CrunchBase : The Week’s Biggest Funding Rounds: Investors Look To The Stars And

The Week’s Biggest Funding Rounds: Investors Look To The Stars And Defense

It was a big week for the space and defense sectors, as investors clearly were looking to the skies. However, other sectors including cyber, healthcare and even data orchestration also saw some big raises. While nothing came close to $1 billion, it was still a pretty good week for big rounds.

1. Chaos Industries, $275M, defense: Less than six months after raising $145 million in a Series B, defense and critical infrastructure tech startup Chaos Industries locked up $275 million in a Series C that reportedly values the startup at $2 billion. The new round was led by Accel and New Enterprise Associates. Los Angeles-based Chaos specializes in advanced detection, monitoring and communication solutions for the defense and commercial sectors. The company’s Vanquish radar provides early warning and tracking capabilities against unmanned aerial systems, missiles and aircraft. Founded in 2022, Chaos has raised $490 million, per the company.

2. True Anomaly, $260M, space: Centennial, Colorado-based True Anomaly, which develops hardware and software systems to help space security and readiness, is accustomed to large raises. Back in late 2023, the space tech startup raised a $100 million round led by Riot Ventures. It’s back again after raising a $260 million Series C led by Accel. The startup helps the government and commercial customers keep an eye on threats to assets they have in space, such as satellites. Founded in 2022, True Anomaly has raised $418 million, per Crunchbase.

3. (tied) Apex, $200M, space: Less than a year after landing a $95 million Series B, space manufacturing company Apex locked up a $200 million Series C led by 8VC and Point72 Ventures. The Los Angeles-based startup is helping streamline the approach to satellites with the ability to mass produce spacecraft buses — the main body and structural component of satellites — to help meet increasing demand from customers like the U.S. Department of Defense. Founded in 2022, the company has raised $322 million, per Crunchbase.

3. (tied) Persona, $200M, cybersecurity: Cybersecurity has proven pretty strong with investors recently, and this week was no exception. Verified identity platform Persona raised a $200 million Series D co-led by Founders Fund and Ribbit Capital that values the company at $2 billion. The San Francisco-based startup’s identity platform allows businesses to securely collect, verify, manage and make decisions about individuals’ and businesses’ identities. Founded in 2018, the company has raised nearly $418 million, per Crunchbase.

5. (tied) Cast AI, $108M, software development: Miami-based Cast AI, which helps optimize workloads with automation, closed a $108 million Series C round led by G2 Venture Partners and SoftBank Vision Fund 2. While the company is mainly known for its work with Kubernetes workloads, it now is helping to optimize workloads for AI. Founded in 2019, the company has raised $181 million, per Crunchbase.

5. (tied) Veza, $108M, cybersecurity: Veza raised a $108 million Series D investment led by New Enterprise Associates. The Redwood Shores, California-based identity security startup said it more than doubled its annual recurring revenue last year and the new round values it at $808 million. Founded in 2020, Veza has raised $235 million, per the company.

7. Persivia, $107M, healthcare: Marlborough, Massachusetts-based Persivia, a developer of an AI-powered platform that helps healthcare decision making, completed a $107 million recapitalization with Aldrich Capital Partners. Founded in 2005, Persivia’s platform turns data into real-time insights to help drive decisions and streamline workflows. It is used in more than 200 hospitals nationwide.

8. Astronomer, $93M, data orchestration: Astronomer, the developer of data orchestration platform Astro, locked up a $93 million Series D led by Bain Capital Ventures. The New York-based startup’s Astro platform has proven valuable as AI has exploded — as automating and processing data workflows across different systems has become a necessity for anyone wanting to produce AI applications. Founded in 2018, the company has raised nearly $376 million, per Crunchbase

9. AssetWatch, $75M, predictive analytics: Columbus, Ohio-based AssetWatch, a predictive maintenance platform developer for the manufacturing industry, closed a $75 million Series C led by Viking Global Investors. Founded in 2014, the company has raised $166 million, per Crunchbase.

10. Utilidata, $61.3M, artificial intelligence: Providence, Rhode Island-based Utilidata, a developer of an AI platform for the energy industry, secured a $60.3 million Series C led by Renown Capital Partners. Founded in 2012, the company has raised $95 million, per Crunchbase.

Big global deals
The biggest raise this week outside the U.S. again came from Singapore.
  • Singapore-based Thunes, a developer of global payments infrastructure, raised a $150 million Series D.

WSJ : Long a New York Punchline, Newark Airport Is Getting Even Worse

Long a New York Punchline, Newark Airport Is Getting Even Worse
Technology outage, construction and staffing shortages led to a week from hell for travelers at the New Jersey hub

NEWARK, N.J.–Families huddled on Mickey Mouse-printed suitcases. Businessmen shouted into phones with their offices trying to rebook flights. Strangers commiserated over shared indignities. Airline employees yelled for passengers to board a shuttle that would take them to another airport two rivers away.

This wasn’t a nationwide air-travel meltdown or storm-induced snarl. It was just another Thursday at Newark Liberty International Airport.

Newark has long been a punchline among travelers in the tri-state area, a launchpad to be avoided at all costs. It routinely tops rankings of large airports in flight delays and cancellations. It is hard to get to and harder to get around.

“The American people are reasonable, but if we have to spend the night sleeping on a bench in the Newark airport we will grab a flag and join the revolution like an extra in Les Miz,” late-night television host Stephen Colbert joked during a government shutdown in 2019.

But over the past few days, Newark achieved the unthinkable: It got worse.

Newark’s week started badly with an air-traffic technology outage that disrupted flights. Runway construction and air-traffic control staffing issues extended the pain, prompting hundreds of flight delays and cancellations this week alone, according to travel analytics company FlightAware.

For travelers, there’s no end in clear sight, especially as the summer months and their inclement weather add to the airport’s troubles.

Shawn Ahmad and his wife were traveling from their home in Philadelphia to Louisville, Ky., to attend this weekend’s Kentucky Derby. Originally they planned to drive. But when they saw that Spirit Airlines was offering cheap airfares out of Newark, they took the bait.

Big mistake.

Their Thursday morning flight was delayed three times before it was listed as “interrupted.” Ahmad said an airline employee told them the hiccup was due to the staffing issues.

Spirit offered to rebook the couple on flights the next day, but they decided to rent a car after all and drive. “We just don’t want the same thing to happen tomorrow,” he said.

Some of the criticism of Newark can be chalked up to snobbery. New Yorkers of a certain ilk see crossing the Hudson into New Jersey to board a plane as a bridge too far, even if parts of Manhattan are geographically closer to Newark than they are to John F. Kennedy International Airport.

New York City Mayor Fiorello La Guardia once refused to get off a plane at Newark, complaining that his TWA ticket from Chicago listed New York as the destination, not New Jersey.

But Newark’s operational problems are very real. In the last Wall Street Journal rankings of best large airports, Newark came in last based on scores for reliability, convenience and value.

Yehong Li, a 31-year-old university researcher, lives in nearby Jersey City and travels once or twice a month. In recent months, he has opted to make the arduous trek all the way to JFK in the far reaches of Queens rather than deal with the potential for hiccups flying out of Newark.

But when he does travel out of Newark, he doesn’t go in blind. Before leaving his house, he checks his airline, social media and flight-tracking apps. “These days you’ve got to be ahead of schedule changes,” he says.

On Monday afternoon, Li was supposed to fly to San Diego out of Newark. When he noticed his flight was delayed due to the system outage, he opted to rebook for the next day, even though his new itinerary included a layover in Dallas.

“I didn’t want to spend the whole day at the airport,” he says. His original flight ended up being delayed more than five hours, he says.

After flare-ups in 2023, United scaled back flying at Newark to ease congestion and took other steps to shore up its operation. The domestic flight cancellation rate at the airport edged down last year, dropping below prepandemic levels, according to government data. But air-traffic control problems keep cropping up.

Cancellations and delays aren’t Newark travelers’ only lament. Some have complained about challenges navigating to or around the airport for airlines and fliers alike.

Newark’s location near busy roadways has hampered the airport’s ability to expand. The limited number of gates forces airlines to park aircraft in “parking lots” away from the terminals. And when a runway needs to be surfaced, as is currently the case, it slows down operations.

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which operates the airport, has committed to a multibillion-dollar plan to overhaul Newark. It opened a new Terminal A in 2023, and announced plans last year to build a replacement for Terminal B. The Port Authority is also replacing the AirTrain system that connects the airport’s three terminals to parking garages and a nearby rail station.

“Our investments today are laying the foundation for the airport of tomorrow,” the Port Authority said in an email.

Since Newark’s new Terminal A opened, a common complaint is that the terminal isn’t directly serviced by the airport’s AirTrain system. Instead, people looking to go in or out of the terminal via the AirTrain must either walk more than 10 minutes to the closest stop at a nearby parking garage or take a shuttle bus.

Then there’s the unavoidable issue of Newark being located in New Jersey, which can seem very distant for the New York clientele the airport serves. Two years ago, the airport officially lost its New York City designation by the International Air Transport Association—a technical change largely invisible to consumers that nonetheless prompted outrage among Garden State residents.

United, which dominates Newark, has tried to counter Newark’s reputation as out of the way and inconvenient, at times mounting GPS-based trackers on top of New York City taxis to display live travel times to Newark and JFK.

In the 1990s, Continental Airlines plastered the city with advertisements hoping to convince New Yorkers to embrace Newark as their own. “Need to feel like a real New Yorker? Eat a bagel on your way to Newark,” one read. Others highlighted the hassles of getting to JFK: “The Road to JFK is Paved and Repaved With Good Intentions.”

The ads sparked blowback from then-mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who complained they were negative and disparaging of New York.

United, which acquired Continental in 2012, went all in on Newark a decade ago when it pulled out of JFK and struck a deal to acquire Delta’s slots at the airport.

United CEO Scott Kirby, who joined United after that, has urged people to give Newark a shot. Still, he has long said the move to leave JFK was a mistake. Some corporate customers preferred JFK and switched airlines.

On Friday after the latest problems, Kirby wrote in a message posted on United’s website that the airline will cancel 35 daily round trip flights at Newark starting this weekend after a group of air-traffic controllers took leave following equipment outages:

“Newark airport cannot handle the number of planes that are scheduled to operate there in the weeks and months ahead.”

WSJ : Trump Officials Explore Ways of Challenging Tax-Exempt Status of Nonprofit

Trump Officials Explore Ways of Challenging Tax-Exempt Status of Nonprofits
Some IRS officials fear the deliberations appear to depart from longstanding practice

Key Points
  • Trump officials are exploring ways to challenge the tax-exempt status of nonprofits.
  • IRS lawyers explored altering rules on denying tax-exempt status to nonprofit groups.
  • Trump has said his administration will strip Harvard of its tax-exempt status and suggested the administration could target other organizations.

WASHINGTON—Trump administration officials are exploring ways of challenging the tax-exempt status of nonprofits, according to people familiar with the matter, in a move that some IRS staffers fear could damage the agency’s apolitical approach.

In hourslong meetings that continued over a recent weekend, Internal Revenue Service lawyers explored whether they could alter the rules governing how nonprofit groups can be denied tax-exempt status, the people said.

The meetings started taking place shortly after the Trump administration appointed a new top interim lawyer at the agency, Andrew De Mello, whom Trump had nominated for a different post in his first term. De Mello privately discussed the nonprofit rules with agency officials, including those at the tax-exempt division, according to people familiar with the matter.

Another senior IRS official, Gary Shapley, separately said in at least one meeting that he’s giving priority to investigating the tax-exempt status of a select group of nonprofit organizations, according to people familiar with his remarks. Shapley made the comments as deputy head of the criminal investigations unit. Shapley, who is also an adviser to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, didn’t name any specific groups, the people said.

Some current and former IRS officials fear that the deliberations appear to depart from longstanding practice at the IRS. They come as Trump has said his administration will strip Harvard University of its tax-exempt status and suggested the administration could target other organizations.

Trump officials outside the IRS have also had ongoing conversations about how to potentially target nonprofits’ tax-exempt status and endowments for months, an administration official said.

The IRS and Treasury Department can make broadly applicable changes that would affect how nonprofits are scrutinized. Officials have long stayed away from any clampdown on the sector, fearing it could be viewed as a partisan attack on certain nonprofits. Some IRS officials have told associates they were worried that De Mello would find a way to target nonprofits disfavored by Trump, according to people familiar with the concerns.

A spokesman for the IRS didn’t respond to a request for comment. A spokeswoman for the Treasury Department said De Mello’s meetings were standard protocol. “It is the job of any agency counsel to meet with department teams to ensure a fulsome understanding of all rules and processes,” the spokeswoman said. She noted that the chief counsel doesn’t serve as a policymaker and instead advises leadership.

The White House has denied considering any executive actions that target nonprofits’ tax status. On Friday, Trump ramped up his fight against Harvard, whose federal funding the administration has frozen amid broad disagreements. A revocation of Harvard’s tax status, which the university is expected to fight, would presumably require an IRS finding that the university violated its rules.

The Trump administration also has pulled grant funding for hundreds of groups, many of which are worried they could lose their tax-exempt status and thus their ability to receive tax-deductible donations.

“None of this is normal,” said Phil Hackney, who advised the tax-exempt division commissioner as a lawyer at the IRS in the early 2000s.

A White House official on Friday said the White House isn’t involved in decisions about any institution’s tax-exempt status, including Harvard’s. It is a crime for the president, vice president or certain other top officials to request a specific IRS audit or investigation.

De Mello took over the role of acting chief counsel after the former official in the role, William Paul, was demoted. Paul had expressed concerns about other Trump administration efforts. De Mello later cut Paul out of the discussions about nonprofits, the people said. Paul declined to answer questions from The Wall Street Journal. “It wouldn’t be right for me to talk to you,” he said.

De Mello was an IRS lawyer before Paul’s job change but wasn’t next in line to take the top job. He was Trump’s nominee in 2020 to be the Education Department’s inspector general but was never confirmed by the Senate. Trump recently nominated Donald Korb, who was IRS chief counsel during the George W. Bush administration, to take the job again.

An IRS chief counsel would likely engage with leaders of the tax-exempt team to make a major change to policies tailored to nonprofits, Hackney said in an interview. “You could have neutral conversations about neutral policies intending to make such a big change. For the chief counsel, it certainly wouldn’t normally be something that’s at the top of the list of things to discuss,” Hackney said.

Many provisions of President Trump’s signature Tax Cuts and Jobs Act from 2017 are set to expire at the end of 2025. Three economists break down the fiscal impact of the cuts for individuals and businesses. Photo Illustration: Annie Zhao
The agency has for decades been allergic to most top-down efforts to challenge the tax-exempt status of nonprofits, after long and bruising battles with Bob Jones University, which initially lost its tax-exempt status in the 1970s, and the Church of Scientology, which eventually settled with the IRS in 1993.

One tack the Trump administration could take against nonprofits is to examine those that focus on diversity, former IRS officials said. In late 2024, lawyers at the IRS wrote a memo that said the 2023 Supreme Court ruling barring affirmative action at educational institutions shouldn’t affect nonprofits that support diversity goals through other programs. Some officials believed that memo could be reversed, with the IRS instead pushed to examine nonprofits that, for example, provide scholarships to minority students.

The Treasury spokeswoman said “speculation regarding unsubstantiated Biden-era analysis is a red herring,” adding “The American people recognize that organizations providing essential community services are appropriately treated as tax-exempt.”

The IRS division that regulates the sector has been chronically understaffed and at times faced controversy. More than a decade ago, the IRS acknowledged it gave improper scrutiny to conservative-leaning nonprofit groups with the words “tea party” or “patriot” in their names. During that episode, IRS lawyers struggled to provide quick, clear guidance to front-line workers about what was allowed and what wasn’t. The agency later attempted to write rules detailing when certain nonprofits could engage in political activity but withdrew those after an uproar.

The IRS has said it doesn’t use politics to decide who gets audited, but Trump has said he believes his own supporters, including evangelists and other faith leaders, were targeted by Democrats through the IRS and other federal agencies.

Last month the president described his recent conversations with faith leaders to reporters in an Oval Office briefing. “They said ‘sir, I was targeted by the IRS. And the FBI came in, sir, and I’ve been going through hell for years,’” Trump said.

Barrons : Europe and China Want to Be Trade Allies. This Sector Could Be Upended

Europe and China Want to Be Trade Allies. This Sector Could Be Upended.

It seems only logical. The world’s two exporting giants, China and the European Union, could team up to resist U.S. President Donald Trump’s trade offensive. In practice, that will be tough.

Both sides are poking out olive branches, or twigs. Beijing removed symbolic sanctions against five members of the European Parliament whom it judged overly outspoken about Uyghur minority rights. Eurocrats leaked the possibility of replacing tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles with administratively determined minimum prices.

That’s a long way from ditching the China “derisking” policy Europe enshrined a few years ago. The bloc will prioritize patching relations with Washington, only inching toward Beijing as a hedge, Brussels-watchers agree. “Lowering barriers against China is not a good idea for Europe,” says Davide Oneglia, director of European and global macro at TS Lombard. “It’s much more reasonable to be aligned with the U.S.”

Arithmetic is one compelling reason. The EU racked up a record 198 billion euros ($225 billion) goods trade surplus with the U.S. last year. Its deficit with China was €305 billion, nearly twice the prepandemic level. “Europe fears that if it strengthens trade ties, it will be flooded by cheap Chinese products,” says Carsten Brzeski, global head of macro at ING Research.

Europe watched China obliterate its early lead in green technology like solar panels and wind turbines, using what the Continent considers unfair subsidies, and fears a repeat on electric vehicles. Beijing’s critical support for Russia’s invasion of EU neighbor Ukraine also rankles.

“Europe is no longer naïve on China,” says Eoin Drea, senior researcher at the Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies. “It’s not the El Dorado everybody thought 10 years ago.”

A few inches in an $800 billion bilateral trade relationship could still impact economies and companies, however. Prohibitive Chinese tariffs on U.S. imports could spell opportunity for competing European suppliers of advanced industrial or medical equipment, notes Jacob Gunter, lead economics and industry analyst at the Mercator Institute for China Studies.

“Companies like Siemens or ThyssenKrupp may compete with General Electric for Chinese market share,” he explains. European jet maker Airbus could take advantage if China continues to boycott U.S. rival Boeing.

More significantly, Trump’s trade war could accelerate the integration of the Chinese and European auto industries. While European brands precipitously lose Chinese customers, China’s innovative EV and hybrid manufacturers threaten to invade Europe.

Brussels’ task is to force them to produce within Europe, preferably through joint ventures that transfer technology to Old World partners. “Europe needs to do a reverse China, trading market access for know-how,” Drea comments.

It’s starting to work, driven by the lower-cost European firms who are most vulnerable. Renault and China’s Geely Automobile Holdings announced a London-based joint venture last year to make hybrid and high-mileage internal combustion engines. Stellantis, which includes the Chrysler, Fiat, and Peugeot brands, has tied up with Zhejiang Leapmotor Technology. Chinese EV champion BYD expects to start producing at its own plant in Hungary later this year.

“I fully anticipate that the Chinese will replicate the Japanese and Korean nearshoring strategy in Europe,” says Germany-based industry analyst Matthias Schmidt.

The Trump administration could still push Europe into a warmer embrace of China. But it would have to try pretty hard. “In the long run the EU and China will be competitors,” ING’s Brzeski says. “It’s a deteriorating economic relationship.”

Barrons : Stock Market Bulls Have Gone Into Hiding. Why Our Money Pros Are the M

Stock Market Bulls Have Gone Into Hiding. Why Our Money Pros Are the Most Bearish in Nearly 30 Years.
Big Money pros are more anxious now than during the bursting of the dot-com bubble, the 2008-09 financial crisis, and the Covid-19

America’s money managers are more bearish today than they have been in nearly 30 years. Barron’s latest Big Money poll of professional investors finds 32% of respondents bearish on the outlook for stocks over the next 12 months—the highest percentage since at least 1997.

Just think about all the crises investors have weathered since then: the bursting of the dot-com bubble, the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the collapse of Lehman Brothers and the 2008-09 financial crisis, the Covid-19 pandemic. And yet the Big Money pros are more anxious now than during any of those painful points for the financial markets, the economy, and the country.

The bulls’ ranks also stand at historic levels in our spring survey—historically low, that is. Just 26% of respondents call themselves bullish on the market’s prospects, the smallest percentage since 1997.

A full 50% of managers were bullish last fall, while only 18% were bearish. The change in sentiment largely reflects worries about the potential impact of the Trump administration’s tariffs on corporate earnings and the economy. Although President Donald Trump has softened his stance since announcing tariff hikes on April 2, and has shown a willingness to make deals with both traditional allies and China, the managers remain concerned about the possibility of a global trade war.

“Trump may have overplayed his hand on tariffs,” says Harris Nydick, managing member and co-founder of CFS Investment Advisory Services in Totowa, N.J. “This is one of the top five times in my career for fog and murkiness. There are so many unknowns.”

The S&P 500 index has fallen about 4% this year after two years of double-digit gains. Tariff worries are only partly to blame, however. Equity valuations were unsustainably high at the start of the year, and investors’ concentrated bets on beneficiaries of artificial-intelligence technology were rocked in late January when China’s DeepSeek revealed an AI model built more efficiently, and at far lower cost, than U.S. models.

Although stocks have rebounded from the lows reached after Trump’s tariff announcement, the Big Money managers think more selling may be in store. Some 58% say the stock market is overvalued, while 38% call stocks fairly priced. Only 4% say the market is undervalued.

The managers’ clients are even more pessimistic than the pros; 56% say their clients are bearish.

Bill Smead, founder and chief investment officer of Smead Capital Management in Phoenix, calls this “one of the craziest junctures for the markets” that he has ever seen. “We needed to unwind growth-stock mania,” he says, but adds that the tariff news led investors to “slaughter things that should do better,” namely industrial and consumer stocks that have been hit hard by trade-war concerns.

Barron’s conducts the Big Money poll twice a year, in the spring and fall, with the help of Erdos Media Research in Ramsey, N.J. The latest poll was mailed out in late March, with supplementary tariff-related questions added in early April. The spring survey drew 119 respondents.

The optimists expect the Dow Jones Industrial Average, S&P 500, and Nasdaq Composite to end the year about 4% to 7% above recent levels, based on their mean forecasts. But the bears see a 7% decline for the Dow and low-double-digit losses for the S&P 500 and Nasdaq. Forty-two percent of respondents describe themselves as neutral in the latest poll.

Only 20% of Big Money managers indicate they approve of Team Trump’s tariff policy, while about 80% put the odds of a tariff-related recession at 40% or higher. Still, 60% consider the market’s tariff-related tempest a buying opportunity.

Several respondents lamented the fact that the White House isn’t focusing on policies that might spur more immediate growth. “I hope the administration begins to take a look at the process of deregulation,” says John Stoltzfus, chief investment strategist at Oppenheimer Asset Management, based in New York.

He isn’t alone: 38% of poll respondents say deregulation ought to be the administration’s top economic priority this year.

Simply put, much of the optimism about a second Trump administration unleashing animal spirits on Wall Street has evaporated since stocks surged shortly after Trump defeated former Vice President Kamala Harris in November.

“Companies are frozen; CEOs are wondering if they should play the long game or short game,” says Matthew Neyland, chief investment officer at SK Wealth Management in Providence, R.I. “There are things that could be done to make the mergers and acquisitions process easier that would help.”

Neyland says banks might be willing to lend more if they had more flexibility with regard to capital requirements. At the same time, “burdensome reporting” regulations make it more complicated for public companies to do business and have led more companies to stay private, he says.

Deregulation and tax-cut extensions may be coming, but Trump has given the market “the spinach first,” says Eric Green, chief investment officer at Penn Capital Management in Philadelphia. Green says he expects “more shoes to drop” before the market selloff is over.

He also expects a rebound in M&A activity, but notes that companies don’t want to announce major transactions until there is more clarity about tariffs. “They’ve been overwhelmed by tariffs,” he says of the White House and Congress. “Everything else might be happening, but slowly. It’s a matter of time.”

What is the biggest risk the stock market will face in the next six months? Among survey respondents, 24% cite an economic slowdown, 19% say a recession, and 14% say political turmoil in the U.S. Carter Randolph, CEO of the Randolph Company in Cincinnati, is the sole poll participant who sees no chance of a recession in the next year. Although investor and business sentiment hasn’t been good, consumer spending has held up, he says, adding that “sentiment isn’t a good investment tool.”

Advertisement - Scroll to Continue


But others aren’t as dismissive of widespread worry on Wall Street and Main Street. Joe Gilbert, a portfolio manager at Integrity Asset Management in Rocky River, Ohio, says the economy looks to be headed toward a downturn. “Tariffs have caused things to come to a standstill,” he says. “It makes it tough to have confidence, and confidence is fuel for the economy, so a recession is more likely than not.”

The Bureau of Economic Analysis reported on Wednesday that gross domestic product, adjusted for inflation, fell at an annualized rate of 0.3% in the first quarter, largely due to a surge in imports ahead of the implementation of tariffs. Real GDP grew 2.4% in last year’s fourth quarter.

Economic concerns are a big reason for gold’s record-breaking rally this year. Bullion has gained almost 27% year to date, to a recent $3,312 an ounce. Gold is often viewed as a defensive holding, a commodity with currency-like qualities that performs well when the dollar is weakening. The Big Money managers are fans: 58% say they are bullish on gold.

Oppenheimer’s Stoltzfus says he thinks it’s fine for investors to own a little gold, noting the price has gotten a boost largely due to buying by the central banks of China, India, and other emerging markets seeking to diversify beyond the dollar. But Tom Forester, manager of the Forester Value fund, says gold miners might be a better play.

Forester’s fund owns Agnico Eagle Mines and Alamos Gold. Both are trading below their five-year average forward price/earnings multiples, he says, and are benefiting from lower oil prices, which reduces costs. Both are Canadian companies.

Many Big Money participants say they are looking beyond the U.S. for better values this year, with 70% calling themselves bullish on non-U. S. stocks. Charles Zhang, founder and president of Zhang Financial in Portage, Mich., tells Barron’s that he likes both developed and emerging market stocks, and favors the iShares MSCI EAFE Value exchange-traded fund and the Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF. “The U.S. dollar is weaker; that and a stronger euro are helping international stocks,” he says.

Zhang, No. 1 in the Barron’s ranking of independent advisors, also sees potential for Chinese stocks to keep rising, noting that Alibaba Group Holding and other leading Chinese stocks still look reasonably priced. Alibaba is up more than 40% year to date but trades for just 13 times the next 12 months’ expected earnings.

Better prices elsewhere, coupled with frustration about U.S. trade policies, have led some investors to throw in the towel on U.S. assets. “Some clients are apoplectic,” says Sandra S. Martin, managing director of Martin Investment Management, which has offices in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla., and Evanston, Ill. She says some of the firm’s Asian clients are now focusing more on international stocks.

It isn’t all doom and gloom in the investment world. A volatile start to 2025 has created better buying opportunities in some stocks that had become too rich. “The average investor needs to think for the long term,” says Joseph Parnes, president of Technomart Investment Advisors in Baltimore. He calls himself a contrarian, and bullish. “You should take advantage of downturns, and within two to three years we should see solid growth,” he says.

Sharon Hill, a senior portfolio manager at Vanguard, likes dividend-paying stocks, particularly in the banking and pharmaceutical industries, and especially as bond yields retreat. “High-yielding stocks are already more attractive as a safety play,” Hill says.

She expects volatility in the bond market to make them even more so.

Many Big Money men and women are upbeat about the outlook for bonds. Nearly 75% of the survey participants say their weighting in fixed-income assets is higher than six months ago, while 70% say they are bullish on bonds. “There is still value in bonds,” says Erica Snyder, CEO of Hunter Associates, with offices in Pittsburgh and Salem, Ohio. “We see the Federal Reserve stepping in to cut interest rates a little bit a few times this summer.”

Rate cuts could put more downward pressure on the 10-year Treasury yield, which has fallen in recent months to a current 4.17%. Sixty-two percent of Big Money respondents expect the 10-year yield to be 4% or lower a year from now.

Lower bond yields are a boon to risk assets, prominently including equities. Jose Medeiros, a managing partner at Stonerise Capital Partners in San Francisco, likes the prospects for Meta Platforms, Amazon.com, and Alphabet. “Tech isn’t a fad; it is a growing part of the global economy, and that isn’t going to change,” he says. “Tech companies are growing earnings at a much faster rate than the broader market, with much higher margins and better cash-flow generation. Tech stocks should trade at higher multiples on that alone.”

John Maffei, chief investment officer at MFM Capital Management in Orlando, Fla., says he has been “looking to scoop up values,” particularly dividend payers, as the market has fallen. “The selloff in some stocks has been overdone with this market volatility,” he says, adding that his clients aren’t panicking.

Still, 2025 is likely to remain a year of surprises. And if subsequent quarters mirror the first, investors could be in for a tumultuous ride. “It is a difficult market,” says Ken Laudan, manager of the Buffalo Blue Chip Growth fund. “You have to be comfortable being very uncomfortable.”

If the Big Money managers are preparing for more market turbulence, the rest of us should be, too.

FT : Killer fungi to spread as climate heats up

Killer fungi to spread as climate heats up
A warming world accelerates rise of infection-causing species in echo of television series ‘The Last of Us’

Rising temperatures will drive the global spread of a killer fungus that infects millions of people a year, according to new research on how climate change is stoking severe disease threats.

The Aspergillus family could expand its reach to more northerly swaths of Europe, Asia and the Americas, underscoring the stealthy menace of moulds already estimated to be a factor in 5 per cent of all worldwide deaths. 

Climatic shifts are broadening the geographical reach of many potentially lethal pathogens, such as those borne by mosquitoes. Fungi are a particular peril, due to their hard-to-detect spores, a shortage of treatments for the diseases they trigger, and growing resistance to existing drugs.

The world is now approaching a “tipping point” in the proliferation of fungal pathogens whose habitats range from arid earth to warm damp corners of houses, warned Norman van Rhijn, co-author of the new Aspergillus research.

“We’re talking about hundreds of thousands of lives, and continental shifts in species distributions,” said van Rhijn, a Wellcome Trust research fellow at Manchester university who specialises in fungal infections and microbial evolution. “In 50 years, where things grow and what you get infected by is going to be completely different.”

The fictional brain-altering fungus portrayed in the post-apocalyptic television series The Last of Us as wiping out much of humanity brought the threat to a wider audience. But the danger in the real world is still under-appreciated.


Mycology, the study of fungi, is a field of many mysteries. More than 90 per cent of fungal species “remain unknown to science”, according to a 2023 report by the UK’s Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. That makes them much less well understood than big parts of the plant and animal kingdoms. 

About 3.8mn people each year die with invasive fungal infections, with the pathogen being the main cause of death in 2.5mn of those cases, according to research published last year.

A leading danger is aspergillosis, a lung disease caused by aspergillus spores that can spread to other organs including the brain. Many infections are spotted late or never, because of medical practitioners’ unfamiliarity or because symptoms are mistaken for those of other conditions.  

Aspergillus, named in the 18th century for its resemblance to a device used to sprinkle holy water, has brought humanity benefits as well as jeopardy.

Some species have uses ranging from industrial chemistry to the fermentation of soy sauce and sake, but others are potentially hazardous to health.

While most people don’t get sick from inhaling aspergillus spores, the mortality rate can be high if infection takes root. They are a particular threat to the growing numbers of people with immune systems weakened by conditions such as asthma or cystic fibrosis, or through medical treatments such as chemotherapy. 


The species Aspergillus fumigatus was named as one of four critical fungal pathogens that posed the highest risk, according to the first ever such list of threats published by the World Health Organization in 2022. 

The latest fungal research, funded by Wellcome and released on Saturday, said that A. fumigatus could spread to an additional 77 per cent of territory by 2100 if the world continues to use fossil fuels heavily. Its range would push towards the North Pole, exposing an extra 9mn people in Europe to infection.

The species can grow “astonishingly quickly” at high temperatures in compost where it lives, said Professor Elaine Bignell, co-director at the MRC Centre for Medical Mycology at Exeter university. 

That could have equipped it to survive and thrive in the human body’s temperatures of around 37C. “Its lifestyle in the natural environment may have provided A. fumigatus with the fitness advantage needed to colonise human lungs,” Bignell said. 

A second species in the latest study, Aspergillus flavus, lives on many crops and could spread into an additional 16 per cent of territory by 2100, the researchers project.

This would give it new or bigger footholds in north China, Russia, Scandinavia and Alaska, while making some existing habitats in African countries and Brazil inhospitable. That disappearance would have mixed effects, since it would disrupt ecosystems in which aspergillus plays a vital role recycling chemicals crucial to life.

The prospect of A. flavus geographical spread was “potentially very worrying”, said Darius Armstrong-James, professor of infectious diseases and medical mycology at Imperial College London. Research has suggested the species has caused disease outbreaks in countries such as Denmark, he added. 

A. flavus also produces damaging chemicals called aflatoxins that can cause cancers or life-threatening liver damage. Higher temperatures and CO₂ levels can boost the toxin’s production and contaminate its crop hosts, scientists have found. 

“There are serious threats from this organism both in terms of human health and food security,” Armstrong-James said, adding that recent data suggested A. flavus may develop high resistance to fungicides.

The development of anti-fungal medicines has been hobbled by the financial unattractiveness of investing in them, because of high costs and doubts over their profitability.


The new Aspergillus research adds to a growing body of work that suggests extreme weather events and related phenomena such as wildfires are likely to boost the spread of dangerous fungi.

Droughts followed by heavy rain may trigger soil disturbance and spore release into the air, said Brittany Bustamante, a University of California, Berkeley scientist studying the epidemiology of aspergillosis.  

UC Berkeley is leading a five-year project to use big data to analyse medical records from 100mn patients in the US, to identify factors that affect the incidence and severity of fungal infections.

The researchers have found that fungal pathogens such as Coccidioides, the cause of the potentially severe respiratory disease Valley fever, spread more widely after drought and other climate-linked changes. 

Coccidioides, which lives in the soils of hot and dry regions, has already expanded its habitat from the south-western US into Washington state. 

Since 2020, data suggested the biggest increases in aspergillosis had been in Latino individuals and people who lived in rural areas, Bustamente said.

The reasons for this were not clear, but could be linked to people who’d had severe Covid — and perhaps were unable to access treatment from overwhelmed health systems.

“Given the potential for climate change to drive future respiratory illness surges, secondary fungal infections like aspergillosis are likely to remain a serious public health concern,” Bustamente said. “And the people most at risk will likely be those already facing structural disadvantages and greater exposure to environmental risks like pollution.”

FT : Shell says it would rather buy back its own shares than bid for BP

Shell says it would rather buy back its own shares than bid for BP
First-quarter profits drop 28% but Shell maintains $3.5bn-a-quarter buyback rate

Shell’s chief executive has said he would rather buy back more of his company’s own shares than launch a takeover bid for rival oil major BP.

“We will always look at these things, but you are also looking to see what is the alternative,” Wael Sawan told the Financial Times. “Right now, buying back Shell [shares] for us continues to be absolutely the right alternative to go for.”

Shell has been persistently linked to a bid for BP after a 32 per cent drop in the latter’s share price over the past year. Elliott Management, the activist hedge fund which has built a 5 per cent stake in BP, has warned that the company faces a takeover unless its management makes deeper cuts to its costs and spending.

Sawan’s comments on Friday came as Shell announced in its first-quarter results that it would hand $3.5bn to investors by buying back its own shares, the 14th consecutive quarter in which it has spent more than $3bn to reduce its share count.

Shell reported adjusted earnings of $5.6bn for the first quarter, down 28 per cent year on year but roughly 10 per cent ahead of analysts’ expectations. Its shares closed up 2.15 per cent on Friday.

Sawan said Shell was well prepared for lower oil prices in the months ahead, after crude dropped to a four-year low in April over concerns about the global economy and increased supply from the oil cartel Opec. Brent crude was trading at $63 a barrel on Friday, down from $76 at the start of the year.

Sawan said the company’s balance sheet was in the best shape for a decade, with gearing at less than 19 per cent, or 7 per cent excluding the leases Shell has on its equipment. “That’s not bad going into some of the choppy weather we see,” he said.

“The last two years was all about getting leaner and fitter. We have been taking steps in anticipation of what could be a softer environment. So our plan is unchanged,” he said.

Sawan said Shell would be able to continue to pay its dividend, which it held at 36 cents a share in the first quarter, at a $40 oil price and that the company could still buy back $6bn to $7bn of shares annually even if oil fell to $50 a barrel.

FT : Private equity’s bind should prompt an investor rethink

Private equity’s bind should prompt an investor rethink
Returns are likely to be lower in a world of weaker growth, higher interest rates and a slump in dealmaking

Canadian and Danish pension funds have been backing away from new US private equity allocations. And Chinese sovereign wealth funds have turned off their money tap to the industry more comprehensively. But even investors in countries that haven’t been threatened with annexation or been made subject to eye-watering tariffs should reassess their exposures to private equity.

Critics have long caricatured American private equity as an outsized manager remuneration scheme attached to a basket of leveraged small cap stocks. This is not completely fair. But a combination of elevated borrowing costs, lofty US public stock valuations and a softer economic outlook all make for a hostile investment landscape and point to weaker returns.

Moreover, the steep uptick in US policy uncertainty that has accompanied the first 100 days of Donald Trump’s second presidential term creates profound challenges for investors. “Policymaking has been volatile bordering on erratic. And valuation is negatively correlated to volatility,” says John Bilton, head of global multi-asset strategy at JPMorgan Asset Management.

This volatility throws a spanner in the works of the private equity machine. Unlike listed markets, it is hugely expensive to make and then reverse private equity allocation decisions. So, when faced with a spike in policy uncertainty, private market investors tend to hit the pause button on fresh commitments, creating a real challenge for fundraising.

Stock market gyrations that come with policy flip-flops also create challenges in the buying and selling of companies in the private market. As Ludovic Phalippou, professor of financial economics at Oxford university, tells me, private company valuations are benchmarked to public market peers, and when prices are flailing, dealmaking grinds to a halt.

That is also bad news for existing investors. According to PitchBook, a market research firm, around $1tn of the $3.5tn total US private equity assets under management consists of “dry powder” — capital that is contractually committed by investors, but has not yet been called upon.

While the mountain of dry powder is often trumpeted as a key strength for managers, being able to provide a trillion dollars of cash when needed can be a problem for investors. One source of cash in their liquidity calculus are forecast distributions from the private equity funds they already hold. And to make distributions, funds must sell portfolio companies or engage in financial engineering.

But according to Bain & Company’s Global Private Equity Report, distributions as a percentage of net asset value have fallen from an average of 29 per cent in the period from 2014 to 2017 to only 11 per cent today. PitchBook estimates there are more than 12,000 US portfolio companies — around seven-to-eight years of inventory at the observed pace of exits. This is much higher than the five-and-a-half-year median exit time they’ve observed across the industry to date. When anticipated distributions fail to show up, investors need to look elsewhere for cash to meet capital commitments they’ve made to other private equity funds.

Yale University — pioneer of the “endowment model” of alternative-heavy investments under David Swensen’s leadership — looks like a case in point. It is reported to have appointed advisers to find buyers for up to $6bn of assets. While sales may be an effort to get ahead of potential tax hikes on university endowments being discussed by Congress, they also look necessary if the fund wants to stop its allocation to private equity from shooting up. According to quantitative analysis firm Markov Processes International, Yale has just over $8bn of unfunded capital commitments to private equity funds outstanding at the end of 2024.

Michael Markov, the firm’s chief executive, tells me that capital calls could typically have been expected to be funded by distributions from existing private equity holdings. But, given the slower pace of distributions, it’s unrealistic to count on this cash. Markov estimates that without offloading existing stakes, the share of Yale’s total endowment allocated to private equity may rise from 47 to perhaps 55 per cent. Not ideal.

Given its diversification characteristics, private equity has a role in portfolios. But in a world of weaker growth and higher interest rates, returns are likely to be lower. Furthermore, while it is never simple for investors to manage cash calls and illiquidity, overwhelming US policy uncertainty intensifies the challenge. Moments like these remind us why investors in illiquid assets should demand additional returns to compensate for risk.

FT : US lawmakers urge SEC to delist Alibaba and Chinese companies

US lawmakers urge SEC to delist Alibaba and Chinese companies
Heads of congressional panels say Baidu, JD.com and others have military links that pose ‘unacceptable risk’ to investors

The heads of two Congressional panels have urged the Securities and Exchange Commission to delist Chinese groups, including Alibaba, that they say have military links that put US national security at risk.

John Moolenaar, the Republican chair of the House China committee, and Rick Scott, the Republican chair of the Senate committee on ageing, wrote to SEC chair Paul Atkins on Friday to ask his agency to take action against 25 Chinese groups listed on American exchanges.

The targets also include search engine Baidu, online retail platform JD.com and the popular social media platform Weibo.

“These entities benefit from American investor capital while advancing the strategic objectives of the Chinese Communist party . . . supporting military modernisation and gross human rights violations,” the lawmakers said in the letter, which was obtained by the Financial Times. “They also pose an unacceptable risk to American investors.”

Moolenaar and Scott said no matter how commercial the Chinese groups appeared on the surface, they were “ultimately harnessed for nefarious state purposes”, partly because of China’s military-civil fusion programme which requires Chinese companies to share technology with the People’s Liberation Army when so ordered by Beijing.

The push marks the latest US effort to counter China and reduce its ability to use American capital, technology and expertise to modernise its military.

The two countries are also embroiled in a trade war that has exacerbated tensions between Washington and Beijing. The CIA on Thursday also released two Chinese-language videos designed to help them recruit more spies inside China.

Moolenaar and Scott said the extent of CCP control over Chinese companies was “systemically concealed from US investors” and Chinese law created “unpredictable risk to US investors that enhanced disclosures cannot mitigate”. They added many of the companies they cited in their letter were “not merely opaque” but were “actively integrated into the Chinese military and surveillance apparatus”.

They said the SEC had the tools and authority under the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act to “suspend trading and compel delisting by suspending or revoking the registration of the securities of Chinese companies that do not adequately protect American investors”.

“The SEC can — and must — act,” Moolenaar and Scott wrote.

The targets include Pony AI, which makes autonomous driving technology, and Hesai, a laser sensors group that the Pentagon has put on a list of groups with alleged military ties, which the company has denied.

They also include Tencent Music, a streaming platform owned by Tencent Holdings, which has already been placed on the Pentagon’s blacklist. Another group is Daqo New Energy Corp, a polysilicon producer that has previously been put on a US commerce department blacklist for allegedly engaging in forced labour in Xinjiang.

The lawmakers said the groups were just a subset of Chinese companies that were “accessing US capital while serving a genocidal dictatorship and our foremost geostrategic rival”.

There were 286 Chinese companies on US exchanges as of March, according to the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, which was created by Congress to investigate the security implications of trade and economic relations between the US and China. 

The move comes as some investors in the US have become concerned that the US-China trade war could escalate into a capital war.

“This multitrillion-dollar US investor underwriting of our principal adversary over these many years will now gradually draw to a close, much like our willingness to continue tolerating China’s grossly unfair trade practices,” said Roger​ Robinson, former chair of the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission who now runs his own consultancy.

Atkins, who was sworn in as SEC chair last month, has yet to announce policy moves focused on China. His predecessor, Gary Gensler, heightened scrutiny of securities associated with Beijing.

Asked in his confirmation hearing about ensuring Chinese groups comply with US standards, Atkins said: “Accounting and auditing is really crucial obviously to investor protection and to the capital markets.”

In addition to pushing for action on Chinese companies in the US, the House China panel has upped scrutiny of American financial groups that work with, or invest in, Chinese companies that have alleged military ties or that face accusations of human rights abuses.

The FT has requested comment from each of the companies.

​The Chinese embassy in Washington said Beijing opposed the US “overstretching the concept of national security, using national apparatus and long-arm jurisdiction to bring down Chinese companies”. 

“We oppose turning trade and technological issues into political weapons,” said Liu Pengyu, the embassy spokesperson.

The SEC on Friday said Atkins will respond to members of Congress directly.