Resilience Beneath the Noise: Why Markets May Be Stronger Than They Seem

In Interlaken’s view, recent economic headlines have painted a picture of extreme fragility. In the United Kingdom, recession fears dominate commentary following uneven growth data. In the United States, concerns about an impending slowdown persist despite data showing ongoing expansion. Meanwhile, central banks across major economies face heightened scrutiny as investors question whether policymakers can successfully navigate inflation, growth risks, and geopolitical tensions. Taken together, the prevailing narrative is one of uncertainty.

Yet, in our opinion, this narrative increasingly diverges from underlying economic reality. While sentiment has turned primarily pessimistic, the data itself tells a more stable story. In the UK, monthly fluctuations have amplified fears that are not fully supported by broader trends, which still point to modest, albeit unspectacular, growth. In the US, headline figures have softened, but key drivers such as consumer spending and business investment remain resilient. Central banks, for their part, are operating in an environment that is complex but not unprecedented. Policy uncertainty is not a signal of systemic breakdown, but rather a reflection of normal late-cycle dynamics.

Geopolitical developments, particularly the current conflict involving Iran, have added another layer of concern. The immediate economic transmission mechanism has been through higher oil prices, which have reignited fears of inflationary pressure and policy tightening. However, history suggests that such shocks, while disruptive in the short term, rarely translate into sustained global economic contraction. The direct economic footprint of the conflict remains limited relative to the size of the global economy, and both consumers and businesses tend to adapt. Energy price increases may shift spending patterns or compress margins temporarily, but they do not inherently derail expansion.

This disconnect between perception and reality is particularly important for financial markets. Markets do not require perfect conditions to perform well; they require outcomes that exceed expectations. When sentiment is pessimistic, expectations are set low. In such an environment, even modestly positive data can act as a catalyst for upward revisions in outlook. This dynamic, often described as a “wall of worry,” has historically been a defining feature of bull markets. Investors brace for the worst, and when the worst fails to materialize, asset prices adjust accordingly.

In our opinion, the current environment reflects many of these characteristics. Central bank uncertainty is elevated, but this is a normal feature of navigating competing economic forces rather than a sign of policy failure. Political developments continue to generate headlines, yet their long-term economic impact remains limited. The UK economy, while uneven, is not exhibiting the sustained contraction implied by recession fears. The US economy, despite softer headline growth, demonstrates underlying strength that contradicts narratives of imminent slowdown.

Taken together, these elements point to an economic backdrop that is more resilient than widely perceived. The divergence between sentiment and data creates conditions in which markets can be positively surprised. Rather than signaling fragility, widespread pessimism may, paradoxically, provide support for continued market strength. In this context, the greatest risk may not be economic weakness itself, but the tendency to underestimate the economy’s capacity to endure it.

Note: Interlaken Advisors does not offer investment or portfolio management services.

Nothing herein is intended to be investment advice. All investments involve the risk of loss, including the loss of principal. Past performance is no guarantee of future returns. The content contained in this article represents only the opinions and viewpoints of the Interlaken Advisors editorial staff.

2026: What is Noise and What is Important

American business enters 2026 with a constructive but more complex backdrop than the outsized gains of recent years. Research suggests that the dominant force shaping markets is not headline risk, but expectations already embedded in prices. Political noise, government shutdowns, and calendar-based indicators continue to command attention, yet history shows markets tend to discount all of these large headlines quickly, focusing instead on forward-looking fundamentals such as earnings growth, capital investment, and productivity.

For U.S. companies, the core expectation for 2026 is continued economic expansion at a more moderate pace. Growth is likely to be steadier rather than spectacular, with inflation pressures easing relative to recent peaks and financial conditions gradually becoming less restrictive. Equity markets appear positioned for positive, though less explosive, returns as optimism persists without tipping into broad euphoria, although we are seeing some early signs of such investor sentiment. In our opinion, this environment favors firms that can deliver consistent execution rather than relying on cyclical tailwinds alone.

American businesses should expect a year in which dispersion matters. Some sectors and firms will outperform meaningfully, while others lag, reflecting differences in pricing power, balance sheet strength, and exposure to structural growth trends such as digitalization, automation, and energy infrastructure investment. The market is likely to reward companies that demonstrate durable earnings visibility and credible long-term strategies over those dependent on short-term macro boosts.

For CEOs, the implication is clear: strategy must remain anchored in fundamentals rather than headlines. Leadership teams should resist overreacting to political developments or short-term data volatility and instead communicate a steady narrative to investors focused on long-term value creation. Investment decisions in technology, productivity enhancements, and workforce capability are especially critical in a year where modest improvements in efficiency can materially differentiate performance. CEOs should also be mindful that markets tend to price in widely anticipated risks; competitive advantage increasingly comes from executing well on initiatives that are less obvious to peers.

For CFOs, 2026 calls for disciplined financial management and flexibility. With interest rates likely to remain structurally higher than the pre-2020 era, capital allocation decisions deserve heightened scrutiny. Balance sheet resilience matters, not because a downturn is inevitable, but because volatility can emerge unexpectedly when sentiment shifts. We believe that this year, CFOs should prioritize liquidity management, stress-test cash flows against a range of economic scenarios, and evaluate refinancing opportunities proactively rather than reactively. Clear articulation of capital priorities, whether reinvestment, debt reduction, or shareholder returns, will be essential for maintaining investor confidence in a more selective market environment.

Both CEOs and CFOs should also recognize that markets are forward-looking and often move ahead of reported results. Transparent guidance, realistic assumptions, and consistent messaging can reduce valuation volatility and help ensure that the company’s strategic intent is understood. In a year where returns are expected to be positive but less forgiving, credibility with stakeholders becomes a competitive asset.

Overall, expectations for 2026 point to a supportive environment for American business, defined by moderate growth, improving inflation dynamics, and markets that reward execution over narrative. Companies that focus on productivity, capital discipline, and long-term strategic clarity are best positioned not just to navigate the year ahead, but to emerge stronger as the next phase of the economic cycle unfolds.

Note: Interlaken Advisors does not offer investment or portfolio management services.

Nothing herein is intended to be investment advice. All investments involve the risk of loss, including the loss of principal. Past performance is no guarantee of future returns. The content contained in this article represents only the opinions and viewpoints of the Interlaken Advisors editorial staff.

Economic Data Risks in 2025 and Beyond

One of the biggest risks to the economy may not be the micro or macro factors themselves, but rather how those factors are currently being measured. The Consumer Price Index, the benchmark statistic that guides Federal Reserve policy, financial markets, and household expectations, is showing troubling signs of data deterioration. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the share of directly collected prices has plunged to around 60 percent, down sharply from about 95 percent just a few years ago. At the same time, the portion of prices that are imputed (estimates drawn from other goods, regions, or statistical models) has surged above 30 percent.

CPI Data Imputations from Bloomberg

Imputation has long played a supporting role in official statistics. If a store is closed or a price cannot be found, statisticians may substitute data from a comparable location. During the pandemic, when in-person data collection was impossible, imputations rose temporarily, and the expectation was that the practice would normalize. Instead, it has become entrenched at historically high levels, leaving the CPI more reliant than ever on modeled assumptions rather than observed facts.

This matters because inflation is not just a number; it is a signal that shapes the cost of borrowing, the path of wages, and the adjustment of pensions and contracts. If that data is just “guessed” then the the underlying numbers lose integrity and the risks extend well beyond spreadsheets. Policymakers may underestimate or overestimate the persistence of inflation, for example, leading the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates too high or too low for too long. Financial markets, which price trillions of dollars of assets based on expectations of inflation, are left to guess whether the official numbers truly reflect reality. Households that depend on CPI-linked adjustments to Social Security or salaries may begin to question whether the figures align with their lived experience. Once trust in statistics erodes, credibility in policy follows.

When we look at the historical backdrop, it provides a cautionary tale. In the 1970s, U.S. officials underestimated how entrenched inflation had become, leading to policy errors that fueled years of economic stagnation. In other countries, such as Argentina or Turkey, unreliable inflation statistics have often driven citizens and businesses to rely on private trackers, severing the link between official measures and everyday life. The United States is far from such extremes, but the direction of travel is concerning. For decades, the CPI has been seen as the gold standard of inflation measurement. If that reputation weakens, the fallout will be felt across the economy.

When we asked why there was a surge in imputation, we realized the answer was quite complex. First, the retail landscape has shifted dramatically toward online commerce, where prices are increasingly dynamic and difficult to capture with traditional survey methods. Budget constraints may also be a factor, as the resources required for nationwide data collection have not kept pace with the demands of a digital economy. Supply disruptions and widening regional differences in prices make consistent tracking harder. And in an ironic twist, the rise of so-called “big data” has tempted statistical agencies to rely more on modeled shortcuts, tilting the balance away from direct observation.

All of this comes at a time when the U.S. economy is already struggling to find stability. Inflation, while down from the peaks of the early 2020s, remains sticky in core areas such as housing and healthcare, which are among the hardest categories to measure accurately. Growth has slowed under the weight of three years of higher interest rates, with GDP expected to hover around one percent this year. Geopolitical tensions continue to put pressure on energy markets, driving volatility. And households, regardless of what the headline numbers say, feel squeezed by costs that seem to rise faster than their paychecks. If the official data do not reflect that experience, frustration and bad investment will mount.

The danger is that policymakers are now flying the economy with blurred instruments. In calm times, small errors in data may not matter much, but in turbulence, even minor inaccuracies can prove disastrous. Inflation measurement is too central to be left vulnerable to guesswork. Without stronger investment in data collection, more transparency about statistical methods, and a willingness by officials to acknowledge uncertainty, the economy risks drifting into a zone where policy is made on shaky ground and credibility begins to crack.

In the end, the greatest threat of 2025 may not be inflation running too hot or too cold, but the simple fact that we can no longer be sure what the temperature really is.

For investors, it’s essential to recognize that markets don’t trade on the absolute level of inflation or growth, but on the gap between what was expected and what reality delivers. If official data are distorted by heavy imputation, those expectations become less reliable, creating wider swings when reality asserts itself. A CPI release that appears benign could send yields tumbling, only for a later revision or market reappraisal to spark a sharp reversal. In this environment, volatility is less a reflection of changing fundamentals and more a symptom of unreliable measurement. The danger is that markets begin reacting not to the economy itself, but to noise in the data, amplifying uncertainty at the very moment clarity is most needed.

Note: Interlaken Advisors does not offer investment or portfolio management services.

Nothing herein is intended to be investment advice. All investments involve the risk of loss, including the loss of principal. Past performance is no guarantee of future returns. The content contained in this article represents only the opinions and viewpoints of the Interlaken Advisors editorial staff.