For years the NY Fed has conducted "Dollar Rolls" of MBS securities with the Primary Dealers. These transactions provide liquidity to the MBS market. The Fed’s description:
The Federal Reserve uses agency MBS dollar rolls as a supplemental tool to address temporary imbalances in market supply and demand. A dollar roll is a transaction conducted at market prices that generally involves the purchase or sale of agency MBS for delivery in the current month, with the simultaneous agreement to resell or repurchase substantially similar (although not necessarily the same) securities on a specified future date.
Still confused? So am I. My conclusion is that this is benign. The Fed is just providing order and a degree of predictability to an important capital market. I also don’t know how much of this is going on. This Reuters article suggests that it is a Trillion dollar market. (Would love some help on the #s?)
Why would the Fed establish a new margin requirement on something that has been going on fine without one for years? Why now? The answer is easy. It’s the fallout from MFG.
In a dollar roll the Fed has no principal risk with the counter-party. The cash and securities are settled through a clearinghouse. But they do have risk in the event the counter-party fails during the 30-day roll. If that were to happen, the Fed would have to replace the position with another party and in the process could suffer a loss.
In an effort to avoid this loss the Fed has established a new 2.5% margin on all MBS dollar rolls. From the Journal:
The Federal Reserve said it will be increasing collateral requirements on 21 primary-dealer banks in transactions dealing with mortgage-backed securities, in a move that would be aimed at securing an extra layer of protection against settlement risks with its counter parties.
Random thoughts:
* What kind of message does this send? (It was communicated to the PDs via a conference call!) It sends a very mixed message in my direction. Essentially the Fed is saying, “We’re not so sure we can trust all of you”. Of course this position is justified given that MFG (an ex PD) went into the tank in a matter of days.
It would have been nice if the Fed had taken a different approach and said:
We’ve looked very close. MFG was the only bad apple. It won’t happen again. We’re comfortable with our counter party risk. No need for changes in margins or haircuts.
But they didn’t say that. In fact they have said/done quite the opposite. So to me, it sends an ominous message.
* A shot at the numbers. Say it was a trillion dollar market. That would mean that at any point and time there would be about $80b outstanding. 2.5% of 80 large comes to a neat $2b. That’s not so much money for the PDs. But this is equity money. There is a cost to equity these days at the big firms. There is not one of them that has excess tier 1.
* I have heard that all the PDs are bellyaching big time over this. It will eat into their profits. I also heard that some of the European banks that are also PDs (BNP, Barclays, Credit Swiss, Deutche Bank, UBS) are really pissed. This is not a good time for them to be asking the Head Offices for an additional allocation of capital.
* I don’t think this is all that profitable of a business for the PDs. It’s just part of the grind of financing Agency MBS paper. This is a slap in the face of the PDs.
*This appears to be very bad timing by the Fed. We shall see if anyone (other than me) interprets the new margin requirements as a warning sign. I believe we are on very shaky ground on the matter of sovereign debt and the brokers who make the system work. We can’t afford to let a few more straws fall on the wobbly camel. I think the Fed may have just added to the fray of concerns.
*I’m making a big deal of this. I think it may prove to be important. Anytime that the Fed does something unanticipated it’s worth noting. There is always something more than meets the eye. The timing is odd. The optics are terrible. The Fed is making credit harder to get (very big numbers involved in MBS land) at what may prove to be exactly the worst moment.
Ben Bernanke has often spoken on the history of the depression. He has pointed at the errors of the FRB in 1937 when credit was tightened and a second leg of deflation started. He has said he would not make that same mistake again. I wonder if he just did. Sometimes small things bring big results in our complex markets.
.



I think it's a matter of wanting to drive down spreads between current coupon MBS & USTs. They Fed wants to be buying 3.5's and the thought is that they are trying to keep dealers from being short into offering them bonds. They are just trying to maximize the benefit of MBS purchases IMO.
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing how the Agency TBA market is the largest, most liquid market that most have never heard of - yet it's extremely critical to a functioning housing market.
This function looks to me a discounting mechanism similar to a repo action involving treasuries.
ReplyDeleteMy question is how much of new issues of MBS
is there? Or are these rollovers just of existing ones?
Discounting should normally increase liquidity with the banks until maturity when repayment settles outstandings. So a margin
reduces liquidity and therefore increases cost of finance.
Wow, a chink in the cabal. If the private Fed cannot trust the primary dealers that means the lender of last resort is fearful.
ReplyDeleteRead more: http://brucekrasting.blogspot.com/2011/11/fed-makes-weird-move.html#ixzz1dxh0O5b2
"(Would love some help on the #s?)"
ReplyDeleteFRBNY publishes historical MBS sales going back to the beginning of 2010, which can be used as a proxy for dollar/coupon rolls (beg. Apr 2010, it explicitly identified them). During the time when the $1.25 trillion LSAP was ongoing, from Jan to Mar 2010, sales averaged $21.6 B/mo, or $259 B annualized. Thereafter, FRBNY engaged exclusively in dollar/coupon rolls since the purchase program had ended. From Apr to mid-Jul (termination of all MBS activity), sales averaged $13.5 B/mo, or $162 B annualized. Since the start of reinvestments in MBS, there have yet to be any dollar/coupon rolls.
Since the transactions are on a monthly schedule (and usually settle in the middle of the month), we can use the $13.5 B to $21.6 B as a good estimate of what is outstanding at any one time. 2.5% margin equates to $337.5 M to $540 M.
Primer on MBS settlements and liquidity:
http://www.ny.frb.org/research/staff_reports/sr468.pdf
The Housing Market (America's great engine. Which once existed on the faith of housing values rising) ... is not only in the toilet. What with toxic mortgages, and everything.
ReplyDeleteBut it's now "investor beware."
Michael Lewis, when he wrote about Ireland's crazed real estate bubble ... pointed out how Ireland "overbuilt." They'd never have the population to fill all the houses they were building."
And, then, Lewis talked about how anyone could judge the health of a real estate investment: DOUBLE THE ANNUAL AMOUNT YOU'D COLLECT IN RENTS ... if you were renting the property.
So instead of comparing sales prices ... you're asking people to look at how much they're paying in rent, INSTEAD of owning. And, why this makes them feel "ahead."
Then? We'll probably lose the real estate deduction ...
Both parties know, now, for sure, that they're "cronies" are in trouble.
Then, ask yourself ... since Jon Corzine went bankrupt overnight ... taking MF Global down the toilet ... by ILLEGALLY comingling investor accounts ... with the money he was mainlining on bets ...
Answer WHY did Corzine think investing in the Italian bonds was a "sure thing?"
Obama? He just stays out of the fallout zone. By doing nothing ... he stays clear of the debris path.
Wall Street, however, is no longer the "commission paying dream job" it used to be.
Think of all those kids, now, with student loans. Not because they studied "the humanities." But because they loaded up on finance courses.
Big traveling ships by sea always dump their toilet waste, and other waste, overboard. The sea is so big ... it's bigger than a giant sewer.
The same may hold true for the "world of finance." Where what's "frozen" is just part of a giant sea?
The homes owned by banks aren't worth zero, exactly. It's just that they're not producing profits. So? It's like looking at real estate agents ... who aren't able to sock away commission checks like in the old days.
While at the same time there's lots of homes not being sold. Because sellers, who might have few illusions ... also don't want to sell at prices too low for them to be satisfied?
The banks never did make it easier on the borrowers underwater, however.
It's a "confidence" thing; instead of a confidence game.
In the confidence game Bernanke has lost. TARP, QE1 and QE2, car company bailouts and now this is sending the same message, saying, “We are not sure what we are doing but we’ll try this.” The markets expect some leadership. Geithner and the Fed has been about cronyism, and the young people are pitching tents everywhere to tell the emperor he has no clothes.
ReplyDeleteIt is a very interesting topic that you’ve written here. The truth is that I’m not related to this, but I think this is a good opportunity to learn more about it. Video Marketing | App Marketing
ReplyDeletecheap goose coats sale online sale Denmark Canada, UK,
ReplyDeletegoose trillium parka jackets online sale Denmark Canada, UK,
Canada goose freestyle vest online sale Denmark Canada, UK,
Canada Goose Chilliwack Bomber sale online sale Denmark Canada, UK,
Canada Goose Mens Citadel jackets online sale Denmark Canada, UK,
cheap Goose Expedition Parka coats online sale Denmark Canada, UK,
canada goose snow mantra parka online sale Denmark Canada, UK,
Canada Goose Yorkville Parka Jackets online sale Denmark Canada, UK,
womens Goose Chilliwack Parka online sale Denmark Canada, UK,
womens Goose Expedition Parka online sale Denmark Canada, UK,
womens Goose Kensington Parka Jackets online sale Denmark Canada, UK,
womens Goose Montebello Parka jackets online sale Denmark Canada, UK,
Canada Goose Womens Solaris Parka online sale Denmark Canada, UK.