Should the Fed Raise Interest Rates This Year?

Paul Hancock, CFP®    September 16, 2015

The Federal Reserve concludes its two-day meeting on Thursday and will announce whether or not they plan to raise interest rates, specifically the Federal Funds Rate. The Fed has kept the Federal Funds Rate at zero since 2008 and hasn’t raised the rate in over a decade. Since discontinuing its Quantitative Easing (QE) program in October of 2014, the market has been obsessed with when the Fed starts to raise interest rates. This obsession makes sense as the Fed has used “forward guidance” as another monetary policy tool in recent years. However, I believe the first increase in interest rates is not nearly as important as the ultimate end to the rise in rates otherwise known as the “Neutral Federal Funds Rate.” So the question remains, will the Fed raise short-term interest rates this week or even this year? Predicting changes in interest rates and monetary policy moves is virtually impossible. However, in looking at the current global economic data, I would caution the Fed not to raise interest rates in 2015.

The Case For and Against Raising Interest Rates

Some Fed governors and market participants want the Fed to raise rates simply so we can get off of 0%. Some argue 0% is an “emergency” level of interest rates and our economy no longer justifies “emergency” levels. Others argue that positive, albeit low, economic growth along with a low unemployment rate should point the Fed to raise rates now. Finally others argue to get off zero would allow for a more efficient bond market. In my opinion, the reasons to raise now are heavily outnumbered by the reasons to wait. In his most recent webcast, Jeffrey Gundlach laid out reasons not to raise interest rates now:

• Both the World Bank and the IMF have cautioned the Fed not to raise interest rates too soon.
• Very low nominal GDP growth compared to historic beginnings of Fed policy hikes.
• A large drop in commodity prices.
• Weak credit conditions seen through a weak junk bond market.
• Weak growth in emerging market economics which has caused a decline in emerging market equities and currencies.
• Inflation and future inflation expectations well below the Fed’s 2% target.
• A precipitous drop in oil prices.
• Improving, but still weak, US wage growth.
• A strong dollar.
• Decelerating manufacturing growth.
• Declining sales (year over year) from S&P 500 companies.

Gundlach said in a normal economic cycle, the current global economic data points to Fed easing rather than Fed tightening. If the Fed does not raise rates tomorrow, I believe the first increase will then be pushed into 2016. If the Fed does not raise rates in September, why would they just a month later? The next opportunity would then be December which historically is a month in which the bond market is very illiquid. I don’t believe the Fed wants to embark on raising interest rates until the time is optimal and December would not be optimal.

Escape from a Liquidity Trap

The Federal Funds rate affects a myriad of market participants from large commercial banks, to bond managers, to hedge funds, to your own deposit rate at your bank, which most likely is 0%! The Fed’s actions also have a very powerful effect on the global financial system. Think back to the depths of the global financial crisis in 2009 in which we were suffering from a severe case of a “liquidity trap”. A liquidity trap is a situation in which monetary policy (increase in money supply) has no effect on increasing interest rates, income and does not stimulate economic growth. Put another way, the world was in shock, so the private sector responded by sticking its head in the sand and decreasing debt in what’s commonly known as deleveraging. This deleveraging has continued over the past 6 years. The classic Keynesian response to a liquidity trap is to ramp up fiscal policy; cut taxes, increase government spending etc. But the constant unwillingness of politicians to get anything done on the fiscal side shifted the burden to the Federal Reserve.

Emerging from Zero

Forward guidance is a new tool the Fed has employed in recent years. As the Fed engaged in QE, there was no chance or even a discussion surrounding raising interest rates. As Paul McCulley has said, 

"The bond market is nothing more than a forward curve on expected Fed policy plus a risk premium.” 

In other words, think of the Federal Funds Rate as a rough proxy for a return on cash, currently 0%. Long term interest rates are in a sense “pulled down” by a 0% policy rate as the risk premium one assumes on a long bond is low in a zero-bound world. Assuming a PIMCO “New Neutral” world, the Fed’s Neutral policy rate should be closer 2% than 4%. Adding a risk premium in our new neutral world for bonds and stocks then only gets us to maybe a 3% return for bonds and 5% return for stocks. I’m certainly not trying to predict future market returns here, but I do want to point out the enormous effect the Fed has on all markets! The emergence from 0% is an important moment. Much more important however, is the ultimate end point to the Fed’s tightening cycle as the Neutral Fed Funds Rate affects everything from deposit rates on cash in the bank, to mortgage rates, insurance premiums, and returns on stocks and bonds. Arguments can be made on both sides and the chances of an increase in interest rates this year is virtually 50/50. Bottom line, the Fed should wait and start to raise interest rates when global economic conditions are much more favorable.

References

The Economic Times – “Definition of “Liquidity Trap” Available online at economictimes.com

DoubleLine Funds Webcast 9/8/2015 – “In Our Time”

DISCLOSURES

INDEX DESCRIPTIONS

All indexes are unmanaged and an individual cannot invest directly in an index. Index returns do not reflect fees or expenses.

The S&P 500 Index is widely regarded as the best single gauge of the U.S. equities market. This world-renowned index includes a representative sample of 500 leading companies in leading industries of the U.S. economy. Although the S&P 500 Index focuses on the large-cap segment of the market, with approximately 75% coverage of U.S. equities, it is also an ideal proxy for the total market. An investor cannot invest directly in an index.

The MSCI® EAFE (Europe, Australia, Far East) Net Index is recognized as the pre-eminent benchmark in the United States to measure international equity performance. It comprises 21 MSCI country indexes, representing the developed markets outside of North America.

The MSCI Emerging Markets Index SM is a free float-adjusted market capitalization index that is designed to measure equity market performance in the global emerging markets. As of June 2007, the MSCI Emerging Markets Index consisted of the following 25 emerging market country indices: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Czech Republic, Egypt, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Israel, Jordan, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Russia, South Africa, Taiwan, Thailand, and Turkey.

The Barclays Capital U.S. Aggregate Index represents securities that are SEC-registered, taxable, and dollar denominated. The index covers the U.S. investment grade fixed rate bond market, with index components for government and corporate securities, mortgage pass-through securities, and asset-backed securities. These major sectors are subdivided into more specific indexes that are calculated and reported on a regular basis.

DISCLOSURES

Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Diversification does not assure profit or protect against a loss in a declining market. While we have gathered this information from sources believe to be reliable, we cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information provided. The views, opinions, and forecasts expressed in this commentary are as of the date indicated, are subject to change at any time, are not a guarantee of future results, do not represent or offer of any particular security, strategy, or investment and should not be considered investment advice. Investors should consider the investment objectives, risks, and expenses of a mutual fund or exchanged traded fund carefully before investing. Furthermore, the investor should make an independent assessment of the legal, regulatory, tax, credit, and accounting and determine, together with their own professional advisers if any of the investments mentioned herein are suitable to their personal goals.

International investing involves additional risks, including currency fluctuations, political or economic conditions affecting the foreign country, and differences in accounting standards and foreign regulations. These risks are magnified in emerging markets. Small and mid-cap stocks carry greater risks than investments in larger, more established companies. Fixed-income securities are subject to interest-rate risk. Investing in high-income securities may carry a greater risk of nonpayment of interest or principal than higher-rated bonds. Investing in commodities is generally considered speculative because of the significant potential for investment loss due to cyclical economic conditions, sudden political events, and adverse international monetary policies. There are several risks associated with alternative or non-traditional investments above and beyond the typical risks associated with traditional investments including higher fees, more complex/less transparent investment strategies, less liquid investments and potentially less tax-friendly. Some strategies may disappoint in strong up markets and may not diversify risk in extreme down markets.

To receive a copy of Genesis Wealth Planning’s ADV Part II which contains additional disclosures, proxy voting policies and privacy policy, please contact us.