You are a free subscriber to Me and the Money Printer. To upgrade to paid and receive the daily Capital Wave Report - which features our Red-Green market signals, subscribe here.
Good afternoon… Just stick with me a bit on today’s show. Still trying to break the fourth wall a bit, and some numbers were a little off, so I had to change them on the fly. But… hey… it’s a one-man band… And playing a lot of instruments is wild… This was longer than usual… but thanks for tuning in! Here is the presentation in PDF format…
Want access to Moneyprinterpro.com? Join us… And… here is the full recording transcript for anyone who wants to read me… Transcript… We are recording, and how about that? So we do have the capacity to actually record here on Substack. So welcome. This is the first weekend Burr that we’re doing. We’re just going to completely freelance this at this point, because why not? Here we are. All right, so let’s dig into it. I hope everybody’s having a good weekend. We’re going to take about 30 minutes today, talk a little bit about what’s going on with gates in the world of private credit, what’s happening between the Fed and how they can manage crisis, volume-weighted average price, and of course, pressure valves in the market. The weekend brief for you, March 21st. Great day in the calendar as always. Private credit crisis is spreading. Gates are not containing the fire. The Fed liquidity deep dive — can the Fed contain any of this alone if we do get to some sort of major event that transpires in the next couple of months? If not, just know what can happen in 2027, 2028. We’ll talk about the technical setup. That S&P 500 level has been utterly key. We talked a little bit about how markets have bounced off key levels in previous events. We’re also kind of at this point now where historically, going back to 1939, when it comes to major geopolitical events, we tend to see a little bit of a bottom. We’re going to test that thesis today. We’re going to talk a little bit about that as well. Gold prices got smoked. Yeesh. Worst week in 43 years. I think that presents an opportunity, everybody. And we’ll talk a little bit about SEC tokenization and Bitcoin as well. Big news coming out that they’re looking for more products. And what does that tell us about the state of affairs and the financial system itself? All right. So the week in numbers, pretty simple. S&P 500 closing around 6,588 is where we sit right now. This is the fourth straight losing week, about 5% off all-time highs. The Dow is 8.3% off its record close, nearing correction territory. Brent hitting 109.55 up on Friday. WTI in the high 90s as well, up 43%. The 10-year Treasury yield is now sitting at 4.38%. We should be a little bit concerned about that because no rate cuts are priced in for 2026. Five central banks held this week, and the ECB may be talking about hikes in April, and Fed members suggesting the possibility of a rate hike later this year. On Monday, oil obviously reversed. The NVIDIA keynote number was in place. We had what happened Tuesday with Israel killing Larijani. FOMC meeting, which we discussed, that led to a holding on where we sit with interest rates and the escalation as we go. Next week, the key thing is construction spending in the U.S., the Chicago Federal Reserve speakers, Atlanta Fed GDP numbers, and KB Home will report earnings as well. A lot of my focus has been in volatility. This is one of the reasons why I think the Trump administration coming out and saying, hey, we may try to wind this down — I want to take you back to the concept of reversal, right? The idea of reversing policy decisions. And that comes back around to the fact that bond volatility is the highest since May 2025. And that matters because this is where we start to get concerned again about the way the system operates. The concern that we could potentially see an unwinding of basis trades and carry trades and everything that comes with it. So if the bond market is screaming at us, and it’s starting to do so, what policy accommodation can be made, whether it is trade or war or fiscal or monetary? So if there is an alleviation of pressure, and it could easily come through some policy change, I don’t know what that would be yet. But remember, it was just canceling all of the tariffs last time, back in April of 2025. But we did not see significant amounts of insider buying on Thursday or Friday of this week. We did, however, see monstrous amounts of insider buying back in April 8, 2025. That’s one of the signals that I am looking for. One of the other things we’re paying very close attention to is just the fact the way this market has operated. 76% of this index is now down 5% or more for the year. And if we pay attention to what we have over at Capital Wave — garrettbaldwin.com/capitalwave or Money Printer Pro — you’re going to see the number of stocks that are breaking down, crashing out. It is a significant dispersion, and it’s a lot of private credit or private equity, a lot of banks, a lot of companies in consumer defensive. Names like McCormick getting beaten up pretty badly in the last month. We see GIS and General Mills. We see Campbell Soup continuing to be weakened. The rotation continues, and it’s just important to note that this is a pretty significant change in basically the S&P 500 constituents for year to date. And it signals that there’s likely going to be more of this ahead. This market is separating. The private credit crisis is spreading. It’s moved beyond software loans and BDC structures. And we’ve seen a lot of insider buying at BDCs, but it’s starting to move into a new corner of the market. And that market is buy now, pay later. Stone Ridge Asset Management running a fund called Lendex that buys whole loans from fintech leaders. They include buy now, pay later — Affirm, Lending Club, Upstart, merchant financing from Block and Stripe. Investors tried to withdraw far more capital than the structure allows. Stone Ridge informed them that they will only honor about 11% of the redemption requests. The fund is structured as an interval fund with limited quarterly redemptions. Does that sound familiar? We just went through this. When everyone asks for their money at the exact same time, the underlying loans can’t be sold quickly without taking significant discounts. That’s it. Buy now, pay later was always built on a very fragile foundation, and the entire business model revolves around extending instant credit with minimal underwriting to consumers making small purchases. When consumers are putting Chipotle burritos on layaway, the borrower pool is not exactly prime, is it? So this approach worked in a zero rate environment. When capital was abundant, when investors were desperate for yield, it doesn’t work when rates rise, doesn’t work when they remain elevated, and credit markets start behaving like credit markets once again. Apollo’s John Zito warned that many private equity marks are simply wrong and that recoveries on software loans alone would be around 20 to 40 cents on the dollar. Morgan Stanley, BlackRock, Cliffwater all faced redemption pressures, and that stress is moving down the credit spectrum. Commercial real estate could be next. UBS warning defaults could hit 15%. Peak bank defaults in 2008 was around five. That is obviously problematic. But here’s the thing that I wrote about today, and it’s very important to note. We can’t just pretend that this doesn’t exist. It doesn’t contain the fire. I wrote that basically gates — it’s like being in a swimming pool without water. You can’t technically drown, but if the house next door is on fire and you can’t get out of that pool, it’s going to create a problem for you. A reader asks if the gates actually matter. Can these funds just simply keep the gates closed at a 5% max drawdown and just wait for things to calm down? Wouldn’t it be contained if we just waited all of this out? The logic’s there. The logic’s smart. If a run causes the crash and the gates stop the run, the crash should never occur. But finance doesn’t work like that. This is a fire. Gates don’t fix loans. The redemption gates only control the exits. They don’t control the credit quality of the assets inside the fund. So if borrowers are missing payments, the defaults start happening, the net asset value will still decline, and the gate keeps the money in the fund. It doesn’t keep those losses out. Point two, the gate is the real contagion. When one fund gates, every pension CIO, everybody who’s running an endowment picks up the phone and they start asking, how much exposure do I have to this? And other funds that were fine on Tuesday are starting to face a queue of redemptions that they didn’t expect. So they put up their own gates. And dominoes in markets don’t need to fall fast. They just need to fall in the same direction. Leverage does not need permission. Private credit funds deploy about 1.5x to 3x their equity via credit facilities. And those facilities have their own margin triggers and their own covenants, and the fund can lock those investors in, but it can’t restrict the lenders who provide that financing. So if the bank yanks the facility or demands more collateral, the fund’s got to sell. They’re not going to get more investors to suddenly start putting more money into a fund that is gating their other investors. That’s an issue. Selling into a market when everyone else is selling — look at what happened in ‘08. That’s where the comparisons to ‘08 are starting to build. And point four is gates kill the product. I talk about the film Margin Call all of the time because it perfectly encapsulates every single crisis we’ve ever had. And it shows what institutions do to survive. And once an investor is told they cannot access their money, the relationship will crack. And that’s what that one scene involving John Tuld at the end involves. He says, we are selling to willing market participants at market prices so that we may survive. That’s a key line. And Kevin Spacey’s character says, if you do this, you’re going to break the market. You’re never going to be able to sell to these people again. And he throws his hands up and says, so what? We have to survive. And we need to flush this out. Well, here’s the issue. Trust is the product at the end of the day. So people don’t read the terms of CLOs. They don’t read the terms of private credit. They don’t read the terms of their mortgages. They don’t read the terms of all of these things. They only look at the yield. That’s all they’re looking at. So new allocations will dry up over time, and existing investors will just simply start to request standing redemption every quarter, and the fund spends three to five years just unwinding and liquidating at discounts. And that’s one of the other comparisons of mortgage-backed securities and private credit — in like four or five years, we’re going to move on to something different. We’re just going to call it something else. Two Bear Stearns hedge funds limited redemptions, froze redemptions in 2007 on subprime exposure. Everyone said it was contained, even the Federal Reserve. 14 months later, Lehman was gone. Gates don’t contain a fire. They show you where the fire lives. You can take that line from me. You can steal that line and use it. Gates don’t contain the fire. They show you exactly where it lives. Now, can the Fed contain a private credit cascade? This was another question that I got asked. He asked whether or not the Fed could contain this issue or whether Congress would need to get involved. And this is a really good question because they really are the same question from two different angles. The Federal Reserve is exceptional at reducing and solving liquidity problems. That’s what the Fed is designed to do. That is the Bernanke Doctrine. If healthy institutions with good collateral can’t access short-term funding because the market seizes up, the Fed can fix that. It opens a facility. It accepts collateral. It lends against that collateral. That’s what happened in March 2020. That’s what they did with the bank lending program back in March of 2023. Back in 2020, the treasury market froze. The repo market froze. So the Fed stepped in and the system stabilized within a couple of weeks. And that helped stabilize and lead to a higher equity market because the relationship between repo, treasury bills, and how equities operate, particularly in a post-2017 environment where more short-term treasury bills are issued to fund the United States government — that leads to more leverage in the financial system. It’s a very unknown part of what makes markets behave the way that they do. The problem is that when a crisis is not a liquidity problem but a solvency problem, that’s the real issue. So if the loans inside the private credit funds are actually bad and the borrowers can’t pay, the collateral is impaired. And the net asset values are genuinely declining. And then the Fed’s liquidity does not really fix that. You can’t lend your way out of a loss. The Fed can prevent the fire from spreading into healthier buildings, but it cannot rebuild the ones that have already burned. They can inject capital into certain things. They can create facilities. They can lend into insurance, technically. But it’s going to require more. The line between liquidity and solvency is almost impossible to draw in real time. Back in ‘08, people spent months arguing about whether Bear Stearns or Lehman Brothers had a liquidity or a solvency problem. They had both. The question here is now, what can Congress do? Can Congress act? Yes, if the problem gets big enough. The Fed’s 13-3 emergency powers were curtailed by Dodd-Frank. Any emergency facility requires that the Treasury Secretary approves it. Now, I’m pretty sure that Bessent will approve almost anything at this point, but it must be broad-based. In 2020, the CARES Act gave Treasury $450 billion in equity, and the Fed could lever up that for Main Street lending and corporate credit facilities. Without the congressional backstop, the Fed’s risk capacity can be limited. Now, Congress in 2026 is a lot different than Congress in 2008, 2020, even 2023. Political dynamics around bailouts for private credit funds that generated massive fees for asset managers are probably going to be very, very different. The market prices in the backstop, and if it’s smaller and slower than expected, that repricing can and will get worse. That’s the issue. So the short version of this is the Fed can buy time. It’s very good at buying time. But time is not a solution. The gap between usually and always is where the real risk lies. We have a technical setup right now and a decision point for this market. S&P 500 hitting where it is. Jason Purs laid out the technical case this week, and I want to walk through it because I agree with his framework. Key level for the SPY, 650. That level’s not random. It’s where positioning was building up and where open interest was stacked. And it’s where price has been more or less getting pulled into, especially around triple witching, which was Friday. Markets don’t drift to these levels. They actually get pinned to them. Now, when that happens, you get a decision point. Either it breaks or it becomes the low. So step back. We’re 5-6% from the highs, and in a bull market, that’s nothing. These pullbacks happen over and over again. They shake people out. They create doubt. Everybody becomes an expert on the Great Depression. And then they reset positioning before the next move higher. The dollar is pressing, as he noted, into a key resistance zone. When stocks and bonds are both under pressure, money will flow into the dollar. The U.S. dollar is a critical refinancing mechanism in the global economy. In addition, with higher oil prices, people internationally need to convert into the dollar in order to settle their trades. Problematic. So if the market’s going to bottom, that flow has to reverse. The dollar would have to roll over. Deutsche Bank’s Jim Reid noted that day 15 is on average that point where U.S. equities bottom after a geopolitical shock. And guess what? We’re at 15. He cautioned the averages are hard to trade with that much uncertainty, but the normal playbook should give people some hope. Now, I continue to argue and advocate that you want to be focusing on more than just this specific level on 650 on the SPY. You also want to be paying attention to the RSI and the MFI. The RSI is a momentum oscillator on price. The MFI is a momentum oscillator on price and volume. And what we’re seeing right now was that push down toward these key levels. Let’s look at the daily because that’s where my focus should be. We are oversold on the Relative Strength Index. And where have we seen this before? Well, April of last year, we saw a squeeze. Back in March 12th, which we called to the day, basically said, look, there’s no insider buying, but there is a significant amount of stocks that have completely broken down and there aren’t that many breakout stocks. And that’s important because when we get down to these levels where there’s zero money flowing into strength, that becomes an issue. Now, the one thing I will note is that momentum remains strong in energy stocks. We would actually want to see energy stocks go the other direction. That would actually provide a little bit more justification for the argument that there are no breakout stocks. But there are breakout stocks. Chevron’s in there. Apache’s in there. Devon’s in there. But it can be one-sided. We’ve seen this happen back in 2022 during the war kickoff with Ukraine. We saw moves back then down toward oversold. Momentum turned positive relatively quickly, by the way. And we squeezed before another sell-off took us into March. But we did see oversold at these levels. And when we see RSI push down to these levels, particularly on the daily, the math aligns with a squeeze, with a little bit of optimism. Now, the big question becomes, does that suck people back in? Is the worst over? The pattern — you see the sell-off, then you see that squeeze, and then you see funds dump. That is what happened in 2020. That is what happened during the Nikkei crash. That was what happened back in 2022 with the gilt crisis. Very similar pattern, obviously, too, with the ‘87 crash as well. So any squeeze I would be very skeptical about unless our signal turns positive and we’re actually seeing real flow back into equities. But the contrarian argument right now is day 15, historical pattern, oversold, and we are down at a level where the number of stocks that are breaking out versus breaking down is quite low. We’re at minus 44 on our number. Energy is where the breakouts are. Industrials are where the breakdowns are, the consumer defensives. And the stuff that is moving higher — Apache, Chevron, and then an outlier like Dell — this is telling us right now that we’re kind of near that level. This is very comparable to where we were November 21st of last year and obviously back on March 12th of 2025 as well. So what do you do? Where do you keep your focus? You’re going to keep your focus on a couple of things. One, you want to be looking at maybe the three-minute chart and look for an adjusted five-minute with a 20-minute line or 8 EMA with a 20 — that would be a 24-minute chart with a 60-minute other level. And we’re looking for these types of moves. We’re looking for technicals to improve, and that gives us an opportunity to try to trade and focus on the upside. But the other place is going to be on volume-weighted average price. With this, there’s that day 15. We start to pay attention to volume-weighted average price. And we can anchor VWAP to the start of the war. We can anchor VWAP to the beginning of the year. We can anchor it back to that period in time in March of 2025 when bond volatility was extraordinarily high. But real simply, VWAP stands for volume-weighted average price. On a one-minute chart, it recalculates continuously. It tells you the true average price where institutional money has been transacted. Institutions use that benchmark for execution quality. The standard deviation bands, which are very important, show you how far the price has stretched from VWAP. Traditional distribution lines — first standard deviation, 68% of price action. Second standard deviation, 95%. Third band, 99.7%. There is no middle ground at the third sigma. Either you get a violent snapback or a mean reversion as the price snaps back toward VWAP, or the move is structural and VWAP itself is resetting. Now, if price holds the lower third sigma band, it’s absorbing the selling and bounces. That is a possible squeeze setup. We look for overreactions, and a bottom effectively came November 20th, where we basically hit the fourth standard deviation band of the SPX, and then we just took right back off. That’s kind of what we’re looking for. And if you’re trying to go long, I’m going to just simply note that you probably want to be doing it on the positive side of VWAP. You don’t want to be trying to make calls down here. You want to actually see price on the right side, and maybe that’s where institutional bidding will have picked up. When we touch that third band, a violent snapback or a structural move — there really isn’t middle ground. This is where we’re always looking for moves down into the fourth deviation band and then a possible move back to VWAP. That’s where Stanley Druckenmiller had noted, hey, with lack of trend, stocks move down, they push into these third bands, then they kind of move back up. That’s algorithms trading 100%. But on top of that, it’s just important to note that Jamie Dimon came out a year ago and said, well, one day the bond markets are going to snap. And what’s a good lesson about volume-weighted average price is when you see these moves into these extreme levels, whether it’s third, fourth, sometimes it will go to fifth depending on the reaction to the headline, you should not be running to Twitter trying to figure out what happened. You should be running at this fire, and you should be looking to trade it by simply buying whatever is in the money, short duration, same-day option, and see if you can get a move back to second standard deviation, first standard deviation, or back to volume-weighted average price. We’re going to have to buck a pretty significant trend for this market to find its legs and get back to all-time highs. But where we want to probably focus is going to either be anchoring to the low of Friday, which came right at 4 o’clock, or anchoring back to that start of the war, the very first day. And that is where we would see institutional buying. You can see it in real time by looking at this chart. Bull case, bear case. Touching that third band, absorbing selling, bouncing, short covering equals a violent reversal. This is how bull markets correct — uncomfortable and fast. If price breaks that third deviation, sustained break, VWAP resetting lower, institutions are not defending it. And if insiders aren’t buying and we start to see these continued breaks, that’s not a dip. It is a reset. One of the things I do want to point out — yes, RSI telling us that we are oversold. MFI is getting to that level. And we are setting up for a squeeze. But insiders are not buying into this weakness. This is from SecForm4.com. This is the five-day moving average of insider buying to selling since the beginning of the year. So insiders are not stepping in. On the 22-day moving average, they’re not really buying either. So that’s telling us a lot about the state of affairs. It’s telling us that we should be cautious. But don’t be shocked if we see a hated rebound, a hated short-term move. This is what happened in 2022 quite a bit. We had a couple of these that transpired — late January 2022, June 2022. We saw one roughly right after the Fed meeting had transpired in March of that year, like a two-week run. And then everybody starts saying, well, why is this market moving higher? I thought everything was terrible. And then all of a sudden, the funds sell right back into it. Anyway, gold retesting the 4,500 support level this week, down from 5,000. That’s a 10% drawdown in a single week. Worst in 43 years. That single decline, six sessions down in seven. The reason is likely rates. The key thing to be focusing on right now is gold works as a safe haven when the Fed is cutting and expecting to cut, in addition to just printing money. So neither is true right now. Safe haven demand exists, and it’s being overwhelmed by rates repricing. There is a counterargument. I was reading Jesse Colombo, who published an analysis showing that gold is oversold on the Williams Percent R indicator, while the 200-day moving average still slopes upward. Oversold in an uptrend is a classic rebound signal. He used the same method to call bottoms in early November and early February after pullbacks as well. Pay attention to that. The GDX, the SIL, silver, platinum, and palladium are all showing the same setup. Oversold in confirmed uptrends. The secular bull market in precious metals is still alive, even if it doesn’t feel that way right now. And then again, the other argument is nations needing to buy oil. Gold becomes a thing to sell. One last thing to note — the move in gold and silver, a lot of people don’t seem to remember this. It brought a lot of silver back into the market. So when silver prices got up into the hundreds, all of a sudden people are dusting off their sterling silver. They’re dusting off coins that they found in their garage, and they’re taking them and they’re selling them for spot. And that cycles back into the system. So once again, the cure for high commodity prices is usually high commodity prices, and that can lead to more supply coming in. But again, we do have structural issues within things like copper and silver for the foreseeable future, even if it doesn’t feel that way right now. So you have two forces — rates crushing gold in the short term and a powerful secular bull market that has not been broken by the pullback. Both can be true at the same time. Watch the dollar at 100 and gold at 4,500. Those are going to be key lines moving forward. Last thing I want to touch on because I’m going to talk about it tomorrow. SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce spoke with Vertify Exchange at the 2026 conference in Vegas this week and said, we want to work with people on new products. Come and talk to us about what we’re trying to do. On tokenization of financial instruments, she said interest has picked up since the administration changed. She says it’s not the SEC’s job to decide how the market moves forward. All right. But the standard read on Peirce’s comments are going to be that the SEC is getting friendlier to crypto. And that is true on the surface. But through my lens, the real story is not about crypto regulation loosening. It’s about the system needing new containers for capital that doesn’t have anywhere productive to go. I wrote a piece in December called “Have All of Us Gotten Bitcoin Wrong?” The core argument is pretty simple. Bitcoin helps convert monetary excess into volatility rather than social or economic stress. So when the government monetizes debt, that money has to go somewhere. And if it goes into food prices, people might riot. If it goes into energy, inflation spirals. If it goes into housing, social cohesion breaks. If it goes into wages, policy tightens aggressively. Bitcoin is very loud financially, but it’s very economically quiet. Prices can surge or crash violently and fast, and nothing really breaks. No rent hikes, no grocery shock, no CPI impact. Bitcoin provides an outlet for marginal speculative liquidity that does not transmit into the prices that people live on. And it almost seems like a conspiracy, doesn’t it? But what Peirce is signaling fits directly into that framework. When the SEC comes out and notes the door is open to tokenized ETFs and crypto spot products and new wrapper structures, they’re not doing it because they suddenly love decentralization. They’re doing it because the system needs, or feels like it needs, more surface area for liquidity to land. More products mean more places for capital to sit that are not housing, commodities, or labor markets. The financial system does not just need one pressure valve. It needs a lot of them. And they need to look legitimate enough that institutional allocators are going to put their money there without getting fired. This is not deregulation for its own sake, in my opinion. This is infrastructure expansion for a system that needs more room to breathe. The uncomfortable question from December is this: Why does the system allow Bitcoin to exist, grow, violently fluctuate without stepping in? That is a political economy question, not a crypto one. And I argue that systems under pressure discover outlets that fail visibly without failing consequentially — just enough to keep the load-bearing structures intact. A sword does not need to be bigger than the city. It just needs to exist. Again, the system needs multiple pressure valves. This isn’t deregulation in my view. It’s infrastructure expansion for a system running out of room. Momentum numbers — minus 44 is where we sit over at Capital Wave and Triples. That is for Money Printer Pro members. If you are a member, you have access to that site. The SPY, the QQQ, the Russell, they’re all on sell signals. Four straight losing weeks. The RSI and MFI say oversold. Insiders are not buying. I kind of just have this gut feeling that a squeeze setup is coming. So remember, the purpose of the market is to deceive. Trump made a statement yesterday that he’s thinking about winding down the Iran war. Well, does that set up a situation where we squeeze a little bit higher? We see a little bit of the pressure unwind and then funds start to sell? Unless I see that insider buying really start to pick up, I remain on the fence. I am still focusing on energy names. I’m still focused in the midstream. I’m still looking at the names like Devon and Apache and riding them a percentage point higher, it seems like each day. But you have to make sure that you pay attention when you’re looking at names like Apache and the XLE — keep a very close eye on the 20-day moving average. And if you are a member of Capital Wave or Money Printer Pro and you are looking at the setup that we have, you will see very plainly that we have energy, the number of stocks that are in breakout mode. If this goes negative, that is a huge warning sign of risk off for all the CTAs and all the funds that have been loading up on energy. We saw something similar happen back during the war in February, March 2022. We had a huge run up in the XLE. And then on June 8th, when we had a negative momentum signal, that was the largest hedge fund sell-off in 15 years. All just pure profit-taking on energy and then just dumped everything else. The S&P 500 fell somewhere between 10% and 13% heading into third Friday of June. So we’re not out of the woods on any of this yet. We don’t have any monetary policy support that I feel extraordinarily happy about. I think that there still is a lot of stress here. I think that more selling will continue. But once again, it would not shock me if after four weeks and with that kind of historical seasonality mindset that people are employing right now around the war and geopolitical events back to 1939, that we do set up for some sort of squeeze. That’s all I got. Have a great weekend, everybody. Manage your risk. I’ll see you on Monday. Tomorrow, I have Postcards from the Edge of the World coming out. And in addition to that, Chart Party will come out tomorrow, even though we did look at some pretty great charts today. And I have another piece coming out Monday on the SEC calling for more crypto innovation, if that’s what you want to call it. Everybody enjoy your weekend. Take care. About Me and the Money Printer Me and the Money Printer is a daily publication covering the financial markets through three critical equations. We track liquidity (money in the financial system), momentum (where money is moving in the system), and insider buying (where Smart Money at companies is moving their money). Combining these elements with a deep understanding of central banking and how the global system works has allowed us to navigate financial cycles and boost our probability of success as investors and traders. This insight is based on roughly 17 years of intensive academic work at four universities, extensive collaboration with market experts, and the joy of trial and error in research. You can take a free look at our worldview and thesis right here. Disclaimer Nothing in this email should be considered personalized financial advice. While we may answer your general customer questions, we are not licensed under securities laws to guide your investment situation. Do not consider any communication between you and Florida Republic employees as financial advice. The communication in this letter is for information and educational purposes unless otherwise strictly worded as a recommendation. Model portfolios are tracked to showcase a variety of academic, fundamental, and technical tools, and insight is provided to help readers gain knowledge and experience. Readers should not trade if they cannot handle a loss and should not trade more than they can afford to lose. There are large amounts of risk in the equity markets. Consider consulting with a professional before making decisions with your money.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Post a Comment
Post a Comment