How to prepare for Hindenburg Omen

For the past two weeks my message inbox has been flooded with messages highlighting that recently “Hindenburg Omen Signal”, which preceded the 2008 and 2020 stock market crashes, has been triggered and a stock market collapse may be imminent. There are several other technical and strategy reports cautioning investors against an apparent bubble in the Artificial Intelligence (AI) related stocks.

Hindenburg Omen Signal: The Hindenburg omen is a technical indicator designed to signal the increased likelihood of a stock market crash. It compares the percentage of new 52-week highs and new 52-week lows in stock prices to a preset reference percentage (typically 2.2%) to predict the increasing likelihood of a market crash. The indicator is said to be suitable for about 30 days out, though it's been a false alarm more often than not in the past decade. Four criteria must be met to signal a Hindenburg omen:

·         The daily number of new 52-week highs and 52-week lows in a stock market index exceeds a threshold amount (typically set at 2.2%).

·         The 52-week highs can't be more than twice the 52-week lows.

·         The stock market index is still in an uptrend. A 10-week moving average or the 50-day rate of change indicator is used for this.

·         The McClellan oscillator (MCO), a measure of the shift in market sentiment, is negative.

How to think about the new Hindenburg Omen narrative

A common problem with the popular market discourse is that every meme indicator that worked once… becomes religion forever.

Hindenburg Omen is just a market breadth anomaly flag that is used to indicate stress emergence — not crash certainty.

Historically, some major crashes were indeed preceded by such a signal. However, false signals have massively outnumbered true signals. The probability distribution is not deterministic. Actually, it is more of a trend change watchlist input — not a trading instruction.

The more important debate now is actually different

The more important debate in my view is “Are AI stocks a bubble or are they discounting the future correctly?”

AI is now the most consequential capital allocation variable in the world — influencing geopolitics, capex, energy security, employment, corporate strategy, national strategy.

But here is the inconvenient fact for India:

·         India has no pure-play AI company.

·         This is not our NVIDIA moment.

·         This is not our TSMC moment.

·         This is not our Google / Meta / Tesla moment.

Our listed exposure is basically:

IT services riding implementation side revenue + consulting banks / logistics / enterprises consuming AI to enhance productivity So in India the AI debate is limited to “IT attrition, pricing, margins”. That is not the real debate in global markets.

The core portfolio question:

In my view the correct frame of reference for Indian investors is – “If global AI bubble were to correct — does India outperform or not?

Indian investors therefore may be better evaluating:

·         October saw FII flows turn positive and several respected global strategists are talking India long duration bull. Is this early 2026 positioning?

·         Have Indian valuations reached the band where global capital actually prefers to hide in India if US/AI corrects?

·         If there is a global risk off — does India fall with them and rebound faster (like 2008-09)… or does India do better in BOTH the fall and the rise?

In my view, instead of predicting market crashes, and consequently taking rash decisions, we would be better off by building antifragile portfolio architecture. For example-

·         Distinguishing between narrative premium vs earnings premium

·         Reducing leverage dependence for performance

·         Moving portfolio factor weights slightly more toward compounding engines, less to short-term momentum chasers

·         Using corrections to accumulate structural compounding themes, e.g., manufacturing formalization, infra development, energy security & efficiency, domestic financial deepening and up-trading in consumption.

Conclusion

Hindenburg Omen is useful… not because it predicts a crash — but because it forces you to re-test the strength of your portfolio design under adverse breadth conditions.

It is not important to forecast whether India will underperform or outperform the global markets. The important thing is to not panic trade technical omen memes — and instead use signals like this to calmly strengthen the probability of multi-year compounding.

Vanity over work

A few months ago, two reputable Indian corporate leaders opined that Indian youth should work harder and longer. Their opinion triggered an intense debate on social media, about the need for work-life balance and how Indian businesses neglect this important aspect of social-economic development.

In this context, it is pertinent to note the outcome of the latest “The Time Use Survey (TUS) 2024, conducted by the National Statistical Office (NSO)”. The survey highlights that these corporate leaders were speaking from their vast experience, and the critics are perhaps oblivious of the ground realities.

The Time Use Survey (TUS) 2024 provides a detailed picture of how Indians allocate their 24 hours among different types of activities. The primary objective of the survey is to measure unpaid work, gender participation, and time distribution between paid, unpaid, and personal activities to make an informed assessment of labour participation, care work, and alignment with sustainable development goals (SGD) of Gender Equality a Decent Work.

The key findings of the survey are listed below:

Average Daily Time Allocation (All Persons, 6+ years)

·         Personal care and self-maintenance: ~11 hours/day

·         Employment and related activities: ~3 hours/day (urban > rural)

·         Unpaid domestic and care work: ~4.5 hours/day

·         Learning, social, leisure, and community activities: ~5.5 hours/day

Gender Differentials

Men: Spend ~6 hours/day in paid work and only ~1 hour in unpaid household work.

Women: Spend ~1.5 hours/day in paid work and ~6.5 hours in unpaid domestic and care work.

Women’s contribution to unpaid work remains three to four times that of men.

Time spent in employment is higher in urban males; unpaid household work dominates female time use, particularly in rural areas.

Rural–Urban Patterns

Rural workers devote more time to primary and secondary activities like agriculture and livestock.

Urban individuals spend more time in education, paid employment, and social/leisure activities.

Time in unpaid household and care work is higher in rural areas due to limited infrastructure and service access.

Age-Wise Patterns

·         Children (6–14 years): Primarily engaged in learning and play.

·         Youth (15–29 years): More time on education and job search.

·         Adults (30–59 years): Highest participation in paid and unpaid work.

·         Elderly (60+ years): More time on personal care, social, and community activities.

There has been no material difference in the past five years (2019-2024) in the pattern of time spent on employment

 ​

​

Unpaid Work and Care Economy

·         The unpaid work economy remains female-driven, accounting for nearly 80% of total unpaid care hours in India.

·         Recognition of this work is vital for valuing women’s economic contribution and designing gender-sensitive policies.

Comparisons with 2019 Time Use Survey

·         Slight increase in paid work time for both genders, especially in urban areas.

·         Unpaid work hours for women show marginal decline but remain substantial.

·         Use of digital and online activities increased, especially for education and entertainment.

·         Improved participation in community and volunteer work post-pandemic.

Some interesting findings of the survey are:

·         Male commuters (for employment related activities) in the age group 15–59 years, spent 77 minutes on average in a day in commuting compared to 67 minutes spent by their female counterparts.

·         Children in the age group 6–14 years, spent 61 minutes in extracurricular activities while participating in such activities. Younger participants in the age group 15–29 years spent 74 minutes in a day on an average in extracurricular activities.

·         About 14.8% male and 3.9% females in the age group 15–29 years participated in sports and exercise activities during a day spending 64 minutes and 46 minutes respectively on an average. Children aged 6–14 years participating in sports and exercise activities spent an average of 83 minutes and 68 minutes in rural and urban areas respectively.

·         87.4% of younger people in the age group 15–29 years in urban areas and 73.4% in rural areas reported to have used mass media in a day. They spent 126 minutes and 116 minutes respectively in using mass media.

·         People aged 6 years and above spent about 89 minutes in a day while taking care of their dependent adult household members. Male participants spent 85 minutes while female participants spent 91 minutes on an average in such caring activities.

·         Rural people aged 6 years and above, spent about 123 minutes in a day in socializing and communication compared to 110 minutes spent by their urban counterparts. Male participants spent 121 minutes in a day compared to 117 minutes spent by female participants.

·         About 71.6% of rural children and 68.8% of urban children aged 6–14 years reported to have participated in learning activities related to formal education in the reference day, spending about 312 minutes in a day in each of the categories. Younger participants (aged 15–29 years) in learning activities related to formal education spent around 308 minutes in a day on average.

·         76.3% females participated in activities of food and meals management and preparation, spending about 209 minutes in the day. Male participation in such activity was 6.2% spending about 87 minutes in a day.

·         Activities related to childcare and instruction for one's own household in the reference day were reported by 32.8% females and 17% males. Time spent by the participants in such activities was 136 minutes and 73 minutes for females and male respectively.

Some random thoughts

The global macro landscape remains in flux. A strange mix of structural deflationary forces is colliding with equally powerful inflationary pressures. Technology, demographics, geopolitics, and policy responses are all pulling in different directions — making this one of the most complex investing environments in decades.

I am not competent enough to decode where the current conditions are driving us. Nonetheless, I would like to share some random thoughts with the readers and seek their views on these.

Inflation vs Deflation: The great tug of war

At the structural level, Artificial Intelligence, aging demographics, and the rapid adoption of renewable energy are profoundly deflationary for the global economy.

·         AI is driving efficiency, collapsing cost structures, and displacing traditional labor models.

·         Demographics in most major economies — from China to Europe to Japan — are suppressing consumption growth and wage pressures.

·         Renewables are gradually reducing marginal energy costs.

Yet, short-term inflationary winds continue to blow.

·         Fiscal profligacy, especially in the US and large emerging economies, ensures that governments remain the biggest spenders.

·         Deglobalization and parochial geopolitics — from tariffs to tech embargoes — are reversing decades of supply-chain efficiency.

·         Rising defense spending, both in the West and the East, adds another layer of price rigidity.

Ironically, even AI — while deflationary in the long run — is pushing up energy prices in the short run, as data centers consume unprecedented power.

The result is a macro paradox: consumer inflation may stay moderate, but asset price inflation looks inevitable.

Japanification — slow growth, aging demographics, and low yields — already grips China and the EU. In contrast, the US remains the lone outlier, buoyed by fiscal stimulus and a technology cycle.

Gold: Monetary alchemy or bubble in waiting?

Gold remains the ultimate barometer of trust in fiat systems. As the world lives with near-permanent fiscal deficits, the case for gold as a hedge against monetary debasement remains compelling.

However, a curious distortion has emerged:

The total volume of paper and digital claims on gold — ETFs, futures, tokenized products — now vastly exceeds the quantity of physical gold available. This means that, in the event of a systemic rush for redemption, the notional market could implode under its own leverage.

While dedollarization and rising central bank purchases continue to support the short to mid-term case for physical gold, the near-term structure looks speculative. A bubble in gold positions cannot be ruled out, just because of over-financialization.

Bitcoin: The digital store of value narrative

Bitcoin’s journey from fringe curiosity to mainstream asset continues. Institutional acceptance is growing; sovereigns are experimenting with it as a reserve diversifier. Banks like J. P. Morgan Chase, which termed Bitcoin “fraud’ not long ago, have now embraced it. The key driver remains distrust in fiat money and political money printing.

Yet, the coming wave of official digital currencies (CBDCs) could complicate the landscape.

Governments will likely pitch their CBDCs as “stable digital cash,” competing for legitimacy and mindshare.

If Bitcoin manages to retain its decentralization ethos and scarcity narrative, it could coexist as the digital equivalent of gold — a hedge against monetary mismanagement rather than a transactional currency.​

​

​

Bonds: The calm before a possible storm

Central banks across major economies have begun cutting rates again, signaling confidence that inflation is under control. Markets have bought into this narrative. However, no one seems positioned for a reversal — a renewed spike in inflation due to energy, wages, or geopolitics.

If inflation re-accelerates, the bond market could face a brutal adjustment. Duration-heavy portfolios, built on the assumption of declining yields, remain vulnerable.

The irony is that sovereigns need low yields to fund ever-rising deficits — and this need might override pure inflation management. That tension will define fixed income in the years ahead.​

​

​

Equities: Between resilience and fragility

Global equities are not in bubble territory — though certain US pockets (AI, mega-cap tech) show unmistakable signs of exuberance.

The greater risk lies in a material correction in US markets, which could reverberate globally through portfolio rebalancing and risk aversion.

However, there’s a counterweight: if developed market central banks ease more aggressively than expected, it could unleash a wave of liquidity toward emerging markets. The result might be a sharp rerating of EM equities, particularly those offering growth and currency stability.

 ​

​

The Big Picture

We are living through a multi-speed world:

·         The US remains inflation-tolerant and growth-driven.

·         China and Europe slide deeper into disinflation and demographic stagnation.

·         Emerging markets stand at the crossroads of opportunity and volatility.

·         Markets are oscillating between the two poles of fear (inflation) and faith (liquidity).

Navigating this phase will demand humility, optionality, and patience — and an acceptance that the next decade will likely reward flexibility over conviction.

Fed cuts 5bps, ends QT, clouds December cut

 The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) of the US Federal Reserve lowered its benchmark overnight borrowing rate by 25bps to 3.75%-4%. The decision was taken by 10-2 vote, with one member voting for a 50bps cut and another voting against the cut. The Fed also announced that it would terminate the current process of the reduction of its asset purchases (quantitative tightening or QT) on 1^st December 2025.

The Fed chairman, Jerome Powell, however, cautioned the market against expectations that the December rate cut was a “foregone conclusion,” saying that it is “far from it.” He cited that there is a “a growing chorus” among the Fed officials to “at least wait a cycle” before cutting again.

Notably, after the September FOMC meeting, the Fed officials had indicated the probability of three cuts, including the one in December.

Job risks prompt the cut, tariff inflation seen as one=time increase

The FOMC decision to cut rate was primarily driven by the cooling job market. The post meeting statement of the FOMC stated that, “Available indicators suggest that economic activity has been expanding at a moderate pace. Job gains have slowed this year, and the unemployment rate has edged up but remained low through August; more recent indicators are consistent with these developments.”

Raising concerns over the job market, the FOMC statement read, “downside risks to employment rose in recent months.”

The statement also noted that “Inflation has moved up since earlier in the year and remains somewhat elevated.” However, Powell felt that the inflation increase due to tariffs will be a “one-time increase” and “it will come to end”.

QT set to end in November

Along with the interest rate decision, the Fed said its process of reducing the amount of bonds it holds on the central bank’s $6.6 trillion balance sheet will end on 30^th November 2025.

The Fed expanded its portfolio of Treasurys and mortgage-backed securities during the Covid crisis, pushing the balance sheet from just over $4 trillion to close to $9 trillion. In the past couple of years, the program, popularly known as QT, had unrolled appx $2.3 trillion off the Fed’s portfolio.

There are signs of tightening in short-term lending markets. To improve short term liquidity, From December the Fed will be investing proceeds from maturing mortgage securities into shorter-term bills.

Mr. Powell however clarified that “while the Fed found it necessary to shrink its holdings, he did not foresee a return to pre-pandemic levels”.

Market reaction

S&P500 and Nasdaq ended the day higher, though lower than the highs recorded before Powell’s cautionary note. Crypto ended 23% lower. Bond yields rose slightly (10-year Treasury to 4.12%), reflecting tempered cut expectations.

Beyond the Debt Conspiracy: What we need to be bothering about

Several readers have commented on my yesterday’s post (“USD, Gold, Crypto and a mountain of $38trn debt”). Some agree that the “debt manipulation” theory was far-fetched, others argued that I was underplaying the seriousness of America’s fiscal overhang. Both reactions are valid. My intent, however, was not to trivialize the US debt issue, but to put it in its proper context — and to focus attention on the much larger transitions now underway in the global financial order.

I would like to elaborate to convey my point in the right perspective.

The Debt Problem Is Real — but Not New

The US federal debt now stands around $38 trillion, or roughly 120% of GDP. That sounds alarming, but the ratio has hovered near that level for over a decade. The composition, though, has changed dramatically.

After the dotcom bust, debt piled up in corporate and household balance sheets. After Lehman, it migrated to banks. Post-Covid, it has firmly shifted to the sovereign. In essence, the debt hasn’t disappeared — it has just changed owners.

This doesn’t mean the US is immune to a confidence crisis. But it does mean that debt is a chronic structural feature of modern fiat economies — not an engineered plot to reset the system.

 ​

​

1933, 1971 — and the temptation of simplistic parallels

Many commentators love to invoke 1933 or 1971 to suggest a looming “USD reset.”

But both those episodes happened in very different institutional and political contexts — gold standard rigidity, post-war reconstruction, and early Cold War dynamics.

Today’s world operates on a networked, digitalized, and politically fractured global economy. If history rhymes, it does so in free verse, not repetition.

The better historical analogy might not be 1933 or 1971, but the slow disintegration of older orders — Roman, British, Ottoman or Mughal — when economic dominance eroded gradually, not overnight.

What the real transition looks like

The true story of this decade isn’t gold manipulation or crypto suppression. It’s the slow-motion rebalancing of global power, as the post-WW2 order strains under its own contradictions:

·         Fiscal dominance is replacing monetary orthodoxy — politics increasingly dictates central bank balance sheets.

·         Fragmentation is replacing globalization — parallel payment systems (like China’s CIPS and India’s UPI stack) are nibbling at the dollar’s monopoly.

·        
Asset inflation remains the political lifeline of democracies — as long as homes, stocks, and jewellery rise in nominal value, grocery inflation can be tolerated.

 ​

​

Digital money: Evolution, not Revolution

The tokenization of debt and the emergence of digital treasuries is definitely worth watching. But speculating that Crypto or stablecoins could “replace” outstanding treasuries may be a little far-fetched.

These aren’t part of a grand conspiracy to devalue debt — they are the next evolutionary stage of financial plumbing, blending liquidity, programmability, and regulatory control.

Think less “Nixon shock,” more “software upgrade.”

The real risk: A world without a coherent order

While investors debate gold and Bitcoin, the bigger risk is that the rules of the global system — trade, capital flows, reserve currency privileges — are eroding without a clear replacement.

This “interregnum” between the US-led order and an undefined multipolar system may prove far more destabilizing than any Fed balance sheet maneuver.

In such a world, volatility will not come from conspiracy or manipulation — it will come from institutional entropy.

 ​

​

Investment implications: focus on what’s observable

Instead of gaming hypothetical resets, investors may be better served by tracking:

·         Real yields and the pace of balance-sheet normalization

·         Fiscal-monetary coordination trends in major economies

·         Shifts in global trade invoicing patterns (USD vs CNY vs others)

·         Political tolerance for inequality and asset inflation

The Takeaway

Markets thrive on stories, and conspiracy is a powerful story. But history suggests that disorder, not design, drives most turning points.

The bigger challenge ahead is navigating a world that’s losing its monetary anchor and political consensus at the same time.

The “debt conspiracy” may fade, but the era of permanent volatility is just beginning.

USD, Gold, Crypto and a mountain of 38trn debt

I returned to my desk after a 10-day Diwali break. As I opened my overflowing mailbox, I realized a lot might have changed in the meantime. Nifty50 is flirting with its all-time level. INR has regained some of its lost ground. Precious metal prices have cooled after a sharp upmove. There is a conspicuous thaw in the Indo-US and Sino-US relations. Prime Minister Modi, who hardly missed an opportunity to represent India at various global forums, has missed the ASEAN summit after missing the UNGA annual session, arguably to avoid a one-on-one meeting with President Trump.

However, what caught my attention was a large number of notes, reports, messages alluding to the unsustainable $38trn US government debt, and how the US government and the US Federal Reserve are conspiring to dissipate this mountain of debt by manipulating the prices of gold and cryptocurrencies (especially Bitcoins). Most messages are arguing that 2026 could be a 1933 and/or 1971 redux, when USD was devalued 69% (1933) and Richard Nixon abruptly ended Bretton Wood and turned USD into a fiat currency to sidestep a debt crisis (1971).

Several analysts(?) suspect that the US strategy is to—

(i)    Create an environment of extreme uncertainty through trade war and geopolitical volatility and coax the eastern economies to accumulate gold at an elevated price.

(ii)   Keep the USD weaker, rebuild the US manufacturing base, incentivize exports, discourage imports to minimize trade deficit and strengthen the core of the US economy.

(iii)  Gain control over blockchain economics - suppress the value of cryptocurrencies and accumulate large reserves. Today the crypto market cap is appx US$4 trn. “Experts” are estimating it to cross US$100 trn in the next 10-12 years.

(iv)  Make UST yields unattractive and gradually substitute stablecoins to devalue public debt. Manipulate the crypto prices higher and offer accumulated crypto-coins to settle the mammoth debt.

(v)   Engineer a crash in prices of precious metals, inflicting severe pain on the eastern economies, which will be facing pressure anyways due to the US export competitiveness, and thus extend the USD supremacy for many more decades.

In my view, this analysis suffers from various shortcomings. It selectively chooses historical context 1933 and 1971 while ignoring demise of Roman, Mughal, British, Mauryan empires etc. Analysts seem to have assumed central banking and electoral democracy as sicut datum est or a fait accompli, in their analysis, whereas there is evidence that the autonomy of the central banks is being politically undermined; and the present form of electoral democracy is facing challenges in several countries.

The analysis also conveniently ignores that The US (and European & Japanese) debt problem is not new, but decades old. The US has been running unsustainable debt ever since the dotcom burst. It is only after the Lehman Bros. collapse that the debt has shifted from banks and household balance sheets to the government's balance sheet. Post Covid, the inflation moved from assets to grocery. It is now coming back to assets.

I would rather file these analyses into the “conspiracy theories” folder, than take it seriously and make it a basis for any change in my investment strategy.

In my view, notwithstanding how much people may dislike grocery inflation, they love asset inflation more than anything. Most of them would vote for a rise in the nominal value of their home, jewellery, and stocks, but only a few would vote for a slower pace of rise in the grocery prices. If you take asset inflation away, the political system might collapse.

In my view, under the present circumstances, the world should be worrying about the potential collapse of the post WW2 world order, while the new order still remains a work in progress. The chaotic transition might hurt the investors much more than what they would expect to gain from a 10-20% rise or fall in gold prices, a couple of percentage points change in US treasury yields, or Dollar (DXY) Index.

I found the views of Mr. Lawrence Wong, Prime Minister of Singapore, as expressed in his recent interview with the Financial Times, most pertinent in this context. (see here)

Following the Custom: Balancing Faith and Fundamentals

Each Diwali, as lamps light up homes, optimism lights up Dalal Street too.

It’s that time of the year again. Business channels are abuzz with market commentators dressed in their festive best, sharing their annual outlooks on the economy and equities. Almost by ritual, hope dominates the narrative — and that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

This year, with investor sentiment subdued and global uncertainties still clouding the horizon, a measured dose of optimism may be just what the market needs. Continuing the custom, here’s a closer look at what could turn favorable for Indian markets over the next one year — and what investors should keep an eye on.

Domestic Drivers: The Spark Within

Consumption revival on the horizon

After three years of subdued consumption, several catalysts are now aligning. Rationalization of income tax and GST rates, material lending reforms by the RBI, a supportive rate environment, and a good monsoon could together revive private consumption demand. The upcoming pay-commission payouts may add further fuel, particularly in semi-urban and rural markets.

 ​

​

Capex momentum building up

The long-awaited private investment cycle seems to be stirring beyond government-led initiatives. In the past six months, Indian corporates have announced new projects worth ₹9.35–9.95 lakh crore, marking a 30–37% year-on-year increase — the second-highest level in 15 years for the April–September period.

The new investments span data centers, defense manufacturing, semiconductors, mining, power transmission, and battery storage — sectors that could structurally strengthen the domestic supply chain.

If these plans translate into execution, they could lift capacity utilization levels, spur employment, and improve corporate earnings visibility over FY27–FY28.​

​

Global Tailwinds: Winds Turning Favorable

Energy and trade outlook brightening

Global energy prices are projected to ease in 2026 as demand growth moderates and logistics costs normalize. An eventual increase in OPEC production could add downward pressure.

Simultaneously, the finalization of trade agreements with the EU, the U.S., and other major partners could stabilize India’s current account and lend support to the rupee.

Foreign flows stabilizing

After months of heavy selling, foreign investors’ outflows are slowing. Several global brokerages have highlighted that after underperforming global peers for a year, Indian equities are re-entering attractive valuation zones.

Structural Shifts: Productivity & Valuations

AI and efficiency gains

While still in early stages, AI-led productivity improvements may begin reflecting in corporate bottom lines from FY27 onward — particularly in IT services, logistics, and manufacturing automation. The initial phase could boost operating margins and asset utilization ratios.

Valuations moderating to reasonable levels

Indian equities have corrected modestly from their 2023 peaks. The Nifty 50 forward P/E now stands around 18.5×, roughly 10% below its five-year average.

With earnings expected to grow in double digits through FY27–FY28, select large-cap names look increasingly compelling from a risk-reward standpoint.​

​

Cautionary Note: Risks Beneath the Diyas

Every Diwali brings hope, but this year’s optimism must be tempered with realism. A few watchpoints remain:

Fiscal balance: Pre-election spending or subsidy pressures could test the fiscal glide path.

External vulnerabilities: A sudden oil price spike or renewed global conflict could alter India’s macro assumptions.

Execution gap: Investment announcements often lag actual implementation; sustained follow-through will be critical.

AI hype vs. reality: Productivity gains may take longer than expected to reflect at scale.

Geopolitics: Even as ceasefire talks progress in the Middle East, tensions between major powers remain fluid.

A balanced investor would acknowledge these risks even while celebrating the improving trends.

Conclusion: The Glow of Disciplined Optimism

Diwali has always symbolized renewal — of faith, fortune, and perspective. This year, as India stands on the cusp of a consumption revival and a capex upcycle, optimism has reason to exist.

Yet, faith alone does not light the path forward — fundamentals do. The coming year could reward investors who practice disciplined optimism: staying invested in quality, avoiding exuberance, and letting conviction — not celebration — drive portfolio choices.

From today, I am taking my Diwali break. My next post will be on Monday, the 27th October.

Wishing all the readers a very Enlightening, Blissful and Joyous Diwali. May the Mother Supreme destroy all the darkness and sorrow from our lives and guide us to the path of enlightenment and divine bliss.