Market Insights

Oh no, Not Another One!!


Well well well. Theresa May, you tinker! Isn’t it nice to know that some things don’t get leaked any more?? A General Election is now just 7 weeks away.  Rounding off a lovely 4 year period of a Scottish referendum, then a UK GE, then an EU Ref, and now another GE. Oh and some local council elections in May as usual too.

The BBC interviewed Brenda in Bristol, amongst others, who were astonished that we had to bother with yet another vote. Voter fatigue might be one factor that fails to deliver the massive Conservative majority that’s expected given current polls. There is talk of a 140+ seat majority for them with a lead of ~22pts over Labour (Thatcher won 144 seats in 1983 with a similar poll lead).

Turnout is one element that may make the final result quite unpredictable. Voter fatigue might be one thing, but surely disappointed Remainers will be absolutely desperate to turn out? Or Soft Brexiteers? If Theresa May is asking for a mandate to pursue her Brexit, then what if everyone against that view turns out while her voters stay at home?

Two reasons why that is less of an issue:
1) They would need to coalesce around an obvious opposition. 
Jeremy Corbyn is not that man. Remainers are already gutted that he failed to put in the hours for them over the EU Referendum, let alone centre-left Labour voters who are upset with him for failing to represent their views full stop. So it falls to the Lib Dems who have already been out to say “This is your chance to change the direction of your country”. But they could only hope to get up to 20-30 seats; not enough to put a dent into Theresa’s lead. The SNP could be a thorn in her side but having already wiped out Labour in Scotland what more can they do in the rest of the UK, given their renewed focus on independence?

2) Our electoral system means we vote differently.
The referendum was proportional: each single vote edged the result closer to the 50% finish line. But now it’s a general election, First-Past-The-Post. Those millions of Remain voters will be distributed unevenly through constituencies. For those hoping to turn this election into a mandate for a referendum re-run, or to at least affect the path of the Brexit negotiations from here, the Remainers will want to point to x million voting for ‘Remain’ candidates. But will candidates declare in that fashion? Will people vote in that fashion? There will be plenty of disgruntled Conservative Party Remainers who would struggle heartily to put their cross alongside anyone other than the Tories. Recent by-election results have shown it can go both ways: Richmond was lost to the Lib Dems, partly due to the strength of the Remainer view (and with outgoing MP Zac Goldsmith as a prominent Outer); but the Conservatives won a historic victory in Labour stronghold Copeland as Corbyn’s anti-nuclear stance weighed on a constituency where that industry is a large employer.

In other words, as much as this is the “Brexit Election”, it will become very murky to deduce anything from it with regard to what kind of Brexit we might have or whether there are regrets. That was a single issue. An election is about much more than that.

So what will we find out? 
– Absent a massive shock, Theresa May will return stronger. She called it; she will win potentially the biggest Conservative majority in decades; she will have a mandate. This improves party discipline: in the absence of an effective opposition there is always the risk the Conservative Party will provide their own opposition by splintering within. Sorting this out reduces the risk of a “No deal” situation.
– The Labour party may well want to lose this election badly, in order to try to force Corbyn out. Therefore don’t rule out the return of a Tony-Blair-supported David Miliband once the election is over. Or similar centrist. But that would take time, giving the PM momentum to get Brexit negotiations rolling before she still faces any serious opposition
– The Lib Dems aren’t dead and buried, but UKIP may well be
– The SNP won’t get their referendum until negotiations are done. For all the inevitable arguing that “Theresa asked the people, now let us do the same”, it’s unlikely they would want to actually have a vote until they knew what they were voting on…. therefore Brexit negotiations will need to conclude first

Expect a flurry of polls in the next few weeks. Expect the Conservative lead to narrow, simply because even distraught Labour voters may find the prospect of a massive Tory victory too much to bear. They may have wanted to signal to Corbyn that he’s useless, but now there is more at stake. Having said that, the strength of Labour voter feeling against Corbyn is insanely high. [Anyone else would start a new party… but historical failures for left-wing parties on that front have snuffed out any initiative]. Therefore the Lib Dems will benefit, meaning a Lazarus-like rebirth from their current pitiful count of 9 MPs.  But the polls will also focus on “Regretful Leavers”. Who would vote the same as they did in the referendum now? Ah, but the devil is in the detail: where are they based and can they bring themselves to vote outside of party lines? Or vote at all? Or maybe they regret voting Leave but their constituency MP has too large a majority to unseat? In other words, the polls are going to be even more useless than normal.

GBP has risen as we face the prospect of a stronger government, and a reduced risk of a disorderly departure from the EU (although that risk is still woefully underpriced). From here, the greater uncertainty still comes from the French election this Sunday, and the German elections in September.

Does a greater majority for TM strengthen her hand when facing Macron or Merkel? Possibly, although claiming any great voter coherence for a Brexit package when they are faced with the choice of a constituency MP is tough. But it probably gives TM the mandate to continue with what she has outlined thus far: leaving the single market and other EU institutions. If anyone were still in the Denial stage of Grief, this election will put an end to that. Hopefully we will reach Acceptance without too much Anger.

Ducks

An old colleague, when asked how he was doing, would always reply “like a Duck”. No, he hadn’t taken to squawking when around bread, but rather that he looked serene on top, but propelled by panicked flapping underneath. The market is currently similar. Although many prices of many assets are within the year’s ranges, and implied volatility measures have been falling, there is the sign of a flapping webbed foot or two emerging in the gloom.

Let’s look at our favourite cross asset chart:

This was normalised as of the lowest levels of vol in the summer of 2014. It’s been noticeable since the Trump election that FX and rates vol has stayed elevated as equity vol has fallen. But not in the last week or so. Those lines at the bottom are coming right back at ya. Various reasons have been given, not least that with the VIX around decade lows, it was cheap for a bit of France Presidential Election wobbling. Or for a Russia/US war. Or for a US/China war. Or indeed any other wars that may now be looming after the President changed his mind on Syria due to Ivanka’s (frankly understandable) upsetment. [Along with the market realising that “Republican Clean Sweep” doesn’t mean “President can do whatever he wants”, they need to wake up and realise that the White House staff is very much prone to change in terms of who is the influencer].

Those are genuine risks and should be on every investor’s radar. But these kinds of moves in the VIX may be symptomatic of something else: positioning. When all else falls quiet, that’s when we can shine a light on the tiny exit doors for markets where positioning becomes too big. There is still a large short position in US rates: the US 10yr yield is therefore still vulnerable to a wobble. But let’s take a look instead at another important market that has grown in size – the VIX.

[The following charts are provided by Variant Perception, an American investment analysis firm who produced this interesting paper on the nature of volatility.]


So during the period where the VIX has been a significant input into everyone’s risk management process, it has itself become a much more highly traded asset. This matters, because it affects its price. As VP explain [emphasis my own]:

We can convert the AUM of these ETFs into a USD vega equivalent after adjusting for leverage and short interest. As we can see from the left chart below, the vega from these ETFs is often worth 30-40% of the entire open interest in the futures market, making them a very significant driver of volatility at present.


 The right chart shows the impact of the ETFs on the VIX futures term structure. ETFs have to constantly roll their VIX futures positions from the front month to the second month (the two most liquid contracts). Therefore, when ETFs are very long volatility, they exert steepening pressure on the VIX futures curve, as they keep selling the front month contracts to buy the next month ones. Similarly when the ETFs are net short volatility, they exert flattening pressure.

This is all very obvious to volatility traders, and may already be obvious to you. It sounds very similar to the kind of delta hedging that goes on in options land. It might just remain a footnote in the dark netherworld, except that when the world goes a bit quiet, such as, say, over an Easter holiday, it could have a much bigger impact.  That second chart, of the VIX Futures premium, now looks – crudely – more like this:

This significant flattening in the curve suggests that the overall VIX market is short vol. That would make sense – after all, selling vol has been the winning strategy for the past 5 years or so:

Again, that makes sense, because central banks’ massive interventions worked deliberately to pump up our depressed deflationary animal spirits. They wanted a world of no volatility. After all, 2008 had quite enough to last us a lifetime. The trouble is, the period of no vol has also lasted a lifetime. The emergency turned into the norm. Selling vol became a strategy in itself. Usually, that’s fine. One day the world changes, the strategy stops working, and the world moves on. Creative destruction.

But what if an entire strategy were devoted to an asset that itself was an input to a whole bunch of other strategies?

What if the world used that asset as a kind of measure of the world’s Fear?

What if that asset suddenly had no price? What would the world think then?

If this sounds like crazy talk, let’s go back to August 24th 2015. The day when we had a sudden 1,000 pt drop in the Dow and it was a kind of mad summertime flash crash in all of the world’s markets. Let’s just see what happened to the VIX back then:

Prices for the CBOE Volatility Index, the market’s favored barometer of volatility, did not update for the first half hour of the trading, a result of market volatility that also led to erratic quotes in S&P 500 options, Suzanne Cosgrove, a spokeswoman for the CBOE said.

Traders who wanted to buy and sell SPX options were held back because a lack of liquidity caused problems in their pricing. Many were at zero or had bid/ask spreads so wide that they were unusable for trading. As a result, SPX options barely traded.

“Basically, the computer market makers that sit behind it all were flashing ‘I don’t want to trade’ signs,” said Jim Strugger, a derivatives strategist at MKM Partners.

The lack of liquidity was not restricted to SPX options, but was broad based, with even normally very liquid sector Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) hardly trading in the first hour or so, strategists said.

“It was extremely difficult to put any trades on in options,” said Steven Spencer, partner at proprietary trading firm SMB Capital in New York. “There were no offers in a lot of options that we were short, so we couldn’t cover anything.”

However, the market righted itself by 10:30 a.m., Spencer said.

When the volatility index did start updating, it quickly shot up to up 25 points to 53.29, the highest since Jan 2009.

While options volume was robust later in the day, with trading volume of about 31.5 million contracts, nearly 75 percent higher than what is normal, the lack of liquidity in the first hour is likely to raise eyebrows.

“There is no doubt that people are going to look back instantaneously and start evaluating liquidity just as they did after May 2010,” said Jim Strugger, a derivatives strategist at MKM Partners.

Oh Jim, if only we had. But we haven’t. And the difference now is that there is an awful lot more risk out there on the table. August 2015 didn’t have Trump or Brexit or Le Pen or a new Cold War or indeed, anything much except for some worries about China.

Just remember the Duck and ask yourself: At what point does the frenzied paddling up-end all the calm serenity?

One Swallow Does Not a Summer Make

Spring has well and truly sprung, though many currently feel more like they’re being continually pronged by a wayward mattress spring. It has certainly been a tricky few weeks, with stocks and fixed income rallying, and volatility plunging. On March 15th, when the Fed hiked rates for the second time in just 4 months, weren’t we supposed to be on the brink of a brave new era? A “proper” hiking cycle? Inflation back, baby, and you better believe it? Now instead we find ourselves well and truly stuck back to the future, with the dominant narrative being that Carry is King. Climb that wall of worry: buy stocks, buy bonds, sell vol, and keep on picking up the pennies in front of the steamroller.

As the VIX heads to the lows of the year, Bloomberg ran an article flagging up the explosion of interest in sell-vol strategies:

With this as the backdrop, we are once again in the virtuous loop that takes stockmarkets to within a percent or two of their highs of the year, and encourages inflows into bonds. Anywhere, anything with some yield will do. After all, even with that Fed rate increase, global yields are still ridiculously low. Money has to be put to work. But oh, that article from BBRG also flags up that there is still a short base in the US Tsy markets, at least as far as the IMM positions are concerned. This is despite the fact that there was a record cutting back of this position in the 10yr in March:

So let’s get this straight. Into the end of the quarter, specs were moved to massively trim their short 10y exposure, but increase their short in the front end? Sure, there is some rationale to this, if we believe the Fed are hiking in the near term, but we are not convinced the US economy is robust enough to deliver lots more hikes in the future.

You’re sitting there re-reading that paragraph, mulling it over in your mind. You’re wondering if there is indeed enough momentum in the US economy. You’re wondering what Janet Yellen might do, the crazy old dovish hiker.

This is where we need to stop.

That was the old world. This is the new one. In less than a year, Yellen is likely gone. Ahead of that, the new President has several Fed Board places to fill (another one now that we hear Lacker “accidentally” revealed market-sensitive info to Medley Global Advisers (Charlotte Hogg is probably as astonished as the rest of us that this isn’t front page news)). Separate to that, the President is cracking on with his agenda, throwing around new visa rules that prevent IT behemoths from employing immigrants, while his Commerce Secretary writes in the FT that the US “has the lowest trade barriers and the largest trade deficit in the world”. He goes on:

This is why President Donald Trump has directed the US Department of Commerce to report back within 90 days with a comprehensive analysis of the economic realities and the fine details of America’s trade patterns. Once Mr Trump has that analysis, he will be able to take measured and rational action to correct any anomalies.

Yes that’s right, he’s working on it now, and trade is something he can affect by executive order alone. The market is still figuring out how he can deliver tax reform now that the Obamacare Repeal imploded, but it’s so stuck on that, it has failed to spot what else is on the horizon. In fact, its eyes have glazed over, and it’s hit the shift+f9 buttons that tell it to keep on carrying, because that’s what worked for the past 7 years, right?

This inability to incorporate political risk is global. The market only ever put the chances of a Le Pen Presidency at around 35%, and the inexorable rise of charming Blairite debutante Macron has seen this fall back to less than 25%. The betting markets saw Macron catapult up to 70% probability of winning, with Le Pen barely registering as anything with which the market should bat an eyelid:

The EUR/USD risk reversal has concomitantly flipped back higher, with its extreme bid for Euro puts now registering as barely a flicker; less even than we were concerned with during the height of the sovereign debt crisis:

So the options market is now almost entirely ambivalent about the risk of France leaving the EU or the Euro, even though one of the two most likely second round candidates in its election in just 5 weeks’ time has both of those as a manifesto pledge? The Euro may have faced an existential crisis in 2011-12, but as we should now appreciate, it is by crisis that the politically-derived currency is forced closer together. Now, 6 years later, with an economy on its knees, a deeply unpopular President and a country unfortunately beset by several debilitating terrorist attacks, we think the French aren’t having their own existential crisis? Or at least that the risk of that is so small as to be unremarkable?

We are due a reality check. The tremors are there. The 13% sell off in the South African Rand over the past two weeks is more than enough to panic those trying to gain access to its 3 month yield of 9%. The Rand is always our bellwether for the insanity of the Keep On Carry Crew: they just got a nasty burn. Meanwhile, market fragility has nicely been shown up in the wobbles in the semi-pegged Czech Koruna ahead of their recent central bank meeting. The central bank’s commitment to keep the floor in place expired at the end of March, and ahead of its meeting on 30th March we saw a few punters try their luck at anticipating the removal of the floor. The CNB had no intention of doing anything, but the activity was enough to see volumes increase over 6x more than normal:

Well, maybe these can be written off as idiosyncratic, country-specific risks. We have seen enough flash crashes over the past few years not to worry, right?

But those happened without the backdrop of a reshaping of the global political order. They happened before central banks became an irrelevance. They happened when we could still try to plot the path for the global economy with some kind of certainty. Not when Britain chooses to leave the embrace of its largest trading bloc; or when a political novice becomes leader of the free world; or when France and Germany face existential elections for their heads of state.

So, one swallow does not a summer make. The summer is more likely beset by a market coming to terms with how fiscal policy works; what the Separation of Powers actually is; how trade negotiations take place; rather than its usual quantitative play off between risks of inflation and the risks of volatility.

Until then, carry on carrying the spring-time swallow.
.

When Politics Into Finance Won’t Go, Part 3

Those years of monitoring central bank activity are well beyond us. Blondemoney herself got drawn into that most recent Fed meeting, but from now on the focus is firmly on the politicians. You can’t have a debate over how the Fed will reduce its balance sheet, without keeping an eye on how Trump will populate the Fed with His People, just to get something done. You can’t really expect the Bank of England to have a coherent 2year view on inflation now that the deed is done, Article 50 is signed, and we’re on a rollercoaster whose path no one can predict. Not least of all, the people actually driving the rollercoaster. Soon we will long for the days we could do something as simple as pore over a central bank statement for whether they slipped in the word “appropriate” or “gradual”.

No, now it’s all about how the world of politics actually works. And the reality is that it is messy. This isn’t time for you to roll your eyes about how those blasted politicians need to Get Things Done, and If Only They Worked In Business They’d Know A Thing Or Two. It’s exactly this attitude that leaves the VIX languishing at multi-decade lows. The abject refusal by markets to engage with the politics is why volatility measures are so low. Once investors realise the entire framework of their analysis has to change, there will be a lurch. We are starting to see it, with stocks coming under pressure. Those 114 consecutive days in the S&P without a move bigger than 1% have been broken. There is even a narrative that now suggests stocks should feel a bit wobbly: if they were bought on the premise that Trump would be delivering bold tax reform, that thesis looks more than shaky. There is a dawning realisation that a “clean sweep” for the Republicans doesn’t mean “The Executive branch can get done whatever it wants”. America may have a two party system but each party is a broad church. Two parties doesn’t mean only two opinions. It just means the system was set up such that only two parties would ever be able to survive. The Separation of Powers, where the executive (President) is institutionally prevented from dominating the legislature (Congress) means that you have to corral factions just to get things done. Ironically, the French institutional system creates a much stronger President, as they possess both executive and legislative power: but that’s a story for another day. The story for today is that the so-called “Trump Trades”, such that they ever existed, should be almost dead and buried.

Now, this doesn’t stop the fact that the world economy is doing OK, thank you very much, and that reflation is alive and well. It doesn’t stop the fact that most countries can therefore step back from the unconventional emergency monetary measures they took when deflationary doom was all around. That secular shift in the macroeconomy is done. Higher yields, they are a-comin’.

Hence, the Buy the Dip crowd can merrily fill their boots on assets that prosper in a reflationary environment.

That is until volatility comes back to scare them. This is where we go back to the only nascent appreciation that politics will provide that volatility because it is almost entirely unquantifiable; and it DOES have an impact on the real economy. The UK has been doing quite well since the Brexit vote precisely because of the rebalancing impact of a significantly weaker pound. So the question from here is whether the pound will recover, or take another lurch lower? And that will depend on how the Brexit negotiations proceed. We don’t know, but we do know that we need to factor in these scenarios:

  1. New governments in France and Germany either support or reject the British position
  2. The UK can’t marshal its own government and there’s either a new government or its negotiating position collapses
  3. Negotiations become so heated that both sides are forced to walk away: Theresa May’s ‘No Deal is Better than a Bad Deal’.

This last point is the most significant when people now say the starting gun has been fired on two years before we leave. What if we leave long before that? Why two years? This hasn’t been done before, it could get extended or dropped entirely. Just like a divorce where it plays along amicably until someone realises they can’t bear to let him get away with the family dog, the terms can change in a heartbeat.

What we should be prepared for from this point onwards is that the focus will shift from the UK’s position, to that of the remaining EU 27. Silent up until now, they can let loose and unleash the toughest stance they want. Markets will likely take fright at this, and that “No Deal” scenario will start to loom onto the horizon.

Ladies and gentleman, please take your seats on the political rollercoaster. Sick bags may not be provided.

Climb that Wall of Worry

The Fed must be delighted. Their second hike in a quarter has been greeted as a dovish hike. This week at least 9 of them are giving speeches: will they pour oil on this becalmed water? Or will it be a case of carry on carrying, as it usually is in the (perceived) absence of event risks… Our favourite blind-pile-into-high-yield, the South African Rand, is at the highs of the year – in fact of about two years.

This is the disquieting fact about markets since central banks got unconventional: the status quo isn’t a flat line, it’s an upward slope. Just as equities always had a long bias, with money needing to be put to work, now bonds, commodities and carry currencies experience the same upward momentum in the absence of anything else going on. So events pass by, positions are shuffled, and then volatility is completely smashed – driving the daily wall of money into higher yielding assets. With negative interest rates out there, why wouldn’t this happen?

Ah but those negative interest rates will not be with us forever. In fact, the interest rate pile is fast shifting from those falling over themselves to cut, to those trying to erase the easing. And thus the Fed must indeed be delighted that their dot plot for the next two years would take them above one of the previous kings of carry, the Australians, without anyone noticing.

This is allowing those uber doves, the ECB, to sneak out their hawkish feathers unnoticed too. We are used to comments from hawks like Nowotny, who last week popped up to argue that the deposit rate could be raised before ending QE.

But now one of the doves, Italy’s Visco  has also said that the time between hiking rates and ending QE could be “shortened”.

The exit debate is clearly furiously afoot at the ECB. Maybe that explains Draghi’s almost exasperated attitude as the last press conference. He referred back to other statements so often that it’s clear he doesn’t want to stamp his voice on the official ECB communications yet.

Other developments over the weekend should also give carry-hunters pause for thought. For the first time in decades, the G20 couldn’t agree that “refraining from protectionism” was A Good Thing. We all know the elephant in the room is orange, and he wants bilateral trade deals as the only way to ensure his country gets its way. But this creates significant risks ahead for those who are in line for a deal and for those who are not. Not just the US: note that Merkel’s main response to her meeting with Trump was to emphasise the need to get the EU/Japan trade deal confirmed ASAP.

This is a paradigm shift from the shibboleth of the past two decades. Previously the equation ran: Globalisation good = trade up = EM growth = DM growth = commodities up BUT inflation down as new labour came onstream and technology made us more productive. Thus the Great Moderation. Now many of those forces are going into reverse. Does this mean growth down but inflation up?

Let’s keep climbing the wall of worry until the stagflation demons make themselves known. Oh, and while we are at it, let’s not forget the monetary policy divergence rankings are rearranging themselves too.