Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

Tams

FOMC Today

Recommended Posts

Do you think this is a good day to trade or to stand down? I have often wrestled with this. I know a lot of my trader friends refuse to trade on FOMC day, or any Fed day for that matter. I'm curious to hear what other's think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you think this is a good day to trade or to stand down? I have often wrestled with this. I know a lot of my trader friends refuse to trade on FOMC day, or any Fed day for that matter. I'm curious to hear what other's think.

 

> I have often wrestled with this.

 

trading is not wrestling.

if you have to wrestle with this, then my advice is --- don't trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on the climate IMO.

 

For the past 6 months or more, FOMC and minutes have been non events because of the wide spread understanding of the economic condition. Rates aren't rising any time soon and the market knows and expects this. The minutes are where the detail lies and can have more impact than the actual announcement. The last minutes release however was a bit of a non event from memory however.

 

Historically however (speaking of ES) is that the FOMC release just gives volatility spikes, but rarely is value or it's perception changed. You just see stop running of the day's high/low before settling where it started. The minutes can however give rise to a change in value and the associated trend.

 

I think this afternoons minutes will be a non event. Because of this, I'd say thats a sure sign all hell will break lose and the market will sink to 0000.25!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tuesday Aug 10, 2010

Economic Calendar - Bloomberg

 

FOMC Meeting Announcement

2:15 PM ET

 

Consensus

Federal Funds Rate - Target Level 0 to 0.25 %

 

Market Consensus Before Announcement

 

The FOMC announcement for the August 10 FOMC policy meeting is expected to leave the fed funds target unchanged at a range of zero to 0.25 percent. Traders will be picking apart the statement for any wording hinting of additional quantitative easing and for changes in the Fed's view of the economy.

 

Definition

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) is the policy-making arm of the Federal Reserve. It determines short-term interest rates in the U.S. when it decides the overnight rate that banks pay each other for borrowing reserves when a bank has a shortfall in required reserves. This rate is the fed funds rate. The FOMC also determines whether the Fed should add or subtract liquidity in credit markets separately from that related to changes in the fed funds rate. The Fed announces its policy decision (typically whether to change the fed funds target rate) at the end of each FOMC meeting. This is the FOMC announcement. The announcement also includes brief comments on the FOMC's views on the economy and how many FOMC members voted for and how many voted against the policy decision.

 

2010 Release Schedule

Released On:

1/27

3/16

4/28

6/23

8/10

9/21

11/3

12/14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Economic Calendar - Bloomberg

 

FOMC Meeting Announcement

Released on 11/3/2010 2:15:00 PM

 

Federal Funds Rate - Target Level

Consensus 0 to 0.25 %

Actual 0 to 0.25 %

 

Highlights

 

The Fed decided to buy an insurance policy on keeping the recovery going. But the premium may be expensive. The Fed left rates unchanged but voted for buying an additional $600 billion in long-term Treasuries by the end of the second quarter of 2011 to expand its balance sheet.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=22803&stc=1&d=1288821055

5aa71040d8763_fedreservepolicy.gif.f56fb6c395a40bbe77200fb8ed1434ef.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good reminder - thanks.

 

If you're daytrading don't forget it since it could catch you in a very bad way -- my rule is to always exit 5 minutes before, and not to trade it usually until 15 minutes after unless the reaction seems muted - then I might push that up to as early as 5 minutes after. If it's volatile I wait.

 

And is it me or does it seem like everything trades really funky the morning of the FOMC?

 

MMS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good reminder - thanks.

 

If you're daytrading don't forget it since it could catch you in a very bad way -- my rule is to always exit 5 minutes before, and not to trade it usually until 15 minutes after unless the reaction seems muted - then I might push that up to as early as 5 minutes after. If it's volatile I wait.

 

And is it me or does it seem like everything trades really funky the morning of the FOMC?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FOMC Minutes

Highlights

The minutes of the Fed's March 15 policy meeting show moderate disagreement regarding quantitative easing but not from what has already been broadcast in recent public speeches. The bottom line is that the Fed is not likely to change QE2 but is starting to think about its exit strategy from a very loose monetary policy. Timing will depend on incoming data.

 

Again, there is some moderate disagreement on quantitative easing. A few FOMC participants believed policy might need to be tightened later this year with QE2 being cut short. A few others believed that "exceptional accommodation" might be needed beyond 2011. Some doubted the benefits of QE2 but believed it not appropriate to change the announced plan for QE2.

 

Overall, the FOMC sees the recovery as gaining traction. "Participants' judgment that the recovery was gaining traction reflected both the incoming economic indicators and information received from business contacts." But there are increased risks seen coming from higher commodity prices, turmoil in North Africa and the Middle East, and the problems in Japan. Most see higher commodity prices as having a transitory effect and inflation expectations appear to be stable for now. But inflation expectations have taken on a bigger role in policy debate as implied in the minutes.

 

"However, a significant increase in longer-term inflation expectations could contribute to excessive wage and price inflation, which would be costly to eradicate. Accordingly, participants considered it important to pay close attention to the evolution not only of headline and core inflation but also of inflation expectations."

 

The Board's staff economists revised down their GDP forecast for 2011 but not by much.

 

"The pace of economic activity appeared to have been a little slower around the turn of the year than the staff had anticipated at the time of the January FOMC meeting, and the near-term forecast for growth of real gross domestic product (GDP) was revised down modestly. However, the outlook for economic activity over the medium term was broadly similar to the projection prepared for the January FOMC meeting. Changes to the conditioning assumptions underlying the staff projection were mostly small and offsetting: Crude oil prices had risen sharply and federal fiscal policy seemed likely to be marginally more restrictive than the staff had judged in January, but these negative factors were counterbalanced by higher household net worth and a slightly lower foreign exchange value of the dollar. As a result, as in the January forecast, real GDP was expected to rise at a moderate pace over 2011 and 2012, supported by accommodative monetary policy, increasing credit availability, and greater household and business confidence. Reflecting the recent labor market data, the projection for the unemployment rate was lower throughout the forecast period than in the staff's January forecast, but the jobless rate was still expected to decline slowly and to remain elevated at the end of 2012."

 

"The staff revised up its projection for consumer price inflation in the near term, largely because of the recent increases in the prices of energy and food. However, in light of the projected persistence of slack in labor and product markets and the anticipated stability in long-term inflation expectations, the increase in inflation was expected to be mostly transitory if oil and other commodity prices did not rise significantly further. As a result, the forecast for consumer price inflation over the medium run was little changed relative to that prepared for the January meeting."

 

Net, the minutes were mostly as expected and had little market impact.

 

Economic Calendar - Bloomberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Market Consensus Before Announcement

 

The FOMC announcement at 12:30 p.m. ET (moved up to make way for the chairman's press conference later in the afternoon) for the April 26-27 FOMC policy meeting is expected to leave the target rate unchanged at a range of zero to 0.25 percent. Given divergent views on the need (or not) for further quantitative easing, the focus of the announcement likely will be any hint regarding any possible QE3 or more likely how the Fed's balance sheet will be unwound. That is, will the Fed take action to slow the natural unwinding from pay down on mortgage-backed securities and other debt?

 

showimage.asp?imageid=20540

 

The Fed closely monitors the core PCE price index to indicate whether or not policy is approximately correct, overly accommodative, or too restrictive. The PCE price index is preferred to the CPI because it is more closely aligned to the cost of living than the CPI (which measures a fixed basket of goods & services.) This chart covers monthly data and the fed funds target rate reflects the monthly average. As such, it will not correspond to the most recent fed funds rate target announced by the Fed.

 

 

Econoday Report: FOMC Meeting Announcement*April*27,*2011

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.