Thursday, June 18, 2015

Roubini and Bremmer Warn of ‘New Abnormal’

Is a new economic crisis that makes 2008 look mild in the offing?

Nouriel Roubini and Ian Bremmer argue in a lengthy survey of world gloom that the possibility of such a crisis is ever present unless world leaders find a way to restore order to a world that is teeming with political and economic risk.

Ian BremmerBremmer (left), the principal of the Eurasia Group of political risk consultants, and Roubini, an NYU professor and economist whose “Dr. Doom” appellation was freshly earned in this eight-page article in Institutional Investor, warn against a growing complacency that might mislead investors into thinking the “New Normal” economy is fading away.

Rather they argue that what they term “The New Abnormal” is ongoing, and may produce in the years ahead extreme levels of upheaval that we’ve seen in the past five years: instability that has brought about the worst economy since the Great Depression, challenges to viability of the Eurozone, the Arab Spring and the attendant Syrian civil war.

What makes our times abnormal is the lack of world order, which Bremmer and Roubini term the G-Zero—a period during which there is no big power with the ability or desire to impose geopolitical order amid crises or write the big checks that underwrite stability.

“The uncertainty and volatility of the past half-decade is far from finished—and is almost sure to trigger new crises,” the high-profile consultants write.

Nouriel RoubiniA key reason is that the world has failed to address structural issues that continue to fester and indeed ensure the resources to solve future problems may be absent when needed. Bremmer and Roubini (right) take readers on a world gloom and doom tour:

The United States, they say, has been lulled into complacency by greater volatility elsewhere, which has had the effect of making the U.S. and its dollar seem the “safest port in the storm.” As such, Democrats and Republicans have not felt the pressure to produce a grand bargain on spending, entitlement and taxes.

Similarly in Europe, the European Central Bank has used its monetary tools to take pressure off currencies in the periphery where there is austerity fatigue even as bailout fatigue takes root in Europe’s core.

On the BRICS front, China and India are avoiding crucial reforms to avoid short-term pain, and Brazil is not making the most of its current advantages, while authoritarianism runs rampant in Russia, and social cleavages threaten South Africa.

Compounding this increased level of volatility, the authors warn of a general disengagement in foreign policy: a post-Libya retreat by European powers, a Chinese politiburo with little interest in foreign affairs and a G-20 that only coordinates meaningful action under shared sense of severe threat, as last occurred in 2008 and 2009.

On the economic front, Bremmer and Roubini argue there has been no serious attempt to respond to the challenges of how to deleverage from high debt, deal with aging populations, impose structural reforms and step back from bloated welfare states.

“Advanced economies continue to face complicated challenges, but the policy responses that political officials have used so far—monetary and quantitative easing and fiscal stimulus that is now constrained by high debt levels—are Band-Aids applied to avert a near-term slide back into recession rather than a genuine effort to resolve long-term structural questions.”

Fiscally, the world is moving in the wrong direction, they warn, in not reducing liabilities and back-ending austerity. In monetary policy, central bank strategies are nationally oriented with a focus on depreciating currencies to boost exports—a trend that could make full-blown currency wars more likely.

“Advanced economies are now running out of policy bullets,” while at the same time setting the stage for new crises by creating asset inflation rather than real growth (through quantitative easing) amidst high debt that will leave no room for stimulus as a viable future policy.

Bremmer and Roubini regard emerging economies as prime potential trigger of future problems.

China is a case in point, they say. When it overtakes the U.S. in GDP, it will still be a developing country whose many problems—a shrinking labor force, aging population and degraded environment—will make its economic course volatile and thus roil the world economy.

Given the investor audience, the consultant duo launch into a macro view of winners and losers in the new abnormal.

Outperformers are countries that can make politically unpopular decisions and those with diversified economic partners. They rate Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Malaysia, Mexico, the Philippines and Turkey as having the best prospects, and India, Peru, South Africa and Thailand as having the worst.

They cite Canada favorably for its success at lessening its dependence on the U.S.

In the corporate sphere, the authors warn today’s environment is tougher for banks and investment banks: “Higher capital and liquidity ratios will reduce returns but will also slow credit creation and hamper growth,” adding that if economic tail risks materialize, there no longer exists the political capital for bailouts nor fiscal resources to rescue banks.

Ironically, the world’s best chance of coping with the New Abnormal would be an emergency that can induce world powers to cooperate on global problems.

While Bremmer and Roubini call out the usual suspects as crisis trigger—a new European financial meltdown or Mideast instability—they also speculate that the current credit and equity bubbles now in the making in the U.S. could be its source.

How the U.S. transitions from its current loose monetary policy will be key:

“Exiting too fast will crash the real economy, while exiting too slowly will first create a huge bubble and then crash the financial system,” they warn.

Bremmer and Roubini conlude that U.S.-China cooperation will be of paramount importance in coordinating a soft landing from the New Abnormal to the emerging world order.

---

Check out these related stories on AdvisorOne:

Wednesday, June 17, 2015

Bull of the Day: Krispy Kreme (KKD) - Bull of the Day

It is one of the biggest company turnarounds since the end of the Great Recession. Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Inc. (KKD) was left for dead but defied naysayers and is expected to see double digit earnings growth in Fiscal 2014. Krispy Kreme makes donuts and sells coffee in over 770 locations in 22 countries. It has an extremely loyal fan base for its signature product: the Original Glazed donut which is usually served warm, directly out of the oven.Over-expansion early last decade tarnished the brand but it has slowly been able to turn it around. On July 15, as testimony to the strength of the company, it announced that it had refinanced its secured credit facilities and retired the entire $22 million outstanding balance of its term loan. The retiring of the loan and the refinanced facilities was expected to save about $1 million in the first 12 months.As of July 12, it had a cash balance of $55 million and an unused borrowing capacity on its revolving credit facility of $31 million.It will also begin a new $50 million share repurchase program. That's significantly higher than the previous $20 million program that was completed in 2012.Zacks Consensus Estimate RisesAnalysts like what they see. In the last 60 days, 3 estimates have risen for fiscal 2014 while only 1 has been lowered. The 2014 Zacks Consensus has risen to $0.62 from $0.57 in that time.That is earnings growth of 31.9%.But the analysts don't expect that to be the end of it. They also forecast another 13.4% earnings growth in fiscal 2015.Big Earnings BeatsKrispy Kreme isn't expected to report earnings until Aug 28. It has really turned around its earnings track record as well. After a history of misses, the company recently started posting big beats.It has surprised 3 out of the last 4 quarters by an average of 38%.This Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy) isn't cheap. It has a forward P/E of 31. But an investor is paying for the big EPS growth and is! not looking for value. The consumer is still splurging on food and Krispy Kreme has a loyal following. It has over 4 million likes on Facebook and 61,000 followers on Twitter, many of which share their tales of driving for miles just to indulge in one of its donuts. That's the power of the Krispy Kreme brand. For investors looking for a restaurant chain which still has its mystique, look no further than Krispy Kreme.Want More of Our Best Recommendations? Zacks' Executive VP, Steve Reitmeister, knows when key trades are about to be triggered and which of our experts has the hottest hand. Then each week he hand-selects the most compelling trades and serves them up to you in a new program called Zacks Confidential. Learn More>>Tracey Ryniec is the Value Stock Strategist for Zacks.com. She is also the Editor of the Turnaround Trader and Value Investor services. You can follow her on twitter at @TraceyRyniec.

Monday, June 15, 2015

Joe Granville, Whose Bearish Calls Moved Stocks, Dies at 90

Joseph Granville, a newsletter writer and technical analyst who moved stock markets with bearish calls in the 1970s and '80s, has died. He was 90.

Granville died in Saint Luke's Hospice House in Kansas City, Missouri, said Laurel Gifford, a spokeswoman for Saint Luke's Health System. He died on Sept. 7, his wife, Karen Granville, said today. The cause of death isn't known, she said.

The publisher of the Granville Market Letter since 1963, Granville predicted the Dow Jones Industrial Average (INDU)'s slide in 1977 to 1978 and the end to the surge in computer-related shares in 2000. He was wrong in 1982 and 1995 when he called for losses before stocks rallied.

In his forecasts, Granville used criteria such as trading and price patterns rather than more commonly analyzed economic data and earnings growth. He started developing his own stock-market theories at what was then E.F. Hutton & Co., a New York-based brokerage, from 1957 to 1963.

By 1981, Granville was influential enough to spur a market slump. That January, he sparked a 2.4 percent one-day decline in the Dow average by advising his subscribers, "Sell Everything!"

His stock-pundit fame brought invitations to play in the Bob Hope Desert Classic golf tournament, perform with a chimpanzee at Caesar's Palace in Las Vegas, and play the piano at Carnegie Hall.

'Extremely Powerful'

"Joe was extremely powerful a generation ago," said Robert Stovall, a global strategist at Wood Asset Management Inc. in Sarasota, Florida, who worked with Granville at E.F. Hutton. "If he gave the thumbs down to a market, it was like the emperor in the coliseum. The market would go down."

In addition to writing about stocks, Granville produced books on subjects such as stamp investing and winning at bingo.

Joseph Ensign Granville was born on Aug. 20, 1923, in Yonkers, New York. His father, W. Irving Granville, "lost $30,000 of his own money and at least twice as much more that he borrowed from Grandma Buck and Auntie Blanche" in the stock-market crash of 1929, according to "The Book of Granville" (1984).

"The family survived only because our relatives were comfortable enough to write off their losses and aid us in recovering," Granville said. "It was my father's devastating experience with the stock market that made me so sensitive to the economic realities that lay behind every human pursuit."

Schoolboy Author

He attended the Todd School for Boys in Woodstock, Illinois, on a music scholarship, according to the Granville Market Letter's website.

A school tour to Mexico inspired Granville to write his first book, "A Schoolboy's Faith" (1941).

In 1948, he graduated from Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, where he studied economics. His studies were interrupted in 1945, when he joined the U.S. Navy and was sent to the Marshall Islands.

While there, he wrote "Price Predictions," a book about pricing U.S. commemorative stamps aimed at speculators. "Everybody's Guide to Stamp Investment" followed in 1952.

Granville was hired by E.F. Hutton & Co. in 1957 to write its daily stock-market letter and worked there until 1963, when he started the Granville Market Letter, a newsletter with a subscription price of $250.

Granville's main stock indicator was called on-balance volume, or OBV, which he developed.

Stock Momentum

The idea "caught me, quite literally with my pants down," he wrote. "One August morning in 1961 I sat on the toilet in the men's room, away from the hubbub of the research department, musing about the stock market."

OBV gauges a stock's momentum. If a stock rises, the day's volume will be added to a cumulative OBV figure. If the share price falls, the total will be subtracted.

Granville also followed charts that tracked investor sentiment, the number of stocks reaching 52-week highs and lows, and the daily number of advancing and declining stocks. He compiled the measures into what he called his "Net Field Trend Indicator," used to predict the market's direction.

"Everyone is following the economy. I'm following the market," Granville said in an October 2006 interview. "I'm the exact opposite of Wall Street."

In "Granville's New Strategy of Daily Stock Market Timing for Maximum Profit" (1976), he said a bear market would occur in 1977-1978. The Dow slid 26 percent from the beginning of 1977 through February 1978 after a two-year rally.

Fame Soars

"His fame rapidly grew following hundreds of seminars starting in 1978," according to the Granville's website.

His influence waned after he missed the surge in stocks that began in August 1982.

Granville was bearish from 1982 until early 1986, according to the Hulbert Financial Digest, a monthly publication edited by Mark Hulbert that ranks market newsletters. Over that period, the Dow average had a 17 percent annualized return. He had turned bullish by the time the stock market crashed in October 1987.

Granville was also incorrect in predicting a stock-market slide in October 1995. He turned bullish in July 1996, after the Dow industrials had climbed about 20 percent.

Not all of Granville's best calls were in the distant past. On March 11, 2000, the day after the Nasdaq Composite Index (CCMP) jumped to a record 5048.62, Granville wrote that investors in technology stocks "will soon be burned." The index, heavy on computer-related companies, tumbled about 78 percent before bottoming on Oct. 9, 2002.

Learning Experience

"When I make a prediction or a statement, it's coming from somebody who's gone through 50 years of markets," Granville said. "It's not like one of these 28-year-old or 30-year-old or 31-year-old kids that come in and think they know all of the answers. They don't. They have to live through their mistakes. I had to live through my mistakes."

Granville's marriage to his first wife, Katherine, in 1945, was "a hysterical reaction to war," as he described it in "The Book of Granville." He had eight children with his second wife, the former Paulina "Polly" Delp, whom he married in 1950 and divorced in 1980. She died in 2012, at 84.

Granville was still making market predictions well into his 80s. He drew parallels between the Dow's climb above 12,000 for the first time in October 2006 to the 1929 stock-market crash and the bursting of the Internet bubble in 2000.

'Market Lessons'

"How quickly forgotten are the market lessons of yesteryear," he said. "Crossing Dow 12,000 will catch the Street buying at the top, as was done in early 2000. Hating technical analysis, the Street will be deaf to the technical message, which is currently screaming 'sell!'"

Granville wanted to be best known for "his major contributions to technical analysis and what he has taught to his followers all over the world," according to his website.

Granville's third marriage was to the former Karen Erickson. The children he had with Paulina included Leslie Joan Granville, Blanchard Irving Granville, Leona Granville Weissman, Mary Beth Granville, Johanna Cushing Granville and John Hallock Granville. Their son Paul Granville died in 1979, and daughter Sara Granville Smith died in 1982.

Tuesday, June 9, 2015

Lloyds Raises £3.3bn From U.S. Mortgage Portfolio Sale

LONDON -- Lloyds Banking Group  (LSE: LLOY  ) (NYSE: LYG  )  this morning announced the latest disposal in its continued "non-core asset reduction," in the form of selling a portfolio of US residential mortgage-backed securities to a number of different institutions for a cash consideration of £3.3 billion.

With a book value of £2.7 billion, the transaction will gift Lloyds around £540 million prior to tax, which will be reinvested into the company for "general corporate purposes."

As part of the sale, Lloyds' pension trust also sold its £805 million (book value) share of the portfolio, to realize a pre-tax gain of £360 million. Management said that this will go toward reducing the deficit in the scheme.

Representing further reduction in its risk-weighted assets, this morning's statement from the 39%-taxpayer-owned bank claimed that the sale will lift the group's core tier 1 capital by around 47 points (£1.4 billion capital equivalent).

Today's news follows last week's disposal of 77 million shares in St. James's Place for £450 million, while Lloyds also reassured investors by saying that it is unlikely to need to raise further funds from shareholders, instead using cash generated from its business and disposals like today's to raise capital needed to absorb future losses on loans.

The share price was little moved in early trade, and still hovers close to its 24-month high of 63 pence. But if you are looking for alternative investment opportunities within the FTSE 100, then this exclusive wealth report reviews five particularly attractive possibilities.

All five opportunities offer a mix of robust prospects, illustrious histories and dependable dividends, and have just been declared by the Fool as "5 Shares You Can Retire On"!

Just click here for the exclusive free report, but don't delay, as all Fool reports are available for a limited time only.

Monday, June 8, 2015

The Great Undoing of Bank of America

The StressTest column appears every Thursday on Fool.com. Check back weekly, and follow @TMFStressTest on Twitter.

Bank of America  (NYSE: BAC  ) has been near-mortally wounded. But that may be good news.

B of A's evisceration came by its own hand. An unintentional seppuku attempt, if you will. You may have heard a bit about this already, but this all went down in January 2008, when the bank agreed to buy a little mortgage outfit known as Countrywide Financial. 

Believe it or not, at the time, there was optimism around the deal. One asset manager at the time was quoted as saying, "Buying Countrywide was a gutty move ... The whole concern about housing and the economy has been greatly exaggerated." Bank analyst Dick Bove was on the same page, claiming that an ugly quarterly report around the time of the deal was a "clean-up" quarter for Countrywide, continuing, "Bank of America is asking them to look into every place they can find to take losses, so when they become Bank of America, we don't see similar impacts."

But it wasn't to be. The "whole concern about housing and the economy" wasn't, in fact, overblown, and the decision to buy Countrywide was an abysmal one.

Of course, I'm far from the first to say that Countrywide was essentially a bought-and-paid-for cancer for Bank of America. This has been said to such an extent that some investors may wonder if Countrywide is simply the scapegoat for an overall ailing bank. But, rest assured, that's not the case -- the Countrywide acquisition was every bit as bad as billed.

Countrywide... What a drag! | Create infographics

If you actually dig through B of A's annual report, you can find a helpful little table that shows the performance of the loan originations that were sold to the GSEs -- primarily Fannie Mae  (NASDAQOTCBB: FNMA  ) and Freddie Mac -- between 2004 and 2008. What's even more helpful is that the table breaks out the Countrywide originations versus the "other" originations -- principally, legacy Bank of America production.

As shown above, the numbers are pretty stark. On a percentage basis, 8.1% of "other" originations during that period have defaulted or are severely delinquent. It's 13.1% among the Countrywide originations. But the sheer size of the origination machine at Countrywide makes this gap even worse, because the total GSE originations from Countrywide during that period was nearly $850 billion versus just $272 billion at legacy Bank of America.

The felt impact of this at Bank of America was repurchase claims, lawsuits, multi-billion dollar settlements, and the like. Maybe, even more painfully, it was the growing perception that Bank of America itself was, and is, a terrible lender.

It's with that latter point that there's some silver lining in this sad story. The Countrywide acquisition highlights just how disastrous the wrong deal can be for a company. There's a solid argument to be made that the B of A-Countrywide tie-up was one of the worst in corporate history. But the recognition of the fact that a good deal of B of A's post-crisis troubles have been driven by the Countrywide cancer should give investors some hope that, as that mess continues to get cleaned up, there's a good, solid bank hiding out in there somewhere.

Many investors are scared about investing in big banking stocks after the crash, but the sector has one notable stand out. In a sea of mismanaged and dangerous peers, it stands out as The Only Big Bank Built To Last. You can uncover the top pick that Warren Buffett loves in The Motley Fool's new report. It's free, so click here to access it now.

This 10-Stock Dividend Strategy Is Trouncing the Dow

The "Dogs of the Dow" strategy is one of the simplest for beating the market. Over the coming year, I'll track the Dogs' performance and keep you abreast of news affecting these companies.

The strategy
The Dogs strategy involves buying and holding equal dollar amounts of the 10 best-yielding dividend stocks of the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJINDICES: ^DJI  ) . The strategy banks on the idea that blue-chip stocks with high yields are near the bottom of their business cycle and should do much better going forward. Investors in the strategy then would get not only large dividends but also gains in the stocks underlying those dividends.

High-yield dividends
High-yield portfolios are often dismissed as inferior to their growth counterparts for various reasons:

Many people fear that increasing dividend yields mean lower portfolio returns. Others believe that dividend payments mean that management believes the business is done growing.

Evidence from Tweedy, Browne refutes these falsehoods. Research shows that portfolios of high-yield dividend stocks outperform lower-yielding portfolios and the market in general. In fact, a study by noted finance professor Jeremy Siegel found that over 45 years, the highest-yielding 20% of S&P 500 stocks outperformed the S&P 500 by three times! The highest-yielding stocks turned a $1,000 investment in 1957 into $462,750 by 2002, compared with $130,768 if the same money was invested in the index.

Performance
After beating the Dow by 6.8% in 2011, the Dogs underperformed the Dow by 0.2% in 2012.

Check out the Dogs' performance in 2013 so far:

Company

Initial Yield

Initial Price

YTD Performance

AT&T

5.34%

$33.71

12.50%

Verizon

4.76%

$43.27

24.74%

Intel (NASDAQ: INTC  )

4.36%

$20.62

17.84%

Merck

4.20%

$40.94

13.42%

Pfizer

3.83%

$25.08

16.49%

DuPont

3.82%

$44.98

25.37%

Hewlett-Packard

3.72%

$14.25

50.21%

General Electric

3.62%

$20.99

12.68%

McDonald's

3.49%

$88.21

16.05%

Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ  )

3.48%

$70.10

26.68%

Dow Jones Industrial Average

 

13,104

17.17%

Dogs of the Dow

   

21.60%

Dogs Return vs. Dow (Percentage Points)

   

+4.43%

Source: S&P Capital IQ as of April 18.

This week, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 1.58%. The Dogs rose less than the Dow, moving down 0.87 percentage points. That brings the Dogs' outperformance down to 4.3 percentage points better than the Dow.

There were a bunch of economic reports and some other extraneous factors boosting the Dow this week. The Dow's momentum continues to carry it up and was boosted this week by better-than-expected retail sales on Monday. Later in the week, inflation reports for both consumers and producers were below the Federal Reserve's target of 2%, which bodes well for the government's continuing of its bond buying.

US Producer Price Index Chart

US Producer Price Index data by YCharts

Then on Thursday, the Department of Commerce reported that building permits rose to 1.02 million in May, their highest level in nearly five years, which bodes well for the housing market. The final positive factor was on Friday, as consumer sentiment rose far above expectations to a six-year high.

Movers and shakers
The biggest mover this past week among the Dogs of the Dow was Johnson & Johnson, which rose 2.72%. On Monday, the FDA gave priority review status to the company's hepatitis-C drug, simeprevir. That's a good sign, as it puts Johnson & Johnson's drug in the lead to be first to market, ahead of Gilead Sciences' competing drug sofosbuvir. If you don't have time to read the company's annual report, Fool analyst Morgan Housel recently went through it and pointed out five things he learned from reading the annual report.

The biggest loser among the Dogs was Intel, which fell 1.88%. On Tuesday, research firm IDC said it expects global IT spending to slow in 2013 to 4.9% growth, down from last year's 5.6%. While Intel is up 16.5% so far this year, over the past 12 months the stock is down 13%. Fool analyst Chris Neiger recently laid out three must-watch areas for Intel investors, which you can read about here.

More dividend stocks
If you're looking for some long-term investing ideas, you're invited to check out The Motley Fool's brand-new special report, "The 3 Dow Stocks Dividend Investors Need." It's absolutely free, so simply click here now and get your copy today.

Thursday, June 4, 2015

Credit Suisse to Stop Relaying Dark-Pool Data, Tabb Says

Credit Suisse Group AG (CSGN), operator of the largest U.S. dark pool, said it will no longer publicly disseminate monthly volume data for the private stock-trading venue, according to an executive at Tabb Group LLC.

Credit Suisse will end its practice of voluntarily relaying information about its Crossfinder pool to research firm Tabb and Rosenblatt Securities Inc., which publish monthly statistics. The Zurich-based bank will stop disclosing volume, Adam Sussman, director of research at Tabb, said in a posting on the New York firm's website. Rosenblatt also won't get the data, Justin Schack, a managing director at the New York-based broker, said.

The move comes 10 days after chief executive officers of the biggest U.S. exchange operators urged regulators to follow policy makers in Canada and Australia and curb trading that occurs away from public venues. U.S. off-exchange volume reached 36.2 percent of all trading in the first quarter, compared with 32.8 percent last year, according data compiled by Bloomberg.

"Every month since March 2007, a wide swath of dark pool operators have voluntarily disclosed various execution statistics," Sussman wrote. "Now these reports are in the danger of becoming inaccurate, as Credit Suisse has decided to stop reporting."

Trading away from exchanges included 14.3 percent in dark pools in February, with Crossfinder accounting for 1.9 percent of overall equities volume, data compiled by Rosenblatt show.

Off Exchange

Brokers in the past have decided against supplying data because they didn't have enough volume or worried about disclosing too much information, Sussman said in the posting. They may also have disagreed with the methodology other dark pools used to count volume since there's no standard. Another reason is that the company may be "inherently secretive," Sussman said. Now there may be a new reason.

"As the controversy over dark trading has erupted over the past year, fueled by the rise in off-exchange trading in the U.S. and the changes occurring in Canada and Australia, the industry has focused more on the gross amount of shares traded off-exchange, rather than the performance of any specific dark pool," Sussman wrote. A broker must decide "whether all of this visibility is good for the rest of the company," he wrote. "What is it actually accomplishing? When you realize 'going out loud' is only getting you burned, you go dark."

Katherine Herring, a spokeswoman for Credit Suisse, declined to comment.

Alternative Trading

Schack said earlier this month that exchanges have stepped up their criticism of trading away from their venues as overall volume has declined, giving them a "smaller share of a shrinking pie." U.S. equities volume has fallen three years in a row, to 6.42 billion shares a day last year from 9.77 billion daily in 2009, data compiled by Bloomberg show.

Dark pools are broker-run alternative trading systems that don't publish bid and offer prices. They report trades immediately, as do exchanges, and must execute orders at the best price available nationally or better. They're used by brokers, asset managers and algorithms in an effort to trade without pushing prices higher or lower.

The venues aren't required by the Securities and Exchange Commission to report volume publicly. While Tabb tracks data from 16 brokers and Rosenblatt covers 19 venues, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of America Corp., Fidelity Investments and Citadel LLC don't report activity to either firm.

Dark Volume

"We're disappointed with Credit Suisse's decision, but respect that the firm must ultimately do what it believes is best for its business," Schack said in an e-mailed statement. "We're confident that we will continue to deliver the highest- quality intelligence on dark-pool volumes and trends to our institutional customers."

The SEC proposed a rule requiring more transparency around dark-pool trading in 2009. It never acted on that initiative.

Some dark pools may reconsider whether they want to continue disseminating trade data after Credit Suisse's decision, Sussman said.

CEOs of the three largest U.S. stock market operators told the SEC on April 9 that it's time to drive more trading back toward exchanges and away from brokers. NYSE Euronext (NYX)'s Duncan Niederauer, along with Bob Greifeld of Nasdaq OMX Group Inc. (NDAQ) and Joe Ratterman of Bats Global Markets Inc., said too much off- exchange activity hurts the so-called price discovery process, making prices less reflective of buy and sell interest, according to a presentation published on the SEC website in connecting with the meeting.

Public Venues

The exchange CEOs told the SEC that trades should occur on public venues unless brokers provide better prices or execute large orders. An exception would be allowed for brokers quoting at the best price on public markets, they said. Brokers currently can match the best price available on exchanges or trade between a stock's national best bid and offer.

The total share of U.S. equities trading through hidden or non-displayed orders was 18.9 percent in February, with 14.3 percent from dark pools and 4.6 percent from exchanges, according to Rosenblatt. About 11.5 percent of trading on the main exchange owned by Bats took place through hidden orders. Nasdaq's orders that aren't displayed publicly accounted for 9 percent of its volume and NYSE Arca's were 6.6 percent of its February trading, the data showed.

Nasdaq's dark orders amounted to 1.44 percent of overall volume in the industry, surpassing trading on alternative venues except Crossfinder, according to the Rosenblatt data. Hidden bids and offers on exchanges can trade with incoming orders that aren't meant to be dark and must cede priority to publicly displayed buy and sell requests at the same price, according to Schack.

Rosenblatt began publishing a report with statistics and analysis called "Let There Be Light" in March 2008, according to Schack. Tabb began supplying data from brokers in March 2007, Sussman said.

Monday, June 1, 2015

Lands' End, Inc. (LE): Insider Buying at Full Value?

Consumer confidence might be riding a six-year high, but boardroom confidence appears to be slipping. (Joe and Jane sixpacks are always lagging indicators) The number of companies reporting insider purchases dropped to just 31 last week. It's the skinniest list iStock has seen in months and months.

We hope the lack of buying is not a sign that main street confidence is not misplaced.

Finding an insider buying idea was difficult this week. So, we'll highlight the name that makes us the least uncomfortable.

Two directors and a beneficial owner (10% or more) of Lands' End, Inc. (LE) opened their checkbooks and signed on the bottom line last week.

[Related -Sears Holdings Corp (SHLD): Speculating on a Huge Insider Bet]

Lands' End operates as a multi-channel retailer primarily in the United States, Europe, and Asia. The company operates through two segments, Direct and Retail. It offers men's, women's, and kids? apparel, outerwear, and swimwear; specialty apparel; accessories; footwear; and home products. The company sells its products through e-commerce Websites, direct mail catalogs, phone, or in-store computer kiosks, as well as standalone and dedicated stores.

Directors, Jonah Staw and Josephine Linden purchased 1,500 and 3,000 shares, respectively. Staw bought at $32.83 for an investment of $49,245, and Linden at $30.83 for $92,490.

Meanwhile, beneficial owner, Edward Lampert bought 187,534 shares, reported on June 16th. The day low was $30.83, which would equal $5,781,673; a substantial buy. It's called cluster buying when multiple insiders purchase simultaneously.

[Related -Macy's, Inc. (M): The One Department Store Stock You Can Trust]

Because LE is recent spinoff from Sears Holdings Corporation (SHLD), a previous history of "getting right" is not available, but Lampert's insider record consists of sale after sale after sale after… so, the buy stands in stark contrast to his typical trading action.

One analyst forecasts earnings per share of $2.29 on $1.59 billion in sales. The average retailer trades at 12.69 times profits and 0.66 times sales. Apply those valuations to Lands' End, and price targets of $29.06 and $32.84emerge, which makes one wonder why the triplet of insiders bought?

Overall: Cluster buying at Lands' End, Inc. (LE) is an encouraging sign, but shares appear fully-valued based on the industry average price-to-earnings and price-to-sales ratios. 

Sunday, May 31, 2015

AdviceIQ: 6 ways to save for retirement

If you're like most people, you probably haven't saved enough to retire. Especially if you're older than 35, it's time to get serious. So here are 6 steps to follow:

Some people foolishly think the future will take care of itself. If you own a business, maybe you think your business will provide ample money in your future (maybe it will, maybe it won't). You might contribute to a retirement-savings plan at work and nurse a vague idea of how much to save. That won't cut it.

According to the Employee Benefit Research Institute (EBRI), almost half (49%) of workers remain unsure if they save enough for a comfortable retirement. One in seven retirees also voices little confidence about retirement nest eggs.

Reasons for this lack of confidence vary but include fuzzy planning. One in five workers believes retirement requires saving 20% to 29% of his or her income and nearly a quarter (23%) think retirement needs 30% or more. Incredibly, just 2% of workers and 4% of retirees say saving or planning for retirement is the most pressing financial issue facing most Americans.

Start with a financial plan. The EBRI survey shows that only 46% of workers formallycalculate retirement savings. Without a target you can't know exactly how much to save. A financial plan won't tell you if you save enough money but it can say if you're headed in the right direction.

Let's say you create a financial plan and then see you only have a 50% chance of retiring with your current lifestyle; you better make some changes. (If it looks like your chances are better than 99%, relax.) Get a target and start moving toward it.

Notably, EBRI reports that fewer than a quarter (23%) of workers and 28% of retirees seek investment advice from a professional financial advisor.

Pay yourself first. This old adage in financial planning hinges on making sure you automatically save money out of your paycheck or invest it straight from your checking account, unseen. If you never see the money, you won't spend it.

Many do spend it. Meeting day-to-day expenses head the list of reasons that workers don't contribute to an employer's plan, according to EBRI. More than half (55%) of workers and 39% of retirees also report a problem with debt – and only half can come up with $2,000 to meet unexpected needs within the next month.

Use your company's retirement plan. If your company matches your contributions to a retirement plan, take full advantage: The match equals free money.

In some retirement plans, you don't even set up an investment account – your employer does it for you as well as sets up a transfer from your paycheck to your investment account. Almost too easy to be true.

Save half of any raise. You can't spend the entire raise. Fight temptation and start increasing your savings with 50% socked away automatically.

Upgrade your skills at work. If you want to make more money, improve how you do what you do (an improvement usually up to you). Then you can demand more money in your paycheck and can really afford to save 50% of extra money.

Be disciplined about saving. Saving for retirement is a marathon. If you save consistently for a long time, you wake up one day near or at retirement and find a big pot of money waiting for you.

You can use that pot as a safety net and decide to continue working or you declare it time to move on to the next chapter. Point is, disciplined saving gives you choices.

MORE: Sheri Iannetta Cupo on how to avoid piecemeal investing

MORE: Jim Blankenship on figuring capital gains taxes

MORE: Lewis J. Walker on the tax bite getting bigger

Josh Patrick is a founding principal of Stage 2 Planning Partners in South Burlington, Vt., and a member of the AdviceIQ Financial Advisors Network, which is a USA TODAY content partner offering financial news and commentary. Its content is produced independently of USA TODAY.

Thursday, May 28, 2015

Netflix, Comcast Strike Deal That Improves Video Quality

Film Navigating Netflix Paul Sakuma/AP

SAN FRANCISCO -- Netflix's videos are streaming through Comcast's Internet service at their highest speeds in 17 months, thanks to a recent deal that bought Netflix a more direct connection to Comcast's (CMCSA) network. The data released Monday by Netflix (NFLX) may become another flash point in a debate about whether the Federal Communications Commission should draw up new rules to ensure that all online content providers are treated the same by Internet service providers. The equal-treatment doctrine, known as Net neutrality, has become a thornier topic since January when a federal appeals court overturned the FCC's regulations on the issue. Net neutrality is also drawing more attention as Comcast tries to gain approval of its proposed $45 billion purchase of Time Warner Cable (TWC), another large Internet service provider. As the world's largest Internet video subscription service, Netflix has long supported Net neutrality as a way to prevent online service providers from giving better treatment to websites willing to pay additional fees for the privilege. Nevertheless, Netflix agreed in mid-February to pay an undisclosed sum to Comcast Corp. to create a new avenue for its videos to reach Comcast's service. Netflix previously had been paying third-party vendors such as Cogent Communications Group (CCOI) and Akamai Technologies (AKAM) to deliver its content to Comcast. Some analysts suspect Netflix may be saving money by paying Comcast directly instead of the vendors, but the specifics remain unknown as part of a confidentiality agreement. The arrangement clearly seems to paying off for Netflix subscribers who are among the nearly 21 million households and businesses that rely on Comcast's high-speed Internet service to watch movies and television shows. Comcast delivered Netflix video at an average rate of 2.5 megabits per second during March. That was a 66 percent increase from a recent low of 1.51 megabits per second in January. The March performance also topped the previous monthly high of 2.17 megabits per second that Netflix had recorded on Comcast. Netflix began tracking the streaming speeds of Internet service providers in November 2012. Higher streaming speeds allow users to watch higher-quality video and translate to fewer interruptions in the picture. That's good news for Netflix because higher-quality video should please many of its 33 million U.S. subscribers who pay $8 a month for the company's video streaming service. But that doesn't necessarily mean the Los Gatos, Calif., company is happy about the circumstances that prodded it into Comcast partnership. Netflix CEO Reed Hastings has steadfastly insisted that his company and other online content providers shouldn't have to pay any tolls to Internet service providers, or ISPs, already charging their customers $40 to $60 a month. Comcast and other broadband providers contend Netflix's growing popularity should require the company to shoulder some of the financial burden for delivering its video. In evening hours, Netflix's U.S. subscribers generate nearly a third of the Internet's downloading activity, according to the research firm. By early this year, Comcast's streaming of Netflix video had slowed to the point that Hastings felt compelled to work more directly with Comcast to retain his company's subscribers.

'Interconnection' The better access that Netflix is getting from Comcast is known as "interconnection," a term referring to digital content's journey to an Internet service provider's gates. That path technically isn't covered by the current definition of Net neutrality, which refers to how service providers treat digital content once it's inside the gates. Comcast has promised to honor the previous rules governing Net neutrality through 2018. In a blog post last month, Hastings argued that future Net neutrality guidelines should be expanded to address interconnection issues, too. "Without strong Net neutrality, big ISPs can demand potentially escalating fees for the interconnection required to deliver high quality service," Hastings wrote. "The big ISPs can make these demands -- driving up costs and prices for everyone else -- because of their market position." Google's YouTube video site and many other websites were paying interconnection fees to Comcast before Netflix struck its own deal with the carrier. Even with the March improvements, Comcast's delivery of Netflix content lags behind several other major service providers. Cablevision (CVC), Cox, Suddenlink and Charter (CHTR) each delivered Netflix video at higher speeds than Comcast in March, according to Monday's breakdown. Netflix has interconnection deals with Cablevision, Cox and Suddenlink, although those arrangements don't require Netflix to pay fees.

Wednesday, May 27, 2015

Fed Issues Minutes from Jan. 28-29th, 2014 FOMC Meeting

Related FED IMF Issues Note on Global Prospects, Policy Changes Ahead of G-20 Meeting in Sydney Feds Announce Guidance For Banks To Work With Marijuana Businesses Related SPY Investing In Olympic Medal Winners (EWN, SPY, RSX, NORW, EWC) Investment Expenses: Three Ways to Cut Them

A meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee was held in the offices of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, January 28, 2014, at 2:00 p.m. and continued on Wednesday, January 29, 2014, at 9:00 a.m.

PRESENT:

Ben Bernanke, Chairman William C. Dudley, Vice Chairman Richard W. Fisher Narayana Kocherlakota Sandra Pianalto Charles I. Plosser Jerome H. Powell Jeremy C. Stein Daniel K. Tarullo Janet L. Yellen

Christine Cumming, Charles L. Evans, Jeffrey M. Lacker, Dennis P. Lockhart, and John C. Williams, Alternate Members of the Federal Open Market Committee

James Bullard, Esther L. George, and Eric Rosengren, Presidents of the Federal Reserve Banks of St. Louis, Kansas City, and Boston, respectively

William B. English, Secretary and Economist Matthew M. Luecke, Deputy Secretary Michelle A. Smith, Assistant Secretary Scott G. Alvarez, General Counsel Thomas C. Baxter, Deputy General Counsel Steven B. Kamin, Economist David W. Wilcox, Economist

James A. Clouse, Thomas A. Connors, Evan F. Koenig, Thomas Laubach, Michael P. Leahy, Loretta J. Mester, Paolo A. Pesenti, Samuel Schulhofer-Wohl, Mark E. Schweitzer, and William Wascher, Associate Economists

Simon Potter, Manager, System Open Market Account

Lorie K. Logan, Deputy Manager, System Open Market Account

Michael S. Gibson, Director, Division of Banking Supervision and Regulation, Board of Governors

Nellie Liang, Director, Office of Financial Stability Policy and Research, Board of Governors

Stephen A. Meyer and William Nelson, Deputy Directors, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

Jon W. Faust, Special Adviser to the Board, Office of Board Members, Board of Governors

Linda Robertson and David W. Skidmore, Assistants to the Board, Office of Board Members, Board of Governors

Trevor A. Reeve, Senior Associate Director, Division of International Finance, Board of Governors

Joyce K. Zickler, Senior Adviser, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

Daniel M. Covitz and Michael T. Kiley, Associate Directors, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors

Jane E. Ihrig, Deputy Associate Director, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

Edward Nelson, Assistant Director, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors; John J. Stevens, Assistant Director, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors

Jeremy B. Rudd, Adviser, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors

Dana L. Burnett, Section Chief, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

Burcu Duygan-Bump, Senior Project Manager, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

David H. Small, Project Manager, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

Andrew Figura, Group Manager, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors

Michele Cavallo, Senior Economist, Division of International Finance, Board of Governors

Yuriy Kitsul, Economist, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

Randall A. Williams, Records Project Manager, Division of Monetary Affairs, Board of Governors

Kenneth C. Montgomery, First Vice President, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston

David Altig, Glenn D. Rudebusch, and Daniel G. Sullivan, Executive Vice Presidents, Federal Reserve Banks of Atlanta, San Francisco, and Chicago, respectively

Troy Davig, Geoffrey Tootell, and Christopher J. Waller, Senior Vice Presidents, Federal Reserve Banks of Kansas City, Boston, and St. Louis, respectively

Robert L. Hetzel, Senior Economist, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

Annual Organizational Matters1 In the agenda for this meeting, it was reported that advices of the election of the following members and alternate members of the Federal Open Market Committee (the "Committee") for a term beginning January 28, 2014, had been received and that these individuals had executed their oaths of office.

The elected members and alternate members were as follows:

William C. Dudley, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, with Christine Cumming, First Vice President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, as alternate

Charles I. Plosser, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, with Jeffrey M. Lacker, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, as alternate

Sandra Pianalto, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, with Charles L. Evans, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, as alternate

Richard W. Fisher, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, with Dennis P. Lockhart, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, as alternate

Narayana Kocherlakota, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, with John C. Williams, President of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, as alternate

By unanimous vote, the Committee selected Ben Bernanke to serve as Chairman through January 31, 2014, and Janet L. Yellen to serve as Chairman, effective February 1, 2014, until the selection of her successor at the first regularly scheduled meeting of the Committee in 2015.

By unanimous vote, the following officers of the Committee were selected to serve until the selection of their successors at the first regularly scheduled meeting of the Committee in 2015:

William C. Dudley Vice Chairman William B. English Secretary and Economist Matthew M. Luecke Deputy Secretary Michelle A. Smith Assistant Secretary Scott G. Alvarez General Counsel Thomas C. Baxter Deputy General Counsel Richard M. Ashton Assistant General Counsel Steven B. Kamin Economist David W. Wilcox Economist James A. Clouse Thomas A. Connors Evan F. Koenig Thomas Laubach Michael P. Leahy Loretta J. Mester Paolo A. Pesenti Samuel Schulhofer-Wohl Mark E. Schweitzer William Wascher Associate Economists

By unanimous vote, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York was selected to execute transactions for the System Open Market Account.

By unanimous vote, the Authorization for Domestic Open Market Operations was approved with an amendment that makes the structure of paragraphs 1.A and 1.B more similar. The Guidelines for the Conduct of System Open Market Operations in Federal-Agency Issues remained suspended.

AUTHORIZATION FOR DOMESTIC OPEN MARKET OPERATIONS (As amended effective January 28, 2014)

1. The Federal Open Market Committee authorizes and directs the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, to the extent necessary to carry out the most recent domestic policy directive adopted at a meeting of the Committee:

A. To buy or sell in the open market U.S. government securities, including securities of the Federal Financing Bank, and securities that are direct obligations of, or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, any agency of the United States, from or to securities dealers and foreign and international accounts maintained at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, on a cash, regular, or deferred delivery basis, for the System Open Market Account at market prices, and, for such Account, to exchange maturing U.S. government and federal agency securities with the Treasury or the individual agencies or to allow them to mature without replacement; and

B. To buy or sell in the open market U.S. government securities, and securities that are direct obligations of, or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, any agency of the United States, for the System Open Market Account under agreements to resell or repurchase such securities or obligations (including such transactions as are commonly referred to as repo and reverse repo transactions) in 65 business days or less, at rates that, unless otherwise expressly authorized by the Committee, shall be determined by competitive bidding, after applying reasonable limitations on the volume of agreements with individual counterparties.

2. The Federal Open Market Committee authorizes the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to undertake transactions of the type described in paragraphs 1.A and 1.B from time to time for the purpose of testing operational readiness. The aggregate par value of such transactions of the type described in paragraph 1.A shall not exceed $5 billion per calendar year. The outstanding amount of such transactions of the type described in paragraph 1.B shall not exceed $5 billion at any given time. These transactions shall be conducted with prior notice to the Committee.

3. In order to ensure the effective conduct of open market operations, the Federal Open Market Committee authorizes the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to use agents in agency MBS-related transactions.

4. In order to ensure the effective conduct of open market operations, the Federal Open Market Committee authorizes the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to lend on an overnight basis U.S. government securities and securities that are direct obligations of any agency of the United States, held in the System Open Market Account, to dealers at rates that shall be determined by competitive bidding. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York shall set a minimum lending fee consistent with the objectives of the program and apply reasonable limitations on the total amount of a specific issue that may be auctioned and on the amount of securities that each dealer may borrow. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York may reject bids that could facilitate a dealer's ability to control a single issue as determined solely by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The Federal Reserve Bank of New York may lend securities on longer than an overnight basis to accommodate weekend, holiday, and similar trading conventions.

5. In order to ensure the effective conduct of open market operations, while assisting in the provision of short-term investments or other authorized services for foreign and international accounts maintained at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and accounts maintained at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York as fiscal agent of the United States pursuant to section 15 of the Federal Reserve Act, the Federal Open Market Committee authorizes and directs the Federal Reserve Bank of New York:

A. For the System Open Market Account, to sell U.S. government securities and securities that are direct obligations of, or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, any agency of the United States to such accounts on the bases set forth in paragraph 1.A under agreements providing for the resale by such accounts of those securities in 65 business days or less on terms comparable to those available on such transactions in the market;

B. For the New York Bank account, when appropriate, to undertake with dealers, subject to the conditions imposed on purchases and sales of securities in paragraph l.B, repurchase agreements in U.S. government securities and securities that are direct obligations of, or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, any agency of the United States, and to arrange corresponding sale and repurchase agreements between its own account and such foreign, international, and fiscal agency accounts maintained at the Federal Reserve Bank; and

C. For the New York Bank account, when appropriate, to buy U.S. government securities and obligations that are direct obligations of, or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, any agency of the United States from such foreign and international accounts maintained at the Federal Reserve Bank under agreements providing for the repurchase by such accounts of those securities on the same business day.

Transactions undertaken with such accounts under the provisions of this paragraph may provide for a service fee when appropriate.

6. In the execution of the Committee's decision regarding policy during any intermeeting period, the Committee authorizes and directs the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, upon the instruction of the Chairman of the Committee, to (i) adjust somewhat in exceptional circumstances the degree of pressure on reserve positions and hence the intended federal funds rate and to take actions that result in material changes in the composition and size of the assets in the System Open Market Account other than those anticipated by the Committee at its most recent meeting or (ii) undertake transactions of the type described in paragraphs 1.A and 1.B in order to appropriately address temporary disruptions of an operational or highly unusual nature in U.S. dollar funding markets. Any such adjustment as described in clause (i) shall be made in the context of the Committee's discussion and decision at its most recent meeting and the Committee's long-run objectives to foster maximum employment and price stability, and shall be based on economic, financial, and monetary developments during the intermeeting period. Consistent with Committee practice, the Chairman, if feasible, will consult with the Committee before making any instruction under this paragraph.

The Committee voted unanimously to amend the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations, the Foreign Currency Directive, and the Procedural Instructions with Respect to Foreign Currency Operations in the form shown below. The approval of these documents included approval of the System's warehousing agreement with the U.S. Treasury. These documents were modified to incorporate the dollar and foreign currency liquidity swap arrangements authorized by a resolution on October 29, 2013. Changes were made to the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations and the Procedural Instructions with Respect to Foreign Currency Operations to align the treatment of the liquidity swap arrangements and that of the reciprocal currency arrangements that have been in place with the central banks of Mexico and Canada since 1994 as part of the North American Framework Agreement. The Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations was amended to remove language regarding the transmission of pertinent information on System foreign currency operations to appropriate officials of the Treasury Department because this language duplicated language in the Program for Security of FOMC Information.

AUTHORIZATION FOR FOREIGN CURRENCY OPERATIONS (As amended effective January 28, 2014)

1. The Federal Open Market Committee authorizes and directs the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, for the System Open Market Account, to the extent necessary to carry out the Committee's foreign currency directive and express authorizations by the Committee pursuant thereto, and in conformity with such procedural instructions as the Committee may issue from time to time:

A. To purchase and sell the following foreign currencies in the form of cable transfers through spot or forward transactions on the open market at home and abroad, including transactions with the U.S. Treasury, with the U.S. Exchange Stabilization Fund established by section 10 of the Gold Reserve Act of 1934, with foreign monetary authorities, with the Bank for International Settlements, and with other international financial institutions:

Australian dollars Brazilian reais Canadian dollars Danish kroner euro Japanese yen Korean won Mexican pesos New Zealand dollars Norwegian kroner Pounds sterling Singapore dollars Swedish kronor Swiss francs B. To hold balances of, and to have outstanding forward contracts to receive or to deliver, the foreign currencies listed in paragraph A above.

C. To draw foreign currencies and to permit foreign banks to draw dollars under the arrangements listed in paragraph 2 below, in accordance with the Procedural Instructions with Respect to Foreign Currency Operations.

D. To maintain an overall open position in all foreign currencies not exceeding $25.0 billion. For this purpose, the overall open position in all foreign currencies is defined as the sum (disregarding signs) of net positions in individual currencies, excluding changes in dollar value due to foreign exchange rate movements and interest accruals. The net position in a single foreign currency is defined as holdings of balances in that currency, plus outstanding contracts for future receipt, minus outstanding contracts for future delivery of that currency, i.e., as the sum of these elements with due regard to sign.

2. The Federal Open Market Committee directs the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to maintain for the System Open Market Account (subject to the requirements of section 214.5 of Regulation N, Relations with Foreign Banks and Bankers):

A. Reciprocal currency arrangements with the following foreign banks: Foreign bank Amount of arrangement (millions of dollars equivalent) Bank of Canada 2,000 Bank of Mexico 3,000 B. Standing dollar liquidity swap arrangements with the following foreign banks:

Bank of Canada Bank of England Bank of Japan European Central Bank Swiss National Bank C. Standing foreign currency liquidity swap arrangements with the following foreign banks:

Bank of Canada Bank of England Bank of Japan European Central Bank Swiss National Bank Dollar and foreign currency liquidity swap arrangements have no pre-set size limits. Any new swap arrangements shall be referred for review and approval to the Committee. All swap arrangements are subject to annual review and approval by the Committee.

3. All transactions in foreign currencies undertaken under paragraph 1.A above shall, unless otherwise expressly authorized by the Committee, be at prevailing market rates. For the purpose of providing an investment return on System holdings of foreign currencies or for the purpose of adjusting interest rates paid or received in connection with swap drawings, transactions with foreign central banks may be undertaken at non-market exchange rates.

4. It shall be the normal practice to arrange with foreign central banks for the coordination of foreign currency transactions. In making operating arrangements with foreign central banks on System holdings of foreign currencies, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York shall not commit itself to maintain any specific balance, unless authorized by the Federal Open Market Committee. Any agreements or understandings concerning the administration of the accounts maintained by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York with the foreign banks designated by the Board of Governors under section 214.5 of Regulation N shall be referred for review and approval to the Committee.

5. Foreign currency holdings shall be invested to ensure that adequate liquidity is maintained to meet anticipated needs and so that each currency portfolio shall generally have an average duration of no more than 18 months (calculated as Macaulay duration). Such investments may include buying or selling outright obligations of, or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, a foreign government or agency thereof; buying such securities under agreements for repurchase of such securities; selling such securities under agreements for the resale of such securities; and holding various time and other deposit accounts at foreign institutions. In addition, when appropriate in connection with arrangements to provide investment facilities for foreign currency holdings, U.S. government securities may be purchased from foreign central banks under agreements for repurchase of such securities within 30 calendar days.

6. All operations undertaken pursuant to the preceding paragraphs shall be reported promptly to the Foreign Currency Subcommittee and the Committee. The Foreign Currency Subcommittee consists of the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Committee, the Vice Chairman of the Board of Governors, and such other member of the Board as the Chairman may designate (or in the absence of members of the Board serving on the Subcommittee, other Board members designated by the Chairman as alternates, and in the absence of the Vice Chairman of the Committee, the Vice Chairman's alternate). Meetings of the Subcommittee shall be called at the request of any member, or at the request of the manager, System Open Market Account ("manager"), for the purposes of reviewing recent or contemplated operations and of consulting with the manager on other matters relating to the manager's responsibilities. At the request of any member of the Subcommittee, questions arising from such reviews and consultations shall be referred for determination to the Federal Open Market Committee.

7. The Chairman is authorized:

A. With the approval of the Committee, to enter into any needed agreement or understanding with the Secretary of the Treasury about the division of responsibility for foreign currency operations between the System and the Treasury;

B. To keep the Secretary of the Treasury fully advised concerning System foreign currency operations, and to consult with the Secretary on policy matters relating to foreign currency operations;

C. From time to time, to transmit appropriate reports and information to the National Advisory Council on International Monetary and Financial Policies.

8. All Federal Reserve Banks shall participate in the foreign currency operations for System Account in accordance with paragraph 3G(1) of the Board of Governors' Statement of Procedure with Respect to Foreign Relationships of Federal Reserve Banks dated January 1, 1944.

9. The Federal Open Market Committee authorizes the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to undertake transactions of the type described in paragraphs 1, 2, and 5, and foreign exchange and investment transactions that it may be otherwise authorized to undertake from time to time for the purpose of testing operational readiness. The aggregate amount of such transactions shall not exceed $2.5 billion per calendar year. These transactions shall be conducted with prior notice to the Committee.

FOREIGN CURRENCY DIRECTIVE (As amended effective January 28, 2014)

1. System operations in foreign currencies shall generally be directed at countering disorderly market conditions, provided that market exchange rates for the U.S. dollar reflect actions and behavior consistent with IMF Article IV, Section 1.

2. To achieve this end the System shall:

A. Undertake spot and forward purchases and sales of foreign exchange.

B. Maintain reciprocal currency arrangements with foreign central banks in accordance with the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations.

C. Maintain standing dollar liquidity swap arrangements with foreign banks in accordance with the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations.

D. Maintain standing foreign currency liquidity swap arrangements with foreign banks in accordance with the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations.

E. Cooperate in other respects with central banks of other countries and with international monetary institutions.

3. Transactions may also be undertaken:

A. To adjust System balances in light of probable future needs for currencies.

B. To provide means for meeting System and Treasury commitments in particular currencies, and to facilitate operations of the Exchange Stabilization Fund.

C. For such other purposes as may be expressly authorized by the Committee.

4. System foreign currency operations shall be conducted:

A. In close and continuous consultation and cooperation with the United States Treasury;

B. In cooperation, as appropriate, with foreign monetary authorities; and

C. In a manner consistent with the obligations of the United States in the International Monetary Fund regarding exchange arrangements under IMF Article IV.

PROCEDURAL INSTRUCTIONS WITH RESPECT TO FOREIGN CURRENCY OPERATIONS (As amended effective January 28, 2014)

In conducting operations pursuant to the authorization and direction of the Federal Open Market Committee (the "Committee") as set forth in the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations and the Foreign Currency Directive, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, through the manager, System Open Market Account ("manager"), shall be guided by the following procedural understandings with respect to consultations and clearances with the Committee, the Foreign Currency Subcommittee (the "Subcommittee"), and the Chairman of the Committee, unless otherwise directed by the Committee. All operations undertaken pursuant to such clearances shall be reported promptly to the Committee.

1. For the reciprocal currency arrangements authorized in paragraphs 2.A of the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations:

A. Drawings must be approved by the Subcommittee (or by the Chairman, if the Chairman believes that consultation with the Subcommittee is not feasible in the time available) if the swap drawing proposed by a foreign bank does not exceed the larger of (i) $200 million or (ii) 15 percent of the size of the swap arrangement.

B. Drawings must be approved by the Committee (or by the Subcommittee, if the Subcommittee believes that consultation with the full Committee is not feasible in the time available, or by the Chairman, if the Chairman believes that consultation with the Subcommittee is not feasible in the time available) if the swap drawing proposed by a foreign bank exceeds the larger of (i) $200 million or (ii) 15 percent of the size of the swap arrangement.

C. The manager shall also consult with the Subcommittee or the Chairman about proposed swap drawings by the System.

D. Any changes in the terms of existing swap arrangements shall be referred for review and approval to the Chairman. The Chairman shall keep the Committee informed of any changes in terms, and the terms shall be consistent with principles discussed with and guidance provided by the Committee.

2. For the dollar and foreign currency liquidity swap arrangements authorized in paragraphs 2.B and 2.C of the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations:

A. Drawings must be approved by the Chairman in consultation with the Subcommittee. The Chairman or the Subcommittee will consult with the Committee prior to the initial drawing on the dollar or foreign currency liquidity swap lines if possible under the circumstances then prevailing; authority to approve subsequent drawings for either the dollar or foreign currency liquidity swap lines may be delegated to the manager by the Chairman.

B. Any changes in the terms of existing swap arrangements shall be referred for review and approval to the Chairman. The Chairman shall keep the Committee informed of any changes in terms, and the terms shall be consistent with principles discussed with and guidance provided by the Committee.

3. Any operation must be approved by:

A. The Subcommittee (or by the Chairman, if the Chairman believes that consultation with the Subcommittee is not feasible in the time available) if it:

i. Would result in a change in the System's overall open position in foreign currencies exceeding $300 million on any day or $600 million since the most recent regular meeting of the Committee.

ii. Would result in a change on any day in the System's net position in a single foreign currency exceeding $150 million, or $300 million when the operation is associated with repayment of swap drawings.

iii. Might generate a substantial volume of trading in a particular currency by the System, even though the change in the System's net position in that currency (as defined in paragraph 1.D of the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations) might be less than the limits specified in 3.A.ii.

B. The Committee (or by the Subcommittee, if the Subcommittee believes that consultation with the full Committee is not feasible in the time available, or by the Chairman, if the Chairman believes that consultation with the Subcommittee is not feasible in the time available) if it would result in a change in the System's overall open position in foreign currencies exceeding $1.5 billion since the most recent regular meeting of the Committee.

4. The Committee authorizes the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to undertake transactions of the type described in paragraphs 1, 2, and 5 of the Authorization for Foreign Currency Operations and foreign exchange and investment transactions that it may be otherwise authorized to undertake from time to time for the purpose of testing operational readiness. The aggregate amount of such transactions shall not exceed $2.5 billion per calendar year. These transactions shall be conducted with prior notice to the Committee.

In its annual reconsideration of the Statement on Longer-Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy, participants generally agreed that only minor updates were required at this meeting. It was noted, however, that because this was the third year in which the statement was being issued, the coming year would be an appropriate time to consider whether the statement could be enhanced in any way. For example, some participants advocated an explicit indication that inflation persistently below the Committee's 2 percent longer-run objective and inflation persistently above that objective would be equally undesirable. Some others suggested that the statement could more clearly describe how the mandated goals of maximum employment and price stability are linked with the objective of financial stability. Following the discussion, the Committee voted to approve minor wording changes to the statement and to update the statement's reference to participants' estimates of the longer-run normal unemployment rate. Mr. Tarullo abstained from the vote because he continued to think that the statement had not advanced the cause of communicating or achieving greater consensus in the policy views of the Committee.

STATEMENT ON LONGER-RUN GOALS AND MONETARY POLICY STRATEGY (As amended effective January 28, 2014)

"The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) is firmly committed to fulfilling its statutory mandate from the Congress of promoting maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates. The Committee seeks to explain its monetary policy decisions to the public as clearly as possible. Such clarity facilitates well-informed decisionmaking by households and businesses, reduces economic and financial uncertainty, increases the effectiveness of monetary policy, and enhances transparency and accountability, which are essential in a democratic society.

Inflation, employment, and long-term interest rates fluctuate over time in response to economic and financial disturbances. Moreover, monetary policy actions tend to influence economic activity and prices with a lag. Therefore, the Committee's policy decisions reflect its longer-run goals, its medium-term outlook, and its assessments of the balance of risks, including risks to the financial system that could impede the attainment of the Committee's goals.

The inflation rate over the longer run is primarily determined by monetary policy, and hence the Committee has the ability to specify a longer-run goal for inflation. The Committee reaffirms its judgment that inflation at the rate of 2 percent, as measured by the annual change in the price index for personal consumption expenditures, is most consistent over the longer run with the Federal Reserve's statutory mandate. Communicating this inflation goal clearly to the public helps keep longer-term inflation expectations firmly anchored, thereby fostering price stability and moderate long-term interest rates and enhancing the Committee's ability to promote maximum employment in the face of significant economic disturbances.

The maximum level of employment is largely determined by nonmonetary factors that affect the structure and dynamics of the labor market. These factors may change over time and may not be directly measurable. Consequently, it would not be appropriate to specify a fixed goal for employment; rather, the Committee's policy decisions must be informed by assessments of the maximum level of employment, recognizing that such assessments are necessarily uncertain and subject to revision. The Committee considers a wide range of indicators in making these assessments. Information about Committee participants' estimates of the longer-run normal rates of output growth and unemployment is published four times per year in the FOMC's Summary of Economic Projections. For example, in the most recent projections, FOMC participants' estimates of the longer-run normal rate of unemployment had a central tendency of 5.2 percent to 5.8 percent.

In setting monetary policy, the Committee seeks to mitigate deviations of inflation from its longer-run goal and deviations of employment from the Committee's assessments of its maximum level. These objectives are generally complementary. However, under circumstances in which the Committee judges that the objectives are not complementary, it follows a balanced approach in promoting them, taking into account the magnitude of the deviations and the potentially different time horizons over which employment and inflation are projected to return to levels judged consistent with its mandate.

The Committee intends to reaffirm these principles and to make adjustments as appropriate at its annual organizational meeting each January."

By unanimous vote, the Committee amended its Rules of Organization to add the position of deputy manager of the System Open Market Account.

By unanimous vote, the Committee amended its Program for Security of FOMC Information with minor changes to the review and reporting process for breaches in the information security rules and with several other minor updates and clarifications. By unanimous vote, the Committee selected Simon Potter and Lorie K. Logan to serve at the pleasure of the Committee as manager and deputy manager of the System Open Market Account, respectively, on the understanding that their selection was subject to their being satisfactory to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Secretary's note: Advice subsequently was received that the manager and deputy manager selections indicated above were satisfactory to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Developments in Financial Markets and the Federal Reserve's Balance Sheet The manager of the System Open Market Account (SOMA) reported on developments in domestic and foreign financial markets as well as System open market operations during the period since the Federal Open Market Committee met on December 17-18, 2013. The manager also presented an update on the ongoing overnight reverse repurchase agreement (ON RRP) exercise. All operations to date had proceeded smoothly. The number of participating counterparties and total allotment in the daily operations increased in late December, in part reflecting the fact that overnight secured rates were low compared with the fixed rate offered in the operations as well as the increase in the cap on individual counterparty bids to $3 billion from $1 billion that was implemented on December 23, 2013. Counterparties' year-end balance sheet adjustments also boosted participation for a time; the ON RRP operations reportedly helped limit downward pressure on money market rates around year-end.

Following the manager's report, meeting participants discussed a proposal to extend the Desk's authority to conduct the ON RRP exercise for 12 months and to lift the per-counterparty bid limit. Under the terms of the proposal, the interest rate on ON RRPs would remain between 0 and 5 basis points. The Chair of the FOMC would authorize any changes in the offered rate or per-counterparty bid limit. Adjustments to the bid limit would be made in gradual steps, and the Committee would be consulted before the exercise would move to full allotment. The proposed changes were intended to allow the Committee to obtain additional information about the potential usefulness of ON RRP operations for affecting market interest rates when that step becomes appropriate. Most meeting participants supported the proposal, with a couple emphasizing that the period for which the exercise would be extended was likely sufficiently long that counterparties would be willing to adjust their current money market practices, thereby providing better information on the possible market effects of such operations. It was remarked that the additional insights obtained from the exercise could be useful in the context of the Committee's future discussions about monetary policy implementation over the medium and longer term. A number of participants, however, indicated a preference for retaining a cap on the per-counterparty bid limit until the Committee has discussed possible approaches to medium-term policy implementation, and a few of these participants preferred to extend the exercise for a shorter period.

Following the discussion, the Committee approved the following resolution:

"The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) authorizes the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to conduct a series of fixed-rate, overnight reverse repurchase operations involving U.S. Government securities, and securities that are direct obligations of, or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by, any agency of the United States, for the purpose of further assessing the potential role for such operations in supporting the implementation of monetary policy. The reverse repurchase operations authorized by this resolution shall be offered at a fixed rate that may vary from zero to five basis points, and for an overnight term, or such longer term as is warranted to accommodate weekend, holiday, and similar trading conventions. Any change to the offered rate within the range specified above or the per-counterparty bid limits will require approval of the Chairman. The System Open Market Account manager will notify the FOMC in advance about any changes to the terms of operations. These operations shall be authorized through January 30, 2015."

Messrs. Fisher and Plosser dissented because of their preference for retaining a cap on the maximum size of counterparties' offers during the extension; Mr. Plosser also preferred a shorter extension of the exercise.

By unanimous vote, the Committee ratified the Open Market Desk's domestic transactions over the intermeeting period. There were no intervention operations in foreign currencies for the System's account over the intermeeting period.

Staff Review of the Economic Situation The information reviewed for the January 28-29 meeting indicated that the rate of economic growth picked up in the second half of 2013. Total payroll employment increased in December, but at a slower pace than in previous months, and the unemployment rate declined but was still elevated. Consumer price inflation continued to run below the Committee's longer-run objective, while measures of longer-term inflation expectations remained stable.

Overall, labor market indicators appeared consistent with a gradual ongoing improvement in labor market conditions. Total nonfarm payroll employment expanded by less in December than in the previous two months, perhaps partly because of unusually bad weather. The unemployment rate declined to 6.7 percent in December. The labor force participation rate also decreased, and the employment-to-population ratio was little changed. The rate of long-duration unemployment declined, but the share of workers employed part time for economic reasons was little changed, and both measures remained elevated. Among other indicators of labor market conditions, the rate of job openings edged up in recent months, and the share of small businesses reporting that they had hard-to-fill positions trended up. Measures of firms' hiring plans were higher than a year earlier, but the rate of gross private-sector hiring was still low. Initial claims for unemployment insurance moved down, on balance, over the intermeeting period, and household expectations of the labor market situation improved, on net, in December and early January.

Manufacturing production increased at a robust pace in the fourth quarter, with broad-based gains across industries. Indicators of manufacturing production, such as the readings on new orders from national and regional manufacturing surveys, were consistent with a further expansion in factory output early this year, but automakers' production schedules indicated that the pace of light motor vehicle assemblies would decline in the first quarter.

Real personal consumption expenditures (PCE) rose at a faster pace in October and November than in the third quarter. In December, the components of the nominal retail sales data used by the Bureau of Economic Analysis to construct its estimate of PCE increased strongly, although sales of light motor vehicles declined after posting a large gain in November. Recent information on several important factors that influence household spending was somewhat mixed. Households' real disposable income was little changed in October and November, and the expiration of the emergency unemployment compensation program at the end of 2013 was expected to reduce aggregate income growth early this year. However, households' net worth likely continued to expand in recent months as a result of rising equity prices and home values. Consumer sentiment in the Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers improved, on balance, in December and early January after a decline in the fall of 2013.

The pace of activity in the housing sector showed some tentative signs of stabilizing, as the effects of the past year's rise in mortgage rates appeared to wane. Single-family housing starts increased in November and only partly reversed that gain in December, while permits for new construction rose a little, on balance, in the fourth quarter. New home sales declined in November and December but were nonetheless higher than in the third quarter, and existing home sales flattened out in December after decreasing for several months.

Real private expenditures for business equipment and intellectual property products appeared to strengthen in the fourth quarter, as nominal shipments of nondefense capital goods rose at a solid pace. Although nominal new orders for these capital goods declined in December and November's increase was revised down, the level of orders remained above that of shipments, pointing to further increases in shipments in subsequent months. Other forward-looking indicators, such as surveys of business conditions and capital spending plans, were also generally consistent with near-term gains in business equipment spending. Nominal expenditures for nonresidential construction, which had been flat in October, moved higher in November. Data on book-value inventories suggested little change in the pace of nonfarm inventory investment in the fourth quarter, and the available information did not point to significant inventory imbalances in most industries.

Real federal government purchases likely fell sharply in the fourth quarter because of continued declines in defense spending and the temporary partial shutdown of the federal government in October. Increases in real state and local government purchases appeared to have moderated in the fourth quarter. The payrolls of these governments were about unchanged during the fourth quarter, and nominal state and local construction expenditures for October and November increased at a slower pace, on net, than in the third quarter.

The U.S. international trade deficit narrowed substantially in November, as exports increased and imports fell. The higher value of exports stemmed in large part from an increase in sales of petroleum products, while the fall in imports was primarily due to a decline in purchases of crude oil.

Total U.S. consumer price inflation, as measured by the PCE price index, was a little under 1 percent over the 12 months ending in November, well below the Committee's 2 percent longer-term objective. Over that period, consumer energy prices declined, consumer food prices rose modestly, and core PCE prices--which exclude consumer food and energy prices--increased slightly more than 1 percent. In December, the consumer price index (CPI) rose somewhat faster than in recent months, primarily reflecting an upturn in consumer energy prices; core CPI inflation remained low. Both near-term and longer-term inflation expectations from the Michigan survey were little changed, on net, in December and early January. Over the 12 months ending in December, nominal average hourly earnings for all employees increased slightly faster than consumer price inflation.

Foreign economic activity continued to improve, with economic growth in the third quarter of 2013 higher than in the first half of the year and more recent indicators suggesting further gains. The pickup was widespread, as the euro area registered a second consecutive quarter of positive economic growth, the Mexican economy bounced back from a second-quarter contraction, and stronger external demand boosted growth in emerging market economies more generally. At the same time, inflation continued to run below central bank targets in several advanced economies, and monetary policy remained expansionary in these economies. Inflation in emerging market economies remained moderate on average, although Brazil, India, and Turkey again tightened monetary policy during the intermeeting period in response to concerns about inflation and currency depreciation. The policy tightening in Turkey was particularly sharp and followed several days of heightened financial market pressures toward the end of the intermeeting period. Similar pressures were evident in some other emerging market economies as well.

Staff Review of the Financial Situation Financial market conditions over the intermeeting period were importantly influenced by Federal Reserve communications, somewhat better-than-expected economic data releases, and developments in emerging market economies. On net, financial conditions in the United States remained supportive of growth in economic activity and employment: Equity prices increased a bit, longer-term interest rates declined, and the dollar appreciated against most other currencies.

While investors were somewhat surprised by the FOMC's decision at its December meeting to reduce the pace of its asset purchases, the policy action and associated communications appeared to have only a limited effect on market participants' outlook for the Federal Reserve's balance sheet. Indeed, the Committee's decision to cut the pace of purchases and its rationale for doing so seemed to increase investors' confidence in the economic outlook, a shift that was further supported by subsequent U.S. economic data releases. However, those effects were reversed late in the period when investors appeared to pull back from riskier assets in reaction to rising concern about developments in some emerging market economies and their possible implications for global economic growth.

Results from the Desk's survey of primary dealers conducted prior to the January meeting indicated that dealers anticipated only minor changes to the Committee's postmeeting statement. In addition, the median dealer expected a $10 billion reduction in the monthly pace of asset purchases to be announced at each meeting in the first three quarters of 2014, with the purchase program ending with a final $15 billion reduction at the October 2014 meeting.

On balance, 10-and 30-year nominal Treasury yields declined about 10 basis points and 20 basis points, respectively, over the intermeeting period, in part because of an increase in safe-haven demands toward the end of the period. The December policy action and subsequent muted market reaction led to decreased uncertainty about future longer-term interest rates, perhaps contributing to the decline in longer-term rates. The measure of 5-year inflation compensation based on Treasury inflation-protected securities increased a little, while inflation compensation 5 to 10 years ahead decreased somewhat.

Conditions in short-term dollar funding markets generally remained stable. Year-end funding pressures were modest, and overnight money market rates declined about in line with their typical behavior in past years. Repo rates were quite low at the end of the year and remained low through most of January, leading to increased participation in the Federal Reserve's ON RRP operations, with a substantial temporary increase in take-up at year-end. Primarily reflecting the increased participation in the exercise, reserve balances expanded more slowly and the rate of increase in the monetary base slowed in December. M2 continued to expand moderately.

Reflecting the improved outlook for economic activity and despite mixed fourth-quarter earnings results, the stock prices of bank holding companies rose notably and spreads on credit default swaps for the largest bank holding companies narrowed somewhat. According to the January Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey on Bank Lending Practices, domestic banks continued to ease their lending standards and some loan terms on balance; they also experienced an increase in demand, on net, in most major loan categories in the fourth quarter.

Broad U.S. equity price indexes edged higher, on net, over the intermeeting period, and equity issuance by nonfinancial corporations increased. Credit remained widely available to large nonfinancial corporations. Corporate bond spreads continued to narrow over the intermeeting period, with investment-grade bond spreads reaching their lowest levels in several years and those on speculative-grade corporate bonds approaching pre-crisis levels. Bond issuance by domestic corporations generally stayed strong, commercial and industrial loans on banks' books increased by a notable amount late in the fourth quarter, and issuance of leveraged loans and collateralized loan obligations generally continued apace.

Conditions in the commercial real estate sector recovered further in the fourth quarter, with rising property prices and fewer distressed sales. In the market for commercial mortgage-backed securities, investor demand remained strong and spreads continued to be tight despite high issuance near year-end. Commercial real estate loans on banks' books expanded moderately.

Credit conditions in municipal bond markets generally remained stable, although a few issuers continued to experience substantial strain. Available data suggest that, for the first time in several years, the ratings agency Moody's Investors Service made more upgrades than downgrades to municipal debt in the fourth quarter. However, Moody's put Puerto Rico on watch for a downgrade.

Households continued to face mixed credit conditions in the fourth quarter. Consumer credit expanded again in November, boosted by further gains in auto and student loans, and bank credit data indicate that this expansion likely continued through December. In contrast, credit card balances were little changed, on net, through November, as underwriting appeared to remain quite tight. The volume of mortgage applications for home purchases held about steady since the previous FOMC meeting while refinance applications remained at very low levels. Mortgage rates declined slightly, in line with modestly lower yields on agency mortgage-backed securities. Despite tight mortgage availability and subdued borrowing, house prices continued to increase in November, although not as quickly as earlier in 2013.

Financial market conditions in the advanced foreign economies over the intermeeting period generally became more supportive of growth. Long-term government bond yields declined and headline equity indexes increased, on net, in most of these countries, with bank stock prices in the euro area rising more than broader indexes. In addition, debt issuance by both governments and banks in the European periphery picked up, and sovereign yield spreads in those countries were flat to down, on balance, over the period. In contrast, amid a ratcheting-up of financial market strains in some emerging market economies, headline stock price indexes in most emerging market economies declined, outflows from emerging market mutual funds continued, and yield spreads on dollar-denominated emerging market bonds increased. Local-currency yields rose in some emerging market economies, such as Brazil, South Africa, and Turkey, and short-term interbank rates in China were volatile and trended higher over the period. The foreign exchange value of the dollar appreciated against most other currencies over the period, with particularly large increases against the Argentine peso and the Turkish lira.

Staff Economic Outlook In the economic projection prepared by the staff for the January FOMC meeting, growth of real gross domestic product (GDP) in the second half of 2013 was estimated to have been stronger than the staff had expected, though some of the strength in inventory investment and net exports was possibly transitory. The staff's medium-term forecast for real GDP growth was little revised, on balance, as the momentum implied by faster GDP growth in the second half of 2013 was largely offset by a higher projected path for the foreign exchange value of the dollar. In addition, the staff revised downward its view of the pace at which potential output had increased over recent years and would increase this year and next. The staff continued to project that real GDP would expand more quickly over the next few years than in 2013 and that real GDP would rise faster than potential output. This acceleration in economic activity was expected to be supported by still-accommodative monetary policy and an easing in the effects of fiscal policy restraint on economic growth, as well as by increases in consumer and business confidence, further improvements in credit availability and financial conditions, and continued gains in foreign economic growth. The expansion in economic activity was anticipated to lead to a slow reduction in resource slack over the projection period, and the unemployment rate was expected to decline gradually, reaching the staff's estimate of its longer-run natural rate in 2016.

The staff's forecast for inflation was little changed from the projection prepared for the previous FOMC meeting, although the near-term forecast was revised down a little to reflect recent declines in energy prices. The staff continued to forecast that inflation would run well below the Committee's 2 percent objective early this year but above the low level observed over much of 2013. Over the medium term, with longer-run inflation expectations assumed to remain stable, changes in commodity and import prices expected to be muted, and slack in labor and product markets receding gradually, inflation was projected to move back slowly toward the Committee's objective.

In considering recent events in emerging market economies, the staff judged that the effects of recent financial market volatility had not been large enough to have a material effect on the overall outlook for those economies and, similarly, that the spillover effects on the United States of developments to date were likely to be modest. Because conditions were in flux, however, these markets would require careful monitoring.

The staff continued to see a number of risks around its outlook. The downside risks to the forecast for real GDP growth were thought to have diminished, but the risks were still seen as tilted a little to the downside because, with the target federal funds rate at its effective lower bound, the economy was not well positioned to withstand future adverse shocks. At the same time, the staff viewed the risks around its outlook for the unemployment rate and for inflation as roughly balanced.

Participants' Views on Current Conditions and the Economic Outlook In their discussion of the economic situation and the outlook, participants generally noted that economic activity had strengthened more in the second half of 2013 than they had expected at the time of the December meeting. In particular, consumer spending had strengthened, and business investment appeared to be on a more solid uptrend. Although the government shutdown likely damped economic growth somewhat, the extent of restraint on growth from fiscal policy diminished late in the year. However, several participants observed that temporary factors had helped boost real GDP during the second half, pointing specifically to the substantial contributions from net exports and increased inventory investment. As a result, participants generally did not expect the recent pace of economic growth to be sustained, but they nonetheless anticipated that the economy would expand at a moderate pace in coming quarters. That expansion was expected to be supported by highly accommodative monetary policy, a further easing of fiscal restraint, and a modest additional pickup in global economic growth, as well as continued improvement in credit conditions and the ongoing strengthening in household balance sheets. A number of participants noted that recent economic news had reinforced their confidence in their projection of moderate economic growth over the medium run. It was also noted that recent developments in several emerging market economies, if they continued, could pose downside risks to the outlook. Overall, most participants still viewed the risks to the outlook for the economy and the labor market as having become more nearly balanced in recent months.

Consumer spending had advanced strongly in late 2013, contributing importantly to the pickup in growth of economic activity. This picture was reinforced by survey data that suggested that consumers had become more optimistic about future income gains. While noting that households remained cautious, participants cited a number of factors that were likely to continue to underpin gains in household spending, including rising house prices, growing confidence in the sustainability of the economic expansion, increasing payrolls, and the high ratio of household wealth to disposable income.

Although the recovery in the housing sector had slowed somewhat in recent months, a number of participants reported solid activity in their Districts. Moreover, various factors were seen as likely to support stronger growth in the sector going forward, including favorable housing affordability, which was in turn partly due to still-low mortgage rates, and demographic trends. However, there were also reasons for being cautious about the prospects for housing construction, such as recent disappointing news on permits for new construction and the possibility that investors' interest in purchasing properties for the rental market would recede.

Business contacts in many parts of the country reported that they were guardedly optimistic about prospects for 2014. While inventory investment would likely come down from its recent unusually high level, participants heard more reports that the business sector was willing to increase spending on capital projects. A number of factors were cited as likely to support such an increase, including the high level of profits, the low level of interest rates, a reduction in policy uncertainty, the easing of lending standards, and large holdings of liquid assets by corporations.

In discussing financial developments over the intermeeting period, several participants noted that the Committee's December decision to make a modest reduction in the monthly pace of asset purchases had not resulted in an adverse market reaction. Several participants observed that current market expectations for asset purchases and the future course of the federal funds rate were reasonably well aligned with participants' own expectations of the path for policy. However, one participant expressed concern that longer-term interest rates could rise sharply if market participants' expectations of future monetary policy came to deviate from those of policymakers, as appeared to have happened last summer, while a couple of others argued that the current highly accommodative stance of monetary policy could lead investors to take on excessive risk and so undermine longer-term financial stability. Recent volatility in emerging markets appeared to have had only a limited effect to date on U.S. financial markets. Nevertheless, participants agreed that a number of developments in financial markets needed to be watched carefully, including the financing situation of the Puerto Rican government and particularly the unfolding events in emerging markets.

In their discussion of recent labor market developments, many participants commented on the relatively small increase in payrolls in December and the further decline in the unemployment rate. A number of participants indicated that the December payrolls figure may have been an anomaly, perhaps importantly reflecting bad weather, and it was noted that the initial readings on payrolls in recent years had subsequently tended to be revised up. In addition, some participants reported that their business contacts had become more positive about hiring in the year ahead. Participants continued to debate the reliability of the unemployment rate as an indicator of overall labor market conditions, taking into account the further decline in labor force participation in recent quarters, still-elevated levels of underemployment and long-term unemployment, and the apparent absence of wage pressures. Much of the downward trend in the labor force participation rate since the start of the recession was seen as the result of shifts in the demographic composition of the workforce and the retirement of older workers; the extent of the cyclical portion of the decline was viewed by some as difficult to gauge at present. A few participants judged that the decline in participation for younger and prime-age workers likely reflected the slow recovery in jobs and wages and so might be reversed as labor market conditions strengthened. In addition, several others pointed out that broader concepts of the unemployment rate, such as those that include nonparticipants who report that they want a job and those working part time who want full-time work, remained well above the official unemployment rate, suggesting that considerable labor market slack remained despite the reduction in the unemployment rate. A few participants noted worker shortages in specific regions and occupations, with one District reporting widespread shortages of skilled labor leading to emerging labor cost pressures. However, a number of participants saw the low ! rates of increase in most measures of wages as consistent with continued labor market slack.

Inflation remained below the Committee's longer-run objective over the intermeeting period. Participants still anticipated that, with longer-run inflation expectations stable, transitory factors that had been damping inflation likely to recede, and economic activity picking up, inflation would move back toward the Committee's 2 percent objective over the medium run. However, several factors that cast doubt on this outcome were also mentioned, including slow growth in labor costs, the lack of pricing power reported by business contacts in various parts of the country, the low level of inflation in other advanced economies, and the danger that inflation expectations at short and medium horizons might not be as well anchored as longer-run inflation expectations. Participants noted that inflation persistently below the Committee's objective would pose risks to economic performance and that inflation developments would need to be monitored carefully.

In their discussion of the path for monetary policy, most participants judged that the incoming information about the economy was broadly in line with their expectations and that a further modest step down in the pace of purchases was appropriate. A couple of participants observed that continued low readings on inflation and considerable slack in the labor market raised questions about the desirability of reducing the pace of purchases; these participants judged, however, that a pause in the reduction of purchases was not justified at this stage, especially in light of the strength of the economy in the second half of 2013. Several participants argued that, in the absence of an appreciable change in the economic outlook, there should be a clear presumption in favor of continuing to reduce the pace of purchases by a total of $10 billion at each FOMC meeting. That said, a number of participants noted that if the economy deviated substantially from its expected path, the Committee should be prepared to respond with an appropriate adjustment to the trajectory of its purchases.

Participants agreed that, with the unemployment rate approaching 6-1/2 percent, it would soon be appropriate for the Committee to change its forward guidance in order to provide information about its decisions regarding the federal funds rate after that threshold was crossed. A range of views was expressed about the form that such forward guidance might take. Some participants favored quantitative guidance along the lines of the existing thresholds, while others preferred a qualitative approach that would provide additional information regarding the factors that would guide the Committee's policy decisions. Several participants suggested that risks to financial stability should appear more explicitly in the list of factors that would guide decisions about the federal funds rate once the unemployment rate threshold is crossed, and several participants argued that the forward guidance should give greater emphasis to the Committee's willingness to keep rates low if inflation were to remain persistently below the Committee's 2 percent longer-run objective. Additional proposals included relying to a greater extent on the Summary of Economic Projections as a communications device and including in the guidance an indication of the Committee's willingness to adjust policy to lean against undesired changes in financial conditions.

A few participants raised the possibility that it might be appropriate to increase the federal funds rate relatively soon. One participant cited evidence that the equilibrium real interest rate had moved higher, and a couple of them noted that some standard policy rules tended to suggest that the federal funds rate should be raised above its effective lower bound before the middle of this year. Other participants, however, suggested that prescriptions from standard policy rules were not appropriate in current circumstances, either because the target federal funds rate had been constrained by the lower bound for some time or because the equilibrium real rate of interest was likely still being held down by various factors, including the lingering effects of the financial crisis, and was significantly below the value of the longer-run rate built into standard policy rules.

Committee Policy Action Committee members saw the information received over the intermeeting period as indicating that growth in economic activity had picked up in recent quarters. Labor market indicators were mixed but on balance showed further improvement. The unemployment rate had declined but remained elevated when judged against members' estimates of the longer-run normal rate of unemployment. Household spending and business fixed investment had advanced more quickly in recent months than earlier in 2013, while the recovery in the housing sector had slowed somewhat. Fiscal policy was restraining economic growth, although the extent of the restraint had diminished. The Committee expected that, with appropriate policy accommodation, the economy would expand at a moderate pace and the unemployment rate would gradually decline toward levels consistent with the dual mandate. Moreover, members continued to judge that the risks to the outlook for the economy and the labor market had become more nearly balanced. Inflation was running below the Committee's longer-run objective, and this was seen as posing possible risks to economic performance, but members anticipated that stable inflation expectations and strengthening economic activity would, over time, return inflation to the Committee's 2 percent objective. However, in light of their concerns about the persistence of low inflation, many members saw a need for the Committee to monitor inflation developments carefully for evidence that inflation was moving back toward its longer-run objective.

In their discussion of monetary policy in the period ahead, all members agreed that the cumulative improvement in labor market conditions and the likelihood of continuing improvement indicated that it would be appropriate to make a further measured reduction in the pace of its asset purchases at this meeting. Members again judged that, if the economy continued to develop as anticipated, further reductions would be undertaken in measured steps. Members also underscored that the pace of asset purchases was not on a preset course and would remain contingent on the Committee's outlook for the labor market and inflation as well as its assessment of the efficacy and costs of purchases. Accordingly, the Committee agreed that, beginning in February, it would add to its holdings of agency mortgage-backed securities at a pace of $30 billion per month rather than $35 billion per month, and would add to its holdings of longer-term Treasury securities at a pace of $35 billion per month rather than $40 billion per month. While making a further measured reduction in its pace of purchases, the Committee emphasized that its holdings of longer-term securities were sizable and would still be increasing, which would promote a stronger economic recovery by maintaining downward pressure on longer-term interest rates, supporting mortgage markets, and helping to make broader financial conditions more accommodative. The Committee also reiterated that it would continue its asset purchases, and employ its other policy tools as appropriate, until the outlook for the labor market has improved substantially in a context of price stability.

In considering forward guidance about the target federal funds rate, all members agreed to retain the thresholds-based language employed in recent statements. In addition, the Committee decided to repeat the qualitative guidance, introduced in December, clarifying that a range of labor market indicators would be used when assessing the appropriate stance of policy once the unemployment rate threshold had been crossed. Members also agreed to reiterate language indicating the Committee's anticipation, based on its current assessment of additional measures of labor market conditions, indicators of inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and readings on financial developments, that it would be appropriate to maintain the current target range for the federal funds rate well past the time that the unemployment rate declines below 6-1/2 percent, especially if projected inflation continues to run below the Committee's longer-run objective.

Members also discussed other elements of the policy statement to be issued following the meeting. Members agreed on updating the description of the state of the economy to reflect the recent strength of household and business spending and to note that, although the labor market showed further improvement on balance, the recent indicators were mixed. Members did not see an appreciable change in the balance of risks and so left the statement's description of risks unchanged.

At the conclusion of the discussion, the Committee voted to authorize and direct the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, until it was instructed otherwise, to execute transactions in the SOMA in accordance with the following domestic policy directive:

"Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Federal Open Market Committee seeks monetary and financial conditions that will foster maximum employment and price stability. In particular, the Committee seeks conditions in reserve markets consistent with federal funds trading in a range from 0 to 1/4 percent. The Committee directs the Desk to undertake open market operations as necessary to maintain such conditions. Beginning in February, the Desk is directed to purchase longer-term Treasury securities at a pace of about $35 billion per month and to purchase agency mortgage-backed securities at a pace of about $30 billion per month. The Committee also directs the Desk to engage in dollar roll and coupon swap transactions as necessary to facilitate settlement of the Federal Reserve's agency mortgage-backed securities transactions. The Committee directs the Desk to maintain its policy of rolling over maturing Treasury securities into new issues and its policy of reinvesting principal payments on all agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed securities. The System Open Market Account Manager and the Secretary will keep the Committee informed of ongoing developments regarding the System's balance sheet that could affect the attainment over time of the Committee's objectives of maximum employment and price stability." The vote encompassed approval of the statement below to be released at 2:00 p.m.:

"Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in December indicates that growth in economic activity picked up in recent quarters. Labor market indicators were mixed but on balance showed further improvement. The unemployment rate declined but remains elevated. Household spending and business fixed investment advanced more quickly in recent months, while the recovery in the housing sector slowed somewhat. Fiscal policy is restraining economic growth, although the extent of restraint is diminishing. Inflation has been running below the Committee's longer-run objective, but longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.

Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The Committee expects that, with appropriate policy accommodation, economic activity will expand at a moderate pace and the unemployment rate will gradually decline toward levels the Committee judges consistent with its dual mandate. The Committee sees the risks to the outlook for the economy and the labor market as having become more nearly balanced. The Committee recognizes that inflation persistently below its 2 percent objective could pose risks to economic performance, and it is monitoring inflation developments carefully for evidence that inflation will move back toward its objective over the medium term.

Taking into account the extent of federal fiscal retrenchment since the inception of its current asset purchase program, the Committee continues to see the improvement in economic activity and labor market conditions over that period as consistent with growing underlying strength in the broader economy. In light of the cumulative progress toward maximum employment and the improvement in the outlook for labor market conditions, the Committee decided to make a further measured reduction in the pace of its asset purchases. Beginning in February, the Committee will add to its holdings of agency mortgage-backed securities at a pace of $30 billion per month rather than $35 billion per month, and will add to its holdings of longer-term Treasury securities at a pace of $35 billion per month rather than $40 billion per month. The Committee is maintaining its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its holdings of agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed securities and of rolling over maturing Treasury securities at auction. The Committee's sizable and still-increasing holdings of longer-term securities should maintain downward pressure on longer-term interest rates, support mortgage markets, and help to make broader financial conditions more accommodative, which in turn should promote a stronger economic recovery and help to ensure that inflation, over time, is at the rate most consistent with the Committee's dual mandate.

The Committee will closely monitor incoming information on economic and financial developments in coming months and will continue its purchases of Treasury and agency mortgage-backed securities, and employ its other policy tools as appropriate, until the outlook for the labor market has improved substantially in a context of price stability. If incoming information broadly supports the Committee's expectation of ongoing improvement in labor market conditions and inflation moving back toward its longer-run objective, the Committee will likely reduce the pace of asset purchases in further measured steps at future meetings. However, asset purchases are not on a preset course, and the Committee's decisions about their pace will remain contingent on the Committee's outlook for the labor market and inflation as well as its assessment of the likely efficacy and costs of such purchases.

To support continued progress toward maximum employment and price stability, the Committee today reaffirmed its view that a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy will remain appropriate for a considerable time after the asset purchase program ends and the economic recovery strengthens. The Committee also reaffirmed its expectation that the current exceptionally low target range for the federal funds rate of 0 to ¼ percent will be appropriate at least as long as the unemployment rate remains above 6-1/2 percent, inflation between one and two years ahead is projected to be no more than a half percentage point above the Committee's 2 percent longer-run goal, and longer-term inflation expectations continue to be well anchored. In determining how long to maintain a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy, the Committee will also consider other information, including additional measures of labor market conditions, indicators of inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and readings on financial developments. The Committee continues to anticipate, based on its assessment of these factors, that it likely will be appropriate to maintain the current target range for the federal funds rate well past the time that the unemployment rate declines below 6-1/2 percent, especially if projected inflation continues to run below the Committee's 2 percent longer-run goal. When the Committee decides to begin to remove policy accommodation, it will take a balanced approach consistent with its longer-run goals of maximum employment and inflation of 2 percent."

Voting for this action: Ben Bernanke, William C. Dudley, Richard W. Fisher, Narayana Kocherlakota, Sandra Pianalto, Charles I. Plosser, Jerome H. Powell, Jeremy C. Stein, Daniel K. Tarullo, and Janet L. Yellen.

Voting against this action: None.

It was agreed that the next meeting of the Committee would be held on Tuesday-Wednesday, March 18-19, 2014. The meeting adjourned at 10:55 a.m. on January 29, 2014.

Notation Vote By notation vote completed on January 7, 2014, the Committee unanimously approved the minutes of the Committee meeting held on December 17-18, 2013.

_____________________________

William B. English Secretary

Posted-In: News Futures Econ #s Economics Federal Reserve Hot Markets

(c) 2014 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

  Most Popular The Craziest iPhone 6 Rumors And Everything Else About Apple's Next Smartphone Procter & Gamble Shares Under Selling Pressure #PreMarket Primer: Tuesday, February 18: Big Merger Deals In The Works Berkshire Hathaway Files SEC 13F Options Outlook For The Week Of February 17: Time To Link Up With LinkedIn? Earnings Expectations For The Week Of February 17: Coca-Cola, Hewlett-Packard, Wal-Mart & More Related Articles (BROAD + FED) IMF Issues Note on Global Prospects, Policy Changes Ahead of G-20 Meeting in Sydney Feds Announce Guidance For Banks To Work With Marijuana Businesses 10 Things Most People Don't Know About The Debt Ceiling Janet Yellen's Testimony Makes A Good First Impression With Analysts Janet Yellen Expresses Optimism, But Says Economy Is Not 'Close to Full Recovery' Yellen's Testimony on Semiannual Monetary Policy Report to Congress Feb. 11, 2014 Around the Web, We're Loving... Create an Account With Options House and Get 150 Free Trades! Pope Francis Rips 'Trickle-Down' Economics Wynn, MGM, Other Casino Giants Vying For U.S. Turf