GSI Banner
  • Free Access
  • Contributors
  • Membership Levels
  • Video
  • Origins
  • Sponsors
  • My Account
  • Sign In
  • Join Now

  • Free Access
  • Contributors
  • Membership Levels
  • Video
  • Origins
  • Sponsors
  • Contact

© 2025 Grey Swan Investment Fraternity

  • Cookie Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
  • Whitelist Us
Daily Missive

The Market’s Diverging Paths

Loading ...Addison Wiggin

November 22, 2024 • 8 minute read


The Market’s Diverging Paths

“The most entertaining outcome is the most likely.”

-Elon Musk

 

November 22, 2024 — There was a time when Russia’s discussion of the use of nuclear arms would have led to a major market selloff.

Instead, it proved a blip on the radar. Stocks tanked pre-market on Tuesday as Russia announced it eased its threshold to drop a nuke, only to end the day higher.

The real market-shaking event of the week? Nvidia. The GPU manufacturer has soared higher, up over 500% in the last three years. Of course, its earnings have soared by a similar amount. But it’s become the hot stock for the AI trend over the past two years, and any misstep could have resulted in a market meltdown.

Fortunately, there was little about Nvidia to shake. Shares barely moved 1% yesterday following earnings. No doubt any trader who thought the stock would make a big move, whether up or down, lost money.

Nevertheless, AI stocks could soon face their own “Cisco moment.” The modem manufacturer was the poster child for the dotcom boom, and saw a spectacular decline from its peaks.

We’re not quite there yet, given Nvidia’s latest results. The AI boom lives on. And the biggest winner? It’s likely Elon Musk, who is moving to pivot Tesla Motors from an EV company to an AI company with tools such as self-driving cars.

Elon Musk is on track to become the world’s first trillionaire, possibly before 2030, if the AI boom is as strong as its supporters contend.

At the other end of the spectrum, there’s Warren Buffett. The 94-year-old value investor has been trimming positions in companies like Apple and Bank of America all year.

Buffett isn’t a market timer per se, but he does tend to lighten up when he feels valuations are high. And he’s sitting on a record level of cash at Berkshire, over $300 billion. As a percentage basis, today marks one of his highest.

Does that mean market danger right away? Or will we continue on the path toward endless AI prosperity?

We suspect it will be a mix of both. Trump’s election and the push to keep tax rates low and deregulate may yet squeeze a few more years of a bull market – but expect some fearful pullbacks along the way.

Meanwhile, James Hickman at Schiff Sovereign takes a closer look at Buffett’s actions and what they may – or may not – mean for investors. ~ Enjoy, Addison

What’s Up With Buffett and His $325 Billion Pile of Cash?

James Hickman, Schiff Sovereign

Much has been written about Warren Buffett having sold a substantial amount of stocks. And his company, Berkshire Hathaway, is sitting on a record $325 billion cash pile as a result.

Buffett has often said that his preferred holding period for an investment is “forever”. So the fact that he has sold so much stock has many observers proclaiming that “Buffett is predicting an imminent stock market crash.”

Except that he’s not. Buffett is a pretty transparent guy who has never been afraid to speak his mind. If he were predicting a crash, he’d probably say it.

Besides, Buffett has sold plenty of stocks in the past; this is not an anomaly. In 2022 and 2023, for example, he dumped shares of Chevron, Activision Blizzard, Taiwan Semiconductor, and HP.

This time around he sold off some shares in Apple and Bank of America. But he actually explained WHY– especially with Apple. And I think his reasoning is worth mentioning.

Buffett explained to a reporter that “We don’t mind paying taxes at Berkshire. And we are paying a 21% federal rate,” which amounted to $5 billion last year.

But he continued, saying that the US federal corporate tax rate “was 35% not long ago, and it’s been 52% in the past. . . With the present fiscal policies, I think that something has to give, and I think that higher taxes are quite likely,” i.e. that the government will take “a greater share of your income, or mine, or Berkshire’s.”

“So if I’m [selling Apple stock] at 21% [tax rates] this year, and we’re doing it at a lot higher percentage later on, I don’t think [shareholders] will actually mind that we sold a little Apple this year.”

This is a critical takeaway.

Nations with enormous debts and deficits can’t live beyond their means forever; Buffett isn’t predicting a market crash– he’s predicting higher taxes… that, sooner or later, the federal government is going to have a take a much bigger bite out of people’s paychecks.

As I’ve written before, there’s a chance that Buffett’s prediction might be wrong. It IS still possible for the US to get back on the right track– a combination of government efficiency, spending cuts, de-regulation, and a technology (AI) fueled productivity boom could generate such an economic boom that the country COULD grow its way out of debt without having to resort to higher taxes (or inflation).

But the new administration will have to get moving immediately. Otherwise, Buffett will be proven right: higher taxes will be inevitable.

His decision to sell Bank of America stock is even more obvious and also bears mentioning. Quite simply, Bank of America is in deep trouble.

You probably recall how the Federal Reserve slashed interest rates all the way down to zero during the pandemic. It was ridiculous– the US government was able to sell Ten Year notes with a yield of less than 0.4%.

Talk about a shitty deal. The largest debtor in the history of the world was selling bonds with such a pitiful yield that they didn’t even keep up with inflation. Who would be such an idiot to buy such a terrible asset?

Bank of America, that’s who. In fact, Bank of America invested hundreds of billions of dollars of their depositors’ savings in these terrible assets.

Well, now that interest rates are literally more than 10x higher (from 0.4% to more than 4%), those same bonds that Bank of America bought back in 2020 and 2021 have lost a TON of money. BofA is sitting on more than $100 BILLION in unrealized losses from their bond portfolio.

Remember, this is the same reason that Silicon Valley Bank (among others) went bust last year– the bonds they bought during the pandemic lost a ton of value, and the bank was wiped out. Bank of America is in a similar position now.

The key difference is that Bank of America has enough capital on its balance sheet to sustain those losses. So they might not be wiped out or fail. But the implications for shareholders are pretty bad.

Whenever a bank gets into trouble, the first thing that happens is the regulators step in and start making a bunch of demands. In this case, the FDIC and Fed will probably force Bank of America to raise more capital.

This will have the effect of severely diluting existing Bank of America shareholders… which most investors, especially Buffett, absolutely HATE.

The second thing that regulators always do with troubled banks is force them to suspend their dividend. And dividends are among the top reasons why Buffett likes to hold companies “forever”. So given the likely prospect of zero dividends and heavily diluted shares, it looks like Buffett is getting out before regulators drop the hammer on Bank of America.

This is a big difference from “Buffett predicting a crash” as so many headlines across the Internet have been suggesting.

That said, the US stock market in general is definitely looking very expensive and near historically high valuations once again.

But there’s at least one sector that’s still cheap: real assets.

I’ve been writing for most of the past two years that real assets make a lot of sense to own, especially during inflationary times. Real assets were THE asset class to own during the 1970s stagflation.

The US is currently on the same path– with its national debt constantly surging to new record highs (now $36 trillion), suggesting that another bout of nasty inflation could be in order down the road.

But, again, there’s now a reasonable chance that the new administration is able to get the nation’s finances on the right track… potentially forestalling an inflation spike and debt crisis.

So do real assets still make sense?

For now, yes. Natural gas is a great example– as I’ve explained before, US natural gas is still incredibly cheap. And any American energy renaissance will depend heavily on natural gas. Prices could surge as a result, and natural gas producers could boom. Yet many companies’ shares are still available for peanuts.

Bottom line, it still makes sense to consider fantastic real asset producers– especially when they are profitable, low-debt, dividend-paying businesses that trade at absurdly low valuations. ~ James Hickman, Schiff Sovereign

Regards,


Addison Wiggin,
Grey Swan

P.S. Reader C.C., who we regularly correspond with, had some interesting views on many of our recent topics, particularly the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and whether or not anyone can really drain the proverbial swamp:

I think there’s lots of potential Mileis in the US who would do a better job, but Trump is the only one so far who dared to call out the DC swamp directly. He was just in the right place at the right time.

…But in the end, it’s still him vs the deep state and the swamp critters. I just hope the people around him know what they’re doing.

Send your thoughts on post-election America, gold, or bitcoin here: addison@greyswanfraternity.com.


George Gilder: Morgan Stanley’s Memory Problem

October 7, 2025 • Addison Wiggin

Overspending during periods of rising ASPs is self-destructive. For most products, today’s ASP increases result less from natural demand pull and more from supplier-enforced discipline. If memory makers treat them as justification for a capex binge, they will repeat past mistakes and trigger another collapse.

The $50 billion bull case for WFE in 2026 rests on a faulty assumption. Lam and AMAT may benefit from selective investments, but the cycle-defining upturn Morgan Stanley describes is unlikely.

Investors should temper expectations. If history repeats — and memory markets have a way of doing so — the companies that preserve pricing power will outperform, while equipment suppliers may find that the promised order boom never fully materializes.

George Gilder: Morgan Stanley’s Memory Problem
Europe’s Increasing Irrelevancy

October 7, 2025 • Addison Wiggin

Europe’s GDP has flatlined over the past 15 years, against a doubling in GDP for the U.S. and even bigger GDP gains in China.

While the U.S. leads the world in AI spending, and China leads in technology like drones, what does Europe lead the world in? Regulation.

They spend more time penalizing U.S. tech firms for regulatory violations than encouraging their own tech ecosystem.

Europe’s Increasing Irrelevancy
Another Day, Another Circular AI Investment

October 7, 2025 • Addison Wiggin

Liquidity is flowing again, but conviction isn’t. U.S. M2 money supply has been expanding for months, even before the recent interest rate cut.

Currently, it’s up 4.8% year over year. That’s the fastest pace since 2022. That’s just enough to drive stocks higher in the short-term. Even algorithms and systematic funds will respond mechanically and buy stocks when they see liquidity rise. It’s the most fundamental indicator.

The volatility index (VIX)’s rise to 16.6, up over 2% this week, shows that big money is hedging, even as the market indices rise. After all, with signs of a slowing economy – and a government shut down – it’s hardly business as usual.

Another Day, Another Circular AI Investment
The Ghost of Bastiat

October 6, 2025 • Addison Wiggin

By then the receipts on my desk had arranged themselves into a sort of chorus. I heard, faintly, another refrain—one from Kentucky. In the first days of the shutdown, Senator Rand Paul stood alone among Republicans and voted against his party’s stopgap, telling interviewers that the numbers “don’t add up” and that he would not sign on to another year that piles $2 trillion onto the debt.

That, I realized, is what the tariff story shares with the broader budget theater: the habit of calling a tax something else, of shifting burdens into the fog and then celebrating the silhouette as victory. Even the vote tally made the point: he was the only Republican “no,” a lonely arithmetic lesson in a crowded room.

The Ghost of Bastiat