| The
Fed decided to beef up short-term lending by buying commercial paper
on Tuesday. It's not a bad strategy actually. About $100 billion
in short-term lending passes hands every day here in the United States.
If the Fed can do for small businesses what nobody else seems willing/able
to do, it may well get credit flowing again. The Fed said about $1.3 trillion
in debt could qualify for the program. The ultimate goal, however,
is to get other lenders doing it again.
Let
me ask you a question though.... if you were a lender, would you
ever do something because the government did it first? I didn't
think so. I wouldn't either.
I still
can't for the life of me figure out why these guys in Washington, Paulson,
and Bernanke don't quite get it. It's not that lenders can't - it's
that lenders won't. It's just not a risk-adjusted venture right
now. If the government is willing to take on the risk, that's their
problem.
Besides, offering is one thing. Getting taken up on the offer
is another. And, with Tuesday's 5% selloff across the board, investors
seem to feel the same way.
The
symptom and the hint of lending health - though not the solution
- is the TED spread.
I don't
know if I've ever talked about the TED spread before. I haven't needed
to in years, so I doubt that I have. Right now though, it's the
heart of the problem.
The
TED spread is just the difference in rates between inter-bank loans and
short-term government debt (T-bills). Or, to be more direct, the TED
spread is the difference in interest rates for 3-month T-Bills and the
3-month LIBOR rate. The LIBOR rate (London Interbank Offered Rate)
is what banks charge each other for short-term loans.
More
important to us, the TED spread measures the lending market's overall
perceived credit risk....the difference between risk-free rates and
still-relatively-low-risk
inter-bank lending rates. Like any lender, when one bank is unsure about
lending to another bank they charge a slightly higher rate, causing the
LIBOR rate to go up.
Usually
- in a normal credit environment - the TED spread is minimal, as
banks don't see much more risk in lending to other banks than they do in
holding government debt. The TED spread will vary from 10 basis points
to 40 basis points in a healthy environment where bank lending risk is
perceived to be low.
When
it's risky to lend to other banks (like now), the TED spread can move much
higher. Over the last month, the TED spread has been holding
its ground between 300 and 400 basis points. In fact, the TED spread
as of Tuesday afternoon was 340 basis points. The 3-month LIBOR
rate is 4.27%, while the 3-month (13 week) T-bill is yielding 0.87%. And
no, that wasn't a misprint - the rate for 13-week government paper
is 0.87%.
But
wait a second... wouldn't a weak return on T-bills and a strong
return
on inter-bank lending inspire the more profitable inter-bank lending? It
should, intuitively. That's the point though - it's not!
It's great for lenders, but terrible for borrowers... and
the lenders aren't budging (not that I blame them). That's why the credit
market is frozen.
That's
also why I said above that the TED spread is a symptom, and not
a cure. The TED numbers are wildly attractive to banks that lend,
so the government is happy on that front. Yet, it doesn't help a bit. Why?The
risk (perceived or real) is still there, and banks don't want to take
any chances unless they get paid nicely (relatively). That's why the LIBOR
rate is still so high... too high for most borrowers.
That's
my primary beef with the economic prod of buying short-term paper. The
Fed and the Treasury can do whatever they want - it won't matter. They
don't control interest rates that are ultimately determined by supply and
demand (LIBOR).
As
counter-intuitive as it might sound, the TED spread will have to shrink
before banks feel confident enough to lend to each other again.
They could make considerably better money by lending when the TED spread
was high (and the borrowing/lending margins are wide), without really
taking on any more actual risk. Despite the beneficial math of the wide
spread though, their unwillingness to get involved on either side of the
table is what's gumming up lending.
The
irony? There won't have to actually be any less risk in inter-bank
lending if the TED spread contracts; banks will just feel like there
is.
To
be clear, the stock market can and may well recover before the TED
spread shrinks. While banks are hesitant to lend money to each other, they
can borrow plenty from the central bank ...if they really need to.
I don't know to what extent the option is being utilized, though I suspect
minimally. However, it could be what's keeping the credit market on life
support while everything else is getting worked out.
Or,
the stock market is fully capable of breaking down even if the TED
spread shrinks and despite the government's willingness to lend.
Either
way, eventually banks will have to get off of life support. In the
meantime
though, well, there's still some volatility we may need to work
through as the spreads get worked out. That could be good or bad, but definitely
trade-worthy.
The
big clue to healthier times, however, I think will be a smaller
TED spread. Until the credit market is unfrozen by a narrow(er) spread,
the underlying technical problem will still persist. That's now why
I'm on a TED spread vigil. I'll be posting semi-regular updates in the
blog.
| |
|
|
| |
 |
Got comments, questions or suggestions?
Send 'em on over: Email
the Editor
If you wish to send a written request
or inquiry, please send it to our physical address:
TGR Group, LLC
4653 Carmel Mtn Rd Suite 308 #402
San Diego, CA 92130 |
|
|