In the days prior to the Federal Reserve’s annual Jackson Hole Economic Policy Symposium at the end of August, senior Fed officials started to make the case that markets had become too sanguine about further rate hikes this year. Janet Yellen’s conference opener restated the Federal Open Market Committee’s tightening bias, saying “the FOMC continues to anticipate that gradual increases in the federal funds rate will be appropriate over time.” There was no softening or policy pivot here. In fact, she added that “the case for an increase in the federal funds rate has strengthened in recent months.” That was the most forceful endorsement of another rate hike from Yellen yet.
The rest of the conference, titled ‘Designing Resilient Monetary Policy Frameworks for the Future’, produced few new insights. The agenda focused on policy efficiency, especially what can be done to improve the pass-through of monetary policy to broader financial markets, and emphasized greater coordination between fiscal and monetary policy. Other speakers argued for maintaining the large Fed balance sheet for the foreseeable future and affirmed Chair Yellen’s view that the current set of policy tools – including the ability to pay interest on excess reserves, large scale asset purchases, and explicit forward guidance – are sufficient to deal with future downturns.
Yellen even provided model-based estimates showing quantitative easing and forward guidance would be as effective as allowing policy rates to fall deeply into negative territory in a future recession. That’s as clear a repudiation as you will get from her of the negative interest rate policy followed by the European Central Bank (ECB) and the Bank of Japan (BOJ). One presenter at the symposium, Marvin Goodfriend, did promote the merits of unencumbering interest rate policy at the zero bound. He argued that the current low levels of nominal bond yields leave little room to push short rates much below longterm interest rates. Yet, for such a policy to function effectively, we would have to seriously reduce Americans’ preference to use cash for transactions, which would resist negative rates. It’s hard to see negative interest rates as anything but an interesting thought experiment for the Fed.
Markets moved sideways
Reflecting the uncertainty about US monetary policy, both equity and the broader fixed income markets trended sideways last month. Both the S&P 500 and the Barclays Aggregate index were essentially unchanged in August; incidentally, both are up about 6% for the year so far.
What still worked in August was the reach for yield. The Barclays High Yield index gained 2%, pushing its year-to-date performance to over 14%. Also not surprising in an environment of possible Fed rate hikes was that financials were the best performing sector in the S&P 500 and the US dollar gained a few tenths of a percent against other major currencies.
Fundamental contradictions
Janet Yellen’s manifestly improved confidence has some backing from US fundamentals. While economic growth in the second quarter was revised down to just 1.1%, much of the weakness was due to a decline in inventories, typically a transitory headwind to growth. In fact, private domestic demand – consumption, housing, and business investment – increased at a more impressive 3% rate, up from just 1.1% in the first three months. Job growth has rebounded, too. After averaging just 84,000 new jobs in April and May, the following two months saw that trend increase to 274,000. Most forecasters are looking for a solid 2.7% growth rate in the current quarter; our forecast, at 3.2%, is even more optimistic. So, the Fed’s central case of a moderately growing economy that will continue to push the unemployment rate lower remains strong.
Still, not all the evidence is pointing in the same direction. The two main US consumer confidence surveys have been on diverging trajectories in recent months. One showed consumers feel their current circumstances haven’t been that good since the summer of 2007, which suggests the pace of consumer spending should accelerate. The other survey has deteriorated below last year’s average, pointing more to weaker spending. It’s a similar story on the manufacturing side: One of the two major purchasing managers’ indexes supports a tentative reacceleration, while the other just indicated a renewed contraction in manufacturing activity.
The Fed may not pull the trigger this year
Those contradictions are not enough to change the Fed’s central, moderate growth case. But they likely sow enough doubt about how sustainable a summer growth rebound is. Doubts like these are what persuaded the FOMC in each of this year’s five meetings not to raise rates. We think that is essentially what the committee faces when it meets later this month. With inflation still well below the Fed’s 2% target, the FOMC is under no pressure to raise rates other than the pressure it has created itself.
After the December 2015 rate hike, the FOMC still provided forward guidance of four additional increases this year. In March the committee cut that guidance to just two. The second half of the year should look similar to 2015, when the FOMC cut guidance in September from two to just one rate hike for the year and delivered that hike at the December meeting. The added complication this year is, of course, November’s presidential election, which may lead to an increase in economic policy uncertainty. That’s the main reason our forecast schedule has the next rate hike penciled in for the first quarter of 2017 and not December 2016.
Another rate hike will do very little to change the outlook for Treasuries. The Fed may be contemplating further policy tightening, but the ECB, the Bank of England, and the Bank of Japan are still looking for policy easing. That should keep yields low in much of the rest of the developed world, which serves as a valuation anchor for longer dated US Treasuries. However, US inflation trends are gradually improving behind the scenes. After averaging close to 0% for most of 2015, it took just three months for headline inflation to jump to a new 1% trend earlier this year. The same base effects are likely to push next year’s average above 2%. That should modestly pull up longer term Treasury yields. We still expect 10-year Treasuries to trade around 1.5% at the end of this year and around 2% at the end of 2017.
Markus Schomer is managing director y Chief Economist de PineBridge Investments.
This information is for educational purposes only and is not intended to serve as investment advice. This is not an offer to sell or solicitation of an offer to purchase any investment product or security. Any opinions provided should not be relied upon for investment decisions. Any opinions, projections, forecasts and forward-looking statements are speculative in nature; valid only as of the date hereof and are subject to change. PineBridge Investments is not soliciting or recommending any action based on this information.
