The man financing Britain’s clean energy future on doubt, policy risk, and the things no CFO can control.
As CFO of one of Britain’s most ambitious clean energy projects, EnergyPathways’ Max Williams has learned that securing capital is only half the job.
Since joining the firm in April 2025, Williams has been overseeing the finances of MESH, an £800 million offshore hub on the Lancashire coast set to combine long-duration energy storage, gas, and green hydrogen production in a single integrated facility.
With MESH still in the pre-FEED stage, the challenge lies not just in raising capital but in keeping government, institutional investors, and industry partners moving in lockstep toward a Final Investment Decision — and ultimately, execution.
A seasoned Chartered Accountant with three decades in energy and natural resources, Williams spoke with Global Finance about financing a first-of-its-kind project, the politics of clean energy, and what keeps him awake at night.
Max Williams, CFO, EnergyPathways
Global Finance: What is your main achievement leading finance at EnergyPathways (EPP)?
Max Williams: EPP is developing a unique solution for energy storage and supply to support Britain’s energy transition. The project, called Marram Energy Storage Hub (MESH), combines long-duration energy storage (LDES) and gas storage, while also growing hydrogen industries using its offshore storage facilities. The ability to drive the project forward has depended in the early stages on reliable and continuing support from equity shareholders who understand and believe in the company’s focus.
The signing of a financing agreement with a global institutional investor was an important step in the company being able to accelerate its pre-FEED (Pre-Front End Engineering Design) work program on both its LDES and gas storage license elements of its project. Our ongoing engagement with government, industry partners and banks will provide further significant funding to progress the project to and beyond the Final Investment Decision (FID). The company designed the full project to minimize government subsidies.
GF: What is the biggest challenge in funding operations for MESH, an £800 million integrated offshore facility in the UK (near the Lancashire coast)? What is the thing you spend most of your time on?
Williams: The Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero designated the MESH Project to be one of national significance. It is designed to meet clean energy goals and provide employment in the region, engaging with Team Barrow [a public-private partnership that aims to revive this port town in northwestern England] and gaining increasing parliamentary support. The biggest challenge is to ensure that all stakeholders, including government, are aligned and supportive, enabling the company to meet key milestones and secure appropriate capital as the development progresses through FEED to FID and first revenues.
GF: How important is it for you to have a good team, and what defines a good team for you?
Williams: With a new concept project such as MESH, success depends on a strong team across all disciplines, not just the finance team but also the teams overseeing EnergyPathways’ technical and commercial operations. Project delivery is going to be a key discipline in arranging project financing. In the energy transition space, a good team functions efficiently and effectively across disciplines with clear communication around objectives and strategies to achieve them. EPP also benefits by having world-class industry partners, including Siemens, Wood Group, and Costain.
GF: How do you see AI affecting your work?
Williams: For a small company with a small team, the use of AI has so far been limited within the accounting function. However, this will develop as the company grows. The company already uses AI to maximize productivity and assist with project design and implementation. An AI energy management system is a key part of our development design, enabling MESH to ensure a reliable and flexible energy supply to Britain’s energy markets.
GF: What advice do you have for aspiring CFOs?
Williams: Being CFO will always put you at the center of reporting, information flow, and decision-making. For EnergyPathways, this means identifying the project’s financing needs and providing suitable, timely solutions to those requirements. In addition, the CFO ensures information transparency for investors and the broader stakeholder community.
GF: What keeps you up at night?
Williams: Matters that are outside the control of the company. For instance, EnergyPathways is developing solutions for energy storage and supply, offering security of supply with a focus on clean energy supply. Development of the MESH project may require changes to government strategy and policy, and macro, global factors may affect policy. The MESH project, though, would benefit the UK’s future energy supply regardless of the polar arguments of clean energy versus exploitation of the North Sea.
Wall Street closed the week higher as easing Middle East tensions, softer-than-expected inflation data, and strong corporate earnings boosted investor sentiment.
Investor sentiment improved after President Donald Trump said a framework to end the conflict with Iran and restore shipping
Replimune (REPL) won over the FDA to submit a marketing application for its lead asset RP1 for the third time despite previous rejections, thanks to the intervention of White House officials, The Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the matter.
Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) countries are moving towards deeper economic integration through digitisation and AI, as leaders of the bloc met in Astana for a two-day summit.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
During the high-level talks, member states discussed creating a unified digital environment to build a seamless market across a shared economic space of more than 20 million square kilometres.
Delegations focused on trade, joint projects and the development of shared digital tools and AI systems designed to strengthen cooperation and reduce fragmentation across the bloc.
Last year, trade within the union more than doubled, while turnover with third countries rose by 72%, while around 90% of settlements are now conducted in national currencies, as EAEU states also mull a single transit system.
With digitisation driving developments across the union, Kazakhstan’s President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev said trade turnover between EAEU members could increase by around 6%, exceeding €85 billion this year, compared with €80 billion last year.
He added that GDP growth across EAEU countries is projected at around 2.5% for 2026–2027.
Now in its 12th year, the EAEU functions as a single integrated market and free trade zone for its five members – Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Armenia.
The bloc already has agreements in place with a number of countries including Serbia, Vietnam, the UAE, Mongolia and Indonesia. China remains the bloc’s key partner, accounting for around one-third of external trade.
Integration through AI
Kazakhstan’s Tokayev said that during its chairmanship of the EAEU, the country has proposed the practical use of AI to help implement the bloc’s so-called four freedoms, with the aim of strengthening the competitiveness of member states.
Member states also proposed developing common principles for the responsible use of AI, as well as shared computing capacity and joint model development.
Meanwhile, Russia proposed a high-level AI get-together next year to further cooperation on domestic AI models and connecting its IT and energy infrastructure, according to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
On the ground, pilot projects are already being tested at the EAEU level.
In Kazakhstan, several AI-powered digital assistants have been developed by both government agencies and startups to help citizens navigate legal and regulatory systems more easily.
According to Deputy Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Development Dmitry Mun, these AI legal assistants are designed to simplify legislation, reduce bureaucracy, and make regulatory systems more accessible for citizens and businesses.
Some of these tools are now being tested to streamline processes across member states.
Trade corridors and logistics modernisation
Around 85% of goods travelling from China to Europe are routed through the Middle Corridor, according to officials.
Artificial intelligence is increasingly being deployed alongside the TDN and the Digital Transport Corridor along the Trans-Caspian International Transport Route. Together, these measures are expected to increase non-commodity exports by around 30% over the next two years.
Kazakhstan’s Minister of Trade and Integration Arman Shakkaliyev said the country also aims to leverage major transport routes, including the Middle Corridor and the North–South Corridor, to build a fully integrated logistics ecosystem.
The goal, he said, is to position Kazakhstan as a key regional hub where transport routes converge and large export flows are consolidated.
The ambition is to develop a fully functioning system by 2030, with cargo volumes reaching around 10 million tonnes. Work is already under way, including railway modernisation and new infrastructure development.
Putin visit and bilateral agreements
The summit followed Putin’s state visit to Kazakhstan, during which the two countries signed seven key pillars of bilateral cooperation, along with a broader package of agreements covering energy, transport, finance, education and industrial development.
Russia remains Kazakhstan’s largest investor, with nearly €25 billion already invested and plans to increase that figure further. It is also building Kazakhstan’s first nuclear power plant, valued at around €14 billion.
Putin said the plant would account for around 20% of Kazakhstan’s electricity consumption, adding that financing conditions for such projects are in line with international practice.
He noted that the project supports Russian industrial capacity through equipment orders and long-term maintenance contracts, while also strengthening cooperation between the two countries in uranium and nuclear technology.
For Kazakhstan, officials say the project represents both energy security and a step towards moving beyond raw-material exports to high-value technological cooperation.
Tensions between China and the EU have intensified in recent months, prompting the European Commission to convene most of its commissioners for a strategic rethink during an “orientation debate” on Friday.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
“China is a critical partner, and engagement and dialogue will continue,” the commission said in a readout following the debate. “At the same time the current state of the trade and investment relationship is not sustainable.”
Calling the relationship “not sustainable” may understate the depth of the rupture.
Relations have steadily deteriorated since European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen branded Beijing a “systemic rival” in a landmark 2023 speech. But tensions surged to a new level once EU policymakers finally settled their differences over the EU-US trade deal that had consumed Brussels for months, freeing the bloc to sharpen its focus on China.
Last year, according to the commission, the bloc registered a record-high €359.9 billion trade deficit with Beijing, fuelling growing calls in Brussels to better protect the EU market from cheap Chinese imports that threaten entire sectors — metals, chemicals and the car industry among them.
“We are seeing a panic attack in the last few weeks on China,” an EU official told Euronews, speaking on condition of anonymity to speak candidly. The official added that the China issue had been “overlooked for too long.”
A total of 200,000 European jobs were lost in EU industry — particularly in the energy-intensive and automotive sectors — since 2024, with a further 600,000 job losses projected this decade in carmaking alone.
On Friday, the commission readout specified that its “overarching approach remains de-risking, not decoupling,” signalling that the bloc is still pursuing targeted efforts to reduce its dependence on China rather than sever economic ties altogether. Yet the risk of a full-scale trade war has never felt so real.
Here are five key points on how the situation has escalated to this point — and where it may be headed next :
1. Fines and regulatory pressure
During the previous legislative term, the EU passed legislation that drew Beijing’s anger — notably measures to screen foreign direct investment. And it has stepped up its fight against so-called dumping, whereby public subsidies are used to undercut competitors through exports sold below market prices in China.
The European Commission has grown increasingly assertive in countering China’s subsidy-driven approach, including by imposing duties on imports of battery electric vehicles. Several product-specific investigations are also ongoing.
Earlier this week, the Commission fined Chinese e-commerce giant Temu €200 million for selling unsafe products and opened a full-scale investigation into JD.com’s acquisition of e-commerce retailer MediaMarkt.
EU lawmakers and governments are also discussing the Industrial Accelerator Act, a legislative proposal that would impose strict conditions on investments in batteries, electric vehicles, solar panels and critical raw materials from countries controlling 40% of the global market share in a given sector.
A separate proposal — a revamped Cybersecurity Act — could push out Chinese equipment suppliers such as Huawei and ZTE from critical infrastructure.
2. A more systemic approach
To counter Chinese overcapacities, the EU agreed in April to double tariffs on steel imports that exceed EU quotas. The measure is a so-called “safeguard” — a tool backed by some of the EU’s largest economies, including France, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands and Lithuania, which called for it to be extended to sectors beyond metals.
In a non-paper, those countries argued that safeguards were more “agile” than other EU instruments targeting cheap export products. The paper also calls for economic security to be factored into assessments of the EU’s interests when deciding on trade defence measures.
The European industry is also ramping up pressure to crack down on Chinese cheap imports calling on the Commission to use trade defence measures “more flexibly, faster, and preventively.”
A major wake-up call for EU policymakers has been the recent case of Nexperia, a Dutch-based chipmaker acquired by Chinese giant Wingtech, which was caught in the crossfire of US-China trade tensions, causing significant disruption in the automotive sector.
The Commission is now set to require sectors such as the car industry to diversify chip suppliers in certain cases, taking supply-chain risks into account in procurement decisions.
Despite these various initiatives, EU policymakers have grown wary that the current rules are too slow-moving for a fast-moving adversary. After duties were imposed on electric vehicle batteries, China’s focus simply shifted to hybrid vehicles.
Brussels is now moving towards a more systemic approach, treating trade defence as a toolbox to rebalance relations with China. One potential addition is a so-called overcapacity instrument to cap imports in specific sectors.
3. China’s threats of retaliation
In recent weeks, China has repeatedly threatened retaliation if the EU presses ahead with closing its market to Chinese goods.
Both the “Made in Europe” legislation and the Cybersecurity Act have drawn Beijing’s ire, prompting intensified lobbying of Brussels and EU member states, with warnings that implementation will trigger a response.
The Europeans are walking a tightrope, acutely aware that their decisions could spark a trade war. After the EU imposed tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles in 2024, Beijing imposed tariffs on EU pork, brandy and dairy products.
“International trade is a two-way street. There’s no forced trade. The China-EU trade relations are win-win in nature. China does not aim for trade surplus,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said at a press briefing on Thursday.
“The EU needs to put trade ties with China in perspective and honour its commitment to free trade. China will closely follow the EU’s moves and take all measures necessary to safeguard legitimate rights and interests,” Ning added.
Some argue it is already too late for the Europeans, who depend on China for key components of their supply chains — components Beijing can weaponize at will.
In 2025, China blocked exports of rare earths, which are vital for EU green technology and defence, as well as chips essential to the European car industry. Beijing can also leverage operating licences for EU companies and restrict access to its market at any time.
4. European divisions
Europe is far from united on China.
Germany, despite a troubling trade deficit with Beijing, has been slow to shift away from its cooperative approach, which prioritises securing market access for German companies in China.
Berlin did not endorse last weekend’s non-paper backed by other major EU economies. Instead, German Economy Minister Katherina Reiche repeated this week that Germany’s overriding priority is to avoid jeopardising exports to China.
Yet the economic cost of dependence on Beijing might be forcing Berlin to reconsider its stance. The German government is reportedly weighing a tougher line that would mark a significant shift in its China policy.
For years, the German industry had a relationship with the Chinese market that critics described as toxic — one that blocked any meaningful attempt to rebalance the trade deficit out of fear of losing commercial access to the vast Asian market.
Spain has emerged as the other major EU country reluctant to act against China. With relatively cheap energy costs, Spain has become attractive to foreign investors, of which Beijing accounts for a growing share.
Its position caused embarrassment for Madrid this week, after it initially appeared to support the France-led non-paper before retreating and claiming it had merely participated in discussions.
“There has been no specific political support for any ‘non-paper’,” Spanish trade minister Carlos Cuerpo said, adding that the EU should “engage” with Chinese authorities through “dialogue.”
5. What happens now?
Brussels’ reassessment of its China stance has been long in the making, rooted in decades of deepening economic dependence. But the latest acceleration was also prompted by a shift in US posture, most visibly the recent visit to Beijing by President Donald Trump.
The Commission’s orientation debate on Friday was just a first step in what could become a broader repositioning. Where that leads — given internal divisions and the threat of retaliation — remains deeply uncertain.
The conclusions of that exercise are expected to feed into a discussion on economic security at the next European Council meeting on 18-19 June. China has appeared on EU leaders’ agenda several times in recent years, only to be pushed aside by more pressing crises.
While Brussels considers adding new instruments to its policy toolbox, political will remains the key determining factor. Nowhere is that gap more stark than in the EU’s handling of the anti-coercion instrument, also known as the “trade bazooka,” which was designed to push back against economic pressure and unfair trade restrictions.
“The anti-coercive instrument was never used, even though we have been coerced quite a lot,” the EU official said. “We need tools that we are actually willing to use.”
Banco Central do Brasil (BCB) has banned fintech and payment providers from settling overseas payments in stablecoins or crypto. With Resolution 561, the BCB is implementing new rules regarding its electronic foreign exchange (eFX) policy, which governs how payment institutions and e-money issuers provide cross-border services.
Its immediate effects, when the new rules go into effect on Oct. 1, will be the return of bank spreads, correspondent fees, and settlements in days rather than minutes, while the cost of international transactions, especially remittances, will increase for businesses and consumers.
Resolution 561 updates Brazil’s eFX framework, which regulates digital cross-border payments settled through traditional foreign-exchange channels. It will restrict companies from collecting reals in Brazil, converting them into stablecoins like USDT or USDC, and then using them for fiat remittances.
The resolution does not prohibit stablecoins in Brazil, Thiago Amaral, partner at Barcellos Tucunduva Advogados, told online publication Migalhas. “What it does is prevent eFX providers from using virtual assets to settle payments or receipts with their counterparts abroad.”
Companies can still use non-resident real accounts to settle international payments, and for individuals, this will not affect their ability to trade crypto. Brazil’s crypto market is worth between $6 billion and $8 billion a month, with stablecoins accounting for roughly 90% of its volume.
Resolution 561 also mandates stricter Know Your Customer (KYC) procedures. According to BCB officials, the resolution aims to ensure traceability, supervision, and compliance with exchange rate regulations while strengthening anti-money laundering efforts.
Remittances Affected
Remittances are likely to be most affected by the changes. Cross-border payment “plumbing” helped many navigate the 1% tax on cash remittance transfers and the further 3.5% tax on remittances and foreign currency purchases, which went into effect in May 2025. In 2024, remittance inflows totaled $4.7 billion, accounting for 0.2% of Brazil’s GDP.
“With the ban on the use of stablecoins in eFX settlements, operators involved in international remittances, overseas purchases, cash withdrawals while traveling, and digital transfers to other countries lose the main advantage they had over traditional banks,” José Artur Ribeiro, CEO of Brazilian crypto exchange operator Coinext, told Brazil’s Money Times.
This article appears in the June 2026 issue of Global Finance Magazine.
Ron Vachris said Costco’s value message is resonating “against the backdrop of ongoing macro uncertainty,” highlighting fuel as the standout: “The result was record-breaking volumes, all 3 4-week fiscal periods of the quarter
Seeking Alpha’s Disclaimer:This article was automatically generated by an AI tool based on content available on the Seeking Alpha website, and has not been curated or reviewed by humans. Due to inherent limitations in using AI-based tools, the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of such articles cannot be guaranteed. This article is intended for informational purposes only. Seeking Alpha does not take account of your objectives or your financial situation and does not offer any personalized investment advice. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank.
Lock in today’s painful prices, or bet that volatility breaks your way? CFOs are being forced to choose.
Commodity hedging is no longer a technical exercise buried in the treasury function. As price volatility spreads across energy, metals, and agricultural commodities, CFOs are forced to make explicit, high-stakes bets about the future — locking in costs at today’s elevated levels or staying exposed in the hope that markets turn. What was once a risk management tool has become a strategic decision with direct implications for margins, pricing, and competitive positioning.
That shift is showing up in earnings in a range of industries, a reminder that hedging decisions are increasingly tied to financial performance and investor expectations. “We are using our hedging to be able to offset against the volatility,” said Andrew Murray, CFO of Fonterra, a New Zealand farmer-owned cooperative, in the group’s March 2026 earnings call.
Others are treating volatility as an opportunity to act. In its latest earnings call, Infinity Natural Resources CEO Zack Arnold said the company had “taken this opportunity … to lock in attractive oil hedges,” stressing how companies are making deliberate market calls rather than waiting for conditions to stabilize. In some cases, the impact is measurable. In Siemens’ most recent earnings call, the global industrial giant’s CFO, Ralf P. Thomas, reported that commodity hedging contributed roughly 100 basis points to its margins, thanks to volatility in copper and silver prices.
New Visible, Strategic Role for Hedging
Power, it turns out, doesn’t come from military might anymore. It comes from metals and other elements, such as cobalt. That’s the argument threading through “The Elements of Power,” Nicolas Niarchos’ new book on the supply chains that hold modern civilization together — or fail to. Niarchos isn’t interested in geopolitics as it’s usually taught, the stuff of borders and aircraft carriers. He tracks something hard to see and now hard to ignore: the fragile networks of extraction, processing, and assembly that make electric vehicles move, smartphones think, AI infrastructure hum, and modern life move forward.
Those networks are long and exposed. Ore pulled from the ground in the Congo passes through Chinese processing facilities before it reaches a factory floor in Europe or America. A disruption anywhere, such as a mine shutdown, a trade restriction, or a sea strait closed by war, doesn’t stay local. It travels fast through prices and production timelines in ways that almost no one anticipated and fewer still knew how to hedge against.
What Niarchos documents is the moment supply chain risk graduated from a logistics problem to a strategic one. Hedging, once the quiet work of treasury and procurement desks, is becoming more like foreign policy.
Darrell E. Fletcher started his career hedging global energy for Alcoa and is now managing director of commodities at Bannockburn Capital Markets, the trading and advisory arm of First Financial Bank. He says the past two years have been “extraordinarily volatile” across energy and metals, forcing producers and fuel-consuming organizations to reassess their approach.
On the producer side, many firms are taking advantage of elevated prices to lock in forward revenues. “There has been a sharp increase in commercial hedgers … hedging the remainder of 2026 and into 2027,” Fletcher says, as companies secure cash flows above internal targets and support borrowing capacity. But strategies vary by size: the largest diversified oil majors often avoid hedging altogether, reflecting investor expectations that their equities provide direct exposure to commodity prices.
For organizations that consume fuel, the shift has been more reactive. Companies with established programs are extending hedges further in the future. Others are entering the market for the first time as price swings hit earnings. “Those who thought the exposure wasn’t meaningful realize it can be,” Fletcher says, noting a surge in conversations with CFOs and treasurers in recent months, some seeking help with a first-time hedging program.
The underlying issue may be less about timing the market than understanding exposure. “Eighty percent of any solid hedging program is: what is the exposure — and does it matter?” Fletcher says. He points to the importance of stress-testing cost sensitivity before implementing a strategy. He also warns that executives are being called out on earnings calls for failing to have a clear hedging rationale, backed by analysis. The mechanics of hedging are “the easy part,” he notes.
Plan vs. No Plan
That gap between companies with a plan and those without is something Charlie Macnamara sees firsthand. As head of commodity derivatives at US Bank — where his desk serves clients ranging from Permian Basin oil producers to auto manufacturers buying aluminum to EV companies sourcing lithium — Macnamara has a view of what separates hedging programs that work from those that don’t.
Charlie Macnamara, US Bank
“The ones that get it wrong are the ones that don’t have a plan — and those are the ones where they let the movement of the market dictate what they need to do,” he says. The result can be a company that ends up buying the top, reacting to fear or surprise rather than executing a strategy, he adds.
Among the industries and organizations Macnamara describes as getting it right, oil and gas producers stand out. Despite the sharp swings in energy markets over the past year, industry players have remained notably disciplined, layering in hedges methodically, rather than chasing prices. “It’s been very cool, calm, and collected,” says Macnamara. That skill and maturity in hedging have been building for several years, he explains.
For CFOs considering a program for the first time, Macnamara suggests starting with the balance sheet rather than the market. “The plan should stem from how impactful the commodity is on their balance sheet and their cash flow volatility,” he says. From there, he says a finance team can define the level of volatility it wants to accept and structure derivatives or other market instruments accordingly.
A Boardroom Mindset Shift
Some organizations, and especially at the board level, need to rethink what hedging means, points out Macnamara. The people executing hedges on the ground, he says, often fear that if the hedge loses money, the C-suite will conclude they’ve done a poor job. He regards this view as misguided, and one that can paralyze programs before they get started.
“If you’re hedging 25% of your cash flow volatility and you lose money on that hedge, that means you’ve saved on 75% — you’ve just bought some insurance on the 25%,” he says. The philosophical hurdle is getting the entire organization to understand that a hedge is not meant to make money. It is meant to reduce volatility. “It sounds very simple, but that tends to be the biggest friction point,” he says.
Not everyone is convinced that locking in prices at today’s levels is the right move. Rob Handfield, Bank of America University Distinguished Professor of Supply Chain Management at NC State University and author of “Flow: How the Best Supply Chains Thrive,” urges caution about the assumption that financial hedging can adequately compensate for the unpredictability of physical supply chains. “Financial hedging assumes that individuals have a strong belief that supply and demand will move in one direction or another,” he says. “This is a challenging gamble.”
However, physical flows are difficult to forecast outside of periods of economic stability, according to Handfield. In the current environment, marked by geopolitical tensions, threats to key shipping lanes such as the Strait of Hormuz, and the resulting energy disruptions, the variables shaping commodity markets are too numerous and volatile to model confidently.
“Unless one has insider information on how governments are making decisions, these are very risky bets,” he says of positions in oil, gold, silver, copper, and other metals. And the consequences of disruption can be long-lasting. Handfield points out that rebuilding natural gas infrastructure alone could take at least a year.
A Matter of Restraint
On the critical question of whether to lock in today’s elevated prices, Handfield argues for restraint.
“I think locking in elevated prices is a mistake,” he says, expressing the view that once geopolitical tensions ease and supply routes normalize, volatility will likely diminish, thus rewarding companies that preserved optionality over those that locked in at the peak. The deeper conceptual issue, he argues, is that supply and demand are stochastic variables: “You can predict what might happen by what is happening today, but you don’t really know what will happen tomorrow.” Hedging makes most sense when prices are historically low, not in the middle of a supply chain crisis, Handfield believes.
That divide — between market practitioners who see today’s conditions as a hedging opportunity and supply chain strategists who warn against overconfidence in financial instruments — may be the central tension CFOs face heading into 2027. Fletcher and Handfield agree on at least one thing: most companies still underestimate how much commodity exposure matters to their bottom line. Where they diverge is on the remedy.
This article appears in the May 2026 issue of Global Finance Magazine.
Earnings Call Insights: Best Buy (BBY) Q1 fiscal 2027
Management View
“Today, we are pleased to report better-than-expected results for the first quarter” (CEO & Director Corie Barry). Barry said Q1 included “positive comps across the majority of our major product categories” and that the company “also drove
Seeking Alpha’s Disclaimer:This article was automatically generated by an AI tool based on content available on the Seeking Alpha website, and has not been curated or reviewed by humans. Due to inherent limitations in using AI-based tools, the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of such articles cannot be guaranteed. This article is intended for informational purposes only. Seeking Alpha does not take account of your objectives or your financial situation and does not offer any personalized investment advice. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank.
Strong first-quarter earnings across corporate America are reinforcing the case for maintaining exposure to U.S. large-cap equities, according to a recent investor note from Citi.
The firm said S&P 500 (SP500) companies delivered 27% year-over-year earnings growth during the quarter, significantly
On Wednesday, the US Department of War confirmed it had awarded Dell Federal Systems, the government-focused unit of Dell Technologies, a five-year, $9.7 billion (€8.3bn) contract to supply the Pentagon.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
As part of the Core Enterprise Technology Agreement (CETA), a Pentagon-wide Microsoft licensing and software procurement framework, the company will provide and manage Microsoft software licences, cloud subscriptions and on-premises software licensing across the US military, intelligence agencies and the US Coast Guard.
Dell Technologies’ shares were up around 5% in pre-market to $320 due to the announcement after closing Wednesday’s session at roughly $305.
The company is set to report its earnings for the first quarter of this year on Thursday, with analysts from Zacks Investment Research forecasting revenues of approximately $35 billion (€30bn), representing annual growth of about 50%.
According to US DoW Chief Information Officer Kirsten Davies, who briefed reporters at the Pentagon, the CETA is expected to save the department roughly $422 million (€360.9mn) annually by consolidating fragmented technology budgets from across the military services into a single purchasing structure.
The contract was granted less than three weeks after US President Donald Trump stood at a White House event and urged Americans to “go out and buy a Dell. They’re great.”
Davies and acting US Navy Chief Information Officer Barry Tanner were both clear that the award followed a competitive process.
“The vendors were all evaluated based on competition, comparison to GSA schedule pricing and overall chain of value to the department,” Tanner noted.
Dell holds a long-standing commercial partnership with Microsoft and is one of its major buyers of Windows licences. Nonetheless, the contract arrives at the culmination of a period of visible alignment between CEO Michael Dell and the Trump administration.
In December 2025, Dell and his wife Susan appeared alongside Trump at the White House to announce a $6.25 billion (€5.3bn) donation to “Trump Accounts,” a tax-advantaged investment programme for children created under the “One Big Beautiful Bill”.
The pledge will provide $250 (€214) to roughly 25 million American children aged 10 and under from households with a median income below $150,000 (€129,000) and was described by Invest America, the nonprofit organisation spearheading the initiative, as the largest ever private commitment devoted to American children.
Michael Dell also sits on Trump’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, informing public policy regarding the economy, public health, national security, energy and emerging technologies.
The convergence of public presidential endorsements and subsequent federal contract awards is attracting scrutiny beyond Dell.
Financial disclosures released this month by the US Office of Government Ethics showed that investment accounts associated with President Donald Trump held Dell Technologies shares during the first quarter of 2026. The disclosures indicate some purchases were made before Trump publicly praised the company at a White House event.
The Trump Organisation has said the accounts are managed independently by third-party financial institutions and that neither Trump nor his family directs individual trades.
Last week, responding to questions about Trump’s financial disclosures at a White House briefing, Vice President JD Vance said the president’s investments are handled by independent wealth advisers and rejected suggestions that Trump personally directs individual stock trades. “He’s not making these stock trades himself,” Vance said.
Commentators and ethics critics have also pointed to trading activity involving companies such as Intel and Palantir, whose shares have at times moved sharply following public comments by Trump or announcements linked to government technology spending.
The Pentagon has said Dell’s selection followed a competitive procurement process.
Even so, the timing of the award alongside Trump’s public praise of the company and financial disclosures showing investments linked to Dell is likely to draw renewed scrutiny from ethics observers and political critics.
A massive $166 billion in corporate tariff refunds sounds nice, but could take years to process.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling invalidating the Trump administration’s tariffs was a positive outcome for companies, but refunds may take years to materialize.
The Supreme Court decided in February that the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency illegally collected $166 billion from 300,000 importers. Logically, companies should get refunds, but lawyers don’t expect a smooth process. Importers should be prepared to wait for one year, even 18 months, according to TD Securities.
The federal agency set up an online portal called the Automated Commercial Environment to handle refunds. Once the agency accepts a company’s claim, it issues refunds within 60 to 90 days.
That’s the short-term optimistic resolution, but history shows a lot of things could go wrong. In 1998, the Supreme Court announced that the government had to return $750 million in fees collected between 1993 and 1998. It took years to get done.
The CBP is set up to collect money quickly—but it doesn’t easily send it back. Companies must document a proper claim on the new portal. Some small business owners don’t understand the complex customs terminology, while others can’t even log in to the new portal due to technical glitches. Let’s say that the agency and the company don’t agree about the amount of the refund. The importer must submit new documentation and begin a second review process. Companies could even be forced to go to court.
CFOs should be ready for a long, fastidious process. The financial expert should set up a cross-functional task force—including tax, accounting, procurement, and supply chain experts—to review the data and audit all the company’s entries. When the time comes, the task force will be able to answer any CBP question.
The online portal created by the CBP agency focuses on importers, but they are not alone. Consumers could also say that they were overcharged because of the tariffs. The federal government ignores them, but some states don’t. Taking matters into his own hands, Illinois Democrat Governor JB Pritzker, in a letter to the Trump administration posted on soicial media, demanded an $8.7 billion refund—that’s $1,700 for each Illinois household affected.
The EU’s new car market maintained steady growth through the first four months of 2026, with nearly 3.8 million vehicles registered, up 4.2% from the same period in 2025. This is according to data published on Wednesday by the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA).
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The figures show a market increasingly dominated by electric and hybrid vehicles, helped by government incentives in major economies and growing competition from Chinese carmakers.
According to ACEA, between January and April 2026, battery-electric cars accounted for 19.7% of the EU market, up from 15.3% a year earlier. Growth was mainly driven by the bloc’s four largest markets, with Italy (+25.5%), Spain (+19.7%), Germany (+6.6%) and France (+2.3%) all recording gains.
In April alone, sales of battery electric vehicles were up by 37.7% in the EU from the same month last year, lifting their market share to 20.6% for the month.
Hybrid-electric vehicles remained the most popular single powertrain choice in April, up 12%, accounting for roughly 36.9% of the month’s sales.
Plug-in hybrids added 16.4%, capturing roughly a 9.8% share in April registrations.
On the other side of the ledger, petrol car registrations fell 16.3% to fewer than 218,500 units, while diesel dropped 17.1% to around 74,000.
Together, petrol and diesel cars accounted for less than 30% of vehicles sold across the EU in April.
European brands performance in 2026
Volkswagen Group retained its position as the bloc’s largest carmaker in the first four months of 2026, accounting for 26.7% of all new registrations, with just over one million units sold, up 2.9% year-on-year.
However, performance varied across the group. Skoda registrations rose 15.5%, and Audi gained 8.6%, while the core Volkswagen brand slipped 3.2%, losing ground across multiple segments.
Stellantis ranked second with a 17.1% market share and over 648,000 units, up a robust 7.8%, driven by a recovery at Fiat of over 32%, and strong gains at Opel and Vauxhall, which together rose 22% in registrations.
Renault Group was the weakest performer in the top three, declining 7.4% to around 384,250 units and accounting for a 10.1% market share, with Dacia registering a particularly sharp fall of more than 15%.
BMW Group and Mercedes-Benz posted gains of 3.9% and 3.8%, respectively, while Toyota and Hyundai Group both recorded modest declines of between 2.5% and 3.1%.
The Chinese surge
The most significant trend in April’s data was the continued rise of Chinese carmakers.
According to ACEA figures, BYD’s EU registrations more than doubled year-on-year in the first four months of 2026, surging 152.9% to more than 71,850 units.
Chery Automobile, through its Omoda, Jaecoo and Jetour brands, grew 267.1% to more than 48,350 units, while Leapmotor, distributing through its joint venture with Stellantis, soared 558.8% to over 28,700 units.
SAIC Motor, owner of the MG brand and the largest Chinese group by EU volume, added a further 10.4% to reach more than 77,000 units.
Combined, Chinese brands accounted for around 6% of EU car registrations between January and April 2026, compared with 3.2% in the same period a year earlier. Across the wider European market, including the UK and EFTA countries, Chinese brands accounted for a combined market share of roughly 7.3% over the same period, up from 3.7% a year earlier.
One week after EU diplomats and lawmakers agreed to eliminate EU duties on most US industrial goods under the EU-US trade agreement, EU ambassadors on Wednesday greenlit a deal with the European Parliament, paving the way for the full agreement’s formal adoption by the EU Council.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The procedural step comes as the US pressures Europeans to implement the EU-US deal clinched last summer by US President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen after weeks of renewed trade tensions.
Trump has threatened to impose 25 percent tariffs on EU cars if the deal is not enforced by the EU by 4 July.
On their side, MEPs still have to formally endorse the agreement reached on the EU side, with a tentative vote scheduled during the plenary session between 15 and 18 June.
“The agreement we reached with the European Parliament marks an important step in delivering on the EU’s commitments,” said a spokesperson for the Cypriot Presidency, which negotiated with MEPs on behalf of EU member states.
The spokesperson added that “robust safeguards” had been included in the agreement “to protect the interests of European businesses and economic operators”.
The deal, considered lopsided by many MEPs, states that the EU would face 15 percent US tariffs while eliminating its own duties on US goods.
However, after Trump repeatedly threatened to impose new tariffs in breach of the deal, EU lawmakers pushed member states to include conditions such as a “sunset” clause that would terminate the agreement on 31 December 2029 unless renewed.
Under the agreement reached last week, the Commission would also be able to suspend the trade deal at the request of either Parliament or a member state if the US fails to lift tariffs on European steel and aluminium products by the end of 2026.
It’s been a big year for Seth Rogen’s Point Grey Pictures.
The 15-year-old production company founded by Rogen, his childhood friend and longtime collaborator Evan Goldberg and producer James Weaver is coming off a huge awards season for its comedy, “The Studio.”
The Apple TV series, which simultaneously pokes fun at the institutions of Hollywood while also peeling back some of the industry’s mystery, is now the most-awarded new comedy in TV history.
“The Studio” has won 13 Emmys, a BAFTA TV award in the international category, two Golden Globes and three Critics Choice awards. It’s currently filming its second season, with most details still under wraps.
I spoke with Rogen, Goldberg and Weaver about the success of the show, which primarily films on the Warner Bros. lot, and what’s next for Point Grey.
On all those awards?
“We’ve never, literally, won any awards before this, so I by no means expected this,” Rogen said, with a chuckle. “I hoped people would creatively recognize that we were really swinging for the fences, but awards were not really something that I was thinking that much about.”
In the show, the Canadian actor and comedian plays beleaguered movie studio head Matt Remick, who must balance the art of filmmaking with the economics of the business. In a nod to Hollywood’s pull toward intellectual property, one storyline focuses on the studio embarking on a movie about the Kool-Aid Man, which Rogen’s character only reluctantly agrees to pursue.
It’s not all about the money
“To me, what is interesting, and what people don’t seem to think about Hollywood, is that the people involved in it actually care about movies, even the ones who make bad ones, even the ones who make choices that stop good ones from being made,” Rogen said. “If you really just wanted to make money, there are much easier ways to make money where you don’t have to deal with people like me.”
He also noted that there’s a role for movies such as the fictional Kool-Aid flick.
“You could argue it’s the Kool-Aids of the world that keep theaters open,” Rogen said. “It’s our fake Kool-Aid movie that allows smaller movies to exist and allows theaters to take risks on smaller movies.”
Remembering comedy
“The Studio” also stemmed from a desire to make a pure comedy, despite the tough time comedies have had recently in the marketplace.
“We just all agreed that we wanted to make something that was just funny,” Goldberg told me. “It just felt like the world stopped making those, and we just wanted to make something that when you tuned in, was just absolutely hilarious.”
A serious L.A. business
Los Angeles-based Point Grey, which has 15 employees, is named for the Canadian school where Rogen and Goldberg met (the first project they wrote together, which became 2007’s “Superbad,” was based on their experiences there). Despite their comedic reputations, the more serious-sounding company name was deliberate so it could be used with any kind of project.
In fact, the company got its start with the Joseph Gordon-Levitt-led dramedy “50/50” about a 20-something who learns he has cancer. Over the years, Point Grey’s projects have spanned genres, including supernatural series “Preacher,” 2016’s “Sausage Party,” the satirical superhero show “The Boys” and biographical mini-series “Pam and Tommy.”
A Point Grey project is “genuinely original” and “daring,” said Weaver, Rogen’s former assistant who now serves as president of the company, which has a first-look film deal with Universal Pictures and a first-look TV deal with Lionsgate. He declined to discuss financials but said the company is profitable.
“We’ve managed to be really productive in terms of the amount of things that we’ve made, and we try to be smart about how we run our financials,” Weaver said. “The company is doing quite well.”
Point Grey is in production on “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem”; just wrapped a romantic comedy for Amazon MGM Studios starring Cameron Diaz and Stephen Merchant; and recently screened an animated film at Cannes called “Tangles” that’s based on a graphic novel about Alzheimer’s.
The production company may eventually expand into video games (“We love video games,” Goldberg told me), and plan to continue to navigate the changes in Hollywood, which is reeling from a continued drought in local production that my colleague Stacy Perman and I wrote about recently.
“Personally, I feel like people are very fatalistic about the trajectory of the industry, but it’s not like the industry is going down, the industry is just changing,” Goldberg said. “We just are very flexible and embrace the change, and hopefully in doing so, we don’t get left behind.”
Stuff We Wrote
Number of the week
After 1,810 episodes as the host of “The Late Show,” Stephen Colbert signed off for the final time Thursday.
CBS has said it canceled Colbert because the show was losing $40 million a year as viewers have increasingly migrated away from late-night viewing in the streaming era.
But many in the TV business are skeptical of the claim and believe Skydance wanted to silence Colbert, a frequent Trump critic, to pave the way for its deal last year to acquire parent network Paramount. (The Federal Communications Commission’s approval of the transaction came days after the show’s cancellation was announced.)
I watched the “Survivor 50” finale Wednesday with some friends, despite only watching two episodes this season (or ever). It was fun seeing the drama unfold, though I was, like everyone else, shocked at that “last twist” of Jeff Probst accidentally spoiling who lost in the final fire-making challenge.
Australia’s annual consumer price inflation slowed more sharply than anticipated in April, cooling to 4.2% from March’s 4.6% print and beating market expectations for a milder drop to 4.4%.
According to data released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the headline
Though ROI is relatively low for finance organizations, many have cracked the code for higher returns.
A recent Bain & Company survey reveals that less than half (48%) of senior financial executives have seen improvements in speed and cycle time since investing in artificial intelligence (AI) within their treasury organizations, and around a third (34%) have seen headcount efficiencies and cost reductions.
Over the past 12 months, most enterprises have discussed AI use cases in corporate treasuries for accounts receivable, treasury, and accounts payable, and have experimented extensively with AI. “They have approached it more from the concept ‘Here’s an intelligence, let’s see how we can incorporate it into our business,’” said Rami Chahine, Chief Product and Technology Officer, at treasury-automation vendor Serrala.
“This is making the office of CFO more of an AI lab than anything,” he continued. “We are not seeing real adoption of active use cases deployed within our customer base. We see a lot of our enterprise customers bringing technology or spending, in some cases, a lot of money on technology, but haven’t really turned on agentic AI to truly realize their return-on-investment in terms of speed of delivery and the speed of work.”
According to the Bain study authors, that is a common situation within finance departments. Of the survey respondents, roughly 12% of finance organizations have deployed machine learning into financial planning and analysis (FP&A) forecasting in production.
“Yet in many cases, the underlying process hasn’t changed,” wrote the authors. “Finance teams run AI-generated forecasts alongside existing bottom-up planning cycles: two processes running in parallel, neither fully trusted.”
As a result, these finance organizations do not realize the expected benefits of faster cycle times, fewer people-hours, or greater accuracy.
AI Can’t Fix GIGO
According to the authors, it isn’t a technology problem. “It’s what happens when AI is layered on top of existing ways of working rather than providing the impetus to change them. If this workflow debt isn’t addressed, AI and automation can multiply complexity instead of productivity,” they wrote.
Other issues that act as headwinds to AI investment include concerns about trust, data sovereignty, and the ability of firms to audit AI’s data usage.
AIs are built to learn, but CFOs are concerned that only their instance of the AI is using their proprietary data to answer only their questions, rather than teaching other AI instances to answer someone else’s questions, said Chahine.
“Everyone believes in the capability,” he said. “Everyone understands the power of agentic AI and its ability to take over some of these manual tasks in the process of financial automation and treasury. But the biggest concern that will make a true impact on adoption is whether we can trust it.”
Despite these issues, CFOs remain bullish about AI investment in their organizations.
More than half (56%) of the surveyed CFOs are increasing AI investment by more than 15% this year. That figure rises to 83% when the window is extended to two years, with 42% of respondents expecting to increase AI spending to above 30% over the same period.
German Trade Minister Katherina Reiche is travelling to China from Tuesday to Friday as Berlin’s trade deficit with Beijing continues to deepen.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The trip comes two days after several of the EU’s largest economies – France, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, as well as Lithuania – issued a non-paper urging the EU to crack down on Chinese overcapacity and unfair trade practices.
Berlin, however, did not endorse their call.
Germany remains the main chokepoint in the EU’s strategy towards China. While Euronews previously reported that the publication late last year of Germany’s trade deficit with Beijing marked a turning point for the EU executive, which is trying to sharpen its trade defence tools, Germany continues to favour cooperation with the Chinese.
In March, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz called for a trade agreement with Beijing. Brussels pushed back against the idea.
“There are a number of concerns and real challenges that the European Union has consistently expressed to China that we need to see them meaningfully address before we can even talk about any future agreements or anything like that,” the Commission’s deputy chief spokesperson, Olof Gill, said at the time.
Even with a record €87 billion trade deficit with China, Berlin hopes Beijing will keep its market open to German industry, despite the obstacles faced by EU businesses in China and the Asian giant’s strategy of reducing its dependence on foreign products.
Access to China’s market
The main objective of Reiche’s visit this week is to discuss potential economic cooperation. According to the German government, the strategy is to explore future opportunities for collaboration while maintaining dialogue with the Chinese leadership.
Despite a steadily growing trade deficit, China remained Germany’s most important trading partner in 2025. According to the Federal Statistical Office, bilateral trade volume reached €250 billion. Around 5,200 German companies operate in China, making the country one of the most important foreign markets for Germany’s automotive, mechanical engineering and electrical industries.
During the trip, Reiche is expected to hold political talks, attend a business forum and visit local companies. She will be accompanied by a business delegation representing around 40 companies. Discussions are also set to focus on the development of energy technologies.
“We hope the visit will help to transfer the insights gained on the ground into the political discussion in Berlin and to further develop bilateral exchange,” said Oliver Oehms, Executive Director of the German Chamber of Commerce in China.
In a survey published in May by the chamber, 51% of German companies operating in China supported policies favouring partnerships with Chinese companies, while 42% backed the “strategic” use of knowledge gained through such partnerships.
But these sectors are also increasingly under pressure, as Chinese competitors benefit from extensive state subsidies.
According to a report published in May by the EU think tank Centre for European Reform, the growing concentration of global car, machinery and chemicals production in China could weaken innovation in traditional manufacturing hubs and increase Beijing’s leverage over Berlin through the threat of supply disruptions, similar to its blockade of rare earth exports in 2025.
The report added that demand generated by Germany’s fiscal stimulus after easing its debt brake could end up boosting Chinese imports rather than supporting Berlin’s domestic industry.
German exports to China fell by 9.7% year-on-year, while imports of Chinese goods such as electronics, electric vehicles and components rose significantly by 8.8%.
“China has already eaten much of German industry’s lunch and is preparing to start on dinner,” the report said.
Skin Rocks is the skincare and anti-ageing brand founded by Caroline Hirons, and it has a steady stream of fans – including our beauty editor. Here’s her honest review of every product…
Laura Mulley Beauty & Wellness Editor and Octavia Lillywhite Acting beauty and wellness editor
17:16, 03 Feb 2025Updated 15:26, 26 May 2026
This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more
Skin Rocks is the skincare brand founded by influencer Caroline Hirons(Image: Laura Mulley)
Octopus one even moderately interested in beauty will know about skincare super-influencer and author Caroline Hirons – as well as her expanding range of products, Skin Rocks. Shunning gimmicks and trends and instead focusing on brilliant formulas with clinically proven results, as well as with no-nonsense instructions, Skin Rocks has quickly become popular with beauty fans – including myself.
As Reach’s Beauty and Wellness Editor, I and my team have been lucky enough to try every product from Skin Rocks, often before they hit the shelves, from cleansers and moisturisers, through to the latest launch, The Strong Acid, so we know which are really worth shouting about. Spoiler alert: I’ve never used a Skin Rocks product I didn’t like – they’re expertly formulated, never irritate my skin, and are well packaged – but here are the products that I would genuinely rebuy when I get to the bottom…
Really well formulated: they’re very effective but never pill or irritate the skin
Packaging looks and feels great, and is clear to understand, with notes about who it’ll suit (and who it won’t), and handy guides on the lids showing how much to use
Clinically proven results
Lots of the products are refillable, with refills costing a little less
Lots of the products come in fragranced or fragrance-free options (I always choose fragrance-free)
Cons
The prices range from mid range to high end
Bottles are made of glass and are heavy (good for recycling, less good for travelling)
If double cleansing to you still sounds like too much time and effort, here’s why it’s probably worth you doing:
Oil removes oil, which is why an oil-based balm cleanser is effective for make-up, SPF (especially water-resistant stuff) and sebum, the skin’s natural oil (which you don’t want to strip, but removing excess can be good). If your skin is normal/dry, you don’t use make-up and you’ve not applied SPF, you won’t need an oil-based balm cleanser. (Though by the way, if you’ve not applied SPF, that’s a bigger problem).
Meanwhile a cream, gel or foaming cleanser will get off all the everyday grime, sweat and pollution – bits that those oil cleansers are not as effective at. That is why you might find the cream or gel cleansers aren’t the best for removing layers and layers of waterproof mascara – it’s not designed to.
Though it’s probably your first step in a routine, this is the latest cleanser Caroline has released – and it’ll come as no surprise to learn that it’s truly one of the best I’ve ever tried. It melts into the skin, breaks down make-up and SPF easily, and emulsifies away quickly with water and a flannel, leaving skin feeling conditioned but absolutely no oily residue left behind.
Skin Rocks’ first cleanser, and it’s a real goodie. As I’ve already covered, it’s not completely effective on layered up waterproof mascara, but for everyday make-up and daily grime, especially if your skin is on the drier side, it’s perfect. If I was only going to use one cleanser from Caroline’s range it would be the next one, but my colleague Octavia, with her dryer skin, would pick this one.
Due to popular demand, this and The Gel Cleanser (below) are now available in supersize 250ml tubes.
Exfoliating acid toners can brighten, renew and refine skin – though they are easy to overdo if you pick the wrong one for your skin type, age or routine – something I’m definitely guilty of. Caroline’s collection of three, covers all skin types and she’s really clear that the Strong is what is says in the bottle – so it’s not for everyone.
The Control Acid, £45 hereIdeal for oily, congested and spot-prone skin, this salicylic acid (BHA) helps to control breakouts and minimise pores.
The Gentle Acid, £53 hereThe brand’s original all-skin-types formula, contains AHA and PHA, is for tackling signs of ageing. It’s not actually that gentle compare to a lot that is on the market, but it’s a great balance of suitable for everyone to use but with effective results. I think you’ll notice a difference within a week if this is the first time you’re adding an acid toner to your regime.
The Strong Acid, £75 here NEWThis is about as strong as an acid can get and stay on the right side of legal in this country. It’s a combination of AHAs, BHAs and PHAs in a secret formula (to prevent copycats) and even Caroline herself advises you don’t add it to your regime unless your skin is used to acid exfoliators already. You’ll feel it tingling on your skin when you apply (use cotton pads – not hands – for this one, and don’t be afraid to scrub a bit with them as you go to aid exfoliation). Two to three times a week is enough to see impressive results.
Retinoid 1 and 2 were Skin Rocks’ first products, and are a brilliantly formulated – and foolproof – way to introduce skin-renewing and anti-ageing ingredient vitamin A into your skincare routine: start with Retinoid 1, then move on to Retinoid 2. I find that I can use Retinoid 1 every night without any irritation, peeling or flaking; a rarity for me when using this potent ingredient.
Designed for more experienced users, Skin Rocks has launched its most advanced retinoid formula to date, created to deliver powerful results when targeting visible signs of skin ageing. The formula combines the brand’s highest concentration of vitamin A with 0.21% retinal and 0.5% Adapinoid — a third-generation retinoid known for helping to reduce breakouts while also addressing fine lines, texture, and overall skin ageing concerns.
According to Skin Rocks’ clinical studies, Retinoid 3 helped reduce the depth of deep wrinkles, minimise the appearance of UV pigmentation, and improve overall skin texture after four weeks of use. The studies also reported improvements in skin firmness, elasticity, and brightness. In consumer trials, 81% of users said their skin felt firmer after two weeks, while 91% felt their skin looked more youthful after eight weeks. The accompanying before-and-after images and customer feedback are equally impressive.
I’m fussy about eye creams – lots either irritate my skin, aren’t moisturising enough, or are too rich – but this one is absolutely perfect – immediately silky, smoothing and plumping. I’d happily use this one forever if I could.
Skin Rocks Moisturisers:
Keeping things as simple as possible, there are only three moisturises in the range – light, normal and rich, with each available fragranced or unfragranced. As someone with combination and occasionally blemish-prone skin, I go for the lighter Moisturiser, and it’s as close to a perfect face cream as you can get. It’s hard to pinpoint exactly why it’s so good, but it layers well with other products, leaves my skin looking and feeling much healthier and, crucially, doesn’t cause breakouts.
My colleague Octavia on the other hand, can’t get enough of the the rich version: ‘My skin is normal-to-dry, but generally dehydrated (probably because I’m better at drinking coffee than water) so I love, love, love The Rich Moisturiser, which I’ll happily use all year round. I love the instant drink feeling it has and how well it dried down to a make-up base with no pilling. It’s just silky. It’s not my only moisturiser, I change things up, but it’s a core part of my repertoire.’
I don’t mess about when it comes to eye cream – I’m very particular! Many either irritate my skin, aren’t hydrating enough, or are too heavy – but this is instantly silky, smoothing and plumping. I’d happily use this one forever if I could afford to.
Admittedly the one Skin Rocks product I haven’t thoroughly tested, mainly because of the aforementioned stripping of my skincare routine down to basics in a bid to repair its barrier, but I has tried it a few times, and it feels so nice on the skin and gives an instant subtle glow, and I love how it contains more antioxidants than just vitamin C.
Another I can’t give a full review to as hyperpigmentation or melasma isn’t a big skin concern of mine, but as I’m naturally freckly I used this regularly in summer to try and reduce some of the unwanted post-summer pigmentation. If the clinical studies and incredible before-and-after photos of this new serum are anything to go by, this is the product I’d trust to help to tackle serious hyperpigmentation. I’ve also recommended it to others on numerous occasions and the feedback I’ve had was excellent.
Like all of Caroline’s products, it’s foolproof to use – it doesn’t pill, irritate or need introducing slowly into your routine, and feels wonderfully hydrating on the skin – and the results speak for themselves.
Another newbie on the Skin Rocks roster: a supercharged essence that does more than just hydrate skin – it’s clinically proven to make your other skincare products work more effectively, too, plus it increases moisture and skin firmness, and minimising the look of pores.
I’ve been using this liquid after cleansing and before serums for a couple of weeks now, and it’s an excellent way to add another light layer of hydration to my skin, especially at this time of year when the weather’s getting colder. I haven’t noticed a dramatic difference, but skin does feel smoother, softer and more hydrated afterwards.
I find this one quite difficult, because it’s a literal extra step in your skincare regime that I’d hope was already covered in other areas. But at the same time, it takes every one of your skincare products and makes it work harder, which in turn makes them better value for money. So overall, I wouldn’t say it’s the most essential product to have in your routine (I’d always prioritise a good cleanser, SPF and targeted serum), but if you can afford this additional step, it’s definitely a nice-to-have – a luxurious extra boost.
Conclusions – which Skin Rocks products I’d buy again tomorrow
Overall, it’s difficult to find fault with any of the Skin Rocks products. They’re a brand I completely trust, and I genuinely feel my skin would thrive using nothing but their range. That said, if I had to narrow it down to a few standout favourites, I’d choose the Retinoids, The Moisturiser, and whichever cleanser best matches your skin type and cleansing preferences.
If you’re beginning to notice new signs of ageing and want to introduce something effective into your skincare routine with visible results, I’d especially recommend The Acids. There are three options to choose from, so you can pick the one that best suits your skin’s needs and where you are in your skincare journey.
For more of Caroline’s practical, no-nonsense skincare advice, you can also pick up her books, Skincare: The New Edit, £17, and her latest one, Teen Skincare, £16.99.
Brent crude edged 2.5% higher on Tuesday and seems to have steadied around $100 per barrel at the time of writing, as US-Iran negotiations stall.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
On the other hand, WTI dropped over 4% and is trading around $92.6 per barrel.
Overall, oil prices were declining since last Wednesday as the framework for a peace deal, or at least a longer and more encompassing ceasefire, between the US and Iran was seemingly on the verge of being agreed.
However, Iran accused the US of breaching the current ceasefire after Washington carried out what it described as defensive strikes in the southern part of the country.
Iran’s foreign ministry stated that the US attacks in the Hormozgan province, where Iranian media reported hearing explosions early Tuesday, amounted to a “serious violation” of the fragile ceasefire that has been in effect for almost seven weeks.
Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said negotiations aimed at ending the conflict could require “a few days” to reach an agreement.
On Monday, US President Donald Trump also reiterated nuclear demands in a social media post, as tensions continue to surround the fundamental aspects of a possible agreement.
Investors appear to have mixed reactions to the developments with some markets seeming to price in a decrease in the probability that a deal is imminent.
In Europe, the Euro Stoxx 50 has fallen more than 0.7% while the broader pan-European Stoxx 600 is trading around 1% lower as we approach the close of Tuesday’s session.
The UK’s FTSE 100, Germany’s DAX 30, France’s CAC 40, Italy’s FTSE MIB, the Netherlands’ AEX and Switzerland’s CH20 have all dropped between 0.1% and 0.7%.
Over in Asia, Japan’s Nikkei 225 and Taiwan’s TAIEX closed flat, but South Korea’s KOSPI jumped 2.5% primarily driven by a continuous demand for AI-related equities.
However, US markets appear completely decoupled from other indices and the broader situation. Not only have WTI prices continued to fall on Tuesday but the S&P 500 also opened 0.6% higher.
Latest on the Strait of Hormuz
Both the US and Iran had signalled headway toward a memorandum of understanding that could end the conflict and resume maritime traffic through the blocked Strait of Hormuz, while allowing negotiators a 60-day window to tackle more complicated matters such as Iran’s nuclear activities and supplies.
In his latest remarks, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the Strait of Hormuz must remain accessible “one way or the other” as traffic through the chokepoint has dropped sharply, with only a few dozen ships currently using the route each day, compared with the usual 125 to 140 vessels.
Iran has continued to permit limited shipping, prioritising vessels connected to allied or friendly nations and arranging passage through state-to-state agreements.
Continuous reports of attacks in the Strait of Hormuz underscore how far from the normalisation of energy flows and other supplies the global economy still is.
On Tuesday, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) reported that a tanker experienced an external blast near the waterline on its port side.
According to the agency, the vessel was located about 60 nautical miles from Muscat, the capital of Oman.
UKMTO said the tanker and all crew members were unharmed, although a quantity of bunker fuel spilled into the sea.
This is the most recent reported incident near the Strait of Hormuz at the time of writing.
