Janet Yellen

If indeed the administration had floated a trial balloon with Larry Summers' Fed Chairman candidacy, it appears to have been full of lead. Moments ago Fed mouthpiece Hilsenrath just undid the disturbance in the farce with an article that promptly crushes Larry's chances as Bernanke's replacement, instead putting Janet Yellen up as the "front-runner for the top fed post."

Overnight newsflow (which nowadays has zero impact on markets which only care what Ben Bernanke had for dinner) started in Japan where factory orders were reported to have risen the most since December 2011, retail sales climbed, the unemployment rate rose modestly, consumer prices stayed flat compared to a year ago, however real spending plunged -1.6% significantly below the market consensus forecast for +1.3% yoy, marking the first yoy decline in five months. This suggests that households are cutting utility costs more so than the level of increase in prices. By contrast, real spending on clothing and footwear grew sharply by 6.9% yoy (+0.6% in April) marking positive growth for a fourth consecutive month. Simply said, the Japanese reflation continues to be limited by the lack of wage growth even as utility and energy prices are exploding and limiting the potential for core inflation across the board.

It's been a long time since Hilsenrath actually reported news instead of serve as a leak dissemination service for the New York Fed. Today was one of those time with news from the WSJ that the Obama administration, and specifically Jack Lew, has begun assembling a short list of candidates for the Federal Reserve chairmanship, in the expectation that Ben Bernanke won't seek reappointment when his second term ends in January. According to Hilsenrath, since the decision on whether the Chairsatan stays or goes is all his, Bernanke may decide to stay for a few more years of QEasing, however he won't: "many of Mr. Bernanke's friends and associates believe he wants to step down when his term expires, after nearly eight years overseeing the central bank's response to the most serious economic downturn since the Great Depression."

There may come a day soon where the markets sell off if one of the whiskers in Big Ben's beard is out of place. Or perhaps if his tie is a bit crooked. Or maybe we end up with Janet Yellen as the next puppet in charge over at the local banking cabal and we fret about her hairdo. I don't know, but one thing that is for certain is that this central bank so wants to be loved and we are so under psychological attack with all of this QE nonsense that it isn't even funny. QE is the endgame. ZIRP was only the beginning. QE, or monetization (which they'll never call it because of the negative connotations), is the heroic measure applied to an already dead system. Our system, for all intent and purposes, died in 2008. It ceased to exist. The investing, economic, and business paradigm that has existed since is drastically different than its predecessor despite all the efforts being made to convince everyone, including Humpty Dumpty, that it is in fact 2005 all over again.

Yesterday, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke likened monetary policy to landing a jet on an aircraft carrier which reminded ConvergEx's Nick Colas of a few choice 'Top Gun' quotes...  "Son, your ego is writing checks your body can’t cash" seems most appropriate. But Colas' review of a recent academic paper on the social dynamics of how long people applaud - and why they stop - is perhaps useful in comprehending the market's reaction.  The funny thing about the work is that the distribution of ‘Clapping duration’ looks pretty much exactly like the P/E ratio of the U.S. equity market going back to the 1800s.  Why do people start and stop their applause or buy into a stock market?  It all happens "at the margin" in both cases, and just a few people putting their hands in their pockets is enough to get the rest to stop.  In the end, this is a simple analysis, but one which speaks to capital markets as essentially large “Social networks”, and that is an intuitively appealing construct.  Attention and engagement ebb and flow based on macro confidence, micro financial results, and other fundamental inputs.  Valuation becomes an analysis of whether more or fewer investors will be clapping next month or next quarter.  But one thing is for sure – you want to be among the first people to clap and quit when the noise is the loudest.

The biggest bond fund manager on the planet likely had a bad day today and judging by his comments during the following Bloomberg TV interview, he is not too impressed with the current Fed head, who is "driving in a fog," or the front-runner to fill Ben's shoes, Yellen "is a Siamese twin in terms of policy... [preferring someone] who would emphasize Main Street as well as Wall Street - which has been the emphasis for the past three or four years." The mistake the Fed is making, Gross explains, "is blaming lower growth on fiscal austerity and expects towards the end of the year once that is gone, all of the sudden the economy will be growing at 3%," or more simply the error of their policy-making ways is "to think that is a cyclical as opposed to a structural problem in terms of our economy." The bottom-line is that Gross sees less Taper (due to disinflation) and warns "those who are selling treasuries in anticipation that the Fed will ease out of the market might be disappointed."

In what year was the following written:

The Federal Reserve appears on track to buy the entire [amount of] government debt it has committed to purchase, barring a sharp, unexpected shift in the economy's prospects. If anything, lingering weakness and renewed concerns about global credit markets may lead top officials to lean toward doing more rather than less. A recent batch of better-than-expected economic data, including a relatively upbeat reading on the job market, has raised questions about whether the Fed acted prematurely in pulling the trigger... The Treasury market has been selling off sharply, in part as a response to the somewhat brighter landscape.

The answer...

President Barack Obama stated yesterday that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has stayed in his position “longer than he [Bernanke] wanted”. Some will be probably agreeing with Bernanke (and Obama) more than he might have expected after having said that. Although he should have stopped short of adding (for fear of hurting Helicopter Ben’s feelings?) that he has done an “outstanding job”.

Emerging markets have tanked but some of the reasons for their underperformance will prove overblown, providing opportunities for long-term investors.

With part two of today's Fed-a-palooza due out shortly in the form of the May 1 FOMC meeting minutes, here is an informative recap of the current roster of assorted birds at the FOMC via Bank of America. Of course, since every decision always begins and ends with Ben, and soon his replacement Janet, all of below is largely meaningless.

So, apparently, according to Jon Hilsenrath, "QE to Infinity" is actually "finite" after all. There is no doubt that the Federal Reserve will do everything in its power to try and "talk" the markets down and "signal" policy changes well in advance of actual action.  However, that is unlikely to matter.  The problem with the financial markets today is the speed at which things occur.   High frequency trading, algorithmic programs, program trading combined with market participant's "herd mentality" is not influenced by actions but rather by perception. As stated above, with margin debt at historically high levels when the "herd" begins to turn it will not be a slow and methodical process but rather a stampede with little regard to valuation or fundamental measures. The reality is that the stock market is extremely vulnerable to a sharp correction.   Currently, complacency is near record levels and no one sees a severe market retracement as a possibility.  The common belief is that there is "no bubble" in assets and the Federal Reserve has everything under control. Of course, that is what we heard at the peak of the markets in 2000 and 2008 just before the "race for the door." This time will be no different.

• Hilsenrath: A Top Contender at the Fed Faces Test Over Easy Money (WSJ)
• Yen drops further as G7 avoids criticizing Japan (Reuters)
• Markets missed Flaherty’s clues on next Bank of Canada chief (G&M)
• Republicans turn screws over Tea Party tax probes (FT)
• Dual-track Libor replacement lined up (FT)
• Risks to China recovery seen as factory output underwhelms (Reuters)
• Barack Obama’s goal of universal healthcare could be set back significantly by Texas Governor Rick Perry (FT)
• Gold Bears Pull $20.8 Billion as BlackRock Says Buy (BBG)
• Mexico sets shelters as volcano shakes, spews ash (AP)
• Europe Eases Corporate Tax Dodge as Worker Burdens Rise (BBG)
• IPOs Set to Raise Most Cash Since Crisis (WSJ)
• Melting Ice Opens Fight Over Sea Routes for Arctic Debate (BBG)
• Top hedge funds bet on Greek banks (FT)
• Icahn Asks Investors to Make Big Bet on a Debt-Laden Dell (BBG)

Overnight risk continues to ignore all newsflow (today the economic reporting finally picks up with advance retail sales due at 8:30 am as expectations for a second modest decline in a row of -0.3%) and is focused entirely on what the consensus decides to make of the Hilsenrath piece, even as the difficulty level was raised a notch following another late Sunday Hilsenrath piece, which puts more variable into the "tapering" equation, and whose focus is whether Bernanke will be replaced by Janet Yellen, Geithner or Summers, or anyone. With all three classified as permadoves, one does scratch their head how the market can be confused: worst case Fed tapers by $10/20 billion per month, market tumbles, then Bernanke's replacement or Ben himself ploughs on even more aggressively with QE. QED.

Politicians love good asset bubbles. Until they blow up. Which they always do.

Jeff Gundlach has been asked "Why Own Bonds?" twice in his career. The first time was in the 90’s when bonds and stocks were highly correlated. If stocks rose, bond prices fell, and vice versa. Therefore, investment managers decided that they should only own stocks as there was no advantage in being diversified. Unfortunately, we all know how well this turned out. Today, investment managers are making the same decision but for a different reason. With the Fed’s artificial suppression of interest rates to historic lows; the return from owning bonds has become painful particularly for underfunded pension funds. That pain, combined with the inflation of asset prices via continuing QE programs, has forced managers into overweighting stocks. The other reason that managers are jumping into stocks is due to the belief that interest rates are going to start rising on “Tuesday.” Gundlach clarifies, “Let me be clear. This is absolutely wrong. Yields are NOT going to rise any time soon.”