The Jackson Hole (JH) meeting is upon us. Every year, news reports are made about it, and its history is charmingly recounted, so I won't delve into that. However, I find it worth reminding that there's no Fed meeting in August, but we're in a time when the timing is extremely tight for interest rate cuts. In contrast, Powell made no mention of JH at the July meeting, neither in the written statement to the press nor in the Q&A.

Of course, the JH meeting isn't a Fed meeting, and there's no obligation to make a statement. But Americans, in particular, have a very strong memory for time and place. What does "time-space memory" mean? They love to hold certain events at the same time of year or in familiar locations, attaching meaning to the content, time, and place in question. But they're also careful to convey that this isn't automatic. Therefore, not every JH meeting produces news. However, if a chain of events necessitates sending a message to the market outside of a regular Fed meeting, they don't hesitate to use JH. If I recall correctly, the last time something like this happened, the market dumped bonds by the truckload, predicting the Fed would raise interest rates, even though there were no eggs or eggs left, sending interest rates soaring. Naturally, the Fed sent the message, "Bonds are my weapon; no one can pull them off before me," that it was rushing, and the market took a positive turn.

I believe the market needs this kind of clarity now. Therefore, Powell can be expected to provide more decisive information about the rate-cutting cycle at this meeting. If you recall, I initially predicted that the July meeting would be a dry spell, that the JH meeting would deliver a message for September, and that 25 basis point rate cuts would be signaled in September and possibly December. This escalated towards the crucial July meeting, but nothing came of it. It seems my initial view remains lingering.

For now, the Trump-Putin meeting appears to be a deal with unclear terms. The possibilities are open and could change across a wide spectrum. But judging by Putin's stance since before the war, one of his two most important criteria is that Ukraine not be admitted to NATO and that the conquered territories not be returned.

One of the topics Zelensky frequently discusses is the recovery of lost territories and the protection of Europe (or NATO, that is, the US). From this perspective, we see that both sides' red lines are intersecting. Someone needs to back down. Aside from issues like trade revolving around the back, Russia-China relations, and a research base for rare metals that could be established in the Arctic, I think an agreement that involves Russia returning some of the conquered territories while not admitting Ukraine to NATO in return might convince the parties for now. As a result, a price increase in the markets could occur, depending on other provisions. The most important price increase would be in oil—if at least the gradual lifting of sanctions is signed as one of the agreement's provisions. In this case, the oil market, already fundamentally dominated by oversupply and demand contraction, could become even more sales-oriented once Russian oil enters the supply side of the equation.

Some of us may think it will cause gold to sell off. But I disagree with this view. I believe the Russia-Ukraine war has eliminated the risk premium on gold. Therefore, peace may not be effective. However, it could trigger short-term selling under other circumstances, but it still needs to be evaluated separately. The healthcare index, one of the S&P 500 sub-indices, has lagged significantly behind other sector indices. Trump's rise to power, even surpassing the Ozampik developments, led to investors abandoning healthcare stocks, including Elly and NOVO. However, many of the sector's major stocks have now returned to their pre-Covid levels and will attract funds' attention again. Watch out for this sector!