Buy the Dip and Sell the Rip?
Trust the Buffoon Put?
Here's one take on all that.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/buy-the-dip-and-sell-the-rips-stock-traders-are-counting-on-the-trump-put-e7017958?mod=watchlist_latest_news
(Subscription)
Excerpt:
Expect the stock market “vigilantes” to force the Trump administration to do a face-saving backtrack in the near future.
The current market environment suggests that traders should adopt a strategy of “buy the dip and sell the rips.” The combination of negative surprises during earnings season and potential bearish policy announcements when the market is overbought will put downward pressure on stock prices. On the other hand, investors should trust the stock market vigilantes to activate the “Trump Put” in the event of a market downdraft, as the U.S. president is said to judge his own performance by the U.S. stock market. In the absence of a severe bearish catalyst, expect stock prices to bounce when the market becomes oversold.

See also
https://trkmw.dowjones.com/view/66e9c5e92241b007af32ae7cmvzxu.28i6/20a0998b
(Subscription)
Excerpt:

Traders are shocked that a president who said he would place tariffs on countries with whom the U.S. has notable trade deficits has put tariffs on some of those countries. After Canada, Mexico and China, the European Union may be next.
The chart below from Goldman Sachs, shows how prediction markets late last week were not taking the tariff threat very seriously — setting up today’s reaction.
The chart (that won't copy) shows only a 30% probability as late as January 30 of "Effective Tariff Rate Reaching 5% in 1H 2025."

And here's more on what was thought to be priced in from The Barron's Daily (BOLD added)
Trump Tariffs Cause Stock Market Chaos. Why Wall Street Didn’t Act on Warnings and 5 Other Things to Know Today.

President Donald Trump looks set to deliver on his promise and impose hefty tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China, with Europe next in his sights. Amid all the turbulence that’s causing in financial markets, one question is obvious—why is this such a surprise?
After all, this is what Trump promised to do since he started his campaign to retake the White House. He reiterated it after he was elected in November. He even gave specific numbers and dates for a start last week.
But traders were still skeptical that anything material would come of it. Stocks rose markedly in January, extending impressive gains since Trump’s victory in November on optimism that deregulation and tax cuts would bolster corporate earnings.
The reason investors dismissed the rather obvious signs was because the tariffs don’t seem to make sense. Maybe they would work as a negotiating technique to extract concessions on other things, but from an economic perspective it’s hard to see what tariffs accomplish—other than rapidly increasing prices for fuel and other goods that will hamper economic growth.
Furthermore, the actual announcement was on the extreme end of the spectrum of what was possible. George Saravelos, a strategist at Deutsche Bank, noted that the tariffs are three times larger than had been priced into the market—and five times as big as the cumulative action Trump took in his first term.
To be sure, Trump may yet de-escalate and walk back the levies—or be forced to do so by the courts or Congress. Given the market’s early losses Monday, it would still be a huge surprise if the tariffs lasted a long time—it certainly seems unlikely they will be in place for four years.
One thing is clear. Chaos and confusion will remain a feature of Trump’s policies.

On February 2, 2025, Panama offered several concessions to the United States following a meeting between Secretary of State Marco Rubio and President Jose Raul Mulino. The concessions include:
Free passage for US warships through the Panama Canal.
Withdrawal from China’s Belt and Road Initiative.
Optimizing transit priority for US Navy ships through the waterway.
These concessions were made in response to concerns raised by the US regarding Chinese influence over the Panama Canal and the high fees charged to US ships. Additionally, the Panamanian government discussed migration issues, offering an airstrip near the Darien Gap for repatriation proceedings.
Maybe I can breathe again re: BLX? But I am pissed. The Orange bully got his way. Granted, the Chinese installations---non-military--- did make me itch.

@rforno, with all due respect, I think your thread title would be more appropriate if it read,
"Tariff President's Markets Open."
As stated on air a while ago by one notable journalist (paraphrasing):
"No president or even presidential candidate in US history other than the buffoon was ever stoopid enough to claim he wanted to be known as the 'Tariff President'."
Sadly, a mere two weeks into the mayhem, he's accomplished that goal!
More broadly, the previously successful strategy of "buying the dip" is going to be very difficult under his regime, as investors will never know when the next buffoon-induced market DROP will occur.
UBS Wealth does however this AM provide these thoughts:
UBS Wealth reiterated its 6,600 target for S&P 500. 'Tariffs unlikely to be sustained.'

Many observers don't think the tariffs will last very long.
"Tariffs on Canada and Mexico are unlikely to be sustained, U.S. economic growth should represent a tailwind for stocks, and we continue to believe that AI presents a powerful structural tailwind for earnings and equity markets," said Mark Haefele, global wealth management chief investment officer at UBS.
He pointed to several off ramps: for one, industry groups will file court challenges as well as lobby for their removal. The tariffs also could be a tactic to reaccelerate a renegotiation of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement that Trump negotiated in his first term. The tariffs also could lead to concessions from Mexico and Canada.
There's also the brief period before the tariffs go into effect, on Tuesday, for negotiation, as well as the several weeks that will be needed for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to actually implement them, judging by the 2018 and 2019 experience, he said.

Imports into the US -
EU imports went from $200b in year 2000 to 600b now; whereas Canada imports went from $200b to 400b. I am sure EU membership has expanded during that period but still that much more imports from a region that presumably is a nursing home makes me think what the hell have we been. China and HK went from 100b to 440b, after hitting nearly 600b a few years ago. Mexico is the biggest beneficiary going from 100b to 500b. Japan stayed steady more or less around 150b, which means as a percentage of our GDP, imports from Japan fell drastically. My earlier comments about China diversifying their exports to the US can be seen in the data.
In any case, given so much illegal immigration is from (and through) Mexico, I think providing serious disincentive to Mexico was warranted 20-30 years ago. This is not a new problem. The biggest beneficiary US industries of illegal immigration must have now decided they received too many than they want. Mexico has had governance problems for as long as I can remember. Why were not illegal immigration and drugs tied into trade agreements for all these years? So, all the public reasoning provided for current Tariffs does not add up for me. Show me what is behind the curtain. Makes me think neither the illegal immigration nor drugs from Mexico will be solved in my lifetime.

CBC: (Interesting, the way Canadians are able to name appointed US cabinet officials. How many Yanks know the names of those counterparts?)
Canada is already expecting Recession, big jump in unemployment, a hit to the Loonie. Featured here are: conflicting signals from the Orange "Administration;" trying to know Trumpster's mind; realizing that he is like a shark who can smell blood. Surely,Trump's been told that the Trudeau gummint is by now a caretaker. A lame duck. "Canada catches the flu whenever the US catches a cold."
https://www.cbc.ca/listen/live-radio/1-57-the-sunday-magazine/clip/16125416-the-implications-donald-trumps-tariffs-canadian-goods

I am watching closely on the H5N1 virus as it mutates and jumps from birds to human. Few death cases are due to the existing health issues of those infected.
The speed of transmission from one poultry farm to another is alarming. Even with the current Biohazard practice in these farms, it has not stopped all cases. That is one reason egg production has hauled in part of the country while raises egg prices. Thousands gallons of milk were destroyed with the detection of the virus in the milk.
In contrast, New Zealand and few countries (cannot recalled) have had few COVID deaths and minimal economic suffering due to their fast reaction and scientific know how’s. Granted, these are small countries and easier to closed their boarders. Noted that these countries were headed by women as my wife reminded me.
@rforno, another view of the future market for tomorrow. Stocks are all down globally. Bonds are mostly in green.
https://finviz.com/futures.ashx

Canada announces retaliatory tariffs on a long list of products.

This is the first round of tariff with China, Canada and Mexico. Both Canada and Mexico retaliated the same 25% tariffs, especially liquor from Red States. China is taking their case to WTO. There is more to come as he also threatens EU and England.
Tariffs affect both sides and they should not be taken lightly of tools in trading policy. I keep thinking what are the catalyst(s) that trigger the market sell off?

imo, FOTUS escalating things out of the blue because his feels like it. As a bully, he doesn't like it when countries he attacks stand up and/or retaliate against him.
Automakers are already cowering, being afraid to speak up out of fear of incurring FOTUS' wrath -- what does *that* tell you about the so-called 'free markets' here?

This is the first round of tariff with China, Canada and Mexico. Both Canada and Mexico retaliated the same 25% tariffs, especially liquor from Red States. China is taking their case to WTO. There is more to come as he also threatens EU and England.
Tariffs affect both sides and they should not be taken lightly of tools in trading policy. I keep thinking what are the catalyst(s) that trigger the market sell off?

I introduced the phrase on a prior post I think last week. Starting to think it has real merit: buffoon-induced black swan event. This one we kinda knew had wings for a while now, so we ain't quite there yet, but likely soon will be.
----------------------------------
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/stocks-expected-to-open-lower-after-trump-tariffs-end-self-delusion-in-markets-ed9f5452?mod=mw_latestnews
(Subscription)
Excerpt:
Stock futures appeared headed to another “large gap down” on the daily charts following the news, said analysts at U.K.-based Matrix Trade, in a note. A gap on the daily chart occurs when an asset opens above or below its trading range from the previous session. Stocks opened sharply lower last week as investors reacted to China startup DeepSeek’s artificial-i-intelligence advance.
-----------------------------------
https://www.barrons.com/articles/trump-tariffs-inflation-trade-war-grocery-bills-cars-ba66b33e?mod=djem_b_Weekly Barrons feed for last 24 hours
(Subscription)
Excerpt:
The hit to markets will depend on what comes next—how Trump responds to retaliation, whether tariffs are lifted swiftly in response to dealmaking, and what’s to come on other trade fronts.
Some analysts say the markets weren’t prepared for the upheaval. “The currency markets will have massive move as the Mexico and Canada moves weren’t expected,” says Jens Nordvig, founder of Exante Data via email. “Then the question is if the equity market can handle it.”
Rebecca Patterson, former chief investment strategist at Bridgewater and independent director at Vanguard, says this opening salvo will increase inflation uncertainty and “make the Fed more cautious about its next policy decisions.” More uncertainty about growth could lead consumers and businesses to move more cautiously, she adds, and will be reflected in higher bond term premiums, “and less optimism about equities, especially those industries most exposed to tariffs. I also would expect the dollar to strengthen. ”

In terms of investments, this Canada/Mexico fubar is my investing tipping point. I’m holding 35% in equities but willing to drop to 30% on Monday if a market dive doesn’t happen.

With all the craziness happening these past two weeks, I had intended to move a significant percentage of equities to our mmkt acct on Friday, but chose to wait and see at the last moment. Sheesh! Foolish me!

I'm less than half now in stocks. A bit more in bonds. Slowly growing MM in dribs and drabs, but for a specific goal. The whole rest of the world thinks the USA has lost its mind and become worthy of suspicion, now. I wonder when the recession-depression will start?
I take some solace knowing the Big Money Thieves will do what they must to protect their own investments. My relative pittance might by the same token not be wiped out. Fingers crossed.

rosenberg takeaway :
- his past models were wrong, in that they did not predict sentiment would move the equity risk premium to zero or negative. (currently 3X historic annual growth, for next 5 years, is priced into valuations)
- many canadian stocks are better bargains than u.s., given valuations and exchange rates. exposed to many identical themes.
- models expects recession (2026?) and unemployment spike, suppressing inflation.
- midterm safe bonds are in a good risk:reward position compared to u.s. equities.
my inferior intuition is screaming that inflation is not so easily killed as long as nearshoring is supported, and it will move violently through different sectors as always.

I believe I posted something similar to @rforno’s Bloomberg data back on January 27 under @Mark’s ”Howard Marks” thread. Here it is (scroll up a bit).
Re: the ongoing discussion (as much about sources as NVDA), I’d agree cable “financial” television is pretty worthless, often inaccurate, slanted or misleading. Most days a parade of clowns talking their book sums it up nicely. Subscribers to Bloomberg’s online resources and print stories, however, fare much better. There are troves of data on virtually every global market and continuous updates 24/7. Bloomberg has the same in depth research tools (stocks, funds, etc) you’ll find at the WSJ and elsewhere. It’s a bit pricy at $329 yearly. Wonder how many here read it?
I read Bloomberg, the WSJ and Barron’s. Also subscribe to a daily financial blog and a monthly financial newsletter. I read The Observer every month. Taken together these sources more than meet my investment appetite & needs. However, our financial situation, education level, amount of wealth managed and available time all influence where we look for financial information.
I think Bloomberg’s paid subscription website does deserve a place somewhere in the hierarchy of financial news sources for average investors. Please do not conflate it with the on-air circus. If folks here have favorite sources to recommend perhaps they will provide links.
Regarding NVDIA. The data @rforno (and I earlier) posted was designed to catch eyeballs. Not the only way to view it of course. @BaluBalu is spot-on that the percentage moves were greater when the stock had a much lower market cap.

I'm waiting for FOTUS to use America's need for Ozempic/Wegovy as a cudgel to threaten Denmark over Greenland. IE, I'm going to tariff these pharmaceuticals 500% until you give us Greenland! Will Denmark care about the wailing of patients in America? *shrug*
I'm sure the thought has crossed his mind.

We will take control of Panama canal with Panama agreeing willingly or by force - will reduce transportation costs. Deregulation will reduce the operating costs.

I find it ironic that those who support taking over the canal (which, btw, is professionally managed, charges reasonable fees, and is considered by many to be better run now than when the US government was in charge) in part because of nearby port investments by other countries are also more likely to support deep cuts in foreign aid and foreign investment. Soft power can be just as, if not more, effective (and with much less loss of life and destruction) than military action for purely economic gain.

The 10% on China announced yesterday are on top of the Tariffs already in place. For an apples to apples comparison, are the Tariffs lower on Chinese products than on border countries' products? Another way to look at it is, total $ Tariffs imposed as a percentage of total imports.
US trade rep / Commerce Dept website probably will have accurate and updated information.
I expect Tariffs on China to be higher if not equal to that on border countries but someone can post the info when available.
Over the past six-seven years a lot of Chinese manufacturers have moved their operations to other Asian countries and continue to be under (direct or indirect) China / CCP control.
It would be good to know how have forum members changed or plan to change their portfolio because of the Tariffs. Your reaction can be very targeted to specific tickers, sectors, or market as a whole. For example, you decreased or plan to decrease your equity allocation because you think Tariffs will dampen (slow down) the economic activity in the US and / or cut into gross margins of US companies.

I too am wondering. Why 25% on Canadian and Mexican products and "only" 10% on Chinese products?

Rick,
When not in a recession or SPX not in a bear market, the largest single day decline for NVDA stock was 35% which in August 2004. There were two other worse declines in similar circumstances than the decline on Monday (16.4%), which happens to be the 9th worst in its history.
Now you can see the value of Gloomberg reporting in the OP. I am not singling out Gloomberg.

Maybe, but NVDA's market cap in 2004 was *nowhere* what it is nowdays, so a 35% drop then would probably be tiny compared to even a 15% drop today, yes?
'Gloomberg ...' *chuckle* Still more useful than the Clownish Network for Business Chatter!