The Interest Rates Paradox and How it'd Predict a Market Top Now
It is a common assumption that higher interest rates naturally slow economic expansion and cool overheated markets.
However, the historical record over the past 50 years tells a more nuanced story when it comes to bubbles. In several major crashes—the dotcom bubble, the U.S. housing bubble, and the Japanese Nikkei bubble—a pattern emerges: monetary authorities began increasing rates well before market tops were reached.
Surprisingly, instead of slowing the market in the short term, these rate hikes coincided with a parabolic run-up in asset prices.
The paradox lies in the fact that while rising rates are expected to dampen market exuberance, during these bubbles, they coexisted with—and arguably even fueled—frenzied market behavior.
This paradox has played out yet again over the last years. With us seeing not only the parabolic rally phase during the interest rate hikes but also us having a current agreement with the interest rates and equites topping at the same time. As with all previous market tops. As we sit here today, we have followed the interest rate topping paradox to the letter.
Let's look more into it.
Historical Patterns and the Paradox
The Early Phase: Initial hikes into a heating up market.
In each of these historical cases, central banks initiated rate hikes as part of a broader strategy to temper what they viewed as emerging economic imbalances. In the late 1980s, for instance, the Bank of Japan began tightening monetary policy as asset prices soared, anticipating overheating in the economy. Despite these early rate increases, the Nikkei continued its upward trajectory, ultimately reaching its peak in December 1989. This pattern was echoed in the U.S. during the dotcom era. Leading into the 2000 peak, the Federal Reserve started to raise rates to control inflationary pressures—even as the technology-heavy market rallied to unsustainable heights.
The pattern has always been similar. Markets are starting to get hot and perhaps there's some unwanted consequence of this (like inflation). So the central bank takes actions to cool things down with the interest rate hikes. Although there have been reactions from this in the near term, overall the trend has become stronger and stronger during the hike cycle.
Let me give you an example to add some context. Alan Greenspan is famous for the "Irrational exuberance" comment. He said that in 1996! The Nasdaq absolutely boomed from there for another 4 years. What had happened before was nothing compared to what came after the interest rate hikes started.
The Parabolic Reaction: Markets Defy Conventional Logic
What seems paradoxical is that rather than a smooth deceleration, markets often reacted to these rate hikes with an intensified speculative fervor. During the dotcom and housing bubbles, small increases in rates did not immediately curb investor optimism; instead, they appeared to add urgency, fueling a belief that the market was resilient enough to outperform despite higher borrowing costs. The market’s parabolic rise in asset prices during periods of tightening monetary policy is counterintuitive, suggesting that investors were less influenced by the immediate cost of capital and more driven by momentum and fear of missing out.
By the high of these rallies it was firmly believed that this was a sign the uptrends would continue. Indeed, they could only get stronger as the interest rates came back down.
....Nah uh. Wasn't how it went all!
And we find ourselves in a strongly similar situation now in 2025.
Leveling Off and the Market Peak
It gets weirder still when you notice rather than markets slowing down on rate cuts they highs of the equites rallies always came rate increases eventually plateau.
Historical data shows that when interest rates stabilized—often within a narrow band of around 5% to 6.5%—this stabilization coincided with the market reaching its absolute peak. In these instances, the plateau did not signal the end of the monetary tightening cycle; rather, it marked the culmination of the bubble. Market participants, having pushed prices to their limits, were suddenly confronted with a reversion, as the underlying economic fundamentals could no longer justify the inflated asset values.
Knowing what happened before does not let you know what will happen in the future, but it's worth knowing. It may well just end up being useful in the future. In every instance of a big market top in the last 50 years the pattern was interest rate hikes and parabolic rallies in this phase, when the hikes stopped the first market sell off began.
We have an exact matching of these conditions now.
The Bear Market and Rate Easing
Once the market had peaked, and the bubble burst, central banks found themselves in a difficult position. In response to the ensuing economic downturns, monetary authorities were compelled to cut rates dramatically—even as equity markets remained subdued. This rapid reduction in rates was aimed at stabilizing economies and stimulating recovery, yet it often came too late to salvage the once-insatiable market exuberance. The inversion of the earlier paradox—where rate hikes were accompanied by soaring markets—serves as a stark reminder of the complexity of monetary policy in times of speculative excess.
All you have to do is look at any of the interest rate charts for the crash in question and it's clear to see these both peaked and reversed around the same time. During bubbles, historically correlation with equities and interest rates is close to prefect. From the start of our interest rate hikes to now, this has continued to apply.
A play out of the historical norms for this would now see rates continue to drop with equities dropping alongside them (Overall, maybe rallying on the news now and then).
Which would make this a rather risky time to be buying the dip.
=================================
Realistic Examples of the Paradox
=================================
Nikkei Bubble (Late 1980s):
Dotcom Bubble (Late 1990s to 2000):
U.S. Housing Bubble (Mid-2000s):
However, the historical record over the past 50 years tells a more nuanced story when it comes to bubbles. In several major crashes—the dotcom bubble, the U.S. housing bubble, and the Japanese Nikkei bubble—a pattern emerges: monetary authorities began increasing rates well before market tops were reached.
Surprisingly, instead of slowing the market in the short term, these rate hikes coincided with a parabolic run-up in asset prices.
The paradox lies in the fact that while rising rates are expected to dampen market exuberance, during these bubbles, they coexisted with—and arguably even fueled—frenzied market behavior.
This paradox has played out yet again over the last years. With us seeing not only the parabolic rally phase during the interest rate hikes but also us having a current agreement with the interest rates and equites topping at the same time. As with all previous market tops. As we sit here today, we have followed the interest rate topping paradox to the letter.
Let's look more into it.
Historical Patterns and the Paradox
The Early Phase: Initial hikes into a heating up market.
In each of these historical cases, central banks initiated rate hikes as part of a broader strategy to temper what they viewed as emerging economic imbalances. In the late 1980s, for instance, the Bank of Japan began tightening monetary policy as asset prices soared, anticipating overheating in the economy. Despite these early rate increases, the Nikkei continued its upward trajectory, ultimately reaching its peak in December 1989. This pattern was echoed in the U.S. during the dotcom era. Leading into the 2000 peak, the Federal Reserve started to raise rates to control inflationary pressures—even as the technology-heavy market rallied to unsustainable heights.
The pattern has always been similar. Markets are starting to get hot and perhaps there's some unwanted consequence of this (like inflation). So the central bank takes actions to cool things down with the interest rate hikes. Although there have been reactions from this in the near term, overall the trend has become stronger and stronger during the hike cycle.
Let me give you an example to add some context. Alan Greenspan is famous for the "Irrational exuberance" comment. He said that in 1996! The Nasdaq absolutely boomed from there for another 4 years. What had happened before was nothing compared to what came after the interest rate hikes started.
The Parabolic Reaction: Markets Defy Conventional Logic
What seems paradoxical is that rather than a smooth deceleration, markets often reacted to these rate hikes with an intensified speculative fervor. During the dotcom and housing bubbles, small increases in rates did not immediately curb investor optimism; instead, they appeared to add urgency, fueling a belief that the market was resilient enough to outperform despite higher borrowing costs. The market’s parabolic rise in asset prices during periods of tightening monetary policy is counterintuitive, suggesting that investors were less influenced by the immediate cost of capital and more driven by momentum and fear of missing out.
By the high of these rallies it was firmly believed that this was a sign the uptrends would continue. Indeed, they could only get stronger as the interest rates came back down.
....Nah uh. Wasn't how it went all!
And we find ourselves in a strongly similar situation now in 2025.
Leveling Off and the Market Peak
It gets weirder still when you notice rather than markets slowing down on rate cuts they highs of the equites rallies always came rate increases eventually plateau.
Historical data shows that when interest rates stabilized—often within a narrow band of around 5% to 6.5%—this stabilization coincided with the market reaching its absolute peak. In these instances, the plateau did not signal the end of the monetary tightening cycle; rather, it marked the culmination of the bubble. Market participants, having pushed prices to their limits, were suddenly confronted with a reversion, as the underlying economic fundamentals could no longer justify the inflated asset values.
Knowing what happened before does not let you know what will happen in the future, but it's worth knowing. It may well just end up being useful in the future. In every instance of a big market top in the last 50 years the pattern was interest rate hikes and parabolic rallies in this phase, when the hikes stopped the first market sell off began.
We have an exact matching of these conditions now.
The Bear Market and Rate Easing
Once the market had peaked, and the bubble burst, central banks found themselves in a difficult position. In response to the ensuing economic downturns, monetary authorities were compelled to cut rates dramatically—even as equity markets remained subdued. This rapid reduction in rates was aimed at stabilizing economies and stimulating recovery, yet it often came too late to salvage the once-insatiable market exuberance. The inversion of the earlier paradox—where rate hikes were accompanied by soaring markets—serves as a stark reminder of the complexity of monetary policy in times of speculative excess.
All you have to do is look at any of the interest rate charts for the crash in question and it's clear to see these both peaked and reversed around the same time. During bubbles, historically correlation with equities and interest rates is close to prefect. From the start of our interest rate hikes to now, this has continued to apply.
A play out of the historical norms for this would now see rates continue to drop with equities dropping alongside them (Overall, maybe rallying on the news now and then).
Which would make this a rather risky time to be buying the dip.
=================================
Realistic Examples of the Paradox
=================================
Nikkei Bubble (Late 1980s):
- Monetary Policy: The Bank of Japan initiated rate hikes to cool a rapidly expanding economy and soaring asset prices.
- Market Behavior: Despite these increases, the Nikkei continued its parabolic climb, peaking in December 1989.
- Aftermath: Following the bubble’s burst, rates were cut sharply as the market entered a prolonged bear phase.
Dotcom Bubble (Late 1990s to 2000):
- Monetary Policy: In response to rising inflationary pressures, the Federal Reserve began increasing rates before the bubble reached its zenith.
- Market Behavior: Rather than curbing exuberance, the rate hikes coincided with an acceleration in market gains, contributing to an unsustainable rise in tech stock valuations.
- Aftermath: The eventual plateau in rates occurred as the market hit its peak, soon followed by a dramatic downturn when investor sentiment shifted.
U.S. Housing Bubble (Mid-2000s):
- Monetary Policy: The Federal Reserve’s gradual rate increases were part of an effort to moderate the housing market’s explosive growth.
- Market Behavior: Housing prices continued to rise, reflecting an underlying confidence in the market that outpaced the modest increases in borrowing costs.
- Aftermath: When rates eventually leveled off, the market was near its peak, and subsequent rate cuts during the bear market underscored the stark reversal of fortunes.
Trade active
We now have the first signs of possible big reversals in bond futures to the upside. If that happens, then it's likely the interest rate trends will continue to match those of historic bubbles and reversals. Analysis on bonds below;
We may be inside of a crash event to 3000 in SPX.
Read the full case with backlog of historic analysis/forecasts here: holeyprofitnewsletter.substack.com/p/the-case-for-3000-in-spx
Read the full case with backlog of historic analysis/forecasts here: holeyprofitnewsletter.substack.com/p/the-case-for-3000-in-spx
Disclaimer
The information and publications are not meant to be, and do not constitute, financial, investment, trading, or other types of advice or recommendations supplied or endorsed by TradingView. Read more in the Terms of Use.
We may be inside of a crash event to 3000 in SPX.
Read the full case with backlog of historic analysis/forecasts here: holeyprofitnewsletter.substack.com/p/the-case-for-3000-in-spx
Read the full case with backlog of historic analysis/forecasts here: holeyprofitnewsletter.substack.com/p/the-case-for-3000-in-spx
Disclaimer
The information and publications are not meant to be, and do not constitute, financial, investment, trading, or other types of advice or recommendations supplied or endorsed by TradingView. Read more in the Terms of Use.