This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Repo Experts Stumped: How Could Fed Hike Without Draining ANY Liquidity: "This Is A Market By Decree"
While it took the equity markets over 24 hours to wake up to the realization that the first Fed tightening in 9 years is actually just that, and that not only monetary conditions will progressively get more constrictive especially if the Fed is intent on 4 more hikes in 2016, but that P/E multiples will contract by at least 3% according to a still optimistic Goldman Sachs, something far more interesting happened in repo markets, where the consensus expectation was that the Fed's rate would be accompanied by a major liquidity drain via reverse repos.
Recall that two weeks ago we cited repo-market expert E.D. Skyrm who calculated that moving general collateral higher by 25bps would require the Fed draining up to $800 billion in liquidity: "In 2013 on my website, I calculated that QE2 moved Repo rates, on average, 2.7 basis points for every $100B in QE. So, one very rough estimate moved GC 8 basis points and the other 2.7 basis points per hundred billion. In order to move GC 25 basis points higher, in a very rough estimate, the Fed needs to drain between $310B and $800B in liquidity."
Then on Wednesday morning Citigroup opined that the liquidity drain could be substantially greater: "There will be a separate document from the NY Fed with details around the operational aspects of the liftoff. Of primary interest will be the size of the overnight reverse repo facility that the Fed will put in place to pull short rates higher. We don’t think it will be unlimited, but a size large enough that will keep short rates from falling below the 25bp floor – and the size could be as high as $1tn."
So what happened?
As we reported a little after 1:15pm on Thursday when the details of the Fed's first post-hike reverse repo operation were revealed, something very strange and unexpected happened: not only did the Fed not drain $1 trillion, or $800 billion, or even $310 billion, the Fed did not drain any incremental liquidity at all!
In fact, the $105 billion accepted in the Reverse Repo operation was just $3 billion more than the op conducted the day before, the last ZIRP operation.
How is this possible, and how could the Fed substantially tighten financial conditions without draining any liquidity?
The answer: having read the work of most repo analysts over the past 48 hours, the truth is that nobody really knows, however for perhaps the most curious attempt at an explanation we go back to Wedbush's repo-expert E.D. Skyrm, who is just as stumped but has proposed an entertaining version of what happened: market by decree. To wit:
The Fed didn't really drain any liquidity yesterday. They moved the IOER up to .50%, moved the RRP rate up to .25%, and the RRP volume
came in at $105 billion, only $3 billion more than the day before. Where was the draining? But interest rates moved up anyway to reflect the
tightening, without any fundamental change. Basically, the Fed decreed a rate tightening and the market moved rates higher.
Markets work in interesting ways sometimes. Why should the GC rate trade at .41% yesterday when it traded at .21% the week before? In
the Repo market, rates are often set by where traders believe rates should be. Then, rates move higher or lower with imbalances between
supply and demand throughout the day. Naturally, there are substitution effects as Repo rates change in relation to other market rates, but
fundamentals don't necessarily dictate why Repo rates trade at .40% compared to .45%.
I wonder how many economic interest rate models include "by decree" as a factor?
That is one of the better financial questions we have heard in a long time, and here is another: do assets trade "by decree" or merely reflecting the wishes of the Fed's trading desk which together with its arms-length HFT intermediaries such as Citadel, has become the dominant marginal price setter across all asset classes.
A logical question is if the Fed is indeed focused on tightening easy financial conditions (ref: the recent implosion of the junk bond bubble) then the market - with its complete liquidity preference indifference to a the 25 bps hike - just dared Yellen to hike again, and again, until finally hundreds of billions if not trillions in excess liquidity are drained.
Finally, if repo rates move "by decree", what about Treasury markets, or commodities, or stocks? And what happens when the Fed can no longer move markets "by decree"?
For now, however, the Fed's "plumb protection team" is happy.
»
- 257 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
The truth leaks out slowly. The plumb protection team better get to work.
this portends a clear green light for a 7-10% move up in the sp over the next nine trading days.
if you buy or own those 3x xhorts etf etn's, you are better off ging the money to a charity, your kids, strippers. anything better than getting ripped year end.
Just BTFD
Good advice until it isn't
And don't forget the TBTF's. The Fed and the TBTF's between them control over 70% of ALL "Markets". And the TBTF's OWN (Literally) The Fed so are obviously setting Fed policy and will not, after an event, operate in any way which would counter the policies they have decreed. Quote there are no more marrkets, only interventions unquote. This is the same as "By decree".
brilliant
Tyler, missed an oppurtunity. Need to have a picture of plumber with his ass crack showing. But I guess, picture not real like our intrest rates.
And, like the Fed, he has exactly the wrong tools to work with. None of those wrenches is going to help him with 1-1/2" ABS drainline.
I noticed that too. He might be high from cement fumes.
You guys are cute, looking for reality when it is just a model, kind of like traders looking for fundamentals or something!
Thank you for stepping in
That thread would have descended into a yet another new form of surreal fantasy
Its that 'Savings Glut'. What Bernanke failed to mention is all the savings are held by billionaires and oligarchs. They are more interested in power and control than they are in being rich, or spending their money. Hence the desire to hold on to their money. That, and they have more than they could spend in a life time any way.
Inflation in yachts and hookers and quality cocaine. Inflation in 'dollar store' crap, ground beef, chicken wings, etc. Deflation in mid-end residential real estate and stuff the Middle Class used to be able to afford, like entertainment, and vacations.
Maybe it's just me, but the above market anomolies explained could be the reason why I have been told by high level bankers that a gold standard "will never work".
I guess "work" means a policy of white-collar crime and outright fraud, so ya, I totally agree.
The FED is the markets my friends. There are no free markets, only banker controlled proxies. It would be incredibly naive for anyone to think that the lack of liquidity removal wasn't planned or conspired.
Yep, I've been saying it for months... even years. There are no markets anymore because the Rule of Law is officially dead. It was buried in 2008. The Fed with their proxies have achieved what they wanted... defacto control of the world govts and world bond markets. They learned their lessons of 2008, and later the EU and PIIGS, and now the BRICS. By taking out the bond vigilantes, and having access to world printing presses, they have perpetuated the Ponzi.
This has all been by design. I predict the farce will continue for at least another year until the 2016 election shakes out. If Hitlery wins, it will be just more of the same, only worse as the Clinton Crime Syndicate simply entrenches the banker/lobbyist NWO with a compliant RINO congress. But if Trump or Cruz should somehow win and actually threaten the NWO, then the elites will implode everything to teach the masses to NEVER NEVER NEVER elect an outsider to threaten them EVER again. The next depression will actually be a series of never ending worsening black swan events, financial and military, all designed to distract the sheeple to prevent them from revolting against the elites. The result will be by design to totally overwhelm a Trump or Cruz prez, and force them to resign or be impeached. That's when the New Feudal World Order will be ushered in... on the back of the greatest crisis the world has ever seen. Plan accordingly.
"They moved the IOER up to .50%,"
The fed won't drain jack shit as long as they keep raising the rate they pay on it.
This really isn't that hard to understand. If your trading partner raises their price and you have no other vendor -- you get an immediate price increase.
All this really shows is the intra bank lending market is totally dominated by one bank -- yellin national. It's not some conspiracy or magic, it's just what is.
ZH readers already knew this. Bank reserves have been very high and not used in lending. Hence the huge slow down in velocity since the banking crisis.
SDShack - Sounds about right, a good theory anyways. But I dont think I need to be a seer to speculate this all ends at the end of the tunnel in WW3. Just from opinion on geopolitics, this looks like Mexican-Stand Off who is more corrupt is less important as hedging for to me seem like probabilities. I hope I am wrong but hedging best as I can to have basics and get more mentally tough.
How and why?? "this portends a clear green light for a 7-10% move up in the sp over the next nine trading days." Does anything ever portend a decline of any significance?
Now is a good time to Buy.
One MUST buy now or be priced out!!
Buy, Buy, Buy!!!
Ain't going to happen with oil gunning for $30. This market cannot levitate without higher oil but oil this low just forces more production by near bankrupt producers. As the oil sector is highly leveraged these small drops in price produce outsized weakness in the market.Oil was going down before the raise in rates and oil was going down after the hike. The trends are in place.
You mean that there wasnt a ton of money sitting around waiting to make a half of percent, I am shocked..... / Sarc... not sure how Tylers didnt understand that.
Monday should be marginally up, after that who knows
FOSFB
There is obviously enough money for everybody... everybody connected that is..
the rest of you slobs get back to work we will make sure you get a little bit don't worry.
My best guess... why would you fight the Fed when you know they could sop up that liquidity and force rates higher if they wanted to? You gonna keep trading in front of the steam roller at 25 bps when you know they could force it to 50 at any time?
Alternate explanation: The Fed and the major banks have their heads so far up eachothers asses you can't tell where one ends and the other begins anyway. They're one organism for all practical purposes.
Perhaps psychology for the moment. Perhaps the market is just choosing to value money at whatever the Fed tells them to regardless of money supply/demand imbalances.
But if Fed decrees can replace the need for open market operations, that should work both ways. Why did the Fed need to print money and buy trillions in bonds with it over the past 7 years to get rates down? Why couldn't the Fed instead just dictate lower rates?
Well the question is, is draining really necessary?
According to Bloomberg they did drain 105 billion
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-18/fed-raised-rates-witho...
That's what this article says,
"In fact, the $105 billion accepted in the Reverse Repo operation was just $3 billion more than the op conducted the day before, the last ZIRP operation."
Yeah I missed that. Downvote for meself.
The (new) mechanism the Fed is using to implement rate increases is to pay interest on excess reserves held at the Fed.
If this is currency conjured out of thin air, it is a positive gradient on the monetary base => inflationary.
'
'
'
Wow. This is above my pay grade.
Somebody care to link up some articles for those of us who haven't interned at Goldman Sachs for several years, to explain some background on what and how and why the Fed would need to/have to, drain 'liquidity' and what that means, in layman's terms?
Whatever it is, I get the drift that it's not good and the casino rigging is still in full effect.
•?•
V-V
Because the FED cannot just "say" for something to be so, they have to actually "do" something physically (or on a computer screen) in order to move the market. Just as they were flooding the market with liquidity as they were lowering the rates, now they have to drain the liquidity as they do the reverse. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-12-16/fed-reveals-rate-hike-plumbing-...
Thanks, altough the part about not having interned at GS is still pertinant for me. WHY do they have to do something rather than just decree it? One day's evidence seems to indicate they can decree it, just like when they print pretty pictures on paper and say it's money. If people accept it then at least for awhile it IS money. I suspect this is part of a ruse on the Fed's part to make people think that no actual liquidity will be harmed in this operation but it is way above my pay grade. I assume there are behind-the-scenes operations at work but that's only because I trust Tyler to know his stuff.
I think they just said intrest rates have gone up - For the plebs, but not actually in any way that it will affect the banks - except as an increase in the bottom line.
If they don't drain the liquidity, but say the rates have gone up, its simply the rates for us, and not them LOL. The illusion of confidence.
We have a winner!
Deadfred - I am no expert but if a bubble gets produced by lowered interest rates then the already wealthy leverage that bubble up which prices out the rest of the market participants but a tiny few. Why does this matter outside of it being corrupt? Eventually your country becomes just like Mexico. Why then in turn does this also matter? Because desperate people do desperate things like kidnap kids for ransom like in Mexico. In turn if I can afford bullet proof glass, guards, etc what does this matter? Now your own quality of life suffers, the prison you trapped others in now has become your home and the cost of security and worry outweighs the benefits of graft.
Its Six Degrees of seperation, you are your brothers keeper by evolutionary design. None of us are likely to be 100% altruistic and all of us imperfect. My intent of spreading information is because I dont want to live in a slum or create my own prison. See, self interest can work if thought out to logical conclusion. And at the rate of business these days blowback happens within the liefspan of those that initiate the looting.
Lets say your ultra rich politician or banker (same thing these days). Having a bunker prepared means what? If nukes go off such may survive for a couple of years but then what? If one fled to New Zealand would the Chinese leave you alone?
So back to my original thought, bubbles must be pricked but what would have been better is if we didnt have a business model in banking that creates them for personal gain at the expense of the majority. This doesnt touch into moral hazard such as temporary beneficiaries thinking they are genius and having bad attitudes multiplying inneficiencis from the head down, until a country cannot operate.
The children of the ultra wealthy do not get kidnapped. They have an army of bodyguards and live in gated communities.
It is the upper middle class that are tageted. The children of doctors, engineers, and small business owners will be the targets.
I think I have this right. A pawn shop analogy works pretty good.
Suppose Pawn Shop Alpha bought some gold coins from a customer. Pawn Shop Alpha now has an asset (coin), but they don't have much cash anymore (liquidity). If Pawn Shop Alpha had a need for cash (regulatory, a really good deal walks in the door, etc), Pawn Shop Alpha heads over to Pawn Shop Fed and gives them the gold coin in exchange for cash, just like a pawn, and promises to come back and reverse the transaction, just like a pawn.
This is a "repurchase agreement" from the Pawn Shop Fed perspective. This adds liquidity to the system and interest rates go down because there is more money sloshing around. As ZH has noted, all this cash the fed shoved into the system is chasing stocks and high yield bonds, screwing up those markets (compared to reality).
If Pawn Shop Fed wanted to do the opposite, they would be doing a "reverse repurchase agreeement." This means Pawn Shop Alpha comes back for their goods and they give up cash (liquidity) and get their asset (coin) back - minus pawn fees. At this point, instead of rolling the transaction at previous terms, Pawn Shop Fed is jacking up their pawn fees, demanding a little more money.
The market naturally expects some pawn shops to refuse the new transactions, due to higher fees. This means, on total, all pawn shops have less and less cash, more and more of their stuff back. The less cash sloshing around, the higher rates go.
What ZH is reporting is that everyone just agreed to higher fees and nothing changed.
I might have some of this wrong, but this is as best as I can understand it and not be totally confused.
Regards,
Cooter
The Fed increased the rate they pay banks on reserves to 0.5% from 0.25%. So no bank would lend reserves to another bank (the discount rate) at a lower rate since the Fed has no counterparty risk. Thus the new discount rate is 0.5%.
But non-banks can't take part in the above scheme, so the Fed also is willing to accept money from non-banks, like money market funds, in return for Treasuries (reverse repo), at 0.25%. So that sets a floor on repo rates of at least 0.25%, for the same reason as above (no counterparty risk). Actually, the new repo rate floor is between 0.25% and 0.5%, for some reason I don't completely understand.
it floats within that range during the day but there is a floor put on it by the fed and the market provides the ceiling, .5%, the next floor for the fed.
SoCal called it out. All the guys talking about 'draining liquidity' have been duped just like traders/algos on Wall Street.
Reason being, because that's what the Fed had always done in the past.
When people figure out the opposite is happening - money supply increases to pay interest on bank reserves, not decreases - there will come an epic mood swing.
I think that helps to make it clear. Unfortunately, me thinks the banks have been behaving more like "Sentimental Value Pawn Shops":
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/sentimental-value-pawn-shop...
C'mon guys, we know a lot about deep water corals--oh, sorry.
Banks are required to keep a specific % of "cash" on hand VS how many dollars of deposits they hold. Cash can be actual cash but US treasury securities also count as cash.
When one bank is short of cash (or treasury securities) and another has excess - the bank with extra cash(T securities) will loan it to the cash poor bank over night -
It is just an accounting entry between the banks - but at the close of business the bank that was short of cash can show they borrowed the cash from the other bank - and both banks then meet the mandated standard.
When the fed floods the system with liquidity - few banks need to borrow - so since you have many more banks with excess cash VS banks that are short of cash - the interest rate charged for these over night loans will be low - it is simple supply and demand - if every bank has excess cash no one needs to borrow - the rate will be zero.
If the fed wants to increase interest rates - they will drain some of the excess liquidity out of the system - this causes more banks to need to borrow / reduces the number of banks with excess cash on hand - and as a result changes the supply / demand balance.
If more banks need to borrow to meet the cash requirement mandate it will raise interest rates.
*** Grossly over simplified but in general close enough to real to help understand the clusterfuck fubar mess of our system***
I'm not an expert either. Couldn't liquidity reduction be both induced and deduced? In other words, in the case of the former, the Fed doesn't dictate/impose a rate of rent but rather achieves its target by not replacing destructed currency (ie not rolling over some quantity of loans) leading to a decreasing money supply over time and thus leading to a natural rate increase OR (2) in the latter case, the Fed raises its target rate (by fiat / dictate / imposition), and this leads to less demand for debt in comparison to the previous rate (because debt-servicing just became more expensive) and thus to an eventual destruction of currency (that would otherwise not been destroyed / possibly even created under previous conditions) commensurate with the dictated raise in rates / drop in debt demand?
Seems to me this article suggests that the Fed should be decreasing the rate of money supply / debt-creation to achieve a target instead of dictating a target rate into existence in anticipation of a decrease in the rate of money supply / debt creation.
Or am I totally off my rocker?
It DOES NOT work that way, dip shit. You people need to STFU unless you really know what you are talking about.
The fed pays interest on excess reserves. Therefore, no other bank would ever loan money out at lower than the fed funds rate, because they could always get more by lending to the fed.
See? It's not so fucking hard that you fuck tards need to be making shit up.
14 11 11 2 25
It's all fiat! This is news? What is a central bank but in charge by decree?
Nothing is real. And nothing to get hung about.
Just my luck I'm allergic to strawberries.
Spoilsport!
Oh...
Why did you get downvoted I wonder? I'm not popular at ZH but that's not true in your case.
Let me take you down..
living IS easy, with eyes closed
cranberry sauce
This was the ah ha moment for me as Grandma Yellen announced they were raising the rate on excess reserves by 25 basis points... Pretty nifty move. Thanks to John Titus of Best Evidence for the education on how this charade hatched and has been playing out. The backdoor is more gravy to the banksters whom care not whether the front or back for lining their pockets.
The trillion dollar question remains does the realization that they just moved the shells around change the preception that its still gravy time or does it confirm the Potemkin nature of its desperation.... or both.
Still think the paper game is the loser here. Deflation in Paper, Inflation in REAL......getcha ya sum.
it should work assuming the money goes where they want it to go. popping the high yield bubble should put a floor under energy, and they think that's important. Yellen ignored core inflation and gave weight to the energy complex, which is basically anti-Fed rhetoric. the problem starts when the new money simply gets plowed back into spec, (hedge funds buying oil and storing it) if the malinvestment in energy seeks to double down we end up with a great depression bottom, crops being plowed into the ground, and at the bottom those with energy refusing to sell (it was the Arabs in the 70s) shortages high interest rates, and that period all came at the end of a long expensive war which America did not win, in case you were looking for historical precedent. own gold bitchez
so they came up with 105B without using the assets on their balance sheet, let's see QE was 85B a month and they plan to raise rates (excuse me, RRPO 105B every quarter, money out of thin air, thats 35B a month if they maintain their schedule and since they are no longer data dependent no reason they can't - that was smart by the way, Janet said Fuck the Data I raise when I wanna raise!, - which sounds like she is implementing QE4. now if they don't raise the market will have a hissy, - where's my 35B - and talks of no raise equals tapering - so you see their plan to raise rates is brilliant. once before Greenspan raised rates and offset the move by opening the REPO window but in the bazooka do what it takes central banking world of today that would be like putting near beer in the punch bowl. i think i start to get it, santa claus rally here we come. of course there is a problem with a huge balance sheet and about to get bigger, but if the IMF program to implement SDRs stays on schedule they can expand the global monetary base A LOT in which case the Fed balance sheet would just look normal.+ if it doesn't they simply chernobyl the Fed at some point, like Fannie its a GSE and a waste dump for bad assets. the can just got a huge kick
The Grateful - Had a similar thought regarding Greenspan and quad stacking as you mentioned. Not sure as I am not a mind reader but if it was me in his shoes I would consider doing this to try to jump a canyon. You know your CB model is flawed and based a lot on human nature which has its dark side.
You need a lot of momentum and go real fast. But to what purpose? To perhaps give time for some technological innovations. I observe between quantum computing, particle physics advances and bio medicine if this was his plan it partially succeeded. I had started an series of articles called The Flaw but didnt have time to complete them. My belief was Greenspans problem was hubris. He may not have deserved to be crucified if I am correct but in this world in such positions you are either a hero or a goat.
I dont think this will be polular to say here but if my hyposis is correct, I would have done the same thing, but to add learning and critique, cutting the balls off regulatory agency funding was a huge and costly miscalculation. It was an attempted short cut in my opinion perhaps considered the lesser of evils, remember when this first started building was the late 1990's. Clinton was President and is a huge believer in counter cyclical policy. He certainly have been influenced by Greenspan. Some of it worked. Much didnt.
Some of my thoughts about Greenspan come from reading his book Age of Turbulence. Anyways, this commentary is getting long in the tooth but to summarize bankers make loans. Its what they basically do. Having a model where they conquered the earth is bad because they tend to attempt short cuts and they dont manage countries very well. Perhaps better than dictatorships but still not good enough and they themselves are becoming ones in any event.
I have been saying since 2011 on this blog that the Fed is now setting rates by decree.
Got a link? That would be awesome. Not trying to be an ass.
I used to comment under another user name, now defunct, so I don't, sorry.
But actual draining will take place sooner or later, make no mistake about it, otherwise the world will abandon the whole system, not just sit asside as it is doing now.
This is just a matter of who will be the sacrificial lambs.
The Fed has been setting rates by decree for almost its entire existence. I have no idea why this is a shock to anybody or some kind of revelation. It means nothing about the Fed's relevance or legitimacy - one way or another.
I remember very distinctly sitting on the desk at First Interstate Bank, a primary dealer, in 1981 when the Fed came in and cut the discount rate a hundred basis points. Trust me, the market didn't wait around to see how much the Fed added in liquidity before moving short rates. It was immediate.
Also, this was an initial reaction. If the Fed Funds or repo rates begin to decline, the amount of liquidity drained will start to increase.
The banks have most of their cash parked at the Fed. already, and now they're making even more on excess reserves after the rate hike. They aren't lending to anyone except the 1.00% so the fed. doesn't need to take more money out of circulation.
Same as it ever was, "let the serfs eat cake".
Forward Soviet>>>>
The banks have most of their cash parked at the Fed. already, and now they're making even more on excess reserves after the rate hike. They aren't lending to anyone except the 1.00% so the fed. doesn't need to take more money out of circulation.
So FED will now pay more interest to excess reserves held. And where from this money to pay as interest to banks resserves will be coming from? This is nothing more than again hyperinflating the dollar currency by printing more of it out of thin air.
It's all lies. Fiat lies. How does the rest of world continue to allow it ?? And everyone is not holding Gold !!!
I don't know whats going on and I'm poor.
If you know what's going on then you must be an insider and rich.
You just need to be more sinnical; then the spice will flow. What's your position on pedophilia?
You are stumped!?
Well.. that's because it's NOT a market, but, A CASINO!!
There... fix it for ya'!
We don't need a market, just a simulation. But it must be designed and operated by a central planning agency like the fed. Like a video game but with "real" money. Eventually we can replace human agents with automated intelligence.
Once things are around 90% fake, making that final 10% leap of faith into complete artificiality will be much easier.
Its all manipulation in American financial system. All big banks of America like goldman and JP works under FED. It looks like America will directly go to hyperinflation as FED would not allow banks to fail as they will keep creating currency out of thin air to bailout.
Raj, right idea but your premise is backward. The Fed works under the big banks.
Looks a scam just to give the banking cartel an a opportunity to raise rates on the consumer...
The delta between the IOER and o/n repo is the only thing that matters. So now it takes a higher interest rate on the fed funds rate to get banks to loan money to each other.
In the meantime, the fed is paying the banks more on the IOER. This "tightening" is the fed printing even more money. That have to raise the O/n rate above the IOER to get money out of excess reserves.
It just begs why they didn't do this a year ago
That makes sense but the DB pictographic from last week portrayed IOER as the ceiling for the fed funds rate and o/n repo as the floor. Plus the IOER is currently 50bps and fed funds rate less than this. I don't understand. Why would a bank would lend money to another bank at a lower rate than it can get from the fed via IOER.
If it looks complicated/twisted/uninterpretable/beyond your 'pay-grade', etc., perhaps it is for a reason...? These people - aside from cute little on-stage theatrics like having a mini-stroke, and bumbling CNBC on-camera contradictions, etc., know precisely what the score is. Their deception is 'Biblical'... Suffice to say that they're not going to beat 'Mother Nature' or even more grim, Father Time - but they'll Deceive 'till the bitter end, of that you can be certain. Ironically, the 'comeuppance' arrives not from domestic shores, and all one need do is to keep a pulse on the peripheral news stories from the geopolitical front to see the future.
Actually there is only one printing press allowed in America and the owners do as they please and make up rules and regulations as needed as well as forge relationships as needed....the complete antithesis to this is Gold and Silver which need no rules, regulations or relationships...This is ALL I need to know...
OK, so here goes my theory:) ...There are a number of well-known (in other fields) mathematical explanations that could explain apparent wierdness at near-ZIRP here. My guess is that we are observing something similar to the notion of "gear backlash" in mechanical engineering," ....or the notion of "phase-locked loop deadzone" in electrical engineering, or the noton of "freewheeling sprocket" on your bicycle. In all of these, the idea is that the system has a deadzone or slips into an "undriven state." It makes perfect sense to me that the market at ZIRP is drifting in a listless undriven state, essentially a deadzone, or freewheeling floating state.
I owned a 1984 Caddilac Seville and when you took your foot off of the accelerator pedal, engine braking would not commence immediately. If you did not immediately apply the brakes the car would alsmot 'float' at that speed for a few seconds before slowing down. It is 2015 and our FED is a 31 year old car. Seats were comfortable.
True Facts - Interesting way to look at it. I have a keen interest in those fields you mentioned in engineering more as a hobby which in a few years will have more time to learn. I like analogies, good post.
Pushing on a string?
Money_For_Nothing - Yep, probably best investment analogy for it.
The dollar is way to strong and inflation is gone in America on imported products.
They didn't drain liquidity because it would cause more deflation.
And draining liquidity would just make the dollar even more stronger and no central bank wants that because it will also bankrupt other countries who took out loans denominated in dollars.
1. They hike the rate and will indeed continue.
2. They will launch a new money printing concept to pay for the interest to the pension funds and others who bought the bonds.
The economy is imploding and now it's not a banks problem, it's consumers problem and social security problem. So they'll try to increase income of people and old people make up a large part of the economy.
Good story, but you make it seem like they care about people or something...
"Good story, but you make it seem like they care about people or something..."
...wait, you mean they don't? What are you trying to insinuate?
This tells you money markets (short-term corporate cash balances) means as much as interbank markets in the modern financial system.
It's a result of financial disintermediation.
Anyone who stays in an ETF for more than a week is just giving their money away. If something bad happens they will stop trading an ETF and will cancel trades that would make money and complete trades that would cost money.
I raise rates like the Fed does all the time. I charge my left hand more than my right hand to take money out of my wallet. /sarc
The fat lady isn't singing but she is warming up.
from reading all the comments,i'm left with the impression
this could go on..Forever(this rigged market)
the question is why can't interest rates rise by decree? and let the banks and bond market sort out the details. is this the way to raise rates in a deflationary environment since deflation has a similar effect to the fed withdrawing liquidity. is this the concession they made to the recession data on their desk? another monetary experiment that looks good on paper? or is the response the same as raising the cost of your addiction by a penny, in other words, no response was required.
rates are often set by where traders believe rates should be
LIBOR? Riggging? Anyone?
So, if I understand this..
So when is a rate hike, not a rate hike?
When it applies to the Fed member banks.
The Plebeians are effected only.
Fed to hold term reverse repo operations in December
18 November 2015, New York (Reuters)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/18/us-fed-reverserepos-idUSKCN0T72ZY20151118
The U.S. Federal Reserve will conduct three longer-dated reverse repurchase agreement operations in December, according to a statement released on Wednesday on the New York Fed website.
The U.S. central bank said these latest "term" reverse repos are part of its ongoing review as to how these will be used to achieve its interest rate objectives when it decides to tighten policy.
The Fed said it planned to offer $300 billion in term reverse repos that mature in early January in addition to its overnight reverse repos.
The first of the December term reverse repos will take place on Dec. 18, followed by one on Dec. 23 and another on Dec. 30.
I was told the Fed didn't have to drain liquidity because foreign investors were buying dollars and strengthining dollars by increasing demand, I am still trying to make sense of this story but the whole process seems so convoluted it's tough to follow the logic.