Expect Two Fed Rate Hikes In 2016 - Mohamed El-Erian - 18 Jan 16 | Gazunda

요약 보기

최근 변동성 확대는 단순한 일시적 조정이 아니라 과거의 인위적 저변동성 체제에서 벗어나는 전환 과정이며, 당분간 큰 등락이 반복될 것이라는 진단. 변동성 분석: VIX는 8월 매도세 수준에는 못 미치지만, 변동성의 변동성(volatility squared)이 커진 고변동성 체제에 들어섰다. 유동성이 제한된 상황에서 레버리지 청산이 이어질 수 있으며, 새로운 대규모 매수자가 나타나기 전까지 하락 시 반등이 약할 것으로 봤다. 유가와 주식: 유가와 주식의 강한 연관성은 믿지 않는다고 함. 둘 다 전 세계 성장 우려, 펀더멘털과 괴리된 밸류에이션, OPEC 스윙 프로듀서 상실이라는 더 큰 요인에 반응하고 있다고 봄. 채권 시장이 저성장을 가장 합리적으로 반영해 왔고, 유가·신흥국·하이일드 일부는 펀더멘털이 아닌 기술적 요인에 지배되고 있다고 평가. 연준: 존 윌리엄스 발언을 인용해 금리 인상 경로는 점진적이며 데이터 의존적이라는 점을 짚음. 경제지표만 보면 추가 인상이 맞지만, 금융시장 변동성에 과도하게 반응하면 과거처럼 가격을 펀더멘털에서 더 벌려놓는 실수를 반복할 수 있다고 우려. 2016년 연준 인상은 3~4회가 아니라 2회 정도로 예상. 경기침체: 2016년 성장률은 약 2%로 봄. 2017년 경기침체 확률은 약 30%로, 기준 시나리오는 아님. 고용 창출(최근 2년 약 600만 개), 대기 중인 현금, 기술 분야 투자 등을 근거로 경제 회복력을 과소평가하면 안 된다고 주장. 출연자 전망: 금융시장 정상화 과정은 매우 거칠 것이나 이는 불가피한 전환이라는 입장.

다듬은 글

※ 자동 자막 원문(다듬기 전)

01. you wrote a Bloomberg View piece this morning we were quoting it as well where you said quote the longer the volatility lasts the more likely it is to be accompanied by a durable decline in markets overall in the context of this though Muhammad it's interesting to note though if you look at the actual VIX index right the volatility index we're not anywhere near our August sell-off so what kind of alts are you talking about Muhammad so we're not there yet in terms of the Vics but we are in a regime of higher volatility with components of what I call and others have called volatile volatility so so think of it as squared and that will cause the leveraging in the system and it will do so in the context of limited liquidity so what people should expect is more volatility more ups and downs like we've seen this week with the buys to the downside until you can identify new buyers in size right and so you know we're talking with oliver Rennick our stocks reporter and he's like you know no one's saying yet by on the dip here by on the dip but you know do we have to wait until oil prices basically stabilize before we see this as a buying opportunity look I'm not a buyer of the strong connection between oil oil and equity I think both of them are responding to something much bigger and they're responding first to doubts about global economic growth second they're responding to valuations that had been decoupled from fundamentals and therefore they were vulnerable and thirdly they are responding to very specific things which in the case of oil is the loss of the swing producer in OPEC so rather than say its oil pushing n it is putting equities in equity portion oil I think both of them are responding to something much bigger and who is responding more rationally so I think the equity market so far as the most is more rational the most rational has been the fixed income market which has been signaling for a while concerned about low growth so that has been the most rational and you have certain components you and I have been talking about it for weeks and months that are completely unhinged oil elements of emerging markets elements of a high yield they're completely unhinged so they are technically dominated rather than fundamentally dominated so you have to imagine right Mohammed I mean you're about to come out with a book that focus up focuses on central bank policy you've got to imagine the central bankers around the world really watching carefully day by day what's happening John Williams in san francisco fed president made a speech earlier and Mohamed I want you to listen to what he said about you know the rate path given this volatility that doesn't mean we're going to do for funds rate increases in 2016 2017 kids were not that good as we were reminded earlier at forecasting and so what happens is the economy doesn't always play the way we expect play out the way we expect it so it's our policy is going to be gradual but to be data dependent okay so you hear that word again data dependent Muhammad but the fact of the matter is though the Fed has been repeatedly almost too optimistic their forecasts have been off by being too bullish about the economy are they really looking at the right data and evaluating it correctly and should they be still on a rape bike path you know but if you look only at economic data then they should be on a path for further hikes I don't think they'll do for three or four this year I think they'll do to but the economy has not been contaminated as yet by what's happening in the financial sector so the question becomes should they respond to the financial sector and that is what's really hard because in the past every time they've responded to financial volatility that made the underlying situation worse they've decoupled prices further from the fundamentals so I think this time around they're going to be focused much more on the economy yes they are data dependent but the data dependent about the economy was in the past they were very sensitive to financial volatility right but should they be now I mean given what we see in the first 15 days here should they be more sensitive now I don't think that we had a choice but to transition at some point from a very artificial regime of suppressed volatility to one of mono more volatility now that transition will never be painless it will be incredibly bumpy but it doesn't mean you stay in an artificial mode in which you're causing damage as well as benefit you know when bernanke embarked on qe2 in August he said August 2010 he said something very important he said it's about quote benefits costs and risks and the longer you stay in this artificial experimental regime right the lower the benefits to hide the customers so we had to transition at some point and of course it was going to be bumpy but that's part of what a transition is about Mohammed I've got to just ask you this point blank are we headed into a recession though so you asked me that a few months ago I said the probability of recession 2017 was thirty percent people thought that was a really high number I still think it's about thirty percent i do not think it's the baseline so this is a joining limousine in 2017 thirty percent in 2017 i think this year we get the two percent growth i think the real question is do we get the recession 2017 and i think it's about a thirty percent probability i haven't changed my assessment on that why not because i think people underestimate the resilience of this economy you know that first we have become an employment machine we've created almost six million jobs in the last two years well into well into the recovery second there's a ton of cash on the sideline that's not yet deployed in productive and offensive reasons as i call it third there's exciting stuff going on on the technology side so i don't think that we should give up on the economy but what we need to do is normalize financial markets that have been excessively decoupled from fundamental