Getting Ready for Vegas

Our annual Stansberry Research conference is almost here... The event is sold out... But you can still get livestream access... A lukewarm day for stocks... The U.S.-China trade rift risk... More on the Federal Reserve's new big shift...

It's coming up quick...

Our annual Stansberry Research Conference & Alliance Meeting begins on Monday. I (Corey McLaughlin) will soon be heading to Las Vegas for three jam-packed days...

This year, the lineup at the Encore at Wynn includes Ritholtz Wealth Management CEO and noted market commentator Josh Brown, former Washington D.C. mayor-turned-venture-capitalist Adrian Fenty, and entrepreneur Peter Diamandis.

Of course, your favorite Stansberry Research editors and analysts will also be sharing their thoughts... including exclusive portfolio recommendations for Alliance members on the third and final day of the conference.

To get things started on Monday, we'll hear from Stansberry Research senior partner and MarketWise CEO Dr. David "Doc" Eifrig... our founder Porter Stansberry... macro analyst Marco Papic... and tech journalist Kara Swisher.

Nick Koziol and I will be covering our biggest event of the year in these pages. And Dan Ferris and I will be recording a couple of Stansberry Investor Hour interviews from Vegas. So stay tuned for that.

I also look forward to meeting many of you in Vegas at the various social events planned. In-person tickets are sold out. But it's not too late to follow along with our Livestream Pass.

For details about our speaker lineup, the conference schedule, and how to get livestream access to watch the presentations remotely, click here. If you're interested, don't wait. Registration for livestream access closes at 11:59 p.m. Eastern time on Sunday.

On to the market today...

After yesterday's volatile and ultimately mixed finish for U.S. stocks, most of the major indexes were up by roughly 1% or more this morning. But the gains dwindled throughout the day into negative territory in the afternoon before mostly finishing higher.

The S&P 500 closed up 0.4%, the Nasdaq Composite Index gained roughly 0.7%, and the small-cap Russell 2000 Index led the group, up about 1%, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average finished little changed.

Bank earnings were strong for a second straight day, with Bank of America (BAC) and Morgan Stanley (MS) beating Wall Street expectations in their quarterly reports this morning. That was enough to outweigh rising U.S.-China trade tensions.

From what we know so far, President Donald Trump is still planning to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping in a few weeks, and other U.S. and Chinese officials are supposed to meet for more trade negotiations in Asia next month.

However, we could see more unexpected moves from both sides in the meantime. That, and a variety of catalysts (like an upcoming Federal Reserve meeting and Magnificent Seven earnings later this month), could make for a "messy" short-term path ahead for stocks, as Ten Stock Trader editor Greg Diamond shared yesterday.

Technical signs suggest remaining "patient" before making any near-term trades, Greg wrote to subscribers today.

Past Stansberry Investor Hour guest and technical analysis believer Jim "the vixologist" Carroll also had a great post on this theme today, concluding...

This would be a bad time to put on your bullish blinders and assume that buying this dip is just the latest in a series of no-brainers.

What to watch as the 'trade war' renews...

Since China's rare earth export restrictions announcement and Trump's 100% tariff threat last week, we've seen numerous headlines about rising tensions between the two countries.

Take a look at this pair of posts on social media platform X from Joseph Wang, a former senior trader for the Fed, that encapsulates the latest in the U.S.-China trade tiff...

Both of these headlines can be true. China wants trade concessions from the U.S. and, if our recent history is an indication, a falling stock market won't stop the U.S. from tough trade talk.

If you recall, it wasn't stock market losses (even after the S&P 500 Index fell nearly 20%), that triggered the "90-day reciprocal tariff pause" and bull market accelerant a few days after April 2's "Liberation Day." It was the bond market, which looked "queasy," as Trump admitted on April 9.

As the market responded to shockingly high tariff-rate threats on dozens of U.S. trading partners, longer-term Treasury yields were dramatically rising and short-term yields were falling. This was alarming. As we wrote on April 9...

Since April 4, the 10-year Treasury yield had jumped almost 40 basis points, a notable move in a short time period. It moved close to 4.4%. Similarly, the 30-year Treasury yield had gone from 4.4% to around 4.9% earlier today.

Meanwhile, the two-year yield – more associated with short-term Federal Reserve policy (and near-term growth and interest-rate expectations) – had fallen from 4.4% in February to 3.7%.

It looked like Wall Street hedge funds were unwinding leveraged "basis trades" based on rapidly changing and worsening growth concerns. That contributed to the move in yields. But we're not seeing that right now.

We haven't seen many people worried about the bond market this time around. But that doesn't mean it won't happen.

As of today, the 10-year yield – which has been gradually falling since mid-May – has fallen to a few tenths of a percentage point above 4%. That's almost exactly where it was just before Liberation Day. Could we see history repeat? Maybe.

Even if it does, things might not be "as bad" this time around. You see, some big bond market "help" may be on the way soon. Here's Nick with more...

The Fed has signaled it will end its other 'restrictive' policy measure...

As we touched on briefly yesterday, Fed Chair Jerome Powell has signaled that the central bank's quantitative tightening ("QT") program will be coming to an end, possibly in the "coming months." As we explained...

Tinkering with its balance sheet – buying or selling U.S. Treasurys, mainly – is the Fed's other big monetary policy "tool" other than tweaking bank-lending rates.

Put simply, the Fed can "ease" policy by buying up bonds to put a floor under demand and keep interest rates lower. That's what happened during every major recession, most recently during the COVID-19 pandemic. As Powell said in a prepared statement to a group of economists yesterday...

During that tumultuous period, we continued purchases in order to avoid a sharp, unwelcome tightening of financial conditions at a time when the economy still appeared to be highly vulnerable. Our thinking was informed by recent episodes in which signals about reducing the balance sheet had triggered significant tightening in financial conditions.

On the other hand, the Fed can "tighten" policy by selling off the bonds on its balance sheet or not reinvesting the proceeds. That's what the Fed has been doing since 2022 (with a brief balance sheet expansion because of bank liquidity issues in the spring of 2023).

All in all, the Fed's balance sheet has "shrunk" from more than $9 trillion in the spring of 2022 to about $6.5 trillion today.

But tightening comes with its own challenges...

In a post-pandemic world, Powell and the Fed were worried about a "taper tantrum" like we saw in 2013, when then-Fed chair Ben Bernanke mentioned (without signaling to markets in advance) that the Fed could cut bond purchases at some point in the future.

Bond investors did not like that... Some panic sold bonds, which spiked yields. The 10-year Treasury yield shot up from about 2% to more than 3% in about seven months.

A similar move happened in 2022 – on a much larger scale – when the Fed began shrinking its balance sheet after two years of expansion during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The 10-year Treasury yield moved from below 2% pre-taper to a high above 4.2% in October 2022. Then it continued higher, before peaking at nearly 5% by October 2023.

With such a swift move higher in interest rates, we entered a prolonged bear market for much of 2022.

But now, the Fed is signaling that the days of tightening and restrictive policy are behind us.

It's only a matter of time before QE starts up again...

Our colleague and Stansberry's Credit Opportunities editor Mike DiBiase has called the 10-year Treasury rate "the most important interest rate in the U.S. economy." It's the interest rate that many other rates – like credit-card, auto, and mortgage interest rates – are based off of.

In many cases, this rate also moves lower when the Fed cuts the federal-funds rate. For example, during the Fed's last rate cut cycle in 2020, the yield on the 10-year Treasury fell from 2% to near 0%.

But this relationship hasn't stuck more recently. In fact, the opposite has happened. Since the Fed's rate-cut cycle last September, the 10-year Treasury yield has moved up from 3.7% to just above 4% today. That's despite a more than 1% decrease of the fed-funds rate range.

If rate cuts can't bring down the 10-year Treasury rate, the Fed will have to use its other lever to bring longer-term interest rates down. More from Mike in the September issue of Stansberry’s Credit Opportunities…

To bring down rates on the long end of the curve, we believe the Fed will soon be forced to resort to one of its oldest tricks: quantitative easing ("QE").

QE was a staple of the central bank's playbook following the last financial crisis and the pandemic. It's where the Fed steps into the market and buys long-term Treasurys. This market intervention causes longer-term interest rates to fall. And that's likely the only way those rates are coming down.

One thing is clear. Looser policy is on the way. The Fed is already lowering interest rates to support the labor market. A new Fed chair, assuredly in favor of lower rates, will also likely be in place by May.

In the meantime, QE is the next lever the Fed will pull to bring down the 10-year Treasury yield. And the first step toward the Fed restarting QE is telling the market it's going to end QT.

Powell wants to avoid another shock like the taper tantrum last decade or, in this case, from a surprise loosening of policy that might indicate the economy needs emergency support. In short, this shift is prepping the market for the idea of easier policy.

As we've noted before, looser central bank policy like rate cuts and QE can serve as rocket fuel for asset prices in the short term. If the Fed does restart QE to lower the 10-year Treasury yield, it will be another ingredient for a "Melt Up" in this bull market.

In this week's Stansberry Investor Hour, Dan and I are joined by our colleague and friend Whitney Tilson, the lead editor of Stansberry's Investment Advisory.

We cover a lot of ground, including the importance of letting your winners run, Whitney's insights on AI, and his favorite speculation trade right now. So make sure you watch or listen. A commentor on our YouTube page said it's one of the best interviews Whitney has ever done.

Watch the entire episode of Stansberry Investor Hour here... or catch the audio version on our website or wherever you listen to podcasts.

New 52-week highs (as of 10/14/25): BWX Technologies (BWXT), Cameco (CCJ), Constellation Energy (CEG), Ciena (CIEN), Enel (ENLAY), EnerSys (ENS), Ero Copper (ERO), FirstCash (FCFS), SPDR Gold Shares (GLD), iShares Convertible Bond Fund (ICVT), Kellanova (K), Ormat Technologies (ORA), abrdn Physical Palladium Shares Fund (PALL), Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy Fund (PBW), Sprott Physical Gold Trust (PHYS), Roivant Sciences (ROIV), Uranium Energy (UEC), ProShares Ultra Gold (UGL), Global X Uranium Fund (URA), W.R. Berkley (WRB), Utilities Select Sector SPDR Fund (XLU), and SPDR S&P Semiconductor Fund (XSD).

In today's mail, feedback on yesterday's edition, in which we didn't name a stock recommendation "out of fairness to paying subscribers"... Do you have a comment or question? As always, e-mail us at feedback@stansberryresearch.com.

"I recently had a conversation with Porter Stansberry about this issue ['fairness to paying subscribers'] after he revealed a stock in a service I paid for. He responded, 'Why would you object that I just mentioned a stock you own to 300,000 people who read this?' I had to admit, it was a good point. So I ask you, Corey. Why would it be 'unfair' to your paying subscribers to reveal a stock, which if others bought it, would only make their holdings go up?" – Subscriber Michael S.

Corey McLaughlin comment: Thanks for the question, Michael. First, I don't know the details of the publication or timing of the stock recommendation from Porter that you're referring to. And since I wasn't there for your conversation, I won't speak to that.

In the case of what we wrote yesterday, the "fairness" comes down to timing...

As regular Digest readers know, I write about stocks our editors have recommended all the time. But we want to make sure the subscribers who paid for that advice have plenty of opportunity to establish a position first.

In the case of yesterday's Digest, I described a trade that was published in DailyWealth Trader just five trading days ago. As a rule, we like to give our subscribers more "operating room" than that. Moreover, after Friday's volatility, the position took a dip. So in his issue yesterday, editor Chris Igou made the case for sticking with the trade – sharing new information and analysis.

It was also an options trade. We think it would be unfair to drop that idea on readers without explaining the full context of how to execute the trade – the holding period, exit strategy, price targets, etc.

All of that said, one of the reasons we publish the Digest is to feature our editors' best ideas and celebrate their big wins... So fear not, keep on reading and you'll get plenty of stock ideas in future issues.

All the best,

Corey McLaughlin and Nick Koziol
Baltimore, Maryland
October 15, 2025