Thesis ledger
Dated forecasts and market interpretations with assessment criteria and subsequent outcomes. This records research, not portfolio performance.
Publication range: 2 Jul 2026 – 10 Sept 2026. Source: Hawk Thorne research record. Thesis descriptions retain the content recorded in the ledger.
Forecasts
15Claims about future events, assessed against a stated condition and time horizon.
- Held
- 7
- Broke
- 6
- Unresolved
- 0
- Awaiting assessment
- 2
Interpretations
99Assessments of current conditions. New evidence can sustain, revise or retire an interpretation. These do not contribute to forecast accuracy.
- Sustained
- 4
- Revised
- 9
- Retired
- 7
- Awaiting assessment
- 50
- Historical assessments
- 29
Assessment rules and forecast calibration
Since 27 July 2026, forecasts and interpretations follow separate assessment rules. Earlier interpretations graded against price thresholds remain in the history and are excluded from calibration.
Declared probabilities compared with assessed outcomes. Brier is the mean squared error; a lower score indicates less error within this sample. A small sample does not establish future forecasting accuracy.
Forecast calibration
scored forecasts: 13 · Brier: 0.250
The sample includes only resolved forecasts with a recorded probability. Interpretations and unresolved entries are excluded.
Fading Fed cut expectations, an EXTREME fiscal gravity read (heavy net issuance against a TGA drawdown) and WTI crude at a fresh 20-day high above $80 are outvoting genuine eurozone and US disinflation data, so the rates path is being set by supply and energy, not the inflation trend.
What would prove it wrong
If the 2-year Treasury yield falls in the sessions following 17 July 2026 despite the EXTREME fiscal gravity read and WTI's fresh high, the supply-and-energy-dominant framing fails.
Read analysis#How it settled
no CL=F trade below 73 through 2026-08-01
US strikes on Iran on 15 July arrived alongside a soft core PPI print (0.2% vs 0.3%) and a China Q2 GDP miss (4.3% from 5.0%), yet the S&P 500 rose 0.24% and WTI fell 0.79%, so the market is pricing the escalation as contained and letting a cooling global cycle steer; the one holdout is the front end, with the 2-year yield at the 100th percentile of its year and 40.5bp of tightening still priced at 12 months.
What would prove it wrong
If WTI breaks above its 20-day high of 79.34 and the VIX moves meaningfully above 17.16 in the sessions following the 15 July strikes, the contained-escalation read fails and the energy-shock framing resumes as the dominant story.
Read analysis#How it settled
CL=F traded above 79.34 on 2026-07-16 (session high 80.87)
June CPI's decline to 3.5% year on year, with the core index falling outright to 336.07, is a genuine disinflation signal that survived a real Hormuz supply shock rather than a forecast tiebreaker, but the 2-year yield's 99.6th percentile reading and 40.5bp of priced tightening at 12 months show the front end has not yet repriced to reflect it.
What would prove it wrong
If the 2-year yield eases meaningfully and priced tightening odds fall after the 15 July PPI print and Warsh's testimony, disinflation has won cleanly; if the yield holds near its current extreme while WTI's gain persists, energy-driven reflation remains the dominant priced force despite the CPI print.
Read analysis#How it settled
horizon elapsed without a machine-checkable falsifier
The 14 July CPI headline forecast of 3.8% y/y is a base-effect artifact sitting on a core stuck near 2.8% and a WTI tape up 13.73% in five sessions; the 2-year yield at the 99.6th percentile and 43.5bp of tightening priced at 12m show the front end has stopped believing the disinflation read, making the energy shock the likely winner of the tiebreaker.
What would prove it wrong
If CPI prints at or below 3.8% y/y, the S&P 500 holds, and the 2-year yield backs off its five-month high while WTI keeps its five-day gain, the disinflation-over-energy read survives intact.
Read analysis#How it settled
^GSPC did not trade below 7354.02 through 2026-07-22
A reinstated Iranian naval blockade has pushed WTI crude up 4.85% intraday and 9.22% over five sessions, colliding with a fresh cluster of confirmed labor-market softening (Volkswagen's threatened cuts, Amazon layoffs, a weaker read of June's participation rate), making the 14 July CPI print the tiebreaker for whether energy-driven reflation or labor-driven disinflation dominates the Fed's path.
What would prove it wrong
If CPI prints at or below the 3.8% year-on-year forecast on 14 July despite the oil rebound, and equities absorb the labor headlines without a selloff, the disinflation trade survives the energy shock intact.
Read analysis#How it settled
CL=F traded above 80 on 2026-07-14 (session high 81.27)
WTI's 4.76% jump on 13 July 2026 following US strikes on Iran is a genuine geopolitical shock, but with gold down 0.79% the same day and equities not yet tested against the headline, fiscal liquidity (an $85.8 billion 30-day TGA drawdown) still looks like the dominant driver of risk assets pending the 14 July CPI print.
What would prove it wrong
If WTI gives back this move within the next one to two sessions and the S&P 500 or gold show no corresponding risk-premium reaction, the liquidity-dominance read survives and the Iran strike is confirmed as transient noise.
Read analysis#How it settled
CL=F did not trade below 71.29 through 2026-07-21
Japan's 7.1% y/y June PPI print, alongside a hawkish BoJ GDP revision and a still-restrictive Fed credit report, signals the inflation-sticky, tightening regime is broadening beyond the US, but the Dollar Index and 10-year Treasury yield show no confirming move yet, so fiscal liquidity (a $95.0 billion 30-day TGA drawdown) remains the dominant driver of risk assets for now.
What would prove it wrong
If Japanese and US inflation-linked yields fail to rise and the yen fails to strengthen on this PPI print over the coming week, the broadening-tightening read fails and liquidity alone remains the dominant driver.
Read analysis#How it settled
DX-Y.NYB did not trade above 101.61 through 2026-07-20
The S&P 500's 0.81% gain on 9 July 2026 is better explained by the $134.2 billion Treasury General Account drawdown this week than by the underlying growth data, where existing home sales fell from 3.2% growth to a 2.4% decline in June even as jobless claims improved.
What would prove it wrong
If the S&P 500 or gold fail to hold their gains even as the Treasury General Account drawdown continues over the coming week, the liquidity-driven read fails and the growth data is confirmed as the dominant price driver.
Read analysis#How it settled
^GSPC did not trade below 7266.99 through 2026-07-20
Gold's 1.51% rise and the Dollar Index's 0.13% fall on 9 July 2026 reverse the liquidity-driven decoupling flagged on 8 July, suggesting the FOMC minutes' hawkish tilt did not survive the next session and rate expectations, not fiscal liquidity alone, are again driving gold and the dollar in opposite directions.
Read analysis#What would prove it wrong
If gold and the Dollar Index diverge again in the coming sessions, gold rising while the dollar also firms, the rate-expectations reunification view fails and fiscal liquidity resumes as the dominant independent driver of gold's moves.
Gold's 2.0% intraday decline on 8 July 2026 without a corresponding move in the Dollar Index breaks the pattern the desk flagged on 3 and 6 July 2026, and points to fiscal liquidity (a $93.9 billion TGA drawdown against $62.3 billion in net issuance) rather than Fed rate-cut expectations as the dominant driver of gold's recent swings.
Read analysis#What would prove it wrong
If the FOMC minutes due 8 July 2026 read hawkish and gold's decline holds while the Dollar Index stays flat, the liquidity-driven read is confirmed; if the minutes read dovish and the Dollar Index reverses lower even as gold stays weak, the cut-pricing thesis in gold is broken outright.
A cluster of softening growth data (ISM services new orders down to 55.1, the Conference Board's Employment Trends Index down to 106.69, Microsoft's roughly 4,800 job cuts) is accumulating into a genuine soft-patch signal that the neutral regime read (risk score 50) is currently masking by averaging it against an expanding fiscal liquidity injection (TGA down $95.5 billion in 30 days), and the S&P 500's 2.49% five-day gain is better explained by that liquidity than by the growth data.
Read analysis#What would prove it wrong
If the FOMC Meeting Minutes due 8 July 2026 read hawkish and the S&P 500 and Gold hold their current gains regardless, the soft-data-matters thesis fails and liquidity conditions remain the dominant price driver over growth data.
Gold's 1.23% gain and the Dollar Index's 0.19% daily rise (1.53% over the month) on 6 July 2026 are moving in the same direction rather than opposite, which is not the signature of a clean rate-cut repricing, and the 10-year yield's earlier 4 basis point rise still has not confirmed it; the fiscal liquidity injection (TGA down $95.5 billion in 30 days) is a more plausible independent driver of gold's advance than Fed timing.
Read analysis#What would prove it wrong
If the FOMC minutes due 8 July 2026 show a dovish tilt, or the Dollar Index reverses lower while gold keeps rising, the liquidity-driven read fails and the cut-pricing thesis in gold gains support; if instead the minutes read hawkish or the 10-year yield keeps rising alongside further gold gains, the cut-pricing thesis fails outright.