A Whiff of Inflation

May 9th, 2016 8:34 am

Via the WSJ:

A top Federal Reserve official said Monday that the U.S. central bank should consider allowing inflation to temporarily rise above its 2% annual target.

Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago President Charles Evans said in remarks in London that aiming for such an overshoot may help the Fed keep price-growth at around 2% more easily.

“Overshooting a little bit just to make sure you get to 2% strikes me as quite sensible,” Mr. Evans said during a panel discussion at CityWeek, a London financial-services conference.

He argued that a prolonged spell of too-low inflation carries greater risks and a brief overshoot may help anchor expectations of future inflation close to the Fed’s 2% goal.

His remarks come as Fed officials are weighing the case for increasing short-term interest rates at their next policy meeting in June.

Soft growth in the first quarter and signs of a slowdown in job creation have reinforced expectations the central bank will hold steady next month and reconsider the case for higher borrowing costs later in the year.

Officials have also signaled that uncertainty surrounding the outcome of a British vote on membership of the European Union June 23 is potentially another factor that could encourage them to stand pat.

Mr. Evans said Monday that he’s comfortable with the Fed’s cautious approach to interest rate increases, saying that although the U.S. economy appears healthy he’d prefer to see firmer evidence that inflationary pressures are sufficient to return annual price-growth to target.

“In my opinion, the continuation of a ‘wait and see’ monetary policy response is appropriate,” Mr. Evans said.

Speaking on the same panel, European Central Bank Vice-President Vítor Constâncio said that continued progress in the U.S. to bring interest rates up to more normal levels is among the key short-term developments in the world economy.

“We are all hoping that the strength of the recovery in the U.S. will allow the Fed to increase rates and get away from the zero-lower bound,” he said, adding that he expects such a move may boost growth more broadly by lifting businesses’ and consumers’ “animal spirits.”

Both Mr. Evans and Mr. Constancio lamented advanced economies’ recent reliance on central banks to revive growth. Mr. Evans said fiscal policy in the U.S. is “providing less support than I would like,” while Mr. Constancio said the eurozone economy would benefit from economic reforms and more “growth-friendly” fiscal policies.

Write to Jason Douglas at [email protected]

“The primacy of the dealers has been eroded.”

May 9th, 2016 7:29 am

Via Bloomberg:

  • Concern bubbles up in answers to survey on market evolution
  • Respondents call for centralized clearing in some letters

For traders of U.S. Treasuries, the easy part was agreeing some corners of the market need to be more centralized. Now comes the real challenge: figuring out how.

The basic structure of the $13.4 trillion market — the way dealers trade with each other and with clients — is splintering. The majority of business on dealer platforms is now done by automated firms, which aren’t required to clear their trades centrally. What’s more, there are at least seven new trading venues in the works, each with a different method for connecting buyers and sellers. And the largest Wall Street dealers have their own systems.

That fragmentation is creating a sense of disorder beneath the surface of the world’s safest and deepest bond market, which serves as the benchmark for most global financial assets and a haven during times of tumult. The concern emerged in responses to a recent Treasury Department survey on the market’s structure. Technological advances and balance-sheet pressures are transforming the mechanics of the $500-billion-per-day marketplace, which for decades resisted the change that swept through other asset classes.

“The market has changed — technology has changed it; regulation has changed it,” said Craig Pirrong, a finance professor at the University of Houston who focuses on derivatives markets and risk management. “The primacy of the dealers has been eroded.”

Splintering Market

This evolution is a critical issue because Treasuries are regulated in a patchwork fashion that hasn’t kept up with market participants. In fact, the opacity of the market makes it tough to assess how the landscape is changing. It took months for U.S. regulators to coordinate and collect data after a “flash rally” in Treasuries on Oct. 15, 2014, that had no apparent trigger. In a span of 12 minutes, benchmark 10-year yields slid 16 basis points then rebounded, prompting the first government review of the market since 1998.

Benchmark Treasury 10-year notes yielded 1.79 percent as of 10:51 a.m. London time, according to Bloomberg Bond Trader data. The price of the 1.625 percent security due in February 2026 was 98 18/32.

Much of the debate in the 51 letters the Treasury received over the past few months from dealers, investors, central banks and academics centered around which activities should get more regulation as the market changes. High-speed trading firms made up more than half of dealer-only platforms last year, up from about 20 percent a decade ago, according to a 2015 report from research firm Tabb Group LLC. Last year, 16 percent of institutional investors did all their trading over the phone, down from 39 percent in 2005, according to Greenwich Associates.

Treasury officials wrote in a blog post last week that trading in U.S. debt doesn’t appear to have suffered as a result of the shifts.

“We find little compelling evidence of a broad-based deterioration of Treasury market liquidity using traditional metrics,” wrote James Clark, deputy assistant secretary for federal finance, and Gabriel Mann, policy adviser in the Office of Debt Management.

Yet some parts of the market have grown outside of U.S. officials’ reach. One of them is the clearing of trades from high-speed automated firms. While Wall Street bond dealers clear transactions through a central platform run by the Depository Trust & Clearing Corp., there’s no regulatory requirement to do so, according to the letters. Clearing platforms are central intermediaries between buyers and sellers that assume responsibility for completing transactions.

Clearing Role

Automated trading firms often don’t clear centrally, which poses a risk to other market participants, according to a joint letter from the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association and the American Bankers Association, two bond-dealer trade groups. The main concern cited in some letters was that if a market swing or technology malfunction leaves one of those high-speed firms with too much exposure to Treasuries, the losses may end up being absorbed by members of the central clearing platform.

Others warned about the risk of such an event as well, including primary dealer TD Securities (USA) LLC, hedge fund Ronin Capital LLC and startup trading platform LiquidityEdge LLC, which facilitates one-on-one Treasuries trading between dealers and investors.

Platform Regulation

Treasuries trading platforms are another area that may operate outside the purview of regulators. That’s because venues that trade solely U.S. debt are exempt from Securities and Exchange Commission rules for alternative trading systems if those venues are registered as broker-dealers. Bloomberg News parent Bloomberg LP offers electronic trading for Treasuries.

The level of oversight of Treasuries-only platforms may make the markets less resilient, according to letters from Nasdaq Inc. and Citadel Securities LLC. ICAP Plc and the joint letter from Sifma and the ABA also recommended boosting oversight of such venues. The two bond-dealer trade groups said “the exemption for Treasury-only platforms may have little to no relevance today.”

Nasdaq, which runs Treasuries trading platform eSpeed and plans to partner with startup CrossRate Technologies LLC to develop another venue, said all trading systems should be monitored and required to develop risk controls.

“Without consistent rules and oversight of all liquidity pools, including private venues, fragmentation may lead to reduced levels of liquidity and wider spreads for those ineligible” to participate in those venues, wrote Joan Conley, a Nasdaq senior vice president.

Fairness, Fees

The question of fairness is central to the debates over clearing and platform regulation. Dealers, automated trading firms and platforms say the rules for all participants should be more consistent.

“The standards to which Treasury market participants are held to ought to be uniform,” wrote representatives from Credit Suisse Group AG, another primary dealer.

Executives from Chicago-based Ronin Capital wrote that the lack of a central-clearing requirement is at least unfair, and at worst dangerous. High-speed trading firms “profit from the safety and efficiency” provided by a central clearing platform “without contributing to it” by paying transaction fees and agreeing to share losses in the case of member defaults, they wrote.

Yet those fees are the main reason automated firms don’t join the central clearing organization, wrote Jim Greco, founder of Direct Match LLC, a startup that plans to offer exchange-style trading for U.S. debt.

While central clearing may help make the market less fragmented, he wrote, “the economics of central clearing, as it’s currently conducted, are cost prohibitive” for most automated trading firms.

Regulatory Lineup

The Treasury’s request for information, issued in January, included questions on whether the market needs more central clearing. And the Treasury and four other regulators listed clearing and settlement as a risk of automated trading in a July report on the October 2014 episode.

Yet the list of regulators on that report shows why it’s a challenge to set consistent rules. The entities — the Treasury, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission — each oversee a different segment of the market.

“There’s multiple regulators and multiple standards,” said Gennadiy Goldberg, a New York-based interest-rate strategist for TD Securities. “That’s a sign of the times,” and the survey “was an outlet for complaints on that.”

More FX

May 9th, 2016 7:09 am

Via Marc Chandler at brown Brothers Harriman:

Drivers for the Week Ahead

  • The resilience of the US dollar and the firmness of US yields after the monthly report showed the weakest job growth in seven months may be significant
  • The Eurogroup of finance minister are to meet Monday to discuss Greece
  • The Bank of England meets; Norway’s central bank meets as well.
  • EM struggled to find a theme/trend as last week ended; China trade data out over the weekend has set a weak tone for the start of the week

The dollar is mixed against the majors as the week gets under way.  The Norwegian krone and sterling are outperforming, while the yen and the euro are underperforming.  EM currencies are mostly weaker.  PLN, INR, and TRY are outperforming while KRW, IDR, and HUF are underperforming.  MSCI Asia Pacific was down 0.2%, despite the Nikkei rising 0.7%.  MSCI EM is up 0.1%, with Chinese markets falling 3-4% for the second straight day.  Euro Stoxx 600 is up 1.4% near midday, while S&P futures are pointing to a higher open.  The 10-year UST yield is flat at 1.78%.  Commodity prices are mixed, with oil up nearly 2% and copper down 1.5%.  

The key issue facing the foreign exchange market is whether the modicum of strength the US dollar demonstrated last week is the beginning of a sustainable move.  It is possible that the market is again at a juncture in which the price action will drive the narrative rather than the other way around.  A move above JPY108 and a decline in the euro below $1.1350 would signal a start to a broader dollar recovery that may have begun last week with impressive gains against the dollar-bloc.

The RBA’s rate cut took many by surprise, and the forward guidance, which included a reduction in the central bank’s inflation forecast, encouraged speculation of another rate cut in the coming months.  The Australian dollar has given back half of the gains registered since mid-January.  A recognition that the Canadian economy continues to wrestle with its terms of trade shock and a record trade deficit spurred some profit-taking in the Canadian dollar.  The US dollar rose through a downtrend line that began in late-January, and short-term Canadian interest rates, which have risen since the end of January, have started softening.

The resilience of the US dollar and the firmness of US yields after the monthly report showed the weakest job growth in seven months may be significant.  Just like strong jobs growth in the Q4 15-Q1 16 period (averaged monthly jobs growth 243k) did not translate to strong growth, the weaker jobs growth may, in fact, coincide with an acceleration of US GDP.

Of course, the jobs data was not horrific, and employment growth is expected to slow as full employment is approached.  Nor were the details particularly troubling.  Manufacturing added jobs when economists had been expected it to have shed workers.  The workweek increased 0.1 hours, which given the number of American employees, translates into about 450k full-time equivalents (in terms of hours worked).  Not only were there more people working a longer work week, but they were also getting paid slightly better.  Average hourly earnings rose 0.3% for a 2.5% year-over-year pace.

Perhaps the most troubling part of the report was not the miss on the headline but the decline in the participation rate.  It fell from 63%, a two-year high, to 62.8%.  The participation rate has been trending higher, and we caution against reading too much into a single data point.

On balance, one must (and we suspect the Federal Reserve will) conclude that the labor market recovery remains intact.  In any event, the Fed will get another reading before next month’s meeting.  The issue, which the FOMC’s April statement identified, is consumption.  We anticipate better numbers ahead, beginning with this week’s April retail sale report.  

April retail sales are expected to have been lifted by stronger auto sales and higher gasoline prices.   The 0.7-1.0% projected increase will be the biggest in a year.  If the GDP component (excludes, food, building materials, gasoline, and autos) rises by 0.4%, it would the largest increase since last July.

The wholesale inventory figures will help economists fine tune expectations for revisions of Q1 GDP.  Recent trade and shipment data suggests a modest upward revision to the first estimate of Q1 GDP toward 0.8%-1.0% (May 27).  However, Q2 grow is projected to move back toward trend of near 2.0%.  The Fed funds futures market continues to price in practically no chance of a June rate hike.  

The eurozone will take another look at Q1 GDP this week.  While more details will be provided, there is some risk of a downward revision to 0.5% from 0.6%.  It makes March industrial output reports less relevant, though we note that French and Italian production are expected to bounce back a fall in February.  Germany is marching to a different tune.  March output likely fell by around 0.2% after a 0.5% decline in February.  Both months are payback for the outsized 2.3% jump in January.  A rise in factory orders may take the sting out of a small fall in output.

The Eurogroup of finance minister meet today to discuss Greece.  The problem is that the IMF did not participate in the funding of the third aid package last summer.  The IMF’s involvement is essential for the Bundestag’s support.  It says it willing to under certain conditions that the other creditors find unacceptable, including a write-down of the debt owed to the other official creditors (but not the IMF).  Greece finds some IMF demands intolerable, like a contingency program of measures that will automatically be triggered when if Greece misses its fiscal target.

The euro finished last week a little more than two cents the off its multi-month high set on May 3 near $1.1615.  Ironically, the eurozone economy is not its most pressing issue.  Even with a slight downward revision in Q1 GDP, the eurozone will still have grown faster than the US, Japan, and UK.  Its pressing challenges are political in nature, like Brexit, the relationship with Turkey now Davutoglu is gone, and Russian sanctions that are set to expire in July.  

The biggest build in speculative gross long euro position in the futures market in three months leaves late longs in weak hands.  A break of the $1.1200 area is needed to signal a move into a lower trading range.  Given the size of the ECB latest initiative, and timing of the launch of the new TLTRO and corporate bond purchase program, it will be several months before the ECB can fully evaluate its efforts.  This means that it is difficult to envision fresh ECB initiatives before the end of the year at the earliest.  

The Bank of England meets.  At the same time that price pressures are beginning to increase, the UK economy is slowing.  The April PMIs uniformly warn that the slowing has bled into the start of Q2.  The last dissent from the BOE was for an immediate hike.  

A dovish dissent now would surprise and lead to an immediate fall in sterling.  The quarterly inflation report will be presented at the end of the MPC meeting.  The Bank of England appears to be anticipating a rate hike in the next two years, or inflation may exceed its 2% target.

The Norges Bank, Norway’s central bank meets as well.  The risks of a surprise cut are only marginally higher than for a BOE rate cut.  Data before the meeting will illustrate why Norges Bank is no hurry to move again cutting the deposit rate by 25 bp to 0.50% in March.  Consumer prices are steady in the low 3% area and Q1 GDP (both overall and including only the mainland economy) expanded after contracting at the end of last year.  The rise in oil prices may make officials more tolerant of the 4.7% appreciation of the krone on a trade-weighted basis and 7.8% against the US dollar this year (second to the yen’s 12.2% appreciation and edging out Canada’s 7.2% gain).  

Japan’s current account for March may not help Finance Minister Aso’s press for a weaker yen at the G7 meeting later this month.  The March current account surplus is often larger than the February surplus, but the expected increase will lift to it near record highs.  It is expected to rise by JPY530 bln to JPY2.965 trillion.  The trade surplus does not drive the current account surplus; investment income does.  However, the trade surplus is expected to double (month-over-month) to JPY906 bln.  

China reported its April reserve and trade figures over the weekend.  It will report inflation, lending, industrial output and investment, and retail sales this week.  China’s reserves rose for the second consecutive month.  Currency fluctuations probably played a small part in the increased valuation, though given the current account surplus, many observers will argue reserves growth should have been greater.  In any event, by any metric, Chinese officials have managed to stabilize capital outflows.

Measured in dollar or yuan, China’s trade surplus swelled.  At $45.56 it was the biggest surplus in three months.  The same is true when measured as CNY298 bln.  In dollar terms, exports and imports are still declining on a year-over-year basis.  In yuan terms, exports rose 4.1%, and imports were off 5.7%.

Lending growth is expected to have moderate while economic activity should firm.  Although many investors and policy makers are anxious about it, the data in hand, and projected, suggests the soft landing scenario is holding.

In a strong US dollar environment, the yuan may closely track its trade-weighted basket.  This will discourage criticism that the PBOC is seeking to devalue the yuan.  In a softer dollar environment, such as over first few months of the year, the yuan tracks the dollar and under-performs against its basket.   Of course, Chinese officials can change tactics at any time.  

Emerging Market assets struggled to find a theme/trend as last week ended.  The jobs data was mixed, and unlikely to change anyone’s mind about Fed rate hikes.  What about this week?  The major data point is US retail sales on Friday.  Near-term, China trade data out over the weekend has set a weak tone for the start of the week.  Exports fell -1.8% y/y and imports -10.9%, while markets were looking for flat exports and imports at -4%.  

Poor China data probably still has the capacity to move markets, especially in the absence of any other notable drivers.  Other country-specific risks remain in play.  Brazil’s senate may vote on whether to proceed with impeachment hearings on Wednesday (yes likely), while Moody’s will review Poland on Friday (downgrade likely).  Political risks remain elevated in Turkey.  The central banks of the Philippines, Thailand, Peru, and Korea meet with steady policy expected from all.

Corporate Bond Stuff

May 9th, 2016 7:06 am

Via Bloomberg:

IG CREDIT:Lowest Volume Friday Since Dec.; Expect Heavy Issuance
2016-05-09 09:56:13.151 GMT

By Robert Elson
(Bloomberg) — Secondary IG trading ended with a Trace
count of $11.7b Friday vs $15.2b Thursday, $15.5b the previous
Friday. It was the lowest volume Friday session since $8.6b
December 18.

* 10-DMA $15.9b; 10-Friday moving avg $14.4b.
* 144a trading added $1.8b of IG volume Friday vs $1.9b
Thursday, $2.2b last Friday

* The most active issues:
* RDSALN 2.875% 2026; client and affiliate selling 3.3x
buying
* C 1.80% 2018; client and affiliate flows accounted for
100% of volume
* TGT 2.50% 2026; client buying 3x selling
* CHTRIG 4.908% 2025 was most active 144a issue; client flows
took 100% of volume with selling near 4x buying

* Bloomberg US IG Corporate Bond Index OAS at 153.9 vs 153.8
* 2016 high/low: 220.8, a new wide since Jan. 2012/150.8
* 2015 high/low: 182.1/129.6
* 2014 high/low: 144.7/102.3

* BofAML IG Master Index at +156 vs +155
* 2016 high/low: +221, the widest level since June
2012/+152
* 2015 high/low: +180/+129
* 2014 high/low: +151/+106, tightest spread since July
2007

* Standard & Poor’s Global Fixed Income Research IG Index at
+200 vs +199
* +262, the new wide going back to 2013, was seen
2/11/2016
* The widest spread recorded was +578 in Dec. 2008

* S&P HY spread at +691 vs +688; +947 seen Feb. 11 was the
widest spread since Oct. 2011
* All time wide was +1,754 in Dec. 2008

* Markit CDX.IG.26 5Y Index at 84.9 vs 84.5
* 73.0, its lowest level since August was seen April 20
* 124.7, a new wide since June 2012 was seen Feb. 11
* 2014 high/low was 76.1/55.0, the low for 2014 and the
lowest level since Oct 2007

* No IG issuance Friday vs $15.525b Thursday, $6.95b
Wednesday, $4.35b Tuesday, $2.55b Monday
* Note: subscribe bar in upper left corner
* Weekly Recap and Issuance Stats
* April Recap and Issuance Stats
* YTD IG issuance now $623; YTD sans SSA $507b

* Pipeline – 4 Set to Price; Week May See $50b Issuance

What to Watch Today

May 9th, 2016 7:04 am

Via Bloomberg:

WHAT TO WATCH:

* (All times New York)
* Economic Data
* 10:00am: Labor Market Conditions Index, Apr (prior -2.1)
* TBA: Mortgage Delinquencies, 1Q (prior 4.77%)
* TBA: MBA Mortgage Foreclosures, 1Q (prior 1.77%)
* Supply
* 11:30am: U.S. to sell $31b 3M, $26b 6M bills
* Central Banks
* 1:00pm: Fed’s Kashkari speaks in Minneapolis

Credit Pipeline

May 9th, 2016 7:02 am

Via Bloomberg:

IG CREDIT PIPELINE: 4 Set to Price; Week May See $50b Issuance
2016-05-09 09:26:33.249 GMT

By Robert Elson
(Bloomberg) — Set to price today:

* Deutsche Bank (DB) Baa1/BBB+, to price $bench 3-part deal,
via DB-solo
* 3Y FRN, IPT equiv
* 3Y, IPT 212.5 area
* 5Y< IPT +237.5 area
* Mubadala Devlopment Corp (MUBAUH) Aa2/AA, to price $500m
144a/Reg-S 7Y, via managers BNP/BAML/FGB/JPM/MUFG/SC; IPT MS
+170 area
* Westpac Banking Corp (WSTP) Aa2/AA-, to price $bench 5-part
deal, via BAML/C/GS/JPM
* 3Y FRN, IPT equiv
* 3Y, IPT +95 area
* 5Y FRN, IPT equiv
* 5Y, IPT +110 area
* 10Y, IPT +137.5 area

LAST WEEK’S UPDATES

* Dell Inc. (DELL) Ba3/BB+, may offer about $16b of high-grade
secured bonds
* Apple (AAPL) Aa1/AA+; may return to market next week
* It priced $12b in 9 parts Feb. 16
* Re-opened 3 of the above issues for $3.5b March 17
* ICBCIL Financial (ICBCIL) A3/A-; roadshow from May 6
* Merck & Co (MRK) A1/AA; has not priced a new issue since
Feb. 2015, has $1.5b maturing May 18
* General Electric Company (GE) A3/AA-, has yet to issue YTD;
parent GE Co has $11.1b maturing this year, including $2.3b
this week
* Kraft Heinz Foods (KHC) Baa3/BBB-; plans near-term calls
with US investors
* Tokyo Metropolitan Govt (TOKYO) — na/A+ has 4 year history
of May issuance; investor meetings held last month.

MANDATES/MEETINGS

* State Grid (CHGRID) Aa3/AA-; roadshow May 4-9
* Banco de Bogota (BANBOG) Baa2/BBB-; meetings from May 3

M&A-RELATED

* Abbott (ABT) A2/A+; ~$5.7b St. Jude buy, ~$3.1b Alere buy
* $17.2b bridge loan commitment (April 28)
* Air Liquide (AIFP) –/A+; ~$13.4b Airgas buy
* $10.7b financing incl bonds, EU3b-3.5b equity (April 26)
* Sherwin-Williams (SHW) A2/A; ~$9.3b Valspar buy
* $8.3b debt financing expected (March 20)
* Nasdaq (NDAQ) Baa3/BBB; Marketwired buy
* $1.1b bridge (March 10)
* Mylan (MYL) Baa3/BBB-; ~$9.9b Meda buy
* $10.05b bridge (Feb 17)
* Dominion (D) Baa2/A-; ~$4.4b Questar buy
* $1.5b issuance expected to fund deal (Feb 1)
* Shire (SHPLN) Baa3/BBB-; ~$32b Baxalta buy
* $18b loan to be refinanced via debt issuance (Jan 18)
* Walgreens Boots (WBA) Baa2/BBB; ~$17.2b Rite-Aid buy
* $7.8b bridge, $5b TL, debt shelf (Jan 7)
* Molson Coors (TAP) Baa2/BBB-; ~$12b MillerCoors buy
* $9.3b bridge (Dec 17)
* Teva (TEVA) Baa1/BBB+; ~$40.5b Allergan generics buy
* $22b bridge; $5b TL commitment (Nov 18)
* Duke Energy (DUK) A3/A-; $4.9b Piedmont Natural buy
* $4.9b bridge (Nov 4)
* Aetna (AET) Baa1/A; ~$28.9b Humana buy
* $13b bridge (August 28)
* Anthem (ANTM) Baa2/A-; ~$50.4b Cigna buy
* $26.5b bridge (July 27)

SHELF FILINGS

* Apple (AAPL) Aa1/AA+; return plan; debt shelf (April 28)
* CVS Health (CVS) Baa1/BBB+; $10b debt shelf (April 22)
* Corporate Office (OFC) Baa3/BBB-; debt shelf (April 12)
* Rogers (RCICN) Baa1/BBB+; $4b debt shelf (March 4)

OTHER

* Southern (SO) Baa1/A-; sees $8b issuance this yr (April 27)
* Wal-Mart (WMT) Aa2/AA; 2 maturities in April (April 1)
* Con Edison (ED) A3/A-; sees $1b-$1.5b l-t issuance (Feb 18)
* GE (GE) A1/AA+; $25b debt possible for M&A, buybacks (Jan
29)

Early FX

May 9th, 2016 7:00 am

Via Kit Juckes at Socgen:

<http://www.sgmarkets.com/r/?id=h1076355b,16e7674a,16e7674b&p1=136122&p2=60ad90b4bcef7abc71672ddbdbd6c99a>

Friday’s US payroll data were a little soft but well within any reasonable person’s confidence interval. The long-term average monthly increase dipped from 206k to 205k. The unemployment rate stayed at 5%, but wage growth edged up to 2.5% y/y. The data confirm the steady growth of job creation. That’s not the US economy’s problem. The economy’s problems are productivity (or lack thereof) and the weakness of capital spending. You can argue that super-low rates have hindered investment while promoting debt-financed share buy-backs and tax-inspired corporate management. Whatever the cause, the situation isn’t changing.

Markets meanwhile, rely on this precarious combination of data – weak enough to keep the Fed in easy mode, but not so weak as to heighten fears of global economic slowdown. Worse, risk sentiment is increasingly sensitive to statistically irrelevant gyrations in the data. So, after her meal of tepid porridge, Goldilocks must negotiate a ricketty rope-bridge to escape furious bears, while small economic surprises threaten to tip her into the ravine below. It reminds me of an Indiana Jones film, and while I hope that it all ends well (it usually does, in films), I have my doubts. Friday’s data were just about within the range of outcomes that keeps markets balanced but if a mere 50k ‘miss’ is enough to make everyone nervous, it’s just a matter of time before we see a bigger shock and more volatility.

Markets need growth to stay on the straight and narrow

[http://email.sgresearch.com/Content/PublicationPicture/225404/2]

Whether this ends with strogner data and higher yields, or weak data and increased fears, the dollar will rally. Bears are treading an ever-narrower path and we want to go on slowly building dollar longs. We’re already short NZD/USD and GBP/USD and will look for opportunities. Mean while, if CFTC data are an indication of market positioning, they show a further increase in the net USD short, as longs increased in CAD and NZD, and shorts in EUR and MXN were cut further. Yen longs however, were cut back slightly as bulls finally reached satiation.

The big dollar position adjustment continues

[http://email.sgresearch.com/Content/PublicationPicture/225404/3]

[*] Oil picture even more blurred.

Oil prices are higher this morning, in reaction to concerns about the fire in Fort McMurray, and appointment of a new Oil Minister in Saudi Arabia. We’re much more comfortable with the idea of oil settling into a range (USD 40-50/bbl?) than with the notion of further gains near term, but as long as prices are still building a base that’s enough to give us a bullish bias of oil-sensitive currencies. Shorts in GBP/NOK and EUR/RUB are fine, the CAD is less cheerful.

[*] China, when not if

Chinese FX data posted a further modest gain in April, driven by valuation gains as the Euro rallied. Trade data posted sluggish import and export data but everyone’s eyes are drawn to the huge jump in imports from Hong Kong, that suggests on-going capital flight. As the dollar’s correction runs out of steam and valuations effects stop boosting FX reserves, so concern will increase again. Likewise, when the current bout of policy support for growth fades, concern about the gradual economic slowdown will return too. None of this is imminent, but it’s inevitable all the same.

China imports – capital flight continues

[http://email.sgresearch.com/Content/PublicationPicture/225404/5]

Ahead this week: We’ve started the week with strong (+1.9% m/m) German factory orders, though there will be more headlines written about a new deal for Greece as the Eurogroup meets. Turkish politics too, will be a topic of interest in Brussels. In the UK, the MPC meets (and does nothing) amid press reports of the Bank of England preparing contingency plans for a vote to leave the EU. Anything which increases talk that the MPC’s next move could be to cut rates will be sterling-negative and a slight fall in GBP shorts on the CFTC data opens the way for weakness. Meanwhile the US data calendar consists mostly of retail sales on Friday – in other words, not providing much guidance.

Stress In Asia

May 9th, 2016 1:00 am

Via the FT:

Deteriorating conditions in China drove up the headline gauge for liquidity stress in Asia produced by Moody’s Investors Services despite stress levels in South and Southeast Asia retreating from record highs in April.

The ratings agency’s Asian Liquidity Stress Index, a measurement of the proportion of companies with weak speculative-grade liquidity among the high yield entities it rates, rose to 34.2 per cent in April, up 2 percentage points from March. The number of high-yield companies with the weakest speculative grade liquidity score rose by two and the total number of firms rated dropped by one.

The ratings agency said the headline index was approaching a record high of 37 per cent hit in December 2008. Of the 76 high-yield issuers rated for a North Asian sub-index – which rose 3.5 percentage points to a record 36.8 per cent in March – 66 are based in mainland China, the sub-index for which jumped 4.1 percentage points to 37.9 per cent.

Mainland Chinese property firms saw their own sub-index spike 5.2 percentage points from February to reach 28.9 per cent, while one covering industrial firms jumped 1.9 percentage points to a record 50 per cent, with 14 of 28 high-yield issuers’ speculative grade liquidity garnering the lowest possible rank in April.

Meanwhile, liquidity stress outside of North Asia appeared to improve after rising to a record high in April: a sub-index for 44 high-yield issuers in South and Southeast Asia dropped 0.9 percentage points to 29.5 per cent in April, while a sub-index tracking 20 Indonesian issuers dropped 3.8 percentage points to 20 per cent.

Is June Live for the Fed?

May 8th, 2016 10:14 pm

Via Bloomberg:

  • Gross says Fed rate increase may come in June as wages rise
  • El-Erian, Kiesel, Dudley say two Fed moves possible this year

Three of the world’s most influential bond investors and the head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York are signaling the U.S. central bank is on course to raise interest rates even after an April jobs gain that was smaller than economists forecast.

Bill Gross, the former manager of the biggest bond fund, said policy makers may act at their next meeting in June. Mohamed El-Erian, chief economic adviser at Allianz SE, said the Fed may move twice this year. Mark Kiesel at Pacific Investment Management Co. and New York Fed President William Dudley echoed the comments.

Investors and policy makers are saying don’t count out the Fed after the Labor Department reported U.S. employers added 160,000 workers last month, short of the 200,000 projected by a Bloomberg survey of economists. Fed Chair Janet Yellen is also examining earnings, which rose 2.5 percent from the year before, more than projected.

“I’m not so sure that June is out,” Gross, who now runs the Janus Global Unconstrained Bond Fund, said on Bloomberg Television May 6. “Yellen, more than jobs, is focused on wages. At 2.5 percent, they’re moving up.”

Benchmark U.S. Treasuries were little changed Monday, with the 10-year yield at 1.78 percent as of 10:51 a.m. in Tokyo, according to Bloomberg Bond Trader data. The price of the 1.625 percent security due in February 2026 was 98 19/32.

“I do think they’ll hike at least once, and they could hike twice this year,” El-Erian, who is also a Bloomberg View columnist, said on Bloomberg Television on May 6. The Fed “has a window.” Financial markets that are relatively calm and a depreciating dollar will make it easier for policy makers to act, he said.

Pimco’s Kiesel, said the labor market is gradually improving. “They’ll probably start with one or two hikes by the end of the year,” he said on Bloomberg Television May 6.

Dudley said it’s reasonable to expect two moves this year, in an interview with the New York Times published on its website on May 6 following the release of the payroll report

Central Bank “Profits”

May 8th, 2016 10:08 pm

This topic always disturbs and perplexes me. The US central bank has achieved record “profits” since the expansion of its balance sheet in the aftermath of the financial crisis. If we are supposed to worry about maintaining those profits,then I guess the logical corollary is that the central bank should expand its balance sheet to infinity as that would increase its profits and increase what it returns each year to the Treasury.

Via the WSJ:

The financial crisis has been a cash cow for central banks. They are turning record profits, bolstered by income from their bulging asset and loan portfolios and, more recently, from charging banks for making deposits.

The windfall has been a boon for cash-strapped governments. But as their balance sheets grow, political pressures on central banks are intensifying.

In the U.S., Congress grabbed $19 billion from a Federal Reserve capital surplus account in December to help fund infrastructure projects, a move Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen said impinged on the central bank’s independence.

These new political pressures also risk distracting central bankers from their main mandate of stabilizing prices and—for the Fed—maximizing employment. At worst, the fear of losses could deter them from pursuing policies that would benefit the broader economy, economists and former central bankers say.

The U.S. Treasury collected almost $100 billion from the Federal Reserve in each of the past two years, more than three times its average annual haul in the three years before the 2008 financial crisis. In Greece, the central bank sent €1.15 billion ($1.31 billion) to the government this year, after making by far its largest profit since at least 2001. Ireland’s government just scooped €1.8 billion from the central bank after a record profit.

Advertisement

Central bankers frequently say such profits are an afterthought to higher economic goals, such as controlling inflation. Even losses aren’t such a big deal, they argue, because central banks can operate with negative capital. Some have done so effectively, notably in Chile and the Czech Republic.

The Bank of England’s role is “not to game asset purchases to make money, it’s what you need to do to affect the wider economy, inflation and unemployment,” said David Miles, who served on the bank’s monetary policy committee between 2009 and last August.

Others worry that profits could sway thinking on more central pursuits.

“Whereas in the past central banks largely ignored the profit-and-loss implications of policy measures, one can’t help thinking that those considerations have mattered on occasion in the recent past,” said Stefan Gerlach, deputy governor of Ireland’s central bank until November and now chief economist at BSI Bank in Zurich.

ENLARGE

Switzerland’s central-bank chairman, Thomas Jordan, argued in 2011 that policy decisions were “always driven by motives other than profit, and will continue to be so in the future.” But when the Swiss National Bank abruptly abandoned its euro exchange-rate peg last year, many economists suspected it wanted to stem losses on its growing pile of foreign currencies.

Those assets, about 510 billion Swiss francs ($524 billion) at the time, are worth less in local currency if the franc rises—as it did when the peg was dropped. The central bank subsequently reported a 50 billion franc first-half loss last year. But the loss would have been even greater if it had held out for longer.

The move followed mounting political pressure over its balance sheet, including a referendum on whether it should hold a fifth of its assets in gold. Despite its huge loss last year, the central bank still distributed one billion francs to the federal government and cantons, and paid a dividend.

In the euro area, analysts had widely expected the European Central Bank in March to start buying bonds yielding less than its deposit rate of minus 0.4%, which would have greatly expanded the universe of assets it could purchase. But Bundesbank President Jens Weidmann warned shortly before the ECB’s March policy meeting that such a move would lead to “guaranteed losses” for the central bank.

The ECB subsequently left its deposit-rate floor in place but said it would start buying corporate bonds—a potentially lucrative move.

In Japan in the 1990s, concerns over potential losses appear to have lessened the central bank’s resolve to expand its balance sheet aggressively, though that reluctance is “clearly no longer true,” said Stephen Cecchetti, an economics professor at the Brandeis International Business School.

To be sure, central banks are in a unique financial position. They can print money, which means they can never be illiquid even when they’re insolvent. Guaranteed future profits from money-printing—known as seigniorage—mean they can usually dig themselves out of a capital hole: bank notes cost little to produce but can be used to buy interest-bearing securities. For the Federal Reserve, that future income is worth nearly $5.5 trillion, estimates Mr. Cecchetti, assuming currency in circulation grows at the same rate as the economy and the Fed earns 2% on its assets.

The trouble is, not everyone appreciates that. Politicians may regard large losses as evidence of policy failure. If investors worry central banks might resort to printing money to cover losses, or turn to the government for support, it undermines the public’s belief in their inflation targets, which makes the targets harder to hit.

As central banks take ever more drastic action to drive up ultralow inflation, or prepare to exit massive asset-purchase schemes, the risk of significant losses is growing. Telling politicians they can no longer expect windfall profits from central banks will be tricky. Asking them to shoulder losses will be even more difficult.