www.transicionestructural.NET es un nuevo foro, que a partir del 25/06/2012 se ha separado de su homónimo .COM. No se compartirán nuevos mensajes o usuarios a partir de dicho día.
0 Usuarios y 4 Visitantes están viendo este tema.
Repo blame game moves focus to hedge fundsHunt for triggers of September’s funding market blow-up lands at new location(...)The sheer size of the numbers involved is eye-watering. One former Wall Street banker said some investors, using a strategy known as relative value Treasuries trading, regularly made profits in excess of $100m a year from it before the financial crisis. Hedge fund managers in New York gossiped about a trader who is said to have made half a billion dollars out of the trick in 2016. (...)The story has all the hallmarks of financial villainy: greedy hedge funds creating turmoil in the market. But others say that it is a sideshow for the much larger issue of declining bank reserves and rising Treasury issuance that has constrained lending activity. The basic premise of relative value trading is to find differences in price between two assets that are nearly identical. One common way to conduct this trade is to buy Treasuries and sell related derivatives contracts like interest rate futures. In theory this trade carries no economic risk — you are buying one thing and selling another, very similar thing. However, because they are not exactly the same, there is a small price difference between them, extracted by the trader.The problem is that the price difference is very small, and therefore not very profitable. To make it worthwhile, traders take the Treasury security they just bought and exchange it in the repo market for more cash. They can then use this fresh cash to bulk up the size of their trade, repeating the process over and over, increasing leverage and juicing returns.(...)For the stability of the repo market, bankers, analysts and fund managers say the bigger issue is the amount of US government debt in the market, which is draining cash out of banks’ reserve accounts that might otherwise have flowed through into the repo market. The Federal Reserve reduced the size of its balance sheet from $4.5tn to $3.75tn between October 2017 and July of this year. At the same time, the US government’s deficit continues to increase, requiring sales of even more Treasuries. With many investors searching for yield in riskier corners of the stock and bond markets, banks have been left to buy up the debt in the absence of the Fed. If hedge funds had not stepped in as a buyer, bankers say that they would be pressured to hold even more Treasuries on their balance sheets — meaning even fewer reserves in the financial system and potentially worse turmoil in the repo market. “The original sin in the US Treasury market right now is not . . . people trying to profit from dislocations, it is excess supply from the US government,” said one repo banker. “If the US government hadn’t issued a lot of debt in 2019, we wouldn’t be having this conversation . . . The reality is that if the hedge funds didn’t buy Treasuries it would be a lot worse.”
[…] La mayoría natural electoral británica se la ha vuelto a jugar al sistema capitalista. A ver qué se inventa ahora el Poder Económico para impedir la efectividad del 'brexit' —y la consiguiente reorientación de la UE hacia Rusia y China—.
Yo ya no se si quedarme como estoy, comprar oro, acciones, corto o largo, piso o fondos, cromos, drogas, muñecos de star wars o plazas de parking.Nunca he entendido mucho de inversiones, pero entre la fed,la deuda,los buybacks, china, el brexit,los tweets de zanahorio y christin lagarta, han conseguido dejarme completamente noqueado. No se si es el fin del capitalismo o el inicio. Esto es horrible.Lo que parece cantado es que la era cero es un hecho. No se pueden subir tipos sin reventar todo, ni se puede dejar de imprimir sin sacrificar medio mundo. Asi que a imprimir...pero hasta cuando?
Está claro, a través de las repos y sobre todo de las reverse repos, como esta crisis es igualita que la de 2008, en aquella época las hipotecas se titularizaron y se lanzaron por todos lados como productos triple A, siendo mierda que sabemos como acabó. Ahora la diferencia es que la Fed está dando dinero a través de la reverse repos a la banca en la sombra y no en la sombra, quizás a esta última más, usando como colateral las MBS, mortage backed securities, hipotecas. Cuando todo explote el que va a quedar tocadísimo es el dolar, por eso ppcc dice que el euro va a ser fortísimo, aquí en este video se explica bastante bien y todo cobra sentido.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRQ1xVL09Wc Además el tio del video cuenta el porque se dispara el 17 de septiembre el interes de los repos, usa la pagina de la fed para explicarlo. En esa fecha es cuando aparecen los MBS que nadie quiere como colateral y se dispara el interes y a partir de ahí tiene que intervenir la fed y empezar a aceptar ese colateral para que el chiringito no se venga abajo.https://apps.newyorkfed.org/markets/autorates/tomo-results-display?SHOWMORE=TRUE&startDate=01/01/2000&enddate=01/01/2000
El problema es el siguiente, ¿qué hacemos si gana Trump, seguimos renovando repos a 30 días al infinito, nos inventamos repos a 5 años, lanzamos un QE con el mercado en máximos?
Demographics, a very real problem“Between 2011 and 2015 alone our country’s population declined from 11.2 to 10.8 million,” the article said, adding that forecasts point to a further decline.At the same time, compared to the 2.4 children per woman that were born in the past, that number has dropped to 1.35 children today.(...) This is the changing nature of people’s relationships within society and the fact that “traditional” families are hard to establish, and that they fall apart easily.The commitment and responsibility required to have a child presuppose desires and skills that are constantly changing.
Yo ya lo dije en septiembre, a la banca al Sol no le dio la gana de seguir vertiendo liquidez en los mercados de repos, no es que no pudieran seguir, es que no era su problema, por eso apareció la iliquidez mucho antes de que las reservas excedentes alcanzasen los niveles que la FED había previsto como conflictivos (buffer de liquidez de 500.000M$ incluido).
And in what may perhaps be a bet that sooner or later the Fed will launch a full-blown QE which again targets mortgage-backed securities, the FT notes that MBS account for the bulk of securities growth; an alternative regulatory reason is that banks can hold much less capital against mortgage bonds than the underlying home loans themselves.
Viene a decir que más vale ser esclavos que tener dinero. A-CO-JO-NAN-TE que eso lo diga un banquero. Mejor dicho, la gobernadora del banco. Desde luego, la frase es profundamente malvada o profundamente ignorante. No hay más.
En su discurso, el nuevo líder del BCE reprendió a los gobiernos alemán y holandés por no invertir sus excedentes presupuestarios en causas que considera dignas , como la infraestructura, la educación y la innovación para "permitir un mejor reequilibrio". En lo que respecta a la gente común, el punto clave de la política financiera señaló de manera descaradamente directa:Citar Deberíamos estar más felices de tener un trabajo que tener nuestros ahorros protegidos … Creo que es en este espíritu que la política monetaria ha sido decidida por m mis predecesores y creo que tomaron una decisión bastante beneficiosa.https://blackswanfinances.com/presidente-del-bce-deberiamos-ser-mas-felices-de-tener-un-trabajo-que-tener-protegidos-nuestros-ahorros/
Deberíamos estar más felices de tener un trabajo que tener nuestros ahorros protegidos … Creo que es en este espíritu que la política monetaria ha sido decidida por m mis predecesores y creo que tomaron una decisión bastante beneficiosa.
As for the punchline, Lagarde defended the negative interest rates introduced by her predecessor Draghi, arguing that people should be happier to have a job than a higher savings rate. This, as a reminder, comes at a time when virtually everyone who is not named "Draghi" or "Lagarde" thinks that negative rates are catastrophic, and assure doom for the Eurozone. When asked about the impact of negative rates on savers, Ms Lagarde said on Thursday that they should think about how much worse the situation would be if the ECB had not cut rates as much as it had. “Would we not be in a situation today with much higher unemployment and a far lower growth rate, and isn’t it true that ultimately we have done the right thing to act in favor of jobs and of growth rather than the protection of savers?” she asked. The unemployment rate in the 19-country eurozone has fallen from 12 per cent in 2013 to 8.2 per cent last year. GDP growth in the single currency zone was 1.8 per cent last year and the ECB expects it to slow to 1.1 per cent this year.Finally, for those curious if the authorities will stop at anything to destroy the currency and send rates to even more negative levels if it means kicking the can on a global, populist uprising, by just a few months, weeks or days, here is the answer: "We should be happier to have a job than to have our savings protected," said Lagarde."I think that it is in this spirit that monetary policy has been decided by my predecessors and I think they made quite a beneficial choice."