Sustainability sure is debatable. Year-end crosscurrents obviously contributed to Monday's action, and probably even for the rest of the week. Concerns for sure on Wall Street stem in-part to an area they won't explore: bolstering S&P prices over the preceding two years to multiples that were unrelated to reality.

The trajectory of growth was never as strong as some contended, outside of Oil & Gas for-instance. But were related to increased executive compensation empowered by buybacks, funded by low-coupon bonds in many cases, and of course preceding historical insider selling in many mega-caps as we outlined.

The reactions to the extreme pessimism on Wall Street is a tough headwind of course, and will remain tricky to navigate. Resurgent interest in Energy, in the 'innovative' (or disruptive like Silicon Carbide's transition in Semiconductors) aspects of tech, in 'defense', in healthcare and ... sustaining life (water) will be seriously important. And Germany is depleting it's expensive Natural Gas and storage supplies quickly, with Russia eager to exploit the situation further.

Ultimately more so than the anachronism of Russia's war, that really needs to get negotiated in some form. We can note how peace would temporarily press Oil, on which the U.S. Government now acknowledges about 8 billion profits .. direct result of Oil trading and something I've periodically alluded too .. or we'd point to drought and climate change, for which monetary policy does bare the ineffectiveness of monetary policy to 'make it rain'.

Agriculture prices are clearly very much related to distribution costs, but also to greater availability of water and conditions favorable for growing, and that's an increasingly global challenge to deal with. The war in Ukraine worsened it all, but also served to highlight the dependency of the world on limited areas.

In-sum: 

a completion of the bottoming process is more likely than bloodbath some on 'the Street' are calling for, although it's been a 'rolling' bear market of course for nearly 2 years, the first part under-cover of S&P strength as noted.

I suspect many money managers are really honing-in on Apple (AAPL), as they're all in it pretty much, and it's the big companies that are or can be struck, not so much the small-caps that have really been pummeled all year long. That's not to say Apple can't hold, or whether today's 'miraculous' sudden availability of iPhone 14 Pro's is somehow say production resumed successfully, but might be emblematic of what's really on their minds.

China is focusing on 'growth' of 'consumption' in comments over these last couple days, and that's being ignored by analysts as far as I know. Maybe it shouldn't be, since I believe so-called 'lower demand' was primarily due to the Chinese customers/buyers being throttled in a great way due to now-phasing-out COVID lock-down restrictions. I'm not saying Apple can't go lower, but I am curious if that's their fear since otherwise all the negativity is 'after the fact' for a majority of listed stocks, that have been declining overall for many months.

Russia/Belarus cooperation is more worrisome than Russia/China naval drills at the moment, and a Russian/U.S. clash would obviously upset everything.