Some ten years after the outbreak of the Great Recession, global economic growth is positive and broadly based, inflation is low in the developed economies and falling in important emerging economies, and monetary policies are very supportive, cautious, and predictable. At the same time, company earnings growth has increased significantly, and the volatilities of many asset prices are low. This environment is generally positive for risky asset classes.
Making sense of it all
I will be upfront about it: to me, the Taylor rule is still a helpful tool to assess the future monetary policy of the US central bank. However, it should not be used as blueprint without thinking it through. Instead, it should be seen as heuristic tool that helps structure one’s analysis.
Taylor Rule – precise formula, vague Inputs
Since 2008, the key-lending rates in the USA seem to have been significantly too low as measured by the Taylor rule. With some economists blaming Alan Greenspan’s loose monetary policy as partially responsible for the financial crisis of 2008, the question is whether we are in for a déjà-vu.
Having defined and explained various management styles in equity management in part 1, we will now have a look at the specific styles and their return/risk ratio over time.
The US central bank has embarked on a cycle of interest rate hikes. The question is: by how much will the interest rates increase still, and at what point will it reach a level detrimental to the economy, where equities should be regrouped into asset classes less sensitive to the economic cycle?
A clear sense of style is not only important in fashion, but more and more so in equity management as well. But what does “style” mean in equity management? Do stylistic preferences change over time, like in fashion? If so, what triggers those changes? Questions upon questions, but before we go into detail in part 2 of this series, let us first clarify what we mean by style(s):
It is almost impossible to speak with fund managers and not address the economy or monetary policy. Why is that so? This blog entry will try to answer the question on the basis of data from the US equity market from 1950 onwards.
Volatility has increased on the markets. The main reason for this has not occurred often in the past years: statements by the central bankers according to which the extremely expansive monetary policy will be reeled in. Are we going through a trend reversal?
The IFO business climate index calculated by the Munich-based IFO Institute is regarded as the most important German economic indicator. At 115.1, the value released for June last week was the highest since the launch in January 1991. It was also clearly above the value that had been expected by the financial analysts on average. The signs for substantial economic growth in Germany seem favourable.
Author: Stefan Rößler
Fund manager Fixed Income
The real estate bubble started to burst in the USA roughly ten years ago, tossing the global economy into a severe recession mainly on the back of contagion effects in the financial sector.
In order to avoid a bad situation from getting worse, many financial institutes had to be bailed out by governments and thus ultimately by the taxpayers. One of the learning points of the financial crisis is to prevent taxpayer-funded bank bail outs in the future.