News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Fed Ends Zero-Rate Era by chollida1 on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @02:31PM (#10746616)
Nanex, an account that follow market micro-structure, had an interesting tweet that showed how the liquidity on 10 year Treasuries just dried up prior to the announcement.

https://twitter.com/nanexllc/status/677202959030083584

I'm surprised this story has gotten so many votes so fast. This rate hike was widely predicted, as intentionally as the fed could by law so that they don't impact the markets too much.

Alot of people think this is the first of a few small rate hikes we'll see in the next 12 months.

IMHO, this is good news for the US economy,

- it will help give the the fed some wiggle room/ammunition to soften the fall when the next recession hits

- a slowly raising rate could stimulate the economy by convincing companies to spend now on large projects rather than wait, ditto for housing/consumers

Having said all that, keep in mind the rate hike is only 0.25% upping the overnight rate to 0.3% so this is likely to have an almost negligible impact on the every day consumer.

Re:Fed Ends Zero-Rate Era by kasey_junk on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @02:35PM (#10746660)
Treasuries always dry up in front of fed announcements. It's marked on the calendar like job numbers and other macro items that can cause wild swings.

Its much cheaper to just not trade during those times than it is to build out the models/risk management components for most market makers.

Re:Fed Ends Zero-Rate Era by theseatoms on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @02:38PM (#10746684)
In other words, the price of liquidity is much higher when impacting news (for any given security) is expected during market hours. To me this seems like a desired feature of properly functioning markets.
Re:Fed Ends Zero-Rate Era by vinceguidry on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @03:29PM (#10747069)
I'm home shopping at the moment, and my mortgage broker told me that he noticed a large hike in mortgage rates, is that due to this announcement and that I should wait a few weeks before locking in a rate?
Re:Fed Ends Zero-Rate Era by eli on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @04:31PM (#10747513)
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/12/16/why-the-fed-move-doesnt-matte...

Trying to time the market is tricky business.

Re:Fed Ends Zero-Rate Era by scarletham on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @05:20PM (#10747808)
Equities dry up as well. Pretty much everything dries up before FOMC announcements.
Re:Fed Ends Zero-Rate Era by tedsanders on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @02:51PM (#10746780)
(1) Liquidity always dries up prior to the announcements. If you're a market maker, you don't want to get run over by someone moving the price on new information.

(2) It's a myth that raising rates will give the Fed more ammunition. That's like saying you should exercise less now so that if you gain weight in the future you'll be able to make a bigger change in the amount you exercise. (Not the perfect analogy, but I hope you get the idea.) The fallacy comes from thinking that the change in interest rates is what stimulates the economy, not the interest itself.

A second issue with raising rates to 'increase ammunition' is that if you choose a rate path that is too high, you'll depress economic growth, pushing rates down, counteracting your goal of higher rates. Monetary economist Scott Sumner writes: "Fed funds target rate increases tend to reduce the Wicksellian equilibrium interest rate, and hence give them less ammunition for the future. The ECB in 2011 is now the classic example, but you can cite Sweden, or Japan (2000 and 2006) or the US (1937) as well."

Here's a neutral-point-of-view blog post that discusses whether it makes sense to think about rate hikes as 'adding ammunition': http://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2015/05/small-shoes-and-he...

And here's a blog post that argues that while rate hikes might not give you monetary ammunition, they still might give you reputational ammunition: http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=31361

Re:Fed Ends Zero-Rate Era by chollida1 on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @03:06PM (#10746904)
I agree with your first point. Most people don't follow the markets so I thought it might be interesting to them.

As to your second point, we will have to agree to disagree. You might be right, I'm not a macro economist, but your opinion is a minority one and its definitely not the mainstream opinion.

Which is fine, it might be right, but I'd rather have the fed have room to cut rates than not have that option on the table.

Re:Fed Ends Zero-Rate Era by jbooth on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @03:20PM (#10746998)
Worth noting that the mainstream macroeconomic wisdom has been completely disconnected from what we've observed in reality the past 10 years or so -- having rates this low for this long is supposed to spur demand and create inflation, according to mainstream macro, right?
Re:Fed Ends Zero-Rate Era by shawn-furyan on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @05:19PM (#10747801)
I think mainstream macro acknowledges that negative rates can be needed to spur demand even though there isn't a good mechanism for achieving negative rates. The zero bound is pretty much a 'natural' restriction that doesn't have anything to do with just how much people want to hang on to their capital in times of uncertainty.
Re:Fed Ends Zero-Rate Era by lintiness on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @03:47PM (#10747200)
low rates have spurred demand and inflation RELATIVE to where they would have been at much higher rates.
Re:Fed Ends Zero-Rate Era by auntienomen on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @03:26PM (#10747048)
Given high demand, yes. But demand hasn't been high.
Re:Fed Ends Zero-Rate Era by lintiness on Wednesday December 16, 2015 @02:36PM (#10746663)
liquidity dries up in everything before big news announcements. resting bids and offers are asking to get picked off.