The US Repo cavalry arrives with the “Lagarde bond yield bounce”

This has been an extraordinary week, so much so that I am going to relegate the shambles that was the ECB action yesterday as President Lagarde lived down to all my criticisms of her to second place. This is because at around 5pm London time yesterday the US Cavalry arrived so let me hand you over to the New York Federal Reserve,

As a part of its $60 billion reserve management purchases for the monthly period beginning March 13, 2020 and continuing through April 13, 2020, the Desk will conduct purchases across a range of maturities to roughly match the maturity composition of Treasury securities outstanding.  Specifically, the Desk plans to distribute reserve management purchases across eleven sectors, including nominal coupons, bills, Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities, and Floating Rate Notes

So most of the “not QE” is now outright QE ar least for now and we know what tends to happen to such temporary moves. After all weren’t the daily Repos supposed to be temporary when they started last September?

Also in another very familiar theme we see that any attempt at a “taper” seems to morph into an expansion.

Today, March 12, 2020, the Desk will offer $500 billion in a three-month repo operation at 1:30 pm ET that will settle on March 13, 2020.  Tomorrow, the Desk will further offer $500 billion in a three-month repo operation and $500 billion in a one-month repo operation for same day settlement.  Three-month and one-month repo operations for $500 billion will be offered on a weekly basis for the remainder of the monthly schedule.

There is a lot of numbers bingo there and many on social media either fell for it or chose to fall for it by declaring an extra US $1.5 trillion of QE. But let us take the advice of Kylie Minogue.

I’m breaking it down
I’m not the same

We had to wait less than an hour to discover that the first Repo was for US $78.4 billion. So we saw that the Fed has in fact finally taken my advice and made sure it was offering too much to find out as much as possible what the true state of play is. Rather late in the day though as it is doing it in an equity market inspired panic as opposed ti thinking ahead. As to QE we have something of a US $78.4 as an 84 day Repo qualifies for me in spite of officially being “not QE” plus we have an Operation Twist style extension of average maturity on the existing US $60 billion a month.

I do not know what today’s Repo allocations will be only that bids will be filled in full up to the US $500 billion maximum. Should they be like last night’s then we will see a US $225 billion increase in QE which is quite some distance from many claims. Of course more or less might be taken.

What is really happening here?

There is an elephant in the room and it was sung about by Aloe Blacc

I need a dollar dollar, a dollar is what I need
Hey hey
Well I need a dollar dollar, a dollar is what I need
Hey hey
And I said I need dollar dollar, a dollar is what I need
And if I share with you my story would you share your dollar with me

Indeed he was especially prescient here.

Bad times are comin’ and I reap what I don’t sow
Hey hey
Well let me tell you somethin’ all that glitters ain’t gold
Hey hey

Actually at US $1583 gold is not glittering much either with rumours abounding that it is being sold to help settle margin payments elsewhere. In a crisis people want the security of King Dollar or the world’s reserve currency. This adds to the existing dollar shortage which I wrote about on the 25th of September 2018, and to the issue last September when a Euro area bank had to go to the US Federal Reserve for dollars.

This brings us to the banks who are the drivers of this. The suspicion is that at a minimum some cannot get dollars in the usual way via markets and thus have to go to the US Federal Reserve. With markets being as they have ( oil, bonds and equities) frankly I would not be surprised if some banks are in trouble. On that note I see one at least has made an official denial of such problems already today.

FRANKFURT (Reuters) – Deutsche Bank’s <DBKGn.DE> top executives sought to assure employees and investors over its ability to weather the coronavirus as shares in the German lender hit a new low on Thursday amid a wider stock market sell-off.

Christian Sewing, chief executive of Germany’s largest bank, told employees in a memo seen by Reuters that Deutsche Bank’s business was in “good shape as the positive momentum of the fourth quarter has continued”.

A Communications Break Down at the ECB

There was some surprise at the lack of much action from the ECB yesterday highlighted by the fact that even more bank subsidies were accompanied by further falls in bank share prices. But it got worse and then much worse. The worse bit was when the ECB press officer had to correct President Lagarde about the size of the extra QE announced as it was 120 billion Euros and not 100 billion. So the claim that Christine Lagarde was good at reading off a teleprompter crashed and burned, But then things got even worse.

Well, we will be there, as I said earlier on, using full flexibility, but we are not here to close spreads[1]. This is not the function or the mission of the ECB.

Curious because you could summarise the term of her “Whatever it takes” predecessor as doing exactly that. Rather than me describe the issue let me hand you over to the correction issued by the ECB.

[Statement in CNBC interview after press conference:] I am fully committed to avoid any fragmentation in a difficult moment for the euro area. High spreads due to the coronavirus impair the transmission of monetary policy. We will use the flexibility embedded in the asset purchase programme, including within the public sector purchase programme.

By down she meant up etc….

This was issued because the statement detonated across Euro area bond markets with the Italian ten-year yield going from 1.3% to 1.8%. Actually as a result of what no doubt will be called “The Lagarde Bounce” the ten-year yield is now 1.88%. So just as the corona virus ravaged Italy needs a helping hand Christine Lagarde has kicked it in the teeth. In fact just like she did to Greece and Argentina. You might think there was a theme there and that such a theme would have stopped her appointment. But no and of course so much of the media joined in by lauding it. Sadly we have a sort of Marie Antoinette theme in play.

Meanwhile two bank subsidies were announced. Firstly the new liquidity measures announced that via the TLTRO banks will be able to get cash at interest-rates as low as -0.75% compared to the -0.5% of everyone else. As Gollum would say.

We wants it, we needs it. Must have the precious.

Also there was something tucked away in the rules so let me hand you over to JohannesBorgen on twitter

As pointed out by @borisg_work I forgot to remove our Brexited friends, so RWA are more likely around 14tn now (anyone has an accurate recent # i’m interested) which suggest between 500bn and 600bn – still very big!

Changes in the Risk Weighted Assets rules meant a boost of around 500 billion Euros of capital relief. He got a boost as the ECB press officer retweeted him so perhaps he explained their own policy to them.

Comment

As you can see this is a bit of a shambles. If you argue that this could be like 2008 then the central planners at least managed a concerted fusillade. This time around they are taking individual pop shots and in at least one case have shot themselves in the foot. Actually at the ECB things are going from bad to worse.

@bancaditalia  governor #Visco @ecb  will do more if needed and can front load purchases if needed. Thursday decision was “not the final word” and ECB policy is aimed to ensure adequate liquidity. in exclusive interview with @BloombergTV

Let me deal with it in terms of bullet points.

  1. Presumably the Governor of the Bank of Italy is furious
  2. What is the point of declaring a number and then saying not only it might be larger but also the timing could be faster only 24 hours later?
  3. Actually they declared the next meeting would not be until April Fools Day less then 24 hours ago.
  4. QE reduces bond market liquidity.

Looking at markets then equity markets are surging as I type this because the stimulus fairy has been deployed. Is that the same stimulus fairy that was supposed to appear in the Euro area yesterday or a different one please? But that is my point because as the swings get wider I am more concerned about a fund or funds blowing up. This week alone we have seen wild swings in the bond,oil,equity and gold markets so in fact I am surprised it has not happened and wonder if we are being told the whole truth?

Welcome to the oil price shock of 2020

Today is one where we are mulling how something which in isolation is good news has led to so much financial market distress overnight and this morning. So much so that for once comparisons with 2008 and the credit crunch have some credibility.

And I felt a rush like a rolling bolt of thunder
Spinning my head around and taking my body under
Oh, what a night ( The Four Seasons)

Just as people were getting ready for markets to be impacted by the lock down of Lombardy and other regions in Italy there was a Mexican stand-off in the oil market. This came on top of what seemed at the time large falls on Friday where depending on which oil benchmark you looked at the fall was either 9% or 10%.Then there was this.

DUBAI, March 8 (Reuters) – Saudi Arabia, the world’s top oil exporter, plans to raise its crude oil production significantly above 10 million barrels per day (bpd) in April, after the collapse of the OPEC supply cut agreement with Russia, two sources told Reuters on Sunday.

State oil giant Aramco will boost its crude output after the current OPEC+ cut deal expires at the end of March, the sources said.

Whilst they are playing a game of who blinks first the oil price has collapsed. From Platts Oil

New York — Crude futures tumbled roughly 30% on the open Sunday evening, following news that Saudi Aramco cut its Official Selling Prices for April delivery. ICE front-month Brent fell $14.25 on the open to $31.02/b, before climbing back to trade around $35.22/b at 2238 GMT. NYMEX front-month crude futures fell $11.28 to $30/b on the open, before rising to trade at around $32.00/b.

The Real Economy

Let us get straight to the positive impact of this because in the madness so many are missing it.

We find that a 10 percent increase in global oil inflation increases, on average, domestic inflation by about 0.4
percentage point on impact, with the effect vanishing after two years and being similar between advanced and developing economies. We also find that the effect is asymmetric, with positive oil price shocks having a larger effect than negative ones. ( IMF 2017 Working Paper )

There is plenty of food for thought in the reduced relative impact of lower oil prices for those who believe they are passed on with less enthusiasm and sometimes not passed on at all. But if the IMF are right we will see a reduction in inflation of around 0.6% should oil prices remain here.

As to the impact on economic growth the literature has got rather confused as this from the Bank of Spain in 2016 shows.

Although our findings point to a negative influence from oil price increases on economic growth, this phenomenon is far from being stable and has gone through different phases over time. Further research is necessary to fathom this complex relationship.

Let me give you an example of how it will work which is via higher real wages. Of course central bankers do not want to tell us that because they are trying to raise inflation and are hoping people will not spot that lower real wages will likely be a consequence. To be fair to the IMF it does manage to give us a good laugh.

The impact of oil price shocks, however,
has declined over time due in large part to a better conduct of monetary policy.

That does give us the next link in the story but before we get there let me give you two major problems right now which have links. The first is that the oil price Mexican stand-off has a silent player which is the US shale oil industry. As I have pointed out before it runs on a cash flow business model which has just seen likely future flows of cash drop by a third.

Now we get to the second impact which is on credit markets. Here is WordOil on this and remember this is from Thursday.

NEW YORK (Bloomberg) –Troubled oil and gas companies may have a hard time persuading their bankers to keep extending credit as the outlook darkens for energy, potentially leading to more bankruptcies in the already-beleaguered sector.

Lenders evaluate the value of oil reserves used as collateral for bank loans twice a year, a process that’s not likely to go well amid weak commodity prices, falling demand, shuttered capital markets and fears of coronavirus dampening global growth. Banks may cut their lending to cash-starved energy companies by 10% to 20% this spring, according to investors and analysts.

That will all have got a lot worse on Friday and accelerated today. I think you can all see the problem for the shale oil producers but the issue is now so large it will pose a risk to some of those who have lent them the money.

US oil/junk bonds: busts to show folly of last reboot ( FT Energy )

I am not sure where the FT is going with this bit though.

There will be no shortage of capital standing ready to recapitalise the energy sector….

Perhaps they have a pair of glasses like the ones worn by Zaphod Beeblebrox in The Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy. Meanwhile back in the real world there was this before the latest falls.

More than one-third of high-yield energy debt is trading at distressed levels. Oil and gas producers with bonds trading with double-digit yields include California Resources Corp., Range Resources Corp., Southwestern Energy Co., Antero Resources Corp., Comstock Resources Inc., Extraction Oil & Gas Inc. and Oasis Petroleum Inc. ( World Oil)

Central Banks

As the oil price news arrived central bankers will have been getting text messages to come into work early. Let me explain why. Firstly we know that some credit markets were already stressed and that the US Federal Reserve had been fiddling while Rome burns as people sang along with Aloe Blacc.

I need a dollar, dollar a dollar is what I need
hey hey
Well I need a dollar, dollar a dollar is what I need
hey hey
And I said I need dollar dollar, a dollar is what I need.

Whoever decided to taper the fortnightly Repo operations to US $20 billion had enough issues when US $70 billion was requested on Thursday, now I guess he or she is not answering the phone. Anyway the role of a central bank in a crisis like this is to be lender of last resort and splash the cash. At the same time it should be doing emergency investigations to discover the true state of affairs in terms of solvency.

This is because some funds and maybe even banks must have been hit hard by this and may go under. Anyone long oil has obvious problems and if that is combined with oil lending it must look dreadful. If anyone has geared positions we could be facing another Long-Term Capital Management. Meanwhile in unrelated news has anyone mentioned the derivatives book of Deutsche Bank lately?

The spectre of more interest-rate cuts hangs over us like a sword of damocles. I type that because I think they will make things worse rather than better and central banks would be better employed with the liquidity issues above. They are much less glamorous but are certainly more effective in this type of crisis. Frankly I think further interest-rate cuts will only make things worse.

Comment

I have covered a lot of ground today but let me move onto home turf. We can also look at things via bond yields and it feels like ages ago that I marked your cards when it was only last Thursday! Anyway we have been on this case for years.

Treasury 10-Year Note Yield Slides Below 0.5% for First Time ( @DiMartinoBooth)

Yes it was only early last week that we noted a record low as it went below 1%. Meanwhile that was last night and this is now.

Overnight the US 10-year traded 0.33%, under 0.44% now. The longbond traded down to 0.70% overnight. The bond futures were up over 12 points. Now trading 0.85%. Note how “gappy” this chart is. Liquidity is an issue. ( @biancoresearch )

This really matters and not in the way you may be thinking. The obvious move is that if you are long bonds you have again done really well and congratulations. Also there is basically no yield these days as for example, my home country the UK has seen a negative Gilt yield this morning around the two-year maturity.

But the real hammer on the nail will not be in price ( interest-rates) it will be in quantity as some places will be unable to lend today. Some of it will be predictable ( oil) but in these situations there is usually something as well from left field. So let me end this part Hill Street Blues style.

Let’s be careful out there

Podcast

I have not mentioned stock markets today but I was on the case of bank shares in my weekly podcast. Because at these yields and interest-rates they lack a business model.

 

 

 

Why is the US Repo crisis ongoing?

The US Repo crisis is something that seems to turn up every day, or if you prefer as often as we are told there is a solution to trade war between the US and China. On Friday the New York Federal Reserve or Fed provided another US $72.8 billion of overnight liquidity in return for Treasury Bonds ( US $56.1 billion) and Mortgage-Backed Securities ( US $16.7 billion). So something is still going on in spite of the fact that we have two monthly plus Repos ( 42 days) for US $25 billion each in play and 3 fortnightly ones totalling around US $59 billion. So quite a bit of liquidity continues to be deployed and this is before we get to the Treasury Bill purchases.

In accordance with this directive, the Desk plans to purchase Treasury bills at an initial pace of approximately $60 billion per month, starting with the period from mid-October to mid-November.

As an example Friday saw some US $7.525 billion of these bought. So the sums are getting larger.

How did this start?

The Bank for International Settlements or BIS which is the central bankers central bank puts it like this.

On 17 September, the secured overnight funding rate (SOFR) – the new, repo market-based, US dollar overnight reference rate – more than doubled, and the intraday range jumped to about 700 basis points. Intraday volatility in the federal funds rate was also unusually high. The reasons for this dislocation have been extensively debated; explanations include a due date for US corporate taxes and a large settlement of US Treasury securities. Yet none of these temporary factors can fully explain the exceptional jump in repo rates.

Indeed, as for a start the issue has proved to be anything but temporary.

Where the BIS view gets more interesting is via the role of the banks or rather a small group of them.

US repo markets currently rely heavily on four banks as marginal lenders. As the composition of their liquid assets became more skewed towards US Treasuries, their ability to supply funding at short notice in repo markets was diminished.

As the supply of reserves fell in the QT or Quantitative Tightening era they stepped up to the plate on a grand scale.

As repo rates started to increase above the IOER from mid-2018 owing to the large issuance of Treasuries, a remarkable shift took place: the US banking system as a whole, hitherto a net provider of collateral, became a net provider of funds to repo markets. The four largest US banks specifically turned into key players: their net lending position (reverse repo assets minus repo liabilities) increased quickly, reaching about $300 billion at end-June 2019 . At the same time, the next largest 25 banks reduced their demand for repo funding, turning the net repo position of the banking sector positive (centre panel, dashed line).

So things became more vulnerable as we note this.

At the same time, the four largest banks held only about 25% of reserves (ie funding that they could supply at short notice in repo markets).

Then demand for Repo funding was affected by the US Treasury.

After the debt ceiling was suspended in early August 2019, the US Treasury quickly set out to rebuild its dwindling cash balances, draining more than $120 billion of reserves in the 30 days between 14 August and 17 September alone, and half of this amount in the last week of that period. By comparison, while the Federal Reserve runoff removed about five times this amount, it did so over almost two years

As you can see the drain from QT was added to in spite of the fact that the market had become more vulnerable due to the lack of players. There was a clear lack of joined up thinking at play and perhaps a lack of any thinking at all. A factor here was something the BIS identifies for the banks.

For instance, the internal processes and knowledge that banks need to ensure prompt and smooth market operations may start to decay. This could take the form of staff inexperience and fewer market-makers, slowing internal processes

After a decade the experienced hands had in general moved on.

But it was not enough to collapse the house of cards. There were other nudges as well on the horizon.

Market commentary suggests that, in preceding quarters, leveraged players (eg hedge funds) were increasing their demand for Treasury repos to fund arbitrage trades between cash bonds and derivatives. Since 2017, MMFs have been lending to a broader range of repo counterparties, including hedge funds, potentially obtaining higher returns.

So hedge funds were playing in the market but as it happened were not an issue for a while as the US Money Market Funds (MMF) turned up. But then they didn’t.

 During September, however, quantities dropped and rates rose, suggesting a reluctance, also on the part of MMFs, to lend into these markets. Market intelligence suggests MMFs were concerned by potential large redemptions given strong prior inflows. Counterparty exposure limits may have contributed to the drop in quantities, as these repos now account for almost 20% of the total provided by MMFs.

So there is a hint that maybe a hedge fund or two became such large players that they hit counterparty limits. Also redemptions from MMFs would hardly be a surprise as we note the interest-rate cuts we have seen in 2019.

Why should we care?

There is this.

 Repo markets redistribute liquidity between financial institutions: not only banks (as is the case with the federal funds market), but also insurance companies, asset managers, money market funds and other institutional investors. In so doing, they help other financial markets to function smoothly.

So they oil the wheels of financial markets and when they don’t? Well that is one of the causes of the credit crunch.

The freezing-up of repo markets in late 2008 was one of the most damaging aspects of the Great Financial Crisis (GFC).

In case you did not know what they are.

A repo transaction is a short-term (usually overnight) collateralised loan, in which the borrower (of cash) sells a security (typically government bonds as collateral) to the lender, with a commitment to buy it back later at the same price plus interest.

Also it is one of those things which get little publicity ( mostly ironically because they usually work smoothly) but there is a lot of action.

 Thus, any sustained disruption in this market, with daily turnover in the US market of about $1 trillion, could quickly ripple through the financial system.

Comment

Some of the factors in the Repo crisis were unpredictable. But it is also true that the US Fed was at best rather flat-footed. There had been a long-running discussion over the use of Interest On Excess Reserves or IOER to banks on such a scale which was not resolved. Then there was the way that so few banks (4) were able to become such large players creating an obvious risk. Then the role of the MMFs as by their very nature they flow into and out of markets and are likely to flow out when interest-rates are declining.

The BIS analysis adds to what we know but changes in stocks give us broad trends rather than telling what flowed where or rather did not flow on September 17th or since. As David Bowie put it.

Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
Turn and face the strange
Ch-ch-changes
Don’t want to be a richer man
Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
Turn and face the strange
Ch-ch-changes
There’s gonna have to be a different man
Time may change me
But I can’t trace time

Number Crunching

The BIS has been looking into some other areas.

An analysis of the #TriennialSurvey finds that global notional for #OTCderivatives rose to $640 trn in 2019, dominated by #InterestRateDerivatives

Average daily turnover of OTC interest rate derivatives more than doubled over 2016-19 to $6.5 trillion, taking OTC markets’ share to almost half total trading

30 years, 53 countries, 1,300 reporting dealers, and $6.6 trillion daily FX trades,

Weekly Podcast

 

A new era of US QE starts with it being renamed Reserve Management

Last night saw something of an epoch making event as all eyes turned to Denver Colorado. This time it was not for the famous “hurry up offence” of John Elway in the NFL but instead there was a speech by Jerome Powell the Chair of the US Federal Reserve. In it he confirmed something I have been writing about on here for some time and the emphasis is mine.

Reserve balances are one among several items on the liability side of the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet, and demand for these liabilities—notably, currency in circulation—grows over time. Hence, increasing the supply of reserves or even maintaining a given level over time requires us to increase the size of our balance sheet. As we indicated in our March statement on balance sheet normalization, at some point, we will begin increasing our securities holdings to maintain an appropriate level of reserves. That time is now upon us.

This of course raises my QE ( Quantitative Easing) to infinity theme. I also note Chair Powell raises the issue of the balance sheet so let us look at that. It peaked at around US $4.5 trillion as we moved into 2015 and stayed there until October 2017 when the era of QT ( Quantitative Tightening) or reverse QE began and it began to shrink. Over the last year it shrank from US $4.17 trillion to US $3.76 trillion before the repo crisis struck.

In mid-September, an important channel in the transmission process—wholesale funding markets—exhibited unexpectedly intense volatility. Payments to meet corporate tax obligations and to purchase Treasury securities triggered notable liquidity pressures in money markets. Overnight interest rates spiked, and the effective federal funds rate briefly moved above the FOMC’s target range. To counter these pressures, we began conducting temporary open market operations. These operations have kept the federal funds rate in the target range and alleviated money market strains more generally.

What this misses out is that US Dollar liquidity has been singing along with Queen for some time.

Pressure: pushing down on me,
Pressing down on you, no man ask for.
Under pressure that burns a building down,
Splits a family in two,
Puts people on streets.

Here I am from the 25th of September last year.

The question to my mind going forwards is will we see a reversal in the QT or Quantitative Tightening era? The supply of US Dollars is now being reduced by it and we wait to see what the consequences are.

As you can see the phrase “unexpectedly intense volatility” is not true of anyone who is a follower of my work. One way of looking at this is that forwards pricing of the US Dollar has been in the wrong place for theory. This is one of the reasons why German bond yields have gone so negative ( as I type this the benchmark ten-year yield is -0.58%) because if you try to switch to US Treasury Bonds to gain the 1.54% or 2% higher yield you find that exchange rates take away the gain. To get a higher yield you have to take an exchange rate risk. Returning to the Chair Powell statement we see that it is more realistic to say we were hovering near an edge and then slipped over it.

If we return to the balance sheet we see that it has risen to US $3.95 trillion for a rise of the order of 190 billion in response to the repo crisis. The exact amount varies daily with the individual repo operations and also fortnightly as we now have those too. Just as an example the difference between the operations on Monday and yesterday was some US $9.55 billion lower. I point this out as some places have been claiming you add the repo operations up which is really rather odd when most so far only have the lifespan of a Mayfly.

Those who analyse events via the prism of bank reserves should be happy with this bit.

Indeed, my colleagues and I will soon announce measures to add to the supply of reserves over time. Consistent with a decision we made in January, our goal is to provide an ample supply of reserves to ensure that control of the federal funds rate and other short-term interest rates is exercised primarily by setting our administered rates and not through frequent market interventions.

An official denial

By now you should all know how to treat this.

I want to emphasize that growth of our balance sheet for reserve management purposes should in no way be confused with the large-scale asset purchase programs that we deployed after the financial crisis.

Indeed the next part is simply untrue or if you are less kind a lie.

Neither the recent technical issues nor the purchases of Treasury bills we are contemplating to resolve them should materially affect the stance of monetary policy, to which I now turn.

One of the roles of a central bank is setting interest-rates as part of monetary policy. Those who follow my podcasts will know I defined it as there second role after the existence and provision of a currency, in this case the US Dollar. Briefly monetary policy was affected as overnight interest-rates went outside the official range as described below by the Financial Times.

the pressures that bubbled up in September and sent the cost of borrowing cash overnight via repurchase, or repo, agreements as high as 10 per cent.

That is not as large as you might think as the impact is only for each day but it was way outside the official range. Also there were times when the role of a central bank was in setting the interest-rate for overnight money in terms of its monetary policy. The credit crunch moved events along as that did not have the hoped for impact on the real economy ( and hence we got QE) but the underlying principle remains.

Comment

So we find that the new version of Quantitative Easing or what will no doubt be called QE4 had the champagne bottle smashed on it last night by Jerome Powell as it got ready to go down to the slipway. It remains for it to be fully fitted out as I do not believe it will stop here.

making the case instead for the Fed to buy anywhere from $200bn to more than $300bn of shorter-dated Treasury bills over the next six months. ( Financial Times)

As you can see the lower estimate pretty much coincides with the change in the balance sheet do far with the repo operations. The larger amount perhaps aims for some sort of margin.

The difference between this and the QE we have seen so far is the term of the assets purchased. Treasury Bills last for up to a year whereas Treasury Bonds are for longer periods of time with what is called the long bond being for thirty-years. Also bills do not pay interest as you pay less for them to allow for that.

So there are minor differences with past QE efforts but the direction of travel is the same. Let me put it another way with this from the US Federal Reserve,

Total assets of the Federal Reserve have increased significantly from $870 billion on August 8th, 2007

They have indeed as we wonder how long it will be before we get back to the previous peak of US $4.5 trillion and presumably beyond.

If QE really worked it would not need so many new names would it? Japan now calls it QQE and now the US calls it reserve management. Perhaps Governor Carney will call it climate-related QE.