66.9 F
Chicago
Thursday, August 20, 2026
Home Blog Page 656

Ethereum Validator Exit Queue Tumbles To Zero As Staking Demand Soars

0
Ethereum Validator Exit Queue Tumbles To Zero As Staking Demand Soars

Authored by Brayden Lindrea via CoinTelegraph.com,

The Ethereum staking validator exit queue has dropped to zero – signaling a dramatic fall in selling pressure and strengthening confidence in Ether (ETH) as a yield-bearing asset.

Data from Ethereum Validator Queue shows the exit queue has fallen from its September 2025 peak of 2.67 million Ether (ETH) to 0 ETH, while the entry queue has risen more than fivefold over the last month to 2.6 million ETH, the highest since July 2023.

Wait times for the entry queue have now stretched out to 45 days, while exiting ETH is being processed in a matter of minutes.

Ethereum staking entry and exit queue data. Ethereum Validator Queue

Industry analysts said the massive staking inflows strengthen ETH’s supply-demand dynamic, potentially setting the stage for sustained upward price momentum in the coming months.

“Once the entry queue converts into active validators, the staking rate moves higher and pushes toward new all-time highs,” Onchain Foundation’s head of research Leon Waitmann said on Monday.

 “Bullish set-up for the coming months.”

The massive inflows have been partly pushed by institutional demand for ETH staking yields, which is currently around 2.8% Annual Percentage Rate.

BitMine Immersion Technologies, led by chairman Tom Lee, has been a contributor, having staked over 1.25 million ETH, more than a third of its total ETH holdings.

Nearly half of all ETH is in PoS deposit contract

Crypto analytics platform Santiment noted that more than 46.5% of the total ETH supply is now in the ETH proof-of-stake deposit contract at 77.85 million ETH, worth $256 billion at current prices.

Change in ETH Proof-of-Stake Deposit Contract since Jan. 2016. Source: Santiment

The total staked ETH stands at about 36.1 million, representing around 29% of the total supply, Beaconcha.in data shows.

Despite the bullish indicator, ETH’s current price of $3,300 is still down from its $4,946 all-time high set on Aug. 4, 2025, CoinGecko data shows.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/18/2026 – 15:10

Pentagon Puts 1,500 Arctic-Trained Troops On Standby For Minnesota Deployment Amid Left-Wing Chaos

0
Pentagon Puts 1,500 Arctic-Trained Troops On Standby For Minnesota Deployment Amid Left-Wing Chaos

The Pentagon has placed 1,500 active-duty troops on prepare-to-deploy status for a possible deployment to the Minneapolis metro area if social unrest escalates in the sanctuary city governed by left-wing politicians, according to multiple reports from ABC News and The Washington Post, both citing unnamed defense officials.

“The Department of War is always prepared to execute the orders of the Commander-in-Chief if called upon,” Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell told CNN.

WaPo and ABC reported that the 1,500 active-duty troops are assigned to two U.S. Army infantry battalions under the 11th Airborne Division, which is based in Alaska. The soldiers specialize in cold-weather operations, as temperatures in Minneapolis are in the single digits.

On Saturday afternoon, we reported that Gov. Tim Walz mobilized the National Guard to support the Minnesota State Patrol and other local law enforcement. These Guardsmen would focus on public safety support, such as traffic control and protecting life and property.

President Trump has already sent 3,000 federal agents from ICE and Border Patrol to Minneapolis and nearby St. Paul this month, as part of a massive federal deportation operation to arrest and deport criminal illegal aliens that are being shielded by corrupt Democratic politicians.

On the ground, federal agents have faced militant left-wing groups, such as Antifa and Antifa-adjacent organizations, waging pressure campaigns to derail federal operations. There have also been so-called “legal observers,” including left-wing activists, who have attempted to disrupt these deportation operations. In addition, dark-money-funded NGOs are aiding these pressure campaigns against federal authorities.

Even the unhinged Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey admitted these pressure campaigns were being supported by a network of nonprofits.

These pressure campaigns against the feds have prompted Trump to publicly say that he could use the “Insurrection Act” to quell the manufactured chaos by left-wing agitators.

“If the corrupt politicians of Minnesota don’t obey the law and stop the professional agitators and insurrectionists from attacking the Patriots of I.C.E., who are only trying to do their job, I will institute the INSURRECTION ACT,” Trump posted on Truth Social.

Meanwhile, CBS News reported Saturday that the Justice Department is investigating Gov. Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey over an alleged conspiracy to impede federal immigration agents during deportation operations (read report).

Left-wing chaos is unfolding even in frigid weather. Just wait until the Democratic Party’s billionaire-funded protest industrial complex ramps up in the spring; the manufactured unrest is only beginning. The clock is ticking for the Trump administration to fracture the left-wing billionaire family foundations, foreign money pipelines, and nonprofit networks waging a color revolution against all things “America First” agenda.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/18/2026 – 14:35

Imagine Ramping Up A “War Time” Economy Where Most Of The Stuff You Shoot At The Enemy, Comes From The Enemy

0
Imagine Ramping Up A “War Time” Economy Where Most Of The Stuff You Shoot At The Enemy, Comes From The Enemy

By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

If you have not read our 2026 Outlook piece – ProSec 2026, we really urge you to do it. It is our best attempt, to date, to outline why ProSec, or Production for Security (and Resilience) is the dominant theme for this year (and likely for years to come). Not just for the U.S. government (which kicked it off), but also for investors (who are rapidly chasing opportunities in the space), and increasingly for foreign governments and corporations.

We have not “trademarked” the term ProSec (yet), but we have been trying to capture this momentous shift in policy and focus since last summer, and haven’t thought of (or seen) a better way to summarize the New Era.

When we first argued that ProSec is the New ESG – the most common responses were: eye rolls and some reasonably aggressive pushback. That is not the case anymore as the shift in focus and the intensity of that focus is becoming apparent. ProSec has become the core of our discussions. We are learning and refining our take, but the core thesis remains not only intact, but it is also gaining momentum. The FT pointed out that Nuclear Weapons are now ESG Compliant. This is reframing ESG to remain relevant when in reality we are moving to a ProSec World. While the nuclear weapon concept might be a bit over the top, Euronext’s European Defense Bonds smell like capitulation. It will take Europe longer to truly admit that ESG has been replaced, and they are already creating the tools to make it happen, in the guise of the existing framework.

We were inundated (maybe just swamped) with people pointing out the Bipartisan Proposal to create a $2.5 Billion Agency focused on rare earths and critical minerals (someone really needs to simplify rare earths and critical minerals into something catchy and easy). We continue to argue that it is the refining and processing that is most important. More on that in “threats.”

We promise to deliver some semblance of a ProSec equity index this week. That will let people track the performance of ProSec companies. It is likely to evolve (as we get better at this), but it will provide a starting point. While ProSec may seem like an equity story, it will also be a credit story! Some companies will have to issue more debt than planned to achieve their ProSec opportunities (we almost said “goals” but ProSec isn’t about “goals” it is about opportunities). Other companies will see spreads tighten on growth, improved earnings, and possibly, especially for smaller, higher yielding companies, from being acquired. This is about investment to create long-lasting profit opportunities (while achieving security and resilience for your companies, investments, and countries).

If we could just stop the report here, we would. It is important, in our opinion, that if you haven’t read our work on ProSec it isn’t too late, and you should.
But many have read our work and discussed it, so we need to plow on. Also, we can’t ignore last weekend’s Fast and Furious 47, since the admin continued to issue edicts as a “fast and furious” pace.

We are going to go back and forth between deadly serious, and a bit over the top, to try to get our points across (and then we can get back to identifying tickers for our indices).

From ESG to ProSec

Let’s follow a mildly tongue-in-cheek and simplified “decision tree” to where we are in global production. Especially the processing and refining of rare earths and critical minerals. But also, things like steel, copper, solar panels, etc.

You might argue that this is overly simplified. I’d agree. You might argue that this is heavily tongue in cheek. I’d disagree as this is only mildly tongue in cheek.

So here is a take on how we got to where we are.

  • Is the process energy (carbon emission) intensive? Does it produce a lot of pollutants?

    • If so, let’s do that step in [insert country here].

  • Did that reduce direct and immediately obvious issues locally?

    • Yes.

  • Did it protect the earth against global pollutants, carbon, etc.?

    • Probably not, but “out of sight” = “out of mind.”

  • Presumably [insert country here] must have led to a lot of production in different countries?

    • Not really, by and large “insert country here” became China.

  • Wow, it must be incredibly difficult to do these things, and that’s why it all went to China?

    • Not really. Most countries create more complex systems and finalize projects all the time. It really just didn’t fit the “framework” that we (the “West”) were looking to develop.

    • Okay, I lied, or at least exaggerated. Initially that was probably correct, but as economies of scale grew and the infrastructure was put in place, there were even greater cost advantages than just not worrying about details like pollution and carbon emissions.

  • Ok, so we should be able to bring it back “quickly?”

    • Well, we ceded all of this to China over the course of a decade or two. Sure, we can bring it back more quickly than that, but it will still take time.

Before getting to one more “rant” let’s take a look at some real world examples.

The Threat to Our Flow of Semiconductors

Semiconductors have been greatly affected by how the global supply chain shifted. While we all know that Taiwan is the leading semiconductor manufacturer in the world (in terms of state of the art chips), even they are partially dependent on China. The U.S. is even more so, and not so much because of the technology to make chips, but due to what goes into a chip.

Working with ChatGPT for this, we start with the “simple question” of what are the 5 most important materials that go into semiconductor manufacturing and/or the chips themselves? Anything in bold AND italicized was done by Academy to highlight.

Quick hierarchy (mental model)

  1. Silicon → physical platform

  2. Photoresists → pattern fidelity

  3. Copper → performance & power

  4. Gases & chemicals → manufacturing viability

  5. High-k & specialty metals → advanced scaling

ProSec lens (relevant to your prior themes)

  • Silicon wafers, photoresists, and specialty gases are strategic choke points

  • Rare metals (hafnium, tantalum, cobalt) tie semis directly to mining and refining security

  • Water and electricity intensity makes fabs a critical infrastructure asset

Yes, we have been trying to “train” ChatGPT on our ProSec research.

Sticking with ChatGPT (but eliminating the graphics it provided):

  • From silica → electronic-grade silicon (step by step)

1) Raw silica (SiO₂)

  • Comes from quartz / quartzite deposits, abundant globally, but purity and consistency matter

  • Mining alone is not the bottleneck

2) Metallurgical-grade silicon (MG-Si)

Process

  • Quartz + carbon (coal/coke/charcoal), smelted in electric arc furnaces at ~2,000°C

Output

  • ~98–99% pure silicon, Still far too impure for chips

Where this happens

  • China (dominant), Brazil, Norway, United States (limited, declining)

    • This step is energy-intensive and already geographically concentrated.

3) Chemical purification → polysilicon

This is where semiconductor relevance begins.

Process (simplified)

  1. MG-Si reacts with HCl → trichlorosilane (SiHCl₃)

  2. Distillation removes impurities to parts-per-billion

  3. Re-deposition via Siemens process → ultra-pure polysilicon rods

Purity

  • Semiconductor grade: 9N–11N (99.9999999%+)

Where this happens (critical chokepoint)

  • China (largest capacity, esp. Xinjiang), Germany, Japan, United States (small but strategic)

    • Only a handful of facilities globally can do true semiconductor-grade purification at scale.

4) Single-crystal silicon ingots

Process

  • Melt polysilicon, Grow a single crystal via Czochralski (CZ) or Float-Zone (FZ) methods

  • Slice into 300 mm wafers

Where this happens

  • Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Germany

  • This step is precision engineering, not mining.

Key takeaway (important)

  • Silicon is abundant. Semiconductor-grade silicon is not.

The bottleneck is:

  • Energy-intensive smelting, Hazardous chemical purification, Extreme quality control, Capital-heavy facilities

Strategic implications (ProSec framing)

  • Mining ≠ security

  • Chemical processing + electricity + know-how = security

Losing access to: Polysilicon purification, Crystal growth, Wafer slicing → fabs go dark, even if chips are designed domestically

  • This is why silicon is quietly treated like a strategic material, even though it’s “just sand.”

That was probably more information that you (or I) needed on silicon in chips.

I’m almost embarrassed to have forced you to read it (or skim over it) but chips are mission critical to our (and virtually every) economy.

Also, this was just one of the 5 main “ingredients” in chips.

An “Imaginary” Conversation

With that serious discussion out of the way, we can get a bit more fully “tongue in cheek” and run through a conversation that plays out in my mind over and over (darn, I should have tried to think of a song for today’s T-Report).

  • What would happen if China decided to cut the U.S. off from some of the things we now rely on them for?

    • Why would they do that?

  • Ok, but hypothetically, what would happen if China decided to cut the U.S. off from some of the things we now rely on them for?

    • Why would they do that?

  • Didn’t we get cut off during COVID?

    • Yes, but that was different because the entire global economy shut down.

  • Were the consequences for U.S. manufacturing capacity really bad?

    • Not really because we weren’t making much of anything because people couldn’t go into the office unless they worked in important industries – like finance.

  • But it would have hampered us?

    • Sure, but they would never do it on purpose.

  • So at least we tried to reduce our exposure against another “accidental” situation, like COVID?

    • There was a lot of chatter about onshoring, re-shoring, friend-shoring, near-shoring, and we even had the CHIPS ACT to boost domestic production of chips.

  • So, we aggressively reduced the risk?

    • By “aggressively” (in air quotes) you mean we talked about it a lot? Heck yeah! Actually, accomplished a lot, meh…

  • So, we remain vulnerable to China cutting off supplies of various things?

    • Why would they do that?

  • But seriously, we remain vulnerable to China?

    • Why would they do that?

  • Okay, maybe I should toss out some reasons why they “might” do that:
    They think it would create leverage for them to be “handed” Taiwan?
    They view us as being in competition to be the major global superpower, and they would employ economic means to achieve their goal.
    The race is in chips and AI, where we lead in design and even manufacturing, but remain heavily reliant on Taiwan (in their sphere of
    influence) and China for the inputs.
    They threatened us repeatedly during trade negotiations, on exactly this topic.
    The U.S. now accounts for only 15% of China’s exports and they seem to continue to take steps to reduce the importance of the U.S. economy on their economy, which might lead them to the decision that they can start a real economic war.
    They did see how poorly the U.S. responds to inflation and disruption in our “comfortable” lives, so they may be tempted to use that to disrupt us, especially on the race to AI and Space superiority (to name a couple key technologies).
    They have been allegedly stockpiling things that are important to them, that they don’t necessarily produce themselves (oil is top of mind, but only one of a number of things).

    • Those all sound crazy to me.

  • You really think there is no possibility that we experience a disruption, accidentally or on purpose?

    • Well, zero probability might be too low, things do happen.

  • Wouldn’t we then be better off if we were prepared for such an eventuality, even if it is a low probability?

    • I guess.

Ultimately, the higher the risk you think we face from having supply shortages due to restrictions from China (whether intentional or not) the more urgent and important ProSec is.

In any case, I cannot think of good reasons not to want greater capacity domestically, for security, resilience, and the JOBS created.

In addition, is there a possibility that Venezuela doesn’t so much become a source of rare earths and critical minerals, but instead a major hub for processing rare earths and critical minerals, far more in our “control” than existing sources? It might be a way to outpace regulation in the near-term?

True economic freedom and true sustainability derive from being able to take care of yourself (just ask Maslow).

The Threat to the U.S. Military – Antimony

General (ret.) Spider Marks loves bringing up antimony (he has been doing it for years). I’m mildly suspicious he does it primarily because he knows I have trouble pronouncing it, but it is a serious topic. And if it is a threat to our military, imagine the threat it is to other countries’ militaries.

Antimony seems to follow the rather aggressive tone I took in my “make believe” conversation regarding China.

This is more or less an actual conversation with ChatGPT (I have paraphrased its answers because this report is already getting long on technical information, and it is not salient to the point we are trying to make).

  • Is antimony used in munitions?

    • Yes.

  • Are there other alternatives?

    • Technically yes, but far less efficient

  • Is it the commodity itself or a refined version?

    • No. Munitions use antimony as refined metal or chemical compounds “the refining step is the real choke point.”

  • Where does the U.S. get its refined antimony?

    • Over 60% from China.

Then directly from ChatGPT (along ProSec lines):

  • What the U.S. does not have:

    • No large-scale primary antimony mine in operation

    • No dedicated munition-grade antimony trisulfide production

    • No surge-capable domestic refining base

  • This is the core vulnerability.

Why this is strategically uncomfortable:

  • The U.S. can manufacture ammunition domestically, but it depends on foreign chemistry to lighten and harden it.

Imagine ramping up a “war time” economy where most of the stuff you use to shoot at the enemy, comes from the enemy.

It almost hurts to even think about, but that is where we are.

Bottom Line

  • Production.

  • Security.

  • Resiliency.

  • ProSec.

Yes, today’s “Bottom Line” is that simple – ProSec.

Hope you have a great long weekend and I promise we will get back to our rate outlooks, credit outlooks, etc., but we believe that understanding and embracing this topic (as it evolves) will do more for your performance this year, than anything else in your control.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/18/2026 – 14:00

EU Hosts Emergency Meeting Over Trump’s Greenland Tariffs, Germany Threatens World Cup Boycott

0
EU Hosts Emergency Meeting Over Trump’s Greenland Tariffs, Germany Threatens World Cup Boycott

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent clarified Trump’s positioning on Greenland overnight, stating that “we are not going to outsource our national security.”

The elites of The European Union are not best pleased at Trump’s tariff threat (on some European allies that oppose the United States’ efforts to acquire Greenland) and immediately called an emergency meeting of ambassadors from the bloc’s 27 nations to discuss just how sternly worded their email response would be.

As we detailed yesterday, Trump has reiterated numerous times that the United States needs Greenland for national security purposes and warned that “world peace is at stake” if the United States does not succeed in obtaining Greenland.

Meanwhile, the eight European nations, which are already subject to 10 percent or 15 percent tariffs by the United States, have sent a small military presence to Greenland.

“Tariff threats undermine transatlantic relations and risk a dangerous downward spiral,” the group of eight countries said in a joint statement on Jan. 18.

As Jacob Burg reports below for The Epoch Times, the military deployment is intended to bolster Arctic security “as a shared transatlantic interest” and poses no threat to anyone, the nations said, adding that they are ready for dialogue with the United States “based on the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity that we stand firmly behind.”

“We stand in full solidarity with the Kingdom of Denmark and the people of Greenland,” the eight countries said, adding, “We are committed to upholding our sovereignty.”

In an English translation of her written statement, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said, “Since the U.S. President’s announcement of tariffs, the [Danish] government has been in intensive dialogue with our allies.”

“It is all the more important that we stand firm on the fundamental values ​​that created the European community. We want to cooperate, and we are not the ones seeking conflict,” she said.

“And I am pleased with the consistent messages from the rest of the continent: Europe will not be blackmailed.

Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson echoed Frederiksen in a social media post on Saturday, adding, “Only Denmark and Greenland decide on issues concerning Denmark and Greenland.”

“This is an EU issue that affects many more countries than those now being singled out,” he added.

“Sweden is now having intensive discussions with other EU countries, Norway, and the United Kingdom for a coordinated response.”

Germany’s vice-chancellor and finance minister Lars Klingbeil said that “a line had been crossed”, adding that the affected nations “must not allow ourselves to be blackmailed”.

“There will be a European response to this threat,” he said.

“It is unacceptable to hit countries that are now taking more responsibility for our common security in Nato,” said Troels Lund Poulsen, Denmark’s defence minister, who will meet Nato secretary-general Mark Rutte on Monday.

Not to be outdone, France’s Emmanuel Macron has called for the EU to activate its so-called anti-coercion instrument that can restrict access to the single market for American companies.

“He will be in contact throughout the day with his European counterparts and will request, on France’s behalf, the activation of the anti-coercion instrument,” said an Élysée official.

Tariff Retaliation

The FT reports that EU capitals are considering hitting the US with €93bn worth of tariffs or restricting American companies from the bloc’s market in response to Donald Trump’s threats to Nato allies opposed to his campaign to takeover Greenland. The move marks the most serious crisis in transatlantic relations for decades.

Manfred Weber, president of the European People’s Party, the largest political party in the EU, said the party wouldn’t back a trade deal with the U.S.

“The EPP is in favour of the EU–U.S. trade deal, but given Donald Trump’s threats regarding Greenland, approval is not possible at this stage,” he wrote in a post on X.

“The 0% tariffs on U.S. products must be put on hold.”

The tariff list was prepared last year but suspended until February 6 to avoid a full-blown trade war. Its reactivation was discussed on Sunday by the EU’s 27 ambassadors, along with the so-called anti-coercion instrument (ACI) that can limit the access of American companies to the internal market, as the bloc wrestled over how to respond to the US president’s threat with punitive tariffs.

“There are clear retaliation instruments at hand if this continues . . . [Trump’s] using pure mafioso methods,” said a European diplomat briefed on the discussion. “At the same time we want to publicly call for calm and give him an opportunity to climb down the ladder.”

“The messaging is . . . carrot and stick,” they added.

European officials said that they hoped their retaliation threats would increase bipartisan pressure in the US against Trump’s actions and result in him retreating from his tariff pledge.

“It is already a situation that no longer allows compromises, because we cannot hand over Greenland,” said a fourth European official.

“The reasonable Americans also know that he has just opened Pandora’s Box.”

Greenland Governance

U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio met with Denmark’s Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen and Greenland’s Foreign Minister Vivian Motzfeldt at the White House on Jan. 14.

Rasmussen described the talks as a “frank but also constructive discussion.”

Trump said on Jan. 16 that he was considering a wave of tariffs on European allies “if they don’t go along” with allowing the United States to purchase the Danish territory.

The U.S. president noted on social media that attempts by the United States to “do this transaction” for Greenland date back “over 150 years.” U.S. President Andrew Johnson’s administration first floated the idea of expanding American influence in the Arctic in the 1860s.

Trump has also previously signaled that Greenland would be a wise investment for the United States due to estimates of high quantities of rare earth mineral deposits on the Arctic island.

While the island was under formal Danish control since the era of colonization in the early 1700s, Greenland was granted self-governance in the 1970s with the creation of a parliament and the Self-Government Act of 1979, expanding the island’s autonomy. However, the island didn’t gain full self-governance until 2009.

On Jan. 9, the officials from Greenland, including Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen and multiple political party leaders, released a statement reaffirming Greenland’s sovereignty and rejecting any claims that would impede the island’s autonomy.

“We don’t want to be Americans, we don’t want to be Danes, we want to be Greenlanders,” the statement said. “The future of Greenland must be decided by the Greenlandic people. … No other country can interfere in this.”

World Cup Boycott

German politician Jurgen Hardt (CDU) spoke to newspaper BILD recently to suggest that Germany could withdraw from football’s biggest competition in response to Trump’s threats against Greenland. “Dropping out of the tournament would, however, only be considered as a last resort in order to get Trump to see sense on the Greenland issue,” he said.

Germany are not the only nation who have raised concerns over the participation at this summer’s World Cup. Back in September 2025, Spanish government officials suggested that withdrawing their national team was on the cards due to political tensions on the global stage. 

It seems to us that boycotting The World Cup would be a naive and we’re sure highly unpopular move (most notably in Germany who are among the favorites), likely ending disastrously from a domestic political perspective. Perhaps the politicians are not aware of the proletariat’s passion for the beautiful game!?

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/18/2026 – 13:25

Oil, Dollars, Gold, & Venezuela In A Nutshell

0
Oil, Dollars, Gold, & Venezuela In A Nutshell

Authored by Matthew Piepenburg via VonGreyerz.gold,

Putting any kind of bow on the current headlines to conveniently explain or “wrap up” recent events in Venezuela would be a fool’s errand. The extraordinary mix, as well as polarized views, as to the personalities, policies, economics, military acumen, and even international legality of the entire saga makes consensus impossible.

Political Optics?

The operation itself, of course, has all the Hollywood features of a daring and successful military drama, which can create tailwind optics for a President.

The opposite, of course, happened for Jimmy Carter, when his April 1980 Iranian hostage rescue mission stalled tragically in the desert, along with any hope of his re-election shortly thereafter.

Political “optics,” however, are often as short and capricious as politics itself. We all remember, for example, President Bush’s famous “mission accomplished” moment on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln long before the mission, in fact, was not accomplished…

From Politics to Economics

But moving away from the undeniably swampy terrain of politics to the Realpolitik of hard math, we can begin to discern certain financial and sovereign motives that speak far more honestly than patriotic narratives of bringing “bad guys” to justice or the stemming of drug trafficking.

There is something far more basic, and even mathematical, behind the headlines in Venezuela whose roots lie years deeper, and whose ripple effects will run far longer into an admittedly unknowable yet nevertheless somewhat precarious future.

The Past – Hegemonic to Broke(n)

This future will directly involve, and impact, gold’s international profile in the years ahead. But to put the present and even future into a greater context, let’s first take a brief look backwards.

For years, we have tracked, debated and observed the many intertwining themes of the slow decline of American hegemony on the global stage and its widening economic fissures and inequalities at the national level.

As always, the familiar themes begin with irrational and unsustainable debt levels, which have compounded under every red or blue administration since Nixon took away the gold standard in 1971.

What followed was an era of extraordinary credit expansion and hence currency debasement, wealth inequality, social unrest and the subsequent centralization schemes which always follow.

Within this mix of ever-changing financial forces and headlines, of course, includes the central theme of the U.S. Dollar and Treasury markets, whose health and strength are absolutely central to U.S. hegemony on the global stage. Period.

Times, Dollars & Trust Are Changing

But that USD and UST, we also know, have been losing strength, credibility and trust in the backdrop of a world slowly moving away from a paper-money system in general and a weaponized USD in particular.

The reasons and forces behind the mounting de-dollarization headlines are both complex yet paradoxically simple.

At a basic level, the over-issuance of IOUs from a nation whose debt levels have gone from $250B in 1971 to $38T in 2026 speaks for itself.

The trillions in mouse-clicked dollars engineered by the Fed to monetize those IOUs and the credit expansion that followed has had an undeniable impact on the absolute purchasing power of that USD.

This is objectively apparent when recognizing the dollar’s 99% decline in purchasing power when measured against gold since 1971.

In addition to the distrust which always follows an IOU or currency from an over-indebted issuer, the subsequent weaponization of the dollar in 2022 only made Uncle Sam’s UST and USD even less trusted and hence less demanded.

The World Is Catching On

Central banks, seeing this growing distrust, had been net-selling USTs and net-stacking gold since 2014:

Through no coincidence at all, the pace of this move toward gold tripled after the 2022 sanctions.

Unsurprisingly, central banks now hold more gold than USTs. Even the BIS can’t help but confess that gold is a superior strategic reserve asset than the once-sacred US 10Y Treasury Bond.

This now obvious move away from the dollar toward gold is no longer a warning or cry from the “gold-bug” camp, but a neon indicator of the structural shift in a global trading and monetary system in open flux.

A Nervous U.S. Resisting Change

Needless to say, the US is therefore admittedly concerned.

It needs a commanding currency and buyers for its IOUs beyond just the Fed itself. At some point, too much QE becomes an open signal that the U.S. (and its Greenback) has become broken beyond repair and hence respect.

This explains other alternative-QE tricks in consideration, such as a possible gold revaluation measure.

Such realities, of course brings us full circle back to the headlines of Venezuela, which are intrinsically connected to the complex interplay of the USD, the UST, the oil markets, and, you guessed it, gold itself.

Oil & USTs: The Traditional Pillars of U.S. Hegemony

I have written about the brief history and changing patterns of the critical petrodollar arrangement and gold’s evolving place in its narrative in prior reports herehere, and here.

To simplify, the petrodollar, “agreed” between the U.S. and the OPEC alliance led by Saudi Arabia shortly after the dollar’s gold-decoupling in 1971, was of central importance to maintaining the USD’s dominance in the global currency system.

By effectively tying global oil sales to the USD, the petrodollar arrangement provided an extraordinary source of demand for a dollar whose supply, following its gold decoupling, was otherwise unlimited.

Acting as a treaty-based “sponge” to absorb otherwise grossly over-produced dollars, the petrodollar system was a therefore an essential buffer against otherwise unsustainable currency debasement.

Equally beneficial to Uncle Sam, the petrodollar system mandated that the producers of that oil earmark a significant percentage of their oil revenues toward the purchasing of Uncle Sam’s IOUs. This served as an undeniable source of support for the UST market and hence America’s ability to expand its debt issuance at levels no other nation in the world could mirror.

In short, the petrodollar became an extraordinary source of both USD and UST demand, making global oil sales via the petrodollar a critical pillar to U.S. financial hegemony.

2026 Is not 1974…

In exchange for this dollar-backed oil arrangement, Saudi Arabia/OPEC received U.S. protection from the Soviets in a cold war era that has changed in the intervening decades since 1974.

What has also changed in those intervening decades, of course, are U.S. debt levels, bond yields, dollar strength, and post-2022 trust in the USA.

As de-dollarization headlines increased in the post-sanction era, there was much hype about the end of the petrodollar when Saudi Arabia waffled on renewing/extending its dollar peg in 2025.

As there was no formal petrodollar treaty ratified by the Senate, technically either side could opt out, but in fact, the Saudis were considering a petrodollar 2.0 contingent upon Israel’s culmination of its war in Gaza.

Wobbling Pillars

By 2025, 20% of Saudi oil was being sold in euros, not dollars, but Trump was offering more carrot than stick to keep the petrodollar going, for obvious reasons.

Meanwhile, however, the Saudis, for the equally obvious reasons listed above, were not blind to the USD’s weakening credibility, the UST’s weakening yields (compared to the 1970’s) and China’s strengthening desire to find a non-dollar energy solution.

Furthermore, anyone, including OPEC, who tracked oil prices throughout the decades, knew full well that oil priced in gold was infinitely more stable than oil priced in USD.

In short, the petrodollar pillar to USD hegemony was not broken, but it was certainly wobbling.

From Nervous to Violent

The U.S. was thus nervous.

Dollar-backed oil is essential to its paper currency’s survival, which is precisely why figures like Muammar Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein, who had each tried to sell their oil outside the dollar, did not, well… survive at all.

As Kissinger noted decades ago, commanding a world reserve currency equally requires the world’s strongest military. In short, monetary and military might went hand-in-hand to protect U.S. interests.

Thus, the recent military actions in Venezuela don’t require too much imagination to understand. Regardless of whether they were right or wrong, the actions against Nicolas Maduro were a classic reminder of oil’s importance to the U.S.

Which raises the obvious question: Can any major oil power ever leave the petrodollar without a fight?

Although China took only 4% of Venezuelan oil in Yuan purchases from the Belt & Road Initiative, 95% of Iran’s oil goes to China and is sold in Yuan, not dollars. Is it any coincidence that “regime change” in Iran is an almost daily headline?

Folks—it’s all about the oil…

Looking Ahead

The US, whose dollar share of global FX reserves has been sinking like a stone in the past two decades, is viscerally worried about a de-dollarizing world in which the BRICS in general, and China in particular, are developing gold-backed trading currencies and other systems (the BRICS “Unit”, M-Bridge membership, BRICS-Pay etc.) to trade resources in general, and oil in particular, outside the USD.

Again: This terrifies Washington DC.

Could 15 to 20 nations in the global south develop a new oil trade currency via a basket of weighted currencies outside the USD? Could the Saudis slowly look away from the petrodollar?

No one can predict the precise nature, policies, agreements or even wars of the future when it comes to oil and the dollar. We can only track past patterns and measure current cracks in the old system.

And Gold, Of Course…

What we are currently seeing in Venezuela may be desperate, but it’s no surprise.

US refineries are designed for the heavy crude which Venezuela holds. And within hours of meeting representatives from China, Maduro was coincidentally whisked away by DELTA forces before a larger arrangement could be met.

It’s also worth noting that billions worth of Venezuelan gold was frozen in their accounts at the Bank of England.

In short, this interplay of dollars, USTs, oil and gold is also no coincidence.

If the petrodollar weakens in any meaningful way, USTs, already seeing a dramatic decline in demand, would fall even further, meaning UST yields, and hence the cost of Uncle Sam’s massive debt burden, would become fatal rather than just embarrassing.

Such a scenario would compel the Fed to initiate extraordinary money-printing to support Uncle Sam’s unloved IOUs, thereby debasing its paper dollar even more and sending gold’s relative valuations considerably higher.

In addition to such monetary desperation, military desperation is an equally concerning possibility.

I, of course, do not know the future. No one does. We can only track patterns, motives, debt levels and hence debt-based desperations, in everything from stablecoins to foreign policy.

What we can all see and agree upon, however, is that things are clearly changing and shaking up as the chaos meter rings louder with each headline.

Gold, of course, loves chaos, and in a world of dying paper currencies, fracturing geopolitics, systemic monetary shifts and wars, or rumors of wars, gold’s secular direction today and tomorrow should be of no surprise to anyone paying attention.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/18/2026 – 12:50

Trump Wants $1BN Fee From States Seeking To Join Gaza Peace Board

0
Trump Wants $1BN Fee From States Seeking To Join Gaza Peace Board

According to a Saturday Bloomberg report, the Trump administration is asking nations interested in holding a permanent seat on a proposed Gaza Strip “Board of Peace” to pledge at least $1 billion in funding.

Bloomberg described that US allies and regional partners have already been briefed on the concept as part of wider diplomatic efforts to influence and direct Gaza’s future after the Israel-Hamas conflict.

via AFP

The intent of the funding threshold is reportedly to ensure that participating countries have substantial financial involvement in stabilizing the territory and supporting long-term redevelopment.

Washington seems to be arguing that spreading the financial burden internationally is critical to preventing American taxpayers from shouldering most of the reconstruction costs. Sadly, this was of no concern when the same taxpayers were footing the bill for billions in weaponry and foreign aid for Israel over prior years – even as Palestinian neighborhoods got flattened by US bombs.

Officials privy to internal deliberations told Bloomberg, “Several European nations have been invited to join the peace board. The draft appears to suggest Trump himself would control the money, something that would be considered unacceptable to most countries who could have potentially joined the board.”

The Times of Israel has obtained a copy of the text of the board’s charter, which says, “Each Member State shall serve a term of no more than three years from this Charter’s entry into force, subject to renewal by the Chairman (Trump).”

“The three-year membership term shall not apply to Member States that contribute more than USD $1,000,000,000 in cash funds to the Board of Peace within the first year of the Charter’s entry into force,” it added. 

As we detailed earlier, among the “founding executive board” members are US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, presidential special envoy Steve Witkoff, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

The board also includes private equity executive Marc Rowan, World Bank President Ajay Banga, and US national security adviser Robert Gabriel, according to a White House statement.

The board, to be chaired by Trump, will oversee the Palestinian technocratic committee-also known as the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG)-which will be led by former Palestinian Authority official Ali Abdel Hamid Shaath.

An anonymous official has sought to ensure to Bloomberg that almost every dollar raised will be “used to execute its mandate” – in reference to the Gaza board and rebuilding and stabilizing the strip. Given that so far Palestinian representation is a small minority, most Gazans will probably remain deeply distrustful of this US-backed and controlled board.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/18/2026 – 12:15

The Real Watches Of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro

0
The Real Watches Of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro

Authored by Watches of Espionage, 

Separating Fact from Fiction in Nicolás Maduro’s Watch Collection

On the morning of Saturday, 3 January 2026, the United States Military conducted an interagency mission to capture and arrest Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. While the long term implications are still unknown and “analysis” has fallen along partisan lines, Operation Absolute Resolve appears to be a masterclass on modern warfare and frankly an operation that only the United States Military and Intelligence Community could carry out.

The situation is still developing, however according to an in-depth brief by Chairman of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff, General “Razin” Caine, the operation was a highly coordinated effort involving more than 150 aircraft and some of the nation’s most elite units, including the U.S. Army’s elite Tier-1 special mission unit, officially 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment-Delta, the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (SOAR), aka the “Night Stalkers”, and US Cyber Command.

Arguably, the most interesting aspect of the operation was the involvement of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). According to press reporting, CIA deployed a small team into Venezuela as early as August 2025 to monitor Maduro’s “patterns of life.” In addition to that team, the agency reportedly used an asset placed close to Maduro himself, a human source inside or near his inner circle, who was able to track his location and provide real-time information during the operation. This asset, combined with SIGINT, ISR, and other intelligence collection, helped US SOF pinpoint Maduro’s exact whereabouts, enabling the raid’s timing and precision.

As always, watches are our prism for viewing the world and current events, so today we take a look at the watches of deposed Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

Rolex Accusations – A Case of Disinformation

Criticising a leader for their expensive habits is as old as time (no pun intended), and often these criticisms are legitimate. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s watch collection is estimated to be valued over $1 million dollars, which is hard to explain given the Kremlin’s claimed salary of $140k per year.

Over the past few years, Spanish-language social media accounts and news outlets have promoted a theory that Maduro owns expensive Rolex references, often citing an interview where Maduro reportedly covers up a “Rolex” with his sleeve when the interviewer notices the watch. The only problem is that the watch in question is actually a Citizen, with a retail value of approximately $250.

To be clear, we are not defending Maduro, who was objectively a dictator. He dismantled democratic institutions, manipulated elections, and stayed in power through repression despite losing public support. Independent observers say he lost the July 2024 election, yet the regime declared him the winner without transparent results or audits, then responded to protests with arrests and violence.

That said, we should be honest and criticize him for his real faults, not fabricate additional shortcomings for social media. Whether this was an honest mistake, a coordinated disinformation campaign by the opposition, or an intelligence service is open for debate.

In reality, Maduro’s watch collection is diverse, intriguing, and even surprising. Some of his watches are, whether or not they carry the emotional weight of a brand name like Rolex, objectively expensive, while others would qualify as cheap to most.

Citizen Eco-Drive CA0131-55L

The watch Maduro wore the most publicly while in power was a humble chronograph from Citizen, a Japanese brand best known to the W.O.E. community for its Aqualand collection of dive watches. Former President Maduro’s Citizen appears to be the seldom-seen CA0131-55L, a 44mm titanium quartz chronograph equipped with Citizen’s Eco-Drive solar charging technology. Given that this reference has been discontinued for some time, it’s difficult to establish an exact retail price, but it likely would have cost no more than $250 to 300.

What made Maduro reach for this watch over the many more opulent options available to the president of an oil-rich country is anyone’s guess, but it would be fair to assume that optics played a role. Wearing an inexpensive Citizen sends a modest, everyman message to constituents and the broader world, one that quickly falls apart when a world leader straps on a watch from the heights of Swiss luxury.

Hublot Big Bang King Power Maradona

In 2024, during the summit of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA), Maduro displayed another watch, which some have falsely reported as a Royal Oak Offshore. The watch, a Hublot Big Bang King Power Maradona, was released in 2012 and allegedly given to Maduro in 2018 at a campaign event in Caracas. Upon giving Maduro the watch, Maradona told him, “When you use it, remember that I will always be with you.”

Before his death in 2020, Maradona was an outspoken proponent of Maduro’s politics, earning fines for dedicating victories to the Venezuelan President while coaching professional soccer in Mexico. With a retail price of around $40,000 at the time, the 48mm rose gold chronograph calls into question the ethics of giving and receiving gifts while in political office, while also presenting issues concerning Maduro’s perception among Venezuelans and the rest of the world. Surprisingly, the $40k watch isn’t the most expensive timepiece Maduro has publicly worn.

Hublot Classic Fusion Tourbillon Cruz-Diez

While it’s unclear whether he actually owned the watch, Maduro was also photographed wearing yet another Hublot in December 2024: the Hublot Classic Fusion Cruz-Diez Platinum Tourbillon. The watch was revealed in 2015 and is either a pièce unique or part of an extremely limited run created by Hublot in collaboration with Carlos Cruz-Diez, a celebrated Venezuelan artist known for modernist, avant-garde works. Executed in a 45mm platinum case and equipped with a tourbillon at six o’clock, a similar example of the watch is currently available from a US-based dealer for $85,000.

Admittedly, only a few photos show Maduro wearing the Hublot, meaning it was perhaps loaned to him or, if he owns it, he had the sense not to wear it excessively for fear of perception-related challenges and media scrutiny.

Chopard & Bovet

Perhaps more damning than anything previously listed here are a pair of watches representing the heights of Swiss artisanal watchmaking. First is a watch from Chopard’s L.U.C. collection, which is where the brand showcases its métiers d’art in hand-crafted watches, many of which feature hand-engraving, painting, or enameling, in addition to manufacture calibers.

In November 2024, Maduro wore what appears to be a Chopard L.U.C. Urushi Year of the Dragon watch with a dial decorated in Japan with Urushi lacquer, gold powder, and mother-of-pearl inlays. There are a bunch of different variations, and it’s difficult to say which Maduro has. In any case, priced over $30,000, Maduro’s Chopard elicits further questions about the Venezuelan President’s horological habits and high-end taste.

The last known piece of Maduro’s collection is a bit of a mystery, but it is most likely a pièce unique from Bovet, possibly based on the Amadeo Fleurier 43, with a custom dial. Like Chopard, Bovet 1822 is known for delicate hand crafts, intricate dials, and enameling, with Maduro’s watch showcasing an enameled dial in addition to Bovet’s signature lug architecture.

Comparables are scarce, but it would be fair to assume a watch like this came with a price point in the hundreds of thousands of US dollars, making it potentially the most expensive, but also the least identifiable piece in his collection.

What Happened to the Watches?

According to press reports, Maduro was captured in a safe house in Fuerte Tiuna, Venezuela’s largest military complex. In the first confirmed pictures post-arrest, he is seen wearing a Nike sweatsuit, a watch notably absent.  While speculation, this grey suit was likely provided by the Delta operators who likely would have stripped him of all belongings while on target, to mitigate concealed beacons or explosives. This would likely include the watch on his wrist.

During the Global War on Terror, all personal items and communications would be bagged and brought back to a central location for intelligence processing, a process called Sensitive Site Exploitation (SSE). It is safe to assume at least some of the belongings were retrieved and likely documented by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), including a Huawei phone given to him by China’s Xi Jinping in September 2025 when he claimed, “Huawei, the best phone in the world, the Huawei, and the Americans can’t hack it, neither their spy planes, nor their satellites.” A comment that did not age well.

So in short, the watches are likely still in Venezuela, although I wouldn’t be surprised if at least one is on display in a team room in North Carolina…

Final Thoughts

Watches rarely tell the whole story, but they often reveal more than their wearers intend. In Maduro’s case, the duality between a carefully cultivated image of modesty and the reality of repeatedly wearing six-figure Swiss complications mirrors the broader contradictions of his rule. The Citizen on the wrist played well for the cameras. The Hublots, Chopard, and a possible Bovet told a different story to anyone paying attention. As with most authoritarian regimes, optics mattered until they didn’t, and eventually, reality caught up.

At W.O.E., this exercise was never about defending a dictator or piling on with lazy internet outrage. It was about accuracy, context, and using watches as a lens to better understand current events and national security.

Watches are tools, symbols, and sometimes props. In this case, they were all three. Whatever ultimately happens to Maduro’s collection, the takeaway is clear. Use objective analysis to criticize leaders for what they actually do, not what social media wants you to believe.

* * *

If you enjoyed this article, please consider signing up for our weekly free newsletter for further updates HERE.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/18/2026 – 11:40

Trump In First Suggests Iran Regime Change: ‘Time To Look For New Leadership’

0
Trump In First Suggests Iran Regime Change: ‘Time To Look For New Leadership’

The deadly unrest and protests in Iran have largely gone quiet, but White House pressure on Tehran has not. President Trump over the weekend for the first time in the two-week crisis called for the end of the Iranian Supreme Leader’s rule. His words came in an interview with Politico

President Donald Trump on Saturday called for an end to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s 37-year reign.

“It’s time to look for new leadership in Iran,” Trump told POLITICO, as widespread protests calling for an end to the regime appear to have waned.

via Barron’s

“The man is a sick man who should run his country properly and stop killing people,” Trump said. “His country is the worst place to live anywhere in the world because of poor leadership.”

Days prior into last week, it became clear that Trump would hold off striking Iran. He described that the killing had stopped, and that Iranian leaders agreed to not execute any protesters.

Recent reporting in major US news sources also indicated that the Pentagon could not assure success in taking out top leadership if strikes on Tehran were authorized. This figured strongly into Trump’s holding off.

Referencing Ayatollah Khamenei, Trump told Politico further, “The best decision he ever made was not hanging more than 800 people two days ago.”

It’s unclear where this 800 figure comes from, as there’s an absence to any such reference from Iranian officials or state media. Typically when the Islamic Republic executes someone, it is highly publicized by state sources as a stern message and warning to the public or other potential criminals.

Khamenei himself isn’t backing down, and is also engaging in accusatory rhetoric aimed at Trump. After linking US and Israeli intelligence to the protests in which “thousands” were killed (Iran has made clear that among these were many police and security forces), the top Shia cleric has said as follows:

We find the US President guilty due to the casualties, damages and slander he inflicted upon the Iranian nation,” Khamenei wrote.

But probably Khamenei is holding back his rhetoric to some degree, not wishing to provoke Trump into attacking Iran at a delicate moment, also when the economy and currency are in a tailspin. Trump responded:

Trump, after being read the posts, said Tehran’s rulers rely on repression and violence to govern. “What he is guilty of, as the leader of a country, is the complete destruction of the country and the use of violence at levels never seen before,” Trump said. “In order to keep the country functioning — even though that function is a very low level — the leadership should focus on running his country properly, like I do with the United States, and not killing people by the thousands in order to keep control.”

There are fresh reports Sunday that internet access is slowly coming back to Iran, after the say prior SMS messaging was restored – though it’s expected that authorities will continue to keep a ban on certain US and Western-based apps and communications platforms. 

While Trump has refrained from attacking Iran, US military assets are said to be en route to the Middle East and CENTCOM area of responsibility. The bulk of the US Navy’s strike group has been in the Caribbean, after the Jan.3rd operation to oust Maduro.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/18/2026 – 11:05

Rotation Continues As Markets Remain Bullish

0
Rotation Continues As Markets Remain Bullish

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

Sector rotation is this weekend’s 2026 Investment Summit. I am presenting at the conference as you are reading this. However, I would be remiss not to share a brief market update as we head into next week. The full newsletter will return next week.

That said, U.S. equity markets delivered mixed performance last week. Major indices generally held near record levels even as volatility increased and macro and policy risks surfaced. Notably, breadth has expanded as the rotation from technology to other sectors continued. Such was particularly notable in materials, industrials, and transportation. We noted on January 8th that a rotation into defensive areas was likely. Since then, staples and energy have significantly outperformed.

Notably, that sector rotation has pushed the equal-weighted index to new all-time highs. That surge continues to close the performance gap with the market-cap-weighted index as technology has lagged. However, technology, financials, and communications are now becoming more oversold. Such sets up a potential counter rotation as we move into the heart of earnings season starting this coming week.

Despite geopolitical concerns, questions about the Federal Reserve’s independence, and policy uncertainty, the US Dollar remained firm, trading near equilibrium since 1976. Furthermore, the dollar remains in a strong bullish uptrend from its 2008 lows, underscoring that narratives of dollar debasement and dedollarization remain false.

The falseness of those narratives is underscored by the rising and record levels of US Treasury bond purchases by foreigners. (If they were de-dollarizing or were worried about debasement, they would not be buying Treasuries, which are dollar-denominated.)

As the week progressed, economic data and corporate earnings began to exert greater influence on market direction. Retail, consumer, and producer price data alongside early labor market indicators painted a picture of a still‑stable economy with signs of cooling momentum. Markets interpreted this data as supportive of sustained growth with a cautiously optimistic Fed posture.

The big news, of course, is that the Q4 earnings season commenced with significant implications for sector leadership. Financial sectors took center stage as mixed bank results from major lenders such as Wells Fargo, JPMorgan, and Goldman Sachs led to sector underperformance midweek, while robust forecasts and expansion plans from Taiwanese semiconductor giant TSMC sparked a rally in chip stocks. Nvidia, Broadcom, Micron, and chip‑equipment suppliers outperformed substantially on Thursday, lifting broader market sentiment and contributing to a two‑day recovery from earlier declines. As noted above, mid‑cap and small‑cap stocks also outperformed, suggesting expanding market breadth beyond mega‑cap technology names.

The importance of sector rotation and fund flows should not be overlooked. According to Lipper data, U.S. equity funds experienced the largest weekly inflows in over three months, with large‑cap exposure leading and tech, industrials, and consumer staples attracting notable capital. Bond funds also saw strong inflows, indicating a balanced approach to risk assets amid mixed signals on growth and inflation. Money market fund outflows reflected renewed risk appetite despite policy noise.

Next week, earnings will take center stage as the primary market drivers. Therefore, let’s review the technical backdrop for near-term support and resistance levels.

📈Technical Backdrop – Bulls Remain In Control

With the S&P 500 closing at 6940 on Friday, the technical conditions reveal a market in a controlled but consolidative state as key milestones approach. The index maintained its uptrend established late last year and into early January, signaling continued bullish momentum as higher highs and higher lows remain intact. This trend is supported by the S&P 500’s recent successful test of the 20-day moving average, with breadth indicators such as advancing stocks and total market participation expanding beyond just mega-cap technology names.

Price action through the week saw the S&P 500 navigate around near‑record levels while consolidating within a tight range just below the psychologically significant 7000 level, which acts as immediate resistance. Both the technical selling and options market dynamics ahead of earnings could just be prepositioning against potential disappointment risk. However, if earnings are better than feared, this could lead to a rather explosive move higher if the rising wedge pattern resolves bullishly. Short‑term momentum indicators on the daily chart suggest neutral to slightly bullish conditions, with the trend slowing but without reversing. The market’s current structure shows typical consolidation behavior after a strong advance, often preceding a continuation rather than an abrupt reversal when broader breadth remains supportive.

On the downside, the index remains supported by key levels that traders and investors should monitor. These include the prior breakout zones and the 50‑day moving average, which has acted as a dynamic support floor through recent pullbacks. A decisive break below these supports could signal a loss of short‑term trend conviction, though weekend risk events, such as geopolitical developments or policy news, could still influence price action once markets reopen after the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday.

From a volatility perspective, U.S. equity volatility metrics remain subdued, although volatility has risen mildly. We could see a further pickup in volatility with earnings season and macroeconomic data releases, which are known to act as catalysts for directional breaks.

🔑 Key Catalysts Next Week

Market activity in the week ahead will be defined by a holiday‑shortened start, a slate of major economic releases, and a broad set of corporate earnings from S&P 500 names and key sectors. Monday, January 19, markets will be closed in observance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day, resulting in light trading and reduced volume once markets reopen on Tuesday. After an active first full week of earnings and macro data, investors will turn next to fresh corporate reports and several high‑impact economic releases, including advance GDP, jobless claims, and core inflation proxies. Given recent market resilience amid mixed macro signals, these catalysts will affect sentiment and positioning as Q4 earnings continue and markets digest inflation trends and labor market dynamics.

The schedule below highlights major U.S. economic releases alongside notable S&P 500 and large‑market company earnings that could move markets.

*  *  *

In sum, the S&P 500’s technical profile remains constructive but range‑bound near resistance. Support levels are holding for now, and trend measures remain bullish above the key breakout levels.

KEY TECHNICAL LEVELS – S&P 500 Index (SPX)

The next directional move will likely hinge on the market’s ability to clear resistance above 7000 or to test deeper support levels that define the current trend structure.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/18/2026 – 10:30

Ahead Of Mass Adoption Cycle: A Full Supply-Chain Breakdown Of Smart Glasses

0
Ahead Of Mass Adoption Cycle: A Full Supply-Chain Breakdown Of Smart Glasses

Smart glasses took center stage at CES 2026 in Las Vegas last week, highlighting a new generation of AI-enabled eyewear integrated with real-time assistants.

In Meta’s case, the push is clearly toward affordability and mass adoption, positioning these glasses as everyday consumer electronics rather than super expensive niche hardware for elites.

A lesson for smart glasses manufacturers is not to repeat Apple’s misstep with the prohibitively priced Vision Pro, which crushed any chance of widespread adoption and eventually led to the exodus of developers.

Before affordable smart glasses hit the consumer market this year and next, Goldman analyst Jerry Shen published a clear, straightforward view of the AI and AR glasses supply chain, breaking it down by the companies that supply the critical components behind these devices.

We suspect demand will accelerate this year after a Bloomberg report earlier this week revealed that Meta has asked its smart-glasses manufacturing partner, EssilorLuxottica, to double production capacity for AI-powered smart glasses by year-end.

Tyler Durden
Sun, 01/18/2026 – 09:55