Q2 2026Quarterly reportA nearly flat dollar quarter concealed an April decline and June recovery
A near-flat broad dollar endpoint concealed an April decline, a June recovery and different moves against the euro and yen.
Data window: 1 April 2026–30 June 2026
On this page
The broad dollar index ended the second quarter close to where it began. That small net change masks a more substantial sequence: an April decline, little movement in May and a June recovery. The selected bilateral rates also resist a simple “unchanged dollar” description. The dollar strengthened against both the euro and yen over the quarter, with a larger move against the yen.
This is an external market retrospective for April–June 2026, using Federal Reserve and US Bureau of Labor Statistics sources. Its scope is selected dollar exchange rates and the US economy, not PineConnector’s full-quarter instruction activity or every major asset market. Inflation provides another example of why the path matters: headline consumer-price inflation increased before June’s monthly reading turned negative. That June observation was published in July and belongs to the completed economic retrospective, not the information available at quarter-end.
The small net dollar change conceals a change in direction
The Federal Reserve’s nominal broad dollar index changed −0.09% between 31 March and 30 June. This is an exchange-rate index against a weighted currency basket, without an adjustment for national price changes. A higher index indicates dollar appreciation against that basket. The small quarterly decline describes the distance between the selected starting and ending observations. Federal Reserve broad dollar index, index definitions.
The intervening month-end observations tell a less static story. The index fell 1.95% in April, rose +0.17% in May and gained +1.72% in June. June’s recovery brought the index close to its March endpoint, without fully erasing the earlier decline. Federal Reserve daily observations.
monthly broad dollar index change (%)
Each bar compares consecutive month-end reference observations. The whole-quarter change is calculated directly from its endpoints, not by adding these rounded values.
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System: H.10 nominal broad dollar index, daily Download data (CSV): Figure 1
View figure data
| Measure | Period or release date | Value |
|---|---|---|
| April | 2026-03-31 to 2026-04-30 | −1.95% |
| May | 2026-04-30 to 2026-05-29 | +0.17% |
| June | 2026-05-29 to 2026-06-30 | +1.72% |
“Nearly flat” is therefore a description of the net quarter-end change, not of conditions throughout the quarter. A market can finish close to its starting point after moving in opposite directions. The endpoint comparison cannot distinguish that path from one in which little happened between the same dates. Here, the monthly observations establish that the reversal matters.
They do not establish daily volatility or the largest move inside a month. Those require a more detailed path and a defined calculation. The defensible finding is that the selected month-end changes were substantially larger than the quarter’s net change, with April and June moving in opposite directions. The quarterly percentage is calculated directly from the quarter’s endpoints; it is not the sum of rounded monthly percentages, which use changing starting values.
The euro and yen weakened despite the broad index’s near-flat finish
EUR/USD, quoted as US dollars per euro, fell 0.88% over the quarter. USD/JPY, quoted as Japanese yen per US dollar, rose +2.22%. Both changes indicate dollar appreciation against the named currency, even though their numerical signs differ. In equivalent terms, the yen’s value in dollars fell 2.17%. That reciprocal calculation is smaller in magnitude than the rise in USD/JPY because it changes the denominator. Federal Reserve euro reference rates, yen reference rates.
reference-rate change (%)
Fed reference observations. Higher EUR/USD means a stronger euro; higher USD/JPY means a stronger dollar against the yen. Changes exclude costs and are not broker execution returns.
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System: H.10 nominal broad dollar index, daily; Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System: H.10 euro daily reference rate; Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System: H.10 Japanese yen daily reference rate Download data (CSV): Figure 2
View figure data
| Measure | Period or release date | Value |
|---|---|---|
| Broad US dollar index | 2026-03-31 to 2026-06-30 | −0.09% |
| EUR/USD | 2026-03-31 to 2026-06-30 | −0.88% |
| USD/JPY | 2026-03-31 to 2026-06-30 | +2.22% |
April initially moved in the other direction for both pairs. EUR/USD rose +1.83%, while USD/JPY fell 1.52%. Their subsequent paths differed in degree. May’s EUR/USD decline was 0.43%, whereas USD/JPY rose +1.64%. By the May endpoint, USD/JPY had already exceeded its March endpoint; EUR/USD was still above its March observation. June then brought further dollar appreciation against both. Federal Reserve euro series, yen series.
This difference matters when interpreting the word “dollar.” A basket index and a currency pair describe different comparisons. A near-flat broad index does not require every constituent exchange rate to finish unchanged. The basket contains other currencies and uses defined weights, so selected pairs cannot substitute for the complete calculation. The euro and yen results show why a broad summary can conceal meaningful bilateral differences. Federal Reserve index methodology.
The reference convention matters too. These are Federal Reserve New York noon observations, not broker closes. Their changes measure exchange-rate movements between selected observations, not the return from a trade after execution costs and financing. That distinction is particularly useful when comparing a published retrospective with a broker chart using a different daily boundary. About H.10.
June reversed the sign of monthly headline inflation
The Consumer Price Index, or CPI, measures changes in the prices consumers pay for a defined basket. Its headline monthly change was 0.6% in April and 0.5% in May, before a −0.4% change in June. These figures are seasonally adjusted, meaning that recurring seasonal patterns are accounted for when comparing consecutive months. April CPI release, May release, June release.
The energy component followed a pronounced change in direction: it rose 3.8% in April and 3.9% in May, then fell 5.70% in June. Core CPI, which excludes food and energy, recorded a June monthly change of 0.0%. The contrast shows why the all-items measure fell more sharply than the measure excluding those categories. It does not mean that every price in the basket fell, or that the energy percentage equals its contribution to headline inflation. April, May and June CPI detail.
Nor are these monthly percentages a quarterly inflation estimate. Each compares a month with its immediate predecessor. A quarter-level calculation requires a stated definition and the appropriate price-index observations. This report preserves the published monthly readings and their release vintages rather than assigning them a different period label.
Annual inflation fell in June while prices remained above a year earlier
The annual headline CPI rate rose from 3.8% in April to 4.2% in May, then eased to 3.5% in June. Core annual inflation similarly moved from 2.8% to 2.9%, before falling to 2.6%. These year-on-year readings use the unadjusted index, in line with the cited releases. April CPI, May CPI, June CPI.
12-month CPI-U price change, not seasonally adjusted (%)
Each observation compares one month with the same month a year earlier. These are monthly year-on-year readings, not a quarterly inflation rate. Releases followed the reference month.
Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics: CPI 2026-04 original news release; US Bureau of Labor Statistics: CPI 2026-05 original news release; US Bureau of Labor Statistics: CPI 2026-06 original news release Download data (CSV): Figure 3
View figure data
| Measure | Period or release date | Value |
|---|---|---|
| April · All items | Released 2026-05-12 | 3.8% |
| April · Excluding food and energy | Released 2026-05-12 | 2.8% |
| May · All items | Released 2026-06-10 | 4.2% |
| May · Excluding food and energy | Released 2026-06-10 | 2.9% |
| June · All items | Released 2026-07-14 | 3.5% |
| June · Excluding food and energy | Released 2026-07-14 | 2.6% |
A negative monthly headline change and positive annual inflation can both be true. The monthly comparison asks whether the index rose or fell from the immediately preceding month. The annual comparison asks whether it remained above or below the same month a year earlier. June’s monthly decline therefore does not imply that the price level returned to its level a year before.
The annual rate also depends on the earlier comparison point. As the calendar advances, the year-earlier month changes alongside the current month. That is why a change in annual inflation cannot be read simply as a magnified version of the latest monthly movement. Here the monthly and annual headline readings both moved down in June, but their meanings and adjustment bases remain different.
Stable policy decisions do not explain the changing currency path
The Federal Open Market Committee maintained the federal funds target range at 3.50% to 3.75% on 29 April, and maintained it again on 17 June. The unchanged announced range sat alongside a dollar index that first fell and then recovered. April policy statement, June policy statement.
The policy rate and an exchange rate answer different questions. The announced range states the committee’s present policy decision. Exchange rates can also reflect views about future policy, inflation and growth, as well as developments in the other economies involved. Holding the current US target range steady does not hold all those influences steady.
Does June’s dollar recovery therefore show a particular change in policy expectations? The evidence here does not establish one. That inference would require dated observations of expected policy and a way to distinguish their effects from other developments. The monthly reference rates document the recovery, while the policy statements document the decisions. Their alignment in a calendar is not a measurement of the link between them.
The CPI release schedule makes that limit especially concrete. April’s figures appeared on 12 May, May’s on 10 June and June’s on 14 July. June’s negative monthly CPI reading was therefore unavailable in that official release at the June policy meeting or at quarter-end. A retrospective can use it to complete the economic picture, but cannot describe the quarter’s currency recovery as a response to a July release. April, May and June release dates.
June’s smaller initial payroll gain arrived after the quarter
The original employment releases reported seasonally adjusted nonfarm payroll increases of 115,000 in April, 172,000 in May and 57,000 in June. This employer-survey measure covers payroll jobs outside agriculture. The initial June gain was smaller than the initial gains reported for the preceding months. April employment release, May release, June release.
June’s unemployment rate was 4.2%, compared with 4.3% in May’s release. That combination is a useful reminder that a smaller payroll gain does not mechanically require a higher unemployment rate. The unemployment measure comes from a separate household survey and depends on the number of people meeting its unemployment definition relative to the labour force. The employer survey and household survey do not count the same thing. May and June employment reports.
The June release was published on 2 July. Like June CPI, it completes the retrospective picture after the currency quarter had closed. The figures above preserve each month’s initial release; they are not summed into a quarterly employment total, because subsequent releases can revise earlier estimates. A total assembled from different initial vintages would not be the same as a consistent later estimate of quarterly job growth.
The path and the currency pair change the answer
The strongest counter-case to a single explanation is visible in those differences. A common dollar summary does not explain the unequal bilateral moves, and a US economic reading alone does not establish what happened in every currency’s market. The evidence supports a connected description of exchange rates, policy decisions and economic releases, while leaving the causes of individual moves unresolved.
For readers following PineConnector activity alongside this external context, the separately available May Pulse report and June Pulse report cover their respective complete months. They should be read in their own stated windows; this market retrospective does not turn those monthly reports into a full-quarter network measure.