The huge "hedge fund short" 101
Many have published a chart that say "hedge funds have the largest speculative short futures position in history". The data is accurate. It also needs interpretation.
Here's my chart it's a few weeks old but illustrates my point
The hedge fund short is someone else's long. That long is institutional investors. It's very big. But that is not the important story. This unlike the ES charts which looked the same and were a choose your fighter Long Only Simps vs Hedge funds (which I got completely wrong)
Respect Long only Simps 🫡
Hedge funds short ES covered like mad. I was wrong.
But fixed income futures positions are quite different. While the long side of the positions are indeed levering up by long only asset managers the short side which is getting so much doomism is more complex
H/T @leadlagreport for this example
Why do hedge funds short bond futures
Speculation IS a real thing!
BUT also to hedge out interest rate risk on something they are long in the derivatives or cash market like:
Corporate and High Yield Bonds, Physical Treasury Bonds, Mortgage Bonds, Muni's, Converts, EM debt etc
For example let's say long only institutions bid up futures to lever up a bet. A hedge fund can buy the correspond US Treasury to that futures contract and take out a spread between the futures and cash markets. It's an arbitrage between the cost of leverage in the futures
Markets and the actual cost of leverage the hedge fund is able to achieve in their funding of the UST long position.
Now. It's possible that the hedge fund is purely speculative or it's possible that they own the bond and are using repo to finance the long and are short the
Futures. Let's go to the data. As this "historic" futures short has been built. Levered long positions have grown by half a Trillion dollars. Either that should be added to the long position of real money
Or should be subtracted from the short position of hedge funds who are doing the cash and carry arbitrage. I won't show all my data but just say that this is a complex topic and the signal in Fixed Income is pretty weak regarding TFF rates data the doomers are posting
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Money creation and credit creation in the private sector 101 part 2.
Role of Repo.
In the prior thread I outline credit creation which can happen without banks and money creation which requires banks.
I also hinted at bank reserves role as being one of grease to the
system and NOT necessary for bank money creation but necessary for interbank deposit shifts. I also didn't discuss base money creation from the Fed and won't be dealing with that in this thread either.
Here I will discuss the specific role of Repo in today's financial system
The big takeaway is it is one of many important and necessary means of credit creation AND it has no role in money creation unless a bank is a party to the transaction.
That will take some weedy mechanics to prove. But before we do that let's talk about the entire economy
Money creation and credit creation in the private sector 101
There has been a lot of focus on the repo market lately. I get it. It's an important part of the capital markets in the credit creation process. But its growth and contraction is part of the credit creation process
The repo market where transactions are between hedge funds and money market investors, and those who desire leverage for whatever purpose is an important market in the credit creation process BUT is not part of the money creation process UNLESS a commercial bank or the Fed is
A party to the transaction. Because this is largely misunderstood by even some plumbing experts it's worth it for me to write out my understanding (maybe im wrong which would be awesome so I can learn). So here I go.
I've been studying various versions of balance sheet expansions over my career. I'd classify them as
Japanese first failed effort
UK's version
U.S. Version 1
U.S. version 2
ECB version
Japanese all in version 2
They are all fairly different in approach. The big takeaway 🧵
The developing Fed version that most are excited about is most akin to the Japanese first failed effort.
Here's a rough summary of each
In 2001-2006 Japan the BOJ initiated QE. In their version they offered significant lending to the Japanese banking system for good collateral
The balance sheet doubled in size at a pace of 35 Tn yen per year. However of that 35tn only 5 was direct asset purchase and most of that was Japanese Tbills. This is very similar to the BTFP program from SVB time and the current SRF. It was also sorta similar to ECB LTRO
Why do repo rates change and what do they have to do with reserves. This is a super technical issue and there are better folks to follow on this topic than me but I'll give it a go.
Firstly what are the two sides of a repo transaction and why do they want to interact.
One side is a guy with a bank deposit he wants to earn interest on. The other is a guy who wants to borrow money overnight and has assets he owns that he is willing to provide as collateral to the loan. We can go down a level on each side but for now let's keep it simple.
Most repo transactions are done with UST as the collateral and most UST collatarel used is TBills but. UST's are also highly common collateral but do to the marked to market risk they offer less borrowing capacity per unit of notional (higher haircut)
Some thoughts on 10 year notes since Powell guided for a restart of the cutting cycle at Jackson Hole. Trying to answer what the bond market is saying
Nominal yields have fallen 33bp
Note yields are driven lower by
1)Falling real GDP expectations
2)Falling Inflation expectations 3) Falling "risk" of owning assets 4) Improving supply/demand balance vs expectations.
In attributing nominal yield changes to these 4 things unfortunately market prices don't
Easily demonstrate these things. For instance 3&4 are only able to be measured via a model which estimates risk premiums or the expected return over holding cash
Even Breakeven inflation and real TIPS yields have risk premium buried in there market yields. However we can try
SPX has a trailing earnings yield of 4% with expected 1 year earnings growth of 11.7%. What's the bull case? For me the bull case is a combination of simply collecting the earnings accrual
and having the multiple expand slightly. In that case a 16% return would occur which is roughly 1 std higher and happens 1 out of 6 timer.
The big driver of equity returns is the accrual of earnings. Over the last 5 years earnings accrual has dominated historic returns
As long as companies continue to grow earnings they will go up over the long term.
Multiples rise and fall and as can be seen in the chart can dominate performance of equities in the short term. Furthermore multiples are impacted by interest rates