Connect with us

Business

Which Interest Rate Should You Care About?

Published

on

Which Interest Rate Should You Care About?

Watch out for interest rates.

Not the short-term rates controlled by the Federal Reserve. Barring an unforeseen financial crisis, they’re not going anywhere, especially not after the jump in inflation reported by the government on Wednesday.

Instead, pay attention to the 10-year Treasury yield, which has been bouncing around since the election from about 4.8 to 4.2 percent. That’s not an unreasonable level over the last century or so.

But it’s much higher than the 2.9 percent average of the last 20 years, according to FactSet data. At its upper range, that 10-year yield may be high enough to dampen the enthusiasm of many entrepreneurs and stock investors and to restrain the stock market and the economy.

That’s a problem for the Trump administration. So the new Treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, has stated outright what is becoming an increasingly evident reality. “The president wants lower rates,” Mr. Bessent said in an interview with Fox Business. “He and I are focused on the 10-year Treasury.”

Advertisement

Treasuries are the safe and steady core of many investment portfolios. They influence mortgages, credit cards, corporate debt and the exchange rate for the dollar. They are also the standard by which commercial, municipal and sovereign bonds around the world are priced.

What’s moving those Treasury rates now is bond traders’ assessments of the economy — including the Trump administration’s on-again, off-again policies on tariffs, as well as its actions on immigration, taxes, spending and much more.

Mr. Bessent, and President Trump, would like those rates to be substantially lower, and they’re trying to talk them down. But many of the president’s policies are having the opposite effect.

The president needs the bond market on his side. If it comes to disapprove of his policies, rates will rise and the economy — along with the fortunes of the Trump administration — will surely suffer.

Mr. Bessent may be focusing on Treasury rates, or yields, partly to relieve pressure on the Federal Reserve, which President Trump frequently berated in his first term and on the campaign trail.

Advertisement

The Fed’s independence is sacrosanct among most economists and many investors. During the campaign, Mr. Trump repeatedly called on the Fed to lower rates. Yet any threat to the Fed’s ability to operate freely could panic the markets, which, clearly, is not what Mr. Trump wants.

To the contrary, when the markets are strong, he frequently cites them as a barometer of his popularity. In 2017, he boasted about the performance of the stock market an average of once every 35 hours, Politico calculated.

Shortly after the November election, I wrote that the markets might restrain some of Mr. Trump’s actions. But I wouldn’t go too far with this now. Few government departments or traditions seem to be off limits for the administration’s aggressive changes in policy or reductions in work force, masterminded by Mr. Trump’s sidekick, the billionaire disrupter-in-chief, Elon Musk. Just look at The Times’s running tabulation of the actions taken since Jan. 21. It’s dizzying.

Still, so far, at least, the administration has been remarkably circumspect when it comes to the Fed. That doesn’t mean President Trump has entirely constrained himself: He has continued to mock the Fed, saying in a social media post that it has “failed to stop the problem they created with Inflation” and has wasted its time on issues like “DEI, gender ideology, ‘green’ energy, and fake climate change.”

Nonetheless, Mr. Bessent said specifically that Mr. Trump “is not calling for the Fed to lower rates.” Instead, the Treasury secretary said, “If we deregulate the economy, if we get this tax bill done, if we get energy down, then rates will take care of themselves and the dollar will take care of itself.” The president has not contradicted him. So far, trying to control the Fed is a line that Mr. Trump hasn’t yet crossed. The bond market is another matter.

Advertisement

Treasury rates haven’t usually garnered the big headlines frequently devoted to the Federal Reserve.

The Fed is easier to explain. When it raises or lowers short-term rates, it’s clear that somebody took action and caused a measurable change.

In reality, when we report that the Fed is cutting or increasing rates, we mean that it is shifting its key policy rate, the federal funds rate. That’s what banks charge one another for borrowing and lending money overnight. It’s important as a signal — a red or green light for stock traders — and “it influences other interest rates such as the prime rate, which is the rate banks charge their customers with higher credit ratings,” according to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. “Additionally, the federal funds rate indirectly influences longer- term interest rates.”

What causes shifts in longer-term rates is much harder to pinpoint because they are set by an amorphous force: the market, with Treasuries at the core. Day to day, you won’t hear much about it unless you’re already a bond maven.

How does any market set prices? Supply and demand, the preferences of buyers and sellers, trading rules — the textbooks say these and other factors determine market prices. That’s true for tangible things like milk, eggs, gasoline, a house or a car. Treasury prices — and those of other bonds, which use Treasuries as a reference — are more complicated. They include estimates of the future of interest rates, of inflation and of the Fed’s intentions.

Advertisement

The Fed sets overnight rates, which are involved indirectly in bond rates for a simple reason. The interest rate for a 10-year Treasury reflects assumptions about many, many days of overnight rates, chained together until they span the life of whatever bond you buy. Inflation matters because when it rises more quickly than anticipated, it will reduce the real value of the stream of income you receive from standard bonds.

That happened in 2022. Inflation soared and so did yields, while bond prices, which move in the opposite direction, fell — creating losses for bond funds and for individual bonds sold under those conditions.

That’s why the increase in inflation in January, to an annual rate of 3 percent for the Consumer Price Index from 2.9 percent the previous month, immediately pushed up the 10-year Treasury yield, which stands above 4.5 percent. Trump administration policies are weighing on bond prices and yields, too.

Mr. Bessent has pointed out that oil prices are a major ingredient in inflation and, therefore, bond yields. But whether Mr. Trump will be able to bring down oil prices by encouraging drilling — while eliminating subsidies and regulations that encourage the development of energy alternatives — is open to question.

Some Trump policies being sold as promoters of economic growth — like cutting regulations and tax rates — could have that effect. But others, like reducing the size of the labor force — which his deportations of undocumented immigrants and restrictions on the arrival of new immigrants will do — could slow growth and increase inflation.

Advertisement

So could the tariffs that he has been threatening, delaying and, in some cases, already imposing. Expectations for future inflation jumped in the University of Michigan’s monthly survey in January. Joanne Hsu, the survey’s director, said that reflects growing concerns about the Trump tariffs among consumers.

“These consumers generally report that tariff hikes will pass through to consumers in the form of higher prices,” she wrote. She added that “recent data show an emergence of inflationary psychology — motives for buying-in-advance to avoid future price increases, the proliferation of which would generate further momentum for inflation.”

None of that augurs well for the 10-year Treasury yield. Nor does a warning issued by five former Treasury secretaries — Robert E. Rubin, Lawrence H. Summers, Timothy F. Geithner, Jacob J. Lew and Janet L. Yellen — who served in Democratic administrations.

They wrote in The New York Times that incursions of Mr. Musk’s cost-cutting team into the Treasury’s payment system threaten the country’s “commitment to make good on our financial obligations.” They applauded Mr. Bessent for assuring Congress in writing that the Treasury will safeguard the “integrity and security of the system, given the implications of any compromise or disruption to the U.S. economy.”

But they decried the need for any Treasury secretary to have to make such promises in his first weeks in office.

Advertisement

Other potential flash points for Treasury yields loom. The Fed has in the past manipulated the market bond supply by buying and selling securities. It’s reducing its holding now, which could put upward pressure on interest rates — and make the Fed an irresistible Trump target. At the same time, Secretary Bessent is financing the government debt mainly with shorter-term bills but may not be able to avoid increasing the supply of longer-term Treasuries indefinitely, as the federal deficit swells. Yet Congress is reluctant to raise the debt ceiling, which will bite later this year.

These are difficult times. So far, the 10-year yield hasn’t shifted all that much. The markets, at least, have been holding steady.

Business

Warner Bros. Discovery board faces pressure as activist investor threatens to vote no on Netflix deal

Published

on

Warner Bros. Discovery board faces pressure as activist investor threatens to vote no on Netflix deal

Activist investor Ancora Holdings Group is calling on the Warner Bros. Discovery board to consider a revised bid from Paramount Skydance and negotiate with the David Ellison-led company, or it says it will vote no on the proposed deal between Warner Bros. and Netflix.

The Cleveland-based investment management firm released a presentation Wednesday detailing why it believes Paramount’s latest offer could be a superior bid compared with the Netflix transaction.

Ancora said its stake in Warner Bros. Discovery is worth about $200 million, which would make its ownership less than 1% given the company’s $69.4-billion market cap.

Ancora cited uncertainty around the equity value and final debt allocation for the planned spinoff of Warner’s cable channels into a separate company as a factor that could change share valuation. The spinoff is still set to happen under the agreement with Netflix, as the streamer does not intend to buy the cable channels. Paramount has proposed buying the entire company.

The backing of David Ellison’s father, Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, was a sign of the Paramount bid’s “credibility and executability,” Ancora said, adding that it had concerns about the regulatory hurdles Netflix could face.

Advertisement

Senators grilled Netflix Co-Chief Executive Ted Sarandos last week about potential antitrust issues related to its agreement to buy Warner Bros. Sarandos has said 80% of HBO Max subscribers in the U.S. also subscribe to Netflix and contended that a deal between the two would give the combined company 20% of the U.S. television streaming market, below the 30% threshold for a monopoly.

The investment management firm noted that Paramount is “reportedly viewed as the current administration’s ‘favored’ bidder — suggesting stronger political support,” a nod to the Ellison family’s friendly relationship with President Trump.

Trump has vacillated in his public statements on the deal. In December, he said he “would be involved” in his administration’s decision to approve any agreement, but last week, he said he “decided I shouldn’t be involved” and would leave it up to the Justice Department.

“Paramount’s latest offer has opened the door,” Ancora wrote in its presentation. “There is still a clear and immediately actionable path for the Hollywood ending that all [Warner] shareholders deserve.”

Ancora said it intends to vote no on the Netflix deal and that it also could seek to elect directors at the upcoming Warner shareholders meeting.

Advertisement

Warner said in a statement that its board and management team “have a proven track record of acting in the best interests of the Company and shareholders” and that they “remain resolute in our commitment to maximize value for shareholders.”

Ancora’s presentation does highlight “two primary questions as shareholders approach this deal,” said Alicia Reese, senior vice president of equity research for media and entertainment at Wedbush.

“The biggest question mark is what is Discovery Global worth?” she asked. “The second is how likely is Netflix to pass regulatory scrutiny?”

The firm’s opposition doesn’t necessarily mean the Warner board will change course, but if other significant shareholders take a similar stance, the board likely would need to “meaningfully and proactively engage further to seek more money,” said Corey Martin, a managing partner at the law firm Granderson Des Rochers.

“If I were Paramount … I would view this as a tea leaf that there might be a little bit of an opening here, to the extent we were to be aggressive,” he said. But, “if Paramount wants this company, it’s going to have to blow the Netflix bid out of the water so that there’s no question to the shareholders which bid represents the most value.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

How Chipotle lost its sizzle

Published

on

How Chipotle lost its sizzle

Chipotle Mexican Grill, the Newport Beach-based chain known for its bursting burritos and lunch bowls, just finished its worst year ever.

Its same-store sales declined last year for the first time since going public two decades ago. The downturn reflects what analysts say is a broader slowdown in fast casual chains — considered a step above fast food but below full-service restaurants.

In a K-shaped economy where the few with money are still spending while everyone else is anxious about rising prices and keeping their jobs, Chipotle is stuck in a sour spot. It isn’t a destination for the rich. Instead, it is a skippable splurge for those looking to save.

“Our guests [are] placing heightened focus on value and quality and pulling back on overall restaurant spending,” Chipotle Chief Executive Scott Boatwright said last week after announcing earnings.

In an uncertain economy muddied by tariffs and an immigration crackdown, consumers are cutting back on discretionary spending and increasingly seeking the best value on essentials such as lunch and dinner.

Advertisement

Chipotle has boomed in popularity since opening in Denver in 1993. It moved its headquarters to California in 2018.

The burrito staple opened 334 new locations last year, bringing its total to roughly 4,000. The company’s net income was $1.5 billion in 2025, virtually flat compared to the year prior. Its comparable sales lost steam with a roughly 2% decline in 2025 following a 7.4% increase in 2024.

In an earnings call earlier this month, executives estimated that same-store sales would be about flat in 2026, with 350 to 370 new restaurants slated to open.

“As we move into 2026, the consumer landscape is shifting,” Boatwright said.

He tried to suggest that Chipotle customers are from the upward-sloping part of the K in the K-shaped economy, so it will not be planning big price cuts to attract new customers. Boatwright said on the earnings call that 60% of Chipotle’s core customers make more than $100,000 per year.

Advertisement

“We’ve learned the guest skews younger, a little more higher income, and we’re gonna lean into that,” Boatwright said.

The company’s suggestion that it doesn’t plan to do much more for cost-conscious consumers sparked an online debate that the burrito giant is no longer for regular people.

McDonald’s demonstrated the value of offering more value these days. It announced this week that its sales surged after the launch of its $5 meal deal last year, part of broader value wars among fast-food establishments.

Chipotle has tried to offer value by not raising its prices as much as inflation would require, reviving a rewards program, testing a “happier hour” with lower prices and offering smaller portions at lower prices.

Chipotle came under fire in 2024 for dishing out inconsistent portion sizes, but has since recommitted to giving every customer a “generous” helping.

Advertisement

Late last year, Chipotle launched a high-protein menu that includes inexpensive options like a cup of chicken or steak for around $4. Protein has been trending as the rise of GLP-1s have many Americans eating less and focused on getting the most out of their meals.

“This is going to be a marquee year for Chipotle to get back on track,” said Jim Salera, a restaurant analyst at Stephens. “Chipotle has traditionally been much more resilient through ebbs and flows of the consumer, but nobody’s immune.”

The company has weathered other challenges in the past. Its business took a hit when it served tainted food that sickened more than 1,100 people in the U.S. from 2015 to 2018. The company paid a $25 million fine to resolve criminal charges connected with the outbreaks.

Some full-service restaurants are also lowering prices to levels that compete with Chipotle, analysts said. A Chipotle burrito or bowl plus a drink costs around $15, while the value-focused full-service restaurant Chili’s offers a multi-course meal for under $11.

“The pricing advantage that fast casual has relative to other segments has eroded significantly” said Aneurin Canham-Clyne, who covers restaurants for the trade publication Restaurant Dive.

Advertisement

Middle- and upper-income consumers aged 25 to 30 make up a significant share of Chipotle’s business, but many are looking for cheaper ways to get their meals. Fast casual chains have to rely on consumers with a range of incomes, not just the top 20% of households, Canham-Clyne said.

“White collar workers making in the low six figures in major cities who are feeling the heat from services inflation or feeling insecure in their jobs as a result of AI, they’re going to be saving a little bit more money,” he said.

Chipotle shares have fallen more than 37% over the past year, and they are not the only fast casual company to struggle in the stock market. Sweetgreen, headquartered in Los Angeles and catering to a health-conscious Southern California consumer, has seen its shares plummet 80% over the past year. The Mediterranean bowl spot Cava saw shares fall more than 50% over the same time period.

Chipotle shares closed Thursday at $35.84, down 4% for the day.

Canham-Clyne said Chipotle is not yet in dire straits. The brand has proven itself consistent and appealing to those looking for high-quality meals at a lower price than most sit-down restaurants.

Advertisement

“They sell a lot of burritos, they have a lot of stores,” Canham-Clyne said. “They can survive a bit of a downturn and continue to grow.”

Continue Reading

Business

Video: How ICE Is Pushing Tech Companies to Identify Protesters

Published

on

Video: How ICE Is Pushing Tech Companies to Identify Protesters

new video loaded: How ICE Is Pushing Tech Companies to Identify Protesters

The DHS is flooding social media companies with administrative subpoenas to identify accounts that are protesting ICE. Social media companies have pushed back but are largely complying. Our tech reporter, Sheera Frenkel, explains.

By Sheera Frenkel, Christina Thornell, Valentina Caval, Thomas Vollkommer, Jon Hazell and June Kim

February 14, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending