The starting point matters. The idea of rotating out of highly valued tech into industries that need it is challenged because those industries have been kept afloat by low rates and private credit.

It's worth monitoring, but the focus is on individual credits and providers. This may be part of a cycle where overcapitalized banks didn't lend, forcing private credit to step in, and now we're coming full circle.

You cannot look at data in aggregate. The 80-90% are stressed. It comes down to collateral and market valuations, making a perfect rotation into industrials difficult.

The bull market has stalled. There's a vicious rotation beneath the surface.

I don't agree for a number of reasons. Look at Japan: inflation turned lower, rates are heading lower. We're still in a fungible global bond market. We still think the Fed is only going to cut three times this year.

You'll have a market reaction if IEEPA is struck down, but we think there's a Plan B and Plan C. The market would react to the strike-down.

Goods inflation is a small part of the basket. Disinflation is happening in housing. The Fed has been scared by inflation and did a disservice by not cutting sooner. Those three cuts should have been done already.

It is about the outlook of where you think you'll land. They cut when inflation was even higher. Now they're getting skittish.

That's convenient. Everyone puts their views in the second half. Our view is more nuanced. Any Fed will do the right thing if the data turns.

The Fed is not showing a sense of urgency. There will be a reluctance to cut right ahead of the midterms. You have to start easing sooner to see the net benefits.