Liberty Street Economics

« | Main

July 7, 2025

The Zero Lower Bound Remains a Medium‑Term Risk

Interest rates have fluctuated significantly over time. After a period of high inflation in the late 1970s and early 1980s, interest rates entered a decline that lasted for nearly four decades. The federal funds rate—the primary tool for monetary policy in the United States—followed this trend, while also varying with cycles of economic recessions and expansions.

By the late 1990s, interest rates had declined to the point that researchers began discussing concerns about hitting the zero lower bound (ZLB)—meaning the policy rate could not fall further to stimulate the economy if needed. However, it was not until December 2008, at the height of the Great Recession, that the bottom of the target range for the federal funds rate reached the ZLB, where it remained until December 2015. After about four years of higher rates, the federal funds rate dropped to the ZLB again to ease economic conditions at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. In response to a surge in inflation, the Federal Open Market Committee lifted the federal funds rate in March 2022 and has since kept it a sizable distance above the ZLB.

This post examines to what extent markets are concerned that policy might return to being constrained by the ZLB at some future date. We use financial market prices to study how changes in the outlook for interest rates and the uncertainty surrounding that outlook affect the perceived risk of returning to the ZLB. Our approach relies on the forward-looking nature of asset prices, which reflect both medium-term cyclical developments and longer-run structural factors that shape the future path and uncertainty of interest rates (see, for example, Bauer and Christensen 2014 and Bauer and Mertens 2019).

Uncertain Interest Rates

Our analysis focuses on interest rate derivatives tied to the future evolution of a key short-term interest rate, either LIBOR or SOFR. SOFR tends to comove closely with the federal funds rate, and other short-term interest rates tend to move in tandem with it. SOFR has replaced LIBOR as the primary benchmark short-term rate in U.S. financial markets, and a wide range of SOFR-based interest rate derivatives are traded. Among these derivatives are futures and swaps that allow us to extract the expected path of LIBOR through the end of 2021 and of SOFR since 2022 at various forecast horizons as well as interest rate caps, which can be priced as a portfolio of options and reflect the uncertainty surrounding the expected path.

We use these financial market prices to estimate perceived probability distributions for future short-term interest rates on each trading day. Our methodology follows Mertens and Williams (2021), where the expected level and uncertainty of future interest rates are captured through a normal distribution. We impose the ZLB by truncating the distribution such that otherwise negative realizations of future interest rates appear as zero. Note that we do not adjust the distributions for risk premiums that investors might demand as compensation for taking on risk.

The chart below shows the baseline estimated probability distribution of seven-year-ahead short-term interest rates on May 27, 2025 (gold curve), along with two hypothetical distributions (blue and red curves), represented by their densities. The dashed lines represent the portions of the underlying normal distributions that would result in negative interest rates and are thus truncated at zero in our estimates. The probability of reaching the ZLB in our baseline estimated distribution therefore coincides with the probability of negative interest rates in the underlying distributions. We refer to this probability as the ZLB risk. On May 27, seven-year-ahead ZLB risk stood at about 9 percent.

Effect of Expected Interest Rates and Uncertainty on ZLB Risk

Line chart tracking baseline estimated probability distribution of short-term interest rates (gold) and two hypothetical distributions for lower expected level of interest rates (blue) and higher uncertainty (red) by density (y-axis axis) and percent (x-axis); zero lower bound (ZLB) is marked by a vertical line, dashed lines represent negative interest rates; the hypothetical distributions are calibrated such that they imply the same ZLB risk, demonstrating that ZLB risk rises with either a decrease in the expected level of interest rates or an increase in uncertainty.
Source: Bloomberg and authors’ calculations.
Note: Baseline distribution is calibrated to seven-year-ahead interest rate projections on May 27, 2025. In this calibration, the shifts in the expected interest rate level and uncertainty lead to the same increase in ZLB risk.

To demonstrate how ZLB risk responds to changes in the expected level of interest rates and uncertainty, we vary the baseline distribution through two hypothetical scenarios. The blue hypothetical distribution has a lower expected level of interest rates, captured by the average of the distribution, but the same amount of uncertainty, captured by the variance across the distribution. In this case, the distribution retains its exact shape and shifts to the left. As a result, the likelihood that interest rates get truncated at zero increases, raising ZLB risk. The red hypothetical distribution keeps the same expected level but reflects a higher amount of uncertainty. As a result, the distribution curve widens, again increasing the likelihood of interest rates reaching the ZLB, similar to the results in Bok, Mertens, and Williams (2025). The hypothetical distributions are calibrated such that they imply the same ZLB risk. In summary, the chart demonstrates that ZLB risk rises with either a decrease in the expected level of interest rates or an increase in uncertainty.

ZLB Risk Over Time

We use price data for derivatives from January 2, 2007, to May 27, 2025, to construct a daily time series of ZLB risk for a range of forecast horizons. The next chart shows seven-year-ahead ZLB risk, along with the corresponding expected level of interest rates and uncertainty, using 20‑day moving averages of the daily time series.

Expected Level of Interest Rates, Uncertainty, and ZLB Risk

Line chart tracking the seven-year ahead zero lower bound (ZLB) risk (gold, right axis), expected level of interest rates (blue, left axis), and uncertainty (red, left axis) by percent (vertical axis) from 2007 through 2025 (horizontal axis); current seven-year ahead ZLB risk is comparable to 2018, even though the expected interest rate is higher, reflecting that uncertainty is higher now than in 2018.
Source: Bloomberg and authors’ calculations.
Note: Estimates are based on market prices as of May 27, 2025, and reflect 20-day moving averages of seven-year-ahead interest rate projections.

The expected level of interest rates has changed over time, tracking movements in the federal funds rate. It declined steadily from about 6 percent in 2007 to around 1 percent after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Since then, it has gradually increased, hovering around 3–4 percent since 2023. Uncertainty has also fluctuated, typically rising during periods of economic stress or major shifts in monetary policy. Uncertainty spiked following the Great Recession and the COVID-19 pandemic and has remained elevated since.

The expected level of interest rates and uncertainty surrounding it tend to comove positively, as seen in the above chart, with a correlation of 0.64. Theoretically, this comovement has ambiguous implications for ZLB risk: While a higher expected interest rate level decreases the probability of reaching the ZLB, a higher uncertainty increases it. Empirically, shifts in the expected level of interest rates appear to be the primary driver of changes in ZLB risk. Currently, seven-year-ahead ZLB risk is comparable to that observed in 2018, even though the expected interest rate level is higher. This reflects that uncertainty is higher today than it was in 2018.

Drivers of ZLB Risk

The chart below confirms that the expected level of interest rates is a key driver of variation in ZLB risk over time. The chart shows a scatterplot of the seven-year-ahead expected level of interest rates on the horizontal axis and the corresponding ZLB risk on the vertical axis, using monthly averages from January 2007 to May 2025. The downward curve in the data shows that the relationship is strongly negative and nonlinear: As the expected level declines, ZLB risk rises—particularly sharply for expected levels below 2 percent on the left side of the chart.

Expected Level versus ZLB Risk: January 2007 to May 2025

Scatterplot tracking zero lower bound (ZLB) risk in percent (vertical axis) by expected interest rate level in percent (0 to 7, horizontal axis) from January 2007 to May 2025; the downward curve in the data shows that the relationship is strongly negative and nonlinear.
Source: Bloomberg and authors’ calculations.
Note: Estimates reflect monthly averages of seven-year-ahead interest rate projections. Red dot represents May 2025 data.

This nonlinearity arises naturally from the truncated distribution. With interest rates limited to not fall below zero, the probability of reaching the ZLB in the future rises rapidly as the expected level approaches 0 percent. Conversely, as expected rates rise to higher levels, the probability of being at the ZLB slowly approaches zero.

The red dot in the chart represents the most recent reading in our data set from May 27, 2025, with a seven-year-ahead expected level of about 4 percent and a ZLB risk of about 9 percent. This is consistent with the historical relationship, as the red dot lies directly on the curve.

The Term Structure of ZLB Risk

The next chart shows the term structures of ZLB risk, the expected level of interest rates, and uncertainty across forecast horizons ranging from 2 to 10 years, reported on May 27, 2025. The term structure of ZLB risk refers to the probability of being constrained by the ZLB at the end of each forecast horizon.

Term Structures of ZLB Risk, Expected Level, and Uncertainty

Source: Bloomberg and authors’ calculations based on May 27, 2025, data.

The recent term structures of ZLB risk and uncertainty in the chart reflect a broadly representative pattern. When the current interest rate is well above the ZLB, the term structure of ZLB risk tends to be upward-sloping, meaning that the probability of being constrained by the ZLB mostly increases with the length of the forecast horizon. Similarly, the term structure of uncertainty is upward-sloping, meaning that longer-horizon interest rate forecasts are less precise than shorter-horizon forecasts. As the first chart in this post demonstrated, this increase in uncertainty raises ZLB risk. Current market pricing differs somewhat in that the expected level of interest rates is roughly constant across forecast horizons. At times when policy is already at the ZLB, near-term ZLB risk might be elevated to a degree that the term structure becomes downward-sloping.

With an expected level of interest rates around 3–4 percent, the perceived risk of returning to the ZLB over the next two years is about 1 percent. This risk increases to about 9 percent at the seven-year horizon and remains at similar levels over longer horizons. To put the current term structure into context, medium- to long-term ZLB risk is currently at the lower end of the range observed over the past fifteen years. The last time seven-year-ahead ZLB risk reached a similar level was in 2018. But the composition of ZLB risk has changed since then: While the expected level of interest rates at the seven-year horizon is about a full percentage point higher than in 2018, the current considerably elevated uncertainty offsets it and results in a comparable likelihood of reaching the ZLB. Updates related to the term structure of ZLB risk and the time series for different horizons are available on the San Francisco Fed’s Zero Lower Bound Probabilities data page.

Conclusion

Financial market derivatives provide real-time forward-looking measures of the perceived risk of reaching the zero lower bound in the future. This ZLB risk tends to fall with higher expected levels of interest rates and tends to rise with interest rate uncertainty. Compared with the past decade, current data show that expected levels of future interest rates are high. Nevertheless, ZLB risk remains significant over the medium to long term, similar to levels observed in 2018, due to recent elevated uncertainty.

Portrait of Sophia Cho

Sophia Cho is a research analyst in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Research and Statistics Group.

Thomas M. Mertens is a vice president in the Economic Research Department of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.

Photo: portrait of John Williams

John C. Williams is the president and chief executive officer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.  

Published concurrently as FRBSF Economic Letter 2025-16, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.

How to cite this post:
Sophia Cho, Thomas M. Mertens, and John C. Williams, “The Zero Lower Bound Remains a Medium‑Term Risk,” Federal Reserve Bank of New York Liberty Street Economics, July 7, 2025, https://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2025/07/the-zero-lower-bound-remains-a-medium-term-risk/.


Disclaimer
The views expressed in this post are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, or the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the author(s).

Comments

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

Post a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

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 Asani Sarkar, all economists in the Bank’s Research Group.

Liberty Street Economics does not publish new posts during the blackout periods surrounding Federal Open Market Committee meetings.

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

Image of NYFED Economic Research Tracker Icon Liberty Street Economics is available on the iPhone® and iPad® and can be customized by economic research topic or economist.

Most Read this Year

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 1,500 characters.

Please be aware: Comments submitted shortly before or during the FOMC blackout may not be published until after the blackout.

Please be relevant: 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.

Please be respectful: 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.‎

Comments with links: Please do not include any links in your comment, even if you feel the links will contribute to the discussion. Comments with links will not be posted.

Send Us Feedback

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