ACTUALITÉS FOREX

On Monday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent laid out the next stage of economic measures directed at Iran. Interestingly, rather than impose sanctions on Iran itself, Bessent was more interested in addressing the regime’s trading partners, threatening to financially isolate anyone seeking to maintain ties with the war-torn country. Yesterday’s statement essentially boils down to an ultimatum for Iran: either return to normal or face complete global isolation, as imposed by operation “economic outcast”. As part of the operation, the Treasury Secretary made it clear that “any entity that facilitates money laundering on behalf of Iran will be removed from the US dollar system”. He went on to state that “an economic engagement of any kind with this murderous regime will expose those responsible to the full reach of American power”, and that “no nation should expect to enjoy the rewards of our system while helping those who seek to destroy it”. The language is abundantly clear, as is the intended audience. While Bessent himself did not name any nation state directly, China was the obvious target of the announcement. The Trump administration has been pressuring Beijing for months into severing ties with Iran, with the Treasury Secretary himself urging China to “get with the programme” during an interview last Friday. The matter is obviously a sensitive one, particularly ahead of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s planned visit to Washington in September. China has long been the primary buyer of Iranian oil, with or without sanctions, maintaining imports of Persian crude thanks to fleets of shadow tankers and flexible teapot refineries on its eastern coast, which purchase up to 90% of Iran’s production. Yesterday’s sanctions target nearly 60 different entities, including specific vessels, brokerage firms and Chinese nationals connected to such operations. The entire Iran operation makes more sense when viewed through the lens of the United States attempting to economically isolate China, particularly in conjunction with other recent actions. The abrupt removal of Maduro in Venezuela earlier this year, while seemingly unrelated, follows a similar logical path. Before the intervention, the South American country exported around 900,000 barrels per day, 80% of which headed to Chinese refineries. After the US deposed Maduro and lifted all sanctions against Venezuela, crude oil production ramped up to 1.2 million barrels per day, half of which now goes to American refineries on the Gulf coast, while the other half goes to Europe and India. Directly linked to the above is the establishment of a major defence partnership between the United States and Indonesia in April of this year, expanding US military access in the region. Paired with maritime exercises with Singapore and Malaysia, the US Navy has been able to extend its sphere of influence in and around the Malacca Strait, through which typically traverse 23 million barrels of oil per day, half of which are destined for China. This year also saw the largest joint military exercise between the US and the Philippines, which involved over ten thousand troops and established advanced missile systems in the Luzon Strait, roughly 100 miles south of Taiwan, further bolstering American presence on the long path between China and the rest of the world. While a number of other countries should also feel targeted by Scott Bessent’s announcement, such as Turkey, Iraq and the UAE, it has never been more obvious that China is the key to all of this. Back to the topic at hand, by what means can the US Treasury remove countries from the US dollar system? Simply put, the department can revoke access to correspondent banks. International payments settled in dollars have to flow through clearing accounts within a US regulated financial institution, therefore removing the link to corresponding banks prevents foreign entities from being able to transact in USD, locking them out of the US dollar system entirely. Given the dollar’s status as the world reserve currency, such measures are extremely punitive, with the potential to completely cut off certain countries from worldwide trading networks. Yesterday’s threat is credible enough. The consequences of not being able to transact in dollars are more dire than the consequences of losing access to Iranian crude oil. At the very least, the recent announcement should be enough to jolt some momentum back into third-party negotiations. Crude oil prices fell marginally on Monday, with Brent Crude and West Texas Intermediate dropping to $90 and $85 per barrel respectively.

The stars aligned perfectly for the entire crypto industry last week. On the one hand was the triple-whammy of the SEC, the White House and the CFTC all pushing for the immediate adoption of new rules pertaining to digital assets; on the other hand, the latest intervention by the US Treasury revealed that bond markets are beginning to lose faith in long-term debt instruments, raising fears of the so-called debasement trade. The SEC’s new proposed rule book, published last Tuesday, bypasses many of the core components of the delayed Clarity Act, and would potentially serve as an effective stopgap while the US legislative branch gets its act together. The proposal, which will remain open to public comment over the next couple of months, would distance many of the major crypto projects from the definition of an investment contract, thereby making such digital assets more palatable to institutional firms. Subsequent meetings at the White House and at the CFTC reinforced the message that the US government is willing to move swiftly on the matter should Congress continue to stall. As for the Treasury intervention, it seems that bond markets were not interested with the planned expansion of the long-term treasury buyback programme. By Friday, bond yields had largely recovered to the same levels on offer before Scott Bessent’s announcement, suggesting that markets are worried about the US government’s ability, or indeed willingness, to reign in the record-high deficit. The lack of faith in traditional debt instruments has forced markets to reallocate into more scarce investment vehicles, hence the recent surge in precious metals and cryptocurrencies alike. Bitcoin jumped 24% over the course of last week – something that it has not done for a number of years. Such euphoric performances are not exactly bear market moves, and indeed last week’s price action has completely shattered the bearish narratives that have steered sentiment over the last 10 months. Technical levels have been torn through, moving averages have been left in the dust, downtrends have been invalidated and long-term predictions are being strenuously tested. An estimated $1.6 billion poured into spot Bitcoin ETFs last week, while $4 billion in short positions were erased across all cryptocurrencies in one of the biggest liquidation events of the last five years. With the leverage now cleared out, the question now turns to whether crypto can maintain the momentum into this week and beyond. The moves in precious metals were nothing to be sneezed at either, with gold gaining 5% by Friday to reach $4,600 per ounce, and silver adding over $4 to its tally to close just under $69 per ounce. Several events are scheduled to light up the economic calendar this week, starting on Wednesday with the PCE price index. The latest inflation reading will factor straight into the Federal Reserve’s next interest rate decision on the 16th of September, which is currently a toss up as to which way the board will swing. While recent data has been somewhat encouraging, and with many officials speaking less urgently of the inflationary pressures caused by tariffs or higher crude oil prices, official figures are far from the Fed’s 2% target. Headline inflation is expected to stay at 3.7% in July, while the core element is likewise predicted to remain unmoved at 3.3%. Interestingly, after this month’s report, the Bureau of Economic Analysis will change its methodology in a way that will likely diminish the impact of “computer software and accessories” prices, which have soared in recent months due to the explosion of the AI sector. Wednesday will also see the publication of the preliminary estimate for US Q2 GDP growth, which is forecast to increase to 1.6%, beating the advance estimate which showed just 1.5%. During the same day, durable goods and personal spending complete the economic picture, while Nvidia (NVDA) is set to publish its latest earnings report after the closing bell. During the latter half of the week, attentions will turn to the Jackson Hole Symposium in Wyoming. While the main theme of the gathering centres around financial innovation and payment infrastructure, Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh will deliver a speech on Friday that will directly address the central bank’s policy path going into the September meeting. Friday may also provide some late week entertainment in the form of the annual revision to non-farm payroll data. Last year, the revision stripped 911,000 jobs from the 12-month period ending March 2025, destroying the job creation narrative that had prevailed up until that point. This year, economists are predicting something of the opposite, with Commerzbank in particular expecting a revision of 250,000 jobs to the upside. #BTC #CRYPTO #HODL About the Author Lawrence J. came from a strong technical and engineering background before pivoting into a more financial role later on in his career. Always interested in international finance, Lawrence is experienced in both traditional markets as well as the emerging crypto markets. He now serves as the financial writer for RADEX MARKETS. Reviewed by RADEX MARKETS Risk Warning: Trading derivatives and leveraged products carries a high level of risk, including the risk of losing substantially more than your initial investment.

Many traders mark a clean level, open the order ticket and then hesitate between Buy Limit and Buy Stop. Choosing the wrong one leaves the order sitting unfilled while price moves away, or fills it straight away at a price nobody planned for. Both outcomes come from the same mistake: the order type does not match what the trader expects price to do next. This guide covers what each order is and where it sits against the current price, the key differences, when to use a buy limit or a buy stop, how to place either one, a GBP/USD example comparing a market order with both pending orders, how a buy stop limit differs, why each order fails, how the spread affects buy orders, and how to manage pending orders without the usual mistakes. A buy limit is a pending order placed below the current price that buys only at that price or lower. A buy stop is a pending order placed above the current price that becomes a market order and buys once price rises to it. See how both orders fill on a live chart. A buy limit is a pending order that waits for price to fall to your level before it opens a buy trade. A buy limit order is an instruction to buy a currency pair at a set price or lower, placed below the current market price. Traders use it to buy a pullback into support, and it fills only at the set price or a lower one, never above it. MetaTrader 5's order documentation describes a buy limit the same way: a request to buy at an ask price equal to or lower than the price set in the order. In practice, a buy limit suits a trader who has marked support on EUR/USD during the Asian session and only wants to buy if London trades back into that zone. The order waits while the trader is away and opens only if the pullback happens, which keeps the entry at the planned price instead of chasing the market later. The view behind it is simple: a buy limit is a bet that price will come back, so it works best in ranges and orderly trends, not in a market that is already running. Read more: Limit Orders in Forex: Where to Place Buy and Sell Limits A buy stop is also a pending order, but it sits above the current price and waits for price to rise to it. A buy stop order is an instruction to buy a currency pair once price reaches a set level above the current market price. Traders use it to buy a breakout above resistance, and once price touches the trigger it becomes a market order and fills at the next available price. The SEC's investor bulletin on order types describes the same mechanic: once the stop price is reached, a stop order becomes a market order, so the fill price is not guaranteed. In practice, a buy stop suits a trader watching GBP/USD compress under a well-tested high before the London open. Placing the order a few pips above that high means the trade opens only if buyers push through, rather than on a guess in advance. The view behind it is the opposite of a buy limit: a buy stop pays a slightly higher price in exchange for proof that the move has started. Read more: What is a stop order? Types, examples and how to set one Buy limit vs buy stop comes down to one trade-off: price certainty against fill certainty. The first difference is where each order sits: the table shows the four pending orders against the current price and what price has to do to trigger each one. A buy limit placed above the current price, or a buy stop placed below it, does not wait at all: the condition is already met, so the order fills at once at the current price. This is the most common placement error, and it turns a planned pullback or breakout entry into an unplanned market order. The comparison below sets buy stop vs buy limit side by side on the points that change how a trade plays out once the order is in place. A buy stop is also how traders protect a short position: the stop-loss on a sell trade is a buy stop placed above the entry, and it closes the trade if price rises to it. Read more: What is a stop-loss order and how to use it in forex trading? The right order depends on the market situation and on whether getting a good price or getting into the trade matters more. The table adds where the stop-loss goes and what to do if each plan goes wrong. If you want to place both orders at the same level, you have not yet decided which situation you are trading. Decide that first, and the order type follows. Both orders are placed from the same order ticket on your trading platform, and the steps below show how to place a buy with either one. Name the setup before you open the ticket: a bounce from support or a pullback in a trend points to a buy limit, while a break above resistance points to a buy stop. If you cannot name it, do not place the order yet. Switch the ticket from an instant market order to a pending order and select the type that matches Step 1. Read the selection back once, because the two sit next to each other in most order menus. Enter a level below the current price for a buy limit and above it for a buy stop. Many platforms reject a level on the wrong side; if yours accepts it, the order fills immediately. Set the stop-loss and take-profit in the same ticket, then size the position from the distance between entry and stop. A pending order that fills while you are away needs its exit already in place. Choose how long the order stays live, such as the end of the day or a set date, and check the summary before you confirm. An order left open indefinitely can fill weeks later in a market that no longer fits the setup. The next section works one GBP/USD trade through a market order, a buy limit and a buy stop so you can see the numbers side by side. GBP/USD trades at 1.2650, with support at 1.2600 below and resistance at 1.2700 above. The same bullish idea can be traded three ways: a market order now, a buy limit just above support at 1.2605, or a buy stop just above resistance at 1.2710. Each plan risks 1% of a £10,000 account, or £100. For GBP/USD a pip is worth $10 per standard lot, about £7.91 at 1.2650, and lot sizes are rounded down so the risk stays within £100. Prices are illustrative, not historical quotes or trading advice, and the spread is left out here and covered later. GBP/USD falls to 1.2603 and then rallies to 1.2840. The buy limit fills at 1.2605 and reaches its take-profit for 90 pips, or £298.80. The market order survives the dip, because its stop at 1.2575 is never touched, and closes at 1.2800 for £190.50. The buy stop triggers at 1.2710 on the way up and closes at 1.2830 for £294.00. GBP/USD climbs straight from 1.2650 to 1.2840. The buy limit at 1.2605 never fills, so that plan makes nothing. The market order and the buy stop both reach their targets. The right response for the limit trader is to accept the missed trade or wait for a new level, rather than chase with a market order at a worse price. A strong move carries GBP/USD through 1.2710 and the buy stop fills at 1.2713, 3 pips above the trigger. The stop is now 43 pips away, so the money at risk rises to £105.35, above the £100 plan, while the target shrinks to 117 pips, or £286.65. The real risk-to-reward falls from 1:3 to about 1:2.72. The difference between a market order and a limit order shows clearly here. The market order buys certainty of entry at the current price but pays for it with a wide stop and a smaller position. The limit order gives up that certainty for a better price, and in Outcome 2 it gives up the whole trade. Read more: Market Order Explained: How It Fills and When to Use It A buy stop limit order is a pending order that turns into a buy limit, instead of a market order, once price reaches its trigger. It carries two prices: the stop price that activates the order and the limit price, the highest price the trader is willing to pay. A plain buy stop controls only when the order starts; a buy stop limit also controls how much is paid, at the cost of possibly not filling. The order sits dormant until the ask reaches the stop price. At that moment it becomes a buy limit at the limit price and fills only at that price or lower. Say the trigger is 1.2710 and the limit is 1.2715: if GBP/USD trades up through 1.2710 steadily, the order fills somewhere between the two levels. The reason to use one is slippage. A plain buy stop fills at whatever price is available after the trigger, which on a data release or a weekend gap can be well above the level. With a cap, the worst entry is known in advance, so the stop-loss distance and position size stay inside the plan. The trade-off shows in a gap: if GBP/USD jumps from 1.2700 to 1.2725, the trigger is hit but price is already above the limit, so the order stays unfilled and the breakout is missed. The SEC's bulletin on stop and stop-limit orders flags the same risk: a stop-limit order may not be executed if price moves away from the limit. Set the limit a few pips above the trigger: at least the normal spread plus a small buffer, such as 5 pips on GBP/USD. A narrow gap protects the price but misses more fast breakouts; a wider gap fills more often but lets more slippage through. Choose a buy stop limit for breakouts around scheduled news, and a plain buy stop when getting into the trade matters more than the exact price. The table sums up what each order type guarantees, which also answers the stop order vs limit order and limit order vs stop limit questions. Read more: What Is a Pending Order? Understanding How It Works in Trading Each order fails in its own way, and knowing how it fails decides where the stop-loss goes and what you do next. A buy limit fails when a strong trend never returns to your level. If EUR/USD sits at 1.1550 and your limit waits at 1.1500, a rally to 1.1650 leaves you out of a 100 pip move. Accept the missed trade or wait for a new pullback level; buying at market after the move usually means a worse entry and a wider stop than the plan allowed. A buy stop becomes a market order at the trigger, so on a fast breakout, a data release or a weekend gap it can fill above your level. In the GBP/USD example, 3 pips of slippage cut the risk-to-reward from 1:3 to about 1:2.72 and pushed the loss past the £100 plan. Avoid holding buy stops through scheduled releases you do not intend to trade, and size the position as if the fill will be a few pips worse. Read more: What Is Slippage in Trading? A false breakout happens when price spikes above resistance, triggers the buy stop and then falls back into the range. With resistance at 1.2700 and a buy stop at 1.2710, a spike to 1.2716 that reverses to 1.2665 takes out a stop at 1.2670 for a 40 pip loss. Waiting for a candle to close above resistance, adding a buffer above the level or trading a smaller size reduces the damage when the break does not hold. Buy orders are filled on the ask price, while most charts show the bid. The gap between the two is the spread, and it decides when a buy order really triggers. Take a spread of 1.2 pips. A buy limit at 1.2605 fills only when the ask reaches 1.2605, which means the bid on your chart has to fall to about 1.2593. If the chart low is 1.2605, the line looks touched but the order did not fill. The reverse happens with a buy stop at 1.2710: if the spread widens to 3 pips around a release, the ask reaches 1.2710 while the bid is only at 1.2707, so the order triggers before the chart shows price at your level. Read more: What Is Spread in Forex? A pending order keeps working after you stop watching, so it needs the same planning as a live trade, and most mistakes with buy limit and buy stop orders happen after the order is already in the market. A buy limit is an instruction to your broker to buy a currency pair only at a specific price or lower. It is placed below the current price and opens a long trade if price falls to that level. A buy limit always sits below the current price. If you place one above the current price, it fills straight away at the current price, because the market is already offering a better price than your limit. A buy stop. It only opens the trade once price has moved through resistance, while a buy limit is built to buy a pullback and would need price to fall first. Most charts show the bid price, but a buy order fills on the ask. Price has to fall far enough for the ask to reach your level, so with a spread of 1.2 pips the bid must trade about 1.2 pips below it. Yes. Once triggered, a buy stop becomes a market order, so in a fast market or after a gap it can fill above the trigger price. A buy stop fills at the next available market price after the trigger. A buy stop limit only fills up to its limit price, so it controls the price but may not fill at all. Not as an entry. A buy stop opens a long trade above the current price, but the same order type is used as the stop-loss on a short position, where it closes the trade if price rises. This guide set out where a buy limit and a buy stop sit against the current price, the key differences between them, the situations that suit each one, how to place them, a worked GBP/USD comparison with a market order, the buy stop limit, the three ways these orders fail, the effect of the spread and the habits that keep pending orders under control. The rules to apply are short. Name the setup before you choose the order, put the stop-loss on when you place it, cancel or widen orders before major data, accept that a buy limit will sometimes miss and size a buy stop for slippage. Buy limit vs buy stop is a choice you make after deciding which market situation you are trading, never before it. The RADEX MARKETS editorial team consists of seasoned financial professionals and market observers. Dedicated to delivering objective market summaries, macroeconomic insights, and educational content, the team strives to keep traders well-informed in a fast-paced financial environment. Reviewed by RADEX MARKETS Risk Warning Trading derivatives and leveraged products carries a high level of risk, including the risk of losing substantially more than your initial investment. Related concepts:

It has been an interesting couple of days for the US dollar. On Wednesday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent surprised everyone by revealing that his department would double the size of its bond buyback programme, from $2 billion per operation currently to $4 billion in September. The move is designed to clear out some of the deadweight bonds that no one is interested in buying, providing more buoyancy to longer-dated treasuries in a bid to reduce yields on 10 and 30-year debt instruments. The strategy worked well initially, with yields rapidly falling from record highs and markets welcoming the injection of cash with open arms. The perceived additional liquidity translated to a swift weakening of the dollar on Wednesday, which dragged the DXY down 0.9% to 98.8 points. Unfortunately for Bessent, markets were not impressed with the rather blunt mechanism and bond yields shot straight back up the following day, despite the Treasury Secretary hinting at the possibility of even larger operations in the future during an interview on Thursday morning. Treasury yields are right back where they started before the announcement and markets are demanding a more comprehensive plan to handle the United States’ debt, which as of today stands at $40 trillion. US stock markets were equally unimpressed on Thursday, as the Dow Jones shed 700 points for a 1.3% daily loss, while the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 fell 0.9% and 0.7% respectively. Bond market shenanigans helped push precious metals higher, with gold closing back above $4,500 per ounce for the first time since May, while silver managed to climb to $68. Comments from the US President did nothing to reassure markets yesterday, after Donald Trump threatened Iran with “economic warfare and isolation on an unprecedented scale”. Crude oil prices predictably surged following the remarks, pushing the Brent Crude index up to $94 per barrel. For all the drama pervading traditional financial markets, the big winner this week continues to be Bitcoin, which melted upwards earlier today to reach highs of $74,000. The crypto sphere has had more than enough meat to chew on over the last few days, what with the SEC’s new proposed ruleset for cryptocurrencies revealed on Tuesday, followed by a high-profile meeting at the White House on Wednesday, which brought together major industry figureheads, financial regulation officials, as well as the US President himself. If that were not enough, yesterday the CFTC organised an event of its own, during which Chairman Selig vowed that the commission would “move swiftly” on crypto rules if the US Congress fails to do so. The lack of progress on the legislative front has forced US regulators to take the helm. Public and private interests alike have clearly had enough of the gridlock that has immobilised the US Senate for much of the year and have decided to take matters into their own hands. Cryptocurrencies have suffered nothing but pain since last October; the sudden change in fortune is both surprising and refreshing. #BTC #SEC #CFTC About the Author Lawrence J. came from a strong technical and engineering background before pivoting into a more financial role later on in his career. Always interested in international finance, Lawrence is experienced in both traditional markets as well as the emerging crypto markets. He now serves as the financial writer for RADEX MARKETS. Reviewed by RADEX MARKETS Risk Warning: Trading derivatives and leveraged products carries a high level of risk, including the risk of losing substantially more than your initial investment.

The US Senate’s failure to schedule a vote on the Clarity Act before the summer recess has forced the SEC, the CFTC, the White House, as well as executives from across the crypto industry to take matters into their own hands. On Tuesday, the Securities and Exchange Commission proposed a framework entitled “Regulation Crypto Assets”, which would grant crypto projects a legally safe option to raise capital and have their tokens traded without having to jump through the traditional hoops associated with securities registration. The following day, a consortium of crypto industry executives and policy makers met at the White House to discuss the path forward in light of the roadblocks currently holding back new digital asset regulation. During the ensuing press conference, President Donal Trump called on Congress to “take the next step by passing the Clarity Act”, adding that the bill is a “very powerful structure legislation which will keep us ahead of […] everyone else”. President Trump was joined on Wednesday by CFTC Chairman Michael Selig, SEC Chairman Paul Atkins and White House crypto advisor Patrick Witt. On the industry side, the gathering included Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev, Nasdaq CEO Adena Friedman, Intercontinental Exchange CEO Jeff Sprecher, Payward co-CEO Arjun Sethi, Chainlink co-founder Sergey Nazarov, Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse, as well as a number of other influential founders and executives. In what is turning out to be a major week for cryptocurrencies, a third event is scheduled for later today, with the CFTC holding the inaugural meeting of its Innovation Advisory Committee, the main focus of which will also be crypto asset regulation. As for the SEC’s proposal, the intention is clear for all to see; the potential ruling serves as a clear workaround to certain elements of the delayed Clarity Act. The framework starts by establishing two distinct exemptions, the first allowing companies to raise up to $5 million over a period of four years, the second upping the limit to $75 million every 12 months, but with stricter financial reporting requirements. The two options are designed to make it easier for companies starting out in the crypto industry to raise capital by means of a token or coin launch, which has always been a little tricky in legal terms because such vehicles closely resemble investment contracts. “Money invested in a common enterprise with an expectation of profit from the effort of others” is essentially the SEC’s definition of a security, hence the legal minefield that has plagued the crypto sphere in recent years. Addressing this directly, the proposal then introduces a measure that states that for any crypto project that has successfully fulfilled its functional and technical obligations as laid out during the initial investment phase, the associated crypto asset would no longer be considered an investment contract. The crucial aspect here is that institutions would more freely be able to own and trade crypto assets once they are fully operational, because at that point they would not fall under the definition of an investment contract; how the initial capital was raised becomes irrelevant. While the SEC classified a number of high-profile cryptocurrencies as digital commodities back in March of this year, including Ethereum, Bitcoin, Solana and a dozen others, the ruling at the time did not comprehensively cover all blockchain activity within those ecosystems. The new proposal, if adopted, would establish a framework under which crypto assets tied to projects that have achieved their functional goals may cease to be subject to an investment contract. Such a ruling offers far greater legal clarity to institutional investors wishing to put cryptographic assets on their books, removing much of the legal grey area currently in place. The proposal will now go through a 60-day period during which the public may comment and offer suggestions to tighten up the wording and clarity of the text. Depending on the extensiveness of the feedback received, the SEC may then revise the proposal before submitting it to a vote, or, in the case of major changes, reopen the matter to public comment. As it stands, the Clarity Act is scheduled for a procedural vote on the 15th of September, which, if successful, would advance the bill to consideration before a final passage vote during the following days. The legal mechanism behind the Clarity Act is far cleaner and greatly more robust than anything lined out by the SEC this week, meaning a successful passage of the bill would immediately make the core of the Regulation Crypto Assets proposal redundant. Nevertheless, it is telling that the SEC is willing to introduce a stopgap to clear out the regulatory ambiguity. It is even more telling that industry leaders are meeting at the White House the following day to discuss matters further. There is also the possibility that the Clarity Act fails entirely, in which case the proposal will suddenly become a vital lifeline for the cryptocurrency industry. Two competing legal paths are emerging concurrently, and while the first is a much more elegant and encompassing solution than the second, many in the industry may be placing their bets on the alternative option. Bitcoin shot up to highs of $70,000 on Wednesday, dragging the entire cryptocurrency sphere along with it and pushing many projects to levels not seen in months. About the Author Lawrence J. came from a strong technical and engineering background before pivoting into a more financial role later on in his career. Always interested in international finance, Lawrence is experienced in both traditional markets as well as the emerging crypto markets. He now serves as the financial writer for RADEX MARKETS. Reviewed by RADEX MARKETS Risk Warning: Trading derivatives and leveraged products carries a high level of risk, including the risk of losing substantially more than your initial investment.

Structural cracks in the global economy emerged from the depths yesterday as investors fled almost every major asset class in unison. Bond yields around the world are surging, with those on US treasuries and European instruments rising to multi-year highs. In the US, 30-year treasury yields topped 5.33% on Tuesday, their highest since 2007, while German and French 10-year bonds saw their sharpest rise in over 15 years. Markets are demanding greater returns for holding long-term government debt due to inflation fears and increased geopolitical risk. It now appears as though negotiations between the US and Iran are back to square one, meaning extended high crude oil prices have to be factored into future economic forecasts. Rising oil prices mean higher prices across the board, creating additional inflationary pressures that many countries around the globe are already struggling to contain. US equities were unceremoniously abandoned, dragging the Nasdaq 100 to a 1.7% loss by the daily close, while the S&P 500 and Dow Jones dropped 0.7% and 0.2% respectively. Semiconductors incurred the biggest losses on Tuesday, which explains the divergence between the tech sector and the broader market. The major indices in Germany and France lost 0.8% apiece, while those in Japan crumbled 2.5%. Precious metals had no safe haven to offer. Gold traded $80 lower by the end of the day, while silver had forfeited the better part of 4% as yesterday’s session drew to a close. Shockingly, cryptocurrencies have actually performed well so far this week. Bitcoin has risen almost 3% since Monday and is currently challenging $65,000 per coin. The lack of progress in Iran is understandably driving crude oil prices higher, with Brent Crude tapping $92 per barrel yesterday while WTI lingered behind at $85. Saudi Aramco appears to have had enough with the sordid affair and has begun loading a number of very large crude carriers inside the Strait of Hormuz. The company has not done so in three weeks, and the development is somewhat unexpected, although given the fact that all other routes continue to present their own difficulties, it is hard to blame them. The lack of movement in foreign exchange markets over the last two days illustrates the global nature of the problem quite well. There is no obvious safe currency, hence no real FX flows. Most countries are in the same boat, and the boat has a leak. The dollar is completely flat going into today’s major news event, namely the FOMC minutes from the July meeting, which was one of the more interesting ones due to 9-3 vote split among board members. While there is nothing forward-looking about the release, market participants will nevertheless be eager to get a reading on the general mood at the Fed. The dollar currency index is currently idling around 99.6 at the time of writing. Meanwhile, the rout in Japanese and Korean stock markets picked up this morning exactly where it left off, with the Nikkei 225 immediately dumping 3% and the Kospi index plummeting 6% as soon as trading got underway in the Far East, demonstrating once again the heavy semiconductor weightings present in both indices. Potentially rough day ahead. #IRAN #FOMC #DXY About the Author Lawrence J. came from a strong technical and engineering background before pivoting into a more financial role later on in his career. Always interested in international finance, Lawrence is experienced in both traditional markets as well as the emerging crypto markets. He now serves as the financial writer for RADEX MARKETS. Reviewed by RADEX MARKETS Risk Warning: Trading derivatives and leveraged products carries a high level of risk, including the risk of losing substantially more than your initial investment.