Author

admin

Browsing

If you go to Japan, there’s a chance you might meet someone with an unusual name – such as “Nike,” “Pikachu” or “Pudding.”

While still a minority, these names have grown in popularity over recent decades as parents reject traditional Japanese names for something more unique.

But the practice has also drawn criticism – mainly that it’s confusing for hospitals, schools and authorities who don’t know how to pronounce them.

Now the government is cracking down on these so-called “kirakira” names, which means sparkly or shiny. New rules came into effect on Monday that will limit parents from giving their babies names pronounced in unconventional ways.

The news was met with mixed reactions; some social media users argued that kirakira names are an expression of individualism, that they’re fairly harmless and don’t warrant government regulation.

“They’re not children of the nation, right? They’re children of their parents,” one person wrote on X after the announcement.

Many more, however, welcomed the change – lamenting that children with unusual names might face harassment, or at the very least complications in administrative tasks like registrations or banking.

“Why do certain people put kirakira names on their kids? It just causes those kids to be bullied,” one X user wrote. Another joked sarcastically: “Please stop restricting kirakira names. Seeing a child’s name reveals the intelligence of their parents, which is helpful.”

How ‘kirakira’ names work

Japan uses three writing systems – Kanji, which is based on Chinese characters, and two other phonetic systems. Names are typically written in Kanji, and this is where the trouble comes in.

Because these Chinese characters were mixed with the existing Japanese language, each Kanji character can be pronounced multiple ways – some with ten or more ways. You decipher the “right” pronunciation based on context clues and the other characters in a sentence or phrase.

In kirakira names, which became more popular from the 1980s onward, parents often choose a name based on the phonetic sound – wanting their child’s name to sound like “Pikachu,” for instance – and pick similar-sounding Kanji characters.

The problem is that those characters might not usually be pronounced that way – making it hard, or impossible, for a teacher or nurse to decipher how to properly say a child’s name just by looking at its written Kanji form.

Some have drawn parallels to how American parents have, increasingly in the past decade, chosen unusual spellings for common names – such as Ashleigh instead of Ashley, or Catelynn instead of Caitlin.

The Japanese government’s new rules aim to limit this by mandating that only widely accepted pronunciations of kanji characters will be allowed.

Parents will need to include the phonetic readings of their baby names in the registry – and if local officials see that the phonetic sound of a name doesn’t match how its characters are typically pronounced, they may reject the name or request additional paperwork.

The rise of unusual names

This is not the first time strict naming rules have sparked debate in Japan.

Japan still legally requires married couples to share the same surname, unlike most other major economies that have done away with the tradition. Normally, wives take their husband’s name, since same-sex marriages aren’t legal in Japan.

A movement to change the rules around surnames has been brewing, led by women’s rights advocates and those trying to preserve the diversity of Japanese surnames in a nation where a handful of names are becoming increasingly common.

First names have afforded more room for experimentation – at least, until the latest rules came in.

More and more people have been given unusual names in the last 40 years, according to a 2022 study that analyzed baby names published in local newsletters over the last few decades.

The trend suggests a shift toward seeking “uniqueness and independence” in Japan, the study said – also seen in changes to other parts of Japanese life during that time like family structures and societal values.

Girls in particular saw an increase in kirakira names, it added – perhaps suggesting that parents had a stronger “hope for their daughters to become unique and independent than for their sons.”

Japan isn’t the only country that has seen an upward trend in unusual baby names. A 2016 study found that American parents picked more unusual names between 2004 and 2015, pointing to the culture’s “increasing individualism.”

In China, too, rapid economic growth and upward mobility have meant people today value individualism and autonomy more than previous generations, according to a 2018 study – reflected in the steady rise of parents choosing unique characters in their babies’ names.

Like in Japan, the study found that Chinese girls were more likely to have unusual names than boys – perhaps reflecting different “parental expectations.”

But it’s also common for countries to have rules in place for what names are acceptable. In the US, this is often state-by-state; names in California can only use the 26 alphabetical characters of the English language, which briefly posed a problem when Elon Musk and Grimes named their baby “X Æ A-12.” They eventually changed the name – very slightly – to “X Æ A-Xii.”

In Germany, authorities may strike down a baby name if they find it offensive or potentially harmful to the child’s best interests. For example, they’ve previously barred parents from using “Borussia,” a reference to a soccer team, or “Gastritis,” arguing that the names would “jeopardize the welfare of the child,” according to the official Frankfurt city administration.

Meanwhile New Zealand also maintains strict rules that include bans on references to titles, meaning names like “King” and “Prince” are routinely rejected.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Russia dramatically intensified missile and drone attacks across Ukraine this month in an effort to sap Ukrainians’ morale – but it is also stepping up ground attacks in many areas along the long frontline, according to Ukrainian officials and analysts.

Some of those attacks have succeeded, with Ukrainian units in Donetsk and the north falling back from some positions, while some rural areas in the south have also been lost.

But Ukraine’s own enhanced use of drones, deployed in several layers on the battlefield, has helped Kyiv inflict heavy losses on the opposing forces with minimal casualties among its own troops. They may become even more critical in the months to come.

The Ukrainians are trying to expand their own drone industry to create defensive corridors along key sections of the front line, often dubbed the “drone wall.”

Meanwhile, ignoring US President Donald Trump’s efforts to secure a ceasefire, the Kremlin is pursuing a two-pronged strategy aimed at forcing Ukraine to admit defeat – destroying its cities from the sky and whittling away its defensive lines on the ground.

Russia has sharply expanded its own drone and missile production in the past year, allowing for mass attacks using several hundred projectiles at once. The Russian strategy seeks to overwhelm Ukraine’s air defenses with scores of low-cost drones so that simultaneous missile strikes can succeed.

On the ground, Russian forces are probing Ukrainian defenses along many parts of the frontline simultaneously, from Zaporizhzhia in the south to Sumy in the north, advancing into abandoned villages and across open countryside in small numbers.

The Russians are not rolling through Ukrainian defenses but gnawing away at them, using cars and motorbikes and scattered infantry platoons.

Russian forces have advanced an average of roughly 14 square kilometers (5.4 square miles) per day so far this year, according to the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) in Washington. This rate implies they’d need nearly four more years to complete the occupation of the four regions illegally annexed by Moscow: Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson.

Those are the Kremlin’s oft-stated goals, but it is also trying to instil a sense among Kyiv’s allies of Russian superiority over Ukrainian forces.

Much of the fighting is in Donetsk, with the Russians still determined to seize the entire region – unless it is handed over in peace negotiations, which is a non-starter for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The Russian Defense Ministry claimed Tuesday that a village south of the key town of Kostiantynivka had been taken. ISW assesses that Russian forces seized roughly 65 square kms of territory – but remain incapable of intensifying offensive operations in several different directions simultaneously.

“The main Russian effort into the summer will once again be against the key towns of Kostyantynivka and Pokrovsk” in Donetsk, according to Jack Watling, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) in London.

Hundreds of miles to the north, Russian units have edged a few kilometers into the Sumy region.

Zelensky told journalists Tuesday that the Russians are “now amassing troops in the Sumy direction. More than 50,000. We understand that. But we are making progress there.”

Zelensky said the Russians wanted “to build this buffer zone, as they call it, 10 kilometers (6.2 miles) deep into Ukraine,” but lacked the capability.

The Russians are supporting these operations with missile and air-launched guided-bomb attacks.

The attacks into Sumy follow a Kremlin directive on May 21 that the military create buffer zones inside northern Ukraine – in Sumy and Kharkiv regions. That came when President Vladimir Putin visited Russia’s Kursk region across the border, part of which had been seized by a Ukrainian incursion launched from Sumy last summer.

Capturing Sumy’s regional capital is probably beyond the Russians – the terrain is thickly forested. But through their attacks, the Russian military can prevent the Ukrainians from redeploying units to Donetsk.

Further east there’s also been an uptick in fighting around Vovchansk in Kharkiv region in recent days.

Across the 1,000-kilometer (621-mile) frontline, according to analysts, the Ukrainian military has to decide which areas are under greatest threat, where to withdraw, how to redeploy – even as many brigades are seriously under-strength more than three years after the Russian invasion.

The manpower balance is still very much in Russia’s favor, despite its heavy losses. Putin recently claimed that 60,000 volunteers are being recruited every month. Observers believe this is likely exaggerated but signing-up bonuses that dwarf civilian wages in Russia make military service an attractive option.

Ukraine’s military chief, Oleksandr Syrskyi, said earlier this month that Kyiv faced “a combined enemy grouping of up to 640,000 personnel,” higher than at the outset of the invasion. Zelensky said in January that Ukraine had 880,000 soldiers, “but 880,000 are defending the entire territory. Russian forces are concentrated in certain directions.”

Russian recruitment “has exceeded Kremlin targets for every month of 2025,” according to the RUSI analyst Watling. “Having shuffled commanders and built-up reserves of equipment, Russia is now set to increase the tempo and scale of attacks.”

But for every square kilometer of Ukrainian land that Russia captures, Moscow is probably losing about 100 men, according to Western assessments.

Layers of drones

Above and behind the frontlines as well as in the air campaign being waged by Moscow, the development and deployment of drones will continue to be critical.

The recent Russian advances in Donetsk, while incremental, were enabled by the tactic of isolating the battlefield – cutting Ukrainian units from supplies through drone strikes on supply vehicles up to 30 kilometers (18.6 miles) from the front lines.

Ukrainian defenses are heavily reliant on layers of drones. The Ukrainians are developing a concept sometimes dubbed the “drone wall,” designed to “provide a continuous defensive corridor of drones along Ukraine’s most vulnerable frontiers to inflict significant casualties on Russian forces,” according to Mick Ryan, author of the blog Futura Doctrina.

Konrad Muzyka, a defense analyst at Rochan Consulting, says that “Ukrainian forces are increasingly lethal with drone-artillery coordination. Russian assaults — motorcycle-based and armored — were defeated across several fronts with minimal Ukrainian losses” in April.

But Ryan points out that an effective drone wall will require integration “and probably AI-assisted decision-making and analysis,” as well as integration with electronic warfare.

And it’s a two-way street. Ukrainian drones are “guided by small radar, and Russia is now systematically working to locate and target these radar stations,” Watling writes.

Zelensky said Tuesday that Russia plans to ramp up production of Shahed attack drones to between 300 and 350 per day. Asked whether there may come a time when Russia fires 1,000 drones in one day, he replied: “I cannot say that this will not happen.”

Sending drones in their hundreds saturates air defenses, as they accumulate over a target area. Russia has also developed drones that can evade Ukrainian jamming and can fly higher and faster than earlier models. Ukrainian analyst Oleksandr Kovalenko said last week that one Shahed had been observed at a record altitude of 4,900 meters.

According to Zelensky, Ukraine is now deploying F-16 and Mirage fighter jets to supplement air defenses. “We are also moving towards drone-to-drone interceptors,” he said Tuesday.

Ukraine’s former military chief, Valerii Zaluzhnyi, says Ukraine must wage a “high-tech war of survival” in which drones play a critical role, to “make the economic burden of the war unbearable for Russia.”

Speaking to a Kyiv forum last week, Zaluzhnyi – now Ukraine’s ambassador to London – said that his country had failed to exploit innovations “where yesterday we were ahead of the enemy. The enemy has already outpaced us.”

Analysts cite Russia’s growing use of short-range fiber-optic drones that can’t be jammed as one example of the technological race. Ukraine is yet to scale up the use of such drones, which rely on millimeters-thick, but miles-long, optical fibers.

Zelensky denied Ukraine was losing the drone war.

“We will have the same number of drones as the Russians, 300-500 per day – we are very close to it,” he said.

The issue was not production, Zelensky said – it was financial. As Ukraine seeks to produce more of its own weapons – often in association with Western manufacturers, Zelensky added: “I would like to see us receive $30 billion to launch Ukrainian production at full capacity.”

But that is a long-term goal.

Watling, from RUSI, envisages a tough few months for Ukraine that “will place a premium on the efficiency of Ukrainian drone and artillery operations, the ability of Ukrainian commanders to preserve their troops, and the continuity of supplies flowing from Ukraine’s international partners.”

The continuation of US supplies is unsure as Trump blows hot and cold about whether Washington should continue helping Ukraine defend itself.

Putin is “desperately seeking to prevent the future supply of Western military aid to Ukraine,” according to ISW, “as well-resourced Ukrainian forces have consistently demonstrated their ability to inflict unsustainable losses on Russian forces.”

Innovation and tactical agility will be as influential as brute force as the war enters its fourth summer.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

A one-two punch from the United States risks shattering the already fragile trade war truce between Washington and Beijing, with Chinese tech companies and students both dealt shock blows by the Trump administration Wednesday night.

Viewed from within China, things had been looking up after the world’s two largest economies agreed to dramatically roll back steep tariffs – a conciliatory step in a trade war that had threatened the entire global trading system.

Factories started whirring again. Long-delayed shipping containers began leaving Chinese ports, destined for the US. Chinese media celebrated the agreement as a national victory, while top officials adopted an upbeat tone in describing cooperation between the two superpower rivals.

But the two jabs from Washington on Wednesday will have far-reaching effects across China, angering families and authorities alike. They also throw into question the future of US-China trade talks; the temporary truce only lasts 90 days, and the clock is ticking to reach a longer-term agreement.

The first hit came in a Financial Times report on Wednesday that said moves by US President Donald Trump had effectively cut off some American companies from selling software used to design semiconductors to China.

These small chips – which power our smartphones, computers, automobiles and home appliances – have been at the fore of the US-China tech battle in recent years. The Biden administration had blocked China from accessing US-made semiconductors, and earlier this month, Washington warned companies against using AI chips made by Chinese tech giant Huawei.

The obstacles were infuriating for Beijing, especially since it has poured tens of billions of dollars into its semiconductor industry, aiming to boost production at home and become less reliant on the US and other countries.

But it was the second blow from the White House that landed right in the living rooms of Chinese families, with US State Secretary Marco Rubio saying the US will “aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students” – especially those in critical fields or with connections to the Chinese Communist Party.

It’s hard to overstate the impact. There were more than 270,000 Chinese students in the US in 2024, and even more before the pandemic. While some hail from China’s political and business elites, many also come from middle-class families.

The path to the US is attractive, but arduous. Chinese families save for years and spend exorbitant amounts of money to send their kids abroad, with students attending cram schools or hiring tutors to polish their applications. Rubio’s announcement jeopardizes all of that – with students now facing potential deportation in the middle of their hard-won education.

Given China is a one-party state that reaches deep into nearly every aspect of society, it can be difficult or impossible for many students to disprove any claims that they’re connected to the Communist Party – especially if the State Department defines that term loosely.

A spokesperson for China’s foreign ministry said on Thursday it “strongly opposes” the move, accusing the US of “unjustly” revoking visas “under the pretext of ideology and national security.”

Candy, a statistics student at the University of Michigan, who did not want to give her full name, said she feared her visa would be canceled before she graduates.

“Ending up with only a high school diploma is something I dread,” she said from China, where she’s visiting family. “I pray to make it through my undergraduate study safely and smoothly.”

“When I first heard the news, I wanted to curse Trump.”

While the visa threat comes as a shock, some argue the targeting of students may in fact be a boon to China in the end.

The number of Chinese students in the US had been declining in recent years, partly because of significant shifts in both policy and public perception. Experts say many Chinese students and families now worry about safety, racism and discrimination, and immigration difficulties in the US – especially as more competitive higher education options open in other countries, including in China itself.

Trump’s crackdown could see more Chinese scholars, including some of the brightest minds in their fields, return to their home country – or choose to stay in the first place, rejecting a US education for a Chinese degree instead.

And these researchers – including key leaders in technological fields – could be the key to China catching up with, or surpassing the US – the very thing many Trump officials are trying to prevent.

Wednesday did bring one bit of good news for China; a federal court blocked Trump from imposing most of his global tariffs, including the current 30% tariffs on China. But the administration immediately appealed the decision, leaving the status of those tariffs – and the trade war – up in the air.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Walmart agreed to pay a small fine and promised to ensure its third-party resellers are unable to sell realistic looking toy guns to buyers in New York, after state Attorney General Letitia James said Tuesday that the retail giant’s online store shipped them to the state.

The settlement comes nearly a decade after Walmart, Amazon, Sears and other retailers entered into a consent order and judgment with New York’s previous attorney general, in which they agreed to keep toy guns that resemble actual deadly weapons off their shelves statewide and they paid civil penalties that topped $300,000.

The 2015 order was part of a nationwide reckoning over realistic looking toy guns in the wake of the fatal shooting of Tamir Rice, a 12 year-old Cleveland boy who was killed by police in November 2014 while holding a pellet gun.

The New York law bans retailers from selling or shipping toy guns of certain colors — black, dark blue, silver, or aluminum — that look like real weapons.

A realistic-looking toy gun Walmart shipped to New York.New York Attorney General’s Office

Toy guns sold in the state must be “made in bright colors or made entirely of transparent or translucent materials,” with businesses subject to a fine of $1,000 per violation, according to James’ office.

James said on Tuesday that an investigation by her office found that Walmart’s online store had shipped at least nine realistic-looking toy guns sold by third-party sellers to New York City, Westchester County and Western New York.

But the investigation also found that between March 2020 and November 2023, at least 46 imitation weapons that violate New York state law were purchased by consumers in the state through the Walmart.com platform, the settlement revealed.

“Realistic-looking toy guns can put communities in serious danger and that is why they are banned in New York,” James said in a statement.

“Walmart failed to prevent its third-party sellers from selling realistic-looking toy guns to New York addresses, violating our laws and putting people at risk,” she said.

“The ban on realistic-looking toy guns is meant to keep New Yorkers safe and my office will not hesitate to hold any business that violates that law accountable.”

Walmart must pay $14,000 in penalties and $2,000 in fees under the settlement, the AG’s office said.

That total of $16,000 is a tiny fraction of the approximately $49 million in net income Walmart earned on an average day in the most recent financial quarter.

CNBC has requested comment from Walmart, which neither admitted nor denied the findings by James’ office in its investigation.

As part of the settlement, Walmart is required to prohibit third parties from offering for sale or selling any of the imitation guns covered by the state law to buyers in New York.

“Walmart shall terminate the ability of a third party from being able to list and sell toy guns and imitation weapons on Walmart.com when it has determined that a third party has engaged in conduct” that violates that restriction on three separate occasions, the settlement said.

And “Walmart shall implement and maintain policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent such third parties from offering for sale, exposing for sale, or selling Prohibited Items on Walmart.com for importation, holding for sale, or distribution to New York,” the settlement says.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

23andMe on Tuesday announced it will voluntarily delist from the Nasdaq and de-register with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, according to a release.

The move comes after Regeneron Pharmaceuticals said earlier this month that it will acquire “substantially all” of 23andMe’s assets for $256 million.

The drugmaker came out on top following a bankruptcy auction for 23andMe, a once high-flying genetic testing company that filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in March.

23andMe said it will file a Form 25 Notification of Delisting with the SEC on or around June 6, which would subsequently remove the stock from listing and registering with the Nasdaq.

The company said the Nasdaq had originally informed the company that a Form 25 would be filed in March, but since the exchange has not yet submitted the filing, 23andMe is doing so voluntarily.

23andMe exploded into the mainstream because of its at-home DNA testing kits that allowed customers to examine their genetic profiles. At its peak, the company was valued at around $6 billion.

But after going public via a merger with a special purpose acquisition company in 2021, the company struggled to generate recurring revenue and stand up viable research or therapeutics businesses.

Regeneron’s deal is still subject to approval by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. Pending approval, it’s expected to close in the third quarter of this year.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Macy’s cut its full-year profit guidance on Wednesday even as it beat Wall Street’s quarterly earnings expectations, as the retailer’s CEO said it will hike prices of certain items to offset tariffs.

In a news release, the department store operator said it reduced its earnings outlook because of higher tariffs, more promotions and “some moderation” in discretionary spending. Macy’s stuck by its full-year sales forecast, however.

For fiscal 2025, Macy’s now expects adjusted earnings per share of $1.60 to $2, down from its previous forecast of $2.05 to $2.25. It reaffirmed its full-year sales guidance of between $21 billion and $21.4 billion, which would be a decline from $22.29 billion in the most recent full year.

In an interview with CNBC, CEO Tony Spring said about 15 cents to 40 cents per share of the guidance cut is due to tariffs. He said about 20% of the company’s merchandise comes from China.

Macy’s will raise some prices and stop carrying certain items to mitigate the hit from tariffs, he added.

“You’re dealing with it on both the demand side as well as the increased cost side,” he said. “And so navigating that, we have a series of different scenarios to try to figure out kind of what will be the reality, and we want our guidance to reflect the flexibility of that uncertainty, so that we can react in real time to how we serve or better serve the consumer.”

Spring said the company will be “surgical” with price changes.

“It’s not a one-size-fits-all kind of approach,” he said. “There are going to be items that are the same price as they were a year ago. There is going to be, selectively, items that may be more expensive, and there are items that we might not carry because the pricing doesn’t merit the quality or the perceived value by the consumer.”

Here’s how Macy’s did during its fiscal first quarter, compared with what Wall Street was anticipating, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG:

In the three-month period that ended May 3, the company’s net income was $38 million, or 13 cents per share, compared with $62 million, or 22 cents per share, in the year-ago period. Sales dropped from $4.85 billion in the year-ago quarter. Excluding some one-time charges including restructuring charges, adjusted earnings per share were 16 cents.

The company’s shares were down more than 2% in early trading on Wednesday.

Economic uncertainty — including President Donald Trump’s on-again, off-again tariff announcements — has complicated Macy’s turnaround plans. The New York City-based legacy retailer is more than a year into a three-year effort to become a smaller, but healthier business. It’s shuttering weaker stores and investing in stronger parts of the company, including luxury department store Bloomingdale’s and beauty chain Bluemercury. It has also tried to improve the customer experience, including by speeding up online deliveries and adding staff to stores.

Spring told analysts on the earnings call that the tariff impact on Macy’s outlook includes the additional costs of inventory previously imported under the 145% China tariffs, which have since dropped to 30%. He said the outlook does not include a potential increase in tariffs on the European Union or any other U.S. trading partner.

Trump recently threatened to implement, and then delayed, a 50% tariff on the EU.

Macy’s sells a mix of national band private brands, which are sold exclusively at its stores and on its website. Spring told CNBC that the company has reduced the share of its private brands that comes from China to about 27% — a drop from 32% last year and more than 50% before the Covid pandemic.

CFO Adrian Mitchell said on the company’s earnings call that Macy’s has taken action to blunt the impact of tariffs on national brands it sells, too. He said the company has renegotiated orders with vendors, canceled some orders and delayed others.

“We’ve been able to gain some vendor discounts, which has been helpful to us, but we’re absorbing some of that price as well,” he said.

And in some cases, Macy’s is keeping prices the same despite higher costs to appeal to value-conscious customers and gain market share from competitors, Mitchell added.

Spring said on the company’s earnings call on Wednesday that Macy’s sales were stronger in March and April compared to February, attributing some of that to improving weather. So far, sales trends in the second quarter have been above those in March and April, he added.

Macy’s plans to close about 150 underperforming namesake stores across the country by early 2027.

In the fiscal first quarter, Macy’s namesake brand remained its weakest. Comparable sales across Macy’s owned and licensed business, plus its online marketplace, declined 2.1% year over year.

When Macy’s took out the stores that it plans to shutter, however, trends looked slightly better. Comparable sales of its go-forward business, including its owned and licensed business and online marketplace, declined 1.9%

On the other hand, comparable sales at Bloomingdale’s rose 3.8% year over year, including its owned, licensed and marketplace businesses. Comparable sales at Bluemercury climbed 1.5% year over year.

To try to turn its namesake stores around, Macy’s has invested in 50 locations — dubbed the “First 50” — with more staffing, sharper displays and changes to its mix of merchandise. It has expanded that initiative to 75 additional stores, bringing the total to 125 locations that have gotten increased attention. That’s a little over a third of the 350 namesake locations that Macy’s plans to keep open.

Those 125 locations performed better than the overall Macy’s brand. Comparable sales among those revamped stores owned and licensed by Macy’s were down 0.8% compared with the year-ago period.

On Macy’s earnings call in March — before Trump made several sudden tariff moves that baffled companies and investors — Spring said the company’s guidance “assumes a certain level of uncertainty” about the economic outlook. He said even Macy’s affluent customer “is just as uncertain and as confused and concerned by what’s transpiring.”

Earlier this spring, Macy’s announced a few key leadership changes — including a new chief financial officer. Macy’s new CFO, Thomas Edwards, will begin on June 22. He previously served as the chief financial officer and chief operating officer of Capri Holdings, the parent company of Michael Kors. He will succeed Mitchell, who is leaving Macy’s.

As of Tuesday’s close, Macy’s shares are down about 29% so far this year. That trails the S&P 500′s nearly 1% gains during the same period. Macy’s stock closed on Tuesday at $12.04 per share, bringing the retailer’s market value to $3.35 billion.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Dick’s Sporting Goods said Wednesday it’s standing by its full-year guidance, which includes the expected impact from all tariffs currently in effect.

The sporting goods giant said it’s expecting earnings per share to be between $13.80 and $14.40 in fiscal 2025 — in line with the $14.29 that analysts had expected, according to LSEG.

It’s projecting revenue to be between $13.6 billion and $13.9 billion, which is also in line with expectations of $13.9 billion, according to LSEG.

“We are reaffirming our 2025 outlook, which reflects our strong start to the year and confidence in our strategies and operational strength while still acknowledging the dynamic macroeconomic environment,” CEO Lauren Hobart said in a news release. “Our performance demonstrates the momentum and strength of our long-term strategies and the consistency of our execution.”

Here’s how the company performed in its first fiscal quarter compared with what Wall Street was anticipating, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG:

The company’s reported net income for the three-month period that ended May 3 was $264 million, or $3.24 per share, compared with $275 million, or $3.30 per share, a year earlier. Excluding one-time items related to its acquisition of Foot Locker, Dick’s posted earnings per share of $3.37.

Sales rose to $3.17 billion, up about 5% from $3.02 billion a year earlier.

For most investors, Dick’s results won’t come as a surprise because it preannounced some of its numbers about two weeks ago when it unveiled plans to acquire its longtime rival Foot Locker for $2.4 billion. So far, Dick’s has seen a mix of reactions to the proposed acquisition.

On one hand, Dick’s deal for Foot Locker will allow it to enter international markets for the first time and reach a customer that’s crucial to the sneaker market and doesn’t typically shop in the retailer’s stores. On the other hand, Dick’s is acquiring a business that’s been struggling for years and some aren’t sure needs to exist due to its overlap with other wholesalers and the rise of brands selling directly to consumers.

While shares of Foot Locker initially soared more than 80% after the deal was announced, shares of Dick’s fell about 15%.

The transaction is expected to close in the second half of fiscal 2025 and, for now, Dick’s outlook doesn’t include acquisition-related costs or results from the acquisition.

In the first full fiscal year post-close, Dick’s expects the transaction to be accretive to earnings and deliver between $100 million and $125 million in cost synergies.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Technology Back in Top-5

Last week’s market decline of 2-2.5% (depending on the index) has led to some notable shifts in sector performance and rankings.

This pullback, coming after a strong rally, is changing the order of highs and lows on the weekly chart — a particularly significant development, at least for me.

Let’s dive into the details and see what’s flying around in the market.

The composition of the top five sectors has seen some notable changes. Here’s how it stands now:

The big surprise here is Technology making its way into the top five, displacing Consumer Staples (now at #6). This shift suggests a gradual move from a more defensive positioning to sectors that are more cyclical and economically sensitive.

Another eye-catching move comes from Consumer Discretionary, jumping from #10 to #7 — a significant leap, albeit still in the bottom half of the ranking. Real Estate and Materials saw minor shifts, while Energy dropped to #10 and Health Care remains at #11.

  1. (1) Industrials – (XLI)
  2. (4) Communication Services – (XLC)*
  3. (3) Utilities – (XLU)
  4. (2) Financials – (XLF)*
  5. (6) Technology – (XLK)*
  6. (5) Consumer Staples – (XLP)*
  7. (10) Consumer Discretionary – (XLY)*
  8. (7) Real-Estate – (XLRE)*
  9. (8) Materials – (XLB)*
  10. (9) Energy – (XLE)*
  11. (11) Healthcare – (XLV)

Weekly/Daily RRG Analysis

The weekly Relative Rotation Graph (RRG) provides some interesting insights:

  • Utilities maintains very high readings, but Consumer Staples (highest on RS-Ratio ranking) is likely to be pushed down by weak daily chart readings.
  • Industrials continues to push further into the leading quadrant with stable momentum.
  • Financials and Communication Services are inside the weakening quadrant but have room to curl back towards leading.
  • Technology, despite having the second-lowest RS-Ratio reading, is rapidly improving with a strong RS-Momentum heading over recent weeks.

Remember, the ranking combines daily and weekly readings.

Technology’s high daily chart reading is propelling it into the top five, while Consumer Staples’ weak daily reading is pushing it out.

Industrials: The Leader Holding Strong

XLI is now pushing against its all-time high, just below 145. After two weeks of attempts, last week’s slight market decline confirms that this resistance level has worked.

We’re now looking for where any potential decline might stop and form a new low. The gap area from two weeks ago seems to be a good support area to watch.

The relative strength line breaking out of its consolidation formation continues to drag the RRG lines higher. XLI, for good reason, remains the strongest sector at the moment.

Communication Services: Stable Relative Uptrend

XLC is continuing its move higher with remarkable stability. The uptrend in the RS line is still valid, currently testing the lower boundary of the rising channel.

Due to the lack of upward relative momentum in recent weeks, both RRG lines are now pointing lower.

However, the RS-Ratio line remains well above 100, keeping the XLC tail on the right-hand side of the RRG.

Utilities: Testing Resistance

XLU is pushing against overhead resistance but has yet to manage a decisive break higher.

With defensive sectors under pressure, it’s questionable whether this breakout will happen in the short term.

The RS line versus SPY is dropping back into its trading range, unable to break away decisively. This drop is causing the RS-Momentum line to roll over and start pointing lower.

It’s the recent strength in relative strength that’s keeping Utilities inside the leading quadrant for now.

Financials: At a Crossroads

The Financial sector seems to be respecting the old rising support line as resistance, with the market dropping off that line last week and now trading around $50.

This move is affecting the relative strength line, which has returned to the lower boundary of the rising channel — a level that needs to hold to maintain a positive outlook for XLF.

The RS-Ratio line is stable around 102.50, high enough to keep Financials on the right-hand side of the graph.

The RS-Momentum line has just dropped below 100, positioning the XLF tail inside the weakening quadrant, but with enough room to curl back up before hitting lagging.

Technology: The Week’s Winner

XLK saw a significant jump two weeks ago and has since returned to test the old resistance area as support. If last week’s decline continues, there’s a bit more room to the downside — $220 seems to be a good level to watch for support, marking the bottom of the gap range from two weeks ago.

The jump has pushed the relative strength line above its falling resistance line, a good sign that seems to be breaking the relative downtrend in place since mid-last year.

This is changing the characteristics of the relative strength move for the Technology sector.

For now, it has only pushed the RS-Momentum line above 100, moving XLK into the improving quadrant on the weekly RRG, but it’s already starting to drag the RS-Ratio line higher.

Portfolio Performance

We’re clawing back some of the losses from recent weeks. The underperformance of almost 6% last week has now shrunk to 4.6%. Still behind the benchmark, but closing in again and narrowing the gap.

It’s a long-term game, so we keep pushing forward. So far, nothing out of the ordinary. Let’s wait and see whether we’ve seen the low in underperformance and how long it will take to return to SPY’s performance since inception.

#StayAlert –Julius

Get the latest stock market update with Mary Ellen McGonagle. Learn key downside signals, how to manage pullbacks, and which earnings reports could impact the market next week.

In this week’s episode, Mary Ellen reviews where the markets currently stand and what to watch for to signal further downside. She also highlights ways to combat inevitable pullbacks and shares the key earnings reports that are likely to move the markets in the upcoming week.

This video originally premiered May 23, 2025. You can watch it on our dedicated page for Mary Ellen’s videos.

New videos from Mary Ellen premiere weekly on Fridays. You can view all previously recorded episodes at this link.

If you’re looking for stocks to invest in, be sure to check out the MEM Edge Report! This report gives you detailed information on the top sectors, industries and stocks so you can make informed investment decisions.

Confused by mixed market signals? Follow along as Julius analyzes sector rotation, asset rotation, and global market trends using daily and weekly Relative Rotation Graphs (RRGs).

In this video, Julius puts the current sector rotation in perspective on both weekly and daily Relative Rotation Graphs (RRGs). He also examines asset rotation and the position of the U.S. markets in relation to international equities.

This video was originally published on May 27, 2025. Click on the icon above to view on our dedicated page for Julius.

Past videos from Julius can be found here.

#StayAlert, -Julius