By Maksym Misichenko · Yahoo Finance ·
What AI agents think about this news
The panel agrees that while inflation has cooled, median households remain vulnerable due to cumulative price increases and potential demand shock risks. They disagree on the extent to which real wage growth offsets this and the impact of Iran energy spikes.
Risk: Sustained high inflation or wage stagnation leading to a demand shock if the Fed holds rates too long (Claude), or a feedback loop of asset price correction and consumption collapse (Gemini).
Opportunity: None explicitly stated.
This analysis is generated by the StockScreener pipeline — four leading LLMs (Claude, GPT, Gemini, Grok) receive identical prompts with built-in anti-hallucination guards. Read methodology →
Moneywise and Yahoo Finance LLC may earn commission or revenue through links in the content below.
Ken Griffin says inflation is still hitting Americans where they feel it most: everyday prices.
In a recent conversation with CNBC’s Sara Eisen at the Milken Institute’s Global Conference, the billionaire founder and CEO of Citadel pointed to a simple McDonald’s order to explain why many Americans remain frustrated with the economy.
“Have you been to McDonald’s recently?” Griffin asked (1).
When Eisen said she hadn’t, Griffin described the sticker shock he felt after buying a McDonald’s Coke that morning.
“$2.50 for a Coke!” Griffin said. “And before the Biden administration, it was 99 cents.”
For Griffin, the point wasn’t just about soda. It was about the way small, familiar purchases can remind Americans that their money no longer stretches as far as it once did.
He then turned to another household staple: eggs.
“What do you pay for eggs in New York City today?” Griffin asked.
“Eight bucks,” Eisen replied.
“For a dozen eggs?” Griffin said.
“Mhm,” Eisen said, nodding. “The brown ones. It’s what we get at home.”
The exchange drew laughs — especially after Griffin admitted that, “in a typical week,” he does not buy his own eggs — but his broader message was serious.
“The United States has endured prolonged and persistent inflation now for six years,” he said. “And in some sense, the rise of gasoline prices at the gas station, it’s like a triggering event. It just brings back to all of us the fact that the purchasing power of the dollar has declined so precipitously for six years now.”
For Griffin, those everyday price shocks are more than annoyances.
“I think everybody in our country, when we see a price shock in any of our day-to-day commodities, gasoline for example, it’s just deeply triggering,” Griffin said. “And I think that there’s just a general apprehension of how much more purchasing power are we going to lose because of the economic policies that we’re pursuing in Washington.”
The latest inflation data helps explain why that concern still resonates. The Consumer Price Index rose 0.6% in April after a 0.9% jump in March, while prices were up 3.8% from a year earlier before seasonal adjustments, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2). Food prices rose 3.2% over the year, while energy prices surged 17.9%. Gasoline prices alone were up 28.4% from a year earlier.
Even if headline inflation has cooled from its worst post-pandemic levels, many households are still dealing with the cumulative effects of years of higher prices — and fresh energy shocks from the Iran war are adding another layer of pressure.
That longer-term pain is clear in the data. Since the beginning of 2020, the CPI food index (3) has risen 33%, while the energy index (4) has climbed 48%.
Griffin’s point? Inflation isn’t just a line in a government report. It shows up when a Coke costs $2.50, a dozen eggs costs $8 and a tank of gas feels painful again.
Griffin urged the Trump administration and lawmakers to “stay focused” on strengthening the power of the dollar and making sure Americans’ paychecks go further.
But history tells a very different story about the dollar’s purchasing power: over time, it has steadily eroded — no matter who sits in the White House. According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (5), $100 in 2026 had the same purchasing power as just $11.74 did in 1970.
That’s why many Americans are looking beyond cash and traditional savings when thinking about how to protect their purchasing power.
One time-tested option is gold. Its appeal is simple: unlike fiat currencies, the yellow metal can’t be printed at will by central banks.
Gold is also considered the ultimate safe haven. It’s not tied to any one country, currency or economy, and in times of economic turmoil or geopolitical uncertainty, investors often flock to it — driving prices higher.
Ray Dalio, founder of the world’s largest hedge fund, Bridgewater Associates, told CNBC last year that “People don’t have, typically, an adequate amount of gold in their portfolio,” adding, “When bad times come, gold is a very effective diversifier.”
Despite a recent pullback, gold prices have surged by more than 35% over the last 12 months.
One way to invest in gold that can also provide significant tax advantages is to open a gold IRA with the help of Goldco.
Gold IRAs allow investors to hold physical gold or gold-related assets within a retirement account, thereby combining the tax advantages of an IRA with the protective benefits of investing in gold, making it a compelling potential option for those wanting to ensure their retirement funds are diversified during rough economic times.
Goldco offers free shipping and access to a library of retirement resources. Plus, the company will match up to 10% of qualified purchases in free silver.
If you’re curious whether this is the right investment to diversify your portfolio, you can download your free gold and silver information guide today.
Read More: Here’s the average income of Americans by age in 2026. Are you falling behind?
Inflation can squeeze households — but for owners of certain real assets, rising prices can also translate into rising income.
Real estate, for instance, has long been viewed as a powerful inflation hedge.
When inflation rises, property values often increase as well, reflecting the higher costs of materials, labor and land. At the same time, rental income tends to go up, providing landlords with a revenue stream that adjusts for inflation.
Over the past ten years, the S&P Cotality Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price NSA Index (6) has jumped by 87%, reflecting strong demand and limited housing supply.
Of course, high home prices can make buying a home more challenging, especially with mortgage rates still elevated. And being a landlord isn’t exactly hands-off work — managing tenants, maintenance and repairs can quickly eat into your time (and returns).
The good news? You don’t need to buy a property outright — or deal with leaky faucets — to invest in real estate today. Crowdfunding platforms like mogul offer an easier way to get exposure to this income-generating asset class.
As a real estate investment platform offering fractional ownership in blue-chip rental properties, mogul gives investors monthly rental income, real-time appreciation and tax benefits — without the need for a hefty down payment or 3 A.M. tenant calls.
Founded by former Goldman Sachs real estate investors, the team hand-picks the top 1% of single-family rental homes nationwide for you. In other words, you gain access to institutional-quality offerings for a fraction of the usual cost.
Each property undergoes a rigorous vetting process, requiring a minimum 12% return even in downside scenarios. Across the board, the platform features an average annual IRR of 18.8%. Offerings often sell out in under three hours, with investments typically ranging between $15,000 and $40,000 per property.
Sign up for an account and browse available properties here to start investing today.
But residential real estate is just one opportunity. For investors with capital on hand, and who want to truly explore every available real estate vertical, there are other ways to invest.
Another option is Lightstone DIRECT, which gives accredited investors access to institutional-quality multifamily and industrial real estate.
Lightstone DIRECT’s direct-to-investor model ensures a high degree of alignment between individual investors and a vertically-integrated, institutional owner-operator — a sophisticated and streamlined option for individual investors looking to diversify into private-market real estate.
With Lightstone DIRECT, accredited individuals can access the same multifamily and industrial assets Lightstone pursues with its own capital, with minimum investments starting at $100,000.
Prominent investors like Dalio often stress the importance of diversification — and for good reason. Many traditional assets tend to move in tandem, especially during periods of market stress.
That message feels especially relevant today. Nearly 40% of the S&P 500’s weight is concentrated in its ten largest stocks and the index’s CAPE ratio hasn’t been this high since the dot-com boom.
This is where, for many investors, alternative assets come into play. These can include everything from real estate and precious metals to private equity and fine art.
It’s easy to see why great works of art tend to appreciate over time. Supply is limited and many famous pieces have already been snatched up by museums and collectors. Art also has a low correlation with stocks and bonds, which helps with diversification.
In 2022, a collection of art owned by the late Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen (7) sold for $1.5 billion at Christie’s New York, making it the most valuable collection in auction history.
Of course, buying art on your own comes with major barriers: high prices, storage, insurance, authentication and the challenge of knowing which works may hold long-term value.
Now, Masterworks is offering a single investment that combines blue-chip art with other scarce assets, such as gold and bitcoin, that have historically moved independently of equities and of one another.
The result is a more balanced, all-weather approach to alternative investing. In fact, this model would have outperformed the S&P 500 by 3.1x from 2017 to 2025.*
By leveraging access to museum-quality artwork alongside other uncorrelated assets, the strategy aims to enhance diversification while still pursuing meaningful appreciation.
Discover how diversifying with this strategy can strengthen your portfolio for the years ahead.
*Investing involves risk. Past performance is not indicative of future returns. The 3.1x figure reflects a model backtest, not actual fund performance.
Join 250,000+ readers and get Moneywise’s best stories and exclusive interviews first — clear insights curated and delivered weekly. Subscribe now.
We rely only on vetted sources and credible third-party reporting. For details, see our editorial ethics and guidelines.
Milken Institute/ YouTube (1); U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2); Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (3), (4); Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis (5); S&P Global (6); Christie's (7)
This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"Cumulative inflation pain is real but the article’s alarm over fresh policy-driven erosion overstates current data and ignores supply-shock origins."
Griffin rightly flags the cumulative 33% food and 48% energy CPI rises since 2020 as eroding purchasing power far beyond the 3.8% headline YoY print. The psychological trigger from visible items like eggs and Coke sustains voter anxiety even as sequential CPI cools. Yet the piece underplays that much of the surge stemmed from pandemic supply shocks and the Ukraine war rather than solely Washington policy. It also ignores real wage gains for many cohorts and the fact that gold and real-estate promotions embedded in the article create an incentive to overstate ongoing threat. Fresh Iran-related energy spikes remain speculative.
If the Fed resumes aggressive cuts and supply chains normalize faster than expected, the cumulative price level could stabilize without further policy damage, rendering Griffin’s “six years of persistent inflation” framing outdated.
"Griffin is describing past inflation trauma through present-day anecdotes, not diagnosing current inflation risk—a crucial distinction the article obscures."
Griffin's anecdotes are real but misleading as inflation signals. Yes, eggs hit $8 in NYC—a supply shock from avian flu, not monetary policy. A $2.50 Coke reflects nominal price increases, but real wage growth has outpaced headline inflation since mid-2023. The article conflates cumulative CPI (33% food since 2020) with *current* inflation momentum, which has cooled to 3.8% YoY. Griffin's framing—'six years of persistent inflation'—obscures that we're now in disinflation, not acceleration. The real risk isn't runaway prices; it's that households anchored to 2020-2022 pain remain psychologically scarred, which could suppress consumption and create a demand shock if the Fed holds rates too long.
If wage growth is genuinely lagging for lower-income households and energy shocks persist (Iran tensions), Griffin's 'deeply triggering' framing may reflect real purchasing power erosion that aggregate data masks. Psychological damage from inflation is economically real.
"The article uses anecdotal 'sticker shock' to drive retail investors toward high-fee alternative asset products rather than providing a balanced view of current macroeconomic trends."
Ken Griffin’s focus on 'sticker shock' is a classic case of anchoring bias. While he highlights the psychological toll of inflation, he ignores the massive wealth effect from the S&P 500’s recent performance. The article conflates localized, supply-chain-driven price spikes—like eggs or energy—with structural monetary failure. By pivoting immediately to gold and alternative asset sales pitches, the piece reveals its true intent: fear-based marketing rather than economic analysis. The real story isn't that purchasing power is dead; it's that the divergence between asset-rich households and wage-dependent consumers has never been wider. Investors should look at real-time wage growth data, which is currently outpacing headline CPI, rather than anecdotal egg prices.
If real wage growth is indeed outpacing inflation, why do consumer sentiment indices remain at historical lows? The 'wealth effect' is concentrated in the top 10% of households, leaving the majority of the economy genuinely vulnerable to these price shocks.
"If inflation is near its peak and disinflation accelerates, the appeal of inflation hedges (gold, private real estate) dwindles relative to broad equities."
Griffin’s inflation narrative leans on anecdotes (Coke at $2.50, eggs at $8) to frame a long-run squeeze on purchasing power, but the piece cherry-picks data and glosses the evolving macro path. The CPI shows a mixed picture: 0.6% month-over-month in April after 0.9% in March; energy up 17.9% year-over-year, which can reverse, and policy risk remains high with Fed tightening versus a softer landing debate. The real-estate and gold pitches read like promotions and may underperform if disinflation accelerates or if higher discount rates and fees weigh on asset valuations. Readers should beware marketing bias in the promotions embedded in the piece.
Even if inflation cools, stubborn wage dynamics and ongoing energy volatility could keep some inflation hedges relevant, and real assets may still offer attractive income and diversification; ignoring that risk would be naive. Additionally, promotional ties in the article might bias readers toward assets like gold and art funds, muddying the macro-driven assessment.
"Wealth concentration means S&P gains fail to cushion most households from cumulative inflation shocks."
Gemini overlooks how the S&P 500 gains primarily benefit the top decile, leaving median households exposed to the cumulative 33% food CPI rise that Griffin cites. This concentration amplifies the demand shock risk Claude flags if sentiment stays depressed. Real wage outperformance since 2023 may not offset anchoring to 2020 prices for consumption decisions. Energy volatility from Iran could widen this gap further without broad-based asset ownership.
"Anchoring to 2020 prices matters only if households expect inflation to persist; if disinflation is credible, forward-looking consumption should stabilize around current price levels, not collapse."
Grok conflates two separate problems: cumulative price level (33% food CPI) versus current inflation momentum (3.8% YoY). The median household's real purchasing power *relative to 2020* has indeed eroded, but that's a stock problem, not a flow problem. If disinflation holds, future consumption decisions normalize around current price anchors, not 2020 ones. The demand shock risk Claude raised depends on *sustained* high inflation or wage stagnation ahead—not backward-looking anchoring. Iran energy spikes are real but priced into oil futures; they're not a hidden tail risk.
"The reliance on asset-driven wealth effects to mask cumulative inflation erosion leaves the broader economy highly vulnerable to even minor market corrections."
Claude, your distinction between stock and flow is analytically sound but ignores the political economy of the 'wealth effect.' If the Fed targets a soft landing, they are essentially banking on asset price appreciation to paper over the 'stock' erosion of purchasing power for the bottom 90%. This creates a dangerous feedback loop: if the S&P 500 corrects, the lack of real wage buffer for the median household will turn a technical correction into a catastrophic consumption collapse.
"Disinflation path may mask financial fragility; higher debt service costs and continued energy volatility could cause consumption to deteriorate faster than CPI trends suggest."
Claude’s framing risks masking a credit-channel slowdown. Even with disinflation, sticky services inflation and elevated debt service burdens can squeeze spending faster than headline CPI implies. If higher rates persist, lower/middle-income households face heavier mortgage, auto, and credit-balance pressure, worsening the 'psychological scar' into a real liquidity constraint. Iran-energy spikes aside, the real risk is financial fragility—deteriorating loan quality and a sharper consumption pullback than inflation trajectories alone would suggest.
The panel agrees that while inflation has cooled, median households remain vulnerable due to cumulative price increases and potential demand shock risks. They disagree on the extent to which real wage growth offsets this and the impact of Iran energy spikes.
None explicitly stated.
Sustained high inflation or wage stagnation leading to a demand shock if the Fed holds rates too long (Claude), or a feedback loop of asset price correction and consumption collapse (Gemini).