The benchmark 10‑year Treasury yield jumped 8 basis points to 5.041% at 4:07 a.m. ET, having briefly topped 5% on Monday before easing back.

One basis point equals 0.01 percentage point; yields and prices move inversely. The 30‑year Treasury yield, more sensitive to geopolitical risk, rose 7 basis points to 5.4%, while the 2‑year note gained about 5 basis points to 4.686%.

The move precedes the Federal Reserve’s two‑day policy meeting that starts Tuesday, with markets now pricing a higher probability of a quarter‑point rate increase after August inflation stayed well above the Fed’s 2% target.

According to the CME FedWatch tool, traders see more than a 92% chance the Fed will lift rates by 25 basis points at its upcoming meeting.

“U.S. 10‑year Treasuries are highly sensitive to inflation expectations, and with inflation gauges still above the Fed’s 2% target, we expect this tight link to persist for a while,” said Jonathan Liang, Standard Chartered’s CIO of fixed income and FX.

Experts told Verum that the close oil‑Treasury relationship could add further upward pressure on yields if crude prices stay elevated, since higher energy costs feed inflation expectations.

BMO Capital Markets notes that the one‑month rolling correlation between front‑month WTI crude and the 10‑year Treasury yield has risen to 0.96.

“Speaking simply, higher oil prices drive higher inflation expectations and the reverse is also true,” said Steve Sosnick, chief strategist at Interactive Brokers.

He added, via email to Verum, that although the oil‑yield link is usually modest, current geopolitical forces behind oil prices and global inflation have made the correlation much tighter.

“As long as oil prices remain firm and keep drifting higher, they will continue to put upward pressure on interest rates,” Sosnick concluded.

OpenAI’s Sam Altman offered the most thorough remarks to date on potential AI safety frameworks, following his alignment with Anthropic’s Dario Amodei and Elon Musk in urging a temporary slowdown of the sector. Tensions surrounding AI safety have surged after an Anthropic researcher resigned last week, claiming that developers feared the technology could “cause humanity’s demise by the end of the decade,” a warning that spurred similar alarm among OpenAI staff and other lab members. The leaders of major AI firms have recently shown uncommon agreement, as Altman and Musk jointly endorsed Amodei’s essay calling for a measured pace in advancing the most powerful AI models. AI‑related stock prices fell on Monday as investors reacted to the statements, while U.S. President Donald Trump rejected the CEOs’ caution on Sunday, arguing that a slowdown would hinder America’s dominance in AI compared with China. Sam Altman outlines two potential disastrous outcomes for AI development. Altman stated in a late‑night X post that a federal framework establishing uniform safety standards for frontier AI is welcome, emphasizing that “no level of American competitive pressure can excuse reckless behavior.” He warned that AI advancement might lead to loss of control over future outcomes and could concentrate excessive power in the hands of a single individual or corporation. At the same time, Washington legislators are rushing to respond to demands for regulatory safeguards. The developments occur as Anthropic and OpenAI prepare for what could be historic initial public offerings, with Altman stating in a Fortune interview on Saturday that the companies will not pursue an IPO in 2026. Amodei’s three‑step plan. A primary safety concern involves models gaining the capacity to enhance their own performance, a process called recursive self‑improvement (RSI). He noted that since early summer AI has been progressing rapidly, largely because AI systems are now capable of creating the next generation of AI themselves. He warned that without oversight, the technology could outpace our capacity to comprehend and control it, making careful, possibly restrained, development essential. He outlined a three‑step approach designed to slow development while preserving commercial benefits and maintaining the United States’ competitive edge in AI. The plan calls for every frontier AI company to provide external evaluators with access comparable to that of employees — a commitment Anthropic has already made — and urges all such labs to adopt shared safety standards, curb uncontrolled AI acceleration, and coordinate globally. On Saturday, Altman posted on X that he concurred with Amodei’s call for AI firms to “pace the frontier,” adding that adopting independent evaluators with employee‑level access is a worthwhile step and that his company will follow suit. Altman said in a Monday post that consistent regulations to manage frontier risk — such as independent auditors — are valuable, but clarified that “pacing” does not equate to halting progress, which remains swift and ongoing. He concluded that the costs of pacing are justified, asserting that no level of American competitive pressure can excuse reckless actions that let capabilities outpace alignment and monitoring. He noted that governmental assistance will be needed for international coordination, but emphasized that the industry should first act independently. Coordinating AI safety measures and a sector‑wide slowdown with Chinese AI developers will present significant hurdles. The United States and China continue a rivalry for AI supremacy, with tensions rising as Chinese models become increasingly sophisticated and widely adopted. He added that the toughest aspect of his proposal is the possibility that rival nations may decline to adopt similar measures. He noted that the long‑term goal would be collaborative effort to impose a speed limit on AI progress, according to an interview with CBS News’ “Sunday Morning.” He acknowledged that achieving such a limit would be challenging due to strong incentives to get ahead and the military advantages involved, admitting uncertainty about feasibility but urging an attempt. The essay has attracted criticism in China, with state‑owned Global Times stating on Monday that “Amodei’s proposals aim to cast China’s legitimate AI development as a threat and exacerbate U.S.–China confrontation.” China’s Foreign Ministry responded on Monday, labeling the CEOs’ remarks as “fearmongering.”

Novo Nordisk

The Danish drugmaker called the changes the beginning of a new chapter, as it has been grappling with stiff competition from chief rival Eli Lilly

In an exclusive interview with CNBC, Novo CEO Mike Doustdar said the rebrand and culture shift are “part of the same package” for the company to evolve its strategy as it tries to win back customers from Lilly.

“I think there’s no secret that over the last four or five years, the external environment and what has happened to Novo Nordisk has really made us reflect how we need to readjust and rethink about the next decade to come and what shifts are needed in our strategic direction,” he told CNBC.

Doustdar said the “work is cut out for us,” adding that Novo needs to improve several aspects – from research and development and manufacturing to sales and marketing – to be able to compete in the obesity drug market.

Shares of Novo have dropped about 15% this year despite the successful launch of the oral version of Wegovy, which surpassed 3 million prescriptions as of June. The company recently scrapped three trials on an experimental cardiovascular drug. That challenge came as it continues to lag in the obesity space with 38.8% market share compared to Lilly’s 60.9% in the second quarter, according to a Lilly earnings presentation citing IQVIA data.

In a release, Novo also announced a broader company rebrand focused around the phrase “Lasting Health Starts Now,” which promotes the idea that patients should make progress toward long-term well-being immediately rather than later. The company said the marketing is a bid to build relevance and trust with the public and other stakeholders, and bring “breakthrough science closer to people’s daily lives.”

When asked whether the rebrand and cultural overhaul were driven by Novo’s recent market share losses in obesity, Doustdar said the changes were less about competitive setbacks and more about adapting to a dramatically different operating environment.

He said the rapid growth of obesity treatments has transformed Novo’s patient base and shifted the market toward a more consumer-oriented model, where patients move on and off therapies more frequently than in traditional diabetes care. As a result, Doustdar said Novo needs to become more focused on meeting patients where they are, while increasing the speed and clarity of its decision-making to keep pace with the evolving market.

“Our operating environment phenomenally changed compared to just 10 years ago,” he told CNBC.

Novo Nordisk will remain the legal name for the company, according to the release. That original name dates back to the 1989 merger of two competing Danish pharmaceutical companies: Novo Terapeutisk Laboratorium and Nordisk Insulinlaboratorium.

The drugmaker said its corporate culture will be based on a new set of four principles that will help it gain advantages in an increasingly competitive market where more of its products have gone direct-to-consumer.

Those tenets are innovating with patients as the primary focus, raising the company’s performance to “create greater value for all stakeholders,” setting clearer priorities and simpler workflows and never compromising on patient safety and ethics.

“When you think about strategy, that’s really the the journey you’re taking and the direction you’re setting the company to go forward with,” Doustdar said. “But you also need behaviors. You need a cultural element that allows your colleagues and yourself to really make sure that a strategy gets executed.”

Despite its challenges, Novo has had one significant tailwind this year in the launch of the oral version of Wegovy. On top of its explosive launch, the pill had a head start over a rival weight loss pill from Lilly called Foundayo.

Doustdar said Novo has maintained “a lion’s share” of the oral market even with competition, noting that physicians find the Wegovy pill to be more effective than Lilly’s, with around 17% of weight loss.