Connect with us

Short-Dated Term Premia and the Level of Inflation

Since the advent of derivatives trading on short-term interest rates in the 1980s, financial commentators have often interpreted market prices as directly…

Published

on

Since the advent of derivatives trading on short-term interest rates in the 1980s, financial commentators have often interpreted market prices as directly reflecting the expected path of future interest rates. However, market prices generally embed risk premia (or “term premia” in reference to measures of risk premia over different horizons) reflecting the compensation required to bear the risk of the asset. When term premia are large in magnitude, derivatives prices may differ substantially from investor expectations of future rates. In this post, we assess whether term premia have increased with the recent rise in inflation, given the historically positive relationship between the two series, and what this means for the interpretation of derivatives prices.  

Estimating Term Premia

A common way to measure term premia is to use a dynamic term-structure model (DTSM) that prices bonds and matches the time-series dynamics of yields. Using a term-structure model, the term premium may be estimated as the difference between the fitted yield of a zero-coupon bond and the model’s forecast for the average short-term risk-free rate over a horizon equal to the bond’s maturity. Defined in this way, the term premium has the interpretation of an expected return measure for an investor who purchases a longer-dated bond that is financed at the short-term risk-free rate.

The chart below plots the yield and term premium for a two-year zero-coupon bond in the Adrian-Crump-Moench (ACM) term-structure model from January 1962 to June 2022. The chart shows that the historical term premium estimates were at their peak during the high inflation period of the late 1970s and early 1980s; estimates of the term premium were as high as 1 to 2 percent at this time but have, in general, experienced a downward secular trend over the subsequent forty years.

Term Premiums Were High when Interest Rates and Inflation Were High

Line chart plotting the three-month moving average of the two-year fitted yield against the two-year term premium from the Adrian-Crump-Moench (ACM) five-factor model using monthly data from January 1962 to June 2022. The chart shows that the historical term premium estimates were at their peak during the high inflation period of the late 1970s and early 1980s; estimates of the term premium were as high as 1 to 2 percent at this time but have, in general, experienced a downward secular trend over the subsequent 40 years.
Sources: Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Federal Reserve Board of Governors; authors’ calculations.
Note: This chart plots a three-month moving average of the two-year fitted yield against the two-year term premium from the Adrian-Crump-Moench (ACM) five-factor model using monthly data from January 1962 to June 2022.

The term premia estimates based on the ACM term-structure model have several attractive features including being available over a long sample period that dates to the 1960s. At the same time, term premia estimates from any DTSM are ultimately model specific. To complement the DTSM approach, we also estimate short-dated term premia using survey-based measures of expected interest rates and the market-implied path of short-term interest rates from derivatives. This approach does not rely on a specific forecasting model or bond pricing model. Instead, the term premia estimate is obtained as the market-implied path less the survey-expected path.

To illustrate how the survey-based estimates work, we consider an example from June 2022. The market-implied path of the federal (fed) funds rate is derived from fed funds futures contracts and overnight index swaps (OIS) on June 23, 2022. Survey expectations for the corresponding horizons are obtained from the Blue Chip Financial Forecasts (BCFF) survey at the end of June 2022 by computing the average forecast across participants over the forecast horizon. The market data are lagged by one week to approximate the information that forecasters may have had when submitting their forecasts prior to month-end. The survey-based term premia measure is the difference between the market-implied yield and the survey expectation.

As shown in the chart and table below, the survey expectations are above the market-implied yields on June 23, 2022, indicating that the survey-based term premia estimates are negative and equal to -17 basis points (bps) for a six-month horizon and -12 bps for a twelve-month horizon based on the OIS-implied rates. The term premia estimate using fed funds futures data over a six-month horizon is similarly negative at -14 bps.

Short-Dated, Survey-Based Term Premia in June 2022 Were Small

Scatter chart showing the market-implied path of the fed funds rate from futures contracts and overnight index swaps versus survey forecasts from the Blue Chip Financial Forecasts on June 23, 2022. The chart reports the zero-coupon rates at the observed maturities and the interpolated rates which closely align. The survey forecast is the average forecast across participants, which is then averaged across horizons to match the three-, six-, twelve-, and eighteen-month interpolated rates.
Source: Authors’ calculations.
Notes: This chart plots the market-implied path of the fed funds rate from futures contracts (FF) and overnight index swaps (OIS) versus survey forecasts from the Blue Chip Financial Forecasts (BCFF) Survey. To derive the market-implied path, we bootstrap zero-coupon rates from raw OIS quotes and futures settlement prices from Bloomberg L.P. and then linearly interpolate to a fixed maturity grid. The chart reports the zero-coupon rates at the observed maturities and the interpolated rates which closely align. The survey forecast is the average forecast across participants which is then averaged across horizons to match the three-, six-, twelve-, and eighteen-month interpolated rates.

Survey-Based Term Premium Estimates for June 2022

Horizon (months)361218
Implied rate from Overnight Index Swaps (OIS)2.072.583.013.02
Implied rate from federal funds futures (FF)2.092.61
Survey forecast average2.402.753.133.23
OIS term premium-0.33-0.17-0.12-0.21
FF term premium-0.31-0.14
Source: Authors’ calculations.
Notes: The table reports implied rates and survey forecasts matching the chart above at the interpolated maturities. The implied zero-coupon rates are from June 23, 2022. The survey forecasts are from the June Blue Chip Financial Forecasts. The survey-based term premium is the difference between the implied rate and the survey forecast.

Short-Dated Term Premia Estimates and the Level of Inflation

We can apply the same approach as above to generate a long time series of survey-based term premia using the BCFF survey. The BCFF survey has forecasts available going back to 1982 for the fed funds rate and from 1987 to 2021 for the three-month Libor (London interbank offered rate). Combining these measures with the market-implied paths of interest rates for the three-month Libor from eurodollar futures and for the fed funds rate from fed funds futures and OIS, we expand on the ACM term-structure estimates to report survey-based term premia measures dating back to the 1980s.

The chart below illustrates the results. Each term premia measure is reported going as far back as possible subject to data availability. The eurodollar measure for the three-month Libor term premium stops in 2021 after which the BCFF switches to forecasting the secured overnight funding rate (SOFR) rather than Libor. Despite the differences in methodologies and data sources, the short-dated term premia measures follow a broad trend. During the 1980s and 1990s when inflation was generally higher, short-dated term premia were also higher. Since the early 2000s, the level of inflation and short-dated term premia have generally been low and relatively stable.

Term Premia Were Higher in the 1980s and Early 1990s

This chart reports the one-year term premium estimate from the Adrian-Crump-Moench (ACM) model alongside survey-based estimates using eurodollar futures, fed funds futures, and overnight index swaps (OIS).
Source: Authors’ calculations.
Notes: This chart reports the one-year term premium estimate from the Adrian-Crump-Moench (ACM) model alongside survey-based estimates using eurodollar futures, fed funds futures, and overnight index swaps (OIS). The ACM estimates are from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The survey-based estimates use market data that are lagged by one week to approximate the information that forecasters may have had when submitting their forecasts prior to month-end. The sample periods for the survey term premia measures are based on data availability. We use Blue Chip Financial Forecasts (BCFF) survey forecasts which are available from October 1982 for the fed funds rate and from December 1987 to December 2021 for the three-month Libor. Bloomberg L.P. data are employed for fed funds futures and OIS. For eurodollar futures, we use historical CME Group data from the start of the sample to March 2017 and then use Bloomberg data. When three-month Libor forecasts are unavailable in the early part of the sample, we backfill using the fed funds forecasts based on a projection that is estimated during the latter period when both series are available. The chart reports a three-month moving average of the monthly term premia estimates.

Zooming in on the more recent period, the chart below reports term premia estimates over different horizons using the ACM term-structure model and survey forecasts of fed funds futures and OIS data. The survey-based measures have remained close to zero since the onset of the Covid-19 crisis but have begun to decline in recent months, similar to the decrease going into the last rate hiking cycle that started at the end of 2015. Although the one-year and two-year ACM term premia have turned positive, they remain at low levels. 

Various Measures of Short-Dated Term Premia Have Remained Low

Source: Authors’ calculations.
Notes: This chart reports a three-month moving average of the monthly term premia estimates since 2010 using the Adrian-Crump-Moench (ACM) term-structure model and using survey forecasts with fed funds futures (FF) and overnight index swaps (OIS) data over different horizons. The data are from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Bloomberg L.P., and the Blue Chip Financial Forecasts Survey.

To conclude, we have shown that historical estimates of term premia have tended to be high when inflation was also high. Given the recent rise in inflation, one might expect a commensurate rise in term premia. We find, however, that various measures of short-dated term premia have remained relatively small in magnitude, implying that current market prices do approximately reflect investors’ expectations for monetary policy over the near term.

 

Richard K. Crump is a financial research advisor in Macrofinance Studies in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Research and Statistics Group.

Charles Smith is a former senior research analyst in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Research and Statistics Group.

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. 


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

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Wendy’s teases new $3 offer for upcoming holiday

The Daylight Savings Time promotion slashes prices on breakfast.

Published

on

Daylight Savings Time, or the practice of advancing clocks an hour in the spring to maximize natural daylight, is a controversial practice because of the way it leaves many feeling off-sync and tired on the second Sunday in March when the change is made and one has one less hour to sleep in.

Despite annual "Abolish Daylight Savings Time" think pieces and online arguments that crop up with unwavering regularity, Daylight Savings in North America begins on March 10 this year.

Related: Coca-Cola has a new soda for Diet Coke fans

Tapping into some people's very vocal dislike of Daylight Savings Time, fast-food chain Wendy's  (WEN)  is launching a daylight savings promotion that is jokingly designed to make losing an hour of sleep less painful and encourage fans to order breakfast anyway.

Wendy's has recently made a big push to expand its breakfast menu.

Image source: Wendy's.

Promotion wants you to compensate for lost sleep with cheaper breakfast

As it is also meant to drive traffic to the Wendy's app, the promotion allows anyone who makes a purchase of $3 or more through the platform to get a free hot coffee, cold coffee or Frosty Cream Cold Brew.

More Food + Dining:

Available during the Wendy's breakfast hours of 6 a.m. and 10:30 a.m. (which, naturally, will feel even earlier due to Daylight Savings), the deal also allows customers to buy any of its breakfast sandwiches for $3. Items like the Sausage, Egg and Cheese Biscuit, Breakfast Baconator and Maple Bacon Chicken Croissant normally range in price between $4.50 and $7.

The choice of the latter is quite wide since, in the years following the pandemic, Wendy's has made a concerted effort to expand its breakfast menu with a range of new sandwiches with egg in them and sweet items such as the French Toast Sticks. The goal was both to stand out from competitors with a wider breakfast menu and increase traffic to its stores during early-morning hours.

Wendy's deal comes after controversy over 'dynamic pricing'

But last month, the chain known for the square shape of its burger patties ignited controversy after saying that it wanted to introduce "dynamic pricing" in which the cost of many of the items on its menu will vary depending on the time of day. In an earnings call, chief executive Kirk Tanner said that electronic billboards would allow restaurants to display various deals and promotions during slower times in the early morning and late at night.

Outcry was swift and Wendy's ended up walking back its plans with words that they were "misconstrued" as an intent to surge prices during its most popular periods.

While the company issued a statement saying that any changes were meant as "discounts and value offers" during quiet periods rather than raised prices during busy ones, the reputational damage was already done since many saw the clarification as another way to obfuscate its pricing model.

"We said these menuboards would give us more flexibility to change the display of featured items," Wendy's said in its statement. "This was misconstrued in some media reports as an intent to raise prices when demand is highest at our restaurants."

The Daylight Savings Time promotion, in turn, is also a way to demonstrate the kinds of deals Wendy's wants to promote in its stores without putting up full-sized advertising or posters for what is only relevant for a few days.

Related: Veteran fund manager picks favorite stocks for 2024

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Inside The Most Ridiculous Jobs Report In Recent History: Record 1.2 Million Immigrant Jobs Added In One Month

Inside The Most Ridiculous Jobs Report In Recent History: Record 1.2 Million Immigrant Jobs Added In One Month

Last month we though that the…

Published

on

Inside The Most Ridiculous Jobs Report In Recent History: Record 1.2 Million Immigrant Jobs Added In One Month

Last month we though that the January jobs report was the "most ridiculous in recent history" but, boy, were we wrong because this morning the Biden department of goalseeked propaganda (aka BLS) published the February jobs report, and holy crap was that something else. Even Goebbels would blush. 

What happened? Let's take a closer look.

On the surface, it was (almost) another blockbuster jobs report, certainly one which nobody expected, or rather just one bank out of 76 expected. Starting at the top, the BLS reported that in February the US unexpectedly added 275K jobs, with just one research analyst (from Dai-Ichi Research) expecting a higher number.

Some context: after last month's record 4-sigma beat, today's print was "only" 3 sigma higher than estimates. Needless to say, two multiple sigma beats in a row used to only happen in the USSR... and now in the US, apparently.

Before we go any further, a quick note on what last month we said was "the most ridiculous jobs report in recent history": it appears the BLS read our comments and decided to stop beclowing itself. It did that by slashing last month's ridiculous print by over a third, and revising what was originally reported as a massive 353K beat to just 229K,  a 124K revision, which was the biggest one-month negative revision in two years!

Of course, that does not mean that this month's jobs print won't be revised lower: it will be, and not just that month but every other month until the November election because that's the only tool left in the Biden admin's box: pretend the economic and jobs are strong, then revise them sharply lower the next month, something we pointed out first last summer and which has not failed to disappoint once.

To be fair, not every aspect of the jobs report was stellar (after all, the BLS had to give it some vague credibility). Take the unemployment rate, after flatlining between 3.4% and 3.8% for two years - and thus denying expectations from Sahm's Rule that a recession may have already started - in February the unemployment rate unexpectedly jumped to 3.9%, the highest since February 2022 (with Black unemployment spiking by 0.3% to 5.6%, an indicator which the Biden admin will quickly slam as widespread economic racism or something).

And then there were average hourly earnings, which after surging 0.6% MoM in January (since revised to 0.5%) and spooking markets that wage growth is so hot, the Fed will have no choice but to delay cuts, in February the number tumbled to just 0.1%, the lowest in two years...

... for one simple reason: last month's average wage surge had nothing to do with actual wages, and everything to do with the BLS estimate of hours worked (which is the denominator in the average wage calculation) which last month tumbled to just 34.1 (we were led to believe) the lowest since the covid pandemic...

... but has since been revised higher while the February print rose even more, to 34.3, hence why the latest average wage data was once again a product not of wages going up, but of how long Americans worked in any weekly period, in this case higher from 34.1 to 34.3, an increase which has a major impact on the average calculation.

While the above data points were examples of some latent weakness in the latest report, perhaps meant to give it a sheen of veracity, it was everything else in the report that was a problem starting with the BLS's latest choice of seasonal adjustments (after last month's wholesale revision), which have gone from merely laughable to full clownshow, as the following comparison between the monthly change in BLS and ADP payrolls shows. The trend is clear: the Biden admin numbers are now clearly rising even as the impartial ADP (which directly logs employment numbers at the company level and is far more accurate), shows an accelerating slowdown.

But it's more than just the Biden admin hanging its "success" on seasonal adjustments: when one digs deeper inside the jobs report, all sorts of ugly things emerge... such as the growing unprecedented divergence between the Establishment (payrolls) survey and much more accurate Household (actual employment) survey. To wit, while in January the BLS claims 275K payrolls were added, the Household survey found that the number of actually employed workers dropped for the third straight month (and 4 in the past 5), this time by 184K (from 161.152K to 160.968K).

This means that while the Payrolls series hits new all time highs every month since December 2020 (when according to the BLS the US had its last month of payrolls losses), the level of Employment has not budged in the past year. Worse, as shown in the chart below, such a gaping divergence has opened between the two series in the past 4 years, that the number of Employed workers would need to soar by 9 million (!) to catch up to what Payrolls claims is the employment situation.

There's more: shifting from a quantitative to a qualitative assessment, reveals just how ugly the composition of "new jobs" has been. Consider this: the BLS reports that in February 2024, the US had 132.9 million full-time jobs and 27.9 million part-time jobs. Well, that's great... until you look back one year and find that in February 2023 the US had 133.2 million full-time jobs, or more than it does one year later! And yes, all the job growth since then has been in part-time jobs, which have increased by 921K since February 2023 (from 27.020 million to 27.941 million).

Here is a summary of the labor composition in the past year: all the new jobs have been part-time jobs!

But wait there's even more, because now that the primary season is over and we enter the heart of election season and political talking points will be thrown around left and right, especially in the context of the immigration crisis created intentionally by the Biden administration which is hoping to import millions of new Democratic voters (maybe the US can hold the presidential election in Honduras or Guatemala, after all it is their citizens that will be illegally casting the key votes in November), what we find is that in February, the number of native-born workers tumbled again, sliding by a massive 560K to just 129.807 million. Add to this the December data, and we get a near-record 2.4 million plunge in native-born workers in just the past 3 months (only the covid crash was worse)!

The offset? A record 1.2 million foreign-born (read immigrants, both legal and illegal but mostly illegal) workers added in February!

Said otherwise, not only has all job creation in the past 6 years has been exclusively for foreign-born workers...

Source: St Louis Fed FRED Native Born and Foreign Born

... but there has been zero job-creation for native born workers since June 2018!

This is a huge issue - especially at a time of an illegal alien flood at the southwest border...

... and is about to become a huge political scandal, because once the inevitable recession finally hits, there will be millions of furious unemployed Americans demanding a more accurate explanation for what happened - i.e., the illegal immigration floodgates that were opened by the Biden admin.

Which is also why Biden's handlers will do everything in their power to insure there is no official recession before November... and why after the election is over, all economic hell will finally break loose. Until then, however, expect the jobs numbers to get even more ridiculous.

Tyler Durden Fri, 03/08/2024 - 13:30

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Shipping company files surprise Chapter 7 bankruptcy, liquidation

While demand for trucking has increased, so have costs and competition, which have forced a number of players to close.

Published

on

The U.S. economy is built on trucks.

As a nation we have relatively limited train assets, and while in recent years planes have played an expanded role in moving goods, trucks still represent the backbone of how everything — food, gasoline, commodities, and pretty much anything else — moves around the country.

Related: Fast-food chain closes more stores after Chapter 11 bankruptcy

"Trucks moved 61.1% of the tonnage and 64.9% of the value of these shipments. The average shipment by truck was 63 miles compared to an average of 640 miles by rail," according to the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics 2023 numbers.

But running a trucking company has been tricky because the largest players have economies of scale that smaller operators don't. That puts any trucking company that's not a massive player very sensitive to increases in gas prices or drops in freight rates.

And that in turn has led a number of trucking companies, including Yellow Freight, the third-largest less-than-truckload operator; J.J. & Sons Logistics, Meadow Lark, and Boateng Logistics, to close while freight brokerage Convoy shut down in October.

Aside from Convoy, none of these brands are household names. but with the demand for trucking increasing, every company that goes out of business puts more pressure on those that remain, which contributes to increased prices.

Demand for trucking has continued to increase.

Image source: Shutterstock

Another freight company closes and plans to liquidate

Not every bankruptcy filing explains why a company has gone out of business. In the trucking industry, multiple recent Chapter 7 bankruptcies have been tied to lawsuits that pushed otherwise successful companies into insolvency.

In the case of TBL Logistics, a Virginia-based national freight company, its Feb. 29 bankruptcy filing in U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Virginia appears to be death by too much debt.

"In its filing, TBL Logistics listed its assets and liabilities as between $1 million and $10 million. The company stated that it has up to 49 creditors and maintains that no funds will be available for unsecured creditors once it pays administrative fees," Freightwaves reported.

The company's owners, Christopher and Melinda Bradner, did not respond to the website's request for comment.

Before it closed, TBL Logistics specialized in refrigerated and oversized loads. The company described its business on its website.

"TBL Logistics is a non-asset-based third-party logistics freight broker company providing reliable and efficient transportation solutions, management, and storage for businesses of all sizes. With our extensive network of carriers and industry expertise, we streamline the shipping process, ensuring your goods reach their destination safely and on time."

The world has a truck-driver shortage

The covid pandemic forced companies to consider their supply chain in ways they never had to before. Increased demand showed the weakness in the trucking industry and drew attention to how difficult life for truck drivers can be.

That was an issue HBO's John Oliver highlighted on his "Last Week Tonight" show in October 2022. In the episode, the host suggested that the U.S. would basically start to starve if the trucking industry shut down for three days.

"Sorry, three days, every produce department in America would go from a fully stocked market to an all-you-can-eat raccoon buffet," he said. "So it’s no wonder trucking’s a huge industry, with more than 3.5 million people in America working as drivers, from port truckers who bring goods off ships to railyards and warehouses, to long-haul truckers who move them across the country, to 'last-mile' drivers, who take care of local delivery." 

The show highlighted how many truck drivers face low pay, difficult working conditions and, in many cases, crushing debt.

"Hundreds of thousands of people become truck drivers every year. But hundreds of thousands also quit. Job turnover for truckers averages over 100%, and at some companies it’s as high as 300%, meaning they’re hiring three people for a single job over the course of a year. And when a field this important has a level of job satisfaction that low, it sure seems like there’s a huge problem," Oliver shared.

The truck-driver shortage is not just a U.S. problem; it's a global issue, according to IRU.org.

"IRU’s 2023 driver shortage report has found that over three million truck driver jobs are unfilled, or 7% of total positions, in 36 countries studied," the global transportation trade association reported. 

"With the huge gap between young and old drivers growing, it will get much worse over the next five years without significant action."

Related: Veteran fund manager picks favorite stocks for 2024

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending