Individual Economists

23 US States Are At High Risk Of (Or In) Recession Currently

Zero Hedge -

23 US States Are At High Risk Of (Or In) Recession Currently

U.S. GDP is made up of many smaller, distinct state economies fueling national growth.

In 2025, states responsible for about a third of U.S. GDP are in recession, or face high recession risk.

Another third are expanding, including Florida and Utah, based on payrolls, employment, and other key economic data.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's Dorothy Neufeld, shows recession risk by state in 2025, based on analysis from Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics.

Where Recession Risk is Highest in America

To analyze recession risk, Zandi looks at state-level economic activity. This included a range of data such as unemployment, building permits, retail sales, industrial activity, delinquency rates, and tax revenues.

States were then categorized into three buckets based on these factors as of October 2025:

  • In Recession/High Risk

  • Treading Water

  • Expanding

State/District Business Cycle Status Share of U.S. GDP (%) Georgia In Recession/High Risk 3.03 Montana In Recession/High Risk 0.25 Wyoming In Recession/High Risk 0.18 Michigan In Recession/High Risk 2.44 Massachusetts In Recession/High Risk 2.73 Mississippi In Recession/High Risk 0.53 Minnesota In Recession/High Risk 1.70 Kansas In Recession/High Risk 0.80 Rhode Island In Recession/High Risk 0.28 Delaware In Recession/High Risk 0.34 Washington In Recession/High Risk 3.02 Illinois In Recession/High Risk 3.85 West Virginia In Recession/High Risk 0.36 New Hampshire In Recession/High Risk 0.42 Maryland In Recession/High Risk 1.86 Virginia In Recession/High Risk 2.66 South Dakota In Recession/High Risk 0.25 Connecticut In Recession/High Risk 1.27 Oregon In Recession/High Risk 1.14 Iowa In Recession/High Risk 0.86 New Jersey In Recession/High Risk 2.93 Maine In Recession/High Risk 0.33 District of Columbia In Recession/High Risk 0.64 Missouri Treading Water 1.54 Ohio Treading Water 3.14 Hawaii Treading Water 0.39 Arkansas Treading Water 0.65 New Mexico Treading Water 0.49 Tennessee Treading Water 1.87 New York Treading Water 7.92 Vermont Treading Water 0.16 Alaska Treading Water 0.24 Colorado Treading Water 1.92 California Treading Water 14.50 Nevada Treading Water 0.86 South Carolina Expanding 1.18 Texas Expanding 9.41 Oklahoma Expanding 0.92 Idaho Expanding 0.43 Kentucky Expanding 0.99 Alabama Expanding 1.10 Indiana Expanding 1.81 Nebraska Expanding 0.63 North Carolina Expanding 2.86 Louisiana Expanding 1.11 Florida Expanding 5.78 North Dakota Expanding 0.26 Pennsylvania Expanding 3.54 Arizona Expanding 1.88 Wisconsin Expanding 1.53 Utah Expanding 1.02

Currently, many coastal, Northeastern states are facing some of the worst economic conditions.

In Maine, for instance, year-over-year GDP growth is just 0.8% as of Q2 2025, compared to the U.S. average of 2.1%. Meanwhile, Washington, D.C.’s unemployment rate was 6.4% in July, significantly higher than the 4.6% U.S. average given sweeping federal cuts.

According to Zandi’s analysis, New York and California are “Treading Water”, together responsible for driving over 22% of U.S. GDP.

In comparison, Texas, which fuels 9.4% of U.S. economic growth is expanding. Unemployment rates of 4.0% in July remain below the U.S. average. Additionally, the Texas economy is growing faster than the nation, while income growth rose 6.3% annually as of Q2 2025, outpacing the national average.

To learn more about this topic, check out this graphic on unemployment by state in 2025.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 14:25

Insane Financial Imbalances And Social Revolution

Zero Hedge -

Insane Financial Imbalances And Social Revolution

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

A rebalancing of the economy and society will ultimately prove very positive, but first we must navigate the model collapse of insane financial extremes.

I've endeavored to explain how self-referential models veer into hallucinations that are accepted as accurate reflections of the real world. Models are by definition synthetic abstractions of the real world, and as these "train" on their own output, they drift away from authentic understanding without the users being aware that their "world" is both artificial and self-reinforcing: each iteration reinforces their belief in the model's accuracy.

Patient users of AI programs can force AI to admit its output was a hallucination, at which point AI tends to abjectly apologize. But human pride--especially strong among those with high opinions of their intelligence and mastery of life--precludes recognition of catastrophic error (i.e. believing in a hallucination) and apologizing for the error.

Human hubris leads us to double-down when faced with evidence we've placed our faith in a hallucination. We deny that our system/model is a self-reinforcing hallucination even as we go over the falls. The faint cries of "save me!" are short-lived.

Models collapse from their own internal dynamics. They don't need our approval. Our disapproval doesn't stop their collapse. Our choices boil down to 1) go over the falls as models collapse; 2) snap out of the hallucination or 3) enter the netherworld of hyper-normalization, the state of mind where we embrace two contradictory "truths": the hallucination is forever and we're not surprised when it collapses.

Model collapse manifests in many ways: people and systems break down. Anti-social behaviors become normalized, and extremes are accepted as normal as we habituate to dysfunction and breakdowns.

I call this Anti-Progress: what we're sold as "progress" actually reduces our quality of life. In my book The Mythology of Progress, I describe Progress as a powerful mythology, but it can also be understood as a model that is collapsing into a hallucination we cling to with hubristic tenacity.

In everyday life, these extremes manifest as Ultra-Processed Life, a synthetic world in which artificial substitutes have replaced authentic life and experiences because the model increases profits via unhealthy addictions in both the consumer and digital realms.

But people break down in this Mouse Utopia of ultra-processed abundance, and the model's self-reinforcing iterations veer ever farther from authentic experiences.

Which brings us to my latest podcast with Richard Bonugli, Insane Financial Imbalances and a Social Revolution (36:34 min). The word "insane" is jarring, for the dominant model of the global order holds that financial extremes are not just sane, they're proof that all is well, and so calling these extremes "insane" is what's insane.

This is classic model collapse: up until the point of breakdown, the model seems to be functioning perfectly, because being self-referential, there is no other possible output other than the system is performing nominally.

In my new book Investing In Revolution, I describe the two structural flaws in the current model: 1) due to its success in generating abundance, the model's adaptive capacity has decayed, leaving it incapable of adapting to rapidly changing real-world conditions, and 2) the dominance of the financial model has fatally imbalanced society and the economy, an extreme imbalance that will be rebalanced by the pendulum swinging to the opposite extreme.

I call this systemically predictable rebalancing a social revolution, as meet the new boss, same as the old boss is no longer sufficient: the values and incentives that maintain a sustainable balance between society and the economy must change. This Reformation is not financial or political, it is fundamentally social in nature.

This imbalance is visible in the widening divide between the share of the economy going to labor and capital: wage earners' share has been declining for decades, reducing their capacity to afford a secure quality of life without piling up debt:

The earnings generated by ownership of capital go mostly to the very top of the wealth-power pyramid: the majority of income from capital flows to the top 0.25%, with the rest dribbling down to the top 5%.

The bottom 50%'s share of financial assets amounts to signal noise--2.6%.

This imbalance is so extreme that it will catalyze social disorder, yet to call it unsustainable is "insane."

The health of the non-elites has reached crisis levels, yet this too is unremarkable because the model has a "solution": more costly medications that must be taken for life: highly profitable, so all is well.

The hallucination that this is all wonderfully sustainable reveals the dominance of the financial model of how the world works. That society is breaking down is of no concern because natural gas is so abundant that we can easily power up AI data centers, and GDP is rising.

The problem is we only manage what we measure, and all the financial analysis "trains" on its own output. Those staring at screens of soaring stocks and corporate profits declare this is the best possible world while the social order breaks down around them.

A rebalancing of the economy and society will ultimately prove very positive, but first we must navigate the model collapse of insane financial extremes, extremes that are unrecognized in the current hallucination. The collision of the self-reinforcing hallucination with the real world will be challenging.

If we accept that the dominant models have lost their capacity to adapt, and that the imbalance between economic forces and society have reached extremes that demand rebalancing, we can return to the real world in good order. If we cling to the hallucination, then over the falls we will go.

*  *  *

My new book Investing In Revolution is available at a 10% discount ($18 for the paperback, $24 for the hardcover and $8.95 for the ebook edition). Introduction (free) Check out my updated Books and FilmsBecome a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.comSubscribe to my Substack for free

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 14:05

Dave Chappelle Says Charlie Kirk "Was No MLK" In New Netflix Special

Zero Hedge -

Dave Chappelle Says Charlie Kirk "Was No MLK" In New Netflix Special

Sometimes comedians fall flat, especially when they write jokes about a recently murdered person without understanding the fundamental facts of their life.  Is it possible to make comedy about a recent assassination and be legitimately funny?  Probably.  However, Chappelle missed a golden opportunity to expose some truth and instead tried to play it safe and ride the political fence. 

In Chappelle's latest Netflix comedy special entitled "The Unstoppable", the comedian touched on the issue of Kirk's murder but never provided any profound insights.  He did try to put himself in Kirk's shoes, admitting his fears that he could end up in the same position due to his criticisms of trans ideology.

"This is another reason it’s hard to talk in America, ’cause, you know, if you talk for a living and see Charlie Kirk get murdered that way, I’m gonna be honest, ni*ga, I was shook. I mean, Charlie Kirk is the wholesome white guy, and they killed this motherfucker."  

"...When all the information was still shoddy, they came out, they were like, ‘Apparently, there were transgender messages inscribed on the bullets.’ I was like, ‘Oh no! I’m dead as fried chicken!’"

The brass cases were actually inscribed with Antifa slogans and a "furry" meme, though the prime suspect, Tyler Robinson, is a far-left gay man who was living with his transgender boyfriend at the time.  According to the charging record, Robinson's conservative parents confronted him about the killing and said that he confessed to committing the crime.  They convinced him to surrender to police after he indicated he might commit suicide.    

It's unfortunate that Chappelle so carefully avoided the elephant in the room by ignoring this fact, as well as the widespread celebration among leftists over Kirk's death.

In the wake of the event there was a relentless progressive propaganda campaign designed to misinform the American public that Tyler Robinson is a "MAGA conservative" instead of a gay leftist.  This culminated in a propaganda screed by another "comedian", Jimmy Kimmel, who used his network platform to spread the same falsehoods.  Chappelle defended Kimmel instead of acknowledging why his show was punished by the network. 

Like Kirk, Chappelle also faced an attack when a gay man carrying a knife rushed him on stage because of a routine about transgender people.  The comedian says he is now fearful of going on stage and being killed.

"My voice has become more powerful than I intended it to be, and I cannot let these n*ggas do me like Charlie Kirk. Or even worse than that, what if these n*ggas trip me up somehow, co-opt me, and then make me say the things that they want me to say? We can't have that."

Chappelle also claimed that "white people" compared Charlie Kirk to Martin Luther King, and then he mocked the notion. 

Critics argue that comparing Kirk to MLK was never an actual point of contention among conservatives (or white people in general) and that Chappelle has constructed a strawman to pander to liberals and "centrists." 

Chappelle calls Kirk an "internet personality" and seems completely oblivious to his numerous campus talks and the size and scope of the Turning Point USA movement.  If there are any similarities (beyond assassination) between MLK and Kirk, it is that they both engaged with the public and students regularly on college campuses to defend their ideals. 

And, if we're talking about religious devotion or Christian virtue, at least Kirk was faithful to his wife.  MLK was a notorious adulterer.

It should be mentioned that Charlie Kirk defended Dave Chappelle's comedy routines on the transgender issue when Chappelle was facing career cancellation by the political left.  He also condemned the lack of charges against the man who attacked Chappelle onstage, warning that it would encourage further political violence. 

The very idea that comedians today have a fear of violent reprisal for political jokes shows that, unfortunately, assassinations can be very effective in squelching free speech simply by compelling people to self censor.  Leftists know this well, it's the reason they cheered for Kirk's death and called for more killings. 

Chappelle, like most celebrities, may be greatly overestimating his political influence.  If Charlie Kirk is no MLK, then Dave Chappelle is definitely no Charlie Kirk.  That said, the weak response by public figures like Chappelle against the political left's violence only emboldens them.   

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 13:45

Yields Hit Session Highs After Poor, Tailing 2Y Auction Sees Lowest Foreign Demand Since 2023

Zero Hedge -

Yields Hit Session Highs After Poor, Tailing 2Y Auction Sees Lowest Foreign Demand Since 2023

It's the last treasury auction week of the year, and due to upcoming holidays, we are running on an accelerated scheduled which means the 2Y auction which usually takes placed on Tuesday, is Monday's business instead. It was a subpar auction with modest demand; overall grade - not great, not terrible.

The auction of $69BN in 2Y paper stopped at a high yield of 3.499%, up 1bp from last month's 3.489%, and tailed the When Issued by 0.3bps, the biggest tail for the short-end since April's 0.6bps tail. It followed a series of what had been mostly stopping through auctions throughout 2025. 

The bid to cover was 2.543, down from 2.684 in November and the lowest since September; it was also below the 6-auction average of 2.623.

The internals were also mediocre at best, with Indirects awarded just 53.21, down from 58.07 and the lowest since March 2023. And with Directs taking down 34.05%, higher than November's 30.74% and above the recent average of 31.69%, Dealers were left holding 12.74% of the sale, the most since June.

Overall, this was a soft, subpar auction, with weak demand metrics, confirmed by the jump in 10y yields to session highs after the break. 

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 13:32

A Christmas Carol For The Markets, 2025 Edition

Zero Hedge -

A Christmas Carol For The Markets, 2025 Edition

By Elwin de Groot, Head of Macro Strategy at Rabobank

As the year draws to a close, Ebenezer “Macro” Scrooge looks back on an eventful 2025. Sitting alone in his glass-walled office on Christmas Eve, the city below twinkling like a Bloomberg terminal in night mode. His screens glowed with charts: yield curves steepening, equities hitting all-time highs, and a lonely alert blinking – “Critical raw materials shortage: nutmeg unavailable.”

“Bah, tariffs!” he grumbled, stabbing at his keyboard. “Christmas is inefficient. If only people understood the beauty of a well-balanced trade account.”

The year had been brutal on his nerves: Trump’s tariff threats in January, the April Global Tariff Shock. And even if the US Supreme Court decides to annul those tariffs, refunding the collected import tariffs would create a “major problem”, Kevin Hassett, US economic policy advisor and shortlisted for replacing Powell, noted over the weekend.

And the list goes on… China’s rare earth export controls in October, and wars that rattled energy markets. Even Scrooge’s Christmas tree had become a macroeconomic case study – 15% pricier thanks to US import tariffs. And the cake for this week’s party? Delayed because nutmeg and cinnamon were now a geopolitical pawn. The EU and China aren’t of much help either. EU-China relations have changed dramatically this year: yesterday China levied tariffs of up to 42.7% on some dairy products from the bloc.  And thinking about getting stuff from the North to the South pole? Well, shipping isn’t what it used to be!

As the clock struck midnight, a chill swept through the room. Suddenly, a shimmering figure appeared – the Ghost of Christmas Past, dressed in a suit stitched from old bond certificates.

“Ebenezer,” the ghost intoned, “look back at 2025.”

The office dissolved into January’s chaos: Trump inaugurated, markets jittering at threats of 25% tariffs on autos and semiconductors. February brought German elections and a €500bn debt-fuelled spending spree. April’s tariff shock loomed large, sending reciprocal tariffs ricocheting across continents. In the UK, Reform UK may, someday, Reform the Bank. And France still has got no 2026 budget! Scrooge watched traders panic, algorithms whirring like snowblowers in a storm.

“Remember the fear?” the ghost asked. “Yet markets proved resilient. AI investments and consumer spending kept growth alive. Oil prices have kept falling; the US blockade of Venezuelan oil has only dented that move. And even Europe, with its post-NATO summit defence roadmap and green-tech push, surprised you.”

Scrooge snorted. “Resilient? My stress index hit a record high.”

Before he could argue, the Ghost of Christmas Present appeared – a lively spirit juggling ornaments labelled “Geopolitics,” “AI,” and “Interest Rates”;  It whisked him to a bustling Christmas market. Families laughed despite the higher prices of gifts and trees.

“See?” said the ghost. “People adapt. They value togetherness over tariffs. Even after war in the Middle East, after shutdowns and rare earth scares, they choose negotiations and peace at their tables. And let’s hope that is also a prospect for the Sudanese and Ukrainian people.”

Scrooge noticed a baker struggling with a half-finished cake. “Critical raw materials,” the ghost chuckled. “China’s export controls made nutmeg a luxury. But look – some kind of monetary policy will still be made and neighbours share what they have. The cake will be baked.”

“Sharing?” Scrooge frowned. “Sounds like fiscal transfers.”

The ghost winked. “Call it social capital. Higher ROI than any hedge fund.”

Finally, the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come appeared, shrouded in clouds of uncertainty like a long-term yield curve. It showed Scrooge a future where his firm ignored human values, chasing only returns. The office was empty, silent – no laughter, no warmth.

“This,” the ghost whispered, “is the cost of forgetting what matters.”

Scrooge trembled. “No! Tell me the future can change!”

He awoke on Christmas morning, heart pounding like a trader’s after a Fed rate cut announcement. Throwing open the window, he saw delivery drones buzzing in with gifts – late, but arriving. The baker waved: the cake was done, thanks to a last-minute spice swap. Scrooge smiled for the first time in years. He cancelled his meeting on tariff hedging and joined his family, raising a toast:

“To resilience – in markets and in life! May our yield curves steepen with joy, not stress.”

And so, despite a year of shocks – tariffs, wars, shutdowns, and shortages – Christmas triumphed. Not through perfect policy or flawless forecasts, but through the enduring power of connection. Even Ebenezer Macro Scrooge learned that while currencies weaken and spreads tighten, the true value lies in being present.

….

Dear reader, this was just a small selection of some of the most eye-catching developments we wrote about in 2025. With this last Global Daily, we thank you for your attention and all the feedback we have received. Our service resumes on 5 January. We look forward to do it all over again in 2026!

Happy Holidays!

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 13:25

Democratic Despotism: The American Left Moves From Censored To Compelled Speech

Zero Hedge -

Democratic Despotism: The American Left Moves From Censored To Compelled Speech

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

More than five years ago, I wrote in these pages of a growing trend on the left toward compelled speech - the forcing of citizens to repeat approved views and values. It is an all-too-familiar pattern. Once a faction assumes power, it will often first seek to censor opposing views and then compel the endorsement of approved views.

This week, some of those efforts faced setbacks and challenges in blue states like Washington and Illinois.

In Washington state, many have developed what seems a certain appetite for compelled speech. 

For example, Democrats recently pushed through legislation that would have compelled priests and other clerics to rat out congregants who confessed to certain criminal acts.

Despite objections from many of us that the law was flagrantly unconstitutional, the Democratic-controlled legislature and Democratic governor pushed it through.

The Catholic Church responded to the enactment by telling priests that any compliance would lead to their excommunication.

U.S. District Court Judge Iain D. Johnston enjoined the law, and the Trump Administration sued the state over its effort to turn priests into sacramental snitches. Only after losing in court did the state drop its efforts.

In the meantime, the University of Washington has been fighting to punish professors who refuse to conform to its own orthodox values. In 2022, Professor Stuart Reges triggered a firestorm when he refused to attach a prewritten “Indigenous land acknowledgement” statement to his course syllabi. Such statements are often accompanied by inclusive and tolerant language of fostering different viewpoints in an academic community. However, when Reges decided to write his own land acknowledgment, university administrators dropped any pretense of tolerance.

Reges was not willing to copy and paste onto his syllabus a statement in favor of the indigenous land claim of “the Coast Salish peoples of this land, the land which touches the shared waters of all tribes and bands within the Suquamish, Tulalip, and Muckleshoot nations.” Instead, he wrote, “I acknowledge that by the labor theory of property, the Coast Salish people can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land currently occupied by the University of Washington.”

His reference to the labor theory is a nod to John Locke, who believed in natural rights, including the right to property created through one’s labor.

In my forthcoming book, “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution,” I explore the foundations of the American Republic, including the influence of Locke. The Framers would have been appalled by efforts to compel speech as an example of “democratic despotism.”  The Framers saw the greatest danger to our system as coming not from a tyrant but the tyranny of the majority.

Reges came face-to-face with the rage of a majority faction defied. He was told that although the university land acknowledgment was optional, his own acknowledgment was not allowed because it contributed to “a toxic environment.”

This week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in Reges’s favor and allowed his lawsuit to move forward.

Judge Daniel Bress wrote that “student discomfort with a professor’s views can prompt discussion and disapproval. But this discomfort is not grounds for the university retaliating against the professor.”

Reges’s lawsuit, brought with the help of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, is a major victory for free speech.

However, the desire to both silence and compel speech continues to grow in tandem.

In Illinois, Democrats have taken up the cudgel of compelled speech on the issue of abortion. Again, over objection that the law was unconstitutional, Democrats and Gov. JB Pritzker passed a law that said that all healthcare providers, including pro-life and religious pregnancy help centers, must extoll to their patients the “benefits” of abortion, even if they have faith-based objections to abortion.

The Catholic Conference of Illinois and other religious organizations are represented by the Becket Fund, a leading defender of religious liberty in the courts.

A district court recently struck down the law, but Illinois refuses to give up. It is appealing the case in the hope of forcing pro-life health professionals to espouse the benefits of abortions.

Cardinal Blase Cupich, Chicago’s archbishop, warned this week that “The Church’s pro-life mission is under attack in Illinois” and called on every Catholic to oppose “this inhumane mandate.”

Note that neither the constitutional guarantee of free speech nor that of free exercise deterred these efforts to compel speech.

It is the very face of democratic despotism as the majority brushes aside disfavored views and values as “toxic” or “harmful.”

It shows how, 250 years after our founding, the seeds for majoritarian tyranny remain in this (like in any) democratic system.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. He is the author of the forthcoming “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution” on the 250th anniversary of the American Revolution.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 12:05

Trump Admin Tests New Medicare Drug Pricing Pilot Programs

Zero Hedge -

Trump Admin Tests New Medicare Drug Pricing Pilot Programs

Authored by Jacki Thrapp via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced two pilot programs on Dec. 19, as the Trump administration tests new ways to lower out-of-pocket drug costs for Americans on Medicare.

An employee is seen at a Florida pharmacy in this file photo. Joe Raedle/Getty Images

The first pilot program, Guarding U.S. Medicare Against Rising Drug Costs (GUARD), would apply an alternative approach to calculating prescription drugs for people on Medicare.

GUARD will examine drug prices in other countries, and if the United States discovers a drugmaker is charging more for the item in America, it may have to pay the government back.

The United States will reference prices in Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.

Existing research finds that the prices of drugs sold in the United States are much higher than the prices of the same drugs sold in other countries,” the pilot program stated.

“One study finds that overall, the U.S. health care system spends substantially more on outpatient drugs for older adults with complex conditions, such as heart failure, diabetes, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), who are mostly covered by Medicare, than 11 other economically similar countries (including, for example, Australia, France, Germany, Canada, and the United Kingdom).”

The GUARD model would include drugs like antidepressants, antivirals, blood glucose regulators, cardiovascular agents, and gastrointestinal agents.

Spending on Medicare Part D drugs doubled in less than a decade, ballooning from $121 billion in 2014 to $276 billion in 2023, according to the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC).

The GUARD model would begin on Jan. 1, 2027, and end on Dec. 31, 2033. The “payment period” would be extended through December 2035.

The second test program, called Global Benchmark for Efficient Drug Pricing (GLOBE), will examine global price data to set patients’ out-of-pocket costs for certain drugs included in Medicare Part B, which would impact costs for treatments related to cancer, autoimmune diseases, eye disorders, and hormonal conditions.

GLOBE will launch on Oct. 1, 2026, and run through 2031.

The Dec. 19 announcement came as the Trump administration also said nine drugmakers had agreed to lower prescription drug costs in America.

This represents the greatest victory for patient affordability in the history of American health care, by far, and every single American will benefit,” Trump said alongside health care executives at a ceremony inside the Roosevelt Room on Dec. 19.

“So, this is the biggest thing ever to happen on drug pricing and on health care. This will have a tremendous impact on health care itself.”

Reuters contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 11:25

Russian General Killed By Car Bomb In Moscow, Marks 3rd Top Officer Assassinated In A Year

Zero Hedge -

Russian General Killed By Car Bomb In Moscow, Marks 3rd Top Officer Assassinated In A Year

A Russian general was killed early Monday after a bomb detonated beneath his car in southern Moscow, Russian law enforcement officials have announced. The hugely provocative act, which was likely either carried out by Ukrainian operatives or allied Western intelligence (or both) marks the third killing of a high-ranking defense official over the past year.

The slain senior officer has been identified Lieutenant General Fanil Sarvarov, 56, who headed the General Staff's operational training department. He initially survived the blast but soon after succumbed to his injuries.

Investigators released video showing a severely damaged white Kia Sorento in a residential parking area near apartment blocks in Moscow's Orekhovo-Borisovo Yuzhnoye district. The doors were shown to be blown out and debris was strewn everywhere.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov later indicated that President Vladimir Putin was informed of Sarvarov's death immediately.

BBC describes that Sarvarov "previously took part in combat operations during the Ossetian-Ingush conflict and the Chechen wars in the 1990s and early 2000s, and also led operations in Syria between 2015-2016."

As for the investigation at the scene, The Moscow Times cites officials who say they are "assessing whether Ukrainian intelligence services could be linked to the incident. Ukraine, which has previously acknowledged carrying out similar attacks inside Russia, did not immediately comment."

This adds to a growing list of high profile assassinations related to the Ukraine war. To review:

—Darya Dugina was killed in a car bombing in 2022 which was likely meant for her father, prominent political thinker and often dubbed "Putin ally" Aleksandr Dugin.

—Gen Igor Kirillov died in December 2024 outside of his residence when a bomb planted in a nearby scooter detonated.

—Gen Yaroslav Moskalik, who served as deputy head of the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, was killed in a car bomb attack last April. A "homemade" explosive device detonated under his Volkswagen Golf in a residential neighborhood.

Throughout the course of the war there's been a string of these high profile assassinations on Russian soil involving car and even cafe bombs.

Footage from the scene of Monday's car bomb attack, which marks the third such covert hit of a top Russian officer in a year:

The cafe bombing had happened in April 2023, and killed prominent pro-Kremlin blogger and war correspondent Vladlen Tatarsky. The blast at a St. Petersburg cafe during a close-quarters speaking event wounded some two dozen bystanders, six of them critically.

America's CIA or Britain's MI6 has long been suspected of being involved in these targeted killings, or at least assisting in such brazen Ukrainian-linked operations, but ultimately little has been uncovered or proven in terms of a potential Western hidden hand in this ongoing 'dirty war'.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 11:05

Question #10 for 2026: Will inventory increase further in 2026?

Calculated Risk -

Today, in the CalculatedRisk Real Estate Newsletter: Question #10 for 2026: Will inventory increase further in 2026?

Excerpt:
Earlier I posted some questions on my blog for next year: Ten Economic Questions for 2026. Some of these questions concern real estate (inventory, house prices, housing starts, new home sales), and I’ll post thoughts on those in this newsletter (others like GDP and employment will be on my blog).

I'm adding some thoughts, and maybe some predictions for each question.

Here is a review of the Ten Economic Questions for 2025.

10) Housing Inventory: Housing inventory decreased sharply during the pandemic to record lows in early 2022. Since then, inventory has increased but is still below pre-pandemic levels. Will inventory increase further in 2026?

Existing Home Sales Year-over-yearFirst, a brief history. Here are a few times when watching existing home inventory helped my analysis.

Starting in January 2005, I was very bearish on housing, but I wasn’t sure when the market would turn. Speculative bubbles can go on and on. However, the increase in existing home inventory in late 2005 (see red arrow on graph below) helped me call the top for house prices in 2006.
There is much more in the article.

The US Economy Is Stronger After One Year Of The Trump Administration

Zero Hedge -

The US Economy Is Stronger After One Year Of The Trump Administration

Authored by Daniel Lacalle,

One year into Donald Trump’s new presidency, the verdict from the data is clear: the apocalyptic consensus forecasts have failed, and the United States stands as the only major developed economy combining strong growth, controlled inflation and fiscal consolidation.

The same analysts and institutions that applauded massive stimulus, monetary excess and regulatory excess under the previous The same analysts and institutions that applauded massive stimulus, monetary excess, and regulatory excess under the previous administration now struggle to explain why the U.S. economy, which they expected to sink into stagflation, is instead outperforming all of its G7 peers. Furthermore, the U.S. peers that followed net-zero, big government and big tax policies are in secular stagnation.

From the “tariff tantrum” to a global surprise

When Trump announced his new wave of tariffs and trade policy, much of the global consensus rushed to predict a disaster. I called it the tariff tantrum. Commentators warned of an inflation surge beyond 2021 levels, 6%–7% Treasury yields, collapsing investment, a recession, and a world turning its back on the United States in favour of supposedly more responsible governments in Europe.​

Twelve months later, none of those predictions materialised. Instead, the U.S. 10-year yield has fallen to 4.1%; the U.S. is the only G7 economy growing robustly, while those nations that doubled down on hyperregulation, aggressive climate‑driven restrictions, high taxes and ever‑bigger government spending are stuck in stagnation despite enjoying a very positive tailwind of low oil and gas prices.

The “tariff tantrum” never became the structural shock that critics announced, because tariffs—however debatable on other grounds—do not cause inflation because they do not add currency units to the economy; uncontrolled public spending and monetary excess do. ​

Growth, investment and a rare fiscal adjustment.

The performance of the U.S. economy in 2025 is extraordinary not just in relative terms, but on its own merits. Real GDP is growing by around 3.8%, with the Atlanta Fed tracking roughly 3.5% annualised in the third quarter, and private investment is expanding at close to double-digit rates. Crucially, this improvement is happening while federal spending is being cut, not expanded as in other peers: public expenditure has fallen by about 3% over the year instead of disguising poor growth with unproductive federal outlays. ​

All international institutions have had to adjust quickly. The IMF, which initially projected a much weaker performance, now expects U.S. growth of about 2.1% in 2026, and several major research houses have revised their forecasts for 2025 up to around 2.5%, after initially warning of zero or even negative growth. Some economists have publicly acknowledged that the profession misread both the resilience of the U.S. private sector and the real impact of the tariff shock, admitting that from January onwards the consensus The consensus was consistently incorrect about the direction of the economy. ​

The most important factor is that the American expansion is not due to another wave of debt-fuelled political spending but rather to the recovery of the private sector, investment, trade, and productivity. In a world where most developed nations’ governments responded to every problem with more spending, more debt and more regulation, the new U.S. strategy creates a significant difference, and the results are much better. ​

Inflation under control

The most significant deviation from the consensus narrative came from inflation. The Keynesian consensus that saw no inflation risk in 2021 when government spending and money supply were soaring unanimously warned in early 2025 that tariffs would push inflation to new annual highs, even above the peaks seen under the previous administration. Instead, by November the consumer price index stands at about 2.7%, below prior expectations of 3.0% and galaxies away from the 6–7% ruin scenario sold to the public. ​

Core inflation tells the same story. The underlying index, excluding food and energy, is running at around 2.6%, significantly lower than in September and October 2024, when the same commentators enthusiastically defended the Biden‑era mix of giant spending and rapid Fed rate cuts. Over the twelve months to November, the all‑items index has risen 2.7%, after 3.0% in the previous twelve‑month period, and core inflation has increased just 2.6%. There is no sign of a tariff‑induced inflation wave in aggregate prices, only the inertia from the debt and spending binge inherited in 2024.

If anything, the trajectory suggests that as final data come in—particularly for food and energy components—the reported CPI could end up even lower. Independent analysis shows a 2.5% inflation estimate for November.

The lesson is clear: it was never tariffs that drove the global inflation spike, but a combination of uncontrolled fiscal expansion and central banks monetising deficits. The U.S. experience in 2025 proved this point once again. ​

Deficit, debt, and the politics of discipline.

While many advanced economies continue to drift into deeper deficits and higher debt, the U.S. has managed a rare success: combining growth with early signs of fiscal consolidation. The federal deficit has fallen by roughly 22%, from about 2.07 trillion dollars in November 2024 to approximately 1.6 trillion a year later, thanks to a mix of higher tax and trade revenues and spending cuts. Measured as a share of GDP, the deficit has dropped from a disastrous 7.1% inherited from the previous administration to an estimated 5.9%. Considering that almost 97% of the 2025 budget was already spent when the Trump administration took office, due to prior spending decisions and the continuation bills approved in 2024, the deficit reduction is even more commendable. ​

The reduction has been accompanied by a major tax reform. Trump has implemented the largest tax cut in decades, bringing the tax wedge on families below 30%, according to estimates from the Tax Foundation. In most OECD economies, policy has been the opposite: higher taxes on work and capital, justified by short‑term revenue needs but negative for investment and productivity.

On the spending side, the numbers are even more remarkable given the starting point. The new administration inherited a budget almost fully pre‑committed. Continuation bills and prior decisions had already locked in around 97% of federal spending. However, federal outlays still fell by 5.6% in the first quarter of 2025 and 5.3% in the second, with total public spending down 3.1% in the first half of the year. Trump has ordered an 8% cut in federal spending for 2026, signalling that fiscal adjustments are a core policy priority.

Debt dynamics are also encouraging. The new administration took office with federal debt around 36.22 trillion dollars and a legacy of 100% of GDP in committed but unfunded liabilities and roughly 1.5 trillion in previously approved obligations. Despite this poisoned inheritance, the debt has stabilised and edged slightly down to about 36.21 trillion, while the debt‑to‑GDP ratio has declined from roughly 122% to 120%, according to the Federal Reserve and independent analysis figures. Even a modest reversal sends a powerful message. ​

Labour market: native workers improve, and government and immigration shrink.

The labour market picture may be the least understood aspect of the U.S. turnaround. November’s employment report shows the best month for native private‑sector employment in absolute, seasonally adjusted terms since 2015, with real wages rising and a clear shift away from public employment and low‑productivity jobs fuelled by uncontrolled immigration. Weekly real wages are up about 0.8% over the year, and workers in middle- and lower-income categories see real gains of roughly 1.4%. Net real wages after taxes are rising at the fastest pace in years.​

The unemployment rate stands at 4.6%, higher than in Canada, the UK, France, Italy and the Eurozone average.

According to household survey data, native employment has increased from around 130.6 million in November 2024 to 133.3 million a year later—an addition of roughly 2.63 million jobs. Over the same period, foreign employment has fallen modestly, by about 21,000, and total public‑sector employment has dropped by 188,000.

This change—more native private-sector jobs and fewer government- and immigration-dependent jobs—is a huge difference compared with Canada, the UK, or most European economies, where employment gains include large public-sector and heavily subsidised job increases. The U.S. experience shows that a combination of deregulation, tax cuts and stricter control of public payrolls can still deliver better jobs and higher real wages for domestic workers. ​

Trade deals have been a success.

The evidence contradicts the notion that tariffs would destroy America’s position in global trade. The previous administration left behind a massive trade deficit—around 79.8 billion dollars in November 2024, seasonally adjusted, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. By September 2025, that deficit had fallen to roughly 52.8 billion, a reduction of about one-third compared with a year earlier. ​

The combination of targeted tariffs, renegotiated trade agreements, and a clearer defence of domestic industry has improved trade flows without triggering the inflation explosion that many had predicted.

Other improvements that matter.

The Trump administration has moved strongly on several fronts: banning central bank digital currencies, rolling back “woke” regulatory and freedom-of-speech limits, healthcare reform, and committing to scrap ten regulations for every new one approved. In foreign policy, Washington has pushed for a peace agreement in Gaza, a more realistic path to a solution in Ukraine based on pressure and sanctions on Russia, and stronger support for the return to democracy in countries like Venezuela. ​

The message for conservatives and centrists in Europe and Latin America is strong: If you want growth, jobs, and lower inflation, you cannot simply replicate the bureaucratic, high-tax, high-regulation model that has left much of the developed world stuck in secular stagnation. Trump may not fit the traditional label of a “classical liberal”, but the results of his first year in office show what a truly reformist conservative government can achieve.

For many in the international policy establishment, the uncomfortable reality is that the United States has delivered what others merely promised: stronger growth, controlled inflation, a narrower deficit, a better labour market for domestic workers, and initial stabilisation of debt. This has been achieved not by expanding the state and suppressing price signals, but by cutting taxes, reducing public spending, deregulating and trusting the private sector to respond. ​

Other advanced economies chose a different strategy: more bureaucracy, higher spending, and aggressive climate and social agendas financed with debt and taxes, and now find themselves in stagnation and a private sector recession despite favourable international energy prices reducing import expenses. ​

One year of Trump’s new term does not guarantee future success, and risks remain—from global shocks to central bank missteps—but it already offers an empirical challenge to the Keynesian consensus recommendations. If the U.S. had followed the net zero, big government and high tax policy suggestions of the mainstream consensus, it would now be in a disastrous fiscal and growth position, and inflation would be much higher, as the UK proves.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 10:45

Macron Seeks New Talks With Putin, Forcing 'Alternative' Path To Stalled US Negotiations

Zero Hedge -

Macron Seeks New Talks With Putin, Forcing 'Alternative' Path To Stalled US Negotiations

Suddenly French President Emmanuel Macron is deciding to revive his diplomacy with Moscow and is stepping in and "stealing the show" - as Politico has newly put it - at a moment US-Russia negotiations have been 'constructive' but largely slow and even stalled.

There's been no breakthroughs in Miami this weekend involving White House envoy Steve Witkoff and his Russian counterpart Kirill Dmitriev, who sat across from Ukrainian national security adviser Rustem Umerov.

Macron's office has said, coming just off a European Council summit which saw a controversial Russian assets confiscation plan for funding Ukraine fail to move forward, that France "welcomed" the idea of new direct talks with the Kremlin, but emphasized that negotiations would happen "in full transparency" for Ukraine and its European allies. "It is welcome that the Kremlin has publicly agreed to this approach. We will decide in the coming days on the best way to proceed," the Elysee said Sunday.

On the so-called reparations plan, Politico writes that "Macron’s extended hand suggests he's looking to return to the spotlight after months of European foreign-policy leadership by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz." The report notes that "Macron played a key role at a gathering of European leaders in sinking the 'reparations loan' from Russia’s frozen assets, which Merz had publicly backed."

Getty Images

Macron had in the opening year of the war been the only Western leader of prominence to directly phone Putin on many occasions, seeking a solution to the crisis in the wake of the Russian army entering Ukraine in February 2022.

Apparently he now wants to take the lead on behalf of Europe in pushing an alternative plan for ending the war, again at a moment engagement on Trump's plan seems to have gone nowhere:

Macron said at last week’s EU summit in Brussels that it would be “useful” for Europe to reach out to Putin to ensure that a peace deal in Ukraine is not negotiated solely by the United States, Russia and Ukraine. “I think that we Europeans and Ukrainians need to find a framework to engage a discussion in due form,” Macron told reporters as the summit wrapped up early Friday morning.

The Kremlin on Sunday "expressed readiness to engage in dialogue" with Macron on the issue, according to Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.

From Moscow's perspective, this is another PR and diplomatic 'win' - given the optics are that nearly four years into the war, and European leadership finds itself with little negotiating leverage while knowing Ukrainian forces are losing on the battlefield. 

As Washington and Moscow now control the narrative, Macron wants to step in to force France's say in any future outcome or settlement, rather than wait on the diplomatic sidelines. Arming Kiev to the teeth has done nothing but prolong the needless killing, and perhaps at least some European capitals are beginning to realize this.

The following was just from two weeks ago:

Emmanuel Macron has reportedly warned Volodymyr Zelenskyy that “there is a chance that the US will betray Ukraine on territory, without clarity on security guarantees”, the German magazine Der Spiegel reported, quoting a leaked note from a recent call with several European leaders.

Der Spiegel said it had obtained an English summary of Monday’s call, featuring what it said were direct quotations from European heads of government in which they expressed fundamental doubts about Washington’s approach to the talks.

The French president described the current tense phase of the negotiations as harbouring “a big danger” for Ukraine’s embattled president, according to the summary. Germany’s chancellor, Friedrich Merz, reportedly added that the Ukrainian leader needed to be “very careful”.

As for the greater realism lately coming from Washington, Vice President J.D. Vance has offered some fresh remarks acknowledging that the issue of territorial concessions in Donbass is hampering the conflict settlement process, and that this is the Zelensky government's doing: "So that territorial concession is a significant hold-up in the negotiations," he stated.

But, he explained, Ukraine knows full well that it will "eventually" lose the rest of the Donetsk region - already nearly under complete control of Russian forces. "The Ukrainians understandably see that as a major security problem, [even as] they privately acknowledge that eventually, they’ll probably lose Donetsk," he emphasized.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 10:25

Georgia Power Gets Green Light To Dramatically Grow Grid To Draw Data Centers

Zero Hedge -

Georgia Power Gets Green Light To Dramatically Grow Grid To Draw Data Centers

Authored by John Haughey via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Georgia Public Service Commission will allow the state’s largest electric utility to proceed with its $15 billion plan to build nearly 10,000 megawatts of new generation—two-thirds of its present capacity—within a decade to accommodate “large load” demand from data centers.

The Vogtle Unit 3, being constructed by primary contractor Westinghouse, a business unit of Toshiba, near Waynesboro, Ga., in this photo taken in March 2017. Georgia Power/Handout via Reuters

The five-member commission on Dec. 19 unanimously approved a “stipulated agreement” with Georgia Power Company that requires data center developers to pay capital improvement costs related to grid expansion, and that households and small businesses won’t be left with the bill should projected growth not materialize as anticipated.

The decision follows months of contentious debate before the commission, which re-surfaced before the final vote during three hours of laborious discussion on motions filed by advocacy groups questioning the certainty of those assurances, followed by animated public comment dominated by opponents.

Many were ushered out of the commission’s Atlanta chambers, chanting, “Nay, nay, nay! The people say, ‘Nay!’” so the vote could be conducted.

Among opponents’ claims was that the commission, which has until March 2026 to issue its final decision, was proceeding with the vote before two Democrats who defeated incumbent Republicans in a November election could be seated in January.

Many expressed anger over rising electricity costs for Georgia Power’s 2.8 million customers across 155 of the state’s 159 counties. The commission has approved six Georgia Power rate increases since 2023, costing the average household at least $43 a month, or an additional $500 a year, according to the Southern Environmental Law Center, while, at the same time, its profits have increased 40 percent.

In July, the commission imposed a moratorium on Georgia Power rate hikes through 2028, but, as many noted, that freeze only applies to base use charges while exempting “reasonable and prudent” costs it incurred—approximately $860 million—in damage from 2024’s Hurricane Helene that can be “recovered” from customers.

Opponents argued that consumers will eventually be left paying for “stranded assets” in a massive build-out to serve data centers that become obsolete or out of business.

Georgia Power now generates between 14,000 and 15,000 megawatts of electricity, and in 2022, projected it would need 200 to 300 megawatts of grid growth over the next decade.

The 10,000 megawatt expansion—enough electricity to power nine million homes—includes at least 8,500 megawatts between 2029 and 2031. It is the largest projected percentage increase in electricity demand over the next five years in any state nationwide except Texas, according to a November Grid Strategies’ analysis.

The company said in testimony filed with the commission that 80 percent of the projected build-out will serve data center development, which it says will boost state and local economies, and “allow Georgia to contribute to the nation’s focus on the global importance of artificial intelligence and the digital economy.”

According to Florida-based Data Center Map, more than 166 of the nation’s 4,297 data centers are in Georgia—sixth most of any state—with Microsoft, Meta, QTS, and Trammell Crow among hyperscalers operating large-load operations.

But as documented by Baxtel, a data center market tracker, those numbers are poised to dramatically increase—more than 26 data centers are under construction and at least 52 planned within 60 miles of Atlanta.

Not all Georgians are enthused. Concerns over water and energy demands by “server farms” have prompted eight Georgia counties and cities to adopt moratoriums on data center development, including Atlanta, which in September 2024 prohibited data center projects within a 22-mile radius of its Beltline Overlay District.

Microsoft, Meta, QTS, and Trammell Crow are among hyperscalers operating large-load data centers in Georgia. Rick Rycroft/AP Photo ‘Trade Secrets’

Under its “stipulated agreement” with the commission’s Public Interest Advocacy staff, Georgia Power said it agreed to file its next “rate case” in 2028 “in a manner that will ensure incremental revenue from large-load customers will provide benefits of at least $556 million per year, equivalent to $8.50 per month, or approximately $102 per year, for the typical residential customer using 1,000 kilowatt-hours per month.”

Attorneys Jennifer Whitfield, representing Georgia Interfaith Power & Light and Southface Institute, Blan Holman on behalf of the Southern Renewable Energy Association, and Sierra Club’s Curt Thompson claimed in motions that information used in Georgia Power’s calculations are regarded as “trade secrets” so they cannot be reviewed.

They debated for 90 minutes with Georgia Power attorney Brandon Marco and Public Interest Advocacy attorney Christopher Collado about, among other issues, the distinction between public disclosure of proprietary information and requiring that information be “on the record” for those who sign non-disclosure agreements to review.

“We need to know today what the assumptions are in that financial promise if we’re going to enforce it down the road,” Whitfield said, requesting the commission “order Georgia Power to supplement the record with financial information related to showing its work as to what went into the financial stipulation promise.”

Advocates motioned for hearings on what information was provided to the commission and to ask Georgia Power “clarifying questions.”

Commission Chair Jason Shaw denied two motions but said one has merit.

“I will grant the request to schedule a hearing … to determine whether petitioners should be granted access to trade secret information under an appropriate confidentiality group,” he said.

Shaw said advocates “failed to justify” disclosure or hearings on Georgia Power’s confidential calculations, which Collado confirmed his staff has vetted.

Commissioner Lauren “Bubba” McDonald said anxiety is understandable, but misdirected in targeting the commission when it can only review applications for loads of 100 megawatts or more.

“We do not solicit data centers, they are solicited by the Governor’s Office of Economic Development,” he said. “They are solicited by [developers] coming in looking at Georgia because of the reliability of energy this state provides.”

Ultimately, McDonald said, “local governments are the ones that decide if a data center is going in, not the public service commission. I want that to be clearly understood.”

Commissioner Tim Echols, one of two incumbents defeated in November, said he was proud after serving 15 years on the commission that “my last vote” will provide “the power we need to keep the state moving forward until 2031.”

His biggest disappointment is the slow pace of nuclear development, which, he said, is the best way to generate the electricity needed to power AI development.

Hyperscalers “need to take the financial risk for building out America’s nuclear future because it doesn’t appear it’s going to happen any other way, and I do think they ultimately will,” Echols said. “They’re using the bulk of the power, and I think they should pay the bulk of the cost and take the risk.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 10:10

Key Events This Shortened Week: GDP And Durables On Deck As 2025 Closes

Zero Hedge -

Key Events This Shortened Week: GDP And Durables On Deck As 2025 Closes

For those traders who are still "out there" instead of the slopes of Chamonix mingling with freshly embezzled US tax dollars by way of Kiev, DB's Jim Reid reminds that we’re now entering a very quiet spell for markets before Christmas, with data releases and other headline announcements almost completely drying up. Indeed, there’s only two-and-a-half days left to go for many places, as the US and several European markets are closing early on Christmas Eve, and this week usually sees some of the lowest volumes of the year.

In terms of the week ahead, it’s a pretty quiet one on the events calendar. One thing to note will be a few US data releases, including the delayed Q3 GDP print Tuesday, but that’s very backward-looking and covers the period before the shutdown. Otherwise the more recent data will be the December consumer confidence reading from the Conference Board, also on Tuesday, which will be in the spotlight given the recent downtick in sentiment. In fact, the previous reading for November was the lowest since the Liberation Day turmoil in April. But apart from that, there really isn’t much scheduled.

With little on the calendar this week, this lack of events got Reid thinking about whether anything could disturb the pre-Christmas calm, as we have seen a few occasions when this week has brought heightened volatility.

The best recent example is probably 2018, when you may remember a huge selloff saw the S&P 500 fall -7.7% in the four pre-Christmas sessions. A whole bunch of negative factors converged at once, including a hawkish Fed signalling more hikes to come, weak global data, US-China trade tensions, and the start of a US government shutdown on Dec 22. That selloff deepened further after the US Treasury Department said in a Dec 23 statement that Secretary Mnuchin had spoken with CEOs of the largest US banks, and that the President’s Working Group on financial markets would have a call. So that created huge concern that policymakers knew something that the rest of us didn’t, and the S&P hit its closing low on Christmas Eve.

Another good example, although not quite as fearful, happened in 2022. That was the year central banks hiked aggressively to combat inflation, with global bonds and equities entering a bear market that featured huge bouts of volatility as they kept sinking lower. And the Christmas run-up was no different, with the 10yr Treasury yield surging +26bps in the week before Christmas. That followed an adjustment to the Bank of Japan’s yield curve control policy on Dec 20, which was widely seen as the beginning of the end of Japan’s ultra-loose monetary policy. They permitted the 10yr JGB yield to rise to around 0.5%, up from 0.25% previously, but the effects cascaded globally given Japan’s role as one of the last anchors for low yields. So that led to some dramatic moves right before Christmas, and it was one of the biggest weekly jumps that year for the 10yr Treasury yield.

To be fair, this time last year saw a pre-Christmas Santa rally that took the S&P 500 up +2.9% in the final 3 days before Christmas. But either way, it shows that even if it’s a quiet week on the calendar, we can’t completely dismiss the prospect of a final year-end curveball, which would be in keeping with the constant surprises of 2025 so far. After all, this year has seen a huge regime shift in German fiscal policy in March, the Liberation Day tariffs in April, a direct military conflict between Israel and Iran in June, and the longest-ever US government shutdown over October-November. And that’s before we think about some other long-running themes, including periodic bond market flareups around fiscal policy, fears of a potential AI bubble, and ongoing concern around private credit.

This morning, the main news has been further sharp losses for Japan’s government bonds, which follows the Bank of Japan’s Friday decision to hike rates by 25bps to 0.75%, the highest since 1995. The hike already meant that Japan’s 10yr yield was up +6.9bps last week to close above 2%, and this morning they’re up another +6.9bps to 2.08%, their highest since 1999.

One factor behind that has been the weakness in the Japanese yen, which fell -1.40% against the US dollar on Friday, despite the hike. And this morning, the country’s chief currency official Atsushi Mimura said to reporters that “We’re seeing one-directional, sudden moves especially after last week’s monetary policy meeting, so I’m deeply concerned”. So in turn, that weakness for the yen is seen as raising the chance of another BoJ rate hike and has prompted the latest selloff for JGBs. We’ve seen that echoed across other countries too this morning, with 10yr Australian yields up +5.1bps this morning, whilst the 10yr Treasury yield is up +2.0bps to 4.17%.

For equities however, there’s been a much stronger picture across the board overnight, with gains for Japan’s Nikkei (+1.90%), along with the KOSPI (+1.82%), the CSI 300 (+0.79%), the Shanghai Comp (+0.64%) and the Hang Seng (+0.20%). Looking forward, US equity futures are also pointing higher, with those on the S&P 500 up +0.26%. Moreover, there’s been a fresh rally for precious metals this morning, with gold prices up +1.40% to $4400/oz, which would be an all-time closing high if sustained, and is the first time they’ve reached that level on an intraday basis as well. Similarly, silver prices (+3.25%) are up to a fresh record of $69.34/oz. So that now leaves their YTD gains at +68% for gold and +140% for silver, which would be the biggest for both since 1979, back when oil prices surged after the Iranian Revolution that year led to major supply disruption.

Courtesy of DB, here is a day-by-day calendar of events:

Monday December 22

  • Data: UK final Q3 GDP, Italy November PPI, US September Chicago Fed national activity index
  • Central banks: ECB’s Simkus, Vujcic and Kazimir speak 
  • Auctions: US 2-yr Notes ($69bn)

Tuesday December 23

  • Data: US Q3 GDP, preliminary October durable goods orders, November industrial production, capacity utilisation, December Conference Board consumer confidence index, Richmond Fed manufacturing index, Canada October GDP
  • Central Banks: RBA minutes from December meeting
  • Auctions: US 2-year FRN (reopening, $28bn), 5-yr Notes ($70bn)

Wednesday December 24

  • Data: US initial jobless claims
  • Central banks: BoJ minutes from the October monetary policy meeting
  • Auctions: US 7-yr Notes ($44bn)

Thursday December 25

  • Data: Japan November housing starts, December Tokyo CPI (23:30 London time), November jobless rate (23:30 London time), retail sales (23:50 London time), industrial production (23:50 London time)
  • Central banks: BoJ Governor Ueda speaks

* * * 

Turning to just the US, the key economic data releases this week are the Q3 GDP and durable goods reports on Tuesday. There are no speaking engagements by Fed officials scheduled this week. 

Monday, December 22 

  • There are no major economic data releases scheduled. 

Tuesday, December 23 

  • 08:30 AM GDP, Q3 second release (GS +3.6%, consensus +3.2%, last +3.8%); Personal consumption, Q3 second release (GS +2.8%, consensus +2.7%, last +2.5%); Core PCE inflation, Q3 second release (GS +2.86%, consensus +2.9%, last +2.6%): We estimate that GDP rose 3.6% annualized in the initial reading for Q3, following a +3.8% annualized increase in Q2. Our forecast incorporates a further decline in imports (-5.5%, quarter-over-quarter annualized vs. -29.3% in Q2 and +38.0% in Q1) after frontloading ahead of tariff increases boosted imports earlier in the year. We expect a further acceleration in consumption growth (+2.8% vs. +2.5% in Q2) but another quarter of soft residential investment growth (-3.9% vs. -5.1% in Q2). We estimate that domestic final sales rose 2.4% in Q3, and that the core PCE price index increased 2.86% annualized (or 2.86% year-over-year) in Q3.
  • 08:30 AM Durable goods orders, October preliminary (GS -3.0%, consensus -1.5%, last +0.5%); Durable goods orders ex-transportation, October preliminary (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.6%); Core capital goods orders, October preliminary (GS +0.5%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.9%); Core capital goods shipments, October preliminary (GS +0.2%, consensus +0.3%, last +0.9%): We estimate that durable goods orders declined 3% in the preliminary October report (month-over-month, seasonally adjusted), reflecting a decline in commercial aircraft orders. We forecast a 0.2% increase in core capital goods orders and a 0.5% increase in core capital goods shipments—the latter reflecting the sharp increase in orders in the prior month.
  • 09:15 AM Industrial production, November (GS +0.1%, consensus +0.1%, last +0.1% [September]); Industrial production, October (GS +0.1%); Manufacturing production, November (GS flat, consensus +0.1%, last flat [September]); Manufacturing production, October (GS -0.1%); Capacity utilization, November (GS 75.9%, consensus 75.9%, last 75.9% [September]) ;Capacity utilization, October (GS 75.9%): We estimate industrial production increased by 0.1% in October and 0.1% in November. Our November forecast reflects strong oil and mining production partially offset by weak natural gas and auto production. We estimate capacity utilization remained at 75.9%.
  • 10:00 AM Conference Board consumer confidence, December (GS 91.0, consensus 91.2, last 88.7)

Wednesday, December 24 

  • 08:30 AM Initial jobless claims, week ended December 20 (GS 215k, consensus 223k, last 224k)
  • Continuing jobless claims, week ended December 13 (last 1,897k)

Thursday, December 25 

  • Christmas Day holiday. There are no major economic data releases scheduled. NYSE will be closed. SIFMA recommends that bond markets also close. 

Friday, December 26 

  • There are no major economic data releases scheduled. 

Source: DB, Goldman

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 10:00

Futures Rise, Japanese Yields Surge, Gold And Silver Soar

Zero Hedge -

Futures Rise, Japanese Yields Surge, Gold And Silver Soar

As we previewed late last week, the Santa Rally is back all right, and US equity futures are trading near session highs with the Nasdaq 100 poised to wipe out December’s losses as revived appetite for technology stocks powered gains across equity markets. As of 8:15am ET, S&P futures are 0.4% higher after the benchmark climbed 0.9% on Friday, the most in close to a month; Nasdaq futures rise 0.6% set to build on Friday’s jump as NVDA jumped 2% on a Reuters report the company sees H200 shipments to China starting by mid-February; Oracle and Micron both climbed more than 2% in premarket trading while most members of the Magnificent Seven megacaps advanced.Tech and mining shares outperformed in Europe. In Asia, benchmarks most exposed to artificial-intelligence demand, including South Korea’s Kospi, also led gains. Global bond markets remained under pressure, led by a second day of losses in Japanese debt following an interest-rate hike by the Bank of Japan. The dollar fell. Gold ($4400) silver ($69) and copper all climbed to record highs.The US economic calendar includes the Chicago Fed national activity index (8:30am). No Fed members scheduled to speak for the session

In premarket trading, Nvidia and Tesla lead gains among the Mag 7 tech stocks as sentiment toward AI-exposed companies improves following Micron Technology’s results last week. Nvidia has told Chinese clients it aims to ship its second-most powerful AI chips to China by mid-February, Reuters reports, citing people familiar with the matter. (NVDA +1.7%, TSLA +1.2%, GOOGL +0.5%, AMZN +0.4%, META +0.4%, MSFT +0.3%, AAPL is little changed).

  • Gold and silver miners advance after prices of both precious metals hit record highs. Newmont (NEM) climbs 2% and Coeur Mining (CDE) rises 4%.
  • Clearwater Analytics Holdings Inc. (CWAN) is up 8% as a group of private equity firms led by Permira and Warburg Pincus has agreed to acquire the investment and accounting software maker in a deal valuing it at $8.4 billion including debt.
  • Honeywell (HON) slips 1% after the industrial conglomerate adjusted its full-year and fourth quarter 2025 guidance to reflect the reclassification of its Advanced Materials business — now Solstice Advanced Materials Inc. — as it discontinued operations following its spinoff on October 30.
  • Marvell Technology (MRVL) rises 2% after Citi opened a positive catalyst watch on the chipmaker ahead of next month’s CES conference.
  • Rocket Lab (RKLB) gains 4% after saying late Friday that it won a contract to design and build 18 satellites, the company’s largest single contract to date.
  • T1 Energy (TE) climbs 7% after it signed a three-year contract to supply Treaty Oak Clean Energy with a minimum of 900MW of solar modules built with domestic solar cells from T1’s planned G2_Austin solar cell fab.

A year-end rally in stocks is taking hold, with investors positive about further gains in 2026, although volumes are set to be thinner in this holiday-shortened trading week. Sentiment has been bullish for three weeks in a row, according to Deutsche Bank strategists. Meanwhile, in commodities, oil rose as Trump intensified a blockade on Venezuela. Gold and silver soared to all-time highs on the escalating geopolitical tensions and bets on Fed rate cuts.

“It has been very remarkable how precious metals’ prices have decorrelated from other assets in recent months,” said Roberto Scholtes, head of strategy at Singular Bank. “Earlier this year, gold prices were materially correlated to the dollar and to high-beta risk assets such as tech stocks and cryptos. But this has been waning gradually, and nowadays they’re running freely.”

The focus on price moves in commodities went beyond record-setting metals, with oil climbing amid heightened geopolitical tensions after the US stepped up a blockade on Venezuela.

Bullishness toward stocks has pushed positioning higher, while fund managers are maintaining record low levels of cash, according to the latest BofA Fund Manager Survey. They are betting on a further rally next year, despite concerns in some quarters over rich valuations, heavy artificial intelligence capex and potentially over-optimistic earnings expectations. Separately, Goldman strategists say the economic outlook is supportive for small-cap stocks, a factor that’s underpriced by the market. The Russell 2000 is likely to advance 10% in 2026, close to the 12% return expected in the S&P 500, they say.

Optimism for a year-end rally in equities are growing after dip buyers late last week supported a rebound in US stocks. While some doubts about the AI trade and elevated valuations persist, optimism over the economy and corporate earnings is helping lift sentiment.

“Markets are riding a risk-on liquidity wave into year-end as resilient US growth underpins earnings next year, while a lower Fed fund rate eases financial conditions,” said Desmond Tjiang, chief investment officer for equities and multi-asset investment at BEA Union Investment. “Fears of AI capex and returns also recede on improving compute economics.”

Unlike the US, enthusiasm for European equities is missing on Monday as the Stoxx 600 slips 0.2% with utilities as well as food and beverage shares among the biggest laggards. Meanwhile, miners outperform as traders monitor the geopolitical outlook in Venezuela. Here are some of the biggest movers on Monday:

  • Saipem shares rise as much as 4.3%, the most since July, after the Italian energy services and drilling specialist wins an offshore EPCI Contract Worth $3.1 Billion by QatarEnergy LNG.
  • Fresnillo shares climb as much as 3% to a record high, leading a rally in mining stocks as gold, silver and copper prices hit record highs.
  • Gruvaktiebolaget Viscaria shares rise as much as 17%, the most in more than a year, after Handelsbanken initiated coverage of the Swedish mining company’s stock with a buy rating, calling its growth potential attractive.
  • Rank Group shares decline as much as 9.1%, hitting the lowest level since mid-May, after the gambling firm said its Spanish businesses, Enracha and Yo, were targeted by payment fraud totaling about €7.1 million.
  • ASP Isotopes shares plunge as much as 50% in Johannesburg after Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman said it is investigating potential claims on behalf of purchasers.
  • Fenerbahce shares fall as much as 3.5% in Istanbul to the lowest level since May after state-run Anadolu Agency reported the sports club’s chairman was questioned as part of an investigation into illegal drug use.
  • Pantheon Resources shares drop as much as 58%, the most since April 2018, after pausing testing of the Dubhe-1 well, citing cost profile of winter operations and focus on “disciplined” capital allocation.

In rates, Japanese yields remain center stage, with the 10-year segment hitting its highest level since 1999. The yield is 6bps higher today, amid speculation the Bank of Japan may need to raise interest rates more aggressively. This has spilled into other global benchmarks, lifting US, UK and German yields by 1-2bps. US yields cheaper by 1bp to 2bp across the curve with 2s10s, 5s30s spreads steeper by 1.2bp and 1bp on the day. US 10-year yields trade around 4.165%, cheaper by 1.5bp vs. 

In Asia, stocks extended gains, as tech firms tracked their US peers higher in a holiday-shortened week. The MSCI Asia Pacific Index climbed as much as 1.1%, with TSMC and Samsung Electronics supporting the gauge higher. Tech-heavy benchmarks in Taiwan and South Korea led gains in the region with a more than 1.5% increase each. Japan and Hong Kong shares also advanced. Here Are the Most Notable Asian Movers

  • Kokusai Electric and Tokyo Electron shares climbed after Morgan Stanley MUFG analysts raised ratings and price targets for the stocks on signs of a recovery in demand for front-end semiconductor equipment. Meanwhile, Nidec shares rose after news the Japanese electronic component company’s founder Shigenobu Nagamori is stepping down from his position as chairman of the board.
  • Shriram Finance shares surge to a record after analysts saw Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group’s $4.4 billion investment improving prospects of a credit rating upgrade.
  • Mixue Group shares surge as much as 13% in Hong Kong, the most since March 7, after the Chinese fresh tea maker opened its first store in the US.
  • Moore Threads shares rise as much as 4.2% after the company unveiled a new generation of chips aimed at reducing dependence on Nvidia Corp.’s hardware.
  • WiseTech shares drop as much as 4.7%, the most since Nov. 18, after Executive Chair Richard White’s investment vehicle RealWise entered into a collar derivative transaction.
  • Seatrium shares gain after the offshore engineering company reached an agreement with Maersk Offshore Wind’s affiliate Phoenix II A/S to deliver a wind turbine installation vessel by Feb. 28.
  • Kokusai Electric and Tokyo Electron shares climbed Monday after Morgan Stanley MUFG analysts raised ratings and price targets for the stocks on signs of a recovery in demand for front-end semiconductor equipment.
  • Daikin shares rose as much as 2.7%, the most since Nov. 20, after SMBC Nikko Securities raised the Japanese air conditioner maker to outperform from neutral on expectations for demand recovery and capital efficiency improvement.
  • Nidec shares climb as much as 7.3%, the most since Nov. 11, after news the Japanese electronic component company’s founder Shigenobu Nagamori is stepping down from his position as chairman of the board.

This week’s Treasury auctions kick-off at 1pm New York with $69 billion 2-year notes, followed by $70 billion 5-year notes and $44 billion 7-year notes Tuesday and Wednesday. Before today’s auction, the WI 2-year currently trades around 3.482% which is ~0.7bp richer than November’s sale

In FX, the upside in Japanese yields and officials’ jawboning has supported the yen versus the dollar. Bloomberg’s Dollar Index is down 0.2%, pressured also by the outperformance in AUD, NZD and GBP.

In commodities, as noted above, gold and silver sit at record highs, up 1.6% and 2.8% respectively. WTI crude oil futures are up 1.9% as the US pursues a third tanker in Venezuela. Bitcoin continues to rise, up 1.8%.

The US economic calendar includes September Chicago Fed national activity index (8:30am). No Fed members scheduled to speak for the session

Market Snapshot

  • S&P 500 mini +0.4%
  • Nasdaq 100 mini +0.6%
  • Russell 2000 mini +0.4%
  • Stoxx Europe 600 -0.2%
  • DAX little changed
  • CAC 40 -0.4%
  • 10-year Treasury yield +2 basis points at 4.16%
  • VIX +0.1 points at 15.05
  • Bloomberg Dollar Index -0.2% at 1207.51
  • euro +0.2% at $1.1737
  • WTI crude +1.2% at $57.17/barrel

Top Overnight News

  • U.S. Coast Guard Chasing Another Tanker Involved in Shipping Venezuela Oil: WSJ
  • Russian General Is Killed After Car Bomb Explodes in Moscow: BBG
  • Paramount Amends Bid for Warner Discovery With New Ellison Guarantee: WSJ
  • Trump on Friday said he would call a meeting of insurance companies in the coming weeks to push them to cut prices and stay in the system.
  • Trump on Friday announced deals with nine pharmaceutical companies to cut prices on most drugs sold through Medicaid and lower cash-pay prices, while committing to most-favoured-nation pricing for future drugs, according to Reuters. The companies also pledged more than USD 150bln in US manufacturing and R&D investment, agreed to remit some foreign revenues to offset US costs, and received relief from US tariffs in return.
  • Charlie Kirk’s Empire Is Lining Up Behind a JD Vance Presidential Bid: WSJ
  • Vanke Averts Default as Bondholders Approve Longer Grace Period: BBG
  • Japan prepares to restart world's biggest nuclear plant, 15 years after Fukushima: RTRS
  • CBS News Pulls ‘60 Minutes’ Segment; Correspondent Calls Decision Political: WSJ
  • One of Elon Musk’s Old Enemies Joins the Race to Run GM: WSJ
  • Syrians emptied Assad’s prisons. They’re filling up again, and abuse is rife: RTRS
  • Toxic Fumes on Planes Blamed for Deaths of Pilots and Crew: WSJ
  • The Warner Deal: Cinema owners fear that Netflix or Paramount acquiring Warner could reduce number of theatrical releases or speed time to streaming platforms: WSJ
  • Trump names Louisiana governor as Greenland special envoy, prompting Danish alarm: RTRS

Central Banks

  • ECB's Kazmir said that the ECB remains flexible and will be ready to step in if needed. He is concerned about the long term growth prospect of the Eurozone.
  • Fed’s Hammack (2026 voter) said rates should be held steady into the spring after recent cuts, warning she was inflation-wary, noting November’s 2.7% CPI likely understated 12-month price growth due to data distortions, and suggesting the neutral interest rate was higher than commonly believed, the WSJ reported.
  • Former BoJ member Sakurai said the first hike to 1.0% could come around June or July and that the BoJ likely sees the neutral rate sitting somewhere around 1.75%.
  • Chinese Loan Prime Rate 5Y (Dec) 3.50% vs. Exp. 3.50% (Prev. 3.50%).
  • Chinese Loan Prime Rate 1Y (Dec) 3.00% vs. Exp. 3.00% (Prev. 3.00%).

Trade/Tariffs

  • China's Commerce Ministry is to impose levies of up to 42.2% on EU dairy products, effective 23rd December, following its anti-subsidy probe.
  • New Zealand concludes free trade agreement with India; deal set to be signed in H1 2026. India and New Zealand are confident of doubling bilateral trade over the next five years.

A more detailed look at global markets courtesy of Newsquawk

APAC stocks kicked off the week with gains across the board as the region coat-tailed on the strength seen stateside. Tech outperformance continued across the region. ASX 200 edged higher as miners tracked gains in gold prices, with the yellow metal buoyed by a weekend packed with geopolitics Nikkei 225 was the clear outperformer as it topped 50.5k as the index cheered the post-BoJ JPY weakness on Friday alongside the global tech rally, whilst simultaneously overlooking the continuing rise in JGB yields. KOSPI was underpinned by its tech sector and following a month-to-date rise in exports. Hang Seng and Shanghai Comp conformed to the risk tone but with upside shallower than the above peers, with the PBoC LPR left unchanged as expected, whilst reports on Friday suggested US lawmakers urged the Pentagon to add DeepSeek and Xiaomi to the list of firms allegedly aiding the Chinese military.

Top Asian News

  • Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Kihara said will not comment on the forex market; recently seeing one-sided, rapid moves; important for currencies to move in a stable manner reflecting fundamentals; will take appropriate action against excessive moves. Closely watching the impact of higher interest rates while cooperating with the BoJ.
  • Japanese Top Currency Diplomat Mimura said he is recently seeing one-sided, rapid moves; will take appropriate action against excessive moves; concerned about forex moves.
  • China Vanke (2202 HK) bondholders approve the decision on a vote for 30-day extension of CNY 2bln bond, however rejecting one-year extension for 15th Dec CNY 2bln bond, via Reuters sources.
  • Goldman Sachs expect Chinese stocks to continue advancing in 2026, citing easing geopolitical tensions and as investors household savings begin flowing to equities as interest rates fall. Analyst Kinger Lau writes that "we expect the bull run to continue, but at a slower pace". Though the firm highlights some main risks to the upside, including; global recession, AI exuberance, US-China tensions and disinflation. Finally, analysts suggest that the macro / equity-market policies remain in effect which should shift the expected fair value of Chinese stocks upward.

European equities (STOXX 600 -0.2%) are trading lower/flat this morning, with price action fairly rangebound in light newsflow. European sectors are trading with a mostly negative bias. Basic Resources (+1.1%) leads on firmer metal prices, followed by Tech (+0.4%) on positive spillover from the strong Nasdaq close, and Energy (+0.3%) on higher crude amid ongoing geopolitical tensions between Russia-Ukraine and US-Venezuela. On the downside, Utilities (-0.9%), Optimised Personal Care (-0.9%) and Food Beverage and Tobacco (-0.9%) lag.

Top European News

  • German Ifo survey finds that 26% of firms expect business to deteriorate in 2026, 59% expect no change, 15% forecast an improvement.

Geopolitics: Venezuela

  • US Coast Guard officials over the weekend tracked two oil tankers in international waters close to Venezuela, marking three tankers within the past week. An official suggested that the tanker is subject to sanctions, according to several media reports.
  • The Venezuelan government rejected the seizure of a new vessel transporting oil, it said in a statement.

Geopolitics: Ukraine

  • US Special Envoy Witkoff said the Ukrainian delegation held productive meetings over three days in Florida with US and European partners, including a separate US–Ukraine meeting, with discussions focused on timelines and sequencing of next steps.
  • Ukrainian President Zelensky said broader consultations with European partners should follow recent talks in the US.
  • Ukrainian President Zelensky said allies had started to slow supplies of air defence missiles and said Kyiv should stand by the US as mediator on talks with Russia, commenting on French President Macron’s proposal.
  • Ukrainian President Zelensky said the situation in the Odesa region was harsh after Russian strikes and said Russia was trying to restrict Ukraine’s access to the sea.
  • The Kremlin said changes made by Ukrainians and Europeans to peace proposals did not bring agreements closer or add anything positive, IFAX reported. It said Dmitriev was still in Miami meeting with Americans and would report on the results upon his return to Moscow. Kremlin aide said a trilateral Russia–US–Ukraine meeting was not being discussed.
  • Ukrainian President Zelensky said elections could not be held in Russian-occupied parts of Ukraine, could only take place once security was guaranteed, and said Kyiv was working with the US on a stable peace while preparing voting infrastructure for Ukrainians abroad, Reuters reported.
  • Ukraine’s deputy prime minister said Russia attacked the Pivdennyi port and was deliberately targeting civilian logistics in the Odesa region.
  • Russia’s Defence Ministry said Russian troops had captured Vysoke in Ukraine’s Sumy region and Svitlie in the Donetsk region, according to IFAX and TASS.
  • Russia's Kremlin said Envoy Dmitriev will report to President Putin on the US proposals for a possible Ukraine settlement. Adds the US intelligence perception of Putin's aims are mistaken following the Reuters report.
  • Russian General Sarvarov was injured in a car explosion in Moscow, via Unn; subsequently, the Russian Investigative Committee said the general was killed in the explosion.
  • "TASS: [Russian President] Putin's envoy is likely to hold the next meeting with the US delegation in Moscow", via Al Arabiya.
  • Two vessels and two piers were damaged in Russia’s Krasnodar after a Ukrainian drone attack, regional authorities said; damage to piers led to a large fire in the area.
  • US Special Envoy Witkoff said weekend meetings between US and Russian delegation were productive and constructive; Russia remains fully committed to achieving peace in Ukraine.

Geopolitics: Middle East

  • Israeli PM Netanyahu reportedly plans to brief US President Trump on possible new Iran strikes, according to NBC News. Israeli officials believe Iran is expanding its ballistic missile program. They are preparing to make the case during an upcoming meeting with Trump that it poses a new threat. Israeli officials have announced a Dec. 29 meeting.
  • Sources said the biggest risk is a war between Israel and Iran will break as a result of a miscalculation with each side thinking the other plans to attack and try to preempt it, according to Axios.
  • Israeli officials warned the Trump administration over the weekend that an Iranian IRGC missile exercise could be preparations for a strike on Israel, according to Axios sources.

US Event Calendar

  • 8:30 a.m. ET: Chicago Fed Nat Activity Index

DB's Jim Reid concludes the overnight wrap

For anyone still out there, we’re now entering a very quiet spell for markets before Christmas, with data releases and other headline announcements almost completely drying up. Indeed, there’s only two-and-a-half days left to go for many places, as the US and several European markets are closing early on Christmas Eve, and this week usually sees some of the lowest volumes of the year.

This morning, the main news has been further sharp losses for Japan’s government bonds, which follows the Bank of Japan’s Friday decision to hike rates by 25bps to 0.75%, the highest since 1995. The hike already meant that Japan’s 10yr yield was up +6.9bps last week to close above 2%, and this morning they’re up another +6.9bps to 2.08%, their highest since 1999. One factor behind that has been the weakness in the Japanese yen, which fell -1.40% against the US dollar on Friday, despite the hike. And this morning, the country’s chief currency official Atsushi Mimura said to reporters that “We’re seeing one-directional, sudden moves especially after last week’s monetary policy meeting, so I’m deeply concerned”. So in turn, that weakness for the yen is seen as raising the chance of another BoJ rate hike and has prompted the latest selloff for JGBs. We’ve seen that echoed across other countries too this morning, with 10yr Australian yields up +5.1bps this morning, whilst the 10yr Treasury yield is up +2.0bps to 4.17%.

For equities however, there’s been a much stronger picture across the board overnight, with gains for Japan’s Nikkei (+1.90%), along with the KOSPI (+1.82%), the CSI 300 (+0.79%), the Shanghai Comp (+0.64%) and the Hang Seng (+0.20%). Looking forward, US equity futures are also pointing higher, with those on the S&P 500 up +0.26%. Moreover, there’s been a fresh rally for precious metals this morning, with gold prices up +1.40% to $4400/oz, which would be an all-time closing high if sustained, and is the first time they’ve reached that level on an intraday basis as well. Similarly, silver prices (+3.25%) are up to a fresh record of $69.34/oz. So that now leaves their YTD gains at +68% for gold and +140% for silver, which would be the biggest for both since 1979, back when oil prices surged after the Iranian Revolution that year led to major supply disruption.

The latest rise in bond yields this morning follows several central bank decisions last week, where hawkish-leaning elements pushed yields higher around the world. So for example, the Bank of Japan did their 25bp rate hike as expected but also signalled more were still ahead and said real interest rates were “at significantly low levels”. Meanwhile in Europe, there was ongoing speculation about a potential ECB hike next year, particularly after they upgraded their forecasts for growth and core inflation. So that helped to push 10yr bund yields up +3.8bps last week to 2.89%, their highest level since the German fiscal stimulus announcements back in March.

However, the main exception to that pattern were US Treasuries, whose yields fell after the soft CPI print led investors to price in more rate cuts, with the 10yr yield down -3.7bps last week to 4.15%. That comes as speculation around the next Fed Chair has continued to swirl, and Trump said last week that it would be “someone who believes in lower interest rates”. We got some more headlines on the next Fed Chair last Friday as well, as CNBC reported that Fed Governor Waller had a “strong interview” with Trump, and that BlackRock’s Rick Rieder would be interviewed in the last week of the year. So as it stands the current odds on Polymarket are 56% for NEC Director Hassett, 22% for former Fed Governor Warsh, 12% for Governor Waller, and 6% for Rieder.

In terms of the week ahead, it’s a pretty quiet one on the events calendar. One thing to note will be a few US data releases, including the delayed Q3 GDP print today, but that’s very backward-looking and covers the period before the shutdown. Otherwise today, the more recent data will be the December consumer confidence reading from the Conference Board, which will be in the spotlight given the recent downtick in sentiment. In fact, the previous reading for November was the lowest since the Liberation Day turmoil in April. But apart from that, there really isn’t much scheduled.

With little on the calendar this week, this lack of events got us thinking about whether anything could disturb the pre-Christmas calm, as we have seen a few occasions when this week has brought heightened volatility. The best recent example is probably 2018, when you may remember a huge selloff saw the S&P 500 fall -7.7% in the four pre-Christmas sessions. A whole bunch of negative factors converged at once, including a hawkish Fed signalling more hikes to come, weak global data, US-China trade tensions, and the start of a US government shutdown on Dec 22. That selloff deepened further after the US Treasury Department said in a Dec 23 statement that Secretary Mnuchin had spoken with CEOs of the largest US banks, and that the President’s Working Group on financial markets would have a call. So that created huge concern that policymakers knew something that the rest of us didn’t, and the S&P hit its closing low on Christmas Eve.

Another good example, although not quite as fearful, happened in 2022. That was the year central banks hiked aggressively to combat inflation, with global bonds and equities entering a bear market that featured huge bouts of volatility as they kept sinking lower. And the Christmas run-up was no different, with the 10yr Treasury yield surging +26bps in the week before Christmas. That followed an adjustment to the Bank of Japan’s yield curve control policy on Dec 20, which was widely seen as the beginning of the end of Japan’s ultra-loose monetary policy. They permitted the 10yr JGB yield to rise to around 0.5%, up from 0.25% previously, but the effects cascaded globally given Japan’s role as one of the last anchors for low yields. So that led to some dramatic moves right before Christmas, and it was one of the biggest weekly jumps that year for the 10yr Treasury yield.

To be fair, this time last year saw a pre-Christmas Santa rally that took the S&P 500 up +2.9% in the final 3 days before Christmas. But either way, it shows that even if it’s a quiet week on the calendar, we can’t completely dismiss the prospect of a final year-end curveball, which would be in keeping with the constant surprises of 2025 so far. After all, this year has seen a huge regime shift in German fiscal policy in March, the Liberation Day tariffs in April, a direct military conflict between Israel and Iran in June, and the longest-ever US government shutdown over October-November. And that’s before we think about some other long-running themes, including periodic bond market flareups around fiscal policy, fears of a potential AI bubble, and ongoing concern around private credit.

Recapping last week’s moves now, global equities navigated several headwinds at the start of the week to recover into the weekend, with the S&P 500 ultimately closing up +0.10% for the week. Concerns over AI valuations had been an issue in the middle of the week, with Oracle struggling after the FT reported that Blue Owl Capital wouldn’t back a $10bn deal for Oracle’s data centre in Michigan. However, the soft US CPI report and a more positive earnings release from Micron helped things turn around into the weekend, and the Magnificent 7 ultimately posted a +1.48% gain for the week.

That US CPI report was critical because it kept open the prospect of further rate cuts from the Fed next year. Admittedly, there were questions about the data’s methodology given the government shutdown, but the print was still viewed as soft enough to make Fed rate cuts more likely. So the headline CPI rate was down to +2.7% year-on-year (vs. +3.1% expected), whilst core CPI hit its lowest since early 2021 at +2.6% (vs. +3.0% expected). Earlier in the week, we also had the delayed jobs report for November, which showed the unemployment rate ticking up to 4.6%, whilst it showed payrolls had fallen by -105k in October, before rebounding by +64k in November. So overall, that kept up the momentum behind further rate cuts, with 60bps of further cuts priced in by the December 2026 meeting at the close on Friday. In turn, US Treasuries rallied across the curve, with the 2yr yield (-3.9bps) down to 3.48%, whilst the 10yr yield (-3.7bps) fell to 4.15%. US credit spreads saw little movement however, with IG spreads widening +1bp last week, whilst HY spreads were unchanged.

In Europe, equities put in a stronger performance, with the STOXX 600 (+1.60%) closing at a new record. In part, they were supported by signs of progress on the Ukraine peace talks, and Brent crude (-1.06%) fell back to $60.47/bbl, whilst yields on Ukraine’s 10yr dollar bonds fell to their lowest since March. In the meantime, the ECB left their deposit rate at 2%, although some hawkish tones also saw yields on 10yr bunds (+3.8bps), OATs (+3.5bps) and BTPs (+3.7bps) move higher. Otherwise, the Bank of England delivered a 25bp cut, taking their policy rate down to 3.75%, albeit in a close 5-4 vote that saw the rest prefer to keep rates on hold. Meanwhile, Euro IG credit spreads were unchanged last week, whilst HY spreads were +1bp wider.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 08:30

Transcript: Samantha McLemore, Patient Capital

The Big Picture -



 

The transcript from this week’s MiB: Masters in Business: Samantha McLemore, Patient Capital, 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

This week on the podcast, an extra special Masters in Business Live from the Phillips Collection in Washington DC I sit down with Samantha Macklemore of Patient Capital. She’s known as really the protege of Bill Miller, who she’s worked with for the past 20 years. First at Leg Mason, then at Miller Value she runs Patient Capital and then has taken over the Opportunity Equity Fund from Miller Value. Her firm now runs it. I thought the conversation was fascinating, and I think you will also, with no further ado, my live conversation with Patient Capitals Samantha Macklemore.

Barry Ritholtz: All right, let me look at my notes, which says, I’m the host of Masters in Business, a podcast that’s been on Bloomberg for the past 11 years. The first Bloomberg podcast. Now there are dozens, many, many award-winning podcasts. Forgot to button my shirt after they ran the backup mic. So let’s get that taken care of since we’re on tv. So most of you have some idea who I am. Sam, why don’t you tell people who you are?

Samantha Macklemore: My name is Samantha Macklemore, I’m the founder and CIO of Patient Capital Management. I started my career many, many years ago now, I dunno how it’s been so long as an analyst at Leg Mason working for Bill Miller, who was a, a very well known value manager.

Barry Ritholtz: So I want to talk a little bit about your time with Bill Miller, but before we get to that, let’s start in college. Magna cum laude from Washington and Lee originally chemistry, but eventually changes to accounting and business. What was the original career plan?

Samantha Macklemore: Well, I, I didn’t have so much a plan when I first decided to major in chemistry, I took chemistry in high school and thought I was really good at it. And then I got to, so I was like, I’ll major in this. I I like to be good at things. And I got to college and that first class I quickly realized I was not so good at it. You know, I, I’d never worked so hard for a B and so I was like, you know, and some of my friends were, you know, doing much better. So I was like, no, that’s not, we’re gonna have to reexamine this whole thing. So I wound up in the business school ’cause I was analytical and that was a much better fit.

Barry Ritholtz: Accounting and business, not necessarily finance and investing. When, when did that spark light?

Samantha Macklemore: Well, it was, they didn’t have a finance degree at the business school. So again, I was very good at accounting. It just came naturally. I don’t know what that says about my brain, but, and I got involved with the investment club. I’ve had some investing experience with my dad who tried to get me interested in markets in high school, you know, in the late nineties. It was a roaring tech bull market much like we’re seeing today, although I don’t think we’re peak bubble. And he bought Dell and I had some funds that were for college. So he had invested those and tried to get me engaged. So I’d had a little bit of experience in high school and then I joined the investment club and I just liked that a lot.

Barry Ritholtz: So how did you find your way over to Leg Masons? Was that your first job right outta college?

Samantha Macklemore: That was, and I like to say I won the job lottery because it was the fall of 2001. So now we were in the tech market crash. It wasn’t a great job market, fortunately, you know, there were a lot of investment banks recruiting from my alma mater. So my plan was to go there. I was ready to do the all-nighters in New York. And Bill, who also went to Washington, Lee happened to come back, you know, the fall of my senior year. He did some speaking. He met with the investment club and I got very lucky. I asked him if I could send him my resume and he said sure. So I sent him my resume and, and joined him as a junior, junior analyst right out of college.

Barry Ritholtz: I imagine Bill Miller comes to an investment club at his alma mater and every person is handing him a resume. Is that accurate or were people a little more circumspect?

Samantha Macklemore: No, you would think, I mean, if I have advice to young people, it’s like,

Barry Ritholtz: Give Bill Miller your resume.

Samantha Macklemore: Give anyone your resume. Go after it. Go for the job. Everyone said there’s no way you can get a job in investment management. And so I just think people thought, okay, this isn’t what, you know, I’ll go do banking, I’m not gonna try. So actually I think I was the only, the only one that sent in my resume. Resume. Really? Yeah, that’s a, the only one that asked to do that.

Barry Ritholtz: There’s a lesson in that. So you start as an analyst at Leg Mason. How long did you do that? When did you transition to a portfolio manager? I

Samantha Macklemore: Was an analyst for a few years. So I started in 2002 and became the assistant portfolio manager of the Opportunity Trust, which is the mutual fund that Bill and I worked on for many years together that I now run in 2008. In, in August of 2008. Right. Good Timing.

Barry Ritholtz: Yeah, right before the markets fell apart during the financial crisis,

Samantha Macklemore: The next month was all hell brokers. Yes. We’ll, we’ll talk about that in a bit. But you spend 20 years working pretty much shoulder to shoulder with Bill Miller. What was that like? What did you take away from that experience?

Barry Ritholtz: I mean, it was amazing. I, I can’t express how lucky I was. I was just so lucky. I, you know, I think it’s an apprenticeship business. So I really, my desk was always right beside bill’s and he liked to teach. And so I would go in his office, we would look at the Bloomberg and you know, look at stock charts and I got to attend a lot of meetings with great CEOs. Jeff Bezos spoke at our investment conference in 2003 the year after I joined. And I got to hear his speech and be in some meetings with him. And so I couldn’t have been luckier in terms of what I was exposed to and that learning opportunity.

Barry Ritholtz: It’s kind of interesting you work with a legendary value investor who is, doesn’t really fit the mold of a traditional value investor. How much of his philosophy did you make your own? How similar or different of you to the Bill Miller style of investing?

Samantha Macklemore: Well, we have a lot of similarities. I think that’s one of the reasons we hit it off. And you know, I, I would say at my core, I’m a contrarian value investor. I didn’t grow up with a lot of money. I had to make money go far. I looked at the markets, I like stuff that was down that was generating cash. Bill and I, you know, when I first applied, talked about Eastman Kodak, which ended up being one of our biggest mistakes, both of us. But we kind of bonded over that. And what was much more, you know, transformational to me was Bill’s view. And he was, he was criticized when I joined him as not a true value manager. ’cause he had invested in names like Amazon, you know, in the early two thousands. And people said you can’t possibly be a value manager if you’re investing in these very high multiple stocks.

And you know, Bill used to joke that he liked to hire people young so he could imprint them like the baby bird, that whatever the first thing it sees it, it thinks is its mother. So I was definitely imprinted, but when Bill made the point, listen, we don’t know what the best values in the market are today. ’cause it depends on the future and the future is unknowable so no one knows what they are. But we do know if we look back over long periods of time, what the best values are, ’cause we have hindsight bias and we can look back and say, well, what went up the most clearly that was the most, the best value. And if you look, it’s always names that can grow and compound value over long periods of time. And those types of companies, because their prospects are so promising, they don’t tend to trade at low multiples.

So he said, as a value manager, why would you have a process where you explicitly exclude what you know are the best values in the market? That doesn’t make sense. And I thought, well, yeah, that just doesn’t make sense. Now to a contrarian type investor, you know, it’s not easy to, ’cause it depends on a future that’s unknowable, it always does. And so where can you get that conviction that that can be challenging? But I think that had a, you know, certainly a big impact on me and it’s a core part of our process to look at a mix of different types of opportunities in the portfolio.

Barry Ritholtz: ] You used the word conviction a couple of times. Opportunity Equity has always been a high-conviction fund, somewhat idiosyncratic strategy. Tell us a little bit about the fund’s philosophy and what makes it so unique amongst, I don’t wanna say value funds, but funds that look at reasonable purchase prices for equities.

Samantha Macklemore: I think we are unconventional and we’ve always been unconventional. And Bill started the Opportunity Trust in 1999 at the peak of that tech bubble. And the idea was let’s create a fund with the maximum flexibility possible to go wherever it wants. And again, there’s lots of structures in the business that make that hard. ’cause style boxes don’t like that people allocators wanna put you in a box and so it hurts demand for your fund when you’re like, no, I’m just gonna go wherever the best values are. But the idea is, over time, that should allow you to earn better returns if, if executed properly. So I think the fund has migrated around over time. It has had a different mix of, you know, what we call attractively, valued compounders like Amazon and Alphabet, which we own more classic value names that everyone would recognize as value, like Citigroup or, and General Motors.

And then we, we like to look at companies early in their life ’cause they’re more likely to be misunderstood. There’s a wider range of potential future outcomes. And, you know, a lot of people don’t feel comfortable, especially in the value investing community, where I think it’s, it’s a more risk averse group who wanna see the value today there, what’s today’s value and what’s today’s price. And again, you know, growth people tend to look further out in the future, but we, we like to have a mix and I think that helps the fund do well in different environments.

Barry Ritholtz: And let me put a little flesh on those bones because this morning the first thing I did was, hey, let’s see how opportunity is done year to date. It has beaten its benchmark year to date, one year, three year, and since inception. So it’s not just like this is a theoretical stock-picking approach. It’s done better than average. Is that a fair way to describe it without getting you into trouble with the compliance department? Yeah, you’re

Samantha Macklemore: You’re gonna get me in trouble with compliance, but yet, well,

Barry Ritholtz: I said it, not you…

Samantha Macklemore: We, we have had a good track record, especially relative to value managers, which have recently, you know, struggled in a very, you know, growthy sort of market

Barry Ritholtz: Since, since the financial, so let, since you went there, since the financial crisis value has been a pretty ugly laggard compared to growth. We’ve been in a very strong era for growth, especially since the end of the pandemic. What sort of challenges does that create to someone that’s labeled a value manager?

Samantha Macklemore: Oh, well, I mean I think it creates a lot of value in terms of, some people say, oh, your value only wanna talk to you. So my colleagues here, she had a conversation the other day and they’re like, we just don’t have any demand for value. No one cares. We’re like, but we’ve done really well and we’re beating the market every year since Sam took over. And it’s like, it doesn’t matter. So I think it does, you know, my view is our, our primary job is to deliver for our clients. And so if we do that, everything else will work out. I’ve seen this in this business time and time again. If you deliver results, everything else will work itself out. And so, and I, I I strongly believe value will have its day in the sun again, but it might take a, an ugly market. So I’m not, I’m not hoping for that.

Barry Ritholtz:  I’ve always tried to figure out a way to more appropriately describe what you do, what Bill Miller does. Is it growth at a reasonable price? Is it value in growth? Like how do you sum it up in a elevator pitch?

Samantha Macklemore: Again, I think it’s value. ’cause if you look at every name in the portfolio, we think they’re all undervalued. But the value of any business is the present value of the future. Free cash flows and growth is a very, very important input into, you know, that calculation. And so, so we are valuing businesses, but I also think it’s important to have diversification between different types of names in the portfolio. And so, you know, I wouldn’t feel comfortable being fully invested in this market and all the griest stuff that has higher valuations. You know, I like having some cheaper names in there that are likely to perform well in a different sort of environment and there’s really attractive values in the value area that have just just been left for dead. So we’ll be patient waiting for the market to close those gaps.

Barry Ritholtz: Since patience was brought up, let’s talk about Patient Capital. What inspired you to launch the firm and tell us a little bit of the thinking behind the name.

Samantha Macklemore: I’ve always been pretty driven and I’ve always had entrepreneurial interests. And so when I became the co-manager with Bill on the Opportunity fund in 2014, I was also interested in developing my own independent track record. So BI Bill gave me some of his personal money to run independently and be the sole decision maker. So at the end of 2019, that had a, a really good track record. We didn’t have an institutional business at Miller Value Partners we had back in the day at Leg. But Bill was more optimizing for the kind of life he wanted to live. He didn’t wanna grow and build a business. So I said, Hey, let me go after this institutional business. And there was at least stated interest in women and minority led opportunities there. So I said, it looks like there might be interest in the marketplace for this. It was important to me to have, I think it’s a great profession for women. I think I’ve read a lot of research on the importance of role models in the industry. So, you know, that was, you know, part of my decision. So we decided to turn it into a private fund, like a hedge fund structure. And we did, we made the decision in 2019 and then we actually launched it in 2020 right. In COVID, which was not the best time to..

Barry Ritholtz:  Not a good time to launch in new fund.

Samantha Macklemore: Whenever I make these big decisions, the market, you know, goes a little wonky. Right.

Barry Ritholtz: Since you’ve become the sole manager of the opportunity equity strategy, is it run the same way it was? How has it changed since Bill has retired from being co-manager that Yeah, so

Samantha Macklemore: The philosophy and process is exactly the same as what we’ve always done. And you know, the, the decision making is different ’cause it used to be a co-decision making structure. When I first became co-manager with Bill, he said, okay, great, you’re co-manager, but I’m not gonna let some 30 something year old tell me what to do on my fund. And I said, I got it. I gotta, you know, I have to convince you. And so over time, you know, it became more equal co and then I, I took it over, obviously when he stepped off at the end of 2022

00:15:05 [Speaker Changed] And Patient Capital has acquired this, it’s now a wholly owned subsidiary. Is that right

00:15:12 [Speaker Changed] Now Patient Capital is, you know, the, the Opportunity trust mutual fund business and the institutional business that I started under patient. And so the, all the team and the structure,

00:15:21 [Speaker Changed] How do they differ aside from a mutual fund has its own rules, regulations, and specific Well that’s

00:15:26 [Speaker Changed] The primary way again for me, I like to think one philosophy, one process, one team. And we’re just looking for the best ideas in the market. And then if it’s appropriate for the strategy, the mutual fund has more restrictions on what it can do, even though it has the widest latitude possible for a mutual fund. So, you know, we owned Bitcoin starting in 2020 in the private fund, but we couldn’t in the mutual fund. Now we own the Bitcoin ETFs, but it would be differences like that.

00:15:52 [Speaker Changed] Coming up we continue our conversation with Samantha Macklemore, chief investment Officer and founder of Patience Capital, talking about the state of the economy today. I’m Barry Ltz. You are listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. I am Barry Ritholtz, you’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. Let’s return to my previously recorded conversation live at the Phillips Collection in Washington DC with patient capitals, Samantha Macklemore. So that one doesn’t think of Bitcoin as a value trade. Tell us what your thinking was there.

00:16:49 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, well my thinking was, I really screwed that one up because Bill got involved in Bitcoin when it was a couple hundred dollars a coin. And I was like, oh, this is another one of those things that’s gonna go to zero. ’cause Bill said, you know, it could go to zero or, but if it goes up, it’s gonna go up a lot. And I was like, I don’t need another thing going to zero. Big, big, big mistake. But, you know, then it had its run, it made it almost to 20,000 in 2018. You know, I again was telling Bill, when it got to 3000 bill, you should, he had a fund. And I was like, it was a huge position. I was like, you should cut it back. You know, this is, you know, has some risk. And it went to 20 and then it did crash, but back to 3000.

00:17:28 So that was another good lesson. But by 2020 again, I thought that there was, you know, potential inflation risk given all the, you know, monetary and fiscal stimulus. And by that time, you know, bill was on the phone every day with institutions and in, and you know, big in individuals that wanted to get up to speed. And there was a bull case early on about it being digital gold. But I thought it was very unlikely because there’s one gold and it has a special psychological space in the investment universe. But by 2020 I thought it was much more likely and it was developing along the path. And usually after you have these crashes, things don’t keep coming back. And so, so I bought it in the fund there on the belief that it was digital gold, which I could actually analyze. And you can look at the market cap of gold and look at, you know, the younger generations are much more inclined to digital assets. So if this is a proxy for the long-term potential here, what’s the upside? And if you do that math today, you know, Bitcoin could be worth 1.3, $1.4 million a share or a coin sometime in the future. And so again, I I still believe that to be the case.

00:18:35 [Speaker Changed] Hmm. I would would not have guessed that that’s a fairly contrarian perspective for a, a so-called value investor. Let, let’s talk about some other fairly contrarian approaches. You were an aspiring innkeeper in Vermont. I I have to ask about that ’cause it’s just so off what I, I know of you Tell us about adventures in inn keeping. Well

00:19:02 [Speaker Changed] I was an innkeeper, I’m not the actual innkeeper, but yes, I like to learn lessons the hard way. That’s, you know, part of my unfortunate law in life and you know, so 2011 we’d gone through the financial crisis, you know, bill was this genius. We’d had a really poor performance. He spent all his time working. I just had my first daughter, which totally rearranged everything in my life and my priorities. And I was like, you know, do I wanna work that hard and do that? Or you know, now I have this daughter and she’s so important to me. So I was considering a whole bunch of things and you know, innkeeper was one of them, as crazy as that sounds ’cause it’s so not my thing. Like, but, and then it was the real estate obviously bubble and crash. And so, you know, I think I had mentioned this to my family, they live in Vermont.

00:19:53 My dad was like, oh the Vermont Inn is going up for auction. And I was like, oh this is very interesting. It’s a sign of our times. Let me go to this auction. So my husband and I went to the auction. You know, we, I did work on what I thought the end was worth before going into that. And you know, there was a first bid for the end and then we bid the second bid and then I’m like, what are you doing? That was crazy. Like don’t do that again. But that was it. It was over. There were no two bids, there were no more bids. And so, you know, we ended up with an inn that was closed down ’cause it had gone through foreclosure. Fortunately my family was all there. So then I made, I compounded the air by getting my brother-in-law and sister involved to run the inn. So got family involved in an absentee business and you know, we also were on a reality show. We won’t go into that. Did you, did

00:20:41 [Speaker Changed] You really

00:20:41 [Speaker Changed] Do a reality show? Yeah, we did a reality show. ’cause I’m not gonna tell you the name ’cause I don’t want you to go watch it, but I needed someone to help me figure out how I was gonna run this in. But we got it open. So the, the auction was in October. I wanted to get it open by the holidays ’cause that’s obviously the big ski season there, which we did

00:21:00 [Speaker Changed] December. You did? We

00:21:01 [Speaker Changed] Did that. Yeah. My dad, my husband’s dad, we got everyone involved in getting the in reopen and we had to figure out how to get people to come and it, so it was, it was not for me. I quickly figured that out. But you know, we kind of got the business running and then sold it. So,

00:21:17 [Speaker Changed] And and what was the lesson? We learned the lesson from don’t scratch your nose at auctions. Yeah,

00:21:22 [Speaker Changed] The lesson was, I like markets. I can sit at my desk and make a lot of money doing very little versus managing a chef who has, you know, a lot of issues on when I tell him the food’s not so good and he thinks he’s an artist and you know, I was like, this is not for me. And the, the maximum amount you could make on it and like that was not that much. So

00:21:42 [Speaker Changed] Not a lot of bad business model.

00:21:44 [Speaker Changed] We, we did make some money so it was okay. But it was a lot of work for, you know, how much you could make. Yes.

00:21:49 [Speaker Changed] And you were working full-time?

00:21:52 [Speaker Changed] I was working, yeah. I was working full-time so you know, I wasn’t on site again. I had people there working

00:21:59 [Speaker Changed] That. That’s an amazing story. Let, let’s talk a little bit about philosophy. You have talked about Buddhism and stoicism as related to finance and investing. Tell us a little bit about that.

00:22:12 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, well I think in investing in Mark and markets, having the right mindset is probably the most important thing. And you know, it’s a mixture of art and science and a lot of people think the scientific part is more important. But I think the art part is more important because, you know, there’s a lot of data on how much more you can make in equity markets over time. And so the reason that you can make more is ’cause you have these periodic losses and it, you know, I liken it to dieting. It’s like people don’t fail at dieting ’cause they don’t know they shouldn’t eat the cookie. Right? Like, you know, you shouldn’t eat the cookie. It’s because it’s too tempting and people know you shouldn’t sell when the markets are down mostly. But it’s hard to do that ’cause you feel like your, you know, your wealth is at risk.

00:23:00 And so I think having tools that help you have the right structure for how you think about things and how you behave are really important. I mean some people are naturally wired that way and different people, you know, have different abilities. But I think having certain tools and mindsets can help anyone be better. And so, you know, staying calm, understanding that there’s only certain things that are within your control and that’s what you can focus on. And then understanding that there will be times when you lose money but over time, if again it’s so sensitive to time horizon, if you have a long time horizon and you can put your money away for a long time, there’s almost nothing safer If you have a 20 or 25 year time horizon, you know, equities have never been down over that time. The US period. Yeah. US equities. Yes. And so I meditate regularly and you know, I keep a journal and I remember during the COVID pandemic, you know, we were all locked away, but I was emailing with Bill and he was reading stoicism and that kind of got me interested and we were, you know, he was sharing quotes. And so I think it can really help you in the moment to make better decisions if you have these tools

00:24:10 [Speaker Changed] Re recognizing what is and is not within your control and a sense of calm, it turns out to be useful in markets. Yeah,

00:24:17 [Speaker Changed] Imagine that. Who,

00:24:19 [Speaker Changed] Who? Whoever would’ve guessed that. And yet most people don’t reach that conclusion. They, they go the other direction. Yes. So, so let’s talk a little bit about where we are in the state of the market today. I’m watching real time transcription, which five years ago would’ve been magic. Mm. There’s been dictation software for decades. It’s always been pretty terrible. It’s amazing how good this is in real time. So let’s talk a little bit about artificial intelligence. What are your thoughts? How does this affect how you’re looking at overall markets and how you’re looking at individual companies?

00:24:58 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, well I think it’s, you know, anyone who knows anything about technology, I have not heard anyone who’s knowledgeable about this space. Not say that it’s completely transformational. And you know, more important, you know, I, I think you know the Capital one CEO, you know, he claims to have the first FinTech at Capital One ’cause they were very into data, but he said it’s bigger than the agricultural revolution, the, you know, invention of fire, the industrial revolution, the digital revolution. And I haven’t really heard anyone dispute that. So there’s lots of questions about how long does it take, what exactly does it do? Are companies overvalued now? But I think, you know, a anyone who knows anything believes that the impact of this is just going to be huge. And so when you’re in that sort of situation in the markets, you obviously need to be aware and try to learn, you know, everything you can.

00:25:51 I think we bought Nvidia in January of 2024. The interesting thing about this is I love markets ’cause they’re so interesting but in they’re complex adaptive systems which make them very, very difficult to outperform. They’re extremely difficult but they adapt. And so what’s interesting to me is that we have this AI bubble, you know, hysteria basically where everyone, it’s all you read all the time. And that makes sense given that we’ve had, you know, the tech bubble, we had the housing bubble, we’ve had some of these bubbles. But I think, and it’s possible that, you know, there will be something negative here, but you’re not seeing valuations at all in line with what we saw in the tech bubble. And the companies that are spending these enormous amounts of money, which they are very large sums of money, they’re basically the best companies that ever existed in the history of the world.

00:26:45 If you look at their returns on capital, their free cash flow margin, you know, their revenue growth rates. And so, so I like that there’s all this AI bubble talk because it keeps a lid on the valuations. I think it actually makes it more sustainable. Not that they’re, you know, I would have concern in some of the companies like OpenAI which you know, had under 4 billion in revenues last year and has committed to $1.4 trillion in spend. So we’re watching that very closely. And I think for me, I have children and I’m thinking what does this mean for the future of employment and is, you know, what can I advise them to go into? Which I think that’s a much tougher question now

00:27:23 [Speaker Changed] Then. So, so I’m glad you went over there ’cause I wanted to ask, you’ve talked about the value of mentorship, about training young people, whether analysts or fund managers, what have you. If you look at the unemployment rate today at 4 3 4 4 and then you look at the college graduate under 30 unemployment, it’s more than double that it’s in the nines. What does AI do for that demographic learning to being mentored, learning a trade, being able to get a job at an entry level when their competition seems to be software?

00:28:02 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, I mean it’s a great question. I’m not sure I have the answer to that. I mean, what we know is you can look at industries adopting AI and those that haven’t and there’s clearly an impact on junior hires. So it is having an impact. And you know, Dario Amede, the CEO of Anthropic has said he believes that the white collar unemployment rate will be, you know, five to 25% in one to five years. So huge impact. And so I think it, you know, that’s why I’m thinking like what do you advise young people to do? I think I asked people at my, you know, college that I went to where I’m on the board, the professors there, they’re trying, you know, they’ve worked hard to set up an AI program and help students be literate and you know, well-versed in this. I think if you can use it as a tool to your advantage, you still need humans to do this work. And so, you know, being capable in that is really important. You know, I was at a Santa Fe Institute meeting a couple weeks ago, you know, that was on AI and they talked about how what the models aren’t good at, which I thought was really interesting is complex problem solving and creativity. So those seem more unique human endeavors. So leaning into areas where, you know, those are critical skills I think are important, but areas like law or you know, obviously customer service coding, some of these areas are getting quite disrupted.

00:29:30 [Speaker Changed] And you’re saying complex problem solving and creativity AI is not great at still,

00:29:35 [Speaker Changed] Still these models cannot do it. Now will they get there? I don’t know. But I think what’s useful is to have a human who is well versed and can think critically about, ’cause these models hallucinate, they’ll make up lies. They’ll tell you incorrect information, they’re getting better at that. But having someone who knows how to check facts, use different models in different situations, you know, that’s gonna be very valuable. I think who can figure stuff out that you haven’t been taught go and solve real problems in the real world, I think is also valuable.

00:30:06 [Speaker Changed] So every time we see a back test that’s based on historical data, it always looks great and built into the back test of the assumption the future is gonna look like the past. How much of what we’re seeing in artificial intelligence is sort of paralleling that, hey, we’re working off the corpus of all these documents that have been previously written. If you wanna do something that’s not gonna get replaced by ai, you have to go in a different direction.

00:30:33 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, no, I think that’s a great point. I mean, what the models do is they look at all of the information that’s out there and they can, you know, do things with it instantaneously. And so I think there’s a belief in the technology community that they will eventually have a breakthrough where they can have novel ideas. I, you know, that’s unclear if and when that’ll happen. I, you know, it hasn’t happened yet. And so, you know, if you can do that, if you can use ideas in an innovative way, if you can, certainly, I think in the investment business for long-term investors, what you’ve seen is machine learning and LA large language models have already been used to optimize short-term trading models. And again, we don’t compete there ’cause I think it’s extremely difficult, you know, to compete. But I think long-term, you know, those models have not been used to think about long-term investments at, you know, we talk about time arbitrage and patience and you know, what do we think the world’s gonna look like in 5, 10, 15 years? The future is uncertain, no one knows. So I don’t see how the models are gonna, you know, get an edge there. I mean, if they become smarter than all humans at some point maybe, but it’ll, it’ll be one of the last things hopefully.

00:31:51 [Speaker Changed] So, so are you using AI in your firm and, and if so, how?

00:31:56 [Speaker Changed] We are and we talk about AI all the time and so I, you know, tell the employees all the time like, you have to be all over this and learn how to use these models because you know they’re gonna displace you if you know, not you specifically, but all of us if we don’t. And so, you know, it’s still so early. So I think a lot of what’s going on now is more experimentation both at big companies and small companies. There was an article in the journal yesterday about how small businesses have had, you know, have been transformed by this ’cause they can do so many things. Like I used one to create a profit sharing plan and I just went back and forth with chat GBT like no, I don’t want this, no I want that. Like what is this model? And it like created it for me, you know, know with the back and forth.

00:32:39 And I sent it to the lawyers and it was good to go. I mean it was good. It needed no changes. And so I’d been, you know, I’ve been wanting to do that for a long time and the team was busy with all sorts of stuff so I finally just did it and it probably took me like an hour to do that. But we try it, we try tools on the investment side, you know, that are both specialized and more generalized. I use chat GPT all the time for, you know, everything in terms of doing research and you know, it’s really, you know, quite amazing. And we have, you know, we have a new tech person that we hired who has played around with automating and using agents to do certain tasks that people did. So I do think it is gonna, you know, replace some work now. I don’t think we’ll have less jobs. People will just be able to do, you know, more higher level work.

00:33:26 [Speaker Changed] Make makes sense. You, you earlier compared this to the dot coms, what are the parallels that are a fair comparison to the late nineties tech and telecom bubble and what do you think is really separating this era from the late 1990s?

00:33:44 [Speaker Changed] Well, I think the clearest, you know, parallel is the market valuation overall is at high levels that we haven’t seen since then. So I think the market’s at 22 times, you know, the next 12 months earnings and it peaked at like 25 times then. So we’re, you know, after the financial crisis we were at very low levels and we’ve spent, you know, the past 16 years, you know, having great markets, some of the best markets we’ve ever had and the valuations have risen. So I, you know, again, as value managers, that makes us, you know, on alert for signs that things might be going awry. But there’s many more, I think more significant differences. So during that there was, you know, I think technology hit 50 times earnings as a sector and a lot of the technology companies were losing a ton of money and there was a lot of, you know, debt financing.

00:34:36 So there’s a lot of unsustainable things, the build out of, you know, the fiber networks they were building for future demand that wasn’t yet there. So that’s very different than today we have this, you know, big infrastructure build out, but you know, there’s still shortages of demand. They can’t meet the demand that already exists. That’s a very different situation. And the companies that are building them, you know, building this infrastructure out for the most part are, you know, extremely, the hyperscalers are extremely well capitalized with great balance sheets, high free cash flow margins. So you know, the risks that sort of risk doesn’t exist. And also at the end of the tech bubble, everyone was piled into, you know, bill recognized the peak and actually got out of those names. And what made him recognize it was that, you know, I think in the first quarter of 2000, you know, the, a very high percent, like 75% of money managers outperformed and only two sectors outperformed tech and telecom.

00:35:34 And so everyone was piled into a, a very narrow area of the market that is not at all, you know, what you’re seeing now. And so I just now, you know, I think the, the bear case would be that for some reason, you know, the demand doesn’t exist and you know, the, the spend rolls over again. I still think it would be a much more modest, you know, pullback be just because of those underlying, you know, fundamental business factors. There are are other areas of the market like quantum computing and nuclear fission that are much more speculative that have already pulled back 50% actually just in this decline. So that also is a good thing. I think it keeps the market healthier longer.

00:36:16 [Speaker Changed] So you don’t explicitly talk about economic cycles, but every now and then I hear you drifting over to unemployment and growth and infrastructure and economist type speaks. How often do you use what’s going on in the broader economy as part of your process? Do you think about that? Are economic cycles significant to your process or is the economy gonna do what it’s gonna do and it doesn’t interfere with your approach? Well we

00:36:47 [Speaker Changed] Definitely try to understand what’s going on in the economy because it can have, you know, big impacts on, you know, investments. You know, there’s a lot of, no one can forecast the economy. You know, there’s a lot of good evidence that no one does that, economists don’t do it, investors don’t do it. So it’s a futile effort. Some, a lot of people claim that they have some view about the future, forecast the world, but

00:37:08 [Speaker Changed] What do we see in a recession forecast by exactly every year for the past three or four years? They’ll get it right eventually, right?

00:37:16 [Speaker Changed] And so, you know, the best strategy is just, you know, if you have a long time horizon to stay invested, but we wanna be aware of risks and the impact. I mean, our whole process is analyzing the fundamentals of businesses and looking at what the intrinsic value looks like and that’s a distribution of outcomes. ’cause the future’s uncertain. So we’re doing different scenarios and then we compare it to market expectations. And so we like a clear gap in those two things and we like, you know, better risk rewards, but we, there’s a lot that goes into both, both of those things. You know, sentiment goes into the market, expectations, you know, where people are positioned and you know, obviously the economic cycle for certain businesses has a big impact. It’s very sensitive to your time horizon, you know, just how much it matters and the longer your time horizon, the less it matters.

00:38:05 [Speaker Changed] Coming up we continue our conversation with Samantha Macklemore, chief investment officer and founder of Patience Capital, talking about the state of the economy today. I’m Barry Ritholtz, you’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. I am Barry Ritholtz, you’re listening to Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio. Let’s return to my previously recorded conversation live at the Phillips Collection in Washington DC with patient capitals Samantha Macklemore. So you mentioned sentiment, I’m trying to remember a moment in history where collectively the investor class, the pundit class, the media all in real time identified a major market bubble at once. Is it, is it just too glib to say, Hey, everybody’s forecasting a bubble, therefore it can’t be a bubble?

00:39:13 [Speaker Changed] Well I’m a contrarian. So, you know, like that that kind of, you know, thinking appeals to me. I think it is true that usually what, you know, Howard Marks wrote a great memo on the whole tech space at in January and you know, I thought the most important line in that was, you know, a bubble is characterized by psychological extremists and so it is that psychological state. So we’re not, when everyone’s bemoaning a bubble and fearing a bubble and claiming a bubble that makes a bubble much less likely. ’cause people are then not positioned in it. And usually we’re the biggest risks are, are not where you’re focused on. If you know there’s a risk in a certain area, you treat it much differently, you manage it much differently. If everyone’s doing that, you know, Nvidia, you know, so, so the risk would be NVIDIA’s earnings are unsustainable and they’ve had this huge run up and they’re, they’ve captured so far about 90% of the economic profits in ai.

00:40:09 Again, I they’re gonna report tomorrow night if I were a betting man, which I’m not, I’m an investing woman, but you know, I would say they’re gonna beat and then the market might really like that ’cause it’s coming into it, you know, oversold. But I think the risk is there’s something happens to earnings, you know, and, and they have an earning cycle. Again, I don’t see that in the near term, but there’s no, you know, valuation, you know, excesses are just not there. Like these companies, if you look at NVIDIA’s growing, you know, 40 plus percent this year, trading at 28 times next year’s earnings, that is not a bubble at, you know, that’s not bubble valuations at all. It’s not what we saw in the tech bubble. So again, I think it is true that when everyone’s worried about a bubble, it’s likely not a bubble.

00:40:56 [Speaker Changed] So people have been talking about a KS shaped economy that the upper arm is doing great, the lower arm is doing poorly, can you apply the same thing to valuations with the market? If you take the top 10 or 20 stocks, they seem to be much more richly valued than the rest of the whatever you want to use Wilshire 5,000 or s and p 500. How do you think about that bifurcation? Yeah,

00:41:20 [Speaker Changed] Well I think there are certain areas, you know, in the market like quality or like return on capital where those, again, if you have high quality, high return on capital, high free cash flow margins, those companies should be valued at, you know, overall a higher level. But we’ve seen very wide gaps there. So I think I, I have a huge respect for the market though. So because we’re, every day we’re doing the work on okay let’s, this company might be attractive, let’s do the work on that and see what the market’s pricing in and we’ll say what is the market telling us this business can do? And usually the market’s pretty good at like, okay, yeah, that’s the easiest case to make and the market will reflect that. So it’s more anomalous to find areas where that’s wrong. Especially, you know, the market’s had a huge move up.

00:42:05 So the more it moves up, the harder it is. But we’re still finding, you know, opportunities I think we added significantly to healthcare and small caps, you know, earlier this year and healthcare until recently was at a 50 year relative valuation low. And those are good businesses with good returns on capital. And so, you know, the market gets so hyper short-term focused, you know, so many people these days are focused on the next quarter and they wanna outperform every month and every quarter. So again, if you can look out longer, I think you, you do have opportunities, but the reason people don’t is ’cause you sometimes have more downside in the short term if you’re buying into, you know, weakness.

00:42:42 [Speaker Changed] So how do you think overall about valuation and future return expectations when generally the markets had a good run and valuations are, if not bilious, a little more rich than average?

00:42:57 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, I mean my view on valuations is that they’re at the high end of the historical range. So again, that makes me more alert, more cautious. I think if you look, you know, at the underlying fundamentals and just the returns on capital of businesses, the free cash flow margins, the balance sheets, higher valuations are justified, but markets go through these cycles of undervaluation to overvaluation and then back again. And so that’s just part of markets. You know, again, I, I don’t think we’re at, you know, levels that I’m extremely concerned. I still think there are, you know, attractive opportunities in markets, but where we can add ballast to the portfolio defensive areas like healthcare, again, I think that helps position the portfolio for a variety of different sorts of environments. And there’s still plenty of cheap area, you know, cheap, cheap names in the market.

00:43:48 [Speaker Changed] So I have three of my favorite questions I always ask guests, but before I get to that, I wanna throw a little bit of a curve ball at you. What do you think investors are not talking about when, when they’re not thinking about AI bubbles, what are they overlooking? What topics or ideas or strategies are they just not thinking about that perhaps they should be? Yeah,

00:44:12 [Speaker Changed] Well that’s a really hard one ’cause I think, you know, there’s so many investors out there thinking about so many things and now in today’s day and age with great podcasts like yours and Twitter and x and all the research online, you can get access to all of the thinking. So, you know, I’m not sure that there’s things, people aren’t thinking about that much. But I would say, you know, one of my biggest lessons from Bill was the big money are made in the big moves. And so you need to be looking for those and you need to, you know, hold those and, and actually holding them is even harder than looking for them. And so I think people focus. If you, if you have a long time horizon and you’re interested in growing your wealth, which is what we want to do, you know, that’s our number one objective is to make money.

00:44:59 You know, I never saw Bill get upset about a stock that went down or losing money on a certain stock. ’cause you know that, you know, in our business, you know, the best investors are wrong about half the time, like half the stocks go down and that’s just part of the business. So you get really comfortable with being wrong. I never saw him mad. I saw him mad when he identified a stock Qualcomm and an analyst said, no, this is really bad at investment, like, don’t buy it. And then it went up 10 times. ’cause he is like, you just don’t get the opportunity to make money. And most of those type of errors, when something’s not in your portfolio, you don’t see it, you don’t notice it’s not there, but it has a huge impact on, you know, your ability to grow wealth. So I, I think there’s not enough discussion about that.

00:45:42 And you know, if you look at endowment returns, I think for the last decade they’re like 6.8% on average. And so the, the US equity market’s up over 13%. So that’s a huge shortfall that if you do the math on like 30 years of 13 versus 6.8, it’s like you, you either you’re up seven times versus you’re up 30 plus times. I mean that compounding math is, it’s shocking actually, even to me who I’m in this business, I know patients, I’m all about compounding and I do the math and I’m like, oh my goodness, the amount of wealth left on the table.

00:46:18 [Speaker Changed] Alright, so let’s jump to our, our speed round and then afterwards we’ll open it up for questions from the audience. I always like to get book ideas from people. Tell us what you’re reading and what are some of your favorite books?

00:46:32 [Speaker Changed] Well, I’m not rea right now what I’m reading is 1929 by Andrew Ross. So that’s nothing new. Everyone’s reading that, but I think it’s, it’s in the

00:46:39 [Speaker Changed] Probably helpful with all the bubble talk.

00:46:41 [Speaker Changed] Well it’s, you know, you have to be aware and I think studying history is really important. You know, I think, have you read The Comfort Crisis by Michael Easter? No, that’s a really good book. And you know, my kids get sick of me preaching, but it’s all about how, you know, we are in a society where, you know, we’re, it’s all about comfort and, and the benefits of, you know, he has this thing Maa where he goes into nature and does really physically challenging things that are challenging enough that he will, and it’s not his thing, it’s actually a Japanese thing, but that you are most likely to fail, but you, and make it challenging enough f just shy of like maybe dying. So again, I’m not a promo, I’m not a proponent of taking it to that level, but I am a proponent of, you know, if you listen to Jensen Wong at Nvidia and he talks about the value of pain and suffering. And he is like, he talks about being a CEO, he’s like, a lot of people wanna be a CEO. He’s like, but the experience is not power and glory. It’s pain and suffering and like the, all the hardest problems come to you. So I think, you know, exposing yourself to things out of your comfort zone where you have the opportunity to grow and have some pain, I, you know, I think that’s kind of what makes life interesting. And so that would be a book that I would

00:47:57 [Speaker Changed] Recommend. So final two questions. What sort of advice would you give to a recent college grad interested in a career in investing in finance?

00:48:06 [Speaker Changed] Well, I mean, back to my experience, I would say go for it and be persistent. I mean, we have a few job postings now, and so we’re trying to fill those postings and it’s amazing to me, you know, a lot of people will go on LinkedIn and they’ll blast out their resume to everywhere and that they’re putting very little time and little thought into that. And we actually have on our site, you have to email it, and we’re paying attention to who’s actually reading that instruction and emailing it. But very few people follow up. I think we had one candidate who followed up like three times. And it makes a huge difference. And it, you know, it demonstrates interest, it demonstrates, you know, you’re paying attention to it. So I would say in a, in a tough job environment, especially it’s, it’s easier than you think to distinguish yourself if you’re actually interested in something. You know, perseverance, taking the time to learn really what the firm is, the person you’re talking to, who they are, what they’re trying to accomplish with this. It’s amazing to me how little people actually spend doing that.

00:49:07 [Speaker Changed] Hmm. Good, good advice. And our final question, what do you know about the world of investing today would’ve been useful 25 years ago or so when you were first getting started?

00:49:18 [Speaker Changed] Yeah. By Nvidia, I know you told me I couldn’t do this by Amazon, by Bitcoin, apple. Don’t miss, you know, but if there’s a broader point, I mean, part of it is like, you know, again, this kind of will go full circle, but the power of patience and compounding, again, it’s like teach what you need to learn. But Bill used to tell me when I was young, because I’d be like, bill, you know, I need to make more money. I need to find more stocks. You need to gimme more responsibilities. And you’re like, calm down. Like be patient. I’m like, no, I can’t be patient. This is my friend who I graduated with, he’s at Goldman Sachs, he’s making like $10 million a year and he’s like, calm down. And you know, now 20 years, 25 years later, it is amazing just the power of compounding. If you find a name like Amazon or you know, and you invest, and again, you’re gonna have a couple, you know, number of big drawdowns in those, you know, stocks that go up a lot go down a lot. And that’s just part of the journey. But it’s so easy to underestimate, you know, just how powerful that can be.

00:50:15 [Speaker Changed] That was my live conversation with Samantha Macklemore, formerly of Leg Mason and Miller Value. Now with Patient Capital, I have to thank the crack team that helps put these conversations together, especially the live event. Alexis Noriega and Elizabeth Srin have been instrumental in making these sorts of things happen. Sean Russo is my researcher, Anna Luke is my producer. Sage Bauman is the head of podcasts at Bloomberg. I’m Barry Riol. You’ve been listening to a special live edition of Masters in Business on Bloomberg Radio.

 

~~~

 

 

 

 

The post Transcript: Samantha McLemore, Patient Capital appeared first on The Big Picture.

Nvidia Prepares To Ship H200 AI Chips To China By Mid-February

Zero Hedge -

Nvidia Prepares To Ship H200 AI Chips To China By Mid-February

Nvidia shares rose slightly in premarket trading in New York after Reuters reported that the US chipmaker has informed customers it plans to ship its second-most powerful AI chip, the H200, to China before the Lunar New Year in mid-February.

Sources familiar with the shipment say Nvidia plans to deliver about 5,000 to 10,000 chip modules, equivalent to 40,000 to 80,000 H200 AI chips, to China in the coming months.

Those same sources noted that the chipmaker plans to expand H200 production capacity in the new year, with orders for that capacity scheduled to open in the second quarter of 2026.

Designed by Nvidia, the H200 AI chips are manufactured by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company using its advanced 4-nanometer process. This is the same foundry that manufactures most of Nvidia's Hopper-generation GPUs.

Major Chinese tech firms, including Alibaba Group and ByteDance, are interested in the H200s for training large AI models. This chip offers about six times the performance of the H20.

However, the sources noted:

Significant uncertainty remains, as Beijing has yet to approve any H200 purchases and the timeline could shift depending on government decisions, the sources said.

"The whole ‌plan is contingent on government approval," the third source said. "Nothing is certain until we get the official go-ahead."

. . .

Chinese officials held emergency meetings earlier this month to discuss the matter ‍and are weighing whether to allow shipments, Reuters reported this month. One proposal would require each H200 purchase to be bundled with a set ratio of domestic chips, according to the report.

This report follows the Trump administration's approval of Nvidia's sale of H200s in China, but only on the condition of a 25% surcharge. The opportunity from the US Gov't will also be available to other chipmakers, such as Intel and AMD.

However, China's move to expand domestic production of advanced AI chips may be at odds with Western chipmakers trying to expand market share in the world's second-largest economy.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 08:20

Housing December 22nd Weekly Update: Inventory Down 2.3% Week-over-week

Calculated Risk -

Altos reports that active single-family inventory was down 2.3% week-over-week.  Inventory usually declines sharply during the holiday season.
The first graph shows the seasonal pattern for active single-family inventory since 2015.
Altos Year-over-year Home InventoryClick on graph for larger image.

The red line is for 2025.  The black line is for 2019.  
Inventory was up 13.5% compared to the same week in 2024 (last week it was up 13.7%), and down 5.7% compared to the same week in 2019 (last week it was down 5.6%). 
Inventory started 2025 down 22% compared to 2019.  Inventory has closed most of that gap, however inventory will still be below 2019 levels at the end of 2025.
Altos Home InventoryThis second inventory graph is courtesy of Altos Research.
As of December 19th, inventory was at 758 thousand (7-day average), compared to 775 thousand the prior week.  
Mike Simonsen discusses this data and much more regularly on YouTube

'Rather Brilliantly Evil': Life In The Fast Lane With Robinhood Markets

Zero Hedge -

'Rather Brilliantly Evil': Life In The Fast Lane With Robinhood Markets

Authored by Eric Salzman via Racket News, (emphasis ours)

By just about any metric it has been a blowout year for the retail brokerage company Robinhood Markets. The company’s stock (HOOD) price is up about 220% in 2025, revenues and account growth have shot higher, and founder Vlad Tenev has become a multi-billionaire.

Robinhood was founded in 2013 but really burst onto the scene in 2020, changing the face of the retail brokerage industry. After a near-death experience in 2021 with the infamous GameStop episode, the company has become a phoenix, rising from the ashes, turning itself into a casino that can fit in a young man’s pocket. On the Robinhood app you can buy and sell stocks, options, crypto and bet on Monday Night Football all at the same time!

Robinhood is a pusher in plain sight and dopamine is the drug it peddles. It rounds up retail, non-professional traders and matches them up with the best and fastest traders in the world and gets paid handsomely to do it. Tenev continually claims he’s democratizing investing, but his customers are, in effect, profitable lab rats. Their order flow is sold to professional trading firms and studied. They’re more like marks than investors.

The Wall Street Journal recently reported:

The chief executive of Robinhood took the stage at the online brokerage’s annual summit in Las Vegas this fall decked out in a race-car driver’s jumpsuit and customized Nikes.

Vlad Tenev told the hundreds of cheering traders in the audience that they had chosen “one of the most intense lifestyles out there.” He compared trading to driving a race car. “A finely tuned machine can make all the difference,” he said, “and that’s the role we feel Robinhood plays for our active investors.”

Vlad is right about one thing: trading for a living is definitely intense. I’ve done it professionally until I realized I really wasn’t good at it (most people aren’t) and went back to sales and strategy! A veteran trader, who was actually very good at it, said to me once, “If it were easy, Girl Scouts would be doing it.”

As far as Vlad taking the stage in race-car driver get-up and talking about a finely tuned machine making the difference, the analogy only works if the driver knows how to handle the damn car.

If you put 99.99% of us into a Formula One car, we’re going to run that thing into the first wall we see. Maybe the odds are a little better trading stocks, or options on stocks and the host of other high-octane wagers that Robinhood promotes and offers, but over the long term, not much better.

The Journal’s story includes that of a 35-year-old man who says he gets up at 6:30 a.m. every day to start trading zero-day options.

It’s a hobby he said he never would have picked up if not for how easy it is on Robinhood. “The thrill gets me going. If $500 can get me $50,000 or $60,000, let me just try.”

Good Lord.

I have to admit that I’ve looked at the meteoric growth of Robinhood with fascination and a sick sense of admiration for what Vlad Tenev and Baiju Bhatt built.

I felt the same way when I watched “Narcos Mexico” and saw how Felix Gallardo built the first Mexican marijuana and cocaine cartel.

My admiration comes from the rather brilliantly evil way Tenev and Bhatt took their early experiences with high frequency trading (HFT), identified a new brokerage profit model that could offer a no-fee brokerage combined with a video game-like interface to serve up dopamine hits to a whole new generation of investors that the traditional brokerage houses either overlooked or didn’t know how to reach effectively.

A Ticket to Billions: Payment for Order Flow

Fee-less trading was Robinhood’s main draw when it started in 2013. You might ask yourself how Robinhood could have made money without the traditional fees a retail broker would charge per trade. To this day, most users of Robinhood don’t know the answer to this question.

From their experience with high frequency trading, the Robinhood boys learned that they didn’t have to send your order to the publicly visible New York Stock Exchange, but could sell customer orders to buy and sell stocks and options to the big and secretive HFT market makers, like Citadel, Dash, Wolverine, Susquahanna, Jane Street and Morgan Stanley, who will happily take the other side of your trade and quietly pay Robinhood for the privilege. This is called Payment for Order Flow (PFOF). You may have read or heard about this from Michael Lewis’ book, “Flashboys.” Before all the super geniuses of the planet went into Artificial Intelligence, they went to Wall Street or Chicago to build these super-fast trading algorithms that can transact in about 100 milliseconds, or faster than you can blink your eyes.

Without getting too into the weeds, when a Robinhood customer places an order to buy a stock, Robinhood can go to say, the New York Stock Exchange to fill the customer’s order or can route the order to one of the HFT market makers as long as it’s making the best effort to get the best execution (essentially, price) for the customer. The HFT market makers post where they will buy or sell a particular stock or option. The market maker profits from the difference.

Profit isn’t guaranteed but market makers typically make a penny or two per share on stock trades — and they are potentially making tens of millions of pennies per day. For options, the HFTs can make a much larger spread, anywhere from 10 cents to a few dollars. This is why HFT market makers like options! HFT market makers pay retail brokerages like Robinhood and Charles Schwab a certain amount per share of their retail orders to direct the orders to them, and as long as the retail customer is getting the National Best Bid and Offer (NBBO) at the moment of trade, all good, right? Maybe.

The SEC found that from 2015 to 2018, Robinhood was not disclosing to its retail clients how the company was making money off orders by selling their order flow. from the 2020 SEC press release.

“…Robinhood made misleading statements and omissions in customer communications, including in FAQ pages on its website, about its largest revenue source when describing how it made money – namely, payments from trading firms in exchange for Robinhood sending its customer orders to those firms for execution, also known as “payment for order flow.” As the SEC’s order finds, one of Robinhood’s selling points to customers was that trading was “commission free,” but due in large part to its unusually high payment for order flow rates, Robinhood customers’ orders were executed at prices that were inferior to other brokers’ prices. Despite this, according to the SEC’s order, Robinhood falsely claimed in a website FAQ between October 2018 and June 2019 that its execution quality matched or beat that of its competitors. The order finds that Robinhood provided inferior trade prices that in aggregate deprived customers of $34.1 million even after taking into account the savings from not paying a commission.

After that ethical speed bump, Robinhood really got down to business. The demographic Robinhood was going for suddenly had lots of time on its hands when Covid hit. The Robinhood app provided a fix as people went to work day-trading, especially trading options. When it comes to getting your dopamine on, trading options — especially those expiring in a week or two — can do the trick.

Leverage

Here is a simple example. Back in 2021 when stocks were on a huge bull run, especially the big technology stocks like Google, Robinhood traders used options to get leverage. Leverage means using a smaller amount of your own money to control a much larger position or exposure in the market — essentially amplifying both potential gains and losses.

In this case, one standard stock option contract gives you control over 100 shares of the underlying stock (without having to buy the shares outright). Therefore, the trader could buy 10 call option contracts for $1,200, betting that Google stock will go higher by more than about 5% in the next two weeks. That $1,200 controls exposure to 1,000 shares (10 contracts × 100 shares each), which is the leverage in action.

At the end of two weeks, if Google went up say, 7%, the options could roughly double in value (or more, depending on the details), letting the trader turn that $1,200 into a big profit. However, if Google only goes up 4% (or less than the break-even point), the options the trader paid $1,200 for expire and become worthless, and the entire $1,200 is lost.

From June 1, 2020 to December 31, 2021, (Source Bloomberg) Google went up 102% and the option bets paid off handsomely. Since this was the first time many Robinhood traders invested in options, they felt it was a license to steal! They had never really lost. However, in 2022 Google shares dropped 39% and option bets got creamed as newbie traders learned the downside of leverage. In 2021 Bloomberg News reported on Robinhood’s option activity.

New disclosures show the app’s monthly volume of options executed tripled last year, making the firm the second-most active among peers behind Charles Schwab Corp., a 50-year-old stalwart that just bought TD Ameritrade. Offering options is so lucrative that they accounted for two-thirds of Robinhood’s reported revenue from order flow, a significant source of income. A single contract can generate more money than handling 100 shares.

Using its app, clients can unlock Robinhood’s most advanced level of options strategies in minutes by tapping their details into a smartphone. They can then instantly start placing wagers on some of the most complex U.S. markets available to the investing public. Approval for similar access can take days at competitors such as Schwab and Morgan Stanley’s E*Trade.

Between 2020 and the 3rd Quarter of 2025, Robinhood has been paid billions by HFT firms for their option order flow. For example, in the 3rd quarter of 2025, HFT market makers paid Robinhood approximately $260 million.

Robinhood gets paid more than other retail brokers for its option order flow. Why?

As of September 2025 Robinhood was paid by HFT firms $0.53 per options contract. Their closest option flow competitor Schwab got $0.39 per contract. Why is Robinhood’s flow so much more valuable than Schwab’s? One theory that I subscribe to is that Robinhood’s main client base — young men — is aggressive risk takers and relatively predictable. As we learned in the “Meme Stock” craze of 2020-2021, this client base moves in herds. HFT algorithms study the trading patterns of this demographic and predict what the Robinhood customer is going to do before they do it and I would bet that Vlad and Baiju knew about this when they started the firm more than a decade ago.

The HFT firms are not guaranteed wins every time, and they are taking risk which means they are not necessarily doing anything wrong. Robinhood on the other hand, pushing option trading aggressively because they know their option order flow is the most valuable by a wide margin is, at best, sleazy.

Recently, the Wall Street Journal reported:

(Vlad) Tenev has come to realize that plugged-in, aggressive traders are actually key to his company’s success.

Robinhood offers a host of ordinary financial products, including retirement accounts and credit cards. It is the riskier products tailored to day traders that make the most money for the company. In the most recent quarter, customer trading generated more than half of Robinhood’s revenue, and 78% of that transaction-based revenue came from crypto and options trading.

Tenev said he directed his team to cater more to that group. “These are our most engaged customers that generate the lion’s share of our revenue,” he said in an interview. “We put our best people on active traders.”

This sort of reminds me of “The Wire” druglord Avon Barksdale

Crypto

Robinhood has continued to expand rapidly in crypto. The Block reported last week:

Robinhood wants to attract more advanced, high-volume crypto traders in both the U.S. and EU and is unveiling new features to do so, including lower fees and added leverage for altcoin futures, the company said Monday.

Hoping to woo sophisticated traders away from rival exchanges, the stock and crypto trading platform has in the U.S. expanded the number of available fee tiers from three to seven, “offering rates as low as 0.03% for high-volume traders,” Robinhood said in a statement. In the EU, users who want to trade perpetual futures will now have access to new trading pairs with eligible customers able to trade up to 7X leverage.

7x leverage on altcoins, what could possibly go wrong?

Zero Day Options

Also recently, Robinhood has piled into a fabulous product mentioned earlier, zero-day options. If there was ever a product where probably 99% of Robinhood customers should not be playing in, it is zero-day options or 0DTE (Zero Days to Expiration), especially with Michael Lewis’ “Flash Boys.”

The way the product works is, say the S&P 500 index starts the day at 6,800. The customer can buy an option that pays off if the S&P 500 goes up 1% by the end of the day or down 1% (greater than 6,868 or less than 6,732). This is called “buying volatility.” If the S&P moves more than 1% in either direction by the end of the day, the customer wins; if not customer loses. There are many iterations of this type of trade, the type of trade Flash Boys wrote the book on, and they are the ones Robinhood’s customers are trading against. Who do you think will win that one over time?

Robinhood is getting paid handsomely to serve up its customers to the sharks. I imagine there are lots of guys like the one the Wall Street Journal spoke to who put down a daily bet at the opening bell and stare at their phone or iPad until the 4 pm close instead of actually living a life.

Prediction Markets

Finally, there’s the prediction markets. Prediction markets have been around for a while. The biggest prediction exchange in the U.S. is Kalshi, which started up in 2021. Kalshi is pretty simple.

Take an event like the presidential election. The player thinks Trump will beat Harris and currently 53% of all betters think Trump will win. The player bets $0.53 on Trump, and if Trump wins the player gets $1.00 and has made $0.47. Conversely, the players that bet on Harris put up $0.47. Now you can pretty much bet on the outcome of anything with Kalshi, including most sporting events.

The genius of Kalshi is that it’s able to call its product an “event contract” regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). Kalshi is now considered to be a regulated exchange. Not having its product classified as a wager, but instead a regulated financial product, means that it’s legal to sell to 18-year-olds in all 50 states. Online sports gambling sites like DraftKings at least require customers to be 21 years old.

Brilliant.

Naturally, this August, just in time for football season, Robinhood partnered with Kalshi to put prediction markets for the NFL and college football on Robinhood’s app. Then in late November, Robinhood partnered with Susquahanna (one of the HFT Flash Boys that buys Robinhood’s order flow) and bought an existing CFTC-regulated exchange, acquiring a designated contract market (DCM) and derivatives clearing organization (DCO), MIAXdx. Susquahanna will be the market maker. The whole shebang will be launched in 2026 and the best news is, those highly entertaining but idiotic Same Game Parlay NFL bets will be available.

Starting Tuesday, users are able to trade preset combinations of the outcome, totals and spreads of individual NFL games, and starting in early 2026, users will have the ability to create custom combos of up to 10 outcomes across NFL games. Those will have “a structural look or feel as a parlay,” JB Mackenzie, vice president and general manager of futures and international at Robinhood, told CNBC.

Even more, the company is allowing users to wager on the performances of individual NFL players in real time. For example, they can place prop bets on a certain player scoring a touchdown at any point during a game as well as the passing, receiving and rushing yards for a player.

Awesome, bro.

We have been in a bull market for stocks for three years now. At some point we are going to have a draw down, probably a big one. Unfortunately, these three years have drawn in hundreds of thousands of our kids to the Robinhood pocket-casino. I’d like to think something can be done before the bad event to at least stop Robinhood’s growth, but there’s really nothing that can or will be done. I’d like to see the prediction market on that.

You can also listen to Eric Salzman discuss Robinhood on his podcast, Monkey Business.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 08:05

Denmark Furious After Trump Names Special Envoy To Greenland

Zero Hedge -

Denmark Furious After Trump Names Special Envoy To Greenland

President Donald Trump announced late Sunday on Truth Social that he is appointing Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry to serve as the U.S. Special Envoy to Greenland. The move prompted Denmark's Foreign Minister, Lars Lokke Rasmussen, to summon the U.S. ambassador, saying the appointment suggests continued American interest in the resource-rich island.

"I am pleased to announce that I am appointing the GREAT Governor of Louisiana, Jeff Landry, as the United States Special Envoy to Greenland. Jeff understands how essential Greenland is to our national security and will strongly advance our country's interests for the safety, security, and survival of our allies, and indeed, the world. Congratulations, Jeff!" Trump wrote in the Truth Social post.

Following Landry's appointment, Rasmussen told Reuters in an emailed statement, "The appointment confirms the continued American interest in Greenland. However, we insist that everyone—including the U.S.—must show respect for the territorial integrity of the Kingdom of Denmark."

In a separate statement, Rasmussen told CBS News he was "deeply angered" by the appointment and warned Washington to respect Denmark's sovereignty.

This prompted Denmark to summon the U.S. ambassador. Danish officials also summoned the U.S. ambassador in August after a report that at least three people with connections to Trump carried out covert influence operations in Greenland.

Trump has repeatedly stated that the U.S. should have jurisdiction over Greenland, mainly for defense and mineral-rich deposits. The strategically located Arctic island fits into the broader theme of Western Hemisphere Defense.  

In March, Vice President JD Vance toured the U.S. Pituffik Space Base, met U.S. Space Force personnel on the island, and accused Denmark of underinvesting there.

According to a January opinion poll, a majority of Greenland's 57,000 people wanted to become independent from Denmark but did not want to join the U.S.

The continued American interest in Greenland underscores the strategic importance of the resource-rich island in the Arctic for hemispheric defense purposes.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/22/2025 - 07:45

Pages