Indian banks may be closer to a re-rating than their recent performance suggests. Bank of India Mutual Fund CIO Alok Singh says lenders have the fundamentals investors typically look for—low non-performing assets, healthy return on assets and equity, and loan growth—but lingering concerns over net interest margins and FCNR-related liquidity flows have kept the trade from taking off.

That overhang could ease as policy announcements emerge and banks disclose stronger business numbers, Singh said in an interview.

Public- and private-sector banks are fairly valued and have become cheaper since last quarter, even as their underlying businesses continue to perform well. “The consensus trade just hasn’t come through yet,” he said, adding that this disconnect cannot persist indefinitely if the operating trend holds.

Edited excerpts from a chat:

Congratulations on the wonderful performance of your smallcap fund. Everybody these days is talking about small and mid caps, but the smallcap benchmark itself hasn’t moved much in the last one year — just 4-5%. So there must be a lot of stock-picking opportunities in the fund?

Small-cap is a large space with a large number of stocks. Even the Small Cap 250 index is only 250 stocks. If you look at stocks above ₹1,000 crore market cap, there are roughly 1,450-1,500 of them. Remove the top 250 (or even top 500), and there are still 900+ stocks left — so it’s a much bigger universe.

As the market and economy normalise, not everything does well — some things do well, some don’t — so bottoms-up stock selection becomes more important. Post-COVID, the entire small-cap space benefited from re-rating, so stock picking mattered, but simple allocation to the space also worked as long as you were exposed. I think this is the first time we’re looking at a truly normalised economy — even the government has chosen 2024 as its base year, implying normalisation happened after that. This is getting reflected in portfolios: if you’re not in the right stocks, you won’t participate as much.

How much of your portfolio goes beyond the Small Cap 250 index?

We have always run a bottoms-up portfolio and use the benchmark more for risk management than for portfolio construction. That said, while we look at all stocks above ₹1,000 crore market cap, it’s not that we only look beyond the top 250. My portfolio’s average market cap is around ₹24,000 crore, and the weighted average is around ₹25,000 crore. There is hardly any large-cap exposure — maybe 2-3%. So it’s predominantly a small-cap portfolio with some mid-cap. It’s not about concentrating in one place — it’s about finding where newer pools of profit are being generated and building the portfolio around that.

Purely from a market-cap perspective, is there a “sweet spot” you hunt in — say, ₹10,000-20,000 crore?

No, we don’t look at it from a market-cap point of view — we look at it from a business point of view. We’re not “growth hungry” either; across our portfolio we buy anything that makes sense on a relative basis, whether that’s value or growth. If you’re buying value, there has to be some change or inflection point happening, otherwise the value doesn’t get unlocked — growth similarly doesn’t sustain without an inflection point.

In one line: we look at things on a relative basis. If something makes sense relatively, we’re okay looking at it — whether it’s a ₹5,000 crore, ₹10,000 crore, ₹20,000 crore, or even ₹50,000 crore market cap company. That’s not how we approach it.

So once an idea makes sense, allocation becomes key?

Yes — and that’s where we believe the real differentiation lies. Everyone stresses finding new ideas, but what you do with an idea is equally important. No idea stays exclusive to you for long, because in the mutual fund world, once you buy something and your monthly portfolio is published, the whole market knows what you’ve bought — even without doing the fundamental work themselves, others can reverse-engineer why. So finding a good, scalable business or one going through a transformation is only one part. How you size it and scale it up in the portfolio is most important — especially for us, since we don’t run either very concentrated or very spread-out portfolios.

You currently have around 90 stocks in the portfolio. Tell us about your position sizing and churn.

Yes, right now it’s around that, but we like to run 70-80 stocks and may moderate it — it’s a bit of a transition period currently. Since the fund launched in 2018, we’ve generally run a 70-80 stock portfolio, and that’s where we wish to stay on a long-term basis. Sometimes the number ticks up a bit due to a few transitional additions. In terms of position sizing, 3-4% is the highest we buy.

Because we run about 90 stocks, there is naturally some churn happening — something is going in or out, which is why the stock count and turnover sometimes rise. But we don’t do a clean, sharp exit from any stock unless there’s a specific reason for concern. On a long-term, steady-state basis, turnover would be more like 0.65-0.7x.

Within small and mid-cap, where do you currently see both growth and valuations that aren’t excessive — i.e., no euphoria?

Frankly, after the last 3-4 months’ up-move in mid and small caps, I don’t see any pockets that are screamingly undervalued. The market looks fairly valued to me right now — wherever you see slightly above-mean multiples, those are being driven by the earnings those stocks are delivering. So across small, mid, or even large cap, the market seems fairly priced in terms of multiples. That means any further movement has to be driven more by earnings, which is why there’s some nervousness — earnings depend on visualisation and assumptions around execution, which people may or may not agree on.

On a steady-state basis, though, the market appears fairly priced. That’s why markets have largely gone sideways over the last month or so. Going forward, I believe earnings will play a bigger role in shaping the market than further multiple re-rating.

Q1 earnings were very good, Q2 is also expected to be good, but the concern is Q3 onward — especially in pockets affected by GST and income tax rate cuts. Is that a worry?

The base effect will play a role, but if you look at GST collections, we’ve actually surpassed prior levels — so collecting more GST at a lower rate, with goods and services volumes unchanged, means volumes have actually picked up. So I don’t think the base effect will be a major issue.

One thing to appreciate: markets were surprised by Q1 earnings because, when the Middle East crisis happened, the consensus was that Q1 would take most of the hit and Q2 onward would see recovery, normalizing in the second half. As we analyzed results, we realised the impact wasn’t concentrated in April but more in the May-July window, due to low-cost inventories and similar factors — so there will be some spillover into Q2 as well, which wasn’t the earlier consensus. That’s adding to market nervousness, since there’s now uncertainty about whether the impact ran through June, July, or even August.

That said, I don’t believe the impact goes beyond Q2 — which also has its own seasonality with Diwali falling a month later this year. Adjusting for these factors, I think earnings should actually be better, because high-frequency demand indicators — vehicular traffic, power demand, GST collections, toll collections, passenger traffic — are all suggesting decent buoyancy in the economy. If that continues into the festive season, the season should be good, since festive spending typically follows a build-up rather than appearing suddenly. Overall, I think external disruptions (freight movement, transit times, buyer-seller reconciliation) have now normalised and shouldn’t be a surprise element unless something changes from here.

Can you get more sector-specific on where you expect strong earnings momentum over the next couple of quarters?

The capital goods space — specifically industrial automation, industrial products, power equipment — is seeing a good tailwind from both domestic and global demand, and I expect that to continue. Precision engineering, part of capital goods, is also seeing decent order flows.

On BFSI, I think banks at large should do well. Earlier there were concerns about NIMs (going back to Q4 of last year), and now there’s some worry about FCNR-related spillover effects. But I don’t think liquidity pressure is as large as the market anticipates — RBI has repeatedly tried to suck out excess liquidity, and even a recent ₹7 lakh crore reverse repo saw limited takers. If liquidity were truly excessive and suppressing NIMs long-term, banks wouldn’t be holding it back from RBI — any reasonable treasury head would rather place it with the RBI than sit on it. That tells me it’s transitory — CBLO might dip to 2-3% for a few weeks, but that’s not permanent. So banking should be another sector that does well.

In the broader segment, capital goods and banking look okay to me. In a smaller segment, metals look good given demand and government policy, with decent capacity utilisation — not a large weight in the index, but earnings growth there looks decent. Elsewhere: pharma is mixed — some doing okay, some facing issues; FMCG faces margin and inflation pressure; consumer durables — some are doing fine; auto is doing okay but fairly priced, so while we stay positive, I don’t see a major surprise element there since the earnings are largely already discounted.

Among these sectors, do banks have the higher chance of re-rating if earnings pick up?

Yes. A large part of large-cap underperformance has come from IT, but banks also haven’t done the “heavy lifting” they should have, given their index weight and valuations. Whichever way you look at it — public or private — banks are fairly priced, and all the boxes that should tick for a bank are ticking: low NPAs, decent ROAs leading to decent ROEs, and loan growth. The consensus trade just hasn’t come through yet because of lingering worries about NIM pressure and possible rate moves. As policy announcements come through over the next few weeks, I think this will reconcile. Business-wise, most banks are doing well and have gotten cheaper since last quarter without the market reacting — but that can’t continue indefinitely if the trend persists.

Credit growth wasn’t a problem for banks anyways, and now deposits are also coming back via FCNR. So both sides of the balance sheet are sorted?

Correct. Banks running high CD ratios will be able to access liquidity now. Also, some NBFCs benefit indirectly — as pressure on larger banks to raise deposits eases, and money needs to be deployed, one avenue is lending to NBFCs. It may not offer the best spread, but it avoids negative carry. So NBFCs become an indirect beneficiary of FCNR flows too. I think the FCNR-related NIM-pressure overhang that the market is pricing in won’t be as large as feared, and as banks disclose business numbers, there should be a positive surprise.

Crude has again crossed $100, and there have already been about $1.5 billion of outflows this month, with the rupee under pressure — the macro setup is weakening this month. How much of a worry is the Middle East tension?

Obviously oil has an overhang on us — there are two sides: the inflation side and the availability side. Availability is the bigger question; every time there’s escalation, the possibility of supply being cut increases. The market is more worried about a potential availability cut than about the price level of $100 or $110 per se, because a higher price only impacts margins, whereas zero oil availability means no margin at all.

That said, yes, $100 or thereabouts does affect inflation and could have a broader margin impact via the Reserve Bank’s response. It’s a very hot-and-cold situation, so it’s difficult to take a decisive view. If it sustains at these levels for a longer period, we’d need to be more worried — but I’m not worried about it today. If there is an actual sustained supply-side issue, that concerns me more than the price being $100 or $110, because economies will adjust to price; there could be some disruption here and there, but on the whole we’d be okay. Non-availability is a bigger issue to me than $100 oil.

Bitcoin traded above the $80,000 mark and Ethereum near $2,620 despite a hawkish Federal Reserve decision and a setback for the CLARITY Act. Bitcoin was trading at $81,012, while Ethereum stood at $2,622 on Saturday.

Over the past 24 hours, Bitcoin gained 4.6%, and Ethereum rose 6%. Among major altcoins, BNB, XRP, Solana, Tron, Hyperliquid, Dogecoin and Cardano gained up to 6.2%.

Riya Sehgal Research Analyst Delta Exchange said the rebound reflects improving risk sentiment and positioning. Cooling oil prices have eased inflation concerns. The rally also forced bearish leverage out of the market, accelerating the move through short liquidations.Also Read |Explained: When should mutual fund investors use CAGR, XIRR or IRR to calculate returns?

Sehgal further said the focus now shifts to whether the breakout can hold. Bitcoin remaining above $80,000 and Ether holding 2,580–2,600 would preserve the near-term structure.

The global crypto market capitalisation was up 4.1% to $2.86 trillion on Saturday, according to the data on Coingecko.
Over the last week, Bitcoin and Ethereum gained 4.9% and 4.6%, respectively. Among major altcoins, BNB, XRP, Solana, Hyperliquid, Dogecoin and Cardano gained up to 18.4%, while Tron declined 1.18%.Nischal Shetty, founder of WazirX, said ETF activity reversed during the week. Bitcoin ETFs moved from daily inflows of $159.9 million to outflows of $450.33 million and $295.98 million. Ethereum ETFs shifted from a $121 million inflow to outflows of $141 million and $224.11 million.

Also Read |Only 2 of 23 mutual fund themes gained in August; IPO, defence stay green as auto, railways and tech slide : Report

Shetty further said BTC and ETH remained relatively stable as spot demand and derivatives positioning absorbed part of the selling. Overall, recovering US and Asian equities, falling volatility and softer commodities supported crypto sentiment, although elevated rates, regulatory uncertainty and expensive oil kept the weekly outlook balanced.

(Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of The Economic Times)

NEW YORK — Apple’s newest iPhone lineup officially went on sale Friday, drawing crowds of customers at stores around the world for the first major product launch under new Chief Executive Officer John Ternus.

The iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max, unveiled the previous week at Apple’s annual product event alongside the company’s first foldable device, the iPhone Duo, feature a redesigned camera system built around a DSLR-like variable aperture, a change Apple says improves performance in low-light environments and allows for enhanced depth-of-field control in photos. The iPhone 18 Pro starts at $1,199, while the larger iPhone 18 Pro Max starts at $1,299, with both models also available through Apple’s lease-based Upgrade program for customers who prefer to spread the cost over monthly payments.

Beyond the camera upgrades, Apple introduced a new authentication feature aimed at addressing growing concerns about AI-manipulated images. The company said the new iPhone 18 lineup can detect AI-generated photos by automatically creating an unalterable Reference Image that remains attached to any edited version of a photo, giving users and viewers a way to verify whether an image has been artificially altered from its original form.

Ternus, who succeeded Tim Cook as Apple’s chief executive officer earlier this month, marked the launch by visiting the company’s flagship retail store on Fifth Avenue in New York City on Friday. He spent time posing for photos and signing autographs for customers both inside and outside the Midtown Manhattan location, a visit that came just over a week after Ternus presided over his first product launch event as CEO.

The iPhone 18 lineup also marks the public debut of Apple’s long-awaited overhaul of Siri, the company’s voice assistant, now branded Siri AI and powered by Apple Intelligence. Apple first announced the redesigned assistant in June but delayed its release until this launch to ensure the technology met the company’s standards before shipping to customers, according to Apple. Notably, Siri AI runs on underlying artificial intelligence models developed by Google, specifically Google’s Gemini model family, reflecting a partnership between the two companies to power the new assistant’s more advanced conversational capabilities.

With Siri AI now live on the new devices, users gain the ability to pull relevant information directly from their messages, photos, emails and other apps in response to natural-language requests. The updated assistant also allows users to draft messages and emails, edit photos through conversational commands, and revisit past conversations they’ve had with Siri, functionality aimed at making the assistant feel more like a persistent, context-aware helper rather than a tool limited to simple, isolated commands.

Crowds gathered at Apple retail locations around the world as the new devices went on sale Friday, with lines forming outside stores in markets including London, where customers queued outside the Apple store on Regent Street, and in New Jersey, where shoppers lined up outside the Apple Store at the Menlo Park Mall in Edison. Apple has typically treated iPhone launch day as a significant marketing moment, with in-store crowds and long lines serving as a visible signal of sustained consumer demand for the company’s flagship product line, even as the broader smartphone market has matured considerably since the iPhone’s original 2007 debut.

This year’s launch carries added significance given the leadership transition at Apple’s top ranks. Ternus, who previously led Apple’s hardware engineering organization for years before being named CEO, used both the initial product unveiling event and Friday’s launch day store visit to establish his own public presence at the helm of the company, following Cook’s move into the role of executive chairman. The successful rollout of a major iPhone generation, alongside the debut of Apple’s first foldable device, represents an early and closely watched test of how Apple’s product strategy and execution will be shaped under its new chief executive.

The iPhone 18 Pro lineup’s redesigned camera system and expanded AI capabilities arrive as Apple continues working to keep pace with rivals in the broader smartphone market, many of which have moved aggressively to integrate generative AI features into their own flagship devices over the past two years. Apple’s decision to power Siri AI using Google’s Gemini models, rather than relying exclusively on its own in-house AI development, reflects the company’s broader strategy of pairing its hardware design strengths with external AI partnerships where doing so allows it to deliver more capable features to consumers more quickly.

With the iPhone 18 Pro and Pro Max now available for purchase globally, alongside the company’s new foldable iPhone Duo, attention is likely to turn toward how strongly the new lineup performs commercially over its opening weekend and into the crucial holiday shopping season, a period that has traditionally represented one of Apple’s most significant windows for iPhone sales each year. Early crowds at flagship stores in New York, London and elsewhere on Friday offered at least an initial visual signal of consumer enthusiasm heading into that broader sales period, even as the company’s full commercial results for the new devices are not expected to be reported until Apple’s next quarterly earnings disclosure.

Google’s Gemini artificial intelligence accessed the protected systems of three real companies while undergoing a cybersecurity test, including one instance in which the model repeatedly guessed passwords until it gained access.

According to The Wall Street Journal, the incidents took place in May and mark the first known examples of Google’s AI autonomously accessing real companies’ systems during this type of evaluation. Google confirmed the incidents to the outlet.

The disclosure comes amid heightened scrutiny surrounding AI as some industry leaders continue to raise concerns about the potential risks posed by increasingly advanced models.

The incident follows similar disclosures involving AI agents from major companies, including OpenAI and Anthropic, that broke out of controlled testing environments.

NEWSOM ADVANCES AI ‘KILL SWITCH’ MANDATE UNDER NEW CALIFORNIA EXECUTIVE ORDER

The newly identified Gemini incidents took place during a test run by Irregular, a company that was also involved in evaluating AI models connected to similar incidents, the WSJ reported.

The AI had been instructed to attack a fictional company inside a controlled testing environment, but internet access was unintentionally available and the fictional company happened to share its name with a real business, according to Google and Irregular.

In a statement to FOX Business, Google emphasized that the model stopped in all three instances and said changes have since been made to the testing process.

“Safe development of powerful AI models is critical and we invest deeply in this area,” Heather Adkins, Google’s vice president of security engineering, told FOX Business.

TECH POWER PLAYERS LAND SEAT AT TABLE FOR HIGH-STAKES DINNER WITH TRUMP, XI

“In a standard evaluation, the model found public information online and guessed credentials to access websites it thought were part of the test,” Adkins said. “In all three of these instances, the model stopped.”

In one case, the model “guessed passwords until it gained access to a protected system,” according to the report.

In the other two cases, the model found credentials in public online repositories that allowed it to access protected systems. In each case, Gemini ended the intrusion after determining that it had accessed a real company’s systems, Google said.

Irregular notified Google about the incidents at the end of July, according to both companies, after the discovery that OpenAI agents had accessed systems belonging to AI software company Hugging Face.

NVIDIA CEO DRAWS LINE ON AI SAFETY AFTER ALARMING INCIDENTS: ‘IF IT’S NOT READY, JUST HOLD IT BACK’

Google said that in all three cases, Gemini stopped after realizing it had reached an actual company rather than the fictional target.

No harm was caused to the companies, according to Google, which said all three were notified. The company did not identify the businesses involved.

Irregular said the model was not meant to have internet access, but access was unintentionally made available, according to the WSJ.

Google did not disclose which Gemini model was involved.

The report comes after OpenAI released information this week about six instances in which it said its models engaged in misaligned behavior.

OpenAI said it found examples of its AI models creating self-generated instructions, concealing mistakes in task summaries, fabricating information using exposed API keys, uploading files to the internet in order to cite them and engaging in unsanctioned communication and collaboration between agents.

CLICK HERE TO GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO

FOX Business has reached out to Irregular for comment.

FOX Business’ Anders Hagstrom contributed to this report.