On the diminishing returns of indicator-led trading

Been pondering the sheer volume of discourse around every new economic print lately, especially in this room. CPI, NFP, GDP, you name it – the anticipation, the immediate knee-jerk reactions, the scramble to interpret what it 'really means' for rates and thus for everything else. And for a brief window, it does seem to matter, often creating a volatility spike that offers some short-term opportunities. But is anyone else starting to feel like the actual actionable edge from these indicators is becoming increasingly ephemeral, almost illusory?

Take the narrative around $USLV today, up almost 2% after a flat few days. Is that truly a deep dive into some nuanced economic undercurrent revealed by an indicator, or just another ripple in the pond? Contrast that with a pair like $INR, which saw a nearly 1% drop yesterday and is still struggling around 13.2. While economic data certainly plays a role, my gut feeling is that a lot of the 'impact' attributed to indicators is often just confirming a trend that price action had already been telegraphing, or serving as a convenient post-hoc rationalization for moves already in progress. It feels like we're increasingly trying to fit the market into a macro story, rather than letting the market tell its own. Am I out in left field here, or do others feel like pure price action, alongside liquidity flows and order book dynamics, might be a more reliable, albeit less narrative-driven, guide than obsessing over whether the latest number was 0.1% higher or lower than 'expected'? Push back, I'm genuinely interested in hearing the counter-arguments.