As my previous post can attest, my mind has been focused elsewhere in recent weeks—and I am also preparing a my next long-form essay to boot—but I thought that I’d have a peak at markets all the same. The Fed’s (non)decision on yield curve control came and went without any significant shift. The FOMC has now locked down the funds rate until the end of 2022, at least, more or less in line with what markets were already expecting anyway. That said, the shift to “time-contingent” forward guidance—over 30 months no less—is a significant step. It caps a remarkable transition from a Fed on auto-pilot in late 2018—with the 2-year yield aiming for 3%—to one now “not even thinking about thinking about raising rates.” A lot of water has gone under the bridge since then, but it’s difficult to escape the conclusion that the shift in U.S. and global monetary policy over the past 24 months is fundamental. The idea of a central bank put was born a long time ago, but it’s difficult to imagine a version stronger than its current form. Quite simply, policymakers wonʼt tolerate, and canʼt afford, tightening financial conditions, of any kind, and over any time horizon, however short and temporary. I have spent considerable ink on these pages arguing that this makes the rebound in equities, in the face of a crashing economy, more-or-less reasonable. In fact, it’s normal for equities to exhibit their strongest return-profiles early in the rebound, as a positive function of sharply rising excess liquidity as policy shifts, but also simply thanks to a low base. After all, it has to pay for those with the guts to buy at the lows.
Read MoreInvestors currently seem perturbed by two trends. Firstly, they are watching the crash in oil prices with part glee, part amazement, if not outright horror, depending on how much skin they have in the game. The second is that almost everyone seems sceptical about the sustainability, I even dare say “fairness”, of the rally in equities. I have little insight into the oil market, but something or someone is about to break. Demand isn’t coming back until the start of Q3, at the earliest, and while I get the supply-side dynamics of a broken OPEC oligopoly, I struggle to see that this Last Man Standing™ price war serves the purpose of any of the interlocutors. In any case, I’ll stick to the tape for this one, watching the price like everyone else. It’ll be a blast! On equities, it’s important to step back a bit and accept that Q1 was an outlier. The MSCI World fell 8.5% on the month in February, and then went on to crater nearly 14% in March, a denouement which includes a 32% round-trip from the highs in Mid-February to the lows in March. That’s record-busting pain, and no matter what type of bear market we’re in—and I do think we’re in just that—a rebound was coming, eventually. As I type, the MSCI World is up nearly 7% on the month in April, which doesn’t seem outlandish to me.
Read MoreThis will be a short update. I am working on a more extended macroeconomic essay—and I am trying to finish a short story—both of which are stealing time. In any case, I have little to say about the main themes beyond what I said last week. In the bond market, I concur with the points made early last week by Bloomberg’s Cameron Crise. Everyone knows the Fed is determined to keep raising rates, but market-pricing suggests that we are close to the end of the road for this hiking cycle. Between those contradicting points of view, the debate about the importance, or lack thereof, of the flattening yield curve has turned into a black hole threatening to consume all other stories in the bond market. I am sympathetic to that, but I don’t think the story is complicated. The 2s5 and 2s10 will invert in the next six-to-nine months, setting up an end of the U.S. business cycle towards the end of 2019 or at the beginning of 2020. At least, I think this is a reasonable base case until either of the following things happens. First, the Fed could suddenly decide that it doesn’t want to invert the curve. I doubt it, but the appointment of Richard Clarida as Vice Chair—apparently, he cares about the curve—certainly is an interesting development. Second, it is possible that the curve can steepen, or hold its current spread, even as the Fed fund rate motors higher.
Read MoreSometimes it is best just to sit back and do nothing, and perhaps, watching the World Cup isn’t such a bad way to spend your time at the moment. Last week, I laid out what I consider the two main economic and market themes. First, real narrow money and liquidity growth is slowing, which is usually a bad sign for risk assets and second, monetary policy divergence is being stretched to new extremes. I surmise that most of the key macro-trading trends can be derived from these two stories. All other important themes are just crammed into the box labelled political uncertainty, a box which incidentally is increasingly full to the brim. The consensus is that political risk is the dog the never barks; this true on a headline level. But I can’t help but think that markets are a like deer caught in the headlight. Everyone is waiting for one of the political land mines to blow up, but no one knows what to do about it. In the U.S., Mr. Trump has escalated the global trade wars, though markets are not exactly pricing-in the end of the globalised world order as we know it. Rather, they seem to have settled on the idea that the U.S. is winning. Small cap U.S. equities have soared, and the dollar is bid. The latter effectively is an equaliser. If the dollar rises as U.S. imposes import tariffs, the real economic impact of Mr. Trump’s policies will be curbed, perhaps even neutralised altogether.
Read More