Inflation

Inflation

The TACO Trade betrays deeper problems

By Alain Guillot

Special to Financial Independence Hub

Wall Street has been on a wild ride in recent months, and the cause isn’t some unknown geopolitical threat or economic collapse: it’s the unpredictable tariff threats from U.S. President Donald Trump.

In response to Trump’s repeated habit of threatening tariffs only to later walk them back, traders have coined a new acronym: TACO, short for “Trump Always Chickens Out.” The term, first popularized by Financial Timescolumnist Robert Armstrong, has become a strategy among investors: when Trump threatens tariffs, markets drop: but savvy traders anticipate a retreat and buy the dip, profiting from the inevitable rebound.

Trump, for his part, is not pleased with the nickname. In a recent Oval Office appearance, he rejected the idea that his constant backtracking reflects weakness, calling it a negotiation strategy. According to him, he often starts with an exaggerated number (such as a 145% tariff on Chinese goods) and then drops it during talks with foreign governments to create leverage.

Let’s be clear: negotiation is part of diplomacy and trade. But weaponizing tariffs in this on-again, off-again manner creates unnecessary chaos in global markets and harms businesses and consumers who are left guessing about what prices they will face or what products will become harder to obtain.

Why I don’t think Tariffs are a good tool for Prosperity

As a personal finance blogger and former financial advisor, I believe strongly in policies that promote long-term stability and broad-based prosperity. Tariffs, in theory, are designed to protect domestic industries from unfair foreign competition. But in practice — especially when used impulsively and inconsistently like we’ve seen under Trump — they often backfire.

Here’s why I personally don’t think tariffs are a great tool for building prosperity:

  1. They raise prices for consumers. When tariffs are imposed, companies pass the extra cost down the line. That means your groceries, electronics, and clothing become more expensive: not because the market demands it, but because politicians created artificial barriers.
  2. They create uncertainty. Markets hate unpredictability. Business owners delay hiring and investments. Global supply chains get disrupted. Investors pull back. And this doesn’t just hurt “Wall Street”: it hurts jobs, wages, and retirement portfolios. Continue Reading…

Taking on Tariffs with Defensive Stocks & Sector ETFs

 

By Dale Roberts, cutthecrapinvesting

Special to Financial Independence Hub

The year 2025 offered the third bear market for U.S. stocks in the last 6 years. That is surprising in itself. Canadian stocks didn’t go into a bear market but they did fall by near 13%. The good news for readers of this blog is that Canadian defensive stocks rose to the occasion. South of the border defensive sector equities were even more robust. Defensive stocks take on tariffs, on the Sunday Reads.

Image via Cuttheecrapinvesting/Unsplash

There’s more than one way to manage risk. Within a balanced portfolio the most common strategy is to use bonds to manage stock market risk and volatilty. We might then turn to gold that makes the balanced portfolio better. I also like using defensive equities, working in concert with bonds, cash and gold.

2025 Total Returns (through May):

Gold $GLD: +25% Developed International $VEA: +17% Canadian $XIC :+7.1% Silver $SLV: +14% Bitcoin $IBIT: +12% EM $IEMG: +9% US Bonds $AGG: +3% Cash $BIL: +2% Nasdaq 100 $QQQ: +2% REITs $VNQ: +1% S&P $SPY: +1% US Dollar $UUP: -7% Small Caps $IWM: -7% Oil $USO: -11%

Defensive sectors for retirement.

That’s a common theme or discussion in our Retirement Club for Canadians.

Let’s take a look at Canadian defensive stocks during the tariff-inspired bear market. The worst decline in 2025 for Canadian equities was January 30th to April 8th. The TSX Composite fell 12.9%.

From the beginning of the tariff tantrum to end of April …

Stock market down, defensives up – nice! 🙂

  • Consumer staples (XST-T) up 12.1%
  • Utilities (ZUT-T) up 11.1%

And be sure to check out this post – investing in Canadian utility stocks and ETFs.

Defensive sectors in the U.S.

If we look to U.S. stocks for the first quarter …

testfolio

The U.S. defensive sectors all rose to the occasion. IVV = S&P 500.

Consumer staples (XLP), Utilities (XLU), Healthcare (XLV). Keep in mind, these are U.S. Dollar ETFs for U.S. dollar accounts. The most favourable tax treatment will be offered in your RRSP and Taxable accounts.

The defensive equities strategy has worked out wonderfully on both sides of the border.

Here’s the models in a retirement funding scenario from February through to the end of April. We start with $1,000,000 and spend at 4.8% of the portfolio value = $4,000 per month.

Of course, stocks have started to recover as Trump backs away (at times) from his tariff threats. Continue Reading…

Tariffs: Great in Theory … Dumb in Practice

Public domain image via Outcome

I saw her today at the reception
In her glass was a bleeding man
She was practiced at the art of deception
Well, I could tell by her blood-stained hands, sing it

You can’t always get what you want
But if you try sometimes, well, you just might find
You get what you need

  • You Can’t Always Get What You Want, by The Rolling Stones

Tariffs: Great in Theory … Dumb in Practice

Apropos of what has been clearly driving markets over the past several weeks, in this month’s commentary I will discuss tariffs. Specifically, I will demonstrate that although they can, in theory, produce certain benefits, in reality, they are far more likely to cause more harm than good, both for economies and markets.

A Boon to Humanity

The entire world has benefitted immeasurably from global trade in the postwar era. Its expansion has vastly expanded the supply of most goods, leading to lower prices. In simple terms, globalization has led to more things at lower prices, which has made the world far wealthier and led to a phenomenal increase in standards of living.

Consumers and businesses in the U.S. and other developed nations have benefitted from the fact that most things can be made for less in other countries. To be sure, the windfall of cheaper goods has involved the dislocation of manufacturing jobs over the last several decades. However, the percentage of the American workforce in manufacturing currently stands at roughly 8%, and less than 14% in 2000.

Furthermore, most experts agree that technology and automation, as opposed to trade, have been primarily responsible for the decline in manufacturing employment in the U.S. Also, given that the U.S. is currently at full employment, it stands to reason that dislocated jobs have been replaced. Importantly, the net benefit of trade has been massive, enabling citizens of advanced economies to enjoy higher standards of living than if they were forced to buy only domestically produced goods.

The Theoretical Benefits of Tariffs

Although the benefits from free trade are undeniable, governments are periodically tempted to tweak trade relationships in their favour to maintain or augment globalization’s existing benefits while minimizing or eliminating its relatively minor drawbacks. These initiatives entail some degree of restrictions on trade. Today, the U.S. is pursuing such policies by imposing tariffs on imported goods.

The purported benefits of these particular tariffs are:

Benefit #1: Improved government finances: This argument contends that tariff revenues will afford the government some flexibility with respect to fiscal policy. Specifically, the revenue which is collected via tariffs will be used to reduce the ever-expanding U.S. deficit. Alternatively, these revenues could serve to increase government spending and/or reduce taxes without a deterioration of the government’s fiscal position.

Promise #2: A manufacturing renaissance: Another potential benefit involves the bolstering of certain industries via reduced competition from imports, with an associated boost to employment in these areas. The current U.S. administration has been particularly vocal about the ability of tariffs to revitalize manufacturing in states where it was once prominent.

Promise #3: A Better Deal: This argument holds that tariffs will force other countries to the negotiating table and put the U.S. in a strong position to secure better trade agreements and/or end unfair trade practices that hurt its economy.

Einstein’s Warning

Albert Einstein famously stated, “In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.” In theory, tariffs can deliver on the aforementioned promises, but the reality is that not only are they unlikely to do so but stand a very good chance of causing more harm than good.

Very little, if anything, in the modern global economy occurs in a vacuum. One specific policy or event can easily start a chain reaction of subsequent policies and events. Although some of these cascading effects can be anticipated, their magnitude is almost impossible to predict. More ominously, many of them are unforeseeable (the technical term used by economists for such developments is “unintended consequences”). As a result of such reverberations, few, if any of the purported benefits of tariffs are likely to materialize, should they remain in place. Moreover, their associated consequences could prove severe.

Improved Government Finances: Robbing Peter to Pay Paul

Escalating tensions and the prospect of long-lasting trade wars have resulted in a heightened state of uncertainty among both businesses and consumers, which may have a significant impact on their investment and spending. Continue Reading…

BMO’s Low Volatility ETFs are built differently — Why that’s a Win for your Portfolio

Image courtesy BMO/Getty Images

By Zayla Saunders, BMO ETFs

(Sponsor Blog)

Markets are noisy right now. Between trade talks, shifting rate expectations and recession whispers, there’s no shortage of turbulence. That’s why low-volatility strategies are back in focus: and BMO’s lineup is standing out.

Not all low-vol ETFs are created equal. In fact, BMO’s low-volatility ETFs have been quietly dominating their corner of the market. Here’s what’s working with the approach and the key differentiators of the methodology.

Source: Morningstar as of March 31, 2024 2

Smart, Targeted Methodology

BMO doesn’t just take the market and strip out the riskiest names. Its methodology is precise, practical, and time tested

Step 1: The Starting Point

BMO begins with a broad universe of stocks that are the largest and most liquid from a particular region — say, Canada or the U.S. — and then ranks them based on historical return volatility (also known as beta). Lower is better here.

Step 2: Ranking

Next, the securities are ranked and selected based on their beta, with lowest betas carrying the highest weight in the portfolio. Beta is calculated using 5-year window, with more weight on recent data. Then the team engages in a fundamental review of securities held.

Step 3: Sector Constraints

Unlike some low-vol strategies that end up extremely overweight in defensive sectors (hello, utilities and consumer staples), BMO imposes sector caps. Why? To ensure diversification and avoid concentration risk. That means that while there will be a tilt towards defensive sectors, you’re building a balanced, resilient portfolio.

The Burning Question: Why ‘Beta’?

Beta and Standard deviation are two of the most common ways to measure a fund’s volatility. The key difference is that beta measures a stock’s volatility relative to the market as a whole, while standard deviation measures the risk of individual stocks.

This is where BMO ETFs stands apart in their strategy: The BMO ETF Low Volatility Strategy uses beta as the primary investment selection and weighting criteria. By constructing ETFs with lower beta securities, the BMO ETF Low Volatility Strategy gives investors access to portfolios that are designed to provide growth while reducing exposure to market risk. Over the long term, low beta stocks may benefit from smaller declines during market corrections and still increase during advancing markets. Additionally, they tend to be more mature and provide higher dividend yield than the broad market.

Beta is a risk metric that measures an investment’s sensitivity to fluctuations in the broad market (market sensitivity). The broad market is assigned a beta value of 1.00, an investment with a beta less than 1.00 indicates the investment is less risky relative to the broad market.

So why now?

Low volatility has always had its place: particularly for long-term investors looking to stay invested through all market cycles, or those who tend to be more emotional around volatility in their portfolio. But right now, the case is even stronger: Continue Reading…

Buying an Annuity versus Equities

Billy Kaderli, RetireEarlyLifestyle.com

By Billy and Akaisha Kaderli

RetireEarlyLifestyle.com

Special to Financial Independence Hub

I read an article by Mark Hulbert titled Why retirees are better off safe than sorry.

This article was about retirement satisfaction and asked if having little money, a reasonable amount of money or lots of money made a difference.

I have followed Mark’s writings for years and was surprised that Mark, to make his point, was hawking annuities.

Mark explains that you could put $100,000 into an annuity and receive $501 per month guaranteed for your lifetime. This equates to $6,012 per year or a 6% return.

My perspective and why

Here’s the problem that I have with this.

Inflation. As inflation has heated up after years being quiet, your $501 monthly check is going to buy you less and less over time. The erosion of buying power will not be noticed at first but over the years it certainly will. This is a huge negative for me.

Once you turn your money over to the annuity company, you no longer have control of it and possibly it is no longer part of your estate. This means you cannot leave it to your spouse, a child, grandchild or your favorite cause. And remember, your annuity is only as good as the company that backs it. If they have dereliction in management or other calamities you could be getting back pennies on the dollar. It happens.

In the example with this annuity It will take you about 16.5 years to break even with your investment.

What if you die before that?

My suggestion

There are other options if you have $100K and want a 6% yield for income and still keep control of the asset.

For instance, you could purchase any or all of these high yielding dividend-paying stocks.

AT&T (T) yield 4.04%

Plains All American Pipeline (PAA) yield 9.10%%

Energy Transfer (ET), yield 7.32%

Exxon Mobil (XOM), yield 3.84%

Main Street Capital (MAIN) yield 5.51%

In this example, you could put $20,000 into each of the above for a 5.96% average yield or $5,962 per year income. Also, there is potential for these equities to increase in value as well as raise their dividends. So, in this case, you have the possibility of being able to reinvest any amount over the 6% giving you the opportunity to increase your holdings while still covering the $6,000 annual income.

Other options

However, if you are not comfortable owning three out of the five stocks in the energy field, for more diversification, you could purchase DVY, IShares Select Dividend ETF with a portfolio of 100 different companies and with a 3.72% yield.

The idea here is to receive the 3.72% dividend distributions and sell off $2,280 worth of shares annually to make the 6% yield.

How is that done? You invest 100K into DVY taking the quarterly dividends which amount to a 3.72% yield. After one year-and-a-day (so that you meet the long-term capital gains requirement), you sell off $2,280 worth of shares.

DVY 10 Year Total Return = +9.40%

In this example based on the past 10-year performance of DVY, your principal would have grown to approximately $109,400, year one, which is a 9.4% annual total return. You receive $3720.00 in dividend income and $2280.00 in capital gains = $6000.00, leaving approximately $103,400 invested.

We all know that past performance is no indication of future results, but there are no guarantees in retirement, investments, nor annuities.

See the performance chart below. Continue Reading…