To The Moon

Tariffs are back in the headlines, and the market is front-running them hard. But this isn’t your typical inflation-driven selloff. It’s something deeper -- a psychological unwinding that’s triggering forced risk reduction across sectors, particularly in $Invesco QQQ(QQQ)$ & $VanEck Semiconductor ETF(SMH)$ . What we’re seeing now is a market reacting not to actual deterioration in fundamentals -- but to the idea of uncertainty being introduced into an already fragile macro narrative.

The issue isn’t inflation, it's confidence. The fear around April 2 isn’t based on what has happened -- it's based on what might happen if new, unexpected structural policies are introduced. Businesses are already pricing in worst-case scenarios: blanket tariffs, retaliatory trade measures, and even further deterioration in U.S.-China relations. That fear is bleeding into every earnings model and forward-looking forecast. Enterprises don’t invest aggressively when they can’t predict their input costs. Consumers don’t spend as freely when headlines suggest their everyday goods are about to get 10-20% more expensive. And markets don’t bottom when the narrative is still deteriorating.

But here’s where it gets interesting: unless April 2 brings an actual negative structural surprise, we’ve likely seen the near-term bottom. Why? Because the pain is being priced in before the damage actually occurs -- and that’s exactly the kind of setup that historically resolves with an upside reversal once the event passes and doesn’t live up to the hype.

What makes this moment unique is that the selloff isn’t driven by traditional macro deterioration. It’s not about labor markets breaking or inflation surging unexpectedly. Instead, it’s about a policy overhang that introduces forecasting risk -- and that is precisely what markets hate the most. The psychological impact is real: CFOs and CEOs are pausing capex decisions, freezing hiring, and lowering guidance not because the business is falling apart, but because the range of possible outcomes is too wide to plan around. For companies selling advertising, cloud services, or enterprise software -- that uncertainty hits doubly hard. These are businesses priced on forward-looking growth, and when clients delay spending decisions, it shows up as slower bookings, lower utilization, and weaker visibility -- even if the long-term story remains intact.

This is what we’re seeing with high-multiple names across SaaS, semis, and adtech. They’re being punished not for poor execution, but for operating in a narrative vacuum. And when narrative breaks, it doesn’t matter how strong your last quarter was. Guidance becomes the new currency. Confidence in execution becomes the only thing that matters. And any company that can show stability in Q1 earnings -- even modest beats with reaffirmed guidance -- could see multiple expansion simply for demonstrating control in chaos.

That’s why this upcoming earnings season is so pivotal. The bar is low -- but the stakes are high. If we see a few key players in semiconductors, software, and consumer platforms guide in line or better -- not even strong, just intact -- that could trigger a sharp reversal, particularly in the oversold innovation names. Because right now, the market isn’t fighting inflation -- it’s fighting fear. And once that fear subsides, capital comes rushing back into the names that were discounted purely because of narrative, not because of a broken business model.

In the meantime, what we’re experiencing is a repricing of risk -- not just in valuations, but in corporate behavior. Companies are bracing for a world where policy risk becomes a constant variable. They’re recalibrating their supply chains, reassessing pricing power, and looking for ways to diversify away from tariff exposure. But here’s the twist: many of these companies are better positioned for that world than the market realizes. U.S.-centric manufacturers are gaining leverage. Vertical integration is back in vogue. Even some tech names are seeing margin benefit from accelerated AI adoption that lowers their reliance on human capital. The companies that thrive from here won’t be the ones chasing short-term macro relief -- they’ll be the ones building around structural tailwinds.

This is the kind of environment that creates long-term winners -- and the market is setting up for that realization. As panic-selling abates and reality sets in that the worst-case may already be priced in, dry powder starts to move. Investors who have stayed patient through the volatility -- who didn’t chase highs but instead waited for dislocation -- are beginning to see generational pricing in secular growth names. Not just names that "might" recover, but names that should re-rate as their execution stories decouple from the broader macro drag.

Because at the end of the day, markets are driven by earnings and sentiment. And when the two diverge -- when companies keep delivering but the market doesn’t believe them -- it creates a spread. A spread that can be closed quickly, violently, and without warning once confidence returns. That’s what I believe we’re walking into.

So while the headlines scream uncertainty, and April 2 looms as some pseudo doomsday, I’m positioning with the view that the risk is already priced. Unless we get something truly new -- not just noise, but a structural negative change -- we’re likely seeing a local bottom that sets the stage for earnings to reset the tone.

Because this isn’t about timing tops or bottoms. It’s about recognizing when price no longer reflects reality -- and when fear has become the driving force in a market that’s forgetting just how quickly narratives can flip.

Worry about the market? Just join us!