Straight from the Desk
Syz the moment
Live feeds, charts, breaking stories, all day long.
- All
- us
- equities
- Food for Thoughts
- macro
- sp500
- Bonds
- Asia
- bitcoin
- Central banks
- markets
- technical analysis
- investing
- inflation
- europe
- Crypto
- interest-rates
- Commodities
- geopolitics
- performance
- gold
- ETF
- nvidia
- tech
- AI
- earnings
- Forex
- Real Estate
- oil
- bank
- FederalReserve
- Volatility
- apple
- nasdaq
- emerging-markets
- magnificent-7
- energy
- Alternatives
- switzerland
- trading
- tesla
- sentiment
- Money Market
- russia
- France
- UK
- assetmanagement
- ESG
- Middle East
- china
- amazon
- ethereum
- microsoft
- meta
- bankruptcy
- Industrial-production
- Turkey
- Healthcare
- Global Markets Outlook
- recession
- africa
- brics
- Market Outlook
- Yields
- Focus
- shipping
- wages
🚨 The S&P 500 P/E Ratios Heat Map.
What do you notice? $SPY Source: Jesse Cohen @JesseCohenInv
The case for a 2% Bitcoin allocation into multi-assets portfolios by Blackrock:
"So how can investors think about a bitcoin allocation? We take a risk budgeting approach: sizing the allocation based on how much it would contribute to total portfolio risk – measured by its long-run volatility and correlation to other assets (...). But from a portfolio construction perspective, it has some similarities with the “magnificent 7” group of mostly mega-cap tech stocks. Their market value – averaging $2.5 trillion in December 2024 – is similar to bitcoin’s (...) In a traditional portfolio with a mix of 60% stocks and 40% bonds, those seven stocks – if held at their current weights in the MSCI World – each account for 4% of the overall portfolio risk on average. That’s about the same share a 1-2% exposure to bitcoin would represent: Even though bitcoin’s correlation to other assets is relatively low, it’s more volatile, making its effect on total risk contribution similar overall. A bitcoin allocation would have the advantage of providing a diverse source of risk, while an overweight to the magnificent 7 would add to existing risk and to portfolio concentration. Why not more than 2%? A larger bitcoin allocation means its share of overall portfolio risk rises sharply. This effect is small when the allocation is small, but above 2% bitcoin’s share of total portfolio risk becomes outsized compared with the average magnificent 7 stock (...) . In an extreme case, should there no longer be any prospect of broad bitcoin adoption, the loss could be the entire 1-2% allocation. We think this is much less likely to happen to a magnificent 7 stock given these companies generate major cash flow and have tangible underlying assets. The upshot? By allocating no more than 2% to bitcoin, investors would: 1) introduce a very different source of return and risk; and 2) manage risk exposure to bitcoin".
JOE BIDEN has issued more pardons than any president in history, raising a few eyebrows.
Source: @MarioNawfal on X
European Stocks trading at an all-time record discount relative to US Stocks
Source: Barchart, Blackrock
JUST IN: MICHAEL SAYLOR AND MICROSTRATEGY $MSTR BOUGHT 15,350 MORE BITCOIN $BTC
MicroStrategy spent ~$1.5 billion to buy the 15,350 at an average price of ~$100,386 per Bitcoin, boosting total holdings to 439,000. $MSTR 📈 +3.50% in pre-market. Source: Michael Saylor Tracker
Investing with intelligence
Our latest research, commentary and market outlooks