Sometimes the mountain looks clearer from the plain the summit to
paraphrase a American-Lebanese poet. The dollar appears to have entered
a new phase on May 3. On that day,
it reversed higher against the euro, yen,
and sterling for lows not seen in a while.
It is tempting to construct a fundamental narrative for the change. However, the usual drivers are noticeable by their absence. The US
economic data has been mixed, including the employment report that often sets
the tone for the monthly data cycle. The US 2-year premium over German is
flat over this period and about 10 bp
smaller over the past fortnight. The US 10-year premium over Japan has
narrowed eight basis points since May 3.
Neither
inflation expectations nor investors expectations for the June FOMC meeting
have changed. The 10-year breakeven inflation rate
has fallen four basis points to 1.60% since May 3. The implied yield of
the June Fed funds futures contract has slipped a single basis point.
The hypothesis
the dollar's resilience is a function of positioning rather than fundamental
developments has broader explanatory power. Given the extreme positioning the
futures market of the euro and yen bulls (gross positioning) relative to speculative positioning in sterling, helps explain why sterling is the strongest of the majors since
May 3, falling only 0.6% against the greenback.
Similarly, it
also explains why the yen is the weakest of the majors. Judging from the speculative positioning in the
futures market that was the most extreme position. Japanese officials
threaten intervention and the yen still strengthens. Japanese officials
threaten intervention and the yen
weakens. Was the threat of intervention the driver the dollar's
bounce?
Some of those
that subscribe to the currency war narrative have been warning since mid-February
of BOJ intervention. It has not materialized. Some
observers imagined a secret protocol in late-February to all the dollar to
weaken, which ostensibly made intervention more difficult. However, officials
have consistently warned that Japan reserves the right to intervene in
disorderly and one-way markets.
Intervention is
an escalation ladder. There are various expression of
concern. Material intervention is a high rung on the ladder.
There is a risk, it seem, that too many observers see verbal
intervention as a prelude to material intervention. However, climbing sequentially may undermine the effectiveness of
actual intervention. Verbal
intervention can be effective if it is a signal of credible material
intervention or a policy change.
Technically,
the low the dollar made against the yen
after the BOJ chose not to expand policy at the end of last month, was not
confirmed by technical indicators. This
warned of the risk of a short covering dollar rally. The dollar's
bounce of 2.25% against the yen since May 3 reduces whatever chances
there were for intervention.
We still argue
the bar to intervention is high. Japan diplomatic style is inclined to make
concessions before a G7 summit to avoid criticism. The same modus
operandi makes it reluctant to intervene
before the G7 meeting and summit later this month. Moreover, these
seemingly technical dollar bounces breaks the appearance of one-way or
disorderly markets.
Turning to the
eurozone, the three largest members reported weaker than expected March
industrial production figures today. Germany and France reported
declines for the second consecutive month. The 1.3% decline in Germany
was twice February’s fall, and the median
forecast was for 0.2% slippage. France was expected to report a 0.7% increase. Instead, industrial output fell 0.3%.
Italy's flat showing compared with
expectations for a 0.2% decline.
One implication
of this is that Q1 GDP is likely to be revised down to 0.5% later this week from
0.6%. It
may not be a big deal, but the pace of growth in the eurozone may have peaked
in Q1, where it surpassed the pre-crisis level of output.
There is no
immediate implication for ECB policy. All the ECB's initiatives have not been implemented. The results have to be monitored for some time, which helps explain why there is typically a lag between
ECB moves. Contrary to the secret Shanghai agreement talk, we suspect
that many in Europe would actually prefer
a stronger dollar.
One of the most
interesting lines of reasoning picked up in Beijing was that many investors
there would see Brexit as a sign of US weakness. Discussions Brexit typically focus
on the implications for the UK and Europe. The US has long favored an
integrated Europe, and contrary to some press reports, it was not simply covert operation. US leaders have
understood a strong Europe was in the US interest and used various policy
tools, carrots, and sticks, to facilitate
it.
President
Obama's trip to London and his remarks about Brexit (in sharp contrast to
Trump's suggestion that Britain would be better offer outside of the EU) was understood by many as the US trying to get
a client state to do what it wanted. Brexit would be seen as a sign that US power is waning.
Of course, we
are not in a position to judge whether this assessment goes to the upper
echelons of Chinese government and the Communist Party. However, the state-centric
narratives are popular in China as it is true to their experience. It is
also consistent with Chinese officials criticism of what is sees as the
instability of an American unipolar world. Attempts to provide examples of the world not being unipolar knocked
aside. Developments like North Korea
possessing nuclear weapons, as does Pakistan (and several other countries that
the US probably wishes did not have them), losing the Vietnam War, or Russia
annexing Crimea, and Castro's tenure in Cuba, to name a few, are deflected as a
ploy to play down the extent of US power.
Disclaimer
A Few Thoughts from Asian Business Trip
Reviewed by Marc Chandler
on
May 10, 2016
Rating: