Bonds & Bullion Bid But Brexit Blowback Batters Banks

"You silly sod, you got us all worked up over a little [Brexit]…"

 

European bank stocks were a bloodbath…Worst.Drop.Ever…

 

But US Financials were not immune, catching down to Treasuries' reality…

 

US Financials are down the most since Summer 2011's US Downgrade…

 

Citi, BofA, and MS all spanked with GS outperforming JPM… but still ugly…

 

As The Dimon Bottom looms…

 

Since Brexit was unleashed, Bullion (+6%), and Bonds (+4%) are dramatically outperforming as Cable and Financials make new lows…

 

Nasdaq is down over 7% since Brexit…

 

Trannies are the worst cash index since Brexit…

 

Dow is down over 1000 points…

 

Every affort was made to keep the S&P 500 above 2,000…

 

Treasury yields continued to plummet post-Brexit…

 

With 2s10s at it slowest since Nov 2007…when the last recession started!

 

The USD Index spiked to 3 month highs…

 

This is the biggest 2-day spike in The USD Index since 1992…

 

Gold gained modestly on the day as crude tumbled…

 

Seriously… every single fucking day…

 

Charts: Bloomberg

via http://ift.tt/2939XKZ Tyler Durden

Chicago Is Pushing For A Massive Bailout Of Its Public School System

It is well known that Chicago's pension liabilities have completely decimated the city's finances and currently stand at close to $20 billion. Faced with a significant challenge of meeting funding obligations as a result of a 2010 state law, Mayor Rahm Emanuel recently won a slight reprieve in the amount of money the city would have to contribute to fund the liabilities over the next few years, as recently Illinois lawmakers overrode Governor Bruce Rauner's veto and will now change the legislation in order to allow the city to defer payments to fund pensions.

Under the prior legislation, Chicago was required to have its public safety workers pensions 90% funded by 2040, and called for an $834 million payment to be made in 2016 alone. The revised legislation reduces that amount to $619 million, and allows for smaller increases through 2020 while pushing the timeline for 90% funding out to 2055 – at which time the timeline will be extended once again of course, as it will never be possible for the City to come up with such funds.

Perhaps riding high on that small victory, Rahm Emanuel is now quietly asking the city to change investment rules that would allow Chicago to purchase debt from sister agencies such as the Chicago Public School systemsaid differently, Rahm Emanuel wants to bail out the Chicago Public School system.

Although as expected, nobody wants to refer to the maneuver as a bailout, only as an "investment."

From the Chicago Tribune

Emanuel this past week quietly proposed a change to city investment rules that would allow the city to buy debt from so-called sister agencies, including CPS, no matter the creditworthiness of that debt. He said he was making the request on behalf of city Treasurer Kurt Summers as part of the Summers' annual investment policy update.

 

Aides for both Emanuel and Summers said the proposal was not designed to give the city a way to provide temporary funding to CPS as it seeks state help to right its teetering financial ship. "That's not what's happening," city spokeswoman Molly Poppe said. "This is not some contingency plan or bailout for CPS."

 

Instead, they said, it's meant to give the treasurer the option of investing in bonds, short-term loans or other types of debt from CPS — and other agencies like the Chicago Housing Authority, Park District, CTA and City Colleges — just as the city has the option of buying its own debt.

CPS carries roughly a $6.2 billion debt load, and recently borrowed $725 million through a bond issuance. In March CPS indicated it would have to tap an existing $370 million credit line with Barclays to help pay a June 30 pension obligation in the amount of $676 million. CPS already carries a junk rating by all three major rating agencies.

Nonetheless, the narrative that the bailout is actually an investment is fully in play.

"This change means that our sister agencies would no longer be treated any differently from an investment perspective than the city, as is commonplace throughout the country," said Alexandra Sims, senior adviser to Summers. "The city has always had the ability to invest in municipal and state bonds. This expands and allows us to invest in the city and all sister agencies as part of the treasurer's plan to invest in Chicago."

* * *

While Emanuel and other city officials pretend that the city is making an investment, it is quite likely that the bailout will mean a significant loss for taxpayers, who already feel the burden of severely under funded pensions as noted above. The reality is that tax hikes are coming, and this "investment" will need to be covered by future revenues from the taxpayers as well.

Eventually the reality that debt can't be forever used in place of honest fiscal reforms will be introduced to Chicago (and everyplace else, Detroit for example). Until then, those who actually do have a little money are going to continue to flee cities such as Chicago, as they see the writing on the wall.

As a reminder, here is a heat map of where $100,000 pensions reside – notice anywhere in particular?

via http://ift.tt/28Ytko3 Tyler Durden

Kremlin: Brexit Is Like Soviet Breakup

The last leader of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, previously said:

The most puzzling development in politics during the last decade is the apparent determination of Western European leaders to re-create the Soviet Union in Western Europe.

And in the wake of Brexit, today's Kremlin said much the same thing:

It’s obvious that the U.K. is going through a “turbulent, confusing and unpredictable period,” Dmitry Peskov [Vladimir Putin’s spokesman] told reporters on a conference call Monday. Russia “has gone through the collapse of the Soviet Union and many generations clearly remember the period of the Soviet collapse, that period of uncertainty.”

 

***

 

The USSR was dissolved in December 1991, more than 18 months after Lithuania led the Baltic republics in declaring independence.

Given that the Soviet Union was anti-democratic and authoritarian, and that EU appears to be pushing to destroy the sovereignty of individual European nations, the analogy might not be that far off.

via http://ift.tt/299i5ab George Washington

Behold Corporate Incest

The list of SolarCity directors who will vote on Tesla’s $2.86 billion bid is getting shorter, as Bloomberg reports two more directors have recused themselves, as the incestuously deep connections between the two companies create clear potential conflicts of interest, according to analysts and experts in governance issues.

A few of the directors are related by blood, others have through longstanding personal and professional relationships and some made significant investments in both companies…

 

“The conflict is very ripe,” said Steven Davidoff Solomon, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley’s School of Law. “Elon Musk is entering into a transaction where he’s going to make hundreds of millions of dollars. The market isn’t happy about it. And they’re not playing by the usual conflict playbook. That’s a triple strike against them.”

Invest or Incest?

via http://ift.tt/299ihWZ Tyler Durden

Greenspan Warns A Crisis Is Imminent, Urges A Return To The Gold Standard

On Friday afternoon, after the shocking Brexit referendum, while being interviewed by CNBC Alan Greenspan stunned his hosts when he said that things are about as bad as he has ever seen.

“This is the worst period, I recall since I’ve been in public service. There’s nothing like it, including the crisis — remember October 19th, 1987, when the Dow went down by a record amount 23 percent? That I thought was the bottom of all potential problems. This has a corrosive effect that will not go away. I’d love to find something positive to say.”

Strangely enough, he was not refering to the British exodus but to America’s own economic troubles.

Today, Greenspan was on Bloomberg Surveillance where in an extensive, 30 minutes interview he was urged to give his take on the British referendum outcome. According to Greenspan, David Cameron miscalculated and made a “terrible mistake” in holding a referendum. That decision led to a “terrible outcome in all respects,” Greenspan said. “It didn’t have to happen.” Greenspan then noted that as a result of Brexit, “we are in very early days a crisis which has got a way to go”, and point to Scotland which he said will likely have another referendum on its own, predicting the vote would be successful, and Northern Ireland would “probably” go the same way.

His remarks then centered on the Eurozone which he defined as a truly “vulnerable institution,” primarily due to Greece’s inclusion in its structure. “Get Greece out. They’re a toxic liability sitting in the middle of a very important economic zone.” Ironically, the same Eurozone has spent countless hours doing everything in its power to show just how unbreakable the union is by preserving Greece, while it took the UK just one overnight session to break away. Luckily the UK was not part of the monetary union or else it would be game over.

But speaking of crises, Greenspan warned that fundamentally it is not so much an issue of immigration, or even economics, but unsustainable welfare spending, or as Greenspan puts it, “entitlements.”

The issue is essentially that entitlements are legal issues.  They have nothing to do with economics.  You reach a certain age or you are ill or something of that nature and you are entitled to certain expenditures out of the budget without any reference to how it’s going to be funded.  Where the productivity levels are now, we are lucky to get something even close to two percent annual growth rate.  That annual growth rate of two percent is not adequate to finance the existing needs.

 

I don’t know how it’s going to resolve, but there’s going to be a crisis.

 

This is one of the great problems of democracy.  It goes back to the founding fathers.  How do you handle a situation like this?  And it’s very troublesome, but eventually you get things like Margaret Thatcher showing up in Britain.  Their situation is far worse than ours.  And what she did is she turned it all around essentially by, as I remember it, the miners were going to strike and she decided – she knew they were going to strike.  Since at that point, the government owned these coal mines, she built up a huge inventory so that when they went on strike, there was enough coal in Britain so that eventually the whole union structure collapsed.  She fundamentally changed Britain to this day.  The fact that we are doing so well in the E.U. is not altogether clear that it is the E.U. or whether it was Margaret Thatcher.

When asked if “we need an accident of history” to address this, Greenspan replied “Probably. In the United States, social benefits, which is the more generic term, or entitlements, are considered the third rail of American politics.  You touch them and you lose.  Now, that is a general view.  Republicans don’t want to touch it.  Democrats don’t want to touch it.  They don’t even want to talk about.  This is what the election should be all about in the United States.  You will never hear one word from either side.  “

This is the same entitlements crisis that Stanley Druckenmiller has also been raging about for years, most recently in his “The Endgamepresentation delivered at the Ira Sohn conference.

Greenspan then went on to bash the false “recovery” narrative, warning that “the fundamental issue is the fact that productivity growth has ground to a halt.” 

 We are running out of people.  In other words, everyone is very pleased at the fact that the employment rate is rising.  Well, statistics tell us that we need more and more people to produce less and less.  That is not a prescription for a viable political system.  And so what we have at this stage is stagnation.  I don’t think that there is anything out there which suggests that there is a recession, but I don’t know that.  What I do know is that the money supply, and too, which has always been a critical indicator of inflation, is for the first time going up remarkably steadily 6 percent, 7 percent, almost a straight line.  It’s tilted up in the last several months.  It’s added a percentage point or two.  The thing that we should be worrying about now, which we have actually given no thought to whatsoever, is that this type of economic environment ends with inflation.  Historically, fiat money has always ended up that way.

And here we get to the heart of the matter, because in not so many words, Greenspan effectively says that hyperinflation is coming:

I know if you look at human history, there are times and times again where we thought that there was no inflation and everything was just going fine.  And I just basically say, wait.  This is not the way this thing ordinarily comes up.  I don’t know.  I cannot say I see it on the horizon.  In fact, commodity prices are soggy.  The oil prices has had a terrific impact on global inflation.  It’s not about to emerge quickly, but I would not be surprised to see the next unexpected move to be on the inflation side.  You don’t have inflation now.  And you don’t have it until it happens.

Of course, Greenspan ignores his own role in the creation of the boom-bust cycle which has doomed the world to series of ever more destructive bubbles and ultimately, hyperinflation which will likely be unlashed once the helicopter money inevitably arrives. In retrospect, the 90-year-old, who clearly is looking forward not backward, has a simple solution: the gold standard.

If we went back on the gold standard and we adhered to the actual structure of the gold standard as it exited prior to 1913, we’d be fine.  Remember that the period 1870 to 1913 was one of the most aggressive periods economically that we’ve had in the United States, and that was a golden period of the gold standard.  I’m known as a gold bug and everyone laughs at me, but why do central banks own gold now?

Why indeed. And of course, that’s rhetorical.

* * *

His full interview is below.

via http://ift.tt/28YpA5M Tyler Durden

Earthquakes Cause Giant Natural Gas Field To Cut Production By 44%

Submitted by Dave Forest via OilPrice.com,

Europe just lost a big chunk of production from one of its most critical natural gas fields, and not for any of the usual reasons — technical problems, pipeline constraints, or terrorist disruptions.

These cuts are due to earthquakes.

The development came at the Groningen natgas field in the Netherlands. The largest producing field in Western Europe — and one of the world’s top 10 gas fields by size.

Groningen’s massive size has been an issue lately though, with drawdown from the field having caused seismic events in the areas above and surrounding the field.

Such concerns prompted the Dutch government to take action Friday. With the country’s Economics Minister Henk Kamp saying that regulators will reduce Groningen’s permitted output by 11.1 percent — to 24 billion cubic meters per year (850 billion cubic feet), down from a previous allowance of 27 billion cubic meters.

Minister Kamp also said that the reduced production quota will stay in effect for the next five years. This means that Europe has lost a significant slice of its go-to production for the foreseeable future.

This latest production cut continues a dramatic slide in Groningen’s output over the past 18 months. With the Dutch government deciding in early 2015 to cut production from 42.5 billion cubic feet annually to 39 billion cubic feet — and then further reducing the quota to 33 billion cubic feet just a few months later.

The further cuts announced Friday come after high-level Dutch regulatory body the Council of State ordered the government to take more action in protecting the public. With Minister Kamp saying that the new production cap would “reduce safety risks to Groningen’s residents and damage to buildings.”

The Minister did say that production could be increased above the quota in the event of exceptionally cold weather or other instances of strict necessity. But overall it appears that Groningen’s output is going to be 44 percent lower than it was less than two years ago — which could put upward pressure on prices in the European market.

That could have a number of knock-on effects. Including attracting more liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Europe — with countries here having a lot of under-used import capacity right now. Watch for the effects of the Dutch shut-in on prices — and structural changes in this market as a result.

via http://ift.tt/28YF1bh Tyler Durden

Monday Humor: WTI WTF NYMEX Ramp Edition

Presented with little comment aside to ask, where is the SEC, CFTC?

 

On a day of non-stop, low volume, weakness, the ‘fundamental’ event of the NYMEX close created a somewhat idiotic spike in WTI Crude…

 

No news, no cross-asset-class momo, no headlines – just pure and utter algo idiocy banging the close.

via http://ift.tt/28Z1hkt Tyler Durden

10 Ways The UK Could Leave The EU

Authored by Alastair Macdonald, originally posted at Reuters.com,

Stalemate between Britain and the European Union over what happens next following Britons' referendum vote to leave has opened up a host of possible scenarios.

Here are some that are (in some cases, barely) conceivable:

1. BY THE BOOK

Prime Minister David Cameron, who said he will resign after losing his gamble to end British ambivalence about staying in, agrees with the EU establishment that the only legal way to leave is to use Article 50 of the EU's Lisbon Treaty to negotiate a withdrawal.

He wants to leave triggering the process to his successor, who may not be chosen by the Conservative party until October. EU leaders want him to do it now, or at least as soon as possible, but they lack the legal power to force him.

In the most amicable divorce scenario, Britain would trigger Article 50, possibly (though unlikely now) as early as Tuesday when Cameron meets the other 27 EU leaders at a Brussels summit, or via a formal letter later from Cameron or his successor.

That sets a two-year time limit on negotiating an amicable withdrawal. Ideally, it would divide up assets and liabilities in the shared EU budget and other priority business, such as perhaps the status of British and other EU citizens who find themselves living on the wrong side of a hard new UK-EU border.

In an even more ideal world, it would set out a new, close economic relationship between Britain and the EU, possibly in a separate, parallel treaty taking effect from the exit date. The withdrawal treaty can be enacted by just 20 of the 27 other states representing 65 percent of the remaining population. A full new relationship would probably need unanimous support.

Two years is very tight but the negotiations can be extended if all 28 countries agree. If there is no deal, then Britain is simply out of the EU two years after Article 50 was triggered — an outcome written in to the treaty to limit uncertainties.

REALLY? TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE. THE EU IS NEVER THIS EASY

2. SORRY, WE DIDN'T MEAN IT

Britain is in political meltdown, with both main parties in civil war and pro-EU Scotland threatening to either block Brexit legally (unclear how) or break away. The referendum result is not constitutionally binding and government and parliament, maybe after a new election, could just ignore it. If so, the EU would carry on as before but a special membership deal it gave Cameron in February has been killed by the referendum result.

REALLY? PUSHES DEMOCRATIC CREDIBILITY BEYOND BREAKING POINT

3. WE MEAN IT, BUT NOT YET

Brexit campaigners have long been suspicious of the two-year limit in Article 50 and some have explicitly said it should only formally be triggered AFTER they have agreed a comprehensive free trade deal that relieves Britain of EU rules such as open EU immigration. Five years or more is the norm globally for such big trade deals. Britain would be a full EU member until then.

That is a nightmare scenario for EU leaders, plunging the bloc into open-ended negotiations with its second biggest power that would inspire eurosceptics across the bloc to emulate it and distract governments from other pressing European issues.

They rule out opening any negotiation until Britain binds itself to the timetable set out in Article 50. And they insist Britain cannot have its cake on market access and still eat it by ending EU budget payments and free movement of workers.

In theory, there could be an endless standoff, with Britain the sulky teenager at the table, poisoning the atmosphere next year as France and Germany run elections and the EU starts confrontational talks on a new 7-year budget. Something would have to give and some compromise would start to be worked out.

REALLY? COMPROMISE IS THE EU WAY; DON'T RULE THIS OUT

4. WE MEAN IT — OR MAYBE WE DIDN'T

Article 50 suggests a one-way exit, rather than a revolving door. EU officials insist that once triggered, a state cannot back out and stay. Lawyers are divided, however. Some British experts believe the leave notice could simply be withdrawn. In Brussels, others say that could happen but only if agreed by all. A future British government might conclude that the best way to end divorce proceedings is just to agree to stay married.

REALLY? SEE SCENARIO 2, BUT WITH ADDED FADING OF MEMORIES

5. CAN WE JUST TWEAK THIS QUICKLY?

Some Brexit campaigners have suggested that the Leave vote simply serve as leverage to renegotiate better, semi-detached terms for Britain inside the EU which could be put to another referendum. EU leaders have ruled that out on the same grounds as above that "cherry picking" will spread and wreck the Union. Cameron's deal, to protect the City of London from the euro zone and curb EU immigration, has been killed by a clause that linked it to last week's referendum result. So any talks would start from a lower base and EU leaders would have to eat their words. But some kind of "associate membership" or "special partnership" has been around as an idea in Europe for a time.

REALLY? SEE 4, BUT NEVER SAY NEVER IN EURO-COMPROMISE LAND

6. LET'S JUST SLIP INTO SOMETHING MORE COMFORTABLE

Britain could try to join the European Economic Area or European Free Trade Association, joining the likes of Norway, Switzerland or Iceland in close partnerships with the EU. That could fly with the EU but British leaders would have to persuade Brexit voters to agree to the EU budget contributions and migrants that are accepted by some of those countries. It also would lack the kind of EU market access for services trade which is so important to Britain's big financial sector. A more tailor-made deal would bring things back to earlier scenarios.

REALLY? DOESN'T SEEM TO BE WHAT BRITONS WANT, AT LEAST NOW

7. WHY DON'T WE START AGAIN?

One extreme view is that the fallout from Brexit in the EU might be so cataclysmic that Europeans would go back to the drawing board and effectively create a new kind of Union that could include Britain. Marshalling disparate national ambitions into a new structure would be a colossal task, not least in the wake of the bitterness that the current crisis has engendered.

REALLY? A DEFINITE LONG SHOT, NOT ONE FOR THE NEAR FUTURE

8. SECOND TIME LUCKY?

Some people who voted to Leave have said that if it doesn't work outside, Britain could always join the EU again. That is true, though it would get no favors. It would face a years-long accession process and require unanimous acceptance by existing members and have to accept a host of conditions that Britain has opted out of during its past 43 years — notably adopting the euro and a virtually 50-percent rebate on EU membership fees.

REALLY? ONE FOR THE (VERY LONG-LIVED) BIRDS

9. ROOM FOR A LITTLE ONE?

Some Scots hope to avoid Brexit by breaking from England. An idea that an independent Scotland could somehow simply sit in the vacant UK chair in Brussels is dismissed by EU officials.

At the time of the 2014 independence referendum, the EU said Scotland could apply for membership but would go to the "back of the queue", behind the likes of Serbia, and that its hope of keeping the pound rather than the euro was a non-starter. There is some sympathy for Scots losing their place in the EU but also deep suspicion of secession, especially in Spain, Belgium and Italy, which have their own separatist problems. And a veto.

REALLY? NOT SOON, BUT SCOTLAND COULD JOIN THE EU ONE DAY

10. SLAMMING THE DOOR

A new British government simply walks out. It could launch Article 50 and leave legally in 2019 without any negotiation. It could also ignore the two-year notice period and tear up its treaty obligations and quit right away, though that would undermine its credibility as a party to international law. There is, however, nothing the EU can do to prevent that.

It could retaliate on trade or against Britons living in the EU, however much that would create a painful tit-for-tat that would badly hurt Europe's economy and citizens. Nonetheless, EU leaders fear that letting Brexit Britain walk all over them will only inspire other European nationalists to destroy the Union.

REALLY? THREAT OF MUTUALLY ASSURED DESTRUCTION THEN DETENTE?

 

via http://ift.tt/28WjRIX Tyler Durden

These “Brexit” Market Moves Were Bigger Than Anything Seen In 2008… And What Comes Next

When the general population is asked to define a moment of paradigmatic instability in the history of financial markets, inevitably 2008 – in which there was a unprecedented divergence between risk perception

and the ultimate reality which saw Lehman fail and lead to the near collapse of the financial system – is the most cited answer. However, on Friday various markets saw volatile moves that put 2008 in the dust: in fact, the historic collapse in GBPUSD was not only far greater than any such move seen in history, but was an unprecedented 12-sigma move.

As Bank of America notes, post Britain’s vote to Leave the EU, the Euro STOXX 50 experienced its largest ever 1-day loss, GBPUSD reached 30yr lows and EURJPY, EURUSD & 10yr Bunds experienced 1d moves that were more significant than on any day in 2008. Gaps in risk perception that were evident even as recently as last week (VSTOXX-VIX spread was as wide as 20pts), may narrow further as spillover risk to global assets remains high. Indeed the Critical Stress Indicator of BofAML’s GFSITM index triggered on 13-Jun, suggesting cross asset stresses had risen by enough to lead to widespread contagion, absent policy intervention.

More details:

While derivatives markets like Sterling options clearly anticipated event risk around the referendum as early as April, there were record gaps in risk perception across regions and asset classes even days before the vote. Bank of America believes that gaps will further narrow as markets outside Europe realize the risks Brexit creates for global markets. For instance, at the time of writing the VSTOXX (V2X)-VIX spread, which traded as wide as 20 pts in the last week, decreased to ~13pts (EU close) as US equity volatility catches up with that in Europe.

But back to the resultant moves, some of which had no precedented in history, indeed some markets were more shock than 2008. something which leads BofA to concludes that substantial “spillover risks remain

Post the Brexit vote, the Euro STOXX 50 (SX5E) experienced its largest 1-day move ever today.

To put this and other asset class moves into context, Chart 2 normalises each asset class’ daily move by the standard deviation of the previous 100d (daily) returns. We note that:

  • Sterling had a 12 sigma move (vs history) on 24-Jun: GBPUSD, risk perception on which has been among the most stretched metrics across the GFSI leading up to EU referendum, reacted the most across the assets in Chart 2. This highlights just how important it is to pay attention to metrics close to the source of stress.
  • GBPUSD, EURJPY, EURUSD & 10yr Bunds were more shocked than even ‘08: Price action suggests FX & bond markets were more shocked by Brexit than they were at any time in 2008.
  • Scope of further contagion remains high: The GFSI’s Critical Stress Signal triggered on 13-Jun, as FX & equity stresses rose sharply. The markets’ reaction to Brexit has also witnessed a narrowing of some gaps in risk perception like the V2XVIX spread; indeed the VIX was >2x more surprised than the V2X today. Given the highly significant moves in cross asset stress and the relative underperformance of V2X (see later) versus EU equities, this metric will be a key barometer for monitoring contagion.

So unless central banks step in, how bad can it get? Some BofA forecasts:

The V2X lagged in the largest 1-d SX5E drop; may rise to ~46 if sell-off persists

 

The V2X underperformed the (~8.5%) fall in the SX5E today – rising by ~3.5 pts, while a historical relationship would suggest an increase of ~10 pts (Chart 2). Our equity strategists called for a 16% fall in the STOXX 600 in the short term vs yesterday’s levels, which translates to a further 10% drop in the SX5E from 24-Jun. Based on a historical relationship of SX5E 1wk returns & V2X 1wk changes, a 10% drop in the SX5E implies a rise of ~11 vol pts in the V2X (on average), which would take it near its 2011 high of 46 (Chart 3). Chart 4 extends the analysis from Chart 3 & highlights potential reaction of V2X in the coming month under various SX5E return scenarios. For instance, if the SX5E was to fall further by 16% in the next month, the VSTOXX is likely to be ~ 55.

 

 

 

How to read the projections in Chart 4: “Twk” stands for “time in weeks” from now to the end of a given projection. For instance, the green projection line in 2wks corresponds to an SX5E return of -8.5% [=6% * sqrt(2)] and predicts a V2X level of ~45.

 

The next question: what happens after such a spike, absent further exogenous shocks?

BofA uses an exponential decay process that is ‘fitted’ to each of the V2X, VIX and VNKY according to historical vol spike (see source of Chart 6 for details). Importantly, the decay process is independent of the starting level of vol, so it may be used to track the normalisation of a range of vol shocks: from the largest spikes in 2008 to the midsized ones in 2010-11 as well as the most recent (smaller) spikes (Chart 6, Chart 7, Chart 8). Note that in recent years, vol spikes have faded faster than in previous periods given the strong hand of central bank intervention (particularly in the US).

Finally, where could the VIX go?

The VIX outperformed the SPX decline; however, it remains low vs the V2X US equity vol, which lagged the broader rise in stress in the lead up to the EU referendum, has outperformed today’s decline in the SPX (as of the EU close). This has led to a narrowing of the gap between US vs EU equity vol. The trend is likely to continue if the sell-off continues.

In short: unless some exogenous entity, read central banks, openly intervene to restore calm and normalcy in the market, traders may be set for a long, painful period of volatility that has now been repricted sharply higher (something the banks will be delighted to use as an excuse to explain another quarter of subpar revenues) and will remain there absent some actions, not words, from the Yellen-Draghi-Carney trio.

via http://ift.tt/295zhP7 Tyler Durden