Core Viewpoint - The US dollar index continues to show weakness, characterized by short-term pressure and long-term depreciation trends, influenced by policy uncertainties and fundamental resilience [1] Fundamental Factors - Two main factors dominate the dollar's movement: 1. Fluctuating US trade policies, including recent tariff rulings and new policy signals, increase global trade uncertainty, suppressing dollar credibility and market risk appetite, while ongoing trade deficits amplify depreciation pressure [1] 2. Divergence in Federal Reserve policy expectations, with delayed rate cut expectations and cautious official statements increasing market hesitance, weakening the dollar's upward momentum [1] Economic Indicators - The robust US labor market and resilient economic recovery are key in preventing significant dollar declines, although they can only limit downward movement without reversing short-term weakness [1] Technical Analysis - The mid-term downtrend of the dollar index is clear, with short-term bearish dominance. The moving averages indicate a bearish arrangement, reinforcing the weak trend, and while the index is in an oversold region, there are no clear signs of a bottoming out, limiting rebound strength [1] Market Outlook - In the short term, the dollar index is expected to remain under pressure, with rebounds likely facing resistance. Future direction will depend on US inflation data, Federal Reserve policy developments, and the implementation of trade policies [2] - In the medium to long term, structural depreciation trends are unlikely to reverse due to high fiscal deficits and the trend of de-dollarization [2]

Group 1 - The political atmosphere in the U.S. is heating up as midterm elections approach, with voters expressing pessimism about the current economic situation, particularly regarding high prices and living costs [2] - Trump's recent State of the Union address aimed to boost confidence by highlighting improvements in economic indicators such as income growth and inflation reduction, despite the reality showing mixed results [2][4] - There is a noticeable gap between marginal improvements in economic data and the public's perception of purchasing power, contributing to cautious market sentiment [2] Group 2 - Trade policy remains a contentious issue, with the Supreme Court's rejection of global tariffs imposing constraints on government trade strategies, yet the White House plans to pursue import restrictions through other legal avenues [3] - Concerns about inflation are heightened as tariffs typically pass costs onto businesses and consumers, potentially leading to secondary inflationary pressures [3] - The political landscape is marked by increasing polarization within Congress over immigration, budget, and enforcement issues, complicating the policy advancement process [3] Group 3 - Trump's proposed domestic initiatives include providing matching savings for workers not covered by corporate retirement plans and limiting congressional members' trading in individual stocks, though the fiscal sources and implementation paths for these measures remain unclear [4] - The narrative of economic recovery and strength is being emphasized to stabilize confidence, while voters and markets are reassessing risks based on inflation, employment, and policy uncertainty [4] - The current U.S. policy environment's uncertainty is becoming a significant variable affecting exchange rates and capital flows, with potential for increased volatility in the dollar and a fluctuating international market [4]

Core Viewpoint - The gold market is experiencing a significant pullback after reaching a monthly high of $5230, indicating a shift from short-term buying to profit-taking, with U.S. monetary policy being a key variable influencing gold prices [1][4][5]. Group 1: Market Dynamics - Gold prices showed a clear upward trend before retreating, with market participants moving towards profit-taking [1][4]. - The U.S. Federal Reserve's recent meeting minutes indicate that several officials believe that a new round of easing should not be pursued until inflation trends stabilize [1][4]. - Changes in U.S. trade policy, including new global tariff proposals by President Trump, have raised concerns about global economic growth, impacting market sentiment [5]. Group 2: Geopolitical Factors - Ongoing geopolitical tensions, particularly in the Middle East, continue to pose potential conflict risks, with the market closely monitoring U.S.-Iran nuclear negotiations [5]. - Such military conflict risks typically increase demand for safe-haven assets like gold, providing medium to long-term support for prices [5]. Group 3: Technical Analysis - The overall trend for gold remains bullish, but it has entered a structural adjustment phase after reaching a peak around $5238 [7]. - The price is currently above long-term moving averages, but there is a notable distance between the price and these averages, indicating a potential need for a return to the mean [7]. - Key support levels are identified around the 50-day moving average, while the 200-day moving average remains significantly below current prices, suggesting that the long-term bullish structure is intact as long as mid-term support is not breached [7].

Core Viewpoint - The report from Caitong Securities highlights Trump's strategic shift to utilize Section 122 of the Trade Act after losing the tariff legal battle, indicating a tactic of "virtual card playing" to maintain negotiation leverage and garner votes ahead of the midterm elections [1][2]. Group 1: Legal and Policy Analysis - Following the Supreme Court's ruling against the IEEPA-based tariffs, the Trump administration quickly invoked Section 122 to impose a 10% uniform tariff on global imports, with plans to increase it to 15% [1]. - The use of Section 122 is characterized as a common negotiation tactic by Trump, aimed at creating new leverage when previous options fail [2]. Group 2: Trade Implications - The shift to Section 122 has technically lowered the tariff barrier, as the nominal tariff under IEEPA was 20%, while the new maximum under Section 122 is 15%, creating a temporary arbitrage opportunity for global traders [4]. - This change opens a "window" for countries with previously high effective tax rates to increase exports, while also providing U.S. traders a chance to boost imports [4]. Group 3: Future Trade Strategy - The report warns that the decrease in tariffs should not lead to blind optimism, as the real challenge lies in the potential initiation of Section 301 and 232 investigations within the next 150 days, marking a period of intensified trade negotiations and market volatility [6]. - Trump's strategy may involve maintaining pressure through Section 122 tariffs while simultaneously launching investigations under Sections 301 and 232, creating a cycle of "investigation-threat-negotiation-compromise" to achieve favorable trade outcomes [6]. Group 4: Political Context - Trump's actions are heavily influenced by the need for votes, as he requires tariff revenue to address a fiscal gap equivalent to 0.55% of GDP while avoiding inflation that could anger voters [6]. - The upcoming 2026 tariff policy is expected to navigate a narrow path between fiscal needs and inflation concerns, with Trump's tax increase rhetoric aimed at ultimately achieving tax reductions to secure votes [6].

Group 1 - The unclear outlook of U.S. trade policy is putting pressure on market sentiment, leading to a collective decline in the three major U.S. stock indices [1] - The Nasdaq Composite Index fell by 0.03%, the Dow Jones Industrial Average decreased by 0.31%, and the S&P 500 Index dropped by 0.03% [1] - Technology stocks experienced widespread declines, with Tesla and Oracle both falling by over 1% [1] Group 2 - Novo Nordisk's stock plummeted by 15% due to the disappointing trial results of its new generation weight loss drug CagriSema, which underperformed compared to Eli Lilly's Zepbound [1]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article indicates that despite a recent attempt at a rebound, the US dollar is not regaining its status as a "safe-haven asset" this year, reflecting ongoing investor concerns about its stability [1][2]. - The decline of the dollar in January is seen as a continuation of weakness, with investor confidence in the global reserve currency being shaken, contrasting with previous significant sell-offs that were linked to external trade policy shocks [2][3]. - The ICE Dollar Index rose by 0.6% on Monday, but it has still declined nearly 1% over the past month and approximately 10% over the last 12 months, indicating a longer-term trend of dollar weakness [3][6]. Group 2 - Analysts from Barclays noted that the current dollar weakness is occurring in a context of economic resilience, suggesting a shift in investor perception regarding the risks associated with the dollar [2]. - The recent trade agreement with India, announced by President Trump, has not alleviated market concerns about potential disruptive shifts in US trade policy, particularly following threats of additional tariffs on European allies [2][6]. - DataTrek Research highlighted that the average decline of the dollar last month exceeded the monthly average for 2025, reinforcing the trend of dollar weakness that has persisted into early 2026 [6].

香港交易及結算所有限公司及香港聯合交易所有限公司對本公告的內容概不負責，對其準確性 或完整性亦不發表任何聲明，並明確表示，概不對因本公告全部或任何部分內容而產生或因倚 賴該等內容而引致的任何損失承擔任何責任。 Johnson Electric Holdings Limited 德昌電機控股有限公司 * (在百慕達註冊成立之有限公司) (股份代號: 179) 25/26 財政年度第三季度 業務及未經審核財務資料 德昌電機控股有限公司（「德昌電機」或「本公司」，連同其附屬公司統稱「本集 團」）發出此公告，內容有關本集團截至 2025 年 12 月 31 日止九個月之業務營運及選 定之未經審核財務資料。 本公司董事會認為刊發最新季度銷售表現與國際企業披露的最佳常規一致。此公告旨 在提升透明度，並確保投資者及潛在投資者在同一時間平等地取得相同的信息。 截至 2025 年 12 月 31 日止九個月，本集團營業額為 2,726 百萬美元，對比上一財政年度 同期之 2,730 百萬美元，下跌約 4 百萬美元。期內，受惠於匯率變動，本集團營業額增 加 40 百萬美元。 汽車產品組別之銷售 截至 2025 年 12 月 31 ...

Group 1 - The New York stock market showed mixed results on January 2, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average rising by 319.10 points to close at 48,382.39, a gain of 0.66%, while the S&P 500 increased by 12.97 points to 6,858.47, a rise of 0.19%. In contrast, the Nasdaq Composite fell by 6.362 points to 23,235.629, a decline of 0.03% [1] - Among the sectors in the S&P 500, eight out of eleven sectors saw gains, with the energy sector leading at a 2.09% increase and the industrial sector following with a 1.88% rise. Conversely, the consumer discretionary and communication services sectors experienced declines of 1.14% and 0.38%, respectively [1] - The final data released by S&P Global indicated that the U.S. manufacturing Purchasing Managers' Index (PMI) for December 2025 stood at 51.8, consistent with the preliminary value but lower than the previous month's 52.2 [1] Group 2 - Jay Hatfield, CEO of Infrastructure Capital Management, predicts that the S&P 500 index will reach 8,000 points by the end of 2026, suggesting a more balanced market as regional banks outperform and high-valued tech stocks lag [2] - Deutsche Bank analysts highlight that U.S. trade policies, particularly the Supreme Court's ruling on the legality of Trump's tariff measures, could significantly shape the market in 2026, alongside developments regarding the Federal Reserve [2] - Adam Turnquist, Chief Technical Strategist at LPL Financial, notes that the stock market has had a rocky start to the new year due to uncomfortable interest rates, warning that if the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield surpasses 4.2%, it could rise further towards 4.5% [2] Group 3 - Tesla reported a global vehicle delivery of 418,000 units for the fourth quarter of 2025, reflecting a year-on-year decrease of 15%, leading to a 2.59% drop in its stock price, which closed at $438.07 per share [2]

Core Insights - Japanese chemical companies are facing a decline in both revenue and profit due to multiple market challenges, including global economic slowdown and uncertainties from U.S. trade policies [1][4] Company Performance Summary - **Mitsubishi Chemical**: Achieved a remarkable net profit increase of 169% year-on-year, rising from 40.9 billion yen to 110.1 billion yen, despite a 10.5% decline in revenue to 1.79 trillion yen. The company benefited from China's economic stimulus and positive fiscal spending in some European countries, but overall economic growth remains under pressure due to U.S. trade policies [1] - **Shin-Etsu Chemical**: Experienced a slight revenue increase of 1.4% to 1.28 trillion yen, but net profit fell by 12.3% to 257.8 billion yen, with operating profit down 17.7% to 333.9 billion yen. The company attributed its performance challenges to global economic turmoil caused by U.S. policies and recent export control measures from China [1] - **Toray Industries**: Reported a significant net profit drop of 25% to 58.1 billion yen, with revenue declining by 4.6% to 1.23 trillion yen. The fiber and textile segment showed resilience with a 1.7% increase in operating profit, but the industrial applications market has not fully recovered, prompting the company to initiate cost-cutting measures [2] - **Sumitomo Chemical**: Achieved a turnaround with net profit of 39.6 billion yen, compared to a net loss of 6.5 billion yen in the previous year, despite an 11.8% revenue decline to 1 trillion yen. The core business and green materials segment faced challenges due to maintenance shutdowns and exit from aluminum business, leading to a 27% revenue drop in that segment [2] - **Mitsui Chemicals**: Experienced a significant revenue decline of 8.6% to 813.6 billion yen and a drastic net profit drop of 65% to 7.8 billion yen. The decline was attributed to lower product prices due to falling raw material costs, reduced sales in core and green materials, and impairment losses related to investments in phenol business in China [3] - **Asahi Kasei**: Reported a 7% revenue decline to 637.8 billion yen and a 33.3% drop in operating profit to 31 billion yen. While sales in the electronics sector contributed positively, negative factors such as inventory valuation adjustments and maintenance shutdowns offset gains [3] - **Tosoh**: Showed poor performance with a 5.4% revenue decline to 499.1 billion yen and a 70.4% drop in net profit to 7.3 billion yen. The decline was driven by a stronger yen, lower product prices due to falling raw material costs, and reduced shipments due to extended maintenance at its Nanyo plant [3] Industry Overview - Overall, Japanese chemical companies are under significant pressure from U.S. trade policy uncertainties, weak global demand, raw material price fluctuations, and periodic maintenance of production facilities. Only a few companies have managed to achieve localized improvements through business structure optimization or breakthroughs in niche markets [4]

Core Viewpoint - The recent decision by the U.S. Senate to terminate Trump's comprehensive tariff policy highlights the ongoing volatility of U.S. trade policy, which oscillates between protectionism and openness, driven by conflicting interests among various economic groups [2][3][4]. Group 1: The Eternal Struggle of Interest Groups - James Madison's insights in "The Federalist Papers" reveal that trade policy is fundamentally a conflict among different economic interest groups, including landowners, manufacturers, and financial sectors [3][4]. - The historical context shows that trade policy has been a source of intense political conflict in the U.S., as it directly impacts money and jobs, benefiting some industries while harming others [4][5]. Group 2: Historical Policy Shifts - U.S. trade policy has evolved through three distinct eras, each prioritizing different goals: revenue generation through tariffs, protection of domestic manufacturers, and reciprocal trade agreements to reduce barriers [8][9]. - Major external shocks, such as the Civil War and the Great Depression, have led to significant shifts in trade policy objectives, reflecting the political realignments of the time [9]. Group 3: Stability of Trade Policy - The stability of U.S. trade policy is influenced by the country's economic geography and political system, where different regions have specialized economic activities that shape their trade interests [11][12]. - The political structure makes it challenging to change established policies, leading to a tendency to maintain the status quo despite ongoing debates and conflicts among interest groups [11][12]. Group 4: The Interplay of Economics and Politics - Understanding U.S. trade policy requires an analysis of both economic and political factors, as historical and political contexts significantly influence policy outcomes [13][14]. - The book "The Conflict of Trade" serves as a comprehensive framework for understanding the complexities of U.S. trade policy, emphasizing the interplay of lobbying, regional interests, and political calculations [16].