Archive

April 18, 2025

Browsing

When markets get more volatile and more unstable, I get the urge to take a step back and reflect on simple assessments of trend and momentum.  Today we’ll use one of the most common technical indicators, the 200-day moving average, and discuss what this simple trend-following tool can tell us about conditions for the S&P 500 index.

Nothing Good Happens Below the 200-Day Moving Average

I’ve received a number of questions recently as to why I’m not way more bullish after the sudden rally off last Wednesday’s low.  I love to respond with Paul Tudor Jones’ famous quote, “Nothing good happens below the 200-day moving average.”

To be clear, the 200-day moving average is almost 500 points above current levels, so it would take quite a rally to achieve that price level any time soon.  But with the VIX still well above the 30 level, that means the market is expecting wide price swings and big moves could be very possible.

But generally speaking, any time I see a chart where the price is below a downward-sloping 200-day moving average, I feel comfortable making the basic assumption that the primary trend is down.  And until the SPX can regain this long-term trend barometer, I’m inclined to treat the market as “guilty until proven innocent.”

Tracking the 200-Day With the New Market Summary Page

The new and updated version of the StockCharts Market Summary page features a table of major equity indexes and includes a comparison to the 200-day moving average for each index.  I’ve sorted today’s table in descending order based on this metric, which allows us to compare the relative position of different indexes and focus on which areas of the equity market are showing real strength.

We can see that only the Dow Utilities remain above the 200-day moving average, even with the strong bounce we’ve observed over the last week.  The S&P 500 is about 8% below its 200-day moving average, and for the Nasdaq Composite it’s over 11%.  So this basically implies that the S&P could see another 8% rally, drawing in all sorts of investors, yet still remain in a bearish phase based on its position relative to the 200-day.

Three Stocks Facing a Crucial Test This Week

One chart I’m watching closely this week involves three key growth stocks that are actually very near their own 200-day moving average.  If these Magnificent 7 stocks have enough upside momentum to power through the 200-day, then there could definitely be hope for the S&P 500 and Nasdaq to follow suit in the coming weeks.  

Note in the top panel how Meta Platforms (META) powered above the 200-day last Wednesday after the announcement of a 90-day pause in tariffs.  But after closing above the 200-day for that one day, META broke right back below the next day.  META has closed lower every trading day since that breakout.

Neither Amazon.com (AMZN) nor Tesla (TSLA) reached their own 200-day on last Wednesday’s rally, and both are now rapidly approaching their lows for 2025.  And if mega cap growth stocks like META, AMZN, and TSLA are unable to power above their 200-day moving averages, why should we expect our growth-dominated benchmarks to do the same?

With a flurry of news headlines every trading day, and an earnings season that could paint a disturbing picture of lowered expectations for economic growth and consumer sentiment, I feel that there is more downside to be had before the great bear market of 2025 is completed.  But instead of trying to predict the future, I choose to simply follow the trends.  And based on the shape of the 200-day moving average for these important charts, the primary trend appears to still be down.

RR#6,

Dave

PS- Ready to upgrade your investment process?  Check out my free behavioral investing course!

David Keller, CMT

President and Chief Strategist

Sierra Alpha Research LLC

Disclaimer: This blog is for educational purposes only and should not be construed as financial advice.  The ideas and strategies should never be used without first assessing your own personal and financial situation, or without consulting a financial professional.  

The author does not have a position in mentioned securities at the time of publication.    Any opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not in any way represent the views or opinions of any other person or entity.

On April 17 (Thursday), Judge Leonie Brinkema of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia ruled against Google (NASDAQ:GOOGL) in the antitrust case concerning its advertising technology business, casting a shroud of uncertainty over the future of the tech giant’s online advertising business.

Brinkema will now need to determine what remedies to impose on Google to restore fair market competition. The plaintiffs sought to force Google to divest its Ad Manager, which includes the company’s publisher ad server and its ad exchange, to restore competition in the market. This outcome is far more likely following Judge Brinkema’s ruling.

This is a developing story happening alongside a similar case against Meta Platforms (NASDAQ:META), which is being sued by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for allegedly monopolizing social media through its acquisition of Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014.

This trial against Google began in September 2024, and the plaintiffs in the lawsuit comprise the Department of Justice (DOJ) and attorneys general from eight states.

The plaintiffs argued that Google’s dominance in ad tech allowed it to charge higher prices and take a larger share of ad sales. They accused Google of stifling competition by controlling the technology used to place ads on websites across the internet.

The ruling against Google marks a significant step in one of numerous anti-competitive cases brought against Google in the past few years, both in the US and internationally.

It follows an earlier ruling in August 2024 in which Google was found to have an illegal monopoly in the online search market in the US. That case will move into the remedies phase next week, with a court date of April 21, 2025.

“This is a game-changer,” wrote Connecticut Attorney General William Tong, one of the plaintiffs in both cases. “As Judge Brinkema writes in her decision, Google was in direct violation of the Sherman Act by dictating how digital ads are sold and the terms under which its rivals can compete.

‘With this victory in hand, we can hopefully work now towards restoring a fair, free, and competitive digital advertising marketplace. This decision is the first step in opening up competition so that Connecticut businesses and consumers will pay less for advertising – and therefore less for goods and services. We will no longer be under the thumb of a gigantic multinational conglomerate.”

US District Judge Amit Mehta, who ruled against Google in the August 2024 case, has considered imposing structural remedies that could involve forcing Google to divest its Chrome business, although Google has argued divestiture would hurt consumers. Instead, the company has suggested allowing browser companies to have multiple default agreements with various search engines.

Regulators have been digging into various aspects of Google’s business, including its advertising technology, search practices and mobile operating system.

In addition to the current case, Google is also facing scrutiny from antitrust regulators in Europe, the UK and other jurisdictions. The outcomes of these cases could have far-reaching implications for Google’s business model and the tech industry as a whole.

Today’s ruling signifies a major development in the ongoing scrutiny of Big Tech’s market dominance, which echoes efforts to dismantle AT&T’s (NYSE:T) phone monopoly in the 1980s. The eventual outcome of that case led to AT&T’s breakup into seven independent enterprises, which laid the groundwork for some of today’s major telecommunications and internet services providers, including Verizon (NYSE:VZ) and Lumen Technologies (NYSE:LUMN). It also gave cable companies like Comcast room to expand into internet services.

Whatever outcome Judge Brinkema decides, the ruling could reshape the online advertising landscape and have far-reaching implications for both the company and the broader tech industry.

Securities Disclosure: I, Meagen Seatter, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

Keep reading…Show less
This post appeared first on investingnews.com

As gold and silver continue to prove their worth as sound investments, market participants should know how precious metals investments are taxed in the US.

While the majority of gold and silver investing comes with a certain degree of taxation, there are different levels of tax based on how market participants decide to invest in these precious metals, how long the investments are held for and the investors individual tax bracket.

Read on for a breakdown of the taxes associated with investing in gold and silver bullion, ETFs and stocks, as well as the forms involved with reporting precious metals investments.

In this article

    How are physical gold and silver taxed?

    Gold and silver bullion, coins and bars are seen as collectibles by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the US. Thus, physical gold and silver, no matter the form, are subject to a higher rate of capital gains tax when they are sold. The same is true for fellow precious metals platinum and palladium.

    While long-term capital gains would typically carry a top bracket of 20 percent, collectibles can be taxed at a higher 28 percent.

    The total an investor will owe in capital gains tax when selling physical gold and silver is based both on their income bracket and the length of time they held the asset.

    The long-term capital gains tax on physical gold and silver is equal to an investor’s marginal tax rate, up to a maximum of 28 percent due to their status as a collectible, meaning those in higher tax brackets still only have to pay 28 percent on long-term gains from physical precious metals sales.

    It is worth noting that the 28 percent maximum is only for long-term capital gains, which applies to metals that an investor has held for more than one year. Short-term capital gains on precious metals held for less than one year are taxed at ordinary income rates.

    For example, a person in the highest tax bracket purchased 100 ounces of physical gold at US$1,800 per ounce and two years later sold their holdings for US$2,000 per ounce. While they are in the 37 percent tax bracket, they would pay 28 percent tax on the capital gains made from these sales. As they earned US$20,000 in capital gains, that would translate to US$5,600 in income tax.

    However, if the investor sold the gold at the same gain just 11 months after they purchased it, it would count as short-term capital gains, and the investor would be taxed at 37 percent and owe US$7,400.

    Investors who are in one of the tax brackets below 28 percent are taxed at the standard rate of their bracket when selling their solid gold and silver assets, whether they are held short- or long-term.

    Similarly to other investments, precious metals sold at a loss can be used to offset capital gains.

    How are gold and silver ETFs taxed?

    Like all other exchange-traded funds (ETFs), gold ETFs and silver ETFs act in the same manner as individual stocks, meaning that investing in these ETFs is similar to trading a stock on an exchange. There are two main types of gold and silver ETFs: those that track the prices of those metals and those that track gold or silver stocks.

    ETFs that follow metals prices provide exposure to either physical gold or silver, or gold or silver futures contracts. It is important to keep in mind that investing in these ETF platforms does not allow investors to own any physical gold or silver — in general, even an investment in an ETF that tracks physical gold or silver cannot be redeemed for the tangible metal.

    ETFs that invest in gold or silver companies provide exposure to gold- and silver-mining stocks, as well as gold- or silver-streaming stocks.

    In terms of taxation, capital gain taxes from selling gold and silver ETFs is determined by the ETF’s holdings, the investors tax bracket and how long they held the asset for.

    Funds will often supply investors with tax forms that they can use to fill out their income tax. The webpage for a fund should have a document describing how income tax is handled for that fund, which is worth reading before investing in it.

    Long-term capital gains from selling shares of gold and silver ETFs are subject to a 28 percent maximum federal income tax rate if they hold physical precious metals and 20 percent if they hold stocks. While long-term capital gains would typically be capped at 20 percent maximum rate. This is because the holdings are considered collectibles, as described in the section above. Short-term gains made from selling gold or silver ETFs are subject to a maximum federal rate of 37 percent.

    Additionally, these gains could get slapped with a 3.8 percent net investment income tax for high net-worth investors, and a state income tax may also apply.

    Futures-based commodity ETFs can come with their own set of rules that you can learn about here. Briefly, they are often taxed in a 60/40 hybrid, with 60 percent treated as long-term gains and 40 percent treated as short-term gains. Additionally, this is calculated at the end of each tax year, whether a sale is made or not.

    ETFs that hold stocks are taxed in the same way as traditional securities, which you can read more about below.

    How are gold and silver stocks taxed?

    In terms of tax on gold and silver stocks, long-term gains from selling are subject to the standard 20 percent maximum federal rate, while short-term gains will face a maximum federal rate of 37 percent. For investors in higher income brackets, there is the potential for gold and silver stock investments to also be hit with the 3.8 percent net investment income tax as well as state income tax.

    Unlike physical precious metals and ETFs that hold them, precious metals stocks are not classified as collectibles, which is why the long-term capital gains tax is capped at 20 percent instead of 28 percent.

    Stocks sold at a loss are important as well as they can be used to offset capital gains when filing income tax.

    How to report taxes on physical gold and silver investments

    Market participants who sell precious metals in the US for a profit are required to report that profit on their income tax return, regardless of whether or not the dealer has any reporting obligation.

    When selling gold and silver investments in the US, there are two different sets of reporting guidelines — one applies to the dealer through which a person sells and the other applies to the investor who is selling the asset.

    It is important to note that taxes on the sale of gold and silver will not be due the moment that the sale is made, and the tax bill for all of these sales is due at the same time as a standard income tax bill.

    For investors selling precious metals, capital gains or losses need to be reported on Schedule D of Form 1040 when making a tax return.

    Investors will first need to detail their precious metals transactions on Form 8949, including the length of time the investments were held. This form must be filed alongside Schedule D. Investors then use this information alongside the 28% Rate Gain Worksheet included in the Schedule D instructions.

    Depending on the type of metal being sold, Form 1099-B may have to be submitted to the IRS by the broker when the sale closes, as such transactions are considered income. As for when a broker will need to file Form 1099-B, there are specific rules that determine which sales of precious metals require the dealer to file this form that apply to transactions over a 24 hours period.

    For gold sales, reportable items include specific gold coins, including the 1 ounce Canadian Gold Maple Leaf and Gold Kruggerand, and gold bars and rounds of at least 0.995 fineness. As for quantity, only sales of more than 25 gold coins and or more than 1 kilogram in gold bars and rounds will require the form.

    Sales of 0.999 fine silver bars and rounds totaling over 1,000 ounces qualify. For silver coins, US coins with above 90 percent silver are reportable, but Silver American Eagle coins are not. Sales of silver coins exceeding US$1,000 will require a form.

    When it comes to selling gold and silver overseas, market participants must follow the laws as they apply to the sale of gold and silver investments in that particular country.

    The information in this article does not constitute tax advice, and investors should work with a tax professional or program to help them make sure everything is reported accurately.

    Securities Disclosure: I, Lauren Kelly, currently hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

    Keep reading…Show less
    This post appeared first on investingnews.com

    OpenAI is in talks to pay about $3 billion to acquire Windsurf, an artificial intelligence tool for coding help, CNBC has confirmed.

    Windsurf, formerly known as Codeium, competes with Cursor, another popular AI coding tool, as well as existing AI coding features from companies like Microsoft, Anthropic and OpenAI itself.

    Bloomberg was first to report on the potential deal, which CNBC confirmed with a person familiar with the matter who asked to remain anonymous since the talks are ongoing.

    OpenAI is rushing to stay ahead in the generative AI race, where competitors including Google, Anthropic and Elon Musk’s xAI are investing heavily and regularly rolling out new products. Late last month, OpenAI closed a $40 billion funding round, the largest on record for a private tech company, at a $300 billion valuation.

    OpenAI on Wednesday released its latest AI models, o3 and o4-mini, which it said are capable of “thinking with images,” meaning they can understand and analyze a user’s sketches and diagrams, even if they’re low quality.

    Should a deal take place with Windsurf, it would be by far OpenAI’s biggest acquisition. The company has made several smaller deals in the past, including the purchase last June of analytics database provider Rockset and video collaboration platform Multi. In 2023, OpenAI bought Global Illumination, which had been “leveraging AI to build creative tools, infrastructure, and digital experiences,” according to a blog post when the deal was announced. Terms weren’t disclosed for any of those transactions.

    Windsurf is among the tools, alongside Cursor and Replit, that developers have flocked to in recent months to “vibe code,” a term that refers to having AI models quickly assemble code for new software. Andrej Karpathy, a former OpenAI co-founder, coined the term in a post on X in February. Earlier this month Microsoft, whose Visual Studio Code text editor is widely used among programmers, announced an Agent Mode feature with similar capability.

    The startup’s investors include Founders Fund, General Catalyst, Greenoaks and Kleiner Perkins. TechCrunch reported in February that Windsurf was raising a funding round at a $2.85 billion valuation.

    — CNBC’s Jordan Novet contributed to this report.

    This post appeared first on NBC NEWS