The survey by UK pollster Survation found that 60 percent of 91 investment professionals polled in September, most based in the US, believe Mr Biden will win the upcoming matchup slated for November 3.
(1/4)
We have argued investors view the election in the same way the betting market views it.
As highlighted above, 60% of investors think Biden will win. This is nearly identical to what the betting markets have discounted.
These probabilities are not close to how the poll analyzers see it. @FiveThirtyEight gives Biden a 77% chance of winning. The @ECONdailycharts models give Biden an 85% chance of winning.
While both polls and betting markets are pricing in a Biden victory, their odds of that outcome vary quite a bit. Investors skew closer to the betting markets.
In other words, we do not believe the markets have strongly priced in an election outcome one way or the other.
(4/4)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Remember, Powell wants a 12-0 vote for every policy decision. He is now working the phones by calling every FOMC member to "horse trade" into a 12-0 vote.
He believes that a 12-0 vote gives policy credibility. Dissents, in Powell's opinion, create doubt and uncertainty.
Powell explained this to Davis Rubenstein in July.
---
From the raw transcript, I edited it for readability
7:58 Powell: The way it works is I talk to the other 18 participants regularly. I speak to them at least once ten days before the meeting and think about this three or four weeks before.
What should we want to achieve? What data do we need to see? How do we want to change our Communications? All those things.
So, I talk to people, listen to them, and try to put together an answer that has broad support on the committee. So when we go into the committee on Tuesday morning [its start], I'm usually confident that I know where this will go.
8:55 Powell: These call calls are generally scheduled and go all day. The Friday before the meeting, I think I have 11 half-hour calls. We talk about the economy, we talk about very specific aspects of the economy, about our mandate, and then we talk about policy, so there's a lot to talk about. I take careful notes.
You can hear him explain it here.
3/3
Since Powell wants a 12-0 vote, he effectively gives everyone a veto.
See the chart above and the annotation about Waller. Waller is arguably the most hawkish member of the Fed. So, if the Fed wants to cut, it can only go as far as the most hawkish member agrees.
The probability of a 50 basis point cut was 60% right before Waller spoke, and it was 20% after he was done. In other words, Waller left the strong impression that he was good with a 25-point basis cut, but no more.
The Fed has only seen two dissents in the last four years. Both in 2022 (highlighted). This is the smallest number in over 70 years.
Again, this is how Powell designed it.
So, as he explained above, when Powell went through his 11 half-hour calls yesterday, and the market was 50/50, he had a lot of "horse trading" to do before a decision could be made (a 12-0 voting agreement).
Then, certain reporters are viewed as "Fed whisperers" who can be called and told "blue horseshoe likes a cut" and let them write a story that "signals" to everyone what will happen at the meeting.
I expect this story on Monday morning.
If not, then this process I described might be changing and could stay changed going forward, leading to more uncertainty and higher volatility.
Before the June 15, 2002, and March 22, 2023 FOMC meetings, the odds of a Fed move were very uncertain, ~50/50.
@NickTimiraos's stories right before these meetings removed uncertainty.
Yesterday's story created uncertainty (chart).
🧵
2/5
Going into the June 15, 2022, FOMC meeting, things were uncertain with a 35% - 45% odd 75bps hike.
@NickTimiraos cleared it up with this:
June 13, 2022 (48 hours before the meeting)
Fed Likely to Consider 0.75-Percentage-Point Rate Rise This Week wsj.com/articles/bad-i…
3/5
Mar 7, 2023 SVB fell. The odds were 100% for a 25 bps hike before March 7. They fell to 55% a week before the Mar 22 FOMC meeting.
Timiroas cleared it up on Mar 20, sending the odds back to 86%
The blue line below shows the Fed’s funds rate projections from the June Summary of Economic Projections. By December 2025, they expected the funds rate to be 4.125%, with five 25-basis-point cuts.
The red line shows what the market is currently pricing in. The market expects the funds rate to be 3.12% at the end of December 2025, with nine 25-basis-point cuts over the next 15 months.
The market expects this month’s rate cut to start an aggressive rate-cutting cycle.
3/5
Below is the Fed’s favorite real-rate measure, the target funds rate less core PCE.
There are two ways to look at this. One is the current real rate level of 2.88%, which is the highest since 2007, which means interest rates are overly restrictive. However, this argument assumes that the post-financial crisis real-rate period, shown in red, is a “normal” period. From 2009 to 2020, the QE period, real rates averaged 1.08%.
That said, from 1982, the start of the bond bull market, to 2007, real rates averaged 2.55%. So, was the QE period the anomaly? Chairman Jay Powell repeatedly says we are not returning to zero interest rates, suggesting the QE period is indeed over. If so, what is the appropriate level of real rates? An argument can be made that it is very close to current levels, and real rates are not that restrictive.
Anticipating an argument, could the high government debt levels mean real rates should be lower? This is known as fiscal dominance, where fiscal policy dictates monetary policy. Chairman Powell also repeatedly said the Fed would not let fiscal dominance dictate momentary policy. In other words, if debt levels are too high, that is an issue for Congress to address, not the Fed to accommodate.