Categories
Forex Market Analysis

Global Markets Update

Markets continue to focus their attention on the same factors that have been the focus of attention for weeks. This has led to a continuous sideways move in most of the indexes during the last weeks. Hence, these factors such as the trade worries continue to influence negatively on the markets.

  • On one side, there is the commercial dispute between the US and China along with the EU.
  • On the other side, the evolution of energy prices and their potential impact on inflation figures.

This weekend, if everything goes as expected, Trump will impose tariffs which are worth over $35bn on Chinese goods.

  • A little bit more from the initial $50bn announced.

It is thought to be a measure to pressure the counterparty and gain a more favourable position in the trade deal.

  • The main problem with this is that it is a large procedure and one which does not look to end in the near future, and further to not finish before the mid-term elections in November.

These factors, along with the higher rate of interests in the USA and a stronger dollar, are hurting emerging markets.

  • Also bearing in mind that the Latin markets are being influenced by the political elections.
    • Recent elections in Mexico
    • Brazilian elections after summer

Thus, Chinese markets are suffering from all these. However more interesting is the 5% appreciation of the Yuan against the US Dollar in just one month.

  • This, on one side, indicates a lower growth expectation. However, it signals the way to free the trade war, through competitive devaluations.

On the other hand, the overall market is ignoring some positive figures like the ISM Manufacturing Index which was published last Monday and reached 60.2 points.

  • This indicates expansion and growth apart from reflecting on how the level of interest of investors is at February levels.
Categories
Forex Market Analysis

Markets Going Through Short-term Obstacles

Weekly Update – July (2nd– 6th)

  • Macroeconomic Outlook

The overall context for this week is not all bad, but also not at all good. However, the possible absence of bad news in the upcoming weeks will allow markets to rebound from the recent sell-off. As it as has been seen last Friday, markets do not need too much news to rebound and improve. This means that in the end, the fundamentals of the market are still solid and short-term obstacles are what’s blocking them to move forward.

  • Last Friday, as soon as there was a principle of agreement about immigration within the Eurozone, this has allowed us to see a more constructive future and release pressure over Germany and its immigration policy.
    • Indeed, one of the three short-term obstacles of the markets is the German policy over immigration which in reality, if the policy of the European Union, as with many other countries like Spain, Italy or Austria are also facing similar problems.
    • Second factor is oil prices, which increase the concerns of inflation.
    • Third factor is protectionism.

1.- Hence, there should not be any bad news this week. Indeed, the government coalition in Germany, after the semi-agreement about immigration in the Eurozone and the stronger sense of state by political forces, can take more shape.

  • At the end, the sense of state will be imposed in Germany and this variable will be disappearing, reducing the threat of instability of the markets.

2.- Regarding oil, there is always new news that will lead to an increase in prices. This increase in price is affecting inflation and is providing a strong support to bonds, making them overvalued.

  • At first, this is bad for the markets since the cash flow of money always goes to safe havens, feeling more secure in bonds ahead of these types of events.
  • It gives the impression that concerns over oil prices will not be possible to solve during the upcoming weeks, however, it will not also get worse.

3.- Then, we have protectionism. It is in a similar situation to oil, it does not have a better outlook towards the future. However, we already know it is something mostly bilateral between the United States and China rather than global.

  • Over time, more controversial news will be released because the import will rise to 50bn to 200bn for example but will not happen immediately.

This week, with this improvement in the fundamental background of the markets due to the apparent absence of bad news, it is necessary to bear in mind that:

  • This Wednesday is a holiday in the United States, which lowers the activity in the markets.
  • On Thursday and Friday, there will be a convention meeting of Central Banks in Austria where the most hawkish bankers will probably have the word.
    • This will probably lead to bonds not being that comfortable and retrace slightly, and in the absence of bad news, the markets should perform better.
  • The third reference of the week is the American wages and unemployment rate.
    • The Unemployment Rate should not weight as much as everyone know it is going really well.
      • The rate is forecasted to remain at 3.8% and creation of employment probably would be under 200k.
      • Regarding wages, the indicator can reach 2.8% coming from a previous 2.7%. Any figure close to 3% can increase the concerns on inflation.
      • Nevertheless, at the same time, concerns of inflation can affect bonds, and whatever influences bond gives some breath to the markets.

Therefore, considering the current context with all these factors and references, it appears to be good for the markets in absences of bad news and strong fundamentals.

  • Short-term will remain hard and nothing will be solved quickly, nonetheless, looking to the medium-term, investors should remain calm and follow the triple P rule:
    • Positioning
    • Perseverance
    • Patience

 

 

 

Categories
Forex Educational Library

Quarterly Report on the Balance Sheet of the Federal Reserve 2017

In the quarterly reports of the Federal Reserve balance sheet, it is possible to appreciate the composition of the assets, obligations, capital and financial information of the Federal Reserve. With these reports that are issued quarterly, it is possible to analyse how the portfolio of the Federal Reserve is composed as well as to give some clues as to what the monetary policy will be like. It is important to remember that for the Federal Reserve, the main monetary policy tool is the interest rate of the federal funds and a secondary tool is a modification in their assets that are reported in the balance sheet.

In the March report of the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve, it was stated that since 2009 the Federal Reserve had the power to carry out Open Market Operations (OMOs) in the domestic market. These operations included limited purchase and sale of:

  • Treasury securities.
  • Government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) debt securities, and federal agency.

The OMOs have historically been used by the Federal Reserve to adjust the supply of reserve balances, as well as to maintain the federal funds rate close to the objective established by the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC).

In addition, in recent years the Federal Reserve has implemented other tools to provide liquidity in the short term to domestic banks and other depository institutions through the discount window.

Between October 2016 and February 2017, the System Open Market Account’s (SOMA) holdings of Treasury securities changed little due to the FOMC policy of rolling over maturing Treasury securities at auction.

In this period of time, the SOMA’s holdings of agency debt decreased due to the maturity of the bonds. On the other hand, MBS increased due to the reinvestment of the main payments. The agency mortgage-backed securities were assets acquired by the bank to provide support to the real estate and housing market after the 2008 crisis and thereby also provide security in the US financial market.

The MBS are financial instruments traded in the capital markets, whose value and flow of payments are guaranteed by a portfolio of mortgage loans, generally residential property. The fact that the Federal Reserve resorted to this type of unconventional monetary policy was to avoid the deflationary risk and give a boost to the economy that had been sunk since 2008.

From 2009 to 2014 the expansion of SOMA securities holdings was driven by a series of large-scale asset purchase programs(LSAPs) that were conducted to give an impulse to the housing market and give a boost to the economy from the financial system.

In the graphs of the article, it is observed that there was not a significant change between the previous reports and the one of the first quarter of 2017 where there have not been large acquisitions, but there has not been any reduction of the assets since it is complemented with the monetary policy reports. normalisation of the balance sheet was to begin until the end of 2017 and various statements have given hints that this normalisation will be very slow to not affect the credit market and therefore the economy.

In the May report, SOMA’s holdings did not show large changes in line with market expectations, which still did not expect any reduction in holdings. Agency debt holdings decreased between February and April due to the maturity of the bonds and the holding of MBS also decreased due to a difference between the payment times of the principal and when this amount was reinvested.

Since mid-2014 the Federal Reserve was one of the first central banks to issue press releases informing the market of its intentions to begin the normalisation of the balance sheet since the objective of this unconventional policy had been achieved for the bank. After knowing these intentions, the markets were a little volatile given that this would mean less liquidity for the market and for the financial system, and possibly higher interest rates for banks which would lead investors to review their portfolios.

In the August report, there were few changes in the bank’s assets due to the policy of reinvesting the treasury securities in auctions. The agency debt decreased as in the previous reports due to the maturity of the bonds while the MBS did not change its amount in the balance. If this report is complemented with the monetary policy report of the Federal Reserve, the market concluded that the normalisation program would begin in October. In addition, the last rise in the interest rate of the federal funds occurred at the June meeting so the market had a great expectation regarding the normalisation of monetary policy in general and that included the balance sheet.

In the report of the fourth quarter of 2017 the FED explained that since the 20th of September 2017, the FOMC had announced that in October it was going to start the normalization program of the balance sheet where its assets were going to be reduced gradually due to the reduction in the reinvestment of the main payments received from the securities held by the SOMA. Principal payments will be reinvested only to the extent that the established limits would be exceeded.

Initially, the decline in SOMA securities holdings would be capped at $6 billion per month for Treasury securities and $4 billion per month for MBS. The limits could reach maximums of $30 billion per month for Treasury securities and $ 20 billion per month for MBS. From 2009 to 2014, the FOMC made a large expansion of SOMA securities holdings through a series of LSAPs that were conducted to support the housing market, support the financial market and give a boost to the economy.

Once the limits reach their respective maximums, it is expected that these values will be maintained so that the asset holdings continue to decline in a predictable and gradual manner, until the FOMC decides otherwise.

The gradual reduction of the holdings of the assets of the Federal Reserve will result in a decrease in the supply of reserve balances. The FOMC expected to reduce the number of balances to a low level compared to the one the bank had in recent years, but higher than they had prior to the financial crisis.

The level should reflect the banking system’s demand for reserve balances and the FOMC’s decisions on the correct monetary policy. This way of reducing the balance slowly would avoid large imbalances in the economy and possible effects on monetary policy. Although in the report the committee was clear on what the objective of standardisation was, no rank was given on the appropriate level of assets, which has been a criticism of these unconventional monetary policies since they had not been used actively before. What there is uncertainty for many analysts about what can happen after normalisation.

 

Graph 71. Domestic SOMA securities holdings. Data from https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/quarterly-balance-sheet-developments-report.htm

 

Graph 72. The US Treasury notes and bonds nominal. Data from https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/quarterly-balance-sheet-developments-report.htm

 

Graph 73. MBS. Data from

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/quarterly-balance-sheet-developments-report.htm

 

The above graphs show the total amount of assets held by the FED and two of the most representative assets on the balance sheet. As you can see, the MBS is a little less than half of the balance sheet, which reflects the large number of assets that the FED should divest, since some analysts believe that the equilibrium situation is where the banks only have public debt and not bonds, neither private nor corporate debt. These mortgage-backed assets are not as safe as public debt, so a significant reduction in these should be generated in the balance sheet.

With the data that is available so far, it is expected that normalisation will continue without problems because the pace of the US economy and the labour market have been positive. As for inflation, despite not yet being at the desired level, if it is close and is expected to increase over the next few years due to the good performance of the global economy, there is no situation that could affect this program. In the first report of the bank’s acquisition of assets in 2018, a difference should be seen with the reports exposed so far and with the graphs in this article.

The normalisation of assets has been expected since 2014 because according to some studies, this is the second-highest amount of assets in the balance in all history. At the FOMC meeting in November, it was decided to raise the federal funds rate up to 1.5%, so a rise in interest rates on loans is expected. Given this measure in addition to normalisation, this large balance sheet also maintained the low rates in the medium and long-term.

 

Categories
Forex Educational Library

Macroeconomics and its Limitations

 Abstract

Macroeconomics is the basis of the fundamental analysis of investors who analyse how an economy is, what are its most prosperous sectors and how is its regulation to make sure that their investment will be profitable. Although macroeconomics includes many models, it still has shortcomings that do not make it entirely reliable. Even with these restrictions, it’s a necessary tool when making decisions to invest.

There are many unknown variables in current economies, and there are questions like why some countries grow more than others, why inflation varies from year to year, why all countries suffer from crises and recessions, which measures can be taken by local governments to reduce the frequency and the magnitude of these events. Macroeconomics is the branch of the economy that tries to solve all these questions that are related to the economy of a country.

To appreciate the importance of macroeconomics, it is best to read newspapers daily or listen to the news.  Every day we see headlines related to the economy, central bank measures, trade agreements with other countries, the unemployment rate, and many others. Although many people are not interested in these issues, it is important to be updated as all these variables affect the lives of all people. For workers and independent people, the Central Banks decisions are significant, as they influence their consumption. Also, these measures determine the levels of investment in industries and commerce.

As the state of the economy affects all people, macroeconomics is a subject that plays a central role in political debates. In the elections of president, governors, and senators it is important that people give the necessary importance to choose who would be a good governor depending on their economic proposals. Other proposals of social and political reforms also matter, but economics is not a minor issue when choosing the right candidate.

It is normal that the popularity of a president would grow when the economy performs satisfactorily, and fall in the polls when crises occur and the unemployment rate increases. But macroeconomic issues are not only an important issue at a local level. There are meetings between leaders and world politicians to carry out joint policies among several countries so that the benefit is mutual, and development is equitable.

Although the world leaders have the job of devising and executing the measures that concern the economy, the work of developing models and explaining what the effects of those policies are is the work of the macroeconomists. To examine the models, macroeconomists must collect information on production, prices, unemployment and other variables from different time periods and several countries. The theoretical models, although they are not fully accurate, are a good tool to determine the effects of monetary policies, fiscal policies, international trade, among other measures, that the authorities can take.

The truth is that macroeconomics is an imperfect and young science. Since historical data is used to test the models, predictions about the future can often be wrong, economic conditions are never the same in two different periods of time. But with the development of several models in the last 50 years, the effect of some measures is clear such as increased public spending or tax reduction. What is often not well known is its magnitude.

Each era has its economic problems. In certain years between 1970 and 1980, some countries had problems with their inflation rates that were extremely high, while the opposite is happening in recent years, experiencing extremely weak inflation rates that do not allow central banks to execute policies that could stimulate higher growth in the economy. In 2007, there was a global financial crisis that lasted for several years. A financial juncture from which some countries still did not have recovered. There have been collapses in the stock markets, as well as the one that happened in the year 2000, when stock values went well above their fair value, especially in the technology sector.

As each epoch has its problems and different political and social conjunctures, it is difficult for macroeconomics to make accurate predictions about the variables in the future because contingencies will always arise. The historical facts of macroeconomics provide incentives to new models to explain past events and predict what may happen in the future. But the basic principles of macroeconomics do not vary in years or decades; there are specific rules that must be followed to model according to the data to which the analysts have to get accustomed.

While the models are far from reality, they are made in a simple way to be more understandable, and often a simple model that explains historical facts is better because a complicated model that takes more time to elaborate, ends up explaining the same thing as the simple model. The models have two kinds of variables, endogenous and exogenous. The endogenous variables are the variables that the model tries to explain, and the exogenous variables come as assumptions to the model, which are taken as true and do not need explanation. The purpose of the model is to show how the exogenous variables affect and determine the endogenous variables.

With the various existing models, macroeconomists analyse all the variables of interest from the savings rate and its impact on long-term growth to the impact of the minimum wage on unemployment. It is important to mention that not only one model explains all or most of the variables, but it is also a set of models from which conclusions can be drawn for fiscal or monetary policies or other types of policies that are implemented in the economy. To know how good a model is, we must analyse how realistic the assumptions and their exogenous variables are, because if they are far from reality, then the conclusions reached will be erroneous.

Another important branch of the economy is microeconomics which studies how households and companies make decisions and how these decisions affect the market which is the place of interaction between agents. A principle of microeconomics is to assume that companies and households have budget constraints, but always try to maximise their benefit.

Given this analysis of companies and people, microeconomics and macroeconomics are related, since microeconomics starts with the most specific aspects of households and their relationship with companies, and macroeconomics is more general, studying not only this relationship but also studying other components that may affect this relationship and factors beyond these two agents such as international trade, the interest rate, public spending of the government, the rate of investment in an economy, etc. The following graph summarizes the difference between macroeconomics and microeconomics.

macroeconomics and microeconomics

Graph 40. Microeconomics and Macroeconomics. Retrieved 10th December 2017. From https://byjus.com/commerce/microeconomics-and-macroeconomics-study-material/

After decades and decades of studies and new models, there are some lessons that macroeconomists have learned about how the economy works and what its limitations are. One of the most important facts that have been learned is that in the long term the capacity of a country to produce more goods and services will determine the quality of life of its inhabitants. To measure this productive capacity, we have the indicator of real gross domestic product (GDP), which does not consider equality metrics in the distribution of that production, but it serves as an approximation of the quality of life.

It has been established that in countries with higher GDP per capita, the population have higher purchasing power, better social indicators, better health system and even better media coverage.

In the long term, the gross domestic product depends on factors of production such as physical capital, human capital, the technological level of the country and the work required to produce goods and services. Domestic production increases when these factors improve or increase. For example, if more technology is used in production, it will be more efficient, it will require fewer working hours and capital, and therefore companies will be able to produce more. Or when a government encourages and gives access to better education for its population, workers will be capable of performing duties that were previously not capable.

As already mentioned in the previous paragraph, there are several policies a government could adopt to increase the production of goods and services. One of them could be incentives to increase the savings rate,  which serve as an investment source in the future, higher efficiency in production, improve existing standards and institutions that allow the market to have no frictions or information asymmetries among others. That is, there are many ways in which the government can intervene in the trend in which the economy has, but it must act based on studies to know what could be the possible effects of the intervention.

Another important lesson is that in the short-term aggregate demand directly influences the number of goods and services produced within a country. That is a result of the behaviour of prices since in the short term they are almost fixed and do not vary much. Therefore, the factors that affect aggregate demand in the short term will end up affecting domestic production. Fiscal and monetary policies and possible shocks to the goods and services market are directly responsible for the behaviour of the economy in the short term, thus determining production and the unemployment rate.

The third important lesson that macroeconomists have learned is that in the long term the rate of growth of money determines the rate of inflation, but has no influence on real variables such as the growth of production or the rate of employment. When a central bank prints more money, in the long term it will not encourage production or employment, it will only cause a devaluation of the currency due to higher inflation rates. In addition, these higher inflation rates will cause increases in the nominal interest rate. But the fact is that being a nominal variable, the growth of money will not affect real variables in the long term such as employment because the variables that determine that is the rate of layoffs and hiring.

The last significant lesson is that, in the short term, those in charge of monetary and fiscal policies face a tradeoff between inflation and unemployment. Although inflation and unemployment are not related in the long term, in the short term they are. Therefore, often authorities must choose which variable to manage. In the short term, the authorities can use fiscal and monetary policies to expand aggregate demand, which will reduce unemployment, but increase the rate of inflation or in an opposite case, they can use contractionary policies in demand which will control inflation, but will affect jobs. In the long term, they stop being correlated because the expectations of the agents are involved.

Now we will show the factors that macroeconomists have not been able to solve. One of the biggest criticisms to macroeconomics is that alternative theories are not considered, that the whole theory is based on neoclassical models, with assumptions about certain behaviours of the agents and the market that other theories debate.  So the possible errors that the models may produce are widespread because there is no debate on the theoretical principles.

The classical theory assumes a natural rate of unemployment and a potential rate of production. But some economists suggest that these levels are not fixed, they change over time depending on the institutions established and the policies implemented by governments, so it is a mistake to talk about these key levels of the economy.

Another important problem is that many times in those models, which are based on historical facts, they attain results not applicable at present. That is, the growth of countries in the past can be explained, but when lagging countries try to implement the policies that allowed that growth, they cannot achieve the same results. But this is not only a criticism of macroeconomics. It is a crisis in general on economic studies because they manage to explain why the crises happened, but fail to prevent them.

Another problem of macroeconomics is that some economists suggest that it is better not to intervene in the economy due to the lack of precision of the models, and therefore, it is not entirely known whether a policy will have the desired effects on the variables analysed. Also, authorities might pursue political goals such as obtaining popularity or votes, so they would use models and studies that favour them, that might not always be the best for the population.

A neoclassical theory emerged in the late 60s and 70s due to several years of economic weakness and with several recessions in between. The main authorities of countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States tried to encourage the accumulation of physical capital over labour as the predominant factor in retaking corporate and economic profit rates. With these reforms aimed at higher profit margins of companies, the world economy seemed to enter a new stage of bonanza, for which they began to reject alternative theories and its predecessor, the Keynesian theory seemed obsolete.

But the volatility experienced in the last two decades, and mainly the 2007 crisis, is the evidence that the theory aims to understand the economic crises, but fails to prevent highly significant events such as that one that started 10 years ago:  A huge financial breakdown from which many countries have struggled to recover, and the well-being achieved in decades disappeared in a matter of years. This lack of foresight about that episode is evidence of the lack of communication of the neoclassical theory with other theories that perhaps might contribute to the appearance of new concepts that might lead to a better general welfare.

In conclusion, macroeconomics is a branch of the economy that studies the big variables such as unemployment, production, investment and savings among others. It has provided many concepts, and clarity about how the general behaviour of the economy is, and how its different components are related. But being dominated by a mainstream theoretical background that does not admit debates about its principles is a science with limitations.  Macroeconomics still does not achieve its purpose of avoiding major crises, and countries who apply policies based on macroeconomic theory do not develop at the same rates as the reference country. Despite its limitations, it is a valuable tool that allows for better overall well-being than decades prior to the world wars.

 ©Forex.Economy