Lumix Lens — 08/06 to 12/06

Summary Table: Macro Driver

Levels as at 12 June 2026, intraday for market prices and latest available release for official series. The direction column reflects the change over the week ending 12 June except where another window is indicated; the balance sheet change reflects the trailing ninety days. Source: Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED) and COMEX. Compiled by the Lumix quantitative model.

News overview

8 June Vanguard published its adoption schedule for the SpaceX listing, confirming that funds tracking CRSP, FTSE and Russell indexes will take the five-trading day fast entry path into the new stock.

9 June Bloomberg reported the SpaceX book was multiple times oversubscribed, with several institutional orders of about US$10 billion or more, ahead of order books closing on Wednesday afternoon in New York.

10 June May CPI printed at 0.5 percent on the month and 4.2 percent over the year, the fastest annual pace since April 2023. Core inflation rose a softer 0.2 percent on the month and 2.9 percent over the year, just below forecasts.

11 June Producer prices rose 6.5 percent over the year, the highest since November 2022, though core measures undershot. The ECB hiked for the first time since 2023. SpaceX priced its offering at US$135, valuing the company at US$1.77 trillion, and the World Cup opened at Estadio Azteca in Mexico City.

11 June S&P 500 (SPY) surged +1.75%, Nasdaq 100 +3.29%, Dow +1.86% after Trump called off airstrikes on Iran and said the US is "going to sign a deal with Tehran soon."

12 June SpaceX began trading on the Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX. President Trump said a peace agreement with Iran could be signed as soon as this weekend, sending crude to a three-month low and the US 10-year yield to about 4.47 percent.

Weekly Asset Recap

Gold

• Real Yields & USD

The 10-year TIPS real yield has surged 16 bp in the last month to 2.16%, flirting with its 52-week high. This is the single most powerful headwind for gold. Simultaneously, the broad USD index has jumped 1.4 points over 30 days (to 120.1) reasserting the traditional inverse dollar-gold relationship. Gold’s textbook correlation with both drivers is highly negative. Over the same 30-day window gold has fallen ~$260/oz (−5.8%), consistent with both forces.

• Policy Stance

The Fed has been on an extended pause at 3.50-3.75% since December 2025. The effective rate (3.625) is essentially unchanged over the past 90 days. The market had priced in rate cuts through early 2026 that have not materialised. The Fed’s balance sheet has contracted only minimally over the last 30 days (-3.1B) and actually expanded +$79B over 90 days, suggesting QT is effectively paused.

• Inflation Expectations

The 10-year breakeven inflation rate has dropped sharply by 16 bp over the last 30 days, from ~2.47% to 2.31%. The 5y5y forward is likewise edging lower (−4 bp over 30d). This cooling in inflation expectations directly erodes the inflation-hedge narrative that had supported gold earlier in the cycle. Notably, headline CPI (May: 334.0) and Core CPI (336.1) remain at all-time highs in level terms, so actual inflation has not yet receded meaningfully, but the market’s expectation of future inflation is clearly declining. This gap between elevated CPI prints and falling breakeven introduces tension.

• Cross-Checks – Explicit Contradictions
  • CPI is still high, but breakevens are falling

Headline CPI at 334 (52w high) and Core CPI at 336.1 (52w high) show actual inflation still stubborn. Yet T10YIE has fallen 16bp in 30d. Markets are either a) pricing in a growth slowdown that crushes future demand-pull inflation, or b) expecting the Fed’s restrictiveness to do the job. Either way, gold is caught between sticky CPI and falling expectations. The market is currently favoring the latter.

• Fed on hold vs. Falling real rate not happening

Gold does best when the Fed is cutting, and real yield is falling. Here, the Fed is on hold AND real yield is rising, creating a double negative scenario.

• USD Strength vs. Elevated Fed balance sheet

A +$79B expansion in the Fed’s balance sheet over 90 days is normally USD-negative, yet the USD is strengthening. This suggests a “risk-off”/ safe-haven bid into dollars, which dominates the usually liquidity-channel effect.

Crude Oil

• Geopolitical Drivers: U.S.-Iran Conflict & Peace Deal Hopes
  • The War Phase:
    • U.S. launched new rounds of attacks on Iran mid-week (June 10-11), causing oil prices to spike sharply.
    • Iran and the U.S. traded attacks, escalating supply disruption fears in the Middle East.
    • Rystad Energy warned crude oil prices could hit $150/barrel if hostilities resume in earnest.
    • ING estimates Brent could surge to $120–$130/barrel this summer if Strait of Hormuz disruptions persist, increasing pressure on Washington to secure a deal.
  • The De-escalation Phase (June 12-13)
    • Trump called off planned strikes on Iran and announced peace talks would resume.
    • Reports of a near-term U.S.-Iran interim peace agreement caused a sharp reversal in oil prices.
    • Oil prices fell to a two-month low on Friday, June 12.
    • Crude oil prices dropped as Trump cancelled new strikes on Iran.

However, some confusion remains: Trump said a ceasefire description published by Iranian state media "bears no relation to the truth," and oil rebounded slightly from session lows before resuming the decline.

• Supply-Side Dynamic
  • US Production & Rig Count:
    • Permian Basin rig count: 256 (down from 273 a year ago)
    • National oil & gas rig count: 562 (slightly up from 555 a year ago)

Diamondback Energy (FANG) is being highlighted as a key swing producer that can help fill potential supply gaps.

• USMCA / Canadian Oil Import Risk:
  • Trump casts doubts on USMCA renewal, stating the U.S. "does not need Canadian goods."
  • However, analysts note Canada accounts for over 60% of America’s oil imports.

Any disruption to Canadian oil flows would be severely bullish for CL=F, given the U.S. refining system’s dependence on heavy Canadian crude.

• EIA Demand Forecast

The EIA’s June 2026 Short-Term Energy Outlook now projects global oil demand will fall by 1.1 million b/d in 2026, a steep reversal from the +1.2 million b/d growth forecast just in February. The agency cites high prices, reduced fuel availability, and demand-curbing government policies, a clear demand destruction signal. The EIA expects a rebound in 2027 (+2.5 million b/d) as supply normalizes.

Editor’s note

This week is a special read. We are living through the largest initial public offering in the history of financial markets, and it arrives with caveats that deserve careful attention. This edition steps outside our usual format to map the key events from now until the middle of July, with a particular focus on two forces most commentary is missing: where the market’s cash has gone, and what the Japanese yen is about to do to what remains.

It is around 11:03pm Sydney time as I write this, and there is huge anticipation in the air - more specifically in my living room, where it feels like staying up for a World Cup final. Except this time it is not for the largest sporting event in the world which fittingly opened in Mexico City only hours ago, but for the largest listing in the history of financial markets. SpaceX is due to begin trading on the Nasdaq in roughly an hour under the ticker SPCX, and by our estimate the offering has tied up around US$175 billion in subscription capital across institutional and retail channels. Indicative pricing ahead of the open sits near US$178 against an offer price of US$135. Names like Rocket Lab, EchoStar and AST SpaceMobile are moving in sympathy ahead of the debut of the sector’s soon to be market leader. So this week we cover something more interesting than the usual weekly tape: liquidity, and specifically the tug of war between SpaceX and the yen for control of it.

The largest listing in financial history

The raw numbers are worth pausing on. SpaceX sold 555.6 million Class A shares at a fixed price of US$135, raising US$75 billion and valuing the company at roughly US$1.77 trillion, which makes it the seventh most valuable company in the United States before a single share has traded, ahead of Tesla. The deal comfortably eclipses Saudi Aramco’s US$29.4 billion listing in 2019, the previous record. There was no price range and no bookbuild theatre. After months of testing the waters meetings, the company simply named its price and let the market decide whether to show up. The market showed up: the book closed more than four times covered, with several institutions reportedly submitting orders of US$10 billion or more and BlackRock alone said to have placed an order of at least US$5 billion. Roughly thirty percent of the deal was reserved for retail investors through brokerages including Fidelity, Schwab and Robinhood, an unusually large retail allocation for an offering of this size.

The company arrives on the public market as a hybrid. It is a launch and satellite business fused with an artificial intelligence ambition following the merger with xAI, a pending acquisition of the coding company Cursor, and a cloud agreement under which Google is reported to pay US$920 million a month. It also arrives unprofitable. First quarter capital expenditure reached US$10.1 billion, of which US$7.7 billion went to AI, the quarter produced a net loss of about US$4.3 billion, and the cumulative deficit since 2002 stands near US$41.3 billion. The prospectus warns plainly that profitability may never arrive. Elon Musk retains roughly 42 percent of the company and cannot sell for a year. And SpaceX is only the first of a trio, with OpenAI filing its prospectus confidentially on Monday and Anthropic filing earlier this month, so the capital calls on this market are far from finished.

One structural detail matter for everything that follows. The underwriting syndicate, led by Goldman Sachs alongside Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup and JPMorgan, holds an option over a further 83.3 million shares worth about US$11.2 billion at the offer price. In practice, overallotment is the deal’s stabilisation mechanism: it gives the stabilisation desk roughly US$11.2 billion of buying capacity with which to defend the US$135 offer price for thirty days. Our work treats that as a floor under the stock until around 12 July. It is capacity rather than guaranteed, and it can be exhausted, but it changes the shape of the first month of trading.

SpaceX and liquidity

Begin with a simple accounting identity. SpaceX has just removed US$75 billions of cash from investor accounts and moved it onto its own balance sheet, where it will be spent on rockets and data centres rather than recycled into other equities. That is the visible drain. The hidden drain is larger. A book that closes more than four times covered means far more capital was committed than was ever going to be filled. Across the institutional book and the retail subscription channels, our estimate is that roughly US$175 billion has been tied up in the process, frozen against allocations that most applicants will come back largely as refunds. Refunds are not instant. Until that money lands back in accounts and is redeployed, it is simply absent from the bid side of every other order book.

The consequence is mechanical rather than sentimental. With the marginal buyer temporarily missing, every rally in the broader tape lacks genuine sponsorship. Holders sitting on positions understand this, and the rational response is to supply into strength rather than wait for follow through that the flow data says cannot arrive yet. Add the attention economy to the cash economy: the World Cup opened in Mexico City on Thursday, and the United States plays its opening match in Los Angeles tonight, so both screens and risk budgets are pointed elsewhere. Volumes outside the SpaceX complex are thinning accordingly.

Yen and the Carry Trade

For much of the past decade, global investors have been able to borrow in yen at extremely low funding costs and recycle the proceeds into higher-yielding dollar assets. The resulting carry trade has become one of the quiet pillars of global liquidity, supporting US equities, credit, Asian technology and emerging-market risk. Estimates of the trade’s size vary widely because the exposure is dispersed across banks, hedge funds, corporates and structured products. Narrow measures place outstanding positions in the hundreds of billions, with Morgan Stanley estimating roughly US$500 billion. Broader measures suggest that total exposure reached several trillion dollars at the 2024 peak.

The precise figure is impossible to verify in real time. The direction of pressure is not. The Federal Reserve has cut its policy rate from 5.25–5.50% in mid-2024 to 3.50–3.75% today, while the Bank of Japan has lifted rates from negative territory to 0.75%. A differential that once paid more than five percentage points now pays closer to three. At the same time, the yen has begun to appreciate, turning the funding currency itself into a source of mark-to-market stress. For leveraged carry positions, this is an unforgiving combination. The income advantage narrows, the funding cost rises, and the yen-denominated liability grows in dollar terms. As the economics deteriorate, the rational response is deleveraging: sell dollar assets, convert proceeds into yen and repay funding.

On June 16th, the Bank of Japan concludes its two-day meeting that afternoon, and markets assign roughly an 80–96% probability to a rate increase to 1.00%, which would mark the first time Japanese policy rates have reached that level since 1995. Governor Ueda and several board members have leaned hawkish in recent weeks, citing still-low real rates and persistent upside risks to inflation.

Markets saw the template in July and August 2024, when a 25-basis-point move by the Bank of Japan helped trigger one of the sharpest carry-trade unwinds in modern market history. The process was not confined to Japan, nor was it limited to foreign exchange. It transmitted through global equities because the trade itself had become embedded in global risk-taking. Carry deleveraging does not appear as a single event but as repeated supply into rallies as leveraged investors use strength to reduce exposure without creating unnecessary market impact. Each rebound becomes an opportunity to sell dollar assets, repatriate proceeds and shrink the funding book.

First, the unwind is a mechanism rather than a moment. A BOJ hike can accelerate it, but it does not complete it. Second, settlement creates lag. Dollar assets sold to repay yen liabilities settle before proceeds can be fully repatriated, which means pressure created on one session can continue washing through the next.

The BOJ meeting therefore represents a likely change in the tempo. The background pressure that has weight on rallies could become an acute repricing event, before settling back into a slower deleveraging process that may persist well beyond the meeting itself.

Macro adjustment: an energy shock meets a new Fed chair

None of this unfolds in a vacuum, and this week’s data set up the stakes for the meetings ahead. The May consumer price index, released on Wednesday, showed headline inflation accelerating to 4.2 percent over the year, the fastest pace since April 2023, with prices up 0.5 percent on the month. The detail was more reassuring than the headline. Energy accounted for more than sixty percent of the monthly increase, with gasoline up 40.5 percent over the year as the war with Iran and the disruption around the Strait of Hormuz fed through to fuel, while core inflation rose just 0.2 percent on the month and 2.9 percent over the year, slightly below expectations. Producer prices on Thursday told the same story from the factory gate, with the headline rate at 6.5 percent, the highest since November 2022, but core measures below forecast. The shock is real, but it is an energy shock, and so far, it is not bleeding meaningfully into everything else.

That distinction is what the Federal Reserve must adjudicate when it meets on 16 and 17 June, Washington in time, in what will be Kevin Warsh’s first meeting as Chair following Jerome Powell’s departure in May. Futures pricing has the committee on hold with close to 89 percent probability, a small residual chance of a cut, and almost nobody pricing a hike. The risk is not the decision but the bias. Recent minutes showed a majority of officials prepared to entertain higher rates if the energy impulse persists, and a statement that shifts from an easing lean to a neutral or tightening lean would do real damage to the rate sensitive end of the equity market. Working in the other direction, President Trump said on Friday that a peace agreement with Iran could be signed as soon as this weekend. Crude fell to a three-month low on the remark; the US 10-year Treasury yield eased to about 4.45 percent, and the European Central Bank’s first hike since 2023, delivered on Thursday, was absorbed without drama. If a deal lands, the single largest input into the inflation scare deflates with it.

Gold tells you how finely balanced this is. The metal traded near US$4,226 on Friday, down close to ten percent over the month, as peace headlines drained the geopolitical premium while real yields held above two percent. Read together with the macro driver table above, the market is currently expressing a belief that the energy shock is temporary, and the policy rate has peaked. The next two weeks will test both beliefs at once.

Key events from the 12th of June - 12th July

What follows is the sequence as our model maps it, with Sydney readers in mind. Two corrections to the folk calendar circulating on trading desks are worth making upfront. The Federal Reserve’s statement lands at 2pm on Wednesday 17 June in Washington, which is 4am on Thursday 18 June in Sydney, so for our readership the Fed decision and the first wave of index buying effectively share a calendar day. And Friday 19 June is the Juneteenth holiday in the United States, with the NYSE and Nasdaq closed, which pulls the quarterly options expiration forward to Thursday 18 June. The practical effect is that events many traders expected to spread across three sessions now stack onto one.

Friday 12 June: the debut, and the World Cup

SpaceX opens for trading today, with the first print expected somewhere between late morning and early afternoon in New York after one of the longest price discoveries auctions the Nasdaq has run. Two scenarios frame the session. In the first, an opening surge driven by retail enthusiasm runs into preset institutional sell orders, and the stock fades through the afternoon, beginning with fanfare and ending flat. In the second, retail demand exceeds expectations and absorbs the institutional supply outright; prediction markets lean this way, assigning roughly seventy percent odds that the stock closes above a two trillion-dollar capitalisation. Beneath both scenarios sits the stabilisation bid, roughly US$11.2 billion of capacity defending the US$135 offer price, in place until around 12 July. For the rest of the tape, the day is a drain: capital and attention are concentrated on one ticker and one football tournament, and trading volumes across other stocks shrink accordingly.

Monday 15 June: digestion

The offering formally settles on Monday, and the first cohort of short horizon retail buyers, those who chased the opening print, typically looks to exit within one to three sessions. Expect shrinking volumes and a market without direction, with the two background dynamics, frozen subscription capital and carry related supply, capping every attempt to rally. In our framework the period from 12 to 17 June structurally favours sellers into strength, not because the asset is weak but because the buyers are not yet back.

Tuesday 16 June: the Bank of Japan

This is the most unpredictable session of the month. If the Bank of Japan delivers the expected move to 1.00 percent, the most leveraged carry positions face forced liquidation, and the selling is algorithmic and indiscriminate: dollar assets are sold to repatriate funds into yen, with Korean technology names, the most crowded expression of the global memory trade after an eighty percent year to date run in the broad Korea index, sitting directly in the blast radius. Against that, some faster money has already cut exposure into the meeting, which sets up the familiar pattern of selling the rumour and buying the news. The path our model assigns the highest weight is an initial drop, a reflex rebound, and a close that is still lower on the day. If the sequence plays out, that session’s low becomes the most likely candidate for the structural low of the entire timeline, the zone in which the model expects sidelined capital to begin reengaging. Settlement mechanics mean the day’s selling will not be fully absorbed until the following session, and the carry unwind itself does not end here; it downgrades from acute panic back to chronic, ongoing pressure that may persist for months.

Wednesday 17 June: Fed handover

Funds forced out on Tuesday complete their final currency settlement, the acute phase of the unwind cools, and the market holds its breath into the Federal Reserve statement at 2pm Washington time, 4am Thursday in Sydney, followed by Chair Warsh’s first press conference. The committee also publishes a fresh summary of economic projections, so the dots will matter as much as the decision. Off market capital, including the refunded SpaceX subscriptions now flowing back into accounts, is waiting on this signal before committing.

Thursday 18 June: The turning point

Everything converges here, and this is the critical hinge of the entire sequence. It is the first full trading session under the new Fed guidance. It is also the fifth trading day since listing, which under the fast entry rules adopted this year by CRSP and FTSE Russell is the day total market and large cap index funds must own SpaceX, with Russell’s committee operating a single batch rule that concentrates the buying at the market close. Portfolio managers have no discretion in this; it is mandated by the rulebooks. Vanguard’s CRSP tracked funds alone imply demand our model puts between US$350 million and US$1.3 billion, and street estimates of the full mechanical bid across Russell and Nasdaq linked trackers over the cycle run to between US$22 billion and US$27 billion. And because Friday is a market holiday, the quarterly options expiration lands on this close as well, stacking expiration volatility with no directional bias of its own on top of mandated index demand inside a single final hour.

The branch is binary. If the Fed holds and sounds neutral, three forces release at once: sidelined subscription capital receives its entry signal, the currency driven selling impulse from the carry trade drops sharply, and index funds are buying on mandate rather than judgement. That combination is what the first genuinely unconstrained move would look like. If the committee instead surprises a hawkish stance and hints at further tightening, the rate sensitive end of the market falls hard. The sidelined US$175 billion stays sidelined or retreats, and the entire breakout scenario is delayed or cancelled. The first two forces are certain to occur in some form. The third is the most likely outcome but not a guaranteed one, which is why the Fed is the single biggest variable in this timeline.

Friday 19 June: markets closed

United States markets are closed for the Juneteenth holiday. After the most crowded session of the quarter, the market gets a long weekend to settle positions, true hedges and let the index flow clear. Sydney desks will spend Friday trading the aftermath through futures and the Asian session.

Monday 22 June: between catalysts

Sentiment softens slightly. Speculators begin positioning for the next wave of mandated buying, the MSCI inclusion later in the week, and the Korean memory complex is vulnerable to profit taking after its extraordinary run, particularly if the SK Hynix ADR programme receives approval and hands foreign holders an easier exit. Nothing structural changes; the market is simply between catalysts, and the carry unwind hums along in the background.

Wednesday 24 June: Micron earnings

Micron reports fiscal third quarter results after the close, with guidance of US$18.7 billion in revenue plus or minus US$400 million, and the print doubles as a referendum on the memory demand curve that underpins the entire Asian technology complex. Curiously, this is also the moment SpaceX’s own market structure is at its most stable in the whole listing cycle. The initial distributions are complete, the stabilisation bid remains in place, and the three biggest catalysts ahead, MSCI inclusion on 26 June, the Nasdaq 100 rebalancing in early July, and the large retail unlock around 12 July, have not yet fired.

Friday 26 June: the second buying wave

MSCI’s fast track inclusion, flagged within the listing’s first days and executed after the close of the tenth trading day, lands on this Friday close, with our model estimating US$10 to US$20 billion of mandated buying. The annual Russell reconstitution also goes final after this same close, adding a second layer of index turnover. It is a heavy close, and the second of the three forced buying waves.

Monday 29 June: the first real supply

Fidelity’s fifteen day flipping window for retail allocations closes over the weekend of 27 June, making Monday the first session in which a large cohort of retail holders can sell without consequence for their future IPO access. Our model pencils in US$20 to US$30 billion of realised selling spread across the following sessions, the first genuine supply event of the cycle, arriving while the stabilisation floor is still active beneath it.

Tuesday 7 July: the third and largest wave

Nasdaq’s fast entry rules admit SpaceX to the Nasdaq 100 around fifteen trading days after listing, and funds tracking the index, led by QQQ with roughly half a trillion dollars in assets against more than US$1.4 trillion of total tracking money, must complete their purchases in a single day while simultaneously trimming every existing constituent to make room. Our model treats this as the most certain and largest single day inflow of the cycle, on the order of US$70 billion at the upper end. It is the third and final forced buying wave.

Sunday 12 July: the floor disappears

The most dangerous date in the listing cycle, and it is not day one. On day one there was a floor, orderly allocation and engineered scarcity. Around 12 July the thirty day stabilisation window lapses and the US$135 floor disappears, at the same moment the largest retail lockup expires. Two pressures that have been artificially separated hit simultaneously, with Monday 13 July the first session traded without the net. The model’s read is simple: the most complex risk of the whole sequence concentrates here, and unlike most market risk, it has been visible on the calendar for months.

August and beyond: the long tail

Beyond July the supply calendar is deliberately staggered. Employee and legacy xAI and Twitter shareholder lockups expire in tranches from August through October, five tranches of roughly seven percent each, with a further 28 percent releasing after third quarter earnings, a design plainly intended to meter the supply so that no single date repeats the July concentration. Elon Musk himself becomes eligible to sell in June 2027, a year after listing, holding roughly 42 percent of the company. The S&P 500 question sits on a similar horizon: S&P Dow Jones confirmed on 4 June that it is retaining its twelve month seasoning rule and its profitability requirement, which demands four consecutive quarters of aggregate profit with the most recent quarter positive. With a first quarter net loss of US$4.3 billion and a cumulative deficit of US$41.3 billion, SpaceX does not get near that test yet, so the deepest pool of mandated buying in the world remains out of reach until mid 2027 at the very earliest.

Three takeaways

First, between 12 and 17 June the structure favours sellers into strength. This is not a judgement about SpaceX’s fundamentals; it is an observation about plumbing. With roughly US$175 billion of subscription capital awaiting refund and a carry trade obliged to sell dollar assets into every bounce, rallies in this window lack the buyers needed to sustain them, and strength is more likely to be supplied into than followed. The market should grind with downward pressure and some floor support rather than move cleanly in either direction.

Second, 18 June is the hinge. Before it, every rally faces two simultaneous sources of supply. After it, provided the Federal Reserve holds and stays neutral, both constraints lift at once, just as the first wave of mandated index buying arrives at the close and the quarterly expiration clears the decks. The compression of the Fed reaction, the index deadline and the expiration into a single session, courtesy of the Juneteenth holiday, makes the pivot sharper than the folk calendar suggests.

Third, the riskiest day of the listing cycle falls around 12 July, not on day one. The debut is protected by a US$11.2 billion stabilisation bid, engineered scarcity and orderly allocation. On 12 July the floor lapses and the largest retail unlock lands at the same time, removing the protection and adding the supply in a single stroke. Day one risk is loud and visible. July’s risk is quiet, structural, and already written on the calendar.

Conclusion: What could break the script

Every timeline of this kind embeds assumptions, and honesty requires naming them. The Fed is the largest: a hawkish shift in bias on 17 June postpones or cancels the release of sidelined capital, and the entire back half of the sequence with it. Iran is the second: the peace agreement President Trump flagged for this weekend is the reason oil, yields and gold all softened on Friday, and a collapse of those talks would reload the energy shock and harden the Fed at the worst possible moment. The index mechanics carry their own caveat, because CRSP’s fast entry rule has never been applied to a live IPO and its committee retains discretion to defer, which would delay the first buying wave on which the 18 June thesis leans. The true size of the carry trade is unknowable in advance, with credible estimates spanning from about US$261 billion to several trillion at the 2024 peak, so the 16 June shock could underwhelm or overwhelm. And the stabilisation floor is capacity, not law: a sufficiently heavy test can exhaust US$11.2 billion before 12 July arrives. The dates in this timeline are firm because the rules behind them are written down. The magnitudes are estimates, and we will mark them to market as the prints arrive.

We therefore encourage you not to miss our next weekly update. For everything you need to stay informed, visit us at lumixtraders.com.au.

Disclaimer: The content published by Lumix Traders Pty Ltd (ABN 35 678 305 738) is intended for educational and informational purposes only. It discusses general market activity, macroeconomic conditions, industry trends, and related commentary and should not be construed as financial product advice, investment advice, or a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any financial product or security. Lumix Traders Pty Ltd is not licensed to provide financial product advice. We do not hold an Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL) under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Nothing contained in this material constitutes financial advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Readers are strongly urged to consult with a licensed and qualified financial adviser before making any investment or financial decision.

The views and opinions expressed in this material are current as of the date of publication and are subject to change without notice. Lumix Traders Pty Ltd has no obligation to update or revise any information following publication. Economic and market commentary presented herein reflects a series of assumptions and judgments as of the date of publication. Actual outcomes will vary. Forecasts and analysis are subject to significant uncertainty and should be viewed as one of a broad range of possible outcomes, not as predictive statements of fact.

Past performance is not indicative of future results. The value of financial assets can go down as well as up. Capital is at risk. This material is not intended for distribution to, or use by, any person in any jurisdiction where such distribution or use would be contrary to applicable law or regulation.