May 9, 2025 • 53 mins
Yellin & the News – After attending the CFA Society of Boston Annual Market Dinner,
Chris Boyd offers his thoughts from Janet Yellen’s keynote speech. Chris reviews
Yellen’s negative views on broad-based tariffs and other policies of President Trump.
Jeff Perry joins the conversation as it shifts to other items in the news including more on tariffs, the Federal Reserve interest rate decision, new employment data, corporate
earnings and a lack of guidance from CEO’s. The episode ends with thoughtful
commentary from Chris about what an investor should do during these uncertain
economic and political times.
For more information or to reach TEAM AMR, click the following link:
https://www.wealthenhancement.com/s/advisor-teams/amr
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Welcome to Something More with Chris Boyd.
Chris Boyd is a certified financial planner, practitioner,
and senior vice president and financial advisor at
Wealth Enhancement Group, one of the nation's largest
registered investment advisors.
We call it Something More because we'd like
to talk not only about those important dollar
and cents issues, but also the quality of
life issues that make the money matters matter.
(00:22):
Here he is, your fulfillment facilitator, your partner
in prosperity, advising clients on Cape Cod and
across the country.
Here's your host, Jay Christopher Boyd.
Welcome to another episode of Something More with
Chris Boyd.
And Jeff Perry is joining me.
We are both of the AMR team of
(00:42):
Wealth Enhancement Group and glad to have you
here.
Jeff, it felt like the old days today.
I was coming.
Oh boy, what's that?
I've been collecting newspapers over the last week
or so.
Where'd you get them?
Well, just the Wall Street Journal, you know,
I've been collecting and Barron's and stuff.
And so, you know, they come in and
(01:05):
often I read things online, but, you know,
so I, but they still, I think, I
forget what it was, but there was one
of these things where they was like, oh,
it's cheaper to get the paper than it
is to just get it.
Which is kind of annoying, but in any
case.
I think that has something to do with
the advertisers.
Yeah, that must be it.
(01:26):
So I got my stack of papers, like
the radio days.
And you've talked about that before.
So that's why I brought that for you.
But I thought we'd talk a little bit
about news items this week.
As we just over the last week, there's
been all this accumulation of things that I
thought, let's talk about a variety of these
(01:47):
and get some perspective out of that.
But before we do, after talking about, you
know, oh, the radio days.
I was at home on Saturday and my
mom calls and says, hey, can I stop
by you around?
Sure.
(02:08):
She comes by with this beautiful, huge orchid
from Verde and Mashpee Commons.
And a little card that says, congratulations on
your 18th anniversary of the show.
So I was like, anniversary of thinking, you
know, at first, but it was the radio
show, now podcast that she was, I'll spare
(02:31):
you the rest.
She's gushing about how proud she is of
me.
Anyone who knows you and your mom knows
how proud she is.
So I can envision what the rest of
the card said.
It's very nice.
And I was not even thinking about it
because you were on last weekend with Russ
(02:53):
and I enjoyed those podcasts, but while I
was out of town.
So every year, I mean, being on the
radio and podcasts and having that commitment to
do it every week and have meaningful content.
And it's something to stop and say, wow,
(03:13):
another year.
We're still doing it.
Yeah, we're still doing it.
So we've got 20 in our sites, right?
Definitely.
You can see it ahead.
Yeah.
So anyway, so fun to celebrate an anniversary.
We've done shows like the 10 and 5
and 15.
(03:34):
There's been some like significance of, oh, what
did we do in retrospective and so forth.
But it's fun to step back and think.
It's important to do it.
It's an accomplishment.
And, you know, you'll never know.
It's like so many things in life, but
you'll never know the people that you impacted
and how they impacted.
(03:54):
Certainly, some of them became clients because, you
know, that people say, you know, I heard
you on the radio.
I listened to your podcast, whatever it is.
And so there's a direct correlation of that,
you know, people benefit from it.
But there's also a lot of people who
gain motivation to do something that they should,
you know, whether that's to fix something like
attack their debt or whether it's to start
(04:17):
investing or whether it's to hire an advisor,
you know, all take positive steps in their
life and you'll never know.
And it's not insignificant.
I can 18 years, thousands of shows and
hours, all these different guests we've had and
charitable organizations along the way that hopefully that's
been some of the impact.
(04:38):
Whenever I'm complimenting you, you shift the topic.
You have that habit.
I'll just start by saying, thank you.
How's that?
You do that every time.
I think it's not just me.
I think it's just your humility.
When I was growing up, my mom instilled
in me that it was important not to
(05:00):
be braggadocious or to be, you know, full
of yourself.
So I think it's part of that upbringing.
I could be a wise guy and say,
did your mom teach you not to interrupt
people?
She did.
Sorry.
She disappointed me.
I'm not going to go back to it,
but congratulations for the 18 years, Mr. Boyd.
(05:23):
It is an accomplishment.
Thanks.
Thank you.
And no, you know, the reason I started
the program, yes, we wanted to get visibility
for our work and recognition if people wanted
to connect with us.
But it was truly the motivation was to
(05:45):
try to have impact and to influence our
listeners for the better.
We've tried to have a show that is
constructive and respectful.
And, you know, at different times we've covered,
you know, politics and we've talked about things
totally off topic of finance, but always tried
(06:09):
to have that kind of tone where it
was about something positive, something constructive.
Substantive.
Yeah.
Substantive.
And ultimately we've, you know, really over the
last five years or so, really zoomed in
on trying to focus more on financial content
(06:30):
exclusively, maybe even less than that.
But, you know, we're really focused on the
financial content these days.
But again, the motivation is that we want
people to come away with this show and
having had an experience that lifts them up,
helps them in some form, helps in their
financial planning and their journey, but their life
(06:52):
journey, more importantly, not strictly their finances.
And not just what's in their wallet.
Right.
Yeah.
Yeah.
It's about more than the stuff.
Right.
So in any case, thank you for your
comment.
In any case, we hope people will continue
(07:15):
to listen and share the show and benefit
from it.
So today we're going to talk a little
bit about what's been happening in the news.
And to start that off, I thought I
had occasion to go to a talk, the
CFA society of Boston on May 1st invited
(07:35):
Janet Yellen as their guest for their big
meeting, their 39th annual market dinner.
And I had the benefit of being invited
by the capital group, the capital funds sorry,
capital group, American funds to attend.
And so thanks to them for the invitation.
(08:00):
And maybe we can just talk a little
bit about that, Jeff, for a minute.
I shared with you some of my notes.
And what I would say is interesting is
first off, Janet Yellen is really kind of
interesting individual in so far as first female
to be a Fed secretary, Fed chair, first
(08:21):
female treasury secretary.
Right.
Sort of a trendsetter in certain regards.
At the same time, no shock as to
her political leanings.
She has been appointed by Democrat administrations in
these posts.
So when her comments about what's going on
(08:45):
to start off with referred to the idea
that broad based tariffs, she used a couple
of words like blowtorch and wrecking ball at
times in the mix, which she wasn't really
being flamethrowing, but these were comments that she
happened to mention, which I'm pretty sure she
(09:06):
knew they were going to get.
Which I made note of because they were.
And she was clearly saying she was not
a fan of broad based tariffs, this drastic
change in policy, that there was a risk
that these would drive costs higher, increase uncertainty,
(09:26):
delay business investment because of the uncertainty, perhaps
contribute to a decline in consumer spending or
capital spending because of this, let's see what
really transpires kind of mindset, raise the probability
(09:50):
of a recession and the likelihood of inflation
being an issue that we need to contend
with.
Though maybe not prolonged, maybe that issue of
it could be a one shot deal, right?
It could be.
TBD, right?
Her comments aren't really unique.
(10:12):
We're hearing them from a lot of credible
sources, a lot of political sources, right?
It's exactly right.
Nothing that she said struck me as, I
guess, unexpected in a sense.
She's threading the needle a bit.
Meaning during when President Biden was president and
(10:36):
he opposed tariffs on China, she was talking
about the benefits.
Now, there's a distinction, but I'm just...
To your point, she did make that point
as well, that targeted tariffs are maybe a
different thing than broad based tariffs, right?
That targeted tariffs, this issue with China is
(10:58):
this question that I think everyone has frustrations
relating to intellectual property theft when it comes
to the lack of openness of markets.
You did see in Trump 1.0, increasing
(11:24):
tariffs on China with respect to this.
In the Biden administration, they retained those tariffs.
They didn't try to change that.
And enhance them in some ways.
Her comments at that time, of course, I
went back and read them because I remembered
and just wanted to see how her position
had changed.
And it is different.
(11:45):
I'm not being critical.
I'm just saying she's making these comments in
the context of previously supporting tariffs for many
of the same underlying reasons that President Trump...
I think the difference is scale, right?
Absolutely.
There is a difference.
Scale, broad based, but she did support...
We'll just talk about China for a second.
(12:06):
Tariffs in China to protect US manufacturing, to
protect certain sectors of our business economy.
Yeah.
Actually, she did talk about certain sectors where
there could be some really intentional targeting that
would make sense.
I don't remember exactly all of them that
(12:29):
she mentioned, but there were a few specifics
when it came to AI and clean energy
and certain things like that that were things
that we might want to try to have
the opportunity to cultivate as a industry and
so forth before...
(12:50):
But I do think the difference is this
expectation of a long-term solution or a
temporary fix, right?
Some of these kinds of things, the perspective
on it.
But in any event, yeah, I follow your
point.
I don't think it was...
(13:10):
I didn't take it as hypocritical because she
did, in the content of the talk, she
did offer caveats to the point that you're
making, I think.
I didn't suggest it was.
I'm just pointing out that she's not anti
-tariff.
She is anti this policy, this broad-based
policy.
The whole notion of reshaping trade, rearranging the
(13:35):
world order when it comes to trade.
I guess my pushback for her would be
Trump 1.0 didn't work to achieve these
goals.
Biden's administration was not successful to achieve these
goals.
I know we're just focusing on China and
Trump's doing a lot more than that, and
(13:56):
I don't support all the things he's doing.
But perhaps...
I'm trying not to be a defender of
what he's doing, but I'm trying to say
maybe there is a reason for this president
or for whoever the president is to try
something different because what we've done before has
not worked.
(14:17):
Well, I'll just continue with some of the
content of what else was discussed in the
talk rather than going down that rabbit hole.
Okay.
So, additionally, the notion of trade deficits as
(14:38):
an issue.
She questioned the effectiveness of reducing trade deficits
and restoring as a way to restore domestic
jobs.
I think some of the discussion was, are
these really the jobs we want to build
(15:04):
in the United States?
Is it better to bring those jobs back
in some respects?
Are the quality of the jobs the jobs
we really would like to grow?
That's a real important question.
Yeah.
We benefit by buying cheap goods overseas that
(15:29):
we use every day, whether it be a
plastic bowl, or whether it be a baseball
or whatever it is.
And this was her argument when she was
supporting President Biden's certain sectors.
The United States needs a manufacturing capability on
our soil for national security, for jobs, for
(15:51):
the future, for supply chains, as was evident
in the COVID years.
So, I think she's right on in that
respect.
CHIPS Act, which Republicans and Democrats, something that's
not political per se, is a great example
of that, where the parties came together and
recognized that we need computer chips, certain types
(16:13):
of computer chips manufactured in the United States.
Yeah.
And I think that's a good point.
There are certain industries and certain...
It may be just important that we do
continue to have the viability of these businesses,
and it may be in our national interest.
Steel may be an example of...
(16:34):
I think steel's one of them, yeah.
You can point to certain kinds of chips,
clearly, as there's certain priorities when it comes
to weaponry technology that comes out of that.
We don't want to have to import our
defense products from an adversary.
Right.
Exactly.
Exactly.
So, yeah, I think that's one of the
(16:55):
things that came out of the experience of
the pandemic and in the first Trump administration
that there was heightened awareness around.
And I think that was probably a valid
realization that we need to make change, and
that's part of what came out of that,
I think.
The other point that Jenny Yellen talked about
(17:18):
was, what do you call her?
Secretary Yellen or chair?
I would say secretary is probably...
You call them their highest position, right?
That they've achieved.
The highest?
I would think so.
Yeah.
So in any case...
Cabinet secretary, yeah.
She pointed to the notion of fiscal policy
as, look, if we want to reduce our
(17:40):
deficits, our trade deficits, as well as our
own deficit in terms of the budget deficit,
that this is probably where this should focus.
Fiscal policy would be a big part of
how to deal with that.
So, yeah, you mentioned this targeted, maybe targeted
(18:02):
support for certain types of manufacturing.
I'm trying to remember what else.
Which typically has, this type of manufacturing we're
talking about, typically has higher wages for the
employees.
So that's something that we want.
Yeah.
We don't want to create a million new
jobs of minimum wage jobs.
Right.
I mean, we need minimum wage jobs, but
(18:24):
that should not be our policy as a
country to create jobs that people can't survive
on.
She talked about having been involved in negotiating
with other countries in her time as treasury
secretary, and that a lot of nations are
just a little bit, you know, just puzzled,
(18:46):
like what to make of this.
And that the way we're interacting with friend
and foe, kind of lumping everybody into this
one bucket of, hey, we're being screwed, you
know, kind of mindset.
Certainly doesn't make sense to treat every country,
no matter what their posture with you, with
us is the same.
(19:06):
And on that note, hopefully you have some
good news.
You know, so much news that's floated is
not actually fact.
So, yeah, that's a good point.
But we do have a potential agreement, you
know, in the news this week.
Yeah, with Thursday, midday, the 8th of May.
So there is a...
(19:27):
Sounds like the beginnings of a deal with
UK, huh?
There is a teaser out there that's happening.
And the United States representatives and Chinese representatives
are meeting in Switzerland coming up, I think
this weekend.
So, hopefully, there'll be something good coming out
of that, something constructive.
Yeah.
So another question that I just, I'll get
(19:50):
through Janet Yellen, and we'll move on to
more news items.
That's, those are big ones.
She was asked about the dollar reserve status.
You know, would that, is this something you
see changing in light of all these dynamics
of what's happening in the world with trade?
And basically, the answer was, not for a
(20:11):
long time.
And we keep hearing that.
But that sounded like it.
There was talk about crypto.
And that's also been in the news a
little bit lately with regard to some issues
with the Trump administration, or not administration, Trump
family, having some ties to crypto and so
(20:32):
forth.
We'll come back and talk about that at
some point.
But just generally, she was asked, you know,
about, you know, this sort of change in
tone on the regulatory environment with respect to
crypto.
And she said she remained skeptical about crypto
(20:52):
as something appealing generally for people because of
the lack of transparency, the volatility, and this
weak regulatory setting where there's, you know, weak
protections for the consumer.
She was also asked about private credit, which
(21:14):
Brian talks about from time to time as
a possible worry point.
And she actually said, although, you know, private
credit has certain attractive benefits, so she'll start
off positive about it, but then said, again,
it lacks transparency and that there's some, she
(21:38):
said there's less systemic risk than feared, maybe.
I shouldn't say it that way, but that
was the way I interpret it.
Though there are risks there, you know, there
are risks there.
Certainly are.
And lack of transparency is one thing.
And I think a lot of people think
it's less volatile.
And it's less volatile because it's not marked
(21:59):
up every 10 seconds.
Yeah, exactly.
People don't see what the market would, or
a buyer would value it at because it's
not.
Less liquid, less accessible.
But does that cause people to have a
fire sale, you know, on other assets?
Does it create the potential for volatility or
(22:23):
disruption in other asset classes when people do
have needs, you know, because anyway.
Yep.
All right.
So you talked about trade a little bit
with the notion of the, I think it
(22:44):
sounds like some potential developments.
I had gone through these newspapers that I
waved around to you earlier, and I had
topics on all kinds of subject matter.
And trade and tariffs is one of them.
(23:06):
So one of the headlines was China feeling
the trade war.
The idea that their economy is also feeling
this.
It's not just the impact that we're going
to feel.
Well, that's the whole plan.
That's the leverage that President Trump thinks he
has.
(23:27):
I'm just going to rifle through a few
of these that were related to trade.
Go ahead.
And then you decide if any we want
to talk about.
OK?
OK.
So the China thing we just hit on.
Trade deficits balloon as companies stockpile.
Countries worldwide are attempting to deepen their trade
(23:49):
ties to offset pain from US, so other
countries amongst themselves.
Some manufacturers in the US see uptick in
orders from companies looking to avoid tariffs.
I guess that's related to what I said
earlier.
Retailers may be keeping prices steady for the
moment, but unstable and worn to expect shortages.
(24:15):
Wall Street Journal reporting that of trade deal
framework with UK, which you just talked about.
And then kind of unrelated to all of
those, but happened in the last week was
the Canadian elections.
And we had the visit from the Canadian
Prime Minister.
Carney, is it?
(24:37):
Not for sale.
Not ever.
It didn't seem like a...
It doesn't seem like Canada's close to a
deal.
Well, it sounded like they're happy to talk.
Happy to talk.
But they're not intending to...
To me, it seemed like they had...
(24:58):
Yeah, don't want to get bullied.
And that's if I was Canada, I think
that would be my posture as well.
You're not going to come in and kiss
the ring and say, how much can we
pay you?
So one of the things that struck me
in this is that notion of activity in
(25:22):
the front, the surge of activity that may
be happening, which is when...
One of the other things that happened this
week was the GDP numbers.
That was the economy in a different section
of topics here.
But this kind of overlaps with that.
The fact that we might be importing more
stuff, trying to get ahead of the tariffs,
(25:45):
right?
Well, if I owned a company that was
importing products, I would be doing that.
Right.
So the fact that we're doing some of
that, and then the idea that this might
impact availability of goods.
Initially, there's a surge.
Brian was talking to us about the idea
that he bought some stuff because he's thinking
there might be shortages.
(26:05):
And he's like, well, I'm going to need
these things anyway.
I might as well get them.
It seems to me we might see a
flurry of these kind of things where incidentally,
the accelerated imports could create a circumstance where
we have a two quarterly negative GDPs because
the import of stuff works against the GDP.
(26:31):
But in any case, these seem like themes
that are going on where we might see
the appearance of a surge of economic activity.
Because people are at consumption, trying to get
ahead of this.
Retail sales, all that stuff.
And the purchase of materials and goods to
(26:51):
get ahead of it.
And then subsequently, the other side of that
is, well, I already bought that stuff.
So maybe I have an economic slowdown.
Reversion to the mean, right?
Yeah.
So that's a concern.
I think at this point, that could be
a possibility.
Yeah.
And I think the numbers that everyone looks
at, especially the Fed, who's thinking about interest
(27:12):
rates.
That was in the news.
Maybe we'll hit it, maybe we won't.
But all this data is being, I won't
say manipulated, but it isn't consistent because of
the things that are happening.
That's disruptive, maybe, as a consequence of this.
So net exports, when it came to the
(27:34):
GDP, was negative, right?
Notably negative.
When you look at the line on the
graph, that's what drove us into, I'd say,
a negative GDP last week.
Was it last week?
Whenever that was announced on the GDP.
Minus, yeah.
(27:55):
You want to talk about the Fed?
Let's do it now.
Sure.
The Fed met this week for one of
their regular meetings, and to no one's surprise,
did nothing.
Yeah.
And Chairman Powell had all the same question
over and over again, which he's not going
to answer.
(28:16):
You know, when, how much?
Yeah, go ahead.
Yeah.
When are you going to lower?
I mean, it's assuming it's lower.
What are you looking at?
We're looking at the data.
I mean, it's the same.
There's no surprises there.
And unlike most Fed meetings, the market did
not go down when he was speaking.
It went down when he was going to
speak.
And then he started speaking and ended up
(28:38):
to be a decent day on Wednesday.
So I kind of, it's a big, it's
as expected in my view.
I don't know if you saw something that...
No, I agree.
I think there was nothing, there was really
nothing unexpected at all.
But basically he said the risks of inflation
and unemployment both rose.
(28:59):
Yeah.
That was my takeaway.
But that being said, his perspective was there's
room to wait to see how things evolve.
I think even in the midst of that
meeting, there was, I forget what the president
posted out on social media, but he pointed
(29:20):
to something about tariffs.
And that was anecdotal to the whole reality
of it.
There's no point in them doing anything because
it remains to be seen what's really going
to happen.
I think it's a general, the right decision.
And I think it's great advice for most
things when you don't know what to do,
(29:41):
you do nothing.
You just kind of keep thinking, keep watching
the data or keep analyzing your problem if
it's something personal.
In this case, I think it's just, there's
so many variables of how it could turn
out.
And conflicting variables.
And so one of the tasks as we
talk about all the time, one of the
primary obligations of the Fed is full employment.
(30:02):
And we had employment weekly data, we get
every week, the unemployment claims and the continuing
claims.
And the number of claims this week was
below, I think 15,000 below expectations this
morning.
So a good number, continuing claims, it's been
for a long time, right around 1.9
million people.
(30:23):
It went slightly under that, was slightly over
last week, slightly under this week.
So there's no like crack in the employment
data.
And the last, actually the data was pretty
good last week when they did the jobs
numbers, 177,000 jobs.
New jobs.
Yeah, new jobs.
Yeah.
(30:44):
The headline on the journal was hiring bucks
trade turmoil, economic clouds loom.
So they put this sort of, to the
point right now, it's not been a problem,
but there's still anxiety out there.
It's a nice day, but there's clouds over
there.
Whether they come, we don't know.
Yeah.
(31:05):
Exactly.
We did see, these are a couple other
things from headlines I'll share, and you can
see if any of these you wanna talk
about.
OPEC, oil prices, they are gonna increase their
production and oil prices did fall.
Trade deficit balloons as companies stockpile.
We talked about that already.
Stock investors stay bullish despite recession forecast.
(31:31):
Cloud boosts Microsoft's earnings.
Cloud, the- Earnings have been, I mean,
so earnings generally we're looking back before Liberation
Day.
And they had strong growth.
There were a couple of these that were
notable headlines.
Generally, they've been okay or good in many
cases.
(31:52):
Yeah.
One related item.
As you've been saying, data, backward data, right
now still looks good.
But I think there's a lot of concerns
about will they materialize?
That's this unknown.
(32:13):
It is.
It's tough to give up the weight that
data backwards, of course, gives us and we,
people usually rely on it heavier, more heavily.
But with the changes, and we don't really
have a sustained period of data since Liberation
Day and what that means.
(32:34):
So it seems to mean, I'm trying to
say the first quarter data seems to mean
a lot less than it might typically.
First quarter earnings seem to mean, could mean
a lot less because the market is a
forward-looking indicator.
And if it gets, if this starts to
get some cracks in that data, I think
that's when the story changes.
(32:55):
And how companies respond to this?
One thing in the news this week, I
think it's very related about how companies are
going to respond to the situation, the tariff
situation.
Toyota said this morning or yesterday that they
are not raising prices on the cars that
are imported and have subject to the tariff
(33:16):
for the, they didn't give it a time
period that I saw, but they're not doing
it.
They are absorbing the price, which means profits
on Toyota.
The company will be down, but so each
company is going to do something.
Will there be a preponderance in one way
or the other?
I think it's too early to tell.
(33:36):
Well, I think that was a headline I
had earlier as well that I mentioned that
there are certain, I think it was retailers
they were talking about, but in that instance,
but in any case, for a time, you
can see this willingness to try to absorb
some of this to say, will this get
resolved rather than raising prices?
Yeah, and slowing their supply chain and laying
(33:59):
off employees and whatever they would have to
do to.
But whether that will be sustainable is a
different question.
Well, probably not.
Yeah.
But that just goes back to the uncertainty.
The word of the quarter, I guess, is
uncertainty because no one really knows how this
is going to play out.
One of the things that I noticed when
it came to corporate trends, company news, like
(34:22):
you said, there are a lot of good
earnings and things like that.
But we've seen a lot of this notion
of suspending outlook.
Guidance.
Guidance, withdrawing guidance.
Yep.
I think that's indicative of something.
(34:43):
And what I mean by that is, if
I don't even know how to tell you
what to expect my profitability and so forth
is going to look like, how am I
going to make decisions about how I want
to move forward as a company?
And I think that this gives reason to
(35:04):
think that the economy is likely to slow.
That aside from the higher costs and all
the pricing considerations of tariffs working their way
into this, there's the uncertainty of, is this
going to get resolved?
Is it going to be worse?
(35:25):
Is it going to have very high costs?
What's going to happen where kind of thing?
Companies are in a position where they're a
little bit mystified as to whether or not
or what exactly is going to happen.
And that leaves them in a position where,
like you said, when you don't know, maybe
(35:46):
you do nothing.
And that strikes me as a slowing effect
on the economy.
And similarly, as a consumer, we might be
in a similar kind of face at some
point.
I don't know that we're there today.
But as you say, I hear there's more
layoffs.
(36:06):
We've been hearing certain layoffs getting creeping into
the headlines as well.
Gee, maybe I'll tighten my belt.
Maybe I'll pause before I make that purchase,
et cetera.
And back to data, we have seen some
initial data respecting travel and tourism.
(36:30):
Airlines specifically are indicating that their bookings are
below expectations or below normal, whatever they're using
for whatever their booking period is.
And that's something that consumers' uncertainty, there it
is again, leads you to do nothing, or
(36:52):
should perhaps, and vacations and travel, whether it's
corporate or leisure, are something that is very,
it's like kind of first on the forefront.
Let's not plan that now, right?
Yeah, I mean, didn't we see big layoffs
from one of the casino companies because they
were expecting tourism to decline when it comes
(37:16):
to, I saw UPS.
Anecdotally, you see some announcing that some of
these layoffs.
It doesn't mean that this is, as you
said, it's not in the data right now,
but you kind of get the sense of,
hey, there's some things happening.
There's something, and I think a lot of
that is tied to uncertainty.
(37:37):
I think from what I've heard discussed is
that notion that a lot of companies, because
it's been hard to get good talent, are
reluctant to let go of good, you know,
their workforce.
So that may be something that, you know,
(37:58):
in a different moment in time, a lot
of times companies are quick to let go
of, to try to keep their profitability and
so forth.
Today, I don't think that's as much the
case.
Yeah, I would agree with that.
Coming before this Liberation Day, you know, in
the years prior, the number one thing that
(38:18):
we heard from business owners that we talk
about that their number, their biggest challenge was
finding quality employees.
Yeah.
So that's fresh on their mind and if
they have good staff, if they have, you
know, adequate staff to what they, if they're
in a good place now, I can see
them, like Toyota, I can see the decision
being made no matter what their outlook is,
(38:40):
which is probably back to the reason that
they are suspending guidance, but saying for now,
we're just going to keep things the way
they are.
But that could change.
I think that's what it all boils down
to.
There was an interesting article in Barron's last
week where they were consulting money pros and
getting their views on markets, which is worth,
(39:03):
you know, absolutely nothing, but still kind of,
you know, it's quick discussion.
Describe your own outlook for the US equities
of the next 12 months.
32% bearish, 26% bullish, 42%
neutral.
Good time to buy.
(39:25):
Are your clients bullish, bearish or neutral?
56% bearish.
7% bullish.
As a contrary indicator, that's my flippant comment,
which was not advice to anyone specifically, but
my flippant comment was typically when it's bearish
(39:45):
sentiment, it ends up to be a good
time to think about adding to your equity
exposure.
Not guaranteed, of course.
Possibility.
Yeah.
Is the US stock market overvalued, undervalued, or
fairly valued at current levels?
58% overvalued, 38% fairly valued, 4
(40:11):
% undervalued.
Again, perceptions, right?
A lot of that comes back to what
happens with profitability and tariffs and all this
that factors into that equation.
Will stocks suffer a bear market, a decline
of 20% from the highs sometime in
(40:34):
2025?
Well, we did.
I think we were technically 19% on
the S&P.
Okay.
But you could argue we already did.
65% say yes.
I think a better question, and maybe it's
there, but are we going back to the
lows of that or are we somewhere else?
(40:58):
That would be a better question.
Do you want to answer it?
I could answer it in my humble opinion.
I don't think we're going back to those
lows, but I think we have a trading
range here for a while until these issues
are resolved.
(41:18):
And that trading range, I don't think will
go back down below 5,000 on the
S&P.
But there's a lot of things I don't
know.
If the trade negotiations, tariff negotiations fell apart
at the same time that unemployment had a
crack and we were getting bad signs from
the consumer, all those things are possible.
(41:43):
Those aren't like crazy predictions that would never
happen.
We could, but if we're somewhere in the
middle there, if things are progressing, if employment
holds steady and the consumer stands up, I
think we're probably in this trading range somewhere
between 5,300 and 5,800 for a
(42:03):
while until there's a clearer indication.
You didn't ask, but I'll chime in as
well.
I'm going to cheat by saying, I don't
know, of course.
But to your comment, I think what we're
trying to do as a design for our
(42:27):
clientele in the way we're positioning our discretionary
managed portfolios is err on the side of
caution.
So we're a little underweight.
We're a little defensive in our positioning, but
we're trying to take advantage of certain industries
that we think are opportunistic that may do
(42:47):
well.
And so although we're a little underweight, we're
trying to be in a position where we
can keep in place good returns.
And of course, I think as some of
this news around tariffs offers greater clarity, we'll
be in a position to react to that,
(43:08):
respond to that.
But it goes back to that point.
Generally, you want to, as we talked about,
have liquidity.
In other instances, you want to have a
bucketed approach and you want to have an
allocation that retains your tolerance of your temperament
(43:31):
so that you're staying the course over time.
Don't try to overly think through some of
this stuff.
I've got some cue with it.
Yeah, drastic decisions, as you've said many times,
are usually the wrong decision.
Yeah, when you're making those decisions in the
(43:52):
heat of the moment.
Last couple of things on this particular one
was probably the most interesting two here left
of the things that we didn't touch on
was is the stock market's tariff-related sell
-off a buying opportunity?
60% say yes, 40% say no.
(44:15):
What odds do you put on a recession
stemming from trade policy?
So the bulk is you'd expect this looks
like a bell curve.
Okay, so 40% probability of recession, 25
(44:40):
% of the respondents said.
60% of recession, 27% of the
respondents said.
80% probability of recession, 25% of
the respondents said.
Sure does, yeah.
We started off the show celebrating your 18th
year of being on the air.
If you could leave people today with like
(45:02):
one, we talked a lot about a lot.
And I think the thing that makes our
clients or investors or people in the public
nervous is that uncertainty.
And you have lived through and guided people
through a number of different periods of uncertainty,
(45:22):
all with a different trigger, but all having
that feeling like, what do I do?
If you could kind of leave people with
a thoughtful comment on.
Okay, yeah, good question.
I'll just mention we didn't get to a
whole bunch of things with ranging from geopolitical
(45:42):
tensions that are happening.
Right.
Air traffic control issues.
And even the papal conclave has started.
All like individual podcasts by themselves.
Yeah, all fun stuff.
Well, maybe not all fun stuff.
You know what I mean?
No.
(46:05):
Your point is a great one.
I appreciate the question.
The circumstances of what happens is new.
It's different each time.
But how to respond to it is probably
not new.
(46:28):
It's not necessarily the same for every investor.
If you are a younger person with many
years to invest, don't use this as an
occasion to change anything that you're doing in
terms of like saying, oh, maybe it's a
crazy time.
Maybe I'll stop buying.
I'll stop adding to my 401k.
(46:51):
Definitely don't do that.
If you haven't been investing in your 401k,
do it now.
Get started.
Get going.
You've got a long horizon.
And we know that there will be volatility
along the way.
But ultimately, people are benefited from the creation
of wealth by owning stocks, owning the market,
(47:14):
owning stocks and bonds.
And different assets and so forth.
We work with retirees primarily.
And I hear from not exclusively, but frequently.
Cape Cod, there's lots of retirees.
And I hear from people often saying, well,
(47:35):
I'm now this age.
How long do I really have?
And although that's a valid consideration, it's not
the only consideration.
Because for most people, a lot of their
wealth is going to outlive them.
Not everyone, of course.
(47:56):
So I would start by saying, have a
financial plan.
Review your liquidity.
Do you have sufficient resources that are stable
and steady, unimpacted by market fluctuations, so that
over the next few years, whether it's the
(48:17):
next few years or some future next few
years, volatility happens.
And we know that happens.
And there's times when it's nice to have
a reserve that you can draw from if
it's needed, when it's needed.
If you don't want to be selling things
at a bad time.
So make sure you have the liquidity you
(48:38):
need.
We generally guide people about that.
Come and see us if you need some
help on thinking through how much is the
right amount and where to keep it.
Because it's less about the rate of return.
It's more about the access and stability.
But in any event, but then your tolerance
(49:03):
for risk can change over time.
But you don't want to make drastic changes.
We refer to that Vanguard study all the
time about behavioral finance, behavioral coaching.
We want to have an allocation that is
befitting your needs and your tolerances.
(49:25):
And there are times when we might make
modest adjustments to that, but we want to
stay the course despite volatility.
Now, we've had the benefit in recent years
where when markets go down frequently within a
couple of years, you're back in the plus.
And that doesn't always happen, I understand.
(49:46):
And that's why we want to plan in
a way that's deliberate with the liquidity and
graduated risk.
But I think it's prudent to say, which
I think is where you were going with
this, Jeff, is stay the course.
Don't make rash decisions.
(50:08):
Speak to your financial advisor.
Get some input around, do you have the
right structure today?
If it's not something that's proactively managed, that
might be something to investigate, getting something that's
not just static and only adjusted by your
phone call to say, hey, should we be
doing something?
You want to be dealing with a manager
(50:30):
that's going to be forward thinking, forward looking.
Did you have anything you wanted to add
to that?
No, I think that was perfectly said.
And I hope our listeners take heed that
we all have emotions and we all want
to react to things.
We all think if we make a move,
it might be the right move at the
(50:51):
right time.
But history tells us and data tells us
and that Vanguard tells us that those decisions
that are emotionally based out of fear or
greed, either one, are usually the wrong decisions.
And most of the time, when you're working
with a trusted financial advisor who has the
experience, that's why you hire them.
(51:14):
So stick to your plan.
Ask questions, certainly.
Think about your risk tolerance.
But most of the times you're better off,
sir, by sticking to your plan and listening
to your advisor.
Excellent.
If you need help in working with someone
who can look at your portfolio and your
(51:36):
financial plan, help you glean insight as to
where the risks are, whether your structure makes
sense for your stage of life and your
cash flow demands and various things that you
might have concerns about, don't hesitate to reach
out.
(51:56):
We offer a complimentary consultation.
Perhaps we can be a resource to you
as well as the many clients we serve
now.
So in any case, it's a no obligation,
you know, kind of a conversation.
Happy to be a resource.
Jeff, thanks.
Thank you.
Good conversation.
Happy 18th anniversary.
(52:17):
Thanks, thanks.
And we hope our listeners are enjoying it
as well.
And we'll keep on with us as we
go forward, hopefully gleaning useful insights as you
think about your portfolio and your financial planning.
Until next time, everybody keeps striving for something
more.
Thank you for listening to Something More with
Chris Boyd.
(52:38):
Call us for help, whether it's for financial
planning or portfolio management, insurance concerns, or those
quality of life issues that make the money
matters matter.
Whatever's on your mind, visit us at somethingmorewithchrisboyd
.com or call us toll free at 866
-771-8901 or send us your questions to
(53:00):
amr-info at wealthenhancement.com.
You're listening to Something More with Chris Boyd,
Financial Talk Show, Wealth Enhancement Advisory Services and
Jay Christopher Boyd provide investment advice on an
individual basis to clients only.
Proper advice depends on a complete analysis of
all facts and circumstances.
The information given on this program is general
financial comments and cannot be relied upon as
pertaining to your specific situation.
(53:21):
Wealth Enhancement Group cannot guarantee that using the
information from this show will generate profits or
ensure freedom from loss.
Listeners should consult their own financial advisors or
conduct their own due diligence before making any
financial decisions.
Welcome to Something More with Chris Boyd.
Chris Boyd is a certified financial planner, practitioner,
and senior vice president and financial advisor at
Wealth Enhancement Group, one of the nation's largest
registered investment advisors.
We call it Something More because we'd like
to talk not only about those important dollar
and cents issues, but also the quality of
life issues that make the money matters matter.
(00:22):
Here he is, your fulfillment facilitator, your partner
in prosperity, advising clients on Cape Cod and
across the country.
Here's your host, Jay Christopher Boyd.
Welcome to another episode of Something More with
Chris Boyd.
And Jeff Perry is joining me.
We are both of the AMR team of
(00:42):
Wealth Enhancement Group and glad to have you
here.
Jeff, it felt like the old days today.
I was coming.
Oh boy, what's that?
I've been collecting newspapers over the last week
or so.
Where'd you get them?
Well, just the Wall Street Journal, you know,
I've been collecting and Barron's and stuff.
And so, you know, they come in and
(01:05):
often I read things online, but, you know,
so I, but they still, I think, I
forget what it was, but there was one
of these things where they was like, oh,
it's cheaper to get the paper than it
is to just get it.
Which is kind of annoying, but in any
case.
I think that has something to do with
the advertisers.
Yeah, that must be it.
(01:26):
So I got my stack of papers, like
the radio days.
And you've talked about that before.
So that's why I brought that for you.
But I thought we'd talk a little bit
about news items this week.
As we just over the last week, there's
been all this accumulation of things that I
thought, let's talk about a variety of these
(01:47):
and get some perspective out of that.
But before we do, after talking about, you
know, oh, the radio days.
I was at home on Saturday and my
mom calls and says, hey, can I stop
by you around?
Sure.
(02:08):
She comes by with this beautiful, huge orchid
from Verde and Mashpee Commons.
And a little card that says, congratulations on
your 18th anniversary of the show.
So I was like, anniversary of thinking, you
know, at first, but it was the radio
show, now podcast that she was, I'll spare
(02:31):
you the rest.
She's gushing about how proud she is of
me.
Anyone who knows you and your mom knows
how proud she is.
So I can envision what the rest of
the card said.
It's very nice.
And I was not even thinking about it
because you were on last weekend with Russ
(02:53):
and I enjoyed those podcasts, but while I
was out of town.
So every year, I mean, being on the
radio and podcasts and having that commitment to
do it every week and have meaningful content.
And it's something to stop and say, wow,
(03:13):
another year.
We're still doing it.
Yeah, we're still doing it.
So we've got 20 in our sites, right?
Definitely.
You can see it ahead.
Yeah.
So anyway, so fun to celebrate an anniversary.
We've done shows like the 10 and 5
and 15.
(03:34):
There's been some like significance of, oh, what
did we do in retrospective and so forth.
But it's fun to step back and think.
It's important to do it.
It's an accomplishment.
And, you know, you'll never know.
It's like so many things in life, but
you'll never know the people that you impacted
and how they impacted.
(03:54):
Certainly, some of them became clients because, you
know, that people say, you know, I heard
you on the radio.
I listened to your podcast, whatever it is.
And so there's a direct correlation of that,
you know, people benefit from it.
But there's also a lot of people who
gain motivation to do something that they should,
you know, whether that's to fix something like
attack their debt or whether it's to start
(04:17):
investing or whether it's to hire an advisor,
you know, all take positive steps in their
life and you'll never know.
And it's not insignificant.
I can 18 years, thousands of shows and
hours, all these different guests we've had and
charitable organizations along the way that hopefully that's
been some of the impact.
(04:38):
Whenever I'm complimenting you, you shift the topic.
You have that habit.
I'll just start by saying, thank you.
How's that?
You do that every time.
I think it's not just me.
I think it's just your humility.
When I was growing up, my mom instilled
in me that it was important not to
(05:00):
be braggadocious or to be, you know, full
of yourself.
So I think it's part of that upbringing.
I could be a wise guy and say,
did your mom teach you not to interrupt
people?
She did.
Sorry.
She disappointed me.
I'm not going to go back to it,
but congratulations for the 18 years, Mr. Boyd.
(05:23):
It is an accomplishment.
Thanks.
Thank you.
And no, you know, the reason I started
the program, yes, we wanted to get visibility
for our work and recognition if people wanted
to connect with us.
But it was truly the motivation was to
(05:45):
try to have impact and to influence our
listeners for the better.
We've tried to have a show that is
constructive and respectful.
And, you know, at different times we've covered,
you know, politics and we've talked about things
totally off topic of finance, but always tried
(06:09):
to have that kind of tone where it
was about something positive, something constructive.
Substantive.
Yeah.
Substantive.
And ultimately we've, you know, really over the
last five years or so, really zoomed in
on trying to focus more on financial content
(06:30):
exclusively, maybe even less than that.
But, you know, we're really focused on the
financial content these days.
But again, the motivation is that we want
people to come away with this show and
having had an experience that lifts them up,
helps them in some form, helps in their
financial planning and their journey, but their life
(06:52):
journey, more importantly, not strictly their finances.
And not just what's in their wallet.
Right.
Yeah.
Yeah.
It's about more than the stuff.
Right.
So in any case, thank you for your
comment.
In any case, we hope people will continue
(07:15):
to listen and share the show and benefit
from it.
So today we're going to talk a little
bit about what's been happening in the news.
And to start that off, I thought I
had occasion to go to a talk, the
CFA society of Boston on May 1st invited
(07:35):
Janet Yellen as their guest for their big
meeting, their 39th annual market dinner.
And I had the benefit of being invited
by the capital group, the capital funds sorry,
capital group, American funds to attend.
And so thanks to them for the invitation.
(08:00):
And maybe we can just talk a little
bit about that, Jeff, for a minute.
I shared with you some of my notes.
And what I would say is interesting is
first off, Janet Yellen is really kind of
interesting individual in so far as first female
to be a Fed secretary, Fed chair, first
(08:21):
female treasury secretary.
Right.
Sort of a trendsetter in certain regards.
At the same time, no shock as to
her political leanings.
She has been appointed by Democrat administrations in
these posts.
So when her comments about what's going on
(08:45):
to start off with referred to the idea
that broad based tariffs, she used a couple
of words like blowtorch and wrecking ball at
times in the mix, which she wasn't really
being flamethrowing, but these were comments that she
happened to mention, which I'm pretty sure she
(09:06):
knew they were going to get.
Which I made note of because they were.
And she was clearly saying she was not
a fan of broad based tariffs, this drastic
change in policy, that there was a risk
that these would drive costs higher, increase uncertainty,
(09:26):
delay business investment because of the uncertainty, perhaps
contribute to a decline in consumer spending or
capital spending because of this, let's see what
really transpires kind of mindset, raise the probability
(09:50):
of a recession and the likelihood of inflation
being an issue that we need to contend
with.
Though maybe not prolonged, maybe that issue of
it could be a one shot deal, right?
It could be.
TBD, right?
Her comments aren't really unique.
(10:12):
We're hearing them from a lot of credible
sources, a lot of political sources, right?
It's exactly right.
Nothing that she said struck me as, I
guess, unexpected in a sense.
She's threading the needle a bit.
Meaning during when President Biden was president and
(10:36):
he opposed tariffs on China, she was talking
about the benefits.
Now, there's a distinction, but I'm just...
To your point, she did make that point
as well, that targeted tariffs are maybe a
different thing than broad based tariffs, right?
That targeted tariffs, this issue with China is
(10:58):
this question that I think everyone has frustrations
relating to intellectual property theft when it comes
to the lack of openness of markets.
You did see in Trump 1.0, increasing
(11:24):
tariffs on China with respect to this.
In the Biden administration, they retained those tariffs.
They didn't try to change that.
And enhance them in some ways.
Her comments at that time, of course, I
went back and read them because I remembered
and just wanted to see how her position
had changed.
And it is different.
(11:45):
I'm not being critical.
I'm just saying she's making these comments in
the context of previously supporting tariffs for many
of the same underlying reasons that President Trump...
I think the difference is scale, right?
Absolutely.
There is a difference.
Scale, broad based, but she did support...
We'll just talk about China for a second.
(12:06):
Tariffs in China to protect US manufacturing, to
protect certain sectors of our business economy.
Yeah.
Actually, she did talk about certain sectors where
there could be some really intentional targeting that
would make sense.
I don't remember exactly all of them that
(12:29):
she mentioned, but there were a few specifics
when it came to AI and clean energy
and certain things like that that were things
that we might want to try to have
the opportunity to cultivate as a industry and
so forth before...
(12:50):
But I do think the difference is this
expectation of a long-term solution or a
temporary fix, right?
Some of these kinds of things, the perspective
on it.
But in any event, yeah, I follow your
point.
I don't think it was...
(13:10):
I didn't take it as hypocritical because she
did, in the content of the talk, she
did offer caveats to the point that you're
making, I think.
I didn't suggest it was.
I'm just pointing out that she's not anti
-tariff.
She is anti this policy, this broad-based
policy.
The whole notion of reshaping trade, rearranging the
(13:35):
world order when it comes to trade.
I guess my pushback for her would be
Trump 1.0 didn't work to achieve these
goals.
Biden's administration was not successful to achieve these
goals.
I know we're just focusing on China and
Trump's doing a lot more than that, and
(13:56):
I don't support all the things he's doing.
But perhaps...
I'm trying not to be a defender of
what he's doing, but I'm trying to say
maybe there is a reason for this president
or for whoever the president is to try
something different because what we've done before has
not worked.
(14:17):
Well, I'll just continue with some of the
content of what else was discussed in the
talk rather than going down that rabbit hole.
Okay.
So, additionally, the notion of trade deficits as
(14:38):
an issue.
She questioned the effectiveness of reducing trade deficits
and restoring as a way to restore domestic
jobs.
I think some of the discussion was, are
these really the jobs we want to build
(15:04):
in the United States?
Is it better to bring those jobs back
in some respects?
Are the quality of the jobs the jobs
we really would like to grow?
That's a real important question.
Yeah.
We benefit by buying cheap goods overseas that
(15:29):
we use every day, whether it be a
plastic bowl, or whether it be a baseball
or whatever it is.
And this was her argument when she was
supporting President Biden's certain sectors.
The United States needs a manufacturing capability on
our soil for national security, for jobs, for
(15:51):
the future, for supply chains, as was evident
in the COVID years.
So, I think she's right on in that
respect.
CHIPS Act, which Republicans and Democrats, something that's
not political per se, is a great example
of that, where the parties came together and
recognized that we need computer chips, certain types
(16:13):
of computer chips manufactured in the United States.
Yeah.
And I think that's a good point.
There are certain industries and certain...
It may be just important that we do
continue to have the viability of these businesses,
and it may be in our national interest.
Steel may be an example of...
(16:34):
I think steel's one of them, yeah.
You can point to certain kinds of chips,
clearly, as there's certain priorities when it comes
to weaponry technology that comes out of that.
We don't want to have to import our
defense products from an adversary.
Right.
Exactly.
Exactly.
So, yeah, I think that's one of the
(16:55):
things that came out of the experience of
the pandemic and in the first Trump administration
that there was heightened awareness around.
And I think that was probably a valid
realization that we need to make change, and
that's part of what came out of that,
I think.
The other point that Jenny Yellen talked about
(17:18):
was, what do you call her?
Secretary Yellen or chair?
I would say secretary is probably...
You call them their highest position, right?
That they've achieved.
The highest?
I would think so.
Yeah.
So in any case...
Cabinet secretary, yeah.
She pointed to the notion of fiscal policy
as, look, if we want to reduce our
(17:40):
deficits, our trade deficits, as well as our
own deficit in terms of the budget deficit,
that this is probably where this should focus.
Fiscal policy would be a big part of
how to deal with that.
So, yeah, you mentioned this targeted, maybe targeted
(18:02):
support for certain types of manufacturing.
I'm trying to remember what else.
Which typically has, this type of manufacturing we're
talking about, typically has higher wages for the
employees.
So that's something that we want.
Yeah.
We don't want to create a million new
jobs of minimum wage jobs.
Right.
I mean, we need minimum wage jobs, but
(18:24):
that should not be our policy as a
country to create jobs that people can't survive
on.
She talked about having been involved in negotiating
with other countries in her time as treasury
secretary, and that a lot of nations are
just a little bit, you know, just puzzled,
(18:46):
like what to make of this.
And that the way we're interacting with friend
and foe, kind of lumping everybody into this
one bucket of, hey, we're being screwed, you
know, kind of mindset.
Certainly doesn't make sense to treat every country,
no matter what their posture with you, with
us is the same.
(19:06):
And on that note, hopefully you have some
good news.
You know, so much news that's floated is
not actually fact.
So, yeah, that's a good point.
But we do have a potential agreement, you
know, in the news this week.
Yeah, with Thursday, midday, the 8th of May.
So there is a...
(19:27):
Sounds like the beginnings of a deal with
UK, huh?
There is a teaser out there that's happening.
And the United States representatives and Chinese representatives
are meeting in Switzerland coming up, I think
this weekend.
So, hopefully, there'll be something good coming out
of that, something constructive.
Yeah.
So another question that I just, I'll get
(19:50):
through Janet Yellen, and we'll move on to
more news items.
That's, those are big ones.
She was asked about the dollar reserve status.
You know, would that, is this something you
see changing in light of all these dynamics
of what's happening in the world with trade?
And basically, the answer was, not for a
(20:11):
long time.
And we keep hearing that.
But that sounded like it.
There was talk about crypto.
And that's also been in the news a
little bit lately with regard to some issues
with the Trump administration, or not administration, Trump
family, having some ties to crypto and so
(20:32):
forth.
We'll come back and talk about that at
some point.
But just generally, she was asked, you know,
about, you know, this sort of change in
tone on the regulatory environment with respect to
crypto.
And she said she remained skeptical about crypto
(20:52):
as something appealing generally for people because of
the lack of transparency, the volatility, and this
weak regulatory setting where there's, you know, weak
protections for the consumer.
She was also asked about private credit, which
(21:14):
Brian talks about from time to time as
a possible worry point.
And she actually said, although, you know, private
credit has certain attractive benefits, so she'll start
off positive about it, but then said, again,
it lacks transparency and that there's some, she
(21:38):
said there's less systemic risk than feared, maybe.
I shouldn't say it that way, but that
was the way I interpret it.
Though there are risks there, you know, there
are risks there.
Certainly are.
And lack of transparency is one thing.
And I think a lot of people think
it's less volatile.
And it's less volatile because it's not marked
(21:59):
up every 10 seconds.
Yeah, exactly.
People don't see what the market would, or
a buyer would value it at because it's
not.
Less liquid, less accessible.
But does that cause people to have a
fire sale, you know, on other assets?
Does it create the potential for volatility or
(22:23):
disruption in other asset classes when people do
have needs, you know, because anyway.
Yep.
All right.
So you talked about trade a little bit
with the notion of the, I think it
(22:44):
sounds like some potential developments.
I had gone through these newspapers that I
waved around to you earlier, and I had
topics on all kinds of subject matter.
And trade and tariffs is one of them.
(23:06):
So one of the headlines was China feeling
the trade war.
The idea that their economy is also feeling
this.
It's not just the impact that we're going
to feel.
Well, that's the whole plan.
That's the leverage that President Trump thinks he
has.
(23:27):
I'm just going to rifle through a few
of these that were related to trade.
Go ahead.
And then you decide if any we want
to talk about.
OK?
OK.
So the China thing we just hit on.
Trade deficits balloon as companies stockpile.
Countries worldwide are attempting to deepen their trade
(23:49):
ties to offset pain from US, so other
countries amongst themselves.
Some manufacturers in the US see uptick in
orders from companies looking to avoid tariffs.
I guess that's related to what I said
earlier.
Retailers may be keeping prices steady for the
moment, but unstable and worn to expect shortages.
(24:15):
Wall Street Journal reporting that of trade deal
framework with UK, which you just talked about.
And then kind of unrelated to all of
those, but happened in the last week was
the Canadian elections.
And we had the visit from the Canadian
Prime Minister.
Carney, is it?
(24:37):
Not for sale.
Not ever.
It didn't seem like a...
It doesn't seem like Canada's close to a
deal.
Well, it sounded like they're happy to talk.
Happy to talk.
But they're not intending to...
To me, it seemed like they had...
(24:58):
Yeah, don't want to get bullied.
And that's if I was Canada, I think
that would be my posture as well.
You're not going to come in and kiss
the ring and say, how much can we
pay you?
So one of the things that struck me
in this is that notion of activity in
(25:22):
the front, the surge of activity that may
be happening, which is when...
One of the other things that happened this
week was the GDP numbers.
That was the economy in a different section
of topics here.
But this kind of overlaps with that.
The fact that we might be importing more
stuff, trying to get ahead of the tariffs,
(25:45):
right?
Well, if I owned a company that was
importing products, I would be doing that.
Right.
So the fact that we're doing some of
that, and then the idea that this might
impact availability of goods.
Initially, there's a surge.
Brian was talking to us about the idea
that he bought some stuff because he's thinking
there might be shortages.
(26:05):
And he's like, well, I'm going to need
these things anyway.
I might as well get them.
It seems to me we might see a
flurry of these kind of things where incidentally,
the accelerated imports could create a circumstance where
we have a two quarterly negative GDPs because
the import of stuff works against the GDP.
(26:31):
But in any case, these seem like themes
that are going on where we might see
the appearance of a surge of economic activity.
Because people are at consumption, trying to get
ahead of this.
Retail sales, all that stuff.
And the purchase of materials and goods to
(26:51):
get ahead of it.
And then subsequently, the other side of that
is, well, I already bought that stuff.
So maybe I have an economic slowdown.
Reversion to the mean, right?
Yeah.
So that's a concern.
I think at this point, that could be
a possibility.
Yeah.
And I think the numbers that everyone looks
at, especially the Fed, who's thinking about interest
(27:12):
rates.
That was in the news.
Maybe we'll hit it, maybe we won't.
But all this data is being, I won't
say manipulated, but it isn't consistent because of
the things that are happening.
That's disruptive, maybe, as a consequence of this.
So net exports, when it came to the
(27:34):
GDP, was negative, right?
Notably negative.
When you look at the line on the
graph, that's what drove us into, I'd say,
a negative GDP last week.
Was it last week?
Whenever that was announced on the GDP.
Minus, yeah.
(27:55):
You want to talk about the Fed?
Let's do it now.
Sure.
The Fed met this week for one of
their regular meetings, and to no one's surprise,
did nothing.
Yeah.
And Chairman Powell had all the same question
over and over again, which he's not going
to answer.
(28:16):
You know, when, how much?
Yeah, go ahead.
Yeah.
When are you going to lower?
I mean, it's assuming it's lower.
What are you looking at?
We're looking at the data.
I mean, it's the same.
There's no surprises there.
And unlike most Fed meetings, the market did
not go down when he was speaking.
It went down when he was going to
speak.
And then he started speaking and ended up
(28:38):
to be a decent day on Wednesday.
So I kind of, it's a big, it's
as expected in my view.
I don't know if you saw something that...
No, I agree.
I think there was nothing, there was really
nothing unexpected at all.
But basically he said the risks of inflation
and unemployment both rose.
(28:59):
Yeah.
That was my takeaway.
But that being said, his perspective was there's
room to wait to see how things evolve.
I think even in the midst of that
meeting, there was, I forget what the president
posted out on social media, but he pointed
(29:20):
to something about tariffs.
And that was anecdotal to the whole reality
of it.
There's no point in them doing anything because
it remains to be seen what's really going
to happen.
I think it's a general, the right decision.
And I think it's great advice for most
things when you don't know what to do,
(29:41):
you do nothing.
You just kind of keep thinking, keep watching
the data or keep analyzing your problem if
it's something personal.
In this case, I think it's just, there's
so many variables of how it could turn
out.
And conflicting variables.
And so one of the tasks as we
talk about all the time, one of the
primary obligations of the Fed is full employment.
(30:02):
And we had employment weekly data, we get
every week, the unemployment claims and the continuing
claims.
And the number of claims this week was
below, I think 15,000 below expectations this
morning.
So a good number, continuing claims, it's been
for a long time, right around 1.9
million people.
(30:23):
It went slightly under that, was slightly over
last week, slightly under this week.
So there's no like crack in the employment
data.
And the last, actually the data was pretty
good last week when they did the jobs
numbers, 177,000 jobs.
New jobs.
Yeah, new jobs.
Yeah.
(30:44):
The headline on the journal was hiring bucks
trade turmoil, economic clouds loom.
So they put this sort of, to the
point right now, it's not been a problem,
but there's still anxiety out there.
It's a nice day, but there's clouds over
there.
Whether they come, we don't know.
Yeah.
(31:05):
Exactly.
We did see, these are a couple other
things from headlines I'll share, and you can
see if any of these you wanna talk
about.
OPEC, oil prices, they are gonna increase their
production and oil prices did fall.
Trade deficit balloons as companies stockpile.
We talked about that already.
Stock investors stay bullish despite recession forecast.
(31:31):
Cloud boosts Microsoft's earnings.
Cloud, the- Earnings have been, I mean,
so earnings generally we're looking back before Liberation
Day.
And they had strong growth.
There were a couple of these that were
notable headlines.
Generally, they've been okay or good in many
cases.
(31:52):
Yeah.
One related item.
As you've been saying, data, backward data, right
now still looks good.
But I think there's a lot of concerns
about will they materialize?
That's this unknown.
(32:13):
It is.
It's tough to give up the weight that
data backwards, of course, gives us and we,
people usually rely on it heavier, more heavily.
But with the changes, and we don't really
have a sustained period of data since Liberation
Day and what that means.
(32:34):
So it seems to mean, I'm trying to
say the first quarter data seems to mean
a lot less than it might typically.
First quarter earnings seem to mean, could mean
a lot less because the market is a
forward-looking indicator.
And if it gets, if this starts to
get some cracks in that data, I think
that's when the story changes.
(32:55):
And how companies respond to this?
One thing in the news this week, I
think it's very related about how companies are
going to respond to the situation, the tariff
situation.
Toyota said this morning or yesterday that they
are not raising prices on the cars that
are imported and have subject to the tariff
(33:16):
for the, they didn't give it a time
period that I saw, but they're not doing
it.
They are absorbing the price, which means profits
on Toyota.
The company will be down, but so each
company is going to do something.
Will there be a preponderance in one way
or the other?
I think it's too early to tell.
(33:36):
Well, I think that was a headline I
had earlier as well that I mentioned that
there are certain, I think it was retailers
they were talking about, but in that instance,
but in any case, for a time, you
can see this willingness to try to absorb
some of this to say, will this get
resolved rather than raising prices?
Yeah, and slowing their supply chain and laying
(33:59):
off employees and whatever they would have to
do to.
But whether that will be sustainable is a
different question.
Well, probably not.
Yeah.
But that just goes back to the uncertainty.
The word of the quarter, I guess, is
uncertainty because no one really knows how this
is going to play out.
One of the things that I noticed when
it came to corporate trends, company news, like
(34:22):
you said, there are a lot of good
earnings and things like that.
But we've seen a lot of this notion
of suspending outlook.
Guidance.
Guidance, withdrawing guidance.
Yep.
I think that's indicative of something.
(34:43):
And what I mean by that is, if
I don't even know how to tell you
what to expect my profitability and so forth
is going to look like, how am I
going to make decisions about how I want
to move forward as a company?
And I think that this gives reason to
(35:04):
think that the economy is likely to slow.
That aside from the higher costs and all
the pricing considerations of tariffs working their way
into this, there's the uncertainty of, is this
going to get resolved?
Is it going to be worse?
(35:25):
Is it going to have very high costs?
What's going to happen where kind of thing?
Companies are in a position where they're a
little bit mystified as to whether or not
or what exactly is going to happen.
And that leaves them in a position where,
like you said, when you don't know, maybe
(35:46):
you do nothing.
And that strikes me as a slowing effect
on the economy.
And similarly, as a consumer, we might be
in a similar kind of face at some
point.
I don't know that we're there today.
But as you say, I hear there's more
layoffs.
(36:06):
We've been hearing certain layoffs getting creeping into
the headlines as well.
Gee, maybe I'll tighten my belt.
Maybe I'll pause before I make that purchase,
et cetera.
And back to data, we have seen some
initial data respecting travel and tourism.
(36:30):
Airlines specifically are indicating that their bookings are
below expectations or below normal, whatever they're using
for whatever their booking period is.
And that's something that consumers' uncertainty, there it
is again, leads you to do nothing, or
(36:52):
should perhaps, and vacations and travel, whether it's
corporate or leisure, are something that is very,
it's like kind of first on the forefront.
Let's not plan that now, right?
Yeah, I mean, didn't we see big layoffs
from one of the casino companies because they
were expecting tourism to decline when it comes
(37:16):
to, I saw UPS.
Anecdotally, you see some announcing that some of
these layoffs.
It doesn't mean that this is, as you
said, it's not in the data right now,
but you kind of get the sense of,
hey, there's some things happening.
There's something, and I think a lot of
that is tied to uncertainty.
(37:37):
I think from what I've heard discussed is
that notion that a lot of companies, because
it's been hard to get good talent, are
reluctant to let go of good, you know,
their workforce.
So that may be something that, you know,
(37:58):
in a different moment in time, a lot
of times companies are quick to let go
of, to try to keep their profitability and
so forth.
Today, I don't think that's as much the
case.
Yeah, I would agree with that.
Coming before this Liberation Day, you know, in
the years prior, the number one thing that
(38:18):
we heard from business owners that we talk
about that their number, their biggest challenge was
finding quality employees.
Yeah.
So that's fresh on their mind and if
they have good staff, if they have, you
know, adequate staff to what they, if they're
in a good place now, I can see
them, like Toyota, I can see the decision
being made no matter what their outlook is,
(38:40):
which is probably back to the reason that
they are suspending guidance, but saying for now,
we're just going to keep things the way
they are.
But that could change.
I think that's what it all boils down
to.
There was an interesting article in Barron's last
week where they were consulting money pros and
getting their views on markets, which is worth,
(39:03):
you know, absolutely nothing, but still kind of,
you know, it's quick discussion.
Describe your own outlook for the US equities
of the next 12 months.
32% bearish, 26% bullish, 42%
neutral.
Good time to buy.
(39:25):
Are your clients bullish, bearish or neutral?
56% bearish.
7% bullish.
As a contrary indicator, that's my flippant comment,
which was not advice to anyone specifically, but
my flippant comment was typically when it's bearish
(39:45):
sentiment, it ends up to be a good
time to think about adding to your equity
exposure.
Not guaranteed, of course.
Possibility.
Yeah.
Is the US stock market overvalued, undervalued, or
fairly valued at current levels?
58% overvalued, 38% fairly valued, 4
(40:11):
% undervalued.
Again, perceptions, right?
A lot of that comes back to what
happens with profitability and tariffs and all this
that factors into that equation.
Will stocks suffer a bear market, a decline
of 20% from the highs sometime in
(40:34):
2025?
Well, we did.
I think we were technically 19% on
the S&P.
Okay.
But you could argue we already did.
65% say yes.
I think a better question, and maybe it's
there, but are we going back to the
lows of that or are we somewhere else?
(40:58):
That would be a better question.
Do you want to answer it?
I could answer it in my humble opinion.
I don't think we're going back to those
lows, but I think we have a trading
range here for a while until these issues
are resolved.
(41:18):
And that trading range, I don't think will
go back down below 5,000 on the
S&P.
But there's a lot of things I don't
know.
If the trade negotiations, tariff negotiations fell apart
at the same time that unemployment had a
crack and we were getting bad signs from
the consumer, all those things are possible.
(41:43):
Those aren't like crazy predictions that would never
happen.
We could, but if we're somewhere in the
middle there, if things are progressing, if employment
holds steady and the consumer stands up, I
think we're probably in this trading range somewhere
between 5,300 and 5,800 for a
(42:03):
while until there's a clearer indication.
You didn't ask, but I'll chime in as
well.
I'm going to cheat by saying, I don't
know, of course.
But to your comment, I think what we're
trying to do as a design for our
(42:27):
clientele in the way we're positioning our discretionary
managed portfolios is err on the side of
caution.
So we're a little underweight.
We're a little defensive in our positioning, but
we're trying to take advantage of certain industries
that we think are opportunistic that may do
(42:47):
well.
And so although we're a little underweight, we're
trying to be in a position where we
can keep in place good returns.
And of course, I think as some of
this news around tariffs offers greater clarity, we'll
be in a position to react to that,
(43:08):
respond to that.
But it goes back to that point.
Generally, you want to, as we talked about,
have liquidity.
In other instances, you want to have a
bucketed approach and you want to have an
allocation that retains your tolerance of your temperament
(43:31):
so that you're staying the course over time.
Don't try to overly think through some of
this stuff.
I've got some cue with it.
Yeah, drastic decisions, as you've said many times,
are usually the wrong decision.
Yeah, when you're making those decisions in the
(43:52):
heat of the moment.
Last couple of things on this particular one
was probably the most interesting two here left
of the things that we didn't touch on
was is the stock market's tariff-related sell
-off a buying opportunity?
60% say yes, 40% say no.
(44:15):
What odds do you put on a recession
stemming from trade policy?
So the bulk is you'd expect this looks
like a bell curve.
Okay, so 40% probability of recession, 25
(44:40):
% of the respondents said.
60% of recession, 27% of the
respondents said.
80% probability of recession, 25% of
the respondents said.
Sure does, yeah.
We started off the show celebrating your 18th
year of being on the air.
If you could leave people today with like
(45:02):
one, we talked a lot about a lot.
And I think the thing that makes our
clients or investors or people in the public
nervous is that uncertainty.
And you have lived through and guided people
through a number of different periods of uncertainty,
(45:22):
all with a different trigger, but all having
that feeling like, what do I do?
If you could kind of leave people with
a thoughtful comment on.
Okay, yeah, good question.
I'll just mention we didn't get to a
whole bunch of things with ranging from geopolitical
(45:42):
tensions that are happening.
Right.
Air traffic control issues.
And even the papal conclave has started.
All like individual podcasts by themselves.
Yeah, all fun stuff.
Well, maybe not all fun stuff.
You know what I mean?
No.
(46:05):
Your point is a great one.
I appreciate the question.
The circumstances of what happens is new.
It's different each time.
But how to respond to it is probably
not new.
(46:28):
It's not necessarily the same for every investor.
If you are a younger person with many
years to invest, don't use this as an
occasion to change anything that you're doing in
terms of like saying, oh, maybe it's a
crazy time.
Maybe I'll stop buying.
I'll stop adding to my 401k.
(46:51):
Definitely don't do that.
If you haven't been investing in your 401k,
do it now.
Get started.
Get going.
You've got a long horizon.
And we know that there will be volatility
along the way.
But ultimately, people are benefited from the creation
of wealth by owning stocks, owning the market,
(47:14):
owning stocks and bonds.
And different assets and so forth.
We work with retirees primarily.
And I hear from not exclusively, but frequently.
Cape Cod, there's lots of retirees.
And I hear from people often saying, well,
(47:35):
I'm now this age.
How long do I really have?
And although that's a valid consideration, it's not
the only consideration.
Because for most people, a lot of their
wealth is going to outlive them.
Not everyone, of course.
(47:56):
So I would start by saying, have a
financial plan.
Review your liquidity.
Do you have sufficient resources that are stable
and steady, unimpacted by market fluctuations, so that
over the next few years, whether it's the
(48:17):
next few years or some future next few
years, volatility happens.
And we know that happens.
And there's times when it's nice to have
a reserve that you can draw from if
it's needed, when it's needed.
If you don't want to be selling things
at a bad time.
So make sure you have the liquidity you
(48:38):
need.
We generally guide people about that.
Come and see us if you need some
help on thinking through how much is the
right amount and where to keep it.
Because it's less about the rate of return.
It's more about the access and stability.
But in any event, but then your tolerance
(49:03):
for risk can change over time.
But you don't want to make drastic changes.
We refer to that Vanguard study all the
time about behavioral finance, behavioral coaching.
We want to have an allocation that is
befitting your needs and your tolerances.
(49:25):
And there are times when we might make
modest adjustments to that, but we want to
stay the course despite volatility.
Now, we've had the benefit in recent years
where when markets go down frequently within a
couple of years, you're back in the plus.
And that doesn't always happen, I understand.
(49:46):
And that's why we want to plan in
a way that's deliberate with the liquidity and
graduated risk.
But I think it's prudent to say, which
I think is where you were going with
this, Jeff, is stay the course.
Don't make rash decisions.
(50:08):
Speak to your financial advisor.
Get some input around, do you have the
right structure today?
If it's not something that's proactively managed, that
might be something to investigate, getting something that's
not just static and only adjusted by your
phone call to say, hey, should we be
doing something?
You want to be dealing with a manager
(50:30):
that's going to be forward thinking, forward looking.
Did you have anything you wanted to add
to that?
No, I think that was perfectly said.
And I hope our listeners take heed that
we all have emotions and we all want
to react to things.
We all think if we make a move,
it might be the right move at the
(50:51):
right time.
But history tells us and data tells us
and that Vanguard tells us that those decisions
that are emotionally based out of fear or
greed, either one, are usually the wrong decisions.
And most of the time, when you're working
with a trusted financial advisor who has the
experience, that's why you hire them.
(51:14):
So stick to your plan.
Ask questions, certainly.
Think about your risk tolerance.
But most of the times you're better off,
sir, by sticking to your plan and listening
to your advisor.
Excellent.
If you need help in working with someone
who can look at your portfolio and your
(51:36):
financial plan, help you glean insight as to
where the risks are, whether your structure makes
sense for your stage of life and your
cash flow demands and various things that you
might have concerns about, don't hesitate to reach
out.
(51:56):
We offer a complimentary consultation.
Perhaps we can be a resource to you
as well as the many clients we serve
now.
So in any case, it's a no obligation,
you know, kind of a conversation.
Happy to be a resource.
Jeff, thanks.
Thank you.
Good conversation.
Happy 18th anniversary.
(52:17):
Thanks, thanks.
And we hope our listeners are enjoying it
as well.
And we'll keep on with us as we
go forward, hopefully gleaning useful insights as you
think about your portfolio and your financial planning.
Until next time, everybody keeps striving for something
more.
Thank you for listening to Something More with
Chris Boyd.
(52:38):
Call us for help, whether it's for financial
planning or portfolio management, insurance concerns, or those
quality of life issues that make the money
matters matter.
Whatever's on your mind, visit us at somethingmorewithchrisboyd
.com or call us toll free at 866
-771-8901 or send us your questions to
(53:00):
amr-info at wealthenhancement.com.
You're listening to Something More with Chris Boyd,
Financial Talk Show, Wealth Enhancement Advisory Services and
Jay Christopher Boyd provide investment advice on an
individual basis to clients only.
Proper advice depends on a complete analysis of
all facts and circumstances.
The information given on this program is general
financial comments and cannot be relied upon as
pertaining to your specific situation.
(53:21):
Wealth Enhancement Group cannot guarantee that using the
information from this show will generate profits or
ensure freedom from loss.
Listeners should consult their own financial advisors or
conduct their own due diligence before making any
financial decisions.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.