We Asked Liz Ann Sonders, Jim Grant, and Brent Donnelly What Investors Miss About This Market
TL;DR
Veteran investors Jim Grant, Liz Ann Sonders, and Brent Donnelly warn that markets are underestimating the inflationary impact of geopolitical conflict, the global nature of energy prices despite US export status, and the importance of distinguishing between structural trends and mean-reverting policy shocks in the current volatile regime.
⚔️ The Inflationary Nature of War 3 insights
War is invariably inflationary
Grant argues that while theories blaming inflation on corporate greed or monetary policy come and go, war permanently strains productive capacity, destroys resources, and requires money printing to finance destruction, making it universally inflationary across centuries.
Historical monetary regime shift
Before the 1960s, inflation was exclusively a wartime phenomenon in the US, but the shift to fiat currency (the "PhD standard") now enables inflation without warfare, with current geopolitical conflicts adding "rancid whipped cream" to monetary mismanagement.
Geopolitical flashpoints
With tensions escalating over Greenland, the Baltic Straits, and the Strait of Hormuz, war preparations are diverting production and manpower resources, threatening to perpetuate inflation well above the Fed's 2% target.
🛢️ Oil Shock Realities 3 insights
Energy vs. crude distinction
Despite being a net energy exporter, the US remains a net crude oil importer and is fully exposed to global price shocks since energy is priced in global markets regardless of domestic supply balances.
Demand destruction dynamics
While high oil prices eventually create demand destruction through "the cure for high prices is high prices," shocks simultaneously pressure growth and inflation, with Strait of Hormuz blockages threatening fertilizer and food supply chains.
K-shaped economic impact
Rising non-discretionary costs disproportionately burden lower-income consumers who spend higher percentages of income on essentials, exacerbating the K-shaped nature of the economic recovery.
📊 Positioning and Policy Reflexivity 3 insights
Regime-dependent strategies
Constant contrarianism loses money by missing structural trends, but rolling policy shocks create mean-reverting regimes where positioning and sentiment become critical trading tools.
The policy reaction function
Market moves trigger policy reflexivity where extreme price action forces governmental responses (e.g., tariff delays after crashes), creating dampening feedback loops that reverse initial shocks.
Framework selection
Investors must apply the right framework to each regime, distinguishing between lasting structural trends like Brazil's appreciation and temporary mean-reverting shocks in US markets.
Bottom Line
Investors must distinguish between lasting structural trends and temporary policy shocks while recognizing that war and energy crises create persistent inflationary pressures that transcend domestic economic conditions and trigger reflexive policy responses.
More from Excess Returns
View all
He Quantified 200 Years of Disruption | Kai Wu on Separating Software Survivors from Value Traps
Kai Wu of Sparkline Capital analyzes why software stocks are trading at historic discounts (10% below market for the first time in 20 years) and presents a framework using 200 years of patent data to distinguish between genuine value opportunities and value traps facing AI disruption.
The Market Cares About Fundamentals — Just Not Yours | The Weekly Wrap - 5/31/2026
Hosts Jack Forehand and Matt Ziggler analyze clips from quant strategist Adam Parker, arguing that markets do trade on fundamentals—specifically forward-looking expectations for 2030-2031 rather than current PE ratios—while the penalty for missing earnings estimates has become structurally harsher than the reward for beating them.
The AI Trade Has a Problem | Ben Hunt, Brent Kochuba and Aahan Menon on What Could Derail It
Markets are ignoring geopolitical exhaustion and inflation shocks to focus on AI's transformative potential, creating a disconnect where stocks 'crash higher' despite risks while systematic macro investors focus on resilient economic data.
We Asked Robert Hagstrom Why MPT Forgot What Matters in Investing — and What He Does Instead
Robert Hagstrom argues that Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT) fundamentally erred by defining risk as price volatility rather than margin of safety, creating an institutional framework that prioritizes emotionally comfortable investing over the primary objective of making money, while business owners focus on cash flows and intrinsic value.