6 headquarters in London, Metreweli said that as Russia and other hostile actors rewrite the rules of conflict through cyber operations, information warfare, and covert sabotage, the global threat environment is becoming increasingly complex and interconnected.

“The front line is everywhere,” she said, warning that the UK faces a new “age of uncertainty.”

Metreweli said Britain’s support for Ukraine will remain firm and that pressure on Moscow will be sustained despite the length and cost of the war.

“Putin should be in no doubt, our support is enduring,” she said. “The pressure we apply on Ukraine’s behalf will be sustained.”

NATO Warns Russia Could Target Allies Next

Her remarks come as European leaders have issued increasingly blunt warnings about Russia’s intentions beyond Ukraine.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said last week that allied countries could become “Russia’s next target,” saying that Moscow’s willingness to absorb massive losses in Ukraine demonstrated a readiness to confront the wider alliance.

“We need to be crystal clear about the threat,” Rutte said. “We are Russia’s next target, and we are already in harm’s way.”

Rutte called for a rapid rise in defense spending to deter aggression and prevent the kind of wide-scale conflict that past generations experienced.

“Russia has brought war back to Europe, and we must be prepared for the scale of war our grandparents or great-grandparents endured,” he said.

“Imagine it, a conflict reaching every home, every workplace, destruction, mass mobilization, millions displaced, widespread suffering, and extreme losses. It is a terrible thought, but if we deliver on our commitments, this is a tragedy we can prevent.”

In June, NATO allies agreed to raise defense spending targets to 5 percent of gross domestic product by 2035—more than double the current 2 percent benchmark and in line with demands long made by U.S. President Donald Trump.

Sanctions and Diplomacy

Metreweli’s speech also follows a series of British and European actions aimed at countering Russian and Chinese influence operations.

The UK recently sanctioned multiple Russian entities accused of conducting information warfare, as well as two China-based companies linked to what the British government described as “indiscriminate cyber activities” targeting Britain and its allies.

Separately, the European Union on Dec. 15 announced fresh sanctions against individuals and companies supporting Russia’s so-called shadow fleet, which transports oil and generates revenue for the war effort, as part of a broader effort to restrict Moscow’s ability to finance its military operations.

Metreweli’s remarks in London coincided with fresh talks in Berlin on Dec. 15 involving U.S. envoys, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and European officials aimed at securing peace and stability in Europe amid pressure from Russia.

U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, held talks with Zelenskyy and other delegates on Dec. 14 in Berlin, as part of efforts to bring the Ukraine war to an end.

“Representatives held in-depth discussions regarding the 20-point plan for peace, economic agendas, and more,” Witkoff said in an update on social media. “A lot of progress was made.”

Trump has pressed for a quick end to the nearly four-year war, but a compromise that both Russia and Ukraine would accept has been elusive.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 05:00

Britain's New Spy Chief Warns Of 'Aggressive, Expansionist, And Revisionist' Russia

Zero Hedge -

Britain's New Spy Chief Warns Of 'Aggressive, Expansionist, And Revisionist' Russia

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

Britain’s new intelligence chief warned on Dec. 15 that the UK is operating in an era when “the front line is everywhere,” as she set out an assessment of global threats and described Russia as an “aggressive, expansionist, and revisionist” power determined to export instability across Europe and beyond.

Blaise Metreweli, who recently became head of the Secret Intelligence Service—commonly known as MI6—said that Russia’s campaign against Ukraine and its wider hybrid operations pose an acute and enduring danger to Britain and its allies, according to a preview of her first public speech released by the British government.

“The export of chaos is a feature, not a bug in the Russian approach to international engagement, and we should be ready for this to continue until Putin is forced to change his calculus,” Metreweli said.

‘The Front Line Is Everywhere’

Speaking from MI6 headquarters in London, Metreweli said that as Russia and other hostile actors rewrite the rules of conflict through cyber operations, information warfare, and covert sabotage, the global threat environment is becoming increasingly complex and interconnected.

“The front line is everywhere,” she said, warning that the UK faces a new “age of uncertainty.”

Metreweli said Britain’s support for Ukraine will remain firm and that pressure on Moscow will be sustained despite the length and cost of the war.

“Putin should be in no doubt, our support is enduring,” she said. “The pressure we apply on Ukraine’s behalf will be sustained.”

NATO Warns Russia Could Target Allies Next

Her remarks come as European leaders have issued increasingly blunt warnings about Russia’s intentions beyond Ukraine.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said last week that allied countries could become “Russia’s next target,” saying that Moscow’s willingness to absorb massive losses in Ukraine demonstrated a readiness to confront the wider alliance.

“We need to be crystal clear about the threat,” Rutte said. “We are Russia’s next target, and we are already in harm’s way.”

Rutte called for a rapid rise in defense spending to deter aggression and prevent the kind of wide-scale conflict that past generations experienced.

“Russia has brought war back to Europe, and we must be prepared for the scale of war our grandparents or great-grandparents endured,” he said.

“Imagine it, a conflict reaching every home, every workplace, destruction, mass mobilization, millions displaced, widespread suffering, and extreme losses. It is a terrible thought, but if we deliver on our commitments, this is a tragedy we can prevent.”

In June, NATO allies agreed to raise defense spending targets to 5 percent of gross domestic product by 2035—more than double the current 2 percent benchmark and in line with demands long made by U.S. President Donald Trump.

Sanctions and Diplomacy

Metreweli’s speech also follows a series of British and European actions aimed at countering Russian and Chinese influence operations.

The UK recently sanctioned multiple Russian entities accused of conducting information warfare, as well as two China-based companies linked to what the British government described as “indiscriminate cyber activities” targeting Britain and its allies.

Separately, the European Union on Dec. 15 announced fresh sanctions against individuals and companies supporting Russia’s so-called shadow fleet, which transports oil and generates revenue for the war effort, as part of a broader effort to restrict Moscow’s ability to finance its military operations.

Metreweli’s remarks in London coincided with fresh talks in Berlin on Dec. 15 involving U.S. envoys, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and European officials aimed at securing peace and stability in Europe amid pressure from Russia.

U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, held talks with Zelenskyy and other delegates on Dec. 14 in Berlin, as part of efforts to bring the Ukraine war to an end.

“Representatives held in-depth discussions regarding the 20-point plan for peace, economic agendas, and more,” Witkoff said in an update on social media. “A lot of progress was made.”

Trump has pressed for a quick end to the nearly four-year war, but a compromise that both Russia and Ukraine would accept has been elusive.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 05:00

Is China In A Better Position To Win The Rare Earth Mineral War

Zero Hedge -

Is China In A Better Position To Win The Rare Earth Mineral War

During an October swing through Southeast Asia, US President Donald Trump struck same-day agreements with Malaysia and Thailand to deepen cooperation on critical minerals and rare earths, underscoring Washington’s push to diversify supply chains away from China, according to SCMP

According to the White House, Trump and Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim agreed to expand collaboration on building and securing critical mineral and rare earth supply chains. Using similar language, Washington said it would also “strengthen cooperation [with Thailand] on critical minerals supply chains development and expansion,” including exploration, extraction and processing.

The back-to-back deals reflect how resource-rich economies have become central battlegrounds in the US-China rivalry over rare earths. Analysts say Beijing currently holds the advantage, having spent decades engaging countries across Southeast Asia, Africa and Latin America. These nations often view China as a “partner that actually builds,” with investment that comes with fewer political conditions than US funding.

China’s dominance is structural. It mines about 70 per cent of the world’s rare earths and controls roughly 90 per cent of global processing capacity, meaning even minerals extracted elsewhere are often sent to China for refinement. As Marina Zhang of the University of Technology Sydney noted, this long-term engagement has given Beijing a “commanding lead,” particularly in downstream processing.

Enrique Dans of IE Business School said China already controls the “chokepoints that matter,” from separation to magnet manufacturing, allowing it to “lock in long-term offtakes and joint ventures in resource-rich countries.” He contrasted that with a US approach that “tends to arrive with conditions, compliance, and slower money,” adding that many governments see Beijing as the partner that delivers visible projects and jobs quickly.

Sun Chenghao of Tsinghua University said China’s model — combining infrastructure, trade and mineral cooperation — has given it a more positive image in the Global South, while the US is increasingly seen as “aggressive.” Although Washington retains influence, he said “China still holds a relative advantage in the rare earth sector,” especially in emerging resource-rich economies.

SCMP writes that the rivalry is intensifying. Rare earths now sit at the centre of a strategic contest that both powers see as vital to economic security, defence manufacturing and technological leadership — with Southeast Asia, Africa and Latin America likely to remain key theatres in the years ahead.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 04:15

Is China In A Better Position To Win The Rare Earth Mineral War

Zero Hedge -

Is China In A Better Position To Win The Rare Earth Mineral War

During an October swing through Southeast Asia, US President Donald Trump struck same-day agreements with Malaysia and Thailand to deepen cooperation on critical minerals and rare earths, underscoring Washington’s push to diversify supply chains away from China, according to SCMP

According to the White House, Trump and Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim agreed to expand collaboration on building and securing critical mineral and rare earth supply chains. Using similar language, Washington said it would also “strengthen cooperation [with Thailand] on critical minerals supply chains development and expansion,” including exploration, extraction and processing.

The back-to-back deals reflect how resource-rich economies have become central battlegrounds in the US-China rivalry over rare earths. Analysts say Beijing currently holds the advantage, having spent decades engaging countries across Southeast Asia, Africa and Latin America. These nations often view China as a “partner that actually builds,” with investment that comes with fewer political conditions than US funding.

China’s dominance is structural. It mines about 70 per cent of the world’s rare earths and controls roughly 90 per cent of global processing capacity, meaning even minerals extracted elsewhere are often sent to China for refinement. As Marina Zhang of the University of Technology Sydney noted, this long-term engagement has given Beijing a “commanding lead,” particularly in downstream processing.

Enrique Dans of IE Business School said China already controls the “chokepoints that matter,” from separation to magnet manufacturing, allowing it to “lock in long-term offtakes and joint ventures in resource-rich countries.” He contrasted that with a US approach that “tends to arrive with conditions, compliance, and slower money,” adding that many governments see Beijing as the partner that delivers visible projects and jobs quickly.

Sun Chenghao of Tsinghua University said China’s model — combining infrastructure, trade and mineral cooperation — has given it a more positive image in the Global South, while the US is increasingly seen as “aggressive.” Although Washington retains influence, he said “China still holds a relative advantage in the rare earth sector,” especially in emerging resource-rich economies.

SCMP writes that the rivalry is intensifying. Rare earths now sit at the centre of a strategic contest that both powers see as vital to economic security, defence manufacturing and technological leadership — with Southeast Asia, Africa and Latin America likely to remain key theatres in the years ahead.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 04:15

Pages