Overview

 Market indexes regained all of their losses since the president’s “Liberation Day” tariff announcement one month ago, culminating in an historic +10% 9-day rally for the S&P 500 (and +18% from its 4/7 intraday low) that sent it back above its 20-day and 50-day moving averages to test resistance at its 200-day. But was this just a short-covering relief rally as bearish commentators assert? I said in my April post that the $10 trillion that left the stock market was not the “capital destruction” they claimed, like a wildfire burning down homes, but rather a rotation into the safety of bonds and cash that could quickly rotate back. Sure enough, when retail investors swooped in to scoop up the suddenly fair valuations of the capitulation selloff, leveraged algo momentum traders quickly joined in. But while I think the longer term holds promise, the chart became short-term overbought (and is pulling back this week), and macro conditions are still treacherous, keeping investors jittery and headline-driven. So, the market remains fragile even as we wind down a solid Q1 earnings reporting season, with the FOMC policy announcement on tap this week.

Nevertheless, in my view, positive signs are emerging to suggest: 1) the trade war (particularly with China) and the hot war in Ukraine will both find their way to a resolution, 2) the fiscal legislation (“one big, beautiful bill”) with new tax cuts working its way through congress will soon be passed, 3) the size and scope of federal government that has crowded out the private sector is shrinking and making way for re-privatization and de-regulation of the economy to unleash organic private sector growth, 4) corporate earnings and capex commitments remain strong, and 5) the Federal Reserve will ensure liquidity growth and restart its rate-cutting cycle like other central banks—and liquidity leads pricing in risk asset markets, gold, and cryptocurrencies. So, I think the noise will quiet and the clouds will clear, making way for a renewed focus on corporate earnings and global liquidity to power forward the economy and stocks. And don’t forget—the market loves to climb a wall of worry, which means it discounts the future and typically turns well in advance of the economic and sentiment metrics.

Of course, the biggest news that juiced the stock market is the apparent offramp forming for the trade stalemate between the US and China. Publicly, China has been saber-rattling as a Trumpian bargaining tactic, in my view, and to stoke the flames of political division in our country with midterms on the docket next year—something the CCP doesn’t have to worry much about. Indeed, it has been loath to give an inch even though its economy was already struggling with deflation, a long-running property crisis, sluggish consumer demand, overcapacity, and weak business and consumer confidence well before the recent tariff escalation. Its services PMI just hit a 7-month low, its manufacturing PMI has officially fallen into contraction at 49.0, and its new export orders component plunged to the lowest reading since the pandemic at 44.7. And although China insists the US “unilaterally” started the trade war, the truth is we are finally pushing back after years of turning a blind eye to their tariffs, IP theft, forced technology transfers, hacking, state subsidies, dumping of goods, fentanyl trafficking, and currency manipulation.

In my view, the US is in far better position to weather a brief trade war than mercantilist China. As Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent succinctly articulated, “China’s business model is predicated on selling cheap, subsidized goods to the US, and if there is a sudden stop in that, they will have a sudden stop in their economy. So, they will negotiate.” Both governments know that an escalating trade war with big tariffs and a tight US Federal Reserve is especially bad for China. The dollar/yuan exchange rate is crucially important to China, and the dollar today is nearly as strong it has been against the yuan since yuan’s devaluation during the Global Financial Crisis. With its massive dollar-denominated debt, a weaker dollar relieves China’s financial strain by boosting global liquidity to the benefit of both countries. So, despite its theatrical saber-rattling, China needs a trade deal that ensures a weaker dollar to shore up the yuan and reduce capital flight.

Indeed, we are now hearing from China that “the door is open” to trade talks, and its security czar is evaluating ways to address the use of Chinese precursor chemicals by Mexican cartels to produce fentanyl for distribution in the US. Moreover, although the Port of Los Angeles announced that volumes will fall be 1/3 as several major American retailers are halting all shipments from China, in reality, American businesses as usual are finding a way to succeed (and skirt the most onerous tariffs) by rerouting supply chains through 3rd party countries like Vietnam and Mexico (“trans-shipping”) and delivering to bonded warehouses to delay the official receipt of goods. Also offsetting the tariffs is the 10% drop in the dollar index.

Looking ahead, although volatility likely will remain elevated for the next few months, unless something crazy comes out of left field, I think the market has seen its lows, and the path of least resistance is higher. American consumers, corporations, and entrepreneurs are optimistic by nature and are always pushing boundaries and seeking a path forward, rather than sitting on their hands waiting for government to tell them what to do. And of course, President Trump is not one to sit on his hands for one minute in his effort to “fix” our unsustainable “death spiral” of inflation, debt, deficit spending, offshoring, and hyper-financialization.

But then we have the FOMC, whose members have been quite happy to sit on their hands in the face of tariff turmoil, falling inflation, and slowing GDP and jobs growth. Among the 19 FOMC participants (the 7 Board of Governors and 12 Reserve Bank regional presidents, which includes both the 12 voting members and the 7 non-voting members who serve as voting members on a rotating basis), they almost unanimously (18 of 19) agreed at their March meeting that growth and employment risks are skewed to the downside while inflation risks are skewed to the upside. Overall, the Fed has taken a dovish stance but will be reactive to sudden distress in growth and jobs rather than proactive in preventing such distress.

Although Fed Chair Powell often talks about tariffs as being inflationary, in fact tariffs are deflationary like all forms of taxation—i.e., without a commensurate increase in income or credit, they necessitate a rethinking and reallocation of one’s existing disposable income. Furthermore, Powell & Co. seem to be ignoring the deflationary signals of falling oil prices, slowing household consumption, declining savings rates, and rising delinquencies. Inflation metrics are pulling back after being propped up by elevated energy prices and long-lag components (like shelter costs) and the prior administration’s profligate federal deficit spending that overshadowed—and indeed created—sluggish growth in the private sector. I talk more about inflation metrics and expectations for next week’s CPI and PPI releases in my full commentary below.

To be fair, government spending (to the tune of nearly 6.5% of GDP) exacerbated the inflation and private sector malaise it created by making it difficult for the Powell & Co. to justify helping out the private sector with lower interest rates, thus crowding out the efficient capital allocation and high return on investment of the private sector with the inefficient capital allocation of bloated government boondoggles. Economist Michael Howell of CrossBorder Capital reminds us that “public debt is expanding faster than private debt, fueled by welfare commitments and rising interest burdens, ensuring persistent liquidity growth.” Importantly, Howell persuasively asserts that, “monetary policy must prioritize liquidity over inflation” concerns, so the Fed’s current hands-off, higher-for-longer, reactionary approach risks causing a liquidity crunch. In his view, “The modern financial system is a fragile, collateral-driven mechanism, and one that requires constant intervention [through proactive management] to avoid collapse.”

As Andrew Lees of MacroStrategy Partners has pointed out, “Economies naturally self-order productively when not constrained by excessive regulation and over-bearing government intervention. The current "financialized" economic system as it is, is dependent on debt and unproductive use of capital (Wall Street vs Main Street).” The private sector has proven to be much better at the efficient and highly productive allocation of capital to maximize ROI. So, as Secretary Bessent has described, the Trump administration seeks to reduce the budget deficit to 3% of GDP and increase real GDP growth to 3%, which would lead to the same kind of small-government/strong-private-sector economy that has turned around a foundering Argentina under President Milei.

The May FOMC meeting convenes this week, so we shall see. CME Group fed funds futures show only 3% odds of a 25-bp rate cut, but increases to 32% at the June meeting, and 78% odds of at least 75 bps (3 cuts) by year-end. In my view, they should be readying for 50 bps in rate cuts by July and a target neutral rate of around 3.25-3.50% by early 2026. Certainly the 2-year Treasury yield (the shortest term that is substantially market driven) at 3.80% (as of 5/6) is signaling to the Fed that rates should be much lower than the current 4.25-4.50% fed funds rate. According to a recent post by AlpineMacro, “…the current 10-2 year spread in the bond market is not sustainable, particularly if the economy slows sharply. Ultimately, the long end of the curve will gravitate to the short end, particularly when investors realize that tariff-induced price increases are temporary.” Notably, projections on bond issuance from Secretary Bessent suggest a gradual return to an 80/20 split between T-bonds & notes (80%) versus T-bills (20%) going forward as opposed to the nearly 100% allocation to T-bills (< 1 year) under his predecessor Janet Yellen.

I have been insisting for some time that the FFR needs to be 100 bps lower, as the US economy's headline GDP and jobs numbers were long artificially propped up by excessive, inefficient, and often unproductive federal deficit spending, while the hamstrung private sector has seen sluggish growth. Moreover, today’s DOGE-led spending cuts, trade war uncertainty, and with budget reconciliation and fiscal legislation still in progress have removed much of that artificial stimulus. But regardless of the May FOMC decision, I expect the rate-cutting cycle to restart in June and signed trade deals with our 18 key trading partners beginning this month.

But for the near term, until those things come to fruition, I continue to expect stocks will remain volatile (with VIX above the 20 “fear threshold” but below the 30 “panic threshold”). CNN's Fear & Greed Index just jumped from "Fear” to “Greed” on the dial but remains volatile. The American Association of Individual Investors' ("AAII") Investor Sentiment Survey has shown more than 50% bearish (vs. historical average of 31%) for 10 consecutive weeks, which is the longest streak since 1990. Capital flows reflect a sharp drop in foreign capital flight into US bonds and equities over the past two months in something of a “buyers’ strike,” adding pressure to the US dollar. And last week saw a negative Q1 GDP print, somewhat offset by an upside beat from the jobs report and rising labor force participation.

There are certainly plenty of high-profile bears. One market technician I respect a lot, A.J. Monte of Sticky Trades, still believes stocks will eventually retest their pandemic lows (!). He warned of the dreaded “death cross” when the 50-day moving average crossed down through the 200-day moving average on 4/12. And then we have Christoper Wood of Jefferies, who believes that US stocks saw a permanent (!) peak last December (at lofty valuations) and will never (!) see those levels again—much like Japan’s market peak in 1989. Instead of US stocks, Wood thinks investors should buy Europe, China, Japan, and India. Others have pronounced that the US brand is permanently damaged and that we have witnessed the end of “American exceptionalism.” Heavy sigh.

Call me overly patriotic with rose-colored glasses, but my view is a little different. Capital tends to flow to where it is most welcome and earns its highest returns, so the recent falling tide of foreign capital flight leaving the US will surely return once visibility clears and the dollar firms up. Most any foreign investor will tell you there is no other place in the world to invest capital for the innovation and expected return than the US given our entrepreneurial culture, technological leadership in disruptive innovation, strong focus on building shareholder value, low interest-rate exposure, global scalability, wide protective moats, and our reliable and consistently strong earnings growth, free cash flow, margins, and return ratios, particularly among the dominant, cash flush, Big Tech titans, which continue to use their piles of cash to seed AI startups and other disruptive technologies. Notably, the US boasts more than 50% of the world’s privately owned late-stage start-ups valued at over $1 billion (aka “unicorns”) and leads in R&D spending and patent applications.

Moreover, it’s not just the Technology sector that is appealing to investors. As BlackRock wrote in their Q2 2025 Equity Market Outlook, “Commentators will often cite the prevalence of a large number of Tech companies in the U.S. as the driver of U.S. equity dominance. But our analysis points to wider breadth in U.S. quality. Current return on tangible invested capital (ROTIC), a proxy for a company’s ability to allocate capital for optimal profitability, is significantly higher in the U.S. than elsewhere in the world, suggesting quality exists not in pockets but across sectors.”

As Kevin O’Leary has opined, “Our number one export is the American dream. Everyone wants to come to America and start a business and become personally free." And this will not change just because our president seeks to incentivize the private sector to strategically reshore manufacturing with the ultimate goals of reviving the middle class, narrowing the wealth gap, reducing the trade deficit, ensuring reliable supply chains, and reinforcing national security. Moreover, Trump’s federal cost-cutting, tariff regime, and America-First rhetoric does not aim for absolute deglobalization, fiscal austerity, mercantilism, and isolationism as the MSM would have you believe, but rather to simply rebalance a system that had become completely out of balance—and indeed was falling into that aforementioned death spiral of rising inflation, debt, deficit spending, offshoring, and hyper-financialization. The rebalancing involves re-privatization and de-regulation rather than relying on massive government spending—and what I call “smart austerity” to eliminate waste, fraud, abuse, corruption and unaccountability, plus a “peace dividend” from ending the war in Ukraine.

So, I continue to believe the macro uncertainty and jittery market will ultimately give way to a melt-up, sending the market to back near its highs of Q1 by year-end or early-2026, driven by rising global liquidity, a weaker US dollar, reduced wasteful/reckless government spending and regulatory red tape, lower interest and tax rates, massive corporate capex, and the “animal spirits” of a rejuvenated private sector and housing market.

The early April selloff brought down some of the loftiest valuations among the popular mega-cap stocks, with the forward P/E on the S&P 500 falling to 18.5x on 4/8 versus 22.7x at its February peak and today’s 20.6x (as of 5/5). In fact, many of the prominent names in the Technology and Communication Services sectors saw their valuations retreat such that they are scoring well in Sabrient’s growth models (as shown in our next-gen Sabrient Scorecards subscription product)—including large caps like Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM), Broadcom (AVGO), and Spotify (SPOT) that are in the new Q2 2025 Sabrient Baker’s Dozen portfolio, and small caps like Freshworks (FRSH), QuinStreet (QNST), and RingCentral (RNG) that are in our new Sabrient Small Cap Growth 46 portfolio. These portfolios along with Sabrient Dividend 51 (a growth & income strategy yielding 4.05% as of 5/5) are packaged and distributed quarterly to the financial advisor community as unit investment trusts through First Trust Portfolios.

Indeed, rather than the passive cap-weighted indexes dominated by Big Tech, investors may be better served by active stock selection that seeks to identify under-the-radar and undervalued gems primed for explosive growth—many of whom could coattail on the Big Tech names and provide greater returns. This is what Sabrient seeks to do in our various portfolios, all of which provide exposure to Value, Quality, Growth, and Size factors and to both secular and cyclical growth trends.

As a reminder, the “Size” factor refers to market cap and the Fama French study that showed small caps historically tend to outperform over time. Although that has not been the case for the small cap indexes (like Russell 2000) for most of the past 20 years, I still think the small cap universe is where to find the most explosive growth opportunities, even if the broad passive indexes can't keep up. So, insightful active selection is important for small cap investing—which is easier to do given the relative lack of analyst coverage and institutional ownership of small caps.

For each of our portfolios, we seek high-quality, fundamentally strong companies displaying a history of consistent, reliable, and accelerating sales and earnings growth, rising profit margins and free cash flow, solid earnings quality, low debt burden, and a reasonable valuation. Notably, our proprietary Earnings Quality Rank (EQR) is a key factor in each of our growth, value, dividend, and small cap models, and it is also licensed to the actively managed First Trust Long-Short ETF (FTLS).

Sabrient founder David Brown describes these and other factors as well as his portfolio construction process in his latest book. David describes his path from NASA engineer in the Apollo moon landing program to creating quant models for ranking stocks and building stock portfolios. And as a companion product to the book, we have launched next-gen versions of Sabrient Scorecards for Stocks and ETFs. You can learn more about both the book and scorecards by visiting: http://DavidBrownInvestingBook.com.

In my full commentary below, I discuss earnings, gold, tariffs, inflation, global liquidity, the power of free market capitalism, and the imminent “bullish triumvirate” of tariff resolution, tax cuts, and deregulation. I also discuss Sabrient’s latest fundamental-based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, current positioning of our sector rotation model, and several top-ranked ETF ideas. Our model likes Technology, Healthcare, Communication Services sectors, and assuming interest rates indeed come down and liquidity rises as I expect, I also like dividend stocks and gold. HERE is a link to this post in printable PDF format.

I had so much to say this month that I decided to defer until next month my in-depth commentary on the exciting new developments in energy and electrical generation. Please contact me to speak on any of these topics at your event!  Read on….

  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

 Key Points:

 1. The country’s 40-year path into a debt & deficit spending spiral was not working and had to change dramatically, not gradually, and the process to fix it is scary and uncomfortable.

2. The president’s “Liberation Day” tariff regime is at once simplistic and perplexing, but the selloff seems overdone, in my view, although the market remains fragile.

3. After an initial price shock, tariffs are deflationary like any tax; and countries are already coming to the table to negotiate them down.

4. The US is much less dependent on trade, less vulnerable to trade disruptions, and in far better position to weather a brief trade war than any other country, including mercantilist China, which is saber-rattling as a Trumpian bargaining tactic and to stoke the flames of political division in our country, in my view.

5. The $10 trillion that left the stock market was not lost like a wildfire burning down homes; it simply rotated into bonds and cash and can quickly rotate back if the outlook does not change and we have fiscal stimulus, supportive Fed, and rising global liquidity.

6. Volatility (up and down) may be sticking around through H1 until clarity improves later in the year.

7. For those still contributing to a 401(k), the selloff has presented a long-awaited opportunity to “buy low.”

8. Investors may be better served by active stock selection, such as Sabrient’s Baker’s Dozen, Small Cap, and Dividend portfolios.

Overview:

The news has been dominated by President Trump’s announced “Liberation Day” regimen of draconian tariffs, which are intended to induce both fairer trade policies from our trading partners and the onshoring of manufacturing. As his words moved from a 10% across-the-board baseline tariff (a nominal amount that initially sent stocks higher) to the gory details of his broader plan, the swan dive commenced. Negative volume went through the roof. Margin calls rained in. Algorithmic trading systems switched from leveraged long to either leveraged short or out of the market completely (thus removing critical liquidity), tripping stop losses and creating a cascade of selling pressure. The next day’s weekly AAII Sentiment Survey hit an extreme 62% bearish reading and will likely fall lower in this week’s survey. IPOs are being put on hold. The Polymarket odds of an emergency rate cut surged to 285, as did the odds of a rate cut meeting (36% at the May FOMC meeting but a 92% lock by the June meeting).

As of Monday morning’s open, the stock market had essentially given back all last year’s gains. Chartists are lamenting the failure of scary-bearish chart patterns (like the dreaded inverse flag pattern) that could potentially send stock indexes all the way down to their pandemic lows. The CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) surged above 45 on Friday 4/4 and then touched 60 in the pre-hours on Monday 4/7, which is reminiscent of the pandemic lockdown five years ago.

But are things today really as bad as that, when global supply chains were paralyzed and people were falling ill (and/or dying) en masse? I would say no, and in just a couple of blood-red, gap-down days, the rapid market meltdown already seems overdone, as I discuss further in today’s post. As famed value investor Ben Graham once said, “In the short run, the market is a voting machine, but in the long run it is a weighting machine.”

Although the VIX certainly could still go higher (perhaps a lot higher) and stocks lower, Friday looked to me a lot like capitulation and perhaps the start of a bottoming process leading to a great (and long-awaited) buying opportunity for long-term investors. Just be careful about “catching a falling knife.” Many countries (reportedly more than 50) have apparently reached out to fix their trade arrangements, although the biggie, China, is still in saber-rattling mode, at least for now.

Of course, the current selloff also was exacerbated by “priced for perfection” valuations and a complacent “buy every dip” mentality, largely driven by AI exuberance (and its promise of transformation disruption and rapid growth in productivity) and the massive capex allocated for AI infrastructure and datacenters. Furthermore, during the run-up to all-time highs in 2024, hedge funds had become more heavily leveraged long in US equities than at any time since the pandemic lockdown (as much 300% leveraged), essentially pulling forward gains from 2025 based on strong earnings expectations. So, there might be some similarities to the dot-com bubble bursting in 2001 in that respect. But even at its recent high, the overvaluation was nowhere near 1999 levels of the dot-com mania, and we don’t have the systemic credit and accounting issues leading into the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. Company balance sheets are quite sound, and although credit spreads have spiked, they remain low on a historical basis.

Even before the 4/2 tariff announcement, stocks were already looking shaky. It was fascinating to watch the charts of the major indexes like the S&P 500 ETF (SPY) and Nasdaq 100 ETF (QQQ) as they struggled for several days to hold support at the 300-day simply moving average, like a sloth hanging from a tree branch, until ultimately losing grip in dramatic fashion following the big tariff announcement. I opined in my March post that it might be time to create a shopping list of stocks but that volatility would likely continue into the tariff target date (4/2) and perhaps into Tax Day (as liquidity draws down for making tax payments). But few (including me) expected the cataclysmic selloff. Volatility may be sticking around for a while until clarity improves, particularly as Q1 earnings season (and forward guidance) kicks off this week.

To be sure, the reality of the new administration’s aggressive policies to fix many long-festering trade issues has caused much consternation and gnashing of teeth, drawn swift retaliation (particularly from China), disrupted global supply chains, lowered corporate earnings estimates, and raised recession risk (both domestically and globally). In response, just like when the so-called “bond vigilantes” short Treasury notes and bonds (or go to cash) in protest of rising budget deficits and total debt, the “stock vigilantes” went to work shorting stocks (or defensively moving to cash or Treasuries, removing market liquidity and briefly driving the 10-year yield below 4.0%) in protest of the uncertain impacts on the economy and corporate earnings. Or as former Democrat turned Trump supporter Batya Ungar-Sargon sees it, “Suddenly, everybody is sitting around saying, ‘Oh, no, the stock market!’ Yeah, the stock market looks like that because the rich [i.e., Wall Street institutional investors and hedge funds] are punishing Trump for siding with the neglected and humiliated American working class over them.” Indeed, the top 10% of Americans by income own 88% of stocks, the next 40% own 12%, and the bottom 50% are shut out.

So, yes, stock portfolios, IRAs, and 401(k) plans are way down, as the evening news keeps telling us. According to Bespoke Investment Group, the Russell 3000 has seen well over $10 trillion in lost market cap since Inauguration Day (1/20). However—and this is an important point—this is not “capital destruction” in the same sense that a wildfire can destroy homes and businesses. The capital pulled from the stock market didn’t vanish from the earth. It simply rotated into cash and bonds. And it very likely will return to stocks once trade situations are ironed out and visibility improves. It might take several months…or it could come back in a hurry. Be prepared. Perhaps start nibbling at stocks now. If you’re like me, you probably received a slew of low-price alerts for your target list. Some speculative investors might be going all-in at current levels. Regardless, for those still contributing to their IRA or 401(k) and not yet drawing on it, this selloff is a gift to be appreciated, in my view, restoring some value back into the market. After all, when you are in long-term accumulation mode, you want to “buy low.”

Of course, no one knows for sure how low it can go and when the selloff will bottom—and the bottoming process may be lengthy and volatile. The wild card for stocks going forward is uncertainty around the severity and duration of tariffs, which seem designed by their sheer audacity to induce a swift resolution. After all, there is no underlying malady in the economy that prevents business leaders and entrepreneurs from adapting like they always do, and only pride and prejudice can prevent a quick resolution to most of the trade arrangements.

Political, economic, and market volatility will surely continue during H1. But even if we get a larger correction than I expect, I continue to believe stocks will soon find support and ultimately give way to a gradual melt-up, sending the market to back near its highs of Q1 by year-end or early-2026, driven by rising global liquidity, a weaker US dollar, reduced wasteful/reckless government spending and regulatory red tape, lower interest and tax rates, massive corporate capex, and the “animal spirits” of a rejuvenated private sector and housing market. So, if you have been hoping and praying for lower prices in risk assets (including stocks and crypto) or for a lower mortgage rate to buy a house, you are getting them now, with the forward P/E on the S&P 500 at 18.7x as of 4/4 (before any significant downward revisions to earnings estimates), versus 22.7x at its February peak. As the poet Virgil once said (in Latin), “audentes Fortuna iuvat” — i.e., “fortune favors the bold.”

Because this market correction was led by the bull market-leading MAG-7 stocks and all things AI related, investors now have a second chance to get positions in some of those mega-cap titans at more attractive prices. There remains a persistent sense among global investors of “American exceptionalism” based on ouir entrepreneurial culture, a tenacious focus on building shareholder value, and the mesmerizing appeal of our Big Tech companies that offer disruptive innovation, huge cash positions, reliable and consistently strong earnings growth, free cash flow, margins, return ratios, low interest-rate exposure, global scalability, and wide protective moats.

So, the initial recovery may well be led by the Big Tech titans that are now much more fairly valued, such as NVIDIA (NVDA) at a forward P/E of 21x (as of 4/4). Notably, some of these names have seen their valuations retreat such that they are once again scoring well in Sabrient’s growth models (as found in our next-gen Sabrient Scorecards subscription product)—including names like Amazon (AMZN), NVIDIA (NVDA), Salesforce (CRM), Alphabet (GOOGL), Meta Platforms (META), Microsoft (MSFT), Broadcom (AVGO), Oracle (ORCL), Arista Networks (ANET), Fortinet (FTNT), Palo Alto Networks (PANW), Palantir (PLTR), and Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM)—two of which (TSM and AMZN) are in the Q1 2025 Sabrient Baker’s Dozen.

But longer term, rather than the passive cap-weighted indexes dominated by Big Tech, investors may be better served by active stock selection that seeks to identify under-the-radar and undervalued gems primed for explosive growth—many of whom could coattail on the Big Tech names and provide greater returns. This is what Sabrient seeks to do in our various portfolios, all of which provide exposure to Value, Quality, Growth, and Size factors and to both secular and cyclical growth trends.

As for small caps, which as pointed out by Fama French used to outperform large caps over the long haul (higher risk, higher reward), the small cap indexes have been consistently lagging large cap indexes over the past 20 years, mostly due to their much lower allocation to the Technology sector. For example, the S&P 500 has a massive 17.6% relative overweight to the Tech sector (30.3%) versus the Russell 2000 (12.7%). And if you include the Tech-adjacent MAG-7 names that are categorized as Consumer Discretionary (i.e., Amazon and Tesla totaling 5.3%) and Communications (Alphabet and Meta Platforms totaling 6.4%), the S&P 500 allocation to the MAG-7 is 30.5%, and the combined Tech plus Tech-adjacent allocation is a whopping 42.0%—or a 28.9% relative overweight versus the Russell 2000!

Some might say that small caps are due for a mean reversion versus the S&P 500, but it seems its relative overweight to cyclical sectors like Industrials, Financials, Real Estate, Materials, and Energy (with only noncyclical/secular growth Healthcare having an overweight of 5.9%) rather than to secular growth Technology would make any attempt at mean reversion temporary. Nevertheless, I still think the small cap universe is where to find the most explosive growth opportunities (with the notable exception of large cap names like NVDA), even if the broad passive indexes (like Russell 2000) can't keep up. So, insightful active selection is important for small cap investing—which is easier to do given the relative lack of analyst coverage and institutional ownership of small caps.

We at Sabrient have become best known for our “Baker’s Dozen” portfolio of 13 diverse growth-at-a-reasonable-price (GARP) stocks, which is packaged and distributed quarterly to the financial advisor community as a unit investment trust through First Trust Portfolios, along with three other offshoot strategies based on Value, Dividend, and Small Cap investing. By the way, our Q1 2025 Baker’s Dozen remains in primary market until 4/16, after which time the Q2 portfolio launches. Also, our Small Cap Growth 45 portfolio remains in primary market until 4/21, followed by the launch of Small Cap Growth 46, and Dividend 51 is in primary market paying a 4.25% yield on new purchases.

As a reminder, Sabrient founder David Brown’s new book, How to Build High Performance Stock Portfolios, is available in both paperback and eBook versions on Amazon. And as a companion product to the book, we have launched next-gen versions of Sabrient Scorecards for Stocks and ETFs. You can learn more about the scorecards book and, download a sample scorecard, and sign-up for a free trial subscription—by visiting: http://DavidBrownInvestingBook.com/

In today's post, I examine in detail the new tariff regimen, the case for reducing (but not eliminating) the trade deficit, the liquidity challenge and “debt maturity wall,” and the case for tariffs and trade realignment. You won’t regret reading it through! I also discuss Sabrient’s latest fundamental-based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, current positioning of our sector rotation model, and several top-ranked ETF ideas. Here is a link to this post in printable PDF format.  Read on….

  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

Overview:

Strong US stock market performance has been driven, in my view, by the combination of: 1) a dovish Fed, money supply growth and global capital flight to the US (“shadow liquidity”), 2) expectations of lower energy costs and falling inflation, 3) AI exuberance and capex and the promise of massive productivity gains, and 4) growing optimism about technologies like nuclear energy, blockchain, quantum computing, robotics, autonomous vehicles, and genomics. But after two consecutive years of 20%+ gains in the S&P 500 for the first time since 1998 (and even greater gains for the Tech-dominated Nasdaq 100)—greatly outperforming all prominent forecasts—investors are looking ahead to a year that arguably brings even greater uncertainty and a wider range of expected outcomes, ranging from a recession and bear market to a continued bull run within a Roaring ‘20s-redux decade.

Will Trump 2.0 business-friendly fiscal policies (e.g., tax cuts, deregulation) and DOGE cost-cutting impact the economy, inflation, federal budget deficit, and corporate profits negatively for a period of time before kicking in later? What about sluggish economic growth abroad and the disastrous impacts of the ultra-strong dollar, particularly among key trading partners like Canada, Mexico, Europe, China, and Japan? And will the massive corporate capex (which is expected to accelerate under the new administration’s policies) start to show commensurate returns in the form of rising productivity and profitability, leading to rising GDP growth (in true supply-side style) without the crutch of government deficit spending (which accounted for about 30% of growth over the last 4 quarters)…and ultimately to rising tax receipts to quickly offset any initial rise in the deficit?

The bull case sees an economy and stock market driven by business-friendly fiscal policies under Trump 2.0 including deregulation, lower corporate tax rate, and restoration of civil liberties and constitutional freedoms should also be stimulative and might fuel disinflation (as opposed to the inflation that many critics expect). Trump’s energy policies are also likely to be disinflationary. Capital flight into the US (most of which stays outside our banking system and therefore is not captured by M2), huge corporate capex, less deficit spending (and politburo-style “malinvestment” and mandates), and strong productivity growth, and rising velocity of money that offsets any tightening in money supply growth.

According to Capital Group, a mid-cycle economy typically displays rising corporate profits, accelerating credit demand, modest inflationary pressures, and a move toward neutral monetary policy—all of which occurred during 2024. And besides expectations of a highly aggressive 15% earnings growth in the S&P 500 over the next couple of years, Silicon Valley VC Shervin Pishevar recently opined, “I think there’s going to be a renaissance of innovation in America…It’s going to be exciting to see… AI is going to accelerate so fast we’re going to reach AGI [Artificial General Intelligence, or human-like thinking] within the next 2-3 years. I think there will be ‘Manhattan Projects’ for AI, quantum computing, biotech.” So, it all sounds quite good.

However, my observation is that GDP and jobs growth have been highly reliant on huge government deficit spending bills, which is not so good. The Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow model forecasts Q4 GDP to come in at just 2.7%, which is sluggish growth considering the huge amount of government money and corporate capex being spent. Rising bond yields and strengthening US dollar means less liquidity and tighter financial conditions, which are negatives for risk assets. The incoming administration—free this time of the unknowing appointment of deep-state obstructionists like in his first term—is suggesting a new tack characterized by smaller government and the unleashing of animal spirits in the private sector, with the goal of achieving GDP growth north of 4%.

So, for 2025, I expect strong fiscal and monetary policy support for economic growth (albeit with some pains and stumbles along the way as government spending is reined in) as well as moderating inflation as shelter costs recede, military conflicts are resolved (war is inflationary), and deflationary impulses arrive from struggling economies in China and Europe. I also expect stocks and bonds will both attain modest gains by year end (albeit with elevated volatility along the way). In this transitional year in which a more politically seasoned Donald Trump’s policies and leadership have gained broader support domestically across demographics (and indeed across the world), how it all gets off the ground and how quickly it generates traction this year will have profound implications for the rest of his term and beyond. Heck, even a growing contingent in ultra-blue California have become willing to give his approach a chance—further red-pilled by the disastrous LA wildfires (more on this below).

To me, the biggest question marks for our economy and stocks in 2025 (other than a Black Swan event) are: 1) the net impacts of Trump’s cost cutting efforts (on federal deficit spending and boondoggles) balanced with his pro-business policies and a supportive Fed, and 2) the impacts of economic growth struggles abroad. China is dealing with deflation (PPI has declined for 26 months in a row), a real estate crisis, weak retail sales, and surging excess savings among a shrinking population. Since the Global Financial Crisis, China’s marginal returns on capital have plunged from around 14% to barely 5% (on par with the US). As for the Eurozone, its share of world GDP has fallen from a high of 26.4% in 1992 to just 14.8% in 202, as its obsession with renewable electricity (rather than fossil fuels and nuclear) costing 5x the price of conventionally produced electricity—and driving low returns on capital and thus capital flight. As MacroStrategy Partners UK has opined, “With all of GDP [essentially] an energy conversion, our future depends on either extending fossil fuel production further or developing nuclear.”

Indeed, the US remains the beacon of hope for global investors. However, at the moment, surging bond yields, weak market internals, and a strengthening dollar suggest investors have grown cautious. All the major stock and bond indexes fell below their 50-day simple moving averages (although they are trying to regain them today, 1/15). Inflation hedges gold and bitcoin have risen back above theirs, but all these asset classes have lost both their momentum in concert with sluggish global liquidity growth since October (as pointed out by economist and liquidity guru Michael Howell of CrossBorder Capital). Of course, rising real yields tend to reduce the appeal of gold, and nominal yields have been rising much faster than the modest (and likely temporary) uptick in inflation.

Indeed, the latest PPI and CPI readings this week show stabilization, which the markets cheered (across all asset classes). As I write, the 10-year Treasury yield has fallen below 4.70% and the 20-year dropped below the important 5% handle. Hopefully, this will stem the rise in 30-year mortgage rates, which are above 7.0%, creating a big impediment to the critical housing market. The delinquency rate on commercial office MBS jumped to a record 11% in December, which is the highest since the Global Financial Crisis. Consumer credit card defaults jumped to a 14-year high as average cc interest rates hit a record high, now in excess of 23%. And then we have our federal government needing to roll over at least $16 trillion (of our $36.2 trillion debt) during the next four years.

Although Michael Howell thinks the 10-year Treasury yield could continue to rise to perhaps 5.5%, which would be a huge definite negative for risk assets, my view is that bond prices will soon find support (and stabilize yields), which would help stocks stabilize as well. After all, US Treasury yields are attractive in that they are among the highest among developed markets, and the two largest economies are diverging, with China’s yields collapsing (10-year below 1.7%) as US yields surged. Indeed, debt deflation and sluggish economic conditions in China are at risk of creating a deflationary spiral. Also, the traditional 60/40 stock/bond portfolio rebalancing is taking place, which shifts capital from equities to bonds.

If I am right and the bottom in 20-year Treasury price (i.e., peak yield) is nigh (as it retests its low from April 2024), we likely would see the dollar decline, gold rally, and bond yields fall, which would be a tailwind for growth stocks. Ultimately, I expect the terminal fed funds rate will be around 3.50% (from today’s 4.25-4.50%), although it might not get there until 2026, and I think the 10-year will gradually settle back to around 4.25%.

Assuming AI and blockchain capital spending and productivity gains are already largely priced into the lofty Big Tech valuations, perhaps this is the year that the market finally broadens in earnest such that opportunities can be found among small caps, bonds and dividend paying stocks, value, and cyclical sectors like Financials, Industrials, and Transports (and perhaps segments of Energy, like natural gas production, liquefication, and transport), However, the Basic Materials sector, particularly industrial commodities (like copper), may struggle with weak Chinese demand, and because many commodities are priced in dollars, a strong dollar reduces purchasing power among all our trading partners, which further hinders demand. As such, Materials continues to rank at the bottom of Sabrient’s SectorCast rankings.

I go into all of this (and more, including my outlook for 2025) in my full post below. Overall, my suggestion to investors remains this. Don’t chase the highflyers and instead focus on high-quality businesses at reasonable prices, hold inflation and dollar hedges like gold and bitcoin, expect elevated volatility given the uncertainty of the new administration’s policies and impact, and be prepared to exploit any market pullbacks by accumulating those high-quality stocks in anticipation of gains by year end and beyond, fueled by massive capex in blockchain and AI applications, infrastructure, and energy, leading to rising productivity, increased productive capacity (“duplicative excess capacity,” in the words of Treasury Secretary nominee Scott Bessent, would be disinflationary), and economic expansion.

When I say, “high-quality company,” I mean one that is fundamentally strong by displaying a history of consistent, reliable, and accelerating sales and earnings growth, positive revisions to Wall Street analysts’ consensus forward estimates, rising profit margins and free cash flow, solid earnings quality, and low debt burden. These are the factors Sabrient employs in selecting our portfolios. We also use many of those factors in our SectorCast ETF ranking model. And notably, our Earnings Quality Rank (EQR) is a key factor in each of these models, and it is also licensed to the actively managed, absolute-return-oriented First Trust Long-Short ETF (FTLS).

Sabrient founder David Brown describes these (and other) factors and his portfolio construction process in his new book, How to Build High Performance Stock Portfolios, which is available on Amazon for investors of all experience levels. David describes his path from NASA engineer on the Apollo 11 moon landing project to creating quant models for ranking stocks and building stock portfolios in 4 distinct investing styles—growth, value, dividend, or small cap growth. To learn more about David's book and the companion subscription product we offer that does most of the stock evaluation work for you, visit: https://DavidBrownInvestingBook.com

As a reminder, our research team at Sabrient leverages a process-driven, quantitative methodology to build predictive multifactor models, data sets, stock and ETF rankings, rules-based equity indexes, and thematic stock portfolios. As you might expect from former engineers, we use the scientific method and hypothesis-testing to build models that make sense—and we do that for growth, value, dividend, and small cap strategies. We have become best known for our “Baker’s Dozen” growth portfolio of 13 diverse picks, which is packaged and distributed quarterly to the financial advisor community as a unit investment trust, along with 3 other offshoot strategies for value, dividend, and small cap investing.

In fact, the Q1 2025 Baker’s Dozen will launch this Friday 1/17, followed by Small Cap Growth on 1/22 and then Dividend on 2/11.

Lastly, let me make a brief comment on the LA wildfires. It seems every wildfire in SoCal has always ended when “we got lucky,” as the fire chiefs and local meteorologists would say, due to the winds tapering off and/or rains arriving just in time. I certainly saw this firsthand a few times during my 20 years raising a family in Santa Barbara. And I always wondered, what will happen when this “luck” doesn’t materialize the next time? Of course, even if one believes that reversing climate change is humanly possible, the lengthy timetable to decarbonization (while countries like China and India continue to increase carbon emissions by burning coal at record amounts to generate 60% and 70% of their electricity, respectively) means that proper preparation today for disasters is essential. And yet California’s leadership was doing the opposite, prioritizing specious social justice agendas while degrading readiness for the “perfect storm” of wildfire conditions…when luck fails to arrive. My deepest sympathies, thoughts, and prayers go out to all those impacted by this preventable tragedy.

Click HERE to continue reading my full commentary online or to sign up for email delivery of this monthly market letter. Also, here is a link to this post in printable PDF format. I invite you to share it as appropriate (to the extent your compliance allows).

  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

Well, the election is finally upon us, and most folks on either side of the aisle seem to think that the stakes couldn’t be higher. That might be true. But for the stock market, I think removing the uncertainty will send stocks higher in a “relief rally” no matter who wins, as additional COVID stimulus, an infrastructure spending bill, and better corporate planning visibility are just a few of the slam-dunk catalysts. Either way, Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is here, as both sides seem to agree that the only way to prevent a COVID-induced depression in a highly indebted economy is to print even more money and become even more leveraged and indebted. Now investors can only anxiously pray for a clean, uncontested election, followed soon by a reopening of schools and businesses. Stocks surely would soar.

Of course, certain industries might be favored over others depending upon the party in power, but in general I expect greater market breadth and higher prices into year-end and into the New Year. However, last week, given the absence of a COVID vaccine and additional fiscal stimulus plus the resurgence of COVID-19 in the US and Europe, not to mention worries of a contested election that ends up in the courts, stocks fell as investors took chips off the table and raised cash to ride out the volatility and prepare for the next buying opportunity. The CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) even spiked above 41 last week and closed Friday at 38, which is in panic territory (although far below the all-time high of 85.47 in March).

Nevertheless, even as the market indices fell (primarily due to profit-taking among the bigger growth names that had run so high), many of the neglected value stocks have held up pretty well. And lest you forget, global liquidity is abundant and continuing to rise (no matter who wins the election) – and searching for higher returns than ultra-low (or even negative) government and sovereign debt obligations are yielding.

All in all, this year has been a bit deceiving. While the growth-oriented, cap-weighted indexes have been in a strong bull market thanks to a handful of mega-cap Tech names, the broader market essentially has been in a downtrend since mid-2018, making it very difficult for any valuation-oriented portfolio or equal-weight index to keep up. However, since mid-July (and especially since the September lows) we have seen signs of a nascent rotation into value/cyclicals/small caps, which is a bullish sign of a healthy market. Institutional buyers are back, and they are buying the higher-quality stocks, encouraged by solid Q3 earnings reports.

Going forward, our expectation is that the historic imbalances in Value/Growth and Small/Large performance ratios will continue to gradually revert and market leadership will broaden such that strategic beta ETFs, active selection, and equal weighting will thrive once again. This should be favorable for value, quality, and growth at a reasonable price (GARP) strategies like Sabrient’s, although not to the exclusion of the unstoppable secular growth industries. In other words, investors should be positioned for both cyclical and secular growth.

Notably, Sabrient has enhanced its GARP strategy by adding our new Growth Quality Rank (GQR), which rewards companies with more consistent and reliable earnings growth, putting secular-growth stocks on more competitive footing in the rankings with cyclical growth (even though their forward valuations are often higher than our GARP model previously rewarded). As a result, our newer Baker’s Dozen portfolios launched since December 2019 reflect better balance between secular growth and cyclical/value stocks and across large/mid/small market caps. And those portfolios have shown markedly improved performance relative to the benchmark, even with this year’s continued bifurcation. Names like Adobe (ADBE), Autodesk (ADSK), Digital Turbine (APPS), Amazon (AMZN), Charter Communications (CHTR), NVIDIA (NVDA), and SolarEdge Technologies (SEDG) became eligible with the addition of GQR, and they have been top performers. But at the same time, our portfolios are also well-positioned for a broadening or rotation to value, cyclicals, and small caps. In addition, our three Small Cap Growth portfolios that have launched during 2020 using the same enhanced selection process are all nicely outperforming their benchmark. So, IMHO, this provides solid justification for an investor to take a fresh look at Sabrient’s portfolios today.

In this periodic update, I provide a comprehensive market commentary, offer my technical analysis of the S&P 500 chart, review Sabrient’s latest fundamentals-based SectorCast rankings of the ten US business sectors, and serve up some actionable ETF trading ideas. In summary, I expect stocks to move higher once the election results are finalized – but with plenty of volatility along the way until the economy is fully unleashed from its COVID shackles. In addition, our sector rankings reflect a moderately bullish bias (as the corporate outlook is starting to clear up), the technical picture looks ready for at least a modest bullish bounce from last week’s profit-taking, and our sector rotation model retains its neutral posture. As a reminder, you can go to http://bakersdozen.sabrient.com/bakers-dozen-marketing-materials to find my latest Baker’s Dozen slide deck and commentary on terminating portfolios. Read on....

Last week, the S&P 500 put up its best week of the year, closing above key psychological levels and breaking through bearish technical resistance, with bulls largely inspired by the dovish FOMC meeting minutes. But this year’s market has been news-driven and quite difficult for traders to read. Even our fundamentals-based and quality-oriented quant models have struggled to perform.

Much ado was made of China’s surprise 3% devaluation of their currency last week. But keep in mind, the yuan is pegged to the dollar, and with the dollar so strong, every major floating currency and commodity is down a lot more than that. Deflation is now a real threat. Then, there is the suddenly resolved issue of Greece’s debt (along with the worry of a domino-like fall of the entire Eurozone).

Last week, the major indexes fell back below round-number thresholds that had taken a lot of effort to eclipse. There has been an ongoing ebb-and-flow of capital between risk-on and risk-off, including high sector correlations, which is far from ideal. But at the end of it all, the S&P 500 found itself right back on top of long-standing support and poised for a bounce, and Monday’s action proved yet again that bulls are determined to defend their long-standing uptrend line.

Stocks are hitting new highs across the board, even though earnings reports have been somewhat disappointing. Actually, to be more precise, Q4 results have been pretty good, but it is forward guidance that has been cautious and/or cloudy as sales into overseas markets are expected to suffer due to strength in the US dollar.