Fed decisions (Sep–Dec)
A Fed hike-pause-hike sequence over the next three meetings looks extremely unlikely. The market’s 7% Yes price is already close to the upper end of a plausible estimate, and I would still lean below that because the Fed usually needs a clear inflation reacceleration to deliver even one hike, let alone two with only a single pause in between.
Analysis
The question asks for a very specific three-meeting pattern: a hike in September, a pause in October, and another hike in December. That is a structurally difficult outcome because it requires the Fed to not only begin tightening again, but to do so in a stop-start sequence over just three meetings. In practice, the FOMC tends to move in more sustained arcs, especially when changing direction. When the committee is confident enough to hike, it usually prefers to continue or to pause for several meetings before reconsidering, rather than alternate quickly between action and inaction. That makes the exact hike-pause-hike path much less likely than a simple pause, a cut, or a one-time hike followed by further pauses.
The macro backdrop implied by this timing is also important. For the Fed to hike in September and then again in December, the data would likely need to show persistent or worsening inflation pressure, strong enough labor-market tightness, and growth resilient enough to remove downside concern. Even then, the October pause would need to reflect a deliberate choice to wait for more confirmation rather than a shift in the underlying outlook. That is a narrow path. In a more typical environment, if inflation were reaccelerating sharply, the Fed would be more likely to keep tightening in consecutive meetings or at least maintain a hawkish bias without a pause. If conditions are softer, the Fed would be more likely to hold or cut, which directly undermines the Yes case.
The current market price of 7% suggests traders see only a small but nonzero chance of this exact sequence, which is sensible for a tail event. The main argument for Yes is that the Fed can surprise in response to sticky inflation, especially if growth and financial conditions remain firm enough to justify a renewed tightening cycle. The main argument against Yes is that the Fed has many easier alternatives than this precise pattern: it can pause throughout, hike once and reassess later, or move toward cuts if inflation improves or the labor market weakens. Because this market requires a very specific three-step path rather than just a general hawkish stance, the probability should stay quite low even if policy risks tilt a bit more hawkish than neutral.
Arguments
For
- Arguments for Yes: Sticky inflation and resilient economic activity could push the Fed back into tightening mode by September.
- Arguments for Yes: A brief pause in October could occur if the Fed wants to gather more data before confirming that a December hike is necessary.
Against
- Arguments against Yes: The Fed is far more likely to keep rates unchanged, or eventually cut, than to engineer a hike-pause-hike sequence.
- Arguments against Yes: Two hikes in three meetings would require a strong and unusual inflation reacceleration that is not the base case for most policy paths.
Key drivers
- A renewed inflation surge would be the clearest catalyst for a September hike and a December follow-up.
- The Fed would need confidence that growth and labor-market strength can absorb a restart of tightening without triggering a sharper slowdown.
- The October pause creates an awkward policy pattern that is less common than consecutive hikes or a longer hold period.
Risk factors
- If inflation cools further or labor demand softens, the Fed is more likely to pause or cut than to hike twice.
- If the committee chooses to restart hikes, it may prefer a more continuous sequence rather than alternating action and inaction.
- Unexpected financial instability or weaker activity data could quickly rule out any hike in one or more of the meetings.
Scenarios
Best case
Inflation and demand reaccelerate meaningfully, the Fed hikes in September, pauses in October to validate the trend, and hikes again in December as part of a renewed tightening cycle.
Most likely
The Fed does not follow the hike-pause-hike pattern, with the likeliest alternatives being consecutive pauses, a single hike at most, or a shift toward easing if the data soften.
Worst case
The Fed holds steady throughout the period or moves toward cuts, making the exact hike-pause-hike path impossible.
More from this day
- CompaniesKalshi1y
Starbucks total global stores in 2026
AI66%MKT11%Edge+55Hidden GemI think Starbucks is materially more likely than not to report more than 41,800 global stores in 2026. The market appears to be pricing in a slowdown that is possible, but the threshold is low enough relative to Starbucks’ historical footprint growth that Yes should be favored.
- PoliticsKalshi2y
Which agencies will Trump eliminate?
AI78%MKT26%Edge+52Hidden GemI think Yes is substantially more likely than the market implies, because multiple reports indicate USAID has already been dismantled in practice. The main uncertainty is whether the market resolves on formal legal abolition or on operational elimination, but the balance of evidence still favors Yes.
- PoliticsKalshi2y
Who will Trump pardon?
AI12%MKT50%Edge-38HypedMy independent estimate is that Barron Trump is unlikely to receive a presidential pardon by Jan. 21, 2029. A pardon would require either an actual prosecutorial risk or an extraordinary political/ family circumstance, both of which look uncommon for someone with no public indication of legal jeopardy.