Tag: Economic scenarios

US President Donald Trump has supported the duties with often false or inaccurate statements. Here we will look at the most sensational ones. Enjoy!

US President Donald J. Trump based his campaign on the need to make America great again – Make America Great Again – and did so to the tune of slogans and catchphrases such as ‘America First!’ and ‘return to the Golden Age’. The trade tariffs, imposed, then lifted, and then reinstated, are the result of this strategy and are justified by blows of impressive statements. The problem is that many of these are unfounded. Off to fact-checking!

Donald Trump, when talking about the United States, tends to inflate the figure.s

Donald Trump is a proud American and, as such, is prone to magnifying everything about the United States of America, including numbers. Let us examine some sovereignist flare-ups: 

• The Paris Climate Agreement cost the United States trillions of dollars that other countries were not paying. In Congress on 4 March 2025, Donald Trump justified his exit from the Paris Climate Agreement in this way: untrue, the United States has never earmarked even remotely similar sums for the Agreement. Joe Biden, when he took office, promised to allocate around $11 billion per year, a figure that was later scaled back. 
• ‘Honda has just announced a new plant in Indiana, one of the largest in the world‘. Also at the Congress on 4 March 2025, the US President declared in a triumphant tone the construction of a new industrial hub by the Japanese giant: untrue, Honda had expressed its intention to build the latest Honda Civic in Indiana rather than Mexico, as reported by Reuters, without confirming this.  
• ‘The US is collecting $2 billion a day from customs duties. ‘. Statement of 8 April 2025, during a speech to coal industry workers: false, the figure is in the hundreds of millions, not billions and, most importantly, the duties are borne by American importers, not foreign exporters.  
• “We were losing $2 trillion a year on trade“—sentence uttered by Donald Trump on 22 April 2025 during an interview with Time in the White House. Here, the POTUS refers to the US trade deficit with the rest of the world before his arrival: false, in 2024 the imbalance amounted to some $918 billion, in 2023 to $773 billion, in 2022 to $945 billion, and so on. 
• ‘I have signed 200 agreements. ‘. On 25 April 2025, in the same interview with the Times, when asked, ‘Not a single one (trade agreement, ed.) has been announced. When will you announce them?” Donald Trump replied with a dry “I have closed 200 deals”: untrue, there was – and is – no evidence to validate this claim.

Donald Trump and the European Union: not quite love at first sight

That the President of the United States of America has no excessive sympathy for the Old Continent is a well-known fact: just recently, he confirmed this ‘slight’ antipathy by raising tariffs to 50%. Let us see why: 

• “They don’t buy our cars, they don’t buy our food. They don’t buy anything.” On Sunday, 6 April 2025, Donald Trump told reporters aboard the presidential plane Air Force One that the EU would take advantage of the US: untrue. In 2024 alone, the EU imported almost $650 billion worth of goods from the US. Not exactly chump change. 
• “They don’t take our agricultural products“. Also on that 6 April, POTUS accused us of not buying goods and commodities for agriculture: untrue, as the US government itself reports, in 2024, the European Union spent almost $13 billion (+1% compared to 2023) on agricultural commodities. We like American dried (nuts) fruit.
• “They put up barriers that make it impossible to sell a car. It’s not a question of money. It’s that they make everything so difficult: the standards, the tests. They drop a bowling ball on the roof of your car from 20 feet up. And if there’s a small dent, they tell you: ‘Sorry, your car is not suitable‘. This is beautiful. Monday, 7 April 2025, bilateral with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: untrue, there is no similar safety check in Europe, and most importantly, nowhere does it say that minor damage can cause the car to fail the test. 
• ‘The European Union was created to exploit the United States of America‘: false. On 10 April 2025, Donald Trump is the protagonist of a tirade so vague that it is difficult to refute. In any case, numerous scholars – especially historians and economists – have been taken aback by this statement. John O’Brennan, a leading professor of European Integration, European Union Politics, and International Relations, said that this statement ‘could not be more wrong or inaccurate‘. And like many others.

From China with fury

That Americans and Chinese do not get along well is well known. US President Donald Trump, since his inauguration, has stepped up his game with a trade war based on extreme tariffs that was later suspended. Let us examine some of his recent mental gymnastics:

• “We had massive deficits with China. Biden let the situation get out of hand. These are $1.1 trillion deficits; ridiculous, and it is simply an unfair relationship. It is 23 January 2025, and we are at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos when these words come from the speakers: false. The fact checkers indicate that in 202,3 indeed the US trade deficit as a whole will be around that figure. Donald Trump, however, forgets one crucial detail: the $1.1 trillion deficit concerns the whole world, not just China, and only considers goods without including services in the calculation. 
• ‘We have a deficit with China of more than a trillion dollars. ‘ This was stated by The Donald in an interview on Fox News Radio on 21 February 2025: false. As reported by the B.E.A. (Bureau of Economic Analysis), in 202,4 the trade deficit was around $263 billion; in 2023 the figure was close to $252 billion. In short, it was wrong by about $730 billion.
• China has never paid even 10 cents to any other American president. Liberation Day, Wednesday 2 April 2025. Donald Trump announces tariffs for the first time and finds time to fire another propaganda bullet. By this, POTUS meant that before him, the Chinese were free to trade with the US for free: untrue. In 1792, Alexander Hamilton, then US Secretary of the Treasury, proposed the Tariff Act – also known as the Hamilton Tariff – to incentivise the consumption of domestically produced goods. 

For Donald Trump, the grass is always greener on the other side

We close this review of rhetorical acrobatics with the United States’ neighbours: Canada and Mexico. These three great nations have always had very close trade relations, formalised by various agreements including NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) and the USMCA (United States Mexico Canada Agreement). 

• The US has a ‘200 billion deficit with Canada. He emphasised this several times on 7 January 2025 at a press conference at his home in Mar-a-Lago: false. Again, the B.E.A. data tell us that in 2024 the imbalance between imports and exports with Canada amounted to $35.7 billion.
• Canada is “ONE OF THE NATIONS WITH THE HIGHEST DUTIES IN THE WORLD“. All caps because Donald Trump, on Truth, often writes in caps lock. On 11 March 202,5, he published this statement: false, as also reported by the World Bank, which puts Canada in 102nd position out of 137 countries for weighted average tariff on all products. This indicator reflects the average import tax, calculated by taking into account the weight of different products imported.
• “Canada does not allow American banks to do business in Canada, but their banks invade the American market. Oh, that sounds about right, doesn’t it?” he wrote in Truth on 4 March 2025: untrue, Canada does not ban foreign banks, much less American ones. They have recently tightened regulations, but banking institutions like Bank of America, Citigroup, and Wells Fargo have been operating in Canada for more than a hundred years.
• “We have a $200 billion trade deficit with Mexico“. The US President said this on 9 February 2025, during an interview for Fox News: untrue. Again, the B.E.A.’s 2024 figures show a trade deficit of around $180 billion, half of what Trump said.

In short, we have only analysed one tenth of the falsehoods that the 48th President of the United States of America has been able to invent during these first five months in office. Knowing the data is very important and allows you to speak with full knowledge of the facts and avoid embarrassing and momentous blunders. 

For this reason, join Young Platform and get informed so that you will have safe arguments with your friends during the Thursday afternoon aperitif!

Explore what banking risk is and how it justifies the extra profits earned by banks.

What is Risk Banking? No, it’s not the latest expansion of your favourite board game, although the dynamics of conquest and strategy that govern it bear a striking resemblance. This term, cleverly borrowed from the famous board game, describes the recent trend among credit institutions—especially those with a bit of extra capital—to engage in mergers, acquisitions (M&A), and amalgamations. It’s akin to when you’ve gathered enough armies in the game to start eyeing your neighbour’s territories with interest.

One key macroeconomic factor associated with banking risk is the change in interest rates, a topic frequently discussed in our articles due to its significant impact on various markets, including the cryptocurrency market. When central banks raise interest rates to combat inflation—while many of us witnessed rising mortgage payments—it’s often a boon for bank profits. These additional earnings will likely be reinvested to promote growth and expansion. So, prepare yourself; the banking risk landscape for 2025-2026 is shaping up to be quite eventful.

The health of Italian banks

Before exploring the main topic, it is helpful to briefly review the health of credit institutions to understand the context in which this risky phenomenon develops. In recent years, banks have greatly benefited from central banks’ decisions regarding interest rates.

In 2023, Italy’s largest listed banks reported a combined net profit of EUR 21.9 billion, which increased to EUR 31.4 billion in 2024. At the European level, the earnings of the twenty largest banks reached approximately EUR 100 billion.

The primary driver of growth during this period was the European Central Bank’s decision to raise interest rates in an effort to combat inflation. From July 2022 to October 2023, reference rates increased from 0% to 4.5%. This rise led to an improvement in the net interest margin, which is the difference between the interest income generated from loans and the interest expenses paid on deposits. In simple terms, banks raised lending rates on loans more quickly than they increased the interest offered on deposits.

However, the positive results were not solely due to this factor. There was also a rise in net commissions, particularly from asset management services. These elements have contributed to the current situation where banks, having accumulated substantial profits—akin to conquered territories or bonus cards in a game—now possess significant liquidity, or ‘armies.’ The next step for these banks, in both contexts, is to invest these resources for further expansion.

The banking risk

The metaphor of banking risk is particularly fitting, as the sector is increasingly resembling a competitive arena. However, unlike a board game, the push for consolidation among banks is driven by several strategic motivations that are essential for their growth and stability. Here are the main factors:

1. Seeking economies of scale: the primary objective is to unify operational structures and optimise costs through the rationalisation of internal processes and the integration of technology platforms.
2. Geographical and product diversification: expanding territorial presence and broadening the range of services offered enables banks to mitigate the risks associated with concentrating on specific markets or customer segments, while simultaneously increasing cross-selling opportunities and, consequently, revenues.
3. Increased competitiveness: larger banks generally have greater bargaining power and a higher capacity to invest in new technologies, human resources development and marketing initiatives, thus strengthening their market position.
4. Strategic response to industry challenges: M&As are seen as a response to accelerating digitisation, the need to comply with increasingly stringent regulations (e.g., on capital and liquidity requirements), and the urgency of addressing cross-cutting issues such as environmental and social sustainability.
5. Shareholder pressure: A relevant factor is the constant pressure exerted by shareholders to maximise the value of shares and dividends, and to attract new investors.

The banking risk: the most emblematic cases

The Italian banking landscape has experienced notable mergers and acquisitions (M&A) that have reshaped the credit sector. The merger between Intesa Sanpaolo and UBI Banca, finalised in 2021, is seen as a pivotal moment that sparked the latest wave of banking consolidation. This merger not only solidified Intesa Sanpaolo’s leadership but also catalysed further integration within the industry.

Another significant example is Crédit Agricole Italia’s acquisition of Credito Valtellinese (CreVal) between 2020 and 2021, which highlights the growing interest of foreign groups in enhancing their presence in key regions of Italy. Additionally, BPER Banca has remained an active participant in the market, acquiring Banca Carige in 2022 and engaging in ongoing discussions about a potential merger with Banca Popolare di Sondrio.

In the background, several hypotheses involving major players are circulating. There has been extensive discussion about UniCredit‘s interest in increasing its stake in Germany’s Commerzbank, as well as previous talks about a potential merger between UniCredit and Banco BPM. Currently, Banco BPM is working to finalise its takeover bid for Anima SGR, which is also attracting interest from UniCredit, with a bid exceeding EUR 10 billion. 

Meanwhile, Unipol, having been excluded from the recent sale of public shares in Monte dei Paschi di Siena, is focusing on facilitating a merger between Bper and Popolare di Sondrio, in which it holds a significant stake. 

Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena (MPS) remains a central element in the mergers and acquisitions (M&A) dynamics, with the Italian government seeking market-based solutions for its eventual stabilisation and privatisation. In this context, there has been renewed speculation about a possible involvement of UniCredit..

What will be the following developments?

What will be the outcome of this phase of banking risk? It is complex to provide a clear answer, mainly because there won’t be an absolute or definitive winner. Banking risk, unlike the dynamics of a board game, is a continuous process that adapts to the changing economic and financial seasons.

The current period is undoubtedly critical. With interest rates falling, the exceptional profit margins that banks have enjoyed in recent years may begin to normalise. This situation prompts banks to reevaluate their strategies and develop new plans to maintain profitability and strengthen their competitive positions.

As a result, we can expect further consolidation within the industry. Large banking groups may seek to fortify their positions to compete effectively on a global scale, while smaller institutions will need to take action to avoid being left behind. This could involve forming strategic alliances or pursuing mergers to create national or specialised leaders in the market.

What about the customers and the economy as a whole? Proponents of these operations often emphasise the anticipated benefits related to increased stability, efficiency, and investment capacity. It will be crucial to monitor whether these significant manoeuvres lead to real advantages in terms of effective competition, service quality, and support for the real economy. In summary, the dynamics of banking risk are still ongoing, and the upcoming developments will continue to shape the future of the credit sector.

Sign up to Young Platform

Start now

The gold price continues its upward journey, having broken the $3,500/ounce mark and now hovering around $3,300. What is happening? 

Over the past year, the price of gold has increased from approximately $2,300 to $3,300 per ounce, representing a 42% rise. This surge has broken through the psychological threshold of $3,500. Factors such as the pandemic and ongoing wars have created a volatile environment, prompting investors to seek safer options. But what exactly has led to this situation? And most importantly, is the bullish trend likely to continue?

Understanding gold prices: A premise that might help you

Understanding gold price movements requires an appreciation of the historical significance and characteristics that make this metal precious. Gold is a unique commodity that has been a part of human culture for thousands of years. The earliest evidence of its use as a medium of exchange dates back to ancient Egyptian and Sumerian civilisations, with the first gold coins minted as early as the eighth century BC. This lasting presence is due to its intrinsic physical properties, such as malleability, durability, divisibility, and rarity, which make it highly sought after. Additionally, with the rise of the electronics industry, gold’s capabilities in thermal and electrical conduction are increasingly being utilised.

Throughout history, gold has been consistently recognised as a reliable store of value, serving as a means to preserve wealth over time. Major events, such as the collapse of monarchies and empires, wars, pandemics, and financial crises, have led to significant changes in historical epochs and economic systems. However, these events have not diminished the collective perception of gold. Its association with security, stability, and wealth preservation is deeply embedded in the ordinary consciousness, which contributes to high investor confidence.

This combination of factors ensures that gold remains in high demand. However, this demand must contend with the limited supply available on our planet. As a result, the price of gold in the markets is determined by the balance of supply and demand.

Once we grasp how gold operates, we can analyse the factors influencing its market performance.

What is driving the gold price upwards?

As we have mentioned, the price of gold is influenced by the law of supply and demand, along with a complex set of underlying dynamics that involve numerous variables. However, we prefer to keep things simple. Essentially, the price of gold is directly proportional to the level of instability, whether perceived or real, in various situations, such as economic, geopolitical, or health-related issues. The greater the instability, the higher the demand for gold, which in turn increases its price. Conversely, when the situation is more stable, the price tends to be more consistent and less affected by sudden fluctuations in demand.

Remember the frantic rush at supermarkets when the lockdown was announced? In that moment of panic, people rushed to buy staples like pulses, which are considered essential survival foods due to their long shelf life, ease of storage, and nutritional value. In normal circumstances, how often do you keep borlotti beans stocked at home? Not very likely. Similarly, gold acts like legumes—it’s not something you consume, but rather the ultimate haven during times of significant stress. 

So, why has gold reached record highs this time around?

Pandemics, wars and inflation: the perfect storm

Since March 2024, the price of gold has surged from EUR 2,000 to EUR 3,300 per ounce—an impressive 63% increase—breaking through the psychological threshold of EUR 3,500. It’s remarkable to consider that just twenty years ago, the price of gold ranged between $400 and $500 per ounce. 

This trend is not surprising when we examine individual adverse macroeconomic events that correlate with gold’s price increases. For instance, during the 2008 financial crisis, the price of gold rose from $711 an ounce to $1,820 within three years. Similarly, from January 2020 to July 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns drove the price up by 30%. More recently, from February 2022 to the present, factors such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the escalation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the election of Donald Trump have contributed to a nearly 85% increase in gold prices.

Black clouds gather on the horizon: Covid-19 breaks out.

During the COVID-19 years, governments and central banks around the world implemented unprecedented expansionary fiscal measures to support their economies, businesses, and citizens. For instance, in Europe, the NextGenerationEU initiative amounts to EUR 806 billion, which is part of a larger EUR 2 trillion aid package. In the United States, the total fiscal stimulus approved during this period reached approximately USD 6.9 trillion. Throughout all of this, interest rates remained near zero. 

What happens when the amount of money in circulation increases so dramatically? The answer is that inflation rises. So, how do major investors typically respond to rising inflation? They tend to turn to gold to protect their capital from devaluation.

It’s starting to pour: Russia invades Ukraine.e

Despite various challenges, the economy began to recover, allowing central banks to finally address the issue of inflation. In 2022, the Federal Reserve started raising interest rates, followed by the European Central Bank and other central banks and financial institutions. However, at that time, Vladimir Putin decided to invade Ukraine, leading to a significant shock in the supply of energy and raw materials, particularly food. Russia is a major exporter of gas and oil, while Ukraine, often referred to as the “Granary of Europe,” is a vital supplier of grain. 

This situation led to​​ another spike in prices, further increasing the cost of living. Do you remember how much gasoline cost in the summer of 2022? It was around €2 per litre. Setting aside the discussion about energy-intensive businesses, the rise in road transport costs alone contributed to price increases across various sectors. We know that rising prices lead to a decrease in purchasing power, which in turn fuels inflation. And when inflation rises, a “gold rush” begins, reminiscent of Scrooge McDuck’s Klondike adventures.

Lightning and thunderbolts: the Middle East catches fire

The geopolitical situation is precarious; however, overall, economies are managing to hold up, partly due to the expansive policies implemented during the COVID-19 era. Yet, less than a year after the invasion, another front of conflict emerges: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict escalates once again, igniting tensions in the Middle East. Among the events that unfold, the Houthi terrorist group begins launching missiles in retaliation near the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, a crucial maritime chokepoint between Yemen and the Horn of Africa that leads to the Suez Canal, through which approximately 15% of global maritime trade passes. Commercial cargo ships, the primary targets of Houthi attacks, are now compelled to avoid the Suez Canal and instead sail around Africa to reach Europe, resulting in an additional 10 to 15 days of travel time. This diversion has inevitably led to a widespread increase in prices. And when prices rise, inflation follows, prompting many to rush to check the gold price in hopes of purchasing a few ounces.

The storm is now perfect: Donald Trump announces customs duties 

Just when you thought the situation couldn’t get any worse, Donald Trump won the election. He decides to create panic in the world’s economic and financial institutions by mentioning one key term: tariffs and duties. In a highly globalised and interconnected market like that of the 21st century, if the leading economy imposes significant tariffs, suspended until Jul, the situation becomes quite serious. This not only increases the risk of inflation, as the barriers to entry drive up the final prices of imported goods, but also raises fears of a recession due to a substantial slowdown in economic activity.

Since April 9, the day Trump announced the tariffs, the price of gold has surpassed the psychological barrier of $3,500 an ounce, marking a 15% increase, before retracing and stabilising around $3,300.

Gold prices in the future: Will the trend continue?

A report by Goldman Sachs highlights an intriguing fact regarding central banks’ interest in gold. Since the freezing of the Russian central bank’s assets in 2022, following the invasion of Ukraine, the average monthly demand for gold has surged from 17 to 108 tonnes. Goldman Sachs predicts that by the end of 2025, the price of gold could reach between $3,650 and $3,950 per ounce, while JP Morgan estimates it may exceed $4,000 per ounce in 2026. In summary, many authoritative sources believe that the combination of pandemics, wars, and tariffs will continue to drive gold prices upward.

Now that you’re familiar with gold, its history, and its characteristics as an anti-inflation safe-haven asset, you might be interested in learning about ‘digital gold,’ which is Bitcoin. A good starting point is our article explaining how to protect yourself from inflation using Bitcoin. Don’t forget to subscribe below to stay updated!

Sign up to Young Platform!

Inizia ora

Donald Trump has announced tariffs on a large number of countries. How much are they, and how have they been calculated? Spoiler: bad

Donald Trump’s announcement of duties on Tuesday sent shockwaves through various groups: politicians, citizens, companies, and especially the markets. Specific points were particularly emphasised. One notable aspect is the range of countries targeted by the US president’s decision—nearly all countries, including an island in Australia home only to penguins, except Russia, Cuba, North Korea, and Belarus.

However, the most intriguing aspect of this sovereignist, anti-globalisation decision is how the duties were calculated. This article will explore this aspect in greater detail.

A wave of global tariffs

The Trump administration’s trade offensive includes additional tariffs on nearly all goods imported into the United States, varying rates based on the country of origin. Here are some key details from the tariff plan:

• Universal Basic Duty: A 10% tariff will be applied to all imports into the U.S.

“Worst Offenders”: Approximately 60 countries accused of unfair trade practices will face significantly higher tariffs starting April 9. These include:

•  China: 34% tariff, added to the existing 20%, for 54%.
•  Vietnam: 46% tariff.
•  Thailand: 36% tariff.
•  Japan: 24% tariff.
•  European Union countries: 20% tariff.

The following section will discuss how misleading this classification can be.

Automobile Tariffs: A special 25% tariff will be imposed on all foreign cars and their components, significantly impacting foreign car manufacturers.

President Trump did not hold back in his trade offensive; countries from Europe to China, Japan to Brazil, are all set to “pay the price.” This list includes microstates and remote territories, ranging from the Svalbard Islands in the Arctic Circle to the uninhabited Heard and McDonald Islands, home only to penguins.

“We have been robbed for more than 50 years, but that won’t happen again,” thundered Trump, asserting that jobs and factories will return to the U.S. thanks to the tariffs. He even invited foreign companies: ‘If you want zero tariffs, come produce in America.’ In summary, this is America First version 2.0, which this time criticises virtually anyone living beyond the borders, even penguins.

How are duties calculated? The confusion between duties and VAT

As you may have noticed from the quotes, Donald Trump’s narrative has consistently centred on reciprocal tariffs. The former president has referred to his tariffs as “reciprocal tariffs,” claiming that the United States will impose duties only equivalent to the tariffs other countries have on American products. On the surface, this reasoning seems almost reasonable; however, the calculation method used by the White House is flawed.

In practice, Washington classified any existing foreign levy to justify high tariffs, confusing value-added tax (VAT) with actual duties. For instance, regarding Europe, Donald Trump claimed, “The EU is charging us 39%!” However, this figure is derived from Europe’s actual duties on some American products (less than 3%) and the VAT. This consumption tax varies from country to country. This calculation also includes any environmental or technical regulatory taxes, leading to a misleading representation of the actual tariff burden.

In simpler terms, the U.S. administration interpreted every existing tax on European products as punitive tariffs against the U.S.. It used basic mathematical operations to calculate the duties we see today. 

No serious economist would equate the Added Tax (VAT), which all consumers pay, including Europeans, with a duty specifically targeting foreign goods. However, this is how it is perceived to work in the “alternative reality” of the Trump trade war.

Reverse engineering on the trade deficit

The second part of the creative process by which the Trump administration determined the duties to impose on other countries is quite intriguing. The primary focus here is the trade deficit. Trump has consistently viewed this deficit as a scorecard: if the US imports more from one country than it exports, he interprets it as ‘losing’ and believes the other country is cheating.

For instance, it is well known that the US has a trade deficit of around $2.5 billion with Russia (importing more from Moscow than it exports). Trump frequently highlighted this fact in the past to justify implementing punitive measures.

During his narrative, the president mistakenly conflated the trade deficit with subsidies and integrated it into the formula discussed earlier. The result? The duties announced by the Trump administration are simply derived from the trade deficit divided by the respective country’s total exports to the United States.

Let’s illustrate this with a practical example by calculating the duty applied to Indonesia. The United States has a trade deficit of $17 billion with Indonesia, while Indonesian exports to the US amount to $28 billion. 

Calculating it: 

17 / 28 = 0.64 → 64%, precisely the figure on Donald Trump’s chart.

This aligns with ​​the government’s Reciprocal Tariff Calculations page: you take the US trade deficit in goods with a specific country, divide it by the total imports of goods from that country, and then divide the result by two. A trade deficit occurs when a country imports more physical goods from other countries than it exports to them.

The possible impact of these decisions

We have already observed the impact of the tariffs imposed by Donald Trump, at least on the surface. During the first day following the announcement, the US stock market plummeted approximately 8% (S&P 500), while the NASDAQ dropped about 9% since the beginning of the week. 

On the other hand, Bitcoin has held up slightly better. Although it is currently down about 7%, it remains in a favourable position compared to last week. 

From a geopolitical perspective, the situation appears even more critical. It is difficult to understand the rationale behind the decisions made by the US president. Trump seems to be aiming to dismantle globalisation, which is the process that has gradually removed barriers to free trade and facilitated economic integration between countries.

There’s an interesting paradox: for many countries, selling goods abroad at higher prices has been a means to accelerate capital accumulation and move closer economically to wealthier nations. This is how China experienced rapid growth, and Europe has also benefited somewhat from this process. However, the real winner of globalisation has been the United States. Why is that?

The U.S. gained favour with half the world by defeating the Soviet system, which failed to provide both consumption and growth. The United States initiated this process by reducing tariffs and showcasing the strength of its market economy. Free trade allowed the U.S. to emerge as a cultural, technological, and economic superpower, contributing to the decline of both the Soviet Union and Maoist China. This approach has generated significant wealth.

Contrary to what Trump might suggest, global trade does not harm the United States today. Thanks to its technological advantages, the US has focused on sectors that yield high productivity and added value. The outcome is a wealthier nation that produces fewer low-cost goods (which it imports) while buying these products at a low price, thus maintaining a very high per capita income.

This success is primarily due to American dominance in the services sector. Consider how many digital services we use daily—such as social media, search engines, streaming platforms, and software—are designed, operated, and monetised in the United States.

Sign up to Young Platform!

Inizia ora

Check out NVIDIA’s quarterly data calendar and the most important companies in the stock market.

The quarterly data calendar for NVIDIA and other major stock market companies is vital for monitoring market trends. NVIDIA and all publicly listed companies must release quarterly reports every three months. These reports provide essential information about the company’s financial performance for the previous quarter, including revenues, profits, expenses, future forecasts, and more.

This article explains why these reports are essential, how they influence investors’ decisions, and provides an updated timetable for their release.

Quarterly reports: why should companies like NVIDIA publish them?

Before exploring the quarterly earnings calendar of NVIDIA and other major companies in the stock market, it is important to understand some key aspects of these reports. First, it’s essential to note that the publication of these documents is a regulatory requirement designed to ensure a certain level of transparency in the markets.

Quarterly reports are pivotal in enabling investors to evaluate a company’s performance. They help them determine whether the company is growing and generating profits and provide the necessary information to decide whether to buy or sell its shares.

These reports reflect a company’s financial health and serve as a tool for comparing it with competitors. For instance, NVIDIA’s results can be compared to those of other companies in the technology sector. Are NVIDIA’s profits, derived from its GPU production, sufficient to justify its market capitalisation? Are there emerging competitors that can produce at lower costs? The analysis of quarterly reports can partly provide answers to these questions.

How they influence the markets

Like many publicly traded companies, NVIDIA’s quarterly earnings significantly impact the markets. However, the effects are not always obvious and require experience and a thorough understanding to interpret correctly. The reality is more complex and not always linear, adding an element of intrigue to the market dynamics.

There is no precise formula for predicting how the market will react to quarterly earnings reports. Multiple factors influence reactions, with investor expectations playing a crucial role. The stock typically rises if a company’s results align with analysts’ forecasts or exceed them. Conversely, if results are positive but fall short of expectations, the stock may decline.

Another essential factor to consider is the macroeconomic environment. During market uncertainty or weakness periods, even a positive quarterly result may not receive the recognition it deserves. For instance, if the Federal Reserve raises interest rates at the upcoming Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting on January 29, favourable quarterly results might fail to have a positive impact. Conversely, in a bullish environment, the market may view even less impressive results positively.

Additionally, several other aspects are crucial in how the market reacts to quarterly results. The size of the company, its industry, its market share, and its overall reputation are all factors that can significantly influence market perception and reactions to its quarterly performance.

NVIDIA quarterlies and more: the complete calendar

2025 will be a crucial year for Big Tech and the market in general. Here is the updated calendar with the quarterly reports of the primary listed companies.

Wednesday, 15 January 2025

• JPMorgan Chase & Co. ($761 billion)
• Wells Fargo & Co. ($274 billion)
• Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. ($206 billion)
• BlackRock, Inc. ($152 billion)
• Citigroup Inc. ($153 billion)

Thursday, 16 January 2025

• Bank of America Corp. ($358.4 billion)
• Morgan Stanley ($220.15 billion)

Tuesday 21 January 2025

• Netflix, Inc. ($415.44 billion)

Monday 28 January 2025

• LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE ($377.21 billion)
• T-Mobile US, Inc. ($274.5 billion)
• Alibaba Group Holding Limited (USD 174 billion)

Wednesday, 29 January 2025

• Meta Platforms, Inc. ($659.88 billion)
• Microsoft Corporation ($3.23 trillion)
• Tesla, Inc. ($397.15 billion)

Thursday 30 January 2025

• Apple Inc. ($3.46 trillion)
• Visa Inc. ($647.53 billion)
• Mastercard Incorporated (USD 489.65 billion)

Tuesday 4 February 2025

• Alphabet Incorporated, Google’s holding company ($1.91 trillion)

Thursday, 6 February 2025

• Amazon.com, Inc. ($2.48 trillion)

Wednesday, 26 February 2025

• NVIDIA Corporation ($2.9 trillion)

Over the past few days, it has become clear that 2025 will be a critical year for assessing artificial intelligence’s true impact. This topic is central to leading companies worldwide, including Meta, Microsoft, NVIDIA, and Alphabet. Stay tuned to our blog for the latest updates.