Tuesday, June 6, 2017

Post June 6

Hope all is well and everyones summer is off to a good start. For this note I am going to go with a different approach. In prior posts, I have gone with a macro themes and trade ideas. For this year, that has been slowing U.S. economic growth and a rally in rates, especially in the back end. So this note will encompass two distinct shifts; first it will not be me presenting a trade idea necessarily, and second, one of my mentors conveyed to me that I should "spell things out and not use abbreviations/vernacular so often," so in this post I will also attempt to be clearer with my thoughts. As Tolstoy said, "true life is lived, when tiny changes occur."

The topic I am grappling with is what has been a refunding of dollar liquidity since the end of 2016. Of course my core competency is typically in broader macro and not money markets, but the macro consequences of this "dollar" move has forced me to do some homework.  I hinted at this topic in my last post, when I talked about the potential for "counter flow" in USTs on the back of cheap dollars. So, this year alone, the rush of dollar liquidity has led to, FRA-OIS back near 11, which has caused a lot of suffering for ed$ puts, cross currency basis swaps (XCCY) are significantly tighter, EMFX is ripping and risk assets in the developed world have surged as financial conditions are near their easiest levels since 2014. The question the BIS has been asking, what unleashed all of this dollar liquidity? I am not sure it is definitely one thing, but this post focuses on one variable in specific, the US Treasury. Could have money market fund adjustments post 2a-7 normalized FRA-OIS, could the increased oil price post OPEC cuts have helped free up some petrodollars, could China's capital controls have kept Asian currencies in check, did the expectation of regulatory relief in the form of easing Basel III from the new administration play a role in increasing bank leverage. All are possibilities, but I am going to focus on the role of Treasury and why this reliquification of dollars is likely unsustainable if underfunded Uncle Sam is the culprit. The biggest reason I feel strongly about the US Treasury being a key variable in this dollar liquidity equation is, the evidence (presented below) suggests that something changed in late December of 2016 in terms of dollar funding, this happens to coincide with the Treasury's cash balance falling by around $350b, providing the global banking system with much needed dollars. The question is, if the treasury needs to reload in terms of issuance, as they will likely have to do later this year, does that suck up all of this dollar liquidity. What has stoked this fear for me is that the Fed is looking likely to change their SOMA policy by year end as they cannot tolerate this relentless flattening in the curve (I do not believe a tepid b/s rolloff through caps will steepen the curve, I have touched on that in previous posts). The combination of b/s roll offs and Uncle Sam desperate for cash (need to extend debt ceiling) with twelve month trailing tax receipts negative, dollar liquidity could get soaked back up again and the dollar shortage theme will remerge.

Part of the reason I am fearful of this topic is, the knock on effect onto my core positions in rates is somewhat unknown to me. If dollar liquidity is again to recede, do USTs act as a guaranteed claim on USD long term, or does what I talked about last post, the potential for counter flow in this "cheap" dollar world end, and force trade surplus nations to cover their effective dollar shorts, i.e. selling dollar reserves. I guess my transition into Q3 and onwards could look to be long dollars, which is now becoming a consensus short. Monitoring Treasury refunding statements and debt ceiling developments will be crucial in assessing when this dollar liquidity train will halt and the right timing for putting on dollar longs. The knock on effects of this are significant to EM, China and thus the Fed.

How did we get here?

If one is to look at where dollar liquidity would manifest itself, for me, there are three key places. First, EMFX will always show you as EM is structurally short around $10.5T in dollars according to the BIS. Second, funding markets through FRA-OIS and XCCY will give you a decent idea. Third, is in FCI, as credit is so intercorrelated to commodities, dollar liquidity always plays a big role in determining financial conditions. In a paper last year, the BIS deemed the dollar as the new VIX. Well, since the middle of December, the Fed has hiked twice and raised the dots and their December meeting in hopes of tightening financial conditions, at least to an extent. The response has been remarkable, from EM to credit spreads in the U.S.

Mnuchin's Unintentional dollar QE. US TSY Cash Balance vs FRA-OIS



While the Fed was busy tightening the screws, the Treasury, in hopes of avoiding the debt ceiling unleashed a wave of dollar liquidity by paying down its cash balance. The ripple effect has cost ed$ put buyers a lot of money, as FRA-OIS has been crushed by this rush of liquidity. So in a sense, during the Fed's "tightening" cycle, we are witnessing the easiest financial conditions since '14, a bull market in EMFX and credit spreads near their tights. What has contributed to me thinking the big catalyst in this liquidity rush, is the massive drawdown in the Treasury cash balance, as the response in timing seems to match the beginning of Q1.

Something Changed at the very Beginning of Q1



So effectively, as the Treasury's cash balance was taken down, cross currency basis swaps tightened. One of the reasons I find it likely that this catalyst is more likely then say a regulatory shift that would free up bank balance sheets for arbitrage, is that these changes take time, and as we see above, the three month basis in EUR has moved considerably tighter. So to me, it looks more likely that Treasury was the catalyst in freeing up cheaper dollars. 

Rip fest in dollar liquidity seen in XCCY, coincided with TSY move in Cash Balance



It just cannot be coincidental that as the Treasury essentially flooded the system with +350B of reserves, there was massive narrowing in $/DM FX basis. What has also helped, especially in the EUR basis, is the relative calm in the banking sector. Towards the end of last summer, when DBK was collapsing, EUR 3 month XCCY was blowing out, as funding pressures reverberated throughout the European banking system. As the EGB curve have steepened a bit, banks are hanging in. To me, curves, especially in the core, could be ripe for flattening as inflation slows. The ECB will conscious of this effect on the banks and pensions. Another reason why I like EUR shorts, what if receding dollar liquidity from increased Treasury issuance coincides with flattening curves in the core?

German Inflation (April # below) is in Trouble if China Slowing Persists




This chart already served me well going into the May flash HICP inflation number, but a slowing of Chinese imports will continue to weigh on price pressures in Germany. Given slowing inflation and carry+roll in the belly, it should stay relatively bid. This will only be enhanced if dovish Mario ignores scarcity concerns in his PSPP program.

EMFX v FRA-OIS, One in the Same




What has become clear is that something reversed EM flows towards the end of last year. Going into December, EM was a consensus short as the Fed was poised to steer more hawkish and the dollar was advancing. But, following the Treasury's move to stave off debt ceiling, dollar liquidity flooded the system and EMFX ripped. Of course this was helped by increased Chinese aggregate demand on the back of expanded fiscal moves in the industrial sector, but that was already taking place on a lagged effect since Q3. Something staved off a dollar shortfall in Asia, my feeling is it was the US Treasury, unbeknownst to them. The question is, why did EMFX ignore a hawkish FOMC path at the same time the US Treasury was staving off debt ceiling by paying down its cash balance. Unfortunately for EM, this has created a false sense of dollar calm. So far this year, we have seen record USD issuance. in Q1, EM governments issued a record $179B in USD denominated debt. Effectively EM on quarterly basis, went limit short dollars and on what appears to be a false sense of liquidity. If this dollar liquidity is really just temporary, crowded EMFX and rates could be hit hard later this year, and this space is already crowded on the long side. If Treasury issuance is to ramp, I will be looking back at some shorts in Asia FX, especially currencies with poor FX reserve adequacy levels.

EMFX Carry Returns (%) Since Treasury led Dollar Liquidity Wave, Coincidence? 



Forwards Curves in TWD and KRW, Big Move since pre-Dec FOMC



This could set up for some decently convex option structures in Asia FX, if this paradigm of cheap dollars is to shift later this year. 

Fra-OIS (inv) v 10 EM country FX reserves



With domestic currencies on a tear, many EM countries have used this as a time to pickup some FX reserves, something they have been shedding since 2014. It is not surprising that this pick up has correlated to a collapse in FRA-OIS. In my last post I talked about the potential for this to occur in China, as the currency looked stable given interest rate differentials and "stabilization" in the capital account. Now, we are hearing China is looking to pickup some USTs. The problem is, if China is to experience dollar problems, like they did in the latter months of last year, the trickle effect in EM is significant. It is worth noting, the BIS assumes that 80% of foreign currency loans in China are USD denominated and half of the foreign debt owned by Chinese firms is in USD. As the rest of EM has done in Q1, Chinese firms effectively went massively short dollars in Q3 as foreign debt owed by Chinese firms skyrocketed to $1.2T in Q3. So the Fed could be beginning balance sheet reduction at the same time the Treasury is reloading its cash balance, and while all of this is going on, EM got massively short dollars again in the few quarters before. Q4 of this year should be most interesting if Treasury is really the cause of this abundance in dollar liquidity. 

Credit Spreads near Tights and Financial Stress Index at lows




Post Treasury move reaction, highly visible in credit spreads and the Financial Stress Index. Both have compressed to their tightest levels since 2014. It is worth reminding, this move will encompass three Fed hikes after the June meeting next week. But, if your approach is that the bank funding has functionally replaced Tbills as the Treasury lowered supply, is it surprising that banks "feel" better, they just got a boat load of cheap liquidity. 

Commercial Paper Outstanding Correlates to Asian Dollar Index




So as the Treasury frees up dollar liquidity, it makes sense for CP issuance to correlate to Asia FX. As LIBOR underperforms banks increase CP issuance, which they have basically had to as Tbill funding looks for an alternative. CP is also a key dollar funding source for foreign banks. As banks relevered, dollars were provided to the broader system and carry was aggressively chased. 

To show how interconnected the Treasury is in all of this we can trace back. As the Treasury went through its cash balance and reduced bill issuance due to debt ceiling concerns, cash pools had to access the market for bill equivalents in o/n bilateral repo. This led to distortions in GC repo v LIBOR. After the Treasury's move at the beginning of Q1, this spread blew out as the lack of bill supply flooded the bilateral market with cash. As we can see, this spread is beginning to normalize. 




It Does Not Look Sustainable, Treasury has to Reload and the Fed Lurks


What has become popular on the street is the Treasury's refunding statements. The May release drew a lot of macro interest. However, I think this interest was misplaced. The street seemed to be obsessed about 50 year bonds, something Mnuchin has hinted that he is inclined to pursue. Extending maturities makes sense, so the duration impact was obvious. Not surprisingly however, dealers were skeptical of the idea and seemed to prefer increasing issuance of longer dated maturities. This is not entirely surprising because without a change in capital requirements, it is more costly for dealers to warehouse long duration risk. However, this should have been side point. The real question is how does the Treasury reload in terms of refunding this year and when? Treasury needs to run a higher cash balance and Tbill issuance has to ramp to facilitate that. This will bring government back to doing what it does best, crowding out. What could make this worse is that the May TBAC assumption for the Fed was that SOMA changes would begin in June 2018, not this year. If the Fed is doing roll offs in SOMA at the same time issuance at the Treasury is ramping (would need to more issuance than expected if Fed moves on SOMA this year), dollar liquidity will come down significantly as these two sources of reserves are sucking it all up. 


Source* TBAC Presentation to Treasury in May

The Fed's balance sheet shifts would have its own effects on dollar liquidity as there are significant ramifications on money markets, bank deposits, IOER, RRP and increased demand for HQLAs (high quality liquid assets). A reduction in the overall size would force banks to buy more USTs to satisfy their Liquidity Coverage Ratios for HQLAs, which also sucks liquidity from the system. So banks could be changing IOER balances for HLQAs at the same time as the Treasury drastically increases Tbill issuance to normalize their cash balance post debt ceiling. This feels like trouble. 

Just a reminder, according to the BIS, a stronger USD leads to wider Covered Interest Parity deviations in cross border bank lending. Bruno and Shin (2015b) model.



"A stronger US dollar is associated with wider CIP deviations and lower growth of cross-border bank lending denominated in dollars. We interpret the magnitude of CIP deviations as the price of bank balance sheet capacity and dollar-denominated credit as a proxy of bank leverage, and argue that such a triangular relationship exists because of the impact of the dollar on the shadow price of bank leverage."

BIS November '16: The dollar, bank leverage and the deviation from covered interest parity
(Stefan Avdjiev, Wenxin Du, Catherine Koch and Hyun Song Shin)

The Rates Conundrum. If Dollar Becomes a Problem post Debt Ceiling.

Just to leave you with a thought, as I will likely spend my summer trying to figure out if a "dollar" event is to transpire, what are the effects on US rates.  Can the dollar rise with falling rates? Well it did in '92-'93....... With that said, back end USTs should continue to rally as 2.15 still does not properly reflect growth and inflation both below 2% for 2017, and Fed that seems determined to get off the zero lower bound. See previous posts for more on my US macro view. 




Thanks for reading and all the best,

Jonathan Turek





Saturday, May 13, 2017

Post May 13


For round three I want to look a bit more holistically at rates, especially in $ rates, where I believe there is tug of war between economics and flow. As I have been making the case, the U.S. economy is slowing at the same time oil prices are falling and China is deleveraging. Yet, in the past few weeks, $ rates backed up despite a break in cal'18 backwardation in the brent curve and a continued hammering of industrial metals in ferrous and non-ferrous. For me, this move in px in commods warranted a big rates rally as the ramifications for inflation and growth are quite apparent. (see iron ore v US ISM in last post). Of course the Fed getting June priced has had an effect on the curve as well, but the back end move looks to have more than just Fed mongering. On that note, I would be getting out of the 2s and silver shorts from last piece, as the market has reassigned almost 10 more bps to the ff curve for this year, which should be a peak at almost 1.5 hikes. 

There are two things clearly weighing on USTs in the back end, however, even if they were to continue, rates eventually price the expected path of inflation and growth and both are trending lower.


1) As I talked about in the previous note, which I have seemingly discounted, the Fed has a put in the yield curve and its having an effect on the long end when hikes are priced in. The qualitative difference in this tightening cycle is the threat of SOMA changes keeping ultras in range. A hawkish Fed into slowing growth should see 2s10s near 80 bps, but the “SOMA put” (I coined that) has prevented that. I actually think the board is using this as a policy tool to keep the curve in check as it bothers them why LSAPs and gradual rate hikes into escape velocity are having the same effect on the yield curve, this is the Bullard question. This allows the Fed to price hikes into the curve without pushing 5s30s below 105bps, even though Rosengren recently said, b/s talk is still just "speculative." 


2) The second point is the power of flows. As the three biggest holders seem to be inclined sellers, two have already been selling over past six months, and one is threatening to (Fed, Japan, China), the back end is nervous. In the second half of this piece I will try and dispel these concerns, especially on the Asia front. The case for counter flow in a time period of weakening economic data should bolster 10s for the next 3-6 months.


First, a macro view


The Fed has an aggregate demand problem




Considering the consumption issues we have seen in Q1, its not surprising to see the US's trade def with China narrowing. As the trade relationship is largely denominated in goods, it makes sense to track this relationship as barometer of aggregate demand in the US economy. This is one of the reasons in the post "export dollars import goods" world, the dollar strengthens into economic weakness. Going into the past two recessions, the US's trade def with China narrowed significantly on a YoY% basis, which is what we are seeing now. The Fed may have gotten their wish with employment gains, but the knock on into discretionary consumption is slowing.


Consumption is slowing again


The Fed will point to upticks in survey confidence as measure to prove that Q1 weakness in consumption was just a blimp. Consumption is turning lower again. Which should not be surprising since RWE from CPI is basically at 0, so wage growth is not there, which happens to be happening at the same time as increasing credit issues with delinquencies and charge offs rising. The Fed will brush it off into June, but can the board with a dovish bias, really tolerate negative consumption? 


Hard to see how PCE deflator goes higher with gasoline rolling




The move in the oil gut from crude stocks into refined products has taken rbob curve into a strong front month contango. According to the recent EIA reports, gasoline builds have been quite large as oil production in the US has surged to over 9.2 mbd. This will not be helped by the fact that the twelve month average for total vehicle miles is slowing. If the summer driving season does not save the gas curve, PCE could be heading swiftly lower into the Fed's desired third hike in Sept. Does the Fed get a third in if PCE deflator is back near 1.2, I don't think so.


Inflation, there just isn't any. Core sticky CPI ex shelter 3m annl




Peak inflation has rapidly turned into disinflation. Post election, the Fed has thought they were near target in inflation so a hiking cycle is justified. I have been making the case that Keynesian aggregates have diluted a profound truth in inflation. There are two segments of CPI driving core prices, shelter and healthcare. The problem that Kashkari and to some extent Evans has picked up on, these are not discretionary areas of the economy, so rising prices are not indicative of economic advancement. Getting to r*, wont help rents and healthcare prices come down. And the scary truth is, if it wasn't for shelter, deflation is alive and well. 


OPECs precious '18 backwardation is dead and its a big deal for g8 rates




I have been in the camp that the repricing inflation expectations and the surge in the inflation surprise indexes was largely oil related and rooted in base effects. The Nov OPEC deal was predicated on getting the market into the front end and have physical drain out storage.  While in a sense this did work, it discounted the pace of US production and more importantly exports.  Now OPEC is in a tricky spot pre their May meeting, especially if demand is slowing, which Vitol says it is. If the Saudi's lose control of oil, the knock in g8 rates is massive in terms of inflation expectations and the current paradigm of a pressured Draghi and trigger happy Yellen.

Copper curve (z7-z8) saying Chinese slowing should continue




Seems like Chinese deleveraging is getting a bit more attention. Despite the fact that I think a Chinese slowdown should lead to a rally in rates, the reaction is prudent, for now. Judging for how long the Chinese regulators will tighten in terms of liquidity is anyones guess. However, the copper curve will always give you a pretty good idea. Calendar 18 spread is back in serious contango, looking more consistent with sub 2% on 10s. If growth is to remerge, it would be shown here, and its not registering.


Does buba know the German effect?  




Part of my bullish bunds bias for this year was Chinese econ beta. The buba and Weidmann can go on about Draghi being behind the curve, because look we've had two months of above trend headline inflation, but if China slows, Frankfurt is in trouble. The knock out PMIs seem to track Chinese industrial activity pretty well, and those are pointing lower; 50% of German exports are China bound. The question for buba is, if China spills over in coming months do they back off Draghi? Hard to say, considering this is the same group of folks that probably still uses monetary aggregates as a predictor of low frequency inflation, so continuing m3 growth has an inflationary spill, even if growth slows. I continue to believe Draghi is trying to push through until the data drops off in Q3 to continue his backdoor bailout, even if there is a hawkish hiccup in June.


Bunds follow China Manufacturing PMI



Part of the flow vs fundamentals argument has also transpired in bunds, with different characteristics.   Bunds have gotten shelled in the past two weeks as April inflation was a beat and growth in core EU broadens. I talked about the flaws in the April HICP data in my previous post under buying vol in erz8, German packaging Easter effects on core HICP is always skewed.  My early readings for EU core HICP is back below 1, which is the safer zone for Mario to delay. It will be hard for him not to make changes to guidance in June at this rate, but calls for a taper announcement in Sept, seem premature to me. Combo of fading German data and more dovish Mario will lead bunds higher. If owning DM rates, would rather own USTs, but Bunds offer nice China beta.


Just as everyone is loading up on EUR......





The market has gotten excited again about the ccy pair it loves to short. The feeling of the tsunami of geo-politcal risk fading following Macrons landslide win, doesn’t warrant a +1.10 Euro in my view. I actually think the medium term case for a Euro short makes all the sense in the world and even offers a hedge to owning EGB’s. If the reason to rally for EUR is a faster rate of tapering, its an easy fade. ECB taper is arguably a bigger threat to EU stability at this time, given amount of sov debt due (Italy 800B in 3 yrs) and size perif budget deficits have gotten. So to lay it out; ECB pushes off more than the market expects, EUR sells off on rate diffs, case 2 is ECB announces taper plans in Sept meeting and the periphery spreads blow out, EUR eventually falls even more. Seems like a good short to me. 

Will the ECB learn from Trichet?

Vice-President Constancio: "Loose for longer is less risky than a premature withdrawal of stimulus"

Hard to cut rates into accelerating inflation, AUD 1y1y





AUD has been hammered in this China deleveraging. Without a serious China rally in growth, the RBA will be in pause considering their secular debt issues in the housing market, but it seems to me the likelihood of them easing in ’17 seems low as well. Consensus is now even pricing in a chance of a RBA cut in the back end of the year. However, to me, if the RBA is stuck, receiving rates in AUD has passed. Inflation is picking up over 2% and 1y1y trades 35 bps over o/n rates. Another thing is, its a decent hedge to the broader deflationary based book, second paying rates in AUD vs a market that thinks easing could happen with inflation over 2% makes sense. 

Receiving ILS rates, Flug and BOI will overlook inflation given oil  





This is an interesting one because the case to be receiving rates in an econ that grew 6% last q is one that is not often made, especially when o/n rates are 10bps. Im not completely sold on this one but as I think much of the inflationary pick up is transient, Flug and the BOI will be in no rush to move on rates. The early Q1 move in CPI seems to have gotten the market overly excited, but as oil related costs are big import cost for the Israeli economy, big rate of change moves can easily skew the number. I expect Flug to discount the CPI number as survey data in PMIs and consumer confidence is turning lower. Flug stays the course as energy prices revert lower. The other big thing is the strength of the ILS. BOI cant have shekel below 3.6., economy relies too heavily on tech, tourism and fine jewels exports, recent strength in ILS will not be tolerated. 


The Counter Flow Argument for USTs





What has become apparent over the past five months is that flow in USTs is strong weigher on price. Evidence has been in the JPY xccy which has tightened dramatically since Q4 as the Japanese have been big net sellers in USTs. Not going to get deep in this now, but I believe this has given the folks at the BIS a false sense of security with regard to the dollar shortage. As treasury reloads in issuance at the same time the Fed is supposedly going to be SOMA changes, dollar liquidity could vanish again. Anyway, one has to think the Japanese cap duration in USTs if hedging dollars is relatively cheap. Seasonally, Japanese buying picks up in the summer months, especially will be true if tensions with NK escalate further. USTs have been hit by a mountain of foreign selling and the market expects SOMA changes by y/e to be the dagger, I dont see it. 

Does China Need to Sell UST's to Defend RMB, This does not look like 2015



The difference between deleveraging and a currency problem has big ramifications for $ rates. Ive been in the China deleveraging camp but Zhou and the PBOC could actually be winning and the need to sell UST's to save RMB like November, is not there. Later tic data will confirm, a repeat of December in China selling is not needed. I also list a decent short play in BRL if CNH pressures continue to build. Of course if China does deval thats the ultimate boon for rates as it will unleash a deflationary storm. The question is, does China need to continue selling USTs to defend the RMB, it doesn't look like it from my angle. The other aspect is selling USTs has a negative feedback loop. When China was selling aggressively in Nov, the dollar just ripped on steeper rates. Selling in size triggers a dollar reaction China is looking to avoid. 

RMB is actually hanging in, dare I say. 

Inline image 1

Divergence in rates is now beginning to move in CNY’s favour.  The chart below shows 12M LIBOR v 12M SHIBOR. RMB is gaining a carry advantage, something it lacked it ''14-'15 when PBOC was cutting rates. 

Asia FX is strong, Wasn't going into China deval in '15

Inline image 2


ADXY is strong. The biggest indicator of China deval was seeing Asia fx blow out in late 2014 through 2015. So far in 2017, Asia fx has ripped. Many of these countries are big c/a surplus countries that rely on China in trade terms, if CNH was struggling, they would be also. 

If EMFX is about to blow out again, BRL will lead the charge



Not an expert on pending pension reforms but Brazil econ still way too dependent on Chinese econ development in the industrial sector. BCB is cutting rates aggressively, which reduces carry over MXN, (still love 1y1y in MXN). Econ looks stuck with retail sales trending lower again and unemployment persistently high. If CNH blows, BRL goes with it on weakening domestic econ that has a lot of beta to Chinese industrial sector. 

HKD stresses can be solved  

Inline image 3

People have been saying that the recent weakness in HKD is a test on HKMA and indicative of China weakness, as the USD/HKD trades near its upper band. Im not as sure, HKMA can raise rates following PBOC lead and spot weakness would soften, also 12m fwds are still falling.....

The perks of carry and capital controls (RMB demand and savings in Hong Kong)

Inline image 4

RMB deposits in Hong Kong have fallen 49% since their December 2014 peak and 24% since September 2016 to 507b RMB. This is partly due to cap controls of course, but also PBOC rates moves. The rate of offshore CNY deposits in HK has fallen below mainland rate for first time since 2015. PBOC tightening is working and cap controls could get them to national congress in Nov with stable CNH.

China holdings of treasuries inverted v 10y breakevens

Inline image 1

If they were selling, breakevens should have risen. Nominal exposure is 10x TIPS, so when they sell, it should be seen in breakevens.

Where would ER and ed$'s be if not for fears of hawkish CB's?

Inline image 5


For an FYI.... it looks like I didn't get this one out in time

June is a lock



Looking at the ed$ curve, a June hike is effectively priced, this is also seen in the ff curve which shows a +85% chance of a June go.  Of course my thinking is the Fed should be talking down rate hikes, which is still possible, but they seem pretty set on their 2017 agenda, hike 2x by Dec, so they can announce SOMA changes. However, in my view, the current econ warrants the dovish board to tone it down. So Im looking at a flattner in edk7-m7 as a pretty convex play in case June implieds are walked slightly lower.  Assuming stable fra/ois, the thing settles around 10.5ish, so risking half a bp for a walk down, which gets this spread to 7. Hard for the Fed not to go in June now, but even reducing implieds would make this trade a winner.





Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Post April 19


Macro View

Here goes round two. Instead of focusing on macro themes, in this piece I am looking at ways to take advantage of the massive risk premia in markets right now, thanks to our friends in Paris. 


Geo-politics have a tendency to garner all of the headlines, but my macro view has not changed much since the last post. I continue to think inflation expectations overshot, which we have now seen in the March data in CPI in the US and HICP in Europe, as base effects took a firm hold. I continue to think the US economy is facing a negative GDP print in Q2 or Q3 of this year. Consumption is slowing as consumers face a third consecutive month of falling real wages with a FICA rise coming, bank lending has fallen off a cliff, velocity of money continues to make new lows, weakness in consumer credit is finally making headlines (delinquencies been rising since q3), and ISM is about to make a big turn lower (shown below). With that said, the market has already began to adjust to a slower growth paradigm, Atlanta Fed has GDP for Q1 at 0.5% and ff has barely 1.4 hikes in the curve for '17. So while I remain in the peak base effects and slowing US growth camp, I would not be adding to existing positions that express this view. Instead, I am looking at geo-political distortions, set on Europe and Italy in specific, case for buying BTPs below. The market has a funny approach to polls in this post fact world. If they show a benign outcome (Macron/Fillon), you can't trust the polls because look what happened with Brexit and Trump. However, if it shows the two volatile candidates gaining ground, perif spreads rip as the market cries about populism continuing its march through the developed world. Either way, only the removal of the uncertainty variable will allow markets to normalize.


First, A Quick Peruse Around Non Italy


2s look pricey relative to ff Curve





Front end seems to be assuming the Fed may get one more in and done for ’17. The problem is, the Fed seems to be getting rolled despite them saying, balance reduction could start this year. Well, under the ’14 Fed statement model and Bernanke’s Jan blog post, we are too close to the lower bound for the Fed to move on balance sheet. I am still not comfortable saying the Fed will shift to balance sheet instead of o/n rates this close to the lower bound, it's just inconsistent with Brainard speech from Feb which seems to have been adopted in March meeting. So, if the market is pricing in a bit over one hike for this year, then b/s is not happening and curve steepeners could go back to bed. I think the Fed needs to get the ball rolling on saving June odds, even just from an optionality perspective. Fed gets back in short end $ rates, pay 2’s or hedge long green ed$’s with front end shorts in ff, v7 is barely pricing in one hike by Oct expiration. The Fed’s policy path is being torn up, they’ll play around before the data fully rolls, pay front end until that happens, not in equivalent size to duration pos though. Would be nice to just put on a 2s10s flattener and hit the beach, but b/s ramifications from Fed getting June repriced should mean there is an effective put in the curve, think the Fed will use that to their advantage for the rest of this year. 


Could be a short in silver also, especially if reals rise. Longs are off the charts




Like Gold better anyway, its outperformance should reemerge (gold/silver cross)




Still a big fan of the India story and its positive effect on gold prices. In India, there has been massive reforms put into effect over the last few years. Digital ID system, the reform of the tax system, and now demonetization. Unlike the developed world, India is actualizing reforms instead of promising them. Will give gold a non STIRs driven boost over next few years. 


Was Chinese growth a false alarm...... Copper curve says yes




A few if so's....


1) back end $ rates should continue to rally (China M2 YoY)





2) US ISM will roll (ISM v iron ore)





3) KRW curve should flatten (2s10s v copper)





GBP curve, duration still looks ridiculous (15y15y v 5y5y inflation swap) 




Probably the thing that keeps me up at night the most, other than the Jets' inability to draft which should be on full display in eight days, is GBP rates. As DM inflation expectations have been repriced, UK 5y5y's remain above 3%. However, the market has priced in an assumption that I clearly missed, the GBP has bottomed and thus inflation expectations should be capped. Another aspect is that the market has realized the Forbes dissent reaction was overdone, Carney is going nowhere, which should favor a steeper curve. I reject the notion the bottom is in for GBP. Tradeable side is weak, ca deficit around 4.5%, rate differentials are also weak around 110 bps inside the $ curve. So, the GBP will rally because May is calling an early election and just ignore its weak balance of payments and dovish BoE? Fade it. Once the GBP is faded, what I like to call the "pound put" is back in play. As the GBP starts to fall again, even on weaker domestic data, the market is forced to price in an inflationary knock on effect in the rates curve. So as the domestic economy weakens and ccy weakens, rates cant follow through in the back end due to this inflation premium, i.e. your "pound put." I am watching a return to 80 bps in 10s, then reevaluate, until then continue to pay GBP rates as a long duration hedge and worthy inflationary fundamentals. 



Can OPEC keep the market happy in the front (m7-m9)




The Saudis clearly want the market to be happy in spot. Obvious reasons for this as we approach local Aramco bond offering and IPO. While the market from my perspective looks to be fully supplied, recent EIA reports show inventory draws are beginning, could be seasonal. The question for me is, for how much longer can the Saudi’s keep everyone in spot happy with US production over 9 mbd and growing? Curve shows, not so much longer....There is also a massive practical difference between now and ’14, US exports have gone parabolic. Market share will play a factor in OPEC extension and time spreads are telling you they will be a big one, especially if Asian demand slows. The market will also have to deal with the possibility of OPEC disappointing, in terms of guidance or action in May. Oil doesn't look like an obvious long to me. 


Case for BTPs



What has become clearer to me in watching in g10 rates is that the best short cases on a credit basis, are actually the very reason to be receiving. Think this is the case in BTPs now. As I noted in the March 22 post, Italy faces a maturity wall over the next 3 years. I.e there is nowhere for the ECB to go in terms of b/s. I bet Draghi fulfills, "whatever it takes". Buy 7y BTP at 1.5%

7y BTP v 10y OAT/Bund

The bet is simple, until Draghi gives over the reigns to Weidmann in '19, Italian rates are capped, creating a decently convex play in the Italian curve. Obviously there is a gaping left tail that comes from Le Pen risk in France. I will not pretend that I have an edge on her chances, but I do think the markets paranoia about her actually winning is what has made BTPs very attractive, especially as z7-z8 spreads in ER have already taken ECB depo hike odds this year to the floor. However, owning BTPs outright into an event, ex ante, that I have no edge on, is not for me. I am looking at some eur/jpy hedges, despite the high cost of vol. Japan is the biggest funders of OATs and BTF's in France, which makes me favor that cross.

Hedge left tail in EUR/JPY


Knock in makes sense as I really only wanna own the thing unless sh*t hits the fan. In Le Pen win scenario, eur/jpy breaks 112 with ease, people dont realize how much the Japanese bought into the bund+ theory with regard to OAT's. Having an out of the money barrier should bring the cost down a bit, its a bit pricey but its not a horrible way to hedge.


 

I have always been amused by the argument that "QE doesn't work." While in a sense its true, Japan's been doing it for ten years at they're still in deflation, US has not had a 3% GDP year since pre crisis and in Europe headline unemployment is still around 10%. However, the question is, what defines "working"? Draghi's QE is meant to solve the problem below, not an abstract relative ideal of having 90's level GDP growth.


"The aim of the wise is not to secure pleasure, but to avoid pain." - Aristotle  


In 10s we have seen over 120 bps of tightening since late summer, not a sustainable trend unless something in Europe breaks. Gov interest pmts have been steady over the past decade between, 4-5%, despite a 35% jump in debt/GDP and a material slowdown in nominal growth. This has been Draghis plan all along. Put up the euros, monetize the curve and let budget deficits narrow without seeing much change in govt outlays (social stability). As there is no escape velocity in DM, spending 4-5% of GDP on interest payments is unsustainable.

Mario's plan

*Assumptions: primary deficit balances and interest payments remains stable at 135%. BTP yields stay in range, maturity profile is constant and nominal GDP is stable at around 2%. (credit to @gmactrading for showing me this)

Interest payments as % of GDP

2017: 3.31 * 1.35 = 4.46%
2018: 2.97 * 1.35 = 4%
2019: 2.73 * 1.35 = 3.68%

Without the current yield environment and what will likely be below trend growth, Italy is crushed under its almost 800B euro in obligations over the next three years. However, if real BTPs are left at zero or negative, Italy will be in the 3% range for interest pmts by the time Draghi leaves the ECB in 2019.


It's do or die for Draghi and Italy (I bet he does)

Someone needs to finance it.....
(Italy net budget balance in orange, budget def %GDP in white)



Vol in red ER is cheap if you want to hedge hawkish Buba 


3m erz8 100.125p (post June ECB meeting expiration) v German PMI





Despite making the case that Draghi is going nowhere, guidance could tilt hawkish in the June ECB meeting as the hawks will be clamoring for a shift from inflation to growth. On the HICP front, post Easter tends to receive a seasonal boost, obviously oil factions are waning but market maybe underestimating the possibility of inflation in core going back to 1%. I don’t buy it, but its cheap. Part of the reason I dont see ECB action this year is, where can they go? If they do depo instead of taper, curve flattens and their precarious banking situation comes back to the forefront. Taper is not really an option given the above need for periphery funding. I think Mario will let it run until Weidmann takes over in '19. 

German 2s10s v Deutsche Bank




Update from March 22 post and position sum up


Been a few weeks since the last post and markets have been rewarding receiving rates and fading growth. Despite recent gains, I would keep, rec MXN 1y1y, back end USTs and Bunds, JPY 10y10y, and CAD 2y2y. I would take off flatteners in euribor (erz8-z9) as ECB has been repriced post March inflation figures. NZD 1y1y, CPI could overshoot and market has taken off any chances of RBNZ hikes for this year. Also taking off flattener in edu7-edz7. Still good options in ed$, but I want to push out, think flattener in u7-z9 still will work despite recent gains. Steepeners in gilts curve continues to weigh as 2s10s back below 100 bps, but I am staying with it as it is natural hedge to long duration bias (expounded upon above). Paying AUD curve has also struggled as iron ore has taken it on the chin, to me, cant see RBA cutting this year so if China is to rebound mid year, paying the front end remains a decent hedge. Now, looking to rec 7y BTPs with a EUR/JPY hedge and short 2s in USTs. 



Thanks for reading