Asia Stocks Surge on Optimism Ahead of Trump-Xi Meeting; Kospi Hits Record High

Economic

Stocks

Summary:

Asian stock markets rallied strongly on Thursday, led by South Korea’s Kospi, which hit an all-time high, as optimism grows ahead of next week’s meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping...

Kospi Rally Signals Market Confidence

South Korea’s benchmark Kospi index soared 2.37% to close at 3,936.55, marking a historic high. The broader Kosdaq index also climbed 0.92%, as investors cheered the upcoming high-level talks between the U.S. and China. The White House confirmed that President Trump will meet President Xi in South Korea next Thursday after a stop in Malaysia and a speech at the APEC CEO Summit in Japan.

Adding to investor confidence, South Korea’s finance ministry reassured markets that it was prepared to intervene to stabilize the volatile won-dollar exchange rate. The South Korean won strengthened modestly to 1,434.7, though it remains down more than 4% over the past three months.

Japan’s Inflation Within Expectations, Stocks Edge Higher

Japan’s Nikkei 225 rose 1.54% to 49,390.07, while the Topix gained 0.39%. The increase was supported by fresh inflation data showing core inflation at 2.9% in September, up from 2.7% in August, in line with expectations. While higher inflation might normally dampen sentiment, the fact that it aligned with forecasts eased investor concerns over further monetary tightening.

Headline inflation also rose to 2.9%, matching the core figure, suggesting broad-based price increases but without any major surprise.

Chinese and Australian Markets Steady

The Hang Seng Index in Hong Kong gained 0.59% to 26,122.10, while mainland China’s CSI 300 climbed 0.57%, amid signs of renewed focus from Beijing on boosting domestic consumption and stabilizing economic momentum.

In Australia, the ASX 200 opened 0.19% higher, before retreating slightly to close down 0.05% at 9,028.00. The Reserve Bank of Australia announced plans to modernize the Reserve Bank Information and Transfer System (RITS), the country’s core interbank settlement platform. RBA Governor Michele Bullock said this would include new technology, longer operating hours, and wider use of central bank money.

U.S. Momentum Carries Into Asia

Global sentiment was lifted by a positive performance on Wall Street, with all three major U.S. indexes closing higher. The S&P 500 rose 0.58%, the Dow added 0.31%, and the Nasdaq gained 0.89%, fueled by strong tech earnings. Notable gains came from Nvidia, Broadcom, Amazon, and Oracle, as optimism surrounding AI and semiconductor demand continued to drive performance.

The upcoming Trump-Xi meeting is viewed as a potential inflection point for global markets, especially in terms of easing geopolitical tensions and trade uncertainty. Investors across Asia are positioning ahead of the summit with cautious optimism, though continued currency volatility, inflation pressures, and geopolitical risks remain on the horizon.

Source: CNBC

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

You understand and acknowledge that there is a high degree of risk involved in trading. Following any strategies or investment methods may lead to potential losses. The content on the site is provided by our contributors and analysts for information purposes only. You are solely responsible for determining whether any trading assets, securities, strategy, or any other product is suitable for investing based on your own investment objectives and financial situation.

Add to Favorites

James Whitman

Central Bank

Economic

The European Central Bank will keep euro-zone borrowing costs at 2% through 2027, according to a Bloomberg survey of economists.

The prediction includes a hold in the deposit rate at next week's monetary-policy meeting. Further action beyond that isn't totally excluded, however: A third of respondents forecasts at least one more cut to add to the eight to date, while 17% sees one or more hikes by the end of next year.

December's decision, when new projections including 2028 for the first time, is seen as pivotal.

Officials led by President Christine Lagarde appear unlikely to shift interest rates in the near future, saying they're content with the pace of consumer-price rises and Europe's resilient economy. They describe policy as being in a "good place" to react flexibly to fresh challenges.

There's no shortage of those. Europe is caught in the middle of renewed US-China trade tensions — this time over semiconductors and rare earths, while credit downgrades are further complicating France's fiscal bind and doubts are emerging over the potency of Germany's plans for sweeping infrastructure and defense investments.

At the same time, a potential delay in the continent's new emissions-trading system risks weighing on inflation in the coming years, and frothy asset valuations are fueling concern over a potential market crash.

"We don't expect any further rate reductions this year, but the ECB will keep its options open," said Dennis Shen, an economist at Scope who also cautions about a meaningful appreciation of the euro beyond $1.20 and additional cuts by the Federal Reserve. "The risk late this year or next year is for further easing rather than tightening."

A weighty argument backing another decrease would come if December's outlook signals a big undershoot of the 2% target in 2028. A reading of 1.6% is seen as the tipping point that could another reduction in borrowing costs.

Near-term dangers to economic growth and inflation are seen as broadly balanced, while uncertainty further ahead remains high. Even so, more respondents worry about upside than downside risks to prices, which rose 2.2% in September — the fastest in five months.

"Inflation remains close to the target, and while some growth indicators have wobbled in recent months, nothing yet warrants a change in the monetary-policy stance," said Nerijus Maciulis, Swedbank's chief economist. "Lagarde may well repeat her main message from the September meeting — we are in a 'good place.'"

Lagarde will next offer her views on the current situation on Oct. 30 in Florence, Italy — the latest venue for the policy gathering the ECB stages outside its Frankfurt home each year.

Even if she and her colleagues were to cut again, analysts reckon doing so would have only a limited impact on demand. Just over 60% say growth is held back equally by cyclical and structural forces. Most of the rest assign more blame for the bloc's sluggishness to the latter.

Supply-chain snarls such as those threatening production in Europe's car industry are just one obstacle. They intensified after the Dutch government, under pressure from Washington, took control of Chinese-owned chipmaker Nexperia — prompting Beijing to respond with export restrictions.

Political challenges are another drag. President Emmanuel Macron is clinging to power after the collapse of yet another French government, while public opinion in Germany is turning against Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

Pia Fromlet and Marcus Widen, economists at SEB, predict interest rates will remain unchanged through 2027, though they ask "why not cut" if inflation slows further while growth looks shaky.

Source: Bloomberg

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Blurring Capitalist Boundaries: Trump’s New Economic Playbook

The U.S. economy, long a beacon of free-market orthodoxy, is showing signs of quiet transformation under President Trump’s second term. A growing pattern of state involvement in corporate strategy, combined with politically motivated pardons and selective industrial intervention, is raising eyebrows. With parallels to central planning models traditionally associated with China, the unfolding strategy signals a shift if not in ideology, then in implementation.

The most striking example of this shift is the government’s 10% stake in Intel, acquired in August. Intel’s third-quarter results beat expectations, and the company attributed part of its rally to surging demand. But Trump was quick to frame the financial success as a state win, claiming the government had made $30–40 billion from its Intel investment.

While technically feasible under existing investment frameworks, the strategic implications are profound. State equity ownership in a major tech firm raises questions about governance, market neutrality, and accounting complexities as acknowledged by Intel itself in its earnings statement. The causal relationship here is clear: state capital injected into a tech leader altered investor expectations and company valuation, while shifting control closer to political influence.

A Presidential Pardon with Financial Undertones

Trump’s decision to pardon Binance founder Changpeng Zhao adds another layer of complexity. Zhao was convicted for enabling money laundering in 2024. The pardon, announced Thursday, drew scrutiny not only for its legal implications but for its timing. Only two months earlier, The Wall Street Journal reported that a Trump family crypto venture had links to a platform allegedly administered by Binance. The pardon appears less about justice and more about protecting political and financial ties blurring ethics with executive privilege.

When asked about the decision, Trump stated, “A lot of people say that he wasn’t guilty of anything,” echoing a pattern of deflective rationalization used in previous controversial pardons. The link between the pardon and the Trump family’s crypto interests introduces a troubling convergence of state authority and private profit.

A U.S. Economic Plan in Everything But Name

These developments raise a larger question: Is the United States under Trump crafting a stealth industrial strategy similar to China's five-year planning approach? The parallels are growing. China’s recently concluded Fourth Plenum emphasized domestic consumption, tech self-sufficiency, and strategic sector investment. While Trump isn’t issuing five-year blueprints, his administration is using tools like tariffs, targeted investments, and executive clemency to shape the economy in highly interventionist ways.

In contrast to Beijing’s structural emphasis on demand-side reform, Trump’s strategy tilts toward asset accumulation and elite-directed intervention. The government’s role is less institutional and more personalized, with Trump himself claiming decision-making power over major deals. This deviation marks not just a divergence from free-market norms, but a shift toward leader-centric economic engineering.

Markets Respond with Momentum, But Risks Mount

Markets have so far responded favorably. Intel stock surged 7.7% in extended trading, the S&P 500 rose 0.58%, and risk assets such as cryptocurrencies gained traction. However, these rallies may reflect speculative alignment with Trump’s policies rather than confidence in long-term fundamentals. Critics warn that political entanglements in corporate governance may lead to distortions, undermine investor trust, and create moral hazard.

On the international stage, Trump’s erratic diplomacy continues to create turbulence. After a recent “productive” call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump abruptly canceled a planned meeting, stating it “didn’t feel right.” The sudden shift was largely ignored by Russian state media underscoring Moscow’s caution in navigating the increasingly volatile US stance.

Meanwhile, Trump’s comment that "talks with Putin don’t go anywhere" reflects a deeper frustration, possibly tied to trade or oil negotiations. It reinforces the view that U.S. foreign and economic policy under Trump is increasingly transactional, reactive, and centered on short-term gains rather than multilateral coherence.

Shadow Planning in a Populist Framework

While not formally declared, Trump’s second-term economic trajectory reveals an unmistakable trend toward strategic interventionism. With state equity positions in private firms, politically connected pardons, and a growing use of executive power in market affairs, the lines between private enterprise and public policy are becoming blurred.

This is not central planning in the Chinese sense but rather a personalized, populist-driven variant where government is an active market participant, executive power trumps institutional process, and political loyalty often overlaps with economic opportunity.

As investors and policymakers grapple with this evolving paradigm, the key question becomes not whether Trump has a four-year economic plan but how far its reach will extend into what was once considered sacrosanct free-market territory.

Source: CNBC

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Tariff Tensions Reignite as Reagan Ad Sparks Diplomatic Fallout

President Donald Trump announced Thursday night the immediate termination of all trade negotiations with Canada in response to a controversial ad aired by Ontario’s provincial government. The ad features a 1987 radio address by former President Ronald Reagan, repurposed to criticize tariffs—a central pillar of Trump’s economic policy. The Reagan Presidential Foundation swiftly condemned the ad as a manipulated misrepresentation, intensifying tensions between Washington and Ottawa.

The move marks a significant escalation in trade friction just as Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney seeks to de-escalate disputes and secure a renewed agreement with the Trump administration.

Ontario's $75 Million Gamble Backfires

At the heart of the dispute is Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s $75 million advertising campaign aimed at US audiences, particularly Republican districts. The ad uses Reagan’s voice to deliver a warning about the long-term harm of tariffs, despite their patriotic appeal. Ford, a self-described Reagan admirer, defended the ad as a legitimate appeal to shared conservative economic values.

However, the Reagan Foundation objected, claiming the ad misrepresents Reagan’s views by taking his words out of context and using them without permission. Although the Foundation did not specify which edits were misleading, it pointed the public to the full recording for clarity.

Trump’s Response: National Security and Legal Pressure

Trump took to Truth Social, calling the ad “FAKE” and accusing Canada of trying to “interfere with the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court,” which is set to hear a pivotal case on the scope of the president’s tariff powers in November. Trump reiterated his belief that tariffs are essential tools for protecting national security and economic independence, suggesting a direct causal connection between the ad and his decision to suspend talks.

The timing of Trump’s announcement is significant. The Supreme Court is preparing to deliberate on whether Trump exceeded his authority in imposing sweeping tariffs. The Ontario ad, which implicitly critiques Trump’s policies by invoking Reagan, may have been viewed by Trump as a coordinated effort to influence public opinion ahead of the ruling.

Trade negotiations had already been strained by recent events, including Canada’s imposition of retaliatory tariffs and reductions in vehicle import quotas for American automakers who pulled production from Ontario. Trump’s latest move risks further damaging economic ties between two of the world’s most interconnected economies.

Broader Implications for US-Canada Relations

The abrupt breakdown in talks casts doubt on the prospects for resolving broader trade issues, including long-standing disputes in the aluminum, steel, auto, and lumber sectors. Prime Minister Carney has attempted to maintain a pragmatic approach in dealing with Trump’s protectionist stance, but this latest incident may harden public sentiment in Canada and complicate future diplomacy.

Meanwhile, the Reagan ad controversy underscores how symbolic gestures and historical legacies are now being weaponized in modern trade politics. Reagan’s free trade rhetoric is being resurrected as a political tool ironically by Canadian officials to challenge the economic nationalism now dominating US trade policy under Trump’s second term.

Trump’s decision to end trade negotiations over an ad campaign illustrates how volatile modern trade diplomacy has become. The incident blends symbolic politics, legal brinkmanship, and deeply personal views on tariffs into a single flashpoint, jeopardizing months of economic dialogue. While Canada has yet to issue a formal response, the episode sets a combative tone ahead of key legal and policy decisions that could reshape North America’s trade architecture.

Source: CNBC

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Strategic Refocus: From Export-Led Growth to Domestic Demand

China’s top leadership concluded the highly anticipated Fourth Plenum by laying out broad development goals for the next five years, placing greater emphasis on expanding domestic consumption and advancing technological self-reliance. This strategic realignment emerges at a time of heightened geopolitical tension with the US and sustained weakness in household spending following the pandemic.

The policy shift was communicated through a state media readout, which outlined the need to "vigorously boost consumption" and balance it with “effective investment,” while expanding overall domestic demand. This adjustment in tone reflects a nuanced understanding of supply-demand dynamics and hints at structural recalibration, although the implementation path remains uncertain.

Consumption Goals Lack Direct Fiscal Commitment

Despite the stronger rhetorical focus on consumption, China’s approach remains cautious and investment-heavy. Analysts including Yue Su from the Economist Intelligence Unit noted that the readout implies continued reliance on infrastructure and sector-specific investment particularly in public services, urban development, and elderly care as indirect stimulants for consumption. However, direct fiscal interventions, such as cash handouts or income support measures, remain absent from the policy agenda.

Dan Wang from Eurasia Group expressed skepticism, stating that the policy appears more aspirational than actionable, with no clear fiscal roadmap to drive meaningful income growth. In contrast to stimulus policies seen in the US, Beijing continues to reject household cash transfers, likely out of ideological concerns and inflationary caution. The result is a policy framework where consumption is promoted in theory but constrained in practice, a gap that reveals more of a correlational hope than a causal commitment.

Growth Targets and Resource Allocation Raise Structural Questions

Beijing reiterated its goal of reaching 5% GDP growth by 2025 and sustaining an annual average of 4.6% through 2035. However, meeting these targets will likely require channeling resources into high-tech industries and strategic manufacturing potentially at the expense of broader demand-side measures.

This selective allocation aligns with China's previous emphasis on industrial policy, particularly in electric vehicles and semiconductors. But past reliance on subsidies in these sectors has led to market saturation and downward price spirals, often distorting global competition and encouraging inefficiencies. While new regulatory adjustments seek to curb excessive competition, the continued state-centered investment model could amplify structural imbalances and limit domestic consumption growth.

Tech Self-Reliance Anchors Long-Term Strategy

One of the most clearly causal relationships in the readout is the connection between US technology sanctions and China’s intensified push for tech self-reliance. Beijing’s leadership reaffirmed its objective to achieve a “significant leap forward” in scientific strength, national defense, and overall economic power by 2035. This includes enhancing domestic R&D, developing advanced manufacturing capabilities, and maintaining a “reasonable” proportion of manufacturing in GDP composition.

The commitment to technological self-sufficiency is both a strategic response to external constraints and a forward-looking attempt to anchor future productivity gains. Still, without corresponding reforms in innovation ecosystems and capital markets, the ability to realize these breakthroughs remains uncertain.

Other Priorities: Manufacturing, Agriculture, and Carbon Goals

The readout also reiterated goals to build a “strong agricultural nation” and accelerate the development of a modern manufacturing system. These priorities aim to reinforce China’s economic resilience and reduce dependence on external supply chains. Meanwhile, in the property sector where overcapacity and debt continue to weigh on growth Beijing’s only guidance was for “high-quality development,” offering no immediate relief for a market under structural distress.

Climate policy received brief acknowledgment, with Beijing reaffirming previously announced carbon reduction targets. However, these commitments remain vague and secondary to near-term growth objectives.

Policy Signals Advance Strategic Intent but Fall Short on Execution

China’s five-year development roadmap signals a directional shift toward domestic stabilization through consumption and technology. Yet the strategy leans heavily on state-led investment, regulatory controls, and industrial targets, while avoiding direct redistributive tools that could more effectively lift household demand.

While policymakers appear more attuned to internal imbalances than in past cycles, the absence of bold fiscal initiatives or structural reform limits the potential for a genuine consumption-led recovery. The broader vision remains rooted in strategic autonomy and economic self-containment, shaped by both domestic fragility and global friction.

As details emerge in the coming weeks and full plans are released in March investors and analysts will be watching for clearer causal instruments to match China’s stated goals.

Source: CNBC

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

James Whitman

Economic

Political

The US government jolted energy markets when it sanctioned Russia's two biggest crude oil producers on Oct. 22. All eyes are now on how the sanctions will affect the supply and price of petroleum across the world.

Russia's exports — about 7.3 million barrels a day, according to the International Energy Agency — account for about 7% of global crude oil and refined fuel consumption. The latest penalties on Rosneft and Lukoil, combined with sanctions imposed earlier this year, mean that firms shipping the majority of Moscow's oil to overseas markets are now blacklisted.

India and China are currently two largest buyers of Russian crude, taking nearly 3.6 million barrels per day. Indian oil refiners said they now expect to halt almost all their purchases of Russian crude. If that happens, Russia will have a challenge finding alternative customers. It's not clear whether China is willing to buy more. State buyers there have already cancelled some purchases.

The measures may also not pile enough immediate pressure on President Vladimir Putin to end his war in Ukraine.

However, a full boycott of Russian oil by India and China would without question intensify competition for oil from other producing countries, pushing prices up. Oil benchmarks in the Middle East soared the day after the sanctions were announced, indicating higher demand for their crude.

The US Treasury Department said it was sanctioning two Russian oil giants — Rosneft PJSC and Lukoil PJSC — as well as all entities in which they hold a direct or indirect stake of 50% or more, for operating in Russia's energy sector.

As a result, all US or US-based entities and individuals are barred from transacting with the sanctioned entities. Non-US ones may also be at risk of being penalized if found to be dealing with Rosneft, Lukoil or their sanctioned subsidiaries. Transactions involving the two firms need to be wound down by Nov. 21, the Treasury Department said.

The previous US administration of Joe Biden already targeted two Russian oil companies, Gazprom Neft PJSC and Surgutneftegas PJSC, in January. In a separate move on Oct. 23, the European Union said it would ban dealings with Rosneft and Russian energy major Gazprom Neft.

Oil buyers and traders across most of the world may have little choice but to shun the sanctioned companies as a large chunk of global commerce depends on banking, trading and insurance services operated out of the US and the EU.

The Treasury Department said the sanctions were a response to Putin's refusal to stop the war in Ukraine. The idea is to restrict the oil and gas tax revenues that account for about a quarter of Russia's federal budget, draining the funds Putin needs to prolong the conflict.

US President Donald Trump vowed to end the conflict within 24 hours of returning to office, but it has rumbled on despite existing US punishments on Russia. The latest measures are his administration's first direct sanctions on Russia's oil sector, marking a shift in his approach.

The US government had largely avoided direct sanctions on Russian oil companies in favor of an unusual price-cap mechanism, adopted under former President Joe Biden. The goal was to limit the Kremlin's energy revenues while preventing a sharp drop in Russian oil supply that could spark a global price shock.

The cap, introduced by the Group of Seven industrialized nations, the European Union and Australia in 2022, set a maximum price for Moscow's oil of $60 a barrel and was followed by limits on refined fuels. Buyers paying above those prices lose access to key services such as shipping, insurance and financing provided by Western firms. Most European nations are also barred from importing Russian seaborne oil under EU sanctions, regardless of the price, though some of the crude still reaches Europe indirectly as refined products from countries that process Russian oil.

Western nations also targeted entities in third countries that were involved in the Russian crude trade. Through sanctions, they have penalized hundreds of tankers and their owners and operators. Some foreign buyers and operators in the trade were blacklisted, including India's Nayara Energy Ltd. — partly owned by Rosneft — and Chinese refiner Shandong Yulong.

Still, while exports of Russian oil often slow in the first weeks after sanctions are introduced, they typically rebound as logistics providers adapt. A "shadow fleet" of mostly older tankers transports Russian crude, supported by parallel banking and port infrastructure.

Despite the original price cap and sanctions, China and India, two of the world's top oil importers, have been scooping up Russian seaborne crude at a combined rate of 2.8 million barrels a day. China also receives about 800,000 barrels a day through pipelines. Russian seaborne crude shipments are back near levels last seen more than two years ago.

As oil prices fell in recent months, the EU and the UK brought down their price cap on Russian oil. But the US did not, and Trump's team has never used the cap as a means of imposing follow-up punishments.

Russia's resilient oil exports have helped to limit the impact on its finances from a drop in oil prices this year. Moscow's seaborne exports reached an 11-month high of $1.5 billion a week in the 28 days ending Oct. 19, according to Bloomberg calculations.

The latest move increases the chances that anyone in the Russian supply chain will be handling barrels from a sanctioned entity. While Russian officials aren't brushing off the latest sanctions, they've expressed confidence the country will find ways to mitigate the impact. Much will depend on whether India's refiners initial projections prove accurate, they drastically scale back imports and other countries are too wary of the sanctions to step in as alternative buyers.

Trump's record of unpredictable policymaking, and the fact that there is a grace period before the sanctions kick in, mean oil buyers may adopt a wait-and-see stance for the time being.

Officials at several major Indian refiners told Bloomberg that it was all but impossible to continue Russian crude purchases. The government in New Delhi has previously insisted that it's allowed to take Russian crude given that it's legal under the price cap, while shunning Iranian or Venezuelan crude which is sanctioned outright by the US.

The Trump administration had imposed punitive tariffs on India over its Russian purchases. Lower imports could help a trade deal to ease those levies.

It's not clear how the world's biggest oil-buying nation and biggest buyer of Russian oil will respond to the new US sanctions.

China has so far been spared Trump's threats of secondary tariffs on its purchases of Russian crude, unlike India. Beijing appears to be emboldened by its success in defusing a trade war with Washington, during which Trump briefly imposed tariffs of 145% on Chinese goods.

Yet while ties between Beijing and Moscow are close, it's unclear whether China will want to take on additional Russian oil supplies rejected by India. The country's economy is slowing, its stockpiles of crude are already high and diversity of supply has been longstanding priority.

Most of the Russian oil destined for India arrives by sea. It could be hard to divert those shipments to China if international traders, shipping firms and banks refuse to take part in the trade for fear of being caught up in the new sanctions.

One option might be to use the same "dark fleet", shadow banking networks and port infrastructure traders have used to move sanctioned Iranian crude to private Chinese refiners, this time to buy Russian seaborne crude and oil products.

Source: Bloomberg

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Stocks

Markets Surge on Diplomatic Optimism

Global equity markets, especially in Asia, gained momentum on Friday after the White House confirmed an upcoming meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The announcement helped ease investor anxiety surrounding trade relations and reignited bullish sentiment, particularly in the technology sector. The MSCI Asia Pacific Index rose by 0.5%, resuming its upward trajectory and extending what has already been a strong year for regional equities.

The planned summit, scheduled to take place during the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting next week, is the first face-to-face engagement between the two leaders since Trump returned to office. While the meeting is not expected to immediately resolve long-standing tensions, markets interpret it as a potential step toward avoiding further escalation, reinforcing the causal link between diplomatic signals and equity performance.

Tech Stocks Take the Lead

Technology stocks were the clear outperformers, with a 1.4% gain in Hong Kong’s tech index and strong moves in US names like Intel, which surged following an upbeat revenue forecast. The rally reflects a dual driver: improving trade sentiment and direct policy support. In the US, the Trump administration is reportedly considering financial backing for domestic quantum computing firms to counter China’s tech rise. In China, the government has renewed pledges to boost technological self-reliance—both of which feed into investor demand for AI-related and high-growth tech assets.

This correlation between government intervention and tech stock performance is becoming more structural, with markets increasingly reacting to policy hints and fiscal signals rather than just earnings fundamentals.

Inflation, Fed Cuts, and Buy-the-Dip Mentality

Investors now turn their attention to the delayed US inflation data, expected to be released later Friday. Despite recent inflation stickiness, market sentiment suggests that the data is unlikely to derail the ongoing rally. Traders are already pricing in at least one Federal Reserve interest rate cut in the coming months, and money markets are positioning for further easing.

Mark Hackett of Nationwide highlighted the persistence of the “buy-the-dip” mindset, which has even led traditionally bearish investors to reassess their positions. The market's resilience in the face of valuation concerns underscores a strong behavioral dynamic where investor confidence in liquidity support is overriding near-term fundamental caution.

Oil and Bond Market Responses: Mixed Reactions to Policy Shifts

In commodities, West Texas Intermediate crude oil declined by 0.6% to $61.43 per barrel after a 5.6% surge the previous day, triggered by fresh US sanctions on Russia. While the initial policy shock drove prices higher, traders are now recalibrating expectations based on broader supply and demand dynamics. The impact of sanctions on shipping and trade flows remains a key variable in energy pricing going forward.

Bond markets showed limited movement, with US 10-year Treasury yields holding steady at 4.00%, while Australia’s 10-year yield ticked up slightly. The muted response reflects uncertainty around both inflation readings and central bank responses, though the broader trend points toward easing financial conditions.

Currencies and Crypto Stay Quiet

Currency markets were relatively stable. The US dollar was flat, while the Japanese yen weakened for a sixth straight session—its longest losing streak since early October. The offshore yuan was largely unchanged, suggesting that traders are awaiting concrete outcomes from the Trump-Xi summit before repositioning further.

Cryptocurrencies continued their quiet rise, with Bitcoin gaining 0.9% to trade above $110,000 and Ether up 1.4% at $3,884. These movements reflect modest risk-on sentiment rather than any sector-specific catalyst.

Investor Sentiment and Structural Caution

While the recent rally appears robust, market strategists urge caution. UBS Global Wealth Management’s Ulrike Hoffmann-Burchardi noted that while AI spending and earnings strength are fueling the bull market, any disruption in US-China relations or disappointment in AI-driven revenue projections could reintroduce volatility.

The current environment reflects a balance between optimism over diplomatic thawing and structural fragility in tech-led valuations. Investors are embracing momentum but remain sensitive to geopolitical and inflationary triggers.

Optimism Rises, But Fragile Foundations Remain

Markets are responding positively to the potential easing of geopolitical tensions and supportive fiscal and monetary signals. The tech sector continues to drive the rally, bolstered by both earnings and policy narratives. However, sustained upward momentum will depend on the outcomes of diplomatic engagement, the direction of inflation trends, and the credibility of anticipated Fed rate cuts.

While the rally reflects real sentiment improvements, it remains vulnerable to disruption. The next key test will be how inflation data and Trump’s Asia visit shape expectations in the coming weeks.