Things from my Newsblur: 2026, Part II

It's only been a few weeks since OM's last Things from my Newsblur — maybe this is the new cadence. As a treat, a couple of fun ones lead things off instead of the usual finance closer. The rest splits into two camps: the difference between loving something enough to do the work, and what happens when AI lets you skip it entirely.

Check out these photos of New Yorkers celebrating the Knicks' historical NBA championship win this weekend
A 53 year wait; the City lost its collective mind and OM’s kids were very happy.   This one’s for OM's fellow New Yorkers!  
(Time Out New York)

Why There Are Only Two Escalators In All Of Wyoming
Wyoming has more national parks than escalators — and nobody seems to mind. Both are in Casper, the last one installed in 1979. With 583,000 people across 97,000 square miles, you just don't need many moving staircases.
(Andrew Rossi, Cowboy State Daily)

Failing is Common, Trying is Rare
Something OM hopes his kids learn early: most people don't actually fail at things — they just talk themselves out of really trying them. Later, the story becomes "Well, I tried but it just didn't work out".  If only that were true...
(David Cain, Raptitude)

Our Achilles Heel
Most of humanity's greatest achievements looked statistically absurd — and that's the point. We're wired to misunderstand probability, which makes us needlessly miserable — 25,000 valedictorians graduate every year in the US, but the Ivy League only has 15,000 freshman spots. Yet if you love the pursuit enough, the odds don't really matter.
(Ted Lamade, Collaborative Fund)

The Odyssey: Nolan's Enduring Commitment to Practical Effects
Real ships in real oceans, seven-foot giants achieved with forced perspective and a 4'6" stunt double, custom flickering LEDs built to mimic firelight because real flames wouldn't work — Nolan’s obsessed with putting something real in front of the camera. OM’s a fan, and The Odyssey is on pace to be one of the biggest R-rated films ever made. 
(Nanditha Anand, The Week)

Brown Professor Suspects Most of His Class Used AI to Cheat
A Brown economics professor gave a take-home exam for the first time ever — the class average was 96%. When he made the final in-person, it dropped to 48%, and a third of the class simply dropped the course rather than sit it unassisted. Let's hope he's right: "We cannot choose to become idiots." 
(Emma Whitford, Inside Higher Ed)

If You Let AI Do Your Writing, I Will Come to Your House and Kill You
Some great sustained fury from Sam Kriss, whose argument is simple: AI writing is always bluffing, always detectable, and the people peddling it are thieves. The Commonwealth Prize section alone is worth the read.
(Sam Kriss, Numb at the Lodge)

The Second Derivative: Why No One Understands the AI Boom
Everyone wants to compare the AI boom to 2000 — a bubble that deflated over years, letting capital absorb the hit. Groundbreaker argues this is more like 2008: a bubble financed with debt, not equity, and debt doesn't slowly deflate — it seizes, all at once. Given it's a debt-driven bubble, what's important isn't how fast things are growing, but whether that growth is slowing down.
(Groundbreaker)

2026: Second Quarter Review

Portfolio Update 
- Uranium (URNJ): Exited at the end of April – a couple of months later than ideal, as flagged last quarter. OM is now more actively using technical signals to help time position sizing; having ignored the first warning in January, he acted on the second in April.

- Crypto/China/India: Exited the remaining stub positions mid-quarter.

Together, these exits pushed cash above 25% by quarter-end. Part of this is a timing mismatch – capital left Crypto, India and China before new ideas (Brazil) were sized up. That, plus a likely re-investment in Uranium, should bring cash down in the third quarter.

Performance and Review
Our Man’s portfolio rose +4.3% during the second quarter, substantially lagging both the S&P 500 TR (+15.2%) and the MSCI World (+14.0%). The portfolio underperformed in every month of the quarter – rising in April (+6.5%), well behind the index rally, then falling outright in May (-0.2%) and June (-1.8%) while markets continued higher.

For the year, the portfolio (+8.5%) sits a little behind the S&P 500 TR (+10.2%) and MSCI World (+10.4%).

The medium-term history of the portfolio is below: 

 

Second Quarter Attribution

 
There are few surprises behind the underperformance: an average of ~20% cash during the quarter, no direct AI exposure, and weak commodity performance. The cash drag isn’t as bad as it looks – about one-third of it came from exiting URNJ at a small profit, which helped avoid a 20%+ loss over the rest of the quarter.

OM was late to recognize AI’s demand pull through the supply chain and missed the initial move, choosing instead to hold indirect exposure – through the US Reindustrialization theme (data centers, grid buildout, etc.) and Commodities (metals used in chips and power). That indirect exposure worked well over the last year but got hurt in Q2 as capital rotated hard into direct AI/growth names. Nothing changed in the theses on Uranium (-261bps) and Commodities (-40bps) – capital simply rotated out, and that will happen intermittently.

Not investing in HBM/DRAM manufacturers was a major error of omission. The setup mirrors Shipping/Tankers, Tin and Uranium: supply is fixed, demand jumps, and price is the variable that adjusts.  AI data centers need HBM (high-bandwidth memory) to feed GPU clusters, and it draws roughly 3x the wafer capacity of standard DRAM per bit; manufacturers are shifting production toward HBM’s better margins, tightening conventional DRAM supply and pushing DRAM prices up 90%+ per quarter. OM has known this was coming for almost a year but wasn’t invested.  Before April 2026 this was because there was no effective way to own it; the manufacturers are mostly single non-US companies (Samsung, SK Hynix, Kioxia), there was no dedicated ETF, and the names were too small a slice of broad semiconductor ETFs to matter.  This changed with the April 2026 launch of a Roundhill DRAM Memory ETF. The sin was knowing this ETF was launching but not acting. The excuses are the usual ones – “up too much already,” “wait for a pullback,” “don’t want to buy the top” – and none of them really matter.
This is a recurring lesson for OM, tied to his personality and approach rather than a rule for everyone, and a reminder of why investing is hard.  It is better to be early and small than not there at all, and if you can't be early but do have conviction then at least be small. It's easier to size up an existing position than start a new one.

The rest of the portfolio held up well:
-    European/UK Financials (+200bps) began to re-rate on strong results – particularly returns on tangible equity – aggressive buybacks, and analyst upgrades.
-    US Reindustrialization (+184bps) benefited from capital rotating toward direct AI beneficiaries.
-    Tin (+155bps) prices remained strong – Alphamin Resources returned ~10% of its market cap as a dividend, though the stocks remain underappreciated by the market.
-    Carbon Credit Allowances (+101bps) strengthened after CARB removed the policy overhang and began finalizing steeper cap-tightening trajectories (10-14% per annum vs. 4% previously).
-    Argentina (+74bps) banks benefited from continued pro-market reform, accelerating private credit growth, and healthy net interest income.
 

Shipping/Tankers (+4bps) and Idiosyncratic Equities (-0bps) were flat.  The exited stub positions added small gains: India (+5bps), China (+5bps) and Blockchain/Crypto (+6bps).

Portfolio (as at 6/30/26 - all delta and leverage adjusted, as appropriate)
Dislocations: 33.7%
14.1% - Uranium (URNM)
6.9% - Argentina (BMA, GGAL, SUPV)
6.6% - Tin (AFMJF, MLXEF and SBWFF)
6.1% - Commodities/Mining (LUNMF, TLOFF, PMCOF and IVPAF)

Thematic: 37.4%
10.4% - US Reindustrialization (AIRR)
10.2% - European/UK Financials (BCS, LYG, NWG)
9.2% - Shipping/Tankers (STNG, INSW, TNK, DHT and FRO)
7.6% - Carbon Credit Allowances (KCCA)

Idiosyncratic: 2.5%
2.5% - Equities (JOE)

Shorts/Hedges: 0.0%

Cash: 26.3%

Disclaimer: Nothing above should be considered investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. While Our Man is invested in all of the securities mentioned, that alone is a terrible reason for anyone else to be. Our Man also holds some cash and a few other positions (of negligible value). Investors should always do their own work and make decisions based on their own circumstances, objectives, and risk tolerance—and not because Our Man happened to mention something here. 

Things from my Newsblur; 2026 Part I

It's been a while since OM's last Things from my Newsblur, and the reading pile has not disappointed. This edition runs the full gamut — from the personal to the philosophical to the financial — with a few pieces that, on the surface, seem unrelated but share a common thread: what happens when we stop valuing the things that actually matter.

Proof You Can Do Hard Things
Something OM tries to instill in his kids — do hard things, not because they're useful, but because proving to yourself that you can is the whole point.
(Nat Eliason’s Newsletter)

The Decline of Deviance
The world is getting less weird — and not just in the ways you'd expect. Fewer cults and teenage pregnancies is a good thing, but there's also less original art, stranger architecture, and scientists willing to rock the boat. This isn't because of the internet — it started long before. When life gets safer and more comfortable, the incentive to be genuinely strange and creative quietly disappears. 
(Adam Mastroianni, Experiment History)

10 Questions to Answer Before You Die 

Avoiding death planning doesn't protect you or the people you love — it just moves the chaos to the worst possible moment. A practical, no-excuses guide to the things that actually matter; not just the financial stuff, but the conversations, the medical decisions, and the things left unsaid.
(Maura Mcinerney-Rowley, Hello, Mortal)

Your Power Tools Got Worse on Purpose
OM isn't a tool guy, but this is what happens when people who don't make things buy the people who do. Two conglomerates hoovered up every tool brand on the shelf — one invested and left the craftsmen alone; the other optimized the financials and extracted all the value until there was nothing left.  You've already seen this happen in other industries whose products you do use! 

(Keyana Sapp, Worse on Purpose)

The Ethiopian Running Secret
Ethiopian runners dominate marathons while largely rejecting the data-driven individualized training that Western sports science swears by. Have we become so seduced by quantification that we've stopped recognizing expertise that doesn't come with a spreadsheet attached?
(Michael Crowley, AEON)

The Bezzle and the Bull Market
Bull markets make us all 'feel' wealthier - and that feeling makes fraud, illusion, and self-deception much easier to sustain. Nobody questions things when everyone's getting rich.  The reckoning always comes later.
(Novel Investor)

Two Takes on New Fed Chair Ken Warsh
Ken Warsh (Claudia Sahm, Stay-At-Home-Macro)
Weighing Warsh (Marvin Barth, Seriously, Marvin?!) 

Most of the commentary has focused on whether Warsh is a hawk or a dove but is it the wrong question? 

Sahm's piece uses his 2010 FOMC record to argue he's unfit for the role. 

Marvin Barth has a completely different view; Warsh represents a genuine philosophical rejection of how the Fed has operated for the last 16 years. If he's right, the debate isn't about interest rates but about whether the post-2008 central banking experiment was a mistake.

2026: First Quarter Review

Portfolio Update 
- After an extended period without the anticipated rebound, OM exited substantially all Blockchain exposure (with Bitcoin at approximately ~$75K). While the position was given time to recover, that near-term bounce did not materialize as expected and OM exited.  OM may look to re-enter at more attractive levels should a broader market dislocation occur. 

-  OM also exited almost all the India exposure. The decision reflects relative opportunity set considerations rather than concerns with the underlying thesis, with similar investments (notably Brazil) offering more compelling risk/reward at this stage.

-  Following a strong start to the year, OM trimmed its US Reindustrialization exposure after it reached approximately ~12% of NAV.  The theme remains core, supported by continued momentum in domestic industrial policy and infrastructure investment. However, given strong performance and elevated positioning, partial de-risking was appropriate. The portfolio retains meaningful exposure.

Cash now sits at ~15% of NAV. Despite this, the portfolio remains positioned for volatility, with a meaningful allocation to dislocation-driven and commodity-linked exposures.

Performance and Review
Our Man’s portfolio rose +4.0% during the first quarter, outperforming the S&P 500 TR (-4.3%) and the MSCI World (-3.2%).  However, performance was marked by elevated volatility; with strong gains in January (+13.2%) and February (+1.6%) followed by a sharp pullback March (-9.6%).   

The volatility reflected the underlying positioning—particularly exposure to commodities and US Reindustrialization—both of which are sensitive to shifts in sentiment and risk appetite. Early strength provided an opportunity to reduce exposure selectively, though OM could have been more aggressive (e.g. Uranium).

The medium-term history of the portfolio is below:

 

First Quarter Attribution

The first quarter was unusual and, at times, chaotic. January in particular saw a near indiscriminate rally across most positions, with the notable exceptions of Blockchain/Crypto and India. That kind of broad price action across the portfolio is typically not sustainable and, in OM’s experience, is better used to reduce risk than chase further upside. 

Uranium (+347bps) and US Reindustrialization (+147bps) were the primary drivers of performance.

Uranium continues to reflect a structural supply-demand imbalance. Demand is increasingly supported by reactor life extensions and new project pipelines, while market pricing still assumes a relatively efficient supply response that has yet to show signs of materializing at scale. The disconnect remains in expectations rather than fundamentals.

US Reindustrialization reflects a broader policy-driven shift toward domestic capacity rebuilding. Markets continue to underweight the durability of this trend, treating decades of deindustrialization as structurally irreversible rather than a policy choice. That gap between perception and policy trajectory remains the core driver of returns, though it also increases sensitivity to sentiment shifts.

Elsewhere, Tin (+10bps) and broader Commodities (-9bps) ended the quarter roughly flat, but not without significant volatility along the way.

Shipping/Tankers (+374bps) was again a meaningful contributor during a time of uncertainty in the oil markets. Disruptions in key transit routes—most notably around the Strait of Hormuz—have increased effective shipping distances and constrained effective supply, pushing rates higher. We’ve seen versions of this before: when routes become inefficient, short-term tanker earnings can move well beyond even best-case assumptions.  The question is always duration. These conditions don’t persist indefinitely, but they also don’t normalize quickly. In the interim, capital allocation discipline across the sector has improved, with a greater share of earnings being returned to shareholders. Valuations reflect reasonable normalized earnings, though the position is expected to naturally decline over time as dividends are realized

The Idiosyncratic Equity position in JOE contributed +16bps.

Losses were broadly distributed, with the largest detractors coming from European/UK Financials (-131bps), Argentina (-126bps), and China (-44bps). The common factor was rising macroeconomic uncertainty, compounded by geopolitical risk, including US/Israel-Iran tensions and ongoing US-China frictions (e.g. the postponed Trump-Xi meeting didn’t help sentiment).

Carbon Credit Allowances (-98bps) were again a detractor. While the regulatory direction remains supportive over the medium term, the sizable impacts were pushed further into 2028, later than expected. This timing shift weighed on near-term pricing, despite reinforcing the longer-term supply tightness thesis.  At current levels, prices are approaching the regulatory floor price, which should limit downside. The upside case depends on whether CARB successfully implements the changes in a timely manner over the next ~6 months. The obvious risk is political—energy affordability is an easy place for pressure to build, particularly if broader geopolitical issues persist – though Governor Newsom is incentivized to encourage implementation before his term ends.

The India (-19bps) and Blockchain/Crypto (-69bps) were largely crystallized in early February as the positions were exited.


Portfolio (as at 1/1/26 - all delta and leverage adjusted, as appropriate)
Dislocations: 47.5%
24.6% - Uranium (URNM & URNJ)
6.8% - Commodities/Mining (LUNMF, TLOFF, PMCOF and IVPAF)
6.6% - Argentina (BMA, GGAL, SUPV)
5.8% - Tin (AFMJF, MLXEF and SBWFF)
3.7% - China (KWEB, FXI and JD)

Thematic: 35.5%
10.0% - Shipping/Tankers (STNG, INSW, TNK, DHT and FRO)
9.1% - US Reindustrialization (AIRR)
8.8% - European/UK Financials (BCS, LYG, NWG)
6.9% - Carbon Credit Allowances (KCCA)
<1.0% each in residual Blockchain/Crypto and India

Idiosyncratic: 2.6%
2.6% - Equities (JOE)

Shorts/Hedges: 0.0%

Cash: 14.3%

Disclaimer: Nothing above should be considered investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. While Our Man is invested in all of the securities mentioned, that alone is a terrible reason for anyone else to be. Our Man also holds some cash and a few other positions (of negligible value). Investors should always do their own work and make decisions based on their own circumstances, objectives, and risk tolerance—and not because Our Man happened to mention something here.

2025: Fourth Quarter Review

Portfolio Update 
All portfolio additions this quarter were in Commodities/Mining, with new positions in Ivanhoe Mines (IVPAF), Prospector Metals (PMCOF), and Talon Metals (TLOFF, see here for external in-depth write-up on Talon). Longtime readers will recognize the central theme across OM’s portfolio: supply deficits created by years of under-investment, now colliding with modest demand growth. OM discussed this dynamic in detail ~18 months ago in the context of Uranium, Tin, and Tankers, and it has continued to strengthen.

What has changed is timing. While under-investment has been widespread across commodities for over a decade, it is only now coming to a head as supply deficits begin to emerge, demand increases, and industrial supply chains re-orient. This has been further compounded by a growing recognition that much of global supply for key commodities sits in jurisdictions unfriendly to the West. 

OM’s Commodities/Mining exposure reflects this setup and is focused on high-quality deposits that had secured financing prior to OM’s investment, providing a longer runway toward production.  To better reflect this shift, OM has reclassified Commodities and Tin from a “Theme” to a “Dislocation” for 2026.

Performance and Review
Our Man’s portfolio continued its strong run in the fourth quarter, rising 7.1% though performance was volatile (Oct: +9.2%, Nov: -4.8%, and Dec: +3.0%).  This comfortably outperformed both the S&P 500 TR (+2.7%) and the MSCI World (+3.4%).

The strong final quarter meant the portfolio returned +36.3% for 2025, well ahead of the broader markets (S&P 500 TR: +17.9%; MSCI World: +18.4%).

As a couple of folks have asked, here is the medium-term history of the portfolio:

Fourth Quarter Attribution

Argentina (+476bps) was the largest contributor, recovering roughly two-thirds of its 2025 losses after President Milei’s party performed strongly in the midterms.  This eased concerns that his reform agenda would need to be scaled back. While the position’s performance in 2025 was frustrating, this largely reflected portfolio management errors - most notably not trimming after the outsized gains in 2024 - rather than any material deterioration in the underlying thesis.

UK/European Financials (+200bps) continue to perform strongly, suggesting that the market is not only being driven by the MAG7/AI! The position has contributed positively in each of its nine quarters in the portfolio, with the ADRs of Barclays and NatWest up ~250% (or roughly twice the MAG7). It is a reminder of the excess returns available when stocks are genuinely cheap and paired with changes that the market has yet to fully appreciate. While these names remain relatively inexpensive, they are no longer dislocated. The market now recognizes the earnings benefits of higher rates, leaving the final phase of performance as a rerating driven by more consistent and predictable earnings growth. As a result, OM has moved European Financials from the Dislocation to the Thematic bucket for 2026, and the position is likely to be reduced over time.

Commodities (+149bps) and Tin (+149bps) were beneficiaries of a broader repricing of supply-chain and geopolitical risk. During the quarter, China’s tightening of export controls on rare earth elements served as a reminder of how concentrated—and politically fragile—many commodity supply chains remain. This coincided with growing evidence that years of under-investment are now translating into physical tightness, particularly in smaller markets where incremental demand can have an outsized price impact.  OM suspects many market participants have forgotten how aggressively these smaller markets can move, or haven’t been around long enough to know.

Uranium (-180bps) detracted, largely due to positioning and expectations rather than any deterioration in the longer-term fundamentals. Market optimism around Uranium’s formal inclusion on the US critical minerals list had built into prices, and delays caused by the government shutdown led to disappointment and near-term pressure across the complex.

US Reindustrialization (+21bps) and Idiosyncratic (+47bps) contributed as domestic industrial exposure continued to benefit from resilient US growth and ongoing capital spending tied to reshoring and infrastructure investment. The US Reindustrialization ETF, in particular, extended gains made earlier in the year, ending up over 30%, as mid-cap industrials remained tied to long-term capital expenditure themes rather than cyclical slowdowns.  Smaller gains came from Carbon Credit Allowances (+12bps), Tankers/Shipping (+6bps), and India (+5bps).

China (-54bps) detracted following renewed political tensions with the US, which weighed on sentiment. Chinese equities performed well over 2025, and after a year of improving liquidity there are early signs of economic recovery. After a lost half-decade and with investor interest still limited, Chinese equities may be worth watching in 2026. 

Blockchain/Crypto (-123bps) positions were a disappointment; OM failed to follow his own advice to exit at the end of Q3.   Such an exit would have been near the all-time highs, instead he overthought and overcomplicated the position, based on an extended global liquidity into mid-2026.   Given the sharpness of the descent, OM will look to exit on a bounce during Q1-26.


Portfolio (as at 1/1/26 - all delta and leverage adjusted, as appropriate)
Dislocations: 48.1%
22.4% - Uranium (URNM & URNJ)
8.2% - Argentina (BMA, GGAL, SUPV)
7.2% - Commodities/Mining (LUNMF, TLOFF, PMCOF and IVPAF)
6.0% - Tin (AFMJF, MLXEF and SBWFF)
4.3% - China (KWEB, FXI and JD)

Thematic: 44.1%
11.6% - US Reindustrialization (AIRR)
10.6% - European/UK Financials (BCS, LYG, NWG)
8.2% - Carbon Credit Allowances (KCCA)
7.0% - Shipping/Tankers (STNG, INSW, TNK, DHT and FRO)
3.8% - India (IBN, INDA and SMIN)
2.9% - Blockchain/Crypto (IBIT, ETHE/ETH and BBBY)

Idiosyncratic: 2.6%
2.6% - Equities (JOE)

Shorts/Hedges: 0.0%

Cash: 5.3%

Disclaimer: Nothing above should be considered investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. While Our Man is invested in all of the securities mentioned, that alone is a terrible reason for anyone else to be. Our Man also holds some cash and a few other positions (of negligible value). Investors should always do their own work and make decisions based on their own circumstances, objectives, and risk tolerance—and not because Our Man happened to mention something here.

2025: Third Quarter Review

Portfolio Update 
Our Man made minor adjustments to the portfolio in the final days of the month, taking profits in Uranium (trimming both the Uranium Miners ETF and the Uranium Junior Miners ETF, reducing exposure by approximately 550bps) and in European/UK Financials (trimming Barclays and NatWest, reducing exposure by about 200bps).

He also added a small position in Commodities through Ivanhoe Mines (IVPAF), though that came on the first day of the fourth quarter.

Performance and Review
Our Man’s portfolio continued its strong run through the third quarter, posting gains in each month (July: +1.2%, August: +5.3%, and September: +6.6%) for a total quarterly return of +13.7%. This comfortably outperformed both the S&P 500 TR (+8.1%) and the MSCI World (+7.5%).

The portfolio’s strong performance over the past two quarters brought its year-to-date return to +27.3% at the end of Q3, well ahead of the broader markets (S&P 500 TR: +14.8%; MSCI World: +14.6%).

As a couple of folks have asked, here is the history of the portfolio over the last few years:

Third Quarter Attribution
 

The biggest driver of performance was Uranium, which contributed +825bps during the quarter. The impact reflected both the size of the position - peaking at 32% before being trimmed on the final day of the month - and its roughly 30% price gain. The position has nearly doubled since OM added to it in April, as it has become widely recognized that the rapid expansion of AI data centers will require significant additional power generation capacity, with nuclear energy a key component. Fundamentals remain strong: the demand-supply imbalance was underscored at the World Nuclear Symposium, while U.S. policy support continued to build, with the Administration encouraging domestic uranium production and signaling an intent to establish a strategic uranium reserve. Technical factors also provided tailwinds, as several financial vehicles (SPUT, YCA, etc.) that purchase physical uranium raised capital and were active buyers in the market, helping to lift spot prices. OM remains comfortable with the current position size while these supportive dynamics persist but expects to trim further during Q4.

Reindustrialization of the US (+220bps) also performed strongly, supported by the ongoing localization of supply chains and the substantial power and electrical infrastructure buildout driven by AI-related data center construction. The theme of localization is well captured by economist Marvin Barth (excerpted below, from Seriously Marvin).

“Long before protectionism, Covid and security concerns accelerated the process, technology began unwinding globalization. Automation allows production to move closer to consumer, obviating extended supply chains. Localization of production is reshaping trade, capex and relative growth. It has driven higher real interest rates, supercharged US earnings, and a decade of emerging market underperformance.”

Other notable contributors included Shipping (+197bps), Tin (+127bps), Blockchain/Crypto (+111bps), Carbon (+92bps), China (+84bps), European Financials (+84bps), and Commodities (+52bps). Among these, Tin and Carbon merit particular mention. Tin remains one of the most attractive risk-reward opportunities in the portfolio; its primary use as the “glue” in making semiconductors comes amid tightening supply, while Alphamin Resources - the industry leader - trades at over a 20% free cash flow yield. California Carbon Allowances (CCAs) rallied after the state reauthorized and extended its Cap-and-Invest program through 2045, removing significant uncertainty. Although regulatory details remain pending, the direction of travel is clear. With CCAs trading near their floor price - which rises by inflation + 5% annually - the setup remains highly asymmetric.

The only significant detractor was Argentina, which fell sharply and detracted -397bps. After a strong first 18 months under President Javier Milei, Argentina encountered its first meaningful setback. Despite an initial devaluation and a crawling peg to the U.S. dollar, the peso weakened sharply through Q2 and Q3, prompting the central bank to use most of its reserves to slow the decline. Investor sentiment deteriorated further after Milei’s party underperformed in a regional election, raising concerns that his reform agenda could be weakened if the upcoming late-October midterms go poorly. However, the currency and equities partially recovered after the U.S. reaffirmed its support for the Milei government, announcing a $20 billion swap line and signaling a willingness to provide material further assistance. While election outcomes remain uncertain, OM believes market sentiment has swung too far negative and is comfortable maintaining the current position, with potential to increase post-election. The “original sin” was not realizing some of the exceptional (and still material) gains earlier in the year. 

The positions in Idiosyncratic Equities (+10bps) and India (-35bps) had a limited impact on the portfolio.

Portfolio (as at 09/30/25 - all delta and leverage adjusted, as appropriate)
Dislocations: 45.5%
26.8% - Uranium (URNM & URNJ)
9.4% - European/UK Financials (BCS, LYG, NWG)
5.3% - China (KWEB, FXI and JD)
4.1% - Argentina (BMA, GGAL, SUPV)

Thematic: 43.6%
12.2% - US Reindustrialization (AIRR)
8.9% - Carbon Credit Allowances (KCCA)
7.5% - Shipping/Tankers (STNG, INSW, TNK, DHT and FRO)
5.1% - Tin (AFMJF, MLXEF and SBWFF)
4.0% - India (IBN, INDA and SMIN)
4.4% - Blockchain/Crypto (IBIT, ETHE/ETH and OSTK)
1.5% - Commodities/Mining (LUNMF)

Idiosyncratic: 2.3%
2.3% - Equities (JOE)

Shorts/Hedges: 0.0%

Cash: 8.5%

Disclaimer:  Nothing above should be considered investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. While Our Man is invested in all of the securities mentioned, that alone is a terrible reason for anyone else to be. Our Man also holds some cash and a few other positions (of negligible value). Investors should always do their own work and make decisions based on their own circumstances, objectives, and risk tolerance—and not because Our Man happened to mention something here.

Things from my Newsblur; 2025 Part II

This “Things from” post is the opposite of the last one; a single speech, which I’ve also excerpted the key section of below.   It was made a fortnight ago by the Bank of Japan’s Deputy Governor Ryozo Himino and is about the Trump Administration’s strategy, but not politics. I’d encourage everyone to read the excerpted piece – especially the non-financial folks.

The speech is very good, but the excerpted section is probably the most insightful thing that's come from a policymaker or the mainstream media re. the Trump Administration.  For those who  want to read it, the whole speech is here.

I think it's an impressively concise observation that makes no judgments.  For the finance people, please note his second point - which the markets think of as ‘TACO’ - is far more what regular folks would do if they ran a business, or a portfolio!   

The Philosophy and Policies of the New U.S. Administration
Eight months have passed since the new U.S. administration took office, and I tend to believe I have learned a lot about its approaches. However, the unexpected developments I face almost daily make me realize that there are still things to be learned.

So, I am still in the process of formulating my view, but if I could offer some personal and tentative reflections, I would argue that there are three characteristics that define the current administration's way of thinking.

First, the administration adopts a holistic approach and treats political, economic, and cultural matters, as well as domestic and international affairs, as integral parts of a single, inseparable policy agenda.

Second, while it is highly flexible in its tactical decisions, switching its approaches as situations evolve and choosing when to press ahead, pause, or make temporary retreats, the administration remains persistent in its strategic choices about what it ultimately aims to attain.

Third, it is unfettered from conventional wisdom and orthodoxy, focuses on facts that define the locus and sources of power, and explores opportunities that have thus far not been exploited.

Consider, for instance, trade policy. Our textbooks teach early on that the rationale for preserving a free trade system lies in the principle of comparative advantage -- each country specializes in what it produces best, thereby promoting an international division of labor, enhancing global economic efficiency and growth, and ultimately benefiting all countries. The conclusion, therefore, is that the global community should work together to pursue a positive-sum game. This is part of the foundational logic of the Washington Consensus, and I believe it contains much truth.

However, this framework does not necessarily capture all aspects of the matter. A superpower tends to possess a market large enough for its trade policy to influence import prices. It also has sufficient leverage to deter retaliatory tariffs from trading partners. According to the theory of optimal tariffs, for such superpowers, imposing moderate tariffs may improve the terms of trade and be more advantageous than forgoing tariffs.1

Moreover, given today's geopolitical environment, it is increasingly important to consider economic security and ensure strategic autonomy and indispensability.

Additionally, some argue that the most efficient economic system is not necessarily ideal in terms of fairness and distribution, and that a government's redistribution policies may not be sufficiently effective. This kind of argument may become more relevant as we face increasing social and economic divides.

Even considering tariffs alone, one may thus detect a confluence of various elements: an economic goal (i.e., better terms of trade), foreign policy considerations (economic security), and a political agenda (fairness and distribution). An element of cultural protest against intellectual elites may be at play as well, alleging that they have defended neoliberal systems and the resultant extreme inequality on the grounds of economic efficiency. Tariffs may thus be seen as a manifestation of a broad, transversal movement involving economics, diplomacy, politics, and culture.

In this light, discussing U.S. policy solely in terms of tariffs is too narrow an approach. A more holistic perspective on the policy is needed to assess the medium- to long-term outlook for Japan's economic activity and prices. That said, given that I am not an expert in politics, diplomacy, or culture, in the remarks that follow, let me focus on the near-term effects of tariff policy.