Russia says it has tapped Washington on the shoulder many times related the the last remaining nuclear treaty between to the well-armed superpowers, but there have been crickets.

Moscow on Thursday reaffirmed it hasn’t heard anything and is still eagerly awaiting a response from Washington to President Vladimir Putin’s proposal to informally extend New START for another year. Presumably even if Trump officials have publicly signaled their willingness, a firm bilateral commitment has to be reached, with clear and open communication. 

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov warned reporters that the impending expiration of the pact on February 5 could create a “serious gap” in the legal framework controlling strategic nuclear weapons.

With the clock ticking, Moscow’s proposal underscores growing fears that, absent an extension, the world could face a nuclear arms vacuum between the world’s two largest arsenals. Peskov’s statement expressed some growing frustration and impatience:

“We keep waiting, but the deadline is approaching. There was no response from the United States,” he said at a news briefing.

Peskov added that “the Kremlin’s position is well known and it is consistent.”

The New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty was signed in 2010 by Presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev, and limits the number of deployed strategic warheads to 1,550 per side, and caps deployed delivery systems – including of missiles, bombers, and submarines – at 700.

The treaty is further designed to regulate targeting of each rival’s political and military centers in a potential nuclear conflict. The hope was that as Witkoff and Kushner have continued direct dialogue with Putin and top Kremlin officials, there would be a breakthrough on the nuclear issue, rapidly improving the bilateral relationship. 

This was certainly one of the high bars set for last August’s Alaska summit. Putin had stated just before meeting Trump in person that the “next stages” of discussions with the administrations could include reaching “agreements in the area of control over strategic offensive weapons.”

Both leaders have shown willingness to reach a breakthrough on this issue, but alas nothing has materialized, and Russia appears genuinely surprised the US hasn’t jumped at the offer to extend it another year, giving more time for longer negotiations for what the future of New START might hold.

In August 2023 the US accused Russia of violating the treaty in disallowing US on-site inspections under its stipulations. In response, Washington halted Russian inspectors’ ability to do the same on American soil. The fact that the Ukraine war has been raging without end has also put pressure on the treaty toward unraveling.

Ahead of today’s AAPL earnings report, we’ve had a very mixed picture from Mag 7 earnings so far: first, there was Microsoft, which crashed after its capex forecast unexpectedly jumped, then there was META, which soared after its capex forecast unexpectedly jumped (only in this case the company made up for it by pretending its ad revenue will also increase almost dollar for dollar with the new capex), and then there was TESLA which first dropped, then jumped, then dropped as the market digested the company’s complete conversion from an auto company (now without the S and X models) and into a robotaxi “story” stock. As such, many are looking to AAPL to break the tie when it reports at 3pm today.

But before we look at the numbers, here’s what Wall Street is expecting:

• Revenue estimate $138.4 billion 
• Products revenue estimate $107.69 billion
• Mac revenue estimate $9.13 billion
• IPad revenue estimate $8.18 billion
• Wearables, home and accessories estimate $12.13 billion
• Services revenue estimate $30.02 billion

Recall that during its fourth quarter conference call, Apple took the rare step of saying that it expects double-digit iPhone growth as well as 10-12% overall revenue growth. There was no way Apple would report such numbers unless it was 100% confident in that being the case. 

As Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman notes, Apple is projecting a monster quarter yet given the current climate around its AI crisis, the future of the company really hangs in the balance here, as it may be fair to say that if Apple beats estimates – or least meets expectations today – the current management of the company and way forward has some staying power. If, for some odd reason, the company misses expectations, we’re in for an extremely tough news cycle and the potential of real change in the months ahead. 

In retrospect, AAPL was not making it up, because the stock has moved higher (even if it has erased much of the gains) after the smartphone company reported earnings which beat many expectations, while the iPhone had its best ever quarter largely thanks to China.

Here are the details:

• EPS $2.84 vs. $2.40 y/y, beating estimates of $2.68
   
• Revenue $143.76 billion, +16% y/y, beating estimate $138.4 billion 
  • Products revenue $113.74 billion, +16% y/y, beating estimate $107.69 billion
    • IPhone revenue $85.27 billion, +23% y/y, beating estimate $78.31 billion
    • Mac revenue $8.39 billion, -6.7% y/y, missing estimate $9.13 billion
    • IPad revenue $8.60 billion, +6.3% y/y, beating estimate $8.18 billion
    • Wearables, home and accessories $11.49 billion, -2.2% y/y, missing estimate $12.13 billion
  • Services revenue $30.01 billion, +14% y/y, missing estimate $30.02 billion

Broken down by product…

… show that iPhone revenue – which hit a record high in Q1 thanks to China – was the most notable: 

Taking a closer look at the Geographic breakdown, one region stands out: 

• Americas rev. $58.53 billion, +11% y/y, missing estimate $59.06 billion
• Europe revenue $38.15 billion, +13% y/y, beating estimate $36.82 billion
• Japan revenue $9.41 billion, +4.7% y/y, beating estimate $9.24 billion
• Rest of Asia Pacific revenue $12.14 billion, +18% y/y, beating estimate $11.39 billion

and… 

• Greater China rev. $25.53 billion, +38% y/y, smashing estimate $21.82 billion

Yes: it was all about China, because while sales in the US actually missed, it was that country where no number is ever cooked – pardon the pun – where revenues (mostly iPhone revenues) grew a stunning 38% to $25.53bn, smashing estimates of a $21.82bn number…

… yet which in context seems very, very fishy, and makes one wonder if Cook cooked numbers with Xi’s help.

Going down the income statement: 

• Total operating expenses $18.38 billion, +19% y/y, above estimate $18.18 billion
• Research and development operating expenses $10.89 billion, +32% y/y, above estimate $10.14 billion
• SG&A operating expense $7.49 billion, +4.4% y/y, below estimate $8.03 billion
   
• Gross margin $69.23 billion, +19% y/y, beating estimate $65.5 billion
   
• Cash and cash equivalents $45.32 billion, +50% y/y, below estimate $49.73 billion

Some more details from the press release: 

• Installed Base Now Has More Than 2.5B Active Devices
• Declares A Cash Dividend of $0.26 Per Share
• Generated Nearly $54 Billion in Operating Cash Flow
• Declared A Cash Dividend of $0.26 Per Share

Yet while the stocks spiked sharply higher on the news of the massive iPhone revenue beat, it has since faded much of the move once again, perhaps as investors inquire what the revenue/margin hit to iphone will be from buying RAM memory which has triple in price in recent weeks.

Senior Saudi and Israeli defense and intelligence officials are converging on Washington this week as the Trump administration weighs potential US strikes on Iran, according to Axios. This as the same report also observes:

“A ‘limited strike’ is an illusion. Any military action by ‌the U.S. — from any origin and at any level — will be considered an act of war and the response will be immediate, ‌all out⁩, and unprecedented, targeting the heart of ‌Tel Aviv⁩ and all those supporting the aggressor,” Ali Shamkhani, a top adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, wrote on X.

Israeli officials, including IDF Intelligence Directorate chief Maj. Gen. Shlomi Binder, are reportedly presenting intelligence on Iranian targets to Pentagon, CIA, and White House officials, while Saudi counterparts are attempting to slow-walk Washington away from outright war. The Saudis lately joined the Emirates in barring the Pentagon for using airspace for any strikes.

Gen. Binder met with senior US defense and intelligence officials on Tuesday and Wednesday, while Saudi Defense Minister Khalid bin Salman – brother of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman – is expected to hold talks with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Trump envoy Steve Witkoff later this week.

Behind closed doors, Trump is said to be considering targeted strikes on Iranian security forces and leadership figures in a bid to trigger internal unrest, Reuters has reported. Secretary Rubio yesterday floated before a Senate hearing the idea that the US must “preemptively prevent” Iran from attacking American forces already in the region, in an interesting display of war logic.

But CNN says stalled US-Iran talks over Tehran’s nuclear and missile programs have only hardened Washington’s appetite for escalation – raising the odds that diplomacy is giving way to force once again, or rather, placing the diplomatic bar so high that it would be next to impossible for Iran to comply.

Currently, Trump officials are reportedly insisting that Iran be stripped of any missile capability capable of striking Israel. Israel, meanwhile, would retain its full missile arsenal – including the undeclared nuclear weapons that everyone in the world knows about – capable of hitting Iran. According to CNN:

The biggest sticking point, sources said, has been the US demand that Iran agree to put limits on the range of its ballistic missiles — an acute concern for Israel, which expended much of its missile interceptor stockpile shooting down Iranian ballistic missiles during last June’s 12-day war. Iran has balked at that and told the US it would only discuss its nuclear program. The US has not replied, leaving both sides at a dead end, the sources said.

Which leaves the so-called “sticking point” glaringly obvious: Washington is demanding that Tehran agree to unilateral disarmament, rendering itself defenseless against Israeli air and missile strikes. In other words, total capitulation – or else.

And about that supposedly “obliterated” Iranian nuclear program?

It’s not clear why Trump has since shifted his focus back to Iran’s nuclear program, which he said last summer had been “obliterated” by US strikes. But Iran has been trying to rebuild its nuclear sites even deeper underground, according to a person familiar with recent US intelligence on the issue, and has long resisted US pressure to halt its uranium enrichment. The regime has also barred the UN’s nuclear watchdog from inspecting its nuclear sites.

Like with Venezuela before – or even hearkening all the way back to Bush’s Iraq invasion – the justifications for war will keep on shifting, until something sticks in a thinly veiled effort to manufacture consent.

Tucker Carlson has revealed that during the brief Iran-Israel war earlier this year, Israeli soldiers were barging into U.S. military meetings at the Pentagon, issuing demands, and telling American officers what to do.

He says Pentagon officials stood by in silence and is… pic.twitter.com/u5vhYwaOwI

— Shadow of Ezra (@ShadowofEzra) October 2, 2025

…And then the pretext will soon after be forgotten about when the bombs fall.

As one commenter pointed out related the several regime change conflicts of the last couple decades: “Free Iran” means exactly what “Free Iraq,” “Free Libya,” and “Free Syria” meant. That is the material reality, however you try to spin it. Either you’re calling for another US-engineered destruction, or you’re so politically naive your opinion can be automatically disregarded.

After a solid 2Y, and a dismal 5Y auction, moments ago the Treasury completed the sale of the week’s final coupon, and today’s sale of $44BN in 7Y paper was appropriately enough, mediocre at best, not terrible, not great, in the parlance of our times.

The auction priced at a high yield of 4.018%, the first 4%+ yield since July, and up from 3.930% in December. It also tailed then 4.014% When Issued by 0.4bps. This was the 5th tail in the last 6 auctions.

The bid to cover of 2.454 dropped from 2.509 in December, and was the lowest since September; it was also well below the six auction average of 2.516.

The internals were a fraction better: Indirects took down 66.9%, up from 59.04% and above the six auction average of 61.8%. And with Directs awarded 22.2%, down sharply from 31.6% last month, Dealers were left holding 10.9%, up from 9.3% last month and above the recent average of 10.2%.

Overall this was a mediocre, tailing auction and while it could have been worse (foreign demand for example was still quite solid), it certainly could have been better. 

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is probing the abuse of the H-1B visa program in the state, beginning with an investigation into three companies in North Texas, the attorney general’s office said in a statement on Jan. 28.

Paxton issued Civil Investigative Demands (CIDs) to companies suspected of fraudulent activity. CIDs are government requests for information in noncriminal investigations. They are issued before any formal complaint or lawsuit is filed against the entities.

“Reports have indicated that the businesses under investigation have likely engaged in illegal activity to scam the H-1B visa program by setting up sham companies featuring websites advertising nonexistent products or services to Texas consumers in order to fraudulently sponsor H-1B visas,” the office said.

For instance, one business allegedly listed a single-family home as its office address and an empty, unfinished building as its worksite address on its website, according to the statement.

The office alleged that the companies sponsored numerous H-1B visa applications over the past years without providing evidence that they delivered any of the advertised services or products.

On Sept. 19, President Donald Trump issued a proclamation that restricted the hiring of foreign workers under the H-1B program.

Under the new rules, businesses must pay $100,000 for any new H-1B petition to bring a foreign worker to the United States.

In the proclamation, Trump wrote that the abuse of the H-1B program constituted a “national security threat by discouraging Americans from pursuing careers in science and technology, risking American leadership in these fields.”

In its statement, Paxton’s office said the attorney general has demanded that companies hand over documents identifying all employees working under them, communications related to operations, financial statements, and records detailing the specific services and products they offer. The businesses being investigated were not named in the press release.

“Any criminal who attempts to scam the H-1B visa program and use ‘ghost offices’ or other fraudulent ploys should be prepared to face the full force of the law,” Paxton said.

“Abuse and fraud within these programs strip jobs and opportunities away from Texans. I will use every tool available to uproot and hold accountable any individual or company engaged in these fraudulent schemes. My office will continue to thoroughly review the H-1B visa program and always work to put the interests of Americans first.”

The H-1B visa program helps employers hire nonimmigrant workers and access business skills and abilities they cannot otherwise obtain from the U.S. workforce.

The program enables the hiring of foreign professionals in specialized fields, including engineering, technology, and medicine. Supporters of the program say H-1B visas are crucial to fill roles for which qualified American workers cannot be found.

Critics allege that H-1B and similar work visa programs are often misused to replace American workers with lower-wage foreign labor. They argue that the program does not always attract the most skilled candidates as intended.

Tightening H-1B Approvals

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed a lawsuit in October 2025 challenging the Trump administration’s $100,000 fee for H-1B petitions.

“The new $100,000 visa fee will make it cost-prohibitive for U.S. employers, especially start-ups and small and midsize businesses, to utilize the H-1B program, which was created by Congress expressly to ensure that American businesses of all sizes can access the global talent they need to grow their operations here in the U.S.,” said Neil Bradley, executive vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced more changes to the H-1B program in December.

Beginning on Feb. 26, the DHS will implement a “weighted selection process” instead of the current random lottery for approving visas, prioritizing higher-skilled and higher-paid foreign workers.

“The new weighted selection will better serve Congress’s intent for the H-1B program and strengthen America’s competitiveness by incentivizing American employers to petition for higher-paid, higher-skilled foreign workers,” said Matthew Tragesser, spokesperson for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

“With these regulatory changes and others in the future, we will continue to update the H-1B program to help American businesses without allowing the abuse that was harming American workers.”

According to data from USCIS, during fiscal year 2025, which ran from Oct. 1, 2024, to Sept. 30, 2025, Amazon was the top beneficiary of H-1B employment approvals in the country, with 13,625 visa petitions approved by the government.

This was followed by Meta Platforms, Microsoft Corporation, and India-based Tata Consultancy Services, each with more than 6,000 approvals. Google and Apple received more than 5,000 approvals.

California had the highest number of H-1B approvals at 86,147. Texas ranked second with 41,571 beneficiaries.

Authored by Brian Quarmby via Cointelegraph,

OpenAI-linked token Worldcoin spiked 40% on Wednesday following a report that the artificial intelligence firm is working on a bot-free social media platform that requires “proof of personhood.”  

According to a Tuesday Forbes report citing sources familiar with the matter, OpenAI is aiming to develop a “humans-only platform” as a point of difference from other social media services on the market. 

Still in its early stages, sources state that a small team of around 10 people is building the platform to compete with X, and that it has reportedly been in development since early 2025, according to tech news outlet The Verge.

Forbes’ sources claimed that any “proof of personhood” would likely be verified via Apple’s Face ID or the World Orb eyeball scanner, which has also been utilized as part of World, the blockchain and crypto project co-founded by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. 

The report coincided with a 40% price pump for Worldcoin to $0.63; however, the price has since pulled back to $0.54 at the time of writing, according to CoinGecko data.

Amid a broader crypto downturn in the latter half of 2025, WLD has had a grim price performance, down almost 70% over the past 12 months. 

The World Orb, which has seen criticism over its implications for personal data privacy, scans a person’s face and their iris to verify that they are a unique human. It is a key part of onboarding genuine users to the WorldCoin ecosystem and helps establish a World ID.  

Details are sparse on how the reported social media platform could be integrated with OpenAI’s suite of products or potentially with WLD. It is believed, however, that OpenAI’s ChatGPT will be integrated to help users create content such as videos or photos. 

Altman has previously criticized bot activity on X and other social media platforms. Back in September, he said the current social media experience in general felt “fake” due to the sheer number of bot-like posts and comments.  

Update (1220ET): As expected, Senate Democrats have just formally blocked a package of government funding bills from advancing.

Democrats voted in unison against a procedural motion to advance the funding package. The motion, which required 60 votes to prevail, failed 45-55.

Eight Republicans joined all Democrats in voting against it, including Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.).

Thune was a late “no” vote and immediately entered a motion to reconsider the package to give him flexibility to bring it back to the floor soon. 

Democrats blocked the funding package, which includes six bills, because it includes funding for the Department of Homeland Security.

But with the government running out of money at the end of the day Friday, there is urgency to get a deal done to avert a partial shutdown.

The Hill reports that a source familiar with the discussions, said that while no agreement had been reached yet, the discussions were ongoing and moving in Democrats’ direction.

*  *  *

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and the White House are negotiating a framework to advance five of the six remaining fiscal 2026 funding bills, alongside a short-term measure to keep the Department of Homeland Security operating, according to Punchbowl News, citing people familiar with the discussions. The talks come as Congress once again barrels toward a potential government shutdown amid a volatile political fight over immigration enforcement.

Under the emerging framework, lawmakers would pass a temporary DHS funding patch to allow negotiations to continue over new limits on Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection as the agencies carry out President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown. Senate Republican leaders have urged Democrats to approve all six outstanding spending bills, a position Schumer has declined to accept.

Even if Schumer and the White House reach an agreement, a funding lapse over the weekend appears likely. The House, which is scheduled to return Monday, would still need to approve both the five-bill spending package and the DHS stopgap measure.

Easy money?

Senate Democrats on Wednesday rallied around a set of proposed reforms aimed at DHS and ICE operations. The proposals would tighten warrant requirements, establish a uniform code of conduct for federal officers, prohibit agents from wearing masks and require the use of body cameras.

The negotiations reflect the political pressure facing the White House after a series of violent incidents involving federal agents. Border czar Tom Homan, who was dispatched by the administration to Minnesota to take over operations from Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino, held a closely watched press conference today as officials seek to defuse tensions following two fatal shootings involving federal agents in recent weeks.

Those shootings have intensified scrutiny of DHS operations and pushed Congress closer to another funding standoff. Democrats have signaled a willingness to force a shutdown if their demands are not met, marking a sharp shift from their posture during earlier funding fights.

“I don’t like shutdowns,” said Sen. Angus King (I-ME), one of three members of the Democratic caucus who opposed the previous shutdown in a comment to Punchbowl. “But it was a matter of conscience. I didn’t want to be complicit with what these guys are doing.”

To Democrats, the current confrontation carries both moral and political stakes. Party leaders see an opportunity to extract concessions as they perceive the White House to be negotiating from a position of weakness and as some Senate Republicans acknowledge the need for changes at DHS.

At the same time, Democratic unity is not assured. During a private caucus call Wednesday night, some House Democrats questioned whether Senate leaders would hold firm, according to multiple people on the call. Others raised concerns about whether the proposed reforms would meaningfully rein in ICE’s conduct.

Some progressives have pushed for more sweeping action. Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) told the outlet that Democrats should be using the moment to “defund and abolish” ICE.

The Senate is scheduled to hold its first procedural vote on the six-bill funding package at 11:30 a.m. To strip DHS funding from the broader package, Democrats would first need to provide votes to advance the legislation. Whether an agreement is reached before that vote remains uncertain.

The risks extend to both parties. House Republicans remain divided, and conservative members have warned they oppose reopening negotiations on DHS funding. Meanwhile, Senate Democrats are under pressure from their base to confront the administration forcefully, particularly following the fatal shooting of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis.

The White House has offered alternative paths for enacting DHS reforms, including executive actions or separate legislation. Democratic leaders have rejected those options, insisting the changes be written directly into the DHS appropriations bill. Unlike previous shutdown fights, Democrats have limited their demands to reforms they believe Republicans could realistically accept.

Still, GOP resistance remains strong. Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) said Republicans would not agree to provisions that impede enforcement of the administration’s immigration agenda.

“The American people wanted the president to enforce law and order,” Mullin said. “ICE is doing their job.”

By Benjamin Picton, Senior Market Strategist at Rabobank

The US Federal Reserve’s rate setting committee left the Fed Funds rate unchanged at 3.50-3.75% with the Statement noting that “economic activity has been expanding at a solid pace…the unemployment rate has shown some signs of stabilization. Inflation remains somewhat elevated.” The decision was taken by a 10-2 vote, with Trump appointee Stephen Miran and Fed Chair hopeful Christopher Waller both dissenting in favor of a 25bp cut. The Bank of Canada, also meeting to set policy rates, similarly opted to keep rates unchanged at 2.25%. Our full review of the FOMC decision is available here, and the BOC decision here.

2 and 10-year Treasury yields were little changed on the day and equities were mixed. Fed-dated OIS saw the market-implied future path of the Fed Funds rate lift by 2-4bps over the remainder of the year. The S&P500 closed virtually flat after briefly hitting 7000 intraday and the NASDAQ eked out a 0.24% gain. The dollar found some support after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told CNBC that the US was still committed to the strong dollar policy and was “absolutely not” intervening in currency markets to support the value of the Japanese Yen. USDJPY closed 0.79% higher on the day, but has resumed selling in early trade this morning.

In his press conference Powell reiterated that some recent data suggested that the labor market has stabilized, despite the very low rate of hiring in the USA. He also said that the outlook for economic activity had “clearly improved” since the last meeting, and that that would matter for labour demand and employment over time. Powell characterized the labor market as exhibiting weak demand but that this was offset by weak supply as labor force growth was constrained by lower immigration and labor force participation. This is a variation on the “no hire, no fire” meme.

When asked why he attended a Supreme Court hearing on Lisa Cook’s case and to respond to a comment by Scott Bessent that his attendance was “political” Powell declined to answer the latter and said that he believed that the court case was perhaps the most important in the Fed’s 113-year history. In that context, he said he believed it would be difficult to explain why he didn’t attend. Having clearly anticipated this line of questioning, he came armed with a precedent – pointing out that Paul Volcker similarly attended a Supreme Court hearing in 1985.

Powell also dead-batted questions about his January 11th press conference where he sensationally suggested that grand jury subpoenas issued by the Department of Justice were politically motivated, and also declined to answer questions on whether he would choose to remain a Fed Governor after his term as Chairman expires in May.

This was Powell at his most technocratic. With midterm elections looming later in the year, and the President poised to gain greater control of the FOMC from May onwards, Powell may have been keen to strike a blow for establishment views on formulaic policy making where monetary policy is adjusted according to a recipe (reaction function) with 2% inflation and maximum employment the desired outputs. Conversely, Miran’s decision to vote for a cut of only 25bp (after voting for 50 at the three previous meetings) might be interpreted as an attempt to lower the temperature between the White House and the central bank, before resuming hostilities later in the year when Powell is replaced as Chair.

Obviously, paint-by-numbers inflation targeting is the virtual antithesis of the administration’s view that monetary policy should work in concert with other tools to achieve the domestic and foreign policy goals of the United States. How can the US Dollar, capital markets or Fed swaplines be mobilized to support US interests if those tools are gatekept by independent technocrats pursuing a much narrower definition of the national interest? How can the flow of credit be effectively diverted to priority industries (semiconductors, energy, defence etc) while interest rates are set dispassionately and indiscriminately across the entire economy? As some administration figures may be happy to point out, that is not how things work in China.

Under such circumstances where the central bank cannot be brought to heel, it seems logical to expect increased subordination through fiscal dominance and other actions of the US Treasury to assert control over tools of monetary policy. Stablecoins is one such area that we have written about previously.

While rates and FX markets were focused on the Fed, gold and silver are again resetting all-time highs. Silver is up 1% at time of writing to $117.85/oz. Gold has busted through the $5500/oz level and has now risen more than $500/oz over the last four days. With Brent crude prices also up 0.56% to $68.78/bbl this morning, it would seem that geopolitics is again a major influence on these moves (along with the weaker dollar).

Donald Trump took to Truth Social overnight to warn Iran to “make a deal”. His post said that a “massive armada” led by the USS Abraham Lincoln was headed to the region – a fleet larger than the one deployed to the Caribbean to conduct operations again Venezuela – and that “the next attack will be far worse” than earlier US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Clearly, the Iran issue is not going away and the price action in energy and metals is telling us that this is a market that will continue to move on geopolitical stimuli. Technocratic approaches to trading it based on economic variables like GDP, employment and inflation are much more risk-laden than they used to be.

Novo Nordisk shares in Europe appear to be forming a base after a 5.5-month bottoming process, following a mid-2024 peak and a subsequent 71% collapse.

Goldman analyst Faris Mourad is telling clients this week that “obesity drugs narrative sentiment is on the rise” and “it’s an opportunity to buy the dip.”

Mourad explained:

The relative performance of the Obesity Drugs basket (GSHLCBMI) to the S&P 500 (SPX) is lagging its narrative sentiment. The basket is down -2 standard deviations today and we think it’s a good opportunity to buy the dip.

We flagged the obesity drug theme yesterday: We like going long our global obesity drugs basket (GSHLCBMI) since it provides exposure to the leading companies (LLY and NVO) as well as potential emerging leaders in this space: market is moving beyond the dominance of a few key players, with new entrants and diverse therapeutic approaches intensifying competition. Large pharmaceutical companies are actively engaging in M&A and licensing deals to replenish pipelines and acquire next-generation obesity assets, as evidenced by Pfizer’s acquisition of Metsera and Roche’s deal with Zealand Pharma in late 2025.

We notice equity investors are also focused on the industries that could face challenges as obesity drugs become more popular. We consider a handful at risk: junk foods, alcohol, tobacco, and health care companies that may be impacted in the medical tech, tools, services, and managed care space. We created a basket that combines all: global unhealthy lifestyle (GSCBUHLT) that can trade $200m in one day at 10% of volume.

Our research team highlights 2026 as a pivotal year for the development of obesity market, with the launch of NVO’s Wegovy pill (approved by the FDA in late Dec25 and expected commercial rollout in early 2026) and Lilly’s Orforglipron (expected FDA approval in 2026), together with the initial unlock of the Medicare population, potentially significantly increasing the addressable population for obesity medications. We expect the focus in the first half of the year to be on the launch dynamics for the Wegovy pill and orforglipron, with sales estimates 25-35% ahead of company consensus for 2027-29. That being said: street consensus estimates show no changes to 2026 and 2027 revenues driven by Oral obesity drugs and the group traded below earnings expectations for the majority of the last year.

GS research is significantly ahead of consensus on the revenue potential of oral Wegovy:

Meanwhile street consensus estimates show no changes to 2026 and 2027 revenues driven by Oral obesity drugs:

Obesity drugs traded below earnings expectations for the majority of the last year:

Related:

• Novo Undercuts Lilly’s Obesity Drug Price, Now Cheaper Than Car Payment

• Medicare Secures 71% Price Cut On Novo’s Anti-Obesity Drug As Part Of Broad Affordability Push

• Novo Nordisk Plunges After Ozempic Pill Fails Alzheimer’s Trials – Shares Suffer Worst Year Ever

• Goldman, UBS React To Novo Nordisk Axing 9,000 Jobs, Slashing Guidance Amid GLP-1 Headwinds

• “Much-Needed Win”: Novo Shares Jump Most In Nearly Two Years After US Approval Of Wegovy Obesity Pill

Will 2026 be a rebound here for Novo?

Authored by William Murray via RealClearEnergy,

It can be hard to explain to a general audience how important the release of the World Energy Outlook (WEO) is to policymakers, energy companies and investors who make hundreds of billions of dollars in investment decisions worldwide each year.

Beginning in the early 1990s, the Outlook included a Current Policies Scenario (CPS) that forecast future oil and natural gas demand over the coming decades based on current laws and government energy policies. This scenario was then used by banks and companies to extrapolate how many billions of dollars they must invest to satisfy coming energy demand. 

The IEA’s all-star reputation made the CPS the benchmark for global energy supply and demand forecasts for decades – until recently. 

In 2020, under its long-time Executive Director Fatih Birol, the IEA decided to abandon the CPS, “in part due to pressure from European nations and green campaigners,” according to Bloomberg energy analyst Javier Blas. Most of these green campaigners were interested in using climate policies to permanently displace oil and coal production.

To do this, IEA inserted new scenarios that considered policy ambitions and aspirations that had not yet become law. This analytical misdirection allowed Paris Accord-era net-zero emission goals to become a concrete forecasting reality. As a result, these forecasts showed peak global oil demand only an additional 3 million to 106 million barrels a day by 2030 before permanently declining.

Riding on IEA’s reputation, these forecasts helped the Davos crowd churn elite public opinion toward the Net-zero and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) framework in the early 2020s, which played a role in the ultimate suppression of billions of dollars in investment in carbon and hydrocarbon resources.

The IEA reinstated the Current Policies Scenario for 2025 after pressure from the Trump administration, while confirming that no peak in global oil demand should be expected until at least 2050. This is a welcome decision, but not before much damage was done, according to a recent report published by the National Center for Energy Analytics (NCEA). 

The report, written by Neil Atkinson, a NCEA Visiting Fellow and the former head of the IEA’s Oil Industry and Markets division, and Adam Sieminski, former administrator for the U.S. Energy Information Administration, found that while reinstatement of the CPS in the 2025 WEO “has gone a long way toward answering that its scenarios are divorced from reality,” the IEA must still do more to reverse past mistakes.

The latest critique found that the IEA is still making a series of unsupportable market assumptions, including:

Electric Vehicles: Forecasts of electric vehicle adoption remain overly optimistic, leading to overestimates of oil demand destruction for light-duty vehicles.

Aviation: A forecast for even a small reduction in aviation fuel use remains overly aggressive.

Marine shipping: The IEA continues to present overly aggressive forecasts of a significant decline in crude oil use for global oceangoing shipping.

Even if the IEA fixes its methodological problems and appoints a new Executive Director, damage from the five-year absence of the Current Policies Scenario could last for a long time. Sieminski and Atkinson estimate that as much as $1.5 trillion of underinvestment in oil and natural gas exploration is expected over the next decade. Underinvestment in the oil patch leads to supply shortfalls, which inevitably brings about a spike in energy prices and a new, much higher price plateau.

By projecting a 2030 demand peak for oil, the IEA sacrificed its credibility, giving succor and elite air cover to organizations like the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, a UN-backed group whose members topped out at 140 banks with trillions of dollars in assets, pledging to align their portfolios with net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

It is unknown exactly how much international investment banks withdrew from funding Arctic oil and coal resources, but many went on the record saying they did. The collapse of the Banking Alliance in the fall of 2025, driven by a combination of political pressure and market realities, will not make up for the consequences of a self-inflicted, years-long supply-demand lag.

The report’s authors do not go so far as to directly accuse the IEA of sneakily undermining the investment climate enough to create future recession-causing price spikes, but energy experts know that similar production shortfalls in the past have done exactly that. 

In the 1970s, a barrel of oil went from $4 to a new plateau of about $32 a barrel by 1981, a seven-fold rise in the nominal price that crashed many national economies. In the super-spike era between 2004 and 2013, long-term oil prices roughly tripled while playing an underappreciated supporting role in the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. 

If another major upward price correction arrives in the coming years, don’t forget to include the IEA’s willful errors when making a list of perpetrators. All government institutions are political, no matter how much structure is insulated from direct influence. Let’s hope the IEA has learned a lesson or two about the costs of believing there is a “right side of history” to be on.

William Murray is a former chief speechwriter for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the past editor of RealClearEnergy from 2015-2017, and has covered energy and environmental policy in Washington D.C., as a journalist and analyst for the past two decades.