alix: we'll deal size versus duration. opec+ -- oil deal size versus duration. opec+ delivers. earnings angst. first quarter reporting's season kicks off this week. it will be bad. just how bad? it is a make it or break it week. investors bracing for a slew of economic data like retail sales, chinese gdp. welcome to "bloomberg daybreak: americas" on this monday, april 13. it is pretty quiet in the market. europe is closed. there's not a lot of volume. we had the best week last week in decades, so no doubt coming off of that level. yen moving higher. it is a mixed dollar story in the g10 space. hard to take any of these moves

seriously when you have such weakened trading volumes. in oil, a choppy session overnight after a big gap down sunday. the direction now depends on when the global economy will be able to open up, and that will be the indicator for all of the economic data, as well as risk appetite. time for today's market moving news from our new york team. we begin with a historic price deal. plus coming to an agreement to -- to cut minutes output. ,inutes after the deal was done the saudi oil minister saying that opec+ is up and alive. with more is in reordering. what do we -- with more is annmarie hordern. what do we know now? annmarie: they were able to finally clinch this deal, 9.7 million barrels a day.

i would say that the main takeaway, goldman put it as historic, but insufficient, given how bad the demand loss is and how bad the supply glut is. these cuts of 9.7 million barrels a day. we should also say that goldman puts it at 4.3 million barrels a day, when you take from first quarter levels, assuming full compliance of core opec and 50% of other participants. we are up slightly now, but we have seen swings in brent and wti throughout the night. it's not doing a huge boost to prices because of the demand picture. some traders saying we are losing as much as 35 million barrels a day. until we get consumption back up, this is likely not going to really be able to fill the void they were hoping to. what it does do is hopefully help in terms of some tank tops on storage, but also, we should

quickly point out aramco was out with their official pricing. they actually cut most of its crude pricing to asia. yes, the price war is over, but we still see major producers going after market share. want to know how much of that is discounted so china can buy discount. i want to know president trump's role in all of this, and what that means on the russian side. annmarie: president trump was really the big winner of this deal. the united states is not even part of opec. turn sincey an about personally, he's been quite hostile to the cartel for years. on one hand, he was able to broker what happened with the talks breaking down on thursday, and that was with mexico. the next can oil minister actually left at the end of the meeting -- the mexican oil minister actually left at the end of the meeting.

the president of mexico called president trump. president trump said they would "pick up the slack" from mexico. these aren't real cuts coming out of the market, but clearly the u.s. was able to inflict a lot of pressure. we also saw top gop senators from oil-producing states with harsh words over the weekend for the kingdom, and raising the prospect of cutting off aid to them. i would say president putin probably over played his hand here. he refused just five weeks ago to meet saudi demands to double some of these cuts, and now they are cutting a tremendous amount more. they are going to a .5, matching saudi production, more than four times the reduction they turned down in early march. so the united states played a huge role. the question going forward is what kind of precedent does this set for the opec+ group when you have others outside of these countries coming into the fray and dealing with the politics.

as bloomberg put it, president trump is the only president who wanted higher oil prices. now i want to turn to the pandemic and its impact on the u.s. economy. clarida chair richard says there's nothing fundamentally wrong with the economy. the'm confident that we, at appropriate time, will be able to unwind these programs. alix: neel kashkari on cbs saying something a little different over the weekend. michael mckee joins me with more. walk me through your takeaway from the interview and the week ahead.

all right, it looks like we are having some technical difficulties. loving be working from set up -- working from home set up. it's ok. taking a quick check on the markets, it is really weak volume as we head into the trading week. as i hopefully talk to michael mckee, it is a very big week. we have china gdp plus import and export numbers come up plus retail sales going to be key. it is the world bank meetings i'm watching as well. emerging markets asking for billions of dollars, plus debt forgiveness, all of that coming towards the end of the week. something else we are also watching in the markets, the onrms that pounded the south sunday, and mississippi killing at least six people, a massive

storm is centered from chicago to little rock, arkansas, and today could bring destructive power to the east coast. meanwhile, winter storm warnings are in effect from montana through south dakota. nebraska and michigan could also be hit. say stay-at-home warnings could impact people hit by the storm, a double whammy of weather plus the coronavirus. more coming up in today's first take. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ alix: time now for bloomberg first take. here to give you an in-depth breakdown is our team of wall

street veterans and insiders, damian sassower, chief emerging-market credit strategist, and michael mckee, chief economics and policy correspondent, who can now actually hear me, and we can hear him. michael: we've got a lot going on this week because we finally start getting data from march, when things really went pear-shaped. not just in the united states, but from around the world. china will kick off with trade numbers, and at the end of the week we get chinese gdp figures. so a lot to watch out of china as they navigate the crisis. for the u.s., the big numbers are retail sales wednesday and industrial production. thursday, we get jobless claims. everybody is fixated on that. the imf's meeting this week, so we will get the world economic outlook. that is where we get into a lot of assessment of what is going on in emerging and frontier

markets. the one thing i want to mention about rich clarida when we spoke with him on "bloomberg surveillance," he's confident the numbers are going to be terrible, but that we can get through it all. he doesn't see a deflationary impulse that is going to hurt the markets. that remains to be seen. he said there is a wide range of possibilities, but he's confident the economy will come out of this because there's nothing fundamentally wrong underneath it. alix: right. that is also relatively similar to what we heard overnight from ,avid coston at goldman sachs saying that the fed and congress have precluded the prospect of a complete economic collapse. our previous downside is no longer likely for the s&p. that really begs the question, what kind of recovery are we looking at? that is now the real debate when there are no clear answers. michael: no, there aren't any clear answers at this point.

that is part of the issue. this is all the behavioral we have nothat really understood. how quickly do you want to go back to a restaurant? how soon do you want to be in a crowd or on an airplane? are you going to save a lot more money? that is a thing you can't model when you can't understand, so the fed is hoping we can get a reasonable approximation of behavior before the virus lockdown, but nobody is quite sure of that. not quite sure, and also bleeds into my next point, which is emerging markets. you brought up the imf meetings later in the week. atas struck by an op-ed bloomberg yesterday by the ethiopian finance minister, writing a compelling article, saying "africa needs emergency fiscal stimulus worth $100 billion in addition to the imf's $50 billion of regular support to tackle the crisis.

the crisis will not be short-lived. additional support over the next two to three years is required." this really sets you up. what happens? damian: let's stick with the more fragile emerging markets. to your point, i think what a lot of the market is missing is the fact that remittances are going to decline quite considerably this year. 2019globally speaking, and we saw $70 billion of remittance into emerging markets. but through offshore informal channels, that could be as high as nearly $2 trillion, or more than 2% of global gdp. that's what ethiopia and a lot of other countries that rely on remittances are really focusing on. right now, em stimulus to date has been insufficient to deal with a prolonged crisis. so how do you deal with that as an investor, and what is the longer-term effect of something like that? we are already hearing about

argentina restructuring its debt for the millionth time in the last few years. damian: we have to take a step. we talked about china a little earlier. there still is a bit of a funding squeeze, still more demand for dollars coming out of china because ethics implied rates have negative pe basis implied- because fx rates have negative pe basis yields. libor-ois spreads are narrowing considerably here off of the fed's groundbreaking programs, which are novel in nature and are going to have an amazing impact on spreads in em and u.s. credit. youreally have to look at libor. you got interbank spreads in europe still wide. fundinge pockets of that need to go away before we can focus on the emerging markets issue. alix: fair enough.

mike, we talked a lot on thursday about what the fed did do. what else can they do to alleviate short-term funding squeezes if they are continually trying to fix them? michael: it is hard to know how the initially help the emerging markets. they are setting up this repo facility for dollars that the emerging markets can tap. problem is that it is at a kind of penalty rate. the real help is going to have to come from the imf and lending programs there. damian has a better number on this, that there were 90 countries that have applied for some sort of additional imf help as a result of this. it tells you how difficult the situation is around the world. as far as the united states is concerned, they've gone into just about every legal corner of the credit markets, and some that are not quite legal, but they fudged. really come up you're looking for from them is ramping up more

money because they didn't use all of the treasury allocation. more money for these programs. the big question is do they get the main street lending program up in time. it is probably going to be two or three weeks, vice chairman quarles said over the weekend. it is an interesting question, and one on which a lot of the economy turns. alix: i'm glad you brought up the main street lending facility because "all street journal" had a scathing editorial about how this is going to make everything worse, not really helping main street. have you read a lot of pushback on what the fed did? michael: you see some pushback, and "the journal" makes some good arguments, that the fed will be in the business of picking winners and losers, and because of the nature of the way these programs work, wall street is going to get helped before main street. we are seeing that with the ppp lending. they are having trouble getting money out the door.

it will probably be the same case with the feds main street program because the banks and the intermediaries, it takes them a while to get through all of this. residualmay see some anger coming out of this. on the other hand, the problem was so fast that the fed felt it had to do whatever it could as quickly as possible. analogy of put the fire out before you figure out who is running the fire truck. alix: which is exactly what you're talking about with the swap lines from emerging markets. wrapping that all in, you're the trader. coming in today, how much of a risk do you want to be taking in today's environment? damian: you want to find those pockets, at least in emerging markets, where the risks for a disorderly selloff are smaller. you've seen a lot of low yielding em bond curves steepen considerably, with a lot of front ends pricing in the

terminal rates of the cycle. those curves have steepened a lot. i would see a lot of people trying to put on pockets -- i don't see a lot of people putting on placards there. i think the risk-reward there is as high as you are going to find in emerging markets today. alix: guys, really appreciate it. thanks a lot. any charts we use throughout the program, go to gtv on your terminal. you can browse all the features and save them. check it out. gtv . coming up, opec-plus reaches a historic deal to cut output. what it means for the curve, coming up. this is bloomberg. ♪

viviana: you are watching "bloomberg daybreak." goldman sachs saying u.s. stocks probably hit bottom because of what the firm called the "whatever it takes approach of

policymakers." goldman removing its production in the near term that the s&p 500 could fall to 2000. softbank will pay the price for some of those ill-fated tech bets. the japanese company forecasting a $12.5 billion operating loss in the fiscal year that just ended after writing down the value of investments in --panies such as and wework such as uber and wework. the world's oil producers agreeing to a historic output thatfter a week of talks involved the opec+ coalition and g20. now, questions as to whether it to shrink the massive glut of oil. alix: for more now, i am joined by mark rossano, c6 capital holdings founder and ceo. i have no doubt that you are really skeptical of this deal, but before we get to that, $23

for wti. what is your favorite trade? mark: at this point, i think you can start to pressure it to the downside. i think u.s. enp's are going to struggle. i mean, they were struggling at $50 oil. the fact that we are at $23, with little hope of any increase in pricing, i think you can start getting into some of your favorite shorts across the energy space, specifically enp's. alix: two counter arguments for why the deal is good. it prevents a's and go to to pricing for the main benchmarks -- prevents a benchmark to the pricing for the main benchmarks. and the end of the curve might be helped a little bit, which could keep some guys in business. what do you make of those arguments? mark: i think a lot of people want to focus on the two volument components of

and time. the question is always owing to be how watch -- how much are they cutting, how much is coming out of the market. but how long are they doing this for? people try to grab onto the fact that, hey, don't worry, it is going to last through 2022. but if we know anything about opec, guys cheat, and we may have to change things later on. but i think more importantly on the storage question, you have to look at the official selling prices. everyone keeps talking about the actual price in the screens, but that is what we see. at the same time, it is not really what the refiners and the guys on the ground are buying. the fact that saudi came out and actually slashed a huge amount going into asia i think is important, and is really kind of telling you something, where they are cutting at about $7.30 off the official selling price into asia, and they are increasing pricing into the u.s. and keeping it relatively flat

into europe. so even though you might say they are cutting volume, i think that speaks more so in terms of how they are looking to position themselves in the market. also make theu argument that they cut the official selling price because they wanted china to buy for spr? are sitting there saying, hey, i need to protect the demand that i have available, and it is in order to give some premium to the refiner because i am concerned that the refiners are going to cut further, so i really need to help them and keep them active. if you look in terms of where we are in the scale of the coronavirus shut down, asia is starting to come back a little bit. that is where you could see some more demand.

they are trying to support that with lower pricing. the other thing no one is really talking about, russia, saudi arabia, nigeria, iraq have all slashed their own refining capacity and are in some form of lockdown indoor curfew -- lockdown and/or curfew. that means local demand is also dropping, which means there is more oil they have to export to help clear this glut, and you might as well push into asia, where you might get some benefit in terms of refiners operating at a higher level. alix: great point. last question. if you see some short opportunities, what is the downside for oil price in the short-term, and then next year, what can we look at in terms of pricing? think youhis point, i see $15 oil. i think there's going to be a lot of support their. the other question is going to be how much volume is going to leave the u.s. coast, and who is going to want it. the u.s. has not only a quality

problem, but a glut problem. i think you are going to have to see production come down in the u.s., which is going to put more pressure on the realized prices in the u.s. enp, so i think that we get to about $15 in the u.s., and in 2021, i think we are going to be hovering around that $35 to $40, but on our way back up, if these cuts really last and we get this surge in demand we are hoping for. alix: mark, always good to catch up with you. super appreciate it. coming up on the program, we are going to get a view from mike swell, goldman sachs asset management cohead of global fixed income portfolio management. what do you do now with high yields? this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ alix: welcome to "bloomberg daybreak." i'm alix steel. a quick check on the markets. europe is closed down, so thin trading volume, and not a lot of

action here. the s&p had its biggest weekly advance tents 1974. junk bonds valued the most since 1998. there was a life praised -- there was a lot priced in thursday at the close. have this historic production deal, but lots of skepticism as to whether it is materially going to make a difference. but say, longer-term, sure, short-term is still a dicey proposition. neel kashkari set over the weekend we should prepare for a continued slow down on the u.s. economy. >> we could have these wave of flareups and control, flareup and control, until we get a therapy or vaccine. i think we should all be focusing on an 18 month strategy for our health care system and economy. if it ends up being shorter than that, that's great. we should pay for the worst case an area. is mikeining me now

swell, goldman sachs asset management cohead of global fixed income portfolio. i feel like so much has changed. knowing how long this will last and what the recovery look like is going to be key for any investment decision. what is your base case? mike: i think it is hard to look at a single case now because there are so many different scenarios. there are scenarios that have the economy resuming activity over the next few months, and scenarios that it is a lot longer. i think what you have to do is really look at the asset classes that have shown a level of dislocation that compensate you in a number of different environments, and an environment where we are still slow and you're supported by central-bank activity, and you also have to look at a scenario where you recover. we think that equities are really hard to call right here, given that you are so levered to your question. really, if you want to look at that are forsses

sale, it is really the credit markets because that is what the fed is really focused on ensuring that there is access to liquidity. you can participate in the event that the central bank becomes more aggressive buying the asset class, so we think the credit market is the market the gives you the most protection under those scenarios. do you want to buy what ,he fed is going to be buying or do you need to go below that to get more of a yield pickup in hopes that the fed is going to buy? mike: i think question number one in this environment is around how do you use fixed income to protect your portfolio. number two is where is the longer-term higher-yielding opportunity. i think number one, treasuries are likely to provide investors to same level -- are likely

not provide investors the same level of protection is in the past. in the event that things get worse, are treasuries going to be that hedge for you? we think the answer to that is no. if you're sitting on a lot of treasuries, you're sitting on -- withside with a very little upside. lotfed is going to buy a and provide an enormous amount of support, and in the event that things get worse, they are going to buy more of them, so it is a unique environment where investment-grade corporates are going to probably provide more of a hedge then treasuries. and to the most difficult question, the assets that are very exposed to your initial question, which is when we come out of it and how deep the recession is going to be, that is where high yield comes a deeply. very interesting what the fed did -- high yield comes into play.

very interesting what the fed did last week. they are going to be buying, or enabling their programs to buy fallen angels. number two is they will potentially be buying high yield etf's, therefore buying the ire high-yield market. and they introduced the program to be able to purchase clo's backed by leveraged loans. so there's kind of a change in focus from the fed. if you can close your eyes for six months to a year and take the volatility of buying assets that have a high correlation to the economy, i think high-yield is going to provide double-digit type returns for investors. i just think from a volatility standpoint, you may be a little bit early right now. alix: such a good distinction, and i would love to close my eyes for six months. to your point of high-yield, not the fallen angels, but the other issuers, do you feel like the

pickup in good investment is going to come because the fed has to buy them, or is the fed going to be successful in pushing investors yourself out the risk curve? mike: the first point, i don't think the fed is going to be a multiple hundred billion dollar buyer of the market. i think the near-term concern is really around the drop of a very high volume of investment grade issuers into the high-yield universe. a actually believe that from credit perspective, the level of downgrades is being overly exaggerated by the market. we think you're going to see a single type percentage downgrade 15%, 20%, not the 10%, people are talking about. we think the downgrade issue into next year is going to be very manageable. when you look at the spread offer versus the expected default rate and the recovery on

high-yield in a protracted recessionary environment, we actually think you're getting fairly compensated in terms of buying high-yield credit, so we do think it is an attractive investment. but as i said before, it is going to come with a lot of volatility. the easy money right now is going to be in converting treasury investments into investment-grade corporate's. i think the harder money over --e is going to be investing we do think it is an attractive spread you are getting paid for the risk. alix: to piggyback off your treasury point, why do you think there's going to be downside? mike: the reason i say there's downside is that there's little upside. the rhetoricear from different fed officials post moving to zero rates, they have been pretty explicit in terms of their hesitancy to move to negative rates. that is very different than what we saw in europe, very different than what we saw in japan. as a result, when you are now pretty much at zero, the

question is, if things get worse, how do treasuries perform? they probably perform fine. maybe they rally slightly. on the other side of the region, on the event that things get better, you have an enormous amount of downside when rates are at zero, so the convexity profile is not very attractive. when you look at investment-grade credit paying you 200 to 300 basis points over treasuries, you have some real yield there. so when things get bad come of the fed needs to do more, and they have committed to not moving the treasury rate below zero. then you have potentially investment-grade corporates that can tighten significantly because the fed is likely to buy more. alix: is it the same view you might have towards europe? obviously, the overall fiscal package is a lot smaller than what we have gotten from the government here. nonetheless, on the individual country basis, they are stepping up. to the sovereigns by the investment-grade or -- do the

sovereigns buy the investment grade or fallen angels? ,ike: i think the policy levers particularly at the ecb, are much more limited than at the fed. the ecb has been buying investment-grade corporate for a long time with very limited level of success. they've already driven rates negative, and there's less commitment to going big. if you look at the united states , the fed has thrown the kitchen sink and all of the bathroom sinks at this issue. very different than the ecb in terms of their size and potentially efficacy of their policy. i think europe is likely to be much more challenged come a much slower to come out of this recessionary environment. i think buying credit in europe is a much bigger question. i think in europe, you really do

want to concentrate investments on what the ecb is buying, and maybe nothing else, because i think the slowdown is going to be much more severe in europe given the lack of ability for policy to make a difference. alix: to wrap it up, i can't let you go without getting your take on em. is there anywhere in em that provides the right kind of yield for the right kind of risk? mike: when you look at this environment, you look at primary assets, secondary assets, and tertiary assets. the primary assets are the ones being directly impacted by massive policy, so that is treasuries, agency mortgages, and investment-grade corporate credit. secondary assets are things we discussed today, things like s and high-yield credit, where you have some level of policy impact. then you have tertiary assets, which i would call em. much more challenging in terms

of policy to stabilize. i think there are a lot of opportunities that have been presented as a result of this dislocation, but em, kind of like europe, is going to be very challenged in terms of their ability to deal with the crisis and come out. from an em perspective, it is a little bit buyer beware, much more on a security selection basis. alix: mike, always good to catch up with you. thank you so much. mike swell of goldman sachs asset management. we want to give you an update on headlines outside the business world. the v on is here with first word news -- viviana hurtado is here with first word news. viviana: the world's biggest oil producers agreed to cut production by 12%. it took a week of negotiations involving the opec+ coalition and the group of 20. there is still a question if the deal is enough to shrink the world let of oil. british prime minister boris johnson says he could have died from the coronavirus. after a week in hospital, johnson was released.

the video, he thanks national health service for saving his life. mr. johnson still isn't strong enough to resume leadership of the government. in the u.s., parts of the u.s. could reopen in may according to dr. anthony fauci, but the infectious diseases chief warning there is no universal ,ightswitch to switch on telling cnn the availability of widespread testing would be the socialrelaxing isolation. he says there's also a chance the coronavirus could rebound in the fall. global news 24 hours a day, on air and on quicktake by bloomberg, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. heart, -- i'mn viviana hurtado. this is bloomberg. alix: thanks so much. ubs posted its strongest first quarter in about two years as the pandemic was sending shockwaves through the global economy, so what does it mean for investing at high-end nest worth -- at high-end net worth

individuals? we will break it down with tom narati, ubs wealth management. if you have a terminal, you can check us out at tv . this is bloomberg. ♪

alix: coming up in the next hour, galaxy digital holdings joining us. you are looking at principal room. this is "bloomberg daybreak: americas." ♪

we turn now to wall street to cover three things wall street is buzzing about today. we are going to look at ubs and what they are advising their clients to do in this tumultuous time. ,oining me now is tom naratil ubs americans cohead of wealth management. really good to catch up with you. what is the number one question you're getting from clients? what is the number one answer? tom: well, there's certainly a lot of questions clients have in this environment. really, the biggest concerns will theund how long time period last where the economy is going through a downslope, and when will it rebound. a key factor in that for us is to talk about the longer-term. this is an extraordinary event. u.s.,r, the fed in the the federal government around the world central banks, and

fiscal stimulus has been simply extraordinary, so we are telling clients to stick with their plans and to look at increasing their exposures to risk assets. sonali: speaking of that, something interesting sergio ermotti said to us last week was that clients were still seeking a lot of loans, and lending has been rising quite a bit. can you take us into more specifics on where people are really seeking to borrow? this type of market environment, we do see clients starting to think about where are they some unique businesses, and certain real estate assets, and they are looking at utilizing some of their securities folios as collateral against those types of loans to take advantage of opportunities that will come as the economy comes out of its

downturn. among the this really ultra-wealthy clients or the whole client base? the it is really among client base that came into 2020 with a substantial amount of cash. they have been putting that cash to work in a number of different areas, and the equity markets, and turn it of, and structured products. increasingly, we see them putting money to work in credit. as the equityat i some ofhave rebounded, that money we have seen increasingly going into credit vehicles, both investment-grade high-yield and dollar-based

emerging-market sovereign debt. sonali: the first three months of the year, we saw deleveraging. are you saying clients are really now to take it vantage of these opportunities -- to take advantage of these opportunities? tom: you are beginning to see some increased focus on leverage going forward. that is something that we think will increase as more real economy opportunities come along for clients, and they utilize the collateral that they have to fund those opportunities. sort of the opposite of what sonali was asking, are you still seeing margin calls? is there still that pressure in the market from your clients? tom: obviously, as you have seen markets stabilizing with equity markets rising, with credit markets stabilizing come of the value of collateral has risen,

and i would say the margin calls but the industry saw are an issue of the past month, not the current months. sonali: i want to talk for a second also about the program you started last week. you made $2 billion available for ppp. obviously, this payment protection program has had some pickups getting off at the start , some criticism. what do you see moving forward? what can the government and banks do to push along this faster? roll protection program is a massive new government program, and obviously there have been changes that have been needed to be made regarding the existing lending platform. sba,u've had people at treasuries, the banking industry that have been working around-the-clock the clock to try to figure out how can money

get as quickly as possible to business owners. one of the ways we did that was our existing non-bank lender new tech. we have been referring our clients who have been perhaps haven't been able to secure those ppp loans as quickly as possible. what we've done to try to help new tech be able to increase toir volumes is to commit loan purchases above $2 billion to help them increase the amount of volume that they can put through. sonali: we know that not getting money into the hands of people fast enough has a lot of ripple effects. what are some of the ripple effects you are seeing now and some of the longer-term issues you can see in the economy if those loans do not get out fast enough? obviously, if we can't get

money in the hands of business owners as fast as possible, the downstream effect is certainly going to be on their employees. that is why there are 70 people in the industry working extremely hard around the clock to try to figure out how we innovate, how we come up with new ways, how we even go into business lines we haven't been , in the case of ubs. we thought this was the quickest way that we could get money into the system to be able to help small business owners and help their employees. sonali: with the small business issue and unemployment rising, we still have old coming out this morning, saying we are not going to see new bottoms. do you believe here that the worst is over? tom: it's always a little

dangerous to make a per diction like that when you are in an uncertain environment as this, but what we do think is that you significant very stimulus coming in, and a very new toolkit the government is using, and they still have more tools at their disposal. second, the federal government has been able to put money through to improve the funding. piping andbout the what it takes to get that money in the hands of business owners in the hands of employees. that certainly is critical. sonali: thank you so much. that was tom naratil of ubs. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ alix: time now for trader's

take. joining me is damian sassower. damian: we are looking at the differentials between em and u.s. bb credit spreads. we saw saw in bbb, basically u.s. high-yield bbb spreads tighten. a lot of this is due to the iconic blue-chip issuers that are in the bbb tranche, but in bb land, we are talking about ford, kraft, other iconic names. makeup -- petrobras of the bbb, so my call is he will see those spreads widen just as you have seen in the bb space. that may be mitigated by brazil and some other things. large, we should cem u.s. spreads widen from here in the

bb tranche. alix: we will see if the imf and world bank can do anything later on this week. always good to catch up with you. thank you very much, damian sassower of bloomberg intelligence. coming up in the next hour, we tackle many themes, including what it winds up meaning for through we muddle the coronavirus response, and what the visibility is for 21. estimize founder and ceo, will join us. this is bloomberg. ♪ because you can't get to the theater, we're bringing

the theater home to you, with xfinity movie premiere. there's a world full of other trolls. how different can they be? our brand-new service that lets you watch all the latest movie releases from the comfort of home. trolls world tour available now. i will protect you no matter what, pinky promise.

just say xfinity movie premiere into your voice remote to bring the theater to you. ♪

alix: oil deal. opec+ delivers an historic production cut. too many questions remain for the bulls to really take charge. first quarter reporting season kicks off this week. it will be bad, just how bad? and investors brace for a slew of u.s. economic data, china gdp, plus imf meetings that hold emerging-market fates in their hands. welcome to "bloomberg daybreak" this monday, april 13. i'm alix steel. s&p futures slightly off, which feels ok since s&p had its best week last week since 1974. theyen the outperformer in g10 space against the dollar. oil treading water at the market tries to digest a deal that is more about duration than the actual size.

also, pay attention what is happening in the equity market when it comes to earnings. bottomedks have likely due to whatever it takes, according to goldman sachs equity strategist even -- equity strategist david kostin. previousan our longere of 20,000 is no in store for the s&p -- of 2000 is no longer likely for the s&p." what do you think? >> i think it is going to be more than that, but i think it is also correct in that it is going to be hard to push the markets a lot lower than we saw in march. the reason is i think a lot of

people look at the broad destruction in earnings power across the market, but it really has to do with how the market is constructed, and i think this specific stat really drives at home. since the beginning of the year, downward revisions to the forward 12 months earning estimate for the nasdaq 100, only down 3%. s&p 500 down 13%. the equally weighted s&p 500 down 20%. markets are going to look forward now to q3. q1 doesn't matter. q2 is a washout. they are going to look forward to q3 and say, how long does the economic disaster basically last? that is the variable everyone is going to look at to say, ok, are they going to push the market ,ack down towards the lows where the multiple for the s&p 500 is going to be something like 14 or 15?

that may be as low as you can get it because you are not going to push apple, google, facebook, a 17 orosoft down below 18 times forward multiple, where in past crashes and bear markets , you've seen the s&p trough out at something like 10 to 12 times. it is almost impossible to see that this time around, which i think is why goldman is right for where the lows of this bear market may be. at 17 times earnings right now, does it make sense? it makes sense if q3 normalizes to a large degree. if q3 doesn't normalize, and we've got to push the 2020 eps number for the s&p 500 down 110 or 100, the market is way overvalued, and we are

going to come back down towards the lows. alix: you made a really interesting point about tech. we talk a lot about how we know the bank earnings and retail and leisure/hospitality, airlines. there earnings are going to be terrible. about --, said much hardware or software. what are they going to look like? leigh: if the demand destruction on the consumer side is so quarter,at the holiday or coming into the holiday quarter for apple looks like people just don't have enough money in their pocket to really , then you mayales see apple fall apart. it kind of would make sense that that would be the end of the bear market, that expectations outapple kind of troughing

would call the end because it is normally at the end of bear markets that the leaders get hit, finally. everyone says it is not going to happen, and then it finally happens. that would be the scenario in which you end the bear market and probably get back down towards the march lows. in terms of google, i think you're going to see that sooner because they are so add driven, and the ad market has been completely falling apart. basicallyey are all waiting for guidance, which they may not even get from google, but they will get a good understanding of just how much the ad market did fall apart in late q1, so i think right after this report, you're going to see all of those add driven companies basically rerate it on a multiple basis -- those ad- driven companies basically

basis, on a multiples but that is a two months from now scenario when you start getting destruction in q2. alix: fair, and we have seen earnings revisions already get and q3 justnd q2, starting to roll over. i am wondering what your view is on operating margin we you have companies like amazon getting a lot of flak for some of its warehouses and workers, etc. are they going to have to hire, raise wages, use different processes and how it is handling its businesses? that could be for any of the companies we are talking about. leigh: socially, this is a big moment for the massive amount of service workers we have in this country that i think have been a little bit left by the wayside, for sure, during this economic expansion. but from a macroeconomic perspective in the mortgage

and's perspective, i just don't see the push here on wage inflation just simply because of the demand destruction. level, on an individual you may see some companies like kroger and others giving small raises, but it is going to be really hard to pick up where we january with the labor numbers really pushing the hourly earnings up. not something i would necessarily be concerned about here. amazon is going to come out of this, amazon, walmart, better than basically anybody else, even without having to most likely significantly see the cost side rise. really good to catch up with you. always great to get your earnings take. coming up, unprecedented

measures for unprecedented times. speak to -- next on the longer ramifications as well. this is bloomberg. ♪

♪ alix: some breaking news for you right now, coming from baker hughes. they are seeing a first quarter goodwill impairment charge of $15 billion. that is huge. they are also going to be reducing their capex by about 20% over 2019. baker hughes is an oil services company, but focused really on lng, so you definitely get a read on what is happening in the market.

the worry is that you're going to have an oversupply of lng, and it is going to get stuck here inside the u.s., and that will actually impact baker hughes. they are saying a first quarter goodwill impairment charge of about $15 billion, cutting capex about 20% versus 2019. let's get a check on the market. it is going to be a slow grind within the market. it is still a holiday in europe. s&p futures now down by just a percent, so pairing -- by just ring previous losses. oil not doing that much. a little bit of whitby action overnight of whitby -- of whippy action overnight. president trump tweeting yesterday that the big oil deal with opec+ is done.

"this will save hundreds of thousands of energy jobs in the u.s. i would like to congratulate and thank president putin of russia and king salman of saudi arabia. i just spoke to them from the oval office. great deal for all." i wanted to get your broad take on what it meant for president trump to become the head of opec++ for a day. he rightfully takes a lot of responsibility for brokering the agreement to get saudi and the russians to sit at the same table. there might have been a lot of stubbornness on the part of one or the other of them, but he did play a significant role in getting the deal going and getting the deal done. anythings this tell us about the future of the relationship between these countries or how global production plays out later, or is this a one-off, short-term thing?

edward: i actually think it is too early to tell. you always think that history will come back, and whatever trends were in place are going to repeat themselves. when there are challenges like the ones today, that you will have a change of course that is more permanent. it may be a little bit of both of them. i think the fact that the g20 got involved, per dissipating in a dialogue on how much oil the world needs and where it is going to come from, is pretty critical. i think it gave rise to a discussion that could've have been better handled than it was on how much we can expect oil supply from the u.s., canada, brazil, norway, and other countries to decline, how much of it will be permanent. i think there's a lot of work that should be done on that because i think a lot of it is going to be a permanent decline in production that is going to help the world get back to a more stable price environment. the fact of the matter is the

u.s. is the largest producer of oil and gas in the world that has to be a participant in discussions about where oil demand is going in the future. if you are saying that some of these cuts are going to be permanent, is that what happened in mexico, why they were so against cutting the full amount because of this new shift president, on making oil more important in our country? edward: i definitely think that was it. the fact of the matter is mexico is well protected because of its ongoing historical hedging program, so it puts it already in a unique category among oil-producing countries, but beyond that, the amlo agenda is one which very much depends on increasing its production on a long-term basis. impacts ond two

that. one, it would've been a amlo wanted do what to get come of the overall fiscal impact of what he was trying to do. and here, the 400 house in barrels a day numbers pretty critical. part of the program was to get a higher utilization of mexican refining, and he has committed an incremental 400,000 arrows a day to the messick refining, such a critically important part of the program that he has that this would have diverted attention and put a kind of permanent wedge against his achieving those objectives. such a great point, i'm your note over the weekend reflected that also. hearing all of this just makes me think we are going to see even steeper contango going forward. if the result is permanent loss

production, this is going to do nothing in the next six weeks to really help on the spot market. next six to eight weeks is going to be the same difficult course it was always going to be, and in that sense, everybody arguing that this is too little too late is absolutely true. they were kind of a month behind where they should have been in undertaking these cuts, and meanwhile, we had effectively 10.3 million barrels a day of oil from saudi arabia heading to markets, continuing to head to markets to the end of this month. but if these cuts are even 80% what the intention is of taking 9.7 million barrels out of opec production or exports and 3 million barrels a day out of non-opec, this really has an impact on third-quarter and fourth-quarter balances, turning in inventory buildup

unprecedented nature rarely rapidly into a very big inventory draw, so the consequent is of the agreement are going to be pretty significant, not now, but later in the year. alix: can you give me some of your price targets you had to reevaluate because of this? edward: we reevaluated for the end of the year by about $17 a barrel, so we are now looking at a recovery of rent into the mid-30's, to the high 30's by , $45 to $50 byer the third quarter. that was above where we were before the weekend events. alix: what kind of demand does that imply, recovery wise? edward: the demand recovery is robust, but not overly robust. we are very conservative in looking at where demand is

likely to go. we have demand growth for the second and third quarters up a bit, so we have the end of the year demand still below 100 95,ion barrels a day at the 90 6 million barrel a day level, but getting back to end above the 100 million barrel a day fourth-quarter by the third quarter of 2021, so the big demand stays that subdued, but the supply side hit really results in what would have been an overwhelming and continuing inventory build into an inventory draw, and getting that down to a level that can really be supportive of the $50 price range going forward by the end of next year. alix: so good to catch up with you. it was a really good note over

the weekend. morse, good to catch up with you. coming up, fed vice chair to clara -- fed vice chair richard says we can keep the economy out of a demand trip. this is bloomberg. ♪

>> i am very confident that is the economy recovers from this hit and begins to return and recover, that we at the appropriate time will be able to unwind these programs. alix: that was fed vice chair richard clarida. for opportunities in this environment, brian weinstein joins me now. i am curious to see how you are thinking about the fixed income world. doyou buy what the fed buys,

you go further out the risk curve, or do you buy into safety? i don't even know what that is anymore. >> i think the overwhelming theme of investors that call us is they want principal protection. there was a big fear over the last couple of weeks that you could lose principal. the first response is to go where the fed wind. the problem is that keeps changing. they are expanding the view. i think the question for investors really is do you have a manager that is doing their homework. no one has ever seen anything like this. we've never seen as many people lose their jobs in three weeks. never seen the global economy stop and then start up again at an unknown point. so we have to do a lot of homework on what we buy because the fed is giving us some guardrails, but they are not going to pick the winners and losers for us specifically. alix: so you have to pick the winners and losers. so what are those? you could make the argument that

you're going to want to buy the fallen angels because that is what the fed is going to buy. you could make the argument that you want to go further into junk for the risks they are not taking. brian: we've always been a believer that you cannot just look at the ratings. with the fed buying fallen angels, those will all be good. so what we are doing is we arere-underwriting -- we are re- underwriting every name we own. at the end of the day, the fed is going to give you liquidity. but people talk about stimulus. borrowing costs are still higher than a couple of weeks ago. this is not necessarily just stimulus. this is plugging a giant hole in a global economy that we don't know how big it is going to be, so we are looking at companies that don't necessarily have to raise capital, that can come back whenever we can, and that can handle this for an extended period of time.

we want to all go back to work. that will not be how this plays out. this matters all the way through structured product and asset-backed securities and municipal bonds. the home market, you have to ask where will the money flow back to, and the fed is giving you some help, but they are not going to pick the individual winners and losers. alix: so that leads us to the question of where do you wait to find safety. treasuries, bunds? where is it? brian: there are certainly some emerging markets that have been taken out with this where you can get yield, but where you going to do with the 75 basis point 10-year note? if tech a look backward, what were investors doing in january or february? we had record inflows into fixed income at low yields, so i think you will see inflows into investment grade high-yield.

you may see a reversal in the -- the passiveis versus active trend. but i think the income theme is going to come back with a vengeance. the difference this time as you have to worry about your principal, too. but investment-grade has come almost all the way back. high-yield has come almost 2/3 of the way back. but i think income will trump the desire to be heroes. they will want safety. alix: does that view imply a v-shaped recovery, or some thing that feels like a multiple w? brian: the v-shaped i think is a story of hope, and also muscle memory. everyone remember's 2008, 2009. it took a while, and all of a sudden you had a big recovery. i think this is a much bigger hole to fill in terms of global growth. what you need is cash flow to be

able to pick back up through the economy. so i would see it more as that rolling w, or an uneven recovery that ripple through the economy. when people get too confident that this is over, again, it is human nature. i think you want to be a little more careful, and right now i think there are still opportunities out there because there is still a lot of fear. alix: brian, really appreciate the perspective. brian weinstein of morgan stanley, thanks very much. coming up, american workers feeling the pain from the coronavirus shut down. who is bearing the brunt? i will speak to the mckenzie group senior partner, next. this is bloomberg. ♪

alix: welcome to "bloomberg daybreak." i'm alix steel. a little bit softer in equity futures.

you're also saying light volume. europe is closed. many taking a long weekend. take today with a grain of salt. dollar-yen is the under performer, the yen performing well. the fed will be paring back from the buying treasury market. less need for that liquidity. take a look at oil. of opec-plus plus deal, not -- not a lot of action overnight. unemployment has skyrocketed in the u.s. over last few week as state and local governments order businesses to close their doors. in a mckinsey global institute report, they found a nationwide eventuallyould impact up to one third of the workforce. joining me as one of the authors ,f the force kewilin ellingrud the kinsey & co. senior partner. great to get your take.

17 million people filing last three week. is that in line with what you guys had modeled? kewilin: it is roughly in line. as you described, 16.8 million over the last three weeks alone. starting with 3.3 million the week of march 21 up to 2.9 million and 6.6 million. 14% unemployment is what would estimate which is in line with the one third of jobs. which is third of jobs 44 to 57 million across the united states is not all jobs completely lost or we are at full layoffs but also includes furloughs as well as drops and hours. you might have been working 30 hours and now you only have four or five hours a week. alix: can you give us perspective of industries.

we will go to restaurants, hospitality leisure. the first thing that will come to everyone's mind, retail. those are the first industries. what are the second round impacts? kewilin: absolutely. 42% of those jobs come from two industries, accommodation and food services. the second is retail services. all of the travel and hospitality industries we think about. accommodation and food services accounts for 10.5 to 12.5 million of those jobs and retail services almost eight to 10 million of those jobs as well. you can also cut it by cupid tatian -- by occupation as well as job types. about 46do that, percent of those jobs come from food services. those would include food delivery. then cuts from our service and sales. both of those account for 46% of

the jobs. there are 2 million jobs being created. growing,he job types groceries, pharmacies, but that is only about two to 3 million jobs compared to 44 to 57 million at risk. sense of howhave a long they will be unemployed? you mentioned include furloughed workers. when it picks back up they go back to work. do you do any work on that and how you model this? kewilin: our hope is that after the next couple of months, the job growth will continue. it depends on which economic scenario. , a1 and a3.led two depending on whether you think

the u.s. will rebound coming out of this and next few months or whether there will be a double-dip, whether the coronavirus will recur sometime late in the summer or early in the fall, leading to a much more dire economic scenario. a couple of months, best case scenario. could be 12 to 18 months of a if yound stark restart believe more of a dire economic scenario. do you have a sense of the longer it goes on, we will see more layoffs versus furloughs? if i'm a company and i will furlough you for two months and then after two months i realize this could be a six month or eight month thing, then maybe i go to laying you off rather than furloughing you. is there a distinction that needs to be made to look at the recovery? kewilin: that could be one of the second order effects where businesses at first are trying

to keep their employees. we also see working in our favor the federal stimulus, the $2.2 trillion overall with some of the small business administration loans, and some of the criteria meaning that if you. -- that if you do not lay off workers, up to 2.5 of your monthly payroll can be for dividends. that is in favor of retaining employees. as this continue and if we do months, last nine, 12 beyond, i could imagine that second effect being less furloughs and more layoffs. alix: what about wages? have you seen the trend or what you are modeling in terms of wages. many people i talk to it is about cutting salaries rather than jobs for now. kewilin: we are starting to look into the wage impact.

what we know is up to one third of jobs impacted or at risk, 86 percent are below 40,000 in wages. many are lower paying jobs. another 13% of them are 40 to $70,000, and only 1% of the jobs at risk are above $70,000. in this first wave of impacts, almost all of the impact has been in lower paying jobs. ,s they continue through this we may see second order effect, third order effects in the higher wage jobs as well. alix: thank you for that. it was a good study, good information, not exactly uplifting news, but thank you so much, quail and ellen crude of ellingrud ofewilin mckinsey. viviana hurtado here

with first word news. viviana: it ends up rise that crippled the energy industry. there is still question over whether the deal is enough to shrink the worldwide glut of oil. now to british prime minister boris johnson. he says he could have died from the coronavirus after a week in the hospital. he was released after a week. the national health service for saving his life. he is still not strong enough to resume leadership of the government. we end with parts of the u.s. that could open in may according to dr. anthony pyeongchang. the end -- according to dr. fauci. dr. fauci telling cnn the availability of widespread testing would be the key to relaxing social isolation. he also says there is a possibility the coronavirus could rebound in the fall. global news 24 hours a day, on air and on quicktake by bloomberg, powered by more than 2700 journalists and analysts in more than 120 countries. i am viviana hurtado.

this is bloomberg. alix: thanks so much. coming up, galaxy digital ceo michael novogratz will be joining us. he believe stocks have bottomed. bloomberg users interact with the charts on gtv . browse recent charts, catch up with the analysis, all of that jazz. this is bloomberg. ♪

alix: this is "bloomberg daybreak." i am alix steel. coming up, an exclusive interview with the u.s. energy secretary.

♪ ceo of digital, you know him as a crypto guy, but the reality is michael novogratz is at his core a macro guy. my first question to you. you've done a ton of work trying to understand the potential for and the limits of coronavirus testing. macro guy, coronavirus testing. explain why. michael: when you talk to the public health experts, the minimum we need to be testing our 3 million to 5 million people a day. that is only if we include the pretty aggressive social contact tracing, i.e. someone gets it and we know who they have been in touch with. that is the minimum we need to

get people to feel safe. otherwise we will just have these things break out again. that is the bottom. we are at an interesting place. and the tragedies are going lower. we have peaked. you can look and say in a weaker two it will feel like the hospitals are mostly empty. the conservative people are saying wait, we have to get the testing in place. the more aggressive people are saying we need to start business. that will be a real battle in the next two weeks that we need to watch policy wise how it fors out to get cues longer-term marketplace and short-term marketplace. erik: as an investor, you have to make a batch. you have to decide who wins that debate. is it the businesspeople or the public health people? interestingt is so

is as much as we are watching donald trump's long-winded press conferences every day, in a lot of ways this will be a governor decision. some of the red state governors will be more aggressive. texas has already said they are. i would bet california and new york are more conservative. listening more towards the scientists and saying we have come this far, we have had the worst loss-of-life in new york, let's be extra careful we do not screw this up. you will see a patchwork of setups. i do not think that is alarming idea, i think it is what we will get. i think you will see private business do their own testing. i got a bunch of antibody tests recently. unfortunately my family was certain we had been infected. it turns out none of us were infected. me when you have

these tests, you can test 100 people for $20 a test, $2000 a week you could test your whole office of 100 people. people would know if they had it. you could put your own testing regimes in to make people feel more comfortable. i talked to a bunch of different ceos who are already planning that. press onsee a public this but also a private press. erik: what you are talking about is epidemiology, largely. and virology as well. you have to think about the evolution of the virus and whether the testing we are doing now accurately gives us a sense of how many people have been infected. fundamentally you're talking about epidemiology. his mastering the epidemiology what determines success or failure as a macro investor? i think this is more of a logistics game. you can read the american

enterprise institute, put out a senator -- the center for ethics at harvard put one out, all of the smart people are coming round of the same idea. now it is logistics. how efficiently can we build a testing apparatus in this country to give people confidence they can go back to work safely? erik: you have done the work. how fast? harvard,the people at the center for ethics, they have been the most thorough i have worked with. they say you cannot start until june. that is an extra month. i do not think it is four months. ask is if we started two weeks or six weeks. in the short run that will make a difference but in the long run that will not make a big difference. i am semi-confident that by midsummer we are back by some form of normalcy.

not normal in the same way. we will not be going to rock concerts, but we will be going to work, we will be going to bars. life will look somewhat normal. probably like it looks in hong kong. erik: what kind of a hangover is there going to be for the economy, if you are right in by june we are all going back to work, we are going to be in our offices, after having been shut for three months? michael: a big one. this is the $64,000 question. we have had the single largest economic destruction in any of our lifetimes. that is not debatable. at the same time, we've had the single largest fiscal and monetary stimulus any of us have seen in our lifetimes. trying to sort all of this out, i think being a traitor will get harder -- being a trader will

get harder. until last week, if you could predict the icu count, you could have some edge on where the market was going to go. all of a sudden, that will not matter as much. we have earnings next week. that will be a fundamental story, a credit story. i think it leaves the market vulnerable. we are in a range. we could easily retest the low. the range could be big. it could be 2900 to 2100. that is a 35% to 40% range. it is going to get more difficult. the fundamentals will matter more. survives that will might look good. companies that will benefit from the stimulus will look good good it will be a much more difficult environment. erik: how is your macro book

position right now? i got short friday for the first time in a long time. stop send credit, selling into bazooka ofast big buying high-yield. it is not a structural position, it is a tactical position. i will trade short for a while. it is the first time i have been big short since the lows. gold and onong bitcoin. we are seeing a monetization of debt like we have never seen in our lifetimes. it is not just in the u.s. with the fed buying everything, it is a global monetization. for me, that has to make hard assets look better. gold has been outperforming. bitcoin is an interesting story. this is the time for bitcoin.

it got wiped out. the: i have heard this is time for bitcoin before. around thebanks world are embarking on a monetary debasement that dwarfs quantitative easing, why is bitcoin at 6700 and not 25,000? remember is have to an 11-year-old experiment. it is only in the last year where it has become a macro weapon, an investment choice. i am seeing in last month hedge funds and high net worth individuals who have never bought it before who are buying it. it is no longer a question of how does it work or what does this mean. i will take a risk. is risk on any store value that enough people believe in it. it is still a question of adoption. i am seeing more adoption in the u.s. and europe that i have since i started. why is it down?

asian retail is still a big part of this. the chinese economy is getting hit. there is a lot of leverage in the system and the asian retail side of crypto. there are still sellers coming out of asia. and thea-u.s. relation china european relationships are going to be looked at in lots of ways as the dust settles. the heaviness we have seen overnight, bitcoin is down 500 points, is mostly coming out of asia. i see newve side is players every day. having coming up. bitcoin is an instrument with no inflation. the inflation rate is getting cut in half as the fed is saying we'll print as many dollars as you can want. erik: among your fellow

investors, many of whom i know you admire, who do you think has traded this crisis most brilliantly? michael: i have not been speaking to him, but looking at his returns, alan howard always seems to have the book position for the crises. he pulled it off again. he is up 25% on a large amount of capital good alan is a smart guy. he buys risk premium when it is trading low. he has done well. business,hedge fund the macro business has done very well in general. , if it isulti-strats millennium or ken griffin at citadel, all up on that year. the fed helped bail a lot of people out. macro guys got onto this relatively well.

it is one of the few times where you can say the hedge fund industry did ok. erik: thank you for joining us. great to see you -- talk to you. that is michael novogratz, the ceo of galaxy digital. alix: thanks a much. really appreciate that. coming up, we will look at how markets are stacking up against their five-year averages. that is coming up next in technically speaking. this is bloomberg. ♪

alix: time for technically speaking. joining me is mike mcglone. talk to me about oil. halfway seen the bottom? mike: i think we are pretty

close to the bottom. you look at crude oil versus its 60 month average, it is at an extreme discount, the most extreme discount in the history of futures over 30 years. 60% below that average, hard to be bearish. a very good resistance in wti. one key significance is oil at an extreme discount, the stock market is not. alix: fairpoint. let's go to the stock market. david coston says the bottom is in. what you see on the charts? mike: it is not at a discount. we had a global heart stopper session yet the s&p 500 is still up 10%. the last two corrections is down 30%. you expect in a global recession you can at least get some form of discount with some people who buy stocks cheap.

they are far from cheap versus the five month average. alix: good to catch up with you on this quiet monday morning. mike mcglone of bloomberg intelligence. that wraps it up for me at "bloomberg daybreak americans." open" with"the jonathan ferro. a load of soft best, to be up -- a little bit of softness to be expected after the monster rally last week. europe remains closed for the day. keeping our eyes on the oil market, trading nowhere. happy monday. bloomberg. ♪

♪ jonathan: from new york city for our audience worldwide, good

morning. 30 minutes until the opening bell. the countdown to the open starts right now. let's start with the price action this monday morning, following the biggest weekly gain on the s&p 500 back to 1974. s&p futures recover as the session grows older. down .33%. muted price action in the bond market, treasuries lower, yields higher, up three basis points to .75%. the dollar stronger against the euro, the euro in a couple of tenths of a percent. let's talk about the top story. the anger, the division, the tension, around the feds latest move. there is been so much tension around what the fed should not do. i think it is important to think about what the fed should be doing and will not be doing, the objective of the federal reserve is to build as many bridges as