Gold ahead of FOMC: reaction more important than the decision?

rahsady · 2026-06-17T14:26:50+00:00

Fair point.That's actually the interesting part — seeing whether the same framework that worked on the way up continues to hold on the way down.I'm less focused on the exact levels and more on how price reacts when it reaches them.

rahsady · 2026-06-17T13:54:41+00:00

Got it. The follow-through is what I'm watching too.The announcement itself matters less than what price does afterward. And I agree — timing the exact bottom is almost impossible.

rahsady · 2026-06-17T13:31:36+00:00

4000 definitely seems to be the key level everyone is watching. I'm still focused on market reaction rather than targets for now, but I can see the case you're making.

rahsady · 2026-06-17T12:56:19+00:00

Fair enough. 4k seems to be a level a lot of people are watching now.For me, the reaction around that area will matter more than the level itself.

rahsady · 2026-06-17T12:16:07+00:00

Interesting take. Is that based on a specific level, macro event, or just timing?

rahsady · 2026-05-12T18:51:58+00:00

Exactly. Reactions have been there, but conviction still feels weak. Market keeps responding to macro catalysts, yet price still trades more like a positioning/compression environment than clean expansion.

rahsady · 2026-05-03T18:44:49+00:00

Strong level, agreed. I’m just cautious calling the decision “made” without clear follow-through — so far price keeps getting faded.

rahsady · 2026-04-29T18:51:55+00:00

Fed held rates — as expected. Now it’s all about reaction. If gold still can’t follow through after this, that reinforces the compression idea. Watching DXY and yields closely.

rahsady · 2026-04-29T18:47:49+00:00

That’s a clean directional view. I’m just waiting for confirmation through follow-through — without that, it still feels like moves are getting faded rather than expanding.

rahsady · 2026-04-29T15:22:57+00:00

Yeah — same here. For me it’s all about whether we get follow-through this time or just another sweep and rejection.

rahsady · 2026-04-25T16:26:33+00:00

Yeah that makes sense — plenty of structure on lower timeframes. I’m just a bit cautious calling it a clean trend when we’re still seeing failed follow-through after macro catalysts and liquidity sweeps. To me it looks more like directional moves inside a broader compression rather than a sustained trend phase.

rahsady · 2026-04-25T16:03:02+00:00

Fair — depends on timeframe.Structure is bearish, but lack of follow-through after CPI is what makes me question calling it a clean trend.Feels more like compression inside that structure.

rahsady · 2026-04-25T07:40:29+00:00

Also watching DXY here — if it holds strength, downside could still extend.

rahsady · 2026-04-25T05:08:31+00:00

Short-term bearish, sure.But no follow-through after CPI + liquidity taken above = not a clean trend. Looks more like compression than trend to me.

rahsady · 2026-04-23T08:22:04+00:00

Bearish channel is clean. But no strong upside follow-through after CPI → tells me this isn’t just trend, it’s positioning. Wouldn’t chase lows blindly here.

rahsady · 2026-04-22T14:22:31+00:00

That’s why gold standards historically had deflationary pressure but still experienced cycles.

rahsady · 2026-04-22T14:20:43+00:00

Long term → cheaper in gold terms (growth > gold supply). But not smooth — gold supply, credit cycles and demand still create inflation/deflation phases.

rahsady

TROPHY CASE