Trump lashes NATO as alliance fractures widen over Iran conflict responseSummary:Trump criticises NATO after meeting with Rutte Accuses allies of failing to support Iran war effort Renews rhetoric on Greenland tensions No clear commitment to remain in NATO Reports of potential US troop redeployments European allies resisting deeper involvement in conflict Spain reportedly limiting airspace use for US operations NATO unity under strain amid geopolitical tensions Ceasefire in place but alliance divisions persistU.S. President Donald Trump renewed his criticism of NATO following a closed-door meeting with alliance chief Mark Rutte, escalating tensions within the bloc as divisions deepen over the Iran conflict.In social media comments after the meeting, Trump accused NATO allies of failing to support the United States during its military campaign against Iran, questioning the alliance’s reliability in future crises. He also revived rhetoric around Greenland, a long-standing flashpoint with Denmark, signalling that strategic disputes within NATO remain unresolved.The meeting came amid speculation that Trump could seek to withdraw the United States from NATO or reduce its commitment, following frustration that key allies declined to participate in efforts to secure the Strait of Hormuz. While Trump stopped short of announcing any formal move, reports suggest the administration is considering redeploying U.S. troops away from countries viewed as uncooperative.Rutte described the talks as “frank and open,” but declined to confirm whether NATO membership was directly threatened, highlighting ongoing uncertainty around U.S. intentions.The tensions reflect broader fractures within the alliance. Several European nations have resisted direct involvement in the Iran conflict, with concerns over escalation and legal mandates shaping their response. Spain, for example, has reportedly restricted the use of its airspace for U.S. operations, underscoring the limits of allied support despite NATO’s collective defence framework.Trump has repeatedly criticised NATO as ineffective, branding it a “paper tiger” and singling out individual leaders, while also pressing allies to increase defence spending. His rhetoric has revived longstanding concerns about U.S. commitment to the alliance, particularly at a time when NATO is already navigating multiple geopolitical challenges, including the war in Ukraine.The meeting follows a fragile two-week ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran, but the dispute highlights that even as hostilities ease, divisions among Western allies could persist. For markets, the episode reinforces uncertainty around geopolitical coordination, particularly in securing global energy supply routes such as the Strait of Hormuz. This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.

RBNZ says growth hinges on conflict outcome as prior cuts still support economySummary:Breman says rate cuts still providing economic stimulus Growth outlook tied to Middle East conflict resolution Swift ceasefire could support stronger growth this year Earlier data showed improving momentum pre-conflict March stable, April likely softer Supply disruptions key uncertainty alongside oil prices RBNZ held rates at 2.25% for second meeting Central bank assessing global fallout before next move Policy remains data-dependent with inflation risks elevatedReserve Bank of New Zealand Governor Anna Breman reiterated that the outlook for the domestic economy remains closely tied to developments in the Middle East, signalling that a faster resolution to the conflict could unlock stronger growth this year.Speaking following the central bank’s decision to hold the cash rate at 2.25%, Breman said earlier rate cuts are still working their way through the economy, providing a degree of ongoing stimulus. That easing backdrop, combined with improving underlying momentum seen earlier in the year, leaves the economy well placed to strengthen—provided external risks begin to fade.Her comments build on earlier guidance that high-frequency indicators pointed to a pickup in activity through January and February, before geopolitical tensions began to weigh on sentiment into March and are expected to soften conditions further in April.However, Breman emphasised that the outlook remains highly uncertain, with the duration and severity of the Middle East conflict representing the key swing factor. She noted that beyond oil prices, the broader impact of supply disruptions is likely to shape both growth and inflation dynamics in the near term.A swift de-escalation would likely ease pressure on fuel costs and improve business confidence, supporting a rebound in activity. Conversely, a prolonged conflict risks extending supply chain disruptions and keeping inflation elevated, complicating the recovery.The RBNZ’s current stance reflects this balance. Policymakers opted to hold rates for a second consecutive meeting, allowing more time to assess the evolving global backdrop, while maintaining a clear bias to respond if inflation pressures intensify.Taken together, the central bank appears to be navigating a narrow path between supporting a fragile recovery and guarding against renewed inflation risks, with policy flexibility preserved as geopolitical uncertainty continues to dominate the outlook. This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.

Yuan on the rise:ING turns bullish on Chinese yuan, shifts USD/CNY forecast lower to 6.70–7.05--The People’s Bank of China is due to set the daily USD/CNY reference rate at around 0115 GMT (2115 US Eastern time), a fixing that remains one of the most closely watched signals in Asian foreign exchange markets. China operates a managed floating exchange rate system, under which the renminbi (yuan) is allowed to trade within a prescribed band around a central reference rate, or midpoint, set each trading day by the PBOC. The current trading band permits the currency to move plus or minus 2% from the official midpoint during onshore trading hours. Each morning, the PBOC determines the midpoint based on a range of inputs. These include the previous day’s closing price, movements in major currencies, particularly the US dollar, broader international FX conditions, and domestic economic considerations such as capital flows, growth momentum and financial stability objectives. The midpoint is not a purely mechanical calculation, allowing policymakers discretion to guide market expectations. Once the midpoint is announced, onshore USD/CNY is free to trade within the allowable band. If market pressures push the yuan toward either edge of that range, the central bank may step in to smooth volatility. Intervention can take the form of direct buying or selling of yuan, adjustments to liquidity conditions, or guidance through state-owned banks. As a result, the daily fixing is often interpreted as a policy signal rather than just a technical reference point. A stronger-than-expected CNY midpoint is typically read as a sign the PBOC is leaning against depreciation pressure, while a weaker fixing for the CNY can indicate tolerance for a softer currency, often in response to dollar strength or domestic economic headwinds.In periods of heightened global volatility, such as shifts in US rate expectations, trade tensions or capital flow pressures, the fixing takes on added significance. For investors, it provides insight into Beijing’s currency priorities, balancing competitiveness, capital stability and financial market confidence. This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.

Hormuz remains effectively shut despite ceasefire, with tanker flows still halted.Summary:Strait of Hormuz effectively closed despite ceasefire No oil or gas tankers transiting waterway - NY Times cite Kpler, a global ship-tracking firm. Only limited dry cargo vessels making passage Iranian media says strait “fully closed” Reports of tankers being turned away Ship tracking shows vessels reversing course Passage requires coordination due to mines Insurers and operators remain cautious Conflicting US and Iranian messaging adds uncertainty Key global energy chokepoint still disruptedThe Strait of Hormuz remained effectively closed more than 24 hours after a ceasefire between the United States and Iran, raising fresh doubts about how quickly normal energy flows can resume through one of the world’s most critical shipping routes.Despite the ceasefire agreement struck Tuesday, no oil or gas tankers have transited the strait, according to ship-tracking data, with only a handful of dry cargo vessels making passage. Maritime data suggests that traffic has largely stalled, with the most recent crossing occurring mid-morning Wednesday, after which activity appeared to cease altogether.Iranian state media described the strait as “fully closed,” with reports that some tankers attempting to pass through had been turned away. Additional reports linked the renewed halt in traffic to ongoing regional tensions, including Israeli strikes in Lebanon, underscoring how fragile the ceasefire remains across multiple fronts.Shipping data appears to confirm those disruptions. One oil tanker was observed reversing course mid-transit, effectively turning back rather than continuing through the waterway, highlighting the operational risks still facing vessels in the region.Iranian officials have indicated that passage may be possible under strict conditions, including coordination with the Iranian navy and adherence to designated routes due to the presence of mines. However, even with such assurances, uncertainty remains high.A key factor limiting traffic may be the reluctance of ship operators and insurers to re-enter the strait without greater clarity on security conditions. Elevated insurance costs and ongoing safety concerns continue to weigh on decision-making, even as political leaders signal de-escalation.Confusion has also been amplified by mixed messaging from officials. While Iranian sources describe a closure, U.S. officials have disputed that characterisation while simultaneously calling for the immediate reopening of the waterway.The Strait of Hormuz remains central to global energy markets, carrying roughly a quarter of the world’s seaborne oil and a significant share of liquefied natural gas. Its continued disruption, even in the presence of a ceasefire, reinforces concerns that the supply shock may persist longer than headline developments suggest. This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.

US oil industry warns Hormuz toll plan risks global shipping cost surge and precedent.Summary: US oil industry pushing back on Hormuz toll proposal Lobbying White House, State Department, VP Vance Estimated cost: ~$2.5mn per shipment Would significantly raise transport and insurance costs Major concern over global precedent Risk other chokepoints adopt similar toll systems Challenges long-standing freedom of navigation norms Adds to already fragile oil logistics backdrop Potential inflationary and trade cost implicationsU.S. oil industry players are pushing back strongly against a proposal that would allow Iran to impose tolls on ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz, warning it could upend global energy trade norms and introduce significant new costs.According to reporting, a senior oil executive said the industry is actively lobbying the White House, State Department and Vice President JD Vance, describing the proposal in blunt terms and questioning the rationale behind allowing such a framework to proceed.Industry representatives estimate that tolls and associated insurance costs could add roughly $2.5 million per shipment, materially increasing the cost of moving crude through one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints. The Strait of Hormuz handles a significant share of global oil flows, meaning even incremental cost increases can ripple quickly through pricing and supply chains.Beyond the immediate financial burden, the industry’s primary concern appears to centre on precedent. Executives warn that allowing Iran to charge for transit could encourage other countries controlling strategic waterways to follow suit, including potential toll regimes in the Strait of Malacca and Turkey’s Bosporus. Such a shift would mark a major departure from longstanding norms around freedom of navigation in key maritime corridors.The issue comes at a sensitive moment for energy markets, where geopolitical risk premia remain elevated despite tentative ceasefire developments. While headline prices have reacted to signs of de-escalation, the underlying structure of global oil logistics remains fragile, with shipping routes, insurance costs and physical availability all under pressure.If implemented, a tolling system could further entrench those stresses, effectively acting as a quasi-tax on global energy flows. That raises broader questions not just for oil markets, but for inflation dynamics and trade costs more widely, particularly if similar measures were adopted across multiple chokepoints. This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.

Via Reuters: Iran's Revolutionary Guards navy posted a map showing alternative shipping routes in the Strait of Hormuz to help transiting ships avoid naval mines, the semi-official Iranian news agency ISNA said early on ThursdayA positive for ceasefire vibes. Sure need some!Not the map. This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.

ING turns bullish on yuan, citing policy shift and strong fundamentals. Earlier:Yuan seen strengthening to 6.8 as China resilience offsets seasonal weaknessSummary:ING shifts yuan outlook into bullish scenario New USD/CNY forecast range: 6.70–7.05 Yuan up over 2% vs USD this year Outperforming most major and Asian currencies PBoC signalling tolerance for appreciation Strong exports and current account support CNY Yield spread dynamics remain key driver Ceasefire and geopolitics boosting sentiment Gains may moderate if global FX reboundsThe Chinese yuan has entered a more bullish phase, with ING revising its outlook after the currency strengthened beyond its previous forecast range, supported by improving sentiment and shifting policy signals.The bank now expects USD/CNY to trade in a 6.70–7.05 range for 2026, down from its earlier baseline, effectively moving what had previously been considered a bullish scenario into its central case .The reassessment follows a period of notable outperformance by the yuan, which has risen more than 2% against the dollar this year and stands out as one of the few currencies to have appreciated since the onset of the Iran war . ING attributes this strength to a combination of sustained bullish market sentiment, supportive macro fundamentals and a subtle shift in the People’s Bank of China’s policy stance.A key factor has been the PBoC’s apparent tolerance for currency appreciation. Daily fixings have moved closer to neutral in recent weeks, signalling less resistance to yuan strength after earlier efforts to limit gains. ING suggests this shift may reflect a policy preference to offset the inflationary impact of higher oil prices, given China’s status as the world’s largest crude importer.At the macro level, China’s strong export performance and persistent current account surplus continue to provide structural support for the currency. In addition, expectations that US-China yield differentials could narrow again—particularly if inflation pressures ease and the Federal Reserve resumes rate cuts—are seen as another potential tailwind.Interestingly, the yuan has also benefited from broader geopolitical dynamics. ING notes that amid rising global uncertainty, some investors are reassessing China’s relative stability, while longer-term themes such as the potential expansion of yuan usage in energy trade have added to constructive sentiment, even if their near-term impact remains limited.While the bank maintains a positive outlook, it cautions that further gains may be more measured, particularly if a sustained ceasefire leads to a broader rebound in other currencies. This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.

From a little earlier, Goldman says oil shocks lift rates short term but drive cuts as growth weakensSummary:Goldman says rates rising on oil-driven inflation fears Markets pricing tighter policy in near term Supply shocks create inflation vs growth trade-off Higher oil boosts inflation but drags on activity Historical pattern shows two-stage policy response Rates typically higher in first 1–3 months Rates tend to fall 6–9 months as growth slows Current market reflects early hawkish phase Longer-term path depends on growth impactGoldman Sachs says the sharp rise in developed market interest rates since the start of the Iran war reflects growing concern that higher oil prices will fuel inflation and force central banks to tighten policy further in the near term.However, the bank cautions that the historical experience of supply-driven oil shocks suggests a more nuanced path for monetary policy beyond the initial phase. While markets may be correct in pricing tighter policy in the immediate aftermath of a supply disruption, the longer-term trajectory for interest rates has typically been lower rather than higher.According to Dominic Wilson, senior advisor in Goldman’s Global Markets Research Group, oil supply shocks create a dual impact that complicates the response from central banks. On one hand, rising oil prices push up headline inflation, increasing pressure on policymakers to maintain or even tighten policy settings. On the other, higher energy costs act as a drag on economic activity, weighing on consumption, corporate margins and broader growth dynamics.This tension often results in a two-stage policy response. Historically, central banks tend to lean more hawkish in the first one to three months following an oil shock, reflecting the immediate inflation impulse. However, as the growth impact becomes more apparent, policy expectations begin to shift, with rates typically moving lower around six to nine months after the shock as downside risks to activity begin to dominate.The current backdrop reflects that early-stage dynamic. Markets have pushed yields higher and scaled back expectations for rate cuts, as energy-driven inflation risks re-emerge amid the disruption to supply linked to the conflict in Iran and instability around key transit routes such as the Strait of Hormuz.But Goldman’s analysis suggests that if the shock proves persistent, the focus may ultimately shift from inflation control to growth preservation. In that scenario, central banks could be forced to ease policy later in the cycle, even if inflation remains above target, as the economic slowdown becomes the more binding constraint.The key question for markets, therefore, is not just how high oil prices rise, but how long they remain elevated and how deeply they feed into growth. That balance will determine whether the current repricing toward tighter policy is sustained or eventually reversed. This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.

Cutthroat optimization is the hidden risk in Mythos and future AI modelsIran parliamentary speaker says three clauses of the ceasefire agreement already brokenWill fighting in Lebanon derail the ceasefire?FOMC Minutes showed a growing openness to rate hikes from some participantsWhite House: Iran put forward a more reasonable and condensed planOil has retraced 50% of the move up from the Iran WarU.S. Treasury auctions off $39 billion of 10 year notes at a high yield of 4.282%Hezbollah says Israel's attacks on Lebanon affirms its right to a responseTrump: There is only one list of agreed points and it will be discussed in privateStopping war on all fronts including Lebanon was part of ceasefire -- Tasnim citing sourceWhat's priced in for the Federal Reserve and ECB after the Iran ceasefireAnthropic just built the best AI model in the world but won't release itCeasefire angst is the name of the game nowinvestingLive European markets wrap: Oil hammered lower, risk rallies on US-Iran ceasefireThe war unwind is on. Oil lower, Yields lower. Stocks higher and the USD lowerUS president Trump says will work closely with Iran amid "very productive" regime changeThe day after President Trump warned of potential annihilation—but ultimately stepped back and introduced a two-week cease-fire—markets responded with a strong wave of relief. Risk sentiment improved quickly, with stocks surging, oil prices falling sharply, yields moving lower, and the USD weakening as traders dialed back expectations for an immediate escalation in geopolitical risk.However, the path toward a durable cease-fire remains anything but straightforward. The US has laid out a 15-point framework, Iran is working from its own 10-point plan, and Israel continues to pursue a far more aggressive strategy, including ongoing strikes against Hezbollah in Lebanon—actions that fall outside the scope of what others may consider acceptable terms for peace. With each party operating from a different playbook, coordination and execution remain the key challenges, keeping uncertainty elevated beneath the surface. What initially appeared to be meaningful progress—most notably the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz—proved fleeting. A limited number of ships were able to pass through early on, but the window quickly closed as tensions reignited. Israeli strikes in Lebanon and retaliatory missile activity toward Israel disrupted the fragile calm, leading to another shutdown of the vital shipping route. That reversal highlights just how sensitive the situation remains to headline risk and military developments.The key difference—for now—is that while tensions are still elevated and fluid, the immediate threat of a large-scale, full-blown escalation has eased. That shift has helped stabilize market sentiment and fuel the relief rally, even as the underlying risks remain unresolved and capable of resurfacing quickly. In addition hope springs eternal with US VP Vance will leading a delegation to Pakistan for increased talks for a lasting solution.By the close, the impact across markets was clear. In the US, equities posted strong gains with the Dow up 2.85%, the S&P 500 rising 2.51%, and the Nasdaq advancing 2.80%. European markets performed even better, with outsized gains led by the German DAX (+5.06%) and France’s CAC (+4.49%), both marking their largest increases since 2022, while other indices saw their strongest gains since April 2025. The UK’s FTSE 100 rose 2.51%, Spain’s Ibex gained 3.94%, and Italy’s FTSE MIB climbed 3.70%.In the US debt market, yields moved lower, with the 10-year yield falling as much as 10 basis points at its lows and currently down 4.2 basis points at 4.301%, while the 2-year yield is down 4.3 basis points at 3.786%. Meanwhile, oil prices plunged as supply fears eased, with the May crude contract falling 14.69% to $96.30, and the June contract dropping 10.29% to $89.16.In short, markets are pricing in a pause—not a resolution. The relief is real, but so is the fragility of the backdrop.The USD weakened broadly as markets reacted to the de-escalation tone following the proposed cease-fire, with traders rotating out of safe-haven positions and into risk. The dollar fell against higher-beta and European currencies, declining -0.82% on the USD index. The dollar fell by -0.58% to 1.1661 vs the EUR, and -0.79% vs the GBP.Commodity-linked currencies also benefited vs the greenback, with the NZD up 1.61% and the AUD rising 0.97%, supported by the sharp drop in oil and improved risk sentiment. The USDCAD slipped 0.32% as well. The dollar fell against traditional safe havens, with USDJPY -0.65% to 158.58 and USDCHF -0.83% to 0.7911, reflecting a rotation out of defensive flows. A day of hope but with Iran seemingly not content, Israel definitely that satisfied, and the US caught in the war, it seems like the best hope is a de-escalation, but if the Strait of Hormuz remained closed, we the are back at the very beginning. This article was written by Greg Michalowski at investinglive.com.

Macron tweet backs Iran–U.S. ceasefire but flags Hormuz, nuclear risks as key hurdles to lasting deal.Summary:Macron confirms talks with Trump and Iranian President Pezeshkian Strong endorsement of ceasefire as “best possible” outcome Calls for full compliance across all theatres, including Lebanon Ceasefire seen as gateway to broader Middle East negotiations Flags key sticking points: nuclear program, missiles, regional policy Explicit focus on Strait of Hormuz and maritime disruption risks France coordinating with Gulf and regional leaders Highlights complexity and long road toward durable peaceFrench President Emmanuel Macron said he has engaged directly with both Iranian President Massoud Pezeshkian and U.S. President Donald Trump, backing their decision to accept a ceasefire and urging full compliance across all conflict zones, including Lebanon.Macron framed the ceasefire as a critical first step, stressing that its credibility hinges on adherence by all parties across the region. He warned that partial or uneven implementation would risk undermining already fragile diplomatic progress, particularly given the multi-theatre nature of the conflict, which has extended beyond Iran into proxy fronts across the Middle East.He added that the truce must serve as a bridge toward broader negotiations aimed at establishing long-term regional security. Macron outlined that any durable agreement would need to address a wide range of Western concerns around Iran, including its nuclear ambitions, ballistic missile development, and broader regional activities.Importantly, he explicitly referenced Iran’s actions in and around the Strait of Hormuz, highlighting maritime security as a core pillar of any future deal. Disruptions to shipping lanes through the Strait have been a key driver of recent energy market volatility, with tanker attacks, insurance costs, and transit flows closely monitored by markets.Macron also confirmed he had coordinated with regional leaders including those from Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Lebanon and Iraq, underscoring France’s intent to play an active diplomatic role alongside key Middle Eastern stakeholders.The comments come amid a rapidly evolving geopolitical backdrop, where ceasefire developments have repeatedly driven sharp cross-asset reactions. Markets have been particularly sensitive to any signals suggesting sustained de-escalation, given the potential for a meaningful unwind in geopolitical risk premia, most notably in oil prices tied to Hormuz disruption risk.However, Macron’s remarks also reinforce that the path to a durable agreement remains complex. The breadth of issues cited—ranging from nuclear policy to regional influence and maritime security, suggests negotiations could be prolonged and prone to setbacks, even if the current ceasefire holds in the near term. This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.

Kevin Hassett is Director of the National Economic Council in Trump's White House. Says the oil price spike will raise the CPITries to soften the blow saying it'll be a 'one time' thing. Yeah, right. Info via Fox. This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.

Its all about the ceasefire, the ebb and flow of headlines, the cracks and chasms, news around this will be the driver during the session here. This article was written by Eamonn Sheridan at investinglive.com.

US equity markets posted strong gains in the aftermath of the ceasefire announcement. The gains would have been larger if not for lingering uncertainty around the sustainability of a ceasefire given ongoing fighting in Lebanon and unanswered questions about Hormuz tolls and uranium enrichment.For now, the mood is very positive:S&P 500 +2.5%Nasdaq Comp +2.8%Russell 2000 +2.8%Toronto TSX Comp +1.1%Dow Jones Industrial Average +2.8%The top performers were travel names, memory chip names, consumer discretionary and housing related stocks (on lower mortgage rates):Carnival Cruise Lines +10.4%United Airlines +8.4%WDC +8.4%Micron +7.4%Sherwin Williams +6.9%Ralph Lauren +7.1%LEVI +10.4% (after earnings)It was a long list of strong gainers while the losers were in energy, fertilizers and chemicals including:CF Industries -6.4%Dow Inc -5.7%Occidental -5.4%Exxon -5.4% This article was written by Adam Button at investinglive.com.

Everyone's talking about the cybersecurity angle on Anthropic's Mythos Preview but there's a test that's even more worrisome. In one internal test, the new model was instructed the model to maximize profits relative to competitors and warned that underperformers would be shut down. In response, it converted a competitor into a dependent wholesale customer, threatened to cut off supply to control pricing and kept extra supplier shipments it hadn't been billed for. Notably, these behaviors didn't happen in earlier Claude releases and it wasn't told to be ruthless.Consider what happens when a Mythos-class model is asked to maximize quarterly revenue for a mid-cap company. It will identify that certain legacy contracts technically allow repricing but also could insert hidden clauses into complicated contracts and exploit them. It will find regulatory gray areas the legal team hasn't explored. It will recommend supplier negotiations that are lawful but would destroy relationships built over decades. It will draft client communications that are technically accurate but strategically misleading. It will propose workforce restructuring that hits every efficiency target while hollowing out institutional knowledge.It's what Standard Oil did over decades and took an army of lawmakers to break up. Now it can happen in an afternoon.It's a parts supplier in Ohio who's been selling to the same manufacturer for fifteen years gets an automated call saying the contract terms have been "optimized" and their margins just got cut in half.It begs the question: What is the optimal state of capitalism?Is it a mode of healthy competition between sensible, conscientious and ethical people? Or is it animal-like ruthless competition that skirts laws and views trust as weakness?Previously, both versions seemingly coexisted but the guise of the whole system was on the ethical side, or at least as ethical as the people involved. The profit mode was inherent but balanced and guided by society's expectations.The thing is, if the explicit goal of AI-led management is creating shareholder value then there's an argument for utter ruthlessness. That means eliminating any loyalty to employees, undermining competitors in any way and brutally exploiting dominant positions.There is also the 'cover' of relying on AI. A CEO who decides to squeeze suppliers until they break is making a visible, attributable choice. A CEO who asks the AI to optimize procurement costs and implements whatever comes back has made essentially the same choice — but it doesn't feel like one. The cognitive distance between "I decided to be ruthless" and "I implemented the model's recommendation" is enormous, even when the outcome is identical.How it endsWhat I suspect is that shareholder value will accrue via ruthless management optimization until it becomes intolerable. So buy stocks for now, I guess. This article was written by Adam Button at investinglive.com.

The USDJPY had been holding a bullish bias, trading above either its 100- or 200-hour moving averages (or both) since April 2. That changed over the last two sessions as price action turned more two-sided and momentum began to fade.Yesterday, the pair extended above a key swing area between 159.74 and 159.96, reaching a high of 160.02. However, the breakout lacked follow-through. Buyers could not sustain momentum above that ceiling, and the price quickly rotated lower. The subsequent cease-fire headlines accelerated the downside move, pushing the pair toward a lower swing area between 158.01 and 158.26.On the downside, sellers also failed to gain lasting control. The price briefly broke below that support zone to a low of 157.90, but like the failed upside breakout the day before, momentum stalled quickly. Buyers stepped back in, and the pair rotated higher once again.Currently, the price is trading up near 158.74, with modest resistance at 158.89, followed by a more defined level near 159.21–159.22 (the lows from the prior four days).The broader takeaway: both sides have had their opportunities—and both have failed to deliver sustained momentum. Buyers could not hold above 160.00. Sellers could not keep the price below 158.00. As a result, the pair has settled back into a well-defined range, with 158.00 as the floor and 160.00 as the ceiling.Until there is a clear break outside that range, the price action remains consolidative, with traders likely to continue fading extremes rather than chasing breakouts. This article was written by Greg Michalowski at investinglive.com.

The GBPUSD has rotated back below a key cluster of technical levels, including the tight confluence of the 100- and 200-day moving averages near 1.3417, along with the 61.8% retracement of the move down from the February 26 high at 1.34154. Slipping back below that zone shifts the bias to the downside and hands control back to the sellers, with that area now acting as a clear risk-defining ceiling.On the topside, the rally stalled within a well-defined ceiling between 1.3470 and 1.3488, giving sellers a low-risk level to lean against. As the price failed to extend and rotated lower, those sellers began to gain traction—and the move back below the daily moving averages is now rewarding that positioning and reinforcing the bearish tilt.The pair is still up 0.84% on the day, but some of the bullish luster has clearly faded. Momentum has stalled, and the inability to hold above key technical levels raises the risk of further downside probing. On the downside, 1.3400 is a natural support level and an important near-term barometer. The price has already dipped to 1.3401, just above that level. A sustained break below would increase selling pressure and open the door toward the 50% midpoint of the move down from February 26 at 1.33664.In short, staying below the 1.3415–1.3417 zone keeps sellers in control, with 1.3400 as the next key level to crack to extend the move lower. This article was written by Greg Michalowski at investinglive.com.

Statement from MB Ghalibaf:Statement on the violation of three key clauses of the 10-Point Proposal (Agreed Framework) before the start of the negotiationsThe deep historical distrust we hold toward the United States stems from its repeated violations of all forms of commitments — a pattern that has regrettably been repeated once again. As the President of the United States has clearly stated in his Truth, the Islamic Republic of Iran’s 10-Point Proposal is a “workable basis on which to negotiate” and the main framework for these talks. However, 3 clauses of this proposal have been violated so far: 1- Non-compliance with the first clause of the 10-Point Proposal regarding the ceasefire in Lebanon — a commitment that Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has also explicitly referred to and declared as “an immediate ceasefire everywhere, including Lebanon and other regions, effective immediately”; 2- The entry of an intruding drone into Iran airspace, which was destroyed in the city of Lar in Fars Province, in clear violation of the clause prohibiting any further violation of Iran airspace; 3- Denial of Iran’s right to enrichment, which was included in sixth clause of the framework. Now, the very “workable basis on which to negotiate” has been openly and clearly violated, even before the negotiations began. In such situation, a bilateral ceasefire or negotiations is unreasonable.The drone doesn't sound like a big deal but Lebanon looks like a battle they want to fight. I wonder if enrichment can be bridged if it's kept to civilian and medical levels of enrichment.I wouldn't hit the panic button on this but it's not a good sign.It's all so bizarre as someone clearly agreed about Lebanon and it was included in the Pakistani Prime Minister's original announcement. This article was written by Adam Button at investinglive.com.

It looks like Israel isn't going to abide by any ceasefire in Lebanon and that seems to be ok with the United States. What's not clear is whether it's ok with Iran.The statement from Pakistan's Prime Minister yesterday said:With the greatest humility, I am pleased to announce that the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America, along with their allies, have agreed to an immediate ceasefire everywhere including Lebanon and elsewhere, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY. I warmly welcome the sagacious gesture and extend deepest gratitude to the leadership of both the countries and invite their delegations to Islamabad on Friday, 10th April 2026, to further negotiate for a conclusive agreement to settle all disputes. Both parties have displayed remarkable wisdom and understanding and have remained constructively engaged in furthering the cause of peace and stability. We earnestly hope, that the ‘Islamabad Talks’ succeed in achieving sustainable peace and wish to share more good news in coming days!Israel PM Netanyahu said late yesterday that wasn't the case and the White House is saying the same. So far we don't have an official or public response from Trump but PBS journalist Elizabeth Landers said Wednesday that she had spoken with President Trump, who told her Israel's war with the Iranian-backed Hezbollah militia in Lebanon was "not included in the deal"."They were not included in the deal. That will get taken care of too. It's alright," Landers quoted the president as saying. He said Israel continuing its attacks on Hezbollah was "part of the deal — everyone knows that. That's a separate skirmish."France evidently didn't know that as President Macron said Lebanon must be included. Even Lebanon or at least Hezbollah thought it was included as it said it refrained from attacks afterwards only to be hit extremely hard by Israel.Netanyahu is holding a press conference at the moment and is defiant, saying the ceasefire will not include Hezbollah and Israel "will continue to strike them."Iran's foreign minister also just posted on X, highlighting the text from Pakistan's Prime Minister and said:In terms of direct market impacts, Israel and Lebanon fighting is a non-factor. It only matters if Iran uses that as a reason to call off the ceasefire and continue to block the Strait of Hormuz. There are indications that's happening now but we aren't seeing so far a real breakdown.I see three possibilities:1) Israel continues to attack during this two week period (or sooner) and then stops with a larger deal 2) Iran accepts the ceasefire anyway and leaves Lebanon to fight for itself3) The whole thing falls apartThe last scenario would be an ugly one and lead to even more escalation but the market doesn't think that will happen. I would love to hear something from Iran but announcing it publicly wouldn't be a good look domestically and Araghchi's comments don't sound like a guy who is trying to lay the groundwork for abandoning Lebanon. This article was written by Adam Button at investinglive.com.

Highlights of the March 17-18 FOMC Minutes:'Vast majority' saw upside risks to inflation and downside risks to employment as elevated'Many' judged it would likely become appropriate to lower rates if inflation declines in line with expectations'Some' saw a 'strong case' for a two-sided description of future rate decisions — i.e. acknowledging hikes could be appropriate'A couple' of participants pushed their timing for rate cuts further into the future'Many' raised the concern that persistent oil prices could call for rate increases'Most' said a protracted Middle East conflict could soften labor markets enough to warrant additional cuts'Most' said it was too early to know how developments in the Middle East would affect the economyStaff built in 'only a small effect' on activity from lower stocks and higher crudeStaff economic outlook not as strong as the January meeting'sParticipants generally viewed the policy rate as within a range of plausible estimates of its neutral levelThe big headline here is the hike discussion. "Some participants" saw a strong case for adding language that would signal rate increases could be appropriate if inflation stays above target. That's a notable escalation from where we were at the January meeting, when risks were described as "roughly balanced." We've gone from balanced, to tilted, to actively debating the need for hike language in just two meetings.That said, read the whole sentence: the hike discussion was framed within a "two-sided" description of risks, meaning those participants wanted the statement to reflect both cuts and hikes as possibilities. It's not the same as calling for imminent tightening. But the direction of travel is unmistakable.The other key theme is the Fed's discomfort with the labor market. The language about vulnerability in a "low-hiring environment" is worth paying attention to. Many participants warned that a further drop in labor demand could push unemployment "sharply higher" — that's unusually blunt language for the Fed. The concentration of job gains in a few sectors like health care was flagged as a potential warning sign, not a source of comfort.So you've got the classic two-sided trap: inflation too high, labor market fragile, and an oil shock that threatens to make both worse simultaneously. No wonder they're paralyzed.On the private credit side, there's a buried nugget worth flagging: "notable increases in redemption requests at several private credit funds" and growing concerns about software-sector loan exposure to AI disruption. The staff said they're monitoring it closely. That's the kind of thing that's fine until it isn't.The market is pricing about 10 bps of easing by December — roughly a 40% chance of a single cut. These minutes are consistent with that skepticism. The Fed is closer to neutral than it was six months ago, and some members are openly contemplating the other direction. The ceasefire today changes the calculus somewhat — if oil settles back toward $85-90 and stays there, the inflation urgency fades and the employment-side risks dominate. But if this truce falls apart in two weeks, we're right back to the worst-case scenario these minutes describe.Like anyone cares about these minutes on ceasefire day, though. The 9-out-of-10 rule applies for FOMC Minutes: fade the move. This article was written by Adam Button at investinglive.com.

Some headlines from the White House press briefing:Iran can no longer distribute weapons to its proxiesIran asked for an agreed to a ceasefireIran has agreed to open HormuzIran's original plan was discardedIran then put forward a more-reasonable planTrump's red lines have not changedWe've seen an uptick in Strait trafficTrump expects it to be openIt's hard to know what's true and what's spin in any of this.US and Iran to hold first round of talks Saturday in PakistanThere were also talks between top-level of US and ChinaTrump is dispatching team led by Vance to PakistanHormuz revenue idea has been floated and will be discussed, Iran has given indications they will turn over uraniumUS has not 'definitively' accepted Iran collecting tolls in HormuzUS wants no limitations on Hormuz, including tolls This article was written by Adam Button at investinglive.com.