Alpha.Sources — Alpha Sources.CV

Global Leading Indicators Feb 2025 - In the Pipe, for Now

It’s been a while since I’ve been writing about markets and the economy. The reason, as I touched on earlier this month, is that I’ve been working on some scripts—with the help of my now trusty and indispensable ChatGPT+ subscription—to automate chart generation for the indicators and data I use and look at regularly. The first of these, on the OECD’s suite of leading indicators, is now done in its beta version, so let’s get started.

The February 2025 version of the chartbook can be found here. It is updated with the February values for the OECD leading indicators in amplitude- and seasonally-adjusted format. The coincident indicator is based on CPB’s data, and is most recently updated for January.

Things to think about #10 - Ukraine, the Endgame, and Coding with AI

Glenn Loury and John McWhorter are at their best when they disagree, and I enjoyed their discussion about the disastrous exchange between Trump, Vance, and Zelensky at the White House. Both agree that the U.S. is right to push for a negotiated settlement, which involves pressuring Ukraine to acknowledge its precarious position. However, they diverge on how this pressure was communicated and its potential repercussions. Glenn argues that Trump and the vice president rightly prioritized American interests by applying pressure on Zelensky, while John takes the opposite stance, framing his argument within a broader critique of the U.S. president and his administration.

The tragedy of Trump v Zelensky

Last week, I questioned how seriously we should take the initial direction of Mr. Trump’s attempt to end the war in Ukraine—an approach that involves openly conceding to Russia’s demand for territorial annexation and a binding commitment to block Ukraine from NATO membership. This was followed by a bizarre attack on Zelensky on X, where the U.S. president accused his Ukrainian counterpart of being a dictator and of instigating the war. On Friday, scenes at the White House made it abundantly clear: we should take it very seriously indeed. On first glance, Noah Smith and Niall Ferguson were right, and I was wrong. The fates of the key players in this drama are deeply intertwined and will converge soon enough, but it’s worth examining them separately.

Trying to make sense of the senseless

Noah Smith, an American columnist and Substacker, and historian Niall Ferguson both made the mistake last week of attempting to rationalise the Trump administration’s fumbling attempts to get Ukrainian peace talks underway.

Niall Ferguson appears to be making a completely reasonable point—one echoed by numerous other observers last week—that it was a mistake for the U.S. to publicly acknowledge that Ukraine can never become a full member of NATO and that the country must cede territory to Russia as part of any peace deal, even if both positions are widely accepted on the Western and Ukrainian sides of the negotiations. This, of course, was before Mr. Trump went on one of his ill-advised social media rampages, effectively accusing Ukraine of starting the war and labeling its sitting president a dictator.

02

Alpha Sources Blog

Powered by Squarespace