Gold and silver Possibly a buying opportunity, but not an aggressive one. The selloff was driven more by forced liquidations than weakening fundamentals. Gold’s structural support remains intact, though near-term volatility is likely. Gradual accumulation is preferable. Silver remains higher risk due to speculation. Big Tech in February Selective trimming makes sense. Underperformance points to leadership fatigue, not a broken AI story. Reducing crowded, fully valued names helps manage concentration risk while keeping core exposure. January Barometer for 2026 Supportive, but not decisive. Policy uncertainty and cross-asset volatility suggest a choppy Q1. A pullback would not rule out a constructive 2026. January earnings Solid but uneven. Guidance mattered more than beats. Markets reward

A thoughtful set of questions. January rarely tells a simple story this year. 1. Is the Gold and Silver selloff a “Golden Pit”? Possibly, but selectively and with discipline. The drawdown had all the hallmarks of forced liquidation rather than a fundamental breakdown. Structural drivers for gold remain intact, including central bank demand, geopolitical hedging and longer-term policy uncertainty. That said, after such extreme volatility, a period of consolidation would be healthy. Gradual accumulation on weakness looks more prudent than aggressive dip-buying, especially for silver, which remains far more speculative. 2. Trimming Big Tech in February? Not a wholesale exit, but some rebalancing makes sense. Big Tech is no longer uniformly cheap, and leadership has narrowed. Trimming stretche

Market Context and Recent Price Action Recent sharp sell-offs in gold and silver were among the most extreme in decades, reflecting forced liquidations, extreme leverage unwinding, and technical stresses rather than outright changes in fundamentals. Silver, in particular, saw outsized moves driven by speculative positioning in China and subsequent margin calls. Both metals then staged a strong intraday rebound, with spot gold back above $4 800 and silver reclaiming around the $83 mark.  Short-term price spikes and reversals of this magnitude often occur when markets have been stretched beyond typical trading ranges. These reversals can be driven as much by trading dynamics (positions getting flushed) as by investor sentiment.  --- Is This a Renewed Rally? Arguments in favour of a

$Palantir Technologies Inc.(PLTR)$   Earnings and Guidance Highlights Palantir reported Q4 2025 results that significantly beat expectations with revenue of about $1.41 billion (up ~70 per cent year-on-year) and adjusted EPS topping forecasts. The company’s strong performance was driven by both U.S. government and commercial segments.  Management issued upbeat guidance for 2026, forecasting full-year revenue of approximately $7.18–7.20 billion (around ~61 per cent growth) and guiding first-quarter revenue ahead of consensus.  After the results the stock rallied meaningfully in after-hours and pre-market trading, reversing some earlier weakness this year.  Drivers of Growth Demand remains very strong from U.S. government an

My call for Friday’s close (post-earnings): $140–$160 is the highest-probability outcome. Why: The market is already pricing a large move. A clean beat on revenue and EPS is likely, but to push above $160, Palantir needs clearly upgraded 2026 guidance and strong commentary on US commercial AI momentum. A “beat but guide inline” outcome usually caps upside. Below $140 only comes into play if guidance disappoints or macro risk-off intensifies. Will Palantir stage a comeback? Yes, but it is more likely a grind, not a vertical move. Fundamentals remain intact and the sell-off looks positioning-driven, not thesis-breaking. Is $200 easy to hit in 2026? No. Possible, but not easy. It requires sustained commercial growth acceleration, expanding margins, and a supportive macro for high-multiple A

Is this short-term deleveraging or a deeper trend shift? Near term: deleveraging. Medium term: narrative stress. The current move has all the hallmarks of a forced unwind rather than a fundamental collapse. ETF outflows, reduced risk appetite, and tighter liquidity conditions are pressuring leveraged positioning. That said, the divergence versus gold is real and matters. Crypto is behaving like a high-beta liquidity asset, not a defensive store of value, which weakens the “digital gold” framing in this phase of the cycle. This does not kill the long-term thesis, but it re-anchors crypto firmly to global liquidity, not safe-haven demand. Are you buying the dip or staying on the sidelines? I would not aggressively buy this first leg down. Historically, sharp crypto drawdowns linked to macro

Would I sell or add at $4,600? I would add selectively, not sell, assuming this is not a forced-liquidity event. A dip of this magnitude after a parabolic move is consistent with position cleansing, not trend failure. The key is position sizing, not conviction. Is the bull market still intact? Yes, structurally. The correction looks like a volatility reset rather than a regime change. Why the bull case still holds Macro floor remains firm: real yields are capped, fiscal deficits persist, and central-bank gold accumulation remains strong. Geopolitical and policy risk premiums have not unwound meaningfully. Demand is diversifying: central banks, long-term allocators, and retail hedgers are all present, not just fast money. What this move likely was A crowded positioning shake-out after extre

$Palantir Technologies Inc.(PLTR)$   1. Why Palantir is down despite strong recent gains Palantir’s share price is weaker in early 2026 with a ~18% drawdown from recent highs and pressure on high-beta tech names at the start of the year. Softness reflects risk-off behaviour in the broader market rather than a fundamental collapse. Palantir has delivered strong performance over the past few years, mirroring classic momentum and AI-driven positioning in software.  Market psychology has been volatile as AI-linked stocks rotate, and some longer-term holders take profits after outsized moves. Price action does not necessarily imply deterioration in Palantir’s core growth trends. 2. Fundamental expectations for Q4 2025 (reported 2 Feb 202

AI Momentum and Google Cloud Growth AI as a reacceleration vector • The prevailing view on Street expectations is that AI, particularly Gemini, has materially lifted investor sentiment and may begin to show through to tangible revenue growth beyond advertising alone. Recent commentary highlights that Gemini integration is expected to aid growth in search advertising by improving user engagement and monetisation.  • Cloud remains the fastest-growing reporting segment for Alphabet, with triple-digit backlog growth noted in prior quarters and forecasted continued acceleration.  • Analysts are specifically watching whether AI enhancements can drive meaningfully faster growth in Google Cloud, not just in headline top-line figures but also in margin expansion and a path to sustained pr

$Palantir Technologies Inc.(PLTR)$   1. Current Context • The stock has pulled back in 2026, down roughly 18% year-to-date, echoing a similar early-year slump in 2024 that preceded a very strong rally.  • Consensus expectations for the Q4 results are for revenue north of ~US$1.34 billion and adjusted EPS around US$0.23, representing high-teens to low-double-digit growth relative to prior periods.  • Valuation remains elevated relative to traditional software peers, with forward multiples reflecting very high expectations.  2. Fundamentals and AI Positioning Bullish structural factors: • The company’s growth has been underpinned by accelerating adoption of its Artificial Intelligence Platform (AIP) by both government and co

What we just saw was not a change in character. It was a stress event. Can gold and silver rebuild momentum? Yes, but not in a straight line. The $400–$500 flush looks like forced deleveraging into thin liquidity rather than a fundamental rejection of the bull case. When one-minute bars move $100, price is being driven by positioning and margin, not macro reassessment. If the US dollar stabilises and real yields stop rising, gold can re-base relatively quickly. Silver will remain the more volatile leg, but that cuts both ways on rebounds. Sell or add? That depends on time horizon and positioning. • Long-term holders: I would not sell into panic. The macro pillars remain intact. • Traders or leveraged exposure: Risk reduction makes sense. Volatility like this usually demands consolidation.

Here is a concise, direct view within the limit. 1. Microsoft at $400? Yes, as a dip-buy. Microsoft sold off on timing concerns, not demand weakness. Azure growth confirms AI traction. $400 is a reasonable accumulation level for long-term investors, though not a short-term bottom call. 2. Can Meta be chased after +10%? No. Meta Platforms is executing well, but post-rally risk-reward is less attractive. Better to wait for consolidation than chase momentum. 3. Apple says memory costs are fine. Why no stock move? Because the market wants growth catalysts, not cost reassurance. Apple is stable, but AI monetisation and services acceleration remain incremental, not transformative yet. 4. Will Tesla deliver in 2026? Unclear, execution-heavy. Tesla still has a compelling narrative, but repeated t

$Microsoft(MSFT)$  Yes, this looks closer to an overreaction than a thesis break, but the entry decision depends on time horizon. What actually disappointed the market The fundamentals were solid. Growth did not slow. The sell-off was driven by expectations, not results. Buy-side positioning had priced in near-flawless AI execution. When management flagged ongoing supply-chain and capacity constraints, the market recalibrated near-term AI monetisation, even though demand remains clearly intact. That distinction matters. Is the AI story impaired? No. Microsoft is demand-constrained, not demand-challenged. Azure’s 38% growth confirms AI workloads are scaling rapidly. The issue is delivery timing. Revenue is being deferred, not lost. That is a v

$Amazon.com(AMZN)$  This is ultimately a capital allocation and timing question, not a demand question. Can AWS absorb a hypothetical US$50B OpenAI-style bet? From an operating standpoint, yes. Amazon generates enough operating cash flow for AWS to sustain heavy investment without existential strain. The issue is free cash flow optics, not balance-sheet survival. A deal of this size would front-load cash outflows while monetisation lags, temporarily compressing FCF and keeping investors focused on capex discipline rather than growth acceleration. However, if structured partly through equity, long-dated commitments, or capacity-sharing agreements, the near-term FCF hit could be softened. AWS’s scale gives it flexibility smaller hyperscalers do

A potential Warsh-style appointment would likely increase volatility before it calms markets, not reduce it. Fed independence risk Kevin Warsh is widely viewed as more hawkish and more openly critical of unconventional monetary policy. Markets would initially interpret his appointment as signalling tighter financial conditions and a lower tolerance for inflation risk. More importantly, the optics matter. Given Donald Trump’s past public pressure on the Federal Reserve, any nominee perceived as politically aligned raises concerns about institutional independence. That perception alone can unsettle both bonds and equities, even before any policy change occurs. Market reaction: calm or chaos? Short term, this would likely heighten uncertainty. Bond yields could rise on fears of tighter policy

The results strongly suggest the storage supercycle is not finished, but the easy phase is likely behind us. Do the beats signal early innings? They confirm that demand is still accelerating, particularly from AI training, inference, and data-centre refresh cycles. What matters more than the headline beat is the forward guide. SanDisk’s Q3 outlook implies demand visibility well beyond a one-quarter burst, while Western Digital’s margin expansion shows pricing power is still improving. This looks less like a peak and more like the mid-cycle acceleration phase, though volatility will rise as expectations reset higher. SanDisk vs Western Digital SanDisk remains the higher-beta, higher-upside play. Its pure exposure to NAND and AI-driven storage demand means earnings revisions can still chase

What we just witnessed was not a breakdown of the gold and silver bull, but a classic volatility purge after a parabolic run. The speed of the move points to forced positioning unwinds rather than a shift in fundamentals. Thin liquidity, leveraged longs being flushed, and investors monetising metal gains to cover losses elsewhere can easily produce air pockets of this size. A firmer dollar accelerated the move, but it does not explain it on its own. Can upside momentum rebuild quickly? Yes, provided price stabilises above key technical zones. For gold, holding the low $5,000s matters. For silver, defending the prior breakout region is critical. If forced selling is largely done, even modest buying can drive sharp rebounds in this liquidity environment. Would I sell or add? I would not chas

Leadership risk at the Federal Reserve matters less for the name chosen and more for the signal markets infer about future policy constraints. A Kevin Warsh–style appointment would likely be read as hawkish-leaning and market-disciplined. In the short term, that could calm inflation-sensitive assets and the long end of the bond curve. However, the relief would be conditional. If investors perceive the chair as politically aligned with Donald Trump, concerns over Fed independence could quickly dominate, especially if public commentary begins to pressure policy decisions. Markets tolerate hawks; they do not tolerate uncertainty about institutional credibility. In other words, Warsh could stabilise rates expectations while simultaneously increasing tail risk around independence. That is not a

The results strongly reinforce the AI-driven storage supercycle thesis, and importantly, they do so on both earnings quality and forward visibility. Are we still early in the supercycle? The numbers suggest yes. SanDisk’s guide implies not just demand strength, but accelerating pricing power and utilisation. That combination is characteristic of early-to-mid cycle behaviour, not late cycle. Capacity discipline across NAND, AI workloads driving higher endurance and performance requirements, and customers locking in forward supply all point to a structurally tighter market than past cycles. This is not a one-quarter squeeze. SanDisk vs Western Digital SanDisk remains the higher-beta, higher-upside expression. It is the purest AI-storage leverage, but also the most vulnerable to sharp pullbac

The volatility looks dramatic, but it does not automatically signal the end of the bull market. What we are likely seeing is a classic late-stage correction within a strong trend, triggered by thin liquidity, margin calls, and cross-asset stress. When metals rise too far, too fast, they become a source of liquidity. Investors sell what is up to fund what is breaking elsewhere. A firmer dollar and crowded positioning simply accelerated the move. Can momentum rebuild quickly? Yes, but not in a straight line. If gold can stabilise above the prior breakout zone around the low-$5,000s and volatility compresses, upside momentum can return. Silver will remain more volatile and usually lags first on the rebound due to its higher speculative component. Sell or add? Into panic selling, I would not c