FX News

We Said the Number Existed in One Place. Our Own Source Had It Eighteen Seconds After the Print.

We published that nine hours after a US release the number existed in only one place.

It was on FXStreet's news wire eighteen seconds after the print — while that same publisher's calendar page still shows n/a, twenty-one hours on. Today's 14:00 pair adds a consensus split where two vendors disagree about the sign, a third calendar an hour early, and a fourth that says in writing it is not allowed to give you the number.

Three of Six Calendars Have the Print. They Give Three Different Consensus Figures.

We set two tests yesterday on a US release the aggregators missed.

Sixteen hours after the print FXStreet still shows n/a and Investing.com's row is blank — but three of six calendars do carry 9.8, so our generalisation fails and we say so. The worse finding: the three pages that have it give consensus as 7.2, as 1, and as an unopened −1.0. And one calendar is serving July 2025 as its latest release.

The Release Printed at 14:30. Nine Hours Later the Only Place the Number Exists Is the Dallas Fed's Own Page.

The Dallas Fed printed 9.8 against a prior of 11.6 at 14:30 UTC — and six of the seven sub-indices underneath it rose, two by double digits.

Two calendars never carried the release and the one that had the time right still shows the actual as n/a. Yesterday's 4.5-billion-euro EUR/USD strike at 1.1400 was never traded. And the RBA at 04:30 is decided on the level and unsettled on the vote.

Something Does Print Today, at 14:30. Two Calendars Miss It and a Third Has It an Hour Early.

A US release prints at 14:30 UTC today that two calendars omit entirely and a third has an hour early — and the timezone mechanism this desk published on Friday turns out to be unidentifiable until 1 November.