Closing Bell - Closing Bell: 3/3/25

Episode Date: March 3, 2025

From the open to the close, “Closing Bell” and “Closing Bell: Overtime” have you covered. From what’s driving market moves to how investors are reacting, Scott Wapner, Jon Fortt, Morgan Brennan and Michael Santoli guide listeners through each trading session and bring to you some of the biggest names in business.

Welcome to Closing Bell. I'm Scott Wapner, live from Post 9 here at the New York Stock Exchange. This make or break hour begins with this sell-off. Tariffs on Mexico and Canada set to take effect tomorrow morning. The president just talking about that. We'll have more on that in just a moment, but there's your picture here as stocks remain unsettled this afternoon. Nvidia, Tesla, some of the big momentum names are also continuing their drops. We're going to ask our experts where all of this is likely heading. In the meantime, as we show you the scorecard here with 60 to go in regulation, we did begin to weaken midday. We've stayed red throughout the afternoon. And as those guys were just talking about, we are at the lows of the session. Yields, they're falling too. Another

read on the economy today is this time the ISM manufacturing report. It came in worse than expected and the Atlanta Fed cutting their own real-time read on first quarter growth even lower than they had a week ago. We're on top of all that. It does take us to our talk of the tape, whether stocks are careening now towards a bigger correction. First, though, let's get to that news. Just moments ago, the president at the White House addressing those tariffs that are expected to take place tomorrow morning. Eamon Javers has the very latest for us. What did the president specifically say, Eamon?

Scott, the president is in the Roosevelt Room right now where he's participating in an announcement of a major chips investment. He's also taking questions from reporters. He was asked about those tariffs set for tomorrow on Canada and Mexico. The president said those 25 percent tariffs will go into effect tomorrow. So to the extent there had been any drama or suspense about whether the president intended to go through with this or not, he is saying he intends to go through with it. The question is now, will there be any exemptions? What kind of details will we get?

What kind of timeline will we get for those tariffs in an announcement tomorrow? We have some sound here from the president just a short time ago in the Roosevelt room. Take a listen to what he said. Tomorrow, tariffs 25 percent on Canada and 25 percent on Mexico, and that'll start. So they're going to have to have a tariff. So what they have to do is build their car plants, frankly, and other things in the United States. The president also taking to his social media platform earlier today to talk about tariffs and the way they might impact U.S. agricultural production. One of the questions in all of this is if tariffs go into place tomorrow, what reaction can we expect from Mexico and from Canada in terms of retaliatory measures. Oftentimes, countries retaliate against

American ag producers. So that's one thing to watch for tomorrow. The impact on American farmers, obviously politically sensitive for this administration. Scott, back over to you. Eamon, there was some question as to what the exact number might end up being. 25 percent, of course, the reported number. But you never know how these things go as you get closer. It sounds like from what the president just said that an 11th hour deal with either country here seems like a long shot. It does seem like a long shot, but I would say not entirely out of the question here. The president loves a dramatic moment. Right. And so, you know, I think we've got to watch through the day tomorrow until these are officially put in place. I think just about anything can happen. There could be a negotiating

breakthrough. The president might decide there's been progress on fentanyl. What White House officials tell me is the thing he's really focused on here is fentanyl production and traffic into the country. If those countries can demonstrate that they've taken some significant step that appeases the president, then you could see a situation where he might back off of that threat to impose those tariffs. But what he's signaling just now in the Roosevelt Room is he's committed to going ahead tomorrow as of right now. AMANDA MCNULTY, CNN NEWSHOUR CORRESPONDENT, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY,

AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, AMANDA MCNULTY, Markets signaling it doesn't like this one bid. We are at the lows of the session now with the Dow down by 680 points. It's a better than 2% loss for the Nasdaq. Really, as you have growth concerns come in, it is the growth trade that has been hit of late the hardest. For more on these markets, let's bring in Dan Greenhouse. He is the chief strategist for Solus Alternative Asset Management. As you see here at Post 9, your reaction to the very latest,

not that you may be surprised that we're going to get tariffs because the president said as much, but how the market is going to figure out how to deal with it. Yeah, well, I think the big problem is you had a lot of people saying, the majority of people saying that the tariff threats were just a negotiating tactic. And I think I was probably in the minority that thought, no, I think these are probably going to go into place. And based on the speech he just gave or the remarks he just gave, it looks like they are going to go into place. So from my standpoint also, the question wasn't whether they were going to go into place or not. I always thought they would.

The question is for how long and on which goods. And that still remains to be seen. Yeah, so we have the 25 percent numbers on both Canada and Mexico. As Eamon rightly pointed out, you could still have time for some sort of last minute salvage of something. But we'll have to wait and see for that. More on the market. We've obviously been upset and unsettled as we've been thinking about how the path forward was going to look. Jonathan Krinsky of BTIG says there's more work to do before you put in a durable low.

So he's looking at Friday's big bounce and saying, well, it could be the start of something. This market activity would have you believe otherwise. Do we need to think about a test of some not so great areas within the S&P? Yeah. Listen, I think I had speculated one or two times ago that I was on that we were probably not going anywhere until at least the next Fed meeting, which is March 19th. So I still think that's the case. We're probably going to end up testing the 200-day moving average, which is not some great statement. That's about 2.5% lower from where we are now. That's a couple of bad days, a bad week or two between now and, say, Fed meetings. So yeah, I think there's a lot of bad days, a bad week or two between now and, say, Fed meetings. So, yeah, I think there's a lot of uncertainty right now. You talked on the Halftime Show a lot about the market being

unsettled. Joe Terranova talked a lot about the momentum trade unwind and the digestion under the headline. And I think all of that's playing out and is likely to continue playing out until you get some clarity on some of these issues, which we don't yet have. All right. I want you to stay with me. We want more on those tariffs, which, as we say, are set to begin tomorrow. The White House continues to insist that they will not have a big impact on inflation or growth. Now, the legendary investor Warren Buffett weighed in on that topic over the weekend with CBS News. Listen. Tariffs are actually, we've had a lot of experience with them. They're an act of war

to some degree. How do you think tariffs will impact inflation? Over time, there are attacks on goods. I mean, the tooth fairy doesn't pay them. You always have to just, and then what?

You always have to ask that question in economics. Always say and then what? Prices will be higher 10 years from now and 20 years from now and 30 years from now. Let's bring in our expert on economics, CNBC senior economics correspondent Steve Leisman. So how are you processing this in your own mind against the backdrop of the White House insisting that this is not going to hurt growth, that it's not going to cause inflation to somebody like Warren Buffett suggesting otherwise? Well, as far as I understand there, Warren Buffett is no radical when it comes to his understanding of economics. He's, you know, about as plain and simple and conventional as you can

get. What Warren is talking about right there is what almost every economist will tell you, that when you place a tax or a tariff on a good, the price of that good goes up. President Trump and people who work with him have insisted from the very beginning that the entire economics community is wrong about this. However, they have presented very little evidence. I can walk through, Scott, if you want, their explanation, which does not hold up incredibly well under scrutiny. What they pointed out is that when the president put tariffs on in 2018, you did not have an effect inside or in the broader consumer price index. Of course, back then, inflation was below the Fed's target. They also seemed to target things that did not go directly into the CPI. These tariffs come, Scott, at a time when inflation is higher, when inflation expectations have begun to go up, when the Fed is

not at its target. And of course, these tariffs are much broader and actually much higher in terms of who and what they are affecting. So the general consensus is that prices will go up. The only debate in the economic community is whether or not there is a one-time shift in the price level or whether we would be off to the races again with inflation. The president, of course, entitled to his point of view, the economics community leaning heavily against that point of view. It's a backdrop to Steve that already presents itself as a slowing economy. You had more evidence of that today within that ISM read, which wasn't great. Obviously,

the Atlanta Fed taking their first quarter GDP now real time number even lower than they just had last week, going down by more than two percent. So that would also be an issue that this market's going to have to deal with as it figures out what exactly is going to happen next. Yeah, the market and the Fed. We just I was over at the NAIB conference. Scott, the National Association for Business Economics and Alberto Musalem, the St. Louis Fed president, talking about one plausible scenario, which is the idea that you could have rising prices on the one hand and declining growth on the other and puzzling over how the Fed is going to deal with that. And it's not entirely clear how it will deal with it. The issue being,

he talked again, by the way, this is a different time for tariffs to be hitting the economy. I think what needs to happen right now, Scott, is the market is the relationship of weaker growth and tariffs. They're linked at the hip right here because the idea of weaker growth is in part coming from the uncertainty surrounding fiscal policy, surrounding tax policy, surrounding tariff policy. The market's banking on rate cuts. I'm seeing here like a 95 percent chance of one come in September or 72 percent chance of a second cut come September. I think the market could be ahead of itself because what I'm hearing from the Fed is one of patience. They have to wait to see what kind of impact these tariffs have before they're going to move again.

One joke that was said to me at the conference, Scott, was all of a sudden everybody once again is on team transitory when it comes to tariffs. Well, the Fed was burned last time by being on team transitory. I think they're going to be more cautious this time. Yeah, the Fed was burned last time by being on team transitory. I think they're going to be more cautious this time. Yeah, good point, Steve. Thanks so much. That's Steve Leisman down in D.C. as you see. How are you thinking about, you know, that variable?

Now, the Fed's in a bit of a pickle here. They wanted to be patient and they felt and they were confident that they had the luxury of being patient. Now, if you have a more dramatic slowdown than some had predicted, their hand could be forced. Yeah, well, first of all, I'll say with respect to the Atlanta Fed GDP number, this is a moving target. For sure.

Yeah, probably not going to be too... For sure. The point, though, it's not so much the number, it's the fact that now you've got two weeks in a row negative. Yeah, that's right. And the direction matters more than the absolute number. It's growth still probably going to be positive, modestly so, not encouraging, but probably won't be minus 2.8. I think the issue for tariffs, to pivot off what Steve said, I think he left out one uncertainty in the economics community, which is by how much a price is going to go up. And something as an investor that you have to wrestle with when looking at any company that's even tangentially exposed to what's going on is,

OK, well, tariffs are going to be 20 whatever percent of the border. Is the exporting company going to absorb any of that? Is the importing company going to absorb any of that? Is the consumer going to? Like the percentage distribution of the price increase, because prices will go up, is really what's the issue here more than anything else. And I think Steve hit the nail on the head, except left out that one part. We don't know by how much prices are going up and who's going to pay it. Sure. You also don't know what the ultimate impact is going to be on the bottom line of

corporate America. I mean, you have David Koston of Goldman cutting his earnings estimates today, leaning a little more defensive from a sector breakout. I mean, but I'm sorry to interrupt. That's the point. I mean, margins are higher today than during the first. How much are companies willing to absorb? But you were joking about Chipotle. You know, they front running the tariffs over the last five years. Some companies have the ability to absorb this more than others. It's going to be very difficult, as you talked about, with respect to some of the automakers to absorb all of this. But in the case of Chipotle, they might be able to. It's a lot of uncertainty. So you're about 790. I mean, you're approaching

an 800 point loss on the Dow, not the greatest representation of the whole market. But if you want a better one, look at the S&P. Not much better. That is being pulled, obviously, by the weakness in large cap tech. We came into this year not expecting that. OK, we came into this year thinking that this administration was going to be pro growth, not that they aren't because of these policies, but that certainly that they were going to represent a different kind of environment to invest in. And the stock market was going to be a large beneficiary of that. Well, I would push back somewhat and say the administration

still is. The problem that you wrestle with now as an investor is the good stuff comes later. Right now, the more immediate impact is curtailing, if this is a concern for you, curtailing of immigration, which is an issue for, like Ross Stars is reporting later this week, 50% of their stores are in California, Texas, Arizona, Florida. If you're deporting some portion of the population, or at least it's not going up as much, that's an issue for some companies. More immediate is obviously the price increases. We know that it's going to be hitting and taking effect tomorrow. Down the road comes the potential deregulation. Down the road comes any adjustments to tax rates, although that's a separate conversation. So the issue, again, that you wrestle with now is the negative stuff is

more immediate. The positive stuff comes further out. Well, that's also why the market has been more resilient, too, even with some pullbacks, because you don't want to take your eye off the prize. You don't want to lose your eye off the prize. You don't want to lose the forest through the trees and think about all of the reasons why there was so much optimism after the election that there was in the first place. And the other issue, again, is with respect to the tariffs, just like you mentioned earlier, there could be an 11th hour deal to stave them off or equally as beneficial as they go into place for a couple of days and then China, I'm sorry, then Canada says, OK, OK, OK. And Mexico says, OK, a la Colombia. And they're

gone in a week or two. And I think as investors, you also have to say to yourself, OK, is this really going to be a permanent, to use Steve's phrase, a price level adjustment? Or is this indeed just a negotiating tool designed to get some concessions from trading partners? Unless they, being they, the administration, which I think they've articulated to this point, view this as a revenue draw to offset the tax cuts. Yes, that's right. Which would imply that they view this as more of a longer game than a shorter one. I don't know what percentage of the argument is being backfilled to say,

OK, well, we need to find revenue, so let's hit the cruise companies. Let's start counting tariff revenue. I'm not sure how—I mean, because remember, for some people, like the Robert Lighthizer camp around the president, this was a lot about national security, that we couldn't go into an increasingly bipolar world with China as an adversary, increasingly reliant on China for so much of our goods that eventually would find its way into, let's say, advanced weaponry.

So some of those industries we need to bring back home. And so there is a national security component to this conversation as well. All of these things find their way into the melting pot, so to speak. But yes, I think the revenue argument, you've had several people in the administration point to the early 1900s, when before the income tax was instituted, virtually all of U.S. revenue was generated from tariffs. And they pointed to that optimistically. Perhaps I've had a number of friends ask me, can you get rid of the income tax and replace it with tariffs? I have ceased being friends with these people for thinking that's a near-term possibility. However, it is the type of

conversation that's around there. And again, as an investor, the force of some of these discussions, how big of a topic we're talking about, do you really want to get that bearish without knowing for sure the permanency of some of these ideas. The other issue within the market of late is the way that NVIDIA and some of these tech stocks has traded. NVIDIA, take a look at an intraday here because the chip sell-off continues. This name at the front of the line because it's down. Let's do an intraday of NVIDIA, if you guys don't mind. It's down almost 9%. So it's at the lows of the session. And as we said, it just hasn't traded all that well of late. You did have the chip announcement at the White House a short time ago where the president made the comment about the tariffs. Of course, he was welcoming an investment by Taiwan Semi.

Christina Partsenevelos is following sort of everything in chips, whether it's NVIDIA, the continued slide in the other names and then TSMC. Yeah. So to your point, NVIDIA did reverse Friday's, what, 4% gains and then some. But the big concern right now is looming export controls you mentioned. And I bring this up because Singaporean authorities arrested three individuals for fraudulent misrepresentation of the destination of U.S.-made Dell and Supermicro servers. So this past weekend, the reason why it's coming up now is that Singapore's minister for home affairs and law questioned, quote, whether Malaysia was a final destination. And so that's suggesting possible re-exports to China. NVIDIA, of course, is not declining or declined to comment to me. Singapore, though, unexpectedly became NVIDIA's second largest revenue source back in 2024. NVIDIA clarified that selling to Singapore accounts for 18% of total revenue in fiscal 2025. So that's about $24 billion, while shipping to Singapore represents less than 2%, so about 500 million or so. So there's a big discrepancy between both. And in

NVIDIA's most recent annual report with the SEC, They said, quote, customers use Singapore to centralize invoicing while our products are almost always shipped elsewhere. So they're trying to tell you that Singapore is not used as a backdoor for China. However, analysts at Mizuho warned today a potential ban on NVIDIA chips, specifically the H20s, to China could remove roughly four to five million dollars in revenue for fiscal 2026. So there is that overhang for the stock, because in a world where computational power equals geopolitical advantage, and I'm calling it the silicon smugglers game, continues with implications far beyond corporate earnings.

And to your point about TSMC, just one last word about their investment, the tariffs will certainly add to TSMC's construction costs, especially after TSMC had already previously, this is going back over a year, acknowledged that U.S. manufacturing in Arizona will cost more to operate than Taiwan. We know that. And back in December,

Macquarie Bank estimated at least 30% more. And that's not including these looming tariffs coming. So it's certainly going to be more, and TSMC is very unlikely to absorb those costs that means the customers have to do so all right that's a good that's a good understanding of all all of these issues which are at play Christina thank you that's Christina parts and neveless let's now bring in capital area planning groups Malcolm Etheridge and requisite capitals

Bryn Talkington both are CNBC contributors Dan Greenhouse of course of Solace is still with us Bryn I'll go Both are CNBC contributors. Dan Greenhouse, of course, of Solus, is still with us. Bryn, I'll go to you first. I mean, are you surprised that NVIDIA has continued to trade so poorly? On the surface, yes, right? So if you look at it fundamentally, they just reported Q3 2025, right? So they have a different year. So if you just look at the estimates for 2027, the stock's trading around 22 times 2027 numbers.

And that's where you have to say the market is saying we don't believe that's going to happen. And you have to respect the market. And I think to Christina's point, if we get $4 to $5 billion of tariffs on our export restrictions on these chips, well, there you go, that they're not going to make that 2027 number. And so right now, the stock is still trading in this channel between, you know, 110 to 115 to 145-ish. So that channel has not been violated. We want to see that hold. But I think that you do need to respect the market of saying, well, you can say what you want about their numbers in the future. We don't believe those are going to happen. And at the same time, you're just seeing so much carnage and like an AMD,

which I think is down 55 percent over the last year. And so this market has not suffered fools. But I don't think this is the time for you just to ignore what the market's saying. I continue to sell calls on the name. I really like the name long term, but I respect how it's trading right now. I do want to see it bounce off this, like right around this level. You want to see it bounce and not violate that hundred dollars. Yeah, we we keep going lower for this session here, down more than nine percent now for NVIDIA. Malcolm, by the way, as this has traded so poorly, it's not like the other mega caps have done much better, which is why, really, as we're having this conversation,

the NASDAQ has just breached its 200-day moving average. And that's for the first time since August of 24. Thank you to our markets desk for pointing that out to us. As we're having a conversation here, it underscores the kind of weakness that we've seen within the Nasdaq, which is now down more than two and three quarters percent on a day where Trivariates Adam Parker, a frequent guest on this program, says he's reducing his exposure to tech even further to a slight market underweight. Yeah, Scott, coming into the year, I told you that I expected there to be a rotation

away from those Mag7 leaders in a changing of the guard, even within tech, to something else that we hadn't really been talking about yet. And I think that potentially it's a mistake to say I'm going to start to cut bait here with some of those mega cap tech names, simply because while the market is having this wholesale sell off, investors tend to have this moment where they recognize big tech as the safety or the port in the storm. And I have no reason to expect that that's not what's going to happen here again. And so I wouldn't necessarily be adding to those names right now while this sell-off is happening for fear of catching a falling knife,

but I wouldn't be selling them either because I think that names like Microsoft, for example, Google, for example, and Apple, those are the names that investors always tend to revert back to expecting that that is where the safety trade is going to be. Dan, I mean, Parker had gotten a little more negative before others did in terms of reducing his exposure, just says he didn't go far enough. So he's, you know, mildly. Well, whenever you're right, you never you're never right enough. Sure. But the point is that the trend for him continues, like lighten up your exposure. And then JP Morgan is out today with a note suggesting, quote, the rotation out

of these stocks continues. Yeah, I would just add some context for the viewers. Fifty percent of the S&P 500 tech sector is higher, roughly. 50% is higher right now. You've got Intel up 20%, F5 up 15%, IBM's up 14%, CrowdStrike, some of the cybersecurity names are up. I mean, obviously, the big cap names are down and suffering, other than Meta, are suffering pretty acutely. But there's a lot of, even Palantir, after its sell-off, is still up 15% or so for the year, although I don't know what it's doing right now. So the rotation is clearly happening, although that's not necessarily evidence of it. It is, however, evidence that the market, which is still roughly positive for the year around flat, has a lot of names that are working even outside of some of these names.

Palantir, by the way, was green earlier today. Let's pull up an intraday of that one, because, you know, that one, Bryn, has really been at the forefront of the momentum sell down, which people have tried to say is done. It would appear not. Vertiv, Vistra, Constellation comes to my mind. One is that we're down again sharply today. This one tried to get something going here and is failing. Yeah, I think when a company, even when the fundamentals and the growth is so strong, goes from $25 to $1.15, and it kind of defies gravity in terms of the $50, $100, and $200 day. You know, I think the 200 day on this name is about 49, 48. And so there's still a lot it could fall.

You also had a lot of insider selling last year. I think they were just as surprised. And so I think this is where investors need to understand what are you buying, what price are you buying, and be respectful of the price you're paying relative to the fundamentals. And I still think, I mean, I like Alex Carpe. He's great.

All the good things about the company. It still is in nosebleed territory at this point. On the remaining shares I had, I sold the 110 calls that expire in April. I have all the confidence in the world that won't get called away. So I'll just continue to sell calls and collect really good premium on the shares I still have. Let's not, you know, devote the whole conversation either to technology. I know it sucks the oxygen out of the room sometimes. But Malcolm, Citigroup's down 4% today. Goldman's down more than 3%. Morgan Stanley is off considerably as well. So the bank cohort is down, obviously reflecting concerns about

economic growth, you would think. Yeah, I'm very surprised to see the financials trade unwind the way that it has so early in this year. That was the one trade or one of two trades that I would say unanimously almost a lot of us were very sure would pan out very well for investors this year, maybe even overtake technology as the sector that you absolutely wanted to be invested in by the time we got to December and did a postmortem. So I think that may be something coming from the Fed on interest rates that looks encouraging as far as rates having more cuts coming than we thought, you know, maybe at the March meeting could potentially help that sector a little bit. But frankly, the give back, if you will, coming out of the White House,

as far as their stance on M&A and leaving a lot of the Biden era practices in place are really what I see weighing on that sector going forward. And to take it out a notch, it's not just financials. Look at Walmart, which is, in some respects, the definition of momentum. Walmart's off 5%, 6%, 7% or so, and that's been a big drag. I will note Visa, which is another momentum name, continues to make new highs. And I brought up the card companies on this show before, and Bryn and Malcolm, tell me if you think I'm wrong. For all the concern that we have about the market, obviously here's the chart of Visa, but it's off 50 bps today, but it's still basically sitting at an all-time high. The card companies from American Express, Visa, Capital One, on down,

had, generally speaking, positive things to say about the consumer. Now, granted, they reported a month ago, and the world has changed to some degree in a month, but the card companies, which are at the nucleus of what consumers are spending, not just retail, not just gasoline, not just vacations, but everything, told me the consumer is doing fine. And based on the price action in Visa, the economic backdrop, which has given rise to these growth concerns, which are playing out in the market, at least for now, based, again, on these companies, seem unfounded. Well, I mean, it depends. You know, if you look at the consumer confidence numbers, which have been steadily coming down, you would say, OK, I'm which is maybe a little concerned about where things are on the bank note. I thought it was interesting. There was a headline for The Wall Street Journal as we were coming on the air,

which says the FDIC plans to propose rolling back a Biden era policy that had stepped up scrutiny of large bank mergers. So I was like, OK, well, maybe the banks are getting a lift on that. No. Yeah. As I just said, they're all down now, maybe caught up with the bigger story about tariffs and the growth slowdown, growth scare and all of it, the drop in yields, all of that having a greater impact, at least than this headline would be. Another stock I want to hit, Bryn, is Tesla. Adam Jonas sort of reiterates his great support for that name, reinstating it as a top pick. The intraday chart, though, would really track the market today. What started out as a pretty good looking chart has turned into that. Tesla's down another 5%.

You talk about a stock that's had a really tough go of late. That's case in point right there. Yeah, on Thursday, it dropped to like 270, right here, 279 bounced off it. This is right at the 200-day moving average. I think that with Tesla, this is going to be a great year. If you don't have a position in Tesla, you can establish a position. It has a huge call premiums, which I have some calls that expire at 3.30 at April. They're not going to get called away. So you can take advantage of this. So 279 is a good entry point. This company still has many years of growth ahead of it. And I think once you see the Juniper come out, which is the renewed Model Y, we start hearing more about the robotics on Tesla's assembly line.

And then also you have the autonomous semi-truck, let's say, one or two years out. I think there's a lot of things that investors are going to turn around and be positive. Historically, if you bought this name when there was blood in the street, you've done quite well on the name. How are you watching this? Because, I mean, it has been an interesting barometer of sorts for a risk appetite where retail sentiment is. How are you processing if if if Elon Musk is the most corrupt individual being adjacent to the president, he's doing a pretty poor job of it for Tesla shareholders. That's for sure. Listen, Bryn knows way more about Tesla, Tesla than I do. I'll take the over on one to two years on the autonomous truck. But that said, in the short term, Adam Jonas in the note points out what everyone has observed, which is Tesla sales are down in all its important regions. I think you've had a tremendous consumer backlash.

You've heard anecdotal stories of people returning their Teslas because now what was once seen as something of a social symbolism now is working in the opposite direction. And the company is dealing with a lot of social issues that are not likely to be rectified anytime soon. That said, the world is moving in the direction of EVs. Obviously, the U.S. a bit behind Europe and certainly behind China. And they are a leader in the area. But with each passing day, every other car company is catching up to them. And it's just it's it's it's it's not so easy. Let's let's just

take another snapshot of what's happening in the market here with 30 to go before this bell rings, because we're hanging around at the lows of the session. Eight hundred thereabouts on the Dow. There you go. Eight or eight or two and a half. It is really the Nasdaq that's the most acute point of pain today, down more than 535. That is approaching a three percent loss. Let me just throw something out at you guys. You know, the president's done a lot in a really short amount of time, thrown a lot at the markets to try and digest the activities at Doge, the executive orders really at an unprecedented pace of doing those. We're talking about a lot of tariffs. Bryn, what if President Trump just simply doesn't care as much about the near-term direction of this stock market than some thought that he would.

Kept hearing, well, it's the most important scorecard next to his golf score. Or you could flip the two and decide which one you think is more important. I point it out because almost everything, if not all of the major averages, are down now since the inauguration. And he's still going ahead with the tariffs. What if he just cares about getting more done towards his framework of the policies that he wants and the markets be darned in the near term?

We have outside of some of these names like a Palantir or Robinhood that have sold off, the markets are still close to all time highs. And so I do not think he is even remotely concerned in the short term about what the markets do. I think he's concerned that in the long term, we want to chop some wood and they do not want to be status quo. And so I think investors need to look at this year like 2017, 2018 redo. In 2017, peak to trough decline in the market was 3%-ish. In 2018, we had like two 15% pulldowns, yet we also survived and markets are meaningfully higher. I feel like we're set up for another 2018 where we're just going to have much higher volatility.

And that's why investors, you better know what you own, how you're positioned, or you're going to get shaken out. And do what investors do all the time is they buy high and sell low. That's my concern. Dan, I've had people sort of raise that issue to me, you know, as they they watch everything developing out of the White House and trying to assess in their own minds whether the market is the holds the stature, if you will, that people expected that it would. You and I got in a debate a couple of months ago where I was making the argument that certainly I don't want to dismiss the S&P as a barometer for the president. People around him have said repeatedly that this is something he cares about. But the point I was

making to you when we had this conversation is I think investors at home and really citizens in general need to look at the number of fentanyl deaths, for instance, as an equally important number, need to look at the number of border crossings as an equally important number. And I think, listen, I don't know the president at all, and I know a few people around him, and I imagine if you ask them, a good question for someone to ask him or ask the people around him is,

if you had to rank those three, the S&P 500, border crossings, and fentanyl deaths, in order of importance, I think knowing the answer to that tells you a lot about how you're supposed to think about the world. I mean, Malcolm, that is something that investors are going to have to grapple with. And maybe it goes towards that story of first half uncertainty, second half better, because the president obviously is highly focused on his agenda more so than the stock market at

this very moment. Yeah, you could make that case today, but I don't know how much time he actually has to start to show those results to the stock market before we see even more of a wholesale sell off. Right. I think, you know, last week it was very easy to write this off as a profit taking or even a growth scare. And now the downward pressure on stocks has continued throughout the week. Sorry, continued into this week. And investors are attempting to understand how much of the recent announcements coming from the White House are actually just a positioning technique, a bargaining tactic. And how much we should actually believe the tariffs tomorrow that are going to go into effect are going to be meaningful. And I think the clarity that we want as investors, the longer it takes to get that, the more we're going to see this market sell off.

And there's not going to be enough pressure from folks coming to step in and buy up that dip to sustain the markets for us to find out whether he actually cares about the S&P as his report card, the way he has in previous years. And so I just think, you know, it's a missed opportunity. It's more of an unforced error here because a lot of the rollout, the announcements around tariffs and such didn't have to happen in such a chaotic way but i will be happy if to your point we get through this period and we find out that there was actually a plan in place that pans out in the form of better relationships with our trading partners and a better economy uh going forward in the back half of the year. You know, as we get ready to get out of here, there's one topic that we haven't talked about this entire time. We're 35 minutes in and that's oil and that's energy. OPEC announced earlier today that they were going to move forward ahead with planned resumption of production increases,

something that they delayed several times before. The president has made lower prices a central theme of his campaign and by by extension, his presidency. And everybody looks at particularly tariffs and immigration as being inflation positive. That is to say they're going to drive prices higher. But, however, the framing around the OPEC resumption, which, again, was delayed several times, is being put as, well, the president has pressured Saudi Arabia in particular— they're the ones with the largest spare capacity, to increase oil production, which will lower prices. I think we really need to keep an eye on this. Gasoline prices in the country right now are about $3.10 a gallon or so. During the president's first term, they were about $2.50,

so let's call it $0.60 lower than they were today. It's going to do a whole lot for investors' perception of inflation and, more importantly, consumers' perception of inflation. If gasoline at the pump is $2.50 as opposed to $3 plus dollars, that's not to dismiss what's going on with tariffs. It's just to say there are offsetting factors that can help reduce that headline inflation rate, much like we saw during the president's first term. VIX up. VIX is, I think, 21. We can show that on the day. It just gives you an idea where the psyche of the market is. Bitcoin's hanging in there, too, Bryn. And, you know, you obviously had the announcement over the weekend from the president about the reserve,

which gave a lift to an asset class that hadn't traded well lately either. Well, there's Bitcoin. Bitcoin's actually down 9%. My screen wasn't giving me the right read. Brynn, how do you see this right here and now? $82.400 is the 200-day. I feel like it's going there. Complete nonsense that what you saw in the run- up this weekend. There was no new news. I think President Trump has been really clear that he is pro crypto and wants to put a framework, a regulatory framework where companies like the Coinbase is like the ripples, et cetera, know the rules of operation. But you think investors need to beware of just these trading off weekend tweets or

weekend posts, because I think that right now you're in a downturn, you're in a risk off. And I think when you're in a risk off environment, Bitcoin consistently has shown us it is a risk off asset. Yeah. Malcolm, you have a take here on what's happened with Bitcoin today. I apologize for giving everybody the wrong read. I checked the screen. I can confirm. With my screen. And it shows it green, believe it or not. It is clearly not. However, it is down 9 percent, 85,000. I find it interesting that what was supposed to be billed as a uncorrelated asset that would do well when the rest of the market's panicked is really trading in lockstep with the S&P 500 over the last three years, at least, right? And

to a much more exaggerated degree, either to the upside or to the downside. So by a factor of four or five in 2022, 23 and 24, whatever the S&P 500 did, Bitcoin seems to be doing the same thing. And I could make the same case about the last 72 hours roughly in the markets. And so I find it strange that Bitcoin is still being billed as all of these things, digital gold, uncorrelated asset, a port in a storm and all those things where realistically I could just buy the S&P 500 and be directionally accurate a little bit better than that. Guys, we'll leave it there. We covered a lot and I greatly appreciate your time and flexibility. Malcolm, thank you. Bryn, we'll see you soon. Dan Greenhouse, it's good having you here on set. Thank you, sir. Let's get a check on the software space today. Sima Modi is here with that. Sima, we've been pretty fixated on chips because they've been a big point of weakness. But part of that JP Morgan

note that I read earlier to our viewers where they suggest to still be cautious on tech overall, they think you're still going to have a rotation from semis into software. And that may just be playing out today. The price action suggests, Scott, that investors are looking within the tech trade at the subsectors that are less exposed to tariffs and geopolitical tensions. That was sort of the thesis when President Trump won and why we saw the IGV sector ETF hit a new high on this idea that it's not as vulnerable as the chips are to the cascading effect of tariffs. You'll see names like Adobe, or actually higher today, amid today's sell-off, Box.com higher as well.

We'll be waiting for earnings tomorrow from CrowdStrike, one of the big players in the cybersecurity space. But overall, the IGV software ETF is outperforming on a day where the broader NASDAQ is down. And I think that tells you how investors are trying to find those pockets that could potentially be insulated from tariffs as we wait for that countdown and that deadline, of course, nearing, Scott. from tariffs as we wait for that countdown and that deadline, of course, nearing, Scott. Seema, thank you for that. You keep watching that for us. We

appreciate you, Seema Modi, watching the software space. Joining me now is Jeff Richards, managing partner at Notable Capital for being a pretty astute venture capitalist out your way. It's good to have you on with us. Welcome. Thanks for having me. I feel like I should be hiding in a bunker today. Yeah, seriously. I mean, what do you make of what's happened with tech of late? Well, it's interesting you mentioned the JP Morgan comment about rotation.

I mean, there's been such a concentration in the MAG7. I was at a dinner last week with Mark Mahaney, who comes on often, and a group of 30 public market investors, and I was shocked how many of them are still concentrated in the MAG7. So hopefully this is also a chance for people to go discover some new names. There are some great small and mid-cap software companies out there. SEMA mentioned CrowdStrike. They're reporting tomorrow. It's up 46% in the last six months. That's a software company in the cybersecurity space, which we continue to see be a very

important space. Certainly doesn't get less important with everything going on in the world. And you've got a bunch of great private companies like Drada and Wiz and others in that space as well. So that's a space we're excited about. And maybe we will start to see a rotation with folks looking for some newer names. We had a pretty good IPO market last year. It was not as strong as it was in 21. But the names that went out have done really well, something we can talk about. But I'm hopeful that this will cause some folks to maybe look around and look for some new ideas. I mean, how could you have a good feeling right now about the roadmap and the runway for IPOs with tariffs and the amount of uncertainty that seems to be at play. The market, you know, upset in its own right is not great for capital markets activity.

You put all that in total. And does that, you know, make you rethink what you were thinking at the beginning of the year, perhaps? Well, and Scott, as you know, it's easy for folks to go by Google, right? It's trading at 18, 19 times forward earnings, Meta, Amazon. These are safe names. Microsoft, the people have been hanging out in for years. And so to get them excited about new names, we probably need lower rates or a signal of lower rates or just more appetite for risk, which certainly you're not seeing today. I think the

thing that I would just sort of contrast that with is the optimism and the energy that everybody in Silicon Valley has right now around AI. I mean, it's so early and yet we're already seeing major corporations spending millions, if not hundreds of millions of dollars on new software and new technology around AI. I just don't think it's hit the radar screen of many public investors yet because so many of the companies that are benefiting and winning in the category right now are still private. Obviously, you have high profile names like OpenAI and Databricks, but tons of great private companies that folks haven't even heard of.

And those companies are winning. They're benefiting big time right now. It just probably won't hit people's radar until some of those companies go public. I mean, not to mention Anthropic, which had news today, obviously, a raise post-money, $61.5 billion. When you see the eye-popping numbers that these valuations are getting to, what's your reaction? Well, look, there's a lot of money around the world. There's more private companies, over 100 million of revenue in the world than there are public. And we have fewer public companies today than we did 20 years ago. So at some level,

you've got capital around the world chasing a small number of companies that are doing really well. The other thing I would just highlight, Stripe came out with their annual report this week. And in it, they had a great chart that showed the growth rate of AI companies versus the growth rate of prior generation software companies. And these companies are growing much faster with fewer heads and are going to be more profitable over the long run. So I think the enthusiasm is warranted. And at some level in the private markets, you know, we don't have a market where you can just buy and sell stocks every day. You're locking in these investments in these companies for hopefully a seven to 10 year window and hopefully seeing liquidity down the road. But it's just scarcity. It's a lot of money

from around the world chasing what everybody knows is a generational shift that's going to create trillions of dollars of value. So it's not surprising. I wonder, though, if there's risk within that of inflating bubbles, right? Fewer places to put even more money so they go towards the top. Well, the thing we all have to remember, if you think about the last bubble back in 99, 2000, there were roughly 200 million people on the Internet in 2000. Today, you've got billions and billions of people that are already sitting on platforms like Meta's got 2 billion users. ChatGPT, fastest growing consumer application in history, went to 200 million in under two or three

years. So the point at which these companies are entering the market, whether you think about small business, enterprise, consumer, the groundwork has been laid for these companies to grow at an accelerated rate. And I think when we talk about bubbles, remember the infrastructure spending is being funded by cash flow at Microsoft and Google and Amazon and Meta. It's not like they're going out and raising capital like companies were in the late 90s and early 2000s to fund that expansion of the internet. It's just a very different climate with a much bigger end set of opportunities.

And I think that's why you're seeing so much excitement for these companies. So what's your, I just want to spin it towards crypto for a moment before I let you go, just simply because it was in the news this weekend with the Reserve. You have Coinbase as a portfolio company of yours. Is this truly the moment for digital assets? Well, I think you could pick apart the strategy that the Trump administration is trying to pursue here. But Brian Armstrong has frequently said,

look, we need to be a leader in this space. Brian Armstrong is the CEO of Coinbase. And if we believe that digital technology is going to play a role in finance in the long run, which it is, I believe that it is, and we certainly believe it will, we need to be a leader in that category. And one thing we take for granted in America is it's very easy for us to go to get a bank account, get a mortgage, go to an ATM. That's not true in other countries. And so where we may see the earliest adoption and the most valuable end use cases other than sort of store of value, which we see with

Bitcoin, is in emerging markets. It's an area that we've been watching closely and have a few investments in Latin America and here in the U.S. companies that are pursuing some of those opportunities. It's just super early, but I agree with the overall sentiment that we want to be a leader in innovation, in AI, in fintech, in cryptocurrency. You can pick apart the strategy, but the end goal seems spot on. Good having you on. We'll see you soon. Jeff, be fintech, in cryptocurrency. You can pick apart the strategy, but the end goal seems spot on. Good having you on. We'll see you soon. Jeff, be well. Thanks, Scott. All right, that's Jeff Richards. Amazon shares sinking amid the broader sell-off today. Talked about Anthropic earlier. Let's send it to Kate Rooney now for more. Kate? Hey, Scott. Yeah, so Amazon

really taking a hit today on this tariff news. Stocks down almost, actually now more than 4%. That's about double the losses we're seeing from the rest of mega cap tech at this point. It is a knee-jerk tariff reaction. The story here, investors are expecting goods just overall to get more expensive on Amazon's e-commerce side of the business. That could slow down sales and hit what has been a really solid margin story at Amazon. So North American margins, which is pretty much the whole e-commerce business, those have been expanding in previous quarters. They had gone negative. If you think back to sort of the COVID era, they'd gone through these major investment cycles. It started to pay off. It's been a big part of the bull case for Amazon. And you got to

look at third party sellers here. That's a big part of this. More than 60 percent of all of the items sold on Amazon are from those third parties. So they may be the ones absorbing more of the cost, passing that on to consumers. And then Amazon does sell fewer goods directly if you compare it to sort of a Walmart or a Target. And the bulk of the items do come from China. When you look at those third parties, Roth, for example, has estimated it's 30% to 40% of those who sell on Amazon import directly from China. Then you also have the Mexico and Canada factor as part of that, Scott. But as I mentioned, down more than 4 percent at this point. You want to just weigh in real quick before I say goodbye on the anthropic raise,

just because you've been covering this all along the way and the numbers are just going up, up and up. Eye popping. They just need this amount of capital. Amazon's been a massive investor up until this point, but there's a lot of new folks on the cap table. You had folks like Salesforce, sort of the venture arm of Salesforce, and they need this money to compete. OpenAI is seen as sort of the leader. At this point, you need cash to compete in AI. So this is sort of a proof point that investors are willing to pay a premium for the best AI companies out there. Anthropic is seen as competitive. So it's a win for Anthropic that they were able to pull off this mega fundraise. It shows sort of the investor appetite for Silicon

Valley. I thought Jeff made a great point, too, that a lot of the value here is being created in private markets. I would not expect Anthropic to go public any anytime soon. And we're going to see more capital raises, I would expect, later this year. Good to have your insight, Kate. Thank you. That's Kate Rooney. Mega caps falling yet again, adding to losses for most of those names over the past month. J.P. Morgan, private bank, U.S. equity strategist, Abigail Yoder is here now at Post 9. Abby, welcome. It's nice to see you. Nice to see you. Stage is yours. Just riff on what you're seeing here with the markets and how you're feeling about it. There's obviously a lot of uncertainty around tariffs and so many other things, it seems.

Yeah, well, I think there's this tug of war between what's going on from a policy standpoint that's creating a lot of uncertainty. But when we think about what's happening from a fundamental standpoint, it looks okay right now. Could the uncertainty from policy, you know, be pervasive enough over the next couple of months that you start to see that come through in terms of hard data? Perhaps. That's not what we're seeing at the moment right now. Okay, so you are firmly in the,

this is a lot of noise, look through it and think about what's yet to come, perhaps over the second half. Yes, and how that translates to a portfolio is we're not changing our U.S. exceptionalism call. I think there's been a lot of attention on what's happening in Europe and China, but that's been a valuation rewriting. You haven't seen anything from a fundamental standpoint, nothing move in terms of an earning standpoint. It's optimism around a ceasefire in Europe and then obviously the AI enthusiasm in China. But until you start to see an inflection

in the real fundamentals, be it economic or on the earnings front, it's really not going to get us excited. That's the thing. I mean, the earnings have hung in there, to say the least. Even in the face, you know, in the last week, I think we've had two calls from different strategists taking down their U.S. equity view. You're holding firm. And earnings must be a huge, huge part of that. Yeah. I mean, the underpinning, so we have a 6,400 year end price target. The breakdown of that is a 21 multiple. So you're staying with that. Yeah. Staying with that. And it's a down multiple. It's a 21 multiple from where we are today at around 21.7 and earnings growth of 12%. So, you know, unless we see cracks in that, I think, you know, in terms of the earnings standpoint,

you feel comfortable with that. Price action within the market, technology obviously upset. What's your view? I mean, it's in a momentum unwind to a certain extent. And I think this is what happens when valuations are too high, right? Like this is what happens. It's expectations get higher and higher. And even if they're met to a certain extent, it's like what's the runway for growth going forward?

And this is just to us like somewhat of a healthy pullback in terms of technology. And I think it's being felt more broadly because this is what people own, but this is a good call, you know, thinking about diversifying outside of that. Are you separating the mega caps from some of the other high growth names that have seen an even bigger pullback than the larger cap ones? Yeah. I mean, because, you know, the previous guest was just talking about the real cash flows. People are going to look for quality. These companies are quality. That hasn't changed. Whether or not the valuation reset is attractive enough for people to come back to them is, I think, the biggest question. Yeah. I mean, we went through this, like, you know, when the Fed started raising interest rates, all those non-profitable tech companies really had a big upset. Now, as we are worried about growth and the valuations for those

companies got too rich, we're seeing it again. It's good to catch up with you. Thanks for being here. Thanks so much. That's Abby Yoder of JPMorgan Private Bank. We do have more breaking news out of Washington at this moment. Megan Casella is at the White House and has that for us. Megan. Scott, President Trump has just signed an executive order that will put in place an additional 10 percent tariff on China that is set to take effect just after midnight tonight, bringing the total tariff rate on China that he has imposed so far in his term to 20%. Now, that has officially been signed as an executive order. An administration official was just giving me the details on that. And I did ask specifically Scott whether he had

also signed anything on Canada or Mexico, and he has not done that yet. So even though the president just told me just earlier this hour that there is no room left for Canada and Mexico to make a deal, he has not yet signed the executive order putting that action into place. But he has now put that signature on the China executive order. That's set to take effect tonight, just after midnight, while we still wait and see what's going to happen next with Canada and Mexico. Scott? Appreciate that update on the North Lawn.

Megan, thank you. Megan Casella of the White House. We're now in the closing bell market zone. CNBC Senior Markets Commentator Mike Santoli is here to break down these crucial moments of the trading day. Pippa Stevens joining us as well on energy and the sell-off there. Michael, I'll turn to you first. Well, we think we're getting the tariffs. Yes. As we are in the morning. 25 and 25 on-off there. Michael, I'll turn to you first. Well, we think we're getting the tariffs, as we are in the morning,

25 and 25 on Canada and Mexico. As Megan was just telling us, an additional 10 on China. That brings 20% of the total there. And here's what you get in the market. Yeah, so clearly rough numbers. We had 2% of hope that we would not get the tariffs. I mean, I was saying earlier today,

it did seem like the market was going to eventually want to test the reality of that very late levitation we got on Friday. We've essentially unwound the entire thing, plus a few points. I do think a lot of it though, just feeds all in the same direction, which is the economy having a stutter step

a little bit softer than we thought it was. Tariffs therefore seem like a kind of war of choice that's creating an exacerbating factor on the growth concerns. It's not causing an inflation panic, really. It's mostly about this is just going to kind of give us an extra little squeeze. Now, the unwind in big cap tech, I mean, the tariffs aren't going to affect Microsoft. It's down 2.5%. It's also about the stuff that was more heavily owned, more lazily owned. NVIDIA clearly is not allowing people to relax. And the

fact that you had the dissipating dead cat bounces in Bitcoin and Tesla today gave, I think, a little bit of a tell on how the tape was. There is a sign at these levels of the S&P you might get some acceleration to the downside, kind of going to the next likely stop, whether that's the 200-day or not. We're only talking a percent or two. Down from here is where people have been eyeballing those things. And obviously, two-year yield is telling you the same story under four. I mean, it's an unwind. I like the word unwind. I mean, it's been an unwind of some of the mega cap money. It's been an unwind of the high valuation growth names. I don't know whether investors are ready to do an unwind of expectations for the months ahead.

And what they think is still going to be the prize that awaits Trump policy. I think a lot of that is well underway, to be honest with you. I mean, I do think that, you know, obviously the market is still only down 5% from a record high. It's about flat year to date. We're right in, by the way, the November 6th gap. Essentially, we closed the S&P 500 on Election Day 5723. Okay, so we're talking about 2% from here. So it wouldn't take much to essentially say, okay, nothing more is priced in in terms of policy goodies at this point. I really do think, though,

the AI trade falling on its face is a big part of this. Since the Stargate open AI announcement, SoftBank, all that, NVIDIA's now 23%, okay? Everyone keeps throwing tens of billions of dollars at this theme, and the main beneficiaries are saying, we're not confident we can capitalize those revenues at as high a rate as we thought before.

Well, certainly deep seek through a wrench into the whole plan. And the market in many respects around AI hasn't recovered. Which was basically the same day. Since then, exactly. All right, Michael, thank you. I'll come back to you in a moment to Pippa Stevens now on energy for us. Pippa? Yeah, Scott. Well, oil tumbled after OPEC announced it will increase production starting in April, taking the market by surprise to a certain extent, given how many have forecasted an oversupplied market this year. The group will gradually return 2.2 million barrels per day through 2026. And energy stocks following that move in oil lower, with upstream players like APA, Conoco, and Diamondback leading the declines,

given that exposure to commodity prices. Now, clean energy also taking a hit. Residential installer Sanova plummeting 64 percent, now a penny stock, saying there's substantial doubt around its ability to continue operating. CEO John Berger adding the overall environment is, quote, terrible. Once a more than five billion dollar company in 2021, it's lost 99% of its value. Scott? Pippa, thank you. That's Pippa Stevens.

We just saw, so Bitcoin's down a bunch. Tesla was up initially, rolled over, I think, when we were on halftime. You pointed that out. So a lot of these points, these pressure points on the market just won't cease. Yeah, and ultimately, that builds into this scenario where people have surrendered and they feel like there's no obvious place to hide. And the market's going to we're going to wake up tomorrow and people are going to say S&P finally looking oversold. It wasn't fully a washout because you actually still have the equal weight outperforming and you don't have 90 percent of

volume to the downside. But you're kind of within hailing distance of a 200 day moving average test, again, down 5 percent from the highs. It's been a pretty good reset of prices and psychology so far. So, again, it leaves you open to this idea. If you get a reassuring jobs report on Friday, if we get the details of Canada, Mexico tariffs and it's not the bluntest instrument of 25 percent on everything, you know, there might be room a little bit for a little relief there. But yeah, there's no doubt about it that the market is telling you defense for now. It doesn't seem as if it feels like we have to rewrite the script we had at the beginning

of the year. And I think it was to some degree a lazy script to feel like it was going to be a great economy, a Fed moving quickly toward more easing and policy accelerants on top of that. That seemed like it was probably too much to ask for. And now we stopped basically thinking it's likely. I mean, look at the look at the Russell, for example, which has just been a brutal trade, 6 percent down on the year. There is a look today near 3 percent and it's down more than 7% within the last month. The things to watch in addition to some of those leading to the downside, like small caps, is the stuff that's held up better. So financials have kind of maintained their leadership position.

Yes, they're down, but they've been more insulated. And related to that is credit conditions. It's eroded a little bit. Spreads have widened out a little bit on some of the riskier debt, not to the point where you'd say, uh-oh, it's game over. But with the VIX at 23, if credit is not going to weaken up very much, that's probably a net positive sign, but it's delicate here. All right, it's going to be a relief for many that the bell's about to ring

because it's going to ring out a pretty ugly day down here on wall street if you look ahead to those tariffs in the morning we'll follow all that in the day ahead