Fed Holds Federal Funds Rate at 3-3/4% to 4% in October 28 FOMC Statement

The Federal Open Market Committee kept the federal funds target range at 3-3/4% to 4% on 28 October 2026, according to the Federal Reserve's statement. The decision passed by a 10-2 vote, with Lisa D. Cook and Beth M. Hammack dissenting in favor of a 1/4 percentage point increase. The statement says economic activity is expanding at a strong pace and that inflation remains elevated.

What did the FOMC decide on 28 October 2026?

The Committee decided to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 3-3/4% to 4%, as of 28 October 2026. The range did not change at this meeting.

How did the vote split?

Two members voted against the monetary policy action. Cook and Hammack preferred to raise the target range for the federal funds rate by 1/4 percentage point at this meeting. The statement names both of them, so the dissent is on the Fed's own record.

The vote count is the simplest measure of agreement on the day. Ten members approved the statement and two did not, so the dissent is the only recorded departure from the majority position. The dissent is recorded as a preferred action. Anything beyond that, such as the dissenters' reasoning, needs a separate source.

Why the dissent matters

The dissent is the most specific part of the record. Cook and Hammack did not simply vote no. They preferred a defined action: a 1/4 percentage point increase in the target range, stated in the release as their preference at this meeting. That gives readers a concrete alternative to compare against the hold, and it shows the Committee was not unanimous on the path, even though a majority approved the statement.

What did the statement say about the economy and inflation?

The statement describes economic activity as expanding at a strong pace and says inflation remains elevated (Federal Reserve statement). TD Economics highlighted the change in wording: the Committee's assessment of activity moved to "strong" from a prior characterization of "solid" (TD Economics). The "solid" wording comes from TD's description, not from a quote of the earlier statement.

Two phrases carry most of the assessment. The first describes activity as expanding at a strong pace. The second says inflation remains elevated. Read together, they describe an economy that is growing quickly while inflation is still running high. The statement does not attach a number to either phrase, so the words are the only evidence the text offers for them.

What does a hold mean for startup funding and deals?

A hold keeps the federal funds target range where the Committee set it, so this decision does not by itself change the benchmark. The statement sets a policy range, not a loan rate, and it does not say how banks or lenders will price their loans. Anyone pricing debt for a round or deal needs the lender's own terms.

The distinction matters because the federal funds target range is a benchmark the Committee sets, while a company's loan or credit line is priced by the lender. The two are connected, but this statement covers only the first. A hold tells a reader where the benchmark sits, not what a specific borrower will pay.

How should a reader cite this decision?

Cite the Federal Reserve statement, not a headline. The press release carries the vote count, the names of the dissenting members and the target range, and it is dated 28 October 2026 on federalreserve.gov. Cite the press release itself, with its date and URL, so the reader lands on the same text this article quotes.

When you quote the decision, give the date, the target range as the statement writes it, the vote count and the two dissenting names. Each of these is in the primary documents, so one citation can point to the Fed rather than to a chain of news coverage.

How to check this decision yourself

• Open the press release dated 28 October 2026 and find the sentence stating that the Committee decided to maintain the target range.
• Confirm the vote reads 10-2 and that the dissent names Lisa D. Cook and Beth M. Hammack.
• The same decision sentence appears in the PDF version of the statement on federalreserve.gov, so a reader can check the wording in either format and see the same target range of 3-3/4 to 4 percent.
• Check the phrases "expanding at a strong pace" and "inflation remains elevated" against the statement's own text, not a summary.
• If you repeat TD's claim that the assessment was upgraded from "solid", compare it with the earlier statement yourself.

What's still unclear?

• Economic data. The statement is qualitative. It does not include underlying data releases, prior readings or revisions, so "strong" and "elevated" cannot be checked against numbers in this document alone.
• Next move. The statement does not say what the Committee will do at its next meeting. Two dissents in favor of a hike show disagreement, but the statement alone does not show how close the majority is to a hike.
• Market reaction. The statement does not show how markets, lenders or investors responded to the decision.
• Weakest point. The "strong" upgrade rests on a comparison with the earlier statement. The earlier wording comes only from TD Economics's description, not from the earlier statement itself.