@Inverse_Fintwit

The extent of my own ignorance is infinite, and I know enough to the point where I know nothing at all.

Canazuela
Joined February 2010
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
Art, as a representation of the last thing humans can be better at than machines, will become more valuable than ever before. Neil Gaiman’s advice to graduating students seems more apt than when he gave the speech originally: “Life is sometimes hard. Things go wrong, in life and in love and in business and in friendship and in health and in all the other ways that life can go wrong. And when things get tough, this is what you should do. Make good art. I’m serious. Husband runs off with a politician? Make good art. Leg crushed and then eaten by mutated boa constrictor? Make good art. IRS on your trail? Make good art. Cat exploded? Make good art. Somebody on the Internet thinks what you do is stupid or evil or it’s all been done before? Make good art. Probably things will work out somehow, and eventually time will take the sting away, but that doesn’t matter. Do what only you do best. Make good art. Make it on the good days too. And Fifthly, while you are at it, make your art. Do the stuff that only you can do. […] The old rules are crumbling and nobody knows what the new rules are. So make up your own rules. Someone asked me recently how to do something she thought was going to be difficult, in this case recording an audio book, and I suggested she pretend that she was someone who could do it. Not pretend to do it, but pretend she was someone who could. She put up a notice to this effect on the studio wall, and she said it helped. So be wise, because the world needs more wisdom, and if you cannot be wise, pretend to be someone who is wise, and then just behave like they would. And now go, and make interesting mistakes, make amazing mistakes, make glorious and fantastic mistakes. Break rules. Leave the world more interesting for your being here. Make good art.” If you’re complaining about AI’s impact on art, it just means you were probably not making only the stuff you can do. And, yes, that will continue to be worth less and less.
Every time I see stuff like this I just see a status war. People used to gain approval and power from making art, and now they are no longer valuable to others through this method, so there is a huge push to stigmatize the competitor and maintain their old position
63
24
11
395
69,054
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
If this can’t save bonds, nothing will
7
110
31
848
60,190
- The Fed has finished its cutting cycle. - Housing is soft - Energy prices have risen alongside other commodities - Inflation is expected to moderate but Fed is worried expectations could rise - The market is pricing in successive hikes - The date is June 2008
7
16
5
220
33,482
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
250
597
120
5,322
1,826,064
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
This is a very interesting avenue of thought for me. Few thoughts: 1. The level of NGDP being an anchor for yields is reasonable to me, because of the composition of NGDP. NGDP = Labor Growth + Output/Worker Growth + Inflation When you look at contribution to NGDP delta of those things— it’s the labor that matters the most, the inflation, then productivity— particularly around policy cycles. Labour and inflation matter most in and around policy cycles. After all, the Fed is explicitly managing policy to optimise for labor and inflation. So policy rates, which are really 70-90% of 10Y yield changes, should be pretty responsive to changes in NGDP, because NGDP is reflecting the changes in the variables the Fed cares about. Said differently—NGDP = labor + inflation (mostly), and Policy Change = Labor + Inflation (mostly). 2. While I think the above is true, I think using NGDP alone as a standalone measure of fair value for bonds is too reductionistic. Can it be used in an ensemble? Yes. But is it a precise estimate for 10Y? Don’t be a silly goose. NGDP basically just gives you a sense of the underlying drivers of the Fed’s decision making. If it is VERY at odds with 10Y/policy rates, that’s a trading opportunity perhaps. I don’t think you should nitpick over a few bps of deviation
The thumbrule that says that the 10-year treasury yield should be roughly equal to nGDP growth is based on a cherry-picked historical anomaly. It only held true during a period in the mid-to-late 1990s, in the aftermath of the Volcker monetary tightness (when the 10-yr rate was actually higher than nGDP growth). During the expansions of the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 2000s, and 2010s, the 10-year was typically 2%-3% points below nGDP growth. Today, that would suggest a 4%-5% yield. The claim that rates should be 6%-7% today b/c that's where nGDP growth is are even more dubious when considering current wage growth. For most of post-war history, 10-yr rates were 2%-3% below aggregate wage (COE) growth. That includes the boom of the late 1990s, which saw very strong growth. The numbers on that front may improve from here, but so far, they've been quite weak, which would suggest a 10-yr yield well below current levels.
2
5
35
4,147
Stress at the lowest rung of junk-rated US debt is starting to make itself known. CCC (Caa in the chart) continues to to push higher, with the gap to BB-rated (the highest rung of junk) on the cusp of 700bps.
11
26
7
191
29,471
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
From today's Shrubstack: "Inflation in August was lower in Zimbabwe than the UK and the US. We used to afraid of becoming Zimbabwe, but soon we will be aspiring to become Zimbabwe. Can't make this up." 🤭🌳
23
38
7
354
31,774
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
we let ze long-end of ze bond market do ze tightening ya
10
9
248
16,006
lmao SPX about to either have history's biggest rally or a genuinely rough Q4
18
16
3
185
13,364
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
ELECTION SPECIAL - BRAZIL EDITION This Meme is so funny, yet hides so much pain 🥹🌳 shrubstack.com/p/election-sp…
13
9
1
140
62,472
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
Nobody is "losing the end" of the bond curve. The yield curve is flat, not steep. Rather, some people are losing the argument for what interest rates should be in this environment and the market is adjusting accordingly. Nothing stops this train.
135
196
25
2,649
218,159
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
Yup - better than expected
Sept per my monthly breakdown doesn't end until next week but I thought I'd post the Federal tax withholding data now since it is Labor Data week. After a summer lull - employment incomes are definitely picking up again. FWIW.
1
5
1
64
12,946
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
I expect quarter-end pension rebalancing to weigh on equity rallies and create demand for bonds through Sept 30. My near-term equity bias is therefore defensive: I expect rebounds to encounter allocation-related selling, making sustained upside harder to achieve while that supply is being absorbed. As of the Sept 28 close, $SPX total-return index had gained 2.72% this quarter, while my AGG total-return proxy had lost 3.39% That 6.11 percentage point gap would lift an unrebalanced 60/40 portfolio to approximately 61.46% equities. In my simplified US defined-benefit pension model, $ 9.6tn of assets and an assumed 1/6 to 1/3 execution fraction imply $23.5–46.9bn of equity sales. This estimates the rebalance as a whole; the amount still to trade on Sept 29–30 is unknown, and the equity sleeve includes exposures beyond US stocks. The pension component is countercyclical. With bond returns unchanged, further equity strength increases the required sale, while equity weakness reduces it. I therefore expect this flow to lean against rallies. I expect downside risk to increase if weakening trend signals and rising RV bring additional systematic sellers into the market. A calm, stable market can attract systematic buying that absorbs part of the pension supply. The Sept 30 PCE release will be the main test of this view. Lower yields could support equity valuations while pensions buy bonds; renewed yield pressure could undermine both assets. I would become less defensive if equities hold their gains despite closing supply, particularly alongside falling yields. Persistent selling accompanied by rising volatility and deteriorating trend signals would strengthen my bearish near-term view. Interestingly sunday's weekly positioning was the opposite bet. Customers paid about 25 million usd for a financed breakout above the Sept high of 7782, with a breakeven at 7744, real payout only above 7850 and a probability of 49.18% for a settlement above 7782 against 40.08% based on market prices. The stated risk was a settlement between the 7653 dealer flip and the 7744 breakeven, a zone holding 24.53% of the probability where the book bleeds and dealers still amplify dips. Monday closed at 7683.69, inside that zone. For Tuesday and Wednesday both views collide, because the pension sale of 23.5 to 46.9 billion USD is the flow that leans against exactly the rally the weekly book expects, and it grows with every point of strength. So the breakout has been deferred, not cancelled. If 7653 holds through the quarter-end close and the PCE print, the supply clears and dealer short gamma above spot is still there to amplify a move into October. If 7653 breaks, dealers turn long gamma below it, the short put block from 7500 to 7655 becomes the live risk and the defensive view takes over.
7
11
1
80
9,307
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
You should be trading futures Tlt is a shit trade No tax advantages It’s a 20 year nobody trades that It doesn’t react to news in real time and offered no mark to market You’re a bag holder of a shitty etf You’re not a master of trading duration for the first time in your life
34
16
3
379
46,252
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
It isn’t so much a surprise what VIX is or isn’t doing. The surprise is how low SPX realized volatility remains given what we’re seeing in bonds, currencies, geopolitics, etc. That said, rates vol and FX vol almost always bleed into equity vol eventually, so caution remains warranted. Whether implied vol is underpriced relative to future realized vol remains to be seen, but the cost to insure a portfolio may still be quite reasonable here.
9
1
66
6,593
Gee, sure would suck if a random thematic unwind were to happen at this level of index premium to equal weight driven by narrow breadth. Not that we've seen it before...
6
10
1
112
14,161
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
Replying to @ErichReimer
No this is always what happens. Credit risk kills the banks so banks hyper sensitive to risks from overlevered subprime consumers, become careful with lending, in the process learning to ignore interest rate risk due to lowflation 2010s+easy money -> interest rate risk kills SVB/FRC/kind of credit suisse -> now banks are careful about interest rate risk and are likely ignoring another area that will be problematic. We always solve for the last crisis but lightening doesn’t strike twice in the same spot. At least not consecutively
4
27
3,659
Inverse Fintwit retweeted
Should You BTFD in Stocks or Short the Next Downtrend? 🧵 The answer depends on where you are in the business cycle. I share our assessment of business cycle conditions and some empirics around trading those conditions. 1/18
1
9
1
53
5,996