In 2018, the composition of the Fed will change dramatically: at the moment 4 out of 7 positions in the Board of Governors are open. In addition, there was a rotation in the list of regulator members who have the right to vote. That is why the reaction to the minutes of the December meeting of the Federal Reserve may be limited.

The central event of today is the publication of the minutes of the last meeting of the Fed. Traders are gradually entering the operating mode, while the macroeconomic calendar is not replete with events. Any more or less significant information guide can significantly affect the dynamics of trading, especially against the background of a large-scale weakening of the dollar.

The US currency is now the driving force of the foreign exchange market: while cross-pairs are traded in a narrow and flat range, the dollar pairs demonstrate quite strong volatility. And the vector of their movement depends solely on the behavior of the greenback.

What can the Fed's minutes tell? First of all, traders will know the general mood of the regulator's members. Judging by the accompanying statement and the comments of Janet Yellen, in December in the camp of the Federal Reserve there was no certainty that they would follow the given course. And although the Fed announced a three-fold rate increase in 2018, the dollar reacted to the results of the December meeting with a significant decline. Yes, on one hand, the "dot plot" indicates a triple hikee, but out of 16 leaders of the Federal Reserve, six immediately announced that the economic situation in the country will not allow the regulator to withstand the current rate. Two members of the Board of Governors (Neel Kashkari and Charles Evans) voted against the rate hike, but they will not affect monetary policy this year. Kashkari, Evans and Kaplan lost the right to vote - but it appeared in their colleagues with more "hawkish" views.

First, we are talking about the head of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland Loretta Mester. Over the past year, she expressed a firm belief in achieving a two-percent inflation rate in 2018, advocating further tightening of monetary policy. In her view, low inflation should not be an obstacle for the Fed, since "the negative consequences of delay are more significant than the effect of raising rates in conditions of weak inflationary dynamics."

Also in 2018, the head of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, John Williams, will have the right to vote. For a long time (for six years) he worked with Janet Yellen, or rather, in her submission, when she headed the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. Therefore, his views are very similar to her position, only with a more "hawkish" bias. In particular, he repeatedly stated that in 2017 the Fed could raise rates four times, given the dynamics of key macroeconomic indicators of the country. In general, the final point of the rate increase cycle, according to Williams, is "slightly below 3%."

Another Fed member with the right to vote in 2018 is the head of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, Raphael Bostic. He takes a more cautious stance, although he advocates a "gradual tightening of monetary policy." Nevertheless, in almost every speech Bostic emphasizes that the rate of increase will depend on the incoming macroeconomic data. Therefore, he cannot be considered as one of the "hawks" , but he rather belongs to the camp of "centrists" (like the future head of the Fed Jerome Powell).

However, the rotation in the list of members of the regulator, who have the right to vote, occurs every year. If the Governing Council were fully staffed, now it would be possible to build certain analytical strategies, predicting the resoluteness of the regulator. But the whole hitch is that at the moment there are four more vacancies in the Board of Governors.

While there is certainty for only one vacancy: the US president proposed the candidacy of Marvin Goodfriend, who previously served as economic adviser in his administration. On the one hand, he repeatedly urged the Fed to raise the rate, but on the other hand - he criticized the policy of the current regulator. Not so long ago, he said that the Fed is unable to "provide confidence in the purpose of inflation." If his candidature is approved by the US Senate, it will be very interesting to follow his actions in the new post.

As for the three remaining candidates for the remaining vacancies in the Board of Governors, there is no reliable information. They are dropping different names, but all of these is at the level of rumors. In addition, at the beginning of this year, the head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York William Dudley will leave his post. The name of his successor is also unknown.

Thus, the Fed's minutes published today will certainly give a general idea of the mood of the regulator's members. But the Fed is on the verge of big changes, so the market can simply ignore the opinion of those officials who will not influence monetary policy this year. There are a lot of them: Robert Kaplan, Neel Kashkari, Charles Evans, Janet Yellen and William Dudley. In addition, the number of open vacancies in the Board of Governors reduces the significance of the December minutes. Taking into account this factor, the market is unlikely to be able to make any forecasts for January-March: the Federal Reserve minutes of 2017 for today has practically lost its relevance.