If there was any confusion why the Fed intends to keep hiking rates, even in the face of negative economic data and disappearing inflation, it was put to rest over the past 2 days when not one, not two , not three, but four Fed speakers, including the three most important ones, made it clear that the Fed's only intention at this point is to burst the asset bubble.
First there was SF Fed president John Williams who said that "there seems to be a priced-to-perfection attitude out there” and that the stock market rally "still seems to be running very much on fumes." Speaking to Australian TV, Williams added that "we are seeing some reach for yield, and some, maybe, excess risk-taking in the financial system with very low rates. As we move interest rates back to more-normal, I think that that will, people will pull back on that,
Then it was Fed vice chairman Stan Fischer's turn, who while somewhat more diplomatic, delivered the same message: "the increase in prices of risky assets in most asset markets over the past six months points to a notable uptick in risk appetites.... Measures of earnings strength, such as the return on assets, continue to approach pre-crisis levels at most banks, although with interest rates being so low, the return on assets might be expected to have declined relative to their pre-crisis levels--and that fact is also a cause for concern."
Fischer then also said that the corporate sector is "notably leveraged", that it would be foolish to think that all risks have been eliminated, and called for "close monitoring" of rising risk appetites.
All this followed the statement by Bill Dudley, who many perceive as the Fed's shadow chairman, who yesterday warned that rates will keep rising as long as financial conditions remain loose: "when financial conditions tighten sharply, this may mean that monetary policy may need to be tightened by less or even loosened. On the other hand, when financial conditions ease—as has been the case recently—this can provide additional impetus for the decision to continue to remove monetary policy accommodation."
And finally, it was Yellen herself, who speaking in London acknowledged that some asset prices had become “somewhat rich" although like Fischer, she hedged that prices are fine... if only assumes record low rates in perpetuity:
“Asset valuations are somewhat rich if you use some traditional metrics like price earnings ratios, but I wouldn’t try to comment on appropriate valuations, and those ratios ought to depend on long-term interest rates,” she said.
It was not all doom and gloom.
Responding to a question on financial system stability, Yellen said post-crisis regulations (and $2.5 trillion in excess reserves which just happen to be fungible and give the banks the impression that they are safe) had made financial institutions much “safer and sounder.”
"Will I say there will never, ever be another financial crisis? No, probably that would be going too far. But I do think we’re much safer and I hope that it will not be in our lifetimes and I don’t believe it will."
Some were quick to compare this statement to Neville Chamberlain infamous - and very, very wrong - 1938 prediction of "peace in our time."
Others drew comparisons to a similar bold prediction by Ben Bernanke, who in 2014 predicted during one of his $250,000/hour speeches that "rates would not normalize during my lifetime."
Yet others, who noted Janet Yellen's 70 years of age, asked her to "define our lifetime." But perhaps the most actionable question, if indeed valuations at 2420 on the S&P are somewhat rich, would the Fed be so kind as to disclose what level in the index does the central bank consider no longer rich.
As for Yellen tempting fate, today's LOD market close may just be the beginning of how much more Janet Yellen has to live.