Interesting watching the recent reversal in investment grade credit and precious metals.
The 10 year Treasury yield continues to rise. Now above 4.44% after another rough day. (Bond markets were closed yesterday.) That’s a sharp rise from the 3.62% notched on September 15 - just about the time the Fed began cutting rates.
Gold has lost $200 in the past week or two. Now $2600 off a high of over $2800 reached October 29. Miners have been hit much harder proportionally.
A fund (CEF) I’ve owned before but don’t now GGN is down 5.5% today. Most interesting as it seems generally to not react sharply to gold prices - being more income focused. Any ideas what hit that one today? The commodities stocks have also been hammered in recent trading sessions. Probably has affected this CEF as well. Could just be a normal commodities market correction. Could also be a warning of coming recession.
Comments
Re gold: People are switching from gold to crypto after Trump's win / remarks as inflation hedge.
Just my 2c.
GGN (at small premium) cousin GNT (at double-digit discount) didn't drop as much.
Sometimes, there isn't any good reason for a CEF to drop.
https://finance.yahoo.com/quotes/GGN,GNT/
ADD: you may use the link to follow the sectors markets when the U.S. markets are open. One may bookmark this page or save the link to your electronic device for future views.
Major global and U.S. etf categories This list is set with %Chg column (daily), which will indicate near real time changes while the U.S. markets are open; being from most positive to most negative returns. The right side of this data provides 'technical' buy/sell indicators (opinion).
wagerinvest much based on some perception. The threats to try and replace Powell before his term expires are noteworthy, however. Along with that, the desire for the President to have a say in setting the Fed discount rate ishillariousinteresting.Point on crypto well taken. But far too early to say. Gold has always been a wild card. Moves in strange ways.
The Fed Chair also appears semiannually before the House & Senate subcommittees.
These mechanisms provide for inputs/feedback from the administration and Congress.
Moreover, the Fed Governors, Fed Chair and Fed Vice-Chair are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.
accuerateaccurate data is of utmost importance. Personally, I’m a paying subscriber to the WSJ and find their charts to be exceptional. But I realize others have their preferences and not everyone subscribes to the WSJ or values it as I do. While I may cite data derived from the WSJ for purpose of further discussion, I hope it is not in conflict with other sources available. If it is in conflict, please note and I’ll double check my source.Thanks @yoginearbull. ISTM this speaks to leaving things as they are since there is substantial (indirect) imput into Fed policy from the Administration. However, some might use this as an argument in favor of extending that reach to provide for a more direct Presidential role in setting interest rates. Personally, it’s an academic argument at this point. Just not sure if you intended to take one side or the other in what is certain in coming months to become a heated debate at the national level?
What are people’s opinions of changing the law so that the Fed Chair has no set term, but instead serves only at the pleasure of the President who may dismiss him or her and nominate / appoint a new Chair any time he wants to?
This would be a terrible idea in my opinion.
Current Presidents may be biased towards lower rates whether warranted or not.
They could appoint a new Chair who would be amenable to rate cuts regardless of the effects on the economy.
The appointment requires Senate confirmation so at least there would be some checks and balances.
With that said, checks and balances might be highly insufficient for the incoming adminstration to put it charitably.
So, is this what you favor ???
Absolute monarchy is a form of monarchy in which the sovereign is the sole source of political power, unconstrained by constitutions, legislatures or other checks on their authority.
I've never made such a statement; so I don't know the 'guys' you noted.
Full checks and balances are required for a 'Rule of Law' state to function.
End of Message.
Concentrated portfolio in top categories, disregarding all the noise("experts" advice, election, valuation, economic indicators)
Never alternative categories (gold, commodities, CEF,long-short,others).
Stocks:since 2010, US LC tilting growth.
Bonds: funds that do well regardless of rates for about 1.5-2 years already with low SD. CBLDX,RSIIX for longer hold. ICMUX and CLOZ more of a trade based on markets+trends.
See CLOZ chart for 1.5 years (https://schrts.co/hsMDDiQm).
I know I have been saying it for months because the trend is still the same, why mess up with a good trend?