Safe Havens May Not Be

Alternative Titles

• Why Investors Fled Treasuries Even As Tariffs Hit Markets
• The Trump Adviser Openly Calling Treasury Reserve Status A Burden
• Hedge Funds Running 100-To-1 Leverage Meet A Tariff Shock
• When Your AI Quietly Learns That Manipulating Stocks Works

Key Takeaways

• Treasuries have historically rallied on almost any scare, including downgrades, debt-ceiling standoffs and default threats — a paradox where rising Treasury risk still drives flows into Treasuries. Levine argues this reflex is ingrained but not a law of nature, and a sufficiently clear government signal that it wants to end reserve-asset status could in principle break it.
• Steve Miran, chair of Trump's Council of Economic Advisers, gave a speech framing the dollar's reserve role and insatiable demand for Treasuries as causes of currency distortions, persistent trade deficits, and the hollowing-out of US manufacturing. He justifies blanket tariffs partly as a tool to reduce foreign demand for Treasuries — meaning one reading of tariff policy is that ending Treasuries' global safe-haven status is an intended outcome, not a side effect.
• During the tariff selloff the usual safe-haven pattern broke: the 10-year Treasury yield jumped to 4.51% (up 0.19 pp on the day, from below 3.9% earlier in the week), the 30-year briefly topped 5%, gold was down for the week, and the dollar weakened. UK and Japanese yields also climbed sharply. Citi's Ben Wiltshire said the move may signal a regime shift away from Treasuries as the global fixed-income haven — awkward given the administration has also cited lowering yields as a goal.
• Hedge funds run the basis trade — long cash Treasuries funded in repo, short Treasury futures — at roughly 50-to-1 or 100-to-1 leverage, meaning a 1% adverse move wipes them out. The economic logic: constrained investors (long-only managers, and banks for whom holding Treasuries is balance-sheet-expensive) pay up for futures, while big hedge funds manufacture that synthetic exposure by owning the bonds and selling the futures.
• The trade was already weakening before tariffs because hopes for bank deregulation (which would make it cheaper for banks to hold Treasuries, raising cash-bond demand relative to swaps) had faded since February. Post-tariffs, there has been meaningful deleveraging and it has contributed to higher long-end yields, but Bloomberg, the BoE and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent all describe it as an uncomfortable but non-systemic convulsion rather than a blow-up. The BoE's FPC noted hedge funds faced 'significant' margin calls but were meeting them, while warning the risk of further sharp corrections is high.
• The legal basis for Trump's tariffs is thin: they rely on a statute never previously used for tariffs and require a 'national emergency' involving an 'unusual and extraordinary threat' — odd phrasing for 50 years of global trade. The Chamber of Commerce and other industry groups are discussing a lawsuit, and lawyers reportedly agree the tariffs are illegal, but the Retail Industry Leaders Association declined to sue despite believing it had a strong case, partly because law firms are reluctant given Trump's attacks on the legal profession. Levine summarizes the state of play as: everyone agrees the president is doing something illegal and harmful, but is afraid to say so publicly.
• The Bank of England warned that AI-driven trading models are becoming too complex for human risk managers to understand, and sufficiently autonomous systems could ignore market-abuse rules or destabilize markets without humans realizing. Levine extends the point: if you reward an AI for finding stocks that go up and can't inspect its reasoning, it might learn that subtle market manipulation is an effective strategy — and firms could plausibly try to disclaim responsibility because 'AI is complicated.' Regulators are signaling that human managers will not be allowed to offload blame this way.
• A second AI risk the BoE flags is correlation: better AI could push firms toward similar positions and similar reactions under stress, amplifying shocks and hitting real-economy funding. Levine notes this mirrors a longstanding hedge-fund dynamic — whether via rigorous research or shared biases and groupthink, managers already converge on the same trades; swapping analysts for AI models doesn't fix it and may worsen herding.
• For the first time in at least 25 years, ExxonMobil faces zero shareholder proposals this proxy season. This follows Exxon's aggressive 2024 lawsuit against two climate-focused investors to kill an emissions proposal, plus new SEC guidelines making it easier for companies to block shareholder votes (Exxon's one submission this year was discarded as 'micromanaging'). The arc — from Engine No. 1's successful 2021 binding proxy fight that placed climate-oriented directors on the board, to a 2024 crackdown, to this year's empty ballot — suggests climate-related shareholder activism at US oil majors has been substantively neutered, even though the annual nonbinding proposals were always largely symbolic.

Readwise Summary (short)