Skip to main content

Don't Fight The Fed

This was one of the key mantra’s I heard repeatedly early in my career when I traded mortgage-backed securities and sat on the bond trading desks at two major investment banking firms.  Back then, in the 1980’s, the mantra seemed to me to overstate the power of the Fed’s ability to move markets.  The concept of QE, or printing money to buy securities, was unimaginable then.  The main power of the Fed rested in its ability to influence only the shortest end of the yield curve (or short term rates, for those of you who don’t come from the finance world).   It seemed back then, in the days of what seemed to be free markets, that the forces of the marketplace, expressed by the thousands of participants coming together to by and sell securities and to borrow and lend money, set the more important longer term rates that directly affected most borrowings – including home mortgages, commercial real estate loans, and corporate borrowings.
In the wake of what we now call The Great Recession, the Fed has changed its approach to markets rather dramatically, as many know but I believe too few question.  For the past five years the Fed has become the major mover of financial markets, literally not permitting interest rates to rise.  Of course, given our country’s relative financial health and stability when compared to the rest of the world, it isn’t hard to say that this policy has worked magically and we ought to applaud those at the Fed for a job well done.  If only life was that simple. 

With rates as low as they’ve been, investors who require a reasonable return on their capital, historically in the vicinity of 6-8%, have been forced to shun high quality fixed income securities and reallocate primarily into stocks and lower quality (high yield) fixed income.  This has created a situation whereby a retrenchment of the Fed from its market dominating position and commitment to ultra-low rates is very difficult, if not impossible.  Such a retrenchment would certainly cause rates to drift higher, which would have a negative impact on general stock prices, as well as home values and real estate values overall.  The market losses and “negative wealth effect” this would cause is surely weighing heavily upon the minds of those at the Fed today.  Further complicating matters is the fact that the Fed, with its immense balance sheet and its ability to manage the market, is generating significant profits which flow through to Treasury and are now being counted upon to pay for a good part of our nation’s budget.  In sum, it is difficult to imagine how the Fed will reverse the dominating position it has taken up since 2009. 

As I reflect upon the market that I grew up in, which was driven by the input of many thousands, I wonder what all of this means for the future of finance in the U.S.  And, finance being an integral element of our society, I am deeply concerned about the trend towards government dominance of our markets.  Freedom, like air or like a pain-free body, is something that most people take for granted until it is lost.  Freedom seems to be under siege in the U.S. and in the world, and a free market financial system has long been a cornerstone of American freedom.  I’ve heard many recently applauding those who have brought us to this place, crediting them with having sufficiently revived our economy.  I fear that the price we will pay for this fix will ultimately prove to be very high.

Popular posts from this blog

Greed & Laziness

In this most contentious and fascinating of election cycles, when nearly each conversation leads to politics, and when polarization runs so high, I ask myself - what is the essence of the debate between left and right?  What does it really mean to be a Conservative or a Liberal?

Why Rates Must Remain Low

There is an old bond trader joke that I first heard in the 1980’s when I traded mortgage-backed securities at Drexel Burnham Lambert.  It went like this:  “Upon dying, Albert Einstein finds himself in what he is told is heaven.  He encounters another individual there and asks him what his IQ is.  When he is told that it is 175 he is overjoyed, knowing that he’s found an intellectual peer with whom he can share much.  Upon meeting another, he discovers that person’s IQ is 140 and is pleased to have met another highly intelligent person with whom he can enjoy chess and other pursuits.  He is feeling pretty good about heaven, when he comes across a person who tells him that his IQ is a mere 90, and he is flummoxed.  What, he wonders, is this guy doing in my heaven and what can I even say to this person?  Then it comes to him.  ‘Where,’ he asks, ‘do you think interest rates are heading?’”

CMBS In Flux

The CMBS market has been in a period of upheaval, with dramatic spread widening on bonds and a resulting much more expensive cost of capital for real estate borrowers who depend upon this channel for their debt financing.Market participants today wonder whether we’ve entered a period like the summer of 2011, when spreads on bonds last widened this dramatically and then snapped back within a year to provide tremendous returns for those who were courageous enough to purchase bonds at the time when there was panic selling.Or, people wonder, is this recent downturn a prelude to a structural or systemic problem, like what was experienced in 2007, when spreads widened and sucked investors in, only to punish those early responders with a much more dramatic price collapse in the next 24 months.