摩根大通警告：美债回购计划或适得其反
Treasury Bond Fix Could Backfire, Warns JPMorgan
A rebound in long dated treasuries is running out of steam after the US Treasury announced plans to at least double its planned purchases of 10 to 38 US debt. Scott Bassett, responding to a surge in long term borrowing costs, very pleased to be joined to the studio by our markets, left Joshua Schuyler, Montgomery Koenig and now Schuyler. This is quite unusual, isn't it? The last time this happened was Operation Twist, I think.
在美国财政部宣布计划将其10至38年期美国国债的预定购买量至少翻倍后，长期国债的反弹势头正在减弱。斯科特·巴塞特回应长期借贷成本的激增，非常高兴能邀请到我们的市场分析师约书亚·斯凯勒和蒙哥马利·科尼格来到演播室，现在有请斯凯勒。这相当不寻常，不是吗？上次发生这种情况我想还是‘扭曲操作’的时候。
Yes. I mean, Operation Twist was under very, very different circumstances in terms of it was post UFC, um, you had the fed at the zero lower bound and they said, well, how do we stimulate the economy from here if we can't cut policy rates any lower will buy at the long end. So that puts long and yields down. It releases some pressure on the mortgage market. And it's meant to be stimulative. And right now we don't need stimulative policy.
是的。我的意思是，‘扭曲操作’是在非常非常不同的情况下进行的，那是在UFC之后，美联储处于零利率下限，他们说，如果我们不能再降低政策利率，我们该如何从这里刺激经济呢？我们会购买长期债券。所以这压低了长期收益率。这减轻了抵押贷款市场的一些压力。而且它本意是刺激性的。而现在我们并不需要刺激性的政策。
And I think the other unusual bit of it is this buyback program in particular is meant to help with market functioning and liquidity concerns. And there's not really an abundance of those within U.S. treasuries. Yes. You had the 30 year auction last week reached for a record high, but there wasn't disorder within it. There was a strong bid to cover ratio. Investors are taking down this debt. They're just requiring a greater risk compensation to do that.
而且我认为另一个不寻常之处在于，这个回购计划特别旨在帮助市场运作和解决流动性担忧。而在美国国债中，这些担忧并不真的那么普遍。是的，上周的30年期拍卖达到了创纪录的高点，但其中并没有混乱。有很强的投标覆盖率。投资者正在承接这些债务，他们只是要求更高的风险补偿来这样做。
So why then, do you think it's got back into the Treasury, decided to make this move now? I mean, it seems very much like they want to put some kind of cap on yields. And the bias in the last couple of weeks has very been upwards pressure. And they don't seem to want to pull other levers. Right. So the other whether you could do is either tax hikes less spending. We're heading into midterm elections and we're talking about more spending still.
那么，你为什么认为财政部现在决定采取这一举措呢？我的意思是，看起来他们非常想对收益率设置某种上限。而过去几周的偏向一直是上行压力。而且他们似乎不想动用其他杠杆。对吧。所以其他你能做的要么是加税，要么是减少支出。我们正进入中期选举，而且我们还在谈论更多的支出。
And so that pressure on yields doesn't seem like it's going away anytime soon. So it's a signaling message from them that they can defend that level of yields. Maybe maybe it's just the rise that they're worried about. But the issue is there's only so much you can do. Um, you can't just keep coming in with buybacks. That just distorts the market further in terms of it's not QE technically. Right. So if you do more of that long and buying, you have to issue somewhere else.
因此，对收益率的这种压力似乎不会很快消失。所以这是他们发出的一个信号，表明他们能够捍卫那个收益率水平。也许也许他们担心的只是上升本身。但问题是你能做的只有这么多。嗯，你不能一直进行回购。那只会进一步扭曲市场，从技术上讲这不是量化宽松。对吧。所以如果你做更多那样的长期购买，你就必须在其他地方发行。
And that's the front end. And the risk is you issue at the front end. And you're easing technically from a financial conditions perspective is that the fed has to hike. And all of that debt at the front end becomes much, much more expensive, a lot more quickly. And your deficit could spiral quite quickly as well. Well, I mean, you mentioned the fact that I just want to help me square the circle of the most interventionist Treasury secretary we've seen in decades with a new fed chair who wants to say far less to the markets.
这就是前端。风险在于你在前端发行。从金融状况的角度来看，你在技术上放宽，而美联储不得不加息。前端的所有债务会变得昂贵得多，而且速度更快。你的赤字也可能迅速螺旋上升。嗯，你提到了一个事实，我只是想帮我理清这个矛盾：几十年来最具干预性的财政部长，与一位希望对市场少说为妙的新美联储主席并存。
How should we look at that? It seems like very, very opposite signals, especially when Warsh has come out and said that they want to hold less balance sheet. Doesn't actually make the balance sheet bigger, but it's certainly heading in this kind of more interventionist direction. That's quite worrying. I think the other tension is that Warsh said the bond markets done some of the tightening for the FOMC. If that reverses, maybe you need a more hawkish fed to balance that.
我们应该如何看待这一点？这似乎是完全相反的信号，尤其是当沃什出来说他们想持有更少的资产负债表时。这实际上并没有让资产负债表变大，但肯定朝着这种更具干预性的方向发展。这相当令人担忧。我认为另一个紧张点是沃什说债券市场已经替FOMC做了一些紧缩。如果这种情况逆转，也许你需要一个更鹰派的美联储来平衡。
And maybe it forces them to be stronger in their messaging. And I think the worry for the dollar in particular is it puts credibility under risk. And if force doesn't respond to hawkish lead, does that create even more pressure on the dollar and even more pressure on yields? I mean, how serious is the credibility challenge just got past. I think it's quite significant. And I think you start to run into comparisons with dollar yen.
也许这会迫使他们在信息传递上更加强硬。我认为对美元来说，特别令人担忧的是这使信誉面临风险。如果美联储不对鹰派领导做出回应，这是否会给美元带来更大压力，给收益率带来更大压力？我的意思是，信誉挑战有多严重，刚刚过去。我认为这相当严重。而且我认为你开始遇到与美元兑日元的比较。
Because if you can't defend that level, which I don't see how you can in terms of, yes, we've gone from 2 billion to 4 billion in buybacks that can accumulate decently quickly. In terms of we have seven buybacks left I think this quarter. So that's 28 billion total. But the US Treasury market is 30 trillion. Of that. The 10 to 20 year sector is something like 6 trillion. So you know there's not a lot you can do I'd say.
因为如果你无法守住那个水平，我不明白你怎么能守住，就回购而言，是的，我们已经从20亿增加到40亿，可以相当快地积累。就本季度而言，我认为我们还有七次回购。所以总共是280亿。但美国国债市场是30万亿。其中，10到20年期部分大约是6万亿。所以你知道，你能做的并不多，我想说。
And it just makes that bond market riskier. So if anything it probably goes in the other direction. And if you have to continually defend it and you're not able to, it's much of a war situation.
而这只会让债券市场风险更大。所以如果有任何影响，可能朝着相反的方向发展。如果你必须不断防守而无法做到，那更像是一场战争局面。
更进一步：量化金融体系
看懂新闻只是起点——沿量化金融路径，把它变成能交付的工程能力