Back to Insights

Publication range: 2 Jul 2026 – 5 Nov 2026. Source: Hawk Thorne research record. Thesis descriptions retain the content recorded in the ledger.

Forecasts

25

Claims about future events, assessed against a stated condition and time horizon.

Held
14
Broke
9
Unresolved
0
Awaiting assessment
2

Interpretations

134

Assessments of current conditions. New evidence can sustain, revise or retire an interpretation. These do not contribute to forecast accuracy.

Sustained
12
Revised
26
Retired
14
Awaiting assessment
53
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.

0%025%2550%5075%75100%100predicted probabilityobserved frequency (%)

Forecast calibration

scored forecasts: 23 · Brier: 0.248

The sample includes only resolved forecasts with a recorded probability. Interpretations and unresolved entries are excluded.

Publication standards →
  1. 4 SeptMacro & PolicyForecastp 62% · 5d horizonLater publication: 7 SeptHeld · 12 Sept

    Fed funds futures price a firmer twelve-month rate path, 37.5 basis points higher, on an August payrolls beat of 162,000 against a 55,000 forecast, while the VIX sits at 15.2 (33rd percentile) with large positive S&P 500 dealer gamma showing the options market pricing calm.

    What would prove it wrong

    If the VIX closes above 20 in the five sessions following the 4 September 2026 payrolls release, the options market has repriced its assessment of the labour-driven rate path.

    How it settled

    no VIXCLS close above 20 through 2026-09-12

    Read analysis#
  2. 3 SeptMacro & PolicyForecastp 62% · 5d horizonLater publication: 4 SeptHeld · 11 Sept

    Fed funds futures price a firmer, not looser, twelve-month policy path (43.5bp) even as the VIX sits in the 4th percentile of its trailing range with dealers short gamma in S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 options, a divergence the 4 September labor report can only partially resolve, since it tests the options market's near-term calm but cannot on its own validate or invalidate a cumulative twelve-month rates path.

    What would prove it wrong

    If the VIX closes above 20 in the five sessions after the 4 September Non-Farm Employment Change release, the options market's low-volatility pricing will have failed the one leg the report can actually test.

    How it settled

    no VIXCLS close above 20 through 2026-09-11

    Read analysis#
  3. 31 AugMacro & PolicyForecastp 62% · 6d horizonLater publication: 3 SeptHeld · 9 Sept

    Fed funds futures price a firmer, not looser, policy path over the next year even as the VIX sits near its lowest levels of its recent range, leaving dealer short gamma in S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 options positioned to amplify whatever the 4 September labor data delivers.

    What would prove it wrong

    If the 4 September Non-Farm Employment Change prints at or below negative 23,000, the priced-higher Fed path should compress and the VIX's low-percentile signal will have been wrong.

    How it settled

    no ^GSPC close below 7500 through 2026-09-09

    Read analysis#
  4. 24 AugMacro & PolicyInterpretationLater publication: 31 Aug

    The regime's credit stress reading is mislabeled: it is fiscal supply pressure on the Treasury curve (heavy issuance, a TGA rebuild to $935.1 billion) driving the stress score, not a genuine deterioration in corporate credit, since the high-yield spread sits in just the 28.6th percentile of its own trailing year.

    What would prove it wrong

    If a named credit event (a downgrade wave, a spike in default risk expectations tied to a specific sector or cohort, or a deterioration in corporate funding costs across the curve) emerges in the sessions following the 26 to 27 August Treasury auctions and the 26 August Core PCE print, the fiscal supply framing for this credit stress reading fails.

    Read analysis#
  5. 30 JulMacro & PolicyInterpretationLater publication: 24 AugRetired · 24 Aug

    The 2-year Treasury yield's stretch near the 98th percentile of its trailing year is being driven by Treasury issuance and cash-rebuild supply pressure, not by a genuinely hawkish repricing of the Fed's path, since futures price only 34bp of additional tightening over 12 months against a decelerating GDP print.

    What would prove it wrong

    If the next Treasury auctions see a bid-to-cover ratio of 2.4 or above, showing dealers absorbing supply without a yield concession, the supply-driven framing for the 2-year yield's stretch is undercut in favor of a demand or growth-driven explanation.

    How it settled

    The falsifier's stated break condition (bid-to-cover >=2.4) cannot be evaluated because no auction results appear in the pack, only upcoming auction dates of 25-27 Aug; the original reading over-specified a testable trigger without evidence available at filing.

    Read analysis#
  6. 28 JulMacro & PolicyForecastp 62% · 8d horizonLater publication: 30 JulBroke · 29 Jul

    The 2-year Treasury yield's stretch near the 99.6th percentile of its trailing year remains a fiscal-issuance story, not a war-risk premium, confirmed by its failure to fall even as WTI crude gave back 4.96% over five sessions on fading Iran escalation risk.

    What would prove it wrong

    If the 2-year Treasury yield falls meaningfully below 4.31% in the sessions following the 28-29 July Treasury auctions and the 29 July Fed decision, the fiscal-supply framing for the front end fails.

    How it settled

    DGS2 closed below 4.31 on 2026-07-29 (close 4.22)

    Read analysis#
  7. 24 JulMacro & PolicyInterpretationp 60% · 8d horizonLater publication: 28 JulRetired · 28 Jul

    WTI crude's 25.72% monthly rally is pricing a live Iran escalation risk that the rates market is not reflecting; the 2-year Treasury yield's 100th-percentile stretch is a fiscal supply story, not a war-risk repricing, and the two will not stay decoupled indefinitely.

    What would prove it wrong

    If the 2-year Treasury yield falls meaningfully below 4.31% in the sessions following the 27-28 July Treasury auctions even as WTI crude holds its gains, the fiscal-supply framing for the front end fails and a flight-to-quality bid becomes the better explanation.

    How it settled

    WTI has fallen 4.96% over 5 days (-2.31% on the day) on de-escalation/ceasefire signals, meaning the war-risk premium is unwinding rather than holding, so the original premise of a live decoupled Iran risk in oil is invalidated by the actual price action.

    Read analysis#
  8. 23 JulMacro & PolicyInterpretationp 60% · 5d horizonLater publication: 24 Jul

    Fresh net Treasury issuance of $125.9bn against an $87.2bn TGA liquidity drain, combined with a live oil supply-risk shock pushing WTI crude to a 20-day high, is compounding rather than easing pressure on the front end, and the pending 23 July 10-year auction is the near-term test of whether the market can absorb it without a yield concession.

    What would prove it wrong

    If the 23 July 10-year Treasury auction clears with a strong bid-to-cover and no yield tail relative to the pre-auction market, the supply-and-drain framing is overstated and attention should focus elsewhere for what is holding yields up.

    Read analysis#
  9. 17 JulMacro & PolicyInterpretationp 62% · 10d horizonLater publication: 23 JulHeld · 1 Aug

    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.

    How it settled

    no CL=F trade below 73 through 2026-08-01

    Read analysis#
  10. 15 JulMacro & PolicyInterpretationp 62% · 10d horizonLater publication: 17 JulBroke · 16 Jul

    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.

    How it settled

    CL=F traded above 79.34 on 2026-07-16 (session high 80.87)

    Read analysis#
  11. 14 JulMacro & PolicyInterpretationp 60% · 5d horizonLater publication: 15 JulUnresolved · 22 Jul

    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.

    How it settled

    horizon elapsed without a machine-checkable falsifier

    Read analysis#
  12. 14 JulMacro & PolicyInterpretationp 58% · 5d horizonLater publication: 14 JulHeld · 22 Jul

    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.

    How it settled

    ^GSPC did not trade below 7354.02 through 2026-07-22

    Read analysis#
Thesis ledger and market assessments | Hawk Thorne Insights