How IMF Programs Actually Move PSX: Short-Term Relief vs Long-Term Reality

• Fiscal tightening

• Subsidy removal

• Higher energy tariffs

• Tax expansion

• Slower domestic demand

This compresses margins and volumes after the relief phase.

Why 2023–2025 IMF Cycles Look “Different”

This time, markets reacted more strongly. Why?

Three reasons:

1. Starting point was collapse-level risk
   Reserves near $4bn meant default was priced in.

2. Rate cycle turned supportive
   SBP moved from 22% → ~10.5% (see TradingEconomics data you shared).

3. Domestic liquidity replaced foreign flows
   Retail participation surged (15,287 new UINs in Dec-25 alone).

IMF didn’t create growth—it removed panic.

Which PSX Sectors Benefit Most During IMF Programs

Short-Term Winners

• Banks (rates, liquidity, government paper)

• Energy (policy protection, cash flows)

• Fertilizers (subsidy logic, agri stability)

Medium-Term Losers

• Autos (unless rates fall meaningfully)

• FMCGs (price controls, inflation politics)

• Highly leveraged cyclicals

IMF cycles favor balance sheets, not stories.

Why “IMF Exit” Talk Doesn’t Move Markets

You said it plainly—and correctly:

IMF programmes end only when governance begins.

Markets agree.

IMF exit rhetoric without:

Pages: 1 2 3 4