Strategist Warns of 20% S&P 500 Plunge amid Trump's Tariff Shock
The Trump administration's newly imposed tariffs have sent shockwaves through the financial markets. Sanctuary Wealth's chief investment strategist, Mary Ann Bartels, described the proposal as a 'worst-case scenario' that was not priced into the market. Looking ahead, she predicts that the S&P 500 Index (SPX) could face a decline of up to 20%.
Don't Miss Our End of Quarter Offers:
Discover the latest stocks recommended by top Wall Street analysts, all in one place with Analyst Top Stocks.
Make smarter investments with weekly expert stock picks from the Smart Investor Newsletter.
The tariffs, which include a minimum 10% baseline levy on imports and rates as high as 49% on goods from specific countries, have already rattled markets. The S&P 500 fell over 4% on Thursday morning, officially entering correction territory.
Bartels noted that if the index fails to hold the critical 5,500 support level, investors could see further declines, potentially bottoming between 5,200 and 5,400.
Tariffs Might Trigger Global Recession
The proposed tariffs could hurt the economy, and Bartels warns they might cause a slowdown or even a recession in the U.S. and worldwide. She believes the administration may be aiming to slow the economy to pressure the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates and facilitate debt restructuring.
Importantly, the March Jobs report, due today, is seen as a key indicator for the Fed's next move. A weakening labor market could prompt the Fed to cut interest rates sooner than anticipated.
Investors Could Eye ETFs During Tariff Chaos
This tariff-induced market turmoil reflects the potential for significant economic and financial fallouts, prompting investors to adopt a cautious stance. Thus, investors could closely monitor some market-tracking ETFs such as (SPY), (QQQ), (DIA), (VOO), (IVV), and (IWM).
According to the TipRanks ETF Comparison tool, analysts see the most upside potential in the IWM ETF of 45.9%, followed by the QQ ETF of 33.3%. All other ETFs are also expected to surge over 20% in the next 12 months.
Disclaimer & Disclosure Report an Issue
This article contains syndicated content. We have not reviewed, approved, or endorsed the content, and may receive compensation for placement of the content on this site. For more information please view the Barchart Disclosure Policy here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBC
an hour ago
- CBC
He can't quit him — easily. Why SpaceX could complicate the Trump-Musk split
Billions of dollars lost in government contracts. A slew of regulatory headaches. These are just some of the ramifications Elon Musk could face over his fallout with U.S. President Donald Trump. The two men may have personally split, at least for now. But if Trump is seeking to retaliate against the tech billionaire, severing the relationship between Musk's many companies and the U.S. government could prove difficult, analysts say. "I would say the president has more cards than Musk does, but it doesn't mean that [Musk] doesn't have any," said Peter Hays, a lecturer of space policy and international affairs at George Washington University's Space Policy Institute. Both sides have "all kinds of leverage on each other," added Dan Grazier, senior fellow and program director at the D.C.-based Stimson Center, a think-tank focused on international security. The public fallout came after Musk repeatedly criticized Trump's spending bill. Trump eventually lashed back, posting on Truth Social that the easiest way to save "Billions and Billion of Dollars" would be to "terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts." However, those threats might not be so simple to implement. SpaceX, satellite contracts SpaceX has $15 billion US worth of contracts from NASA for the company's Falcon 9 rockets and its development of the multipurpose Starship rocket system, tapped to land NASA astronauts on the moon this decade. The company has also been awarded billions of dollars to launch most of the Pentagon's national security satellites into space while it builds a massive spy satellite constellation. That's why, if Trump cancels those contracts, SpaceX would have to seriously rethink its business model, Grazier says. Musk "needs the government to keep his company operating as they are," he said. But the U.S. government is also reliant on SpaceX, he says. For example, it's the only U.S. company capable right now of transporting crews to and from the International Space Station, using its four-person Dragon capsules. "Trump needs Elon Musk in pretty much the exact same way that Elon Musk needs President Trump, as far as SpaceX goes," Grazier said. "It's not like the United States has a credible alternative to SpaceX right now as far as space launch goes," he said. "And the United States needs reliable space launch capabilities." WATCH | F eud explodes into public view: Threats, insults as Trump-Musk feud explodes into public view 1 day ago Duration 2:27 Tearing up SpaceX contracts would have a huge domino effect across a lot of the government's critical functions in space, according to Clayton Swope, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. And those functions are "most closely centred around the Pentagon and NASA," he told Bloomberg News. But if Trump holds off on cancelling SpaceX contracts, and is looking for another way to poke at Musk, he could put the squeeze on Musk's companies through the government's regulatory agencies, some experts say. "Those can all be leverage points for the administration," said Cary Coglianese, director of the University of Pennsylvania's Penn program on regulation. Last year, Musk was waging at least 11 separate regulatory or legal battles with the Biden administration or independent federal agencies related to his business empire, according to NBC News. This might have been why, in part, Musk eventually endorsed Trump, who had pledged during the presidential campaign to slash regulations. How Trump's tax bill ignited his feud with Musk | Hanomansing Tonight 1 day ago Duration 7:21 Yet Trump could now pressure those same agencies to make Musk's life difficult. Just some of the regulators Musk's business empire must deal with include the Federal Communications Commission for his satellite internet service Starlink, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for Tesla, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for SpaceX. The FAA, under pressure from Trump, or to curry his favour, could say it's not going to approve any SpaceX launch permits, says Roger Nober, director of the Regulatory Studies Center, also at George Washington University. For Tesla, for example, Trump could pressure regulators to deny necessary approvals of its autonomous driving program, or could renew investigations into the safety of its full self-driving software, some analysts told ABC News. "If full self-driving were to be invalidated, that would be a huge hit to Tesla stock and to Musk," Gordon Johnson, CEO and founder of the data firm GLJ Research, told ABC. Although the courts shouldn't tolerate such actions if they are shown to be vindictive, the president wouldn't necessarily need a "litigation-proof strategy to really mess up" Musk's life, Coglianese said. It could still be "very painful and problematic" for Musk, while courts sorted out the issues, he said. "And if Musk's operations get delayed or disrupted, that can mean real money." Nober says he believes that any lasting regulatory change against Musk's companies would be difficult to implement, given his very public spat with Trump and that the president said he's going to punish his one-time friend. "If they then initiate regulatory action that's intended punish any of Musk's business… it's going to be vulnerable to challenge on the theory that it was arbitrary," he said. However, there may be other minor administrative regulatory roadblocks that government agencies could impose on Musk that would be difficult to challenge in court, Nober says. "They can make life difficult" for Musk, he said. On Thursday, amid their war of words, shares of Tesla plunged more than 14 per cent, leaving $150 billion US of the electric automaker's value erased by the end of trading day. The plunge was probably because Tesla, like a lot of Musk's companies, have a lot of little things they deal with, with a lot of regulatory bodies, Nober says. "Just making those more difficult, or slowing them down, or reviewing them, or taking longer to turn things around, has a cumulative impact," he said.
Winnipeg Free Press
2 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
TACO time
Opinion The stock market says, 'Yes.' And the bond market says, 'No.' This sums up much of the recent sentiment about the economy in the United States, and for that matter the global economy, amid the back-and-forth policies of U.S. President Donald Trump. Stocks have largely recovered their losses this year, as investors believe the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — with its tax cuts largely focused on the wealthy — will power a surge in growth. Michael Probst / The Associated Press files The curve of the German stock index DAX is seen in the background as U.S. President Donald Trump is shown on a TV screen at the stock market in Frankfurt, Germany. What's more, many investors ascribe to 'TACO', a term coined by a Financial Times columnist that stands for 'Trump always chickens out,' meaning most of the tariffs threats are bluster meant to make him appear to be a master deal-maker and they won't be here to stay. 'That is quite a diverging opinion from what the bond market is saying,' says Jonathan Baird, Toronto-based editor and publisher of the Global Investment Letter. Bond investors view the One Big Beautiful Bill as a recipe for inflation, eventually adding more than US$3.8 trillion to the annual budget deficit. Tariffs, too, are inflationary, which further make the case for more investors to sell their U.S. bonds. Average investors, not Wall Street, are likely feeling indecisive and maybe even fearful. A dose of caution is warranted, says John De Goey, portfolio manager with Design Wealth Management in Toronto, and author of Stand Up to the Financial Services Industry. Even without Trump-induced mayhem, 'stocks are very expensive and therefore very risky.' He points to the cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings — or CAPE — for the S&P 500. CAPE helps determine if an investment — based on a 10-year average of inflation-adjusted earnings — is valued appropriately. Right now, the S&P 500 is highly overvalued, according to CAPE. De Goey says the metric may not be a good predictor of bear markets. 'But it's extremely reliable for determining what the annualized return will be for the asset class … over the next decade,' he says. 'So when the S&P 500 is in the 30s or higher, the return over the next decade has historically been around zero.' The CAPE for the world's largest stock index has been about 35 in recent weeks. What's more, many seasoned investors see a decade ahead that could be similar to the 1970s when 'stagflation' weighed on markets. Characterized by higher than normal inflation and slow economic growth, stagflation can be toxic for stock and bond returns. 'I would suggest probably being as defensive as you're comfortable being,' says Baird, who expects stagflation to be a problem for the next few years. He doesn't recommend moving all of the portfolio to cash to preserve capital. That is tricky to time correctly on getting out of the market and, even more so, getting back into the market. Broadly, stagflation fighting strategies should focus less on growth stocks. Instead, consider companies selling goods and services consumers can't go without — like groceries and housing. Bonds should have shorter durations to reduce the impact of inflation. Commodity- and currency-based strategies can also provide some upside amid volatility. As well, alternative investments — private equity and credit, private real estate and hedge funds — are increasingly used by portfolio managers. 'The low-hanging fruit is increasing alternatives exposure,' De Goey says, noting these assets are less correlated to stock and bond markets, providing portfolio stability. Previously only available to wealthy investors, alternatives are now widely available as mutual funds and exchange-traded funds (ETFs). That said, investors should still own stocks, including those in the U.S., but they should consider reducing exposure to overvalued companies like the so-called Magnificent Seven (including Amazon Inc., Tesla Inc., Apple Inc. and Meta Inc.), says Jai Gandhi, investment adviser with Endeavour Wealth Management, iA Private Wealth in Winnipeg. 'We're not cutting our weight to the U.S. market compared with a year ago, but we're conscious of the high values of companies that hold more risk.' That said, owning good companies never goes out of style for long-term investors. 'We don't worry too much about short-term price movements,' says Hardev Bains, president and chief investment officer at Lionridge Capital Management in Winnipeg. Rather, the focus for Bains and other fundamental investors is owning companies with long-term profitability growth, strong balance sheets (significantly more assets than liabilities) and competitive advantages. These companies, however, are only purchased when their share price reflects fair value relative to those qualities. What's more, even holding great companies can be risky when they become steeply overvalued. At that point, it's worthwhile selling those holdings or at least reducing their portion in the portfolio. 'Part of our discipline is if we sell companies and can't find anything to buy — which happens in periods of expensive markets — we go to cash, as we're doing right now,' Bains says Companies may have great business models, but their share price today is generally too high to purchase with a margin of safety. Still, Lionridge's equity portfolio obviously must hold stocks — currently about 20 companies that are likely to weather stagflation and even a recession better than other stocks. A recession is likely already underway, De Goey notes, pointing to gross domestic product (GDP) in the first quarter contracting in the U.S. 'No reasonable person expects the economy to grow in Q2 given tariffs are now having more of an impact.' Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. The best companies should remain profitable, and market drops will put their shares on sale from time to time, Baird says. In the meantime, beware of FOMO — fear of missing out — when markets surge higher, he adds. That often leads to buying high and, worse, selling low in a knee-jerk reaction to markets plunging in fear. 'We're all fallible and prone to psychological traps,' Baird adds. 'So the biggest thing for any investor is managing our emotions.' Joel Schlesinger is a Winnipeg-based freelance journalist joelschles@
Globe and Mail
4 hours ago
- Globe and Mail
Alberta resumes buying U.S. alcohol and gambling machines, months after pause meant to fight tariffs
Alberta is buying American alcohol and gambling machines again, three months after Premier Danielle Smith announced restrictions aimed at fighting back against U.S. tariffs. Service Alberta Minister Dale Nally says the move signals a 'renewed commitment to open and fair trade' with the United States. Smith said in March that the province would no longer buy U.S. alcohol and video lottery terminals, or sign contracts with American companies. That came a day after U.S. President Donald Trump slapped heavy tariffs on Canadian goods and energy. Nally says the decision to resume buying U.S. alcohol and gambling machines 'sets the stage for more constructive negotiations' ahead of a renewal of the Canada-U.S.-Mexico trade agreement. Ontario, Manitoba reach internal trade agreement, promise alcohol sales deal by end of June The minister says Albertans are encouraged to continue supporting local producers, even as more U.S. options return to store shelves. Nally said in April that the province was pausing its policy around procurement from U.S. companies 'in the spirit of diplomacy.' He said since the province's retaliatory measures were first announced in early March, the Trump administration had put a hold on further tariffs.
