Market News & Insights
Market News & Insights
AI Stocks Tumble, The Big Case for Tariffs, and Shutdown Makes History
GO Markets
6/11/2025
•
0 min read
Share this post
Copy URL

Artificial intelligence stocks have begun to waver slightly, experiencing a selloff period in the first week of this month. The Nasdaq has fallen approximately 2%, wiping out around $500 billion in market value from top technology companies.

Article content

Palantir Technologies dropped nearly 8% despite beating Wall Street estimates and issuing strong guidance, highlighting growing investor concerns about stretched valuations in the AI sector.

Nvidia shares also fell roughly 4%, while the broader selloff extended to Asian markets, which experienced some of their sharpest declines since April.

Wall Street executives, including Morgan Stanley CEO Ted Pick and Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon, warned of potential 10-20% drawdowns in equity markets over the coming year.

And Michael Burry, famous for predicting the 2008 housing crisis, recently revealed his $1.1 billion bet against both Nvidia and Palantir, further pushing the narrative that the AI rally may be overextended.

As we near 2026, the sentiment around AI is seemingly starting to shift, with investors beginning to seek evidence of tangible returns on the massive investments flowing into AI, rather than simply betting on future potential.

However, despite the recent turbulence, many are simply characterising this pullback as "healthy" profit-taking rather than a fundamental reassessment of AI's value.

Supreme Court Raises Doubts About Trump’s Tariffs

The US Supreme Court heard arguments overnight on the legality of President Donald Trump's "liberation day" tariffs, with judges from both sides of the political spectrum expressing scepticism about the presidential authority being claimed.

Trump has relied on a 1970s-era emergency law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), to impose sweeping tariffs on goods imported into the US.

At the centre of the case are two core questions: whether the IEEPA authorises these sweeping tariffs, and if so, whether Trump’s implementation is constitutional.

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett indicated they may be inclined to strike down or curb the majority of the tariffs, while Justice Brett Kavanaugh questioned why no president before Trump had used this authority.

Prediction markets saw the probability of the court upholding the tariffs drop from 40% to 25% after the hearing.

Article content
Polymarket odds on Supreme Court upholding Trump's tariffs

The US government has collected $151 billion from customs duties in the second half of 2025 alone, a nearly 300% increase over the same period in 2024.

Should the court rule against the tariffs, potential refunds could reach approximately $100 billion.

The court has not indicated a date on which it will issue its final ruling, though the Trump administration has requested an expedited decision.

Shutdown Becomes Longest in US History

The US government shutdown entered its 36th day today, officially becoming the longest in history. It surpasses the previous 35-day record set during Trump's first term from December 2018 to January 2019.

The Senate has failed 14 times to advance spending legislation, falling short of the 60-vote supermajority by five votes in the most recent vote.

So far, approximately 670,000 federal employees have been furloughed, and 730,000 are currently working without pay. Over 1.3 million active-duty military personnel and 750,000 National Guard and reserve personnel are also working unpaid.

Article content

SNAP food stamp benefits ran out of funding on November 1 — something 42 million Americans rely on weekly. However, the Trump administration has committed to partial payments to subsidise the benefits, though delivery could take several weeks.

Flight disruptions have affected 3.2 million passengers, with staffing shortages hitting more than half of the nation's 30 major airports. Nearly 80% of New York's air traffic controllers are absent.

From a market perspective, each week of shutdown reduces GDP by approximately 0.1%. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the total cost of the shutdown will be between $7 billion and $14 billion, with the higher figure assuming an eight-week duration.

Consumer spending could drop by $30 billion if the eight-week duration is reached, according to White House economists, with potential GDP impacts of up to 2 percentage points total.

By
GO Markets

The information provided is of general nature only and does not take into account your personal objectives, financial situations or needs. Before acting on any information provided, you should consider whether the information is suitable for you and your personal circumstances and if necessary, seek appropriate professional advice. All opinions, conclusions, forecasts or recommendations are reasonably held at the time of compilation but are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not an indication of future performance. Go Markets Pty Ltd, ABN 85 081 864 039, AFSL 254963 is a CFD issuer, and trading carries significant risks and is not suitable for everyone. You do not own or have any interest in the rights to the underlying assets. You should consider the appropriateness by reviewing our TMD, FSG, PDS and other CFD legal documents to ensure you understand the risks before you invest in CFDs. These documents are available here.
‍
Any references to Australian or international shares, sectors, indices, ETFs, crypto-related stocks or other instruments are provided for market commentary and watchlist purposes only and do not constitute a recommendation, offer or solicitation to buy, sell or hold any financial product or adopt any investment strategy. International markets may involve additional risks, including currency fluctuations, regulatory differences, market structure differences, reduced liquidity and higher volatility. Company-specific, sector-specific and macroeconomic risks may also affect performance.

Commentary on geopolitical developments, economic data, central bank decisions, earnings, policy changes and other global or financial market events is based on information available at the time of publication and may change without notice. Such events can lead to sudden market moves, price gaps, reduced liquidity, wider spreads and increased volatility, particularly in leveraged products such as CFDs. Forward-looking statements, expectations and scenario analysis are inherently uncertain and should not be relied on as guarantees of future market behaviour or outcomes.

Related Articles

Market insights
Trading strategies
Shares and Indices
Fundamental analysis
Forex
The tariff impact: The US margin problem vs Asia’s volume problem
Tariffs do not hit every company the same way. For US retailers and consumer brands, the first pressure point is usually margin.
GO Markets
•
May 25, 2026
Central Banks
Market insights
Forex
CFDs
Shares and Indices
Federal Budget 2026-27: What traders should watch
Tuesday, 12 May 2026, at roughly 7:30 pm AEST, Treasurer Jim Chalmers will stand up in Canberra and deliver the 2026-27 Federal Budget. According to Budget.gov.au, that is when the Budget is officially released, with the Budget papers going live online at the same time.
GO Markets
•
May 10, 2026
Central Banks
Geopolitical events
Market insights
5月份美国市场驱动力：消费者价格指数、就业人数和石油冲击
GO Markets
•
April 28, 2026
See all News & Insights

Recent Articles

每日财经快讯
美伊爆出重大利好，油价重挫，风险偏好飙升！

周末特朗普宣布与伊朗达成停战谅解备忘录，风险资产用脚投票押注战争全面结束。

 

停战备忘录具体的内容

根据媒体的报道来看美伊的和平谅解备忘录包含几个市场重点关注的内容，其中双方在霍尔木兹的开放上面达成了一致，伊朗将对水雷进行免费清理允许海运油轮，使得船只通行在一个月内恢复到站前水准，而美国将会接触对伊朗港口实施的海军封锁撤出相关水域，并且承诺解冻伊朗海外250亿美元的资产，停火协议延长60天。

 

给全球金融市场带来的影响

从备忘录内容中不难发现，所谓协议调节谈了这么久全球金融市场真正紧盯的部分并非是局部地区的战火民生或者主权保障等问题，市场真正在意的还是航道因素带来的能源短缺和价格飙升，而备忘录当中对于恢复航运和能源供应的措辞让周一开盘的市场出现了一边倒的迹象，油价暴力下挫的同时，金银及股指期货都获得了极强的上涨动力，纷纷跳空高开，高开高走。

 

措辞的差异

·     美伊双方虽然协定了开放霍尔木兹海峡但是在具体实施上双方并没有达成一致措辞，美国反馈海峡的行驶和通航是完全开放且不收费的，但是伊朗官方媒体坚持表态海峡管理权由伊朗决定，并非完全意义的自由通行，所有船只依然接受伊朗的管理，在是否免费方面也由伊朗方面进行裁决

 

·     美国觉得本轮谈判核问题是让位于海峡生命线通航，但是在60天停火协议结束后依然保持伊朗交出浓缩铀的底线，而伊朗的反馈则是将核问题分开进行谈判，本轮谈判的所有筹码不包含核问题，核问题还将与美国进行新一轮的磋商

 

·     华盛顿对于从伊朗撤军这一问题上表示不会再伊朗履约之前解除封锁，而伊朗的的表态则全程围绕美军解除封锁再行清理水雷。

 

·     双方叙事上看伊朗将其总结为通过能源命脉封锁逼迫美国退让捍卫主权的胜利，而美国则宣传为通过武力施压迫使伊朗放弃核发展的战略性胜利。

 

各方的反应

对于全球依赖霍尔木兹海峡能源供应的国家如欧洲和日韩等国对于本次备忘录的达成自然是欢欣鼓舞，因为长期以来能源价格不仅威胁了这些国家的经济发展也对政治生态造成了极大的压力。而巴基斯坦和卡塔尔在本次斡旋中居功至伟，其所攫取的战略利益不局限于经济利益更兼政治利益的极大反馈。

美伊双方则是通过大赢特赢在宣传本次备忘录带来的赫赫战果。

唯一对这件事表达不满的则集中在以色列一侧，以色列对于是否能完全摧毁伊朗的核武器计划拥有非常执着的信念，其官方表态和总理表态上都是对该条件赋予底线般的定义，认为伊朗会利用这六十天的窗口进行高浓缩铀和离心机网络的构建，所以在表态上以色列强调其不是备忘录签署国，不受该协议约束，而这种“自由行动”的表态口径仍将给短暂的和平曙光带来极大的不确定性，同时以色列强烈谴责美国解绑伊朗被冻资产。而这一系列的表态并未让美国改变短期策略，而持续的施压不成是否会演变为下一轮的突发性冲突或将变成短期内市场头上高悬的达摩克利斯之剑。

 

总结：

从即时性反馈来看全球资本市场和风险偏好都已经定价了美伊战争已经圆满终结是一个非常危险的信号，因为以色列的不确定性和高悬的油价依然没有被彻底解决，就连美伊双方的措辞也是牛唇不对马嘴，所以投资者在追逐风险偏好类的情绪之前必须谨慎看待此次事件带来的短线利好刺激。

‍

William Zhao
•
May 25, 2026
Tariffs may affect US and Asian companies in different ways. For US retailers and consumer brands, the pressure often appears through margins as import costs rise and pricing power is tested. For Asian exporters, the pressure may appear through lower order volumes if US buyers reduce demand. Textiles, apparel and basic consumer goods are generally more sensitive to US demand, while semiconductors and AI hardware may be less directly exposed to US consumers but still carry policy, capex and valuation risks.
Market insights
Trading strategies
Shares and Indices
Fundamental analysis
Forex
The tariff impact: The US margin problem vs Asia’s volume problem

Tariffs do not hit every company the same way.

For US retailers and consumer brands, the first hit is usually margin. Import costs rise before pricing power does. Companies can try to pass those costs on, but customers may resist higher prices, especially if household budgets are already stretched. Existing inventory can also soften the first blow, which means the initial earnings result may look manageable while the next one carries the real pressure.

For Asian exporters, the stress can show up differently. The risk is not always a sharp price cut. It may be a slower order book, as US buyers delay purchases, reduce volumes or shift suppliers. That makes the impact more uneven across sectors, with the pressure depending on what each company sells, where it sits in the supply chain and how exposed it is to US demand.

Tariffs, earnings and the Asia versus US split | GO Markets

Same tariff. Different earnings hit.

That is the key split for traders watching this earnings season. The US side is mainly about margin timing. The Asia side is about demand sensitivity. Not every export sector carries the same level of US demand risk.

TL;DR

  • US companies may face margin pressure as tariffed inventory moves through earnings.
  • Asian exporters may face volume pressure if US buyers reduce orders.
  • The timing is different: US retailers may feel the impact later, while Asian exporters may see it earlier through weaker order books.
  • Textiles, apparel and basic consumer goods are likely more sensitive to US demand.
  • Semiconductors and AI hardware may be less directly exposed to US consumers, but still carry policy, capex and valuation risk.

The big picture

Tariffs are paid at the US border by importers. From there, the cost can move through the system in several ways: higher prices, weaker margins, lower supplier prices, lower demand or a mix of all four.

Research cited by the Kiel Institute and New York Fed suggests US buyers and businesses may be absorbing a significant share of the tariff burden. That matters because it changes where the earnings pressure shows up first.

For a US retailer, the problem is straightforward but uncomfortable. If the company raises prices, demand may weaken. If it absorbs the tariff cost, margins may compress. If it still has older inventory, the hit may not show up immediately.

For an Asian exporter, the pressure can arrive through a different channel. If US buyers become cautious, they may order less. The exporter may keep prices relatively stable, but factory utilisation falls, fixed costs are spread across fewer units and earnings pressure builds.

That is why this is not just a tariff story. It is an earnings timing story.

US companies: the margin problem

The US side of the tariff story is about cost absorption.

Retailers, apparel brands, consumer electronics sellers and appliance companies often rely on imported goods, components or packaging. When tariff costs rise, they may try to protect margins through price increases, supplier negotiations, sourcing changes or inventory management.

The challenge is that none of these are clean solutions.

Price increases can test consumer demand. Supplier negotiations may take time. Sourcing changes can be expensive or slow. Inventory timing can make the first result look better than the underlying cost trend.

This is why earnings calls matter. Management commentary around pricing actions, tariff mitigation, sourcing, vendor negotiations and inventory timing may reveal more than headline sales growth.

What to watch on the US side

These signals may provide useful context in upcoming earnings reports:

If margins hold while sales remain stable, companies may be managing the pressure. If sales rise but margins fall, tariff costs may not be passing through cleanly. If guidance becomes more cautious, the market may start pricing a delayed earnings impact.

Asian exporters: the volume problem

The Asia side is not always about exporters cutting prices.

In many categories, Asian suppliers operate in competitive global markets with limited pricing power. If US buyers reduce orders, exporters may feel the impact through lower volumes rather than lower unit prices.

That distinction matters.

A company can report stable prices and still face earnings pressure if factories are running below normal utilisation. Lower volumes can reduce operating leverage, delay capital expenditure and weaken guidance.

The highest-risk sectors are usually those most closely tied to US retail demand, seasonal buying cycles and low-margin production.

Which Asian sectors are most exposed?

1. Textiles and apparel +
Highest Sensitivity

Textiles and apparel are among the clearest examples of US demand exposure.

These exporters are often tied directly to US retail orders, private-label contracts and seasonal buying cycles. If US retailers turn cautious, orders can be delayed, reduced or cancelled relatively quickly.

Risk is higher because margins are often thin, production is labour-intensive and buyers may have more power in negotiations.

Relevant export markets: Vietnam, Bangladesh, India, Indonesia and parts of China.
2. Basic consumer goods +
High Sensitivity

This includes toys, household goods, furniture, simple appliances and other discretionary or semi-discretionary exports.

These categories are exposed when US retailers reduce inventory or when consumers pull back from non-essential spending. Tariffs can add pressure if buyers try to push costs back onto suppliers.

Relevant export markets: China, Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia.
3. Electronics assembly +
Medium to High Sensitivity

Electronics assembly is more mixed.

Lower-end consumer electronics can be sensitive to US household demand. Higher-value components or enterprise-linked electronics may be more resilient, depending on end-market exposure.

This sector can also be harder to read because supply chains are complex. A company may look like a technology exporter, but its actual earnings sensitivity may still depend on US consumer replacement cycles.

Relevant export markets: China, Vietnam, Malaysia, Thailand, Taiwan and the Philippines.
4. Machinery and industrial goods +
Medium Sensitivity

Machinery is less directly tied to US consumer demand than apparel or household goods. The risk is more about business investment.

If US companies delay capital expenditure because tariff uncertainty rises, machinery orders may weaken. However, order books can provide some buffer, and specialised products may have more pricing power.

Relevant export markets: Japan, South Korea, China, Taiwan and Singapore.
5. Semiconductors +
Lower Direct Sensitivity

Semiconductors are less directly exposed to US retail demand than textiles or consumer goods. Demand is often tied to broader technology cycles, autos, industrials, cloud infrastructure and AI investment.

That does not make the sector risk-free. Tariffs, export controls, geopolitics and a weaker global capex cycle can still affect earnings expectations.

Relevant export markets: Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore and parts of China.
6. AI hardware and data-centre supply chains +
Lowest Direct Sensitivity

AI hardware is more tied to cloud capital expenditure and data-centre buildouts than day-to-day consumer spending.

The risk is different. It is less about US shoppers buying fewer goods and more about whether AI capex expectations remain realistic, whether policy restrictions expand and whether valuations already price in strong growth.

Relevant export markets: Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia and advanced electronics supply-chain hubs.

A simple sector risk map

Sensitivity Analysis
Indicative Asian exporter sensitivity to US consumer demand
Note: This is a general framework only. Sensitivity may vary by company, customer mix, contract structure and end market exposure.

Why timing matters

The US and Asia timelines may not line up.

A US retailer may still be selling older inventory, so the tariff impact can be delayed. Margins may hold in one quarter, then weaken as new tariffed inventory becomes a larger share of the sales mix.

An Asian exporter may see the pressure earlier if US buyers reduce orders before the cost hit appears in US consumer prices.

That creates a split earnings map:

  • US side: delayed margin pressure.
  • Asia side: earlier volume pressure.
  • Policy side: tariff exemptions, pauses or escalations can change the setup quickly.

The mistake is assuming a clean and immediate tariff impact. A strong US retailer result does not automatically mean tariff pressure is gone. It may only mean older inventory is still flowing through. A stable Asian exporter margin does not automatically mean demand is healthy. Volumes may be weakening beneath the surface.

The trap in the earnings season

What to watch next

On the US side, gross margins, inventory commentary, same-store sales and second-half guidance may provide useful context.

On the Asia side, export volumes, factory utilisation, order backlogs, working capital and capital expenditure guidance may be more relevant.

Across both regions, tariff policy remains the swing factor. Exemptions, pauses or new restrictions could quickly change market expectations.

Sector charts may provide additional context on whether market pricing is aligning with the earnings narrative, but they should be read alongside company commentary and macro data from the economic calendar.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

How do tariffs affect US companies and Asian exporters differently? +
Tariffs may affect US companies through margin pressure and Asian exporters through volume pressure. US companies may face higher import costs, while Asian exporters may face fewer orders from US buyers.
Which Asian export sectors are most exposed to US demand? +
Textiles, apparel and basic consumer goods are generally more exposed to US demand because they are closely tied to retail orders and consumer spending. Electronics assembly and machinery are moderately exposed, while semiconductors and AI hardware may be less directly exposed.
Why can tariff impacts show up later in retailer earnings? +
Retailers may still be selling older inventory purchased before tariffs applied. The impact may become more visible later as new tariffed inventory moves through sales and margins.
What should investors watch in tariff-related earnings reports? +
General signals include gross margins, inventory commentary, same-store sales, export volumes, factory utilisation, order backlogs and management commentary on pricing or sourcing.
Are semiconductors and AI hardware exposed to tariffs? +
They may be less directly exposed to US consumer demand, but they can still be affected by policy restrictions, export controls, global capex cycles and valuation expectations.
Bottom Line

The tariff story is no longer only about who pays. It is about where the earnings pressure shows up first.

GO Markets
•
May 25, 2026
No items found.
游轮病毒突袭全球市场：汉坦病毒会成为下一个 CFD 波动机会？

最近一搜南美的游轮上爆发了新一轮的病毒危机，只有极少数亚种才能在人与人之间传播的汉坦病毒造成了数人死亡的局面，而关于这个病毒的恐慌也在都让人们回忆起大流行时期新冠带来的惨痛记忆。

 

追根溯源：
汉坦病毒的来头是不你呀病毒汉坦科，是一种单链RNA病毒，通常来说这是一个啮齿类动物作为主要宿主的病毒，通常来说属于鼠疫的一种，不算是对人类有直接威胁的病毒，传播途径一般也是一老鼠的尿液和粪便以及唾液为主，所以食品安全是组织该病毒传播的首要防治方法，其次在打理老鼠的排泄物的时候要注意规避气溶胶接触对受污染空气进行隔离。本次病毒是一对荷兰夫妻在南美地区垃圾场附近拍摄鸟类照片时不幸感染，随后将病毒传播于整个游轮。

 

主要引发的疾病及症状

汉坦病毒在全球范围内主要引起两种严重的急性传染病，具有明显的地域性：

肾综合征出血热（HFRS）：

主要发病区：亚洲（尤其是中国、韩国）和欧洲。

症状：发热、出血，肾脏损害（少尿、蛋白尿），致死率：约1% - 15%

汉坦病毒肺综合征（HPS）：

主要发病区：美洲

症状：早期类似流感，随后迅速发展为严重的呼吸窘迫、肺水肿（肺部积水）和心源性休克，致死率：可达35% - 50%。

恐怖之处

乍听之下汉坦病毒如果不接触啮齿类动物，注意食品安全好像就不会造成较大范围扩散，但是之所以这次病毒引起了全世界的警觉不单纯是因为人们对于曾经的大流行心存阴影，更重要的是该病毒在人传人亚种范围具备极强的隐蔽性，潜伏时间最长可达8周，而这段时间里感染者不会有任何不适，意味着该病毒溯源极其困难，早期症状又和普通感冒高度类似容易造成病人贻误最佳治疗窗口，而等到真正开始发病了，病人可能在48小时内从急症转为器官衰竭。这种恐怖的效应恰恰是专家们谈之色变的地方，同时恰逢美加墨世界杯在即，人流涌动密切接触将变得更加频繁，所以各国传染疾控中心都已进入高度关注戒备状态。

 

市场的侧重点有哪些

首先从现有资讯来看汉坦病毒并不能断定为下一个新冠贷来新一轮恐怖的大流行，因为在传播路径上来看，汉坦病毒的人与人之间传播并不容易，所以与新冠不同，该病毒迄今为止并未引起大范围的防护恐慌和资本市场的强效驱动。

病毒发展所带来的潜在投机逻辑：

1. 病毒传播初期直接影响到补鼠防害类企业的业绩，业务方面需求或将随着美加墨世界杯人流涌入开始逐步攀升，在北美最大的有害生物防治就是ORKIN品牌的母公司 Rollins（ROL）,属于重要的防守型蓝筹企业；而全球最大的商业有害生物防治公司Rentokil Initial（RTO）也会因类似的逻辑被市场关注。

2. 而如果病毒并未在短期内得到控制反而是扩散性质有所爆发，下一步市场就会将目光投到防护类产品生产商和检测品牌上，美股口罩生产巨头3M或将在这时候获得资本的青睐和关注，小盘股如 Alpha Pro Tech（APT）作为主要防护服和口罩生产商也将得到市场资金的快速炒作。美股的Thermo Fisher Scientific（TMO）作为重要的核酸检测概念或将会因为病毒产生爆发性传播而获得资本市场关注。

3. 而如果在扩散这一步上人类没有及时控制住汉坦的传播那么下一步疫苗企业将再度占据新闻的头版头条，疫情期间Moderna（MRNA）和 BioNTech（BNTX）也讲在读在资本市场的炒作中独领风骚。

结论：实际上历年来都有汉坦病毒传播的案例并且作为老牌病毒已经多次偶尔获得公众的关注，但是从现有结论看，这次突发只是因为游轮密闭环境再度拉起了人们对于疫情的恐慌神经，如果不出现意外和人为性质对病毒的疏忽防范的话这个病毒并不会在全球社会上掀起较大浪花；可是作为投资者在交易市场行情时应对小概率肥尾事件保持警惕和敏锐度，当不可控情况出现时，应及时布局调整投资交易方向方可规避更大范围的损失。

 

 

‍

William Zhao
•
May 12, 2026
See all News & Insights