Global Liquidity Index (GLI) June 2014 Update

by Michael J. Howell13. June 2014 16:40
The Global Liquidity Cycle fell again to end-May 2014 to a below-par index value of 47.0 (‘normal’ range 0- 100), according to our monthly GLI (Global Liquidity Indexes). These indexes comprise all Central Bank interventions, all cross-border financial capital flows and all private sector liquidity creation, including shadow banks and corporate cash inflows, across some 80 economies Worldwide. This is now the second consecutive month of below-average World liquidity. Liquidity is a leading indicator that points to heightened tensions in financial markets and real economies 6-12 months ahead. The GLI has fallen noticeably since late-2013.


New Report: Running Out of Dollars?

by Michael J. Howell3. June 2014 20:37
US Tapering, Chinese Tightening and Japanese and European 'Torporing' are squeezing Global Liquidity. On top, the narrowing US foreign deficit is shutting off even this depleted flow from moving overseas. We argue that liquidity risks are rising, possibly magnified by shadow banks, and certainly reflected in collapsing bond risk premia this year. Bottom line, a strong dollar means less Global Liqudiity and greater market risks.


Emerging Markets Liquidity/ Capital Flows May 2014 Data Release

by Michael J. Howell15. May 2014 21:34
Emerging Market Liquidity remains weak according to our latest GLI data. End-April saw aggregate EM liquidity fall to an index score of 18.5 from 22.9 in March (‘normal’ range 0-100). EM liquidity is therefore below its trend and decelerating. Notably, Chinese liquidity slumped to an index value of 28.7. Typically, this is an unattractive investment environment and foreshadows an upcoming period of economic weakness.


The Drain from Ukraine!

by Michael J. Howell13. May 2014 23:17
Russia's finances are looking grim. Our latest capital flow data shows that a net US$80 billion has left Russia over the last 12 months, with US$120 billion at annualised rate exiting last month alone. The net result is that our measures of Russian internal liquidity measures have halved in recent months to an index score of 28.4 ('normal' range 0-100) at end-April. The exiting cash has seemingly avoided the US dollar, possibly for fear of tougher US sanctions on Russian money, and instead piled into the Euro and sterling. This may make a Eurozone rate cut next month more certain, and it has catapulted capital inflows into the UK higher. On our CBC indexes, these now stand at 80, ('normal' range 0-100). For the brave, Russian assets must be a long-term buy. For the faint-hearted, stick with high-end London real estate!


Japanese Liquidity....Bad Signs!

by Michael J. Howell13. May 2014 17:19
According to our latest GLI index data, Japanese Liquidity has definitively weakened (64.8, or down from 91.1 last September, 'normal' range 0-100) over the past six months, led downwards by falling private sector cash flows (76.8 to 37.2 over same period). This may explain the weakness in Japanese equities. The implication is that either Abenomics is not working, or China’s economic slowdown is imparting a negative drag. This requires the BoJ to renew its easing and push the Yen lower.


May 2014 Release Global Liquidity Indexes GLIs

by Michael J. Howell13. May 2014 17:15
The Global Liquidity Cycle continues to slip lower according to our latest GLI estimates. End-April 2014 data show a move down to 45.8 from 52.8 ('normal' range 0-100). Global Liquidity is therefore below trend and decelerating. Risks are rising. Typically, market volatility tends to pick up within six months. The causes are widely-spread: Central Bank liquidity injections tightened again to 33.4 in April, with almost two-thirds of policy-makers by number now running 'tight' quantity policies. The most active of the key Central Banks withdrawing net stimulus last month were the US, Japan and China.


Global Liquidity Update

What Is Important?

by Michael J. Howell20. April 2014 14:04
Traditional economic and financial analysis in our view falls short. A recent IMF study showed that out of 88 recessions Worldwide since 2010, the economics consensus had only managed to predict 11 three months before the year in question, and still 3 out of the 11 were mistakes: a hit rate of less than 10%. So what is missing! We concentrate on different things. Here is a quick re-cap: # we believe in the quality theory of money, rather than the quantity theory. Here money circulates because it has value, it does not have value because it circulates. This means that changes in its value (the exchange rate) cause monetary velocity to speed up and slow down # consequently changes in monetary velocity and changes in cross-border capital flows (which far outstrip trade flows) combine to disrupt asset markets, and should ultimately but not always affect the real economy through duration adjustment via the changing tempo of capital spending # a distinct financial cycle exists which can differ from the more familiar economic cycle # liquidity is money in the form of means of purchase, whereas savings is money as means of settlement. Both are important but at different points on the monetary circuit. Imbalances between liquidity and savings are the main cause behind swings in the financial cycle # separating liquidity from savings reflects a flow of funds view of the World, where sources of funds precede uses of funds and where flows and stocks are tied together for consistency. In other words, debt flows cannot continue to build for ever # the 'price of money' is the exchange rate not the interest rate. The latter is NOT set by Central Banks but by the market based on the marginal productivity of capital. Central Banks are monopoly supplies of means of settlement money in crises # monitoring the flow of liquidity and the pattern of cross-border flows is critical to understand the asset economy and the real economy. Liquidity is a leading indicator and we put much effort into tracking its movements across 80 economies on a monthly basis. These GLI (Global Liquidity Indexes) have been regularly produced since the mid-1980s and are available by subscription.

Tags: ,

If Five Was Seven

by Michael J. Howell20. April 2014 12:23
Chinese Liquidity touched a lowlish index level of 31.1 in March according to our GLI data. Consistent with these persistently low macro-liquidity conditions, the Chinese State Statistics Bureau reported a weak Q1 GDP number. Or did they? The headlines trumpeted another 7.4% quarterly growth rate. All seemingly fine, except that this misleading number is a year-on-year increase and not a quarter-on-quarter one. Using quarterly, annualised data, Chinese GDP slowed markedly in Q1, 2014 to a 5.7% growth rate, or barely, above trend, and a sharp deceleration from the Q3, 2013 rate of 9.5% and the Q4 7.0% clip. Middling growth for the Middle Kingdom! Tight Liquidity plainly matters. If investors are realistic they must now cut at least 2-3% points from consensus Chinese GDP growth expectations for 2014.


Are EM Problems Really Structural?

by Michael J. Howell14. April 2014 13:09

In a just-released report we use Total Factor Productivity (TFP) data to highlight the worrying decline in the economic efficiency of many EM economies, notably China. The chart below highlights China and shows the essential problem. TFP measures 'true' value-added. Chinese TFP added 8% points to GDP growth in the early 2000s, but now TFP contributes nothing and is below US TFP. In short, China's true efficiency-adjusted growth rate is less than America's. But isn't this what financial markets have been trying to tell us?

Chinese and US Total Factor Productivity (% point contribution to GDP Growth)


Chinese Liquidity - End-March 2014 Data Released

by Michael J. Howell14. April 2014 12:48


Copyright © - All rights reserved