I'm feeling something different than everyone else right now, and I wanted to write it down because it feels better to let it out and share it with you rather than keeping it in my head. Why am I constantly analyzing this? I'll try to explain the general market situation, the new Fed Chairman K. Warsh, the US economy and elections, unemployment and the impact of AI, the Strait of Hormuz conflict, leaving China and Russia out, as best as I can.

Markets are bad. I know. Five weeks of selling, 8-9% below the January peak, the energy shock, the intense news flow. But as I watch this, I think this picture doesn't seem new to me. Fear always feels this concrete. It always seems this well-justified. And I try not to make the same mistake every time: I try not to turn a short-term problem into a permanent thesis.

That's exactly what people are doing right now. The news flow gets heavier, a few weeks of selling come, and suddenly everyone starts using the same words. Stagflation. Inflation. Recession. Structural breakdown. End of trend. Each of these words might be true at a certain point, but mostly, the moment they're said loudest is when they're most wrong. That's how market psychology works. Fear generates its own narrative, that narrative triggers more sales, and more sales reinforce the narrative. The cycle continues for a while, and then one day it pauses. Because the underlying reality hasn't changed. This time the trigger is Iran. Oil is above $100, the Strait of Hormuz is effectively closed, and energy prices are pushing inflation expectations higher. I take this seriously, I don't underestimate it. But I also know that every major correction has had its own very convincing story. Each time it was said, "this time it's different," and most of the time it wasn't.

The real question for me is: has business performance really deteriorated? Are companies like $NVDA, $AMZN, $GOOGL, $TSM, $META showing fragility, or are prices just falling? These two things aren't the same, and the market often ignores that difference. If the fundamentals are strong, that gap between price and reality closes after a while. As far as I can see, I don't think the fundamentals have deteriorated. That's why I'm not touching my positions. I feel uncomfortable, yes, feeling comfortable in this environment would be wrong, but there's a difference between discomfort and being wrong. That's actually the hardest part of holding positions right now.

But on the Iran issue, let me say this: for me, it's not just a market variable. The Strait of Hormuz carries 20 million barrels a day, and when it's actually closed, it's not just the price of oil that's affected. Fertilizer costs increase, shipping insurance skyrockets, and the food chain is under pressure. And all of this could last for months. But I also know that Trump needs populist rhetoric as soon as possible for the elections. The military side of the war ends at some point, but the disruption to energy infrastructure doesn't heal so quickly. The IEA didn't underestimate this, and neither do I. That's why I think the energy theme, especially nuclear energy, will gain importance ($OKLO, $CEG, $LEU, $CCJ).

As for artificial intelligence, this is where I think about it the most and where it's talked about the least. You look at the official data, and for now, there's no doomsday scenario. Job loss directly linked to AI is currently a very small fraction of total employment. But when you look behind this data, you see something different. People in their 20s who work or are trying to work in knowledge-intensive jobs are under serious pressure. New graduates can't find jobs. The gaps aren't being filled. This is happening quietly, without a dramatic collapse. Amazon Meta is a prime example; they quietly laid off employees, and two days later we all forgot about it. The system is simply slowly transforming.

We can see this in other companies too, the list goes on and on with $XYZ $PYPL. In some sectors, hiring has completely stopped, while in others, the same job is being done with fewer people. Whether this is a reflection of increased productivity or a permanent contraction of the employment base is difficult to distinguish right now. But this distinction will become clearer over time, and when that clarity arrives, markets will price it in very quickly. I also know that people, unlike in our country, reflect their feelings at the ballot box. The macro picture might tell you the economy is doing well, but that information doesn't reach a 26-year-old unemployed. When that person goes to the ballot box, they vote based on their own reality. And 63% of American workers believe that artificial intelligence is reducing job opportunities. This isn't just a poll figure; it's partly a snapshot of voter psychology. This brings me to the elections.

The 2026 midterm elections are approaching, and the current situation presents a very difficult challenge for Trump. Gas prices are high, youth unemployment is rising, and mortgage interest rates are plummeting. And the fruits of economic growth aren't reaching the lower classes; real wage growth is strong in high-income households and minimal in low-income households, according to research. This is a gap unseen in this country for years. When the distance between the narrative of "the economy is growing" and people's daily lives is so wide, that narrative doesn't win votes. History has shown this time and again. Voters aren't looking at the average; they're looking at their own pockets and their own kitchens.

On top of that, the AI ​​narrative is being added. The story of "AI eliminated my job" or "I can't find a job because of AI" will be heard much louder in the coming months. Whichever side embraces this narrative better, whichever side's discourse it fits more organically, will benefit from it. And right now, it's not that difficult to predict where this narrative is going.

As for the Warsh issue, this is the most complex and least discussed aspect for me. He takes office in May. He has a clear doctrine called "Sound Money": a tight balance sheet, currency stability, and a cold distance from speculative expansion. Theoretically, it makes sense. Scott Bessent, who spent 15 years with Druckenmiller and knows the markets from the inside, is the same. I understand the logic behind Trump choosing him, actually. But the picture he will face in practice is a bit difficult. If he lowers interest rates, he will open himself to inflation fueled by the energy shock. If he doesn't, growth slows, unemployment increases, and political pressure intensifies. Moreover, Warsh's central thesis is that AI will increase productivity so rapidly that growth can be achieved without creating inflation. I think he can do this with Scott Bessent and Lutnick, provided the environment has softened by then. The Iran shock shook his theoretical foundation. From the moment he takes office, he may face a self-contradictory conjuncture. This is a very rare and challenging starting point.

The markets are not currently pricing in many interest rate cuts in the next year. Long-term interest rates are rising, and there's a feeling that the curve is steepening. This is a reality that directly affects my portfolio. Holding positions in companies with future-oriented valuations and little profit today is more costly in this environment. Therefore, I understand those who focus on quality, strong free cash flow generating, and clean debt structures, but the index can't go very far without Mag-7 and the technology sector. That's why I'm sticking with technology. I'm a long-term technology investor and I don't really believe in the power of compound interest.

Am I wrong? Maybe. It's not easy to speak definitively in this environment, and I don't trust those who do. To be honest, nobody really knows right now. Those who claim to know are either looking at a very short time frame or speaking with very selective data. What I do know is this: these kinds of periods, where everything seems to come at once, are overcome with clarity, not panic. You need to focus on the fundamentals, not the noise. Believe in your position, but not blindly; constantly question, read, and update.

The information, comments and recommendations contained herein are not within the scope of investment consultancy. Investment consultancy services are provided within the framework of the investment consultancy agreement to be signed between brokerage firms, portfolio management companies, banks that do not accept deposits and customers. The comments in this article are only my personal comments and these comments may not be appropriate for your financial situation and risk return. For this reason, investments should not be made based on the information and comments in my articles.