With the Federal Reserve finally making moves toward normalizing monetary policy by raising interest rates and reducing the size of its bloated balance sheet, it's an interesting exercise to look at what has motivated this move outside of the supposed health of the economy. As you will see in this posting, there is a repeated theme in comments made by various Federal Reserve insiders.
Let's start with the head of the Federal Reserve. Here's
a recent exchange from Janet
Yellen's July 12, 2017 testimony before Congress on the subject of asset prices: (starting at the 57 minute 55 second mark):
Ms. Carolyn Maloney (D - NY 12th): The
Fed has suggested that the stock market is currently overvalued. Are
there other markets that you consider or see as overvalued as well and do you
think a correction in any of these markets would cause problems for financial
stability?
Janet Yellen: So,
in looking at asset prices and valuations, we try not to opine on whether they
are correct or they're not correct. But, on...as you asked, what the
potential spillovers or impacts on financial stability could be on asset price
revaluations. My assessment of that is that as asset prices have moved up
we've not seen a substantial increase in borrowing based on those asset price
movements. We have a financial system, a banking system that's well
capitalized and strong and I believe it's resilient."
Here's Eric
Rosengren, President Federal Reserve Bank of Boston from a speech given May
9, 2017 entitled "Trends in Commercial Real Estate":
"While
an overheated economy followed by a recession is only one possible scenario,
and certainly not my prediction, it helps to illustrate one way in which low
cap rates might be of concern in the event of such a reversal. While all market
participants should consider how their positions would be impacted by adverse
scenarios, Figure 15 shows that leveraged institutions and government-sponsored
entities have significant exposures to commercial real estate. In the
event of an adverse scenario such as a recession, these exposures
could pose significant risks to these institutions.
While
I am certainly not expecting such a scenario to occur, central bankers are
charged with thinking about adverse risks to the economy. So current valuations in real
estate are one such risk that I will continue to watch carefully."
Here's
Figure 15 which shows that the banking sector has been a massive investor in
commercial real estate, currently owning 53 percent of the total, up 9.6
percent on a year-over-year basis:
Here's Jerome
Powell, Member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve from a speech given January
7, 2017 entitled
"Low Interest Rates and the Financial System":
"Low-for-long
interest rates can have adverse effects on financial institutions and markets
through a number of plausible channels, as listed on the next slide.
After all, low interest rates are intended to encourage some risk-taking.
The question is whether low rates have encouraged excessive risk-taking
through the buildup of leverage or unsustainably high asset prices or through
misallocation of capital. That question is particularly important today. Historically, recessions often occurred when the Fed
tightened to control inflation. More recently, with inflation under
control, overheating has shown up in the form of financial excess. Core
PCE inflation remained close to or below 2 percent during both the late-1990s
stock market bubble and the mid-2000s housing bubble that led to the financial
crisis. Real short- and long-term rates were relatively high in the
late-1990s, so financial excess can also arise without a low-rate environment.
Nonetheless, the current extended period of very low nominal rates calls
for a high degree of vigilance against the buildup of risks to the stability of
the financial system."
Here
is slide 8 from his presentation which shows the risks associated with "low-for-long interest
rates":
Here's Stanley
Fischer, Vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve from a speech given June
20, 2017 entitled
"Housing and Financial Stability":
"It
is often said that real estate is at the center of almost every financial
crisis. That is not quite accurate, for financial crises can, and do, occur
without a real estate crisis. But it is true that there is a strong link
between financial crises and difficulties in the real estate sector….
But
memories fade. Fannie, Freddie, and the Federal Housing Administration are now
the dominant providers of mortgage funding, and the FHLBs have expanded their
balance sheets notably. House
prices are now high and rising in several countries, perhaps as a result of
extended periods of low interest rates...
But
there is more to be done, and much improvement to be preserved and built on,
for the world as we know it cannot afford another pair of crises of the
magnitude of the Great Recession and the Global Financial Crisis."
Here's John
Williams, President Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco from an interview on
Australia Broadcasting Corporation television interview June
27, 2017 (11 minute 55 second mark):
"We are seeing some reach
for yield and some maybe excess risk-taking in the financial system with very
low rates...
I am somewhat concerned
about complacency in the market...The stock market still seems to be running
pretty much on fumes. It's very strong
in terms of that. It's something that
clearly is a risk to the U.S. economy, some correction there -- it's something
we have to be prepared for to respond to if it does happen."
And, last but not least,
let's wrap up this posting by looking at what Janet Yellen had to say on
June
27, 2017 in conversation with Nicholas Stern at the British Academy (1 hour 7 minute 45 second mark):
"Asset
valuations are somewhat rich if you use some traditional metrics like price-earnings
ratios, but I wouldn't try to comment on appropriate valuations and those
ratios ought to depend on long-term interest rates and of course there is uncertainty about that...so...yes, by standard metrics some asset valuations look high but there's no certainty about that."
As
I recall, the last time we heard about the abandonment of traditional metrics
for stock valuations was back in the late 1990s and very early 2000s when
measures like price-earnings ratios were tossed out the window when tech sector
stock prices were unhinged from reality. We all know how that movie
ended, don't we?
Here is a chart showing the trailing price-to-earnings ratio for the S&P 500 going back to 1987:
While not at the levels seen during the tech stock boom (or during the extraordinary period during the Great Recession's plunge in profits), the PE ratio certainly appears to be reaching the point of being "rich".
Here is a chart showing the trailing price-to-earnings ratio for the S&P 500 going back to 1987:
While not at the levels seen during the tech stock boom (or during the extraordinary period during the Great Recession's plunge in profits), the PE ratio certainly appears to be reaching the point of being "rich".
While
the braintrust at the Federal Reserve rarely show their hand, there seems to be
a subtle yet repeated comments about the possible negative repercussions of
their long-term near-zero interest rate policies, in particular, the impact on
asset prices. One would think that they learned from their experiences
with low interest rates and the bubble created in the American housing market
but, apparently, some lessons are harder learned than others.
No comments:
Post a Comment