You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.

Indirect Hit Ratio At 100% In Just Completed 4 Week Bill Auction

Tyler Durden's picture




  • 4 week prices at 0.056%
  • 27.75% allotted at high; Median rate of 0.04%, low of 0.0%; The median rate was 0.000% recently
  • Bid to Cover 3.82, compared to 3.97 last week
  • Indirects take down $5.97 billion of competitives, or 19.8%
  • And shockingly, the indirect hit ratio was 100%: $5.956 billion tendered by Indirects, $5.956 billion accepted. This is a stunning result as every competitive indirect bid into the Bill auction was covered.




Similar Articles You Might Enjoy:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 12:59 | Link to Comment cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

Ignore that man behind the curtain.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 18:47 | Link to Comment 35Pete
35Pete's picture

You wouldn't be talking about the Wizard Of (troy) Oz, would you? 

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:00 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:40 | Link to Comment Pedro
Pedro's picture

Good question.  I don't know where to look to educate myself on this.  Tyler posts this every so often, but, I can't figure it out.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:55 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 14:03 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:32 | Link to Comment Ripped Chunk
Ripped Chunk's picture

I'll take a whack,

When the purchases do not go through the primary dealers who then subsequently resell the securities to the market, it is harder to determine true demand (yield). Since the identity of the direct purchasers can be masked, it leads to speculation about weather further monitorization of the debt is occurring in secret.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:38 | Link to Comment WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

+1

And I believe "indirect" in this case is Fedspeak for: guaranteed-not-to-fail auctions. It's like when Saddam got a 100% vote - yeah right. "Make your mark with your bloody stump here."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2331951.stm

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 16:16 | Link to Comment Pedro
Pedro's picture

Many thanks to both Anonymous and Ripped.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 16:48 | Link to Comment Enkidu
Enkidu's picture

Thanks for asking Pedro...

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:30 | Link to Comment TurboBob
TurboBob's picture

"What does this mean?"

I'm a neophyte, but those who are in the know are too arrogant to give an appropriate answer.  So I'll give my answer and then they can feel superior about jumping my case when I explain it incorrectly.

The direct bidders are exactly that, entities who go to the auction and buy directly for their own accounts.  The indirect bidders are the primary dealers (the banks who work with the FED). They buy for their clients not for themselves, they are indirect purchasers.  It's very lucrative to be one of the chosen few primary dealers, they make gazillions buying the bonds directly from the FED at auctions and then reselling them.....therefore these puppies will not upset the FED.  If the FED says buy, they buy.  Must keep the puppetmaster happy with you.  These indirect bidders never get stuck holding the bonds,  if they buy too many bonds they cannot unload them, they just resell the bonds back to the FED next week (outside of the auction process).

An auction with 100% means that the indirect bidders came in at the end of the bid and bought everything that was left. The were the only ones in the room at the end of the bid,  they bid for what was left and they got it all. (100%)  The bonds would have gone unsold without their presence.  In ESSENCE because the bonds are subsequently repurchased by the FED the FED was the real purchaser of these bonds.  The FED just saved the auction from failing by buying up all the remaining bonds through their puppets, the primary dealers (the indirect bidders).

IS that close, all you supergeniuses?

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 16:23 | Link to Comment Pedro
Pedro's picture

That was a most excellent summary Turbo.  Very clear.  Sorry to take advantage, but, if I may ask; What is considered a normal or successful auction in percentages?  Does it have to hit 100% to be declared a successful auction or would 60-80% do?

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 20:37 | Link to Comment WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

Direct Buyers: folks who buy straight from the Treasury, typically comprising a minor stake in US debt purchases Indirect Buyers: folks who buy LARGE chunks of US debt, typically Foreign Governments Primary Dealers: banks that HAVE to buy US debt to insure an auction doesn’t fail.

 

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article17214.html

In other words, nobody wanted to buy.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 16:15 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:00 | Link to Comment bugs_
bugs_'s picture

Daddy what do you do at work?

Well darling I'm an Auction Repairman.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:40 | Link to Comment WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

LOL!

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:03 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

It's either a sign of desperation or complacency that they don't even try very hard to cover their tracks or put on a good show.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:42 | Link to Comment WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

I wonder if that's a sign of inflation? Guess you can't distort a number like 100%.

I think it's safe to go downtown and put my A-board on: GOLD BITCHES!!!

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:03 | Link to Comment Rick64
Rick64's picture

Wow they are really getting good at this.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:03 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:06 | Link to Comment hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture

There are some rare animals in this park.  Definitely worth the price of admission.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:07 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:09 | Link to Comment ShankyS
ShankyS's picture

So we pretty much ate the whole enchilada. That's gonna hurt.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:09 | Link to Comment Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

"it rubs the lotion on it's skin!"

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 16:38 | Link to Comment mikla
mikla's picture

+1 HAHAHAAAAA!

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:10 | Link to Comment Burnbright
Burnbright's picture

QE under the table...nice.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:10 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 14:34 | Link to Comment Judge
Judge's picture

The indirect bid's are consumers who's idenity is unknown, like the primaries.  Some speculate, and probably correctly,  that the Fed is a secret bidder, buying the Treasuries for one of it's accounts and in so doing expanding the money supply.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:18 | Link to Comment Internet Tough Guy
Internet Tough Guy's picture

Dealer blackjack. Player loses.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:18 | Link to Comment Quantitative Wh...
Quantitative Wheezing's picture

You're all wrong....when the deflationary spirial kicks in during wave 3 (any day now), then these yields will go negative.  Ask yourself the question....if you had $5BB in cash, where would you put it?  In a bank??  In stocks, gold or corn?? or in hyper liquid us government backed short-term cash equivalents?

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:20 | Link to Comment George the baby...
George the baby crusher's picture

It's a trick question right?  But I'm going to go for treasuries.... What did I win?

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:34 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

You're very own government approved and supported printing press.

Now get to work.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:33 | Link to Comment hack3434
hack3434's picture

"hyper liquid us government backed short-term cash equivalents?"

 

That reminds me of the old realtor motto..."Property values double every ten years...buy!"

 

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:37 | Link to Comment cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

[hyper liquid us government backed short-term cash]

Translation: monetary diarrhea

It had to be said.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:29 | Link to Comment Selah
Selah's picture

I long for the "before time" when all this would have been incomprehensible gibberish to me.

DAMN YOU ZH!!!  

Ignorance = Happiness.

 

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:33 | Link to Comment bugs_
bugs_'s picture

Comment of the day?

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:35 | Link to Comment Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

apparently.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:33 | Link to Comment Postal
Postal's picture

Along those lines... This is "incomprehensible gibberish" to me, as I'm not a finance/investment person.

That said, can somebody explain this post to me, please? I don't understand what's being said or what it means. Thx.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:36 | Link to Comment Cindy_Dies_In_T...
Cindy_Dies_In_The_End's picture

It basically means we are buying all of our own trash.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:34 | Link to Comment cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

Yeah. But this way you'll actually see the bus that's going to run you over. It's all about the horror, baby!

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 14:28 | Link to Comment Selah
Selah's picture

Good point!

I am not one to avert my glance from an epic/historic train-wreck...

Got Glock/Gold/Gumption?

 

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:35 | Link to Comment Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Kant agrees, but when asked if he would have done it differently, he said, "No."

Personally I like to think of not ignorance, but bliss.  Igorance is not bliss.  Bliss is happiness, and hapiness is the truth.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:30 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:42 | Link to Comment cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

No no! Because then they would need real money to operate, which means selling ad spots, which means pleasing your sponsors, which means running puff pieces and letting the sales department edit the show and pull stories off the air right from the hands of the talking heads even as they read them. Then it's nothing by cocaine, [cheese|beef]cake, booze and ratings week all-nighters.

Besides we already have CNBC for that.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 14:45 | Link to Comment fuu
fuu's picture

You need a camera, some lights, and a video editing software package. Storage is cheap. Bandwidth is pretty cheap.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:33 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:39 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:39 | Link to Comment Mako
Mako's picture

US Treasuries are the safest until they are not.   Once the whole thing collapses there will be nowhere to hide.   

You can't escape the equation, building a system on a requirement for exponential growth seems futile.  No need to worry viruses haven't figured it out either.  

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 14:37 | Link to Comment ghostfaceinvestah
ghostfaceinvestah's picture

Some viruses only die when they have killed their host.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:53 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:54 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 13:57 | Link to Comment Biff Malibu
Biff Malibu's picture

I'm reading this while my children are reciting the "Pledge of Allegiance" in the background...I think I'm going to throw up...

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 14:04 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 14:17 | Link to Comment chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

Let me translate this for you all:

GOLD BITCHES!!!

I am Chumbawamba.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 14:21 | Link to Comment theprofromdover
theprofromdover's picture

Huzzah.........!

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 14:48 | Link to Comment Bylinka (not verified)
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 14:53 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:26 | Link to Comment MarketTruth
MarketTruth's picture

And the DOW down $113. And your point Anonymous can't-get-a-real-name is?

Oh, that gold is a good buy today... then you are right. The time to buy physical gold is now.

WB Chumbawumba!

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 16:18 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:46 | Link to Comment WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

Oh, nice. I didn't scroll down far enough. I have admit that when I first started surfing ZH I was a little put off and even confused by some of your comments. They have all become crystal clear as my understanding has increased.

 

Wed, 02/24/2010 - 06:44 | Link to Comment chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

Thanks! :)

I am Chumbawamba.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 14:21 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 14:31 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 14:37 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:01 | Link to Comment fuu
fuu's picture

So:

 

Primary Dealers accounted for 57% of purchases but only 21.6% of all Primary Dealer bids were accepted.

Directs accounted for 8% of purchases but only 22.11% of all Directs bids were accepted.

Indirects accounted for 16% of purchases but 100% of the Indirect bids were accepted.

SOMA accounted for 16% of purchases and 100% of SOMA bids were accepted. SOMA is the System Open Market Account. http://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/soma/sysopen_accholdings.html

 

So it would appear there is a market in the Primary Dealers. More were trying to buy then were accepted.

 

Directs also apepar to have a real market. More bids tendered than accepted.

 

Indirects do not appear to actually have a market. you would expect to see more bids offered than accepted if people were really "bidding". To my certainly uneducated and naive view this was a failed auction taht was saved by a miracle bid from indirects. It also would appear that the Fed is buying and that is stealth monetization.

The Fed should be buying through SOMA? 

 

Or I could just be totally wrong here.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:05 | Link to Comment 43 Steelie
43 Steelie's picture

From the NYFed Website:

Conclusion
Steps to increase the transparency of U.S. Treasury auctions in recent years have provided useful information to market observers. Investor class allotment information—shown to be related to the performance of individual securities—is now available on a more timely basis and for more securities than in the past. In addition, bidder category data are now available, and their prompt release offers observers an early read on the allocation of securities. The indirect bid, in particular, seems to be a fairly good proxy for foreign purchases of Treasury notes, although not Treasury bills.

http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/current_issues/ci13-1/ci13-1.html


Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:11 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:15 | Link to Comment Lexington Duffet
Lexington Duffet's picture

Maybe this explains part of it:

A failed bond auction occurs when there are not enough bidders for the bonds sold.  Say the UST wants to sell $10 billion in UST bonds.  The US government is in essence borrowing 10 billion from the buyers.  Normally, say normal for 10 years ago, there might be 20 billion in bids for 10 billion in bonds IF the interest rate paid on the bond makes sense and IF there are enough bidders.  Because the US currency was so strong, the UST could essentially set any interest rate it wanted and not only wld people still buy the bonds but the offering would be oversubscribed.  That is, the US currency was so strong any interest rate made sense to a lot of buyers.   1925 question: USD or German Weimer Republic bonds?  2000:  USD or Iraqi dinars?

Now, say we look at this hypothetical US bond auction today.  The US has been hemorraging money to the oil nations and to China through its trade deficits; the US government through tax cuts, wars and repeal of pay as you go has run up huge deficits.  Even with a trillion in pork thrown out, the US economy sucks. And the Chinese are flexing their muscles.  The chinese get angry about whatever and stop buying UST.

The auction goes forward with the UST trying to sell by auction $20 billion in bonds.  There are only $16 billion bid--a failed auction because 4 billion is not sold.  This is a big deal, as it shows the demand for UST is WAY down.  It also means the UST must raise its the interest rate on the bonds in order to create sufficient demand for its bonds.  Ergo, the US must pay more interest on its debt; its harder to borrow money; the currency value of the USD is at issue, etc.

So, I think the ZH theory is this:  to prevent a failed auction and the concurrent negative fall out, the UST is itself buying the bonds in order to avoid a failed auction and the problems that will bring to the US. 

If this is true, it means the treasury is engaging in extreme emergency measures, being politely not forthcoming.  Bad situation if correct.

The ZH wogs often argues that the UST is creating excess money supply but it seems to me that was already done when you sell the bonds in the first place and so that is really a non-issue.  Seems to me that the debt is the debt whether you self-finance it or not.

In passing, the Treasury is dealing with emergencies beyond their control.  Look to the US policy makers who actually caused these large debts and who enaged the US in stupid very costly wars if you want to blame a group for the problems.  IMO, to deflect blame, certain folk are, very inappropriately in my view, demonizing the money policy wogs at the Fed and Treasury.  Others, lets call them revolutionary outsiders, basically hate everyone involved with the US finance system. 

 

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:59 | Link to Comment arkady
arkady's picture

I think you are right up until the end, where you conclude that it does not matter who is buying the debt.  Yes it does!  Of course it does.   Because with your logic, why get the Chinese involved or anyone else for that matter!?

The problem with the Fed buying the treasuries is that he is monetizing the debt.  He is creating freshly minted FRNs to pay for the bloody treasuries.  The government then goes ahead and spends it.   Its not the fastest form of inflation, but its inflation no matter how you dice it.  He is creating money out of thin air and worse yet, the interest being paid goes to the Fed and BACK to the Treasury.  Essentially the government creates money.  

What this auction demonstrates is that that our treasury is relying more and more on strict debt monetization. 

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:26 | Link to Comment Caviar Emptor
Caviar Emptor's picture

"Set the money presses to Warp Factor 9, Scotty!! errrr...I mean Ben!! (Dang, gotta work on that)"

Captain Barry OB-wan-kan-OB calling for more nuclear energy.....now I know why.

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:28 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:42 | Link to Comment I am a Man I am...
I am a Man I am Forty's picture

Gonna force the primary dealers to buy the 5 and 7 year notes later this week??

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 15:45 | Link to Comment I am a Man I am...
I am a Man I am Forty's picture

"The indirect bid, in particular, seems to be a fairly good proxy for foreign purchases of Treasury notes, although not Treasury bills."

Make that everybody.


Tue, 02/23/2010 - 16:42 | Link to Comment Fix It Again Timmy
Fix It Again Timmy's picture

Why so negative all the time?  We're just doing God's work here on earth.  Besides, we're saving money, we don't need security guards at Ft. Knox anymore!

Tue, 02/23/2010 - 18:02 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sat, 04/17/2010 - 10:17 | Link to Comment Tom123456
Tom123456's picture

Good Linux hosting option package offered by ucvhost which not only provides the best in terms of hosting packages but also believes in truly being there for the customer, 24x7. cheap vps Moreover , they offer unlimited bandwidth as well as nearly 1GB storage along with database maintenance, email facility along with storage, availability of sub domain and many other important features for a very low price. ucvhost thanks

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!