U.S. Treasuries not the safe bet they once were, research says
Adds comments from U.S. officials
By Ann Saphir and Howard Schneider
JACKSON HOLE, Wyoming, Aug 23 (Reuters) -No safer than a bund. Or a gilt. Or an OAT.
Long touted as hands-down the world's "safe haven" securities, the behavior of U.S. Treasuries during and after the COVID-19 pandemic calls that label into question, suggesting they are little different from the debt issued by the likes of Germany, Britain, France, or even big corporations.
That's the key finding of new research presented at the Kansas City Fed's annual research conference in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. It examines a shift in investor behavior in that period that raises questions about the "exorbitant privilege" the U.S. government has long enjoyed to borrow broadly on the global market even as federal budget gaps grow ever wider.
It's a timely question given growing deficits are seen as a near certainty regardless of who becomes the next U.S. president.
New York University's Roberto Gomez-Cram, London Business School's Howard Kung and Stanford University's Hanno Lustig also throw into question the assertion that the Treasury market was dysfunctional in that period - as asserted by the Federal Reserve when it launched its massive bond buying - or just rationally pricing the risk of a massive unfunded spending shock then being prepared in response to the health emergency.
"In response to COVID, U.S. Treasury investors seem to have shifted to the risky debt model when pricing Treasurys," wrote New York University's Roberto Gomez-Cram, London Business School's Howard Kung and Stanford University's Hanno Lustig in the paper. "Policymakers, including central banks, should internalize this shift when assessing whether bond markets are functioning properly."
The researchers looked at the behavior of Treasuries securities during the pandemic shutdown of 2020, when yields shot higher not just for U.S. debt but for bonds issued by nations across the globe.
They found that investors did not, as they had during previous episodes of global financial stress, pile into Treasuries and drive up their value. Instead, investors marked down Treasury securities, much as they did for bonds from other countries.
Meanwhile the U.S. Federal Reserve responded to the spike in U.S. Treasury yields as if it were a result of market dislocation, they said, buying up bonds to bring back order to the world's usually most liquid debt market as they had during the Global Financial Crisis.
"In the risky debt regime, valuations will respond to government spending shocks, which may involve large yield changes in bond markets," the researchers said, noting that they found especially big market moves on days when fiscal stimulus was announced.
"In this environment, large-scale asset purchases by central banks in response to a large government spending increase have undesirable public finance implications," they wrote. "These purchases, which provide temporary price support, destroy value for taxpayers but subsidize bondholders" and may also encourage governments to overestimate their true fiscal capacity, they wrote.
PUSHBACK
The paper drew pushback from the audience, including Treasury Department officials and others who said it needed to account for uncertainty unleashed around the pandemic, the fact that hundreds of billions of dollars of fiscal response to the crisis was financed without trouble, and that more recently U.S. bond yields had been dropping even with continued large deficit spending.
The paper did not reflect "the uncertainty in the episode," U.S. Treasury Under Secretary for Domestic Finance Nellie Liang said in comments from the floor of the conference.
She noted that "with the passage of the Cares Act there is more than a trillion dollars of debt….and there is no sign of problems in that even during March or April" when global governments were first reacting to the health crisis.
Reporting by Ann Saphir and Howard Schneider and Dan Burns; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
