Did Investor Sentiment Affect Credit Risk around the 2016 Election?   Liberty Street Economics
Liberty Street Economics

« The New York Fed DSGE Model Forecast–November 2017 | Main | How Much Is Priced In? Market Expectations for FOMC Rate Hikes from Different Angles »

November 29, 2017

Did Investor Sentiment Affect Credit Risk around the 2016 Election?



LSE_2017_Did Investor Sentiment Affect Credit Risk around the 2016 Election?

Immediately following the presidential election of 2016, both consumer and investor sentiments were buoyant and financial markets boomed. That these sentiments affect financial asset prices is not so surprising, given past stock market evidence and episodes such as the dot-com bubble. Perhaps more surprising, the risk of corporate default—which is driven mainly by firms’ financial health but also by bond liquidity—also fell following the election, as indicated by lower yield spreads. In this post, I show that, although expectations of better corporate and macroeconomic conditions were the primary drivers of lower credit risk, improved investor sentiment also contributed.

Investor Sentiment and Credit Risk around November 2016 Election
Yield spreads of high-yield (HY) corporate bonds measure, to a large extent, the additional credit risk of the bond relative to a Treasury bond. As shown below, yield spreads (red line) fell leading up to the election, increased in the two weeks just before election week, then decreased again following the election and through February 2017. Investor sentiment (blue line) is measured by the percentage of individual investors who are bullish minus the percentage who are bearish in surveys by the American Association of Individual Investors (survey-based sentiment measures are recommended). Sentiment improved sharply by 20 percentage points following election week and continued to be positive until January 2017, coinciding with the decline in yields during this period.


Did Investor Sentiment Affect Credit Risk around the 2016 Election?


But Fundamentals Were Also Improving
Since investor sentiment reflects beliefs about future market movements, sentiment changes may anticipate news about the economy or firms that in turn changes credit risk. For example, improved investor sentiment in the corporate bond market may presage weaker macroeconomic performance and higher credit risk. Stronger sentiment may also reflect more positive news about companies.

In the last months of 2016 and the beginning of 2017, positive corporate and economic news likely supported lower yield spreads. For example, the change in twelve-month ahead expectations of company earnings per share had been rising since the summer of 2016 while the ratio of debt to equity, or leverage, was steady (see the following chart).


Did Investor Sentiment Affect Credit Risk around the 2016 Election?


On the macroeconomic front, retail sales growth was positive and rising (see chart below). The ADS index (which tracks initial jobless claims, payroll employment, industrial production, personal income less transfer payments, manufacturing and trade sales, and quarterly real GDP) became positive in December 2016, indicative of improving macroeconomic conditions. Also, oil prices had been mostly increasing since November 2016, further contributing to lower yield spreads.


Did Investor Sentiment Affect Credit Risk around the 2016 Election?


Was It All Fundamentals or Did Sentiment Also Drive Credit Risk?
So how strongly was investor sentiment associated with credit risk after accounting for firm fundamentals (that is, changes in leverage and earnings), equity volatility, and macro indicators? We regress weekly changes in the yield spread on changes in these variables and also changes in liquidity (measured by corporate bond mutual fund flows, corporate bond issuances, and bond liquidity in secondary trading markets) since improved liquidity is known to lower yield spreads.

The bar chart below shows the estimated contribution to weekly changes in yield spreads of changes in leverage and volatility (gold), macro indicators (dark gray), liquidity (light gray) and sentiment (blue) along with the actual yield spread change (black line). Lower stock volatility and higher stock prices (resulting in lower market-implied leverage) following election week implied a large drop in yield spreads. Positive news on interest rates and macro indicators also drove down yield spreads. In the three weeks before election week, sentiment changes contributed minimally to yield spread changes but did so moderately during election week and in the following three weeks. However, to the extent that stock market performance was driven in part by sentiment, the contribution attributable to sentiment may have been larger.


Did Investor Sentiment Affect Credit Risk around the 2016 Election?


How Long Did the Sentiment Effects Last?
The effects of investor sentiment on yield spreads continued to be apparent through the first quarter of 2017 but died out by the second quarter. Therefore, while sentiment effects were associated with the election period and pushed up bond prices for some time afterward, they may not have affected the longer-term path of bond prices.


Disclaimer
The views expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Federal Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the author.





Asani SarkarAsani Sarkar is an assistant vice president in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Research and Statistics Group.


How to cite this blog post:
Asani Sarkar, “Did Investor Sentiment Affect Credit Risk around the 2016 Election?,” Federal Reserve Bank of New York Liberty Street Economics (blog), November 29, 2017, http://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2017/11/did-investor-sentiment-affect-credit-risk-around-the-2016-election.html.
Posted by Blog Author at 07:00:00 AM in Corporate Finance, Financial Markets
Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The comments to this entry are closed.

About the Blog
Liberty Street Economics features insight and analysis from New York Fed economists working at the intersection of research and policy. Launched in 2011, the blog takes its name from the Bank’s headquarters at 33 Liberty Street in Manhattan’s Financial District.

The editors are Michael Fleming, Andrew Haughwout, Thomas Klitgaard, and Donald Morgan, all economists in the Bank’s Research Group.

The views expressed are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the position of the New York Fed or the Federal Reserve System.


Economic Research Tracker

Liberty Street Economics is now available on the iPhone® and iPad® and can be customized by economic research topic or economist.


Useful Links
Comment Guidelines
We encourage your comments and queries on our posts and will publish them (below the post) subject to the following guidelines:
Please be brief: Comments are limited to 1500 characters.
Please be quick: Comments submitted after COB on Friday will not be published until Monday morning.
Please be aware: Comments submitted shortly before or during the FOMC blackout may not be published until after the blackout.
Please be on-topic and patient: Comments are moderated and will not appear until they have been reviewed to ensure that they are substantive and clearly related to the topic of the post. We reserve the right not to post any comment, and will not post comments that are abusive, harassing, obscene, or commercial in nature. No notice will be given regarding whether a submission will or will not be posted.‎
Disclosure Policy
The LSE editors ask authors submitting a post to the blog to confirm that they have no conflicts of interest as defined by the American Economic Association in its Disclosure Policy. If an author has sources of financial support or other interests that could be perceived as influencing the research presented in the post, we disclose that fact in a statement prepared by the author and appended to the author information at the end of the post. If the author has no such interests to disclose, no statement is provided. Note, however, that we do indicate in all cases if a data vendor or other party has a right to review a post.
Archives