【英语财经】还能与美联储“对赌”多久？ Fighting the Fed

Oil has been a huge swing factor for markets in recent months and China will determine the fate of us all. But if there is one thing that emerging markets investors need to watch — and try to understand — it is still the Federal Reserve.

The US central bank not only sets monetary policy for the world’s biggest economy — its ostensible task; by doing so, it determines the direction of the dollar, the amount of available global liquidity and, by implication, how much will flow in and out of emerging markets.

The tricky thing is that despite the Fed’s laudable attempts to improve transparency over the past few years, its intentions are as hard to read as ever. This is partly due to the fact that it has been forced to resort to unconventional tools in the aftermath of the global financial crisis and is even now operating close to the “zero lower bound” where the effects of monetary policy decisions are not straightforward.

But some of it is the Fed’s own fault. Repeated over-optimism where the US economy and recovery from the crisis are concerned has eroded the bank’s credibility to the point where investors no longer wholly believe the Fed’s own predictions about its policy path — a stunning development, if you step back and think about it.

Right now, for example, market pricing (using the OIS, or overnight index swap rate) says there is a zero per cent chance of a 25 basis point interest rate increase at the Fed’s next meeting this month, a 17 per cent likelihood in June and a 35 per cent chance in September.

Not until next March, almost a year from now, does the market suggest a greater-than-even chance of a single rate rise — and even then it is only at 56 per cent.

By contrast, the Fed’s latest forecast, released at its March meeting, sees two rate rises in 2016 and a further three to four next year. That is quite some divergence and, worryingly for policymakers, one that has persisted for many months now. Even more worrying, the market has been more right than wrong so far. In December, the Fed was predicting four rate increases this year and it took until March to cut that back to two in the face of sluggish US growth in Q4 and intense market volatility in Q1 that tightened financial conditions.

Meanwhile, the Fed’s two most important peers, the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan, are continuing to ease policy and are years from tightening again — which is also true for the Bank of England and central banks across Europe.

So fighting the Fed has paid off as the repeated delays in significant US monetary tightening have been broadly supportive — simultaneously — of US equities, US bonds and EM assets generally through a weaker dollar and plentiful liquidity. Will the strategy continue to work?

Perhaps not. If there is one central bank in the world powerful enough to bring markets round to its way of thinking, rather than following their lead, it is surely the Fed. And while its policymakers — led by chair Janet Yellen — continue to sound cautious, that caution is set to disappear as soon as the data start to look better. Specifically, the Fed believes the US labour market has largely healed, financial conditions have eased again following the horribly volatile start to the year and international risks such as a collapse in China or the oil price appear less likely.

That leaves inflation. So far, Fed officials remain cautious about recent signs that the core CPI may be picking up at last. But if they get corroborating evidence, they will quickly move to increase rates.

Even then, rate rises will be cautious. In fact, the doves on the Federal Open Market Committee are willing to let inflation run until it is a little ahead of target in the expectation that this will buoy growth and employment. But there is no inconsistency between cautious tightening and two rate moves this year, with Medley Global Advisors putting its money on June and December at this point.

If June is blown off track by volatility ahead of the UK’s Brexit referendum on June 23, then the first rate rise could be delayed until September (rather than July, which is not a press conference meeting). But a second increase before year end should still be possible assuming the US economy is in decent shape, especially since the US presidential election will then be behind us.

Dan Bogler is president of Medley Global Advisors.

最近数月来石油成了市场动荡的重要因素，同时中国将决定所有人的命运。但是，如果说新兴市场投资者需要注意（并试着理解）一件事的话，那仍然是美联储(Fed)。

美国央行不仅为全球最大的经济体制定货币政策（这是其明文规定的任务），它还以此决定了美元走向和全球可用流动性总量，进而决定了进出新兴市场的资本流量。

棘手之处在于，尽管近年来美联储试图提高透明度的努力值得称赞，但其意图一如既往地难以解读。这部分是由于美联储在全球金融危机之后被迫诉诸于非常规工具，且至今仍然在利率接近于零的水平上进行操作，导致其货币政策决定的效果难以把握。

但是，这在一定程度上是美联储本身的过错。一再过于乐观地评估美国经济及其从危机中复苏的力度，损害了美联储的可信度，以至于投资者不再完全相信美联储本身对其政策路径的预测——如果你退后一步思考，这是令人震惊的发展。

例如，按照眼下的市场定价（借用隔夜指数掉期利率(OIS)），美联储在本月举行的议息会议上将利率上调25个基点的可能性为零，在6月会议上加息的可能性为17%，9月加息的可能性为35%。

事实上，按照市场预测，一直要到明年3月（距离现在将近1年），美联储再次加息的可能性才会高于50%，而且即便那时加息的可能性也只有56%。

相比之下，美联储在3月会议上所做的最新预测称，2016年将加息2次，明年还将进一步加息3至4次。这与市场预测存在相当大的落差，而政策制定者应该担心的是，这种分歧已经持续了数月。更令人发愁的是，迄今为止市场预测更准确。去年12月美联储预测今年将加息4次，一直到今年3月，面对去年第4季度美国经济增长乏力、今年第1季度市场强烈波动使得金融条件趋紧的现实，它才把加息预测减为2次。

与此同时，美联储最重要的两大同行欧洲央行(ECB)和日本央行(BoJ)，继续放松政策，对它们来说再次收紧政策是多年以后的事情——英国央行(BoE)和欧洲其他国家的央行也是一样。

因此，与美联储“对赌”的战略迄今是有回报的，因为美联储一再延迟出台货币政策的重大收紧行动，通过疲软的美元和充足的流动性，为美国股票、美国债券和新兴市场资产提供了广泛且同步的支撑。这一战略还能继续奏效吗？

或许不行。如果说这世上还有一家央行，强大到足以说服各个市场顺应它的思路，而不是被这些市场牵着走，那一定就是美联储。虽然在珍妮特?耶伦(Janet Yellen)的领导下，美联储的政策制定者们依然态度谨慎，可一旦数据开始变得强劲起来，他们的谨慎也将随之消失。具体来说，美联储认为美国劳动力市场已基本恢复，金融条件在今年初的可怕动荡后已再次缓解，而且国际风险（如中国经济崩溃或油价暴跌）似乎也降低了。

剩下的问题就是通胀。对于表明核心CPI也许最终出现上扬的近期迹象，美联储官员迄今保持谨慎。但如果他们得到佐证依据，他们将迅速采取行动上调利率。

但即使到了那时，美联储对加息依然会谨慎。事实上，联邦公开市场委员会(Federal Open Market Committee)中的鸽派愿意让通胀自由上行，直到其略高于预期目标，他们预计这将提振经济增长和就业。但在谨慎收紧政策与今年加息2次之间并无矛盾；英国《金融时报》旗下宏观研究机构Medley Global Advisors目前预计，加息时间将分别是今年6月和12月。

如果6月23日英国退欧公投前的波动干扰了6月加息动向，那么美联储今年首次加息时间可能会推迟至9月（之所以不是7月是因为美联储在该月不会举行记者会）。但在今年底之前应该还会有第二次加息（假定美国经济状态良好），特别是因为届时美国大选已经结束了。

丹?博格莱(Dan Bogler)是英国《金融时报》旗下宏观研究机构Medley Global Advisors总裁

译者/何黎