Select Language

Search

Insights

No match found

Services

No match found

Industries

No match found

People

No match found

Insights

No match found

Services

No match found

People

No match found

Industries

No match found

Talking About Talking About Tapering - High Quality Credit Spreads

FICC Podcasts May 06, 2021
FICC Podcasts May 06, 2021

 

Dan Krieter and Dan Belton discuss the impact of the Fed’s eventual tapering announcement on spread markets. Topics include the potential for a severe market reaction like 2013 as well as the near-term vs. long-term impacts of the removal of Fed accommodation.


Follow us on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Stitcher and Spotify or your preferred podcast provider.


About Macro Horizons
BMO's Fixed Income, Currencies, and Commodities (FICC) Macro Strategy group led by Margaret Kerins and other special guests provide weekly and monthly updates on the FICC markets through three Macro Horizons channels; US Rates - The Week Ahead, Monthly Roundtable and High Quality Credit Spreads.

Podcast Disclaimer

Read more

Dan Krieter:

Hello, and welcome to Macro Horizons, high quality spreads to the week of May 5th, talking about tapering.

Dan Krieter:

I'm your host Dan Krieter here with Dan Belton, as we discuss what Fed tapering of asset purchases may mean for credit spreads in the future, even if the Fed is not ready to talk about it yet.

Dan Krieter:

Each week, we offer a view on credit spreads, ranging from the highest quality sectors such as agencies and SSAs to investment grade corporates. We also focus on US Dollar swap spreads and all the factors that entails, including funding markets, cross currency markets, and the transition from LIBOR to SOFR.

Dan Krieter:

The topics that come up most frequently in conversations with clients and listeners form the basis for each episode, so please don't hesitate to reach out to us with questions or topics you would like to hear discussed. We can be found on Bloomberg or emailed directly at Dan.Krieter@bmo.com. We value and greatly appreciate your input.

Speaker 2:

The views expressed here or those of the participants and not those of BMO Capital Markets, its affiliates, or subsidiaries.

Dan Krieter:

Hello, everyone. We'd like to start by apologizing for any potential reduction in audio quality this episode. We're having some equipment trouble here. Turns out, Danny Belton's Zoom recorder is not working.

Dan Krieter:

So how about we start here. Dan, how did you break your Zoom recorder?

Dan Belton:

I prefer to think of it as my Zoom recorder breaking on its own.

Dan Krieter:

No, I'm just kidding anyways. Here, we'll start with this. So the last few episodes, we've made a lot about the lack of volatility in credit spreads recently, and really, we didn't really think there's anywhere to go but up. April was the lowest trading range in credit spreads of any calendar month in four years at just four basis points. And we thought, "Well, it can only get better."

Dan Krieter:

Turns out, so far at least, that's not correct. I'm looking at the Bloomberg Barclays investment grade index today. We closed at 88 basis points yesterday, and we've closed at exactly 88 basis points for five consecutive sessions. That hasn't happened where the index hasn't changed in five days since August of 2020.

Dan Belton:

Dan, the first trading session of May, we had the third lightest volumes of the year to date and so just a lot of lethargy in the part of credit spread investors.

Dan Krieter:

And I think that the lethargy that you note, Dan, is notable in and of itself because even if credit spreads haven't moved in these past couple weeks, we've certainly had some news that you'd think would be notable that the market might react to.

Dan Krieter:

And, of course, here, I'm referring to some of the really positive economic data we've had recently that indicates that the economic reopening is going to be rather strong later this year, but not just that. We are now emerging from earning season after Q1, and it seems like we've had extremely strong earnings.

Dan Belton:

Earnings have been remarkably strong. I think a lot of that was priced in. We had over 90% of companies beating earnings. That was the highest proportion since 1993. So we've had earnings a lot better than most people were expecting, but the market hasn't really jumped on that. And so the question that I've been struggling with is what is it going to take to get us to lower spreads from here? And I think it's probably going to have to come from technicals.

Dan Krieter:

And correct me if I'm wrong here on earnings, you say 90% of companies beat earnings, but even going into earnings season, it seemed like there are already some pretty optimistic expectations coming from analysts. Is that right?

Dan Belton:

That's right. There's just been a lot of optimism priced into earnings, and earnings have even exceeded those optimistic expectations, but that's not been reflected in spreads, at least as they've moved in the past several weeks.

Dan Krieter:

I mean, obviously spreads aren't moving in reaction to either the economic data or the very impressive earnings results which I think... you made the point earlier, what will spreads react to at this point? It's really hard to see, given how much optimism has been priced into the market, what even qualifies as an upward surprise at this point. It just seems like we've seen spreads bounce off of this upper 80 basis point range now so many times that I really struggled to see what's going to push spreads through that barrier and particularly meaningfully. It's just really hard to see upward performance potential in credit at the moment.

Dan Krieter:

And we move neutral on credit, what, at the beginning of March, highlighting this risk-reward dichotomy where there just didn't seem to be much upside. And I think that's been confirmed by what we've seen in these past few weeks.

Dan Krieter:

And so looking ahead, I think the view from a high level remains unchanged. Even if we think spreads really aren't going to move much in the near term, I do think the next move in spreads is going to be wider, and I'm not necessarily saying it's going to be a significant move wider, but I do think we need a bit of a repricing for spreads to continue narrowing. And I think the odds of that widening actually taking place continue to grow as we move closer and closer towards proof or lack thereof of a very, very robust economic reopening.

Dan Belton:

Dan, when we think about this recovery in the ways that it can unfold from here, once we get a little bit more clarity on where the economy is after these strong earnings and strong growth picture coming through in the medium term, there's three ways that this recovery can unfold the way that I'm thinking about it.

Dan Belton:

First, we can have this optimism continue to be exceeded by actual data. And in this situation, we would likely see a rise in inflation on a sustainable basis that would bring higher rates and higher borrowing costs, importantly, for credit investors, and these higher borrowing costs, particularly given the amount of debt on corporate balance sheets right now, that could lead to some transitory spread widening, particularly among the lower rated sectors that we cover. So we could see some spread decompression in the case of a strong economic recovery exceeding expectations.

Dan Belton:

Now, if the recovery unfolds and it fails to meet expectations, I think the case for potential spread widening in that scenario is pretty obvious. We would have some amount of defaults and downgrades in the medium term, then that would likely be followed by a continued low rate environment and ultimately, more and more Fed accommodation.

Dan Belton:

I think the only macro scenario that results in narrower credit spreads is what we've been referring to as the Goldilocks scenario which is where the economy continues to grow at a strong pace, but it doesn't result in a particularly strong bout of inflation. So we got marginally higher rates, but not anything that's going to interfere with corporate funding costs. I think in that scenario, we'd see spreads continue to trade at very narrow levels, but there's risks on either side to that outcome.

Dan Krieter:

I see the market in a similar fashion, and I liked the way you typified that, the Goldilocks scenario. There certainly is a path there, but it's a very narrow one. And that's really why we think the next looming credit spreads would likely be a modest widening.

Dan Krieter:

I don't think you hear much argument that in the scenario that the economic recovery falls short, that we're going to see spreads widen. I think that kind of goes without saying, but I do want to draw attention to evidence we got this week that the reflation, high inflation, high growth scenario would also potentially result in wider credit spreads because that one, I think, is the one where you'd get more pushback there when you have a very strong economic reopening. On its face, that's very good for business and should be good for credit.

Dan Krieter:

But this week we had comments from Treasury Secretary Yellen implying that Treasury rates and Fed funds rates may need to move higher in order to rein in a "overheating economy." And we got those comments yesterday and on that day, we saw risk assets really start to wobble. And even though stocks came back towards the end of the day, they were down pretty significantly in the beginning of the session and potentially came back slightly as a result of Yellen "clarifying" her remarks.

Dan Krieter:

But the way I looked at that was you've got the Treasury Secretary talking about a potentially overheating economy and risk assets viewing that as a negative. There's a possibility of a "good news is bad news" scenario coming, and I think that applies to credit spreads as well. If we see that reflation narrative start to come back and Treasury rates move higher, it does appear like that could result in spread widening.

Dan Krieter:

And if that scenario does come to pass, Dan, where along the credit spectrum should we be positioned?

Dan Belton:

I think the obvious answer to that is we'd like to move up in credit ahead of any spread decompression event. I think that's probably, given the risk rewards that we're seeing in the market, I think that makes sense for a lot of reasons. We had been overweight, triple Bs for much of this year, and we didn't get too much narrowing. We got slight out-performance and higher carry, but I think that spread compression trade has likely worn out and given these risks on the horizon, I think it makes more sense to move up in credit.

Dan Krieter:

I agree with you there, Dan, and now, without much changed over the past week, I figured during this podcast, it might be a good idea to tackle one of those bigger issues, in this case being tapering here. Obviously, Treasury Secretary Yellen's comments brings into mind the idea that the Fed could eventually accelerate tapering timelines.

Dan Krieter:

We saw the Fed at the FOMC meeting last week, certainly in no rush to talk about tapering. In Chair Powell's words, "It was not yet time to talk about talking about tapering," and we have more Fed speak out today with Evan saying that he's not ready yet to think about it either.

Dan Krieter:

But the truth of the matter is, Dan, the market is pulling those expectations ahead. We continue to see economist expectations for the timing of tapering being drawn forward into as early as the third quarter of this year with more aggressive tapering scenarios regarding pace since the market really remains sort of captivated by this reflation story.

Dan Krieter:

And it being the story at hand, I thought today would be a really good time to tackle the sort of broad question of what we could expect to see in credit if and when the Fed taper? So I'll start here with this question to you. Back in 2013, obviously, the first thing we saw regarding tapering was what the market described as the "taper tantrum" where we saw investment grade credit spreads 25 plus basis points wider relatively quickly as speculation surrounding the end of central bank asset purchases really began to crop up.

Dan Krieter:

So first question for you: Do you think that we would see a taper tantrum this time around?

Dan Belton:

So I think Chair Powell will do everything in his control to avoid a repeat of the 2013 taper tantrum. And that's likely, to your point, going to consist of messaging the potential for taper as early as possible as to not spook investors.

Dan Belton:

So I don't think we're going to see much of a reaction. I think you could make a fairly compelling argument that their reaction in both Treasuries and credit markets was likely over-done around the taper. You mentioned that credit spreads moved to 25 basis points higher on that announcement. That was all done in about the first month of the "taper tantrum" as that sell-off in Treasuries went on and on. Credit spreads actually came back in quite a bit, and we're only about 5 to 10 basis points wider at the end of the Treasury market taper tantrum.

Dan Krieter:

It goes to show you, I think the important point you said is that the market initially overreacted and part of the reason for that might be that we were dealing with tapering for the first time, both the market and the central bank. So the Fed not necessarily knowing the right way to communicate, to message that to the markets and the market not really knowing how to price it. So you had this initial knee jerk widening and credit spreads which was pretty quickly retraced.

Dan Krieter:

And now, if we fast forward to this market, whatever it is, eight years later, the market has gained a better understanding of how to price tapering. We've seen asset purchases from global central banks all around the world with various timing regarding asset purchase, beginning, ending, different tapering scenarios. And I think the market, for the most part, now understands how to trade it. And I think central banks are better at messaging it.

Dan Krieter:

So we all know tampering is coming at some point in time this year. And I think that you could see a small reaction in spreads in either direction based off of details surrounding both the timing and the pace of the end of asset purchases, but those changes should be small. I don't think that you're going to see anything like a taper tantrum. We all know what's coming, and we know how to price it better.

Dan Krieter:

So if we're not going to see a taper tantrum, Dan, or at least anything like what we saw in 2013, then let's move onto the next question regarding tapering of asset purchases which is will there be any impact from the end of purchases themselves? And I think here, what we really want to focus on is what's known as the "portfolio channel of QE. Can you walk us through what that means?

Dan Belton:

So the idea here is that the primary impact of quantitative easing is that it pushes investors out the risk curve. So when the Fed buys treasuries in MBS, it's taking them from investors who are then pushed into other asset classes and eventually down the road, demand for assets like corporate debt increases. And so that's what really drives down spreads drives up prices of all financial assets.

Dan Belton:

So to your question about whether we would see an impact, I think given what a strong impact quantitative easing has had on credit spreads in general, I think we would expect to see some impact on the removal of Fed accommodation, even if it's not as disorderly as it was in 2013.

Dan Krieter:

Because as you say, the portfolio channel of QE is the Fed forcing investors out the credit curve over time. Well, then you could say the inverse is true for tapering, that tapering is effectively an increase in Treasury supply that then has to be absorbed by the market and potentially crowding out private sector borrowers.

Dan Krieter:

So the way I look at it is I think of tapering as an effective increase in Treasury supply, and when we think about what an increase in Treasury supply means for spreads, we typically think of it having a sort of parabolic relationship where at the beginning, when you see increases in Treasury supply that works to decrease the liquidity advantage of Treasuries, the "liquidity premium" which is a textbook component of credit spreads, and you see spreads start to narrow.

Dan Krieter:

But after a while, we're given a sufficient increase in Treasury supply, you reach a point of saturation perhaps, where now, so much Treasury supply has to be adjusted by investors that the debt of private sector entities starts to be crowded out as Treasuries comprise a larger and larger portion of investment assets, and private sector borrowers, for lack of a better word, have to "pay up" in order to attract investment dollars.

Dan Krieter:

And I think if we look historically that that's what we've seen, and I want to start by focusing specifically on what we saw regarding the end of asset purchases following the credit crisis. Dan, you talked about how we saw the taper tantrum and that was in mid-2013, and then the Fed actually delivered on tapering towards the end of 2013. So correct me if I'm wrong here. I think the Fed actually began reducing asset purchases in late 2013, early 2014. In the six months between the taper tantrum and the end of 2013, we saw spreads narrower as that over-reaction to the taper tantrum was priced out. But then, what happened in 2014 when the Fed actually began to slow its asset purchases?

Dan Belton:

It's exactly right. So spreads really hit their local peak just about a month after the taper tantrum began which we could pinpoint around early May. Spreads hit their peaks around late June, and then they really ground narrower for about the next 12 months. So after hitting their peak in June of 2013, they really ground narrower as the Fed started tapering and then for about the next six months and had hit a bottom around July of 2014. Now, this comprised the entire time that the Fed was beginning its taper. Then when tapering was complete in October of 2014, spread started to really sell off again.

Dan Krieter:

So one potential interpretation of that is that spreads followed the pattern we might expect, given an increase in Treasury supply in 2013, 2014. We saw an initial narrowing as the initial steps in the Fed's tapering program was going to be reducing asset purchases by only a couple billion a month. So a very small increase in supply which we would expect to potentially narrow spreads.

Dan Krieter:

But then as you get towards the end of the tapering program, and now the Fed is buying significantly less. I think it was 85 billion a month they were buying before tapering. Now we're talking the Feds buying, I don't know, 25 billion or less, so we've reduced asset purchases by 2/3s. Now we start to see supply begin to overwhelm, and we see spreads start to move wider.

Dan Krieter:

And now, even looking at the chart beyond that, we can look that spreads continued on that upward trajectory for the majority of 2015 and actually ended up hitting a peak in early 2016. And you think then about, from a supply perspective, "The Fed is no longer increasing the size of its balance sheet. It's holding it steady."

Dan Krieter:

But then we get another form of [inaudible 00:15:57] supply coming in 2015 which was remembered as the year that there was a significant slowdown in emerging market economies in Asia. And we saw Asian central banks have to step in on behalf of their currency by selling US Dollar assets in a lot of Treasuries. And so you have a big Treasury supply event in 2015 from Asian central bank selling. And again, we see upward pressure on credit spreads.

Dan Krieter:

And then as soon as we see that selling pressure from foreign central bank start to level off in early '16, spreads finally find their footing, and we start to go narrower again. So I think looking at that 2013 to 2016 experience paints a pretty compelling picture for how Treasury supply or an increase in Treasury supply can put upward pressure on credit spreads.

Dan Krieter:

And I think another real important point to make here is that we saw spreads generally trending wider for the majority of the mid-2014 to early 2016 time horizon. And we're attributing that to increases in Treasury supply or a lot of its increases in Treasury supply. And I think it's worth noting in particular that that time period is really the only time period in the 10 years following the financial crisis where spreads actually trended wider for a sustained period of time.

Dan Krieter:

Dan, you recently did a study into the behavior of spreads following the financial crisis, and what did you find that made that time period following the end of asset purchases so special?

Dan Belton:

So in the past 10 years, really, since the financial crisis, if you look at spreads versus their 90-day moving average, spreads are generally trading tight of that moving average on 67% of days. The exceptions to this are when spreads tend to shoot wider during periods of intense risk-off tone.

Dan Belton:

That's happened a handful of times since the financial crisis. There's the European sovereign debt crisis. There's the period in early 2016 where you talked about with the emerging market weakness and then, of course, the coronavirus and a couple others.

Dan Belton:

But during most other times, spreads are generally grinding narrower over a prolonged period, usually lasting as long as a couple years. Now, the only time that we've seen since the financial crisis when spreads were kind of grinding wider is that 2014 to 2016 period.

Dan Krieter:

And I think that makes a lot of sense through the lens of the era of extraordinary central bank accommodation, if you want to call it that, when the size of central bank balance sheets, the amount of accommodation they're lending to the market has a very large impact on asset price valuations.

Dan Krieter:

And so we focus specifically on what happened in 2013 to 2016, but now I almost want to take a step back and look at, "How did changes in Treasury supply impact credit spreads for the entirety of the post-financial crisis period?" And we're going to get to this in our written work on Friday, but if you just overlay changes in effective Treasury supply, Treasury supply x Fed, and you overlay that in a line chart with credit spreads, you actually see a pretty strong positive correlation. They move together quite well.

Dan Krieter:

You have 2010 and '11. You see a big increase in credit spreads, and you see a huge increase in Treasury supply as a result of the ARRA program and stimulus deployed during the financial crisis.

Dan Krieter:

Now, of course, this time period also contains the European debt crisis. So we have one of those credit events you talked about, Belton, that makes credit spreads shoot wider. So difficult to isolate there, the impact of the European debt crisis from the increase in Treasury supply, but we have higher spreads and we have higher Treasury issuance.

Dan Krieter:

Then following that, we see Treasury supply start to fall. QE is continuing to go on. Some of the emergency Treasury issuance programs are now in the past, and we see spreads start to fall. Again, here, we're pricing out European debt crisis at the same time, but the positive correlation continues until you get the taper tantrum of 2013 in the time period we just described where net Treasury issuance then begins to increase again as a result of the end of Fed purchases, and we see spreads turn wider, until they sort of peak in 2016, and then we see Treasury supply start to fall off. Spreads follow.

Dan Krieter:

And then we get to the 2018, 2019 period. And this is of particular interest to us because it was at the beginning of 2018 that the Fed decided it was going to try to normalize its balance sheet and actually, for the first time, try to reduce its holdings of Treasury and mortgage-backed securities.

Dan Krieter:

And Dan, what do we see in credit spreads in 2018 and 19?

Dan Belton:

Dan, so credit spreads generally underperformed in 2018 and that culminated with a pretty intense risk-off period in the fall of that year. Within credit markets, there was increased fears of the proportion of triple Bs in the IG index, but just broadly, I think there was a decent amount of stress in the system as the Fed kept unloading Treasuries from its balance sheet.

Dan Belton:

So then after that period of risk-off towards the end of 2018, spreads resumed their multi-year trend of grinding narrower in 2019.

Dan Krieter:

And I think that's the big counter-argument is [inaudible 00:20:41] 2019 to the case we've laid out for the majority of this podcast that Treasury supply has a generally positive correlation with credit spreads, and as Treasury supply increases, so too do credit spreads.

Dan Krieter:

2019 is the exception there. 2019 had pretty heavy supply from Treasury following Trump's corporate tax cuts that increased the government deficit, but we saw credit spreads narrow for the majority of 2019.

Dan Krieter:

Now there's a couple mitigating factors here. The fact that we are recovering from that credit event at the end of 2018 that you talked about, Belton. We also saw the Fed ending their hiking campaign and cutting rates for the first time, and I think it was June of 2019. And if we think back to the market environment there, the expectation was, essentially, that the market, for lack of a better word, was at [inaudible 00:21:25] at this point. The Fed was going to stop raising rates, and hopefully, we were going to just stay at this period of growth, and conditions would be generally pretty good. Obviously, it didn't turn out that way, but that was the idea. And in such an environment, obviously, that's pretty conducive to a yield grab and spreads tightening scenario.

Dan Krieter:

So you see an exception there in 2019. I don't think it's a big point against the argument. It's just not a really a point for, and it's really just arguing that obviously, Treasury supply is not the only thing that matters, and there are other mitigating circumstances there, so you can see this relationship break down or come back at periods of time. But if you just look at the long-term relationship over the past decade, it is pretty clear that as Treasury supply increases, so too do credit spreads.

Dan Krieter:

And I think that's really the point to take away from today's podcast is the Fed tapering asset purchases and ultimately ending them in 2022 will likely have an upward impact on credit spreads. Over the longer term, it will be slow, but it will have a widening influence. That's something to keep in mind as investors set their spread targets, particularly in 2022 when we expect the teeth of Fed tapering to really sink in.

Dan Belton:

Dan, I think that's just an interesting point to underscore that even if we don't see a "taper tantrum" proceed, any announcement of the Fed removing accommodation this year, we could and likely will still see a negative impact of the removal of Fed purchases on credit. And it's really not that surprising to see this relationship that you just described because it's really just operatively the opposite of quantitative easing. As the Fed takes Treasuries out of the market, credit spreads tend to narrow, and as the Fed puts Treasuries back into the market or allows treasuries to clear the market without them, spreads should be expected to widen all else equal.

Dan Krieter:

But the key point here, and I think the one that I want to demonstrate more than anything else is that even though this is well communicated and well expected by the market, that doesn't change the dynamic we're describing. The portfolio channel of QE and the tapering, which is its inverse, it happens mechanically and over time. It's not something that will be priced ahead of time. Do you agree with that statement?

Dan Belton:

Yeah.

Dan Krieter:

Well then, just to stick with the tapering theme here and wrap up very quickly, Dan, you did a study into previous episodes of tapering and what areas of the high quality spread market outperform during that time. I'm curious to hear what your study found.

Dan Belton:

It's largely what we would expect, but during the taper tantrum of late 2013, we saw broad credit spread decompression where higher rated corporates outperformed and lower rated corporates relatively underperformed. We also, from the perspective of the yield curve, we saw outperformance of both long and short end yields relative to the belly of the curve. So the belly is what really got hit the hardest. The 10-year point of the curve underperformed the most, whereas 3s and 30s, both relatively outperformed that part of the curve.

Dan Belton:

So I think that's fairly straightforward when you think about the impact of removal of quantitative easing on inflation and inflation expectations. That can explain the outperformance of the 30-year sector relative to 10s and then front end spreads you'd obviously expect to not be as impacted by quantitative easing.

Dan Belton:

So to us, this reinforces our preference to move up in quality and move maybe even shorter in duration.

Dan Krieter:

And that's certainly true in the tapering environment, but I think even looking just short-term because I think our conversation today was a long-time horizon in nature, looking at just our preference now to be up in quality. I think that the two are different. I think that this was a discussion on tapering because it's a very market relevant topic, and people increasingly trying to get their arms around what tapering is going to mean for credit spreads, but it's not this impact of tapering that's driving our current [inaudible 00:25:08] credit view. It's that there's just not that upward potential in credit that we talked about at the beginning of the podcast and that we're going to see, likely, pop wider here in the next couple of months on the back of either inflation or the lack thereof, either one, really, at this point.

Dan Krieter:

We're likely going to see a modest increase the next few months as data regarding the economic recovery starts to come out, whether that's heavy inflation or a disappoint through recovery where it doesn't look as robust as people thought. The only way that's not going to happen, like you talked about earlier, Dan, is that Goldilocks scenario which I just really have a hard time believing we're going to actually achieve.

Dan Krieter:

So once we get that pop wider, though, I would expect to be looking at a resumption of narrowing later in the year. It wouldn't surprise me to see that pop wider ultimately be retraced later in the year. But then, our discussion on tapering really starting to factor in in 2022, where we could see a return to a grind wider versus a pop wider based off of headlines like what we're expecting in the near term.

Dan Krieter:

Does that fall in line with what you're expecting as well?

Dan Belton:

I think you put it well earlier when you talked about getting to the teeth of the Fed taper and the real technical impact that this increase in Treasury supply is likely to have on spreads.

Dan Krieter:

All right. Well then on a quick programming note, we are going to be off next week. We have a monthly round table edition of the Macro Horizons podcast with Belton, myself, and the rest of the team. So we will be back here in two weeks and hopefully, Danny Belton will have himself a new Zoom recorder.

Dan Krieter:

Thanks for listening.

Dan Krieter:

Thanks for listening to Macro Horizons. Please visit us at bmocm.com/macro horizons. As we aspire to keep our strategy efforts as interactive as possible, we'd love to hear what you thought of today's episode. Please email us at daniel.belton@bemo.com. You can listen to this show and subscribe on Apple Podcasts or your favorite podcast provider.

Dan Krieter:

This show is supported by our team here at BMO, including the FICC Macro Strategy Group and BMO's marketing team. This show has been edited and produced by Puddle Creative.

Speaker 3:

This podcast has been prepared with the assistance of employees of Bank of Montreal, BMO Nesbitt Burns Incorporated, and BMO Capital Markets Corporation, together, BMO, who are involved in fixed income and foreign exchange sales and marketing efforts.

Speaker 3:

Accordingly, it should be considered to be a product of the fixed income and foreign exchange businesses generally and not a research report that reflects the views of disinterested research analysts. Not withstanding the foregoing, this podcast should not be construed as an offer or the solicitation of an offer to sell or to buy or subscribe for any particular product or services, including, without limitation, any commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. We are not soliciting any specific action based on this podcast. It is for the general information of our clients. It does not constitute a recommendation or suggestion that any investment for strategy reference herein may be suitable for you.

Speaker 3:

It does not take into account the particular investment objectives, financial conditions, or needs of individual clients. Nothing in this podcast constitutes investment, legal, accounting or tax advice or representation that any investment or strategy is suitable or appropriate to your unique circumstances or otherwise, it constitutes an opinion or a recommendation to you.

Speaker 3:

BMO is not providing advice regarding the value or advisability of trading in commodity interests, including futures contracts and commodity options or any other activity which would cause BMO or any of its affiliates to be considered a commodity trading advisor under the US Commodity Exchange Act.

Speaker 3:

BMO is not undertaking to act as a [inaudible 00:28:26] advisor to you or in your best interests in you to the extent applicable, or rely solely on advice from your qualified, independent representative, making hedging or trading decisions. This podcast is not to be relied upon in substitution for the exercise of independent judgment. You should conduct your own independent analysis of the matters referred to herein together with your qualified independent representative, if applicable.

Speaker 3:

BMO assumes no responsibility for verification of the information in this podcast. No representation or warranty is made as to the accuracy or completeness of such information. And BMO accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss arising from any use of or reliance on this podcast.

Speaker 3:

BMO assumes no obligation to correct or update this podcast. This podcast does not contain all information that may be required to evaluate any transaction or matter, and information may be available to BMO and/or its affiliates that is not reflected herein.

Speaker 3:

BMO and its affiliates may have positions long or short and affects transactions or make markets insecurities mentioned herein or provide advice or loans due or participate in the underwriting or restructuring of the obligations of issuers and companies mentioned herein.

Speaker 3:

Moreover, BMO's trading desks may have acted on the basis of the information in this podcast.

Speaker 3:

For further information, please go to bmocm.com/macrohorizons/legal.

 

Dan Krieter, CFA Director, Fixed Income Strategy
Dan Belton Vice President, Fixed Income Strategy, PHD

You might also be interested in