logo
Morning Bid: Stocks crater again, no 'ifs' or 'puts'

Morning Bid: Stocks crater again, no 'ifs' or 'puts'

Yahoo07-04-2025

By Mike Dolan
LONDON (Reuters) - What matters in U.S. and global markets today
By Mike Dolan, Editor-At-Large, Financial Industry and Financial Markets
Forget about those puts. The White House does not seem concerned enough about crashing global stock prices to reverse its massive trade tariffs, and the Federal Reserve appears in no hurry to deliver rapid interest rate cuts. So the market sell off deepens and threatens to turn into a crash.
I'll discuss all the market mayhem and then explore some competing history lessons on trade and explain why they may be bad news for U.S. Big Tech mega stocks.
Today's Market Minute
* On Sunday, Trump indicated he was not concerned about losses that have already wiped out trillions of dollars in value from share markets around the world. "I don't want anything to go down. But sometimes you have to take medicine to fix something," he said.
* Taiwan stocks plummeted almost 10% on Monday, the biggest one-day percentage fall on record. Taiwan's president has taken to X to pledge a "golden age" of shared prosperity with the U.S.
* Some hedge funds say they are offloading all or most of their holdings of stocks as U.S. President Donald Trump's trade war wipes out trillions of dollars of market value and forces them to curtail trading using borrowed cash.
* EU countries will seek to present a united front in the coming days against U.S. tariffs, likely approving a first set of targeted countermeasures on up to $28 billion of U.S. imports from dental floss to diamonds.
* Fake cosmetics, massage pillows and sex toys. These are some clues pointing to a suspected Russian-run sabotage plot behind parcel explosions in the UK, Germany and Poland last summer, a person with knowledge of the Polish investigation told Reuters.
Stocks Crater Again, No 'ifs' or 'puts'
Any investor hesitation in offloading expensive U.S. stocks earlier this year was partly due to suspicion that President Donald Trump would pull back or soften his tariff plan in the face of sharp equity market losses.
But after the worst week on Wall Street since the pandemic hit in 2020, Trump effectively doubled down on Wednesday's tariff sideswipe against the rest of the world. "Sometimes you have to take medicine to fix something," he said as he returned from a weekend of golf in Florida.
S&P 500 futures plunged another 4% at one point on Monday, putting the market on course to enter full-blown bear market territory as losses from recent peaks top 20%. With the VIX 'fear index' of volatility soaring as high as 60 for the first time since August, the whole financial complex is on edge.
Global stocks in Asia and Europe tanked again today, with Hong Kong's Hang Seng clocking a 13% loss in its biggest one-day drop since the traumatic emerging markets crisis of 1997. It's now in the red for the year.
Treasury yields, however, backed up, as did the dollar, especially against China's yuan. Oil prices fell to their lowest in four years, and both gold and Bitcoin fell too, the latter to its lowest since the election in November.
If there is a 'Trump put' in the stock market, the strike price would appear to be much lower than Friday's close. And investors appear set to dump equities until they reach it.
The current Washington tariff plan and the unfolding retaliation, such as China's 34% tariffs on all U.S. exports, look likely to sow recession at home and abroad, an outcome that was unthinkable to many people at the start of the year.
Goldman Sachs now sees a 45% chance of a U.S. recession this year, effectively a coin toss. JPMorgan last week said there was a 60% chance of a wider global downturn.
Time for a Fed rescue then?
Much like the imagined Trump put, the 'Fed put' seems out of sight right now.
On Friday, Fed Chair Jerome Powell outlined concerns about the trade uncertainty and business anxiety, but he put as much emphasis on the potential inflation spur from tariffs as the possible damage to growth. And he said he saw little in the labor market to warrant early rate cuts.
Absent a shift of tone from Trump or Powell or some rowback on promises of trade retaliation, then the most important news for markets in the coming days will come with the corporate earnings season that kicks off in earnest this week.
With such seismic uncertainty, investors are likely to see a sweep of downgraded outlooks and profit warnings, which will only add more fuel to the fire.
And now I'll explain why U.S. tech firms and banks may find themselves squarely in the crosshairs of this escalating trade war.
Tough Tariff History Lesson for US Tech
The problem with U.S. President Donald Trump using historical grievances to justify a trade war is that others will do likewise, leaving richly-valued U.S. tech firms and banks in the crosshairs of retaliation.
One of the big puzzles about last week's dramatic stock market plunge following the announcement of the sweeping U.S. tariff hikes was that so few investors seemed prepared for it when it was hiding in plain sight.
Trump's tariff plans, while at the high end of expectations, were flagged endlessly for months before and after his November 5 election victory. Resulting retaliation from China, Europe, Canada and others was publicly and repeatedly promised too.
That it took up to last Thursday for markets to begin to factor in a wider recession is bizarre at best, negligent at worst.
Even stranger was that being long U.S. megacap tech stocks was still considered the most crowded trade on the planet as recently as March. And yet by Friday, the once "Magnificent Seven" leaders of the sector were nursing a bear market 25%-plus decline from their post-election peaks in December.
It may simply be a case of the most crowded trades emptying out the quickest. But there are other reasons for Big Tech to turn tail.
The Rest is History
Trump is justifying his decision to impose the highest average U.S. import tariffs in more than a century with a history lesson on how overseas trading partners have "looted, pillaged and raped" America and how often "the friend is worse than the foe."
Others have similarly dusted off the spreadsheets and history books, but they find a different narrative.
Trump's widely-criticized tariff formula focused solely on trade in goods, not services. But experts point out that this quid pro quo was precisely how the U.S. chose to design the globalized trading system that it's now choosing to unravel.
The global dominance of U.S. Big Tech companies, whose stock valuations have skyrocketed for more than a decade, was one of the big prizes Washington secured.
Under Pressure
In a recent article, trade economist Ricardo Hausmann questioned the administration's sole focus on goods trade, adding that tariff retaliation may be beside the point.
"America's economic ties to the rest of the world go far beyond goods. Services and investments are equally – if not more – important. And if that's where its advantages and potential vulnerabilities lie, there is little reason for other countries to retaliate with tariffs."
Counter-tariffs certainly might come - China already announced measures on Friday - but this is not where the pain would be felt most. The outsized slide in U.S. tech and bank stocks, as a result, reflects more than just recession fears.
Hausmann details how last year's $1.2 trillion U.S. goods trade deficit is only half the story, as there was nearly a $1 trillion U.S. surplus in services like digital, telecommunications and finance, if the repatriated profits of overseas subsidiaries are added back.
In effect, America's overall trade is nearly in balance.
But given that the value of U.S. investments abroad is estimated to be $16.4 trillion compared to the $374 billion that foreign companies earned in America last year, the former is a much more valuable target for any tit-for-tat reactions than U.S. goods, he said.
What's more, U.S. dominance in tech and intellectual property was not an accident. Indeed, it is rooted in the Uruguay Round of trade talks in 1994, when developing countries agreed to enforce rich countries' IP protections in exchange for goods market access.
If the U.S. is reneging on the latter, the former may be considered fair game.
"While the debate in the U.S. and abroad is focused on tariffs and their impact on prices and exports, other countries will soon begin to wonder whether protecting America's most valuable economic assets - its IP and the global mechanisms that allow it to be monetized - still serves their interests," Hausmann wrote.
Emerging economies aside, European leaders - with their multiple grievances against U.S. Big Tech and demands for fairer digital taxation - see this vulnerability too.
France, for one, said its companies should pause investments in the U.S. while the situation is clarified. French Finance Minister Eric Lombard also said Paris was working on "a package of responses that can go well beyond tariffs".
The European Union's recently adopted "Anti-Coercion Instrument" allows it to limit offending countries' access to public procurement tenders, restrict protection of IP rights or limit financial service firms' access to EU markets.
Too hefty to invoke?
"Donald Trump buckles under pressure, corrects his announcements under pressure, but the logical consequence is that he must also feel the pressure - and this pressure must now be exerted from Germany, from Europe," German Economy Minister Robert Habeck said on Thursday.
The gloves are off.
Chart of the day
Hong Kong's benchmark Hang Seng stock index was one of the star performers of the year prior to Trump's trade sideswipe last week. But it plunged 13% on Monday, falling into the red for the year to date and recording it biggest one-day drop since the traumatic emerging markets crisis of 1997.
Back then, the regional crisis became so severe that the Hong Kong Monetary Authority was eventually forced to intervene to buy equities as part of its defence of the HK dollar peg.
Monday's drop unfolded despite the fact that a unit of China's sovereign fund, Central Huijin Investment, bought China-listed stocks to defend market stability.
Meanwhile, the Hang Seng Tech Index plummeted 17%, marking its worst single-day performance since records began, bringing the index close to where it began the year before the DeepSeek-inspired rally.
Today's events to watch
* U.S. February consumer credit
* Federal Reserve Board Governor Adriana Kugler speaks
Opinions expressed are those of the author. They do not reflect the views of Reuters News, which, under the Trust Principles, is committed to integrity, independence, and freedom from bias.
(By Mike Dolan; Editing by Anna Szymanski and Bernadette Baum)

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Scoop: Trump pressed to take hard line with Iran after Israel strikes
Scoop: Trump pressed to take hard line with Iran after Israel strikes

Axios

time26 minutes ago

  • Axios

Scoop: Trump pressed to take hard line with Iran after Israel strikes

A group of pro-Israel members of Congress is urging President Trump to ensure "zero enrichment, zero pathway to a nuclear weapon" in negotiations with Iran, Axios has learned. Why it matters: The lawmakers — including a Republican, Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) — said Israel's strikes against Iranian nuclear sites and other military targets has created a "renewed sense of urgency" on the issue. "This decisive action comes after two months of unsuccessful diplomatic attempts and represents a critical chance to stop the Iranian regime from acquiring a nuclear weapon," they wrote in a letter to Trump first obtained by Axios. The White House did not immediately respond to Axios' Saturday afternoon request for comment on the letter. Driving the news: The letter is led by Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.), a staunchly pro- Israel centrist Democrat, and signed by seven other House Democrats, in addition to Bacon. The nine lawmakers noted that the two-month deadline which Trump set in March for reaching a nuclear deal arrived on Thursday — the day Israel launched its strike. They urged him to add "crushing diplomatic pressure ... to Israel's military pressure" by working with European countries to impose "Snapback" sanctions on Iran for being out of compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal. What they're saying: Trump told Axios' Barak Ravid on Friday that he believes Israel's strike improved the chance of reaching a nuclear agreement with Iran. "I couldn't get them to a deal in 60 days. They were close, they should have done it. Maybe now it will happen," he said. But Iran's foreign minister said that nuclear talks planned for Sunday have been cancelled, and Trump said Saturday that the war between Israel and Iran "should end."

James River Group Holdings, Ltd. (NASDAQ:JRVR) is largely controlled by institutional shareholders who own 80% of the company
James River Group Holdings, Ltd. (NASDAQ:JRVR) is largely controlled by institutional shareholders who own 80% of the company

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

James River Group Holdings, Ltd. (NASDAQ:JRVR) is largely controlled by institutional shareholders who own 80% of the company

Given the large stake in the stock by institutions, James River Group Holdings' stock price might be vulnerable to their trading decisions The top 7 shareholders own 51% of the company Recent purchases by insiders Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. To get a sense of who is truly in control of James River Group Holdings, Ltd. (NASDAQ:JRVR), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. We can see that institutions own the lion's share in the company with 80% ownership. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk). Because institutional owners have a huge pool of resources and liquidity, their investing decisions tend to carry a great deal of weight, especially with individual investors. As a result, a sizeable amount of institutional money invested in a firm is generally viewed as a positive attribute. In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of James River Group Holdings. Check out our latest analysis for James River Group Holdings Institutional investors commonly compare their own returns to the returns of a commonly followed index. So they generally do consider buying larger companies that are included in the relevant benchmark index. James River Group Holdings already has institutions on the share registry. Indeed, they own a respectable stake in the company. This can indicate that the company has a certain degree of credibility in the investment community. However, it is best to be wary of relying on the supposed validation that comes with institutional investors. They too, get it wrong sometimes. It is not uncommon to see a big share price drop if two large institutional investors try to sell out of a stock at the same time. So it is worth checking the past earnings trajectory of James River Group Holdings, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too. Since institutional investors own more than half the issued stock, the board will likely have to pay attention to their preferences. James River Group Holdings is not owned by hedge funds. The company's largest shareholder is Gallatin Point Capital LLC, with ownership of 13%. T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. is the second largest shareholder owning 10% of common stock, and BlackRock, Inc. holds about 6.6% of the company stock. Furthermore, CEO Frank D'Orazio is the owner of 0.5% of the company's shares. We did some more digging and found that 7 of the top shareholders account for roughly 51% of the register, implying that along with larger shareholders, there are a few smaller shareholders, thereby balancing out each others interests somewhat. While it makes sense to study institutional ownership data for a company, it also makes sense to study analyst sentiments to know which way the wind is blowing. Quite a few analysts cover the stock, so you could look into forecast growth quite easily. The definition of company insiders can be subjective and does vary between jurisdictions. Our data reflects individual insiders, capturing board members at the very least. The company management answer to the board and the latter should represent the interests of shareholders. Notably, sometimes top-level managers are on the board themselves. Most consider insider ownership a positive because it can indicate the board is well aligned with other shareholders. However, on some occasions too much power is concentrated within this group. Shareholders would probably be interested to learn that insiders own shares in James River Group Holdings, Ltd.. In their own names, insiders own US$5.3m worth of stock in the US$268m company. Some would say this shows alignment of interests between shareholders and the board. But it might be worth checking if those insiders have been selling. With a 18% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over James River Group Holdings. This size of ownership, while considerable, may not be enough to change company policy if the decision is not in sync with other large shareholders. While it is well worth considering the different groups that own a company, there are other factors that are even more important. For instance, we've identified 1 warning sign for James River Group Holdings that you should be aware of. But ultimately it is the future, not the past, that will determine how well the owners of this business will do. Therefore we think it advisable to take a look at this free report showing whether analysts are predicting a brighter future. NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Inicia sesión para acceder a tu portafolio

Cullen/Frost Bankers (NYSE:CFR) Ticks All The Boxes When It Comes To Earnings Growth
Cullen/Frost Bankers (NYSE:CFR) Ticks All The Boxes When It Comes To Earnings Growth

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Cullen/Frost Bankers (NYSE:CFR) Ticks All The Boxes When It Comes To Earnings Growth

The excitement of investing in a company that can reverse its fortunes is a big draw for some speculators, so even companies that have no revenue, no profit, and a record of falling short, can manage to find investors. But the reality is that when a company loses money each year, for long enough, its investors will usually take their share of those losses. Loss-making companies are always racing against time to reach financial sustainability, so investors in these companies may be taking on more risk than they should. If this kind of company isn't your style, you like companies that generate revenue, and even earn profits, then you may well be interested in Cullen/Frost Bankers (NYSE:CFR). While profit isn't the sole metric that should be considered when investing, it's worth recognising businesses that can consistently produce it. Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. The market is a voting machine in the short term, but a weighing machine in the long term, so you'd expect share price to follow earnings per share (EPS) outcomes eventually. So it makes sense that experienced investors pay close attention to company EPS when undertaking investment research. We can see that in the last three years Cullen/Frost Bankers grew its EPS by 12% per year. That growth rate is fairly good, assuming the company can keep it up. Top-line growth is a great indicator that growth is sustainable, and combined with a high earnings before interest and taxation (EBIT) margin, it's a great way for a company to maintain a competitive advantage in the market. Not all of Cullen/Frost Bankers' revenue this year is revenue from operations, so keep in mind the revenue and margin numbers used in this article might not be the best representation of the underlying business. While we note Cullen/Frost Bankers achieved similar EBIT margins to last year, revenue grew by a solid 5.4% to US$2.0b. That's encouraging news for the company! You can take a look at the company's revenue and earnings growth trend, in the chart below. Click on the chart to see the exact numbers. Check out our latest analysis for Cullen/Frost Bankers Of course the knack is to find stocks that have their best days in the future, not in the past. You could base your opinion on past performance, of course, but you may also want to check this interactive graph of professional analyst EPS forecasts for Cullen/Frost Bankers. Owing to the size of Cullen/Frost Bankers, we wouldn't expect insiders to hold a significant proportion of the company. But we are reassured by the fact they have invested in the company. Indeed, they have a considerable amount of wealth invested in it, currently valued at US$193m. Investors will appreciate management having this amount of skin in the game as it shows their commitment to the company's future. It means a lot to see insiders invested in the business, but shareholders may be wondering if remuneration policies are in their best interest. Our quick analysis into CEO remuneration would seem to indicate they are. For companies with market capitalisations between US$4.0b and US$12b, like Cullen/Frost Bankers, the median CEO pay is around US$8.8m. Cullen/Frost Bankers offered total compensation worth US$6.7m to its CEO in the year to December 2024. That comes in below the average for similar sized companies and seems pretty reasonable. While the level of CEO compensation shouldn't be the biggest factor in how the company is viewed, modest remuneration is a positive, because it suggests that the board keeps shareholder interests in mind. It can also be a sign of a culture of integrity, in a broader sense. As previously touched on, Cullen/Frost Bankers is a growing business, which is encouraging. Earnings growth might be the main attraction for Cullen/Frost Bankers, but the fun does not stop there. With a meaningful level of insider ownership, and reasonable CEO pay, a reasonable mind might conclude that this is one stock worth watching. Now, you could try to make up your mind on Cullen/Frost Bankers by focusing on just these factors, or you could also consider how its price-to-earnings ratio compares to other companies in its industry. Although Cullen/Frost Bankers certainly looks good, it may appeal to more investors if insiders were buying up shares. If you like to see companies with more skin in the game, then check out this handpicked selection of companies that not only boast of strong growth but have strong insider backing. Please note the insider transactions discussed in this article refer to reportable transactions in the relevant jurisdiction. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store