It’s the kind of headline that rattles even seasoned investors: conflict flares up in the Middle East. Iran fires at Israel. Oil prices move. Markets wobble.

Your gut reaction? Probably something like: “Time to sell? Should I sit this one out?” We're one week on from the escalation of the conflict, and markets have been wringing their hands all week over the implications on trade, oil prices and more.

If you ask some of Australia’s sharpest market minds, you might hear a very different answer: actually, this might be exactly the time to buy.

Buying season's open

That’s the view from TenCap's Jun Bei Liu, who’s seen plenty of these market shakeouts before.

Should we be buying right now? We asked Jun Bei on this week's Switzer Investing TV:

“Absolutely. Definitely.” she replied without a moment's hesitation.

She adds that these downturns often come after a burst of scary headlines, typically over a weekend, which fuels a Monday market sell-off — but then sentiment stabilises.

“We often catch up on Monday, and things usually happen on Friday or over the weekend — then they get worse, and Monday is always the major sell-off day.”

But those same scary headlines, she argues, create the very opportunities smart investors wait for.

“Look—it is a good buying opportunity. To be honest, I think the market is responding not as badly as we initially saw on Friday. Yes, there’s a broader sell-off, but it’s not that bad. It’s quite orderly.”

And for those with a shopping list of quality stocks, she’s crystal clear:

“If there’s continued weakness, you just buy the companies you’ve always wanted to own. You top up. I think it’s a great opportunity.”

The week that was according to the ASX200 (XJO) index.

Markets climb the wall of worry

It’s not just Liu leaning in.

Michael Wayne from Medallion Financial sees history repeating itself in how markets handle geopolitical shocks like Iran vs Israel:

“There are always these global events. When you look back through history, you can pick any decade — there’s always flare-ups. Markets tend to climb the wall of worry.”

In other words: short-term fear, long-term opportunity — if you stay disciplined.

Wayne acknowledges that investors can’t predict these events, but says market resilience in the face of conflict is often underappreciated.

“We’re cautiously optimistic. We tend to be like that most of the time.”

The economist’s take: don’t panic

Michael Knox, Chief Economist at Morgans, sees little reason for markets to unravel in response to the Iran–Israel conflict specifically.

“To be frank — honestly — I don’t think we should be worried.”

He notes that while Iran grabs headlines, its oil production isn’t large enough on its own to cause global supply shock:

“Iran, of course, is an oil producer — but it’s a relatively small oil producer in comparison to the others I’ve just mentioned. So it’s a short-term scare — but I don’t think it’s a major problem.”

Knox is also quick to remind investors that Saudi Arabia and its allies are well protected militarily:

“The Saudis are well defended behind their own missile shields… I don’t think that’s such a big problem.”

Keep watch, buy smart

If you only read the headlines, a Middle East conflict might sound like the moment to pull your money and run.

But for professional investors who’ve seen this pattern before, these sell-offs can be exactly when long-term opportunities emerge — especially if you’re disciplined enough to focus on quality companies rather than reacting to daily noise.

“That’s what the share market is,” Liu summed up. “You’ve got to buy future earnings, right? You’ve got to be optimistic to expect what’s to come.”

And if the pros are right, this latest market wobble could turn out to be more of a buying window than a warning light.

Watch this week's episode of Switzer Investing TV below.

If you ever want a quick read on how the Australian stock market’s travelling, you don’t need to dig through endless charts or complicated indices. Just look at Commonwealth Bank.

Yep: CBA is now a basic proxy for ASX 200.

That’s not just a throwaway observation, either. Ask any pro investor trying to beat the market these days, and they’ll tell you that CBA’s weight in the index has made it almost impossible to ignore.

As fund manager Jun Bei Liu from TenCap put it on Switzer Investing TV this week:

“For fund managers, we’ve got a benchmark - the ASX 200 - and CBA is a big part of that index. I can’t just sell it unless I find something that’s going to do even better than CBA. So it’s a bit different.”

In other words, even if you think it’s expensive, you’re stuck holding it. Because if you’re managing money against the benchmark, CBA’s dominance now forces your hand.

The data also bears out the observation that the CBA share price now essentially tracks the index (or is it vice versa?). A cursory glance at the last six months of market performance shows that CBA and the ASX are basically paired. At least they are since Trump's Liberation Day tariffs sent money scurrying out of the US and other risk-heavy areas and into markets like Australia.

The blue represents CBA over the last six months, and the red represents the ASX 200. As you can see, since around April 7 - Liberation Day - the fate of CBA has been intertwined with the local index:

The offshore ETF flood keeps pushing it higher

But it’s not just local fund managers driving this. The real kicker here is what’s happening offshore.

Global investors and passive funds are still piling money into Australia, often automatically buying whatever sits at the top of the index, usually through index funds. And CBA is sitting right there, front and centre.

Jun Bei again:

“We’ve had so many foreign investors buying CBA because it represents the Australian index. Our economy is OK. At the same time, the Aussie dollar is so cheap, and investors think it’s a good chance to buy some of these things.”

And even a small tilt from international money into Australia has an outsized impact here. As Liu explains:

“More recently, we’ve seen a lot of flow move out of the US. The US has been more than 50% of the global market. And they’re nervous, with tariffs and things going on, so they’re just moving a little bit outside. And even a little bit means a lot when it comes to our small market. Naturally, they buy more CBA, more Brambles, more Wesfarmers. That’s why you’re seeing those stocks being so strong.”

Medallion Financial’s MD Michael Wayne sees exactly the same thing happening from the ETF side of the ledger:

“Whether it’s the passive flow of money into ETFs, or the lack of alternatives in Australia, that’s potentially a reason. Foreign money has also come in. The Australian dollar has held up relatively well. The Australian market has held up relatively well.”

So between global flows flooding our market, local managers stuck matching benchmarks, and a limited pool of large-cap alternatives, CBA keeps soaking up capital.

Can the CBA share price keep going higher?

This is where things start to get interesting. Because while everyone agrees there’s plenty of money chasing CBA, there’s also no denying that it’s looking pretty stretched right now.

As Liu puts it:

“The best thing it will do is probably just grind higher. It might underperform a bit compared to the rest of the market, but I think the share market overall will go higher. CBA might just grind a bit higher—it is expensive—but I don’t think it’ll have a substantial fall.”

So she’s not calling the top, but also not expecting fireworks.

The valuation tells the story. Right now, CBA is trading on a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 31.77. At that kind of premium, you’re basically paying for perfection. Either earnings need to grow a lot faster than anyone expects, or you need even more capital flooding in to push the price higher. And that’s where things get tougher.

Wayne doesn’t sugar-coat it:

“It does beggar belief in many ways, just looking at the valuation it trades on: relative to its earnings growth and dividend per-share growth, which have been fairly anaemic. There’s no doubt that, relative to other banks globally, CBA is expensive.”

He’s not wrong. While CBA’s business is incredibly solid with dominant market share, strong capital position and reliable dividends, none of that easily justifies 32 times earnings forever. At some point, something has to give: either earnings growth accelerates, or the multiple contracts.

For now though, the flows keep coming. And as long as the rest of the world sees CBA as Australia’s proxy blue-chip, the index-following money keeps piling in.

You know the feeling. Markets get jittery, a bit of bad news rolls through, and suddenly the first stocks to get smashed are the tech names. Growth stocks get dumped, volatility spikes, and everyone starts muttering about “valuation risks.” But for some of Australia’s sharpest investors, these moments aren’t reasons to run — they’re exactly when you start leaning in.

“Yes, [tech] gets trashed. But that’s your opportunity.”

TenCap's Jun Bei Liu has seen this pattern play out plenty of times before. Speaking on Switzer Investing TV this week, she didn’t mince words about what happens to tech stocks during periods of uncertainty.

Why tech stocks go 'on sale' during a downturn

Jun Bei's logic is simple: tech used to be treated as defensive growth. But after years of outperformance, investors now see it as a pocket of easy profits to take when volatility hits. That short-term selling often opens the door for new buying.

“In the old days, when market uncertainty was high, people wanted to buy tech because they were defensive — their growth wasn’t affected by uncertainty. But these days they get sold off. That’s because tech has done really well for people, so when uncertainty hits, people take profits. Again, that gives you a buying opportunity into companies whose earnings aren’t impacted by these global events.

"They will continue to grow.”

And with interest rates likely to start falling again, valuations, often the biggest concern for a tech company, start to look potentially shaky too.

“Valuation is always talked about, but if we’re entering a rate-cutting cycle, valuation won’t be a problem — provided the company can deliver earnings and exceed expectations.”

Know what you're buying, says Medallion MD

Over at Medallion Financial, Michael Wayne sees something similar — but with a caveat. Yes, there are opportunities. But you have to know which tech businesses have real staying power.

Take Megaport, for example:

“With Megaport, for the last four or five results — whether it’s half-year or full-year — it’s either been a 20% rally or a 20% decline on the day. But more recently, it does seem like momentum has come back into the business.”

Wayne’s been watching some of these companies for years. He sees them less as short-term buck-makers and more as long-term compounders.

“We’ve been looking at this company [Megaport] for over six years. We’ve had clients in at best entry points — it’s been a wonderful business, but it has had its moments.”

That same resilience shows up in other local tech names that keep delivering strong earnings:

“Technology One has had, what, over a decade now — at least, if not longer — of compound earnings and revenue growth consistently. It’s a company with a very sticky customer base. They just keep delivering.”

And when it comes to WiseTech Global, Wayne is just as confident in its long-term growth story:

“WiseTech Global is a good quality business underneath it all. They recently did another large-scale acquisition. We think it will continue to grow very quickly. And we like those compounding characteristics. Until there’s any evidence that’s changing, we don’t see any reason to turn away from the business.”

The current crisis

As markets nervously wait for loud noises from Iran, jitters have sent prices down ever so slightly throughout the week. That includes the tech stocks. But our experts are telling us that when others take value off the top during nervous periods, a window opens for new upside.

If you’re buying quality businesses with strong growth, sticky customers, and room to keep compounding, the pros will tell you: volatility isn’t a threat — it’s your entry point.

As Liu put it simply:

“You’ve got to buy future earnings, right? You’ve got to be optimistic to expect what’s to come.”

And for tech investors brave enough to lean into that optimism, these market dips might just be the chance they’re waiting for.

Watch this week's episode below.

8639. It’s now a magic number. It now represents the new record high for the ASX200, set just after the session opened on 11 June 2025. It's definitely worth celebrating, but we still need to watch out for these forces at play.

By the numbers: how the record-breaking day played out on the ASX

The market opened at 8538 points, before hitting its new record high at 8639 a mere 15 minutes later. After that, many decided it was time to push back from the table and trim their positions, taking value where they could.

Other than the record intraday trading figure, 11 June on the Australian market was like any other. It was full of encouraging climbs and tumbling lows set against the typical hum of the ASX. 

By the middle of the day, newswires were reporting that real estate stocks saw their fortunes climb, while the IT sector lagged behind. 

Companies with their names in the headlines saw tumultuous results, including Monash Healthcare, which inexplicably has somehow transferred the wrong embryo into the wrong woman for the second time since April 2025. Its price has now more than halved since January. 

Another headline-getter was Qantas, which announced plans to shelve its Qantas Asia brand and return its planes into the Australian fleet due to low demand on its Singapore-based routes. That saw a downturn of around 1.3% by the close of the session.

Screenshot

By the end of the session on Tuesday, the ASX200 closed exactly one point above its initial open at 8539, ready to do it all again tomorrow. Just another day on the market merry-go-round, really.

So what really set the market into a record-breaking mood on Tuesday? What else, but the secret ingredient that powers most markets into record territory. 

Optimism.

What could bring the market back down?

Valentine's Day - 14 February - saw the ASX hit its last fresh record high of 8557 points. As we know, less than two weeks later, the highs we were all celebrating at the time would all be gone as Trump and his placard of global tariffs threw the world economy into a tailspin.

In just two weeks, the market went from popping corks to watching the most precipitous fall in global exchanges since COVID-19 forced everyone behind closed doors. Snap-back to the present and you find that we're still facing similar challenges abroad that could take back our precious records in a heartbeat.

The ASX200's rise today was attributed mostly to positive progress in talks between China and the US. Both parties managed to get through their third full-day of negotiations without someone deciding to throw their toys out of the pram, and so the market rejoices in what might be a return to positive progress.

But remember: we're dealing with some of the most unpredictable and reactionary political forces we've ever seen. One cross-word could see either side walk out. And any market-watcher can assume that a precipitous fall in global markets would follow in the wake of said scorned diplomats.

But even if those talks do go swimmingly, there are still problems elsewhere. The US/China talks are happening in London, which also just copped some pretty rough headlines as the market opened yesterday.

Just up the road from the negotiating table, the UK was announcing a new record of its own. New data that showed the unemployment rate was at its highest in four years. And the rate of Britons out of a job continues to accelerate, following seven straight monthly declines in the number of patrolled employees in the economy. Cue a falling Sterling, and signs that rate cuts are coming in August. 

Follow London's longitude across the pond and you'll be met with loud noises as the military and National Guard seek to quell rioting in Los Angeles: one of the world's largest economies in a single city, ready to blow like a powder keg over Trump's heavy-handed military interventions. And if that wasn't bad enough, other so-called "Sanctuary Cities" staged support protests of their own.

And all this is set against the backdrop of doom and gloom from the World Bank, which says that global economic growth growth ain't going to be what we all see in our Christmas stockings for 2025.

Markets used to be that if you could read the trends and factor in the fundamentals, you could read the market. Now it's a more complicated game of geopolitical Jenga than most of us can comprehend. 

What should we do next? Consult the gospel of Munger

If you're in a pickle, and need some wisdom, I often seek sanctuary in the philosophies of Warren Buffett's right hand man, Charlie Munger. 

Munger has two great quotes I like here, and the first is about bull markets. While we may not be in a traditional bull market right now, it still bears itself out:

“Bull markets go to people’s heads," Munger says. "If you’re a duck on a pond, and it’s rising due to a downpour, you start going up in the world. But you think it’s you, not the pond," he concludes. The market showing signs of optimism is terrific, especially in an age when it feels as if lurching from crisis-to-crisis. But like the duck rising in the market downpour, we shouldn't pat ourselves on the back for getting through it. The market continues to go up - as markets so often do in the long-term - and we should keep a close eye on the waterline as we go.

And finally, Munger knows that trading is two-sides of a coin: there are the up times, and the down times. And just because we're up right now, doesn't mean we'll be up forever.

Again, from the gospel of Munger, "capitalism without failure is like religion without hell". Simplified? 

For that we go over to Sir Isaac Newton, "what goes up, must come down".

For what it's worth, the ASX200 is probably set to rise again today.

The federal government has proposed an additional tax of 15% on the earnings made on super balances of over $3 million, the so-called Division 296 tax (or the "Super Tax" for readers of this website). This has set off a highly-politicised debate that has often shed more heat than light.

Yet back in 2009, the wide-ranging Henry Review of the tax system cogently identified the three main problems with the super tax system and recommended reforms to fix them. The Henry Review recommendations, after some updating, are a better, more comprehensive solution than the controversial Division 296 tax.

The three problems are:

1. tax concessions for contributions are heavily skewed to high income earners
2. with an ageing population, it is unsustainable to keep the retirement phase tax-free
3. the system is so complex that most people do not fully understand it.

It is critical to properly address these problems with how super is taxed because Australians now have a massive $4.1 trillion in superannuation savings.

Let us look at the main Henry Review recommendations and then see how the proposed Division 296 tax stacks up. Unlike some super tax systems, our system does not tax super pension payments, so the two key issues are how we tax contributions and earnings.

Tax concessions are skewed to high income earners

Employers pay workers in two ways.

First, they directly pay a cash salary that is taxed under a progressive income tax scale. The effective marginal tax rates, including the Medicare levy, rise in steps with income from 18% through to 32% (for the average wage earner), 39% and 47%.

Second, employers pay a contribution on workers’ behalf into their superannuation fund. From July 1, under the superannuation guarantee charge (SGC), this contribution will rise to 12% of cash salary. The contribution is taxed at a flat 15% when it is made into a fund, regardless of what income tax bracket the worker is in.

The way contributions are taxed is a massive concession for high income earners. They pay 47% tax on additional cash salary – but only 15% on their super contributions. In contrast, low income earners receive a tiny concession because the contributions tax rate of 15% is only just below their usual effective marginal tax rate of 18%.

The Henry Review recommended that instead, everyone should receive the same rate of tax concession as the average wage earner. This is how that idea would work today.

First, super contributions would be taxed in the hands of employees alongside their cash salary, rather than this tax being deducted by the super fund as is currently the case. Second, everyone would receive the same tax offset calculated as 17% of their contributions as their super tax concession.

One side effect of this Henry recommendation is that the average wage earner would now be paying the 15% contributions tax out of their own pocket, instead of the super fund paying this tax on the member’s behalf.

However, this loss of cash income can be avoided by tweaking the Henry recommendation.

Under my modified recommendation, the superannuation guarantee rate would be reduced to 10%, employers would be encouraged to fully pass on their savings from this by increasing wages by 1.8%, and the tax offset rate would be lifted to 20%. These policy settings would maintain both cash incomes and super balances for the average wage earner.

Pension mode should not be tax-free with an ageing population

In accumulation mode, the current system taxes fund earnings at 15%, with a lower effective rate of 10% on capital gains. However, after you retire and your account changes from accumulation mode to pension mode, the tax on earnings stops and your pension benefits are also tax-free.

The Henry Review recommended that earnings should continue to be taxed in pension mode in the same way as in accumulation mode. That way, retirees make a contribution to income tax revenue, which is important with an ageing population. A uniform earnings tax would also simplify what is an overly complex super tax system.

The Henry Review also recommended the earnings tax rate be reduced to 7.5% because long-term saving through superannuation is desirable. However, that proposal is probably unaffordable today because of the budget deficit.

The proposed change is just a patch-up job

The proposed Division 296 tax further complicates the tax system by introducing a third tax treatment for earnings, whereas the Henry Review simplifies the system with a uniform earnings tax. The complexities of Division 296 can be seen from the 304-page explanatory memorandum.

The new tax also raises less revenue than the Henry Review recommendations yet we are experiencing a structural budget deficit. The new tax is more open to avoidance than the Henry recommendations. The new tax also does nothing to address the problem that tax concessions for contributions are heavily skewed to high income earners.

Taxing unrealised capital gains under the new tax may cause financial hardship for some retirees who are asset rich but income poor. The $3 million threshold for the new tax is not indexed, unlike all of the other super tax system thresholds.

Overall, the proposed Division 296 tax is best seen as a rough attempt to counteract past policy errors that allowed excessive contributions into super.

The federal government should first address the main problems with the super tax system by implementing the Henry Review recommendations, suitably updated. Then, a considerably reworked Division 296 tax could potentially play a useful supporting role.

Chris Murphy, Visiting Fellow, Economics (modelling), Australian National University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Bitcoin might be hovering near all-time highs (crossing the US$101,000 mark at the time of writing), but for some market watchers, it still doesn’t pass the test — technically or temperamentally.

Appearing on Switzer Investing TV this week, Michael Gable of Fairmont Equities walked through the recent Bitcoin chart and explained why, despite the bullish setup, it’s not an asset he’d ever buy.

“I don’t follow Bitcoin,” Gable admitted, “but from what I’ve seen with these cryptos, they trade a little bit differently to stocks.”

He acknowledged the current pattern on the chart — a classic cup and handle — is typically seen as bullish. But for Gable, Bitcoin’s tendency to fake out investors before reversing course is a red flag.

“They tend to produce these false breaks,” he said. “It looks like it’s breaking higher, then it gets sold off. Or it looks like it’s breaking lower, then it rips higher. It fools people.”

That kind of unpredictability is a major issue for technical analysts who rely on clean breakouts and follow-through. And it’s not just a one-off pattern — Gable pointed to recent price action as another example of what he calls “false breaks.”

“It looks like it’s broken to the upside, but then it’s been sold off,” he explained. “So I just wonder if it’s one of those false breaks where investors thought, ‘okay, now’s the time to buy’, only for it to get dumped.”

Some investors have compared Bitcoin to gold — a hedge during times of geopolitical risk or economic instability. But Gable isn’t buying that comparison either. When asked what he’d rather hold in times of global uncertainty, his answer was simple:

“I’d rather be in gold, to be honest.”

“Gold can do really well — and not just when the economy’s struggling,” he added. “It can rally even when the market’s going up, depending on what central banks are doing or how the US dollar is moving.”

In fact, gold and equities have both moved higher in recent months, with Gable noting that the traditional narrative — that gold only rallies during market crashes — isn’t always true.

“Gold’s up, what is it — 50%? — in the past 12 months. And the market’s headed higher too. So that can happen at the same time.” Let's take a look at the two side-by-side, actually! Below is a chart that shows Bitcoin's price (illustrated in purple and relative to the US dollar) and gold's per ounce price (illustrated in red).

And while the two may be tangling around the same values right now, you can see that gold's ascent is steady, while Bitcoin's is a rollercoaster.

So while some investors are betting that Bitcoin is the new safe haven, Gable isn’t convinced. He sees Bitcoin as too erratic, too unreliable around key technical levels, and too difficult to trade with confidence.

“Assuming I was happy to buy Bitcoin — and I’m just finding an entry point — I’d want to see how it behaves around support or resistance… I don’t think I’d want to just step in at a particular level.”

For now, he’s staying out — and sticking with the gold he knows.

There was a time when Pilbara Minerals was the star of the lithium world — a rare mix of financial strength, market timing, and direct exposure to the electric vehicle boom. At its peak, it attracted enthusiastic backing from retail and institutional investors alike. But that momentum also drew out the short sellers.

And they were right. At least according to Adam Dawes of Shaw and Partners, speaking on this week’s episode of Switzer Investing TV.

You see, as lithium prices crested before their now-spectacular collapse — falling more than 90% from their highs — Pilbara’s share price followed. That dragged with it the hopes of bullish investors. 

Meanwhile, short positions in the stock surged, with sceptics betting that prices and sentiment would keep falling. 

That view paid off.

“You’ve got to be a believer in the story now,” said Adam Dawes of Shaw and Partners on Switzer Investing TV this week.

“All the shorters were right all the way.”

Despite still being viewed by many as the best operator in the sector — cashed up, well-managed, and not bleeding money — Pilbara Minerals has become a kind of ghost ship of the EV trade. It’s adrift, with no firm timeline on when demand will catch up with the hype.

Back in early-2023, when Pilbara was near its market peak, here's where lithium prices were per tonne:

• Lithium Carbonate (China): Averaged around US$76,000 per ton in January 2023
• Lithium Hydroxide (China): Averaged around US$81,500 per ton in January 2023
• Spodumene (Australia): Averaged around US$6,000 per ton in January 2023

Today, the prices for Lithium Carbonate is around US$9000 per tonne.

“I’ve always said lithium is going to be a 2026 story,” Dawes said. “But now, we could potentially see that going further and further out.”

Lithium prices appeared to stabilise earlier this year, sparking brief hope that the worst was over. But that floor has already given way, with prices slipping again — and with them, the shares of lithium producers.

“You’re going to have to be patient with Pilbara,” Dawes added.

“At some point this will do really well… but it’s been given up on. Nobody wants to have a bar of it anymore.”

Still, he argues, that disinterest could present a contrarian opportunity.

The passionfruit problem

Dawes and host Peter Switzer both pointed to the current imbalance between supply and demand as the root of the problem. 

Lithium mines all over the world are now being closed or mothballed in a response to falling prices and small margins.

And that’s where Switzer introduced his now-viral analogy: the passionfruit problem.

“I remember working in the markets with my dad,” he said. “One day, passionfruit was going for $150 a box. Why? Because there had been a glut — and the farmers had ripped up all their vines. Suddenly, there was no supply. So prices went through the roof.”

The lesson? Commodity markets are cyclical — and supply doesn’t always return as fast as demand. When prices are low, supply disappears. When demand eventually comes back, there’s nothing ready to meet it.

It’s a problem that could play out in lithium too, especially if EV adoption rebounds more sharply than expected in 2026 or beyond. But that recovery isn’t happening yet — and that’s what’s keeping Pilbara stuck in a holding pattern.

“If you want to play lithium,” Switzer added, “you’ve got to become an expert on EVs. That’s when it’ll be in hot demand again.”

For now, Pilbara remains a waiting game. It still might be the right company. But it’s caught in the wrong part of the cycle.

James Hardie’s $3.9 billion acquisition of US rival AZEK was pitched as a bold move to strengthen its grip on the American home exteriors market. 

But months after the announcement, the deal is still clouded by questions. Not so much about strategy but how it was handled with investors. And what toll it will take long term on the share price.

What happened?

The acquisition of AZEK by James Hardie was unveiled in early 2025. The deal was structured as a part-cash, part-scrip deal that didn’t require a shareholder vote. At least according to James Hardie executives. 

Shareholders were perturbed by the idea that a deal of that size should have probably gone to a vote regardless of how the deal was put together.

Analyst sentiment also turned, with some levelling similar criticism over the decision to skip consultation with shareholders, despite the acquisition’s potential to reshape the business.

Strategically-speaking, the aim of acquiring AZEK was to consolidate James Hardie’s position as a leader in home builds, especially across North America.

But so far, that pitch hasn’t been enough to win over the market.

Red, red lines

The stock initially tumbled on the announcement and has failed to recover meaningfully in the months since. 

More recently, investor sentiment took another hit when James Hardie flagged additional legal and transaction costs associated with completing the deal.

The cooling sentiment was front and centre on this week’s episode of Switzer Investing TV, with analysts from Shaw and Partners and Fairmont Equities weighing in.

“The market didn’t like it, did it?” said Adam Dawes of Shaw and Partners rhetorically.

“It’s actually not a bad acquisition. It’s just being done with scrip as well as cash. So there’s some debt there and there’s more — there’s excess paper on the market. 

“I think that’s what the market’s not too happy about.”

He added that while funding for the deal had now been secured, the market had already priced in its concern.

“Everyone’s got used to it, I think. The price definitely reflects the market’s sentiment to the stock at the moment.”

That’s a sentiment echoed by Michael Gable of Fairmont Equities on the same episode of Switzer Investing TV, who reviewed James Hardie’s chart performance and came to a blunt conclusion:

“Price action is pretty poor at the moment,” Gable said.

“I think it’s too early now to say that we’ve got a low in James Hardie. Maybe it wants to retest these lows here — which is just under $30. I think we need more evidence.”

Gable noted the absence of a typical post-sell-off bounce, describing the stock as “almost back to those lows near April” and warning that it hasn’t shown convincing signs of recovery.

So where does that leave investors?

Despite long-term faith in the underlying business, the AZEK acquisition has clearly shaken market and investor confidence. Mostly because of how the deal was handled it seems.

Unless James Hardie can start delivering clear earnings upside and show how AZEK will contribute meaningfully to growth, the “misadventure” label may stick.

BHP stock has long been a bedrock of the Australian market — a go-to for dividends, exposure to global growth, and a gauge of commodity sentiment. But in 2024 it underwhelmed.

Now, as we move into the second half of the year, investors are asking a sharper question: can you actually make money on BHP in 2025?

On this week’s episode of Switzer Investing TV, both our chartist-in-residence Michael Gable of Fairmont Equities and Shaw and Partners’ Adam Dawes weighed in — offering a clearer picture of what’s really going on behind the share price.

Where are we now?

Over the last 12 months, the ASX200 has made a slow but steady climb, getting close to its previous record highs.

It has been helped along by improving inflation, the hope of interest rate cuts, and stronger performance from sectors like tech and consumer stocks.

BHP, on the other hand, hasn’t kept up. Its share price is still well below where it was a year ago. The main reason? Iron ore prices have come down, China hasn’t bounced back as strongly as expected, and investors are less confident that BHP’s big dividends will hold. While the broader market has been moving forward, BHP has mostly been stuck in place — or going backwards.

The technicals: signs of a bottom?

Switzer Investing TV’s expert chart surfer Michael Gable of Fairmont Equities says BHP’s chart is quietly improving.

“It does seem to be turning around,” he said. “After briefly breaking that [support], it bounced right back up… consolidated a bit… and then a few weeks ago, it’s back higher again.”

Gable points out that the recent pullbacks haven’t shown signs of aggressive selling — a shift from earlier this year when the price action looked more volatile and reactive. He sees BHP as having potentially formed a bottom.

“It took BHP only about five days to rally…but in the past two weeks it’s slowly come back and retested — that’s a good sign,” he said. “It doesn’t demonstrate a lot of heavy selling. It looks like it’s going to head on[wards].”

So the bleeding may have stopped, and the market might be recalibrating. If you’re a technical trader, that’s not a bad place to be.

Dividends, China, and Trump

But while the chart certainly looks more calm compared to recent action, the fundamentals still carry risk — especially if you’re buying for income or short-term capital growth.

Shaw and Partners’ Adam Dawes didn’t sugarcoat it when he spoke on Switzer Investing TV:

“It’s going to be a little bit tough,” he said. “Dividends are being squeezed at every angle.”

The key pressure point? Iron ore prices.

Prices for our world-famous resource hovered near US$100 for months — defying expectations. But now they’ve slipped into the low 90s, putting downward pressure on earnings and, by extension, dividend payouts.

“Iron ore’s been defying gravity… now it’s finally slipped to around US$95,” Dawes said. “There’s talk about Trump’s deal with Nippon Steel — that might pull prices back.”

Geopolitical factors — particularly with the latest steel and aluminium tariffs from Trump — are now back on the table. The commodity cycle is shifting under investors’ feet, and BHP’s dependence on iron ore keeps it squarely in the line of fire.

Can you actually make money on BHP this year?

That depends on what kind of investor you are.

If you’re chasing yield, be aware that dividend strength is weakening — especially if iron ore slides further. If you’re looking for a contrarian entry point, the technicals suggest BHP may be forming a base.

Some analysts have set price targets as high as 25% above current levels — but those forecasts are built on improving sentiment from China, a stable US dollar, and no major supply disruptions. When was the last time those planets aligned?

Right now, the stock sits somewhere between bargain and value trap. There’s no screaming buy signal — but no screaming sell, either.

And that might be enough to put BHP back on the radar for investors with patience, a longer view, and a high tolerance for noise.

Remember to do your own research for your own circumstances. This article does not take into account your personal circumstances.