US stocks close lower as earnings weigh
NEW YORK: US stocks closed lower on Tuesday as the S&P 500 and Nasdaq retreated from record highs after some disappointing corporate earnings, while investors awaited a Federal Reserve policy statement.
A host of Dow components reported earnings, with UnitedHealth, Boeing and Merck all closing lower after their quarterly results. Health insurer UnitedHealth stumbled 7.5% and was the biggest drag on the Dow after a disappointing profit forecast, while Boeing declined 4.4% despite reporting a smaller second-quarter loss.
Merck dipped 1.7% after the drugmaker reported quarterly results and said it was extending its pause on shipments of HPV vaccine Gardasil to China until at least the end of 2025 due to persistent weakness in demand.
"Earnings have been a bit of a mix. Economic data has been somewhat mixed too, but not enough to move the needle in terms of the Fed," said Tim Ghriskey, senior portfolio strategist at Ingalls & Snyder in New York.
"The next two days, you have Microsoft, Meta, Apple, Amazon - those are big companies, and they will move markets depending on how the earnings are and how the outlooks are."
Earnings from megacaps Meta, Microsoft, Amazon and Apple are due this week and are likely to have a strong influence on market direction due to their large market weightings.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 204.57 points, or 0.46%, to 44,632.99, the S&P 500 lost 18.91 points, or 0.30%, to 6,370.86 and the Nasdaq Composite lost 80.29 points, or 0.38%, to 21,098.29.
United Parcel Service shares plunged 10.6% as the package delivery company posted earnings and again declined to issue annual revenue and margin forecasts, deepening concerns that US President Donald Trump's continually changing trade policy is weighing on the company. That helped drag down the Dow Jones Transport Average by 2.3% for its biggest daily percentage decline since May 21.
Likewise, Whirlpool plummeted 13.4% after the home appliances maker slashed its annual earnings forecast and dividend, citing pressure from a pull-forward in imports by rivals ahead of Trump's tariffs. Procter & Gamble shares shed 0.3%, as the maker of consumer goods such as dish soap and toilet paper forecast annual results below estimates and said it would raise prices on some products to offset the tariff impact.
Nearly 200 S&P 500 components have reported earnings and are posting results 6.4% above expectations, according to LSEG data, compared with an average of 6.3% over the last four quarters.
On the economic front, consumer confidence in July increased more than expected to 97.2. In June, US job openings and hiring, or JOLTS data, had decreased, pointing to a further slowdown in labour market activity.
The JOLTS report was the first in a string of data on the labour market this week, culminating in Friday's government payrolls report.
The Fed is largely expected to leave rates unchanged at its policy announcement on Wednesday. Remarks by Fed chair Jerome Powell will be closely monitored to gauge the timing of any potential rate cuts.
Key negotiations between the US and China completed their second day in Stockholm as the world's two leading economies aim to resolve their trade conflict, with Trump saying he was told by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent that the latter had a very good meeting with Chinese officials.
Declining issues outnumbered advancers by a 1.03-to-1 ratio on the NYSE and by a 2.08-to-1 ratio on the Nasdaq.
The S&P 500 posted 32 new 52-week highs and nine new lows, while the Nasdaq Composite recorded 76 new highs and 83 new lows.
Volume on US exchanges was 18.01 billion shares, compared with the 17.89 billion average for the full session over the last 20 trading days. — Reuters
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malaysia Sun
an hour ago
- Malaysia Sun
China turns to BRICS partner for coffee
Beijing fast-tracked authorization for nearly 200 Brazilian firms after the US slapped massive tariffs on the countrys products Beijing has authorized nearly 200 Brazilian companies to export coffee to the Chinese market amid escalating trade tensions between the South American nation and the US, according to the Chinese embassy in Brazil. The greenlight follows Washington's decision to impose a hefty tariff on Brazilian coffee and other goods. The 50% tariff, which took effect in late July, targets coffee and meat - two key sectors of Brazil's economy. The move comes amid the broader trade war launched by US President Donald Trump against multiple countries. "China has approved the authorization of 183 new Brazilian coffee companies to export to the Chinese market," the embassy said Saturday in a post, adding that the measure took effect on July 30 and will remain valid for five years. Brazil's Ministry of Industry and Foreign Trade has estimated that 35.9% of exports to the US will be affected by the tariffs, warning that annual losses could reach up to $14.5 billion. During the 2024/2025 crop year, Brazil exported 7.468 million bags of coffee to the US, making it the largest destination for Brazilian coffee exports, according to the Brazilian Coffee Exporters Council. The US accounted for 16.4% of Brazil's total coffee exports. In monetary terms, that amounted to $1.9 billion in coffee exports, along with $1.35 billion worth of meat. READ MORE: The BRICS hit back: Trumps old tricks meet new world China's growing appetite for coffee appears to align with its latest move to expand imports from Brazil. According to data from the International Coffee Organization, coffee consumption in China grew by 15% in the latest season. At the same time, the number of branded coffee shops in the country surged by 58% over the past 12 months, reaching 49,691 outlets, according to market intelligence firm Alegra Group. The rapid expansion signals China's emergence as a key growth market for global coffee producers. Trump has defended the steep tariffs on Brazilian goods, citing what he called a "witch hunt" against former President Jair Bolsonaro, despite the fact that the US ran a $6.8 billion trade surplus with Brazil in 2024. Trump had previously justified his trade policies by claims that he intended to correct trade imbalances. (
The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
Pfizer reports strong Q2 revenue
NEW YORK, Aug. 5 (Xinhua) -- U.S. pharmaceutical company Pfizer announced its second-quarter earnings on Tuesday, reporting a 10 percent year over year operational growth. The financial results posted by the New York-headquartered company represent revenue of 14.7 billion U.S. dollars or 0.51 dollars of earnings per share. In an upward revision of its full-year guidance, Pfizer said it now expects adjusted earnings per share for 2025 to range between 2.90 dollars and 3.10 dollars, compared to its previous forecast of 2.80 dollars to 3.00 dollars. The company maintained its annual revenue projection of 61 billion to 64 billion dollars, reflecting confidence in its underlying business performance. "Our business is performing well and I'm pleased with the progress we achieved in the second quarter," Pfizer Chairman and CEO Albert Bourla said in a statement. Pfizer's strong performance came amid mounting policy pressures from the White House. U.S. President Donald Trump has recently sent letters to 17 pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer, demanding that they cut prices on all existing medications for Medicaid patients to levels no higher than those in Europe. During Tuesday's earnings call, Bourla acknowledged that the company received the letter from the Trump administration. However, he declined to elaborate on the policy's specific impacts, although he emphasized that discussions with the administration have been "extremely productive." Pfizer's Q2 results were bolstered by rising sales in several key product categories. Its Vyndaqel line of cardiomyopathy treatments showed solid growth, and COVID-19-related products were major contributors.
New Straits Times
4 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Brexit's parallels with Trump tariffs tell a tale
In figuring out why the United States tariff shock hasn't sent the economy or financial world into a tailspin, Britain's exit from the European Union trade bloc provides something of a playbook — and without a particularly happy ending. Aside from vast differences in economic scale and global reach, the two episodes bear some comparison in how they upended years of deeply integrated free trade and possibly in how business, the economy at large and financial markets reacted. The 2016 Brexit referendum and Trump's tariffs this year were each widely billed as economic shocks that would send the financial world into paroxysms. They didn't, at least not at the outset. To be sure, both were followed by dramatic downward lurches in the two countries' currencies. But, to some extent, the steep drop in sterling after the referendum vote and the dollar's plunge on President Donald Trump's tariff plan this year helped offset some of the wider impact, at least on stock markets that are loaded with global firms with outsized foreign revenue. More broadly, however, the difficulty in isolating their immediate net impact means no "big bang" economic crisis unfolds to prove critics right, even if their enduring legacy turns out to be a slow burn of economic potential and lost output, often obscured by multiple other crosswinds. In Britain's case, the seismic effects of the Covid-19 pandemic distorted any attempt to easily assess Brexit when it actually happened. Tortuous negotiations with the EU meant the UK's departure eventually occurred on the eve of the health crisis in 2020 and the new trade rules did not come into force until a year later. But in the four years between the referendum surprise and the pandemic, the UK economy never entered a recession nor recorded a negative quarterly GDP print — confounding pro-EU supporters at the time and bolstering the Brexit lobby. Emerging from the twin hits, however, the economy has almost flatlined since. What's more, it's taken more than eight years for the pound's effective exchange rate to recover its pre-referendum levels. Few mainstream economists now doubt that Brexit has taken a serious toll on the UK economy. One academic study by a number of Bank of England economists earlier this year concluded that uncertainty following the referendum resulted in little change in goods exports and imports before the exit was finalised. But after the new rules hit, UK imports fell three per cent and overall exports fell 6.4 per cent, largely because of the 13 per cent hit in exports to the EU. While this slump seems relatively modest compared with the official forecasts of the longer-term hit, the pain has been borne disproportionately by small businesses. And the cumulative damage to London and the service sector over the next 10 years continues to worry the City. The US tariff story is of a completely different order, of course, as it will reverberate across the world economy. But there are some parallels, not least in certain aspects of the market reactions and the initial resilience. Economists estimate that the tariffs could lop anywhere from 0.5 per cent to one per cent off US gross domestic product over time. That's a US$150 billion to US$300 billion hit, which, though painful, would not be an instant crisis for an economy that's growing at a roughly two per cent annualised rate, where imported goods represent just 11 per cent of GDP and where tech and AI trends are generating considerable tailwinds. But as former White House economic adviser Jason Furman said in a New York Times essay last week, the tariff damage is likely not a one-off hit. The loss of 0.5 per cent of GDP, he argued, is "the equivalent of every household in America taking around US$1,000 and lighting it on fire, then doing it again every year. Forever." In the end, the main point of the British comparison is to show how extreme partisan arguments on the pros or cons of such giant economic policy changes don't necessarily get resolved cleanly in adaptive, hardy and hyper-complex economies. The latest YouGov opinion poll shows 56 per cent of Britons now think it was wrong to leave the EU, some nine years after their narrow vote to leave. The jury on Trump's tariffs is still out.
