Walgreens Rolling Out Covid-19 Saliva Home Tests

You can also listen to our radio show at two pm Eastern Time on Bloomberg Radio, or watch us on YouTube search Bloomberg Global News. Well, Anthony Faucci, President Biden's chief medical advisers suggesting that the U S may soon as you guidance, easing public health protocols where people are fully vaccinated. US definitely stepping up at S effort to track virus variants with genetic sequencing. Tim There is so

much going on right now. Yeah, we're watching this play out in real time right now, and we have Robert Thompson, chief executive Officer of Clinical Reference Laboratory, joining us on the phone from Lennox to Kansas. UM, thanks so much for joining us. On this Bob, how you do and very well, thanks for having me. Good Um, what do you make of where we are right now when it comes to COVID, Because we've gotten some really good news in recent days, as we've seen number of new cases

and hospitalizations down. But at the same time, when we think about this in the context of where we were a few months ago. You know, where we are now is where we were in October and November and things weren't so great then. So our cases the nationwide have dropped from the peak, which was only seven weeks ago. UM, and the positive rate has dropped from to last week. I think we were at four point eight percent, So indeed,

that is really good news. UM. I think everyone's watching to see if the variance, particularly the UK variant, is going to have an impact on the numbers. It's not visible yet. I mean, even if you look at Florida in isolation, which has the greatest number of the UK

variant cases, they're still dropping pretty fast. So UM, I really feel like, you know, we are an inflection point, UM, and I think we're going to continue to see cases decline in the positive rates decline, largely as a result of the natural immunity and that we've built up over time. I mean, there's twenty seven million diagnosed positive cases. Most of the estimates say that it's really three times that

many that have actually been exposed. So that gets you to, you know, somewhere around eighty million people that have been exposed and have natural immunity, and you throw in forty million that have had the vaccine, then you get to a third of the US population. And I think that's really what we're seeing here in these numbers declining this quickly.

So we've you know, obviously this has been kind of a path that we've all been on, dealing with the virus, understanding the virus, getting a vaccine, getting a vaccine out, a lot of testing along the way. Um, that's what you guys are right, you're involved in testing, and you've got a new saliva test out of COVID nineteen saliva test, rapid response test. Tell us about that and um, how it works, what it costs, and what you think this role or these kinds of tests will have the role

in terms of us getting COVID under control. So our our test is the saliva based test, which is much easier to collect and more accurate than other at home nasal swap tests. UM. It's not technique depend on anybody can spit in a tube. So UM, I've done it, done it well. So you know, we're really uh trying

to take that test and expand access to it. So we've been dealing with universities and employers UM and today we launched a program with Walgreens where if you go to the Walgreens Finecare app, where one of the options for COVID based testing UM and it's a hundred nineteen dollars. It's the gold standard testing methodology, the rt PCR tests

UM and you know, we're really excited about it. I think in this next phase of of the testing market is going to be less of these mass you know, five people drive through sites and I think much more of sort of near patient physician office or at home testing as we migrate to the next phase of managing

this pandemic. What's the cost of it? So do you see this as in terms of the reopening here, Let's say we do get the majority of people vaccinated here in the United States this summer, do you still see a need for a testing product such as this? If why if people are vaccinated on a widespread basis. Yes, and let me explain why. So to begin with, we're already seeing test drop. We're we're down in this country from the peak, and that's just less symptomatic people showing

up for testing. I believe that trend is going to continue, so we're gonna see less and less of sort of mass screening, but we're still going to have that thirty whatever the current estimates are about of the population that is not a muni that is declined to take the vaccine vaccine, and you're going to have all the under eighteen year olds who right now are not authorized to take the vaccine. So we're still going to have a pretty big chunk of the population that does not have immunity.

And as a result of that, I think we're going to on a much smaller scale, have to continue to test again near patient testing. Um, you know, well into into next year. Hey, Robert, I am curious the variants will be able to pick up variants. So our test targets a piece of the of the viral RNA that's very stable. So every week we look at the new

variants and we see where the mutations have occurred. None of them have occurred at our target piece of the RNA, so we pick up all of the variants to South African, the Brazilian, and the UK variants. Very briefly, how long do you envision COVID stays with us? I mean from a business perspective, how long are you planning on this test being a product? Um? I think we're gonna see, you know, it'll continue into next year, but just on

a smaller scale. So we've we've done an enormous number of tests, five thousand plus so far, and you know, a lot of those were for universities, a lot of those were for state and local health departments. I think that piece of the business is going to gradually UM fade or maybe not so gradually fade UM. And what will happen is place is is this kind of testing Walgreen's CVS that sort of thing. Hey, gonna re leave it there, Hey, Bob, thank you so much. Bob Thompson,

he's chief executive officer at Clinical Reference Laboratory. On the phone from Lenexa, Kansas. This is Bloomberg Business Week with Carol Masser and Bloomberg Quick Eggs. Tim Stinovich from Bloomberg Radio but Tessa down more than since the January high after a seven four year percent gain back in We know, tim, it was one of the high flyers last year and it was doing really well and then we've seen it pulled back this year. Yeah, it's been doing really well.

As a Day is equity markets reporter at Bloomberg News, and she joins us on the phone from New York City. The big question is why has it been doing so well over the last couple of weeks, um, why why are we seeing this pullback in Tesla? And I should say it's now down only about four percent, so really off those loads from earlier today, Hi, and thanks for

having me so yes, that's a great question. And flashes have you know, recovered somewhat since all year today, But they did dive pretty sharply today, extending their losses from yesterday. And that was mainly triggered by a tweet from Elon Musk over the weekend saying the price of cryptocurrencies bitcoin

anitarium seemed to be high. So given Tesla itself announced a one point five billion dollar investment in which coin earlier this month, Masks comments may have heard Tesla's own investment all right, So it's a word part but but and that you know, it's interesting it's a one and a half billion dollar investment in bitcoin, but I mean this is a massive company, a six hundred fifty seven

and six hundred fifty eight billion dollar market cap. So put in perspective the bitcoin exposure versus the Tesla business, that's a great question. Um. You know, as you said, it's a you know, one point five billion dollars sounds like a significant amount of money, but in the grand scheme of things, especially when it's Tesla, it's really small

change for the company. I mean, this is a company that ended twenty twenty with almost nineteen billion dollars in cash, had an annual adjust and I didn't come off around

two and a half billion dollars. So when I speak to Bord Street analysts, they say that, you know, rather than seeing it as an investment, we should rather see this as a signal from Tesla that it is willing to push new boundaries and you know, try out you and brave things as it tries to transform the vey cars are bottom so and given that exposure is so small relative to the company's side, they are not really

worried about the short term Volati literates. But that said, uh, you know, it still has that investor sentiment attached to it and kind of given muskets. Uh, you know, has its really big cult following that is definitely playing into the weakness today. Our analysts on Wall Street thinking about Tesla right now, are they still saying that in general, that it's a by or are they saying, hey, wait a second, this thing went really high, really quickly. We're

taking a step back here. Well, Um, Testa is an unusual company, and that I think it's reflected in the fact that Walsted and this just cannot seem to agree on, you know, whether this company is majorly overvalued or still significantly undervalued whilst it is and at this point pretty much split on whether it's a buy or a cell. Some say, you know, it's a cell. It's they overvalued. The stock has run up too soon, too fast. Um, And you know at this point there are better opportunities

elsewhere in the eavy slate. Um. But that said, there are some who also say that Tesla has only has gotten started the ev transformation that we think will take hold of the auto industry over the next decade or so has only gotten started, and the stock has very hired to go well. And that's what I wanted to ask you, Esha, because if I look, if I got pull up the f A function on Tesla on the Bloomberg and take a look. I mean, as I mentioned, it's a six hundred almost six hundred fifty eight billion

dollar market cap company. Revenues are expected to be in this one year about forty eight billion, and that's up fifty four percent year over year. I mean, earnings growth is expected to be up fourty four percent. It's still this massive growth story growth company. Are these expectations realistic for this company? UM? I would say that the overall walls it consensus expectations UM do not seem out of the place at this point. Yes, you know, no, it's possible.

I know other auto company has done something like this before, but but Tesla is a very different kind of auto company. That's its main play of you know, you know on Mascas also said that, you know, even if the growth comes a little slow, when it really takes off, it's expected to write in an in an exponential fashion. UM. Tesla is expanding in different geographies China, as we know, is a huge market. No one has had expected the easy space to explode the way it has exploded over

the past couple of years. So um, from from what we understand, you know, these are unusual numbers, but Tesla has delivered orles whatever promised so far. Right, Yeah, it comes down to those fundamentals. Esha, thank you so much. Day Equity Markets reporter at Bloomberg News. Tesla shares they have erased their game for the year, though as a result of some of the pullback, it's now down three percent year to date. This is Bloomberg Business Week with

Carol Messer and Bloomberg Quick Takes. Tim Stinovich from Bloomberg Radio. Well in the magazine this week and excerpt from a new book out on the secretive world of commodity traders and how they link consumers and investors to global hotspots. And maybe it's a bit of a surprise to those investors to say the least, Tim, Yeah, to say the least, especially for a group of teachers in Pennsylvania exactly. This

is the subject of a new book. It's called The World for Sale, Money, Power and the traders who barter the Earth's resources. It's written by Javier Blass and Jack Farchie. It's out in the UK, now out in the US come March. Javier is Bloomberg News Chief Energy correspondent, joining us on the phone from London, along with Bloomberg Business Week editor Joe Weber on the access line in brook Again,

this is going straight to Netflix. I'm just saying, Joel, Yeah, well, we we try, and I'm sure Javier would be very pleased with that outcome, as as our colleague Will Kennedy said yesterday to me, he said, just in case you didn't know um and don't follow Javier on on Twitter, he's a book for sale and it's literally called for sale, and so we were we were really pleased that we

got to excerpt it. And it is sort of an example of of, you know, like I think with the book will accomplish is we pull back the curtain in many ways on on many markets that you just don't don't even know about. And Javier tell us more about um UM pensioners who found that they had a little something something in their portfolios that they may not have expected. Well,

you know that pension funds are very, very conservative. They usually buy the kind of US speciery that are not yielding a lot, but you know that you you will never lose money. You do not expect to see US pension funds like teachers in Pennsylvania, or police offices in South Carolina, or firefighters in West Virginia investing in something that will go via the Kaiman Island into doubling the capital of Ireland, into a community trader in Switzerland, and

from there into northern Iraq. And that's exactly what they were putting their money, because they were financing glenn or the world's largest commodity trader, and what they were financing in particular was a deal to buy oil in Kurdistan in northern Iraq and to ship that crew into the

global market. When I was reading this, however, I kept thinking to myself over and over again, E. S G. S G. S G, Like, what about all these pension funds who are saying, we're not making investments that that violate you know, the terms of how we're thinking about E. S G. So, So how do his investments get made in these large pensions. Well, usually they get hold it into an outside manager in this case was frankin Talventone,

and they usually get folded into emerging market debt. I mean in many of the prospectuses of of UM de pensions fans that will review, this was disclosed as an oil note linked to Iraq. It didn't even say that it was not actually the government, the central government in Iraqi in back back, but just an autonomous province in the north of the country. UM. I just simply think

that sometimes there are a small investment. This was only a five or only quote unquote only five hundred million dollars, and I think that sometimes they just flow under the rather just bundle into American market debt. So have your Glencore obviously plays an important role in here and and also elsewhere in the book. What did you learn about

Glencore in reporting this that you didn't already know? Well, I mean, it's interesting because we need these Commority traders everything that we buy coins from natural resources, and you need the commoity traders to buy and and and tell

to you. What you learn when you get very close to these companies is that it's a very strange combination that they are incredibly hard working and willing to go to no one else goes um and at the same time they have that kind of profit minded only mixed with a bit of all old fashioned commercial banking, probably a hundred years ago of of my worries, my bone

and handshakes. And I'm personal personally busy in every client every year and be on the road or on the air for two hundred and fifty or three hundred days a year. But what it's more amazing is that they are willing to go literally everywhere. I mean, you look at the list of countries that the State Department will tell everyone, do not go there. The commoity traders go there.

And and they also play big roles in politics that sometimes we do not realize because for many of these countries, think about the Middle East or some countries in Africa,

well that word resources, morning and power go together. How do you what do you think is that the most striking this whole idea that commodity traders can influence history or and or I guess I should say that you've got these what are thought to be pretty safe investors are hoping that they're safe investors, and conservative investors pension investors that they don't exactly understand maybe what they're investing in.

I think that both are very important. I mean, one thing that Jack and I were writing the book we were goying to achieve. We think that the commoity traders played a big role in the global economy. They play a big role in politics, and because on institutional investors be pension funds or other kinds of institutional investors are investing than providing funds with them. They are also very important to all of us. But prices Jack and me writing this and researching it is that very few people

know anything about the commodity traders. There are hardly any books about them. Their accounts on most cases are secret because they have probably owned companies. And also they are controlled by a very few people. I mean most promotive traders are controlled by the staff or or a family that owns them. So any money that they make, any profit that they may go in the pockets of a

few selected the individuals. Like I said, I think it has good to a Netflix so or something, because it's just really explaining how these markets work and peeling back some of the layers. Um great stuff. Thank you so much. Have your blast. Chief Energy correspondent Bloomberg News from London. Check out his new book The World for Sale. Money power and the traders who barter the Earth's resources in

the UK and coming to us in March. And of course our thanks to the editor Bloomberg Business Week, Joel Webber. This is Bloomberg Business Week with Carol Masser and Bloomberg Quick Takes Tim Stinovic on Bloomberg Radio. The economy is a long way from our employment and inflation goals, and it is likely to take some time for substantial further progress to be achieved. We will continue to clearly communicate our assessment of progress toward our goals well in advance

of any change in the case of purchases. A nice double dose Federal Reserve Chairman J Powell Charlie Pellet, of course, some highlights from his testimony earlier today. J Powell's testimony of course, in that semi annual testimony that he does before Congress on the state of the US economy, and Tim really giving some you know, reminder that he thinks there's progress being made, but we still have a long way to go until we get to kind of a

pre pandemic economy. Akka, we're not raising rates anytime. Be patient, everyone, relax, relax. Joining us with more on J. Powell and FED policy really the overall US economy. Danny blanche Flower, professor of economics at Dartmouth College, former Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee member. He joins us on the phone from Florida. Danny, how are you. I'm great, Always good to talk to you guys on a very interesting day. Well interesting, how

was saying very sensible things? I mean, this is the reality that we're in. It's the right thing to do. We'll talk to us about that. Tell us what was what struck you as being very very sensible from J. Powell? Well,

I think I think the uncertainty is is very high here. Um, we're seeing the economy recover, but there's clearly, clearly the number of people that are claiming benefits remembers slack in the economy, and of course the uncertainty going forward about how quickly the vaccinations are going to go, how effective they're going to be, how how firms bounds back. And I think the other one is what kind of long

run changes in behavior are they going to beat? Are people going to commute the same as they did, are they going to go back to cruise ship? All of that, but particularly are they going to save more. And I thought what was interesting because you have a sort of conservative message which has often not happened between the Central Bank and the Treasury, which perhaps not a surprise, and also from the thing from the Council of Economic Advice

from cc ROUS. So you're having a thirsted views and a consistent view across all the parts and so often in the past we've seen working against each other. So now what we're seeing are the two branches, if you like, a monetary and fiscal policy essentially saying the same thing, a bit different than in the UK, where we're actually on the NPC members are actually disagreeing with each other about whether they should go to negative breaks and we haven't really heard that in the US, but that's a

clear thing that's going on in Britain. How do you think that the FED and particularly FED share Powell is or should be paying attention to the sharp increase in bond yields that we've seen in recent weeks. Well, I mean, obviously that's that relevant and to think about it, but the scale of that rise, I don't think it's that significant.

But what else should they do? What other alternatives do they have other than trying to get America back to work and try to kind of overcome the difficulties that have been caused by this this this terrible pandemic. So I think the answer is, you know, you can't do everything, you do what you can do. I mean, think about the story of Easy If we could talk about what's the impact of what the FED has done to inequality? And Janet Yellen talked about that much he was the chair.

But their answer was, you can't do much about it. You've probably got to go ahead with this worry about what's going ahead in the future. If you have to do something, then you change and you adapt. The same thing with inflation. If you see inflation starting to in deal with it when you get there. But at the moment, you keep doing what they're saying. And I think that's right.

And we've learned from the past. We learned from the past that actually everybody was too are too optimistic about what was coming, too worried about inflation, too optimistic about the growth parts of the economy, And they don't want to make that error again. Danny, does it feel like the bond market is playing a little bit of catch up from what the equity markets were seeing a few months ago when we bounce back, you know, from our lows because of the health crisis. Well, well maybe, I

mean I'm a I'm a believer. That's basically what we're seeing in these markets is just um being everything being pushed by what the central banks are doing. When I voted from hundreds of billions of dollars of quantity bay and in my head, I have I have sentially thoughts to myself, I'm doing this to raise assets, right, So what we have a market following what the Fed is doing. They obviously listen carefully to Powel's you about you know, our rate is going to go to negative, but really,

are we going to do more? QUEI are we going to push those markets up? And I think the answer is for now that the story is keep on keeping on. But we just don't really know. I mean, the best answer to what coming is it depends, right, So maybe maybe the bond markets are are getting bit a bit nervous, But you know, I think the course is said, I mean,

the course is absolutely the course he's gonna follow. Well, you know, it's going to have to understand that there's a headline that just crossed the Bloomberg, the SMPI of racing. It's one drop to trade, little change. I mean, we're now at our highs of the day, and I feel like Danny, we have seen this trade over and over and over again the last decade, where we get a bit of a pullback sytimes, we get an official close to tempers and correction or an official tempers and correction,

and then everybody comes back in. Um, who's right though in terms of our market players. Are equity investors right to continue to purse this market higher? Well? I think, well, I think consist of what I've just said. I think equity markets are right in the sense that the sn't think if I'm right, which I think I am, the central banking is queuing is what's driving the equity market. Then you say, well, how good is the economy? How much time is there going to be a risphistical package

it will take time to come in? Is the FED going to go negative? Probably not? Well what else can you do? The only thing you can do is start is back to queueing again, and then they're not going to take But they're not gonna They're not going to start pulling out monkeyst in with this. So every time that story comes, the equity markets say okay, I'm with that,

and that's when you see the surge again. So I think for now the story continues, and you know it's good to be bullish on equalities for the reason we've just said for how long though? That's the question? Yeah, of course. I mean I don't know the answer to that,

so I don't think anybody else does. But you know, to this point, we're now you know, we're not We're a long way in and I think, but I don't see anything in the in the short medium term that's going to be persuade us from that message, because we have so many people out there who are claiming benefits

and are on short time work. And you know that that the the economy move needs to move to small input And I've argued for a very long time, but we were nowhere near full employments in two thousand fifteen to two thousand and eighteens at the room to maneuvers hard. So I just want to ask you again, sing, you're not worried at all about inflation? No, I not, not

one bit. I mean I think I was while we were while we were on break, I actually went and looked at a number that I liked, which is the employment rate, which today is now back to the level that it was in the first quarter century since the Second World War. We're at fifty seven. We were at sixty four point seven and two thousand and the US had the worst, the only advanced countries between two thousand and two thousand twenty, but the only country that had

a declining employment rate. So we're so far essentially, we're so start and full employment forget, and I'm plowing its focused on this. So the potential slack in the economy is in men so inflation arises when when there's when

the economy is tight, there's no sign of that. Obviously, people might say that this is about what's coming, is about structural things, but all the other of economies in the world have been faced by the same structural things that technology and globalization and so on, so they've all done much better. So I think the potential for the UK at US to grow in a non inflationary environment is is strong, and in many senses that's what power

has been reflecting. And he reflected back to two thousand, fifteen to eighteen, when the FED had a wrong view of the economy saying that capacity was less than that and raised rates and shouldn't have done and killed growth off that they've now it says, come to the position that I've that I've put forward. The unemployment rate doesn't

tell us much of what's going on. The employment rate looks terrible fifty five, fifty four and fifty seven point five and overestimated because all these weirdnesses in the labor market about people wrongly being classified. But that's a disastrous numbers. There's huge amounts of black Inflation doesn't rise. And I've probably been on Blumber fifty times over the last decade when people say to me inflation is coming, isn't it? And I've always said, no, it isn't, and it's you're

not coming from wage inflation. But even though the weirdness is in the data, does it does it come from a one point nine trillion dollar spending package that could could be deployed very soon. Well, the answer to the answer is that we clearly all the stimulus that we thought and the and the cutting in rates and the doing of the quee was meant to create inflation. But it was meant to create inflation against the deflationary shock.

So if you end up yes, the answer is that the potential deflationary shock that we're seeing pulls prices into negative territories, so this simply restores it. Of course, there's a point that's the point of the stimulus. But the issue is two percent teams a goal that's very much way off. And the story actually is we know very well what to do if inflation rises in a significant way, but it hasn't. But the point of is to create inflation.

But the question is to what extent do we have a major deflation shot going on in the answer is we do. Hey, Danny, let me just go back to what you talked about the labor market. You talked about all the slack in the labor market, right, and I think they've fed and certainly j Pal has been very clear about you know, we've got to improve those numbers, get people back to work. Will we need all of

those workers? And I just think about the increased and ramped up digitization of our society, and I just wonder will all of those workers ultimately be needed in our post pandemic economy. Well, a couple of things. The first thing is both joanet. Helen and Ross talked about the imports of jobs, and we know that capital, We know that capital intensive industries and technological change can actually be

labor enhancing. Think of all the the people who now sell iPhones and laptops and involved in that kind of technology. So that's the first thing. The second thing is that we can actually and Janet's maybe clere that she's interested in that, you can actually think of femilists where you try and encourage jobs. And so the issue is what's the I mean for people in Plumberg to think about.

What you basically are going to always think about is what's the relative price of labor compared to the relative price of capital? And if in a Biden administration, and Janet's made it clear they're interested in giving a subsidy to encourage the use of people of workers and make the relative price of workers low. And now obviously you could debate about the minimum wage, and it's of it. There's an issue about can you encourage people to be

more productive all of that sort of stuff. So I think the answer is that, um, we can make capital labor enhancing as well. UM and if and in a way I like to sort of pose this question in two thousand, then you ask me this question, where are the new jobs going to come from? Don't think I would have had a possible clue of saying it. But if you look where of most many of those jobs come from, they've come from technologically advanced places as Tesla

and as electric cars and I and all of uh. So, I think the answer is the digital age made well and the green jobs. You can make green jobs very labor intensive. You can have people going out insulating houses. So the answer is, with a bit of thought and interesting care, you can actually make the future labor in Hampsting not laborhood. Right. It's something that I've talked about

that with the president of the Rockefeller Foundation. We've got all these you know, countries spending so much on COVID relief and pumping a lot of money into economies. We could do that and create green jobs at the same time and deal with two massive problems. Um good stuff. Danny B. Well Danny Blanche Flower, professor of economics at Dartmouth, former Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee member, joining us

from Florida. I'm assuming it was warm there. I don't know. Yeah, I mean yesterday we learned it was seventy degrees there in the afternoon from one of our guests. But hey, that's better than New Hampshire, right mac a journal now, but you let me drive? Oh no, no, no no, no, rug home an night please, I'll do vel. I want to drive, just drive. The question trying. This is the drive to the globe. Thanks, we'll try us down on Bloomberg Radio. All right, you are listening to Bloomberg Business Week.

Just about eleven minutes left in today's trading session, Carol Master, Tim Stanovic, and as Charlie mentioned, the snp U S stocks in general roaring back after J. Powell of the Federal Reserve basically saying, listen, folks, slow down, slow down. I'm not too worried. I'm not going to take, you know, my foot off the gas. Things are gonna do. It's all good, it's all It's gonna still take a little while to get back to normal. So stocks are pretty

much just off their best levels of the session. We have seen quite move back. Yeah, we really have. Ryan Dietrich is chief market strategist at LPL Financial. He joins us on the phone right now from Charlotte, North Carolina. LPL Financial has just about billion dollars under management. M Ryan, what do you make of today's trade? Yeah, Tim, how

about that reversal? Right? As back down nearly four percent at the lows, and it has a shot of being green and we can say goodbye to the five day losing streak on the SMP five Right, what got us when you looked at that five day losing streak, we're in the midst of stocks are only down about one and a half percent during those five days. There's a relatively modest five day losing streak. For instance, last year five separate days saw a worst drop of one and

a half percent um. So it's just kind of all about context, right, And again, what did J Pal say? I don't think anything that we didn't expect. He's still quite dubbish. Low rates are here to stay, and that's what the market wanted to hear. And now the losing streak come, like I said on the SMP, looks like it's over. Was it all J Powell in your view?

Or was it people all of a sudden saying oh wow, that stuck that I've been interested in is now a few percentage points cheaper or you know, in the case of some of those high flyers, a lot cheaper and that was a buying opportunity. Yeah, you're right, Carol, I mean I think it was with j Pal kind of sparked it. Right. You think about a beach ball. You put it under the water. Once you let go, it gets moving. Once it gets moving, it really pops up. And that's you know, j Pal kind of released the

beach ball effects, so to speak. But at the same time, what have we been seeing, right, I mean, just continued strong manufacturing numbers, services numbers. We just had a really strong earning season that's wrapping up and all. By the way, now j Pal said that, you know, monetary policy is still here, and we all know there's probably another fiscal plan coming in March of at least one and a

half trillion dollars. So all those things combined kind of said that, you know, hey, stocks just don't feel like going down, and it's something that we should not ignore. Okay, But but there are signs of froth in the market right from a technical from a technical perspective, what are

those signs? Where are you seeing them? Yeah, well, you know, when you look at market technicals, they're honestly pretty strong, Tim But I kind of say a cousin the technicals is sentiment, right, that's kind of in the price and and we've seen just huge flows coming into equity funds.

We've seen very historically low put to call ratios. You know, there are clearly some signs that there's a little too much excitement that's out there, and that's okay, right, I mean, after seventy six percent rally, given where we were this time about a year ago, I think it makes sense people a little excited, but it makes sense to us also if you've just overlay this bull market that started last March with the one that started in two thousand nine.

They almost trekk perfectly with each other, but that one in early two thousand ten you had a ten per cent correction, some sideways consolidation for good part of the middle of two thousand ten. We think that could play out once again here. So Ryan, how much of the trade that we're seeing and the comeback, how much of that is banking on what we see in the second half of this year. Yeah, Well, if you look at who's been leading, I think you have to say a

lot it's those cyclicals. Right. Look at today, I mean energy stocks once again are doing well. The cyclical value your energy financials is the yield curve keeps deepening. What's the ten you're doing ten years up a little bit today, but the yield curve to tin keeps the opening. Those are all telling us that, hey, the market is betting on a very significant reopening and that's why the cyclical value.

But coming on with you guys for a couple of months saying, you know, last year we liked growth a lot of lpill research. This year we've kind of changed our tune a little bit, saying, listen, cyclical value makes sense finally to maybe get some strength, and that is exactly what's happened. But before everyone gets way excited about financials, for instance, Carol, they've got nowhere for fourteen years. Okay, they're where they were in two thousand seven, so let's

not get too excited here. But that's bolish from a longer term point of view, because hey, they haven't gone awhere for fourteen years. We know text up a ton, and we don't have a problem with technology, but if you look for something that's kind of still beating up and hadn't gone anywhere. Oh my financial still look pretty good to us here. I get the value argument, but if the growth is in the growth players or the

momentum players, why wouldn't you continue to make your bets there. Yeah, well, the way we're constructing our portfolios far more than seventeen thousand advisors, we are kind of doing a two pronged approach, right. We We don't have a problem with technology and communication services. They kind of got us to the party. But we're much more open to the idea of taking a little bit of profits there and adding to your your your

cyclical value names industrials, materials, and financials. I mean, what materials. I come on you guys for a while talking about copper. That sounds kind of boring. Coppers up, you know, another three percent today, nine year highs. If copper is strong like it's been for several months, that tells us a few things, mainly the global economies on firm footing and likely higher rates, and those the cyclical values should probably do well. And coppers just blowing up again today. How

are you looking at the rise in the tenure? Yeah? Yeah, that's that story of the weekend. And everybody's wondering where does a tenure go to get too high to knock stocks off their rally. We think there's still a ways to go. I mean, the bottom line, is this a little bit of inflation be okay? I mean the Fed share person Pale just said that today, right, a little bit of inflation, he's okay. With the tenure yield to us is suggesting again a likely stronger economy, more stimulus.

So we've got a target about one seventy five on the tenure by the end of this year, which would be a little a little bit higher where forty basis points higher than where it is. But we think that'd be perfectly normal. And let's not forget it wasn't that long ago that in years up around three percent. I know, it feels like a lifetime ago in a lot of ways, but a little higher trending ten your yield does suggest again of probably improving economy in our view. Where don't

you want to be right now? Yeah? This well, great question. They are those defensives, you know, your utilities and your reads kind of some of those areas that are that are that's as pharmaceuticals that are just more defensive by nature. They haven't done quite as well. Um, that's kind of where we see. Also, I've been an LPIL for five years. We haven't liked Europe for the five years i've been here.

We're still a little bit underway Europe. We like emerging markets, and we like Japan first, little more international flavor, but a Europe in an area we still think is probably gonna underperform. We did see their travel stocks over in the UK as UK economy is opening up, you don't see a play there. Yeah, I mean there're always potentially could be some type of a play, but the overall dynamics as we look at Europe are still slowing. There's

still some some demographic issues and earning scrowth. I mean, we're going at thirty five percent earning growth this year in emerging markets, leading the overall global resurgence that we're seeing in earning. So we just think e M is still probably the better place from a diversified global portfolio point of view. All Right, gotta ron, Ryan, think you

so much? Trying. D Church, chief market strategist at LPL Financial with us from Charlotte, North Carolina, and this tim on a day when quite a big swing when it comes to those major equity averages. Yeah, NAZAC was down as much as three point nine percent, down half a

percentage point. Thanks for listening to Bloomberg Business Week. Download the podcast on iTunes, SoundCloud, or Bloomberg dot com, and you can also listen to our radio show at two pm Eastern on Bloomberg Radio or watch us on YouTube. Search to Bloomberg Global News