PMC Weekly Review - September 23, 2016
For the sixth time this year, market participants around the world set their sights on the Federal Reserve (Fed). Once again, there were slim prospects of a decision from the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) to hike interest rates, and based on the market’s expectations, the Fed did not disappoint. In 2016, FOMC is batting one thousand: six-for-six with no changes in monetary policy or the fed funds rate. Despite the lack of policy modification, the Fed has changed some of its language, speeches, and the wording of its policy statement. A closer look at these updates reveals that the Fed has been either more dovish or hawkish, depending on the current stock market sentiment. This leaves one to question whether a robust stock market is an additional FOMC mandate and the tail wagging Fed policy?
Based on the Federal Reserve Reform Act of 1977, the FOMC is tasked with a dual mandate that holds the Fed accountable for fostering maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates. Whereas the Fed’s attention to the dual mandate has been clear over the past forty years, its new directive of a rising stock market has more recently crept into focus. The concern with the stock market’s reaction to Fed policy has never been higher than in the post- financial- crisis era. This year, each glimpse into a hawkish stance by the Fed has been followed by heightened volatility, a pause in the grind higher, or a selloff in equities, before a shift back to an accommodative stance.
Following a December 2015 rate hike, the FOMC started backpedaling early in 2016 (when U.S. stocks experienced the worst 10-day start of the year in history), proceeded to lighten its hawkish tone, and held off tightening at its next few meetings. Similarly, the heightened volatility experienced post-Brexit in June led to both a weaker Fed stance and language at the July FOMC meeting. Despite the indications of a solid labor market (with the unemployment rate below 5%), and stable price levels, it seems the FOMC would like to raise rates, but a strong force is holding it back.
Although the Fed’s accommodative stance has expanded the money supply, pushing businesses and consumers to spend, in a much larger way it also has increased asset prices, boosting investors’ account balances. This positive externality has helped drive market indices to all-time highs, and pushed Americans (who have been very pleased with their 401K statements over the past few years), to spend, driving the roughly 70% personal consumption component of GDP higher. Removing the accommodation and the stock market support may have unintended consequences that lead to a larger-than-expected growth slowdown.
In looking at all the motivations for continued accommodation, one can understand why the FOMC would vote in favor of holding off on raising rates. However, this action is difficult to defend through the lens of the Fed’s dual mandate. In her comments following the policy statement, Chair Janet Yellen hinted that the FOMC intends to hike rates before the year ends. With only November and December FOMC meetings remaining this year, we are left to wonder if the Fed can raise rates (without concern for the stock market) and regain control of its tail.
The information, analysis, and opinions expressed herein are for general and educational purposes only. Nothing contained in this weekly review is intended to constitute legal, tax, accounting, securities, or investment advice, nor an opinion regarding the appropriateness of any investment, nor a solicitation of any type. All investments carry a certain risk, and there is no assurance that an investment will provide positive performance over any period of time. An investor may experience loss of principal. Investment decisions should always be made based on the investor’s specific financial needs and objectives, goals, time horizon, and risk tolerance. The asset classes and/or investment strategies described may not be suitable for all investors and investors should consult with an investment advisor to determine the appropriate investment strategy. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
Information obtained from third party sources are believed to be reliable but not guaranteed. Envestnet|PMC™ makes no representation regarding the accuracy or completeness of information provided herein. All opinions and views constitute our judgments as of the date of writing and are subject to change at any time without notice.
Investments in smaller companies carry greater risk than is customarily associated with larger companies for various reasons such as volatility of earnings and prospects, higher failure rates, and limited markets, product lines or financial resources. Investing overseas involves special risks, including the volatility of currency exchange rates and, in some cases, limited geographic focus, political and economic instability, and relatively illiquid markets. Income (bond) securities are subject to interest rate risk, which is the risk that debt securities in a portfolio will decline in value because of increases in market interest rates. Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) are subject to risks similar to those of stocks, such as market risk. Investing in ETFs may bear indirect fees and expenses charged by ETFs in addition to its direct fees and expenses, as well as indirectly bearing the principal risks of those ETFs. ETFs may trade at a discount to their net asset value and are subject to the market fluctuations of their underlying investments. Investing in commodities can be volatile and can suffer from periods of prolonged decline in value and may not be suitable for all investors. Index Performance is presented for illustrative purposes only and does not represent the performance of any specific investment product or portfolio. An investment cannot be made directly into an index.
Alternative Investments may have complex terms and features that are not easily understood and are not suitable for all investors. You should conduct your own due diligence to ensure you understand the features of the product before investing. Alternative investment strategies may employ a variety of hedging techniques and non-traditional instruments such as inverse and leveraged products. Certain hedging techniques include matched combinations that neutralize or offset individual risks such as merger arbitrage, long/short equity, convertible bond arbitrage and fixed-income arbitrage. Leveraged products are those that employ financial derivatives and debt to try to achieve a multiple (for example two or three times) of the return or inverse return of a stated index or benchmark over the course of a single day. Inverse products utilize short selling, derivatives trading, and other leveraged investment techniques, such as futures trading to achieve their objectives, mainly to track the inverse of their benchmarks. As with all investments, there is no assurance that any investment strategies will achieve their objectives or protect against losses.
Neither Envestnet, Envestnet|PMC™ nor its representatives render tax, accounting or legal advice. Any tax statements contained herein are not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding U.S. federal, state, or local tax penalties. Taxpayers should always seek advice based on their own particular circumstances from an independent tax advisor.
© 2016 Envestnet. All rights reserved.