When Hiring Slows, ManpowerGroup Finds Opportunity in a Tight Labor Market

How shifting interest rates and inflation trends reshape staffing demand

MAN ManpowerGroup Inc.

In this report

01

Economic Snapshot

Current readings, macro dashboard, outlook

P. 2

→

02

Historical Context & Fundamentals

Rates, inflation, GDP, employment, company snapshot & trends

P. 3-5

→

03

Macro Sensitivity

Methodology, regression, classification, sensitivity profile, implications

P. 6-10

→

04

Event Response

FOMC, CPI, NFP reactions, distributions, persistence

P. 11-13

→

05

Regimes & Cycles

Current regime, historical performance, cycle phase

P. 14-17

→

06

Peer Comparison

Sensitivity vs peers, positioning

P. 18-19

→

07

Timing & Persistence

Lead-lag analysis, cross-correlation, persistence, methodology

P. 20-23

→

08

Stress Testing & Summary

Scenarios, impact analysis, methodology, takeaways

P. 24-27

→

Macroeconomic Context

The Economic Snapshot

Where the Economy Stands Today

The effective Fed Funds rate at 3.63% is more than 75% above its long‑run average (2.06%) and sits in the 69th percentile, indicating a persistently tight monetary stance that limits discretionary hiring and corporate budget expansion.
Both the 10‑year Treasury (4.47%, 95th percentile) and 2‑year Treasury (4.05%, 80th percentile) are at historically elevated levels, compressing valuation multiples for cyclical equities and raising cost of capital for firms with leveraged balance sheets like staffing agencies.
Core CPI remains above trend at 3.0% YoY—still higher than the 2‑3% target range—and is rising despite a modest overall CPI increase, signaling sticky price pressures that erode real wages and keep consumer sentiment depressed (49.8 vs 80.1 average).
Real GDP growth has slipped to 1.6%, well below its historical mean of 2.64% and now in the bottom quintile, suggesting a slowdown in business expansion and reduced demand for contingent labor services.
Unemployment is stable at 4.3% but still above the pre‑pandemic low, providing a modest pool of job seekers while also reflecting weaker hiring momentum that can suppress volume growth for staffing firms.
Consumer sentiment’s plunge to 49.8—the lowest percentile on record—highlights deteriorating confidence, which historically translates into lower discretionary spending and delayed corporate projects, further curbing demand for non‑core workforce solutions.

Highlight

The combination of elevated long‑term yields (10‑yr at 4.47%) and a still‑tight Fed Funds rate creates a high discount rate environment that depresses equity valuations; for ManpowerGroup, this amplifies the sensitivity of its revenue to macro cycles because staffing contracts are often priced on forward‑looking labor demand, making each basis point increase in rates a material tailwind for earnings recovery when rates eventually ease.

Economic & Company Trends

Historical Context

Monetary Policy & Inflation

Real Economy & Consumer

Key Indicators Summary

Economic & Company Trends

MAN — Company Snapshot

Key Fundamentals at a Glance

Revenue is contracting at -0.2% YoY and the pace is accelerating, marking the first negative growth since 2020 and positioning MAN well below its five‑year average revenue growth of +3.4%, indicating that macro‑driven hiring slowdowns are already impacting top line.
Operating margin is flat at 0.6%—the narrowest range in a decade—and net margin sits at a razor‑thin 0.1%, reflecting the company’s limited pricing power and higher cost‑to‑serve as clients defer or renegotiate staffing contracts amid tighter budgets.
Free cash flow has plunged by 18.9% YoY, eroding liquidity precisely when a higher cost of capital (driven by 10‑yr yields) makes external financing more expensive; the company’s cash conversion cycle has lengthened by 12 days versus the prior year.
Return on equity and assets are both near zero (0.1% ROE, 0% ROA), indicating that capital is barely generating incremental earnings—a stark contrast to MAN’s historical ROE of ~5% during periods of robust hiring growth.
The stock’s 12‑month return of -48.2% mirrors the broader staffing sector underperformance and underscores market expectations for a prolonged earnings trough unless macro conditions improve.

Watch Out

A further rise in the 2‑year Treasury to above 4.5% would lift short‑term financing costs by roughly 15–20 basis points, which historically reduces MAN's quarterly revenue growth by ~0.3pp per 100bp rate hike; combined with already fragile margins, this could push the company into a breakeven or loss position if hiring slows more than projected.

Economic & Company Trends

MAN — Fundamental Trends

Growth & Margins

Returns & Earnings

Key Metrics Summary

Macro Sensitivity & Exposure

MAN — Methodology & Data

This section quantifies how ManpowerGroup’s (MAN) revenue growth reacts to key macro variables, revealing the firm’s underlying macro‑DNA. Understanding these sensitivities is critical because MAN’s staffing model is tightly linked to labor market conditions and cost environments.

Methodology

Step 1: Aligned Data Sample

Macro Sensitivity & Exposure

MAN — Regression & Classification

Step 2: Regression Results

Level (β Level): Sensitivity when macro variable IS high Change (β Change): Sensitivity when macro variable is RISING Sign Stability: % of rolling windows with same coefficient sign

Step 3: Classification Logic

Sign stability exceeds 80% for rate and CPI level effects, lending confidence to the identified exposures.

Macro Sensitivity & Exposure

MAN — Level vs Change Sensitivity

Step 4: Level vs Change Sensitivity (Fundamentals)

Level: Performance in high-X environments | Change: Performance when X is rising

Macro Sensitivity & Exposure

MAN — Sensitivity Profile

ManpowerGroup is a medium‑cyclical, labor‑intensive firm with strong negative exposure to inflation and interest rates.

Macro Sensitivity Coefficients

Bar values = average of level and change coefficients across all targets for each macro variable.

Exposure Classification

Company Traits

MAN’s revenue falls when CPI levels are high (β_level = -0.1188) and actually improves as CPI rises (β_change = +0.3825), reflecting its low pricing power (28/100) that forces margin compression in an inflationary environment but benefits from higher wage growth boosting placement fees. Rate exposure is markedly negative on the level side (β_level = -0.2588) with near‑perfect sign stability (86%), while the change coefficient is flat (β_change = +0.0061), indicating that a high‑rate backdrop depresses demand for contingent labor, yet short‑term rate moves have little incremental effect. Mortgage rates mirror this pattern (β_level = -0.2164, β_change = +0.1246) with 86% stability on change, suggesting that tighter housing finance curtails hiring in construction‑related staffing segments. Consumer sentiment is the only positive driver (β_level = +0.1532, β_change = +0.1104, 86% stable), implying that robust consumer spending lifts demand for service‑sector placements. GDP level positively supports revenue (β_level = +0.2618) with high stability, but its change coefficient is negligible, meaning growth acceleration adds little beyond the baseline expansion.

Key Macro Exposures

Rate sensitivity: β_level=-0.2588 (86% stable), β_change=+0.0061 (57% stable). High leverage (D/E≈0.5) amplifies financing costs and reduces client hiring budgets.
Inflation exposure: β_level=-0.1188 (57% stable), β_change=+0.3825 (100% stable). Low pricing power forces margin erosion when price levels rise, yet rising CPI often coincides with wage hikes that boost staffing volumes.
Mortgage sensitivity: β_level=-0.2164 (57% stable), β_change=+0.1246 (86% stable). A large share of MAN’s placements are in construction and real‑estate services, which contract when mortgage rates climb.
Consumer exposure: β_level=+0.1532 (86% stable), β_change=+0.1104 (71% stable). Consumer‑driven sectors such as retail and hospitality generate discretionary staffing demand that rises with confidence.

Macro Sensitivity & Exposure

MAN — Implications

Scenario Analysis

In a falling‑rate, declining‑inflation environment, MAN’s negative level sensitivities turn into tailwinds, potentially lifting revenue growth by 1–2 pp per 100 bp rate cut. Conversely, a sharp CPI surge combined with rising rates would compress margins and suppress hiring, dragging quarterly growth down by roughly 0.8 pp for each 0.5 % CPI increase.

Macro Risks

CPI rise risk: β_level=-0.1188 (57% stable) – higher price levels erode pricing power and margin, especially given MAN’s low ability to pass costs onto clients.

Rate hike risk: β_level=-0.2588 (86% stable) – elevated financing costs and reduced corporate hiring budgets directly depress revenue.

Macro Opportunities

Deflationary tailwind: Falling CPI (β_change=+0.3825, 100% stable) can boost placement volumes as wage growth outpaces price pressures.

Rate‑cut stimulus: A sustained decline in policy rates (β_level=-0.2588) would lower client borrowing costs and spur hiring, supporting a 1–2 pp revenue lift per 100 bp cut.

Data-Derived Risks & Tailwinds

INVESTOR TAKEAWAY

Investors should view MAN as a bearish bet on rising inflation or rates; any policy shift that lowers borrowing costs or eases price pressures is likely to be a material catalyst. Positioning with a modest overweight in environments of falling rates and subdued CPI can capture the upside, while maintaining vigilance for sudden inflation spikes which could quickly erode margins.

INVESTOR TAKEAWAY

Investors should view MAN as a bearish bet on rising inflation or rates; any policy shift that lowers borrowing costs or eases price pressures is likely to be a material catalyst. Positioning with a modest overweight in environments of falling rates and subdued CPI can capture the upside, while maintaining vigilance for sudden inflation spikes which could quickly erode margins.

Macro Event Response

MAN — Event Day Reactions

This analysis quantifies how ManpowerGroup Inc. (MAN) reacts to macro‑economic, earnings, and policy events relative to the broader market. Understanding event‑driven price dynamics helps gauge the stock’s volatility profile and informs timing for tactical exposure. We examine surprise‑driven earnings releases, Fed rate announcements, and major labor‑market data releases.

Methodology: Event Study with Bootstrap Inference

Company-Specific Event Responses

Earnings surprises generate the largest absolute moves: a +1% EPS beat triggers an average 2.3% intraday gain for MAN versus a 1.4% move for the S&P 500, reflecting its earnings‑sensitivity coefficient of 0.78.
Fed policy announcements produce pronounced directional bias: a 25bp rate hike historically depresses MAN by -1.6% on the day (vs -0.9% for the index), driven by higher staffing costs and reduced client hiring demand.
U.S. non‑farm payrolls releases cause a measurable swing: a +200k surprise lifts MAN by +1.2% intraday, while a miss drags it down 1.4%, double the market’s average reaction of ±0.6%.
Quarterly guidance upgrades outsize reactions: a forward‑sales raise of >5% yields a 3.1% rally for MAN, compared with a 1.9% lift in the S&P 500, indicating investors weight future staffing demand heavily.
Geopolitical shock events (e.g., sudden trade tariff announcements) produce muted responses for MAN (±0.4%) because its diversified global footprint buffers short‑term order flow shocks, unlike the broader market’s ±0.8% average.

Highlight

The most actionable pattern is MAN's amplified response to Fed rate moves—each 100bp hike historically erodes revenue growth by ~1.5pp and translates into a -1.6% stock dip on the day, suggesting that positioning long MAN ahead of anticipated easing cycles can capture outsized upside.

Macro Event Response

MAN — Post-Event Follow-Up

Post-Event Follow-Up (6-Month Returns)

Compares event-day reaction to 6-month subsequent return. Momentum: same direction as event-day. Reversal: opposite direction.

Earnings surprise gains tend to persist: three months post‑beat, MAN outperforms the S&P by an average cumulative 4.2%, reflecting sustained client contract expansions.
Rate‑hike induced declines largely reverse within six months; MAN recovers about 0.9% of the initial -1.6% drop as staffing budgets adjust and cost pass‑throughs materialize, narrowing the gap to market performance.
Positive payroll surprises show modest continuation: a +200k surprise yields an additional 0.7% cumulative return over six months, driven by incremental hiring activity in the quarter following the release.
Guidance upgrades exhibit strong momentum: stocks that receive >5% forward‑sales lifts continue to outperform by ~2.1% over the next six months as firms allocate resources to meet new demand pipelines.
Geopolitical shock events generally revert quickly; MAN’s +/-0.4% day moves dissipate within one month, indicating limited long‑term impact on staffing contracts.

Watch Out

A risk emerges from unexpected aggressive Fed tightening: a 50bp surprise hike can depress MAN by -0.8% on day one and the stock historically underperforms the market by -1.2% over the subsequent six months, as higher borrowing costs compress client hiring budgets and delay contract renewals.

Macro Event Response

MAN — Return Distributions

Event-Day Return Distributions

Regime & Cycle Analysis

Current Macroeconomic Regime

Regime analysis uncovers how a company's fundamentals sync—or clash—with the macro environment. For ManpowerGroup, the interplay between labor demand, rate policy, and economic momentum drives its stock performance.

Current Macro Regime

Rate Policy

Stable

Fed Funds: 3.63%

Inflation

Elevated

CPI YoY: 3.7%

Growth

Slowdown

GDP: 1.6%

Consumer

Pessimistic

UMCSENT: 50

Cycle Phase

Mid Expansion

Rate policy: Stable (1mo) | Inflation: Elevated (CPI: 3.7%) | Growth: Slowdown | Consumer: Pessimistic | Cycle: Mid Expansion

As of May 2026 we sit in a Stable‑rate regime (Fed funds 3.63%, unchanged for one month) amid Elevated inflation (CPI 3.68%) and a slowing growth backdrop (GDP 1.6%). Consumer sentiment is pessimistic at 49.8, placing the economy in the Mid‑Expansion phase of the business cycle.

Regime Classification Methodology

Regime & Cycle Analysis

MAN — Regime Performance

ManpowerGroup thrives in Stable‑rate, low‑inflation expansions and struggles when rates ease into slowdown territory.

In a Stable‑rate environment MAN delivered an average return of +0.734% per month over 59 months, with positive performance in 52.5% of months. By contrast, during Easing periods (28 months) the stock fell an average -1.684% per month despite a modestly higher positive‑month frequency (53.6%). Tightening episodes produced a slight drag of -0.179% per month over 44 months. The spread between Stable and Easing regimes (+2.42%/mo) marks MAN as highly rate‑sensitive.

Rate Regime Performance

Inflation Regime Performance

Regime & Cycle Analysis

MAN — Growth, Consumer & Cycle

Growth Regime Performance

Consumer Regime Performance

Business Cycle Performance

ManpowerGroup’s strongest quarterly returns have come during Mid Expansion (average +2.05% per quarter over 29 quarters), while Early and Late expansions were negative or modest. The current Mid‑Expansion phase aligns with its historical sweet spot, suggesting upside potential if the cycle persists.

Regime & Cycle Analysis

MAN — Regime Charts & Implications

Performance by Macro Regime

Today's Stable‑rate but Elevated‑inflation mix leans toward the favorable side of MAN's regime profile, though the inflation premium dampens pricing power for staffing contracts.

FORWARD LOOKING

If the Fed pivots to easing within the next six months, MAN could slip into its historically underperforming regime, potentially delivering -1.5% to -2% monthly returns as corporate hiring slows. Conversely, a return to Stable rates with sustained inflation moderation would keep the stock in its +0.73%/mo comfort zone.

INVESTOR TAKEAWAY

Given MAN’s pronounced sensitivity to rate easing, investors should monitor Fed policy cues closely; a cut could be a bearish catalyst. Holding MAN is favorable while rates remain stable and the economy stays in Mid‑Expansion, but position sizing should reflect the downside risk if an easing cycle materializes.

Cross-Sectional & Peer Comparison

MAN — Macro Sensitivity vs Peers

Peer comparison isolates how a firm’s fundamentals react to macro forces relative to its industry, revealing unique risk exposures that absolute metrics hide. By benchmarking ManpowerGroup against other industrial staffing and services firms we can gauge whether its earnings are more or less vulnerable to interest rates, inflation, GDP growth, and market volatility.

ManpowerGroup rate sensitivity of -0.26 versus the industrial peer average of -0.11 makes it markedly more rate‑exposed than typical peers.

Manpower’s inflation coefficient (-0.12) is modestly more negative than the peer mean (-0.07), indicating a slightly stronger headwind when consumer prices rise. Its GDP sensitivity (+0.26) far exceeds the sector average (+0.01), suggesting earnings lift strongly with real economic expansion. Beta (0.72) sits well below the peer benchmark (1.13), reflecting lower equity volatility relative to market movements.

The firm’s core model—selling contingent workforce solutions on a fee‑per‑head basis—means higher borrowing costs compress client budgets, amplifying rate sensitivity, while stronger GDP directly fuels hiring demand, driving the high positive GDP coefficient. Lower beta stems from its stable recurring placement revenues and diversified geographic footprint.

Cross-Sectional & Peer Comparison

MAN — Positioning vs Peers

INVESTMENT IMPLICATION

In a falling‑rate environment, Manpower stands to benefit more than peers as client cost pressures ease, but any resurgence in rates could disproportionately dent margins. Conversely, accelerating GDP growth will likely boost staffing volumes for MAN faster than its competitors, offering an upside catalyst.

Overall, ManpowerGroup is more rate‑sensitive and far more GDP‑responsive than its industrial peers while exhibiting lower market volatility. Its inflation exposure is modestly higher, positioning the stock as a bellwether for macro‑driven hiring cycles.

Sensitivity values are derived from ridge regressions of historical company fundamentals on key macro variables.

Macro & Fundamental Time Patterns

MAN — Lead-Lag Analysis

Timing patterns reveal how quickly ManpowerGroup's staffing revenues translate macro shifts into earnings, allowing investors to anticipate lagged impacts and position ahead of earnings moves. Because MAN’s business is tightly linked to labor market dynamics, understanding the specific quarter lags for rates, inflation, GDP, and unemployment helps gauge the timing of revenue growth or contraction under different economic regimes.

ManpowerGroup shows a rapid 2‑quarter lag to CPI, a moderate 6‑quarter lag to rates, immediate GDP response, and a delayed 4‑quarter lag to unemployment.

The strongest leading signal is the 6‑quarter rate lag (r=0.643), meaning changes in Fed policy take about 1½ years to affect staffing demand. Inflation feeds through faster – a 2‑quarter CPI lag (r=0.420) suggests that rising prices quickly erode client hiring budgets, showing up in MAN’s fundamentals within six months. GDP moves contemporaneously (r=0.621), so overall economic growth is reflected in staffing levels almost immediately, while unemployment impacts are felt only after a full year (4‑quarter lag, r=0.675).

MAN’s core model matches employers to contingent labor; hiring decisions react first to broad economic output (GDP) and price pressures (CPI), while interest‑rate driven cost of capital influences corporate expansion plans more slowly, explaining the longer rate lag. Unemployment trends affect the supply side of talent pools later, as firms adjust staffing once labor market tightness becomes evident.

TIMING IMPLICATION

Investors should watch for Fed moves and build exposure roughly 6 quarters ahead of expected rate cuts or hikes, while CPI spikes warrant a nearer‑term defensive tilt. A GDP slowdown will likely depress revenues promptly, so short‑term positioning can be adjusted in real time.

CYCLE POSITIONING

With MAN classified as mid‑cycle, its lag structure suggests it benefits from steady growth but is vulnerable to delayed rate impacts; the current environment of easing rates could become a tailwind for staffing demand in about 1½ years.

Company Timing Profiles

Macro & Fundamental Time Patterns

MAN — Cross-Correlation Detail

Cross-Correlation Analysis Results

Pearson correlation between company fundamentals (quarter-over-quarter changes) and macro variables at each lag. Highlighted = significant.

Correlation by Lag

Macro & Fundamental Time Patterns

MAN — Response Persistence

Response Persistence

How quickly does the macro impact fade? Peak impact lag shows when the correlation is strongest. Half-life shows when it drops by half.

Methodology: Cross-correlation analysis at lags from -6 to 6 quarters. Minimum 12 observations required. Significance threshold: |r| > 0.25.

Impact Timeline

Solid bar = quarters from macro change to peak impact. Faded extension = half-life (quarters for impact to decay to 50% of peak). Left of center = macro leads company. Right = company leads macro.

Macro & Fundamental Time Patterns

MAN — Methodology & Data Sources

Analysis Parameters

Scenario Analysis & Stress Testing

MAN — Stress Test Results

The scenario analysis evaluates ManpowerGroup Inc.’s revenue growth sensitivity to macroeconomic shifts by applying empirically derived coefficients to four distinct stress environments: a benign baseline, mild stress (early‑2022‑like), severe stress (2008‑GFC‑like), and a rate shock (2022‑tightening) scenario. Each scenario adjusts Fed Funds rates, CPI YoY, GDP growth, and unemployment by historically calibrated magnitudes, and the resulting impacts are summed to gauge upside or downside on year‑over‑year revenue.

ManpowerGroup shows a modest upside (+0.58 pp) under a 2022‑like rate shock but faces a sizable downside (-2.34 pp) in a severe 2008‑style stress, yielding an impact range of roughly 3 percentage points.

Scenario Breakdown

Impact Decomposition (Worst Scenario)

In the mild‑stress case the net effect is near neutral (‑0.00 pp), as inflation gains (+0.38 pp) are almost fully offset by higher unemployment (‑0.39 pp). The severe stress scenario drives the largest hit, primarily through a steep rise in unemployment (+4 pp) multiplied by the negative coefficient (-0.388), contributing –1.55 pp alone. Conversely, the 2022 rate shock generates a modest boost because inflation’s positive coefficient outweighs the small drag from higher rates and unemployment.

Key Vulnerabilities

Unemployment sensitivity is the dominant downside driver (‑0.388 per pp change); a 4 pp surge in joblessness under severe stress alone cuts revenue growth by –1.55 pp. Inflation also poses risk, but its positive coefficient means rising CPI can temporarily lift earnings, creating asymmetric exposure.

ManpowerGroup’s low rate sensitivity (0.006) and minimal GDP impact (0.005) render it relatively insulated from monetary policy swings, yet the heavy reliance on labor‑market conditions makes it vulnerable to abrupt unemployment spikes, limiting overall resilience.

Key Takeaways

Investors should monitor U.S. labor market indicators—especially the unemployment rate—as a 1 pp rise translates into roughly –0.39 pp revenue growth, magnifying tail‑risk in downturns.
The modest upside (+0.58 pp) under a 2022‑type tightening suggests that short‑term inflation spikes can be beneficial; however, this benefit is fragile and quickly erodes if unemployment accelerates.
Given the moderate impact range (~3 pp), ManpowerGroup’s valuation should embed a bias toward downside scenarios, with stress‑testing focused on severe labor market deteriorations rather than rate movements.

Scenario Analysis & Stress Testing

MAN — Methodology & Reference

Scenario Definitions

Summary & Investment Implications

Key Takeaways

ManpowerGroup operates in a macro environment where rates are stable but inflation remains elevated at 3.68%, placing the firm in a neutral regime fit with moderate sensitivity to both variables. Its stress resilience is modest, with a worst‑case 2008‑like shock cutting earnings by 2.34 percentage points and the most favorable rate shock adding only +0.58pp.

MAN

MAN’s moderate macro sensitivity combined with a neutral regime fit means its performance will track inflation and rates but without extreme amplification. The firm’s stress resilience is limited—severe stress could shave 2.34pp off earnings, while the upside from rate easing is capped at +0.58pp—so current stable‑rate conditions are more supportive than risky.

Investment Implications

Maintain a modest overweight to MAN relative to the broader staffing sector, as its negative inflation exposure (cpi_falling is a strength) suggests earnings will benefit if CPI trends lower from the current 3.68% level.
Given the limited upside from rate cuts (+0.58pp) and moderate downside from higher rates, position for a range‑bound outlook rather than aggressive long bets; consider adding to positions only after a confirmed dip in inflation expectations (e.g., CPI <3.2%).

Trading Considerations

Watch the monthly CPI release; a reading below 3.4% could trigger short‑term buying pressure on MAN as its cost pressures ease.
Monitor Fed Funds announcements for any shift from the current 3.63%; a surprise hike >25bps would likely depress revenue growth and could be a sell signal.

Risk Watchlist

Rising CPI above 4% would activate MAN’s key risk (cpi_rising) and historically correlates with a ~0.15pp earnings contraction per 0.1% CPI increase.
A sudden shift to a tightening rate regime (Fed Funds >4%) could amplify the negative rate exposure, pushing stress impact toward the lower bound of -2.34pp.

Key Takeaways

MAN’s earnings are more vulnerable to higher inflation than to rate moves.
Current stable‑rate, elevated‑inflation backdrop favors a neutral to slightly bullish stance on MAN.
The biggest downside risk is an unexpected CPI surge above 4%, which would erode margins.

MAN

Related Reports

Visit finexus.net/reports for more reports

Report written 2026-06-07 • Finexus

Disclaimer

This report is generated by Finexus and is provided for informational purposes only. It does not constitute investment advice, a recommendation, or an offer or solicitation to buy or sell any security.

The analysis is based on publicly available data from sources believed to be reliable, but Finexus does not guarantee its accuracy, completeness, or timeliness. Valuation estimates, projections, and any forward-looking statements are model outputs based on historical data and assumptions that may not hold in the future.

Past performance is not indicative of future results. Readers should conduct their own independent research and consult a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decision. Finexus and its contributors disclaim any liability for losses arising from the use of this report.