 Hello and welcome to our guest session where we've got Mike Singleton who's tuning in from the States, he's going to tell us a little bit more about himself and his background. But Mike is a senior analyst in Victus Research and I've seen quite a few of his videos now and I think they're think they're awesome they really break down and deconstructs what can be quite a complex macro environment particularly given how pretty ferocious 2022 has been into something a little bit more digestible and also practical if you're a student trying to consume this data and information and use into something more kind of investment strategy wise so I'll hand over to Mike and he's going to walk us through a kind of slide pack how you know his investing philosophy of his process and how he makes sense of it so Mike welcome and over to you. Alright, thank you for having me Anthony. By way of introduction. My name is Mike Singleton I'm the founder and senior analyst at Invictus Research. And as a quick summary, our goal Invictus is just to provide research on the business cycle to keep it really simple and deliver it through short easy to watch videos. Sort of like the business section of the newspaper but from the perspective of a global macro investor rather than a journalist. Before starting Invictus. Let me go to the intro slide. I was working at a private investment firm called Broadrun Investment Management. I was the senior most analyst on the investment team there. It was a wonderful experience I had the chance to lead about $100 million worth of investments over my time there. Prior to that I worked briefly to your price and main street capital, and on the right there is a picture of my lovely wife Mimi and I on our wedding day and not picture it is our son john who was born about a month ago. So let's take a step back. Most investors, particularly as it relates to macroeconomics in the business cycle are really all over the place we're living through a very interesting time in financial markets, pretty much everyone has access to unlimited data. One might say we're all drowning in data retail and professional investors alike. And our view at Invictus information really has very little edge by itself. We have access to the same data that I have hedge funds have access to that same data. So, if there's no informational edge. Where does the edge why the edges and how you analyze it. And believe me there's a lot of misunderstanding when it comes to macro probably more than any other discipline within finance. So, what do you what what you need, when you have a, you know, an excessive information like this what you need is the right frameworks for putting it on to context you need mental models as Charlie Munger might say. So what is a mental model. It's an analytical framework for understanding reality. Good mental models describe reality well poor mental models describe reality poorly. If you don't have mental models and investing or in life, you will tend to just be overwhelmed by all of the data that life throws at you. The various religions are sort of like mental models, political parties provide mental models, again mental models are just ways of putting the data that we encounter in everyday life into context and making sense of it all. And like I said earlier, mental models are good if they describe the world accurately and they're bad if they don't, and a large part of your journey as an investor is figuring out which mental models are the right ones to make central to your process. One of the frameworks one of the mental models that's most central to our process and dictates is our growth and inflation framework. Well, it says that growth and inflation are the two primary variables that drive the returns of the liquid asset markets so stocks, bonds, commodities and currencies, and nothing else really matters everything else is either a noise or be an input into our growth and inflation outlook, almost every analysis we do at Invictus, whether it's looking at the employment situation or the credit cycle or we're doing some type of market analysis. It's always with the end goal of trying to get a better grasp on the growth and inflation outlook. Anytime you were presented with new information anytime anyone any any analyst of the business cycle is presented with new information and you don't know what to do with it. Pretty, pretty good first step is to think about how it might change your outlook for growth and inflation. Okay, so growth and inflation drive the asset markets. But there's more to the story. You can't, you can't just, you know, look at them willy nilly you have to have the right method of interpretation so we look at growth and inflation in a very specific way. We look at the year over year rate of change so this year versus the same time last year. The absolute level is really less important than the rate of change. In other words we care less about growth or inflation being higher low, we care more about it getting better or worse. And this is sort of logical right. It doesn't really matter to the markets of growth is high in absolute terms if growth is about to crash, you know stocks will do poorly. Likewise if growth is very low in absolute terms but it's in the process of bottoming, then stocks are very likely to do well. At this point, I think if you're new to macro hopefully you're breathing a sigh of relief, because it has a discipline macro has a reputation for being very complicated but you know, now you really only need to worry about two things. I think it's even better than that because forecasting growth and inflation. Well, stop take a step back not forecasting but growth and inflation are not random they're not unpredictable. They are cyclical, right. And they move in trends. So if you want proof of that, we will go to the next slide. Here we're looking at the growth and inflation cycles going back to the 1950s, and you can see that they look like a sine curve. If you remember from trigonometry, they trend and then peak trend and then trough trend and then peak over and over and over again. Growth and inflation are both cyclical and together the real that's real growth on the top, not nominal growth I guess I should clarify. Together, the real growth cycle and the inflation cycle form what we at Invictus call the business cycle. So, if you're an astute listener, you might have realized that because growth and inflation can only go up or down. This creates the possibility of four distinct economic regimes, each of which represents a distinct phase in the business cycle. You've got early recovery where growth is accelerating but inflation is still going down reflation where growth and inflation are going up together stagflation where growth is going down but inflation is going up and deflation, which is when they are both going down together. So these two regimes early recovery and reflation are broadly risk on and the bottom two stagflation and deflation are broadly risk off risk, risk off risk on. You could think of them as being good for risk assets and bad for risk assets it's just sort of the parlance. We'll talk more about these regimes later but before we do that we're going to spend a couple of minutes talking about the growth cycle in the US and what the implications are. On this slide we're looking at the Institute for supply and management's manufacturing PMI PMI stands for purchasing managers index. So what is this. Why do we care about it. Why are we showing it to you. Invictus we think the ISM manufacturing PMI is one of the best cheat codes in macro, and yet so many investors still ignore it for some reason. It's a diffusion index it's something called a diffusion index it's constructed from the survey responses of purchasing managers at manufacturing companies. So, if a lot of you are new to macro that might not have helped at all. So, I'll do my best to simplify it. But this is only a very slight simplification it's not really that complicated purchasing managers are asked in a survey, our business conditions getting better or worse. If they get better than this line goes up, if they say worse than the line goes down. That's it. It's pretty much that simple. The PMI is index to 50 so above 50 means positive manufacturing growth, and below 50 means negative manufacturing growth. Although keep in mind, we're still more interested in the rate of change here than the absolute level. So, the PMI is just another way to measure growth, that's how we use it Invictus, we like it because it's high frequency, meaning it's reported monthly rather than say quarterly for GDP. It's a measure of manufacturing growth, manufacturing is very very cyclical relative to services, it's very sensitive to economic conditions and so it tends to lead other measures of broader growth, like say GDP. In any case, the important takeaway from this slide is simply that the ISM manufacturing PMI measures economic growth, it's a way of tracking the growth cycle. If you want evidence that it tracks growth and you don't believe me. You can see the PMI here next to the year of your rate of change in GDP. They look very very similar and that should make a lot of sense because they're both reflections of the same underlying growth dynamics in the real economy. Of course GDP is reported quarterly like we just said instead of monthly, and that makes it less useful, despite the fact that GDP essentially gets all the headlines. But that's just in the US right. This is a really interesting chart, I think. We're obviously looking at the PMI again, and we're comparing it to the OECD index for global growth. And you can see that the US growth cycle and the global growth cycle actually track each other shockingly closely in my mind. Why is that? Well, we live in a very globalized world, especially with regards to commerce. I will also add that the US by itself has an enormous impact on the global business cycle. First of all it accounts for about 20% of global output, and it counts for a larger percentage of consumption. The US tends to be a significant consumer of global goods and services. And on top of that, the US currency, the US dollar is the primary global reserve currency. The US business cycle has significant impact on every other country's business cycle. And as a result, the US and the global business cycles are largely synchronized. All right, here's another interesting chart. The PMI against the CRB commodity index, which is essentially like the S&P 500, but it's for commodities. So oil, natural gas, corn, copper, gold, wheat. And you can see there's a fairly close correlation there as well, which should make sense, right? All else equal as growth increases. So does aggregate demand for commodities, think lumber for homes, copper and steel for cars, oil for powering industrial activities, that boost in demand in turn pushes up prices. Anything is just a function of supply and demand and the PMI represents demand. So all else equal, faster growth should mean higher prices for commodities. So in short, just from looking at the ISM manufacturing PMI, you can get really valuable information about the US growth cycle, the global growth cycle, the commodity cycle, and all of this is just from looking at one diffusion index. So that's pretty good, pretty good bang for your buck there. And if you're interested in learning more about this, Raoul Paul actually has a great video covering a lot of this on YouTube if you're interested, it's one of his oldest real vision videos. So that's a good resource. All right, so we've talked about growth and inflation. We've talked about the four economic regimes a little bit, we've talked about the ISM manufacturing PMI, and its implications for the growth cycle in the US and globally. All of this macro stuff so far has been somewhat abstract. And to be honest, it's only useful in so far as it actually helps you make money, that's your, your goal if you're an investor in the asset markets. So, you know, if you're forecasting GDP correctly down to the decimal point, it doesn't necessarily mean you're going to make money, it doesn't matter, unless you know how and why that information drives the asset markets. The good news is that there is a relationship between the financial markets and the real economy and the relationship. Maybe this is counter consensus relationship is fairly straightforward the financial markets are a reflection of the underlying economy. That's the relationship because growth and inflation trend and cycle, so do financial markets, and the financial markets do so, because the economy do so does so. It's also important, just on a high level to understand that each business cycle resembles prior business cycles, not just in terms of growth or inflation going up or down that's that's obviously true but also in terms of the asset markets reactions. Why is that well because similar assets will always react in similar ways to similar economic conditions in aggregate, not, not specifically. Right. So if you want evidence that markets reflect the economy. This next slide should be pretty clear evidence of that on the top is the ISM manufacturing PMI which we just talked about quite a bit. And it's overlaid with the year of year rate of change in the S&P 500. Obviously that's a very close relationship. In my opinion it's a very logical one. But let me give you the right read on it in case it's not perfectly obvious when growth is accelerating when the PMI is moving up stocks tend to do better. And when growth is decelerating going down and the PMI is going down stocks do worse. It really is that simple. Don't overcomplicate it. Economic activity drives trending stock market performance. I think anyone who says stuff like, you know the market is broken price discovery is destroyed the feds ruined the markets. That's not right. And they're probably just suffering from about a bad performance. I don't know anyone who's doing really well that says stuff like that. On the bottom there is the CRB commodity index which we just talked about too. It's a basket of commodities we're looking at the year of year rate of change versus CPI inflation, which by the way is also measured in your every year terms usually, and they look very similar. Well, the price of commodities is certainly an input into inflation so that's part of it. But commodity prices are also the most liquid and economically sensitive constituent of inflation right when there's an economic shock, what typically will react first the cost of your rent, or the market prices of freely trade commodities well, obviously it's a ladder. I would also point out that generally speaking, the markets front run the reported economic data by about three months markets are forward looking. They are, you know what a classic investor would call it discounting mechanism, and that's an extremely important understand the markets take economic information and they price it in in advance. Okay. All right back to the four market regimes we have early recovery reflation stagflation and deflation on this slide. We're showing the back test for the various equity sectors against those four economic regimes. If you just look at the page, I think you'll find it to be extremely common sense. When the market is pricing in better economic conditions, you know, faster growth, healthy inflation and whatnot. You'll see riskier more cyclical exposures tend to outperform stuff like technology and consumer discretionary stocks and financials. Why is that people are the market is discounting people are going to buy new iPhones new cars new houses are going to be taking out loans. Even worse economic conditions. It's the defensive exposures that tend to outperform utilities, health care, consumer staples. And again that should be very logical right. Most people don't stop paying their electric bill or their health insurance premiums, or stop buying toothpaste even if there's a recession. That said, I will give a word of caution on back test because I think everyone in the finance industry has sort of a thing for back tests and anything quantitative. I think there's the sentiment that because something's quantitative attended down by God and that's not true. All back tests are highly sensitive to your back test parameters where you set dates, how you're defining growth, etc. And second, every business cycle is different. So I'll give you an example real estate is generally defensive right, which again should be logical, it should pass the common sense test. Most people and companies really have to be in trouble before they stop paying their rent. But if you looked at 2007 eight nine, that was a risk off market but real estate underperform the broader market. Doesn't that contradict the back tests. Yeah, it does but of course, if you remember or if you've seen the big short, there was a real estate crisis going on. So if you just bought real estate stocks in 2007 because the back test said that they were defensive, you know you would have gotten your clock clean. The best way to view these back tests is that they are just guidelines. They are for setting expectations. They're not for predicting the future. This next slide we're looking at the same economic regimes but instead of looking at equity sectors we're looking at style factors. What's a style factor, it's just a way of grouping together stocks that have similar characteristics, and therefore, usually to some extent trade together as a group. Small caps versus large caps high beta low beta defenses versus cyclicals and so on and so forth. Again this slide should make a lot of sense intuitively the top half of that square is risk on early recovery and reflation when growth is accelerating that's risk on. So, in those regimes you should be seeing riskier exposures outperform small caps cyclical high beta high leverage low liquidity etc. On the bottom, you have the to risk off regime so you should see largely the opposite large caps outperform low leverage high liquidity. And also, another high level comment if you see a back test that doesn't make any sense economically or intuitively, it's probably not a great back test common sense is a very important skill when interpreting a back test. Next slide is just another way of visualizing those same back test on the prior two slides. Two things I want to point out here in particular, because they might be a little bit surprising right now with inflation where it is. In developed markets, so think largely the US and Europe risk appetite, liquidity, strong performance from risk assets are all pro cyclical with growth and inflation draw down risk moves left on this chart draw down risk increases is growth inflation slow together. And there are a variety of explanations for this which we can maybe touch on later but on a high level the reason is that developed markets are rife with naturally deflationary forces so over the last 40 years or so when inflation has kicked up it's been largely benign, and at least relative to pre 1980. So deflationary forces have been deflationary shocks have really been the larger risk to the markets, since around 1980 versus inflationary ones. Right, so, at this point I have to apologize because I've lied or at least been a little bit misleading earlier I said growth and inflation or all that matter. And there's a sense in which that's true if I really wanted to you know, stretch the truth a little bit. But there's one more thing that we really need to get a handle on and that's monetary policy set by the Federal Reserve. The reason we talk about this last after growth and inflation is twofold. First, growth and inflation are primary that's really really important to understand. They drive the majority of price action across the global asset markets. And second, growth and inflation. Largely drive central bank decision making. Nevertheless, it's still important to talk about this separately, I think. Luckily understanding monetary conditions is much easier than most people make it out to be particularly if you're equity focused. So first, what do we mean by monetary conditions. Invictus we define it as the impact that the Federal Reserve has on liquidity through the financial markets. We call it inorganic liquidity because it's the result of an exogenous force not free market behavior. In terms of stocks all you really need to know is at the bottom of the page there the bottom left. Tighter policy means higher discount rates for discounted cash flows, lower asset valuations think the price to earnings ratio in the case of stocks. Easier policy means the opposite, lower discount rates and higher asset valuations. And this is all else equal right obviously there's never just one factor affecting stocks. The best way in our view to measure monetary conditions is through real time market indicators like the dollar relative to other currencies. This mortgage spreads above and beyond the risk free rate. The relative performance of growth equities real rates yield curvature. You can also look at some reported data, like the Fed funds rate or the Fed's balance sheet, but you have to understand that those data sets will always always always lag the market. If you want to see how monetary conditions interact with different equity risk exposures, as in, as in a back test, check out the right side of the screen there. I'll just summarize it quickly. Easier policy, lower discount rates disproportionately help high growth, high valuation, riskier exposures. Of course the flip side to that is when liquidity is taken away, they tend to crash, which is what you're seeing in certain parts of the stock market right now. And that brings us to another important part of our process. What we call confirmation from the asset markets. So it's one thing to understand the economic data and build a model. And we certainly do a fair amount of that Invictus. But there's a second part to a process. And this is actually the more important part. We have our fundamental view from our bottom up work you know growth or inflation will go this way or that. But you will not invest on that until the asset markets are confirming it. We want validation from the asset markets before we start underwriting new investments with real capital. Why, why is that well it's because human beings, including us at Invictus might forecast the business cycle incorrectly, but the asset markets as a whole will never forecast the business cycle incorrectly never. I pretty much guarantee it. Moreover, as we mentioned earlier, the asset markets will actually front run the economic data every time with virtually no exceptions. So you'll give yourself a huge edge in terms of forecasting, and more importantly portfolio management by studying the bond market stock market, the commodity market the forex market and learning what they have to tell you about growth and inflation. So, here's some quick evidence of what we're talking about. On the top there we've got a ratio of small cap stocks to large cap stocks. In the middle we have spot price of copper versus the spot price of gold. And at the bottom we have the US tenure yield. And a lot of people have never seen a chart like this before but they're surprised to see that they have a very similar profile over time. The reason is that they're all trading on the same underlying macro dynamics, more or less, namely growth, all three of these indicators, largely change trade on the rate of change of economic growth. So, if we were to do sort of a thought experiment here, if we believe based on our fundamental outlook that growth was going to accelerate, we would like to see all three of these indicators going up confirming faster growth. And over the last year or so, we've actually seen a historic divergence in these charts right you can see usually they move together right now they're kind of moving in opposite directions it sort of looks like a Neapolitan ice cream carton. But we can talk about that later if you want, maybe a conversation for another time. There's evidence that studying the markets will refine your forecasting, and more importantly, help you make that better investment decisions and look no further than Stan Druckenmiller, probably the most successful hedge fund manager of all time, famously compounded his clients capital at 30% per year for 30 years with no down years and I think it's maybe like one or two down quarters, possibly making him the best hedge fund manager of all time and who knows if anyone will ever recreate a track record like that. But Stan says by far the best economic predictor I've ever met is the inside of the stock market. I don't mean the stock market I mean the inside of the stock market. What does that mean in practical terms, well basically means what we just talked about. He has his own expectations for growth and inflation but he respects what the market is telling him. You know he respects things like the copper gold ratio small cap large cap ratio performance of cyclical stocks versus defensive ones. He wants validation from the markets before investing if you've ever listened to Stan talk, you know on YouTube or whatever. You know how seriously he takes market internals. All right, one last mental model before we wrap it up. But first we need to answer a question question that we haven't addressed explicitly. And that's on the topic of time horizon. So over what time horizon is the market are the markets and accurate reflection of underlying economic activity. To use around number at Invictus we say about a month, although obviously, you know that's not a rule, it's just sort of a principle. But generally speaking, any market move longer than a month is a reflection of some economic development the most important of which is always growth. Another way of saying that the growth cycle drives trending performance in the asset markets, and probably always will. What about the shorter term moves. What about seemingly random noise in the markets. Well, a lot of it is noise doesn't mean anything, but we associate a lot of that noise to positioning sentiment and psychology. So the mental model here is trending moves are driven by economic fundamentals and short term moves are driven largely by positioning sentiment psychology. And the good news is that analyzing sentiment positioning data is fairly straightforward and principle, although it's more challenging in practice. The reason it's straightforward and principle is because it tends to be mean reverting positioning tends to oscillate from bullish to bearish and in a perfect world, we're going to be adding exposure and everyone is bearish and reducing when everyone is bullish. And obviously the reason we would want to do that is better returns when positioning is really stretched in one direction, even small counter consensus surprises can cause big moves in price. And we have it in the quote there but think of it like a rubber band. The further it's stretched the more violently it'll snap back on a catalyst and victims we use a number of sources to evaluate positioning and sentiment including investor surveys flow funds data from the Fed, which is longer term data. The weekly commitment of traders report from the CFTC, and we also look at a lot of options data. So, that's the overview of the Invictus process. I don't know if Anthony has any questions I'm happy to answer them or whatever you want to do next. Yeah, let me. I do have a couple of questions I was noting down and as you can see on the screen as we as we go there's definitely some good resources that the mic has so you should definitely check those out if you've enjoyed the break down a couple of things I guess one, just to give the kind of further context to the listeners is what what is your daily, because they're thinking about careers as well so I'm trying to tie in that element. What does a typical day look like for you then because if you're eliminating out, let's say the kind of blast them and kind of all the headlines that are coming out every single day. Are you follow how much is it following tracking say single items of major news flow like a central bank speaker saying X or a company stock coming out with an earnings report of why, or to then looking at data and just looking at the growth and various different or looking at the other types of information that you said with market internals. What's a typical day in your life look like from your analysts perspective. That's a great question and it's funny I think that a lot of investors really like Warren Buffett right and Warren Buffett famously says he spends all of his day reading. He says he subscribes to you know eight different newspapers and so I think that within the industry there's this thing that everyone wants to read newspapers and be on top of the news and I think there's the perception that there's some edge from that. I think I really admire Warren Buffett and I've read all of his letters. I don't think his edge actually comes from reading the newspaper. And I, at least personally, I sort of separate my professional work and analysis and reading the news I consider that more entertainment. And there's a few reasons for that. One is that the news is written by journalists and journalists tend to be backward looking just because the nature of their profession is backward looking right I report on something that's just happened. You can't report on the future. But the markets are discounting mechanisms like we mentioned earlier. And so the world view that an investor has is just very different from a journalist. And so that's part of the value out of Invictus is, you know, we're looking at the world the way an investor looks at the world, not the way a journalist looks at the world and maybe that seems like a fine distinction. But as an investor where you get your information is really important, because in subtle ways it can affect how you think. In terms of what we actually spend our time looking at, almost all of our, you know, information is taken from, you know, basically column government reports the be a the various Federal Reserve surveys in the markets. So that's where we get information that we use for making investment decisions. And, you know, I like staying on top of what he wants doing with Twitter to, but it's just not it's not a part of the decision making process. Okay, cool. And then the other thing was one of the slides I saw when you're explaining about the risk on risk off and it had the spectrum between the different assets and where they would sit on the most extreme in terms of, I guess, risk appetite was crypto. Now, crypto is an asset. What's your views there in terms of where we're at at the moment, and then from the clients that you talk to, to the analysis and correlations that you see with more traditional assets. If any. Yeah, that's a good question. So I think the most important thing to understand is that crypto is a risk asset that trades with financial condition very closely with financial conditions. So I'll try and break this down in a way that makes sense. There's two there's two constituent parts to financial conditions, excuse me. Not used to talking this much. There's two constituent parts to financial conditions there's economic conditions and there's monetary conditions right. So, and they're the two inputs into liquidity. So liquidity gets better when economic conditions improved, which should make sense right. If the economy, I think the economy is going to do better I'm more likely to transact with you Anthony. And then the second constituent to liquidity is the inorganic liquidity that we talked about earlier. That's basically the Fed, right so Bitcoin does better and risk on regimes where economic conditions are improving people are feeling good. You know they're buying a car they're investing in all coins they're getting stimulus checks whatever. Crypto is also, you know, an asset with zero cash flows which sort of de facto makes it a very long duration asset. So it's very sensitive to the discount rate. So when the Fed is raising rates. That's really bad for crypto, and when it's, you know, easing monetary policy reducing rates, particularly real rates crypto can see very very well. Right now we're outlook on crypto Bitcoin Ethereum, you know the altcoin complex is bearish and the reason is the Fed is explicitly saying it wants to take the wind out of risk assets. And there's only one institution in the world that has the credibility to say something like that and it's the Fed. So, if they're promising us they're going to do it, we believe them, and we have some precedent for this right. So if you look at real rates and a chart of the price of Bitcoin, they look fairly inverse. And if you look at the last hiking cycle the last policy cycle which ended in 2018, you can see that real right as real rates went up. Bitcoin crashed. The Fed is saying it wants to do the exact same thing it wants to take rates above neutral. And I will say I'm impressed with how well Bitcoin and crypto generally has held up I would have thought it would be down a lot more. It's still down a lot I think that's probably important to keep in perspective but as long as the Fed is saying, we want to tighten we want to bring rates up we want to bring real rates up, we want to take the wind out of risk assets build Dudley saying you know stocks need to feel more pain. I wouldn't touch crypto. I'd be looking for tactical opportunities to add, you know short exposure. And then the final one was where you had the, well I thought was really excellent breakup with the four regimes. Where do you see where we're at and right now in the regimes and I know it's, you were talking about a month to kind of let things and realize and so forth and a bit of time for that to see through but how do you see where we're at in the context of right now and that transition but then also with what the market is kind of aware of with where we're heading with the soon to be tightening of policy and the subsequent impact that we could have then the second half of the year. That's a really good question. So, I think it's very others. If you, I'll refer to the framework we use in our last monthly market outlook, there are three parts to our thesis right now. One, we expect growth to continue declining it's already declining we expect that to continue the asset markets are clearly pricing that in. So we don't really have validation to decline in the coming months. Obviously that has not happened yet. We think April, the April print is very likely the first decline in your every year rate of change terms. I'll add the asset markets aren't totally pricing that in yet right inflationary exposures are still doing quite well. So we don't really have validation from the asset markets on that part of the thesis so we're not short inflationary exposures yet. We don't have trends we don't short strong momentum. Our back test tell us that's a horrible idea. So we don't do it. And I've certainly lost money betting against those things in the past. And then the third thing is tightening financial conditions, which is like we just said the fed saying it's going to tighten it's happening you'll curves are inverting rates are moving up or have been moving up across the curve. You saw, you know, the Dixie dollar index is moving higher mortgage rates are spiking clearly financial conditions are tightening. Eventually that's going to break something. That's sort of the history of, you know, central bank policy making in the Western world. And when that happens that that will happen through crushing demand so that'll push growth down further, and it'll also reduce inflation. So that's around the corner at some point in terms of what it actually happens. So we're watching closely, but in I could and I could guess it's going to happen in the next couple months, but really part of being a good investor is, you know, keeping an eye on things and changing your mind when information changes and right now, you know the market is still saying stagflation. We expect faster inflation slower growth tightening policy, we expect that to transition into deflation but we leave it to the market to tell us exactly when that is. Cool. All right, we'll let on on that will look to wrap up the session Mike. Thank you very much for giving up some time to to share your thoughts and share your process. I'll share in the description of this video, all the links to Invictus and to Mike so feel free to connect with him through those means and Mike thank you again from the community and catch up with you soon. My pleasure Anthony thank you for having me.