Market Breadth: Discussion centers on whether the rally can broaden beyond the MAG 7, with equal-weight S&P underperformance since 2022 and the need for earnings to sustain a rotation.
Information Technology: Tech’s dominance is tied to superior earnings growth, but there are concerns over hyperscaler ROI on data centers and a potential shift as valuations and positioning normalize.
Key Companies Mentioned: Microsoft (MSFT), Google/Alphabet (GOOGL), Oracle (ORCL), and Blue Owl Capital (OWL) were cited in the context of debt capacity and off-balance-sheet financing, though no single company was a focused pitch.
US Treasuries: Yield curve and 10-year dynamics are framed as data-dependent; if growth holds, yields stay range-bound or drift higher, while weaker data would drive a bond rally.
Bitcoin: Bitcoin lagged despite broader speculative rallies, reflecting liquidity sensitivity and leverage dynamics; a recovery is viewed as a bullish risk-on signal, with an upside bias noted.
Gold: Gold’s momentum has been resilient and “memeified,” yet it is overbought and may consolidate even as it still offers exposure to themes like dollar debasement and fiscal dominance.
Value vs Growth: Growth’s premium over value peaked and has moderated; sustained rotation depends on earnings, with an acknowledgment that growth still holds stronger earnings power.
Outlook & Risks: No base-case US recession is expected; liquidity remains ample, but rising retail margin debt and tariff-driven margin pressure are risks, and volatility may present opportunities.
Transcript
Over the last 6 months, you've seen a 40% increase in the FINRA margin loan balances. Where does this exuberant shake out? Clearly, it hasn't helped on the the crypto ecosphere. If you look at consensus for 2026, what you can see is that there is an expectation that Mag 7 will slow down slightly, but you will start to see a big acceleration in the everything else. The question for investors is, are those expectations wellounded? I'm pleased to welcome back the show Cameron Dawson, CIO of New Edge Wealth. We'll be getting her outlook for 2026, all markets related. Good to see you again, Cameron. Good to see you. >> Thank you so much for having me, David. >> Yeah, welcome back. Look, we're speaking today on Friday the 19th and uh markets are having a great day. Good week, actually, after a bit of a pullback on the news that Oracle will no longer be funded by um uh Owl Capital, but uh we'll talk about that in just a minute here. Are we seeing the beginning of a rotation away from tech overall? >> Oh boy. Well, that certainly has been the case since midn November. We started seeing a shift in markets where things like healthcare, utilities, a little bit of life out of energy, materials, started showing better relative performance. And all of the areas that house the MAG 7, tech, communication services, as well as consumer discretionary, those are the three sectors where the MAG7 sit all went into more of a starting to lag camp where you started to see some of the relative performance start to soften. And the question, of course, is can this continue? It's one thing to have a short-term rotation. We've seen plenty of those over the course of the last few years where you have little bursts of outperformance of everything else. So, if you look at the long-term trend chart of something like the equal weight S&P 500, what you can see is that it's been in a relentless downturn since 2022, but if you look really closely, you can see a couple points of of time where you've seen better performance out of the equal weight stocks. And so, as I mentioned, it's a question of can this continue? Does this have legs? And for us, we think the answer to that is really dependent on earnings. We make the the observation that the reason that you have seen such powerful earnings growth uh or sorry powerful outperformance of the Mag 7 over the equal weight is because that's just been where the earnings are. The Mag 7 over the last 3 years has grown earnings by 200%. And that's compares to the equal weight of earnings growth of just 16%. And so if you look at consensus for 2026, what you can see is that there is an expectation that MAG 7 will slow down slightly, but you will start to see a big acceleration in the everything else where you start to see a big recovery in those average stocks. And I think the question for investors is are those expectations wellounded? We've constantly seen over the last 3 years effectively that the MAG 7 has surprised to the upside and you've seen surprises to the downside from everything else. So what we're what we're saying is that there's a bit of a high bar for that everything else trade to work. That typically is is what we see this time of year. Everybody makes the call of this big hope and dream that we're going to broaden out. uh but we think that it really has to have a a fundamental foundation behind it in order for it to continue. So this could be about positioning and valuation as much as anything else in the short term. Uh and the question is of course is do you see the earnings kind of back it up to make it have legs. One last quick point on that positioning is that if we go to back to the end of October that kind of effectively blowoff top uh it was a mini blowoff top that we had in some of the mag 7 and speculative parts of the market. What you saw is that growth traded to an 85% premium to value at that peak in October. It's now fallen to about a 20% pre sorry a 65% premium to value. uh but what we saw is that that 85% level is effectively the peak that we got to at any point over the last 10 years. So the observation is simply to say this is likely a lot to do with valuation and positioning. Big question of if it continues it depends on earnings. >> Do you think that the uh mounting levels of debt that these large tech companies have acquired pose a risk going into 2026? So I think that we have to make a delineation between those that have seen their debt levels go up but still have very very low levels of net debt to IBIDA for example. So a lot of the hyperscalers and those that uh have already high levels of debt to IBIT but uh are continuing to add even more debt as you open the show with the talk of what's going on with Oracle and Blue Owl for example. And so I think the the the delineation is that if you are a Microsoft or a Google, there's still lots of room for you to be able to continue to spend and increase debt before you probably re reach a ceiling where the market is pushing back on you. However, um I would say is that you Jim Chenos did a great piece back earlier this week or last week where he said look a lot of the return on investment for these data center buildouts don't go aren't over what the weighted average cost of capital is. So effectively, you have these companies that even though they don't have a lot of debt levels, the incremental return that they're getting from making these investments is not necessarily high enough to justify them making the investments, which is why they're turning to folks like Blue A to do some of this o offbalance sheet financing. So it doesn't just because the debt levels aren't high doesn't mean the market's not going to look very closely to say, is it justified for you to be spending all of this money? there could be some push to say why don't you just give it back to us which is what they typically did. >> Yeah. And the other uh counteracting force I guess is the fact that the Fed has engaged in what some speculate as QE. Uh they have committed to buying up new reserves um in the reserve management program starting as of last week actually. Uh that in conjunction with lower rates would make this a very easing cycle going into 2026 the first quarter at least. What are your expectations for markets to react uh to this easing cycle? >> Yeah, we were surprised to see that your typical liquidity sensitive parts of the market, your crypto for example, as being probably one of the most liquidity sensitive areas, not respond as robustly to the announcement that the Fed was going to go down this path. I mean, we see it as a necess necessary path as you saw things like sofur spreads widening out and showing some signs of maybe some short-term funding market stress. And one of the things that we had been watching really closely is this idea that we think about one of the reasons why liquidity has remained so abundant in the market over the past few years. even as the Fed had rates above neutral, even as you were seeing large issuance of of treasuries is because of this observation that a lot of the Treasury funding was being done at the short end of the curve and being gobbled up by money market accounts and we were raising the question of what happens when flows into money markets start to slow. You're seeing short-term rates get cut. So the the interest that you earn on money markets are is like is falling uh in real time and that not to say that you are seeing uh people pull money out of money markets because of that but the pace of additions is likely to slow just at the time where you see the pace of treasury bill issuance which needs money markets to gobble those up uh is going up. And so this clearly seems to be a a function to help solve for part of that problem as well as some stigma around the discount window which gets into a whole different conversation. But if we were to just distill it down then to your point you have an environment where liquidity the Fed is signaling that it wants to keep liquidity abundant. That's good. Uh you have an environment where rates do seem uh at least not biased higher. Uh but I think the challenge that the market is now wrestling with and this was a great observation that Adam Parker of Trivariat made a couple of uh or a couple days ago where he said look you know if you go back to 2022 the Fed was still hiking rates but the market at the low in in 2022 was effectively making the observation that they were closer to the end of rate cuts than they were to the beginning. meaning that the pace of rate cut rate hike sorry end of rate hikes uh uh closer to the end of those in the beginning which just meant that we were closer to the end of the hiking cycle closer to the beginning of the cutting cycle than we were at other points prior in 2022. So he goes well effectively we're now in the exact opposite. you're closer to the end of the cutting cycle, at least this reccalibration cycle where the Fed is cutting even though the labor market's not falling off a cliff, for example. Uh but that to expect a lot more cuts from here, we're getting closer to neutral. Pal told us that at the December Fed meeting. In fact, he said we're effectively at neutral. So, it could be that that some of the markets uh kind of lackluster response to the last Fed cut could have been saying, "Hey, you know what what was the Winston Churchill? This is not the end. This is not the beginning of the end, but it could be the end of the beginning." >> Before we continue with the video, let's talk about today's sponsor, Starf Fighters. Starf Fighter Space is an aerospace company operating the world's only commercial fleet of Mach 2 capable Lockheed F104 aircraft. They're based out of NASA's Kennedy Space Center and focus on hypersonic air launch testing and micro satellite deployment aiming to reduce cost and timeliness compared to traditional launch methods. The company has worked with organizations like NASA, Lohee Martin, GE and the US Air Force. They recently completed a regulation A+ raise and are planning to go public later this year, making it one of the few space related companies transitioning from private to public markets right now. If this is something that you're interested in or want to look into, talk to your financial adviser and start your own due diligence process on Starf Fighters space. There's lots to learn. You can scan the QR code here or go to the link down below in the description to learn more. So I have here a chart from one of your or a slide from one of your um uh Monday chart uh Monday chart slide deck. So we have uh it says here two cuts expected in 2026. And then uh the text accompanying it says this likely reflects doubt that a captured Fed share mostly one that is new um uh the Fed internal machine uh would new to the Fed internal machine would have the political sway to get committee votes for aggressive rate cuts. So given this outlook then how do you expect the yield curve to perform into 2026 and ultimately uh what's your positioning for bonds? >> Yeah, that I I think that's an important point. We were we were surprised when uh uh uh uh Kevin Hasset's name was being thrown around and obviously he was seen as being the most politically captured of the potential Fed uh uh Fed nominees and yet the 10-year yield was below 4%. We're like, where's the term premium? You know, where's the beef? Like the Wendy's lady. Uh, and saying, you know, where's people's concerns that a captured Fed would run policy too easy, cause inflation to be sticky? Where are inflation expectations? And you know the conclusion was that well it's probably because the bond market doesn't believe that the uh that the Fed board would coalesce around somebody who was perceived to be an outsider and perceived to be politically captured effectively in an act of defiance. They would not follow uh uh whatever the the the Fed chair wanted to be done. And obviously there's all this question about, you know, the other ways for them to to influence the board and put other people on the board, firing people for example. Um, so you maybe that is the reflection that that it's not just one person that matters, it's the whole it's the whole board that matters. Now, one of the the the things that we had been arguing uh was was effectively that you and this is not a point of argument but just an observation is that the Fed doesn't control the long end of the curve unless they're expressly expressly trying to control the long end of the curve. Meaning that the Fed doesn't control the 10-year or the 30-year. That's much more reflected much more influenced by market-based dynamics, supply and demand dynamics of bonds. uh when we think about uh the supply of bonds, of course it has to do with the treasury, how many bonds are being issued, demand has to do with people's inflation expectations, growth expectations, demand for safety, demand for risk. Um all of that together uh drives the long ending of the curve. And so we have a very simple uh uh uh framework which is you know Fed cuts short-term interest rates, what does the 10-year Treasury yield do? And if the answer if if the context is uh economic surprises are moving positive meaning economic data is getting better the 10ear Treasury yield will go up. If the context is economic data is doing worse and economic surprises are moving negative then the 10ear Treasury yield will go down. So in order to answer your question about the yield curve it really depends on the backdrop of economic data. If we see economic data continue to plot around long and be in this environment where um you know growth is not stellar but it's not terrible then you're in an environment where yields likely remain in this kind of wide chroy range and you just sort of oscillate around you this 420ish kind of mean right where you go a little bit below it a little bit above it but you don't really make much progress but if you're in an environment where inflation's remaining sticky or go reacelerates obviously that would the upward pressure on yields. If you're an environment where you're questioning growth and you have an unemployment rate that goes up to 47, 48, then that would be an environment where you'd see a big rally in bonds. So, it all depends on the context of economic data, not just what the Fed is doing. And that's of course the lesson that we learned over the course of the last two effectively year and a half of a cutting cycle where yields are higher after 175 basis points of cuts because the economy has held up. Yeah, I guess this next point also depends on the context of economic data, not just what the Fed is doing with the rates. But if you just take a look at the last cutting cycle, for example, in 2019, uh the Fed was cutting into an all-time high at the time for the S&P 500, uh ditto 2024, and now we're resuming another cutting cycle. Uh well, we have already a couple months ago. Uh but the point stands that over the last year and a half, uh the markets have continued to grind to new all-time highs while the Fed has eased. And so that has when when they've done that in the last two cycles, 2019 and 2024, uh the markets just grinded higher a year afterward. So, uh can that be a precedent for can we use that precedent for what's about to happen next year as well? >> Well, I I would say that, you know, we we've been in this cutting cycle since September of 2024. We had a pause in between the deliverance of the first set of cuts and the second set of cuts. So maybe we're living in that year after uh you know once you hit once you start cutting at all-time highs we're probably living through that now. Um I'd say that the there's an important observation uh which is that if you go back to the September through December period of last year as well as this year there was a really important dynamic that was happening in both of those times. You had a Fed that was delivering rate cuts, but you had a world that was raising GDP forecasts, meaning that you had consensus expecting better growth than they had prior expected, which meant that there was optimism coming through in some of the data, but the Fed was still delivering cuts. That's an environment where risk assets do really well, right? I get my liquidity, I get my stimulus, I get my lower rates, but I'm not cutting my growth forecasts. That's the perfect environment for risk assets. So the question as we go into 2026 is okay, if we're closer to the end, we're closer to neutral and let's just assume that new Fed chair can't define neutral as 1% or 2%. Right? Remember Stephen Steven Myron's dot in the dot plot for 2026 is 2%. He's effectively arguing he thinks the neutral rate is two and not three. three is what the long-term neutral dot is um on the you know Fed and the median dot. U so let's assume that the neutral rate is three based on on how far the the new Fed chair can push it. That means that then you we maybe have two more cuts. If you remain in an environment where you're raising growth forecasts, yes, we get your scenario where markets continue to do well. If we're in an environment where we start cutting growth forecasts, then you're in a scenario where I don't think markets do as well. So, you know, it's it it it's it would be nice to be able to to draw some kind of prescriptive this is exactly what's going to happen, but just as the Fed is going to be very data dependent, as they like to say, um you know, we cannot ignore the fact that markets will be data dependent as well. Maybe maybe just to like to to actually put a definitive dot on it, we're making we're not making a call for a US recession in 2026. We don't think that as of right now the labor market is falling off a cliff. We reserve every right to change to change our mind. Uh we are concerned with nonlinearity in labor market data to quote Neil Data. Uly the idea that a little bit of weakness turns into a lot of bit of weakness uh pretty quickly. uh but you've been able to be afraid or you could have been afraid of nonlinearity in labor market data for the last year and a half and it hasn't proven to be the right fear to to have. So um certainly a risk we're watching um but not something that we're necessarily making the allout call of run for the hills labor you unemployment's going to have a six handle or something like that. >> I I have here the uh chart showing the unemployment rate now at 4.4% the highest it's been since I think 2021. On the other hand though, uh we're getting some volatility in the weekly non-form payroll data. Some sometimes they've beaten expectations, sometimes not. And so how do you explain rising unemployment with sometimes uh more jobs being added than expected? >> Yeah, I mean there's obviously when we think about the unemployment rate, uh we have to think about the numerator and the denominator, right? It's not just labor market demand but labor market supply. And one of the reasons why the unemployment rate has slowed uh or has has maybe not gone up as much as pe some people were expecting is because you had an environment where labor supply was falling in a concommatant fashion with labor demand. Labor demand was falling because you were seeing non-firm payrolls slow down, new job additions slowing down, but labor supply was also falling because of immigration. And so some would argue that the unemployment rate if you had kept labor supply constant with with immigration, you would have seen it move even higher. You I think the push back to that is, you know, if the if the labor market was that much weaker uh underneath than what was maybe captured in some of the surface statistics, would we have not seen it in some consumption data? Would we have not seen it somewhere else in the economy show up? Now, very easy to push back on that and say, well, consumption data is just weighted to the highest income households. Uh that you we've all seen the stats, the top 10% of households generating 50% of consumption. So, if there is weakness um based on what you're seeing uh uh within if there is more weakness with labor underneath the surface, then it may be being skewed by what goes on with consumption data. And some people will point to things like uh uh apartment rents as as the deflation we're seeing in apartment rents is a sign of some of this labor market weakness u uh starting to bubble up. But of course there's supply and demand dynamics there. So I I we we expect the pace of job additions to remain uh rather subdued. And one point on that is a lot of people are saying, "Oh, it must be it. It must be AI is the reason why companies are are are employing less people." Um, we don't think we'd see it in the data yet. Maybe at the margin there's certain jobs that that people are slowing the pace of of new freshman or like new graduate software engineers, for example. Uh but we think that the reality is that the reason you're seeing slowing job additions uh and maybe some increased firing announcements is more to do with margins related to uh uh related to tariffs. And so because tariffs is all the data is showing are being borne by by corporates, not all of it, but the the the majority of the tariff cost is being borne by corporates. They're looking for ways in order to defend their margins. and in order to defend their margins uh they are looking to pull back on hiring which is you know obviously a big cost and expense for a lot of uh individual companies. So point being is that we think that the reason you've seen a slowdown in job additions and some weakness in the labor market is a function of what's going on um uh uh within margins. I love how the how the sun came out ju just as we're just as we're talking about >> Yeah. Yeah. Maybe maybe that is a harbinger for what's to come in 2026. Let's stay optimistic. >> There's hope for us after all. Thank you for bringing out the sun, Cameron. We appreciate it. Uh let's talk about your positioning into 2026. And to end the conversation, starting with Bitcoin. Now, uh this is an interesting chart you've got here. Selling pressure is real. Bitcoin fades between before it gets to resistance. You you and I were chatting offline. You're telling me that uh one of the themes that you've noticed is a lack of conviction either way uh that you've that you've observed. And um it goes to show that Bitcoin falling has spooked a lot of investors uh who are riskone. At the same time though, if you take a look at the Russell, it's been hitting new all-time highs. And in fact, it's been beating Bitcoin uh on a year-to- date basis. Let me just take a percentage scale uh year to date. Yeah. Up 13%, Bitcoin still down 10%. So, it's not a matter of people are just risk off overall. It's really just Bitcoin when you look at it. >> Yeah. And I think that that's it's such an important observation because one of the things that kept catching our eye as we went through September and October is you were seeing massive rallies in meme stocks and other speculative parts of the market. We wrote a piece that was called Chicken Fried that was talking about the the big rallies that you were seeing in things like Korean fried chicken stocks because of of a picture of of Jensen Wong with uh uh eating fried chicken and really as endemic of of the degree of speculation that was in the market. But then just saying if there's so much speculation in the market, why isn't crypto behaving? And maybe it was a function of of liquidity around the edges growing tighter. Um, I'm not an expert in this topic as at all. But we do see this as a tip of the spear of liquidity and risk appetite and so, you know, a a recovery in Bitcoin we would see as an overall bullish signal for kind of a riskon type of market. But maybe it's just reflecting the fact that you're starting to see some more dispersion in returns. There's a lot of leverage within the Bitcoin uh or and crypto ecosphere. And the thing I would note as well is that there's been a big buildup of leverage within retail accounts as well. One of the stats we've been following closely and continues to kind of raise an eyebrow is that over the last 6 months you've seen a 40% increase in the um uh in the FINRA margin loan balances. So those are margin loan balances for retail investors. And you know that is is reflective of the degree of optimism that has reentered markets and certainly uh the strength that has been um uh in markets coming off of the the lows in April. So I think that that one of the things to watch in 2026 is that we know where does this exuberant shake out. Clearly it hasn't helped on the the crypto ecosphere and like I said not an expert. I know that there's lots of dynamics about different whales and that type thing happening. Um but we do see it as an important liquidity indicator and risk appetite indicator in the market. >> Well, how low do you think interest rates could go uh next year? And um I I asked this because like you brought up, liquidity is or has been proven to be a very important driver for Bitcoin and other risk assets. >> I think it depends on how much the new Fed chair is able to bend the committee to its will, his will. uh uh that if the new Fed chair comes out and says, you know, I think that the neutral rate is lower and let's use not that my is being considered, but let's use Myron's 2% dot. I think it I think the the neutral rate is closer to 2%. Um it would take a lot of weakening in the labor market to likely convince the rest of the committee to get down to that level. So, we've been using 3% as a um as a placeholder effectively to say, hey, that's the Fed's own forecast of what uh of what the neutral rate is and the median dot. So, it wouldn't be surprising uh if you were to see uh uh them move towards that direction. But what's interesting is the market has them barely getting to 3% by the end of 2026. Well, it won't take a lot more weakening within the labor market to get that pricing for uh when we get to to 3% um to be pulled forward. >> And I think there's one observation here uh that's important, which is that the last 3 years, I would argue maybe even longer, 3 and 1/2 years, the bond market has been always more doubbish than what the Fed has been. If you go back to 2022, the summer of 2022, the bond market was starting to price in cuts starting in 2023. Of course, we still got rate hikes. You saw, you've seen the 2-year Fed funds curve inverted for a significant period of time. We had the deepest inversion since the since the great financial crisis. Effectively, the two-year saying, "Hey, Fed, you're going to cut rates and you're going to cut them a lot based on where you are today." um that's starting to close, meaning that the the two-year is still projecting rate cuts or expecting rate cuts, but is not nearly as dovish versus where the Fed is standing. And maybe that's one of the the things that I mentioned, you know, that that um Adam Parker is picking up on is that, you know, maybe we're closer to the end of this cutting cycle than we are the beginning. I think that's easy to say after 175 basis points of cuts. Well, let's see what happens uh with either either one of the two. Kevin, you have here a nice graphic summing up your sentiment here. Kevin, do your thing. Uh nice Home Alone reference just in time for Christmas. Okay, so uh gold then the fact that gold has been signaling uh well, not signal, I'll let you talk about what it's been sign, but the fact that gold has been pressing higher. It says here on this chart almost overbought again. What is it signaling? The last time we've well several times throughout history whenever gold and precious metals have uh rallied um it usually signals either a defensive play uh for investors overall or higher inflation and or higher geopolitical tensions if that have if that hasn't happened already. Uh and the fact that gold has pressed towards $4,000 and stayed there and now we're at 4,400 and has consolidated around that range for quite some time. Is that signaling a more riskoff play into 2026 or are we seeing a paradigm in which gold and risk assets can be moving in tandem together? >> Yeah, I think that one of the things that's been interesting is how much has gold become somewhat memeified itself, right? Where gold looks and traded a lot like other momentum stocks and meme stocks back in September and October. And so I think that there that there is an interesting assertion to make effectively that gold's ro risk profile has gotten riskier as we've seen this run. There's lots of anecdotes about different uh traders in both China and South Korea becoming much more involved in the gold market as well. Um potentially adding to some of this move. So you've certainly seen um gold become, you know, instead of that that that gold bugs who were buying, you know, coins off commercials, um becoming a little bit more of a trading asset on the retail side of things. I think it's fascinating to observe that gold's resilience has been just monumental this year. You have seen it get overbought multiple times. And you there's two ways to burn off an overbought condition. You can either go down in price or you can go sideways with time. And we've seen in both times we've had had an overbought condition, effectively gold goes sideways. We've been calling it the Chuck Norris of assets of like just when you think that that you know that gold is down, it comes back fighting and it just seems to be invincible. Um and and I I would say is that it's done an incredible job at burning off these overbought conditions. If you were to look at something like a weekly RSI, so looking at the overbought signal on a longerterm basis, it is incredibly overbought. And so it should not surprise anybody if we see gold consolidate. And maybe, you know, maybe the driver of that could be a Fed that's just leaning slightly less doubbish as we go into the next year. Also note that other central banks look to be nearing the end of their cutting cycles, which could have an influence on gold. And I really love the reminder that at Renmack um that Jeff Degraphth put out which is that you when an asset doubles in less than two years the probability of it going up significantly in year three falls pretty materially. Um and so I think that that there's that aspect as well of of just you know know that you've had a huge run. It doesn't mean that it doesn't still give you exposure to trends like dollar debasement and fiscal dominance and all of that. Um, but when you've moved as far and as fast as you have, um, it would be incredibly naive to think that you can't go down. >> So, >> I say that after it just consolidated sideways once again. >> Well, even Chuck Norris has to retire sometime. So, we'll see where consolidation ends. Cameron, let's end uh the conversation with a quick rapidfire uh speed round. So, uh let's let's let's begin. So, value versus growth next year. >> Ooh. Um you know what? I uh Next year, I'm going to say, this is hard. I know you wanted this to be a speed fire, but it's going to be difficult because I I think that they're going to jockey for position a lot. So, there's going to be points where I'm I'm right and I'm wrong um all at once. Look, I I I think that that uh I think that growth will still have the earnings. Uh and so after this value um rally that we have if growth valuations get close you we consolidate further I think it would be an opportunity to go into growth because growth earnings are still significantly stronger than what we're seeing in value. >> Okay. Uh well look quick is all relative so you can take as much time as little time as you need. Um if you had to rotate out of tech which sector would you go to? Uh probably healthcare >> and um DXY up or down next year? >> Down. >> Okay. And uh DM or emerging markets? >> DM. >> All right. And 10 year yield towards 4% or 5%. >> Towards five. >> Okay. Uh >> not five though. I don't think it gets that far. >> No. Okay. All right. And we've already talked about the Fed uh Bitcoin above $100,000 or no >> above. It's not that far away. >> Yeah. And I'm not making this very difficult for you. And I think uh maybe just your highest conviction bull uh bullcase asset. What would that be? >> We run diversified portfolios. >> Okay. All right. What's What are you overweight in into 2026? You know, I I I called myself this morning uh defiantly neutral. Um I think that there are there there's going to be lots of opportunities for volatility along the way and and what we always remind investors um um at at this time of year, which is that it's not whether or not you experience volatility, it's what you do with it. And so at this point, it's really hard for me to say that I'm incredibly bullish equities with them trading at two 22 and a half times forward and expecting 14% earnings growth. But because of that setup, I'm probably going to get some great opportunities as the year progresses. >> Okay. Any New Year's resolutions? >> Oh man. >> That you like to share with us? >> Yeah. Um I want to be home more. >> Okay. >> Travel less. Yeah. travel less, be home more, and uh get more of that home cooking. All right. Well, we we've all been there. We can all appreciate that. Thank you so much, Cameron, for your contributions. >> Thank you, David. >> This conversation and this year, I hope you have a merry Christmas and happy new year. We'll see you in 2026. >> Merry Christmas and happy new year to you as well. >> And uh where can we follow you before we go? >> You can find me on X at Cameron Dawson and on LinkedIn. Uh Cameron Dawson CFA, I think, is the is the handle. >> All right. We'll put the links down below. So, make sure to follow Cameron there. Thank you for watching. Don't forget to like and subscribe.
'Exuberant Shakeout' Warning: 2026's Biggest Market Movers | Cameron Dawson
Summary
Transcript
Over the last 6 months, you've seen a 40% increase in the FINRA margin loan balances. Where does this exuberant shake out? Clearly, it hasn't helped on the the crypto ecosphere. If you look at consensus for 2026, what you can see is that there is an expectation that Mag 7 will slow down slightly, but you will start to see a big acceleration in the everything else. The question for investors is, are those expectations wellounded? I'm pleased to welcome back the show Cameron Dawson, CIO of New Edge Wealth. We'll be getting her outlook for 2026, all markets related. Good to see you again, Cameron. Good to see you. >> Thank you so much for having me, David. >> Yeah, welcome back. Look, we're speaking today on Friday the 19th and uh markets are having a great day. Good week, actually, after a bit of a pullback on the news that Oracle will no longer be funded by um uh Owl Capital, but uh we'll talk about that in just a minute here. Are we seeing the beginning of a rotation away from tech overall? >> Oh boy. Well, that certainly has been the case since midn November. We started seeing a shift in markets where things like healthcare, utilities, a little bit of life out of energy, materials, started showing better relative performance. And all of the areas that house the MAG 7, tech, communication services, as well as consumer discretionary, those are the three sectors where the MAG7 sit all went into more of a starting to lag camp where you started to see some of the relative performance start to soften. And the question, of course, is can this continue? It's one thing to have a short-term rotation. We've seen plenty of those over the course of the last few years where you have little bursts of outperformance of everything else. So, if you look at the long-term trend chart of something like the equal weight S&P 500, what you can see is that it's been in a relentless downturn since 2022, but if you look really closely, you can see a couple points of of time where you've seen better performance out of the equal weight stocks. And so, as I mentioned, it's a question of can this continue? Does this have legs? And for us, we think the answer to that is really dependent on earnings. We make the the observation that the reason that you have seen such powerful earnings growth uh or sorry powerful outperformance of the Mag 7 over the equal weight is because that's just been where the earnings are. The Mag 7 over the last 3 years has grown earnings by 200%. And that's compares to the equal weight of earnings growth of just 16%. And so if you look at consensus for 2026, what you can see is that there is an expectation that MAG 7 will slow down slightly, but you will start to see a big acceleration in the everything else where you start to see a big recovery in those average stocks. And I think the question for investors is are those expectations wellounded? We've constantly seen over the last 3 years effectively that the MAG 7 has surprised to the upside and you've seen surprises to the downside from everything else. So what we're what we're saying is that there's a bit of a high bar for that everything else trade to work. That typically is is what we see this time of year. Everybody makes the call of this big hope and dream that we're going to broaden out. uh but we think that it really has to have a a fundamental foundation behind it in order for it to continue. So this could be about positioning and valuation as much as anything else in the short term. Uh and the question is of course is do you see the earnings kind of back it up to make it have legs. One last quick point on that positioning is that if we go to back to the end of October that kind of effectively blowoff top uh it was a mini blowoff top that we had in some of the mag 7 and speculative parts of the market. What you saw is that growth traded to an 85% premium to value at that peak in October. It's now fallen to about a 20% pre sorry a 65% premium to value. uh but what we saw is that that 85% level is effectively the peak that we got to at any point over the last 10 years. So the observation is simply to say this is likely a lot to do with valuation and positioning. Big question of if it continues it depends on earnings. >> Do you think that the uh mounting levels of debt that these large tech companies have acquired pose a risk going into 2026? So I think that we have to make a delineation between those that have seen their debt levels go up but still have very very low levels of net debt to IBIDA for example. So a lot of the hyperscalers and those that uh have already high levels of debt to IBIT but uh are continuing to add even more debt as you open the show with the talk of what's going on with Oracle and Blue Owl for example. And so I think the the the delineation is that if you are a Microsoft or a Google, there's still lots of room for you to be able to continue to spend and increase debt before you probably re reach a ceiling where the market is pushing back on you. However, um I would say is that you Jim Chenos did a great piece back earlier this week or last week where he said look a lot of the return on investment for these data center buildouts don't go aren't over what the weighted average cost of capital is. So effectively, you have these companies that even though they don't have a lot of debt levels, the incremental return that they're getting from making these investments is not necessarily high enough to justify them making the investments, which is why they're turning to folks like Blue A to do some of this o offbalance sheet financing. So it doesn't just because the debt levels aren't high doesn't mean the market's not going to look very closely to say, is it justified for you to be spending all of this money? there could be some push to say why don't you just give it back to us which is what they typically did. >> Yeah. And the other uh counteracting force I guess is the fact that the Fed has engaged in what some speculate as QE. Uh they have committed to buying up new reserves um in the reserve management program starting as of last week actually. Uh that in conjunction with lower rates would make this a very easing cycle going into 2026 the first quarter at least. What are your expectations for markets to react uh to this easing cycle? >> Yeah, we were surprised to see that your typical liquidity sensitive parts of the market, your crypto for example, as being probably one of the most liquidity sensitive areas, not respond as robustly to the announcement that the Fed was going to go down this path. I mean, we see it as a necess necessary path as you saw things like sofur spreads widening out and showing some signs of maybe some short-term funding market stress. And one of the things that we had been watching really closely is this idea that we think about one of the reasons why liquidity has remained so abundant in the market over the past few years. even as the Fed had rates above neutral, even as you were seeing large issuance of of treasuries is because of this observation that a lot of the Treasury funding was being done at the short end of the curve and being gobbled up by money market accounts and we were raising the question of what happens when flows into money markets start to slow. You're seeing short-term rates get cut. So the the interest that you earn on money markets are is like is falling uh in real time and that not to say that you are seeing uh people pull money out of money markets because of that but the pace of additions is likely to slow just at the time where you see the pace of treasury bill issuance which needs money markets to gobble those up uh is going up. And so this clearly seems to be a a function to help solve for part of that problem as well as some stigma around the discount window which gets into a whole different conversation. But if we were to just distill it down then to your point you have an environment where liquidity the Fed is signaling that it wants to keep liquidity abundant. That's good. Uh you have an environment where rates do seem uh at least not biased higher. Uh but I think the challenge that the market is now wrestling with and this was a great observation that Adam Parker of Trivariat made a couple of uh or a couple days ago where he said look you know if you go back to 2022 the Fed was still hiking rates but the market at the low in in 2022 was effectively making the observation that they were closer to the end of rate cuts than they were to the beginning. meaning that the pace of rate cut rate hike sorry end of rate hikes uh uh closer to the end of those in the beginning which just meant that we were closer to the end of the hiking cycle closer to the beginning of the cutting cycle than we were at other points prior in 2022. So he goes well effectively we're now in the exact opposite. you're closer to the end of the cutting cycle, at least this reccalibration cycle where the Fed is cutting even though the labor market's not falling off a cliff, for example. Uh but that to expect a lot more cuts from here, we're getting closer to neutral. Pal told us that at the December Fed meeting. In fact, he said we're effectively at neutral. So, it could be that that some of the markets uh kind of lackluster response to the last Fed cut could have been saying, "Hey, you know what what was the Winston Churchill? This is not the end. This is not the beginning of the end, but it could be the end of the beginning." >> Before we continue with the video, let's talk about today's sponsor, Starf Fighters. Starf Fighter Space is an aerospace company operating the world's only commercial fleet of Mach 2 capable Lockheed F104 aircraft. They're based out of NASA's Kennedy Space Center and focus on hypersonic air launch testing and micro satellite deployment aiming to reduce cost and timeliness compared to traditional launch methods. The company has worked with organizations like NASA, Lohee Martin, GE and the US Air Force. They recently completed a regulation A+ raise and are planning to go public later this year, making it one of the few space related companies transitioning from private to public markets right now. If this is something that you're interested in or want to look into, talk to your financial adviser and start your own due diligence process on Starf Fighters space. There's lots to learn. You can scan the QR code here or go to the link down below in the description to learn more. So I have here a chart from one of your or a slide from one of your um uh Monday chart uh Monday chart slide deck. So we have uh it says here two cuts expected in 2026. And then uh the text accompanying it says this likely reflects doubt that a captured Fed share mostly one that is new um uh the Fed internal machine uh would new to the Fed internal machine would have the political sway to get committee votes for aggressive rate cuts. So given this outlook then how do you expect the yield curve to perform into 2026 and ultimately uh what's your positioning for bonds? >> Yeah, that I I think that's an important point. We were we were surprised when uh uh uh uh Kevin Hasset's name was being thrown around and obviously he was seen as being the most politically captured of the potential Fed uh uh Fed nominees and yet the 10-year yield was below 4%. We're like, where's the term premium? You know, where's the beef? Like the Wendy's lady. Uh, and saying, you know, where's people's concerns that a captured Fed would run policy too easy, cause inflation to be sticky? Where are inflation expectations? And you know the conclusion was that well it's probably because the bond market doesn't believe that the uh that the Fed board would coalesce around somebody who was perceived to be an outsider and perceived to be politically captured effectively in an act of defiance. They would not follow uh uh whatever the the the Fed chair wanted to be done. And obviously there's all this question about, you know, the other ways for them to to influence the board and put other people on the board, firing people for example. Um, so you maybe that is the reflection that that it's not just one person that matters, it's the whole it's the whole board that matters. Now, one of the the the things that we had been arguing uh was was effectively that you and this is not a point of argument but just an observation is that the Fed doesn't control the long end of the curve unless they're expressly expressly trying to control the long end of the curve. Meaning that the Fed doesn't control the 10-year or the 30-year. That's much more reflected much more influenced by market-based dynamics, supply and demand dynamics of bonds. uh when we think about uh the supply of bonds, of course it has to do with the treasury, how many bonds are being issued, demand has to do with people's inflation expectations, growth expectations, demand for safety, demand for risk. Um all of that together uh drives the long ending of the curve. And so we have a very simple uh uh uh framework which is you know Fed cuts short-term interest rates, what does the 10-year Treasury yield do? And if the answer if if the context is uh economic surprises are moving positive meaning economic data is getting better the 10ear Treasury yield will go up. If the context is economic data is doing worse and economic surprises are moving negative then the 10ear Treasury yield will go down. So in order to answer your question about the yield curve it really depends on the backdrop of economic data. If we see economic data continue to plot around long and be in this environment where um you know growth is not stellar but it's not terrible then you're in an environment where yields likely remain in this kind of wide chroy range and you just sort of oscillate around you this 420ish kind of mean right where you go a little bit below it a little bit above it but you don't really make much progress but if you're in an environment where inflation's remaining sticky or go reacelerates obviously that would the upward pressure on yields. If you're an environment where you're questioning growth and you have an unemployment rate that goes up to 47, 48, then that would be an environment where you'd see a big rally in bonds. So, it all depends on the context of economic data, not just what the Fed is doing. And that's of course the lesson that we learned over the course of the last two effectively year and a half of a cutting cycle where yields are higher after 175 basis points of cuts because the economy has held up. Yeah, I guess this next point also depends on the context of economic data, not just what the Fed is doing with the rates. But if you just take a look at the last cutting cycle, for example, in 2019, uh the Fed was cutting into an all-time high at the time for the S&P 500, uh ditto 2024, and now we're resuming another cutting cycle. Uh well, we have already a couple months ago. Uh but the point stands that over the last year and a half, uh the markets have continued to grind to new all-time highs while the Fed has eased. And so that has when when they've done that in the last two cycles, 2019 and 2024, uh the markets just grinded higher a year afterward. So, uh can that be a precedent for can we use that precedent for what's about to happen next year as well? >> Well, I I would say that, you know, we we've been in this cutting cycle since September of 2024. We had a pause in between the deliverance of the first set of cuts and the second set of cuts. So maybe we're living in that year after uh you know once you hit once you start cutting at all-time highs we're probably living through that now. Um I'd say that the there's an important observation uh which is that if you go back to the September through December period of last year as well as this year there was a really important dynamic that was happening in both of those times. You had a Fed that was delivering rate cuts, but you had a world that was raising GDP forecasts, meaning that you had consensus expecting better growth than they had prior expected, which meant that there was optimism coming through in some of the data, but the Fed was still delivering cuts. That's an environment where risk assets do really well, right? I get my liquidity, I get my stimulus, I get my lower rates, but I'm not cutting my growth forecasts. That's the perfect environment for risk assets. So the question as we go into 2026 is okay, if we're closer to the end, we're closer to neutral and let's just assume that new Fed chair can't define neutral as 1% or 2%. Right? Remember Stephen Steven Myron's dot in the dot plot for 2026 is 2%. He's effectively arguing he thinks the neutral rate is two and not three. three is what the long-term neutral dot is um on the you know Fed and the median dot. U so let's assume that the neutral rate is three based on on how far the the new Fed chair can push it. That means that then you we maybe have two more cuts. If you remain in an environment where you're raising growth forecasts, yes, we get your scenario where markets continue to do well. If we're in an environment where we start cutting growth forecasts, then you're in a scenario where I don't think markets do as well. So, you know, it's it it it's it would be nice to be able to to draw some kind of prescriptive this is exactly what's going to happen, but just as the Fed is going to be very data dependent, as they like to say, um you know, we cannot ignore the fact that markets will be data dependent as well. Maybe maybe just to like to to actually put a definitive dot on it, we're making we're not making a call for a US recession in 2026. We don't think that as of right now the labor market is falling off a cliff. We reserve every right to change to change our mind. Uh we are concerned with nonlinearity in labor market data to quote Neil Data. Uly the idea that a little bit of weakness turns into a lot of bit of weakness uh pretty quickly. uh but you've been able to be afraid or you could have been afraid of nonlinearity in labor market data for the last year and a half and it hasn't proven to be the right fear to to have. So um certainly a risk we're watching um but not something that we're necessarily making the allout call of run for the hills labor you unemployment's going to have a six handle or something like that. >> I I have here the uh chart showing the unemployment rate now at 4.4% the highest it's been since I think 2021. On the other hand though, uh we're getting some volatility in the weekly non-form payroll data. Some sometimes they've beaten expectations, sometimes not. And so how do you explain rising unemployment with sometimes uh more jobs being added than expected? >> Yeah, I mean there's obviously when we think about the unemployment rate, uh we have to think about the numerator and the denominator, right? It's not just labor market demand but labor market supply. And one of the reasons why the unemployment rate has slowed uh or has has maybe not gone up as much as pe some people were expecting is because you had an environment where labor supply was falling in a concommatant fashion with labor demand. Labor demand was falling because you were seeing non-firm payrolls slow down, new job additions slowing down, but labor supply was also falling because of immigration. And so some would argue that the unemployment rate if you had kept labor supply constant with with immigration, you would have seen it move even higher. You I think the push back to that is, you know, if the if the labor market was that much weaker uh underneath than what was maybe captured in some of the surface statistics, would we have not seen it in some consumption data? Would we have not seen it somewhere else in the economy show up? Now, very easy to push back on that and say, well, consumption data is just weighted to the highest income households. Uh that you we've all seen the stats, the top 10% of households generating 50% of consumption. So, if there is weakness um based on what you're seeing uh uh within if there is more weakness with labor underneath the surface, then it may be being skewed by what goes on with consumption data. And some people will point to things like uh uh apartment rents as as the deflation we're seeing in apartment rents is a sign of some of this labor market weakness u uh starting to bubble up. But of course there's supply and demand dynamics there. So I I we we expect the pace of job additions to remain uh rather subdued. And one point on that is a lot of people are saying, "Oh, it must be it. It must be AI is the reason why companies are are are employing less people." Um, we don't think we'd see it in the data yet. Maybe at the margin there's certain jobs that that people are slowing the pace of of new freshman or like new graduate software engineers, for example. Uh but we think that the reality is that the reason you're seeing slowing job additions uh and maybe some increased firing announcements is more to do with margins related to uh uh related to tariffs. And so because tariffs is all the data is showing are being borne by by corporates, not all of it, but the the the majority of the tariff cost is being borne by corporates. They're looking for ways in order to defend their margins. and in order to defend their margins uh they are looking to pull back on hiring which is you know obviously a big cost and expense for a lot of uh individual companies. So point being is that we think that the reason you've seen a slowdown in job additions and some weakness in the labor market is a function of what's going on um uh uh within margins. I love how the how the sun came out ju just as we're just as we're talking about >> Yeah. Yeah. Maybe maybe that is a harbinger for what's to come in 2026. Let's stay optimistic. >> There's hope for us after all. Thank you for bringing out the sun, Cameron. We appreciate it. Uh let's talk about your positioning into 2026. And to end the conversation, starting with Bitcoin. Now, uh this is an interesting chart you've got here. Selling pressure is real. Bitcoin fades between before it gets to resistance. You you and I were chatting offline. You're telling me that uh one of the themes that you've noticed is a lack of conviction either way uh that you've that you've observed. And um it goes to show that Bitcoin falling has spooked a lot of investors uh who are riskone. At the same time though, if you take a look at the Russell, it's been hitting new all-time highs. And in fact, it's been beating Bitcoin uh on a year-to- date basis. Let me just take a percentage scale uh year to date. Yeah. Up 13%, Bitcoin still down 10%. So, it's not a matter of people are just risk off overall. It's really just Bitcoin when you look at it. >> Yeah. And I think that that's it's such an important observation because one of the things that kept catching our eye as we went through September and October is you were seeing massive rallies in meme stocks and other speculative parts of the market. We wrote a piece that was called Chicken Fried that was talking about the the big rallies that you were seeing in things like Korean fried chicken stocks because of of a picture of of Jensen Wong with uh uh eating fried chicken and really as endemic of of the degree of speculation that was in the market. But then just saying if there's so much speculation in the market, why isn't crypto behaving? And maybe it was a function of of liquidity around the edges growing tighter. Um, I'm not an expert in this topic as at all. But we do see this as a tip of the spear of liquidity and risk appetite and so, you know, a a recovery in Bitcoin we would see as an overall bullish signal for kind of a riskon type of market. But maybe it's just reflecting the fact that you're starting to see some more dispersion in returns. There's a lot of leverage within the Bitcoin uh or and crypto ecosphere. And the thing I would note as well is that there's been a big buildup of leverage within retail accounts as well. One of the stats we've been following closely and continues to kind of raise an eyebrow is that over the last 6 months you've seen a 40% increase in the um uh in the FINRA margin loan balances. So those are margin loan balances for retail investors. And you know that is is reflective of the degree of optimism that has reentered markets and certainly uh the strength that has been um uh in markets coming off of the the lows in April. So I think that that one of the things to watch in 2026 is that we know where does this exuberant shake out. Clearly it hasn't helped on the the crypto ecosphere and like I said not an expert. I know that there's lots of dynamics about different whales and that type thing happening. Um but we do see it as an important liquidity indicator and risk appetite indicator in the market. >> Well, how low do you think interest rates could go uh next year? And um I I asked this because like you brought up, liquidity is or has been proven to be a very important driver for Bitcoin and other risk assets. >> I think it depends on how much the new Fed chair is able to bend the committee to its will, his will. uh uh that if the new Fed chair comes out and says, you know, I think that the neutral rate is lower and let's use not that my is being considered, but let's use Myron's 2% dot. I think it I think the the neutral rate is closer to 2%. Um it would take a lot of weakening in the labor market to likely convince the rest of the committee to get down to that level. So, we've been using 3% as a um as a placeholder effectively to say, hey, that's the Fed's own forecast of what uh of what the neutral rate is and the median dot. So, it wouldn't be surprising uh if you were to see uh uh them move towards that direction. But what's interesting is the market has them barely getting to 3% by the end of 2026. Well, it won't take a lot more weakening within the labor market to get that pricing for uh when we get to to 3% um to be pulled forward. >> And I think there's one observation here uh that's important, which is that the last 3 years, I would argue maybe even longer, 3 and 1/2 years, the bond market has been always more doubbish than what the Fed has been. If you go back to 2022, the summer of 2022, the bond market was starting to price in cuts starting in 2023. Of course, we still got rate hikes. You saw, you've seen the 2-year Fed funds curve inverted for a significant period of time. We had the deepest inversion since the since the great financial crisis. Effectively, the two-year saying, "Hey, Fed, you're going to cut rates and you're going to cut them a lot based on where you are today." um that's starting to close, meaning that the the two-year is still projecting rate cuts or expecting rate cuts, but is not nearly as dovish versus where the Fed is standing. And maybe that's one of the the things that I mentioned, you know, that that um Adam Parker is picking up on is that, you know, maybe we're closer to the end of this cutting cycle than we are the beginning. I think that's easy to say after 175 basis points of cuts. Well, let's see what happens uh with either either one of the two. Kevin, you have here a nice graphic summing up your sentiment here. Kevin, do your thing. Uh nice Home Alone reference just in time for Christmas. Okay, so uh gold then the fact that gold has been signaling uh well, not signal, I'll let you talk about what it's been sign, but the fact that gold has been pressing higher. It says here on this chart almost overbought again. What is it signaling? The last time we've well several times throughout history whenever gold and precious metals have uh rallied um it usually signals either a defensive play uh for investors overall or higher inflation and or higher geopolitical tensions if that have if that hasn't happened already. Uh and the fact that gold has pressed towards $4,000 and stayed there and now we're at 4,400 and has consolidated around that range for quite some time. Is that signaling a more riskoff play into 2026 or are we seeing a paradigm in which gold and risk assets can be moving in tandem together? >> Yeah, I think that one of the things that's been interesting is how much has gold become somewhat memeified itself, right? Where gold looks and traded a lot like other momentum stocks and meme stocks back in September and October. And so I think that there that there is an interesting assertion to make effectively that gold's ro risk profile has gotten riskier as we've seen this run. There's lots of anecdotes about different uh traders in both China and South Korea becoming much more involved in the gold market as well. Um potentially adding to some of this move. So you've certainly seen um gold become, you know, instead of that that that gold bugs who were buying, you know, coins off commercials, um becoming a little bit more of a trading asset on the retail side of things. I think it's fascinating to observe that gold's resilience has been just monumental this year. You have seen it get overbought multiple times. And you there's two ways to burn off an overbought condition. You can either go down in price or you can go sideways with time. And we've seen in both times we've had had an overbought condition, effectively gold goes sideways. We've been calling it the Chuck Norris of assets of like just when you think that that you know that gold is down, it comes back fighting and it just seems to be invincible. Um and and I I would say is that it's done an incredible job at burning off these overbought conditions. If you were to look at something like a weekly RSI, so looking at the overbought signal on a longerterm basis, it is incredibly overbought. And so it should not surprise anybody if we see gold consolidate. And maybe, you know, maybe the driver of that could be a Fed that's just leaning slightly less doubbish as we go into the next year. Also note that other central banks look to be nearing the end of their cutting cycles, which could have an influence on gold. And I really love the reminder that at Renmack um that Jeff Degraphth put out which is that you when an asset doubles in less than two years the probability of it going up significantly in year three falls pretty materially. Um and so I think that that there's that aspect as well of of just you know know that you've had a huge run. It doesn't mean that it doesn't still give you exposure to trends like dollar debasement and fiscal dominance and all of that. Um, but when you've moved as far and as fast as you have, um, it would be incredibly naive to think that you can't go down. >> So, >> I say that after it just consolidated sideways once again. >> Well, even Chuck Norris has to retire sometime. So, we'll see where consolidation ends. Cameron, let's end uh the conversation with a quick rapidfire uh speed round. So, uh let's let's let's begin. So, value versus growth next year. >> Ooh. Um you know what? I uh Next year, I'm going to say, this is hard. I know you wanted this to be a speed fire, but it's going to be difficult because I I think that they're going to jockey for position a lot. So, there's going to be points where I'm I'm right and I'm wrong um all at once. Look, I I I think that that uh I think that growth will still have the earnings. Uh and so after this value um rally that we have if growth valuations get close you we consolidate further I think it would be an opportunity to go into growth because growth earnings are still significantly stronger than what we're seeing in value. >> Okay. Uh well look quick is all relative so you can take as much time as little time as you need. Um if you had to rotate out of tech which sector would you go to? Uh probably healthcare >> and um DXY up or down next year? >> Down. >> Okay. And uh DM or emerging markets? >> DM. >> All right. And 10 year yield towards 4% or 5%. >> Towards five. >> Okay. Uh >> not five though. I don't think it gets that far. >> No. Okay. All right. And we've already talked about the Fed uh Bitcoin above $100,000 or no >> above. It's not that far away. >> Yeah. And I'm not making this very difficult for you. And I think uh maybe just your highest conviction bull uh bullcase asset. What would that be? >> We run diversified portfolios. >> Okay. All right. What's What are you overweight in into 2026? You know, I I I called myself this morning uh defiantly neutral. Um I think that there are there there's going to be lots of opportunities for volatility along the way and and what we always remind investors um um at at this time of year, which is that it's not whether or not you experience volatility, it's what you do with it. And so at this point, it's really hard for me to say that I'm incredibly bullish equities with them trading at two 22 and a half times forward and expecting 14% earnings growth. But because of that setup, I'm probably going to get some great opportunities as the year progresses. >> Okay. Any New Year's resolutions? >> Oh man. >> That you like to share with us? >> Yeah. Um I want to be home more. >> Okay. >> Travel less. Yeah. travel less, be home more, and uh get more of that home cooking. All right. Well, we we've all been there. We can all appreciate that. Thank you so much, Cameron, for your contributions. >> Thank you, David. >> This conversation and this year, I hope you have a merry Christmas and happy new year. We'll see you in 2026. >> Merry Christmas and happy new year to you as well. >> And uh where can we follow you before we go? >> You can find me on X at Cameron Dawson and on LinkedIn. Uh Cameron Dawson CFA, I think, is the is the handle. >> All right. We'll put the links down below. So, make sure to follow Cameron there. Thank you for watching. Don't forget to like and subscribe.