Markets
BAM Circus Festival Takes Place In Milan
French acrobat Olivier Mathieu performs “Approach 18. stairs / Touch” (Emanuele Cremaschi/Getty Images)
“lost faith in US assets”

The trade war is catalyzing a global downgrade of everything American

US stocks have derated versus their international peers by the most on record, and buying Treasuries has become a “political issue.”

Luke Kawa

The pre-Rose Garden status quo of global trade and capital flows was, to simplify: the US bought a ton of stuff from the rest of the world, and in return, the rest of the world bought US bonds and stocks.

In mid-March, Jon Turek, founder of JST Advisors, warned on how a trade war could wreak havoc on one of the biggest sources of American exceptionalism in the stock market: the ability to command increasingly high valuations. The outsized profit growth plays a starring role, but there was an undercurrent of another virtuous cycle at play, he noted.

“The current setup between trade and capital has been: US imports goods => Rest of world surplus => RoW exports capital => US assets richen => Excess US demand => US imports goods,” Turek wrote. “US assets have had a step level appreciation in multiples partly because of foreign demand for US assets surging.”

Premium valuations for US multiples now appear to be collateral damage in the push to undo the dominant paradigm of cross-border trade through tariffs. Over the past two months through Tuesday, the 12-month forward price-to-earnings ratio for the S&P 500 has come down by 4 points, the sharpest such decline since the 2020 Covid crisis. But what’s remarkable is how much more US stocks have derated relative to the MSCI World ex-US Index: by more than 2.5 points, the most on record (based on data going back to 2006). In short, global investors are downgrading America.

When ratings agency Standard & Poor’s downgraded the US credit rating below AAA in August 2011 amid the debt ceiling saga, it didn’t matter a lick beyond producing fodder for a nightly CNN segment from Erin Burnett on what we were doing to get it back. Yields went down. US assets were still the safest assets on the planet, and everyone knew it. Unfortunately, while this self-wrought aversion for US assets is best demonstrated by what’s going on in the stock market, there’s an element of this at play in the US Treasury market, as well. 

Typically, when recession fears are mounting — like they are now — Treasuries rally, as markets price in easing from the Federal Reserve to offset the potential economic pain. But longer-term US government bonds have not been offering shelter from the stock market storm. Ten-year Treasury yields are up about 20 basis points from the time of President Trump’s Rose Garden announcement, even as the S&P 500 has slumped double digits over the same period. From a cross-asset perspective, the scariest moment of the sell-off came on Tuesday afternoon, when long-term Treasury yields soared as US stocks nosedived.

These worries, to be sure, are distinct from and more nuanced than your bog-standard doomsayer take about foreigners dumping US bonds as a method of financial warfare. As an example of the nascent aversion to US bonds, Guy Lebas, chief fixed income strategist at Janney, notes that Tuesday’s auction of three-year Treasury notes was noteworthy for the pullback in demand from foreign buyers (emphasis added):

“To say that [Tuesday] afternoon’s 3yr auction was not great is an understatement. In isolation it wasn’t great, but when you combine it with other, ‘international relations’ issues, a story emerges. Total demand for the 3yr was on the weaker side and the ‘direct bidders’ were the lowest in five years, taking only 6% of the auction. ‘Direct bidders’ is a category that includes big US asset managers and foreign central banks and official accounts. It’s usually a pretty stable group, but when you consider some of the big changes in the international financial order over the last week, it’s pretty clear why. Foreign official accounts probably stepped back from today’s 3yr sale on the margin. Why? Suddenly buying a 3yr UST, which used to be normal course of business for a central bank in, say, Asia, isn’t normal. It’s a political issue. So if I’m the head of a CB desk, I’m probably calling my boss before I decide to participate in the auction. And maybe she’s calling her boss. And maybe he’s calling the national treasurer. And maybe that person is too busy and doesn’t respond, and so the CB doesn’t participate in the auction.”

But there’s also a massive pair of elephants in the room for the Treasury market that likely far outweighs the nascent “aversion to US assets” dynamic for bonds. Those were expertly chronicled by the Financial Times’ Kate Duguid and team here. To summarize…

The first is the basis trade: this is hedge funds playing for US Treasury futures to cheapen relative to cash bonds, a position that uses lots of leverage. Volatile markets can upend the trade through higher collateral demands (which, if not met, would force an unwind in the position marked by the selling of cash bonds, pressuring yields higher). Or if the fund is taking a bath on its other, unrelated trades, a broad culling of positioning can also have the same impact.

The second trade is related, but different: a play for US Treasuries to outperform interest rate swaps. These wagers became en vogue amid the belief that the Trump administration would pursue regulatory changes that would prompt banks to buy more US government debt. An oversimplification of Trump 1.0 policy sequencing is, do the pro-market stuff first, and then disruptive measures second. That has not been close to what we’ve seen this time around, and those hoped-for regulatory tweaks have yet to be made.

Addressing dysfunction in US Treasury markets is certainly something that’s within the Federal Reserve’s remit, and the central bank has tools to do so even without a change to policy rates.

George Saravelos, Deutsche Bank’s head of currency strategy, reckons that there is no choice “for the Fed but to step in with emergency purchases of US Treasuries to stabilize the bond market (‘emergency QE’)” if these dislocations swell.

“On monetary policy, if the Fed moves to save the plumbing, it won’t be a signal the Fed is moving to support economic demand. It’ll just be to save the plumbing,” 22V Research’s Dennis Debusschere and Peter Williams wrote.

Regardless of the different elements at play, the bottom line is that the long-held reputation of US assets to be the cleanest dirty shirt, or the best house in a bad neighborhood, in times of market tumult is absent during this rout.

“In a typical crisis environment the market would be hoarding dollar liquidity to secure funding for its underlying US asset base,” Deutsche Bank’s Saravelos wrote. “Dynamics here seem to be very different: the market has lost faith in US assets, so that instead of closing the asset-liability mismatch by hoarding dollar liquidity it is actively selling down the US assets themselves.”

More Markets

See all Markets
markets

Duolingo tumbles despite better-than-expected Q1 results

Traders are crying foul over the green owl.

Duolingo posted better-than-expected first-quarter results, calling it an “outstanding start to the year.”

But the market seems to disagree, with shares down more than 10% in after-hours trading.

Here are the Q1 details:

  • Revenue of $292 million (compared to analyst estimates of $288.5 million).

  • Adjusted EBITDA of $83.4 million (estimate: $73.5 million).

  • Daily active users of 56.5 million (estimate: 55.7 million). 

  • Paid subscribers of 12.5 million (estimate: 12.7 million).

The company also boosted its full-year adjusted EBITDA guidance to $310 million, up from a prior range of $299 million to $305 million, and solidified its revenue outlook to $1.21 billion, the midpoint of its previous range.

The first quarter’s top- and bottom-line beats are larger than the changes to its full-year guidance. This may be Duolingo’s way of keeping expectations low, but on the surface it could be viewed as a sign that the good news for 2026 is already in the rearview mirror.

The language-learning app hit all-time highs more than a year ago and has been in free fall ever since, losing over 75% of its value as investors grapple with the effects of artificial intelligence on the foreign language business.

Duolingo’s user growth has slowed meaningfully in recent quarters, and has been decelerating for years. The company blamed some of this on choosing to forgo some of its unhinged social media posting, trading off user growth for a more positive experience. Whatever the reason, the slowing in user growth continued in Q1, with the app showing a 21.2% increase in daily active users compared to 2025. The deceleration was softer than feared, however, outperforming its guidance and the Street’s call.

Going forward, CEO and cofounder Luis von Ahn sees room to expand in some areas that might seem a little far afield for a language-learning app, until you remember how gamified nearly every app experience is these days.

“We are moving quickly to prioritize the product and free user experience, while also investing in our next engines of growth, like chess, math, and music. We have conviction this is ultimately what will make us a larger and more durable company,” he wrote.

markets

Palantir beats on earnings and revenue, raises guidance

Palantir reported Q1 sales and earnings per share that topped Wall Street’s consensus expectations and boosted its revenue and profit guidance. The defense, intelligence, and AI software company reported:

  • Adjusted Q1 earnings per share of $0.33 vs. Wall Street expectations for $0.28, according to FactSet.

  • Q1 sales of $1.63 billion vs. an expected $1.54 billion, per FactSet.

  • Q1 sales growth of 85% year over year vs. a 74.5% Wall Street expectation.

  • Q1 US commercial sales of $595 million vs. the $605 million consensus of seven analyst estimates collected by FactSet.

Looking forward, Palantir forecast:

  • Q2 2026 revenue in the range of $1.797 billion to $1.801 billion, vs. Wall Street expectations for $1.68 billion.

  • Q2 2026 adjusted operating income between $1.063 billion and $1.067 billion, vs. an expectation for $873.6 million.

  • Full-year 2026 revenue in the range of $7.65 billion to $7.662 billion, vs. its previous estimate of between $7.182 billion and $7.198 billion and Wall Street expectations for $7.24 billion.

  • Full-year 2026 adjusted operating income between $4.440 billion and $4.452 billion, vs. its previous estimate of between $4.136 billion and $4.142 billion and analyst expectations for $4.19 billion, according to FactSet.  

Shares were roughly flat shortly after the report.

A retail favorite since at least 2024, Palantir’s shares have struggled early in 2026, falling about 18% through Monday’s close. The problem isn’t with the fundamentals, as Palantir’s results have repeatedly trounced expectations for profitability and growth. (Though it did slightly undershoot expectations for Q1 US commercial sales, if one is being a stickler.)

It’s just that the market has given Palantir lots of credit over the last three years, during which time its shares soared roughly 1,900%. In the market’s view, perhaps Palantir’s sterling performance merely represents the company keeping its end of the bargain.

markets

Pinterest spikes after delivering impressive Q1 results, with fastest sales growth since Q2 2024

Pinterests nascent comeback gained traction on Monday as the company reported better-than-expected Q1 results.

After sinking double digits following each of its past three earnings reports, the social media company looks poised to snap that inauspicious streak, with shares jumping 20% in postmarket trading.

Here are the Q1 numbers: 

  • Revenue of $1.01 billion (versus a consensus estimate of $965.7 million and guidance for $958 million to $978 million).

  • Adjusted EBITDA of $206.5 million (estimate: $176.7 million, guidance for $163 million to $183 million).

  • Monthly active users of 631 million (estimate: 630.5 million).

Guidance for Q2 was modestly ahead of estimates:

  • Revenue in a range of $1.13 billion to $1.15 billion (estimate: $1.12 billion).

  • Adjusted EBITDA in a range of $256 million to $276 million (estimate: $264.8 million).

The stock had lost 40% of its value over the past six months as investors scrutinized the headwinds from tariffs and chatbots — worries that are seemingly being assuaged by these results.

Considering the vibe curation companys recent track record, the bar had been slightly lowered for Q1: in its guidance for the first quarter of the year, the company said it expected Pinterest to grow between 11% and 14% year over year, already a few ticks downward from the 16% growth the company saw in 2025. 

In the first part of the year, Pinterest actually enjoyed revenue growth of nearly 18%, its strongest pace since Q2 2024.

“As we continue building an AI-powered ads platform that delivers performance for advertisers, we remain focused on ensuring monetization more fully reflects the strength of our engagement,” said CEO Bill Ready.

The company’s attempted open-source AI pivot may be starting to show signs of paying off for investors. 

markets

Paramount beats Q1 earnings estimates, maintains full-year revenue guidance

Paramount delivered its first-quarter results after the bell on Monday. Shares of the entertainment company rose about 5% in after-hours trading.

For Q1, Paramount reported:

  • Adjusted earnings of $0.23 per share, compared to Wall Street estimates of $0.15 per share from analysts polled by FactSet.

  • Revenue of $7.35 billion, compared to a $7.28 billion estimate.

  • 79.6 million Paramount+ subscribers, compared to the 79.9 million consensus.

Looking ahead, the company said it expects Q2 revenue of between $6.75 billion and $7.95 billion, compared with the $7.07 billion Wall Street consensus forecast. The company maintained its full-year revenue guidance of $30 billion.

Q1 marks the company’s first earnings report since winning the bidding war for Warner Bros. Discovery in late February. As of Monday afternoon Eastern time, prediction markets speculating on which company will ultimately come out on top of the bidding war have Paramount at a 77% chance, compared to 17% for “none.”

(Event contracts are offered through Robinhood Derivatives, LLC — probabilities referenced or sourced from KalshiEx LLC or ForecastEx LLC.)

The megadeal still faces some hurdles, including significant opposition from notable entertainment workers and potential antitrust challenges on the federal or state level. Last week, a group of subscribers sued to block the deal on antitrust grounds.

Latest Stories

Sherwood Media, LLC produces fresh and unique perspectives on topical financial news and is a fully owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., and any views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of any other Robinhood affiliate, including Robinhood Markets, Inc., Robinhood Financial LLC, Robinhood Securities, LLC, Robinhood Crypto, LLC, Robinhood Derivatives, LLC, or Robinhood Money, LLC. Futures and event contracts are offered through Robinhood Derivatives, LLC.