Liberty Street Economics
Return to Liberty Street Economics Home Page

158 posts on "Financial Markets"

April 11, 2016

Just Released: U.S. Economy in a Snapshot—More Data for More Charts



2015_economic-snapshot-june-450_art

We launched the U.S. Economy in a Snapshot in June 2015 to provide interested readers with a monthly update of current economic and financial developments. Combining charts and summary points, the packet covers a range of topics that include labor and financial markets, the behavior of consumers and firms, survey responses, and the global economy.

Continue reading "Just Released: U.S. Economy in a Snapshot—More Data for More Charts" »

Posted by Blog Author at 10:05 AM in Financial Markets, Macroecon | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 08, 2016

Reconciling Survey- and Market-Based Expectations for the Policy Rate



Reconciling Survey- and Market-Based Expectations for the Policy Rate


In our previous post, we showed that the gap between the market-implied path for the federal funds rate and the survey-implied mean expectations for the federal funds rate from the Survey of Primary Dealers (SPD) and the Survey of Market Participants (SMP) narrowed from the December survey to the January survey. In particular, we provided explanations for this narrowing as well as for the subsequent widening from January to March. This post continues the discussion by presenting a novel approach called “tilting” that yields insights by measuring how much the survey probability distributions have to be altered to match the market-implied path of the federal funds rate. We interpret any discrepancy between the original and tilted distributions as arising from either risk premia or dispersion in beliefs.

Continue reading "Reconciling Survey- and Market-Based Expectations for the Policy Rate" »

Posted by Blog Author at 7:00 AM in Financial Markets, Monetary Policy | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 07, 2016

How Do Survey- and Market-Based Expectations of the Policy Rate Differ?



LSE_2016_markets-changing-gaps_delnegro_460_art

Over the past year, market pricing on interest rate derivatives linked to the federal funds rate has suggested a significantly lower expected path of the policy rate than responses to the New York Fed’s Survey of Primary Dealers (SPD) and Survey of Market Participants (SMP). However, this gap narrowed considerably from December 2015 to January 2016, before widening slightly at longer horizons in March. This post argues that the narrowing between December and January was mostly the result of survey respondents placing greater weight on lower rate outcomes, while the subsequent widening between January and March likely reflects an increased demand for insurance against states of the world where the policy rate remains at very low levels.

Continue reading "How Do Survey- and Market-Based Expectations of the Policy Rate Differ?" »

Posted by Blog Author at 2:30 PM in Financial Markets, Monetary Policy | Permalink | Comments (0)

April 01, 2016

Hey, Economist! What Did You Make of “The Big Short”?



LSE_2016_big-short_bram_460_art

The Big Short has been making a big splash this year, racking up five Academy Award nominations and taking home the Oscar for best adapted screenplay. The movie provides a very entertaining way to gain an understanding about some of the underpinnings of the financial crisis, particularly through a few memorable cutaway scenes—such as when actress Margot Robbie explains mortgage-backed securities (MBS) from a bubble bath, chef Anthony Bourdain compares collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) to seafood stew, and singer Selena Gomez explains synthetic CDOs using the analogy of “side bets” made by people watching a casino blackjack game.

Continue reading "Hey, Economist! What Did You Make of “The Big Short”?" »

Posted by Blog Author at 7:00 AM in Financial Markets, Housing | Permalink | Comments (0)

March 28, 2016

How the Fed Smoothed Quarter-End Volatility in the Fed Funds Market



Correction: In the original version of this post, the chart “Average Daily Fedwire Payments Are Higher at Quarter-End” contained incorrect data. The chart has now been updated. We regret the error.

How the Fed Smoothed Quarter-End Volatility in the Fed Funds Market

The federal funds market is an important source of short-term funding for U.S. banks. In this market, banks borrow reserves on an unsecured basis from other banks and from government-sponsored enterprises, typically overnight. Before the financial crisis, the Federal Reserve implemented monetary policy by targeting the overnight fed funds rate and then adjusting the supply of bank reserves every day to keep the rate close to the target. Before the crisis, reserves were generally in scarce supply, which periodically caused temporary spikes in the fed funds rate during times of high demand, typically at the end of each quarter. In this post, we show that the Fed actively responded to quarter-end volatility by injecting reserves into the banking system around these dates.


Continue reading "How the Fed Smoothed Quarter-End Volatility in the Fed Funds Market" »

Posted by Blog Author at 7:00 AM in Financial Markets, Monetary Policy | Permalink | Comments (0)

March 23, 2016

Is Bitcoin Really Frictionless?



LSE_2016_bitcoin_sarkar_460_art

Bitcoin is the most popular virtual currency yet developed. Proponents assert that bitcoin can remove frictions involved in payment and settlement systems by eliminating the need for the financial intermediaries that exist in traditional currencies. In this blog post, we show that while bitcoin transfers themselves are relatively frictionless for the user, there are significant frictions when bitcoins trade in exchange markets resulting in meaningful and persistent price differences across bitcoin exchanges. These exchange-related frictions reduce the incentive of market participants to use bitcoin as a payments alternative.

Continue reading "Is Bitcoin Really Frictionless?" »

Posted by Blog Author at 7:00 AM in Financial Markets | Permalink | Comments (1)

February 19, 2016

Did Third Avenue’s Liquidation Reduce Corporate Bond Market Liquidity?



Liquidity Series III, eleventh of eleven posts

The announced liquidation of Third Avenue’s high-yield Focused Credit Fund (FCF) on December 9, 2015, drew widespread attention and reportedly sent ripples through asset markets. Events of this kind have the potential to increase the demand for market liquidity, as investors revise expectations, reassess risk exposures, and fulfill the need to trade. Moreover, portfolio effects and general fears of contagion may increase the demand for liquidity in assets only remotely related to a liquidating firm’s direct holdings. In this post, we examine whether FCF’s announced liquidation affected liquidity and returns in broader corporate bond markets.

Continue reading "Did Third Avenue’s Liquidation Reduce Corporate Bond Market Liquidity?" »

Quantifying Potential Spillovers from Runs on High-Yield Funds



Liquidity Series III: Tenth of eleven posts

On December 9, 2015, Third Avenue Focused Credit Fund (FCF) announced a “Plan of Liquidation,” effectively halting investor redemptions. This announcement followed a period of poor performance and large outflows. Assets at the fund had declined from a peak of $2.5 billion in May of 2015 to $942 million in November. Investors had redeemed more than $1.1 billion in shares since April 2015, and the fund’s year-to-date performance as of November had fallen below -21 percent. The FCF “run” highlights the need to quantify the potential for systemic risk among open-end mutual funds and the potential for contagion in the event of more widespread runs on other vulnerable funds. In this post, we first characterize open-end mutual funds that seem vulnerable to redemptions in much the same way as FCF. We then analyze the potential for fire-sale spillovers to other mutual funds if large redemptions in “at-risk” funds were to occur.


Continue reading "Quantifying Potential Spillovers from Runs on High-Yield Funds" »

Posted by Blog Author at 7:00 AM in Financial Institutions, Financial Markets | Permalink | Comments (1)

February 17, 2016

High-Frequency Cross-Market Trading and Market Volatility



LSE_liquidity_460x288px_08

The close relationship between market volatility and trading activity is a long-established fact in financial markets. In recent years, much of the trading in U.S. Treasury and equity markets has been associated with nearly simultaneous trading between the leading cash and futures platforms. The striking cross-activity patterns that arise in both high-frequency cross-market trading and related cross-market order book changes in U.S. Treasury markets are also witnessed in other asset classes and naturally lead to the question that we investigate in this post of how the cross-market component of overall trading activity is related to volatility.

Continue reading "High-Frequency Cross-Market Trading and Market Volatility" »

Posted by Blog Author at 7:00 AM in Financial Markets | Permalink | Comments (0)

February 16, 2016

The Workup, Technology, and Price Discovery in the Interdealer Market for U.S. Treasury Securities



LSE_liquidity_460x288px_07

The interdealer market for Treasury securities shares many features with other highly liquid markets that trade electronically using anonymous central limit order books. The interdealer Treasury market, however, contains a unique trading protocol, the so-called workup, that accounts for the majority of interdealer trading volume. While the workup is designed to enhance liquidity in a market with diverse participation, it may also delay certain price-improving order book adjustments and therefore affect price discovery. In this post, we exploit the tight relationship between the ten-year Treasury note traded on the BrokerTec platform and the corresponding Treasury futures contract to explore how the workup protocol affects trading in the interdealer market and to highlight the impact of technological changes on observed trading behaviors.


Continue reading "The Workup, Technology, and Price Discovery in the Interdealer Market for U.S. Treasury Securities" »

Posted by Blog Author at 12:00 PM in Financial Markets | Permalink | Comments (0)
About the Blog
Liberty Street Economics features insight and analysis from economists working at the intersection of research and policy.

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 for iPad®

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

Most Viewed

Last 12 Months
LSE in the News

Access to linked content may require a subscription.


Useful Links
Feedback & Comment Guidelines
Liberty Street Economics invites you to comment on a post.
Comment Guidelines
We encourage you to submit comments, queries and suggestions on our blog entries. We will post them below the entry, subject to the following guidelines:
Please be brief: Comments are limited to 1500 characters.
Please be quick: Comments submitted more than 1 week after the blog entry appears will not be posted.
Please try to submit before COB on Friday: Comments submitted after that will not be posted until Monday morning.
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. The moderator will not post comments that are abusive, harassing, or threatening; obscene or vulgar; or commercial in nature; as well as comments that constitute a personal attack.  We reserve the right not to post a comment; 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