Writers: Lucy Cox, Faith Spalding, Allie Adajar
Editors: Lucy Cox, Faith Spalding
Intro:
Welcome to the Weekly BluRB, a newsletter catered to students and professionals to get the latest news and insights on global markets. Get prepared for the week by reading four weekly stories circulating around equity markets, macro trends, geopolitics, and new business developments. And the best part: we’ll give you an informed view about where we think prices, policy, and trends are going in the near future. The content in these writings is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investing advice.
US News: President Trump Meets with Australian Prime Minister — Lucy Cox
Art of the Deal: Rare Earths Deal to Provide Tailwinds to a Resurging Market
President Trump met with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese this Monday, where the two made some seminal advancements in the US-Australian partnership. First up, the two signed a historic deal to counter China’s crackdown on exports of rare earth minerals and assert western dominance in the sector.
Earlier this month, China announced new rules set to take hold in December of this year that drastically exports of rare earth minerals. China is a large, and sometimes only, supplier of many important rare earth minerals, and the consequences of such a crackdown could be severe. For example, computer chips rely heavily on rare earth minerals, and thus supply chains of some of the west’s most important companies, like Apple and NVIDIA, could be sent into a frenzy. Additionally, China is the sole global producer of samarium, which is used almost exclusively for military purposes. As such, the main American consumer of samarium is none other than Lockheed Martin, who uses it to produce the highly important F-35 fighter jet.
Monday’s meeting between the two leaders led to the agreement on a deal to combat this announcement by the formidable exporter. The deal would support around $8.5 billion of “ready-to-go” projects to expand Australian mining capabilities, $1 billion of investments into projects in both countries over the next six months, and further partnership on pricing, permitting, and rules, for government review of sales and of companies and projects in the rare earths industry.
This agreement will likely provide a further boost to a reemerging industry in the markets. Rare earth companies have been seeing record highs in shares amidst recent Trump administration posturing, with shares of US-listed companies like MP Materials and USA Rare Earth more than doubling this year. Investors have been bearish after some major moves by the Trump administration to bolster the industry, which include plans to build a strategic mineral reserve, stakes taken in rare earth companies like Lithium Americas and Trilogy Metals, and price floors for rare earths (which shields them from volatile price swings in a heavily Chinese-dominated market).
AUKUS Still Stands
After undersecretary for Defense Elbridge Colby, an AUKUS skeptic, generated concern with his announcement of a review of the Biden-era agreement, Monday’s meeting between President Trump and Prime Minister Albanese offered a sigh of relief to backers of the submarine pact between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Bolstering his support for a strong posture against China, President Trump affirmed in his first public endorsement of AUKUS that the deal is “full steam ahead” during his meeting with Prime Minister Albanese.
The deal is largely meant to do two things in order to counter Chinese aggression: provide Australia with nuclear-powered submarines and conduct trilateral sharing of advanced capabilities (largely tech-related). To accomplish this, the US will sell a number of Virginia-class submarines (primarily produced by General Dynamics) while the three member countries also work on a new nuclear-powered submarine, the SSN Aukus.
Concerns surrounding AUKUS were largely from American skeptics, like undersecretary Elbridge, arguing that the US needed to focus on satisfying our own demands before arming our Pacific ally. However, President Trump dismissed concerns as “minor details” left to be worked out, reaffirming US support for Australian armament as an important strategic concern for the Trump administration.
TLDR: The US and Australia are still good friends, China is the foe, and US-listed defense and rare earth companies are the beneficiaries.
Global Macro: What’s up in Europe? — Faith Spalding
France: Heists are Hot, Credit Ratings are Not
Sunday’s heist at the Louvre brought an element of mystery to the newscycle and panic to the art world, as diamonds worth “immeasurable heritage value” were burglarized from the largest museum in the world.
Beyond chaos at the Louvre, the French government has been treading water. Turmoil in the French central government largely reflects the state of the French economy: consistent political upheavals are flooding French markets with risk. Last week, Prime Minister Sebastien LeCorneau prevented the French government from facing another upheaval after proposing to suspend an increase in retirement age, a policy that was grossly unpopular with French voters. Yet with three government upheavals occurring over this summer alone, investors are getting wary and growth is dampening.
This comes as the S&P downgraded France’s credit from an AA- to an A+ last Friday, issuing a warning that on-going political instability is hindering the government’s ability to make economic advances. In September, we reported on the Fitch Agency’s downgrade of French credit ratings, but the S&P’s decision is incredibly striking — credit agencies don’t typically issue unscheduled credit downgrades, underscoring that instability in the French government has reached an inflection point. The bond market was quick to react to the abrupt downgrade late last Friday, with 10-year yields rising three basis points to 3.39%. While the euro steadied, we expect more turbulence as Moody’s Ratings are due to be released this Friday. With two out of three of the biggest agencies downgrading French credit, we expect Moody’s to follow suit.
United Kingdom: A Gloomy October
Besides the weather, outlooks are looking gloomy for the United Kingdom. This Monday, Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey warned that Brexit would have a negative impact on the British economy for the “foreseeable future.” Further underscored by Bailey, the United Kingdom has seen a decline in potential growth rates from 2.5% to 1.5% in 15 years. With trade restrictions and tampered growth, post-Brexit fiscal policies have exacerbated a poor situation.
For instance, beyond the United State’s aggressive tariff policy, trade growth has been hampered. “Non-tariff barriers” have slowed down trade between Britain and the European Union, largely due to the large amount of paperwork businesses have to fill out when importing and exporting goods. Studies conflict about the genuine impact of Brexit on UK trade, with some estimating that UK goods exports are 30% lower than they would be had Brexit not occurred, with other studies stipulating a 6% reduction. We can’t be certain because we can never actually estimate the counterfactual, but it’s clear that trade success has likely been impacted by Brexit.
The UK is also facing sustained domestic concerns, especially as the cost of living remains untenable for many British families. This month, S&P Global reported that the UK’s consumer index has fallen to 47.4 percentage points, down from September’s 47.8 score. This is accompanied by an inflation rate of 3.8% to the year in August, well over the Bank of England’s 2% target. The rate remained unchanged from July. It’s clear that the UK is experiencing a period of slow growth, an unfortunate side effect of global economic uncertainty and the result of Brexit’s consequences.
Ireland: Luck of the Irish?
Sometimes it’s true what they say about the “luck of the Irish.” Last week, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) declared Ireland as one of the world’s fastest growing economies of 2025, projecting an economic expansion of 9.1%. Notably, the report emphasized Ireland “disproportionately contributed to euro area growth in the first quarter, with export performance driven by pharmaceutical sector transactions, partly as a result of front-loading.” Ireland’s front-loading of major exports like pharmaceuticals was a short-term strategic move to counteract President Trump’s tariff assertions and delay pain to major Irish industries. According to Ireland’s Central Statistics Office, from January to July, exports of chemical and related products soared 536% year-on-year to €23.9bn.
However, Ireland isn’t all that lucky in the longterm: the IMF’s prediction for growth in 2026 was revised to just 1.3%. As the effects of President Trump’s tariffs continue to ripple across the global economy, trade policy remains the main reason optimistic outlooks have been blunted. Ireland currently has a 15% tariff rate on exports to the US, but with President Trump’s recent announcement threatening up to 100% tariffs on pharmaceuticals, pressure on Ireland’s largest industries could increase. While Washington is currently delaying the levy and announced earlier this month that generic products would be exempt from the new policy, Ireland is home to a significant group of American pharmaceutical companies, including Pfizer.
Ireland is the third largest exporter of pharmaceutical goods annually, with medical and drug exports accounting for over 45% total goods exported in 2024. However, the US and the European Union signed a joint agreement on August 21st capping tariffs levied on pharmaceutical exports at 15%, leaving Ireland’s drug industry in a grey area. One on hand, the new framework exists to maintain somewhat of a balance between the Trump administration’s protectionist trade policy and economic concerns from E.U. member countries. Yet on the other hand, with the White House unclear about the timeline of these new policies, and the current “pause” on 100% tariffs of pharmaceutical exports could end as quickly as it started.
Ultimately, uncertainty arising from the White House’s frequent, abrupt announcements has ushered a new level of risk into international markets that simultaneously threaten diplomatic ties.
TLDR: France’s government is flailing, Brexit has hampered long-term economic development in the UK, and Ireland’s optimistic 2025 growth figures are only part of the story.
Story of the Week: Diamonds Are (Not) Forever — Allie Adajar
The value of a diamond has always been determined on the premise of scarcity. But in the past decade, lab-grown alternatives have turned that premise upside down, as these stones are chemically identical to naturally mined ones. In a slow but sure infiltration of the diamond market, the share of lab-grown stones has jumped from 1% to 20% since 2015. 52% of engagement rings sold last year had a lab-grown center, shooting up from 19% in 2019. As for prices, they have dramatically plummeted. What was once sold at a 10% discount now sells with a 90% price reduction. Suzy Weiss, co-founder and reporter for The Free Press, writes in an article that lab-grown stones are “poised to reset our understanding of luxury, scarcity, beauty, and value.”
The impact has been seismic: dealers tell Weiss that the market for secondhand diamonds has hit rock bottom, as buyers are losing faith in the natural diamond’s value. Unlike older generations, younger customers do not see jewelry as a worthy investment; they would rather buy tech-related goods like iPads and phones. Yet while traditional jewelers mourn the death of the old market, lab-grown jewelers are celebrating this new one. For many sellers in the Diamond District, up to 90% of sales come from man-made stones. Once the domain of the rich, these artificial stones are democratizing diamonds and transforming the sector to an attainable luxury: four-carat rings are selling for $2,500 instead of $25,000.
This transformation is geographically significant as well. 70% of the world’s lab-grown diamonds are churned out in tons in Henan, a central province in China. The rapid surge in supply has driven prices down, sparking fierce debate within the jewelry industry. Traditionalists argue that lab-grown stones are unnatural and lack the quality and mystique of earth-mined ones, while others see it as ethically sound. Edward, a consumer who used to buy all types of secondhand jewelry, supports the rise of lab-grown stones, remarking, “People don’t need to go deep into the ground and scar the earth to construct the diamond now.”
Even the regulators cannot agree. The Gemological Institute of America recently declared that lab-grown diamonds will not be graded by the classic “four Cs” (cut, color, clarity, and carat) and will instead be measured by new standards of either “standard” or “premium.” Another gem certification body, The International Gemological Institute, has ruled this oversimplification of diamond grading as nonsense. Consumers are split: some view lab-growns as inauthentic and cheap, a jewelry equivalent of fast fashion, while others see them as progression into a cheaper, cleaner mode of luxury goods.
The question is not whether lab-grown diamonds will replace natural ones, as they already have in many cases, but what this says about how society defines worth. Weiss asks, “If the ends are the same, do the means still matter?” The allure of exclusivity is starting to lose its shine, as this is now a world where almost anyone can use AI to create an algorithm or buy a four-carat diamond ring. Luxury was once grounded in permanence and scarcity, but we are seeing the focus switch to accessibility.
The popular phrase “A diamond is forever” was a marketing masterpiece that turned carbon into cultural capital. The narrative is changing now; Pandora advertises their lab-growns with the slogan “diamonds for all.” As the romance-fueled industry collides with mass production, the shift in the diamond’s worth feels like less of a decline and more like a modernization.
Great articles! Very insightful.