Power Lunch - Power Lunch 4/8/26

Episode Date: April 8, 2026

CNBC’s Kelly Evans and Brian Sullivan take you through the heart of the business day bringing you the latest developments and instant analysis on the stocks and stories driving the day’s agenda. ���Power Lunch” delves into the economy, markets, politics, real estate, media, technology and more. The show sits at the intersection of power and money. “Power Lunch” gives viewers a full plate of CNBC’s award-winning business news coverage, plus a healthy dose of personality from the show’s anchors and the network’s top-notch roster of reporters and digital journalists. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Your money is soaring on Iran peace talk, but is the real risk really over? Welcome to Power Lunch, everybody, alongside Kelly. I'm Brian. The markets are moving up. But questions remain, luckily for you. Stephanie Link is here for the entire hour. And Keith Lerner also on set as a potentially fragile. Two weeks ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran bringing in the buyers. One of the biggest updates in years, Kelly, but oil and energy stocks having one of their biggest down days in years. Flip signs of the coin. Plus, we have two key voices coming up. Ian Bremmer is the founder and president of the Eurasia Group.

He'll join us to break down the high state's dynamics in the Middle East right now. And Stephen Byrd is Morgan Stanley's global head of sustainability research. We'll talk through power demand with him. Grid investment. The next phase of the energy transition, hard to determine the way oil price is swinging around right now. Let's get to Aiman Javvers. In the meantime, he is at the White House with some breaking news from the press conference that just wrapped up. Kelly, that's right, the press secretary here at the White House,

saying that the vice president, J.D. Vance, will be heading to Pakistan. along with a negotiating team this weekend to open in-person negotiations with the Iranian side. The vice president allegedly going to go there along with Jared Kushner and Stephen Whitkoff, also to participate in those talks. The press secretary here at the White House saying, guys, that the White House believes that the Strait of Hormuz should be opened without any conditions. And that's an important point because it gets to this question of whether the Iranians will at the end of this be able to, able to charge tolls for transit through the Strait of Hormuz. I asked the press secretary

if that's an acceptable outcome to the United States. And what Caroline Levitt said was that the president wants the straight open without preconditions. That means without tolls. So for now, the U.S. position, guys, is that the strait needs to be opened and the Iranians need to not be charging tolls for transit. I'm going to send it back over you, having a little audio problem here, but send it back over to you guys. All right. Amen, Javis, Amen, we appreciate it, even though you can't hear it. us. We can hear you. And in fact, we do have some new reporting on that exact topic. The Strait of Hormuz in shipping. I was in touch minutes ago with German shipping giant

Hapag Lloyd, and they sent me this quote. Based on our current risk assessment, we are currently refraining from transiting the straight. At the same time, we are continuously and very carefully assessing when a passage will once again be possible. That from Hapag Lloyd, just one shipper, but it's a big one. They're still not comfortable going through that Hormuz area. That lines up with some marine insurance sources that have told me today that as of a few hours

ago, there has been little to no increase in actual shipping activity. In fact, only two bulk carriers have crossed the strait that according to marine traffic by Kipler, now those bulk carriers carry dry cargo, not oil. Most of it's not flammable.

That's key. Some of the issue being not just the fear of what may happen, but also that thing that Aymann talked about, the potential toll that Iran or some in Iran may be trying to charge. There is a live look, Kelly, of the Strait of Hormuz, and you could see that very tip. There is still no tanker activity in the street. Critically important what you just reported, Brian, as well. And yet even throughout the day, as we've been hearing more updates about whether or not the Strait is reopening, the market remains undeterred by this rally that we're seeing. In fact, it dials up 1,300 points right now,

very similar to what we saw when the bell rang at 9.30 a.m. A notable bound. today. All four major averages are rallying by more than 2% as the temporary ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran is sending stocks soaring. Will it last, though? And what should investors do in the meantime? As we try to figure this all out, as Brian mentioned on set with us for their takes. Keith Lerner is the chief investment officer at Truest Wealth. And Stephanie Link is the chief investment strategist at High Towers and High Tower and a CNBC contributor. Welcome. Keith, take it away. Are you surprised by the market reaction? Well, it's been a big move. But I would say, heading into this week, the market was the most

oversold on many metrics since the tariff shock. And by the way, just an interesting factoid for today, today is the one-year anniversary of the low following the terror shock from last year. Almost to the day. Now, this actually brings up a big point of discussion and debate in the market. Some say this is going to be exactly like that event.

The president backed off. Markets rally never really looked back. Others say because the price of oil is different. We had a... Our Emerita said laying out the case an hour ago for $5 gasoline still higher prices for diesel, that that shock will be harder to reverse in one fell swoop, and same for the market impact.

I don't know if you fall in one of those two camps. Yeah, well, the first thing I would say is also, think about last year, we were down almost 20%. This correction was only about 9%. So it's not the same exact situation. And as people say, it takes more than, takes two to tango. So it probably is a bit more challenging.

I will say, though, I think investors and corporations have adapted over and over time, as far as all these shocks that have been coming. And each time, what do we see? We see that profits eventually come back to new highs, profit margins come to new highs, and companies adapt. And I think that's part of the reason why so far the market has actually taken all these concerns, someone in strife.

We have to break away, but Stephanie quickly, before we break, which of those two camps? Are you in the kind of off to the races or the, let's wait and see a little bit? I think we're off to the races because I think the economy is a lot stronger than headed into the war. and I think it's going to resume the momentum. And by the way, earnings have been going higher. And earnings are going to grow 14% this year.

And multiples are down 17%. Wow. But yet you just sold Chevron, and we're going to get to that in a second. But we've got some breaking news that we have to break away from. We're going to come back. You're not going anywhere. We're not going to drag you here and then send you on your way. But we are going to send our audience to D.C. for moments for some breaking news of the Fed Minutes and Megan Cicella.

Guys, that's right. We just got the minutes of the Fed's March. meeting just a few moments ago. Now remember, these are about three weeks old at this point, but what the minutes reflected was a Fed that was keeping its rate steady for now, while noting that the outlook was very uncertain and that war in the Middle East was impacting both sides of the Fed's dual mandate. So on rate policy, all but one member, that was Stephen Myron, voted to keep rates unchanged. Participants emphasized the importance of being nimble in their policy stance, saying that a rate hike could be appropriate if inflation were to remain

at above target levels. Now, on the economic outlook, there was uncertainty about about the economic outlook remaining elevated. Economic activity, they said, was expanding at a solid pace. Job gains remained low, the employment rate remained little changed. Inflation remained somewhat elevated in their outlook. They said progress in reducing inflation had been absent in recent months, but that the labor market remained broadly in balance. February jobs data, they said, was impacted by the health care strike

and winter weather holding down some of those numbers. There was a lot of discussion even three weeks ago about the impact of the developments in the Middle East. on the outlook and the policy stance. The Fed said that the implications of those developments in the Middle East for the economy were uncertain at that point. Several participants noted near-term inflation expectations were higher due to rising oil prices. And then as for long-term expectations, some participants noted that longer-term inflation expectations could be more sensitive to those higher energy prices. Several participants also noted that a prolonged conflict

was likely to lead to more persistent increases in energy prices and that a majority of participants noted that risk to inflation and employment increased with those Middle East developments, guys. So again, about three weeks old here, but still seeing some discussion of how this conflict, this war that we're talking about so much today, was impacting the Fed in March, guys. All right, Megan Casella in D.C. Stephanie Link, so we'll go back to that. You believe that earnings are still going to be strong. You're not worried about the inflationary aspect of what's going on, at least not in a macro sense. It's always been at the length of the war. If it was going to be short,

then we could resume the strength in the economy. This would be a blip. There's no question about it. Atlanta Fed trackers at 1-3 right now, right? But it's a blip because we had so much momentum headed into the war. And I think if it's short, if it's this, you know, six, eight weeks kind of thing, not six-eight months. If it's six-eight months, I'm totally wrong because that will feed into the economy and into the consumer. But I won't just highlight one thing.

Gasoline is only 3% of household budgets. So it's not so much about the gasoline price. prices per se, because cars are so much more efficient, right? And we have EVs and all that. But it really does it feed into so many other parts of inflation. And I think if you get oiled down and some of the commodities down, I think you'll continue to be able to... I'm not saying it doesn't... Gasoline matters, but I want to just highlight what you said it yesterday. Just quickly, the average American uses 30 gallons, 30 to 50 gallons of gasoline a month. So that's $50 to $50 to $60 a month extra. They're going to be paying to some families

that's going to matter. But for macro-consumer spending, I don't know how much that matters because you've already got beef, groceries, health insurance, car insurance, everything is already up. Maybe it makes it worse, but to your point, it's never been lower as an input cost to the economy. And it's a case-shaped economy. Thank you for coming to my TED Talk. And it's a K-shaped economy. I'm just curious to pick up on what you said, which is, you know, if this isn't over in six or eight months, forget it. But when we say it, is the oil price the determinant? In other words, just last hour, someone said, you know, it's got to get below 85 for this to kind of be the all-clear.

So I don't know if we're ever going to get someone waving a flag and say, you know, the straight's open, or it's closed, or it's semi-hopper, or it depends. But is it going to come down to the oil price to tell us that this is definitively over or not? I think it's all about the straight. I think is it going to get open or is it going to get open or is it going to get open? And even if it's partially open, that's better than where it's better than where. Bring up that live chart again, that graphic again. And Keith Lerner, I want to get your take. You're a macro strategist. In fact, you just upgraded energy today because the sell-off, I think you think maybe it's cheap. Get into that. Are you and your team looking at this map every day? If not, tell us. Like, how much does, because we're treating light that, like it's pretty sacrosanct. It is.

It's very important. But I would also remind folks, like right now, all we're talking about is Iran. And as we go back the last five years, I would just say each time we're, we have this different thing on the carousel of concerns. And eventually we move to the next thing. So I would also say what's happening is important, but it's not the only thing that matters. I mean, at this point, to the broader point,

we're still seeing is tech AI spending going to stop all of a sudden because of this? Probably not. Does this going to cause day-to-day movements in the market? Yes. But we also remember, we had the highest inflation since the 70s, the fastest rate hikes since the 80s, supplies chain disruptions.

And each time our corporations have adjusted, Here's an interesting stat that I've been sharing with some of our clients recently. Since the global financial crisis, we've had over about 200 months since then. Out of that 200 months, how many months have we been in recession? Two months. So 1%. So my point is not to say that this doesn't matter. It can't get worse.

Is that our companies have adapted, and I think that this bull market and the economy continues to earn the benefit of the doubt. Yeah. I mean, I know that's, you say much the same thing. Why have earnings been going up this year? the estimates for kind of the quarters to come? Well, for the most part, it's technology, and it's the AI boom, and it's also the AI food chain that I know we're going to talk in a couple of, in a little while about not only is it AI, but as data centers, it's great,

its power, and that is fueling a lot of the growth. It's also consumer. The consumer is actually consuming, and I think it goes right back to the economic data. I mean, last week alone, every one of the job reports that we got, whether it was Challenger Gray, ADP, claims, or non-farm payrolls, all beat expectations. And so the consumer, if they have a job, they're spending, and that's what they're doing. And in the meantime, ISM manufacturing and ISM services, yes, I know it was a disappointment. Why did you sell Chevron?

Because I thought there's, well, I was buying a lot more technology. Because he just upgraded energy today. Yes. You sold Chevron, which is the Stephanie Link version of a downgrade. If you sell it, it's a downgrade. That's the ultimate downgrade is the sell. First and foremost, I still own SLB, and I'm really big in that position, and I like the services companies better.

The other reason is simply. I just, I'm up 35% in the name and I wanted to take some profits. 21 times earnings for a company that's going to see production growth in the upper single digits. It's just not that exciting to me, but I did take that money and I bought a whole bunch of technology names. New names. We can talk about it. We should. We have you the whole, but you just upgraded energy today.

So relate that to what Stephanie just said. You don't seem concerned about 21 times earnings. Don't pit me against Stephanie. This is what we're saying. what we're doing here. I see that. I see that. I'm sitting over here. Stephanie and I were talking about this earlier. So our perspective, we're overweight industrials, we're overweight tech. And because of what you just outlined with the straight, there's still a lot of uncertainty out there. So we've had an 8% pullback in energy. And from a portfolio of diversification

standpoint, let's see things start to escalate again. What's going to outperform? It's going to be energy. And also, if you zoom out on energy since 2008, it's only up about 50%. The S&P's up well over 300%. So it's lagged. Technically, it looks great. And I think oil is likely to stay somewhat higher than what was happening before. So put that all together, I think this is a good opportunity to add energy on weakness. And I think it may look like it's expensive, but those earning estimates are likely to move up in a meaningful way. There we have it. Keith, thanks. We'll let you go. Keith Lerner of Truist, Stephanie, stick along with us. As we mentioned, we'll see you in just a little bit. All right. So we are just getting started and ahead on power lunch.

after a huge start to the year, is it time to sell more energy? Maybe we should just have Keith stick around. We're going to stick around. We're back right after this. All right. Let's talk more now about energy, the markets, the ceasefire, because markets overall, they are booming. Most energy stocks, they are not having one of the worst days in years.

James West is a head of energy and power research at Mellius Research, one of the most followed analysts on the street. And I know the markets are ripping today, James, good news. We want it to hold. You may have heard my reporting just minutes ago that HAPAC Lloyd, one of the biggest shippers of the world, has told me that as of now, they're not putting ships through the strait. We haven't seen a lot of activity. There's been a reported attack on a Saudi pipeline, attacks on Lebanon as well. Why then is the market reacting like this when what we're seeing and what we're reading and hearing doesn't necessarily equal the market reaction today?

Yeah, I think the market's been complacent this entire time during this conflict. I think oil prices have been too low, given what's happened. I think oil prices are off too much today, given that really nothing has happened in the straits and we're not really reopened. In fact, the ceasefire is not holding at all at this point, as you point out. Yeah, and so what does that mean? Let's assume, well, we want to assume the best, okay? So I don't want to be negative.

But we're one errant drone attack or missile attack away from, a $10 pop in oil. I feel comfortable saying that I think you would agree. And if you don't, tell me and tell me why. What does that mean then for the companies and the stocks that you follow because while oil is down big today, it's still at 95. It's not at 65. Right. Right. So I think you're right. One Aaron drone and we're up at our $10, maybe even $20 at that point, because it signals the conflict will go on for much longer than the market is anticipating today. But I think they'll also So we're moving into a new normal. Let's say the conflict does end at some point in the near term. Oil prices are not going back to the 60s. They're going to be in the $80 to $90 range, which is good for these stocks.

All these earnings estimates are way too low, particularly for the service stocks. It's going to see the recovery, of course, in the Middle East, and then drilling elsewhere, but also for the major oils, the E&Ps as well, because they're going to benefit from the higher price. Yeah. And in fact, so I'm trying to figure this out, doing a piece maybe on Friday, James, so maybe you could help me out. Looking back 2021 to 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine, we saw oil spike. And in the subsequent quarter, we saw 250% average gain in big oil earnings per share. And Stephanie, you can chime in because I know you just sold Chevron. Stephanie Link is here on set with us, James.

So how much in the second quarter, not the first quarter, but second quarter and third quarter, whatever, do you think we will see earnings per share rise? on average? I think we'll probably see at least a 15 to 20 percent increase for kind of the major oil companies. I think much bigger increases for the EMPs. In fact, we've talked to Exxon. We've talked to many of the majors here in recent days and the service companies in recent days. The only place earnings are going down near term is services because they're under pressure in the Middle East and their operations have been disrupted. But everything else is going up and up to the right and up very quickly. And I think the out years, you know, 27, 28, 29, that's where you're

see the much bigger rises in the earnings expectations. How long in terms of the oil services segment is it going to take for them to get their facilities back up and running? That was one of my concerns about SLB because 30% of their revenues are tied to the Middle East and a lot of the infrastructure has been destroyed. So maybe it's been destroyed. So how long do you think that's going to take and do you think that's an opportunity today to be buying these names in anticipation of a recovery. So the good news is none of the oil field service infrastructure has been damaged or destroyed. There might be little pieces here and there. Most of the workforce is localized in the Middle East by law in the Middle East. And so we're not moving a bunch of expats back into the

country and that takes a while. So as soon as the conflict is resolved, we can get back to work pretty quickly. In fact, we're working on land in Saudi right now. We're not working offshore in Saudi. We're working in Oman. We're not working in Kuwait. parts of Iraq, but there is some activity happening. And so we can get very quickly back to work. It kind of depends on the customer, whether, you know, Aramco, or the Quaid Oil Company, how quickly they want to get back after they assess. But most likely, you would assume they want to get production back up. They want to see what the impact has been on their reservoirs, because they shut in the production, so there will be some damage there. So it'll be production-related

work that comes quickly, and the new drilling follows after that. So we see a fairly swift recovery. The supply chains are getting set up right now to do that. They're tall. to the customer base, they know kind of what the timing should be and when the conflict ends, when they want to be back up and running, and it's fairly quickly. So we'd see us with recovery, but a lot of momentum really for a company like SLB as we exit the year and go into 27 and 28, where we would have thought expiration and production spending, so-called that revenue for SLB would have been, let's say, up high single digits. It's probably low double digits, if not higher now because we're going to see more activity in the Middle East and more activity

globally. And that's the stock you like, right? James. Absolutely. All right. James West, Mellis Research. James, thank you very much. And speaking of oil, that's the subject of today's power pole with prices back in the mid-90s. The big question is whether you think WTI crosses above 100 again this year. Scan that QR code on your screen now to vote. We'll reveal the results later in the show.

For now, let's bring in Andy Lipow, President of Lipau Oil Associates. Andy, we heard him read us in last hour say she thinks that prices at the pump could still go to $5 based on the fact that 13 million barrels a day of oil are still shut in. There's going to be a lot of problems kind of getting product where it needs to go. Do you think that's a realistic view? Well, I think that $5 a gallon gasoline is still quite a ways away. That's about $40 a barrel. But it is really possible to see WTI prices rally back to its recent highs,

especially if this ceasefire doesn't hold and the strait continues to be shut. and we see missiles flying from the U.S. into Iran and Iran back into its neighbors. So I'm certainly not going to rule it out. What at this point do you think is going on with the disconnect between the physical markets and kind of where we're seeing markets in the financial world trade? In other words, WTI in the mid-90s, we normally think, okay, that's a certain number at the pump. But this time is a little different because of these physical shortages, or is it? Well, certainly the physical crude oil market is pricing far higher than the future.

prices in order for refineries to get their hands on a physical cargo. If you look at what WTI is selling for into Asia, in July, it's $40 a barrel over Brent prices. So there is a very large shortfall on the physical market. And I do agree with MREDA SEND that the supply shortfall today is somewhere between 13 and 14 million barrels a day. And that's not going to come quickly back, even if the straight is reopened. We have to think about it this way. Not only are tankers bottled up inside the strait, you need empty laden tankers to go back into the straight in order to load crude oil in order to get that production to start coming back. Let me, instead of leading the witness, ask you what you think on the question of $100 oil,

Andy, are we headed back above that level or no? I think we are because I'm really concerned about this ceasefire. We've got to, the U.S. 15-point plan versus the Iranian 10-point plan, and each of these plans have items in it that the other side just simply won't agree to. So my biggest concern is that the ceasefire falls apart while prices go up. Okay. And then for those then who think, no, this is, you know, the height of the panic is over. What are they missing? Well, I think they may think that if the conflict ends, you know, where will the prices go down to, and I think they would go down to the mid-70s to $80 a barrel range because the market

is now going to price in additional geopolitical risk. If Iran was able to shut down the straight once, they can do it again into the future. All right. Andy, for now, thanks. We'll leave it there. Circle back soon. Appreciate it. Andy Lipau with Lipau Oil Associates. Coming up, does the volatility in the energy space change the calculus for powering data centers? We'll get into that with Morgan Stanley's head of thematic research right after the break. All right, let's stay on the energy story because while the markets overall are moving higher, oil is crashing. But let's stay realistic.

Crude oil is still $30 plus per barrel more than just 45 days ago. Some countries have already seen product shortages, things like jet fuel and more. All this further highlighting the world's dependency, some might say dangerous dependency on oil and natural gas. Could this boost investment in other times? types of power like solar, wind, nuclear, storage, and more. Some of those stocks, not just oil and gas, of double digits since the start of the war. Let's talk about that and bigger themes and also get some stocks at Stephanie Link likes. Joining us Stephen Bird, he is Global Head of Thematic and Sustainability Research at Morgan Stanley and Stephanie as well.

A lot of S is in there. I did the best I could. It's been a long couple weeks, to be honest with it. Give me a break. It has. All right. So, Stephen, there is this. theme, and Stephanie chime in, because I know you like some of these names as well, that what we're

seeing now is going to push people more toward a lot of the stocks that you and your team cover because we're going to realize, whoa, things can get cut off. I do see that, though, renewables by itself is simply not reliable enough for nations to say, this is my path to energy independence. It's part of the picture. I would say nuclear is a big part of it. Energy storage is a big part of it. But we just cannot move away from natural gas. I see. see reallocations, different approaches. So yes, it's good for clean energy. I just don't want to overstate that in terms of the grand scheme of things. And when I think about data centers, it's really not the big solution for data centers. That's still mostly natural gas and nuclear

that's going to be. When you mentioned nuclear, you mentioned wind, or maybe did we mention wind, you mentioned natural gas. One company that crosses in all of those is a company called GE-Verno. Yes, indeed. You might have, I think Stephanie Link owns. See how that, it's amazing. How it works on television. Talk to us about G.E. Renova, and then Stephanie, why do you like them as well? They're a great company across the entire value chain. So when you think about renewables, you think about grid upgrades, you think about data centers,

you think about just the absolute demand for energy we need. That's G.E. Renova. They're at the center of all of it. Do you know that their backlog was up 66% last quarter alone on a year-over-year basis? So everyone talks about orders, but orders can get canceled. Backlog is real revenue dollars. And so that's the thing that I pay so much attention to. But I want to just ask you a question about natural gas.

Do we have enough pipelines? Because that's the bottleneck, right? In the U.S., we need more. What I like to see is big companies like Williams are at the heart of that. They're now tied with the AI trade. I see them doing more and more pipeline activity. That's going to lead to more GE turbines. And the data center community loves that.

So that's the biggest part of the solution. Are we really likely? So when's the last time we built out? My assumption is there's no pipeline construction happening. But maybe I'm wrong about that. maybe that's happening. Up here, I'd say in the mid-Atlantic, northeast, absolutely correct. Down south, it's easier to build laterals, add additional supply. It's a very different picture down there, and we see a lot of activity down in Texas, Louisiana, a place like that. That's an area of

tremendous growth. Is that why we're seeing data center capacity come on to come to market in those locations? I'd say also regulation is a little more friendly. The politics are a little more favorable down there compared to up here. But yeah, natural gas availability, that's absolutely huge. But what Williams is doing is pumping. They're the art. They're doing. They're doing. arteries and veins. They're going right to the data center from the power source. Kind of a unique view as well. And then when you make power, you have to get the power. Another big problem is power lines. The average power line in America is like 70. It's older than me even. Like 70 years old. They're not very efficient. There's a lot of power loss. Quantas services,

PWR, another company. Oh, that's Stephanie Lipton. It's amazing how this all works out. that is trying to solve that by installing billions of dollars in power lines. Yes, and Quanta is great because we need more labor. We need the folks who actually know how to build stuff. Quanta is brilliant at building. That is one of the biggest bottlenecks we have right now in terms of data center infrastructure. I'd say labor, grid access, power turbines, backup power transformers. We need all of it.

I'd say labor in particular. Those types of players will see greater and greater premium for their content. They had an analyst day last week, and they increased their total addressable. market between now and 2030, $2.4 trillion from $940 billion. They are in so many parts of the whole food chain. So it's data centers, yes, it's about 10, 15% of their business. Grid, upgrade the grid. 75% of the grid is over 25 years old. We need to upgrade the grid, and it takes a long time, and you need the people exactly for that. And of course, the power story. So they're part of every different segment, which is why I like it so much. And it is the people that makes them so

different, right? Is that a name you could literally buy, lock it up, forget about it for five, 10 years? Easily a decade. Really? You think G. Renova, because a little bit when we talk about what's happened, you know, this microcosm of the past five weeks, fine, that's one business to be in trying to anticipate whether we're going to be in old energy or new energy names. But I'm curious who you think are going to be the compounders, not to go so far as to say the tech like returns, but you never know. Well, look, I think a lot, the easy way to play it is Nvidia or Broadcom, the technology side of things. I think less popular are all the the names that you're tracking and that I'm tracking.

And so, like, vertive is also a name that I like very, very much. Eaton is a name that I like very much. So I own a boatload of these things. And it does trade, they do trade like Invidia, though. I mean, but they are... They're not cheap, relative. They're not, but the backlogs are huge. Hold on.

Let's talk about Eaton. Yeah. Art up there in Cleveland, Ohio. Been around 118, whatever years. Wow. Okay. They kind of were a company that was just in everything, but you never thought about them. Right.

And I know Nvidia is the sexy data center name. But you're not building a data center unless Eaton is probably in it, right? Or Vertive, in some cases, too. They're getting no love and attention, maybe a little love from the smart money like yourself, Stephanie, but you can jump in as well, Stephen. Eaton, you can't build a data center without them. No, you can't. And actually, their electricals, America, their backlog was up 200%.

I mean, the numbers are just staggering. And I just don't think that they're the obvious choice. I think everyone thinks of like Vertive and GE Vernova, Vernova, right? I mean, vertive, who doesn't want to invest with Dave Cody? Right? I mean, he's the executive chairman. He was at Honeywell, and it was a rock star, right? And they make the cooling systems, which you'd absolutely need, and they have the services piece. Everyone thinks of Verte of or GE Vernova, which is also popular. I think Eaton is kind of an off the beaten path a little bit. Just to bring it back to what you said about Chevron, too. Look, I understand. You're up 35% year-to-date. Why not take some money off the table? But you could ask kind of a similar question for some of these names, which have done so well. I'm just curious what your thought process is there. I think the growth is more. I think they're more expensive, but I think the growth. And again, again, the backlogs all of these companies are enormous and that gives me more visibility. Nothing wrong with Chevron guys and gal. Nothing wrong with it at all. I just made money and I wanted to put it elsewhere as being a portfolio. We're giving her such a hard time about it.

Leave us with us. How could you sell Chevron? I don't know when you and your team have all this time because you write like 100 page reports. I'm going to lie to our audience and I read every word. I don't have the time. I understand. But you do great work. Leave us with another name or two that you love. So the big deal here is the growth in AI is nonlinear in terms of the capabilities. So I would say a Bitcoin name like Tara Wolf is going to turn themselves into a host of data centers. And the upside is tremendous. So that's the name I'm hearing you with.

Paul Prager's been on this program many times. And I've seen him in Eastern Maryland that he is single-handedly re-changing the city of Eastern Maryland. I worry there's going to be like the people in the credit pipeline to some of these data center buildouts. Is that a reliable business? It's a great question. So nowadays we're seeing the hyperscalers guarantee everything. So when Terowulf builds or riot or some of these others build the data centers, all of the lease revenue is being guaranteed by the hyperscalers.

That's a new normal. It's a great question. Because we've seen already people being, oh, they're not the latest and greatest chips. We're not going to, but if it's guaranteed. We're good to go. It's a pretty sure thing, I guess. Power lunch, Cleveland edition. We're going.

Kelly, you ready? You're ready. You're all going. Stephen Bird, you're going. We're going to say goodbye, but we appreciate you coming in. Thank you very much. All right, folks, quickly sign up for my forthcoming, energy-related newsletter called Power Insider.

I will not write nearly as much as Stephen and his team, but we're going to steal his ideas, put it into the newsletter ourselves. We'll meet Power Players and more to launch next Wednesday, April 15th. We're doomed. Let's use the QR code and sign up today. And by the way, Stephanie, you've got a huge women and wealth event also coming up soon. We do. May 28th. I can't wait.

And you are invited. It's not just for women. We're opening it up to everyone. but we have $100 trillion in wealth transfer coming over the next 25, 30 years. And if a lot of that money is going to women, and a lot of the women investors are just getting started. So we want to help educate them in any way that we can. So we've got the best team, all CNBC contributors, women.

But men are invited. You are invited. You just can't speak. That's impossible. We just got the hook in our ear. There you go. Patty jumped that you got to go. We got it. When you get the got to go, you got to go. Coming up, we're going to talk more about the maybe multi-trillion dollar question.

Can we actually have a ceasefire if we really aren't sure who's actually running Iran? Ian Bremmer is next. Well, let's get to Aeman Javers. Got some breaking news on the ceasefire agreement between the U.S. and Iran. And maybe it's not related to a ceasefire at all, Aman Javers. Yeah, Brian, just wanted to flag this social media post for you that just dropped from the Speaker of the Iranian Parliament as we watch whether or not this ceasefire as fragile as it is can hold in this social media post. The Speaker is alleging that the United States has violated three of Iran's principles for a ceasefire already so far. They say that the

Iranians say that the United States has noncompliance with the first clause of its 10-point proposal, that the entry of a drone into Iranian airspace, violates the terms of the ceasefire and denial of Iran's right to enrichment, which was included in Iran's framework, they say, also violates the terms of the ceasefire. Now they say, now the very workable basis on which to negotiate has been openly and clearly violated even before the negotiations began in such a situation. A bilateral ceasefire or negotiations is unreasonable. So you have here the Speaker of the Iranian Parliament now saying that a ceasefire fire and negotiations are unreasonable due to what they say are American violations of terms

that the Iranians have laid out there. And this is one of those situations, Brian, where you might want to look at sort of deeds more so than words, you know, watch what the Iranians do over the next minutes and hours to see if there's anything behind this, but just wanted a flag that we are seeing this kind of skeptical language now from the Iranians around the seaspire. We have Ian Bremmer standing by, but I want to reiterate what we're talking about here, Aymn, because something you and I have talked about a lot on air. I've been talking about it. Is it clear right now who's actually in charge of Iran? Because we seem to get conflicting statements, and it would appear, and people I've talked to and people you've talked to, it appears that there is

no Iran per se, that there's no one voice and that there's a lot of people that seem to be chiming in with sometimes conflicting messages. Yeah, I mean, I think that there is some of that going on, Brian, but we do have a sense of who this official is. This is the Speaker of the Parliament in Iran. Somebody who's been very outspoken on social media and clearly has designed his social media posts in many ways in English to find an American audience, very casual sometimes, very trollish sometimes on social media, designed to provoke a response in the United States. So clearly this piece of sort of the propaganda messaging effort by the Iranian government is intact. The question is, to what degree is it all being coordinated behind the scenes? And that's the piece that we can't quite see.

All right, Amen, we appreciate again keeping an eye on the market's little teensy bit off the highs. Dow's still up 1100. Let's bring it Ian Bremmer. He's the founder and president of the Eurasia group. Stephanie Link still with us as well. Ian, the headlines, you know, if you just had them in front of you today, you'd think, geez, wow, I guess, you know, so much for that. And then you'd look at the stock market and the stock market's like, yeah, no, it's almost like it's saying, we're not buying it. This thing is ending. They're going to work it out. Well, look, yesterday morning, people had their hair on fire because they thought the Trump was about to launch a genocide against Iran. That's obviously not happening.

So the big picture is that the single person who decided to start this war and has been willing to escalate consistently over the last five plus weeks has now decided he's had enough and he wants to de-escalate and he's announcing victory and he's announcing regime change and he's saying we're going to work together a joint venture with the Iranians on the straight. And I mean, the markets correctly understand that if Trump is oriented towards de-escalation, then that takes a lot of unpredictability away from the future of this conflict. Doesn't mean the war is over. Doesn't mean the ceasefire is going to stick. Doesn't mean that we're suddenly going to have all tankers going through the straight unmolested.

but it does mean the likelihood that the Americans will unilaterally further escalate has gone down significantly. And you still have all of these thousands of troops that are steaming their way into the Persian Gulf. So that matters a lot. Right. So what is your advice then at this point? Who's got it right? I mean, and I don't mean who. I just mean it sounds like what you're saying is yesterday the market went too far and assuming the worst. And today, do you think it's gone too far and assuming it all clear?

I'm not really, I know, I know this is the wrong show to say this on. I'm not really that interested in the day-to-day assessment of whether or not the vibes are correct in where we are. I'm more interested in whether the global economy is going to take a pandemic-sized hit. Right, but the market's interested in that too. And look, with all due respect, it has a lot of data points on that. There's a lot of people who have trillions of dollars at stake in answering that question. Their bet today is they don't have to worry as much about it as they thought. Is that their bet today?

Is that really their bet today? Or are we thinking about how the corporations are or are not going to invest in the Gulf long term? Are we thinking about whether we're going to have financial crises in these countries? Look, I mean, we're talking about the same thing. I'm just trying not to give you a response from the headlines. Yeah. And rather talk about where I think the war is going. And here, the United States is climbing down.

And that really matters. but Israel is still a belligerent. The biggest piece of contraindicating news to Trump is that after the Pakistani prime minister said that there's a deal that includes Lebanon, not only did the Israeli prime minister say, no, there isn't, but actually in the last 12 hours,

you've had over 250 people killed by Israel in what is clearly the biggest escalation in the 40 days of the Israeli war in Lebanon. and that comes right on the back of Trump announcing de-escalation. So that's a problem. There's also the reality that there's been strikes on Iran since this was announced, not by the United States, probably by the UAE, and they're responding. And then there is the question that you just asked, which is, do we know who's in charge of Iran?

And certainly in the same way that they were able to militarily respond to the U.S. even when they had their command and control structure under deep question because they allowed this mosaic structure of decentralized decision-making by individual military commanders. Well, that also plays out when you're trying to adhere to a ceasefire. And we're going to see some strikes that weren't necessarily ordered by the IRGC. We also had some reported strikes on the East West Pipeline in Saudi Arabia. And I think sort of Stephanie Link agreeing with the, in Bremer, I think his macro premise. I don't want to speak for him. How much credence are you putting in

to today's market reaction? And here's why I say that. As I said on Squawk Box this morning, there's a lot of positioning in markets, futures contracts for oil, short, long, stocks, leverage, whatever. Today, you're going to get a lot of people getting short covered, margin called, faces ripped off, fortunes will be made, fortunes will be lost today. When something moves 15% like oil. People are going to go bust today and get it rich today. But how long, how much credence do you put in today's market move? If any. It's encouraging today. It might be short covering, but rallies always start with short covering. That's number one. Number two, if you think that this is going to be a short-lived thing, which I am believing to be the case,

whether the streets open up 100%. I'm absolutely not thinking that, but just some sort of of improvement. It's the incremental change that I'm expecting, and I think we will make progress. I'd love to ask Ian if I can. What do you want to see in the short term that would make you feel a little bit better? Yeah, I'd like to see additional agreements between the Iranians and other countries to get significantly larger numbers of tankers actually through. And non-tankers, just ships carrying fertilizer and, you know, Petro and Petro. And Petro. and all the rest. And that is super important because I want to understand how the Americans are going to react to this continued toll-taking by the Iranians in the strait. Is Trump going to,

can the Iranians get those deals done? And then are the Americans prepared to live with the consequences of that? Because that's a very different reality, but it's a reality that the markets will be more comfortable with. Do you, Ian, quickly, think it will be significant. And this was earlier reports a few days ago. I don't know if this is intended to be the state of affairs going forward if the Iranians want those payments and Chinese want. No, I don't think that's significant. I think what's significant is that there's a great likelihood given all of the different actors in play here, whether it's the Houthis in Yemen or it's Hezbollah or it's Israel. I mean, all, and it's the Iranians who are less than a fully unitary

actor here. The potential that this still blows up is really high. And, you know, following actions, again, the U.S. still has all of these military plans and all these ground troops. Now, they're not ready today, but they probably will be in the next two to three weeks when this ceasefire, even if it sticks, is up. And I wouldn't guarantee, I wouldn't want to try to guarantee that Trump is going to feel the same way if the markets go down and oil prices are a little lower, but he doesn't feel like he's getting the position he wants to with the Iranians. he might change his mind on this, and the Israelis and the Emirates might change it for him. So for all of those reasons, I want to be a little less bullion here, even though I'm feeling much better than a lot of people were at, you know, sort of 6 p.m. 5 p.m. yesterday. Understood.

Ian, thank you. Appreciate it today. Sure. Ian Bremer with Eurasia Group. Dow's still up near 7, up 1156. Treasury yields on the move as well in the wake of this temporary ceasefire. We've got more in the Bond report after the break. Lots of stocks that are moving. Bonds are moving as well. Let's get more to Rick Santelli in Chicago to talk about what is happening. What's the word in the bond market, Rick? Well, the word is near unchanged. I guess that's two words. You know, if you look at a week to date of a two-year, you can see, sideways, sideways. We drop. We hit 370 intraday load today in the session earlier. But now we're near unchanged. Ten year, same look to the chart. We early hit first.

422, but now we're near unchanged. And we did have an auction that was very mediocre in tens. It didn't really make a huge difference. The 10-year and the entire treasury complex really will, at some point, pay attention to debt and deficits again. And I think the way they're moving looks a lot different than the next chart. Here's crude oil. First of all, it touched a low today of 9105. That's the lowest level in two weeks going back to March 26. There's no bounce to the there. It's down and out and sideways. Listen, if you believe that markets whisper, it's whispering pretty loudly that it's telling us if it was an expert that prices are probably going to continue to move lower.

That's my interpretation. I know many guests don't agree with that, but I don't know. I like following the markets. Sully, back to you. We like following our bet, Rick, and you're looking good on it. So Rick Santelli. Dows up 1135 points. Power lunch to a close after the break. Another reminder of the CNBC Pro Well-Forman event, May 28th, New York City. Scan that QR code on your screen. Stephanie, Link will be there. Look at that great, great lineup, Stephanie that you want to add in a four seconds we have left?

It's going to be a lot of fun, really smart women, way smarter than me, but I think we're going to teach people a lot about investing. And before we go, let's reveal the results of today's power poll. We asked you whether you think crude will cross above 100 again this year. 87% of you say yes. Wow. Wow. That's right. Maybe a little skepticism on the ceasefire. Let's hope for the best. Put that on Polly Market for Kelshi. Yep. Hey, thanks for watching Power Lunch. I will see you on Fast Money at 5 p.m. And closing bell starts right now.