Economy July 30, 2026 07:25 AM

Bank of England Maps Out Three Economic Paths After Holding Rates at 3.75%

Central, milder and adverse scenarios show differing inflation and growth trajectories tied to energy prices and second-round effects

By Caleb Monroe
Share
Twitter Reddit Facebook LinkedIn

The Bank of England left its policy rate unchanged at 3.75% following a 6-3 split on the Monetary Policy Committee. In accompanying analysis it published three scenarios - central, milder and adverse - that outline alternative paths for inflation, output, and energy prices through 2029. Markets are pricing a high probability of two rate hikes by Q3 2027.

Bank of England Maps Out Three Economic Paths After Holding Rates at 3.75%
Summarize with
ChatGPT Perplexity Claude Grok Gemini

Key Points

  • The Bank of England held the policy rate at 3.75% after a 6-3 vote, with markets pricing a high chance of two rate hikes by Q3 2027 - relevant for financial markets and borrowing costs.
  • Central scenario: inflation peaks at 3.2% in Q4 2026, falls to 1.7% in Q1 2028, and reaches 1.9% in Q3 2029; growth runs 1.1% in Q3 2026 and Q3 2027, rising to 1.7% in Q3 2028 and 1.6% in Q3 2029 - impacting consumer sectors and long-term investment decisions.
  • Adverse and milder scenarios diverge primarily on energy prices and second-round effects - higher energy costs in the adverse path lift inflation expectations, while the milder path assumes weaker demand and a looser labour market limit persistent inflation.

The Bank of England kept its policy rate at 3.75% on Thursday after the Monetary Policy Committee voted 6-3 to hold. Alongside the decision, the central bank published three alternative economic scenarios - central, milder and adverse - each laying out different projections for inflation, growth and energy prices across the forecast horizon.

Officials noted that financial markets currently place a high probability on two further rate increases by Q3 2027, and the scenarios incorporate that market pricing into their assumptions.


Central projection

Under the Bank's central scenario, inflation reaches a peak of 3.2% in the fourth quarter of 2026. It then drops below the 2% target to 1.7% in Q1 2028, before edging up to 1.9% by Q3 2029. Economic growth in this baseline path runs at an annual rate of 1.1% in Q3 2026 and again in Q3 2027, accelerating to 1.7% in Q3 2028 and 1.6% in Q3 2029.

Energy price assumptions in the central projection follow market curves. Brent oil is assumed to decline gradually from $76 per barrel in Q3 2026 to around $71 at the end of the forecast period. Natural gas futures peak at just over 123 pence per therm in the fourth quarter before falling to a little under 60 pence by the end of the horizon. The Bank assumes the energy shock produces moderate second-round inflationary effects.


Milder scenario

In the milder outcome, inflation peaks at 2.7% in Q4 2026, then moderates to 2.4% in Q3 2027 and 1.7% in Q3 2028 and Q3 2029. Growth is recorded at an annual 1.1% in Q3 2026 and Q3 2026, and then at 1.6% in Q3 2028 and Q3 2029. The Bank says oil and gas future prices in this scenario are similar to levels observed after the U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding was signed - roughly 3% and 6% below the central scenario respectively.

Crucially, the milder path assumes there are no new second-round effects. A looser labour market and weak demand are assumed to limit workers' bargaining power and firms' ability to pass on higher costs, curbing persistent inflationary pressures.


Adverse scenario

The adverse scenario envisages a notably higher inflation profile. Inflation rises to 3.1% in Q3 2026, accelerates to 4.1% in Q3 2027, then eases to 2.8% in Q3 2028 and 2.4% in Q3 2029. Growth in this scenario is 1.1% in Q3 2026, slows to 0.9% in Q3 2027, and then picks up to 1.6% in Q3 2028 and 1.7% in Q3 2029.

Energy price assumptions are materially higher than in the central case: oil averages about 30% above the central projection and gas about 60% higher, though the Bank notes these levels are still below the most severe scenario considered in April. Under the adverse path, persistently elevated energy prices push up inflation expectations, producing stronger and more persistent second-round effects than in the central scenario.


The Bank's published scenarios present alternative routes for inflation and growth that hinge largely on energy price developments and the extent of second-round effects. They provide a framework for understanding how differing energy trajectories and labour market conditions could influence monetary policy decisions and economic outcomes through 2029.

Risks

  • Elevated energy prices in the adverse scenario could sustain higher inflation and push inflation expectations upward, affecting consumer prices and energy-intensive industries.
  • Second-round inflationary effects - if stronger than in the central projection, they could make inflation more persistent and complicate monetary policy, influencing markets and corporate pricing strategies.
  • A looser labour market and weaker demand in the milder scenario could limit wage and price pressures, but also imply weaker nominal demand for sectors reliant on consumer spending.

More from Economy

German CPI Rises to 2.8% in July as Energy Costs Surge Jul 30, 2026 China’s Politburo Signals Willingness to Bolster Growth but Offers No New Steps Jul 30, 2026 Bank of England Divided Over Next Move as Rates Held at 3.75% Jul 30, 2026 Bank of England Holds Rates at 3.75% as Split on Further Tightening Widens Jul 30, 2026 Microsoft Earnings Calm Markets as Fed Uncertainty Weighs on Stocks Jul 30, 2026