PSX benchmark index up 2.3%WoW

The Pakistan Stock Exchange (PSX) recorded gains during the outgoing week amid ongoing diplomatic efforts to end the Middle East conflict. The benchmark Index closed at 177,874 points on Friday, November 13, 2026, up 2.3%WoW. Average daily trading volume was reported at 1.3 billion shares, up 24%WoW. Qatar-mediated US-Iran proposal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, alongside Russia-Ukraine peace talks in Abu Dhabi resulted in a decline in international oil prices. Brent crude eased by 3%WoW to US$96.1/ bbl on of Friday. On the macroeconomic front, workers’ remittances rose 14%YoY to US$3.9 billion in October 2026, translating into 4MFY27 remittances of US$14.8 billion. Moreover, fiscal surplus was reported at PKR1.3 trillion in 1QFY27 while primary surplus stood at PKR3.0 trillion. Furthermore, central government debt declined by 1% FYTD to PKR82.7 trillion as of September 2026. Government raised PKR551 billion through the latest T-Bill auction against the target of PKR400 billion, while cut-off yields declined. Foreign exchange reserves held by State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) were reported at US$21.6 billion as of November 06, 2026. Passenger car sales increased 60%YoY to 21,635 units in October 2026, led by growth in lower-displacement cars. Other major news flow during the week included: 1) ADB approved US$500 million contingent disaster financing facilities to support Pakistan’s disaster response, 2) Saudi-Pakistan Joint Business Council launched a private equity fund, with three-fourths of the initial size to be invested in Pakistan, 3) Prime Minister approved the final draft of the Auto Policy, 4) MSCI added ATRL to its FM Index, while FLYNG and PAKOXY were removed from the FM Small Cap Index, and 5) NTC imposed definitive anti-dumping duties of up to 37% on PVC resin imports for five years. Active sectors were: Leasing, Modaraba, and Miscellaneous, while laggards included: Refinery, Technology & Communication, and Paper. Major net buyers were Mutual Funds (US$25.8 million) and Other Organizations (US$5.1 million). Major net sellers were: Individuals (US$21.2million) and Banks (US$21.2million). Top performing scrips were: YOUW, FFL, MARI, PSEL, and PGLC. On the other side, top laggards were: ATLH, KTML, AICL, SSOM, and CNERGY. AKD Securities, expects the market to improve on the back of strengthening economic indicators. Moreover, any positive development on Middle East conflict could moderate international oil prices and serve as a key trigger for market as it paves the way for monetary easing. Market continues to trade at attractive valuations, with forward P/E of 6.4x. Top picks of the brokerage house include: OGDC, PPL, UBL, MEBL, HBL, FFC, ENGROH, PSO, LUCK, FCCL, INDU, ILP and SYS.

Microsoft Outage: Full Dress Rehearsal or Cyberattack?

The more than 12-hour outage of Microsoft Outlook and Teams crippled communications for businesses and governments globally on Friday. Analysts like me, who love to explore conspiracy theories, have a question, was this merely a technical malfunction, a full dress rehearsal or a cyberattack? Microsoft attributed the disruption to server issues, saying it was unaware of any malicious activity. It also announced a broader rollout of software fixes to stabilize its systems. However, the explanation does not eliminate the larger concerns about the vulnerability of the world's digital infrastructure. The outage affected government agencies, financial institutions, airlines and businesses across continents. Organizations struggled to send emails, manage calendars and conduct virtual meetings. Some financial institutions reportedly resorted to fax machines to confirm transactions, while at least one bond repurchase transaction in Europe was halted. Even healthcare services had to fall back on alternative IT arrangements and paper records. Interestingly, this was the second major disruption of Microsoft services in less than 50 days. Such repeated incidents raise questions about the reliability of platforms that have become indispensable to everyday business and government operations. Here comes the conspiracy theory. Following the much-publicized setback of AI giant Nvidia, concerns about the commercial prospects of AI companies and their service providers have intensified. Could the Microsoft outage have provided an opportunity to assess the resilience of competing platforms, identify system vulnerabilities and test recovery arrangements? Believers in conspiracy theories may even wonder whether this was a full dress rehearsal for a much larger disruption. Was the malfunction entirely accidental, or could someone have used the opportunity to test the consequences of a digitally induced breakdown? There is, admittedly, no evidence to establish such a connection, and Microsoft has ruled out any known malicious activity. Nevertheless, the incident offers an important lesson. The global economy has become excessively dependent on a handful of technology companies. When one major service provider encounters difficulties, the disruption can travel across borders and sectors within minutes. Businesses, governments, financial institutions and airlines must stop treating uninterrupted digital connectivity as a certainty. They need independent backup systems, alternative communication channels, offline data access and regularly tested business continuity plans. Whether this was a technical failure, a cyberattack or simply an unfortunate coincidence, users must remain prepared for more outages. The next disruption may last longer, affect more critical services and leave considerably less time for improvisation.

Nvidia's AI empire stumbles over Huang's human error

Nvidia, the company that has ushered humanity into the age of AI, has hit its biggest hurdle because of a very human error at the top

Jensen Huang, the cofounder and chief executive of Nvidia, who has basked in the spotlight of the AI boom, has come crashing down from center stage in the global tech industry. Allegations have emerged that Huang had an intimate relationship with a woman suspected of being a Chinese spy. Exposure of another relationship - this time with a company executive - has added to the scandal. Nvidia's board announced on Thursday that Huang has resigned as president, CEO and board member, effective immediately. It's like a plot from a James Bond movie. A rock-star CEO who built the world's most powerful chip company finds himself at the heart of an espionage scandal involving cutting-edge AI technology, one of the most sensitive battlegrounds in the US-China rivalry. The timing could hardly have been more dramatic. Democrats, who have taken an increasingly tough stance toward Big Tech and tech billionaires, have just won control of both chambers of the US Congress. Meanwhile, President Donald Trump, who has maintained close ties with Huang, has spoken out in support of him since the scandal broke. Next week, Trump is scheduled to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping during the APEC summit. With so many developments converging at once, it is hard not to wonder whether the timing is entirely coincidental.

Nvidia and Huang have become virtually synonymous. The company's public image centers on its charismatic leader in a black leather jacket. Nvidia, which designs the world's most advanced AI chips, is one of the most important customers of Taiwan's TSMC, Asia's largest tech company by market capitalization. Huang has frequently visited Taiwan and other parts of Asia, solidifying strong relationships with the region's leading tech executives. If Nvidia loses momentum without Huang's leadership, the consequences for Asia's technology supply chains could be profound. His departure could also give China's semiconductor companies a chance to gain ground, potentially shifting the balance of tech power between the US and China. Nvidia shares plunged following news of Huang's scandal. Nvidia is much more than a chip designer. The company has also become something of a central bank for the AI industry, providing massive funds to leading AI startups and cloud computing companies that, in turn, purchase its chips. This has made Nvidia a crucial source of capital and confidence for the broader AI ecosystem. The sudden loss of Huang, effectively the governor of this AI central bank, could raise fresh questions about the sustainability of the AI-driven stock market boom. That said, despite Huang's departure, Nvidia's financial performance is unlikely to suffer any immediate direct impact, as global tech giants remain heavily reliant on the chip giant's dominant market share in advanced AI semiconductors. However, it's difficult to overstate the consequences of losing such an iconic leader. If Nvidia loses its way without Huang at the helm, the fallout could spread far beyond the company itself in the not-too-distant future, affecting the global technology industry, geopolitics and financial markets. Courtesy: Nikkei Asia

US-Iran War: Why Saudi Arabia Has Become the New Target?

If one takes a cursory look at the headlines of leading conventional media, an interesting shift in the regional conflict becomes apparent. The US-Iran war appears to be turning into a Houthi-Saudi war, with Saudi Arabia increasingly portrayed as the victim of Houthi assaults.

There are two important developments worth examining. First, Israel stopped its attacks on Iran, and Donald Trump also announced a halt to US attacks. However, the conflict has not formally ended, and Washington continues to keep its military options open.

Second, the narrative surrounding Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia, particularly allegations concerning the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, appears to be gaining prominence. Saudi authorities have reported missile and drone interceptions, including in the Mecca region. The Houthis, however, have denied targeting the holy cities and maintain that their operations are directed against strategic and military installations.

An important question arises: why does the confrontation appear increasingly concentrated on Saudi Arabia? There have been no comparable reports of Houthi attacks on other GCC countries or US military bases hosted by them. This apparent selectivity deserves closer examination.

My concern is that the regional narrative may be undergoing a subtle but significant transformation. For years, Washington and its allies have projected Iran as a greater threat to regional stability than Israel. Now, the growing focus on Houthi attacks against Saudi Arabia risks shifting attention away from the original US-Israel-Iran confrontation.

There is another dimension that cannot be ignored; Saudi Arabia's oil exports. Attacks or threats against its oil infrastructure, particularly the East-West pipeline and export facilities, could undermine the Kingdom's economic interests and disrupt global energy supplies. The Houthis have claimed attacks on such installations, although individual claims require independent verification. The Kingdom emerges as the principal target of a wider strategy disrupting Saudi oil exports?

This is not a conclusion to be drawn lightly. However, Riyadh must carefully assess whether the conflict is merely changing its battlefield or whether Saudi Arabia itself is becoming the new center of gravity.

Making the US a Welcome Guest in Pakistan

As a geopolitical analyst with a particular focus on South Asia and the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), I warmly welcome H.E. Natalie Baker, the designated US Ambassador to Pakistan. Having served in Pakistan for a considerable period, she is reasonably familiar with the country's political and economic landscape, as well as its immediate neighbourhood. This experience should help her appreciate the challenges and opportunities confronting Pakistan.

I would, however, like to submit a few considerations for her attention.

Pakistan shares borders with Afghanistan, Iran and India. Unfortunately, border crossings with the three neighbours have remained closed for extended periods at different times. While such closures are frequently attributed to cross-border terrorism and security concerns, their economic and humanitarian consequences deserve equal attention. The closure of the Afghan border, for instance, disrupts transit trade and, more importantly, the movement of perishable fruits and vegetables, causing substantial losses to farmers on both sides of the border.

Similarly, US sanctions on Iran have constrained Pakistan's access to potentially low-cost Iranian gas, including the proposed onward supply to India. Pakistan also offers transit facilities for goods destined for Central Asian markets through Iran. During the recent US-Israel war on Iran, transit movements remained suspended for an extended period, highlighting the vulnerability of regional trade to geopolitical tensions.

There is also an apparent imbalance in Washington's regional priorities. While the United States regards India as a major trading partner, Pakistan has traditionally been viewed primarily as a frontline ally in the war against terrorism, particularly in Afghanistan. This perception deserves reconsideration.

The United States is a major destination for Pakistan's textiles and clothing exports. Yet, American investment in Pakistan's textile and clothing industry remains relatively modest. Greater US entrepreneurial participation could help Pakistan move towards greater value addition, modernization and stronger industrial competitiveness.

Finally, the continuing conflict in Pakistan's neighbourhood is contributing to rising anti-American sentiment. This is an important consideration that should not be overlooked.

I sincerely hope Ambassador Baker will view these submissions as an opportunity to broaden bilateral engagement. A relationship based on mutual economic interests, regional stability, trade and investment, rather than security considerations alone, would serve both countries better.

Making the United States a welcome guest in Pakistan requires understanding Pakistan's concerns as much as expecting its cooperation.

Give Eisenkot a Chance to Prove He Enjoys Majority

There are growing apprehensions that President Isaac Herzog may be under intense domestic and external pressure to ensure Benjamin Netanyahu remains Prime Minister of Israel for as long as possible. Such apprehensions must not be allowed to undermine the democratic process or the mandate emerging from the recent elections.

The October 27 election did not give Netanyahu's political alliance the parliamentary majority required to form a government. Moreover, some of his traditional allies have distanced themselves from him. In contrast, Gadi Eisenkot received recommendations from 67 members of the 120-member Knesset, against 46 for Netanyahu. President Herzog subsequently entrusted Eisenkot with the responsibility of forming the next government.

The question is why should there be any hesitation in allowing the parliamentary process to take its course?

I have two fundamental reasons for opposing Netanyahu's continuation in office. First, his political alliance failed to secure a majority, while several former allies have reconsidered their association with him. Second, he faces international allegations of war crimes, including an International Criminal Court arrest warrant, besides ongoing corruption proceedings at home. These circumstances raise serious questions about his political legitimacy and the credibility of his leadership.

I may not be an ardent supporter of Gadi Eisenkot, nor am I suggesting that he has an easy task ahead. His ability to bring together ideologically divided political groups remains uncertain. However, uncertainty about his ability to secure a working majority cannot be a legitimate reason to deny him an opportunity.

The right to elect a government rests with the elected representatives of the people. The President's constitutional responsibility is to facilitate this process, not to influence its outcome in favour of a particular individual.

Eisenkot should be allowed to negotiate, demonstrate his support and seek the confidence of the Knesset. If he succeeds, he should become Prime Minister. If he fails, the constitutional process provides for the next course of action.

Democracy cannot be selective. Keeping Netanyahu in office merely because some influential quarters prefer him would undermine the very institution that the President is expected to protect.

Justice delayed is justice denied. Israel's elected representatives, not external preferences or political pressure, must decide who governs the country.

US Must Shift from Escalation to Diplomacy

The United States' decision to relocate military aircraft from British air bases over a potential Iranian threat raises an important question; has Washington finally realized that the risks of prolonging this war are becoming increasingly difficult to manage?

According to media reports, the US Air Force relocated ten refuelling aircraft from RAF Mildenhall in England to Germany, Spain and Scotland. Osprey transport aircraft were also moved to another nearby base. Security at two British air bases was reportedly raised to the second-highest threat level in the US military's protection system.

Although British authorities have maintained that there is no immediate or direct threat to these installations, the American decision to reposition military assets speaks for itself. This is not simply a routine movement of aircraft. It reflects growing concern about the vulnerability of US military infrastructure.

One wonders what has triggered such anxiety. Iranian aircraft, drones and missiles are unlikely to reach British military bases. However, the threat should not be assessed exclusively in terms of geographical reach or conventional military capability. Iran may have developed asymmetric capabilities that can disrupt navigation, communications and other critical systems over considerable distances.

If Iran can interfere with aviation and navigation systems beyond the immediate theatre of conflict, even the most sophisticated American military aircraft could become vulnerable. Modern warfare is no longer determined exclusively by the range of missiles or the number of aircraft deployed. Electronic warfare, cyber capabilities and disruption of critical infrastructure can neutralize expensive military hardware without physically destroying it.

The repeated relocation of American aircraft from British bases should therefore be viewed as a warning rather than an isolated security precaution. Washington must recognize that further escalation could expose its military assets, weaken its international standing and undermine its claim to be an invulnerable superpower.

Donald Trump must reconsider his strategy. Instead of committing additional resources to an increasingly unpredictable confrontation, he should declare a unilateral ceasefire and open the door to meaningful diplomacy.

There is no merit in escalating a war that is increasingly exposing the limitations of American military power. Knowing when to stop is also a demonstration of leadership.