This Should Be A Market Collapse… Why Isn’t It? | Ed Yardeni
Summary
Market Outlook: Ed Yardeni remains bullish on the S&P 500 with resilient earnings and lowered recession odds, arguing markets are discounting geopolitical shocks.
Energy/Oil: Discussion centers on oil supply disruptions, alternative routes, and the US oil industry's potential boost, alongside scenarios for how $100–$150 oil could affect growth and Fed policy.
Equities vs. Bonds: Prefers equities over bonds for 2026, but views ~4.75% on the 10-year as a strong buying opportunity with US bond vigilantes relatively muted.
Gold: Positions gold as a portfolio diversifier with supportive long-term demand from China and India, temporary selling from Turkey, and potential for renewed ETF interest and rebalancing flows.
Tech & Comm Services: Shifted from long-standing overweight to market weight after valuation reset; notes these sectors were 46% of S&P market cap and remain core but not overweight.
Global/Emerging Markets: Staying with the “go global” trade as Korea and Taiwan rebound strongly, maintaining exposure despite Middle East risks.
Inflation Dynamics: Inflation has stalled near 3% with tariffs keeping it above 2%, while energy-driven pass-through could reappear even as productivity may offset pressures.
Transcript
uh tankers are coming to the the US Gulf and to Venezuela. Um we we could really have a pretty significant increase in business for the American oil industry. I'm kind of surprised that the bond yield has hasn't gone up more, but I think it still could. Today, instead of supply chain disruptions, we've had the tariff effect and that maybe is about to wear off. >> So, if you had to be overwway bonds or equities this year, which would it be? We're speaking on the 13th of April. President Trump this morning announced a naval blockade of all vessels entering and leaving Iranian ports and uh this blockade is now in effect. He warned that any Iranian fast attack ships in the area will be eliminated. He said that the US will not allow Iran to export the world. Joining us now to discuss this and much more is Ed Yardi, president of Yardani Research and uh he's been on the show before Ed many times and we'll talk about his prior views. link down below if you'd like to see our last interview with Dr. Ed. Good to see you, Dr. Ed. Good to welcome back. >> Thank you. >> You were on the show um a couple of months ago, and you told CNBC on the 6th of April, which is last week, that you think the S&P had already bottomed uh and indeed the last week saw some of the biggest gains in the S&P in a single week uh for a long time. Dr. Do today's events meaning the naval the US naval blockade of the straight of Hormuz has that changed your perspective at all now that the rest of the world may see lower world uh oil exports through through the straight of Hormuz we know that there was already shadow fleets going through but now a blockade is going to basically limit that going into Asia right >> no I I still think that uh March 30th it was a Monday uh the market took took a big dive and then on Tuesday it rebounded dramatically uh when uh there was talk uh about the president uh looking for an exit strategy and sure enough Wednesday night he gave a speech and we in which he said you know it could last another two to three weeks and you know uh the US won and if uh if he had to declare victory and walk away that was okay with him and he's basically repeated that again recently but uh you know uh you you can't really invest based on what the president says day by day. It's it's a good way to uh kind of uh lose lose lose your investment mind because things say change so fast. And uh he's speaking to a lot of audiences at the same time. He's clearly trying to convince the Iranians that uh he'll blast them to smitherines if they don't cooperate. and then when the markets don't cooperate with what he's doing, he tones it down and then the market rallies on that. Uh but I I do think that the the markets have been remarkably stable even with this latest announcement that the United States is going to uh blockade Iranian ports. The markets have been remarkably stable in the face of all that. And uh I think investors are concluding that this too shall pass and they're looking beyond it. And uh I I agree with that view. Look, geopolitical crisis have always been buying opportunities. A few months after Pearl Harbor, the US got its act together and uh took out a big chunk of the Japanese na navy in in Midway and the market bottomed at that point. there was still a lot of war left in World War II and and yet the market did bottom early on. So the the market is a discounting mechanism. Uh I think in the current situation the market anticipates that one way or the other uh the oil will get out the commodities that the rest of the world needs will get out. Very reminiscent of what happened in uh early 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine. Price of oil soared. a lot of angst about uh whether there'd be a food shortage because grain couldn't get through the Black Sea and somehow or other uh everything kind of unfolded in a way that brought these commodity prices down and uh the world uh economy and financial markets unfortunately have learned to live with this horrible war that Russia inflicted on on Ukraine and we could continue to have uh unstable uh conditions in the uh Gulf, the the Arabian Gulf, but there is a pipeline from Saudi Arabia to the Red Red Sea and uh and uh you know t if if uh if some of the stories that I'm reading uh on the internet and the president's proclaiming that uh tankers are coming to the US Gulf and to Venezuela, um we we could really have a pretty significant increase in business for the American oil industry. >> Are you still maintaining your $7,700 uh sorry 77 point S&P 500 by the end of the year call? >> Yeah, actually um uh it's based on uh earnings uh this year being $310 a share for the S&P 500 and $350 a share uh next year. And uh I am amazed to see that the industry analysts are even more optimistic than I thought I was. Uh they're looking not for 310 that right now they're looking for 320 this year and they're not looking for 350 next year. They're looking for 370. Uh I don't know what's going on, but analysts the past several weeks have gotten more bullish on earnings um in the face of uh the the war. And uh the analysts read the headlines the way we all do. They know there's a war going on but at the end of the day they get a lot of their guidance from the companies and the companies are reporting they reported really great uh fourth quarter earnings and looks like uh first quarter earnings are going to be up at least 12%. That's what the analysts are looking for now and sometimes they tend to be too pessimistic about the the latest quarter that that we're in. But then for the third, second, third, and fourth quarters are looking for double- digit increases in earnings again. So they're they're very upbeat. So I I was actually thinking of raising my earnings estimate before the war. Then because of the war, I held back and kept them where they are. And meanwhile, I'm watching the the analysts who maybe didn't get the uh the memo about the war having a a negative impact on the US economy and earnings. And so far there's not much of evidence that that's actually the case. >> The NFIB uh small business optimism index, which uh is tracked by your website, your denny.com, uh that's been going down basically ever since 2025, but of course exacerbated by uh the Iran conflict. Do you think there's a disconnect between corporations and analysts on these corporate anal uh earnings calls being more optimistic and the rest of small business America here, Dr. Ed? Well, you know, um optimism is u a kind of a ambiguous idea. You know, are you optimistic or pessimistic? And uh uh I I don't know if they're asking them are you optimistic or pessimistic about your specific business or the business environment. Um, and so you would think that all all the uncertainty and there will be an uncertainty index that comes out with the next NFIB uh data which I guess uh is tomorrow, Tuesday, the uh April 14th uh just to be clear about uh what day we're talking about. Uh so uncertainty is clearly going to weigh on uh on confidence. But at the same time, you know, I'm a small entrepreneur. I've got my own business and uh >> you know if you ask me about things I might say well you know I I used to be more optimistic now I'm kind of >> kind of leaning towards pessimistic. I don't like what I'm seeing geopolitically but how's your business? Oh it's great you know and I'm actually hiring some people and that's that's that's uh that's why I don't pay that much attention to that particular index. I pay more attention to their u uh labor market indicators. Are they hiring or not? and uh that uh that's a little bit more useful in at least thinking about the labor market. >> Before we continue with the video, let's talk about a topic that's been on a lot of precious metals investors minds. How to generate income with your gold holdings. Most assets either generate income or rely on price appreciation. Gold has traditionally fallen into the second category. Our sponsor today, Monetary Metals, has found a way that lets gold do both. Instead of just holding gold and waiting for price moves, investors can now earn a yield on it, paid in physical gold. Through the leasing platform, investors can earn up to 4% annually with yield paid monthly in ounces. That means your holdings increase in gold over time. The metal remains in your asset base and can be redeemed at any time. Thousands of investors are already earning monthly interest in gold through Monetary Medals. So, visit monetary-medals.com/lin in the link down below or scan the QR code here on the screen and make the most out of your gold today. Yeah, we'll come back to the labor market in just a bit. And also, this is an important uh chart. Uh their plans to raise prices relative to inflation, which has been coming up, but according to the blue line, percent planning to raise average selling prices. Is that lagging, Dr. Ed? Is that why it's not going up or do you just not anticipate this going up at all? you know, there's pre-war and there's uh wartime. I mean, we we let's see what the March data looks like. This was uh be before the war and uh before the war, I think overall, you could say that inflation had come down substantially from its peak in 2022. Uh but um overall consumer price inflation measures seem to have stalled out coming down and settled around 3% which is full percentage points more than the Fed is targeting. And I think a lot of that had to do with Trump's tariffs. Trump's tariffs didn't raise inflation uh but they kept it from coming down to 2%. I think we would have been down to 2% by now. uh where Trump's tariffs had a big impact was on durable goods prices. Uh that's uh those prices uh had been negative on a year-over-year. Now they're they're positive. So I I I again the NFIB is a quas quasi useful indicator. The 7700 S&P 500 call, is that predicated on oil coming down or do you think earnings will still remain positive if let's say oil doesn't move from current levels which is near $100 WTI even for the remainder of the year? >> I think the US economy can actually handle $100 uh uh a barrel oil. Uh we are much less um energy intensive now than we were for example during the stagflationary 1970s where we got hit by by two oil shocks and those shocks spread very quickly to a broader inflation problem. Uh maybe that's less likely to occur this time. The economy is much more services. It's much more digital. Um it's uh less less manufacturing all in all. And yeah, I I think the economy can is resilient enough, which has kind of been my theme since the beginning of what I call the roaring 2020s, is that uh don't underestimate the resilience of the economy. And sure enough, it's absorbed a lot of shocks, including this one so far. And I think it's going to continue to demonstrate its resilience by growing without without going through a recession. that in turn will be uh pos mean that earnings will be resilient and that should uh continue to be the uh the underlying uh bullish development for the stock market. >> You actually have a three-stage framework that was outlined in this article by Benzinga. Uh according to Yardani, an oil supply shock moves through bond yield curves in three stages and the US economy has only reached page one. stage one at $1 to $125, which is just not even where we're at currently. Inflation fears dominate. Fed turns hawkish. At $125 to $150, the shock persists uh long enough that the growth um fears start to emerge. And then at the uh final stage above $150, that's where we have real demand destruction and the Fed actually turns dovish. >> So, walk us through this framework here. >> Well, look, I I I don't think it's a framework. It's really kind of descriptive of the the shape of the yield curve, how the bond market is responding to oil prices. Uh it's uh it's kind of hypothetical, right? I don't really have any hard evidence or an econometric model, which I don't view as hard to explain, you know, is it exactly 125 that things start to come unglued. uh but it's really just a way of conveying um how I think the economy will respond to difference price levels and uh 100 to 125 I think the economy can absorb it uh can grow the bond yield might stay around current levels the Fed uh uh probably wouldn't do anything in that kind of scenario because they'd have more inflation uh even if there they see some slowing the economy it's not going to be enough to cause them to ease And then you know you go higher oil prices you have you have a different scenario. So it's not like we go you know stage one leads to stage two leads to stage three. It's uh it's really it should have been called scenario one two three. >> You have uh this piece from your Denny cryptics that I want to highlight. Apocalypse now not lowering recession odds. You lowered your recession odd from 35% down to 20%. Tell us about why you did this. Well, show the date again near the top there. >> Yeah. >> What do you have there? Like March March 30th. >> This uh this is the date. April 7th. >> Oh, April 7th. Yeah. Uh yeah, by by then it uh was uh pretty clear that So again, we we thought the market made its low on uh March 3rd. We said that uh sorry, March 30th. uh we said that uh on the next day on Tuesday, we said it Tuesday night after the market had that initial uh big surge and we said that that's that's an important chart right there that uh that's the con that that's the bull bear ratio that we're we we give a lot of weight to and uh we saw that uh the bearishness really had mounted and from a contrarian perspective so much bearishness with a bull bear ratio down close to one We concluded that there would probably be a policy response when when people get uh extremely bearish. The policy makers one way the other get the message and the policy response uh that uh developed of course was uh uh this the ceasefire uh we kind of moved to in that direction at the at the time. Um and so uh I concluded that u the uh as a result of all that and with Trump uh announcing that uh he was aiming for two to three more weeks, it was pretty clear that uh he wants to get out of there. Uh doesn't mean that there won't be some lingering forces there uh enforcing a blockade. >> Yeah. >> But I don't think it's going to be the the kind of firepower we have there now. But that led me to conclude that the recession was less likely. Uh spike up to, you know, over 125 was was less likely. Uh and that's that's the conclusion. >> For somebody who's very bearish on the economy, like somebody on the bottom end of this chart, for example, what assumptions are they making about the war in Iran or perhaps the war's impact on the economy that you either disagree with or are just outright wrong? Well, you know, I I've been talking about the roaring 2020s. I try to be reasonable and I said that's my base case. >> Sure. >> I gave it 60% subjective probability. Uh then um uh I gave 20% to an even better scenario, at least in the short run, which was a meltup. Uh so that's basically 80% for a bullish scenario. And then I had 20% coming into the war uh as uh as as the risks. And I really uh when people asked me what they were, I I wrote down the G seemed uh I mean I'm kicking myself which it should have been obvious to all of us when the president was moving all that firepower into the Middle East. He he wasn't doing it just for show. >> Uh it was show and tell. You know if if the show doesn't do it then uh show and bomb I guess is really what it was. Uh but uh so my my my my thinking was that um the u uh that this uh war uh would uh I mean again with the benefit of hindsight we should have seen it seen it coming. Uh but um I I think that uh the uh the economy is resilient. the the inflation uh uh picture I think is widely anticipated to be dare I use that word transitory. Uh I think inflation is going to be a little stickier than the markets are thinking. I'm kind of surprised that the bond yield has hasn't gone up more but I think it still could. U but but all in all the alternative is uh the uh the 1970s. So, you know, if you want to kind of take historical analogies, the 1920s would be everything just works out, continues to work out. The 1970s is that we get a big shock uh a bigger sh oil oil shock that's more persistent that actually force forces the Fed to go vulkar and that is to raise interest rates to levels that cause a recession to keep the energy shock from broadening out into the rest of of inflation. And then uh a uh analogy I have yet to really talk about uh that every now and then crosses my mind is the 1930s which was geopolitically just an uglier and uglier decade all around. I don't think it's going to be the 1930s. I don't think it's going to be the uh 1970s stagflationary environment. Um, but that that scenario I would put in the 20% bucket of everything that could go wrong, which I I brought that bucket down in terms of subjective probabilities from 35% uh to to 20%. Look, I I use that as a way to kind of convey my uh how I see the, you know, how seriously I I take these scenarios and it gives me a good way to communicate. So, you know, if things uh go badly again, I'll I won't hesitate to say, you know what, uh it's it's getting worse than I thought. And I've said that, you know, we're looking at the fog of war. You know, I I don't feel comfortable being a military and trying to predict how this all plays out because we we see even military strategists don't really anticipate how things go. Uh but, uh I'm doing the best I can under the circumstances. the uh CPI that came out uh last week, it rose 3.3%. That's the March number. That's the highest number since 2024, May 2024, driven by a 21% surge in gasoline and oil in a month-to-month basis. Now, to what extent do higher oil prices translate to higher consumer goods. You said earlier that we're living in an economy now that is not as dependent on oil as the late '7s was. So, there is still some rollover from higher oil to other things. But to what extent? >> Well, that's a good question and I I I don't know the answer. So, we can kind of do things on a relative basis. So, yeah, we we can go back to 2022 when oil prices soared, when Russia invaded Ukraine and there was and grain prices uh soared and uh there there was certainly some pass through, but there was also supply chain disruption. So, it wasn't a it's not a clear analogy to the current situation. uh today instead of supply chain disruptions, we've had the tariff effect and that maybe is about to wear off. We have yet to see that it actually wears off. Um but uh we we don't have the uh the inflationary background that we had in 2022. So maybe this one will be a more modest uh shorter uh lived uh inflation spike. But uh I'm staying staying nimble on this one because I think there's too much consensus that this two shall pass and uh I am I am somewhat concerned that it may take longer. Then again in the roaring 2020 scenario, productivity just continues to uh uh get better and better and productivity is a very powerful force in keeping inflation down. Uh, so um I'm kind of open-minded on the inflation picture, though I I do have a sort of um an interest in um my base case working out the roaring 2020s. So that's root for productivity being a big offset to these inflationary uh pressures and the bond market seems to be uh aligned with that view right now. >> Well, let's talk about the bond market. You said maybe the long end of the curve didn't go up, but the two the short end, the two-year went up about 50 basis points in a single month. You coined the term bond vigilantes in the 80s. Are the bond vigilantes back now? >> Well, they are in the two-year notes, but two-year notes are not bonds. And the bond vigilantes seem to be actually kind of asleep at the switch. Uh if you want to see where bond vigilantes are are working hard to push yields up, it's clearly in Japan. uh it's been in the UK. Uh but uh here in the US uh the bond market's been real quiet. I didn't think the bond yield will fall below 4% and and this year and it hasn't. I've been thinking 4 and a/4 to 4 and 3/4%. And uh I still think there'll be enough of an inflation shock up ahead here and concerns that it's it's spreading that we will see four and 3/4%. But I would view that as a a tremendous buying opportunity. I don't know if we'll get an an opportunity the way we did in 2023 to buy them at uh at 5%. Uh look, there's still a safe haven uh uh bid for uh for bonds. People are buying bonds because they feel uh in a volatile world uh if they just hold them for 10 years, they know exactly what what they're going to get. Uh and some people may may prefer that. But the other thing to keep in mind is the world has actually become wealthier and wealthier and as it becomes wealthier and wealthier uh there's naturally a tendency to rebalance every now and then. So if a lot of people are making a lot of money in the stock markets around the world they start to get nervous and say you know maybe I should take some of my profits and put it into bonds maybe even into gold. uh which uh of late hasn't been a a great place to be, but uh I think the trend is still higher for gold. >> The trend is higher for gold from $4,700, but deser What What's your assessment as to why gold didn't move up on the Iran war? >> Turkey. Yeah, I I was kind of scratching my head and wondering, you know, you have the you have the war, you have inflation as a result of the war, you have uh, you know, more bigger deficits as a result of the war, more pressure to increase defense spending, and gold goes down. Um, and apparently the story is that uh the war put a lot of downward pressure on the currencies of some emerging markets, particularly Turkey. And apparently Turkey sold a lot of gold in an effort to prop up um the country's currency. So that's uh one explanation. Uh you know, I mean, nothing goes straight up. Uh uh it's it's actually much better if it doesn't go straight up. If it if it consolidates, if there's profit taking, you get rid of the leverage uh in the in the trading and then uh you find that uh lo and behold, there's still buyers. I mean, I think Chinese investors are still likely to be buyers because they've gotten killed in their investments in real estate. They've gotten whipsaw in the Chinese stock market. Chinese stock market is great for trading, but it's not for investors. It just goes nowhere fast uh with a lot of volatility. Uh so there's n natural buyers in India. There's they've always been uh buyers of gold and and silver. And uh we've seen uh around the world people have been buying uh ETFs like GLD and and things like that. But uh you know I I think uh the excitement's kind of worn off for now but it it could come back. And I think a lot of my my attitude view of of gold is that it is a good diversifier in a portfolio. It it has historically been inversely correlated with the S&P 500. Uh but it's also had the same trend. So, if my base case scenario of getting to 10,000 on the S&P 500 by the end of the decade, by the end of 2029 works out, I think the price of gold could get to 10,000 on rebalancing uh people making so much money in the stock market that they want to rebalance into gold and into bonds for example. >> Do you think gold has now replaced or will replace bonds in people's portfolio? I think uh I think people who didn't have any gold in their portfolio now have put maybe 5 to 20% uh in in uh in gold. Uh and maybe that's as an alternative to to bonds. Uh but uh there certainly seems to be lots of demand for bonds uh US bonds anyways. >> Do you think the rising uh debt and deficit situation in the US has put pressure on uh bond and treasury demand? This is an article from Fortune. Just want to get your evaluation of this. US debt suddenly draws weaker demand as $10 trillion must be rolled over this year. So the past week auctions for two, five, and seven-year Treasury notes all drew weaker demand, forcing yields to go higher than expected. That's a stark contrast from last month when Treasury yield treasury offerings saw the highest demand ever in the history of 30-year auctions. This was dated uh March 20th 28th, so not exactly new, but um it was a couple of weeks ago. uh and um part of the reason later on that the article later on goes on to explain is not just the Iran war situation but also the fact that the funding for the war requires the deficit to be expanded. Do you think this impacts your outlook for bonds and treasury demand? >> David, you probably uh may you may know that I coined the phrase bond vigilantes. >> Yes. uh back in 1983. And uh I think uh the last time the bomb vigilantes the previous time the bomb vigilantes uh really uh kind of created some problems uh in the US was in 2023 uh when the bond yield went from 4% to 5% in 3 months. It was August, September, October went from four to 5%. And at 5% people are starting to talk about 6% and a debt crisis and all that. I I have in the past said I'll worry about a debt crisis when the bond market worries about it. So I got concerned. Uh but then just as I uh was getting too concerned uh the bond deal started coming down rather sharply at 5%. It was on November 1st. Uh Bill Aman said that he covered his brilliant short position in the bond market. He said you know he'd made enough money there and he didn't want to play anymore. But he's very short-term obviously. But more importantly, uh, the Treasury Secretary Janet Yalen basically announced that she was going to issue more in bills and not increase the issuance of bonds. She basically told the bond vigilantes, "Okay, I get it. I'm not going to stress you out by issuing more additional bonds. I'm going in T-Bill market." And so the bond vigilantes are not the only players in the bond market. There's the Treasury, there's the Fed, foreign investors, domestic investors. there's a whole bunch of players and it doesn't always add up in a way where the bond vigilantes kind of call the shots. uh but uh right now there's not much evidence that the bond vigilantes are getting a agitated if they do and as I said if we get a 4 and 3/4% I think a year after we got to 5% uh in 2023 we got the 4 and 3/4% and we didn't get to 5% cuz the buyer said you know what this is good enough for me I'm going to going to jump in >> so if you had to be overwway bonds or equities this year which would it be >> equities >> okay Now, I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, in December of last year, you ended a 15-year overweight on big tech. Is that is that correct? >> Yeah, that's right. And also uh an overweight on um the um uh uh the the US relative to uh other countries around the world. So, uh yeah, that was a a big call on our part. Uh we also went underweight the Mag Magnificent 7 at the at the time uh which turned out to be a a pretty good uh recommendation. And when the Magnificent 7 uh well at that time their their forward P was about 32. When they got to about 25 a couple of weeks ago, we said, you know what, they're cheap. They're they're great companies. Uh let's go back to market weight. And uh that's worked out pretty well for us. uh with regards to tech and communication services, they got to 46% of the market capitalization of the S&P 500. And I I just felt kind of uncomfortable telling people to overweight uh two sectors that already represented 46% of the S&P 500. If you just market weighted them, you at 46%. And to tell people to overweight them was just uh I I thought it just didn't make sense that two sectors uh would just continue to gobble up uh market cap weight uh and earning share. And um that also turned out to be a pretty good call until the uh the war started because uh the market was was broadening out to the S&P 493 and uh it was going increasingly global. Actually I was late on the go global call. It was already uh happening last year, but it took me a while to kind of change my mind on that. Uh and I think now as the war uh is be not winding down or ending, but as the the markets are learning to live with it, I mean, we the markets have learned to live with Russia and Ukraine at the war, I think uh whatever ongoing uh problems we have in the Middle East uh may may very well be something that the markets could learn to live with. Obviously, I'm assuming that, you know, the the best cure for high commodity prices is high commodity prices that one way or the other. Uh oil will get out of the Middle East. And if it doesn't get out of the Middle East, um Trump will probably uh ignore the fact that more oil is being sold by by Russia and that, you know, more oil is being sold by the US. the uh US versus one here the US versus uh world call turned out to be a very good call because uh the US equities markets had the worst start to the year versus other global markets for many years now are you shifting that view now given that Asia depends on oil coming out of the straight of hormuz as opposed to the west and the US in particular that doesn't really need it >> I was thinking about that but before I could do anything about it uh the uh the markets decided that to go right back into the uh go global trade. I mean, Korea kind of had an amazing V-shaped recovery. Tai Taiwan, these are emerging markets, though they really should be developed markets. Um, it's been uh no, the the go global trade is kind of back in in fashion. I'm going to stay with it. I I I don't do what trading calls very well. Uh, every now and then I have a good one. Um, but I I like to limit them to when I have some conviction about it. Other than that, I try to have kind of long-term convictions on things. As you said, I was very bullish on uh technology uh and u overweighting the US stay home as I called it for a very long time. Uh now I hope I can find some themes to stay with also for a long time. >> Well, I encourage people to check out uh Yardiquakes. Uh, so I have a subscription here and I get uh these weekly updates on what I should be watching every week. Give us an update on what we should be. >> It's actually David, it's actually daily. >> Daily daily daily. Yes. Daily daily update on what we should be. >> It's the week ahead, but every single day we we put something out. And the idea is to uh help people understand uh how the the macroeconomics, the geopolitics impacts the markets and how the markets uh in turn have an impact on the economy. >> What should we be uh focusing on this week for data that's coming out this week? Well, it's actually a light week for for data, but uh the producer price index uh comes out on Tuesday and that'll be another kind of indicator of the extent to which um the war in March affected inflation in March and in the PPI. Uh so clearly the energy components are going to be up a lot and uh transportation uh inflation will also be up a lot. But uh I think you know we probably aren't yet seeing a pass through. But you know companies learn how to pass through price costs so quickly in 2022 they could probably do it again. And maybe that'll be the shocker is how quickly inflation does pass through uh and create creates a at least a short-term problem. >> Okay. Well, excellent. Thank you very much Dr. Ed. Tell us where we can find your work. So, as as you said, you can go to yardenni.com uh which uh allows you to either sign up for the institutional product or for the individual product. >> Okay. We'll put the links down below. So, make sure to follow uh Ed and Yardi research there. Thank you again, Dr. coming back on the show. We'll speak again soon. >> Absolutely. Thank you, David. >> Thank you for watching. Don't forget to like, subscribe.
This Should Be A Market Collapse… Why Isn’t It? | Ed Yardeni
Summary
Transcript
uh tankers are coming to the the US Gulf and to Venezuela. Um we we could really have a pretty significant increase in business for the American oil industry. I'm kind of surprised that the bond yield has hasn't gone up more, but I think it still could. Today, instead of supply chain disruptions, we've had the tariff effect and that maybe is about to wear off. >> So, if you had to be overwway bonds or equities this year, which would it be? We're speaking on the 13th of April. President Trump this morning announced a naval blockade of all vessels entering and leaving Iranian ports and uh this blockade is now in effect. He warned that any Iranian fast attack ships in the area will be eliminated. He said that the US will not allow Iran to export the world. Joining us now to discuss this and much more is Ed Yardi, president of Yardani Research and uh he's been on the show before Ed many times and we'll talk about his prior views. link down below if you'd like to see our last interview with Dr. Ed. Good to see you, Dr. Ed. Good to welcome back. >> Thank you. >> You were on the show um a couple of months ago, and you told CNBC on the 6th of April, which is last week, that you think the S&P had already bottomed uh and indeed the last week saw some of the biggest gains in the S&P in a single week uh for a long time. Dr. Do today's events meaning the naval the US naval blockade of the straight of Hormuz has that changed your perspective at all now that the rest of the world may see lower world uh oil exports through through the straight of Hormuz we know that there was already shadow fleets going through but now a blockade is going to basically limit that going into Asia right >> no I I still think that uh March 30th it was a Monday uh the market took took a big dive and then on Tuesday it rebounded dramatically uh when uh there was talk uh about the president uh looking for an exit strategy and sure enough Wednesday night he gave a speech and we in which he said you know it could last another two to three weeks and you know uh the US won and if uh if he had to declare victory and walk away that was okay with him and he's basically repeated that again recently but uh you know uh you you can't really invest based on what the president says day by day. It's it's a good way to uh kind of uh lose lose lose your investment mind because things say change so fast. And uh he's speaking to a lot of audiences at the same time. He's clearly trying to convince the Iranians that uh he'll blast them to smitherines if they don't cooperate. and then when the markets don't cooperate with what he's doing, he tones it down and then the market rallies on that. Uh but I I do think that the the markets have been remarkably stable even with this latest announcement that the United States is going to uh blockade Iranian ports. The markets have been remarkably stable in the face of all that. And uh I think investors are concluding that this too shall pass and they're looking beyond it. And uh I I agree with that view. Look, geopolitical crisis have always been buying opportunities. A few months after Pearl Harbor, the US got its act together and uh took out a big chunk of the Japanese na navy in in Midway and the market bottomed at that point. there was still a lot of war left in World War II and and yet the market did bottom early on. So the the market is a discounting mechanism. Uh I think in the current situation the market anticipates that one way or the other uh the oil will get out the commodities that the rest of the world needs will get out. Very reminiscent of what happened in uh early 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine. Price of oil soared. a lot of angst about uh whether there'd be a food shortage because grain couldn't get through the Black Sea and somehow or other uh everything kind of unfolded in a way that brought these commodity prices down and uh the world uh economy and financial markets unfortunately have learned to live with this horrible war that Russia inflicted on on Ukraine and we could continue to have uh unstable uh conditions in the uh Gulf, the the Arabian Gulf, but there is a pipeline from Saudi Arabia to the Red Red Sea and uh and uh you know t if if uh if some of the stories that I'm reading uh on the internet and the president's proclaiming that uh tankers are coming to the US Gulf and to Venezuela, um we we could really have a pretty significant increase in business for the American oil industry. >> Are you still maintaining your $7,700 uh sorry 77 point S&P 500 by the end of the year call? >> Yeah, actually um uh it's based on uh earnings uh this year being $310 a share for the S&P 500 and $350 a share uh next year. And uh I am amazed to see that the industry analysts are even more optimistic than I thought I was. Uh they're looking not for 310 that right now they're looking for 320 this year and they're not looking for 350 next year. They're looking for 370. Uh I don't know what's going on, but analysts the past several weeks have gotten more bullish on earnings um in the face of uh the the war. And uh the analysts read the headlines the way we all do. They know there's a war going on but at the end of the day they get a lot of their guidance from the companies and the companies are reporting they reported really great uh fourth quarter earnings and looks like uh first quarter earnings are going to be up at least 12%. That's what the analysts are looking for now and sometimes they tend to be too pessimistic about the the latest quarter that that we're in. But then for the third, second, third, and fourth quarters are looking for double- digit increases in earnings again. So they're they're very upbeat. So I I was actually thinking of raising my earnings estimate before the war. Then because of the war, I held back and kept them where they are. And meanwhile, I'm watching the the analysts who maybe didn't get the uh the memo about the war having a a negative impact on the US economy and earnings. And so far there's not much of evidence that that's actually the case. >> The NFIB uh small business optimism index, which uh is tracked by your website, your denny.com, uh that's been going down basically ever since 2025, but of course exacerbated by uh the Iran conflict. Do you think there's a disconnect between corporations and analysts on these corporate anal uh earnings calls being more optimistic and the rest of small business America here, Dr. Ed? Well, you know, um optimism is u a kind of a ambiguous idea. You know, are you optimistic or pessimistic? And uh uh I I don't know if they're asking them are you optimistic or pessimistic about your specific business or the business environment. Um, and so you would think that all all the uncertainty and there will be an uncertainty index that comes out with the next NFIB uh data which I guess uh is tomorrow, Tuesday, the uh April 14th uh just to be clear about uh what day we're talking about. Uh so uncertainty is clearly going to weigh on uh on confidence. But at the same time, you know, I'm a small entrepreneur. I've got my own business and uh >> you know if you ask me about things I might say well you know I I used to be more optimistic now I'm kind of >> kind of leaning towards pessimistic. I don't like what I'm seeing geopolitically but how's your business? Oh it's great you know and I'm actually hiring some people and that's that's that's uh that's why I don't pay that much attention to that particular index. I pay more attention to their u uh labor market indicators. Are they hiring or not? and uh that uh that's a little bit more useful in at least thinking about the labor market. >> Before we continue with the video, let's talk about a topic that's been on a lot of precious metals investors minds. How to generate income with your gold holdings. Most assets either generate income or rely on price appreciation. Gold has traditionally fallen into the second category. Our sponsor today, Monetary Metals, has found a way that lets gold do both. Instead of just holding gold and waiting for price moves, investors can now earn a yield on it, paid in physical gold. Through the leasing platform, investors can earn up to 4% annually with yield paid monthly in ounces. That means your holdings increase in gold over time. The metal remains in your asset base and can be redeemed at any time. Thousands of investors are already earning monthly interest in gold through Monetary Medals. So, visit monetary-medals.com/lin in the link down below or scan the QR code here on the screen and make the most out of your gold today. Yeah, we'll come back to the labor market in just a bit. And also, this is an important uh chart. Uh their plans to raise prices relative to inflation, which has been coming up, but according to the blue line, percent planning to raise average selling prices. Is that lagging, Dr. Ed? Is that why it's not going up or do you just not anticipate this going up at all? you know, there's pre-war and there's uh wartime. I mean, we we let's see what the March data looks like. This was uh be before the war and uh before the war, I think overall, you could say that inflation had come down substantially from its peak in 2022. Uh but um overall consumer price inflation measures seem to have stalled out coming down and settled around 3% which is full percentage points more than the Fed is targeting. And I think a lot of that had to do with Trump's tariffs. Trump's tariffs didn't raise inflation uh but they kept it from coming down to 2%. I think we would have been down to 2% by now. uh where Trump's tariffs had a big impact was on durable goods prices. Uh that's uh those prices uh had been negative on a year-over-year. Now they're they're positive. So I I I again the NFIB is a quas quasi useful indicator. The 7700 S&P 500 call, is that predicated on oil coming down or do you think earnings will still remain positive if let's say oil doesn't move from current levels which is near $100 WTI even for the remainder of the year? >> I think the US economy can actually handle $100 uh uh a barrel oil. Uh we are much less um energy intensive now than we were for example during the stagflationary 1970s where we got hit by by two oil shocks and those shocks spread very quickly to a broader inflation problem. Uh maybe that's less likely to occur this time. The economy is much more services. It's much more digital. Um it's uh less less manufacturing all in all. And yeah, I I think the economy can is resilient enough, which has kind of been my theme since the beginning of what I call the roaring 2020s, is that uh don't underestimate the resilience of the economy. And sure enough, it's absorbed a lot of shocks, including this one so far. And I think it's going to continue to demonstrate its resilience by growing without without going through a recession. that in turn will be uh pos mean that earnings will be resilient and that should uh continue to be the uh the underlying uh bullish development for the stock market. >> You actually have a three-stage framework that was outlined in this article by Benzinga. Uh according to Yardani, an oil supply shock moves through bond yield curves in three stages and the US economy has only reached page one. stage one at $1 to $125, which is just not even where we're at currently. Inflation fears dominate. Fed turns hawkish. At $125 to $150, the shock persists uh long enough that the growth um fears start to emerge. And then at the uh final stage above $150, that's where we have real demand destruction and the Fed actually turns dovish. >> So, walk us through this framework here. >> Well, look, I I I don't think it's a framework. It's really kind of descriptive of the the shape of the yield curve, how the bond market is responding to oil prices. Uh it's uh it's kind of hypothetical, right? I don't really have any hard evidence or an econometric model, which I don't view as hard to explain, you know, is it exactly 125 that things start to come unglued. uh but it's really just a way of conveying um how I think the economy will respond to difference price levels and uh 100 to 125 I think the economy can absorb it uh can grow the bond yield might stay around current levels the Fed uh uh probably wouldn't do anything in that kind of scenario because they'd have more inflation uh even if there they see some slowing the economy it's not going to be enough to cause them to ease And then you know you go higher oil prices you have you have a different scenario. So it's not like we go you know stage one leads to stage two leads to stage three. It's uh it's really it should have been called scenario one two three. >> You have uh this piece from your Denny cryptics that I want to highlight. Apocalypse now not lowering recession odds. You lowered your recession odd from 35% down to 20%. Tell us about why you did this. Well, show the date again near the top there. >> Yeah. >> What do you have there? Like March March 30th. >> This uh this is the date. April 7th. >> Oh, April 7th. Yeah. Uh yeah, by by then it uh was uh pretty clear that So again, we we thought the market made its low on uh March 3rd. We said that uh sorry, March 30th. uh we said that uh on the next day on Tuesday, we said it Tuesday night after the market had that initial uh big surge and we said that that's that's an important chart right there that uh that's the con that that's the bull bear ratio that we're we we give a lot of weight to and uh we saw that uh the bearishness really had mounted and from a contrarian perspective so much bearishness with a bull bear ratio down close to one We concluded that there would probably be a policy response when when people get uh extremely bearish. The policy makers one way the other get the message and the policy response uh that uh developed of course was uh uh this the ceasefire uh we kind of moved to in that direction at the at the time. Um and so uh I concluded that u the uh as a result of all that and with Trump uh announcing that uh he was aiming for two to three more weeks, it was pretty clear that uh he wants to get out of there. Uh doesn't mean that there won't be some lingering forces there uh enforcing a blockade. >> Yeah. >> But I don't think it's going to be the the kind of firepower we have there now. But that led me to conclude that the recession was less likely. Uh spike up to, you know, over 125 was was less likely. Uh and that's that's the conclusion. >> For somebody who's very bearish on the economy, like somebody on the bottom end of this chart, for example, what assumptions are they making about the war in Iran or perhaps the war's impact on the economy that you either disagree with or are just outright wrong? Well, you know, I I've been talking about the roaring 2020s. I try to be reasonable and I said that's my base case. >> Sure. >> I gave it 60% subjective probability. Uh then um uh I gave 20% to an even better scenario, at least in the short run, which was a meltup. Uh so that's basically 80% for a bullish scenario. And then I had 20% coming into the war uh as uh as as the risks. And I really uh when people asked me what they were, I I wrote down the G seemed uh I mean I'm kicking myself which it should have been obvious to all of us when the president was moving all that firepower into the Middle East. He he wasn't doing it just for show. >> Uh it was show and tell. You know if if the show doesn't do it then uh show and bomb I guess is really what it was. Uh but uh so my my my my thinking was that um the u uh that this uh war uh would uh I mean again with the benefit of hindsight we should have seen it seen it coming. Uh but um I I think that uh the uh the economy is resilient. the the inflation uh uh picture I think is widely anticipated to be dare I use that word transitory. Uh I think inflation is going to be a little stickier than the markets are thinking. I'm kind of surprised that the bond yield has hasn't gone up more but I think it still could. U but but all in all the alternative is uh the uh the 1970s. So, you know, if you want to kind of take historical analogies, the 1920s would be everything just works out, continues to work out. The 1970s is that we get a big shock uh a bigger sh oil oil shock that's more persistent that actually force forces the Fed to go vulkar and that is to raise interest rates to levels that cause a recession to keep the energy shock from broadening out into the rest of of inflation. And then uh a uh analogy I have yet to really talk about uh that every now and then crosses my mind is the 1930s which was geopolitically just an uglier and uglier decade all around. I don't think it's going to be the 1930s. I don't think it's going to be the uh 1970s stagflationary environment. Um, but that that scenario I would put in the 20% bucket of everything that could go wrong, which I I brought that bucket down in terms of subjective probabilities from 35% uh to to 20%. Look, I I use that as a way to kind of convey my uh how I see the, you know, how seriously I I take these scenarios and it gives me a good way to communicate. So, you know, if things uh go badly again, I'll I won't hesitate to say, you know what, uh it's it's getting worse than I thought. And I've said that, you know, we're looking at the fog of war. You know, I I don't feel comfortable being a military and trying to predict how this all plays out because we we see even military strategists don't really anticipate how things go. Uh but, uh I'm doing the best I can under the circumstances. the uh CPI that came out uh last week, it rose 3.3%. That's the March number. That's the highest number since 2024, May 2024, driven by a 21% surge in gasoline and oil in a month-to-month basis. Now, to what extent do higher oil prices translate to higher consumer goods. You said earlier that we're living in an economy now that is not as dependent on oil as the late '7s was. So, there is still some rollover from higher oil to other things. But to what extent? >> Well, that's a good question and I I I don't know the answer. So, we can kind of do things on a relative basis. So, yeah, we we can go back to 2022 when oil prices soared, when Russia invaded Ukraine and there was and grain prices uh soared and uh there there was certainly some pass through, but there was also supply chain disruption. So, it wasn't a it's not a clear analogy to the current situation. uh today instead of supply chain disruptions, we've had the tariff effect and that maybe is about to wear off. We have yet to see that it actually wears off. Um but uh we we don't have the uh the inflationary background that we had in 2022. So maybe this one will be a more modest uh shorter uh lived uh inflation spike. But uh I'm staying staying nimble on this one because I think there's too much consensus that this two shall pass and uh I am I am somewhat concerned that it may take longer. Then again in the roaring 2020 scenario, productivity just continues to uh uh get better and better and productivity is a very powerful force in keeping inflation down. Uh, so um I'm kind of open-minded on the inflation picture, though I I do have a sort of um an interest in um my base case working out the roaring 2020s. So that's root for productivity being a big offset to these inflationary uh pressures and the bond market seems to be uh aligned with that view right now. >> Well, let's talk about the bond market. You said maybe the long end of the curve didn't go up, but the two the short end, the two-year went up about 50 basis points in a single month. You coined the term bond vigilantes in the 80s. Are the bond vigilantes back now? >> Well, they are in the two-year notes, but two-year notes are not bonds. And the bond vigilantes seem to be actually kind of asleep at the switch. Uh if you want to see where bond vigilantes are are working hard to push yields up, it's clearly in Japan. uh it's been in the UK. Uh but uh here in the US uh the bond market's been real quiet. I didn't think the bond yield will fall below 4% and and this year and it hasn't. I've been thinking 4 and a/4 to 4 and 3/4%. And uh I still think there'll be enough of an inflation shock up ahead here and concerns that it's it's spreading that we will see four and 3/4%. But I would view that as a a tremendous buying opportunity. I don't know if we'll get an an opportunity the way we did in 2023 to buy them at uh at 5%. Uh look, there's still a safe haven uh uh bid for uh for bonds. People are buying bonds because they feel uh in a volatile world uh if they just hold them for 10 years, they know exactly what what they're going to get. Uh and some people may may prefer that. But the other thing to keep in mind is the world has actually become wealthier and wealthier and as it becomes wealthier and wealthier uh there's naturally a tendency to rebalance every now and then. So if a lot of people are making a lot of money in the stock markets around the world they start to get nervous and say you know maybe I should take some of my profits and put it into bonds maybe even into gold. uh which uh of late hasn't been a a great place to be, but uh I think the trend is still higher for gold. >> The trend is higher for gold from $4,700, but deser What What's your assessment as to why gold didn't move up on the Iran war? >> Turkey. Yeah, I I was kind of scratching my head and wondering, you know, you have the you have the war, you have inflation as a result of the war, you have uh, you know, more bigger deficits as a result of the war, more pressure to increase defense spending, and gold goes down. Um, and apparently the story is that uh the war put a lot of downward pressure on the currencies of some emerging markets, particularly Turkey. And apparently Turkey sold a lot of gold in an effort to prop up um the country's currency. So that's uh one explanation. Uh you know, I mean, nothing goes straight up. Uh uh it's it's actually much better if it doesn't go straight up. If it if it consolidates, if there's profit taking, you get rid of the leverage uh in the in the trading and then uh you find that uh lo and behold, there's still buyers. I mean, I think Chinese investors are still likely to be buyers because they've gotten killed in their investments in real estate. They've gotten whipsaw in the Chinese stock market. Chinese stock market is great for trading, but it's not for investors. It just goes nowhere fast uh with a lot of volatility. Uh so there's n natural buyers in India. There's they've always been uh buyers of gold and and silver. And uh we've seen uh around the world people have been buying uh ETFs like GLD and and things like that. But uh you know I I think uh the excitement's kind of worn off for now but it it could come back. And I think a lot of my my attitude view of of gold is that it is a good diversifier in a portfolio. It it has historically been inversely correlated with the S&P 500. Uh but it's also had the same trend. So, if my base case scenario of getting to 10,000 on the S&P 500 by the end of the decade, by the end of 2029 works out, I think the price of gold could get to 10,000 on rebalancing uh people making so much money in the stock market that they want to rebalance into gold and into bonds for example. >> Do you think gold has now replaced or will replace bonds in people's portfolio? I think uh I think people who didn't have any gold in their portfolio now have put maybe 5 to 20% uh in in uh in gold. Uh and maybe that's as an alternative to to bonds. Uh but uh there certainly seems to be lots of demand for bonds uh US bonds anyways. >> Do you think the rising uh debt and deficit situation in the US has put pressure on uh bond and treasury demand? This is an article from Fortune. Just want to get your evaluation of this. US debt suddenly draws weaker demand as $10 trillion must be rolled over this year. So the past week auctions for two, five, and seven-year Treasury notes all drew weaker demand, forcing yields to go higher than expected. That's a stark contrast from last month when Treasury yield treasury offerings saw the highest demand ever in the history of 30-year auctions. This was dated uh March 20th 28th, so not exactly new, but um it was a couple of weeks ago. uh and um part of the reason later on that the article later on goes on to explain is not just the Iran war situation but also the fact that the funding for the war requires the deficit to be expanded. Do you think this impacts your outlook for bonds and treasury demand? >> David, you probably uh may you may know that I coined the phrase bond vigilantes. >> Yes. uh back in 1983. And uh I think uh the last time the bomb vigilantes the previous time the bomb vigilantes uh really uh kind of created some problems uh in the US was in 2023 uh when the bond yield went from 4% to 5% in 3 months. It was August, September, October went from four to 5%. And at 5% people are starting to talk about 6% and a debt crisis and all that. I I have in the past said I'll worry about a debt crisis when the bond market worries about it. So I got concerned. Uh but then just as I uh was getting too concerned uh the bond deal started coming down rather sharply at 5%. It was on November 1st. Uh Bill Aman said that he covered his brilliant short position in the bond market. He said you know he'd made enough money there and he didn't want to play anymore. But he's very short-term obviously. But more importantly, uh, the Treasury Secretary Janet Yalen basically announced that she was going to issue more in bills and not increase the issuance of bonds. She basically told the bond vigilantes, "Okay, I get it. I'm not going to stress you out by issuing more additional bonds. I'm going in T-Bill market." And so the bond vigilantes are not the only players in the bond market. There's the Treasury, there's the Fed, foreign investors, domestic investors. there's a whole bunch of players and it doesn't always add up in a way where the bond vigilantes kind of call the shots. uh but uh right now there's not much evidence that the bond vigilantes are getting a agitated if they do and as I said if we get a 4 and 3/4% I think a year after we got to 5% uh in 2023 we got the 4 and 3/4% and we didn't get to 5% cuz the buyer said you know what this is good enough for me I'm going to going to jump in >> so if you had to be overwway bonds or equities this year which would it be >> equities >> okay Now, I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, in December of last year, you ended a 15-year overweight on big tech. Is that is that correct? >> Yeah, that's right. And also uh an overweight on um the um uh uh the the US relative to uh other countries around the world. So, uh yeah, that was a a big call on our part. Uh we also went underweight the Mag Magnificent 7 at the at the time uh which turned out to be a a pretty good uh recommendation. And when the Magnificent 7 uh well at that time their their forward P was about 32. When they got to about 25 a couple of weeks ago, we said, you know what, they're cheap. They're they're great companies. Uh let's go back to market weight. And uh that's worked out pretty well for us. uh with regards to tech and communication services, they got to 46% of the market capitalization of the S&P 500. And I I just felt kind of uncomfortable telling people to overweight uh two sectors that already represented 46% of the S&P 500. If you just market weighted them, you at 46%. And to tell people to overweight them was just uh I I thought it just didn't make sense that two sectors uh would just continue to gobble up uh market cap weight uh and earning share. And um that also turned out to be a pretty good call until the uh the war started because uh the market was was broadening out to the S&P 493 and uh it was going increasingly global. Actually I was late on the go global call. It was already uh happening last year, but it took me a while to kind of change my mind on that. Uh and I think now as the war uh is be not winding down or ending, but as the the markets are learning to live with it, I mean, we the markets have learned to live with Russia and Ukraine at the war, I think uh whatever ongoing uh problems we have in the Middle East uh may may very well be something that the markets could learn to live with. Obviously, I'm assuming that, you know, the the best cure for high commodity prices is high commodity prices that one way or the other. Uh oil will get out of the Middle East. And if it doesn't get out of the Middle East, um Trump will probably uh ignore the fact that more oil is being sold by by Russia and that, you know, more oil is being sold by the US. the uh US versus one here the US versus uh world call turned out to be a very good call because uh the US equities markets had the worst start to the year versus other global markets for many years now are you shifting that view now given that Asia depends on oil coming out of the straight of hormuz as opposed to the west and the US in particular that doesn't really need it >> I was thinking about that but before I could do anything about it uh the uh the markets decided that to go right back into the uh go global trade. I mean, Korea kind of had an amazing V-shaped recovery. Tai Taiwan, these are emerging markets, though they really should be developed markets. Um, it's been uh no, the the go global trade is kind of back in in fashion. I'm going to stay with it. I I I don't do what trading calls very well. Uh, every now and then I have a good one. Um, but I I like to limit them to when I have some conviction about it. Other than that, I try to have kind of long-term convictions on things. As you said, I was very bullish on uh technology uh and u overweighting the US stay home as I called it for a very long time. Uh now I hope I can find some themes to stay with also for a long time. >> Well, I encourage people to check out uh Yardiquakes. Uh, so I have a subscription here and I get uh these weekly updates on what I should be watching every week. Give us an update on what we should be. >> It's actually David, it's actually daily. >> Daily daily daily. Yes. Daily daily update on what we should be. >> It's the week ahead, but every single day we we put something out. And the idea is to uh help people understand uh how the the macroeconomics, the geopolitics impacts the markets and how the markets uh in turn have an impact on the economy. >> What should we be uh focusing on this week for data that's coming out this week? Well, it's actually a light week for for data, but uh the producer price index uh comes out on Tuesday and that'll be another kind of indicator of the extent to which um the war in March affected inflation in March and in the PPI. Uh so clearly the energy components are going to be up a lot and uh transportation uh inflation will also be up a lot. But uh I think you know we probably aren't yet seeing a pass through. But you know companies learn how to pass through price costs so quickly in 2022 they could probably do it again. And maybe that'll be the shocker is how quickly inflation does pass through uh and create creates a at least a short-term problem. >> Okay. Well, excellent. Thank you very much Dr. Ed. Tell us where we can find your work. So, as as you said, you can go to yardenni.com uh which uh allows you to either sign up for the institutional product or for the individual product. >> Okay. We'll put the links down below. So, make sure to follow uh Ed and Yardi research there. Thank you again, Dr. coming back on the show. We'll speak again soon. >> Absolutely. Thank you, David. >> Thank you for watching. Don't forget to like, subscribe.