The Great Dollar Slowdown

selling pressure. But at the same time, haven's didn't really work as they should, gold fell while bond yields rose, So what gives? And as always, we will close out this episode with our tradition the craziest thing I saw in markets this week, and by all means, if you saw something crazy and markets, give us a call on the Bloomberg Podcast hotline at six four six three to four three four nine zero and leave us voicemail and maybe we'll play your voicemail on the show and we

will appreciate your crazy things. I think Sarah especially will appreciate them, because I think she struck out this week on crazy things I did. I had a pretty crazy week, and I just took cover because luckily, so many listeners wrote into us this week, so we had a plethora to choose from. So I said, you know what, Mike, I'm going to stand down this week. I'm going to take a bye week, and I'm just this is my

bye week, and uh, someone this week. All right. I was a little jealous that people seem to be directing their crazy things more to you than to me. But you know, then I realized, maybe they realized you just need to help. I guess, I guess is it that I'm gonna say, that's not the reason why. But you know, next time anyone reaches out, if you reach out to me, let's let's find out why. Let let us know why

you're not hitting my cup. Okay, fair enough. Well, joining us this week on the show for the first time. Very excited to have him. He's a fund manager at Westwood Holdings. His name is Adrian Helper. Adrian, welcome to the show. Thank you for having me and Adrian, I gotta say I was reading some of your talking points they sent along to prepare for the interview, and I got excited about one thing. It's you were talking about the Velocity of Money. And the reason I got excited

is I love this data series. Not many people track this or follow this, and whenever I ask anyone about it that they give me a blank stare. So I'm gonna start off. We're gonna talk about the election and the volatility, like Sarah said, but I wanted to talk start off talking about the velocity of money because I'm not sure I'll ever get a chance to talk with

someone who who tracks it. And for listeners who aren't familiar with the velocity of money, UM, it's basically a calculation done to try to take a stab at estimating how often every dollar in the money supply turns over. The whole data series to me, Adrian is fascinating. Let me let me just go through it to explain what

the chart looks like to to listeners. UM. Bloomberg has a calculation of it that goes back to the late nineteen fifties, and if you look at the chart, it's interesting because it stays pretty stable for most of the series from the late nineteen fifties through say the early nineties. Then in the nineties it really starts shooting higher reaches about peak of about two point two in n then it kind of reverts back to the mean, picks up again a little bit before the financial crisis peaks it

around two and two thousand and six. What's really interesting, then, is it it then it really crashes hard, uh, mainly in the global financial crisis, but even in the recovery after that, the trend is still pretty solidly down UM. And then it breaks below that range was in previously UM into the less than two areas. Obviously, at the beginning of this year it crashes really hard to about one point one. So a lot of that I get Like this year, obviously, the savings rate just exploded, so

money is not changing hands as much. What I'm curious about is that overall trend since the since the nineties. UM, it's the steady trend down that sort of peaked sort of close to the height of the dot com bubble and then trends down all the way until this massive

drop in it at the beginning of this year. I Mean, my guess is, and I'm curious what you think, but my guess is that is it just that the Internet has sort of eliminated a lot of the middlemen and and sort of you know, each dollar changes hands less than it used to. Is that a crazy theory or do you think that makes sense? There may be part of that, and you know, this is where economics meets investing, as there's a lot of theory here about you know

what that impact is on markets themselves. And certainly we can have all of the monetary creation in the world and liquidity that's created, but unless that money changes hands, it's going to be very hard for us to see inflation. It's going to be hard to see on yields rise um And finally enough it's it's been getting on the

train of concurrent with bond yields continuing to fall. I think there may be part of the explanation around a changing context of payment systems that some degree is a little bit more even barter even though we don't call it barter um. The way we do transactions in an internet age is at least part of it is an exchange of goods without monetary influence um. I do think

that's a small part. I think that especially since two thousand and six, what we've seen is a rising savings rate, at least a stable to a rising savings rate, and that savings right of course, if you look back to the nineteen fifties, has been coming down significantly, kind of like the you know, the opposite of home ownership, and it almost looks like we're going back to the nuclear family kind of economy. Savings rates have been going up, and maybe that had to do with before you know,

your house was your was your saving you didn't. We're too much about having the money in a bank for losing your job. That's been a bigger part of it. I think of we need the money changing hands. We need consumers to find their save things and leverage funnily enough to get the economy going. So it's something that I watch of. We can have all the monetary creation in the world until that money changes hands, it's going to be hard to see inflation and and a push

for economic growth from monetary creation. Yeah, I was gonna ask you, do you think that that sort of deceleration in the velocity of money does it explain why inflation has stayed so low us say, in this century? Where is it sort of to two sides of the same coin, being the the you know, technology and just trends in general that are causing both things at wance. A good question. I think inflation is influenced by both of those things. I think it's influenced by your savings rates, by low

velocity of money. So this is not just consumers, This is corporations, This is a lack of capital expenditure, things that have since the crisis. Inflation itself is influenced by that, of course, but it is also heavily influenced by changing modes of transaction, which comes from technology. So what could

possibly spark change? And our investors missing something because I feel like the predominant narrative over the past couple of weeks is that we are going to see this reflation trade take hold because we may see a blue wave or no matter what the election outcome is, we are going to see more fiscal spending that's going to feed itself into the system. At some point, you're going to get an economic rebound and COVID nineteen will reconcile itself

and you'll see inflation take shape. Our our investors who believe in that narrative truly missing the point that, yes, all of those factors might be in play, but the

velocity of money just still remains low. And what would possibly change that I think that is part of things that in some investors are missing this so much data instruction or round all of this creation of money, of the larger balance sheet that we're operating with monetary policy pushing the portfolio balance channel, and then you know what

that means for perspective inflation in the future. This gets down to whether you know when bond deals rise and what that means for balanced portfolios, things of those natures. That said, until we see money change hands, it's going

to be hard to see inflation and rising prices take hold. Now, money will start changing hands if we see that differentiation between the core basket of goods demanding stable but wage inflation which keeps taken up and as people make more money than they are able to pay a little bit of extra for that xbox, for the new one that's coming out that my son ones, whichever it is. So we do see that potential happening. And I would say it's just a it's a it's a metric that is underappreciated.

As you mentioned, it's a confluence of economics and markets. Investors should be watching that more closely for inflation and a measure I mean that could be a spark to the fireplace or given the amount of monet creation we've had, that would be much larger influence than in the past. It's the place my kids been bugging me for the PlayStation? Uh, Sarah, what is it that I don't even know what it is now? The PlayStation PS PS PS five PS where

I don't know, I don't know, I've lost track. As you can tell, I'm not exactly ready to go out and buy that for her. But well, this is how you know. The holiday season's right around the corner. But they're already getting asked. That's a good segue into sort of what you're you've been doing with your funds this year? Um, you know, that's the kids call it. Whenever they look up someone on social media, they call it stalking, which I I feel like it's a bit of a strong term, Sarah.

But I was doing a little stalking of Adrian's funds on the terminal and that was good some Bloomberg. Yes, yes, dude, due diligence, I'll call it not stalking. Uh. And and and hey, everyone under your bio is up for the year. Congratulations. That's uh, that's good. Total Westwood Total Return fund up twelve percent year today, pretty good, pretty good. Um. Poking around in the holdings, I noticed, um, you had some tips. Some treasury inflation protected securities were among sort of the

bigger holdings in some of the funds. And it's been an interesting sort of dialogue about tips this year. Uh, people were piled into you know, obviously during the whole crisis in March, I mean, the bond market just went berserk, and you could buy tips for a song. I guess, you know, the market was basically discounting what looked like deflation, or at least that's what it looked like. I might it might have just been a liquidity story in the

bond market. And I think there was a big discussion at least among you know, some of my colleagues saying, well, tips then did really well. Uh, you know break evens are upper people where people just bargain hunting hunting with tips or was it uh, really based on concerns about

inflation going forward? And maybe your funds always have tips up there in the in the sort of high weightings of the fund I don't know, but walk us through basically what your your outlook is for tips right now and how you're thinking about, you know, inflation linked bonds in general. Sure, well, you know, during the global financial prices the DFC, we saw TIPS really crap at that point, and that was liquid room. That was a market that

dried up. That was a use of capital on bank balance sheets and in a large way for which created exist location. We didn't see that this time. Maybe parts of Dodd Frank and clean up and liquidity rules did their job. We did, we saw less of that disconnect. I think that means that when you looked at what happened with TIPS, it is more reflective of what you know, what we saw there in the duldrums was more reflective of a very dire apploic on inflation, and so we

have seen that come up a little bit. Of course at Jackson Hole of FED did tell us that they are going to continue to let inflation run hot. That doesn't mean inflation is going to get there. And maybe that actually even means the Fed thinks that they don't see perspective inflation coming. But for folks like myself that have a multi asset representation, that's their long term view.

It means I'm always going to have likely some degree of inflation protection in case we see they say that that velocity of money could be the spark to the fireplace when there's a lot of monetary creation. So I want some degree of inflation protection on the fund if we see that, I want the compensation to come in

for heightened inflation. You over just my straight nominals. So it's always a decent protection to have on and I think that's that's where investors are really appining now, less that they see inflation, but more than inflation protection itself may be becoming attractive because of the rapidity with which inflation could change. I mean, we've got wage inflation that it has been increasing over core um I should say

it's just been ticking up. At the same time, you've you've got a lot of liquidity in the environment and a lack of velocity. If we were to see the stimulant that we're trying to achieve from the Fed and from the Treasury take hold, then I want to be protected in some ways for the portfolio. So where does the outlook for nominal bond yields stand? Then on one end, you have the velocity of money conversation, But it feels as that the narrative has just been shifting very quickly lately.

It was just last week that we were discussing bond yields breaking through eight basis points, people talking about possible upside towards one percent, that we were going to see this reflation trade. Then all of a sudden, heading to this week, as we saw COVID cases rising, in particular, more restrictions overseas in Europe, concerns about what that could mean for the US, we saw that completely reverse itself with the tenure breaking back through a basis points and

below it. Where do we currently stand and is it reasonable to expect that we are going to see much movement either which way? Or is the reality that we're just stuck in this trading range funny all of a sudden, Yeah, it's amazing. Really, you have to put everything in perspective. Plushing my curls over here. You know, the base rate, the short end of the curve is anchored, and the is very clear that it is going to be anchored for a while. As I mentioned, to let inflation run

hot or too. You know, the average inflation targeting. If you look at the ducts that they produce, they give us an idea that we're not going to move rates until probably two thousand three, could be longer, which means we're really talking about the curve. We're talking about whether economic growth comes up, and you are seeing the potential for inflation, you want to be compensated for a term premium, etcetera.

In your tenure body field. And it's hard for me to see a tenure body fielding yield above one percent significantly without exorbiting economic growth. And you know, while I do see the potential for good economic growth, it's supported by the necessary physical stimulus and by monetary policy. This is not an engine running by itself. This is us pouring gas. I'm an I'm an old old man that I used to work on cars back when the head carburetors and not infectors. This is us pouring gas directly

into the carburetor. The car will start and you'll see some fire come out when you close the lid, you close. The bondum is the same the UK. Does the car stay started? We're not there yet. The hoods still open. We've got the car started, but it's not running on its own just yet. Until we see that, it's gonna be hard to see bond yields above, they're going to

be inordinately low. And that's just if the Fed doesn't do what it did in the last in the GFC, which is, you know, how quickly we pulled out the old playbook. If we need to stimulate the economy further, we could go down to buying out the curve, so called twist. We're not calling that route yet. We are increasing the size of the balance sheet. We're buying a

shoulder average maturity. But if need be, if we felt like that that portfolio balance channel was needed, we could do that as well, which which I think constrains bond yields to where you know, you hold bonds treasury bonds for two reasons. You hold it for the income and you hold it for the insurance policy. There's a lot of questions right now as to whether that insurance policy is still useful. The S and P five hundred or

some risk asset drops significant lead. Do I make money on the bomb lid by prices going up and rates going down? I think you still do. I think it's an attractive asset to hold for the insurance policy, and you hold up for the income, and I say, real rates are still significantly negative. We don't have to look very far to our foreign partners to see what, you know, where other bond yields are in the developed markets to say that, gosh, let's say one percent, all of a sudden,

doesn't seem so bad. Who would have ever thought you'd be thinking along those lines. Huh. By the way, Star, that was a nice twelve part question for Adrian there. I'm proud of you. That was that. That was a good one. You know, I was originally going to say, earlier in the show, your first question to Adrian, I was gonna say, you really outdid yourself with that one. I think that might have been an all time record. I had to I had to play my part. We'll

put a time around that. But uh as uh agent is Sarah pointed out, there is um the minor little event risk coming up known as the US election. Um. I feel like, you know, obviously, all the polls, all the betting markets, whatever metric you look at, makes it look like Biden's a pretty good chance to win. The Senate looks more like a toss up. I mean, the House is likely going to stay under Democratic control. The

Senate looks more like a toss up. Yet, I feel like a lot of investors sort of talk themselves into this notion of a blue wave coming, that the Dems would sweep both the House, Senate and the White House, and that as a result, we'd get this massive fiscal stimulus early in And so, you know, a lot of people for that are sort of, you know, positioning for this idea of a reflation, a steeper yield curve, perhaps that proverbial rotation from growth to value and cyclicals that

sort of is seems to always be someone's positioning for that somewhere. But I wonder, you know, for a guy like you, I mean, does it make sense to try to get ahead of this result next week or do you sort of stand back and and try to, you know, let the cards fall where they may. You know, how are you sort of approaching this event risk coming up?

I think it does make sense, And and my prediction for who's gonna win is I'm just kidding, I'm not gonna It's very hard to say the outcome of the election. What I what I can do as an investors, I can look at the various potential outcomes, and you know, while I don't I don't have an Excel model that probability waits those I can get an idea of what

I think the outcome might be in different scenarios. And I think you're exactly right on what is consensus right now as far as Biden win less you know, the potential but less consensus of a Blue sweep, or you know, really just the Democrats take the center, and if that happens, I think there, you know, that's a positive potential event

from fiscal rise. You're exactly right that that will just as we talked about the economic activity and the push on nominal interest rates further out, that will push up the curve. So we'll see a rising interest curve, we'll see rising inflation expectations, we'll see rising commodity prices where you know, stimulus means we're going to pump money into infrastructure and roads and buying copper for wires and things. That is where we'll start to see some activity there.

So that's that's a positive offset by the taxes where the corporate tax rate would go from all the things we know, and we can see some shift around in some sectors. So there's a there's a great opportunity for investors to think about individual companies in their reactions and the sector rotations. Places like healthcare are going to be impacted. That's probably the number one place where there's a complete difference between what the two candidates would would like to see.

The other option is that we see Trump won the election. Um. Then as you say, the Senate's kind of a kind of a toss up, and if we see Trump win the election and just things stay the same, then actually that's probably a good outcome as well, because we both candidates would like to see a lot of fiscal stimulus. One of those candidates doesn't want to raise taxes at the same time, so maybe that's a positive, more positive outcome that center outcome, which is where you have a

Senate that remains read and a blue president. There's one aspect of that that scares me, and usually that's the good outcome. Usually that means okay, less policy volatility. A lot of things don't make it through, and the market likes less uncertainty and less volatility on policy. Um. One thing that does scare me around that of anything that does is because of all this partisanship that we have, will there be a pushback and an elongation of the

time frame to get to a phase for stimulus. UM, that's what I think the market will be focused on for for the big risk on risk off afterwards is can we come to agreement on providing the necessary stimulus to the economy? Um. Secondary questions will be okay, well, depending on the candidate that wins, will we see taxes or or no taxes? Will we see UM A, c A or some other healthcare plan? The primary thing right now,

because of the visibility of COVID, is going to be okay. Well, then can we come to fruition on our phaise for Well, if there's anything that we learned four years ago, almost to the day, it's that one predicting the election is very difficult, and to predicting what the outcome of an election means for markets is also very difficult. I mean, the market even got it wrong on election night, going limit down in the middle of the night and then

just rip roaring back. But I think we can all agree that Tuesday will be a bit of a hectic and maybe a crazy night, Mike, a crazy night that could last a month maybe, and we're all looking forward to it. Well, I feel like that was an intentional segue there, Sarah, that was that right? You read me correctly. Right, you want to talk some crazy things, I'm ready for it. I'm ready. I'm ready to use all of our submissions as my own. All right, Charlie Pellett will tell us

what time it is. Stand clear of the craziest things we saw in markets this week. All right, Sorry, since you're getting flooded with listeners crazy things, let us know what you got. So I'll start with Seal Roston and I really hope I am pronouncing your name correctly. Apologies if I'm not. Uh. He actually reached out to me on the Bloomberg terminal, so likely the coolest way to be reached out for a crazy thing. Maybe a little

bit elitist, but we'll go with that. Absolutely. He's a London based analyst over at Man Group and he flagged a story on the Bluemberg terminal. It's crazy and also just very ironic. The headline of this story is fraud

prevention firm goes bankrupt after CEO charged fraud. The lead the first paragraph of the story reads, cyber fraud prevention firm n S eight, Inc. Filed for Chapter eleven bankruptcy on Tuesday, listing assets of at least ten million dollars in liabilities of at least one hundred million dollars and con you think if you run a cyber fraud firm that you would be hyper vigilant of not committing the fraud yourself. Maybe it's just a proof of concept or something.

He's uh, you know, he was just exploit showing them their vulnerabilities, craps. Was it his his own firm that found his own fraud then right, right, right, that's all gonna work out. That is a good one. That is a good one. I that's a good one. I applaud that. And a guy from Man Group how about that. That's pretty interesting. That's uh the big hedge fund firm in London,

all right. I got one from Twitter from our loyal listener whose name is probably not really Twiggy Sunday, but that's what he goes by on on Twitter, and he points out, I feel like this stupid asteroid comes up every week on the show. But there's an asteroid floating out in space. You can't get away from it that they say is worth ten thousand quadrillion dollars. I don't. There must not be a number after quadrillion, Why it's ten thousand quadrillion dollars From quadrillion it goes to infinity.

I don't know. Yeah, and uh, he asked the question, Well, what could possibly be on this asteroid? I assumed it was covered in intrastrate derivatives? Is the only thing I could think that would get you to to to ten thousand quadrillion, Adrian, I don't know, maybe maybe uh something else. Eric Quener on Twitter responded, maybe it's covered with the new iPhone, which could be a too. Turns out it's

just covered in iron. It's it's full. It's if they think it's almost entirely made of iron and nickel and enough that it's worth ten thousand quadrillion dollars. Although I feel like our pest guests, Cam Harvey would would be shaking his fist at at the screen right now if you heard that, because obviously that amount of supply of iron and nickel is gonna hurt prices, I would assume. But anyway, pretty good one from Trick Twiggy Sunday. It's unbelievable.

Whenever you heard the quadrillion as a number, the next time you do prices, right with me? Mike, I'm gonna have to use quadrillion. That's right. We did not have a prices right, Well I got one frag and we can still do a prices right, Okay, Adrian, I don't know would you pay ten thousand quadrillion for an asteroid made of iron and nickel? I think it depends on its velocity. That was a great answer, the velocity of buddy, the velocity of an iron clad asteroid. How about you, Adrian?

I fear that we did not warn you about our gimmick. Here.

The craziest thing have you have you observed? I think crazy in the past week or past month, or I haven't looked other than you know, thinking about the markets yesterday or Wednesday was the you know, it's one of those very unusual days where everything is down in the markets, and that was there's only then three days that we've seen that since nineteen nineteen nineties, and both of the both of the other days we're in March of this year, and so you start to worry about, you know, the

crack in what is kind of the fundamental underpinnings of things like risk parity and you know, just the old crux up for what you sixty portfolio was the way to go and that forty is bonds. Yeah, you need to make sure that the offsets there. So, but that's not quite the crazy you're looking for now. That is that is very crazy, and that is the crazy we're

looking for. But I have I have a question, Like you said, I saw the statistic about that being the third time it's ever happened since the nineteen The other two were this year. What does that tell you about this market regime that we're living in the fact that on a day when we saw pretty severe sell off in the equity market, gold was lower, bonds were lower. I mean, classic market studies would tell you that doesn't make sense. De leveraging Maybe some c I was assumed

some funds blown up somewhere, or some leverage funds. But but what do you think, Cadren if we were to see a you know, blow up in the equity markets when bond prices then build up ten points, would we see bond yields then go down to negative? Yeah? I probably would be the one to tell you guess they

could do. But right now there's an asymmetry in those prices, and the same thing does with you know you have commodities in gold, and there's a there's a questioning now on the protection that you get in various risk assets. But bitcoin did fun. I actually I I I tweeted out what happened to hedges as a joke after a Wednesday sell off, and you better be sure I was quick to hear bitcoin did five you you heard that

about a thousand times. I imagine the enthusiasts will call them not pumpers, not promoters, the offici crypto crypto offficionados out there. All right, Now, that's a good one, Adrian. I didn't I hadn't seen that stat of only three times. That's remarkable. Um, but it does uh make me competent. I've I've edited about ten straight stories about the portfolio going out of fashion, so I it does kind of explain why people are worried about that. All right, I

got a good one for you and Sarah. Um, let's hear it, all right. One of my favorite characters in the financial press is Mr Bill Gross. I'm sure listeners are very familiar with him, the bond King as they call him, and I like him because a lot of financial types and this is the way you should be by the way is buttoned down, reserved. You don't want to make headlines for for anything but a good fun performance.

Bill doesn't worry about any of that. He's out there living his life and you know, let let the headlines fall where they may. And when he writes his momentaries, it's it's always among my favorite because they're so colorful and and just so unlike most other commentary out there. So Mr Gross bought a million dollar statue made of

glass sculpture. I guess it's not one single statue uh made of glass uh that is supposed to be evocative of the um of Japanese fishing lures or or fishing bobs whatever they call him that amazingly to me were made of glass. I don't know, like a lobster pot bowie type of thing, but made of glass. I I blown glass. I can't imagine that is the most durable material for that. But regardless, it's also not a very durable material for outdoors artwork. Um because the thing kept breaking.

And there's a big conflict here because Mr Gross's neighbor does not like the statue and he's complained about it because he lights it up real bright at night, and and you know there there's concerns that maybe he's thrown rocks at it, or someone else who doesn't like it has thrown rocks at it. But they're not sure if it's that or just the palm trees the fronds are falling on it. Whatever the case, it casts some serious

damage to to this sculpture. So Gross put off this giant net over it, and that thing's like ten feet hot. So this guy next to him is trying to look out and enjoy the views of the Pacific, and he doesn't like the sculpture. He also doesn't like the giant net over it, so he's been calling the uh I forget what beaches, Laguna Beach. Maybe it's it's one of those really high money, yeah, Laguna Beach beach towns in California. So the neighbor has been calling the police. They're threatening

to sue each other. Um Gross got back at him by blaring music on like volume eleven on his outdoor speakers, including the theme song to Gilligan's Island, in order to drive this guy crazy. And he even texted the guy. He said, keep it up and there's gonna be a concert every night so, uh, I just love this story. I don't know, I love I love, I love him. I also so there's these broken shards of the sculpture

that I would actually be willing to bid on. Uh, you know, because good artwork, you know, Sarah, I I love nothing more than ridiculously overpriced artwork which I cannot afford. But I feel like I could afford a few shards of Bill Gross's broken sculptures. You think you could? You think you can make that work? I tell you, if there, if anyone out there is connected to Gross, tell him

I'm a bitter. I mean, maybe only a couple hundred bucks, but I'd like to display them in my more modest New Jersey yard with absolutely a giant spotlight on them and see what the neighbors think. Because good artworks all about the story. And if anyone came up to me and said, why do you have these glass shards in your in your front, you know I could be like, well, sir, let me let me tell you this story. Tell you

the story. So, by all means, if Mr Gross, if you hear this, I'm a I'm a bitter on your broken pieces of glass. You know, this really makes me think you know how I told you many times that the guy above me is constantly playing jazz music. Well now I'm wondering if he's playing jazz music because he really dislikes something that I'm doing. He's trying to annoy me. I don't know. I don't know, but I do have. I have one more that I want to share from Twitter,

and this is from at T J. Beller. He did reach out to both of us, so thank you very much. He said. The craziest thing I saw in markets this week courtesy of Taylor Rigs, who was a Bloomberg anchor and reporter on television, Apple and Microsoft now larger combined market cap than the entire consumer stape staples sector, and Mike wrote back to him confirmed, um three point six trillion, just about what those two companies combined versus two point

three trillion for just consumer staples. And I just myself pulled up a chart of Apple's market cap because it's pretty unbelievable when you think about the speed at which we have seen its market cap nearly double. It took years for Apple to reach that one trillion dollar market cap level, so that was originally surpassed in well now as we speak, about three quarters of the way into one nine trillion, so almost doubled in less than two years,

from one trillion to two trillion. To talk about velocity, Adrian, Yeah, what do you think about that, Adrian? Does that make you nervous that there's a company worth almost two trillion out there, that these two companies are as big as the entire stables sector of the s MP? Or is it is that just the world we live in now, where these these mega cap companies dominate everything. It's all about earnings. It's the world we live in, and it's it's the future of of pulling in all that those

growth assets that they're doing. If it makes me nervous, it's around regulation, of starting to think about when you have such great, large industries and the emos, do we have a concern around regulation that looks at breaking up pieces of that because we feel like we're constraining further. And I think that'll be a conversation for the you know, for the next administration, regardless of which comes in. It's

already something they're looking at. Yeah. Absolutely, And if I'd say if that asteroid actually we're covered in iPhones, then that would be bad news for Apple all thinks. I don't know how Apple would have gone on the iPhones on the asteroid in the first place, but some alien, some alien company has replicated the iPhone. Who knows. We'll start some conspiracy theories. Thanks for the laugh on Adrian. That was not deserved, but I appreciate I appreciate the

fake laugh. Anyways, a fake laugh will take Mica a long way. It doesn't matter, a notional laugh, whatever it takes. All my laughs are genuine. Okay, thank you? All right, Well, we're looking forward to a very very busy week um an exciting week for many of us and Adrian Helford. This was a great opportunity to have you on the show and we really appreciate it. Thank you for having me. What goes up. We'll be back next week. Until then, you can find us on the Bloomberg Terminal website and

app or wherever you get your podcasts. We'd love it if you took the time to rate and review the show on Apple podcast so more listeners can find us. And you can find us on Twitter, follow me at at Sara Pantzack, Mike is that reaganonymous, and you can also follow Bloomberg Podcasts at Podcasts. Also thank you to Charlie Pellett of Bloomberg Radio and the voice of the New York City subway system. What Goes Up is produced by Jordan Gospore. The head of Bloomberg podcast is Francesco Levie.

Thanks for listening, See you next time.