| 0 comments ]

Chinese AI Matches Mythos In Cybersecurity Tasks With Open-Weight Model

While Anthropic has been forced to shut down its latest general-use models for over two weeks after it emerged that the company's de-tuned public-facing Fable 5 model could be 'jailbroken' into its unrestricted form (Mythos 5) to perform tasks that pose security risks, a Chinese AI company backed by Alibaba and Tencent has released a model that matches the performance of Mythos in some cybersecurity scenarios. 

The company, Zhipu AI - also known as Z.ai, can match the latest US models when it comes to finding security bugs - though it still lags at other tasks, according to the Wall Street Journal

Overall, the capability gap between top U.S. models and those built by Chinese companies has narrowed significantly, and use of Chinese AI systems has surged as businesses seek to rein in runaway costs. A host of companies, including Microsoft, are weighing how they can offer Chinese models on their platforms, a development that is set to alter the balance of power among tech companies.

What's more, Zhipu's GLM-5.2 is an open-weight model, meaning it can be downloaded and run on hardware by anyone and can be modified and used without supervision - which hackers are undoubtedly loving. 

GLM-5.2 has ranked as one of the 10 most-used AI models, according to data from OpenRouter, a company that provides access to more than 400 AI models. In some benchmarking tests, according to the cybersecurity company Semgrep, GLM-5.2 bested Anthropic’s Claude Opus 4.8 model, which was released in May. When given further instructions, Opus 4.8 and GLM-5.2 can match Mythos in bug-finding ability, according to researchers.

As we noted last week for our premium subscribers, this is how Goldman's Delta One head, Rich Privorotsky framed the latest Chinese shock to the system from open-weight models: 

The big development over the last couple of days has been GLM-5.2, another Chinese open source model that appears highly competitive on SWE benchmarks relative to some of the latest private models. It is not quite cutting edge, but the gap between open and closed models continues to narrow. The weights are open (MIT license), models can be distilled, quantized and reproduced...its a big leap in capability and a clear sign the field is narrowing.

It's not just some of Wall Street's top thinkers who were immediately drawn to the stats of the latest Chinese offering: various industry insiders were in shock.

Artificial Analysis’ new knowledge work benchmark rated it higher than GPT 5.5

"This kind of powerful weapon that can alter the landscape of cyberwarfare can’t remain solely in American hands," Zhou Hongyi - CEO of Chinese cybersecurity company 360 Security Technology, speaking at a cybersecurity conference in Beijing. His company has released a new bug-finding tool called Tulongfeng - which it claims is comparable to Mythos when it comes to finding bugs. 

Zhou Hongyi, chief executive of 360 Security Wu Hao/EPA/Shutterstock

So while the Trump administration restored some access to Mythos 5, IT departments across America are now at a disadvantage when it comes to using something this powerful to find and patch their own vulnerabilities. 

"Banning Fable while selling chips China needs to develop its own version is a gift to China," said Saif Khan - a distinguished technology fellow at the Institute for Progress think tank who focused on export restrictions under the Biden administration. Kahn says that the US needs to maximize the use of Mythos and similar models to harden cyber defenses while it can

Among the Mythos 5 and Fable 5 users that had lost access before Friday’s decision to restore Mythos 5 access for some trusted entities: the National Security Agency, which had been testing the tools and found them impressive in trials, according to people familiar with the matter.

Critics of the White House approach have said it has been lax in restricting use of Chinese open-weight models from companies such as DeepSeek and Zhipu, which are popular among U.S. businesses. -WSJ

Meanwhile - OpenAI on Friday said it will now limit access to its latest model - GPT 5.6, after Trump administration officials raised security concerns. The company warned that the government's current case-by-case evaluation process isn't a good long-term solution, but they're adhering to it following a recent executive order focused on security and model oversight. 

In short, the Trump administration is driving people to use open-weight Chinese models, while hobbling the US AI industry. 

Tyler Durden Sun, 06/28/2026 - 18:05
https://ift.tt/NGRPi9A
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/NGRPi9A
via IFTTT

Chinese AI Matches Mythos In Cybersecurity Tasks With Open-Weight Model SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

The Path To A September Rate Cut (Despite AI Inflation)

By Peter Tchir of Academy Securities

The Path to a September Rate Cut (despite AI inflation)

A lot has changed in the past 24 hours. After Thursday’s CNBC interview, it seemed obvious (to me) that I needed to write about how there is a real path to a Fed Rate Cut in September. Not only has the market priced in a 75% chance of a hike in September, and 1.25 hikes by the December meeting, most have also taken any chance of a cut off the table. I think that is missing the path that I believe Warsh is trying to create. We argued last weekend, The Fed and Rates, that Warsh had curtailed the tail risk on the long end of the curve. We switched from bearish to neutral on the long end of the curve (10s went from 4.46% to 4.37% this week). The more we think about it, the more we believe that he has started us on a path, that despite his hawkish rhetoric, sets up for a cut in September to be followed by another cut in October, just ahead of the midterms.

Two things occurred, making me rethink today’s topic: Iran and doubts about the AI trade.

Those two topics are important enough that we need to at least address them, but in the end, we decided to focus on the path to rate cuts, as the other two stories will take time to play out.

Iran, Attacks Resume, But Ceasefire is Not Officially Broken

Iran and the U.S. exchanged fire on Friday and Saturday, and fighting continues to be a risk this weekend. Academy published a SITREP on The U.S. Strikes Iranian Targets over Ceasefire Violation.

For now, the working assumption is that this round of back-and-forth attacks will not derail the discussions. That both sides were “flexing” to remind the other side of why they are at the table. If the ceasefire breaks down, the hostilities escalate, and the oil trade is once again disrupted, then the odds of a September rate cut look bleak, but for now, that is not our base case on Iran.

There are two things that have not gotten the attention they deserve with respect to oil prices:

  • The U.S. drained the SPR (strategic petroleum reserve) rapidly and to its limit, which kept oil prices capped, but that ability is largely gone, so something needs to be done.
  • Providing sanction relief to Iranian oil may be as important as re-opening the Strait. Providing sanction relief not only brings more Iranian oil to the market than before, but it also lets them move the oil they were already sending (above sanctioned limits) with a higher degree of flexibility and transparency.
    • The fact that the concept of OPEC seems to be in tatters doesn’t hurt either.

Admirals Joyner and Whitworth, along with Bret Lowry, Maria Donnelly and I (Peter Tchir), touched on the f ragility of the peace between Iran and the U.S. in this month’s Around the World Podcast (iTunes and Spotify). The podcast also provides an update on our take on the Russia/Ukraine war, Cuba (which doesn’t get the attention it deserves), and of course, China and macro.

We need to keep a close eye on Iran, but for now, we see us limping along the path to discussing the details of the rather vague MOU that both sides seem to interpret very differently.

Questioning the AI Growth Story

We continue to see two economies. The AI and Data center economy and the rest of the economy. The former has been generating the jobs, the growth, and the earnings. The SOX Index (Philadelphia Semiconductor Index as if anyone, anywhere doesn’t know what the SOX is at this time) hit a high on Monday before dropping almost 10% from there.

Micron’s earnings call helped generate a rebound on Thursday, but that proved to be short-lived.

Questions are swirling around the spending. The cost of the buildout (more on that later). The utility of AI versus the cost of using AI. At some level, is the cost of using AI rising even faster than the benefits?

The growing angst about AI and Robotics (in our AI Revolution pieces) continues to grow and is something the AI companies need to aggressively address before it becomes a problem (via legislation or taxes, for example).

This isn’t a debate that will be answered today, but it does seem like the market is starting to rethink valuations. Stories were circulating that OpenAI may delay their highly anticipated IPO from this year to 2027. Since there is no official timetable, it is difficult to evaluate the veracity of such news, but it did little to help market sentiment.

It is always risky (and not wise) to publish a chart that one does not really understand. But rarely has the T-Report been accused of being risk averse and wise, so here it goes.

According to Bloomberg the Silicon Data LLM Token Expenditure Index (is a daily statistical benchmark to measure the effective expenditure level of the actively traded broad LLM Market, measuring price per million tokens). Say that ten times quickly!

I really don’t know how good this index is at measuring what it tries to measure (and it is in its infancy in any case), but it seems like something worth paying attention to as we all try to figure out where we are headed on AI spend (not just the spending to build out AI and data centers, but the actual spending on the compute they provide).

For what it’s worth, credit spreads in the sector started to widen recently. Not that problematic and certainly not enough to derail the borrowing to spend, but it is always worth paying attention to credit.

Expect more questions about valuations, even with good news, let alone with bad news.

The Path to a September Rate Cut

Let’s get to the “ fun ” part of today’s Report. We will lay out a case for September Rate Cuts that is entirely consistent with Warsh’s messaging.

We will do this, step by step. Some of the “steps” may seem to be disjointed, but I think they all tie well together.

Miran and The Neutral Rate

Let’s just go back in time, before the U.S. attacked Iran.

Miran was the administration’s inside person on the Fed. I didn’t like that he voted to cut every single time, but I think he did a lot of good work on the Neutral Rate.

The Neutral Rate, like R* and many other things in the field of economics, sounds precise, but is incredibly difficult to measure. There is a range of what the Neutral Rate is at any given time. That range moves along with the economy and technology.

  • I felt attacking the neutral rate, and arguing that it was lower than the previous Fed had thought, was a solid argument towards getting cuts. You could probably justify 50 to 100 bps of cuts, just based on arguing that the prior Fed had been wrong on where the neutral rate was.
    • It is not an accident that I try to frame this as the “new” Fed blaming the “old” Fed for mistakes. It is consistent with this admin (and every other administration), to blame prior administrations for mistakes. It is often reserved for Presidents, but the tactic can be applied more broadly.

While no one is talking about the neutral rate today, I think this work will become relevant again.

STOP WITH THE PCE CHATTER!

Surprisingly, few things make my head explode (though high on the list is The Big Short’s portrayal of just a few people seeing cracks in the housing market, when lots of people saw the issue, but got stopped out because they timed it wrong).

But on Thursday my head nearly exploded, as I heard over and over that “ PCE, The Fed’s preferred inflation gauge ” did whatever it did.

I don’t know what it did because the PCE is NOT this Fed’s preferred measure. I’m not even sure if it was Powell’s favorite measure. I’m pretty positive Bernanke said it was the best measure. Maybe Yellen did too? Maybe Powell, though that doesn’t stand out. But I can pretty much guarantee you that Warsh doesn’t stay awake at night looking at PCE data.

The Data Source Task Force

I keep raising my hand (though I’m not sure that is a thing), but I’d love to be on the data source task force. Garbage In, Garbage Out.

This is where we square the circle on Warsh’s tough stance on inflation, with achieving a September Rate Cut.

Which data set do you believe?

The blue line is Owners ’ Equivalent Rent of Residences. It feeds into CPI. You can read the BLS Description. I challenge anyone to read that and argue it reflects anything in the world of renting shelter today.

In our “beloved” CPI, OER didn’t peak until the middle of 2023. Even then it “peaked” at 8%. Zillow peaked at almost 16% back in early 2022! For anyone who remembers the rental market post-Covid, which metric seems right?

Remember Team Transitory, who was still going ahead with QE while “contemplating” a rate cut, basing their assessment on inflation in shelter on OER versus something actually seen in the real world?

What is the BLS & Cleveland Fed New Tenant Repeat Rent NTRR YoY index? If you guessed, worst name ever for an index, you are probably correct! It is an index that the Cleveland Fed introduced (with little fanfare) to try to track rents. Guess what? It tracks the Zillow index pretty darn well!

So, Warsh doesn’t even need to go to outside sources! The Task Force can ask the somewhat obvious question – Why don’t we use the index that the smart people in Cleveland created? They did this work for a reason! They know OER is flawed. Maybe OER needs to be in CPI because it takes an act of Congress to change the CPI calculation (because it is used for Social Security benefits). But maybe, just maybe, someone at the Fed can say we should base monetary policy on something that resembles the real world, instead of some archaic, obsolete metric?

Two things come out of this work:

  • The Team Transitory mistake was waiting too long to tighten monetary policy, because they were looking at the wrong data.
  • Affordability, not inflation, is the bigger problem people face, and the affordability problem was a 2021/2022 problem, that was NEVER picked up accurately by the inflation data.

Now let’s go back to PCE and bring back Truflation.

I put the “green” line for inflation target at 2.9% rather than 2%. Yes, we have been “conditioned” to treat 2% as the target, but Warsh did “hint” that the left side (i.e., “big figure”) is more important than the total or “rounded” number. Sure, 2.9% isn’t 2%, but expect to be “conditioned” over the coming months to see that 2 point something is close enough to 2.

Truflation core is currently at 1.45% and has been below 1.8% since February.

Truflation produces real-time, daily inflation indices and other economic data to provide a more transparent and current view of the market than traditional government-reported metrics. Unlike monthly, survey- based methods, Truflation’s indices are compiled using extensive datasets (you had me at real time. You also had me at datasets).

It is also quite obvious, that had Team Transitory even glanced at Truflation we might have moved to tighter monetary policy sooner?

The same two mistakes that show up in housing show up in this as well:

  • The Team Transitory mistake was waiting too long to tighten monetary policy, because they were looking at the wrong data.
  • Affordability, not inflation, is the bigger problem people face, and the affordability problem was a 2021/2022 problem, that was NEVER picked up accurately by the inflation data.

The Data Source Task Force will come back with data that provides cover to cut and that data is likely better for basing decisions on, than the data the Fed has been wedded to!

Affordability NOT Inflation

I’m not even sure how to “fix” this chart, but I will figure it out (maybe with the help of AI).

We don’t look at the CPI data series very often. We tend to focus on monthly or annual changes. But affordability is the cumulative effect and that is what is hitting people.

  • Given what we saw with Truflation and with rent, I suspect that CPI understates the real-world problem – by a LOT. And the problem is primarily a 2021 and 2022 problem!

I think there are cases to be made around past mistakes being made because the wrong data was used.

Avoiding future mistakes by looking at the correct data makes sense!

The Impact of the War Being “Over”

We can quibble about whether the war is over or not, but going back to Academy’s SITREP, we expect peace talks to continue, and the flow of oil to also continue.

Yes, there are problems in the energy ecosystem. We are “higher for longer” in prices, from oil out to January, to diesel, etc., but by all accounts the worst is behind us.

Why would we possibly be pricing in war impacts on inflation, when we seem to be in some new status quo? Maybe I spend too much time with geopolitical experts, but we don’t see a return to full hostilities, or significantly higher oil prices. Again, the removal of sanctions is a big deal.

The Administration’s Goals Have NOT Changed

The President didn’t wake up one day a few weeks ago, and tell Warsh, go ahead and hike. The President, as I believe he reiterated again this week, says he knows a lot about real estate and lower rates help real estate.

So, you can believe that Warsh is truly hawkish, that Bessent no longer cares about 3, 3, 3, and the President is oblivious to his hand-picked Fed Chair being hawkish (a chair who will likely spend Thanksgiving dinner at the home of his father-in-law, a large Trump donor), or you can think about what “master plan” is behind all of this.

Imagine (it is easy if you try) that Warsh convinced Trump that sounding dovish right now would be a disaster. Imagine (again, it is easy if you try) that he convinced the President to let me sound hawkish on inflation. That my hawkish message will control the long end of the yield curve (which it did). That we will convince every reporter and Wall Street analyst to believe we are going to hike and fight inflation. That we are retaining our independence (which they will to a degree).

And then Mr. President, this is the “good” part, data will start rolling our way. Inflation is already overpriced and with the war ending, it will come down more. Then, we will argue (persuasively, because it is true) that we should use other sources of data that show lower inflation.

Then, Mr. President, we will dazzle them with “neutral rate” mumbo jumbo. It has always been mumbo jumbo, but we will use it to our advantage.

Then, when the hawks and “dumocrats” (or is it spelled with a b?) say we are not protecting the people against inflation, we will point out it is all about affordability and the prior administration and “their” Fed (despite Powell being appointed by Trump) being “too late” resulting in “the mess” we are in.

You can agree or disagree with anything I just wrote on “political” grounds or otherwise, but can you really argue that it cannot play out that way?

AI and Data Center Inflation

Do you know what sort of spending is not affected by 50 bps of hikes?

  • Spending by companies trading at 100x some multiple! (Ok, probably some hyperbole here, again, but seriously, 50 bps of hikes is meaningless to the data center/AI build). Just look at the price of electricity. Hiking to slow down AI/Data center spending (which is inflationary for now), will be incredibly ineffective/useless. The people hurt by 50 bps of hikes aren’t the ones driving inflation, they are the ones trying to stay one step ahead of the Repo Man (still a bizarre movie).

AAPL dropped after announcing some price hikes. The price hikes on relatively expensive things to begin with (the upper part of the k rather than the lower part). But the market, I believe, perceived that those price hikes would not be absorbed easily. If one of the largest consumer product companies raises prices and the market questions their ability to pass on costs, what does that mean for the

average company selling to consumers? I don’t read that as inflationary.

Someone in my stream, who I cannot seem to find at the moment, pointed out that some of the survey data pointed to increases in prices paid, and declines in prices received. Bad for margins, but hardly inflationary.

Anecdotally, and this was somewhat confirmed by a chip company we met with recently. Remember when they were “giving away” memory? I looked at updating my 5-year-old desktop. I have 64 gig of RAM. I do remember paying “up” for the upgrade. While today’s RAM is better, faster, etc., I was shocked, that most desktops came with 32 gig as standard and 64 gig was a relatively costly upgrade.

This feeds back into the “ are AI/Data Centers getting too expensive” question? And yes, it is inflationary, but has nothing to do with the true affordability or the inflation problems many are dealing with.

Bottom Line

Look for the market to start pricing in rate cuts. If there is one “pound the table message” I’d give, it is lower yields at the front end of the curve. The “hike” community is applying the wrong data to this Fed.

I’m less clear on the long end, but I’m neutral, to even slightly bullish on 10s. Bessent wants a 3 handle. Warsh took out the tail risk. There are all sorts of headwinds facing the longer end of the yield curve, but I think with some “appropriate” timing, the admin can launch Operation Twist with some other tools and force the long end lower.

I’m far from certain on AI/Data Center valuations.

I think with recent weakness, go heavily overweight energy, especially nuclear across the globe. As the President focuses on domestic issues, energy and electricity production remains front and center. Even Europe is nearing that point.

Lean heavily on ProSec and overweight the biotech/pharma component, while underweight the chip component (still a critical part of ProSec but not where the best value is).

Look for credit spreads to come under some pressure, as the big tech/data center/AI/space issuers have more to do and are less price sensitive than we are used to, because their multiples allow them to be less price sensitive. Just like their potential to issue more equity (after years of buybacks) is weighing on their equity.

While Bitcoin and crypto in general aren’t moving markets like they once did (thanks to prediction markets and leveraged ETFs, etc.), the losses in crypto may slow down the “gambling” crowd, which won’t help equities in general, especially the high-flyer, momentum stocks that have benefited most from this crowd.

Good luck and get ready for another short week, that will probably feel much longer than 4 days!

Tyler Durden Sun, 06/28/2026 - 16:20
https://ift.tt/OuCKIJG
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/OuCKIJG
via IFTTT

The Path To A September Rate Cut (Despite AI Inflation) SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

US SNAP Payment-Error-Rate Hits High Of 10.62%

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

The national payment error rate for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) hit 10.62 percent for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025, far exceeding the 6 percent threshold set by Congress.

“While this is a modest decrease from FY 2024, the FY 2025 rate still shows significant waste at the state level,“ the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) said in a June 24 statement.

”Including both overpayments and underpayments, this year’s rate represents a collective $10.1 billion in improper payments nationwide.”

The payment error rate measures how accurately states calculate SNAP eligibility and the amounts that beneficiaries receive.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed into law by President Donald Trump last year, established a State Quality Control Incentive provision under which states must pay a percentage of SNAP program bills if their payment error rate exceeds a certain limit.

A state with an error rate of 6 percent to 8 percent will be required to fund 5 percent of the benefits. This scales up as error rates get higher. States with error rates of 10 percent or more must fund 15 percent of benefits.

“[This has instituted] real financial consequences for states that mismanage taxpayer dollars,” the USDA stated, noting that these rules could come into effect as soon as Oct. 1, 2027.

States with error rates exceeding 6 percent are also required to submit a Corrective Action Plan to the USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service, explaining how they intend to address the root causes of the high error rates. Some states may end up getting financially penalized.

“These payment error rates are further proof that state accountability is severely lacking in SNAP,” Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said.

“USDA has taken historic action to help interested states curb SNAP waste, and I hope other states, regardless of political leadership, prioritize needy families and the American taxpayer over politics.”

Tackling Error Rates

A June report from the American Public Human Services Association detailed the results of a survey conducted among all 50 state SNAP agencies between May 19 and June 5, which was aimed at understanding how the agencies planned to improve their payment accuracy.

Out of the 39 states that responded to questions on state capacity and operational readiness, 92 percent said they had already completed a root cause analysis of the error rates or that such an effort was underway.

“States reported that payment errors stem from both participant and administrative factors, with responses suggesting errors are roughly evenly distributed between the two,” the report reads.

Many states have increased or are considering boosting their workforce, expanding training, adopting new technologies, and strengthening quality assurance functions to identify and avoid errors.

Commenting on the FY 2025 SNAP payment error rates, Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Chairman Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.) said efforts must be taken to ensure that the program is administered in a fair, accurate, and responsible manner, according to a June 24 statement from the committee.

“It is clear that improvements were needed to ensure SNAP is administered as intended to support those truly in need while protecting taxpayer dollars,” Boozman said.

“I applaud the states that are implementing innovative solutions to decrease error rates and be good stewards of federal funds. The reforms included in the Working Families Tax Cuts were designed to promote accountability for significant mismanagement.”

Working Families Tax Cuts refer to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

SNAP Changes

States and federal officials are making SNAP food purchase rules more stringent to direct beneficiaries toward healthier choices.

Beginning this fall, SNAP-authorized retailers are required to stock more nutritious items across four food categories—produce, protein, dairy, and grains.

Almost a dozen states also plan to ban beneficiaries from buying energy drinks, candy, and soda using SNAP coupons over the coming months.

However, on June 22, a federal judge blocked the USDA from restricting SNAP beneficiaries in five states from buying sugary foods or drinks.

The states—Colorado, Iowa, West Virginia, Tennessee, and Nebraska—had previously received USDA approval to impose such restrictions. The judge ruled that the department lacked the authority to approve these food restriction waivers.

A USDA spokesperson defended the department’s actions.

“The idea that taxpayer funds should not be used to purchase junk food should not be controversial,” the spokesperson said.

“USDA will not be backing down from the fight to Make America Healthy Again, including for ​families and communities reliant on ​SNAP.”

Tyler Durden Sat, 06/27/2026 - 17:30
https://ift.tt/PgFZ7Wt
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/PgFZ7Wt
via IFTTT

US SNAP Payment-Error-Rate Hits High Of 10.62% SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

Apple Wants To Buy Memory From China As Soaring Chip Prices Spark Inflation Shock

Last Thursday, in the aftermath of Apple's biggest one day plunge since Liberation Day, and second biggest single-day drop ever...

.... when the company lost over a quarter trillion dollars in market cap after the company's unprecedented price increase announcement  which for some products was as much as 50% as Apple decided to pass on soaring component costs to consumers, following similar moves from other consumer electronics companies....

...  and which Apple blamed on "unsustainable" prices by the memory cartel - namely SK Hynix, Samsung, Micron and Sandisk - who have been flooded with unprecedented demand from hyperscalers (freshly funded with hundreds of billions in newly-issued investment grade debt) we predicted that "China's memory makers are waiting by the phone" for a disgruntled Tim Cook to call, demanding bulk, cheaper RAM.

To be sure, Apple wasn't alone: just hours later Microsoft also announced it was raising Xbox prices, in effect launching an avalanche of memory-driven price increases across the industry, now that it has been normalized to pass on soaring memory prices to consumers.

This, in turn, takes place following a series of reports - initially on this website almost a month ago which showed that the recent surge in core inflation is largely due to runaway chip/memory prices as Apple has since confirmed...

... followed last week by the WSJ also joining the chorus by reporting that "the Data-Center Boom is sparking a third wave of inflation."

Fast forward to this morning when with AI stocks tumbling as "check/capex payers", including AAPL, get crushed, while "check/capex receivers" soar...

... the abovementioned Chinese memory makers did not have long to wait, and overnight the FT reported that Apple is lobbying the Trump administration for clearance to buy memory chips from CXMT, a Chinese company that the Pentagon as put on a blacklist because of alleged connections to the People’s Liberation Army. 

As we expected, the iPhone maker has been waging a lobbying campaign to get the White House’s blessing in order to ease the financial pressure of the rise in memory chip prices. A person told the FT that Apple approached the commerce department more than a month ago, but the tech company has been targeting other officials across the administration and allies in Washington.

Apple is not barred from buying chips from China's DDR giant CXMT, or YMTC, another Chinese memory chipmaker which focuses on NAND memory and has been growing its market share aggressively, having caught up to Sandisk, and set to become the world's 3rd largest maker of flash memory as soon as this quarter 

But the Pentagon has put both companies on its Chinese Military Company blacklist. The so-called 1260H list contains dozens of Chinese groups with alleged ties to the PLA that undermine US national security.

Securing CXMT as a memory supplier would help remedy a situation in which the tech giant is being squeezed by its own suppliers, a position in which Apple has never been before .

The lobbying campaign comes after President Donald Trump met his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping in Beijing last month. Ahead of the summit, and in the months ahead of their previous meeting in South Korea in October, the US has held back from introducing new technology-related export controls that would affect Chinese companies.

As the FT notes, the Pentagon’s 1260H list creates reputational risk for companies, but in most cases it has no legal ramifications. We said as much just hours earlier when we said that those "worried about Chinese memory roadblocks by the US govt to ease memory inflation forget Trump undid 40 years of Iranian sanctions to lower the price of oil." And now that oil price inflation is contained, Trump has memory-driven cost-push inflation to fix ahead of the midterms, and whether he wants to or not, the only option his Admin has - besides imposing a price ceiling on memory (which may still come) - is to agree with Apple's request.

Last year, when memory prices were far lower and domestic producers did not have their customers by the throat with record chip prices and chip inflation was not yet the biggest driver of core prices, the commerce department added CXMT to a package of Chinese groups it intended to place on a trade blacklist called the “Entity List”. But the White House told it to hold off on new export controls because the administration was in the middle of tough negotiations with China to try to reach a truce in the trade war.

In any case, the FT notes that it remains unclear if Apple would get any guarantee from the administration, especially a promise that the US would not later put CXMT on the Entity List. Trump last year agreed to let Nvidia sell advanced H200 chips to China, a move many of his officials opposed.

In February, the Pentagon updated the 1260H list before withdrawing it within an hour. Several people said it was removed because the White House was angry that someone at the Pentagon had taken CXMT and YMTC off the list. When the Pentagon re-released it this month, both of the Chinese memory chip manufacturers had been reinstated.

“Apple choosing to partner with a Chinese military company would be a grave mistake,” John Moolenaar, the Republican chair of the House China committee, told the FT. However, he expect that the Republican will rapidly change his tune once there is public outcry in a the next few weeks against soaring electronic component prices, which will ultimately be blamed on runaway memory costs. 

“Helping the [Chinese Communist Party] succeed in its plans to dominate critical supply chains will make our country’s tech industry and economy more dependent on China at a time when we must build secure tech supply chains with our allies,” Moolenaar said, seemingly unaware that by not using Chinese components, he is allowing South Korea's memory cartel dictate not only US inflation but also the country's monetary policy, now that even Fed officials are pointing to AI/memory prices as key inflation drivers.

  • *KASHKARI: INFLATION DRIVEN BY SUPPLY ISSUES, INCLUDING AI-BUILD

Readers may recall that back in 2022 - when the world's faced another major surge in chip and component prices due to the logistical nightmare following covid - Apple faced a backlash when it considered buying memory chips from YMTC for iPhones to be sold in China. Marco Rubio, who was then the top Republican on the Senate intelligence committee, told the FT that “Apple was playing with fire”. Back then Rubio added that Apple would be “subject to scrutiny like it has never seen from the federal government” if it proceeded to procure YMTC chips. However, back in 2022, memory hadn't emerged as the biggest source of rising core inflation. It has now, and should Rubio refuse to pivot on his position, he would promptly become the target of public ire over surging consumer goods prices. 

Yet even with Tim Cook, and soon all other US consumer electronics products makers pushing hard for alternative memory sources, the memory lobby won't give up easily on the (temporary) oligopolistic position the commodity makers have achieved. “It makes no sense for the administration to decouple America’s reliance on critical minerals from China, only to approve new dependencies in a field as critical as AI,” said Michael Sobolik, a security expert at the Hudson Institute. 

One former official warned the US risked losing another industry by letting Apple buy memory from a group that receives Chinese subsidies. “Trump can show the courage to keep American memory alive for our security and our competitiveness or pour it down the drain so [Apple chief executive] Tim Cook can squeeze out a few more points of margin.”

It wouldn't surprise us if the "unnamed former official" is on South Korea's payroll because while China is still a modest actor in the memory space, the actual giants are all located in South Korea: Apple relies on US chipmaker Micron in addition to South Korea’s Samsung and SK Hynix for the DRAM memory used in its devices.

Meanwhile, in advance of a historic flood of orders that could send its market cap soaring, we reported that China's DRAM giant CXMT has received regulatory approval to list in Shanghai for the largest mainland IPO since 2022 as the Chinese national champion positions itself to challenge the DRam incumbents. The IPO of its domestic NAND peer, YMCT, is set to follow just weeks later 

Oh, and for those confused what happens when a commodity price surges, the post-covid case study should serve well: in 2023, DRAM prices because of a supply glut. This was a boon for buyers such as Apple, which was able to secure massive amounts of cheap inventory. 

But the AI boom of the past three years has seen a reversal in fortunes for the memory suppliers. As hyperscalers spent hundreds of billions of dollars for AI infrastructure, demand for advanced DRam — known as HBM — has led to a protracted shortage of traditional memory for consumer electronics. 

However, now that the market has shown it will no longer reward ridiculous amounts of hyperscaler capex spending - a U-turn from the market's reaction function for much of the past year - especially now that most of the big chip spenders no longer generatepositive cash flow and forced to issue billions in new debt for every incremental order of memory...

... in the end it won't be Trump that decides the fate of memory prices: it will be hyperscalers' own shareholders who will eagerly punish their management teams for incremental capex spending, forcing these companies to come up with new and creative ways to use and optimize existing Ram (likely in the form of many more Software-driven TurboQuant moments) to come up with more efficient and faster models.

In any case, after soaring into the stratosphere for the past year courtesy of all Hyperscaler free cash flow and hundreds of billions in on and off balance sheet debt, the party is finally ending and the memory bubble is about to burst. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 06/27/2026 - 15:10
https://ift.tt/1gkpuBG
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/1gkpuBG
via IFTTT

Apple Wants To Buy Memory From China As Soaring Chip Prices Spark Inflation Shock SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend
| 0 comments ]

Tanker Rates Nearly Halve As Hormuz Shipping Normalizes

The recent spike in the cost to hire a supertanker carrying 2 million barrels of crude from Saudi Arabia to China is now being sharply reversed, as more shippers send vessels through the Strait of Hormuz and normalization trends continue to improve.

Bloomberg reports that tanker rates for the Saudi Arabia-to-China route tumbled to about $287K on Friday, down 44% from more than $514K on Tuesday. That data came from the Baltic Exchange.

Rates remain elevated and still highly profitable for owners, but the sharp drop late in the week suggests the market is beginning to normalize after an interim U.S.-Iran peace deal reduced the war risk premium around the Hormuz chokepoint. Early movers certainly capitalized on lofty rates last week.

According to Bloomberg data, 48 vessels have transited the narrow waterway on Friday, though that does not include ships that switched off their transponders.

By the end of the week, Brent crude fell below $72 per barrel, while WTI traded around $69, hovering near pre-war levels.

A late Thursday note from Arrow Shipping & Energy said that 75 million barrels of crude have flowed out of the Persian Gulf via tankers since the U.S. and Iran signed an interim peace deal. Persian Gulf exports are now at about 75% of pre-war levels, according to Bloomberg estimates.

Related:

Tanker loadings are now resuming at Saudi Arabia's Ras Tanura terminal, yet another sign exports from allied Gulf countries are ramping up.

"Crude remains under significant pressure as the bearish narrative continues to center on improving flows through the Strait of Hormuz," said Rebecca Babin, senior energy trader at CIBC Private Wealth Group. "While transit numbers appear somewhat lower following yesterday's attack on a vessel, traffic has not stopped entirely."

HSBC analyst Kim Fustier said the reopening of the Hormuz waterway has created a "near-term supply overhang; Gulf exports rebound faster than the market can absorb them."

Fustier noted, "China remains key swing buyer," but said the "next inflection point when backlog of stranded vessels runs out and SPR releases end in July," may shift Brent back towards $80/bbl.

Tyler Durden Fri, 06/26/2026 - 15:40
https://ift.tt/VRy4p5L
from ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/VRy4p5L
via IFTTT

Tanker Rates Nearly Halve As Hormuz Shipping Normalizes SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend