Well, well, well ...... who'd be a central banker ?
ref :- General
After the Federal Reserve's surprise (shock ?) move in slashing
rates by 50 basis points yesterday, we had to pen a little addendum to what we
were banging on about earlier in the day. Remember we were pontificating about
how effective monetary stimulus could be in fighting the Coronavirus-induced
slowdown, and the dangers of central bankers, and particularly the Fed, being
seen as reliable saviours for investors when things turn nasty ? As it turns
out, we didn't have long to wait before we saw new evidence of just how
difficult the fallout from this pandemic (is it one yet ?) will be for central
bankers, investors and in fact anyone else you care to mention.
The Fed hasn't executed an "emergency" rate move, i.e.
one outside of its regular policy meetings, since the Financial Crisis. It made
its move only about half an hour after a joint statement from G7 finance
ministers and central bankers pledging to use all available tools against the
threat posed by Coronavirus. They are the first, and so far only, of the seven
to take action .... and what's more, they went for 50bp when it has been their
norm to move in 25bp steps. All in all pretty decisive action, wouldn't you say
?
And the market reaction ? DOWN ..... stocks finished nearly 3%
lower. Of the safe-havens, gold jumped about $50 and buyers of US Treasuries
forced the 10yr yield down to a barely believable 0.91% at one stage. So how
does that work ? Seems like the Fed can't win ....
First of all, we have to believe that though the Fed, of course, wants
an orderly market they are not in the business of saving investors from losses,
whatever some investors might think. Monetary policy is formulated to keep a watchful eye on inflation and to protect and grow the economy and employment, and in the long run of course that will be reflected in share prices.
Yesterday's action had the opposite effect of what one might theoretically
expect for a number of reasons :
Market psychology -- taking such a bold and unexpected
step less than a week after saying that no emergency measures were being
contemplated before the scheduled FOMC meeting on 17/18 March gave the
investors the jitters. "What does the Fed know that we don't ? Wow, things
really must be bad ...."
Fed communication -- the action may have been
decisive, the conference given by Fed Chairman Jerome Powell less so. He gave
investors little reason to think that he stood foursquare with them. He made no
mention of the fact that the 13% tumble in share prices last week had tightened
financial conditions to such a degree that the 50bp cut in rates barely made up
for it. He also had nothing to say about measures beyond conventional monetary
policy.
Lack of ammunition -- if conventional monetary policy
is all you've got, you really need a bit more room to manoeuvre that anyone's
got right now. Yesterday's cut brings Fed Funds down to a band of 1.00 - 1.25%.
A further cut of 25bp is FULLY PRICED IN for later this month, and another 25bp
cut is widely expected in June. That doesn't leave much of an opportunity for
the Fed to spring any more surprises. If they've got any other plans in mind
beyond rate-cutting, they're not talking about them.
Frankly, it's not easy for the Fed and it's not being made any
easier by the President, who immediately bawled them out for not cutting
further. We have to wonder ..... if investors smelt a bit of panic about the
Fed's sudden 50bp cut, what would they have made of things if the Fed had followed
Mr Trump's wishes ?
Addendum to the addendum
A bit of a rally going on in stocks this morning, and it's down to
the results of Super-Tuesday and the votes for Democratic candidates in no less
than 14 US States. It's a measure of just how big the Coronavirus issue is that
for a while Super-Tuesday seemed to slip many peoples' minds. It was a very good
day for Joe Biden, whose campaign, of course, had got off to a poor start in the
early primaries. He now looks like the slight favourite for the nomination
ahead of socialist Bernie Sanders. The markets are certainly happy that the
chances of the decidedly market-unfriendly Sanders have been reduced in favour
of a more middle-of-the-road candidate, though Mr Sanders did take California
and is not far behind. Whether either stands a viable chance against the
sitting President is another matter ....
NOTE : Trump is 73, Biden 77 and Sanders 78 .... however else the
world has changed, plainly US politics is not yet a young person's game.
No comments