Advice and strategies
for your future

In May, markets recovered most of the March–April drawdown. We used that rebound as an opportunity to reduce exposure rather than as an invitation to add beta. In June, we continued this de‑risking gradually: we remain invested, but with portfolios aligned to a market regime that is still supportive over the medium term, yet clearly more demanding. Over the past month or so, markets have broadly traded sideways. Following the sharp rebound between April and May, indices have moved into a consolidation phase, lacking a strong enough catalyst to extend the uptrend. This pause comes just as some of the key drivers of the rebound, most notably AI‑related capex, are starting to show signs of strain. The volatility seen in the semiconductor space since 1 April is the clearest illustration of this: the segment has captured a disproportionate share of recent performance, driven by the AI spending wave and a

REDUCING, STILL in June… In April, we wrote that markets had already exploded higher and that everything that followed would be a bonus to capture. We acted accordingly: we began reducing exposures significantly, and we will continue that process through the first two weeks of June. This is not a change of course; it is the execution of a plan we announced. The May rally illustrates precisely why this discipline matters. The S&P 500 gained 5% on the month, the Nasdaq 8%. These figures are accurate but misleading. The broad index moved higher, but most of the advance was driven by an extremely narrow group of names: technology now accounts for approximately 32% of the S&P 500, and the top ten holdings represent nearly 37% of index weight. We saw exactly this dynamic with gold at the start of the year: a parabolic rise, an unassailable narrative, then a sharp

After the Rally, Stay Disciplined In April, the S&P 500 has rallied by about 15% from its recent low and is now approaching a first tactical resistance area around 7’300 points, extending towards 7’400, which we see as a zone to reduce risk rather than increase it. Our central scenario remains positive, with a year‑end target of 7’700 points, but we expect an intermediate correction of roughly 15–20%, potentially towards 6’500, before that upside can be realised. In other words, we stay constructive on the medium‑term trend, but current levels are, in our view, more appropriate for trimming exposure than for adding to it. The latest earnings season clearly supports the bull case, yet most of the good news is already reflected in valuations and no longer provides a fresh boost to multiples. The main reason for this expected consolidation is the leadership change at the Federal Reserve. In most

Markets have had a clear reminder over the past few days that political unpredictability is still a powerful source of volatility. The contrast between last year’s “Liberation Day” and today’s escalation with Iran is striking, and once again March and April are proving difficult months for President Trump. At the same time, Democrats are making inroads from Texas to Mar a Lago: recent local elections in traditionally Republican areas of Texas have flipped to blue, and a Democratic candidate has just won in the very district that includes Mar a Lago. For a president who openly treats the stock market as his primary scoreboard, watching his base erode on such symbolic ground is a genuine setback and increases the likelihood that he will try to put a so-called Trump put under risk assets. On the geopolitical front, the third week of open conflict between the United States and Iran has

We were about to send you the following note on Friday… and then, within a matter of hours, the world changed. February is ending with the S&P 500 down a modest 0.87%, but it certainly did not feel that way: for many investors, the month looked and felt like a bear market. We were nonetheless heading into March with a constructive mindset, expecting an up month that would feel quite different from what we had just gone through. Our view was (and still is) that valuations have largely reset and that selling pressure has, for the most part, been exhausted. In the meantime, the geopolitical backdrop has shifted dramatically. The joint Israeli–American attack has thrown the Middle East into a new phase of turmoil, with intensified bombing, the direct involvement of several regional capitals, and mounting tensions around the Strait of Hormuz. The combination of strikes, counter‑strikes and increasingly heated

January is ending and our nerves have already had their fair share of rollercoasters. The “Trump shock” has been front and center from day one, with repeated salvos on the dollar, tough talk on trade and now the nomination of Kevin Warsh to lead the Fed. All the ingredients of an institutional soap opera are in place: a highly interventionist president on monetary matters, a future central bank head with a strong profile, and, in the background, the sensitive question of Fed independence. It is reasonable to expect markets to trade in sync with Senate hearings, media leaks and conflicting statements, triggering frequent bursts of volatility in the dollar, rates and, by extension, equities. In this more unsettled environment, we remain constructive for 2026. Our base case still assumes positive global growth, gradually easing inflation and central banks that, in our view, will need to turn more accommodative as the year progresses.