In the words of Bjork’ 90s indie hit “Oh So Quiet” –It's, oh, so quiet Shhhh, Shhhh, It's, oh, so still Shhhh, Shhhh, You're all alone Shhh, Shhh And so peaceful until…Until… that is the question, and considering it is ‘peaceful’, it's probably best to review the minutes from the Fed as it is signalling that the quiet time is not far from ending soon.FOMC: The Pressure BuildsThe May 6th to 7th Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) minutes reaffirmed the Fed’s cautious stance, with Chair Powell keeping to the “wait and see” script. But under the surface, the outlook has become more complicated as event risk is getting louder.Clearly, Trump’s Tariffs have created new complications for the Fed’s dual mandate.As the minutes note:“With uncertainty higher due to ‘larger and broader’ than expected tariffs, the Committee may ultimately face a more difficult trade-off between its price stability and full employment mandates.”And this was well before the Trade Court’s decision that the Liberation Day tariffs are illegal under the Economic Emergency Act of 1977, and then it was subsequently overturned 24 hours later by the appeals court.The Fed has flagged increased downside risk to real activity and now sees the probability of recession as nearly equal to its baseline forecast. At the same time, inflation risks for 2025 have been revised upward, though longer-term projections remain skewed to the upside, particularly as inflation expectations creep higher.Seen in these quotes from the minutes:“The staff continued to view the risks around the inflation forecast as skewed to the upside, with recent increases in some measures of inflation expectations raising the possibility that inflation would prove to be more persistent than the baseline projection assumed.”“Many participants reported that firms planned to partially or fully pass on tariff-related cost increases.”To paraphrase Milton Friedman, “Tariffs are not a tax on the sovereign, they are a tax on the consumer.” And this is what is being missed by government officials and the President himself.A counterargument to higher cost is that Fed officials suggested there is a chance of weakening demand, lower immigration driven housing inflation, and competitive pricing tactics. Which would feed back into the risk of recession as mentioned above, and signal that the US is entering a new stagflation era.Seen here:“Several argued that there might be less inflationary pressure for reasons such as reductions of tariff increases from ongoing trade negotiations, less tolerance for price increases by households, a weakening of the economy, reduced housing inflation pressures from lower immigration, or a desire by some firms to increase market share rather than raise prices.”On employment, the labour market remains tight but is potentially vulnerable to hiring pauses as policy and trade risks weigh.“The labour market was seen as ‘broadly in balance’ and the unemployment rate as ‘low.’”“Participants were concerned that tariff uncertainty could lead to a pause in hiring and the labour market to soften in the coming months.”Financial market signals were mixed. Several participants noted an unusual pattern: long-term Treasury yields rose even as the dollar weakened and equities sold off, raising concerns about shifting correlations and safe-haven perceptions.“Some participants commented on a change from the typical pattern... with longer-term Treasury yields rising and the dollar depreciating despite the decline in the prices of equities and other risky assets... [noting] that a durable shift... could have long-lasting implications for the economy.”Monetary framework discussions continue as well. The Fed appears to be reconsidering its post-COVID commitment to flexible average inflation targeting (FAIT). The minutes state:“Participants indicated that they thought it would be appropriate to reconsider the average inflation-targeting language in the Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy.”An interesting development is putting more rigidity into the mandate currently, suggesting the Fed is looking to ‘safeguard’ policy changes from external political forces.Where does this leave the US and the Fed in the short term? Don’t expect any near-term policy change, but the longer the Fed delays, the steeper the eventual rate cuts may need to be as the risks of a tariff-induced recession lead to the monetary brake being released.The consensus is that by January 2026, a possible 125 basis point will come out of the Federal funds rate, some even are forecasting 175 due to the need to stimulate the economy rather than restrict it. The consensus figure would see the Federal Funds rate landing on the terminal rate of 3.00% to 3.25%, the unknown is when, the size and velocity of reaching this point will be.It is oh so quiet, but it won’t be for long if the Fed is anything to go by.
It's oh so quiet, but for how long?

Related Articles

Here is the situation as April begins. A war is affecting one of the world's most important oil chokepoints. Brent crude is trading above US$100. And the Federal Reserve (Fed), which spent much of 2025 engineering a soft landing, is now facing an inflation threat driven less by wages, services or the domestic economy, and more by energy. It is watching an oil shock.
The Fed funds rate sits at 3.50% to 3.75%. The next Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting is on 28 and 29 April and the key question for markets is not whether the Fed will cut, it is whether the Fed can cut, or whether the energy shock may have shut that door for much of 2026.
A heavy run of major data releases lands in April. The March consumer price index (CPI), non-farm payrolls (NFP) and the advance estimate of Q1 gross domestic product (GDP) are the three that matter most. But the FOMC statement on 29 April may be the release that sets the tone for the rest of the year.
Growth: Business activity and demand
Think about what the US economy looked like coming into this year: AI-driven capital expenditure (capex) was a major part of the growth narrative, corporate investment intentions looked firm and the One, Big, Beautiful Bill Act was already in the mix. On paper, the growth story looked solid.
Then the Strait of Hormuz situation changed the calculus. Not because the US is a net energy importer, it is not, and that structural insulation matters. But what is good for US energy producers can still squeeze margins elsewhere and weigh on global demand. The 30 April advance Q1 gross domestic product (GDP) estimate is now likely to be read through two lenses: how strong was the economy before the shock, and what it may signal about the quarters ahead.
Labour: Payrolls and employment
February's jobs report was, depending on how you read it, either a blip or a warning sign. Non-farm payrolls (NFP) fell by 92,000, unemployment edged up to 4.4% and the official line was that weather played a role. That may be true but here is what also happened. The labour market suddenly looked a little less convincing as the main argument for keeping rates elevated.
The 3 April employment report for March is now genuinely consequential. A bounce back to positive payroll growth would probably steady nerves and a second consecutive soft print, particularly against a backdrop of higher energy prices, would start to build a very uncomfortable narrative for the Fed. It would be looking at slower jobs growth and an inflation threat at the same time. That is not a comfortable place to be.
Inflation: CPI, PPI and PCE
Here is the uncomfortable truth about where inflation sits right now. Core personal consumption expenditures (PCE), the Fed's preferred gauge, was already running at 3.1% year on year in January, before any oil shock had fed through. The Fed had not fully solved its inflation problem, rather, it had slowed it down. That is a different thing.
And now, on top of a not-quite-solved inflation problem, oil prices have moved sharply higher. Energy prices can feed into the consumer price index (CPI) relatively quickly, through petrol, transport and logistics costs that can eventually show up in the price of nearly everything. The 10 April CPI print for March is probably the most important single data release of the month, it is the one that may tell us whether the energy shock is already showing up in the numbers the Fed watches.
Policy, trade and earnings
April is also the start of US earnings season, and this quarter's results carry an unusual amount of weight. Investors have been pouring capital into AI infrastructure on the basis that returns are coming. The question is when. With geopolitical volatility driving a rotation away from growth-oriented technology and towards energy and defence, JPMorgan Chase's 14 April earnings will be read as much for what management says about the macro environment as for the numbers themselves.
Then there is the FOMC meeting on 28 and 29 April. After the early-April run of data, including NFP, CPI and producer price index (PPI), the Fed will have more than enough information to update its language. Whether it signals that rate cuts could remain on hold through 2026, or whether it leaves the door slightly ajar, may be the most consequential communication of the quarter.
Geopolitical volatility has already pushed investors to reassess growth-heavy positioning. The estimated US$650 billion AI infrastructure buildout is also coming under heavier scrutiny on return on investment. If earnings season disappoints on that front, and if the FOMC signals a prolonged hold, the combination could test risk appetite heading into May.
Big US data release ahead? Stay focused.
Open an account · Log in

Asia-Pacific markets start April with a focus on how prolonged disruption in the Strait of Hormuz feeds through to inflation, trade flows, and policy expectations. China's 15th Five-Year Plan shifts attention toward artificial intelligence and technological self-reliance, with knock-on effects for supply chains and regional growth. Japan and Australia both face the challenge of managing imported energy inflation while gauging how far they can normalise policy without derailing domestic demand.
For traders, the mix of elevated energy prices and policy divergence may keep volatility elevated across regional indices and currencies.
China
Lawmakers in Beijing have approved the 15th Five-Year Plan (2026-2030), placing artificial intelligence (AI) and technological self-reliance at the centre of the national agenda. The government has set a growth target of 4.5% to 5.0% for 2026, the lowest in decades, as it prioritises quality of growth over speed.
Japan
The Bank of Japan (BOJ) faces increasing pressure to normalise policy as energy-driven inflation risks a resurgence. While consumer prices excluding fresh food slowed to 1.6% in February, the recent oil price spike may push the consumer price index (CPI) back toward the 2% target in coming months.
Australia
The Australian economy remains in a state of two-speed divergence, with older households increasing spending while younger cohorts face significant affordability pressures. Following the Reserve Bank of Australia's (RBA) rate increase to 4.10% in March, markets are highly focused on upcoming inflation data to assess whether additional tightening may be required.
Track Asia-Pacific themes and
monitor moves as they unfold.
Open an account · Log in
Recent Articles

The 8 April ceasefire announcement and parallel discussions around a 45-day truce have not resolved the Strait of Hormuz disruption. They have, for now, capped the worst-case scenario, but tanker traffic remains at a fraction of normal levels and Iran's demand for transit fees signals a structural shift, not a temporary one.
What began as a regional conflict has become a global energy shock, and the question for markets is no longer whether Hormuz was disrupted, but how permanently the disruption changes the pricing floor for oil.
Key takeaways
- Around 20 million barrels per day (bpd) of oil and petroleum products normally pass through the Strait of Hormuz between Iran and Oman, equal to about one-fifth of global oil consumption and roughly 30% of global seaborne oil trade.
- This is a flow shock, not an inventory problem. Oil markets depend on continuous throughput, not static storage.
- If the disruption persists beyond a few weeks, Brent could shift from a short-term spike to a broader price shock, with stagflation risk.
- Tanker traffic through the strait fell from around 135 ships per day to fewer than 15 at the peak of disruption, a reduction of approximately 85%, with more than 150 vessels anchored, diverted, or delayed.
- A two-week ceasefire was announced on 8 April, with 45-day truce negotiations under way. Iran has separately signalled a demand for transit fees on vessels using the strait, which, if formalised, would represent a permanent geopolitical floor on energy costs.
- Markets have begun rotating away from growth and technology exposure toward energy and defence names, reflecting a view that elevated oil is becoming a structural cost rather than a temporary risk premium.
The world’s most critical oil chokepoint
The Strait of Hormuz handles roughly 20 million barrels per day of oil and petroleum products, equal to about 20% of global oil consumption and around 30% of global seaborne oil trade. With global oil demand near 104 million bpd and spare capacity limited, the market was already tightly balanced before the latest escalation.
The strait is also a critical corridor for liquefied natural gas. Around 290 million cubic metres of LNG transited the route each day on average in 2024, representing roughly 20% of global LNG trade, with Asian markets the main destination.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) has described Hormuz as the world’s most important oil transit chokepoint, noting that even partial interruptions may trigger outsized price moves. Brent crude has moved above US$100 a barrel, reflecting both physical tightness and a rising geopolitical risk premium.

Tankers idle as flows slow
Shipping and insurance data now point to strain in real time. More than 85 large crude carriers are reported to be stranded in the Persian Gulf, while more than 150 vessels have been anchored, diverted or delayed as operators reassess safety and insurance cover. That would leave an estimated 120 million to 150 million barrels of crude sitting idle at sea.
Those volumes represent only six to seven days of normal Hormuz throughput, or a little more than one day of global oil consumption.
Updated shipping and insurance data now confirm more than 150 vessels have been anchored, diverted, or delayed, up from the 85 initially reported. The 1.3 days of global consumption coverage from idle crude remains the binding constraint: this is a flow shock, not a storage problem, and the ceasefire has not yet translated into meaningfully restored throughput.
A market built on flow, not storage
Oil markets function on continuous movement. Refineries, petrochemical plants and global supply chains are calibrated to steady deliveries along predictable sea lanes. When flows through a chokepoint that carries roughly one-fifth of global oil consumption and around 30% of global seaborne oil trade are interrupted, the system can move from equilibrium to deficit within days.
Spare production capacity, largely concentrated within OPEC, is estimated at only 3 million to 5 million bpd. That falls well short of the volumes at risk if Hormuz flows are severely disrupted.
Inflation risks and macro spillovers
The inflationary impact of an oil shock typically arrives in waves. Higher fuel and energy prices may lift headline inflation quickly as petrol, diesel and power costs move higher.
Over time, higher energy costs may pass through freight, food, manufacturing and services. If the disruption persists, the combination of elevated inflation and slower growth could raise the risk of a stagflationary environment and leave central banks facing a difficult trade-off.
No easy offset, a system with little slack
What makes the current episode particularly acute is the lack of slack in the global system.
Global supply and demand near 103 million to 104 million bpd leave little spare cushion when a chokepoint handling nearly 20 million bpd, or about one-fifth of global oil consumption, is compromised. Estimated spare capacity of 3 million to 5 million bpd, mostly within OPEC, would cover only a fraction of the volumes at risk.
Alternative routes, including pipelines that bypass Hormuz and rerouted shipping, can only partly offset lost flows, and usually at higher cost and with longer lead times.
Bottom line
Until transit through the Strait of Hormuz is restored and seen as credibly secure, global oil flows are likely to remain impaired and risk premia elevated. For investors, policymakers and corporate decision-makers, the core question is whether oil can move where it needs to go, every day, without interruption.

A headline about a civilisation "dying tonight" is built to overwhelm, but the more telling signal may be the calm underneath it, because markets are starting to treat this cycle of sharp escalation followed by sudden de-escalation as a pattern, not a surprise.
In macro circles, that pattern has a blunt label: TACO, or "Trump Always Chickens Out". The phrase is loaded, but the logic is simple. A maximum-pressure threat hits, risk assets wobble, then a pause, delay or softer outcome appears once the economic cost starts to bite.
That does not mean the risk is small. It may just mean investors have grown used to a script where rhetoric flares, markets absorb the shock, and restraint shows up before the worst-case scenario fully lands.
The path ahead
The current convergence of geopolitical tension and historical positioning extremes has created a unique "coiled spring" environment for global markets. While the TACO framework suggests a pattern of sharp escalation followed by strategic pauses, the real test for traders over the next 60 days will be the transition from headline-driven volatility to structural market rotation.
Whether the positioning gap closes through a gentle de-escalation or a violent short squeeze, having a defined reaction framework can help traders navigate the noise.

So here is the thing: April’s US earnings season is arriving in a market that still feels anything but normal. As GO Markets explains in The global US earnings playbook: The essential guide for traders, this reporting period is landing after a real shift in what markets care about. It is no longer just about chasing growth at any cost. It is about what the numbers are saying beneath the surface.
And in 2026, those signals are colliding with a high-friction backdrop:
- Geopolitical conflict: Ongoing tension in the Middle East
- Oil supply shock: Brent crude above US$100
- The Fed: A central bank still boxed in by sticky inflation
The durability pivot
Yes, AI is still the market’s main story but it's still the flashy engine getting most of the attention. But underneath that, there is a quieter move towards companies that look built to hold up better when conditions get harder.
When rates are uncertain and energy markets are under pressure, names like JPMorgan Chase and the major defence contractors start to carry more weight. They are not replacing the AI narrative, rather, they are becoming part of the way traders read risk appetite, earnings durability and, ultimately, where the market is looking for something more solid to hold on to.


