The global expansion remains resilient, but rising energy and transport costs are making growth more inflationary while narrowing the scope for policy support.<\/strong> This week\u2019s evidence points to continued US activity, uneven household demand across Asia and mounting fiscal constraints in Europe. The IMF highlighted the interaction between the negative energy-supply shock and strong AI-related investment demand: the former reduces purchasing power, while the latter supports activity but adds pressure on electricity, materials and infrastructure. UNCTAD forecasts global growth of 2.6% in 2026, down from 2.9% last year. The central macro risk is a prolonged squeeze on real incomes and margins, with weaker growth failing to deliver sufficiently rapid disinflation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The recovery in Gulf crude exports has reduced the immediate supply deficit without resolving the constraints keeping delivered energy expensive.<\/strong> Some late-September export readings reached or exceeded pre-war levels, but these should be distinguished from monthly averages and subsequent disruptions. Vortexa\u2019s September estimates put Gulf flows excluding Iran at approximately 81% of pre-war levels, with crude and condensate at 91% but refined products, including LPG, at only 60%. Depleted inventories leave less protection against another interruption, while replenishment demand could absorb part of the recovery. Refiners outside the affected regions also require additional crude to replace lost fuel supplies. Brent finished Friday at $104.72, and the EIA raised its Q4 Brent spot-price forecast by $14 to $105 per barrel.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Tanker shortages have become an independent source of energy inflation, fragmenting markets and weakening the transmission from higher exports to lower consumer prices.<\/strong> Hormuz shuttle operations, ship-to-ship transfers and longer voyages absorb vessel capacity, making the export recovery itself more demanding on shipping. Reuters reported US Gulf\u2013China freight costs of approximately $40 per barrel, compared with $8.60 before the conflict. Saudi Aramco widened its November Arab Light discount to Asia to $5 below Oman\/Dubai, partly reflecting the need to compensate buyers for freight costs. Lower prices at origin can therefore coexist with expensive supply at destination. The resulting regional price differences reflect transport constraints, crude quality and refinery requirements as well as aggregate supply.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Transport disruption extends the energy shock into global trade, although freight conditions remain uneven across shipping markets.<\/strong> Higher fuel and insurance costs increase landed import prices, while longer journeys raise inventory requirements and working-capital financing needs. Firms must absorb the costs, pass them to customers or change suppliers, putting pressure on margins, purchasing power and trade volumes. However, the tanker surge should not be extrapolated to all freight: Drewry\u2019s World Container Index fell 2% to $4,351 per 40-foot container as demand softened during China\u2019s Golden Week. The broader risk is persistent pressure on total delivery costs and reliability, even where container spot rates are easing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Diplomacy could reduce the geopolitical premium faster than it repairs the physical energy system.<\/strong> Trump\u2019s statement that Washington would not attack Iran before the US midterms, alongside continued discussions over Hormuz, provided a potential route towards de-escalation. An implemented shipping agreement remains distinct from negotiating progress, however, and attacks on tankers and Saudi infrastructure continue to threaten the recovery. Riyadh airport disruption illustrates the wider consequences for aviation, tourism and business activity, while US Gulf hurricane-related shut-ins added a separate supply constraint. Announced Russian diesel deliveries, accelerated inventory releases and temporary US diesel measures may provide relief, but their effectiveness depends on actual delivery and scale; none directly restores damaged refining capacity or normal shipping efficiency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n US activity remains consistent with expansion, but supply pressures are intensifying as hiring slows.<\/strong> September\u2019s ISM services index eased to 54.9 from 55.4, while new orders remained firm at 59.8. The more concerning development was the increase in prices paid to 74.0, the highest since July 2022, alongside slower supplier deliveries. Initial jobless claims fell to 197,000, reinforcing the distinction between subdued recruitment and widespread job destruction after the previous week\u2019s weak payroll report. The economy therefore retains support from existing employment, consumption and investment, but businesses face a less favourable combination of slower activity growth and rising operating costs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Rising inflation expectations are complicating the policy outlook before a broad deterioration in employment has emerged.<\/strong> The New York Fed\u2019s September survey showed one-year inflation expectations increasing to 3.9% from 3.6% and three-year expectations to 3.3%, while five-year expectations remained at 3.0%. Michigan\u2019s preliminary October survey showed sentiment falling to 46.3, with one-year inflation expectations rising to 4.7% and longer-run expectations to 3.5%. Durable-goods buying conditions weakened sharply, particularly as high prices and borrowing costs constrained households. These readings do not establish a uniform loss of long-term anchoring, but they reinforce the Fed\u2019s concern about persistence. September\u2019s minutes supported the possibility of another increase this year without establishing a commitment to an extended hiking cycle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Europe\u2019s recovery remains uneven, with investment support offset by weaker external demand and exposure to imported inflation.<\/strong> German industrial production rose 2.0% month on month in August, comfortably exceeding expectations, but the increase excluding energy and construction was a more modest 0.6%. Exports fell 0.8%, including a 6.3% decline in shipments to the United States. Meanwhile, ECB policymaker Primo\u017e Dolenc distinguished September\u2019s 3.8% headline inflation from relatively stable underlying inflation and limited evidence of second-round wage effects. In Britain, Catherine Mann warned that elevated inflation could influence the next annual wage negotiations, although other policymakers emphasised weaker labour-market conditions. The common challenge is determining how much cost pressure will persist as demand becomes less supportive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n France\u2019s fiscal outlook increasingly depends on political delivery, with an uncomfortable trade-off between credibility and growth.<\/strong> Parliament\u2019s finance committee rejected a proposed reduction in pensioners\u2019 tax allowances as scrutiny of the 2027 budget began, signalling resistance to the government\u2019s \u20ac43 billion consolidation package. The plan seeks to reduce the deficit from 5.4% of GDP this year to 5.0% next year, already a limited adjustment relative to the fiscal challenge. The rejected measure could return later, but early opposition raises doubts about implementation. Diluting consolidation risks further damage to confidence and financing conditions; delivering it alongside elevated energy costs would constrain household purchasing power and domestic demand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Asian consumption remains an uneven counterweight to the global investment cycle.<\/strong> China\u2019s Golden Week spending per domestic trip fell 1.9% year on year to RMB893.92, its lowest level since 2022. Stronger outbound travel and differences in the holiday calendar complicate comparisons, but the figures provide little confirmation of a broad domestic consumption recovery. Japan\u2019s August household expenditure fell 3.1% year on year and increased only 0.1% month on month, despite continued annual real-wage gains. At the same time, the BoJ\u2019s regional assessment identified firm investment appetite and broader price pressures. Across both economies, the evidence suggests that improving activity in selected sectors is translating only unevenly into household spending.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The next test is whether persistent input-cost pressure broadens into realised inflation before demand weakens materially.<\/strong> Wednesday\u2019s US September CPI release will help assess the balance between energy effects and underlying price persistence, while Tuesday\u2019s IMF outlook will update the global growth assessment. For energy and trade, sustained export deliveries, refinery availability, freight costs and transit reliability will provide stronger evidence of normalisation than announcements alone. A durable improvement requires both more available supply and a lower cost of moving it to consumers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Treasuries recovered modestly as auction demand improved and volatility subsided, but the move offered limited evidence of a decisive reversal in the broader repricing.<\/strong> The two-, five-, ten- and thirty-year yields closed at 4.791%, 5.018%, 5.242% and 5.599%<\/strong>, falling 3.8bp, 3.7bp, 3.3bp and 2.4bp respectively. This was an almost parallel rally with slight steepening: 2s10s finished at 45.1bp<\/strong>, 5s30s at 58.1bp<\/strong> and 2s30s at 80.8bp<\/strong>. Strong auctions, reduced corporate issuance and improving technical conditions supported the recovery. International performance was differentiated: gilts weakened, Japanese long bonds rallied strongly, and French spreads partially retraced the previous week\u2019s widening. Pasted text (2)(1)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Policy pricing retained a tightening bias, with a modest US adjustment contrasting with substantially higher UK rate expectations.<\/strong> Following the Fed\u2019s September 16 increase to a 3.75\u20134.00% target range<\/strong>, the team\u2019s model showed the October hike probability falling from 21.2% to 17.7%<\/strong>, while the December meeting probability remained around 81%<\/strong>. The June 2027 implied overnight rate declined only 3bp to 4.593%<\/strong>, indicating limited retreat from the expected tightening path. ECB December hike probability declined from 82.8% to 78.0%<\/strong>, but its June 2027 implied rate rose 3.3bp to 3.089%<\/strong>: near-term caution did not translate into a lower eventual path. The BoE was the clear hawkish outlier, with November hike probability reaching 88.4%<\/strong> and the June 2027 implied rate rising 26.4bp to 4.671%<\/strong>. That divergence argues for distinguishing domestic policy exposure from a general global-duration view.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lower real yields explained most of the Treasury rally, while inflation compensation remained comparatively stable.<\/strong> Ten-year TIPS yields fell 2.2bp to 2.891%<\/strong>, against a 1.2bp decline in ten-year breakevens to 2.352%<\/strong>, approximately reconciling with the nominal move after rounding and series differences. Thirty-year real yields declined 1.8bp to 3.332%<\/strong>, while the swap-based 5Y5Y forward inflation rate slipped just 0.4bp to 2.419%<\/strong>. These observations provide little evidence of renewed long-term inflation repricing during the week. They also distinguish this week\u2019s recovery from September\u2019s broader rise in real financing costs. However, real yields embed both expected real short rates and risk premia; without the matching ACM observations, the weekly move cannot reliably be divided between policy expectations and term premium. BCA\u2019s September assessment\u2014that its yield models pointed primarily to policy repricing\u2014provides an alternative to a purely fiscal-risk explanation, rather than a definitive decomposition. Pasted text(20261010-230523)<\/p>\n\n\n\n French sovereign risk remained elevated, but the weekly evidence shows partial normalization rather than fresh contagion.<\/strong> The ten-year OAT\u2013Bund spread narrowed 3.6bp to 137.2bp<\/strong>, following the prior week\u2019s reported peak near 159bp. Both legs contributed: French ten-year yields fell 1.7bp to 4.853%<\/strong>, while Bund yields rose 1.9bp to 3.481%<\/strong>, consistent with some reversal of defensive positioning. The recovery was unstable, with the spread reaching 127.2bp on October 6 before widening again. BTP\u2013Bund tightened 5.3bp to 109.1bp<\/strong>, and Spain\u2013Bund narrowed 1bp to 61.4bp<\/strong>. Fiscal commitments helped sentiment, but the reported ECB assessment that intervention conditions were not currently met reinforced the importance of a credible domestic adjustment. The Bundesbank\u2019s October 10 warning about rising European debt-crisis risks belongs to the subsequent news window; it cannot explain Friday\u2019s closing moves. Elevated spreads and pressure on European banks remain reasons to distinguish French credit exposure from outright euro duration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Japan\u2019s long-end rally does not substantiate the claim that widespread repatriation drove the global bond adjustment.<\/strong> Japanese ten- and thirty-year yields fell 7.5bp to 3.018% and 12.9bp to 4.072%<\/strong>, respectively; with the two-year yield slightly higher, this was a pronounced bull-flattening<\/strong>. The team\u2019s flow material instead indicated continued foreign-asset purchases, including Goldman\u2019s report of approximately $7.6bn in September foreign-bond purchases by Japanese trust accounts<\/strong>. More attractive JGB yields and currency-hedging costs remain structural considerations for foreign demand, but current evidence does not establish broad liquidation of overseas bonds. Elsewhere, UK ten- and thirty-year yields rose 7.7bp to 5.443% and 5.8bp to 5.949%<\/strong>, producing slight 2s30s flattening. Canada rallied with the front end leading, while Australian yields were broadly unchanged. The cross-market pattern therefore favours country-specific explanations over a single global capital-flow narrative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Successful auctions demonstrated demand at prevailing yields, while buybacks supplied additional support without resolving the maturity and refinancing trade-off.<\/strong> The $39bn ten-year sale on October 7<\/strong> cleared at approximately 5.30%<\/strong> with a reported stop-through. The following $22bn thirty-year auction<\/strong> cleared at 5.618%<\/strong>, with bid-to-cover of 2.54 versus a six-auction average of 2.41<\/strong>, and indirect allocations of 72.3% versus 69.1%<\/strong>. These are reported auction statistics; indirect bidding should not be equated exclusively with foreign demand. Treasury also accepted $6bn<\/strong> in its October 8 buyback targeting 2046\u20132056 maturities, following $1.3bn<\/strong> in shorter-dated purchases on October 6. Citi\u2019s expectation of $3bn reductions in both twenty- and thirty-year auction sizes at November\u2019s refunding remains a forecast. Substituting bills for long bonds can reduce duration supply but increases rollover exposure. Rieder\u2019s preference for predictable issuance and a longer weighted-average maturity highlights that trade-off; neither Treasury buybacks nor his proposed Fed intervention should be described as an established yield cap.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Positioning and funding conditions point to an orderly adjustment, although some of the recovery reflected technical flows.<\/strong> MOVE fell from 107.3 to 98.5<\/strong>, after reaching 113.6 on October 5<\/strong>. The ten-year SOFR swap spread became slightly less negative, moving from \u221240.7bp to \u221239.9bp<\/strong>, while SOFR traded 0\u20133bp below IORB<\/strong>, offering no broad funding-stress signal in the supplied observations. Asset managers reduced ultra-long futures exposure by approximately $11.9m of DV01 in the week to October 6<\/strong>, and ultra-long open interest declined for seven consecutive sessions. Subsequent evidence of new positions in two-, five- and ten-year futures, alongside long-end short covering, helps explain the late-week recovery. These are different flows and investor groups: short covering does not establish that earlier asset-manager deleveraging has been reversed. Available liquidity measures remained functional, despite intermittent bid\u2013ask widening.<\/p>\n\n\n\n AI remains a structural competitor for capital, but new hyperscaler issuance was not an observed source of Treasury pressure this week.<\/strong> The team identified no confirmed AI-specific or hyperscaler primary issuance during October 5\u20139<\/strong>; aggregate investment-grade supply fell well below the $25bn lower end of syndicate forecasts as borrowers postponed transactions. This reduced one potential source of incremental duration and issuance-related hedging, plausibly helping Treasuries stabilize. Strategic AI spending can remain comparatively insensitive to modest policy increases even as housing and other borrowers experience greater restraint, but that longer-term mechanism should be separated from this week\u2019s transactions. Bessent\u2019s anticipated productivity-led disinflation also remains a future benefit rather than an offset to immediate financing needs. Renewed issuance could restore supply pressure; conversely, a material weakening of AI investment expectations could support sovereign duration through lower growth expectations and defensive demand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n BCA\u2019s positioning adds a specific expression of a shorter hiking cycle: front-end outperformance rather than an unconditional long-bond call.<\/strong> Its September review recorded a 54bp rise in ten-year yields<\/strong>, a repricing of the expected peak funds rate from 4.23% to 4.83%<\/strong>, and 15bp flattening in 2s30s to 76bp<\/strong>. Those are September observations, not Week 41 changes. Against that backdrop, BCA recommended a duration-neutral 2s30s steepener and a long July 2027 fed funds futures position<\/strong>, expecting less tightening than the approximately 73bp priced at its research date. Its preferred scenario involved another 50bp of hikes, while its policy-rule indicator had not yet peaked, leaving room for further selling first. At the October 9 close, 2s30s had reached 80.8bp. The thesis depends on eventual front-end repricing lower relative to long yields and is vulnerable to more persistent tightening or disproportionate long-end demand. CPI on October 14 and PPI on October 15<\/strong> are the next important tests; both are scheduled for 08:30 ET.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Agency MBS offer a volatility-normalization opportunity, but benchmark valuation is less generous than the earlier interview quote suggested.<\/strong> The supplied Bloomberg US MBS index yielded 5.856%<\/strong>, with 39.5bp OAS and 5.95 years\u2019 effective duration<\/strong>, versus 5.917%, 40.5bp and 5.96 years a week earlier. The interview\u2019s 6.5% yield and approximately 130bp Treasury spread remain unidentified and should not represent the sector benchmark. BCA upgraded agency MBS to overweight after 96bp of September underperformance against duration-matched Treasuries<\/strong>, expecting a shorter hiking cycle to reduce volatility and support spreads. This week\u2019s lower MOVE reading is consistent with that thesis, although the 1bp OAS tightening is modest. Mortgage optionality, extension risk and prepayment behaviour still matter, while agency portfolio expansion and bank capital relief remain prospective catalysts. The positioning distinction is therefore between a targeted recovery in mortgage spreads and taking substantially more outright long-end rate exposure. Pasted text(20261010-230523)<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Large-cap gains continued to mask weakness beneath the headline indices.<\/strong> The S&P 500 rose 1.15% to 7,811.54<\/strong>, recording its first closing high since August, while the Dow gained 0.93%<\/strong> and Nasdaq 100 0.24%<\/strong>. The Russell 2000 fell 0.91%<\/strong>, extending its losing streak to five weeks and its cumulative decline to 5.7%<\/strong>. Internationally, the Nikkei advanced 1.06%<\/strong>, Hang Seng 1.00%<\/strong> and FTSE 100 0.86%<\/strong>; the STOXX 600 was broadly unchanged and the DAX lost 0.57%<\/strong>. The US 10-year yield\u2019s retreat from 5.36%<\/strong> to approximately 5.24%<\/strong> eased immediate valuation pressure, but persistent small-cap underperformance showed that financing conditions remained restrictive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Defensive and energy leadership broadened weekly participation without confirming a cyclical recovery.<\/strong> Utilities and Energy each gained 3.79%<\/strong>, followed by Consumer Staples 3.08%<\/strong>, Health Care 2.48%<\/strong>, Real Estate 2.14%<\/strong> and Financials 1.80%<\/strong>. Technology +0.80%<\/strong>, Communication Services +0.25%<\/strong>, Materials +0.19%<\/strong> and Industrials +0.12%<\/strong> lagged. These figures represent simple average constituent returns within sectors. Lower yields supported Utilities and Real Estate, while elevated oil prices supported Energy. SpaceX\u2019s spectrum agreement added a separate catalyst, lifting tower operators on prospective infrastructure demand while pressuring incumbent telecom companies through increased competition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Strong earnings expectations are absorbing part of the rate shock, making record prices compatible with falling valuation multiples.<\/strong> Goldman Sachs\u2019 Peter Callahan reported approximately 20% compression in the Nasdaq multiple<\/strong> in late September, while Mark Wilson cited a forecast of 27% US third-quarter earnings growth<\/strong>. This challenges the interpretation that equities are simply ignoring higher yields: adjustment is occurring through lower multiples and weaker performance outside the dominant earners. However, a lower forward P\/E provides limited protection if earnings reflect unusually high margins or optimistic forecasts. With the ten largest stocks representing approximately 40% of the S&P 500<\/strong>, the durability of their profits remains more important to index performance than headline breadth alone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The AI debate is increasingly about monetisation and sustainable profits rather than adoption itself.<\/strong> Reports placing OpenAI\u2019s September annualised revenue near $50bn<\/strong>, below earlier indications around $70bn<\/strong>, unsettled technology shares before subsequent expectations of a $70bn year-end run rate<\/strong> helped sentiment recover. Differences in revenue presentation explain much of the discrepancy, so it does not establish a collapse in underlying sales. Nevertheless, the episode exposed the infrastructure trade\u2019s sensitivity to a small group of customers. Falling token prices, exceptionally strong semiconductor margins and substantial investment commitments make paid usage, realised pricing and cash conversion increasingly important. Rapid adoption can continue while returns diverge sharply between suppliers, platforms and applications.<\/p>\n\n\n\n More selective financing raises the importance of balance-sheet strength and returns on capital.<\/strong> Firmus withdrew its proposed $5bn Australian IPO<\/strong> and shifted towards alternative funding, demonstrating resistance to the transaction\u2019s terms rather than confirming cancellation of its investment programme. Established hyperscalers retain substantial operating cash flows, whereas smaller providers depend more heavily on external funding and concentrated customer demand. Meanwhile, the shift from buybacks towards capex exchanges immediate shareholder distributions for uncertain future returns. Opportunities are also extending into cybersecurity, data infrastructure and AI deployment tools, while application-software companies must demonstrate that AI improves monetisation rather than eroding pricing power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Cautious institutional positioning could amplify a recovery, but does not eliminate concentration risk.<\/strong> Goldman\u2019s US fundamental long-short clients had net exposure near the bottom of its one-year range and around the second and third percentiles<\/strong> over three- and five-year horizons. Those readings support the possibility of renewed buying if earnings deliver and yields stabilise, although they describe one investor cohort rather than the whole market. The VIX\u2019s decline to 14.84<\/strong> therefore coexists with cautious positioning and substantial stock-level dispersion. Tom Lee\u2019s constructive scenario depends on resilient earnings and easing financing pressure; Dan Niles\u2019 caution centres on persistent high yields and potential disappointment in AI economics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A broader advance requires earnings resilience alongside relief from financing and energy costs.<\/strong> European defence, infrastructure and energy-independence investment offer selective support, with Wilson highlighting German fiscal beneficiaries that had received 13\u201314% upward EPS revisions despite more than 20% multiple compression<\/strong>. Energy exposure and French sovereign stress remain constraints. The immediate tests are bank earnings, technology guidance and September CPI. Lower yields accompanied by stable earnings would favour a recovery in smaller companies and rate-sensitive sectors; lower yields caused by deteriorating demand would be less supportive. The distinction argues for assessing cash generation, funding needs and order-book conversion rather than relying on a general post-election rally.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Macro The global expansion remains resilient, but rising energy and transport costs are making growth more inflationary while narrowing the scope for policy support. This week\u2019s evidence points to continued US activity, uneven household demand across Asia and mounting fiscal constraints in Europe. The IMF highlighted the interaction between the negative energy-supply shock and strong […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1971","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n
\n\n\n\nRates<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nEquities<\/h2>\n\n\n\n