Berkshire Hathaway’s Q3 filing reveals continued recalibration, marked by strategic reductions in some of Buffett’s largest and most iconic holdings. This sustained selling trend hints at Buffett’s careful approach to maintaining portfolio balance amid market uncertainties.

One of the most significant shifts this quarter was Buffett’s additional cut to Berkshire’s Apple (AAPL)stake, which was reduced from 400 million shares to 300 million shares. This is now over two-thirds less than its size since 2023, suggesting a cautious tone toward the tech giant’s valuation. Similarly, Buffett trimmed back Berkshire’s position in Bank of America (BAC) by 23%, reflecting a potential reassessment of the banking sector. Buffett's move could also be a reflection of the bank facing some serious challenges in its bond portfolio, which have resulted in massive unrealized losses and write-offs.

An unexpected move this quarter was Buffett’s swift exit from Ulta Beauty (ULTA). After only one quarter, he sold nearly all his shares in the cosmetics chain—a departure from his typical long-term investment approach. This rare short-term exit may reflect a reassessment of the company’s growth outlook or an adjustment based on Berkshire’s evolving sector strategy.

In addition to the reductions and exits, Berkshire Hathaway showed continued commitment to some of its core holdings by modestly increasing stakes in Sirius XM Holdings (SIRI) and Heico Corp (HEI). Buffett added 3.77 million shares of Sirius XM, raising his total stake to over 105 million shares—a 3.72% increase. This suggests Buffett’s confidence in Sirius XM’s strong market positioning and reliable cash flows, which fit well with his preference for stable businesses.

Additionally, Berkshire increased its position in Heico Corp by 5,445 shares, bringing the total to nearly 1.05 million shares. This incremental boost indicates Buffett's growing interest in the aerospace and defense technology space, where Heico has maintained a resilient foothold.

While Buffett trimmed several holdings, he also added a few fresh positions. Berkshire’s investment in Domino’s Pizza (DPZ), with a 1.28 million-share purchase, showcases Buffett’s interest in consumer-facing companies with strong brand recognition and cash flow. In a surprising addition, he also took a stake in Pool Corp (POOL), acquiring 404,057 shares. This move into the pool equipment sector highlights Buffett’s search for unique investment opportunities with niche market potential.

According to its 10-Q report, Berkshire continued to sell more than it bought in Q3, with net stock sales amounting to approximately $36 billion against $1.5 billion in purchases. This consistent trend of heavy selling aligns with Buffett’s comments about tax considerations and portfolio rebalancing, though it has fueled speculation about his broader market outlook.

Several other holdings saw significant cuts:

Charter Communications (CHTR): Berkshire reduced its position, selling one million shares and ending the quarter with 2.8 million.

Nu Holdings (NU): Buffett reduced his stake in this Brazilian financial firm by 20.7 million shares, retaining 86.4 million shares.

Capital One Financial (COF): Berkshire trimmed this position by 719,000 shares, leaving it with 9.1 million shares.

Berkshire also fully exited its position in Floor & Decor (FND), a flooring retailer, selling off all four million shares—a move that reflects Buffett’s decisive adjustment in the consumer discretionary sector.

Buffett’s portfolio adjustments illustrate his classic value investing principles with a renewed focus on balancing risk and opportunity:

Selective Diversification: While Berkshire continues to hold iconic names like Coca-Cola, American Express, and Moody’s, Buffett’s adjustments show selectivity in reducing overexposure to individual sectors.

Opportunistic Adjustments: The addition of consumer-oriented stocks like Domino’s Pizza and Pool Corp underscores Buffett’s strategy of focusing on resilient businesses, even while shedding higher-risk or fully valued positions.

Risk Management and Patience: Buffett’s steady reductions in high-exposure holdings reveal his discipline in preserving capital and managing concentration risks, aligning with his longstanding commitment to prudent, long-term investment.

As investors analyze these moves, Buffett’s actions provide valuable insights into the mindset of one of the world’s most respected investors during a period of market flux.

Listed REIT prices declined sharply two years ago, as the market anticipated and priced in the forthcoming drop in property prices, moving lower ahead of the broader commercial real estate market. However, following a prolonged period of weakness for listed real estate, we are now seeing a beacon of optimism for the asset class. A recent resurgence in transaction volumes suggests that the bulk of the private market has now absorbed necessary write-downs, instilling confidence that private market values are stabilizing. Consequently, we believe the stage is set for real estate investment trust (REIT) investors to look forward with a renewed sense of optimism and potentially benefit from the pricing in of potential growth in earnings and assets values.

In the third quarter of 2024, for the first time in over two years, US real estate transaction volumes look to have increased as reported by CBRE, the world’s largest property brokerage ─ a bellwether for the corporate real estate sector. This is very welcome news for property investors following a painful period of higher borrowing costs, economic uncertainty, and declining asset values. All told, these factors contributed to transaction levels that collapsed nearly 70% from peak levels in 2021. With large gaps between buyer and seller pricing expectations, liquidity was not available at private real estate’s reported valuations. Non-traded (private) REITs’ gated investor funds, queues of unmet redemption requests in core property funds formed, and eventually losses for investors and lenders slowly crystalized through the private markets’ gradual adjustments to reported values. With reported real estate prices now starting to reflect their underlying asset values, supported by central banks beginning to lower interest rates, investor optimism has grown alongside improving real estate debt markets, fostering a recovery in real estate transactions.

CBRE also reported a 20% revenue increase from US investment sales (also known as advisory sales – ie. buy/sell transactions) in the third quarter. According to its CEO, “Capital markets transaction activity has passed an inflection point and is in early stages of recovery.” Management further noted, “We think buyers and sellers have largely come together for most asset classes or are very close to having come together…there is debt available now…there’s increased interest in multi-family. We’ve seen a little bit of cap rate (rate of return) compression in multi-family and industrial.”

CBRE’s commercial mortgage originations advanced over 50% over the same quarter, signaling burgeoning strength in real estate lending as well. We see conditions as being ripe for increased lending as the transaction market recovers and evidence of stronger asset pricing surfaces and becomes better appreciated by the market.

Elsewhere, there are notable recent transactions illustrating healthy asset pricing and attractive lending, supporting our team’s view that real estate pricing has bottomed and a new cycle is beginning:

KKR/Lennar: In June this year (2024), private equity company KKR acquired 5,200 apartment units from home construction company Lennar’s multifamily division for US$2.1bn, representing an estimated 15-20% premium to asset value for the listed residential REITs.

Brookfield/DRA: In May, investment firm Brookfield acquired a 14.6m square foot portfolio of industrial warehouses from real estate investment adviser DRA for US$1.3bn. The deal encompasses 128 properties across 20 markets and is 98% leased.

Tishman Speyer/Rockefeller Center: In October, diversified real estate firm Tishman Speyer completed a US$3.5bn refinancing of NYC’s Rockefeller Center in the CMBS market for a 6.5% interest rate. For much of the past two years, office transactions remained dormant and plagued by distressed lending conditions. This refinancing marks the largest single-asset office debt deal in history and was significantly oversubscribed by debt investors.

Within real estate, REITs are enviably positioned, with 30% loan-to-value ratios (compared to 60% for private real estate), have cheaper cost of funds, and can issue equity in public markets to grow, thereby taking advantage of the resurgent liquidity to buy assets. However, for the past two years, REITs have been stymied in their acquisition pursuits by lack of deal-flow and wide bid-ask spreads. As transactions pick up and pricing improves, REITs across sub-sectors are increasingly deploying capital for acquisitions or development projects, which we believe will advance earnings growth. Furthermore, many REITs have joint ventures or fund management platforms capable of delivering additional returns when assets are sold. These profits have largely diminished over the prior two-year standstill in the transaction market; but as deal volumes recover, REITs are likely to once again be positioned to harvest gains from these vehicles, bolstering profits.

The recovery in transactions, therefore, highlights multiple avenues for REITs to boost earnings growth, strengthening the outlook for asset values, and ultimately, the potential for higher share prices and growing dividends in a new cycle.

In a day-after-the-election briefing to a group of business executives on what the trade policy of a second Trump presidency might look like, the question was asked, “What would an example of a good tariff be?”

The answer is the same one that the 16th century Swiss physician and alchemist Paracelsus gave about dosages of medicine—given in moderation and for the right purpose, they can help heal. Given in excess, they become a poison.

Special additional tariffs are part of current trade remedies, adopted as a matter of national policy and embedded in domestic US law and international agreement. They are recognized therefore as “good” by Congress even if hardly ever welcomed by the measures’ opponents. Additional tariffs are mandatory to offset dumping (sales at less than fair value) and foreign subsidies where material injury is found. And where there is serious injury, the president is given discretion to impose additional tariffs under a safeguard provision. The policy behind the use of these remedies is not just one of equity. The provision of trade remedies may well have been necessary to allow a system of generally open trade to survive with sufficient domestic political support.

There is a second grouping of tariffs (and subsidies, which are another form of protection) that was considered good by the Biden administration and perhaps by a majority in Congress. These measures were selective. A key US national security objective during the Biden administration was to assure that the United States had the ability to manufacture leading edge semiconductors. This was done through subsidies in the CHIPS Act and through tariffs imposed under separate presidential authority. Similarly, climate change and geopolitics were seen during the Biden White House as worthy objectives for support. This accounts for the current additional tariffs and subsidies for batteries, electric vehicles (EVs), and the like.

The use of tariffs (and subsidies) is not free of controversy, however. The tariffs on EVs and batteries slow the ability of the country to meet climate objectives. At the other extreme, whether climate change is seen as a problem or even acknowledged by the next administration is unknown.

President Trump went far beyond suggesting the selective use of tariffs in his campaign. He spoke very often of imposing a blanket tariff of 10 or 20 percent on all imports, with a 60 percent tariff on Chinese imports. The blanket tariff of 10 or 20 percent would not readily be avoided unless an adequate domestic supply of the goods in question can be produced domestically at a higher price due to the tariff or a sufficient bureaucracy is installed from which to seek exemptions from the tariff.

It is clear that several of those likely to have a major role in the incoming Trump administration, as well as the president-elect, consider this to be a good use of tariffs. Others, outside the new administration, will continue to disagree—including nearly all economists, many US businesses dependent on imports for necessary inputs, and all US trading partners.

It is widely agreed that the high tariff signed into law in 1930 by President Herbert Hoover was a colossal error. Thirteen presidents, from Franklin D. Roosevelt up to and including Barack Obama, accepted the premise that lowering tariffs and conducting trade based on agreed rules would increase global economic activity and generally benefit the US. That policy ended with Donald Trump and was not revived by Joseph R. Biden Jr. High tariffs may now be tried with the announced goals of reining in the US trade deficit and raising US manufacturing employment. Trade deficit reduction, if it occurs, might be achieved at a lower level of economic activity at home and abroad. In that case, manufacturing employment could actually decline. A blanket tariff will clearly generate upward price pressure and lower consumption of imports. That much is sure.

The American people have not been told that they will bear the cost of the tariff (in fact, they were told foreign exporters would pay it) nor that they should consume less. The blanket tariff is a way to lower consumption without admitting that this is what is going to take place. No US administration has sought to impose a value added tax (a national sales tax) because of its domestic unpopularity. There was no mandate from the election to make consumption less attractive, and even less possible for those at the lower end of the economic scale.

It has been claimed that a blanket tariff will cause the shifting of production to domestic factories. It is not at all clear, however, that this works. US production of steel and aluminum did not increase because of the Trump tariffs of 25 and 10 percent, respectively. Nor is it credible that goods that now are almost entirely sourced abroad, like shoes and clothing, will substantially return to being produced domestically. Does a 10-20 percent tax bring about a recapture of industries lost when competitive advantage has shifted abroad? And where would the additional resources come from to make these new goods, if not from sectors that are already producing needed goods and services, including for export industries. The economy is at full employment. It is true that a 10-20 percent cost advantage solely due to the tariff might be sufficient to determine future investment decisions about plant locations. But the US would have to be closer to being cost competitive for the product in question for that to take place, and tariffs would make the US a less competitive base for exports.

Winning the popular vote by a wide margin, reelected President Trump will consider that he has a clear mandate to make greater use of tariffs. A cautionary note should be sounded, however, due to the UK’s experience with Brexit. Brexit made trade far more difficult between Britain’s largest trading partner, the EU. The Conservative government sold Brexit as a cost-free stroke of good fortune. It wasn’t. In June 2016, 51.89 percent of the British electorate had voted for Leave compared with 48.11 percent for Remain, a margin of 3.78 percentage points. This year, the political party responsible was resoundingly beaten at the polls. Current polling (as of May 2024) shows that now over 55 percent think leaving was a mistake versus 33 percent that it was the right thing to do. Nonetheless, there are immense obstacles to Britain now returning to the EU. Some damage cannot easily be undone.

In the 2024 US presidential election, the vote for Trump was 50.3 versus 48.1 percent for Kamala Harris. This is a similar margin to the other major economic vote of our time, Brexit. Now there is little doubt that Trump is going to impose much higher tariffs perhaps with the aid of Congress. The 2026 mid-term election may show what voters think of an abrupt and substantial tariff imposed by President Trump early in 2025. Even if they change their minds, some of the resulting damage to the world trading system and the US economy will be hard to undo.

CO2 Energy Transition Corp, trading under the proposed ticker NOEMU, is preparing to make a significant entrance into the public markets. The company, focused on developing sustainable energy technologies and carbon capture solutions, is aligned with the global push for a cleaner, greener future. As industries worldwide embrace decarbonization, the NOEMU IPO has become a focal point for investors interested in sustainability-focused opportunities. Here’s what you need to know about this anticipated public offering.

CO2 Energy Transition Corp is a leading innovator in the carbon capture and sustainable energy sector. The company specializes in developing technologies that capture and repurpose CO2 emissions, turning them into usable materials or energy sources. With a clear commitment to aiding industries in reducing their carbon footprint, CO2 Energy Transition Corp positions itself as a critical player in addressing climate change while creating economic value.

The company's technologies have diverse applications across industries such as manufacturing, energy production, and agriculture. Their solutions are not only environmentally friendly but also economically viable, offering a dual advantage of compliance with environmental regulations and cost savings.

The NOEMU IPO represents CO2 Energy Transition Corp’s strategy to scale its operations and accelerate the adoption of its technologies globally. The funds raised through this IPO will allow the company to expand its research and development (R&D) efforts, strengthen its production capabilities, and establish new partnerships.

Ticker Symbol:NOEMU

Exchange:NASDAQ

Expected Price Range:$12–$15 per share

Shares Offered:8 million shares

Proceeds Allocation:Primarily for R&D, scaling production, and expanding the company’s international presence.

The company’s valuation and financial performance will be closely watched by investors, particularly given the growing market interest in green technologies and ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) investments.

The NOEMU IPO has garnered significant attention for several reasons:

Global Energy Transition: Governments and corporations are committing to net-zero carbon emissions by mid-century. CO2 Energy Transition Corp is well-positioned to capitalize on this shift with its innovative solutions that align with global sustainability goals.

Market Potential: The global carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) market is expected to grow from $4 billion in 2024 to over $15 billion by 2030, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of approximately 20%. CO2 Energy Transition Corp’s unique approach to CO2 reuse provides an edge in this competitive and expanding market.

Technological Edge: Unlike traditional carbon capture methods that are often costly and inefficient, the company’s solutions are designed to integrate seamlessly into industrial systems, providing higher efficiency and scalability.

Strong Leadership and Partnerships: The company’s leadership team includes experts in energy technology, sustainable engineering, and finance. Moreover, CO2 Energy Transition Corp has established partnerships with leading industrial players, enhancing its credibility and market reach.

Investor Interest in ESG: As institutional investors prioritize ESG-compliant investments, the NOEMU IPO offers an appealing option with its clear sustainability focus and potential for long-term growth.

While the NOEMU IPO presents exciting opportunities, investors should remain mindful of the inherent risks.

Market Volatility: The renewable energy and carbon capture sectors can experience fluctuations in demand due to regulatory changes, economic conditions, and technological advancements.

Competition: The CCUS industry is becoming increasingly competitive as new startups and established energy firms invest in similar technologies. CO2 Energy Transition Corp must continue innovating to maintain its competitive advantage.

Scaling Challenges: The success of the company’s technologies depends on their ability to scale effectively and prove commercially viable across various industries.

The proceeds from the NOEMU IPO will empower CO2 Energy Transition Corp to address its growth objectives while driving the adoption of sustainable practices. Given the rising emphasis on carbon neutrality across industries, the company’s innovative solutions have strong potential to disrupt the market and become a cornerstone of global decarbonization efforts.

Looking ahead, CO2 Energy Transition Corp is expected to expand its reach into international markets, leveraging its expertise to address varying regional needs in carbon reduction. If the company executes its strategy effectively, its market value could significantly rise in the coming years.

Proprietary trading, commonly referred to as prop trading, is an exciting and lucrative segment of the financial markets. It involves traders using a firm’s capital to make trades rather than their own funds. This approach allows for potentially significant profits while minimizing personal financial risks. But what exactly is prop trading, and how does it differ from other forms of trading? Let’s explore the world of proprietary trading in this comprehensive beginner’s guide.

Proprietary trading occurs when a financial firm—such as a bank, hedge fund, or trading firm—uses its own capital to trade stocks, bonds, commodities, forex, or other financial instruments. Unlike retail trading, where individuals trade with their own money, prop traders operate with the firm’s resources, sharing a percentage of the profits generated.

The firm provides traders with access to significant amounts of capital, enabling them to execute high-value trades that would be difficult for retail traders.

Prop traders typically receive a portion of the profits from successful trades. The split varies between firms but often rewards high-performing traders generously.

Since the firm’s capital is on the line, risk management is a critical component. Firms implement strict guidelines and provide tools to ensure traders minimize losses.

Prop traders benefit from advanced trading platforms, proprietary algorithms, and leverage that magnifies their purchasing power in the markets.

Prop traders can execute large trades without risking their personal funds.

Working in a prop trading firm offers access to cutting-edge technology, mentorship, and market insights.

Successful traders can earn substantial incomes through performance-based profit sharing.

Prop trading environments are excellent for honing technical skills, market analysis, and risk management strategies.

Firms expect consistent profitability, and underperforming traders may lose their positions.

While traders don’t risk personal capital, failure to adhere to risk management guidelines can result in termination.

Prop trading requires mastery of advanced strategies and quick decision-making.

Stocks are among the most common instruments for prop traders due to high liquidity and volatility.

The foreign exchange market offers opportunities for leveraged trading in global currencies.

Gold, oil, and other commodities attract prop traders for their volatility and diversification potential.

Options and futures are popular for their risk management capabilities and potential high returns.

Traders must quickly analyze market data and make informed decisions.

Success requires controlling emotions and avoiding impulsive actions.

Familiarity with trading platforms and algorithms is essential.

Effective strategies to mitigate losses are crucial for long-term success.

Look for firms offering training, mentorship, and supportive environments for beginners.

Focus on building expertise in market analysis, strategy development, and risk management.

Begin with smaller trades to build confidence and minimize mistakes.

Many firms offer educational resources to help new traders succeed.

Proprietary trading is a dynamic and potentially rewarding career for those willing to put in the effort to master the skills and strategies required. By using a firm’s capital and leveraging advanced tools, traders can achieve significant profits without risking personal funds. However, the high-pressure environment requires discipline, adaptability, and a commitment to continuous learning.

For aspiring traders, prop trading represents an exciting pathway into the financial markets, offering both financial rewards and professional growth.

The world’s largest companies wield immense power, shaping industries, influencing economies, and driving innovation. These corporate giants span various sectors, including technology, energy, retail, and finance. In this article, we explore the largest companies globally based on revenue, market capitalization, and industry influence, shedding light on their achievements and impact.

The size of a company is typically gauged by:

Revenue– Total income from sales and services, reflecting business scale.

Market Capitalization– Total market value of a company’s outstanding shares, indicating investor confidence.

Global Influence– Impact on industries, economies, and innovation.

Revenue (2023):$611 billion

Headquarters:Bentonville, Arkansas, USAWalmart’s dominance in the retail sector stems from its vast global network, low-cost strategy, and diversified offerings.

Revenue (2023):$604 billion

Headquarters:Dhahran, Saudi ArabiaAs the world’s largest oil producer, Saudi Aramco plays a pivotal role in global energy markets.

Revenue (2023):$513 billion

Headquarters:Seattle, Washington, USAAmazon’s expansion into cloud computing, logistics, and AI underscores its adaptability and vision.

Market Cap (2023):$2.8 trillion

Headquarters:Cupertino, California, USAApple’s innovative products and ecosystem have made it the most valuable company globally.

Market Cap (2023):$2.5 trillion

Headquarters:Redmond, Washington, USADominating the software and cloud computing space, Microsoft continues to shape digital transformation.

Market Cap (2023):$1.8 trillion

Headquarters:Mountain View, California, USAAlphabet’s investments in AI, cloud, and search solidify its influence in tech.

Technology:Companies like Apple, Microsoft, and Samsung drive innovation, shaping the future of AI, hardware, and software.

Energy:Firms like Saudi Aramco and ExxonMobil dominate, ensuring energy supplies in a volatile market.

Retail:Walmart, Amazon, and Alibaba transform shopping with their vast scale and technological integration.

Finance:JPMorgan Chase and ICBC lead in banking, impacting global capital flows and investments.

These companies contribute significantly to GDP, create jobs, and set trends in their respective industries.

Firms like Tesla and Apple push boundaries in electric vehicles, consumer electronics, and renewable energy.

Many large companies invest in sustainability, aiming to address global challenges like climate change and inequality.

The rise of AI, machine learning, and quantum computing will likely boost companies in the tech sector.

Energy companies are pivoting towards renewable energy as the world seeks greener solutions.

Firms continue to expand internationally while adapting to local markets to meet consumer needs.

The largest companies in the world are more than just economic powerhouses; they are drivers of innovation, progress, and societal change. As they evolve to meet global challenges, their influence will only grow, reshaping industries and setting the stage for the future.

Understanding these corporate titans offers valuable insights into the global economy and the trends shaping tomorrow’s world.