Video features

Hello, everyone. We're coming off another day of choppy trading in equities, so I thought I would say a few words on the latest developments, our outlook and the investment impact. Let's start with what has happened in recent weeks. Well, equity markets have remained volatile and recession fears have grown largely due to the latest policy developments around tariffs. Most recently, stocks fell sharply on Monday after President Trump suggested the country could face a "period of transition" and temporary economic "disturbance" as he pursues his policy agenda. The president's recent comments have investors worried that he's less focused on stock market performance than he was in his first term? So, how concerning do we find these recent developments? Clearly, we have entered a period of extreme policy uncertainty, and we have to acknowledge that risks have increased. In fact, we have recently raised the combined probability of either a cyclical or stagflationary economic downturn within the next 6 to 12 months to 30%. Particularly concerning are the tariffs on Canada and Mexico. But still our base case, which we assign a 50% probability, remains that U.S. economic growth will moderate from last year but remain positive. We do expect President Trump to maintain an aggressive stance on trade, but believe he will want to stop short of causing a recession. It's also important to remember that the U.S. economy entered this phase of uncertainty in a position of strength. With unemployment low, still solid job growth, and an overall healthy consumer. While softer data like business and consumer sentiment has pulled back. Real activity data has not yet materially changed. Finally, within markets, we also believe the large moves in certain sectors, like technology, have been amplified by extended positioning heading into the year, which has now largely unwound. So the natural next questions are what does this mean for investments and what should you do? Our core message in recent months has been to stay invested, but also to hedge downside risks. The latter part of that advice has only become more important, with volatility likely to remain elevated in the near term. That being said, we believe the medium term outlook for stocks is attractive and risk reward has improved. The US remains our preferred equity market, while the S&P has lagged the rest of the world recently. We believe positive catalysts are already accounted for in a year to date outperformers like Germany and Chinese technology stocks, while US valuations are now more properly pricing in downside risks. And ultimately, we believe a recession will be avoided. Earnings growth will be strong and artificial intelligence spending will continue. Policy uncertainty should also slowly decline as the year progresses. In the months ahead, we should get greater clarity on tariffs, a potential government shutdown, reconciliation packages, and more. Outside of equities, fixed income should continue to play an important role in diversifying portfolios as well. We've seen this in recent weeks, with bonds rallying as stocks sold off. Here, we continue to favor high quality segments where you can still earn good carry with less risk, like investment grade corporates, mortgage backed securities, and five-year U.S. treasuries. We did trim some interest rate exposure as the market has become pretty dovish. Now pricing in almost 80 basis points of fed cuts this year. But overall, we see the direction of travel as lower with a ten-year yield heading towards 4% by December. We also continue to like gold to further hedge against geopolitical risks. Stay tuned for more guidance from our CIO team. I will also be joined by Henry McVey, Head of Global Macro and CIO of KKR's balance sheet for a special client livestream this Thursday at 4 p.m. eastern. Please ask your UBS financial advisor for the details.

Hi everybody, and welcome to the CIO House View monthly livestream. Today is Thursday, December 5th, 2024. I'm Anthony Pastore, the Head of Broadcast Communications here in the Chief Investment Office. Thank you very much for joining us. Today, I'm joined by my two Chief Investment Office colleagues, Jason Draho, the Head of Asset Allocation, and Kurt Reiman, the Head of CIO Fixed Income and our Election Watch publication. Gentlemen, good to have you here in the studio with me. And, got a lot to get to today, which we'll do in just a moment. But in the meantime, to our audience, we always appreciate hearing from you. And what that means is we would love to hear if you have a question, you could send it in by clicking that "ask a question" button right on the website, and that will allow you to engage with us during today's discussion. We'll be taking those questions and offering them up to Kurt and Jason in just a little while. But in the meantime, we're going to dive right in first and foremost with what's going on in the market. So Jason, the CIO came out with the Year Ahead Outlook, the 2025 outlook. We're calling it "The Roaring 20s" which we'll get into more detail in a moment, but just kind of giving us where we are now. What's your view for 2025? According to the House view, according to the Year Ahead? And what is the latest data from the last few weeks, what the Fed is doing, and what the markets are doing to indicate how next year is going to look? So I would classify our Year Ahead outlook, it's "the Roaring 20s", and the markets this year, they've been roaring. I'd say our growth outlook, I'd call it benign growth, roaring markets in simple terms. And the economy this year, a lot of uncertainty of how the economy would land, so to speak. But in terms of the outlook for next year, what we think is a little bit of moderation across the board. From growth, inflation, interest rates. So to give you perspective, you know, the economy will likely grow around 2.8% this year, give or take a little bit. Last year, a little bit over 3%. Next year, we think it's going to be like between 2 - 2.5%. So still a good number, but a little bit further moderation. Likewise inflation should continue to come down. It's going to be a more gradual descent from the very elevated levels before. But all that sets up the Fed to be able to cut rates. We think in a couple of weeks, 25 basis points in December, and then 100 basis points next year, at 25 per quarter. If you have that combination of growth, that's still over 2%, inflation is coming down, the Fed is cutting rates. That to me is a pretty benign macro environment. That's our expectations for next year. If we think about what we've learned just in the past few weeks in terms of the economy, the economic data continues to surprise to the upside by and large. And a simple way to measure that also is just looking at tracking estimates for how the economy's growing in the fourth quarter. The line the Fed puts out quarterly, or like a real time estimate of how is the economy growing at that quarter based on data through the December 5th, they're estimating the economy's growing in the fourth quarter at 3.3%. So that could, you know, change. But for perspective, in early November, like November 1st, that was 2.4%. So almost a full percentage point increase. That's kind of the backdrop. What does it mean for the Fed? And where do we go from here? A lot, it's going to depend on jobs data we get for November tomorrow, December 6th. And then on December 11th, we get the November CPI data. If it comes in line with sort of consensus expectations, And, you know, we're looking at about 200,000 as consensus for November, then you probably have the Fed cutting. The caviat I'd say is that the data we had for October was really noisy because of hurricanes and strikes. So the data we're going to get for November is a bounce back. But it also means it's sort of noisy. So almost we need like three months full data, the full fourth quarter data. Like what's the real trend? Because it could go this way, then this way, and then maybe it's going to settle down. So the markets will have a tough time maybe digesting unless it's really extreme one way or another, even that could be dismissed as somewhat noisy. It seems like the markets have already priced in that the Fed is going to cut another 25 basis points at the next meeting, next week. As of the moment, right now it's about a 75% chance. Right. Exactly. And we're looking at, by the way, I should have started this, with an S&P 500, that for the year so far is up about 28%. So it's been a real banner year for equities. It's a roaring year. A roaring year, exactly, to coin the title. Thank you, Jason. Kurt, let me bring you in because, you know, the most recent conversations that we were having, we were really focused on the upcoming election. Now, we're past that, and we know that the Trump administration 2.0 will be coming in in January. But I think there's been a lot of concern out there from a lot of our investors, advisors, and even friends of mine are talking about, well, okay, great. So now we know what their agenda is, meaning the Trump administration's agenda. And that includes these tariffs, these big percentage tariffs on some of our most important allies in the import, export communities of Canada, Mexico, China. And the questions keep coming up. Well, how is that going to potentially impact the economy next year? Potential that inflation moves higher again. I mean, I think it's a lot of speculation and we won't really know specifically what those tariffs will look like until they're in the White House, and who knows how that's going to all land. But for what we know now, what's the impact potentially on the economy? Okay. So there is three ways I'd frame it in terms of scenarios for what we could expect. We could get a deal, you know, escalate and try to get some sort of a victory, even if it's just symbolic. And that is how I'm thinking about the Canada, Mexico tariff announcement. 25% on two countries that have very tightly intertwined trade networks. But for non-trade issues, you know, striking deals on these sorts of things is very much going to be part of this next administration. The second, though, is universal tariffs. And that's been threatened throughout the campaign. The reason why I think this has a lower probability is that this administration, to Jason's point, is the the baton hand-off on the economy is pretty good. Yeah. And so at first, do no harm is the principle that I'm thinking about. And universal tariffs would do harm, in raising inflation for a period of time, and then weighing on the growth outlook. So I think the more likely scenario is selective tariffs. That means that we're going to hear a lot about that. There will be tariffs in 2025. They will be at first, announced in terms of trying to reach a deal. They may be announced and implemented on a rising grading scale over time. But we have to compartmentalize. There will be countries where it's escalate to de-escalate. And that's more the, you know, Canada, Mexico, maybe some of our allies, friends and partners in Europe. And then there's escalate to decouple. And I think that's more of the China scenario. So where I would be looking for the tariffs to be implemented first, and more aggressively, would be towards China. And that's basically picking up, dusting off the books from the prior administration. And you've also seen the appointments that we've seen come through. Those have all been indicating that this is going to be an administration that's going to be tough on China. Right. Yeah. And just to remind everyone, there are tariffs that already exist from Trump, and Biden kept a lot of those. And so you know, this is not a new thing for all of us just because we're talking about it now. It's something that's already been ongoing. But it could potentially change depending on what the new administration decides to do. But on the flip side of that, the other things that were being discussed on Trump's campaign trail were maybe, possibly a benefit to certain parts of the economy, talking about lowering corporate taxes, personal tax exemptions might be changing, and maybe looking better for certain people. What's the impact potentially there? Yeah, I think the initial market reaction to the Trump win was focused on the possibility of deregulation and not seeing taxes rise. I think that's a pretty fair assessment. We will most likely get a full extension of the personal tax cuts, despite the fact that, these will raise the deficit. It's just a question of how much is Congress willing to allow deficits to grow. They'll be looking for offsets. And that's where deregulation comes in. Is there opportunity for some modest spending cuts or maybe some other areas of raising revenue, in order to close the gap? Some. But what's important about this is that we not assume that this is going to be necessarily stimulative for the economy. When when you're paying the same tax rate in 2026 that you paid in 2025, it's not a boost to your disposable income. One other area that does get talked about quite a bit is, as you mentioned, corporate tax cuts. I think that's a bridge too far. We're already talking about adding to the deficit. If we were to extend tax cuts, further tax cuts to corporations, that would make the deficit impact greater. There has been some talk about feeding through the income from tariffs to be able to offset maybe the opportunity to cut corporate tax rates. I think that's also legislatively very difficult, if not also problematic from a legal standpoint. But any way, that's being talked about, so I thought I'd mention it. Yeah. Right now corporate taxes, we don't think they're going to get cut, but it's certainly something that the market is looking and trying to factor in as a possibility. And let's not forget, I mean, you know, even going into this red sweep, there's a very slim majority that the Republicans have in both chambers of Congress. So anything that's legislative, it needs to be voted on, it's still going to be tough. That's correct. With the three appointments that came from the House and to the Cabinet and elsewhere, that leaves the Republicans with a one seat majority. That's right. And three seats in the Senate. So they have to effectively get everybody on board. And as we saw in the last Congress or the current Congress now even, that's not always possible. So I think anybody out there who is a part of the American public and even our foreign friends and colleagues, understand that it's not that easy to get things voted on by your entire party anywhere in Washington DC. So, yeah, it'll be a little bit of a struggle when it comes to legislation. Jason, when you talked about something called the "Trump put", especially when it relates to looking at Treasury yields, which right now we're looking at a ten-year that's around 420, two-year I think is around 410 the last I looked. But, you look at that as a restriction, you said. Talk about that and what that is. So first, let's kind of define what I mean by puts. And put is just in terms of financial security, it's the idea that you can buy something, that caps your downside. You can buy a put option on the S&P 500 and limit how much you can go down. In financial markets, we've talked for decades about the idea of a Fed put.The markets go down, then suddenly too much, the Fed starts to react because they're worried, say, about growth concerns. What we learned during the first Trump administration is that there was effectively a Trump put out there, because he follows the stock market closely. I think that's pretty widely documented. He would tweet about it. And if the market falls too much as a signal of not being happy with his policies, then something that would cause a change, of course. So that, we know that Trump put essentially is for the equity markets. What I would suggest is, there might be a Trump put also for the Treasury markets, meaning that he actually can't have interest rates go higher, or bond prices go lower because it would be negative for the economy. And it's important to think about today versus where we were eight years ago. On Election Day in 2016, the inflation rate CPI was 1.6%, now it's 2.6%, and other measures were even higher. The ten-year Treasury yield was 1.85% back in 2016. This election cycle it was 4.28%. So all this means, why I think there is a Trump put is that you don't want rates to go much higher, because that could be a drag on the housing market, it could be a drag on the stock market, the economy overall. Which means from a policy perspective, the markets will kind of signal, if you do things that are too inflationary, or things that would expand the deficit, we're worried about big deficits going forward, interest rates will likely rise. That could be, you know, bad for the markets overall. So to me, Trump knowing that it's bad, would say, well, we can only go so far before risking essentially rates kind of skyrocketing. So essentially that's a Trump put I think for Treasuries which means there's a sort of limit how high rates can go, which means there's a limit on what they can do, whether it's maybe tariffs, whether it's on fiscal policy that could be inflationary. That's a conjecture. We'll see how this plays out. But I think that's something that is in some sense, if you want to have a good financial markets, then you have to also make sure rates don't go higher, means you have to have a Trump put for Treasuries as well. You would almost think that, you know, since Trump is like you said, he's somebody who follows the markets, And, you know, he wants to make sure his net worth stays where it is, that he would look at what you just talked about, and look at the tariffs that he's potentially trying to implement and, and say, oh, that's inflationary, maybe that's not such a great idea. So it'll be interesting to see how, you know, the quote-unquote, threats to these foreign countries versus what the reality will be when he looks at the entire picture, will dictate how he may or may not deal with this. So I assume you read my research. So of course he knows about this. Of course he does. Right. You can send it directly to his desk. As a follow up, Jason, you know, something that's discussed, of course, in the Year Ahead report are, the equity markets at which we just indicated they're up about the S&P is up 28% for the year so far. And, the base case is that there's still room to go. So talk about the reasoning why we think that equities still have some potential travel room here to go higher. Well, I go back to my first answer regarding the economy, in sort of benign growth. If you have these conditions of growth being good, inflation coming down, and the Fed cutting rates, all else equal, that is a conducive environment for equities to go higher. So that's you know, and to be clear, our price target for the S&P 500 at the end of 25 is 6600. That's roughly about a 10% upside in price from where the current level around 6000. You add you know, dividends to that, you're looking at about 11 to 12% total return over 12 months, which is in line roughly with historical averages. And given the macro conditions, again, that should be sort of favorable for that. Now, there are concerns right now on the market about things getting a little bit frothy. Yeah. And I would you know, there's definitely pockets of froth. You know, a simple thing that's interesting is that the the Conference Board does surveys of consumer confidence, they also ask the question, do you expect the stock market to go up? In the most recent one, it was the highest it's ever been, the percentage of people saying yes, higher than the dotcom bubble. You have to go back to you know, the mid 80s. So things like that kind of raise the concerns, are markets getting a little bit too exuberant? My kind of take is that, that's not really the case. If you look at sort of broad based. Things like crypto, the Bitcoin is now over 100,000. There's some pockets of that. But typically, to get really kind of frothy conditions, you need a lot of confidence about the state of the economy. And consumer and business sentiment measures are actually, you know, well below kind of prior peaks. So that suggests, there are still some concerns about the economy. We've talked about, you know, tariff risk. So it's not an all-clear. You're not seeing things like M&A or IPOs that tend to be really sort of signs of exuberance. They're actually relatively muted. And you actually don't see a lot of what I would call like narratives of people telling stories about like, "this time it's different", you know, we can value companies on these metrics, not cash flows. You're not seeing that. So to me, we're not there yet. And it could happen. I'm not saying it will happen, but to me, it's much more like 1996 when Alan Greenspan first uttered irrational exuberance. We had another three and a half years to go before we actually kind of topped off. And I think we're much closer to that than we are to like the 1990s, you know, 1999, 2000. So how are valuations right now in the equity markets? It seems like obviously you talk about these pockets of opportunity, but it seems like valuations are pretty healthy. Well, or you know elevated. I mean they're by most measures you could say that equities are certainly above long-term averages. The issue about valuations is that they matter in the long-term, they don't matter necessarily in the short-term, meaning just the predictability, just pure statistics of like what's the relationship between your starting P in Jan 1, versus your total year return. It's basically zero. Right. So you need other factors. You know, policy changes, concerns about recession, something that would cause the valuation to roll over. Again, those are risks, but without it, you know, the valuations could stay where they are. So our thesis is really just predicated on earnings growth being good next year to get that kind of return I've talked about before. Yeah, great. And Kurt, on the fixed income side, if we do continue to see the Fed cut rates as is our House View right now, 100 basis points in 2025, another 25 perhaps next week, what does that say for the opportunities within the fixed income markets next year? They're strong. Our view is that the Fed will cut rates more than the market expects. And that'll have a nice impact on the front, intermediate part of the curve. So we like the five-year sector. Going a little bit further out our ten-year forecast next year is to go from current levels of around 420 down to 4%. So it's not a huge lift. But it's better than the other direction. Right. As Jason was mentioning, there is that, idea of a of a Trump put, if you will, in bond yields. But we can't rule out the possibility that the bonds, the ten-year moves back to four and three quarters or 5%. And that's the reason why we don't go too far out the duration spectrum is that there is that, I don't know if I want to call it asymmetric risk, but there is that risk that bond yields rise out the back end. So we like moving out of cash, and into the five-year. Taking on any more interest-rate risk to us, seems like it's a bridge too far, just now. And then if you think about some of the other opportunities, if your goal is to pick up income, don't do it by going further out the interest rate spectrum, go into quality bonds in the corporate space, or maybe look to opportunities in MBS. Parts of the market have been weighed down by volatility being high. That volatility has come back down. Spreads have narrowed, there's still room for that to even, not in the corporate space where spreads are very tight, But in mortgage-backs there still is. So there are opportunities within the bond market next year. More for just general, let's call it, income, not for spread appreciation. But hey, we're talking about plus 4%. We weren't there 4 or 8 years ago. So that's a good thing. Right. Put that cash to work now if you happen to still be sitting in it. Yeah. And I know that you and the team recently changed your call, or updated your call. Now, you really like that five-year part of the curve, for the reasons that you were just saying. You don't want to go out too long, but five-year seems to be a little bit of a sweet spot. That's right. Yeah. Great. Thanks, Kurt. We're starting to get questions in. I just want to remind all of you watching, if you do have a question, click the "Ask a Question" button on your screen. We'll get to some of the audience questions here in a moment. Jason, I wanted to go back to you, specifically looking at the equities side. Are there any particular areas within the space sector wise where you would recommend clients and investors be kind of looking for some of those opportunities you were talking about? Well, one of the sectors we like, the one that's most attractive to us is the tech sector. Right. It does tie into one of our key messages, which is, you know, "Seize the AI opportunity." You know, there's a lot of questions and concerns like, you know, did the AI opportunity kind of run its course. Is it, you know, is it a bubble or not? When we look at the fundamentals, we just think there's continued runway for the amount of investment that will have to take place, particularly what we classify as the infrastructure layer, which is built in in the data centers, using the micro, you know, the processors, the semiconductors to provide the foundation to be able to run these models, which ultimately will lead to some applications later on. The investment at some of the big mega-cap tech companies are doing in this space is just enormous. We're talking about 165 billion last year, 225 billion this year, and it could be 265 billion next year. So there's just we think, more clear runway for the tech sector in this AI theme. Another thing that we like is more kind of a thematic idea, is to invest in power and resources. So this kind of a dovetails to some extent the AI theme. It's like the AI-adjacent theme. It's sort of adjacent, plus other things. Yeah. Because look, to run these data centers, it's been well documented, so like just big demands for energy. These companies are actually going out and getting their own direct power sources. But you add on to that, like further electrification of like electric vehicles, you know, US and globally? Just sort of general electrification, sort of of the economy. And so there's a variety of companies that we think can sort of be positioned for that thematically against it, for power and resources that go into building that power. So those are a couple of ideas that beside from saying more to go in equities, in general, to sort of having equity exposure, specific opportunities that we like in the equity markets. What about small and mid-caps? I'd say our preference right now would be more towards large-cap, you know, it isn't necessarily a strong large versus small call. You know, we've seen for the past year a couple of times where smalls had a good run, but for small-caps from the experience the past year or two is that, you need not just good or benign growth, you need almost goldilocks, meaning growth is, if anything, accelerating, inflation is still coming down and the Fed is actively cutting. And investors really have confidence to truly kind of broaden out in a sustainable way. That could happen. But as our base case, I would say just having broad exposure. And then some of these thematic ideas is because it offers a bit of a risk reward trade-off, all things considered. Terrific. Thanks, Jason. All right. So let's get to some questions. First one coming in here is asking, and Jason, since we're talking about equities I'll position this to you, is saying, you know, CIO's view is that the S&P earnings growth next year will be around 8%. And the question is why is it lower than what the rest of the street is saying? Is that the case that it's lower than what the street saying? I don't have that data in front of me. I wouldn't say it is, but there's a couple of important caveats when you think about these numbers. Yeah. When you see our forecast, this is a sort of top-down view of the markets overall. And then based on some analysis, the markets we think the S&P 500 earnings will grow 8%. A lot of sometimes numbers you see for Wall Street in general for earnings are more bottoms-up. So you take individual analysts making forecasts for individual stocks, you aggregate that. Now what's known historically is that, that bottoms up assessment often ends up being too optimistic, and it gets revised down. Like every single quarter, the guidance tends to go lower. And then the companies, there's this whole kind of you know, game that companies play with Wall Street. So when you see those numbers, they could be bottoms-up, which again, you almost have to cut it by about 3% to get what the top-down strategists are saying. I think that most of what I've seen in forecasts for next year would be more consistent with our 8%. The other caveat is that really kind of depends on what are people assuming regarding tax cuts and tariffs, and particularly tariffs. You know, depending on what you assume, it could impact corporate earnings in different degrees. So I think if you could see just variations, not because an economic assumption is that much different, or the fundamentals are much different, but they're just assuming something different on, you know, let's say on tariffs for example, or regulation changes next year. So that's an important caveat. And as Kurt is already outlining, there's a wide range of outcomes of how these things could play out. Depending on where you want to go you're going to get some variation. And you know, as we move into next year, we'll get better clarity of what that policies are going to be and then sort of refine it. I think that is based on the fundamental benign outlook that is sort of consistent with that. Great, excellent. Another question coming in asking about, currencies. Kurt, if any of you want to tackle this one and asking where does CIO see, you know, opportunities in investing in currencies, it seems like now the US dollar might be a little top heavy, maybe a little overvalued. But what does 2025 look like when it comes to the currency market? It's overvalued. It's been overvalued. Tariffs and other policies like that will make it even more overvalued. So it's one of those, tricky moments where, you know, you can see something that's strong, become stronger. The administration has been speaking quite vocally about a weaker dollar, and I think it understands the inconsistency between some of the policies that they're promoting and their preference for the dollar. I think Scott Bessent at Treasury is fully aware of this, they're not going to get a weaker dollar as they pursue an aggressive, muscular tariff strategy. So our view is, is that over, you know, over the the longer term, say, over the next year, we do expect the dollar to be weaker than its current level and we would sell into strength. But, we recognize that the dollar could, in the near-term become stronger because of the policies that the administration is looking to put in place. As you were speaking, we just got a question talking about Scott Bessent, who you just, dropped a name there for a second. And the question is, what could his nomination as Treasury Secretary mean for the Fed policy next year? Could it affect it at all? I mean, technically, the Fed, as we know, is supposed to be sitting a part from the government. Bessent has been historically critical of the Powell Fed, in Treasury. Trump has too. It's right, Trump has too. But yeah, but Bessent in Treasury will steer clear of commenting on Fed policy and sort of, you know, trying to intervene. That would be a risky proposition when your role is to ensure adequate and safe funding for the government, talking about or commenting even negatively or positively about what the Fed is doing. So likely to steer clear. That's also consistent with our now long running message that in a Trump administration, we think Fed independence is still secure. That Jerome Powell retains, his chairmanship through May of 2026. But also, the market reaction, to Scott Bessent's appointment at Treasury was an indication that the market was quite comfortable and comfortable because the administration took the time to vet someone who was not just loyal to the administration's agenda, but was also well-known and well-respected on Wall Street and within the Beltway. So we had something of, you know, kind of sell-the-rumor, buy-the-fact in the bond market around Trump's election, and that buy-the-fact, meaning yields falling, was the Bessent appointment, and I think it's that idea of not moderating the President's policies, but carrying it out in a in a methodical way and being a trusted voice. Excellent. Thanks, Kurt. Just to add one thing. Yeah, please. I agree with everything that Kurt said, but that won't prevent Trump necessarily from tweeting out his displeasure if the Fed's not cutting interest rates. So, there's I think, everything that Kurt's saying, that's how Bessent would approach it. But the Fed meets the beginning of February. If the don't cut rates then, wouldn't be surprised to see a tweet if like the Fed is not doing the right job. I feel like I've seen language like legislation by tweet when it comes to, and it's not anything different than we saw in 2016 to 2020 when he was sitting in the White House, So I would expect more of the same. And I think the American people would expect that as well. This, this is an interesting question, and I know we're not in the business of giving advice on crypto, particularly Bitcoin, but we have seen Bitcoin surging since it was announced that Trump won the election and, it's up by $100,000 today. Is there any outlook on the crypto market? I mean, I know there's crypto ETFs out there that certain people can get into. Obviously, there's a very high minimum for a lot of these ETFs. But any thoughts that you'd share. So you know, we don't officially forecast you know Bitcoin or any other sort of cryptocurrency in terms of what their price could do. Exactly. And if I saw anyone make a forecast I'd also take it with a massive grain of salt. Because how do you value something that doesn't generate kind of cash flows over time? Like a stock, a bond, these things you know, there's cash flows. You can just kind of, there's a valuation framework. So it really comes down to, you know, almost as much as market sentiment, conviction of among a variety of different types of investors. Psychology more than anything else which is incredibly difficult to predict. We know Bitcoin has had massive swings over the past few years. It's on an upswing. You know, this time next year we could be, you know, after the market, sort of disappointed because there's not enough crypto-friendly legislation. It could be down to, you know, 40,000. So everything's on the table. Of course. The one thing I would say about this is, if you treat it just as a general asset class, take off the name Bitcoin, it is incredibly volatile. You know, it's to me I think, a high beta high volatility non-profitable tech stock. Which is something that you know, you have to be very careful when you sort of invest in those things. It could do really well, but it could also, you know, go, you know, very low. Great, thanks, Jason. And one last question, and this is from me. And I'll ask this to you Kurt, or Jason, feel free to jump in. In the Year Ahead, there's also talk of precious metals. Gold has had an incredibly, strong year. It trades like the S&P 500. It's up also about 28% for the year. But there's talk of there's lithium, there's copper, there's other metals that are out there. And what's our thought on precious metals in 2025, and does gold still have room to go here? Gold does. It's primarily around some of the changes that central banks are making in their reserve holdings away from, not mass sales, but away from dollar holdings and towards gold, in their minds, probably a more trusted holding after the decision to expropriate Russian Central Bank assets after the invasion of Ukraine. So that's ongoing, and likely to still benefit gold in the next administration. We can also add to it the geopolitical and tariff risks. They would likely also support it. But any other thoughts? Yeah, Jason, anything to add to that? No, I think well, you know, on the gold piece I agree with that. I just go back to what I mentioned on on equities in terms of the "invest in power and resources." There's clearly some areas, I guess some thought that before you go green, you have to go brown, like investing in copper and things of that sort. So there's definitely kind of more broad based opportunities that are tied to some of these other thematic ideas. And either you can buy stocks or if there's opportunities within the commodity space directly, and, you know, minerals that will get you some of that exposure. Excellent. Great. Great conversation. Gentlemen, thanks very much. Always good to be with both of you. Good to see you. Great. Thank you to our audience as well. Thank you for the very thoughtful questions that you sent in. We always appreciate getting those as we always say, and thank you for spending time with us today. Don't forget, our next CIO monthly livestream will take place right after the New Year, Thursday, January 2nd, at 1 p.m. Eastern Time. And until then, we of course will keep you posted with all of the latest views through our House View publications, our CIO alerts, also our multimedia content, videos like this, and as well as podcast etc. You can find those all at ubs.com/views. Navigate lots of insights from the CIO and the firm, from our colleagues and our best partners. And for more on the CIO's outlook for 2025, the website is right there on your screen, ubs.com/cio-yearahead. And as always, we encourage you to continue this conversation with your financial advisor. They are certainly the best person to talk to if you have questions after today's conversation. In the meantime, we want to wish you all a wonderful holiday season, a Happy New Year. We'll see you in 2025. Thanks for joining us. Have a great rest of your day. From New York City, I'm Anthony Pastore, thank you very much.