Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
  • Flaming Orange Craziness tariffs
    No change in my asset allocation (wait & see).
    Tariffs doesn't bother me - it will be temporary. Most of the countries run trade deficit with US, export economy countries will suffer more (Example-Colombia). Our prices will not increase much - companies will eat some cost (they will get tax benefit to offset the increased cost). 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 consider it as consumption tax (since we don't have VAT, more than 50% population don't pay income taxes). I am looking at tax cuts which will more than offset cost increase due to tariff.
  • NVDA and largest market-cap losses
    NVDA had 8 of the top 10 market cap losses in one day.
    NVDA also had 5 of the top 10 market cap gains in one day.
    Skip to the 4:37 mark for NVDA info/chart.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0DR2TnvIIk
  • Flaming Orange Craziness tariffs
    My current understanding of his vision suggests that -- due to its unique position among the world's nations -- imposing both substantial across the board and targeted tariffs will prove to be beneficial for the United States.
    If by beneficial you mean "less bad", then others agree.
    while tariffs are predicted to inflict pain on all three nations, they would cause more damage to Canada and Mexico, smaller economies that are deeply dependent on the United States.
    ...
    Economists predict that the initial effect would be negative for all three nations, which are bound by a free-trade agreement known as USMCA (United States-Mexico-Canada).
    ...
    Here’s what tariffs could mean for each country.
    All links are into NYTimes article:
    How Could Trump’s Tariffs Affect the U.S., Canada and Mexico?
  • NVDA and largest market-cap losses
    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.
  • Flaming Orange Craziness tariffs
    FOTUS was hell-bent to get 'a better deal' for America in his first terme by renegotiating NAFTA. At least then there was industry consultation and a traditional diplomatic/commercial negotiation process. So now he's blowing up HIS deal that HE 'negotiated' for the same reason? I call shenanigans.
    These 'tariffs' are just the Sundowning Florida Man throwing arbitrary and ill-informed tantrums to show the world that there are somethings that 'I alone' have the ability to do -- I have power, I have to use it. He needs foreign or 'other' bogeymen and perceived 'threats' from the 'other' to justify his flailings, so this is what we get. How long before 'fetanayl' becomes 'foreign DEI' as his existential crisis du jour?
    Some of his more rational advisors I'm sure are going nuts over the Canada tariffs though ... especially over oil. Let the middle of the country (and his base) suffer for it. (Look at SOBO's pipeline map). He wants to lower inflation and the price of goods? Sure, tariffs will fix that riiiiiight up for ya, buddy. Wait for it -- and remember whose signature is on the orders that did that. (Hint: it's not Biden or Obama or the Democrats in Congress.)
    Yet he said yesterday “Tariffs don’t cause inflation. They cause success....Tariffs are going to make us very rich and very strong.” IDIOT.
    WaPo notes that "only 1.5 percent of migrants apprehended by U.S. Customs and Border Protection in the 2024 fiscal year and 0.2 percent of fentanyl seized at U.S. borders came from Canada" and suggests that's just a canard pretense to justify his actions to his cult.
    I never believed he would start WW3 with our adversaries. However it is entirely likely he'll do so with our allies. Up is down, down is up, and you did not see that with your own eyes, people.
    Elect a clown, and the government becomes a circus. It'd be funny if it wasn't so dangerous.
    Oh ... just saw this tidbit:
    "The GOP also expects to factor in Trump’s tariffs as revenue that will reduce the[ir spending/tax plan] legislation’s price tag."
    So the GQP has swallowed FOTUS' idiocy that tariff money goes straight into the US Treasury. MORE IDIOTS.
  • The Week in Charts | Charlie Bilello
    The Week in Charts (01/31/25)
    The most important charts and themes in markets and investing, including:
    00:00 Intro
    00:48 Topics
    01:57 A One-Day Panic Over DeepSeek
    08:32 Microsoft/Meta/Tesla/Apple Earnings
    16:25 Slower Growth, but the Expansion Continues
    20:25 The Fed Pause Is Here
    26:32 Houses Taking Longer to Sell
    29:00 DOGE Saving $1 Billion a Day?
    32:15 Using Tariffs as a Tool
    35:02 More Affordable Rents
    Video
    Blog
  • Flaming Orange Craziness tariffs
    The illegal crossing of migrants and the flow of fentanyl into the U.S. were the irritants Trump named when he first threatened to slap Canada and Mexico with 25 per cent tariffs last fall. Government officials say less than one per cent of each enters the U.S. from Canada. [Immigration Minister] Miller acknowledged on Friday they no longer believe border concerns to be at the heart of Trump’s tariff threats.
    ...
    Earlier in the day, fresh uncertainty had been injected into an already volatile situation following a report by Reuters, citing three unnamed sources, that Trump was expected to announce Canada and Mexico would face tariffs on their imports beginning March 1 ...
    “I was just with the President in the Oval Office, and I can confirm that tomorrow, the Feb. 1 deadline that President Trump put into place in a statement several weeks ago continues,” said White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt. “These are promises made and promises kept by the president,” she added.
    “Starting tomorrow those tariffs will be in place.”
    https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/canada-uncertainty-tariffs-feb-1
    (report supposedly updated an hour ago)
    Reuters has a 26sec video clip of Leavitt making that statement. It's real.
    https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/north-america-braces-new-trump-tariffs-saturday-deadline-nears-2025-01-31/
  • Bloomberg Real Yield
    31 Jan, 2025:

    Uncertainty. Hedging bets, loathe to make predictions.
    Lowest level of bond volatility in years.
    Collin (sic) Martin, Schwab Fixed Income. Amaury D'Orsay, Amundi Fixed Income.
    No cuts expected anytime soon. Stand pat at least for the first half of the year. Perhaps more volatility from the long end of the curve, and in the Credit Markets.
    D'Orsay lately could see the 10-year maybe at 5%. Still realistic? No, maybe 4.8%. And more likely, a bit below that.
    Martin: we could get to 5% without even factoring in the Trump policies. Even with just two cuts later in the year, 5% is realistic, given the state of the labor market and everything else. The Big Picture dynamics are present.
    (On-screen: 10 year T is at 4.52%.)
    Sonali to D'Orsay: how do tariffs fit into your estimation? Muddy. Focus on the data. That's the thing to do, these days. Martin: "We expect the 10-Year to trade in a wide range."
    To D'Orsay: "What is your bigeest conviction trade right now?" Inflation Bonds.
    *******************
    I.G. new monthly credit bond issuance = only $3B short of the record. (And this is the final day of January.) ...RECORD set in Leveraged Loan issuance. $202B. Beats the previous record from just last month.
    Maurenn O'Connor, Wells Fargo. We will forgive her for being connected to the sewer called Wells Fargo. And Meghan Graper, Barclays.
    ...O'Connor: rolling over stuff that is maturing is a big chunk of what's responsible for new issuance, currently.
    Market is priced for perfection. Ultra-tight yield spreads. Longer-term risk is inflation. ...Sudden conclusion, this time.
  • Flaming Orange Craziness tariffs
    Interrupting "Real Yield" today, Sonali Basak reported from Reuters than tariffs will not begin until March. Everything else I see says the ridiculousness will start on Feb 1st, but that oil/gas will be dogged by a smaller tariff. A report I saw earlier asserted 25% on Canada, 25% on Mexico, 10% on China. Really??? Reward China for being scumbags politically and militarily? ... But of course, the Orange Dolt thinks whatever he wants to think. His cardinal rule is that it must be nonsensical.
    Any specific, actual updates? Thank you.
  • Steep Tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China Will Take Effect Saturday

    fwiw saying I'm hearing 10% on Canadian oil .... better than 25% but just as stupid.
  • Steep Tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China Will Take Effect Saturday
    paul Krugman’s substack blog predicts “ The end of North America”.
    I’ve been saying for a while that markets were far too complacent about Trump’s threat to impose tariffs on Canada and Mexico, believing that he wouldn’t follow through because it’s such a stupid, self-destructive idea. As I wrote on Jan. 22,
    [S]o far markets have shrugged Trump’s tariff threat off, apparently in the belief that he won’t follow through. But why not? Economists would, if he asked, tell him that high tariffs on neighboring nations closely integrated with the United States will do major damage; businesspeople would say the same thing. But if Trump wants your opinion, he’ll tell you what he wants it to be.
    I believe that the only thing that might dissuade him from destructive policies would be a severely adverse market reaction — which means that the lack of such a reaction, based on the belief that he won’t really do it, greatly increases the probability that he really will.
    And he really did. The New York Times reports,
    President Trump plans to move forward with imposing stiff tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China on Saturday, in an attempt to further pressure America’s largest trading partners to accept deportees and stop the flow of migrants and drugs into the country.
    In a news briefing on Friday, the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said the president would put in place a 25 percent tariff on goods from Mexico, a 25 percent tariff on goods from Canada and a 10 percent tariff on goods from China.
    Ms. Leavitt said the president had chosen to impose tariffs because the three countries “have all enabled illegal drugs to pour into America.”
    “The amount of fentanyl that has been seized at the southern border in the last few years alone has the potential to kill tens of millions of Americans,” she said. “And so the president is intent on doing this.”
    The tariffs are likely to initiate the kind of disruptive trade wars seen in Mr. Trump’s first term, but at a much larger scale.
    I think you have to see “fentanyl” in this context as the equivalent of “weapons of mass destruction in the runup to the invasion of Iraq. It’s not the real reason; Canada isn’t even a major source of fentanyl. It’s just a plausible-sounding reason for a president to do what he wanted to do for other reasons — George W. Bush wanted a splendid little war, Donald Trump just wants to impose tariffs and assert dominance.
    Also, although I’m not sure such things matter anymore, what’s the legal basis for these tariffs? U.S. trade law gives the president huge discretion to impose tariffs, but only for a specific set of reasons: economic injury from import surges (Section 201), national security (Section 232), unfair foreign competition (Section 301), dumping — sales below costs. Drug smuggling, especially imaginary drug smuggling, isn’t on the list.
    The president can impose tariffs much more broadly if he declares a national economic emergency. But has he done that? Does 2.6 percent inflation and 4.1 percent unemployment sound like an economic emergency to you? And even if Trump gets around to declaring an economic emergency, what does fentanyl have to do with it?
    As far as I can tell, there’s a real possibility that Trump’s new tariffs will face a court challenge, and that he will lose. I’m not an expert on trade law, but I do know a bit, and this looks flatly illegal to me.
    But even if these tariffs are blocked, or Trump finds some way to declare victory and call them off, the damage will be immense.
    As I wrote the other day, in the three decades since NAFTA went into effect, North American manufacturing has evolved into a highly integrated system whose products — autos in particular, but manufactured goods more broadly — typically contain components from all three members of the pact, which may be shipped across the borders multiple times. Manufacturers developed this system not just because tariffs were low or zero, but because they thought they had a guarantee that tariffs would stay low.
    One way of saying this is that until just the other day there was really no such thing as U.S. manufacturing, Canadian manufacturing or Mexican manufacturing, just North American manufacturing — a highly efficient, mutually beneficial system that sprawled across the three nations’ borders.
    But now we have a U.S. president saying that a duly negotiated and signed trade pact isn’t worth the paper it was printed on — that he can impose high tariffs on the other signatories whenever he feels like it. And even if the tariffs go away, the private sector will know that they can always come back; the credibility of this trade agreement, or any future trade agreement, will be lost. So North American manufacturing will disintegrate — that is, dis-integrate — reverting to inefficient, fragmented national industries.
    Hence my title, “The end of North America.”
    And to think that many people imagined that Trump would be good for business. “
    any bets on what Markets will do?
  • Inflation watch- Your Coffee just went up (then down) by 50%
    In 2022, undocumented immigrants contributed $25.7 billion in Social Security taxes. Those monies go to those of us who are "authorized" to benefit from the numerous SS programs. They certainly do not go to those who paid in via payroll deduction. Please don't tell me tariffs will make up this shortfall.
  • Inflation watch- Your Coffee just went up (then down) by 50%
    Deportation agreement! How much per head is this costing the tax payer?

    Far less than one single life taken by one of them!
    Gary1952,
    How about the 64 people that died on American Eagle 5342 on trump's watch?
    On trump's second day, he:
    1. Fired the head of the Transportation Security Administration
    2. Fired the entire Aviation Security Advisory Committee
    3. Froze hiring of all Air Traffic Controllers
    4. Fired 100 top FAA security officers.
    I submit that these might have been contributing factors.
    How about the 3 aboard the US Army helicopter that might have been pre-occupied with the turmoil that their new boss hegseth will bring?
    I submit that this might have been a contributing factor.
  • Steep Tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China Will Take Effect Saturday
    It is totally NUTS to turn on our biggest trading partners in North America. US import most of the oil from Canada and became less dependent on Middle East. A WSJ article “ Trump’s 25% Tariff Deadline Is Almost Here. What to Expect” highlights many products ( produces, lumber, electronics, oils, cars, and etc) will cost more to the consumers. Re-shoring in manufacturing is far, far away from today. Will see how this will re-ignite inflation this year.
  • Stable-Value (SV) Rates, 2/1/25
    Stable-Value (SV) Rates, 2/1/25
    TIAA Traditional Annuity (Accumulation) Rates
    Restricted RC 5.50%, RA 5.25%
    Flexible RCP 4.75%, SRA 4.50%, IRA-101110+ 4.75%
    TSP G Fund 4.625% pending (previous 4.625%).
    Options outside of workplace retirement plans include m-mkt funds, bank m-mkt accounts (FDIC insured), T-Bills, short-term brokered CDs.
    #StableValue #401k #403b #TIAA #TSP
    https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1865/thread
  • Buy Sell Why: ad infinitum.
    We have been trimming S&P 500 in last several months and buying IAU (new position), DBA (new position), BRKB, and active managed bonds. This year we will be more defensive. Made a modest gain last year that that is good enough for us.
  • Inflation watch- Your Coffee just went up (then down) by 50%
    Deportation agreement! How much per head is this costing the tax payer?

    Far less than one single life taken by one of them!
    you do know about immigrant crime rates, yes?
  • Steep Tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China Will Take Effect Saturday
    https://www.cnbc.com/2025/01/31/trump-tariffs-on-canada-mexico-and-china-begin-saturday-white-house-says.html
    “We’ve got the Super Bowl coming up, and eerily, the amount of people that fit in the [New Orleans] Superdome are almost exactly equal to the number of people dying every year here in America from fentanyl, and that comes from China and Mexico,” Trump trade advisor Peter Navarro told CNBC in an interview earlier Friday. “This is why we have these kind of discussions.”
    For these countries, that is a loss of potential customers each year that could be buying the goods that these countries export to the US.
    I thought the case against Canada is also fentanyl but Navarro's statement does not include Canada.
    Has anyone in this forum tried fentanyl? Where would I buy it if I want to try why it seems so popular.
  • Fund Allocations (Cumulative), 12/31/24
    YBB, here or at your site, pl consider adding an extra line for previous reading for OEFs & ETFs right below the current reading.
    E.g.,
    "OEFs & ETFs: Stocks 60.54%, Hybrids 4.24%, Bonds 17.58%, M-Mkt 17.64%
    Allocation as of 11/30 -

    OEFs & ETFs: Stocks 61.41%, Hybrids 4.27%, Bonds 17.40%, M-Mkt 16.92%"
    Now, I see that is a huge change for equities, which could be a mixture of price appreciation plus change in fund flows (decrease in MM?). The reader can then go dig more for data on their own.