Wall Street Isn't Fixed: TBTF Is Alive And More Dangerous Than Ever

Submitted by David Stockman via Contra Corner blog,

Practically since the day Lehman went down in September 2008 Washington has been conducting a monumental farce. It has been pretending to up-root the causes of the thundering financial crisis which struck that month and to enact measures insuring that it would never happen again. In fact, however, official policy has done just the opposite.

The Fed’s massive money printing campaign has perpetuated and drastically enlarged the Wall Street casino, making the pre-crisis gamblers in CDOs, CDS and other derivatives appear like pikers compared to the present momentum chasing madness.  In a nutshell, the Fed’s prolonged regime of ZIRP and wealth effects based “puts” under risk assets has destroyed two-way markets. The market’s natural mechanism of risk containment and stabilization—-short sellers—has been driven from the casino. Accordingly, carry-trade speculators engorged with free money funding have taken the market to lunatic heights, while leaving it vulnerable to a violent collapse upon an unexpected drop because the market’s natural braking mechanism—short sellers taking profits—- has been eviscerated.

At the same time, the giant regulatory diversion known as Dodd-Frank has actually permitted the TBTF banks to get even bigger and more dangerous. Indeed, JPM and BAC were taken to their present unmanageable size by regulators—ostensibly fighting the last outbreak of TBTF—who imposed or acquiesced to the shotgun mergers of late 2008.

So now these same regulators, who have spent four years stumbling around in the Dodd-Frank puzzle palace confecting thousands of pages of indecipherable regulations, slam their wards for not having sufficiently robust “living wills”. C’mon! This is just another Washington double-shuffle.

The very idea that $2 trillion global banking behemoths like JPMorgan or Bank of America could be entrusted to write-up standby plans for their own orderly and antiseptic bankruptcy is not only just plain stupid; it also drips with political cynicism and cowardice. If they are too big to fail, they are too big to exist. Period.

Indeed, it is utterly amazing that adult legislators and regulators could even take the idea of a “living will” seriously—-let alone believe that they could possibly thwart the recurrence of another outbreak of so-called “financial contagion”. Yet so thick is the beltway cynicism and so complete is the K-Street domination of policy-making that a trite bureaucratic gimmick like the “living will” has become a major component of so-called macro-prudential policy.

So there is nothing to do except go back to the fundamentals. First and foremost, the September 2008 meltdown was not a main street banking problem; it was a crisis confined to the canyons of Wall Street, owing to the fact that the gambling houses domiciled there had massively bloated their balance sheets with toxic assets and risky derivatives trades, and then funded these balance sheets leveraged at 30:1 with huge amounts of “hot money” in the form of repo and unsecured wholesale loans.

As I demonstrated in the Great Deformation, the “bank run” was almost entirely in the Wall Street wholesale market. By contrast, there was never any danger of retail runs at the corner branch bank offices, and the overwhelming majority of the 7,000 main street banks did not own the kind of toxic securitized assets that were roiling Wall Street.

In fact, the wholesale market runs in the canyons of Wall Street were actually a positive, economically therapeutic event. They had already taken out three of the reckless gambling houses—- Bear Stearns, Lehman and Merrill Lynch—-and were fixing to finish off the remainder, that is, Goldman and Morgan Stanley.

Had the market been allowed to finish off the work of the economic gods in late September 2008, the TBTF problem would have been substantially alleviated. Today there might have existed a half dozen “sons of Goldman” in the form of M&A, trading, investment banking and asset management boutiques—run by chastened veterans who lost their lunch during the 2008 Wall Street cleansing.

The excuse for Washington’s massive intervention against the free market in the form of TARP and the Fed’s monumental flood of liquidity, of course, is that the US economy was about to be annihilated by something called financial “contagion”.  But that is a specious urban legend invented by the crony capitalists who controlled the Treasury and the money-printers who had fueled the housing and credit bubble at the Fed.

As I have also shown, for example, AIG’s dozens of insurance subsidiaries were money good and would have been protected in bankruptcy by insurance regulators and capital maintenance rules, while settlement of the holding company’s fraudulent CDS insurance would have been parceled out pennies on the dollar by a Chapter 11 judge to the dozen giant global banks who had stupidly attempted to turn toxic CDOs into AAA credits. Likewise, FDIC could have liquidated Citigroup’s regulated bank, while allowing the gamblers who bought the stock, bonds and other obligations of the holding company to face their just deserts.

In short, TBTF became a “problem” to be ostensibly remedied with bureaucratic malarkey like living wills primarily because Washington made it a problem—- by means of its panicked bailouts of Wall Street in the fall of 2008. Indeed, the true solution to TBTF is always and everywhere to allow the free market to cleanse its own excesses and imbalances and to impose financial discipline and demise upon outbreaks of reckless gambling and leverage when they occur.

Unfortunately, even if Washington were to refrain from ad hoc bailouts, the free market cure would be perennially compromised by the giant moral hazard posed by deposit insurance and the Fed’s cheap money discount window. Owing to these policy institutions, which systematically encourage excessive gambling by their beneficiaries, US banks are inherent wards of the state—including the easily abused privilege of fractional reserve banking conferred by regulatory charters.  The right thing to do would be to abolish these sources of moral hazard and tell the K-Street financial lobbies to fold up their plush tents because their employers are now all expected to sink or swim on the free market.

Needless to say, the chances that Washington would permit the Wall Street gambling houses to be returned to the unfettered free market that they profess to defend—are somewhere between slim and none. Accordingly, a second best solution is warranted, and it could readily be done.  And it would be far more effective than the lunacy of living wills and all the other bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo that has come out of Dodd-Frank.

First, Washington should re-enact a strict version of Glass- Steagall. Only “narrow banks” which take deposits and make consumer and business loans would have access to the Fed’s discount window. By contrast, propriety trading, underwriting, merchant banking, asset management and all the rest of the financial services sectors would be banned at regulated banks and sent back to the free market where they belong.

Secondly, a ceiling on regulated bank size would
be established
—perhaps measured at 1% of GDP or $200 billion in terms of asset scale. There are no demonstrated economies of scale in deposit and loan banking above that size, anyway.

Stated differently, banks wishing to indulge in the moral hazard of deposit insurance and accessing the Fed’s discount window would not have to prove they were not “too big to fail” or that they had a viable “living will”. Instead, a TBTF law would do it for them in the form of a statutory cap on the size of regulated banks.

To be sure, Wall Street would scream that such a regime would interfere with the ability of small business and American consumers to get cheap loans. But in a national economy that has gone through a rolling 30-year LBO resulting in $60 trillion of credit market debt outstanding and which sports leverage ratios against income in all sectors that are off the historical charts—that complaint has no merit. Making debt more expensive and permitting it to be economically priced on the free market is, in fact, just what is needed to eventually cure the nation’s debt-ridden economic malaise.




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1tYxOOA Tyler Durden

Wall Street Isn’t Fixed: TBTF Is Alive And More Dangerous Than Ever

Submitted by David Stockman via Contra Corner blog,

Practically since the day Lehman went down in September 2008 Washington has been conducting a monumental farce. It has been pretending to up-root the causes of the thundering financial crisis which struck that month and to enact measures insuring that it would never happen again. In fact, however, official policy has done just the opposite.

The Fed’s massive money printing campaign has perpetuated and drastically enlarged the Wall Street casino, making the pre-crisis gamblers in CDOs, CDS and other derivatives appear like pikers compared to the present momentum chasing madness.  In a nutshell, the Fed’s prolonged regime of ZIRP and wealth effects based “puts” under risk assets has destroyed two-way markets. The market’s natural mechanism of risk containment and stabilization—-short sellers—has been driven from the casino. Accordingly, carry-trade speculators engorged with free money funding have taken the market to lunatic heights, while leaving it vulnerable to a violent collapse upon an unexpected drop because the market’s natural braking mechanism—short sellers taking profits—- has been eviscerated.

At the same time, the giant regulatory diversion known as Dodd-Frank has actually permitted the TBTF banks to get even bigger and more dangerous. Indeed, JPM and BAC were taken to their present unmanageable size by regulators—ostensibly fighting the last outbreak of TBTF—who imposed or acquiesced to the shotgun mergers of late 2008.

So now these same regulators, who have spent four years stumbling around in the Dodd-Frank puzzle palace confecting thousands of pages of indecipherable regulations, slam their wards for not having sufficiently robust “living wills”. C’mon! This is just another Washington double-shuffle.

The very idea that $2 trillion global banking behemoths like JPMorgan or Bank of America could be entrusted to write-up standby plans for their own orderly and antiseptic bankruptcy is not only just plain stupid; it also drips with political cynicism and cowardice. If they are too big to fail, they are too big to exist. Period.

Indeed, it is utterly amazing that adult legislators and regulators could even take the idea of a “living will” seriously—-let alone believe that they could possibly thwart the recurrence of another outbreak of so-called “financial contagion”. Yet so thick is the beltway cynicism and so complete is the K-Street domination of policy-making that a trite bureaucratic gimmick like the “living will” has become a major component of so-called macro-prudential policy.

So there is nothing to do except go back to the fundamentals. First and foremost, the September 2008 meltdown was not a main street banking problem; it was a crisis confined to the canyons of Wall Street, owing to the fact that the gambling houses domiciled there had massively bloated their balance sheets with toxic assets and risky derivatives trades, and then funded these balance sheets leveraged at 30:1 with huge amounts of “hot money” in the form of repo and unsecured wholesale loans.

As I demonstrated in the Great Deformation, the “bank run” was almost entirely in the Wall Street wholesale market. By contrast, there was never any danger of retail runs at the corner branch bank offices, and the overwhelming majority of the 7,000 main street banks did not own the kind of toxic securitized assets that were roiling Wall Street.

In fact, the wholesale market runs in the canyons of Wall Street were actually a positive, economically therapeutic event. They had already taken out three of the reckless gambling houses—- Bear Stearns, Lehman and Merrill Lynch—-and were fixing to finish off the remainder, that is, Goldman and Morgan Stanley.

Had the market been allowed to finish off the work of the economic gods in late September 2008, the TBTF problem would have been substantially alleviated. Today there might have existed a half dozen “sons of Goldman” in the form of M&A, trading, investment banking and asset management boutiques—run by chastened veterans who lost their lunch during the 2008 Wall Street cleansing.

The excuse for Washington’s massive intervention against the free market in the form of TARP and the Fed’s monumental flood of liquidity, of course, is that the US economy was about to be annihilated by something called financial “contagion”.  But that is a specious urban legend invented by the crony capitalists who controlled the Treasury and the money-printers who had fueled the housing and credit bubble at the Fed.

As I have also shown, for example, AIG’s dozens of insurance subsidiaries were money good and would have been protected in bankruptcy by insurance regulators and capital maintenance rules, while settlement of the holding company’s fraudulent CDS insurance would have been parceled out pennies on the dollar by a Chapter 11 judge to the dozen giant global banks who had stupidly attempted to turn toxic CDOs into AAA credits. Likewise, FDIC could have liquidated Citigroup’s regulated bank, while allowing the gamblers who bought the stock, bonds and other obligations of the holding company to face their just deserts.

In short, TBTF became a “problem” to be ostensibly remedied with bureaucratic malarkey like living wills primarily because Washington made it a problem—- by means of its panicked bailouts of Wall Street in the fall of 2008. Indeed, the true solution to TBTF is always and everywhere to allow the free market to cleanse its own excesses and imbalances and to impose financial discipline and demise upon outbreaks of reckless gambling and leverage when they occur.

Unfortunately, even if Washington were to refrain from ad hoc bailouts, the free market cure would be perennially compromised by the giant moral hazard posed by deposit insurance and the Fed’s cheap money discount window. Owing to these policy institutions, which systematically encourage excessive gambling by their beneficiaries, US banks are inherent wards of the state—including the easily abused privilege of fractional reserve banking conferred by regulatory charters.  The right thing to do would be to abolish these sources of moral hazard and tell the K-Street financial lobbies to fold up their plush tents because their employers are now all expected to sink or swim on the free market.

Needless to say, the chances that Washington would permit the Wall Street gambling houses to be returned to the unfettered free market that they profess to defend—are somewhere between slim and none. Accordingly, a second best solution is warranted, and it could readily be done.  And it would be far more effective than the lunacy of living wills and all the other bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo that has come out of Dodd-Frank.

First, Washington should re-enact a strict version of Glass- Steagall. Only “narrow banks” which take deposits and make consumer and business loans would have access to the Fed’s discount window. By contrast, propriety trading, underwriting, merchant banking, asset management and all the rest of the financial services sectors would be banned at regulated banks and sent back to the free market where they belong.

Secondly, a ceiling on regulated bank size would be established—perhaps measured at 1% of GDP or $200 billion in terms of asset scale. There are no demonstrated economies of scale in deposit and loan banking above that size, anyway.

Stated differently, banks wishing to indulge in the moral hazard of deposit insurance and accessing the Fed’s discount window would not have to prove they were not “too big to fail” or that they had a viable “living will”. Instead, a TBTF law would do it for them in the form of a statutory cap on the size of regulated banks.

To be sure, Wall Street would scream that such a regime would interfere with the ability of small business and American consumers to get cheap loans. But in a national economy that has gone through a rolling 30-year LBO resulting in $60 trillion of credit market debt outstanding and which sports leverage ratios against income in all sectors that are off the historical charts—that complaint has no merit. Making debt more expensive and permitting it to be economically priced on the free market is, in fact, just what is needed to eventually cure the nation’s debt-ridden economic malaise.




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1tYxOOA Tyler Durden

Russian Defense Minister Tells Troops "To Be In State Of Constant Battle Readiness"

Having discussed his view that the Ukraine government is at fault for worsening the conflict, Russia’s Putin explained to Angela Merkel that a “rising civilian toll has created a humanitarian crisis in Ukraine.” However, it was Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu’s comments that “the world has changed and changed dramatically,” demanding that his troops “must be in constant combat readiness,” are the most disconcerting as his strong tone in the following clip appears to confirm Poland and NATO’s fears.

 

Putin’s conversation with Merkel…

Russian President Vladimir Putin, German Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke by phone, exchanged views on “intensifying crisis situation” in Ukraine, Kremlin says in e-mailed statement.

 

*PUTIN TELLS MERKEL UKRAINE GOVT AT FAULT FOR WORSENING CONFLICT

 

Putin says “real political dialogue” needed between authorities in Kiev and representatives of rebels

 

Offensive by Ukrainian forces in southeast leads to mounting civilian toll, humanitarian problems: Putin

Shoigu starts talking (in Russian) at around 30 second mark, clip includes coverage of the military drills that are under way…

 

Excerpted Transcript (via NTV),

Sergey Shoigu, Russia’s Defense Minister said that “Peacekeeping units should be in a state of constant battle readiness.”

 

He added: “The world has changed, and has changed dramatically. As you know from previous examples, including in the brigade, peacekeeping units can be activated without warning.”

 

After checking the 15th motorized rifle brigade of peacekeeping forces, the defense minister said that now all peacekeeping brigades are staffed exclusively by contractors, reported “Interfax”.

 

Meanwhile, the humanitarian crisis in eastern Ukraine is getting worse by the day. Today the problems of those who are located in the eastern Ukraine zone where the Ukrainian army has been dispatched was discussed at an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council.

 

According to recent reports, the casualties of the conflict now amount to 1,400 people, with more than four thousand injured. In addition, about 300,000 people have fled their homes.

*  *  *

“Prepare for the unexpected,” Shoigu concludes…




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1ntM8q4 Tyler Durden

Russian Defense Minister Tells Troops “To Be In State Of Constant Battle Readiness”

Having discussed his view that the Ukraine government is at fault for worsening the conflict, Russia’s Putin explained to Angela Merkel that a “rising civilian toll has created a humanitarian crisis in Ukraine.” However, it was Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu’s comments that “the world has changed and changed dramatically,” demanding that his troops “must be in constant combat readiness,” are the most disconcerting as his strong tone in the following clip appears to confirm Poland and NATO’s fears.

 

Putin’s conversation with Merkel…

Russian President Vladimir Putin, German Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke by phone, exchanged views on “intensifying crisis situation” in Ukraine, Kremlin says in e-mailed statement.

 

*PUTIN TELLS MERKEL UKRAINE GOVT AT FAULT FOR WORSENING CONFLICT

 

Putin says “real political dialogue” needed between authorities in Kiev and representatives of rebels

 

Offensive by Ukrainian forces in southeast leads to mounting civilian toll, humanitarian problems: Putin

Shoigu starts talking (in Russian) at around 30 second mark, clip includes coverage of the military drills that are under way…

 

Excerpted Transcript (via NTV),

Sergey Shoigu, Russia’s Defense Minister said that “Peacekeeping units should be in a state of constant battle readiness.”

 

He added: “The world has changed, and has changed dramatically. As you know from previous examples, including in the brigade, peacekeeping units can be activated without warning.”

 

After checking the 15th motorized rifle brigade of peacekeeping forces, the defense minister said that now all peacekeeping brigades are staffed exclusively by contractors, reported “Interfax”.

 

Meanwhile, the humanitarian crisis in eastern Ukraine is getting worse by the day. Today the problems of those who are located in the eastern Ukraine zone where the Ukrainian army has been dispatched was discussed at an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council.

 

According to recent reports, the casualties of the conflict now amount to 1,400 people, with more than four thousand injured. In addition, about 300,000 people have fled their homes.

*  *  *

“Prepare for the unexpected,” Shoigu concludes…




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1ntM8q4 Tyler Durden

Petrodollar Under Threat As Russia And Iran Sign Historic 500,000 Barrel A Day Oil Deal

Russia Delivers Blow To Petrodollar In Historic $20 Billion Iran Oil Deal

Russia signed a historic $20 billion oil deal with Iran to bypass both western sanctions and the dollar based western monetary system yesterday.

Putin Russia Gold Bar.png
President Putin Admire Gold Bar (London Gold Delivery Bar)

Currency wars are set to escalate as the petro dollar’s decline continues.  

Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak and his Iranian counterpart Bijan Zanganeh signed a five-year memorandum of understanding in Moscow, which included cooperation in the oil sector.

“Based on Iran’s proposal, we will participate in arranging shipments of crude oil, including to the Russian market,” Novak was quoted as saying.

The five year accord will see Russia help Iran “organise oil sales” as well as “cooperate in the oil-gas industry, construction of power plants, grids, supply of machinery, consumer goods and agriculture products”, according to a statement by the Energy Ministry in Moscow.

The deal could see Russia buying 500,000 barrels of Iranian oil a day, the Moscow-based Kommersant newspaper has previously reported. Under the proposed deal Russia would buy up to 500,000 barrels a day or a third of Iranian oil exports in exchange for Russian equipment and goods.

The Russian government withdrew the statement regarding the deal last night, but said it would issue a new statement today.

In January, Russia said that they were negotiating an oil-for-goods swap worth $1.5 billion a month that would enable Iran to lift oil exports substantially to Russia, undermining Western sanctions.

Yesterday, the Russian President told regional leaders that “the political tools of economic pressure are unacceptable and run counter to all norms and rules.” He  said in response to western sanctions he had given orders to boost domestic manufacturers at the expense of non-Russian ones.

The White House has previously said that reports of talks between Russia and Iran were a matter of “serious concern”.



Reserve Currencies In History – Dollar’s Demise Continues

“If the reports are true, such a deal would raise serious concerns as it would be inconsistent with the terms of the agreement with Iran,” Caitlin Hayden, spokeswoman for the White House National Security Council, said in January.


U.S. and European Union sanctions against Russia threaten to hasten a move away from the petro dollar that’s been slowly occurring since the global financial crisis.

See important guide to Currency Wars here Currency Wars: Bye, Bye Petrodollar – Buy, Buy Gold




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1vczTrA GoldCore

Next Time Obama Boasts About The "Recovery", Show Him This Chart

Irony aside, the growth of income (trough to peak) during so-called 'economic expansions' has changed… and President Obama's "recovery" is the worst of the lot…

 

Chart: @ptcherneva

 

A reminder of the irony… One can read 696 page neo-Marxist tomes "explaining" inequality in a way only an economist could – by ignoring the untold destruction economists themselves have unleashed on society with their "scientific theories" (and providing a "solution" to the inequality problem which we warned readers was coming back in September of 2011) or one can read the following 139 words by Elliott's Paul Singer which in two short paragraphs explains everything one needs to know about America's record class inequality, including precisely who is the man responsible:

Inequality in the U.S. today is near its historical highs, largely because the Federal Reserve’s policies have succeeded in achieving their aim: namely, higher asset prices (especially the prices of stocks, bonds and high-end real estate), which are generally owned by taxpayers in the upper-income brackets. The Fed is doing all the work, because the President’s policies are growth-suppressive. In the absence of the Fed’s moneyprinting and ZIRP, the economy would either be softer or actually in a new recession. 

 

The greatest irony is that the President is railing against inequality as one of the most important problems of the day, despite the fact that his policies are squeezing the middle class and causing the Fed – with the President’s encouragement – to engage in the radical monetary policy, which is exacerbating inequality. This simple truth cannot be repeated often enough.

Q.E.D.

 




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1oe2Akd Tyler Durden

Next Time Obama Boasts About The “Recovery”, Show Him This Chart

Irony aside, the growth of income (trough to peak) during so-called 'economic expansions' has changed… and President Obama's "recovery" is the worst of the lot…

 

Chart: @ptcherneva

 

A reminder of the irony… One can read 696 page neo-Marxist tomes "explaining" inequality in a way only an economist could – by ignoring the untold destruction economists themselves have unleashed on society with their "scientific theories" (and providing a "solution" to the inequality problem which we warned readers was coming back in September of 2011) or one can read the following 139 words by Elliott's Paul Singer which in two short paragraphs explains everything one needs to know about America's record class inequality, including precisely who is the man responsible:

Inequality in the U.S. today is near its historical highs, largely because the Federal Reserve’s policies have succeeded in achieving their aim: namely, higher asset prices (especially the prices of stocks, bonds and high-end real estate), which are generally owned by taxpayers in the upper-income brackets. The Fed is doing all the work, because the President’s policies are growth-suppressive. In the absence of the Fed’s moneyprinting and ZIRP, the economy would either be softer or actually in a new recession. 

 

The greatest irony is that the President is railing against inequality as one of the most important problems of the day, despite the fact that his policies are squeezing the middle class and causing the Fed – with the President’s encouragement – to engage in the radical monetary policy, which is exacerbating inequality. This simple truth cannot be repeated often enough.

Q.E.D.

 




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1oe2Akd Tyler Durden

2014's Biggest Equity, Bond, And FX Market Moves

In the first seven months of 2014, Goldman notes that equity, fixed income, and FX markets were most intently focused on the labor market with a number of the largest moves occurring due to employment reports and jobless claims. The equity market responded to a mix of economic, monetary policy, and geopolitical news. The fixed income market focused on employment reports, although other factors also resulted in large one-day moves. The dollar, although less volatile than usual, did move on both US economic developments and news out of Europe.

 

The primary drivers were Fed communication and economic releases. The FOMC’s focus on labor market indicators gave employment reports heightened importance, with nine of the 30 moves directly related to a labor market data release.

Equity Market

 

In the equity market (represented by the S&P 500) the top moves in the past seven months were driven by a mix of economic data, monetary policy announcements, and geopolitical developments. The largest decline occurred on February 3 after the ISM manufacturing survey came in well below consensus. Weaker-than-expected auto sales added to the day-long equity sell off, with the S&P 500 down 2.3% at the end of the day. The next major decline–January 13–did not appear to be connected to any major economic release. The decline on January 24 came a day after a weaker-than-expected HSBC China flash PMI, reflecting concerns about emerging market growth.

On February 6, the ECB announced its decision to not cut rates, although President Mario Draghi hinted at the possibility for other stimulus measures as soon as March. Equities rose on the announcement. The next day’s January employment report featured a strong household survey but a weak establishment survey. The market focused on the household survey, and equity prices rose as a result. On March 4, equities rose after Russian President Vladimir Putin announced the stoppage of military exercises along the Ukrainian border. The March employment report was weaker than expected, and equities fell as investors pulled out of growth stocks. Another sudden move away from stocks with stretched valuations came on April 10, when the S&P 500 fell 2.1%. Concern about international tensions re-emerged on July 17 when equities fell sharply after a Malaysian Air flight with 298 passengers and crew was shot down over Eastern Ukraine. Finally, on July 31 a significantly weaker-than-expected Chicago PMI report sparked a day-long decline in equities.

Fixed Income Market

 

The fixed income market (represented by the 5-year Treasury yield) focused on labor market data, although several other factors also caused large moves. The largest rise in yields came in response to the March 19 FOMC statement and Summary of Economic Projections (SEP). FOMC members’ forecasts for future fed funds rates were more hawkish than expected, leading to a 19bp rise in the 5-year Treasury. The next largest moves came from employment news in early January. A positive surprise on the December ADP employment report sent the 5-year yield up 8bp, but a couple of days later a negative surprise on the BLS employment report sent it back down 11bp.

The weaker-than-expected HSBC Chinese PMI Index printed on January 23 stoked concern about emerging market growth driving down yields. On February 13, the retail sales print came out below consensus and, coupled with weak earnings, resulted in a day-long decline in Treasury yields. On March 4, a softening of tensions along the Ukrainian border caused Treasury yields to rise. Employment news dominated the next couple of months, with a stronger-than-expected February employment report pushing Treasury yields up on March 7, and a weaker-than-expected March employment report pushing them back down on April 4. On April 17, better-than-expected jobless claims and a strong Philadelphia Fed survey resulted in improved sentiment and an 8bp rise in the 5-year yield. On July 30, the Q2 GDP report printed above expectations and showed an upward revision to Q1, pushing yields upwards.

Foreign Exchange Market

 

The foreign exchange market experienced few large intra-day moves, with two of the largest daily moves occurring on days with no major events. The dollar registered its biggest one-day gain of 0.6% on March 20 on the release of a stronger-than-expected Philadelphia Fed release. Several of the largest declines in the trade-weighted dollar were due to news out of Europe. On February 6, the ECB’s decision not to cut rates caused the euro to appreciate against the dollar. A month later (March 6), a similar ECB announcement caused the euro to appreciate and resulted in the largest one-day decline by the trade-weighted dollar of 0.5%. Positive reports out of peripheral Europe on April 8 also resulted in the dollar’s depreciation against the euro.

The December employment report, released January 10, included a significant downside surprise on nonfarm payrolls, causing the dollar to depreciate. However, on January 15, the dollar appreciated on a better-than-expected Empire manufacturing survey coupled with concerns about emerging market economies. The dollar depreciated on April 4 with the release of the March employment report, largely due to a surprise increase in the labor force participation rate. Finally, on July 30, the stronger-than-expected Q2 GDP report caused the dollar to appreciate.

 

Source: Goldman Sachs




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1sdJw7s Tyler Durden

2014’s Biggest Equity, Bond, And FX Market Moves

In the first seven months of 2014, Goldman notes that equity, fixed income, and FX markets were most intently focused on the labor market with a number of the largest moves occurring due to employment reports and jobless claims. The equity market responded to a mix of economic, monetary policy, and geopolitical news. The fixed income market focused on employment reports, although other factors also resulted in large one-day moves. The dollar, although less volatile than usual, did move on both US economic developments and news out of Europe.

 

The primary drivers were Fed communication and economic releases. The FOMC’s focus on labor market indicators gave employment reports heightened importance, with nine of the 30 moves directly related to a labor market data release.

Equity Market

 

In the equity market (represented by the S&P 500) the top moves in the past seven months were driven by a mix of economic data, monetary policy announcements, and geopolitical developments. The largest decline occurred on February 3 after the ISM manufacturing survey came in well below consensus. Weaker-than-expected auto sales added to the day-long equity sell off, with the S&P 500 down 2.3% at the end of the day. The next major decline–January 13–did not appear to be connected to any major economic release. The decline on January 24 came a day after a weaker-than-expected HSBC China flash PMI, reflecting concerns about emerging market growth.

On February 6, the ECB announced its decision to not cut rates, although President Mario Draghi hinted at the possibility for other stimulus measures as soon as March. Equities rose on the announcement. The next day’s January employment report featured a strong household survey but a weak establishment survey. The market focused on the household survey, and equity prices rose as a result. On March 4, equities rose after Russian President Vladimir Putin announced the stoppage of military exercises along the Ukrainian border. The March employment report was weaker than expected, and equities fell as investors pulled out of growth stocks. Another sudden move away from stocks with stretched valuations came on April 10, when the S&P 500 fell 2.1%. Concern about international tensions re-emerged on July 17 when equities fell sharply after a Malaysian Air flight with 298 passengers and crew was shot down over Eastern Ukraine. Finally, on July 31 a significantly weaker-than-expected Chicago PMI report sparked a day-long decline in equities.

Fixed Income Market

 

The fixed income market (represented by the 5-year Treasury yield) focused on labor market data, although several other factors also caused large moves. The largest rise in yields came in response to the March 19 FOMC statement and Summary of Economic Projections (SEP). FOMC members’ forecasts for future fed funds rates were more hawkish than expected, leading to a 19bp rise in the 5-year Treasury. The next largest moves came from employment news in early January. A positive surprise on the December ADP employment report sent the 5-year yield up 8bp, but a couple of days later a negative surprise on the BLS employment report sent it back down 11bp.

The weaker-than-expected HSBC Chinese PMI Index printed on January 23 stoked concern about emerging market growth driving down yields. On February 13, the retail sales print came out below consensus and, coupled with weak earnings, resulted in a day-long decline in Treasury yields. On March 4, a softening of tensions along the Ukrainian border caused Treasury yields to rise. Employment news dominated the next couple of months, with a stronger-than-expected February employment report pushing Treasury yields up on March 7, and a weaker-than-expected March employment report pushing them back down on April 4. On April 17, better-than-expected jobless claims and a strong Philadelphia Fed survey resulted in improved sentiment and an 8bp rise in the 5-year yield. On July 30, the Q2 GDP report printed above expectations and showed an upward revision to Q1, pushing yields upwards.

Foreign Exchange Market

 

The foreign exchange market experienced few large intra-day moves, with two of the largest daily moves occurring on days with no major events. The dollar registered its biggest one-day gain of 0.6% on March 20 on the release of a stronger-than-expected Philadelphia Fed release. Several of the largest declines in the trade-weighted dollar were due to news out of Europe. On February 6, the ECB’s decision not to cut rates caused the euro to appreciate against the dollar. A month later (March 6), a similar ECB announcement caused the euro to appreciate and resulted in the largest one-day decline by the trade-weighted dollar of 0.5%. Positive reports out of peripheral Europe on April 8 also resulted in the dollar’s depreciation against the euro.

The December employment report, released January 10, included a significant downside surprise on nonfarm payrolls, causing the dollar to depreciate. However, on January 15, the dollar appreciated on a better-than-expected Empire manufacturing survey coupled with concerns about emerging market economies. The dollar depreciated on April 4 with the release of the March employment report, largely due to a surprise increase in the labor force participation rate. Finally, on July 30, the stronger-than-expected Q2 GDP report caused the dollar to appreciate.

 

Source: Goldman Sachs




via Zero Hedge http://ift.tt/1sdJw7s Tyler Durden