5320 Northshore Drive,
North Little Rock, Arkansas 72118
contact@sowellmanagement.com
You should receive a confirmation email shortly. Don’t forget to reserve your room through the unique Sowell hotel reservation page. You can extend your stay at the Sowell Summit reduced room rate.
WEEK AHEAD
June 2-6, 2025
Since President Trump’s decision to delay reciprocal tariffs in favor of renewed trade talks, equity markets have staged a spirited rebound—proving, once again, that nothing calms Wall Street like the promise of diplomacy over duty. This resurgence has fortified positive market momentum and kept our technical signals firmly in bullish territory. The tactical trend-following models remain fully allocated—100% invested, whispering, ‘Trust, but verify… and stay long.”
Week in Review
As investors closely watched how tariffs and the stock market revival would evolve following the mid-May US-China trade talks, the week delivered some subsequent blasts.
After Trump agreed to extend EU trade talks at the beginning of the week, optimism further surged midweek after the Court of International Trade ruled that the president overstepped his authority by imposing blanket tariffs on trade-surplus nations, suspending reciprocal and fentanyl-related tariffs. However, the Court of Appeals later paused the ruling, keeping the tariffs in place until next week. Tensions escalated on Friday as Trump accused China of violating a recent trade agreement, which had stalled negotiations.
Nvidia unveiled on Wednesday better-than-expected first-quarter results: adjusted earnings per share of $0.96 on revenue of $44.06 billion. Despite a drag on growth from the U.S. ban on Nvidia H20 chips in China, CEO Huang reassured that strong global demand for AI infrastructure remains. Yet, sentiment softened on Friday after reports that the administration plans to widen restrictions on China's tech sector with new regulations aimed at subsidiaries of companies under U.S. curbs.
Despite Friday's pullback amid tariff and US-China uncertainties, the S&P 500 gained +1.9% for the week and +6.3% MTD, pushing itself back into positive territory YTD. Nasdaq Composite gained +9.65% MTD, with Technology stocks rebounding (+10.3%) during the month, followed by Communication Services (+9.59%) and Industrials (+8.94%). In fixed income, while Treasury yields softened this week, the 10-year (4.40%) and 30-year (4.93%) still ended the month higher overall.
The week was also full of releases of important economic indicators.
GDP growth slowed down, but inflationary pressure continued to show signs of easing.
The rebound in consumer sentiment gained momentum after the May 12 US-China trade deal, while consumer spending cooled down after the pre-trade-war panic.
The manufacturing market showed a surprising contradiction.
The housing market showed signs of cooling and slowing.
The labor market showed some turbulence.
Week Ahead
All eyes are still on the evolving impact of tariffs and US-China negotiations. The next hearing in the case of tariff ruling is on June 5, but even if Trump lost the case in the eventual Supreme Court, he could still use other powers to impose tariffs. On the other side, U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessent expects more talks between the U.S. and China in the coming weeks and doesn't rule out a direct call between President Trump and President Xi.
Statistics for the manufacturing market will remain under the spotlight as ISM Manufacturing PMI, ISM Manufacturing Employment, Construction Spending, and Factory Orders will be released, so as the labor market with JOLTS Job Openings, ADP Nonfarm Employment Change, Nonfarm Payrolls, and Unemployment Rate to be unveiled.
"We need to stay where we are. You can say that we're hitting our employment mandate, and now we have to get the price stability mandate under control. We need to be in a restrictive posture."
– Raphael Bostic, Atlanta Fed president and CEO, Council for Economic Education's National Economics Challenge, May 30, 2025
The Medicaid Paradox: UnitedHealth’s Crisis and the Fragility of For-Profit Public Health
At the center of the American healthcare machine sits a paradox: some of our most critical public health programs—Medicaid and Medicare Advantage—are administered not by government agencies but by some of the largest, most profitable corporations on Earth. To be clear from the start—this is a highly nuanced, complicated issue. As portfolio managers, we usually only wade in when the stock is up big or down big. Lucky us.
However, this paradox is now playing out in real-time at UnitedHealth Group, with the stock down approximately 50% over the past year.
This industry giant, once a model of vertical integration and operational stability, is reeling. A string of compounding crises—spiraling medical costs, regulatory scrutiny, leadership upheaval—has thrown the company off balance. Andrew Witty, UnitedHealth’s CEO, resigned abruptly in May. The company also suspended forward guidance for 2025, citing cost pressures, particularly within its Medicare Advantage unit. The result: UNH shares cratered, shedding nearly 18%—their worst single-day drop since COVID.
UnitedHealth reported Q1 2025 earnings below expectations, with earnings per share of $6.85 (adjusted EPS of $7.20). Worse, the company revised its 2025 earnings outlook to $24.65–$25.15 per share, down from the previous range of $28.15–$28.65. They blamed increased care utilization among Medicare Advantage members, which drove higher-than-expected costs. Additionally, the company cited “unanticipated changes” in its Optum health services subsidiary as a factor in the earnings miss. Revenues for the quarter still grew to $109.6 billion, up 9.8% year-over-year.
And if those numbers weren’t bad enough, there are rumors of a potential fraud investigation. Losing 50% of your stock price in a month tends to bring out the lawyers.
Beneath it all, a deeper structural question has resurfaced: what happens when public health responsibilities are tethered to shareholder value?
If we’re honest, whether it’s public health, national security, or other social responsibilities—the market isn’t new to these conflicts.
Earnings Shock Meets Leadership Shuffle
Until recently, UnitedHealth was riding high—its diversified business model and data-driven cost controls made it a Wall Street favorite. But in Q1 2025, those controls cracked. Rising utilization in Medicare Advantage blew a hole through projections. Even more troubling, the company openly admitted it couldn’t see clearly enough to issue forward guidance.
Then came the leadership shake-up. Witty’s departure was framed as personal, but the market read between the lines. Stephen Hemsley—long-standing chair and former CEO—has stepped back in, a move that signals both stability and regression. When your crisis plan is “bring back the guy who ran the show 10 years ago,” you’re not innovating—you’re scrambling.
The Public–Private Contradiction
Here’s the real story, though: this isn’t just a company-level issue. It’s a system-level fragility baked into the structure of U.S. healthcare delivery.
UnitedHealth is not a rogue actor. It is the largest player in a system where government-funded care flows through private-sector pipes. Roughly half of Medicare recipients are now enrolled in Medicare Advantage—a program run not by CMS but by insurers like UNH. Medicaid managed care? Same story.
These programs are designed to deliver care more efficiently and more affordably. But what happens when that care comes under pressure from earnings calls, margin targets, and Wall Street expectations?
You get rationed services, complex billing structures, narrow networks—and now, a publicly traded behemoth that can’t project its own financial future because utilization rates went up.
In other words, the system works until people actually use it. OMG.
The Illusion of Control
The most dangerous illusion in for-profit public health is the illusion of control. Models can predict, and costs can be managed, but when real humans enter the equation—aging, sick, unpredictable—the system bends under pressure. Do we hope that AI does better?
That’s what we’re seeing at UnitedHealth now. It’s not just volatility. It’s a warning: when the stewards of public health are tethered to quarterly earnings, public health becomes a variable expense.
And then there’s the policy wild card. Trump’s renewed focus on lowering drug prices—a populist rallying cry that resonates across party lines—could either ease UnitedHealth’s pain or deepen it. If lower pharmaceutical costs translate into reduced total spending across Medicare and Medicaid, payers like UNH might get some relief on their medical loss ratios.
But the structure of that relief matters. If reforms slash PBM margins or dismantle the rebate-driven economics behind OptumRx, the pressure won’t vanish—it’ll just shift from claims to revenue. In trying to fix one corner of the healthcare system, we may be yanking at the profits holding the rest of it together.
A Closing Thought
This moment demands more than crisis management. It demands clarity.
UnitedHealth’s stumble is not just a corporate setback. It’s a test of a system that increasingly leans on private enterprise to deliver public good. And suppose the largest, best-capitalized insurer in the country can be thrown into disarray by a spike in care utilization. What does that say about the resilience of the system itself?
This isn’t just a story about UNH. It’s a story about how fragile our healthcare architecture becomes when purpose and profit pull in opposite directions.
Source: Hedgeye.com, “Chart of the Day, Medicare Advantage Enrollment Crosses the Majority Line,” February 13, 2024, https://app.hedgeye.com/insights/146305-chart-of-the-day-medicare-advantage-enrollment-crosses-the-majority-line?type=%2C.
Disclosure: The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Rayliant Investment Research. The material is for informational purposes only and should not be considered investment advice. The securities identified and described do not represent all of the securities purchased, sold or recommended for client accounts. The reader should not assume that an investment in the securities identified was or will be profitable. The opinions contained herein are subject to change without notice.
Advisory services offered through Sowell Management, a Registered Investment Advisor. The views expressed represent the opinion of Sowell Management. The views are subject to change and are not intended as a forecast or guarantee of future results. This material is for informational purposes only. It does not constitute investment advice and is not intended as an endorsement of any specific investment. Stated information is derived from proprietary and non-proprietary sources that have not been independently verified for accuracy or completeness. While Sowell Management believes the information to be accurate and reliable, we do not claim or have responsibility for its completeness, accuracy, or reliability. Statements of future expectations, estimates, projections, and other forward-looking statements are based on available information and Sowell Management’s view as of the time of these statements. Accordingly, such statements are inherently speculative as they are based on assumptions that may involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties. Actual results, performance or events may differ materially from those expressed or implied in such statements. Investing in securities involves risks, including the potential loss of principal. While equities may offer the potential for greater long-term growth than most debt securities, they generally have higher volatility. International investments may involve risk of capital loss from unfavorable fluctuation in currency values, from differences in generally accepted accounting principles, or from economic or political instability in other nations. Past performance is not indicative of future results.