Recent updates
Key questions
Is Trump’s trade conflict over?
The tariff dispute between the US and its top trading partners appears to be nearing a resolution. Last week, the US concluded agreements with the European Union and Japan, while negotiations appear to be progressing well with China. These developments fit with our longstanding view that cooler heads would prevail in the conflict, averting a spiral of retaliation. But risks remain—the deals struck lack the detail of full trade agreements, and disputes could re-emerge. The Trump administration continues to mull tariffs on specific sectors, such as pharmaceuticals, which could be disruptive. Against this backdrop, we still believe investors should prepare for further bouts of volatility.
Investment view
We expect market upside over the coming 12 months, and greater tariff certainty will help support that. At the same time, after a strong rally and with good news now well-priced, we believe that markets may be vulnerable to volatility in the near term.
Will the threat to Fed independence harm markets?
President Trump has intensified his criticism of Fed Chair Jerome Powell, amid renewed reports that the central bank chief could be removed before the end of his term. A direct challenge to Fed autonomy could add to the risk premium on US Treasuries and undermine confidence in the US dollar. But our view is that the president is unlikely to take this risk. We expect Fed policy to be guided primarily by labor market and inflation data, leading to around 100 basis points of easing by June 2026.
Investment view
High grade and investment grade bonds offer attractive risk-reward proposition, in our view. We do not expect risks to the Fed's independence to change this. With rates cuts set to resume later in the year, quality fixed income offers a way to lock in attractive yields.
Podcasts



Livestreams
Featured reports
- Quiet...too quiet
- The end of the “reciprocal” tariff pause
- Will the Trump 2.0 economic ideology be more MAGA or DOGE?
- Trump 2.0 Executive Order Tracker
- US fiscal outlook and the effort to contain bond yields
- How is President Trump affecting sustainability?
- The first 100 days
- Trade war: Our latest views
- Tariff-ying or tariff-ic?
- Tariff scenarios
- Part of the deal
- What do Trump’s executive orders mean for climate?
- Prepare for Trump 2.0
- What does Trump mean for commodities in 2025?
- Taxes, spending, debt, and deficits under Trump 2.0
- What could Trump 2.0 mean for global trade?
Disclaimer
Global asset class preferences definitions
The asset class preferences provide high-level guidance to make investment decisions. The preferences reflect the collective judgement of the members of the House View meeting, primarily based on assessments of expected total returns on liquid, commonly known stock indexes, House View scenarios, and analyst convictions over the next 12 months. Note that the tactical asset allocation (TAA) positioning of our different investment strategies may differ from these views due to factors including portfolio construction, concentration, and borrowing constraints.
Most attractive – We consider this asset class to be among the most attractive. Investors should seek opportunities to add exposure.
Attractive – We consider this asset class to be attractive. Consider opportunities in this asset class.
Neutral – We do not expect outsized returns or losses. Hold longer-term exposure.
Unattractive – We consider this asset class to be unattractive. Consider alternative opportunities.
Least attractive – We consider this asset class to be among the least attractive. Seek more favorable alternative opportunities.
Note: For equities, we have collapsed “Most Attractive” with “Attractive” and “Least Attractive” with “Unattractive” from the five-tier rating system that is found in the Equity Compass into three tiers.