Category: Chart of the Week

Uncertainty Fuels Meltdown in U.S. Equities

Entering 2025, investors were overwhelmingly bullish on the outlook for U.S. equities. Positive sentiment was fueled by the perceived benefits of the incoming administration, specifically the likelihood for pro-business policies and looser regulation. These expectations drove the Russell 2000 and NASDAQ to fresh all-time highs post-election, although some of this exuberance was dampened following a more hawkish tone from the Federal Reserve in mid-December. Since his inauguration, Trump has been outspoken on tariffs and government spending, but the gravity of these measures, compounded by inconsistent implementation, has led to market uncertainty. As a result, the VIX, a measure of market volatility, reached a post-election high on March 10.

Concurrent with the spike in volatility, segments of the U.S. equity market have fallen into correction territory, defined as a decline greater than 10% from recent highs. Small-cap equities, as measured by the Russell 2000, have declined almost 17% from their high in November 2024. Small-cap equities are more economically sensitive, but underperformance has been compounded by depressed earnings. Large-cap equities, as measured by the S&P 500, achieved a new all-time high in February, but have flirted with correction territory in March, down over 9%. A shift in investor sentiment continues to weigh on U.S. equities as Trump acknowledged the potential for further volatility without ruling out the possibility of a recession. Additionally, the market darlings of the past two years, the Magnificent 7, have not been immune to market volatility, as rich valuations may make these companies more susceptible in a market pullback. This cohort of companies has declined 20% since an all-time high in December 2024, as companies like Tesla have erased all of their post-election gains.

Expectations for the U.S. equity market have fallen short thus far in 2025. As the new administration navigates the path forward, the impacts of policy decisions on the economy remain uncertain, so volatility may persist. Although volatility can be painful and is likely to continue, a disciplined and diversified approach that focuses on long-term performance is still the best recipe for portfolio success.

School’s Out?

While the United States has historically prioritized public spending on education more than other developed countries, there has been a recent convergence in U.S. education expenditure as a percentage of GDP with that of other countries in the OECD, a group of mostly developed and democratic nations. Specifically, in 2000, the U.S. spent 6.1% of total GDP on education, which was notably higher than the OECD average of 4.9% at that time. That said, the U.S. figure dropped to 4.7% in 2016, which was slightly below the 4.8% OECD average that year. Based on this trend, it should come as no surprise that U.S. students are beginning to fall behind their global peers in key academic areas. To that point, U.S. K-12 students ranked 12th and 28th in science and math, respectively, out of 37 OECD member countries in 2022 according to Pew Research. The U.S. average score for math fell by a whopping 13 percentage points between 2018 and 2022 alone.

While the challenges faced by U.S. students due to the COVID-19 pandemic were significant, the fact that U.S. now spends roughly the same as other developed nations (as a percentage of GDP) has certainly contributed to these lackluster scores. Going forward, a renewed focus on education-related spending and outcomes should serve the U.S. well, as a robust public education system helps drive economic growth, stability, and innovation.

Optimism is Pessimism?

In a 2016 redux, Donald Trump’s victory in the November election kicked off another wave of economic optimism across CEOs and small business owners alike. To that point, the Bloomberg CEO Confidence Index, which measures U.S. CEO confidence in the economy one year from now on a scale from 0 to 10 (10 being most confident), and the National Federation of Independent Businesses Small Business Optimism Index, a composite of ten seasonally-adjusted components based on the outlook of roughly 620 NFIB members, are two of the primary ways to gauge the economic outlook of U.S. businesses. Trump’s pro-growth policy goals of corporate tax cuts and deregulation have spurred an uptick in both indices, although higher business confidence may further delay meaningful rate cuts from the Federal Reserve.

With equity market momentum and increased CEO confidence, there is expected to be little disruption in hiring and spending by larger companies within the U.S., which should translate to continued economic strength. That said, the increase in small business confidence may be a more prescient indicator of future growth. Small businesses, which employ upwards of 50 million domestic workers and bring in roughly $16 trillion in annual revenue, are the engine that drive the U.S. economy, meaning as small business optimism increase, spending, investment, and hiring could increase significantly as well. Combine these dynamics with a recent 100 basis point reduction in benchmark interest rates, and economic growth may be poised to remain robust. While this would be largely positive for the U.S., it may be viewed as a reason for pessimism by the Federal Reserve. Specifically, as the Fed continues to battle sticky inflation (the latest CPI print came in hot at 3.0%), a higher growth environment would make it harder to continue to cut interest rates without causing inflation to reaccelerate. Recent data indicate just one to two rate cuts from the Fed for the rest of 2025, and if the U.S. economy sees higher levels of growth and inflation in the near term, future cuts may have to remain on ice.

No Longer Stuck in the Middle?

By now, readers likely know that large-cap equities propelled the U.S. equity market higher in 2023 and 2024, as the S&P 500 Index advanced over 20% in each of those years. Although positive performance continued for U.S. stocks to begin 2025, the often-overlooked mid-cap space ultimately led the way, with the Russell Midcap Index gaining 4.3% in January. This figure was higher than both the 3.2% and 2.6% returns notched by the Russell 1000 Index and Russell 2000 Index, respectively, during the month. Commonly underrepresented in investor portfolios, mid-cap indices provide exposure to more established business models than small-cap benchmarks but also offer potential exposure to companies growing at a faster rate than those within the large-cap universe.

As it relates to recent performance drivers, mid-cap equities were buoyed by the January CPI print, which led to a broadening out of markets. The space also benefited on a relative basis as mega-cap technology stalwarts sold off due to rhetoric surrounding trade restrictions and AI competition from China. While market concentration issues related to these mega-cap companies are a belabored topic, the theme of concentration is not isolated to the large-cap space. To that point, just two companies in the Russell Midcap Growth Index (Palantir and AppLovin) accounted for nearly 30% of the return of that benchmark last year. As of the end of last month, these two companies comprise more than 8% of the index and, with market capitalizations above $100 billion, are now outside of the typical range used to delineate the mid-cap space. Since these and similar dynamics have plagued indices across the equity spectrum, Russell will implement a second rebalance in November based on market capitalization beginning next year. This rebalance will help ensure the Russell indices provide an accurate representation of their respective asset classes and have the potential to combat historic levels of concentration. As index construction evolves, it is prudent for investors to construct diversified equity portfolios to balance the risks and rewards of each asset class.

Egg Prices Ruffle Consumer Feathers

While investors scrutinize rhetoric from the Trump administration for its potential to ignite another bout of inflation for U.S. consumers, one challenge is already ruffling feathers at the grocery store. Egg prices have surged amid a resurgence in avian flu cases as farmers have been forced to cull millions of egg-laying hens to protect healthy flocks. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average cost for Grade A large eggs reached $4.15 per dozen in December, which represents a more than 13% increase from November and a 65% year-over-year rise. In some states, costs have far exceeded the national average, with wholesale prices surpassing $7.24 and $8.35 per dozen in New York and California, respectively.

The latest outbreak has proven particularly severe, with more than 14.7 million egg-producing chickens infected in January alone (more than the total for all of 2023 following the initial outbreak of the flu). With the virus present in all 50 states, the CDC estimates that at least 150 million birds, including both commercial poultry and wild birds, have been affected since 2022. With no definitive end to the flu outbreak in sight, egg producers are lobbying the federal government to fund vaccine research as a potential long-term solution. As Easter approaches, rising demand for eggs could further exacerbate issues and potentially drive prices to record highs. The U.S. Department of Agriculture forecasts an additional 20% increase in egg prices through the end of this year due to shortages, with some grocery stores already struggling to maintain supplies and others instituting limits on purchases.

While the current price of eggs has been driven higher by the flu outbreak, trade restrictions could have a far greater impact on inflation for U.S. consumers. Consequently, investors must weigh the domestic supply shocks for eggs and other goods alongside ongoing trade uncertainties and accept that inflation and elevated interest rates may persist through 2025.

Assessing the Trade War “Battlefield”

The tariff plans announced by President Trump in recent days represent a significant escalation in trade policy and a shift away from targeted import taxes and toward broad-based economic measures. Specifically, the Trump administration imposed a blanket 10% levy on China and initially imposed a 25% duty on imports from Mexico and Canada, but has since paused those measures amid negotiations with the governments of those two nations as of this writing. The economic implications of these new policies are profound, potentially triggering inflationary pressures and reshaping global trade dynamics. This week’s chart highlights how U.S. export-dependent economies like Mexico and Canada are particularly vulnerable to Trump’s initiatives.

Trump’s tariffs have already prompted retaliatory responses from certain countries, raising concerns about the potential for an escalating trade conflict. Many economists note that these reciprocal measures could lead to a contraction in U.S. real GDP, an increase in consumer prices, and a disruption of established international trade networks. As the global community watches this ongoing situation closely, the ramifications of these unprecedented trade measures are yet to be fully understood.

Alternatives to Drive Growth in the Next Real Estate Cycle

As the real estate market evolves, alternative sectors are expected to drive significant growth in the coming years. Senior housing, cold storage, industrial assets, and data centers are expected to be particularly popular among investors, with each benefiting from unique factors like demographic changes and technological progress. Senior housing stands out as the sector with the highest projected NOI growth (9.7%) due to an aging U.S. population and the growing demand for retirement communities. Additionally, senior housing properties currently present value-add opportunities, as the average occupancy rate of 85% remains below historical norms due to regulatory challenges and restrictions implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic. As these regulatory pressures ease, there is significant potential for occupancy recovery and rent growth. Properties offering a mix of independent living, assisted living, and memory care units are especially attractive, as they cater to the diverse needs of an aging population and ensure steady revenues. These newer facilities, designed to meet the needs of both residents and their families, often achieve higher occupancy rates and command premium rents compared to older properties, enhancing their investment appeal. Regions with favorable climates, such as the Sunbelt and Mountain areas, are particularly attractive for these investments.

The single-family rental and affordable housing sectors are also gaining traction, as rising homeownership costs and a lack of affordable housing have increased demand for these types of properties. Affordable housing, particularly properties supported by government voucher programs, provides resilient income streams and often generates higher rental yields compared to traditional multifamily assets, making these segments essential in addressing housing shortages in high-growth regions. Data centers and digital infrastructure are becoming critical drivers of NOI growth as well, supported by the rising adoption of cloud services, e-commerce, and advanced computing. Meanwhile, smaller-scale industrial assets and cold storage are thriving due to increased demand for temperature-controlled supply chains and multi-tenant facilities that cater to small businesses. Together, these sectors offer durable demand, scalability, and opportunities to benefit from modern supply chain trends.

While the outlook for these alternative real estate sectors is strong, investment in these spaces does not come without risks. Regulatory challenges, energy consumption concerns for data centers, and liquidity issues in niche sectors like cold storage and affordable housing require careful consideration. That said, the structural trends detailed above should serve as tailwinds for alternative real estate in the years ahead.

The Economic Toll of the California Wildfires

Earlier this month, wildfires broke out across Los Angeles County, California, destroying more than 12,000 homes, businesses, schools, and other structures. Officials recently reported a total of 40,700 acres have burned across the area, with some of the blazes still only partially contained. According to Goldman Sachs estimates, the fires have resulted in roughly $40 billion in losses ($10–30 billion of which are insured) and could lead to a 0.2% drag on first quarter U.S. GDP growth. This potential impact, while significant, would be smaller than those of other natural disasters in U.S. history, including Hurricanes Katrina (2005) and Harvey (2017). These types of events typically result in short-term economic disruptions, but lost economic output is often gradually recovered as federal aid and insurance payouts allow communities to rebuild. As such, the cumulative economic impact of the wildfires may ultimately be lower than current estimates as eventual reconstruction efforts will likely provide a boost to GDP.

The wildfires in California are drawing attention to the availability and price of homeowners insurance, as the state faces frequent disasters, high real estate prices, and an uncertain insurance landscape. To that point, seven of the 12 largest insurance companies have either paused or restricted new policies in California due to the frequency and severity of natural disasters over the last decade. On January 10, the California Department of Insurance announced a one-year moratorium on the cancelation or non-renewal of homeowners insurance policies by carriers in specific areas affected by the wildfires. In coming years, California homeowners may see a shift in property insurance away from standard policies to provide higher risk coverage at higher rates.

A Cup of Joe Could Break the Bank

Over the last few years, a cup of coffee has become much more expensive as the costs of the two primary beans used to make the beverage, Arabica and Robusta, have moved significantly higher. Arabica beans are often imported to the U.S. from Brazil and are used to make higher quality coffee blends, while Robusta is a cheaper type of bean often exported from Vietnam and used to make instant coffee. A variety of factors can impact the prices of these beans, including weather irregularities, demand fluctuations, supply chain disruptions, regulatory changes, and currency movements.

This year, major drivers of prices include the high demand for coffee and concerns around supply given severe weather in Brazil and Vietnam. A late August frost in Brazil impacted the newly flowering trees and, thus, the next season’s beans, while severe droughts in both countries have impacted harvests. Droughts can cause coffee tree branches to die, leaves to fall (prohibiting photosynthesis), early flower shedding, and bean damage, all of which reduce a coffee tree’s expected harvest. Aggregate demand for coffee has gradually been increasing in tandem with these issues, primarily due to the growing coffee market in China. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, coffee consumption has risen by roughly 150% in China over the last decade, as the drink has become more affordable, accessible, and grown in popularity among young people. This growth is projected to continue into the next season of coffee consumption, up to 6.3 million bags (132lb each) from 5.8 million bags in the 2022/2023 season.

These challenged supply/demand dynamics have been felt by investors. To that point, coffee futures prices climbed 70% in 2024 and remain well above long-term averages as traders hedge against potential production delays and the anticipation of higher coffee prices. Additionally, name brands have also felt a squeeze, as Nestlé (the parent company of brands such as Nescafé and Nespresso) announced in November its plans to increase coffee prices and make smaller packages to absorb the higher costs of coffee beans. As consumers consider alternative morning beverages like orange juice or milk to cut costs, a word of advice: A cup of coffee is worth the price!

Deficit Dangers

Large-scale government programs aimed at stabilizing the nation’s economy in the wake of the pandemic, higher interest costs, and an increase in healthcare and retirement benefit spending have fueled higher deficit levels in recent time. To that point, the nearly $2 trillion U.S. federal budget deficit in the fiscal year that ended in September represented 6.4% of GDP, which was the largest such figure ever outside wartime periods or global crises (e.g., the Global Financial Crisis, COVID-19, etc.). Based on forecasts from the Congressional Budget Office, 2025 will be the third consecutive year that the United States will see a federal budget deficit in excess of 6% of GDP. The overall national debt has ballooned to more than $36 trillion as federal spending continues to outweigh tax revenues. This week’s chart outlines these dynamics above.

There are several risks posed by excessively high debt levels, including higher inflation, lower economic activity, and the potential that the nation will be equipped with fewer financial tools to handle geopolitical challenges as a large portion of U.S. debt held is by foreign investors. One risk that incoming Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and other officials have highlighted is “rollover risk,” or the possibility that a drop in investor appetite at Treasury auctions would render the government unable to raise cash to pay for rapidly maturing debt. Bessent has made reducing the federal deficit a top priority via a combination of spending restraint, deregulation, and tax cuts aimed at fueling economic growth. While significantly reducing the federal budget deficit over the next four years may prove challenging for policymakers, it should be noted that the U.S. did manage to shrink its fiscal gap from 9.8% of GDP in 2009 to 4.1% in 2013 at the end of the Global Financial Crisis. That said, this moderation in the deficit came during a period of extreme economic recovery, which is a decidedly different environment than the current climate. Readers should note that efforts to return the federal deficit to historical levels will likely span years and different presidential administrations, though the structural advantages of the U.S. economy provide a buffer against the risks detailed above.