
Takeaway:
Major central banks moved in different directions this week — some hiking aggressively due to energy‑driven inflation (especially from Middle East conflict), others holding with a hawkish tone, and a few easing or intervening to stabilise currencies. The divergence reflects differing domestic inflation pressures, growth risks, and exposure to global energy shocks.
This divergence reflects:
|
Central Bank |
Policy Rate Decision |
New Benchmark Rate |
Key Economic Driver |
|
Bank of Japan |
Raised +0.25% |
1.00% (31-year high) |
Wholesale energy costs shifting to consumers |
|
European Central Bank |
Raised +0.25% |
2.40% (Main refinancing rate) |
Strait of Hormuz supply-chain shocks |
|
Federal Reserve |
Held (Hawkish bias) |
3.5%-3.75% |
Focus on delivering price stability meaning possible rate rises |
|
Bank of England |
Held (7–2 vote) |
3.75% |
Expecting secondary wage/price spikes meaning holding rates for longer |
|
Norges Bank |
Held (Hawkish bias) |
4.25% |
Stubborn core inflation at 3.4% meaning holding rates for longer |
|
Central Bank of Brazil |
Cut -0.25% |
14.25% |
History of prioritising domestic economic growth |
|
Swiss National Bank |
Held (Dovish bias) |
0.00% |
Currency intervention to weaken Franc |
Global central banks split sharply this week. Japan and the ECB raised rates to counter energy‑driven inflation, while the Fed, Bank of England and Norges Bank held with a hawkish tone. Brazil cut rates to support growth, and Switzerland maintained 0% while signalling readiness for currency intervention.