The Fed Gets Blindsided… Again

This post The Fed Gets Blindsided… Again appeared first on Daily Reckoning.

The big news this week was that the House of Representatives impeached President Trump for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

Trump now joins Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton as the only U.S. presidents to be impeached (Nixon resigned before he could be impeached).

Now it goes to the Senate for trial. But there’s virtually no chance the Senate will convict Trump on the charges, given the Republican majority.

The market has completely shrugged off the news. The stock market is up today, which tells you it doesn’t fear political instability or expect anything to come of the impeachment process.

But the real market story right now on Wall Street has to do with the Fed, and it’s not getting anywhere near the attention it deserves.

Since September, the Fed’s been pumping in massive amounts of liquidity into the “repo” markets to keep the machinery of the financial system lubricated.

So far, the figure stands at about $400 billion. But it’s showing no signs of slowing down.

The Fed has now announced it will provide an additional $425 billion of cash injections into the repo market as the year draws to a close on concerns that funding could fall short into year’s end.

And Jerome Powell has admitted these injections will continue “at least into the second quarter” of 2020.

What does all this bailout money say about the health of the money markets?

And that’s really what it is — a bailout. Without Fed intervention, liquidity in these markets would have dried up.

But the Fed’s massive liquidity injections are basically a Band-Aid on the real problem.

There’s plenty of liquidity in the market right now. The real problem is that the big banks, the 24 “primary dealers” who have direct access to the Fed’s liquidity, aren’t lending the money out like they’re supposed to.

They’re sitting on it, which is depriving other banks and financial institutions of the short-term funding they need.

Part of it has to do with regulations that require these banks to hold a certain amount of reserves, so they’re reluctant to lend them.

But it’s also because these banks can earn more on their money by parking their reserves at the Fed than they can lending it out, which pays very little interest.

Here’s what one portfolio manager, Bryce Doty, says about it:

The big banks are just hoarding cash. They told the Fed they have more than enough cash in excess reserves to meet regulatory issues, but they prefer having money at the Fed where they can still earn 1.55%, rather than in the repo market.

So, until that situation changes, there’s no reason to expect that the Fed’s support will go away anytime soon.

But if you ask New York Fed head John Williams, everything’s just hunky-dory.

He says it’s all “working really well.” But the Fed is having to expand its balance sheet at the fastest pace since the first round of QE began in December 2008.

It’s gone from $3.8 trillion in September to over $4.07 trillion today. And it’s going higher.

Would all this be necessary if the system were working well?

The Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors recently published its annual Supervision and Regulation Report, which measures the financial condition of major U.S. banks, including loan growth and liquidity in the banking system.

How did the banks grade?

Overall, the board concluded that 45% of U.S. banks with more than $100 billion in assets merited a rating of “less than satisfactory.”

Tellingly, the report did not say which banks have these less-than-satisfactory ratings. It doesn’t want to make any real waves, after all. The entire system depends on confidence.

Of course, the Fed didn’t see problems in the repo market coming at all. They never do. All they ever do is react and pretend that they have everything under control.

Basically, the Fed was blindsided… Again.

But they don’t have everything under control or they would have seen the problems coming and maybe done something about it.

Continued problems in the repo market may mean the Fed could launch another round of official quantitative easing in the very near future, possibly as soon as early January.

The good news for the markets is that the Fed’s liquidity injections have helped boost stocks to record levels again.

The Fed is basically handing investors a Christmas present. Unfortunately, most people on Main Street don’t realize it. The present’s being put under the tree this year (and maybe next) won’t last. They can’t.

The post The Fed Gets Blindsided… Again appeared first on Daily Reckoning.

Volatility Holds the Key to Markets in 2019

This post Volatility Holds the Key to Markets in 2019 appeared first on Daily Reckoning.

Over the last two weeks, after making good on the four-rate interest hike of 2018, Fed Chairman, Jerome Powell, became more dovish to start 2019.

His change in tone is worth considering because of his historical stance on reducing the amount of artificial stimulus coming from the Fed. Last week, after the required five-year holding period for Fed transcripts were up, we got a glimpse into Powell’s thoughts from 2013, before he was Chairman.

Powell tried to persuade then-Chairman, Ben Bernanke, to reduce the Fed’s stimulus, even though it would lead to greater near-term market volatility. That was when the third round of the Fed’s asset-buying program (QE3) was in full swing. The Fed was purchasing an estimated $85 billion per month mix of Treasuries and mortgage-backed securities.

To indicate that the Fed wouldn’t buy bonds forever, Bernanke floated the idea of slowing down its program, or “tapering,” at some non-defined future date.

Powell, on the other hand, believed the market needed a specific “road map” of the Fed’s intentions. He said that he wasn’t “concerned about a little bit of volatility” though he was “concerned that there may be more than that here.”

Indeed, once Bernanke publicly announced the possibility of the Fed’s bond-buying program slowing down, the market tanked, in a response that became known as a “taper tantrum.” As a result, Bernanke backed off the tapering idea.

Fear of more taper tantrums kept the Fed in check after that. The Fed ultimately waited until it had raised rates sufficiently, before starting to cut the size of its balance sheet. But now Powell is the Chairman. And it seems that he is much less comfortable with volatility than he was under Bernanke, as his most recent remarks indicate.

But it certainly wouldn’t be the first time a Fed chairman has modified his views when he was in control. Alan Greenspan, for example, was a staunch advocate of the gold standard when he was younger (and as presented in Foreign Affairs). But once he was Fed head, suddenly he thought a gold standard wasn’t such a hot idea after all. Go figure.

In the case of Jerome Powell, his new sensitivity to volatility means the Fed will be watching the markets for high volatility that causes sell-offs, even if also espousing their “data driven” mentality. And that he is prepared to act should that happen by backing off the Fed’s current forecast for reducing its balance sheet.

I’ve argued before that the Fed isn’t reducing its balance sheet as aggressively as it would have you believe. And I certainly expect it to dial back even more so in light of the recent volatility.

The reason is obvious.

The main catalyst for the bull market that surfaced over the past 10 years since the financial crisis in 2008 was stimulus that was fueled by the Fed and other leading central banks. This money acted as an artificial stimulant or “drug” to financial asset prices.

The world’s leading central banks have been following the Fed’s lead in withdrawing liquidity. And even though global liquidity really began drying up late last year to a minimal degree relative to its size, it should come as no surprise that markets have threw a tantrum.

Since early October, we’ve seen a lot of price volatility, with several hundred-point daily swings in the markets becoming the norm. Powell calmed the waters with his dovish comments on January 4 and the following week as well. But make no mistake, the waters are still choppy.

Many on Wall Street expect to see more volatility ahead and are forecasting that 2019 will be rocky for the stock market. But others on Wall Street are, in direct contrast, forecasting a continued bull market.

That’s the other driver of volatility — clashing opinions and wildly divergent market forecasts. We haven’t had much volatility in recent years because nearly everyone was on the same side of the bet. That’s all changed now.

To add to the market turmoil, the federal government shutdown has now officially entered its fourth week. It is now the longest shutdown on record. But the shutdown also has real economic ramifications outside of the DC beltway.

First, in a climate where the expansion of business activity is already slowing down, the shutdown is causing economists to further lower first-quarter GDP estimates. That puts a lid on expansion and hiring plans for both psychological and actual risk reasons.

More than 800,000 federal workers have missed paychecks, which means less money to pay bills and purchase goods and services that contribute to the American economy. But that’s not the only problem, although it might seem far more important, especially to those missing paychecks.

From an information standpoint, the state of the economy is tough to predict without data produced by agencies like the Department of Commerce. For instance, farmers, already hurting from trade wars, won’t be able to get key data on figures like monthly international shipments to plan crop schedules.

Then there’s the Federal Reserve itself. Whether you think it should or not be setting interest rates at all, the Fed determines interest rates while considering factors such as market volatility, slowing economic figures and trade wars. The best way to do that is to access real data. Now, business conditions will be hard to gauge accurately if reports aren’t available due to the shutdown.

That means the shutdown will stoke volatility in the markets until an agreement is reached. And when that will be is anybody’s guess right now. No real progress has been made and there doesn’t appear to be an end in sight.

But this week, the markets will be getting new information to digest. The release of fourth-quarter earnings reports will begin with big banks. These will provide more insight into how companies performed during the year-end volatility in 2018.

The corporate earnings outlook on Wall Street is fairly negative. Companies have been managing expectations downward. Apple, for instance, chopped its forecasted revenue figures last month, citing the slowdown in China’s economic growth as a reason for less iPhone sales. Apple stock lost about 10% on the day of the announcement, taking the overall market down with it.

Analysts are now estimating fourth quarter profit growth of 14.5% for the S&P 500 companies. That’s down from the 20.1% they forecast at the start of the quarter. But that could actually be a good thing for share prices.

The lower the bar, the greater the possibility it can be exceeded. There’s more upside potential in that case, in other words. That means if earnings begin to outperform prior forecasts next week, it could very well lift the markets. This tension of negative and positives factors will foster a see-saw of a quarter in the markets mixed with volatility, so being aware and nimble will be the best strategy.

But the volatility could present a great trading opportunity. Wall Street knows that it doesn’t matter if information is positive or negative — there are still ways to profit from the right information.

Something called the Cboe Volatility Index (VIX) is widely considered a “fear gauge.” That’s because it’s supposed to reflect what swings in the S&P 500 index could be over the next month.

The VIX computes its levels based on outstanding options contracts which are supposed to indicate the price that investors, or speculators, are willing to pay for protection against their positions going bad.

Currently, the VIX should be higher than it is. It recently spiked, but then settled down much lower than what the real volatility of the S&P has been this past month.

Usually, options tend to over-price volatility. That’s because people buy options in order to place bets on the future, or to protect themselves from wild swings in share prices. The less certain they are, the more they are willing to pay for that protection.

Yet, right now, the cost of protection is cheap. That’s like your health insurance premium all of a sudden dropping just when you catch a major illness. It doesn’t quite make sense.

That means that while fourth-quarter earnings season reports are emerging, it’s a good time to take advantage of buying these cheap options. Buying them on certain companies can protect you against adverse swings in share prices due to earnings announcements. It’s a form of portfolio insurance. And again, it’s relatively cheap.

That’s one pivotal key to being a great investor — accessing information. Sure, the more insights and information you have, the more overwhelming it can seem. However, if you can stay focused, your portfolio will thank you.

Regards,

Nomi Prins
for The Daily Reckoning

The post Volatility Holds the Key to Markets in 2019 appeared first on Daily Reckoning.