Tag Archive for: federal reserve

Beyond the Ballot Box: Midterms and Markets in Perspective

/in /by

In the 2026 midterm elections, control of Congress is up for grabs, and the result will shape our nation’s legislative agenda for the next two years. While we aren’t political commentators at Warren Street, we do dabble in the dark arts of politics when they touch markets. 

Our read of the data confirms that in the short-term, markets get choppier as investors price for uncertainty. Over longer horizons, returns still answer to earnings and economic growth. This time though, the election coincides with a generational technological shift, which we believe is also worth a closer look.

The Current State of Play

Between an elevated cost of living, AI data-center build-out, and mortgage rates climbing, midterm candidates are wrestling with issues that shape the lives of every American. The binding constraint on midterms – however – is inflation. With Iran’s continued attacks on energy infrastructure, they’ve kept oil prices elevated enough to pressure the administration’s midterm chances without tipping the world into recession.

This has had a real influence on the prospects for the House and the Senate. Markets are currently pricing a Democratic House, linked back to a razor-thin majority from Republicans and expectedly uncompetitive races. Meanwhile, the Senate was initially a toss-up that has since shifted towards the Democrats, with betting markets placing a clean sweep above even odds for over a month. 


A Close Race in the Senate

Current Senate as of 10/06/2026

None of this is particularly unusual. Across the last 23 midterms dating back to 1934, the president’s party has lost an average of 27 House seats and three Senate seats for two primary reasons: 1) the party out of power has a greater voter turn-out and 2) presidential approval ratings – regardless of party – typically dampens in the first two years. These factors work together to, at times, make races tighter than one would expect.

Looking at the Data

It’s common for returns to start shaky in midterm years before accelerating as markets bypass initial uncertainty and as outcomes become more crystallized. However, midterm years have historically weighed on returns, with the S&P 500 averaging an annualized 4.7% in midterm years versus a 9.5% return in all other years, dating back to 1931.

As expected, volatility also increases with the uncertainty that is accompanied by midterms. Since 1970, the median movement from the average return is 16% compared to 13% for non-election years. 

What’s reassuring, however, is the longer-term trajectory of markets. Since 1950, the average one-year return following a mid-term election is 15.1% – twice the 7.4% average for subsequent returns in other years. That’s because although markets may experience a re-pricing in the short-term, companies eventually adapt. Earnings and economic growth finds a way of re-accelerating in the world’s most refined capital markets despite a new political regime.

Lastly, the configuration of the entire administration matters less than some would think. Since 1933, markets have averaged double-digit returns under unified government and a split congress. 

The Most Favorable Configuration Would be a Democratic Sweep

Beyond the Ballot Box

It’s tempting to focus on the election’s immediate winners and losers. As long-term investors, though, we’re watching the structural catalysts that drive long-term returns. Specifically, what implications might the midterms have on the AI trade? It’s no secret that AI has a PR problem, compounded by environmental and Not in My Back Yard (NIMBY) pushback from local communities. Ballot measures in eight states could delay, limit, or outright prohibit large-scale data centers, and polling shows that the distaste is bi-partisan.

While we don’t think today’s dissatisfaction is enough to halt the build-out, history does show that public sentiment can convert into regulation. Dodd-Frank followed the backlash against banks and nuclear development stalled after Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. The timing matters too, with AI Hyperscalers leaning on debt to fund this infrastructure, which in turn pushes their free cash flow negative. If voters pressure candidates into action, the risk isn’t necessarily a full-stop on AI infrastructure – it’s whether there is a slowdown meaningful enough to test investors who are already working with a thin margin for error. 

Investment Implications

Midterms may introduce short-term volatility, but our structural positioning in portfolios hasn’t changed. We remain constructive on well-diversified portfolios with an international tilt, and we’re deliberate about how much AI exposure we hold both home and abroad. Domestically, pairing market-cap weights with a quality tilt continues to perform. Internationally, the Emerging Markets index has become a concentrated AI bet, so we’ve balanced that “growth” exposure with value-oriented companies that return capital via dividend yields and stock buy-backs.

These changes aren’t market timing. They reflect our standard operating procedure of starting with the global opportunity set, diversifying sources of risk and return, and rebalancing as markets move. That discipline is what helps us keep clients from over-or-under-reacting to market swings, regardless of what grade we get from the nation’s upcoming “midterm” exam.

Phillip Law, CFA

Phillip Law, CFA

Senior Portfolio Manager

Warren Street Wealth Advisors, LLC., a Registered Investment Advisor

The information presented here represents opinions and is not meant as personal or actionable advice to any individual, corporation, or other entity. Any investments discussed carry unique risks and should be carefully considered and reviewed by you and your financial professional. Nothing in this document is a solicitation to buy or sell any securities, or an attempt to furnish personal investment advice. Warren Street Wealth Advisors and/or its clients may hold positions in the securities mentioned. Holdings may change at any time without notice. Due to the static nature of content, securities held may change over time and current trades may be contrary to outdated publications. Form ADV available upon request 714-876-6200.

Sources:

5% and Counting: Is the US Treasury Back?

/in /by

One of the most prominent headlines in financial media today surrounds a less sexy asset class: US government bonds (a.k.a. Treasuries). Think about a Treasury as an IOU where you’re loaning money to the US government, with the goal of collecting interest and principal. More recently, yields on the 10-Year US Treasury have breached 5% – a key threshold that influencers and journalists are touting as “critical level” for risk assets. So what’s genuinely pushing these yields higher, and what do we make of it?

While the 5% level is the highest we’ve seen in nearly 20 years, rates only become truly restrictive when an economy isn’t growing, the private sector is already overleveraged, and resources sit underutilized. None of that describes the US’ position today, but the timing of this surge does feel eerie (alongside conversations around AI doom), linked to a myriad of factors:

  • Fed credibility → Central bank credibility has been a lingering concern since President Trump’s public feud with former Fed Chair Jerome Powell, and newly appointed Chair Kevin Warsh’s shaky press conferences didn’t help. Fortunately, Warsh was able to calm market nerves recently by committing more durably to the Fed’s inflation mandate, even if it means raising short-term interest rates.
  • Fiscal Debt Sustainability → US Debt levels are high, something we share with other developed nations. While we believe that Treasuries remain the cleanest dirty shirt in the hamper (amongst the debt of other nations), persistent deficits and associated interest expense do raise concerns around long-term fiscal sustainability.
    • What’s overlooked is that the rate of deficit growth is surprising to the downside. Higher bond yields and political pushback have capped government spending to an extent. Yes, absolute debt levels are high, but given that markets are about rate of change and surprises, could investors be overindexing on absolute debt levels as a cause?
  • Real (Strong) Growth → Strong economic growth naturally commands higher yields since investors have more attractive places to put their capital. Nominal GDP is outpacing cost of borrowing per BCA Research, manufacturing and services activity are in expansionary territory, and corporate profits are on a tear (the S&P 500 reported a whopping ~50% year-over-year (YoY) earnings growth last quarter).
  • Foreigners (not) Fleeing Treasuries– while there’s been some rebalancing across international balance sheets (to fund national security interests or to rotate into other US bond instruments), we have yet to observe a widespread pullback from Treasuries on international balance sheets or an increase in the pace of selling.
  • Unorthodox Fiscal Policy→ you’ll notice we didn’t list inflation as a primary contributor. While inflation is definitely a driver, we believe unorthodox fiscal policy with idiosyncratic impacts on global supply chains is a more relevant culprit. Be it trade wars and forced reshorting of supply chains or waging war against our largest enemy in the middle east (next to a critical resource chokepoint), these instances have resulted in higher prices and driven yields upwards. A more stable policy path could ease both.
  • New Competition for Capital→ AI Hyperscalers like Google are issuing debt to fund AI buildouts – forcing Treasuries to face real competition for investor dollars. 

Investment Implications:

What About for Stocks?

The classic worry is that higher yields suppress stock returns by making borrowing more expensive for home ownership and corporations, while also creating a more attractive entry point for bonds and thus pulling money out of equities. We’ve yet to see that happen. Housing was already soft to begin with, and AI-debt has been rate-insensitive throughout the AI buildout (which also supports the economy through hiring of roofers, electricians, and HVAC teams). Real economic growth estimates for 2026 remain around 2.0% across major institutions.

Meanwhile, the relative value trade-off between stocks and bonds have yet to force a rotation, especially if profit growth across corporate America continues to hold strong (expected to be 28.8% YoY for Q3 2026). The catalyst could be lying in wait, but as of this publication, strong fundamentals have yet to fully curve equity appetites.

What About Treasuries in a Portfolio?

Personally, I believe there’s reasons to be excited to be a bond investor today. Bonds have always played a core role in a portfolio: capital preservation and income generation. Now, longer term bonds can deliver income above inflation, cushion against downside, and diversify against equity risk.


There may be more volatility ahead – especially if the Iran war escalates or if Washington sends confusing signals ($5,000 GOP Checks?), but the US government is finally paying you to hold its debt. Yes, Washington’s balance sheet has its flaws, but global sovereign debt is a relative game. If the world gets messy, I’d feel more at home (no pun intended) owning income-producing US treasuries – backed by the taxing authority of the world’s strongest superpower and the world’s most liquid market – compared to other sovereign debt.

Phillip Law, CFA

Phillip Law, CFA

Senior Portfolio Manager

Warren Street Wealth Advisors, LLC., a Registered Investment Advisor

The information presented here represents opinions and is not meant as personal or actionable advice to any individual, corporation, or other entity. Any investments discussed carry unique risks and should be carefully considered and reviewed by you and your financial professional. Nothing in this document is a solicitation to buy or sell any securities, or an attempt to furnish personal investment advice. Warren Street Wealth Advisors and/or its clients may hold positions in the securities mentioned. Holdings may change at any time without notice. Due to the static nature of content, securities held may change over time and current trades may be contrary to outdated publications. Form ADV available upon request 714-876-6200.

Beyond the Magnificent Seven: A 2026 Midyear Check-In

/in /by

Back in January, we published our 2026 Outlook under the title “Beyond AI & Mega-Cap Tech.” Our argument was simple: real diversification was working and could add value beyond the AI trade which was concentrated to a handful of household names (namely the Magnificent Seven, which includes Microsoft, Amazon, and other big tech names). Six months later, we observe that the AI trade has indeed packed its bag, picked up a passport, and traveled to other asset categories including small caps and emerging markets.

As of late July, small caps and emerging markets are leading the pack. The Russell 2000 (small cap index) is up 18.8% year-to-date while emerging markets 16.3% — all outpacing the S&P 500’s respectable 8.9%. Investors rotated into other corners of the same AI story, with small caps and EM carrying their own AI-adjacent demand related to chips, data centers, and power. 

The AI Trade, Domestically: Rotated, But With More Vulnerability

The Magnificent Seven, as a basket, is down 6.9% year-to-date. Hyperscalers (i.e., the biggest spenders on AI infrastructure) including Microsoft (-18.3%), Meta (-10%), and Amazon have struggled in 2026. Only Apple (+25.3%), Alphabet (+6.1%), and Nvidia (+5.8%) are green — and none are this year’s real winners in tech.

That title belongs to the memory and storage names behind the AI buildout: Micron and other chip manufacturers (i.e., CPUs, Memory, etc) are leading the trade, even after “taking a breath” off early-summer highs. Data center demand for memory has minted bigger winners than the household names that started the AI story.

Research cited by Capital Group and Empirical Research Partners shows 68 AI-linked stocks (a.k.a. “Magical 68”) now make up 42% of the S&P 500’s market cap and are compounding earnings north of 30% vs. roughly 5%+ for non-AI stocks – evidence that backlogs are being structurally rewritten to meet supply-constrained demand. In fact, the semiconductors industry alone has also grown from roughly 6–7% of the index three years ago to nearly 20% today.

The bigger question remains whether that demand holds up. Chips are being sold into datacenters built for AI service demands assumed to keep compounding for years – a slowdown, or is absorbed faster than expected – today’s earnings – and the valuations riding on them – could reprice just as fast as they arrived. 

The AI Trade, Internationally: Same Movie, Different Language

Emerging markets caught the same bug. The MSCI EM Index — up 16% YTD — now carries a heavier tech weighting than the S&P 500, essentially making EM an AI trade. Investors adding EM for diversification may just be buying semiconductors or memory chips in a different currency.

It’s worth noting that EM’s recent outperformance traces back to a handful of AI-linked chip names. Taiwan and South Korea now make up roughly 45% of the benchmark — nearly double their weight a year ago, and above the dot-com peak. Taiwan’s market cap alone exceeds China’s, despite an economy a fraction of the size, with forward earnings (i.e., market cap to cash earnings) running several standard deviations above trend. Put plainly, the diversification benefit of market-cap weighted EM is thinner than it once was and is linked to the fragility of the AI supply chain.

Kevin Warsh and the Inflation Watch

Inflation is sending mixed signals, with core prices (excluding food and energy) running near 2.5%, but the headline number — what you actually feel at the pump and grocery store — is up 3.5% year-over-year due to tensions in the Middle East (the Federal Reserve’s target is ~2%). Consumer spending remains resilient and AI-related business investment is creeping into higher prices. Despite these pressures, cooling wage growth and anchored long-term inflation expectations make it less likely that this turns into a longer-lasting, demand-driven problem.

Kevin Warsh, the Fed’s new chair, wasted no time setting a firmer tone. At his first meeting, he scrapped the Fed’s usual forward guidance and signaled a tougher stance, holding rates steady while making clear that further rate hikes — not cuts — could be on the table. That represents a sizable shift from earlier this year, where markets expected two rate cuts; year; now they’re pricing in the possibility of an interest rate hike. 

There’s a less obvious ripple effect worth knowing about: the AI boom is increasingly funded by borrowed money, not just cash on hand. Big tech companies have issued roughly $130 billion in bonds so far this year to fund AI infrastructure, already surpassing all of last year’s total, with the broader AI debt market on track to exceed $500 billion in 2026. If interest rates rise, that borrowing gets more expensive — which could eventually squeeze the profits and stock valuations behind the AI trade that’s driven so much of the market’s gains.

Investment Implications

We recognize the risks building in the AI ecosystem, but the technology remains genuinely transformative, with substantial earnings potential and runway left in the build-out. Rather than timing an exit from one of the market’s most powerful themes, we’ve repositioned equity exposure to manage these imbalances more deliberately.

On the U.S. side, we’ve paired core market-cap-weighted exposure with a Quality tilt (JQUA), favoring companies with stronger balance sheets, durable free cash flow, and healthy returns on equity. This is a more disciplined way to own the AI trade — capturing upside while screening out the accounting and accrual adjustments that can inflate earnings tied to the theme.

On the EM side, we’ve balanced our pure-growth exposure (XSOE) with a value- and income-oriented fund (EYLD), tilting toward cash-generative businesses focused on dividends, buybacks, and debt paydown. This preserves our exposure to developing-market growth while reducing sensitivity to EM’s biggest AI-related vulnerabilities over a multi-year horizon.

The AI story likely has room to run, but we expect turbulence as investors scrutinize return on investment, large language model providers limit token usage, and frontier-model competitors emerge (e.g., Kimi K3). We view these positioning shifts as a thoughtful way to stay invested in AI while diversifying risk and return within an increasingly concentrated market.

Phillip Law, CFA

Phillip Law, CFA

Senior Portfolio Manager

Warren Street Wealth Advisors, LLC., a Registered Investment Advisor

The information presented here represents opinions and is not meant as personal or actionable advice to any individual, corporation, or other entity. Any investments discussed carry unique risks and should be carefully considered and reviewed by you and your financial professional. Nothing in this document is a solicitation to buy or sell any securities, or an attempt to furnish personal investment advice. Warren Street Wealth Advisors and/or its clients may hold positions in the securities mentioned. Holdings may change at any time without notice. Due to the static nature of content, securities held may change over time and current trades may be contrary to outdated publications. Form ADV available upon request 714-876-6200.