It’s fair to say that markets are now starting to pay some attention to the outcome of the U.S. presidential elections, and its potential implications for the price of key asset classes. As far the result goes, the incumbent Mr. Trump looks like a sitting duck. Mind you, that wouldn’t have been my position a month ago. I have been prejudiced towards the idea that a hapless Joe Biden and a “silent majority” in favor of Trump—or in opposition to the Democrats—would carry the president to a second term. Mr. Biden still seems hapless to me, and I suspect the silent voter is still on the president’s side. But neither of these tailwinds are likely to be enough to protect the incumbent from what is an increasingly disastrous performance in the face of the pandemic. Sure, we can argue that Trump has been dealt an unfortunate hand this year, but that’s the way the cookie crumbles. My predictions notwithstanding, the simple reason a Biden presidency is worth contemplating is because it is the outcome that markets are now entertaining. Recently, this view has been augmented with the taster in the form of the idea of a Democratic sweep of the Senate and the House. To the extent that it is possible to summarise markets’ assumptions about what a triumph for the Democrats will look like, it seems to be a relatively positive story, for now. Once Republicans have been put out to pasture, the counterproductive wrangling over the next stimulus bill will make way for a huge fiscal push in Q1, and the Fed will welcome such action with unlimited and soothing QE. As analysts from BoFA put it succinctly on Friday:
Read MoreI meant to publish this entry before I went on holiday, but time got the better of me. My initial impression of markets and the economy as I get back in the saddle is that I haven’t missed much. As such, after hitting F5 an awful lot of times to pull my spreadsheets into the present, I am left thinking about the same themes that I have since Covid-19 ripped up the script. Actually, I am pondering the same themes that I was mulling before the virus too. Economists and analysts are running out of ways to describe the current regime, but in a nutshell, the state of play is as follows. The virus was the straw that broke the camel’s back, prompting policymakers to double-down on the fascinating experiment they have been flirting with, in some form or the other, since the onset of the great financial crisis. How much fiat currency can be created before it either destroys capital markets via inflation, or perhaps more likely, sows political disaccord, if not outright kinetic conflict? I am neatly leaving out the prospect of policy actually getting it right, which is to say; the idea that a new equilibrium is obtained which allows monetary and fiscal policy to seamlessly leave the stage. After all, why would policymakers give up the power that they’re currently being offered by economic events? Luckily the answer to the first part of this question seems to be a very long time, and quite possibly well within the investment horizon for many investors. As a result, investors are being invited to pick up dimes in front of the proverbial steamroller, at gunpoint for added effect. History suggests that they will do just that, until something breaks.
Read MoreMany investors understandably remain focused on the rally in equities, probably with a mix of satisfaction and astonishment. As interesting as the virus-defying rise in equities is, though, the real story this week has been in U.S. rates, Let me explain. It started with analysts suddenly remembering that trying to shield the economy from the Covid-19 induced lockdowns is going to cost money. Markets’ memory was stirred by the U.S. Treasury announcing that it is planning to place $3T worth of debt in Q2 alone, a cool 14% of GDP, and that’s probably just the beginning. The initial response by many analysts was to extrapolate to a depreciation of the dollar. After all, that’s an awful lot of currency that Uncle Sam will need to produce, assuming that is, that the Fed is going to stand up and be counted. As I argued in my day-job, that reaction was surprising to me. After all, it’s not as if European governments won’t have to dig deep either, and it’s not clear to me that the race to throw money at Covid-19 favours a bet against the dollar. In any case, before we get to currencies, the incoming tsunami of U.S. debt issuance is also, obviously, important for fixed income, and in a world of uncertainty, I am happy to report that the movie currently on offer is one that we have seen before.
Read MoreI said my peace on what I consider to be the big market stories last week, so I won’t belabour bonds and equities too much this week. FX markets, however, could well be the driver of the NarrativeTM in the next few months, at least judging by the rustling of the grapevine. This story starts with the notion of the “global Fed,” which is not a new idea at all. Fed watchers tend to pivot between two extremes in their analysis of, and forecasts, for U.S. monetary policy. In one end, Fed conducts itself according to the reality of a relatively closed U.S. economy, without regard to the impact of its policy on the rest of the world, and the value of the dollar. At the other end, the Fed acts according to its role as a warden of the global reserve currency, taking into account the impact of its policy on the rest of the world. A more cynical version of this story is the idea that the Fed, in a world of free capital mobility, is constrained by the fact that other major central banks, in economies with large external surpluses, are stuck at the zero bound. This could happen in practice as tighter monetary policy in the U.S. drives the value of the dollar higher and/or leads to an increase in capital inflows. Both likely would drive up the external deficit, which would probably be counterproductive in an environment when the Fed would otherwise want to raise rates to curb inflation pressures.
Read More