There are 3 main scenarios that could
develop in the liquidity and money market in the €-area at the beginning of
2014, after the tensions at the end of 2013.
First, tensions could
dissipate since the reinforced year-end effect has gone.
Just to recall, in the last few weeks of
the year:
1. The overnight rate
(EONIA) has risen from 11 bp on 2nd of December to 45 bp at the end of the year,
2. Euribor 3 months has
risen in the same period from 24 bp to 29 bp,
3. The 1 year OIS in one year
time has risen over the same period from 19 bp to 29 bp,
4. Excess
liquidity in the €-area has increased from EUR 190 bn to EUR 275 bn (EUR 85 bn
increase) between the 2nd and 30th of December,
mostly as a consequence of the underbidding at the
operations offered by the ECB to sterilize the liquidity created by the
Securities Market Program (SMP).
There is of course consistency between the
quantity and the interest rate developments mentioned above. The prospective use of
end of year balance sheets for the ECB Asset Quality Review made liquidity more
valuable, because of a stronger than usual window dressing effect [€
liquidity is getting more valuable: what can be done about it?], thus raising the demand
and therefore the supply of central bank liquidity (given that banks determine
its amount outstanding through the prevailing full allotment auction). The
increased supply could not completely offset, however, the interest rate effect
of the increased demand and the offer to deposit excess liquidity at the ECB
for 1 week with a remuneration of 25 basis points lost much of its appeal when
money market rates approached that level.
Under this first scenario, money market
rates should go down, underbidding at SMP sterilizing operations should be less common and excess liquidity should return towards the 150-190 level prevailing
before the end of year effect would manifest itself. At the same time, the
incentive of banks to return the liquidity borrowed under the 2 three year Long
Term Refinancing Operations should decrease, as the perceived stigma effect of borrowing from the ECB should be weaker once the date relevant for the AQR has passed. More generally
there may be less reluctance to borrow from the ECB, also on other types of operations. Therefore excess liquidity
should remain consistent with the overnight rate, EONIA, staying somewhat closer to 0 than to the 25
bp of the official rate of the ECB (the Main Refinancing Operation – MRO rate).
Second, tensions could remain,
albeit reduced, and the ECB could decide to promptly counter them considering
them as inconsistent with its forward guidance and with its view that the
€-area economy needs an accommodative policy, given the prevailing dim price
prospects. I have dealt with the different tools that the ECB could use for
this purpose in previous posts. You would know by now that top of my list are a
new Very Long Term Refinancing Operation, to roll over the ones that are
getting closer to maturity, and a stop of the operations to sterilize the
liquidity effects of the SMP purchases [Is
the price stability target of the ECB at risk?]
Third, interest rate tensions
could remain but the ECB could decide not to do anything. The resulting
situation could be quite unstable. High money market rates would push banks
away from the SMP sterilization operations, the resulting increase in excess
liquidity would have a subduing effect on interest rates and the participation
to the sterilization operations would again be profitable, thus creating the
potential of an instability cycle. The instability would be further aggravated
from the fact that the behaviour of each bank in its borrowing from the central
bank would depend on its expectation of what other banks would do: for an
individual bank the best situation would be to do the opposite of what other
banks do. If other banks inject liquidity into the system, by not participating
in sterilization operations, and push down market rates, participating in these
operations and getting the MRO rate at which the deposits are remunerated is
profitable. Vice versa, if other banks do participate in sterilizing operations, market rates would go up and the choice not to participate becomes more interesting
for the individual bank. Given the impossibility to have an objective,
rational, expectation of what other banks will do and the instability intrinsic
in deriving this expectation from the last episode of participation to the
sterilization operations, the instability would not have an obvious way to be
resolved.
I imagine the reader that followed me so
far would like to know what is my guess about the probability of the three
scenarios.
I give the highest probability to the
first scenario of lessening of tensions, even if the risk of an “endogenous
tightening” of monetary conditions as excess liquidity moves towards zero,
which I presented in previous posts [€
liquidity is getting more valuable: what can be done about it? and Can the ECB control interest rates?] remains and
may eventually push the ECB to find ways to inject more liquidity into the
system.
I give the lowest probability to the third
scenario that the ECB decides to do nothing and maintains this decision: either
the ECB will see the potential of instability that I envisaged above and will
want to avoid it or will observe for a while the actual instability and want to
stop it by some intervention.
Of course, only an intermediate
probability is left for the second scenario of continuing instability and
prompt ECB action.
Only a few days will be needed to see how
things will actually develop. The sharp fall of EONIA on the first working day of 2014 is consistent with the first scenario.
*** Research assistance
was provided by Mădălina Norocea
No comments:
Post a Comment