Yield Curve Inverts

Shuxclams

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
9,286
15
81


Stocks Stumble As Yield Curve Inverts
Tuesday December 27, 1:14 pm ET
By Ellen Simon, AP Business Writer
Stocks Move Lower As Bond Market Gives Signs That in Past Have Preceded Economic Slowdowns

NEW YORK (AP) -- Stocks stumbled Tuesday as the bond market gave signals that in the past have preceded economic slowdowns.

The yield curve, the spread between the yields of short-term and long-term bonds, inverted for the first time in five years. That means short-term interest rates are higher than long-term interest rates. Investors have been watching the yield curve closely because, in the past, inverted yield curves have usually preceded a recession.

Bonds' yields rise as their prices fall. Typically, investors expect a larger yield for a longer maturity. Bonds were higher, with the yield on the 10-year Treasury note falling to 4.372 while the two-year Treasury notes yielded 4.373 percent.

Volume in equity markets was light, exaggerating the effect.

The Dow Jones industrial average fell 49.22, or 0.45 percent, to 10,834.05.

Broader stock indicators also declined. The Standard & Poor's 500 index fell 6.93, or 0.55 percent, to 1,261.73, and the Nasdaq composite index fell 15.16, or 0.67 percent, to 2,234.26.

The U.S. dollar was up against other major currencies in European trading. Gold prices were also higher.

Crude oil futures fell. A barrel of light crude was quoted at $57.40, down $1.03, in trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

Specialty retailers were mixed on early reports of increased sales. Best Buy Co. Inc., the nation's largest consumer electronics retailer, fell 27 cents to $44.03. Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., the largest retailer specializing in home furnishings, rose 27 cents to $36.81.

Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the nation's largest retailer, fell 57 cents to $47.77 after saying Saturday it sees U.S. comparable store sales for December, those from stores open at least a year, rising 2 percent to 4 percent, in line with earlier forecasts. Amazon.com Inc. fell 72 cents to $48.50 after it saw its best holiday season ever, with a record number of items shipped, the giant online retailer said.

Online retailer Overstock.com Inc. fell $2.50, or 7.4 percent, to $31.14 after it said earnings would fall below earlier targets. "We've had a nice holiday season, just not as nice a season as we've had in the past or as I'd hoped for," said Patrick Byrne, the company's CEO, in a statement.

Guidant Corp., a maker of pacemakers and heart defibrillators, fell $2.16 to $64.82 after it said it received a warning letter from the Food and Drug Administration about its manufacturing, research and sales center in St. Paul, Minn. The company also said Friday its results would fall below expectations. Earlier this month, Boston Scientific Corp. announced a $25 billion takeover offer for Guidant, after Johnson & Johnson lowered a previous bid for the company to $21.5 billion amid product recalls. Boston Scientific fell 56 cents to $25.28. J&J fell 28 cents to $60.83.

The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies fell 6.94, or 1.01 percent, to 679.50.

Decliners led advancers by roughly 2 to 1 on the New York Stock Exchange, where volume was 599.34 million, up from 549.66 million Friday. U.S. equity markets were closed Monday for the Christmas holiday.

Overseas, Japan's Nikkei stock average fell 0.86 percent after hitting a five-year high Monday. Britain's markets were closed for Boxing Day. Germany's DAX index was up 0.48 percent and France's CAC-40 was up 0.24 percent.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/051227/wall_street.html?.v=10


Its obviously the leftist/liberal media trying to put GWB and his policies down ~

http://money.cnn.com/2005/12/27/news/ec...d_curve/index.htm?section=money_latest

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - For those who see the yield curve as a crystal ball for the economy, the so-called inversion in the Treasury market Tuesday could be seen as a bad omen.

But before you rush to horde your money under the mattress in anticipation of another recession, relax. Unlike the last time the yield curve inverted in 2000 -- signaling the beginning of the post-bubble economic downturn -- this time around, market strategists are taking a glass-half-full stance on the prospects for the economy.

Earlier in the session, the yield on 10-year Treasuries temporarily fell below that of 2-year notes, a rare event because investors tend to demand higher yields on longer-dated bonds to compensate for the risk of higher inflation later.

But the curve later reverted to its more normal status, with the 10-year yield at about 4.36 percent, above the 2-year note yield of 4.35, but just barely.

The yield curve refers to the slope of rates in the Treasury bond market, and an inverted yield curve traditionally signals a slowing economy or a recession.

According to a 2003 analysis by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, each of the six recessions since 1970 was preceded by a yield curve inversion -- an unnerving precedence. (For more on the geometry of the yield curve, click here).
Exception to the rule

But there are always exceptions to the rule, said Stuart Schweitzer, global market strategist at JPMorgan Asset Management.

In the past, whenever the yield curve inverted and a recession followed, both short-term rates and long-term rates were on the rise.

This time, short-term interest rates have been climbing gradually while long-term rates have remained fairly flat, he noted, indicating financial conditions aren't as tight as they have been when rates were rising in the past.

He added that inflation remains mild and the economy is growing at a surprisingly solid clip, despite concerns over high energy prices.

"The economy is resilient. Christmas sales were fine, not outstandingly good, but solid," he said. "There's no evidence that a rise in interest rates is sufficiently damaging spending."

Market observers said there could be some danger of an economic slowdown if the Federal Reserve decides to keep raising short-term interest rates aggressively.

"The biggest risk in 2006 is that the Fed will be seduced by worries about inflation into raising rates too high," said Hugh Johnson, chairman of Johnson Illington Advisors. "A lot depends on what the 10-year does and while I would hope that they would take notice that it's going down in yield, the question is whether they will take it seriously or dismiss it."

The Fed has publicly discounted the usefulness of the yield curve as an economic indicator, saying that other factors, such as a heavy flow of overseas capital into the U.S., have driven the yield on 10-year notes to abnormally low levels -- distorting the yield curve's predictive abilities. (Bond prices and yields move in opposite directions.)

Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan earlier this year even called the persistence of low long-term Treasury yields despite rising short-term interest rates a "conundrum."

But JPMorgan Asset Management's Schweitzer said there are signs that the Fed is getting close to the end of its rate hikes, though the market is generally expecting the central bank to raise rates at least once if not twice more, which would bring its benchmark fed funds rate to 4.75 percent.

Schweitzer said he expects the yield curve to invert intermittently in 2006 and economic growth could slow for a while, especially when "hurricane reconstruction spending has peaked."
No need to run and hide

So what should skittish investors do as the yield curve bounces up and down? Sit tight for now.

Market strategists see little reason to change investment strategies, particularly when it comes to investing in financial institutions and securities firms, which are most severely impacted by the movements of short- and long-term rates.

"People have been watching the yield curve for quite a while and have baked in the possibility of an inversion," said David Easthope, analyst at Celent LLC, an independent research and consulting firm. "I don't get the sense that there is any panic because firms have learned a lot since 2000 about being prudent."

Unlike the heydays of the technology bubble, corporations have been more cautious about spending -- in fact, many are now cash-rich as they've focused on solidifying their balance sheets, he said.

Companies have also been more active in hedging against interest rate moves through the use of derivatives, which should provide some protection against rate fluctuations.

Banks and securities firm tend to get hit hard when rate spreads narrow since they borrow money at short-term rates and lend at long rates. A flat yield curve, therefore, squeezes margins and an inverted one would hurt a bank's profits.

But Jeff Kleintop, chief investment strategist at PNC Advisors, added that the financial sector, which used to be dominated by lending activities, has branched out into other activities, such as merger financing and asset management, which could help offset any weakness from tight spreads.

"I think we're in a far better position than we were five years ago," Kleintop said.

Johnson at Johnson Illington Advisors added that investors should view an inverted yield curve as "a flashing yellow light" but focus on other indicators such as the financial markets, jobless claims and consumer expectations before making any changes to their investment strategies.

Take it for what you will......











SHUX
 

catnap1972

Platinum Member
Aug 10, 2000
2,607
0
76
Originally posted by: Shuxclams

Its obviously the leftist/liberal media trying to put GWB and his policies down ~

Yup :thumbsup:

Economy is the best it's been in the last 10,000 years and the defeatists refuse to admit it

:laugh:

 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
I'll take it as somewhat proof of what I've been saying for many months up here (and it seems the EPI picked up on the same exact things as I have been saying: http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/pm110 ). And, imo, it won't be just a recession.

The foundation of this "recovery" is as false and propped up as was the intel for invading Iraq.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
There were several people on CNBC today that debunked the yield curve inverserion. Said that it did not apply now for various reasons.

Regardless, DOW went from 40 up to 90 down pretty quick right after that. Take it for what it's worth, which nobody really knows.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,839
2,625
136
What is the economic theory behind such an inversion being a bad thing? I'm guessing the inversion usually happens at the start of a severe credit crunch (when banks tighten up granting new loans, thus driving up rates, affecting short term rates first). If so, I haven't seen any other evidence of such a credit crunch occuring.

Can anyone contribute some real analysis here (versus the 10,000 year sort of thing).
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
There was another analyst on CNBC just now that says that all six inverstions during his investment career have led to some sort of recession, but that six was not enough of a statistical sampling to show that they all do and felt that this one would not do the same. FWIW.
 

Shuxclams

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
9,286
15
81
in the past, inverted yield curves have usually preceded a recession.

There is evidence of Credit tightening actually.... and with Variable Rates on Mortgages coming due Banks are going to be less likely to offer more credit. Also Banks, actually lendors are now 'upping' the minimum payment on CC's - so overall the market is looking at the writing on the wall and someone in the crowd can read....... ;)



SIDENOTE: Remember, Banckruptcy laws were changed.....rates going higher across the board and peoples debt is all time high.... OUCH if the housing bubble bursts, imagine what it was like during the depression......




SHUX
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: Engineer
There was another analyst on CNBC just now that says that all six inverstions during his investment career have led to some sort of recession, but that six was not enough of a statistical sampling to show that they all do and felt that this one would not do the same. FWIW.
Of course he did. Good little spinner for the Propagandist.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
81
I'd contribute that to speculation that added in a way that the short term yields came up on top. Otherwise this would imply that FED will cut rates in the future (signaling economic downturn), which I don't really see happining anytime soon.

The yield cure is made out of this:

This curve, which relates the yield on a security to its time to maturity is based on the closing market bid yields on actively traded Treasury securities in the over-the-counter market. These market yields are calculated from composites of quotations obtained by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. For information on how the Treasury?s yield curve is derived, visit our Treasury Yield Curve Methodology page.

So really the curve can be influenced by speculators in OTC market.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Some people stating the obvious as if it is a highly regarded secret are funny.

Interest rates goes up, economy slows down.
This is basic.

This recovery isnt anymore false than the boom of the late 1990s when unemployment was low and people were being paid 90K out of school to design crappy websites.

 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
81
Originally posted by: Thump553
What is the economic theory behind such an inversion being a bad thing? I'm guessing the inversion usually happens at the start of a severe credit crunch (when banks tighten up granting new loans, thus driving up rates, affecting short term rates first). If so, I haven't seen any other evidence of such a credit crunch occuring.

Can anyone contribute some real analysis here (versus the 10,000 year sort of thing).

Lower 10 year rate implies that in 10 years the interest rates will be lower. So basically it's saying that FED will have to cut rates in the future and given our curent fiscal status (huge deficit), they'd only cut rates for an economic downturn.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Inconceivable that we are deficit stimulating the economy by 350 billion dollars and we are not in a huge stock market upswing.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: techs
Inconceivable that we are deficit stimulating the economy by 350 billion dollars and we are not in a huge stock market upswing.

Do you think the govt takes 350 billion and sticks it in the stock market?
 

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
26,201
4,871
126
Originally posted by: halik
So really the curve can be influenced by speculators in OTC market.
Originally posted by: halik
Lower 10 year rate implies that in 10 years the interest rates will be lower. So basically it's saying that FED will have to cut rates in the future and given our curent fiscal status (huge deficit), they'd only cut rates for an economic downturn.
Combine the two and you get your answer. The people are speculating that we will have a downturn. Often, economy is based much on fear or exuberance. If the majority of people think things will be great, they spend more and things are great. If the majority of people think things will deteriorate, they spend less and things may deteriorate.

This is the situation we are in now. The economy is just fine, but it is on rocky foundation. There are many signs that things may go bad. They don't have to. But, there are many bad signals looming in the next few years. The fundamentals just aren't as stong as we would like them (housing fluctuating, deficits, median wages going down, etc). And the government has used most of its ammunition (cutting taxes significantly any further is not likely, cutting interest rates now isn't likely, spending our way out of recession isn't likely). So if things to go bad, we have little ability to fight it off.

Result, there is strong speculation that the economy may go into a recession in the next few years. Hopefully it won't. But many signs point to yes.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: techs
Inconceivable that we are deficit stimulating the economy by 350 billion dollars and we are not in a huge stock market upswing.

Do you think the govt takes 350 billion and sticks it in the stock market?

No, only "hand picked" companies of the stock market. The few, the proud, the Haliburtons! :shocked:
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: techs
Inconceivable that we are deficit stimulating the economy by 350 billion dollars and we are not in a huge stock market upswing.

Do you think the govt takes 350 billion and sticks it in the stock market?

No, only "hand picked" companies of the stock market. The few, the proud, the Haliburtons! :shocked:

Be interested in seeing those transactions. How many shares did the US govt purchase and at what price?

350 billion is quite a lot of money to put into the market.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: techs
Inconceivable that we are deficit stimulating the economy by 350 billion dollars and we are not in a huge stock market upswing.

Do you think the govt takes 350 billion and sticks it in the stock market?

No, only "hand picked" companies of the stock market. The few, the proud, the Haliburtons! :shocked:

Be interested in seeing those transactions. How many shares did the US govt purchase and at what price?

350 billion is quite a lot of money to put into the market.

I didn't say that they bought stock, they propped the stock price of those companies, hand picked of course, by pumping the money, borrowed at that, into them! :Q

 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: techs
Inconceivable that we are deficit stimulating the economy by 350 billion dollars and we are not in a huge stock market upswing.

Do you think the govt takes 350 billion and sticks it in the stock market?

No, only "hand picked" companies of the stock market. The few, the proud, the Haliburtons! :shocked:

Be interested in seeing those transactions. How many shares did the US govt purchase and at what price?

350 billion is quite a lot of money to put into the market.

I didn't say that they bought stock, they propped the stock price of those companies, hand picked of course, by pumping the money, borrowed at that, into them! :Q

That isnt what you said when responding to my question about sticking 350 billion straight I.E. purchasing stock into the market.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: techs
Inconceivable that we are deficit stimulating the economy by 350 billion dollars and we are not in a huge stock market upswing.

Do you think the govt takes 350 billion and sticks it in the stock market?

No, only "hand picked" companies of the stock market. The few, the proud, the Haliburtons! :shocked:

Be interested in seeing those transactions. How many shares did the US govt purchase and at what price?

350 billion is quite a lot of money to put into the market.

I didn't say that they bought stock, they propped the stock price of those companies, hand picked of course, by pumping the money, borrowed at that, into them! :Q

That isnt what you said when responding to my question about sticking 350 billion straight I.E. purchasing stock into the market.

Well now, I've clarrified my position, now haven't I!?!? :D
 

zephyrprime

Diamond Member
Feb 18, 2001
7,512
2
81
Originally posted by: Thump553
What is the economic theory behind such an inversion being a bad thing? I'm guessing the inversion usually happens at the start of a severe credit crunch (when banks tighten up granting new loans, thus driving up rates, affecting short term rates first). If so, I haven't seen any other evidence of such a credit crunch occuring.

Can anyone contribute some real analysis here (versus the 10,000 year sort of thing).
There's definitely a reduction in credit expansion going on although it may not have risen to the level of a "crunch" yet. Rising fed overnight rates make it harder to borrow.

However, I don't think credit crunches are are the primary cause of yield inversions. I think investors are expecting the economy to tank in the near future and are buying up long bonds and ditching short term bonds in order to get into a safe investment vehicle to ride out any possible recession.

 

Shuxclams

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
9,286
15
81
Originally posted by: zephyrprime
Originally posted by: Thump553
What is the economic theory behind such an inversion being a bad thing? I'm guessing the inversion usually happens at the start of a severe credit crunch (when banks tighten up granting new loans, thus driving up rates, affecting short term rates first). If so, I haven't seen any other evidence of such a credit crunch occuring.

Can anyone contribute some real analysis here (versus the 10,000 year sort of thing).
There's definitely a reduction in credit expansion going on although it may not have risen to the level of a "crunch" yet. Rising fed overnight rates make it harder to borrow.

However, I don't think credit crunches are are the primary cause of yield inversions. I think investors are expecting the economy to tank in the near future and are buying up long bonds and ditching short term bonds in order to get into a safe investment vehicle to ride out any possible recession.



/Me is talking about converting a sizable amount of my risk into 10-year myself....







SHUX
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Lots of pure speculation here----how investor act is a little like watching lemming jump off cliffs.

But in my mind any recent economic progress made is based on running up ever more debt, a similar
thing happened with Ronald Reagan but at least American industrial decline was not as much part of the mix.
The key is still our trade defecit that has been growing by leaps and bounds since 1980.

One fine day our creditors will cut us off and the merry go round will stop. Meanwhile we are living off savings
taken from the flat lined stock market and invested in the new McMansions now blighting the landscape. As decent paying American jobs are outsourced, it takes no crystal ball to realise a crunch will come.------with the better
placed unable to run faster to maintain the same income from a ever shrinking pie. But when the base of the food chain goes, there goes the consumer spending that keeps this economy afloat. Once unemployment goes much higher, the end will be near.

We have already outsourced the means of recovery.------and no one really planning for what next after the Feds
steering wheels--already locked and turned hard right fails to arrest the skid.

Just my take on the matter----that yield curve thing is not much of an indicator---when we have only to look and see that the debt we are living on now must sooner or later catch up with us.------and much sooner is my guess.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: Engineer
There was another analyst on CNBC just now that says that all six inverstions during his investment career have led to some sort of recession, but that six was not enough of a statistical sampling to show that they all do and felt that this one would not do the same. FWIW.

I am not sure how that is possible. There have been six inversions and only 3 recessions sine 1980.