Blog

  • US and Israel urgently need to replenish weapons stockpiles after 12-day war, defense analysts warn

    US and Israel urgently need to replenish weapons stockpiles after 12-day war, defense analysts warn

    A Jewish-American national security group is sounding an alarm about how America and Israel’s enemies may exploit low missile stockpiles after the 12-day war with Iran.  

    Defending Israel and the Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar from Iranian counterstrikes cost the U.S. and Israel between $1.48 billion to $1.58 billion, according to an analysis by the Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA), and burned through a large portion of missile interceptor stockpiles. 

    Both the U.S. and Israel now face an ‘urgent need’ to replace those stocks and sharply increase production rates. 

    The U.S. had roughly 632 Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptors before June 13, the day Israel began its offensive in Iran. About 540 interceptors remain in its arsenal based on JINSA’s calculations of interceptor deliveries and use, according to the report. 

    In addition, the two Patriot missile interceptor systems responsible for defending Al Udeid, the U.S.’s largest base in the Middle East that’s home to 10,000 soldiers, reportedly used roughly 30 Patriot interceptors against the 14 Iranian ballistic missiles targeting the site June 23, The interceptors cost about $3.7 million each, totaling $111 million.

    Iran launched 574 medium-range ballistic missiles toward Israel and the U.S. airbase in Qatar after Tel Aviv and Washington conducted strikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites between June 13 and June 24, when the conflict ended in Iran’s counterstrike in Qatar.

    Lt. Gen. Thomas Bergeson, former chief of U.S. Central Command, said the U.S. and its allies needed to do more to invest in nonkinetic interception mechanisms,or systems that can neutralize a threat without explosive force, would be much cheaper in defending against future attacks. 

    ‘There’s any number of operational test and developmental testing going on with a cheaper bullet than a multibillion-dollar interceptor to shoot down a relatively inexpensive missile or UAS,’ he said. ‘Any electro-magnetic interference capability, a microwave laser EMP, whatever that can screw up, the guidance system or the proportion of that particular system is something that could be cheaper.

    ‘You can have literally hundreds if not thousands of rounds in one interceptor at very low cost.’

    While the cost for the U.S. and Israel was high, the cost for Iran was greater — between $1.1 billion and $6.6 billion. Air defenses saved Israel about $13.5 billion in property damage.

    Iran used up between a third and a half of its ballistic missile arsenal during the 12-day conflict, suggesting Iranian assertions it could have continued striking Israel for years if it wanted were overblown. 

    Replacing its missile stockpiles will be even more costly given that Israel struck many of its launchers and production sites. 

    But the U.S. used up 14% of its global stockpile of prized THAAD missile interceptors. America’s THAAD system accounted for nearly half of all interceptions due to ‘insufficient’ capacity of Israel’s Arrow interception system. 

    It would take three to eight years to replenish the THAAD interceptors used in the 12-day war at current production rates. 

    Patriot interceptor production is more robust than THAAD, according to the report, but the U.S. is providing a number of Patriot interceptors to Ukraine. So, it’s unclear how many remain in the stockpile. 

    If the U.S. and Israel fail to urgently replenish their interceptor inventories — especially THAAD and Patriot systems — they risk entering the next crisis with dangerously thin defenses, according to the report. Adversaries may take note of the extended gap between munitions use and stockpile replenishment, which leaves U.S. bases across the world open to vulnerabilities. 

    ‘Iran’s large-scale missile campaign may have revealed vulnerabilities in Israeli and U.S. air defense systems, providing lessons that Iran or other U.S. adversaries could exploit in the future,’ the report said.

    The Pentagon could not immediately be reached for comment on its plan to replenish missile interceptor stocks.

    This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

  • Ron Klain dodges reporters after marathon grilling in Biden cover-up probe

    Ron Klain dodges reporters after marathon grilling in Biden cover-up probe

    Ex-President Joe Biden’s former chief of staff ignored reporters on his way out of an interview with congressional investigators on Thursday after a marathon grilling behind closed doors.

    Ronald Klain served as White House chief of staff for the first half of Biden’s term. He also reportedly played a key role in helping the former leader prepare for what proved to be a disastrous first and only 2024 election debate against current President Donald Trump.

    Klain sat with staff and some lawmakers on the House Oversight Committee for hours for a voluntary transcribed interview.

    Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., earlier told reporters that the interview was going well just after the session broke for lunch.

    ‘I think we’re having a very good transcribed interview. Mr. Klain is being fairly responsive to our questions,’ Comer said.

    Comer is investigating whether Biden’s top White House aides concealed signs of mental decline in the then-president, and if that meant executive actions were signed via autopen without his knowledge.

    Lawmakers who briefly attended the interview, however, called him ‘credible.’

    ‘I think he is telling what he knows accurately,’ Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., told Fox News Digital.

    On the other side of the aisle, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., told reporters, ‘He answered every single question. He was fully cooperative.’

    Comer was guarded, however, in response to questions about how much new information was gleaned.

    ‘There have been tidbits,’ he said. ‘We’ve asked specific questions. Obviously, evidence emerges on a daily basis that would suggest Joe Biden wasn’t mentally fit to be President of the United States.’

    Klain is the sixth former Biden administration aide to appear for Comer’s probe and the third to appear voluntarily.

    Former White House physician Kevin O’Connor, as well as senior advisors Annie Tomasini and Anthony Bernal, all appeared under subpoena.

    Each also pleaded the Fifth Amendment to avoid answering questions.

    Longtime Biden aide Ashley Williams and former staff secretary Neera Tanden both appeared voluntarily.

    Like the previous five before him, the longtime Democratic operative did not answer questions from reporters either before or after his interview.

    This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

  • GREGG JARRETT: Newly declassified documents destroy Russian collusion hoax

    GREGG JARRETT: Newly declassified documents destroy Russian collusion hoax

    Lies and lying people comprise the sorry epitaph of Barack Obama’s presidency.  

    The Big Lie was that then-candidate Donald Trump colluded with Russia to rig the 2016 presidential election. It derived from a phony dossier commissioned and financed by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that Obama’s national security team happily peddled to destroy his successor.  

    It begat an even bigger whopper that ‘Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump’ and ‘aspired to help’ his election chances. This notorious deceit was inserted in the official Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that was ordered by Obama himself and conjured up by his CIA Director John Brennan.  

    None of it was true. 

    The bogus dossier was exploited to justify the ICA. Conversely, the ICA was used to legitimize the dossier. The circular faux verification was a clever ruse. And it worked splendidly. When both documents were leaked to the gullible Trump-hating media, journalists adopted them without question as sacred gospel from the Holy Book of Obama. The Russia hoax took off like a rocket.  

    It crash-landed on Wednesday, July 23, when Tulsi Gabbard, the director of National Intelligence, accused Obama, Brennan and others of engineering the false intelligence. ‘They knew it would promote this contrived narrative that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help President Trump win, selling it to the American people as though it were true. It wasn’t,’ she added.  

    Newly declassified documents show that a December 8, 2016, draft of Obama’s Presidential Daily Briefing (PDB) debunked the notion of Russian electoral meddling to help Trump. But wait … that was problematic because it did not conform to the preferred narrative of Trump-Russia collusion. So, FBI Director James Comey and his cohorts reportedly scuttled it. That way, Trump, as president-elect, could not be briefed on its contents.   

    The next day Obama convened a highly confidential meeting at the White House. The president ordered his intelligence cronies to expedite a new ICA that would reverse the PDB’s conclusion and energize the collusion fiction. With his marching orders in hand, Brennan immediately went to work on it. 

    His challenge was devising a way to contort the known evidence and contradict the consensus of nearly everyone else in the intelligence community. No problem. CIA experts on Russia who strenuously objected were sidelined and silenced. Brennan ignored their warning that there was no direct evidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to elect Trump.  

    Other intel agencies that typically contribute to the assessment were deliberately excluded to stifle dissent. Evidence shows that Brennan then selected a handful of sycophants — with only one principal drafter — to craft the entire ICA that bore little resemblance to the truth and established facts.  

    On January 6, 2017, the rushed-to-completion ICA was produced. It offered a remarkable transformation from the earlier PDB: ‘Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-Elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him.’ (Page 7 of ICA)  

    The head-spinning about-face of intel conclusions was an immaculate conception of corrupt handicraft that belongs in the Intelligence Hall of Shame.  

    Although Brennan denied it, numerous delusions drawn from the fake dossier were placed in the formal intelligence assessment to give it the sustenance that it otherwise lacked. Armed with both fallacious documents, Comey then met with Trump later that day in a devious but misbegotten scheme to entrap him. It failed miserably because the newly elected president had no idea what the FBI director was talking about.        

    Obama’s dirty fingerprints were all over the cooked-up intelligence claiming that Moscow helped Trump in some grand collusion conspiracy. On Wednesday, Gabbard held a news conference to lift the veil of secrecy and malevolence. She leveled the following broadside:  

    ‘President Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey and others, including their mouthpieces in the media, knowingly lied as they repeated the contrived narrative that was created in this January 2017 intelligence community assessment with high confidence, as though it were fact.’   

    Mincing no words, Gabbard accused Brennan of lying about his use of the dossier even though he knew it was a discredited and politically manufactured document. ‘He directed senior CIA officials to use it anyway,’ she said.  

    Other intel agencies that typically contribute to the assessment were deliberately excluded to stifle dissent. 

    As ‘irrefutable proof,’ she unlocked the 2020 report of the House Intelligence Committee that had never before been seen publicly, thanks to the machinations of then-Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who buried it as classified in a limited-access vault at CIA headquarters. The report outlined in detail the events that I summarized above. 

    It was easy to do so because many of them are contained in the book I wrote six years ago, ‘Witch Hunt:’ ‘John Brennan was instrumental in proliferating the dossier. But even before the Clinton campaign and Democrats funded Christopher Steele’s project to smear Trump with the collusion hoax, the seeds of the collusion narrative were germinated by none other than Brennan.’ (Pages 66-67)  

    I recounted how Brennan boasted to the House Intel Committee in May of 2017 that he had been the first to alert the FBI about collusion. ‘As he exerted uncommon pressure on the FBI to pursue a counterintelligence probe on Trump, he resolved to help spread the false allegations to Congress and the media. He politicized phony intelligence and instigated the fraudulent case against Clinton’s opponent.’ (Page 68) 

    The Russians never had ‘Kompromat’ (compromising material) on Trump, as the dossier falsely accused. But they apparently did have it on Hillary. And that proved quite a stunner on Wednesday.  

    The heretofore hidden House Intelligence report reveals how Russian intelligence ‘possessed DNC communications that in 2016 Clinton was suffering from ‘intensified psycho-emotional problems, including uncontrolled fits of anger, aggression, and cheerfulness.’ Clinton was placed on a daily regimen of ‘heavy tranquilizers’ and while afraid of losing, she remained ‘obsessed with a thirst for power.’’  

    Obama and Democrat Party bosses apparently knew all about Clinton’s mental instability and found it ‘extraordinarily alarming.’ So much so, they worried it might have a ‘serious negative impact’ on the November election.    

    Unlike the dossier, those shocking discoveries were not just idle gossip. The committee reviewed reams of source material and obtained corroboration during some 20 interviews with FBI agents and intelligence officers.  

    How did the Russians get their hands on the damaging material? The report explains that Putin ordered hacking operations on the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. It seems that since Putin believed Hillary would win the election, he held the ‘Kompromat’ in his back pocket to use as potential blackmail for later use. 

    His challenge was devising a way to contort the known evidence and contradict the consensus of nearly everyone else in the intelligence community. No problem. CIA experts on Russia who strenuously objected were sidelined and silenced.

    In sending a criminal referral for possible prosecution to the Justice Department, Gabbard stated, ‘The evidence that we have found and that we have released directly point to President Obama leading the manufacturing of this intelligence assessment.’ 

    In response, the DOJ announced that it had formed a ‘strike force’ to fully assess all the evidence and to investigate the next legal steps. Attorney General Pam Bondi vowed to ‘leave no stone unturned to deliver justice.’  

    Obama denies any wrongdoing. But he should thank Trump for winning the recent landmark Supreme Court decision that provides all presidents with immunity. Ironically, the former president can now hide behind its broad protections. However, no such shield extends to others involved.  

    It is folly to predict at this stage what prosecutions, if any, the future may hold. But the stain of corruption is already embedded in the epitaph of Obama’s presidency.   

    This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

  • Homeless people can be removed from streets by cities, states in new Trump executive order

    Homeless people can be removed from streets by cities, states in new Trump executive order

    As part of his effort to ‘Make America Safe Again,’ President Donald Trump signed an executive order to allow cities and states to remove homeless people off the streets and into treatment centers. 

    Trump signed the order, ‘Ending Vagrancy and Restoring,’ Thursday afternoon. 

    The order states that the ‘number of individuals living on the streets in the United States on a single night during the last year of the Biden administration — 274,224 — was the highest ever recorded.’ 

    It directs Attorney General Pam Bondi to ‘reverse judicial precedents and end consent decrees’ stopping or limiting cities and states from removing homeless individuals from the streets and moving them to treatment centers. 

    Though it is unclear how much money will be allocated to the effort, Trump’s order redirects federal funds to ensure that removed homeless individuals are sent to rehabilitation, treatment and other facilities.

    Additionally, the order requires Bondi to partner with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy to prioritize federal grants to cities and states that ‘enforce prohibitions on open illicit drug use, urban camping and loitering, and urban squatting, and track the location of sex offenders,’ according to USA Today. 

    The order also stipulates that discretionary grants for substance-use disorder prevention, treatment and recovery programs ‘do not fund drug injection sites or illicit drug use.’ 

    Homelessness increased in the U.S. by 18% from 2023 to 2024, according to Housing and Urban Development’s annual homelessness assessment report released in January. 

    Trump has previously vowed to clean up American cities, especially the nation’s capital of Washington.

    Speaking in March, Trump said, ‘We’re going to have a crime-free capital. When people come here, they’re not going to be mugged or shot or raped. They’re going to have a crime-free capital again. It’s going to be cleaner and better and safer than it ever was. And it’s not going to take us too long.’ 

    This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

  • What James Carville doesn’t get about voter priorities

    What James Carville doesn’t get about voter priorities

    Writing in the New York Times on Monday, longtime Democratic political strategist James Carville outlined a compelling message for Democrats to unite around ahead of the 2026 midterms.

    Carville urged Democrats to delay the ‘civil war’ that will eventually erupt between the party’s moderate and progressive wings, and to coalesce around a single ‘oppositional message’ focused entirely on repealing President Donald Trump’s agenda.

    With all due respect to Mr. Carville, his myopic focus on a strategy of resisting Trump above all else is simply too narrow to be truly effective.

    Put another way, a Democratic agenda built entirely around repealing the Republican agenda may be enough for 2026, but it falls far short of what Democrats must do if they hope to take back the White House in 2028.

    Indeed, nowhere in the Times piece is any description of actual policies that Democrats should advance as an alternative to what Republicans are offering, either next year or in three years.

    There are no calls for an entirely new economic agenda, one that replaces Democrats’ tendency for profligate spending with a more fiscally conservative plan focused on managing the debt while also protecting the social safety net.

    In many ways, Democrats today should look to former President Bill Clinton, who was able to reduce the debt, leave a budget surplus and still protect vital social programs.

    Moreover, the word ‘immigration’ is not even mentioned. 

    This comes despite 2024 election polling showing that immigration was a top issue for voters, and exit polls showing voters trusted Trump over former Vice President Kamala Harris by a 16-point margin (52% to 36%), per Fox News.

    To that end, if Democrats hope to take back more than just one chamber of Congress, the party needs an agenda that prioritizes securing the border, combined with a pathway to citizenship for legal migrants and Dreamers.

    And, while I do agree with Mr. Carville that the midterms will be decided based on kitchen table issues rather than foreign policy, that does not mean Democrats can afford to ignore this issue.

    As a party, Democrats must advance an agenda that positively asserts democratic values at home and abroad. 

    This entails rejecting the belief of the far left – and increasingly the far right – that any use of American power is inherently bad.

    To be sure, formulating an entirely new Democratic agenda takes time. And it will require the emergence of moderate candidates at a time when Zohran Mamdani’s win in New York City has energized the progressive wing of the party. 

    Nevertheless, as the 2024 election made clear, Democrats cannot afford to run from the center toward the far left. What the party needs is a candidate who can win, not one chosen because they passed progressives’ ideological purity test.

    Interestingly, Carville cites former President Clinton as a figure who emerged as Democrats’ ‘savior’ in 1992. 

    But Clinton was able to do so because, at a time when the party was moving further to the left, Clinton dragged the party toward the middle on the economy and crime.

    Finally, the crux of Carville’s message – ‘we demand a repeal’ of Trump’s agenda – overlooks the core factor behind who Americans cast a vote for.

    Voters choose candidates who have plans and policies that will improve their lives. 

    Slogans, no matter how catchy, may work for the midterms, but if Democrats then fail to deliver actual change between 2026 and 2028, its unlikely voters will trust them.

    Quite simply, voters want a strong economy, safe streets, a government that is not excessively bloated and secure borders, not candidates whose only agenda is resisting the president. 

    Now, this is not to say that the agenda outlined by Carville will not be successful next year – it very well may.

    Rather, it is to point out that even if it helps Democrats reclaim the House of Representatives, it will not be enough to take back the White House in 2028.

    For that, the party needs to advance its own agenda, one that addresses the above issues and actually provides a real, viable alternative to the Trump-GOP agenda. 

    This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

  • Momentum Leaders Are Rotating — Here’s How to Find Them

    Momentum Leaders Are Rotating — Here’s How to Find Them

    Is the market’s next surge already underway? Find out with Tom Bowley’s breakdown of where the money is flowing now and how you can get in front of it.

    In this video, Tom covers key moves in the major indexes, revealing strength in transports, small caps, and home construction. He identifies industry rotation signals, which are pointing to aluminum, recreational products, and furnishings. Tom then demonstrates how to use StockCharts’ tools to scan for momentum stocks in emerging leadership groups — see why SGI tops Tom’s list. He ends with a discussion of post-earnings reactions from major names like GOOGL, TSLA, IBM, and LVS. 

    And, of course, Tom wraps every idea with clear chart setups you can act on today. 

    This video premiered on July 24, 2025. Click this link to watch on Tom’s dedicated page.

    Missed a session? Archived videos from Tom are available at this link.

  • S&P 500 Breaking Out Again: What This Means for Your Portfolio

    S&P 500 Breaking Out Again: What This Means for Your Portfolio

    The S&P 500 ($SPX) just logged its fifth straight trading box breakout, which means that, of the five trading ranges the index has experienced since the April lows, all have been resolved to the upside.

    How much longer can this last? That’s been the biggest question since the massive April 9 rally. Instead of assuming the market is due to roll over, it’s been more productive to track price action and watch for potential changes along the way. So far, drawdowns have been minimal, and breakouts keep occurring. Nothing in the price action hints at a lasting change — yet.

    While some are calling this rally “historic,” we have a recent precedent. Recall that from late 2023 through early 2024, the index had a strong start and gave way to a consistent, steady trend.

    From late October 2023 through March 2024, the S&P 500 logged seven consecutive trading box breakouts. That streak finally paused with a pullback from late March to early April, which, as we now know, was only a temporary hiccup. Once the bid returned, the S&P 500 went right back to carving new boxes and climbing higher.

    New 52-Week Highs Finally Picking Up

    If there’s been one gripe about this rally, it’s that the number of new highs within the index has lagged. As we’ve discussed before, among all the internal breadth indicators available, new highs almost always lag — that’s normal. What we really want to see is whether the number of new highs begins to exceed prior peaks as the market continues to rise, which it has, as shown by the blue line in the chart below.

    As of Wednesday’s close, 100 S&P 500 stocks were either at new 52-week highs or within 3% of them. That’s a strong base. We expect this number to continue rising as the market climbs, especially if positive earnings reactions persist across sectors.

    Even when we get that first day with 100+ S&P 500 stocks making new 52-week highs, though, it might not be the best time to initiate new longs.

    The above chart shows that much needs to align for that many stocks to peak in unison, which has historically led to at least a short-term consolidation, if not deeper pullbacks — as highlighted in yellow. Every time is different, of course, but this is something to keep an eye on in the coming weeks.

    Trend Check: GoNoGo Still “Go”

    The GoNoGo Trend remains in bullish mode, with the recent countertrend signals having yet to trigger a greater pullback.

    Active Bullish Patterns

    We still have two live bullish upside targets of 6,555 and 6,745, which could be with us for a while going forward. For the S&P 500 to get there, it will need to form new, smaller versions of the trading boxes.

    Failed Bearish Patterns

    In the chart below, you can view a rising wedge pattern on the recent price action, the third since April. The prior two wedges broke down briefly and did not lead to a major downturn. The largest pullbacks in each case occurred after the S&P 500 dipped below the lower trendline of the pattern.

    The deepest drawdown so far is 3.5%, which is not exactly a game-changer. Without downside follow-through, a classic bearish pattern simply can’t be formed, let alone be broken down from.

    We’ll continue to monitor these formations as they develop because, at some point, that will change.

  • Top 5 Canadian Biotech Stocks of 2025

    Top 5 Canadian Biotech Stocks of 2025

    Biotech is a dynamic industry that is driving scientific advances and innovation in healthcare. In Canada, the biotech sector is home to companies pursuing cutting-edge therapies and medical technologies.

    According to Grandview Research, the global biotech market is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 13.96 percent between 2024 and 2030 to reach a value of US$3.08 trillion.

    Read on to learn what’s been driving these Canadian biotech firms.

    1. Bright Minds Biosciences (CSE:DRUG)

    Year-on-year gain: 2,290 percent
    Market cap: C$243.73 million
    Share price: C$34.41

    Bright Minds Biosciences is focused on developing novel treatments for neuropsychiatric disorders and pain.

    Its portfolio consists of serotonin agonists designed to target neurocircuit abnormalities that make disorders like epilepsy, post-traumatic stress disorder and depression difficult to treat. The company’s drugs have been designed to potentially retain the powerful therapeutic aspects of psychedelic and other serotonergic compounds, while minimizing their side effects, thereby creating superior drugs to first-generation compounds such as psilocybin.

    Bright Minds’ BMB-101, an agonist targeting the 5-HT2C receptor, will target classic absence epilepsy and developmental epileptic encephalopathy. An evaluation of Phase II trials done in collaboration with Firefly Neuroscience (NASDAQ:AIFF) determined that BMB-101 stopped seizures in a mouse model of epilepsy, suggesting it could be a vital new treatment.

    In October 2024, Bright Mind’s share price surged nearly 1,500 percent in a single session after global pharmaceutical company H. Lundbeck announced its intention to acquire Longboard Pharmaceuticals, another firm with a 5-HT2C agonist in its pipeline.

    In March of this year, Bright Minds added five world-renowned leaders in epilepsy research to its scientific advisory board.

    2. Hemostemix (TSXV:HEM)

    Year-on-year gain: 170 percent
    Market cap: C$20.44 million
    Share price: C$0.14

    Hemostemix is a clinical-stage biotech company focused on developing autologous stem cell therapies, an approach that uses a patient’s own cells to theoretically enhance safety and efficacy. Its main product, ACP-01, is a cell therapy derived from a patient’s blood to promote tissue repair and regeneration in areas affected by disease.

    The company announced its first advanced sales orders for ACP-01 on January 29 and has been working to expand internationally and attract new investment.

    In July 2025, Hemostemix reported that the unanimous passing of Senate Bill 1768 in Florida, US, means it can begin commercial ACP-01 treatments for ischemic pain in the state in Q4. The bill creates a framework in which healthcare providers can administer stem cell therapies that had not been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) but meet the bill’s guidelines.

    The company projected 2026 sales of C$22.5 million following the news.

    Additionally, Hemostemix is currently collaborating with Firefly Neuroscience on a Phase 1 clinical trial of ACP-01 for vascular dementia.

    3. Eupraxia Pharmaceuticals (TSX:EPRX)

    Year-on-year gain: 109.3 percent
    Market cap: C$266.36 million
    Share price: C$7.20

    Eupraxia Pharmaceuticals focuses on developing locally delivered therapeutics for patients with unmet medical needs. Its primary focus has been orthopedics and oncology. Eupraxia acquired EpiPharma Therapeutics in late 2023, absorbing the company’s lead candidate EP-104GI.

    In February, the company released positive data from the sixth cohort of its Phase 1b/2a trial for EP-104GI in eosinophilic esophagitis. In July, the company advanced its investigation into the Phase 2b portion after selecting an initial dose based on encouraging safety and efficacy data from the earlier Phase 2a cohorts, with top-line results from the Phase 2b study anticipated in Q3 2026.

    4. ME Therapeutics Holdings (CSE:METX)

    Year-on-year gain: 33.33 percent
    Market cap: C$147.95 million
    Share price: C$5.00

    ME Therapeutics is a biotechnology company focused on developing cancer-fighting drug candidates that can increase the efficacy of current immuno-oncology drugs by targeting suppressive myeloid cells, which have been found to hinder the effectiveness of existing immuno-oncology treatments. Immuno-oncology is a relatively new area of cancer drug research and has shown promising results when used to treat cancer with low survival rates.

    ME Therapeutics’ antibody h1B11-12 is designed to inhibit the cytokine G-SCF. Research performed by ME in collaboration with Dr. Kenneth Harder at the University of British Columbia demonstrated that G-CSF appeared to increase tumor growth in breast and colon cancer, as well as a correlation between survival in patients with colorectal cancer and low expression of G-CSF.

    The work suggests that inhibition of tumor-secreted G-CSF using h1B11-12 could support the existing treatments. Trial planning efforts are ongoing, and the company expects development of a cell line for future production of the drug to be finished in the latter half of 2025.

    The company is also part of an ongoing collaborative effort to develop therapeutic mRNA delivery methods to myeloid cells with NanoVation Therapeutics, a privately owned biotech company that develops customized nucleic acid and lipid nanoparticle technologies to empower genetic medicine. The collaboration has already resulted in two new mRNA formulations, for which testing began on October 4, and has demonstrated encouraging anti-cancer activity in a preclinical model of colorectal cancer.

    In May 2025, the company said it would receive up to C$140,000 in funding from the National Research Council of Canada Industrial Research Assistance Program to advance its mRNA therapeutic program.

    ME Therapeutics is also exploring a listing on the Nasdaq or the New York Stock Exchange.

    5. NervGen (TSXV:NGEN)

    Year-on-year gain: 28.42 percent
    Market cap: C$276.78 million
    Share price: C$3.75

    NervGen is a clinical-stage Canadian biotechnology company that focuses on developing innovative treatments to enable the nervous system to repair itself following damage from injury or disease.

    The company’s core technology targets a mechanism that hinders nervous system repair. When the nervous system is damaged, chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans form a “scar.” Initially, CSPGs help contain damage, but their long-term interaction with the PTPσ receptor inhibits repair.

    NervGen’s lead drug candidate, NVG-291, is designed to relieve these inhibitory effects, promoting nervous system repair. NervGen is advancing NVG-291 in a Phase 1b/2a clinical trial for spinal cord injury (SCI), reporting positive data from the chronic cohort in June. It received fast track designation from the US FDA.

    NVG-300, a newer preclinical candidate, is being evaluated for ischemic stroke and SCI.

    Securities Disclosure: I, Meagen Seatter, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

    This post appeared first on investingnews.com

  • Biotech and Pharma Market Update: Q2 2025 in Review

    Biotech and Pharma Market Update: Q2 2025 in Review

    The second quarter of 2025 was a period of dynamic evolution within the biotechnology and pharmaceutical sectors.

    Critical factors like escalating policy pressures, pipeline pivots by leading companies and the increasingly transformative impact of artificial intelligence (AI) shaped the landscape and presented both challenges and opportunities for growth.

    Escalating policy and tariff pressures

    The biopharmaceutical industry is currently grappling with significant headwinds, primarily driven by an evolving and unpredictable tariff landscape. This uncertainty has already impacted market activity, with only two initial public offerings in Q2 compared to five in Q1.

    Regulatory shifts and concerns of an imminent trade war caused a nearly nine percent drop in the SPDR S&P Biotech ETF nearly nine percent in the first week of April, following US President Donald Trump’s announcement of a 10 percent global tariff on nearly all goods entering the US.

    Subsequent discussions have led to a dynamic and often unpredictable landscape. Throughout May and June, negotiations saw a temporary de-escalation, with some of the more severe tariffs being paused or substantially reduced for many goods until mid-August; however, a cumulative tariff of up to 245 percent on certain Chinese active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) has been in effect since April, significantly impacting the pharmaceutical supply chain.

    Lingering uncertainties have also persisted; as of mid-July, while direct negotiations are ongoing, the US has signaled an intent to potentially increase the baseline reciprocal tariff rate to 15-20 percent and has threatened a hike of 35 percent on goods currently subject to the 25 percent fentanyl tariff, effective August 1.

    Further intensifying the pressure, Trump has recently proposed a dramatic 200 percent tariff on imported finished pharmaceutical products, as well as 30 percent tariffs on the EU and Mexico, slated to begin on August 1.

    For pharmaceuticals, the higher import costs for APIs and finished drugs are forcing companies to continuously re-evaluate their supply chains and brace for potential price increases.

    Tariffs on steel and aluminium could also increase costs for stainless-steel bioprocessing equipment, lab equipment and medical devices.

    Picton Mahoney’s 2025 Mid-Year Report discusses the risks associated with tariffs, including increased recession odds, stagflation risks and the possibility of renewed protectionist policies creating ripple effects across global equity markets. The authors add that building pricing pressures in the US from new tariffs and a weaker US dollar could exacerbate negative economic trends.

    The report also highlights that policy uncertainty is bad for corporate planning and could lead to a pause in spending.

    Evaluate Pharma’s World Preview 2025 report, released in June, states that mergers and acquisitions (M&A) activity in the biopharmaceutical industry is “off the pace so far in 2025”, with the slowdown attributed to uncertainties surrounding US tariffs and drug pricing policy. An unnamed former Big Pharma CEO is quoted as saying, “I’d be holding off dealmaking for 3-6 months until this [tariff framework] plays out”.

    The report also indicates that the deals that are happening are “heavily risk-mitigated” and often involve late-stage or marketed assets or, if programs have not yet been finalized, include contingent payments.

    M&A trends and pipeline expansion

    Despite a slowdown in the market, pharma and biotech companies continued to pursue M&As in the second quarter, seeking to strengthen their product pipelines with a focus on bolt-on acquisitions.

    Notably, there was a trend of European pharmaceutical giants acquiring US-based biotechnology firms, such as GSK’s (NYSE:GSK) acquisition of Boston Pharmaceuticals’ subsidiary, BP Asset IX, to gain access to its live disease drug, efinofermin, in a deal valued at up to US$2 billion.

    Significant investments were also directed toward immunology, rare diseases and neurodegenerative disorders, underscoring a broader trend in the industry toward targeted pipeline expansion and addressing unmet medical needs across a range of complex conditions.

    Sanofi’s (NASDAQ:SNY) US$9.5 billion acquisition of Blueprint Medicines garnered considerable attention due to the startup’s very specific and strong focus within the rare disease space. Many industry observers expect the deal will help grow Sanofi’s portfolio of rare disease treatments.

    The acquisitions were diverse in their therapeutic focus, but Merck’s (NYSE:MRK) acquisition of SpringWorks Therapeutics, which specializes in rare and genetically defined cancers, highlighted the ongoing dominance of oncology.

    Healthcare policy changes under Trump

    AI-driven solutions are continuing to have an impact on life science industries. Several panels at Web Summit Vancouver highlighted how investors are increasingly focused on AI’s potential for significant productivity gains in life sciences, particularly in drug development and synthetic biology, despite challenges in regulation and data integration.

    Wesley Chan of FPV Ventures highlighted life sciences as a sector where AI offers significant productivity gains, citing Strand Therapeutics’ AI-developed mRNA cancer therapy as an example of a generational investment opportunity available through the convergence of biology and AI.

    Tom Beigala, founding partner at Bison Ventures, said he believes AI and next-generation computational technologies are driving innovation across the entire healthcare system, from making drug discovery easier and more cost-effective to optimizing data utilization and significantly increasing labor and clinical productivity.

    Eric Hoskins, partner at Maverix Private Equity, identified AI-guided personalized medicine as one of the “fast movers” poised to bring an abrupt and immediate change to healthcare.

    Reflecting this accelerating integration of AI into clinical practice and patient care, Sanofi and Regeneron (NASDAQ:REGN) partnered with Viz.ai, an AI healthcare firm, in May to integrate AI into COPD management.

    Looking ahead

    As the biotech and pharma sectors head into the third quarter, the outlook remains clouded by policy uncertainty, rising input costs and shifting global trade dynamics. Yet opportunities remain for firms that can navigate the complexity. Large-cap leaders like Novartis (NYSE:NVS), Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) and Sanofi have demonstrated that strong fundamentals and strategic pipeline development can drive outperformance, even in turbulent markets.

    As far as policy goes, the Trump administration’s inclusion of enhanced orphan drug incentives under the “Big Beautiful Bill” could act as a catalyst for rare disease innovation.

    AI remains a transformative force across the industry. As generative models begin to inform pipeline design and clinical trial optimization, companies with robust data strategies and smart manufacturing capabilities are expected to gain a competitive advantage.

    “For us, we really like applications of AI where you’ve got proprietary data, in many cases, probably off the shelf for lightly modified AI models, and then going after super high value applications,” said Beigala, a founding partner of Bison Ventures, which has a portfolio spanning AI-enhanced drug discovery, advanced life science tools for pre-clinical testing and synthetic biology applications.

    Similarly, investment in domestic CDMO infrastructure and real-time manufacturing analytics will be crucial for supply chain resilience in an increasingly protectionist trade environment.

    Looking ahead, commercial-stage differentiation will become more critical than ever. Investors will be watching closely for companies that can combine clinical results, cost control and regulatory readiness to stand out in a cautious market.

    “That’s what we look for, these application models where the team is so thoughtful and smart and so uniquely positioned to understand and have access to data that nobody else has,” Chan explained.

    Biopharma’s next phase will be defined by measurable progress. In Q3, adaptability, resilience and clear-eyed execution will matter more than ever.

    Securities Disclosure: I, Meagen Seatter, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

    This post appeared first on investingnews.com

  • Copper Price Update: Q2 2025 in Review

    Copper Price Update: Q2 2025 in Review

    The copper price was volatile during the second quarter of 2025, but remained elevated compared to the price point near the start of the year.

    Several factors were at play for copper during the second quarter, most notably the ongoing threat of tariffs on several sectors with close ties to the red metal. This also caused significant fallout in global financial sectors, with economists early in the quarter raising the spectre of a widespread recession.

    Uncertainty, fear, and speculation were primary price drivers as metal traders, market movers, and investors tried to determine the best investment strategy against the backdrop of a chaotic economic landscape.

    What moved the copper price?

    Copper started the quarter in freefall.

    After reaching an all-time high of US$5.22 per pound on the COMEX on March 26, the price plummeted to US$4.06 on April 8. Although it wouldn’t stay there long, by April 11, it had climbed back above US$4.50 and continued to US$4.88 on April 22.

    Copper price chart, April 01 to July 23, 2025

    via TradingEconomics

    From the end of April, all of May and much of June, the copper price was volatile but range-bound, trading between US$4.50 and US$4.80.

    However, the end of June saw a surge in momentum in the market, as the price began to climb, and on June 30, it reached US$4.97 per pound.

    Since then, the price has soared. Setting a new all-time high of US$5.65 per pound on July 10.

    Supply and demand by the numbers

    Over the past few years, a growing imbalance has developed in the copper market, as demand growth has outpaced the expansion of primary and secondary supply lines.

    According to a June 24 press release, data from the International Copper Study Group (ICSG) showed a 3.2 percent growth in refined production, with a combined gain of 4.8 percent from China and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the two largest producers globally. Further increases came from Asia, where output was 3.5 percent higher.

    The increased levels were offset by Chile, where smelter output fell 9.5 percent, due to smelter maintenance shutdowns.

    However, the refined production outpaced mining production, which rose just 2 percent during the period. Peru accounted for a 5 percent year-over-year growth due to increased output at MMG’s (OTC Pink:MMLTF) Las Bambas, Anglo American (LSE:AAL,OTC Pink:AAUKF,OTC:NGLOY) and Mitsubishi’s (OTC Pink:MIMTF) Quellaveco and Chinalco Mining’s (OTC Pink:ALMMF) Toromocho mines.

    Likewise, production in DRC surged by 8 percent, attributable to the expansion of the Ivanhoe Mines (TSX:IVN,OTC:IVPAF) and Zijin Mining’s (OTC Pink:ZIJMF,HKEX:2899,SHA:601899) joint venture Kamoa-Kakula mine.

    Demand continued to grow at a higher rate than refined output during the first quarter of 2025, with the ICSG suggesting a 3.3 percent increase in copper usage.

    The largest segment came from Chinese markets, which required 6 percent more copper than in 2024, but this demand occurred during an 11 percent decline in net refined imports into the country. China is the world’s largest consumer of copper, accounting for approximately 58 percent of global demand.

    Outside of China, demand was essentially flat, with high demand from Asian, Middle Eastern and North African countries being offset by weak demand in Europe and North America.

    Overall, the data provided by the ICSG indicated a 233,000 metric ton surplus of refined copper through the first four months of 2025, a slight decrease from the 236,000 metric tons during the same period in 2024.

    Outside the numbers

    “Yes, we believe we have moved into a supply deficit in 2025 and that the market is currently in deficit. Uncertainties in the financial markets (trade, growth and inflation) have had a negative impact on copper demand, but this has been offset as copper is becoming less tied to global economic growth and more tied to industries that provide structural growth to the market,” he said.

    White went on to explain that AI data centers, emerging economies and the energy transition are all putting increased stress on copper supply.

    Furthermore, the supply outlook was not expected to keep pace with demand this year. Q1 2025 mined copper production has indicated low production, and the copper supply outlook for this year has already worsened with the first major disruption of the year,” he added.

    The shutdown referred to by White was at the Ivanhoe-Zijin Kakula-Kamoa mine in the DRC.

    Ivanhoe reported a temporary interruption of underground mining at the Kakula mine on May 2. The company cited seismic activity and initiated a partial shutdown of operations at phase 1 and 2 concentrators, utilizing surface stockpiles.

    Operations at the mine were suspended until June 11, when the company announced it had initiated a restart. It also stated that it was slashing production guidance by 28 percent due to the impact, with the revised number falling between 370,000 and 420,000 metric tons, down from the previous range of 520,000 to 580,000 set in January.

    The difference in guidance accounts for more than half of the projected surplus in the ICSG report, demonstrating just how tight the copper market has become.

    The Trump effect

    Volatility has been present since the start of the year, with much of it attributed to uncertainty stemming from an ever-shifting US trade policy under President Donald Trump.

    Commodity prices plummeted at the start of the second quarter, with copper losing 22 percent between its quarterly high of US$5.22 on March 26 and April 8, when it fell to US$4.06.

    The drop came alongside the fallout from the “Liberation Day” tariffs Trump announced on April 2, which applied a 10 percent baseline tariff to imports into the United States from all but a handful of countries. It also threatened the imposition of more significant retaliatory tariffs to take effect on April 9.

    Additionally, the United States initiated a tit-for-tat tariff war with China in early April, starting with a 34 percent tariff on Chinese imports, which quickly rose to 145 percent on Chinese imports and 125 percent on US exports to China.

    The effect of the tariffs caused significant declines in major US indices, with the Dow losing 9.5 percent, the S&P 500 shedding 10 percent, and the Nasdaq losing 11 percent in two days. More than $6 trillion was wiped from the markets over two days, the most significant such loss in history.

    More importantly, the uncertainty seeped into the US bond markets, causing yields on the 10-year Treasury to rise sharply to 4.49 percent as investors began to dump US bonds. The rising rates came as China and Japan both sold holdings back into the market in an attempt to counter Trump’s trade plans.

    The combined effect led analysts to suggest that a recession was imminent, prompting broad sell-offs in the commodity markets as traders worked to dispose of stockpiles of high-value inventories.

    Copper is susceptible to recessions due to its wide range of applications, which are heavily dependent on consumer spending.

    Ultimately, a sliding stock market and spiking bond yields prompted Trump to announce a 90-day pause on the retaliatory tariffs, stating that it would allow countries to come to the table and negotiate a deal with the United States.

    Although the rout of the copper market was short-lived, it demonstrated the push-pull that tariffs and trade policy can have on copper prices.

    In February, Trump signed an executive order which invoked section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act to initiate an investigation into the impact of copper imports on all forms of national security.

    In the order, Trump noted that while the US has ample copper reserves, its smelting and refining capacity has declined. China has become the world’s leading supplier of refined copper, commanding a 50 percent market share.

    “The supply and demand imbalance has recently been catalyzed with the US trade actions, where copper stocks have moved into the US on speculation that the Section 232 investigation into copper may result in a copper tariff,” White said.

    He explained that the global inventory system has become fragmented. With the supply deficit, it has become increasingly difficult to source physical copper, resulting in drastically lower inventories on the London Metal Exchange (LME) and Shanghai Futures Exchange (SHFE).

    The administration reached a decision early in the third quarter, and on July 8, Donald Trump announced a 50 percent tariff on all copper entering the United States.

    The move caused prices on the COMEX to spike to record highs, triggering more panic buying among traders as they raced to transfer above-ground copper stocks into US-based facilities to avoid the additional tariff costs.

    While ICSG hasn’t published numbers since May, it was already demonstrating then that significant stockpiles were being moved between international warehouses and the US. It reported that stocks at the LME had declined 122,900 metric tons from the start of the year, while stocks at the COMEX and SHFE had both posted gains of 80,970 metric tons and 31,619 metric tons, respectively.

    “Copper is globally fungible. It’s like oil. The sanctions don’t work on Russian oil or Iranian oil, because it just flows around. Copper can do that, too. So it’s incorrect to think that a copper tariff, therefore, copper is up, and all copper stocks have to go up. If you’re a copper miner in Chile selling to China, then the US tariff has no direct bearing on your business whatsoever,” he said.

    Tigre also explained that the US imports 50 percent of its copper needs, and there is no way that tariffs are going to fix that overnight.

    “The mines just aren’t there. The help he’s (Trump) provided with permitting is highly relevant, and it has already helped; that’s okay. You get the permits, and then you have to build the mine, right? So it’ll be years before the incentives create more US production. Meanwhile, it’s Dr. Copper. It goes in everything, so consumers, manufacturers, everybody’s got this added cost,” he said.

    Where does copper go next?

    Beyond the tariffs, the fundamentals remain, as Tigre pointed out, the world is dependent on copper and demand for the red metal has been increasing faster than supply.

    “There aren’t enough copper projects on the pipeline, not ones big enough to matter. So I’m extremely bullish on copper. All those reasons to be bullish on copper are still on the table in front of us, and when I first made the call, copper was around four bucks or something, and now, if we’re going there at five, almost six, and all that tailwind is stil to come and push it higher,” Tigre said.

    While he remained positive on copper’s long-term outlook, he declined to say where the price would end up at the end of the year.

    Even though copper may be one of the safer commodity bets owing to its staggering demand and low supply, investors should keep in mind the broad economic landscape when entering into a position with a metal that can change quickly with consumer spending.

    Securities Disclosure: I, Dean Belder, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

    This post appeared first on investingnews.com