Mr. Market checks Mr. Trump

Risk-asset volatility and potentially sharp reversals remain a threat

The 90-day pause of tariffs on most countries and exemption of key tech imports suggest the U.S. administration is taking some account of financial risks and costs as well as a country’s willingness to engage. It shows there are factors that could put a check on the administration’s maximal tariff stance. As a result, late last week we extended our tactical horizon back to six to 12 months to dial up risk. Yet we still think tariffs can hurt growth and lift inflation, and major uncertainty remains.

The U.S. has paused country-specific “reciprocal” tariffs on all nations, except China, for 90 days and exempted some key tech imports. These tariffs are intended to create negotiating leverage on countries with which the U.S. runs goods trade deficits – and reduce imbalances. See the chart below.

Even with the pause, the U.S. average effective tariff rate is still around 20%, including 145% tariffs on select Chinese imports. We see U.S. tariffs adding to inflation. Prolonged uncertainty raises the risk of recession. It may drag on corporate investment and delay longer-term commitments. Consumer spending could be hurt by any erosion of wealth and real incomes. Dented confidence in the U.S. could curb foreign investor appetite for U.S. assets. Trade tensions with China are set to deepen. We see tariffs lowering growth in China, and potential policy stimulus only partly offsetting that drag.

Along with country-specific tariffs, we see two other primary types of U.S. tariffs. First, tariffs on strategic sectors to support reshoring of activity. Second, a universal 10% tariff on most imports to generate revenue and aid domestic production. Even with last week’s pause – and subsequent exemption of some key tech imports such as smartphones – the U.S. is still facing much higher tariffs than we expected a few weeks ago. With uncertainty around where tariffs will land and unpredictable negotiations ahead, we aim to understand the factors that can prompt the administration to change course on policy. It appears to be taking some account of market volatility, financial risks, and other sources of pushback, as well as a country’s willingness to engage. That is putting a check on its maximal stance and could bind policy changes.

Checks on policy emerge

The implications? The near-term risk of a financial accident has eased. We cautiously leaned back into risk late last week by extending our tactical horizon back to six to 12 months from three months. We also renewed our overweight to U.S. and Japanese stocks. U.S. equities are supported by the AI theme, resilient corporate earnings and a so far solid economy. We see Japanese stocks still benefiting from stronger corporate profits and shareholder-friendly reforms. We recently upped Europe’s stocks to neutral but focus on selective opportunities while looking for more progress on structural challenges.

Yet we expect ongoing risk-asset volatility and potentially sharp reversals. Spiking yields in long-term U.S. Treasuries seemed to be a factor in the change in tariff tactics. We stay underweight long-term Treasuries, our highest conviction view: Tariffs are likely to add to already sticky inflation, and congressional budget plans last week reinforce the outlook for persistent budget deficits. We favor gold instead as a portfolio diversifier. The broad-based equity selloff has created opportunities to tap into certain sectors, and selectivity is key. We still like U.S. technology benefitting from the AI buildout and adoption. We also favor global banks. That includes U.S. banks given the scope for deregulation even with some potential economic pain. We also like banks in Europe (higher rates versus pre-pandemic levels) and Japan (stronger loan growth).

Our bottom line

The U.S. paused most “reciprocal” tariffs even as U.S.-China trade tensions look set to deepen. Checks on policy allowed us to extend our tactical horizon back to six to 12 months and resume our positive view on U.S. and Japanese stocks.

Wei Li, Managing Director, is the Global Chief Investment Strategist at BlackRock Investment Institute at BlackRock Inc.

Jean Boivin is Managing Director, Head of the BlackRock Investment Institute at BlackRock Inc.

Glenn Purves, Global Head of Macro – BlackRock Investment Institute, and Catherine Kress, Head of Geopolitical Research – BlackRock Investment Institute, contributed to this article.

Disclaimer

This material is not intended to be relied upon as a forecast, research or investment advice, and is not a recommendation, offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities or to adopt any investment strategy. The opinions expressed are as of the date indicated and may change as subsequent conditions vary. The information and opinions contained in this post are derived from proprietary and nonproprietary sources deemed by BlackRock to be reliable, are not necessarily all-inclusive and are not guaranteed as to accuracy. As such, no warranty of accuracy or reliability is given and no responsibility arising in any other way for errors and omissions (including responsibility to any person by reason of negligence) is accepted by BlackRock, its officers, employees or agents. This post may contain “forward-looking” information that is not purely historical in nature. Such information may include, among other things, projections and forecasts. There is no guarantee that any of these views will come to pass. Reliance upon information in this post is at the sole discretion of the reader.

© 2025 BlackRock Inc. All rights reserved. iSHARES and BLACKROCK are registered trademarks of BlackRock, Inc., or its subsidiaries in the United States and elsewhere. This article first appeared April 14, 2025, on the BlackRock website. Used with permission.

Image: iStock.com/whyframestudio