Being strong-willed and unpredictable may be excellent characteristics when negotiating deals with businessmen and adversaries, but the stock market and the financial media are having a difficult time understanding and coping with President Trump and his tariff policy. The stock market, on the other hand, after the initial shock of seeing how high and wide-ranging initial tariffs proposals were, appears to be stabilizing and recovering from its April 8, 2025 lows. This does not mean we would rule out another test of the lows in the near future. In fact, a retest of the lows would be a normal and healthy process. What would also be normal after the recent panic selloff is for the popular indices to remain in a trading range for three to six months as investors digest the long-term impact of Trump’s policies. In our opinion, it may take three to six months to see how trade negotiations and tariff implementation play out in the global economy and in corporate earnings.
The rough boundaries for an intermediate-term trading range in the equity market would be the intraday trading lows of April 7 or April 8 and the resistance at the 200-day moving averages in the various indices. For the S&P 500 this translates into a low of SPX 4835 (the April 7th intraday low) and a high of 5750 (the current 200-day moving average). This represents a tradable 19% intermediate-term range. See page 12. However, by the end of the year, we believe the S&P 500 can better its 200-day moving average.
One of the more disturbing price trends in recent weeks has been the weakness in the dollar. While everyone frets over tariffs, which may or may not be implemented, the weakness in the dollar, if it continues, will make imports more expensive. Hopefully, the dollar will rebound once markets calm down and the unwinding of leverage is completed; nonetheless, holding at the $100 level is important for the long-term trend of the greenback. Conversely, bond market volatility has also made headlines, but the 10-year Treasury yield, now at 4.35%, appears to be stabilizing. The technical chart suggests the yield is currently at the midpoint of a 2-year trading range. See page 11.
Last week’s AAII survey showed bullishness rose 6.7% to 28.5%, erasing the previous week’s loss, and bearishness fell 3.0% to 58.9%. Last week’s 61.9% bearish reading represented a new high for this cycle and sentiment readings continue to exceed the bull/bear split of 20/50 which is rare and favorable. Equally important, the 8-week bull/bear spread is at minus 32.8% and the most positive since the October 2022 reading of minus 33.5%. See page 15.
And this was not the only “extreme” reference to 2022. The University of Michigan consumer sentiment survey for April showed that expectations fell from 52.6 to 47.2. This reading is even lower than the 47.3 recorded in July 2022 and the 47.4 reported in August 2011. Note that both of these prior readings appeared shortly before significant lows recorded in October 2022 and October 2011. Again, this suggests that the extremes seen in a variety of technical and sentiment indicators point to the market being at or near an important low.
Nevertheless, we have often pointed out that there is a huge disparity between Democrat and Republican sentiment in various surveys and underlying University of Michigan data shows that less than 20% of respondents surveyed this year self-identify as Republican. It could be that Republicans are fearful of self-identifying, or it could mean that the survey has a selective bias. This could be an important distinction since the University of Michigan current sentiment index for Republicans is still rising but the same index is falling for Democrats. See page 5.
According to the University of Michigan, the median consumer expectation for inflation in the next year rose from 3.3% in December to 4.3% in January, to 5.0% in March, and is preliminarily estimated to be 6.7% in April. This is a massive swing in inflation expectations. However, the Federal Reserve of NY’s Survey of Consumer Expectations (SCE) showed one-year inflation expectation was 3% in December, 3% in January, 3.13% in February and 3.58% in March. Meanwhile, the SCE shows the household’s 3-year median expectation for prices has been unchanged at roughly 3% in the same time period. We find the disparity between these surveys is striking and a bit disturbing. Analysts can only be as good as the quality of the data they are analyzing. The University of Michigan seems concerned about this disparity as well. It wrote “Partisan Perceptions and Sentiment Measures” on April 11, 2025 which stated that their survey has been consistent over time and concluded that “Proportions of the three political groups (Republican, Democrat, and Independent) in 2025 are generally within the historical ranges seen since 2017.” This is surprising since the accompanying chart in this document shows that Republicans were roughly 25-27% of respondents in 2017 and were well under 20% in 2025. (Actual percentages were not provided.) See page 8. In our view, we believe consumer surveys are much like recent presidential polls and may not be a true reflection of actual voters or consumers. Polls and surveys, however, can sway consumer, investor, or voter perceptions and this is dangerous. For this reason, retail sales reports will take on added importance in coming months.
But there was excellent inflation news this week. Import prices were up 0.9% YOY in March and prices for Chinese imports fell 0.3% YOY. Headline CPI decelerated from 2.8% YOY to 2.4% YOY and core CPI falling from 3.1% to 2.8% (rounded up). In short, headline inflation is edging closer to the Federal Reserve’s target of 2%. Moreover, the CPI is already below its long-term average of 3.7% and its 40-year average of 2.85% YOY. Plus, we noticed that in the March report the energy price index fell 3.3% YOY with WTI prices down 14% YOY. In April, WTI prices are down 25% YOY which suggests lower energy prices should continue to dampen headline inflation in next month’s report. See page 3.
All core CPI indices have been falling in recent months. In March, all items less shelter (1.5% YOY), all items less food and shelter (1.1% YOY), all items less food, shelter, energy, and used cars and trucks (1.8%), all items less energy (2.8%), and the Fed’s favorite index — all items less food, shelter, and energy (1.8% YOY) — are well below 3%. Even troublesome components like services (3.7%), health insurance (3.1%), medical care (3.0%), and motor vehicle maintenance and repair (4.8%), are down from recent levels of 5%-6% or higher. Only the other goods and services index (3.8%) rose in March from 3.3%. See page 4. ETFGI, a leading independent research and consultancy firm known for its expertise on global ETF industry trends, recently reported that net inflows to the ETF industry in the United States were strong in March and for the first quarter inflows set a new record of $298 billion. This exceeded the previous record of $252.23 billion set in the first quarter of 2021 and the third highest quarter of $232.18 billion in the first quarter of 2024. As result, by the end of March, assets in the US ETF industry were $10.4 trillion, the fourth highest in history, just slightly below the record $10.73 trillion set in January 2025. We found this report to be reassuring since it is the opposite of current media coverage suggesting that global investors are running from US assets. In recent days pundits began to question whether American exceptionalism is over. Thoughts of the end of American exceptionalism are depressing; however, actual data does not support these theories.
Gail Dudack