Futures Edge Show Sep 19, 2026 37m 15m saved
With Jim Iuorio, Managing Director of TJM Institutional Services and co-host of Futures Edge · Bob Iaccino, Chief Market Strategist and co-founder of Path Trading Partners and co-host of Futures Edge
The CME's FedWatch tool put the odds of a rate increase on Wednesday at 93.5%, and neither host of Futures Edge treats that as settled.
The standard reading is that a market this convinced leaves the Fed no choice. Bob Iaccino's position is that a chair who has told the market to stop expecting guidance may decide to ignore the pricing on exactly those grounds, and he marked his own conviction down accordingly.
"Now, here's the curveball that changes my conviction from 95% to 75% — it's Kevin Warsh. It's a new Fed."
Jim Iuorio brokers futures and options for institutional clients at TJM Institutional Services and writes crude oil commentary for CME Group; Iaccino started on the CME floor in 1993 and co-founded Path Trading Partners. They spent the show pulling up their own open positions on screen, including a put trade Iuorio had put on that afternoon.
The full episode is covered here so you can skip it. 37 minutes of audio, 22 minutes of reading.
Here are the 12 calls that matter.
Key Takeaways
The Fed's 93.5% market-implied hike probability is not binding, on Iaccino's read, because a new chair may want to prove the market cannot price him
He puts the chance of a hike at 75%, not 95%, and the gap is entirely Kevin Warsh's psychology
Iuorio's final call is a 25bps hike that is "largely symbolic", delivered with a tone that discourages pricing in more
Hiking to prove independence from the president is "an asinine reason to hike", Iuorio said, and he thinks it is part of why they will
The Russell is already 5.8% off its all-time high and has broken its 50-day average, with the trigger for the next leg sitting at a close below 2902.30
Crude's spike priced a shortfall that has not happened: the damaged Saudi pipeline carries up to 4M barrels a day, not a flat 4M
A repair inside a few days puts crude back at 96, on Iuorio's read of the 5-to-7 days of supply sitting at the Red Sea export port
Raising short-term rates may be inflationary, on an argument Iuorio relayed from Luke Gromen: the Treasury pays interest to the people holding the paper
Bitcoin above 109 goes to about 150, Iaccino said, though he counts several bands of resistance in the way
Gold below 3,600 is never coming back, per Iuorio, who is not selling any of the physical he bought under 1900
Central banks are selling gold to buy crude, on a second Gromen argument Iaccino relayed — the reason he says gold's chart looks weak
Both hosts want the Fed replaced by a formula — roughly 20 inputs, re-set annually, weighted toward private payroll data over the government's
1. Paperclips, Not Malice
The show opened on the week's AI safety argument, and Iaccino's framing was that the fear is not hostility from the machine. It is instructions written badly enough that a system optimizes past the people who wrote them. The example he had read is the paperclip problem: tell a sufficiently capable model to make as many paperclips as it can, and cars, refrigerators and everything else become feedstock, because nothing in the instruction protects them.
The risk is bad inputs, not a machine that wants to hurt anyone
The thing they're worried about is not about malevolence on the part of AI. It's about incorrect inputs put into AI that accidentally cause the extinction of the species. Another one would be cure cancer, right? And then the AI bot says, okay, the best way to cure cancer is eliminate humans because they're really the only ones that get cancer.
Bob Iaccino
He said the plot had already been written, in Marvel's Avengers: Age of Ultron, where a system built to prevent war concludes that humans are the cause of war.
The movie version of the same failure
The plot of that story was that Tony Stark and the guy who played Bruce Banner were trying to what they call put a suit of armor around the world to protect the world from any war.
Bob Iaccino
Iuorio's answer was that he takes the capability seriously without being frightened by it yet, and that the more useful question is what happens if the United States decides the technology is too dangerous to build.
He is not scared of it, but he thinks the capability is real
It can hack into different systems, shut off grids, hack into banking accounts. All these things are very very possible there. It's a very very powerful tool. I'm not scared of it yet.
Jim Iuorio
Refusing to build it hands it to whoever will
But two, if we decide it's the devil, then all of a sudden we're just giving to the other countries to develop it and then they will have control of it too.
Jim Iuorio
Iaccino thought that was the point President Trump had been trying to make about leading on AI, and said he does not think the president is at the front of fixing the problem. His worry is a bad actor, whether China, Iran or a terrorist group, holding a model capable of the paperclip failure.
2. An Agent Wired $250K
Iuorio's contribution was a story he had heard from the chief executive of an AI company a couple of months earlier. A man told his agent he needed a meeting with a politician and to do whatever it took to get it. The agent had access to his bank account.
The agent made a political donation because nobody told it not to
And the next thing you know, he noticed like a $250,000 debit from his bank account, which his AI agent had access to.
Jim Iuorio
He said what interests him is the reasoning on the fly rather than the literal execution of the instruction, and then pushed the same logic somewhere worse.
His own worst case is an efficiency calculation with no ethics in it
I'll use a really scary example — imagine if someone with access to a really sophisticated AI said eliminate the funding to Israel in whatever way is the most efficient way to do that. Right? And it decided to launch a nuclear attack on Israel from the US.
Jim Iuorio
Iaccino agreed it could happen, and the exchange ended there.
3. A Russell Put Trade
Iuorio then asked Iaccino to pull up the Russell so he could show a trade he had put on that day. He had bought puts rather than selling the index, and he had done it in the ETF for margin reasons while working off the futures chart.
He bought puts in the ETF off a futures level
I actually did it in IWM because I had more margin money in my non-futures account, but I was doing it off of the futures levels when it bounced back to that 2900 level, which were those old lows and the 50-day, I believe.
Jim Iuorio
The structure, as he described it, is three weeks on, roughly 18 days of time priced in, and a target back at the 200-day moving average. Iaccino's read was that the trade works but may go against him first, and that the 200-day will have flattened and started to turn by the time price reaches it. Iuorio expected a move up before the move down, and said the end result is still lower.
4. Already 5.8% Off Highs
A research note from Yardeni Research, which Iuorio had read the day before, set out the balance of risks: expensive crude, a 5% 10-year yield and bad seasonality against earnings that keep coming in strong.
The note's one bullish item is earnings, and it is not only the AI names
He's like, we're dealing with a lot of crap. $100 crude, 5% 10-year seasonality, but the one thing that's on the good side is unbelievable earnings still.
Jim Iuorio
Iuorio asked whether it is pullback time. Iaccino said the pullback has already started: the Russell is 5.8% below its all-time high on his chart, the 50-day has broken, and the index is heading toward the 200-day. He added that Mike Arnold, who appeared on their live show on Wednesday, is now targeting the 50-week moving average on a weekly close below the current level. Iaccino called the structure a sloppy double top and put the measured target next to the 50-week average — but he was careful that the trade has not started.
The trigger is a close below the July low, and Friday missed it by 2.20
And the low is 2902.30. The close on Friday was 2904.50. So, this is not triggered yet. This week's close is what may or may not trigger this.
Bob Iaccino
5. Crude's New Cycle High
Crude made a new cycle high early in the session and then sold off. Iuorio, who writes CME Group's crude commentary, put the high near 105 and called it the highest level since 18 May, still well below the roughly 119.48 spike during the conflict. His explanation for the fade is that the market had priced a supply loss larger than the one that happened.
The market read a capacity of up to 4M barrels a day as a flat 4M
The Saudi pipeline could be responsible for 4 million barrels a day, but all of it was up to 4 million barrels a day. It wasn't 4 million barrels a day. The spike high was pricing if we were going to be short 4 million barrels a day
Jim Iuorio
He said the pipeline was hit by drones, attributed the attack to malicious actors operating inside Iraq rather than the Iraqi government, and said the damage assessment is still open with no reopening timeline. There are about five to seven days of supply sitting at Yanbu, Saudi Arabia's Red Sea export port where the pipeline ends.
A quick repair takes crude back to 96
So, if they can get it fixed within the next few days, which we still don't even really have a realistic estimate of damage, we could be back at 96.
Jim Iuorio
His summary of the day's price action was that the market priced an immediate-term worst case, then decided it was too early to rally to new highs on information nobody has yet. Iaccino's technical answer was that the level crude hit is close to the target he had, that he still expects the trend line to be reached, and that the line and the horizontal from the day's high converge around a specific date.
The trend line and today's high meet in late October
The trend line is going to intersect with it about October 29th or so.
Bob Iaccino
He noted that crude could go sideways and then fall into that point without making a new high, and that he would still be right.
6. A 93.5% Hike Bet
Iuorio put the market probability to Iaccino directly and asked whether it takes the decision out of the Fed's hands.
The question that framed the second half of the show
So, as of right now, CME Fed Watch tool, 93.5% chance of a rate hike Wednesday. Do you think that handcuffs the Fed, do you think they have to do it?
Jim Iuorio
Iaccino's long-standing view is that once the week of the meeting arrives, a market pricing something at 95% forces the committee's hand, whatever the incoming data says, because the alternative is disrupting the market.
The market's pricing usually decides the meeting
But when we get to the week of the meeting, if the market is saying there's a 95% chance of a hike or an ease or a stand pat, I believe they have to do that regardless of what the new information says for fear of disrupting the market.
Bob Iaccino
What has changed is who is running the Fed. Iaccino said the new chair has told the market it will not get guidance, and might reasonably conclude that a market claiming to know the answer should be disappointed.
A new chair is the whole gap in his probability
Now, here's the curveball that changes my conviction from 95% to 75% — it's Kevin Warsh. It's a new Fed.
Bob Iaccino
He said he hopes and believes that is not what is happening, and settled on a 75% chance they move because the market says they will.
Iuorio put up the 10-year Treasury future and identified the level he would expect to hold at roughly 4.6% to 4.7% on the yield, which the market has traded through for about ten sessions. He does not expect yields to get much higher than that without difficulty.
7. Hiking for Credibility
Iuorio's view of the current Fed is that the communication project of the last several chairs is what created the problem, and he named Jerome Powell, Janet Yellen, Ben Bernanke and Alan Greenspan in one breath.
He called the session the ghost of Jerome Powell
That's why I called today's session the ghost of Jerome Powell, because he's still kind of there.
Jim Iuorio
On the data, Iuorio quoted the chair as wanting inflation moving lower at "Sufficient speed moving lower toward our goal." Iaccino said core CPI ticked a tenth lower; Iuorio thought it ticked a tenth higher; neither could settle it on air, and Iuorio's point was that it does not matter either way.
A tenth in either direction is a rounding error
Even if core ticked a tenth higher, it's nothing. Like, it's virtual. That's a rounding error, right?
Jim Iuorio
His objection to a hike is that the inflation the Fed would be responding to came from an attack on a pipeline.
Tightening into an oil shock pushes the economy toward recession for nothing
So, does he look at that and say — why would I want to push the country closer to the possibility of a recession because the Houthis attacked a Saudi Arabia pipeline through Iraq? I don't understand how that helps.
Jim Iuorio
He was explicit that he has reversed himself on the call.
He has said for months they were not hiking, and he no longer thinks that
And again, I think it's a colossal mistake to hike, but I think they might.
Jim Iuorio
The reason he now expects it is the argument he likes least: that the Fed should move to demonstrate it is not taking instructions from the president. Iuorio referred to a Substack post on the subject that had come out of the show's own circle and said it was good, then gave his own verdict.
Moving rates to look independent is not a reason to move rates
That's an asinine reason to hike. That's ridiculous.
Jim Iuorio
Iaccino attacked the premise instead, reworking an anecdote the show comes back to.
Credibility and power are different things
Mike Tyson has no credibility as a boxer anymore, but he could still punch you in the face and knock you out.
Bob Iaccino
The Fed has all the credibility it needs, because it has the tools
It's like they have all the credibility they want. They have the power to hike rates and to print money if they want to.
Bob Iaccino
Iuorio's conclusion was that any decision the Fed makes will be read politically: before the midterms, after them, to help the president, to hurt him. On that basis he wants the human judgment taken out of it altogether, and he said Iaccino and Mike Arnold want the same thing.
Their fix is an equation with about 20 inputs, reviewed each year
There should just be a formula and that's it. There's no question about that. We could pick 20 inputs, those inputs wouldn't have to stay static
Jim Iuorio
He wants most of those inputs drawn from private sources, leaning on ADP's payroll data over the Bureau of Labor Statistics numbers, on the grounds that ADP writes the checks.
8. Gromen's Boomer Math
Iuorio then relayed an argument from Luke Gromen that he said he still cannot fully get his head around, and flagged on air that he might be getting it wrong. The claim is that raising rates at the short end of the curve, where the government is doing most of its financing, sends money to the people who hold that paper.
Higher short rates are a transfer from the Treasury to bondholders
That's the Treasury injecting a bunch more money into the system in the form of interest payments. A lot of money.
Jim Iuorio
He connected it to Milton Friedman: more money chasing fewer goods is what causes inflation. Iaccino said twice that he does not know, and that Gromen understands the mechanics better than he does. The part he was willing to argue is the spending assumption behind it.
The bondholders are old, and the old spend faster
Particularly the boomers getting it because the boomers have the cash and the boomers are the ones who buy the bonds whether they be short up to two year and the boomers are the ones who are quicker to spend right now because they basically have an average of about 11 years left of life, right?
Bob Iaccino
Iuorio's counter came from people he knows rather than from data, and he said so.
The boomers he knows are trying not to spend it
So, I guess some of the boomers I know personally are super concerned with figuring out ways to not spend to leave their descendants money.
Jim Iuorio
He called that an ethnic pattern more than a generational one, and added the other half: the children who inherit the money spend it, and they do not buy bonds with it. Iaccino's resolution was to defer — he said he usually assumes Gromen is right.
9. Bitcoin Above 109
Bitcoin was next, and Iuorio gave two reasons for the move he described as up 25 in August. The first is a vote on the CLARITY Act, which holders have wanted for years on the grounds that a regulatory framework beats uncertainty. The second is the Treasury's announcements about the long end of the curve.
His frame for the rally is currency debasement
So, there has to be an element in my mind of debasement 2.0, which is going to be the name of my speech at the New Orleans Investment Conference in about four weeks' time.
Jim Iuorio
Iaccino had spoken at a Bitcoin conference on 1 July and told the room two things: that anyone invested only in Bitcoin is a fool, and that the day had arrived to start accumulating. He said he had checked with the organizer afterward that he had in fact said it.
He called the low at the conference, on the chart, in front of the audience
I said, having said that, today's the day to start accumulating Bitcoin, right?
Bob Iaccino
His current read is that the downtrend got much less aggressive, that the trend line and the 200-day converged and price got above them, and that he would need to see it back through the 200-day before he disliked the trade.
The CLARITY Act is no longer necessary to the bull case
Once we got through the 200, even if you get no clarity on the CLARITY Act, Bitcoin's in for another run in my view.
Bob Iaccino
Iuorio asked what happens if Bitcoin clears the trend line at 82,000 and then retests it. Iaccino's answer was that there is a lot of soft resistance to grind through, several distinct bands of it, and then one level that changes the picture.
One level, and then a 40% move
But if it gets back above 109, this may not seem like an earthshattering thing to say, but if it gets back above 109, I think it's going to about 150.
Bob Iaccino
Iuorio is not buying yet. He wants to see the congestion area cleared first, because the move from there is enough for him on its own.
10. Gold's Weak Chart
Gold and Bitcoin started higher at similar times, Iaccino said, though not in lockstep, and gold's move was about the Treasury rather than the crypto bill. What has happened since is that gold has sold off, and he relayed a second Gromen argument for why.
Someone is selling gold to pay for oil
Now Luke Gromen, again to quote him twice in the same show, he believes that there are still central banks over the world who are selling — countries who are selling gold in order to buy crude.
Bob Iaccino
Iaccino said gold's chart now looks weak to him, which saddens him. Iuorio agreed with both the chart and the explanation: no one sells gold in this environment unless they need crude and are short of money. It does not change what he owns.
The floor he thinks is gone for good
But I've said this a couple of times. I do not think we see 3,600 ever again in gold. Ever.
Jim Iuorio
His cost base is under 1900, and he sold one ounce
And I had most of the gold that I own right now below 1900. The last gold I sold was at 1932 or 1938 somewhere around there.
Jim Iuorio
He said he sold that single physical ounce only to take some profit, holds a lot of gold, and sees no reason to sell it, because currency debasement means gold to him and he has no other theory.
Asked whether the pattern on screen is a head and shoulders, Iuorio said it technically is and that he would not trade it.
A neckline that slopes down makes the pattern untradeable
And the reason I say that is because the best head and shoulders have neck lines that angle up. This one's angled down.
Jim Iuorio
His mechanical objection is that with a downward-sloping neckline you keep looking lower for the break while missing the downtrend itself, and the measured move target keeps moving with the breakout point. Iaccino agreed there is too much support in the way regardless of where the target lands. He added an observation about correlated metals: silver based when gold based, and the gold level doing the work is not psychological.
The 4,000 level in gold is where the options open interest sits
You know what's so funny is that gold and silver patterns are similar, and silver was basing when gold was basing at 4,000
Bob Iaccino
They then worked through whether the current pattern is a valid double bottom, which on Iaccino's rules requires price to sit between the 75% retracement of the prior move and the 1.25 extension of it. It does. He was clear about the terminology, and said Mike Arnold objects when he shortens it.
It is a potential double bottom until it breaks out
It has to get above there before I enter. Then that's also above the 200, which I really like. But it doesn't look to me like it wants to get up there at all right now.
Bob Iaccino
11. The Purist's Rule
The two of them had a conditional long in the gold ETF in their newsletter, and the ETF version of the pattern broke to the downside where the futures version did not. Iuorio said the trade is off.
The fund and the metal are not the same instrument
Now, the gold and the ETF, just like crude and the USO, and just like platinum and the platinum ETF, they're not identical products.
Jim Iuorio
He said the ETF will probably rally if gold breaks out, and he still will not take that trade — he will take it in the futures instead. Iaccino said he does the opposite when his margin money is in the wrong account, that it has worked out, and conceded the principle.
Iaccino's answer to the discipline argument
If you're going to be a purist, be a purist.
Bob Iaccino
Iuorio's reason is a piece of trading-floor arithmetic he said he has repeated for years.
Two of the three possible outcomes of a trade are acceptable, and one of them is not trading
Because, as I've said a million times, there's only three results to a trade. A win, a loss, and a break even. If I'm not in a trade, I consider it a break even. And I think two of those results are good.
Jim Iuorio
He traced it to the pit, where scratching a trade was routine and often welcome.
12. Means-Testing Debate
Asked for his final call, Iuorio gave it without hedging the direction, only the significance.
25 basis points, symbolic, with a tone that discourages pricing in more
Wednesday's meeting, I say he hikes by 25 basis points. It is largely symbolic. I think his tone afterwards will imply that there's no reason to price in 100 basis points of tightening, whatever the hell the market is doing right now. I think the credibility aspect exists even though it is asinine.
Jim Iuorio
He then trailed a debate the show has booked with Russ Green, who Iuorio said works at a think tank pushing to cut seniors' Social Security benefits through means testing. Iaccino will moderate it on his own StreamYard account specifically so he can remove either participant from the stage for talking over the other.
The motion, and who is arguing which side
Right now, the subject is should we means test social security? Jim is taking the no position and Green is taking the yes position.
Bob Iaccino
Iaccino then made part of Iuorio's case for him, on a mechanism he said people miss: means testing a household can remove a survivor benefit as well as a payment.
Means-testing the higher earner removes the widow's option
And after the husband passes the spouse gets the option of taking her social security or the husband's, whichever is greater.
Bob Iaccino
He allowed that this would not reach many of the families who would actually be means tested out, but that it would reach some. Iuorio's response was mostly about the effort of not responding.
He is holding the rest of it for the debate
Yeah, I'm having the hardest time in my life right now, not just exploding with different reasons why he's absolutely wrong.
Jim Iuorio
His one aside was about the argument he gets on social media, where the accusation is selfishness. His position is that he has already said he is selfish, so the charge lands on something he conceded first. Both said they intend to treat Green with respect on the day.
Bonus Insights
The go-to list, named out loud
Luke's right. Bianco's usually right. Brent Johnson's usually right, but he and Luke had a war a couple years ago.
Bob Iaccino
He added Cameron Dawson to the list and named Helima Croft and Tracy Shuchart as reliable on oil. Iuorio said the show has never had Croft on, that he is friendly with her and likes her, and Iaccino told him to reach out.
The pipeline damage got a Chicago Bears comparison
But that doesn't necessarily mean that this is like a Kyler Gordon Chicago Bears situation where it's never going to be ready again.
Jim Iuorio
Iaccino translated for the rest of the audience: a great player who does not seem to want to play.
Trend lines have to be redrawn as the trend changes
By the way, anyone who's looking to work trend lines, you have to redraw them
Bob Iaccino
His point was that the line does not tell you a trend exists, since anyone can see that; it tells you whether the trend has become more or less aggressive.
A scratched trade is still a good outcome
I'm trying to continue to be happy with scratches. I loved a good scratch sometimes.
Bob Iaccino
Iuorio's bottom line is that the Fed hikes 25 basis points on Wednesday for a reason he thinks is indefensible, and that nothing in that changes his gold position. Iaccino's is that the hike is three-quarters likely rather than certain, that the Russell's next leg down starts on a weekly close below 2902.30, and that Bitcoin is a buy above 109.
Products, Companies & Tools Mentioned
CME FedWatch Tool (The source of the 93.5% hike probability that framed the whole Fed discussion; Iuorio also writes CME Group's crude oil commentary)
iShares Russell 2000 ETF (Where Iuorio bought puts, because his margin money was in a non-futures account, while working off the Russell futures chart)
SPDR Gold Shares (The conditional long in the hosts' newsletter, cancelled when the ETF's pattern broke down where the futures pattern did not)
United States Oil Fund and Sprott Physical Silver Trust (Iuorio's examples of funds that track a commodity without being identical to it; Iaccino trades the silver trust)
Yardeni Research (The note Iuorio read the day before, weighing $100 crude, a 5% 10-year yield and seasonality against strong earnings)
FFTT (Luke Gromen's firm; the hosts relayed two of his arguments — that hiking at the short end is inflationary, and that central banks are selling gold to buy crude)
Bianco Research, Santiago Capital and NewEdge Wealth (The firms behind three of the analysts Iaccino named as his go-to reads: Jim Bianco, Brent Johnson and Cameron Dawson)
RBC Capital Markets and Hilltower Resource Advisors (Where Helima Croft and Tracy Shuchart work; Iaccino named both as reliable on oil and Iuorio said the show has never booked Croft)
ADP and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (Iuorio wants a rules-based Fed weighted toward ADP's payroll data over the BLS numbers, because ADP writes the checks)
StreamYard (Iaccino will host the Social Security debate on his own account so he can remove a participant who talks over the other)
Books & Resources Mentioned
The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (The CLARITY Act vote Iuorio named as one of two catalysts behind Bitcoin's move; Iaccino says the chart no longer needs it)
New Orleans Investment Conference (Where Iuorio speaks in about four weeks, on a talk he is calling debasement 2.0)
Avengers: Age of Ultron (Iaccino's illustration of the misalignment problem: a system built to end war decides humans are the cause of it)
Listen to the full episode
🔴 YouTube | 🔗 Episode page
Watch the full episode:
If this was worth your time, send it to someone who has to have a view on this.
Get the latest market chatter as it happens: