Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh started his fight against inflation with jawboning during June’s decision on monetary policy. The performance was all words, many task forces, and no action. Warsh doubled down on the jawboning for July’s decision. The Chair expressed even more resolve for hitting the 2% inflation target while making the measuring stick provisional. PCE remains the benchmark for now, but Warsh suggested the task forces could change that strategy after January and declined to identify the broader set of inflation data informing his judgment.

Warsh doubled down on jawboning by describing a contentious policy meeting while also sidestepping a request to explain the decision to hold rates unchanged. Warsh also refused to provide any insight on the dissent from the three of twelve voting FOMC members who each voted for a quarter-point rate hike (Beth M. Hammack, Neel Kashkari, and Lorie K. Logan). He even declared as a counterpoint that there was “a lot of agreement on the hard questions.” He also heard a lot of “commonality” on the key questions he mentioned at the top of the press conference; the answers just had different “leans.”

Finally, Warsh further extended his brand of opaque Fedspeak by countering the image of a Fed fighting over rate hikes with the unanimity on a metaphorical vote for a period of “watchful thinking not watchful waiting.” In either sense of watchfulness, Warsh did not provide specifics about what the Fed is actually prepared to do to finally bring inflation back to target.

The statement itself made the decision to hold rates steady even harder to explain. The FOMC described economic activity as expanding at a solid pace, productivity and capital investment as strong, job gains as keeping pace with the workforce, and unemployment as little changed. At the same time, inflation remained elevated. Yet, the Committee offered no explanation for why this combination of solid growth, stable employment, and above-target inflation justified leaving rates unchanged. Instead, the statement jumped from attributing some price increases to supply shocks straight into more jawboning: “The Committee will deliver price stability.”

Warsh’s declarations about inflation were all the more awkward given he continued to imply that the Fed before his tenure was not serious enough about its inflation target. For context, Warsh consistently describes inflation as a choice, a claim predating his appointment to the Chair. However, he has yet to specify the choices the Fed needs to make beyond the potential recommendations from his various task forces. Instead, he is keen to point out distinctions between the current FOMC and prior ones: “we have begun a new chapter, and we understand that the five-plus years of inflation above target cannot be cured in nine weeks—or by a single month of modest price decreases.”

Warsh introduced one more potential choice without making it specific: the balance sheet. He asked how much accommodation it is still providing even if interest-rate policy remains the Fed’s primary instrument. As with the inflation framework, Warsh posed the question without providing an answer, an intended adjustment, or a timetable.

Passing the Inflation Fight to the Bond Market

One emergent choice could be passing the inflation-fighting baton to financial markets. In his opening statement, Warsh anticipated questions about what the Fed did to fight inflation between the June and July meetings. He pointed out that the Fed’s retreat from the business of forecasting and forward guidance allowed financial markets to react to data instead of the Fed. The result? Higher bond yields that have tightened financial conditions. He used a sports metaphor to emphasize the change in the game: “market participants are learning to play the ball, not the referee—and market prices will continue to respond in the direction and magnitude they see fit.”

While Warsh insisted that “where necessary and appropriate, we will not hesitate to act,” he declined to clarify the conditions under which the FOMC would actually do something about inflation. Still, toward the end of the press conference, Warsh acknowledged that the bond market’s tightening of financial conditions provides “some comfort that we’ve got the ability and capability to deliver.” The coded language suggests that the Fed is willing to let the bond market do part of the inflation-fighting work while the FOMC waits for results.

One perplexed reporter pointed out that the bond market’s higher rates suggested the Fed was falling behind on hiking its own rates. Another befuddled reporter bluntly asked, “Why should rates not be higher today?” Warsh deftly avoided referencing the Fed funds rate and instead chose to point out the “market’s judgement” to take nominal rates higher along the Treasury curve. While the Fed will not allow the market to dictate its actions, the Fed is “observing” markets.

Warsh next pointed out that both the Fed and markets have upcoming decisions to make about interest rates. He tried to make it plain: “Monetary policy matters not just by what we say, or even what we do. Monetary policy matters by how it affects the real economy.” Of all the Warshspeak on the day, that statement stood out to me as the clearest declaration of the Fed’s modality for action in the Warsh era. If the Fed concludes that market is tightening financial conditions in response to inflationary pressures, the Fed will be content to wait for inflation to respond accordingly.

The Bond Market Hears Warsh Loud and Clear

The bond market seemed to get the point. Long-duration Treasury bonds sold off sharply as soon as the Fed’s statement hit the wires and barely stopped to catch a breath for the rest of the regular trading day.

The reaction function for stocks was much more volatile. The S&P 500 (SPY) rallied into and through the statement until someone tapped stocks on the proverbial shoulder and turned attention to the bond sell-off. The S&P 500 sold off sharply in the last hour of trading, falling from a marginal 0.4% gain intraday to a 1.5% loss at the close.

The subtle frustration from the press intensified with every unanswered question. One reporter almost pleaded with Warsh. The reporter pointed out his repeated claims about intolerance for above target inflation while his Fed has yet to take action. In response to the reporter’s request to clarify what he means by “no tolerance for inflation” and the plans to act, Warsh responded by acknowledging the impatience he had heard about this situation. Yet, he still only offered the same menu of jawboning by declaring this Fed is “on the job. We will deliver.” First, the Fed needs to answer a series of hard questions in order to deliver on its remit.

The press’s frustration symbolically boiled over in the last question: “You said you’d be open to having press conferences when there’s news to make. Today, no change in rates. No forward guidance. For the average household, what was the news today?” Warsh’s final non-answer was telling. Warsh first reiterated his commitment to the existing press conference schedule for 2026. He went on to assure the audience that the Fed is “on the case”, and his confidence in the Fed’s ability to deliver on its inflation target was even stronger than when he took the Chair position. He concluded the session by leaving the audience with “the optimism of a new central banker that we’re committed as ever to deliver and to offer an assurance we will.” And with that doubling down, the jawboning came to an end.

Be careful out there!

Full disclosure: long TLT

The post Warsh Doubled Down On Jawboning Even As the Fed Fights Over Rate Hikes appeared first on Inflation Watch.

In his first press conference as Fed Chair, Kevin Warsh found another way to talk up and reaffirm the Fed’s credibility on inflation. He shortened the policy statement to focus on what he called the ”facts,” removed forward guidance, repeatedly invoked the Fed’s commitment to “price stability,” and launched task forces designed to produce strategic and operational reforms for some time in the future.

Fighting Inflation With Jawboning

In his opening remarks, Warsh insisted that “members of the FOMC are unambiguous and unanimous. This Committee will deliver price stability.” He returned to the same jawboning when asked about inflation and the Fed’s ability to bring inflation back to target: “Today, I am announcing that this Committee has unambiguously and unanimously decided that we are going to deliver on that.”

Given the lack of forward guidance, Warsh’s repetition and reemphasis came without defining what the commitment means for the next rate decision. This approach is classic central-bank jawboning. The posturing gives Warsh room to maintain hawkish credibility without committing the FOMC to a near-term rate hike.

The most revealing moments came when Warsh responded to questions about the restrictiveness of current policy. He described monetary policy’s restrictiveness as “uneven.”

“If I look at the housing market as one example,” Warsh said, “Fed policy is not the single determinant of the state of the housing market, but broadly, I would say Fed policy appears to be somewhat restrictive there.” Warsh contrasted housing with financial markets. “I would have a hard time saying those words if I were looking at what is happening in financial markets.” That observation alone could have been sufficient to knock the S&P 500 (SPY) down 1.2% on the day and position it for another test of its uptrending 50-day moving average (DMA) support (the red line below).

Warsh made a similar point later in the press conference: “I do see some restrictiveness in things like housing. It is hard to use those same words anywhere else.” In other words, there is little to no case for cutting rates when the majority of the economy and financial markets are not behaving as if monetary policy is restrictive.

And for Further Emphasis…

In response to a question about underlying inflation pressures in the economy, Warsh pointedly emphasized the message from the statement on monetary policy: “…to be clear, the Fed will deliver price stability.” He again described the Fed’s commitment to price stability as “strong, unanimous, and unambiguous.” Warsh called this commitment “an important message we have missed for five years” and promised, “we are going to fix that.”

Warsh’s insistence and emphasis build the credibility behind the jawboning. The end of forward guidance avoids pre-committing to a rate path that at this time would have to point to higher rates. Warsh wants to pre-commit to an outcome. The outcome is 2% inflation. The path is deliberately unspecified except through the work of task forces.

There’s A Task Force for That

The task forces were a pillar of Warsh’s first press conference. He announced the launch of five task forces: Fed communications, the Fed’s balance sheet, data sources, productivity and jobs in an era of technological transformation, and inflation frameworks. Warsh said the groups will “start with first principles, ask hard questions, examine current practice, consider alternatives, and ultimately propose next steps for policymaker consideration.”

The inflation task force bolstered the jawboning on inflation. Warsh said, “The last task force, the one on inflation frameworks, will examine the drivers of inflation, first principles, and weigh the full range of ideas for delivering price stability in a changing economy.” Since the Fed already wields substantial inflation expertise in the Cleveland Fed’s Center for Inflation Research, I am keenly interested in the makeup of this task force and the institutional response to its work. I also wonder whether Warsh will advocate for delays in changing monetary policy until this task force completes its work.

Warsh even deferred to the task force when asked whether he still believes AI-driven productivity gains pave the way to rate cuts. When asked whether productivity could justify lower rates, he shifted the issue to the new productivity and jobs task force. He said the task force will examine “timing, scale, speed, implications for output and employment.”

Confidence In Price Stability, Not the Path to Get There

Ironically, Warsh sounded most confident when discussing the things he believes the Fed can control, and least confident when discussing forecasts. He repeatedly showed confidence in the Fed’s ability to deliver price stability. He expressed little confidence in the effectiveness of the Fed’s rate projections.

That contrast may define his chairmanship. Forecasts are uncertain. Dots can be erased. Forward guidance can mislead. But inflation, in Warsh’s telling, is ultimately a monetary-policy choice.

“You bet it is,” he said when discussing the idea that inflation is primarily determined by monetary policy. “I’ve said for years, inflation is a choice. You bet it is.”

Once again, Warsh postured as hawkish without overtly committing to rate hikes. If inflation is a choice, and inflation remains above target, then the Fed is responsible for choosing differently. Rate cuts do not bring inflation down (just ask the Turkish Central Bank).

Reporters tried repeatedly to nudge Warsh into acknowledging rates must go higher. He steadfastly refused each time. For example, when asked why the Fed did not raise rates given the inflation risks, he answered curtly: “I’ve got nothing more to say than the statement itself.”

Still, when asked whether there was any discussion of a rate cut, Warsh dismissed the idea quickly: “There was one proposal on the table. There was no discussion of any other proposals. The discussion on that proposal was, I would say, quite limited. The group was unanimous and unambiguous on it.” Any lingering hopes for a rate-cut narrative officially died at that point. Perhaps the new narrative is possible now that the FOMC does not include a voting member who requests rate cuts no matter what the data say.

Conclusion

Warsh is targeting inflation credibility through communication before leaning on the interest-rate weapon. He seems to be buying time for inflation to cool on its own accord (transitory without calling it transitory). However, given inflation has remained sticky for years and is now creeping higher, time is not on his or the Fed’s side.

Yet, the latest Summary of Economic Projections (SEP) projects a Fed-standard glide path to the Fed’s target in another two years…

Regardless, toward the end of the press conference Warsh proclaimed a credibility argument underlined the jawboning: “When we deliver on our price-stability objectives, which we will, the American people will feel as though the hardships they have been living through, in part because of inflation over the last five years, are in the rearview mirror. That credibility will have dividends across what we do.”

The market question is whether Warsh can make this promise credible without first proving he and the FOMC are willing to raise rates. I am betting they continue to find ways to avoid rate hikes for the rest of the year absent a calamitous turn of monetary events.

Warsh’s war on inflation started with jawboning and the new Fed Chair used his first press conference to establish inflation-fighting seriousness without directly threatening tighter policy.

The post Warsh’s War On Inflation Starts With Jawboning appeared first on Inflation Watch.

• 2025 GDP growth at 1.5-1.9% (down from 1.8-2.2% in December)
• PCE inflation at 2.6-2.9% (up from 2.3-2.6%)
• Federal funds rate at 3.9-4.4% (up from 3.6-4.1%). These adjustments allow for minimal rate cuts this year, preserving flexibility.

Despite rising near-term inflation expectations, Powell reiterated, “We do not need to be in a hurry to adjust our policy stance and we are well positioned to wait for greater clarity.” This approach sought to reassure jittery financial markets while preserving optionality, a critical balancing act as economic chaos and uncertainty intensifies. Specifically, Powell coolly presented two potential scenarios, supposedly neither of which will trip up the Fed:

“If the economy remains strong and inflation does not continue to move sustainably toward 2% we can maintain policy restraint for longer. If the labor market were to weaken unexpectedly or inflation were to fall more quickly than anticipated we can ease policy accordingly. Our current policy stance is well positioned to deal with the risks and uncertainties that we face in pursuing both sides of our dual mandate.”

Powell further argued that inflation expectations – while rising in the short term – are not shifting over the long run:

“We do see increases widely in short-term inflation expectations and people who fill out surveys and answer questionnaires are pointing to tariffs about that. If you look in the survey world, if you look a little further out, you really don’t see much in the way of an increase. Longer-term inflation expectations are mostly well anchored.”

Powell used this argument to suggest that short-term inflationary pressures, including tariffs, should not be mistaken for a structural return to high inflation. By insisting that long-term inflation expectations remain stable, Powell steered the conversation away from stagflation and toward a more benign interpretation of recent inflation trends.

However, Powell extended these reassurances too far by parroting Treasury Secretary Bessent’s claims that tariffs are a one-time and transitory inflationary impact. Powell insisted that “it can be the case that it’s appropriate sometimes to look through inflation if it’s going to go away quickly without action by us, if it’s transitory…and that can be the case in the case of tariff inflation.” I critiqued this explanation in “The Sleight of Hand Behind the ‘One-Time Adjustment’ and ‘Transitory’ Tariff Inflation Narrative“. While a tariff can impose a one-time price adjustment, that adjustment embeds higher costs into the economy. Powell himself acknowledged that consumers remain deeply frustrated by elevated price levels, stating, “The grocery bill is about past inflation really…they’re unhappy and and they’re not wrong to be unhappy that prices went up quite a bit and they’re paying a lot for those things.” It is exactly the higher price level that formed the core of my critique of dismissing tariffs as transitory. This deft maneuver worked in the moment as no one in the press pushed back and pointed to elevated price levels as being the future concern for tariffs now.

Powell also created uncertainty about the ultimate inflationary impact of tariffs: “we also hear that people are very reluctant to allow prices to go up. At the same time we hear that businesses are intending to pass many of these prices through. So it’s hard to say how this is going to work out.” Given this uncertainty, Powell should not suggest or even hint that tariff-driven inflation could be transitory. After all, the transitory framework failed miserably in 2021.

The market reaction to Powell’s messaging will be crucial in the coming weeks. Will Powell’s deft maneuvering and lack of urgency be sufficient enough to inoculate financial markets against the on-going, surrounding policy and economic chaos of rising inflation expectations, tariff-driven uncertainty, and fragile consumer sentiment? Powell’s ability to maintain flexibility will be tested as market participants digest his messaging. The next few weeks could determine whether his balanced stance reassures investors or leaves them scrambling for clarity all over again. For now, the immediate reaction in the stock market signaled a spark of relief.

The below 15-minute chart of the S&P 500 (SPY) provides the critical price levels traders need to watch in coming days for support and resistance during this bear market. Buyers celebrated with relief upon the release of the statement but ran out of gas at the intraday high of the week as Powell concluded the Q&A with reporters.

Conclusion

Powell successfully maneuvered what could have been a challenging press conference without committing the Fed to a firm policy shift. While he downplayed stagflationary risks and sidestepped concerns about persistently high price levels, worsening economic realities could eventually force Powell and the Fed to recalibrate this strategy under far more difficult market conditions.

Be careful out there!

Full disclosure: long SPY

Note: this post was edited with the help of ChatGPT 4.0

The post Jerome Powell’s Fed Deftly Maneuvers Through a Stagflationary Minefield appeared first on Inflation Watch.

For three months, the bond market has flagged stabilizing inflation starting with the Fed’s first rate cut of 50 basis points (bps). The stock market continued to rally along its uptrend lines. In parallel, the Federal Reserve signaled its second thoughts about its benigas n projections for inflation in the September Summary of Economic Projections. The stock market failed to listen and even Fed fund futures insisted on forcing the Fed into a December rate cut. The Fed delivered that rate cut with a major caveat in the December Summary of Economic Projections: hotter forecasts for inflation and economic growth and an incrementally hawkish expectation for future monetary policy rates. Accordingly, the Fed finally got the stock market’s attention as the market essentially plunged from euphoria to oversold in one day.

Long-term yields continued to increase the day of the Fed decision and the following day. The iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT) sliced right through presumed support and closed right at the low for the year set in April.

I took profits on my latest round of TLT put options last week. I will not chase TLT down here. Instead, I will wait to fade the next relief rally.

Instructive Projections

The Fed’s changes were significant but consistent with the Fed’s smoke signals and the declines in the long-term bond market.

• 2025 PCE inflation of 2.3-2.6% vs. the 2.1-2.2% September projection
• 2025 federal funds rate of 3.6-4.1% vs. the 3.1-3.6% September projection
• 2025 GDP 1.8-2.2% vs. the September projection of 1.8-2.2%

Fed Chair Jerome Powell’s commentary during the press conference was instructive. Powell left no question that the Fed sees higher inflation ahead: “these median projections are somewhat higher than in September consistent with the firmer inflation projection.” He acknowledged that under-estimating inflation this year was a partial driver of higher 2025 expectations: this year’s projections have “fallen apart as we’ve approached the end of the year”. Yet, Powell also laid the foundation and rationale for keeping a bias toward easing. He pointed reiterated that the labor market is no longer contributing to inflationary pressures and its accompanying cooling has gone far enough. Moreover, activity in the housing sector has been “weak”. Accordingly, Powell claimed that “cuts will certainly help to support economic activity and the labor market while we can still make progress on inflation because policy is still meaningfully restrictive.”

I remain skeptical. Is current policy really “meaningfully restrictive”? In his opening statement, Powell declared “with today’s action we have lowered our policy rate by a full percentage point from its peak and our policy stance is now significantly less restrictive. We can therefore be more cautious as we consider further adjustments to our policy rate.” This claim only weakly translates into “meaningfully restrictive.” Moreover, financial conditions are now almost as loose as they have ever been since the pandemic per the Chicago Fed’s Adjusted National Financial Conditions Index (ANFCI).

Sure, as one reporter in the Q&A pointed out, “we haven’t seen much change in mortgages, auto loan rates, or credit card rates.” Still, the conventional measures of financial conditions are about as good as can be in the post-pandemic era. Thus, the Fed is walking a fine line between the fear of restoking firmer than expected inflation and a labor market that is noticeably cooling. In the middle, the stock market is pricing in a perfect resolution to this dilemma even with the current plunge.

Powell’s Inflation Narrative Still Rests With the Pandemic

At several points during the Q&A portion of the conference call, Powell offered his version of inflation’s recent history, its origins and drivers. I was surprised to hear him claim that the economy is still dealing with pandemic-related disruptions that are propping up inflation. Perhaps this was a thinly veiled attempt to excuse this year’s under-appreciation of inflation’s stickiness. Powell also blamed technical factors for inflation’s stickiness: the way housing rents are calculated, lags in the data, and “temporary factors like fluctuations in used car prices.” As usual, I turned a skeptical ear toward this narrative because Powell, as he consistently does, absolved the Fed of any responsibility in aiding and abetting inflation’s stickiness by keeping rates too low for too long. I reviewed the case for why the Fed should have raised earlier in “Why Monetary Policy Was Late In Responding to the Pandemic-Era Inflation Surge“). At least this year’s experience and the learning response suggests the Fed will be more circumspect. Victory over inflation is not quite at hand yet.

The Fiscal Wildcard

Circumspection and caution should be keywords going into 2025 and beyond given the uncertainties in fiscal policy. A deepening tariff war and significant tax cuts threaten the Federal Reserve’s fragile dance with inflation-fighting. The mix of opinions within the Fed are telling. In describing how individual Fed members incorporated fiscal policy risks into their forecasts, Powell responded that some members chose to try to estimate fiscal impacts, some chose to leave out fiscal impacts, and others chose not to indicate whether they included fiscal policy. That is quite a mix! Powell made it sound like people stubbornly constructed their forecasts. Anyway, this inconsistency means that the reality of fiscal actions could drive inflation estimates even higher and cause even greater caution at the Fed.

King Dollar

The U.S. dollar (DXY) was the big post-Fed winner. Fresh strength in the U.S. dollar drove the Invesco CurrencyShares Euro Currency Trust (FXE) to a new 2-year low. This breakdown sets up FXE to eventually retest the lows from 2022. Accordingly, I am finally fully on the strong dollar bandwagon. I also expect the stock market to struggle to hit new all-time highs while the U.S. dollar makes new highs.

Is the Invesco CurrencyShares Euro Currency Trust (FXE) ready to resume a downtrend that started in earnest during the financial crisis?

YouTube video of the December 18th FOMC Press Conference

Be careful out there!

Full disclosure: long SPY put spread

The post The Federal Reserve’s “Hawkishness” Finally Gets the Stock Market’s Attention appeared first on Inflation Watch.

The chart below shows the change in PCE in the red (and lower) line. The change in the CPI is in the blue (and higher) line.

Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All Items Less Food and Energy in U.S. City Average [CPILFESL], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, October 10, 2024. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Personal Consumption Expenditures Excluding Food and Energy (Chain-Type Price Index) [PCEPILFE], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, October 10, 2024.

Who is paying attention to the stabilizing trend n core inflation? The stabilization started ahead of the Fed’s 50 basis points rate cut on September 18th. The giddy anticipation of that rate cut dominated sentiment. Since then, the market has become relatively more certain about a 25 basis point cut in November.

Long-term bod yields fell going in to the Fed meeting but have since shot nearly straight up. Same for the U.S. dollar. The iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT) fell again in response to the CPI report, and the U.S. dollar gained marginally. So the bond and currency markets may start anticipating a longer-lasting stabilization trend. Note how TLT has come straight down except for a one week pause above support at its 50-day moving average (DMA) (the red line below).

Source: TradingView

During this time, the U.S. dollar index (DXY) first bottomed and then shot straight up for much of October.

Source: TradingView

While both shorting bonds and going long the dollar have been profitable trades, the most interesting trading action sits with the S&P 500 (SPY). Despite rising long-term bond yields, the index managed to break out to a fresh all-time high. The September CPI report barely knocked the index off its all-time high. The S&P 500 seems to have a mind of its own and is hardly paying attention to much at all over time. Even the recent increase in the volatility index (VIX) has barely fazed the S&P 500. Moreover, this strengthening bullish appearance is happening during a time which represents the third of the stock market’s most dangerous months.

Source: TradingVIew

In other words, while stabilizing inflation could dampen the trajectory for rate cuts, the S&P 500 seems to be on a near one-way track higher going into the November Presidential elections and year-end. Cause and effect across financial instruments seems quite muted. Or maybe stock traders and investors are straining to make the case that stabilization will soon give way to a resumption of a downtrend in inflation. Either way, it is not clear who is paying attention to stabilizing core inflation.

As long as these broken correlations persist, I prefer to just follow the current trends: fade TLT rallies, buy dips in the U.S. dollar, and, yes, buy the S&P 500 (I am currently hedged with a SPY put spread).

Be careful out there!

Full disclosure: net long the U.S. dollar, long SPY put spread

The post Who Is Paying Attention to Stabilizing Core Inflation? appeared first on Inflation Watch.

These graphs show a clear victory over inflation. Still, the 70% confidence interval remains wide over a range from close to 0% to 4%.

Gold Disagrees

Gold disagrees with the Fed’s inflation victory. Gold bugs are likely staring at the top end of the PCE confidence range (or even higher!). Gold is the most interesting contradictory signal for the Fed’s victory because it has easily outperformed the S&P 500 (SPY) this year. The SPDR Gold Trust (GLD) is up 26.7% year-to-date; this performance well outpaces the S&P 500’s 19.6% gain for the year. Gold can of course gain favor for a variety of reasons, but as long as rates are trending downward, I expect gold to continue higher. Notably, GLD bounced back sharply after its initial post-Fed fade and closed last week at a fresh all-time high.

The Wary Bond Market

The bond market looks a little wary about the Fed’s presumed victory. The iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT), which goes up when long-term interest rates go down, rallied into the Fed’s announcement on monetary policy. However, TLT gapped down ahead of the news and closed lower. TLT continued lower the rest of the week. It is possible the bond market got ahead of itself in anticipating economic weakness and/or lower inflation. Either way, I am looking at the technicals of TLT and see the confirmation of a (horizontal) presumed trading range. This trading range is working against the steep uptrend in the 20-day moving average (the dotted line in the chart below) and the 50-day moving average (the red line in the chart below). Thus, some kind of trend change or resolution is likely on the way in coming weeks. The outcome may sway my interpretation of the Fed’s inflation victory.

Bowman Disagrees

Both gold and the bond market could even take cues from the one dissenting voice on the Fed. On Friday, Governor Michelle W. Bowman explained why she only wanted a 25 basis point cut: “We have not yet achieved our inflation goal.” In particular, Bowman worries the 50 basis point cut “could be interpreted as a premature declaration of victory on our price stability mandate.” Bowman is not ready to declare victory.

The next Fed meeting is not until November. There is a lot of time ahead for Fedspeak to lean against any excessive victory celebrations in the financial markets. I will keep an interested eye on the market’s reaction to sobering words of caution and restraint.

The U.S. Dollar Hangs in the Balance

The Fed’s implied victory over inflation is also the U.S. dollar’s loss. The Fed is a bit late in lowering interest rates relative to several of its peers. The European Central Bank (ECB), the Bank of England (BoE), and the Bank of Canada (BoC) each dared to lower rates ahead of the Fed’s move. Yet, currency markets stayed keenly focused on coming rate cuts from the Fed such that the U.S. dollar weakened against each of the related currencies even as other banks fell one-by-one.

The British pound, Invesco CurrencyShares® British Pound Sterling Trust (FXB), benefited the most from dollar weakness of the currencies that are in the middle of rate cut cycles. Last week, FXB broke out to a fresh 31-month high. The weekly chart below shows FXB has room to recover back to its highs from 2021. Such a run is in the cards if Fed rate cut expectations continue to point lower.

I want to get more bullish on the Canadian dollar, but Invesco CurrencyShares® Canadian Dollar Trust (FXC) barely shows signs of life. FXC is scraping along a bottom that has served as support since the lows of 2022. If FXC hurdles over the previous weekly high, I will get more constructive. In the meantime, it seems the Canadian dollar is captured by a fate similar to the U.S. dollar (DXY).

The Victory Trade

So far, the Fed’s victory over inflation looks like victory for gold and the British pound. The story from the stock market is mixed. While the S&P 500 is back to an all-time high, the NASDAQ remains below a bearish topping pattern. Small caps are languishing. I do not expect the story to get clearer during October given its reputation as one of the stock market’s most dangerous months. Thus I am (short-term) neutral on the stock market as a whole while I remain (perma) bullish on gold. Gold is my inflation victory trade.

Be careful out there!

Full disclosure: long GLD, long SPY put spread, long QQQ put spread, net long USD

The post What A Victory Over Inflation Looks Like to the Federal Reserve appeared first on Inflation Watch.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All Items in U.S. City Average [CPIAUCSL], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, July 11, 2024

The chart above shows that the CPI stayed within a tight range of change between 0% and 0.5% until June’s reading. That pleasurable drop into negative territory for the first time since May, 2020 was enough to cause major shifts in financial markets. Investors quickly rotated out of growth stocks like big cap tech and bought up interest rate sensitive stocks and the “cheap” stuff that has been left for dead.

The iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) soared 3.6% to a 28-month high, a long overdue and bullish breakout.

The iShares U.S. Home Construction ETF (ITB) surged 6.2%, quickly defied a recent downgrade from Citigroup that seemed poised to send ITB into an eventual bear market, and shook off the blues from a busted spring home selling season.

The iShares U.S. Real Estate ETF (IYR) gapped up 2.8% and almost finished recovering its losses for the year.

Even the regional banks came alive. The SPDR S&P Regional Banking ETF (KRE) jumped 4.2% and almost got back to flat for the year.

The end result of these strong gains and reversals was an abrupt improvement in market breadth. My favorite technical indicator, the percentage of stocks trading above their 50-day moving averages (DMAs), or what I call AT50 for short, climbed an astonishing 13 percentage points. A subtle downtrend came to an abrupt and definitive end.

This shift continues a string of notable divergences in market breadth. This divergence is a bullish contrast to the notable declines in the S&P 500 (SPY) and the NASDAQ (COMPQ) on the day, 0.9% and 2.0% respectively. Both major indices suddenly look toppy again.Once again, they printed what technical traders call bearish engulfing patterns, sometimes called major reversals. Only the surge in market breadth stops me from getting bearish (I remain neutral on the stock market per the last label in the S&P 500 chart below).

Now all the market needs is an actual rate cut from the Fed to give the celebration in market breadth some lasting power. As I noted when making the case to buy into the iShares MSCI BRazil ETF (EWZ), the market has recently sniffed out an imminent launch of a rate cutting cycle from the Federal Reserve. July 11th is the day the market practically forced the Fed’s hand. The odds of a rate cut for September jumped from 69.7% to 86.4%. The odds for staying right where they are dropped a lot closer to zero.

Source: CME FedWatch Tool

Now Back to the Inflation Story

While the celebrating over a negative handle on the headline CPI was market-moving, the headline CPI just continued an easily recognizable trajectory. Core CPI increased from the previous month and was up 3.3% year-over-year; both increases were lower than the previous month. The trend continues downward. Thus there was really no new news in the data. The trend is down, the trend is still the friend of the consumer.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All Items Less Food and Energy in U.S. City Average [CPILFESL], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, July 11, 2024.

I earlier complained in “Fed’s Powell Avoids the Obvious: Inflation and Interest Rate Forecasts Make Little Sense” that Powell’s insistence that the Fed would cut once was inconsistent with a forecast indicating no progress on inflation. The core CPI continues to suggest that (overall) inflation’s days are dead for now.

Epilogue: TLT

The soft inflation numbers naturally drove bond yields down. The iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT) jumped 1.0% after fading from its highs of the day (TLT moves opposite the direction of yields). I used this opportunity to buy a fresh tranche of put options. I like fading TLT because the crushing levels of debt issuance periodically force yields higher and send TLT lower. Moreover, the economy is still able to generate enough inflation scares to send bond yields higher. Having said that, I have shifted the trade from a downtrend channel (shown in blue below) to a horizontal trading range (shown in black below). The first trade off this new presume range worked well as I took profits right at the top of the previous downtrend channel.

Of course a rate cut from the Fed could alter this trade all over again.

Be careful out there!

Full disclosure: long ITB, long SPY puts, long QQQ calendar call spread, long TLT put options, long EWZ

The post Now the Market Just Needs the Rate Cuts appeared first on Inflation Watch.

Most telling in today’s performance was Powell’s dance around the questions trying to reconcile the economic forecasts with the rate forecasts. They seem inconsistent at best and make little sense at worst: one rate cut and no further progress on inflation (core PCE (Personal Consumption Expenditures)). The quotes below come from Powell’s introductory remarks.

• A midpoint expectation for one rate cut in 2024: “If the economy evolves as expected, the median participant projects that the appropriate level of the federal funds rate will be 5.1 percent at the end of this year, 4.1 percent at the end of 2025, and 3.1 percent at the end of 2026.” Note that the current rate is set to 5.25% to 5.50%. March’s median projection was 4.6% for year-end.
• Core PCE projection for 2024 increased from March’s 2.6% to 2.8% for 2024 and going to 2.0% in 2026. Core PCE has shown no downward momentum yet this year. It has gone from 2.9% in January to 2.8% from February through April. Thus, the Fed expects no further progress on inflation this year.
• The Fed made no changes to its GDP growth forecasts: 2.1% this year, and 2.0% for the next two years.
• The Fed made a slight change to its unemployment forecast. This year stayed at 4.0%. The rate went from 4.1% to 4.2% next year and from 4.0% to 4.1% in 2026.

Put it all together, and it is not clear why the Fed wants to cut rates at all this year. I made this point last month in “Fed’s Powell Avoids Rate Cut Talk While April CPI Keeps Hope Alive” and in March in “Financial Conditions Make A Monetary Roundtrip and Undercut the Need for Rate Cuts“. Now, with no forecasted progress in core PCE inflation for this year, the Fed seems to risk sticky inflation staying sticky for longer if it cuts rates before seeing the “sustained progress” Powell talks about ad nauseam. In this latest round, Powell repeated the policy principle yet again: “we don’t think it’ll be appropriate to reduce rates and begin to loosen policy until we have more confidence that inflation is moving back down to 2% on a on a sustainable basis and that’s the that’s the test we’ve applied”.

When Powell was asked about the conundrum, I expected him to untangle the problem by indicating these forecasts are interdependent and assume that the underlying economic mechanisms that connect all these factors work out as expected. For example, one hypothetical would be a world without a rate cut in 2024 which undermines the rosy projections for GDP and employment. Instead, Powell essentially undermined the meaningfulness of the forecasts.

Powell began by explaining away the sticky core PCE with a technical discussion about lapping lower readings from last year. He essentially suggested that the sticky core PCE is an artifact of tough comparables and thus not as meaningful as it seems at first glance. More baffling was Powell’s attempt to reconcile a year-end forecast that is higher than analyst forecasts for core PCE in May while at the same time forecasting a rate cut:

“it’s a forecast a fairly conservative forecast month by month that would lead to slightly higher…12 months rates by the end of the year if we get…better ratings than that then you will see that come down or remain the same. If you’re at 2.6 2.7 [for May] you know that’s that’s a really good place to be.”

In other words, this last lonely rate cut rushing toward the departure gate looks like the Fed’s fleeting attempt to throw the market a bone and deliver permission to continue to rally in anticipation of a rate cut cycle.

The Teflon S&P 500

The S&P 500 went into the Fed announcement at all-time highs and trading well above its upper Bollinger Band (BB) (the black lines defining price volatility in the chart below). From a technical perspective the S&P 500 is in an extremely stretched position to the upside. The small fade into the close still left the index quite stretched (short-term) to the upside.

The market gapped up in the morning presumably on a favorable print for the CPI (Consumer Price Index). However, while Powell acknowledged the positive development, he still threw cold water on the idea that this report finally gave the Fed permission to proceed with rate cuts:

“…we see today’s report as progress and as you know building confidence, but we we don’t see ourselves as having the confidence…that would warrant beginning to loosen policy.”

I am impressed the S&P 500 held on to any gains for the day. Then again, the index, and the stock market in general, has over the course of time acted like teflon against the on-going slippage in the forecast for lower rates.

The Trapped Bond Market

The stock market’s teflon has occasionally emerged tarnished by rising long-term bond yields. The breakout (lower yields) for iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT) earlier in June paved the way for the latest phase in the stock market’s rally. Yet, the S&P 500 did not come down with a pullback to the previous downtrend channel. TLT’s fade from last week’s high, as Powell made the case for a dovish hawkishness, may set the stage for a new trading range that traps the bond market in a new sideways trading channel. If so, the S&P 500 can detach more clearly from the machinations in yields. To-date, the on-going expectations for rate cuts has been an important driver helping the S&P 500 eventually recover from fears over long-term bond yields even as market breadth has waned.

In the meantime, I bought TLT put options as a trade on the presumed, new range.

Be careful out there!

Full disclosure: long TLT puts, long SPY puts and put spread

The post Fed’s Powell Avoids the Obvious: Inflation and Interest Rate Forecasts Make Little Sense appeared first on Inflation Watch.

I break down the key components of Powell’s observations (using the transcript from the CNBC TV recoding of the live event) and then juxtapose them with the prospects for inflation going forward.

The S&P 500 (SPY) since the October lows overlayed with my past short-term trading calls. (Source: Tradingview.com)

Is Policy Really Restrictive?

Powell observed that “the labor market is about as tight as it was before the pandemic in 2019, and that’s good. Real wages are now positive, and unemployment has been below 4% for 27 consecutive months, something that hasn’t happened in half a century. So, the labor market is very strong, with signs of gradual cooling and rebalancing, so that the supply and demand for workers are coming back into balance, just as we would want.” The logic did not make sense at first. Powell provided the evidence of balance in the labor market later on in the discussion. He noted that “the ratio of vacancies to unemployed people, for example, has gone from more than 2 to 1 to now 1.3 to 1, and it was 1.2 before…You also see wages coming down, and you see quits coming down.” Most importantly, Powell used these observations as evidence that “policy is probably restrictive.”

Powell went on to add that restrictive policy is weighing on rate-sensitive spending. However, the conventional indicators of financial conditions still show they are just as loose as they were before the Fed started hiking, January 28, 2022 to be exact. In other words, either the market has done some serious advanced front-running of rate cuts or current policy is not nearly as restrictive as the Fed thinks. Even the stock market’s all-time highs suggest monetary conditions are not tight. From the Federal Reserve Board of Chicago’s National Financial Conditions Index (NFCI) (follow the black line for ANFCI):

Even the hand-wringing this year from the Federal Reserve about resilient inflation implies that policy may not be restrictive enough (whether that means rate hikes, or, more likely, extending the time horizon for current rates).

Resilient Inflation

Powell repeated a familiar refrain about inflation not falling as fast as expected given presumed restrictive policy. Thus, Powell had to show deference to the possibility that today’s high rates will need to stay in place longer than expected:

“The first quarter in the United States was notable for its lack of further progress on inflation. We had higher readings in the first quarter, higher than we expected. We did not expect this to be a smooth road, but these were higher than I think anybody expected. So, what that has told us is that we’ll need to be patient and let restrictive policy do its work.”

This comment tells me rate cuts are nowhere on the horizon. Moreover, Powell noted “we have the highest interest rates in some time. It may be that it takes longer than expected to do its work and bring inflation down.”

Most telling were Powell’s words when a question offered the opportunity to reassure the market that rate cuts were still on the way. Emphasis mine:

“So, as I just mentioned, I do think it’s really a question of keeping policy at the current rate for a longer time than had been thought. By many measures, the policy rate is restrictive. The question is, is it sufficiently restrictive? And I think that’s going to be a question that time will have to tell. Entertain the possibility? That could be a very small probability, but I have said that I don’t think it’s likely based on the data that we have that the next move we make would be a rate hike. I think it’s more likely that we’ll be at a place where we hold the policy rate where it is.”

Note what Powell did NOT say: it’s more likely that rates will be lower by the end of the year (or even next year).

So, nowhere in the discussion did Powell provide a line for the market expect rate cuts anytime soon. Thus, he has primed the market to get excited about any soft data that could provide the seeds of an excuse for the Fed to cut rates. Powell’s positioning is made even more potent by the stock market’s ability to trade at all-time highs despite all the hand-wringing about inflation this year.

Inflation Forecast

Powell expressed a lot of uncertainty about the path for inflation despite his confidence that “we will do that, that we will get inflation down to 2%.” I am not sure how rate cuts help bring down inflation (Turkey sure learned a central bank cannot cut rates to lower inflation), so I have to assume Powell has an image of “higher for longer” monetary policy rates.

Responding to a question on whether inflation could end up being more persistent than expected, Powell said: “I think we need more than a quarter’s worth of data to really make a judgment on that.” It’s like the perpetual data delay. It will be interesting to hear whether April’s inflation data finally gives the Fed more confidence that inflation is coming down sustainably. Time is running out for the Fed to start telegraphing the first rate cut, so the pressure is on the Fed to spin a story about April and May inflation that points to the 2% target.

When I look a the core CPI graph (year-over-year percentage change in the price index), it looks like inflation will soon resume a steep descent. To apply a modicum of extra rigor, I ran a simplistic forecast through ChatPGT’s Data Analyst. I let the model pick its forecasting method. This is a very simplistic forecast because it only uses the aggregate CPI time series. A more accurate forecast would consist of aggregating the forecasts of individual components of core CPI.

I provided the model core CPI (measured year-over-year) data back to 2016. I wanted the model to surmise that “equilibrium” consists of a tight range for inflation. I did not provide any more data because I figured the further away history gets from the pandemic era, the less likely the model has any value (another downside of using a single, aggregated time series for the forecast).

The chart below combines the actual core CPI data with the forecast. The “funnel” around the forecast shows the confidence interval within which inflation will fall in the future at 95% certainty. The wide swath of possibilities is consistent with Powell’s uncertainty about the path ahead. The flat average forecast is a typical behavior of time series forecasting where there are no definitive seasonal effects detected or modeled future episodic events. (For you ChatGPT and statistics wonks, I provide an Appendix below where ChatGPT explains the model and justifies its approach).

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers: All Items Less Food and Energy in U.S. City Average [CPILFESL], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; May 15, 2024.

The Bond Market Rules

Putting aside vain attempts to forecast future inflation, the bond market is the ultimate arbiter of inflation expectations and/or how inflation may impact interest rates. The bond market in the form of the iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF is at a very critical (technical) juncture. The downtrend in TLT (uptrend in rates) was the ultimate guide in pushing the market into its April correction. The rebound in stocks for May perfectly correlates with the rebound in TLT (lower rates). The “soft” April CPI report sent TLT up 1.4% and right up against the top of the downtrend channel.

iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (Source: TradingView.com)

A confirmed breakout with a higher close should open the floodgates of bullishness for the stock market. A failure at resistance from the upper part of the channel could trigger a false breakout for the indices. Thus, given this year’s correlation with stocks, I reloaded on TLT puts as a hedge on my long trading positions.

Overall, the lesson in all these dynamics is that inflation combined with the interest rate response should continue to dominate the market’s underlying narrative. With rates on hold, even the Fed is just along for the ride for now.

Be careful out there!

Appendix (ChatGPT explains and justifies the CPI forecast)

{the following is verbatim including ChatGPT’s musings on data types and fixing its own processing problems}

The data consists of monthly core CPI year-over-year percentage changes starting from January 2016. To project the CPI for the next 24 months, I will use the ARIMA (AutoRegressive Integrated Moving Average) model, which is well-suited for time series forecasting.

Justification for ARIMA Model:

1. Handling Trends and Seasonality: ARIMA can model both trend and seasonality in the data, which is crucial for accurate CPI forecasting.
2. Flexibility: The model can be adjusted to different time series characteristics through its parameters.
3. Proven Effectiveness: ARIMA has been widely used and tested in economic and financial forecasting, making it a reliable choice.

Steps for the Analysis:

1. Data Preparation: Convert the date column to a datetime format and set it as the index.
2. Stationarity Check: Perform tests to check if the time series is stationary. If not, apply differencing.
3. Model Identification: Use autocorrelation (ACF) and partial autocorrelation (PACF) plots to identify the order of the ARIMA model.
4. Model Estimation: Fit the ARIMA model to the data.
5. Forecasting: Generate forecasts for the next 24 months.
6. Confidence Intervals: Calculate confidence intervals for the forecasts.
7. Visualization: Plot the actual data, the forecasted values, and the confidence intervals.

Let’s start with the data preparation and initial analysis. ​​

The Augmented Dickey-Fuller (ADF) test results are as follows:

• ADF Statistic: -0.988
• p-value: 0.758
• Critical Values:
  • 1%: -3.508
  • 5%: -2.895
  • 10%: -2.585

Since the p-value is greater than 0.05, we fail to reject the null hypothesis that the time series is non-stationary. This indicates that the series needs to be differenced to make it stationary.

Let’s apply first-order differencing and recheck for stationarity. ​​

The ADF test results after first-order differencing are as follows:

• ADF Statistic: -2.447
• p-value: 0.129
• Critical Values:
  • 1%: -3.509
  • 5%: -2.896
  • 10%: -2.585

The p-value is still greater than 0.05, indicating the time series is not yet stationary. Let’s apply second-order differencing. ​​

The ADF test results after second-order differencing are as follows:

• ADF Statistic: -2.843
• p-value: 0.052
• Critical Values:
  • 1%: -3.509
  • 5%: -2.896
  • 10%: -2.585

The p-value is now close to 0.05, indicating the time series is approaching stationarity. Since it’s marginally above the threshold, we will proceed with ARIMA modeling with second-order differencing.

Model Identification

Next, we’ll use ACF and PACF plots to identify the appropriate orders (p, d, q) for the ARIMA model. ​​

The ACF and PACF plots provide insights into the appropriate orders for the ARIMA model:

• ACF (Autocorrelation Function): The ACF plot shows significant lags at various points, suggesting that an MA component (q) might be needed.
• PACF (Partial Autocorrelation Function): The PACF plot shows significant lags at the beginning, suggesting that an AR component (p) might be necessary.

Given the plots, an ARIMA model with orders (p, d, q) will be selected. Based on visual inspection, we can start with ARIMA(2, 2, 2) since both ACF and PACF show significance up to lag 2.

Model Estimation

Let’s fit the ARIMA(2, 2, 2) model to the data and generate forecasts for the next 24 months. ​​

It seems there’s an issue with the data types in the forecast confidence intervals, which might be causing the error. Let’s inspect the forecasted values and the confidence intervals to identify the problem. ​​

The forecasted values and confidence intervals appear to be valid. The issue might be due to incorrect data handling during the plotting process.

To resolve this, let’s explicitly convert the confidence intervals to a numeric type before plotting. ​​

It appears the error persists despite converting the confidence intervals to float. This might be due to a mismatch in the indices of the forecast intervals and the forecasted mean.

To resolve this, I’ll ensure the indices of the confidence intervals match those of the forecasted mean before plotting. ​​

The issue may be due to an incompatibility between the data types of the forecast index and the confidence intervals. To resolve this, I will ensure all data is in the correct numeric format and use the correct plotting function.

I’ll convert all relevant data to the same data type and then re-plot. ​​

The plot now correctly displays the actual data, the forecast, and the confidence intervals.

Summary of Analysis and Forecast:

• Data Preparation: The time series data was checked for stationarity and transformed using differencing to achieve stationarity.
• Model Selection: Based on the ACF and PACF plots, an ARIMA(2, 2, 2) model was chosen.
• Model Fitting and Forecasting: The ARIMA model was fit to the data, and forecasts for the next 24 months were generated.
• Visualization: The actual data, forecasted values, and confidence intervals were plotted to provide a comprehensive view of the projected CPI.

This approach provides a robust forecast by incorporating both autoregressive and moving average components, accounting for trends and seasonality in the core CPI data. The confidence intervals offer a range of possible future values, helping to understand the uncertainty associated with the predictions.

Full disclosure: long SPY calendar call spread, long TLT puts

The post Fed’s Powell Avoids Rate Cut Talk While April CPI Keeps Hope Alive appeared first on Inflation Watch.

I am tempted to say financial markets have already done the Fed’s work. However, it is very likely that the minute the Federal Reserve even hints that rate cuts could be delayed until next year, the resulting tantrum in financial markets could be epic. The Fed is loathe to disappoint markets, and the message from the last meeting and subsequently from Jerome Powell has been to promise a rate cut sooner than later. Financial markets have persistently focused on any and all dovish twinges in Fed-related pronouncements. For example, from Powell’s testimony to Congress on March 6th (emphasis mine):

“We believe that our policy rate is likely at its peak for this tightening cycle. If the economy evolves broadly as expected, it will likely be appropriate to begin dialing back policy restraint at some point this year. But the economic outlook is uncertain, and ongoing progress toward our 2 percent inflation objective is not assured. Reducing policy restraint too soon or too much could result in a reversal of progress we have seen in inflation and ultimately require even tighter policy to get inflation back to 2 percent. At the same time, reducing policy restraint too late or too little could unduly weaken economic activity and employment.”

Powell can insert all the standard caveats he wants. Markets read this statement as saying rate cuts are on their way!

A Nervous Bond Market

Yet, bond markets have been a little “nervous” all year. For example, the iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (TLT) has trended downward (meaning higher bond yields) so far this year with lower highs and lower lows. From TradingView:

TLT is just a fresh low of the year away from finally catching the stock market’s attention again.

Copper, Lumber, and Oil – oh my!

The bond market has good reason for some jitters. Several commodities have sprung back to life this year. Copper miner Freeport-McMoRan Inc (FCX) is welcoming the upcoming Fed meeting with a 7+ month high. FCX is up 19.8% in less than two weeks. (FCX has been stuck in a trading range since the beginning of 2021).

Lumber bottomed out in early 2023. This month, lumber broke out above last summer’s high and is back to levels last seen in August, 2022.

Oil, everyone’s favorite non-core component of inflation, has been in “stealth” rally mode all year. The United States Oil Fund, LP (USO) looks ready to launch parabolically on the wings of rate cuts.

Where will these prices go with rate cuts? I vote higher.

The Golden Touch

Speaking of getting ready for rate cuts, gold, my favorite hedge enjoyed a spectacular (and overdue) breakout this month. SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) traded at an all-time high at its peak this month.

I like buying the dips in GLD going forward. The odds seem sufficiently high for the Fed to feel “forced” into easing into a sea of market liquidity.

Straining to See the Weakness in Labor Markets

So maybe the Fed can strain its economic gaze and find an excuse to do a “proactive” rate cut. The graph below shows the unemployment rate has likely bottomed out (left axis and blue line) Yet, it remains near historic lows. Initial unemployment claims have been trendless with a recent peak set last summer (right axis and green line). Finally, real GDP quarter-over-quarter growth has levitated in positive territory and for the last two years has defied overly persistent expectations for a recession (right axis and red line). From my perch, I see no excuse for a rate cut here, but perhaps I am not creative enough with the data.

Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Unemployment Rate [UNRATE], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; U.S. Employment and Training Administration, Initial Claims [ICSA], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Real Gross Domestic Product [GDPC1], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

The Stock Market’s Giddy Anticipation

The stock market’s giddy anticipation of rate cuts is poetic. The stock market has soared on loosening financial conditions and has been able to ignore just about any bad news the macro environment tries to toss out there. Recent successive all-time highs speak volumes to the buffer the Fed can enjoy if it so chooses to wait out the Presidential election before making changes to monetary policy.

Conclusion

With market breadth increasingly lagging the stock market’s ascension, I have been a skeptic about the overall rally for several weeks. The Federal Reserve is probably the last catalyst between now and the Presidential election that has a chance of validating my skepticism. If the Fed complies with the market’s giddiness, there is no telling how high the market could soar in coming months. If the Fed decides to wait things out, the stock market will lose a major contributor to the upward and higher fund. Then again, maybe the Fed pulls off a magical “hawkish rate cut” (one and done rate cut with a warning about the potential for inflation to rise from the ashes). The Fed could figure out just the right balance between disappointing the stock market and fueling ever increasing levels of speculation and higher commodity prices…

Be careful out there!

Full disclosure: long GLD

The post Financial Conditions Make A Monetary Roundtrip and Undercut the Need for Rate Cuts appeared first on Inflation Watch.