Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has filled in a little bit more of the details in the wake of a Financial Times report issued Tuesday which said President Putin is offering to freeze the current battle lines for the sake of a peace deal.

The significant concession came as a surprise to many, who asked what’s the catch. Peskov in Wednesday comments filled in the missing information, stressing that peace can be achieved if Ukrainian forces fully withdraw from territory in the four oblasts Moscow annexed in 2022.

Financial Times wrote that “The proposal is the first formal indication Putin has given since the war’s early months three years ago that Russia could step back from its maximalist demands to end the invasion.”

Peskov in the fresh statement emphasized that Russia’s claim to the territories of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia remain enshrined in its constitution.

He was asked directly whether a Ukrainian withdrawal would end the war, to which he responded, “If Ukraine withdraws its troops from these four regions, then yes.”

“According to the results of the referendums, these territories have entered the administrative borders of Russia. From our point of view, this is a de jure and de facto situation,” Peskov said.

But so far Zelensky hasn’t even been willing to cede Crimea, despite the Russian-speaking population of the strategic peninsula long being firmly in Russian hands, also with its naval Black Sea fleet being stationed there since Soviet Times and throughout recent history.

President Trump said Wednesday that Ukraine “lost” Crimea years ago, and so it is “not even a point of discussion”. But Washington’s demands that Ukraine finally compromise on the issue has been rejected by Zelensky.

Peskov commented on this too, expressing total agreement with Trump. “This completely corresponds with our understanding, which we have been saying for a long time,” he said.

If the Ukrainian government did finally accede to Russia’s demands, it would lose 20% of its total territory, given this is about how much Russian forces currently occupy.

The US is also said to currently be offering Ukrainian neutrality vis-a-vis NATO, alongside international recognition of Crimea as Russian territory. But talks have still not gotten off the ground, and the Trump admin is ramping up the pressure on Zelensky especially.

Authored by Matt Margolis via PJMedia.com,

Can you believe it? The Democrats, once the supposed champions of the working class, have exposed themselves as nothing more than elitist snobs who couldn’t care less about real Americans. Recent polling has confirmed what conservatives have known all along: the Democratic Party is now the domain of overeducated, snobby, wealthy liberals who look down on anyone who doesn’t share their “enlightened” worldview.

Remember when Democrats at least pretended to care about the working class? Those days are long gone, replaced by a woke agenda that caters to the most unhinged elements of society. Now, they’re more interested in slobbering over MS-13 gangbangers than addressing the real concerns of everyday Americans.

Democratic strategist Doug Sosnik didn’t sugarcoat the situation during a conversation with Mark Halperin on 2WAY. The latest poll numbers, he explained, confirm what many on the Left have feared for months: the Democratic Party is in serious trouble. In a blunt, unflinching analysis, Sosnik laid out a series of hard truths that paint a grim picture of the party’s standing with American voters and underscore just how deep the erosion has become.

First, Sosnik pointed to the seismic shift in party affiliation. 

“The electorate in 2024 was 6% less Democratic than compared to four years ago,” Halperin noted, asking if that level of movement was historically significant. Sosnik didn’t mince words: “The shift is significant, but more importantly… I can’t remember the last time that people who voted on Election Day — the majority, uh, plurality of them — were Democrats.” He continued, “It shows a real erosion for the Democratic Party,” noting that many of the Democrats who backed Biden in 2020 simply didn’t show up this time around.

That drop-off was made even more glaring when coupled with the latest favorability ratings.

“Lowest net favorable rating since the ’90s,” Halperin remarked, prompting Sosnik to outline a trifecta of disasters driving the collapse in support: inflation, immigration, and cultural arrogance.

On the economic front, Sosnik admitted, “We had the worst inflation in America since the early 1980s.” 

He added that by the time Election Day arrived, “everything… was on average 20% higher than when Biden took office.” That kind of economic pain, Sosnik argued, doesn’t just dent a party; it shatters its credibility.

But the damage didn’t stop there. 

Immigration, Sosnik said, became both a practical problem and a symbol.

“There’s a concern that people, uh, for their own personal… safety and security… the immigration issue was sort of both a real problem for Democrats, but also… a proxy for just a general sense that there was a lawlessness with a Democratic administration.” That perception of disorder extended into the cities, where “these big cities around America that were largely… governed by Democrats” seemed unable — or unwilling — to maintain control.”

Then came the cultural disconnect, the sense that Democrats had abandoned everyday Americans in favor of elite ideologies.

“A lot of people in America in the middle of the country thought Democrats were looking down on them,” Sosnik said bluntly. He attributed part of that disconnect to “how they talked, issues they cared about, all the DEI programs.” The result? A broadening sense among voters that Democrats “weren’t competent to govern.”

New polling data shows that Democrats have the lowest net favorability ratings since the 1990s. Concerns about inflation, public safety and immigration during the Biden Administration were major reasons, says Democratic strategist Doug Sosnik. But another factor is “a sense that… pic.twitter.com/O22GAfOccd

— 2WAY (@2waytvapp) April 23, 2025

Taken together, the conversation was less a diagnosis than an autopsy. The Democrats aren’t just facing a messaging problem; they’re grappling with a wholesale rejection from swaths of the electorate they once considered safe. The warnings have been mounting for years. Now, with favorability cratering and voters fleeing, the party is watching those warnings come to life.

It’s rare for PepsiCo to miss Bloomberg Consensus earnings estimates. Still, the soda and snack giant has stumbled amid growing uncertainty surrounding the trade war and waning consumer sentiment—factors that ultimately prompted the company to lower its full-year earnings outlook.

The maker of Pepsi beverages and Frito-Lay snacks missed the consensus estimate, with Barclays analyst Lauren Lieberman calling the miss “exceedingly rare to see PEP results fall short of consensus expectations and while the miss was just 1c, we think it exemplifies just how challenging things are at the company today given in the past decade​-​plus, there’s always been a way to deliver the bottom line.” 

Here’s a snapshot of Pepsi’s 1Q25 earnings:

• Core EPS: $1.48 (vs. $1.61 YoY), slightly below Bloomberg Consensus expectations of $1.49

• Reported EPS: $1.33 (vs. $1.48 YoY), missed the estimate of $1.48

• Operating Profit: $2.58B, down 4.9% YoY, missed $2.78B estimate

• Revenue: $17.92B, down 1.8% YoY, beat $17.77B estimate

• Organic Revenue Growth: +1.2% (vs. +2.7% YoY), above +0.53% estimate

• Capex: $603M, below $657M estimate

• Convenient Foods Volume: -3%

Regional Breakdown:

• Foods North America: $6.21B

• Latin America Foods: $1.66B

• EMEA: $2.39B

• International Beverages: $759M

• PepsiCo Beverages North America: $5.88B (vs. $5.87B YoY, beat $5.83B estimate)

“As we look ahead, we expect more volatility and uncertainty, particularly related to global trade developments,” CEO Ramon Laguarta stated. 

The common theme among US companies has been a reduction in or complete withdrawal of guidance (see AA) due to tariff uncertainty. Pepsi slashed its EPS outlook for the year due to mounting macroeconomic headwinds but maintained its organic revenue growth forecast and shareholder return targets.

Here’s more color on the changing outlook:

• Core EPS: Now expected to decline 3% YoY (previously expected a low-single-digit increase)

• Core EPS (constant currency): Now flat YoY (previously expected mid-single-digit growth)

• Organic Revenue: Still expects a low-single-digit increase

• Tax Rate: Core annual effective tax rate expected at ~20%

• Shareholder Returns: Still targeting ~$8.6 billion in total cash returns for the year

Goldman analysts Bonnie Herzog and Ethan Huntley, along with others, provided clients with their initial summary of the mixed earnings report, indicating a “Q1 topline beat but a slight EPS miss – FY25 EPS guide lowered given tariffs & macro pressures.” 

Here’s more color on their take:

Investor expectations heading into PEP’s Q1 print were quite low, dragged largely by ongoing concerns over the health of the consumer which have pressured consumption trends – as seen in recent scanner data trends, particularly for FLNA. And as expected, PEP’s Q1 results were soft with +1.2% organic revenue growth (vs our/cons ests of +0.9%/+0.6%), though the planned timing and phasing of certain productivity initiatives weighed on core operating margins – leading to a slight EPS miss at $1.48 (vs our/FactSet cons ests of $1.50/$1.49). Further, given expected higher supply chain costs related to tariffs, elevated macroeconomic volatility, and a subdued consumer backdrop, PEP lowered its FY25 f/x neutral EPS growth to ~flat y/y (vs +MSD growth prior) but maintained its organic sales guidance of +LSD% (vs our/Visible Alpha cons ests of +2.5%/+2.3% ahead of the print). Surprisingly given the weaker dollar, PEP continues to expect a ~3pt headwind from f/x to impact reported net revenue and EPS growth and therefore expects core EPS growth of -~3% implying FY25 EPS of ~$7.92 (vs $8.16 last year, and vs our/FactSet cons est of $8.29/$8.26 into the print). Furthermore, PEP restated its financial segments this morning making it difficult to analyze their new segmented results vs expectations. However, PEP’s PBNA segment delivered 1% organic sales (vs our/cons ests of +0.5%/-0.1%) and 14% operating profit growth and PEP’s new PepsiCo Foods North America (PFNA, comprised of the former FLNA and QFNA) delivered -2% organic sales and -7% f/x neutral operating profit growth. While optically concerning, we think today’s results could serve as a clearing event – helping to reset investor expectations at a much more realistic level. However, we expect the stock to underperform today.

Taking a step back, Q1 organic sales growth was up +1.2% (vs our/cons ests of +0.9%/+0.6%) – despite the benefits of an easier y/y compare (1Q24 organic sales growth of +2.7%, with vols -2%) – driven by healthy price/mix and relative strength internationally. As expected, the top-line growth continued to be driven by net price realization (+3% vs our +1.8% est), reflecting mgmt’s continued efforts to offset inflationary cost pressures with strong revenue management actions. That said, organic volumes were under pressure, as expected, down -2% (vs our/cons ests of -0.9%/-1.5%) – and were sequentially weaker than Q4 (-1%).

By segment, PEP’s PBNA segment delivered 1% organic sales (vs our/cons ests of +0.5%/-0.1%), with price mix of +2% and volumes down -1%. PFNA organic topline growth was down -2%, with price mix of +1% and volumes down -3%. Internationally, PEP’s new International Beverages Franchise (IB Franchise) organic topline growth was up +7%, with healthy +5% volume growth and price mix of +2%. EMEA organic topline growth was up a solid +8%, driven by price mix of +16% with volumes -8%. Elsewhere, Latin America Foods (LatAm Foods) organic topline growth was up +3%, driven by price mix of +3% with volumes down -0.5%. Lastly, Asia Pacific Foods organic topline growth was down -1%, driven by healthy volumes of +3.5%, albeit offset by price mix (-4%). Moving down the line, gross margins were broadly flat y/y at 55.7% (vs our/cons ests of 55.8%/55.5%), while Op margins were down ~50bps y/y to 15.6% (vs our/cons ests of 15.7%/15.8%), as SG&A expenses as a % of sales were up ~60bps y/y to 40.1%. As a result, PEP delivered Q1 core f/x neutral EPS growth that was down -4% to $1.48 (vs our/cons ests of $1.50/$1.49).

Bottom Line – We maintain our Buy rating on PEP as we believe it remains well positioned given its strong brand portfolio (esp. Frito Lay) and long-term growth opportunities in Beverages, particularly given its impressive revenue growth management capabilities, its owned distribution network and superior supply chain, which ensures the right (& affordable) products are available when & where needed. Overall, we continue to believe PEP should be able to deliver sustainable average annual +MSD% organic sales growth in the next decade – despite some potential near-term headwinds.

Here’s more commentary from other Wall Street desks (courtesy of Bloomberg):

Barclays (equal-weight), Lauren Lieberman

• “It is exceedingly rare to see PEP results fall short of consensus expectations and while the miss was just 1c, we think it exemplifies just how challenging things are at the company today given in the past decade​-​plus, there’s always been a way to deliver the bottom line,” Lieberman writes

• PEP’s reduced annual EPS guidance reflects higher supply chain costs (tariffs); in prepared remarks, PEP also discussed upping commercial investments

• PEP mentioned two new areas of focus for cost savings within the new Pepsi Foods North America division: “optimizing and right​-​sizing” the supply chain and the “go​-​to​-​market footprint”; increasing efficiencies in transportation & logistics

• Both of these are “critical points” given its outsized investment in Frito over the past five years, which has generated a “disappointing ROI,” according to Lieberman

JPMorgan (neutral), Andrea Teixeira

• Expects negative stock reaction to the “sizeable net tariff impact” and macro/consumption volatility

• It’s the first time PEP misses EPS estimates in “many years”

• Core EPS guidance lowered by a “very high magnitude” despite the company’s plan to take mitigating actions

• North America savory snacks volumes were down 4% in 1Q, worse than Teixeira’s -3.5% estimate, and will likely “remain the key concern for investors as far as calling for a potential inflection given the several headwinds (low-income consumer under pressure, GLP-1, etc)”

Bloomberg Intelligence, Kenneth Shea

• Higher-than-expected supply-chain costs related to global trade volatility were the “key factor” to 8% drop in 1Q adjusted EPS

• Shea blames the “lingering weakness” in the PepsiCo Foods North America segment as the main reason for the EPS guidance cut

Piper Sandler (overweight), Michael Lavery

• NA Food segment remains challenged, while organic revenue growth in international business continues to be healthy, growing 5% in the quarter, driven by beverages

• Lavery said she expects to hear more about productivity savings progress and promotional outlook for the salty snack category on the company’s earnings call

• Also hopes to better understand what tariff assumptions are included in PEP’s updated guidance

Additional headlines from the Pepsi CEO:

• PEPSI CEO: WORKING ON ‘RIGHT-SIZING’ COST OF FRITO LAY PRODUCTS

• PEPSI CEO: CONSUMERS IN CHINA, MEXICO ‘HURTING A BIT’

• PEPSI CEO ON DYE BANS: SHIFTING ENTIRE PORTFOLIO NATURAL COLORS

• PEPSI CEO: TRANSITION TO NATURAL COLORS IN NEXT FEW YEARS

• PEPSI CEO: EXPECTING LIMITED IMPACT IN US SNAP PROGRAM CHANGES

• PEPSI CEO: DEVELOPING PROTEIN PRODUCTS, KEY FOR GLP-1 USERS

Proteins for GLP-1 users??

Following an unexpectedly large jump in February (biggest in a year), existing home sales were expected to drop significantly in March, and they did. Existing home sales fell 5.9% MoM (considerably worse than the 3.1% MoM drop expected) reversing the upwardly revised 4.4% MoM rise in February, dragging sales down 2.4% YoY…

Source: Bloomberg

This is the weakest March sales pace since 2009… and biggest MoM drop since Nov 2022.

Source: Bloomberg

The drop in sales aligns perfectly with the lagged rebound in mortgage rates, which suggests the next two months will see an improvement before weakness resumes…

Source: Bloomberg

The median sales price increased 2.7% from a year ago to $403,700, a record for the month of March and extending a run of year-over-year price gains dating back to mid-2023.

Source: Bloomberg

Interestingly, new and existing (median) home prices are once again identical…

Source: Bloomberg

The gain in prices largely reflected more sales activity for homes priced above $1 million, NAR Chief Economist Lawrence Yun said on a call with reporters. However, he also noted that the size of the increase was relatively mild compared to wage growth.

Prices are rising even as more inventory comes onto the market from depressed levels. The supply of previously owned homes jumped 19.8% from a year ago to 1.33 million, the most for any March since 2020.

Sales declined in all four regions from the prior month, with the biggest drops occurring in the West and South.

Sales of existing single-family homes retreated 6.4%, while sales of existing condominiums were unchanged.

Properties remained on the market for 36 days on average last month, compared with 42 days in February

Finally, while home prices are at record highs, on a ‘real’ inflation adjusted basis (relative to gold, we mean), they are at 12 year lows…

If you had 129 ounces of gold right now, would you swap them for a ‘used’ house?

The United States would deplete its munitions stockpile if it entered into genetic warfare against a global superpower, Anduril co-founder Trae Stephens warns.

Stephens, who co-founded of the cutting-edge defense startup alongside Palmer Luckey, dropped the chilling warning on Auren Hoffman’s World of DaaS podcast.

“The reality is, if we got into a hot conflict with a great power, we would run out of munitions in a week,” Stephens told Hoffman. “We’ve built these capabilities that are incredibly exquisite, incredibly custom, with really complicated supply chains.”

Anduril co-founder @traestephens to @auren: “If the U.S. got into a hot conflict with a great power, we would run out of munitions in a week.”

“You see situations like Ukraine where we deplete not only available inventory, we also deplete our own inventory.” pic.twitter.com/DD3mz7H04j

— Josh Caplan (@joshdcaplan) April 22, 2025

Stephens, who is also a partner at Peter Thiel’s venture capital fund Founders Fund, pointed out that the U.S. is struggling to supply Saudi Arabia with enough Patriot missiles to counter daily Houthi attacks, leaving the the Middle East Kingdom to seek out additional inventories from other nations due to limited availability.

• FLASHBACK: Raytheon CEO Explains Why China Has US Military By The Balls

“What that means is, our partner nations, like Saudi Arabia, for example, which is fighting this ongoing conflict with the Houthis—they’ve got stuff being shot into their sovereign territory, creating havoc on a daily basis,” Stephens explained. “We cannot sell them enough Patriot missiles. They literally have to go to other partner nations and try to buy their inventory of Patriot missiles”

Stephens also highlighted that in cases like Ukraine, the U.S. is rapidly depleting both its own and available inventories of military capabilities to support the war effort, with limited resupply options, as manufacturers resort to calling retirees back to rebuild assembly lines.

“Then you see situations like Ukraine, where we deplete not only the available inventory but also our own inventory of the capabilities we’re sending to support the war effort, with no ability to actually resupply,” the technology executive said. “The Primes are literally calling people out of retirement to rebuild assembly lines to make some of these capabilities.”

The AP reported back in November 2024:

The wars in Ukraine and the Middle East are eating away at critical U.S. weapons stockpiles and could hamper the military’s ability to respond to China should a conflict arise in the Indo-Pacific, the top U.S. commander for that region said Tuesday. Head of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command Adm. Samuel Paparo cautioned Tuesday that the U.S. providing or selling billions of dollars worth of air defenses to both Ukraine and Israel is now impeding his ability to respond in the Indo-Pacific, such as if China invades Taiwan.

“It’s now eating into stocks, and to say otherwise would be dishonest,” Paparo told the Brookings Institution last year.

Stephens’ stark warning echoes a recent interview with Luckey, who stressed that rebuilding the U.S. manufacturing base is not only feasible but critical to counter rising global volatility.

“If we can’t make the things that we need to maintain our quality of life, then we are actually just subservient to our adversaries,” Luckey, who leads Anduril as CEO, told legendary music producer Rick Rubin on his Tetragrammaton podcast. 

.@PalmerLuckey supports tariffs on China, affirming that reindustrialization is both “absolutely” possible and necessary.

“If we can’t make the things that we need to maintain our quality of life, then we are actually subservient to our adversaries.” pic.twitter.com/x4LwS5T8t1

— Josh Caplan (@joshdcaplan) April 18, 2025

“Is there a possibility that over time America could get back its manufacturing base? Absolutely,” Luckey told Rubin. “The problem that we did, I mean there’s a million problems, but what we did is hollowed out our country by allowing China into the World Trade Organization and allowing American companies to outsource manufacturing to China without penalty, without import tariffs, without any reason to not do it.”

 “Why wouldn’t you, if you’re allowed to just send it to another country where everything’s cheap, where it’s dirt cheap and there’s no environmental regulations and no labor laws, why wouldn’t you do that? And we’ve been able to get a bunch of cheap shit over the last 50 years as a result,” the startup billionaire added. “That has helped the United States. Everyone’s able to buy cheap TVs and cheap cars and cheap stuff because of China’s rise. The flip side of that is that there’s no more manufacturing in the United States.”

Check out this ReadyWise go-bag… 25-year shelf life…

U.S. families with young gamers can breathe a sigh of relief this week as Goldman analysts told clients that the upcoming Nintendo Switch 2 won’t see price hikes due to the ongoing trade war.

Nintendo’s hotly anticipated Switch 2 is now available for pre-orders at major U.S. retailers as of early Thursday morning. 

According to the tech blog Tom’s Guide, demand for the new console is so intense that major retailers’ websites are crashing, with “sold out” notifications appearing across some platforms operated by Walmart, Target, and Best Buy.

Nintendo Switch 2 will retail for $449, with the Mario Kart World bundle costing $499.

The good news for U.S. families who are avoiding tariff landmines as President Trump tries to negotiate an ‘America First’ trade deal with the Communist Chinese is that Goldman gaming analysts Minami Munakata and Haruki Kubota said console prices will remain at pre-trade war levels.

Here’s more color on this from Munakata:

On April 18 (U.S. time), Nintendo announced that pre-orders for the Nintendo Switch 2 will begin in the U.S. on April 24. The company had originally planned to begin pre-orders on April 9 but announced on April 5 (U.S. time) that it was postponing the start of pre-orders following the Trump administration’s announcement of new tariff policies.

The console price will be US$449.99, as originally announced. However, prices for peripherals, such as controllers and cameras, have been raised by around 5%-10% from the initially announced prices, and the company said that further price revisions are possible depending on changes in the market environment.

Munakata explained to clients Nintendo’s move to keep console prices at pre-trade war prices “makes sense in view of potential medium- to long-term impact on software sales.” 

She continued:

We believe the decision to keep the console price unchanged reduces the need for concern about the impact on unit sales forecasts. Growth in the installed base for game hardware is essential for sales of game software, which accounts for the majority of Nintendo’s profits. While US-bound hardware, which we assume will be shipped from Vietnam, will likely face a cost increase due to the 10% universal tariff (reciprocal tariff is paused), we view Nintendo’s decision to prioritize a smooth launch for the Nintendo Switch 2 by keeping the console price unchanged in the U.S. (one of its most important markets) as a reasonable one, given the focus on long-term growth of the Nintendo Switch 2 platform.

Separately, an overnight report from Bloomberg stated that the demand for Switch 2 in Japan has been “overwhelming.”

Nintendo President Shuntaro Furukawa wrote on X:

“We have received 2.2 million applications for the lottery sale at our official online store for customers in Japan alone, which is far larger than what we had anticipated. As such, we apologize that a significant number of the applicants won’t be selected.”

Uh oh…Nintendo President Shuntaro Furukawa has publicly apologized for underestimating Switch 2 demand in Japan after the lottery system there received 2.2 million applications. They are expecting that a “significant number” of people will not be selected to purchase a console. https://t.co/tZ3XPQW9i9 pic.twitter.com/6ih9UCQHwt

— Nintendeal (@Nintendeal) April 23, 2025

Pelham Smithers of Japan-focused equity research house Pelham Smithers Associates said Japan accounts for about a third of the global Switch installation base, which implies 6.6 million pre-orders globally. 

Back to Goldman’s Munakata, she provided more details about Nintendo’s tariff impact:

A Bloomberg report on April 10 suggested that over 1 mn game consoles were exported from Vietnam to the U.S. in Jan-Feb 2025 (we believe that Nintendo accounts for the majority of game consoles produced in Vietnam, and that most US-bound Nintendo hardware is produced there). Based on the report, Nintendo may be able to build up inventory to meet most of its U.S. demand for FY3/26 before the end of the tariff pause (90 days from April 9). We believe this means the potential negative earnings impact from lower hardware profitability is likely to be limited in the near term (our FY3/26 Nintendo Switch 2 shipment assumption is 6 mn units for the Americas and 14.5 mn units overall).

Near-term earnings impact likely limited, but watching news flow for any medium- to long-term impact.

On the other hand, if the announced 46% tariff gets imposed on exports from Vietnam after the tariff pause, we believe extended imposition of reciprocal tariffs by the Trump administration could still put downward pressure on Nintendo’s earnings over the medium to long term. If the impact of the tariffs were to be passed on through higher selling prices, this could lead to a lower unit sales outlook for hardware. If Nintendo were to absorb the costs while keeping the selling price unchanged, this could lower hardware profitability. In either case, the tariffs could put downward pressure on Nintendo’s earnings, so we will continue to monitor news flow related to tariffs.

Despite the tariff impacts, Munakata remained “Buy” rated on Nintendo…

Our 12-month target price of ¥13,600 is unchanged, and we maintain our Buy rating.

Last month, Munakata wrote a note stating that Switch 2 will “unlock dormant hardware and dormant users” and send “the number of active consoles to continue to renew record highs.”

Separately, Rockstar’s Grand Theft Auto VI’s release later this year is expected to provide additional tailwinds for the gaming industry, which had been stuck in a rut for years but appears to have entered a renewed growth trajectory in 2024.

The good news is that Switch 2 remains at pre-trade war prices. 

Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

We have good and bad news for investors who want to know whether the stock market will soar, stall, or plummet. First, the good news. This article presents the market path for what lies ahead. Unfortunately, the “right” path is among three likely scenarios.

Despite our inability to definitively show you the way forward, we can share the technical patterns that will help guide us and, in time, assign better odds as to which of the three paths will be the “right” path. Importantly, we also lay out the possible economic, geopolitical, and monetary policy scenarios that would likely correspond with each forecast.

Mapping Our Paths

The graph below plots the three most likely market paths going forward.  

Forecast A is the most bullish scenario. In this scenario, the S&P 500 has already seen its lows for the cycle. The market will grind higher until it meets resistance near the key 50- and 200-day moving averages. After a brief period of consolidation, the market would break above those important moving averages, the death cross between the two important moving averages would flip back to a golden cross, and new highs would follow. 

In our opinion, scenario B is the most likely path. It argues that, like scenario A, we may have seen the year’s lows, but the stock market will consolidate in a wide range for many months before resuming a bullish trend.

C is the most concerning path. It entails a series of lower highs and lower lows for the foreseeable future. Moreover, a recession would most likely accompany this scenario.

We now present each forecast in more detail to better understand which event is most likely and how geopolitical, economic, fiscal, and monetary policy decisions can help guide us down the right path or switch paths as the environment changes.

Scenario A (Soar)- Politics, Economics, and the Fed

This scenario argues that the damage tariffs have caused the markets, and the economy is nearing an end. From a geopolitical perspective, this would mean President Trump and many of our important trade partners are close to signing beneficial trade agreements. Moreover, our bullish scenario would also likely require a trade agreement with China or, at a minimum, constructive discussions. 

A less hawkish Fed would also promote this outlook, in addition to tariffs. Chairman Powell came out relatively hawkish in mid-April. He claims the Fed is handcuffed due to its low unemployment and tame inflation mandates. To his point, they would cut rates as early as May if they saw the economy weakening and unemployment rising. However, they are still scared of the inflation boogeyman; thus, they are less likely to cut in advance of weakening labor conditions. In Powell’s opinion, tariffs are temporarily inflationary. But he raised the hawkish specter that they might be persistent.

We must also remember that liquidity in the bond market appears to be a potential problem. Bullish markets are fueled by positive sentiment and ample liquidity. If the Fed addresses the liquidity problem, the odds of a bullish outlook rise.

Lastly, case A assumes that any economic damage caused by tariffs and related consumer and corporate financial decisions is short-lived. The scenario assumes that economic activity will resume at its prior pace once a resolution on the tariffs is reached.

Donald Trump has a so-called “Trump Card” in his back pocket. Tax reductions, reduced regulations, and other pro-business legislation could be additional support for a rally to new highs.

Scenario A- Technical Analysis

The graph below shows multiple areas of potential resistance between 5600 and 5800 for the S&P 500. The combination of the key 50 and 200-day moving averages (5705 and 5751), a Fibonacci retracement level (5630), and the green support/resistance line (5800) will likely keep a lid on prices. However, if the news is bullish enough, it will break through that resistance, resuming the bullish trend, and a record high is more likely.

Scenario B (Stall)- Politics, Economics, and the Fed

Unlike scenario A, scenario B is based on a more extended period for tariff resolution. Furthermore, the signed agreements may not be as economically friendly as we envision for scenario A. Discussions with China may occur. Still, they would likely be embattled with an agreement seemingly far off.  

From time to time, tariff deals will be completed, and with each significant trade partner signing an agreement, the market will breathe a sigh of relief and provide optimism, which will help keep a floor on the market near recent lows. Conversely, ongoing trade spats, new tariffs, and retaliatory tariffs will keep a lid on the market.

The potential consolidation range is wide, and activity could be volatile as investors quickly rotate between optimism and pessimism, between the ceiling and the floor. This is the roller coaster scenario we laid out at the beginning of the year.

The Fed may remain hawkish but be willing to cut rates and possibly end QT if tariffs prove to be less of an inflation threat than they worry about. Like trade deals, a more friendly Fed would help keep a floor on losses at the recent lows.

Scenario B- Technical Analysis

We use the same graph as scenario A. However, we added the yellow box to approximate the range the market could travel in throughout most of the year. The consolidation is likely between 5800 and 4900.

Scenario C (Plummet)- Politics, Economics, and the Fed

Scenario C is our bearish outlook. Given that the S&P 500 is already 20+% off its peak, the market is priced to some degree for weaker earnings, slower economic growth, deficit reductions, and prolonged tariff negotiations. For C to play out, i.e., a peak-to-trough decline of 40% or more, the economic outlook and tariff concerns would worsen appreciably.

This scenario would likely coincide with a recession and or a credit event. Moreover, we suspect it also entails that the Fed is slow to react to liquidity issues and the government is providing less fiscal support than normal during downturns.

Corporations will find it hard to make decisions in such an environment and thus have trouble committing capital expenditures. Moreover, with reduced economic activity, they will reduce expenses, including laying off employees. Higher joblessness, a weaker economy, and poor consumer sentiment would result in consumers saving more and spending less.

While this is not our base case forecast, it’s certainly plausible. However, a sharp decline from current levels suggests that the Fed and government do not appreciate, or care, how their policies harm the economy in the short term.

Scenario C- Technical Analysis

Scenario C will likely play out in a series of lower highs and lower lows. Optimistically, this could be like 2022 as shown below.  From peak to trough, the S&P 500 fell by 28%. The recent peak to trough was 21%. Thus, if this scenario plays out similarly to 2022, 4400 may mark the low.

Another way to estimate a potential bottom is to assume the S&P 500 regresses to its long-term trend. Despite the recent decline, the S&P 500 is about 30% above its 55-year trend (4120), as shown below. Unfortunately, as the graph shows, it can fall below its trend and result in an even more significant loss.

We can also use fundamentals to help us find a reasonable floor. For this exercise, we lean on a valuation analysis we shared in December 2024, which forecasted an S&P price of 4840 if valuations reverted to 2022 levels and earnings growth is flat. As we wrote:

But what if the U.S. encounters a recession due to economic or political policies or a credit-related event? Then, a decline in valuations toward the 2022 level of 22x earnings should be expected. Such would equate to roughly a 20% decline from current levels.

Lastly, we share the graph below to help provide more context for drawdowns from record highs, such as the one we are currently experiencing. Since 1969, nine drawdowns have been worse than the current one. Six of the nine have been limited to -35% or less, leaving three, including the dot-com crash and the financial crisis with larger losses.

Summary

We lean toward scenario B, the roller coaster with periods of intense volatility. If this holds, our ability to follow our trading rules and technical indicators while trying to ignore unproductive behavioral traits will be fully tested.

It’s impossible to predict the path, but considering different scenarios and understanding the likely fundamental factors determining each path provides us with a road map to help us follow one or switch paths if needed.

In times of economic uncertainty, cash is king.

But where do Americans have the most cash in the bank?

As Visual Capitalist’s Pallavi Rao details below, households in Hawaii have the highest median bank balance at $43,600. In contrast, households in Mississippi hold about $2,000 in the bank.

Personal finance advisers SmartAsset analyzed median bank deposit data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The latest government figures are from 2022, and a 6.34% inflation rate was applied to convert those figures into 2024 dollars.

This median bank balance number visualized includes checking and savings deposits. Data is unavailable for six states: Alaska, Delaware, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming.

While households in states with large economies (California, Florida, Washington) do tend to have more money in the bank, Texas and New York both buck the trend.

Instead, cross-referencing this map with an earlier visualization on median incomes offers the most correlation. Households in wealthier states tend to have more in the bank.

For example, Hawaii’s economy ranks 38th in the country. However it also has some seriously wealthy residents. About one in 10 Hawaiian households are millionaires. The state’s median income ($142,000) is only second after DC.

On the other hand, New York City is home to the most millionaires in the country, but the state’s median bank balance ranks 22nd.

This could indicate many things: significant wealth disparity in the state, more spending, or also that New Yorkers are investing their savings.

Meanwhile, Southern states tend to hold less cash in the bank. These same clusters of states also have a higher share of residents under the poverty threshold.

If these median bank balances have you worried, it’s worth keeping things in perspective. Check out: All the World’s Money Divided Amongst 8 Billion People to see how wealth concentration is skewed on a global scale. And why the average person has far less than you might think.

Authored by Egon von Greyerz via VonGreyerz.gold,

For at least 35 years, the monetary system has been telling us that the current era is coming to an end. 

That means a debt collapse, a currency collapse and a collapse of most bubble assets like stocks and property. 

THUS THE BIG SHORT!

As I am writing this on Easter Monday, the Dow is down 1,100 points (2.9%) and the Nasdaq is down 3.3%. 

Anyone who buys the dips will be slaughtered. As I have said for a very long time, before this is over, stocks will be down 90-99% in real terms, which is gold. 

More importantly, this total collapse has very little to do with TRUMP. More later. 

And don’t for a moment believe that gold is overvalued. As many have used conventional technical tools to predict a gold correction, I have been saying for a long time that gold is in an acceleration phase and will reach multiples of the current price. (Yes, of course, there will be corrections on the way up, but most probably not yet.) 

THUS THE BIG LONG! 

END OF A MONETARY ERA

The end of a monetary era is always the same, with bubble assets going up in smoke. 

The majority of investors haven’t got a clue what is happening. They are hanging on to their stocks, hoping that Trump will save them by firing Powell and telling the next Chairman of the Fed to lower interest rates. 

But the time of manipulating rates is over. The market will now determine rates, which it should always do. And with uncontrollable debt escalation in the US and many other countries, the cost of debt can only go one way – UP! 

Remember, there is only one buyer of US debt, which is the Fed. But the Fed can only buy debt if the US government issues more debt.  

And therein lies the crux. More debt must be created in a futile attempt to save the ever-growing and out-of-control finances of the US. 

This is without doubt the biggest Ponzi scheme in history. Madoff would certainly have enjoyed it. 

And still, it would have been so easy, as all of this has been totally predictable.

To paraphrase Churchill, the more you study history, the more self-evident the future becomes. 

Still no government, no central banker, no journalist and virtually no market student spends any time on learning from the past. 

Why, why, why, you ask yourself. Well, it is clearly sheer arrogance in believing that we know better today and that we have better tools. And of course, “The times are different today”. Hmmm!

But they are not and have never been. 

Every monetary system has collapsed in history, and every currency has gone to ZERO, without fail. 

As I witnessed Greenspan’s expansionary policy after the property market collapse in the 1990s and how debt and derivatives quickly continued to grow, I was certain that we were seeing the end of a major monetary system. 

I had, since the late 1980s, been convinced that gold was the best insurance against yet another coming failure of the monetary system.

As major central banks like the UK and Switzerland were selling their gold in the mid to late 1990s, it was clear that we were near the bottom. So we waited until the 1999 gold bottom at $250 and confirmation of the gold price recovery in the early 2000s before buying physical gold.

BACK TO TRUMP – the culprit

But everything is, of course, Trump’s fault!  

All the misery hitting the world now is due to Trump’s capricious actions.

Here are just a few examples of how TRUMP is now wrecking not just the US but the whole world economy, according to the general public as well as the media and politicians in most countries:

Stocks crashing, bonds crashing, rates up, dollar crashing, trade wars with massive daily tit for tat yo-yo swinging tariffs between 10% and 145%, much higher Inflation, collapse of global trade etc, etc.

Yes, all of the above is happening and much more and it is all Trump’s fault.

But is it really?  No, Trump is not the culprit.

Instead, Trump happens to be the catalyst. 

An absolutely superb analysis of the US-China trade war was given by this very acute Chinese influencer:

@speedboyonlinestore

Absolutely Right

♬ original sound – SpeedboyOnlineStore

Leaders are instruments of their time, and they appear at the time in the cycle to carry out what was going to happen anyway. 

Just like Thatcher and Reagan were the right leaders to lead the upturn in the early 1980s, Trump is perfect for creating the havoc and chaos that comes with the end of a major monetary era.  

What is happening in the US and global economy today, and the total collapse which is about to happen, is not “Trump’s fault”.

He just happened to be the right person to execute the inevitable downfall of a major monetary era. 

But even if it is not his fault, history will unfairly blame him as the villain who brought the world economy down, and thus see him as probably the worst president in history.  

So not the best of timing for Mr Trump.

GOLD IS NATURE’S MONEY

Gold is the only money that has survived in history because it is the only money which is made by nature. 

Gold has history on its side – 5,000 years, as the only surviving currency, is enough proof.  Let’s see where Bitcoin is in 5,000 years…

Investors have nowhere to run.  

Government bonds were seen as good as gold. That’s why they were called Gilts in the UK. 

But today, they are not worth the piece of paper they are written on these days. 

Governments won’t even be able to pay the interest on them. And the capital is already lost. 

And the currency these bonds are issued in is also on its way to ZERO. 

It is incomprehensible and irresponsible to hold government bonds today!

Investors are guaranteed to lose 100%.

And stocks are likely to lose at least 90% in real terms, gold. The same with property, private equity and all other leveraged assets.

GOLD IS THE ULTIMATE WEALTH PRESERVATION ASSET

That is one of the reasons gold is going up.  There is nowhere else to turn to for anyone looking for wealth preservation. 

But gold can, of course, not absorb all the capital which is looking for safety. 

The coming gold demand can only be satisfied at much, much higher gold prices. 

Gold is now also a Tier 1 asset. This means that physical gold is, according to the Bank for International Settlements rules, as safe as cash and government bonds. 

This is, of course, laughable. As I just explained, cash and government bonds will be worthless. Thus, it is an insult to gold to put it in the same category as cash and bonds. 

As we enter the biggest global wealth destruction in history, we will simultaneously witness a long-term revaluation of gold. Gold is the only monetary asset which has survived in history and will, in the coming years, be the only asset which will preserve investors’ wealth.

Thus, it is important to understand that this is not just another gold rally. Instead, gold will resume the role that it has historically had, as nature’s money and the only REAL MONEY that has ever existed. 

The current rerating of gold to what it was always meant to be is both historical and fundamental. Gold will be permanently re-rated and revalued, both as a transactional asset and as a wealth preservation asset that every investor must hold. 

But gold won’t be just 0.5% of global financial assets as it is today. More likely gold will be 10% or more. 

I have been standing on a soapbox for over 25 years, warning about the risks to the financial system and the critical importance of gold for wealth preservation purposes. 

Few have listened. But now, as gold has gone up 11- 12x depending on the currency it is measured in, everyone is talking about gold. 

There will be gold sellers popping up everywhere, and many without the integrity that investors must demand. 

• Only deal with companies that have the highest reputation and have been reputably involved with gold for at least 15-20 years. The long-term superior reputation of the owners and management is critical. 

• Hold gold in the safest jurisdictions, such as Switzerland and Singapore. 

• Don’t hold your gold in the US, which is more likely to take irrational actions. 

• Don’t hold your gold in banks.

• Also, only hold physical gold, which you can access directly in the vault. 

Many will wonder about silver. Yes, silver is likely to go up faster than gold. But it is much more volatile and thus riskier. We recommend 25% silver maximum and 75% gold. 

And remember that times are likely to become very difficult. Help your family and friends to whatever extent you can. 

The animated biblical film “The King of Kings”, featuring Pierce Brosnan and produced by Angel Studios—the once small-time production company behind the surprise blockbuster “Sound of Freedom” in the summer of 2023—has continued its box office climb for a second consecutive week. 

According to Box Office Mojo, The King of Kings—inspired by Charles Dickens—follows a father and son on an imaginative journey through the life of Jesus.

The Christian movie ranked number three on the Domestic 2025 theater list, behind Warner Bro. ‘s “A Minecraft Movie” in the second spot and Warner Bro. ‘s “Sinners” in number one. Just for reference, Walt Disney Studios’ disastrous “Snow White” is number ten on the list. 

On Sunday, Angel Studios released a press release boasting about its theatrical footprint increasing by 10% for the second week and earning “a projected $17.2M second weekend, bringing its estimated box office cume to $45,339,117.”

“Buoyed by its Rotten Tomatoes PopcornMeter rising to 98% and its coveted A+ CinemaScore, The King of Kings is poised for a strong theatrical run,” the studio said.

“At Angel, our Angel Guild plays a crucial role in picking winners, and this film is a testament to that vision,” Brandon Purdie, Global Head of Theatrical Distribution & Brand Development at Angel Studios, stated, adding, “The King of Kings is an epic, emotional journey made for the big screen. Theaters are responding by making room, and audiences are flocking in droves, speaking loud and clear: they’re here for stories that amplify light.”

Readers may recall Angel Studios’ release of the low-budget flick “Sound of Freedom” in the summer of 2023. This film became a cultural and box office phenomenon, defying expectations to gross over $200 million globally and ignited a nationwide conversation on child trafficking.

Movies with a purpose versus mindless, woke nonsense appear to be a winning strategy for studios. Yet Disney still hasn’t read the tea leaves about the cultural shift and what’s now socially acceptable—hence their latest bomb: Snow White.