Connect with us

Spread & Containment

Lockdowns had a role: they saved lives

There are threats and lists and all manner of abuse aimed at those who promoted or supported measures that saved lives during the COVID-19 pandemic. I…



There are threats and lists and all manner of abuse aimed at those who promoted or supported measures that saved lives during the COVID-19 pandemic. I just want to make it clear that I supported measures to protect life until we could be adequately vaccinated. And I’ll support them again if a new deadly pathogen emerges tomorrow for which we have no specific treatments or vaccines.

In those countries that effectively used stay-at-home orders (“lockdowns”), closed borders and mandated masks, a lower proportion of lives were lost compared to countries that got on board well after the virus was already established in their jurisdiction.

Even then, many of those countries continued to import viruses through travel. Early and thorough use of a range of restrictions prevented the levels of death seen in countries where the response was slow or partial.

The aim – although not always well stated – was only to do this until understanding improved, and vaccines, drugs and better management of the sick were available and accessible for all. For all? Phah!We’re nowhere near that yet for a large swathe of humanity.

Sixty-four countries in the bottom grouping of 180 based on first and second COVID-19 vaccination dose. But hey, what’s the holdup on my 4th dose?
Graph snipped from the Australian ABC’s website.[24]

Restrictions caused harm but their delay/absence resulted in death

If we can take the heat out of our feelings for a moment, perhaps we can stand back in 2022 and honestly say that are no easy or harmless ways to protect lives during a pandemic. There are only ways of keeping people away from each other and hopefully doing that while minimising all the other harm – hopefully all much less severe than death – that can result from that. A pandemic is just an utterly crappy event. There’s no good. There’s just bad and not so bad.

We needed to be better at explaining why we had to be subjected to the things we were. We needed to be quicker to lift restrictions when they were not useful. We needed to tailor them with more finesse where possible. We needed to be authentic when we could see one restriction contradicted another – discussing why, even though the answer was something like “because we need this to keep being done”.

While lockdowns caused a range of harms [a few recent examples: 8,9,10,11,12,13,15], others have not found such a clear correlation [a few recent examples: 1,4,5,7] and in some cases, there were improvements to health and levels of infectious disease.[6,14,16,17]

Lists, threats and restrictions

I’m not complaining about being singled out, abused or threatened with being put on trial as I’ve had few of those approaches compared to many others. Although I block a lot quicker than I used to as well.

Most recently I’ve been added to a list of 101 people who “pushed for lockdowns”.[2] The premise of this particular article is kinda dumb though. It’s correlating the current lockdowns in Shanghai in 2022 with comments made before good vaccination levels were attained in other parts of the world. From my perspective, I was supportive of Australia’s border closures early in 2020.[3] I wouldn’t be now. But 2020 was a very different and pre-vaccine stage of the pandemic – it just isn’t comparable to the use of lockdowns in 2022 anywhere today.

The false dichotomy that was always a lie

“It’s either health or the economy!” …they told us.

And of course, many believed them. But it was never that. It was health and the economy.

We saw some great evidence to support this back in July 2021 from the Grattan Institute’s report, Race to 80: our best shot at living with COVID.[19]

From the Grattan Institute’s July 2021 report, Race to 80: our best shot at living with COVID.[19]

If we look at those top countries versus countries that were late to lockdown or lockout or to respond with restrictions in general, the death rate tells a standout tale.

Even Taiwan suffered “prevention fatigue” – a term that sums up what happened anywhere there were humans in 2021.[20] But to their credit and that of their leadership, they turned that outbreak around.[21]

Countries that responded quickly and strongly to the pandemic – including Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand and South Korea – did not suffer as high a case fatality rate as did countries that did respond less quickly.
From Our World In Data, Mortality Risk of COVID-19 [22].

In some instances – for example, in Australia and New Zealand – the removal of influenza and other inflammatory respiratory viruses from the winter mix due to the cessation of the global influenza travellator, may have added to a reduction of annual death compared to the average year pre-pandemic.

Countries that responded quickly and strongly to the pandemic – including Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand and South Korea – did not suffer the high rate of excess death seen in countries that did not respond as quickly.
From Our World In Data, Mortality Risk of COVID-19 [22].

And despite the use of lockdowns, Australia (overall – sorry Victoria, I know you guys suffered extra hard) and New Zealand actually had a lot of time not locked down than did some other countries. We dipped in, and once back under control, we relaxed those lockdowns and went on with life, relying on a hotel quarantine (HQ) system at the border. For a while that was leaky, but then it sealed up as the airborne nature of transmission finally (?maybe) was addressed. We didn’t hear as much about HQ working as we did when it failed though.

From the Grattan Institute’s July 2021 report, Race to 80: our best shot at living with COVID.[19]

Of course, one Australian State (New South Wales) lost control of the virus not long after this and spread it to other sites. It, like Victoria after it, also suffering from the public’s prevention fatigue, couldn’t maintain the martial mindset needed to prevent an efficient virus from transmitting.

Until then, restrictions, including lockdowns, quarantine, testing, tracing, isolation and (eventually) masks, had been working across all of Australia’s States and Territories to keep the virus out and contain the spread when it got in, while vaccines were ordered and administered. Lives were saved. When employed quickly, they were also able to be turned off fairly quickly as their effect allowed contact tracing to get ahead of spread.

But despite our economy bouncing back from lockdowns, once the virus started to spread without restriction, even in an 80% vaccinated population, we have now seen firsthand that businesses, hospitals, aged care, airlines, you name it – they’ve all struggled to field enough staff because of illness. And we’ve seen lots of trouble with unstocked shelves due to supply chain interruptions (something we spoke about in 2020 [23]) both in delivery at this end and production and manufacture at the source. “Oh but that’s just because of the rules to isolate”. That is part;y true, but in case you’ve missed it, COVID-19 can leave you exhausted, mentally foggy and not a little sick. Even before this pandemic, it wasn’t a great idea to go to work sick. You infect others and suddenly the job is more understaffed. But further, operating complex equipment and machinery or performing complex tasks when your mind isn’t all there carries risk. Mistakes cost money and cause injury.

Lockdowns in 2022

Now I sound defensive. But there really isn’t a reason for lockdowns in the post-vaccine age. Before vaccines, we saw a huge number of deaths. And even though we know most COVID-19 deaths occur among the elderly and those with underlying conditions, they were each the death of loved ones and they added to eth anxiety, depression and loss this pandemic is responsible for.

As we now know – even though severe disease and death happen in a relatively small proportion of those infected, when millions are infected that small percentage becomes a big very number of lost loved ones!

What’s my point?

Lockdowns had a role, as did stopping travel, using quarantine and enforcing isolation. Masks still do have a role as does completely revamping our indoor air quality. It’s appalling that during the current election campaign in Australia we have yet to hear any talk from a “leader” about a plan to fund measures to keep us safe from the inherent dangers of contaminated air. So many lessons, so little learned.

The role of lockdowns was to save lives that would have been lost if not enacted quickly. Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and others observed time and time again that lives were lost due to slow responses. Lockdowns could have been done better but when used surgically – quickly on, quickly off with financial support, communication and enhanced mental and other health support – they reduced lockdown-related harms while also preventing the death they were intended for.

I don’t stand down from my support of these measures in the early stages of the pre-vaccine pandemic. Despite what threatening lists and articles may be trying for.

But to be clear, lockdowns don’t have a place now because we got through that temporary need.


  1. The impact of Victorian COVID-19 lockdowns on the presentation and management of acute appendicitis
  2. Who Pushed for Lockdowns? 101 Leading Voices
  3. COVID-19 cases slow a little in Australia
  4. A Global Longitudinal Study Examining Social Restrictions Severity on Loneliness, Social Anxiety, and Depression
  5. Lockdown surgery: the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 measures on cardiac cases
  6. The impact of lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic on work-related accidents in Austria in 2020
  7. Risk Behaviors, Family Support, and Emotional Health among Adolescents during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Israel
  8. Rise in depression and anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic: results from a cross-sectional national survey
  9. Adolescents, Suicide, and the COVID-19 Pandemic
  10. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on eating disorders: A systematic review
  11. Impact of the first national COVID-19 lockdown on referral of women experiencing domestic violence and abuse in England and Wales
  12. The links of stress, substance use and socio-demographic factors with domestic violence during the Covid-19 pandemic in Portugal
  13. Women’s mental health: acute impact of COVID-19 pandemic on domestic violence
  14. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and multiple community lockdowns on total live birth rates and preterm births in Melbourne, Australia
  15. Impacts of COVID-19 lockdowns on frailty and wellbeing in older people and those living with long-term conditions
  16. Transmission of paediatric respiratory syncytial virus and influenza in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic
  17. Air pollution declines during COVID-19 lockdowns mitigate the global health burden
  18. Influenza and respiratory syncytial virus during the COVID-19 pandemic: Time for a new paradigm?
  19. Race to 80: our best shot at living with COVID
  20. ‘Prevention fatigue’ driving sudden COVID surge in Taiwan: Expert
  21. Why Taiwan Is Beating COVID-19 – Again
  22. Mortality Risk of COVID-19 – Our World in Data
  23. So you think you’re about to be in a pandemic?

Hits: 429

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

Disney World brings back fan favorite transportation choice

Not every major company has done the same thing (we’re looking at you, Starbucks).



Before the covid pandemic, Starbucks (SBUX) - Get Free Report offered self-service stations for milk, cream and sometimes various alternatives. 

That went away during the pandemic because customers did not like the idea of touching a dispenser that another person had just touched. Never mind the shared counters drinks were placed on, the napkin and straw dispensers that everyone touched — pouring your own milk or cream came with an enhanced risk of illness.

DON'T MISS: JetBlue may force American and Southwest to make a major change

In reality, maintaining milk stations — sometimes more than one in each store — cost the chain a lot of money. Keeping the dispensers filled was labor intensive and customers got mad when one was empty. And people likely used or wasted more milk and cream compared with the current policy, where those are kept behind the counter. 

Starbucks made the change at a time when companies could do anything if they used "public safety" as the reason. Some of those changes, however, were not reversed once the impact of covid lessened and most of society returned to normal 

Walt Disney (DIS) - Get Free Report, for example, got rid of parking trams at Disney World. That made sense since the trams were not built for social distancing and smaller crowds meant shorter walks to the parks.

In September Disney fully restored that service, which surprised some park visitors. Now, the theme park giant has brought back another transportation option that some thought might be gone for good. 

The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.

Disney fully restored its parking lot trams in September.

Roberto Machado Noa/LightRocket via Getty Images

Disney World improves transportation

Disney World's massive property creates unique transportation challenges. Magic Kingdom, for example, is not within walking distance from its de facto parking lot, the Ticket & Transportation Center.

To get people to its signature theme park, the company offers its famed monorail and a ferry boat service. You can also ride the monorail to Epcot, between the Magic Kingdom and Epcot, and to the Contemporary, Grand Floridian, and Polynesian Resorts.   

READY TO BOOK YOUR DISNEY DREAM VACATION? Our travel partners can help.

Disney World also offers a boat service between Epcot and Hollywood Studios. In 2019, the company added Skyliner, a gondola service that connects the Pop Century, Art of Animation, Caribbean Beach, and Riviera Resorts with Epcot's International Gateway and with Hollywood Studios.

Adding Skyliner made staying at the theme park's value resorts, Pop Century and Art of Animation, a lot easier. Those properties used to be served with buses, which were often stressed during peak times.

Skyliner, which is open air, did not close during the covid period, aside from areas where properties it connects were closed. 

The service has been popular as it has made it faster to get between parts of the massive theme park in a way that, like the monorail, feels like a ride, not simply transportation. 

Disney brings back a popular transportation choice

Disney World's size means that no one transportation solution will work.

The company has brought back another — one that many thought might be a permanent covid casualty. The theme park company disclosed the move on its Walt Disney World Cast and Community Facebook page.

"Guests at Walt Disney World will once again be able to sail across Bay Lake between Disney’s Contemporary Resort, Disney’s Wilderness Lodge, and Disney’s Fort Wilderness Resort & Campground. Marked with its signature blue flag, the watercraft 'blue route' will return for afternoon and evening voyages beginning Oct. 1, making it even easier to grab a bite to eat at neighboring resorts."

That was met with excitement from followers of the page.

DISNEY WORLD DEALS: Make your Disney World, Disneyland, or Universal Studios dream a reality

"I had almost given up hope on this completely! I am so happy to see this service return," Denis Iverson McGilvery wrote.

That was the general sentiment shared by hundreds of followers, while a few hoped for even more returns to service.

"This is great news! Hoping to see the second launch at Disney Springs open up soon as well," Elizabeth Kelley added.

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

Working with Communities: The Importance of Partnerships in Our Industry’s Success

NAIOP’s 2023 chair talks about four topics that often arise during his visits to chapters across North America: community relations, e-commerce, EV trends…



Since assuming the position of NAIOP chair in January, I’ve had the pleasure of visiting chapters from Orlando to Milwaukee to SoCal, talking with thousands of members about current market conditions, the forces impacting our industry, and our future as an organization. Four topics have frequently arisen during these conversations, regardless of chapter location or size. These include:  

1. Community Relations. In today’s environment, it’s essential that developers fully understand the impact of their product type on the communities in which they operate, particularly regarding the types of jobs, hours of operations and the environmental impacts of their project (traffic, water, energy, etc.). Whether developing in South Florida, New Jersey, Chicago or Los Angeles, our chapters report increased anti-growth sentiment and the importance of engaging with the community early and often.

2. E-commerce’s Role: Facility Demand and Data. E-commerce sales as a percentage of total retail sales were on a growth trajectory before the pandemic, turbocharging the industrial sector. While truck traffic associated with home deliveries has received attention from news organizations, non-governmental organizations and policymakers alike, consumer behavior as the driving force is often ignored. Further, some research suggests that ordering goods for delivery is better for the environment because people make fewer individual trips to malls, grocery stores and other local shops. Comprehensive research about e-commerce’s environmental footprint is needed to help educate our external audiences and debunk common misconceptions.

Regardless, developers need to clearly articulate e-commerce’s economic impact and the role industrial real estate plays in the community. For that sector – one I’ve been part of for four decades – it means helping policymakers, community groups, the media and the public understand that a) consumers are choosing e-commerce, which requires three times the amount of logistics space; and b) e-commerce can be a more sustainable option compared to traditional brick and mortar. In addition to the economic growth case, it’s important to explain our role as real estate developers in helping their community run smoothly and durably. We should partner with communities to underscore the importance our properties have in the ability to deliver essential goods, including baby formula, medicine, clothing and food.

3. EV Trends. In response to growing truck traffic and climate change concerns, many communities – typically on the West and East Coasts – are imposing requirements around the electrification of commercial vehicles. Southern California leads the pack.

Two years ago, Southern California’s local air quality regulatory body approved the unprecedented Indirect Source Rule (ISR), which required warehouse occupiers to quantify and report vehicle trips to and from warehouses to identify impact and be the basis for issuing taxes. Because of this, and in addition to new laws around electric vehicles at the state level, California businesses are investing heavily in electric trucks and vans and the infrastructure needed to support them.

Members from NAIOP’s California chapters, comprising the NAIOP California State Council, continue to experience the evolving spread of the ISR throughout the state. We also see other states looking at adopting similar “indirect source” concepts, including New Jersey, New York, Washington, Colorado and Nevada. NAIOP will continue to track and provide updates on this issue, as members in urban areas will no doubt keep seeing this policy impacting development projects.  

4. Designing Policies with Communities. We have seen an increase in antiwarehouse development sentiment. Some communities have used moratoriums to pause new projects in response to community pushback, typically on environmental impact grounds. NAIOP and other business associations continue to make the case that such moratoriums disrupt the supply chain, hamstring businesses from operating efficiently, and create job and economic losses.

In some communities, NAIOP members have worked with city staff and the community to create good neighbor policy agreements. These volunteer agreements can address issues like setbacks, landscape screening and noise abatement strategies. In some situations, these agreements can help speed up the entitlement process and create a positive relationship with the community. Developers have found that proactively incorporating neighborhood-friendly building features is a more effective approach than having aggressive approval conditions imposed upon their projects that impede functionality and are overwhelmingly expensive if legislated upon them.  

This year as NAIOP chair has been a meaningful one for me. As we begin the fourth quarter and the end of my term, I’ll continue to be steadfast in strengthening NAIOP and helping this organization and its members boldly talk about the value our industry brings to communities and the economy. I look forward to my remaining chapter visits and seeing many of you at CRE.Converge later this month in Seattle.

This piece has been adapted from the chair’s column in the fall issue of Development. Access the fall 2023 issue here.

Read More

Continue Reading


Options for Calculating Risk-Free Rates

One of the most fundamental concepts in finance is the notion of a risk-free rate. This interest rate tells us how much money investors are guaranteed…



One of the most fundamental concepts in finance is the notion of a risk-free rate. This interest rate tells us how much money investors are guaranteed to receive in the future by saving one dollar today. As a result, risk-free rates reflect investors’ preferences for payoffs in the future relative to the present. Yields on U.S. Treasury securities are generally viewed as a standard benchmark for the risk-free rate, but they may also feature a “convenience yield,” reflecting Treasuries’ special, money-like properties. In this post, we estimate a risk-free rate implicit in the prices of S&P 500 index options—called the box rate—to measure investors’ time preference separate from Treasury convenience yields.

Risk-Free Payoffs from Options

Options with a European-style expiration can be used to replicate a risk-free payoff using the put-call parity relationship. By buying a put option and selling a call option of the same strike price and maturity, an investor receives the strike price in exchange for delivering the underlying asset on which the option is written. By then selling a put option and buying a call option for a different strike price with the same maturity, an investor can construct a risk-free payoff equal to the difference in strike prices, as shown in the chart below. In industry jargon, this trade is sometimes called the box spread. The difference between the price of the box spread portfolio today and its payoff at maturity reveals a risk-free rate that we call the box rate—the rate at which investors can borrow or lend in the option market. Historical estimates of the box rate from a recent paper are available here.

The Box Spread Trade: Replicating Risk-Free Payoffs with Options

A Liberty Street Economics line chart replicating risk-free payoffs with options—the box spread trade—by plotting the combined payoff at maturity from purchasing a 95-strike call and selling a 95-strike put while also selling a 105-strike call and buying a 105-strike put.

Source: Authors’ calculation.
Notes: The chart plots the combined payoff at maturity (solid blue line) from purchasing a 95-strike call and selling a 95-strike put (squares) while also selling a 105-strike call and buying a 105-strike put (triangles). Regardless of the value of the underlying asset at maturity, the combined payoff is a constant value of $10, equal to the difference in the strike prices. This trade is known as the “box spread.”

Estimating Box Rates

We estimate box rates using S&P 500 index options (SPX options). SPX options are among the most liquid and heavily traded options in the world. They have a European-style expiration and long time-series of available historical data, serving as the basis for the Cboe Volatility Index (VIX Index).

The chart below presents an example of estimating box rates on March 15, 2022, the day before the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) began its most recent rate hiking cycle. The top panel estimates the one-year box rate from an ordinary least squares (OLS) regression that exploits put-call parity. The box rate implied by the slope coefficient is 1.59 percent. Since option markets are close to arbitrage-free because of the competitive forces in financial markets, put-call parity holds almost exactly. In this example, the R-squared is .99999992 out to seven nines and the standard error of the box rate estimate is less than .01 percent, or one basis point.

The bottom panel extends the analysis to multiple maturities. The box rates and Treasury yield curve have a similar upward slope. The convenience yield, which is the spread between these curves, ranges from 10 to 30 basis points across different maturities.

Example of Estimating the Box Rate

Two-panel Liberty Street Economics line chart estimating box rates on March 15, 2022, the day before the FOMC began its most recent rate hiking cycle. The top panel estimates the one-year box rate from an ordinary least squares (OLS) regression that exploits put-call parity, while the bottom panel extends the analysis to multiple maturities.

Sources: OptionMetrics; Federal Reserve Board.
Notes: The top panel plots put minus call mid-quote prices for the same strike price and maturity on March 15, 2022, alongside fitted values from an ordinary least squares (OLS) regression. The box rate implied by the slope coefficient from the regression is 1.59 percent for a maturity in 367 calendar days on March 17, 2023. The bottom panel plots the term structure of box rates from index options of different maturities alongside estimates of Treasury rates from a smoothed yield curve found here. All rates are zero-coupon discount rates with continuous compounding. Years-to-maturity is actual calendar days divided by 365. The option data is from OptionMetrics for S&P 500 index options with maturities between one month and five years whose bid quotes are greater than zero.

Box Rates and Treasury Convenience Yields over Time

Analyzing box rates and Treasury yields over time, we find three main results. First, from January 1996 to April 2023, the box rate is 35 basis points above the Treasury rate on average, implying a 35 basis point convenience yield. Second, convenience yields grow dramatically during the financial crisis of 2007-09, reaching a peak of roughly      130 basis points in October 2008 as a one-month moving average. Third, the average term structure of convenience yields is almost flat across maturities out to three years. 

The chart below illustrates the first two results. The top panel plots the time series of the one-year box rate and Treasury rate over time. The bottom panel plots the convenience yield, which equals the difference between the two rates. Box rates and Treasury rates closely comove, with the Treasury rate consistently below the box rate throughout the sample. In addition to being consistently positive, the convenience yield also exhibits some time-series variation, spiking most significantly during the 2007-09 financial crisis, while staying at more stable levels between 20 and 40 basis points in recent years.

Box Rate Closely Tracks the Treasury Rate and Implies a Positive Convenience Yield

Liberty Street Economics line chart plots the one-year box rate, Treasury rate, and convenience yield estimate from January 1996 through April 2023 as a twenty-one-day moving average across trading days. The top panel plots the time-series of the one-year box rate and Treasury rate (in percentage terms), while the bottom panel plots the convenience yield (in basis points).

Sources: OptionMetrics; Federal Reserve Board.
Notes: The chart plots the one-year box rate, Treasury rate, and convenience yield estimate from January 1996 through April 2023 as a twenty-one-day moving average across trading days. The box rate is estimated by ordinary least squares (OLS) from put-call parity. To obtain a constant one-year maturity, we linearly interpolate the nearest S&P 500 index option maturities whose put-call parity regressions have an R-squared of at least .99999 out to five nines. Treasury rates are from a smoothed yield curve to obtain a one-year, constant maturity, zero-coupon rate. Both rates are zero-coupon discount rates with continuous compounding. Results are similar using the Theil-Sen estimate of the box rate from the box spread trade.

The chart below illustrates our third result by plotting the average term structure of convenience yields. As we saw in the example above, box rates can be estimated for different index option maturities. We find that the average level of convenience yields is relatively stable and close to 35 basis points across maturities. This means that when the Treasury issues debt at any maturity out to three years, it tends to save around 35 basis points relative to the risk-free rates implicit in the option market.

Convenience Yield Term Structure Relatively Flat out to Three Years, 35 Basis Points on Average

Liberty Street Economics line chart plots the nonparametric binned regression of convenience yield (in basis points) onto time-to-maturity using the binsreg package to show the average term structure of convenience yields is almost flat across maturities out to three years.

Sources: OptionMetrics; Federal Reserve Board.
Notes: The chart plots the nonparametric binned regression of convenience yield onto time-to-maturity using the binsreg package. It reports a 95 percent uniform confidence band and pointwise confidence bands after partitioning time-to-maturity into ten bins. We use a binned regression approach to account for the fact that option maturities are fixed in calendar time and are not constant maturity. The regression includes maturities from six months to three years. The sample period is January 1996 to April 2023.

Interpretation and Applications

Treasuries are generally considered to be one of the most liquid securities in the world, as they can be traded quickly, in large scale, and at low cost. Treasuries are also a common form of collateral that play a unique role in regulatory capital and liquidity constraints. Because options are risky financial derivatives, the box rate is an alternative risk-free rate benchmark that is based on option prices that do not embed a safe asset premium. Note that the recent effort to replace LIBOR with a new benchmark interest rate shows the importance of finding risk-free rate alternatives. The box rate, which is based on market prices, is one candidate that may be considered alongside other robust reference rates such as SOFR (Secured Overnight Financing Rate) to support financial stability.

The convenience yield estimated with the box rate is also a potentially useful barometer for stress in the financial system. It measures how much investors are willing to pay to hold Treasury securities instead of less money-like assets with identical cashflows. In historical data, the convenience yield was largest during the financial crisis of 2007-09. Investors and policymakers who want a real-time measure of the scarcity of safe assets may therefore find convenience yields based on box rates useful.

Economic Magnitude of Treasury Convenience Yield

As a back-of-the-envelope approximation, if we apply the one-year convenience yield estimated with the box rate to the amount of Treasury marketable debt outstanding each year, the Treasury convenience yield has saved taxpayers around $35 billion per year over the past twenty years. Given the increase in debt following the    COVID-19 crisis, this amount has increased to $70 billion per year since 2020. These significant taxpayer savings bring into focus the importance of suggested reforms and recent research on the Treasury market, where improving the resiliency and functioning of the Treasury market may help to maintain Treasuries’ convenience yield.

Jules H. van Binsbergen is the Nippon Life Professor in Finance at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

William Diamond is an assistant professor of finance at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

Peter Van Tassel is a financial research economist in Capital Markets Studies in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Research and Statistics Group. 

How to cite this post:
Jules van Binsbergen, William Diamond, and Peter Van Tassel, “Options for Calculating Risk-Free Rates,” Federal Reserve Bank of New York Liberty Street Economics, October 2, 2023,

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 or the Federal Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the author(s).

Read More

Continue Reading