Week ahead: Tariff whiplash, Powell pressure and the Gold rush pause — Buckle up, it’s a macro minefield

It’s a packed week ahead — no shortage of macro catalysts or headline risk. We’ve got a global data deluge coming through: U.S. leading indicators, the UMich sentiment read, Eurozone PMI and consumer confidence, plus Germany’s IFO survey. On top of that, expect the airwaves to light up with central bank speak as the IMF–World Bank meetings kick off in Washington. And just to keep traders caffeinated, we’ve got a firehose of Q1 earnings to sift through.

So what am I dialed into? Good question. I'll have one eye on the “Art of the Deal” headlines — always worth tracking when tariff chess gets mixed with election optics. But more importantly, I’m watching how the tape tells the tale through the data.

Yeah, some of it might get dismissed by the Street as lagging or irrelevant — “the worst is still ahead,” they’ll say. But don’t underestimate the market’s reaction if we get a set of prints that challenge the current doom narrative. If the hard data even hints at stability, it could flip the script, especially with positioning this lopsided.

Still, let’s not kid ourselves — this market is on life support, and that lifeline is a rate cut. Period. Which brings us right back to Powell — and, not surprisingly, Trump’s wrath.

Now, I’ll be the first to say it — Powell’s a conservative in the classic mold, and as a fiscal conservative myself (hand raised), I get the discipline. But let’s be honest, this isn’t about Navarro’s industrial policy cosplay or Lutnick’s trade map gibberish — Trump actually has a point this time.

Let’s rewind: back in Sept 2023, the Fed slashed 50bps with the S&P at record highs and the Atlanta Fed flashing +3% GDP. Now, fast-forward to today — the S&P is down 20%, recession odds are rising, and the Atlanta Fed is printing -3% GDP, yet Powell’s still clinging to higher-for-longer like nothing’s changed.

That inconsistency is what’s lighting the fire under Trump — and frankly, a lot of traders too. You can call it political, but markets run on relative credibility. Right now, the Fed’s signaling discipline, but the economy is signaling distress. Something’s gotta give — and if the data lands soft enough, Powell may be forced to blink, political optics be damned.

The week ahead

The S&P 500 just gave back most of last week’s bounce and is now down 14% off its February highs. Vol’s cooled from the five-year peak — but don’t kid yourself, it’s still running hot by historical standards. The tape’s shaky, sentiment’s thin, and no one wants to be the last bull holding the bag.

Earnings season is rolling in heavy, and all eyes are on the usual suspects — Tesla and Alphabet — two of the so-called “Magnificent Seven” that led the charge over the past two years and are now taking it on the chin. Tesla’s down 40% YTD, Alphabet off 20%, and the shine is officially wearing off. Leadership is fading, and if the mega caps can’t carry the tape, this market’s going to need a new story fast.

Everyone’s tuned in not just for earnings beats or misses, but for the C-suite tea leaves. Forward guidance has never been more important — not because it's reliable, but because it's the only thing anchoring expectations in a market that feels like a coin toss is pricing it.

The real story? This isn’t just a tariff spat. It’s a rolling, slow-motion policy earthquake. Trump has paused a few of the bigger blows, but the trade war is alive and well, especially with China, and the market knows it. Companies are flying blind. The landscape’s shifting every week, and no one knows what the rules will be next quarter, let alone next year.

Meanwhile, the recession risk is no longer theoretical. The latest street polls have that probability sitting at 45%, up from 25% just a month ago. And it’s not just economists sounding the alarm — corporate America is bracing. United Airlines, for example, just gave investors two full playbooks: one for a stable economy, and one with the brakes slammed hard. That’s not cautious — that’s survival-mode transparency.

Across the board, earnings growth expectations are already being marked down. S&P 500 profit growth was pegged at 14% to start the year. Now? Try 9.2% — and that’s before companies start baking in the real costs of tariffs, supply chain rerouting, and demand softness. Don’t be surprised if that gets revised lower after this earnings deluge.

Forex markets

And just in case this market needed another spark for chaos, Trump took another swing at Powell this week, saying his “termination can’t come fast enough.” The Fed? Still stuck in wait-and-see mode — which right now feels a lot more like watch-and-pray. They’re clinging to the data while the market is practically begging for a lifeline.

Of course, you’ve still got a chorus of talking heads rushing to defend the old Fed regime — warning that removing Powell would somehow shatter the dollar’s credibility, detonate the bond market, and plunge the U.S. into fiscal darkness. Spare me.

I’ll take the other side of that trade — especially if a name like Waller or Kevin Warsh steps in. Would it rattle the market in the short term? Sure. But let’s not confuse bad optics with structural catastrophe. Removing a Fed Chief isn’t the same as dismantling it. And let’s be honest — this Fed has been drifting for years, delivering mixed signals and getting caught flat-footed more often than not.

A knee-jerk selloff? Likely. But you know how this works — the sun comes up the next day, the market recalibrates, and new leadership either restores confidence or resets expectations. Either way, the idea that Powell is irreplaceable is a myth built on outdated assumptions. In this game, credibility is earned in real time — not inherited with the chair.

Let’s put this one to bed right now: comparing Trump to Erdoğan when it comes to central bank meddling is not just lazy — it’s intellectually bankrupt.

First off, Erdoğan’s interventions into Turkey’s central bank have been systematic, prolonged, and rooted in a completely different monetary worldview — one that’s famously defied basic economic logic. He literally fired central bank governors for raising interest rates in the face of spiraling inflation, claiming lower rates would reduce inflation. That’s not policy nuance — that’s voodoo economics. And the result? A collapsed currency, hyperinflation-lite, and foreign investment in retreat.

Now, shift back to Trump. Is he aggressive? Sure. Vocal? No question. But let’s not pretend he’s reengineering the Fed into a political tool to back a fringe economic theory. His beef with Powell is about policy timing, not monetary heresy. Trump’s frustrated because the Fed kept rates too tight for too long during moments of market stress — especially when every other central bank was already cutting or easing in one form or another.

Let’s also not forget: Trump isn’t trying to ban rate hikes or take over the Fed’s decision-making process. He’s doing what every U.S. president has done in some form — apply pressure, publicly or behind the scenes, to push the Fed into being more market-sensitive. Reagan did it. Clinton’s team did it. Even Obama had his quiet moments of frustration.

Erdoğan dismantled the independence of Turkey’s central bank and installed loyalists who torched the lira to the point where grocery prices became a political crisis. Trump calling Powell out on Twitter or suggesting he’d like to replace him? That’s political theater — not macro sabotage.

So the next time someone casually tosses out the Erdoğan comparison, understand they’re more interested in clickbait narratives than actual monetary analysis. The U.S. dollar remains the global reserve currency, the bond market still trades with depth and credibility, and the Fed — for all its faults — hasn’t lost institutional independence.

Bottom line: you can criticize Trump’s tone, his delivery, even his strategy — but putting him in the same breath as Erdoğan on central bank policy is a false equivalence. And it says more about the person making the comparison than the policy itself.

Gold markets

I’m starting to wonder if I’m the last gold bull on the street who actually thinks this trade could use a breather. Gold just posted its biggest-ever weekly ETF inflow — $8.0bn, and let’s be honest, most of that was catch-up flow. Passive money finally showed up to the party, and by default, the ETFs had to chase the tape and buy the flow. That’s not conviction — that’s mechanical positioning.

And while I’m no slave to technicals, even I can’t ignore the fact that GLD’s RSI is brushing up against infinity right now. It doesn’t take a chartist to know when something’s gone vertical. Gold’s earned a seasonal breather here — and maybe, just maybe, a tactical fade from the froth.

Let’s be clear: I’m not selling physical. That’s vault money, and it stays put. But on the paper side? Yeah, I’m absolutely looking to trim some of the speculative futures exposure. This is one of those moments where the risk-reward on leveraged gold longs looks skewed. Not bearish — just overcooked.

Also worth flagging: broader risk-off flows are starting to look a little exhausted, and we’re getting hints of positioning fatigue across macro land. That often signals a local low in sentiment. If equities stabilize, yields firm up a bit, and the Fed holds its fire for a few more weeks, gold’s next leg probably consolidates sideways rather than rips.

So yeah, still a structural bull — but short-term, the smart play might be stepping off the gas before the crowd figures it out all at once.

The view

You’ve probably heard the line — “bears are like broken clocks: right twice a day.” Cute. But also clueless. Flip that logic around and it unravels fast: if the bears are only right twice a day, then the bulls must be wrong twice a day too. And in this market, that’s starting to look more like every day ending in “Y.”

Here’s the problem: people don’t trade data — they trade emotions. They pick a side — bull or bear — and cling to it like it’s an identity. That’s where the damage begins. Confirmation bias takes over, and suddenly every data point that doesn’t fit your narrative gets tossed out like yesterday’s print. You’re not managing risk anymore — you’re running a fan club.

Forget labels. Bullish, bearish — it’s all noise. What matters is whether you're right at the right time. Being early isn’t brave if you’re bleeding P&L. Being long in the wrong half of the cycle? That’s not conviction — that’s financial self-harm.

And right now, let’s be real — the Street is so soaked in fear it’s practically drowning. Sentiment is shot. Risk-off positioning is at extremes. Net bullishness has cratered to levels we haven’t seen since the GFC, and that’s despite this being a garden-variety drawdown, not a Lehman-grade implosion.

The VIX? Just printed levels we haven’t seen since peak COVID. Everyone’s scared. Everyone’s hedged. And that tells you something big — we’re probably closer to a floor than a flush. Markets don’t bottom when people are greedy. They bottom when people are panicking and overhedging — and we’re damn near there.

Look, the bear arguments — valuations, earnings downgrades, Fed missteps, and recession risk — they’re all valid. But if everyone and their algo already expects them? Then the trade is gone. It's in the tape. And if the whole Street is pricing in doom, what happens if we just muddle through?

As the old rule goes: when all the experts and forecasts agree — something else happens.

So ask yourself — if fear’s maxed, everyone’s leaning short, and vol is screaming… what side of that do you really want to be on?

This isn’t about being a hero. It’s about seeing the setup for what it is: a market so overloaded with bearish positioning, it’s practically begging for a counterpunch. Don’t fight the tape — but don’t ignore the crowd either. When positioning gets this extreme, it rarely ends with more of the same.

Sometimes the best trade is stepping into the fear — not because it feels good, but because everyone else already did the opposite.