by Scott Martindale
  CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

 Overview

The full pullback/correction I have been anticipating remains elusive. After all, stocks can’t go straight up forever, and this bull run has become long in the tooth. The greater the divergence, the worse the potential correction. Ever since the market recovered from its April “Liberation Day” tariff-driven selloff, every attempt at a correction or consolidation has been quickly bought before it could get started. But last week seemed different. It was Nasdaq’s worst week since April, and all the AI-driven market exuberance seemed to have suddenly shifted to fears of a valuation bubble. Alas, fear not. It seems to have been nothing more than another brief pause to refresh—i.e., take some profits off the table, reassess fundamentals versus sentiment, shake out the weak holders (including momentum traders), test technical support levels, and shore-up bullish conviction…punctuated by a nice bounce off the 50-day moving average.

Even on October 10, when the S&P 500 fell 2.7% on President Trump’s announcement of massive tariffs on Chinese imports and China’s retaliatory export restrictions on rare earth elements, the market began its recovery the next day. Besides Big Tech, speculative “meme” stocks were also hot. And to further illustrate the speculation, the Russell Microcap Index (IWC) has been performing in line with the S&P 500, setting a new all-time high in October (for the first time since 2021). It is notable that the lower-quality Russell 2000 Small-cap Index (IWM), in which over 40% of the companies in the index are unprofitable, has been substantially outperforming (+10.6% vs. +4.3% YTD) the higher-quality S&P 600 SmallCap (SPSM), in which all stocks are required to show consistent profitability for index admission.

So, it was only a matter of time for bears to try again to push the market lower, especially given the growing set of headwinds (described in my full commentary below). During last week’s selloff, we saw the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) surge above 20 (fear threshold) as traders deleveraged. Bitcoin dropped below $100,000 for the first time since June (a 20% correction from its all-time high in October). The CNN Fear & Greed Index dipped into Extreme Fear category. State Street’s Risk Appetite Index showed Big Money refraining from risk assets for the first time since mid-May. And Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway’s (BRK.B) cash reserves hit yet another record high of $382 billion, as valuations had become too pricey for the “Oracle of Omaha.” But at its low last Friday, the S&P 500 was only down about 4.2% from its peak.

Market breadth remains a concern. While the mega caps kept rising, we have seen only occasional glimpses of nascent rotation, including this week in which the Dow Industrials (DIA), Dow Transports (IYT), and equal-weight S&P 500 (RSP) have all significantly outperformed the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100. But each prior attempt this year at broadening across sectors and market caps has been short-lived. Only 22% of active fund managers are beating their passive benchmark. Investech noted that from an historical perspective, the Nasdaq Composite has hit a new all-time high with 2:1 negative breadth (decliners/advancers) only twice in its 54-year history—once just prior to the 2022 bear market and once several days ago. Notably, bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies corrected much more sharply than stocks, mostly due to deleveraging, and have not yet bounced back like stocks have. Nevertheless, blockchain, tokenization, and stablecoin implementation continue to progress, so I’m not concerned about my crypto allocation.

The S&P 500, Nasdaq 100, and Dow Jones Industrials each successfully tested support at their 50-day moving averages and then quickly recaptured and retested support at their 20-day moving averages this week as the government shutdown moved toward resolution. But leadership this week has noticeably swung to the Dow Industrials (notably, not cap-weighted), which is the first to get back above its all-time high, and the Dow Transports are getting close, which according to Dow Theory would confirm the bull market. Also, the small-cap Russell 2000 is on the verge of recovering its 20-day average. Notably, gold, silver, and copper have also recovered above their 20-day moving averages and seem bent on reaching new highs.

In essence, I would characterize the latest pullback as a passing “macro scare” within a structural bull market, with some promising new signs of healthy market rotation, and I still think the S&P 500 will achieve another 20%+ return for 2025—for the third year in a row, which would be only the second time in history other than the 5-year (1995-99) dotcom/Y2K bull run.

So, looking ahead, should we expect all rainbows, unicorns, blue skies, and new highs through 2026? Well, while there surely will be more macro scares, more consolidation, and more retests of bullish conviction ahead of the seasonal Santa Claus rally, I believe the fundamental tailwinds greatly outweigh the headwinds, as I discuss in my full commentary below. The government shutdown is over, at least until the end of January. Investors remain optimistic about AI capex and productivity gains, a trade deal with China, a more dovish Fed, business-friendly fiscal policies, deregulation, fast-tracking of power generation infrastructure and strategic onshoring, a stable US dollar, and foreign capital flight into the US (capital tends to flow to where it is treated best). And lower interest rates will lead to more consumer spending, business borrowing for investment/capex, earnings growth, and stock buying (including retail, institutional, and corporate share buybacks). Indeed, the 10-2 Treasury yield spread stands at about 50 bps today, which is consistent with past periods of continued US economic expansion. 

However, while retail investors have continued to invest aggressively, institutional investors and hedge funds (the so-called “smart money”) have grown more defensive and deleveraged. So, maintaining a disciplined approach—such as focusing on fundamental analysis, long-term trends, and clear investment goals—can protect against emotional kneejerk overreactions during murky or turbulent periods.

On that note, remember that stock valuations are dependent upon expectations for economic growth, corporate earnings, and interest rates, tempered by the volatility/uncertainty of each—which manifests in the equity risk premium (ERP, i.e., earnings yield minus the risk-free rate) and the market P/E multiple. Some commentators suggest that every 25-bp reduction in interest rates allows for another 1-point increase in the P/E multiple of the S&P 500; however, those expected rate cuts over the next several months might already be baked into the current market multiple for the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 such that further gains for the broad indexes might be tied solely to earnings growth—driven by both revenue growth and margin expansion (from productivity and efficiency gains and cost cutting)—rather than multiple expansion.

Broad, cap-weighted market indexes like the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 essentially have become momentum indexes, given their huge concentration in AI-driven, Big Tech mega-caps. So, although growth stocks and crypto may well lead the initial recovery through year end, longer term, rather than a resumption of the FOMO/YOLO momentum rally on the backs of a narrow group of AI leaders (and some speculative companies that ride their coattails), I expect the euphoria will be more tempered in 2026 such that we get a healthy broadening and wider participation across caps and sectors and with a greater focus on quality and profitability. There are plenty of neglected high-quality names out there worthy of investment dollars.

As I discuss in my full commentary, top-ranked sectors in Sabrient’s SectorCast model include Technology, Healthcare, and Financials. In addition, Basic Materials, Industrials, and Energy also seem poised to eventually benefit from fiscal and monetary stimulus, domestic capex tailwinds, a burgeoning commodity Supercycle, rising demand for natural gas for power generation, and more-disciplined capital spending programs.

As such, although near-term market action might remain risk-on into year end, led by growth stocks, the case for value stocks today might be framed as countercyclical, mean reversion, portfolio diversification, and market broadening/rotation into neglected large, mid, and small caps, many of which display a solid earnings history and growth trajectory as well as low volatility, better valuations, and less downside risk, with greater room for multiple expansion. On 10/30, I published an in-depth post detailing the case today for value investing titled, “Is the market finally ready for a value rotation?” in which I discussed three key drivers: 1) mean reversion on extreme relative valuations, 2) diversification of portfolios that have become heavily titled to growth, and 3) sticky inflation benefiting real assets and cyclical/value sectors. So, perhaps the time is ripe to add value stocks as a portfolio diversifier, such as the Sabrient Forward Looking Value Portfolio (FLV 13), which is only offered annually as a unit investment trust by First Trust Portfolios and remains in primary market only until Friday, 11/14.

In addition, small caps tend to benefit most from lower rates and deregulation, and high-dividend payers become more appealing as bond alternatives as interest rates fall, so Sabrient’s quarterly Small Cap Growth and Dividend portfolios also might be timely as beneficiaries of a broadening market—in addition to our all-seasons Baker’s Dozen growth-at-a-reasonable-price (GARP) portfolio, which always includes a diverse group of 13 high-potential stocks, including a number of under-the-radar names identified by our models.

So, rather a continued capital flow into the major cap-weighted market indexes, which are dominated by mega-caps, growth, and technology, a healthy market rotation would suggest equal-weight, value, dividend, strategic beta, factor-weight, small/mid-caps, other sectors, and actively managed funds. Indeed, I believe we are being presented with an opportunity to build diversified portfolios having much better valuations and less downside than the S&P 500. In actively selecting diversified stocks for our portfolios (which are packaged and distributed as UITs by First Trust Portfolios), Sabrient seeks high-quality, undervalued, often under-the-radar gems for our various portfolios—starting with a robust quantitative model followed by a detailed fundamental analysis and selection process—while providing exposure to value, quality, growth, and size factors and to both secular and cyclical growth trends.

The Q4 2025 Baker’s Dozen launched on 10/17 is off to a good start, led by mid-cap industrial Flowserve (FLS) among its 13 diverse holdings, as is our annual Forward Looking Value 13 portfolio, led by mid-cap rideshare provider Lyft (LYFT) among its 28 diverse holdings. In fact, most of our 20 live portfolios are doing well versus their relevant benchmarks. And for investors concerned about lofty valuations and a potential spike in market volatility, low-beta and long/short strategies might be appropriate, such as the actively managed First Trust Long-Short ETF (FTLS), which licenses Sabrient’s proprietary Earnings Quality Rank (EQR) as a quality prescreen.

You can find our EQR score along with 8 other proprietary factors for roughly 4,000 US-listed stocks in our next-generation Sabrient Scorecards, which are powerful digital tools that rank stocks and ETFs using our proprietary factors. You can learn more about them by visiting: http://HighPerformanceStockPortfolios.com.

In today’s full post, I discuss in greater depth this year’s speculative rally and mega-cap leadership, whether the AI trade has gotten ahead of itself, market headwinds versus tailwinds, inflation indicators (in the absence of government data), and reasons to be optimistic about stocks. I also reveal Sabrient’s latest fundamental-based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, current positioning of our sector rotation model, and several top-ranked ETF ideas.

Click HERE to find this post in printable PDF format, as well as my latest Baker’s Dozen presentation slide deck and my 3-part series on “The Future of Energy, the Lifeblood of an Economy.” As always, I’d love to hear from you! Please feel free to email me your thoughts on this article or if you’d like me to speak on any of these topics at your event!  Read on….

  by Scott Martindale
  CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

 Overview

Well, the FOMC followed the script and cut the fed funds rate (FFR) by 25 bps (from 4.25-4.50% range down to 4.00-4.25%) in an 18-1 vote. It was the first rate cut since December of last year—even though the rate needs to be 100 bps lower, in my view, as I have been advocating for quite some time, given the prior overreliance on government spending and hiring giving way to the growing impact of elevated rates on private sector growth and hiring, particularly within rate-sensitive industries. No more government largesse means the Fed must get busy with rate cuts. Market breadth was already improving in anticipation of the Fed’s dovish turn, with market segments like small caps, value stocks, banks, and transports perking up.

Although this was a relatively tepid move by the FOMC rather than the full-throated declaration of a new easing cycle that is needed, Fed chair Jerome Powell still believes monetary policy has officially shifted from "modestly restrictive" (his words at the July meeting) to "more neutral” today and characterized the latest rate cut as a "risk management" decision in light of slowing economic activity and jobs growth on the one hand, offset by sticky inflation on the other, which I discuss in greater depth in today’s post.

Of course, slashing FFR even 50 bps would give a panicky signal to the market, so newly appointed Fed Governor Stephen Miran was the lone dissenter, favoring 50 bps. Instead, they will proceed with gradual cuts on a steady path to eventually arrive at its long-term goal of a terminal FFR around 3.00% (2% inflation plus 1% neutral rate, aka “r-star”). The CME futures market now reflects 86% odds of two more 25-bp cuts this year (75 bps total for the year, bringing FFR down to 3.50-3.75%) and 78% odds of another two cuts next year (down to 3.00-3.25%)—as well as 50% odds of three cuts next year, despite the Fed’s own dot plot of two 25-bp cuts this year and just one in 2026. In my view, this will lead to more consumer spending, business borrowing for investment/capex, earnings growth, and stock buying (including retail, institutional, and share buybacks).

In response, the major indexes surged to new highs yet again. Any attempt at a pullback has been nothing more than an overbought technical correction/consolidation, as enthusiasm grows around the promise of AI revolutionizing our lives, workplace, and society at large, leading to rising productivity and prosperity. However, while we await the fully ripened fruits of these rapidly advancing technologies, stock gains have been driven more by multiple expansion in anticipation of great things to come, as well as a weaker dollar and surprisingly strong earnings growth—albeit driven more by cost-cutting and productivity growth than revenue growth, with net margins closing in on their 2021 peak of 13%.

Thus, lofty stock valuations and tight corporate bond spreads suggest an expectation that profitability and ROIC will remain strong for the foreseeable future despite the many storm clouds (such as geopolitical threats, ongoing hot wars, tariffs and unresolved trade negotiations, struggling global trading partners, sticky inflation metrics, weak jobs growth, social strife, and now a federal government shutdown). In fact, rather than investor fear manifesting in falling stock prices and rising market volatility, it instead seems to be reflected in the price of gold and silver, which have been surging.

Back in June, Mike Wilson of Morgan Stanley asserted, “we identified 4%-4.5% [on the 10-year yield] as the sweet spot for equity multiples, provided that growth and earnings stay on track.” Similarly, Goldman Sachs saw 4.5% acting as a ceiling for stock valuations. Wilson identified four factors that he believes would sustain market strength: 1) a trade deal with China (which China desperately needs sorted out), 2) stabilizing earnings revisions, 3) a more dovish Fed (i.e., rate cuts), and 4) the 10-year yield below 4% (without being driven by recessionary data). Indeed, all four have shown good progress.

From the 4/7 lows, retail investors flipped from tariff panic to FOMO/YOLO, and the rest of the investor world has jumped onboard. Speculative “meme” stocks have been hot, and AQR’s Quality-minus-Junk factor (aka “quality margin”) has been shrinking. Moreover, small caps have been surging, as evidenced by the Russell 2000 Small-cap Index (IWM) setting new all-time high last week (for the first time since 2021), which is a historically bullish signal, and the Russell Microcap Index (IWC) has done even better. Similarly, value stocks also have perked up, with the Invesco S&P 500 Pure Value ETF (RPV) also reaching a new high, and the transports, like the iShares Transportation ETF (IYT), seems bent on challenging its highs from last November.

The broad market was long overdue for a healthy broadening to bolster bullish conviction, and indeed it appears the ducks finally lined up to support it. This broadening bodes well for further upside as capital merely rotates rather than leave the market entirely. The Carson Group has observed that for every time since 1980 that the Fed cut rates while the market was within 2% of an all-time high (21 instances), stocks continued to rise over the ensuing 12 months. As Eric Peters of One River Asset Management opined, “There is no appetite for austerity within either party, so their preference is for inflation-resistant assets, which [suggests]…stocks, gold, bitcoin.”

Overall, there is no magic here, the setup is bullish for stocks, with improving market breadth (i.e., wider participation), as we enter Q4. But that’s not to say we won’t get a pullback in the near term. Chart technicals show a relative strength index (RSI) that has been in overbought territory for a historically long time, but I think any significant pullback would be a buyable event. So, following two solidly bullish years, I think this year also will finish strongly, with a potential third-straight 20%+ year (total return, assuming dividends reinvested) in the crosshairs. But the cautionary tale is that, while not unprecedented, a third straight 20%+ year has only happened once before in the past 100 years, during 1995-99, i.e., when it ran for five straight years during the dot-com boom (followed of course by the dot-com bust). Also, while I expect longer-duration yields (and by extension, mortgage rates) to eventually recede, be careful about jumping too aggressively into them, as elevated yields might remain sticky until federal debt and inflationary pressures have shown that they are indeed moderating, as I expect they will by early next year.

Although corporate insider buying has been weak, share buybacks have already set an annual record and are on track to hit $1.1 trillion by year end. Also, investor appetite for IPOs has returned in force, with 259 IPOs on US exchanges through Q3 2025, which is up 75% versus the same point in 2024, reflecting an abundance of both investor optimism and liquidity. And Electronic Arts (EA) is officially going private in the largest leveraged buyout (LBO) in history, at $55 billion.

Furthermore, the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow Q3 forecast has risen to 3.8% (as of 10/1), interest rates are coming down across the curve, the US economy is holding up, corporate earnings momentum remains strong, the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) remains low, the Global Supply Chain Pressure Index (GSCPI) remains at or below the zero line (i.e., its historical average), global liquidity and M2 growth is modest/supportive, new tax rates and deregulation from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) are supportive and stimulative, exciting new technologies are accelerating, strategic reshoring and supply chain redundancies are underway (but not total deglobalization), and secular disinflationary trends and productivity growth have resumed. The only thing missing is a fed fund rate (FFR) at the neutral rate—which is around 3.0%, in my view.

However, as I discuss in my full post below, cautionary signals abound, so investors should be tactically vigilant in this environment of rising valuation multiples, overbought technicals, sluggish corporate revenue growth (with strong earnings growth based on margin expansion from productivity growth and cost-cutting), rising bankruptcies and delinquencies, and falling Leading Economic Indicators by focusing on high-quality companies and diversification (across sectors and asset classes) while holding hedges (like protective put options or inverse ETFs).

Top-ranked sectors in Sabrient’s model include Technology, Financials, Industrials, which all seem poised to benefit from stimulus and capex tailwinds. With the 10-2 and 30-2 Treasury yield spreads currently at 56 bps (4.10-3.54%) and 117 bps (4.71-3.54%) respectively—the highest since early 2022—the steepening yield curve should be favorable for regional banks, which borrow short and lend long (so a higher spread leads to higher profits). Also top-ranked in our model is Healthcare based mostly on valuation, and it indeed might be a sleeper opportunity, as (according to DataTrek Research) “US large cap Healthcare has lagged the S&P 500 by more than 4 standard deviations, a level of underperformance we’ve never seen in a major sector.” And while Energy sits at the bottom of our Outlook rankings, the sector also has earned consideration based on firmer oil prices and disciplined capital plans.

The Sabrient team focuses on fundamental quality—starting with a robust quantitative growth-at-a-reasonable-price (GARP) model followed by a detailed fundamental analysis and selection process—in selecting our Baker’s Dozen, Forward Looking Value, Dividend, and Small Cap Growth portfolios, which are packaged and distributed as UITs by First Trust Portfolios. By the way, the new Small Cap Growth (SCG 48) portfolio launches on Friday 10/3, so 10/2 is the final day to get into SCG 47, which is off to a good start, led by SSR Mining (SSRM) and Mercury Systems (MRCY) among its 44 holdings. The Q3 2025 Baker’s Dozen has also started off well, led by Sterling Infrastructure (STRL) and Valero Energy (VLO) among its 13 concentrated positions, as has our annual Forward Looking Value (FLV 13) portfolio. In fact, most of our 20 live portfolios are doing well versus their relevant benchmarks. Again, value and small caps seem like good ideas for a broadening market.

Notably, our proprietary Earnings Quality Rank (EQR) is a key factor used in our internal models, and it is also licensed to the actively managed First Trust Long-Short ETF (FTLS) as a quality prescreen. In fact, you can find our EQR score along with 8 other proprietary factor scores for roughly 4,000 US-listed stocks in our next-generation Sabrient Scorecards, which are powerful digital tools that rank stocks and ETFs using our proprietary factors. You can learn more about them by visiting: http://HighPerformanceStockPortfolios.com.

In today’s post, I discuss Fed policy, the modest inflationary pressures, the weak private sector jobs market, solid-but-fragile economic growth outlook, lofty stock valuations, and the case for value and small caps given emerging monetary and fiscal support. I also reveal Sabrient’s latest fundamental-based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, current positioning of our sector rotation model, and several top-ranked ETF ideas. Click HERE to find this post in printable PDF format, as well as my latest presentation slide deck and my 3-part series on “The Future of Energy, the Lifeblood of an Economy.”

As always, please email me your thoughts on this article, and feel free to contact me about speaking on any of these topics at your event!  Read on….

  
  by Scott Martindale
  CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC
  
 Overview

As we close out H1 2025, markets seem eager to press higher on optimism about imminent fiscal stimulus and monetary policy support during H2—plus perhaps a “peace dividend” thrown in. Of course, investors at home and abroad know that President Trump will pull out all stops to demonstrate meaningful successes in raising organic economic growth and jobs creation, fostering an affordable and reliable energy supply for an electricity-hungry future, and leveraging trade negotiations to open up overseas markets while shrinking the debt/GDP and deficit/GDP ratios over the next 12 months. Otherwise, he risks a catastrophic loss in the mid-term congressional elections—which means his political opponents will be impeding him every step of the way in an effort to make that loss happen.

I had been expecting elevated volatility during H1 as the economy faced a gauntlet of challenges before surging to new highs in H2, but sanguine retail investors (with a healthy dose of FOMO) have been too eager to wait it out. Instead, they bought the April dip and never looked back, seemingly confident that my optimistic scenario would play out. And then the momentum-driven algos jumped in, followed by the institutional money. The Invesco S&P 500 High Beta ETF (SPHB) is up nearly 50% since the “Liberation Day” selloff, reflecting major risk-on behavior. Foreign capital is returning as well after a brief period of rebalancing, hedging, and “tariff paralysis.”

But, with lingering macro uncertainties and valuations seemingly “priced for perfection,” caution is warranted. Inflation and jobs metrics have been softening, in spite of what the headline numbers and MSM might suggest, as I discuss in greater depth in today’s post. The current inflation trend, as illustrated by the rolling 3-month annualized month-over-month (MoM) metrics rather than looking back 12 months to last year’s price index, shows Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) and Consumer Price Index (CPI) falling to just +1.08% and +1.01%, respectively. And regarding jobs growth, if you look under the hood of last week’s reports, private sector hiring has been quite weak, with the headline numbers bolstered by government hiring (at the state and local level, while federal jobs shrink) and government-supported sectors, like healthcare and education.

Of course, some of this reluctance to hire can be chalked up to the lack of clarity around trade deals, tariffs, inflation, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), and Fed policy, but much of this is clearing up. For example, now that the OBBBA has been signed into law, we know the new rules on tax rates, subsidies, and incentives. Moreover, the trade deals are gradually coming to fruition. However, the FOMC might continue to lay low in “watch and wait” mode to see how the economy and inflation respond rather than cut rates, which leaves Fed policy intentions murky.

I discuss both inflation and jobs in greater depth in my full commentary below, and I again make the case that the FOMC should have a terminal/neutral fed funds rate 100 bps lower than today’s 4.33% effective rate. Bond yields have normalized with the 10-year Treasury now around 4.40%, which is back to its levels last November to flatten the yield curve, and the 2-year is around 3.90%. Both rates are signaling to the FOMC they should cut, and in fact the Fed’s own long-run estimate for the fed funds rate is 3.0%. The market needs lower interest rates in tandem with business-friendly fiscal policy, including a 5.0% 30-year mortgage rate and a weaker dollar, to support US and global economies, to allow other central banks to inject liquidity, to avert global recession and credit crisis, and to relieve indebted consumers and businesses.

As Real Investment Advice has opined, “…if interest rates drop by just 1%, this could reduce [federal] spending by $500 billion annually, helping to ease fiscal pressures, [and] the coming strategic investments, workforce development, and sustainable energy policies could improve economic outcomes while resolving deficit concerns.” I agree.

So, I believe the Fed remains behind the curve as it worries about tariffs and phantom inflation—which the FOMC sees as a lurking boogeyman, like frightened children lying wide-eyed awake in their beds at night, expecting it to pounce at any moment. But as I continually pound the table on, tariffs are actually disinflationary (in the absence of a commensurate and offsetting increase in income). And more broadly, I believe inflation has resumed its 40-year (1980-2020) secular downtrend, as I discuss in my market commentary below.

Famed investor, co-founder of PIMCO, and “Bond King” Bill Gross argues that the growing federal deficit, elevated bond supply, and a weak dollar likely will keep inflation above 2.5% and create headwinds for bonds. However, while we both like US equities (even at today’s valuations, which I discuss in greater detail below), I see the outlook for bonds differently. Now that we have some clarity on the OBBBA and the debt ceiling, foreign investors and US consumers and businesses know much more about the rules they will be playing under.

Capital tends to flow to where it is most welcome and earns its highest returns, so I think the recent tide of foreign capital flight leaving the US will reverse, helping the dollar find a bottom and perhaps strengthen a bit, which based on historical correlations would suggest higher bond prices (lower yields, despite elevated issuance in the near term) and perhaps lower gold prices. However, without the de facto boost to global liquidity of a weakening dollar, the Fed will have to step up and provide that liquidity boost, such as by lowering interest rates and implementing “stealth QE” (such as through reduced bank reserve requirements) to encourage lending and boost velocity of money (M2V), which has recently stagnated.

Most any foreign investor will tell you there is no other place in the world to invest capital for the innovation and return on shareholder capital than the US, given our entrepreneurial culture, technological leadership in disruptive innovation, strong management and focus shareholder value, low interest-rate exposure, global scalability, wide protective moats, and our reliable and consistently strong earnings growth, free cash flow, margins, and return ratios, particularly among the dominant, cash flush. So, I continue to like US equities over international equities for the longer term (other than a simple mean-reversion trade).

Hindered by its quasi-socialist policies, Europe doesn’t come close to the US in producing game-changing technologies, opportunities, and prosperity for itself and the world at large. In my view, it lacks our level of freedom, openness, dynamism, and incentive structures. And as for China’s unique “capitalism with Chinese characteristics,” although its authoritarian rule, homogenous society, and obedient culture helps ensure broad unity and focus on common goals, its system is still far inferior when it comes to freedom of thought, entrepreneurship, and innovation, in my view. Despite America’s inequalities and inadequacies, there is no better country on earth for tolerance and opportunity for economic prosperity, and we continue to grow ever more diverse and inclusive—without government programs forcing it to be so.

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

Indeed, rather than investing in the passive cap-weighted indexes dominated by Big Tech, investors may be better served by active stock selection that seeks to identify under-the-radar, undervalued, high-quality gems. This is what Sabrient seeks to do in our various portfolios, all of which provide exposure to Value, Quality, Growth, and Size factors and to both secular and cyclical growth trends. When I say, “high-quality company,” I mean one that displays a history of consistent, reliable, resilient, durable, and accelerating sales, earnings, and free cash flow growth, rising profit margins, a history of meeting/beating estimates, high capital efficiency and ROI, solid earnings quality, a strong balance sheet, low debt burden, competitive advantage, and a reasonable valuation compared to its peers and its own history.

These are the factors Sabrient employs in selecting our Baker’s Dozen, Forward Looking Value, Dividend, and Small Cap Growth portfolios, which are packaged and distributed as UITs by First Trust Portfolios. (By the way, the new Q3 Baker’s Dozen and Small Cap Growth portfolios are launching late next week, so these are the final several days to get into the Q2 portfolios launched in April—both of which are performing well versus their benchmarks so far.)

We also use many of those factors in our SectorCast ETF ranking model, and notably, our proprietary Earnings Quality Rank (EQR) is a key factor used in each of our portfolios, and it is also licensed to the actively managed First Trust Long-Short ETF (FTLS) as a quality prescreen. In fact, we have launched our next-generation Sabrient Scorecards, which are powerful digital tools that rank stocks and ETFs using our proprietary factors. You can learn more about them by visiting:
http://HighPerformanceStockPortfolios.com.

In my full commentary below, I discuss in greater depth the trends in inflation, jobs, GDP, and stock valuations, as well as Sabrient’s latest fundamental-based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, current positioning of our sector rotation model, and several top-ranked ETF ideas. Click HERE for a link to this post in printable PDF format.

By the way, my in-depth discussion of energy and electrical power generation (that I keep teasing) will be released soon. As always, please email me your thoughts on this article, and feel free to contact me about speaking on any of these topics at your event!  Read on….

 
  by Scott Martindale
  CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

  Overview

So much for the adage, “Sell in May and go away.” May was the best month for the stock market since November 2023 and the best month of May for the stock market in 35 years, with the S&P 500 up +6.1% and Nasdaq 100 up +9.3%. Moreover, the S&P 500 has risen more than 1,000 points (20%) from its 4/8 low and is back into positive territory YTD (and challenging the 6,000 level). History says when stocks rally so strongly off a low, the 12-month returns tend to be quite good. Even better news is that the rally has been broad-based, with the equal-weight versions of the indexes performing in line with the cap-weights, and with the advance/decline lines hitting all-time highs. An as Warren Pies of 3Fourteen Research observed on X.com, “…the S&P 500 has retraced 84% of its peak-to-trough decline. The [market] has never retraced this much of a bear market and subsequently revisited the lows. The technical evidence points, overwhelmingly, to the beginning of another leg to the bull market and new ATHs.” We certainly aren’t seeing the H1 volatility I expected, with the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) back down to February levels. So, is this the all-clear signal for stocks? Well, let’s explore this a bit.

As Josh Brown of Ritholtz Wealth Management reminds us, “Stocks [tend to] bottom in price a full 9 months before earnings do… By the time earnings are reaching their cycle low, stocks have already been rallying for three quarters of a year in advance of that low. This is why you don’t wait to get invested or attempt to sit out the economic or earnings downturns.” Typically, the growth rates for GDP, corporate earnings, wages, and stock prices should not stray too far apart since they are all closely linked to a strong economy. And as of 6/9, the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow model indicates an eye-popping +3.8% growth is in store for Q2 (albeit largely due to a collapse in imports following the negative Q1 print from front-running of imports, ahead of the tariffs).

And with the last administration’s last-minute surge in deficit spending wearing off, the new administration is doing quite well in bringing down inflation, starting with oil prices. Indeed, April CPI came in at +2.33% YoY and the rolling 3-month annualized CPI (a better measure of the current trend) is +1.56%. Looking ahead, the Cleveland Fed’s Inflation NowCasting model forecasts May CPI of +2.40% YoY and an annualized Q2 CPI of +1.70%, while the real-time, blockchain-based Truflation metric is +1.90% (as of 6/9). After all, disruptive innovation like AI is deflationary by increasing productivity, China’s economic woes are deflationary (cheaper goods), and tariffs are deflationary (in the absence of commensurate rise in income), so the rising GDP forecast and falling CPI numbers reflect the exact oppositive of the “stagflation” scare the MSM keeps trumpeting. I discuss inflation in greater length in today’s post below.

It all sounds quite encouraging, right? Well, not so fast. For starters, the charts look severely overbought with ominous negative divergences that could retrace a lot of gains. Moreover, with ISM manufacturing and services indexes both in contraction, with so much lingering uncertainty around trade negotiations, with President Trump’s “one big, beautiful bill” (aka OBBB) wending a treacherous path through congress, and with his ambitious drive to reverse the course and negative outcomes of decades of hyper-globalization, entitlement creep, and climate/cultural activism facing fierce resistance both at home and abroad, the coast is hardly clear.

Witness the rise in bond term premiums even as the Fed contemplates cutting its benchmark rate as foreign central banks and bond vigilantes slash demand for Treasuries (or even sell them short) due to expectations of unbridled federal debt and Treasury issuance. According to Mike Wilson of Morgan Stanley: “we identified 4%-4.5% [10-year yield] as the sweet spot for equity multiples, provided that growth and earnings stay on track.” Similarly, Goldman Sachs sees 4.5% acting as a ceiling for stock valuations—and that is precisely where the rate closed on Friday 6/6. Wilson identified four factors that he believes would sustain market strength: 1) a trade deal with China, 2) stabilizing earnings revisions, 3) a more dovish Fed (i.e., rate cuts), and 4) the 10-year yield below 4% (without being driven by recessionary data)—but there has been observable progress only in the first two.

Regarding our debt & deficit death spiral, I will argue in my full commentary below that despite all the uproar, the OBBB might not need to institute harsh austerity with further cuts to entitlements (which, along with interest on the debt, amount to 73% of spending) that would mostly hurt the middle/working classes. The bill rightly repeals low-ROI tax credits and spending for boondoggles from prior bills, most notably low-transformity/low-reliability wind and solar energy projects that require government subsidies to be economically viable. But beyond that, the focus should be on lowering the debt/GDP ratio through fiscal and monetary policies that foster robust organic economic growth (the denominator) led by an unleashed private sector fueled by tax rate cuts and incentives for capital investment, deregulation, disruptive innovation, and high-transformity/high-reliability natural gas and next-generation nuclear technology. Real Investment Advice agrees, arguing that market pundits might be “too focused on the deficit amount…rather than our ability to pay for it, i.e., economic growth.”  The charts below show the debt-to-GDP ratio, which is about 120% today, alongside the federal deficit-to-GDP ratio, which is about 6.6% today. (Note that US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s target of 3% deficit-to-GDP was last seen in 2016.)

Of course, nothing is all bad or all good. But Trump is shining a bright light on the devastating fallout on our national security, strategic supply chains, and middle/working classes. Changing the pace and direction of globalization, including deglobalizing some supply chains, reshoring strategic manufacturing, and focusing on low-cost energy solutions for a power-hungry world cannot occur without significant disruption. Within the US, we can have different states provide different types of industries and services depending upon their comparative advantages like natural resources, labor costs, demographics, geography, etc.—after all, we are all part of one country. But on a global scale, with some key trading partners that might be better considered rivals, or even enemies in some cases, we can’t entrust our national security to the goodwill and mutual benefit of international trade. Indeed, China has a history of not fulfilling its commitments in prior trade agreements, like reducing state subsidies overproduction (“dumping”), and IP theft, moving some manufacturing into the US, and increasing imports of US goods.

I have talked often about the 3-pronged approach of addressing our federal debt by: 1) inflating it away with slightly elevated inflation around 2.4% to erode the value of dollars owed and increase nominal GDP to reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio, 2) cutting it away with modest reductions or at least freezes on spending and entitlements, and 3) growing it away by fostering robust organic growth from a vibrant private sector with pro-cyclical fiscal and monetary policies that ultimately grows tax receipts on higher income and GDP (even at lower tax rates) and reduces the debt-to-GDP ratio. But of these three, the big “clean-up hitter” must be #3—robust growth. In fact, a key reason that the OBBB does not propose more austerity measures (i.e., spending cuts beyond waste, fraud, and the “peace dividend”) is to ensure that GDP grows faster than the debt and deficit. We can only live with slightly elevated inflation, and it is difficult to cut much spending given the dominance of mandatory spending (entitlements and interest payments) over discretionary spending. So, the primary driver must be robust private sector organic growth—and by extension an embrace of disruptive innovation and a productivity growth boom that boosts real GDP growth, keeps a lid on inflation, widens profit margins—leading to rising wages tax remittances.

As a case in point, I highly recommend a recent episode of the All-In Podcast in which the panel of four Tech billionaires (of various political persuasions) speak with Miami Mayor Francis Suarez. In 2017, Suarez took over leadership of a city that was in distress, near bankruptcy, and a murder capital of the country, and he resurrected it with three core principles for success: “keep taxes low, keep people safe, lean into innovation”—whereas he laments that most other big-city mayors prefer to do the opposite, i.e., raise taxes, tolerate crime, create suffocating regulations, and reject the offers and entreaties of billionaire entrepreneurs like Jeff Bezos (Amazon) and Elon Musk (Tesla) as overly disruptive or politically incorrect.

May inflation metrics will come out this week, and then the June FOMC meeting convenes 6/17-18. So far, the FOMC has been quite happy to just sit on its hands (while the ECB just cut for an 8th time) in the face of tariff paralysis; falling oil prices, unit labor costs, and New Tenant Rents; declining inflation and savings rates; rising delinquencies; and slowing jobs growth; instead preferring to be reactive to sudden distress rather than proactive in preventing such distress. Inflation metrics continue to pull back after being propped up by elevated energy prices, long-lag shelter costs, and the prior administration’s profligate federal deficit spending that overshadowed—and indeed created—sluggish growth in the private sector. Economist Michael Howell of CrossBorder Capital persuasively asserts that monetary policy “must prioritize liquidity over inflation concerns, so the Fed’s current hands-off, higher-for-longer, reactionary approach risks causing a liquidity crunch.”

So, I believe it’s going to be hard for Fed Chair Jay Powell to justify continuing to “wait & watch.” As of 6/9, CME Group fed funds futures show zero odds of a 25-bp rate cut this month, but increases to 17% at the July meeting, and 64% odds of at least 50 bps by year-end. I have been insisting for some time that the FFR needs to be 100 bps lower, as the US economy's headline GDP and jobs numbers were long artificially propped up by excessive, inefficient, and often unproductive federal deficit spending, while the hamstrung private sector has seen sluggish growth, and 30-year mortgage rates need to be closer to 5% to allow the housing market to function properly. But regardless of the FOMC decision this month, I expect the rate-cutting cycle to restart soon and signed trade deals to emerge with our 18 key trading partners, calming domestic and foreign investors.

I still expect new highs in stocks by year end. For now, traders might wait for a pullback and bounce from support levels, or perhaps an upside breakout beyond the 6,000 level on the S&P 500. But my suggestion to investors remains this: Don’t chase the highflyers and instead focus on high-quality businesses at reasonable prices, expect elevated volatility given the uncertainty of the new administration’s policies and impact, and be prepared to exploit any market pullbacks by accumulating those high-quality stocks in anticipation of gains by year end and beyond, fueled by the massive and relentless capital investment in blockchain and AI applications, infrastructure, and energy, leading to rising productivity, increased productive capacity (or “duplicative excess capacity,” in the words of Secretary Bessent, which would be disinflationary), and economic expansion, as I explore in greater depth in my full post below.

Rather than investing in the passive cap-weighted indexes dominated by Big Tech, investors may be better served by active stock selection that seeks to identify under-the-radar, undervalued, high-quality gems. This is what Sabrient seeks to do in our various portfolios, all of which provide exposure to Value, Quality, Growth, and Size factors and to both secular and cyclical growth trends. When I say, “high-quality company,” I mean one that is fundamentally strong, displaying a history of consistent, reliable, and accelerating sales and earnings growth, a history of meeting/beating estimates, high capital efficiency, rising profit margins and free cash flow, solid earnings quality, low debt burden, and a reasonable valuation compared to its peers and its own history. These are the factors Sabrient employs in selecting our Baker’s Dozen, Forward Looking Value, Dividend, and Small Cap Growth portfolios (which are packaged and distributed as UITs by First Trust Portfolios). We also use many of those factors in our SectorCast ETF ranking model, and notably, our proprietary Earnings Quality Rank (EQR) is a key factor used in each of our portfolios, and it is also licensed to the actively managed First Trust Long-Short ETF (FTLS) as a quality prescreen.

Sabrient founder David Brown describes these and other factors as well as his portfolio construction process in his latest book. He also describes his path from NASA scientist in the Apollo moon landing program to creating quant models for ranking stocks and building stock portfolios. And as a companion product to the book, we have launched our next-generation Sabrient Scorecards for Stocks and ETFs, which are powerful digital tools that rank stocks and ETFs using our proprietary factors. You can learn more about both the book and scorecards by visiting: http://HighPerformanceStockPortfolios.com.

Keep in mind, stock market tops rarely happen when investors are cautious, as they continue to be today. So, I continue to believe in staying invested in stocks but also in gold, gold royalty companies, Bitcoin (as an alternative store of value), and perhaps Ethereum (for its expanding use case). These not only serve as hedges against dollar debasement but as core holdings within a strategically diversified portfolio. Bitcoin’s climb back to new highs in May has been much more methodical and disciplined than its previous history of maniacal FOMO momentum surges that were always destined to retrace. This is what comes from maturity and broader institutional acceptance, characterized by “stickier” holders and strategic allocations. Notably, iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT) had its largest-ever monthly inflow during May.

I highly encourage you to read my full commentary below. I discuss in greater depth the economic metrics, the truth about the OBBB, deglobalization, trade wars, affordable energy, economic growth, jobs, inflation, and global liquidity. I also discuss Sabrient’s latest fundamental-based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, current positioning of our sector rotation model, and several top-ranked ETF ideas. Click HERE for a link to this post in printable PDF format.

By the way, rather than including my in-depth discussion of energy and electrical power generation in this post, I will be releasing it in a special report a little later this month, so please watch for it. As always, please let me know your thoughts on this article, and feel free to contact me about speaking on any of these topics at your event!  Read on….

 
  by Scott Martindale
  CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC
 

  Here is my take on the early inflation metrics for April. I feel as though I have been shouting into the wind for several months about the deflationary trends that are upon us—as opposed to the worries about resurgent inflation we keep hearing from smart economists and the Fed.

The outgoing administration during its final months juiced its already enormous spending that had long supported GDP and jobs growth. This contributed to the spike in inflation metrics in October-January, with CPI/PPI hitting +3.00%/+3.65% YoY in January, and pushed the budget deficit to $1.3 trillion for the first half of fiscal year 2025 (10/1/24-9/30/25), marking the second-highest six-month deficit on record, which was exacerbated by surging interest payments on surging debt.

Then the new administration came in with the lofty but earnest goal of fixing our unsustainable death spiral of inflation, debt, deficit spending, offshoring, and hyper-financialization. Well, it's so far, so good on the inflation front, which has been falling for the past 3 months, with all March readings back below 3%, and the new April readings falling even further.

As shown in the upper chart below, April CPI and PPI came in at +2.33% and +2.41% YoY, and the real-time blockchain-based Truflation (which historically presages CPI) is at +1.79% today. The middle chart shows the rolling 3-month annualized rates (which I like to follow for a better read on the current trend), which came in at just +1.56% and -0.08% (yes, negative). It is evident that PPI is the most volatile, but the resumption in the downtrend is clear. The third chart shows the correlation among CPI, PPI, and the Global Supply Chain Pressure Index (GSCPI). GSCPI remains subdued, in negative territory (i.e., below its long-term average), which bodes well.

But in my view, maintaining somewhat elevated inflation above 2% might be appropriate to help reduce the giant federal debt by “inflating it away” as part of a 3-prong approach comprising: 1) elevated inflation in the 2.5% range, 2) cost cutting, particularly rooting out waste and fraud, and 3) robust real economic growth through fiscal & monetary policies that foster organic private sector growth (rather than continued overreliance on inefficient government)—leading to gains in productivity, margins, earnings, jobs, wages, GDP, and ultimately tax receipts.

And by the way, here's my take on the impact of tariffs: 1) tariffs are a tax, 2) taxes are deflationary, 3) ipso facto, tariffs are deflationary (in the absence of a commensurate increase in income).

Read on....

 Overview

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

Overview:

The stock market continues to chop around within a 2-month sideways trend, as uncertainty about fiscal and monetary policies confront elevated (some might say extreme) valuations, risk premia, and market cap concentration (with the top 10% of stocks by market cap now accounting for about 75% of the total), as well as slowing growth among the MAG-7 stocks. Uncertainty ranges from DeepSeek’s implications on the massive capex spending plan for AI, to DOGE’s rapid discovery of the shocking array of wasteful spending and corruption, to President Trump’s starling proposals regarding Gaza, Greenland, and Canada, to the frantic protests of Democrats and injunctions from federal judges on his dizzying array of executive orders.

Nevertheless, investors seem broadly optimistic about Trump 2.0 policies in the longer term but are concerned about near-term pain (which he has warned them about) from things like tariffs, trade wars, widespread job cuts across the federal government (from DOGE), and civil unrest and political dysfunction from those pushing back on the new policies—and the near-term impact on geopolitical tensions and the trajectories of GDP, the budget deficit, federal debt, inflation, the dollar, interest rates, and new issuances of Treasuries. As a result, gold has gone parabolic and seems determined to challenge the $3,000 mark. Bond investors may be rewarded handsomely when economic fundamentals normalize and the term premium fades. Until then, sentiment rather than data has been the key driver of bond yield rates.

Since the Fed started its rate cutting cycle, the fed funds rate is 100 bp lower while the 10-year Treasury yield jumped as much as 100 bps mostly due to short-selling “bond vigilantes,” although it has receded quite a bit of late. But more important than the fed funds rate is bringing down the 10-year Treasury yield, which has a much greater impact on long-term borrowing costs—like home mortgages—but is primarily driven by market forces and sentiment. So, other than direct intervention via QE (buying longer-term Treasuries and MBS on the open market), all the Fed and Trump administration can do is try to shore up investor confidence and expectations for economic growth, jobs, inflation, deficits, interest rates, productivity, and earnings.

Indeed, new Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says the president believes, “if we deregulate the economy, if we get this tax bill done, if we get energy down, then [interest] rates will take care of themselves.” To that end, Bessent has espoused a “3-3-3” economic plan to increase GDP growth to 3%, reduce the budget deficit to 3% of GDP, and boost oil production by 3 million bbls/day (and according to Ed Yardeni, you might throw in 3% productivity growth as a fourth “3”). In Bessent’s view, we have “a generational opportunity to unleash a new economic golden age that will create more jobs, wealth and prosperity for all Americans.”

The recent uptick in US inflation has not been due to supply chain disruptions, as the Global Supply Chain Pressure Index (GSCPI) is negative (below its long-run average) at -0.31 (Z-score, or number of standard deviations from the mean). Instead, it seems to be more about: 1) money supply and velocity both rising in tandem, and 2) heavy foreign capital flight into the US (much of which remains outside of our banking system and is not captured by M2 money supply metrics) and interest payments on US debt (which goes primarily to wealthy individuals and sovereign governments) going toward asset purchases, which creates a consumer "wealth effect." This surge in foreign capital into the US is driven by our strong dollar, innovative public companies and start-ups, higher bond yields, desirable real estate, property rights, and business- and crypto-friendly policies.

Many commentators have called current stock valuations “priced for perfection.” Much like China’s mercantilist economy facing falling growth rates—as it has become so large it simply can’t find enough people to sell to maintain its previous trajectory—the MAG-7 stocks also seem to be hitting limits to their growth rates from sheer size. In fact, according to the The Market Ear, the “big four” richest executives (Musk, Bezos, Zuckerberg, Ellison) have seen their combined wealth explode from $74 billion in 2013 to $1.1 trillion today—nearly as much as the total US trade deficit ($1.2 trillion), or our total annual imports from China, Canada and Mexico ($1.3 trillion). Insane. But because of the extreme level of market concentration among the market juggernauts that distort the valuation multiples of the broad market indexes, I believe there are still many smaller “under-the-radar” stocks offering fair valuations for attractive growth, which is what Sabrient’s models seek to identify. I discuss this further in my full commentary below.

For 2025, my view is that, after a period of digestion and adjustment to this current flurry of activity (and likely a more significant market correction than most investors expect), we will see the stimulative and transformational impacts of: 1) business-friendly fiscal policies and deregulation, 2) less anti-trust enforcement and lawfare, 3) massive cuts to wasteful/unproductive government spending (including on illegal migrants and foreign wars), 4) tame supply chain pressures and labor, oil, and shelter costs all stabilizing, and 5) supportive monetary policy and a steepening yield curve (through normalization in interest rates and the term premium). Collectively, this promises to unleash our private sector and recharge economic growth.

Furthermore, I think recent signs of resurgent inflation and fears of a ballooning deficit will both recede, as I discuss in greater depth in my full post, which will allow the Fed to make two-to-three 25-bp rate cuts on its path toward what I believe is a terminal (aka neutral) rate around 3.50%...and the 10-year yield likely settling into the 4.25-4.50% range (i.e., a term premium of 75-100 bps)—particularly given that many of our global trading partners likely will be forced to cut rates to stave off recession (in Europe) and deflation (in China). Of course, what happens outside our border impacts us. China’s deflationary economy is still slowing and the CCP remains reluctant to use broad stimulus, but rate cuts have been signaled. Japan finally decided to increase its policy rate from 0.25% to 0.50% (still quite low), which strengthened the yen, as it tries to stave off stagflation. Europe is a basket case, especially the manufacturing sector, with recession expected in its largest economies, Germany and France. The ECB will likely cut rates several times and further weaken the euro.

Keep in mind, Treasury yields tend to be self-correcting in that as they rise investors become more defensive and drawn to the higher yields, which increases demand for bonds and brings yields back down. Of course, fiscal policy, deficit spending, inflation, and corporate earnings all come into play as well. But regarding interest rates alone, as long as the Fed is not raising the fed funds rate or tightening liquidity, the environment for stocks is supportive.

Overall, I think this all bodes well for banks, mortgage services, and indeed the whole financial sector, as well as for IPOs/M&A (after a steep downtrend over the past 4 years), small-mid-cap stocks, solid dividend payers, and longer-duration fixed income. Top-ranked sectors in Sabrient’s SectorCast rankings include Technology, Healthcare, and Consumer Discretionary. However, other market segments that don’t rank very high right now but may gain traction in the Trump 2.0 economy include oil & gas, nuclear, and transports, as well as industrials and utilities involved in building out the AI infrastructure and power grid. I also think there is turnaround potential in the beaten-down homebuilders and REITs. And I continue to like gold, silver, and cryptocurrencies as uncorrelated asset classes, market/dollar hedges, and stores of value.

So, rather than the high-valuation MAG-7 stocks, investors are advised to focus on high-quality, fundamentally strong companies displaying a history of consistent, reliable, and accelerating sales and earnings growth, positive revisions to Wall Street analysts’ consensus forward estimates, rising profit margins and free cash flow, solid earnings quality, and low debt burden. These are factors Sabrient employs in selecting our portfolios and in our SectorCast ETF ranking model. And notably, our Earnings Quality Rank (EQR) is a key factor in each of these models, and it is also licensed to the actively managed, absolute-return-oriented First Trust Long-Short ETF (FTLS).

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

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

Click HERE to continue reading my full commentary (and to sign up for email delivery). I examine in greater detail the DeepSeek and DOGE shocks, AI spending, equity valuations, GDP, jobs, inflation, tariffs, and what lies ahead for 2025. I also discuss Sabrient’s latest fundamental-based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors, current positioning of our sector rotation model, and several top-ranked ETF ideas. Also, here is a link to this post in printable PDF format.

  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

Last week, the much-anticipated inflation readings for May—and the associated reaction from the Fed on planned rate cuts—was pretty much a non-event. The good news is core inflation continues to gradually fall. The bad news is it isn’t falling fast enough for the Fed. Headline CPI and PPI are pretty much stagnant over the past 12 months. This led the Fed to be mealy-mouthed about rate cuts. One might ask, why does it matter so much what the Fed does when the economy is doing fine, we have avoided recession, wages are growing, jobs are plentiful, unemployment is low, and asset prices are rising?

But the reality is there is a slow underlying deterioration happening from the lag effects of monetary tightening that is becoming increasingly apparent, including a lack of organic jobs and GDP growth (which is instead largely driven by government deficit spending) and a housing market (important for creating a “wealth effect” in our society) that is weakening (with growing inventory and slowing sales) given high mortgage rates that make for reluctant sellers and stretched buyers (notably, the 10-year yield and mortgage rates have pulled back of late just from rate cut talk). Moreover, real-time shelter inflation (e.g., rent) has been flat despite what the long-lagged CPI metrics indicate, and the real-time, blockchain-based Truflation reading has been hovering around 2.2% YoY, which happens to match the April and May PPI readings—all of which are very close to the Fed’s 2.0% inflation target.

Of course, stock market valuations are reliant upon expectations about economic growth, corporate earnings, and interest rates; and interest rates in turn are dependent on inflation readings. Although some observers saw promising trends in some components of May CPI and PPI, Fed chair Jay Powell played it down with the term “modest further progress,” and the “dot plot” on future rate cuts suggests only one or perhaps two rate cuts later this year.

Nevertheless, I continue to believe the Fed actually wants to cut rates sooner than later, and likely will do so during Q3—especially now that central banks in the EU, Canada, Sweden, Switzerland, Brazil, Chile, and Mexico have all cut rates. Moreover, Japan is struggling to support the yen with a positive interest rate—but it needs to keep rates low to prevent hurting its highly leveraged economy, so it needs the US to cut rates instead. The popular yen “carry trade” (short the yen, buy the dollar and US Treasuries) has been particularly difficult for the BoJ. All told, without commensurate cuts here in the US, it makes the dollar even stronger and thus harder on our trading partners to support their currencies and on emerging markets that tend to carry dollar-denominated debt. I talk more about this and other difficulties outside of the (often misleading) headline economic numbers in today’s post—including the “tapped out” consumer and the impact of unfettered (wartime-esque) federal spending on GDP, jobs, and inflation.

As for stocks, so far, the market’s “Roaring 20’s” next-century redux has proven quite resilient despite harsh obstacles like global pandemic, multiple wars, a surge in inflation, extreme political polarization and societal discord, unpredictable Fed policy, rising crime and mass immigration, not to mention doors flying off commercial aircraft (and now counterfeit titanium from China!). But investors have sought safety in a different way from the past, particularly given that stubborn inflation has hurt real returns. Rather than traditional defensive plays like non-cyclicals, international diversification, and fixed income, investors instead have turned to cash-flush, secular-growth, Big Tech. Supporting the bullishness is the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX), which is back down around the 12 handle and is approaching levels not seen since 2017 during the “Trump Bump.” And given their steady performance coupled with the low market volatility, it has also encouraged risk-taking in speculative companies that may ride coattails of the Big Tech titans.

But most of all, of course, driving the rally (other than massive government deficit spending) has been the promise, rapid development, and implementation of Gen AI—as well as the new trends of “on-premises AI” for the workplace that avoids disruptions due to connectivity, latency, and cybersecurity, and AI personal computers that can perform the complex tasks of an analyst or assistant. The Technology sector has gone nearly vertical with AI giddiness, and it continues to stand alone atop Sabrient’s SectorCast rankings. And AI poster child NVIDIA (NVDA), despite being up 166% YTD, continues to score well in our Growth at Reasonable Price (GARP) model (95/100), and reasonably well in our Value model (79/100).

Nevertheless, I continue to believe there is more of a market correction in store this summer—even if for no other reason than mean reversion and the adage that nothing goes up in a straight line. Certainly, the technicals have become extremely overbought, especially on the monthly charts—which show a lot of potential downside if momentum gets a head of steam and the algo traders turn bearish. On the other hand, the giddy anticipation of rate cuts along with the massive stores of cash in money market funds as potential fuel may well keep a solid bid under stocks. Either way, longer term I expect higher prices by year end and into 2025 as high valuations are largely justified by incredible corporate earnings growth, a high ratio of corporate profits to GDP, and the promise of continued profit growth due to tremendous improvements in productivity, efficiency, and the pace of product development across the entire economy from Gen AI. In addition, central banks around the world are starting to cut rates and inject liquidity, which some expect to add as much as $2 trillion into the global economy—and into stocks and bonds.

On another note, it is striking that roughly half the world’s population goes to the polls to vote on their political leadership this year, and increasingly, people around the world have been seeking a different direction, expressing dissatisfaction with the status quo of their countries including issues like crime, mass immigration (often with a lack of assimilation), sticky inflation, stagnant economic growth, and a growing wealth gap—all of which have worsened in the aftermath of the pandemic lockdowns and acquiescence to social justice demands of the Far Left. Ever since the Brexit and Trump victories in 2016, there has been a growing undercurrent of populism, nationalism, capitalism, and frustration with perceived corruption, dishonesty, and focus on global over local priorities. Not so long ago, we saw a complete change in direction in El Salvador (Bukele) and Argentina (Milei) with impressive results (e.g., reducing rampant crime and runaway inflation), at least so far. Most recently, there were surprises in elections in India, Mexico, and across Europe. Although we are seeing plenty of turmoil of our own in the US, global upheaval and uncertainty always diverts capital to the relative safety of the US, including US stocks, bonds, and the dollar.

I expect US large caps to remain an attractive destination for global investment capital. But while Tech gets all the (well deserved) attention for its disruptive innovation and exponential earnings growth, there are many companies that can capitalize on the productivity-enhancing innovation to drive their own growth, or those that are just well positioned as “boring” but high-quality, cash-generating machines that enjoy strong institutional buying, strong technicals, and strong fundamentals in stable, growing business segments—like insurers and reinsurers for example.

So, I believe both US stocks and bonds will do well this year (and next) but should be hedged with gold, crypto, and TIPS against a loss in purchasing power (for all currencies, not just the dollar). Furthermore, I believe all investors should maintain exposure to the Big Tech titans with their huge cash stores and wide moats, as well as perhaps a few of the speculative names (as “lottery tickets”) having the potential to profit wildly as suppliers or “coat-tailers” to the titans, much of their equity exposure should be in fundamentally solid names with a history of and continued expectations for consistent and reliable sales and earnings growth, rising profit margins and cash flow, sound earnings quality, and low debt.

Indeed, Sabrient has long employed such factors in our GARP model for selecting our growth-oriented Baker’s Dozen portfolio, along with other factors for other portfolios like our Forward Looking Value portfolio, which relies upon our Strategic Valuation Rank (SVR), our Dividend portfolio, which is a growth & income strategy that relies on our proprietary Dividend Rank (DIV), and our Small Cap Growth portfolio, an alpha-seeking alternative to the Russell 2000. Notably, our Earnings Quality Rank (EQR) is not only a key factor we use internally for each of these portfolios, but it is also licensed to the actively managed First Trust Long-Short ETF (FTLS) as an initial screen.

Each of these alpha factors and how they are used within Sabrient’s Growth, Value, Dividend income, and Small Cap investing strategies is discussed in detail in David Brown’s new book, How to Build High Performance Stock Portfolios, which will be published imminently. (I will send out a notification soon!)

In today’s post, I talk more about inflation, the Fed, and the extreme divergences in relative performance and valuations. I also discuss Sabrient’s latest fundamentals based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors (which, no surprise, continue to be led by Technology), current positioning of our sector rotation model, and several top-ranked ETF ideas. And don’t skip my Final Comments section, in which I have something to say about BRICS’ desire to create a parallel financial system outside of US dollar dominance, and the destructiveness of our politically polarized society and out-of-control deficit spending.

Click here to continue reading my full commentary. Or if you prefer, here is a link to this post in printable PDF format (as some of my readers have requested). Please feel free to share my full post with your friends, colleagues, and clients. You also can sign up for email delivery of this periodic newsletter at Sabrient.com.

  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

StocksThe S&P 500 fell more than 5% over the first three weeks of April (it’s largest pullback since last October). Bonds also took it on the chin (as they have all year), with the 2-year Treasury yield briefly eclipsing 5%, which is my “line in the sand” for a healthy stock market. But the weakness proved short-lived, and both stocks and bonds have regained some footing to start May. During the drawdown, the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX), aka fear index, awakened from its slumber but never closed above the 20 “panic threshold.”

In a return to the “bad news is good news” market action of yore, stocks saw fit to gap up last Friday as the US dollar weakened and stocks, bonds, and crypto all caught a nice bid (with the 10-year yield falling 30 bps)—on the expectation of sooner rate cuts following the FOMC’s softer tone on monetary policy and a surprisingly weak jobs report. So, the cumulative “lag effects” of quantitative tightening (QT), falling money supply, and elevated interest rates finally may be coming to roost. In fact, Fed chairman Jay Powell suggested that any sign of weakening in inflation or employment could lead to the highly anticipated rate cuts—leaving the impression that the Fed truly wants to start cutting rates.

But I can’t help but wonder whether that 5% pullback was it for the Q2 market correction I have been predicting. It sure doesn’t seem like we got enough cleansing of the momentum algo traders and other profit-protecting “weak holders.” But no one wants to miss out on the rate-cut rally. Despite the sudden surge in optimism about rates, inflation continues to be the proverbial “fly in the ointment” for rate cuts, I believe we are likely to see more volatility before the Fed officially pivots dovish, although we may simply remain in a trading range with downside limited to 5,000 on the S&P 500. Next week’s CPI/PPI readings will be crucial given that recent inflation metrics have ticked up. But I don’t expect any unwelcome inflationary surprises, as I discuss in today’s post.

The Fed faces conflicting signals from inflation, unemployment, jobs growth, GDP, and the international impact of the strong dollar on the global economy. Its preferred metric of Core PCE released on 4/26 stayed elevated in March at 2.82% YoY and a disheartening 3-month (MoM) rolling average of 4.43%. But has been driven mostly by shelter costs and services. But fear not, as I see a light at the end of the tunnel and a resumption of the previous disinflationary trend. Following one-time, early-year repricing, services prices should stabilize as wage growth recedes while labor demand slows, labor supply rises, productivity improves, and real disposable household income falls below even the lowest pre-pandemic levels. (Yesterday, the San Francisco Fed reported that American households have officially exhausted all $2.1 trillion of their pandemic-era excess savings.) Also, rental home inflation is receding in real time (even though the 6-month-lagged CPI metrics don’t yet reflect it), and inflation expectations of consumers and businesses are falling. Moreover, Q1 saw a surge in oil prices that has since receded, the Global Supply Chain Pressure Index (GSCPI) fell again in April. So, I think we will see Core PCE below 2.5% this summer. The Fed itself noted in its minutes that supply and demand are in better balance, which should allow for more disinflation. Indeed, when asked about the threat of a 1970’s-style “stagflation, the Fed chairman said, "I don't see the stag or the 'flation."

The Treasury's quarterly refunding announcement shows it plans to borrow $243 billion in Q2, which is $41 billion more than previously projected, to continue financing our huge and growing budget deficit. Jay Powell has said that the fiscal side of the equation needs to be addressed as it counters much of the monetary policy tightening. It seems evident to me that government deficit spending has been a key driver of GDP growth and employment—as well as inflation.

And as if that all isn’t enough, some commentators think the world is teetering on the brink of a currency crisis, starting with the collapse of the Japanese yen. Indeed, Japan is in quite the pickle with the yen and interest rates, which is a major concern for global financial stability given its importance in the global economy. Escalating geopolitical tensions and ongoing wars are also worrisome as they create death, destruction, instability, misuse of resources, and inflationary pressures on energy, food, and transportation prices.

All of this supports the case for why the Fed would want to start cutting rates (likely by mid-year), which I have touched on many times in the past. Reasons include averting a renewed banking crisis, fallout from the commercial real estate depression, distortion in the critical housing market, the mirage of strong jobs growth (which has been propped up by government spending and hiring), and of course the growing federal debt, debt service, and debt/GDP ratio (with 1/3 of the annual budget now earmarked to pay interest on the massive and rapidly growing $34 trillion of federal debt), which threatens to choke off economic growth. In addition, easing financial conditions would help highly indebted businesses, consumers, and our trading partners (particularly emerging markets). Indeed, yet another reason the Fed is prepared to cut is that other central banks are cutting, which would strengthen the dollar even further if the Fed stood pat. And then we have Japan, which needs to raise rates to support the yen but doesn’t really want to, given its huge debt load; it would be better for it if our Federal Reserve cuts instead.

So, the Fed is at a crossroads. I still believe a terminal fed funds rate of 3.0% would be appropriate so that borrowers can handle the debt burden while fixed income investors can receive a reasonable real yield (i.e., above the inflation rate) so they don’t have to take on undue risk to achieve meaningful income. As it stands today, assuming inflation has already (in real time, not lagged) resumed its downtrend, I think the real yield is too high—i.e., great for savers but bad for borrowers.

Nevertheless, I still believe any significant pullback in stocks would be a buying opportunity. As several commentators have opined, the US is the “best house in a lousy (global) neighborhood.” In an investment landscape fraught with danger nearly everywhere you turn, I see US stocks and bonds as the place to be invested, particularly as the Fed and other central banks restore rising liquidity (Infrastructure Capital Advisors predicts a $2 trillion global injection to make rates across the yield curve go down). But I also believe they should be hedged with gold and crypto. According to Michael Howell of CrossBorder Capital, a strong dollar will still devalue relative to gold and bitcoin when liquidity rises, and gold price tends to rise faster than the rise in liquidity—and bitcoin has an even higher beta to liquidity. Ever since Russia invaded Ukraine on 2/24/2022 and was sanctioned with confiscation of $300 billion in reserves, central banks around the world have been stocking up, surging gold by roughly +21% and bitcoin +60%, compared to the S&P 500 +18% (price return). During Q1, institutions bought a record 290 tons, according to the World Gold Council (WGC).

With several trillions of dollars still sitting defensively in money market funds, we are nowhere near “irrational exuberance” despite somewhat elevated valuations and the ongoing buzz around Gen AI. At the core of an equity portfolio should be US large cap exposure (despite its significantly higher P/E versus small-mid-cap). But despite strong earnings momentum of the mega-cap Tech darlings (which are largely driven by robust share buyback programs), I believe there are better investment opportunities in many under-the-radar names (across large, mid, and small caps), including among cyclicals like homebuilders, energy, financials, and REITs.

So, if you are looking outside of the cap-weighted passive indexes (and their elevated valuation multiples) for investment opportunities, let me remind you that Sabrient’s actively selected portfolios include the latest Q2 2024 Baker’s Dozen (a concentrated 13-stock portfolio offering the potential for significant outperformance) which launched on 4/19, Small Cap Growth 42 (an alpha-seeking alternative to the Russell 2000 index) which just launched last week on 5/1, and Dividend 47 (a growth plus income strategy) paying a 3.8% current yield. Notably, Dividend 47’s top performer so far is Southern Copper (SCCO), which is riding the copper price surge and, by the way, is headquartered in Phoenix—just 10 miles from my home in Scottsdale.

I talk more about inflation, federal debt, the yen, and oil markets in today’s post. I also discuss Sabrient’s latest fundamentals based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors (which continue to be led by Technology), current positioning of our sector rotation model, and several top-ranked ETF ideas. And in my Final Comments section, I have a few things to say about the latest lunacy on our college campuses (Can this current crop of graduates ever be allowed a proper ceremony?).

Click here to continue reading my full commentary. Or if you prefer, here is a link to this post in printable PDF format (as some of my readers have requested). Please feel free to share my full post with your friends, colleagues, and clients. You also can sign up for email delivery of this periodic newsletter at Sabrient.com.

By the way, Sabrient founder David Brown has a new book coming out soon through Amazon.com in which he describes his approach to quantitative modeling and stock selection for four distinct investing strategies (Growth, Value, Dividend, and Small Cap). It is concise, informative, and a quick read. David has written a number of books through the years, and in this new one he provides valuable insights for investors by unveiling his secrets to identifying high-potential stocks. I will send out an email once it becomes available on Amazon.

  by Scott Martindale
  President & CEO, Sabrient Systems LLC

Stocks are pulling back a bit to start Q2 but have shown remarkable resilience throughout their nearly 6-month (and nearly straight-up) bull run, with the S&P 500 (SPY) finding consistent support at its 20-day simple moving average on several occasions, while the slightly more volatile Nasdaq 100 (QQQ, beta=1.18) has found solid support at the 40-day moving average. Moreover, the Relative Strength Index (RSI) on SPY has reliably bounced off the neutral line (50) on every test. And it all happened again early last week—at least until Thursday afternoon when Minnesota Fed president Neel Kashkari ventured off Fed chairman Jerome Powell’s carefully crafted script to say they may not cut interest rates at all this year if inflation’s decline continues to stall.

Before that moment, Powell had been keeping his governors in line and saying all the right things about imminent rate cuts in the pipeline (albeit making sure not to provide a firm timetable). And the pervasive Goldilocks outlook has lifted stocks to uncomfortably elevated valuations (current forward P/E for SPY of 21.3x and for QQQ of 26.6x) that suggest a need for and expectation of both solid earnings growth in 2024-25 and falling interest rates (as the discount rate on future earnings streams).

Up until Kashkari’s unexpected remarks, it appeared that once again—and in fact every time since last November, when the indexes look extremely overbought and in need of a significant pullback (as typically happens periodically in any given year) a strong bid arrived like the Lone Ranger to save the day and push stocks higher. It has burned bears and kept swing traders who like to “fade” spikes hesitant. Not surprisingly, the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) has seen only a couple of brief excursions above the 15 line and has been nowhere near the 20 “fear threshold.”

But after his remarks, the market finished Thursday with a huge, high-volume, “bearish engulfing candle,” and the CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) surged 20% intraday (closing at 16.35), and all those previously reliable support levels gave way—until the very next day. On Friday, they quickly recovered those support levels following the apparently strong March jobs report, finishing with a “bullish harami” pattern (that typically leads to some further upside). As you recall from my March post, I have felt a correction is overdue—and the longer it holds off, the more severe the fall. The question now is whether SPY and QQQ are destined for an upside breakout to new highs and a continuation of the bull run…or for a downside breakdown to test lower levels of support. I believe we may get a bit of a bounce here, but more downside is likely before an eventual resumption in the bull run to new highs.

Regardless, the persistent strength in stocks has been impressive, particularly in the face of the Fed's quantitative tightening actions (balance sheet reduction and “higher for longer” rates)—along with the so-called “bond vigilantes” who protest excessive spending by not buying Treasuries and thus further driving up rates—that have created the highest risk-free real (net of inflation) interest rates since the Financial Crisis and reduced its balance sheet by $1.5 trillion from its April 2022 peak to its lowest level since February 2021.

But (surprise!) gold has been performing even better than either SPY or QQQ (as have cryptocurrencies, aka “digital gold”). Gold’s appeal to investors is likely in anticipation of continued buying by central banks around the world as a hedge against things like growing geopolitical turmoil, our government’s increasingly aggressive “weaponization” of the dollar to punish rogue nations, and rising global debt leading to a credit or currency crisis.

To be sure, solid GDP and employment data, a stall in inflation’s decline, rosy earnings growth forecasts for 2024-2025, tight investment-grade and high-yield credit spreads, low volatility in interest rates, a low VIX, and a sudden recovery in manufacturing activity, with the ISM Manufacturing Index having finally eclipsed the 50 threshold (indicating expansion) after 16 straight months below 50 (contraction), all beg the question of why the Fed would see a need to cut rates. As Powell himself said the other day, we have seen an unusual and unforeseen occurrence in which “productive capacity is going up even more than actual output. The economy actually isn't becoming tighter; it's actually becoming a little looser…” Indeed, the “higher for longer” mantra might seem more appropriate, at least on the surface.

Yet despite the rosy outlook and investor confidence/complacency (and Kashkari’s latest comments), the Fed continues to suggest there will be multiple rate cuts this year, as if it knows of something lurking in the shadows. And that something might be a credit crisis stemming from our hyper-financialized/ultra-leveraged economy—and the growing debt burden across government, small business, and consumers being refinanced at today’s high interest rates. We are all aware of the outright depression in commercial real estate today; perhaps there is a contagion lurking. Or perhaps it’s the scary projection for the federal debt/GDP ratio (rising from 97% of GDP last year to 166% by 2054). Or perhaps it is a brewing currency crisis with the Japanese yen, given its historic weakness that may lead the BOJ to hike rates to stem capital outflows. Or perhaps it’s because they follow the real-time “Truflation” estimate, which indicates a year-over-year inflation rate of 1.82% in contrast to the latest headline CPI print of 3.2% and headline PCE of 2.5%.

I discuss all these topics in today’s post, as well as the relative performance of various equity and asset-class ETFs that suggests a nascent market rotation and broadening may be underway, which is a great climate for active managers. Likewise, Michael Wilson of Morgan Stanley asserts that the stock rally since last fall has been driven more by loose financial conditions, extreme liquidity (leverage), and multiple expansion (rather than earnings growth), but now it's time to be a stock picker rather than a passive index investor.

So, if you are looking outside of the cap-weighted passive indexes (and their elevated valuation multiples) for investment opportunities, let me remind you that Sabrient’s actively selected portfolios include the Baker’s Dozen (a concentrated 13-stock portfolio offering the potential for significant outperformance), Small Cap Growth (an alpha-seeking alternative to the Russell 2000 index), and Dividend (a growth plus income strategy paying a 3.74% current yield). The latest Q1 2024 Baker’s Dozen launched on 1/19/24 and remains in primary market until 4/18/24 (and is already well ahead of SPY).

Click here to continue reading my full commentary in which I also discuss Sabrient’s latest fundamentals based SectorCast quantitative rankings of the ten U.S. business sectors (which continue to be led by Technology), current positioning of our sector rotation model (which turned bullish in early November and remains so today), and several top-ranked ETF ideas. Or if you prefer, here is a link to this post in printable PDF format (as some of my readers have requested). Please feel free to share my full post with your friends, colleagues, and clients! You also can sign up for email delivery of this periodic newsletter at Sabrient.com.

By the way, Sabrient founder David Brown has a new book coming out soon through Amazon.com in which he describes his approach to quantitative modeling and stock selection for four distinct investing strategies (Growth, Value, Dividend, and Small Cap). It is concise, informative, and a quick read. David has written a number of books through the years, and in this new one he provides valuable insights for investors by unveiling his secrets to identifying high-potential stocks. Please let me know if you’d like to be an early book reviewer!