Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: This is the Bloomberg Daybreak Asia podcast. I'm Brian Curtis
Speaker 2: along with Doug Krisner join us each day for the
Speaker 2: stories making news and moving markets in the Asia Pacific.
Speaker 2: You can subscribe to the show anywhere you get your
Speaker 2: podcasts and always on Bloomberg Radio, the Bloomberg Terminal, and
Speaker 2: the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 3: All right, let's get to that. Closing arguments in Donald
Speaker 3: Trump's hush money trial today round very long and late.
Speaker 3: Joining us live as Hadrianna Loan Crown, who is a
Speaker 3: national politics reporter. Thank you, Hadriana, really appreciate it you
Speaker 3: were in court today. Now we're going to go through
Speaker 3: what happened. But that was a long day. What an
Speaker 3: adjourney to eight Eastern.
Speaker 4: Yes, it was definitely a long day. We started at
Speaker 4: around nine five, wrapped up at around eight pm. It
Speaker 4: was a six hour long summation from the prosecution. It
Speaker 4: was a bid over two and a half three hour
Speaker 4: to two two and a half hours, i would say,
Speaker 4: for the defense, which is what we began our morning with.
Speaker 4: So it was a long day for sure.
Speaker 3: So let's go through it. Defense first, and the theme
Speaker 3: would be that both Stormy Daniels and Michael co under
Speaker 3: liars correct.
Speaker 4: Right, So essentially Todd Blantz has been arguing that Trump
Speaker 4: committed no crimes in that Stormy Daniels, you know, the
Speaker 4: adult film actress kind of part of the centerpiece of
Speaker 4: this of this big puzzle here, was trying to extort
Speaker 4: money from Trump. In twenty sixteen, Blanch even produced a
Speaker 4: top ten list of reasonable doubts for jurors. Is, as
Speaker 4: you know, all we need is one juror to have
Speaker 4: some form of reasonable doubt to prevent a conviction here,
Speaker 4: and so part of that list included a claim that
Speaker 4: prosecutors failed to produce evidence that Trump used some unlawful
Speaker 4: means to influence the election, that Trump himself never reviewed
Speaker 4: checks he signed for Michael Cohen because he was too
Speaker 4: busy running the country, kind of portraying this as something
Speaker 4: that his associates had done without him being aware, because
Speaker 4: he was in the capacity of president and therefore was
Speaker 4: not paying attention to this issue. So that was really
Speaker 4: what Blant was trying to argue here.
Speaker 3: Yeah, Now, the prosecution its job then was to go
Speaker 3: back and try to back up what Cohen and Daniels
Speaker 3: had testified, right.
Speaker 4: And so we knew all along, I mean, having Michael
Speaker 4: Cohen be the star witness could be potentially risky for
Speaker 4: the prosecution just given of course his own criminal history.
Speaker 4: So a big part of you know, the direct and
Speaker 4: the you know, the questioning of Cohen as well as
Speaker 4: now here in the wrap up for the prosecution has
Speaker 4: been to try to get around Cohen's credibility problems, really
Speaker 4: pointing to evidence instances of corroboration with other witnesses that
Speaker 4: were called to testify, such as David Pecker, who was
Speaker 4: who you know, ran a natural inquirer, which, as we
Speaker 4: all know from earlier in the trial, had agreed to
Speaker 4: be the kind of eyes and ears of of the
Speaker 4: campaign and catch and kill really you know, buying stories
Speaker 4: that were negative about Trump and then not publishing them,
Speaker 4: publishing hit pieces on Trump's opponents, and then also publishing
Speaker 4: positive pieces on Trump. So a big part of the
Speaker 4: prosecution was to again, uh, try to get other you know,
Speaker 4: try to prove that there wasn't as much of a
Speaker 4: credibility issue with Cohen, that there were other witnesses to
Speaker 4: corroborate it, as well as to lay out it's you know,
Speaker 4: their own evidence with phone wrecords, et cetera, showing that
Speaker 4: Trump did in fact know that all of this was
Speaker 4: taking place, even using his own tweets where he, you know,
Speaker 4: said very plainly this was a reimbursement to Michael Cohen.
Speaker 3: Now, just go through the ground rules here. The prosecution
Speaker 3: had to raise the bar to election fraud to make
Speaker 3: this a felony. Is there any way that the jury
Speaker 3: and we understand they come back tomorrow, I'll ask you
Speaker 3: about that that the jury or the judge can come
Speaker 3: back and say no felony, but convict of a misdemeanor.
Speaker 4: That's I mean, that's something that is something that I
Speaker 4: think we'll learn more about tomorrow because the judge has
Speaker 4: to kind of instruct the jury. He's going to spend
Speaker 4: about an hour or so tomorrow morning. They're coming back
Speaker 4: at ten. Usually it's nine thirty, but we get a
Speaker 4: half hour of sleeping in so the judge will really
Speaker 4: walk the jury through exactly what is needed, what can
Speaker 4: be concluded at the end of the deliberation. So we'll
Speaker 4: definitely get more details about that tomorrow.
Speaker 3: Okay, And as you say, they come back at ten Eastern,
Speaker 3: not knowing there is no way to predict what juries
Speaker 3: will do and this needs to be unanimous to get
Speaker 3: a felony. Have you heard any feeling you were in
Speaker 3: the courtroom, any gut and I know you're a reporter,
Speaker 3: but any gut on on who was stronger here or
Speaker 3: what we're going to look for.
Speaker 4: Well, you know, it's interesting. There are a couple of
Speaker 4: things to point out here. One is, obviously the prosecution
Speaker 4: is kind of the last taste in the jurors you
Speaker 4: know minds, and so earlier on today we had Blanche
Speaker 4: kind of repeatedly say, you know, here's an instance of
Speaker 4: Cohen lying in the past. Here's another instance, really trying
Speaker 4: to prove that they should not rely on Cohen to
Speaker 4: make their decision. And at the end of that, you know,
Speaker 4: one might say, you know, that was pretty strong. Okay,
Speaker 4: I'm seeing this. He's a liar. Why should I trust him?
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 4: But then you go on to the prosecution. Obviously it
Speaker 4: was six hours, there was a lot more, you know,
Speaker 4: kind of painstakingly walking through so many different pieces of evidence.
Speaker 4: A lot of the evidence, as I just said, was
Speaker 4: Trump himself showing that he had knowledge of what was
Speaker 4: going on. Again, a tweet saying it was a reimbursement
Speaker 4: you know of documents with Alan Weisselberg, the CFO, his
Speaker 4: handwriting and all of these different pieces. So after that,
Speaker 4: I mean, I think that anyone who was kind of
Speaker 4: worried about Cohen now realizes, well, it's not just Cohen
Speaker 4: as maybe they had thought before. They're reminded of every
Speaker 4: single witness before that, because there were you know, a
Speaker 4: dozen or so witnesses, and so because the prosecution spent
Speaker 4: a lot of time detailed detailing that, I think that
Speaker 4: does suggest or you know, maybe poke holes a bit
Speaker 4: at the defense's argument, which really focused around Cohen Cohen Cohen.
Speaker 4: So I think that that could have been, you know,
Speaker 4: a choice that maybe ends up backfiring on them. And
Speaker 4: then of course something to consider in our attempt to
Speaker 4: you know, figure out in advance what could happen is
Speaker 4: how long the jury takes to deliberate. And what I'm
Speaker 4: hearing from sources who I'm speaking with is that generally
Speaker 4: the longer the deliberations, the more likely it is that
Speaker 4: they you know, maybe a hung juries or something else
Speaker 4: that would you know, rule in I guess you could
Speaker 4: say the favor of Trump or not in the favor
Speaker 4: of the prosecution, So that's something we'll keep an eye
Speaker 4: out for as well.
Speaker 3: Yeah yeah, and the as you say, the instructions tomorrow.
Speaker 3: Great job, Hedriana, Thank you. We really appreciate your time.
Speaker 3: That is a Adriana loenkra on that National politics reporter
Speaker 3: if she was in the court room at today, and
Speaker 3: a lot for the jury to consider. In San Francisco,
Speaker 3: I'm a boxer.
Speaker 2: Joining us now with Sarah Malick Cio of Vene for
Speaker 2: her take on markets. Sarah, I think we can talk
Speaker 2: about a lot of different asset classes. I know you're
Speaker 2: quite gifted in that regard, but let's start off first
Speaker 2: with I think the perception is that stocks have been
Speaker 2: rallying like crazy, and it's not totally the case. I mean,
Speaker 2: we have seen the S and P five hundred bound
Speaker 2: from a bit of a sell off in April, and
Speaker 2: I was just having to look at some of the
Speaker 2: key names. If you look at companies like Microsoft and Amazon,
Speaker 2: they're basically flat over the past three months. Meta is
Speaker 2: actually down a little over the last three months, and
Speaker 2: you have Apple, which has made a comeback. So it's
Speaker 2: a little bit of mix and match there in the market.
Speaker 2: So what do you like at the moment?
Speaker 5: Well, I think definitely, the market rally has been fairly narrow.
Speaker 5: First of all, it's been wrapped up by the strength
Speaker 5: of Nvidia and their earnings last week. And Apple was
Speaker 5: another company you brought up. And Apple actually, you know,
Speaker 5: the while a quarter was not incredibly impressive because the
Speaker 5: stock was so under owned. That's why Apple rallied.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 5: What I make of the market though, is that there's
Speaker 5: two drivers from here, and that's earnings and the economy.
Speaker 5: First quarter earnings were very strong. Eighty percent of companies
Speaker 5: beat earnings estimates and that's a big driver for the markets.
Speaker 5: And then the economy has remained fairly strong. Manufacturing data
Speaker 5: has been you know, somewhat on the stronger side. Perils
Speaker 5: data remains fairly strong. And all of that means our
Speaker 5: economy is still growing while inflation has stopped reaccelerating like
Speaker 5: we saw earlier this year. So all that together is
Speaker 5: why the market continues to have a strong performance.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the environment feels pretty good. It seems like I mean,
Speaker 2: if you go back and look at the two year yield,
Speaker 2: the last time it was close to five percent, like
Speaker 2: this because investors you get nervous about rising market interest rates.
Speaker 2: The SEB five hundred was a thousand points lower, so
Speaker 2: we've gained a thousand points. That yield on the two
Speaker 2: year basically sideways the level that the two years at
Speaker 2: is essentially I guess telling you you might only get one,
Speaker 2: maybe two cuts from the FED over the next two years,
Speaker 2: and yet the markets have hung in there. And I
Speaker 2: think it's interesting that you mentioned in Nvidia, but a
Speaker 2: lot of the companies that might be riding on the
Speaker 2: back of Nvidia companies that I mentioned, like Amazon and
Speaker 2: Microsoft and Google. While Google's done pretty well, some of
Speaker 2: the others didn't really do much over the past month.
Speaker 2: So it does leave you with a lot of choices
Speaker 2: here in if you're trying to play AI, where to
Speaker 2: go to maybe get some games.
Speaker 5: Well, there's very limited winners in the AI space at
Speaker 5: this point that win no matter what. And those two
Speaker 5: companies are first of all, in Vidia because it basically
Speaker 5: supplies to anyone trying to grow in the AAI space,
Speaker 5: and secondive Microsoft, which has had a very strong lead
Speaker 5: and head start in artificial intelligence by spending tens of
Speaker 5: billion in that area. So those are the two key players.
Speaker 5: That's one reason why Nvidia continues to perform well. Second,
Speaker 5: for those concerned about Nvidia and the rally that it's had,
Speaker 5: if you look at Nvidia's EE ratio versus the semic
Speaker 5: inductor space for twenty twenty five in video is actually
Speaker 5: still trading at a discount, So the argument that Invidia
Speaker 5: is expensive really doesn't hold true. As for the markets
Speaker 5: going higher from here, you know, continued consumer spending has
Speaker 5: been what's driven the markets higher, and inflation has stopped
Speaker 5: reaccelerating like it did earlier this year. So when we
Speaker 5: talk about less FED rate cuts than expected, and why
Speaker 5: are the markets okay with that, it's because the FED
Speaker 5: is cutting less for the right reasons, and those reasons
Speaker 5: are that the economy remains strong. So the Fed is said, Okay,
Speaker 5: we don't need to cut as much because we're not
Speaker 5: imminently going into a recession.
Speaker 2: You know, at some point the bond vigilantes may come back.
Speaker 2: We saw a little bit of weak auction sales today.
Speaker 2: It kind of brings to mind what happens when investors
Speaker 2: finally get worried about debt and deficits. Are we there yet?
Speaker 5: You know, I don't think we're there yet, but it
Speaker 5: is definitely a concern when we look at the level
Speaker 5: of US debt and interest rates that are going to
Speaker 5: stay higher for longer. I think that is a long
Speaker 5: term structural issue for the US, except it's not something
Speaker 5: as we can see with the markets up you know,
Speaker 5: quite nicely year to date, that the markets are that
Speaker 5: concerned about, you know, switching over to fixed income as
Speaker 5: an asset class. I think, you know, what you can
Speaker 5: lock in now is yield in certain areas that we
Speaker 5: haven't seen in many years than often times decades. So
Speaker 5: fundamentally strong acet classes like municipal bonds, high yield municipal
Speaker 5: bonds are offering very attractive yeals at this point.
Speaker 2: Are you seeing any attractive options in Asia at the moment?
Speaker 2: I mean, obviously this is Bloomberg daybreak Asia. We tend
Speaker 2: to focus on Asia once we get past the initial
Speaker 2: Wall Street wrap up. What do you like out here?
Speaker 5: Yeah? Sure, So two things we think about with Asia
Speaker 5: and markets outside of the US, and that's currency and
Speaker 5: what's going on with inflation. You know, with currency, I
Speaker 5: think that could be a positive outside of the US
Speaker 5: because as the FED finally gets the rate cuts or
Speaker 5: the economy starts to slow, that should make the dollar
Speaker 5: a little bit weaker here and that's more positive for
Speaker 5: international investments for Asia. I think Japan still has a
Speaker 5: lot of legs, strong corporate governments and strong earnings or
Speaker 5: drivers there. And we have three themes in Japan reopening, reflation,
Speaker 5: and restoring post the pandemic. We like sectors like defense,
Speaker 5: artificial intelligence because of the demographics issues in Japan, exporters
Speaker 5: as the end may weaken from here. And also we
Speaker 5: like companies outside of Japan in areas for example, that
Speaker 5: are exposed to China, which is kind of lagged, and
Speaker 5: as that perhaps comes back with some spending, I think
Speaker 5: that could be positive for China exposed companies.
Speaker 2: Bloomberg did a survey of a dozen economists looking at China,
Speaker 2: looking at the property market and the efforts that we've
Speaker 2: seen here of late in terms of pushing some of
Speaker 2: the big cities to lower some of their buying restrictions
Speaker 2: for housing. It seems to be working a little bit.
Speaker 2: According to this survey, seven out of twelve respondents see
Speaker 2: a jump across the board in China and they're seeing
Speaker 2: growth improve. The economists see growth in twenty twenty four,
Speaker 2: edging up to four point nine percent. How much of
Speaker 2: a concern for you is the property sector and whether
Speaker 2: or not it's ongoing in terms of stress.
Speaker 5: Yeah, two areas of concern for us in China. One
Speaker 5: is the property sector. Two is trade issues with other
Speaker 5: countries doing less trade with China, including US. China has
Speaker 5: bounced off the bottom as folio managers from a global
Speaker 5: basis have come back in to buy in China. We
Speaker 5: have seen a pickup in some of the electronic spaces
Speaker 5: and luxury apparel spaces. But I think those two structural
Speaker 5: issues of trade and property are still ones that China
Speaker 5: may need to overcome. So you know, the question of
Speaker 5: do you want to chase China from here after you
Speaker 5: know some of the bounce off the bottom that we've seen.
Speaker 5: I would like to see more progress with the property
Speaker 5: sector and understand where the trade issues might bottom.
Speaker 2: I've been looking very carefully at ways of playing you know,
Speaker 2: derivative plays on AI and you know, some of them,
Speaker 2: like the independent power producers and utilities, they've already seen
Speaker 2: a big balance. A piece are kind of high. So
Speaker 2: let me put it to you, what's your number one
Speaker 2: pick in the AI sphere.
Speaker 5: I think you know, you can look outside of in video.
Speaker 5: You can look at areas that may benefit as AI
Speaker 5: becomes more highly used. So one is infrastructure, which has
Speaker 5: multiple tail on. Number one is we need to build
Speaker 5: more manufacturing. This is US infrastructure in the United States
Speaker 5: and even global infrastructure. You know, in order to meet
Speaker 5: the needs of artificial intelligence. Infrastructure will benefit. Second trend
Speaker 5: for infrastructure renewable energy. As we upgrade our grids, will
Speaker 5: need more renewable energy and more infrastructure. And then we
Speaker 5: look across sectors like healthcare and financial services that use
Speaker 5: a ton of data, which is also very promising targets.
Speaker 2: All right, Sarah, thanks so much for joining us. Sarah Malex,
Speaker 2: cio of newbe Charlie Ripley, Senior investment strategist at Alian's
Speaker 2: Investment Management for our Closer look at markets, Charlie. In
Speaker 2: some ways, the auctions grabbed the most attention today. The
Speaker 2: US Treasury sold seventy billion dollars of five year notes
Speaker 2: at four point five to five three percent. That was
Speaker 2: above the pre auction level of four point five to
Speaker 2: four percent. It doesn't sound like a lot, but it
Speaker 2: did send ripples through the market and yields did pop
Speaker 2: on that up eight basis points. Are the bond vigilantes
Speaker 2: getting ready to do their thing?
Speaker 1: Hi, Brian, thanks for having me on.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 1: You know, when you look at today's auction set, you know,
Speaker 1: there is a different set of investors that invest in
Speaker 1: you know, the three year and the five year and
Speaker 1: the seven year space. And you know, I think today's
Speaker 1: tailing auctions, you know, probably did feed into some of
Speaker 1: that negative pricing that we saw on the bond market,
Speaker 1: but I don't think it's going to be particularly reflective
Speaker 1: of what we what we might see and you know,
Speaker 1: maybe the longer end of the curve, you know, I
Speaker 1: think those are a different set of investors, you know,
Speaker 1: particularly insurance investors that are looking for longer duration. So
Speaker 1: it'll be interesting to see how that plays out next month,
Speaker 1: but you know, it's likely not you know, a precursor
Speaker 1: to to what we'll see at auctions next month.
Speaker 2: There was a Wall Street Journal story just a short
Speaker 2: while ago that broke, and I just want to mention
Speaker 2: it briefly and then ask you a question about M
Speaker 2: and a murk. According to the Wall Street Journal, is
Speaker 2: nearing one point three billion dollar deal for an eye
Speaker 2: drug company called I Biotech. We did actually have a
Speaker 2: flurry of deals getting some coverage today in the marketplace. Obviously,
Speaker 2: the big one was Hess Investors approving the Chevron fifty
Speaker 2: three billion dollar takeover, but another one involving energy trends
Speaker 2: for acquiring assets from WTG and also T Mobile acquiring
Speaker 2: some of US Cellular's wireless operations. And it bigs the
Speaker 2: question about whether this pickup in M and A that
Speaker 2: we're seeing, is it sending a broad message or is
Speaker 2: it too early to say.
Speaker 1: You know, I think it's too early to say. You know, typically,
Speaker 1: you know, in a higher rate environment, it's harder to
Speaker 1: see some of these larger M and A deals get
Speaker 1: through with interest rates at these levels. So you know,
Speaker 1: I think, you know, because we've been at you know,
Speaker 1: high interest rate levels for some time, maybe there's a
Speaker 1: little bit less patience to get some of these deals done.
Speaker 1: But you know, I think the real catalyst is going
Speaker 1: to be, you know, a lower interest rate environment that
Speaker 1: really drives you know, additional M and A activity.
Speaker 2: And do you see a lower interest rate environment coming.
Speaker 1: That's a great question. And I think, you know, when
Speaker 1: you look at the set of probabilities and you know,
Speaker 1: a data dependent FED and and you know everything that's
Speaker 1: happening on the inflation front. You know, I think the
Speaker 1: path of probabilities is a little bit wider than expected,
Speaker 1: and you know, I think people are a little bit
Speaker 1: less convicted about the directions of rates in this environment.
Speaker 1: You know, you did mention we have seen, you know,
Speaker 1: some mixed data sets on the economic front, and even
Speaker 1: when you look at the FED speak from policy makers,
Speaker 1: you know, Neil cash Car's comments today, you know, alluded to,
Speaker 1: you know, the potential for rate hikes should they need
Speaker 1: to move in that direction. So, you know, against this
Speaker 1: backdrop where you know, we have a very data dependent
Speaker 1: FED and a very reactionary function from them, you know,
Speaker 1: I think it's going to be you know, difficult to
Speaker 1: have a high conviction of of of anything in any
Speaker 1: direction if they're basing policy specifically on inflation data.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Is it dangerous to a certain extent that the FED
Speaker 2: is data dependent in that it's sort of disallowing itself
Speaker 2: from getting out in front of something. And I talk
Speaker 2: about that because you have a lag in the lag defect,
Speaker 2: I mean, we're we're not seeing the strong impact on
Speaker 2: the economy that we expected from higher interest rates, and
Speaker 2: we're also seeing a kind of slow lag in inflation
Speaker 2: coming down to where we think it should be. So
Speaker 2: should the should the Fed make a call and act
Speaker 2: on it, or do you think it's right to be
Speaker 2: data dependent?
Speaker 1: You know, I think they they've committed to the data
Speaker 1: dependent you know, transparency view. You know, you look at
Speaker 1: you know, December of last year. You know, they'll let
Speaker 1: the proverbial genie out of the out of the out
Speaker 1: of the bottle when they decided to forecast three rate
Speaker 1: cuts for the year. And you know, perhaps maybe they
Speaker 1: did get a little bit ahead of themselves and in
Speaker 1: terms of being a little bit preemptive there, but you know,
Speaker 1: I think the reality is, you know, that the data
Speaker 1: is moving slower than what they had made it expected
Speaker 1: back then, and they have to adjust to that today.
Speaker 1: And I think that's why we're seeing, you know, market
Speaker 1: pricing from market participants on rate cuts continue to go
Speaker 1: lower and lower, or get pushed out further and further.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we're just reminded sometimes of the differences in the
Speaker 2: way central banks look at interest rates. For instance, in Europe,
Speaker 2: they don't mess around with owner's equivalent rent and so
Speaker 2: our data pumped through their system, inflation would be running
Speaker 2: around two percent, it would be acceptable. But since we
Speaker 2: do have this owner's equivalent rent and you know, sort
Speaker 2: of a lagged input into the numbers from that, we're
Speaker 2: stuck in this position. Do you do you worry that
Speaker 2: that inflation is going to stay high too long? Or
Speaker 2: do you think that, hey, it's really not all that
Speaker 2: bad at these levels. And the reason we and the
Speaker 2: way we know that is look at the markets.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think that's a great question. You know, obviously,
Speaker 1: in the first half of this year so far, we've
Speaker 1: seen you know, the impact on service inflation, particularly rents,
Speaker 1: and how that's been a legging factor. But you know,
Speaker 1: when we think about how the FED, you know, should
Speaker 1: should position through that, you know, it really makes sense
Speaker 1: for them to be data dependent. But on the one hand,
Speaker 1: you know, they have to understand that there is a
Speaker 1: leg and effect to the policy here.
Speaker 2: I suppose what most people are doing here is is
Speaker 2: kind of enjoying the best of both worlds. You know,
Speaker 2: they've got a lot of cash and they've plowed that
Speaker 2: into short term treasuries and then you know they're playing
Speaker 2: in the equity markets with x number of dollars kind
Speaker 2: of addressing the AI frenzy and X number and just
Speaker 2: sort of good old fashioned industrials and materials and that
Speaker 2: sort of thing. Is that the smart way to play this?
Speaker 2: Or do you have a better way?
Speaker 1: Yeah? You know, I think if you look at you know,
Speaker 1: bond yields, historically, they've been fairly low for the last decade,
Speaker 1: and you know, you go back to the two thousand
Speaker 1: to twenty ten era, you know, ten year rates averaged
Speaker 1: a little bit higher than or you know, about two
Speaker 1: percent higher than where they were at in the decade
Speaker 1: following you know, the Great Financial Crisis, And I think,
Speaker 1: you know, an investment strategy that looks at you know,
Speaker 1: long duration to hedge against. You know, some types of
Speaker 1: systematic risk can be problematic, and we've seen that, you know,
Speaker 1: throughout this hiking cycle as rates have risen, and so
Speaker 1: you know, I think it does behoove investors to look
Speaker 1: for other types of strategies, you know, to mitigate those risks,
Speaker 1: whether it's investing in cash or other derivative based ETFs
Speaker 1: that might you know, benefit of portfolio structure overall.
Speaker 2: So are you leaning toward opportunity here or caution?
Speaker 1: You know, I think we lean towards a little bit
Speaker 1: more caution. I mean, there's a lot of uncertainty around
Speaker 1: the path of inflation. You know, we look at the
Speaker 1: data set, we look at you know, the hawks and
Speaker 1: the doves that comprise the f MC. I think, you know,
Speaker 1: they really want to cut rates at some point this year,
Speaker 1: but the inflation data isn't isn't allowing them to do so.
Speaker 2: And all right, Charlie, we got to go. Thanks so
Speaker 2: much for joining us. That's Charlie Ripley, senior investment strategist
Speaker 2: at Alion's Investment Management.
Speaker 4: This is the.
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Daybreak Asia podcast, bringing you the stories making news
Speaker 2: and moving markets in the Asia Pacific. Visit the Bloomberg
Speaker 2: Podcast channel on YouTube to get more episodes of this
Speaker 2: and other shows from Bloomberg. Subscribe to the podcast on Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 2: or anywhere else you listen and always on Bloomberg Radio,
Speaker 2: the Bloomberg Terminal, and the Bloomberg Business app.