Your cover places Europe as a non-leading actor in a world dominated by the US and China. What would have to happen in 2026 for Europe to stop reacting and start leading from an economic point of view?
Fundamentally, you have to move from words to actions. Lay the foundations to reduce its dependence in various areas, such as defense (the announced increase in spending on defense and security must materialize), energy (where it continues to be dependent on other countries, previously on Russia, now on the United States), on rare minerals (it depends on China), on technology… All of this with the aim of reducing dependence on external supply chains. This more proactive attitude in the face of the clear leadership of the United States and China requires greater unity (acting as a whole and not prioritizing national interests), an increase in investments (especially in R&D, where Europe is clearly behind the United States) and more financing to face them (promote the single capital market that in turn mobilizes savings towards innovation, depending less on bank financing), as well as the promotion of “European champions” with greater capacity to compete with the two world leaders. The objective is to collaborate with both leaders, but at the same time defend our own European interests. Likewise, Europe must avoid overregulation to promote greater economic growth.
If geopolitics tighten again (China–US, tariffs, Russia) what assets will work best as a haven?
The safe haven assets par excellence are gold (it does not depend on any government and serves as a hedge against inflation and geopolitical tensions), the Swiss franc or the Japanese yen. Although the dollar also usually acts as a safe haven, currently it may not do so as much in the event of problems with the independence of the Federal Reserve or risks to growth due to a worse tariff environment. Like the American bond, whose value depends on confidence in the US and may face the risk of higher inflation. Furthermore, in a context of greater geopolitical risk, defensive stocks should perform better relative (earnings not dependent on the economic cycle, solid dividends)
Regarding AI, it is mentioned that there is no generalized bubble but there are warning signs. Which of these signs do you consider closest to generating financial stress?
We consider that the fundamental risks are that the high investments will not be profitable in a timely manner. In this sense, we are concerned about the growing recourse to debt to finance capex compared to the historical recourse to companies’ own cash flow, as well as the circularity of investments or the potential bottlenecks of AI (energy, semiconductors
It is mentioned that European inflation is “very controlled”, while the US inflation shows components with a clear risk of rebound. Which region poses the greatest risk for investors in 2026?
In terms of inflation, we see more risk in the United States, where there are upward pressures in the short term derived not only from tariffs but also from other factors (industrial policy, immigration policy, etc.), which will further complicate the Fed’s position (prioritize employment or inflation control?). In terms of growth, the main focus of risk is Europe, where the key is to move from words to actions and adequately implement the promised fiscal stimulus (European defense, German infrastructure) that allows an acceleration of economic growth and a return to double-digit growth in business results.
After a year of +41% and a now more limited potential, what would have to fail for the IBEX to not even reach that expected 5%?
The key to success will be strict adherence to profit growth prospects. Current valuations, after three years of increases, are demanding and leave no room for disappointment. Any downward deviation in corporate results could contract multiples and negate gains. Added to this are macroeconomic factors such as restrictive monetary and fiscal policies, a possible macroeconomic deterioration in Europe or instability in Latin America, especially relevant for IBEX companies.
After beating the benchmark in 2025, what changes in 2026 in your selection process to maintain that advantage?
After three consecutive years of strong increases in the indices, current valuations are demanding, reflected in the limited potential that we anticipate for the Ibex 35 in 2026. In this scenario, we must be even more selective and the stock picking strategy becomes even more necessary, always starting from a deep macro and micro analysis that allows us to adapt to the macro environment and specific situation of each company at all times throughout the year.
The Big Five portfolio combines several sectors. What does each one contribute to the overall stability of the portfolio and what is the risk in each case?
Our portfolio is characterized by a strategic balance between defensive and cyclical stocks. In the defensive segment, we include Enagás, which offers stability and predictability thanks to its regulated model, although its main risk lies in possible changes in the remuneration framework. Added to it Cirsa Enterpris, a stock that has demonstrated resilience with 69 consecutive quarters of EBITDA growth (except for the 8 in the COVID period), and whose main risk is the regulatory evolution of the gaming sector.
On the cyclical side, ArcelorMittal provides significant exposure to the global industrial cycle. We see a clear catalyst in the entry into force of the new safeguard measures in Europe for 2026, although its high volatility and the risk of a massive influx of Asian products prior to these measures (July 2026) are factors to monitor. IAG offers us exposure to the increase in global mobility and a potential for consolidation in the airline sector, with geopolitical conflicts as its most relevant risk. Finally, Santander positions us against the general economic cycle and the evolution of interest rates. Although its main risk would be a global economic deterioration that forces rate cuts (a scenario that we do not contemplate in the short term).
In 2026 you are looking for companies with attractive dividend yield and profit growth. What conditions must a security meet to avoid falling into the trap of high dividend but low structure?
Our selection criteria are rigorous: We look for companies with high stability in the generation of cash flows that support a solid shareholder remuneration policy and without risk of cuts. Additionally, we demand strong fundamentals that support attractive earnings growth prospects. To avoid the dividend trap, we analyze the following aspects in depth: 1) Dividend sustainability: In addition to profitability, we analyze the ability of cash flow to cover investments, debt repayments and the maintenance of the dividend. 2) Financial situation: We prioritize companies with low levels of debt, avoiding risks of dividend cuts forced by debt obligations. 3) Dividend History: We prefer companies with a history of stable or growing dividends. 4) Company quality: We analyze its sector positioning and resilience to risks that could drastically affect its benefits. 5) Stock valuation: We are not only looking for dividend yield, but it also has to have significant revaluation potential with respect to our target price. Furthermore, abnormally high dividend yields, as a result of price collapses, are subjected to an exhaustive analysis to rule out fundamental deteriorations that call such profitability into question.
In short, we do not try to select those companies with the highest dividends, but rather invest in quality companies, with stable and growing cash flows that make the dividend sustainable over time.