Global liquidity risks a heavy slump in EMs

Subject Global liquidity trends. Significance Concerns over global liquidity have resurfaced since late 2014, both in advanced and emerging markets (EMs). Both central banks and the IMF note that market liquidity has declined, especially in bond markets, due to stricter regulations on derivatives trading in advanced economies, lower sovereign bonds demand in some countries and the end of the credit boom in some EMs. Global liquidity is a loosely defined concept that can be interpreted in different ways and covers a variety of countries and market realities. Impacts Liquidity is highly cyclical and follows a 'boom and bust' cycle. Accomodative monetary policy and financial regulation may partly offset the exposure to global liquidity volatility. US monetary policy tightening could exacerbate an EM crisis, where corporates have heavily issued dollar-denominated debt. The ECB monetary policy will remain accommodative until at least March 2017 partly offsetting risks of a global liquidity shortage.

2015 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 622-640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Landgraf ◽  
Abdur Chowdhury

Purpose – What caused the mid-2000s world commodity price “bubble” and the recent commodity price growth? Some have suggested that rapid global industrial growth over the past decade is the key driver of price growth. Others have argued that high commodity prices are a result of excessively loose monetary policy. The purpose of this paper is to extend the current research in this area by incorporating emerging economies, the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) nations specifically, into global measures. Design/methodology/approach – The paper uses a vector error correction (VEC) model and computes variance decomposition and impulse response functions (IRFs). Findings – The empirical analysis suggest that the “demand channel” plays a large part in explaining commodity price growth whether BRIC countries are included or excluded from the analysis. However, excess liquidity may also play a part in explaining price growth. In addition, factoring in BRIC country data leads to the conclusion that unexpected movements in liquidity eventually explain more of the variation in commodity prices than unexpected demand shocks. This specific result is not caught in the sample that only incorporates advanced economies. Research limitations/implications – Despite the theory of Frankel (1986) and the findings of previous global vector autoregression (VAR)/VEC analyses, interest rates, especially shocks, have a minimal impact on consumer and commodity prices. Perhaps future studies should include an interest rate in their analysis that more closely reflects interest rates associated with information used by commodity consumers, producers, and investors. Some analyses such as Hua (1998) use the LIBOR rate, which is highly associated with developed financial markets in the advanced economies. Data quality and availability in the BRIC countries severely limited the length of the time period analyzed and the frequency of the data. Finding longer sample periods or higher frequency data can help to minimize bias in future research. In this paper, monetary aggregates and short-term interest rates were loosely connected to monetary policy. It would also be interesting to directly examine how special programs like quantitative easing influenced global liquidity. Practical implications – The results of the IRFs and variance decompositions confirm some of the previous findings reported in Belke et al. (2010), Hua (1998), and Swaray (2008) that suggest that positive shocks to liquidity positively impact commodity prices. In particular, both samples suggest that this is a short-run impact that occurs after two quarters. However, in the sample that includes information about liquidity from BRIC countries, excess liquidity positively affects commodity prices after six and seven quarters as well. The insignificant results of Granger causality tests of the effect of monetary variables on commodity prices suggests that this relationship is limited to movements in liquidity that is unexpected by agents in the system. These “shocks” could be attributed to a number of factors including exogenous monetary policy changes such as the unprecedented responses by the Federal Reserve during and after the 2008 global financial crisis. Social implications – First, empirical research that claims to analyze relationships at a “global” level needs to account for the growing influence of emerging economies and not simply the advanced economies. Otherwise, results may be biased as they were when too much of the forecast error variance in commodity prices was attributed to shocks to output when it should have been attributed to shocks to excess liquidity. Second, those who criticize expansionary monetary policy in the advanced countries, especially by the Federal Reserve, for pushing up commodity prices should also direct their attention toward monetary authorities elsewhere, especially the BRIC countries, since information on excess liquidity from these countries adds to the influence that global excess liquidity has on commodity prices. Third, monetary policymakers in the advanced countries need to closely monitor liquidity in the BRIC countries, since the discrepancies between the ALL and ADV samples suggests that BRIC excess liquidity affects commodity prices in a way that cannot be captured by examining advanced country data alone. Originality/value – No other paper in this area looked at the BRIC countries.


Author(s):  
Michael Haliassos ◽  
Gikas Hardouvelis ◽  
Margarita Tsoutsoura ◽  
Dimitri Vayanos

This chapter reviews the developments in Greece's financial system since the beginning of the crisis. The chapter places them in a broader context by (i) evaluating the long-term performance of Greece's financial system in comparison to other countries, and (ii) reviewing the credit boom-and-bust cycle that Greece has experienced since Euro entry. Risks in the Greek economy remain overly concentrated to those originating them and are not well diversified. By raising the cost of equity capital for firms, this impedes investment. It also drives up corporate leverage, thus making the economy more vulnerable to shocks. These vulnerabilities manifested themselves even before the sovereign crisis hit. Strengthening investor protection, through improvements in the justice system and financial regulation, is an important part of the solution. In the shorter run, the debt overhang problem in the private sector should be addressed. The chapter discusses policy options to achieve these goals.


2009 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruslan Y. Goyenko ◽  
Andrey D. Ukhov

AbstractThis paper establishes liquidity linkage between stock and Treasury bond markets. There is a lead-lag relationship between illiquidity of the two markets and bidirectional Granger causality. The effect of stock illiquidity on bond illiquidity is consistent with flight-to-quality or flight-to-liquidity episodes. Monetary policy impacts illiquidity. The evidence indicates that bond illiquidity acts as a channel through which monetary policy shocks are transferred into the stock market. These effects are observed across illiquidity of bonds of different maturities and are especially pronounced for illiquidity of short-term maturities. The paper provides evidence of illiquidity integration between stock and bond markets.


2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 264-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marielle de Jong ◽  
Hongwen Wu

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to build alternative indices weighing using a measure of fundamental value rather than debt size. The official bond indices built to reflect general price trends are market weighted, meaning that the bonds are weighted by their debt size. The more indebted, the more weight in the index, which mechanically increments the investment risks that are inherent. Those market indices are shown to be return-to-risk inefficient in recent studies compared to indices with alternative weighting schemes. The authors contribute to this growing literature, which mostly focuses on equities, by testing on bonds. Design/methodology/approach – The authors build alternative indices weighing using a measure of fundamental value rather than debt size. The authors have done this for sovereign bonds using gross domestic product (GDP) figures and for corporates taking sales revenues. Findings – The authors find in empirical tests that the fundamental indices build tend to outperform the market-weighted indices. Originality/value – This article builds on two articles by Arnott et al. (2005, 2010), in the Financial Analysts Journal and Journal of Portfolio Management, respectively, and adds value in the sense that – it takes an appreciation-free fundamental measure, – tests on the European as opposed to the US bond markets.


Significance The move mainly aims to pre-empt the widely anticipated launch of a sovereign quantitative easing (QE) programme by the ECB on January 22. However, it will accentuate divergences between bond and equity markets. Sovereign bond yields for most advanced economies are falling to new lows and are increasingly negative at the shorter end of the yield curve, because of deflation fears and lacklustre growth outlooks. Yet equity markets are hovering near record highs, buoyed by the US recovery and expectations of further monetary stimulus in the euro-area. Impacts Bond markets will be driven by deflation fears, while equity markets, especially US stocks, will be buoyed by Goldilocks-type conditions. Market expectations that the ECB will launch a sovereign QE programme will make bond yields fall further. Bond yields will be suppressed by investor scepticism about the ECB's ability to reflate the euro-area economy.


Subject Mexico credit outlook downgrades. Significance On August 23, ratings agency Standard & Poor's (S&P) lowered the sovereign credit outlook of the Mexican government to negative from stable. The same day, the credit outlooks of state-owned enterprises Pemex (oil) and CFE (electricity) were also moved to negative. Moody's modified its outlook on Mexico's debt to negative in March. Impacts A rating downgrade would represent both a financial and a political blow for the government. The 'normalisation' of US monetary policy should moderately increase borrowing costs for emerging sovereigns, including Mexico. In the unlikely case of a global liquidity crunch, Mexico may activate its IMF credit line, borrowing up to 88 billion dollars immediately.


Significance The meetings are expected to provide forward guidance on monetary policy. With consumer prices reaching a five-and-a-half year high in Hungary and a seven-month high in the Czech Republic, attention has turned to the future trajectory of Central European (CE) interest rates. Tightening would run against the populist streak of governments in both Prague and Budapest. Impacts Rate hikes in the Czech Republic and eventually also in Hungary by mid-2019 may contribute to a broad-based slowdown in growth next year. Tighter rates may moderate the headline inflation rate in January-June 2019, partly offsetting the negative impact of economic overheating. CE currencies may gradually strengthen, helping to shield against excessive capital outflows, as global liquidity conditions tighten. Some monetary policy divergence is likely within CE, as Poland’s central bank is unlikely to push for higher interest rates before end-2019.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 154-166
Author(s):  
Linas Jurksas

Abstract The purpose of this paper is to determine the factors that shape the liquidity levels of euro area sovereign bonds. The values of liquidity measure and explanatory variables were calculated from the limitorder book dataset for almost five hundred bonds from six largest euro area sovereign bond markets. The created variables were used in a cross-sectional regression model. The results revealed that characteristics of sovereign bonds are indeed highly linked with bond liquidity levels, and these effects become even stronger during the regimes of lower market liquidity. Contrary to the statements of market participants and findings of many other studies, the magnitude of trading automation and obligatory requirements imposed on dealers were found to be negatively linked with the liquidity level of sovereign bonds.


2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 307-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Blommestein

Purpose The purpose of this study is to assess the seriousness of the impact of new regulatory factors on liquidity in government bond markets since the onset of the global financial crisis. Design/methodology/approach Questionnaires were circulated for examining the adverse impact of regulatory changes on liquidity. New evidence was presented about the adverse impact of the process of regulatory changes on market liquidity. Findings The paper presents new survey results on the adverse liquidity impact of regulations on market liquidity. Responses show that government issuers differ in their assessment on the severity of the impact of the various regulations. Determining this longer-term impact is quite complex because measures of liquidity may not only reflect the impact of regulatory changes, but also the responses by policymakers and market participants (to these regulatory changes), covering in particular the following: market transparency, trading practices, market infrastructure and other policies to promote liquidity, including by reducing unconventional monetary policy measures. Also, market dynamics may have become more complex due to responses by market participants. Practical implications Debt managers need to take into account regulations with a significant adverse influence on both market liquidity and the price discovery process. As liquidity in government bond markets also has a direct impact on funding possibilities and financing costs, funding liquidity may also be affected, especially during periods with market stress. This means that the funding strategy may need to be adapted. Originality/value The paper presents new survey results on the impact of new regulations on market liquidity. This assessment is quite complex because measures of longer-term liquidity may reflect the impact of regulatory changes and the responses by policymakers and market participants to these changes.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wajid Shakeel Ahmed ◽  
Muhammad Shoaib Khan ◽  
Muhammad Jibran Sheikh ◽  
Inzamam Khan

PurposeThis particular study examined the government bond price variations in order to determine the presence of excess volatility both at country and panel group level of BRICS countries context.Design/methodology/approachThe study applied the autoregressive GARCH panel model approach proposed by Fakhry and Richter (2015) to evaluate the presence of excess volatility and then examined the diversification benefits. Further, the use of discrete wavelet transformation (DWT) has added the advantage to observe volatility across bonds along with potential diversification benefits by retaining information from the time and frequency domain perspective for both the maturities.FindingsThe main finding indicates that the excess volatility is present in BRICS countries at individual level i.e. in the case of Russia, India and China. However, the 10-year bond showing a less volatility compared to 5-year bond with the possibility of reaping out the benefits of diversification with international portfolio of sovereign bonds.Practical implicationsThe main implication of the research is related to the non-perseverance of EMH as far sovereign bonds of BRICS countries are concerned as the results indicate presence of excess volatility in the 5-year and 10-year bond markets. However, the implicit behavior of 5-year bond could benefit the active fund managers and investors by taking an advantage of a reducing systemic risk through short-medium term investments.Originality/valueThis study contributes not only to the existing studies of similar nature by examining the excess volatility in bond markets but also taking account of co-moment of distinct maturities to confirm possible international diversification benefits for BRICS countries context.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document