Simon Johnson: The Fed Just Muppeted Us All

Yes, I am going to start using Muppet as a verb, thanks for asking.

I was very pleased with the outcome of the Stress Tests last week.  Not that I actually read any of results, which I consider to be highly-massaged opium for the masses.  Rather, as an asset allocator (as opposed to a policy wonk) I was very happy with how the market reacted to “the news” – literally the only thing that truly matters for someone in my profession.  having a 4% position in the Berkshire B’s ($BRK-B) and a 3% position in JPMorgan ($JPM) certainly didn’t hurt my mood either.

But professional bank scold Simon Johnson has a different take on what we were fed last week.  In his view, allowing the banks leeway on capital reserves will only open up the door to the next disaster – a matter of when rather than if.  He writes in Bloomberg the following:

The truly dreadful news last week was conveyed in the results of the Federal Reserve’s latest bank stress tests. As presented by the Fed, most of the news was good. Some large financial institutions were judged likely to have sufficient equity capital even if the U.S. economy were to experience a significant downturn. With that, banks such as JPMorgan Chase & Co. were allowed to increase their dividends and buy back shares. Naturally, bank stocks rallied.

But there’s a problem, and it’s not a small one. If you buy the Fed’s view of what is likely to constitute stress, there is some justification for its action. Even then, you should ask the question that Anat Admati, a Stanford University finance professor, has been pressing: Why would we let banks reduce their capital in the face of so much financial and economic uncertainty around the world? If you leave shareholder equity on bank balance sheets, it still belongs to shareholders. Let it stay there as loss-absorbing capital in case the world turns nasty again.

Reducing bank capital, according to Admati and her colleagues, doesn’t help the economy. Bankers like lower capital levels because their pay is based on return-on-capital unadjusted for risk. Shareholders are willing to go along either because they don’t understand the risks of thinly capitalized and therefore highly leveraged businesses, or they expect to share in the downside protection that will be provided by the government.

Johnson goes on to explain that the rigors of the test make some pretty optimistic assumptions in terms of Europe’s worst-case scenario etc.  He may be right, but for now, the bulls got hooked up large on the heels of this thing.  Look at the scoreboard.



Tags: ,

This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

Wealthcast Media, an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here:

Please see disclosures here.

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web
  1. pinewswire commented on Sep 22

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More to that Topic: […]

  2. commented on Oct 03

    … [Trackback]

    […] There you will find 67587 additional Info to that Topic: […]

  3. easyweb td online banking commented on Dec 05

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More on that Topic: […]

  4. fake watches commented on Dec 29

    … [Trackback]

    […] There you can find 61063 additional Information on that Topic: […]

  5. replica watch commented on Dec 31

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More Info here on that Topic: […]

  6. vaping cbd for anxiety commented on Jan 02

    … [Trackback]

    […] There you can find 32620 more Info to that Topic: […]