Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Business Week. I'm Carol Masser. Every day
Speaker 1: we're bringing you the latest news from the world's of
Speaker 1: business and finance, plus technology, politics. So much going on
Speaker 1: in the world of politics, economics, and it's all harnessing
Speaker 1: the power of Business Week reporters and editors. You can
Speaker 1: download Bloomberg Business Week on iTunes, SoundCloud, or Bloomberg dot com.
Speaker 1: If you can also listen to our radio show at
Speaker 1: two pm Eastern on Bloomberg Radio and be sure to
Speaker 1: watch us too on YouTube by searching Bloomberg Global News.
Speaker 1: All right, you're listening to Bloomberg Business Week. We had
Speaker 1: a bunch of headlines with the US new cases topping
Speaker 1: eighty nine thousand, setting a daily record. We know global
Speaker 1: infections are surpassing forty five million, and we are seeing
Speaker 1: really Europe grappling to control of renewed surge in the disease.
Speaker 1: This as we continue to see work done and moving
Speaker 1: forward on a vaccine. Let's get to our weekly chat.
Speaker 1: I love this with Dr Ian lost bead Or, Clinical
Speaker 1: Associate Professor of Medicine at n y U Landgo Medical Center.
Speaker 1: He joins us once again on the phone in New York.
Speaker 1: Dr les Bader. Nice to have you here, Ian, How
Speaker 1: are you very well? Thanks Carol, Happy Friday, and definitely
Speaker 1: green is good, so up and away would be is
Speaker 1: always good. How are you doing. I'm doing okay. I
Speaker 1: think it's been a jem packed week. We're getting ready
Speaker 1: for another one on the news front because of the election.
Speaker 1: But we're also I think there's safe to say, a
Speaker 1: new round of stress as we start to see are
Speaker 1: we continue to see that these you know, virus case
Speaker 1: cases hospitalizations rise around the country, around the world. I
Speaker 1: mean we're well into what the second wave here or
Speaker 1: at least the beginning of it in the US. Yeah, definitely,
Speaker 1: you know we are as we've said before on the show.
Speaker 1: You know, we we've seen these waves with other pandemics.
Speaker 1: This is not the first or the last pandemical see. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: you know, humans also for from recency bias. We're always
Speaker 1: fighting the last war, and candidly we were in globally,
Speaker 1: I think unprepared and I think we've tried to aggressively
Speaker 1: pursue that the vaccines are coming. The preliminary data that
Speaker 1: I've seen look very good. You know, with antibuddy tigers,
Speaker 1: we talked about that last week. Levels that that that
Speaker 1: are actually higher and seem to last longer than in
Speaker 1: people who actually have the disease. Now, you know, will
Speaker 1: every vaccine do this and will people need more than
Speaker 1: one vaccine? Possibly? Um, And we've certainly spent a lot
Speaker 1: of capital, time and energy and billions of dollars on that,
Speaker 1: But it's so unusual to be able to get a
Speaker 1: vaccine in under a year. Usually this takes a long time.
Speaker 1: So I think, um, we were really unprepared. Humans are
Speaker 1: always fighting the last war. But I think we've responded well.
Speaker 1: And in any war, you know, there are winners and losers,
Speaker 1: and certainly a lot of companies are are getting a
Speaker 1: lot of money and hopefully it will be worth it.
Speaker 1: You know, it's interesting we had a conversation. The cover
Speaker 1: story of Bloomberg business Week magazine is all about Operation
Speaker 1: Warp Speed and and particularly one company that's really involved
Speaker 1: in terms of the logistics of getting getting this out.
Speaker 1: But what's interesting is we had some discussions in about
Speaker 1: you know, normally when there's a drug development, we don't
Speaker 1: hear about all the testing. We don't hear about the setbacks,
Speaker 1: which is a normal part of right creating. You know,
Speaker 1: a vaccine if you will, or or or a treatment
Speaker 1: that has to go through all the phase trials of testing,
Speaker 1: so you know, in some ways there's a lot of
Speaker 1: transparency on this process, which is great, right, but it
Speaker 1: also maybe ups the anxiety about whether or not do
Speaker 1: I want to take this vaccine because it's happening so
Speaker 1: fast and there's been setbacks. But that's I mean, it's
Speaker 1: not dissimilar to something that often takes a lot longer
Speaker 1: for That's definitely true. You know, the data I've seen
Speaker 1: not not to push a vaccine or another. The data
Speaker 1: that I've seen is carefully done studies, and certainly the
Speaker 1: clinical studies and phase three studies are not being rushed.
Speaker 1: They're accumulating patients, they're doing very careful follow up and
Speaker 1: blood testing. So my sense is that that these um
Speaker 1: UH these studies are being done very carefully, and I
Speaker 1: certainly would feel comfortable based on what I'm seeing, to
Speaker 1: the early in line or even joined to study UH
Speaker 1: to see how effective it is. But I'm encouraged, and
Speaker 1: I think we we don't have a lot of other options.
Speaker 1: Either we succumb to shutdowns and and UH slowing economy
Speaker 1: and and and higher death rate, or we sort of
Speaker 1: step up to the plate we've talked about last week,
Speaker 1: and we can talk against some individual responsibility. What can
Speaker 1: we do individually while we're waiting, we can talk about
Speaker 1: that if you wish well talk a little bit about that,
Speaker 1: because I do think that's important. You know, we we kid,
Speaker 1: we joke, but we it's not a joke. You know.
Speaker 1: The whole idea of social distancing and wearing masks. I mean,
Speaker 1: there are things that you can do that make a
Speaker 1: significant impact, no question about it. I just had a patient.
Speaker 1: There are several patients actually who have come in for
Speaker 1: follow ups, and we're talking about flu shots and encouraging
Speaker 1: people to get flu shots. And there are actually rumors
Speaker 1: on the internet that the flu shot UM increases your
Speaker 1: risk of COVID nineteen, which is completely untrue. Uh. They're
Speaker 1: referring to a study uh previously about flu shots and
Speaker 1: they actually helped protect against several other viruses. Interestingly enough
Speaker 1: RSV and other viruses UM, but for some other coronaviruses,
Speaker 1: non COVID nineteen viruses, there was a slight increased incidence
Speaker 1: of them. They're basically like common cold viruses. Other coronaviruses,
Speaker 1: and some people you know, seem to think that that
Speaker 1: was increased risk, but in fact that's not so. I
Speaker 1: think we need to educate people. I think we need
Speaker 1: to reassure people because, as you say, this is a
Speaker 1: very dynamic time. You know. The good news is uh,
Speaker 1: uh that it really is a less than five percent
Speaker 1: death rate. It's about globally about three percent, and various
Speaker 1: countries are higher or lower. Uh. So it's a nine
Speaker 1: you know, survival rate. And again, how do we focus
Speaker 1: on that three so, you know, lose weight, get your
Speaker 1: blood sugars under control, where a mask, do social distancing,
Speaker 1: hand washing. Uh. There are individual things that we can do.
Speaker 1: And passing wars, you know, global wars. Everybody participated there.
Speaker 1: There should not be this you're on one side or
Speaker 1: I'm on the other. Dr lesbid I thought what was
Speaker 1: interesting Charlie and his report talking about uh from the
Speaker 1: team over at Johns Hopkins. This whole idea of kind
Speaker 1: of what worked over the summer doesn't work now. I
Speaker 1: mean the conditions have changed, especially as it gets colder,
Speaker 1: we're inside more. Um, there's gatherings and let's kind of
Speaker 1: throw on top of it. Pandemic fatigue. Yeah, exactly, you're
Speaker 1: you're both of you are quite right that as it
Speaker 1: gets colder, it's much harder for people to eat outdoors
Speaker 1: or socialize outdoors. Uh, And there is pandemic fatigue to
Speaker 1: some degree in retrospect. I believe it was actually Jeff
Speaker 1: Gunblack who said, I think back in February, let's just
Speaker 1: close the country down for four weeks. That might have
Speaker 1: made a big difference. But people were in certainly in
Speaker 1: New York City for for several months, and there were
Speaker 1: really emotional and psychologic consequences, not to mention economic. And
Speaker 1: I think that's the difference between Asia or certain parts
Speaker 1: of Asia. If we can believe those numbers where you
Speaker 1: can lock down a city of forty million, say no
Speaker 1: one and no one out, very tough to do that
Speaker 1: in free societies and and open societies. So we're back
Speaker 1: to simpler methods until we get a vaccine. Do you
Speaker 1: not believe the numbers out of China? I know we
Speaker 1: have to be smart and cautious, but do you not? Uh,
Speaker 1: you know, I think it's hard to know. And I
Speaker 1: think in a way it doesn't really matter because we
Speaker 1: have to deal with what we have to deal with here,
Speaker 1: which is you know, airplanes coming in and out and
Speaker 1: people traveling around and and honestly, the the screening people
Speaker 1: with just shooting a temperature at them to to check
Speaker 1: their temperature as a very inefficient. People can be uh
Speaker 1: harboring the virus for for several days and be infectious
Speaker 1: without really having symptoms. So and masks as well. Back
Speaker 1: in everyone war cloth masks um and we had fifty
Speaker 1: million worldwide dead. We actually fortunately have much lower numbers.
Speaker 1: It's about um over a million worldwide. So uh, not
Speaker 1: to compare one virus to another, they're they're definitely different viruses,
Speaker 1: but I think it's harder in an open traveling society
Speaker 1: to lock it down quite as effectively. And therefore we
Speaker 1: have to rely on individuals taking responsibility with masks and
Speaker 1: losing weight and maybe taking some vitamin D and and
Speaker 1: being healthy and using intelligence, you know, to to protect themselves. Well,
Speaker 1: what's interesting too, and I just want to follow on
Speaker 1: that because we did we did have an interesting story
Speaker 1: um earlier this week on the Bloomberg that just talked
Speaker 1: about a record two hundred days no local case, making
Speaker 1: Taiwan the world's envy. Basically saying, you know that they
Speaker 1: have the world's best virus record by far, And I
Speaker 1: do the caveat if you said, you know, if we
Speaker 1: can trust all the numbers. But what's interesting is they
Speaker 1: did talk about closing borders early, tightly regulating travel. UM.
Speaker 1: They do talk about rigorous contact tracing, which I feel
Speaker 1: like it's been tough to really get off the ground
Speaker 1: here in the United States. They also talked about Taiwan's
Speaker 1: deadly experienced with stars and how it scared people into compliance.
Speaker 1: And I wonder if how big a factor that is
Speaker 1: based from what Asia had to deal with and that
Speaker 1: knowledge having gone through that before, versus you know, maybe
Speaker 1: our lack of that experience UM here in the United States. No,
Speaker 1: I agree, Lord, Taiwan is a relatively small island, and
Speaker 1: they can really they're surrounded by water. They can certainly
Speaker 1: seal their borders of and and can function independently, certainly
Speaker 1: for a period of time. I think it's less realistic
Speaker 1: in Europe and the United States to do something like that.
Speaker 1: I certainly support kind of a universal mask mandate. I
Speaker 1: think we're kidding ourselves to say that will stop things
Speaker 1: in his track. But I think simple things like that
Speaker 1: if people would get on board with certainly slow things
Speaker 1: until we do get the vaccine, and hopefully people will
Speaker 1: will be encouraged. I'm I'm concerned exactly as you report
Speaker 1: that people have hesitancy they think operational work speed is
Speaker 1: too too fast, as outlined in the Bloomberg article. I'm
Speaker 1: not sure that's really true. I I do think a
Speaker 1: lot of companies have benefited financially enormously. This happens in war.
Speaker 1: Those military material suppliers always do well. Uh. And I
Speaker 1: think in this COVID war, uh, some drug companies maybe
Speaker 1: unfairly have been rewarded. But I do feel safety precautions
Speaker 1: have been pretty careful. All right. And I'm just just
Speaker 1: real quickly, just got about twenty seconds. Are you guys
Speaker 1: seeing an n y U and going to seeing an
Speaker 1: increasing cases coming into the hospital COVID slightly not a
Speaker 1: huge surge. So there are pockets in New York and
Speaker 1: Brooklyn and others where you know, there are gatherings without masks.
Speaker 1: So we are seeing a slight uptick nowhere near what
Speaker 1: was previous, but there's still you know, we're still early
Speaker 1: in the winter, all right. Always great to check with
Speaker 1: you check in with you have a good weekend, a
Speaker 1: safe weekend. Dr Ian LUs Bader, Clinical Associate Professor of
Speaker 1: Medicine at n y U Land Going Medical Center, joining
Speaker 1: us on the phone from New York City. Coming up,
Speaker 1: we're gonna check in with one of the most read
Speaker 1: stories on the Bloomberg. It's also from Bloomberg Business Week,
Speaker 1: and it talks about a well known quant firm and
Speaker 1: how they are taking your election bets, and of course
Speaker 1: rather timely with the election of course just around the corner.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Business Week with Carol Masser from Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 1: Got a great story for you all. This story, it's
Speaker 1: in the magazine this week, which is hitting news stands,
Speaker 1: online and on the Bloomberg. It's also among our most
Speaker 1: read on the Bloomberg terminal today. There's an investment angle.
Speaker 1: There's an election angle. It's about the well known quant
Speaker 1: trade or known for its interest in statistics of gambling
Speaker 1: and it's ready to be on the other side of
Speaker 1: big presidential wagers. Let's get into it with Bloomberg News
Speaker 1: investing reporter Annie Massa. She's on the phone in New
Speaker 1: York City and also with as Bloomberg Business Week Editor
Speaker 1: Jill Weber on the phone in Brooklyn. There's always a
Speaker 1: way to make money off of everything, it feels like, Joel. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: you know, and you can spend that money on you know,
Speaker 1: the New York Mets, if you're Steve Cohen or you know,
Speaker 1: if you have other other deep pockets and change. You
Speaker 1: can also wager on the outcome of the U S election,
Speaker 1: which basically got my attention when Annie came to us
Speaker 1: with this story. And um, actually I always my ears
Speaker 1: always perk up whenever she says something about Susquehana, because
Speaker 1: that's just a company that I find very interesting. Further
Speaker 1: interest in in um probability in the in the biggest sense,
Speaker 1: but that also comes down to things like games and
Speaker 1: outcomes presidential elections. So so any um hundred million dollars
Speaker 1: is the cap um how much how much you got
Speaker 1: going into I haven't gotten involved for it because I'm
Speaker 1: in the US, whereas it isn't legal, and this prospect
Speaker 1: they're kind of raising for people to bet in the UK,
Speaker 1: where these kinds of political betting markets are legal, you
Speaker 1: have to be based over there, so it's not available
Speaker 1: to us today, but who knows the future be sports
Speaker 1: settings obviously has been legalized in some states. So tell
Speaker 1: us what's going on, tell us what they're up to here.
Speaker 1: The idea is that Susquehanna, which as Joel mentioned, has
Speaker 1: a big interest in gaining and probabilities games like poker, backgammon,
Speaker 1: and also political betting UM, has this UH farm in
Speaker 1: Dublin that h does sports setting and also UM betting
Speaker 1: on political outcomes. And so there are exchanges in the
Speaker 1: UK where UM you can bet on things like the
Speaker 1: outcome of the US presidential election. And what susquets proposing
Speaker 1: is they kind of sit behind the scenes UM on
Speaker 1: these exchanges. And if you were a hedge fund UM
Speaker 1: or you know, a big better based abroad in the UK,
Speaker 1: you could go to one of these exchanges and place
Speaker 1: a pretty large bet on the outcome of the election,
Speaker 1: and Um Susquehanna might be one of the kind of
Speaker 1: market makers on the other end willing to take the
Speaker 1: other side and and any UM give us a sense
Speaker 1: of like, were you able to figure out how many
Speaker 1: people have actually participated in this wager yet at Tuskhana. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, if Bear is mentioning, it has not really
Speaker 1: been UM picking up a whole lot of beat on
Speaker 1: Wall Street. But I got interested in this idea of
Speaker 1: whether financial firms would ever be interested, um one day,
Speaker 1: in getting involved in more size in the political betting markets.
Speaker 1: And you can bet on all kinds of outcomes beyond
Speaker 1: just the idea of who's going to win the presidency.
Speaker 1: You can bet on what day will the winner be called?
Speaker 1: Will it be you know, November third election night, or
Speaker 1: will it laugh you know, will it go out to
Speaker 1: November fourth or fifth or six? If UM votes are
Speaker 1: still being counted, you can bet on you know, what
Speaker 1: margin while they went by individual states and how they
Speaker 1: all got. So there's all kinds of outcomes that you
Speaker 1: can bet on on these markets. Um. The options are
Speaker 1: kind of limit less, and I was curious to see
Speaker 1: if there's any history there of financial firms betting on
Speaker 1: political outcomes. And it actually turns out that in the US,
Speaker 1: up through World War Two it was there was actually
Speaker 1: a very big political betting market that operated on the
Speaker 1: Curb Exchange, which later became the American Exchange. UM. So,
Speaker 1: and you know, it only kind of went away as
Speaker 1: polling and more types of gambling became more widespread and accessible. UM.
Speaker 1: You know any one of the things that companies of
Speaker 1: stories and you mentioned it is predicted UM data on
Speaker 1: on which day of the week the election will be determined.
Speaker 1: And according to the chart that accompanied the story, it's
Speaker 1: it's Wednesday, November four has the has the most action
Speaker 1: on it. UM. And I'm wondering, um, as you sort
Speaker 1: of have talked to uh, um, you know that all
Speaker 1: the people in this sort of space are they do
Speaker 1: they think that the activity will ramp up between now
Speaker 1: and the end or or is it going to become
Speaker 1: a little bit more muted since uncertainty will obviously be
Speaker 1: the name of the game. It seems like they're actually
Speaker 1: has been a bit more action in the past couple
Speaker 1: of days. UM. As I was reporting the story, there
Speaker 1: had done a total of about two hundred million dollars
Speaker 1: that on just the winner um of of the US
Speaker 1: presidential election on that chair UM in the UK, which
Speaker 1: is one of the exchanges. And UM, it's been just
Speaker 1: over the course of the time that I was reporting
Speaker 1: the story out that over two hundred and sixty millions. So,
Speaker 1: I mean, these aren't these aren't by any means like
Speaker 1: huge eye popping figures by Wall Street Standard's been pretty small, um,
Speaker 1: but I mean there was a pickup that I saw
Speaker 1: even over the course of writing the story as we
Speaker 1: got closer to the presidential election. I have to say,
Speaker 1: any I do love, like you know, the UK, where
Speaker 1: they just kind of dice and slice and bed on everything,
Speaker 1: and it's it's certainly very a different world here in
Speaker 1: the US. But I do wonder, you know, could it
Speaker 1: be pending the outcome of the election itself, you know
Speaker 1: that changes or impacts the regulatory environment. I mean, I
Speaker 1: wonder if there is enough demand for something like this
Speaker 1: here in the US. Yeah, it's a great question of
Speaker 1: sports betting has only recently there was a federal band
Speaker 1: lifted on it, and now states are free to um
Speaker 1: legalize sports betting, and so you know, you wonder whether
Speaker 1: political betting could ever come into the next to something
Speaker 1: we mentioned in the story though, is there's already evidence
Speaker 1: that regulators uh don't love that idea. There was an
Speaker 1: exchange that tried to lift um a kind of uh
Speaker 1: few like a futures derivative product based on the outcome
Speaker 1: of the twelve elections, So that would be on a
Speaker 1: regular derivative exchange, but kind of like almost a political
Speaker 1: betting type product, and the c SEC kind of struck
Speaker 1: that down, saying, you know that that could really get
Speaker 1: into murky territory um and damage the integrity of elections,
Speaker 1: and it's not really clear what it would be used
Speaker 1: for as a hudgen product. So I think that that
Speaker 1: shows that maybe regulators don't have a great taste in
Speaker 1: their mouth about political betting markets just yet in the US.
Speaker 1: And you know one other thing that just bears mentioning
Speaker 1: in uh in your story, Annie's uh. You know that
Speaker 1: there are other ways to express bets on elections, and
Speaker 1: you know, places like JP Morgan Uh, as you write,
Speaker 1: strategists there have created you know, Trump basket and the
Speaker 1: Biden basket of stocks that they think could do well
Speaker 1: depending on which administration. But obviously that that kind of
Speaker 1: technique has not worked in the past based on you know,
Speaker 1: certain stocks that end up outperforming their expectations as well,
Speaker 1: which all goes back to the idea of you know,
Speaker 1: it's it's ultimately that's why why lets you wage you
Speaker 1: a million dollars? Because no one knows and all I
Speaker 1: can think about election night when future is tanked and
Speaker 1: then the next day the market rallied, so nothing is
Speaker 1: for sure. Um, Joel, thank you so much. Joel Webber,
Speaker 1: of course, editor of Bloomberg Business Week, and Annie massa
Speaker 1: investing reporter at Bloomberg Newsroom the Journal. Yeah, but you
Speaker 1: let me drive. Oh no, no, no, no, who's honey Please,
Speaker 1: I'll do the riding. I want to drive, just drive
Speaker 1: the questions trying. This is the drive to the Globe community.
Speaker 1: Thanks Dawn on Bloomberg Radio. I just got about eleven
Speaker 1: minutes left in today's trading day, getting ready to wrap
Speaker 1: up the entire week, and we know it's certainly been
Speaker 1: a tricky one for equities. Back with us for the
Speaker 1: drive to the clothes. Ryan Detrick, senior market strategist at
Speaker 1: LPL Financial. They've got roughly eight hundred billion in assets
Speaker 1: under management, joining us on the phone from Charlotte, North Carolina. Ran,
Speaker 1: Nice to have you back with us before we get
Speaker 1: into the markets. Uh, there's so much going on, but
Speaker 1: I do want to ask you how's it going in Charlotte? Hey, Carol,
Speaker 1: thank you for having me back. Thanks are going all right?
Speaker 1: You know we had that hurricane come through just yesterday
Speaker 1: and literally schools were canceled tons of wind and it
Speaker 1: was it was it was, you know, a rough, rough day,
Speaker 1: kind of summarizing I think for sure. But overall, you know,
Speaker 1: we're slowly kind of doing things. My daughter is a
Speaker 1: day b day right now in January. I think they're
Speaker 1: gonna go to old time. Although obviously we can talk
Speaker 1: about all the cases that are spiking that might change,
Speaker 1: but we're hanging in there. I guess down here in
Speaker 1: Charlotte's best way to put it. Well, that's what I
Speaker 1: wanted to ask you. I think you know, certainly as
Speaker 1: individuals and certainly as investors, were trying to gauge, okay,
Speaker 1: how things are going, what we're seeing in terms of
Speaker 1: these virus cases because it's all connected, right. What happens
Speaker 1: with the virus is certainly impacting our world, our health,
Speaker 1: our economy, uh and really gives us an idea of
Speaker 1: maybe what's to come over the next few months, and
Speaker 1: ultimately it'll play out in the financial markets as well.
Speaker 1: So what are your expectations because you are watching those
Speaker 1: numbers go up? Yeah, I mean, you know, and let's
Speaker 1: not forget I mean financial markets they tend to lead, right,
Speaker 1: I mean they tend to kind of react before the
Speaker 1: economic data honestly and just do today. And I think
Speaker 1: it got us today was that consumer spending number up
Speaker 1: one point four month over month in September. We've got
Speaker 1: five straight months of at least one percent gain in
Speaker 1: consumer spending. We've never seen that that data goes back
Speaker 1: to the nineteen sixties. Now. I'm aware that's because of
Speaker 1: a huge drop in March and April. But the one
Speaker 1: thing I think it's guests come on with you, and
Speaker 1: as we talk with r lp L advisors, everyone is
Speaker 1: so surprised at the resiliency of the US consumer, and
Speaker 1: we know the economy is not perfect, but they make
Speaker 1: up sevent GDP. We all know that GDP number yesterday.
Speaker 1: So the consumer, with all the bad things that are happening,
Speaker 1: is still spending and that is one big positive we
Speaker 1: think as we head into one and likely the economy
Speaker 1: continues to expand. Do you think it continues though, especially
Speaker 1: if we see another shutdown of some sorts. We're still
Speaker 1: waiting on some kind of stimulus. Who knows if we
Speaker 1: we ultimately get it. I mean there are people out there,
Speaker 1: you know the stories and we've talked with him before,
Speaker 1: people who are just you know, barely getting by just
Speaker 1: trying to pay the rent or put food on the table. Absolutely,
Speaker 1: and you know there there will be help coming for them.
Speaker 1: Unfortunately it's taken a lot longer. Maybe we all thought
Speaker 1: would be August six when Congress went to the summer recess,
Speaker 1: where that didn't happen. But you know, just looking at
Speaker 1: the market signals, right. I mean if you look at copper,
Speaker 1: I mean copper has been really strong, copper versus gold
Speaker 1: has been strong. That's normally a sign of an improving economy.
Speaker 1: Look at and you're yield today ten you're yields up today,
Speaker 1: that big down day the other day ten year old
Speaker 1: was higher. So bond market is maybe telling us a
Speaker 1: little bit, and know where we listening to us to Hey, yes,
Speaker 1: stocks are vaultile, there's an election next week, there's COVID,
Speaker 1: all these concerns. We get it. But the bond market
Speaker 1: and the credit markets they're still suggesting potentially, you know, uh,
Speaker 1: improving economy, which I know was little opposite to what
Speaker 1: people expect. But I'm not going to ignore what the
Speaker 1: bond market saying here. Yeah, it's interesting we've been talking
Speaker 1: to about the gold trade that you would anticipate that
Speaker 1: everybody would be running to gold, and yet we we
Speaker 1: haven't necessarily really seen that play out. So let me
Speaker 1: also ask you about the tech earnings. Right, there's been
Speaker 1: so much momentum in the financial markets this year thanks
Speaker 1: to the tech sector, um slew of earnings Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Twitter. Uh,
Speaker 1: how do you assess the results that we got and
Speaker 1: what it tells us about maybe their fortunes to come,
Speaker 1: especially like maybe over the next six or twelve months.
Speaker 1: Absolutely well, we still like technologies next six or twelve months.
Speaker 1: But right here and right now, I think it tells
Speaker 1: us that bar is awfully high because what they said
Speaker 1: was and all that bad. But boy, those stocks are
Speaker 1: really getting pounded right now as as you just discussed,
Speaker 1: and you know, it makes it sense to us that
Speaker 1: maybe there's a little bit more of a correction and
Speaker 1: technology here. But again, when you look out in the
Speaker 1: next year, technology is still one of those areas that
Speaker 1: we're gonna have a lot of earnings growth. Then don't
Speaker 1: forget historically speaking, we have a low inflation, low growth,
Speaker 1: low rates world. What tends to do well in that
Speaker 1: scenario it's growth stocks as investors reach for growth and
Speaker 1: specifically technology. So we're not we we'd actually think about
Speaker 1: using this um pullback in tech recently as an opportunity
Speaker 1: to potentially add to positions that you're willing to hold
Speaker 1: the next six to twelve months. How we're viewing it
Speaker 1: right here, so it sounds like you still like the
Speaker 1: growth play, not necessarily the value play. Yeah, we we
Speaker 1: definitely still side with growth a little bit over value.
Speaker 1: But at the same time where maybe take a barbelled approach,
Speaker 1: you know, stick with you god us here communications and
Speaker 1: the growth names and tech names. But on the other
Speaker 1: side of things, those industrials and materials still look pretty good.
Speaker 1: We're not too warm and fuzzy about financials. That's the
Speaker 1: other part of the cyclical value trade, but industrials and
Speaker 1: materials really as economy comes back and if we get more,
Speaker 1: were gonna get an infrastructure plan. Likely whoever wins this
Speaker 1: next election next week, do you think Do you think so? Yeah,
Speaker 1: we do. We think it will probably be a bigger
Speaker 1: infrastructure plan. Obviously, if Joe Biden wins, what we do
Speaker 1: expect if President Trump were to win next week sometime
Speaker 1: in one, will probably get an infrastructure bill. Won't be
Speaker 1: quite as large, but that can still be a tale
Speaker 1: with those industrials and materials which have done quite well
Speaker 1: the last three months. So what I don't know. I'm
Speaker 1: curious about the discussions you guys are having Ryan when
Speaker 1: it comes to the election. Listen, you can look at
Speaker 1: history and you can look at trends, um, But I
Speaker 1: do wonder if something maybe is a little bit different
Speaker 1: this time around because of COVID and the impact on
Speaker 1: the economy. But how do you see the election the outcome, uh,
Speaker 1: potentially impacting the markets? Yeah, and the near term. Historically
Speaker 1: you get a little bit of a sell off ahead
Speaker 1: of an election. We're seeing that, and then once you
Speaker 1: get the election out of the way, markets tend the
Speaker 1: rally once that uncertainties relieve. But you know what, one
Speaker 1: of the foremost dangerous words and investments right this time
Speaker 1: is different. We all know that, but boy oh boy,
Speaker 1: this time sure does feel different. With COVID and all
Speaker 1: the different scenarios that are out there are big takes this.
Speaker 1: Whoever wins this action, as we have in thee has
Speaker 1: an economy that's slowly expanding, that's likely not going to
Speaker 1: be in a recession. It might see earnie growth in
Speaker 1: large caps and almost a hundred percent Earnie growth in
Speaker 1: small caps, that's a pretty good elixir for higher equity prices.
Speaker 1: And it's trying to put a bow on this in
Speaker 1: a lot of people didn't like President Trump for four years.
Speaker 1: There's been a hundred almost a hundred and fifty new
Speaker 1: all time highs in the SMP for eight years of
Speaker 1: President Obama, they didn't really like him or his policies.
Speaker 1: Potentially the stocks did well then, So it's important to
Speaker 1: separate who you're voting for with really your investments. It's
Speaker 1: a very important thing to remember there. All right, kind
Speaker 1: of it'll be an interesting week. Do you expect um
Speaker 1: volatility next week because of the election outcome or not necessarily?
Speaker 1: Now we do? You look at the vix. The vix
Speaker 1: has obviously been quite high, so we think a little
Speaker 1: bit more volatility next week. Um is probably going to
Speaker 1: be on the cards, unfortunately for investors, but again it's
Speaker 1: an opportunity because we're probably not going to have a
Speaker 1: recession next year, and that's still a chance to add
Speaker 1: to positions for a longer term point of view. Alright,
Speaker 1: a little bit of optimism there, all right, Ryan, thank
Speaker 1: you so much. Ryan D. Trick, he's senior market strategist
Speaker 1: at LPL Financial joining us on the phone from Charlotte,
Speaker 1: North Carolina, where again another part of the country where
Speaker 1: they're seeing those virus cases go up. They've got about
Speaker 1: eight hundred billion dollars in assets under management. Thanks so
Speaker 1: much for listening to Bloomberg Business Week. Download the podcast
Speaker 1: on iTunes, SoundCloud, or at Bloomberg dot com, and be
Speaker 1: sure to check out our daily radio show at two
Speaker 1: pm Eastern on Bloomberg Radio. And be sure to watch
Speaker 1: us too on YouTube by searching Bloomberg Global News