Posts Tagged ‘Shadow Banking’
China Snugs, Signals Banks Should Get Used to It

While all eyes are on the Federal Reserve today as the market awaits clues into when the central bank will begin slowing its liquidity provisions, China’s central bank continues its own snugging operation, keeping the money market rates at lofty levels.

Rather than inject liquidity into the money markets, as the banks were clamoring for, the PBOC drained CNY2 bln yesterday, which continued the cash crunch and ensured that today’s 10-year bond auction would see lukewarm demand.  Sure enough, today’s CNY30 bln 10-year bond offering saw its lowest bid-cover ratio in a year.

(Read more…)

The 7-day repo rate, which is an indicator of interbank liquidity rose 144 bp today to 8.26%, which is the highest rate since in two years.  It has averaged about 3.3% this year through last month and has averaged about 6.2% this month.  Other measures of liquidity, such as the inversion of the swaps curve, also reflects this shortage of liquidity. 

There are several factors at work, some of which are market based. For example, there are reports that a large amount of wealth management products sold by the banks are coming due at the end of June.  There is also has been a decline of capital inflows into China.   Yuan holdings by Chinese banks from sales of foreign exchange to almost CNY67 bln in May (reported June 14), which is the smallest increase since last November.

Yet if it was just this, the PBOC could have counteracted it.  In addition, if  the PBOC had simply under-estimated the holiday impact and other liquidity needs, the PBOC could have injected liquidity into the system.  There was some speculation that the PBOC was going to cut reserve requirement today, which it has not.  Many participants appear to have misjudged the PBOC’s policy intentions. 

The PBOC is taking advantage of the tighter liquidity conditions, ensuring that they stay tight as Tuesday’s draining operation indicates to drive home an important point.  That point is that there has been an overly rapid expansion of credit from the banks that it will not accommodate.  It wants banks to scale bank on the credit expansion plans and manage their own liquidity better. 

Total social financing, which is understood as a broad measure of China’s credit expansion, rose 52% in the Jan-May period from a year ago.  Much of these funds appear to be remaining in the financial sector rather than the  real economy.  Money supply itself has exceeded the government’s 13% target every month so far this year and was up 15.8% above year ago levels in May. 

Chinese regulators are forcing trust banks and wealth management firms to shift assets to publicly traded securities.  This began at the end of Q1 and is in essence taking funds from the so-called shadow banking system that was drawn upon by property developers and local government financial vehicles.  The impact is beginning to be felt.  Trust loans, for example, in May  (reported June 9) slowed to 8.4%  from a 16% pace at the end of last year.  Rating agencies such as Fitch previously, and Moody’s today has issued warnings about the risks posed by the shadow banking system related to local governments’ financing arms.

Total credit in China, include off-balance sheet loans stood at 198%  of GDP at the end of last year. This is up from 125% in 2008.   According to Fitch figures this rise is a bit faster than what Japan experienced at the tail end of its bubble (45% growth 1985-1990) and South Korea (+47% 1995-1998).

Chinese officials are trying to reduce the excess in the banking system, which appears to be of growing concern to the new government, despite the liquidity squeeze that has led to failed auctions in recent days by the government and government owned banks.

Cash crunches in China are not that uncommon, but they are often short-lived.  What make what is happening now noteworthy is that officials are tightening the proverbial screws tighter and longer than participants are accustomed.  The tightness cannot be simply attributed to last week’s holiday. 

The tightening of liquidity was one of the factors that pushed Chinese shares to six month lows today.  Banks and property developers were hit harder than the overall market.  There was also talk that the government, which has refused to grant permission for new initial public offerings, may soon relent.  There is also some nervousness ahead of HSBC and Markit initial PMI readings due out tomorrow.

Some near-term reprieve from the central bank is expected soon to prevent a deeper panic.  Reports suggest that PBOC has asked local banks to submit orders for 14-day  reverse repo agreements earlier today.  This is one of the tools that the PBOC uses to inject liquidity into the system, but has not been used for more than four months.   This would appear to offer the banking system some help to get through the quarter and month end.  However, it also asked banks to submit orders for a 28-day repos, which would ensure that liquidity remains tight for longer. 

The yuan itself was fixed lower for the second consecutive session.    From mid-February through last May, the dollar fell about 2.1% against the yuan.  Over the last couple of weeks it has stabilized in mostly a CNY6.1230-CNY6.1400 range.  The 12-month NDF implies about  a 2.4% depreciation of the yuan, which is the most in 4 1/2 years, which seems a bit exaggerated.

    



 
Following Surge In “Fails To Deliver” To Two Year Highs, Treasury Market Finds A Brief Respite

Our “silver lining” concluding remark to last week’s lackluster 10 Year bond reopening auction was that “the good news is that with the reopening, dealers should have some additional collateral for a while, or at least until the Fed monetizes it. Look for this CUSIP – VB3 (On The Run) to remain on the POMO exclusion lists for white a while.” Sure enough, following the Friday settlement of this auction, things in the Treasury repo market have normalized somewhat after hitting very dangerous levels. How bad did it get? The following chart of failures to deliver from the NY Fed shows just how acute the shortage of “high quality collateral” (where the 10 Year is the fulcrum instrument) got in the past two months, with the total rising to $129 billion, or the biggest freeze in the (Read more…) market since the debt-ceiling crisis in the summer of 2011 when this number hit $280 billion.

In the grand scheme of things, however, the recent move is tiny by complete market lock up measures: one need only recall that during the height of the Lehman failure crisis, virtually the entire $3 trillion repo market had locked up and not a single Treasury was being delivered or received in repo (this is somewhat apples to oranges as the Fed revised its methodology of tracking primary dealer data at the end of March).

But perhaps the best indicator of just how bad the Treasury market had gotten until the settlement of last week’s 10 Year reopening, is the repo rate, which had plunged deep inside special territory in the first week of June and was consistently at the penalty rate of -3% (established in 2009), and slightly special for far longer. This means that those seeking to borrow 10 Year paper have had to pay up to 3% on an annualized basis: hardly a sustainable IRR in the ZIRP new normal.

This was also reflected in the General Collateral rate which recently dropped to as low as 0.04% or the lowest since July 2011, and which popped back to double digit territory, or 0.11% according to ICAP, as of this morning.

That said, don’t expect the renormalization in 10 Year repo rates to last: if anything, last week’s auction showed just how thin the liquidity and collateral availability in shadow banking really is: if just a $7.7 billion allottment to Primary Dealers (as per the 10 Year reopening) can send the repo rate from -3% to positive, then the action on the margin is truly unprecedented.

This is accentuated by both the Fed’s ongoing monetizations in the 10 Year space which actively withdraws securities from the private market, as well as the aggressive shorting of 10 Year paper, both as an outright bet on interest rates, and as a need to hedge rate risk in pair trades with corporate bond purchases.

Keep an eye on the repo market: with such pronounced collateral shortages, and with the Fed repeatedly expressing its concerns with the shadow banking system, Bernanke may be ignoring all signs of bubbles in the traditional markets, but he has no choice but to take the signals sent by the shadow market seriously. And if he indeed does not taper, this means that even more eligible OTR collateral will be withdrawn from the market, repo rates will continues to be punitive, and sooner or later this will have a substantial impact on downstream liquidity channels, first at the Primary Dealer community, and then everywhere else.

Source: NY Fed

    



 
Guest Post: Developing Crisis In The Developing World

Submitted by John Rubino via The Dollar Collapse blog,

Things have been a little erratic lately here in US, but not really headline-worthy. The economy continues to grow, sort of, houses continue to sell and stock and bond prices fluctuate but can’t seem to follow through in either direction. We are not, in short, engulfed in any kind of crisis.

(Read more…)

But out in the world, especially in once-hot emerging markets like Brazil and China, the story is very different. As Prudent Bear’s Doug Noland explains in his most recent Credit Bubble Bulletin:

Meanwhile, the “developing” market Bubble continues to unwind. As leverage comes out of the commodities, currency “carry trades” and developing stocks and bonds. And as capital flight becomes a more serious issue, the marketplace must ponder the consequences not only of what a faltering Bubble means for scores of markets and economies, there is as well the issue of developing central banks having to sell from their trove of Treasuries and bunds and such to finance a surge in outflows (“hot” and otherwise). There’s even this new dynamic where Treasury yields rise on days of global currency and equity market tumult. It’s been awhile…

 

I suspect that the global jump in yields (and CDS and risk premiums) has more to do with de-leveraging than it does with tapering worries. This dynamic has caught many by surprise. The speculators anticipated cleverly exiting their leveraged MBS and other trades based on their expectations for Fed policy. Now, there’s a tremendous amount of unanticipated market uncertainty.

 

Japanese policymakers have really mucked things up. The Nikkei sank 6.5% Thursday and was down 1.5% for the week. Perhaps it’s a little early to pronounce the BOJ’s “shock and awe” monetary experiment a failure. The yen rallied 3.5% this week against the dollar. Against the Philippine peso it was up 4.5%, versus the South Korean won 4.1%, the Indian ruppee 4.3%, the Malaysian ringgit 4.0%, the Indonesian rupiah 3.2%, the Argentine peso 3.9% and the Brazilian real 4.2%. Indonesia raised rates to support its weak currency. The yen “carry trade” (sell yen and use proceeds to buy higher-yielding instruments globally) is doling out painful losses – forcing the unwind of leveraged trades across many markets. I wouldn’t be surprised if the yen short is the largest short position in modern history. The yen bears are now running for cover – causing all kinds of havoc in the currencies and securities markets.

 

“Emerging” Asian markets are in the middle of an unfolding financial storm. Friday’s 2.1% gain cut the Philippine equities loss for the week to 9.2%. Even with Friday’s 4.4% recovery, the Thailand stock exchange ended the week down 3.4%. South Korea’s Kospi dropped another 1.8%.

 

Latin America is as well caught in troubling dynamics. Brazil’s currency (real) traded to a four-year low against the dollar this week – despite currency interventions and the removal of taxes on financial flows and currency derivatives. Brazilian equities were hit for 4.4% this week, increasing y-t-d losses to 19.1%. Mexican stocks dropped 2.4%, boosting y-t-d losses to 10.2%.

 

The Shanghai composite dropped 2.2% in a holiday-shortened week. China pegs its currency to the U.S. dollar, so we can’t look to the performance of the renminbi for much of an indication of flows or mounting financial market stress.

 

I have posited that China is in the midst of an historic Credit Bubble. I have over the years tried to explain how interrelated their Bubble is to ours. Our mismanagement of the world’s reserve currency led to 20 years of huge Current Account Deficits. A significant portion of the Trillions of associated IOU’s have made it onto the balance sheet of the People’s Bank of China, especially over recent years. And no Credit system and economy has gone to greater excess during the post-2008 global reflation. It was the “fledgling” Credit Bubble spurred to “terminal phase” excess.

 

If the “developing” economy Bubble has passed an important inflection point, then China is vulnerable. If “hot money” is leaving EM [emerging markets] then China should be susceptible. And, let there be no doubt, when China finally succumbs global economic prospects really dim – and prospects for some fellow EM economies turn downright dismal. Recall how the tightening of subprime finance gravitated to “Alt-A” and then worked its way to the “conventional” core. And when housing in general began to falter the bottom fell out of subprime.

 

This week provided a bevy of notable China-related headlines: From the Financial Times: “China Debt Auction Failure Raises Liquidity Fears;” “Fresh Data Highlight China’s Sluggish Growth.” From Bloomberg: “China Debt Sale Fails for First Time in 23 Months on Cash Crunch;” “China Local Debt Audit ‘Credit Negative,’ Moody’s Says;” “China’s Leaders Face Test of Growth Resolve After May Slowdown;” “China Export Growth Plummets Amid Fake-Shipment Crackdown.” From Reuters: “Fitch Warns on Risks from Shadow Banking in China;” “China Estimates Fake Trade Invoicing at $75 billion in Jan-April;” “China State Auditor Warns Over Local Government Debt Levels.”

 

The price of Chinese sovereign Credit default swap (CDS) “insurance” jumped from 92 to 113 in three sessions, before dropping back down to 98 on Friday. Chinese interbank lending rates have recently spiked higher – and there were even reports of several borrowers forced to pay up for increasingly scarce liquidity. There were debt auctions that did not go smoothly. The currency forwards market is showing some atypical downward pressure on the renminbi.

 

Many believe this newfound tightness in Chinese money markets can be easily resolved by liquidity injections from the People’s Bank of China. And perhaps Chinese monetary and economic managers still have things under control. If so, the same clearly cannot be said for many of their fellow “developing” policymakers. Capital flight is always extremely difficult to manage.

 

I worry that the world has never faced the possibility for such destabilizing flows and speculative de-leveraging. To be sure, global markets have never been as dependent upon the power of central bankers. And in my mental tallies of risk and complacency, I never envisaged they could so elevate in tandem.

So can the US stay placid when the rest of the world turns chaotic? Highly doubtful. There’s a market phenomenon in which one investment play blows up and forces those on the wrong side of the trade to dump their liquid assets to raise cash. Which causes the high-quality assets to fall as much or more than the junk. As Noland notes, the world’s premier liquid asset is the Treasury bond.

If the developing world’s need to raise cash is a factor in the recent spike in US interest rates, this implies a feedback loop in which rising US rates further destabilize emerging markets, forcing the sale of more Treasuries, and so on. Can the Fed stop this? Not unless it wants to buy up not just the newly-issued Treasuries as it does now, but the trillions of dollars of bonds that might be dumped once things really get going.

It’s important to understand that we’re here because for years the developed world in general and the US in particular have been exporting their problems to the developing world via monetary policy. We fund our overspending by creating a bunch of new dollars,  many of which flow beyond our borders looking for higher yields. They land in, say, Brazil, pushing up both local asset prices and the exchange rate of the real. So individual Brazilians see their cost of living rise while Brazilian exporters are priced out of global markets. This is the currency war that Brazil’s government has been complaining about.

Then the hot money flows back out, causing a different set of problems for a country that has spent the past decade trying to adjust to excessive capital inflows.

 

The result: some seriously fragile banks and over-leveraged companies and investors, any of which could trigger a nationwide crisis.

The same general process is at work in other major emerging markets, with each in its own way now posing a threat to the global financial system — at the pinnacle of which sit the S&P 500 and the Treasury market, looking an awful lot like Southern California real estate circa 2007.