Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Fairyland

Qe 'sucking Out' Liquidity In Markets: Strategist

Recommended Posts

QE 'sucking out' liquidity in markets: Strategist

Happy realisation! After how many years?

The aim of quantitative easing (QE) might be to increase liquidity in global markets, but it's actually having the opposite effect, according to one analyst, who echoed comments from several financial institutions.

Antonin Jullier, global head of equity trading strategy at Citi, told CNBC Tuesday that the bond-buying policies implemented by central banks including the Federal Reserve and European Central Bank had had a detrimental effect.

"The lack of liquidity is coming from QE, it's one of the consequences...it's sucking it out," he said.

The aggressive stimulus was "one-sided," according to Jullier, who said it was increasing valuations of securities, but not producing more stock flotations or capital increases.

"The net inventory of securities has actually been flat for years now. So there are no new securities available," he added, calling it a period of "de-equitization."

Read MoreIs market liquidity your number one concern?

Central banks have been purchasing fixed-income assets in secondary bond markets since the global financial crisis of 2008. The aim is to boost liquidity in the banking sector and thus encourage banks to lend to the wider economy. As well as in the U.S. and euro zone, programs have also been launched in Japan and the U.K.

Some economists have lambasted the tactic, however, and more recently market participants have voiced concerns over hefty valuations as well as a lack of liquidity.

Steven Maijoor, the chairman of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), spoke of a possible liquidity crunch in the euro zone at a Reuters-hosted financial regulation summit last month.

Meanwhile, in November last year, a report by the International Capital Market Association (ICMA) looked at the European corporate bond market and concluded that its liquidity was "rapidly evaporating," mainly due to financial regulation and extraordinary monetary stimulus.

Citi's Jullier added that low liquidity – which is being seen across all asset classes -- was "difficult."

But not everyone is so quick to blame QE for the current state of the market.

Read MoreGoldman: Market going nowhere, so do this...

JPMorgan's Jamie Dimon and Larry Summers, the former U.S. treasury secretary, have both warned that low liquidity is causing wild intraday swings. However, they give other reasons for the moves, such as new rules from regulators.

"The banking system is far safer than it has been in the past, but we need to be mindful of the consequences of the myriad new regulations and current monetary policy on the money markets and liquidity in the marketplace—particularly if we enter a highly stressed environment," Dimon said in the newsletter in April.

Edited by Fairyland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sucking liquidity out is the right policy.

There are different ways to do it - with QE - by removing high quality safe assets that contribute liquidity and substituting lower quality assets (e.g. cash), or by levying a negative interest rate and then deleting the proceeds from that.

In an economy suffering from a lack of real growth or negative real growth, liquidity needs to be removed to allow markets to clear.

That is where the similarity between QE and NIRP ends however. The former subtracts liquidity from agents who are asset poor and the the latter subtracts liquidity from agents who are asset rich. Pick your poison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   108 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.