【Bloomberg Surveillance】Bond Market Volatility, Fed Policy Path, and Geopolitical Energy Risks
Listen on Apple Podcasts

—

📊 Executive Summary

• 📈 Bond market volatility surged as yields climbed above 5% and equity markets retreated, with Bob Michael (J.P. Morgan AM) maintaining a bullish stance on intermediate and long-term bonds despite fresh economic headwinds.
• 🏦 The Federal Reserve’s rate path faces scrutiny, with Lindsay Piazza (Stifel) expecting only gradual policy moves and emphasizing the difficulty of curbing entrenched inflation without broader economic slowdown.
• 💹 Credit markets show early signs of stress, as spreads widen, particularly in lower-rated segments, reflecting fears that higher rates and energy prices are biting into corporate America.
• 🛢️ Geopolitical risks in oil and energy add to volatility, with Henrietta Trace (Veda Partners) highlighting the complexities of U.S.-Iran relations, potential diesel export restrictions, and U.S. political frictions ahead of the midterms.
• 📉 Market participants debate the true Fed inflation target, with Bob Michael predicting a de facto acceptance of a mid-2% range rather than the formal 2% goal, suggesting a structural shift in policy tolerance.

—

This episode of Bloomberg Surveillance dives into the undercurrents shaping global markets and central bank policy, with particular focus on U.S. fixed income volatility, the Federal Reserve’s ongoing inflation battle, emerging credit market strains, and the geopolitical chessboard disrupting energy security. The show features seasoned market voices, including Bob Michael of J.P. Morgan Asset Management, Lindsay Piazza of Stifel, and policy expert Henrietta Trace of Veda Partners. Their analysis navigates through macroeconomic, market, and political fault lines as investors seek clarity in a landscape clouded by yield spikes, energy uncertainty, and political tension.

—

📈 Bond Market Volatility and Fed Policy Dilemma

Key Analysis

[00:00:40] Bob Michael opens the discussion by addressing the “unusual” price action in bonds, with yields surging above 5% as global risk sentiment sours. He cites twin catalysts: the absence of diplomatic breakthroughs in the Middle East during UN week—propelling oil prices higher—and unexpectedly hawkish signals from Fed officials, notably New York Fed President Williams. Michael contends that the move from 3.90% to over 5% was “orderly,” lacking the capitulatory panic he’d anticipated: “We were always looking for a blow-off top. We never got it.”

Rather than deter his bond strategy, Michael argues that “5.23% is a much happier place for us in the bond market. We can go back in, buy with some yield.” He signals a readiness to re-enter the market at these yield levels, conditional on some stabilization, dismissing suggestions he is “aggressively buying” but admitting there’s “plenty of buying yet to do” if volatility recedes.

[00:02:09] Regarding yield curve dynamics, Michael asserts: “It feels to us the entire yield curve is oversold. The demons have set in.” He likens current market mood to the “PTSD” following 2022’s selloff, but expects looming PCE and labor data to calm nerves.

On credit, Michael points to spreads widening (especially in triple-C rated debt), a sign the Fed’s tightening is beginning to “bite” outside sovereign markets. He remarks: “The rise in yields…is starting to slow the economy. Businesses are struggling more to finance themselves.”

Controversy & Counterpoints

While Michael finds value in current yield levels, hosts Lisa Abramowitz and Jonathan Ferro challenge the wisdom of re-entering fixed income amid such persistent volatility and macro uncertainty. Questioned about whether to prefer sovereign or corporate credit, Michael frames it as a recession call: “If I thought we were going into recession, sovereign risk for sure…But we don’t think that’s going to happen.” He remains confident in U.S. macro resilience, citing “a lot of money still sloshing around.”

A central debate emerges on the Fed’s true inflation target. Michael provocatively claims: “I don’t think their inflation objective is 2%. It’s mid twos. That’s better for the U.S. economy.” The hosts probe the significance of a 50-basis-point difference, with Michael cautioning that such deviations, though seemingly small, can have pronounced market impacts if compounded.

—

🏦 Fed Policy, Inflation Challenges, and U.S. Macro Trajectory

Key Analysis

[00:12:09] Lindsay Piazza of Stifel enters the discussion with a measured take, labeling incoming data as “relatively neutral,” sufficient to justify the September rate hike but not enough to force further immediate tightening. She asserts: “The U.S. economy is still on relatively positive footing…justifying that the Fed does have some room to further firm monetary policy.”

Piazza critiques the Fed’s delayed response to inflation post-pandemic, arguing that the central bank “stopped short of a sufficiently restrictive level,” allowing price pressures to become entrenched. [00:13:54] She sees a “bare minimum” path for additional hikes: “The majority of officials are still anticipating…just one additional rate increase by the end of the year.”

Addressing the challenge of *interest-rate-insensitive* segments of the economy, Piazza observes: “It would take substantially higher yields to truly bring inflation down to 2%. A lot of inflation is out of the Fed’s control.” Yet, she insists that the Fed’s dual mandate requires persistent effort, including tolerating a higher unemployment rate as the likely collateral damage of restoring price stability.

Controversy & Counterpoints

A contentious point is whether raising rates aggressively can genuinely defeat today’s *structural* inflation drivers, many of which originate from global supply shocks and energy instability. Piazza counters prevailing skepticism: “That doesn’t mean monetary policy officials throw up their hands. It simply means more intense policy moves are needed.”

This sets up an ongoing dialectic with bond bulls such as Michael, who argue the Fed may already be close to neutral, and adds complexity to investor calculus on rates, labor markets, and the ultimate “pain threshold” required to anchor inflation expectations at—or above—the official target.

—

🛢️ Geopolitical Energy Risks and U.S. Political Fault Lines

Key Analysis

[00:16:12] The energy theme is explored by Henrietta Trace of Veda Partners. She situates recent market jitters in the broader context of U.S.-Iran negotiations, the persistent impasse over the Strait of Hormuz, and the resultant fragility of global oil shipping. Trace stresses: “As long as Iran is involved with ships getting through, you have tankers, insurers, farmers, banks…that is untenable for a Western democracy and economy.”

[00:17:39] The episode highlights U.S. domestic political frictions—especially the looming possibility of *diesel export restrictions*—as the Biden administration scrambles to control energy prices ahead of pivotal midterms. Trace starkly describes internal Republican divisions: “It’s Iowa vs. Texas”, as farm-state interests clash with the oil sector over supply interventions, and voters in key states react to economic squeeze points.

This complex policy environment threatens to generate “unintended consequences,” with Trace drawing historical parallels to Nixon-era price controls and warning of their inefficacy. The panel notes the potential for policy slippage into more hawkish geopolitical or military action if energy price pain persists.

Controversy & Counterpoints

Hosts and panelists debate the efficacy of policy actions such as embargoes or price controls. While diesel restrictions could provide short-term relief to some constituencies, Trace cautions against their longevity and economic logic. There is agreement that neither U.S. nor Arab partners can accept Iranian leverage over the strait, but disagreement on the likely political outcome; Trace predicts more military escalation if diplomatic efforts stall, while others express doubts about such binary choices.

The political haze extends to polling and the broader ramifications for Democratic and Republican positioning heading toward 2028. Trace observes: “The party is trying to position for 2028. Who’s going to steer this party that has been under control of President Trump for a decade?”

—

💡 Conclusion & Market Impact

• ⚠️ All speakers signal heightened risk awareness, with prevailing macro and political factors—especially sharp bond volatility, unresolved Fed policy direction, sticky inflation, and geopolitical energy pressures—amplifying both risks and potential opportunities across asset classes. Investors face a market in transition, where policy tolerance for higher inflation may be structurally shifting, while headline events continue to test both economic resilience and portfolio strategies.

—

Generated by AI, may contain errors and omissions. Solely for informational and educational purposes and does not constitute investment advice.

【Bloomberg Surveillance】Energy Markets, Central Bank Discipline, and the Consumer AI Revolution
Listen on Apple Podcasts

—

📊 Executive Summary

• 🏦 Central banks in Europe face a delicate balancing act as energy price risks and geopolitical uncertainty complicate efforts to maintain inflation discipline, per Geoff Few, BNY.
• 🛢️ Soft Chinese demand is acting as an unexpected buffer for global oil prices, helping mitigate the risk of a much sharper rise amid ongoing geopolitical shocks.
• 🇬🇧 The UK’s approach to fiscal discipline is cited as a rare example of “execution of a plan”, contrasting with the structural imbalances and widening spreads seen in France and other Eurozone countries.
• 💬 US-China trade talks remain fraught, but both sides see value in extending key trade deals—yet face domestic political obstacles that prevent true stability, as highlighted by former White House advisor Kellyanne Shaw.
• 🤖 Meta’s push into consumer AI (with the “Muse” assistant) signals a major shift for advertising and user engagement models, raising questions about platform cooperation and the future role of digital agents, according to Ken Gorowski, Wells Fargo.

—

This episode of Bloomberg Surveillance expertly navigates three critical themes shaping markets and policy: the intersection of energy prices with central bank maneuvering, the evolving state of global trade—especially in US-China relations—and the disruptive advance of consumer-facing AI, particularly in the context of Meta’s Muse platform. Featured guests include Geoff Few from BNY, who dives deep into European energy and monetary dynamics; former White House trade negotiator Kellyanne Shaw, who analyzes the upcoming Trump-Xi summit and its likely outcomes; and Ken Gorowski of Wells Fargo, who explores the implications of rapid consumer AI deployment for tech and advertising.

—

🌍 Energy, Inflation, and Central Bank Discipline

Key Analysis

[00:00:36] Geoff Few opens by highlighting two critical themes dominating risk assets: energy price volatility and the bifurcated equity market response—especially AI trade vs. energy names. He asks, “how much two-way risk is there” ahead of the week’s diplomatic efforts, noting that recent softening in Chinese oil demand has been a meaningful cap on global energy prices. Without this moderation, “crude prices could have been way, way higher,” which could have further complicated policy-making for European central banks and set off global inflation alarms.

[00:02:09] The inflation challenge for the European Central Bank (ECB) is further compounded by geopolitics. As Few points out, “the market is all over Europe, not just the ECB,” with strikingly aggressive rate pricing in economies like Sweden, even as inflation expectations have moderated. The ECB’s assertion that ‘rates are not set purely on energy prices’ is at odds with current market pricing, which rapidly incorporates oil volatility and related risks. Thus, unless energy prices decisively fall, monetary policy could remain tighter than economic reality justifies.

[00:02:44] Looking at fixed income markets, the current US yield curve—with the 2-year Treasury at 4.72%, above the Fed policy rate—signals some scope for disappointment if market discipline is not fully internalized. Few cautions: “Don’t price in three or four hikes in the next six months… get the next meeting right first.” He argues that discipline by central banks in meeting-by-meeting guidance is starting to become a market anchor, fostering somewhat better risk appetite.

[00:04:39] On the fiscal side, Few laments a “missing link”: the absence of fiscal discipline in both Washington and across Europe—“the fiscal discipline is not coming any time soon.” He singles out the UK for having and executing a plan, even if its growth effects are debated.

Controversy & Counterpoints

[00:06:04] The discussion pivots to sovereign spreads, with France’s spread over German bunds at 100bps—a clear market signal of fiscal skepticism. Few notes that France has “never recovered” from its previous political shocks, and the structural deficit persists. However, he pushes back against deterministic doom, observing that market reward follows “if the numbers make sense, irrespective of what’s going on in government.”

[00:07:00] The possibility of true fiscal discipline during an energy crisis is questioned by the hosts, with the example of Sweden—where fiscal rules remain intact—contrasted against broader Eurozone limitations and the loss of monetary sovereignty. Few concludes that “spending rules with spending offsets” are essential, though difficult given current pressures.

—

🌏 US-China Trade, Geopolitical Bargaining, and the Limits of Stability

Key Analysis

[00:07:49] Trade relations between the US and China take center stage as Kellyanne Shaw highlights the balancing act of the upcoming Trump-Xi summit. She characterizes the stakes as “simultaneously high and low”—the meeting functions as a “second act” to prior Beijing talks, with the chief deliverables being incremental: each side seeking ~$30 billion in tariff rollbacks and compliance checks on existing agricultural and manufacturing commitments.

[00:09:49] Shaw asserts that both sides desire an extension of the Busan trade deal, but differ on its duration. She expects “no agreement until November”—an indicator of how deeply domestic political considerations limit flexibility and real progress. On the sensitive issue of Chinese EVs accessing the US market, Shaw is clear: “Really hard … there are national security concerns, political resistance, and established screening regimes. The president leaves everything on the table, but certainty is not his style.”

[00:11:09] USMCA (the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement) renegotiations are depicted as another locus of China-related tension—“the US wants stricter rules of origin to prevent Chinese subcomponents from gaining the benefit.” Shaw highlights that negotiations are more fraught with partners like Canada than even with China, as legacy issues and entrenched interests dominate.

Controversy & Counterpoints

[00:11:52] The conversation touches on negotiation frustrations. Shaw notes that US officials “don’t understand why [Canadian negotiator] Carney walked away”—exposing the difficulty in reconciling public narratives with in-room realities. She underscores that, ultimately, while China is the “epicenter,” allied relationships bring their own challenges and can sometimes be even more complex.

[00:10:58] As for the president’s apparent openness to Chinese EV investment, hosts challenge whether it’s a genuine option or mere rhetoric. Shaw reiterates that, regardless of optics, “there is no certainty and stability from this president,” emphasizing unpredictability as a structural feature of current US trade policy.

—

🤖 The Consumer AI Revolution and Its Risks for Tech & Advertising

Key Analysis

[00:12:48] Ken Gorowski of Wells Fargo lays out his thesis for raising Meta’s price target: “The ‘Muse’ assistant marks the transition to consumer AI from chatbots.” For the first time, “beyond chat…we are on the cusp of a real breakthrough in consumer AI.” This potential leap has implications far beyond technology—shaping the links between engagement, productivity, and the advertising business model.

[00:13:52] Nevertheless, platform cooperation is not guaranteed. Gorowski points out Amazon has “blocked Muse”—a signal of initial resistance, as major platforms weigh competitive threats (“Amazon has fought with Google before…they’re not going to give it away right away”). Despite this, he predicts eventual reconciliation, since e-commerce platforms will need to integrate with user-facing AI to remain competitive and relevant.

[00:14:59] Regarding deployment across hardware, Gorowski believes that Muse-like agents will be “dispersed across all of Meta’s platforms—Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp”—making these platforms not only social networks, but fundamental AI productivity tools. He positions this shift as a potential advantage for Meta, given its ecosystem’s breadth, but expects fierce competition from OpenAI, Google, and (eventually) Apple.

[00:16:12] On advertising and monetization, Gorowski notes: “AI search was early in its disruption, but agentic AI really does challenge” the traditional logic of ad placement. If agents pre-fill shopping carts or drive decisions, the value of “last click” advertising declines, forcing Amazon, Meta, and others to rapidly adapt retail media strategies. For Meta, whose revenue is estimated to be “roughly half from e-commerce verticals,” these shifts are existential yet present new use cases and ways to expand total engagement time.

Controversy & Counterpoints

[00:16:53] The potential for AI agents to disrupt ad models leads to debate. Gorowski is bullish for Meta: “We actually think this could be incremental to Meta [time spent], whereas it may not be so incremental for others” like Amazon or Google, whose business models are more exposed to transactional search. However, he acknowledges this is an unsettled question, and all platforms must “navigate this new paradigm” with unknown consequences for revenue streams and competitive strategy.

[00:13:52] Platform resistance (like Amazon blocking Muse) underlines the tension between collaboration and competitive moat protection. Gorowski expects that, while necessary deals will eventually emerge, the “agentic” model of consumer AI will pressure established data silos and disrupt the flow of advertising dollars.

—

• 🧐 Central banks are navigating a minefield of geopolitical and energy risks, with market discipline and policy clarity more important than ever; fiscal discipline remains elusive outside isolated examples like the UK.
• 🌏 US-China trade relations will remain transactional and fragile, with both sides focused on tactical wins but systemic challenges—especially in tech and EVs—likely to persist.
• 🤖 The advent of consumer AI, exemplified by Meta’s Muse, heralds a new era in technology and advertising, posing fundamental challenges to platform interoperability and legacy revenue streams.

Generated by AI, may contain errors and omissions. Solely for informational and educational purposes and does not constitute investment advice.

【Bloomberg Surveillance】AI Regulation, U.S. Rate Hike Debate & Private Equity Investment Amid Economic Resilience
Listen on Apple Podcasts

—

📊 Executive Summary

• 🤖 AI regulation is at a political and business crossroads, with Ted Morrison (Baird) highlighting the hazards of political intervention versus the need for industry self-regulation and warning of the risks to open-source AI models.
• 💹 U.S. long-term yields are surging, and Guneet Dhingra (BNP Paribas) suggests 5% yields on the 10-year Treasuries may just be the floor—not the ceiling, as growth and AI spending remain robust and inflation is sticky.
• 🏦 Fed policy faces new challenges with the economy’s muted rate sensitivity; further hikes are expected, yet the market awaits clarity on a sustained hiking regime rather than a “one-and-done” move.
• 💼 Harvey Schwartz (Carlyle CEO) underscores U.S. economic resilience amid higher rates, large deficits, deglobalization, and global uncertainty, and sees structurally higher rates as the new normal.
• 🔬 AI’s real-world impact dominates capital allocation discussions, with major firms like Carlyle deploying AI and joining research consortia, even as societal concerns and regulatory debates swirl.

—

This episode of Bloomberg Surveillance offers a sweeping look at the collision of fast-moving artificial intelligence (AI) innovation, U.S. monetary policy challenges, and the positioning of major private equity players in a complex macroeconomic environment. Guests include Ted Morrison of Baird, Guneet Dhingra of BNP Paribas, and Harvey Schwartz, CEO of Carlyle Group, who together dissect the regulatory, economic, and strategic ramifications of today’s uncertainties—from AI governance to yield curve inversion and resilient U.S. growth.

—

🤖 AI Regulation and Political Tensions

Key Analysis

[00:00:36] The episode opens with headlines about U.S. leadership rejecting AI safety concerns as “a sick conspiracy,” framing the debate within the context of tensions with Beijing and strategic confrontation with China.

Ted Morrison (Baird) ([00:01:17]) urges caution amidst “hysteria,” drawing parallels to the initial COVID-era panic. He emphasizes fact-based, strategic approaches: “Everybody’s got to take a deep breath and actually deal in the facts…I’m not a huge believer in the federal government regulating an industry.”

According to Morrison, liability rules and market incentives already induce self-regulation. He highlights how IPO scrutiny of firms like Anthropic reflects regulatory pressure on the industry to demonstrate responsible conduct ([00:02:26]).

Morrison warns that political intervention is fraught with hazards due to policymakers’ inadequate grasp of AI: “Bringing in the politicians…is probably one of the worst mistakes because…they’re not equipped to understand this technology.” The onus, he argues, is on CEOs and industry leaders to craft coherent strategies and messaging.

Competition concerns are fierce. Morrison asserts that frontier AI companies worry most about open-source innovation because it upends their pricing models ([00:03:22]). The proliferation of open-source tools (NVIDIA’s Nemotron, Alibaba’s Gwen) dramatically reduces token costs, threatening to commoditize cutting-edge models and “put open source in a box from a regulatory standpoint.”

Ultimately, Morrison frames today’s regulatory battle as an existential fight for both business models and societal impact, with “massive strides in healthcare and productivity” on the line ([00:05:16]). He also criticizes tech giants for failing to win public trust about AI’s broader benefits, as polling still shows deep skepticism ([00:05:42]).

Controversy & Counterpoints

The core controversy centers on regulation versus market-driven discipline. While Morrison discourages state intervention due to regulatory risk and lack of expertise, others argue government oversight is essential to ensure societal protections and accountability—especially when AI’s applications can be far-reaching and opaque.

The impact on open-source models also raises equity concerns. Restrictive regulation could stifle innovation and competition, while unchecked development may amplify systemic risks and ethical challenges.

—

💹 U.S. Yields, Fed Policy, and the Growth Conundrum

Key Analysis

The episode pivots to the bond market where, as Guneet Dhingra (BNP Paribas) explains ([00:08:02]), 5% yields on the 10-year U.S. Treasuries “are here to stay”. He underscores that the current repricing reflects the economy finally catching up with its fundamentals, especially buoyed by the relentless build-out in AI and sustained consumer strength.

Dhingra notes that the economy demonstrates lower interest rate sensitivity than expected. Even as rates rise, robust sectors (AI, technology, consumer) show little sign of fatigue: “Small-cap stocks are up 15% in a year when rates have gone up 100 basis points. That is unusual… the AI build-out isn’t going to stop based on a 50 basis point rise.” ([00:08:44])

The core implication is that traditional monetary transmission mechanisms are less effective—leading Dhingra to forecast that yields could rise further, possibly above 5%. The front-end (Fed policy) remains relevant, but it is long-end yields that drive real economic impact, as they set benchmarks for mortgages and corporate credit ([00:09:34]).

On Fed strategy, Dhingra asserts that hikes are a “necessary but not sufficient” condition ([00:10:07]). One-off hikes won’t suffice; the Fed needs to restore market confidence with a credible path—a “sequence of hikes” that signals genuine inflation-fighting seriousness, reminiscent of periods in the late 1990s.

Importantly, Dhingra emphasizes that sticky growth, rather than just sticky inflation, is the main market surprise. Fiscal support, persistent AI build-out, and an accommodative Fed stance are all fueling an unexpected rate of expansion, pushing policymaker targets like “R star” upward ([00:12:34]).

Dhingra quantifies the prospective hiking cycle at 3-6 additional rate hikes, evoking the precedent of the late 1990s, when only multiple successive hikes truly affected market dynamics ([00:13:03]).

Controversy & Counterpoints

One key debate is whether the Fed’s stance—shaped by backward-looking estimates like “R star”—is truly behind the curve, as Dhingra contends, or whether stickier inflation and growth may ebb as fiscal and AI-related stimulus inevitably fades.

Skeptics also question whether AI spending can really remain uncorrelated to higher rates over the longer term. Historically, even disruptive capex cycles have shown sensitivity to borrowing costs.

—

🏦 Private Equity in a High-Rate, Dynamic Economy

Key Analysis

In an on-site segment from the Carlyle Group’s Global Investor Conference, Harvey Schwartz (Carlyle CEO) offers a high-level view from the private equity vantage point. Leveraging data from Carlyle’s portfolio of hundreds of companies employing 750,000 people worldwide, Schwartz asserts that, “the economic engine is doing quite well” ([00:14:36]). U.S. GDP growth is tracking a solid 2.25%-2.5% coming out of August.

He notes that inflation remains sticky (neither accelerating nor decelerating), and dismisses the notion that the Fed is either entering a new aggressive hike cycle or about to cut rates precipitously. For Schwartz, structurally higher rates are now the baseline expectation, driven by larger deficits, high global capital demand, and deglobalization-induced economic reordering ([00:16:54]).

Key to his assessment is the crowding-out effect: Massive capital investment by “hyperscalers” is comparable to fiscal stimulus, creating upward pressure on bond spreads and cost of capital but also fueling real economic growth and investment opportunities. Despite higher rates, Carlyle remains actively investing, citing robust global deal flow ([00:18:07]).

Schwartz also highlights Carlyle’s strategic deployment of AI, announcing the firm’s joining of MIT’s AI Impact Consortium. Proprietary data and machine learning are core to Carlyle’s approach to alpha generation (“how can we run Carlyle better, make better investments, improve the value of the portfolio?”) ([00:20:27]).

On the broader societal impact, Schwartz expresses cautious optimism: “I truly do believe we will see breakthroughs in industry growth, in medical science…extraordinary opportunities here with this technology.” Yet he calls for appropriate guardrails, echoing the “airbags in cars” metaphor for intelligent regulation, not prohibition ([00:22:18]).

Controversy & Counterpoints

While Schwartz sees the higher rate environment as manageable and even healthy for disciplined capital deployment, the persistent lag in Carlyle’s own share price is noted, inviting scrutiny of private markets valuations and public market skepticism. Shared optimism in the transformative potential of AI may not uniformly translate to portfolio outperformance if regulation or public trust issues intensify.

The tension between growing the AI economy and ensuring societal protection recurs, with Schwartz advocating for pragmatic, innovation-enabling regulation—potentially at odds with more risk-averse, precautionary policy voices.

—

🔔 Conclusion & Market Implications

• 📈 The confluence of surging long-term yields, resilient consumption, and AI-driven capex is pressuring the Fed to adopt a clearer, multi-hike strategy, with 5%+ U.S. 10-year yields likely to endure in the near-to-medium term.
• 🤖 Regulatory battles over AI may reshape industry business models, with open-source threatened by top-down curbs and political maneuvering, raising profound equity and innovation questions for the sector.
• 🏦 Private capital—via firms like Carlyle—is betting on the durability of economic growth, even amid tighter financial conditions and elevated market uncertainty, enabled by structural trends in data, technology, and global capital flow.

—

Generated by AI, may contain errors and omissions. Solely for informational and educational purposes and does not constitute investment advice.