Vol. I  ·  No. 22 — Established MMXXIV — Price: by subscription

The Research Brief

A Weekly Survey of Markets, Policy, & Power

Issue No. 22 · Sunday, the 16th of August, MMXXVI · London

This Week, in Brief
Four notes for the hurried reader
  1. UK Q2 GDP came in at 0.4% quarter-on-quarter, and the composition matters more than the headline: June's 0.3% monthly gain leaned on World Cup spending and a heatwave, neither of which recurs in Q3. Consensus for the third quarter is too high.
  2. The Bank held Bank Rate at 3.75% on a 6–3 vote, with three members already wanting a rise — and Treasury modelling shared with the Prime Minister warns 2027 growth could fall to 0.3% if the Strait of Hormuz stays disrupted. Both of those cannot be true for long.
  3. The FTSE 100 lost roughly 1.4% on the week while the DAX gained: London's miners and a firmer pound against continental software. The divergence has now repeated often enough to count as a pattern.
  4. US July CPI slowed to 3.4%, payrolls fell 23,000, and retail sales dropped 0.6% — yet Cleveland's Hammack spent the week arguing for "some number" of rate hikes.
§ I. from the editor

The Editor's View

A note from the desk

The Fed Should Hold: A Supply Shock Is Not a Demand Problem

The Research Brief takes the view that the 42% probability now attached to a September Fed hike is too high, and that the committee holds again. The hawkish case rests almost entirely on a supply shock — energy up 14.7% year-on-year, petrol up 24.6%, fuel oil up 39.1%. Take that out and core CPI is running at 2.5% and decelerating. Meanwhile the demand side is visibly cracking: payrolls down 23,000, prior months revised down by a combined 103,000, retail sales down 0.6%, Michigan sentiment at 51.0 from 55.2.

A committee that tightens into that combination is choosing to fight a price it cannot control while employment rolls over. Hammack's objection — that 3.5%–3.75% is not "meaningfully restricting" anything — is coherent, and the jump in one-year inflation expectations to 4.3% is exactly what de-anchoring looks like in its early stages. That is the strongest counterargument and it is not a weak one. It is still three votes.

The rest of this issue is for members

Continue reading the full issue.

You have read This Week in Brief and the Editor’s View. Members also receive the macro and policy backdrop, UK, European and US markets, geopolitics, signals, earnings notes and the week ahead.

Subscribe — £5 a month
Cancel any time  ·  No advertising







✦   ❦   ✦
Notice to the reader This newsletter is published for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute investment advice, a solicitation, or a recommendation to buy or sell any financial instrument. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Financial markets involve risk. Always conduct your own due diligence and consult a qualified financial adviser before making any investment decisions. This publication is not authorised or regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).