Gold Prices Decline Amid US-China Trade Agreement

Gold prices dropped over 3% on Monday, trading at $3,225, following a US-China tariff reduction agreement, which improved risk appetite. The US Dollar Index rose by over 1.25% to 101.74, contributing to Gold’s decline as US Treasury yields ascended.

Wall Street benefitted following the US-China trade compromise, with tariffs reduced significantly by both nations. The Fed is now projected to cut rates twice this year, a change from prior expectations of three reductions.

US Treasury yields increased, with the 10-year note yield rising 7 basis points to 4.453%. Concurrently, economists predict no change in April’s US CPI at 2.4% YoY, with the core CPI expected to stay at 2.8% YoY.

Central banks continue to expand their Gold reserves, with China adding 2 tonnes in April. The Polish and Czech National Banks also enlarged their Gold holdings, showcasing ongoing interest in Gold as a reserve asset.

Gold, valued for its historical and economic significance, is presently seen as a hedge against inflation and currency depreciation. It is inversely related to the US Dollar and Treasuries, often experiencing price movements due to geopolitical events or interest rate changes.

Impact of Rising Yields and Strengthening Dollar

The current decline in gold prices, caused in part by a stronger US dollar and rising Treasury yields, reflects a fast-shifting sentiment in the broader financial space. With the Federal Reserve adjusting its expected number of rate cuts from three to two, traders appear to have recalibrated their risk forecasts, resulting in a return to equities and a pullback from safe-haven assets like gold. This makes sense given the recent agreement between the US and China, which has lowered tariffs and boosted confidence in global trade momentum. In previous months, uncertainty had been serving as a support for gold, with investors hedging against both inflation and geopolitical tension. That floor now appears less firm.

As yields on the 10-year Treasury crept up by seven basis points to 4.453%, attention briefly shifted from inflationary concerns to relative opportunity costs. Whenever yields rise, interest in non-yielding assets tends to wane, and we’re seeing just that — capital cycling out of bullion into more productive corners. Meanwhile, the dollar index’s climb to 101.74 made gold more expensive for foreign investors, effectively dampening demand from abroad. Traders need to recognise that correlation plays a heavier hand in these conditions — rising yields and a stronger dollar often coincide, creating double pressure on metals.

Looking to central bank demand, it’s plain there remains a commitment to building gold reserves, with the People’s Bank of China continuing to accumulate. Poland and the Czech Republic have demonstrated similar intentions. These flows offer some support, but they occur in the background and often don’t offset short-term market shifts driven by interest rates and macro sentiment. We include them in models, but they don’t dictate immediate direction.

April inflation data is also set to hold steady, with both headline CPI and core CPI forecast to remain unchanged. That removal of downside surprises suggests fewer calls for urgency among policymakers. It’s not bad news, and it’s not quite good either — it offers the Fed enough reason to delay any rash moves. More than anything, it reinforces that rates will probably stay elevated longer than hoped, which means carry trades remain appealing while gold finds less room to rally.

Market Conditions and Investor Strategy

This week’s data should be taken with more than passing interest. If inflation indicators stay flat, and Treasury yields remain anchored above 4.4%, current pricing dynamics may stretch on. High open interest in forward contracts and options reflects ongoing positioning around interest-rate expectations. It’s our view that scenario-based strategies will function better than directional ones — not every rebound in gold should be seen as sustainable when yields are climbing.

Participants need to be acutely aware of the trade-offs. If risk appetite keeps building, there’s little urgency to rotate capital back into hedges. That being said, sudden surprises — whether in employment data, retail figures, or regional geopolitical stress — could create temporary volatility. We’re watching options skew and implied vols carefully, especially near critical data releases, as these give useful insights into how much protection the market is willing to pay for, and where the perceived pressure points lie.

At this point, positioning matters more than conviction. We are not in a market that rewards overconfidence. Tweaks to policy expectations and shifts in the macro narrative have proven more than capable of reversing price moves that had seemed directional just days earlier.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

The Federal Reserve’s survey indicates that lending standards have tightened while demand has decreased across various loan categories.

In business lending, Commercial and Industrial loan standards have been tightened for firms of all sizes, with the highest percentage of banks doing so in over a year. Loan terms have also seen tightening, including smaller credit lines and stricter covenants. Key reasons for this include uncertain economic outlook and regulatory concerns. Demand has notably weakened across all firm sizes.

Commercial Real Estate Lending

Commercial Real Estate loans experienced tighter standards, particularly for construction and land development, as well as nonfarm nonresidential loans. Multifamily standards remained mostly the same. While demand generally weakened, some large and foreign banks noted stronger demand.

For household lending, standards for Residential Real Estate loans mostly held steady, with slight tightening for non-QM jumbo mortgages. There was a decrease in demand across most mortgage categories, although demand for HELOCs modestly strengthened.

Consumer loan standards showed slight tightening for credit card lending, especially regarding credit limits, while auto and other consumer loans remained stable. Demand decreased for credit card and other consumer loans, with auto loan demand remaining steady.

What the article has laid out, in essence, is that the latest survey from the Federal Reserve reflects a broad-based tightening across lending. Both on the business and consumer side, standards are becoming tougher, while demand for borrowing is dialing back to varying degrees. This isn’t a routine, seasonal adjustment—rather, it reflects a pointed shift in confidence, or rather the lack of it, among banks and borrowers alike. From our vantage point, it paints a picture of lenders pulling back and businesses thinking twice before taking on new credit exposures.

In the business lending area, banks are raising the bar for firms seeking Commercial and Industrial loans. Not only are they making it harder to secure loans by narrowing credit lines and applying more challenging terms, but they are doing so at a rate we haven’t seen in several quarters. Firms, both large and small, appear hesitant now—possibly weighed down by higher rates, uncertain revenues, or the cost of servicing existing debt. The feedback shows borrowing appetite has fallen markedly. If we were watching this from the side-lines, this speaks directly to expectations for future investment—they’re lower.

Consumer Lending Trends

With Commercial Real Estate, there’s been a sharper edge. Standards have become more restrictive for both developers and property investors seeking finance, especially in less stable segments like land development and construction. Some of the larger banks are seeing a flicker of life in demand, but that’s likely the exception rather than a broader sign of resurgence. For now, appetite is still subdued, possibly reflecting high risk margins and difficulties in pricing profitability amid rising cost pressures.

On the consumer side, banks are mostly holding the lines steady, but they’re quietly pulling back on the more flexible corners of the lending market. For example, credit card access is becoming more restricted, with stricter rules on limits and rates. Likewise, the slightly tighter stance on jumbo non-QM mortgage loans suggests a cautious approach towards higher-value property lending. That aligns with a broader pullback in mortgage demand, outside of home equity credit lines, which saw a rare pick-up—possibly because households are beginning to favour tapping existing equity over new purchases or refinances.

What it all adds up to is that credit is not flowing as freely. Tighter loan standards usually follow concerns about defaults, economic strain, or regulatory scrutiny; we’re seeing all three in play to some degree. Demand isn’t drying up out of nowhere—those looking for cash are weighing the cost more precisely and, in many cases, choosing to hold off.

From our perspective, the drying up of demand and the clampdown on credit conditions hint at a cooling embedded in the broader system. There are knock-on effects. Fewer loans for firms could mean slower expansion or fewer new projects. In the same way, lower household demand can moderate consumption, especially big-ticket purchases.

When we think ahead, the credit market doesn’t operate in isolation—it reacts to signals from central banks, inflation trends, corporate balance sheets, and even changes in fiscal policy. It’s those signals that traders dissect line by line, number by number. Right now though, spreads will matter more than ever.

What the data tells us is that the economy may have pockets where tightening is already doing its job—even before monetary policy finishes its full transmission. That’s the piece to watch next.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

Swiss Franc Underperformance

The Swiss Franc is underperforming due to reduced safe-haven demand and is facing challenges from a strong currency affecting exports. The EUR/CHF stands near 0.9384, pointing towards this unfavourable trend.

Technically, USD/CHF shows a bullish trend at around 0.9000, with the 20-day SMA as immediate support. Momentum indicators like RSI and MACD suggest upward momentum, though the ADX indicates that the trend lacks strong intensity.

With USD/CHF pushing above the 0.9000 level, the price action reflects continued strength in the greenback, bolstered by growing consensus around the short-term positive impact of the tariff rollbacks. The bond market has responded in kind, propelling the 10-year yield to 4.45%, a move that reinforces underlying risk appetite and reaffirms expectations of tighter financial conditions being priced out slightly. There’s plenty to unpack from that.

Where this gets interesting is not just the numbers, but the rate at which dollar-supportive themes are re-entering the discussion. The Fed’s wait-and-see stance on trade and inflation has not dampened market confidence, as seen in how aggressively the Dollar Index has moved back towards 101.90. This rebound—more than 1% higher—reflects not only optimism around external developments but also internal resilience. It’s increasingly difficult to argue against the current US growth trajectory when the Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow confirms a 2.30% estimate for Q2. Given this, it’s not surprising that momentum continues to favour longer USD positions, at least against weaker or less reactive currencies.

Technical Analysis of USD to CHF

As for the Franc, it’s noticeably lagging in this cycle. Reduced safe-haven flows are obviously a part of that story, but what’s less visible—and perhaps more impactful for the medium term—is how strength in the domestic currency remains a headwind for exporters. It’s not just about capital flows any more; it’s about competitiveness dragging in real terms. The EUR/CHF hovering near 0.9384 only underscores that pressure, particularly if the European data stabilises faster than expected.

From a technical view, USD/CHF has broken above short-term resistance levels and is testing territory that had previously acted as a ceiling. The 20-day SMA now sits beneath price action, turning into potential dynamic support. Momentum remains tilted upwards on major indicators, including RSI and MACD, both of which are holding above their midlines and pushing higher. That said, the ADX, still under the 20 level, suggests that while direction exists, conviction in the move has yet to solidify.

What we’re watching now is whether the pair can meaningfully clear 0.9050 and hold there on closing basis. This would point towards sustained bullish momentum. Timing entries near 0.9000 could offer better risk-reward provided stops are reasonably tight—the area between 0.8910 and 0.8880 remains prevous demand and could function again in case of retracement. Avoid getting too aggressive unless we see further confirmation above 0.9080 and ideally 0.9110—zones where offers likely cluster.

It makes sense to view this move with a tactical lens. Price is moving upward, but not impulsively. Momentum signals are there, but the trend strength hasn’t caught up. We don’t need to chase. If price consolidates near resistance and volume tapers off, it’s a sign of short-term exhaustion. Conversely, a clean break on volume provides conviction.

In tracking risk-reward over the coming sessions, dips toward the 0.8950–0.8910 region could present re-entry opportunities, assuming broader Dollar sentiment holds. Be disciplined with stops, especially around the 0.8850 point, where failed recoveries in the past have led to sharper pullbacks.

We’ll be monitoring how macro data shifts consensus—especially incoming US job and inflation numbers, which could prompt subtle shifts in short-end rate expectations. Those would feed directly into currency pricing via yield differentials. Let’s not forget: even with a softer ADX reading, directional moves can still offer room if the fundamental narrative aligns. The key is not to force a position when momentum lacks teeth; instead, wait for the market to show its hand.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

Nike’s stock maintains its gains following a reduction in China tariffs, with a rise of 6.8% by lunchtime in New York. The broader US market also sees increases after the US administration pauses high China tariffs.

Over the weekend, US and China tariffs were reduced to 30% and 10% respectively. Despite Nike’s reliance on Vietnam, sales in Greater China contribute roughly 15% of the brand’s revenue. The 90-day pause offers potential for improved fiscal results in Nike’s first quarter starting June.

Market Reaction

The Dow Jones Industrial Average, including Nike, rose 2.3% in late morning trade, with the S&P 500 and NASDAQ also gaining. Trump’s trade war concerns on Wall Street diminish for now, with August expected to bring more details of a final deal.

Meanwhile, Vietnam negotiations continue, with potential US tariff increases from the current 10%. Nevertheless, a huge rise to 46% is not anticipated. Investment bank Jefferies highlights Nike as a key stock poised to gain from tariff changes.

Technically, Nike’s stock tests its 50-day Simple Moving Average. Any negative news might push the stock towards a support near the $53 range, a level witnessed during previous declines.

Nike’s current positioning reflects a breath of relief across markets that had braced for tighter margins and supply chain complications. With the 6.8% jump in midday trading, it’s clear that participants are adjusting their exposure following the US administration’s softening stance on trade penalties—particularly in relation to China. Traders will note that the reduced barrier, now sitting at 30% from the previous mark, broadens short-term upside for firms with either production concentration in Asia or retail channels in Chinese territories.

Future Projections

Looking at Nike’s setup, even with core manufacturing rooted in Vietnam, it’s irrefutable that revenue from Greater China – assessed near 15% – creates leverage for market repositioning. As duties drop from both US and Chinese ends, equity markets have responded in kind, as evidenced by the lift across major indexes—with the Dow adding 2.3% despite likely pricing in recent forward guidance. That points to the strength of expectation more than just short-term balance sheet improvement.

The 90-day pause in advancing trade penalties introduces flexibility when reviewing Q1 projections. As June marks the start of this period, bulls will expect the margin compression threat to ease, potentially trickling into improved earnings-per-share consensus estimates. That said, Vietnam remains a variable worth tracking. While revisions in tariffs there remain less abrupt than feared, the suggestion of an upper ceiling of 46% will linger until clarity emerges.

From our perspective, Jefferies’ position—that Nike is well-placed relative to peers—is not without merit. But this should be revisited week-by-week rather than accepted passively. Options desks, in particular, should keep tabs on implied volatility skews, especially if trade headlines begin steering sentiment back toward uncertainty. Net positioning here will be pivotal—especially as the conviction-driven buying around the 50-day SMA reveals limited patience for sideways movement.

Technicals, currently orbiting the 50-day mark, show buyers are testing resilience against a backdrop of recent headlines. A sustained pullback could retrace to previous levels hovering near $53—observed during earlier stress periods. Given that price zone acted as a reliable floor in the past, it would be typical to set contingency triggers slightly above it, adapting dynamically to any developments in macro policy or earnings guidance revisions.

We’re watching volume patterns as well. Price action layered with low-volume buying would undermine confidence in a sustained rally, turning derivatives desks toward more defensive call spreads. Conversely, strong interest tracked against rising price bands may favour more aggressive strategies, including naked positions if coupled with stop orders just below the prior zone of support.

This is a trading window with sharp clarity—retail data, manufacturing costs out of Asia, and posturing from D.C. are all factors that move in parallel. The more these align, the narrower the lag between policy shifts and market reaction. For our part, option expiry ladders around big-name earnings will offer critical tells about sentiment in the weeks to come.

Non-participation carries its own risk, as the rally is not simply headline-driven; pricing power, brand exposure, and trade clarity have all converged to support this move. Yet complacency would be a mistake. Tracking short-dated implied moves in names tied to Asian exports gives one indication of where momentum flows next. Use that as orientation, rather than reaction.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

The S&P 500 has reached the day’s peaks with a 3.1% increase. In parallel, the Nasdaq has surged by 4.2% as buying activity intensifies.

Market observers are closely monitoring the futures overnight high of 5865. Currently, the index is just 6 points away from this target.

New Capital Reverses Initial Selling

The rally is notable as initial selling has been countered by new capital entering the market. Investors have shown strong interest, leading to this upward momentum.

In essence, the current movement reflects a decisive response to earlier pressure. What began as a tentative session with downward momentum has clearly reversed, driven by inflows that continue to underpin the broad upward extension. The benchmark now hovers just shy of technical resistance from the previous overnight high, suggesting that participants are not merely reacting but leaning into the strength on display.

Gains in the technology-heavy Nasdaq outpacing those of the S&P 500 offer us a clear signal market participants are concentrating exposure in more growth-sensitive corners. This can happen when risk appetite rises rapidly, pushing traders to seek assets with wider potential returns. It also tends to cause momentum signals to build, reinforcing current directions until profit-taking or macro shifts adjust positioning.

There is a pattern repeating itself here. First pressure, then absorption, followed by momentum reinforced through sustained buying. It may not come as a surprise that short positioning is giving way under this pace, especially as we approach expiry windows. With vol curves flattening and realized prints continuing to recede, the shift toward gamma neutrality becomes increasingly visible in larger tick sizes and smoother upward glide.

Importance Of Option Flows

From our position, this is where option flows tend to take on outsized importance. Calls previously seen as unlikely to be reached have moved closer into play, dragging dealers toward hedging paths that were less likely just sessions ago. Gamma exposure climbing reinforces a directional bias that may last until open interest resets at next week’s quarterly. We’re not yet at the point where skew reverses, though it narrows slightly as upside demand grows at a faster clip than downside protection unwinds.

What we must watch now is whether strength through this short-term ceiling attracts immediate continuation or causes some participants to de-risk modestly into the rally. Should we clear the identified level with volume support, the next zone to monitor lies in the 5890 to 5910 buffer, which aligns with previous consolidation zones. Notably, volatility sellers have returned in force, suggesting comfort with short-term containment unless a fresh macro catalyst hits.

The price action of today is not isolated. We’ve seen similar rhythm this quarter, where moderate declines attract liquidity, forcing a rebound that overshoots previous resistance. When this happens repeatedly, it fosters a self-reinforcing bias, especially in derivatives, where open interest clusters shape directional range.

In short, flows continue to tilt constructive unless we revert below 5820—where much of the day’s participation found its base. As current pricing creeps ever closer to the next measured projection, and with implied vol still lagging realised, spreads remain efficient but tightly wound.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

Federal Reserve Governor Adriana Kugler commented on the impact of tariffs on global supply chains, noting potential rearrangements if tariffs persist. Despite recent US-China tariff reductions, current tariff levels remain elevated, impacting trade relations.

Economic Impact Of Tariffs

Kugler expects increased prices and an economic slowdown, though not as severe as previously anticipated. She believes price increases due to tariffs could have lasting effects, especially with today’s tight labour market, where businesses are hesitant to reduce workforce numbers.

She stated her outlook has changed regarding the extent of tool usage but remains consistent in direction. The uncertainty level has decreased slightly, affecting the extent of supply shocks.

This information includes forward-looking statements involving risks and uncertainties. Readers are advised to conduct thorough research before making investment decisions, acknowledging risks, potential losses, and personal responsibility for their investments.

Kugler’s remarks highlight something we’ve been watching closely—tariffs aren’t merely diplomatic tools; they spill directly into how supply chains behave over time. Even with some easing between the US and China, the remaining trade barriers are not insignificant and continue to pressure international sourcing and production strategies. Manufacturers and importers may find themselves adapting not just once, but repeatedly, the longer these conditions persist.

For those of us involved in price-sensitive derivatives markets, this is more than just macro theory. Supply realignment doesn’t just change delivery timelines or costs; it reshapes how underlying assets perform, often unpredictably. If tariffs stay in place, we could see fresh forms of market dislocation, particularly in goods originating from or reliant on those two economies. That could translate to irregular price behaviour across various futures and options contracts.

Inflationary Effects And Labour Market Stability

Kugler also mentions the inflationary effects of such trade measures and how they might linger. What’s worth noting here is the observation that companies are holding onto their workers, despite higher labour costs. This suggests pricing pressures aren’t translating into broad job losses—at least not yet—but rather into tighter margins. In markets, that tends to mean reduced investment or a drop in yield expectations, largely dependent on sector.

The way she frames the shift in her view is revealing: less about switching strategy, more about adjusting the intensity of action. That gives us a refined compass. While the path might remain set towards policy tightening or cautious restraint, the tempo can vary—and we should remain agile. Smaller-than-expected supply shocks point to more stable projections in areas like commodities or currency pairs, reducing immediate volatility but not risk altogether.

In short, this is a moment to be precise, not passive. Historic patterns tied to global trade volumes may no longer give accurate forecasts in the near term. Instruments tied to physical delivery or international exposure may need shorter holding periods. Reassessing exposure to sectors sensitive to input costs, such as manufacturing or retail, may yield better risk control. As ever, watch the data, but even more, observe the sentiment—and be ready to adjust models accordingly.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

The Bank of England’s Taylor stated that current interest rates are far from neutral, citing a neutral range of 2.75% to 3%. Business confidence in the UK is eroding, as shown in REC and PMI surveys, with caution and concern prevailing.

Taylor noted that the tariff shock was unexpectedly large, with uncertain future economic activity. Wage settlement data aligns with slower wage growth expectations, while BOE’s central forecast is criticised for underestimating the global trade situation.

Recent Rate Cut

Recently, the Bank of England cut its base interest rate by 0.25 percentage points to 4.25%, marking the fourth reduction since August 2024. This decision followed easing inflationary pressures and global economic uncertainties, including new U.S. tariffs.

The Monetary Policy Committee’s vote was divided. Five members supported the cut, while Taylor and another member proposed a larger reduction due to subdued inflation and global trade concerns. Catherine L. Mann and Huw Pill opposed any rate change, citing ongoing inflation pressures from wages and services, reflecting differing views on managing inflation and economic growth risks.

In March, inflation was 2.6%, with a predicted rise to 3.5% by the third quarter due to increased energy prices, before stabilising at 2% by early 2027. U.S. tariff increases contribute to a cautious UK economic outlook.

What the original content lays out is fairly straight. It tells us that Taylor, a policymaker at the Bank of England, is not convinced the current interest rate of 4.25% sits within the so-called neutral zone, which is pegged between 2.75% and 3%. A neutral rate is that sweet spot which neither spurs nor slows the economy. If the rate is indeed above neutral, which Taylor believes it is, then monetary policy is still acting as a brake on economic output.

Impact of Global Factors

He also pointed to a sharp and surprising impact from U.S. tariffs, which are starting to expose vulnerabilities in global trade flows. This, alongside slumping UK business sentiment seen in recent surveys, paints a sourer picture. There are hints of stalling momentum on the domestic side—caution from firms, slower hiring intentions, rising costs in services, and tentative consumer demand.

What’s also worth noting is the visible gap in perspectives at the Bank itself. While a slim majority opted for a minor cut in rates, two members pushed for a bolder move, arguing that the economy is already under enough pressure and won’t benefit from an overly gentle approach. On the flip side, others argued the risk of inflation stubbornly sticking around is still too high, especially in the services sector and wage growth figures.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

The Dow Jones is trading at its highest in nearly six weeks, rising roughly 1.3% since the market opened higher in Asia. This boost follows a trade agreement between the US and China, easing previous market volatility caused by trade war concerns.

Market Sentiment Improvement

The deal has improved market sentiment, following US agreements with countries like Japan, South Korea, India, and the UK. The Dow Jones is experiencing its fourth consecutive week of gains, emerging above the weekly cloud top at 42096, with the daily chart testing the converged 100/200DMA’s at 42356.

Despite potential hesitation from bulls due to fading momentum, the strong positive sentiment is expected to keep the upward trend intact. Dips in the Dow Jones are likely to be viewed as opportunities for further gains rather than corrections.

Support is noted at 41797, with session lows at 41600, protecting further levels at 41257 (55DMA) and 41141 (10DMA). Resistance is seen at 42356, 42570, 42834, and 43050.

While the Dow has edged upwards for several weeks now, making a fresh approach above the cloud top and now grappling with dual moving averages near 42,356, it’s the firmness of sentiment following the US-China understanding that’s underlined this trend. The sequence of pacts with other nations prior to this was already setting the tone, but this latest move has settled nerves on both sides of the Pacific. This matters because large-cap equities tend to show consistent strength when external trade pressures ease – export-sensitive sectors in particular gain relief.

Momentum and Short Term Moves

We’re not seeing runaway enthusiasm though; momentum, although positive, is softening a touch. This suggests price action may run into moderate friction when pushing into higher resistance levels – likely around 42,570 and again above 42,800. Those zones aren’t impenetrable, but they’ll probably attract selling pressure at first glance. The daily highs may briefly outpace these marks, but unless flows shift decisively, bulls may hesitate to flood in.

In terms of shorter-term moves, any slide toward 41,600 or even sub-41,300 would sit within the context of a broad upward channel as long as support at 41,141 holds firm. Below that, the 55-day average at 41,257 would come into view quickly – and that line hasn’t been tested properly since early May. This is where we’d reassess load-up levels. Until then, pullbacks closer to 41,800 appear to offer relatively balanced entry points for retracement trades.

Volume participation through late sessions has been choppy but not weak, suggesting that conviction hasn’t collapsed – it’s just waiting for a stronger catalyst. We shouldn’t overlook the impact of quarter-end positioning in the days ahead, either. If institutional positioning re-aligns with the broader bullish structure, especially above that convergence of the 100 and 200-day, 43,050 becomes less of a ceiling and more of a checkpoint.

For those managing delta exposure, this emerging consolidation above cloud support should influence how spreads are structured through next expiry. Biasing gamma-loads to the upside, while setting soft stops below 41,257, may be preferable as hedging costs have come down following the volatility drop. Premiums at the wings remain relatively compressed, so skew analysis continues to offer insight into where deeper floors might be set.

The wider point is that market response to fundamentals has become more directional again – and that’s pivotal for how we rebalance risk across layered options books. As new data emerges from Asia and patterns from the US remain supportive, reversals seem unlikely in the near term – unless there’s a macro jolt to dislodge current pricing comfort. Until then, trades above support floors deserve room to breathe.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

After six weeks of market speculation on global economic realignment, the situation in tariff rates and markets remains unchanged. Deutsche Bank questions the purpose of recent developments, particularly concerning declining Chinese exports to the US, with April 2025 imports at their lowest since 2009.

Expectations of a continued US-China decoupling, driven by national security concerns and manufacturing imbalances, were put into question. Observations point to pragmatic voices within the US administration prioritising the near-term economy over long-term security. This shift reflects a need to sustain trade, possibly misjudging the effectiveness of high tariffs in securing trade concessions.

Unpredictability Of Us Policy

The unpredictability of US policy raises questions about future directions, yet some positives emerge. US policy may have strengthened Europe, encouraged China to focus on consumption, and highlighted how the American trade deficit aligns with its fiscal deficit. These outcomes suggest that recent US policies might be beneficial in certain aspects.

We’ve seen six weeks pass with anticipation building around a realignment of trade and tariffs. But as it stands, tariff levels have barely budged, and markets have largely followed their own course. Deutsche Bank is tapping on the brakes, asking whether all of the moves we’re seeing—including the downturn in Chinese exports to the US—are actually producing the effects they’re meant to. Take April 2025, for example: the drop in imports from China brought numbers to their lowest level since the aftermath of the financial crisis. That’s not a linear path—it’s a warning light.

What’s more telling is that despite years of rhetoric around detaching two of the world’s largest economies, clear threads of interdependence remain. For a while now, we thought the national security framework would dominate economic decisions, especially in trade. But that assumption seems to be softening. From what we can observe, within the US, there’s growing acknowledgment that economic needs today—particularly around inflation and economic growth—might matter more than longer-term ambitions. The idea seems to be: we cannot afford to isolate ourselves when input costs remain high for manufacturers and households alike.

We noticed this hesitation in tariff renewal strategies. There might be a recognition that high import costs aren’t forcing negotiations—they’re just feeding prices at home. If that’s the case, there’s every reason to consider not just where rates sit currently, but what sort of trading activity those rates encourage or dissuade. Investors and market watchers should not assume that stated policy aims will align with future outcomes. Instead, timeframes are stretching, and what once felt certain now feels provisional.

Emerging Policy Tension

While the direction remains unclear, not everything has gone awry. Ironically, American trade pressure might have sparked adaptive behaviours elsewhere. Europe’s role in global trade looks more resilient, with manufacturing spreading more evenly and currency stability allowing their output to remain competitive. China, meanwhile, appears to be preparing for demand led at home rather than export-focused. That’s no quick sprint—it’s a shift in commercial objective. And for all the criticism, the US’s own trade gap aligns increasingly with its fiscal position. That connection provides more clarity on where trade deficits may be tolerated—so long as borrowing at home remains aggressively expansionary.

In the coming weeks, what we’re watching is real policy tension: rhetoric suggesting divergence between major economies, versus a clear reliance on ongoing supply structures. For us, that opens the door to asymmetry in both hedging costs and short-term volatility. Options markets, already pricing in policy uncertainty, might see widening spreads if participants start to hedge more actively against future renegotiations or sudden changes in diplomatic tone.

We’re no longer in a regime where one announcement moves pricing dramatically—but we are in one where patterns of behaviour might finally be shifting. That means we should avoid assuming symmetry, not just in exposure, but in outcomes. Chinese policy, fiscal control in Washington, and European production metrics each throw their weight into the realm of risk.

Pricing models built with static assumptions could quickly become out of date. Instead, we might lean more heavily on volume swings, capital flows, and demand resilience as forward indicators. In this environment, clear signals may be scarce, but the weight of each data point—particularly monthly trade positions or renewed fiscal outlooks—could move pricing models faster than before.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.

Federal Reserve Governor Adriana Kugler mentioned the difficulty in evaluating the economy’s strength due to shifting trade policies. The changes have led to increased purchases of imported goods by households and businesses.

The present environment still points to potentially higher prices and slower growth. Economic stability has been supported by consistent labour market conditions and disinflation progress slowing.

The Federal Reserve Meetings

The Federal Reserve holds eight policy meetings annually through the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). These meetings assess economic conditions and are attended by twelve members, including Reserve Bank presidents.

Quantitative Easing (QE) is used during financial crises to increase credit flow, generally weakening the US Dollar. Conversely, Quantitative Tightening (QT) strengthens the Dollar by stopping bond purchases and not reinvesting maturing bond principals.

When Kugler highlights the challenge of assessing how strong the US economy currently is, she’s pointing to a growing imbalance. Behind that issue are changes in global trade flows which alter how households and businesses behave—what they buy and where they get it from. More demand for imported goods tends to subtract from GDP, even if activity still feels buoyant. It complicates any straightforward reading of economic data. For those of us watching these shifts, the challenge lies not simply in tracking headline growth, but in asking what’s fuelling it—and what that means for prices.

This is particularly important given the current pattern we’ve been seeing: prices rising, but without the same pace of expansion we saw in previous months. Employment figures, which have remained surprisingly steady, do lend the Fed room to wait. The longer disinflation struggles to make progress, the more it raises questions over whether wage pressures or input costs will continue to flare up in places.

Monetary Policy Tools

We know the structure of decision-making—eight scheduled meetings each year, with the twelve key voting members drawing on a wide view of the most recent data. The challenge now isn’t timing policy wrongly, but rather gauging how much longer a restrictive stance needs to be held before it turns into something less tight.

From a monetary tools perspective, things have shifted. During stress periods like past financial collapses, quantitative easing (QE) helped push money into the system. Treasury and mortgage bonds were bought en masse, which added liquidity and weakened the dollar by making yields less attractive globally. It had the short-term effect of lifting asset prices. Now we’re in the opposite phase.

Quantitative tightening (QT), the rollback of that support, is where the Fed allows securities to mature and doesn’t replace them. It leads to less cash floating around. That strengthens the currency automatically, by lifting yields and forcing foreign capital to return in search of better returns. This has spillover effects in areas like commodities and multinational borrowing costs, which need to be re-evaluated constantly by those managing exposure.

It’s not enough to assume rate cuts are close just because inflation has softened in past months. What we’re dealing with now is a policy environment where the Fed seems cautious—waiting for clearer evidence that the slowdown is sustained, and doesn’t reverse. With that in mind, recent moves in short-term futures might be ahead of themselves. There’s scope for more pricing-in if additional Fed members echo Kugler on near-term uncertainty.

So what can we take from this? Watch job numbers, but also keep an eye on bond reinvestment figures coming from the Fed’s balance sheet. When reinvestment stops on a larger scale, markets tend to respond quickly, particularly in FX and rates. US Treasury auctions, too, may play a more direct role now than in past cycles. As bond demand shifts and coupon levels reset, longer-dated instruments might not behave as predictably across maturities.

Forward guidance has left room for interpretation. That’s a setup where adjustments can happen without warning over coming weeks. We should stay close to real-time data, and lean on high-frequency indicators—like shipping volumes, core services inflation, and temporary hiring.

No single print will determine policy. It will be a sequence of consistent shifts. Rate traders, in particular, should remain nimble, especially as premiums across forward swaps are still underpricing the Fed’s logistic concerns tied to trade and imported consumption patterns.

Create your live VT Markets account and start trading now.