logo
The era of American stock market exceptionalism is over

The era of American stock market exceptionalism is over

Telegraph19-04-2025

Nearly three quarters of fund managers think that US exceptionalism has peaked. The prevailing trend of the last decade – a belief in the continued success of US markets far beyond that of other regions – is over, according to the Bank of America's latest survey.
Over the past two months, fund managers have dumped US equities at a record pace as President Trump's tariff war and uncertainty over global economic stability continue. For those watching closely, it should not come as a shock, although it has happened perhaps a little faster than anticipated.
While it has come to feel like business as usual, US exceptionalism isn't the historic status quo. In the 1980s, for example, the rapid rise of Japanese stocks challenged the US dominance of global markets.
Tom Stevenson, investment director at Fidelity Personal Investing, explains that ultimately, the stock market bubble was over-inflated and had a long way to fall – a scenario today's US market is particularly vulnerable to.
One of the most notable pinpricks came at the start of this year with the release of DeepSeek, a sophisticated AI tool developed in China. The extremely cheap development cost of the model has sparked concerns that the AI moat of the American tech giants may not be as wide as had been assumed.
Since 2012, average earnings from US stocks have risen 145pc – over the same period, European and UK markets have each seen earnings increase by just 37pc and 30pc, respectively.
Hugh Gimber, global market strategist at JP Morgan, says: 'Technology has been the leading sector globally and the US has been overweight in that sector. In an environment where technology [stocks] have been standout it has been hard for other regions to out perform.'
However, the performance gap between the Magnificent Seven (Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Tesla, Meta and Nvidia) and the rest of the S&P 500 has narrowed of late. A year ago, the tech giants were outgrowing the rest of the US market by 30pc, a figure that has plummeted to just 6pc. That is expected to halve to just 3pc in 2026.
The upset is apparent in other metrics, too. While the Magnificent Seven accounted for 50pc of the S&P 500's earnings in 2024, this share is projected to fall to a third for 2025.
All of this adds up to a simple fact: US equities are unlikely to outperform the rest of the world to the extent that they have done in the recent past.
In fact, Mr Stevenson warns they may underperform.
Markets are also becoming suspicious of US government debt, which could have dramatic consequences for the stock market.
Mr Gimber explains: 'One of the big parts behind the US economic outperformance is the size of the government deficit that has been running.
'This has been an expansion built on US government debt, and although levels are still rising the market is getting wary of US government debt, especially in the context of inflationary pressure from tariffs.'
By contrast, Europe and the UK are running smaller deficits relative to their economies and are increasing their commitments to defence spending, increasing fiscal stimulus.
Typically, when equities are struggling, money flocks to the dollar as a safe haven, but now even the greenback is under strain.
Jamie Mills O'Brien, investment director in European equities at Aberdeen, says: 'The dollar is not behaving like a safe haven currency in the way you would expect it to.
'Dollar weakening as equities are weakening points to a different way that asset allocators are viewing the market.'
Stevenson agrees: 'That is relevant for a UK based investor – if the US market is no longer outperforming and you have a drag from the currency, then that makes a case for lower exposure to US dollar-based assets.'
As a result, investors with global portfolios are likely to be looking to diversify further beyond the US than they have in a long time. The MSCI All Country World Index, a global equity index, is weighted 63pc to the US due to its exceptionalism. As that faith wavers, this appears risky.
Charles Sunnucks, portfolio manager in emerging market equities at Oldfield Partners, says: 'I don't think people understand how concentrated the world index is.
'Friends and family have been surprised by their level of exposure.'
So where do investors turn?
Investors are not entirely turning their backs on the US, but appear to be considering their options. Fund managers are now 36pc net underweight in US equities, the highest level in the past two years.
For managers in other regions, this is an opportunity.
Mr Sunnucks argues that while individual countries within emerging markets are at higher risk, a fund invested across these regions can capitalise on the fast-moving cycles that offer accelerated growth opportunities.
Investing across Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EMEA), for example, offers a more diversified pool of stock than the tech-heavy US.
Incidentally, the US may have built a rod for its own back, with the rise of AI making emerging economies more accessible than ever before.
As Mr Sunnucks notes, AI can remove language barriers and assist with the initial due diligence process, previously extremely cumbersome and potentially expensive tasks.
The current upheaval has also sparked interest in more familiar markets.
Mr Gimber argues there are positives to be found across the UK and Europe as a result of likely countermeasures to the current geopolitical environment.
An evolving policy mix in the US has fundamentally altered how European governments consider fiscal stimulus, while ongoing trade conversations provide a more optimistic outlook for investors and challenge the dominance of US growth.
Mr Mills O'Brien agrees: 'The fiscal prominence of the US is being challenged by the European economies with proposals for spending packages, while the US is contracting government spending.'
How should investors view the world in this new light? Mr Stevenson urges them to reconsider their allocation to the US.
The investment director suggests a 50pc exposure to US stocks is a currently prudent level, but warns anything lower would be a 'bold call'.
He says: 'The US may be facing challenges from China on the tech front but it still has such a dominant position in the industries of the future.
'I always say betting against the US is a really bold thing to do as an investor. It has rarely paid off.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump tariffs may remain in effect during appeals process, court rules
Trump tariffs may remain in effect during appeals process, court rules

The Independent

time22 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Trump tariffs may remain in effect during appeals process, court rules

President Donald Trump 's tariffs will remain in effect, for now, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday night. The president's 'Liberation Day' tariffs may stay in place during the appeal process while the court considers the legality of the measures. The federal decision temporarily reverses a lower court's ruling that found Trump had overstepped his authority, according to Reuters. The decision applies to broad-based tariffs affecting most U.S. trading partners, as well as targeted duties on imports from Canada, China, and Mexico amid ongoing pressure for them to do more to stop the illegal flow of immigrants and synthetic opioids across the U.S. border, the Associated Press reported. The court has not yet ruled on whether Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs is lawful, but agreed to pause the lower court's decision while it hears arguments, which are scheduled for July 31. Trump is the first U.S. president to use IEEPA, a 1977 law historically used to impose sanctions on enemies of the U.S., to impose tariffs. Tuesday's ruling follows a May 28 decision by the U.S. Court of International Trade, which held that the Constitution grants Congress — not the president — the power to impose taxes and tariffs. The tariffs have created turbulence for global markets and American businesses, many of which have struggled to adjust supply chains and pricing strategies amid shifting policy. The ruling on Tuesday does not impact tariffs implemented under separate legal frameworks, which include those on steel and aluminum.

Elon Musk to relocate SpaceX firm to Scotland after Donald Trump fallout
Elon Musk to relocate SpaceX firm to Scotland after Donald Trump fallout

Daily Record

time25 minutes ago

  • Daily Record

Elon Musk to relocate SpaceX firm to Scotland after Donald Trump fallout

Alba MP Ash Regan said Scottish ministers should capitalise on the Musk-Trump row by trying to tempt the tech billioniare here. An MSP has urged Elon Musk to relocate his SpaceX firm to Scotland after the billionaire fell out with Donald Trump. Ash Regan said ministers should capitalise on the row by making an effort to tempt Musk here. ‌ The Edinburgh Eastern Alba MSP said her last suggestion, that Musk open a Tesla factory in Scotland, was 'ruled out due to the policies of the UK Labour Government'. ‌ But she said the country has the skills for space exploration firm SpaceX. She said: ' Glasgow is already known as the satellite manufacturing capital of Europe and we are on the verge of becoming a global player in the industry. 'We have the sites, the people and the vision to match Elon Musk's aspirations for SpaceX so the Scottish Government should be opening the door and advertising Scotland as the go-to place if he wishes to relocate his business ventures. 'The Scottish Government has been a key partner in the growing success of our satellite industry so in Scotland we would have a much better opportunity of attracting such investment where the UK Government has previously failed.' The Tesla billionaire fell out with Trump in spectacular fashion last week after recently leaving the US government where he had been involved in the controversial cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency (Doge). ‌ It came as Musk went public with scathing criticisms of Trump's signature tax and spending bill which he branded an "abomination" that would turbocharge US national debt. An extraordinary war of words then broke on social media, with the world's richest man and the world's most powerful politician - formerly allies - trading bitter insults and threats. Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. ‌ It culminated in Musk, who owns X (formerly Twitter), posting that Trump's name was mentioned in FBI files related to deceased paedophile Jeffrey Epstein - a post he has since deleted. Musk had written: "Time to drop the really big bomb: Donald Trump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!" He followed it up with another cryptic post: "Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out." Trump hit back by reposting a message from his lawyer David Schoen, who said: "I was hired to lead Jeffrey Epstein's defence as his criminal lawyer 9 days before he died. He sought my advice for months before that. "I can say authoritatively, unequivocally, and definitively that he had no information to hurt President Trump. I specifically asked him!"

Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, federal appeals court rules
Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, federal appeals court rules

NBC News

time2 hours ago

  • NBC News

Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, federal appeals court rules

A federal appeals court allowed President Donald Trump's most sweeping tariffs to remain in effect on Tuesday while it reviews a lower court decision blocking them on grounds that Trump had exceeded his authority by imposing them. The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C., means Trump may continue to enforce, for now, his 'Liberation Day' tariffs on imports from most U.S. trading partners, as well as a separate set of tariffs levied on Canada, China and Mexico. The appeals court has yet to rule on whether the tariffs are permissible under an emergency economic powers act that Trump cited to justify them, but it allowed the tariffs to remain in place while the appeals play out. The Federal Circuit said the litigation raised issues of 'exceptional importance' warranting the court to take the rare step of having the 11-member court hear the appeal, rather than have it go before a three-judge panel first. It scheduled arguments for July 31. The tariffs, used by Trump as negotiating leverage with U.S. trading partners, and their on-again, off-again nature have shocked markets and whipsawed companies of all sizes as they seek to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. The ruling has no impact on other tariffs levied under more traditional legal authority, such as tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled on May 28 that the Constitution gave Congress, not the president, the power to levy taxes and tariffs, and that the president had exceeded his authority by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law intended to address 'unusual and extraordinary' threats during national emergencies. The Trump administration quickly appealed the ruling, and the Federal Circuit in Washington put the lower court decision on hold the next day while it considered whether to impose a longer-term pause. The ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small U.S. businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties and the other by 12 states. Trump has claimed broad authority to set tariffs under IEEPA. The 1977 law has historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies of the U.S. or freeze their assets. Trump is the first president to use it to impose tariffs. Trump has said that the tariffs imposed in February on Canada, China and Mexico were to fight illegal fentanyl trafficking at U.S. borders, denied by the three countries, and that the across-the-board tariffs on all U.S. trading partners imposed in April were a response to the U.S. trade deficit. The states and small businesses had argued the tariffs were not a legal or appropriate way to address those matters, and the small businesses argued that the decades-long U.S. practice of buying more goods than it exports does not qualify as an emergency that would trigger IEEPA. At least five other court cases have challenged the tariffs justified under the emergency economic powers act, including other small businesses and the state of California. One of those cases, in federal court in Washington, D.C., also resulted in an initial ruling against the tariffs, and no court has yet backed the unlimited emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed.

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