- AUDJPY picked offers around 94.20 as risky assets defended early morning lower.
- Weak projections for Australian GDP and retail sales did not bring volatility to the Aussie.
- China’s trade balance data is higher at $95.95 billion compared to the old version of $84.74 billion.
AUDJPY defended Tokyo weakness in the risk appetite chart and is moving to retake the critical 95.00 hurdle. The risk barometer fell in the grip of the bears as risk-sensitive currencies opened lower on Monday. The bullish bias is favored as the market tone is extremely bullish as the Federal Reserve (Fed) is expected to scale back the magnitude of rate hikes in its upcoming monetary policy meetings.
On Friday, weak projections for the Australian economic outlook dictated in the Reserve Bank of Australia’s (RBA) monetary policy statement failed to impact Australian bulls.
According to the minutes of the monetary statement, the Gross domestic product (GDP) for the first half of CY2023 landed at 2.0% and at 1.4% for the second half. In addition, short-term inflation expectations rose to 8.0% amid strong price growth in the services sector.
Moreover, weaker retail sales data did not dampen the mood of Australian investors. Retail sales for the third quarter fell 0.2% from expectations of 0.4% despite rising inflationary pressures in the Australian economy.
Going forward, investors will keep an eye on China’s trade balance data. The trade balance is seen to be higher at $95.95 billion compared to the old version of $84.74 billion. It should be noted that Australia is one of China’s major trading partners and China’s trade balance data will have a significant impact on the Aussie.
On the Tokyo front, further developments on the intervention of the Bank of Japan (BOJ) will provide clarity to market participants. The USDJPY pair faces continued extreme selling pressure around the 148.00 region, which could be an area of activity for intervention by Japanese policymakers. Contrary to this, Japanese Finance Minister Shunichi Suzuki said on Friday that they had “no intention of guiding the fx to certain levels by intervening.”
