The Shortest Tightening Cycle Ever

The Shortest Tightening Cycle Ever

To be sure, this is a strange title for a blog when you consider that the Federal Reserve hasn’t even started to raise interest rates yet.

Nevertheless, given the Fed posturing and signaling over the last few months, and the employment report that came out today, the Fed is all set to tighten policy for the first time in a decade. My expectation is that it will raise the federal funds rate by 25 basis points in December—and then go out of its way to explain to the world that it will remain “data-dependent” and gradual in its approach to policy tightening after its initial rate hike.

I have no reason to doubt the Fed’s intentions on that front. I firmly believe that the ruling majority in the Federal Open Market Committee is still concerned about the fragile state of the global economy. Nevertheless, it will likely vote on tightening policy because the employment picture in the United States has improved. In the Fed’s judgment, it is better to raise rates now in order to slow things down, rather than to clamp down if inflation were to accelerate later. The Fed’s base case is that the U.S. economy will continue to grow at the new trend rate of 2%, and inflation will slowly begin to inch back. This projection also happens to be the market’s goldilocks base case.

The Decision to Tighten in December Could Be Misguided

I understand the Fed’s logic but also firmly believe it is misplaced.

In my view, the world economy is still quite fragile, as some previous growth drivers are fading rapidly. Economic growth in emerging markets is decelerating. Developed markets are undergoing economic revival in aggregate, but at the end of the day, the U.S. economy is the only bright spot in that group. The Fed is poised to tighten policy. And the tightening of financial and credit conditions that has resulted from a stronger U.S. dollar and modestly wider credit spreads, will likely slow down the U.S. economy and kill the growth momentum of its services sector, which is the primary engine of growth left in the United States.

Therefore, I strongly believe that by the middle of next year, the upcoming tightening cycle that will likely begin this month will prove to be a policy mistake and, as a result, may be one of the shortest and shallowest tightening cycles in history. I believe the Fed will then reverse course in the not-too-distant future as quite a number of central banks in developed markets have done in the past.

Even if my prediction doesn’t prove to be the base case, I would assign an equal probability to this scenario as I would to the base case of a goldilocks scenario in which a Fed tightening is gradual and the U.S. economy continues to grow at its new trend rate of 2%, with inflation getting closer to the target.

With that being said, I think there is also a possibility—not large, but also not trivial—that the Fed is behind the curve and my views are misplaced. In that case, the Fed’s dot plots provide the path for Fed tightening beyond what the market expects, which is more in line with the Fed’s goldilocks hopes. I think this scenario is less probable but likely to prove very problematic for the markets.

The bottom line, in my view, is that the Fed is likely to raise rates in December. This is a regime change and, though markets and asset prices will be able to handle this regime change, I expect 2016 to see modest returns with much higher volatility than we have experienced in any year since the financial crisis of 2008-2009.

Want to read more from me? Visit News and Insights from OppenheimerFunds.

Gaurav Chakravorty

Software Engineer (Leadership) @ Meta | Writing about recommender systems

9 年

Your prediction is probably going to be right. Unlike past hiking cycles, I agree that the case for hiking from 0 to 5 in 2 years is not there like it was in 2004. However, I think the more important rate that matters to long-term investors is the ten year yield. Allocators and fixed income have been missing the point for a few years now. Demand for fixed income and yield is higher than it has ever been. But I think those who are betting on a fixed dollar return of 2.2% on the ten year bond, that is for the next ten years, are placing a huge wager that all other investments including startups and stocks and home prices will return less than that over the next ten years! To that I don’t agree. Perhaps the reasons for such low bond yields are … 1. Fixed income has had a great run for many years! There is no doubt that the Sharpe ratio of bond funds like VBLTX have been better than a stocks fund like VTSMX. In simpler terms it has been easier to make money from bonds than stocks for like two decades. They also have had the benefit of making money when the papers are full of bad news, like 2008. 2. Why take risk as an allocator when you stand to lose more than you gain? If I am allocating someone else’s money like a hedge fund PM or an endowment fund manager and I invest in something that drops 20%, I am very likely to get canned. If my investment goes up 20% I might receive a pat on the back while my firm rakes in the dough. I feel there is a dichotomy of ambition and of risk taking. On one hand fund allocators are reaching for yield. On the other hand people are quitting jobs to start up companies like 1999! And rightfully so … we can see that the 99% isn’t getting anywhere in this financial world. One feels the need to take risks to get into this club of financial security! I feel the need for the day is for both sides of the coin to take equal risk, those with money and those without!

回复
Aashish Gupta

Strategy | Planning | Policy | CCEO

9 年

Why is fed contemplating this move? Has USA already entered into a virtuous cycle of demand generation ?

回复
Errol Anderson

Author of “Errol’s Commodity Wire”

9 年

Brian agree, a 1/4% hike will not impact the rich, but can dampen middle class consumption in a U.S. economy that is built on 70% consumerism. The Fed is playing a high stakes global poker game.

回复
Brian Tremaine, P.E. (Inactive)

Tremaine Engineering Services LLC

9 年

Nice concise argument. Makes very good sense. Those who have money will not be to affected by 250 basis points but the majority who don't will and that will dampen consumption.

回复
Chris Ferreri

Chief Operating Officer at Hartfield, Titus & Donnelly

9 年

While I agree that this will be a short-lived tightening, the Fed is in need of policy tools that current rates do not provide.

回复

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Krishna Memani的更多文章

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了