The Buraeu of Labor Statistics have released the latest jobs report for April. Let’s take a look at the latest numbers. The total non-farm payroll employment increased by 263,000 the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today, beating the forecast of 190,000. Biggest job gains were in professional and business services, construction, health care, and social assistance. Professional and business services added 76,000 Construction added 33,000 Employment in health grew by 27,000 Social assistance added 26,000 The unemployment rate fell to its lowest level since December 1969 to 3.6% beating the forecast of 3.8%.
The number of unemployed persons decreased by 387,000 to 5.8 million. The average hourly earnings remained unchanged at 3.2%, below the forecast of 3.3%. USDCAD – Hourly USDJPY – Hourly The next US jobs report is on 7th June.
This article is written by a GO Markets Analyst and is based on their independent analysis. They remain fully responsible for the views expressed as well as any remaining error or omissions. Trading Forex and Derivatives carries a high level of risk.
Sources: Go Markets MT4, Google, Datawrapper,
By
Klavs Valters
Account Manager, GO Markets London.
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 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.
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.
Artificial intelligence stocks have begun to waver slightly, experiencing a selloff period in the first week of this month. The Nasdaq has fallen approximately 2%, wiping out around $500 billion in market value from top technology companies.
Palantir Technologies dropped nearly 8% despite beating Wall Street estimates and issuing strong guidance, highlighting growing investor concerns about stretched valuations in the AI sector.
Nvidia shares also fell roughly 4%, while the broader selloff extended to Asian markets, which experienced some of their sharpest declines since April.
Wall Street executives, including Morgan Stanley CEO Ted Pick and Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon, warned of potential 10-20% drawdowns in equity markets over the coming year.
And Michael Burry, famous for predicting the 2008 housing crisis, recently revealed his $1.1 billion bet against both Nvidia and Palantir, further pushing the narrative that the AI rally may be overextended.
As we near 2026, the sentiment around AI is seemingly starting to shift, with investors beginning to seek evidence of tangible returns on the massive investments flowing into AI, rather than simply betting on future potential.
However, despite the recent turbulence, many are simply characterising this pullback as "healthy" profit-taking rather than a fundamental reassessment of AI's value.
Supreme Court Raises Doubts About Trump’s Tariffs
The US Supreme Court heard arguments overnight on the legality of President Donald Trump's "liberation day" tariffs, with judges from both sides of the political spectrum expressing scepticism about the presidential authority being claimed.
Trump has relied on a 1970s-era emergency law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), to impose sweeping tariffs on goods imported into the US.
At the centre of the case are two core questions: whether the IEEPA authorises these sweeping tariffs, and if so, whether Trump’s implementation is constitutional.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett indicated they may be inclined to strike down or curb the majority of the tariffs, while Justice Brett Kavanaugh questioned why no president before Trump had used this authority.
Prediction markets saw the probability of the court upholding the tariffs drop from 40% to 25% after the hearing.
Polymarket odds on Supreme Court upholding Trump's tariffs
The US government has collected $151 billion from customs duties in the second half of 2025 alone, a nearly 300% increase over the same period in 2024.
Should the court rule against the tariffs, potential refunds could reach approximately $100 billion.
The court has not indicated a date on which it will issue its final ruling, though the Trump administration has requested an expedited decision.
Shutdown Becomes Longest in US History
The US government shutdown entered its 36th day today, officially becoming the longest in history. It surpasses the previous 35-day record set during Trump's first term from December 2018 to January 2019.
The Senate has failed 14 times to advance spending legislation, falling short of the 60-vote supermajority by five votes in the most recent vote.
So far, approximately 670,000 federal employees have been furloughed, and 730,000 are currently working without pay. Over 1.3 million active-duty military personnel and 750,000 National Guard and reserve personnel are also working unpaid.
SNAP food stamp benefits ran out of funding on November 1 — something 42 million Americans rely on weekly. However, the Trump administration has committed to partial payments to subsidise the benefits, though delivery could take several weeks.
Flight disruptions have affected 3.2 million passengers, with staffing shortages hitting more than half of the nation's 30 major airports. Nearly 80% of New York's air traffic controllers are absent.
From a market perspective, each week of shutdown reduces GDP by approximately 0.1%. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the total cost of the shutdown will be between $7 billion and $14 billion, with the higher figure assuming an eight-week duration.
Consumer spending could drop by $30 billion if the eight-week duration is reached, according to White House economists, with potential GDP impacts of up to 2 percentage points total.
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.
