Portuguese digital nomad navigating financial markets.
Joined July 2017
- Tweets39.5K
- Following570
- Followers1.2K
- Likes49.1K
People that admit we're in a hiking cycle and keep buying bonds, yet start a low IQ accounts lists like the arrogant ignorant people they are. Keep trying to sell books, little one.
Miguel da Fonseca retweeted
“Massive attack coming… wait, never mind, they want to negotiate.”
That’s theater diplomacy on loop.
Using bullying + broken promises + fake news as leverage is a failed strategy.
Acknowledge the facts and fulfill your commitments. We don’t need more theater.
So are 50% retracements. You’re buying in the middle of nowhere with very little support.
Go back and study the previous cycles for $GLD.
30% drawdowns are perfectly normal.
It doesn't mean the secular bull market is over. It's just a reset.
I still believe gold is likely to reach $8,000 before we see another prolonged consolidation.
Miguel da Fonseca retweeted
Most traders say they trade for personal freedom.
The freedom to not have to work a job they don’t like. The freedom to set their own schedule.
The freedom to answer to no one.
The freedom to determine their income.
But here’s the uncomfortable truth most never look at:
Many traders end up less free than when they started.
They leave a boss…
Only to become enslaved by their P&L.
By every tick.
By the need to prove something...today.
Freedom gets confused with lack of structure.
Real freedom isn’t doing whatever you want.
It’s being able to do what you said you would do, even when fear, greed, boredom, or ego show up.
If you can’t follow your plan when you’re down for the day, you’re not free. You’re emotionally leveraged.
If your mood depends on your last trade, you’re not free. You’ve outsourced your nervous system to the market.
If you override risk rules because “this one feels different,” that’s not freedom.
That’s compulsion wearing a freedom costume.
True trading freedom looks boring from the outside.
• Defined stops
• Walking away when conditions aren’t there
• Accepting missed trades
• Accepting small losses without needing revenge
• Letting profits come without squeezing them for validation
That kind of freedom requires self-mastery, not just market skill.
Most traders don’t fail because they lack intelligence or strategy.
They fail because their Inner Market is running the show.
👉Unresolved pressure to prove worth.
👉Fear of future regret.
👉Old survival patterns around money and success.
Those don’t disappear when you quit your job. They follow you into the charts.
Here’s where skilled 1:1 coaching changes the game:
Not surface-level mindset hacks. Not generic advice you forget under pressure.
But precise work on how you actually show up in real time.
• Identifying your specific emotional patterns at the point of execution
• Building real-time awareness of your Inner Market
• Training your nervous system to tolerate uncertainty, not react to it
• Installing structure that you can actually follow when it matters
• Separating self-worth from P&L at a felt level...not just intellectually
Because insight alone doesn’t create freedom. Embodied self-regulation does.
With the right coaching, traders don’t just “learn more”…
They stop using the market to regulate how they feel. They stop negotiating with their rules.
They stop needing the next trade to fix the last one.
And that’s when consistency starts to emerge.
Here’s the paradox:
> Structure is what creates freedom.
> Boundaries are what create choice.
> Risk management is what creates psychological space.
When your downside is truly contained, your mind can breathe.
Your perception sharpens.
Your execution stabilizes.
That’s freedom.
Not the absence of rules... but rules that protect you from the parts of you that hijack the wheel under pressure.
The market doesn’t take your freedom.
It reveals where you never actually had it.
And that’s not a flaw. It’s an invitation.
If this post resonates, R/T, follow me, like, and BOOKMARK this post
#tradermindset #tradingpsychology $ES_F $NQ_F
$SPY $QQQ
Miguel da Fonseca retweeted
No, but it’s also not bullish enough with a sustained China buying strike and the US waiting out the midterms to refill inventories. Price always overshoots and exits from the Strait, along with trapped longs all the way up, should maintain downside pressure. Bearish short-term.
...unless demand destruction is just around the corner, but at $70 crude with current growth conditions I'll take the other side of that (and agree with this take).
Gross shorts near pandemic-era highs in Brent are a paper market signal that diverges from the physical picture in a specific way. In April 2020, the shorts were correct — demand had collapsed and storage was overflowing. Today, OECD commercial inventories are still running below the five-year seasonal average, Hormuz physical throughput is recovering slowly from near-zero, and the SPR (Strategic Petroleum Reserve) entered this conflict near 1983 lows after prior drawdowns. Hedge funds positioned as if the supply picture looks like 2020 when the inventory and infrastructure picture looks nothing like 2020 is the setup for the squeeze.
Miguel da Fonseca retweeted
The Iran deal is like winning a fight with your wife but you somehow end up sleeping on the couch.
Just another dumb oil tourist that doesn't understand oil fundamentals 101. The arrogance of these people that started trading yesterday, but think people that dedicate their lives to the oil market and managing energy equity funds don't know what they're talking about.
Miguel da Fonseca retweeted
Very hawkish dot plot.
Nine out of 18 officials have at least one hike this year (and six of those 9 have *multiple hikes*).
Only one person has a cut this year, and one participant (presumably Warsh) didn't submit an SEP
The statement gets a complete writethru from top to bottom, much shorter
Miguel da Fonseca retweeted
FREE TO READ:
The top-10 reasons why oil prices are below $100 a barrel.
1) China, China and China
2) Demand destruction
3) Lots of oil bypassing/leaving the Strait of Hormuz
4) The original oversupply
5) Huge SPR release / commercial stocks draw
6) Refinery flexibility
7) Trump's jawboning
8) Options market development
9) The fog of war is thinner
10) Soaring Americas oil output
bloomberg.com/opinion/articl…
Miguel da Fonseca retweeted
The smartest commodity analyst on the planet just said he’s a “bag holder” and still adding.
Here’s why he’s right — and why even a ceasefire signed TODAY changes nothing for months. 🧵
Miguel da Fonseca retweeted
Here's my base case @RKelanic
Miguel da Fonseca retweeted
In the Roman mind, Rome was the undisputed center of the world. Yet the Iranians shattered that illusion; when Marcus Julius Philippus (Philip the Arab) marched east against Persia, the campaign did not result in Roman victory — it ended in a peace established on Sasanian terms: the emperor had to come to terms!
Miguel da Fonseca retweeted
The largest supply shock in history is pricing into the curve, not the backend (yet).
I've been saying this since 2004: the curve shape reflects the fundamentals. The long end reflects the industry's marginal cost, incorporating the cost of capital which are ultimately driven by liquidity.
ICE Brent spot is $107/bbl, while the three-year is at $75/bbl. Percent backwardation — which strips out price-level effects — hit an all-time high in April. It remains near record today. The largest oil supply shock in history is reasonably priced into the curve, and it likely has much more to run. Remember we are in the depths of the shoulder months, so there is no stress on the system.
Markets are fixated on Dated Brent differentials, c.$5/bbl last night which is down sharply, but that is a microcosm of the oil market. Dated Brent is Sullum Voe. One North Sea terminal. Not the global oil market.
Spot has not exceeded the Russia-Ukraine peak for one reason: the back end of the curve sits $10–$12/bbl below where it was then.
But the long end isn't a clean signal. Liquidity past 24 months is thin, dominated by producer hedges. Cal-29 isn't where the market thinks oil settles. It is where corporate treasurers are forced to transact, which makes it consistent with their costs of capital.
The cleaner signal is the energy equity complex — long-dated call options on undeveloped reserves. ExxonMobil holds 14 years. Chevron, 15. Equity prices integrate the entire forward strip. Diverge too far and an arbitrage opens. In a capacity-constrained world those reserves are worth more, not less. The equity market is pricing the opposite. Every oil CEO has warned we exit this disruption with lasting supply problems. The market refuses to listen.
S&P Energy ÷ S&P 500 can be used as a proxy for the long-dated oil price, and it currently implies long-run Brent of ~$70 — below the strip at $72–$75 — but not too far away.
A proxy for the curve shape follows: Brent ÷ (S&P Energy ÷ S&P 500). Or rewritten: Brent × S&P 500 ÷ S&P Energy. That single number proxies the FCF yield differential between the energy sector and the rest of the market. That has been bouncing around all-time highs.
When the FCF yield gap reaches extremes, investors should rotate. Even at $75 — not spot's $105 — the energy complex yields 600-1,000 bp above the S&P 500. In 2022, investors did rotate and those that did weathered the ensuing 35% collapse in the NASDAQ much better than those that didn’t.
The equity market is betting Brent falls to realign FCF yields. If it doesn't, capital has to buy Energy and sell the Mag 7. A 1,000bp differential in FCF yields cannot persist. And if oil breaks out as we expect, something has to give. You know which one I think will give. That is the Revenge of the Old Economy!
We are at the tipping point.
2/10