Markets are Too Calm — and That’s the Problem, Says Jamie Dimon
There’s a peculiar kind of silence in markets right now — one that sounds less like confidence and more like complacency. That was the blunt message from JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon in recent interviews and appearances: asset prices are high, credit spreads are tight, and investors seem to be shrugging off a long list of risks. When one of Wall Street’s most prominent risk-watchers warns that “people feel pretty good,” it’s worth listening.
What happened and why it matters
- Jamie Dimon has repeatedly warned investors that markets are underestimating risk — from rising inflation to geopolitical flashpoints and stretched credit conditions.
- His comments have come in public forums (investor days, conferences, TV interviews) over the past year as global headlines — tariffs, geopolitical clashes, and credit concerns — made rounds. Recent press coverage highlighted his concern that markets are acting complacently even after shocks such as renewed geopolitical tensions that lifted oil prices. (marketwatch.com)
Why this matters:
- Complacency can mask the build-up of systemic risk: elevated valuations and narrow credit spreads mean there is less cushion when a real shock hits.
- If inflation reaccelerates or a credit cycle worsens, central banks may have less room to respond without causing deeper market dislocations. Dimon explicitly flagged higher inflation risk and a potentially “worse than normal” credit cycle as threats. (benzinga.com)
The investor dilemma: optimism vs. realism
- Markets have rallied and volatility has fallen — and with that recovery comes a tendency to treat downside scenarios as unlikely. That’s the classic optimism bias at work.
- Dimon’s argument is the opposite: when valuations look rich and policy levers are constrained (big deficits, limited central-bank flexibility), the probability of a sharper correction or a prolonged tougher patch rises. (cnbc.com)
Practical implications:
- Earnings expectations may still be too sanguine. If profits disappoint, equity multiples could compress. (cnbc.com)
- Credit markets are deceptively calm. Narrow spreads don’t reflect borrower weakness or a future tightening in liquidity conditions. (benzinga.com)
Signs that Dimon’s warning isn’t just noise
- Historical precedent: periods of sustained policy stimulus and low rates have pushed asset prices up before sharp corrections followed (think pre-2008 dynamics). Dimon has drawn attention to how many market participants today lack firsthand experience with a real credit cycle. (benzinga.com)
- Market reactions to geopolitical events have been muted compared with price moves in commodities (e.g., oil spikes), suggesting investors are selectively ignoring channels that can feed into inflation. Recent coverage showed oil moving while stocks barely flinched. (marketwatch.com)
How investors (and policymakers) might respond
- Reassess risk budgets:
- Expect lower forward returns if valuations are high — adjust position sizing accordingly.
- Stress-test portfolios for higher inflation, wider credit spreads, and slower growth.
- Watch liquidity and credit indicators closely:
- Monitor funding costs, loan defaults, covenant loosening, and secondary-market liquidity as early warning signs.
- Factor geopolitics into scenario planning:
- Energy shocks, trade disruptions, and cyber/terror risks can transmit rapidly into inflation and supply chain stress.
- For policymakers: communicate limits. Central banks and fiscal authorities should be candid about trade-offs and constraints to avoid fostering false reassurance.
Quick wins for individual investors
- Trim concentrated positions and rebalance toward diversified exposures.
- Maintain a short list of high-quality, liquid assets to lean on if markets reprice.
- Consider inflation-protected instruments or real assets as partial hedges if inflation risk appears underpriced.
- Avoid chasing yield in low-quality credit just because spreads are narrow.
What the coverage shows (context)
- MarketWatch highlighted Dimon’s recent comments noting the disconnect between oil moves and muted equity reactions after a geopolitical spike. (marketwatch.com)
- CNBC and Bloomberg have traced Dimon’s warnings back through 2025, where he flagged tariffs, deficits, and complacent central banks as sources of risk. (cnbc.com)
- Analysts and commentators pick up the framing that many market participants haven’t lived through a deep credit downturn and may underestimate how fast conditions can change. (benzinga.com)
My read of those sources: Dimon isn’t trying to be a constant Cassandra. He’s reminding an upbeat market that risk is asymmetric right now — upside may be limited while downside remains meaningful.
A few sharper questions worth watching
- Will inflation settle back near policymakers’ targets, or will renewed energy or supply shocks re-accelerate prices?
- How would central banks respond if inflation and growth diverged (stagflation)?
- Are credit standards loosening quietly in leveraged lending or other pockets that could transmit losses rapidly?
- How do fiscal dynamics (large deficits) limit policy options in a stress scenario?
Final thoughts
Complacency is seductive: calm markets feel good and reward short-term risk-taking. But markets don’t owe investors perpetually rising prices. Jamie Dimon’s warnings are a useful reality check — not a prediction of imminent doom, but a call to re-evaluate assumptions. For investors, that means humility, active risk management, and scenario planning for outcomes that the market currently underprices.
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Why Berkshire’s new boss just named four “forever” stocks — and quietly shrugged at two others
When a company built by Warren Buffett hands the reins to Greg Abel, investors listen. In his first shareholder letter as Berkshire Hathaway’s CEO (published in early March 2026), Abel did more than salute the past — he clarified which holdings he views as “forever” and which ones didn’t make that inner circle. The choices are equal parts reassurance and subtle signal about what matters when stewardship changes but the mandate to preserve value doesn’t.
This matters because Berkshire’s portfolio is enormous, concentrated, and iconic. What the company says about its biggest positions matters for markets and for anyone trying to think long term about durable businesses.
What Abel called “forever” — and why it matters
Abel described four holdings as core, long-term positions Berkshire expects to own for decades:
- Apple
- American Express
- Coca-Cola
- Moody’s
Why those four? The common thread is clarity: strong brand moats, predictable cash flow, management teams Berkshire trusts, and business models that have shown resilience across cycles. Abel’s naming of these companies signals continuity with Buffett’s playbook: identify exceptional businesses, buy sizeable stakes at attractive prices, and hold through time.
A few quick context points:
- These four companies make up a large portion of Berkshire’s equity portfolio — together they’re a center of gravity for the firm’s public-equity bets.
- Apple in particular is massive for Berkshire by market value; Coke and AmEx are classic Buffett examples of consumer and financial moats; Moody’s offers a high-margin, durable niche in credit-rating services.
The two notable omissions
Two of Berkshire’s other very large holdings were notably absent from Abel’s “forever” roster:
That doesn’t mean they’re being sold tomorrow. But omission is itself information. In Bank of America’s case, Berkshire has already trimmed its position significantly in recent quarters, and Buffett historically points to stakes he truly intends to “maintain indefinitely” — the omission hints at reduced conviction or simply a pragmatic reweighting. Chevron remains a huge position but is more exposed to commodity cycles and capital allocation debates than the four Abel singled out.
Why this distinction matters for investors
- Signaling vs. action: Naming a stock as “forever” is not a trade order, but it is a governance signal. It tells shareholders what management views as reliable anchors of capital allocation.
- Style clarity: The four “forever” names reinforce Buffett-era core principles — brands, margins, predictability — while the omitted names underscore that portfolio composition can shift even at a company famous for buy-and-hold.
- Succession risk and continuity: Abel’s list reassures those worried that Berkshire might abandon Buffett’s temperament. It also highlights the open question of who will make day-to-day portfolio choices; Abel inherited stewardship responsibilities but doesn’t have the same public track record as Buffett.
How to think about “forever” stocks for your own portfolio
- “Forever” for Berkshire ≠ forever for every investor. Berkshire’s stake sizes, tax position, and horizon are unique.
- Look for durable cash flows and pricing power, not just nostalgia. Coca-Cola’s brand vs. Chevron’s commodity exposure illustrates the difference.
- Be honest about concentration: Berkshire’s approach is concentrated bets. Most individual investors should balance conviction with diversification.
- Reassess when the business changes, not when the stock price does. Holding forever means monitoring the business — management quality, competitive edge, and capital allocation — not checking charts daily.
A few concrete investor takeaways
- If you admire Buffett-style investing, study why Apple, AmEx, Coke, and Moody’s fit that mold rather than simply copy the tickers.
- Treat the omission of Bank of America and Chevron as a reminder that even blue-chip holdings can be downgraded in conviction.
- For long-term investors, focus on business durability and management incentives; for traders, these signals may matter more for short-term flows than long-term fundamentals.
What this moment reveals about Berkshire itself
- Continuity with adaptation: Abel’s letter emphasizes sticking to durable businesses while acknowledging an evolving portfolio and new capital-allocation dynamics.
- Cash pile and patience: Berkshire still holds massive cash reserves — a tactical advantage if valuations wobble and buying opportunities appear.
- Uncertainty in day-to-day management: With the portfolio’s traditional stewards reshuffled, the market is watching how Berkshire will source new big ideas and allocate capital at scale.
My take
Abel’s naming of four “forever” stocks reads like a careful bridge: it comforts investors who feared a wholesale departure from Buffett’s philosophy, while also hinting that practical decisions — trimming, adding, and pivoting — will continue. For most individual investors, the lesson isn’t to buy these exact names blindly; it’s to adopt Berkshire’s discipline: buy strong businesses with durable advantages and hold them until the story truly changes.
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Markets on edge: when politics, AI and technicals collide
The opening hook: Markets don’t move in straight lines — they twitch, spasm and sometimes lurch when politics and technology intersect. This week’s action felt exactly like that: a presidential directive touching an AI firm, hotter-than-expected inflation signals and geopolitical jitters combined to push the major indexes below their 50‑day lines — even as equal‑weight ETFs quietly marched to highs. The result is a market with two faces: leadership concentrated in a handful of mega-cap stocks, while breadth measures show a more constructive tape underneath.
What happened, in plain terms
- A White House move restricting federal use of Anthropic’s AI and related contractor bans rattled investors because it directly ties politics to the AI supply chain and big-cloud platforms. (investors.com)
- At the same time, a hotter producer-price backdrop and rising geopolitical tensions pushed risk appetite lower, tipping the major indexes below important short- to intermediate-term technical levels (the 50‑day moving averages). (investors.com)
- Yet equal‑weight ETFs (which give each S&P 500 stock the same influence) were hitting highs, signaling that more of the market — not just the handful of mega-cap names — was showing strength. That divergence (cap-weighted indices weak, equal-weight strong) is crucial to watch. (investors.com)
Why the divergence matters
- Major-cap concentration: When indexes like the S&P 500 and Nasdaq are buoyed mainly by a few giants, headline readings can mask weakness in the broader market. That’s what cap-weighted indexes do: one or two big winners can hide the rest.
- Equal‑weight ETFs tell a different story: If an equal‑weight S&P ETF is making new highs, more stocks are participating in the advance — a potentially healthier sign than a rally led by five names. Investors often use this as a breadth check. (investors.com)
- Technical thresholds (50‑day lines) matter for short-term momentum: many traders and models treat a close below the 50‑day as a warning flag. Seeing major indexes slip below them while equal‑weight funds rally creates a tactical tug-of-war. (investors.com)
The catalysts behind the move
- Political/AI shock: The Trump administration’s restriction on Anthropic for federal agencies — and related contractor constraints — introduced a direct policy risk to AI vendors and cloud partners. That’s not abstract: it affects large platforms, defense contracting, and the perceived growth runway for AI-oriented businesses. Markets price policy risk quickly. (investors.com)
- Inflation data and macro noise: Elevated producer prices and the risk that tariffs or geopolitical flareups could keep inflation sticky make the Fed’s path less certain and reduce tolerance for valuation extremes, especially in cyclical and interest-rate-sensitive names. (cnbc.com)
- Geopolitics and safe-haven flows: Any uptick in global tensions nudges investors toward defense, commodities and some haven assets — and away from crowded growth trades. That dynamic can accelerate short-term rotation. (investors.com)
Where the real strength is: sector and stock themes
- Memory and AI infrastructure: Semiconductor memory names (Sandisk, Micron, Western Digital) have been bright spots this year, driven by data-center demand for GPUs, memory and AI workloads. Even with headline noise, these parts of the market are benefiting from a secular AI buildout. (investors.com)
- Stocks to watch ahead of earnings: With earnings season and major reports coming (Broadcom, MongoDB were noted examples in the coverage), traders will pick through guidance and order trends for clues around AI capex and cloud demand. Strong results could re-center the narrative on earnings rather than politics. (investors.com)
Tactical investor implications
- Watch breadth, not just the headline index: If equal‑weight ETFs are confirming strength, consider using them as a market-health signal. Narrow, mega-cap-led rallies can roll over quickly if the big names stumble. (investors.com)
- Respect the 50‑day: For many quantitative and discretionary traders, the 50‑day moving average is a key momentum filter. A close below it on the major indexes increases short-term caution. (investors.com)
- Be selective, watch earnings: Political shocks can be headline-driven and temporary. Focus on companies with durable demand tailwinds (AI, memory, industrials with pricing power). Earnings and guidance will separate transient volatility from real trend changes. (investors.com)
Market psychology and the “policy shock” problem
There’s a subtle behavioral point here: policy shocks — especially those that single out specific firms or technologies — carry outsized psychological weight. They create binary uncertainty (can the company keep selling to government clients?) and can catalyze algorithmic selling, sector rotation and cessation of flows into targeted ETFs. That domino effect can momentarily depress technicals even when the fundamental demand story (e.g., AI infrastructure spending) remains intact. (investors.com)
What I’m watching next
- Follow-through in equal‑weight ETFs: If they keep rising while cap‑weighted indexes repair and reclaim 50‑day lines, the risk of a broader, sustainable rally improves. (investors.com)
- Earnings commentary from semiconductor and cloud vendors: Will orders and capex commentary support the memory/AI demand story? Strong guidance could re-center markets on fundamentals. (investors.com)
- Macro prints: Inflation and jobs data remain the backdrop. Hot prints can amplify policy- and geopolitics-driven selloffs; softer prints can give risk assets room to regroup. (cnbc.com)
Quick takeaways for busy readers
- Market mood is mixed: headline indices are below their 50‑day lines, but equal‑weight ETFs are making highs — a meaningful divergence. (investors.com)
- Political moves targeting AI vendors can create outsized short‑term volatility even as the long-term AI investment theme remains intact. (investors.com)
- Focus on breadth, earnings and macro prints to judge whether this is a temporary tremor or a deeper shift. (investors.com)
Final thoughts
Markets are messy by design — they’re where policy, psychology and profit motives meet. This week’s patchwork action shows why investors should look beyond the headline index and pay attention to breadth signals like equal‑weight ETFs. Political headlines can spark fast moves, but durable trends are usually revealed in earnings, revenue guidance and flow patterns. Keep watch on those real-economy data points; they’ll tell you whether the market’s undercurrent is a blip or the start of something bigger.
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Markets on a Short Week: Why the S&P 500 Is Stalling and Software Stocks Are Getting Hit
It’s a weird kind of market mood — not a panic, not a party. The S&P 500 opened a holiday-shortened week largely flat, but the index has now slipped for two weeks in a row. Much of the heat is on software and other tech-related names as investors wrestle with a familiar tension: the promise of AI-driven growth versus the reality of big, uncertain spending and shifting profit prospects.
What happened this week — the headlines that matter
- The S&P 500 was little changed to start a shortened trading week while software names slid.
- The broad index has recorded declines for two consecutive weeks — enough to make investors pause after a long stretch of gains earlier this year.
- Tech megacaps and AI-related names remain the primary market movers, producing big swings that ripple across the index because a handful of companies carry outsized weight.
Why software and tech are getting punished
- AI euphoria has been a two-edged sword. Expectations for automation and generative AI have driven massive capital allocation toward chips, cloud infrastructure and software, pushing valuations higher. When companies signal large, front-loaded AI spending or give cautious guidance about monetizing those investments, investors react harshly.
- The market’s “shoot first, ask questions later” instinct: once a narrative shifts from “AI = endless upside” to “AI costs may not pay off quickly,” stocks perceived as vulnerable (particularly in software and services) face steep re-pricing.
- Earnings and guidance season remains the catalyst. Even beats can be punished if forward commentary hints at slower growth or heavier investment. That’s enough to drag the S&P when the companies affected have significant index weight.
The bigger picture: not a broad market breakdown, but a rotation and recalibration
- This isn’t a textbook market crash. Other parts of the market — cyclical sectors, financials, energy at times — are behaving differently. What we’re seeing is sectoral stress and volatility inside an otherwise range-bound market.
- Interest-rate and inflation dynamics still matter. Any signs that inflation is cooling can calm rate-cut expectations and lift sentiment, while stronger data keeps yields elevated and increases the discount on long-duration tech earnings.
- The concentration effect: When a few large tech names rally or slump, headline moves in the S&P can look extreme even though much of the market is not mirroring that behavior.
Smart ways investors are responding (what I’m seeing from the desks)
- Rebalancing from concentrated AI/mega-cap positions into broader, less-correlated exposures (value, cyclicals, small- and mid-caps).
- Trimming positions where guidance looks shaky rather than selling everything. Earnings commentary is getting more scrutiny than raw headline beats.
- Using volatility to add selectively: investors who believe in longer-term AI winners are sometimes averaging into names after pullbacks, but with tighter risk controls.
Takeaways for investors and readers
- Markets are digesting the AI narrative: enthusiasm is still real, but the “how and when” of monetization is being questioned. That shift shows up first and loudest in software and AI-adjacent stocks.
- Two down weeks for the S&P 500 is a reminder that even a generally healthy market can wobble when a few big sectors re-price.
- Watch earnings calls and forward guidance closely — the market is trading less on past results and more on future spending and margin implications.
- Keep an eye on macro data (inflation, employment, Treasury yields). Those signals influence how investors discount long-duration tech profits.
A few tactical points to consider
- If you’re long-term focused: short-term swings are normal; use pullbacks to reassess positions versus panic-sell.
- If you’re trading: volatility favors active risk management — tighter stops, hedges, or smaller position sizes.
- For diversified investors: remember that index moves can mask underlying breadth. The S&P’s headline action might overstate the degree of weakness across other sectors.
My take
There’s a healthy re-pricing happening more than a breakdown. The market is trying to put sensible valuations on companies that face meaningful strategic decisions about AI: how much to spend, where to compete, and how quickly that spending will turn into profit. That uncertainty produces headline volatility — especially in a shortened week with fewer market hours to digest information. For long-term investors, this is a useful reminder to focus on fundamentals and on the companies that show both the ability to invest sensibly and the path to profitability.
Sources
(Note: this piece was written with a base narrative inspired by a CNBC live-updates story about a holiday-shortened week when software shares slid; the reporting above synthesizes that theme with broader coverage from the sources listed.)
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
When the Agentic Internet Shows Up to Work: Cloudflare’s Q4 Surprise and a Bullish 2026 Outlook
Cloudflare just reminded the market why infrastructure businesses can suddenly feel like the center of the AI party. On February 10, 2026, the company reported a stronger-than-expected fourth quarter and issued a 2026 revenue outlook that beat consensus — and the stock reacted accordingly. But beneath the headline beats lies a mix of durable growth signals, new AI-driven demand, and a few technical and valuation wrinkles investors should notice.
Quick snapshot you can skim
- Quarter reported on February 10, 2026: revenue $614.5M (up ~34% year-over-year).
- Q4 non-GAAP EPS: $0.28.
- Full-year 2026 revenue guide: $2.79B and adjusted EPS guidance around $1.11 — above Street revenue expectations.
- Management highlights: AI agents and Cloudflare Workers driving more traffic and developer adoption.
- Cash/financials: >$4.1B in cash and marketable securities, improving free cash flow margins.
(Primary numbers come from Cloudflare’s February 10, 2026 press release and subsequent market coverage.) (cloudflare.net)
What changed — and why investors cheered
- Real beats, not just optics. Cloudflare’s Q4 revenue and non-GAAP EPS both beat Street estimates, and management pointed to one of its largest-ever ACV deals and accelerated new ACV growth. Those are hard, enterprise-level wins, not seasonal flukes. (cloudflare.net)
- AI activity = traffic multiplier. Cloudflare says AI-generated requests and “agentic” activity are meaningfully increasing the volume and complexity of traffic across its network. That trend boosts demand for edge compute (Workers), performance, and security services — Cloudflare’s core product set. Multiple analysts tied the beat to tailwinds from AI-driven traffic. (investors.com)
- Profitability is improving. GAAP still shows a loss from operations, but non-GAAP operating income and free cash flow expanded materially in Q4 — a signal that revenue growth is starting to translate into better margins and cash generation. (cloudflare.net)
Why the 2026 guide matters
Cloudflare’s guidance for 2026 (roughly $2.79B revenue) came in above consensus. That’s the cleanest proof management expects the AI-driven lift and large-account momentum to persist. Guidance beats reduce the uncertainty premium investors place on growth names and give analysts license to raise models — which often fuels short-term share-price pops.
But guidance also carried prudence on EPS: full-year adjusted EPS guidance was slightly below some expectations, implying Cloudflare is investing to capture growth even while improving margins. That mix — revenue optimism with measured margin assumptions — is typically viewed favorably by growth investors who want scale without runaway spending.
The investor dilemma: growth story vs. technical reality
-
Bull case: Cloudflare sits at the intersection of networking, security, and edge compute. If AI agents become permanent heavy users of the web, Cloudflare’s platform and its Workers developer ecosystem become sticky, high-margin revenue drivers. Large ACV deals and expanding RPO (remaining performance obligations) give the company predictable, durable revenue. (cloudflare.net)
-
Bear case: software multiples have been under pressure, and Cloudflare’s stock had seen institutional selling before this beat (technical indicators like Accumulation/Distribution were flagged as weak by market data providers). In plain terms: fundamentals are improving, but some investors may remain cautious until the company consistently delivers margin expansion and sustained higher growth rates. (investors.com)
-
The middle path: Treat the stock as an infrastructure growth play that merits patience. Short-term volatility is likely; the longer-term thesis hinges on AI traffic continuing to re-platform the Internet and Cloudflare converting that traffic into higher ARPU and enterprise traction.
What to watch next (near-term catalysts)
- Q1 2026 results and whether sequential revenue trends and margin expansion continue. Cloudflare guided Q1 revenue modestly above consensus; execution there will be telling. (investing.com)
- Growth of Cloudflare Workers and developer adoption metrics — these are leading indicators for future revenue per developer and platform monetization. (cloudflare.net)
- Deals and ACV cadence: will large deals keep accelerating, or was the big Q4 ACV a one-off? Large-contract momentum is central to the enterprise story. (cloudflare.net)
- Broader software multiple compression or expansion — macro moves in tech stocks will still sway Cloudflare’s share price regardless of company-level execution.
A few strategic takeaways for investors and builders
- Infrastructure is the quiet winner when usage patterns shift. When users (or agents) change how they interact with the web, companies that own reliable, global pipes and flexible edge compute win.
- Developer platforms scale differently. Success in developer adoption (Workers, SDKs, APIs) can create durable revenue streams if monetized thoughtfully.
- Cash and profitability matter even for growth names. Cloudflare’s >$4B cash cushion and improving free cash flow give it optionality to invest in product, sales, or tuck-in M&A while weathering market cycles. (cloudflare.net)
My take
Cloudflare’s Q4 and 2026 guide are a meaningful validation of the “Agentic Internet” thesis management has been selling: agents and AI workloads are real demand multipliers for edge and networking infrastructure. The numbers back the narrative — enterprise ACV growth, developer traction, and a rising cash flow profile are all positive. That said, investors should balance enthusiasm with discipline: stock moves from guidance beats can overshoot, and the share performance will still respond to broader sector sentiment and technical flows. If you believe AI agents materially re-platform web traffic, Cloudflare is a natural infrastructure play worth owning; if you’re skeptical about the durability of the lift or the multiple, use the recent rally as an opportunity to reassess position size rather than chase.
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Amazon, AI spending and investor jitters: why one earnings line sent AMZN tumbling
The market hates uncertainty with a passion — but it downright panics when a beloved tech stock promises to spend big on a future that’s still being written. That’s exactly what played out when Amazon’s latest quarter landed: solid revenue, mixed profit signals, and a capital-expenditure plan so large that it turned a routine earnings beat into a sell‑off. Bank of America’s take—still bullish, but cautious—captures the tension investors are wrestling with right now.
What happened (the quick version)
- Amazon reported Q4 revenue that beat expectations and showed healthy AWS growth, but EPS missed by a hair.
- Management guided for softer near‑term margins and flagged much larger capital spending — roughly $200 billion — largely to expand AWS capacity for AI workloads.
- Investors responded badly to the uptick in capex and the prospect of negative free cash flow in 2026, pushing AMZN down sharply in the immediate aftermath.
- Bank of America’s analyst Justin Post stayed with a Buy rating, trimmed some expectations, but argued the long‑run case for AWS-led growth remains intact.
Why the market freaked out
- Big capex = near-term profit pressure. Even when the spending is strategically sensible, huge increases in capital expenditures reduce free cash flow and raise questions about timing of returns.
- AI is a double-edged sword. Hyperscalers (Amazon, Microsoft, Google) all need more data-center capacity to serve enterprise AI demand — but investors want clearer signals that that spending will convert to durable profits, not just capacity that sits idle for quarters.
- Guidance matters now more than ever. A solid top line couldn’t fully offset management’s softer margin outlook and the possibility of negative free cash flow next year.
- Momentum and sentiment amplify moves. When a mega-cap name like Amazon shows a materially higher capex plan, algorithms and tactical funds accelerate selling, which can make a rational re‑pricing into a rout.
Big-picture context
- AWS remains a powerful engine. Revenue growth at AWS is accelerating sequentially (reported ~24% in the quarter), and demand for cloud capacity to run AI models is real and growing.
- The capex is largely targeted at enabling AI workloads — GPUs, racks, cooling, networking — and Amazon argues the capacity will be monetized quickly as customers migrate AI workloads to the cloud.
- This episode isn’t unique to Amazon. Other cloud leaders have also signalled heavy spending on AI infrastructure, and markets have punished multiple names when the path from spend to profit looked murky.
- Analysts are split in tone: most remain positive on the long-term opportunity, though many trimmed near-term targets to account for margin risk and multiple compression.
A few useful lens points
- Time horizon matters. If you’re a trader, margin swings and capex shock news can be reason to sell. If you’re a long-term investor, ask whether the spending can reasonably translate into stronger AWS monetization and durable enterprise customer wins over 2–5 years.
- Unit economics and utilization are key. The market will want to see capacity utilization improving, pricing power on AI inference workloads, and margin recovery once new capacity starts generating revenue.
- Competitive positioning. Amazon’s argument is that AWS’s existing customer base and proprietary silicon (Trainium/Inferentia) give it an edge. But Microsoft, Google, and specialized AI cloud players are competing fiercely — and execution will decide winners.
What Bank of America said (in plain English)
- BofA’s Justin Post kept a Buy rating: he thinks the investment in AWS capacity makes sense given Amazon’s customer base and the size of the AI opportunity.
- He acknowledged margin volatility and the likelihood of negative free cash flow in 2026, so he nudged down his price target modestly — signaling optimism tempered by realism.
- In short: confident on the strategic rationale, cautious about short-term earnings and valuation bumps.
Investor takeaways you can use
- Short term: expect volatility. Earnings‑related capex surprises can trigger large moves. If you’re sensitive to drawdowns, consider trimming or hedging exposure.
- Medium/long term: focus on evidence of monetization — accelerating AWS revenue per share of capacity, higher utilization, or meaningful pricing power for AI services.
- Keep the valuation in view. Even a dominant company needs realistic multiples when growth is uncertain and capex is front‑loaded.
- Watch the cadence of forward guidance and AWS metrics over the next few quarters — those will be the clearest signals for whether this spending is earning its keep.
My take
Amazon is leaning into what could be a generational shift — AI at scale — and that requires infrastructure. The market’s knee‑jerk reaction to big capex is understandable, but it can mask the strategic upside if that capacity is absorbed quickly and leads to differentiated AI offerings. That said, execution risk is real: big spending promises are only as good as utilization and pricing. For long-term investors willing to stomach volatility, this feels like a fundamental question of timing and execution, not a verdict on the company’s addressable market. For short-term traders, the move is a reminder that even quality names can wobble when strategy meets uncertainty.
Signals to watch next
- AWS growth and any commentary on capacity utilization or customer adoption of AI services.
- Amazon’s quarterly guidance for margins and free cash flow timing.
- Competitive moves: GPU supply/demand dynamics, Microsoft/Google pricing, and enterprise AI adoption patterns.
- Concrete product wins that show Amazon converting new capacity into revenue (e.g., large enterprise deals or clear upticks in inference workloads).
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Markets wobble as AMD and weak jobs data rattle tech — why Tuesday’s sell-off matters
Hook: The market’s morning felt a bit like watching a favorite team fumble the ball twice in a row — confidence slipped, big names tripped, and investors suddenly started asking whether this is rotation, overreaction, or the start of something bigger.
The headline: the S&P 500 fell for a second consecutive day after Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) reported earnings that disappointed investors’ expectations for forward growth, and fresh jobs data painted a softer picture for the labor market. Tech — the market’s heartbeat for much of the past few years — took the brunt of the pain, dropping more than 2% on Tuesday and becoming the weakest of the S&P 500’s 11 sectors.
Why AMD’s report hit so hard
- Earnings beats don’t always equal happier investors. AMD reported revenue that met or beat some expectations, but guidance and the quality of that revenue left traders cold — portion of the quarter’s upside tied to China unexpectedly, and data-center growth that underwhelmed relative to lofty AI expectations. That combo punched a hole in confidence for a chipmaker that’s supposed to be a major AI beneficiary.
- Expectations were already priced for perfection. After years of AI-driven enthusiasm, investors have a shrinking tolerance for anything short of clear evidence that a company will materially win from AI momentum. When that narrative wobbles, multiple chip and software names can be sold at once.
The jobs data angle — why weak hiring matters now
- Private payrolls (ADP) showed far fewer hires than economists expected, adding to other signals of softening labor demand. That weak labor data pushed investors into a two-edged reaction:
- Some traders see softer jobs as a reason the Fed could be less hawkish later — a potential tailwind for risk assets.
- Others worry the labor weakness is early evidence of an economic slowdown, which would hurt corporate revenue and margins — a clear headwind for equities, and particularly for high-valuation tech names.
In short, the jobs data amplified the AMD story: if growth (and labor) is cooling, lofty AI-driven valuations look riskier.
How tech’s >2% drop fits into the bigger picture
- Tech’s decline on Tuesday was notable because it’s the market’s largest sector by weight and has been the engine of recent gains. A >2% drop in tech can move the entire index even if other sectors are stable or up.
- The sell-off isn’t only about fundamentals. It’s also about positioning: after long periods of tech outperformance, funds and traders run exposure that’s sensitive to sentiment swings. When headlines trigger a reassessment (AMD guidance + weak jobs), selling cascades.
- AI hype is a double-edged sword. Companies perceived to be winners from AI get sky-high multiples; when investors start to question who will actually monetize AI and how fast, those multiples compress quickly.
Market mechanics to watch in the next few sessions
- Mega-cap leadership: Watch how the largest market-cap names behave (Nvidia, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon). If these stabilize or bounce, the broader index may recover quickly; if they keep selling, rotation could deepen.
- Earnings cadence: Big-tech earnings coming up (Alphabet, Amazon and others) will be treated as tests — not just of revenue/earnings, but of the AI narrative and capex outlook.
- Economic cross-checks: Upcoming official labor reports and other growth indicators will matter more than usual because traders are parsing modest labor signals for direction on monetary policy and growth.
What investors and readers should keep in mind
- Volatility is normal in transitions. The market is pricing a transition from valuation-driven, growth-premium leadership to a period where execution, durable revenue, and margin sustainability matter more.
- Short-term moves can be noisy. One or two disappointing reports can trigger outsized reactions; that doesn’t automatically equal a structural market shift. But repeated disappointments across earnings and macro data would be more consequential.
- Sector diversification and position sizing matter. For investors with concentrated tech exposure, this episode is a reminder to review risk tolerance and whether portfolio concentration still matches long-term objectives.
My take
This wasn’t just a day when one chip stock slipped — it felt like the market checking whether its AI story has legs. AMD’s earnings raised questions about how quickly companies can turn AI buzz into repeatable, scalable results; weak private payrolls added the macro uncertainty layer. For long-term investors, panic-selling on a two-day move often creates buying opportunities — but not until the narrative clears: either earnings and macro data stabilize, or the market re-prices corporate growth more permanently. Keep an eye on upcoming earnings and the official labor reports this week — they’ll tell us whether this is a short-term hissy fit or the start of a broader re-evaluation.
Takeaways to remember
- AMD’s mixed report blew a hole in AI-fueled expectations for some chip and software names.
- Weak private jobs data amplified fears about growth and made high-tech valuations look riskier.
- Tech’s >2% drop on Tuesday mattered because of the sector’s weight and its role as the growth engine.
- Watch mega-cap earnings and official labor data for clues on whether sentiment shifts are temporary or structural.
Sources
(Note: reporting in these articles includes market coverage from February 4–5, 2026, around AMD’s earnings and contemporaneous jobs data.)
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
When a Rally Meets Reality: Tech Rotation Sends Dow Lower — but Palantir Shines
The market hit that familiar tug-of-war this week: broad indexes slipping while one high-profile tech name sprinted ahead. The Dow fell roughly 400 points and the S&P 500 lost about 1% as investors rotated out of richly valued software and cloud names — even as Palantir’s strong fourth-quarter results and upbeat guidance gave the tech complex a momentary lift.
Here’s a readable take on what happened, why it matters, and what to watch next.
Why the selloff felt different this time
- Markets were already on edge from stretched valuations in AI and software stocks. That “priced-for-perfection” setup made the sector unusually sensitive to any signal that future growth might be harder to monetize.
- A wave of fresh product launches and model advances in AI (and attendant discussions about disruption and pricing power) amplified investor anxiety about which companies will actually keep margins and customers.
- The result: investors rotated away from high-flying software names toward either defensive sectors or names with clearer near-term fundamentals — a rotation that pulled the Dow and S&P lower even though pockets of tech reported strong results.
A bright spot: Palantir’s Q4 pushed a rally — briefly
- Palantir reported stronger-than-expected fourth-quarter results and gave upbeat guidance, which initially sent its shares higher and provided a lift to the tech sector.
- The company’s numbers reinforced the narrative that certain data- and AI-centric firms are converting demand into revenue and improved profitability — which is exactly what investors want to see when they question long-term business resilience.
- Still, the broader software and cloud indexes were under pressure, suggesting Palantir was the exception rather than the rule in this pullback.
Market dynamics in plain language
- When a handful of sectors (here: software and cloud) dominate gains over a long stretch, even modest doubts about future growth can produce outsized moves down.
- Earnings surprises, guidance, and product launches now serve double duty: they can validate a growth story or create fresh skepticism about sustainability (and sometimes both, across different names).
- In other words, a single company’s great quarter (Palantir) can’t single-handedly reverse a sector-wide reassessment — but it points to the winners investors will watch most closely.
What this means for investors and observers
- Volatility is a feature, not a bug, in an era where AI expectations are stretched. Expect sharper moves as new models and product rollouts reshape perceived winners and losers.
- Look beyond headlines: strong revenue growth or a beat matters, but so do guidance, customer metrics, and unit economics. Those are the signals that tend to outlast one-day price moves.
- Diversification and a clear view of time horizon matter more than ever: short-term rotations can punish momentum-heavy portfolios, while longer-term investors may find opportunities in temporary selloffs.
Quick takeaways
- Palantir’s solid Q4 and bullish guidance offered a pro-tech datapoint, but the broader software selloff overwhelmed those gains. (Markets can be unforgiving when an entire bucket of stocks is being re-priced.)
- The price action reflects two competing narratives: genuine structural opportunity from AI versus near-term worries about disruption, pricing power, and stretched valuations.
- Expect more headline-driven volatility as upcoming earnings and AI product launches hit the tape.
My take
This episode feels like a market-level reality check. Enthusiasm for AI remains powerful — but so does the discipline of investors who now demand clearer proof that AI-driven revenue growth translates into durable profits and defensible markets. Companies that can show both grit (unit economics, cash flow) and growth will outperform in the messy stretches between hype cycles.
Sources
(Article titles and coverage used to shape this post; links above point to the corresponding news outlets’ market coverage pages.)
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
When silver forgot the rules: how a China-fueled frenzy blew the top off precious metals
The screens went white. For weeks, traders had been riding one of the most aggressive precious‑metals rallies in decades — then in less than twenty hours silver gave back roughly $40 an ounce and plunged in a way few had seen before. That violent reversal exposed how a cocktail of Chinese retail speculation, strained physical markets and technical safeguards (margins, algorithms, exchange rules) can turn a smoke‑and‑mirrors rally into a sudden market unwind.
Below I unpack what happened, why it got so extreme, and what investors should keep in mind going forward.
How the rally got out of hand
-
Parabolic move first. Silver staged an extraordinary rally through 2025 and into January 2026, propelled by a mix of industrial demand, geopolitical fears and speculative momentum. What starts as rational buying (industry, ETFs, central‑bank flows) can become self‑reinforcing when retail and leveraged players pile in. (Think: more buyers, less paper required per contract, and an expectation that prices only go up.) (m.economictimes.com)
-
A big Chinese footprint. Chinese traders and retail platforms played an outsized role in the surge. Heavy retail participation in China — often through leveraged products and exchange‑linked accounts — amplified volatility and expanded the “paper” exposure to silver beyond what physical supply could cover. When that speculative flow begins to reverse, the effect is amplified. (businessinsider.com)
-
Physical vs. paper stress. Tight physical inventories and frictions in cross‑border flows made the market fragile. When buyers started demanding physical delivery or when exporters tightened exports, the disconnect between the futures (paper) market and actual bullion intensified. That mismatch can sustain rallies — but it also primes the market for violent corrections if leveraged holders are forced to liquidate. (thestreet.com)
-
Margin hikes and forced selling. Exchanges (notably CME) raised margin requirements as volatility surged. Higher margins squeezed leveraged traders and funds, forcing rapid sell orders into already thin markets — a mechanical feedback loop that turned a correction into a crash. (thestreet.com)
-
Macro news as the spark. A shift in macro expectations — for example, a hawkish signal on U.S. monetary policy — strengthened the U.S. dollar and reduced the appeal of non‑yielding assets like gold and silver. That change in sentiment provided the trigger that turned fragile positioning into mass liquidation. (ft.com)
Why this felt different from past pullbacks
-
Speed and leverage. The crash happened faster than many historic drops because leverage today is higher and execution is electronic. Automated systems, program trading and margin‑sensitive accounts can force outsized flows in minutes rather than days.
-
China’s policy layer. Recent Chinese moves affecting metals exports and trading channels added a nation‑level source of uncertainty. That made liquidity in global physical markets more brittle and increased the chance that local Chinese flows would have outsized global effects. (astreka.com)
-
Cross‑market contagion. Silver’s drop didn’t happen in isolation — other industrial metals and gold were affected too. Where previously commodities could absorb shocks, the breadth of positioning (and the prevalence of leveraged retail exposure) made the systemwide reaction sharper. (ft.com)
Lessons for investors and traders
-
What matters more than you think: market plumbing. Supply and demand fundamentals matter — but so do margin rules, exchange interventions, delivery mechanics and who holds the risk. In leveraged, thinly‑liquid markets these mechanics can dominate fundamentals for a while.
-
Know your counterparty risk and leverage exposure. Retail platforms that offer cheap leverage can create asymmetric risks for clients. When you’re long with high leverage, even a small policy or macro surprise becomes dangerous.
-
Distinguish physical from paper exposure. Owning a bar in a vault and owning a futures contract are different bets. When the paper‑to‑physical ratio becomes extreme, prices can diverge quickly and painfully.
-
Expect whipsaw conditions around policy news. Monetary and geopolitical headlines can flip the narrative quickly. Position sizing and stop‑loss discipline aren’t optional in these markets.
What to remember
-
The January 2026 crash was a structural warning: rapid, leveraged flows from China plus strained physical markets and margin hikes equal the recipe for explosive reversals. (businessinsider.com)
-
Margin rules and exchange interventions can be the market’s circuit breakers — and sometimes the accelerants. (thestreet.com)
-
Ownership matters: physical metal, ETFs, futures and leveraged retail products behave differently in stress. (thestreet.com)
My take
We’ve been through narrative cycles before — short squeezes, retail mania, and commodity panics — but the 2025–2026 episode highlights how globalization and digitization of trading magnify those dynamics. Speculation in one major market (China) can now ripple through exchanges and vaults worldwide in a single trading session. For disciplined investors, that means re‑anchoring strategies to fundamentals, minding leverage, and treating liquidity risk as a first‑class concern.
For traders who thrive on volatility, this environment offers opportunity — but only if you respect the mechanics that turned a rally into a rout. For institutions and regulators, it’s a reminder that market structure evolves and that safeguards (margins, position limits, clearer delivery rules) must keep pace.
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
These 5 Ultra‑High‑Yield Dividend Stocks Could Power Your 2026 Income Plan
Intro hook
Looking for steady cash flow in 2026 without chasing speculative growth stocks? Dividend yields in the 5%–8% neighborhood are downright rare for large-cap names — and that's exactly why income-hungry investors are paying attention. Below I walk through five ultra‑high‑yield picks highlighted recently by The Motley Fool, explain why their yields are so attractive, and flag the biggest risks to watch before you put money to work.
Why this matters right now
- The late‑2020s market has been a tug‑of‑war between higher interest rates, resilient corporate profits, and a search for yield as bond returns normalized.
- Companies in midstream energy, REITs, and BDCs have become go‑to sectors for income because they historically generate predictable cash flows or distribute most of their taxable earnings.
- But high yields often reflect market skepticism — either the business faces cyclical pressures, elevated leverage, or payout sustainability questions. Knowing which high yields are durable is the difference between a steady income stream and a painful cut.
A short snapshot of the list
- These five names were recently profiled by The Motley Fool as “ultra‑high‑yield” candidates to consider for 2026: Enterprise Products Partners, Realty Income, Brookfield Infrastructure Partners, Oneok, and MPLX. (fool.com)
What makes each pick interesting
-
Enterprise Products Partners (EPD) — Yield ~6%
- Why it stands out: A top U.S. midstream operator with an enormous pipeline footprint and a long history of distribution increases. Capex cycling down after big build years can free up cash for distributions or buybacks. (fool.com)
- Watch out for: Commodity cycles, take‑or‑pay contract mix, and MLP/partnership structures that add tax and payout complexity.
-
Realty Income (O) — Yield ~5%
- Why it stands out: “The monthly dividend company” — a large, diversified REIT with thousands of properties and a long streak of regular increases (monthly payouts and many consecutive quarters of increases). REITs must distribute most taxable income, which supports predictable income for shareholders. (fool.com)
- Watch out for: Rising rates that can pressure REIT valuations, tenant credit risk in certain retail segments, and the need to grow funds from operations (FFO) to sustain payout growth.
-
Brookfield Infrastructure Partners (BIP) — Yield ~5%
- Why it stands out: A diversified global infrastructure platform (utilities, transport, midstream, data) that benefits from long‑dated contracts and regulated or contracted cash flows. Management recycles capital to fund growth in higher‑return areas like data centers. (fool.com)
- Watch out for: Currency exposure, cyclical asset sales, and the complexity of parent/structure and fee arrangements.
-
Oneok (OKE) — Yield ~5%
- Why it stands out: A growing U.S. midstream operator that expanded via acquisitions in 2024–2025 and has signaled dividend raises in early 2026. The business model centers on fee‑based cash flow from pipelines and terminals. (fool.com)
- Watch out for: Integration risk from large acquisitions and higher leverage following deal activity.
-
MPLX (MPLX) — Yield ~7.7%
- Why it stands out: One of the highest yields among large‑cap midstream names. Backing from Marathon Petroleum helps provide steady feedstock and contractual relationships; recent basin expansions support near‑term growth. (fool.com)
- Watch out for: The very high yield signals elevated market concerns — monitor coverage ratios, commodity exposure, and whether special items or one‑time cash flows are propping up the payout.
How to think about yield versus risk
- High yield is the symptom, not the diagnosis. A 7%+ yield can be attractive, but it’s crucial to ask why the market is pricing that income stream so richly.
- Evaluate payout coverage: For REITs use FFO/AFFO per share, for midstream look at distributable cash flow (DCF) coverage, and for BDCs examine core net investment income and book value trends.
- Balance diversification: If your portfolio tilts to energy midstream and REITs for yield, be aware those sectors can correlate during economic slowdowns. Consider mixing in dividend growers, utility names with stronger balance sheets, or high‑quality bond funds to smooth volatility.
- Tax and structure: MLPs/partnerships and BDCs bring different tax reporting and distribution characteristics than simple dividend‑paying corporations. Factor tax efficiency and account type (taxable vs. retirement account) into allocation decisions.
Practical allocation ideas
- Income bucket approach: Put a portion of your “income” allocation into higher‑yielding names (like these picks), but cap single‑position exposure to limit the impact if a dividend is cut.
- Ladder with maturity‑like diversification: Combine monthly/quarterly payers, categorial diversification (midstream, REIT, infrastructure, BDC), and varying yield levels so one sector’s weakness doesn’t derail overall income.
- Reinvest vs. cash: Decide whether to take dividends as cash for living expenses or reinvest them to compound returns — your choice should match your near‑term liquidity needs.
A few cautionary datapoints from other sources
- High yields often show up when share prices fall; that can reflect true underlying weakness. Kiplinger and other outlets frequently warn not to buy yield blind — check why a stock is cheap before assuming the dividend’s safe. (kiplinger.com)
- Third‑party aggregators and exchanges republishing the Motley Fool list help confirm tickers and yield figures but always verify current yields and payout announcements on company filings or reliable market data before trading. (nasdaq.com)
Key takeaways
- These five names (Enterprise Products Partners, Realty Income, Brookfield Infrastructure, Oneok, MPLX) offer yields in the roughly 5%–7.7% range and are backed by business models that can generate steady cash. (fool.com)
- Yield alone isn’t a buy signal — check payout coverage metrics, leverage, and the company’s growth pipeline.
- Diversify across sectors and structures (REIT, midstream, infrastructure, BDC) to reduce single‑sector concentration risk.
- Confirm yields and recent dividend actions with up‑to‑date company reports or market data before investing.
My take
If your priority for 2026 is steady income, these names deserve a seat at the due‑diligence table. I’m especially drawn to diversified infrastructure and high‑quality REITs for balance, while high‑yield midstream names can make sense if you accept commodity cyclicality and monitor coverage closely. Treat ultra‑high yields like a lead — they can be heavy, useful, and occasionally dangerous if you don’t know why they’re so heavy.
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
The AI Stock That Keeps Bouncing Back: Why CoreWeave Won’t Stay Down
Artificial‑intelligence stories are supposed to be rocket launches: dramatic, fast, and rarely reversing course. Yet some of the most interesting winners have a bumpier ride — pullbacks, doubts, and then surprising rebounds. Enter CoreWeave, the cloud‑GPU specialist that has been fighting gravity and, lately, winning.
A quick hook: the comeback you might’ve missed
CoreWeave (CRWV) shot into public markets in 2025, soared, slid, and then climbed again — all while quietly doing what AI companies need most: giving models the raw GPU horsepower to train and run. Investors worried about debt, scale and whether AI spending would hold up. But a close strategic tie to Nvidia — including a multibillion‑dollar stake and capacity commitments — helped turn skepticism into renewed momentum.
Why this matters right now
- AI model development needs specialized infrastructure: racks of Nvidia GPUs, power, cooling, and expertise. Not every company wants to build that.
- That creates an addressable market for GPU‑cloud providers who can scale quickly and sign long‑term deals with big AI customers.
- Stocks that serve the AI stack (not just chip makers or software vendors) often trade more on growth expectations and capital intensity than near‑term profits — so sentiment swings can be dramatic.
What CoreWeave actually does
- Provides on‑demand access to large fleets of Nvidia GPUs for customers that run AI training and inference workloads.
- Sells capacity and management services so companies (including big names like Meta and OpenAI) can avoid building their own costly infrastructure.
- Is planning aggressive build‑outs — CoreWeave’s stated target includes multi‑gigawatt “AI factory” capacity growth toward 2030.
Those services are plain‑spoken but foundational: models need compute, and CoreWeave packages compute at scale.
The Nvidia connection — more than hype
- Nvidia invested roughly $2 billion in CoreWeave Class A stock and has held a meaningful equity stake (about 7% as reported). That converts a vendor relationship into a strategic tie.
- Nvidia also committed to buying unused CoreWeave capacity through April 2032 — a demand backstop that reduces some revenue risk for CoreWeave as it expands.
- For investors, that kind of endorsement from the dominant GPU supplier matters. It signals product‑level alignment and the potential for preferential access to the most in‑demand accelerators.
Put simply: CoreWeave isn’t just purchasing Nvidia hardware — it has a firm, financial and contractual linkage that changes the risk calculus.
Why the stock fell (and why that doesn’t tell the whole story)
- The pullback in late 2025 was largely driven by investor concerns around the capital intensity of building massive GPU farms and the potential for an AI spending slowdown.
- Rapid share gains after the IPO stoked fears of an overshoot — and when expectations cool, high‑growth, high‑debt names often correct sharply.
- Those concerns are legitimate: scaling GPUs at the pace AI demands requires big debt or equity raises, and execution risk (timelines, power, contracts) is real.
But the rebound shows the other side: compelling demand, marquee customers, and a deep tie to Nvidia can offset those fears — or at least shift expectations about how quickly returns may arrive.
The investor dilemma
- Bull case: CoreWeave sits at the center of a secular AI compute wave, with strong revenue growth potential and a strategic Nvidia link that helps secure hardware and demand.
- Bear case: Execution risk, heavy capital needs, and potential macro or AI‑spending slowdowns could pressure margins and require dilution or higher leverage.
- Time horizon matters: this is not a short‑term dividend play. It’s a growth, capital‑cycle story where patient investors bet on future monopoly‑adjacent utility for AI computing.
A few signals to watch
- Customer contracts and revenue growth cadence (are enterprise and hyperscaler deals expanding or stabilizing?)
- Gross margins and utilization rates (higher utilization of deployed GPUs improves unit economics)
- Capital‑raise activity and debt levels (how much additional financing will be needed to meet gigawatt targets?)
- Nvidia’s continuing involvement (more purchases or strategic agreements would be a strong positive)
The headline takeaway
CoreWeave illustrates a recurring theme of the AI era: infrastructure businesses can be wildly valuable, but they’re capital‑intensive and sentiment‑sensitive. The company’s strategic relationship with Nvidia both de‑risks and differentiates it — and that combination helps explain why the stock “refuses to stay down” when the broader narrative shifts positive.
My take
I find CoreWeave an emblematic AI bet: powerful, essential, and messy. If you believe AI compute demand will keep compounding and that having preferential GPU access matters, CoreWeave is a natural play — though one that requires a stomach for volatility and clarity about financing risk. For long‑term investors who understand capital cycles, it’s a name worth watching; for short‑term traders, expect swings tied to headlines about deals, funding, or Nvidia’s moves.
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Reading the Fed’s Signals: Bowman’s January 16, 2026 Outlook on the Economy and Monetary Policy
Good morning at the conference table of the mind: imagine the Federal Reserve’s meeting notes as a weather report for the economy. On January 16, 2026, Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle W. Bowman stepped up in Boston and delivered a forecast that felt less like thunder and more like watching the clouds: inflation easing, but a labor market growing fragile — and policy makers watching both closely. Her remarks at the New England Economic Forum are a practical, plainspoken reminder that the Fed’s job is often about balancing calm and caution.
Why this speech matters
- The speaker is Michelle W. Bowman, Vice Chair for Supervision of the Federal Reserve Board — a policymaker with a voting role on the FOMC and direct responsibility for bank supervision.
- The talk comes at a moment of transition: after several rate cuts in late 2025, inflation readings looking better once one-off tariff effects are stripped out, and early signs that hiring is weakening.
- Bowman’s emphasis: inflation seems to be moving toward the Fed’s 2% goal, but a fragile labor market raises downside risk — and that should shape monetary policy decisions.
Highlights from Bowman’s outlook
- Recent policy changes: the Fed lowered the federal funds target range by 75 basis points since September 2025 (three 25-basis-point cuts), bringing the range to 3.50–3.75%. Bowman voted for those cuts, viewing policy as moving toward neutral.
- Inflation narrative: headline and core PCE inflation have fallen, and when estimated tariff impacts are removed, core PCE looks much closer to 2%. Core services inflation has eased in particular; remaining pressure is concentrated in core goods, which Bowman expects to moderate as tariff effects fade.
- Labor market concern: hiring rates are low and payroll growth has flattened; with layoffs not yet widespread, the labor market could still deteriorate quickly if demand softens. Bowman views the labor-market downside as the larger near-term risk.
- Policy stance and approach: Bowman favors a forward-looking, data-informed strategy — ready to adjust policy to support employment if labor fragility worsens, while noting policy is not on a preset course.
- Supervision agenda: as Vice Chair for Supervision, Bowman also highlighted regulatory priorities — rationalizing large-bank ratings, improving M&A review processes, and implementing the GENIUS Act responsibilities on stablecoins.
The investor and business dilemma
- For businesses: easing inflation can reduce input-cost pressure, but softer hiring and potentially weaker demand mean firms should be cautious about growth plans and workforce commitments.
- For investors: the combination of lower inflation risk and a fragile labor market suggests the Fed is unlikely to pivot aggressively. Markets should prepare for gradual adjustments rather than dramatic rate swings, with a watchful eye on employment indicators.
What to watch next
- Monthly payrolls and the unemployment rate — signs of a pickup in layoffs or a sharper rise in unemployment would increase the Fed’s focus on supporting employment.
- Core PCE inflation excluding tariff adjustments — Bowman explicitly treats tariff effects as one-offs; if core goods inflation doesn’t continue to soften, that would complicate the 2% story.
- Business hiring intentions and consumer demand measures — weak demand would reinforce Bowman’s caution about labor-market fragility.
- Fed communications at upcoming FOMC meetings — Bowman emphasized that policy is not on autopilot and that the Committee will weigh new data meeting by meeting.
A few practical takeaways
- Expect policy to remain “patient but ready”: the Fed’s stance is moderately restrictive but responsive to incoming data.
- Companies should build flexibility into hiring and capital plans — layering contingent plans (e.g., phased hiring, temporary contracts) reduces risk if demand softens.
- Bond and equity investors should monitor real-time labor and inflation indicators rather than relying solely on past rate moves.
My take
Bowman’s speech reads as pragmatic: credit the Fed for recognizing progress on inflation while honestly calling out the economy’s weak spots. The emphasis on labor-market fragility is a useful corrective to narratives that celebrate disinflation as a finished project. Policymaking in 2026 looks set to be a juggling act — steadying inflation without worsening employment — and Bowman’s call for forward-looking, data-driven decisions is the kind of steady voice markets and Main Street need right now.
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
When Credit Markets Get Hot, Complacency Becomes the Real Risk
Global credit markets are running at their hottest in nearly two decades — spreads are compressing, issuance is booming, and big-name managers from Pimco to Aberdeen are waving caution flags. That combination makes for a heady cocktail: strong returns today, and a growing list of reasons to worry about what happens when the music stops.
Why this matters right now
- Corporate bond spreads have tightened to levels not seen since around 2007, driven by strong demand for yield and an ongoing search for income across institutions and retail investors.
- Heavy issuance — from investment-grade firms to private credit vehicles — has flooded markets with supply, yet investors continue to buy. That eagerness reduces compensation for taking credit risk.
- Managers who’ve lived through cycles (and painful defaults) are increasingly saying the same thing: fundamentals are showing cracks in some corners, underwriting standards look looser than they should, and the “complacency premium” may be dangerously low.
The tone isn’t doomsday. Rather, it’s a reminder that stretched markets can stay stretched for a long time — and when conditions change, losses can happen fast.
How the market got here
- Central banks’ pivot from emergency easing to tighter rates in recent years, followed by signs of easing expectations, encouraged buyers back into credit. Falling government yields made corporate spreads look attractive — at first.
- Private credit exploded in size as investors chased higher returns outside public markets. That growth brought looser lender protections and more leverage in some deals.
- Big pools of long-term capital (pension funds, insurers, yield-seeking mutual funds) have structurally increased demand for credit, reducing the market’s risk premiums.
Those forces combined into a classic late-cycle pattern: strong performance, plentiful issuance, and gradually deteriorating underwriting standards.
What the big managers are saying
- Pimco’s research and outlooks have highlighted compressed spreads and growing caution about private credit and lower-quality, highly leveraged sectors. Their view: be selective, favor high-quality public fixed income, and avoid chasing thin risk premia where protections are weak. (See Pimco’s recent “Charting the Year Ahead” insights.)
- Aberdeen (abrdn) analysts have laid out scenarios — soft landing, hard landing, and “higher-for-longer” rates — and pointed out that spreads now price a fairly optimistic path. They advise balancing risk and opportunity, favoring investment-grade credits while watching for vulnerabilities in lower-rated segments.
These voices aren’t saying “sell everything.” They’re saying: recognize where compensation is thin, stress-test portfolios for adverse outcomes, and favor structures and collateral that offer real protection.
Where vigilance should be highest
- Private credit and direct lending: Less liquid, often less transparent, and sometimes offering little extra spread relative to liquidity and covenant risk.
- Lower-rated corporate bonds and cov-lite loan markets: Covenant erosion and looser underwriting reduce recovery prospects if stress arrives.
- Heavily levered sectors or those exposed to cyclical slowdowns: Retail, certain parts of tech and media, and some leveraged consumer plays.
- Vehicles promising liquidity that isn’t supported by underlying assets: Mismatches can amplify losses in stressed conditions.
Practical portfolio nudges
- Tilt toward quality: Favor issuers with stable cash flows, healthy balance sheets, and strong covenants when possible.
- Mind liquidity: Don’t over-allocate to strategies or funds that can’t meet redemptions in a stress event if you rely on liquidity.
- Diversify across credit continuums: Think of public vs. private, secured vs. unsecured, and short vs. long duration as decision levers — not as a single “credit” bucket.
- Stress-test yield assumptions: Ask how returns hold up if rates shock higher or default rates rise modestly.
- Focus on security selection: In a spread-compressed world, alpha from selection matters more than broad beta exposure.
The investor dilemma
- On one hand, credit has delivered attractive returns and many investors can’t ignore the income.
- On the other, chasing that income without discipline risks permanent impairment of capital if defaults or liquidity squeezes spike.
That tension is the heart of the current message from the Street: participate, but don’t confuse participation with prudence.
A few scenarios to watch
- Soft landing: Spreads tighten further, defaults stay low — investors get more upside, but valuations look stretched.
- Hard landing: Spreads widen materially, defaults rise — lower-quality credit and illiquid private positions suffer first and worst.
- Higher-for-longer rates: Credit performance is mixed; higher absolute yields cushion total returns, but re-pricing risk and refinancing stress hurt vulnerable issuers.
Being explicit about which scenario you’re implicitly betting on helps shape position sizing and risk controls.
My take
There’s nothing inherently wrong with credit markets being hot — markets reflect supply, demand, and investor preferences. The problem is complacency: when good outcomes become the norm, people gradually lower their guard. Today’s environment rewards selectivity, structural protections, and a healthy dose of skepticism about easy-looking yield. For most investors, that means reducing blind beta in favor of credit with clear collateral, conservative underwriting, and diversified liquidity sources.
Final thoughts
Markets can stay frothy for longer than intuition suggests. That’s why the best defense isn’t trying to time the exact top but building resilience: limit exposure where compensation is thin, demand transparency and covenants, and keep some capacity to redeploy into genuinely attractive opportunities if conditions normalize or stress reveals weaknesses. The loudest warnings aren’t forecasts of immediate collapse — they’re a call to invest with intention.
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
When a Truth Social Post Moves Markets: Credit-card Stocks Tumble After Trump’s 10% Pitch
It took a few sentences on Truth Social to send a jolt through Wall Street. On Jan. 10–12, 2026, shares of card-heavy lenders—Capital One among them—slid sharply after President Donald Trump called for a one‑year cap on credit‑card interest rates at 10%, saying he would “no longer let the American Public be ‘ripped off’ by Credit Card Companies.” The market reaction was immediate: card issuers and some big banks saw double‑digit intraday swings in premarket and regular trading as investors tried to price political risk into credit businesses. (cbsnews.com)
The scene in the trading pit
- Capital One, which leans heavily on credit‑card interest, was among the hardest hit—dropping roughly 6–9% in early trading depending on the snapshot—while other card issuers and big banks also fell. Payment processors such as Visa and Mastercard slipped too, though their business models are less dependent on interest income. (rttnews.com)
- Traders didn’t just react to the headline; they reacted to uncertainty: Would this be a voluntary squeeze, an executive action, or an actual law? Most analysts pointed out that a 10% cap would require congressional legislation to be enforceable and could be difficult to implement quickly. (politifact.com)
Why markets panicked (and why the panic might be overdone)
- Credit cards are a high‑margin, unsecured loan product. Banks price risk into APRs; slicing those rates dramatically would compress profits and force repricing or pullback in lending to riskier customers. Analysts warned of a “material hit” to card economics if 10% became reality. (reuters.com)
- But there’s a big legal and political gap between a president’s call on social media and an enforceable nationwide interest cap. An executive decree cannot rewrite federal usury rules or contractual APRs without Congress—or sweeping regulatory authority that doesn’t presently exist. That makes the proposal politically potent but legally fragile. (politifact.com)
- Markets hate uncertainty. Even improbable policy moves can shave multiples from stock valuations when they threaten a core revenue stream. That’s why even companies like Visa and Mastercard dipped: a hit to consumer spending or card usage patterns could ripple into transaction volumes. (barrons.com)
Who wins and who loses if a 10% cap actually happened
- Losers
- Pure‑play card issuers and lenders with big portfolios of higher‑risk card balances (e.g., Capital One, Synchrony) would see margins squeezed and might exit segments of the market. (rttnews.com)
- Rewards programs and cardholder perks could be reduced as banks seek to cut costs that were previously subsidized by interest income. (investopedia.com)
- Winners (conditional)
- Consumers who carry balances could see immediate relief in interest payments if the cap were enacted and applied broadly.
- Payment networks could potentially benefit from increased transaction volumes if lower borrowing costs stimulated spending, though network revenue isn’t directly tied to APRs. Analysts are divided. (barrons.com)
The investor dilemma
- Short term: stocks price in political risk fast. If you’re an investor, the selloff can create buying opportunities—especially if you think the cap is unlikely to pass or would be watered down. Some strategists flagged this as a dip to consider adding to core positions. (barrons.com)
- Medium term: watch credit metrics. If a cap—or even credible legislative movement toward one—appears likely, expect a repricing of credit spreads, tightened underwriting, and lower return assumptions for card portfolios.
- For conservative portfolios: prefer diversified banks with strong deposit franchises and diversified fee income over mono‑line card lenders. For risk seekers: sharp selloffs can be entry points if you accept policy risk and can hold through noise. (axios.com)
Context and background you should know
- Credit card interest rates have been unusually high in recent years—average APRs have been around or above 20%—driven by higher Fed policy rates and the risk profile of revolving balances. That’s why the idea of a 10% cap resonates politically: it’s easy to sell to voters frustrated by the cost of everyday credit. (reuters.com)
- The mechanics matter: imposing a blanket cap raises thorny questions about existing contracts, late fees, penalty APRs, and whether banks could offset lost interest with higher fees or reduced credit access. Policymakers and consumer advocates debate tradeoffs between lower rates and potential credit rationing for vulnerable borrowers. (reuters.com)
Angle for business and consumer readers
- For business readers: policy headlines can create volatility—think through scenario planning, stress‑test margins under lower APR assumptions, and model customer credit migration or fee adjustments.
- For consumers: a political promise is different from a law. While the headline offers hope, practical steps—improving credit scores, shopping for lower APR offers, and negotiating with issuers—remain the most reliable ways to lower your rate today. (washingtonpost.com)
My take
The episode is a textbook example of modern politics meeting modern markets: a high‑impact, low‑information social‑media policy push that forces quick repricing. The risk to banks is real if Congress moves, but the legal and logistical hurdles are substantial—so the smarter read for many investors is to separate near‑term market panic from long‑term structural risk. For consumers, the promise is attractive; for firms, it’s a reminder that political headlines are now a permanent driver of volatility.
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
A banner year — and a cautionary tail: how AI powered the S&P’s 2025 jump
Hook: 2025 ended with markets celebrating a banner year — the S&P 500 rose roughly 16.4% — but the party had a clear DJ: artificial intelligence. That enthusiasm pushed big tech higher, buoyed indices, and created intense concentration in a handful of winners. By year-end, some corners of the market had begun to fray, reminding investors that rallies driven by a single theme can be both powerful and fragile. (apnews.com)
What happened this year — the headlines in plain language
- The S&P 500 finished 2025 up about 16.4% as markets digested faster-than-expected AI adoption, a friendlier interest-rate backdrop and renewed risk appetite. (apnews.com)
- AI enthusiasm — from chipmakers to cloud providers and software firms — was the dominant narrative, driving outperformance in tech-heavy areas and across the Nasdaq. (cnbc.com)
- Late in the year some pockets cooled: not every AI-linked stock delivered on lofty expectations, and overall breadth narrowed as gains concentrated in a smaller group of large-cap names. (cnbc.com)
A little context: why 2025 felt different
-
Three key forces aligned. First, companies accelerated spending on AI infrastructure and services; second, markets grew more comfortable with an easing in monetary policy expectations; third, investor FOMO around AI narratives stayed intense. Those forces compounded to lift valuations, especially in firms tied to semiconductors, data centers and generative-AI software. (cnbc.com)
-
But rally composition matters. When a handful of megacaps or a single theme is responsible for a large slice of index gains, headline numbers can mask vulnerability. That dynamic showed up later in the year as some AI-exposed pockets underperformed or stalled — a reminder that concentrated rallies can reverse quickly if growth or profit expectations slip. (cnbc.com)
Why AI became the market’s engine
- Real demand, not just hype: companies across industries rushed to integrate AI for cost savings, automation and new products. That created genuine revenue and margin opportunities for the vendors supplying chips, cloud capacity and software tooling. (cnbc.com)
- Scarcity of supply for key inputs: specialized chips and data-center capacity tightened, lifting the financials of firms positioned to supply AI workloads. Where supply constraints met exploding demand, prices and profits followed. (cnbc.com)
- The reflexive nature of markets: investor sentiment amplified fundamentals. Early winners saw outsized flows, which pushed valuations higher and attracted still more attention — a classic feedback loop. (cnbc.com)
The risks that crept in as the year closed
- Narrow leadership increases systemic sensitivity. When a smaller group of stocks drives the bulk of gains, an earnings miss or regulatory worry can have outsized market impact. (cnbc.com)
- Valuation compression risk. High expectations bake future growth into prices; if execution falters, multiples can re-rate quickly. Analysts flagged restrictive valuations for some AI winners. (cnbc.com)
- Macro and geopolitical overhangs. Tariff talk, geopolitical tensions, and any unexpected shift in Fed policy can flip sentiment — especially when market positioning is crowded. (cnbc.com)
How different investors experienced 2025
- Index owners: enjoyed a strong calendar return, but the headline gain hid concentration risk. Passive investors benefited when the big winners rose, but they also absorbed the downside when those names wobbled. (apnews.com)
- Active managers: some delivered standout returns by being long the right AI plays or adjacent beneficiaries (semiconductors, cloud infra). Others underperformed if they were overweight cyclicals or value stocks that lagged the AI trade. (cnbc.com)
- Long-term allocators: faced choices about whether to rebalance away from hot winners or to add exposure in anticipation of durable structural gains from AI adoption. That debate dominated portfolio meetings. (cnbc.com)
Practical lessons from the 2025 rally
- Look past the headline. A healthy rally ideally shows broad participation; concentration warrants scrutiny. (apnews.com)
- Distinguish durable winners from momentum. Ask whether revenue and profits support lofty valuations, not just whether a story is exciting. (cnbc.com)
- Mind risk sizing. In thematic rallies, position sizing and diversification are practical defenses against sharp reversals. (cnbc.com)
Market signals to watch in 2026
- Earnings delivery from AI-exposed companies — can revenue growth translate into margin expansion? (cnbc.com)
- Fed guidance and real rates — further rate cuts or a surprise tightening would change the calculus on valuation multiples. (reuters.com)
- Signs of broader participation — rotation into cyclicals, value, or international markets would indicate healthier breadth. (apnews.com)
My take
2025 was a clear example of how a powerful structural theme can reshape markets quickly. AI isn’t a fad — the technology has broad, real-world applications — but the market’s tendency to overshoot expectations is alive and well. For investors, the smart posture is curiosity plus caution: follow the business economics underneath the hype, size positions thoughtfully, and don’t confuse headline index gains with uniform, across-the-board strength. (cnbc.com)
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
When dividends take the wheel: why Bank of America thinks payouts matter in 2026
The market’s engines have been different lately. Price gains drove much of the S&P 500’s recent roar, but Bank of America’s research team — led by Savita Subramanian — is flagging a shift: dividend growth may pick up in 2026 and start reclaiming its traditional role in total returns. That’s a signal worth listening to if you own stocks for income, total-return compounding, or simply to reduce reliance on multiple expansion.
Why this matters now
- Bank of America’s strategists argue that valuation expansion (higher price-to-earnings multiples) has been a major driver of recent gains — and that this tailwind may fade. When multiple expansion stalls, dividends become a bigger piece of the returns puzzle. (investing.com)
- BofA projects stronger earnings breadth in 2026, and with payout ratios near historic lows for many firms, it expects dividend growth to rise year over year — providing more cash return to shareholders. (m.in.investing.com)
- CNBC highlighted the same theme in its roundup of stocks with payouts that beat the market, anchoring the media coverage that income-focused investors should watch dividend trends as we move into 2026. (archive.ph)
What Bank of America actually said (in plain language)
- The bank sees 2026 as a year when earnings growth broadens beyond a handful of mega-cap winners. That can support rising dividends across sectors. (m.in.investing.com)
- Historically, dividend contributions to total return were much larger than they’ve been in the past decade; reverting toward that longer-run role would meaningfully lift long-term total returns even if price appreciation is muted. (investing.com)
The investor dilemma: chasing growth vs. locking in cash
- If price returns slow, investors either must accept lower total returns or look to other sources of return — dividends are the obvious alternative.
- High dividend yields can cushion downside and provide deployable cash, but they can also mask company-specific risks (e.g., weak cash flow or one-off payouts).
- The smart move is not to fetishize a yield number; it’s to evaluate payout sustainability: earnings coverage, free cash flow, balance-sheet strength, and management’s capital-allocation priorities.
Sectors and stock types to watch (what typically leads when dividends matter)
- Financials: banks and insurers can boost payouts when earnings and capital tests permit — and Bank of America itself has been growing its dividend in recent quarters, illustrating how a healthy bank can combine buybacks and higher payouts. (investor.bankofamerica.com)
- Energy and commodities: mature producers often return excess cash via dividends when commodity markets cooperate.
- REITs and utilities: by design, these businesses distribute a large share of cash flow and tend to be dividend-heavy.
- Mature consumer and industrial companies: lower-growth, cash-rich firms frequently prioritize steady payouts.
(These are general tendencies; any specific company needs case-by-case scrutiny.)
How to think about building an income-aware portfolio for 2026
- Tilt for quality: prioritize companies with consistent cash flow, conservative payout ratios, and intact balance sheets.
- Check payout drivers: are dividends covered by operating cash flow or propped up by asset sales or one-time events? Coverage matters.
- Diversify across dividend sources: combine REITs, select financials, defensives (consumer staples), and high-quality dividend growers rather than concentrating in one sector.
- Reinvest thoughtfully: if your goal is compounding, dividend reinvestment can materially boost long-term returns — a point BofA emphasizes when prices don’t carry the full return load. (investing.com)
A small list of real-world reminders (not stock picks)
- Even large, well-capitalized banks have increased payouts when capital ratios and stress-test results permitted — showing how regulation and capital policy shape dividend outcomes. (investor.bankofamerica.com)
- Media coverage (CNBC and others) is already flagging individual stocks and groups where payouts “beat the market,” reflecting a broader marketplace focus on income as 2026 approaches. (archive.ph)
What to watch next (concrete signals)
- Corporate payout-ratio revisions and published dividend guidance.
- Federal Reserve and macro signals that affect corporate borrowing costs and capital allocation.
- Quarterly earnings breadth: are more companies showing EPS growth (not just the mega caps)? BofA links rising dividend growth to broader earnings strength. (m.in.investing.com)
My take
Dividends aren’t glamorous, but they’re practical. If Bank of America’s call about rising dividend growth in 2026 proves right, investors who prepare now — by favoring payout sustainability and quality — will be positioned to benefit from steadier cash returns even if headline price gains cool. That doesn’t mean abandoning growth, but it does mean giving dividends their due in portfolio planning.
Sources
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.
