找回密码
 注册
搜索
查看: 3346|回复: 28

[转贴] "Operation Twist" might be more powerful than many investors expect

[复制链接]
发表于 2011-9-30 10:44 AM | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式


本帖最后由 ByStander 于 2011-9-30 11:44 编辑

"Operation Twist" might be more powerful than many investors expect.

The Fed's latest effort to boost the economy is designed to ripple through markets. Here is one potential script:

    A fund manager sells 30-year Treasurys to the Fed.
    Now he has cash, but needs to use it to buy something with a better yield and/or similar risk characteristics.
    He snaps up some 30- year mortgage bonds.
    The seller of those bonds now has cash and may buy corporate bonds.
    The seller of the corporate bonds now has cash and may buy 'junk' bonds or even stocks.

As the Federal Reserve Bank of New York prepares to release on Friday new details about the central bank's rate-lowering program, some bond-market strategists have done their own back-of-the-envelope assessment already.

Their conclusion: Operation Twist could in some ways do as much—or more—for the bond market than its predecessor, known as QE2. The program also could prove to be a boost for stocks.

When the plan was announced Sept. 21, it got a resounding raspberry from the stock market. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 2.5% that day and had its worst week since October 2008. Stocks have stabilized somewhat since then.

Operation Twist was initially maligned by some market participants because it mainly involves the Fed shuffling its bond holdings, rather than pouring new money into the system. By contrast, QE2, so-named because it was the second round of quantitative easing, saw the Fed pump in $600 billion.

Even though Operation Twist hasn't begun being implemented, it already is having an impact on long-term interest rates. It also is affecting what bond investors are buying and selling, pushing many to buy somewhat more risky bonds like mortgage securities and corporate bonds. That's the outcome the Fed has suggested it wants to achieve.

"Operation Twist has greater punch than the QE2 program, or should," said Ray Stone, an economist at Stone & McCarthy Research, a firm that focuses on research for the bond market.
Journal Community

Prices on 30-year Treasury bonds have soared on the announcement of Operation Twist, at times driving yields below 3% for the first time since January 2009. The yield, which moves in the opposite direction to price, has fallen 0.21 percentage point since the day before the program was announced Sept. 21. Ten-year notes also have surged. Yields on both Treasury securities have moved off their recent lows.

Here is how the program works: The Fed will buy $400 billion of longer-term Treasurys—those maturing in six to 30 years—and in turn will sell $400 billion of Treasurys that mature in three months to three years.

Essentially, the Fed is sucking up bonds that have the most risk tied to interest-rate fluctuations. By doing that, the Fed shrinks the supply of those investments available to private investors, which raises the price.

But investors still need bonds with similar interest-rate risk, known as duration, in part because many of them have set duration targets within their investment portfolios.

Barclays Capital and other bond observers measure the impact of the Fed's buying through a concept known as 10-year equivalents, or the amount of 10-year notes an investor would have to buy to get the same amount of interest-rate risk.

In those terms, Operation Twist looks similar to, or a little bigger than, QE2.

Barclays Capital analysts suggest that Operation Twist will remove roughly $375 billion in 10-year equivalents from the market.

Credit Suisse put that number at $436 billion in 10-year equivalents from the market, more than the roughly $412 billion pulled out of the Treasury market during QE2. Goldman Sachs analysts estimate the impact at roughly $400 billion.

Those numbers don't count the impact of the Fed's surprise announcement that it would take the proceeds from its maturing mortgage-backed securities and reinvest them in other mortgage securities, which caused mortgages securities to rally and shrank the gap, or spread, between mortgages and Treasurys.

"Operation Twist is taking the exact same amount of interest-rate risk out of the market, so it should have effectively the same effect" as QE2, said Priya Misra, head of U.S. rates strategy at Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

But bond-market observers contend that the creation of new money wasn't what gave the QE programs their oomph, rather it was duration the Fed removed from the markets. Fed officials, including Chairman Ben Bernanke and the New York Fed's Brian Sack, who runs its market desk, also have pointed to the Fed's duration removal as a key aspect of how Fed policy works.

As the Fed buys bonds, portfolio managers see those prices rise, tempting them to sell. The managers then have cash, which they use to buy other investments that have better expected returns. To get those returns, they buy something slightly riskier, perhaps corporate bonds.

That pushes corporate-bond prices higher, pushing holders to sell and then buy something else, like higher-yielding corporate bonds. In theory, the pattern repeats itself, causing a ripple effect through the financial markets, pushing up prices of everything, even stocks at some point.

"It will force all money managers to venture into the riskier realm of whatever they're allowed to invest in," said Ward McCarthy, chief financial economist within the fixed-income group at Jefferies & Co.

But as Mr. McCarthy points out, the Fed isn't operating in a vacuum. Worries plaguing financial markets—soft economic data and the prospects for a disorderly end to the European debt crisis—might cause investors to stay in safe assets like Treasurys.

"We look at it in the context of everything. Not just this one item [that] suddenly changes our mind as to how we are going to approach things," said Bob Auwaerter, head of fixed income at Vanguard, adding that his funds, which have roughly $620 billion under management, are cautious in the current environment. "I would say at this moment, from a risk perspective, we have some risk on but we're pretty close to home."
 楼主| 发表于 2011-9-30 07:41 PM | 显示全部楼层
80个人看过居然没人评论?
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-9-30 07:50 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-1 12:16 AM | 显示全部楼层
回复 ByStander 的帖子

so why QE2 and OT have so opposite effect, I mean for USD and commodity? So did Fed expect that?
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-1 09:40 AM | 显示全部楼层
"The seller of the corporate bonds now has cash and may buy 'junk' bonds...",
The seller of the Junk bonds now has cash, and buy short term bonds from Fed, and repeat, repeat, ....
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-1 09:49 AM | 显示全部楼层
ByStander 发表于 2011-9-30 20:41
80个人看过居然没人评论?

HTer关心的是如何赚快钱,你如果告诉如何用5分钟棒做DT,保证呼应云集
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-1 09:55 AM | 显示全部楼层
市场很早就已经回答了OT是失败的
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2011-10-1 10:24 AM | 显示全部楼层
shoujie 发表于 2011-10-1 10:55
市场很早就已经回答了OT是失败的

OT好像还没开始吧?

点评

正是因为没开始才有目前这个反应。俺以为市场本来就是『预期』未来的『效果』。 OT对市场来说,就好像感冒药对癌症病人。市场已经看到了预期。  发表于 2011-10-1 10:37 AM
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2011-10-1 10:25 AM | 显示全部楼层
google 发表于 2011-10-1 10:49
HTer关心的是如何赚快钱,你如果告诉如何用5分钟棒做DT,保证呼应云集

我倒是知道怎么在五分钟内赚大钱,不过风险比较大,就不在这里说了
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-1 10:40 AM | 显示全部楼层
ByStander 发表于 2011-10-1 10:24
OT好像还没开始吧?

(本人拙见)

正是因为没开始才有目前这个反应。俺以为市场本来就是『预期』未来的『效果』。

OT对市场来说,就好像感冒药对癌症病人。市场已经看到了预期。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-1 10:46 AM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 xiamao 于 2011-10-1 11:49 编辑

我倒是知道怎么用5分钟棒赚大钱,small 风险,就不在这里说了,  

give me $30 , then tell other 10 more frogs  我倒是知道怎么用5分钟棒赚大钱,small 风险,就不在这里说了
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2011-10-1 10:47 AM | 显示全部楼层
shoujie 发表于 2011-10-1 11:40
(本人拙见)

正是因为没开始才有目前这个反应。俺以为市场本来就是『预期』未来的『效果』。

QE2呢?我还没听说有谁认为过QE2可以真正解决问题的,不过这并不妨碍QE2期间的股市上涨,或者说是价格扭曲
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2011-10-1 10:47 AM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 ByStander 于 2011-10-1 11:48 编辑
xiamao 发表于 2011-10-1 11:46
我倒是知道怎么在用5分钟棒赚大钱,small 风险,就不在这里说了


是吗?要不我们两个都在这里说说?我的方法肯定比你的来钱多而且快
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-1 10:59 AM | 显示全部楼层
呵呵,保护银行的interest risk, 等于送钱。
earning asset is fixed with interest income
liability  is floating and forward curve is artificially downward, if the bank has more earning asset, win
buy XLF
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-1 11:17 AM | 显示全部楼层
ByStander 发表于 2011-10-1 10:47
QE2呢?我还没听说有谁认为过QE2可以真正解决问题的,不过这并不妨碍QE2期间的股市上涨,或者说是价格扭曲 ...

OT的预期当然是基于QE1和QE2的。因为QE1和QE2是这样的结果,所以才有OT的预期。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-1 11:17 AM | 显示全部楼层
lehldk 发表于 2011-10-1 11:59
呵呵,保护银行的interest risk, 等于送钱。
earning asset is fixed with interest income
liability  i ...

回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-1 11:18 AM | 显示全部楼层
shoujie 发表于 2011-10-1 11:40
(本人拙见)

正是因为没开始才有目前这个反应。俺以为市场本来就是『预期』未来的『效果』。

回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2011-10-1 11:30 AM | 显示全部楼层
shoujie 发表于 2011-10-1 12:17
OT的预期当然是基于QE1和QE2的。因为QE1和QE2是这样的结果,所以才有OT的预期。

我有点糊涂了。你所说的预期是指对OT影响股市的预期还是对OT影响经济的预期?
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2011-10-1 12:01 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 shoujie 于 2011-10-1 12:03 编辑
ByStander 发表于 2011-10-1 11:30
我有点糊涂了。你所说的预期是指对OT影响股市的预期还是对OT影响经济的预期?


Both

实际效果只能拭目以待了
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2011-10-1 12:10 PM | 显示全部楼层
shoujie 发表于 2011-10-1 13:01
Both

实际效果只能拭目以待了

QE1, QE2对股市有明显拉升作用,对经济的改善则不明显。如果是“BOTH"的话,那老大的”OT的预期当然是基于QE1和QE2的。因为QE1和QE2是这样的结果,所以才有OT的预期。“应如何理解?是指跟QE1,2一样,OT期间股市会上涨,经济仍没起色?
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

手机版|小黑屋|www.hutong9.net

GMT-5, 2025-7-9 07:57 PM , Processed in 0.086299 second(s), 16 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.5

© 2001-2024 Discuz! Team.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表