Tag: Federal Reserve

Yield Curve Inverts, Briefly

The fears relating to the coronavirus and weakish consumer sentiment from the US, plus the Feds hold decision turned the tables on the US yield curve overnight, with the 3-month rate 2 basis points higher than the 10-year at one point. Its slightly positive now… but this is a sign of uncertainty.

Plus a measure of core U.S. inflation released on Thursday showed price pressures slowed to an annualized 1.3% in the fourth quarter from 2.1%, a weaker figure than analysts had expected. And below the Fed’s target.

The dip will be seen as some as a warning signal because it has inverted before each of the past seven U.S. recessions. The last inversion was at the height of the trade war.

But it also is driven by the thought that the Fed may need to pump more liquidity into the market, despite the assurance they were planning to ease back their open market operations in the next few months. This means buying more treasuries out along the curve. – Price up means yields fall.

Clearly, investors are looking for some form of safety and buying Treasuries out the curve is really the only way to do it.

And Bloomberg says that falling yields also triggered other market dynamics which are exacerbating the move. Convexity hedging — when mortgage portfolio managers buy or sell bonds to manage their duration exposure — is back in play. As yields fall, they make purchases.

The sequence of a swift drop in yields and curve flattening unleashing convexity-linked forces that re-starts the cycle is a recurring feature of the Treasury market .

A massive wave of convexity-related hedging in the swaps market in March helped send 10-year yields to levels then not seen since 2017. That came after the Fed took an abrupt shift away from policy tightening they had been doing in 2018. The Fed went on to cut rates three times over all of 2019.

Other factors may be at work now as well. Structural demand for long-dated Treasuries — linked to liability-driven investment and hedging from foreign investors including Taiwanese insurers — has helped to drive the curve flatter, according to Citigroup Inc.

We think its too soon to know whether this is an over-reaction, but once again it underscores markets are on a hair trigger. So expect more volatility ahead.

Fed Holds Cash Rate (As Expected)

The Fed kept the cash rate on hold, and there was little change to the commentary, other than a slightly weaker set of words surrounding the consumer.

Growth in household spending moderated toward the end of last year, but with a healthy job market, rising incomes, and upbeat consumer confidence, the fundamentals supporting household spending are solid. In contrast, business investment and exports remain weak, and manufacturing output has declined over the past year. Sluggish growth abroad and trade developments have been weighing on activity in these sectors. However, some of the uncertainties around trade have diminished recently, and there are some signs that global growth may be stabilizing after declining since mid-2018. Nonetheless, uncertainties about the outlook remain, including those posed by the new coronavirus. Overall, with monetary and financial conditions supportive, we expect moderate economic growth to continue.

Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in December indicates that the labor market remains strong and that economic activity has been rising at a moderate rate. Job gains have been solid, on average, in recent months, and the unemployment rate has remained low. Although household spending has been rising at a moderate pace, business fixed investment and exports remain weak. On a 12‑month basis, overall inflation and inflation for items other than food and energy are running below 2 percent. Market-based measures of inflation compensation remain low; survey-based measures of longer-term inflation expectations are little changed.

Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The Committee decided to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 1‑1/2 to 1-3/4 percent. The Committee judges that the current stance of monetary policy is appropriate to support sustained expansion of economic activity, strong labor market conditions, and inflation returning to the Committee’s symmetric 2 percent objective. The Committee will continue to monitor the implications of incoming information for the economic outlook, including global developments and muted inflation pressures, as it assesses the appropriate path of the target range for the federal funds rate.

In determining the timing and size of future adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate, the Committee will assess realized and expected economic conditions relative to its maximum employment objective and its symmetric 2 percent inflation objective. This assessment will take into account a wide range of information, including measures of labor market conditions, indicators of inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and readings on financial and international developments.

Voting for the monetary policy action were Jerome H. Powell, Chair; John C. Williams, Vice Chair; Michelle W. Bowman; Lael Brainard; Richard H. Clarida; Patrick Harker; Robert S. Kaplan; Neel Kashkari; Loretta J. Mester; and Randal K. Quarles.

Fed Says Some SME Online Lender Websites Are Flawed

The US Federal Reserve Board on Thursday released Uncertain Terms: What Small Business Borrowers Find When Browsing Online Lender Websites, a report that examines the information that prospective small business borrowers encounter when researching and comparing credit products offered by online lenders.

Nonbank online lenders are becoming more mainstream alternative providers of financing to small businesses. In 2018, nearly one-third of small business owners seeking credit reported having applied at a nonbank online lender. The industry’s growing reach has the potential to expand access to credit for small firms, but also raises concerns about how product costs and features are disclosed. The report’s analysis of a sampling of online content finds significant variation in the amount of upfront information provided, especially on costs. On some sites, descriptions feature little or no information about the actual products or about rates, fees, and repayment terms. Lenders that offer term loans are likely to show costs as an annual rate, while others convey costs using terminology that may be unfamiliar to prospective borrowers. Details on interest rates, if shown, are most often found in footnotes, fine print, or frequently asked questions.

The report’s findings build on prior work, including two rounds of focus groups with small business owners who reported challenges with the lack of standardization in product descriptions and with understanding product terms and costs.

In addition, the report finds that a number of websites require prospective borrowers to furnish information about themselves and their businesses in order to obtain details about product costs and terms. Lenders’ policies permit any data provided by the small business owner to be used by the lender and other third parties to contact business owners, often leading to bothersome sales calls. Moreover, online lenders make frequent use of trackers to monitor visitors on their websites. Even when visitors do not share identifying information with the lender, embedded trackers may collect data on how they navigate the website as well as other sites visited.

US Agencies Find “Shortcomings” For Several Large Financial Firms

The Federal Reserve Board and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation announced Tuesday that they did not find any “deficiencies,” which are weaknesses that could result in additional prudential requirements if not corrected, in the resolution plans of the largest and most complex domestic banks. However, plans from six of the eight banks had “shortcomings,” which are weaknesses that raise questions about the feasibility of a firm’s plan, but are not as severe as a deficiency. Plans to address the shortcomings are due to the agencies by March 31, 2020.

Resolution plans, commonly known as living wills, describe a bank’s strategy for rapid and orderly resolution under bankruptcy in the event of material financial distress or failure.

In the plans of Bank of America, Bank of New York Mellon, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, State Street, and Wells Fargo, the agencies found shortcomings related to the ability of the firms to reliably produce, in stressed conditions, data needed to execute their resolution strategy. Examples include measures of capital and liquidity at relevant subsidiaries. The agencies did not find shortcomings in the plans from Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan Chase.

The firms will receive feedback letters, which will be publicly available on the Board’s website. For the six firms whose plans have shortcomings, the letter details the specific weaknesses and the actions required. Overall, the letters note that each firm made significant progress in enhancing its resolvability and developing resolution-related capabilities but all firms will need to continue to make progress in certain areas.

To that end, the letters confirm the agencies expect to focus on testing the resolution capabilities of the firms when reviewing their next plans. Resolving a large bank would be challenging and unprecedented, and the agencies expect the firms to remain vigilant as markets change and as firms’ activities, structures, and risk profiles change.

The agencies also announced on Tuesday that Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Wells Fargo had successfully addressed prior shortcomings identified by the agencies in their December 2017 resolution plan review.

Kitchen Sink From The Fed – Up To $365 Billion In The Next Month! [Podcast]

The latest from the Federal Reserve, and the trade talks – are they connected? Why the lift in repo transactions ahead?

https://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/opolicy/operating_policy_191212

Digital Finance Analytics (DFA) Blog
Digital Finance Analytics (DFA) Blog
Kitchen Sink From The Fed – Up To $365 Billion In The Next Month! [Podcast]
Loading
/

Kitchen Sink From The Fed – Up To $365 Billion In The Next Month! [Video]

The latest from the Federal Reserve, and the trade talks – are they connected? Why the lift in repo transactions ahead?

https://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/opolicy/operating_policy_191212

Kitchen Sink From The Fed – Up To $365 Billion In The Next Month!

The Fed appears to be concerned about end of the year liquidity, judging by their latest statement on their repo operations.

The Open Market Trading Desk (the Desk) at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York has released the schedule of repurchase agreement (repo) operations for the monthly period from December 13, 2019 through January 14, 2020.  In accordance with the most recent FOMC directive, the Desk will conduct repo operations to ensure that the supply of reserves remains ample and to mitigate the risk of money market pressures around year end that could adversely affect policy implementation.

The Desk will continue to offer two-week term repo operations twice per week, four of which span year end. In addition, the Desk will also offer another longer-maturity term repo operation that spans year end. The amount offered in this operation will be at least $50 billion.    

Overnight repo operations will continue to be held each day.  On December 31, 2019 and January 2, 2020, the overnight repo offering will increase to at least $150 billion.  In addition, on December 30, 2019, the Desk will offer a $75 billion repo that settles on December 31, 2019 and matures on January 2, 2020. 

The Desk intends to adjust the timing and amounts of repo operations as needed to mitigate the risk of money market pressures that could adversely affect policy implementation, consistent with the directive from the FOMC.

Detailed information on the schedule and parameters of term and overnight repurchase agreement operations are provided on the Repurchase Agreement Operational Details site.

So, the NY Fed will continue to offer two-week term repo operations twice per week, four of which run across the end of the year end. Plus, they will also offer another longer-maturity term repo operation that spans year end. The amount offered in this operation will be at least $50 billion.

Beyond that, they announced that the overnight repo offering will increase to at least $150 billion to cover the “turn” in a flood of overnight liquidity.  And on December 30, 2019, the Desk will offer a $75 billion repo that settles on December 31, 2019 and matures on January 2, 2020.

And they leave the door open to more if need by saying “intends to adjust the timing and amounts of repo operations as needed to mitigate the risk of money market pressures that could adversely affect policy implementation, consistent with the directive from the FOMC.”

So in essence, as well has growing the size its overnight repos to $150 billion, the Fed will run nine term repos covering the year-end turn from Dec 16th to Jan 14th, 8 of which will amount to $35 billion and the first will be $50 billion, for a total injection of $365 billion in the coming month.

This is what the Fed Balance Sheet might look like. If this is not QE, I do not know what is….

The core question is what are they afraid of?

Fed Holds Their Cash Rate

Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in October indicates that the labor market remains strong and that economic activity has been rising at a moderate rate. Job gains have been solid, on average, in recent months, and the unemployment rate has remained low. Although household spending has been rising at a strong pace, business fixed investment and exports remain weak. On a 12‑month basis, overall inflation and inflation for items other than food and energy are running below 2 percent. Market-based measures of inflation compensation remain low; survey-based measures of longer-term inflation expectations are little changed.

Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The Committee decided to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 1‑1/2 to 1-3/4 percent. The Committee judges that the current stance of monetary policy is appropriate to support sustained expansion of economic activity, strong labor market conditions, and inflation near the Committee’s symmetric 2 percent objective. The Committee will continue to monitor the implications of incoming information for the economic outlook, including global developments and muted inflation pressures, as it assesses the appropriate path of the target range for the federal funds rate.

In determining the timing and size of future adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate, the Committee will assess realized and expected economic conditions relative to its maximum employment objective and its symmetric 2 percent inflation objective. This assessment will take into account a wide range of information, including measures of labor market conditions, indicators of inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and readings on financial and international developments.