Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. This is Bloomberg Business Wait inside from the reporters and editors who bring you America's most trusted business magazine, plus global business, finance and tech news. The Bloomberg Business Week podcast with Carol Messer and Tim Stenebeck from Bloomberg Radio.
You want to talk next about the Treasury and some security breaches that have happened that are concerning America's debt levels poised balloon beyond already record levels as we know in the year ahead, leading to a decreasing number of primary dealers in the US treasury market. The decline of primary dealers and the rise of electronic trading have then led to concerns about the potential for just such breakdowns in the treasury market. Joining us now to discuss is
Bloomberg's Michael McKenzie. Michael, several concerning headlines over the last few days. How can we be sure that the Treasury, if it's not now becomes impenetrable. It needs to be right.
Absolutely, And I think the US, whether it's exchanges, any kind of marketplace, they spend a lot of time, a lot of effort making sure they can be protected from hacking. I know, covering equities more than ten fifteen years ago, all major exchanges were well on top of this. It was the only area they actually exchanges actually talked to each other, actually agreed to work together. Normally they're in a cup throw a business are trying to grab IPOs.
So I'm sure the Treasury is on it.
And you know, again, it's just something that I think every company has to do this, all right?
Are they also on it? Michael? I want to get to the story that you did with that Liz Kapa, McCormick and Alex Harris about the pipeline the primary dealers, and I feel like this gets into the wonkiness of following the markets right.
Explain.
Explain.
First of all, the role of primary dealers.
Primary dealer system was created in nineteen sixty by the New York Fed. The New York Fed selects the primary dealers and their job is to interact with the New York Fed market's desk. So when the New York Fed does REPO and all kinds of you know, money market type operations on a daily basis, they're interacting with the primary dealers. Primary dealers then turn around and say Okay, if you want to buy and sell treasuries, where where
the registered market maker who does that for you? So you have a lot of big asset managers, hedge funds, or types of people who want to come in here and buy and sell treasures. They normally go through the primary deal and market for the bulk of what they do and what.
Your story gets into that there's not as many as they're used to. So what are the concerns here? We've only got about a couple of minutes or so, But I want to get to the point because it's an important story. It's the kind of story that Bloomberg does so well, that you do so well, and explaining why we should care.
Yeah, no, we should care because the real problem here is, Yes, the number of proper dealers is shrunk, but a lot of that's due to solidation or we've had family mergers since the heyday of the nineteen eighties. What's really the problem here is that the amount of US treasure dead outstanding has just rocketed. It's gone up something like I think fifteen billion in the last ten years, and so at the moment the treasury mark is about twenty nine trillion.
They think it could get to fifty trillion within the next ten years if the presence pacers spending continues. So this really is a wake up call to people in Washington. You've got to get serious about spending. You've got to find new sources of revenues at ie taxes to kind of settle the system down. Because the system is showing signs of stress. Dealers can't really be as active as they used to be. That's partly because of the post
financial crisis regulation. So in the story we talk we sort of quote Jamie diamond saying, look, you know, we have a trillion dollars of cash we could put to use, but we can't because regulators say we can't do that. So there's a real kind of tension here. And the genesis for this story was that, you know, myself and Liz and Alex, we've been to a couple of conferences this year and this is the number one issue is
that the debt keeps going up. The primary dealer is instructed to work on the behalf the treasury to sell debts smoothly and make sure there are no sort of blow ups in auctions, but they're coming under a lot more pressure and if the debt continues to rise, this is a problem. And finally, if we look at the ten year treasure yield, when the Fed began cutting rates in mid September, that was yielding around three sixty. Today it's closing out this year around four sixty. So it's
reason a percentage point pretty much. Now, if you go into the wonkiness of the bomb market, about three quarters of that rise in the tenure yield is due to a higher term premium. And that term premium is what investors are demanding in terms of extra yield take down US debt, and that's really a worrying sign, all.
Right, all right, So just another thing to think about for twenty twenty five, where I feel like a lot of things are going to come at us. Michael, it's an incredible deep dive by you guys, and I highly recommend everybody check it out on Bloomberg Dot comment on the Bloomberg Happy New Year, Happy year, Yeah, be woll Blomrig's Michael mackenzie, who keeps a watch on the rates market and certainly the treasury trade. Hey, we're going to
stay with the treasury. Vonnie, you kicked it off the story that really caught our attention yesterday the US Department Treasury Department hacked by a Chinese state sponsored actor through a third party software service provider. It's how the world works, and yet you expect it to be safe and secure. Treasury describing the situation as a major cybersecurity incident. For more on this and some thoughts, we are joined by
Wendy Thomas, the CEO of Secure Works, a cybersecurity firms. Wendy, your thoughts when you saw and heard this story?
Well, there's a few recurring themes that we've certainly talked about before. A vulnerability and a third party technology that enabled these hackers to steal an authentication key bypass security measures and access Treasury workstations and documents. And the theme of while no one's claimed credit for this attack, a high profile Chinese state sponsored cyberactivity. So I think these are recurring themes. But certainly this is a major incident as we cap off this year.
How do we know it's a Chinese date sponsored actor? And if we do know that, if we have the tools to tell what kind of a hack it is, why can't we protect against that kind of hack here?
It is a good question. So the Treasury has confirmed that they've identified a number of indicators that do point to a China state sponsored APT or advance persistent threat actor. The ways that you protect against this, whether you're a government or a business, remain the same.
Right.
You have to be able to prevent everything that you can. But because we are so incredibly interconnected via software, via supply chain vendors that are key part of doing business each day, we have to prevent as much as we can, but frankly be ready to detect and respond quickly. If you look at the date at which Beyond Trust first detected some anomalous activity, it was December second, and we're
sitting here on December thirty. First. The patches were issued sort of mid month and December added to sisa's non exploited Vulnerabilities catalog mid December. It does take speed in order to one identify that something is hitting and two be able to protect. And that's a holistic approach of prevent, detect, and respond.
Is there an argument that the public should have known sooner? I mean, when does the public get to know about such things?
Well, there's been an increasing work, especially by the US government over the last couple of years for organizations to report quickly, particularly if they are publicly treated companies in this case obviously a key government institution impacting our economy.
But there is a bit of fog of war when you have a cyber attack and you detect something that's certainly anomalists, but you're not sure if it's malicious, and that's where companies like secare works come in to help quickly attribute anomalous activity to certain thread actors and to non exploited vulnerabilities in order to protect the actual breach of information or documents or encryption through ransomware.
Wendy, is this just a case of this is the environment we live in, and China's going to hack into our systems. We're going to hack into Chinese systems. And it's a digital world, it's a cloud based world. This is just the way it is. Despite cybersecurity companies like yourself and solutions out there. This is just the new reality or continued new reality.
I think the reality is that the attacks will continue. Right as twenty twenty five looms, we look to have continued heightened geopolitical tension, which could contribute to additional escalating cyber activity, particularly with China, and whether that's increasing tariff policies that may come into play the TikTok January nineteenth deadline that's coming around the sale of the company.
Does something like this make you think that TikTok you understand the US concerns?
Oh?
Absolutely.
I think anybody using TikTok should do so with caution, whether they're an individual. I mean, the volume and variety of citizen data that TikTok is harvesting in order to feed its algorithm has concerns for all of us. And that's why I think you've seen it first banned in government institutions where you can no longer mix kind of personal use of TikTok with a government used.
Device that is so terrifying. I mean, is it much worse than some of the American corporations and what they're harvesting.
Well, it's a little bit different where we do have disclosures around the data that is being harvested and used for those algorithms and the opportunity to opt out. This is a foreign power looking to harvest individual data, and we don't really know what type of positioning for political or economic advantage that might be used for.
Wendy, thank you so much for joining. That was very explanatory, very helpful.
Thank you.
That's Wendy Thomas, CEO of Secure Works.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week podcast. Catch us live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Easter Listen on Apple car Play and ed brot Auto with a Bloomberg Business app, or watch U Live on YouTube.
So let's get to Alan Hibberd now pressneachls an alternative money specialist at goldsilver dot com.
Alan, I mizzlstart. Where does gold, gold and water? It's key risks in twenty twenty five.
Yeah, thanks for having me.
So, I'm definitely expecting gold to have a great year in twenty twenty five, just like it did in twenty twenty four. I would not be surprised at all if it clears that three thousand dollars anounce threshold, and it could be the last year to buy gold under three thousand dollars an ounce. So in terms of the risk, what would prevent it from doing that? There's really two things that I see. One is actually bitcoin. If capital is attracted to bitcoin instead of gold, gold might not
creep that high. And the other risk factor which really isn't a risk factor. It's actually peace. It's world peace. If all the wars and conflicts in the world settled down and our leaders are actually able to negotiate peace, capital might not flow into gold like it has been throughout the last couple of years. So those are the two risks that I see. It's really gold is bitcoin and peace.
All right.
So then for the run up that we've seen in twenty twenty four, Alan, is it because of the geopolitical concerns mostly which we know gold has typically historically been a safe haven. But is that the reason why we've seen such the run up In your.
View, I think that's sort of the main underlying factor, because it's that geopolitical uncertainty that causes so many other things. So we saw it China buying a ton of gold. Not only is China the number one producer of gold in the world, it's also the number one importer of gold in the world, and that's very unusual. And investors around the world are also buying gold because of inflation, and the inflation is caused by all these countries who
are fighting wars running their printing presses. So if it weren't for the wars, they wouldn't be running the printing presses so heavily. Investors wouldn't be worried about inflation, and they wouldn't be running to gold. So I think it really starts with all the geopolitical uncertainty. If we call get along, we wouldn't have to buy gold. We could just live our lives.
Well, Alan, you heard Mike macgloane there.
We were speaking a little bit about crypto and he maintains that this idea of a strategic reserve is a faustian bargain with the crypto people and the incoming president and the administration.
Is that true in your view?
Well, I think bitcoin is best thought of as superior money. And anytime that two different moneies come up against each other, the same thing happens every single time throughout history. Capital flows from the weak money into the strong money, and it's only a matter of time. So if you look at the United States and you want to discuss the Strategic National Bitcoin Reserve, is it a good idea, is
it a bad idea? Is it going to happen within the first hundred days, or is it not even going to happen in the next four years, all of that doesn't really matter. Capital is definitely going to flow from weak money like the US dollar into strong money like bitcoin.
It's just a matter of time.
I think you to back that up a little bit. Why do you say bitcoin is superior money? It's not even money, no offense.
I have yet to transact in bitcoin, and I think if you ask, most people, unless you go to an emerging area, have yet to transact in bitcoin.
Yeah, it's a great question.
I'm glad you asked, and I could talk about it for hours, but I'll try to keep my answer short. There's really two ways to think about money. First is as a medium of exchange, which I would actually call it currency. So if you're going to buy a cup of coffee or groceries, you're going to use currency, and you want something that moves quickly, it has low transaction fees and doesn't take a lot of energy to make that transaction, and the US dollar is great for that.
The other reason you'd have money is as a store of value, and that basically means you acquire it and then you hold it for ten years or twenty years, and it just sits there, and you might even forget that you have it, but the whole point is for it to stay in one place and secure your value over time. That's gold and it's bitcoin, so that when I say money, I'm referring to gold or bitcoin. That's store of value of functionality, whereas a currency like the
US dollar that's more of a medium of exchange. So, by the way, don't hold your breath on being able to use bitcoin to buy a cup of coffee. It's not going to happen. It shouldn't happen, doesn't matter.
Why are you so convinced it's a store of value because the supply is finite? Does that make it a store of value as.
Really it's partly because the supply is finite, But more importantly, it gets increasingly more difficult to make another bitcoin. That's so so, so critical. That happens naturally with gold. No one has to design it that way. But if there's two different ounces of gold sitting in the ground, and one's really easy to get to and one's really hard to get to, you're going to mine up the easy one, so later in the future you're going to have to go after that hard one and spend more energy to
get a unit of gold. In the future, bitcoin mimics that same property artificially using code, so that it takes more and more and more energy to mine each subsequent bitcoin. That's good news for anyone holding bitcoin, because if you acquired it earlier, it didn't take you that much energy to get it. However, anyone who wants to acquire a bitcoin in the future has to give up a lot of energy to get one.
I guess Ellen, I would ask that if there's a limited supply, I understand the dynamics of supply and demand, but if there's a limited supply, how can it be something that is used much more or broadly. I understand the value of maybe blockchain in terms of transacting, but the individual bitcoin as a way of transacting, If it's going to be limited in supply forever, how can it be something that's much more broadly in use in terms of how we look at the US dollar or other currencies.
Yeah, well, it sort of relates to my previous answer, which is that I wouldn't expect bitcoin to be used in day to day transactions, even if you develop something like the Lightning network or other layer two solutions they're called. I don't think it'll be that common to actually transact bitcoin. It will be more common to transact to US dollars, euros, yen and.
So forth, whatever jurisdiction.
Alan didn't. People say that about NFTs too, And they're not worth very much these days.
Are they.
I would not go anywhere near NFTs. No, I only go near Bitcoin. I made a mistake going after a dozen other cryptos when I thought they had attractive use cases. But they're very hard to value and they have real idiots syncratic risks. So I even went so far as to go visit one of these cryptocurrencies in person. I looked at their code, I met the team, I did my due diligence, and I lost ninety nine point nine percent of my value on that coin. And I have
multiple stories like that these. Most of these cryptocurrencies, they're not well. Some are designed to be scams. They're not all designed to be scams, but some of them turn out to be scams because they have so many idiosyncratic risks. You have to have execution on the part of the software team. You have to have marketing, you have to
have adoption, you have to have functionality. You can't have problems and you can't really have competitors that accomplish the same thing better than the way you accomplished it, or you're not going to attract capital.
So if you say bitcoin is still in the process of price discovery, how do you discover, you know, a price when it's it's very unclear what the fundamentals are.
Yeah, I mean right, its value is that it hunts outside the establishment. And yet that lack of transparency raises so many questions.
Well, bitcoin is transparent.
I mean it's a public blockchain, right, so you can go and look online and see where all the blockchains are sitting with the history of them has been in, what block they were mined. You can see all of that. So transparency is actually pretty fantastic on bitcoin. However, if I want to see how many dollars exist, I have to trust the Federal Reserves data, and I don't and it could be outdated and I don't know who's holding those dollars or where they are.
Right the faith of the US government, And I know some could debate that right now, but nonetheless you have the faith of the US government. Listen, this excitement, we know we could go on for probably another hour. Means this is going to be a hot topic in twenty twenty five. Allen, thank you so much. Have a great new year. Alan Hibbard, Precious Metals and alternative money specialist over at goldsilver dot com.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week podcast. Listen live each weekday starting at two pm Eastern on applecar Play and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa. Play Bloomberg eleven thirty for.
More on this group pharmaceuticals what to watch out for In twenty twenty five, we were joined by Bloomberg News healthcare reporter Madison Muller, who is a must read on all companies and developments in this space. Madison, good to have you here with us. You know, I'm thinking about twenty twenty four. You know, an explosive year, Bloomberg News wrote last week, twenty twenty four was the year weight loss drugs took over. What was significant about twenty twenty four?
After what was it? Kind of a busy year for this space also in twenty twenty three.
Yeah, twenty twenty four was really the year that we saw the real world impacts of these drugs start to take shape. So it's not just talking about the clinical studies and how much percent weight loss and how great these drugs are, but we were actually seeing what happens when you put these out into the general population, and the challenges with insurance coverage, the challenges with just affordability
and access in general, supply shortages. We also saw, as I know we've talked about on the show, the rise of telehealth companies that are making cheaper copy or selling cheaper copycat versions of the drugs and advertising them really widely on social media, and the sort of battle that's ensued between the drug companies and the compounding pharmacies that
make these copycat drugs. So there was a lot that was almost surprising or unexpected that happened when these drugs really got out into the world, and I think twenty twenty four was the year that that started taking shape.
So where are we on supply demand? Madison? Can people access them now who need them or want them?
Yeah?
So all for most of twenty twenty four, both Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly really struggled to get a handle on the supply of their drugs. We saw wigov and zeb bound and manjaro and ozembic in and out of shortage throughout the year. So towards the end of the year, Eli Lilly actually did get a handle on their supply.
And you know, according to the US Food and Drug Administration, zep bound and manjaro are not in shortage anymore, but there is some ongoing litigation there because a group of compound pharmacies are suing the FDA over this, saying that the drugs still are in shortage. So the drama on the saga is kind of continuing there. Novo Nordisks drugs are still in short supply as of you know, yesterday and today when we last checked the US FDA website.
But that being said, all of the doses are listed as available and so they've gotten a better handle on their supply as well. From talking to patients, some of the drugs are still hard to find, just with different supply chain dynamics, so people are still seeking out these cheaper versions that are maybe more readily accessible through telehealth companies.
Madison, how are you thinking about twenty twenty five The companies to watch, the executives to watch maybe the app starts to watch.
Yeah.
I mean, twenty twenty five is going to continue to be an exciting year. We have data from Eli, Lilly's oral drug or for Glipron that's coming in twenty twenty five. It's in late stage studies, and that's going to be a pretty big deal because we've talked about how people want an oral version of these drugs. You know, the current medications are a weekly inject for a lot of people, that's not super appealing, although for a lot of people it is because clearly there's no issue with demand for
these products. But some people and in some you know, other markets, pills are preferred. And so we have a lot of companies that are trying to make oral versions of the drugs, including Lily and Novo. We have Structure, Viking,
some smaller companies, but Pfizer as well. And so Lily has phase three data from their drug or for clipper On that's coming out in twenty twenty five, and so we're going to see that, We're going to see some other companies, you know, coming out with data from other trials. The competition's going to continue heating up and so and it you know, insurance coverage is also a place to watch.
We had the Biden administration propose a new rule that would allow Medicare, which is the government health insurance program for people over sixty five, to cover weight loss drugs, and so it will be up to the Trump administration in a few months whether to pass that or to block it. And so we could see me care begin to cover these drugs soon, and so that's an important development to watch as well, but sort of remains to be seen what will happen there.
That would be a big relief to a lot of people. But more broadly, how are hospital stoctors, health insurers preparing for a potential raft of changes in regulation. We see the incoming administration with President incoming Trump nominating people like Marty mccurray for FDA and Dave Wilden for CDC. These are people who've raised outs about vaccines and other treatments, and of course RFK Junior potentially the new AJH secretary.
Yeah, I think that there's still a lot of uncertainty with RFK Junior in particular. He is someone you know, staying on the topic of weight loss drugs, has sort of come out against the pharmaceutical industry at large, but has also commented on ozembic and other GLP one drugs, saying, you know, his view is that the America's food system should be fixed before we turn to pharmaceutical interventions. And
so that's i know, been an area of uncertainty. But again, until he's actually you know, confirmed, then we don't.
Know what will happen.
We don't know exactly what the policies will be. But there definitely has been a bit of uncertainty with some of the picks, more so in particular than others. I know, Dave Weldon is someone that has you know, said a lot about vaccines in the past. Marty Mackery actually is more is viewed as more industry friendly. So there's some it's a bit of a spectrum with the various picks and how much uncertainty and how friendly they are going
to be to the sector. And so I think that that's something again that we're going to have to watch early in twenty twenty five and sort of see what policies they begin talking about, whether these people are actually confirmed or not, and go from there.
Madison, Man, We've had so many conversations with you and it almost feels like I joke with you that this is like the perfect drug that's going to kind of fix everything that ails all of us. Having said that, what's the thing you're someone who critically looks at this space, What is the thing that could go wrong? I mean, have they been tested long enough? Do we have to worry about safety concerns longer term?
Like?
What is it?
I think one of the things that we're actually already seeing go wrong, And it might not be the fault of the drug makers or the actual drugs themselves, but the widespread availability of these drugs, especially through telehealth companies and these cheaper copycats that are being marketed and made by compounding farmies, they're getting into the hands of some people who shouldn't be using them, which you know generally is not maybe not a safety issue for someone who
just wants to take one to lose a couple of pounds, even though they aren't the population that these drugs are meant for. But I did a story a couple of weeks ago about people with eating disorders that are actually getting access to these drugs right through telephone companies that don't really have checks in place to make sure that the right, people are getting them and not something that's a little concerning.
Came across that and prepping for this chat. Good stuff as always, medicine, happy news year.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Business Week podcast. Catch us Live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Eastern Listen on Apple car Play and then brought auto with a Bloomberg Business ad or want us Live on.
YouTube with more contacts on the markets. Now we have Matt Stuckey joining us. He's chief Portolio manager of equities with Northwestern Mutual Wealth Management. So, Matt, you heard just there and her explanation of everything that's going on. Was there anything that you particularly agreed with or disagreed with?
You know, I think what we're seeing here into year end is a little bit of the froth coming out of the market. If you kind of looked into the sentiment in the near term across institutions as well as consumers, there has been a build up in enthusiasm for equities
and that is a shorter term contrarian indicator. And just as an example, if you look at the conference boards question to consumers, W already expects stock prices to be a year from now, over fifty percent of them said that they would be higher than where they are today.
That's a forty year high. And if you look at the Bank of america'stitutional survey for how they're positioning, over forty percent of fund managers were overweight equities versus cash, near the high point that we've seen over the last five years. And so that's contributed to a very strong flow environment for US equities that can continue in the
shorter term. But typically that's a contrarian indicator, and I think some of this weakness into your end is just some of the frauth coming out of the market.
All right, So what's the focal point for you now? When you look at the markets, I'm just thinking about that FED meeting on January thirty. First, you've got economic news, You've got JP Morgan kicking off earnings on January fifteenth, you've got the inauguration. What's key for you, especially when I think about, you know what ultimately supports equities and continued gains.
Yeah, I think the path of inflation in twenty twenty five is what we're going to watch the closest. And the reason I bring that up is, you know, the path of interest rates and the level of interest rates has really dictated winners and losers in the economy as well as in the markets. And what I mean to that is you look at kind of higher for longer and who that helps and who that hurts. It's really
how they're affected by interest rates. And so larger companies that have turned out debt haven't really seen interest cost increase at all since the FED started to high rates, and that's not the case for smaller companies that are more tied to floating rate debt. And you can also use the same analogy to consumers. Wealthier consumers that own their own homes or have locked in mortgages around three percent and access savings are earning higher interest rates on those savings.
That's not the case for.
Lower income Americans that are more affected by inflation and are feeling the pinch of higher credit card rates as
well as higher automobile rates. And so if inflationary trends were to kind of resume their downward trend that we saw in the front half, in the middle parts of twenty twenty four and into twenty twenty five, you know, we think that gives the FED more room to start cutting rates, which hopefully allows the economy to broaden back out and broader market participation to take place into next year.
You know, we can see that happen. We also can see a higher for longer kind of sticky inflation dynamic also happened. And so if you're an investor, the question is how do you position for kind of some of this uncertainty a kind of both ends of the spectrum.
And I think I think the good news is that if you look at the fixed income markets today, we're seeing near twenty year highs in real interest rates, and so that is something that we think investors can do a lot of good by positioning themselves towards that asset classes a little bit more than maybe there their best
park levels would dictate. And then furthermore, if there is this broadening out that takes place, if disinflationary trends resume as we kind of look forward to the next calendar year, we think some of the smaller cap make caap areas of US equities are pretty attractive.
Here for a couple of reasons.
First and foremost, they're price more attractively than US large caps. And secondly, if you look at kind we're earning set for these asset classes relative to kind of the high bar that we're put in place in a couple of years ago. We think the path forward towards the rebound and earnings is a little bit easier than kind of continue march forward that we've seen for earning's estimates and large caps, which are really reluctant on higher profit margins.
Does any of this depend on the FED cutting rates more than at least once next year?
I think it does require FED to continue on their easing path more than just one or two cuts. And that's why the inflation area dynamics are so critical as we think about the path forward in twenty twenty five. You know, back and forth and inflation dynamics have kind of caught on industors off sides all year. We started twenty twenty four with six to seven cuts priced into the forward curve and we're ending this year with just
one or two cuts priced into the forward curve. And so the path forward for inflation I think is the critical place to watch in terms of where market leadership is headed.
You know, I just want to go back to small caps. I mean, man, I feel like people have been calling for that small cap outperformance, our mid cap outperformance. And I'm just looking on my Bloomberg just comparing the past few years of the S and P five hundred versus the Russell two thousand. It's been really hard. And I understand the S and P five hundred influenced by some of those big megacap tech names, but nonetheless hard to kind of beat that outperformance.
I think that's right, and I think there's a couple of things going on there. One is kind of how interest rates impact the earnings and fundamentals of smaller companies relative to larger companies. But the other is what you touch touch on there, just the phenomenal growth levels we see in the mag seven. If you look at just the top ten of the S and P five hundred today, it's roughly forty percent of the index, and just you know, five years ago it was roughly twenty three percent of
the index. And so these higher cap weighted names are having even greater impact in terms of the performance of the S and P five hundred, and fundamentally that's where the growth has been as well. And so if you look at the last couple of years, it certainly it makes fundamental sense and monetary sense why US large caps have led. The question is is if you look forward
to next calent year, does that narrow? I think for the first time, as you're sitting kind of looking at kind of what's priced in and what's expected, the gap between the MAGS seven earnings growth and the rest of the market is starting to look kind of more and more compressed versus where we were as we started twenty twenty four and where we were when we s twenty twenty three. And so you know, whether that comes to
fruition or not, I think we'll dig take. Whether or not this US large scap out performance can continue into next year.
We shall see. We shall see, and whether or not once again we have another year where fundamentally those big tech names or big megacaps really kind of lead the way. Good to get your thoughts, Matt Stuckey, Thank you so much, Happy New year. He is chief portfolio manager of equities over at Northwestern Mutual Wealth Management, joining Vonnin me on this Tuesday, December thirty.
First, This is the Bloomberg Business Week podcast, A little on Apple, Spotify and anywhere else you get your podcasts. Listen live weekday afternoons from two to five pm Easter on Bloomberg dot Com, the iHeartRadio app tune In, and the Bloomberg Business App. You can also watch us live every weekday on YouTube and always on the Bloomberg journalone