Photo courtesyJennifer Whitney, Client Success Manager at Red Oak Compliance Solutions
Jennifer Whitney, an offshore and global distribution industry professional with more than three decades of experience in asset management and financial services, has joined Red Oak Compliance Solutions as Client Success Manager, effective January 5.
Whitney brings extensive experience working with financial advisors at wirehouses, banks, and RIAs serving non-U.S. and cross-border clients. In her role, she will work closely with clients to support adoption of the Red Oak platform, with an emphasis on long-term client relationships, continuity, and trusted partnerships.
Red Oak Compliance Solutions is a compliance ecosystem that connects every stage of content creation, review, distribution, and oversight for the financial services industry, helping firms reduce risk and bring compliant communications to market more efficiently. The company has been recognized on the Inc. 5000 list for seven consecutive years and continues to expand its compliance platform to meet the evolving needs of regulated firms, including the integration of technology tools that streamline advertising review and regulatory oversight.
Whitney stated that her decision to join Red Oak reflects a deliberate move toward long-term infrastructure and relevance within financial services. “After dedicating my career to distribution and business relationship roles, I was looking for a platform that creates lasting solutions for the future of financial services firms,” she said. “Red Oak sits at the intersection of compliance, technology, and marketing, and client success is where I can bring the most value,” she noted.
Based in Austin, Texas, Whitney will work with clients across the United States and internationally, leveraging her experience in supporting advisor workflows, regulatory compliance considerations, and relationship-based service models.
After a 2025 that clearly demonstrated the diverging paths taken by various central banks around the world, all signs point to somewhat more stability in monetary policy in 2026. That said, attention remains on whether the recent arrest of Nicolás Maduro by the United States will have repercussions on oil prices and, consequently, on inflation and the actions of central banks.
Without a doubt, the focus will be on the U.S. Federal Reserve. Its chair, Jerome Powell, reaches the end of his term in April, amid doubts about the future independence of the institution and with a member of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), Lisa Cook, entangled in legal proceedings. “The Fed has many factors at play in 2026. Not only will a new chair take over, but the macroeconomic outlook remains uncertain. The labor market appears to be cooling without collapsing, while inflation remains stable,” notes Bret Kenwell, Market Analyst at eToro in the U.S., who questions whether the U.S. monetary authority “will be able to adopt a dovish tone if these factors persist in 2026, or whether its dual mandate will keep moderate measures in check.”
A similar view is held by Ray Sharma-Ong, Deputy Global Head of Bespoke Multi-Asset Solutions at Aberdeen Investments, who believes that “the Fed is between a rock and a hard place, with inflation remaining high despite a weakening labor market.” This disconnect “has widened the divisions within the Committee.”
That said, following the rate cuts in 2025 and the current context of the institution, “the Fed’s monetary policy is no longer a catalyst for the markets,” according to the expert. The reason is that with federal funds interest rates between 3.5% and 3.75%, the Committee considers that monetary policy is within the effective range of neutrality. Therefore, “the bar for new cuts is very high, implying that the monetary policy outlook is likely to remain static for some time.” As a result, with official interest rates on hold, “we no longer expect a broad-based beta rally in equities; market correlations may decrease, and fundamentals may gain greater importance.”
For Paolo Zanghieri, Senior Economist at Generali AM, part of Generali Investments, the economy continues to enjoy a solid foundation, but downside risks to employment remain more important to the FOMC than upside risks to inflation.
Now, following the December rate cut, “it can now wait for more data before deciding on the extent and pace of further rate cuts.” Here, Zanghieri‘s outlook is clear: the projected path for the official interest rate has not changed since September, with two more cuts of 25 basis points, one next year and another in 2027. “Our forecast of another rate cut next year aligns with what the Fed expects, but we believe the easing will stop there,” he notes, admitting that this forecast would only be modified in terms of timing, with a possible delay of the next cut to mid-year.
Europe Nachu Chockalingam, Head of Credit at Federated Hermes, highlights the work done by central banks in recent years to reduce global inflation. From this point, she expects official interest rates to fall, but in general, “to remain slightly above pre-pandemic levels, especially in developed market economies.”
Her view is that the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England will continue cutting rates, “but the direction the European Central Bank (ECB) will take, having started to ease policy earlier, is a bit less clear.” Mainly because inflation in the eurozone is nearing the 2% target, “but the outlook remains uncertain due to global trade disputes and geopolitical tensions.”
The expert explains that short-term risks to the interest rate outlook persist, but she believes the situation would have to deteriorate significantly for the ECB to cut rates again in 2026. Some of these downside risks she mentions include any delayed adverse impact from U.S. tariffs, a stronger euro, the impact of Chinese imports, or delays in Germany’s fiscal stimulus. Political unrest in France, within the context of worsening fiscal conditions, is another potential risk, according to Chockalingam.
The Bank of England (BoE) will also generate market attention throughout 2026. David A. Meier, Economist at Julius Baer, expects two rate cuts from the BoE and a wait-and-see approach from Scandinavian monetary authorities. The BoE, the expert recalls, cut rates to 3.75% at its last meeting amid slowing inflation and weak growth but remained cautious about further easing. “We forecast two more cuts in 2026 and maintain a neutral outlook for the pound sterling,” he notes.
Meier also outlines his expectations for the Nordic central banks: Sweden’s Riksbank kept the policy rate at 1.75% at its last meeting, “with outlooks pointing to possible hikes in late 2026, supporting a bullish scenario for the Swedish krona.” Meanwhile, the Norges Bank, keeping rates at 4% due to persistent inflation, “strengthens the Norwegian krone as the highest-yielding G10 currency.”
Japan Regarding Japan, Álvaro Peró, Fixed Income Investment Director at Capital Group, reveals that reflation continues amid positive economic growth and inflation above target. The expert explains that although the election of the new Prime Minister, Sanae Takaichi—who campaigned on a platform of fiscal stimulus, state investment, and financial repression—has raised market expectations for more flexible policy, the Bank of Japan (BoJ) has reiterated the need for further hikes in a context of yen weakness and reflationary pressures.
This view is shared by Homin Lee, Senior Macro Strategist at Lombard Odier. The expert expects interest rates in Japan to continue rising in 2026. “After having shielded Japan from deflation through years of accommodative monetary policy, we expect the BoJ to welcome signs of reflationary success with two interest rate hikes in 2026, the first likely in January,” he notes.
Latin America Forecasts also extend to the largest Latin American economy: Brazil. At DWS, they suggest that the Central Bank of Brazil “appears willing to maintain its aggressive stance” and indicate that structural reforms, following next year’s elections, “could help unlock the country’s potential.”
This is the view of Yi Li-Hantzsche, Emerging Markets Analyst at DWS, who acknowledges that so far, Brazil’s central bank has shown an unwavering commitment to bringing inflation back to target, “despite pressure from the government and the close ties between Governor Galípolo and President Lula.” The expert believes that with a constructive electoral outcome and the prospect of credible reforms, “Brazil could finally unlock lower rates without putting its credibility at risk.”
Wikimedia CommonsNicolás Maduro, President of Venezuela
The oil boom positioned Venezuela as one of the richest countries in the world between the 1950s and 1980s. Today, it resembles a post-war economy. What happened? A combination of factors brought to its knees what was once one of the greatest Latin American powers, leading to the most recent milestone: the capture of the—controversial—Venezuelan president, Nicolás Maduro, by the United States. Now, global and Latin American investors are closely watching the evolution of this story, which features an economy that the financial market sees as “on pause” and that has generated a diaspora of 7.9 million people.
According to figures from the World Economic Forum in Davos, Venezuela once ranked as the fourth nation with the highest GDP per capita in the world, alongside France. The country was nicknamed “Saudi Venezuela” and “The Millionaire of the Americas,” and not without reason. To this day, it holds the largest proven oil reserves on the planet, with around 303 billion barrels of the hydrocarbon, according to OPEC figures updated as of June last year.
Oil wealth, for example, made gasoline in Venezuela still considered the cheapest in the world, thanks to massive government subsidies. It is practically given away, since a liter of gasoline in Venezuela costs 0.097 centimos of a bolívar at current prices—a figure so low that currency converters do not even register it, showing an absolute zero in parity with the U.S. dollar.
However, this oil wealth created a rentier economy, nearly 100% dependent on oil, which collapsed due to two factors that explain the current situation. One is the drop in international oil prices in the 1980s. The other is the rise to power, through democratic means, of Hugo Chávez, who later centralized the economy and dismantled the checks and balances that allowed him to accumulate power and impose a statist economic model.
In this article, we will focus only on the first point.
The collapse of Venezuela
According to data from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Venezuela’s GDP in 2024 stood at $82 billion, with three consecutive years of growth (8% in 2022, 4.4% in 2023, and 5.3% in 2024). These may seem like very positive figures, but they hide a devastating reality.
The same data show that Venezuela’s GDP in 2012 reached a historic peak of $372 billion. In other words, the most recently known GDP is 78% below the highest in the country’s history. Only European countries and Japan during World War II have seen such a sharp decline in GDP, yet Venezuela did not experience even an internal armed conflict during this period, despite its political instability.
IMF economists warned that, when measured between 2013 and 2020, Venezuela’s GDP fell by 88%, surpassing by three years the duration of the U.S. collapse during the Great Depression. There is no similar precedent.
And while the country was “swimming” in cheap gasoline, hyperinflation took a massive toll that contributed to the current devastation.
In 2018, hyperinflation reached a historic figure of 130,000%, which moderated to “only” 548% in 2024 and may have dropped to just over 300% last year, thanks to orthodox “neoliberal” monetary policies such as reducing public spending and lifting currency controls, along with a de facto dollarization.
However, the damage is done. A decade of ongoing hyperinflation (from 2014 to 2024) led to the most dramatic erosion of purchasing power ever seen in modern times. IMF figures indicate that between 1998 and 2018, the Venezuelan currency lost 99.999997% of its value.
But perhaps the economic collapse could have been avoided or mitigated if the country, with its immense oil wealth, had properly managed that bonanza. The problem, many voices from the economic front argue, is that statist public policies turned the Venezuelan oil industry into one of the most inefficient in the world.
The Erosion of Oil Production OPEC data show that between 2008 and 2013, Venezuela’s oil production averaged 2.8 million barrels per day, before collapsing to 337,000 barrels in 2020 and recovering to 921,000 in 2024. Even so, the most recently known annual figure is still 67% lower than during the period when the country was considered one of the world’s top oil producers.
Venezuela’s oil paradox is dramatic. Despite being the country with the largest proven oil reserves in the world, it ranks between 20th and 22nd among oil-producing nations. This is due to investment in the industry collapsing by more than 80% starting in 2003—one year after the attempted coup against President Hugo Chávez, who in response purged the top ranks of the state oil company PDVSA and virtually shut the industry off to new investment. The argument was that the country’s oil wealth required nothing more than state regulation.
In conclusion, Venezuela’s economic collapse is now the most dramatic for any country in modern history without a war.
Analyses indicate that the maximum 88% decline in Venezuela’s GDP surpasses the U.S. collapse during the Great Depression, the shock of World War II, and even exceeds the 70% economic collapse experienced by Syria during its civil war in the last century and the 62% GDP drop in that Middle Eastern country during its more recent internal conflict.
According to economists who have studied this phenomenon, there are three main causes that explain it all—unfortunately tied to political decisions: the destruction of property rights, resource plundering, and destructive economic policies even during times of economic boom.
And the worst part is that the solution for this country, despite its oil wealth, is not just around the corner. Recovery—with the right economic policies—is estimated to take about 20 to 30 years, especially considering that in the last five years Venezuela lost its greatest wealth, and that of any country: 25% of its population.
In Its Own World, Yet Within the Region After more than a decade of economic crisis, Venezuela is relatively isolated from other Latin American countries, living its own reality with its own market distortions. But the country that was once one of the region’s main powers does not go unnoticed.
Just a few months ago, one advantage market players saw for Latin American investments was a relative geopolitical calm that other regions couldn’t boast. With the situation evolving, it is difficult to know what direction the oil-producing country will take and what implications it may have on the global—and Latin American—stage, especially if tensions escalate with China and Russia, two major allies of the Chavista regime. In any case, investors will be watching developments closely.
The economic connections of neighboring countries with Venezuela have diminished over the years, and there is a perception that it is a market “on pause,” both in terms of foreign investment and international trade. However, the country maintains commercial ties with several of the region’s major economies.
Figures from the Observatory of Economic Complexity (OEC) show that the country’s main partners in the region are Brazil and Colombia. In recent years—the latest data from the organization is from 2023—Brazil ranked as the fourth-largest buyer of Venezuelan exports (after the U.S., China, and Spain) and the third-largest seller to that market. Colombia, another neighboring country, ranks second among Latin American countries in both categories, and Ecuador is the third-largest buyer of Venezuelan exports in the region. All these markets, however, represent only single-digit shares of Venezuela’s foreign trade.
Unlike the U.S. and Spain, which primarily purchase crude oil, and China, which favors petroleum coke, according to the OEC, the Latin American countries that buy the most Venezuelan products mainly purchase nitrogen-based fertilizers and, in the case of Ecuador, unstuffed frozen fish.
Millions of Expatriates Watching From Abroad Another strong link between Venezuela and the rest of the region is the massive diaspora that has settled in other Latin American countries. Millions have left the country over the past 15 years, fleeing a collapsed economy in search of opportunities in more stable nations in the region, especially neighboring ones. Many of these individuals leave to find work and send remittances back to Venezuela, injecting some capital into struggling local households.
Venezuelan migration, which accelerated after 2014, has expanded across the continent. According to UNHCR, the United Nations refugee agency, around 7.9 million people have left the country in search of opportunities, with 6.7 million settling in other Latin American and Caribbean countries.
The most popular destinations for Venezuelan migrants are Colombia and Peru, with 2.8 million and 1.7 million Venezuelan citizens, respectively, according to data from the Inter-Agency Coordination Platform for Refugees and Migrants (R4V), an initiative led by UNHCR and the International Organization for Migration (IOM). They are followed by Brazil, with about 626,900 Venezuelans; the U.S., with 545,200; and Chile, with 532,700.
FIBA announces Pablo Vallejo, General Manager at Banco Pichincha – Miami Agency, as its new president.
The organization made the announcement through an official post on its LinkedIn profile.
“With 27 years of experience in the financial services sector, Pablo is an accomplished executive with a strong track record in finance, recognized for his strategic leadership and deep knowledge of the banking industry,” the Financial & International Business Association stated in its social media post.
“His extensive experience, vision, and commitment to excellence will be key in guiding FIBA’s continued growth and expanding its impact within the financial community,” the post continued.
“It is an honor and a privilege to serve as FIBA’s president in 2026, and an even greater responsibility,” Vallejo wrote on his LinkedIn profile. “FIBA’s results in 2025 were outstanding across all areas, marking a year defined by innovation and success. The bar is set very high,” he added.
Vallejo has been serving as General Manager at Banco Pichincha – Miami Agency for nearly five years. Previously, he spent 23 years at Citi, holding various executive roles in Quito (Ecuador), San Juan (Puerto Rico), and Miami.
“As we enter 2026, the challenge is clear and the opportunity even greater. With strong support from the executive team, the Board, and FIBA’s Executive Committee, our focus will be on driving growth, expanding our impact, and continuing to build on a very solid foundation,” Vallejo also expressed in his LinkedIn post.
Credicorp announced that its subsidiary, Banco de Crédito del Perú (BCP), has signed an agreement to acquire 100% of the issued and outstanding shares of Helm Bank USA for $180 million, with the amount subject to the customary closing price adjustment.
“We believe this transaction strengthens Credicorp’s strategy to enhance its cross-border capabilities to serve clients with international operations and reinforces our ability to meet the growing needs of Latin American clients, while preserving Helm Bank’s legacy as a community-focused institution,” the company said in a statement.
As of September 30, 2025, Helm Bank, an entity authorized to operate in the state of Florida (United States), had $1,141.8 million in assets and $106.8 million in equity.
“This acquisition allows us to deepen our ability to serve Latin Americans whose financial lives span both their home countries and the United States,” said Gianfranco Ferrari, CEO of Credicorp.
“We believe Helm Bank’s legacy as a community-focused institution, combined with its expertise in serving international clients, aligns perfectly with our strategy. We look forward to strengthening that role and enhancing its capabilities within our broader ecosystem,” he added.
“Partnering with Credicorp is a natural evolution for Helm Bank,” said Mark Crisp, President and CEO of Helm Bank.
“Credicorp’s financial strength, trusted reputation, and client-centered philosophy provide a solid foundation for our next chapter. Together, we are well-positioned to amplify our impact and deliver greater value to the communities we serve, both in the United States and Latin America.”
The completion and closing of the transaction are subject to customary closing conditions, including regulatory approvals in both the United States and Peru.
Credicorp is Peru’s leading financial services holding company, with a presence in Chile, Colombia, Bolivia, Panama, and the United States. Credicorp has a diversified portfolio of businesses, organized into four main lines: Universal Banking, through BCP and Banco de Crédito de Bolivia; Microfinance, through Mibanco in Peru and Colombia; Insurance and Pension Funds, through Grupo Pacífico and Prima AFP; and Investment Management and Advisory, through Credicorp Capital, Wealth Management at BCP, and ASB Bank Corp. Additionally, Credicorp complements its operations through Krealo, its corporate venture capital investment arm.
Banco de Crédito del Perú serves over 18 million clients and has a national network. The bank also operates internationally through its BCP Miami Agency, strengthening its regional presence.
Founded in 1989, Helm Bank USA is a community bank incorporated in the state of Florida, authorized to operate there by the Florida Office of Financial Regulation (OFR). It is supervised by the OFR and is a member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), which insures its clients’ deposits.
The arrest of Nicolás Maduro by the United States adds a new focal point to global geopolitics. The detention “confirms the idea that there are no zero-probability events: all scenarios become possible once the rules no longer exist,” explains Philippe Waechter, Chief Economist at Ostrum (an affiliate of Natixis IM). According to the expert, the key question now will revolve around Russia and China’s responses, both of which support Maduro. Waechter recalls that the United States and Venezuela have had tension since Hugo Chávez came to power in Venezuela in the late 1990s. Previously, the country was a U.S. “preserve,” specifically through oil and chemical industry exploitation. “As a reflection of this, baseball is the country’s favorite sport, just as it is in the United States,” he notes.
Waechter now emphasizes that the United States under President Donald Trump “wants to get its hands on Venezuelan oil.” While it is low-quality crude, it represents 17.5% of global reserves, “the largest in the world.” For this reason, and given the White House’s strong pro-oil bias, combined with the stagnation of the U.S. shale oil exploration and production industry, “Venezuela is a good alternative,” according to the expert.
In conclusion, Waechter points out that if the United States takes control of Venezuela, “sanctions on oil exports would be lifted and crude production in the country would resume, thereby increasing oil supply in the global market.” This would therefore be a favorable factor for a decline in the price of black gold. However, “the final question is whether, once again, an intervention of this kind will be destabilizing for the region. There is no shortage of examples,” adds the Ostrum expert.
Oil takes center stage
This geopolitical event therefore brings oil back into the spotlight. Energy prices reacted lower in the first relevant session following the arrest of Nicolás Maduro: oil fell by around 1% and natural gas dropped nearly 4%, “a move that draws attention given the geopolitical context, but which the market is reading, for now, as a political event with no immediate physical impact,” explains Diego Albuja, ATFX LATAM market analyst.
The expert adds that the key driver behind price movements in major energy commodities is the fact that no production disruptions or damage to Venezuelan oil infrastructure have been reported. As a result, “without a real supply shock, the geopolitical risk premium quickly fades and prices return to responding to global market fundamentals.” He notes that the market is looking more toward the medium term, potential political changes and normalization scenarios, rather than an immediate impact on crude flows. The sharper drop in natural gas prices is mainly due to factors specific to the U.S. market, such as high storage levels, more benign weather expectations, and technical adjustments in speculative positions, rather than the situation in Venezuela.
“The market is sending a very clear message: as long as there is no real supply disruption, fundamentals prevail. However, this balance is fragile and can change quickly if signs of operational damage, logistical blockages, or abrupt changes in the sanctions regime emerge,” Albuja concludes.
From his perspective, Raphaël Thuin, Head of Capital Markets Strategies at Tikehau Capital, notes that in recent years investors and markets have learned to look beyond recurring geopolitical risks and focus on the fundamental factors that drive long-term market performance. Recent developments in Venezuela “appear to fit this pattern,” as the country’s global economic impact “remains limited, with relatively low exposure for most international companies.”
As a result, the expert considers it likely that long-term market prospects “will not be affected.” He also does not rule out the possibility of positive catalysts. For example, he notes that one of the objectives of the current U.S. administration is to facilitate the flow of more Venezuelan oil to global markets. That said, Thuin acknowledges that geopolitical and regime changes “inevitably introduce new uncertainties,” and therefore concedes that in 2026, as in 2025, “geopolitics will be a factor investors and market performance will need to take into account.”
Other assets: gold and equities
While oil is now in the spotlight, there may be other spillover effects. For example, Ned Naylor-Leyland, Investment Manager for Gold and Silver at Jupiter AM, points out that precious metals, in this environment of market volatility, geopolitical tensions, and macroeconomic uncertainty, once again reinforce their historic role as a store of value, behaving differently from equities and bonds. Gold has already surpassed the $4,400-per-ounce level, rising by around 2% amid the arrest of Nicolás Maduro.
Similarly, Javier Molina, Senior Market Analyst at eToro, says that the situation in Venezuela “adds immediate noise.” While the expert places emphasis on the oil market, he also adds that these types of episodes “tend to result in tactical moves and spikes in volatility, but rarely alter the structural trend of risk assets on their own.” Ultimately, it serves as a reminder that the short term “can be uncomfortable, even within a bullish cycle.”
Currently, Molina stresses that the underlying trend remains upward and that staying invested “continues to make sense, especially in companies with visible earnings and positive momentum.” However, he acknowledges that “this is no longer a market for complacency,” as geopolitics, the fragility of the macroeconomic cycle, and high concentration levels “require heightened risk management, position-size adjustments, and acceptance that volatility is part of the journey.” For now, and ahead of the opening of U.S. equity markets, European stock indices were trading slightly higher by mid-session.
For many experts, there is a strong correlation between Bitcoin and digital assets with global liquidity. According to Yves Bonzon, CIO of Julius Baer, we are facing one of the “most liquidity-sensitive segments in financial markets,” which has led some analysts to interpret the cryptocurrency’s price drop as an early warning of monetary contraction. In his latest analysis, Bonzon raises this debate by posing fundamental questions.
Have investors found the key to measuring liquidity fluctuations in the financial system?
Bonzon points out that recent market dynamics have intensified these questions. He recalls that recently, U.S. stocks experienced a sharp intraday drop after the initial rally triggered by Nvidia’s results was unwound. Although this type of movement is uncommon, he emphasizes that “they are usually followed by strong rebounds.”
In the digital asset space, Bitcoin has entered a marked bearish phase: “It has experienced a sustained downtrend, falling more than 30% from its recent peak.” The price evolution, along with its decoupling from gold, has reopened the debate about its ability to act as a digital equivalent of the precious metal. Bonzon insists that investors must differentiate between short- and long-term correlations, as in the short term the relationship can fluctuate from “significantly positive to significantly negative,” a behavior that intensifies when Bitcoin “trades like a high-beta technology stock” during periods of excessive leverage or deleveraging.
In the long term, however, the CIO asserts that both gold and Bitcoin will tend to move “largely in tandem” as long as Western governments continue to use capital markets for sanctions, an environment that favors “greater structural demand for external assets that hedge against the consequences of such actions.”
Bonzon adds that although Bitcoin and digital assets are among the most sensitive segments to global liquidity, it does not necessarily make the cryptocurrency a reliable leading indicator. He explains that its relatively short history already shows a recognizable pattern: after its halving events, it tends to enter a sustained consolidation phase. Despite this, and in the context of the firm’s Secular Outlook, Julius Baer continues to consider Bitcoin “a viable long-term hedge against fiscal dominance and fiat currency devaluation.”
NVIDIA earnings trigger a rollercoaster in U.S. stock markets
The report contextualizes the recent behavior of traditional markets. U.S. stocks recently suffered an exceptionally volatile session: after a start driven by Nvidia’s results, the S&P 500 “opened more than 1% higher,” only to experience “a massive intraday reversal” and close in negative territory.
The Nasdaq 100 experienced an even more extreme move, with “an unusually wide intraday trading range of more than 4%.” These are very uncommon episodes: “Since 2000, only eight such episodes have occurred,” Bonzon recalls. However, all of them have historically been followed by average rebounds of 16% in the 100 days afterward. Since that session, both benchmark indices have recorded three consecutive days of recovery.
Other indicators also showed signs of stability, such as the NYSE Securities Broker/Dealer Index, which recently rebounded at its 200-day moving average, and the VIX, which, according to the expert, has calmed, trading only slightly above its long-term average of 20.
In fixed income markets, Bonzon notes that the Merrill Lynch Option Volatility Estimate (MOVE) Index, which reflects implied volatility in the U.S. Treasury market, “is behaving well,” staying below 80 points. He also notes that neither nominal nor real U.S. Treasury yields have shown significant movements in recent sessions, while inflation expectations remain stable. A similar stability is observed in the U.S. dollar index, which remains around 100 points, and in gold prices, which continue moving sideways within a range of $4,000 to $4,200 per ounce.
Digital gold or Nasdaq on steroids?
Regarding Bitcoin, Bonzon details that the cryptocurrency “has lost more than 30% of its value from its previous all-time high in early October,” after touching a provisional low of $80,553. At the same time, Bitcoin ETFs are heading toward a record month of outflows.
The CIO mentions that in a recent Financial Times opinion piece titled “The Warning Signal from Bitcoin’s Drop,” Katie Martin wrote that the evolution of Bitcoin and digital asset prices in general is becoming an early warning that markets feel unstable, giving investors, especially leveraged ones, an early signal of liquidity contraction.
The divergence between gold and Bitcoin has led some analysts to conclude that the cryptocurrency is not really digital gold. But Bonzon qualifies that statement as potentially premature: gold investors usually operate without leverage, while a large portion of Bitcoin investors, especially retail, do use leverage. This mismatch explains why, in certain periods, “investing in Bitcoin resembles investing in high-beta IT stocks.”
He also warns that the theory of Bitcoin as a leading liquidity indicator has limits: “If Bitcoin became the new U.S. liquidity indicator followed by everyone, the signal would stop working.”
The argument for long-term co-movement between gold and its digital equivalent remains valid
During his recent trip to Singapore and Hong Kong, Bonzon received numerous questions about the crypto market’s future. He notes that despite the asset’s short history, there is “a distinctive pattern” that usually repeats after each halving, marking the start of “a sustained consolidation phase.”
In the long term, Bonzon expects both gold and Bitcoin “to continue rising as long as Western governments keep instrumentalizing their capital markets for sanctions.” This dynamic would extend the structural demand for external assets that protect against geopolitical intervention.
As a tail risk, the CIO warns that a potential peace agreement in Ukraine that includes the unfreezing of Russian assets could trigger a “sudden profit-taking” in off-system assets.
In the coming months, the high correlation between Bitcoin and U.S. tech stocks is expected to decrease, as it is a phenomenon linked to the current phase of stock market consolidation. Meanwhile, sentiment indicators are “in depressed territory,” and overbought/oversold indicators point to “advanced selling pressure,” leaving room for short-term rebounds.
Structurally, Bonzon states: “Bitcoin should continue to be the original ‘native token,’ the only digital asset capable, in principle, of fulfilling the function of digital gold.” However, he rules out replacing fiat currencies, as it is “embedded in a deflationary monetary system by design and therefore suboptimal as a medium of exchange.”
Nevertheless, Julius Baer maintains its central thesis: “We continue to consider Bitcoin a viable long-term hedge against fiscal dominance and fiat currency devaluation.” The CIO concludes by noting that the next halving is scheduled for mid-2028.
A new wave of ETFs investing in private markets has made headlines over the past year. The sector is still in its early stages but evolving rapidly. The structure bundles traditionally illiquid assets into a historically liquid vehicle. Based on recent work with asset managers exploring these options, Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH) has developed a guide analyzing the factors driving the product’s evolution, as well as the opportunities, challenges, limitations, and risks it presents.
What Are Private Market ETFs and Why Are They in the Spotlight?
Unlike most listed assets, private markets, such as private equity, private debt, or private real estate, are typically illiquid. By nature, they are owned by a small group of investors, can be harder to trade, and are usually valued infrequently, often quarterly.
ETFs, in contrast, trade intraday and generally contain listed securities that are also traded throughout the day. By packaging private market assets into an ETF, investors gain exposure to an investment that is traditionally illiquid, costly, and long-term, in a more accessible way.
U.S.-domiciled ETFs are subject to regulatory liquidity requirements that limit investment in illiquid assets to no more than 15% of the fund’s net asset value.
Overall, private markets and ETFs represent two of the fastest-growing areas in the investment sector, consistently capturing an increasing share of capital flows for over a decade.
As an example, BBH cites a survey of private market investors conducted this year, which revealed strong investor confidence: of 500 global investors surveyed, 34% planned to invest in private market ETFs, and 57% sought more information about these products.
Market Context and Growth Drivers
The private market investment landscape is rapidly expanding and converging with another sector megatrend: ETFs.
Growth of Private Markets: Private assets currently represent over $14.8 trillion in committed and deployed capital, projected to reach $20–25 trillion by 2030. Additionally, the number of U.S. public companies has declined by roughly 50% since the 1980s, making private assets a key, often untapped, opportunity for investors historically excluded from these asset classes.
ETF Boom: The U.S. ETF market reached a total net asset value of $11.8 trillion in July 2025, with over 460 new ETFs launched in just the first half of the year, including Apollo’s and State Street Global Advisors’ first public-private credit ETFs.
Retail Access: Historically, retail investors had limited pathways to invest in private assets. Most products were targeted at institutional or high-net-worth investors. ETFs that hold private assets offer everyday investors a means to access private markets, often with minimums as low as a single share.
Several existing ETFs already emphasize connections with alternative and private market investments. Many are innovative, successful, and provide exposure, often indirect, to private assets. However, terminology is important, and BBH defines a private market ETF as one that directly holds private assets, such as private companies, private debt, or private real estate. This includes ETFs holding private companies either directly (e.g., AGIX’s investments in xAI or Anthropic) or via a special purpose vehicle (SPV).
BBH notes that ETFs do not qualify as private market ETFs when:
Alternative vs. Private Markets: “Alternative” is a broader term encompassing a wide variety of investments, including hedge funds. These strategies typically invest mainly in listed securities within a private fund vehicle.
ETFs holding publicly traded investment managers whose main activity is investing in private markets (e.g., Blackstone, Brookfield, Apollo, KKR). These funds invest in listed securities that indirectly gain exposure to private markets through the ongoing business activities of the companies they own.
ETFs invest in listed vehicles, such as business development companies (BDCs), which lend to or hold stakes in private companies.
BBH emphasizes that details matter for understanding regulatory restrictions, operational mechanisms, NAV calculations, valuations, and any relevant discussion regarding potential returns, liquidity, and risk.
Operational Mechanics of Private Market ETFs
Any ETF investing in private assets requires a well-designed valuation policy to manage daily market fluctuations, with triggers specifying when and how private asset holdings should be revalued.
Given the 15% exposure limit to private assets, investment managers must continuously monitor the mix of public and private market assets. Intraday movements in public markets can alter the fund’s overall allocation, so managers need a plan to rebalance the fund accordingly.
New Products on the Market
Recently, two ETFs have launched with an innovative approach: the IG Public & Private Credit ETF (PRIV) and the Short Duration IG Public & Private Credit ETF, both designed to provide greater exposure to private credit.
To achieve this, these ETFs have partnered with Apollo to provide firm, executable intraday offers on the portfolio via a guaranteed capital line backed by Apollo. This mechanism offers reasonable certainty that Apollo will provide liquidity if daily redemptions need to be funded, even for underlying private credit portfolios that would otherwise be difficult or impossible to liquidate during lock-up periods.
Conclusion
ETFs represent an opportunity for both managers and investors. Investment managers can expand distribution and access to private markets while offering broader exposure to a historically illiquid asset class.
Investors can view this from two perspectives:
Institutional investors may view private market ETFs as a means to access the asset class more efficiently, with significantly fewer liquidity obligations.
Retail investors, historically excluded from these assets, now have a pathway to participate in private market investments.
Regardless of product design, the existing 15% limit results in limited exposure to private assets. However, the current administration appears willing to reconsider many related regulations. In August, the SEC removed the 15% limit for registered closed-end funds investing in private funds.
“This is welcome news for the fund community and is likely to drive increased demand for such funds,” the BBH report notes, adding that it also serves as “a potential signal of the administration’s intent to increase access to alternative assets, which could foreshadow future developments in the ETF space.”
After a year dominated by geopolitical headlines and economic uncertainty, and marked by U.S. tariffs, asset managers are looking ahead to 2026 with cautious optimism. Overall, investment firms suggest that the U.S. economy will remain solid while Europe’s outlook improves, supported by market-friendly monetary policies from major central banks. Together, these factors should create an environment rich in opportunities, but one that also calls for a stronger emphasis on diversification.
When assessing the economic outlook, Anthony Willis, Senior Economist at Columbia Threadneedle Investments, expects solid growth in 2026. “We anticipate a rebound in activity in some European economies, with Germany particularly well-positioned thanks to the stimulus measures announced. China is expected to maintain its growth target at around 5%, while U.S. expansion should be broadly in line with this year. The UK’s growth prospects remain modest and not significantly different from those in 2025, although there is some scope for a slight deterioration,” Willis notes.
A Question of Resilience
“The global economy is undergoing a transition, not a slowdown. Global growth will moderate in 2026 but remain resilient as long as the economic cycle continues, driven by innovation and supportive economic policies. The technology wave is reshaping a multipolar world in which geopolitical and inflation risks have become more structural. These factors add to concerns stemming from fiscal vulnerabilities and valuation excesses, but AI-driven capital investment, shifts in industrial policy, and monetary easing should support activity and extend the cycle,” Amundi states.
Christian Schulz, Chief Economist at Allianz Gl, points out that “the global economy enters 2026 still constrained by the aftermath of trade wars,” with growth expected to ease only slightly to around 2.7%. The investment cycle driven by artificial intelligence, combined with proactive economic policies, will act as a stabilizing force. According to Schulz, “inflation in the United States will rise back above 3%, while pressures in Europe and Asia will be more contained, opening the door to interest rate cuts.”
He adds that 2026 will test institutional resilience, policy flexibility, and the ability to adapt to a more fragmented world. “Investors will need to pay attention to technological advances that will broaden investment opportunities beyond the U.S. technology sector and parts of Asia. Combined with more flexible monetary and fiscal policies, these factors should support global resilience despite challenges to pillars such as central bank independence and free trade,” he concludes.
“Although current market prices reflect a Goldilocks scenario, growth with contained inflation, we believe this is the least likely outcome for 2026. That said, markets may remain anchored to this optimistic assumption until labor market data show clear signs of stabilization. Ultimately, the combination of negative real rates globally, looser credit conditions, and a shift toward more expansionary monetary policies in an environment of still-persistent inflation suggests that inflationary growth is the most likely scenario for 2026. Overall, 2026 should offer investors significant opportunities, provided they are prepared to adapt to a wide range of outcomes, from limited recession risk to episodes of stagflation,” argue John Butler and Eoin O’Callaghan, macro strategists at Wellington Management.
Diversification in the Face of Challenges
Although geopolitical risks remain elevated, Schulz highlights that “attempts at de-escalation in the Middle East represent a positive development.” The United States and China will continue to lead the AI revolution, with spillover effects accelerating in other regions. Valuations in technology and certain less-regulated financial activities warrant caution, but “lower interest rates and moderate private-sector leverage reduce the risk of systemic instability.”
For DWS, the outlook for 2026 appears attractive, although the margin for error remains narrow. “Political headlines and geopolitical risks could trigger heightened volatility at any time. For this reason, a broadly diversified investment strategy, across both regions and asset classes, can help investors seize opportunities while remaining prepared for potential setbacks,” the firm adds.
This view on the importance of diversification is also shared by Amundi, which believes that long-term structural changes will continue to clash with short-term dynamics, keeping risk levels elevated while also reshaping opportunities as governments and companies seek to preserve trade and investment flows. “Our stance for 2026 is moderately constructive on risk assets, with greater diversification at all levels and a range of strategic hedges, such as alternative assets, gold, and selected currencies,” the firm concludes.
Average Wealth per Adult Will Continue to Grow Over the Next Five Years, with the United States as the main driver of this expansion, followed by the China region, Latin America, and Oceania, according to the UBS Global Wealth Report 2025. Europe and Southeast Asia are expected to experience solid but more moderate growth, while the Middle East and Africa will remain stable or see slight increases.
According to the latest report from the institution, total personal wealth is expected to show particularly dynamic behavior, with annual growth close to 5% in North America and approximately half that pace in the Middle East and Africa. The momentum will come mainly from rising asset prices and value creation associated with technological innovation in a context of structural transformation.
In this scenario, it is estimated that by 2029 there will be more than five million new millionaires worldwide. This trend will be reflected in the majority of the 56 markets analyzed, with no distinction between developed or emerging economies, large or small, dynamic or stagnant.
One of the Most Striking Findings of the Study Is That the Evolution of Wealth Does Not Always Move in Parallel With Economic Growth. At Times, It Far Outpaces It; at Others, It Lags Behind. Even Within Regions Showing Strong Macroeconomic Performance, There Can Be Areas Where Wealth Accumulation Is Weak or Stagnant.
Added to this is the fact that asset prices do not necessarily follow the same trajectory as GDP, and that the private sector—where individual wealth is concentrated—does not move at the same pace as the public sector, which is particularly relevant in economies where the latter holds considerable weight.
Another Key Factor Going Forward Will Be the Individual Mobility of Wealth, Driven by Intergenerational Transfers. In This Regard, the Size of the Population or Economy Is Not the Only Thing That Matters: Some Smaller Countries Could Surpass Much Larger Nations in Transfer Volume, Even When Demographic Projections Would Suggest Otherwise.
UBS Concludes That, While These Scenarios Are Subject to Multiple Factors and Could Evolve in Various Ways, the Initial Signs of Growth Already Observed Provide a Solid Foundation for Reflecting on the Path That Global Wealth Will Take in the Coming Years.
