Tag: FINANCE

TRADITION suggests that Wall Street should favour the Republican Party. America’s conservatives usually back low taxes, free trade and a reduction in regulation. But the 2016 election seems to be an exception. A Bank of America Merrill Lynch poll of fund managers in October found that a Republican victory was seen as one of the biggest risks facing financial markets, along with the disintegration of the EU.

A study* by Justin Wolfers of the University of Michigan and Eric Zitzewitz of Dartmouth College found that in the wake of the first debate, there was a six-percentage-point rise in the probability of a Hillary Clinton victory on betting markets. In reaction, stockmarkets rose, and gold and Treasury bonds (two assets that benefit when investors become risk-averse) fell. “Financial markets expect a generally healthier domestic and international economy under a President Clinton than under a President Trump,” the authors concluded.

What makes this election different for investors is the nature of the Republican candidate—Donald Trump is a long way from the party’s mainstream. A Trump victory would throw up all kinds of uncertainty…Continue reading

IN 2007 financial dangers, piled up like so much tinder, ignited at last and caused a swathe of destruction across the global economy. The blaze also engulfed governments, which faced intense public pressure to prevent such calamities from recurring. Much has happened on the regulatory front since then. Few believe, however, that the problem of financial instability has been solved. To regulators’ frustration, in a world of global financial flows, efforts to safeguard one country often endanger others.

This bothersome tendency has become harder to ignore as cross-border capital flows have swollen. Annual gross financial flows in rich countries soared from roughly 5% of GDP in 1980 to around 25% of GDP on the eve of the financial crisis. This worldwide torrent of money has its benefits. Investors can more easily diversify their portfolios. Investors in slow-growing rich countries gain access to higher-yielding investments in poorer, capital-starved economies, and those poorer economies gain access to desperately needed capital relatively cheaply.

Yet there are costs as well. Emerging economies with less sophisticated financial markets and…Continue reading

TO MOST investors, Venezuela looks less like a market than a mess. The IMF expects output to shrink by 10% this year and inflation to exceed 700%. As the bolívar’s value has plunged, multinational firms have announced billions of dollars of write-downs. For much of this year, however, some strong-stomached investors have scented an opportunity. They rushed to buy bonds issued by the government and by the state-owned oil company, PDVSA.

They have been rewarded handsomely. Venezuelan government bonds have outperformed other emerging-market sovereign bonds tracked by JPMorgan (see chart). The government, led by Nicolás Maduro, boasts it has never missed a debt payment. Indeed he has given priority to debt service over other urgent needs, such as importing food. Mr Maduro is keen not to scare off the foreign creditors sorely needed by PDVSA.

However, Venezuela looks increasingly stretched. Two big PDVSA payments, of $1 billion and $2 billion, are due on October 28th and November 2nd. Last month the company proposed a bond swap to ease a looming payments crunch: investors holding PDVSA bonds maturing in 2017 (which are not…Continue reading

Will they Passera?

FROM the mists of Italian banking, new shapes are emerging. One is at last becoming flesh: on October 15th the shareholders of two lenders, Banco Popolare and Banca Popolare di Milano, approved a merger that has been months in the making. The substance of another—Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena, the world’s oldest bank as well as Italy’s most troubled—is still shrouded, but it is likely to become clearer at a meeting of Monte dei Paschi’s board on October 24th.

The merged bank, to be called Banco BPM, will surpass Monte dei Paschi to become Italy’s third-largest lender. Its creation is a small triumph for Matteo Renzi, the centre-left prime minister. Last year Mr Renzi introduced a reform obliging Italy’s ten biggest popolari, or co-operative banks, to become joint-stock companies by the end of 2016. The hope was that this would spur takeovers, yielding fewer, stronger, more efficient banks.

The Banco BPM deal, which promises annual savings of €290m ($318m), or 10% of the combined cost base, is Mr Renzi’s first result. Two awkward obstacles stood in its…Continue reading

When you’ve eliminated the impossible…

JOINING “Hamilton”, a Broadway show, and concerts by Adele, a British soul diva, on the list of tickets-to-kill-for in New York is a screening in an ugly new office building that recently popped-up in the East Village, a place best known for offbeat culture. There is a ten-week-long queue to see simulations by Watson, IBM’s cognitive artificial-intelligence platform.

Initially known for stunts such as beating the world’s best chess player, Watson has been seeking a wider audience. It has found a vast potential one in the world of financial regulation. Rules have become so sprawling and mysterious that even regulators have begun asking for a map. In response, a market is springing up: for “regtech”, fintech’s nerdy new offspring.

On September 29th, IBM announced the purchase of Promontory, a 600-strong consultancy whose senior staff include former officials from the Federal Reserve, the World Bank, the Securities and Exchange Commission and other regulators. The hope is that person and machine will combine into a vast business. Promontory was founded in…Continue reading

JAMES CARVILLE, political adviser to Bill Clinton, the former president, famously said that he wanted to be reincarnated as the bond market so he could “intimidate everybody”. He was frustrated by the administration’s inability to push through an economic stimulus for fear of spooking investors and pushing bond yields higher.

More than 20 years later, the world looks very different. Many developed countries have been running budget deficits ever since the global financial crisis of 2008; their government debt-to-GDP ratios are far higher than they were in the early 1990s. Yet the bond market looks about as intimidating as a chihuahua in a handbag; in general, yields are close to historic lows.

In the 1990s “bond-market vigilantes” sold their holdings when they feared that countries were pursuing irresponsible fiscal or monetary policies. In Britain even fear of a “hard Brexit” is only now being reflected in rising gilt yields—and they are still below the (very low) levels seen before the vote to leave the EU in June. Even developing countries with big budget deficits can borrow easily. This week, for example, Saudi Arabia…Continue reading

AMERICANS who want a comfortable retirement, and who work in the private sector, have to look after their own interests these days. No longer can most rely on their employer to pay a pension linked to their final salary; such defined-benefit promises are too expensive.

Instead, workers are promised something called a defined-contribution (DC) pension which, truth be told, isn’t a pension at all. It is a savings pot to which employers and employees contribute, with some tax advantages. How big that pot will be, and what kind of income it will provide, is unknown.

Most of those savings will probably be invested in mutual funds. Yet as William Birdthistle, an academic lawyer, writes in an entertaining new book*, small investors need to become better informed about the way mutual funds work.

One might think, for example, that all investors in a fund are treated equally. But Mr Birdthistle cites a set of JPMorgan equity funds which have seven different types of shares, with opaque names such as Class R5. The main difference tends to be the fees that funds charge. Small investors usually pay most, even those in some DC schemes. These fees…Continue reading

AMERICA’S presidential contest offers voters a stark choice. Hillary Clinton represents continuity with the Obama administration—not a bad pitch to voters, given low unemployment, steady job growth and a recent upturn in the rate of increase of real incomes. In the opposite corner is Donald Trump, standing on a radical platform of protectionism, draconian immigration restrictions, massive defence spending and construction of a big, beautiful wall along the Mexican border. Mr Trump’s dangerous economic nationalism demands an explanation. Is he the predictable consequence of years of hardship for many Americans?

Two broad theories vie to explain Mr Trump’s ascent. One camp sees him as an inevitable backlash against economic-policy priorities that have left many Americans behind. As America and the world have grown more economically integrated, growth in household incomes has stagnated and inequality soared. The costs of freer trade were borne most acutely in Southern and Mid-Western manufacturing towns exposed to competition from cheap Chinese imports. A series of recent papers shows that the most affected labour markets have…Continue reading

Retired hurt

WHEN you consider the hundreds of billions of dollars of losses and fines that the banking industry has made or incurred over the past decade, the affair that has just ended the career of John Stumpf, the boss of Wells Fargo, may at first seem innocuous. In September Wells admitted that its retail-banking sales people had been too pushy, and agreed to pay regulators a $185m fine, a tiny sum by recent standards (Deutsche Bank is presently in negotiations to pay a fine of perhaps $5 billion to American regulators). Mr Stumpf probably thought that he had a couple more happy years to go as the head of the world’s most valuable bank.

But on October 12th, he stepped down after being roasted alive for weeks in an inferno of criticism. Wells’s transgressions have caught the public mood far more than esoteric abuses in the mortgage-backed-security market ever did. The bank admitted that its staff created up to 2m bogus accounts, without customers’ permission, in order to meet aggressive sales targets. To many Americans fed up with banks’ red tape and lousy service that seemed reckless, unforgivable and possibly…Continue reading

YOU would expect strong job growth to be accompanied by falling unemployment, but America is proving that one does not always entail the other. Over the past year, employment is up by fully 3m but the unemployment rate has stayed around 5%. In fact, a few more workers are unemployed than a year ago (see chart). The reason is that more Americans are seeking jobs. Over the past 12 months the labour-force participation rate of so-called “prime-age” workers—those between 25 and 54—is up by just under one percentage point, the fastest growth recorded since January 1989. Economists trying to spot inflation on the horizon want to know how long this trend can continue.

The recent surge in prime-age participation follows a long decline from its peak, 84.6%, scaled in January 1999. Between then and September 2015, it tumbled by an average of about a fifth of a percentage point a year. Among men, it had been falling since the mid-1960s. The long slide accelerated after the financial crisis, as laid-off workers quit the labour force in droves.

Hence the refrain of some that low unemployment is a mirage: stronger economic growth,…Continue reading