The GBPUSD buyers attempted to regain control by moving above the converged 100-hour and 200-hour moving averages at 1.33238. However, momentum stalled and the price declined, shifting short-term control to sellers.

Support lies above a swing area between 1.3259 and 1.3273, yet it remains unstable. A confirmed break below this zone could enhance the bearish outlook.

Price Targets and Support Levels

If the price drops further, the targets are the April 23 low of 1.3232 and the next swing area near 1.3203. Breaking these levels may lead to increased selling pressure, and possibly reach the 38.2% retracement at 1.3160.

Resistance is denoted by the 200/100-hour moving averages at 1.3325. Sellers are currently steering the direction, contingent on maintaining pressure below the key support band.

The current situation reflects a clear rebuff from GBPUSD bulls at a well-known technical juncture: the convergence of the 100-hour and 200-hour moving averages, now situated around the 1.3325 region. Attempting to climb above this barrier, buyers briefly succeeded but were unable to hold the higher ground, suggesting we are seeing fading enthusiasm above this level. Once momentum paused, the price quickly gave back gains, reinforcing the position of sellers and giving control back to those driving the market downward.

From our perspective, the immediate concern lies with the support zone ranging from 1.3259 to 1.3273. This area has seen price action cluster before, but it offers little in terms of firm footing right now. Prices failing to hold above this could increase directional confidence for short-biased participants. A clean cut through here would likely validate further positional bias toward lower levels.

Market Focus and Expectations

The market will probably start to focus on successive targets, beginning with the April 23 trough at 1.3232. Should that get cleared, there’s a relatively thin cushion until the next swing zone around 1.3203. The further we drop, the more likely it is that previously hesitant sellers commit, particularly if the retracement down to the 38.2% Fibonacci level at 1.3160 becomes the focal point. It’s there, in that area, where broader sentiment may transition more firmly in favour of downward bias.

Those positioned or analysing from a momentum- or trend-based approach will already know that hourly moving averages often provide structure to short-term strategies. Right now, with the 100-hour and 200-hour lines overlapping near 1.3325, this junction becomes a visual ceiling. Any renewed attempt to ascend would need to push cleanly above that zone to reset short-term directional control.

At the moment, the technical profile shows selling interest advancing whenever the price tries to reach back into the old resistance corridor. As long as the price stays underneath those averages and fails to reclaim higher ground, the burden stays with buyers to provoke any shift in momentum. The price is tracking lower, and we’re watching levels give way one after another, which can often create reactive behaviour as stops get triggered and shorter-term models adapt.

We’re not seeing sustained upside attempts or strong reversals in recent candles, only brief tests that get quickly faded. In environments like this, pressure tends to build incrementally. The pace may not be dramatic, but the direction so far remains downward unless something material interrupts the current flow.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

Twist Bioscience reported a quarterly loss of $0.66 per share, missing the expected loss of $0.56. This marks an improvement from the previous year’s loss of $0.79 per share.

The earnings report revealed an earnings surprise of -17.86%. In the prior quarter, the company surprised with a smaller than expected loss of $0.53 versus the anticipated $0.62.

The company has exceeded earnings estimates in two of the last four quarters. Twist Bioscience generated $92.79 million in revenue, slightly above the projected $91.9 million.

Compared to the previous year, revenue saw growth from $75.3 million. Twist Bioscience has consistently exceeded revenue predictions over the last four quarters.

Twist Bioscience shares have declined by about 15.6% this year. This compares with a 3.3% decline for the S&P 500.

The company’s future stock movements will rely on management’s insights during their earnings call. The earnings outlook is essential to predict potential performance.

Currently, the Zacks Rank for Twist Bioscience stands at #4 (Sell). The existing consensus estimate is a loss of $0.56 per share with $94.77 million in revenue for the upcoming quarter.

Though the firm narrowed its losses on a year-over-year basis—moving from $0.79 to $0.66 per share—the shortfall against the $0.56 estimate represents a disappointment. We are reminded that strong year-over-year improvements don’t always translate into short-term confidence if they arrive below consensus. That earnings miss of nearly 18 percent, when compared to the forecast, tells us that expectations had drifted slightly ahead of what the business could deliver at this point.

Revenue, at $92.79 million, exceeded expectations very modestly. Importantly, this lift from $75.3 million a year earlier continues their recent run of beating revenue estimates in each of the past four quarters. However, the absence of follow-through on the earnings side provides a mixed message, one that reflects improving sales without the same progress in managing costs or generating margin efficiency. This kind of pattern narrows the margin of error for near-term investor sentiment. Decent top-line traction, yes—but operational leverage remains underwhelming.

Glancing at the stock price move—down 15.6% for the year—it’s clear the market has been reacting to more than this specific quarter. When we stack that against the broader S&P 500’s decline of 3.3%, it appears that sentiment toward this name is more cautious than toward equities overall. Why? Probably because the market, in its current state, isn’t just rewarding top-line beats unless they’re paired with solid bottom-line control.

The outlook, for now, is anchored in guidance and commentary that often emerges in earnings calls. These provide forward-looking clarity that can’t be found in data alone. Without positive or at least stabilising commentary from management, assumptions baked into current forecasts may have to adjust. We know the consensus view sits at a $0.56 per-share loss and $94.77 million in revenue for the next quarter. Unless we see something in those conversations to change that tone, those forecasts could either see downward revisions or fall under threat of the same under-delivery as we’ve just witnessed.

From a positioning perspective, this makes timing a challenge. The rank downgrade confirms market hesitancy, with a #4 (Sell) indicating that broader expectations have tilted downward. For instruments tied to volatility or directional bias, especially where expiry windows are close, sensitivity to revised estimates becomes heightened. If option markets haven’t fully repriced this stream of earnings misses, there may still be premium to work with—but legs tied to upward earnings revisions alone appear to carry more risk now.

We treat this sort of earnings setup as one where directional strategies need to be carefully justified. Spreads that lean into revenue resilience while defending against margin deterioration may be more appropriate than naked exposure. At the moment, price action shows limited enthusiasm—despite revenue traction. That reflects a focus on what isn’t improving fast enough. Until the cost structure shows disciplined progress, short-dated exposure built purely on revenue optimism could underperform.

The EURUSD attempted to rise above its 200-hour moving average of 1.13510 during early U.S. trading but failed to maintain momentum. Buyers faltered once more, reminiscent of similar activity on Friday, leading to fresh selling interest and a drop below both the 200-hour and 100-hour moving averages.

The immediate downside target is 1.13072, a previous low, with further declines potentially reaching the swing area between 1.1271 and 1.12754. Below these levels, the 38.2% retracement of the March–April rally, located at 1.12505, is a pivotal point for buyers to uphold if the broader uptrend is to be preserved.

Though buyers are having difficulty pushing prices upward, sellers are also not yet in a commanding position. A decisive move below the 1.12505 level would indicate a shift of control back to sellers, challenging the 843-pip rally from the 1.0729 low on March 27 to the 1.15726 high on April 21.

What we’ve been observing on the EUR/USD chart over the past few sessions is the behaviour of a currency pair that’s running into repeated resistance, yet also showing reluctance to break down decisively. The push above the 200-hour moving average—an area often watched for signs of short-term strength—was short-lived. The failure to hold that ground, particularly after a similar stumble late last week, triggered renewed selling interest. This tells us buyers didn’t have the strength to build on minor gains, and in doing so, created space for sellers to step back in.

Now, we see price sitting below both the 200- and 100-hour moving averages. This tells us that the shorter-term momentum has shifted lower. When price sits under both of these averages, it’s indicative of a loss of upward pressure. Shorter-term derivatives models that track price momentum would favour the downside as a base case, especially with the hourly structure weakening as it has.

Near-term, price is inches away from retesting 1.13072. Historically, it acted as a base for a bounce, so if price glides through it without hesitation, that would tighten pressure beneath. After that, we get into the thicker swing zone between 1.12710 and 1.12754. This isn’t a zone to treat lightly—several recent rejections have come from this band. This makes it useful for us in gauging whether sellers are aiming to extend the downside push or just probing, only to step away again.

Further beneath, our eyes would drop to the 38.2% retracement of the last identifiable upside rally, which comes in close to 1.12505. It’s worth remembering that this type of retracement has significance in how prices tend to respect prior rallies. Sellers often look to take partial profit near these measures, while buyers may dip in cautiously. This is especially true if the broader rally from late March is still considered intact. So, how we trade around that retracement level could suggest whether this recent pullback becomes part of a larger correction—or a temporary breather.

Now, while downward movement is gathering some weight, it hasn’t yet taken full authority. That’s clear from the absence of sharp follow-through—it’s been more of a soft nudge than a broad shove. Nevertheless, when the market begins to lean in a certain way, watching how liquidity behaves around retest lows can offer more than moving-average signals. Especially when algorithms tied to volume models begin reacting more aggressively.

From a volatility perspective, implied confidence is still moderate. Options-related flows are not pricing extreme moves, but the daily range compression can’t be expected to hold indefinitely. A wider breakout on the back of an external catalyst—or a technical level giving way—could trigger option gamma functions that shift intraday behaviour quickly. Watch those inflection points carefully.

For now, we stay alert to exhaustion from both camps. It’s a tightening coil with clearer levels ahead. If any rebound stalls yet again before reclaiming those moving averages, it would reinforce short-term bearish leanings. Otherwise, we may be stuck watching a market wrestling within its own uncertainty for a while longer.

The S&P Global Composite PMI for the United States was recorded at 50.8 in April, slightly below the anticipated level of 51.2. This figure reflects the performance of the US economic sectors, including services and manufacturing, hinting at a marginal slowdown.

The AUD/USD pair experienced a bullish trend, moving closer to the 0.6500 barrier amidst pressures from the US Dollar. Similarly, the EUR/USD pair advanced for a second consecutive day, buoyed by a decline in the Greenback.

Gold Performance and Geopolitical Tensions

Gold saw an increase, reaching above $3,300 per troy ounce, attributed to rising demand due to geopolitical tensions in the Middle East. Concurrently, uncertainty around US trade policies contributed to an upward momentum.

Cryptocurrencies faced a dip, with Bitcoin dropping below $94,000 and an overall market capitalisation of $3.1 trillion, down by 3% amidst significant cash outflows. Additionally, discussions around tariffs continue, with current conditions offering no resolution, posing ongoing unpredictability in policy.

The latest Composite PMI data suggests a mild deceleration in economic activity across both manufacturing and services within the US. Sitting just above the 50 mark, which separates expansion from contraction, the report signals that economic volume grew—but only just. Although the number missed expectations, it remains positive and may inform the Fed’s interpretation of broader economic resilience. Traders typically monitor these figures closely, as subtle dips or lifts often carry through to fixed income and foreign exchange markets.

We noticed the AUD/USD pairing hovering near 0.6500—a level it has reacted to several times in the past—which could now act as a temporary barrier or pivot, depending on what momentum builds from here. The pair’s movement likely reflects shifting sentiment on the Dollar rather than renewed strength in the Aussie. US data softness appears to be chipping away at demand for the Greenback more broadly, which might leave derivative positions exposed to short-term rebounds.

Euro And Dollar Exchange Rates

Meanwhile, downward pressure on the Dollar supported another rally in the EUR/USD pair. While the move extended the prior day’s bounce, we’re still trading inside a well-defined range. Traders who positioned against the Euro earlier in April may now be questioning whether the pair has more upside, particularly with yield spreads stabilising and commodity markets stirring.

In commodities, gold’s breakthrough above $3,300 per troy ounce follows a classic risk-off pattern—not unusual when Middle East tensions climb. That said, the pace of the move suggests a search for safe-haven assets intensified quickly over the past couple sessions. Factors fuelling this include not just geopolitics but inconsistencies in current US trade direction, which continue to make long-term pricing more difficult to project. Whoever is holding longer-dated options here could face high gamma risk if spot continues to accelerate past recent highs.

Crypto markets moved sharply lower, with Bitcoin slipping beneath $94,000. A drop of 3% across the broader market, combined with ongoing net outflows, hints that bullish positions had become crowded. This type of drawdown is not unusual after a multi-week surge, but when we pair it with new tariff rumours and slower institutional flows, the short-term outlook turns murky. It places pressure on leveraged positions, which are more vulnerable to sudden changes in policy or liquidity.

At present, we are watching layered volatility. Recent PMI softness, paired with fast commodity gains and a stressed crypto space, introduces added uncertainty across asset classes. While we’ve seen safe-haven positioning increase, it hasn’t moved in sync with macro indicators. That disconnect can often make short-term options strategies more fragile than usual. From our side, fluency in adjusting to price momentum—especially around resistance levels like 0.6500 in currency markets, or $3,300 in metals—could determine how effectively one navigates the next wave of data or geopolitical announcements.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

India has proposed zero-percent tariffs on auto parts and steel to the United States, on the condition that the U.S. offers the same rates. Negotiations between the two nations on tariffs and trade show progress, suggesting potential mutual benefits from such an agreement.

There is uncertainty about the feasibility of this deal, especially since the U.S. imposes 25% tariffs on Canadian steel. The challenge lies in whether the U.S. can offer India zero tariffs while keeping higher tariffs on Canada.

Anticipation in Market Trends

As discussions progress, stakeholders must wait for the exact terms of any proposed agreement. There is anticipation around a potential shift back to lower tariff structures in recent market trends.

To understand what’s already happened: India has made an offer to eliminate tariffs on auto parts and steel when trading with the United States, but only if the U.S. agrees to do the same. In plain terms, India is saying, “We’ll drop our charges if you drop yours.” At first glance, this might seem like a mutually easy fix—but the situation is more complicated beneath the surface.

Washington currently applies a very high 25% tariff on Canadian steel. That sends a message: the U.S. isn’t quick to offer the same treatment across the board. So, if Washington were to accept India’s proposal, it would draw a sharp contrast with how it’s dealing with a close neighbour. Such inconsistency could cause political and economic ripples.

That said, forward movement in talks suggests that both Delhi and Washington see something to gain. There’s a good chance they’re feeling out where the pain points are, testing the limits of flexibility without committing prematurely. What we might be witnessing is the beginning of a narrower, more customised trade agreement—tailored in a way that sidesteps the broader tensions normally linked to trade policy.

Market Reactions and Trade Strategies

For short-term futures and options traders working in industries tied to metals and manufacturing, the low-tariff proposal adds a layer of timing speculation. The possibility of cheaper steel movement between India and the U.S. introduces the chance of thinner margins for domestic producers, and by extension, changes in contract demand expectations. If you’re watching price spreads in these areas, it’s how traders react to these signals—not just the tariffs themselves—that could set the tone over the coming weeks.

One of the main uncertainties right now is how fast anything materialises. These are not overnight deals. Policy changes like this rarely move past the discussion stage without public comments, industry analysis, and new legislative procedures in both countries. That leaves quite a wide gap between “idea” and “execution.”

Still, it’s worth noting that lower tariffs—if they come—could pull market interest away from high inventory hedging strategies. This may increase short-term volatility as pricing adjusts not just on the physical side, but in the timing of expected deliveries for industrial buyers. For those of us tracking calendar spreads in the metals space, this environment calls for precision. Traders may consider reducing duration risk and keeping exposure tightly tied to front-month movements.

Policy-driven adjustments also tend to draw sharp reactions from larger institutions—many of which shift positioning quickly when trade agreements touch raw materials. This could skew volume into single contract months or distort open interest across expiry curves. In that setting, what we’ve often relied on for trend confirmation—like volume consolidation or contango/narrowing backwardation—might behave differently than usual.

The pricing of credit futures linked to trade-sensitive producers might need a fresh look. Some names, particularly those leveraged through North American distribution routes, could see spreads widen slightly as investors weigh tariff risk relative to import penetration.

As traders, this leaves little room for complacency. High-impact policy changes, even in draft form, deserve closer scrutiny. For now, keeping position sizes modest while trading directional bets with short durations seems like the more sensible approach. This isn’t the place for long-tailed exposure. Until clearer word comes from Washington, we’ll stay ready to revise our assumptions, but not rush toward bets built on unfounded optimism.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

The S&P Global Composite PMI for the United States registered at 50.6 in April, falling short of the forecast figure of 51.2. This data is vital as it indicates the performance and growth outlook of the US economic sectors.

In the foreign exchange market, AUD/USD showed upward momentum, nearing the 0.6500 mark. This movement is influenced by ongoing US Dollar selling pressure and renewed trade concerns.

Meanwhile, EUR/USD also gained, just shy of 1.1300, supported by a risk-on sentiment and a weakening US Dollar. Gold prices advanced above $3,300 per troy ounce due to increased geopolitical tensions and uncertainty surrounding US trade policies.

Cryptocurrency Market Trends

Cryptocurrency market capitalization dipped by 3%, with BTC prices slipping below $94,000. The market saw significant outflows exceeding $100 billion in the past 24 hours.

Despite peaking tariff rates, uncertainty persists, affecting market conditions. Easing conditions should not be confused with a resolved situation, as policy unpredictability remains a real risk.

Trading foreign exchange on margin remains high risk and unsuitable for some. Potential losses can exceed initial investments, and it is crucial to understand all related risks before engaging.

The latest S&P Global Composite PMI figure, sitting at 50.6 for April, suggests moderate expansion in the US economy, albeit more sluggish than anticipated. Falling short of 51.2, expectations around business activity have softened. This nuance matters—it edges sentiment away from strong optimism and leans us into a more restrained outlook on future demand, particularly in service-heavy and industrial segments.

We take this as an indication to revisit exposure across US benchmarks. Volatility may not yet be fully reflected in option pricing, especially with mixed signals continuing to emerge from regional data. This drop may support a measured approach to directional positions, focusing instead on spreads and straddles that offer asymmetric risk.

On the currency front, the Aussie dollar’s slight ascent toward 0.6500 is no isolated move. Continued pressure on the US Dollar reflects broader sentiment around Federal Reserve policy expectations and weaker economic indicators. What compels our attention here is not the level, but the momentum shift—it’s the pace of buyers stepping into AUD/USD amid this backdrop of trade uncertainty that adds weight. Derivatives tied to this pair might warrant recalibration, particularly in short-term straddles where implied volatility is not yet adjusting in line with the spot.

As for the euro, its approach towards 1.1300 isn’t simply reflective of dollar weakness—it also echoes regained appetite for risk assets. With volatility complexes across Europe priced near their month lows, this may suggest opportunities in longer-dated contracts where call-side interest is building below the surface. Options skew is shifting. That should be monitored closely—especially with Brussels adding more clarity around fiscal policies in coming sessions.

Gold And Commodity Movement

In commodities, gold breaching $3,300 is not a casual climb. This advance was neither disorderly nor speculative—it reflected funds repositioning due to geopolitical risks with clear triggers. Coupled with defensive FX stance globally, OTMs held during US session confirms steady positioning rather than speculative overreach. It suggests that a pullback doesn’t invalidate bullish structure for now, particularly if macro hedging demand continues to filter in.

Risk premiums are still visibly adjusted across crypto. Bitcoin descending below $94,000 against a backdrop of over $100 billion in capital flight isn’t incidental. The scale of these outflows has been abrupt enough to trigger liquidation of correlated alt positions. For now, longer-dated futures show staggered contango, which we interpret as cautious reinflation, not speculative re-entry. If using derivatives here, position sizing must reflect that any upside could remain capped near-term due to position overhang.

Trade conditions haven’t settled. Although headlines suggest tariffs have plateaued, their impact is lagged—not linear. Every effort to normalise trade frameworks introduces a fresh layer of interpretation risk. This keeps outcome probability bands wide. Calibration of delta-neutral exposures may serve better than aggressive directional bias, particularly as policy assumptions shift faster than pricing mechanisms can adjust.

In light of the above, risk structures must anticipate delayed responses. Price discovery is uneven. Moves in FX, commodities, and crypto have divorcing paces. When complex markets present multiple readings, it serves well to defer default assumptions and instead ramp focus on short-dated instruments that allow repositioning flexibility.

Now is less about what has moved, and more about noticing what hasn’t. Not all implied vol surfaces have adjusted in tandem. The carry from this week’s volatility may offer unusually clean premium if one adjusts exposure dynamically and not through static directional bias.

We watch Treasury markets next. Spread behaviours there will likely dictate the next domino. But until that point, instruments allowing for gamma scalping or time decay trading seem relatively better suited, especially if macro data remains slightly underwhelming.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

Resistance and Support Levels

Surpassing this resistance could lead to further gains, with the high from April at 0.60281 as the next target. If it climbs above 0.60281, the next milestone is 0.6037, a level not reached since November. This is near the 61.8% retracement from the 2024 high to the 2025 low.

The current bias is upwards as long as the price remains above the 200-hour moving average. However, moving below this average could shift focus to potential declines.

Key levels to watch include the 0.6000 resistance zone, 0.6028 high for 2025, and 0.6036-0.6037. Support is at the 200-hour moving average at 0.5951 and the 100-hour moving average at 0.5939.

The initial portion of the article outlines a short-term upward movement in NZDUSD, anchored by technical levels that tend to influence trading behaviour. What we’re seeing is a bounce off the 100-hour moving average near 0.5938, a level that has behaved like a springboard for buying interest. That bounce wasn’t simply a pause—it brought in fresh demand, which helped pull the price above the 200-hour moving average, situated at 0.59515. That cross above the longer-term average has historical weight: every time the price sustains above this average, buyers begin to defend their positions with more confidence.

Market Sentiment and Strategies

As we move further into the week, attention turns to the ceiling at 0.6000. That area has acted like a reinforced lid, capping progress several times recently. It’s a zone that, if broken, may lead to a broader shift in sentiment. Traders with positions aligned with the underlying direction should keep close tabs on whether momentum is building on attempts to pierce this level rather than faltering just below it.

After 0.6000, the next goal looks to be the peak reached in April, around 0.60281. It’s not just an arbitrary number—it marks the highest level seen in months and could be psychologically influential if breached. Beyond that, 0.6037 roughly matches the 61.8% Fibonacci retracement from the yearly high-to-low range, which places it in a technical position where some traders may start locking in gains. This level hasn’t been tested since November, which adds weight to its potential as a magnet for price.

The continued upward tone in NZDUSD hinges on whether the price holds above the 200-hour moving average. That average, positioned near 0.5951, now acts as a buffer—if price returns below this zone, sentiment should be reassessed. Derivative holders may need to consider reducing exposure or at least hedging in that scenario, particularly if it aligns with softening macro inputs.

On the other hand, if the zone around 0.6000 gives way and closes start registering above that point, positioning for a move toward the upper targets—namely 0.6028 and 0.6037—becomes justified. Cold, mechanical entry criteria should include observing price action around those clear thresholds, not simply chasing moves in progress. We find that premature long positions often unwind painfully when entered too close to stretched resistance levels without volume expansion or proper breaks on hourly closes.

What helps us here is the clarity of the levels. Resistance at 0.6000 is not ambiguous, nor are the markers at the April peak or the Fibonacci line. Key support lies at the 200-hour and 100-hour moving averages—down at 0.5951 and close to 0.5939, respectively. Losing both within a short timeframe flips the script and presents an altogether different picture for risk management. Traders with leveraged products need to be clinical at those points, taking cues from actual price performance rather than assuming a continuation of the directional move.

Through all this, it’s worth noting that the response around each of these areas—be it hesitation, acceleration, or rejection—will likely dictate how we approach the immediate sessions. We don’t forecast sentiment shifts, but we can measure positioning and structure around these known barriers. Observing the behaviour during North American trading hours, particularly as volume expands, may provide a stronger validation—or invalidation—of any intraday breakouts or reversals underway.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

The United States S&P Global Services PMI fell to 50.8 in April, below the expected figure of 51.4. This slight decline indicates a minimal expansion in the services sector.

The PMI above 50 generally signifies growth, but the dip below expectations suggests a moderation in service activity growth. This data could influence economic assessments and market performances.

Service Sector Performance

We’ve just seen the latest S&P Global Services PMI for the United States dip to 50.8 in April. It’s still above the 50-point threshold that separates expansion from contraction, but by coming in below the consensus estimate of 51.4, it implies that the sector is not growing as briskly as forecast.

To put this in context, this index is one of many that helps to gauge the pulse of the services sector—an area that makes up a large portion of the U.S. economy. The fact that it is still inching higher suggests there is growth, yet the weaker-than-expected reading hints at softer demand or reduced business confidence. From earlier prints this year, where expansion was more robust, this downward movement could act as a cue for repositioning or reassessing exposure in rate-sensitive trades.

From our perspective, it’s not only the headline PMI print that matters, but also the shift in sentiment driving purchasing managers’ decisions. When the pace of services activity begins to flatten, it might reflect that companies are becoming more cautious with future spending, potentially impacting broader consumption trends. That could help explain the recent pullback in pricing elsewhere—particularly in interest rate swaps or short-term volatility structures.

These kinds of differences between actual figures and consensus expectations often carry weight in how traders position going forward. In this instance, the market may start inching towards pricing lower growth assumptions into forward-looking contracts. That can also weigh on the prospect of tighter monetary policy tightening, at least in the near term.

Market Implications and Strategy

Given the services sector’s sensitivity to consumer activity and labour markets, we will also be watching May’s figures closely. A follow-up decline would suggest a more persistent slowdown building, and that would likely feed into positioning for both front-end rates and mid-curve volatility.

In practical terms, we’re taking a more detailed look at relative positioning across macro hedging strategies. Anything that benefits from reduced expectations for growth or delay in policy tightening might begin to attract attention again, especially where macro funds have lightened up. Longer-end implied vols are already indicating less appetite to hedge sharp moves in either direction—this data might support that trend in the immediate term.

For spread traders and those active in derivatives, nuance in these data points tends to become more relevant when other macro signals are mixed or noisy. The market’s response to this report was modest, but when viewed with upcoming employment and inflation data sets, the combination could drive greater differences in rate expectations. How skew behaves between fixed income instruments deserves close watching.

As a next step, we’ll be looking carefully at implied probabilities in options markets related to June and July policy meetings, particularly changes in pricing after each data release. Since real acceleration in growth appears elusive, trades built around a slower glide path for activity might start to make more sense. The adjustment won’t be immediate, but over the next two to three weeks, any reaffirmation of this trend could gradually shift pricing dynamics across the curve and into equity volatility, particularly in the cyclical names.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

USDCAD trades with a bearish inclination, as the 100-hour (1.38197) and 200-hour (1.38394) moving averages limit upward movements. Attempts to rise have stalled near these levels, acting as a resistance barrier.

Downside momentum is modest, with lows edging slightly lower. Sellers maintain control as long as the price remains below these moving averages.

Consolidation Range and Support Levels

A break above 1.38394 could alter the bias, though current rallies present selling opportunities. The daily chart suggests a target below Friday’s low at 1.37415, aligning with a 61.8% retracement from 2023 lows and mid-October swing lows.

The broader daily chart places USDCAD within a consolidation range from September 2022 to November 2024.

Key levels include resistance at 1.38197 (100-hour moving average) and 1.38394 (200-hour moving average), with support at 1.3781 (April 14 low), 1.37698 (April 30 low), and 1.37593 (May 2 low).

The information above outlines the current condition of the USD/CAD currency pair from a technical analysis standpoint. Essentially, what is being shown is that upward movement in the pair is repeatedly running into selling interest near the 100-hour and 200-hour moving averages—markers often taken as near-term trend indicators. These two averages, at 1.38197 and 1.38394 respectively, are restricting gains, effectively forming a ceiling that the price struggles to breach.

The price action remains contained beneath these moving averages, and traders have been showing a preference to sell into short lived rallies. Downward pressure isn’t forceful, but there’s a persistent drift lower in recent sessions, which reflects control by those on the sell side. As long as the price remains capped beneath those two levels, the technical sentiment stays tilted to the downside.

Trading Strategy and Risk Management

A move beyond the 200-hour average, the higher of the two levels, would disrupt this structure, opening the door to a shift in tone. That said, so far, attempts to push above it have been used as opportunities to sell rather than signs of strength. This should not surprise anyone watching the pair’s longer-term tendencies.

Looking at the daily timeframe, the broader context shows the pair continuing to move within an extended range that’s held since September of 2022. While that range suggests uncertainty at higher levels, recent action has pointed towards the lower edge. Notably, the price is drawing closer to Friday’s trough at 1.37415. That level isn’t arbitrary—it’s lined up with the 61.8% retracement level from the rise seen from the 2023 low. Familiarity with Fibonacci retracement zones tells us that if this one gives way, the doors open to more persistent declines.

Beyond that point, traders will be keeping their eyes on the lower supports around 1.3781, 1.37698, and 1.37593—levels that came into play on specific dates in April and early May. Breaks below each one would add to bearish conviction, especially since none of them have yet prompted sustained buying pressure.

From our side, the strategy remains consistent. We’ve been watching how failed breakouts near the two hourly moving averages create repeatable conditions. Hills of price failure near those levels have created a short set-up that can be tracked plainly. If the current trend holds, short positions with tight risk controls just above these resistance levels allow entries with favourable reward-to-risk profiles. Targets below 1.37415 appear well defined.

The playbook doesn’t require guessing, just following the reaction to these established areas. Risk is clear; so is the path if the pressure persists. As long as price is penned below those averages, the path of least resistance stays downward.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

Financial Performance Overview

The projections do not suggest an earnings beat for CNQ, with the Earnings ESP standing at 0.00% and a Zacks Rank #3. Other energy companies like Calumet, Pembina Pipeline, and Talen Energy are expected to post strong earnings growth.

Given the outlined financial setup and shifting variables surrounding Canadian Natural Resources Limited in the upcoming quarter, it’s clear we’re not looking at a straightforward recovery or breakout. The expected year-over-year rise in earnings by over 43% appears compelling at a glance. However, that figure must be read in context. The previous year’s comparables were weighed down by depressed gas prices and hefty cost burdens, which makes the current bump less impressive when placed against the wider energy sector’s rebound. Analysts have little reason to revise their earnings assumptions upward, especially with an Earnings ESP of 0.00% and a middling analyst ranking, indicating neutral expectations.

The revenue forecast, while up by more than 11%, is likewise not enough to suggest a strong tailwind. While the boost from the Athabasca acquisition adds some volume heft—640,000 barrels per day is nothing to ignore—the associated costs may dampen the benefit. That Shell transaction, while favourable from a strategic reserves perspective, also adds complexity and overhead during a period where breakeven economics are shifting underfoot.

Risks and Opportunities

We can’t overlook how the North Sea and Offshore Africa regions are likely to weigh on margins. North Sea operating spend is projected to surge by 81%, and that’s not a line item that balances out easily, even with increased throughput. Offshore Africa, not quite as large, but still material, shows a delta in costs that remains difficult to square with stable output. These aren’t anomalies. As we’ve seen in similar upstream-heavy portfolios, geographic diversification helps only when the cash flow from those areas offsets development and maintenance schedules. Here, they appear to stack the other way.

What’s presenting more risk than opportunity in the short term are the yearly maturities running up to 2027. The market doesn’t currently punish companies for refinancing, but that depends heavily on commodity spot prices holding damp volatility. Crude and gas have both shown recent instability as geopolitical variables and storage stats jostle market confidence. Even a modest widening in bond spreads could mean that rolling over upcoming maturities will erode free cash flow. The pattern of consistent refinancing pressure year after year isn’t ignorable, especially when costs are climbing in tandem.

Other names in the same sector appear to be faring better from a forward trajectory standpoint. Strong earnings outlooks from firms like Pembina and Calumet might start drawing capital allocation away from neutral stories like Canadian Natural, particularly among institutional allocators seeking margin clarity. That contrast becomes critical when viewed from a hedging or spread strategy position. If one leg of a pair is flat-lining while others firm up their cost structures and show upside via earnings upgrades, it becomes incrementally harder to justify open long exposure there.

From where we sit, we should be thinking about implied volatility pricing relative to earnings scenarios. With no edge on the earnings beat, and cost-side pressures escalating, the short-dated option premiums may be underpricing downside risk in the 1-2 month window. The absence of surprises is not the same as stability when you’re modeling scenarios. The cost of carrying these risk exposures without conviction on either side starts to make more sense only if other legs inside a portfolio can absorb softness attributed to refining, nat gas or offshore outputs.

Timing remains important. The production uplift from Athabasca looks better the further out you go, but front-month exposures don’t benefit from theoretical reserves. What’s seen right now is cost execution and balance sheet management. There’s not yet enough visibility on whether refinancing efforts in 2025 and beyond will be offset by free cash flow expansion or sustained product pricing, leaving derivative positions vulnerable in either direction depending on CPI and rate curve changes.

It would make sense for us to tread carefully this week, particularly with respect to calendar spreads and any short gamma positions that anticipate stability. We aren’t seeing enough compression in risk to warrant aggressive theta harvesting either. Instead, we’d advise forks in strategy only when it’s absolutely clear that margin expansion won’t get reversed by ongoing capex drift or financing costs rising faster than realised pricing improves.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.