Why The Nasdaq Just Hit Correction Territory

The US stock market started history's greatest way of a wealth creation.

From factory workers and Detroit to farmers in Omaha, anyone can own a piece of the great American companies. But today, our most innovative companies are staying private longer, which means every day Americans are missing out until now. Introducing VCX, the public ticker for private tech.

Now available wherever you buy stocks. Visit GATVCX.com for more info that's GATVCX.com. Carefully consider the investment material before investing, including objectives, risks, charges and expenses. This and other information we found in the funds perspective

at GATVCX.com.

This is a paid sponsorship.

Ingrid and Indie present here. Jobs, by which you don't have a lot of money. Hey, how much money do you have? How much money you have to pay? And you see that it's a "guiler beat".

And now the job. This is a job for Sponsor Jobs. With real profits, it won't happen. Petraoing read, try and find qualified talent with Sponsor Jobs. Make the Indie simple.

Now on Indie.de/recruiting. For all of you, there's a price for all of you. This week, the big Bauer Fruchtjogurt, 250g, for 39 cents. Or a small mineral water. 1.5 liters, for only 79 cents, to be really nice.

“And the most important thing in your all-de-north.”

All of you. Good for all. Welcome to Profty markets. I'm Ed Elson, it is July 29th. Let's check in on yesterday's market titles. The S&P 500 and the Dow rose.

Meanwhile, the Nasdaq declined as Chip Stocks got crushed more on that in a moment. Brent crew declined to about $84 per barrel. The yield on Tenia Treasuries fell, ahead of the Federal Reserve's interest rate decision, due later today.

And finally, SpaceX shares fell to a new low of $107 per share down 52 percent from their all-time high.

OK. What else is happening? The most important sector in the stock market is starting to fall apart. The tech heavy Nasdaq 100 fell for a fifth straight day, briefly entering correction territory, meaning it fell 10 percent from its highs. Chip companies led the decline.

The PHLX semiconductor index sank as much as 6 percent in micron fell 9 percent. But the self-started overnight in Asia, where SK high next dropped nearly 15 percent, and the cost be index fell 11 percent. This drawdown raises a major red flag in the first half of this year. Nine of the 12 biggest contributors to the S&P 500's return were semiconductor stocks.

“So investors are left wondering, where can this market go without Chip Stocks?”

Here to discuss this, we're speaking with Torsten Slok. Chief Economist at Apollo Global Management, Torsten, great to see you again. Thank you for joining us. You said, and it's a striking quote recently on our friend Steve Eisman's podcast. You said, quote, this AI thing better work out, because if it doesn't work out, your portfolio will be in trouble.

Is this a sign that AI might not be working out? The challenge at the moment is that the hyperscalers and those who are building the infrastructure, are changing their financing, which used to be mainly from the equity side of the balance sheet to now being on the debt side of the balance sheet. And they're out of debt that has come to the market from the hyperscalers, meaning the companies that are building out the infrastructure has just been enormous. So as a result, we've seen very, very significant increase in supply of investment, great credit that is in the hyperscalerspace.

And the consequence of that is that we have started to see spreads in credit, widen out on that hyperscaler debt. And this has resulted, of course, in a number of questions being asked, namely, our spreads widening out on hyperscaler debt, because of words about the underlying credit of these companies, meaning the ability to pay back that debt.

“Or is it simply just because of demand and supply that there's just more supply at the moment?”

And now there's just not so much demand. And as a result, spreads have been widening out. The other development more recently to your question is also the CDS spreads, meaning the cost of ensuring yourself against these companies going under in the next five years. Though CDS spreads have also wiped now quite significantly. So one way of answering your question is that there's simply so much debt that has come to the market.

And the market has now begun to ask some questions around, well, if these companies need all this financing, what is the right interest rate?

And that really the starting point for how the domino bricks are toppling here, namely, that spreads have widened out.

And as a result, the equity in these companies, the stock price of these companies, have also started to underperform. And that is where we are today, namely, this discussion around what is the speed of the AI build out? What is the payoff from the AI build out? And all those questions, of course, are very important when we think about the stock price, especially for the hyposecalis and more broad in the magnificent seven.

Yeah, just looking at the price of those credit default swaps that you mentioned there. Some companies whose credit defaults prices have hit record highs in recent weeks. Oracle, SpaceX, Google, Amazon recently in video. I mean, from your perspective, how dangerous is the debt situation in AI right now?

How likely is it that some of these enormous names that have become so structural and so important to the market could actually go under in the next five years?

“Remember that all these companies are sure, of course, known to well, they are investment great credits.”

That means that they are very, very profitable. They have very, very strong earnings growth, they have very high profit margins. They generally have very, very solid credit fundamentals. That's, of course, very important when we begin to think about the question, will they go under over the next five years? Because companies that are among the most profitable companies in the world have done exceptionally well in the last three, four years.

Of course, they are very, very unlikely to go under. But that is exactly the mirror image of this discussion. Given everything that, if we just agreed on how solid they are from a credit perspective, why is it that this credit spreads are whitening out? Especially to your point, why is this serious whitening out? Meaning why are people buying protection against these companies going under the next five years?

What are people really worried about?

“And that's, of course, why the discussion in the market at the moment is about how can these companies that have been market leading?”

Meaning that they've been driving returns for this on P500 so strongly for the last several years? How can it be that suddenly people are beginning to ask questions about what will be the situation for these companies over the next five years? And is that divergence between, hey, fundamentals are really great? But at the same time, market pricing is telling you that there's more and more worries. That is the conversation, is it the market pricing that's wrong?

And the fundamentals are good? Or vice versa, is the market pricing telling you that there is some more danger coming down the road? And of course, that danger is all about the payoff from AI. How long time will it take before we see the payoff from AI? Remember, as we all know, stock prices today is the net present value of future discounted cash flows.

So that means that at the moment the market has a certain expectation. The consensus has a certain expectation that returns will look like this. But if the payoff in AI is going to come only like this, that means that the net present value of these companies should be lower.

“And that is the risk, of course, at the moment that maybe the market pricing is actually correct in the sense that there's more questions being asked about what is the payoff profile?”

Because if it is involving a slower stream of payments in the future, then it does imply that the equity should be lower today and credit spread should be wider today. So this is this discussion around AI implementation, where are we seeing it paying off? Are we seeing it in form of high productivity? Are we seeing in the form of a stronger economy? That is the very abstract discussion that is behind most of these improved price movements that we have seen.

Why do you think this is all happening right now? And when I say this, I refer to the negative sentiment surrounding these companies and surrounding the AI build up. Because these are topics that you and I have discussed for many months at this point that other people and other investors have discussed for a long time. But it seems as though, I mean, to Jeremy Aions is quite a module. It seems as if the music is beginning to get quiet only now.

And I can't quite tell why that is. Why is it happening at this moment? There's a series of developments that have brought us to this point.

It first was Amazon issuing debt.

And that resulted in some concessions and some changes in the debt that was issued. And there's been trading wider. I mean, in the market saying that spreads on this particular credit should be a bit wider. We've also seen last week and you talked about this last week of course, Google going for the first time. It is history to now having negative free cash flow, which is also a development where people are beginning to ask.

Is there too much investment? Is there too little investment? If there's negative free cash, then what does that mean? How long time is that going to take? How many years will it take before we see a payoff on those investments? So I think it's a reaction to some of the individual events we've seen around individual names that are moving towards the narrative exactly to your point on.

Okay, yes, this has been going on for a while. In fact, for several years, this has been the main driver of returns in this in P500 and NASDAQ.

“But now the questions are being asked, well, okay, but what is the profile of this payoff in earnings?”

So there's two races going on, namely there's a race to deliver ROI, meaning return on investment for AI.

And there's a second race, namely that data center build out requires a lot of financing.

And if that financing now is becoming more and more expensive, then people are asking essentially two questions about on the one hand, how quickly will the AI investments pay off, in other words, in the form of higher profit margins in the form of higher earnings growth? Not so much in the magnificent 7, but higher profit margins for the S&T 493 and higher earnings growth for the S&T 493. And similarly, the other race is, on the other side, namely, can we still continue to see issuance of hyperscaler data of debt for the build out to grow with this very, very rapid pace.

If the spreads are now whitening and if the CDS spreads are also whitening.

“So those two things are the two areas to watch, namely, what's the evidence of AI paying off?”

And the other area is to watch what is the returns and what is there for the spreads that investors require, especially, of course, on hyperscaler debt. It seems like whenever these questions are put to the CEOs of these companies, these big tech companies, they often avoid the question or they don't answer it fully or, in the case of, like, Jensen Huang, for example, where it was asked of his company, what's going on with all these circular deals. And his response was, I don't think there's anything circular about what we're doing, which to me is kind of insane.

We have big tech earnings coming up. I'm curious if you think that we will get some clarity on a lot of these questions from the leaders of these big tech companies and these hyperscalers, do you think the fears will be addressed?

This is extremely important because I actually think the most important event tomorrow, and of also on Thursday, other hyperscaler earnings.

It's actually become more important than there for emcee meeting, and despite that, I'm an economy suspended on my time when the Fed and you and I have talked about this for a long time. Namely, of course, Fed action is very important, are the raising interest rates, are the raising interest rates, that's a very important debate at the moment. But currently, because we are at get approaching, it looks like at least some infection point, and the risks are rising that the market might interpret this as an infection point.

It becomes very, very important what we get from the three hyperscalers that I'm reporting tomorrow and Thursday, because to your point, it almost feels like that there's a whole different conversation going on.

“The labs and the hyperscalers are talking like this is existential, we have to do this that can be no discussion about it, because this is the only thing that's required.”

Because we need to create as much compute as we can, whereas on Wall Street, the conversation is saying, "Well, hold on, what is the price for that compute? How much revenue can you generate for that compute?" So I think that discussion really is really the technologist talking in the direction of saying, "Of course, we need a lot more tech, we need a lot more compute." And the Wall Street language saying, "Well, no, that price of building that compute is now coming at a widest rate, because there's simply not enough capital available to build that compute."

And that is coming together tomorrow, and the day after, in the hyperscaler earnings, because then we will figure out, it's still the messes from them, like it was with Google last week, that we're still growing, the capex more and more and more, or other signs that the capex has been as a rule over, and how is that then going to be interpreted by market. There's a lot of different small signals not so much only about the headline earnings, but also about what is the action from the hyperscaler. How do they think about the spread whitening we've seen during this quarter in terms of their plans for the capex continue to build out?

Final question, one of your big themes has been, you pointed out, how dependent on AI the market has become, and so your advice is try to find areas and investments that are not AI. Can you figure out how to diversify away from AI? And that might be the right investment strategy.

First question, I mean, Apple has been the best performer of the year, they're the ones who sat out of the AI race.

Number one is that a non AI investment, and number two, what areas and what sectors are you looking at, what are some ways that people and investors can diversify out of AI if they're worried that the AI trade is sold and slowed down. If we think about the 6040 portfolio, this is the simplest way of thinking about investing, I have some bonds and I have some equity and the equity is 60% the bonds is 40% historically this has been very diversified when stock prices went up. One prices would go down and vice versa when stock prices went down, bond prices would go up. So I would be naturally hitched that if one side didn't do well, then the other side would do well. This worked out for a long long time, what interest rates were falling, and that resulted of course in rising stock markets, and at the same time, whenever there was a bump, it was always a good idea to be in bonds.

On the bond side, it's also turning into more and more AI, hyperscaler issuance is, of course, AI in software. We also have a lot of issuance now in AI and venture capital, it used to be the venture capital was inventing prescription drugs, farmer, biotech, but now venture capital 87% is also AI, so the challenge to this discussion is that investors AI is really everywhere, it's inequities, it's in credit, meaning public credit and it's also, of course, in venture capital.

“So the answer to the question is exactly that a good recommendation at the moment is to invest in non-AI, and what really is fundamentally non-AI is really value.”

Value investing is not being popular for a long time, but if you look at the facts or models at the moment, growth is absolutely crashing completely and value is skyrocketing, because people are going away from growth towards value to actually investing companies that have earnings.

So actually investing companies that are able to pay the debt service in cost, so that they're not vulnerable, we're interested rates are higher for longer.

So non-AI, in this case, in the public space, means there's a P-400, in the private space, it means private equity, that is value investing, they're the private credit, that is value investing, and more broadly, non-AI, of course, also means sectors globally, of course, also commodities that are not directly associated with the AI trade.

“Those are places to hide and to invest, to benefit from not being in the AI trade, because the AI trade, of course, is wobbling at the moment.”

All right, Torsten Slock is chief economist at Apollo Global Management, Torsten, always appreciate your time. Thank you.

It's Imit, thank you. After the break, Justin Wolf has joined the show to break down Trump's latest tariff strategy, and for even more markets insights you can subscribe to my weekly newsletter simply put at simply put.proftlymedia.com

“So, both of the show comes from Lisa. If you've ever looked at Maslow's hierarchy of needs, you'll see sleep right there at the foundation right in between breathing and eating.”

Good sleep is the bedrock of a good life, and the bedrock of good sleep just might be a Lisa mattress.

Lisa has a lineup of beautifully crafted mattresses tailored to how you sleep. Each mattress is designed and assembled in the USA, with specific sleep positions and feel preferences in mind, and they back it all up with free shipping, easy returns, and a 120 night sleep trial. Our research associate Dan Schlung got a mattress from Lisa. He went with the superior hybrid, and he said it provides the perfect amount of support plus he's been sleeping noticeably better since he got it, which has great news for all of us go to Lisa.com for 30% off.

Select mattresses plus get an extra $50 off with promo code Markets exclusive for all listeners. That is lees.com promo code Markets for 30% off select mattresses plus extra $50 off and when you use our code you are supporting our show, Lisa.com promo code Markets. Running a business shouldn't feel like surviving a software group project, one after accounting another for inventory another for sales and somehow none of them talk to each other. That's where Odu comes in, and all in one business management software that brings every part of your business together, from sales and accounting to inventory and marketing all in one powerful platform.

No messy integrations, no bouncing between tabs and best of all, no spreadsheets. Stop managing software and start managing your business with one unified system. Try for free today at Odu.com/box. That's OduO.com/box. We're back with Profty Markets. Trump's latest trade strategy just took effect. Early on Friday, a new set of tariffs kicked in on 80 countries covering more than 99% of US imports. This time, the Trump administration is reaching for a new legal tool, section 301 of the trade act of 1974, the stated rationale, countering the loss of US business from the use of forced labor.

Countries that have taken steps to ban forced labor will face a 10% tariff, while those without a ban face a 12.5% tariff, the average tariff rate is now 11.1% and it is expected to rise to 11.8% by the end of 26, that is according to the Yale budget lab.

Justin, it is great to see you. It feels like it's been a long time. I'm sure it has, but it feels that way.

“We wanted to get your views on this new tariff regime. Specifically, is it different from the previous one? Is it worse better the same? What do you make of it?”

I'm going to give folks at home just a little bit of re-1. It's three episodes. Episode 1 was Liberation Day, the Emergency Powers Act, set of tariffs that they've had to pay back because they were never constitutional. Then they moved to a so-called balance of payments crisis despite the fact that America's balance of payments is and has been for decades precisely $0, but that was regarded as a crisis. Those tariffs are still unclear if they were legal and whether we might have to pay them back, but by the same token, even if they were legal, they ended last week, six months later, that was the nature legislation.

So now we need to look around behind the couch and see if we can find a left-over tariff authority that the United States government might be able to use.

Remember actually, it's very easy to get tariffs done if you're the US government. What you do is you read in the constitution where it says the right to tax and the right to tariff belongs with Congress. The President refuses to get a Congress because the President doesn't like Congress and Congress doesn't like tariffs. So he fiddles around down the back of the couch and discovers this section 301 thing that he's talking about. What it does if you're a White House lawyer, you get to say you beauty, the boss wanted tariffs. I found a way to give him to him.

If there wasn't economic team at the White House, there would have said, no, no, no, no. That one doesn't work because it doesn't actually achieve any of the things we want.

Let me explain why. This is a global across the board tariff, basically 10 or 12.5% on every essentially every country we trade with.

If what the President wants is bargaining power when he sits down in prison, she and China, this doesn't give it to it. He can't say, do what I want or this form of tariff goes down. It goes up. And he can't say, thank you for paying homage. I'm going to reduce this form of tariff. So the very thing the President wants tariffs for this doesn't deliver. So episode three of the tariff saga is the worst and surprisingly enough that dumbest one yet.

“I think this brings up an important question, which is like, why are we doing it again?”

It seems like the consensus from 2025 is it did not, it was not paid for by other nations. We have a pretty clear understanding of that. It was paid for mostly by American companies or by American consumers. We gave them money back. Right. When they were illegal and unconstitutional, we didn't even raise money. And that was another piece of it too. So we tried it. Didn't work. Then we were told by the Supreme Court not legal. Now we also have launched a war in Iran, which is adding more fuel to the fire that is inflation.

“And we're doubling down. And so I guess the question, like, is there any world in which this makes any economic sense whatsoever?”

Or is this pure grievance, pure politics, just an excitement about bullying other nations? What actually is in it for us here? There's several questions. It one is, is there a world in which there are tariffs that would have an economically defensible rationale? I'm going to say, yes, there is. I don't love it. I don't love those tariffs, but we can have a real debate about smart tariffs, targeted tariffs, tariffs that serve the American interest. It would not be tariffs on inputs into American production. It would not be on again, off again.

But the businesses could actually make investment. If they're lasting businesses would make investments in the United States, there's a bunch of things that you would do completely differently. So could we have a sensible set of tariffs that would not seem like a loseless? We could. Is this that? No. What this is is a set of tariffs, basically, Jamison Greer is a lawyer, and the boss asked for tariffs, and he found a way to get in tariffs. But Jamison Greer forgot actually the reason we want tariffs is to serve America's interest.

And I hate doing this to you, but I love it, which is pretty much at the same time as you released this video. Played up was he economics is going to release one. When we take a look at what's the underlying theory of international trade is, and I'm happy to repeat any of it before you hear mate. Yeah, please. There is actually, if you listen to Jamison Greer, there's very revealing interview on the daily the New York Times podcast. There is actually a very serious theory of the case, but the theory of the case is fundamentally that of a lawyer. A lawyer is the bloke you call him when the other country does something wrong. You have a grievance, you want damages, and you go and you see what you can do.

The problem with a lawyer is a lawyer tends to think in very zero at some terms. If you got something at something that I didn't get, that is they think about trade very much is zero sum, head to head, battle, it's a war.

I am trading my Australian economist trading my services as a stunningly and slightly economic commentator. Now, we are doing that because we are both better off.

I could speak for the rest of this and speak over you, and then if you had a zero sum capacity, you think we will head lost their board just again. Actually, we are just creating a shitty podcast. We both lose and the audience would lose. And that's the fundamental difference, which is you and I understand trade is cooperation. And the moment you understand that, then thrown up roadblocks to cooperation is different than thrown up roadblocks to the other side in the war. So there is a coherent view, it's just muddled.

It seems that the psychology of the president is that any transaction, any form of business, is a form of war. It's a form of battle. It requires some level of aggression. The thing that is so remarkable about this, though, is how clearly it backfired and hurt him, not just in terms of what we saw in terms of inflation, but also the polling, because people are seeming to connect the dots here, more tariffs equals more inflation, which brings me to your view. Your views on, or I'd like to get your views on what inflation will look like over the next year. It seems that the Iran war is kind of similar to tariffs last year, which is it's on again, off again, and no one seems to know what's actually happening there, but it's still generally around tariffs are the same story.

“What do you think inflation will look like in 2026? Do you think that this round of tariffs will continue to contribute to higher prices?”

The president is actually a really brilliant TV producer, and I'm not being funny there, I think that he has a great sense of drama or narrative of intrigue, and I always want to tune in for next week. I didn't actually watch the apprentice, but we know some people did. He appears to be taking that to the White House. Now that's the good part. The analogy that he's used for, which is it's the same right as room. It's the same right as room running the trade wars as running the Iran war. It's been a year talking about the trade war, and neither of us has a lot of defense knowledge. I'm happy to admit that. I know I look like a soldier, but actually beneath this tough exterior is a quiet professor.

“But it is the same right as here, and they do seem to be on again and exactly the same way, and I think in season three of tariff wars, we've learned this is a teller novella that's never going away.”

I really hope the Iran war goes away, but given what we saw on, we've got one production company, they've got one major franchise, the trade wars, we know what their story lines look like, it feels like that's going to be the story line over in Iran. The supply shock raises the cost of doing business and slows the economy. So two bad things, and the thing is a fed count fix the supply shock. It can fix one of the two symptoms, but not both of them.

It's also the case that the economics textbook says, "When there's a supply shock, you raise the cost of doing business. Everyone raises their prices to take account of that."

And that might be the end of it, that we have higher prices, but if that's the end of it, no prices stay high, we get no further inflation. So the economics textbook actually says, "If you're the fed, you can afford to wait it out, you can look through it." And partly because of her writing economics textbooks, I tend to think we should take economic theory a little bit seriously. The counter arguments are very strong. The counter argument Kevin Waters said is, "We've been out there for five years waiting for a transfer to prove itself to be transitory. How much longer can we afford to wait?"

“But I think, you know, certainly, the tariffs are still playing a role, but actually the effective tariffs on price levels, it's going to be complete pretty soon, unless the president does something crazy.”

The effect of the war probably still has a little bit more to go, but therefore the effect on inflation through, say, after the midterms, might turn out to be relatively minor if we're prepared to be patient. So three and a half percent right now, I assume that you would agree that that's not a particularly sustainable inflation rate. If we sit around there for the next several months, or is that cause for real concern? The simple answer is simple, which is the feds as it should be too, we're aiming for two, three and a half isn't too. That's the very simple answer, and so that's the look, if you guys are going to crush the economy every other time we get inflation, you should do it this time, I want to see some internal inconsistency.

Then I think there's no case for being patient, but you know, it is one of those finely balanced moments. I check the markets recently, just like literally minutes ago, and they said the betting odds for tomorrow's fed decision is 70, 30. 70, 30 sounds like, oh great, the markets are pretty confident the feds are not going to move. Actually, I want folks to understand it's very rare for the day before a fed decision for things to be that much up in the year. So, I want to acknowledge both sides of that debate are actually bringing good faith, good rigour, good arguments.

“As long as we're within half a percentage point or so of what the right is, I don't need to worry about it, so I think we don't know what's going to happen tomorrow, but that gives you a sense of how good the arguments are on both sides.”

Just for context from us, as this goes out, this episode comes out Wednesday, we're recording this Tuesday, July 28th, so that interest rate decision will come out later today, happy Wednesday it, but what a delight for Wednesday. What do we have as lot of numbers from yesterday, could you look them up for me?

Exactly, I'll check them out. But the expectation is that rates will stay where they are, but as you say, a rate hike isn't off the table, and I thought it was quite interesting.

So, what do you have a thought on what is the right decision? So, on the prediction side, you and I are in slightly different lines of business, you talk directly to people in markets, people don't pay me enough money to do that. If anyone wants to, they're welcome to pay me a lot of money, given that the markets say it's 70, 30, I reckon the 70% chance thing is more likely to happen than the 30% chance thing. So, whoever you win if you next, who gives a more confident answer, should remember actually that markets tend to be better informed than any economy. So, I just sounded glad, but actually it wasn't. I was the most accurate economist you'll ever talk to, because I said, I am dumb relative to markets, and I'm the only one dumb enough to admit that.

So, you know, and what I'm more interested in is, you know, helping people understand what's going on, and if things do go well, there are, there are times you and I have been having conversations like this, but for Fedman, you just say, I can't believe the mistake they're on the customer.

“And so, I think at a moment when the debate is, you know, pretty close, and it's serious. I actually just want to acknowledge, could job Fed, you guys have brought out the right arguments.”

I wasn't a huge fan of Kevin Wanch before the fact, very interesting Wall Street Journal article yesterday, that seems to suggest there's a little more friction inside the Fed than we'd heard previously, but I do feel like we're in a good place with the Fed, and that's fantastic, because that's not true for all federal agencies. I think that is good news. Justin Wolfers is Professor of Public Policy and Economics at the University of Michigan. He is the founder of Plotipus Economics, and you can find some of his economic analysis there.

Justin, we really appreciate your time, as always. Thank you. Great pleasure. And have you Wednesday?

Okay, that's it for today. Tune in tomorrow for our coverage of Microsoft and Meta's earnings. We will see how they fare amid this broader tech cellar for.

“Also, be covering the Federal Reserve's interest rate decision on calcium, the odds that the Fed holds rates steady this time around are actually about 77%, but it's worth noting the odds of a rate height of four year end are at a new high of 74%.”

Stay tuned. This episode was produced by Clay Miller and Alison Weiss, and engineered by Benjamin Spencer. Our video editor is Brad Williams, our research team, is Dashalon, Kristen Adonahue, and Mia Savario, and our social producer is Jake McPherson. Thank you for listening to Proftly Markets from Proftly Media. If you liked what you heard, give us a follow. I'm Ed Nelson. I'll see you tomorrow. Running a business shouldn't feel like surviving a software group project, one after accounting another for inventory, another for sales, and somehow, none of them talk to each other.

That's where Odu comes in, and all in one business management software that brings every part of your business together.

From cells and accounting to inventory and marketing, all in one powerful platform, no messy integrations, no bouncing between tabs and best of all, no spreadsheets.

Stop managing software and start managing your business with one unified system. Try for free today at Odu.com/box.