Use This Visualization Charted: How China Reshaped Global Oil Trade See visuals like this from many other data creators on our Voronoi app. Download it for free on iOS or Android and discover incredible data-driven charts from a variety of trusted sources. Key Takeaways China is now the world’s largest crude oil importer, with net imports reaching 11.5 million barrels per day in 2025. North America has transformed from a major importer into a net exporter following the U.S. shale boom. Despite shifting demand toward Asia, the Middle East remains the world’s largest crude oil exporting region. Over the past three decades, the geography of global crude oil trade has been fundamentally reshaped. Rapid economic growth across Asia fueled a surge in oil demand, while advances in North American production altered long-established trade flows. This visualization tracks net crude oil imports and exports by region from 1990 to 2025, using data from OPEC, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), and the UN Comtrade Database. Asia Has Become the Center of Global Oil Demand China experienced the largest change of any region in the dataset. After importing almost no crude oil in the early 1990s, China’s net imports climbed to 11.5 million barrels per day in 2025, making it the world’s largest importer. YearEurope (Oil Imports, Mb/d) ChinaIndiaS. KoreaJapanRest of Asia Pacific 19908.8—0.40.84.00.8 19918.4—0.51.14.10.6 19928.4—0.61.44.30.9 19938.3—0.61.54.31.1 19947.8—0.61.64.61.2 19957.6—0.61.74.61.5 19967.70.00.72.04.51.9 19977.80.30.72.44.62.0 19988.50.20.82.34.31.9 19997.60.61.22.44.21.7 20007.61.21.52.54.31.8 20017.81.11.62.44.21.9 20027.71.21.72.24.12.0 20038.41.71.82.24.21.9 20049.12.41.92.34.02.2 20059.62.41.92.44.22.6 20069.72.82.22.54.12.6 20079.73.22.42.44.02.7 200810.23.52.62.34.02.5 20099.04.02.62.33.42.3 20109.34.72.82.43.52.6 20119.35.03.42.53.52.8 20129.65.43.72.63.53.2 20139.25.63.82.53.43.1 20149.16.23.82.53.23.1 20159.86.73.92.83.22.9 20169.57.64.32.93.23.0 2017108.34.33.03.23.2 20189.79.24.53.03.13.3 20199.810.24.52.93.03.3 20208.110.84.02.72.52.8 20218.310.24.22.62.52.9 20229.210.14.62.82.73.4 20238.911.34.72.72.53.5 20248.911.04.82.82.33.5 20258.711.55.02.82.43.7 India also saw rapid growth, with imports rising from 0.8 to 5.0 million barrels per day over the same period. Together, China and India have become the primary drivers of global crude oil demand growth. North America’s Energy Revolution In the early 1990s, North America was a significant net importer of crude oil. By 2019, however, the region had become a net exporter, reaching 2.5 million barrels per day by 2025. YearMiddle East (Oil Exports - Mb/d)CISAfricaSouth & Central AmericaNorth America 199011.62.13.80.2— 199112.21.44.10.4— 199213.01.64.00.4— 199313.61.73.90.6— 199413.52.04.00.8— 199513.52.04.11.2— 199613.42.24.31.3— 199714.12.44.41.5— 199815.22.64.71.6— 199914.72.84.31.4— 200015.63.34.61.5— 200114.73.44.51.5— 200213.44.04.61.1— 200314.14.65.21.0— 200415.95.25.91.0— 200516.55.65.91.8— 200616.45.85.91.3— 200716.26.16.51.5— 200817.06.35.81.4— 200914.96.46.51.4— 201015.66.56.71.8— 201117.46.25.62.0— 201217.76.26.42.3— 201317.16.15.92.0— 201416.46.05.12.7— 201516.66.45.33.0— 201618.96.64.93.0— 201718.36.75.33.0— 201818.56.95.52.6— 201917.16.95.52.50.4 202015.86.24.42.41.6 202115.56.04.92.01.4 202217.76.34.52.21.8 202316.66.24.72.72.4 202415.76.14.63.12.2 202516.36.24.63.72.5 The shift was largely driven by the U.S. shale revolution, which increased domestic oil production. Combined with growing exports from Canada, North America has become an increasingly important supplier to global markets. The Middle East Remains the World’s Export Hub Even as oil demand has shifted toward Asia, the Middle East remains the dominant crude oil exporting region. Net exports stood at 16.3 million barrels per day in 2025, far exceeding those of the CIS and Africa. Learn More on the Voronoi App If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Charted: The World’s Biggest Oil Producers on Voronoi.

Prediction markets crossed another milestone in June, surpassing $50 billion in monthly trading volume for the first time. The same week, European regulators initiated a new coordinated response to the sector, DraftKings completed the launch of its own exchange, and Cboe proposed bringing prediction-style contracts into the U.S. securities market. Europe Starts Closing Ranks on Prediction Markets European regulators are taking a closer look at the prediction markets. Gambling regulators from nine countries, including Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, and Belgium, issued a joint warning ahead of the World Cup, promising closer cooperation and enforcement against platforms that operate without local authorisation. They also urged sports leagues and clubs to verify the legal status of prediction market operators before signing commercial partnerships. At the same time, the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) reminded firms that many event contracts may already fall under the EU’s long-standing restrictions on binary options. The regulator said that simply calling a product an “event contract” does not change how it should be classified under MiFID II. Taken together, the statements suggest Europe is moving toward a more coordinated regulatory approach. Gambling regulators are focusing on licensing and consumer protection, while securities regulators are examining whether some prediction market products already fit within existing financial rules. DraftKings Bets on Its Own Exchange DraftKings has completed the launch of DKeX, its in-house prediction market exchange built around the Railbird platform it acquired last year. The company spent eight months developing the venue before moving its event contracts off third-party infrastructure. By operating its own exchange, DraftKings can keep trading, matching, and clearing within the same ecosystem rather than relying on external providers. The move follows similar decisions by Robinhood and Coinbase, both of which have also brought key pieces of exchange infrastructure in-house as their prediction market businesses expanded. Owning exchange infrastructure turns into a competitive advantage in prediction markets, allowing firms to capture more of the economics behind every trade instead of sharing them with third-party venues.Cboe Wants to Turn Company Metrics Into Tradable Events Cboe is seeking SEC approval to list binary options tied to corporate performance metrics, expanding prediction-style trading beyond macroeconomic data and market indexes. The proposal covers more than 100 metrics across 23 companies, including Nvidia data centre revenue, Apple iPhone shipments, and SpaceX revenue. Rather than trading how a stock reacts to earnings, investors would trade whether a specific business metric reaches a predefined threshold. Unlike prediction markets operated by Kalshi under CFTC rules, Cboe’s contracts would be listed as securities options, cleared by the Options Clearing Corporation, and distributed through the existing brokerage ecosystem. The proposal suggests that prediction-style products are moving beyond event contracts into traditional capital markets, where company fundamentals themselves could become tradable binary outcomes. Number of the Week Prediction markets surpassed $50 billion in monthly trading volumefor the first time in June, according to Artemis data. Volume rose 75% from May, helped by World Cup-driven activity. Kalshi remained the largest venue with roughly $33 billion in monthly volume, followed by Polymarket at $14 billion and Rothera at about $2 billion.Meanwhile, around 70% of all closed Polymarket markets have generated less than $10,000 in trading volume, according to CNBC’s analysis of the platform’s Gamma API.Most prediction market contracts have low volume, leaving users exposed to volatility and bots https://t.co/eoLTAsNwQs— CNBC (@CNBC) July 2, 2026The finding illustrates an important characteristic of prediction markets: record platform-wide volume is concentrated in a relatively small number of high-profile events, while most individual markets remain thinly traded.Bottom Line June’s record trading volume was driven in large part by the World Cup. The next test is whether prediction markets can sustain that level of activity once the tournament ends. The other question is which framework absorbs the product. Cboe is asking the SEC to approve prediction-style contracts as securities options, ESMA says many event contracts already fall under MiFID II, and gambling regulators are asserting licensing authority ahead of the World Cup. The SEC's response to Cboe's filing will be the first concrete signal. This article was written by Tanya Chepkova at www.financemagnates.com.

In the summer of 2012, with bond markets pricing in a chance of a euro breakup, Mario Draghi pledged to do “whatever it takes” to preserve the currency union. It worked: spreads fell, though the programme behind the pledge, Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT), was never used. Despite having no formal relationship with national fiscal authorities, the central bank stepped in because markets had doubts about some governments’ solvency, and this threatened the monetary union’s existence. We are familiar with Sargent and Wallace’s “unpleasant monetarist arithmetic,” and Leeper’s  “active/passive” monetary/fiscal, where fiscal authorities prioritise debt sustainability and monetary authorities price stability. However, the original theory did not anticipate the euro area: one monetary policy with twenty-one fiscal policies. The missing piece is not so much coordination, as it is clear mandates, communicated well.   Price stability is not negotiable, but it requires credible fiscal commitment to debt stabilisation.“Whatever it takes” showed what happens when that fiscal commitment looks fragile. Barred by treaty, the ECB was never going to fund a deficit directly. Instead OMT was designed to make it irrational for markets to bet on a eurozone government losing access to funding. We saw fragmentation risk twice more, during the pandemic – leading to the pandemic emergency purchase programme (PEPP) – and when rates rose rapidly during 2022 – leading to the Transmission Protection Instrument (TPI). None of these instruments finance a deficit in the sense of Sargent and Wallace. They are a softer version of the problem: sovereign market disruptions reshape what the central bank must do to keep monetary policy working across the monetary union.The EU has tackled the problem through a rules-based approach. The 2024 reform of the Stability and Growth Pact aimed to achieve credible national fiscal commitments. With Excessive Deficit Procedures in place for several Member States, the litmus test will be whether country-specific consolidation paths can be achieved. Inevitably, the opposite version of this problem gets less attention, because it looks like good news rather than a crisis. When a Member State is running a surplus – which may or may not be built on solid foundations – it may feel relatively unconstrained in its spending plans.  Such a scenario has obvious implications for price stability, particularly if the economy has little slack. I say all of this as someone who has sat on both sides of this relationship: from 2011 to 2019 I ran the New Zealand Treasury and I now sit on the ECB's Governing Council. What looks like a coordination problem from the outside looks quite different from within each institution. New Zealand operated “consensus assignment,” where monetary policy took the primary stabilisation role and fiscal policy focused on sustainability and building buffers. This was not formally coordinated. Each institution was clear about its own role,  avoided working at cross-purposes, and was independent enough not to be called upon to do the other’s job. It was held together by clarity of mandate and institutional memory of what happens when that clarity breaks down.In a speech just over 8 years ago, reflecting on lessons from the Global Financial Crisis, I wondered whether “better coordination of fiscal, monetary and financial stability policy [would] help lift the economy’s performance over the cycle as well as help lift the economy’s sustainable growth rate”.  Eight years on, a clear answer is that coordination is not always bad. For large shocks, some alignment of fiscal and monetary policy is appropriate. I saw this from the fiscal side when the Christchurch earthquake struck in February 2011, which was followed by a large fiscal mobilisation with comparatively little monetary policy response. During the pandemic, I watched the same dynamic from the other side of the table, as both fiscal and monetary policy moved in the same direction. So, crisis-alignment can be the right call, depending on circumstances. But the lesson is that this type of coordination must not become a standing expectation of fiscal support, thereby undermining central bank credibility and its ability to meet its price stability mandate.Credibility must be actively maintained. I am not just talking about achieving the mandate, but also clearly communicating your actions and the reasons for them. Central banks have spent three decades building public understanding of why price stability matters, through transparent frameworks, plain language, and consistent accountability. Fiscal authorities need the same discipline. The challenge is that the costs of undisciplined public finances are diffuse and delayed, while the benefits of spending are immediate and visible. Making the case for fiscal rules to the citizens who determine whether governments hold to them is itself part of what credibility means. Commitment that lacks public legitimacy will not long survive contact with a political cycle, however firmly it is written into law.To conclude, coordination in the sense of a standing, negotiated division of roles is not credible in the euro area. For large shocks, some alignment is desirable, but grounded in each institution’s mandate, not according to some moveable boundary agreed in advance. The rest of the time, the euro needs twenty-one fiscal authorities that can stick to credible commitments through good times and bad. In this way, the ECB will never have to choose between its mandate and other goals.  Of course, a centralised fiscal capacity – underpinned by a single safe asset – would help but that’s another topic altogether.

This week, we tracked more than 55 tech funding deals worth over €1.6 billion and over 10 exits, M&A transactions, rumours, and related news stories across Europe. If email is more your thing, you can always subscribe to our newsletter and receive a more robust version of this round-up delivered to your inbox. We also released our monthly report for June — now available FREE to all Tech.eu readers — covering the biggest fundraises, standout deals, and evolving tech trends. Either way, let's get you up to speed. ? Notable and big funding rounds ?? Quantum Systems raises $1.2B at $8B valuation ?? With 3,500+ agricultural SMEs financed, InSoil lands €120M to expand regenerative agriculture lending ?? Openchip lands €115M SETT investment to strengthen Europe’s semiconductor capabilities ??‍?? Noteworthy acquisitions and mergers ?? Saltroad acquires AI platform Ogma to scale speech therapy for children ?? DATADOG acquires ADAPTIVE ML to strengthen its AI lab ?? The Exploration Company acquires European Astrotech ?? Ipsen to acquire Memo Therapeutics for up to €700M ?? Openchip lands €115M SETT investment to strengthen Europe’s semiconductor capabilities ? Interesting moves from investors ? Omnea launches fund with Firedrop to back employees as future founders ?  P101 expands into seed investing with PranaVentures integration and €100M fund ?  Nothing-backer Tapestry VC raises $80M fund, opens London office ? Common Path launches to connect low-income graduates with UK startups ?? More deals, smaller rounds: European startup funding in June 2026

Pepperstone confirmed on Friday the appointment of Reed Sayer as its new Head of UK. Sayer joins from XTB, where he spent more than ten years building his career, most recently holding the position of Head of UK Sales. Over the course of his decade-plus tenure in financial services, he is said to have developed in-depth expertise in online trading and financial markets and is well regarded for his client-focused approach and commercial understanding. In his new position, Sayer will lead the UK arm’s growth agenda, oversee client relationships, and advance the company’s expansion plans in the domestic market. “This is a really exciting moment for Pepperstone’s UK business, and I’m thrilled to be part of it. There’s a brilliant team here, and I can’t wait to bring my experience to the table and help take things to the next level,” commented Sayer. Marc Boever, who leads Pepperstone’s operations across EMEA, welcomed the appointment, pointing to Sayer’s proven commercial track record and established reputation within UK trading circles as key assets for the business going forward. The timing of the hire is notable, arriving shortly after Pepperstone’s UK division earned top honors across several categories in the Investment Trends Leveraged Trading Report 2026, including first-place rankings for value for money and spreads. The appointment also follows a strong financial year for the UK unit, which saw profit before tax nearly double.The post Pepperstone Names Reed Sayer as New Head of UK first appeared on LeapRate | Online Trading Industry News, Broker Intelligence & Fintech Analysis.

CloneFraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm. Almost all firms and individuals must be authorised or registered by us to carry out or promote financial services in the UK. This firm is not authorised by us but has been contacting people pretending to be an authorised firm. We call this a clone firm. Search our Warning List for other unauthorised and clone firms we're aware of. Clone firm details Fraudsters are using the following details to scam people: Name: Blackswan Trading/blackswan-trading.com (clone of FCA registered firm) Email: support@blackswan-trading.com Website: https://blackswan-trading.com Scammers may give out other false details, including email addresses, telephone numbers, postal addresses and Firm Reference Numbers. They may mix these details with the genuine details of authorised firms. They may also change their contact details over time. FCA authorised firm details This is the genuine, authorised firm that the fraudsters are claiming to work for. It has no connection with the clone firm. The correct details are: Firm Name: Black Swan Financial Services Ltd Firm Reference Number: 651982 Address: Bramble Lodge The Green Horns Drove Rownhams Southampton Hampshire, SO16 8AJ, UNITED KINGDOM Telephone: +4407944107341 What this means for you If you deal with this firm, you won't have access to the Financial Ombudsman Service if you want to complain. You also won't be protected by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) if things go wrong. This means it's unlikely you'd get your money back if the firm goes out of business. If you sent money to a fraudster on or after 7 October 2024, you may be covered by protections introduced by the Payment Systems Regulator (PSR). Find out what to do if you've been tricked into making a payment to a scam account. How to protect yourself You should only deal with financial firms that are authorised by us. If a financial firm is authorised by us, it gives you greater protection if things go wrong. You can use the FCA Firm Checker to make sure a financial firm is authorised by us and has our permission to provide the services you're looking for. You'll also be able to find: information on how you're protected contact details for authorised firms If you're contacted unexpectedly by a financial business, make sure you reply using the contact details on the Firm Checker. Find out more about how to protect yourself from scams. Report a clone firm If you think you've been approached by an unauthorised or clone firm, call us on 0800 111 6768, or use our contact form.

Italy’s Companies and Exchange Commission (CONSOB) today announced that it has ordered the blocking of access to six unauthorized investment websites. The post Italy’s CONSOB orders blocking of access to six unauthorized websites appeared first on FX News Group.

UnauthorizedThis firm may be providing or promoting financial services or products without our permission. You should avoid dealing with this firm and beware of scams. Almost all firms and individuals must be authorised or registered by us to carry out or promote financial services in the UK. This firm is not authorised by us and may be targeting people in the UK. Search our Warning List for other unauthorised firms and individuals we're aware of. Unauthorised firm details Name: Genisis Arbit / genesis-arbit.com Address: Dawson house, 5 jewry st, London, UNITED KINGDOM, EC3N 2EX Telephone: +31631335306 Mobile: +447441421928 Email: support@genesisarbit.capital Website: http://genesis-arbit.com/, http://genesisarbit.top/, genesisarbit.expert, genesisarbit.one Some firms may give incorrect contact details including postal addresses, telephone numbers and email addresses. They may change these contact details over time. They may also give you details that belong to another business or individual, so the information looks genuine. What this means for you If you deal with this firm, you won't have access to the Financial Ombudsman Service if you want to complain. You also won't be protected by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) if things go wrong. This means it's unlikely you'd get your money back if the firm goes out of business. If you sent money to a fraudster on or after 7 October 2024, you may be covered by protections introduced by the Payment Systems Regulator (PSR). Find out what to do if you've been tricked into making a payment to a scam account. How to protect yourself You should only deal with financial firms that are authorised by us. If a financial firm is authorised by us, it gives you greater protection if things go wrong. You can use the FCA Firm Checker to make sure a financial firm is authorised by us and has our permission to provide the services you're looking for. You'll also be able to find: information on how you're protected contact details for authorised firms If you're contacted unexpectedly by a financial business, make sure you reply using the contact details on the Firm Checker. Find out more about how to protect yourself from scams. Report an unauthorised firm If you think you've been approached by an unauthorised firm, call us on 0800 111 6768, or use our contact form.

Fraud and AML in Asia have shifted over the past year. Alongside the system-level attacks that continue, panellists point to a growing move towards human compromise, scams that target the customer’s judgement rather than the bank’s defences. This LexisNexis Risk Ready 2026 panel, hosted by Vincent Fong of Fintech News Network, works through that shift from four angles, security, compliance, customer experience and payments, and asks what financial institutions should actually do about it. The conversation moves from how scams have become more personalised and harder to detect, to the awkward questions underneath them: who should be liable when a customer authorises their own loss, why awareness training only goes so far, and what happens to fraud defences when an AI agent, not a person, is the one authorising the payment. It closes on the threat most banks are not yet planning for, the day post-quantum computing breaks the encryption protecting today’s data. Speakers: Irfan Amer, CISO, AEON Bank Dr Mohanamerry Vedamanikam, Chief Compliance Officer, Boost Bank Lolitta Suffian, SVP, Customer Experience, Bank Simpanan Nasional (BSN) Edward Metzger, Vice President, Market Planning for Payments Efficiency and Platforms, LexisNexis Risk Solutions Vincent Fong, Chief Editor, Asia, Fintech News Network In this episode: How fraud is shifting towards human compromise, and why authorised scams are harder to stop than unauthorised fraud The UK approach to making banks liable for scam losses, and the debate over shared responsibility across telcos and digital platforms Doctoral research into why university students and aware consumers still fall for money mule recruitment and scams A Bank Simpanan Nasional case showing the role of human intervention when a customer authorises a payment to a scam account What agentic commerce means for fraud, when an AI agent rather than a person is authorising the transaction The post-quantum risk to encryption, and the harvest now, decrypt later threat facing biometric and personal data The post Fraud & AML in Asia: What Banks Need to Know in 2026 appeared first on Fintech Singapore.

Visa has announced the launch of live AI-driven commerce transactions across Europe, allowing AI agents to initiate purchases on behalf of cardholders. The transactions were unveiled at the Visa Payments Forum in Paris and involved more than 30 European financial institutions, including Swiss issuers Cornèrcard, Swisscard and Viseca. The system relies on the Visa Intelligent Commerce platform to connect financial institutions, merchants and AI networks. Operating within strict parameters defined by the user, AI agents can search merchant websites, select items and stage transactions for checkout. Consumers retain full control over their funds by authorising each payment before completion. Verifying trusted agents Merchants participate in the system through the Trusted Agent Protocol and the Agent Directory. These tools allow retailers to identify verified AI agents and distinguish them from unverified traffic or malicious bots. This framework enables merchants to control how agents access their sites. It also governs how products are displayed and how transactions are prepared, without requiring entirely new infrastructure. Cloudflare and Akamai support the implementation, which integrates with existing e-commerce protocols. Passkey authentication for compliance Financial institutions process these AI-initiated payments using Visa Payment Passkeys. The system uses secure authentication credentials tied to the user to confirm identity. It also ensures compliance with European Strong Customer Authentication (SCA) requirements. Santosh Ritter “We are now seeing how AI agents can make purchases directly from real merchants on behalf of people. The next step will be to roll this out on a large scale,” Santosh Ritter, Country Manager of Visa Switzerland and Liechtenstein, said.       Featured image credit: Edited by Fintech News Switzerland, based on image by ismode via Magnific The post Visa Brings Live AI-Agent Payments to Europe in Real Merchant Trials appeared first on Fintech Schweiz Digital Finance News - FintechNewsCH.

ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AND MARKETS AUTHORITY, PUBLISHED IN APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 78 OF THE LAW OF 21 NOVEMBER 2017Trading in the financial instruments of MAZARO, ISIN BE0974404361, on Euronext Brussels is suspended on the request of the company from 03/07/2026 at 11:30 CET until the publication of a press release.

Why Most Traders Fail Prop Firm Challenges (And How to Be Different) I’ve passed six prop firm challenges in the last two years trading MNQ and forex pairs. I’ve also failed three spectacularly—one in just four days. The difference between passing and failing had nothing to do with my trading skill. It came down to understanding one critical truth: prop firm challenges are not about proving you’re a great trader. They’re about proving you won’t blow up their capital. Most traders approach evaluations like they’re trying to impress someone. They overtrade, chase setups, and treat the profit target like a finish line they need to sprint toward. That’s exactly how you fail. After studying what actually works—and teaching dozens of students through their own challenges—I’ve developed a prop firm challenge strategy that prioritizes survival, consistency, and psychological control. Here’s exactly how it works. The Core Principle: Treat the Drawdown Like It’s Half the Size Most challenges give you a 10% drawdown limit with a 8-10% profit target. Mathematically, you have plenty of room. Psychologically, that’s a trap. Here’s my first rule: If your max drawdown is 10%, treat it like it’s 5%. Why? Because the moment you’re down 7-8%, your mental game is cooked. You start trading emotionally. You make exceptions to your rules. You convince yourself “just one more trade” will fix everything. That’s how revenge trading destroys challenges. By creating a psychological buffer, you maintain the same calm mindset you had on day one—even when you hit a losing streak. And you will hit losing streaks. The question is whether you’ll survive them. Position Sizing: Start Smaller Than You Think You Should When I start a challenge, I calculate my position size based on risking 0.5-0.75% per trade, even though I could technically risk more. For MNQ scalping, that might mean trading just 1-2 contracts on a $50K account. For forex, that’s 0.5 lots maximum on most pairs. It feels tiny. That’s the point. Here’s why this works: Smaller positions = clearer thinking. You’re not sweating every tick. You can survive 6-8 losers in a row without approaching your psychological drawdown limit. It forces you to focus on quality setups instead of trying to force profits with size. Once I’m up 3-4% in the challenge, I’ll scale to 1% risk per trade. But never before. This conservative approach has helped me pass challenges in 8-12 trading days consistently, without the white-knuckle stress most traders experience. Strategy Selection: Trade What You Know, Not What’s “Hot” The worst thing you can do in a prop challenge is experiment with new strategies or instruments you’ve barely tested. I stick to what I know cold: order flow trading on MNQ and supply/demand setups on forex majors. That’s it. Your prop firm challenge strategy should be built around: 1. High-Probability Setups You’ve Traded 100+ Times For me, that’s absorption at key supply and demand zones on MNQ, or London session reversals on EUR/USD. I know these patterns intimately. I understand the context where they work and where they fail. If you’re still “learning” a strategy, the challenge is not the time to trade it. 2. Clear Entry and Exit Rules No discretion. No “I think” entries. During a challenge, I follow my entry checklist religiously: Confluence with a fresh supply or demand zone Order flow confirmation (delta divergence or absorption) Favorable session timing (I avoid low-liquidity hours completely) Risk-reward minimum of 1:2 If all four aren’t present, I don’t trade. Period. 3. Session-Appropriate Trading I only trade during my “A+ hours”—the times when my strategies have the highest win rate. For MNQ, that’s typically the first 90 minutes after the NYSE open. For forex, it’s the London-New York overlap. Understanding the best time to trade prevents you from taking low-quality setups during choppy, low-volume periods that destroy challenge accounts. The Daily Routine That Keeps You Disciplined Passing a prop challenge isn’t about one great day. It’s about 10-15 consistent days where you don’t do anything stupid. Here’s my daily routine during challenges: Pre-Market Review yesterday’s trades—focus on process, not P&L Mark key supply/demand zones on my charts Check economic calendar for high-impact news Set mental limit: “I’ll take maximum 3 trades today” (prevents overtrading) During Trading Hours Wait for my A+ setups—no forcing trades Trade my plan exactly as written If I take 2 losses, I’m done for the day (hard rule) If I hit +2% for the day, I’m also done (protect profits) Post-Market Journal every trade with screenshots Grade my discipline, not my profits Identify any rule breaks and write why they happened This routine keeps me focused on process over outcome—which is exactly what proper risk management demands. The Psychological Game: How to Handle Drawdowns You will have losing days. The question is whether you’ll let them derail you. When I hit a drawdown during a challenge, I follow this protocol: Down 2-3%: No change. This is normal variance. Keep trading my plan. Down 4-5%: Take a one-day break. Review my last 10 trades for rule breaks. Adjust if I’m deviating from my strategy. Down 6%+: Full reset. Take 2-3 days off. Treat it like I’m starting fresh. Sometimes this means accepting I need to reset the challenge—and that’s fine. Better to reset than to blow the account trying to hero your way back. This systematic approach removes emotion from the equation. You’re just following a protocol, not making desperate decisions. Advanced Tip: Use Order Flow to Stack the Odds For MNQ scalpers, order flow gives you a massive edge during challenges because it helps you avoid false breakouts and choppy ranges that chew up capital. I watch for: Absorption at key levels—when large buy or sell orders get absorbed without price moving, it signals trapped traders and potential reversals Delta divergence—when price makes new highs but cumulative delta doesn’t confirm, it’s a warning sign of weak buyers Stacked imbalances—consecutive candles showing one-sided order flow in the direction of my supply/demand zone If you want to learn exactly how to use order flow for precise MNQ entries, I break down my entire approach in that guide. Common Mistakes That Kill Challenges (And How to Avoid Them) Mistake #1: Trading every day. You don’t get bonus points for participation. If there are no A+ setups, don’t trade. I’ve passed challenges taking only 15-20 total trades. Mistake Het bericht Prop Firm Challenge Strategy: How I Pass Evaluations Trading MNQ and Forex (Without Blowing Accounts) verscheen eerst op theforexscalpers.

A forex accountability group helps traders build discipline, review mistakes, and follow a plan with less emotion and more consistency.

3 July 2026 The International Capital Market Association (ICMA) yesterday submitted its response to the call for input on the shared vision set out by the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Bank of England (BoE) for tokenisation and the future of UK wholesale markets (the “Call for input”).ICMA’s consultation response builds on ICMA’s constructive and consistent engagement with HM Treasury (HMT), the FCA and the BoE since the early stages of Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA) 2023 and Financial Market Infrastructure (FMI) sandbox proposals, as underscored by our responses to previous consultations on the topic.Key points: Tokenisation is a key factor in efforts to modernise wholesale market infrastructure, improve operational efficiency and support resilience, competitiveness and access to capital across the wider economy, while reinforcing the UK’s position as a jurisdiction that enables responsible innovation in the future distributed ledger technology (DLT)-based wholesale markets. For these gains to materialise at scale clear regulatory frameworks, coordinated infrastructure development with a view towards interoperability and a sustained focus on practical use cases are necessary. ICMA members agree in principle with the vision, regulatory principles and shared ambitions set out in the paper and welcome the steps undertaken to date to allow the offering of tokenised securities products in or from the UK. However, for the vision set out in the paper to be achieved, some further adjustments are necessary, including the suggestions highlighted below. The acceleration of plans to allow the use of tokenised collateral for Central Counterparties and the Sterling Monetary Framework is essential to foster demand and increase the appetite for issuers to issue in the UK. ICMA members understand that interoperability remains as a point of critical importance and emphasise the relevance of enabling sufficient integration of legacy and tokenised systems beyond settlement infrastructure. We consider common standards critical to facilitate interoperability, both within the UK and on a cross-border basis, with ICMA’s Bond Data Taxonomy standing out as a key initiative. ICMA members recognise that the ongoing work on the Digital Securities Sandbox will assist in guiding the future UK regulatory regime for digital securities and would welcome further communication on its progress, along with greater use of collaborative public-private working groups as a great channel for further engagement of the market. ICMA’s detailed response can be found here.

The June employment report highlighted a widening divergence between payroll growth and household employment metrics. While the establishment survey pointed to a cooled hiring landscape, wage growth remained steady, and the underemployment rate improved slightly. Metric Consensus forecast Actual Prior month actual Change in non-farm payrolls 113k 57k 129k (revised) Unemployment rate 4.3% 4.2% 4.3% Average hourly earnings (MoM) 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% Average hourly earnings (YoY) 3.5% 3.5% 3.4% Labor force participation rate 61.8% 61.5% 61.8% Analysis of deviations The primary driver behind the headline payroll miss was a steep contraction in the leisure and hospitality sector, which shed 61,000 jobs during the month. Minor losses were also recorded in information (-9,000) and trade, transportation, and utilities (-4,000). On the positive side, education and health services led gains with 69,000 additions, followed by professional and business services with 36,000 and construction with 11,000. Manufacturing added a modest 3,000 jobs, matching expectations.While the payroll figure disappointed, the fall in the headline unemployment rate to 4.2% was supported by a drop in the underemployment rate from 8.1% to 7.9%. However, this decline occurred alongside a drop in the labor force participation rate to 61.5%, down from 61.8% previously, suggesting that some workers may have exited the labor force, dampening the labor supply pool.Comparison with alternative labor metrics The downshift in official payrolls contrasts with the ADP private payrolls data released a day earlier, which reported a more robust private sector addition of 98,000 jobs. Within ADP’s metrics, services accounted for 96,000 positions while goods-producing sectors added 2,000. Historically, short-term discrepancies between ADP and BLS prints are common. Still, both reports point to a general deceleration in aggregate labor demand relative to the prior year’s trends.Meanwhile, the latest JOLTS job openings report for May showed total vacancies at 7.594 million, continuing a gradual multi-month consolidation pattern. Leading sectors for openings included education and health services (1.539 million) and professional and business services (1.485 million), aligning with the areas showing relative resilience in the June establishment payroll survey.Learn directly from OANDA experts at live webinars.https://www.oanda.com/us-en/skills-and-insights/webinars/live-market-analysis/Macroeconomic and Federal Reserve implications This mixed report introduces complexity for the Federal Reserve’s upcoming policy path. The sharp slowdown in headline payroll additions and the substantial negative revisions to prior months imply that restrictive monetary policy is successfully cooling labor demand. Conversely, the reduction in the unemployment rate and steady wage pressures—with average hourly earnings expanding at 3.5% annually—suggest that the labor market is not in freefall.As a result, the data may strengthen the case for the Federal Reserve to consider a more accommodative stance or accelerate discussions around interest rate cuts later this year to preserve economic momentum, provided that core inflation figures continue to align with their long-term objectives.CME Fedwatch tool CME Fedwatch tool - FOMC meeting probabilities Source: https://www.cmegroup.com/markets/interest-rates/cme-fedwatch-tool.html Past performance is not indicative of future results According to the CME FedWatch Tool, markets are reflecting heavily anchored expectations for the immediate future, with an 82.4% probability that the target interest rate will remain in the 350–375 basis point range at the July 29, 2026, meeting. Looking ahead to the September 16, 202,6 session, market sentiment is closely divided: the probability of rates remaining at 350–375 bps stands at 46.2%, while the likelihood of a shift to the 375–400 bps range is priced slightly less at 46.0%. This near-even split highlights how the mixed signals within today’s data—softer hiring versus tight household metrics—have left traders balancing the prospects of future policy accommodation against structural labor resilience.EUR/USD daily chart technical analysis EUR/USD daily chart - Source: tradingview.com - Past performance is not indicative of future results In the January–February period, a clear inverted Head and Shoulders reversal pattern emerged, featuring a left shoulder, a higher peak forming the head, and a lower peak for the right shoulder. A downward-sloping red trendline defined the neckline. Once the price broke below this neckline and the dotted support line, aligned with the “Gap - War start” annotation, it triggered a significant bearish move down toward the major support floor near 1.1300 in March. The upper resistance (purple line) connects the major multi-month peaks, while the lower support (purple line) connects the major multi-month lows, serving as a massive psychological and technical floor. Because these two lines are diverging—with the top sloping up slightly and the bottom sloping flat to down—the macro structure resembles a large broadening formation, which typically indicates high volatility and uncertainty. Stochastic Oscillator (14, 1, 3): After hitting deeply oversold territory (below 20) in late June, the Stochastic lines have crossed over and are pointing sharply upward (currently at 39.63 / 30.11). This indicates short-term bullish momentum. The RSI is sitting at 43.44, recovering from near-oversold territory. Notably, there is a mild bullish divergence here: while the price action made a lower low in late June than in mid-June, the RSI made a higher low (indicated by the small teal line at the bottom), suggesting that selling pressure was exhausted. Summary OutlookThe EUR/USD is attempting a relief rally off a major multi-month support floor.Bullish Scenario: If the current momentum can push the price past the weekly Pivot ( 1.14704) and break above the descending red resistance line, it could trigger a short squeeze up toward R1 (1.16162).Bearish Scenario: If the pair fails to clear the $1.14700 region, it will likely rotate back down to retest the crucial support zone between $1.1315 and $1.1276. Opinions are the authors'; not necessarily that of OANDA Business Information & Services, Inc. or any of its affiliates, subsidiaries, officers or directors. The provided publication is for informational and educational purposes only.If you would like to reproduce or redistribute any of the content found on MarketPulse, an award winning forex, commodities and global indices analysis and news site service produced by OANDA Business Information & Services, Inc., please refer to the MarketPulse Terms of Use.Visit https://www.marketpulse.com/ to find out more about the beat of the global markets.© 2026 OANDA Business Information & Services Inc.

CNBC's Julia Boorstin reports on Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's comments during the company's town hall, according to reporting from Reuters.

How are financial institutions like US Bank helping small businesses take advantage of new, innovative tools and technologies that will enable them to better serve their customers and scale their operations? At FinovateSpring 2026 earlier this year, I spoke with Queanne Smith, Senior Vice President at US Bank, on how integrated digital solutions and strategic partnerships can bring greater efficiency and new revenue opportunities to small and medium-sized enterprises. In our conversation, Smith talks about the challenges that small businesses face when confronted with fragmented banking services, and explains how embedded banking and platform integration can build trust and efficiency. Smith also discusses the importance of delivering end-to-end solutions like billpay and payroll and shares her thoughts on the best practices for bank-fintech partnerships. “We did a survey in 2025 with about a thousand of our small business owners and identified that 63% of those small business owners were really struggling and overwhelmed by the number of platforms they were utilizing for their cash management services … The integration that we’re looking to build enables our small business owners and midsize businesses to have a one-stop shop experience. The opportunity for us to think about how clients interface with us and experience us is a real thing. The objective is to minimize the points of friction and improve the client experience overall.” Queanne Smith is a Senior Vice President at US Bank, where she leads business strategy and partnerships designed to expand access to capital and growth tools for small business owners. Smith works at the intersection of banking, technology, and community impact, leveraging partnerships, data, and emerging tools to deliver scalable, measurable outcomes. In 2025, Smith was recognized as part of American Banker’s Most Powerful Women in Banking Top Teams. The fifth-largest commercial bank in the United States, US Bank serves millions of clients via a diversified range of business lines. These operations include commercial and institutional banking, business banking, payments, wealth management, and consumer banking. Headquartered in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and a member of the Fortune 500, US Bank was named one of the World’s Most Ethical Companies by the Ethisphere Institute. Photo by Giant Asparagus from Pexels The post US Bank’s Queanne Smith on Streamlining Small Business Banking appeared first on Finovate.       

The U.S. labor market is losing momentum, but not collapsing. Nonfarm payrolls rose by only 57,000, previous months were revised lower, and hiring has clearly slowed, while layoffs remain limited.The drop in unemployment is less positive than it looks. The unemployment rate fell to 4.2%, but this was partly due to a decline in labor force participation to 61.5%, meaning some people stopped actively looking for work.The report reduced pressure on the Fed to tighten policy further. Slower job growth and easing wage pressure revived hopes for future rate cuts, weakened the dollar, and supported assets such as gold, Bitcoin, and EUR/USD. June data from the U.S. labor market showed a clear weakening in employment momentum. Nonfarm payrolls increased by only 57,000, significantly below economists’ expectations. In addition, data for the previous two months were revised downward, weakening earlier signals that had suggested greater resilience in the labor market. United States Non Farm Payrolls, source: Trading Economics At first glance, the decline in the unemployment rate to 4.2% appeared positive. However, this is not an unambiguous sign of improvement. The drop in unemployment was accompanied by a marked decline in labor force participation. The participation rate fell to 61.5%, reaching its lowest level in more than five years. This means that some individuals stopped actively looking for work and were therefore no longer included in unemployment statistics.Companies are not conducting mass layoffs, but they are hiring more cautiouslyThe report does not point to a labor market collapse, but it does show increasing caution among employers. Initial jobless claims remained almost unchanged, suggesting that the scale of layoffs remains limited. The issue, therefore, is not a sharp reduction in employment, but a weaker willingness among companies to create new jobs.The largest decline in employment was recorded in the leisure and hospitality sector. This is particularly important because, at this time of year, the industry typically increases seasonal hiring. Weaker-than-usual employment growth may indicate a more cautious approach by companies toward consumer demand and future operating costs.At the same time, some sectors continued to support the labor market. Healthcare and social assistance remained the main source of employment growth. Job numbers also increased in manufacturing and construction. Weakness persisted, however, in the information sector, where employment declined for the seventeenth time in the past eighteen months.Wages are rising, but inflationary pressure is easingAverage hourly earnings rose by 3.5% year over year in June. This increase shows that wages are still growing, but they are no longer generating inflationary pressure as strong as during the period of peak labor market tightness. For the Federal Reserve, this may be an argument that employment conditions remain relatively stable and do not require an abrupt policy response. United States Average Hourly Earnings YoY, source: Trading Economics From the perspective of households, however, the picture is less favorable. Slower employment growth means fewer opportunities to find a new job, while inflation continues to limit the real purchasing power of wages. Even if nominal wages are rising, many workers may not feel a clear improvement in their financial situation.Markets took note of the report’s weaknessThe release triggered a moderately positive reaction in financial markets. The S&P 500 opened higher, while U.S. Treasury yields declined. Investors scaled back expectations for further interest rate hikes by the Fed, although they still priced in at least one rate increase this year.The market reaction shows that weaker employment data were interpreted as a factor reducing pressure on the central bank. If the labor market continues to lose momentum, the Fed may have fewer reasons to tighten monetary policy further.A mixed picture of the U.S. economyThe data were disappointing, but they should not fundamentally change the overall assessment of the economy. The labor market reflects uneven economic growth, in which some sectors are still creating jobs while others are clearly slowing. From the Fed’s perspective, the situation does not look alarming, as the labor market is not generating additional inflationary pressure. For American households, however, it means more difficult conditions, especially when limited employment opportunities coincide with persistently high living costs. Kevin Warsh’s first press conference as FOMC Chair was perceived as hawkish and fueled concerns about an interest rate hike in the United States. As a result, the dollar strengthened significantly in recent weeks. Following today’s NFP report, hopes for an interest rate cut have resurfaced. Of course, with core PCE inflation currently at 3.4% year over year, this remains unlikely. Nevertheless, today’s reading creates a balance between arguments for monetary easing and monetary tightening, given the Fed’s dual mandate of maximum employment and price stability. It was precisely these hopes that led to a weakening of the dollar. EUR/USD is currently trading at 1.1446, up 0.59%. Instruments quoted in USD, which have recently failed to generate returns for investors, also deserve attention. Gold is up 2.37% today, while Bitcoin has gained 2.64%. Daily timeframe of EURUSD, GOLD and BTCUSD, source: TradingView A labor market without collapse, but also without strengthThe June report shows that the U.S. labor market is in a phase of clear slowdown. There are no signs of mass layoffs or a sharp deterioration in conditions, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to describe the market as strong. Companies are acting cautiously, new jobs are being created more slowly, and the decline in unemployment is partly the result of lower labor force participation.The key takeaway from the report is therefore that the labor market is not collapsing, but it is losing resilience. For the Fed, this means less pressure from wages and employment, while for workers it means more challenging job-search conditions and limited improvement in real incomes. Opinions are the authors'; not necessarily that of OANDA Business Information & Services, Inc. or any of its affiliates, subsidiaries, officers or directors. The provided publication is for informational and educational purposes only.If you would like to reproduce or redistribute any of the content found on MarketPulse, an award winning forex, commodities and global indices analysis and news site service produced by OANDA Business Information & Services, Inc., please refer to the MarketPulse Terms of Use.Visit https://www.marketpulse.com/ to find out more about the beat of the global markets.© 2026 OANDA Business Information & Services Inc.

One of the first things people learn about Elliott Wave analysis is that five-wave impulse patterns point in the direction of the larger trend. The clearer the pattern, the better. But then they get to the chapter about flat corrections, where an impulse is actually the final wave of a correction, right before the preceding trend resumes. This makes it difficult and, to be honest, it never gets easy. You just get used to remembering the always-present flat correction possibility. This is what we recently had to deal with in USDCAD. Similar Elliott Wave setups occur in the crypto, commodity and stock markets, as well. Our Elliott Wave Video Course can teach you how to uncover them yourself! The chart above, included in our EW Pro analysis on May 4th, revealed a very clear five-wave impulse to the downside. We marked it i)-ii)-iii)-iv)-v), where two lower degrees of the trend were visible within wave iii). The simplest conclusion was that more weakness can be expected, but not before a corrective recovery in wave b) was in place. Two weeks later, however, we decided to voluntarily change our mind, before the market forced us to. USDCAD did, indeed, rise to over 1.3700 as we’d expected, but the structure of that recovery didn’t look corrective. Instead, it was too sharp and fast, increasing the probability that something else was happening. We decided to take a step back and saw that that impulse pattern could also fit in the position of wave c) of an a)-b)-c) running flat retracement. Wave b) being this large was unusual, but it didn’t violate any Elliott Wave rules. So, with USDCAD near 1.3770, this bullish count became our primary one, putting initial targets north of 1.4000 within the bulls’ reach. More than a month later now, the pair is hovering around 1.4200. Confidence is a virtue in many respects and we’ve plenty of good things to say about sticking to the plan until proven wrong. But there is also nothing wrong with changing your mind if the evidence is piling up against you. Here, proven wrong would’ve meant staying short while USDCAD rises by another 200 pips to as high as 1.3967. Instead, avoiding being too confident in the markets allowed us to see that there was something wrong with that recovery and that maybe it wasn’t corrective at all. As Gary Stevenson put it in his book ‘The Trading Game’: ‘Being wrong is not a sin. Staying wrong is.’ In our Elliott Wave PRO subscriptions we provide analyses of Bitcoin, Gold, Crude Oil, EURUSD, USDCAD, USDJPY and the S&P 500 twice a week! Check them out now! The post Changing Our Mind to Stay Ahead in USDCAD appeared first on EWM Interactive.