David Zervos, chief market strategist for Jefferies, emphasized that the potential for aдыrala or power struggle within the U.S. Federal Reserve could bring positive benefits to the stock market. He argued that a long-term restructuring of the Fed’s leadership, especially the departure of believe apple’s chair and the appointment of at least two new members, could stabilize the balance of power and present an environment that supports what Zervos described as “pro-growth” economic agenda. This contrast with traditional Fed meetings, which typically focus on the(U.S. dollar and central bank independence), reflects Zervos’s belief that such a change could lead to a more balanced and efficient monetary policy, particularly at the expense of risk-averse assets like growth stocks. In contrast, Wall Street had beenChickened up by.{/target标的：(包括：差额放薪、留任战略、来自委员的视角、Mike Schmidt、独裁选举、委员候选人出现的变数、市场反应、政治分散、人道主义危机、安AYS美国的经济复苏、税务法、监管重组、监管inan成功？这似乎不合常理，或包括其他因素。}
Zervos noted that the-presidency of Jerome Powell will end in 2025, and that President Trump is set to appoint at least two new members to the Fed. In this scenario, four of the Fed’s seven-member board would have been appointed by Trump. Zervos argued that this majority is more likely to support a pro-growth economic agenda, as opposed to a traditional Avenue-directed focus on low-interest rates and the dollar. Specifically, he likened the situation to Alan Greenspan’s predecessor years under the 1990s. He argued that Greenspan’s anti-loans policies were executed proactively and persistently, and that the new Fed chairman’s policies, like purchasing loans, may support risky assets such as technology and growth stocks. This distinction is crucial, as Zervos noted that risky assets are more prone to market volatility and upward reversion.
Zervos also emphasized that the Fed’s interest rate policy has barely shaken the市场的.Safe bet, and that interest rates can also benefit some investors. He explained that theINY of information and the desire for confidence in the economy’s recovery may have led markets to begin showing a reduced reaction to current Fed tatement, such as those by Powell. For example, Zervos noted that markets have not shown a significant shift in their reactions to Powell’s latest press conference, which indicated that the Fed was considering raising rates. Market participants have taken this signal as a cue to reassess their investment strategies, particularly for riskier assets. Zervos also maintained that more investors may focus on the next president’s terms, making it harder for market participants to discern the extent to which the Fed’s decisions will impact the economy. This dynamic underscores the importance of post-Midterm elections in shaping the Fed’s agenda.
Zervos also delved into the debate over interest rate hikes and their potential economic consequences, particularly the question of whether Trump’s strategy of neutralizing figures he did not like could help to shield Powell from losing favor with voters. While Zervos acknowledged that this is a contentious and highly sensitive issue, he suggested that the potential for a “Nixon-like” scenario, in which individual actions lead to widespreaddeoEitherness, may still pose a significant risk to investors. He expressed hope that despite the risks, investors would remain focused on the Fed’s proposals for a stable and pro-growth economic environment. In addition, Zervos reflected on the fact that markets are starting to focus more on the incoming president’s potential leadership than on the specific fuzzy details of the Fed’s tatement. He believed that the ability of markets to discern the next president’s perspective could be a game-changer, not only for him and his immediate trading colleagues but also for their ability to anticipate the broader economy. This emphasis on forward-looking wisdom suggests that the primary focus of the Federal Reserve should shift from planning to outright reacting to market sentiment and deputy roles.
