Author Topic: FED  (Read 12714 times)

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
FED
« on: March 13, 2016, 09:05:20 AM »



Greenspan Explains The Fed's Miserable Track Record: "We Didn't Forecast Better Because We Can't"
Tyler Durden's pictureSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 03/12/2016 16:28 -0500

Alan Greenspan Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Great Depression Warren Buffett


 
inShare
10
 
On March 11, the National Archives announced its first opening of Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) records, along with a detailed 1,400-page online finding aid (yes, just the index is 1,400 pages). The records which are available via DropBox, seek to identify the causes of the 2008 financial crisis.

Among the numerous materials are interviews with key players in Washington and on Wall Street, from Warren Buffett to Alan Greenspan. The documents also include minutes of commission meetings and internal deliberations concerning the causes of the financial crisis.

While we admit we have yet to read the several hundred thousand pages released yesterday, here is what has so far emerged as of the better punchlines within the data dump, and it comes courtesy of the man who many believe is responsible not only for the second global great depression (which needs trillions in central bank liquidity to be swept under the rug every day), but for the "bubble-bust-bigger bubble" cycle that was unleashed with Greenspan's Great Moderation.

Here is Allan Greenspan meeting with Dixie Noonan et al on March 31, 2010:

This is a reason why the Board is getting an unfair rap on this stuff. We didn’t forecast better than anyone else; we regulated banks that got in trouble like anyone else. Could we have done better? Yes, if we could forecast better. But we can’t. This is why I’m very uncomfortable with the idea of a systemic regulator, because they can’t forecast better.
This comes from the person in charge of the most powerful central bank in the world; a world which now is reliant exclusively on central bankers for its day to day pretend existence

Malaysia's Biggest Investment Forum

FED
« on: March 13, 2016, 09:05:20 AM »

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #1 on: March 13, 2016, 12:59:57 PM »



The Fed caused 93% of the entire stock market's move since 2008: Analysis
Yahoo Finance By Lawrence Lewitinn
March 11, 2016 3:40 PM

 0:13 / 5:34
   

playlist_grip
Yahoo Finance: Investing
 The Fed caused 93% of the entire stock market's move since 2008: Analysis 5:34 NOW WATCHING 
The Fed caused 93% of the entire stock market's move since 2008: Analysis
 The more we earn, the more often we drink 1:06 
The more we earn, the more often we drink
 CollegeHumor.com just crossed a major milestone — Here's how they've stayed relevant for 17 years 9:20 
CollegeHumor.com just crossed a major milestone — Here's how they've stayed relevant for 17 years
 Here's what makes people successful and productive 4:21 
Here's what makes people successful and productive
 The fight to stop casinos from taking your winnings 3:36 
The fight to stop casinos from taking your winnings
 Ulta Salon soars; MS upgrades Hertz Global; GM buys self-driving car startup 1:03 
Ulta Salon soars; MS upgrades Hertz Global; GM buys self-driving car startup
 How one small college's surprising sales ban could be bad news for Red Bull 3:18 
How one small college's surprising sales ban could be bad news for Red Bull
 Finally, millennials are moving out of their parents' basements (and driving up rents) 3:13 
Finally, millennials are moving out of their parents' basements (and driving up rents)
 The housing bust is officially over 1:06 
The housing bust is officially over
 We have just witnessed a 'death cross' in the market's fear indicator 4:26 
We have just witnessed a 'death cross' in the market's fear indicator
 Load More
The bull market just celebrated its seventh anniversary. But the gains in recent years – as well as its recent sputter – may be explained by just one thing: monetary policy.

The factors behind that and previous bubbles can be illuminated using simple visual analysis of a chart.

The S&P 500 (^GSPC) doubled in value from November 2008 to October 2014, coinciding with the Federal Reserve Bank’s “quantitative easing” asset purchasing program. After three rounds of “QE,” where the Fed poured billions of dollars into the bond market monthly, the Fed’s balance sheet went from $2.1 trillion to $4.5 trillion.

This isn’t just a spurious correlation, according to economist Brian Barnier, principal at ValueBridge Advisors and founder of FedDashboard.com. What’s more, he says previous bull runs in the market lasting several years can also be explained by single factors each time.

Barnier first compiled data on the total value of publicly-traded U.S. stocks since 1950. He then divided it by another economic factor, graphing the ratio for each one. If the chart showed horizontal lines stretching over long periods of time, that meant both the numerator (stock values) and the denominator (the other factor) were moving at the same rate.

“That's the beauty of the visual analysis,” he said. “All we have to do is find straight, stable lines and we know we've got something good.”


View gallery
.
Scouring hundreds of different factors, Barnier ultimately whittled it down to just four factors: GDP data five years into the future, household and nonprofit liabilities, open market paper, and the Fed’s assets. At different stretches of time, just one of those was the single biggest driver of the market and was confirmed with regression analyses.

View gallery
.
He isolated each factor in a separate chart, calling them “eras” for the stock market.
From after World War II until the mid-1970s, future GDP outlook explained 90% of the stock market’s move, according to statistical analysis by Barnier.

GDP growth lost its sway on the market in the early 1970s with the rise of credit cards and consumer debt. Household liabilities grew with plastic first, followed by home mortgages, until the real estate crash of the early 1990s. Barnier’s analysis shows debt explained 95% of the entire market’s move during this time.

The period between the mid- to late-1990s until 2000 was, of course, marked by the tech bubble. While stocks took much of the headline, that time also saw heightened activity in the commercial paper market. Startups and young companies sought cash beyond their stratospheric share values to fund their operations. Barnier’s regression analysis shows commercial paper increases could explain as much as 97% of the tech bubble.

Shortly after the tech bubble burst, a housing bubble began, once more in the form of mortgages and other debt. That drove 94% of the market’s move for the first several years of the current century.

As the financial crisis reached a fevered pitch in 2008, the Federal Reserve took to flooding the financial market with dollars by buying up bonds. Simultaneously, interest rates fell dramatically, as bond yields move in the opposite direction of bond prices. Barnier sees the Fed as responsible for over 93% of the market from the start of QE until today. During the first half of 2013, the Fed caused the entire market’s growth, he said.
Since the Fed stopped buying bonds in late 2014, the S&P 500 has been batted around in a 16% range and is more or less where it was when the QE came to a close. Investors need to anticipate the next driver, said Barnier.

“Quantitative easing has stopped, but now we're into the interest rate world,” he said. “That means for any investor trying to figure out what to do, step one is starting with a macro strategy.

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #2 on: March 13, 2016, 07:01:31 PM »



陳定遠‧流動性貨幣的去向
2016-03-13 10:01
     

 
上個星期筆者指出,西方國家陸續推出量化寬鬆措施,海量增加流動性貨幣,企圖刺激投資和消費,提振經濟活動,然而成效甚小,各國經濟依舊低迷。那麼,這些因為零利率政策,甚至量化寬鬆措施而增加的海量的流動性貨幣,到底去了哪裡?要知道這些錢究竟去了哪裡也不是容易的事,這裡我們只能數據分析推測。
美歐日英自2008年以來的量化寬鬆措施,至少增加了6萬億美元的流動性貨幣,顯然,這些增加的貨幣量並沒有全部進入實體經濟,沒有刺激到投資與消費需求。美國在2008年底推出的第一輪量化寬鬆措施,金額達6千億美元之巨,全用來購買房利美、房地美、聯邦住房貸款銀行這些與房地產有關的政府支持機構的證券,這些機構在次貸危機時瀕臨破產,是導致全球金融風暴爆發的導火索之一。
向這些機構注入大量流動性貨幣,目的是重新建立金融市場的信用,穩定信貸市場,讓人對這些機構的信心恢復,換句話說,目的在於穩定市場,而不是刺激經濟,因此對經濟沒有直接提振的作用。其實,美國的第一輪量化寬鬆額度不止6千億美元,美國總共購買了1.725萬億美元的金融資產。
因為量化寬鬆措施而增加的流動性貨幣很多不進入實體經濟,是因為有兩個好去處。第一個是成為到處流竄的熱錢,也叫游資;第二個是集中到金融市場作為投機尋租之用。
先談游資。何謂游資?游資是一種短期性的投機資金,以尋租為目的。若發覺某地的資金回報較高,游資便會流竄到該地,企圖捷足先登,奪人先機,獲取較高的回報。香港是個開放的國際金融中心,是游資最活躍的地方之一。游資流竄到香港,除了認為香港有投機尋租的機會外,更多的是為了竄入中國,進行投機尋租活動。
香港金融學家雷鼎鳴教授最近在2月28日的《亞洲週刊》撰文指出:“2008年金融海嘯發生後,主要因為歐美國家搞量化寬鬆,國際上有大量資金流通,直至今年2月初,香港的貨幣基礎共增加了1.287萬億港元(約1650億美元)”。
另一方面,通過虛假貿易和地下銀行等渠道進入中國的游資,有理由相信其金額更大,這可以從中國外匯儲備的增量得見端倪。2009年6月中國的外匯儲備餘額為21316億美元;2010年底,增至28473億美元;到了2014年年末中國外匯儲備已激增至38430億美元。僅僅4年,外匯儲備竟然增加近一萬億美元,這讓人不得不懷疑這是托西方國家量化寬鬆措施之福(也許是禍?)。中國雖然有嚴厲的資本管制,但主要通過虛假貿易讓游資進入中國也已經是公開的秘密,游資通過地下渠道竄入中國已經沒有以前那麼重要。
根據世界交易所聯合會(WFE)統計顯示,2013年全球股市成交量為69萬億美元,2014年成交量增加17.4%至81萬億美元,2105年全年成交量又劇增至114萬億美元,增幅為41%。由此可見大量的資金已經轉移至股票市場,作為尋租之用。這些的數字,還沒有包括用在大宗商品、外匯和其他金融衍生產品的交易上。
筆者有理由相信,量化寬鬆措施所增加的流動性貨幣,有很大的一部份是從銀行體系被轉移到金融市場,變成了搗亂金融市場的游資,游資的進出往往導致金融市場的波動;另一部份資金則被帶到金融市場,在股市、匯市、大宗商品和衍生產品等市場進行投機炒作,如此推波助瀾,興風作浪,往往帶來破壞性極大的金融風暴!
把大量的資金用在沒用生產性的二級股票市場的交易上,為的就是“錢生錢”,就是尋租。
應該用在增加實體經濟上的投資與消費的大量流動性貨幣,卻被轉移到了金融市場,進行沒有生產性的活動上,不但對實體經濟沒有幫助,反而有害,這是金融市場破壞實體經濟的一大證明。(星洲日報/百思莫解‧作者:陳定遠‧南方大學學院企業與管理學院教授


點看全文: http://opinions.sinchew.com.my/node/39371#ixzz42mKkWIqR
Follow us: @SinChewPress on Twitter | SinChewDaily on Facebook

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2016, 08:13:29 PM »



财经  2016年03月13日
本月政策会议临近 美联储升息问题拉开爭论

本月政策会议临近 美联储升息问题拉开爭论
美联储副主席费捨尔。

美国联邦储备局(美联储)等待通胀加速已经很久了,现在官员们面临一个错综复杂的局面,近期物价上涨的证据是否强劲到足以推进原定的升息计划,对此他们可能要展开喋喋不休的爭论。

在上週一出炉的几份声明中,处於辩论核心的决策者展现出截然不同的观点,联储副主席费捨尔认为,经济数据目前表明,通胀出现「首次萌芽」,而美联储委员佈雷纳德则反对称,联储在证明通胀的「持久性」之前,不应採取行动。

这些分歧性的观点,也许不会立即產生影响。美联储即將在本周开会,但会上料不会决定升息,因为前几周油价依然承压,全球股市也继续动盪。

不过,这有可能让美联储主席耶伦维护过去一年来共识的能力有所削弱,美联储要决定,在疲弱的全球经济环境下,让通胀在目前加快上升而后给予控制,或者说放慢升息速度,这样做是不是风险更大。

当美联储在较长时期內一直达不到2%通胀目標时,这样的討论並无意义,然而美联储看重的通胀指標在1月升至1.7%后,或许大家会全力参与这场討论。

通胀目標很难实现

费捨尔表示,距离通胀目標「並不是那么遥远」。在这样一个低油价、全球需求疲弱以及美元升值拉低进口价格的时期,通胀目標很难实现。

自2014年中以来,美联储官员即认为,通胀所遭遇的「阻力」將会过去,而近期的商品及服务价格数据表现,加上大宗商品跳涨,或许表明这个时刻终於到来了。

费捨尔表示,「我们此刻很可能会见到通胀上升的苗头。通胀自过低水平回升,是我们所乐见的。」

原本认为美联储要到今年底才升息的投资者,近期已將预期时点往前挪,主要因为油价劲扬且部份其他商品价格攀高。

但这可能也不足以说服联储委员佈雷纳德(Lael Brainard)这样的美联储官员。

最近几周,即便先前较为担忧通胀的决策官员也加入她的行列,担心公眾对通胀的预期下滑;后者通常是物价升势更加疲弱及可能出现通缩的预兆。

佈雷纳德指出,没有理由因为一个月强劲的数据,就仓促行事。

她表示,「儘管1月数据不错。对我来说,这只个数据面,我想要见到一种格局,有些持久性,这將会让我有些宽慰。」

她对一群银行人士表示,「鉴於外需疲弱且恶化,透过审慎调整政策路径,来小心保护並保留我们在国內已有的进展是很重要的事。」

美联储在去年12月,进行了近10年来的首次升息。

当时,它暗示今年可能升息4次,反映了美国劳动市场走强,且看好通胀將开始升向美联储2%的目標。

但今年开局以来油价下跌、全球经济放缓以及金融市场动盪,再让投资者认为,美联储的乐观看法或许弄错了。

华尔街分析师如今认为,今年只会升息两次,利率期货交易员正押注將只会升息一次

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #4 on: March 14, 2016, 05:43:44 PM »



Why the Fed should stun Wall Street with a rate hike

By Joseph Adinolfi
Published: Mar 11, 2016 5:06 p.m. ET

     94 
A team of strategists at BAML said the Fed should surprise the markets
Getty Images
The Fed should shock the markets with an unexpected interest-rate hike just to set a precedent.
When it comes to the tricky task of raising interest rates, the Federal Reserve likes to prep investors before pulling the ripcord. It sees this as a way to prevent markets from reacting violently to unexpected news.

But this approach failed in December, when a well-telegraphed rate hike was followed by weeks of extreme volatility.

On Friday, a team of currency and interest-rate strategists at Bank of America Merill Lynch suggested that it might be time for a new approach.


After studying Fed-funds futures data, the strategists discerned that the Fed has typically provided investors with plenty of warning before raising rates.

As the following chart shows, the Fed hasn’t raised interest rates unless the market assigned it at least a 60% probability of doing so. This seems to contradict the Fed’s desire that every meeting be viewed by investors as potentially “live,” meaning the central bank could make a rate move at any one of its confabs.


This is great for minimizing volatility, the team said in a note released Friday. But it constrains the central bank’s ability to raise interest rates, sometimes forcing them to wait for a meeting with a pre-scheduled press conference before announcing any big decisions.

There’s a way to break this cycle. The Fed could set the historical norm aside and make one of its impending rate hikes at a meeting where markets aren’t pricing one in — though they were careful to rule out this happening in March.

One such surprise should be enough to convince markets that every meeting during this tightening cycle is a “live” meeting,” said Mark Cabana, rates strategist at BAML.

By surprising the market once, the Fed would regain some of the flexibility it has lost for fear of disturbing the markets.

“The Fed has been very reluctant to surprise and we think that’s likely to continue,” Cabana said.

“If it thought that economic conditions were appropriate and it wanted the market to assign greater odds that the fed would go, so that if they did surprise it wouldn’t have such an impact on financial conditions,” Cabana said.

So far, the likelihood of a rate hike in coming months is slim to none. For the Fed’s next policy meeting March 15-16, the probability of the central bank lifting rates is nil, according to the CME Group’s FedWatch tool. Odds are just 22% for April, 47% for June and the market isn’t pricing in a more than 60% likelihood until September.

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #5 on: March 14, 2016, 08:14:16 PM »



Faber: Central banks will create global socialism
Leslie Shaffer   | @LeslieShaffer1
8 Hours Ago
CNBC.com
124
SHARES
45
COMMENTSJoin the Discussion

Central banks around the globe are pursuing strategies that will put all financial assets into government hands, perma-bear Marc Faber, told CNBC's Squawk Box. He also took the opportunity to endorse Donald Trump's bid for the U.S. presidency.

Faber said central bank policies are essentially monetizing debt, particularly in Japan, where he claims the Bank of Japan (BOJ) is buying all the government bonds the treasury is issuing.

He expects that asset buying by global central banks will only increase, even though he believes those policies aren't working to stimulate the economy.

"The central banks aren't interested in what works, they're interested in their own prestige. And they are so deep into it already and it didn't work. They will increase the medicine," said Faber, the publisher of The Gloom, Boom & Doom Report. "Eventually, they'll buy all the government bonds; they'll buy all the corporate bonds, all the shares outstanding. Afterwards the housing market goes down, they'll buy all the homes and then the government will own everything."

Marc Faber.
Faber: China’s growth is nearer 4%
That's the road to socialism, he said.

"I could see a situation where at the end the government owns all the corporations and all the government bonds and then we are back into socialism, into a planning economy," said Faber.

To be sure, the Bank of Japan does not buy Japan government bonds (JGBs) directly from the treasury; it only purchases them in the open market. Since some entities, such as banks and insurers, are required to hold JGBs in their reserves, the BOJ is unlikely to acquire all of the bonds outstanding. The BOJ does, however, use its quantitative easing program to purchase select exchange traded funds (ETFs) in the open market.

The U.S. Federal Reserve began tapering its quantitative easing program in 2013 and officially ended it in late 2014.

But last week, the European Central Bank (ECB) announced further easing measures, including expanding the size of its bond-buying program to 80 billion euros ($89.23 billion) worth of assets a month, to include corporate bonds.

European Central Bank (ECB) President Mario Draghi.
Economists mixed on ECB stimulus
Faber expects these programs will only expand.

"The governments in my view, with their agents the Federal Reserve and other central banks and with the treasury department, they will do anything not to let asset prices go down," said Faber.

"If the stock markets go down, I'm convinced all the central banks will buy stocks. All of them," he said, noting that this is not without precedent, citing Hong Kong's purchase of stocks during the Asian Financial Crisis in the late 1990s.

Faber also took the opportunity to say he wanted Trump to take the White House in the U.S. election later this year, although he noted he's not eligible to vote.

"They basically hate Trump because he's not the party insider," Faber said. "He brings some fresh air into the whole process."

Faber added that he has "great sympathy" for the leading Republican candidate.

"I would vote for him for the simple reason that I think he's the only one that can really defeat Hillary Clinton and I would do anything if I were an American not to get Hillary Clinton as a president, anything."

Faber didn't elaborate on why he disapproves of Clinton as a candidate.

When asked how he felt about the possibility the Republican Party could still field Condoleezza Rice, who was secretary of state during the George W. Bush administration, as an 11th hour candidate, Faber said the idea made him feel sick.

"I think she was a horrible secretary of state," Faber said, without elaborating

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #6 on: March 16, 2016, 12:15:07 PM »




MoneyDJ理財網新聞首頁最新頭條新聞頭條新聞
新聞內文
看回應看回應 | 寫心得寫心得 | 轉寄轉寄 | 收藏收藏 | 列印列印 |


字級設定: 小 中 大 特
JP摩根經理人調查:Fed若未推升美元 對新興市場有利
回應(0) 人氣(62) 收藏(0) 2016/03/16 11:24
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-03-16 11:24:51 記者 郭妍希 報導
聯準會(Fed)即將在明(16)日公布貨幣決策,讓投資人態度轉趨觀望,新興市場這個月(3月)的跌深反彈走勢能否延續下去?專家認為,一切都要看美元是否走升。
新興市場在經歷長達9個月的下降趨勢後,最近兩個月出現跌深反彈。嘉實XQ全球贏家系統報價顯示,3月至15日為止,iShares MSCI新興市場ETF (iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF,代號為EEM.US)跳漲7.09%,先鋒富時新興市場ETF (Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF,代號為VWO.US)也勁揚了6.74%。
J.P.摩根認為,新興市場續彈與否,美元的走勢是關鍵。barron`s.com 15日報導,J.P.摩根分析師Adrian Mowat發表研究報告指出,調查發現全球基金經理人都在密切關注美元走向,多數仍對美元抱持多方看法,一般認為強勢美元通常對新興市場不利。

美元指數(U.S. Dollar Index)自一年前攀升至100.3點的高峰後,至今一直在95-100點之間徘徊,而懷疑美元多頭循環告終的人大都假設Fed將按兵不動。若美元並未因Fed接下來的動作而走強,那麼經理人認為這對新興市場非常有利。
除此之外,新興貨幣今(2016)年走勢相當穩健,隨著市場對新興貨幣的信心增強,投資人的確可能重拾貨幣套利策略。企業盈餘成長也是關鍵,拜原物料價格止穩、貨幣政策仍寬鬆之賜,企業經營環境有望改善,而市場會提前在盈餘翻轉前六個月就反應。
摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)分析師Matthew Hornbach日前才剛對新興市場示警,認為各國政策方向分歧,再加上新興國家得償還美元計價外債、美元牛市通常會以超漲收場等因素,美元在超漲前可能還有10-15%的升值空間,這也是大摩對新興市場、原物料價格看法保守的主因。另外,日圓則有望受避險需求推動,預估歐元兌日圓到2017年第1季為止可能會貶值16%。
大摩策略師Jonathan Garner也要大家沉住氣,因為1月底至2月初恐怕並非亞洲/新興市場本波空頭循環的底部,熊還沒離開,建議大家利用本波反彈出脫持股、而不是跟著股價追高。
MarketWatch曾於2月15日報導,根據J.P.摩根證券(通稱小摩)策略師Mislav Matejka發表的研究報告,部分技術指標顯示,股市短期內有遭超賣的跡象,近期有反彈的機會,且力道將比1月底那波6-8%的行情還要強勢且持久。報告舉出的其中一項訊號是,美國散戶投資人協會(The American Association of Individual Investors;AAII)的多空指標已下滑至負29點,創2031年4月以來新低。
不過,Matejka也建議投資人把這次反彈視為出售股票的機會,因為2016年股市展望仍然保守、預估下半年可能會進一步走弱。
*編者按:本文僅供參考之用,並不構成要約、招攬或邀請、誘使、任何不論種類或形式之申述或訂立任何建議及推薦,讀者務請運用個人獨立思考能力,自行作出投資決定,如因相關建議招致損失,概與《精實財經媒體》、編者及作者無涉


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=9d3c0d43-45b5-408a-a394-79fd7659a7e2&c=MB010000#ixzz432Dts5IP
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #7 on: March 16, 2016, 02:29:02 PM »




MoneyDJ理財網新聞首頁最新頭條新聞頭條新聞
新聞內文
看回應看回應 | 寫心得寫心得 | 轉寄轉寄 | 收藏收藏 | 列印列印 |


字級設定: 小 中 大 特
通膨蠢動!高盛:FOMC應會上修核心PCE,看多美元
回應(0) 人氣(135) 收藏(0) 2016/03/16 13:05
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-03-16 13:05:57 記者 郭妍希 報導
聯準會(Fed)高度關注的通膨指標「核心個人消費支出(PCE)平減指數」在1月年增1.7%、創2014年7月新高,逐漸逼近Fed設定的2%目標,若再不升息,恐怕有貨幣政策趕不上通膨、導致經濟過熱的疑慮。(圖為Fed主席葉倫)
高盛因此預估,Fed 3月將按兵不動、6月可能升息一碼,但4月升息的機率也不能完全排除,這樣的鷹派做法應該會推動美元走升。不過,美元指數在一年前突破100點大關後,從此卻在95-100點區間內震盪,讓長期看多美元的高盛臉上無光,這次是否能扳回一城、有待觀察。
嘉實XQ全球贏家系統報價顯示,PowerShares德銀美元指數基金(Powershares DB US Dollar Index Bullish Fund,代號為UUP.US)年初迄今下跌2.26%,2015年、2014年分別上漲7.01%、11.38%。

barron`s.com 15日報導,高盛分析師Silvia Ardagna發表研究報告指出,雖然美國經濟數據方向正確、金融市場逐漸回穩、新興市場風險因人行堅稱人民幣不會驟貶而減輕,再加上歐洲央行(ECB)、日本央行(BOJ)加碼寬鬆,但美元都並未因此攀升。現在,唯一還未受到矚目的就是通膨,但假如聯邦公開市場委員會(FOMC)一如高盛預期上修2016年核心PCE預估值,那這應可解讀為Fed立場偏向鷹派。
Ardagna指出,若Fed運用3月的會議引導投資人對升息的期望,那對美元有利。以去(2015)年10月為例,FOMC會議結束後,市場預估的12月升息機率從開會前一天的35%跳升至50%,而美元相對於十大工業國(G10)一籃子貨幣的匯率也升值0.4%,直到11月9日美元升勢才觸頂,而12月升息機率也拉高至80%,這段期間美元相對G10貨幣共計升值1.7%。
Fed副主席費雪(Stanley Fischer)3月7日即駁斥低失業率、高通膨之間聯繫已被打破的理論,宣稱兩者的關聯不久就能再次得到驗證。
路透社、英國金融時報報導,費雪7日在一場經濟論壇上表示,在油價、美元止穩後,美國通膨率遲早會朝2%標邁進。他還說,通膨距離央行預設的目標(2%)並沒有大家想像那麼遠。
富蘭克林坦伯頓全球宏觀團隊投資長、「富坦全球債券基金」(Templeton Global Bond Fund)冠軍操盤人麥可哈森泰博(Michael Hasenstab)2月12日在官網也曾發表最新研究報告指出,油價不需上漲、只要持穩不再續跌,則通膨率就可回歸到2%的正軌。強勢美元雖然也會壓低美國通膨,但哈森泰博指出,就算美元相對歐元升值了10%、也只會讓通膨率下降10個基點。因此,主要影響通膨的是油價,而他認為這個因素是短暫的。
摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)分析師Matthew Hornbach日前才剛對新興市場示警,認為各國政策方向分歧,再加上新興國家得償還美元計價外債、美元牛市通常會以超漲收場等因素,美元在超漲前可能還有10-15%的升值空間,這也是大摩對新興市場、原物料價格看法保守的主因。另外,日圓則有望受避險需求推動,預估歐元兌日圓到2017年第1季為止可能會貶值16%。
*編者按:本文僅供參考之用,並不構成要約、招攬或邀請、誘使、任何不論種類或形式之申述或訂立任何建議及推薦,讀者務請運用個人獨立思考能力,自行作出投資決定,如因相關建議招致損失,概與《精實財經媒體》、編者及作者無涉。


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=13fb06dd-786b-42e2-a06c-5a0865d59e2c&c=MB010000#ixzz432lhtUhl
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #8 on: March 17, 2016, 07:48:47 AM »



"Data Dependent" Fed Chickens Out Again: Blames "Global" Risks For Unchanged Rates, Cuts Rate Hike Forecast
Tyler Durden's pictureSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 03/16/2016 15:32 -0400

fixed Goldilocks headlines


 
inShare
4
 
With gold up 15% since The Fed hiked in December (and stocks lower) and the market pricing a hike today at just 4% (June 53%), it is not surprising that Janet panicced and folded again in the face of "unequivocally good" data based on what the "Dow Data Dependent" Fed has said it monitors. Of course there were plenty of excuses:

FED MEDIAN FORECAST IMPLIES TWO 2016 RATE HIKES VS FOUR IN DEC
 
FED SAYS GLOBAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS CONTINUE TO POSE RISKS
 FED LEAVES RATES UNCHANGED AT 0.25%-0.5% AS EXPECTED
FED: GEORGE DISSENTED IN FAVOR OF A RATE RISE TO 0.5%-0.75%
Not too dovish (upgrade uncertainty), not too hawkish (lowered rate hikes), a goldilocks statement, with just a little less inflation and just a little less GDP growth, and just two more quarter of near-ZIRP rates is what it takes for the world to get it all together.   

Before The Fed statement, June was at 53% probabilty of a rate-hike...It collapsed after

 



 

Since The Fed's last "action" things have not quite gone as expected...



 

Additional headlines include:

*FED: MKT-BASED INFLATION COMPENSATION MEASURES REMAIN LOW
*FED SAYS RANGE OF DATA SHOW MORE STRENGTH IN LABOR MARKET
*FED: ECONOMY EXPECTED TO WARRANT ONLY GRADUAL RATE INCREASES
*FED FORECASTS SHOW SHALLOWER PACE OF RATE RISES IN 2017, 2018
*FED: ECONOMIC ACTIVITY MODERATE DESPITE GLOBAL DEVELOPMENTS
 

Some of the highlights from what is a quite dovish statement, which notes that the data is strong and yet the Fed is unable to hike rates:

Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in January suggests that economic activity has been expanding at a moderate pace despite the global economic and financial developments of recent months. Household spending has been increasing at a moderate rate, and the housing sector has improved further; however, business fixed investment and net exports have been soft.
 
* * *
 
Inflation picked up in recent months; however, it continued to run below the Committee's 2 percent longer-run objective, partly reflecting declines in energy prices and in prices of non-energy imports.
And here is why: the chickening out moment, it is the "global economy's" fault.

However, global economic and financial developments continue to pose risks. Inflation is expected to remain low in the near term, in part because of earlier declines in energy prices, but to rise to 2 percent over the medium term as the transitory effects of declines in energy and import prices dissipate and the labor market strengthens further. The Committee continues to monitor inflation developments closely.
Full redline comparison with the January statement below:



*  *  *

As a reminder, the last time we got a "hawkish, balanced" statement was October 2015... and this happened...

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #9 on: March 17, 2016, 08:08:24 AM »



Live blog and video of Fed decision and Janet Yellen press conference
March 16, 2016, 12:58 PM ET

The Federal Reserve is set to announce its latest interest-rate decision, as well as provide its dot plot and economic forecasts and hold a press conference with Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen. Follow along as MarketWatch live-blogs the proceedings, and watch the Yellen press conference live.

Read: Fed holds rates and sees only two hikes this year

Sort by:OldestNewest
3:36 amStocks hold gains, dollar slipsby William WattsADD A COMMENT

Stocks are holding on to gains as Yellen wraps up. The S&P 500, which erased losses after the FOMC statement, is up 0.6% a  2,029, while the Dow is up 100 points.

Bonds rallied, sending yields lower, with the two-year dropping back below 0.9%, down 10 basis points, to trade at 0.8672%. The 10-year yield is off 3.89 basis points at 1.9311%.

The dollar took a big hit from the Fed’s dovish tone, with the ICE dollar index hitting a one-month low as the both the euro and the yen jumped.

The weaker dollar helped lift commoditeis, with gold soaring nearly $30 in electronic trade to more than $1,260 an ounce, while oil futures extended earlier gains to end the day with a nearly 6% rise.

3:32 amADD A COMMENT
And with that, the press conference is over.

3:31 amby Rex NuttingADD A COMMENT
The Fed isn’t considering dropping interest rates into negative territory, Yellen says in response to a hypothetical question. Europe and Japan have moved to negative interest rates in an attempt to provide more stimulus through monetary policy.

She emphasizes that the Fed has lots of tools it could turn to (such as further quantitative easing) before it would consider negative rates,

3:29 amby Rex NuttingADD A COMMENT
The Philips Curve is alive, Yellen says.

She says there is still a relationship between the level of slack in the labor markets and the inflation rate, although she says it now takes a large change in the unemployment rate to fuel very much inflation.

3:18 amADD A COMMENT
Yellen forced to go on defensive about Fed’s political leanings, because of this article about Gov. Brainard’s contribution to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

“I want to start by saying that I’ve been involved for many years in the Federal Reserve system, and we are a nonpartisan, independent institution devoted to pursuing our Congressionally mandated objectives. And I have never seen a political views in any way influence the policy judgments that are made inside the Federal Reserve,” she said.

3:12 amby Rex NuttingADD A COMMENT
Most Americans aren’t as negative about the economy as sometimes portrayed, Yellen says. Consumer sentiment surveys aren’t at very low levels, reflecting the improvement in the labor market and in household balance sheets, she says.

3:09 amby Rex NuttingADD A COMMENT
There’s no evidence of a broad-based pickup in wages, Yellen says, which is evidence that the economy is not yet at full employment and that there are potential workers at the margins who are holding down wages.

3:08 amby Rex NuttingADD A COMMENT
The Fed declined to say whether it considers the risks to the economy as “balanced” or tilted toward the downside, Yellen said.

The so-called “bias” in the Fed’s assessment of the balance of risks used to be considered an important signal of its intentions, but the dot-plot has made it somewhat irrelevant. The Fed is on the path to higher rates.

3:03 amby Steve GoldsteinADD A COMMENT
Yellen is not willing to say that lower oil prices haven’t helped consumption.

“The typical, the average household in the United States with oil prices where they are now is probably benefiting around $1,000 a year. And so very detailed microdata that I have seen on household spending patterns suggest that there may be a link, as you would expect, from reduced amounts that people pay at the pump, to other spending like eating out for restaurant meals and other things,” she said.

3:02 amby Rex NuttingADD A COMMENT
Yellen says the Fed could raise rates at its next meeting, in April, even though there’s no scheduled press conference after that meeting.

She says every meeting is “live” in the sense that a rate hike could be decided, but until the Fed actually hikes rates during one of these in-between meetings, the markets will assume that the Fed will act only when it can explain itself afterward.

That means June, September and December.

 

2:59 amby Rex NuttingADD A COMMENT
The Fed isn’t surprised by the slowdown in China, but the slower growth in some emerging markets as well as Europe and Japan wasn’t entirely expected.
Still, the slowdown in rest of the world hasn’t changed the Fed’s view of the U.S. economy significantly

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #10 on: March 17, 2016, 02:23:00 PM »



M   Jean-Sebastien Jacques to Succeed Sam Walsh as Rio Tinto CEO
Fed Scales Back Rate-Rise Forecasts as Global Risks Remain
 Jana Randow
 jrandow
March 17, 2016 — 2:00 AM MYT Updated on March 17, 2016 — 4:34 AM MYT
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Janet Yellen's Statement in Two Minutes

Don't Miss Out — Follow Bloomberg On
Facebook   Twitter   Instagram   YouTube

Recommended

Tesla Will Unveil a Drivable Model 3. Here's What It Looks Like
Bill Gross, co-chief investment officer of Pacific Investment Management Co., speaks during an interview in New York, U.S., on Monday, May 16, 2011. Photographer: Scott Eells/Bloomberg
Bill Gross Sold a Client's Valeant Bonds Three Months Ago
NEW YORK - AUGUST 11:  The Plaza Hotel is seen August 11, 2004 in New York City.  (Photo by Peter Kramer/Getty Images)
New York's Plaza Hotel Up for Sale in Foreclosure Auction

 Janet Yellen's Statement in Two Minutes
Yellen calls April a `live meeting' when asked about next hike
Kansas City Fed chief dissents in favor of 25-point rate rise
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Federal Reserve officials held off from raising borrowing costs and scaled back forecasts for how high interest rates will rise this year, citing the potential impact from weaker global growth and financial-market turmoil on the U.S. economy.
The Federal Open Market Committee kept the target range for the benchmark federal funds rate at 0.25 percent to 0.5 percent, the central bank said in a statement Wednesday following a two-day meeting in Washington. The median of policy makers’ updated quarterly projections saw the rate at 0.875 percent at the end of 2016, implying two quarter-point increases this year, down from four forecast in December.
“You have seen a shift this time, in most participants assessments of the appropriate path for policy,” Fed Chair Janet Yellen said at a press conference in Washington. “That largely reflects a somewhat slower projected path for global growth, for growth in the global economy outside the United States, and for some tightening in credit conditions in the form of an increase in spreads.”
Yields on Treasury securities fell following the Fed’s actions, with the rate on the 10-year note dropping to 1.91 percent at 4:25 p.m. in New York from 1.99 percent just before the announcement.

“The committee currently expects that, with gradual adjustments in the stance of monetary policy, economic activity will expand at a moderate pace and labor market indicators will continue to strengthen,” the FOMC said in its statement. “However, global economic and financial developments continue to pose risks.”
Kansas City Fed President Esther George dissented from the decision, preferring a quarter-point rate increase.
“April remains a live meeting,” Yellen said when asked about the timing of the next rate move. “There will be additional data on the labor market, and on various factors that pertain to inflation. So that’s certainly a live possibility.”
“The tone of the FOMC statement and accompanying economic projections was dovish,” Neil Dutta, head of U.S. economist at Renaissance Macro Research LLC in New York, said in a research note. The reference to global risks “pushes the Fed in the role of the world’s central bank. In this role, the Fed needs to let inflation in the U.S. surge to offset disinflation in the rest of the world.”
Weaker-than-forecast global growth has clouded the U.S. outlook and led investors to expect a slower pace of tightening since the Fed raised rates in December for the first time in almost a decade. Yellen said in February that market turbulence had “significantly” tightened financial conditions by pushing down stock prices, causing the dollar to strengthen and boosting some borrowing costs.
Moderate Growth
“Economic activity has been expanding at a moderate pace,” with household spending gaining amid “soft” company investment and net exports, the Fed said. While inflation has “picked up in recent months,” market-based measures of inflation compensation are still low, the central bank said.
The median of Fed officials’ projections, known as the “dot plot,” saw the federal funds rate at 1.875 percent at the end of 2017, compared with 2.375 percent forecast in December. The end-2018 level fell to 3 percent, from 3.25 percent, with the longer-run projection at 3.25 percent, down from 3.5 percent.
Policy makers maintained their projections on how soon inflation will return to the Fed’s 2 percent target, while cutting their inflation forecast to 1.2 percent this year from 1.6 percent. Officials still see the preferred price gauge rising 1.9 percent in 2017 and 2 percent in 2018.
Officials maintained their forecast for a 4.7 percent U.S. unemployment rate in the fourth quarter of this year. The median projection for 2017 fell to 4.6 percent from 4.7 percent, and in 2018 to 4.5 percent from 4.7 percent. The rate stood at 4.9 percent in February.
“A range of recent indicators, including strong job gains, points to additional strengthening of the labor market,” the FOMC said.
The Fed reiterated that the “stance of monetary policy remains accommodative, thereby supporting further improvement in labor market conditions and a return to 2 percent inflation.”
Next Move
Economists in a Bloomberg survey conducted earlier this month put the probability of an April rate increase at 15 percent and chances of a June move at 42 percent. That compares to market-implied projections of 25 percent for April and 54 percent for June, according to pricing in fed funds futures as of Tuesday.
Fed officials have differed publicly about economic prospects, with Governor Lael Brainard on March 7 arguing for patience in tightening monetary policy while Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer on the same day pointed to the “first stirrings” of inflation.
Yellen and her colleagues have singled out uncertainty over China’s outlook as a risk to U.S. growth.
The domestic U.S. economy has mostly been solid, however. Payroll gains have averaged 235,000 over the last six months as the jobless rate matched the Fed’s goal for maximum employment, though measures of long-term unemployment and wage growth suggest the labor market still has room to grow.
Some progress has also been made on the inflation side of the Fed’s dual mandate. The personal consumption expenditures price index, which the Fed targets at 2 percent annual gains, rose 1.3 percent in January from a year earlier, after 13 consecutive months with rises below 1 percent, owing to a slide in energy prices.
The separate consumer price index released Wednesday showed prices, excluding food and energy, rose by a greater-than-anticipated 0.3 percent in February from the previous month.
Oil prices have surged around 40 percent since mid-February, when the cost for a barrel of crude fell to about $26, the lowest since 2003.
Stocks, Currencies
U.S. stock markets, which had slumped by more than 10 percent by mid-February from the start of the year, have also regained ground, with the Standard and Poor’s 500 Index now down just 1.4 percent this year through Tuesday. Meanwhile the dollar, whose strength in 2015 hurt U.S. exports and dented growth, has slipped about 1.3 percent against a broad basket of currencies since Dec. 31.
The Fed’s tightening bias contrasts with aggressive easing abroad.
The European Central Bank unleashed another round of unprecedented stimulus last week that included a cut in a key interest rate further below zero.
In Tokyo, the Bank of Japan held fire on further stimulus Tuesday but laid the groundwork for additional easing after cutting its deposit rate to minus 0.1 percent in January.
China’s central bank cut the main interest rate to a record low in six successive reductions through October, and recently made another reduction to the required-reserve ratio for major banks

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #11 on: March 17, 2016, 02:32:07 PM »




MoneyDJ理財網新聞首頁最新頭條新聞頭條新聞
新聞內文
看回應看回應 | 寫心得寫心得 | 轉寄轉寄 | 收藏收藏 | 列印列印 |


字級設定: 小 中 大 特
葉倫坦承通膨增溫是假象!大摩:Fed今年只會升1次
回應(0) 人氣(2730) 收藏(0) 2016/03/17 12:46
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-03-17 12:46:25 記者 郭妍希 報導
聯邦公開市場委員會(FOMC)語調偏向鴿派,從聯準會(Fed)主席葉倫(Janet Yellen,見圖)的說法來看,最重要的理由就是核心通膨並沒有像數據顯現出來的那麼高。
FOMC不但將今(2016)年實質GDP成長率預估值從去年12月預估的2.4%下修至2.2%,眾所矚目的2016年通膨指標「核心個人消費支出(PCE)平減指數」預估值也維持在1.6%不變,無視1月核心PCE年增率已上升至1.7%的事實。
路透社報導,葉倫16日在會後記者會上指出,通膨最近幾個月的確有攀高跡象,這有部分是受到一些經常波動的暫時性因素推動、但長久來看影響不大。因此,葉倫坦承,雖然核心通膨等指標明顯上升,但她不確定這是否能延續下去。

市場原本認為,美國1月核心PCE指數年增1.7%、增幅創2014年7月新高,已逐漸逼近Fed設定的2%目標,若再不升息,恐怕有貨幣政策趕不上通膨、導致經濟過熱的疑慮。葉倫這番話,明顯是想降低通膨預期。
摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley,通稱大摩)相當贊同葉倫的看法。barron`s.com 16日報導,大摩發表研究報告指出,FOMC聲明強調,Fed會不會繼續升息,端看通膨是否合作;雖然核心PCE指數過去兩個月逐漸揚升,但這主要是拜去年同期基期較低之賜,預估接下來到今年年中為止,核心PCE指數應會開始趨緩。
FOMC最新貨幣政策聲明預估,今年底的利率預估中值落在0.875%,暗示Fed今年只會升兩碼,少於去年12月預測的四碼。
不過,大摩重申,雖然Fed今年希望增加升息次數,但假如核心PCE年增率一如該證券預期,從1月的1.7%一路趨緩至夏季,那麼Fed恐怕難以如願。大摩認為,今年Fed只會升息一次,而時間點會落在12月份。
華爾街日報報導,芝加哥交易所集團(CME Group)的聯邦基金期貨數據顯示,投資人在FOMC發布聲明後預估,4月的升息機率只有12%、低於聲明發布前的26%;6月的升息機率也由稍早的52%下降至38%,12月機率從82%降至69%。
*編者按:本文僅供參考之用,並不構成要約、招攬或邀請、誘使、任何不論種類或形式之申述或訂立任何建議及推薦,讀者務請運用個人獨立思考能力,自行作出投資決定,如因相關建議招致損失,概與《精實財經媒體》、編者及作者無涉


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=a2ae1a07-1d15-40ec-a665-4131a41c82ae&c=MB010000#ixzz438d20aTg
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #12 on: March 17, 2016, 02:33:08 PM »
 



MoneyDJ理財網新聞首頁最新頭條新聞頭條新聞
新聞內文
看回應看回應 | 寫心得寫心得 | 轉寄轉寄 | 收藏收藏 | 列印列印 |


字級設定: 小 中 大 特
FED為何不升息?葉倫:薪資增幅尚未出現持續走高
回應(0) 人氣(563) 收藏(0) 2016/03/17 10:26
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-03-17 10:26:51 記者 賴宏昌 報導
聯準會(FED)主席葉倫(Janet Yellen;見圖)16日在記者會上表示,聯邦公開市場委員會(FOMC)決議維持資產負債表上的龐大長期有價證券規模、藉此維繫寬鬆的金融狀況並降低重大負面衝擊降臨時須將聯邦基金利率降回零的風險。FOMC 16日以通膨仍低於2%目標為由、宣布將聯邦基金利率維持在0.25-0.5%。
葉倫指出,美國非自願兼差人數依舊處於偏高水準、薪資增幅也尚未出現持續走高的跡象。她指出,美國企業投資依舊疲軟、部分可能是因為低油價導致鑽油活動降溫。此外,美國淨出口因外國經濟增長趨緩、美元升值效應猶存而偏弱。
葉倫預期低油價以及美元升值效應將持續壓抑消費者物價整體走勢、預期2-3年內通膨才會回升至2%。她提到,部分以調查所得到的長期通膨預期處於歷史低檔。

美國密西根大學2月調查的未來5年通膨預期自1月的2.7%降至2.5%、平1970年代末期開始統計以來最低紀錄。美國2月排除石油產品不計的進口物價年減2.9%、連續第15個月呈現萎縮、創2001年4月至2002年11月以來最長萎縮紀錄!
葉倫指出,受生產力成長率低迷、美國人放慢成家速度以及海外因素的影響,中性(不鬆、不緊)名目聯邦基金利率目前處於歷史低檔。
Thomson Reuters報導,葉倫16日表示她的確看到就業市場全面轉好跡象、但對於薪資沒有跟著成長感到有點訝異!此外,葉倫還提到,以目前的油價來計算,美國一般家庭一年大約可以省下1千美元左右的油錢,但截至目前為止家庭支出尚未出現應有的強度。
美國商品期貨交易委員會(CFTC)統計顯示,截至3月8日為止當週美元淨多單金額自前一週的74.5億美元降至68.8億美元、11週以來第10度呈現縮減。CFTC統計顯示,日圓投機淨多單部位自此前一週的59,625口擴增至64,333口、再創8年以來新高。
葉倫夫婿、2001年諾貝爾經濟學獎共同得主George A. Akerlof曾說,「菲利浦曲線(Phillips curve)」可能是總體經濟關係當中最重要的。MarketWatch報導,葉倫16日表示菲利浦曲線理論(失業率下滑將推動物價、薪資走高)依舊有效,只是現在得看到失業率進一步下滑才能創造出相同的通膨率。
FED 3月7日公布,美國2月勞動市場狀況指數(Labor Market Conditions Index;LMCI)報-2.4、較1月大減1.6點,創2009年6月(-2.9)以來新低,連續第4個月走低。
美國2月民間整體時薪平均年增幅連續第2個月走跌,自1月的2.5%降至2.2%、創2015年6月以來最低增幅。平均週薪年增率自1月的2.5%大跌至1.6%、創2013年12月以來最低增幅!2月平均週薪月減6.11美元、創2006年開始統計以來最大減額!
2015年第4季美國生產力成長率(美國非農業企業每位受薪員工的每小時實質經濟產出)年率報-2.2%、創2014年第1季(-3.1%)以來最差紀錄。2015年美國生產力成長率報0.7%、創2013年(0.0%)以來新低,遠低於1947-2015年的長期平均值(2.2%);2011-2015年平均值為0.5%、創1978-1982年(0.3%)以來最低5年均值;2007-2015年平均值也僅有1.2%。生產力欲振乏力意味著美國實質(經通膨因素調整後)薪資增幅難以顯著上揚、同時也將令企業獲利面臨壓力。
FRED網站顯示,「未來五年之五年期預期通膨率(5-Year, 5-Year Forward Inflation Expectation Rate;簡稱:5y5y)」3月15日報1.65%;2月11日報1.42%、創2009年3月10日(1.3%)以來新低。值得注意的是,自2003年開始統計以來,這項指標只有在2007-2009年經濟衰退期間低於1.70%。
*編者按:本文僅供參考之用,並不構成要約、招攬或邀請、誘使、任何不論種類或形式之申述或訂立任何建議及推薦,讀者務請運用個人獨立思考能力,自行作出投資決定,如因相關建議招致損失,概與《精實財經媒體》、編者及作者無涉


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=44aa4fa6-774a-420e-86da-bd1126204ed6&c=MB010000#ixzz438dGI5UV
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #13 on: March 17, 2016, 02:34:10 PM »




MoneyDJ理財網新聞首頁最新頭條新聞頭條新聞
新聞內文
看回應看回應 | 寫心得寫心得 | 轉寄轉寄 | 收藏收藏 | 列印列印 |


字級設定: 小 中 大 特
FED偏鴿派、到底在說啥?打壓強勢美元才是真正目的
回應(0) 人氣(883) 收藏(0) 2016/03/17 09:21
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-03-17 09:21:37 記者 陳苓 報導
美國聯準會(FED)態度趨向鴿派,暗示今年升息次數減半,由四次減為兩次。有分析師認為,美元過強導致全球金融過於緊縮,FED偏向鴿派的真正目的是要打壓美元。
巴倫(Barronˋs)網站、今日美國報16日報導,Morgan Stanley Investment Management固定收益投資組合經理人Jim Caron指出,看看美元走勢就知道FED動機。FED發布聲明後,華爾街日報美元指數(The Wall Street Journal Dollar Index)下跌1%至87.59點,創去年10月以來新低。
Caron表示,FED提到「全球經濟和金融發展」出現風險,其實指的就是美元。過去20個月來,FED貿易加權美元指數狂飆24%,導致油價重挫、垃圾債狂瀉、新興市場疲弱。如今美元轉弱可減少傷害,風險資產將再受歡迎。他建議買進垃圾債、投資等級債券、以及新興市場的美元計價債。

他說,FED限制美元升幅,以解決全球金融困境;未來美元將成焦點,美元轉強導致金融市場趨緊,美元放軟可緩和情勢。儘管FED兩大職責為就業和通膨,不包括管理美元走勢,PAAMCO信貸策略師Putri Pascualy說,要是金融情況過於緊縮、美元漲幅過大,終會衝擊勞動和通膨,因此FED聚焦美元並無不妥。
FED打貶美元奏效、美元相對於歐元、日圓雙雙走低。嘉實XQ全球贏家系統報價顯示,16日歐元兌美元強升1.05%、報1.1226;盤中一度升至1.1242,為2月15日以來盤中新高。16日美元兌日圓貶值0.50%、報112.56;一度貶至112.29,為3月9日以來盤中新低。
MoneyDJ新聞17日報導,聯邦公開市場委員會(FOMC)16日結束為期兩天的會議後將聯邦基金利率維持在0.25-0.50%不變,而央行官員對2016年底的利率預估中值則落在0.875%,暗示Fed今年只會升兩碼,少於去年12月預測的四碼。
根據聲明,FOMC認為,緩慢地調整貨幣政策立場,可讓經濟溫和擴張,就業指標也可持續改善。不過,全球經濟與金融動態仍持續構成風險。至於Fed對眾所矚目的2016年通膨指標「核心個人消費支出(PCE)平減指數」預估值則依舊維持在1.6%不變。
*編者按:本文僅供參考之用,並不構成要約、招攬或邀請、誘使、任何不論種類或形式之申述或訂立任何建議及推薦,讀者務請運用個人獨立思考能力,自行作出投資決定,如因相關建議招致損失,概與《精實財經媒體》、編者及作者無涉


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=5bfc7d7d-dbb2-4f3b-b839-5c0f775bf876&c=MB010000#ixzz438dX2FZm
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #14 on: March 19, 2016, 06:17:20 AM »



Bernanke: Monetary policy 'reaching its limits'
Jacob Pramuk   | @jacobpramuk
3 Hours Ago
CNBC.com
10
SHARES
139
COMMENTSJoin the Discussion

Monetary policy in the United States and other developed countries "is reaching its limits," but the Federal Reserve has not yet run out of responses to a potential slowdown, former Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke wrote Friday.

In a blog post for the Brookings Institution, he argued a "balanced monetary-fiscal response" would better boost the economy than monetary tools alone. Bernanke assessed policy options for the Fed, saying negative interest rates hold "modest benefits" but are unlikely.

"I assess the probability that this tool will be used in the U.S. as quite low for the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, it would probably be worthwhile for the Fed to conduct further analysis of this option," Bernanke wrote.
Ben Bernanke
Katie Kramer | CNBC
Ben Bernanke
The U.S. central bank this week held its target short-term interest rate range at 0.25 percent to 0.5 percent. The Fed indicated it could hike twice this year, but as rates remain below historical averages, many market watchers have wondered what the Fed could do to respond to another potential slowdown.

Bernanke said the Fed could use forward guidance, or "talking down" longer-term rates while convincing markets that short-term rates will remain low. If economic weakness warranted a stronger response, the Fed may consider quantitative easing.


A specialist works at the New York Stock Exchange on March 16, 2016, as the decision of the Federal Reserve appears on a TV screen.
Market's message to the Fed: We don't believe you
$100 dollar bills
Battle is swirling around fate of the $100 bill

But more bond-buying could spook markets and may not prove as effective as when it was used after the financial crisis, Bernanke argued. The Fed may then mull following central banks in Europe and Japan to negative interest rates.

On Wednesday, Fed Chair Janet Yellen said the central bank had not "actively" discussed the policy move.

"What I would like to make clear is that this is not actively a subject that we are considering or discussing. The committee continues to feel that we are on a course where the economy is improving and inflation is moving back up," Yellen said.

Bernanke said market aversion to negative rates seems "overdone." He noted that the policy would bring only "modest benefits" with "manageable costs."

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #15 on: March 19, 2016, 06:19:23 AM »



Fed's Bullard: Low rates may be causing low inflation
Everett Rosenfeld   | @Ev_Rosenfeld
3 Hours Ago
Breaking News
11
SHARES
21
COMMENTSJoin the Discussion
James Bullard, president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
David Orrell | CNBC
James Bullard, president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
This is a breaking news story. Please check back for further updates.

Low rates may be causing low inflation, St. Louis Fed President James Bullard theorized in Friday remarks.

Bullard, who is a voting member of this year's Federal Open Market Committee, suggested in prepared remarks for a policy conference in Frankfurt, Germany that the current period of low interest rates and low inflation could potentially persist for a long period of time. Furthermore, raising rates could conceivably increase inflation, he said.

He didn't conclude this argument was correct, but suggested it deserved further analysis.

The St. Louis Federal Reserve president also discussed the normal argument for raising rates, saying the FOMC's policy remains extreme, labor markets are close to normal, and inflation is close to the Fed's target levels.

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #16 on: March 19, 2016, 06:54:46 AM »



Weekend Reading: Did The Fed Just Cage The Bear?
Tyler Durden's pictureSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 03/18/2016 16:45 -0400

Bear Market China Crude Crude Oil Doug Kass Federal Reserve Janet Yellen John Hussman Market Conditions Monetary Policy recovery Technical Analysis Tyler Durden Volatility


 
inShare
 
 
Submitted by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

 

AAA-WeekendReading-Yellen-Bear

The past two week’s have been full of Central Bank interventions starting with the ECB last week and culminating with a more accommodative Fed and BOJ interventions this week.

As stated earlier this week:

“The Fed currently finds itself in a tough spot from a “data dependent” standpoint. Last December, when the Fed Funds rate was increased, the Fed discussed the potential for further rate hikes in 2016 as inflation and employment data strengthened. With that data improving, along with the strong rebound in the financial markets, the Fed runs the risk of losing credibility if they DO NOT hike rates again on Wednesday OR give a very strong indication they will do so at the next meeting.” 
I was wrong. The Fed jumped into the boat with the ECB this week by not only ignoring the recent spate of stronger employment and inflationary pressures, but by lowering economic forecasts and reducing the number of rate hikes this year from 4 to 2. This was, in effect, “Yellen’s Bazooka.” Given the more “accommodative posture,” it is not surprising the financial markets decide to jump into the boat with her.

With the markets currently trading above the 200-dma, the next big resistance levels will be the downtrend that started last summer as shown below. Not surprisingly, this rally is occurring with both fundamental and economic data substantially weaker which continues to restrain the Fed from a further tightening of monetary policy. Or, “bad news” is “good news” for now.

SP500-MarketUpdate-031716

With that, this week’s reading list takes a look at various the Fed’s recent actions and whether Yellen has been able to “cage the bear” for now.

1) Janet Yellen Still Operating In Denial by Stephen Gandel via Forbes

“On Wednesday, the Federal Reserve decided to keep rates where they were for another month, and indicated that it was only likely to raise rates twice in the next year and four times in 2017. The change brings the Fed’s own rate expectations closer in line to what the market was predicting before this week’s FOMC meeting.
 
Nonetheless, the Fed has a history of tricking it self into believing the economy is stronger than it really is—something that has happened a lot during this recovery. And there is reason to believe it is doing so again. If that’s the case, the Fed could be living in denial about its ability to raise interest rates.”
Fed-rate-path-031716

But Also Read: FOMC Doesn’t Believe Own Data by Jeffrey Snider via Alhambra Partners
And Read: Is The Fed’s Tightening Cycle Almost Over? by Matthew Klein via FT AlphaVille
Don’t Miss: Yellen’s March Madness by Macro Man
More: Was There A G-20 Accord Or What Spooked The Fed by Guy Haselmann via ZH
Interesting: Currency War Relief From Fed by Randall Forsyth via Barron’s
2)  Private Sector Debt & Slowing Economy by IronMan via Political Calculations

“The U.S. Federal Reserve released its latest Flow of Funds report for the U.S. economy on 10 March 2016. Let’s run through a short checklist to see what it tells us of the relative health of the U.S. economy….
 
Falling or negative acceleration of private sector debt?
Check.
 
Falling real GDP growth rate?
Check.
 
Let’s go to the chart….”
acceleration-private-debt-in-US-2006-01-thru-2015-12

But Also Read: Stock Crash Coming by Ken Goldberg via The Street
And Read: Earnings Estimates Are Still Falling by Eric Bush via GaveKal Research
Further Reading: Recessions Lead To Prosperity by John Tamny via Forbes
Interesting: Economic Growth Reaching Limits by Gail Tverberg via Our Finite World
3) Markets Are Quiet…Too Quiet by Russ Koesterich via Blackrock

Over the past four weeks, stocks have staged an impressive rebound from their February lows. The equity rebound of the past month is a classic “relief rally,” where investors are relieved conditions are not as bad as they previously feared.
This one has been partly predicated on hopes that China is stabilizing, which helps explain the sharp rise in commodity prices given that China is the biggest commodities consumer.
Unfortunately, signs of real improvement in China are scant. While the U.S. appears to be stabilizing, the Chinese economy remains challenged.
Given the still uneven pace of global growth and tighter financial market conditions, volatility may too be low. This, in turn, suggests the potential for a rise in volatility — which would imply another bout of stocks selling off.
Also Read: Things Aren’t That Bad by Philip Van Doorn via MarketWatch
But Also Read: World Headed For Bear Market by Nomi Prins via Daily Reckoning
Interesting: Fear Indicator Surges To Record High by Josh Lukeman via ZH
CSFB-FearGauge

4) El-Erian: The Road We Are On Is Coming To An End by Ben Moshinsky via BI

“Policymakers will either watch helplessly as the world sinks into a mire of financial volatility and political collapse, or they’ll find a way to unlock the piles of corporate cash sitting on the sidelines, reinvigorating growth.
 
At the moment, it’s a coin flip. ‘The road we’re on is coming to an end,'”
Also Read: A Look At The Latest JOLTS Report by Tyler Durden via Zero Hedge
5) Is The Oil Correction Over by Marc Chandler via Real Clear Markets

“The losses in the May sweet light crude oil futures today have not done much technical damage to the near-term outlook. The contract has been struggled most of the last week to sustain gains above $40.
 
A break of last week’s low of $38 a barrel could be an early indication of the three-legged correction since mid-January has run its course.
 
The first downside target is near $36.75 and then $35.60. Note that the May contract is set to close below the five-day moving average (~$39.40) for the first time since February 24. The RSI is turning, and the MACDs may turn lower in the coming days.“

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #17 on: March 19, 2016, 06:57:43 AM »



Did Jim Bullard Just Signal "Sell"?
Tyler Durden's pictureSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 03/18/2016 15:10 -0400



 
inShare
 
 
Flip-flopping Fed President Jim Bullard has done it again. Having helped spark the recent ramp in mid-Feb with his uber-dovish comments that "tightening was unwise," he now expresses his hawkish opinion - with stocks back nearer record highs - that it would be "prudent policy to edge rates toward normal levels." Is that a "sell'?

 



 

Markets don't care for now - whatever he says, it's a buy!

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #18 on: March 19, 2016, 03:28:00 PM »


Ben S. Bernanke | March 18, 2016 11:00am

What tools does the Fed have left? Part 1: Negative interest rates
Federal Reserve System
Banking
Financial Institutions
 fed
The U.S. economy is currently growing and creating jobs, a situation I hope and expect will continue. We can’t rule out the possibility, though, that at some point in the next few years our economy will slow, perhaps significantly. How would the Federal Reserve respond? What tools remain in the monetary toolbox? In this and a subsequent post I’ll discuss some policy options the Fed might consider, focusing first on negative interest rates. Readers should also be aware of the March 21 conference at the Hutchins Center at Brookings on the tools remaining to monetary and fiscal policymakers should the economy deteriorate.

To anticipate, I’ll conclude in these two posts that the Fed is not out of ammunition, and that monetary policy could help cushion a possible future slowdown. That said, there are signs that monetary policy in the United States and other industrial countries is reaching its limits, which makes it even more important that the collective response to a slowdown involve other policies—particularly fiscal policy. A balanced monetary-fiscal response would both be more effective and also reduce the need to use unconventional monetary tools.

First steps for easing policy

Given where we are today, how would the Fed respond to a hypothetical economic slowdown? Presumably the central bank’s first response, after dropping any plans to raise rates further, would be to cut short-term interest rates, perhaps to zero. Unfortunately, with the fed funds rate (the Fed’s target short-term rate) now between ¼ and ½ percent, and likely to remain relatively low, moving to zero provides much less firepower than in the past. For comparison, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), the Fed’s monetary policy-making body, cut the short-term interest rate by 6.8 percentage points in the 1990-91 recession and its aftermath, by 5.5 percentage points in the 2001 recession, and by 5.1 percentage points at the beginning of the Great Recession in 2007-2008.

With the fed funds rate near zero, the FOMC could next turn to forward guidance, that is, to communicating to markets and the public about the Fed’s policy plans. If the Fed can convince market participants that short-term rates will stay low for some time, it can “talk down” longer-term rates, such as mortgage rates, which are typically more important to consumers, businesses, and investors.[1] (When central bankers get together over a ginger ale, they like to call these efforts “open-mouth operations.”) The evidence suggests that forward guidance can be quite powerful, and if the amount of extra policy support needed is not too great, rate cuts plus guidance might be all that is needed.

But what if not? The Fed could resume quantitative easing (QE), that is, purchases of assets (typically longer-term assets) for the Fed’s portfolio, financed by the creation of reserves in the banking system. Like forward guidance, the goal of QE is to reduce longer-term interest rates to encourage borrowing and spending. It appears to work through at least two channels. First, the Fed’s purchases push up the price and (equivalently) push down the yield of the assets it buys. That effect is transmitted through the system as investors who sold the assets shift into others (such as stocks or corporate bonds). Second, the Fed’s asset purchases can help signal its intention to keep rates low for a long time. [2] For more on QE and its effects, see here.

The Fed employed QE from late 2008 until October 2014, and the policy helped support the U.S. recovery and reduce the risk of price deflation. Other major central banks are using it now. But the FOMC might be reluctant to turn to it again. It’s hard to calibrate, and communicating about it is difficult (as we learned in 2013 when Fed talk about ending QE led to a “taper tantrum” in financial markets). It’s also possible that a new round might be less helpful than before.

For these reasons, before undertaking new QE, the Fed might want to consider other options. Negative interest rates are one possibility.

Negative interest rates: general considerations

Several central banks, including the Bank of Japan and the European Central Bank, have implemented negative interest rates. In practice this means that, instead of receiving interest on the reserves they hold with the central bank, banks are charged a fee on reserves above a threshold. The expectation is that, to avoid the fee, banks will shift to other short-term assets, which drives down the yields on those assets as well, possibly to negative levels. Ultimately, the efforts of banks and other investors to avoid negative returns on the shortest-term assets should lead to declines in a broad range of longer-term interest rates, such as mortgage rates and the yields on corporate bonds. (Generally, though, we’d expect these longer-term rates to remain positive, because of the extra compensation that investors demand for bearing credit risk and for tying up their money for longer periods.) By putting downward pressure on the interest rates most relevant to borrowing and spending decisions, the introduction of negative interest rates should work through the same channels as more standard monetary policies.

The idea of negative interest rates strikes many people as odd. Economists are less put off by it, perhaps because they are used to dealing with “real” (or inflation-adjusted) interest rates, which are often negative. Since the real interest rate is the sticker-price (nominal) interest rate minus inflation, it’s negative whenever inflation exceeds the nominal rate. Figure 1 shows the real fed funds rate from 1954 to the present, with gray bars marking recessions.[3] As you can see, the real fed funds rate has been negative fairly often, including most of the period since 2009. (It reached a low of -3.8 percent in September 2011.) Many of these negative spells occurred during periods of recession; this is no accident, since during recessions the Fed typically lowers interest rates, both real and nominal, in an effort to spur recovery.

negative interest rates

For most of the period reflected in Figure 1, the Fed had no need to implement a negative interest rate in order to ease policy: Until 2008, the nominal fed funds rate was always well above zero, so that ordinary interest rate cuts remained feasible when needed. Since late 2008, however, the fed funds rate has been barely above zero much of the time, so that achieving further reductions in the real funds rate would have required taking the nominal rate negative. In principle at least, how much extra pop could this policy have delivered? If during this period the Fed had decided (and been able) to lower the short-term nominal interest rate to, say, -0.5 percent, then it presumably could have achieved a real fed funds rate half a percentage point lower as well. For example, instead of being -3.8 percent in September 2011, the real fed funds rate might have been around -4.3 percent, with commensurate declines in other interest rates. As you can see, the amount of extra stimulus generated by this further reduction in rates would not have been negligible by any means (roughly, it would have corresponded to two extra quarter-point rate cuts in more normal times), but neither would it likely have been a game-changer.

Negative interest rates: practical issues

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #19 on: March 19, 2016, 03:29:14 PM »


Negative interest rates: practical issues

In August 2010, Federal Reserve staff prepared a memo for the FOMC evaluating the likely effects of cutting the interest rate paid on bank reserves to zero or below. That memo, recently released by the Fed, was lukewarm about negative interest rates for mostly practical reasons. I’ll repeat and address a few points made by the staff, with, of course, the benefit of five years’ hindsight.

Legal and operational constraints

Some of the staff’s concerns were operational (software might need to be modified to handle negative rates, the demand for currency might increase, etc.). These don’t seem that worrisome to me. Of greater concern is the basic legal issue: Does the Fed have the authority to impose a negative interest rate on the reserves banks hold with it? [4] (I don’t pretend to any legal expertise on this matter and my comments should be treated accordingly.)

Outside observers often do not seem to appreciate the legal constraints the Fed faces (regarding the assets it can purchase, for example), which are generally much tighter than those faced by other major central banks. In this instance, the law says that the Fed can pay banks interest on their reserves, but it is not immediately clear whether that authority extends to “paying” negative interest. If it does not, an alternative the Fed might consider is to use its authority to charge banks a fee for accepting their reserves—something it already does for providing other services. A fee on reserves would be essentially equivalent to a negative interest rate. A possible problem with this strategy is that, per the Federal Reserve Act, the Fed’s fees for services must reflect, “over the long run,” the actual costs of providing those services. Presumably the direct cost to the Fed of holding banks’ reserves is low. A separate authorization allows the Fed to charge banks for its costs of supervision and regulation; possibly a fee on reserves could be subsumed under that heading. In short, as pointed out by Chair Yellen while speaking to Congress in February, there remain some legal issues to resolve before the Fed could implement a negative interest rate. For the rest of this post I’ll assume these away.

How negative?

The fundamental economic constraint on how negative interest rates can go is that, beyond a certain point, people will just choose to hold currency, which pays zero interest. (It’s not convenient or safe for most people to hold large amounts of currency, but at a sufficiently negative interest rate, banks or other institutions could profit from holding cash, for a fee, on behalf of customers.) Based on calculations of how much it would cost banks to store large quantities of currency in their vaults, the Fed staff concluded in 2010 that the interest rate paid on bank reserves in the U.S. could not practically be brought lower than about -0.35 percent.[5] Moreover, for various reasons, the 0.35 percentage points would not be fully reflected as declines in other short-term and longer-term rates, they argued. They concluded that the monetary policy benefit of a negative rate would likely be small.

Since then, however, several countries have implemented negative policy rates below the putative limit of -0.35 percent without triggering massive currency hoarding. For example, Switzerland’s policy rate is now at -0.75 percent, Sweden’s at -0.50 percent. Negative rates have even spread to longer-term securities; in Germany, government debt carries a negative rate out to maturities of eight years. The lack of currency hoarding in Europe is intriguing and suggests that the negative rates tool might be more powerful than thought. I am skeptical, though, that U.S. rates could go as negative as in Switzerland or Sweden, at least not without causing significant disruptions to the functioning of some key financial markets and institutions (see below). And a general conundrum is that central banks need market participants to believe negative rates will be in place for a long time for there to be much effect on economically important long-term rates; but if market participants believe that, they’ll have even more incentive to buy vault space and pay the other costs involved in hoarding cash.

Effects on money market funds

There has been much discussion recently about negative rates’ effects on bank profitability, but the 2010 Fed memo was more concerned about money market funds (MMFs), which play a larger role in the U.S. than in Europe or Japan. Like banks, U.S. MMFs have traditionally promised their investors the ability to withdraw at least the full amount that they’ve invested. Not making good on this promise is known as “breaking the buck.” (When a fund did this in 2008 due to losses on its Lehman Brothers commercial paper, it started a highly destructive run on the fund industry.) The Fed staff memo expressed concern that, facing zero or negative short-term interest rates, MMFs could break the buck or shut down as their management fees dried up. [6] MMFs are important providers of short-term funding for both banks and nonfinancial firms; and, although in the long run the cash that flows through MMFs would find some other channel, in the short run a squeeze on MMFs could be disruptive.

Events since the staff memo was written have reduced, but not eliminated, these concerns. MMFs used to be able to maintain the appearance of stability by displaying a constant net asset value of at least $1.00 per share, but Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reforms announced in 2014 (set to be fully implemented this October) have changed that. Starting in October, MMFs will have to display floating net asset values with four decimal places, except for government MMFs (funds with 99.5% or more of their holdings in cash or government securities) and prime funds focused on retail depositors (as opposed to institutional investors). With floating net asset values, MMFs will no longer effectively be promising to pay investors back dollar for dollar, that is, “breaking the buck” is no longer an issue.  However, as mentioned, not all funds must adopt the new approach; those that do not could still be potentially rendered unstable by consistently negative returns on the assets they hold.

Effects on banks and their profits

What about banks? A concern often heard about negative rates in Europe and Japan starts with the presumption that banks are unwilling or unable to pass negative rates on to their depositors. Consequently, it is argued, negative rates for reserves and possibly other assets create a profit squeeze for banks, which could be a problem if it prevents banks from lending normally.

Of course, banks have been dealing with a low-interest-rate environment for a while now, and short-term rates going negative would not help. It seems implausible, though, that modestly negative short-term rates would have large incremental effects on bank profitability or lending. Contrary to the simple story, most U.S. bank funding does not come from small depositors, but from wholesale funding markets, large institutional depositors, and foreign depositors, all of whom would presumably accept a marginally negative rate if the alternative were holding currency.[7] On the asset side of banks’ balance sheets, the interest rates on loans and other investments would almost certainly remain in positive territory, so that banks would continue to enjoy positive interest margins. Finally, to the extent that banks in general were not able to pass on the negative rate to their sources of funding, in a competitive credit market the extra cost would be borne at least in part by borrowers and not just banks. (Though if the central bank’s negative interest rate does not pass through fully to the cost of credit, the benefits of the policy are reduced.)

Disruptions to some financial markets

Fed staff also worried, in 2010, about the effects of negative rates on the functioning of some key financial markets. Notably, the federal funds rate, which the FOMC targets, is determined in the market for overnight loans among banks. Because banks today hold very large quantities of reserves (a residue of QE), they have little need to borrow reserves from each other, with the result that activity in the fed funds market has declined dramatically. For a number of reasons, activity in that market would likely fall still further if rates paid on reserves went to zero or to slightly negative levels, raising the possibility that the FOMC would not have a market-determined value of the federal funds rate to use as a policy target. Were that to happen, though, it would not be particularly problematic for the FOMC to switch the rate it targets; it could even set policy in terms of the interest rate it pays (or receives) on reserves.

Conclusion on negative interest rates

The anxiety about negative interest rates seen recently in the media and in markets seems to me to be overdone. Logically, when short-term rates have been cut to zero, modestly negative rates seem a natural continuation; there is no clear discontinuity in the economic and financial effects of, say, a 0.1 percent interest rate and a -0.1 percent rate. Moreover, a negative interest rate on bank reserves does not imply that the most economically relevant rates, like mortgage rates or corporate borrowing rates, would be negative; in the US, they almost certainly would not be. Negative rates have some costs, in their effects on money market funds for example, but these ought to be manageable. On the other hand, the potential benefits of negative rates are limited, because rates that are too negative would trigger hoarding of currency. Although the European experience suggests that rates can be more negative than the Fed staff estimated in 2010, I don’t think U.S. rates could approach the extreme values seen in Switzerland or Sweden without becoming counterproductive.

Overall, as a tool of monetary policy, negative interest rates appear to have both modest benefits and manageable costs; and I assess the probability that this tool will be used in the U.S. as quite low for the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, it would probably be worthwhile for the Fed to conduct further analysis of this option. We can imagine a hypothetical future situation in which the Fed has cut the fed funds rate to zero and used forward guidance to try to talk down longer-term interest rates. Suppose some additional accommodation is desired, but not enough to justify a new round of quantitative easing, with all its difficulties of calibration and communication. In that scenario, a policy of modestly negative interest rates might be a reasonable compromise between no action and rolling out the big QE gun.

[1] Forward guidance comes in a number of varieties. It can be qualitative, with few specifics (as when the FOMC promised to keep short-term rates low “for a considerable period”) or quantitative, giving numerically explicit circumstances that would prompt a policy change. It can be time-dependent (specifying a date, as when the FOMC in August, 2011 promised to keep rates low “at least through mid-2013”) or state-dependent, tying future policy actions directly to conditions in the economy.

[2] In a variant of quantitative easing, the Maturity Extension Program of 2011, the Fed bought longer-term assets but sold shorter-term assets. This policy, known informally as “Operation Twist,” allowed the Fed to put downward pressure on longer-term interest rates without expanding its total assets holdings.

[3] Here we define the real fed funds rate as the effective fed funds rate minus the year-over-year CPI-U. There are many possible definitions, but they all tell the same story.

[4] This Wall Street Journal article discusses some of the legal issues.

[5] Another potential constraint arises from the fact that the Fed is not allowed to pay interest to the government-sponsored enterprises, such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, even though the GSEs hold reserves at the Fed. Presumably, if the Fed relies on the interest-on-reserves law to charge interest to banks, the GSEs would be exempt. If so, they would have an incentive to accept money from banks for redeposit at the Fed at zero interest, an arbitrage that would reduce the ability of the Fed to maintain a negative rate.

[6] See here for another Fed memo—this one from December, 2008—estimating the effect of a zero-interest-rate environment on money market funds.

[7] According to the FDIC, half (49.3%) of all U.S. commercial bank deposits are insured, which amounts to just over one-third (37.6%) of total liabilities. Presumably almost all small retail deposits are insured, so that this figure is a ceiling for banks’ reliance on such deposits.



Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #20 on: March 19, 2016, 03:46:32 PM »



2016年03月18日 13:01 PM
市场对鸽派美联储押注过甚
工银国际研究部联席主管 程实 为英国《金融时报》中文网撰稿
 

对于美联储3月会议而言,耶伦“怎么说”要比“怎么做”更加重要。由于议息会议之前,期货市场隐含的3月加息概率极低,因此,市场更加关注美联储的前瞻指引。

事实上,美联储在行动上的确没有意外之举,3月17日凌晨宣布维持基准利率在0.25-0.5%区间不变,并将预期加息路径下移。值得注意的是,尽管会议声明和耶伦言论整体中性,并未释放太多的确定信息,但汇市、股市和大宗商品均表现亢奋,表明市场对无偏事实产生了有偏认知。美联储未亮牌,市场已“All in”,市场表现出对鸽派的极度偏爱,这反而加大了未来“失望”的可能。

在美国经济主要数据接连超预期、国际金融市场动荡有所缓和、外部掣肘因素渐次削弱、潜在通胀压力有所上升、内部风格渐趋传统审慎的背景下,美联储未来的加息路径将动态调整,而政策风格将比市场想象的更加鹰派。

从行动上看,美联储应时而变,如预期般放松了政策弓弦,3月议息会议维持基准利率不变,预测点阵显示,2016年加息次数从2015年12月暗示的4次降为2次。从言论上看,美联储传递出的信息是较为模糊的,并未给出明确的政策指引。一方面,会议声明确定了政策方向,但未确定政策力度。美联储肯定了美国经济的稳健复苏,除工业和工资增长等少数数据略显颓势外,美国主要经济指标均表现有力,这奠定了货币紧缩的物质基础。


另一方面,耶伦言论格外谨慎,本质上并未给出明确指引。她认为:第一,美联储未来的加息依旧是一个相机抉择的过程,美联储政策“没有预设路径”,未来4月、6月、7月、9月、11月和12月都有展开行动的可能,但也不确定;第二,美国经济整体复苏稳健,外部不确定性阶段性缓解但并未根本接触,实体经济既有下行风险,也有上行风险;第三,近期通胀数据一直处于高端,但也不能由此认为核心通胀率还会进一步上升;第四,美联储希望保持谨慎,但并不希望行动落后于曲线;第五,利率预测并非预设计划或承诺。

由此可见,耶伦言论非鹰非鸽,由于模糊而显得无偏和中性,这暗示,美联储内部尚未形成统一意见,因此,耶伦表态格外小心。尽管言论本身是无偏的,但市场却始终对美联储放松政策充满迫切的期待,所以,市场对此的解读为,不鹰就是鸽,汇市、股市和大宗商品市场受这种无偏认知的影响,表现亢奋。

从格林斯潘到伯南克再到耶伦,美联储近三任主席均给人以偏好宽松的印象,美联储在过去几年也的确表现得非常鸽派。伯南克为拯救危机中的美国经济出台了一系列超常规货币宽松政策,并在2010-2011年全球加息大潮中始终保持着零利率不变;而耶伦继任美联储主席后,在退出QE和首次加息上表现的格外谨慎。但决定美联储政策风格的,不是人,而是趋势。

美联储常年表现像只老鸽,未来表现则可能像只雏鹰。从政策方向看,美联储越是酝酿许久才改变货币政策,越是不会轻易改变政策方向,美国产出缺口已接近消失,重回宽松不仅不会带来任何增长效应,还会凭空加大通胀效应,长期中得不偿失,因此,任何关于降息、QE4或负利率的猜测都是不专业、不现实的,美国经济基本面早已符合持续加息的条件,政策制定者只要保有基本的专业理性,就不会走任何形式的回头路

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #21 on: March 20, 2016, 02:17:15 PM »



Weaken the dollar — the dovish Fed’s hidden agenda?
Published: March 20, 2016 12:08 PM GMT+8

SHARE THIS ARTICLE

   
0
 
   
0
 
   
0
 
   
0
 
   
Fed Chair Janet Yellen acknowledged the importance of the dollar in policy making at her post-FOMC meeting news conference Wednesday. — Reuters pic
Fed Chair Janet Yellen acknowledged the importance of the dollar in policy making at her post-FOMC meeting news conference Wednesday. — Reuters pic
WASHINGTON, March 20 — In lowering its likely path of future interest rate increases this week, the Federal Reserve pushed down the dollar, perhaps aiming to ease strains caused by clashing monetary policies.

Economists and investors alike were surprised when the US central bank announced Wednesday that it only sees two rate hikes in 2016, half the number it envisioned in December, a more accommodative stance in exiting crisis-era policy.

The Fed also left its benchmark federal funds rate at a historically low 0.25-0.50 per cent, as expected, after raising it in December for the first time in nine years.

The policy-setting Federal Open Market Committee “backed off on the number of expected rate hikes this year. Why, I really don’t know,” said Joel Naroff of Naroff Economic Advisors.

“If you look at the recent data, and the members are supposed to be data-dependent, it is clear that whatever economic issues concern them, it cannot be US economic weakness.”

While spotlighting its more optimistic view on the US economy, the Fed also broadly cited “risks” from the global economic slowdown and financial market turmoil.


 
Several analysts and economists interpreted the language as an effort by the Fed to rein in the dollar’s gains against other currencies. A strong dollar weighs on import prices, thus keeping US inflation in check, and encourages volatility on the financial markets.

Interest rates are on an upward bound in the United States, which attracts investors seeking higher yields and boosts the greenback.

The opposite is true in a number of other central banks, such as in the eurozone and Japan, where authorities are redoubling their efforts to be more accommodative and revive their sluggish economies.

The stark divergence in monetary policies — between negative rates on one side and the potential for hikes on the other — had underpinned the attractiveness of the greenback all through 2015.

The dollar, which gained nearly 10 per cent last year against a basket of currencies, has fallen about three per cent since early March.

Dollar key to Fed puzzle

For the economists at Barclays Research, “the Fed has become increasingly responsive to changes in financial conditions” and too much of that could lead to “policy paralysis.”

“Although not exclusively a story about the relationship between Fed policy and the foreign exchange value of the dollar... we believe it clearly illustrates the conundrum,” they said in a client note.

Fed Chair Janet Yellen acknowledged the importance of the dollar in policy making at her post-FOMC meeting news conference Wednesday.

“Movements in exchange rates... are a factor that any country needs to take into account in deciding what is the appropriate stance of monetary policy,” Yellen said.

But, questioned about influence from the divergence in monetary policies, she insisted: “It does not mean that monetary, US monetary policy is somehow constrained in a way that makes it impossible for our monetary policy to diverge from policies abroad.”

Kit Juckes, a foreign-exchange analyst at Societe Generale, said the Fed “seems committed to driving inflation expectations higher, and in the process, is doing nothing to support the dollar.”

The Fed’s more dovish tone “stymied the policy divergence trade” of investors, noted Patrick O’Hare at Briefing.com.

Some even say it goes farther than that, seeing in the Fed’s more cautious attitude as part of a concerted strategy by the Group of 20 major economies to tamp down the dollar.

“To any conspiracy theorists it’s all become quite clear. There is a global coordinated central bank effort to weaken the (dollar) in play,” said Chris Weston, chief market strategist at IG Markets, evoking a secret “Shanghai Accord”at the G20 meeting of finance chiefs last month.

Julian Jessop of Capital Economics also highlighted the issue: “Is the G20 trying to steer the dollar lower?”

He suggested, however, that the Fed’s dovishness could “soon evaporate” if inflation pressures keep building, forcing it to raise rates and watch the dollar grow stronger. — AFP

- See more at: http://m.themalaymailonline.com/money/article/weaken-the-dollar-the-dovish-feds-hidden-agenda#sthash.kDE2aHPu.dpuf

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #22 on: March 21, 2016, 03:46:18 PM »



Opinion: Is Janet Yellen blind to the rebound in inflation?

By Rex Nutting
Published: Mar 20, 2016 11:33 a.m. ET

     162 
The Fed believes temporary factors are goosing the inflation rate
Bloomberg
Inflation hawks think Janet Yellen is behind the curve and needs to raise interest rates to keep inflation from boiling over.
The U.S. economy, by all indications, is near full employment, and, according to the inflation hawks, that means inflation rates should start rising again.

In fact, the hawks say, inflation is already bubbling, and, if Janet Yellen doesn’t cool things fast, inflation will be at a full boil. Very soon, the hawks say, the inflation rate will exceed 2%, which is the Federal Reserve’s target rate.

Inflation has been below 2% for four years, which is one reason the Fed is keeping money so easy. Most Fed officials don’t think inflation will get back to 2% on a sustainable basis for two more years.

–– ADVERTISEMENT ––




But the data are troubling. Six months ago, inflation barely had a pulse, rising at just 0.2% year-over-year. But now the personal consumption expenditure price index (the Fed’s preferred measure of inflation) is at 1.25%, even as energy prices continue to drop.


Inflation is now rising at a 1.25% rate in the past 12 months.
What’s behind this recent uptick in inflation? One theory is that we have too many jobs. That is, economic theory suggests that when the unemployment rate gets very low, workers gain bargaining power and are able to command higher wages because the demand for labor is higher than the supply. Bosses must raise wages to keep good workers, and then they must raise their selling prices in order to pay those wages.

This relationship is known as the Philips Curve, and it’s been the main theory behind the Fed’s monetary policy for more than 50 years: The Fed tries to keep the unemployment rate just above the level that would fuel inflation. That level is known as the nonaccelerating inflation rate of unemployment, or NAIRU.

There’s only one problem. Although the theory seems quite reasonable on a chalkboard, the empirical evidence shows that it doesn’t work in the real world. NAIRU seems to change over time. Sometimes it seems that NAIRU is above 6%. But right now, NAIRU seems to be below 5%. It could be below 3%. Recent research cited by the Council of Economic Advisers suggests NAIRU could be zero. No one really knows. And no one has a better theory to explain inflation.

So far, Fed officials are doing what seems most practical: They are letting the economy run. Before they feel obligated to slam on the brakes, they’ll want actual evidence of higher prices and higher wages. They’ll cautiously raise rates away from zero but maintain accommodative policy for a while longer, especially with risks of global contagion rising.

But what about the spike in the PCE price index in the past few months? Surely that indicates that NAIRU has been breached! Isn’t it time to get serious about raising rates?

Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen was asked about that at her latest press conference on Wednesday and she said she wasn’t convinced.

“Given that the economy is now close to our maximum employment objective, hopefully inflation is moving up,” Yellen said, before switching to the other hand. “As you mention, recent readings on inflation have moved up. There may be some, you know, I want to warn that there may be some transitory factors that are influencing that.”


Jewelry and watch prices have surged in the past two months.
In other words, just as transitory declines in oil prices and the one-time strengthening of the dollar have pushed the PCE price index far below the Fed’s target, transitory increases in other prices are now pushing the index higher. But Yellen doesn’t think it’ll last, in either case. Oil prices and the dollar will stabilize, and the transitory price increases seen over the past few months will also fade away.

Now, this may seem like cherry picking the data: Yellen picks which prices matter to her, and disregards the rest. But there is a method to her madness.

Remember, inflation is a general and sustained increase in prices, not just temporary increases or decreases for a few goods and services. What the Fed cares about, what we care about, is the pace of underlying inflation. Transitory spikes or dips aren’t generalized inflation; that’s just the markets working out the ebbs and flows of supply and demand.

Economists have a lot of tools to help them figure out whether the underlying rate of inflation has changed or whether it’s just temporary factors. One method is to use core inflation measures, which automatically ignore volatile food and energy prices. Core inflation does a pretty good job of predicting future inflation rates, but it offends people who think food and energy prices matter in the real world.

Another method has been devised by the Dallas Fed. Its trimmed mean PCE index strips out whatever prices are rising or falling most in a given month, ignoring the outliers on the theory that the biggest price changes are reactions to shocks in individual markets, not part of a general trend.

Researchers at the Dallas Fed point out that the recent spike in the PCE index has been driven by unusually large price increases for goods such as apparel, jewelry, motor vehicles, and drugs, and for services such as air fares, school lunches, tickets for spectator sports and banking fees.

Apparel prices, for instance, are up at a 14% annual rate in the first two months of the year, compared with a 0.9% decrease in 2015. Jewelry and watch prices are up at a 62% annual rate, compared with a 0.7% drop in 2015. Motor vehicle prices are up at a 3.2% rate, compared with a 0.2% rise last year. Drug prices are up at an 11.5% rate, compared with a 1.7% increase last year.

Most likely, the recent spike in the PCE index is due to temporary shocks, not to an acceleration in underlying inflation. There’s no urgency to raise rates on account of hyperinflation lurking right around the corner. In reality, the Fed would be ecstatic if it could get inflation back to 2% any time soon

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #23 on: March 21, 2016, 04:42:55 PM »



Fed's Lacker says he is confident inflation will return to 2%
CNBC.com staff   | @CNBC
14 Mins Ago
Breaking News
COMMENTSStart the Discussion

This story is developing. Please check back for further updates

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #24 on: March 22, 2016, 10:39:24 AM »



美債》葉倫心腹拋4月升息震撼彈!殖利率衝高
回應(0) 人氣(550) 收藏(0) 2016/03/22 08:30
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-03-22 08:30:45 記者 郭妍希 報導
聯準會(Fed)官員突然拋出最快4月就可能升息的震撼彈,消息傳來帶動日前因聯邦公開市場委員會(FOMC)聲明偏向鴿派而走跌的殖利率跳漲。
MarketWatch報導,Tradeweb報價顯示,紐約債市21日尾盤時,美國10年期公債殖利率上漲5個基點至1.921%;對聯準會(Fed)利率決策較敏感的2年期公債殖利率上漲3.1個基點至0.870%;30年期公債殖利率上漲4.8個基點至2.722%。公債價格與殖利率呈反向走勢。
美國債市本週五(3月25日)因適逢耶穌受難日(Good Friday)將休市一天,市場交投在長週末來臨前也顯得清淡,使債市的波動遭到誇大。

舊金山聯邦儲備銀行總裁John C. Williams (見圖) 21日在接受Market News International專訪時表示,聯準會(Fed)可能在4月或6月升息,且要不是因為國際因素,Fed本應更早調升利率。Williams還說,通膨的進展相當「令人振奮」。
亞特蘭大聯邦儲備銀行總裁Dennis Lockhart也和Williams有相同看法,他21日宣稱經濟已經夠穩健,就算4月升息也承受得住。里奇蒙聯邦儲備銀行總裁Jeffrey Lacker 21日則說,通膨應該會在未來幾年逐漸加溫,朝Fed預設的2%目標邁進。
Williams一向被視為Fed主席葉倫(Janet Yellen)的人馬,他的這番說詞和葉倫3月16日於貨幣政策記者會上的說法並不一致,似乎是認為市場如今預期的升息機率太低,想要藉此拉高一些。
路透社報導,葉倫16日當時指出,通膨最近幾個月的確有攀高跡象,這有部分是受到一些經常波動的暫時性因素推動、但長久來看影響不大。因此,葉倫坦承,雖然核心通膨等指標明顯上升,但她不確定這是否能延續下去。
Fed還有數名官員本週會陸續發表談話,市場態度也轉趨觀望。MarketWatch報導,CRT Capital Group公債策略部主管David Ader表示,本週即將登場的Fed官員態度大多偏向鷹派(即費城聯邦儲備銀行總裁Patrick Harker、聖路易斯聯邦儲備銀行總裁James Bullard),但在FOMC上週發表聲明之後,很難想像Fed的官方立場會馬上翻盤。


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=5ada3406-ecab-44ca-a495-d2eedd18cf57&c=MB010000#ixzz43auzHFf5
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #25 on: March 22, 2016, 06:05:05 PM »



财经  2016年03月22日
联储局官员:美经济数据佳 4月料升息

(纽约22日讯)联储局两名官员表示,美国可能有必要升息,最快就在下个月会议上,理由是儘管国外经济有阻力,但是美国经济数据相当不错。

亚特兰大联邦储备银行行长洛克哈特(Dennis Lockhart)周一在乔治亚州萨凡纳指出,「经济数据显示,动能充沛,接下来的几次会议,有理由进一步採取行动,最快可能在4月底的会议就升息。」

美国联邦公开市场委员会(FOMC)下一次开会时间是在4月26日至27日。

上周FOMC暂缓升息,同时把今年升息预估次数减半,去年12月原本预估今年升息4次,如今降为2次,因为全球经济成长可能影响美国经济。

洛克哈特立场中立,今年在FOMC没有投票权。他对美国经济审慎乐观的看法,与旧金山联邦储备银行行长威廉斯(John Williams)一致。

先前威廉斯接受国际市场新闻访问时说,「其他条件不变,假设一切情况基本相同,数据继续以我所希望和预期的態势呈现,那么4月或6月肯定是升息可能的时间点。

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #26 on: March 23, 2016, 09:36:41 AM »



《美債》鴿派大將倒戈、暗示升息近眼前!殖利率翻漲
回應(0) 人氣(234) 收藏(0) 2016/03/23 08:22
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-03-23 08:22:21 記者 郭妍希 報導
身為聯準會(Fed)鴿派大將的芝加哥聯邦儲備銀行總裁Charles Evans (見圖)對經濟前景發表樂觀談話、還暗示下一次升息或許近在眼前,讓投資人驚訝不已,原本因比利時恐怖攻擊案而走揚的公債價格頓時紅翻黑。
MarketWatch報導,Tradeweb報價顯示,紐約債市22日尾盤時,美國10年期公債殖利率上漲1.4個基點至1.935%;對聯準會(Fed)利率決策較敏感的2年期公債殖利率上漲2.3個基點至0.892%;30年期公債殖利率下跌不到1個基點至2.716%。公債價格與殖利率呈反向走勢。
Evans 22日表示,以當前的經濟展望來看,Fed今年應該會升息兩次。他還說,Fed利率預期點狀圖(dot plot)的中值落點相當合理。

雖然Evans今(2016)年並非聯邦公開市場委員會(FOMC)的投票成員,但由於他是重量級鴿派成員,這次立場竟然丕變,讓愈來愈多人相信聯準會(Fed)或許打算在4月或6月升息。FOMC才剛在上週維持利率不變,還把今年預估的升息次數從原本的四次減少至兩次,理由是全球經濟依舊充滿疑慮。
舊金山聯邦儲備銀行總裁John C. Williams昨(21)日在接受Market News International專訪時才剛表示,Fed可能在4月或6月升息,且要不是因為國際因素,Fed本應更早調升利率。Williams還說,通膨的進展相當「令人振奮」。Williams一向被視為Fed主席葉倫(Janet Yellen)的人馬。
債券價格22日稍早一度因為布魯塞爾爆炸案走走強,但不久就在Evans發表談話的影響下翻黑,也讓殖利率走高。
歐洲公債價格原本也因為恐攻事件上揚,但德國企業信心優於預期,卻使價格漲幅收斂。德國經濟研究所(Ifo Institute)公布,3月企業信心指數從2月的105.7點上升至106.7點。
MarketWatch報價顯示,德國10年期公債殖利率22日稍早一度下挫最多5個基點,終場跌幅則收斂至2.5個基點、來到0.210%


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=82a3b5cb-ea92-45e3-a572-fe18e0b6afe0&c=MB010000#ixzz43gVgJtAz
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Offline ongchef

  • Marquess
  • ********
  • Posts: 15,585
Re: FED
« Reply #27 on: March 23, 2016, 10:06:05 AM »
 :D :D :D...........su dou nou chan de ren yu cai copycat he sou fei hua!!! :D :D :D :thumbsup: :handshake: :handshake:

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #28 on: March 23, 2016, 08:18:34 PM »



Fed Chair Yellen has a mini revolt on her hands
Steve Liesman   | @steveliesman
7 Hours Ago
CNBC.com
60
SHARES
74
COMMENTSJoin the Discussion
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen.
Joshua Roberts | Reuters
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen.
Fed Chair Janet Yellen has something of a mini revolt on her hands.

Four of the 17 members of the Federal Open Market Committee have now publicly indicated their disagreement with the dovish guidance in last week's policy statement and in comments from Fed Chair Janet Yellen at her press conference.

The latest dissenter is Patrick Harker, the new president of the Philadelphia Fed, who said in a speech Tuesday night that the Fed should "get on with" rate hikes and consider another move in April.

He joins centrists John Williams of San Francisco and Dennis Lockhart of Atlanta who earlier this week said the Fed should consider an April hike. Esther George, the Kansas City Fed president who is thought to be among the more hawkish Fed members, dissented at the meeting last week and called for a 25 basis point hike.

Only one of the four dissenters is a voter this year, suggesting that Yellen has the votes she needs if she wants to keep rates unchanged at the April meeting.

But their viewpoints raise questions about just how secure those votes are and whether other hawkish members of the FOMC, for example Loretta Mester of Cleveland, or even Fed Vice Chair Stanley Fischer, could be leaning toward a hike next month. They also present something of a public challenge to Yellen's leadership.

While Yellen said at her press conference that April, like all meetings, was a live meeting, she otherwise indicated she was wary of rate hikes in the near future.

"Proceeding cautiously in removing policy accommodation at this time will allow us to verify that the labor market is continuing to strengthen despite the risks from abroad," Yellen said.

"Such caution is appropriate given that short-term interest rates are still near zero, which means that monetary policy has greater scope to respond to upside than to downside changes in the outlook."

In its policy statement, the Fed raised its level of concern over global economic weakness and declined to say whether the risks were balanced toward stronger or weaker economic growth. Some observers believe the Fed needs to asses the risks as balanced before it will hike again.

In addition, the average number of rate hikes forecast this year by FOMC members declined to just two from four. The combination of the statements, Yellen's press conference and changes to the rate outlook led markets to price in a rate hike only as soon as September, where it previously had pegged June

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #29 on: March 23, 2016, 08:19:55 PM »



QUICK FIND BEN, AND FIRE UP THE HELICOPTERS WITH COLD HARD CASH FROM THE SKIES
Our Reporter | March 23, 2016
download (1)
After more than 600 interest-rate cuts and $12 trillion of asset purchases since the financial crisis failed to move the inflation needle enough, central banks may need to head even deeper into uncharted territory.
The way to get the world out of its disinflationary rut could lie in them directly financing government stimulus — a strategy known as deploying “helicopter money” after a 1969 proposal from Nobel laureate Milton Friedman.
Economists at Citigroup Inc., HSBC Holdings Plc and Commerzbank AG all published reports to investors on the topic in the past two weeks, while hedge fund titan Ray Dalio sees potential in the idea. European Central Bank officials are already squabbling about what President Mario Draghi calls a “very interesting concept.”

“We don’t know for certain that ‘helicopter money’ will be the next attempted silver bullet, however the topic is receiving considerably more attention,” said Gabriel Stein, an economist at Oxford Economics Ltd. in London. “The likelihood is reasonably high of some form being implemented somewhere.”

The theory — never attempted by a modern major economy — is to fuse monetary and fiscal policies now both running out of room. Cash-strapped governments sell short-term debt straight to their central bank for newly printed money that is then injected straight into the economy via tax cuts or spending programs. The usual and currently-constrained intermediaries, like banks, are bypassed.
The idea is to spur spending and investment directly rather than influence bond yields or sentiment. Central banks can be saved from permanently underwriting governments by establishing growth or inflation limits.
In a 2002 speech that earned him the nickname “Helicopter Ben,” then-Federal Reserve Governor Ben S. Bernanke said taking to the skies would “almost certainly be an effective stimulant to consumption and hence to prices.”
Reviving the debate is the failure of inflation to accelerate in much of the world despite Bank of America Corp.’s calculation that as of early February central banks had cut rates 637 times and spent $12.3 trillion on assets. It also estimated 489 million people now live in countries where rates are negative.
Runaway Inflation
To Dalio, the founder of $154 billion Bridgewater Associates, that means the next step should be to do even more to spark demand.
“If you look around the world, our risk is not inflation and our risk is not overheating economies,” he told Bloomberg Television’s Erik Schatzker on March 3. “They’re going to have to go more directly to spenders.”
So what’s not to like? Critics say spraying money around would eventually mean Weimar-style runaway inflation and bloated government debt. The independence and credibility of central banks would be potentially damaged. And the policy could backfire if households sit on the money.
Bundesbank President Jens Weidmann has already said “helicopter money” would “rip huge holes in central bank balance sheets” and leave governments and taxpayers to “pay the bill in the end.”
‘Free Lunch’
Then there’s the law. The ECB is prohibited from financing states and lacks a single Treasury to work with, while the Fed is constrained in what assets it can buy.
“The helicopter option is simple, easily implemented and, for some, offers the closest thing to a free lunch,” said Stephen King, senior economic adviser to HSBC. “If this sounds too good to be true, that’s because it is.”
Draghi last week said that while the ECB has not studied the concept “it clearly involves complexities, both accounting-wise and legal-wise.” Colleague Peter Praet, nevertheless declined to rule it out as an option when asked.
The debate may remain academic. In the U.S., prices are shifting higher and the International Monetary Fund still forecasts inflation in advanced economies to accelerate next year to 1.7 percent from 1.1 percent.
Revisiting the Unimaginable
“I don’t think helicopter money gets rolled out quite yet,” said Ewen Cameron-Watt, chief investment strategist at BlackRock Inc. “You need a considerable downturn and further decline in inflation expectations first.”
Still, if economies do slide anew, Jonathan Loynes of Capital Economics Ltd. in London, noted central banks have shown willingness to revisit once-rejected ideas.
“The clear lesson of recent years has been that seemingly unimaginable policy measures previously confined to the theory or history books can become reality if extraordinary economic circumstances persist for long enough,” he said

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #30 on: March 24, 2016, 06:09:20 AM »



Bob Pisani Says "The Fed Is Alarmed By Market Complacency" - Why This Is A Big Problem For Yellen
Tyler Durden's pictureSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 03/23/2016 15:11 -0400

Bob Pisani Copper Dennis Lockhart None St Louis Fed St. Louis Fed Steve Liesman


 
inShare
1
 
"Is the Fed confusing the market?"

That is how Bob Pisani' latest CNBC column begins, to which our logical response is "what market" - the "market" which any time it drops by 10% see every central bank unleashes historic jawboning and/or unprecedented monetary easing with QE (as in the case of the ECB now monetizing private bonds); the market which can not go below 2,000 without Yellen admitting her "dots" were twice as much as they should have been;  the market which has been propped up only by corporate buybacks funded by cheap debt courtesy of... the Fed.

That market?

But before we mock Bob, he does make some interesting points, namely one swhich we heard as recently as one week ago from one of Pisani's co-workers. This is what Bob says:

It was a beautiful narrative: the FOMC last week clearly reflected a dovish tone, implying two rate hikes in 2016, while modestly upgrading the state of the economy. Only Esther George of Kansas City, a hawk, dissented.
 
But that narrative is starting to change, for reasons that are confusing the market. This morning James Bullard, head of the St. Louis Fed and an FOMC voter, implied in an interview that an April rate hike was possible. He joins Patrick Harker from Philadelphia Fed, a hawk and nonvoter, who also said April was on the table. Charles Evans and Dennis Lockhart, while both nonvoters, also made hawkish comments recently.
 
This has only become more relevant now that Bullard, who is a voting member and perceived to be a centrist, has come out and implied the Fed may be getting behind the curve.
 
Bullard appeared to have an immediate effect on currency and commodity markets this morning: the dollar strengthened, and commodities dropped, with copper down 1.8 percent, gold down 2.5 percent, oil down 3 percent. Perhaps more importantly, the dollar index has been up four days in a row. It has now retraced 60 percent of the loss it saw in the days immediately following the FOMC meeting, when the dollar index dropped a stunning 2.3 percent in two days.
Bob's conclusion:

What happened? It's possible the Fed has seen the market reaction and become alarmed by the complacency. It's true, the probabilities for even a June rate hike—let alone April--declined dramatically in the face of the Fed meeting. That may have alarmed the Fed, and so some members may feel the need to keep the markets more alert.
Why is all of this relevant? Because it is nearly a carbon-copy of what none other than one of the Fed's favorite journalists, Steve Liesman, said last week when he dared to ask Yellen if the Fed has lost credibility:

Madam Chair, as you know, inflation has gone up the last two months. We had another strong jobs report. The tracking forecasts for GDP have returned to two percent. And yet the Fed stands pat while it's in a process of what it said at launch in December was a process of normalization.... Does the Fed have a credibility problem in the sense that it says it will do one thing under certain conditions, but doesn't end up doing it?
Recall what we said one week ago:

"if the Fed can not make a favorable impression on those who are paid to at least pretend that they "get it", what about the rest of the market.  Worst of all, since the Fed peddles only in faith and "perpetuating the narrative" du jour, in this case one that the Fed has credibility despite not doing what it has explicitly said it would do, how long until it is not just Liesman, but everyone else, who openly admits that the Fed's emperor is fully naked."
Today we got one answer when one of the other people who are paid to pretend all is well, Bob Pisani, openly dared to question the status quo regime.

Which is concerning, not so much because the Fed may be having a "mini-revolt" on her hands within the Fed as Liesman asked - Yellen can easily ignore any opposing voices; the far bigger revolt is when the paid propaganda, such as Liesman and Bob, openly start asking questions. It is that lack of faith that is most troubling to Yellen, as it is this close from admitting the Fed emperor has been naked all along.

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #31 on: March 24, 2016, 07:30:50 AM »



《歐股》FED再嗆四月升息!油、礦股齊跌,歐元連四貶
回應(0) 人氣(198) 收藏(0) 2016/03/24 06:12
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-03-24 06:12:45 記者 陳瑞哲 報導
歐洲油、礦股雙雙失速,導致歐股周三反攻失利,泛歐Stoxx 600指數全場開高走低,終場由紅翻黑收跌0.07%。

聯準會(FED)官員近期頻頻對升息加重口氣,使得美元再度轉強,聖路易分行總裁布拉德(James Bullard)周三指出,美國景氣大至不變,四月升息應需認真考慮。費城分行總裁哈克(Patrick Harker)日前甚至表示,未來升息步伐有必要加快。

歐元聞訊走貶,歐元兌美元尾盤貶值0.32%至1.118、英鎊下挫0.63%至1.4115,兩者均已連續四日貶值。

原物料價格好壞看美元臉色,隨著美元走強,原物料類股近期跌勢有加遽跡象,英美鉑金公司(Anglo American)當日重挫5.39%、原物料交易商嘉能可(Glencore)同步收跌3.97%。

石油類股同樣表現不佳,歐洲油田服務供應商Amec Foster Wheeler、TGS-NOPEC Geophysical分跌大跌7.74%與5%。

比利時首都布魯塞爾22日遭恐怖攻擊,德國隔日即通過加碼國防預算,藉以安定人心,使得旅遊類股當日成功止跌,德國第一大航空公司漢莎航空(Lufthansa)終場收漲2.88%,法國旅館集團收高0.2%


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=e2d821c4-6047-4594-8df7-87df922e820f&c=MB010000#ixzz43lqZMsxs
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #32 on: March 24, 2016, 11:36:05 AM »



搞叛變、多名FED官員挺4月升息!美元指數飆1週高
回應(0) 人氣(380) 收藏(0) 2016/03/24 09:16
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-03-24 09:16:39 記者 陳苓 報導
上週美國聯準會(FED)的政策會議意外偏向鴿派,暗示將緩慢調升利率,升息次數也從四次減為兩次,市場歡欣鼓舞。不料好日子不到一週就風雲變色,數名FED官員公開與葉倫唱反調,齊呼應在四月升息。
CNBC、MarketWatch、路透社報導,FED旗下的聯邦公開市場委員會(FOMC),17名成員有5人搞叛變。最新的反叛成員是費城聯準銀行總裁哈克(Patrick Harker),他認為FED應考慮四月升息。聖路易聯準銀行總裁布拉德(James Bullard)也說, 該是FED動手的時候了,他們三月沒採取行動,將視四月數據做出判斷。
在此之前,舊金山聯準銀行總裁威廉斯(John Williams)和亞特蘭大聯準銀行總裁洛克哈特(Dennis Lockhart)都力挺四月升息可能。堪薩斯聯準銀行總裁喬琪(Esther George)更在上週會議投下反對票,認為應在三月升息。唱反調的五名成員,只有兩人在FOMC有投票權,意味葉倫四月若想按兵不動,應該仍能取得足夠票數,怕是到時其他鷹派成員跑票,公開挑戰葉倫權威。 FOMC下次會議在4月26、27日。

FED頻頻放話,原本放下心中大石的投資人轉趨緊張。芝加哥交易所集團(CME Group)聯邦基金利率期貨顯示,四月升息機率從22日的7%、23日跳升至14%。儘管當前市場多認為,四月升息可能性極小,但是倘若通膨逼近FED的2%目標,就業市場維持穩健、FED官員看好美國經濟,或許市場觀點也會跟著轉變。
FED官員敲邊鼓,美元飆升,站上一週新高。追蹤美元相對六大主要貨幣的美元指數,23日上漲0.3%、至95.980,為3月16日以來新高。
要是FED真的在四月升息,美元或許將轉強。Business Insider Australia報導,澳洲西太平洋銀行(Westpac)的G10外匯策略師Richard Franulovich認為,美國經濟領先指標頻傳喜訊,美元不會繼續被看貶,未來有望飆漲。Franulovich指出,3月份紐約州製造業景氣指數自前月的-16.64跳升至+0.62,創8個月新高。費城FED指數也從-2.8增至+12.4,為13個月高。里奇蒙FED指數更從-4飆至+22,逼近6年新高,徹底逆轉了去年的衰退敗象。他認為這些數據不是雜音,指出了真正的新趨勢,預期未來幾週公布的芝加哥採購經理人指數(PMI)和ISM PMI也將報佳音。
Franulovich表示,美元強彈有前車之鑑,去年三月政策會議上,FED態度也意外偏向鴿派,導致美元走低,但是去年下半美元就反轉上漲,當前情況幾乎和去年如出一轍。去年年初FED立場轉變,美元重貶,但是去年Q2季末,數據好轉,FED疑慮消退,升息之說又重回檯面,帶動美元走升。Franulovich認為,今年類似情況或許將會重演。
MarketWatch等多家外電報導,芝加哥聯邦儲備銀行總裁伊文斯(Charles Evans)為鴿派大將,連他都對經濟前景發表樂觀談話,還預估央行今年會升息兩次,讓市場更加相信,美國也許4月或6月就會升息。美國公債殖利率的走勢也預測,Fed主席葉倫應該會達成2%的通膨目標。(鴿派支持採用低利率政策、刺激成長。鷹派則偏好採行較高利率,以免通膨失控。


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=2f68a4db-d34e-4ee1-bc09-60a2e7322411&c=MB010000#ixzz43mqJzslz
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #33 on: March 24, 2016, 02:21:17 PM »



The probability of an April rate hike just doubled

By Joseph Adinolfi
Published: Mar 23, 2016 12:50 p.m. ET

     25 
‘I think we need to get on with it,’ Fed official says
Reuters
St. Louis Fed President James Bullard, a voting member of the Fed’s rate-setting committee, hinted that an April hike was still possible in remarks from Wednesday.
The decidedly hawkish tone embraced by Federal Reserve officials so far this week is forcing investors to rethink the likelihood of an interest rate hike at the central bank’s April meeting.

The CME’s FedWatch too, used to gauge the market’s view of probability for Fed interest-rate hikes, shows that traders were pricing in a 14% chance of a hike in April on Wednesday, compared with just 7% a day ago.

The Fed will announce its next rate-hike decision at 2 p.m. Eastern Time on April 27, at the close of its next two-day policy meeting.



Note: The data in this chart reflects current market activity. a CME Group spokeswoman confirmed. The presence of Tuesday’s date in the top right corner is an error on the CME website.
To be sure, an April hike remains unlikely.

“The probability went from very low to still low,” said Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist at J.P. Morgan.

But the shift in expectations is significant because it shows that recent remarks from Fed officials have muddled market participants’ view of the central bank’s intended path for rising interest rates.

On Monday, both Atlanta Fed President Dennis Lockhart and San Francisco Fed President John Williams floated the idea of raising interest rates in April.

Neither Lockhart nor Williams are voting members this year. But St. Louis Fed President James Bullard is. And on Wednesday, he said there was a “credible” case for the Fed to hike interest rates last week.

“We didn’t do it, so now we can look at April and see what the data look like when we get to April,” Bullard said.

The views of those Fed officials contrast sharply with the central bank’s cautious outlook at the conclusion of its March meeting just a week ago.

An updated policy statement released after the March meeting showed the Fed remains wary of global economic and financial conditions and their potential impact on the U.S. economy.

And a new set of projections released alongside the statement showed a plurality of Fed policy makers now expect just two rate increases in 2016, down from an estimate of four back in December.

The Fed declined to raise interest rates in March, despite the fact that strong labor-market data and signs of rising inflation caused some to speculate about a possible hike.

Even Chicago Fed President Charles Evans, a notorious dove, presented slightly more hawkish view in comments from Tuesday. Evans said he would back a “wait-and-see approach” at the Fed until there’s evidence that the recent uptick in U.S. inflation has been sustained. But noted that U.S. economic fundamentals are “quite good.”

Perhaps the most hawkish comments came from Philadelphia Fed President Patrick Harker who said the Fed should seriously consider raising rates in April.

“I think we need to get on with it,” he said. Harker won’t become a voting member of the Fed’s policy committee until next year.

With little in the way of market-moving data released so far this week, it’s likely that the Fed speakers are responsible for a bulk of the shift in expectations, Feroli said.

“I think the Fed speak recently has been perceived as more hawkish than the developments last week,” Feroli said.

Fed Chairwoman Janet Yellen did caution that April remains a “live” meeting during a news conference last week.

However, many analysts continue to believe a hike in April remains extremely unlikely, but that view could shift quickly. That is especially the case if inflation continues to move toward the Fed’s 2% target, the job market remains healthy and Fed officials continue to express optimism about the U.S. economy and less concern about global growth

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #34 on: March 24, 2016, 08:55:45 PM »


FOCUS
GLOBAL
LOCAL
CORPORATE FIGURE
RESEARCH
GOLDMAN TO FED: STOP WORRYING SO MUCH ABOUT THE STRONGER DOLLAR
Our Reporter | March 24, 2016
images (2)
From : Rachel Evans
It’s time for the Federal Reserve to end its dollar fixation.
That’s the takeaway from a Goldman Sachs Group Inc. report Wednesday that suggests the U.S. currency poses little threat to the Fed’s inflation goals, challenging policy makers’ comments to the contrary. That’s good news for dollar bulls who are betting on expanded monetary-policy divergence between the U.S., Europe and Japan.
Inflation is at the heart of the Fed’s debate about the timing of interest-rate increases as officials look to normalize monetary policy after seven years of near-zero interest rates. With a stronger dollar not translating into significantly cheaper import prices, Goldman Sachs suggests the central bank faces fewer headwinds to hiking rates than markets are currently pricing in.
“The majority of the effects of a stronger dollar on import prices have already been realized,” New York-based analysts Zach Pandl and Elad Pashtan wrote in the note. “Inflation data to date appears to be more closely tracking a path with less dollar pass-through to core inflation” than implied by the Fed’s projections for consumer prices.
Bond Market
Investors agree. The gap between yields on Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities and nominal 10-year notes, known as the break-even rate, climbed to the highest since August earlier this week. The measure indicates inflation will average about 1.59 percent over the next decade, compared with 1.2 percent last month. The Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index, which tracks the currency versus 10 peers, advanced 0.7 percent on Wednesday, extending its longest streak of gains since the period ending Feb. 16.
Fed Chair Janet Yellen said after last week’s policy meeting that the strength of the U.S. currency may continue to weigh on consumer prices. Officials lowered their forecasts for price gains this year to just to 1.2 percent, from 1.6 percent previously.
The Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index has weakened 2.7 percent this year, after a 9 percent gain in 2015 and an 11 percent rally the year before.
“Although any pent-up pass-through effects from dollar appreciation remain a downside risk to core PCE inflation, that alone does not appear to be a compelling reason for lower inflation over the course of the coming two years,” Pandl and Pashtan wrote.

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #35 on: March 24, 2016, 08:57:13 PM »



華爾街預言家:聯儲不會加息 防特朗普冒起
03月24日(四) 15:42   

聯儲局
【on.cc東網專訊】歐洲太平洋資本行政總裁、有「華爾街預言家」之稱的Peter Schiff在接受外國傳媒訪問時表示,鑒於美國經濟前景不斷惡化,聯儲局很快會投降,並打消所有加息預期,因聯儲局目前已不能自拔,情況正如2008年金融危機之初一樣。

Schiff強調,聯儲局之所以不加息,是不希望看到尚未浮出水面的經濟衰退,在未來幾個月的總統選舉成為公眾話題。如果這種情況出現,共和黨總統候選人特朗普當選的勝算會再高幾成,這是聯儲局主席耶倫不惜任何代價都要避免的。

故此,聯儲局的加息時機只會一再押後,到最後是今年內都不會加息

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #36 on: March 28, 2016, 09:43:00 AM »



Fed's Williams: US doing fine, world isn't
CNBC.com staff   | @CNBC
22 Mins Ago
CNBC.com
7
SHARES
2
COMMENTSJoin the Discussion
John Williams, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco
Getty Images
John Williams, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco
A member of the U.S. central bank's monetary policy-setting committee believes global developments are preventing the world's largest economy from returning to normalized interest rates.
John Williams, President & CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, told CNBC on Monday that he believe the U.S. economy is doing "quite well," pointing to stable inflation and strong employment growth.

"The real issue is the global financial and economic developments, there's uncertainty about what's happening around the world and how that feeds back to the dollar and the U.S. economy," he told 'Asia Squawk Box.'

Williams reiterated that the central bank's policy decisions would remain data dependent, singling out inflation as one of the Fed'stop concerns.

"We've been missing our 2 percent inflation goal for three and a half years or so, global disinflationary factors are still holding inflation down...The data to me isn't so much about the labor market continuing to improve, I'm very positive on that, it's more about inflation moving back to 2 percent in the context of very strong headwinds," he explained,citing the strong dollar and low commodity prices.

"We have a domestic mandate...but that said, we understand that we're in a global economy so what happens in Brazil or China has a huge impact on the U.S. in terms of our inflation and employment goals."

His remarks come as global markets seek clarity from Federal Reserve officials for clues on whether the central bank will hike rates at its April policy meeting.
James Bullard
Another rate hike may be coming soon: Fed's Bullard
Expectations of an increase have risen following hawkish commentary from several members of the FOMC last week, including Williams.

Atlanta Fed President Dennis Lockhart and Williams both believe a hike during the scheduled April 26-27 review is warranted, while St. Louis Fed President James Bullard said "the next rate increase may not be far off."

The remarks spooked Wall Street however, as it contradicted Fed Chair Janet Yellen's dovish-sounding statement earlier in March.

When asked about the mixed policy messages, Williams insisted that the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) was united in its vision.

"I would say there's broad agreement on the committee that our basic strategy, which is to gradually remove policy accommodation and raise interest rates over the next couple of years, has strong support. The real question is when we should raise rates, what pace we should raise rates. That's going to be driven by the data so we'll have to wait and see."

Markets will now be paying close attention to Yellen's speech at the Economic Club of New York on Tuesday as well as Fed Vice-Chair William Dudley's address on Thursday for further hints on the central bank's outlook.

Friday's employment report will also be scrutinized for proof of the economic recovery. Societe Generale expects at least 24,900 jobs were created in March, which would mark an improvement from February's 24,200

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #37 on: March 28, 2016, 02:06:19 PM »



為何Fed忽鴿忽鷹?葉倫心腹:升息時點、速度沒談攏
回應(0) 人氣(322) 收藏(0) 2016/03/28 12:34
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-03-28 12:34:59 記者 郭妍希 報導
聯邦公開市場委員會(FOMC)3月16日在貨幣政策會後雖然按兵不動、發表鴿派聲明,但聯準會(Fed)內部顯然意見分歧,雖然主席葉倫(Janet Yellen)已在16日警告年初的通膨可能只是曇花一現,但其他多名Fed官員卻在之後輪番發表鷹派看法,美元指數跟著由貶轉升,金融市場更是丈二金剛摸不著頭緒。
ICE美元指數(DXY)上週共計上漲了1.3%,觸及96.368點,創3月16日以來新高。美元今(28)日在亞洲盤相對於日圓又續漲。嘉實XQ全球贏家系統報價顯示,美元兌日圓28日開盤迄今最高升至113.68、創3月16日新高。
聯準會(Fed)主席葉倫(Janet Yellen,見圖)即將在本週二(3月29日)於紐約經濟俱樂部發表談話,紐約聯邦儲備銀行總裁William Dudley也會緊跟著在週四發表談話,投資人莫不殷切期盼這兩位重量級大老能為大家解惑。

一向被視為葉倫人馬的舊金山聯邦儲備銀行總裁John C. Williams今(28)日在接受CNBC亞洲頻道「Asia Squawk Box」專訪時又再度重申了鷹派看法,認為美國經濟其實相當不錯,不但通膨穩定、就業成長也頗為強勁,真正的問題來自全球的金融與經濟發展,因為美元和美國經濟究竟會受到那些衝擊,依舊充滿不確定性。
在被問到Fed官員為何對貨幣政策看法紛呈時,Williams堅稱,其實大家對FOMC的基本策略都相當認同,就是要逐漸移除寬鬆政策、在未來幾年調高利率,有爭議的主要在升息的時間點與調整的速度,而這一切都要看經濟數據如何發展。
Williams重申,Fed的貨幣政策將以經濟報告為根據,通膨是Fed憂心的首要問題。他說,美國已連續三年半達不到2%的通膨目標,主要是受到全球通縮困境的壓抑,就業持續改善已不是重點,通膨能不能在如此惡劣的環境中(指強勢美元、原物料價格崩落)回升至2%、才是問題。
Williams表示,Fed的法定義務(即維持物價穩定、充分就業)雖然是針對美國國內,但如今世界已成地球村,巴西、中國究竟發生何事,對美國的通膨與就業目標都會產生重大影響。
不過,他說,Fed不會因為通膨低迷而實施負利率貨幣政策(NIRP),美國還有其他工具可供使用,這當中包括量化寬鬆貨幣政策以及前瞻指引(forward guidance)。他表示,美國的情況相當不同,Fed已決定在未來幾年調高利率,而整體經濟也比歐洲、日本強上許多,因此Fed應該不至於會用到負利率。
Williams 3月21日在接受Market News International專訪時就曾表示,聯準會(Fed)可能在4月或6月升息,且要不是因為國際因素,Fed本應更早調升利率。Williams還說,通膨的進展相當「令人振奮」。
亞特蘭大聯邦儲備銀行總裁Dennis Lockhart和Williams都相信,FOMC有充分理由在4月26-27日的貨幣政策會議上升息,而聖路易斯聯邦儲備銀行總裁James Bullard也說,距離Fed下一次升息的時間點或已不遠。
美國本週五(4月1日)即將公布眾所矚目的3月就業報告,屆時勢必會成為投資人觀察重點。法國興業銀行估計,3月美國非農業就業人數應該至少新增了24,900人,高於2月的24,200人。


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=500d83a8-9dc9-481f-9365-3579a17272b7&c=MB010000#ixzz44AqAOPrh
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #38 on: March 28, 2016, 08:22:26 PM »



The dollar may give the Fed a green light on rates: Analyst
Tom DiChristopher   | @tdichristopher
44 Mins Ago
CNBC.com
6
SHARES
3
COMMENTSJoin the Discussion

The Federal Reserve could raise interest rates in June if the dollar doesn't spike in expectation of such a move, Fidelity Investment's Jurrien Timmer said Monday.

Earlier on Monday, San Francisco Fed president John Williams told CNBC that while the U.S. economy is doing "quite well," global developments are feeding back into the dollar and the U.S. economy, preventing the Fed from moving.

Williams and three other regional Fed presidents have said the central bank should begin tightening monetary policy sooner rather than later.


John Williams, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco
Fed's Williams: US doing fine, world isn't
A trader on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange.
The market is about to lose its leader: Traders

The Fed raised interest rates for the first time in nearly a decade in December, but has since held steady. At its last meeting, Federal Open Market Committee members indicated they only anticipate raising rates twice this year, down from earlier expectations of four hikes.

Timmer said the Fed has been stuck in a "tug-of-war" in which the talk of higher rates strengthens the dollar, leading to corresponding weakness in the Chinese yuan. That in turn causes the People's Bank of China to draw down foreign reserves to offset yuan outflows, which creates volatility in U.S. markets.

That's why dollar movements will be the key indicator as to whether the Fed will act, said Timmer, Fidelity's director of global macro. The FOMC's April meeting is off the table, but June is potentially in play, he said in an interview on CNBC's "Squawk Box."



Cramer: Hey, Fed, don't look at KB Home earnings
"If the Fed starts talking about a June hike and things don't sort of unravel in the currency markets, then maybe they get a green light, and that would be reflected in the fed funds futures odds," he said.

"If come May the odds are well above 50 [percent] and the dollar is still somewhat well-behaved, then they get a green light, but it's too early to tell whether we're going to be there or not," he added.

Richard Clarida, global strategic advisor at Pimco, said he believes Fed Chair Janet Yellen will use the April statement to prepare investors for a June hike. However, he stressed that the committee will move gradually.

"If they go too aggressively, more than is priced [into the market], they do get a big move in the dollar," he told "Squawk Box" on Monday. "But I think they're resigned to some support for the dollar and I don't think that will deter them from hiking a couple more times this year.

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #39 on: March 29, 2016, 08:29:39 AM »



Yellen to battle the 'dark side'
Patti Domm   | @pattidomm
1 Hour Ago
CNBC.com
9
SHARES
7
COMMENTSJoin the Discussion
Janet Yellen
Getty Images
Janet Yellen
Fed Chair Janet Yellen has some explaining to do.

Yellen speaks Tuesday in a much anticipated midday appearance before the Economic Club of New York — just days after several Fed officials surprised markets by saying a rate hike could be coming soon. The problem is that the U.S. central bank on March 16 released a post-meeting statement that markets viewed as dovish, and most Fed watchers see June as the first time it would consider raising rates.

"This is the dark side of transparency. People talk and the market thinks the Fed is going to tell us, that the Fed is all-knowing and clear," said Deutsche Bank's chief U.S. economist, Joseph LaVorgna. "And what we're finding is transparency doesn't make the market any more comfortable or confident in what the Fed is going to do. ... The Fed has wrong-footed the market consistently."

Charles Biderman
Santelli Extra: The strong jobs market myth
The dollar, while weaker Monday, has firmed in recent sessions on comments from St. Louis Fed President James Bullard and others who said the Fed could consider a rate hike in April. "All the FOMC members seem to be swinging back and forth in their sentiment, probably reflecting market conditions," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics. "Bottom line the economy is strong and it's rapidly approaching full employment, and inflation is much more likely to be heading north than south."

But Monday's economic data raised questions about the strength of the economy and whether it can endure rate hikes. Economists trimmed first-quarter GDP forecasts after a downward revision to January's consumption data and a wider trade gap. The median first-quarter growth tracking estimate was sliced by a sharp half percent to 0.9 percent, according to the CNBC/Moody's Analytics rapid update of economists' estimates.

"She has to acknowledge that the economic growth is more uneven than the Fed would like," said Diane Swonk, founder and CEO of DS Economics. "The hawkishness existed obviously at the meeting as well or we would not have gotten the dissent." Kansas City Fed President Esther George dissented at the March gathering. The Fed also issued new forecasts that day, including an interest rate projection that showed two hikes in 2016, revised down from four.

NYSE Trader on the floor
This big fuel for the bull market is losing steam
While some Fed watchers expect Yellen to re-emphasize that April will be a "live meeting," meaning the central bank could raise rates, the market is placing low odds on it actually moving. Zandi said a key will be whether Yellen starts to discuss what would happen if the Fed does not start moving to normalcy. That would not mean the Fed would be ready to raise rates in April, but would signal that it intends to hike soon and keep hiking, he said.

"This economy is pretty close to full employment It's not consistent with where rates are today," said Zandi. Economists expect to see 205,000 nonfarm payrolls for March when jobs data are released Friday.

Swonk, however, said there is more labor slack than meets the eye, and that's clear in a reluctant consumer. "I think she'll reaffirm her concern about wages and that growth is tepid. She's argued there's still a slack in the labor market and she's been proven right on that," Swonk said. "It's not a 4.9 percent unemployment rate economy."

Janet Yellen, chair of the U.S. Federal Reserve.
Fed is trying to confuse investors: Strategist
The Fed has looked for a growth rate of 2 percent but the economy is falling short, she said. "I think it keeps June in the game but even though hawks will still have an itchy trigger finger in April they're not going to move," Swonk said.

Zandi said the Fed is not paying much attention to gross domestic product. He took issue with the way GDP is calculated in the first place, as it misses information services and technology.

But he did say the Fed's message has been confusing. "I am perplexed by the communicating. It does feel like it's been a bit of a pingpong match." he said. "It seems her tone is swinging more than I would have thought."

Besides Yellen's 12:20 p.m. EDT speech and question and answer session, there are two other Fed speakers. San Francisco Fed President John Williams gives remarks at 5:15 a.m. ET in Singapore, and Dallas Fed President Rob Kaplan speaks at 1 p.m. in Austin, Texas. He also has a 4 p.m. appearance.

There is S&P/Case-Shiller home price data at 9 a.m., and consumer confidence at 10 a.m. Earnings are expected from Lennar, Dave & Buster's, McCormick and Restoration Hardware.

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #40 on: March 30, 2016, 06:03:35 AM »



Yellen pushes back at the hawks, stocks higher
Patti Domm   | @pattidomm
3 Hours Ago
CNBC.com
64
SHARES
193
COMMENTSJoin the Discussion

Fed Chair Janet Yellen reassured markets that the U.S. central bank will move cautiously with further rate hikes, pushing back at recent hawkish comments from other Fed officials.

Yellen, speaking to the Economic Club of New York, said it is appropriate to proceed with caution in moving policy, and that economic and financial conditions are somewhat less favorable than in December when the Fed raised interest rates for the first time in nine years.
But some Fed watchers thought Yellen's message was murkier than usual and raised doubts about the central bank's forecasts and monetary path.

"Janet Yellen gave her audience limited lip service to 'baseline' projections and expectations for dual mandate improvement and rate normalization, but carpet-bombed her audience with possible downside caveats. In so doing, she created the distinct impression that she had little confidence in the Fed's baseline outlook," wrote Ward McCarthy, chief financial economist at Jefferies, in a note.

But the market took her words as dovish nonetheless, and stocks rose, the dollar weakened, and bond yields fell, particularly the Fed-sensitive two-year note yield. That note slipped to 0.78 percent from 0.84 percent before her speech. Bank stocks fell with declining yields.
Read MoreYellen: Economic readings mixed, appropriate to be cautious

"Curiously, for a central bank presumably in the middle of a tightening cycle, Yellen's speech focused more on downside risks that those to the upside," wrote Dana Saporta, director of economic research at Credit Suisse.

Traders also focused on her comments that progress has been made in inflation measures, but that she sees inflation remaining low this year and the prospect of down readings concerns her.
"The major thing that changed since December and March that affects the baseline outlook is the slightly weaker-than-expected pace of global growth," Yellen said in response to a question after her speech.

Yellen's appearance was the first since several Fed officials suggested last week that the central bank should start to move more quickly to raise rates, even as early as April.

Those comments were viewed as surprising and a sign of disagreement within Yellen's Fed, particularly after the FOMC issued a dovish statement after its March meeting.
"One of the challenges of transparency is when you're transparent during a period where policy is in flux, and new things are being tested. In being transparent, you're also exposing vulnerability and that's what we're seeing here," said Saporta.

Markets also priced out a full rate hike for 2016, and according to RBS, the odds for a rate rise fell to 25 percent for June from 32 percent. The expectation for a full rate hike by December dropped to a 90 percent chance.

Read MoreShock cuts to Q1 GDP show economy could be faltering

"I think it's less lashing back against the hawks and more offering her opinion. I don't think that she's overcompensating or swinging the pendulum. She just has a different opinion," said Ian Lyngen, senior Treasury strategist at CRT Capital.
John Briggs, head of strategy for the Americas at RBS, said Yellen was not so much countering the hawkish comments but reinforcing the March FOMC statement.

"How much of this is keeping markets on your side to gain time for overseas concerns? The Fed gets very involved in the markets so it's hard to tell," said Briggs. "Either way, her comments are conducive for easier financial conditions for the United States."

Yellen did say the U.S. economy and labor situation in particular are making progress, but her concerns suggest a very slow path of rate hikes. She also said the Fed has the ability to be accommodative. Recent data have been mixed and economists cut the median first-quarter GDP growth tracking estimate to just 0.9 percent Monday after weaker consumer spending data and a wider trade gap.

"I think it depends on all of the things she's really focusing on — inflation expectations, overseas and whether the U.S. economy holds up. Certainly what she's doing is helping weaken the dollar which helps out the overseas side, keeps rates low and stocks higher," said Briggs.

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #41 on: March 30, 2016, 10:31:45 AM »



Yellen push back at hawks creates confusion
Patti Domm   | @pattidomm
2 Hours Ago
CNBC.com
151
SHARES
309
COMMENTSJoin the Discussion

Fed Chair Janet Yellen attempted to reassure markets that the U.S. central bank will move cautiously with further rate hikes, pushing back at recent hawkish comments from other Fed officials. But the Fed chair also managed to unleash a backlash from some of Wall Street's more often staid economists.

Yellen, speaking to The Economic Club of New York, said that it is appropriate to proceed with caution in moving policy, and that economic and financial conditions are somewhat less favorable than in December when the Fed raised interest rates for the first time in nine years.
But some Fed watchers thought Yellen's message was murkier than usual and raised doubts about the central bank's forecasts and monetary path.

"Janet Yellen gave her audience limited lip service to 'baseline' projections and expectations for dual mandate improvement and rate normalization, but carpet-bombed her audience with possible downside caveats. In so doing, she created the distinct impression that she had little confidence in the Fed's baseline outlook," wrote Ward McCarthy, chief financial economist at Jefferies, in a note.

Read MoreYellen: Economic readings mixed, appropriate to be cautious

Citigroup economists cut back on their rate hike expectations after the speech and now expect just one rise this year, in either September or December. And Amherst Pierpont's chief economist, Stephen Stanley, said the chair's speech revealed herself to be a "radical dove," in a note he titled "Janet Yellen jumped the shark."

"In the past, she and I might have looked at a glass of water and disagreed about whether it was half full or half empty," wrote Stanley. "Today she took the partially full glass and dumped most of the water out and defiantly declared the glass mostly empty. Her assessment of the economic and policy outlooks is well out of step with most of her colleagues on the FOMC as well as most private sector economists."

Yellen's appearance was the first since several Fed officials suggested last week that the central bank should start to move more quickly to raise rates, even as early as April.

Those comments were viewed as surprising and a sign of disagreement within Yellen's Fed, particularly after the FOMC issued a dovish statement after its March meeting.

"There really wasn't any new direct information content. We know they're going slowly. We know they're being cautious. We know they're being flexible. What was new was the weight of risks," said McCarthy. "She heaped them on. She came off as being uncertain about the outlook for growth, inflation and therefore monetary policy. ... If the price of everything goes up then she'll be convinced they've finally beaten back deflation."

Markets took her words as dovish and stocks rose, the dollar weakened and bond yields fell, particularly the Fed-sensitive two-year note yield. That note slipped to 0.78 percent from 0.84 percent before her speech. Bank stocks fell with declining yields.

"Curiously, for a central bank presumably in the middle of a tightening cycle, Yellen's speech focused more on downside risks that those to the upside," wrote Dana Saporta, director of economic research at Credit Suisse. Saporta said she expects Yellen would have been just as dovish had the other Fed officials not called for rate hikes.

Traders also focused on her comments that progress has been made in inflation measures, but that she sees inflation remaining low this year and the prospect of down readings concerns her.
"The major thing that changed since December and March that affects the baseline outlook is the slightly weaker-than-expected pace of global growth," Yellen said in response to a question after her speech.

Diane Swonk, founder of DS Economics said the Fed chair "caged the hawks" on the FOMC and she ultimately is the most important vote on the committee.

"We see her desire to really experiment and let the unemployment rate fall further. She's given herself wiggle room with the data. Obviously, data dependent means something else. It means 'subjective data dependence.' ... Glacial is now an overstatement for Fed rate hikes. We'll probably get one in June but I also think we'll get two dissents in April. This is going to be confusing for markets over this tug of war to raise rates or not."

"I don't think she meant to pull back markets as much as she did. ... I think the reaction to it is because it stands in such bold contrast to: 'Let's go, let's go, let's go,'" said Swonk

She said Yellen believes that there could be persistently low inflation even in a lower unemployment environment where employers do not increase wages, sparking inflation.

Markets also priced out a full rate hike for 2016 immediately following Yellen's comments, and according to RBS, the odds for a rate rise fell to 25 percent for June from 32 percent. The expectation for a full rate hike by December dropped to a 90 percent chance.
"One of the challenges of transparency is when you're transparent during a period where policy is in flux, and new things are being tested. In being transparent, you're also exposing vulnerability and that's what we're seeing here," said Saporta.
Read MoreShock cuts to Q1 GDP show economy could be faltering

John Briggs, head of strategy for the Americas at RBS, said Yellen was not so much countering the hawkish comments but reinforcing the March FOMC statement.
"How much of this is keeping markets on your side to gain time for overseas concerns? The Fed gets very involved in the markets so it's hard to tell," said Briggs. "Either way, her comments are conducive for easier financial conditions for the United States."

Yellen did say the U.S. economy and labor situation in particular are making progress, but her concerns suggest a very slow path of rate hikes. She also said the Fed has the ability to be accommodative. Recent data have been mixed and economists cut the median first-quarter GDP growth tracking estimate to just 0.9 percent Monday after weaker consumer spending data and a wider trade gap.

"I think it depends on all of the things she's really focusing on — inflation expectations, overseas and whether the U.S. economy holds up. Certainly what she's doing is helping weaken the dollar which helps out the overseas side, keeps rates low and stocks higher," said Briggs

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #42 on: March 30, 2016, 11:38:51 AM »



2016年03月30日 06:12 AM
耶伦谨慎言论使美国加息前景渺茫
英国《金融时报》 萨姆•弗莱明 华盛顿报道
 

美国加息前景昨日进一步渺茫。珍妮特•耶伦(Janet Yellen)主张谨慎,理由是市场条件不利、海外增长弱于预期以及通胀前景不确定。

美联储(Federal Reserve)主席称,近来市场降低加息预期,已经帮助缓解了海外不利事态给美国带来的冲击,她形容这些举动是一种“自动稳定器”。

亲爱的读者,我们注意到您在30天内连续阅读了5篇以上文章,如果您喜欢FT中文网,我们诚邀您登录访问或免费注册为FT中文网的会员。

尽享FT中文网会员专属服务:

■ 收藏您喜爱的文章

■ 使用FT商学院的互动教程

■ 发表评论并同步到微博

■ 免费享受内容定制服务邮件,并无限制阅读全文

■ 受邀参加会员专属的线下活动与高端论坛

立即注册
请登录

会员名称
密码
忘记密码?
在这个电脑上记住我
登录
但是,她强调称,如果美国意外陷入停滞,美联储没有什么空间可以逆转政策进程,通过降息来刺激经济,这突显了逐渐收紧政策的必要性。在纽约发表讲话期间,她着重指出中国以及石油市场仍在发酵的种种风险,并据此主张美国央行在考虑何时再次加息时应该谨慎行动。

在耶伦发表讲话后,美国国债上涨,CRT Capital的交易员称耶伦的言论“是对当前政策立场和短期前景的出乎意料的鸽派评估”。两年期国债收益率(与价格走势相反)下滑6个基点,至0.81%。


“无论此前美联储官员传达了(有关4月加息的)何种推测,现在都已经烟消云散了,”花旗集团(Citigroup)的利率策略主管史蒂文•英格兰德(Steven Englander)称。

美国股市从早盘的跌势反弹,基准的标普500指数(S&P 500)收市时升至今年最高水平,报2055.01,同时美元汇率下滑至一周来最低水平。

译者/何黎

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #43 on: March 31, 2016, 05:52:52 AM »



Why the Fed rate talk was 'a bunch of nonsense'
Jeff Cox   | @JeffCoxCNBCcom
2 Hours Ago
CNBC.com
59
SHARES
25
COMMENTSJoin the Discussion

The Federal Reserve was never hiking rates four times this year. Investors didn't believe it, and now Fed Chair Janet Yellen has all but explicitly acknowledged it.

Indeed, Yellen's blockbuster speech Tuesday assuring that the central bank would go slowly on future adjustments to monetary policy only caught some of the market by surprise. Others realized there was virtually no chance of a hawkish Fed in 2016.

"Central bankers at the Fed bark but they won't bite," Peter Schiff, frequent Fed critic and founder of Euro Pacific Capital, told CNBC.com. "I knew all that talk was a bunch of nonsense."

Read MoreMarket's message to the Fed: We don't believe you
At their December meeting, Federal Open Market Committee officials indicated that the likely level for their interest rate target by the end of the year would be about 1 percentage point higher than it was at the end of 2015, translating to four quarter-point hikes.

Events afterward were a roller coaster: A violent market reaction lower, dueling public comments from Fed officials alternating between hawkish and dovish, a market rally, then, most recently, strongly dovish language after the March FOMC meeting and then Yellen's speech.

Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen
Mary Schwalm | Reuters
Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen
There was a point recently where markets were beginning to buy a rate-hiking Fed, with expectations of a move around midyear and, possibly, a second in December.

No more.

After Yellen's speech, the market believes the only likely increase will come in November or December, which are showing respective probabilities of 50 percent and 62 percent, according to the CME. Fed fund futures don't have a full quarter-point hike technically priced in until March 2017.

Read MoreJPMorgan's Lebovitz: Yellen's message? 'Relax'
"Her strident dovishness causes us to lower our projected number of rate increases this year to possibly one in September or even as late as December," Citigroup economist William Lee said in a note that echoed the widely held Wall Street sentiment after the central bank chief spoke.

Yellen's comments reflected a variety of fears, much of them centered on the global landscape.

As David Rosenberg, chief economist and strategist at Gluskin Sheff, pointed out, she used the word "global" 11 times, which was seven more than her speech to Congress in February, and "uncertainty" 10 times, up from three in the last speech.

The remarks came amid a deteriorating economic picture, though a U.S. recession still is considered unlikely by most economists. The Atlanta Fed now expects gross domestic product to gain just 0.6 percent in the first quarter, down from about 2.7 percent in early February. The Atlanta Fed's GDP-based recession indicator shows just a 10 percent chance of recession, though that has not been updated since Feb. 4.

"Whenever a central banker is uncertain, rest assured that the only certainty is that he or she does nothing," Rosenberg said in his daily report for clients. "That was the message from Yellen's speech. Rate risk is off the table, but the reasons for it — a lack of growth visibility — are why investors did not bid up stocks even more so despite her overt dovish tone."
The market, of course, embraced Yellen's dovish tone, though the gains cooled a bit as Wednesday trading continued. The Fed, with its seven years of zero rates and $3.7 trillion worth of money printing, has faced criticism for being too market sensitive. Citigroup's Lee called Yellen's speech "a remarkable transfer to markets of the FOMC's authority to set future policy rates."

For investors, the question ahead will be how long the Fed can continue to keep the market afloat. Ultra-accommodative monetary policy is showing its limits in other countries, and Yellen's narrative that the dovish tone is being inspired by global weakness, not in the U.S., is gathering skeptics.

"If anything, I would say the global problems have subsided since December," Euro Pacific's Schiff said. "The real problem is the U.S. economy. The U.S. economy is weakening,"

Schiff said he thinks the Fed may attempt a rate hike this year, but any efforts at tightening won't last.

"The economy already is in recession," he said. "The question is, when is the Fed going to acknowledge it."

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #44 on: April 01, 2016, 02:18:05 PM »



2016: The End Of The Global Debt Super Cycle
Tyler Durden's pictureSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 03/31/2016 21:00 -0400

Alan Greenspan Apple Bear Market Bear Stearns Ben Bernanke Ben Bernanke Bond Central Banks Commercial Real Estate Fail Federal Reserve Global Economy Great Depression High Yield Home Equity Housing Bubble Housing Prices Japan Lehman Market Crash Merrill Merrill Lynch Moral Hazard Mortgage Backed Securities Quantitative Easing Real estate Recession Sovereign Debt Volatility White House Yield Curve


 
inShare
9
 
Submitted by Etai Friedman via Palisade-Research.com,

After the stock market crash of 1987, The Federal Reserve embarked on a path that led to the biggest debt bubble in the history of the world. The day after the 1987 crash (Oct. 20, 1987) Alan Greenspan, Chairman of the Fed, announced to the world that The Fed stood ready to provide whatever liquidity was needed by the banking system to prevent the crash from turning into a systemic financial crisis. That was the day the Fed “put” was born.

 



 


A put is an option that allows its owner to sell a specified amount of a particular asset at a predetermined price by a specific date. As an example, if an investor had a February 90 put on Apple’s stock that investor would have the right to sell 100 shares at 90 a share until the third Friday in February when the option expired. An investor would only exercise that put if Apple’s stock price dropped below 90 a share before expiration. As it stands Apple’s stock price is 94.02 as of Friday’s close so no rational investor would exercise that put. But if on Monday Apple’s stock crashed and was trading 60 a share than the investor would exercise his put and gladly sell his stock at 90 a share to the person who sold him the put. So in effect after 1987 The Fed was acting as a giant put for the financial markets, a role it had heretofore not played.

In September of 1998 Long Term Capital Management, a highly leveraged high profile hedge fund, sustained losses that threatened its solvency. The fund with a few billion in equity had $80 billion in assets and all of its trades were going against the firm. LTCM’s equity was going to be wiped out within days. Warren Buffet and a consortium of investors offered to bail out the fund by paying fire sale prices for the assets and shutting down the fund. LTCM’s management balked and looked to The Fed for a better solution. The Fed engineered a bailout by numerous banks that left LTCM’s management in place with some of their wealth to spare. Once again, The Fed intervened in a market calamity and this time bailed out an extremely reckless hedge fund that should have been allowed to fail. The Fed’s put engendered moral hazard in the hedge fund community by allowing reckless and destabilizing behavior to go unpunished.

In December of 1999, The Fed injected enormous amounts of liquidity into the banking system to fend off any potential problems from the Y2K problem. If you recall, The Fed was worried that banking computer systems might erroneously register 1900 as the year on January 1, 2000 due to perceived deficiencies in banking software. To avert any panic, The Fed stuffed money into the banking system to make sure no calamities ensued. The stock market which was already in the midst of a mania in the tech sector effectively had kerosene poured on the fire. The extra banking liquidity found its way into the stock market and sent the tech bubble into overdrive. After the new year passed without so much as a hiccup The Fed withdrew the excess liquidity and the tech bubble peaked in March 2000 and then collapsed.

This is where the story of the debt bubble begins. Prior interventions by The Fed promoted moral hazard and rampant speculation but up to this point they did not need to employ debt to prop up the U.S. economy. That all changed after the internet stock mania collapsed, trillions in wealth was destroyed, and the U.S. economy went into recession. The Fed was once again worried that the crash in technology stocks would cause a systemic financial crisis so they embarked on an interest rate cutting program that saw the Fed Funds Rate drop from 6.5% to 1% from 2000 to 2003. This in effect morphed the tech stock bubble into a housing bubble. Adjustable rate mortgage yields plunged in value and accelerated a housing boom already in progress. The public, encouraged by low rates and lax underwriting standards stampeded into housing sending prices through the roof. Mortgage debt exploded and home equity values skyrocketed buffeting the tech collapse induced recession. The average American increased their leverage to all-time highs. Figure 1 shows that by the fourth quarter of 2007 household debt payments as a percentage of disposable income hit a record 13.2% up from 10.5% just 15 years earlier.

Figure 1

1

The Fed meanwhile did not normalize rates until 2005 when the Fed Funds Rate was back up to 4% on its way to 5.25% by 2006, the year the housing boom peaked.  Total debt in the U.S. went from $18 trillion in 2001 to $30 trillion by 2007. Comparatively speaking it took 35 years for total debt in the U.S. to go from under $1 trillion to $4 trillion. As we all know the collapse in housing prices revealed that trillions in mortgage backed securities were not actually AAA rated and the collapse in value of these securities almost took the financial system with them.

Large investment banks, like Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch, became insolvent and were forced to merge with better capitalized banks. Lehman Bros. was allowed to fail and brought the global financial system to its knees. The Fed, now headed by Ben Bernanke, went into overdrive slashing the Fed Funds rate to zero percent and essentially backstopping all financial institutions and depositors’ cash and near cash investments.

A new tool was introduced by The Fed, called Quantitative Easing, which allowed The Fed to purchase mortgage backed securities and other long dated debt to push down long term interest rates and encourage lending. Rates at both the front end and the back end of the yield curve plunged to historic lows with the hope that people and businesses would begin to borrow again and get the economy growing. These extreme measures stopped the free fall in financial assets and began a six-year expansion that was both meager and debt fueled.

During and following The Global Financial Crisis consumers in some developed countries deleveraged but the rest of the economy, namely governments and businesses, leveraged up. From the first quarter of 2008 to the second quarter of 2015 total debt in the U.S. increased from $30 trillion to $40 trillion. Globally, total debt grew from $142 trillion in the fourth quarter of 2007 to $200 trillion in the second quarter of 2014, an increase of $58 trillion. Total global debt as a percentage of global GDP grew from 269% in 2007 to 286% in 2014. The massive central bank intervention during The Global Financial Crisis prevented a deleveraging of the global economy and actually encouraged more leverage to stimulate growth. Once again the planet was borrowing from future growth to propel current growth. This was indeed a short sighted solution to an existential crisis faced by the world. Kicking the can down to 2016 has now come to its logical end.

During 2015 the strength of the global economy began to be questioned as commodity prices collapsed, Chinese economic growth slowed, and global trade slowed. For the first time since the European Sovereign Debt Crisis credit spreads began to widen and low rated corporate debt and leveraged loans began declining in value. As seen by Figure 2 Corporate Net Debt to Ebitda rose to record levels while Ebitda began to decline.

Figure 2

2

Declining oil prices crushed low rated high yield energy debt. Figure 3 shows that prices of CCC rated debt collapsed in the fourth quarter of 2015.

Figure 3

3

Also in the first quarter of 2016 low rated commercial real estate debt plunged in value as seen in Figure 4.

Figure 4

4

The credit markets are signaling that the debt fueled expansion that began in 2010 is turning to bust. This is the most precarious moment in financial market history because as the world slides into recession global central banks have no ability to soften the oncoming recession with debt creation. Globally interest rates are close to zero and even negative in Europe and Japan. Long term government bond yields are also extremely low. This is sending a very clear and ominous signal that the world cannot service more debt and in fact needs to deleverage and get on more solid financial footing.

The last time the world deleveraged was during The Great Depression. The defining quality of The Great Depression was the destructive deflation that gripped the economy. Deflation destroys financial asset values like stocks and corporate bonds and hard assets like real estate. It also lowers incomes while making debt more expensive to service as debt to income ratios rise. The world economy is on the precipice of another Great Depression.

This state of affairs demands a dramatic repositioning of investment portfolios. Investors who choose to remain passive but want to preserve their wealth need to liquidate their investments in stocks and corporate bonds and hold cash only.  Investors who are more opportunistic can hold a combination of cash and U.S. government bonds. U.S. government bonds have already begun to rally so buying at current levels is not quite as attractive as it was a month ago but we expect negative interest rates to eventually visit America so there is still considerable upside. Figure 5 shows that inflation expectations continue to plunge even as The Fed erroneously is raising interest rates.

Figure 5

5

The more aggressive investor can find opportunities to earn high returns employing strategies that will benefit from a financial collapse and a severe, deflationary recession. These strategies include shorting stock index futures, getting long VIX futures, etfs, and options, getting long stock index option volatility via index etfs, and on a limited basis shorting individual company stocks whose business plans will be acutely affected by economic developments.

We would not simply be short financial assets every day because we recognize that the markets will initially be quite volatile which means sharp bear market rallies in between dramatic declines in financial assets. We would initially be positioned to benefit from this two-way volatility and as the declines become more severe and investors begin to throw in the towel the fund will be more short oriented.

We recognize that The Fed will not sit idly by as this bear market intensifies. However limited their options they will employ them and they may provide brief respite from the bear market. We believe The Fed will stop raising interest rates and begin cutting them in 2016 taking them into negative territory. We also believe The Fed will embark on QE4, although it is not clear what assets they will purchase. What is clear is that rate cuts and QE4 will offer brief pauses in financial asset declines but will not ultimately arrest those declines.

Major fiscal policy adjustments will be needed and this will depend on who takes the White House in 2017. A Democratic win would be a negative while a Republican win by certain candidates may pave the way for major fiscal policy changes. For instance, Ted Cruz’s flat tax would be particularly beneficial and soften the blow of the economic contraction as more money will be directly put into Americans’ hands.

We also believe the next President needs to strip The Fed of their dual mandate of price stability and full employment. The Fed should no longer be tasked with ensuring full employment and debt creation should be disincentivized through changes to the tax code.

Lastly, we would like to highlight we take no pleasure in what we see coming to pass in the financial markets and simply wants to offer investors the opportunity to earn high returns in what otherwise will be an environment devoid of financial opportunities and of declining employmen

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #45 on: April 01, 2016, 02:29:43 PM »



公然造反?亞特蘭大FED打臉葉倫,力挺今年升息三次
回應(0) 人氣(502) 收藏(0) 2016/04/01 09:21
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-04-01 09:21:08 記者 陳瑞哲 報導
聯準會(FED)高層間的矛盾衝突似乎有加遽的跡象,葉倫主席周二才發表談話力主放慢升息腳步,但時隔不到48個小時,就被旗下的地方諸侯公開打臉。

FED亞特蘭大分行總裁洛克哈特(Dennis Lockhart)周四接受日經新聞訪問時表示,美國今年至少有三次升息的本錢,如果整體經濟數據夠強的話,第一次升息不是四月就是六月發動,擺明不甩葉倫主張。

洛克哈特立場偏向鷹派(厭惡通膨),今年具有投票權。有鑑於年初金融動盪,洛克哈特在三月貨幣決策會議上同意暫緩升息,但隨著美國通膨回升、製造業景氣改善,加上二月就業報告強勁,讓他對升息的意志轉強。美國周五稍晚將公佈三月份就業報告,如過結果優於預期,可能強化鷹派對四月升息的論述。

FED上次會議公佈利率意向點陣圖(dot plot)時,有位不知身份的官員主張今年應升息超過兩次,外界一度爭辯可能是FED副主席費雪(Stanley Fischer)或是洛克哈特,是誰現在應該很清楚了


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=c36f706f-a686-4c7c-8330-30c0133ca557&c=MB010000#ixzz44YKAzJLk
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #46 on: April 01, 2016, 02:30:58 PM »



無視葉倫「鴿」聲送暖!高盛重申:Fed今年將升息3次
回應(0) 人氣(329) 收藏(0) 2016/04/01 12:11
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-04-01 12:11:22 記者 郭妍希 報導
聯準會(Fed)葉倫(Janet Yellen,見圖)本週二(3月30日)才剛發表完相當偏向鴿派的看法,但高盛(Goldman Sachs Group)卻不買帳,堅稱Fed今(2016)年會三度升息,比聯邦公開市場委員會(FOMC)預估的還要多出一次。
華爾街日報報導,高盛資深經濟學家Zach Pandl 31日在接受專訪時表示,Fed會在6月、9月與12月分別升息一次。高盛的看法明顯比其他券商偏向鷹派,舉例來說,摩根大通(JPMorgan Chase & Co.)僅預期Fed今年會升息兩次。Pandl隸屬於高盛首席經濟學家Jan Hatzius帶領的團隊。
不過,高盛首席信用策略師Charles Himmelberg卻認為,Fed或許會等到今年下半年才會開槍。他說,全球經濟成長疑慮再起、葉倫發表鴿派言論,讓市場氣氛在第1季激烈震盪,因此,預估Fed會等到下半年再來升息,屆時美國的成長將使失業率下降、核心通膨率上升。

雖然Fed五名官員上週陸續發表鷹派聲明,但本週在葉倫的帶領下,芝加哥聯邦儲備銀行總裁Charles Evans 31日卻宣稱他認為今年升息兩次的做法相當合理,預估升息的時間點一次會落在年中、另一次則會落在12月。
fxstreet.com報導,紐約聯邦儲備銀行總裁William Dudley 31日也發表演說指出,市場對通膨的疑慮其實是杞人憂天,但美國經濟體質仍相對較佳。他說,葉倫傳達的訊息是,假如經濟照當前的步伐繼續前進,那麼央行將會緩步升息。他重申,Fed會繼續抱持謹慎的態度,因為全球經濟依舊充滿不確定性。
一向被視為葉倫人馬的舊金山聯邦儲備銀行總裁John C. Williams 3月28日在接受CNBC亞洲頻道「Asia Squawk Box」專訪時則又再度重申了鷹派看法,認為美國經濟其實相當不錯,不但通膨穩定、就業成長也頗為強勁,真正的問題來自全球的金融與經濟發展,因為美元和美國經濟究竟會受到那些衝擊,依舊充滿不確定性。
在被問到Fed官員為何對貨幣政策看法紛呈時,Williams堅稱,其實大家對FOMC的基本策略都相當認同,就是要逐漸移除寬鬆政策、在未來幾年調高利率,有爭議的主要在升息的時間點與調整的速度,而這一切都要看經濟數據如何發展


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=1e9a3f4c-4078-4bb9-b125-c162a1e07aba&c=MB010000#ixzz44YKTmKVl
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #47 on: April 05, 2016, 06:22:13 PM »



Fed's Evans says needs to be aggressive to get up to inflation targets
3 Hours Ago
Reuters
13
SHARES
4
COMMENTSJoin the Discussion
Charles Evans, president of Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
Melody Hahm | CNBC
Charles Evans, president of Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
The U.S. central bank has to be proactive and aggressive to get up to the Federal Reserve's inflation targets, Chicago Fed President Charles Evans said in Hong Kong on Tuesday.

U.S. inflation measures have shown some recent strength, with the Fed's preferred annual measure flat at 1.7 percent in February, though still below its target of 2 percent.


Janet Yellen
Nail salon jobs mean no Fed rate hikes in 2016: Pro
U.S. Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen holds a press conference following the two-day Federal Open Market Committee policy meeting in Washington March 16, 2016.
Why the Fed rate talk was 'a bunch of nonsense'
Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen speaks to the Economic Club of New York in New York March 29, 2016.
Yellen: Appropriate to proceed cautiously

After having raised rates for the first time in a decade in December, the U.S. central bank stood pat in January and again in mid-March, when it cited weakness overseas and an early-year market sell-off that has since reversed.

Evans, who has been pushing for only two rate hikes this year, repeated that risks to the economy are tilted to the downside.

He does not have a vote on policy this year, but does take part in the Fed's regular policy-setting meetings

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #48 on: April 07, 2016, 10:14:13 AM »



FED升息兩次都嫌多!大摩:頂多一次、最快年底動手
回應(0) 人氣(147) 收藏(0) 2016/04/07 08:41
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-04-07 08:41:22 記者 陳苓 報導
美國聯準會(FED)暗示升息次數砍半,從四次減為兩次,然而摩根士丹利投資管理(Morgan Stanley Investment Management、大摩)認為,其實兩次都算多,今年FED頂多升息一次,而且可能拖到12月才敢動手。
巴倫(Barronˋs)網站6日報導,大摩固定收益投資組合經理人Jim Caron表示,從FED 3月會議紀錄看來,4月升息幾乎無望,他對此毫不訝異。他說,FED 3月才把升息預期減半,這是一大改變,不大可能腰斬之後,又在4月升息。
Caron估計,就算6月升息都嫌太快,應該要到12月才會動手。年初金融市場急遽緊縮,未來幾個月殘存的衝擊仍會影響經濟活動,因此6月不宜升息。美國11月將舉行總統大選,市場風險提高,因此第三季也不適合升息,可能要到12月才有辦法宣布調高利率。

華爾街日報報導,市場也認為4月升息無望,聯邦基金利率期貨顯示,投資人估計4月升息機率為3%。6月升息則為22%。
高盛看法則和大摩恰恰相反。FED主席葉倫3月30日發表完相當偏向鴿派的看法,但高盛(Goldman Sachs Group)卻不買帳,堅稱Fed今年會三度升息,比聯邦公開市場委員會(FOMC)預估的還要多出一次。
華爾街日報報導,高盛資深經濟學家Zach Pandl 3月31日接受專訪時表示,Fed會在6月、9月與12月分別升息一次。高盛的看法明顯比其他券商偏向鷹派,舉例來說,摩根大通(JPMorgan Chase & Co.)僅預期Fed今年會升息兩次。Pandl隸屬於高盛首席經濟學家Jan Hatzius帶領的團隊。


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=a35e95bd-fc55-4821-8437-d213b3b0dc13&c=MB010000#ixzz456MvaLDF
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Online king

  • King
  • ***********
  • Posts: 65,337
Re: FED
« Reply #49 on: April 07, 2016, 10:16:18 AM »



FOMC會議紀錄:全球景氣逆風吹襲,四月升息障礙重重
回應(0) 人氣(408) 收藏(0) 2016/04/07 07:27
MoneyDJ新聞 2016-04-07 07:27:56 記者 陳瑞哲 報導
聯準會(FED)公佈三月份FOMC會議紀錄指出,官員對上半年升息態度謹慎,原因是擔心外部風險,而FED對此的應變能力有限。(路透社)

FOMC為FED旗下貨幣決策單位,會議紀錄顯示,FOMC雖然曾對四月升息有過辯論,但與會委員一般同意全球景氣逆風,以及金融情勢對美國經濟的威脅仍然存在,在此狀況下,部分委員強力主張FED不應太過急躁。

據路透社報導,芝加哥商業交易所(CME)利率期貨資料顯示,投資人預期四月升息的機率接近於零,只有十二月升息的機率稍高點。

聖路易分行總裁布拉德(James Bullard)周三表示,三月FOMC會議過後,美國經濟數據好壞參半,這將使得FED難以在下一次會議升息。

FED在去年底開出升息的第一槍,當時曾暗示今年將再升息四次,不過三月FOMC會議已將升息預估次數縮減至兩次,時間點則是一再往後遞延。

值得一提的是,FOMC三月會議以9比1的票數通過暫緩升息,但會議紀錄顯示,當時其實有兩位委員支持升息,一位是堪薩斯分行總裁喬琪(Esther George),另一位身份雖然並未公開,但猜想應該是亞特蘭大分行總裁洛克哈特(Dennis Lockhart)。(華爾街日報


全文網址: http://www.moneydj.com/KMDJ/News/NewsViewer.aspx?a=339fb9c7-8f2d-4a2d-9c7b-66eafa0bde64&c=MB010000#ixzz456NSfBbG
MoneyDJ 財經知識庫

Malaysia's Biggest Investment Forum

Re: FED
« Reply #49 on: April 07, 2016, 10:16:18 AM »