Oil Price Reality: Are We Destined for New Highs, or Just Another False Alarm?
Evan Lucas
16/6/2025
•
0 min read
Share this post
Copy URL
Oil has been thrust back into the spotlight as the negative catalyst for markets. The events over the weekend highlight just how fragile the Middle East is and how it will shape global trading in the second half of 2025.Putting Iran in an oil-specific perspective, despite rising geopolitical tensions, the potential for sustained disruptions to energy supply appears limited for now. This is backed by historical data seen in April, June, and October last year, where heightened risk didn't translate into prolonged price surges.There are absolutely geopolitical concerns around Iranian retaliation, coupled with Israeli retaliation, and so on. But the likelihood of strikes on regional energy infrastructure appears low.Iran’s relationships with Gulf nations have improved markedly, reducing the risk of hostile action toward their oil operations. This has been led by Saudi Arabia, which will be strong in ensuring no disruption to global oil supplies. The caveat is if Iran decides to go at it alone and block the Strait of Hormuz, which would severely impact the likes of Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, Kuwait, and Iraq. This appears unlikely, but a risk we need to be aware of.
Where does diplomacy sit?
Expectations are for tensions to spike in the short term. However, that will likely lead to renewed diplomatic engagement, particularly if the alternatives prove economically or strategically untenable (i.e., long-term war, regime changes, civil unrest). That's the long term; the near-term resolution is the concern. The United States and the greater regions of Europe and Asia will be brought in. We know that the President has a very high preference for low oil prices as a major part of his election campaign. With no signs, demand is likely to collapse. The only way to keep prices down on this escalation is to ramp up supply. The catch is that US producers remain very reluctant to ramp up supply at current prices. OPEC and Saudi Arabia have already moved to increase production to stamp out non-OPEC members on price, and Russia is still a global pariah with its war with Ukraine. So the supply lever is going to be tricky.
So, what about pricing?
Energy price volatility is being closely tied to positioning in the futures market. Historical patterns show a strong correlation between net longs and Brent pricing.If we speculate that short positions were to be fully unwound (from 187k lots to zero), the implied move could be around $14 per barrel. Brent recently hit $65 per barrel before the conflict and spiked to an intraday high of $78.5 per barrel on the news breaking. This reflects the type of technical squeezes we can expect. Sustained gains would then require fresh long positioning.
Summary
The market remains focused on how Iran and Israel might respond further, and whether any escalation might target energy infrastructure directly. Meanwhile, the U.S. continues to signal interest in keeping diplomatic channels open. Unless Iran decides to go against all expectations and independently block the Strait of Hormuz, we can expect heightened volatility in the short term, without any prolonged surge — similar to the patterns we saw during heightened tensions throughout last year.
By
Evan Lucas
Disclaimer: Articles are from GO Markets analysts and contributors and are based on their independent analysis or personal experiences. Views, opinions or trading styles expressed are their own, and should not be taken as either representative of or shared by GO Markets. Advice, if any, is of a ‘general’ nature and not based on your personal objectives, financial situation or needs. Consider how appropriate the advice, if any, is to your objectives, financial situation and needs, before acting on the advice.
Asia starts the week with a fresh geopolitical shock that is already being framed in oil terms, not just security terms. The first-order move may be a repricing of risk premia and volatility across energy and macro, while markets wait to see whether this becomes a durable physical disruption or a fast-fading headline premium.
At a glance
What happened: US officials said the US carried out “Operation Absolute Resolve”, including strikes around Caracas, and that Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro and his wife were taken into US custody and flown to the United States (subject to ongoing verification against the cited reporting).
What markets may focus on now: Headline-driven risk premia and volatility, especially in products and heavy-crude-sensitive spreads, rather than a clean “missing barrels” shock.
What is not happening yet: Early pricing has so far looked more like a headline risk premium than a confirmed physical supply shock, though this can change quickly, with analysts pointing to ample global supply as a possible cap on sustained upside.
Next 24 to 72 hours: Market participants are likely to focus on the shape of the oil “quarantine”, the UN track, and whether this stays “one and done” or becomes open-ended.
Australia and Asia hook: AUD as a risk barometer, Asia refinery margins in diesel and heavy, and shipping and insurance where the price can show up in friction before it shows up in benchmarks.
What happened, facts fast
Before anyone had time to workshop the talking points, there were strikes, there was a raid, and there was a custody transfer. US officials say the operation culminated in Maduro and his wife being flown to the United States, where court proceedings are expected.
Then came the line that turned a foreign policy story into a markets story. President Trump publicly suggested the US would “run” Venezuela for now, explicitly tying the mission to oil.
Almost immediately after that came a message-discipline correction. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the US would not govern Venezuela day to day, but would press for changes through an oil “quarantine” or blockade.
That tension, between maximalist presidential rhetoric and a more bureaucratically describable “quarantine”, is where the uncertainty lives. Uncertainty is what gets priced first.
Source: Adobe images
Why this is price relevant now
What’s new versus known for positioning
What’s new, and price relevant, is that the scale and outcome are not incremental. A major military operation, a claimed removal of Venezuela’s leadership from the country, and a US-led custody transfer are not the sort of things markets can safely treat as noise.
Second, the oil framing is explicit. Even if you assume the language gets sanded down later, the stated lever is petroleum. Flows, enforcement, and pressure via exports.
Third, the embargo is not just a talking point anymore. Reporting says PDVSA has begun asking some joint ventures to cut output because exports have been halted and storage is tightening, with heavy-crude and diluent constraints featuring prominently.
What’s still unknown, and where volatility comes from
Key unknowns include how strict enforcement is on water, what exemptions look like in practice, how stable the on-the-ground situation is, and which countries recognise what comes next. Those are not philosophical questions. Those are the inputs for whether this is a temporary risk premium or a durable regime shift.
Political and legal reaction, why this drives tail risk
The fastest way to understand the tail here is to watch who calls this illegal, and who calls it effective, then ask what those camps can actually do.
Internationally, reaction has been fast, with emphasis on international law and the UN Charter from key partners, and UN processes in view. In the US, lawmakers and commentators have begun debating the legal basis, including questions of authority and war powers. That matters for markets because it helps define whether this is a finite operation with an aftershock, or the opening chapter of a rolling policy regime that keeps generating headlines.
Market mechanism, the core “so what”
Here’s the key thing about oil shocks. Sometimes the headline is the shock. Sometimes the plumbing is the shock.
Venezuela’s heavy-crude system: Orinoco production, key pipelines, and export/refining bottlenecks.
Volumes and cushion
Venezuela is not the world’s swing producer. Its production is meaningful at the margin, but not enough by itself to imply “the world runs out of oil tomorrow”. The risk is not just volume. It is duration, disruption, and friction.
The market’s mental brake is spare capacity and the broader supply backdrop. Reporting over the weekend pointed to ample global supply as a likely cap on sustained gains, even as prices respond to risk.
Quality and transmission
Venezuela’s barrels are disproportionately extra heavy, and extra heavy crude is not just “oil”. It is oil that often needs diluent or condensate to move and process. That is exactly the kind of constraint that shows up as grade-specific tightness and product effects.
Reporting has highlighted diluent constraints and storage pressure as exports stall. Translation: even if Brent stays relatively civil, watch cracks, diesel and distillates, and any signals that “heavy substitution” is getting expensive.
Heavy-light spread as a stress gauge: rising differentials can signal costly substitution and tighter heavy supply.
Products transmission, volatility first, pump later
If crude is the headline, products are the receipt, because products tell you what refiners can actually do with the crude they can actually get. The short-run pattern is usually: futures reprice risk fast, implied volatility pops; physical flows adapt more slowly; retail follows with a lag, and often with less drama than the first weekend of commentary promised.
For Australia and Asia desks, the bigger point is transmission. Energy moves can influence inflation expectations, which can feed into rates pricing and the dollar, and in turn affect Asia FX and broader risk, though the links are not mechanical and can vary by regime.
Some market participants also monitor refined-product benchmarks, including gasoline contracts such as reformulated gasoline blendstock, as part of that chain rather than as a stand-alone signal.
Historical context, the two patterns that matter
Two patterns matter more than any single episode.
Pattern A: scare premium. Big headline, limited lasting outage. A spike, then a fade as the market decides the plumbing still works.
Pattern B: structural. Real barrels are lost or restrictions lock in; the forward curve reprices; the premium migrates from front-month drama to whole-curve reality.
One commonly observed pattern is that when it is only premium, volatility tends to spike more than price. When it is structural, levels and time spreads move more durably.
The three possible market reactions
Contained, rhetorical: quarantine exists but porous; diplomacy churns; no second-wave actions. Premium bleeds out; volatility mean-reverts.
Escalation, prolonged control risk: “not governing” language loses credibility; repeated operations; allies fracture further. Longer-duration premium; broader risk-off impulse across FX and rates.
Australia and Asia angle
For Sydney, Singapore, and Hong Kong screens, this is less about Venezuelan retail politics and more about how a Western Hemisphere intervention bleeds into Asia pricing.
AUD is the quick and dirty risk proxy. Asia refiners care about the kind of oil and the friction cost. Heavy crude plus diluent dependency makes substitution non-trivial. If enforcement looks aggressive, the “price” can show up in freight, insurance, and spreads before it shows up in headline Brent.
Catalyst calendar, key developments markets may monitor
US policy detail: quarantine rules, enforcement posture, exemptions.
UN and allies: statements that signal whether this becomes a long legitimacy fight.
The United States entered a government shutdown on October 1, 2025, after Congress failed to agree on full-year appropriations or a short-term funding bill. Although shutdowns have occurred before, the timing, speed, scale, and motives behind this one make it unique. This is the first shutdown since the last Trump term in 2018–19, which lasted 35 days, the longest in history.For traders, understanding both the mechanics and the ripple effects is essential to anticipating how markets may respond, particularly if the shutdown draws out to multiple weeks as currently anticipated.
What Is a Government Shutdown?
A government shutdown occurs when Congress fails to pass appropriation bills or a temporary extension to fund government operations for the new fiscal year beginning October 1.Without the legal authority to spend, federal agencies must suspend “non-essential” operations, while “essential” services such as national security, air traffic control, and public safety continue, often with employees working unpaid until funding is restored.Since the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act of 2019, federal employees are guaranteed back pay to cover lost wages once the shutdown ends, although there has been some narrative from the current administration that some may not be returning to work at all.
Why Did the Government Shutdown Happen?
The 2025 impasse stems from partisan disputes over spending levels, health-insurance subsidies, and proposed rescissions of foreign aid and other programs. The reported result is that around 900,000 federal workers are furloughed, and another 700,000 are currently working without pay.Unlike many past standoffs, there was no stopgap agreement to keep the government open while negotiations continued, making this shutdown more disruptive and unusually early.
Why an Early Shutdown?
Historically, most shutdowns don’t occur immediately on October 1. Lawmakers typically kick the can down the road with a “Continuing Resolution (CR)”. This is a stopgap measure that can extend existing funding for weeks or months to allow time for an agreement later in the quarter.The speed of the breakdown in 2025, with no CR in place, is unusual compared to past shutdowns. It suggests it was not simply budgetary drift, but a potentially deliberate refusal to extend funding.
Alternative Theories Behind the Early Shutdown
While the main narrative coming from the U.S. administrators points to budget deadlock, several other theories are being discussed across the media:
Executive Leverage – The White House may be using the shutdown as a tool to increase bargaining power and force structural policy changes. Health care is central to the debate, funding for which was impacted significantly by the “one big, beautiful bill” recently passed through Congress.
Hardline Congressional Factions – Small but influential groups within Congress, particularly on the right, may be driving the shutdown to demand deeper cuts.
Political Messaging – The blame game is rife, despite the reality that Republican control of the presidency, House, and Senate, as well as both sides, is indulging in the usual political barbs aimed at the other side. As for the voter impact, Recent polls show that voters are placing more blame on Republicans than Democrats at this point, though significant numbers of Americans suggest both parties are responsible
Debt Ceiling Positioning – Creating a fiscal crisis early could shape the terms of future negotiations on borrowing limits.
Electoral Calculus – With midterms ahead, both sides may be positioning to frame the narrative for voters.
Systemic Dysfunction – A structural view is that shutdowns have become a recurring feature of hyper-partisan U.S. politics, rather than exceptions.
Short-Term Impact of Government Shutdown
AreaImpactFederal workforceHundreds of thousands have been furloughed with reduced services across various agencies.Travel & aviationFAA expects to furlough 11,000 staff. Inspections and certifications may stall. Safety concerns may become more acute if prolonged shutdown.Economic outputThe White House estimates a $15 billion GDP loss per week of shutdown (source: internal document obtained by “Politico”.Consumer spendingFederal workers and contractors face delayed income, pressuring local economies. Economic data releaseKey data releases may be delayed, impacting the decision process at the Fed meeting later this month.Credit outlookScope Ratings and others warn that the shutdown is “negative for credit” and could weigh on U.S. borrowing costs.Projects & researchInfrastructure, grants, and scientific initiatives are delayed or paused.
Medium- to Long-Term Impact of Government Shutdown
1. Market Sentiment
Shutdowns show some degree of U.S. political dysfunction. They can weigh on confidence and subsequently equity market and risk asset sentiment. To date, markets are shrugging off a prolonged impact, but a continued shutdown into later next week could start to impact.Equity markets have remained strong, and there has been no evidence of the frequent seasonal pullback we often see around this time of year.Markets have proved resilient to date, but one wonders whether this could be a catalyst for some significant selling to come.
2. Borrowing Costs
Ratings downgrades could lift Treasury yields and increase debt-servicing costs. The Federal Reserve is already balancing sticky inflation and potential downward pressure on growth. This could make rate decisions more difficult.
3. The Impact on the USD
Rises in treasury yields would generally support the USD. However, rising concerns about fiscal stability created by a prolonged shutdown may put further downward pressure on the USD. Consequently, it is likely to result in buying into gold as a safe haven. With gold already testing record highs repeatedly over the last weeks, this could support further moves to the upside.
4. Credibility Erosion
Repeated shutdowns weaken the U.S.’s reputation as the world’s most reliable borrower. With some evidence that tariffs are already impacting trade and investment into the US, a prolonged shutdown could exacerbate this further.
What Traders Should Watch
For those who trade financial markets, shutdowns matter more for what they could signal both in the short and medium term. Here are some of the key asset classes to watch:
Equities: Likely to see volatility as political risk rises, and the potential for “money off the table” after significant gains year-to-date for equities.
U.S. Dollar: With the US dollar already relatively weak, further vulnerability if a shutdown feeds global doubts about U.S. fiscal stability.
Gold and other commodities: May continue to gain as hedges against political and credit risk. Oil is already threatening support levels; any prolonged shutdown may add to the bearish narrative, along with other economic slowdown concerns
Outside the US: With the US such a big player in global GDP, we may see revisions in forward-looking estimates, slingshot impacts on other global markets and even supply chain disruptions with impact on customs services (potentially inflationary).
Final Word
The 2025 shutdown is unusual because of its scale and because it started on Day 1 of the fiscal year, without even a temporary extension. That speed points to a deeper strategic and political contribution beyond the usual budget wrangling that we see periodically.For traders, the lesson is clear: shutdowns are not just what happens in Washington, but may impact confidence, borrowing costs, and market sentiment across a range of asset classes. In today’s world, where political credibility is a form of capital, shutdowns have the potential to erode the very foundation of the U.S.’s role in global finance and trade relationships.
The US has entered the Israel-Iran war. However, despite an initial 4 per cent surge on the open, oil has settled where it has been since the conflict began in early June — around US$72 to US$75 a barrel.Trump claims the attacks from the US on Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend are a very short, very tactical, one-off. This is something his base can get behind — some really big conservative players do not want a long-contracted war that sucks the US into external disputes.Whether this will be the case or not is up for debate, but there is a precedent from Trump's first presidency that we can look to. Iran had attacked several American bases in 2019, as well as attacking Saudi Arabia's most important oil refinery with Iranian drones. There wasn't a huge amount of damage; it was more a symbolic movement and display of capabilities by Iran.Initially, Trump didn't react — it took pressure from Gulf allies like the UAE and Israel for him to respond, which saw him order the assassination of the head of the Iranian Defence Force, Qasem Soleimani. This led to an Iranian response of ‘lots of noise’ and ‘cage rattling’, but minimal real action events, just a few drone attacks. Trump is betting on the same reaction now.If Iran follows the same patterns from the previous engagement, the geopolitical side of this is already at its peak.As of now, Iran is not going after or destroying major Gulf energy capabilities. Nor have there been any disruptions to the shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. In fact, apart from a posturing vote to block the Strait, Iran has not made any indication that it is going to disrupt oil in any way that would lead to price surges.Additionally, despite the U.S. military equipment buildup in the region being its highest since the Iraq war, critical Iranian energy infrastructure is running largely unscathed.This all suggests that the geopolitics and the physical and futures oil markets remain disconnected. Oil will spike on news rumours, but the actual impacts in the physical realm to this point remain low. Of course, this could change in future. But, for now, the risk of seeing oil move to US$100 a barrel is still a minority case rather than the majority.
For over 110 years, the Federal Reserve (the Fed) has operated at a deliberate distance from the White House and Congress.
It is the only federal agency that doesn’t report to any single branch of government in the way most agencies do, and can implement policy without waiting for political approval.
These policies include interest rate decisions, adjusting the money supply, emergency lending to banks, capital reserve requirements for banks, and determining which financial institutions require heightened oversight.
The Fed can act independently on all these critical economic decisions and more.
But why does the US government enable this? And why is it that nearly every major economy has adopted a similar model for their central bank?
The foundation of Fed independence: the panic of 1907
The Fed was established in 1913 following the Panic of 1907, a major financial crisis. It saw major banks collapse, the stock market drop nearly 50%, and credit markets freeze across the country.
At the time, the US had no central authority to inject liquidity into the banking system during emergencies or to prevent cascading bank failures from toppling the entire economy.
J.P. Morgan personally orchestrated a bailout using his own fortune, highlighting just how fragile the US financial system had become.
The debate that followed revealed that while the US clearly needed a central bank, politicians were objectively seen as poorly positioned to run it.
Previous attempts at central banking had failed partly due to political interference. Presidents and Congress had used monetary policy to serve short-term political goals rather than long-term economic stability.
So it was decided that a stand-alone body responsible for making all major economic decisions would be created. Essentially, the Fed was created because politicians, who face elections and public pressure, couldn’t be relied upon to make unpopular decisions when needed for the long-term economy.
Although the Fed is designed to be an autonomous body, separate from political influence, it still has accountability to the US government (and thereby US voters).
The President is responsible for appointing the Fed Chair and the seven Governors of the Federal Reserve Board, subject to confirmation by the Senate.
Each Governor serves a 14-year term, and the Chair serves a four-year term. The Governors' terms are staggered to prevent any single administration from being able to change the entire board overnight.
Beyond this “main” board, there are twelve regional Federal Reserve Banks that operate across the country. Their presidents are appointed by private-sector boards and approved by the Fed's seven Governors. Five of these presidents vote on interest rates at any given time, alongside the seven Governors.
This creates a decentralised structure where no single person or political party can dictate monetary policy. Changing the Fed's direction requires consensus across multiple appointees from different administrations.
The case for Fed independence: Nixon, Burns, and the inflation hangover
The strongest argument for keeping the Fed independent comes from Nixon’s time as president in the 1970s.
Nixon pressured Fed Chair Arthur Burns to keep interest rates low in the lead-up to the 1972 election. Burns complied, and Nixon won in a landslide. Over the next decade, unemployment and inflation both rose simultaneously (commonly referred to now as “stagflation”).
By the late 1970s, inflation exceeded 13 per cent, Nixon was out of office, and it was time to appoint a new Fed chair.
That new Fed chair was Paul Volcker. And despite public and political pressure to bring down interest rates and reduce unemployment, he pushed the rate up to more than 19 per cent to try to break inflation.
The decision triggered a brutal recession, with unemployment hitting nearly 11 per cent.
But by the mid-1980s, inflation had dropped back into the low single digits.
Pre-Volcker era inflation vs Volcker era inflation | FRED
Volcker stood firm where non-independent politicians would have backflipped in the face of plummeting poll numbers.
The “Volcker era” is now taught as a masterclass in why central banks need independence. The painful medicine worked because the Fed could withstand political backlash that would have broken a less autonomous institution.
Are other central banks independent?
Nearly every major developed economy has an independent central bank. The European Central Bank, Bank of Japan, Bank of England, Bank of Canada, and Reserve Bank of Australia all operate with similar autonomy from their governments as the Fed.
However, there are examples of developed nations that have moved away from independent central banks.
In Turkey, the president forced its central bank to maintain low rates even as inflation soared past 85 per cent. The decision served short-term political goals while devastating the purchasing power of everyday people.
Argentina's recurring economic crises have been exacerbated by monetary policy subordinated to political needs. Venezuela's hyperinflation accelerated after the government asserted greater control over its central bank.
The pattern tends to show that the more control the government has over monetary policy, the more the economy leans toward instability and higher inflation.
Independent central banks may not be perfect, but they have historically outperformed the alternative.
Turkey’s interest rates dropped in 2022 despite inflation skyrocketing
Why do markets care about Fed independence?
Markets generally prefer predictability, and independent central banks make more predictable decisions.
Fed officials often outline how they plan to adjust policy and what their preferred data points are.
Currently, the Consumer Price Index (CPI), Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) monthly jobs reports, and quarterly GDP releases form expectations about the future path of interest rates.
This transparency and predictability help businesses map out investments, banks to set lending rates, and everyday people to plan major financial decisions.
When political influence infiltrates these decisions, it introduces uncertainty. Instead of following predictable patterns based on publicly released data, interest rates can shift based on electoral considerations or political preference, which makes long-term planning more difficult.
The markets react to this uncertainty through stock price volatility, potential bond yield rises, and fluctuating currency values.
The enduring logic
The independence of the Federal Reserve is about recognising that stable money and sustainable growth require institutions capable of making unpopular decisions when economic fundamentals demand them.
Elections will always create pressure for easier monetary conditions. Inflation will always tempt policymakers to delay painful adjustments. And the political calendar will never align perfectly with economic cycles.
Fed independence exists to navigate these eternal tensions, not perfectly, but better than political control has managed throughout history.
That's why this principle, forged in financial panics and refined through successive crises, remains central to how modern economies function. And it's why debates about central bank independence, whenever they arise, touch something fundamental about how democracies can maintain long-term prosperity.
February opens with a policy-heavy tone led by Australia’s RBA decision, while Japan provides the core macro anchors through GDP and inflation updates. In contrast, China’s calendar lightens due to the Spring Festival, shifting attention to liquidity and policy headlines. Across the region, a firmer USD and softer metals continue to frame cross-asset performance, especially for commodity-linked currencies.
Australia: RBA
Australia begins February with a policy-driven focus as the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) delivers its monetary policy decision, setting the month’s initial tone for rates, currency, and equities. While markets had priced around a 70% chance of a hike as of 30 January, expectations remain highly sensitive to evolving data and RBA commentary.
Key dates
RBA Monetary Policy Decision: 2:30 pm, 3 February (AEDT)
Wage Price Index (WPI): 11:30 am, 18 February (AEDT)
Labour Force: 11:30 am, 19 February (AEDT)
What markets look for
Aussie traders will gauge whether the RBA reinforces a data‑dependent stance or shifts more decisively toward tightening.
Wage and labour data will be central in testing inflation persistence, while the next CPI reading anchors positioning heading into March. A balanced or mildly hawkish tone could keep short‑term yields elevated and limit downside in the AUD.
Market sensitivities
AUD and ASX performance will primarily reflect the RBA’s policy tone and broader USD momentum, while resource‑linked sectors should continue to track metals and bulk commodity trends.
The February earnings season, highlighted by CBA and CSL (11 Feb), BHP (17 Feb), and Rio Tinto (19 Feb), is also set to reintroduce stock‑specific drivers once the initial policy focus fades.
Australia’s February Consumer Price Index (CPI) release will be a key post‑RBA event, offering the clearest read on whether domestic inflation pressures are easing in line with the central bank’s expectations.
The data following the RBA’s February policy decision and could quickly reset rate path probabilities reflected in ASX futures pricing.
Key dates
Consumer Price Index (CPI): 11:30 am, 25 February (AEDT)
What markets look for
Markets will focus on whether trimmed‑mean and services inflation components show further moderation.
Persistent strength in non‑tradables or wage‑related sectors could reinforce expectations for additional tightening later in Q1, while a softer headline would support the view that policy rates have peaked.
Market sensitivities
A stronger‑than‑expected CPI print would likely lift front‑end yields and support the AUD, while a downside surprise could weigh on the currency and flatten the yield curve.
Equity sentiment may diverge and financials could find relief from a pause bias, whereas rate‑sensitive sectors like real estate and consumer discretionary would benefit most from a cooler inflation read.
Japan’s Q4 GDP release will be a key reference point for how firmly the recovery is progressing after recent quarters of uneven growth momentum. Arriving ahead of the Tokyo CPI print, it helps shape expectations for domestic demand, external trade performance, and how much scope policymakers have to adjust their stance without derailing activity.
Key dates
Q4 GDP: 11:50 pm, 15 February (GMT)/ 10:50 am, 16 February (AEDT)
What markets look for
Investors pay close attention to the balance between consumption, business investment, and net exports to judge whether growth is broad‑based or narrowly supported.
A stronger‑than‑expected print tends to reinforce confidence in Japan’s expansion story, while a weaker outcome can revive concerns about stagnation and delay expectations for any meaningful policy shift.
Japan: Tokyo CPI
Tokyo’s latest inflation reading shows headline CPI easing to 1.5% year‑on‑year in January from 2.0% in December 2025, dipping further below the recent peaks seen during the post‑pandemic upswing.
The CPI release offers one of the timeliest reads on Japan’s inflation pulse and is closely watched as a lead indicator for nationwide price trends.
Coming late in the month, it serves as a check on whether the recent inflation upswing is sustaining at levels consistent with policymakers’ many objectives.
Tokyo CPI: 11:30 pm, 26 February (GMT)/ 10:30 am, 27 February (AEDT)
What markets look for
Attention centres on core measures that strip out volatile components, alongside services prices, to see whether underlying inflation is holding near target or drifting lower.
A firmer profile strengthens the case that Japan is exiting its low‑inflation regime, while softer readings suggest that price pressures remain fragile and dependent on external factors.
Market sensitivities
A hotter‑than‑expected Tokyo CPI print can push Japanese yields higher and lend support to the yen, often translating into pressure on exporter‑heavy equity names.
Conversely, a softer outcome tends to ease yield pressures, weaken the yen, and provide some relief to equity sectors that benefit from a more accommodative policy backdrop.
China’s February macro calendar is structurally lighter due to Spring Festival timing.
The National Bureau of Statistics of China notes that some releases are adjusted around Spring Festival timing, with the February PMI scheduled for early March leaving markets without major domestic data anchors for much of the month.
Key dates
Spring Festival: 17 February to 3 March
What markets look for
Markets turn their focus to policy signals out of Beijing — think targeted stimulus or liquidity injections, as well as shifts in funding conditions and flows responding to global risk sentiment or USD moves.
Trade and tariff rhetoric, or surprise consumption measures like expanded trade-in subsidies and festive spending incentives recently flagged by the Ministry of Commerce, often spark sharper reactions than the usual data releases.
Market sensitivities
CNH and CNY pairs turn more reactive to USD flows and external headlines, often amplifying volatility in regional equities, commodity currencies like AUD, and China-exposed EM assets.
Holiday-thinned liquidity elevates headline risk, particularly in materials (iron ore, copper), tech hardware supply chains, and regional financials, where policy surprises or US tariff updates can trigger 1–2% daily index swings.
Expected earnings date: Wednesday, 4 February 2026 (US, after market close) / ~8:00 am, Thursday, 5 February 2026 (AEDT)
Alphabet’s earnings provide insight into global digital advertising demand, enterprise cloud spending, and broader technology-sector investment trends.
As Google Search and YouTube are widely used by both consumers and businesses, results are often used as one input when assessing online activity and corporate marketing budgets, alongside other indicators.
Key areas in focus
Search
Search advertising remains Alphabet’s largest revenue driver. Markets are likely to focus on ad growth rates, pricing metrics such as cost-per-click, and overall advertiser demand across sectors such as retail, travel, and small-to-medium businesses.
YouTube
YouTube contributes to both advertising and subscription revenue. Markets commonly monitor advertising momentum, engagement trends, and monetisation developments as indicators of digital media conditions and brand spending.
Google Cloud
Sustained Cloud profitability is often discussed as a factor that may influence longer-term earnings expectations, though outcomes remain uncertain. Markets are expected to focus on revenue growth, enterprise adoption trends, and operating margins.
Other bets
Initiatives such as autonomous driving and life sciences, while typically smaller contributors to revenue, markets may still watch spending levels and progress updates as indicators of capital allocation and cost discipline.
Cost and margin framework
Management has previously flagged elevated capex tied to AI infrastructure, including data centres, specialised chips, and computing capacity. Traffic acquisition costs, staffing levels, and infrastructure expansion are also key variables influencing profitability.
What happened last quarter
Alphabet’s most recent quarterly update highlighted advertising trends, Cloud profitability, and continued increases in capex to support AI initiatives.
Management commentary has indicated that infrastructure spending is intended to support long-term competitiveness, while the market continues to assess the near-term margin trade-offs.
Last earnings key highlights
For reported figures and segment detail from the most recent quarter, refer to Alphabet’s latest earnings release materials, including revenue, earnings per share (EPS), Services mix, Cloud operating income, and capex commentary.
Bloomberg consensus estimates moderate year-on-year (YoY) revenue growth and higher EPS versus the prior-year quarter, with ongoing focus on operating margins given AI-related investment.
Bloomberg consensus reference points:
EPS: low-to-mid US$2 range
Revenue: high US$80 billion to low US$90 billion range
Capex: expected to remain elevated
*All above points observed as of 31 January 2026.
Market-implied expectations
Listed options implied an indicative expected move of around ±4% to ±6% over the relevant near-dated expiry window. Movements derived from option prices observed at 11:00 am AEDT, 2 February 2026.
These are market-implied estimates and may change. Actual post-earnings price moves can be larger or smaller.
What this means for Australian market participants
Alphabet’s earnings can influence near-term sentiment across major US equity indices, particularly Nasdaq-linked products, with potential spillover into the Asia session following the release.
Important risk note
Immediately after the US close and into the early Asia session, Nasdaq 100 (NDX) futures and related CFD pricing can reflect thinner liquidity, wider spreads, and sharper repricing around new information.
Such an environment can increase gap risk and execution uncertainty relative to regular-hours conditions.
