JPMorgan Chase (JPM) CEO Jamie Dimon Warns of ‘Market Complacency'
Elevate Your Investing Strategy:
Take advantage of TipRanks Premium at 50% off! Unlock powerful investing tools, advanced data, and expert analyst insights to help you invest with confidence.
Make smarter investment decisions with TipRanks' Smart Investor Picks, delivered to your inbox every week.
Speaking to Ireland's Department of Foreign Affairs, Dimon, who leads the world's largest commercial bank, issued a downbeat outlook, saying there is 'complacency in the markets' and that investors have become a 'little desensitized' to tariff news.
He also warned that inflation could re-emerge as a significant problem in the U.S. and that there's a real risk of interest rates rising again. 'The market is pricing a 20% chance (of a rate hike), I would price in a 40-50% chance. I would put that as a cause for concern,' said Dimon.
Vulnerabilities
In June of this year, Dimon told a conference that the U.S. economy was vulnerable 'to a downturn in the coming months,' with a 'chance real numbers will deteriorate soon.' The comments from Dimon, who has led JPMorgan since 2006, come as U.S. President Donald Trump resurrects his tariff agenda.
In recent days, President Trump has threatened 50% duties on Brazilian imports, a 50% duty on copper, and 35% tariffs on Canada. While U.S. markets are down on July 11 over worries about Trump's tariffs, Wall Street indices are currently sitting near all-time highs as investors remain largely bullish on equities.
Dimon has repeatedly warned that tariffs will have an impact on the U.S. economy and markets in coming months and that investors and traders should proceed with caution. JPM stock has gained 21% this year.
Is JPM Stock a Buy?
The stock of JPMorgan Chase has a consensus Moderate Buy rating among 21 Wall Street analysts. That rating is based on 15 Buy, four Hold, and two Sell recommendations issued in the last three months. The average JPM price target of $295.10 implies 3.42% upside from current levels.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
30 minutes ago
- Forbes
Second Quarter Earnings Season Preview
The second-quarter earnings season begins this week, with 39 S&P 500 companies scheduled to report. ... More This week has a heavy emphasis on banks including: JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Wells Fargo (WFC), Citigroup (C), Bank of America (BAC), and Goldman Sachs (GS) (AP Photo/File) The second-quarter earnings season begins this week. 39 S&P 500 companies scheduled to report, with a heavy emphasis on the large banks. Notable companies scheduled to release earnings include: Blackrock (BLK), JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Wells Fargo (WFC), Citigroup (C), Bank of America (BAC), Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), Goldman Sachs (GS), PepsiCo (PEP), Netflix (NFLX), 3M (MMM), and American Express (AXP). Earnings At A Glance With only a few companies reporting and combining actual results with consensus estimates for companies yet to report, the S&P 500's blended earnings growth rate for the quarter is at 4.8% year-over-year, slightly below the expectations at the end of the quarter. Notably, the calendar year 2025 expected earnings growth rate is 9.0% and 2026's expectations are at 14.0%. S&P 500 Earnings Estimate Summary Market Performance Tariff worries led to a slight decline in the S&P 500 last week. The Magnificent 7, consisting of Microsoft (MSFT), Meta Platforms (META), (AMZN), Apple (AAPL), NVIDIA (NVDA), Alphabet (GOOGL), and Tesla (TSLA), outperformed last week. Market Performance Magnificent 7 Because these companies are critical drivers of earnings growth, a significant percentage of the S&P 500's market capitalization, and are currently in a bear market, the Magnificent 7 remains the group to watch this earnings season. The first of the Magnificent 7 is scheduled to report results next week. Magnificent 7: Q2 Estimated Earnings Growth Earnings Insights By Sector According to FactSet data, the earnings expectations for the financial sector are deceptively low due to JPMorgan Chase (JPM). JPM reported a significant gain from sales of Visa (V) stock in the same quarter last year, so the company has challenging year-over-year comparisons. If JPM is excluded from the financial sector, year-over-year earnings growth improves to 9.3% from 2.4%. Earnings Growth Estimates By Sector On the other side of the ledger, earnings growth rate expectations within the communication services sector are being flattered by Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD). According to FactSet, WBD reported a significant loss last year due to a goodwill impairment charge, so it is benefiting from extremely easy comparisons. If WBD is excluded, the expected growth of the communication services sector falls from 29.4% year-over-year to 8.2%. The energy sector is predicted to show the most significant decline in year-over-year earnings due to lower oil prices. Energy Commodities Revenue Results By Sector Sales growth is closely tied to nominal GDP growth, which combines after-inflation economic growth (real GDP) with inflation. If the estimates of second quarter nominal year-over-year GDP growth of 4.7% are correct, there could be some upside to sales growth. At this early point in the earnings season, sales growth at 4.2% is meeting expectations. GDP Growth Fuels S&P 500 Sales Consistent with the earnings picture, revenues in the energy sector should see the most significant year-over-year decline. Estimated Sales Growth By Sector Dollar Weakens The US dollar weakened relative to the same quarter last year. On the margin, this should benefit companies' international earnings. According to FactSet, 41% of S&P 500 sales are from international sources. US Dollar What To Watch Next Week The economic calendar also heats up this week with consumer inflation (CPI) and retail sales. Tuesday's June CPI is expected to be hotter, increasing to 2.6% year-over-year from 2.4%. The Federal Reserve already expects some inflation impact from tariffs and is likely on the sidelines until at least September. The retail sales report on Thursday is expected to show a modest rebound for the US consumer. Since consumers are a crucial driver of the US economy, this rebound will be essential for economic growth expectations. Newsflow about the administration's trade negotiations and new tariff announcements will remain a focus. Significant new tariffs are currently scheduled to be implemented on August 1, barring an acceptable trade agreement. With financials dominating the first week of earnings season, the headline earnings should begin on a positive note. With the tariff overhang and consensus expecting an acceleration in earnings growth for the third quarter, forward earnings guidance from management will be watched closely.
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Earnings season begins: Pay attention to all the tariff talk
The second-quarter earnings season is upon us: six weeks to eight weeks of numbers, not to mention company officials gloating or trying to defend their results against angry investors and analysts. This earning season, like the first-quarter season, will come with a big wildcard: President Donald Trump's efforts to impose much heavier tariffs on imports to the United States. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter The Administration announced a huge list of tariffs increases on April 2 that shocked so many from the Federal Reserve to Wall Street that the Standard & Poor's 500 Index fell more than 10% over the next two days. Related: Analyst reboots Amazon stock price target on AI growth The president has proposed 35% tariffs on Canadian goods. And a 50% tariff on Brazil, the world's largest coffee producer (among other things) unless the Brazil halts prosecution of former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro, charging him with organizing a conspiracy to overturn Brazil's 2022 election. Over the weekend, Trump threatened 30% tariffs on Mexico and the European Union to take effect on Aug. 1 unless they come to a new deal. Related: Wall Street giant shares bold message on S&P 500's Magnificent 7 And we'll see, starting Sunday evening when futures trading begins at 6 p.m. ET, if investors force the administration to back down again. Tariffs are a dangerous game. You hear many Wall Streeters predicting the actual tariffs come in at roughly 10%. Trump learned a small lesson in April when stocks literally started to melt down. The history of draconian tariffs is they usually cause economic mayhem. And the politicians who get them enacted or their parties lose their jobs. So, in the meantime, the earnings start to come in: 103 in the week ahead and 702 in the week following. This week's reports are heavily weighted to financial institutions and big ones, too: JPMorgan Chase (JPM) , Wells Fargo (WFC) , BlackRock (BLK) and Citigroup (C) on of America (BAC) , Morgan Stanley (MS) and Goldman Sachs (GS) on Wednesday. American Express (AXP) and Charles Schwab (SCHW) on Friday. In all, some 42 financial companies will release reports this week. JPMorgan is the largest with a market cap of $797 billion. Among financial companies, only Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A) and (BRK.B) is bigger at just over $1 trillion in market cap. (Yes, it's true Warren Buffett's conglomerate also includes one of the biggest railroads, See's Candies and a network of truck stops, but half the business is insurance. Berkshire is expected to report results in early August.) It's not all financial companies that report this week. Others include: United Airlines (UAL) on Semiconductor (TSM) , Netflix (NFLX) and PepsiCo (PEP) on Thursday. 3M Company (MMM) and Schlumberger (SLB) on Friday. Related: Stock Market Today: 35% Tariff on Canada Spooks Investors Financial institutions are always trying to balance interest on loans and earnings on investments against costs, especially cost of funds or, in the case of insurance companies, the costs of paying claims. The base short-term rate is the Fed's federal funds rate, now 4.25% to 4.5%. The Fed has been reluctant to cut rates this year because it's been concerned with how inflationary the tariffs will prove. Bloomberg/Getty Images The 73 financial stocks in the S&P 500 financial sector in the aggregate have had a decent year. The financial sector index is up 7.9% in 2025, with 48 stocks showing positive gains for the year to date. The return ranks the financials sixth out of the 11 S&P 500 sectors. Tops are the industrial and information technology sectors, up about 14% and 9.4%, respectively. The financial sector fell nearly 16% between April 2, when President announced his tariff proposal and the bottom of 702.44 on April 7. Since the bottom, the sector has rebounded about 24% to 868.31. The results are skewed a bit by Coinbase (COIN) , which runs one of the world's largest crypto currency exchanges. It's up 56% year to date. The company reports second-quarter earnings on July 31. More Investing: Weekly Wins: 10 Rules for You to Be a WinnerAmazon tries to make AI great again (or maybe for the first time)Veteran portfolio manager raises eyebrows with latest Meta Platforms moveGoogle plans major AI shift after Meta's surprising $14 billion move The big banks have not been scofflaws. Charles Schwab is up 22.3% year-to-date, second best in the sector. Citigroup has risen 23%. JP Morgan has added 19.7%. Goldman Sachs' gain is 23%. Related: Watch out: The threats that could derail the big rally Property-and-casualty insurance companies have struggled a bit this year, especially those exposed to the Los Angeles-area wild fires earlier this year. Chubb (CB) , Allstate (ALL) and Travelers (TRV) have seen their stocks show handsome returns over the last 52 weeks. But their returns for the year-to-date are flat or modest because of the fires. A study from UCLA estimated that the Los Angeles fires caused losses of between $95 billion and $164 billion with insured losses of some $75 billion. Wall Street is betting President Trump's big tax bill will unleash all sorts of money into the financial markets. That's why the S&P 500 and Nasdaq hit new highs this past week and Nvidia saw its market cap top $4 trillion. But forgotten in that euphoria was that financials were the weakest S&P 500 sector, down 1.9%. The bill, however, is so complicated that no one is sure what's in it, much less if the provisions will do any good. The banks and other financial companies will be getting looser regulations, true. But there's risk to that: Bad or just plain stupid actors can destabilize the system. Perhaps we should agree that a few signals would help. The economy has to demonstrate there's a clear, stable path forward. The Administration has to demonstrate clarity of vision. You don't want constant disruptions from tariffs or other political machinations. If the first condition is met, inflation can ease, and interest rates can come down. As important, companies will start to feel confident enough to expand new plants and offices and hire more people. Investment flows would migrate to opportunities that offer new growth. Related: Veteran analyst drops new clue on Nvidia's next big move The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
‘One big beautiful bill,' and 4 Republicans who abandoned their principles
On July 4, amid fanfare and flyovers, President Trump signed his 'one big beautiful bill.' The legislation reduces taxes, increases appropriations for the military, border security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement — while cutting spending on Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, better known as food stamps. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the bill's $4.5 trillion decrease in revenues and $1.2 trillion increase in spending will add $3.3 trillion over the next decade to the already astronomical $36 trillion national debt. Despite Trump's claims, the bill is extremely unpopular. Five recent polls found net approval ratings ranging from minus-19 percentage points to minus-29 points for the legislation. 'The more [Americans] learn about this bill, they hate it just as much,' declared Harry Enten, CNN's data analyst. Many Americans haven't yet realized that the tax cuts and estate tax changes, which disproportionately benefit the wealthy, have been made permanent, while the exemption on workers' tips and overtime and reductions on taxes to Social Security benefits will expire in 2028. Most are unaware that, in an attempt to minimize Republican losses in the midterms, legislators delayed until 2027 implementation of the Medicaid cuts (which will result in 11.8 million Americans losing their health insurance) and that reductions in the federal share of SNAP costs won't kick in until 2027. Opposition from so-called Republican 'moderates' and 'deficit hawks' initially appeared sufficient to defeat or at least force substantial revisions of the bill. But virtually all of them caved. For once, Elon Musk had it right. The 'big beautiful bill,' Musk wrote, is a 'disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it. You know you did wrong. You know it.' Here are profiles of four Republicans who shelved their principles. Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.), whose district contains one of the nation's highest percentages of Medicaid recipients, stated unequivocally that he would not support legislation 'that includes any reduction in Medicaid coverage for vulnerable populations.' Nonetheless, he voted for the House bill. Valadao then expressed concerns about changes in the Senate: 'I've been clear from the start that I will not support a final reconciliation bill that makes harmful cuts to Medicaid, puts critical funding at risk, or threatens the stability of healthcare providers.' Although the Senate reduced Medicaid appropriations by almost a trillion dollars and cut almost in half the tax states can impose on private healthcare providers, a 'vital stream' of income for the program, Valadao voted for the final bill. It 'was not an easy decision,' Valadao said, but 'no piece of legislation is perfect.' The Senate bill, he claimed, 'does preserve the program for its intended recipients — children, pregnant women, the disabled and elderly.' And it included a fund to give rural hospitals a few years to adjust to reduced revenues. Going forward, Valadao promised to work hard to identify and mitigate risks. In December 2024, Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) did not accede to President-Elect Trump's demand that Republicans raise the debt ceiling by $5 trillion dollars. 'I'm absolutely sickened,' he proclaimed, 'by a party that campaigned on fiscal responsibility and has the temerity to go forward to the American people and say you think this is fiscally responsible.' This spring, however, Roy voted for the reconciliation bill, which included that $5 trillion increase in the debt ceiling and added trillions to the deficit, after Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) agreed to advance implementation of the work requirement in Medicaid from 2029 to 2026. 'Mediocre but passable,' he said, the bill still needed 'massive improvements if we are to make a dent in our deficit or to change the trajectory of this country.' The Senate 'failed us,' Roy claimed. We can 'amend it, send it back, fix it … Happy to stay here every day until we get it right.' Yet within days, Roy announced he was convinced the Trump administration would use executive orders and other legislation 'to ameliorate those areas' made worse by the Senate — and voted for the final bill. Asked about Musk's characterization of the House bill, Sen Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) replied, 'He's telling the truth.' The legislation doesn't 'bend the deficit curve down. It supports it going up.' Johnson indicated 'there's no way' he would support a bill that sustained this 'new normal.' He was untroubled by the president's threat that anyone who opposed his bill would face a primary challenge: 'I'd be happy to be done with politics.' After meeting with Trump and members of his staff, however, Johnson indicated he was satisfied they were 'committed' to reducing federal spending to pre-pandemic levels: 'A rigorous effort will soon be announced,' he added, 'to review every program and every line of the federal budget, looking for ways to… put America on the path to fiscal sustainability.' Johnson voted for a Senate bill that added about a trillion dollars more to the national debt than the House bill. After the Senate passed Trump's bill, a reporter asked Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) about the assertion by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) that instead of joining him, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) to defeat the legislation, she engineered 'a bailout for Alaska at the expense of the rest of the rest of the country.' After a long pause, Murkowski, who had 'made very clear' in June that 'we cannot go forward with a bill that makes cuts to Medicare,' replied, 'I know that in many parts of the country there are Americans that are not going to be advantaged by this bill … But when I saw the direction that this is going — you know you can either say, 'I don't like it' and not try to help my state, or you can roll up your sleeves.' Murkowski used her leverage to delay the requirement that states with high food stamp error rates, including Alaska, contribute more to the cost of benefits. Alaska and Hawaii received waivers of food stamp work requirements based on high unemployment rates in their states. And the bill provided tax relief for whaling boat captains. 'This has been an awful process,' Murkowski explained, 'a frantic race to meet an artificial deadline.' As the legislation returned to the House, she expressed her 'sincere hope that this is not the final product.' While she had made improvements for Alaska, this bill 'is not good enough for the rest of the nation — and we all know it.' It 'needs more work across chambers and is not ready for the president's desk.' In the months before the 2026 elections, Democrats will almost certainly be quoting Valadao, Roy, Johnson and Murkowski, and making the point that promises by allegedly principled Republican politicians are nothing but 'sound and fury, signifying nothing.' Glenn C. Altschuler is the Thomas and Dorothy Litwin Emeritus Professor of American Studies at Cornell University.
