Robeco expands its 3D active ETF range with the launch of the 3D Emerging Markets UCITS ETF. According to the firm, this new fund combines the strengths of Robeco’s quantitative approach with a long-standing track record and experience in emerging markets. The ETF is listed on the London Stock Exchange, SIX Swiss Exchange, Frankfurt Stock Exchange, and Borsa Italiana.
The asset manager believes there is strong momentum among European investors for active ETFs, as they are highly valued for their versatility, performance, and accessibility. “The ETF offers investors a highly attractive alternative to passive ETFs by providing liquid and transparent access to emerging markets equities through Robeco’s proven Enhanced Indexing strategy,” they note.
Regarding the fund, they explain that it leverages a sophisticated quantitative approach to capitalize on the complexities of emerging markets. Its enhanced factor model uses robust metrics, while machine learning and natural language processing (NLP) signals help uncover short-term dynamics, improving the responsiveness of the strategy. The Enhanced Indexing that underpins the ETF allows for many small, yet meaningful, deviations from the index, using risk and ESG indicators to reduce potential downside risks.
“Our 3D active equity ETFs have been very well received by clients, and we have now expanded the range to include emerging markets alongside our current offerings, which provide exposure to developed markets in the U.S., Europe, and the rest of the world. Robeco brings 15 years of experience in managing quantitative emerging markets strategies, as well as in navigating the unique challenges and opportunities they present. Over this time, we’ve built a solid track record, refining our factor definitions and harnessing advances in computing power, machine learning, and natural language processing. With this launch, we are offering our quantitative emerging markets strategy in an efficient, transparent, and accessible format. The ETF strategy will focus on the most liquid stocks to ensure smooth execution, while capturing the unique alpha of this capability,” explains Nick King, Head of ETFs at Robeco.
Despite this volatile context, alternative investments have experienced continuous growth. Alternative assets under management rose from $13.3 trillion at the end of 2021 to $17.6 trillion by mid-2024, and they are expected to reach $29.2 trillion by 2029. The industry is not only larger than before, but also increasingly diversified and sophisticated, blurring and merging the lines between traditional financial segments.
According to EY in its report “The EY Global Alternative Fund Survey”, based on a sample of 400 alternative fund managers and institutional investors, we are witnessing a robust growth landscape in terms of assets, supported by high investor satisfaction levels and ambitious expansion plans by alternative fund managers across North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific.
“Growth forecasts are also positive. Alternative fund managers and the investors who entrust their capital to them expect the coming years to bring continued growth and increased asset allocations. Infrastructure, private equity, and secondary funds are considered some of the asset classes with the greatest potential for the future,” the document notes.
According to the consulting firm, one of the most surprising findings of the survey is the crucial role that individual investors and their private capital funds are playing as a new frontier of growth in the industry.
According to the consulting firm, one of the most surprising findings of the survey is the crucial role that individual investors and their private capital funds are playing as a new frontier of growth in the industry. Moreover, it considers the demand for greater accessibility to be significant, but notes that the democratization of the sector also presents challenges. For EY, the need for education, regulatory compliance, and efficiency will force many alternative fund managers to make significant and far-reaching changes to their business models.
Despite this volatile context, alternative investments have experienced continuous growth. Alternative assets under management grew from $13.3 trillion at the end of 2021 to $17.6 trillion by mid-2024, and are expected to reach $29.2 trillion by 2029. The industry is not only larger than before, but also increasingly diversified and sophisticated, blurring and merging the boundaries between traditional financial segments.
According to EY in its report “The EY Global Alternative Fund Survey”, based on a sample of 400 alternative fund managers and institutional investors, the outlook is one of strong asset growth, supported by high investor satisfaction levels and ambitious expansion plans from alternative fund managers in North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific.
“Growth forecasts are also positive. Alternative fund managers and the investors who entrust their capital to them expect the coming years to bring continued growth and larger asset allocations. Infrastructure, private equity, and secondary funds are considered some of the asset classes with the greatest potential for the future,” the document states.
According to the consulting firm, one of the most surprising findings of the survey is the crucial role of individual investors and their private capital funds as a new frontier of growth in the industry. Furthermore, it notes the strong demand for accessibility, but also highlights that democratization brings new challenges. For EY, the need for education, regulatory alignment, and operational efficiency will require many alternative asset managers to undergo major, transformative changes to their business models.
Growth Drivers in the Industry
When discussing growth levers, the report points out that diversification is emerging as another key driver. “Many alternative fund managers are seeking to expand their range of investment options and take advantage of booming markets such as private credit or new technologies like tokenization. To ensure that diversification fuels growth—and not just complexity—creativity, investor engagement, and a clear strategy will be essential,” the report explains.
In this context, it is not surprising that artificial intelligence (AI) is a dominant theme in optimizing operating models and increasing productivity. According to EY, expectations are high and investment in AI is rising rapidly, but many questions remain about how to implement it effectively. In some cases, alternative fund managers and investors have surprisingly different expectations. “For AI to succeed in this sector, data, human talent, and investor support will be key,” the report notes.
EY’s Conclusion: Three Recurring Themes
As alternative fund managers and investors plan for profitable growth, EY‘s analysis reveals three recurring themes:
The need for a clear strategy
The importance of innovation
The implementation of scalable operating models—to optimize distribution, technology, talent, transparency, and trust
“The relevance of these factors is reinforced by the current market uncertainty, which is creating an increasingly dynamic competitive environment, characterized by rising strategic and operational challenges. Looking ahead, we foresee a potential blurring of traditional boundaries, greater fee pressure, and the emergence of asymmetric market dynamics similar to those long seen in traditional asset management,” the report states.
To survive and thrive in this dynamic environment, EY offers a clear yet complex piece of advice: firms must embrace transformation without losing the qualities that make them unique—or the capabilities that have driven their success so far.
In Recent Months, the Trump Administration Has Imposed Four Different Types of Tariffs on Mexico, resulting in an average duty of up to 23%. But none of this is static—because to the political equation, we now have to add the unpredictability of business reactions. Analysts at BBVA México—Diego López, Carlos Serrano, and Samuel Vázquez—try to piece together the puzzle in a recent report.
A Summary of the Situation
So far, Mexico has been hit with tariffs in four areas: migration and fentanyl, the automotive sector, steel and aluminum, and beer. It’s worth noting that Mexico was excluded from the “reciprocal” tariff package announced on April 2 due to its free trade agreement with the U.S., the USMCA.
As of now, there is a crucial data point: in 2024, Mexico exported $505.9 billion to the United States. Of that total, 48.9% was conducted under USMCA, while 51.1% was outside the agreement.
This means that more than half of Mexican exports would currently face a tariff of at least 25%, a considerable tariff burden. On top of that, some sectors face additional tariffs. For instance, automotive exports not routed through USMCA are subject to a combined tariff of 50%.
Summarizing with year-end 2024 data:
19.1% of exports face a 50% tariff
55.4% face a 25% tariff
Only 25.6% are duty-free
With this distribution, Mexico’s weighted average tariff rate stands at 23.4%.
But Everything Could Change
Analysts at BBVA México believe this initial assessment could shift significantly if exporters—who previously avoided using USMCA due to the administrative burden of proving rules of origin compliance—begin to reconsider.
Although it’s not yet clear how many companies will adopt the agreement, a more intensive use of USMCA is anticipated.
In the automotive sector, it is expected that exporters will soon begin systematically documenting U.S. content, allowing for tariff deductions and a significant reduction in the fiscal burden.
A plausible scenario is that, by factoring in the average U.S. content (18.3%) in Mexican automotive exports, the overall average tariff could soon fall to 13.1%.
If, in addition, Mexico reaches the historical high of 64.2% of exports channeled through USMCA, the tariff could be reduced further. And if the Trump administration agrees to lower migration and fentanyl-related tariffs to 12%, the average rate could drop to 8.4%.
Toward an Unexpected Scenario
All this could lead to an unforeseen scenario: Mexico could become one of the countries facing the lowest levels of U.S. protectionism globally.
For now, the Mexican government and its businesses are moving toward an administrative and logistical restructuring to adapt to the new landscape—while evaluating the opportunities opening up, especially considering that U.S. tariffs on China exceed those on Mexico in all scenarios.
Raymond James announced that it will acquire minority stakes in some of its own independent brokers to help “advisors achieve their business goals through a trusted partner,” according to a company statement.
The firm’s equity financing offer is part of its Practice Capital Solutions program, which allows “financial advisors to access capital conveniently without giving up autonomy over their practices. With the firm as a trusted minority capital partner, advisors can secure the funding needed to reach their business objectives,” said Tash Elwyn, President of Raymond James’ Private Client Group.
Eligible practices will work directly with Raymond James to exchange a minority equity stake in their business and revenue for the capital required to meet specific needs such as succession planning, team expansion, operational improvements, or preparation for a merger or acquisition, according to the St. Petersburg, Florida-based financial services firm.
The practices will retain full control over operations and business continuity throughout the investment, with the option to repurchase the stake under clearly defined favorable terms, the firm added.
“With equity financing through Practice Capital Solutions, advisors can support their unique vision for their practice without sacrificing the long-term interests of their clients and teams to an external investor. They can also be fully confident in their partnership with Raymond James—not only because of the firm’s financial strength and one of the strongest capital ratios in the industry, but also due to its demonstrated commitment to advisor autonomy,” Elwyn stated.
Practice Capital Solutions at Raymond James includes both traditional debt financing for succession and acquisitions as well as this new equity financing option. Both methods can be strategically combined to enable advisors to complete a full sale of their practice on their own terms, the statement added.
“By working closely with advisors, we’ve designed a solution that elegantly addresses the challenges they face when monetizing their practice, ensuring our capital solutions not only benefit the advisors and their clients, but also align seamlessly with Raymond James’ culture,” said Emma Boston, Vice President of Strategic Operations at Raymond James.
“Our approach reinforces business ownership and advisor independence, addressing their capital needs while strengthening our partnership as their equity investor. Most importantly, we accomplish all of this while ensuring the advisor retains full control over their practice, daily operations, and legacy,” she added.
Insigneo announced that it has added RIA Pinvest to its network of affiliated advisors and advisory firms. Based in Miami,Pinvest is affiliated with Grupo Financiero Pichincha, the leading private bank in Ecuador, and has a presence in six countries across the Americas and Europe.
“We are delighted to offer Pinvest our institutional-grade client service model, which includes access to model portfolios, alternative investments, trading capabilities, and separately managed accounts, among other investment solutions. Our in-house research and analysis services from the Chief Investment Office, led by Ahmed Riesgo, will also be part of the offering,” said José Salazar, Head of Market for Insigneo in Miami.
Grupo Financiero Pichincha serves 8.4 million clients and employs 16,300 people. Pinvest is led by Esteban Zorrilla, who, along with a highly experienced team, will focus on delivering personalized wealth management solutions to high-net-worth (HNW) and ultra-high-net-worth (UHNW) individuals and their families.
“Our partnership with Insigneo marks a key milestone in our mission to deliver world-class, globally diversified wealth management solutions to Latin American clients,” said Esteban Zorrilla, CEO of Pinvest. “We are building Pinvest on the foundation of independence, transparency, and personalized advice, and Insigneo’s robust platform enables us to deliver exactly that,” he added.
Michael Averett, Chief Revenue Officer at Insigneo, stated: “We focused on the success of our advisor-centric platform and essentially opened up certain aspects of it to our RIA clients. Demand for a platform like ours, which serves international clientele, has been strong, and RIAs servicing these clients are knocking on our door to enhance their offerings,” he added.
Insigneo has long served RIAs and has recently enhanced its platform to include new technology and products, as well as financial software capabilities that help RIAs better manage their clients’ needs, the company said in a statement.
Financial analysts were eagerly anticipating the annual shareholders meeting of Berkshire Hathaway on Saturday, May 3, curious to hear what Warren Buffett would say about President Donald Trump’s tariff war. But Buffett, 94, surprised everyone with a different announcement: nothing less than his retirement.
“Tomorrow we have a Berkshire board meeting, and we have eleven directors. Two of the directors, my children Howie and Susie, know what I’m going to talk about. For the rest, it will be news. But I believe the time has come for Greg to become the company’s CEO by the end of this year,” said Buffett.
On Sunday, May 4, The Wall Street Journal featured the magnate’s photo on its front page with the headline: “There Will Never Be Another Warren Buffett.”
Buffett led Berkshire Hathaway for 60 years, during which time he became an icon—or an “oracle”—of investing. He will be succeeded as CEO by Greg Abel, 63, the current Chief Executive Officer of Berkshire Hathaway Energy.
Buffett emphasized that he will not sell a single share of his company, which in 2024 reached a market capitalization of approximately $1.2 trillion. He also stated that he will remain available as an advisor.
Trade Policy Should Not Be a Weapon
During the company’s shareholder meeting in Omaha, Nebraska, Buffett defended global trade and expressed criticism of the protectionist policies of current U.S. President Donald Trump: “We should engage in world trade along with other countries, and we should do what we do best—and do it well,” said the billionaire.
“I don’t think it’s a good idea to design a world where a few countries say, ‘Ha, ha, ha! We won!’ and the rest feel envy,” Buffett added. “Trade should not be a weapon.”
Berkshire Swimming in a Sea of Liquidity
Buffett is stepping down from the helm of the company as its stock hits all-time highs. The last snapshot of the company before the unexpected announcement shows a strong accumulation of liquidity.
As of its March 31 balance sheet, Berkshire held significant positions in cash and short-term Treasury bonds.
According to Bloomberg, Buffett’s personal fortune is estimated at around $170 billion.
A new immigration proposal from the United States has captured the attention of the global investment-by-residency ecosystem: the so-called “Trump Gold Card,” which would offer permanent residency in exchange for a $5 million investment. Although it is not yet an official or legislated measure, the initiative has already sparked intense debate in specialized circles.
What Does the Trump Gold Card Propose?
According to statements by Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, the proposal would allow foreign investors to obtain a Green Card through a direct investment, without the obligation to create jobs or actively participate in a business. Lutnick mentioned that, in just one day, investment commitments of $5 billion were generated from 1,000 interested investors.
There is even talk of developing a digital application platform, possibly driven in collaboration with Elon Musk. However, the proposal still requires legislative and regulatory approval before becoming a reality.
Proposed Benefits of the Trump Gold Card:
Permanent residency in the United States.
Exemption from the obligation to create jobs.
Territorial taxation (pending confirmation).
Possibility to apply for U.S. citizenship after the required period.
Type of Investment
Amount USD
Type
Requirements
EB-5 Regional Center
800,000
Passive
Create 10 direct/indirect jobs
EB-5 Direct Investment
1,050,000
Active
Approved business plan, 10 direct jobs
Comparison With the EB-5 Program: Investment or Purchase?
The well-known EB-5 program, in effect since 1990, requires an investment of $800,000 (through regional centers) or $1,050,000 (direct investment), along with the creation of at least 10 full-time jobs. The essential difference is that the Trump Gold Card is proposed as a “direct purchase” of residency, without the business and employment requirements that characterize the EB-5 program.
How Does This Proposal Position Itself in the Global Context?
The “Trump Gold Card” does not emerge in a vacuum. There are already residency and citizenship by investment (RCBI) programs with even higher thresholds in markets such as Austria, Singapore, or Hong Kong.
Rank
Country
Program Name
Minimum Investment (USD)
Type
1
Austria
Citizenship by Exceptional Merit
$3–10 million+
Citizenship
2
Singapore
Global Investor Program
$7.78 million
Permanent Residency
3
United States
“Trump Gold Card” (unofficial)
$5 million
Permanent Residency
4
Hong Kong
Capital Investment Entrant Scheme (CIES)
$3.84 million
Permanent Residency
5
New Zealand
Active Investor Plus Visa
$3.12 million
Residency
6
Bermuda
Economic Investment Certificate
$2.5 million
Permanent Residency
7
Samoa
Citizenship by Investment
$2.44 million
Citizenship
8
Saudi Arabia
Premium Residency
$1.13 million
Residency
9
Seychelles
Permanent Residency
$1 million
Residency
10
El Salvador
Freedom Passport Program
$1 million
Citizenship
Strategic Analysis: Migration and International Image
From my perspective as an international advisor on investment migration programs, I believe that the proposal is not scandalous in its content, but rather in its public presentation.
Compared to already existing programs in Austria or Singapore —much more costly and structured— the difference lies in the style. While other jurisdictions maintain discretion and institutional rigor, Trump’s communication approach favors spectacle.
This strategy, although effective at attracting headlines and funds, runs the risk of politicizing a migration tool that has traditionally been managed with prudence and geopolitical strategy.
In the world of investment migration, the way a program is communicated also defines its legitimacy and international perception.
The “Trump Gold Card,” although still at the conceptual stage, represents a shift in narrative within the global mobility universe for high-net-worth individuals. The United States, with its possible formal entry into this space, could redefine the rules of the game —not because of the investment amount, but due to the symbolic impact of its immigration policy.
For global investors, this new scenario will demand not only capital, but also strategic vision, specialized advice, and deep understanding of the international migration map. Because in today’s world, mobility is the new power.
The Author:Juliana Cloutier is an expert in investment migration and founder of Alta Invest Advisory. With over 17 years of international experience and a background in private banking at HSBC (United States, Singapore, United Kingdom, and Canada), she advises high-net-worth individuals and families on global mobility strategies and wealth planning. She is an active member of the Investment Migration Council (IMC) and Invest in the USA (IIUSA).
The European Central Bank (ECB) has responded to rising economic risks and the deterioration of financing conditions in the euro area with a new deposit rate cut to 2.25%. The decision was unanimous. However, the most noteworthy aspect was ECB President Christine Lagarde’s perspective on the potential impact of Trump’s tariff policies on the eurozone economy—and what that means for the ECB.
Despite this, Ulrike Kastens, Senior Economist for Europe at DWS, highlighted that Lagarde did not commit in advance to any future interest rate path. “The high level of uncertainty still demands a focus on data dependence and meeting-by-meeting decisions, especially since the impact of the tariff policy is unclear. While downside risks to the economy dominate, the impact on inflation is less certain, as it also depends, for example, on potential EU retaliatory measures,” Kastens noted.
According to her analysis, unlike the post-March meeting statement, it was not declared that monetary policy is “significantly less restrictive.” “For Lagarde, labels like ‘restrictive’ or ‘neutral’ are not helpful to characterize monetary policy because, in a world full of disruptions, monetary policy must be calibrated to achieve sustainable price stability. That is the only destination,” the DWS economist emphasized.
Lale Akoner, Global Markets Analyst at eToro, agreed with Kastens that the biggest surprise was that the ECB no longer labeled monetary policy as “restrictive” in its statement, though it also did not claim to have entered “neutral” territory. In her view, this change suggests the possibility of further rate cuts amid rising political uncertainty stemming from U.S. tariff decisions and their impact on European growth.
“Given the growing political uncertainty worldwide, the ECB is expected to adopt a more data-dependent approach, similar to the Fed. Nonetheless, while tariffs pose downside risks to growth, increased European spending on defense and infrastructure could partially offset them. If rising deficits threaten debt sustainability, the ECB may have to resume large-scale bond purchases through its Transmission Protection Instrument (TPI),” Akoner explained.
What Comes Next?
According to Konstantin Veit, Portfolio Manager at PIMCO, it’s clear that downside risks to growth currently outweigh concerns over temporary price increases or the state of public finances. He recalled that Lagarde stated, “There is no better time to depend on the data,” reaffirming that decisions will continue to be made on a meeting-by-meeting basis, and that data flows will determine the future path of monetary policy.
Looking ahead, Veit considers it likely that official rates will continue to gradually fall and that the ECB is not yet done with rate cuts. “The current pricing of the terminal rate, around 1.55%, suggests a slightly accommodative destination for the deposit facility rate. In June, with new staff projections, the ECB should be in a better position to determine whether a clearly stimulative policy will be necessary,” he said.
Orla Garvey, Senior Fixed Income Manager at Federated Hermes, noted that Lagarde balanced her changes in language. “The disinflation process is seen as ongoing, and growth is under short-term pressure, which likely supports current market pricing for rate cuts. This is consistent with the progress already made on inflation, and the impact of a stronger currency and lower oil prices. The ECB continues to keep all options open without committing in advance to any specific interest rate path,” Garvey explained.
Roelof Salomons, Chief Strategist at the BlackRock Investment Institute, also agreed that the direction of interest rates remains downward, though he sees some roadblocks. “The ECB may need to adjust its path to respond to both the tariff pass-through and fiscal stimulus in Europe, without much new data since the last meeting to guide decisions. President Lagarde appeared more concerned about growth risks than inflation,” Salomons said after the ECB’s April meeting.
In Salomons’ words: “When you’re running downhill, sometimes you have to keep running not to fall.” In the short term, he sees a slightly higher probability of the ECB cutting rates below the neutral level, which he currently estimates at around 2%. In the long term, however, he acknowledges that increased fiscal spending will raise borrowing needs and push neutral rates higher. “The global economy has endured several shocks. Tariff uncertainty is another one affecting both demand and supply, raising the cost of capital. Europe is not immune, but remains a relative beacon of stability thanks to strong balance sheets and policymakers’ ability (and willingness) to respond. Greater unity and a pro-growth agenda in Europe could significantly boost demand,” concluded the BlackRock expert on the challenge facing the ECB.
At Amundi, they expect the ECB to continue cutting rates until its official interest rate reaches 1.5%. And, if financial conditions continue to tighten, they also expect the ECB to slow the pace of its balance sheet reduction. All of this aligns with macroeconomic expectations which, according to the analysis of Mahmood Pradhan, Head of Global Macro at Amundi Investment Institute, are characterized by a disinflation process that is on track and growth prospects that have deteriorated due to rising trade tensions.
“The eurozone economy has developed some resilience to global shocks, but growth prospects have deteriorated due to increasing trade tensions. The rise in uncertainty is likely to dampen household and business confidence, and the adverse and volatile market reaction to trade tensions may have a restrictive impact on financing conditions. These factors may continue to weigh on the eurozone’s economic outlook,” concludes Pradhan.
From Donald Trump’s first term (2017–2021), we know that he favors low interest rates and a not overly strong dollar—two ideas that now appear to clash with the work Jerome Powell has done at the helm of the Federal Reserve since February 2018. His current term as Chair of the central bank ends in May 2026, though he will remain a Governor until February 2028. Without a doubt, the controversy between Trump and Powell is heating up, particularly after Powell’s recent speech on April 16 at the Economic Club of Chicago, where he addressed U.S. economic prospects.
In his address, Powell emphasized that the U.S. economy remains in a solid position, though he acknowledged that it faces downside risks due to uncertainty generated by trade policies, especially the new tariffs imposed by the Trump administration.
“At the moment, we are in a good position to wait for greater clarity before considering any adjustment in our monetary policy stance. We continue to analyze incoming data, the evolution of the economic outlook, and the balance of risks. We understand that high levels of unemployment or inflation can be harmful and painful for communities, families, and businesses. We will continue doing everything in our power to achieve our goals of maximum employment and price stability,” concluded Powell.
Beyond this tempered conclusion, Powell delivered key messages about the relationship between monetary policy and the Trump administration’s tariff strategy:
“As we better understand changes in policy, we will gain a clearer view of their implications for the economy and therefore for monetary policy. It is very likely that tariffs will generate at least a temporary increase in inflation. The inflationary effects could also be more persistent. Avoiding that outcome will depend on the magnitude of those effects, how long they take to fully pass through to prices, and ultimately on keeping long-term inflation expectations well anchored.”
Juan José del Valle, analyst at Activotrade, remarked:
“Powell’s Wednesday speech raised doubts about the economic outlook, and Trump’s harsh tone toward the Fed Chair—calling into question the institution’s independence—led the Nasdaq to fall more than 3% during the session.”
Trump’s Response
President Donald Trump responded the following day, expressing his displeasure with Powell for not lowering interest rates and even suggesting his removal. According to international news agencies, the White House is reportedly evaluating the dismissal of the Fed Chair. Bloomberg reported that Kevin Hassett, economic advisor to the White House, said: “The president and his team continue to study the matter.”
This isn’t Trump’s first criticism of the Fed. Earlier this month, he criticized the central bank’s “slowness” in lowering rates via a post on Truth Social, and recently labeled the Fed’s reports a “complete disaster,” accusing Powell of “playing politics” by not adjusting interest rates—especially compared to the ECB, which has implemented multiple cuts.
The Stakes for the Fed
Experts warn that this political pressure from the White House adds to the already challenging situation the Fed faces: balancing inflation and growth risks.
“The bank appears focused on preventing the unanchoring of inflation expectations. The latest New York Fed survey highlighted this risk, showing that Americans’ short-term inflation expectations have risen significantly, while economic outlooks have sharply deteriorated.”
However, U.S. retail sales offered a more reassuring signal—though the figures were driven in part by early household purchases ahead of tariff implementation. The true impact of the trade war may take time to reflect in economic data. Still, uncertainty is already weighing on businesses: visibility has plummeted, and order books are thinning, as shown by ASML’s figures.
Some firms are directly on the front lines of the trade war: Nvidia is expected to take a $5.5 billion asset loss due to the ban on exporting its H20 chips to China, according to Edmond de Rothschild AM’s daily analysis.
Can the President of the Fed Be Dismissed?
According to the Federal Reserve’s own rules, the Chair cannot be dismissed for political reasons or policy disagreements. Under the Federal Reserve Act, Board members can only be removed “for cause”. However, the law does not explicitly define what that entails. Legal experts interpret “cause” to mean misconduct, inability to perform duties, corruption, extreme negligence, or legal violations.
“While legal scholars argue that a president cannot easily remove the Fed Chair, and Powell has stated he would not resign if asked by Trump, the latest comments from the White House are forcing investors to seriously consider the implications of a possible dismissal,” Bloomberg notes.
Historically, no Fed Chair has ever been removed. According to legal experts, any attempt to dismiss Powell for political reasons could trigger legal challenges, provoke a crisis of confidence, and prompt a negative market reaction as the institution’s independence is undermined.
At a time when financial markets are experiencing increasing volatility, household interest in stock markets remains a key indicator of economic confidence. Which countries invest the most? According to the latest study* by HelloSafe, the citizens of the United States, Canada, and Australia are the most active. After analyzing cultural, economic, and regulatory dynamics, the authors conclude that there are significant differences from one continent to another.
To understand the results of this report, it is necessary to take into account that the data presented on this map are the most recent available, and correspond to 2023 and 2024. “As there are no official statistics on the matter, there is a margin of error between 5% and 10% due to fluctuations in stock asset ownership and the difficulty of estimating the number of such owners. The figures include investors who directly own a stock portfolio, but also people who invest indirectly in stock assets through various financial vehicles (such as life insurance, for example),” clarify the authors of the report before we delve into its conclusions.
The analysis of stock ownership rates reveals marked disparities between continents since in North America, households have the highest rates, with 55% in the United States and 49% in Canada, reflecting a strong investment culture. Oceania follows this trend, with 37% in Australia and 31% in New Zealand. In Europe, there are significant differences as Nordic countries like Sweden (22%) and Finland (18.7%) are ahead of large economies like France (15.1%) and Germany (14.2%).
In Asia, rates remain globally modest, despite the dynamism of financial centers such as Hong Kong (13.8%) and Japan (15.2%). Lastly, emerging countries in Latin America and Africa, such as Brazil (8%) and Morocco (0.5%), present much lower levels, illustrating still-developing financial markets.
Pauline Laurore, finance expert at HelloSafe, explained: “The difference in stock market participation between countries can be explained by a combination of structural factors. In countries like the United States and Canada, investment in equities is deeply integrated into retirement savings plans —through pension funds— and supported by strong tax incentives. The financial culture there is more developed, and access to markets is facilitated by low-cost platforms and favorable regulation. In contrast, in many emerging countries, financial infrastructures are less mature, investment products are not widespread, and savings are still mainly channeled into real estate or low-risk assets. Even in highly populated countries like India and China, the low level of stock market penetration (6–7%) shows that there is considerable growth potential, provided educational, technological, and institutional obstacles are overcome.”
The analysis of the absolute number of shareholders reveals significant differences between countries in terms of demographics and economic development. In North America, the United States dominates with more than 185 million investors, far ahead of Canada, with 19 million. In Asia, although the proportion of investors is lower, the volume is impressive due to population: China (98.7 million) and India (85.8 million) rank among the global leaders.
In Europe, the figures are more modest despite advanced economies: the United Kingdom (22 million) and Germany (11.8 million) stand out, while France has 10.2 million holders. In Latin America, Brazil stands out with 17.1 million investors, far ahead of its neighbors. Finally, in Africa, South Africa leads the list with 8.47 million investors, which contrasts with much lower figures in Morocco (189,500). These figures reveal the combined influence of standard of living, investment culture, and demographic weight.
U.S., India, and Brazil: The Three Best Stock Market Performers of the Last 10 Years
An analysis of annualized returns over the past 10 years shows that the United States, with the S&P 500, remains at the top with a return of 16.89%, making it one of the most profitable indices of the period. Emerging markets, especially Brazil and India, closely follow, with returns near 15.9%, offering attractive potential despite their volatility. Vietnam and New Zealand also stood out with respectable, though more moderate, returns (12.22% and 10.66%, respectively).
In contrast, markets such as the United Kingdom (2.67%) and Spain (1.65%) performed significantly worse, suggesting less dynamic growth during the period. Other European countries like Portugal (1.71%) and France (5.93%) also underperformed compared to their global counterparts.
The HelloSafe study analyzes, in a new report, the rate of household participation in the stock market across 32 countries worldwide. This study examines countries where households allocate a significant portion of their savings to equities and other investment products.
