Trump Administration Could Bring an Economic ‘Detox.’ What It Means for Stocks.
Investors may have nothing to fear but fear itself. But sometimes fear is more than enough.
Investors may have nothing to fear but fear itself. But sometimes fear is more than enough.
As another week begins with more selling–all three major indexes are falling, with the Nasdaq Composite hit hardest–fear is undoubtedly running high in the market. The Cboe Volatility Index, Wall Street’s fear gauge, jumped 15% to 27 on Monday morning. That would be its highest close since Dec. 18, when it was at 27.62.
Uncertainty about government policy and the health of the economy is overshadowing positive data.
Tariffs are one part of the problem. Not only are they disruptive to global trade and lead to higher prices, but President Donald Trump has walked back their implementation and doubled down enough to give the market whiplash. And then there are worries about huge cuts to federal spending, including mass firings and slashing outlays for programs, with a budget fight that could lead to a government shutdown at the end of the week.
Investors have little incentive to keep the faith, especially because signs of economic weakness are starting to emerge.
“Prior to tariff uncertainty, Momentum factors were leading, and risk factor returns were stable,” notes 22V Research’s Dennis DeBusschere. “ Payrolls and PMI data indicate weaker growth at the same time tariffs are adding to uncertainty about the path of economic data and earnings.” The result is that stocks are swinging wildly, riskier names are out of favor, and defensive shares are the flavor of the month.
According to Sevens Report’s Tom Essaye, “until there’s some movement towards stable policy, the best we can hope for is a churn sideways between around 5,700 and 6,000 in the S&P 500.” The index broke below 5650 in morning trading Monday.
The problem is that the greater the losses, the more the market could be closing in on a “liquidation avalanche,” as Dohmen Capital Research’s Bert Dohmen puts it. The concern is that forced selling, such as to raise cash for margin calls on shares bought with borrowed money, or by money managers desperate to limit losses, creates a downward spiral.
Wall Street famously abhors unpredictability, but even more worrisome may be rhetoric from Washington, D.C., that indicates the Trump administration is fine with causing what it believes will be a short-lived downturn as it pursues long-term goals it considers more important.
Asked whether a recession on the way, the president declined to rule out the possibility. “I hate to predict things like that,” Trump told Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures. “There is a period of transition, because what we’re doing is very big. We’re bringing wealth back to America.”
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, a former hedge fund manager, predicted “a natural adjustment as we move away from public spending to private spending, in an interview with CNBC. “The market and the economy have just become hooked, and we’ve become addicted to this government spending, and there’s going to be a detox period. There’s going to be a detox.”
As T.S. Lombard’s Dario Perkins notes, Elon Musk and others in Trump’s orbit have pointed to Argentina as a successful example of this strategy. President Javier Milei imposed strict austerity measures to combat inflation, leading to a brief recession in 2024.
Of course, “copying the policies of a country that had massive endemic corruption and was on the brink of hyperinflation is, er, problematic,” Perkins writes. “Yes, inflation is a bit high, but not so high that Musk and co should deliberately engineer a recession. Perhaps the new U.S. administration has forgotten what a ‘real’ recession is like.”
The 2008-2009 financial crisis was nearly two decades ago, and the U.S. only rebounded from the Covid-19 downturn so quickly and strongly because of huge government spending. That means it is “odd to see US policymakers talk as if they want to inflict damage on the economy, or at least do things that risk causing damage,” he notes.
The White House didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Damage could snowball quickly. If big government layoffs continue at a time when hiring is already weak, it could lead to a further loss of confidence and even higher unemployment. And as history shows, recessions aren’t always quick or without damage.
“The US is not Argentina, and it is not facing an imminent debt crisis,” Perkins writes. “In any case, does anyone seriously think a recession in 2025 would lower America’s debt trajectory? Every recession I know has had the exact opposite effect.”
The good news is that we aren’t there yet. Earnings have held up well, and while the mention of tariffs in fourth-quarter conference calls was up 40% from their prior peak in 2018, mentions of a recession fell to their lowest point since the first quarter of 2018, as DataTrek Research’s Nicolas Colas notes.
“The dichotomy between record high ‘tariff’ and near-record low ‘recession’ mentions on investor calls neatly reflects the mood of corporate America,” he writes. “The C-suite is struggling to come to grips with tariff policy but remains fairly optimistic on the US economy. So far, anyway…Any change to the latter view would be unwelcomed.”
For his part, TS Lombard’s Perkins isn’t predicting a recession. Sevens Reports’ Essaye notes that concern about tariffs so far has been worse than their effects. While it makes sense to brace for volatility, “that negative scenario is not a foregone conclusion and actual facts on the economy and earnings [are] hanging on.” he says.
22V Research’s DeBusschere highlights that in aggregate, macroeconomic data still point to a very high probability that the U.S. economy is still expanding. “Over the past few weeks though, market internals have weakened to a level more consistent with economic slowdowns/heightened recession risk,” he says. “Markets are discounting a sharp slowdown that is not evident TODAY in actual data.”
The problem is that as long as chaotic moves in Washington, D.C., continue, that won’t matter for stocks.
“Although the U.S. will still likely avoid a recession this year, investor sentiment does appear to be headed toward another recession scare,” writes Paulsen Perspectives’ Jim Paulsen. “An actual recession would probably result in a bear market, but even an ongoing or worsening ‘fear’ of recession will likely magnify the current stock market correction.”
When the market gets clarity about what comes next, prices can recover. But until then, it is hard to see how stocks can rise consistently. Just the fear of a recession is enough to weigh on markets.
Write to Teresa Rivas at teresa.rivas@barrons.com
A divide has opened in the tech job market between those with artificial-intelligence skills and everyone else.
A 30-metre masterpiece unveiled in Monaco brings Lamborghini’s supercar drama to the high seas, powered by 7,600 horsepower and unmistakable Italian design.
A divide has opened in the tech job market between those with artificial-intelligence skills and everyone else.
There has rarely, if ever, been so much tech talent available in the job market. Yet many tech companies say good help is hard to find.
What gives?
U.S. colleges more than doubled the number of computer-science degrees awarded from 2013 to 2022, according to federal data. Then came round after round of layoffs at Google, Meta, Amazon, and others.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts businesses will employ 6% fewer computer programmers in 2034 than they did last year.
All of this should, in theory, mean there is an ample supply of eager, capable engineers ready for hire.
But in their feverish pursuit of artificial-intelligence supremacy, employers say there aren’t enough people with the most in-demand skills. The few perceived as AI savants can command multimillion-dollar pay packages. On a second tier of AI savvy, workers can rake in close to $1 million a year .
Landing a job is tough for most everyone else.
Frustrated job seekers contend businesses could expand the AI talent pipeline with a little imagination. The argument is companies should accept that relatively few people have AI-specific experience because the technology is so new. They ought to focus on identifying candidates with transferable skills and let those people learn on the job.
Often, though, companies seem to hold out for dream candidates with deep backgrounds in machine learning. Many AI-related roles go unfilled for weeks or months—or get taken off job boards only to be reposted soon after.
It is difficult to define what makes an AI all-star, but I’m sorry to report that it’s probably not whatever you’re doing.
Maybe you’re learning how to work more efficiently with the aid of ChatGPT and its robotic brethren. Perhaps you’re taking one of those innumerable AI certificate courses.
You might as well be playing pickup basketball at your local YMCA in hopes of being signed by the Los Angeles Lakers. The AI minds that companies truly covet are almost as rare as professional athletes.
“We’re talking about hundreds of people in the world, at the most,” says Cristóbal Valenzuela, chief executive of Runway, which makes AI image and video tools.
He describes it like this: Picture an AI model as a machine with 1,000 dials. The goal is to train the machine to detect patterns and predict outcomes. To do this, you have to feed it reams of data and know which dials to adjust—and by how much.
The universe of people with the right touch is confined to those with uncanny intuition, genius-level smarts or the foresight (possibly luck) to go into AI many years ago, before it was all the rage.
As a venture-backed startup with about 120 employees, Runway doesn’t necessarily vie with Silicon Valley giants for the AI job market’s version of LeBron James. But when I spoke with Valenzuela recently, his company was advertising base salaries of up to $440,000 for an engineering manager and $490,000 for a director of machine learning.
A job listing like one of these might attract 2,000 applicants in a week, Valenzuela says, and there is a decent chance he won’t pick any of them. A lot of people who claim to be AI literate merely produce “workslop”—generic, low-quality material. He spends a lot of time reading academic journals and browsing GitHub portfolios, and recruiting people whose work impresses him.
In addition to an uncommon skill set, companies trying to win in the hypercompetitive AI arena are scouting for commitment bordering on fanaticism .
Daniel Park is seeking three new members for his nine-person startup. He says he will wait a year or longer if that’s what it takes to fill roles with advertised base salaries of up to $500,000.
He’s looking for “prodigies” willing to work seven days a week. Much of the team lives together in a six-bedroom house in San Francisco.
If this sounds like a lonely existence, Park’s team members may be able to solve their own problem. His company, Pickle, aims to develop personalised AI companions akin to Tony Stark’s Jarvis in “Iron Man.”
James Strawn wasn’t an AI early adopter, and the father of two teenagers doesn’t want to sacrifice his personal life for a job. He is beginning to wonder whether there is still a place for people like him in the tech sector.
He was laid off over the summer after 25 years at Adobe , where he was a senior software quality-assurance engineer. Strawn, 55, started as a contractor and recalls his hiring as a leap of faith by the company.
He had been an artist and graphic designer. The managers who interviewed him figured he could use that background to help make Illustrator and other Adobe software more user-friendly.
Looking for work now, he doesn’t see the same willingness by companies to take a chance on someone whose résumé isn’t a perfect match to the job description. He’s had one interview since his layoff.
“I always thought my years of experience at a high-profile company would at least be enough to get me interviews where I could explain how I could contribute,” says Strawn, who is taking foundational AI courses. “It’s just not like that.”
The trouble for people starting out in AI—whether recent grads or job switchers like Strawn—is that companies see them as a dime a dozen.
“There’s this AI arms race, and the fact of the matter is entry-level people aren’t going to help you win it,” says Matt Massucci, CEO of the tech recruiting firm Hirewell. “There’s this concept of the 10x engineer—the one engineer who can do the work of 10. That’s what companies are really leaning into and paying for.”
He adds that companies can automate some low-level engineering tasks, which frees up more money to throw at high-end talent.
It’s a dynamic that creates a few handsomely paid haves and a lot more have-nots.
A 30-metre masterpiece unveiled in Monaco brings Lamborghini’s supercar drama to the high seas, powered by 7,600 horsepower and unmistakable Italian design.
An opulent Ryde home, packed with cinema, pool, sauna and more, is hitting the auction block with a $1 reserve.