For months now, the U.S. Federal Reserve has been hinting that the ‘taper’ of its quantitative easing (QE) program would begin, and last week the hints turned into an operation plan. Monthly bond-buying programs that are running at $120 billion per month will be reduced by $15 billion per month. The Bank of Japan has not been adding to their balance sheet for months now, and in October the Bank of Canada announced the end of its QE program. At the same time, forecasts for overnight interest rate hikes for most developed nations continue to be brought forward. The emerging markets have already started with nine countries having raised rates in the past three months. The monetary stimulus punchbowl hasn’t been pulled away yet, but it is being drained.
For markets, the Fed matters the most, so let us focus on them. Of course, this pending taper is bringing back memories of the taper tantrum of 2013. In 2013, Fed Chairman Bernanke began talking about tapering in May with the actual tapering of QE commencing in December. During the taper talk period, the U.S. 10-year yield rose quickly from 1.8% to 3.0%, the U.S. dollar declined, and the S&P 500 rose. After the taper started, yields fell back down, the dollar went flat, and of course the S&P 500 rose (is it just me or does that index always just go up?).
That was a fun trip down memory lane, now forget about it. We all like simple stories, neatly wrapped up with a bow. Fed does this, market reacts like that, simple. Unfortunately, looking at ONE tapering episode and drawing conclusions is not that simple. If n=1, good luck trying to reject the null hypothesis, for those statistical-oriented readers. Or if you prefer, its like apples and oranges.
The markets are certainly in a different place today compared with 2013. Bond yields aside, the S&P 500 was trading at 14x forward earnings in 2013 compared with 21x today. In 2013, the S&P 500 had just recovered to its previous high from 2007, which took about 5 ½ years. Today, the S&P 500 is 38% higher than its pre-Covid 2020 high (took six months). The U.S. economy was growing at an average of 2.5% in 2013, way lower than the trailing Q4 average of 4.9%. The trade-weighted U.S. dollar was low, by historical standards, around 82 compared with today’s 94.
The biggest difference between these two tapers is where the money went and where it is going. The QE following the great financial crisis ended up more within bank balance sheets. Indirectly of course, but given banks reduced lending activities to repair balance sheets, the QE did not have a material economic impact since bank deleveraging was a natural counterbalance to QE. This time, QE has been funding government fiscal spending and support programs to help offset the impact of the pandemic. This QE had a central line right into the economy.
It is clear to see that as the government deficits come back down to earth, thanks to rising tax receipts as the economy recovers and emergency spending programs dwindling, there is less need for QE to fund the government. Demand (i.e., QE) is tapering at the same time supply (i.e., deficits) are falling. The good news is we are less likely to see bond yields rise because of this taper. The bad news is the Fed is able to taper because since fiscal spending is falling, there is a fiscal cliff on the spending side. Hopefully the economy has enough of its own momentum to get safely over this cliff.
The taper tantrum of 2013 does not provide a useful playbook for taper 2021. The market is in a different place, and the bond-buying programs ended up having vastly different impacts on the economy and markets. This makes it difficult to draw any hard conclusions.
The bigger stories for portfolios are that inflation continues to prove not so ‘transitory,’ short yields have risen, and the timing of rate hikes is approaching. In other words, the tightening cycle is almost upon us. Best to fill your cup from the punchbowl now.
— Craig Basinger is the Chief Market Strategist at Purpose Investments
Get the latest market insights to your inbox each week from Craig Basinger.
Sources: Charts are sourced to Bloomberg L.P.
The content of this document is for informational purposes only, and is not being provided in the context of an offering of any securities described herein, nor is it a recommendation or solicitation to buy, hold or sell any security. The information is not investment advice, nor is it tailored to the needs or circumstances of any investor. Information contained in this document is not, and under no circumstances is it to be construed as, an offering memorandum, prospectus, advertisement or public offering of securities. No securities commission or similar regulatory authority has reviewed this document and any representation to the contrary is an offence. Information contained in this document is believed to be accurate and reliable, however, we cannot guarantee that it is complete or current at all times. The information provided is subject to change without notice.
Commissions, trailing commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with investment funds. Please read the prospectus before investing. If the securities are purchased or sold on a stock exchange, you may pay more or receive less than the current net asset value. Investment funds are not guaranteed, their values change frequently and past performance may not be repeated. Certain statements in this document are forward-looking. Forward-looking statements (“FLS”) are statements that are predictive in nature, depend on or refer to future events or conditions, or that include words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expect,” “anticipate,” intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “estimate” or other similar expressions. Statements that look forward in time or include anything other than historical information are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results, actions or events could differ materially from those set forth in the FLS. FLS are not guarantees of future performance and are by their nature based on numerous assumptions. Although the FLS contained in this document are based upon what Purpose Investments and the portfolio manager believe to be reasonable assumptions, Purpose Investments and the portfolio manager cannot assure that actual results will be consistent with these FLS. The reader is cautioned to consider the FLS carefully and not to place undue reliance on the FLS. Unless required by applicable law, it is not undertaken, and specifically disclaimed, that there is any intention or obligation to update or revise FLS, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.