Podcasts about Morgan Stanley

Morgan Stanley Investment Management's Global Head of ETFs Ally Wallace breaks down the firm's newly launched Ether and Solana ETFs from the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. Wallace explains why Morgan Stanley priced all three of its crypto products at 14 basis points — the cheapest on the market — and how its April Bitcoin ETF became the firm's most successful launch ever. And, she unpacks the staking component of the new proof-of-stake products, including Morgan Stanley's decision to pass back 100% of staking rewards to investors. - 00:00 Morgan Stanley Launches Ether and Solana ETFs 00:17 Launching Into a Subdued Crypto Market 00:57 Bitcoin ETF Pulls In $400M, MS's Best Launch Ever 01:27 Competing at 14 Basis Points, the Cheapest on the Market 02:15 The First Bank-Owned Asset Manager in the Space 02:33 Passing Back 100% of Staking Rewards 03:02 How the Staking Economics Work 03:52 Positioning Solana and ETH in Portfolios 04:46 Why Morgan Stanley Chose CoinDesk Benchmarks 05:28 Coinbase and BNY Mellon on Custody

Carl Quintanilla, Jim Cramer and David Faber explored a big week for earnings — led by tech giants Microsoft, Amazon, Apple and Meta. Hear Cramer's eye-opening comments about Nvidia shares. The anchors also discussed stocks on the rise, fueled by the slide in oil prices after the U.S. and Iran halted strikes over the weekend. Also in focus: Nvidia reportedly in talks to provide a $250 billion backstop for OpenAI as part of a data center project, Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas' note on SpaceX amid the stock's weakness, an update on Paramount's decision to delay its proposed acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery, the anchors react to the stock that soared 466% in its Chinese market debut.   Squawk on the Street Disclaimer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Our CIO and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist Mike Wilson explains why market leadership is rotating beyond semiconductors and where investors may find opportunities despite near-term volatility.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript ----- Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Mike Wilson, Morgan Stanley's CIO and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist. Today on the podcast, I will explain why the recent volatility in markets makes sense. It's Wednesday, July 22nd at 2 p.m. in New York. So, let's get after it. The broadening trade is back and it's gaining steam. We established this thesis last week. Importantly, there's a key reason this broadening trade is likely to continue. One of the more crowded areas of the market—semiconductors—has lost its momentum. As I've also noted before, this is not a call that the AI cycle is over. However, stocks do trade on the rate of change in growth, and expectations often reach a place where they can no longer surprise on the upside. Earnings revisions tend to get too stretched, and capital starts looking for the next place where fundamentals are improving but positioning is still light. This is no different than what happened to other leadership groups earlier this year in areas like precious metals and energy stocks. Remember, I first made the call for market broadening in our November outlook. My view is that the economy had moved into a new expansion after the rolling recession ended in April 2025. Markets were starting to catch on before the Iran conflict interrupted that trend. Investors piled back into the AI trade—especially semis—as oil prices jumped and Fed expectations shifted more hawkish. Back in June, I noted that those earnings revisions were likely nearing their peak. Hyperscale stocks starting to lag was the first indication. Since semis ultimately depend on hyperscaler spending, that divergence usually doesn't last. It doesn't mean the buildout is ending. However, the spenders may be moving from blind enthusiasm to a more disciplined phase as a means of addressing the market's concerns about falling cash flows. We've seen this pattern before. Since ChatGPT launched, this ebbing and flowing between the hyperscaler and semiconductor stocks has happened three times. This is the fourth such adjustment, during which the hyperscaler stocks are likely to outperform the semis. Since a few weeks back, hyperscalers have outperformed semiconductors by almost 30 percent. Another consequence is that the major averages may trade lower in the near term. When a crowded, large-cap leadership group is unwinding, the index can look choppy even as the market underneath is improving. That's the key distinction. The index may struggle, but the broadening can still work. Over the next month, don't be surprised if the S&P 500 trades as low as 7000 before it makes a move to 8000 by year-end. Use this weakness to add to equity positions. I continue to like Consumer Discretionary Goods, Transports, and Biotech. Discretionary Goods remains one of the cleaner expressions of the broadening thesis. Wallet share is shifting from services back toward goods, goods pricing is improving, and earnings revisions are strengthening. Transports continue to show improving revisions as volumes stabilize and pricing gets better. Biotech is one of the more attractive lower-rate beneficiaries, especially if policy expectations are too hawkish, as I think they are. On that last point, the Fed backdrop matters. The June FOMC meeting told us forward guidance is going to be limited, and the inflation path is going to drive policy. The softer-than-expected inflation data last week should allow the Fed to stay on hold rather than hiking. It may take the bond market a few more data points to fully re-price this view. Bottom line, the broadening is in gear, but it may not feel comfortable because it's happening while the crowded momentum trade unwinds, a process that is likely unfinished. That's usually how rotations in market leadership work. Like spring, it's often: in like a lion and out like a lamb. Thanks for tuning in. I hope you found it informative and useful. Let us know what you think by leaving us a review. And if you find Thoughts on the Market worthwhile, tell a friend or colleague to try it out!

AI investment is reshaping the global outlook. In part one of this economic roundtable, our panel explores where the momentum is strongest — and where investment still needs to catch up.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Seth Carpenter: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Seth Carpenter, Morgan Stanley's Global Chief Economist and Head of Macro Research. Michael Gapen: And I'm Michael Gapen, Chief U.S. Economist. Chetan Ahya: And I'm Chetan Ahya, Chief Asia Economist. Jens Eisenschmidt: And I'm Jens Eisenschmidt, Chief Europe Economist. Seth Carpenter: And today is going to be our third quarter economic roundtable taking a wide-angle view on the global economy and all the key forces shaping our outlook and the economy. Seth Carpenter: It's Monday, July 20th at 10am in New York Jens Eisenschmidt: And 4pm in Frankfurt. Chetan Ahya: And 10pm in Hong Kong. Seth Carpenter: Since our last roundtable in April, the global economy has continued to face all sorts of shocks, a mix of resilience and friction. Inflation pressures have not disappeared. Energy and geopolitical risks have come up, they've receded, they've come back, they've receded all over the place But there is one underlying source of momentum that we have to talk about. And that is the AI-driven CapEx cycle. Michael, let me turn to you because the U.S. is a real focal point of all of this. Tell me a little bit about where Morgan Stanley Research is thinking about hyperscaler CapEx. How big it is? And then for you, when you think about the U.S. economy, just how big of a driver is it for what we're looking for in the U.S.? Michael Gapen: Yeah, we continue to revise higher our estimates for hyperscaler and AI-related CapEx in the U.S. economy. We were thinking a little over a trillion for 2027. Now we're more like 1.2 - 1.3 trillion, maybe as high as 1.4 trillion in 2028. So, the level of hyperscaler spending continues to keep rising. The growth rate and its effect on the economy is likely to slow. But as you noted, it's still a major driver of momentum in the U.S. You would look at that headline number and think, "Wow, that's, you know, 3.5 percent or so of GDP. Must be a massive source of momentum for GDP growth." But roughly about 60 percent of that hyperscaler CapEx spending goes to items like computers and peripherals, equipment spending categories that have a very, very high import content. We still get a significant number that AI CapEx is probably contributing around 40 basis points to growth this year. Be a similar-sized amount perhaps next year.So, for an economy that's growing somewhere a little bit above 2 percent right now, maybe closer to 2.5 percent next year, that's a non-trivial amount. We just have to remember it's fueling growth around the world, just not here in the U.S. Seth Carpenter: Yeah, that's a really great point because I have seen some estimates where people say, "Well, if it wasn't for AI CapEx, the U.S. economy wouldn't have grown at all." And that's clearly wrong, as you point out. But U.S. imports are necessarily exports from somewhere else. And, Chetan, if I can pull you into the story then, U.S. firms are buying a lot of AI-related equipment from Asia. What does that mean in your part of the world? And in particular, I'm thinking about Korea, Taiwan, and maybe some other economies in Asia. What's the critical story there? Chetan Ahya: So, for Asia, this has definitely been a big boon. If you look at Asia's exports, they have been booming, and particularly for the ones which are exporting semiconductors to the U.S. They are seeing semiconductor exports growing by 90 percent. And when we go back in time and compare Asia's semiconductor exports, it's very tightly linked to the U.S. IT CapEx. And it's not surprising when Mike Gapen mentions about the imports going up. It's on the other side, helping Asia's exports quite meaningfully. So, so far, we've seen this benefiting Korea, number one, Taiwan, and also Japan. All these three are big beneficiaries of U.S. AI CapEx. And of course, also not just U.S., but the other countries which are doing any little amount of CapEx on AI front, that's also helping these three economies in the region. Seth Carpenter: You've been doing a lot of work, Chetan, recently about how much the story can actually broaden out, that the AI CapEx cycle has really contributed to Asian growth, but it doesn't tell the whole story that there's a broader industrial cycle. Can you give us a little bit of a flavor of that story? Chetan Ahya: That's right, Seth. So, we are actually highlighting that there is a CapEx and industrial super cycle that is underway in Asia, and there are four components to this story. AI and semiconductors CapEx, which we just briefly discussed. Number two is energy. Number three is defense. And number four is industrial supply chain onshoring related CapEx. I know that everybody still thinks that AI is the most important part of this story, but when I give you the numbers and the breakup of that... So, for Asia, AI and semiconductor companies CapEx is about $380 billion in 2026, but energy CapEx is going to be $900 billion. So, this is a far broader story than just AI for Asia. Seth Carpenter: Mike, let me come back to you and to the U.S. then. So, isn't the growth story also broader than that as well domestically? So, what's going on in terms of consumer spending in the U.S., and is there a broader CapEx story in the U.S. as well? Michael Gapen: I would say, is it broader than that? I think maybe you could argue also it's narrower than that. Here's what I mean by that. As I noted AI CapEx contributing about 40 basis points to growth, it's certainly underpinning equity valuations in the U.S. and underpinning strong wealth creation. So about [$]180 trillion in household net worth in the U.S. About [$]55 trillion of that has been created in just the last five years alone, underpinned in part by AI-related spending and optimism about future profitability. That's really supported spending by upper income households. So, I think it's both investment-led and consumer-led, but they're inextricably linked. So, the positive for the U.S. is that it's providing a lot of resilience. The negative component of that is it feels like momentum in the U.S. is narrowly driven. Jens Eisenschmidt: Let me maybe jump in here from Europe to provide some perspective from the other side. So, I think it's a fair summary to say that AI investment is not yet, or maybe will never get there, dominating the business cycle. What we do have instead is an unusually consumption-driven expansion. That has to do not so much with an extraordinary strength of consumption, but more of an absence of other factors. Now, prospectively looking forward, we think the fiscal expansion might help lifting us a little bit. And then it is really the debate how much AI investment can arrive in Europe. For now, I would say it's probably a factor of 20 that separates European investment plans from the plans we know that exist for the U.S. Seth Carpenter: Let me stick with you then in Europe because you brought up fiscal as one of the factors going on here and where it's going… You and your team recently wrote a blue paper talking about what the outlook is for fiscal policy in Europe, and in particular, we had this era of cheap debt. Interest rates in Europe were low, at times negative. It was super easy to borrow. Not as much happened then. There's been a shift towards more fiscal expansion at the same time that interest rates have gone up, causing the cost of debt to go up. Feels like there's a lot of push and pull going on. Can you unpack for us a little bit what was in that paper you wrote, what's going on with fiscal policy in Europe, especially in Germany? And what it might mean over time for Euro-area countries? Jens Eisenschmidt: Yeah, so I think fiscal policy in Europe really is looking at a regime shift. So, there is this very famous, probably in the U.S. even more so than here, notion that the Europeans have built a very comfortable welfare state. And that's true if you just look at the accounting from a GDP perspective. It's close to 50 percent that, you know, budgets are actually extended on welfare spending. And now you have three structural headwinds for any type of fiscal spend. So, one is aging related costs, you mentioned it already. Defense spending has to increase significantly, and the interest rate costs will also rise significantly. All of that means there will be very hard choices to be made. The one thing that actually could help here is growth. Growth is the one thing that's, for now at least, missing, at least in comparison to the U.S. It's probably half what we expect, what the U.S. colleagues think is in stake for the U.S., and a quarter or even less than that of what is there in Asia. So, growth is really the key, the solution, the answer to everything in Europe. More growth than just 1 percent, which is potential, would help solving that fiscal challenge. For now, it looks really, really like an uphill battle. Returning to Germany, it's the one country that has a very good fiscal starting position. They are pushing a lot but they're to some extent pushing a string. So, even with the German huge fiscal package, given that private sector investments so far are absent, doesn't get us a ton of growth. Seth Carpenter: Chetan, maybe I'll come back to you before we close part one of this roundtable. The AI CapEx cycle started with AI, broadened out further. How long do you expect this cycle to last? How durable can it be? And how might it compare to previous CapEx cycles? Chetan Ahya: Yeah, Seth. So, we think this will be a multi-year CapEx cycle. And when we are thinking about the duration of the cycle, there are two things that I would keep in mind. Number one is that most of the drivers that we just discussed – the CapEx on AI, energy, defense, and industrial supply chain onshoring related investments – these are all structural drivers. So, we think these are going to continue for some more time. At this point of time, we have the visibility for this cycle to be lasting for three-four more years. And then the second point of framework that I would keep in mind is that the corporate balance sheets are in a pretty good shape. So, when you are thinking about the leverage in the private sector, you can look at both households and the corporate sector balance sheet. But since the cycle is CapEx driven, we are looking at the corporate balance sheets, and they are in a pretty good shape. Across the region, corporate debt to GDP is below where it was in 2019. Seth Carpenter: Mike, let me, let me wrap up quickly with you. We talked about AI, AI CapEx. For now, that's a very strong demand story. When are we going to see a supply side of things coming from AI? Are you already seeing a big contribution to GDP and growth from productivity coming from AI? Michael Gapen: We are, but not outside of the high-tech sectors, and we're seeing limited, what I'll call labor market restructuring of tasks and occupations beyond high AI-exposed occupations. So right now, everything is still very isolated I think maybe as we get into 2029 and beyond, so as Chetan says, we probably have a three to four-year super cycle here around a build-out phase. Then we might see some of that broader-based diffusion to other non-tech sectors in the economy. Seth Carpenter: All right, Jens, for you, let's wrap up here. So, what is the state of play for the build-out in the CapEx cycle for AI in Europe? Jens Eisenschmidt: Yeah, it's very early stages. As I said before, we really; we connected to all the industry experts or analysts covering the sector and the total plans are a factor of 20 below what we see in the U.S. by just the seven hyperscalers. So, I would say very fragmented, very small, in general. Not only AI. I think the one thing I would be looking at for any type of sign of revival, sign of growth is investment. The second would be investment. And you can guess what the third would be… Investments in the core countries. That's really what we need to see, and we haven't seen much in Germany or France on this front. Seth Carpenter:That's a great place for us to stop today. We talked about the real side of the economy, AI, CapEx, trade. Tomorrow we're going to come back, and we'll talk about how that growth outlook affects inflation. And once you start talking about growth and inflation, you got to talk about policy, and that's where we'll be tomorrow. Mike, Jens, and Chetan, thank you for joining today. And for the listeners, thank you for listening. Be sure to tune in tomorrow for Part 2 of our conversation. And I have to say, if you enjoy this show, please leave us a review wherever you listen, and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or a colleague today.

In the second part of our economic roundtable, Michael Gapen, Jens Eisenschmidt and Chetan Ahya join Seth Carpenter to discuss how central banks are balancing sticky inflation, resilient growth and regional policy trade-offs.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Seth Carpenter: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Seth Carpenter, Morgan Stanley's Global Chief Economist and Head of Macro Research. And once again today, I am joined by Morgan Stanley's chief regional economists: Michael Gapen, the Chief U.S. Economist, Jens Eisenschmidt, our Chief Europe Economist, and on the other side of the world, Chetna Ahya, our Chief Asia Economist. Yesterday, we talked about what's supporting growth around the world, especially AI spending in the U.S. and some government spending in Europe, and Asia's role in making all of this happen. Today, we're going to try to dig deeper and go into policy. It's Tuesday, July 21st at 10 am in New York Jens Eisenschmidt: And 4pm in Frankfurt. Chetan Ahya: And 10pm in Hong Kong. Seth Carpenter: Since the last time we did this in mid-April, I will say the debate around central banks has probably become more complicated. Global growth has held up, probably better than many people expected. And inflation, which picked up a lot, started to recede. But it has not gone away. And some of the forces helping to shape the economy, the AI spending, government spending, that possible upswing in manufacturing, that could keep demand strong, and it might keep pushing inflation higher. So, the question today is, if growth remains resilient, how much room really do central banks have to navigate? Mike, let me start with you because your call for the Fed here in the U.S. is out of consensus, or at least at odds with where the market is pricing things. We talked about the demand going from AI. You pointed out that imports are actually limiting how much domestic demand there is. So, what is the underlying story for inflation in the U.S.? And what does it mean for the Fed? Michael Gapen: So, our view is that inflation will come down in the U.S. So, we think disinflation will be driven by some payback in energy prices. Some payback from tariffs, which have pushed up goods prices over the last year. And some further diminishment in housing-related inflation, namely shelter. So, we think on a broad-based perspective, inflation has already peaked and will start moving lower. And we think we've seen evidence of this in recent inflation prints. A risk to that, though, is from the demand side of the economy and AI-related inflation in two parts. One, higher software prices, chipflation. So, the pass-through of some of the AI pricing components. Fortunately, here, they're about less than 1 percent of the consumer basket. So, we don't think that there's a great risk, a strong risk, a high risk of AI-related inflation in the consumer bundle. I think the real risk is that maybe we underestimate broad-based demand, animal spirits. And so, you might just see a broad-based increase in inflation from stronger demand. That'll be a little bit harder to see in real times. But our expectation is that inflation moves lower to about 3 percent, by the end of this year and closer to 2.5 percent next year. Seth Carpenter: All right. Thanks, Mike. And in fact, the most recent inflation report that we just got confirms your perspective that inflation should be coming down. And so, I guess the question then remains: What would it take for the Fed to hike this year if inflation has come down like we've seen? Michael Gapen: Well, I think that the answer there is that inflation wouldn't come down in line with our expectations. So, if the view is that energy prices, tariffs, and shelter inflation should provide plenty of offset and bring inflation down, I think the answer is you don't get payback. Explicitly, core goods prices stay elevated. Maybe we get ongoing disruptions in the Middle East that push energy prices higher and create second-round effects. So, I think inflation just lingering at elevated levels could mean the Fed gets brought in to raise rates in September or later this year. We think if they're patient enough, they'll see enough disinflation to keep them on the sidelines. But the risk is disinflation forecast is too optimistic, inflation stays firm, the Fed needs to raise rates. Seth Carpenter: All right, Jens, what about for you and the ECB? They've already raised interest rates once this year. I think you've got a forecast for them raising interest rates again in September. What could make you wrong about that forecast? What's going to make you convinced that you're right about that forecast? And is there a similar tension that the ECB is wrestling with that Mike talked about for the Fed? Jens Eisenschmidt: Yeah. I mean, starting with the last part of your question, I think no doubt, very similar tension. Just that, of course, it's less obvious. It's essentially a nuanced European version instead of the loud American version that we always stereotypically think the world looks like. So, essentially, we have here clearly not an AI boom. That, I mean, there's no question. And we have discussed that yesterday. Still, there is certainly the notion that the world demand is not really weak, and some of this will also arrive in Europe. And so, you have that tension between maybe there's more resilience than we had thought, and so inflation will not come down through to slack as much. And so, we might actually add something here in terms of monetary restrictiveness. Now, the other thing that is often forgotten, even though it's blatantly obvious, the starting point is just different. The ECB is running neutral monetary policy by all accounts. I mean, you could say 2 percent is neutral, and now they are 2.25. But, you know, there are ranges of uncertainty around any estimate. And the latest that they published runs – goes from 1.75 to 2;2.5. So basically, even if they were to increase rates to 2.5 in September, you could go with the microphone around the governing council, and you would probably find a lot of people saying, "Well, this is still a neutral policy." That's probably not the case for the U.S. So, I guess this matters here for that debate too. Seth Carpenter: All right. Yesterday we talked about lots of different things, but for Europe, we brought up fiscal policy. How do you think about fiscal policy and how it affects monetary policy? And so, I'm thinking about two channels. One, how much does the ECB care that if they keep pushing up interest rates, they're going to increase the debt service burden for countries that are already facing high debt costs? And second, is fiscal policy going to be the extra impetus for inflation that forces even more rate hikes from the ECB? Jens Eisenschmidt: I guess it depends on who you ask. Certainly, more concerned members in the governing council that would point to exactly that fiscal stimulus as a reason why interest rates have to be increased further from here. The other answer I would give is – probably for now at least, the view on fiscal policy is really model-based. You look at what type of increase in interest rate gets you essentially more fiscal restraint because there's an increase in interest rate bill and so less spending somewhere else. And that gets you basically less stimulus or less growth, I mean, very roughly speaking. I don't think it's a major concern for now. We haven't reached yet interest rates where this would start to play a role. I guess, again, Europe being fragmented as it is, with all the political risk that's around the corner. Think about the elections in France and Italy and Spain next year. That will very likely find itself expressed in spreads. And so, the higher the interest rates are, the larger the spreads could become. Seth Carpenter: So, for each of you, there's clearly a role for inflation. One of the risks we'll talk about maybe is inflation expectations and how maybe there's a big shift in what's going on with inflation. But Chetan, that brings me to you and Asia, because one economy where there unquestionably has been a fundamental shift in inflation and inflation expectation over the past several years is Japan. The Bank of Japan is on this normalization path where they're raising interest rates. Interest rates had been negative and then zero, and now they're gradually raising things up. Inflation has come back to Japan. Markets are looking at what the Bank of Japan is likely to do. Can you tell us a little bit about what our view is for the Bank of Japan this year and next? And what might make them hike interest rates faster than we think? And is there any risk that in fact they hike interest rates slower than we think? Chetan Ahya: Yeah, Seth. So, we are expecting BoJ to hike twice from here. The first rate hike is coming up in December of this year, and then another one coming up in June of next year. And then we think that, you know, the underlying inflation trend in Japan is not really that strong. So, while market pricing is for about three more rate hikes instead of two that we are building in our base case. And some of the macro investors are even talking about four more rate hikes. We think the underlying inflation trend warrants a caution and BoJ to go slowly than what the market is pricing in and what the macro investors are saying in. And the key part of our framework on thinking about Japan's inflation is that bulk of the explanation to inflation rise in Japan lies in currency moves. And secondarily, you can look at also the other drivers are more from supply side, which is higher energy prices or food prices. Whereas it's not driven so much by demand. To elaborate further on why it is not driven by demand, when you look at Japan's consumption trend, and if you index it to hundred at pre-COVID levels in September [20]19 then it's currently about 101; i.e., that it's just about 1 percent up over the last seven years. So that's a very tepid trend of consumption demand. And therefore, we don't think that BoJ needs to rush into hike in a more aggressive pace going forward. Seth Carpenter: So, there is this fundamental shift, but boy, it's not on a tear, and so the BoJ can take its time. You know, Chetan, it's hard to wrap up a conversation about the global economy without talking about China. I get the sense that there's not a lot going on with monetary policy, but we did just see a soft Q2 GDP print. So, against that backdrop, what should we be expecting in terms of policy? Is there any monetary policy coming? Or is there going to be some fiscal expansion? Or is China just sort of stuck in this lower gear? Chetan Ahya: Yeah, Seth. So, we were also surprised by the soft GDP print. But when you look into the data, actually, it was interestingly doing well on exports. And I mentioned earlier about how the global CapEx trend is helping Asia. It's definitely helping China too. But at the same time, China's domestic demand turned out to be quite weak. And particularly in the areas where we think that the policy response can be providing some help, i.e., infrastructure spend, was also very weak. And therefore, we are expecting that in the back half of the year, you will see the government taking up some fiscal expansion. Not new stimulus announcement, but whatever they had budgeted. They have enough room within that to utilize that budget and actually increase that fiscal spending towards infrastructure. We have about 2 trillion RMB worth of funds available for the government to go ahead and spend in the second half. And then lift that growth trend, which has dipped to 4.3 percent in second quarter to back to 4.6 percent in the back half of the year. Seth Carpenter: You know what? Maybe that's a great place for us to leave it. We've gone around the world again today, but this time focusing much more on policy. In the U.S., the Fed is facing this interesting situation. We think inflation is coming down. The last CPI print went in our favor. And so as a result, our forecast is that the Fed doesn't change policy at all this year. But it's going to come down to the data, and in particular, whether or not Mike and his team are right in terms of where inflation is going. In Europe, the ECB has already raised interest rates once this year. Jens and team are looking for another interest rate hike. The ECB really does seem more sensitive to inflation coming from the energy shock, but there are lots of other crosscurrents that they're paying attention to as well. And then the other major developed market central bank, the Bank of Japan, is on this normalization path. They are in the process of raising interest rates, but Chetan pointed out to us that the growth rate is such that they don't have to be in any sort of hurry, and they can take their time. So, with that, Mike, Jens, Chetan, thank you so much for helping us connect all of these dots. And to the listeners, thank you for listening. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a review wherever you listen. And share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or a colleague today.

Andy Burnham enters No 10 today as prime minister, the US continued trading fire with Iran over the weekend, and Morgan Stanley has become Wall Street's top bank for AI debt deals. Plus, Germany's chancellor Friedrich Merz is pitching his country to investors as “Europe's bedrock of stability”. Mentioned in this podcast:Andy Burnham urged to use flexibility in fiscal rules to boost investmentUS strikes Iran after American troops killed in JordanMerz pitches Germany as ‘Europe's bedrock of stability' to investorsMorgan Stanley becomes Wall Street's top bank for AI debt dealsWant to get in touch? Email us at podcasts@ft.comNote: The FT does not use generative AI to voice its podcasts The FT News Briefing is produced by Victoria Craig, Sonja Hutson, Saffeya Ahmed, Katya Kumkova, and Fiona Symon. Our editor is Marc Filippino. Our show is mixed by Sam Giovinco and Alex Higgins. Additional help from Gavin Kallmann, Michael Lello, Peter Barber and David da Silva. Our intern is Cole van Miltenburg. Our executive producer is Topher Forhecz. Flo Phillips is the FT's global head of audio. The show's theme music is by Metaphor Music.Read a transcript of this episode on FT.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Cliff Nonnenmacher is a lifelong entrepreneur whose journey began at age 8, selling golf balls outside country clubs. By 19, he launched what's believed to be the first food delivery subcontractor for McDonald's in the U.S.—decades before Uber Eats. He later ran watersport concessions, owned a video store, and distributed the Fun Noodle nationally. At 21, Cliff took his self-built trading portfolio to Wall Street, landing a role at Morgan Stanley. In 2003, he transitioned into franchising and never looked back. Cliff has owned, operated, and scaled multiple franchise brands and helped develop others internationally. With over 25 years of experience in franchising, finance, and business, he now mentors aspiring entrepreneurs and franchise owners. Cliff is the founder and CEO of Franocity, is the host of Pursuit of Profit, the #1 podcast in franchising, and author of Beyond The Brand – The Entrepreneur's Guide to Fearless Franchising. He lives in Delray Beach, Florida, with his wife Nicole and their son Chase.

Hosts Steve, Adam, and Joey kick off by unpacking a wild two weeks in the markets, from Iran-driven oil and rate jitters to a sharp global tech and AI sell‑off tied to a new Chinese large language model. They balance the bad headlines with surprisingly strong earnings (think Taiwan Semi, BlackRock, Morgan Stanley), robust housing starts, rising auto sales, and eye‑opening stats like record-low jobless claims and 1,200 new U.S. millionaires created every day in 2025. Along the way, they dive into retirement readiness versus flashy car spending, explain “accredited investor” risks with products like Yrefy, and warn listeners not to let politics or “vibecession” pessimism derail long‑term investing.

In dieser Samstagsfolge von Alles auf Aktien reden wir einfach mal über alles. Über das Leben in Dubai, den harten Job des Investmentbankers und die konkrete Formel für finanzielle Freiheit. Heute ist jemand bei uns zu Gast, der all das erlebt hat und immer noch erlebt. Sie hat früh alles gewagt und dann genau das bekommen, wonach sie strebte. Erst wickelte sie Milliarden-Deals für Morgan Stanley ab, dann ging sie zu Delivery Hero und AboutYou. Heute macht sie ihr eigenes Ding – von Dubai aus. Ihr erfahrt von ihr außerdem, wie eine 100-Stunden-Woche aussieht, warum man besser keine Anleihen hält, wie man 100.000 Euro investiert und wie nah die Drohneneinschläge wirklich waren. Ein Gespräch mit Julia Stötzel. Mit dem Code „AAAFRIENDS“ kannst du 50 Prozent auf deine Tickets sparen – aber nur unter folgendem Link. https://veranstaltung.businessinsider.de/event/financesummit26/summary?rp=c6dc55d6-6f4f-4fb4-b75f-3f3501d84859 Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und – ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

Our analysts Andrew Sheets and Mark Schmidt unpack why U.S. healthcare feels so expensive and the potential impacts of rising hospital costs.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Andrew Sheets: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Andrew Sheets, Global Head of Fixed Income Research at Morgan Stanley. Mark Schmidt: And I'm Mark Schmidt, Head of Municipal Strategy at Morgan Stanley. Andrew Sheets: And today on the program, a discussion into one of the biggest mysteries in one of the biggest sectors of the economy. We're talking about healthcare costs. It's Friday, July 17th at 2pm in London. Mark Schmidt: At 9am in New York. Andrew Sheets: So, we're talking today about healthcare, which represents roughly a fifth of the U.S. economy, the bulk of job creation over the last several years, and in my view, honestly, one of the biggest inflation paradoxes that we see in the market. On the one hand, the high cost of healthcare is taken as a given, and it's something that many Americans still struggle with financially. But if you look at the official inflation data in the U.S., healthcare costs have been lower than normal, and that's been true now for a number of years. So, what's going on? How do we tie this together? And Mark, you just wrote a report that tries to do exactly that. So, what did you hope to accomplish with this report? Mark Schmidt: You're absolutely right. It's hard to underline enough just how large healthcare is to the U.S. economy overall. Americans spend nearly $6 trillion on healthcare. That's more than the GDP of the entire country of Germany. And if we think about prices, Americans pay more. A knee replacement, for example, costs $25,000 in the United States. That same procedure costs just $6,000 in France. Common heart treatments that would cost $3,000 in Germany or $10,000 in Australia cost $34,000 in the U.S. It also matters for everyone's local community. Healthcare jobs have been growing twice as fast as the rate of job growth in the economy overall. And those are good jobs. They pay above average wages. For many Americans these days, the most secure path to the middle class is a career in healthcare. Now, this may seem a little bit arcane, but it probably hits close to your portfolio as well. Earlier in the year, when we took a look at how equity separately managed accounts invest, they typically have a core overweight to healthcare. And even though American prices may seem like an American issue, many of the largest and most profitable healthcare companies in the world are actually headquartered in Europe. So, whether you're sitting in New York or sitting in London, the price of American healthcare probably matters to you. But as you noted, Andrew, it does feel like a paradox because although Americans cite healthcare costs as one of their top concerns, and although healthcare spending is growing at 6 percent a year or more, the official inflation data says that healthcare prices are in check. And at one point earlier in the year, healthcare inflation, according to official data, even dipped below 3 percent. It just didn't make a lot of sense, and that's why we got together with our colleagues across equities, fixed income research, public policy, and economics to dig into what was actually going on. Andrew Sheets: So, Mark, let's dig right into that. I mean, it seems like a perfect encapsulation of the so-called Main Street versus Wall Street perception of the economy. So, what's going on? How does one kind of square those two numbers? Mark Schmidt: The easiest way to understand it is that you can't walk through a grocery store and figure out the price of a knee replacement. And that's true both for you and me. It's also true for the government. They have to survey hospitals and health insurance companies. The trouble is that the prices that health insurance companies pay hospitals, well, those are trade secrets. So, at any given point in time, even for the best government economists, it's not entirely clear what the price trends are. And that's why when you look at the official data, healthcare inflation typically has relatively lumpy jumps in the series. You could see several months of 0.1 or 0.2 percent official growth in healthcare inflation. Or as earlier this week, you could see certain categories jump to 0.4 or even 0.8. Andrew Sheets: Another element, Mark, that you talked about in the report is that people are also consuming more healthcare. So, talk a little bit about that. How that factors into this dynamic, and again, is that just going to be the new normal as the population ages and we tend to spend more on healthcare as we get older? Mark Schmidt: That's right. The good news is that we're living longer lives. The bad news is that means that we have more chronic healthcare conditions to deal with. The good news is that more procedures can be done in outpatient settings, and those, generally speaking, are cheaper. The bad news is that inpatient care, inpatient prices go up as the complexity of procedures that actually happen in a hospital setting increase significantly. When you balance it all out, it's a situation where, thankfully, the United States and most Americans have the means and the wealth to pay more for healthcare. The flip side of that is that they are paying more for healthcare, and that's why we think that the recent softness in healthcare inflation is actually too good to be true. Andrew Sheets: Something that jumped out at me from this report, Mark, was just how important hospitals are in this equation. And the experience of the patient and the experience of the hospital can be different economically. And that difference can also matter for how this shows up in official inflation and government statistics.So, you know, it would be helpful maybe just to walk the listener through. If I go into the hospital and I need knee surgery. You know, how does that look like from my perspective in terms of paying for it, assuming I have health insurance through my employer? How could that look like to the hospital? And how could that look like coming out the other end into the official government statistics? Mark Schmidt: Well, of course, Andrew, the first thing that you do when you break your leg is you call six hospitals and shop around for the cheapest price, right? Andrew Sheets: [Laughs] Of course. Mark Schmidt: So that's actually the problem because when you get care, you're not in a place to ask about the price. And frankly, even if you asked your doctor or nurse what the price is, they probably wouldn't know. Not only is it not their job to know the price, but all of those negotiations happen after the fact – with the prices that the insurance companies negotiate with the hospitals. After COVID, hospitals had a lot more costs to spread out among the people who were coming in the door, and so they raised prices across the board, not just for procedures that were related to respiratory illness. Naturally, insurance companies noticed that, and they started to push back. So long after you get a cast for your broken leg – and by the way, I wish you a speedy recovery – insurance companies end up going back and forth negotiating with your doctors for exactly how much they should pay you. And although these prices were loosely set well before you walked in the door, the exact way it gets billed and coded? Well, let's just say there's a lot of back and forth. For a well-run hospital, the cost of talking to and ultimately getting reimbursement from your insurance company, that alone could be 2 to 4 percent of revenue. And in especially complex cases, that whole negotiation can eat up 5 to 7 percent of the total bill. You're also right to flag that hospitals really are still the central point of the U.S. healthcare system. Americans spend $2 trillion in a hospital setting. And hospitals overwhelmingly coordinate care for both primary, specialty, and pharmacy services. Andrew Sheets: Mark, another issue I wanted to ask you about was the Affordable Care Act, Medicare, Medicaid, and how those programs fit into the story? Mark Schmidt: The One Big Beautiful Bill Act included a variety of measures to slow the overall growth rate of healthcare. Now, for all the reasons we just discussed, that's probably warranted. The Affordable Care Act is another wrinkle. Enhanced subsidies, which were already set to expire – did in fact expire at the end of last year. And as a result, more Americans are now uninsured. It remains to be seen how that impacts overall costs. In the United States, when you have a health emergency, a hospital is legally obligated to treat you because of a 1990s law called EMTALA. Even if you can't pay, the system eventually does. Historically, uncompensated care costs have been passed on to individuals and companies with insurance. For now, however, it remains to be seen whether these changes in law and in the overall number of people with insurance will cause healthcare prices to rise or fall. Andrew Sheets: And Mark, just for the broad-based implications of this, right? It's fair to say that in any health insurance system, there are some people who consume a lot more healthcare. They're unhealthy or they're unlucky. And there are some who consume a lot less. And, you know, this is something where that overall coverage question matters. Because if you have things that reduce the number of otherwise healthy people who are in those healthcare pools, it can raise the cost for everybody else. Those people who were in some ways subsidizing the higher consumers of healthcare are no longer there. Is that a fair way to frame it, do you think? And are there potential changes given some of these legislative actions that could lead to changes of what the pool looks like – and what overall costs could look like? Mark Schmidt: That's a great point. And healthcare is probably the only part of our economy where you would say, "Thank goodness I did not get my money's worth." As we think about it… Andrew Sheets: [Laughs] Very true. Very true. Mark Schmidt: As we think about it, most young and healthy people are going to be paying more for their health insurance than they receive in healthcare. Again, that's a good thing. Because American healthcare prices are so much higher than anywhere else in the world, paying in more than you get back? Well, that hits the wallet harder in America than it does in other countries. And that's why for many people – choice – choosing how much health insurance to have and how much to pay for it, really is central to keeping the American economy dynamic. The flip side, however, is that as Americans get older, more people have Medicare. Now, Medicare is pretty good if you have it. But the catch is that Medicare prices, according to most independent estimates, do not fully reimburse for the cost of care. So, as more seniors take up more beds in a hospital, that means that commercial prices, the prices for people who have private insurance through their employer, are likely to rise even faster. Andrew Sheets: So, Mark, I think a good place to close it out and kind of bring this all together is a really important conclusion of this report – is that hospitals have been absorbing a number of these rising costs of healthcare through lower margins for the hospital. And that has resulted in lower ultimate inflation because the inflation is measured out the other side, out ultimately what the hospital earns. And if you could just maybe talk a little bit more about that. To what extent have those margins been compressed? And what that might mean for things going forward? Mark Schmidt: That's right. We dug into the finances for hundreds of not-for-profit hospitals in the United States. They are facing higher costs and shrinking margins. Historically, hospitals have partially passed on expense increases of this magnitude. Now, in their conversations with insurance companies, the biggest benchmark setting of prices happens once every two to three years. So, we're not going to see hospital prices show up in the inflation data overnight. But when we look at hospitals across the country, their budget information and their guidance is consistent with firming prices. Andrew Sheets: Great. Thank you so much, Mark. I've really enjoyed the conversation. Mark Schmidt: Thanks for having me, Andrew. Andrew Sheets: And thank you for listening. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please share it with a friend or colleague today. And rate and review us on wherever you listen. It helps more people find the show.

Traditional finance continues embracing crypto as Morgan Stanley's E*TRADE launches Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana trading for eligible retail clients, Citadel Securities invests $400 million in Crypto.com, and Visa unveils a new stablecoin platform designed for banks and fintech companies. Matt explains why competition to control digital dollar infrastructure is accelerating as more traditional financial firms enter the stablecoin market.The episode also covers Europe's growing list of MiCA-licensed crypto firms, Malaysia's investigation into a crypto-related network state project, Taiwan sentencing the operator behind the BitShine exchange to 22 years in prison, and a UK crypto fraud ring that impersonated police officers to steal more than £4 million. Matt wraps up with JPMorgan's improving outlook for Bitcoin, concerns over rising oil prices, and why he believes blockchain technology could eventually provide a more transparent and auditable election system.Happy Hodling, Everyone. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Credit markets are stepping in to fund the surging demand for AI. Our experts Lindsay Tyler and Anish Shah explore the opportunities and risks behind this record financing wave.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Lindsay Tyler: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Lindsay Tyler, TMT Credit Research Analyst at Morgan Stanley. Anish Shah: And I'm Anish Shah, Global Head of Debt Capital Markets at Morgan Stanley. Lindsay Tyler: Today, how issuers and investors are approaching the rapidly evolving world of AI financing. It's Thursday, July 16th at 10am in New York. As AI demand accelerates, credit markets are being asked to finance infrastructure on a scale that used to be associated with utilities, telecom, or energy. That raises a central question for issuers and investors: How much debt can the AI ecosystem absorb? And at what price? Anish, can you walk our listeners through the key products in your purview? Anish Shah: Certainly, in my nearly twenty years at Morgan Stanley, this is probably the most incredible time period I've ever seen in the credit markets. I've had the privilege of working across a number of different roles in capital markets and lending. And a couple of years ago, we integrated the debt underwriting business across both investment-grade and leverage finance franchises in recognition of how interconnected the whole credit ecosystem has become. In addition to our core activities helping clients raise capital for their strategic priorities, two of the big focus areas that we've had have been finding ways to harness the power of the private credit universe and also delivering best-in-class capabilities in funding this incredible growth in AI spend. Lindsay Tyler: AI financing has certainly been a theme we've also been focused on in research. Our equity research colleagues project that a handful of key players could add more than 30 gigawatts of capacity over a two-year timeframe, driving around [$]2 trillion of aggregate cash CapEx in that period. And to put that into context, a single gigawatt of data center capacity can require roughly $12 billion for the shell, and then often more than double that for chips and racks. So, from your vantage point, what inning are we in? And what gives you confidence that credit markets can continue funding this opportunity at scale? Anish Shah: I mean, Lindsay, the numbers certainly are staggering, as you note. And if you just observe the CapEx estimates for the hyperscalers and broadly for AI infrastructure, we're certainly in the early innings. Lindsay Tyler: Mm-hmm. Anish Shah: The largest tech companies have historically, as you know, raised very little debt. In fact, many of these companies have not even needed a credit facility. As CapEx projections were materially increased in the second half of last year, we saw the beginning of scaled capital raises. Hyperscaler issuance has quickly gone from less than one percent of the investment-grade market to more than 10 percent of the market. You know, as I look ahead, based on what we're seeing on the ground, we think that AI-related funding, whether it's for data center development or financing compute capacity, could top 15 percent of the total issuance across all credit products. This has been an unprecedented test for the capital markets, both in terms of the depth of capacity and the breadth of product. The teams have been on the forefront of deep investor dialogue and product innovation. This spans corporate investment grade, first of their kind financings in high-yield and leveraged loan markets, and new takes on asset-backed financing. And each of these areas has seen material issuance both in public and private markets. Lindsay Tyler: Great backdrop. Let's dig first into investment-grade corporate debt, an area you know well from your time previously leading the investment-grade team. Can you help frame the scale and the significance of this financing bucket and how AI-related debt is scaling within it? Anish Shah: Well, you know, as you know, the investment-grade bond market, specifically in dollars, is the deepest, most liquid pool of capital in the world. Volumes have grown materially over the last few years and are likely to eclipse $2 trillion in issuance this year. Hyperscalers are among the very best credits in the world, and they have the ability to come in and out of markets with relatively quick twitch, little to no pre-marketing, and in fairly large size. You know, $20 billion-plus deals used to be rare in the investment-grade market, now happen multiple times a quarter. This is why we've seen the predominance of AI-driven capital raising take place in the investment-grade market. For the most part, investors have digested that supply very well. While we've seen some modest widening credit spreads for hyperscalers and some of the other tech issuers, I'd say it's de minimis relative to their expected ROI. Lindsay, I've talked a lot about supply dynamics and issuance. What other factors are you and investors considering when assessing fair value for investment-grade rated technology bonds? Lindsay Tyler: Sure. It's prudent to really weigh a mix of technicals, fundamentals, and relative value. You know, as you discussed on the technical side, and related to my discussions with debt and equity investors, I've been focused on scale of buildouts, market capacity, digestibility across currencies, positioning along the curve, implications of equity issuance, and whether AI financing could crowd out other areas of TMT credit. But moving more to the fundamental side of things, you mentioned ROI, and for the players that are scaling compute capacity, there are a handful of key monetization and return questions that keep coming up. How quickly can these companies bring new capacity online? Once it's live, how does it translate into durable revenue and cash flow? Is that capacity supporting internal products, proprietary models, broader cloud offerings, or compute leased to third parties? And then how fungible is the capacity across those use cases if demand or returns shift? Further on the fundamental side, we've done some differentiated work around growing long-term commitments. We've seen that high-quality hyperscalers and a few of the semis companies are anchoring the AI ecosystem through leases, guarantees, other obligations. These commitments really extend beyond vanilla bond issuance. So, I encourage investors to look beyond the funded debt and really understand the accounting and the ratings implications here of some of those commitments. And this ties nicely into the next topic that I wanted to raise, which is project finance debt. I've noticed that, you know, a lot of the commitments that we're seeing from IG players support another layer of financing. Lease commitments can underpin project finance debt, an area of sizable issuance and innovation. The public high-yield market has emerged as a new funding source in this way for data center construction, with more than 30 billion priced across 15 deals, since fall 2025. Can you walk us through, Anish, the innovation behind these structures, and how are these high yield deals different than other ways to, kind of, raise project finance debt? Anish Shah: Yeah, it's incredibly interesting. I mean, the bulk of the issuance, as I noted has come in the investment grade market, but I would say the bulk of the innovation has come in the sub-investment grade market. You know, historically, for very capital-intensive sectors like energy and power or real estate, the project loan market was the most efficient source of initial funding. The developer would tap banks to underwrite a highly structured construction loan. Once the project is up and running, you could then refinance that loan with the predictable cash flows into a more institutional financing, like the investment grade bond market or the term loan B or securitization markets.That product may still be very viable in many sectors, but we felt early on that bank-provided construction loans would not meet the capacity needs of the AI investment cycle. The market really needed an institutional credit product that bypassed the need for construction loans. The key innovation came in the form of first-of-its-kind high-yield bonds that funded the development of a new data center complex. Given the relatively short construction period and the "offtake" supported by some of the highest quality credits in the world, we felt like this financing structure would be incredibly well-received in the high-yield market. The win here is that the developer accesses fixed rate long-term capital and maintains flexibility to call the bonds and refinance at a lower cost. Judging by how these financings have gone, there's a strong level of investor enthusiasm. I think that they've only scratched the surface, and I would expect that we see much more of this. And potentially even expand it to other products in the leverage finance markets given the tremendous level of investor demand. Lindsay Tyler: Yeah. It's certainly been exciting to follow many of those deals. Beyond the public space, we're also seeing a wave of innovation in private credit and asset-backed finance. Anish, how do companies decide whether capital is best raised in the public or the private markets? Anish Shah: Well, I'm glad you raised the whole avenue of private markets because it may be the most significant change in the credit markets over the last few years, broadening the scope of private credit from directly lending into leverage buyouts to now financing large investment-grade projects. There are great examples in the world of GPU and TPU financing, where we structure loans secured by the asset and the cash flows, or in data center development.Lindsay, from your perspective, what are investors focused on when these private structures intersect with public credits? Lindsay Tyler: Sure. Many of these asset-backed private financings have prompted investors to look more closely at any of the public companies involved, whether as issuers, tenants, customers, or support providers. This ties back to the point I raised earlier. Where does the risk reside, and who ultimately is on the hook? These financings have also sparked broader discussions around circularity, vendor financing, and technology obsolescence risk, even when amortizing structures are in place. I do think those are fair concerns to weigh, and they really speak to how quickly the AI financing trend is evolving and how much credit work there is to do. So, Anish, with that balance in mind, relatively strong demand, rapid innovation, but also some real credit questions, let's end with a quick lightning round. Anish Shah: Lindsay, let's do it. Lindsay Tyler: First, what is the biggest risk that could test investor appetite for AI-related debt? Anish Shah: I would say investors are acutely focused on construction delays. Don't underestimate the level of diligence being done by the breadth of capacity you're seeing in the markets. Investors are doing their homework, and we're spending a lot of time trying to mitigate any of their concerns with structural protections. Lindsay Tyler: Got it. Second, beyond data center shells and chips, what is the next potential AI financing opportunity? Anish Shah: It most certainly is energy and power. We're going to see a ton of capital being raised in utilities. It's going to be a little different than what the hyperscalers are doing, just given the nature of their balance sheets. You're going to see more junior capital. We've seen a wave of junior subordinated debt issuance out of the utilities. We're also seeing a lot of activity from our project finance and tax equity team, just given all things energy infrastructure. Lindsay Tyler: Great. And third, if we're sitting here a year from now, what do you think could be the biggest AI financing story we're talking about? Anish Shah: Well, we certainly underestimated the level of financing activity that we saw in the past year. I think when we look back a year from now, we will probably see that the AI labs were much more ready to finance on their own on a standalone basis. That's going to alleviate some of the pressures in the market, but I think it's going to create a whole new set of considerations and structural innovation. Lindsay Tyler: Well, it's certainly been remarkable to watch this financing theme take shape in real time, and the next chapter sounds like it could be even more interesting to follow. Anish, thanks for joining us and sharing your insights. Anish Shah: Great to join, Lindsay. Thanks. Lindsay Tyler: And thank you for listening. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share the podcast with a friend or colleague today.*****Anish Shah is a member of Morgan Stanley's Global Capital Markets Division and is not a member of Morgan Stanley's Research Department. Unless otherwise indicated, his views are his own and may differ from the views of the Morgan Stanley Research Department and from the views of others within Morgan Stanley.

The Last Trade: Jackson, Michael, and Brian make the case that Bitcoin is carving out a structural bottom as old-coin distribution collapses and the worst of ETF and treasury-company selling exhausts itself. They break down Japan reclassifying crypto as a financial product and slashing its effective tax rate from 55% toward 20%. They dig into why the Clarity Act, not the administration, is the real green light for Wall Street. They close on Morgan Stanley's $4 to $8 trillion AI capex wave and the launch of Onramp's Back to the Basics campaign.---

Wall Street has just posted one of its strongest quarters in history.The world's biggest banks delivered record profits as trading desks, investment banking and wealth management all fired at the same time. But with Jamie Dimon warning that conditions are "nearly as good as it gets", is this a peak or just the beginning of an even bigger cycle?In this episode, Anthony Cheung and Piers Curran break down what drove the blockbuster earnings from Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, Morgan Stanley and Citi, why AI has become the biggest force behind investment banking, trading and capital markets, and whether today's record profits could be borrowing growth from tomorrow.They also analyse June's US inflation report, why the biggest monthly decline in CPI since 2020 isn't quite as straightforward as the headlines suggest, and what it means for Federal Reserve interest rate expectations.Finally, they revisit the biggest IPO of the year. After surging in its first few days of trading, why has SpaceX fallen back to its IPO price? From index fund buying and green shoe options to lock-up periods and insider selling, they explain the market mechanics that most investors never hear about.If you want to better understand what's driving global markets and how professionals think about the biggest financial stories each week, this episode is for you.(00:00) Wall Street's Record Quarter(02:55) Why Banks Made So Much Money(10:15) Morgan Stanley's Hidden Winner(15:24) Is This As Good As It Gets?(19:00) AI's $1 Trillion Spending Boom(25:14) US Inflation Cools(31:14) Why SpaceX Is Falling(35:10) Green Shoe Options Explained(38:36) SpaceX Lock-Up Risks(42:16) One IPO, Every Bank Wins

With Constantine Hatzivassiliou—Partner, Certuity Golf taught Constantine Hatzivassiliou how to perform under pressure. Building a nearly $5B multi-family office taught him that the best advisors become the first call when life, not just the markets, gets complicated. In Summary Many advisors spend years mastering investments, but for affluent families, portfolio management is often just the starting point. Jason Diamond welcomes Constantine Hatzivassiliou, Partner at Certuity, to discuss how his journey from aspiring professional golfer to leader of a nearly $5B multi-family office shaped his approach to client service. Their conversation explores why trust is earned long before a crisis, how family office services evolve naturally from client needs, and why the advisor's role increasingly resembles that of a quarterback coordinating every aspect of a family's financial life. The discussion also examines organic growth, referrals, fiduciary advice, private equity's impact on the RIA landscape, and the qualities that allow advisors to become indispensable over decades—not just market cycles. The Storyline Many advisors spend years perfecting investment management. But as clients become more successful, the job changes. The questions become bigger than portfolio construction. A business is being sold. A family dynamic shifts. A tax issue emerges. An estate plan needs updating. Suddenly, the advisor isn't simply managing assets—they're coordinating decisions, relationships, and emotions. For Constantine, that broader role was shaped long before he entered wealth management. As an aspiring professional golfer, he learned lessons about discipline, preparation, and performing under pressure that continue to influence how he serves clients today. Jason and Constantine explore how Certuity grew from approximately $210 million in assets to nearly $5B, not through acquisitions but through referrals and a service model built on becoming indispensable to the families they advise. Constantine explains why he believes the best advisors function more like quarterbacks than portfolio managers, orchestrating the many moving pieces that come with significant wealth. The conversation also examines the evolution of the multi-family office model, the role of fiduciary advice, the impact of private equity on the advisory landscape, and why experience, judgment, and trust remain the qualities clients value most. Ultimately, this episode is about what it takes to become the first call when life – not just the markets – becomes complicated. Topics Covered Lessons from professional golf that translate to wealth management Building Certuity from $210mm to nearly $5B in assets What distinguishes a multi-family office from a traditional RIA Why referrals fuel long-term organic growth Becoming the “first call” for affluent families Fiduciary advice and the evolution of the advisory profession Family office services beyond investment management Private equity and M&A in the RIA space Developing the next generation of advisors Trust, relationships, and lifetime client service > Download a transcript of this episode… Listen and Learn Highlights for Advisors How did professional golf prepare Constantine for advising wealthy families? (3:45) Constantine explains why competing under pressure taught him discipline, emotional control, and process—qualities that now guide every client relationship. How did Certuity grow from $210 million to nearly $5 billion? (8:00) He shares why nearly all of the firm's growth has come organically through client referrals rather than acquisitions or aggressive recruiting. What separates a multi-family office from a traditional advisory firm? (11:45) The conversation explores how expanding into trust, estate, tax, and family office services became a response to client needs—not a business strategy. Why should advisors think of themselves as quarterbacks? (20:00) Constantine recounts a client business sale that fell apart at the closing table and explains why advisors often become the person holding everything together. How does Certuity view private equity and acquisitions? (36:20) Jason and Constantine discuss when outside capital can make sense—and why Certuity has chosen a different path centered on client alignment. Why do wisdom and experience still matter in an AI-driven world? (29:30) Despite advances in technology, Constantine argues that judgment, trust, and perspective remain the qualities affluent families value most. Key Takeaways High-net-worth clients increasingly value coordination, judgment, and perspective over investment selection alone. Family office services often evolve naturally as advisors respond to increasingly complex client needs. Sustainable organic growth is rooted in trust, which explains why referrals account for the overwhelming majority of Certuity's new business. Golf and wealth management share the same disciplines: preparation, emotional control, patience, and executing under pressure. The most valuable advisors become trusted partners during life's defining moments—not simply portfolio managers. Technology continues to reshape wealth management, but experience and wisdom remain difficult to replicate. Building a lasting advisory business requires investing in culture, succession, and the next generation of talent. https://youtu.be/m72Hq6bMTo4 Quotable Moments “The best advisors aren't simply managing portfolios. They're the first person clients call when life gets complicated.” “A bad shot in golf is the equivalent of a bad day in the market. You can't let one dictate everything that comes next.” “More often than not, we're not just financial advisors—we're financial therapists.” “Growth gets the headlines. Trust is what makes it possible.” FAQs What is a multi-family office? A multi-family office delivers integrated services beyond investment management, often coordinating tax, estate planning, philanthropy, business planning, and other complex financial matters for affluent families. Why has Certuity grown primarily through referrals? Constantine attributes the firm's growth to deep client relationships, a collaborative service model, and becoming the trusted advisor clients recommend to others. How does golf relate to wealth management? Golf reinforces discipline, emotional control, preparation, and performing under pressure—all qualities Constantine believes are essential for effective advisors. What is Constantine's perspective on private equity in wealth management? While he understands why many firms pursue private equity, he believes every strategic decision should ultimately be measured against what best serves clients. What qualities distinguish exceptional advisors today? According to Constantine, exceptional advisors become trusted coordinators of a client's financial life—bringing together specialists, solving problems, and providing perspective during life's most important moments. A multi-family office delivers integrated services beyond investment management, often coordinating tax, estate planning, philanthropy, business planning, and other complex financial matters for affluent families. Constantine attributes the firm's growth to deep client relationships, a collaborative service model, and becoming the trusted advisor clients recommend to others. Golf reinforces discipline, emotional control, preparation, and performing under pressure—all qualities Constantine believes are essential for effective advisors. While he understands why many firms pursue private equity, he believes every strategic decision should ultimately be measured against what best serves clients. According to Constantine, exceptional advisors become trusted coordinators of a client's financial life—bringing together specialists, solving problems, and providing perspective during life's most important moments. Related Resources Emotional Intelligence: The “Untouchable” Differentiator in an AI World Intentional Growth: How Top Advisors Build Businesses That Last The 10 Characteristics of the Most Successful Teams Constantine HatzivassiliouPartner  Constantine Hatzivassiliou is a Partner at Certuity, a nationally recognized multi-family office serving affluent families, entrepreneurs, executives, foundations, and endowments. He advises clients on the complex financial, tax, estate, and business planning decisions that accompany significant wealth, helping families coordinate all aspects of their financial lives through a comprehensive family office approach. Drawing on more than two decades of experience, Constantine works closely with successful business owners, corporate executives, and multi-generational families to simplify financial complexity and align investment management, tax planning, estate planning, philanthropy, and family governance strategies. As a Certified Exit Planning Advisor (CEPA®), he frequently assists entrepreneurs in preparing for liquidity events, business transitions, and the long-term stewardship of family wealth. His clients often view him as a trusted advisor and strategic sounding board, helping them navigate important financial decisions with the perspective of both a family office professional and a coach. Prior to joining Certuity, Constantine held advisory and banking positions with The Bank of New York Mellon, Bernstein Global Wealth Management, and Pacific Mercantile Bank. Before entering the financial services industry, he was a Golf Professional and member of the PGA of America, experiences that continue to shape his disciplined, competitive, and relationship-focused approach to advising clients. Outside of his professional responsibilities, Constantine is passionate about mentoring young athletes and strengthening the communities in which he lives and works. He serves as a Board Member of Coerfontaine Football Club (CFC), a premier youth soccer organization focused on developing young athletes and helping them pursue collegiate and professional opportunities while fostering leadership, discipline, and character. He also serves as Chair of the Safety and Security Committee for Parkland, where he works alongside community leadership to enhance resident safety, security, and quality of life. In addition, Constantine is a Founding Board Member of The Boardroom, a private membership organization focused on fostering meaningful relationships among business leaders, entrepreneurs, and professionals through networking, education, and philanthropy. Born in Greece, Constantine spent his childhood in Montreal before relocating to South Florida. He attended the University of Florida before earning a Bachelor of Arts in Economics from Florida Atlantic University, where he graduated with honors. He holds the Certified Exit Planning Advisor (CEPA®) designation. A lifelong student of the game, Constantine remains active in golf and is a member of Muirfield Village Golf Club, founded by his longtime  hero and mentor, Jack Nicklaus, as well as Parkland Golf & Country Club. Constantine resides in Parkland, Florida, with his wife, Stephanie, and their two children, Nicholas and Olivia. NOTE: The views and opinions expressed by the guests on this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Diamond Consultants. Neither Diamond Consultants nor the guests on this podcast are compensated in any way for their participation. Episode Transcript Lessons from the Links: From Golf Pro to $5B Family Office Partner A conversation with Jason Diamond and Constantine Hatzivassiliou, Partner at Certuity. Jason Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is Lessons from the Links: From Golf Pro to $5B Family Office Partner. It’s a conversation with Constantine Hatzivassiliou, partner at Certuity. I’m Jason Diamond and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond: At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned and, each year, one in four advisors managing $1 billion or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education-driven and based on building relationships starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at (908) 879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our annual advisor transition report, it’s the award-winning data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions, download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Jason Diamond: Golf is a way of exposing who you really are, there are no teammates to blame, no clock to run out and no hiding from a bad decision. Every shot demands discipline, patience and the ability to stay focused when the pressure is highest, my guest today knows that firsthand. Before becoming a partner at Certuity, a multifamily office approaching five billion in assets, Constantine Hatzivassiliou was pursuing a career as a professional golfer. An injury ultimately redirected his path towards wealth management but many of the lessons he learned on the course still shaped the way he serves clients today. Certuity has grown from roughly 210 million in assets to nearly five billion, that’s impressive on its own but the more interesting story is how they’ve done it. The firm has grown largely through referrals built around a multifamily office model and focused on becoming far more than an investment advisor to the families it serves. In Constantine’s view, the best advisors aren’t simply managing portfolios, they’re the first person clients call when a business is being sold, a family issue becomes complicated or a major decision carries consequences well beyond the balance sheet. Constantine and I discuss the lessons golf teaches about handling pressure then we dive into the evolution from the traditional wealth management world to the multifamily office model, why referrals drive nearly all of Certuity’s growth, how he thinks about private equity’s influence on the advisory business and what it takes to become the first call for the wealthy families they serve and perhaps, most importantly, why the same qualities that help someone succeed on a golf course may be surprisingly relevant to building trust over a lifetime. It’s a great conversation so let’s dive in. Constantine, thank you so much for joining, thrilled to have you here. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Thank you for having me, excited to be here. Jason Diamond: Yeah, absolutely. So, you had an unconventional path to wealth management, you started as a professional golfer, I think that’s a first for us on this show, before ultimately transitioning into this world. Can you tell us a little bit about the journey and what brought you here? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Yeah, I never thought I’d be here, my parents were certainly shocked that I got here path wise. Growing up, immigrants from Greece, you settle into Florida the traditional way where you either go down the diner route or the gas station route in mechanics which my father was the latter and school and education was never priority, it was always about supporting the family needs. So, next thing you know, sports are a critical part of any good household, that’s how I was raised and I played everything but golf. I grew up on a golf course because my parents believed that a location of a property was critical to long-term financial success. We lived on a golf course, it was in our backyard, we’d stare at it and we’d use it to play football or baseball or anything but actual golf. And my freshman year at the University of Florida, I started dating a girl on the golf team and she got me hooked to the point where, after four years of hitting balls with the women’s and men’s golf team at the University of Florida for six hours a day, we finished school and realized I’m actually pretty good at the game and, while I have a finance and economics background and degree, let’s try and pursue this for a living and I was blessed. I had a sponsor who helped me succeed at golf on a small scale, it was a humbling experience to say the least. I was competing and playing with Sean O’Hair, Ken Duke, guys who made it out on tour for a very long time, we had the same sponsor so we functioned as a team, it was a collegiate team effectively trying to make it out on tour. And, unfortunately, my second year of competing, I blew out my back doing heavy deadlifts which set me aside for 18 months. While I was recovering, my primary sponsor was in financial services and says, “Hey, you have a background in this, it’s killing you not being able to be on the golf course, why don’t you come work for me while you’re rehabbing so that, when you get back to playing golf, it’s easier for you to talk about our business as a sponsor to try and develop business to throw it to the financial services side?” And Jason, the reality is, after 18 months working there, I fell in love with it. I made way more money working in that environment than I ever would’ve made playing golf because, again, I came to the game late. I was decent but I was nowhere near the caliber of players that are succeeding now out on tour. So, I pivoted after having met my wife and decided to settle down into the wealth management space and, what is it now, 26 years later, going strong. So, it’s been a fun transition from golf into wealth management to say the least. Jason Diamond: Probably my favorite background … I watch a lot of golf, I should caveat that, probably my favorite origin story we’ve had, I’ll give you the Wanamaker trophy or whatever you get, first place. Let’s talk about the business now, so Certuity. For our audience who may not be familiar, tell us a little bit about the firm, what types of clients do you serve and any context you can provide on size as well. We’ll talk about how your firm got there but just give us where we are today to start with. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: So, goal by the end of the year is to have $5 billion in AUM, we’re just shy of that now. We currently service 428 families across the country. So, we’re boutiquey and nimble, we’re based in South Florida, we have offices in New York, San Fran and LA. I’m fortunate to be one of four partners at the firm supporting the growth and the direction of the company and it’s a fun endeavor in the sense that, when we first started, I was employee number four 16 years ago and, with 210 million in AUM at the time to grow it to where we are today, to learn all the things that we have over the years, the curve balls that were thrown at us because all of us came from massive institutional wealth management firms. So, we transitioned from the Bernsteins of the world, the BNY Mellons of the world into an RIA in the South Florida market, there was absolutely an entrepreneurial learning curve involved. Jason Diamond: I bet. And on follow-up question, 16 years ago, did you have a book of business, client business and do you still maintain a book of business today? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: I do. The four of us at the firm share in all of the clients, we work together. Being in the Southeast, I’m responsible for, let’s call it, the Southeast demographics of the US which is a large portion of Certuity’s book. I have a partner in Tennessee, I have a partner in LA and San Francisco and we divide and conquer across the country. But, yes, we came over with a small book, we’ve all grown it organically since then. So, we’ve been very effective in how we’ve grown. Jason Diamond: Just from adding new client money? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Strictly through new clients referred to us by existing clients. Jason Diamond: Wow. I want to talk more about the growth because that’s remarkable. But before I do, can we double click on the service model? So, I would say the most typical we hear, I think more of our guests typically come from the wirehouse world where it’s I have my book, you have your book. What does your service model look like? So, is it truly, if it’s working well from the end client perspective, you should be interchangeable with your partners and it’s a true team approach? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: How we engage our clients, the theory should be I can get hit by a bus tomorrow and outside of the client not being able to speak to me directly, they will not have a hiccup in any way, shape or form. And when we’re dealing with families across multiple generations, the way we’ve built our platform, that continuity is critical in the engagement process for the clients hiring us to help them through all of the challenges that they face. Jason Diamond: What’s your sweet spot in terms of client size? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Our average client size today has just shy of eight million AUM with us. We have some clients who have $1 million certainly but they’re strategic in that their friends, their family, they could be centers of influence who help send business our way because they value what it is that we do and there’s a strategic partnership because we might need them for their trust and estate services or their accounting work and they have clients who have a need and we’re on the short list of people they refer to. Jason Diamond: That they trust. Yeah, makes sense. So, I’ve seen this in the news and also even on your own internal materials, I’ve seen you described as both a modern multifamily office, you’ll also obviously hear the term RIA as well. Does that distinction matter at all? And maybe my second part of that question would be what is the distinction between that space, whatever you call it, and the more traditional firm world from a client service perspective? You mentioned that all of your partners from that world. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: I started in this industry truly at an institutional level at Bernstein in New York and, for anyone who knows Bernstein, they really do brainwash you on the fiduciary model and the values affiliated with that philosophy has translated through my career at BNY Mellon which has a very similar feel as Bernstein. And then, when we came here, we instilled that same core value principle of fiduciary responsibility for our clients so we are very different than a traditional wirehouse or brokerage house, it is why we’ve grown so successfully. I would never, one, work for an institution that did bide by those standards and, secondarily, I wished Congress and Senate would turn around and actually implement a mandatory fiduciary liability for all financial advisors because, far too often, we see prospective clients or families get taken advantage of because the individual sitting across from them giving them financial advice is not necessarily aligned with their goals and objectives. Jason Diamond: So, I take it you are fee only. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: We are fee only. Jason Diamond: Yeah. I don’t want to lose the thread on the first part of my question. Do you think there is a distinction between a multifamily office and an RIA? I don’t want to lead you here but to me it implies a different level or different caliber of service model that probably includes more of the ancillary trust and estate and CPA type stuff that higher network clients need but curious what your thoughts are. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Our first seven years at the firm, we were strictly an RIA, we functioned as an advisory service provider to our clients. What attracted me and my partners to Certuity was the nimbleness of the firm. So, for instance, at BNY Mellon, we often deemed a change necessary as moving an aircraft carrier across the world but it was an impossible task to accomplish. But when you’re small and nimble and clients come to you with a need and you’re in the service, ultimately, first and foremost, it made sense for us to start building out family office services for our clients because they had a need and we found it as a way to centralize everything because, far too often, when the communication standards break down between all the individual parts, one, it’s more expensive for the clients and, two, the process isn’t efficient, things get missed. So, we tried, largely due to our growth, to bring everything in house and our clients appreciate that for it. Jason Diamond: So, this is not a chicken and egg situation, this is very much we had large clients, we were attracting large clients and, in order to service them optimally, here’s what we felt we needed to build. Is that fair? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: 100%. Jason Diamond: Let’s shift gears, I need to go deeper on the professional golf thread a little bit. I promise I won’t make the whole interview about your golf background. I’m curious if you feel like that experience or that, I don’t know, upbringing or, I guess, background laid any foundation for the way you engage with clients today or the way you operate as a business leader today. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: So, there’s a couple parts to that. The golf side, certainly, just from an engaging client perspective, 90% of our clients are golfers. Jason Diamond: It’s very true. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Right. It just helps because of our background and certainly with some of the clients and partners that we have at the firm, golf is a critical thread in what we do. However, when it comes to golf, what I learned playing golf at a high level directly translates to how we manage money for clients and I’ll express it this way. There’s generally two types of golfers, there’s the artist, the Sergios of the world who don’t fundamentally function off of specific points in their swing or a very structured platform, they see something, their mind becomes creative and they execute on it. I was never that way, I am a numbers person, I think everything analytically, I break everything down to the minute, everything is strategized and organized, I was taught to practice that way by Coach Alexander at the University of Florida and that foundational element seemed easy, it worked. If you practice properly, you’ve succeeded. Under pressure, all those hours and hours of repetition translated to success more often than not. In our industry, it’s process-driven, it has to be unemotional. A bad shot in golf is the equivalent of a bad day in the market, you can’t let one bad day in the market influence everything you do for the next year. Same way on the golf course playing in a tournament, you can’t allow one golf shot to affect the rest of the round. We kid with our clients oftentimes that, while we are fundamentally their financial advisor, more often than not, we’re their financial therapist. We have to control their emotions and make sure they’re not making an irrational decision. For instance, a couple days ago we were out with a client the day that Iran shot down one of the US military helicopters and we’re sitting down at lunch and, all of a sudden, his phone starts blowing up because he’s getting all these Google alerts to the market heading in the wrong direction and he had to go do a life insurance test later on that afternoon. So, all week, he had prepped and he was calm and he was relaxed, he was really excited, he’s, “My wife is setting me up with a new insurance policy and I know it’s for her benefit but all my numbers look good, I’m going to ace this and my premiums will be really low because of it,” it was a $25 million policy. And as he’s looking at his phone and he sees the market collapsing in his mind, his blood pressure rose to no end, you could see that his anxiety level went through the roof and, had I not been there with him at the time to hold his hand through that process, his afternoon would’ve been shot. I would’ve got a phone call saying, “What are we doing to prevent 2% loss in my portfolio,” because that’s how he thinks and, in that moment, I was the therapist to talk him off a ledge. It’s so hard for individuals to manage the stress of the markets, that golfer mentality of, okay, just breathe, relax, let’s see what’s going on, let’s make an educated, confirmed decision, let’s circle back with our caddy if we’re on tour and competing and make a unified decision for the long-term success of the goal that we’re trying to achieve. And what we do every day is the same thing with our clients. Jason Diamond: It’s an incredibly thoughtful answer, I expected a version of the latter part of your answer. I appreciate that you added the part about just most clients like golf, enjoy talking about golf, enjoy playing golf and it’s an effective business development tool, there’s no question. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: So, I have two kids, a 12-year-old and an eight-year-old, my son who’s 12 who’s an exceptional soccer player and wants to, aspires to play professionally one day has now fallen in love with golf which I’m ecstatic about. I think golf and tennis, from a business development perspective- Jason Diamond: Yeah, lifelong sports. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: And I look at it now and my mentor when I started in the business was absolutely right. The fact that I could get a CEO of a Fortune 100 company to want to actively spend four hours with me where we could dive into the weeds about their personal life, their financial situation, their business, you could never get that time otherwise. I urge everyone who’s coming out of college or is going into college who wants to aspire to be in any type of sales related role, golf is a great venue to make long-term relationships. Jason Diamond: And importantly, tennis is not as good on the knees long-term or the back long-term. So, you stick to golf, you get a little more longevity out of it. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: It does help, yes. You’re right. Jason Diamond: My thought always goes to people call it the 15th club in golf, just this mental element of the game and to me it’s the clear moment in golf that always comes to mind for me is the 72nd hole. I don’t know if you just watched the US Women’s Open but Nelly Korda standing over a two-foot putt that I really thought she missed, is there an equivalent of that moment? Are you ever able to recreate that pressure in your current role or is that something that you miss? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Jason, we have those moments weekly, countless stories. Here’s where I love my job. I’ve transitioned from being the guy behind the screen who is just trading accounts, that’s where we all start and you have to have that foundational perspective of what’s involved in trading an account on a daily basis. Not that we ever picked stocks to an extensive level, we were generally managing ETFs, mutual funds and strategies but I’ll give you an example. So, just last week, we had a family and this is where the family office side comes in more so than the financial advisory services come in. We had spent four months in helping a family sell their business, it was a life altering moment, the dad started the business, the dad had been independently successful, net worth of well into eight figures, was happy and content, brought his son into the business, son was brilliant, saw an opportunity within the business and grew the business by 4,000%. Jason Diamond: Literally? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Yup. All because of this, the son saw a different direction and pivoted the business and grew it out and here he is, getting ready to have their first child and he gets approached by a firm to acquire his business. They’re ecstatic, the number was perfect, I thought it was overvalued, I was telling them that there’s no way they could turn it down because the number was too significant. Had they gone to the market, they would probably never achieve that level of return. And literally, the day of closing, as we’re expecting the wire to come through, the deal gets pulled. So, here you have the father who’s crushed because he was trying to provide something for his son, the son who’s just devastated because he now was preparing for the second stage of his life and you go through at that stage the classic stages of grief, it’s the cycle that goes through it. I was holding their hand through the three-month process up to there, every day, hourly calls, strategizing, building everything out, organizing the accounting team, organizing the attorneys, getting it all to work out. And here I am, father and son, unbelievably stressed, you have the wives in the background who can’t quite comprehend what’s going on, you have employees beneath them who are now confused as to there was a transition getting ready to take place and the only person who can step in under that critical moment to bring everybody back together was me. So, here I am thinking, 20 years ago, I’ll just pick stocks and bonds for individuals but now I’m in the middle of deal flow trying to help a family solve the issues that arise. So, those are hugely critical- Jason Diamond: Yeah, that’s right. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: …moments where, because our clients are our friends and family, we care for them like they’re our own, you become emotionally attached. And the same pressure that I felt when I won my first mini tour event after college, when I had to get up and down from the impossible bunker shot and I hit it to six feet and I made the crucial put to win my first $23,000 check which I thought was unbelievable, they gave you those big old-fashioned- Jason Diamond: The Happy Gilmore checks. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Exactly, right? It was the greatest day at that time. The stress of being in that bunker trying to hit that shot is the same stress I felt having two phones ringing, one the father, one the son where we have to keep that situation separate. So, you’re diving into unbelievably stressful situations and the best part is, when we get it all solved and literally yesterday we solved the entire dynamic of the business, I get a text from the son saying that this was the most incredible rollercoaster experience he’s ever experienced, that he’s incredibly grateful for all that I did and our team did for him and that, for the rest of his life, we will always be the first person he calls to solve any of his problems. So, for us, that’s the recreation of that stressful moment and then the victory on the back end. Twenty-five years ago, I got the big Happy Gilmore check. Yesterday, I got that text which I’ve printed out and framed and have it in my office as a constant memory of why it is we do what we do. Jason Diamond: And I would bet that’s more impactful than the $23,000. It’s an incredible story and I’ll tell you why, you said it but it’s as far away from stocks and bonds as you could possibly get. But I think, most advisors, a story like that resonates much more. It leads into my next question. You intentionally choose to service a high net worth segment of the market and I would assume that number’s probably creeping up, not down over time in terms of who you service. My thought is that’s a very competitive segment of the market as well. Is this how you differentiate is just you make it about those types of human examples or is there more to it? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: I’m envious of the advisor who could walk into a room of 200 people and they become the central focal point of the room where they can walk up to every single person and fearlessly ask them incredibly personal information, I’m not wired that way. For me, I’m very much the individual that I will find the one person that I have common ground with, I will deepen that relationship and I will add value and, because of the value that I create, I become a critical component of that individual’s success. And that’s how we’ve grown our business holistically at the firm largely buy that extra layer of service. We’re a commodity business. Being in South Florida, the clubs that I belong to, 10 to 15% of the members feel like they’re financial advisors. You could throw a rock anywhere and find a financial advisor so how do I differentiate myself? The only way I can truly differentiate myself and my firm is the level of service we provide, to go that extra step. To where, when we’re calling a client, they know I’m calling them to support their needs not because I’m seeking something for any ulterior motive. Jason Diamond: But you don’t mention financial planning or investment management or asset custody. Is that because I assume just that’s table stakes? Of course we do that but … Okay, yeah. Makes sense. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: That’s the easy part, right? That’s foundationally … And to your earlier point, you were asking the RIA model. One of the biggest challenges that we had down here in South Florida was the RIA model is new. If you were in the northeast, RIAs are very common, out west, incredibly common. Down here in South Florida, I just finished dealing with Bernie Madoff. Jason Diamond: You were fighting the good education fight a little bit. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: At Bernstein, 108 of our clients had assets with Bernie Madoff. Jason Diamond: Yeah. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: So, when you leave, one of our biggest growing curves as an RIA in South Florida was, when you leave the power of BNY Mellon or Bernstein and you’re some random little shop called Certuity, no one knows who you are. So, there was a big part of our education in the business was learning how to educate clients and prospective clients on the value of the RIA model and the fiduciary model in particular. Jason Diamond: Could you give me the 30-second answer to that if somebody says who are you, your prospect? I’ll tell you why I ask. Forget just Bernstein’s and BNYs of the world, a Morgan Stanley advisor or Merrill advisor has the exact same fear. I’m leaving Merrill to go launch Jason Diamond Wealth Management, my client’s going to say, “Well, who is that?” So, give me the quick pitch. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Your typical broker, let’s say, you’re not really hiring JP Morgan, you’re not really hiring Wells Fargo, you’re not hiring Goldman Sachs, you’re hiring the advisor who works for that institution. Now, yes, that advisor has the Rolodex of data and information available at the firm level but, ultimately, you’re entrusting that individual to make your decisions for you. The broker who leaves the brokerage model to open up their own brick and mortar operation has to then decide are they continuing down the wirehouse brokerage model where they’re transactional in nature, the economics behind that, far more profitable. The revenue streams affiliated with a brokerage house drastically blows us out of the water. But then you have to also look at yourself in the mirror so how are you running your book of business, how are you running your practice. So, to answer your 30-second question, the RIA model, in my opinion, is truly the only way any family of wealth should proceed with an advisory firm because you want an individual who is aligned in your goals and objectives. Our clients know that I’m their chief financial officer, I work for them. They task us with building out a financial strategy that is customized to their individual needs and they never have to worry do I have an ulterior motive as to why I’m presenting an option in that strategy. And, because of that, the fiduciary model, I think, is critical for our success as a firm and, again, as I mentioned earlier, I wish it’s something that was industry well and not the vast minority. Jason Diamond: Yeah. No, that’s a great answer. So, do you think then that, as time has gone on, this has gotten easier? I assume the answer is yes either because more clients are aware of your brand and/or more aware of the space as a whole. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: The first thing that helped the most was some gray hair. When I started at Bernstein, I attempted to solicit new clients very much the same way I do today. But when I was 26 years old and I’m sitting in front of a family worth and the dad was in the 70s and he lived his life and I’m younger than his kids, he would look at me and say, “What do you really know? What experience do you have?” So, doing this now for as long as I have, the number one thing that has helped me the most in growth is just wisdom and time. Without that, yes, you can be a rockstar stock picker. We have so many kids coming out of college today with the advent of AI and technology that have algorithms that could run unbelievable portfolios and there is a segment of the market who wants to hire and engage those individuals but, generally speaking, the families that we service, that is 10th or 12th on the list of importance. Jason Diamond: No, I think that’s spot on. I think most high net worth clients counterintuitively agree with that, that alpha, for lack of a better term, is really not the name of the game or not in the top five reasons why you would engage with a financial advisor. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Agreed. The biggest thing that we’ve been doing to educate clients especially in today’s environment, I had a call yesterday with an individual, a client who lives in New Jersey who works out of New York for a hedge fund, he knows our space incredibly well. He’s one of those kids, 28 years old, brilliant, as smart as you’ll ever be but his tax bracket is atrocious. He is paying so much of his W-2 income in taxes and building out a strategy that can reduce his tax liability by several hundred thousand dollars a year far exceeds any alpha I can generate by picking a top decile performer. Jason Diamond: What was the strategy? Move to Florida? I’m just kidding. Don’t answer that. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: We offered that but, unfortunately, he has to be physically in the office in New York City but yes. Jason Diamond: I think that will resonate, by the way, your gray hair comment. I appreciate the humility and the modesty in that because, the reality is, one of the questions I was going to ask you about was next-gen talent cultivation. In my opinion, this is a hard game for younger folks for that reason. People sit across from other people with a lot of money and they say, “Why am I going to entrust you with my life’s work when you just don’t have that degree of experience?” I was asking more even about your firm success and your firm story, have you felt like that’s caught on more? Do you have more brand awareness, if you will, now when you go to a prospect meeting or do you think you’re still constantly fighting that education fight? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: So, first part, brands, it’s improved in our immediate network. In our little bubble of the world, yes, it’s known. Let’s call it, in South Florida the influential attorneys, the accountants, the divorce attorneys know who we are because, having been down here long enough, we’ve had opportunities to work together. Our network of friends, certainly, the word spreads. But in the grand scheme of things, we are so small in the South Florida landscape or the LA landscape or the New York landscape so any incremental gain that we pick up is meaningful. And then, as it relates to young talent, our success is completely, long-term, derived by the young talent that we bring in to nurture them to help them grow. I look at our success, two of our critical mentors and board members of our firm are in their 80s, their children and grandchildren, nepotism aside, whether it was interning while in college or coming to work for us after school, they’re our best employees. And our goal as a firm, just like how I was offered the opportunity to become a partner and own a piece of the business, our goal long term will be to transition the business to this younger generation that we’re developing. I look at, again, those two board members who are in their 80s, the advice they’ve given me is don’t ever stop working, you have to be doing something. And I turn to them and say, “I don’t work every day.” I put in 20 hour days, well, not quite 20, 18 hour days but it’s never work because, what I do every day, I don’t deem it work, I love what I do, I don’t ever see myself stopping. Because they’ll tell me all of their friends that have stopped working or sold their business, invariably, the men die within six months because boredom and we always joke around that you’ll continue to work forever. So, I would hope that one day I transition into that advisory board member role where I step aside day-to-day activity where I’m now a mentor to our younger generation that we’re promoting into partners because we’ve made promises to our clients that we will forever be their family office. So, we have to, as part of our growth model, have those transitions in place because we’re servicing many families that have 85-year-old clients and two-year-old clients and we’re tasked with the two-year-olds as well as the 85-year-old. Jason Diamond: I also feel like there’s a little bit of younger generations I think have been reluctant to some degree to get it, you can disagree with this, to get into this space because there’s a more appeal to things like investment banking and sales and trading to some degree. The other problem obviously you alluded to is asset gathering. Your model speaks so clearly to success because you don’t say I own the client, that’s my relationship. To me, you plant the seeds of being able to handle succession much better than somebody who does the mine is mine and yours is yours approach. Is that fair? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: That’s completely accurate. And I think there’s two types of people that serve in the financial advisory space. You have the individual who is analytics driven, who likes being behind the bank of monitors trading account and there’s a critical part of our firm and our success is driven by the team in the office that aren’t necessarily client facing that do all the heavy lifting every day because they’re really doing the heavy work. Myself, my partners, the select few, while talented and able to do that, realize the value that we present is quarterbacking the relationship and helping understand all the components. We kid around that we’ve all stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night, we’ve become experts in tax, we’ve become experts at trust and estate planning, we’ve become experts at divorce, we’ve become experts at the medical field. It’s shocking how it’s 2:00 in the morning and you get a phone call, panic attack by a client saying they need a doctor for X, Y and Z, can you connect me. So, the younger generation, yes, the sexy space is investment banking and that is really hard work. I could not do what my friends at Goldman do who are at these private mid-market funds, that’s just not me. I’ve been fortunate that I stumbled into an avenue in financial services that I think perfectly fits my personality and my want and desire to help others because that’s what we’re driven by and we try and hire people with that same mindset. The hardest thing as an RIA especially in South Florida is finding and retaining talent that is like-minded and that could function well within our family. Jason Diamond: If you build a firm predicated on culture and client service, I understand, certainly, the importance of that. I want to shift gears, I don’t want to lose this thought. You mentioned organic growth, it’s incredible. You have not mentioned inorganic growth at all and maybe because you haven’t had to but give me your thoughts on M&A, private equity in this space, do you have plans to sell the business, take on a capital partner, buy other RIAs? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Yeah. So, I understand why private equity in the last 10 years has come into the market. For years, they bought up insurance practices, that recurring revenue, sticky assets, it makes sense. Personally, I’m not a fan of them being in our markets, I think they’re motivated at the end of the day by AUM growth, revenue growth and the second transaction which, for most of our clients, would not make sense because, again, that then questions why it is that we’re motivated to do something. Am I taking extra risk in the portfolio because I want to grow the AUM because I’m looking to sell in a year? Am I bringing in a strategy that has a higher fee? For us, it doesn’t work. In the brokerage model, it makes perfect sense. Now, there are some RIAs who leave the wirehouses, open up an RIA shop, do really well for their clients but don’t have the long-term aspirations of making the institution a legacy to where they’re passing it off. I hope my kids one day want to come work for dad and follow in his steps, that’d be amazing. Just like our younger generation working at the firm, our goal is we’ve already targeted the three or four guys that will be partner one day and we’ll transition the business over to them. But it’s okay if there’s an RIA out there who doesn’t have that transition product or isn’t motivated by that and is looking at it as a vehicle that I’ve built a really good successful book of business and I want to now retire and spend time with my family and kids and travel, et cetera, and that’s where PE steps in and offers an attractive number and the person makes their move. So, I can’t fault the individual for wanting that and I’m not saying that they’re not doing well by their clients, it’s just, for us, I’m not a fan of it because, again, I’m first critically and always focused on what’s best for the client. Jason Diamond: Fair. And I largely agree with some of what you said around private equity in this space but private equity enables … Obviously, it’s capital so which enables acquisitions which is why a lot of firms take on private equity. So, what about the idea of potentially buying businesses to start up inorganic growth? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: We have gone down the road of acquiring other institutions potentially. The challenge is, because we manage money so uniquely and our approach is so different, I’m not going to bring on an institution or bring in a new partner to the firm or a new book of business that we’ve acquired if the methodology and the life of that book doesn’t mirror ours. So, yes, there is opportunities to grow through acquisition, it’s not something that we are leaning on heavily. However, for the right institution that’s available that is aligned with our thinking, whose clients would value and appreciate how we do things or, if that institution is doing something truly unique that we would want to bolt onto our platform, all day long because, again, for the benefit of the client, it makes sense. So, yes, there are opportunities for that. Too often we find that, when a book is available for acquisition, the highest bidder tends to win out and we don’t have the deep enough pockets to write a multiple that we don’t deem to be, let’s call it, market neutral. Jason Diamond: Yeah, market prudent. I understand the premise and I think that’s fair. I also think you have the luxury, because of your organic growth, you can be super, super picky about inorganic and I love how you bring it all back to the lens of the client. Can this improve the client experience in some way? And, if so, yes, we’ll take a look. I got time for one more question, I can’t believe time has flown. You’ve had a remarkable journey, professional golf now partner at a $4 billion plus on the way to $5 billion RIA multifamily office. What are you most proud of when you reflect on your career journey? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: What am I most proud of? To see what Rich, myself and Mark and Jayson built over these years from where we were sitting in a small conference room, struggling to figure out how do we find a way to hire a trust and estate attorney to help with that component, which CPAs do we bring on board in-house because clients have a need. So, the entrepreneurial spirit involved in growing the business, the late nights, the struggles, the banter back and forth, to put so much blood, sweat and tears into this and now to look at all that we’ve accomplished, being in four separate states with offices, having so many wonderful employees that have come to us from all over the world, Germany, from China, from Tokyo, bringing people in to the US and building out something that, when we leave at the end of the day, are incredibly proud of. My father’s no longer with us, for 50 years, I always strived to make him proud because he never told me that he was proud of me, he was the classic Greek old-fashioned dad. I think he looks down on his now for everything that we’ve built and would say that he’s proud of us so, for me, that’s the best. Jason Diamond: Yeah. That’s an incredible place to end. Thank you for sharing that, it’s a touching place to end and I appreciate you being open. Thank you. This has been one of my favorite episodes, your journey, your humility, your honesty, your transparency, it’s no wonder you’ve built a business you’ve built. So, thanks for joining us, Constantine. I look forward to having you back on to talk about the next chapter. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Thank you. Next time we’ll do it from the golf course. Jason Diamond: Oh, absolutely. Mindy Diamond: As a financial advisor, you hold yourself to the highest standards of integrity, honesty and credibility. You are successful because you take your professional responsibility seriously and are dedicated to your clients. But are you living your best business life? Are your goals aligned with your firms or could a better option exist? Should I Stay or Should I Go? Is a book written with you in mind? It’s a self-guided journey that walks you through the key steps that we take with our advisor clients. This strategic thought process and roadmap to professional self-discovery is designed to help you ask the right questions and think critically and objectively whether you’re considering change or not. Learn how to get your copy at diamond-consultants.com/thebook.   Lessons from the Links: From Golf Pro to $5B Family Office Partner A conversation with Jason Diamond and Constantine Hatzivassiliou, Partner at Certuity. Jason Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is Lessons from the Links: From Golf Pro to $5B Family Office Partner. It’s a conversation with Constantine Hatzivassiliou, partner at Certuity. I’m Jason Diamond and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond: At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned and, each year, one in four advisors managing $1 billion or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education-driven and based on building relationships starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at (908) 879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our annual advisor transition report, it’s the award-winning data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions, download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Jason Diamond: Golf is a way of exposing who you really are, there are no teammates to blame, no clock to run out and no hiding from a bad decision. Every shot demands discipline, patience and the ability to stay focused when the pressure is highest, my guest today knows that firsthand. Before becoming a partner at Certuity, a multifamily office approaching five billion in assets, Constantine Hatzivassiliou was pursuing a career as a professional golfer. An injury ultimately redirected his path towards wealth management but many of the lessons he learned on the course still shaped the way he serves clients today. Certuity has grown from roughly 210 million in assets to nearly five billion, that’s impressive on its own but the more interesting story is how they’ve done it. The firm has grown largely through referrals built around a multifamily office model and focused on becoming far more than an investment advisor to the families it serves. In Constantine’s view, the best advisors aren’t simply managing portfolios, they’re the first person clients call when a business is being sold, a family issue becomes complicated or a major decision carries consequences well beyond the balance sheet. Constantine and I discuss the lessons golf teaches about handling pressure then we dive into the evolution from the traditional wealth management world to the multifamily office model, why referrals drive nearly all of Certuity’s growth, how he thinks about private equity’s influence on the advisory business and what it takes to become the first call for the wealthy families they serve and perhaps, most importantly, why the same qualities that help someone succeed on a golf course may be surprisingly relevant to building trust over a lifetime. It’s a great conversation so let’s dive in. Constantine, thank you so much for joining, thrilled to have you here. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Thank you for having me, excited to be here. Jason Diamond: Yeah, absolutely. So, you had an unconventional path to wealth management, you started as a professional golfer, I think that’s a first for us on this show, before ultimately transitioning into this world. Can you tell us a little bit about the journey and what brought you here? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Yeah, I never thought I’d be here, my parents were certainly shocked that I got here path wise. Growing up, immigrants from Greece, you settle into Florida the traditional way where you either go down the diner route or the gas station route in mechanics which my father was the latter and school and education was never priority, it was always about supporting the family needs. So, next thing you know, sports are a critical part of any good household, that’s how I was raised and I played everything but golf. I grew up on a golf course because my parents believed that a location of a property was critical to long-term financial success. We lived on a golf course, it was in our backyard, we’d stare at it and we’d use it to play football or baseball or anything but actual golf. And my freshman year at the University of Florida, I started dating a girl on the golf team and she got me hooked to the point where, after four years of hitting balls with the women’s and men’s golf team at the University of Florida for six hours a day, we finished school and realized I’m actually pretty good at the game and, while I have a finance and economics background and degree, let’s try and pursue this for a living and I was blessed. I had a sponsor who helped me succeed at golf on a small scale, it was a humbling experience to say the least. I was competing and playing with Sean O’Hair, Ken Duke, guys who made it out on tour for a very long time, we had the same sponsor so we functioned as a team, it was a collegiate team effectively trying to make it out on tour. And, unfortunately, my second year of competing, I blew out my back doing heavy deadlifts which set me aside for 18 months. While I was recovering, my primary sponsor was in financial services and says, “Hey, you have a background in this, it’s killing you not being able to be on the golf course, why don’t you come work for me while you’re rehabbing so that, when you get back to playing golf, it’s easier for you to talk about our business as a sponsor to try and develop business to throw it to the financial services side?” And Jason, the reality is, after 18 months working there, I fell in love with it. I made way more money working in that environment than I ever would’ve made playing golf because, again, I came to the game late. I was decent but I was nowhere near the caliber of players that are succeeding now out on tour. So, I pivoted after having met my wife and decided to settle down into the wealth management space and, what is it now, 26 years later, going strong. So, it’s been a fun transition from golf into wealth management to say the least. Jason Diamond: Probably my favorite background … I watch a lot of golf, I should caveat that, probably my favorite origin story we’ve had, I’ll give you the Wanamaker trophy or whatever you get, first place. Let’s talk about the business now, so Certuity. For our audience who may not be familiar, tell us a little bit about the firm, what types of clients do you serve and any context you can provide on size as well. We’ll talk about how your firm got there but just give us where we are today to start with. Constantine Hatzivassiliou: So, goal by the end of the year is to have $5 billion in AUM, we’re just shy of that now. We currently service 428 families across the country. So, we’re boutiquey and nimble, we’re based in South Florida, we have offices in New York, San Fran and LA. I’m fortunate to be one of four partners at the firm supporting the growth and the direction of the company and it’s a fun endeavor in the sense that, when we first started, I was employee number four 16 years ago and, with 210 million in AUM at the time to grow it to where we are today, to learn all the things that we have over the years, the curve balls that were thrown at us because all of us came from massive institutional wealth management firms. So, we transitioned from the Bernsteins of the world, the BNY Mellons of the world into an RIA in the South Florida market, there was absolutely an entrepreneurial learning curve involved. Jason Diamond: I bet. And on follow-up question, 16 years ago, did you have a book of business, client business and do you still maintain a book of business today? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: I do. The four of us at the firm share in all of the clients, we work together. Being in the Southeast, I’m responsible for, let’s call it, the Southeast demographics of the US which is a large portion of Certuity’s book. I have a partner in Tennessee, I have a partner in LA and San Francisco and we divide and conquer across the country. But, yes, we came over with a small book, we’ve all grown it organically since then. So, we’ve been very effective in how we’ve grown. Jason Diamond: Just from adding new client money? Constantine Hatzivassiliou: Strictly through new clients referred to us by existing clients. Jason Diamond: Wow. I

In der heutigen Folge sprechen die Finanzjournalisten Nando Sommerfeldt und Holger Zschäpitz über neue Paypal-Fantasie, die unterschätzte Apple-Rallye und die Antwort auf die Frage: Kann ein Atommüll-Staatsfonds auch Rente? Außerdem geht es um Samsung Electronics, Micron Technology, IBM, SK Hynix, Alphabet, Meta Platforms, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, PayPal Holdings, Block, Morgan Stanley, BlackRock, BASF, Volkswagen, BMW, Mercedes-Benz Group, Richemont, Kering, LVMH, Hermès, Burberry, TSMC, Netflix, ABB, Abbott Laboratories, GE Aerospace, Intuitive Surgical, UnitedHealth Group, Alcoa, United Airlines Holdings, BHP, ING Group, Smartbroker Holding, AMD, Broadcom, Nvidia, Viasat, AST SpaceMobile, Rocket Lab, Planet Labs, EchoStar, SpaceX, Amundi Global Luxury UCITS ETF (WKN: A2H564), Boreas S&P Absolute Luxury UCITS ETF (WKN: A412DN), iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF (WKN: A0RPWH), Xtrackers MSCI World UCITS ETF 1C (WKN: A1XB5U), SPDR MSCI ACWI ETF (WKN: A1JJTC), iShares Core MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF (WKN: A111X9), VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF (WKN: A2QC5J), Amundi MSCI Semiconductors UCITS ETF (WKN: LYX018), VanEck Space Innovators UCITS ETF (WKN: A3DP9J), Global X Copper Miners UCITS ETF (WKN: A3C7FZ), Global X Silver Miners UCITS ETF (WKN: A3DC8R), VanEck Uranium and Nuclear Technologies ETF (WKN: A3D47K), iShares Global Clean Energy ETF (WKN: A0MW0M). Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und – ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien *Anzeige: Eight Sleep: Der Pod 5 reguliert die Temperatur im Bett automatisch, trackt Schlaf- und Gesundheitswerte ohne Wearable und kann so zu besserem Schlaf beitragen. Mit dem Code ALLESAUFAKTIEN erhaltet ihr auf https://www.eightsleep.com/allesaufaktien bis zu 350 Euro Rabatt.* Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

Unser Partner Scalable Capital ist der einzige Broker, den deine Familie zum Traden braucht. Bei Scalable Capital gibt's nämlich auch Kinderdepots. Alle weiteren Infos gibt's hier: scalable.capital/oaws. BlackRock knackt 15 Bio. $ Vermögen. ASML hebt Prognose an. Richemont wächst doppelt so schnell wie erwartet. Morgan Stanley sammelt 148 Mrd. $ ein. Buffett hatte die Alphabet-Idee. Alibaba steckt in Apple Intelligence China.  Aehr Test Systems. wächst. Hello Kitty hat seit den 70ern über 80 Mrd. $ umgesetzt. Die Firma dahinter heißt Sanrio (WKN: 866933) und kassiert bei jedem Deal Lizenzgebühren. Nach 30% Kursrückgang liegt das KGV bei 22. Lego, Warner Bros. und ein neues Videospiel stehen an. Stripe will zusammen mit Advent PayPal (WKN: A14R7U) für rund 50 Mrd. $ kaufen. Bei 5 Mrd. $ Gewinn klingt das günstig. Aktie ist über 10% hoch. Ob Kartellbehörden mitspielen, ist offen. Robinhood startet eigene Blockchain, handelt 3 Mrd. $ in wenigen Tagen. Diesen Podcast vom 16.07.2026, 3:00 Uhr stellt dir die Podstars GmbH (Noah Leidinger) zur Verfügung. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

En Capital Intereconomía repasamos las claves del día y la evolución de los mercados en Asia, Wall Street y Europa en una jornada marcada por la debilidad del sector de los semiconductores, la temporada de resultados y la evolución del mercado inmobiliario. Las bolsas asiáticas cotizan con descensos, lastradas por las compañías de semiconductores, mientras Corea del Sur sorprende con una nueva subida de tipos de interés. En Europa, los mercados afrontan la apertura con cautela e indefinición, pendientes de la publicación de nuevos resultados empresariales y de las próximas decisiones de los bancos centrales. En el primer análisis de la mañana hablamos con Araceli de Frutos, asesora del fondo Alhaja Inversiones FI, para analizar la evolución del precio del petróleo y sus implicaciones para las compañías energéticas. También repasamos los resultados presentados por Morgan Stanley y BlackRock, la situación de SpaceX, que continúa cotizando por debajo del precio de su debut bursátil, y los planes de Anthropic para salir a bolsa el próximo mes de octubre. Además, analizamos la relajación de la rentabilidad del bono estadounidense a diez años y las expectativas de mercado ante la próxima reunión del Banco Central Europeo. Terminamos con una entrevista a Amadeo Navarro Medina, cofundador de Homely Capital Group, para analizar la consolidación del mercado del flex living en España tras la fusión entre Badi y Caterina House. Durante la conversación abordamos el creciente interés de los inversores institucionales por este segmento inmobiliario, las oportunidades que ofrece un modelo cada vez más ligado a las nuevas formas de vivir y trabajar, y el papel que desempeña Homely Capital en el desarrollo de este tipo de activos. También repasamos la evolución de la compañía durante el primer semestre del año y sus principales objetivos para la segunda mitad de 2026.

AI has become a strategic policy priority as governments race to secure their technological future. Our Head of U.S. Public Policy Research Ariana Salvatore explores what's driving the shift and the implications for markets.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Ariana Salvatore, Head of U.S. Public Policy Research at Morgan Stanley.Today: Why sovereign AI is becoming a policy priority around the world.It's Wednesday, July 15th, at 10am in New York.The AI controls debate used to be focused on chips. Cutting edge semiconductors are essential to train large AI models, after all. But over the past year, the debate has moved well beyond that narrow focus. The policy conversation has broadened beyond things like which advanced semis can be sold to China.The bigger question now is who controls the full AI stack — chips, cloud infrastructure, frontier models, data centers, cybersecurity standards, and the energy systems that support all of it.That's what we mean when we talk about sovereign AI. At the simplest level, it's a country's ability to develop and deploy artificial intelligence using its own infrastructure, data, workforce, and technology ecosystem. But sovereign AI is also about reducing strategic dependence on foreign platforms and foreign-controlled supply chains.That echoes a trend toward multipolarity that we've been writing about since back in 2018. Countries around the world are prioritizing national security over economic efficiencies. We see that theme applying to AI as well.So, what does this all mean for markets?First, sovereign AI turns AI infrastructure into a matter of national industrial policy. Data centers, power availability, and grid reliability are just a few examples of components that are becoming strategic assets. That means governments are likely to play a larger role in deciding several aspects of the AI buildout. Where it's built? Who finances it? And which countries get access to the most advanced parts of the stack?Second, sovereign AI reinforces the shift toward derisking and a more fragmented international order. The U.S. is trying to promote the export of an American AI technology stack to allies and partners. At the same time, it's preserving national security guardrails around the most sensitive capabilities. Meanwhile, we see China trying to indigenize as much of the technology as possible, from chips to cloud to model deployment. Other countries are navigating between the two.Third, and importantly, sovereign AI is also an energy story. Who gets to build and benefit from AI increasingly depends on access to low-cost, reliable power. That makes energy availability a competitive advantage — and it also makes energy affordability a political constraint.That dovetails with one of our thematic predictions heading into this year: the politics of energy. We see rising power costs as a more visible political issue. That's led to backlash against data center development. There's more local opposition to new projects, and greater pressure on policymakers and utilities to make sure that existing ratepayers are not subsidizing AI-driven grid investment.We think that could push AI infrastructure in a few directions. One is toward a conditional build-out. Here, offsets like large-load tariffs and other cost-allocation mechanisms are designed to protect households and small businesses.Another direction is policy support for the lowest-cost sources of energy, even where that might create tension with emissions objectives. And the third direction is more off-grid or behind-the-meter power solutions. That would include things like fuel cells, storage, and other time to power strategies — so data center developers can secure electricity without intensifying local affordability concerns.The pursuit of sovereign AI comes with many questions around inflationary impacts: compute & power are both constrained, regulation remains uncertain, and there could be more limitations on things like tech transfers if the government sees a national security edge. So, to the extent that countries want to reduce their dependencies, it may cost more to get there. There are, however, companies that can benefit in this environment.But there's also a policy risk. We are left with a more reactive policy environment. Selective access in some areas, tighter controls in others, and ongoing uncertainty around how Washington will treat advanced chips, cloud infrastructure, and frontier model deployment. Now that uncertainty matters because it affects corporate planning, cross-border investment, and the shape of global AI alliances.So what does this all mean for investors?More and more, governments view AI capability as a source of economic power and geopolitical leverage. That means the AI race is moving from a question of who builds the best model to who controls the infrastructure, standards, supply chains, and energy systems that allow those models to scale.In our view, that means sovereign AI is one of the most important themes to watch in the next phase of the AI buildout.And we'll be coming back to this topic soon. In the coming weeks, Stephen Byrd and I will talk about sovereign AI in more depth, particularly around what it means for power demand, data center investment, energy affordability, and the broader infrastructure required to support the next stage of AI adoption.Thanks for listening. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.

Carl Quintanilla, Jim Cramer and David Faber led off the show with a "Faber Report": Sources tell David that Stripe and Advent International have jointly offered $60.50 per share to acquire PayPal, whose shares surged on that news. The anchors reacted to what Berkshire Hathaway Chairman Warren Buffett told CNBC's Becky Quick exclusively about investing in Alphabet. Speaking of exclusives, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink joined the program for a wide-ranging interview -- discussing earnings, the investment climate and the AI boom. Also in focus: An unexpected decline in June producer prices, Morgan Stanley and Johnson & Johnson earnings, IBM shares coming off their worst day ever, SpaceX shares trading near their IPO price.   Squawk on the Street Disclaimer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Former NEC Director Gary Cohn joins with his reaction to Fed Chairman Warsh's testimony and shares his outlook for the economy at large. Then, we break down why Apple shares are jumping today. Plus, we bring you the details of Morgan Stanley's latest earnings report. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

With the main surge of bank earnings over, investors face Morgan Stanley today along with chip infrastructure firm ASML. PPI follows a light CPI and Warsh continues testimony. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The {securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for his or her own particular situation before making any investment decisions. For illustrative purpose(s) only. Investing involves risk, including loss of principal, and for some products and strategies, loss of more than your initial investment. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please seeschwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market, economic or political conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0726) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Strong earnings kicking off the earnings season face headwinds with rising tensions between the U.S. and Iran. As crude oil hovers around $80, Tom White talks about the key headlines investors should watch for. While momentum in software stocks came to a grinding halt following IBM Corp.'s (IBM) preliminary earnings, ASML (ASML) posted a beat and raise that sparked much needed life into the AI trade. Tom also notes Morgan Stanley's (MS) earnings and a tentative PayPal (PYPL) buyout. ======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day. Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/ About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

The CNBC Business News Update with Jessica Ettinger features market numbers & news with CNBC expert analysis and sound from top business names. Updated throughout the business day. Visit https://www.cnbc.com/ for more. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See https://pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

US struck Iran overnight, Trump said they will do so again on Wednesday night. Adding, they will hit power plants and bridges next week unless Iran negotiates.IRGC targeted weapons/storage in Bahrain and Kuwait, US positions in Jordan and the Fifth Fleet Command HQ. Iran said it is a mistake to think military action will force them to talk.ASML (+3.7%) reported Q2 earnings that beat estimates while raising its FY guidance above analyst expectations. Additionally, the Co. announced a partnership with Intel (INTC) for high-volume production of Intel 18A logic products using High NA EUV.US equity futures are firmer across the board, with NQ supported by ASML and SK Hynix upside overnight.DXY and Fixed Income rangebound ahead of a busy speaker slate.Crude benchmarks eke out mild gains, with another round of US strikes tonight.Looking ahead, highlights include US PPI (Jun), BoC Policy Announcement (Jul), Fed Beige Book (Jul), Speakers including Fed's Williams, Musalem, Warsh & Cook, BoC Governor Macklem, BoE's Pill, Earnings from United Airlines, Johnson & Johnson, Morgan Stanley, PNC Financial Services, BNY Mellon.Read the full report covering Equities, Forex, Fixed Income, Commodites and more on Newsquawk

In der heutigen Folge sprechen die Finanzjournalisten Nando Sommerfeldt und Holger Zschäpitz über den Dürre-Krisen-Indikator und machen einen Wall-Street-Banken-Exkurs. Außerdem geht es um Lucid, HCA Healthcare, Pentair, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, SpaceX, Uber, Evotec, Delivery Hero, ASML, BlackRock, BNY Mellon, Morgan Stanley, Johnson & Johnson, United Airlines, J.B. Hunt, Rio Tinto, Richemont, BASF, Covestro, Shell, Thyssenkrupp, Barclays, Deutsche Bank, Evonik, Lanxess, Wacker Chemie, K+S, Nvidia, JPMorgan Global Equity Plus (ISIN: LU3351089811). Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und – ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien *Anzeige: Eight Sleep: Der Pod 5 reguliert die Temperatur im Bett automatisch, trackt Schlaf- und Gesundheitswerte ohne Wearable und kann so zu besserem Schlaf beitragen. Mit dem Code ALLESAUFAKTIEN erhaltet ihr auf https://www.eightsleep.com/allesaufaktien bis zu 350 Euro Rabatt.* Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

US struck Iran overnight, Trump said they will do so again on Wednesday night. Adding, they will hit power plants and bridges next week unless Iran negotiates.IRGC targeted weapons/storage in Bahrain and Kuwait, US positions in Jordan and the Fifth Fleet Command HQ. Iran said it is a mistake to think military action will force them to talk.Brent +0.8% on the above, USD failed to benefit with CPI continuing to weigh, USTs rangebound though Bunds came under modest pressure.APAC stocks were firmer as the US CPI read-across outweighed fresh US-Iran strikes, to the continued benefit of US futures, though Europe points lower, Euro Stoxx 50 -0.2%.GBP and EUR led on the softer USD, USD/JPY briefly moved below 162.00Looking ahead, highlights include Swedish CPIF Final (Jun), Spanish CPI Final (Jun), EZ Industrial Production (May), US PPI (Jun), BoC Policy Announcement (Jul), Fed Beige Book (Jul), Speakers including Fed's Williams, Musalem, Warsh & Cook, BoC Governor Macklem, BoE's Pill, ECB's Nagel, Supply from Germany, Earnings from United Airlines, BlackRock, Elevance Health, Johnson & Johnson, Morgan Stanley, PNC Financial Services, BNY Mellon.Click for the Newsquawk Week Ahead.Read the full report covering Equities, Forex, Fixed Income, Commodites and more on Newsquawk

ASML heeft een extreem goed kwartaal achter de rug. De omzet steeg met 21 procent, de winst ging met 26 procent omhoog. Beide veel beter dan gedacht. Maar belangrijker, voor de tweede keer dit jaar gaat de omzetverwachting omhoog. Ook die verhoging was niet verwacht. Met al dat goede nieuws zou je denken: het aandeel gaat door het dak. Aanvankelijk leek het erop. Aan het begin van de beurshandel stond het aandeel zo'n 7 procent hoger, maar de koers zakte als een oude onderbroek. Deze aflevering kijken we waar dat pessimisme vandaan komt. Ook lopen we uitgebreid door de cijfers en de verwachtingen heen. Je hoort meer over het opschalen van de productie, over de orders en over de mogelijke aandelensplitsing. Gaat het ook over Stripe, de betaalverwerker. Dat is een Amerikaanse concurrent van Adyen die groeit door overnames. Nu willen ze de grootste overname uit hun geschiedenis doen: voor ruim 50 miljard het kwakkelende PayPal opkopen. Het lijkt een bedreiging voor Adyen, maar toch gaat dat aandeel opvallend goed op het nieuws. De Zuid-Koreaanse beurs komt ook langs. De beurs doet het dit jaar erg goed, maar heeft ook wat manische periodes. De koers schommelt nogal. Het gaat zo hard dat zelfs de president van het land ingrijpt! Te gast: Jordy Beuving van De Aandeelhouder BNR Beurs is een journalistiek onafhankelijke productie, mede mogelijk gemaakt door Saxo. Over de makers: Jelle Maasbach is presentator van BNR Beurs en freelance financieel journalist. Zijn favoriete aandeel om over te praten is Disney, maar daar lijkt hij de enige in te zijn. Sinds de eerste uitzending van BNR Beurs is 'ie er bij. Maxim van Mil is presentator van BNR Beurs en journalist bij BNR, waar hij zich focust op de financiële markten en ontwikkelingen in de tech-wereld. Je krijgt hem het meest enthousiast als hij kan praten over ASML, of oer-Hollandse bedrijven zoals Ahold of ABN Amro. Jorik Simonides is presentator van BNR Beurs, economieredacteur en verslaggever bij BNR. Hij wordt er vooral blij van als het een keer níet over AI gaat. Je hoort hem ook in de BNR-podcast Moerdijk: dorp van de rekening. Milou Brand is presentator van BNR Beurs, freelance podcastmaker en columnist bij het Financieele Dagblad. Jochem Visser is presentator van BNR Beurs, maakt Beursnerd XL en is redacteur bij de podcast Onder Curatoren. Vraag hem naar obscure zaken op financiële markten en hij vertelt je waarom het eigenlijk nóg leuker is dan je al dacht. Over de podcast: Met BNR Beurs ga je altijd voorbereid de nieuwe beursdag in. We praten je in een kleine 25 minuten bij over alle laatste ontwikkelingen op de handelsvloer. We blijven niet alleen bij de AEX of Wall Street, maar vertellen je ook waar nog meer kansen liggen. En we houden het niet bij de cijfers, maar zoeken ook iedere dag voor je naar duiding van scherpe gasten en experts. Of je nu een ervaren belegger bent of net begint met je eerste stappen op de beurs, de podcast biedt waardevolle inzichten voor je beleggingsstrategie. Door de focus op zowel de korte termijn als de lange termijn, helpt BNR Beurs luisteraars om de ruis van de markt te scheiden van de essentie.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Our CIO and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist Mike Wilson discusses where investors may find opportunity beyond the AI sector and risks that could slow market gains.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Mike Wilson, Morgan Stanley's CIO and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist. Today on the podcast I'll be discussing our broadening thesis and the near-term risks to monitor. It's Tuesday, July 14th at 11:30 am in New York. So, let's get after it. The broadening trade is now playing out. It's showing up in stock prices, relative performance and earnings revisions. It's also making investors question the sustainability of the most crowded areas of the market, and consider other near-term risks. I first made the broadening call late last year based on my view that the economy had entered a new expansion after completing the rolling recession in April of 2025. In a new expansion, earnings growth tends to be much better than expected because revenue growth returns to companies that have already become more cost efficient. That's classic operating leverage. The market began to anticipate that dynamic late last year, but then the Iran conflict interrupted the move. Oil surged, rate-cut expectations disappeared, and investors crowded back into the most obvious AI capex beneficiaries led by semiconductors and memory, in particular. Since mid May, that interruption has faded with oil prices falling sharply and the broadening trade has begun to work again. Importantly, the market is not abandoning AI. It is simply rotating within AI and beyond AI. And that distinction matters. Semiconductors have had a historic run, supported by earnings revisions. But even great stories get exhausted in the short term. When earnings revisions breadth is pressing against historical highs and the trade becomes one of the most crowded areas of the market, the bar for upside gets very high. At that point, the issue is not whether the story is good. The issue is whether the rate of change can keep improving. That is a very different question. The underperformance of the hyperscalers was probably the first warning sign. Semis depend on hyperscaler capex. So when the spenders start lagging the beneficiaries, that divergence usually resolves one way or another. And now we're starting to see it. Meta's decision to sell excess capacity to outside customers may not mean the AI capex cycle is over. But it does tell you the market is beginning to ask harder questions about the path and pace of that spending. Credit spreads and stock prices of these hyperscalers provide the feedback loop to managements that maybe they should curtail the pace of spend. We've had multiple corrections inside this AI cycle already. This looks like another one – not the end of the cycle, but a reset. That reset is what gives the rest of the market room to work. Our preferred ways to express the broadening remain Consumer Discretionary Goods, Transports, and Biotech. These are not the areas investors have been excited about. In fact, positioning and sentiment remain subdued. But that's exactly why I like them. The risks to the story in the short term are two-fold. First, uncertainty about the full re-opening of the strait remains high, with pivots on both sides. This is keeping oil prices volatile in the short term even if the primary trend remains lower. Second, interest rate volatility is picking up again with the entire curve shifting higher in both nominal and real terms. If this doesn't stabilize, it will have a negative impact on stocks both at the index level and even for stocks that should benefit from our broadening call. With the inflation data coming in today softer than expected, this should reduce some of the recent upward pressure on rates. However, the new Fed Chair and board remain resolute to make sure inflation doesn't rear its head again. In the end, dealing with this risk up front is a good thing in my view even if it means uncertainty for markets. Bottom line, equity markets have been consolidating and correcting for the past several months. This is the result of the peak rate of change in earnings revisions and a reaction function shift at the Fed to focus more on the inflation mandate than growth. With the recent rollover in semiconductors, heavy supply of equity and credit issuance, and a transition of leadership at the Fed, expect more volatility and corrective activity in stocks before the next leg of the bull market resumes. Don't chase momentum. Instead, add to risk on down days to areas that will benefit from a broadening in the economy and earnings growth. Thanks for tuning in; I hope you found it informative and useful. Let us know what you think by leaving us a review. And if you find Thoughts on the Market worthwhile, tell a friend or colleague to try it out!

BlackRock, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, Ripple, and 49 other firms have joined the UK's tokenization taskforce to develop live tokenization use cases across financial markets. Trump calls for the Senate to pass the Clarity Act.Brought to you by

AI is officially a national security issue and Washington is moving fast. The Bitcoin Policy Institute's Zack Cohen, Zack Shapiro, and Ken Egan break down Palantir and Nvidia's sovereign on-prem AI architecture, OpenAI's government-coordinated 5.6 rollout, and reports that Beijing may curb exports of China's top AI models. Then Zack Shapiro lays out his highest-conviction thesis: the biggest AI fortune won't be made by frontier labs, but by the people who help industry actually absorb the technology. Plus, a major CLARITY Act update as law enforcement opposition softens on Capitol Hill.

(0:00) About the Boardroom Governance Summit (Aug 26-27, 2026)  (0:55) Intro (2:37) About the podcast sponsor: The American College of Governance Counsel. (3:24) Start of interview.  (4:23) Origin story Mayree Clark (6:08) Origin story Linda Riefler (8:23) About their Leading-Edge Stewardship framework and personal road-map. (11:38) Teamwork and Long-Term Value Creation (16:03) On board diversity and pace of change (19:02) Boards in distress: Mayree joining Ally Financial in financial crisis (2009) (21:39) MSCI Culture and CEO Relations (26:02) Tough calls on CEO transitions (example of CSX CEO transition) (32:39) Private Equity Board Lessons (flexibility on decision-making and talent pools) (36:22) Handling under-performing directors (43:11) German Governance Across Borders (Mayree's experience serving on Deutsche Bank's board) (48:06) Purpose, Adversity, and Stewardship (50:42) What are the 1-3 books that have greatly influenced your life:  Mayree: Self Renewal : The Individual and the Innovative Society, by John Gardner (1963) Linda: A Brief History of Everything, by Ken Wilber (2017) How the Word is Passed, by Clint Smith (2021) The Spark Within, by Michael Neal (coach) (53:36) Who were their mentors, and what they learned from them. (56:37) An unusual habit or an absurd thing that they love. (1:00:16) The living person they most admire. Mayree Clark is a longtime corporate director, founder and Managing Partner of Eachwin Capital, and former senior executive at Morgan Stanley. She currently serves on the boards of Ally Financial and Deutsche Bank AG.  Linda Riefler is an experienced corporate director and former senior executive at Morgan Stanley. She currently serves on the boards of CSX Corporation, MSCI Inc., and North American Partners in Anesthesia, and is chair of Pencils of Promise. You can follow Evan on social media at:X: @evanepsteinLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/epsteinevan/ Substack: https://evanepstein.substack.com/__To support this podcast you can join as a subscriber of the Boardroom Governance Newsletter at https://evanepstein.substack.com/__Music/Soundtrack (found via Free Music Archive): Seeing The Future by Dexter Britain is licensed under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License

Cheaper obesity medicines could unlock broader demand, while supply-chain bottlenecks and premium-drug innovation may also shape how the market evolves. Our analysts Terence Flynn and Thibault Boutherin break down the investor implications.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Terence Flynn: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Terence Flynn, Morgan Stanley's U.S. Pharma and Biotech Analyst. Thibault Boutherin: And I'm Thibault Boutherin, Morgan Stanley's Europe Pharmaceuticals Analyst. Terence Flynn: Today, how cheaper GLP-1 obesity medicines could reshape access, pricing, and supply chains; and what the first generic markets may signal for Europe and the U.S. It's Monday, July 13th at 10am in New York. Thibault Boutherin: And it's 3 pm in London. Terence Flynn: Around one billion people live with obesity worldwide, including over a 100 million in the U.S. Right now, the introduction of the first lower cost generics of semaglutide, a GLP-1 medicine, in some international markets, could have consequences on affordability and demand. Thibault, what are the first countries seeing the introduction of sema generics? What are the current dynamics, and why should global investors pay attention? Thibault Boutherin: Sure. So, so far generics are being introduced this year in three countries: in India, Canada and Brazil. And if we look at India, this is the first market where the generics are being introduced. The patent for semaglutide expired in March 2026, and 13 companies have launched 26 generics across different formulations: autoinjectors, vials, and pills, which price is lower than the branded drug. And because the India market was quite under-penetrated for GLP-1, we are seeing affordability driving volume expansion. In Canada, two generics have been launched so far. Four other generics are waiting for approval, and more are being filed. And finally, in Brazil, one generic was approved last month, and we are expecting these generics to be launched in Brazil in July. And 17 other generics are in different stage of regulatory review in Brazil, and we would expect more to enter the market by the end of this year. And the reason why we focus on these markets is because we believe they could provide a blueprint for what could happen later in the U.S. and in Europe; in particular for Canada, which shares some characteristics with Europe and the U.S. And the patent for semaglutide will expire in Europe in 2031 and in the U.S. from 2032. Terence Flynn: Great. Maybe on the India front, I know that's at the leading edge. What happened with patient demand when price came down? Thibault Boutherin: Sure. So, what we saw in India is a surge in volume when generics were launched, and the volume in April 2026 were already six times higher than the volume in February. And that expansion has been driven mostly by these generics launch, which captured 80 percent of semaglutide volume in April. And our India team expect that the GLP-1 market in India will actually expand in value from $125 million in [20]25 to more than $1 billion by 2030, despite lower prices as we see better, you know, greater volume and greater adoption of GLP-1s in India. Terence Flynn: The other thing, you know, you and I have discussed is the supply chain, and one of the questions is the ability of some of the generic manufacturers to scale semaglutide. So, maybe talk to us about the current capabilities. And could we see bottlenecks in the supply chain formation here? Thibault Boutherin: Yeah, sure. So, there are three key elements to watch on the supply chain. The first is the active pharmaceutical ingredient or API, and that's the semaglutide molecule itself. The second element is the device and the device components, and the third element is the fill and finish, which is basically putting all of these things together. On the API side, so semaglutide molecule, we believe there will be no bottleneck in supplying for generics as we see a handful of large Chinese companies, out of China, building multi-ton capacity for semaglutide. So, we believe there will be no shortage of API to supply the generic supply chain for injectables. On the device, these are the same device companies that are supplying the branded version of semaglutide, and other GLP-1s for the device that are also supplying the generic makers. And we are seeing meaningful investments being made, so we don't believe there will be a bottleneck here. Where we could see a bottleneck emerging is on the fill and finish side. Fill and finish requires highly controlled clean room space to minimize contamination. It requires regulatory approval, and it takes up to three years to build fill and finish capacity. And so, that's where if there is not more investment being made over the next few years, there could potentially [be] a bottleneck emerging for the generic companies. Terence, while semaglutide generics will definitely represent a challenge for the existing branded version of this GLP-1, there are some insights in these emerging dynamics that suggest that tirzepatide, the other GLP-1, could be less at risk. Can you touch a bit on some of these dynamics? Terence Flynn: Absolutely. So, just to remind listeners that semaglutide targets a pathway called GLP-1. Tirzepatide actually targets two pathways. The first is GLP-1, and the second is GIP. And there are some data comparing these molecules, both in Type 2 diabetes and obesity. And tirzepatide gives not only better efficacy but also improved tolerability. And so, what you're seeing in some of the ex-U.S. markets is segmentation, where there are some consumers that are willing to pay a premium price for tirzepatide. Our team in Brazil has done a lot of work on this front looking at this dynamic and, you know, we expect that to play out in many geographies. So, despite the entry of lower-cost generic versions, we think you will still see segmentation of the market between differentiated brand and the lower-cost generics. And that as a result, you will continue to see branded growth.In the U.S. right now, market share is about 60 percent in favor of tirzepatide. And so again, you're seeing a differentiation between these two molecules. Thibault Boutherin: And beyond the introduction of generics GLP-1s, there are other dynamics in the industry that are driving this market. And the introduction of oral drugs this year has been a big topic. Terence, what are your views on the role that orals could play on the market? Terence Flynn: Yes, as a lot of people are probably aware, the many of the existing GLP-1 medicines are injectable. And so those are delivered once a week with a needle. But there are now additional oral options of these GLP-1 medicines. They started off first for Type 2 diabetes, but they have now broadened into obesity as well, following some recent FDA approvals. And what we're seeing is that the introduction in the U.S. so far is expanding the market. So, the majority of people that are taking the oral versions of these medicines are new users to GLP-1s. So again, you're getting market expansion. When you think about the orals as well, one of the other questions is capacity. I know, Thibault, you were talking about the supply chain. There are similar questions for these oral medicines because not all of the oral medicines are the same. Some are easier to manufacture than others, and as a result, that's another variable to consider. So, some of these are what's called peptide-based orals, and some of these are non-peptide-based orals. And the non-peptide-based orals are much easier to scale, for a larger global market. And so that's definitely another variable that we're monitoring and that I think investors need to consider. Thibault Boutherin: And beyond the pill versions of these GLP-1s, we are seeing more innovation in the drug pipeline of the industry, which could be a key driver of differentiation against the competition from the generics. So, what are we seeing emerging today from diabetes and obesity pipelines, which could be exciting for the future of the category? Terence Flynn: So, as we see time and time again in pharmaceutical markets, the key players continue to innovate to try to improve profiles of the existing medications. So, there are, you know, kind of two areas. One would be efficacy; another would be safety tolerability. And so, there are a number of players that are working first to develop longer acting medication. So, as I mentioned, the existing injectable drugs are dosed once weekly. But there are a number of companies that are working to develop potentially monthly or less frequent injections. So, that's one area that we're monitoring closely. And then the second, and again, this plays into what I discussed on tirzepatide, is additional pathways that are involved here in diabetes and obesity, and a number of players are working to target additional pathways beyond GLP-1 and GIP. And so, some of the leading pathways that are being studied are something called amylin and glucagon, and there are a number of medications that are in the late-stage pipeline that are coming along, which have some pretty interesting data. And so that's another area that we're watching. And again, the goal there would be to either improve efficacy and/or improve tolerability versus the existing medications. Thibault Boutherin: Great. And maybe we can also take this opportunity to talk about some of the short-term drivers in the market that are not facing generic today, like the U.S. So, what could be, you know, the key drivers for growth of GLP-1s and the overall obesity and diabetes category over the next five years? Terence Flynn: Yeah, obviously the key one is seeing additional uptake of these medicines. I think right now we estimate, again, obesity in particular, there's about low double-digit percent uptake. And so obviously seeing increasing uptake of these medicines. The orals, as I mentioned, are already driving market expansion. And then the third is access. So obviously in any market, that's very important. In the U.S., I think about 50 percent of employers cover these medications right now. We expect that to increase in the years ahead as the data continues to build. But then this year starting very shortly, the patients in the Medicare program in the U.S., so those people over the age of 65, will be able to access these medicines for $50 per month. And so, we think that is another driver of growth – is this will broaden access to about an additional 18 million people, starting this summer. So, the next phase of the diabesity market comes down to execution, lower cost and scaled supply in the mass market, and innovation and differentiation to compete in the premium segment. Thibault, thanks so much for taking the time to talk. Thibault Boutherin: Great speaking with you, Terence. Terence Flynn: And thanks for listening. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share the podcast with a friend or colleague today.

Preliminary hearings are taking place in the trial of Tyler Robinson. In light of this, we decided to examine Candace Owens's many claims and ask whether they are credible. And unlike some, we are going to try and use actual standards for intelligence analysis and measuring source credibility.-----SPONSOR: Lear CapitalGold and silver are at all-time highs as central banks, sovereign funds, and major institutions like Morgan Stanley shift capital out of the dollar and into precious metals. Lear Capital helps everyday Americans get into physical gold and silver with experienced reps, transparent pricing, and IRA-eligible options. With a qualified purchase, you can receive up to $20,000 in bonus gold or silver.Call Lear Capital at 800-707-4575 or visit https://www.Nick4Lear.com-----GET YOUR MERCH HERE: https://shop.nickjfreitas.com/BECOME A MEMBER OF THE IC: https://NickJFreitas.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/nickjfreitas/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NickFreitasVATwitter: https://twitter.com/NickJFreitasYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@NickjfreitasTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@nickjfreitas3.000:00:00 - Intelligence Standards for Evaluating Political Claims 00:08:10 - Sponsor Message on Inflation and Gold Investing 00:09:56 - Examining Claims About Charlie Kirk's Marriage 00:13:46 - Reviewing Alleged Fort Huachuca Meeting Evidence 00:24:00 - Assessing Witness Credibility and Source Reliability 00:25:52 - Ballistics Evidence and Conspiracy Allegations 00:31:27 - French Government Assassination Claims Examined 00:40:34 - Egyptian Aircraft Allegations Reviewed Against Available Evidence 00:46:33 - Israeli Phone Data Claims Put Into Context 00:53:36 - Evaluating New Claims and Supporting Evidence 00:59:50 - Case Against Tyler Robinson Reviewed 01:03:39 - Surveillance Footage and Timeline Analysis 01:08:42 - Financial Motive Claims and Available Evidence 01:14:10 - Applying Intelligence Standards to Political Allegations 01:19:36 - Final Assessment of Evidence and Credibility

Kristin's quick bio:Kristin Milchanowski, PhD is Chief AI and Quantum Officer at BMO Financial Group leads BMO's AI, data, and analytics strategy, with 20+ years in the field and past roles at Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan, and EY.Author of Return on Intelligence, a 43-principle playbook for scaling AI responsibly so small businesses aren't left behind.Oxford AI fellow with a PhD in Decision Sciences and, off the clock, a licensed race car driver and former Lamborghini board member.Connect with her on LinkedIn.Quick conversation summary:Kristin explains what AI actually looks like inside a bank, whether you see and feel it or not.She reveals the exact moment an employee's job quietly changes the second you hand them an AI “widget” and the deliberate bet BMO made on AI with all employees.And she lands on the one trait that lets anyone keep up in the AI race, no tech degree required. Hint: it's not being the smartest person in the room.This special edition was sponsored by Cream City Cyber, Milwaukee's global cybersecurity consultancy helping companies of all sizes navigate digital risk. From AI governance to cybersecurity, they've got you covered. Learn more at creamcitycyber.com.

In der heutigen Folge sprechen die Finanzjournalisten Nando Sommerfeldt und Holger Zschäpitz über eine neue Tonlage bei VW, die Folgen der Gesundheitsreform und was sonst noch wichtig wird in dieser Woche. Außerdem geht es um EasyJet, Apollo Global, IAG, Air France-KLM, Brink's, NCR Atleos, T. Rowe Price, Aurora Innovation, FedEx, Volvo, Ascendis Pharma, MoonLake Immunotherapeutics, Dyne Therapeutics, Vaxcyte, Cytokinetics, CG Oncology, Denali Therapeutics, AbbVie, Apogee Therapeutics, Bending Spoons, Mattel, Scotts Miracle-Gro, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, JPMorgan, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Morgan Stanley, BlackRock, ASML, TSMC, Netflix, ABB, Abbott, GE Aerospace, Intuitive Surgical, UnitedHealth, Alcoa, United Airlines, BHP, Fraport, Fastenal, Altria, Nvidia, Coca-Cola, Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Broadcom, Vulcan Materials, Kansas City Southern, IBM, General Dynamics, Hershey, Tootsie Roll, Axon, Tesla, SPDR MSCI ACWI IMI (WKN: A1JJTD), iShares Edge MSCI World Momentum Factor ETF (WKN: A12ATF). Wir freuen uns an Feedback über aaa@welt.de. Noch mehr "Alles auf Aktien" findet Ihr bei WELTplus und Apple Podcasts – inklusive aller Artikel der Hosts. Hier bei WELT: https://www.welt.de/podcasts/alles-auf-aktien/plus247399208/Boersen-Podcast-AAA-Bonus-Folgen-Jede-Woche-noch-mehr-Antworten-auf-Eure-Boersen-Fragen.html. Hier könnt ihr den AAA-Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.welt.de/newsletter/article232797673/Alles-auf-Aktien-Der-taegliche-Boersen-Newsletter-fuer-WELTplus-Abonnenten.html Und – ganz neu: AAA gibt es jetzt auch auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/alles_auf_aktien/ Disclaimer: Die im Podcast besprochenen Aktien und Fonds stellen keine spezifischen Kauf- oder Anlage-Empfehlungen dar. Die Moderatoren und der Verlag haften nicht für etwaige Verluste, die aufgrund der Umsetzung der Gedanken oder Ideen entstehen. Hörtipps: Für alle, die noch mehr wissen wollen: Holger Zschäpitz können Sie jede Woche im Finanz- und Wirtschaftspodcast "Deffner&Zschäpitz" hören. +++ Werbung +++ Du möchtest mehr über unsere Werbepartner erfahren? Hier findest du alle Infos & Rabatte! https://linktr.ee/alles_auf_aktien Anzeige: Diese Folge enthält Werbung für Smartbroker+. Depot eröffnen, 30 € ETF als Bonus sichern und aus tausenden ETFs wählen. Smartbroker+ macht Investieren einfach. Alle Informationen gibt es unter: https://get.smartbrokerplus.de/triple-aaa-podcast2/ Anzeige: Eight Sleep: Der Pod 5 reguliert die Temperatur im Bett automatisch, trackt Schlaf- und Gesundheitswerte ohne Wearable und kann so zu besserem Schlaf beitragen. Mit dem Code ALLESAUFAKTIEN erhaltet ihr auf https://www.eightsleep.com/allesaufaktien bis zu 350 Euro Rabatt. Impressum: https://www.welt.de/services/article7893735/Impressum.html Datenschutz: https://www.welt.de/services/article157550705/Datenschutzerklaerung-WELT-DIGITAL.html

The USMCA review is underway, with implications beyond tariffs. Our Head of U.S. Public Policy Research Ariana Salvatore breaks down the key issues shaping the road ahead.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Ariana Salvatore: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Ariana Salvatore, Head of U.S. Public Policy at Morgan Stanley Research.Today, I'll be talking about the USMCA review – what happened on July 1st, what it means for North American trade, and how investors should be thinking about the road ahead. It's Friday, July 10th at 10am in New York. Last week, the six-year review deadline for the USMCA came and went. And as we'd anticipated, the U.S. declined to extend the agreement for another sixteen-year term. U.S. Trade Representative Greer stated that the U.S. did not agree to renew the USMCA in its current form, pointing to shortcomings and trade deficits with both Canada and Mexico, much of which echoed his testimony in front of Congress in December of last year. So, what happens next? This decision triggers an annual review process that could continue until the agreement's scheduled expiration in 2036. So, that means effectively the new deadline for negotiations is now July of 2027. And if we get to that point and see a similar outcome, this procedure repeats until the deal is terminated in 2036. Now, importantly, the agreement itself remains fully in force during this period. The current tariff regime, rules of origin, investment protections, and dispute settlement mechanisms are all unaffected for now. That's actually in line with the expectation that we laid out earlier this year. In short, we anticipated an outcome in which negotiations stall and the deal moves to annual reviews. We thought that was becoming more likely than an ambitious expansion of the agreement in its current form. That being said, there are some important implications of this outcome. First, we think North American trade is being reshaped by a transition from a rules-based framework – where tariff schedules and preferential access anchored trade decisions – toward a more discretionary, sector-specific approach tied to industrial policy objectives. That, of course, increases uncertainty around exemptions, sector treatment, and consequently investment decisions for corporates. Second, we think two bilateral deals may not be off the table. While it's still our base case that the trilateral framework remains intact, reporting seems to suggest that negotiations are progressing much more substantively with Mexico than with Canada. A third round of U.S.-Mexico negotiations is scheduled for the week of July 20th, while substantive text-based negotiations between Canada and the U.S. have not yet begun. That asymmetry could mean that bilateral issues between the U.S. and Mexico are resolved more easily, while outstanding frictions like Canada's dairy market quota system could prove to be an overhang in those bilateral talks. Third, the structural divergence between Mexico and Canada is accelerating, which is something my colleagues have highlighted in their recent work. If we think about Canada's manufacturing export base – autos, metals, machinery, energy, and transportation equipment – that actually overlaps with the areas that the U.S. government is increasingly defining as strategic. And therefore, necessitating more government involvement through, in things like Section 232 tariffs. Canada accounts for only a negligible share of U.S. imports across computers, semiconductors, communications equipment, and advanced electronics. Those are actually the sectors where Mexico has become deeply integrated, particularly through assembly and re-export activity linked to AI servers, electronics, and industrial hardware. Mexico now supplies roughly 35 percent of U.S. IT hardware imports and nearly 50 percent of U.S. server imports. And the North in particular has emerged as a vital interconnection hub between Latin America and the U.S. That's been driven by nearshoring trends, AI adoption, and multi-cloud strategies, as my colleagues Nik Lippmann and Fernando Sedano highlight. That means the scope and the objectives of the bilateral talks between the U.S. and Mexico and the U.S. and Canada may diverge even more from here. So where does that leave us? The USMCA is still intact, but the annual review process means North American trade policy is now a recurring negotiation, not yet a settled framework. And that will likely remain the case if policymakers agree next July to punt the issue yet another year. The primary risk, in our view, stems less from the possibility of a full USMCA collapse and more from the prolonged uncertainty around implementation details, sector-specific trade measures, and Section 232 tariffs. Thanks for listening. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.

Robert Feldman and Michael Gapen discuss how AI could reshape growth, labor markets and productivity in the U.S. and Japan.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Robert Feldman: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Robert Feldman, Senior Advisor at Morgan Stanley MUFG Securities in Tokyo. Michael Gapen: And I'm Michael Gapen, Morgan Stanley's Chief U.S. Economist. Robert Feldman: Today, we'll discuss why the U.S. and Japanese economies may react differently to the AI productivity test. It's Thursday, July 9th at 8 pm in Tokyo. Michael Gapen: And 9 am in New York. Robert Feldman: AI is the biggest theme around the world right now, but AI will play out differently in different economies. Take the cases of the U.S. and Japan. In the U.S., it's already a catalyst in investment, imports, productivity, and the labor market outlook. But here in Japan, it's seen as a savior for an economy with an intense labor shortage, low unemployment, and very little room to raise labor force participation. Mike, in the U.S., AI's contribution to real GDP growth will rise from about 0.05 percentage points in 2024 to an estimated 0.43 percentage points in 2027. What does that mean for markets? Michael Gapen: Well, Robby, I think it, it means a number of things, but, you know, I'm an economist, so the answer is always, "It depends." I think the real crux of the issue over time in the U.S., and therefore what it means for financial markets, is ultimately whether AI is labor replacing – and pushes the unemployment rate higher. Or it acts like a more traditional general-purpose technology that's labor augmenting. So, if, that's the case, meaning it looks similar to the internet and digital era, then it would mean faster output growth, stronger productivity growth, but still an economy that's running at or near full employment. That would be very beneficial in our estimation for risk assets, equity markets, credit markets, and it would probably mean that we stay in an interest rate environment that's certainly higher than it was during the post GFC period. But if – AI is a very different technology than we've seen in the past, and it displaces labor, and we get increases in the unemployment rate as AI diffuses through the economy. Then it could be very different for markets. Maybe returns to capital and equity markets are supported, but that might be more narrowly for technology stocks and not broader, say, consumer discretionary stocks. So, the answer, of course, is it depends. We don't know. And I think, ultimately, we come down on the side of thinking that AI will not create dystopian outcomes in the labor markets, that employment will hold up. So, we have a fairly constructive view, perhaps an optimistic view. And we think, ultimately it'll benefit markets greatly, similar to what we saw from the mid-90s to the early 2000's. Robert Feldman: Well, in your model, you have a particular variable that captures the speed of diffusion. But your baseline has AI spreading twice as fast as the internet did. But without that rise of employment. Is that really manageable? And if it's not, what economic indicators would warn us, if we're crossing into the danger zone? Michael Gapen: This is really the tricky part as, as you know. We have a new technology. We have to model how it diffuses through the economy. And I would say I think there's an argument here that penetration rates and usage rates are very different than what economists think about diffusion, which is how the production process is reshaped because of this new technology. And so most economists look at the internet and digital era and think it took 20-25 years to fully diffuse. Mass penetration in maybe 10 years, but full diffusion in more like 20-25 years. And so, each innovation cycle tends to happen more rapidly. So, I do think AI will spread more rapidly. And even by saying it spreads twice as fast as the internet did still means that it'll take roughly a decade, maybe 10-12 years for this to fully diffuse. So, our argument here would be that that is enough time for a flexible economy and a flexible labor market, like we have in the U.S., to rebalance labor. But if we're wrong, then Robby, what I think you will see is that as AI rolls through, it diffuses faster. And what we would see then is increases in rates of job separation and layoffs that would overwhelm the labor market's ability to reallocate workers. So, I think we would see two things – or three things: scale layoffs, a rise in the unemployment rate, and probably a significant amount of underemployment. Those who get rebalanced may be rebalanced into work that's not, say, consistent with the skill of that worker. So, I think we would see a very disrupted labor market in the process. But if it takes a decade, maybe 10-12 years, we think ultimately the U.S. economy is flexible enough to rebalance labor without large scale layoffs. Robert Feldman: Now, people are afraid of a lot of things, but one other thing is that AI might create new kinds of jobs, new kinds of tasks, have different impacts on people's wealth, and different responses from policymakers as well. How do these knock-on effects change the AI labor story? Michael Gapen: Yeah. That's right. I think you make a very good point there that I think it's easy to fall into what an economist would call a partial equilibrium trap. So, for example, we look at occupations exposed to AI task replacement, and we say, "Wow, if all these tasks are replaced, we might lose 10 million workers or 20 million workers." But that's too simplistic, in our view. Because as you note, AI may destroy some tasks or replace some tasks, but it's also going to create new ones. So, it may eliminate some types of occupations but create others. And in addition, if people are, say, laid off because of AI, you get a loss in labor market income for the economy. But AI will likely create returns to capital, say, stronger equity performance, and that's an indirect wealth effect. So, our model kind of, looks at, say, three wedges or three horse races in the economy then. It's about the speed of diffusion of AI against the ability of the labor market to rebalance. It's task destruction or task replacement versus new task creation. And then third, it's we might have weakness in labor market income in the short run, but there are indirect wealth effects. So, thinking about it this way in a richer general equilibrium context, these feedback effects matter a lot. So, the combination of if the labor market's disrupted, we get easing in monetary policy, maybe a fiscal response. There are new tasks, new jobs that are created for workers to rebalance to over time. And overall demand in the economy gets held up because wealth effects can offset some lost income. All of that is extremely important in our view that ultimately the U.S. economy can rebalance and handle the AI diffusion in a manageable way. We could be wrong, of course, but our main point here is you have to think about this in a richer context. You can't just simply, say, stack up workers and occupations and say, "Oh, we're going to lose a lot of employment." That's not the way innovation waves have worked in the past. We don't think they're going to work that way in the future. Robert Feldman: Mm-hmm. That's fascinating because the situation in the United States is so different from that in Japan, largely because of the demographic situation. Here in Japan, the key element is how much AI can ease the labor shortage. In fact, in some labor-intensive jobs now, we're seeing 6 percent wage increases, and that's great. As long as productivity rises fast enough that price hikes aren't necessary. Michael Gapen: So Robby, in your scenarios for Japan, the same 10 percent productivity gain can lead to very different outcomes. Deflation and weaker employment in one case. More inflation, higher wages, and more employment in another. What do you think drives the difference? Robert Feldman: Mm-hmm. Well, the crucial element really is the flexibility of goods and labor markets. With high flexibility, you get higher GDP, higher employment, and moderate inflation. With low flexibility, you may get a bit higher GDP, but employment plunges, and there's deflation of both prices and wages – more in wages. Now, in Japan, over the last two decades, we've seen monopoly power in key markets go down. For example, agriculture and energy. Labor markets are more flexible too, but lifetime employment system still applies to about two-thirds of the economy. And that deters people from trying to find better jobs and even from acquiring the skills needed for a new job. Michael Gapen: What conditions are needed for AI to be additive to Japan's economy? Robert Feldman: We need more reskilling. Japan is lucky because people are healthy, and they want to work into their 70s and beyond. But acquiring the skills to remain productive is a challenge, even though Japan's workforce is well-educated and still has a strong work ethic. So, to sum up, in the U.S., the race is between diffusion and absorption. But in Japan it's between labor scarcity and productivity. Is that fair? Michael Gapen: It is fair, and we come down on the side of optimism. We think diffusion will happen fast, but it'll happen at a pace that the U.S. economy can handle. So, we come down having a positive view overall. We do not lean in the direction of dystopian labor market outcomes. Robert Feldman: Mm-hmm. I agree with that as well for Japan. So, Mike, thanks for taking the time to talk. Michael Gapen: Great speaking with you, Robby-san. Robert Feldman: And thanks for listening, everyone. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share the podcast with a friend or colleague today.

With James Woodfall, Communication and Behavior Specialist, Raise Your EI As AI makes expertise more accessible, what becomes an advisor's true advantage? EI expert James Woodfall explains why authentic human connection may be the one thing technology can't replicate. In Summary As artificial intelligence reshapes how information is delivered, financial advisors are being challenged to rethink what truly differentiates their value. Mindy Diamond sits down with James Woodfall, a former wealth management business owner turned emotional intelligence expert and founder of Raise Your EI, to explore why emotional intelligence may become one of the profession's greatest competitive advantages. Together, they discuss how rapport, curiosity, and authentic human connection influence trust, referrals, leadership, and client loyalty and why those skills can be developed just like technical expertise. The conversation also examines the difference between AI's “synthetic empathy” and the authentic relationships clients continue to value—and why that distinction matters to financial advisors now more than ever.   The Storyline For decades, advisors have built successful businesses by combining technical expertise with thoughtful financial guidance. But as AI makes information more accessible and planning tools more sophisticated, expertise alone is becoming less of a differentiator. James Woodfall believes the future belongs to advisors who master something technology cannot authentically replicate: human connection. Drawing on his experience as both a former wealth management firm owner and a specialist in communication and behavioral science, James explains why emotional intelligence isn't simply a “soft skill.” It's a business skill that affects nearly every aspect of an advisory practice—from building trust and earning referrals to leading teams and helping clients make difficult decisions. Mindy and James explore why asking better questions matters more than having better answers, how curiosity creates stronger relationships than scripts ever can, and why advisors who create memorable client experiences may find themselves even more valuable in an increasingly automated world. The conversation ultimately reframes AI not as a replacement for advisors, but as a catalyst forcing the profession to rediscover the uniquely human qualities clients have valued all along.   Topics Covered Emotional intelligence as a business skill Building trust through rapport and curiosity Authentic empathy vs. synthetic AI empathy The psychology behind client decision-making Why referrals are rooted in emotional outcomes Coaching advisors to improve communication Leadership and emotional intelligence AI's impact on advisor differentiation Creating premium client experiences Future-proofing advisory businesses > Download a transcript of this episode… Listen and Learn Highlights for Advisors Why do better questions lead to better financial advice? (6:10) James explains why financial planning is only as good as the conversations that precede it—and why understanding a client's fears and aspirations leads to better outcomes than simply gathering financial facts. How does emotional intelligence translate into business growth? (15:30) Rapport isn't simply about making clients feel comfortable. James discusses why advisors who build trust quickly tend to earn more referrals and become significantly more referable. Can emotional intelligence actually be learned? (37:05) Contrary to popular belief, emotional intelligence isn't an innate personality trait. James explains why it is a trainable skill and how advisors can intentionally improve it throughout their careers. What makes authentic empathy different from AI? (39:10) One of the episode's most compelling discussions explores the difference between AI's ability to simulate empathy and the authentic emotional connection that develops between two people. Why should advisors think more about experience than efficiency? (45:10) Clients don't always pay more for information. Often, they pay more for confidence, judgment, reassurance, and the experience of working with someone they trust. Will AI replace advisors or elevate the best ones? (46:55) James shares why he believes AI is more likely to automate routine work while making relationship-centered advisors even more valuable. Key Takeaways Emotional intelligence is a measurable business capability—not simply a personality trait. Stronger client relationships begin with curiosity rather than advice. Advisors who solve emotional concerns make it easier for clients to recommend than advisors who simply deliver technical expertise. AI may replicate information, but authentic trust remains distinctly human. Premium advisory relationships will increasingly be defined by the experience clients receive—not just the answers they're given. Emotional intelligence improves leadership, client retention, referrals, and advisor well-being. The firms that embrace both technology and human connection will likely be best positioned for the future. https://youtu.be/xlQMQm6mqtc Quotable Moments “Rapport building is one of the foundational things for trust building.” “It's not real empathy. It's synthetic empathy.” “If all of our decisions were made on price, Ferrari wouldn't have a business.” “The advisors who create authentic human connection may be the ones who remain untouchable.” FAQs What is emotional intelligence, and why does it matter for financial advisors? James defines emotional intelligence as the ability to recognize, understand, and influence emotions in ourselves and others. For advisors, those skills strengthen communication, trust, leadership, and client relationships. Can emotional intelligence actually be developed? Yes. Unlike IQ, emotional intelligence can be improved through intentional practice, feedback, coaching, and greater self-awareness. Why do referrals have so much to do with emotional intelligence? Clients often remember and recommend how an advisor made them feel more than the technical work performed. Solving emotional concerns creates stories clients naturally share with others. What does James mean by “synthetic empathy”? AI can recognize language patterns and respond empathetically, but it doesn't genuinely experience human emotion. James argues that authentic empathy remains one of an advisor's greatest competitive advantages. How should advisors think about AI? Rather than viewing AI solely as a competitor, advisors should use it to improve efficiency while investing more time in conversations, judgment, and relationships that technology cannot fully replace. What is the biggest mindset shift advisors should make? Stop viewing emotional intelligence as a soft skill. Treat it as a business skill that directly influences growth, leadership, client loyalty, and long-term differentiation. James defines emotional intelligence as the ability to recognize, understand, and influence emotions in ourselves and others. For advisors, those skills strengthen communication, trust, leadership, and client relationships. Yes. Unlike IQ, emotional intelligence can be improved through intentional practice, feedback, coaching, and greater self-awareness. Clients often remember and recommend how an advisor made them feel more than the technical work performed. Solving emotional concerns creates stories clients naturally share with others. AI can recognize language patterns and respond empathetically, but it doesn't genuinely experience human emotion. James argues that authentic empathy remains one of an advisor's greatest competitive advantages. Rather than viewing AI solely as a competitor, advisors should use it to improve efficiency while investing more time in conversations, judgment, and relationships that technology cannot fully replace. Stop viewing emotional intelligence as a soft skill. Treat it as a business skill that directly influences growth, leadership, client loyalty, and long-term differentiation. Related Resources Why AI Matters Now: Filling the Estate Planning Gap with Wealth.com The Paradox of Choice Traps Successful Advisors Freedom vs. Familiarity: Is It Worth Disrupting Comfort for Something That Might Be Better? Guest Bio James Woodfall, founder of Raise Your EI, is a former financial planner who now advises financial services and firms on how they can leverage emotional intelligence (EI) to improve individual and organizational performance. He is the co-author, with Cliff Lansley, of “The Heart of Finance,” which teaches finance professionals to develop the emotional intelligence needed to build effective and profitable client relationships. NOTE: The views and opinions expressed by the guests on this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Diamond Consultants. Neither Diamond Consultants nor the guests on this podcast are compensated in any way for their participation. View the transcript of this episode… Emotional Intelligence: The “Untouchable” Differentiator in an AI World A conversation with Mindy Diamond and James Woodfall, Communication and Behavior Specialist at Raise Your EI.      Mindy Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is Emotional Intelligence: The “Untouchable” Differentiator in an AI World. It’s a conversation with James Woodfall, Communication and Behavior Specialist from Raise Your EI. I’m Mindy Diamond, and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at (908) 879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our Annual Advisor Transition Report. It’s the award-winning, data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. For years, advisors have competed on expertise, the ability to solve problems, deliver answers, and provide guidance clients couldn’t easily find on their own. But today, those answers are becoming easier to access via artificial intelligence and tools like ChatGPT, Claude, and Perplexity. AI can generate planning ideas, summarize complex topics, and answer questions in seconds. As the technology continues to improve, it raises an important question. If information becomes increasingly commoditized, what will clients continue to value most? My guest today, James Woodfall, is the Founder of the training firm, Raise Your EI, and a former wealth management business owner. James now helps advisors, leaders, and organizations strengthen the communication and behavioral skills that drive trust, influence, and performance. Skills rooted in emotional intelligence or EI, something that AI cannot authentically replicate. What’s interesting about James’s perspective is that he doesn’t view emotional intelligence as a soft skill. He views it as a business skill, one that impacts how advisors build rapport, earn referrals, lead teams, deepen client relationships, and ultimately differentiate themselves in an increasingly competitive marketplace that includes human and machine-driven advice. Our conversation explores why rapport is the foundation of trust, how emotional intelligence can be developed like any other professional skill, and why advisors who learn to create authentic human connection may be best positioned to thrive alongside AI, not compete against it. Or as James puts it, remain untouchable in the face of a changing world. Because while technology may continue to reshape how advice is delivered, the experience of being understood, trusted, and guided by another human being remains remarkably difficult to replicate. So, let’s get to it. James, thank you for joining me today, especially coming all the way from the UK. I’m grateful. James Woodfall: Thanks for having me on. Mindy Diamond: So, let’s start at the beginning. You’re a different kind of guest for us, and a topic that is near and dear to my heart because I’m always all about emotional intelligence and EQ, but it’s a topic that sometimes can feel a little squishy to some folks. So, tell us a little bit about your background and really how you got into the world of wealth management. James Woodfall: I got into wealth management probably was by accident while I was, I think about 19 years old. I got a job at a bank because I was living with different jobs and it was the first company that would take me. So I ended up working in a bank as a cashier in a branch. And then after a series of different career moves, I ended up running my own wealth management firm for about nine years, which I sold about three and a half years ago. Around the time that I was selling it, I did my first master’s degree in communication and behavior analysis, and that’s when I started taking a bit of a deep dive into understanding emotional intelligence and behavior and communication. But really, I started that journey before I sold my wealth management company, and really the goal was, how can I become a better financial advisor to my clients by having a better understanding of their psychology behavior around money so that I could communicate with them more effectively, help them build their plans? So I had a bit of a… like a lot of people I speak to in wealth management, they fell into it. Mindy Diamond: So, a lot to unpack there and I’m fascinated by your story. Tell us a little bit about how you began to use or leverage emotional intelligence. You say you got into it or were fascinated by it because it was a way of helping your clients. So, talk to us a little bit about that. How did you begin to see the impact long before you started this business? James Woodfall: So going back a couple of steps to that. When I started the business, it was very transactional. You’d sit down with the client, you find out about what sort of assets they have, what type of plans they have already, and you look for gaps where you can optimize things, or there was a product which they need which you didn’t have. But I moved away from that type of service to a financial planning led service. So, where actually before we get talking about, well, how do we structure your world? We spend a lot of time building a plan in cashflow modeling software. So the one that I used was over at a company called Voyant, and effectively I build a cashflow plan for the clients, which would map out based on assumptions of what age they would reach financial independence. And then that then would then move on to, how to we optimize your holdings? Now what occurred to me pretty quickly in offering that service is that the outputs from that type of exercise are only as good as the inputs. So you’re really relying on the client to be able to come up with the answers to the questions that you ask them to make the financial plan work. And in my experience, quite a lot of the time you sit down with these people and you ask them, “Imagine you’re retired, what does an ideal week look like for you?” So, what I realized is actually I was asking clients a lot of questions which no one had ever asked them before, such as, “If you go retire, imagine you’re retired tomorrow, what does your idea week look like?” Very rarely do we get asked that day-to-day, especially not from friends, family members, certainly. So I went off and actually did a diploma in coaching because I thought initially I want to become better at actually getting people to think about the future and think about plans. And in doing that, I ended up wanting to take a bit of a deeper dive into understanding behavior at a higher level. So that led me on to getting my masters. Impacts on clients though is that I became, and me as well, is that I became a far better listener first. So I listened first, I stopped making so many assumptions as I found I had about people. And really, I think that changed the dynamic in terms of me constant, I suppose, dictating to people about what they should be doing. So of course that’s what a good advisor does, isn’t it, is advice. You switch around into actually making sure you’ve got a deep understanding of people’s hopes, fears, goals, dreams, and then ultimately, you can help them better in terms of optimizing their financial plans and wealth. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. 100% of what you just said speaks to me in a big way, because that is 100% our philosophy. Most recruiters, I don’t mean it disparagingly, but most recruiters in general are pretty transactional. They see a hammer, they see a nail. So, a recruiter sees a financial advisor and he’s a means to an end to making a deal to a transaction. And our whole approach from day one was never about seeing you, financial advisor, as a transaction, but rather first and foremost, wanting to understand what’s important to you. And we get told all the time that we were asking questions that nobody ever asked them before. And I want to unpack it more, because I love what you’re saying. The goal as far as I see it is not just to ask a bunch of questions nobody asked before, but it’s to ask questions as a means to an end, to start out by asking questions that make somebody comfortable that tell them that you care about them. Then it’s about asking questions that they’ve never been asked before because the answers to a question like, “How do you see yourself behaving in retirement,” has everything to do with how much money they’ll need to retire. So, one informs the other. In our world asking somebody, “What are the things that spark you and what are the things that really don’t? And what will you do with this information?” And all those sorts of questions are questions many people had never been asked before, especially if somebody was looking at them as a transaction. And yet, it’s what deepens relationships, it’s what creates trust, and it’s what allows you to identify me as a recruiter, identify the best solution or the best opportunity for someone. So, do you agree with that? Is there anything that I’m off about? James Woodfall: No, that’s exactly the point. I think I’m asking better questions as a wealth manager talking to your client. Because ultimately this is, I suppose, one of the things which comes from understanding emotional intelligence, is that for most of us, we make decisions in motion first and then we justify with logic and reasoning, which is basically back to from. If I was to start with logical reasoning and then expect people to make a buying decision. And so a lot of the time, especially with things like retirement savings, for example, because it’s in the future, it’s over there, especially if it’s 10, 20 years away, people think, “Well, why will I give up so much money a month now for something which is so far in the future that I can’t comprehend it yet?” But if you start reigning the questions in a way which gets to kind of the… Really what you want to uncover is, if you wake up at 3:00 in the morning and you can’t get back to sleep, what’s on your mind? Because if you can uncover that emotion that fits all that kind of pain or problem, then you deal with emotion first and logic second. Mindy Diamond: And it tells you what you need to solve for, right? James Woodfall: Exactly, yeah. Mindy Diamond: If what keeps me up is I’m worried I’m going to outlive my money, and you know that’s your true north in terms of how you begin to tackle that they’re thinking about the future, they want you to focus on the long term. Right? Is that what you get from that? What’s the typical answer you get to that question, that one in particular? James Woodfall: For retirement planning, it’s usually clusters around. “Well, I’m not sure I’m making the right decision. There’s lots of options that are complicated. But really, actually, am I going to have enough money? Am I going to run out?” Because it’s the big question, isn’t it? How long are you going to live and how much are you going to need? Mindy Diamond: Right. As I was preparing for this interview, I think I know the answer because I’m a person that lives in this world that believes fully in, I don’t have a degree in behavioral finance but I’m big on emotional intelligence, connecting, developing trust, and that I don’t have any right to sell anybody anything or suggest anything unless I’ve connected on an interpersonal level. But I don’t know that everybody believes that. So help us, our listeners to understand, why does this matter to financial advisors? So, I’m going to give you two examples. I’m a younger advisor that has, say, five to 10 years in the business, say $100 million or 100 million pounds under management and is looking to really build a business. How and why does the concept of emotional intelligence, of EI, matter to me? And then I’m going to ask you the same question again with respect to someone who manages a billion dollars or a billion pounds. How and why does it matter? James Woodfall: Yeah. I think probably a starting point is, let’s just clear up I suppose in definitions so that we understand what we’re talking about when we say emotional intelligence, it’s an EQ. Because I suppose let’s think about, let’s call EQ the measurement, and emotional intelligence is the concept. So the definition of emotional intelligence is it’s an ability, and it’s this ability to understand and influence emotions in ourselves and others. So within ourselves, can we perceive and understand our own emotions? What turns them on? What triggers them? Can we do something about that? Can we recognize it, manage it in the right context, or either initiate our emotions in the right context? And can we do that when we’re talking to other people? So, are we good at perceiving people’s emotions within different contexts, and are we good at influencing and utilizing that information to help us communicate more effectively? So, these are skills which requires regard within those two roles to make you effective. And so, one of the things that we’ve learned from probably 30 years of people studying emotion intelligence is that if emotion is involved within the job role, emotional intelligence correlates with job performance and has a meaningful impact on the difference between an average and a big performer. So regardless of whether it’s one of the two scenarios that you’ve said, performance improvements are always on the table. But one of the things which tends to happen as you move from, say, up in terms of the money that you’re managing is the stakes get higher. So quite often, you actually need a much far higher degree of self-management, a higher degree of self-awareness, a higher degree of ability to perceive emotions in others, and to be able to communicate with influence. Because quite often as you are dealing with clients who are more affluent, there’s a correlation between actually the skills that your clients have and the skills that they expect you to have as an advisor. So the higher you go up that sort of ladder in terms of value, the more effective you need to be. So that’s where that EQ measurement. If you had to sit down and do an EQ assessment, for example, you need to be scoring way above average the higher up you go. Mindy Diamond: How will somebody begin to notice that developing the emotional intelligence muscle, developing the quantity of EQ, how will that begin to show up and impact their business? James Woodfall: There’s a couple of ways, and I think it really does show up in self-awareness and self-management and awareness and understanding of others. So one of the things which will show up in terms of that awareness and understanding of others is, can you build trusted relationships quickly? So like those skills that we were talking about before about asking better questions and listening, especially the first time you meet a new prospective client, if you can really turn your ears on and get very, very curious about the person that you’re talking to, rapport building is one of the foundational things for trust building. And really, if you get rapport building right, one of the goals should be to find common ground early, because the minute that you can build a connection with people and you start uncovering things that you’ve got in common, it starts signaling to people that actually you’re someone who is like them, on their side, and that they’re someone that you can trust. Now people who get this right, they tend to close more clients and they tend to gain more referrals or recommendations to other clients. And when I used to run my business, referrals was the largest source of new clients. Every single year, all the other different marketing streams, they didn’t produce anything near referrals. And I think back to that, if you look back to the kind of retirement example, if you can really get an answer to that question of, you wake up at 3:00 AM, what’s on your mind, what’s up when you’re getting back to sleep? If you can uncover that and solve that, for a client, it’s far easier to articulate that to a friend than it is for them to explain the technicalities of what you did with their retirement savings. But it’s easier to articulate, “You should absolutely go and see James. We were worried about whether we’re saving enough, he solved that, it’s brilliant, you need to go and see him.” That’s what I mean, is that they’re able to articulate the emotional outcome. Mindy Diamond: Even though what we’re talking about here is someone making the case that strengthening one’s emotional intelligence will make you a better advisor, easier to say that, sounds logical. But you’re connecting it to, you’re saying that someone who actually gets this right, gets it better, is going to create more of an instant rapport rooted in trust, and likely grow their business because it makes them more referable. And those are things that certainly every young advisor wants, but every advisor wants. So, let me switch the tables a second. I get why a young advisor with 100 million wants to get to a billion, why this is really important. They want to do everything they can to really make themselves the most referable. But let’s take the advisor that’s on the back nine that has been doing this 30 years, manages a billion and a half of pounds, dollars in assets under management, is growing by referrals and it’s an organic referral stream. It’s a business that feeds itself. So, while everybody always needs to be in business development mode, they feel like they’ve cracked the code, they’ve got it covered. How and why does this concept impact a senior advisor, someone with a much bigger, more robust book of business? James Woodfall: Yeah, it’s interesting. So if we take a bit of a step back and look at a bit about what some of the research says about the impacts of emotional intelligence, there have been some studies done within financial services about the impact of your training on business outcomes. So there was a study done probably around about between 2000 and 2004 with Ameriprise, and they brought their agents through a year-long emotional intelligence development program. And it was interesting, they measured at the beginning of the program EQ, what someone’s EQ score was, but they measured things like health, anger, trade anger. So, how often were people experiencing anger, stress, and burnout. So they’re measuring all sorts of things other than EQ just to see what the impact of EQ training was. Now EQ scores went up, sales went up, I think on average of about 24% across four cohorts. But things like stress, burnout, health outcomes, perceived health outcomes, people are asked to rate, how would you rate your health, that went up. Experience of anger went down because people become better at managing it. So as you look at the kind of example that you described, I would say that as someone who’s in that stage of the career where they may not have the capacity to take on more clients. So just think, well, actually, I don’t want an uplift of 20%, 24% in sales because I might not process that. But one of the things which I suppose the EI research shows actually is that it impacts your quality of life. And there is finding which is quite common in research, is that actually EI scores correlate with age. So as we go through life and we have sort of ups, downs, highs, lows, and we learn from those. We learn from our emotional experience, and that’s hypothesis, is it feeds into our EQ score. So you’ve probably got people at that later stage of their career who actually probably have had experience which has developed their emotional intelligence. They’ve got mature standing, which means that they might not necessarily need to go out and find new clients. They’ve got experience, which has helped them develop client relationships, but they might want to take a step back at quality of life. If they’re experiencing stress, burnout, pressure, EQ can help absolutely with all of those. The other thing which is quite common as well is that if they’re playing any sort of leadership part within that business now, let’s say if they’re a business owner, EQ absolutely is key for leadership performance. So making sure that you’re building a team of people around you, you can help you develop the business. And actually, EI and leadership’s one of the biggest areas where research has been focused. But I think one of the other things I’ve got to say is that we’ve all got blind spots. It doesn’t matter where we are in life, we’ve all got things that I suppose that we could be better at. And actually shining a lens on those and improving our self-awareness is something that you can develop at all stages. Mindy Diamond: A lot of people in our industry, whether it be a recruiter or an advisor themselves, believe that efficiency or being most effective and efficient is the true north. And that to ask what may fee like unnecessary or ancillary questions that don’t directly get to help me to figure out what your asset allocation is so that I can grow your portfolio, may feel ancillary. And so, is that one of the most common objections you get when somebody, say, comes to you and they’re thinking about retaining you and they’re wondering what the benefit is? James Woodfall: Well, I think the people in firms I tend to talk to, there’s a couple of common things that are coming to mind now. One is pressure around fees. So, how can I make sure I’m articulating my value in a time where clients are more informed, they can go on AI and they come to meetings prepared with answers, and they’re challenging back around the value that advisors can provide. So getting back, I suppose, and the answer is funnily enough, is actually if you’ve designed your service around a proposition which makes yourself easy to replace by someone else who can do it for the same or cheaper price with a promise of better performance, or even in the years coming, a robo-advisor, it’s going to be challenging to retain and grow clients. But I’m not particularly worried about AI. The other types of firms that come to me is to say, “Look, we’ve identified actually that we need to think differently about our business model, what we do and who we serve, because it’s going to be easier than it’s ever been for clients to come up to do some of these things themselves.” But absolutely what is untouchable, I think, is this ability to create a human connection, to sit down and discuss a range of different options. “Do I do X, do I do Y? What are the trade-offs if I choose that over that?” And to uncover those things which, as I said, really keep people up at night and solve for them. I think it’s going to be quite hard to replicate that digitally. Mindy Diamond: So I want to get to a end that you hit the nail on the head, and I want to delve deeper into it. Whatever the advisor is looking for, they may not worry about pressure around fees, they may not be kept up at night. They have a practice or a business that’s worked well all these years and is growing organically and it’s more than good enough. But anybody who isn’t concerned about the potential impact of AI on their business and whether they’re a financial advisor or recruiter or anybody else, is living under a rock. So, the goal for everyone should be to make yourself untouchable. And you hit it on the head, it’s the ability to create human connection. So, I want to ask you something. It occurs to me, you talk a lot about learning to ask the right questions. In some cases, the questions that a client never been asked before makes sense to me. But I think the real skill, I mean, I imagine anybody can teach you a list of questions to ask. The real skill comes in is knowing what to do with that information. So, let’s assume that someone says an advisor says you ask that smart question, “What keeps you up at night? What do you think about at 3:00 AM?” Pressure around fees. I find people, clients asking me, prospects asking me all the time what sort of value I can add, whether it be in the land of AI or competitively, whatever it is, pressure around fees. What do you do? So you’ve asked the smart question, but what do you teach? What do you do with that information? James Woodfall: It’s a mindset, I think, because having just say a list of questions I don’t think is really helpful to any advisor when you’re training them. And yet I find I do get people who, okay, say, “Well, look, what questions should we ask? Have you got a list of questions that you would ask?” I hold back giving those out because I think that, well, that’s what I would say. It’s not necessarily going to land the same way if you say it. The mindset I’m trying to teach advisor is to adopt a curious mindset. So not asking questions for question’s sake, but if I’m talking to someone, what I want to do is I want to understand, how are you thinking? How do you see the problem? What assumptions are you making? What things do you believe which maybe don’t line up with how things are in reality, or goals, objectives, or whatever it is. So I’m trying to understand how you think, and that requires not asking questions off a list of great questions to ask, comes off of understanding the format for that, is utilizing the open questions to gather information, to check assumptions that might sit behind them, because actually understanding those assumptions is really, really useful. And to then summarize and play back to someone that you’re talking to so that you can demonstrate that you’re listening and you deeply understand them, and being able to summarize and be able to succinctly put their words into a, “Well, what do we do next about this?” Mindy Diamond: Yeah, and, why does it matter? I love that because what I always say is it’s art, not science. AI could give you a list of, if I put in the topic of emotional intelligence and give me a list of 10 smart questions to ask relative to X. One of the questions I would ask someone from an emotional perspective that demonstrates I have strong emotional perspective relative to pressure around fees, AI could spit out the questions. But I think you’re 100% right. The real key is being a good listener and meeting someone where they are. And it’s not about a prescribed or canned list of questions that demonstrate you have strong emotional intelligence. It’s much more about asking the right next question, saying the right thing, the validating statement afterwards. And not as a means to an end, not as a means to a transaction, not as just a way of checking the box, I have emotional intelligence, but really because demonstrating that you deeply care. And I like what you said, the notion of a changed mindset. Do people get that right away? I guess what I’m asking is, financial advisors, while smart ones who are looking to make themselves untouchable by AI will get that concept. They’re looking to differentiate themselves and they’re looking to hone the skills that AI can’t bring to the table. But at the same time, financial advisors are number oriented and goal oriented. And so, how long does it typically take to begin to see, or how do you paint the picture about getting from here to there, connecting the dots between strengthening changing your mindset, strengthening your emotional intelligence, and seeing more results? James Woodfall: Well, look, it’s about behavior change, isn’t it? Like any kind of behavior change, there has to be a few things at play. One is that you have to have a good understanding of where you are right now, what things that you are good at, but what things you need to work on. And then effectively the things you need to work on, you need a plan of how you’re going to work on them. So I think commonly how you develop these kind of relational skills is that you need to be able to get close to, what does the goal look like? Where am I headed? If I get this right, what’s it going to look like? And then you need to have a plan to get from A to B. And actually part of that plan has to be built around good feedback. And I was quite lucky where during my career, I worked for two large banks before I started my firm. And I had really, really good training from managers that I worked with, almost on a monthly basis would come and sit in my client meetings and then feedback to me about what I could have done better. And so actually, if you’re going to really commit to developing, I suppose relational skills and becoming more emotionally intelligent, you need help from someone within your firm or externally to come in and actually observe you by trying out new things and giving you feedback. Now of course, you could do some of that yourself if you’re doing a virtual meeting, you could hit record, play it back, be your own analyst. But quite often we can’t see that ourselves, but if you’ve got say a third party, they can watch you in action. Quite quickly they can hone in and say, “Well, actually, you could have asked a different question here, or actually if you’d phrased that like this, you might’ve got a bit more information, or the client closed down when you ask that question.” So actually then, you start to create that behavior change. So feedback I think is one thing, but actually aligning it with really, values, I think. So, one of the things that I suppose is quite important for behavior change is that we are motivated to do things where we strongly believe it’s the right thing to do. So, I think which is why it can be quite difficult for a firm to bring in with a team of advisors and say, “Well, we’re going to roll out emotional intelligence training,” because you’ll get some of us go, “This is brilliant.” Mindy Diamond: Eye roll. I would imagine eye roll is the… It can be a lot of the response, right? James Woodfall: You get a lot of resistance, because some people see it as a criticism of just saying, “Well, actually I’m good at that. I don’t need training in that, thank you very much.” Mindy Diamond: And because if efficiency in getting to a goal is the true north, I mean, I think the mindset shift you’re talking about is going from believing that getting to the goal by just asking the right numbers and dealing in data, changing that from it’s about building a relationship, which ultimately will impact the amount you manage and how you grow and how you connect and all of that stuff. But for people that are goal-oriented, linear in their thinking, I imagine this can be not just felt as a criticism but hard to embrace. James Woodfall: Oh, yeah, no. I think we view the brain as kind of a black box. I do get people I speak to, they go, “Mental health isn’t real. And all of this is psychobabble,” but from the people that I’ve had feedback from, and this is even for people I haven’t trained. I wrote a book about 18 months ago about the topic which talks about emotion intelligence within the 5X context. I’ve had people contact me on LinkedIn and say, “Look, I read your book. I’ve been following your content for a while. I’ve put some of the ideas to work, and I’m now getting my manager and their manager contact me and saying, ‘What are you doing differently?’” Because all of a sudden they’re opening up conversations with clients that they couldn’t before, doing business with clients where they couldn’t before. And all it is that this kind of focus on the client, the relationship, building that connection, and all of a sudden you start seeing that convert into more sales opportunities. Mindy Diamond: Yes and more yes, because that’s always been our philosophy, my philosophy from starting the business and our philosophy, and I couldn’t agree with you more. You articulated it probably as did, I got to it instinctively. You have research behind it, etc. By the way, for our listeners, we will link your book in the notes for this episode if anybody’s interested in buying it. But you hit the nail on the head, so, or you took the words out of my mouth in terms of next question. Who are your clients? Are they individual advisors? Are they independent RIAs? Are they Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch? And what kind of work do you do for them? James Woodfall: So, I do, there’s probably two parts to my business. One is the consulting training part, which is going into firms, typically firms that were the owner managed typically, where the owner either is still advising or has a big impact on other behaviors of the advice team that’s underneath them. And really, I work on a consultancy basis. So rather than going and just provide EI training, what I do is effectively start with understanding the business. So exactly as I’ve been talking to you about, the process I used to follow as an advisor, it’s the same process I follow when I’m working with practices, is I want to find out what’s going well in the business. Where are the blockers, what’s not going so well? And I’m a social science researcher. So I’d want to spend some time in the business actually doing a bit of a deep dive and maybe speaking to the team while the owner’s not in the room and finding out a bit about how they’re seeing things. Because ultimately, what that will do is it allows me to look at thematically extracting what types of training interventions might move the needle within the business. And then I put that onto a report for businesses and say, “Look, this is what I think we should be doing.” Some of that might be me working one-to-one, doing that coaching, observing, training with particular people in the business who have been highlighted as requiring development, or it might be group training, might be taking the whole teams through a training program. And then following up, helping build those development plans, and then being there supporting with the one-to-ones as they bed in that behavior change. So, that’s one part of the business. The other part of the business is working for the larger firms. I’ve done a bit of work for Fidelity this year and last year, and they’re looking to hire me as an authority expert on the topic to put together training programs that go out to the advisors that they work with. So, there’s the two aspects, like an external speaker trainer that’s brought in by some of the larger companies. And then the other one is a bit more hands-on, applying not only the science but my experience of having been there and run a business. Mindy Diamond: Right. So are the big firms like… So you mentioned Fidelity, are the wirehouses, Merrill, Morgan, UBS, Wells Fargo, are they embracing this? Are the big banks embracing it, or is this largely in the RIA space right now? James Woodfall: In the UK, there’s been a huge kind of interest in emotional intelligence, behavioral finance, relational skills. And actually, a lot of the kind of people who require influential in the UK are actually based in the US. And so, I think there’s a good bit of crossover. We’ve got good people who are specialists in looking at the retirement piece from a retirement transition about, how do you support people through what is a profound psychological transition? So, I think the RIAs are really interested in it as a topic. Then we’ve got the larger institutions are interested in it either as the RIAs are clients of theirs and they want to be seen to providing thought leadership to the RIAs and helping them develop these skills. But also, we’ve got some quite large companies in the UK now here, like the banks, for example, the banks or the whole exited the advice market in around about 2012, 2013, and then this year they’re starting to come back. So they’ve had 15 years nearly out of the market and they’re coming back because they’re just wanting an opportunity for face-to-face advice. So, I think actually it’s a hot topic now and I think all segments of the market are looking at, how do they develop non-technical skills to help them succeed in the future? Mindy Diamond: Can someone who was not born with strong EQ, can they learn this? James Woodfall: Absolutely. One of the interesting things about EQ is it’s not like IQ, for example. IQ is our a sort of cognitive ability. There was some good research that was done probably about, I think 2016, which looked at, do you remember all this sort of brain training apps like, if you do Sudoku, do you get smarter? You get better at Sudoku, but it doesn’t translate into performance on another. You don’t get better at crosswords from doing Sudoku, for example. So, IQs are pretty much fixed and there’s not a lot we can do about that. But EQ has been shown to be a trainable ability. So regardless of where you are now, if you understand your strengths and weaknesses and put a plan together for improvement, everyone has the ability to improve their EQ. And it’s not like personality, for example, where it’s quite hard to shift the dial. Let’s say if you’re quite strongly introverted and you find social situations difficult, if you just took that approach and said, “Well, look, can we make you extremely extroverted?” The answer would be, well, probably not. But EQ absolutely helps that person because noticing that you feel uncomfortable in, say, a networking situation if you have to do that professionally, having the tools in the bag to manage that feeling and throw yourself into the experience, that’s EQ in action. So, it doesn’t matter your baseline of where you are, EQ can have a big impact on your ability to perform across a range of different contexts, home, work, with friends. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. Let’s talk about your comment that EQ or strong emotional intelligence is what can make an advisor untouchable by AI. And I assume the premise being that, I can’t replace a human relationship. It may be able to come up with the questions, but at least for today it lacks the ability to know what to do with that information and to create the human connection. Talk to me more about that. How and why is that? I mean, is that part of why people are coming to you, because they’re worried about AI encroaching on their business? James Woodfall: Where we are at the moment is actually AI… Let’s look at healthcare for a second. Chatbots in healthcare have actually been outperforming humans in some respects. So there’s a type of therapy called cognitive behavior therapy, that’s been run with AI agents and patients. And as researchers to show that actually, disclosure has increased when patients are speaking to a chatbot because cognitive behavior therapy is like it’s guided, is a method, it’s a methodology to it. But disclosure increases and this theory behind that is is that people open up more when they don’t feel like they’re being judged by another person. So that’s interesting, because that saying to us, “Well, actually, people are trusting AI agents with very, very personal information, and people are already getting that feeling of empathy with AI agents.” Because if you tell an AI agent something deeply personal and it says, “That must have been really difficult for you,” for example. Mindy Diamond: Yeah, it does that well. Wonderful feedback about how great you are or what a smart question you just asked. James Woodfall: Yeah, but it’s synthetic, it’s not real empathy, it’s synthetic empathy. Whilst we might feel actually we get that feeling that we’re being understood, it’s not real. And I think the advisor’s edge is, look, I think where we might end up with this is that if you take a step back and you do this kind of exercise of what’s my ideal client, the ideal client is, I think, now is someone who is still time poor. So yes, an AI agent might be able to interview you, build a financial plan, but do you really want to spend the time doing that or do you have any inclination to do that? No. Well, that’s a perfect client who would hire an advisor. They value human relationships. Obviously when we do get AI entering the advisor market, it’s going to be at a lower price point. So actually, we’re now talking about a difference between experience. So the experience of being with an advisor comes at a premium. So that experience is going to be what people are going to pay additional value for. So, it’s the experience of dealing with a human. It’s the experience of dealing with a human who can talk them through complex information and options, help them understand their thinking and apply judgment, connect with those emotional things. But there’s a whole range of information that we get when we’re talking face-to-face, which AI doesn’t have access to. So back to that retirement example, if we say, “Well, man, I’ve modeled your plan. If we do X, Y, and Z, you’re not going to run out of money when you retire. You’re going to be okay.” And then the person, usually what they do is they sigh with relief, which is actually the emotion of joy, relief is actually happiness. So that sigh of relief and the softening of muscle tension in the body that you see when you’re face-to-face with another person, AI can’t, doesn’t get that data. Mindy Diamond: And how powerful is that? So, why does that matter? If I say, “I have X, I need Y. I have X number of years until I retire. Will I have enough money to retire the way I want to?” AI can spit that answer out faster than any financial advisor and come back hopefully saying, “Yes,” they’ll know that I will experience relief and joy because I’ll write back saying, “Great news.” It’ll say, “Yes, that is fabulous news.” It’ll tell me why I’m relieved and all that sort of stuff. So, why does that matter? James Woodfall: I think fundamentally, it comes back to trust. For those people who can get that quick answer, they’ll go, “Yeah, that’s great.” But there’ll be some people who go, “Yeah, fine. I’ll take that answer at face value.” There’ll be other people who go, “Well, what if you made a mistake?” Quite interesting that actually, people will get the same answer from a human advisor and they’ll trust it more. And I think one of those things is because we’re wired for connection, so when empathy develops, it’s quite interesting. Something which you see in young children, for example, is when we develop at the very early stage, probably about three or four years old, before children have learned to self-regulate their emotions, you see emotional contagion in groups of children happen quite rapidly. You get one child who say gets a toy taken away from them and starts crying, and then all the other children at the same age in the nursery start crying. Now, none of those other ones are crying because they’re sad. They’re crying because we have these things called mirror neurons, which means we pick up and mirror the emotional state of people around us. So, you actually get an experience of shared feeling and especially if you’ve got strong rapport, strong relationship, you actually share emotions of the people around you. Now, of course, as we grow out of that developmental stage, we learn this ability to understand that actually what we’re feeling isn’t happening to us, it’s happening to someone else. But have you ever been around… My favorite example for this is, if my wife has had a bad day at work because she comes home and starts slamming the door and banging cupboards, why I start to feel anger, because it’s rubbing off, it’s in the room. So, it’s this shared understanding that I think is where the value is. And so absolutely the answer might be faster and quicker, but for some clients they value that experience of having that answer delivered by someone who understands them. Mindy Diamond: And I think, so the point is that there will be clients or prospects that will value the efficiency of AI, that don’t necessarily need the face-to-face, that don’t necessarily… They just want the answer. They want the answers to the test, they don’t care how you got there. But what you’re talking about is finding the clients that really value the human connection. And if that’s what in fact is going to make advisors untouchable, then they need to make sure that they really strengthen this skill. James Woodfall: It’s not just the answer, but it’s the whole experience that’s wrapped around that. So actually last year, and my wife took me to a restaurant and we had a lovely, lovely meal. And on the menu there was this cup of coffee and the beans were like one of the rarest beans in the world. They’re the ones that get eaten by this little animal with the jungle in it, poops them out, and then the beans get roasted. But it was about 40 pounds for this cup of coffee and I thought, well, I’m going to have that. But that’s the experience, isn’t it? I could get a cup of coffee at McDonald’s, but actually the experience of this, something which is rare, exclusive, delivered in an amazing environment, that’s what you’re paying for. So, you’ve got to remember that actually if experience dictates a lot of what we value as well. So because if all of our decisions were made on price, Ferrari wouldn’t have a business because everyone would just be buying the cheapest car that does the job. You’re going to think advisors that are going to operating in this space, well, they need to think about the whole package, as in the experience that the plan that’s delivered, and the advice. Mindy Diamond: But it speaks to the notion of any advisor that isn’t thinking about AI’s impact on his business and how to reshape or rewire the business, even just rewiring the value proposition, retooling their value proposition, how they explain their value and what they do needs to change because they’re competing not only with the advisor that sits next to them or down the hall, but they’re competing with AI. How about as AI, as you see AI develop? So fast-forward five years, you and I are talking about where AI is today, but AI is, God knows where it’ll be five years from now. So, how do you foresee, do you still foresee the advisor being untouchable if they get this right, five or 10 years from now? James Woodfall: I don’t think it’s financial advice that’s unique with this, because I think it’s any profession where at the moment human judgment and understanding are valued. Healthcare, for example, same thing, doctors follow consultancy process. You’ve got this like tax, legal, a whole range of professions which are all grappling on the same problem. So I think in five years time, I think the answer is, is that we just don’t know what AI will look like. But certainly in the moment, if you track what Claude are doing with code work, and what Perplexity is doing with its skills and add-ons, a lot of it is actually at the moment geared up to freeing up the advisor’s time so that they can spend more time with clients. So, I think at the moment this sort of trend is looking like AI companies want to support advisors to be way more efficient so that they can deal with more clients. But in five years time, who knows? I think probably one of the biggest leaps that will happen is when AI is no longer working from, say, just a transcript. If it gets out to that kind of chat where you can actually interact with an AI agent like you and I are talking, I think that’s going to provide a different experience, because then you’re moving it from, as I said, that kind of structure where somebody is stuck there tapping away at keyboard, having a conversation with a chatbot, effectively, to actually having a conversation with an embodied agent with a face, gestures, a voice. That I think will start to change things a little bit. Mindy Diamond: Yeah. Well, it will be an interesting future, for sure. This has been a fascinating conversation. I really enjoyed it, and thank you so much for sharing so graciously. Is there anything to wrap up that I didn’t ask you, that you would want an advisor to know about this concept or anything you’re thinking about? James Woodfall: I think we’ve taken a broad sweep and then a deep dive into certain areas. I think really probably have to get started. I think probably one of the… I mean, you mentioned obviously I’ve got a book that you share the links to, which is fantastic. Audiobook is available to that as well on Spotify or wherever audiobooks are listed. I think there’s a lot of good advice in that about how to get started. So, I think for people who are looking at covering that next step of, what do we do, it’d be, yeah, pick up a book and have a bit of a deep dive. If you want to skip the book and come straight to having a conversation with me, then I write a weekly email, which goes out once a week, which is just one topic. So very much like we’ve been talking today, I share ideas on that once a week, or on LinkedIn, I’m around on LinkedIn as well. Mindy Diamond: Good. Well, we will link all of it so everyone knows how to find you. Thank you again for being so gracious. Love the topic, love the work that you’re doing, love that there’s a need for it, and can’t wait to see where you go from here. James Woodfall: Brilliant. No, I enjoyed it. Thank you. Mindy Diamond: Thank you. As a financial advisor, you hold yourself to the highest standards of integrity, honesty, and credibility. You are successful because you take your professional responsibility seriously, and are dedicated to your clients. But are you living your best business life? Are your goals aligned with your firms or could a better option exist? Should I Stay or Should I Go? Is a book written with you in mind? It’s a self-guided journey that walks you through the key steps that we take with our advisor clients. This strategic thought process and roadmap to professional self-discovery is designed to help you ask the right questions and think critically and objectively, whether you’re considering change or not. Learn how to get your copy at diamond-consultants.com/thebook. Emotional Intelligence: The “Untouchable” Differentiator in an AI World A conversation with Mindy Diamond and James Woodfall, Communication and Behavior Specialist at Raise Your EI.      Mindy Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is Emotional Intelligence: The “Untouchable” Differentiator in an AI World. It’s a conversation with James Woodfall, Communication and Behavior Specialist from Raise Your EI. I’m Mindy Diamond, and this is the Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at (908) 879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our Annual Advisor Transition Report. It’s the award-winning, data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. For years, advisors have competed on expertise, the ability to solve problems, deliver answers, and provide guidance clients couldn’t easily find on their own. But today, those answers are becoming easier to access via artificial intelligence and tools like ChatGPT, Claude, and Perplexity. AI can generate planning ideas, summarize complex topics, and answer questions in seconds. As the technology continues to improve, it raises an important question. If information becomes increasingly commoditized, what will clients continue to value most? My guest today, James Woodfall, is the Founder of the training firm, Raise Your EI, and a former wealth management business owner. James now helps advisors, leaders, and organizations strengthen the communication and behavioral skills that drive trust, influence, and performance. Skills rooted in emotional intelligence or EI, something that AI cannot authentically replicate. What’s interesting about James’s perspective is that he doesn’t view emotional intelligence as a soft skill. He views it as a business skill, one that impacts how advisors build rapport, earn referrals, lead teams, deepen client relationships, and ultimately differentiate themselves in an increasingly competitive marketplace that includes human and machine-driven advice. Our conversation explores why rapport is the foundation of trust, how emotional intelligence can be developed like any other professional skill, and why advis

Our Global Head of Fixed Income Research Andrew Sheets outlines what could potentially go wrong and disrupt markets' optimism this summer.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Andrew Sheets, Global Head of Fixed Income Research at Morgan Stanley. Today, discussing three things that could disrupt a quiet summer. It's Wednesday, July 8th at noon in New York. As markets turn the page toward the second half of the year, there are lots of reasons for optimism. Global growth remains solid. Earnings growth is strong, and broadening across more companies. Capital markets remain open and deal activity is robust. We continue to think that the best analogy for current conditions is something like 1997 through 1998 or 2005 through 2006 – periods where corporate aggression was increasing, and had further to go, leading to equities outperforming credit. Even more immediately, July also happens to be one of the best months of the year for markets. And while one should never base their entire investment strategy on how far the earth has travelled around the sun, this month has been the best month for the U.S. High Yield returns, by far, over the last 15 years. The last time the S&P 500 fell in the month of July was 2014. So given all that, what could go wrong? Well, here are three things that are on our mind. First, a key part of our most optimistic view is that U.S. inflation will be lower than the Federal Reserve expects in the second half of this year, leading them to leave interest rates unchanged, rather than raise rates as the market expects. The risk is that this assumption is just wrong, perhaps soon. There is certainly an argument that, if the Fed is worried about inflation, it shouldn't wait to act, and the market is currently placing roughly 1-in-3 chance that the Fed hikes rates on July 29th. If that happens – and again, our base case is it does not – it could drive volatility. Second is earnings season, which kicks off next week. While the general trend of earnings is important, the bigger focus is likely to be on the results of large U.S. tech companies, and in particular, how much they plan to spend building out AI infrastructure. Over the last several quarters, almost like clockwork, these spending estimates have been revised higher and higher. And that has helped boost confidence in AI – as the spending is a sign that the technology holds promise – as well as boosting the broader earnings outlook; since all of this spending is becoming other company's revenue. Our base-case remains that this AI spending cycle has further to run, with capex from the major U.S. hyperscalers rising from over $800bn of spending this year to roughly $1.2 trillion of spending next year. But the risk would be that second quarter earnings now show more hesitation to spend, maybe because the share prices of some of these big spenders have been recent underperformers. And given how much the current growth and earnings story is linked to AI, and how popular AI exposure is with investors, that would create a risk. Finally, there's Iran. Our base case assumes a gradual renormalization of flows through the Strait of Hormuz, and we forecast Brent oil at about $75/bbl in 12 months time, which is pretty similar to current levels. But as of this recording there were reports of renewed hostilities, and the ceasefire may be fragile. The U.S. has already drawn down its Strategic Petroleum Reserve to its lowest-ever levels, potentially reducing some ability to absorb shocks if the conflict re-escalates. Historically, July tends to be strong, and markets have a number of helpful tailwinds at their back. But an unexpected rate hike, an unexpected reduction in Hyperscaler Capex, and a resumption of the Iran conflict are three factors that are not in our base-case – and could disrupt that. Thank you, as always, for your time. If you find Thoughts on the Market useful, let us know by leaving a review wherever you listen. Also tell a friend or colleague about us today.

Morgan Stanley's Adam Jonas joins Squawk on the Street to explain his initiation of SpaceX, including his $600 bull-case valuation and what could propel the company higher from here. Plus, former Defense Secretary Mark Esper reacts after President Trump says the ceasefire with Iran is over, examining the geopolitical and market implications. And RXR CEO Scott Rechler discusses the outlook for New York City real estate and how the industry is responding to the unstable Midtown Manhattan building, current being transformed from an office to residential property. Squawk on the Street Disclaimer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Bitcoin fell below $62K after renewed U.S.-Iran tensions triggered a broader risk-off move across markets. We break down the macro forces driving Bitcoin, why Japanese companies are adding BTC to their treasuries as the yen weakens, and what it means for the market. We also discuss Robinhood chain hot start, Strike's no-liquidation Bitcoin-backed loans, Morgan Stanley's AI outlook, and why Bitwise CIO Matt Hougan believes this correction is a healthy deleveraging process, forming the bottom for higher prices in the fall. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The biggest AI stocks have had a remarkable run – but questions still remain. Our Head of Americas Specialty Sales, Thomas Wigg, speaks with Global Head of Thematic and Sustainability Research Stephen Byrd and Global Head of Public Policy Research Ariana Salvatore about the competition and durability of the investment cycle.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript ----- Thomas Wigg: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Tom Wigg, Morgan Stanley's Head of Americas Specialty Sales. Stephen Byrd: I'm Stephen Byrd, Morgan Stanley's Global Head of Thematic and Sustainability Research. Ariana Salvatore: And I'm Ariana Salvatore, Morgan Stanley's Head of Public Policy Research. Thomas Wigg: Today, the rally in AI CapEx beneficiaries has taken a breather in recent weeks on concerns of competition from open-source models, backlash to token-maxxing, and growing political opposition to data center builds. It's Tuesday, July 7th at 10am in New York. Let's start with you, Stephen. There's a lot of discussion recently around a backlash at token-maxxing. Essentially, enterprises trying to curtail their high spending on AI tokens from the frontier labs, and, in many cases, shifting to cheaper open-source China models. Can you first offer some perspective here on the value of tokens for enterprises? I know you have a popular token factory model that walks through the economics of agents. Stephen Byrd: Yeah, Tom, we do have this model that really walks through token economics, both from the adopter side as well as the hyperscaler side. So, let's do the adopter side. So, there's a study out that shows a whole range of enterprise use cases of AI, and the average single use case that they identify would save a company about $55 or provide that much benefit. And while we don't know exactly how many tokens it will require, we can make some educated guesses as to a typical token usage to achieve that $55 outcome. And we know that a typical American model, though this varies a lot, you can think of as the cost per million tokens being in the range of $5 per million. Some will be lower, some will be higher. So, for a few dollars of token cost, an enterprise can generate benefit of $55. So that doesn't make me overly concerned about token spend and concerns about token-maxxing. I know we're going to get into that, but the foundation here is really good in the sense that enterprise use cases are very much in the money. Thomas Wigg: How do you think market share ultimately shakes out on tokens? Do the cheaper models overtake the frontier AI labs? Do tokens bifurcate based on the complexity of workloads? How do you think this plays out? Stephen Byrd: What we continue to see is this relentless pace of innovation and cost reduction. So, the frontier keeps going out – meaning model capabilities continue to increase, and, with that, we see enterprise adoption growing quite a bit. Long way to say there is a role for both the frontier as well as these open-source models, and we'll continue to see both flourish. What I see is a lot of tokens will be spent on open-source models. A lot of the value will be in the higher end models because that's where enterprises are going to go. Let me give you an example. I was speaking with one of our programmers about a recent project, and he used a very high-end coding tool, an American coding tool. And for him, that incremental cost of the tokens was very much worth it. And here's a very practical example as to why it makes sense for many enterprises to use the higher end models. If a coding tool gets one of the thousands of lines of code wrong, the cost to remediate is very, very high. In other words, that incremental cost – in this example I'm thinking of, it's a few dollars incremental cost – is so worth it because if the quality is not there, the cost to any enterprise to go back and remediate is so high. And that's true in a lot of enterprise use cases, but not in every use case. And what we are seeing is these open-source models that are cheaper will be very good for a variety of more mundane use cases that are still very valuable. That said, what we've seen in data from places like OpenRouter is dollar-weighted, meaning valued by enterprise spend, the vast majority is still the proprietary models. But even within proprietary models, we could have more expensive and less expensive models. You do not need to go to the frontier. Where I come out on all this is that I'm very confident that the demand for compute is going to exceed the supply. What is difficult to exactly know is who are the winners, what is the exact mix. But the fundamentals of the demand for compute look extremely strong. Thomas Wigg: So, I think you just gave me the answer, but I do want to bring this all back to AI CapEx. Now, last year, when the market sold off on Deep Seek concerns, the concept of Jevons paradox ultimately prevailed, where the cheaper pricing led to even greater demand and CapEx went higher.Do you think the same plays out here? Stephen Byrd: It does look that way very much. And the Jevons paradox dynamic is what we still see today in the sense that as the models get better, what we can do with the models increase, the cost of tokens will keep dropping, the cost of compute will keep dropping.But let's talk about what might derail that, just to make sure we're thinking about all the risks. If somehow commoditized models could perform at the same level as proprietary models in all situations, then I would feel differently. But I don't see that. What I see is that these newer models really do have capabilities that are fairly breathtaking and that are worth that extra money. But if somehow, we hit a wall where these models aren't getting better and therefore the sort of the open models are going to catch up, then I'd feel differently about that. This is where Ariana will, will come in in terms of policy and, you know, this comes up a lot when we think about U.S. versus China. How do we think about, you know, access to different models? How do we think about the cost of different models? What about the risk of appropriation of capabilities by the Chinese firms, for example? That comes up a lot in policy circles. But the base case that I have is this just looks more like Jevons paradox, and there's going to be continued innovation, continued reduction in the cost of producing these services from these models. That looks like more of the same. Thomas Wigg: Let's shift to Ariana to talk about the political angle here. The cover of Barron's over the weekend was a guy wearing a no data centers T-shirt. And this does seem to be one of the few bipartisan issues of agreement heading into the midterms.The stat that the article gave was that 75 data center projects worth $130 billion were blocked or delayed in 1Q26, which is equal to the total number for 2025. This is according to Data Center Watch. Now, most of this is in blue states like New York, Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota considering a statewide moratorium, but you're also seeing Pennsylvania, Arizona, Ohio, parts of Texas restricting tax incentives here. So as this gets louder into the midterms, how do you think this plays out? Ariana Salvatore: So, this is definitely one of the big wedge issues, not just for the midterm elections, but for 2028. And to your point, it's expanding into something that's got bipartisan momentum behind it. Our view is that as long as the Trump administration is in power, something like a federal ban is unlikely to come to fruition. That's because we think the administration is still broadly supportive of the AI data center build-out. And I think even if you were to see a Democrat in office further down the road, that position is the same. And the reason is, it's just too difficult to imagine the U.S. giving up that strategic imperative relative to China. So, while it is true that voters are against AI, while it is true that you are seeing these sorts of local efforts pick up steam, it's also the case that China is accelerating its own AI build-out – not just domestically, but around the rest of the world too. It's also the case that they are kind of tweaking some export restrictions on inputs for some of these data centers, and those geopolitical realities, I think, are hard to ignore. So, at the end of the day, there is a broader strategic imperative here that both Democrats and Republicans kind of recognize and get behind. Now, what does that mean in the near term for the build-out? I think it's not that you're going to see a real pushback or moratorium so much as a conditional build-out.That means you're going to see data centers have to incorporate things like grid modernization in their contracts, agree to longer term investments, for example. Do something that benefits the communities or give it back in some way. And I think that's kind of the policy trajectory in addition to the administration continuing to lean on tech companies to basically, you know, square the circle here and find some way to make this more affordable for, you know, local constituents. Thomas Wigg: Stephen, let me get your take on this too, because I know you live in the D.C. area, and you have a lot of political conversations like you referenced earlier. How do you think this plays out? Is it a red state versus blue state dynamic? And if what Ariana says comes to fruition, where it's a conditional build-out in terms of either giving back to the community or ensuring certain prices or certain technologies behind the meter, in front of the meter, does that have implications for certain areas of the market? Stephen Byrd: Yeah. First, I think Ariana's points were all spot on. I just want to, kind of, build on that and, and dive into it a little more detail. A few things. The politics are, from my perspective, not being the expert that Ariana is, I find them a little strange – in the sense that at the federal level, we have one dynamic, and at the state and local level, we have a bit of a different dynamic. And what I mean by that is, at the federal level, I think it's becoming increasingly clear just how geopolitically important AI supremacy is. As these models get more capable, I think it's pretty clear that the Trump administration really sees just how potent these tools are from a geopolitical point of view. So that points in the direction of wanting to support AI and wanting to ensure that the United States has a leading and dominant position in terms of AI capabilities. Pause there, and then go to your point about, sort of, the local and state level. Building on what Ariana said, what I see are basically two approaches to data center development. In states where the utility is vertically integrated, meaning they control everything, like Louisiana, I do see a path where – in those kinds of states where the politics are a bit more favorable – you could develop a data center connected to the grid, where the data center developer is paying full freight and then some. Meaning that they are providing back to the community, they're providing sort of net benefits, and there should be plenty of capital to make that work and really support all constituents. That can work – in a state where the politics work – because utilities are really weather vanes from a political point of view. So, if their state supports data center development, they will more likely support a data center development. The other approach, though, in many states, whether it's deregulated or it's in a state where the politics are a little less favorable. Which, to your point on the cover of Barron's, it's a lot of states, what I'm increasingly seeing is that the developers are going to go off grid. And they just don't want to show any impact to the community that could be considered negative. So, no use of water, no use of power, and hopefully have a, you know, low or zero emissions profile to show no impact at all. Even then, you want to give back to the community. But the view there is, look, we want to sidestep all of these concerns that we might be causing impacts to the grid by just not being connected. So, I think we're going to see a whole lot of off-grid data center projects. That's mostly natural gas turbines and fuel cells, that general approach. Energy storage will be required in a big way. That's not easy to do. So, in the context of delays there, the Bitcoin players who do have grid access today are clearly seeing a lot of demand for their products. So, I would say politics is now a huge issue that's showing up. The other thing I'd flag is often local communities and states are rejecting projects and using permit requests as a way to do that. So, for example, if your data center needs an air permit because your turbines are going to emit some kind of an, you know, sulfur dioxide, et cetera, into the air, you can run into trouble there. If your data center requires water and you need a water permit, you can run into trouble. So, that's causing these developers to try to find approaches that really minimize or eliminate the need for those kinds of permits. Thomas Wigg: Stephen and Ariana, thank you for taking the time. And to our audience, thank you for listening. If you enjoy Thoughts on the Market, please leave us a review wherever you listen to the show and share the podcast with a friend or colleague today.*****Tom Wigg is a member of Morgan Stanley's Institutional Equity Division and is not a member of Morgan Stanley's Research Department. Unless otherwise indicated, his views are his own and may differ from the views of the Morgan Stanley Research Department and from the views of others within Morgan Stanley.

As Chief Investment Strategist at Hightower Advisors, Stephanie Link spends her days researching the market's winners. Today, she's breaking it all down for us. Stephanie explains why the economy keeps defying the doom-and-gloom headlines, which stocks she thinks will champion the next decade, and why she believes we're only in the third inning of the AI revolution. Nicole and Stephanie get tactical fast: the difference between the Mag 7 and the "S&P 493," which stocks are not worth the hype, and Stephanie's thesis that cybersecurity stocks will end up being bigger than AI. She names her favorite tickers across cybersecurity, data centers, robotics, and quantum computing, and explains whether it's too late to buy NVIDIA. Stephanie also gets real about the so-called "AI bubble," the circular spending debate freaking out investors, and why she bought SpaceX but capped it at just 2% of her portfolio. Plus: what her 19-year-old daughter is investing in, why "FAANG" just got a 2026 update, and the one boring, unsexy ETF Stephanie says every new investor should consider. Check out Nicole's financial literacy course ⁠The Money School⁠ Find a Financial Advisor or Financial Coach from Nicole's company ⁠Private Wealth Collective⁠ Watch video clips from the pod on ⁠Money Rehab's Instagram⁠ and ⁠Nicole Lapin's Instagram⁠  Read more about Stephanie's work Here's what Nicole covers with Stephanie: 00:00 Are You Ready for Some Money Rehab? 01:12 Stephanie Link Joins Money Rehab 01:41 Why the Market Keeps Defying the Doom and Gloom 04:07 CapEx, Decoded 06:58 The K-Shaped Economy: Why the Vibes Don't Match the Numbers 09:49 Inflation, Oil Prices, and the War's Ripple Effect 11:41 Mag 7 vs. the S&P 493: Which ETF Should You Buy? 16:16 Why Stephanie Says No to Leveraged ETFs 17:32 Cybersecurity Will Be Bigger Than AI 20:16 The Best Cybersecurity Stocks on Stephanie's List 23:15 How to Vet a CEO Before You Buy the Stock 25:16 Investing Lessons from Stephanie's 19-Year-Old Daughter 28:23 What Stephanie Won't Buy: Crypto, Staples, and Energy 32:20 Inside the AI "Food Chain": Powering the Data Center Boom 35:43 Robotics and Quantum Computing: The Next Big Themes 41:00 MicroStrategy vs. Palo Alto: What "On Sale" Really Means 43:07 FAANG Is Dead, Long Live MANGOES 43:47 Why Stephanie Bought SpaceX (and Kept It to 2%) 55:40 Is It Too Late to Buy NVIDIA? 59:06 Grading the Innings: AI, Cybersecurity, and Robotics 59:50 Hot Stocks: Micron, SanDisk, and the Chips Everyone's Chasing 1:02:27 Is There an AI Bubble? 1:03:16 The Circular Spending Debate 1:08:08 Stephanie Link's Tip You Can Take Straight to the Bank All investing involves the risk of loss, including loss of principal. This podcast is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Always do your own research and consult a licensed financial advisor before making any financial decisions or investments. Disclosures: Hightower invests in companies including Boeing Company, Dover Corp, General Electric, Quanta Services, Rockwell Automation, Union Pacific Corporation, Broadcom, International Business Machines Corporation, Marvell Technology Inc, ServiceNow Inc, Palo Alto Networks Inc, Snowflake Inc, Synopsys Inc, Bank of America, Capital One, Coinbase, Morgan Stanley, Truist Financial Corp, Amazon.com Inc, Meta, SpaceX, Alcoa Corp, Antofagasta PLC, Natera Inc, UnitedHealth Group Inc, iShares MSCI Brazil ETF, SLB Limited

A changing macro backdrop is creating new opportunities across the equity market. Our CIO and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist Mike Wilson looks at what's driving the shift and where it may lead next.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript ----- Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Mike Wilson, Morgan Stanley's CIO and Chief U.S. Equity Strategist. Today on the podcast I'll discuss why I think the broadening out in equity markets can continue. It's Monday, July 6th at 11:30 am in New York. So, let's get after it. Let's talk about a market dynamic that's becoming harder to ignore. The broadening trade is back, and it's gaining momentum partly because one of the most crowded areas of the market – Semiconductors – is finally starting to lose some of its own. To be clear, this doesn't mean the AI cycle is over. However, trends don't move in straight lines, and leadership can ebb and flow; especially if there are fundamental reasons supporting it. In fact, we've seen this happen several times already over the past couple of years with the hyperscalers and semiconductors ebbing and flowing. This is based on positioning, the rate of change on expectations for capex and the returns on that capex. Meanwhile, our broadening call goes back to last November. Back then, we argued the economy had entered a new expansion after the rolling recession ended in the April of 2025. That view was based on a classic early-cycle setup where revenue growth returns to companies that had become cost efficient. That is the definition of operating leverage and that always leads to better than expected earnings growth – the core differentiation to our original outlook this year. The market started to discount that broadening late last year and into early this year. Then, the Iran war interrupted it. Oil prices surged, and the bond market went from pricing Fed cuts to pricing hikes, and investors crowded back into the obvious AI capex winners – especially Semiconductors. That made sense for a while. The revisions in Semis were spectacular. But when earnings revisions breadth gets pressed against historical extremes, the question becomes less about whether the story is good and more about whether the rate of change can keep improving. That's a much higher bar. And over the past few weeks, the market seems to be asking that question with semiconductor stocks fading. The underperformance in the hyperscalers was probably the first signal. Semis depend on hyperscaler capex, so when the spenders start to lag the beneficiaries, that divergence can't last forever. It usually ends up reconciling with hyperscalers' tempering capex guidance or indicating they are more focused on getting a return on that investment. META's announcement last week that it would begin selling excess capacity to outside customers fits right into that discussion. It doesn't kill the AI buildout, but it does change the market's perception of how linear that buildout will be. What matters for investors is how they should trade it. First, the market should continue to broaden out. Second, we continue to favor Consumer Discretionary Goods, Transports, Regional Banks, and now Biotech as part of that rotation. Discretionary Goods remains the cleanest expression, in my view, because the wallet-share shift from services back to goods is underway, goods pricing is improving, oil prices have fallen, and earnings revisions are strengthening. Transports are also showing better revisions, and Regional Banks still benefit from the broader recovery, improving loan growth dynamics and our call for a re-steepening of the yield curve. Biotech deserves more attention here, too. It is also one of the most rate-sensitive areas of the market, and our work shows it has historically done very well in falling-rate regimes. If the market's policy expectations are too hawkish – and I think they are – then Biotech offers an attractive risk-reward setup, particularly with an M&A cycle that continues to build. The Fed is part of this story as well. Chair Warsh's comments last week that inflation risks have come down should matter, especially after the weaker labor data that came out Thursday. The market had become too hawkish on policy. If falling energy prices and contained core inflation allow the Fed to stay on hold rather than hike, that should help lower rate expectations and further support broader leadership in equity markets. Bottom line, the major averages may stay choppy because Semis are a large part of the index and crowded. But, the message is improving beneath the surface. The broader market performance indicates a broader economic and earnings recovery may just be beginning. The best news is that this view is still out of consensus, which means the opportunity for investors remains significant. Thanks for tuning in; I hope you found it informative and useful. Let us know what you think by leaving us a review. And if you find Thoughts on the Market worthwhile, tell a friend or colleague to try it out!

Carl Quintanilla, Jim Cramer and David Faber kicked of a new trading week with a historic event: President Trump rang both the NYSE and Nasdaq opening bells from the Oval Office, making him the first president to do so. The bell ringing was in celebration of the first trading day of the Trump Accounts. Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev joined the show from the White House to talk about the new investment accounts for children. The anchors discussed the tech sector getting a boost to start the week. Also in focus: Broadcom and Apple extend AI chip partnership, South Korea's SK Hynix launches $28 billion U.S. listing, the sectors Morgan Stanley strategist Mike Wilson says are good plays for a broadening stock market, Oracle's losing streak, trillion-dollar tech and AI -- from Nvidia to Meta.    Squawk on the Street Disclaimer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

As America nears its 250th birthday, our Global Head of Fixed Income Andrew Sheets looks back at the early republic as a volatile frontier market, and what its path from credit risks to durable institutions can teach investors today.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript ----- Andrew Sheets: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Andrew Sheets, Global Head of Fixed Income Research at Morgan Stanley.Today, markets are closed for the observance of 4th of July. But as America approaches its 250th anniversary, we take a look back to look forward at early America as a frontier market.It's Friday, July 3rd at 9am in Seattle.If you were a global investor at the end of the 18th century looking for a stable, low-risk home for your capital, it would have been entirely reasonable to avoid the newly minted United States of America. By the standards of modern finance, the young republic was not a developed market in waiting. It was a frontier economy: volatile, debt-burdened, institutionally fragile, resource-rich, politically combustible, and astonishingly unequal.Its currency had collapsed. Its public finances were suspect. Its citizens resisted taxation, and its growth prospects were extraordinary. In 1810, 70 percent of the country was under the age of 25.That is one of the revelations of Gordon Wood's Empire of Liberty, which focuses on the early days of the new country from 1789 to 1815.Wood's America is not the marble republic of statues and myth. It is speculative, messy, and full of motion. The United States succeeded not by escaping the dysfunctions that we associate with emerging or frontier markets, but by turning them into sources of strength.Start with capital. Early America needed it desperately. Roads, canals, land purchases, and government all required credit, and there was never enough of it. The country was rich in land and poor in liquidity, a classic emerging market mismatch.What the young country couldn't borrow or invent, it misappropriated, lifting intellectual property from its former masters in Britain. What Alexander Hamilton understood was the importance of confidence given this challenge; that debts would be honored, contracts enforced, and taxes, however unpopular, collected.His financial program was an attempt to solve the emerging market problem before the phrase existed. How to persuade investors that a new state, born in revolution and nearly bankrupted by war, could be trusted. To Hamilton, public credit was the foundation of independence.To many Jeffersonians, however, this system looked like an attempt to smuggle a British financial order back into the country that had just fought to expel it.The early republic's debates over debt, banks, speculation, and taxation sound contemporary because the underlying question is perennial in frontier markets: Can a society embrace credit and foreign capital without being captured by it?The U.S. was not starting from zero. It inherited legal traditions, habits of self-government, and a culture of contract and property. Those foundations gave confidence that disputes could be adjudicated, debts pursued, and rules would not be arbitrary.Early America was risky, but it was not lawless. And still, it did not go smoothly. There was no Federal Reserve, FDIC, or even a uniform national currency. Business was conducted with foreign coins, notes issued by private banks, IOUs, and blind optimism.Bank failures were common. In 1808, the Farmers Exchange Bank of Rhode Island issued over $600,000 of notes against less than $90 of gold in its vaults. You almost have to admire the audacity.Yet the same instability that made early America risky also made it unusually open. Land was the country's great asset class, a source of migration, ambition, speculation, and opportunity, at least for white settlers. It also produced bubbles, administrative strain, the expansion of slavery, and the violent dispossession of Native peoples.The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 was a risky, leveraged acquisition of distressed real estate, doubling the scale of the American experiment before anyone had quite figured out how the original version was supposed to work. Wood is especially good on the familiar energy unleashed by this world.The engine of U.S. growth was not an aristocracy of polished grandees, but the "middling sort." Shopkeepers, artisans, tavern owners, mechanics, farmers, merchants, and speculators – many convinced that in America, birthright mattered less than hustle.Commentators of the time complained about the degraded press, political polarization, hostility to expertise, and the vulgarity of a society obsessed with getting ahead. None of this sounds especially distant.What saved America from the usual traps of frontier economies was not immaculate stability. It was adaptability. Its constitution was amended. Political power changed hands despite animosity.Bankruptcy laws allowed for failure. Competition was ferocious, and economic power was generally too diffuse to be easily monopolized. The early republic's genius lay less in solving its contradictions than in creating ways to fight over them without destroying the whole.That is a useful lesson for America at 250. We tend to look backwards for reassurance, imagining that the country once possessed a unity, prudence, and institutional solidity that we have since lost. Wood suggests something different, that the United States was turbulent from the start.Its legacy was contested, its finances distrusted, its politics venomous, its expansion intertwined with slavery and Native dispossession, and its future uncertain. Emerging markets become developed markets not because they stop having crises, but because they build credibility through them. They learn which institutions matter, which bargains endure, which debts must be paid, and which moral liabilities compound when deferred.America was not born orderly, rich, or secure. It was born in the mud, financed on fragile credit, driven by speculation, and sustained by an almost irrational confidence in the future.So, enjoy the fireworks – and let them be a reminder that national maturity is not the absence of volatility. It's the capacity to turn that volatility into renewal.A postscript: Gordon S. Wood died in early June of this year. As a professor, author, and one of the preeminent scholars of the American Revolution, he brought fresh insight and deep humanization to the country's founding. For anyone looking for a better understanding of America as it celebrates a big anniversary, we'd wholeheartedly recommend his workThank you, as always, for your time. If you find Thoughts on the Market useful, let us know by leaving a review wherever you listen and also tell a friend or colleague about us today.

Following meetings across Europe and Asia, our Global Head of Cross-Asset Strategy Research, Serena Tang, discusses two of the main themes on investors' minds: uncertainty around U.S. monetary policy and increasing caution toward AI despite its long-term potential.Serena Tang: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Serena Tang, Global Head of Cross-Asset Strategy Research at Morgan Stanley.And today, I'm bringing you a debrief from my investor meetings across Europe and Asia, and the key debates around AI and the Fed.It's Thursday, July 2nd at 10am in New York.The last two weeks, I have been traveling in Europe and Asia to meet with investors to discuss Morgan Stanley's latest views. Two themes dominated nearly every room I walked into.The first is the Federal Reserve and monetary policy path in the U.S. Many investors had interpreted Chair Kevin Warsh's June FOMC meeting, his first at the helm, as unambiguously hawkish. What market investors at my meetings pointed out is that [the] Fed's Summary of Economic Projections – commonly shortened to SEP, which details policymakers' forecasts for macro metrics like GDP growth, inflation, and the federal funds rate – added a hike in 2026 and pushed out rate cuts, implying more restrictive policy.Now, Morgan Stanley's economists think that hikes implied by SEP at the June FOMC meeting should be interpreted with caution. The projections appeared conditioned on elevated near-term inflation and may not capture the disinflation from a straight reopening. We actually anticipate a lower path for core inflation given a combination of a reversal in travel-related inflation and tariff payback, which lead to our call that the Fed remains on hold through 2026.The second recurring theme in meetings with investors across regions is, unsurprisingly, AI. While in every single meeting investors believe firmly in the secular story of ongoing AI CapEx cycle, there was some unease – especially since AI is now also becoming an inflation story on the macro side and a funding story on the micro side.Chipflation is a new word in town, with markets still debating whether it can be one of the things that derail the AI CapEx cycle. In our economists' and sector analysts' views, it's more nuanced. While memory price is up sixfold over the past year, we think chipflation is more likely to reprice and ration AI infrastructure than derail the cycle. AI demand is scaling across three layers at once, more memory per chip, more chips per system, and more systems per cluster, while hyperscalers remain first in the allocation queue. Now, the key risk is CapEx efficiency. Memory is becoming a larger share of the AI system cost, but the cycle, we think, remains intact.As for AI funding needs, the debate with investors has been how much more can it accelerate? It's worth noting that the majority of corporate bond issuance quarter-to-date has been related to funding construction of data centers.Hyperscale's have been broadening their investor base through non-dollar issuances. They have collectively issued around $25 billion of debt in other currencies like euro, Swiss franc, and the [Japanese yen] in May.Our credit strategy colleagues forecast nearly another $600 billion of AI-related global issuance in 2026; meaning for U.S. IG corporate bonds alone, we expect one trillion of net issuance, a reason for our view that the asset class can underperform this year. With our equity colleagues estimating hyperscaler cash CapEx to surpass $1 trillion in 2027, we expect issuance to accelerate.Bringing it all together, investors globally are all grappling with the same uncertainties around the Fed and AI CapEx, which will likely continue to be key debates to come. But Morgan Stanley's base case view of lower inflation driving the Fed to stay on hold and a strong AI CapEx cycle that remains intact means we recommend investors should still stay constructive on risk assets.Thanks for listening. Let us know what you think by leaving a review. And if you enjoyed the podcast, please share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.

With voters focused on prices and the economy, our Head of Public Policy Research Ariana Salvatore and U.S. Thematic Strategist Michelle Weaver discuss the consumer trends that could matter most heading into November's elections.Read more insights from Morgan Stanley.----- Transcript -----Ariana Salvatore: Welcome to Thoughts on the Market. I'm Ariana Salvatore, Morgan Stanley's Head of Public Policy Research. Michelle Weaver: And I'm Michelle Weaver, Morgan Stanley's U.S. Thematic Strategist. Ariana Salvatore: Today, we'll be talking about the consumer and what recent data could imply for the midterm elections. It's Wednesday, July 1st at 10am in New York. Last week, Mike Zezas and I caught up on the consumer while he was down at our Consumer Captains Conference. This week, Michelle, I want to talk to you about what your data are saying and get into the implications of all of this for the midterm elections. So, maybe we start with the AlphaWise data. What are our surveys picking up when it comes to how the consumer feels about the outlook in the aggregate? Michelle Weaver: We run a monthly proprietary survey of around 2,000 U.S. consumers, and it's diversified by age, gender, and region, and we ask questions around sentiment, spending plans, and other special topics. Our survey recently showed a continued gradual recovery in consumer confidence in the U.S. economic outlook. We're not off to the races by any means, but we did see the net outlook score improve to -10 percent, up from -14 percent a month ago and a low of -18 percent two months ago, when concerns around oil prices were at their peak. Overall, more consumers feel negatively about the economy versus positively, hence that net score is negative. But we are seeing signs of improvement, so things are improving on a rate of change basis. Ariana Salvatore: That makes sense given the MOU that was signed between Iran and the U.S. Now, looking forward, what does the survey tell us about spending plans? Michelle Weaver: Broadly, consumer spending plans remain stable. They expect to spend more on essentials categories. This includes things like groceries, gas, and household items, while they're expecting to spend less on discretionary categories. We saw the weakest spending intentions within the consumer electronics category, and consumers are not likely to see much price relief in that category. Many consumer electronics makers are now taking their prices up because of the high price of memory chips that goes into those products. Ariana Salvatore: One of the most important components of the survey is the question that you ask on top areas of concern. What are you guys seeing there? Michelle Weaver: Inflation is still the number one concern for consumers, and we actually saw the percent of consumers citing it among their top concerns tick up again last month. So, now that's at 60 percent, up from 59 percent last month, and a low of 53 percent in January. People are also worried about the U.S. political environment. That was cited by 42 percent of consumers, up from about 39 percent last wave. Concern around geopolitical conflicts rounds out the top three, but that level's been pretty stable around 25 percent. But Ariana, can consumers expect any relief on prices from the policy front? Consumers got a nice boost from tax refunds. Is there anything else in the pipeline? Ariana Salvatore: So, we've gotten this question a lot into the midterm elections, and our view is basically that there are a number of obstacles in the way of something like another reconciliation package to give direct stimulus to consumers, whether that's procedural, whether it's the political perception. One of the most important is actually the deficit concerns, right? So, we don't expect something additional for the consumer through the legislative angle, aside from what we've already seen, like the Road to Housing Act. And that's also against a backdrop of what we've been seeing on the economic side and what your data is reflecting, which is that the consumer sentiment metrics are actually ticking up slightly from their lows. And that, of course, maps directly onto what our U.S. econ team has been saying. Their view is that the consumer story in 2026 has turned more neutral. Real consumption growth is still expected to decelerate to about 1.7 percent. That's below last year, but again, not falling off a cliff. The core dynamic is that the One Big Beautiful Bill Act had this fiscal boost from last year, tax refunds running about 17 percent higher year-over-year, but the oil shock basically mitigated that and essentially neutralized the fiscal impulse. But that's not hitting everybody equally. Goods spending tends to bear the brunt. Our econ team estimates that the oil shock takes 30 basis points off consumption entirely from goods rather than services. Low- and middle-income households are most exposed since energy makes up over 8 percent of spending for the bottom income quintile versus under 5 percent for the top. And that broadening out story from just the high-income consumer driving spending is probably going to be a little bit delayed just given the oil shock.But maybe let's drill in a little bit more on that income bifurcation. How does that manifest in your view across spending intentions? Michelle Weaver: Mm-hmm. Overall, short-term spending intentions – so spending plans over the next month – are net +20 percent this month. That's still above the historical average of around +16 percent, but it is down somewhat from 23 percent last month. And the divergence is really driven by income. Upper-income consumers remain meaningfully more optimistic, while lower-income households are still under stress. So, we're still seeing the K economy very much in place. And the economy and inflation are almost always top issues for voters. How are you expecting the dynamics we've been talking about to impact the midterms? Ariana Salvatore: So, data are showing an uptick, obviously, which should on net benefit Republicans all else equal, albeit off a low base. And that's because there are other data points to consider here. So, things like the generic ballot, things like historical precedent, things like the presidential favorability ratings – all of those things are painting a more constructive backdrop for Democrats heading into November. But also, to put a finer point on it, we're seeing the AlphaWise data that you're citing reflected across other surveys as well. So, we saw the UMich data from last week show the year ahead inflation outlook drop to 4.6 percent from 4.8 percent. And of course, that's a reflection of the expectation that gas prices are going to moderate into November too. Now, on that front, it's about rate of change, right? So, not the absolute level. But again, I would just remind our listeners that this is one factor in the context of many. So, net-net, we definitely still see a slight advantage for Democrats heading into November, especially when we drill into some of the trends that we've been seeing across the primaries. Michelle Weaver: And what are some of those trends you've been picking up from the primaries? Ariana Salvatore: So, the first thing I would say is that we're cautious to extrapolate too much from primaries to the general election, but really maybe two key points here. The first is turnout seems to be an early indicator in favor of Democrats. So, enthusiasm is up. We're seeing more participation and more engagement relative to prior elections. The second point I would make is that the primaries have been showing a mixed bag in terms of candidates for November. So, in some states like New York and Colorado, you saw more progressive candidates win their races. And all else equal, that could translate to more of what we call a fragile instead of a cohesive majority come November. So, think more political noise around fiscal deadlines, things like appropriations and the debt ceiling. But of course, we still have less than 50 percent of the primaries, so plenty to watch heading into the fall. Michelle, thanks for taking the time to talk. Michelle Weaver: Thanks for having me. Ariana Salvatore: And thanks for listening. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a review wherever you listen and share Thoughts on the Market with a friend or colleague today.