周二亚洲早盘，黄金走弱延续至4030美元附近，市场对12月降息的押注明显降温，使美元连续反弹，从 而拖累金价。随着美国政府重启后数据逐步恢复，投资者正将注意力集中在本周四的延迟版9月非农报 告，该数据将为美国增长动能与美联储未来路径提供关键线索。目前外汇与商品市场呈现情绪分化：美 元因政策趋紧与外部政治不确定性而保持韧性，而风险资产整体偏谨慎整理。 • 美联储降息预期快速降温，美元短线或继续保持相对强势； • 本周关注美联储会议纪要与周四非农数据，这两项将决定黄金与美元是否出现方向性突破； • 在关键数据公布前，市场更倾向维持区间波动，建议保持仓位灵活与风险控制。 黄金受美元走强与降息预期降温影响继续承压，短线弱势结构仍未扭转。本周的非农将成为影响市场预 期与政策定价的关键节点，或决定黄金能否摆脱4030区域的压制。美元依旧维持主导地位，短期格局仍 呈现"美元强、黄金弱"的结构化走势。 麦格理最新观点显示，市场已明显降低年底降息的概率，美元OIS显示12月降息可能性跌破50%，意味 着维持利率不变逐渐成为主流预期。支撑美元回升的因素包括：美联储官员持续释放偏鹰信号；多项追 踪工具指向三、四季度美国实际增速均在 ...

智通财经APP获悉，英国央行以微弱优势投票决定维持利率在4%不变，为 12 月份降息奠定了基础。英 国央行货币政策委员会五名成员投票决定维持政策不变，行长贝利的投票起到了关键作用;另有四名成员 呼吁降息25个基点至3.75%，投票结果比预期更为鸽派。英国央行表示，9月份3.8%的通胀率"很可能是 峰值"。 在所有维持利率不变的官员中，贝利是最鸽派的，这位行长逐渐倾向于支持降息，他认为通胀风险"近期 已有所下降，趋于平衡"。他在一份书面声明中表示："我们仍然认为利率正在逐步下降，但我们需要确 保通胀率能够回到我们2%的目标水平，然后再再次降息。" 这一决定标志着英国央行打破了自2024年8月以来每隔一个季度逐步放松货币政策的步伐。贝利在新闻发 布会上表示，通胀"可能难以逆转"的风险依然存在。然而，英国央行也为 12 月份的行动做好了准备，届 时货币政策委员会将更清楚了解到经济情况，英国工党政府本月晚些时候公布的关键秋季预算案以及另 外两轮通胀和就业数据。 尽管市场对此决定早有预期，但英国央行修改了其指引，表示利率"可能继续逐步下行"，"谨慎"一词被 删除。 英镑兑美元汇率在决议公布后回吐了早盘涨幅，交投于1.3 ...

Group 1 - The core focus of the article is the divergence in monetary policy among major central banks, particularly the recent interest rate decisions by the Federal Reserve, Bank of Canada, European Central Bank, and Bank of Japan [1][8] - The Federal Reserve lowered interest rates by 25 basis points but indicated that further cuts are not guaranteed, reflecting a cautious approach to monetary policy [2][3] - The Bank of Canada also cut rates by 25 basis points, suggesting that its easing cycle may be nearing an end, while the European Central Bank and Bank of Japan maintained their current rates [1][8] Group 2 - The Federal Reserve's decision to end its balance sheet reduction indicates a shift towards a more neutral policy stance, with a focus on economic data for future decisions [2][3] - The article highlights the complexities faced by the Federal Reserve due to the government shutdown, which has delayed key economic data releases, complicating monetary policy decisions [5][6] - The Bank of Japan is expected to consider raising interest rates soon due to persistent inflation, marking a potential shift from its long-standing ultra-loose monetary policy [9][10] Group 3 - The article discusses the potential for the Federal Reserve to adopt a more flexible approach to monetary policy, moving away from traditional frameworks like the Taylor rule due to current economic uncertainties [7] - The European Central Bank is anticipated to maintain a more dovish stance compared to the Federal Reserve, influenced by weaker economic growth and lower inflation pressures in the Eurozone [8] - The article notes that the Japanese yen's future performance will depend on the Bank of Japan's overall policy signals, particularly regarding any potential interest rate hikes [10]

21世纪经济报道记者吴斌超级央行周成为全球市场关注焦点。当地时间10月29日，美联储降息25个基 点，但美联储主席鲍威尔提醒12月份再度降息"远未成定局"。加拿大央行也将利率下调25个基点，但暗 示本轮降息周期接近尾声。10月30日，日本央行和欧洲央行维持利率不变。 最后，鲍威尔发布会上表态"12月降息远未成定局"实际上是一种"兜底"行为，其核心目的在于防止市场 将美联储降息和结束缩表的这种行为解读为美联储将重启激进降息通道，给市场传达美联储仍将根据一 次次的数据决定下一步货币政策的清晰立场。 在工银国际首席经济学家程实看来，货币政策在数据真空与需求减弱的双重约束下，宽松取向实际上更 具合理性，美联储在本次议息会议中降息，不仅符合市场预期，也体现了其对现实约束的主动应对。 四家央行24小时内密集公布利率决议的情况相当罕见。道琼斯市场数据团队分析显示，这至少是自2021 年初以来，四家央行决策者首次在"同一天"商讨利率问题。尽管四家央行每年各举行八次货币政策会 议，但具体的日期往往各不相同，两家央行会议时间重叠的情况相对常见。 面对不同的经济现状和通胀形势，各个地区有不同的优先事项，这意味着各大央行不太可能采取 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Federal Reserve has lowered the benchmark interest rate by 25 basis points to a range of 3.75%-4.00% and announced the end of balance sheet reduction, responding to economic constraints due to the ongoing government shutdown [1][2][4] Economic Impact of Government Shutdown - The government shutdown has lasted nearly a month, leading to a temporary interruption of fiscal spending and a reduction in labor income, which compresses consumer spending [3][4] - Historical data indicates a positive non-linear relationship between the duration of government shutdowns and economic losses, with longer shutdowns resulting in more permanent losses [5][6] Monetary Policy Adjustments - The Fed is expected to accelerate easing measures in both time series and rule dimensions, moving from a cautious stance to a more aggressive adjustment phase [7][8] - The Fed's decision to lower rates aligns with market expectations and reflects a proactive response to current economic constraints [4][8] Future Rate Projections - It is anticipated that the Fed will lower rates by an additional 75 basis points in 2025 and potentially by 50-75 basis points in 2026, aiming for a more neutral federal funds rate [2][9]

Group 1: Federal Reserve's Decision-Making Framework - The Federal Reserve has evolved from a financial system stabilizer to an independent central bank with a dual mandate of maximizing employment and stabilizing prices, guided by the Taylor Rule[1] - The Taylor Rule suggests that based on current economic outlook, the Fed is expected to implement one rate cut in 2026, while traders have priced in 2.7 cuts[1] - The Fed's independence may be challenged by political pressures, particularly from Trump's strong demand for low interest rates[1] Group 2: Economic Implications of Monetary Policy - If the Fed implements cuts beyond what the economy requires, it could lead to a shift from a soft landing to economic expansion, lowering short-term U.S. Treasury yields but increasing long-term yield premiums[1] - A lower dollar interest rate and deteriorating dollar credit conditions may exert depreciation pressure on the dollar and support gold prices to reach new highs[1] - An expanding U.S. economy is likely to boost overall demand, positively impacting U.S. stocks and commodities like copper[1] Group 3: Risks and Historical Context - Historical data shows that the Fed's policy rates have deviated significantly from the Taylor Rule's prescriptions during periods of stagflation and the 2021 "transitory inflation" narrative, with deviations reaching nearly 10%[1] - The risks in the Fed's decision-making stem from academic uncertainties regarding neutral rates, the timing and impact of monetary policy on the real economy, and subjective political influences[1] - The upcoming Fed chair, expected to take office in May 2026, may further complicate the Fed's adherence to data-driven policies due to political correctness[1]

Core Insights - The article discusses the historical case of John Law and the Mississippi Bubble, drawing parallels to modern economic situations, particularly in the U.S. [2][7][11] Group 1: Historical Context - In 1716, John Law proposed the idea that "paper money can create wealth" to address France's financial crisis, leading to the establishment of a private bank that issued paper currency [2] - The Mississippi Company, founded by Law in 1717, received a 25-year monopoly to develop the Louisiana territory, which was believed to be rich in resources [2][3] Group 2: Economic Boom and Bust - The stock price of the Mississippi Company skyrocketed from 500 to nearly 10,000 livres, creating a speculative frenzy among the public [3] - By 1719-1720, the circulation of paper money doubled, leading to a 100% increase in prices in Paris, which caused public distrust in paper currency [4] Group 3: Policy Responses and Consequences - Law's attempts to stabilize the economy through various policies, including making paper currency legal tender and restricting gold and silver holdings, failed and led to public panic [4][5] - The Mississippi Company's stock plummeted from 9,000 to 1,000 livres within weeks, resulting in Law's dismissal and the collapse of the paper money system in France [5][7] Group 4: Modern Parallels - The article draws a comparison between the Mississippi Bubble and current U.S. economic policies, suggesting that reliance on credit expansion without real production can lead to similar financial disasters [7][10] - The U.S. faces significant fiscal challenges, with a projected federal deficit of 6.2% of GDP and public debt nearing $36 trillion, raising concerns about the sustainability of its economic model [8][10] Group 5: Trust and Credibility - The article emphasizes that the limits of monetary policy are defined by societal trust in the system, warning that repeated fiscal irresponsibility can erode this trust [11] - The potential for a trust crisis in the U.S. dollar is highlighted, suggesting that global capital may seek alternatives if confidence in the dollar diminishes [10][11]

Core Viewpoint - Stephen Milan, a newly appointed Federal Reserve governor closely associated with the former Trump administration, advocates for aggressive interest rate cuts, challenging the cautious stance of the Fed [1][3][5] Group 1: Interest Rate Policy - Milan voted against the majority at the last Federal Reserve meeting, advocating for a 50 basis point cut instead of the 25 basis points supported by his colleagues [1][3] - He believes the current interest rates are significantly above the neutral rate, which he estimates to be around 2.5%, indicating a gap of nearly 200 basis points [3] - Milan calls for a rapid and substantial reduction in rates, suggesting a total cut of 125 basis points in the remaining meetings of the year, which exceeds the general expectation of 50 basis points [3][5] Group 2: Inflation Perspective - Milan emphasizes that inflation pressures are easing, particularly in housing costs, which he considers a key factor in his inflation outlook [5][6] - He assigns a significant weight to housing costs in inflation measures, noting that they account for approximately 16% of PCE inflation and a higher percentage in CPI [5] - He attributes the decline in housing inflation to stricter immigration policies during the Trump administration, which he believes have reduced housing demand [5][6] Group 3: Market Reactions and Criticism - Milan's views have sparked scrutiny, particularly regarding the potential influence of political factors on his decision-making, given his ties to the Trump administration [6][8] - He attempts to distance himself from political influences, asserting that his analysis is based on objective economic data [8] - Critics argue that his models may oversimplify complex economic factors, potentially overlooking risks such as geopolitical tensions and wage pressures that could counteract housing cost declines [9] Group 4: Comparison with Fed Leadership - In contrast to Milan's aggressive stance, Fed Chair Jerome Powell has adopted a more cautious approach, emphasizing the need for more data before making policy adjustments [9] - Powell's comments reflect a "wait and see" attitude, highlighting uncertainties surrounding tariffs and immigration policies, which differ from Milan's call for immediate action [9][10] - Milan's focus on housing costs and willingness to adjust his views based on data make him a unique variable in the Fed's policy discussions moving forward [10]

Group 1 - The importance of high-quality data for monetary policy decisions is emphasized, especially in the context of the current government shutdown affecting data availability [2][3] - Inflation is noted to be rising, particularly in food and gasoline prices, which are significant concerns for the public [4] - The cost of housing is highlighted as a major component of inflation, with expectations of significant disinflation in the services component driven by changes in the housing market [5][7] Group 2 - The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) typically meets every six weeks, and there is hope that necessary economic data will be available by the time decisions need to be made [3] - Current economic conditions include inflation at approximately 3% and unemployment at 4.3%, which are historically low [7] - The Atlanta Fed reported a growth rate of 3.8% in the third quarter, suggesting that economic models would not support a near-zero neutral rate under these conditions [8] Group 3 - The discussion includes the impact of fiscal deficits, which are currently about $400 billion lower than the previous fiscal year, contributing to a tighter monetary policy environment [28][29] - The regulatory environment is changing, with expectations of increased deregulation, which could expand potential output faster than actual output [14][30] - The relationship between financial conditions and monetary policy is explored, indicating that financial conditions can be influenced by non-monetary factors [29][30] Group 4 - The persistence of services inflation, particularly driven by housing costs, is identified as a key factor in inflation dynamics [33] - The expectation is that shelter rents will decrease, leading to a reduction in overall inflation [34][35] - The discussion on tariffs and their impact on inflation suggests that the burden of tariffs primarily falls on foreign producers rather than American consumers [40][42] Group 5 - The Federal Reserve's approach to inflation targets and the complexities of measuring inflation are discussed, with a focus on the challenges of public perception regarding inflation [21][23] - The need for forward-looking forecasts in monetary policy is emphasized, particularly in light of significant population growth shocks [18][19] - The potential for tax cuts to stimulate economic growth while tariffs may not lead to increased consumer inflation is analyzed [38][39]

Group 1 - The core issue behind the political crisis surrounding the Federal Reserve is whether it can "manipulate" interest rates and the implications of a steepening U.S. Treasury yield curve [1][5] - The market is optimistic about the Federal Reserve's interest rate cuts in the short term, influenced by Trump's potential nominations for a "dovish" shadow chairman [2][20] - The Federal Reserve can "set" but not "manipulate" policy interest rates, as interest rates are endogenous and influenced by macroeconomic factors [3][45] Group 2 - The U.S. government's fiscal and debt situation is in a "quasi-war state," necessitating fiscal consolidation to manage rising deficits and leverage ratios [7] - Sustainable fiscal consolidation can be achieved through economic growth or budget cuts, each with different political costs [7] - A decrease in the basic fiscal deficit rate by 1 percentage point could lead to a decline in the 10-year Treasury yield by 12-35 basis points [5][7] Group 3 - The Federal Reserve's long-term ability to manipulate the yield curve is limited, and the trend of rising yield premiums on U.S. Treasuries is likely to continue [4] - The market tends to price in overly "dovish" expectations during rate hike cycles and overly "hawkish" expectations during rate cut cycles [4] - The transition from "loose fiscal + loose monetary" to "tight fiscal + loose monetary" policies is crucial for the Federal Reserve's future rate cut space [5][20]