Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 502

Brace, brace, brace: The real issue behind the banking turmoil

Editor's Note: This article was first published by Franklin Templeton on 17 March 2023.

The commentariat until recently had shifted from hard to soft landing to no landing at all. Suddenly, those lags in monetary policy don’t look so long and variable after all. But it’s highly unlikely that we are about to face another banking crisis, GFC style. The tremors reverberating across the banking world from Silicon Valley to Zurich expose idiosyncratic weaknesses, but the risk is that markets focus on the headlines and miss the bigger issue building beneath the surface. Banks can be rescued in a heartbeat with unlimited liquidity from central banks…

*BANKS BORROW $164.8B FROM FED FACILITIES IN WEEK TO MARCH 15

The franchise and confidence in the institution might be irreparably damaged but liquidity crises can be solved with the flick of a switch per the headline above.

Credit constriction is the key issue

The real issue that lies behind the banking turmoil is the constriction of credit supply that central banks are inducing amidst their assault on inflation. The constriction of credit, and withdrawal of liquidity, ultimately finds out the weaknesses in the system. The supply of credit supports growth and drives inflation. Just as the excess creation of money through the pandemic caused inflation to surge, its rapid destruction as central banks shrink the money supply is highly disinflationary.

In a highly financialised world fuelled by liquidity and availability of credit, sooner or later things start to break when central banks withdraw that credit and liquidity as rapidly as they have. The only question has been what and when. The warning signs have been brewing for several months that monetary policy has been choking off the supply of money. This is the pointy end of the hiking process.

Consider the rate of growth of US money as measured by the M2 definition. It boomed in the pandemic of course and started shrinking toward the end of 2022.

Many may not have realised that the number of banks in the US insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp is nearly 5,000. These figures do not include credit unions which fall under separate regulation. There are around 6,500 of those. In Texas alone there are 375 banks. The rapid demise of smaller banks in the US and at Credit Suisse is a timely reminder that when the liquidity pool gets drained there is always going to be people standing naked.

But the tight credit conditions being inflicted on economies is the ultimate culprit. Arguably, the demise of Silicon Valley Bank owes its genesis to the dramatic shrinkage of capital being made available to the private equity, start-up and tech sectors which made up the bulk of SVB’s customer base. As credit has been drained from the system and liquidity become scarce, funding markets for start-up ventures has dried up. What do you do then? You draw on your liquid bank deposits. So, whilst we might finger point at idiosyncratic blow-ups, the fact is central banks have squeezed funding markets like the proverbial lemon making the cost and availability of credit that much more challenging.

The fallout from credit tightening

Nowhere is the tightness of bank credit more closely scrutinised than in the benchmark New York Fed Senior Loan Officer Survey. Whenever it has signalled conditions as tight as currently indicated the US has been in or soon entered recession. The below chart highlights that commercial loan growth follows the survey with a lag. Note the survey is now a couple of months old and predates the bank mayhem of recent days. If there is one memo that regional bank treasurers are likely sending to their loan officers this week, it’s ‘don’t lend any money unless the credit is pristine and well-priced’. The provision of commercial loans dries up when the survey points to conditions this tight. No doubt the next survey will be a doozy.

One reason why monetary policy is destroying the flow of credit is the extreme level of inversion of the yield curve in the US. It has until recently been at acute and record levels of inversion. For banks that borrow short and lend long this has been a recipe to stop creating credit or go broke. It’s not coincidental that the curve shape maps closely to the loan officers survey above.

None of this shows up in official CPI stats for a while, of course, despite this being largely the only thing central banks are focussed on. That’s because it leads, and points to a significant contraction in credit creation and GDP and inflation in the coming period, rather than the past.

In Australia, the impact of tighter credit conditions at the hand of the RBA is centred on construction and building. More than 1200 firms in that sector have entered receivership, liquidation or administration this financial year so far. The chart below shows the 6 monthly change in new credit for housing. It’s never been weaker outside the GFC. This isn’t surprising, as no-one can afford to buy overpriced houses at current interest rates.

But tremors have been showing up for a while as the credit pool has been drained. The UK Pension system crashing the gilt market, FTX imploding or some banks looking shaky are in some ways distractions that are too easily dismissed as isolated events. Monetary policy is a blunt tool and it’s finding out the interest rate and liquidity sensitive areas in the market quickly.

Banking and capital markets run on confidence. If that confidence goes, it’s over.

Bond markets are ahead of the game

Central banks are singularly focussed on lagging CPI data whilst largely ignoring the forward-looking data on credit measures. The latter continue to signpost a significant slowdown underway. For the history buffs, it is Interesting that in June 2008 the Fed Meeting notes said:

“The Committee expects inflation to moderate later this year and next year. However, in light of the continued increases in the prices of energy and some other commodities and the elevated state of some indicators of inflation expectations, uncertainty about the inflation outlook remains high.” - FOMC June 2008.

Such a statement could easily be included in next weeks scheduled meeting. Of course, Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy in September 2008, Bear Stearns had already fallen over, and the housing market went up in flames. It’s likely that central bankers are a little more attuned to the financial stability risks these days.

This is unlikely another GFC. But it’s always something and flow of credit matters in a highly financialised world. In 2018, the Fed broke the High Yield bond market and was forced to back away when not a single company was able to raise money in that market in December of 2018. Many have said central banks can’t stop raising rates even amidst these ructions because of inflation. If credit and liquidity tighten as they have, inflation’s grave is dug. It may not have been filled in, but it’s over and just a matter of time. Central banks will be highly sensitive to signs that the financial system is quaking, and the flow of credit is stalling.

The bond market has decided that hikes are largely over, and cuts are coming. That is consistent with our view, and we have been positioned accordingly but it has been startling how quickly things shift. This isn’t a linear path and it’s likely we see heightened volatility in coming days and weeks reinforcing the importance of being nimble.

 

Andrew Canobi is a Director, Fixed Income; Joshua Rout, CFA, is a Portfolio Manager and Research Analyst, Fixed Income; and Chris Siniakov is Managing Director, Fixed Income at Franklin Templeton, a sponsor of Firstlinks. This article is for information purposes only and does not constitute investment or financial product advice. It does not consider the individual circumstances, objectives, financial situation, or needs of any individual.

For more articles and papers from Franklin Templeton and specialist investment managers, please click here.

 

3 Comments
Russell (student of heterodox economics)
March 31, 2023

Andrew, you may know fixed interest, but you appear not to understand how the monetary system works. Central Banks are not "constricting credit by "shrinking" the money supply. The supply of money (you use M2 in your article, which is currency + reserves backing bank deposits) is not chosen or fixed by the Central Bank, it is dictated by the demand for money by bank customers and banks, and (in normal times) only somewhat influenced by CBs with their only tool, official interest rates. Banks create money when they lend, and they do not lend their deposits or their reserves. There is no "money multiplier" effect. Particularly in a time where central banks are lifting interest rates fast and hard, the relevant regulator (APRA in Australia) SHOULD be paying close attention to their key role of supervising bank lending standards and stress-testing the banks capital adequacy, asset quality and other risks. Because we implicitly back all banks with the country's "full faith and credit." This is the way stability in the system can be maintained. See this Bank of England explainer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvRAqR2pAgw

Gary Judd
March 31, 2023

I direct Russell's attention to https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-bulletin/2014/money-creation-in-the-modern-economy.pdf

Gary Judd KC
March 30, 2023

Andrew Canobi has pretty much hit the nail on the head.
I quote a couple of passages from Trying to be a Rational Banker in an Irrational World, a 27 September 2009 paper I prepared for a presentation to a New Zealand Institute of Directors event. At the time I was the chairman of CBA subsidiary, ASB Bank, and the presentation concerned the causes of the Global Financial Crisis.



I want to talk to you about some of the causes of the current financial and economic crisis.
My thesis is that there has been a failure by policymakers clearly to identify and honestly to state what those causes are. Instead we have been subjected to rhetoric which suits and is aligned with political agendas because it shifts the blame away from the policymakers.
Clearly identifying and honestly stating the causes of the crisis are necessary for the purpose of devising the right responses. C.f, “In order to meet their commitment to fight protectionism, G20 leaders need to come to grips with what causes it”: Lowy Institute for International Policy, September 2009 Policy Brief.
….

The fundamental cause of the global economic crisis was liquidity in the global financial system -- the credit creation which arose from deliberate actions of the US Federal Reserve and other central banks, including our own, in keeping interest rates low. We now know with the benefit of hindsight that they were kept artificially low. So there was all this money sloshing around in the global financial system and it had to go somewhere. Where it went was primarily into the US residential lending market.
….
You can't necessarily blame the Federal Reserve and other central bankers for the misjudgements which resulted in the excess money in the system. The problem is the system which permits men to play God with the money supply. They think they know what's best but they don't. A central banker can get something right only by sheer coincidence. Even if he doesn't make a misjudgement of events current at the time, he cannot be responsive to future changes in the financial environment in such a way as to avoid perverse outcomes, because first of all he has to recognise that the environment is changing and secondly he has to use imprecise instruments to try to deal with the change.
….
An aspect of that description [by Alan Bollard, then Governor of the RBNZ] with which I would cavil is the failure to mention that it was the Federal Reserve's decision to push interest rates up which placed pressure on borrowers' ability to service their borrowings and started the downward spiral which began to occur around mid-2007. Playing God with the money supply did not just create the expansionary conditions which led to the bubble in the housing market, but also it started the downward spiral.

Why is it important to understand these facts, the fact that the underlying cause of the problem was the money supply and the fact that the excess liquidity and credit found its way into the creation of the toxic assets largely because of US government policies? Because if you don't understand and acknowledge causes of a problem, how on earth are you going to be likely to devise appropriate solutions.



Andrew Canobi’s article identifies similar features of the current situation .

I think the cause is systemic, the “playing God with the money supply” nature of the system, and that booming and busting will persist until the system changes.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Is it all falling apart for central banks?

Policy pincers in Australia and the US

Why we believe bonds are now beautiful

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Vale Graham Hand

It’s with heavy hearts that we announce Firstlinks’ co-founder and former Managing Editor, Graham Hand, has died aged 66. Graham was a legendary figure in the finance industry and here are three tributes to him.

Australian stocks will crush housing over the next decade, one year on

Last year, I wrote an article suggesting returns from ASX stocks would trample those from housing over the next decade. One year later, this is an update on how that forecast is going and what's changed since.

Taxpayers betrayed by Future Fund debacle

The Future Fund's original purpose was to meet the unfunded liabilities of Commonwealth defined benefit schemes. These liabilities have ballooned to an estimated $290 billion and taxpayers continue to be treated like fools.

Australia’s shameful super gap

ASFA provides a key guide for how much you will need to live on in retirement. Unfortunately it has many deficiencies, and the averages don't tell the full story of the growing gender superannuation gap.

Looking beyond banks for dividend income

The Big Four banks have had an extraordinary run and it’s left income investors with a conundrum: to stick with them even though they now offer relatively low dividend yields and limited growth prospects or to look elsewhere.

AFIC on its record discount, passive investing and pricey stocks

A triple headwind has seen Australia's biggest LIC swing to a 10% discount and scuppered its relative performance. Management was bullish in an interview with Firstlinks, but is the discount ever likely to close?

Latest Updates

Investment strategies

9 lessons from 2024

Key lessons include expensive stocks can always get more expensive, Bitcoin is our tulip mania, follow the smart money, the young are coming with pitchforks on housing, and the importance of staying invested.

Investment strategies

Time to announce the X-factor for 2024

What is the X-factor - the largely unexpected influence that wasn’t thought about when the year began but came from left field to have powerful effects on investment returns - for 2024? It's time to select the winner.

Shares

Australian shares struggle as 2020s reach halfway point

It’s halfway through the 2020s decade and time to get a scorecheck on the Australian stock market. The picture isn't pretty as Aussie shares are having a below-average decade so far, though history shows that all is not lost.

Shares

Is FOMO overruling investment basics?

Four years ago, we introduced our 'bubbles' chart to show how the market had become concentrated in one type of stock and one view of the future. This looks at what, if anything, has changed, and what it means for investors.

Shares

Is Medibank Private a bargain?

Regulatory tensions have weighed on Medibank's share price though it's unlikely that the government will step in and prop up private hospitals. This creates an opportunity to invest in Australia’s largest health insurer.

Shares

Negative correlations, positive allocations

A nascent theme today is that the inverse correlation between bonds and stocks has returned as inflation and economic growth moderate. This broadens the potential for risk-adjusted returns in multi-asset portfolios.

Retirement

The secret to a good retirement

An Australian anthropologist studying Japanese seniors has come to a counter-intuitive conclusion to what makes for a great retirement: she suggests the seeds may be found in how we approach our working years.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2024 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.