Voices of the Trading Winners: Interview with the Winners of the 2025 FastBull Gold Short-Term Trading Contest

Summary:

The 2025 FastBull Gold Short-Term Trading Contest has concluded, marking the end of an exhilarating two-week competition centered around the popular XAUUSD trading pair. This global event drew skilled traders from across the world, each vying for the top spot by demonstrating their mastery of short-term trading on a demo account. Participants navigated the volatile gold market with $100,000 in virtual funds, executing at least 50 trades with a minimum holding time of 60 seconds. The leaderboard saw frequent shifts, showcasing the dynamic nature of short-term trading. Ultimately, three traders exhibited exceptional consistency and profitability, earning them a share of the $3,500 prize pool.

Voices of the Trading Winners: Interview with the Winners of the 2025 FastBull Gold Short-Term Trading Contest_1

We had the privilege of speaking with the top three winners to gain insights into their winning strategies and experiences.

Abhishek from India, the champion, surprised even himself with his victory, given that he primarily identifies as a swing trader. "It's a wonderful moment, like a dream come true," he expressed. Unlike typical short-term traders who meticulously watch their positions, Abhishek adopts a remarkably calm approach. "Once I open a position, I simply leave it and don't look at it again. I feel that if you keep looking at it, it doesn't help." He views gold as a favored instrument among traders, especially in competitive settings, noting its tendency to reach expected levels. When asked about managing gold's recent volatility, his strategy was straightforward: capitalizing on existing profits. Reflecting on his success, Abhishek pointed to a unique opportunity: trading amidst "trade war" conditions, which aligned favorably with his positions. His toolkit for identifying trading levels includes a single paid indicator, "Automatic Highs&Lows Ultimate 1" by Bullish Mind. Abhishek's advice to fellow traders emphasizes seizing opportunities, maintaining hope, and, crucially, practicing robust risk management. "Saving your capital is the best thing to earn more," he wisely stated.

The runner-up, zzzkkk777 from Hong Kong, expressed both happiness and honor in securing second place. Also a medium-to-long-term trader with a focus on gold and silver, he emphasized the importance of mindset, particularly with the heightened volatility caused by global tariff wars. He holds a bullish outlook on gold, believing it will reach new historical highs. For short-term trading on the FastBull platform, zzzkkk777 found various technical indicators helpful, including MACD, RSI, and Bollinger Bands, especially when combined with volume-price analysis and key support levels for entry and stop-loss guidance. His impressive comeback on the final day, climbing from eighth to second, was attributed to identifying an oversold condition in gold and capitalizing on the subsequent rebound. His encouraging words to other FastBull users highlighted the platform's features like chat, economic calendar, and charts, wishing everyone success in future competitions.

Manal Amd, also from India, who clinched third place, felt that his victory validated years of hard work. While typically a long-term positional or swing trader, he adapted to the contest's short-term nature, executing around 500 trades in 13 days with a remarkably low maximum drawdown of 7% and a 325% return on his capital. He stressed the significance of quick decision-making in trading but cautioned against impulsive actions without confirmation, emphasizing the binary nature of the market: loss or profit. Manal Amd doesn't encounter many difficulties these days, crediting his five years of market experience and reliance on multiple confirmation signals like trend lines, support, resistance, and indicators such as EMA and MACD. His consistent performance throughout the competition was maintained by a keen awareness of major market events like geopolitical tensions and tariff wars, which helped align his trades with the prevailing market direction. His advice echoes Abhishek's on the importance of risk management and maintaining a winning streak by paying attention to significant market developments.

The diverse strategies employed by these three winners - a calm swing trading approach, a focus on technical analysis and macroeconomic events, and a high-frequency short-term strategy - highlight the multifaceted nature of successful trading. Their shared emphasis on risk management, identifying market opportunities, and maintaining discipline serves as valuable guidance for all traders aspiring to achieve similar success in the dynamic world of gold trading. The 2025 FastBull Gold Short-Term Trading Contest not only identified top talent but also provided a platform for these traders to share their insightful experiences with the broader trading community.

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

Gerik

Economic

India–Palestine conflict

A $500 Billion Time Bomb?

According to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), U.S. banks recorded $482.4 billion in unrealized losses on securities by the end of 2024 — up 32.5% from the previous quarter. This number is approaching the crisis level seen during the SVB collapse in March 2023 and is not far from the record $684 billion recorded at the end of that year.

These unrealized losses stem from rising interest rates, which have sharply reduced the market value of long-term securities such as U.S. Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities (MBS). While these losses don’t hit the income statement unless assets are sold, they pose a major liquidity risk if depositors start to panic and withdraw funds en masse.

Professor Rebel Cole, a former IMF advisor and finance professor at Florida Atlantic University, warns:

“Just one piece of bad news about a vulnerable bank could be enough to spark another crisis — just like in March 2023.”

Interest Rate Pressure and Fragile Balance Sheets

The value of bank-held bonds tends to move inversely with 10-year Treasury yields. With yields now above 4.5%, dangerously close to Q4 2024 highs, analysts are concerned.

Stanford’s Professor Amit Seru notes that a rise past 5% could cause unrealized losses to balloon to $600–700 billion, severely straining the system.

Much of these securities are categorized as “held to maturity” (HTM), meaning their value changes are not reflected in earnings reports — only on balance sheets. However, if any portion is sold, accounting rules require a full market revaluation of the portfolio, potentially triggering capital shortfalls.

Lessons from SVB: Still Unlearned?

SVB, which held over 90% of its HTM portfolio in long-term bonds and MBS, collapsed just days after announcing a $2 billion realized loss. This triggered a bank run and a broader panic across the tech-focused banking sector.

Though the Fed quickly stepped in to protect uninsured deposits and broker acquisitions, the underlying issue — the risk of long-dated securities in a rising rate environment — remains unresolved.

Professor Cole notes:

“Many banks are still holding these securities, and if they’re forced to sell under stress, they’ll be exposed to massive revaluation losses. That’s when regulators step in and shut them down.”

Stagflation Risk Could Prolong the Pain

The potential for stagflation — high inflation paired with stagnant growth — is growing, especially under President Trump's renewed tariff policies. This scenario would keep interest rates elevated for an extended period, compounding stress on banks.

Torsten Sløk, chief economist at Apollo Global Management, warns that credit losses could mount across sectors like tech, growth, and venture lending — where margins are thin and liquidity is tight.

Adding to the risk is a looming commercial real estate crisis, which many experts believe could deliver a secondary blow to already weakened balance sheets.

A Fragile System Waiting for a Spark

Despite regulatory interventions and post-SVB vigilance, key vulnerabilities persist: elevated interest rates, large unrealized losses, limited hedging strategies, and fragile commercial real estate exposures.

As Professor Seru explains, it’s not a question of if another banking shock will happen — but when. And when it does, it may come fast, with devastating speed, just like SVB’s collapse.

The U.S. banking sector may be one bad headline away from its next crisis.

Source: The Fortune

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 Engagement Signals New Phase in Bilateral Relations

Vietnam and the United States are intensifying efforts to advance their economic and financial partnership, marked by a bilateral dialogue between Vice Minister of Finance Cao Anh Tuấn and Robert Kaproth, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Finance at the U.S. Treasury. The meeting, held during Vietnam's participation in the SelectUSA 2025 Summit, comes as both nations celebrate 30 years of diplomatic ties and look to consolidate their Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with greater substance.

Vietnam brought a substantial delegation of over 100 enterprises to the investment summit, with ambitions to expand direct investment into the U.S. This move reflects Vietnam’s broader strategy to reposition itself as a reliable, transparent, and complementary partner for U.S. businesses, especially in high-demand sectors like technology, energy, aviation, and agriculture.

Complementary Economies and Shared Strategic Interests

Vice Minister Cao emphasized the structural complementarity between the two economies: Vietnam supplies consumer goods at competitive prices without undermining U.S. industries, while relying on the U.S. for advanced technologies and critical infrastructure. He argued that strengthening financial cooperation would reinforce mutual trust and reflect the nations’ converging strategic and economic interests.

Mr. Kaproth welcomed Vietnam’s efforts and reaffirmed Washington’s intention to deepen financial ties. He reiterated that while trade negotiations remain under the purview of USTR, the Treasury continues to monitor developments closely—particularly as trade imbalances and concerns over customs compliance remain sensitive issues.

Trade Imbalance and Customs Compliance Under Scrutiny

The U.S. expressed its ongoing concerns over the growing trade deficit with Vietnam, highlighting its unsustainable nature. Mr. Kaproth stressed the importance of tightening customs oversight to prevent transshipment and origin fraud, especially as U.S. tariffs on China continue to be rerouted through third countries.

Vice Minister Cao responded that Vietnam is actively deploying new customs enforcement measures to ensure fair trade practices and is open to further dialogue on this matter. He also requested that the U.S. facilitate greater access for Vietnamese firms to high-tech imports and ease technology transfer restrictions, allowing Vietnamese companies deeper integration into U.S.-based supply chains.

Five-Year Financial Engagement Plan and Future Dialogue

Significantly, both parties agreed that this is a timely moment to deepen bilateral financial engagement. Plans are underway for new dialogues, technical cooperation, and policy roundtables to operationalize the strategic partnership, aligning with broader regional shifts and supply chain realignments amid global uncertainties.

Vice Minister Cao also extended an invitation for U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to visit Vietnam, underscoring Vietnam’s commitment to long-term institutional collaboration.

Vietnam’s Investment Ambitions in the U.S. Begin to Materialize

In a parallel session, Vice Minister Cao met with James Burrows, Vice President of the U.S. Export-Import Bank (US Exim), alongside Vietnamese corporate leaders from the national energy, maritime, and aviation sectors. These discussions focused on leveraging U.S. financial tools to facilitate Vietnamese investment in America and enhance bilateral industrial collaboration.

Vietnam Airlines recently secured government approval for a fleet expansion involving the purchase of 50 narrow-body aircraft. While awaiting final shareholder decisions, this move is viewed as a gateway project to deepen aviation and aerospace ties between the two countries.

The Vietnam Maritime Corporation (VIMC) outlined its interest in establishing logistics centers in the U.S. and partnering on port development and equipment modernization, potentially with financing support from US Exim.

Meanwhile, the state-run energy conglomerate PVN reaffirmed its intent to expand oil trade with U.S. giant ExxonMobil. Its refining subsidiary BSR has already imported 27 shipments of WTI Midland crude—totaling over 22 million barrels and nearly $1.8 billion in value—from suppliers including Shell, Vitol, and Trafigura.

Towards a More Balanced, Integrated, and Strategic Economic Future

The talks mark a meaningful pivot in U.S.-Vietnam relations. Vietnam seeks not just trade surplus but balanced growth and investment reciprocity. The U.S., for its part, is increasingly recognizing Vietnam as a critical Indo-Pacific partner capable of supporting strategic supply chain diversification.

As both countries navigate a shifting global economic order marked by trade realignment, energy security concerns, and technological bifurcation, the depth and strategic clarity of this financial cooperation may set a new benchmark for bilateral relations in Southeast Asia.

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

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

India–Palestine conflict

Strategic Minerals Remain Off-Limits Despite Diplomatic Concessions

Following a tentative trade truce between the United States and China reached in Geneva over the weekend, China’s Ministry of Commerce announced a 90-day pause on export restrictions for 28 American companies. It also lifted non-tariff measures on 17 entities previously listed on its “unreliable entity list.” These measures signal a shift in tone from Beijing and are aligned with China’s commitment, outlined in the Geneva joint statement, to suspend or withdraw non-tariff countermeasures imposed since April 2, 2025.

However, a conspicuous exception remains: China is still withholding exports of seven critical rare earth elements—samarium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, lutetium, scandium, and yttrium. These materials are indispensable for U.S. sectors ranging from aerospace and clean energy to defense and semiconductors. Their absence from the rollback package suggests that Beijing is not willing to relinquish its most powerful strategic resource in this early stage of trade normalization.

Rare Earths as a Bargaining Lever

The strategic calculus is clear. China supplies more than 70% of the world’s refined rare earth elements (REEs), making it the linchpin in global advanced manufacturing. U.S. industries—particularly those producing missiles, electric vehicles, and renewable energy components—remain heavily dependent on Chinese rare earths. Beijing’s decision to retain control over these exports serves as a calculated maneuver to maintain geopolitical leverage, especially as tariff negotiations continue under a highly transactional Trump administration.

Adding weight to this interpretation, China’s Commerce Ministry issued a same-day statement emphasizing the need for “comprehensive control” over strategic minerals. It justified ongoing restrictions by referencing national security concerns and smuggling risks, effectively framing rare earth policy as a sovereignty issue rather than a commercial one.

Companies Granted Temporary Relief

Among the 28 U.S. companies given a 90-day reprieve from dual-use export restrictions are frequent targets of Chinese sanctions due to their connections to American defense and technology operations. These include Universal Logistics Holdings, Cyberlux, Hudson Technologies, and Oceaneering International. On April 9, shortly after President Trump imposed sweeping new tariffs, an additional 12 firms—including Teledyne Brown Engineering, Kratos Unmanned Aerial Systems, and Insitu—were added to the list.

The 17 companies removed from the unreliable entity list also include high-profile drone manufacturers such as Sierra Nevada Corporation and Kratos. While the suspension grants these firms temporary freedom to conduct limited business with China, they remain in a precarious position as Beijing reserves the right to reimpose controls once the 90-day window closes.

Unanswered Questions and Strategic Silence

China’s refusal to include rare earth exports in its list of relaxed measures has gone largely unexplained. When questioned during a routine press briefing, the Commerce Ministry declined to offer specifics, reinforcing the view that rare earths are being deliberately withheld as a future bargaining chip.

This aligns with subtle messaging from state-linked media. A social post by CCTV-affiliated account Yuyuantantian pointedly asked, “With U.S. defense industries now ‘strangled by rare earth shortages’, what changes might occur in American weapons and equipment?” This rhetorical question underscores Beijing’s awareness of its market dominance and its willingness to exploit this advantage selectively

China’s recent easing of certain export curbs appears to be a tactical gesture designed to defuse short-term tensions without sacrificing long-term leverage. The continued hold on rare earth shipments illustrates that these materials remain a cornerstone of China’s strategic posture. While the Geneva truce may have temporarily reduced the temperature of U.S.-China relations, the deeper contest over technological supremacy and economic security remains unresolved—and rare earths sit at its core. As the 90-day reprieve clock ticks down, the future of U.S. access to these essential resources may well define the trajectory of broader trade diplomacy.

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

China–U.S. Trade War

Economic

Trump’s Gulf Strategy: Wealth, Power, and Pragmatism

President Donald Trump’s high-profile Middle East tour has been as much a diplomatic campaign as a symbolic realignment of America’s global posture. From red electric supercars and camel processions in Saudi Arabia to towering praise for Gulf cities’ futuristic ambition, Trump’s message was clear: the United States, under his leadership, is open for business—with no questions asked.

Trump announced that within just 48 hours, his administration secured $1.8 trillion in investment promises from Gulf states, including $600 billion publicly confirmed on May 13. He framed this economic diplomacy as a golden opportunity to fuse "America First" with the Gulf’s state-led capitalism, calling it a new “Golden Age” of U.S.-Middle East partnership.

Admiration for Authoritarian Efficiency

The tone of Trump’s engagements has raised eyebrows globally. He praised Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman—implicated in the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi—for his “visionary” leadership, even joking, “I like him too much, that’s why we give too much.” In Riyadh, he lauded skyscraper projects as “genius,” and in Abu Dhabi and Doha, he expressed admiration for rapid development unencumbered by democratic hurdles.

At the heart of Trump’s approach is a rejection of the traditional American ideal of moral leadership. “Too many presidents try to look into foreign leaders’ souls,” he declared. “That’s God’s job. My job is to protect America.” This blunt ethos aligns with a growing U.S. retreat from promoting democratic values abroad, replaced instead by transactional, deal-centric diplomacy.

The Qatar Question: Diplomacy and Controversy

In Doha, Trump celebrated Qatar’s outsized diplomatic influence. The small but strategically crucial nation has facilitated U.S. negotiations with actors ranging from Iran to Hamas and played a role in recent hostage rescues and ceasefire deals. Qatar’s Al Udeid airbase, once secretive, now anchors America’s regional command center.

But goodwill came with controversy. Qatar reportedly offered Trump a Boeing 747-8 to replace the aging Air Force One—a gesture many saw as unconstitutional and potentially compromising. Critics, including Senator Rand Paul, warned that accepting such a gift could blur lines between diplomacy and influence-buying, particularly given Qatar’s troubled human rights record.

Human Rights and the Price of Realpolitik

Trump’s embrace of Gulf leaders came without mention of human rights abuses, media suppression, or political imprisonment in the region. This omission wasn’t accidental—it reflects his deliberate pivot to what some call a "hyper-pragmatic" foreign policy. Trump himself framed it starkly: “God will judge world leaders. My job is peace, stability, and prosperity for America.”

While U.S. intelligence agencies are now reviewing the jet gift’s legality and safety, the broader concern is Trump’s apparent comfort with authoritarian power structures, especially when paired with capital-rich allies. Critics argue this risks turning America’s foreign agenda into a mirror of Gulf politics: top-down, opaque, and power-driven.

President Trump’s Middle East tour has redrawn the contours of American foreign policy. With $1.8 trillion in investment pledges and warm ties with Gulf monarchs, he presents a vision of a U.S. unconstrained by moral frameworks, judicial oversight, or free press critique. Whether this marks a “new golden era” or a dangerous departure from democratic values remains one of the most divisive questions of his second term. What is certain is that Trump sees in the Gulf not just money—but a model of power without restraint.

Source: CNN

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

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Gerik

Economic

Powell Flags Structural Shift in Interest Rate Outlook

Speaking at the Thomas Laubach Research Conference in Washington on May 15, Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell warned that long-term interest rates are likely to remain elevated due to a changing economic landscape and persistent monetary uncertainty. Powell noted that the U.S. is transitioning out of the ultra-low rate environment that defined the 2010s, and that “the era of near-zero rates is unlikely to return soon.”

The Fed’s benchmark interest rate currently sits at 4.25–4.5%, with recent trades near 4.33%. This is a stark contrast to the 2008–2015 period, when rates were effectively zero for seven years. Powell’s remarks come amid lingering inflation pressures and the potential for recurring global supply disruptions, which he described as “major shocks” that could persistently affect both inflation and central bank policy responses.

Supply Shocks, Inflation, and the Trump Trade Effect

Powell emphasized that the Federal Reserve now views inflation volatility and supply-side disturbances—such as those seen during the pandemic and energy crises—as more structural than previously assumed. While he did not directly reference President Trump’s trade policies, Powell acknowledged in prior remarks that tariffs can both slow growth and fuel inflation, adding to the policy dilemma the Fed faces.

Currently, the U.S. is in a 90-day tariff de-escalation period with China, but further trade uncertainty looms. Powell stressed that the central bank must remain cautious in loosening policy, especially after previously misjudging the persistence of inflation in 2021.

Fed’s Five-Year Strategic Policy Framework

To guide decision-making in this complex environment, the Fed will undertake a comprehensive five-year review of its policy framework. This initiative will revisit key elements such as how the Fed forecasts economic conditions, how it communicates uncertainty to markets, and how it responds to deviations from inflation and employment targets.

The last major framework overhaul occurred in 2020 during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, when the Fed adopted a flexible average inflation targeting (FAIT) strategy—allowing inflation to exceed 2% temporarily to support job growth. However, this strategy came under fire after inflation surged far beyond expectations, forcing the Fed into one of its most aggressive rate-hiking cycles in decades.

In the upcoming review, Powell noted that there will be particular attention paid to how the Fed defines and responds to “shortfalls” in inflation or employment, and whether those terms create confusion or policy inertia. Many Fed officials have since conceded that the 2021 inflation spike was initially mischaracterized as "transitory."

Improving Policy Communication in a Volatile Era

Powell emphasized that improving how the Fed communicates with markets and the public will be a central focus of the new framework. While the Fed is widely praised for its transparency, Powell admitted that during turbulent periods, “conveying the degree of uncertainty clearly becomes essential.”

He added that clarity around how the Fed interprets economic shocks—particularly those related to supply constraints, labor markets, and geopolitical instability—will be crucial to maintaining credibility and anchoring expectations.

Preparing for an Era of Complexity

Powell’s remarks reflect a broader institutional realization that the post-pandemic economy is less predictable, more shock-prone, and structurally different from the past. The Federal Reserve’s new five-year strategic review signals a commitment to adapting its tools, language, and flexibility in response to an evolving economic environment.

The full details of the framework are expected to be released “in the coming months.” While Powell did not confirm the venue, speculation suggests the Jackson Hole Symposium, where the 2020 policy pivot was first unveiled, may again serve as the platform for announcing the Fed’s next chapter.

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

Stocks

Stock Markets Enjoy Momentum, But Clouds Gather

The S&P 500 climbed 0.41% on Thursday, marking its fourth straight session of gains and capping a 4.54% rise over four days. The Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 0.65%, while the Nasdaq dipped 0.18%. European stocks also joined the rally, with the pan-European Stoxx 600 and FTSE 100 rising 0.56% and 0.57% respectively, aided by better-than-expected U.K. GDP data.

Yet beneath this rally lies a current of unresolved uncertainty. While investors welcomed the temporary U.S.-China tariff truce, unresolved disputes over rare earth exports, high interest rates, and tense diplomacy still pose downside risks.

Powell Flags Structural Risks Ahead

Fed Chair Jerome Powell delivered a sobering counterpoint to the upbeat market sentiment during a speech at a central bank conference. He warned that interest rates may remain higher for longer due to increased risk of persistent and frequent supply shocks. Though he did not reference U.S. tariffs directly, Powell’s remarks echo concerns that protectionist measures—like those advanced by President Trump—could disrupt supply chains and feed into long-term inflation volatility.

These remarks come as the Fed balances its inflation-fighting mandate with managing external shocks, including energy volatility, geopolitical disruptions, and trade restrictions.

Rare Earth Exports Still a Flashpoint

Despite last weekend’s U.S.-China trade deal, China continues to block exports of seven key rare earth elements to the U.S., materials vital for sectors including defense, EVs, and clean energy. This undercuts the short-term optimism around bilateral trade improvements and highlights the fragility of the current détente.

Beijing has only partially lifted restrictions, allowing 28 U.S. companies to apply for export licenses, but the most strategic materials remain restricted, leaving American manufacturers vulnerable.

Trump’s Trade Policy and the Apple Friction

President Trump’s personal intervention in trade negotiations has added another layer of complexity. His rebuke of Apple CEO Tim Cook for expanding production in India—despite ongoing U.S.-India trade talks—has raised eyebrows. Trump reportedly said, “I don’t want you building in India,” suggesting a push for reshoring U.S. manufacturing that could disrupt corporate global strategies and sour bilateral deals.

While India remains an attractive manufacturing base, Trump’s stance could strain tech supply chains and further complicate trade negotiations with New Delhi.

Geopolitical Pressures and Diplomatic Signals

Both President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin opted to skip Ukraine-Russia peace talks in Turkey, sending lower-level delegations instead. Ukraine’s President Zelenskyy interpreted this as a sign that Moscow isn’t serious about ending the war. The absence of the U.S. president also limits the weight Washington brings to de-escalation efforts.

Meanwhile, U.S.-U.K. trade deals are reportedly poised to benefit a European automaker with U.K. operations—underscoring how individual companies may benefit from political realignments while the broader EU still awaits its own bilateral arrangement with Washington.

India’s Resilience Amid Regional Tensions

Despite recent military tensions with Pakistan, India’s stock market has rebounded above pre-conflict levels. This resilience reflects investor confidence in India’s long-term fundamentals. For many global investors, border skirmishes, though significant, are now seen as manageable variables within a broader investment calculus that favors India’s scale, reforms, and demographic advantages.

The U.S. stock market is enjoying a moment of strength, powered by easing trade rhetoric and optimism around tech and global growth. However, Fed warnings on inflation volatility, strategic tensions over rare earths, and Trump’s unpredictable trade moves suggest that tailwinds could quickly become turbulence. Investors would be wise to temper their enthusiasm and brace for a market environment shaped as much by diplomacy and policy as by earnings and economic data.