Dissecting the FOMC Statement The US Federal Reserve cut interest rates overnight by 25 basis points, taking the US Federal Funds rate to 2.25%. The rate cut was mostly seen as a hawkish one. In the press conference, Chair Powell said that the central bank’s rate cut was a “mid-cycle adjustment to policy ” rather than “the beginning of a long series of rate cuts.” We have dissected the July FOMC statement in comparison with the June statement to highlight the changes for ease of reference.
By
GO Markets
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. If the advice relates to acquiring a particular financial product, you should obtain our Disclosure Statement (DS) and other legal documents available on our website for that product before making any decisions.
The ASX 200 closed out the 2025 financial year on a high, reaching a new intra-month peak of 8,592 in June and within touching distance of the all-time record. The index delivered a 1.4% total return for the month, rounding off a strong final quarter with a 9.5% return and locking in a full-year gain of 13.8% — its best performance since 2021.This strong finish all came down to the postponement of the Liberation Day tariffs. From the April 7 lows through to the end of the financial year, the ASX followed the rest of the world. Mid-cap stocks were the standout performers, beating both large and small caps as investors sought growth opportunities away from the extremes of the market. Among the sectors, Industrials outperformed Resources, benefiting from more stable earnings and supportive macroeconomic trends tied to infrastructure and logistics.But the clear winner was Financials, which contributed an incredible 921 basis points to the overall index return. CBA was clearly the leader here, dominating everything with 457 basis points on its own. Westpac, NAB, and others also played a role, but nothing even remotely close to CBA. The Industrials and Consumer Discretionary sectors made meaningful contributions, adding 176 and 153 basis points, respectively. While Materials, Healthcare, and Energy all lagged, each detracting around 45 to 49 basis points. Looking at the final quarter of the financial year, Financials were by far the biggest player again, adding 524 basis points — more than half the quarter’s total return of 9.5%. Apart from a slight drag from the Materials sector, all other parts of the market made positive contributions. Real Estate, Technology, and Consumer Discretionary followed behind as key drivers. Once again, CBA was the largest individual contributor, adding 243 basis points in the quarter, while NAB, WBC, and Macquarie Group added a combined 384 basis points. On the other side of the ledger, key underperformers included BHP, CSL, Rio Tinto, Treasury Wine Estates, and IDP Education, which all weighed on quarterly performance.One of the most defining features of the 2025 financial year was the dominance of price momentum as a market driver — something we as traders must be aware of. Momentum strategies far outpaced more traditional, fundamental-based approaches such as Growth, Value, and Quality. The most effective signal was a nine-month momentum measure (less the most recent month), which delivered a 31.2% long-short return. The more commonly used 12-month price momentum factor was also highly effective, returning 23.6%. By contrast, short-term reversals buying last month’s losers and selling last month’s winners was the worst-performing approach, with a negative 16.4% return. Compared to the rest of the world, the Australian market was one of the strongest trades for momentum globally, well ahead of both the US and Europe, despite its relatively slow overall performance.Note: these strategies are prone to reversal, and in the early days of the new financial year, there has been a notable shift away from momentum-based trading to other areas. Now is probably too early to say whether this marks a sustained change, but it cannot be ignored, and caution is always advised.The second big story of FY26 will be CBA. CBA’s growing influence was a key story of FY25. Its weight in the index rose by an average of 2.1 percentage points across the year, reaching an average of 11.5% by June. That helped push the spread between the Financials and Resources sectors to 15.8 percentage points — the widest gap since 2018. Despite the strong cash returns, market valuations are eye-watering; at one point during June, CBA became the world’s most expensive bank on price metrics. The forward price-to-earnings multiple now sits at 18.9 times. This is well above the long-term average of 14.7 and higher than the 10-year benchmark of 16.1. Meanwhile, the dividend yield has slipped to 3.4%, down from the historical average of 4.4%. Earnings momentum remains soft, with FY25 growth estimates still tracking at 1.4%, and FY26 forecast at a moderate 5.4%. This suggests that recent gains have come more from expanding valuation multiples than from actual earnings upgrades, making the August reporting date a catalyst day for it and, by its size, the market as a whole.On the macro front, attention now turns to the Reserve Bank of Australia. The central bank cut the cash rate by 25 basis points to 3.6% at its July meeting. Recent commentary from the RBA has taken on a more dovish tone, with benign inflation data and ongoing global uncertainty expected to outweigh the strength of the labour market. The RBA appears to be steering toward a neutral policy stance, and markets will be watching for further signals on how that shift will be managed. Recent economic data has been mixed. May retail sales were weaker than expected, while broader household spending indicators held up slightly better. Building approvals saw a smaller-than-hoped-for bounce, employment remains strong, but productivity is low. Inflation is now at a 3-year low and falling; all this points to underlying support from the RBA’s easing bias both now and into the first half of FY26.As we move into FY26, the key questions are:
Can fundamentals wrestle back control over momentum?
Will earnings growth catch up to price to justify valuations?
How will policy decisions from the RBA and other central banks shape investor sentiment in an ever-volatile world?
While the early signs suggest a possible rotation, the jury is still out on whether this marks a new phase for the Australian market or just a brief pause in the rally that defined FY25.
While recent data has shown core inflation moderating, core PCE is on track to average below target at just 1.6% annualised over the past three months.Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell made clear that concerns about future inflation, especially from tariffs, remain top of mind.“If you just look backwards at the data, that’s what you would say… but we have to be forward-looking,” Powell said. “We expect a meaningful amount of inflation to arrive in the coming months, and we have to take that into account.”While the economy remains strong enough to buy time, policymakers are closely monitoring how tariff-related costs evolve before shifting policy. Powell also stated that without these forward-looking risks, rates would likely already be closer to the neutral rate, which is a full 100 basis points from current levels.
2. The Unemployment Rate anchor
Powell repeatedly cited the 4.2% unemployment rate during the press conference, mentioning it six times as the primary reason for keeping rates in restrictive territory. At this level, employment is ahead of the neutral rate.“The U.S. economy is in solid shape… job creation is at a healthy level,” Powell added that real wages are rising and participation remains relatively strong. He did, however, acknowledge that uncertainty around tariffs remains a constraint on future employment intentions.If not for a decline in labour force participation in May, the unemployment rate would already be closer to 4.6%. Couple this with the continuing jobless claims ticking up and hiring rates subdued, risks are building around labour market softening.
3. Autumn Meetings are Live
While avoiding firm forward guidance, Powell hinted at a timeline:“It could come quickly. It could not come quickly… We feel like the right thing to do is to be where we are… and just learn more.”This suggests the Fed will remain on hold through the July meeting, using the summer to assess incoming data, particularly whether tariffs meaningfully push inflation higher. If those effects prove limited and unemployment begins to rise, the stage could be set for a rate cut in September.
This coming Friday sees the January core PCE inflation data – the Fed’s preferred measure of inflation. Now most are forecasting that it should confirm that inflation has eased compared to this time last year. The consensus estimate has the monthly increase at 0.2 per cent with the annual rate at 2.5 per cent.
Now that is premised on a range of factors, they are also based on the fact the newly installed administration was not in power when these numbers were being collated. For now then – here are the key issues of the PCE read this Friday: Inflation Expectations: A temporary blip? Or is this the ‘transitory v structural debate again? – Upside impactor Several surveys are showing some upward movement in price expectations, mainly down to tariffs and other new external impacts.
Most don’t see this as a sign of a new inflationary trend but that is cold comfort considering how wrong these forecasts have been over the past three years. Case in point here is the University of Michigan’s 5 to 10 year inflation expectations which jumped to 3.5 per cent in February release, highest of this cycle. The caveat is that while this figure is high, historically this read has run above actual inflation, even when inflation was stable at 2 per cent, even so – a 1.5 per cent miss seems way out and even a 2.8 to 2.9 per cent read would be an issue for further cuts and the current US inflation story.
Other things to keep in mind: Tariffs were front and centre in February and clearly remain a political and geopolitical risk/threat. It should die down in the coming weeks as the administration settles in, the news cycle moves and the size of the tariffs retreat – that is until something causes the President to react. But March should be quieter – but the year will be volatile.
Countering the University of Michigan survey is the New York Fed’s, which hasn’t shown a major shift. If the increase in expectations were widespread, this would move the dial and would be more concerning. It makes the NY Fed data all the more interesting ahead of its launch.
We should also point out February’s manufacturing PMI showed rising input and output prices, while service sector price indices eased – why? Tariffs. This aligns with the 10% tariffs on Chinese imports that kicked in earlier this month.
With 25% steel and aluminium tariffs set for March 12, some price pressures may persist in March. Used Car Prices: A Temporary Divergence? – Down side impactor Used car prices in CPI have been running hotter than expected, especially relative to wholesale prices, which typically lead by a few months. And, this even after the surge in used car prices during the COVID era.
This market has remained above trend but is easing a Manheim wholesale used car prices fell 1.1 per cent month on month in early February, reinforcing our view that CPI inflation in this category has limited room to rise. If consumer demand were truly driving higher prices, we’d expect to see wholesale prices moving up as well which hasn’t happened. New York Congestion Pricing: Is this one and done?
A big policy pitch from the President for the state of New York was the congestion charging throughout New York City. True to its word the Trump administration revoked approval for congestion pricing in New York City, which had gone into effect in early January. This is likely to be the reason for the 2.6 per cent month on month spike in motor vehicle fees within CPI.
If the fee is ultimately scrapped, we’d expect an equivalent pullback in this CPI category. But with legal challenges keeping the fee in place for now – it was a double hit. One to watch.
Housing & Shelter: Watching LA Zillow’s single-family rent index rose 0.33 per cent month on month in January, consistent with shelter inflation continuing to slow – but still growing above historical averages. However it is not even across the country - Los Angeles rents spiked 1 per cent month on month - the biggest monthly jump since early 2022. The recent fires may have played a role, and if this strength persists, we could see upward pressure on shelter inflation later this year.
Median home prices remained flat in January, and with the broader housing market cooling, long-term upside risk to shelter inflation remains limited. In short, this Friday’s PCE is going to a line ball read – any hit that inflation is continuing to defy expectations as it has since September, the Fed will be dealt out of the rate market in 2025 and the USD, US bonds and risk exposures with debt are going to see reasonable movements. Which brings us to the other elephant in the market trading room – Tariffs on silver things.
Tariff Changes on Steel and Aluminium: Who really pays? We have been reluctant to write about the steel and aluminium tariffs that were announced on February 11. The Trump administration confirmed its plan to reinstate full tariffs on imported steel and aluminium—a move that will significantly impact both industries and consumers.
These tariffs are scheduled to start in early March, these Section 232 import tariffs will impose a 25% duty on steel and aluminium products, with aluminium tariffs rising from the previous 10% to 25%. Right now every nation on the planet (including Australia) is in Washington trying to wiggle their way out of the impending price surge – so far there is radio silence from the administration on if it will budge on any of the changes. Memory Lane If we take the 2018 tariffs as a guide, history suggests that once domestic stockpiles are depleted and buyers turn to global markets, U.S. prices will likely rise to reflect most of these duties.
However, exemptions may still be granted, particularly for aluminium, where the U.S. depends heavily on imports about 85% of aluminium consumption comes from overseas. While U.S. importers will bear roughly 80% of the tariff costs, exporters may need to lower prices to remain competitive—assuming they can’t find better pricing in other markets. Other things to be aware of from a trading point of view - The U.S. imports ~ 70 per cent of its primary aluminium Canada.
Who is the biggest play in that Canadian market? Rio Tinto. And it's not just Canada Rio Tinto ships approximately 1.75 million tonnes of aluminium annually from Canada and Australia.
Nearly 45 per cent of Rio Tinto’s U.S. aluminium sales are value-added products, which carries a premium of $200-$300 per tonne over London Metal Exchange (LME) prices. That is something that very much irks the President. Couple this with the fact physical delivery in the U.S. is also at a premium price and that gives you an average price estimate that could rise by ~40 per cent to approximately $1,036 per tonne ($0.50/lb), up from the 2024 average of $427 per tonne.
The thing is Rio Tinto itself is forecasting strong demand in North America, and its Value-add pricing is unlikely to change as domestic suppliers can’t easily replace the volumes it needs. In short, price pressure is coming – and suppliers will likely win out over the consumer. So what about Steel?
The U.S. imports 25-30 per cent of its steel so it’s not as reliant on this product as aluminium, but 80 per cent of those imports are currently exempt under Section 232 which is about to scrap it. That means the tariffs will impact around 18 million tonnes of steel imports annually, with: 35-40 per cent being flat products, 20-25 per cent semi-finished steel, and the rest covering long steel, pipes, tubes, and stainless steel. The Trump administration has signalled concerns over semi-finished steel imports, particularly Brazilian slab imports (~3-4 million tonnes per year).
What Does This Mean for Steel Prices? All things being equal - U.S. domestic steel prices will rise in full alignment with the 25% tariff on affected imports. The short and tall of it For both steel and aluminium, the reintroduction of tariffs means higher prices for U.S. buyers, particularly once inventories run down and imports reflect the new duty rates.
While exemptions remain a possibility, businesses reliant on imported metals should prepare for cost increases and potential supply disruptions. Traders should be ready for volatility, margin changes and erratic conditions as the administration rages over pricing issues.
You've been using a 30-pip trailing stop for as long as you can remember. It feels professional, manageable and relatively safe.
But during volatile sessions, you see your winners get stopped out prematurely, while low-volatility winners drift back and hit stops that are relatively too tight.
Same 30 pips, different market contexts, but inconsistent in the protection of profit and overall results.
The Fixed-Pip Fallacy?
Traders gravitate toward fixed pip trailing stops because they feel concrete and calculable. The approach is easy to execute, readily automated through platforms like MetaTrader, and aligns with how most people naturally think about profit and loss.
But this simplicity masks a fundamental problem.
A twenty-five pip move in EURUSD during the London open represents an entirely different market event than the same move during the Asian session. The context matters, yet the fixed-pip approach treats them identically.
This becomes even more problematic when you consider different currency pairs. GBPJPY might have an average true range of thirty pips on an hourly chart, while EURGBP shows only ten. The same trailing stop applied to both instruments ignores the reality that volatility varies dramatically across pairs.
Timeframe introduces yet another layer of complexity. Take AUDUSD as an example: a ten-pip move on a four-hour chart barely registers as meaningful price action, but on a five-minute chart it represents a significant swing. The fixed-pip method treats these scenarios as equivalent.
The natural response might be to use something more sophisticated, like an ATR multiple. This accounts for your chosen timeframe, the instrument's normal volatility, and even session differences. But it brings its own complications.
When do you measure the ATR? Do you use the value at entry, knowing it might be distorted by sessional effects? Or do you make it dynamic, which becomes far more complex to implement in practice?
Perhaps there's another way forward that doesn't rely on abstract measures of volatility but instead responds directly to the movement of price in relation to the trade you're actually in—accounting for your lot size and the profit you've already captured.
Maximum Give Back: The Percentage Approach
Instead of asking "how do I protect profit after fifty pips," ask "how do I protect profit after giving back a certain percentage of open gains."
Consider a maximum give-back threshold of 40%. When your trade is up one hundred pips, the trailing stop activates if price retraces forty pips from peak, locking in a minimum of sixty pips.
But when that same trade reaches two hundred fifty pips of profit, the stop adjusts, and now it activates at a one-hundred-pip pullback, securing at least one hundred fifty pips. The stop distance scales naturally with the magnitude of the win you're sitting on.
This creates a logical asymmetry that fixed pip approaches miss entirely. Small winners receive tighter protection. Big winners get room to breathe.
The approach adapts automatically to what the market is actually giving you in real time, without requiring you to predict anything in advance.
You don't need to maintain a reference table where EURUSD gets thirty pips and GBPJPY gets sixty. You don't need different standards for different instruments at all.
The same 40% logic works whether the average true range is high or low, whether volatility is expanding or contracting. It survives regime changes without requiring recalibration because it's responding to the trade itself rather than to abstract measures of what the instrument normally does.
The market tells you how much it's willing to move in your direction, and you protect that information proportionally. Nothing more complicated than that.
Key Parameters to Specify in Your System:
Maximum Give Back Percent: 30-50% is typical, but is dependent on how much profit retracement you can tolerate.
Minimum Profit to Activate: In dollar amount or an ATR multiple form entry. This prevents premature exits on tiny winners, e.g., if it has moved 5 pips at 40% that would mean you are only locking in a 3-pip profit.
Update Frequency: Potentially every bar. More frequent, but there may be issues if there is a limited ability to look at the market (if using some sort of automation, this could be programmed).
Is Maximum Giveback Always the Optimum Trail?
As with many approaches, results can be highly dependent on underlying market conditions. It is important to be balanced.
The table below summarises some observations when maximum giveback has been used as part of automated exits.
The major difference isn’t likely to be an increased win rate. It is about keeping more of your runners during high-volatility price moves rather than donating them back to the market.
It may not always be the best approach, as different strategies often merit different exit approaches.
There are two obvious scenarios where fixed pips may still be worth consideration.
Very short-term scalping (sub-20 pip targets)
News trading, where you want instant hard stops
Integrating Maximum Giveback With Your System
You may have other complementary exit filters in place that you already use. Remember, the ideal is often a combination of exits, with whichever is triggered first.
There is no reason why this approach will not work well with approaches such as set stops, take profits and partial closes (where you simply use maximum Giveback in the remainder as well as time-based exits.
Final Thoughts
To use fixed-pip trailing stops irrespective of instrument pricing, volatility, timeframe, and sessional considerations is the trading equivalent of wearing the same jacket in summer and winter.
Maximum Give Back trailing adjusts to the ‘market weather’. It won't make bad trades good, but it will stop you from cutting your best trades short just because your stop was designed for average conditions.
The market doesn't trade in averages but has specific likely moves dependent on context. Your exits should not be average either.
Multi-Timeframe (MTF) analysis is not just about checking the trend on the daily before trading on the hourly; ideally, it involves examining and aligning context, structure, and timing so that every trade is placed with purpose.
When done correctly, MTF analysis can filter market noise, may help with timing of entry, and assist you in trading with the trending “tide,” not against it.
Why Multi-Timeframe Analysis Matters
Every setup exists within a larger market story, and that story may often define the probability of a successful trade outcome.
Single-timeframe trading leads to the trading equivalent of tunnel vision, where the series of candles in front of you dominate your thinking, even though the broader trend might be shifting.
The most common reason traders may struggle is a false confidence based on a belief they are applying MTF analysis, but in truth, it’s often an ad-hoc, glance, not a structured process.
When signals conflict, doubt creeps in, and traders hesitate, entering too late or exiting too early.
A systematic MTF process restores clarity, allowing you to execute with more conviction and consistency, potentially offering improved trading outcomes and providing some objective evidence as to how well your system is working.
Building Your Timeframe Hierarchy
Like many effective trading approaches, the foundation of a good MTF framework lies in simplicity. The more complex an approach, the less likely it is to be followed fully and the more likely it may impede a potential opportunity.
Three timeframes are usually enough to capture the full picture without cluttering up your chart’s technical picture with enough information to avoid potential contradiction in action.
Each timeframe tells a different part of the story — you want the whole book, not just a single chapter.
Scalpers might work on H1-M15-M5, while longer-term traders might prefer H4-H1-H15.
The key is consistency in approach to build a critical mass of trades that can provide evidence for evaluation.
When all three timeframes align, the probability of at least an initial move in your desired direction may increase.
An MTF breakout will attract traders whose preference for primary timeframe may be M15 AND hourly, AND 4-hourly, so increasing potential momentum in the move simply because more traders are looking at the same breakout than if it occurred on a single timeframe only.
Applying MTF Analysis
A robust system is built on clear, unambiguous statements within your trading plan.
Ideally, you should define what each timeframe contributes to your decision-making process:
Trend confirmed
Structure validated
Entry trigger aligned
Risk parameters clear
When you enter on a lower timeframe, you are gaining some conviction from the higher one. Use the lower timeframe for fine-tuning and risk control, but if the higher timeframe flips direction, your bias must flip too.
Your original trading idea can be questioned and a decision made accordingly as to whether it is a good decision to stay in the trade or, as a minimum action, trail a stop loss to lock in any gains made to date.
Putting MTF into Action
So, if the goal is to embed MTF logic into your trade decisions, some step-by-step guidance may be useful on how to make this happen
1. Define Your Timeframe Stack
Decide which three timeframes form your trading style-aligned approach.
The key here is that as a starting point, you must “plant your flag” in one set, stick to it and measure to see how well or otherwise it works.
Through doing this, you can refine based on evidence in the future.
One tip I have heard some traders suggest is that the middle timeframe should be at least two times your primary timeframe, and the slowest timeframe at least four times.
2. Build and Use a Checklist
Codify your MTF logic into a repeatable routine of questions to ask, particularly in the early stages of implementing this as you develop your new habit.
Your checklist might include:
Is the higher-timeframe trend aligned?
Is the structure supportive?
Do I have a valid trigger?
Is risk clearly defined?
This turns MTF from a concept into a practical set of steps that are clear and easy to action.
3. Consider Integrating MTF Into Open Trade Management
MTF isn’t just for entries; it can also be used as part of your exit decision-making.
If your higher timeframe begins showing early signs of reversal, that’s a prompt to exit altogether, scale out through a partial close or tighten stops.
By managing trades through the same multi-timeframe approach that you used to enter, you maintain logical consistency across the entire lifecycle of the trade.
Final Action
Start small. Choose one instrument, one timeframe set, and one strategy to apply it to.
Observe the clarity it adds to your decisions and outcomes. Once you see a positive impact, you have evidence that it may be worth rolling out across other trading strategies you use in your portfolio.
Final Thought
Multi-Timeframe Analysis is not a trading strategy on its own. It is a worthwhile consideration in ALL strategies.
It offers a wider lens through which you see the market’s true structure and potential strength of conviction.
Through aligning context, structure, and execution, you move from chasing an individual group of candles to trading with a more robust support for a decision.
Major companies have announced over 25,000 layoffs in the U.S. this month alone, with Amazon leading the charge with 14,000 announced corporate job cuts.
This number may increase to 30,000 for Amazon by the end of the year, as CEO Andy Jassy pursues a vision of operating like "the world's biggest startup.”
Other big corporations have followed the same trend, with Target making 1,800 corporate cuts, Starbucks 2,000 positions, and, in Europe, Nestlé plans for over 20,000 cuts.
What distinguishes this round of layoffs is the focus on white-collar roles seen as vulnerable to AI-driven automation—affecting middle managers, analysts, and corporate staff.
Gartner analysts predict that by 2026, one in five organizations will use AI to eliminate at least half of their management layers.
According to a KPMG survey, 78% of executives face intense pressure from boards and investors to prove AI is saving money and boosting profits, with traditional metrics often failing to capture its business impact.
42% of organisations have now deployed an AI agent, up from 11% in Q1 2025
Ford CEO Jim Farley warned that AI will "replace literally half of all white-collar workers," while Salesforce's Marc Benioff claims AI is already doing up to 50% of his company's workload.
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei predicts AI could eliminate half of all entry-level white-collar jobs within five years, potentially spiking unemployment to 10-20%.
Nvidia Makes History Again As First $5 Trillion Company
NVDA hit a $5 trillion market on October 29, becoming the first company in history to reach this milestone. The achievement came just three months after breaching $4 trillion, further cementing its position as the dominant force in artificial intelligence infrastructure.
Since Q4 2022 — when Chat-GPT launched and began the AI-boom — Nvidia shares have climbed by over 1200% and Nvidia's valuation now exceeds the entire cryptocurrency market and equals roughly half the size of Europe's benchmark Stoxx 600 index.
Top assets by market cap
The milestone comes on the back of CEO Jensen Huang unveiling $500 billion in AI chip orders and plans to build seven supercomputers for the US government.
However, there are warnings that AI's current expansion relies on a few dominant players financing each other's capacity, and valuations may be running hot. The real test comes on November 19 when Nvidia reports its quarterly results.
Fed Lowers Rates, but May Be Last Cut of 2025
The Federal Reserve delivered a quarter-point rate cut last night, but Jerome Powell's post-meeting press conference sent a clear message: don't expect another cut anytime soon.
While the Fed moved forward with the expected reduction, Powell pointed to two key obstacles that may prevent further easing this year. First, the ongoing federal government shutdown has created a data blackout, depriving policymakers of critical employment and inflation reports.
Second, Powell revealed "strongly differing views" among Fed officials about the path forward, with a "growing chorus" advocating for a pause before cutting rates again.
Markets responded by adjusting expectations, now pricing in roughly two-to-one odds for a December rate cut — down from what had been considered more certain just hours earlier.
Odds for December rate cut dipped after Powell press conference
While the Fed still seems to remain committed to eventual rate cuts, the timeline has become dependent on the government shutdown and clearer economic signals about inflation and employment trends.
