Buy Crypto Markets Spot FuturesIOST Earn Event Center Rewards Hub

The last trading day was Thursday, September 10. All three indices fell for a fourth straight session: the Nasdaq Composite closed at 26,081.72, down 0.65%; the Dow Jones Industrial at 52,064.10, downThe last trading day was Thursday, September 10. All three indices fell for a fourth straight session: the Nasdaq Composite closed at 26,081.72, down 0.65%; the Dow Jones Industrial at 52,064.10, down

Pre-Market Briefing on Sept 11: Stocks Fall for a Fourth Straight Day, Exxon Mobil (XOM) Bucks the Trend with a 0.61% Gain, Can Core Hold 2.5% After August CPI Due Tonight?

#US Stocks

SIX$0.00456-1.93%

4$0.019638+14.71%

GAIN$0.0007132-21.64%

Author: MEXC

2026/09/11 16:06

The last trading day was Thursday, September 10. All three indices fell for a fourth straight session: the Nasdaq Composite closed at 26,081.72, down 0.65%; the Dow Jones Industrial at 52,064.10, down 0.60%; the S&P 500 at 7,592.30, down 0.58%. The daily star was Exxon Mobil (XOM), up 0.61% at $165.23 — while the integrated oil and gas industry averaged −1.25% that same day, the energy sector −1.59%, and Chevron (CVX) fell 0.50%. The counterintuitive part: WTI crude rose 6.69% on that very day. US August CPI is released at 12:30 UTC tonight, the last inflation print before the Fed's September 16 decision. Today's Academy is a Friday case study: in the week of March 2023, six banks carried almost the same share of uninsured deposits and ended up in completely different places. All figures are as of the September 10, 2026 US close, and all times are UTC.

The September 10 close: a fourth straight decline

All three indices closed lower again on September 10, and it was the fourth consecutive session. The Nasdaq Composite fell 0.65% to 26,081.72, the deepest of the three; the Dow Jones Industrial fell 0.60% to 52,064.10; the S&P 500 fell 0.58% to 7,592.30. The Russell 2000 dropped 1.04%, so small caps fell further than large caps.

The trigger was August PPI. Producer prices rose 5.4% year over year, above expectations, and the market read it as inflation not yet finished. The 10-year Treasury yield jumped more than 10 basis points at one point and broke above 4.94%, the highest in nearly three years.

Interest rates are the discount rate for every asset. When the 10-year moves 10 basis points in a session, what gets compressed is not one sector but the entire discounted-cash-flow table. That is why the Nasdaq and the Russell led the decline: the longer the duration and the further out the earnings, the more sensitive the valuation is to the discount rate.

The other event that day was oil. With tensions escalating in the Middle East, WTI crude rose 6.69% to about $102.48 a barrel and Brent rose 6.34% to about $107.63. Oil and bond yields moving up together is a double squeeze for equities: one raises costs, the other raises the discount rate.

At the single-stock level, Oracle (ORCL) closed down 5.23% at $153.17, dragged along with the market and the oil complex; after the close it rose about 4% on its quarterly results — revenue of about $19.35B, up roughly 30% year over year, cloud infrastructure of about $7.4B, up roughly 121%, and remaining performance obligations of about $664B. The stock is still down about 20% year to date, and the market has not settled its disagreement over the intensity of the company's capital spending.

Star of the day, Exxon Mobil (XOM): what moved it was a well

Exxon Mobil (XOM) is an integrated oil and gas company with a market capitalisation of $684.8B. On September 10 it closed at $165.23, up 0.61%, adding about $4.1B of market value in a day. Volume was only 1.01x the average, so there was no volume surge, and the stock sits just 6.8% below its 52-week high.

What moved it was an exploration announcement. On September 9 the company reported the 20th discovery in Angola's Block 15: the well encountered 25 metres of oil-bearing sandstone at 940 metres of water depth. The block has produced more than 2.7 billion barrels over 30 years, and the new well can tie back to existing facilities rather than requiring a new platform from scratch — which sets the order of magnitude for its development cost.

But what was actually disclosed needs stating plainly. The company gave drilled thickness and water depth; no recoverable-reserve figure has been published, and that number usually arrives with the development plan later. Twenty-five metres of oil-bearing sandstone tells you what the drill bit hit, not how much can be produced: porosity, permeability, crude quality and development economics all sit in between. When reading an exploration release, separating "encountered" from "recoverable" matters more than remembering the metres.

The five-dimension score fills in the character of the day. Volatility Control is a perfect 100, and Valuation Temperature is 95 — two corners held up firmly. Trend Position at 83 says the stock is already near the top of its range. Relative Strength at 59 and Peer Ranking at 58 are both mid-pack, and Peer Ranking is the weakest of the five: 6th out of 13.

Translated into one sentence, the chart says: it does not move much. For a stock with full marks on volatility control, both +0.61% and −0.61% sit inside its normal range. So what deserves attention on this day is not the size of the gain, but the fact that it closed green at all on a broadly red session.

Same oil price, six majors, six directions

Put the six international integrated names side by side on the same day and they do not point the same way: Petrobras (PBR) +2.15%, BP (BP) +0.88%, Exxon Mobil (XOM) +0.61%, Shell (SHEL) +0.38%, TotalEnergies (TTE) −0.45% and Chevron (CVX) −0.50%. Top to bottom is 2.65 points.

The pair worth comparing most closely is XOM and CVX: both are US integrated majors, both faced the same oil price, the same tax regime and the same trading session, and they finished 1.11 points apart. That tells you what was being priced that day was not the label "oil" but each company's own asset mix, regional exposure and news flow.

The integrated oil and gas industry averaged −1.25% that day and the energy sector −1.59%. That number matters, because it means this day cannot be written up as "oil stocks rallied." Quite the opposite: oil stocks closed lower as a group, and XOM was the one that went against it — outperforming the industry average by 1.86 points.

One-minute concept: to read a one-day move, start with beta

Beta measures how far a stock swings relative to the market: when the market moves 1%, how much does this one move on average. It describes amplitude, not direction.

Exxon Mobil's beta is 0.175. The market moves 1% and it moves 0.18% on average. On September 10 the S&P 500 fell 0.58%, so on that coefficient the stock "should" have fallen about 0.10% — it closed up 0.61% instead, and the difference is what belongs to its own news.

At the other end of the same coverage pool is CRWV, with a beta of 7.41: the market moves 1% and it moves 7.4% on average. It fell 6.13% that day, the worst in the pool. And two days earlier, on September 9, it had been the star of the day, up 11.72%. The same stock, two sessions apart, at both extremes — that is not fundamentals flipping in 48 hours, it is a high beta amplifying the market's own swings in the same direction.

The two are 42 times apart. That multiple explains how two stocks in the same session can leave completely opposite impressions.

So reading a one-day move should follow an order: beta first, then the sector average, and only then the company's own news. Reversing the order is where mistakes come from — seeing a 6.13% drop and going looking for bad news usually means mistaking ordinary volatility for an event.

It is also worth saying that low beta cuts both ways. It falls less on down days and it rises more slowly on up days. The number 0.175 does not pick a direction; it simply scales the market's move down.

What to watch tonight: US August CPI

US August CPI is released pre-market at 12:30 UTC tonight, and the University of Michigan consumer sentiment preliminary reading for September follows at 14:00 UTC.

This one is the macro focus of the week for a specific reason: it is the last inflation print before the Fed's September 16 decision. August PPI came in yesterday at 5.4% year over year, and market pricing for a 25bp hike in September moved up to roughly 70%. The policy rate is 3.50%–3.75%, set in December 2025 and unchanged through five consecutive meetings in 2026.

It matters because it sits closest to rates in the policy chain: CPI fixes the inflation print, the print fixes the dot plot, and the dot plot fixes the whole curve.

⚠️ Check the months before reading this chart. The two CPI bars are July prints and the two PPI bars are August prints — not the same month. What tonight fills in is precisely the August slot for CPI. Treating all four as a same-month comparison produces the wrong conclusion.

The four gauges currently stand at: PPI headline 5.4%, PPI core 4.6%, CPI headline 3.4%, CPI core 2.5%.

Two things read straight off the chart. First, headline and core are 0.9 points apart, and that gap is almost entirely energy. Second, both PPI bars are above 4.6%, so costs are still stacked upstream and have not fully passed through to the consumer.

Why watch core rather than headline? Because food and energy are driven by supply shocks — one geopolitical flare-up can send the energy component into double digits, and that says nothing about the temperature of domestic demand. Strip those two out and you can see how hot demand itself is. That is why the Fed treats core as the anchor.

Drill-down: inside that 3.4% headline, which two bars hold it up

Break last month's CPI into components and the spread is enormous: gasoline 24.6% and energy 14.7%, against apparel 3.9%, shelter 3.2%, food 3.0% and core goods at just 0.8%. Gasoline and core goods are 23.8 points apart.

Energy is under a tenth of the basket yet accounts for almost the entire gap between headline and core. That is why the same report can look ugly on the headline and still be mild at the core — the two numbers are not looking at the same thing.

Two other components are worth remembering on their own. Shelter is about a third of the basket and moves slowly; it is the ballast of the headline print, and at 3.2% it is still drifting down. Core goods is where tariffs and supply-chain costs show up directly, and it currently stands at just 0.8%.

So tonight has two concrete things to watch. First, do not read the headline alone: core at 2.5% year over year is the anchor, and the wider the two diverge the harder next week's dot plot becomes to write. Second, watch whether core goods ticks up — August PPI processed goods for intermediate demand rose 1.8% month over month, and when upstream costs start passing through, this is the first component to reflect it.

Connecting the two: the upstream of that energy component rose 6.69% yesterday

The upstream of that 14.7% energy component in tonight's CPI is crude oil. And yesterday crude surged — WTI up 6.69% to about $102.48 a barrel, Brent up 6.34% to about $107.63.

Yet oil stocks closed lower as a group. The day breaks cleanly into three layers.

Layer one, the crude upstream. Escalating tensions in the Middle East took WTI to $102.48. That is the upstream source of tonight's CPI energy component, but CPI measures retail prices at the consumer end, and between crude and the pump sit refining, transport, taxes and retail margin — the pass-through is neither immediate nor proportional.

Layer two, the industry in the middle. Crude surged and the integrated oil and gas industry still closed down 1.25%, the energy sector −1.59%, and Chevron −0.50%. The oil price and oil stocks are not the same thing: cost structures, tax regimes, output contracts and hedging arrangements all sit in between. A barrel rising 6.69% does not mean the companies holding the oilfields earned 6.69% more that day — and in any case the market prices off the forward curve, not today's spot.

Layer three, the one name. Exxon Mobil rose 0.61%, which is 1.86 points above the industry average and 1.11 points above Chevron. Volume was only 1.01x average, so there was no volume surge — this one moved on its own rather than riding a sector tailwind.

Put the three layers together and you get a transferable rule: when a commodity price jumps, do not jump straight to the conclusion that the related stocks will rise. Ask first where the company sits in the chain, then ask how much of that move its costs and contracts have already absorbed.

US Stocks Academy: nine-tenths of deposits uninsured — so why did some fail in two days and others open as usual

Start with the timeline of that week in March 2023.

On the evening of March 8, Silicon Valley Bank (SIVB) sold bonds to shore up liquidity, booking a $1.8B loss in one go while announcing a share offering; the stock dropped sharply after hours. On March 9, depositors requested $42B of withdrawals in a single day and the bank closed with a cash balance of negative $958M, with the stock down about 60%. On March 10, California regulators took it over, in what was then the second-largest US bank failure. On March 12, Signature Bank (SBNY) was closed the same day; regulators then announced backing for all deposits, and the panic cooled.

That same week, BNY Mellon (BK) carried uninsured deposits of 92% of its total, almost identical to Silicon Valley Bank's 93.8% — and it was open for business as usual.

This chart shows the share of uninsured deposits at six banks at the end of 2022: Silicon Valley Bank 93.8%, BNY Mellon 92.0%, State Street (STT) 91.2%, Signature Bank 89.3%, Northern Trust (NTRS) 81.6% and First Republic (FRC) 67.4%.

The ordering is the point. The three that disappeared rank highest, middle and lowest, and the three that survived sit in between. First Republic had the lowest uninsured share of the six and still could not hold on two months later.

So this ratio did not separate the outcomes. It tells you whether the money is covered by deposit insurance; it does not tell you whether the money wants to leave.

What actually separated them was something else: where the money came from.

Silicon Valley Bank's depositors were companies inside a single venture circle who knew one another. One message circulating in a group chat and several hundred companies can hit withdraw the same morning — the run was not caused by the money being uninsured, it was caused by synchronisation.

Custody banks have a completely different client structure. Funds, pension plans and central banks park money at BNY Mellon or State Street to settle trades and safekeep assets. Moving that money means rebuilding accounts, systems and compliance processes, which takes months. The switching cost is itself the moat, which is why the 2023 run never reached them.

From here comes a transferable test: when a company draws 60% of revenue from a single customer, or all its customers sit in one industry, the risk is not the word "concentration" — it is whether they will all change their minds on the same day. That test is not only about banks; it applies to any business whose customers are highly alike.

Company of the day: BNY Mellon (BK)

BNY Mellon deserves its own section, because it stretches the word "bank" into a dimension most people have never seen.

Founded in 1784, it is the oldest bank in the United States, but its core business is not lending. It safekeeps assets and handles clearing for funds, pension plans and central banks, with roughly $62.6 trillion of client assets under custody and administration — a figure larger than the combined GDP of many countries, though none of it is its own money. It is money other people have placed with it.

It earns service fees, not a spread. Custody, clearing and fund administration fees are the bulk of revenue. That determines the shape of its risk: it is far less exposed to the credit cycle, because it does not make its money on whether loans come back.

Its moat is that the clients' money cannot easily move. Switching custodians means rebuilding accounts, reconnecting systems and re-running compliance, which takes months. For a pension plan managing hundreds of billions, that is not a decision that fits inside a quarter. Which is why, even with 92% of its deposits uninsured, the 2023 run never reached it.

The other two in the group follow the same logic. State Street (STT) also provides asset custody and is the manager of the SPDR ETF family; institutions place money there to settle trades. Northern Trust (NTRS), founded in 1889, serves pension plans, endowments and high-net-worth families, with client relationships often measured in decades.

What the three share is this: clients put money there not for deposit interest but for settlement and safekeeping. Different purpose, different stickiness — and that, rather than any ratio, is what split the six into two groups that week.

Frequently asked questions

Q: Can September 10 be described as "rising crude lifted oil stocks"?

A: No — the facts run the other way. WTI rose 6.69% that day, but the integrated oil and gas industry average closed down 1.25% and the energy sector −1.59%, with Chevron (CVX) down 0.50%. Exxon Mobil (XOM) at +0.61% was the one that went against it, outperforming the industry average by 1.86 points, and volume was only 1.01x average with no volume surge.

Q: How large are the recoverable reserves in Exxon Mobil's Angola discovery?

A: Not published. What was disclosed is a drilled thickness of 25 metres and a water depth of 940 metres; the recoverable-reserve figure usually arrives with the development plan later. "Encountered" and "recoverable" are two different concepts, and that qualifier must be kept in any rewrite.

Q: Can the four numbers in the inflation-gauges chart be compared directly?

A: No, the months differ. CPI headline at 3.4% and CPI core at 2.5% are July prints; PPI headline at 5.4% and PPI core at 4.6% are August prints. What tonight fills in is the August slot for CPI. Treating all four as a same-month comparison produces the wrong conclusion.

Q: How should beta be used?

A: It measures how far a stock swings relative to the market and describes amplitude only, not direction. Exxon Mobil is 0.175 and CRWV is 7.41 — 42 times apart — and on the same broadly red session the first closed up while the second fell 6.13%. The order for reading a one-day move is beta first, then the sector average, then the company's own news. Low beta cuts both ways: it also rises more slowly on up days.

Q: Does a high share of uninsured deposits mean a bank is in danger?

A: No. Among the six banks at the end of 2022, the three that failed ranked highest (Silicon Valley Bank 93.8%), middle (Signature Bank 89.3%) and lowest (First Republic 67.4%), with the three survivors in between. The ratio tells you whether the money is insured, not whether it wants to leave. The real difference is client structure: whether the depositors know one another, and how high the switching cost is.

Q: Can Oracle's newly reported quarter be mixed with the prior quarter's figures?

A: No. Revenue of about $19.35B, cloud infrastructure of about $7.4B, growth of about 121% and remaining performance obligations of about $664B are the quarter just reported; the prior quarter was IaaS of $5.8B, growth of 93%, and a backlog of $638B with a net quarterly addition of $85B. Both sets must be labelled by quarter, or the sequential maths comes out wrong.

Disclaimer: This article is compiled and written by the MEXC RealStocks team. The data in this article is based on the closing of the US stock market on September 10, 2026. The content is a compilation of public market information, and individual stocks are publicly discussed targets, which do not represent the recommendation or opinion of MEXC and do not constitute any investment advice. More US stock content: @MEXC | @Alpha_MEXC | @MEXC_Research

Market Opportunity

SIX Price(SIX)

----

USD

SIX (SIX) Live Price Chart

The articles shared on this page are sourced from public platforms and are provided for reference only. They do not represent the position or views of MEXC. All rights belong to MEXC. If you believe any content infringes upon the rights of a third party, please contact [email protected] for prompt removal. MEXC does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of any content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be interpreted as a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC. For expert insights and in-depth analysis, visit MEXC Learn.