Feb
2
Taylor’s Rule, from Dean Davis
February 2, 2008 |
I was recently reading commentary on the question "is the Fed already behind the curve?". The Taylor Rule model was used to assert that the Fed has not cut far enough. The commentator used an approximate recent GDP growth rate of less than 1%, excess capacity and trend in core inflation to state that the Fed Funds rate should be nearer 1%. Quite alarming, it seems to me. What is your take on the Taylor Rule?
East Sider replies:
The Taylor rule works beautifully… in retrospect.
It requires precise estimates of things that are not observable — GDP trend, GDP slack, inflation — so it's useful only for ex-post criticism, not ex-ante policymaking. IMNSHO.
Another argument is often made based on 2 year treasuries trading nearly a full percentage point through 3% fed funds, with analysts saying this means "the market" is looking for the Fed to cut rates to at least 2 percent.
Professionals have wearied of pointing out the credit difference between an overnight unsecured interbank loan, and the perceived security of a liquid obligation representing the full faith and credit of the the US govt.
Comparing apples to apples at the front end of the curve - fed funds to two year swaps - it turns out Bernanke's shop may not be all that much of a laggard.
At Friday's close, overnight funds were roughly 20 bp higher in yield than 2 year swaps. Interestingly and counter-intuitively, that's spot on the one year moving average of that spread.
The market is certainly leading the Fed, but not by the scary-sounding distances usually cited.
Comments
1 Comment so far
Archives
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- Older Archives
Resources & Links
- The Letters Prize
- Pre-2007 Victor Niederhoffer Posts
- Vic’s NYC Junto
- Reading List
- Programming in 60 Seconds
- The Objectivist Center
- Foundation for Economic Education
- Tigerchess
- Dick Sears' G.T. Index
- Pre-2007 Daily Speculations
- Laurel & Vics' Worldly Investor Articles
Has “East Sider” seen the beautiful graphs of how closely Taylor Rule prescribed monetary policy has matched actual monetary policy? (Please see figure 1 here, http://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/commentary/2003/0703.pdf) These liberals on the East Side criticize a formulaic monetary policy because they want more Fed discretion as part of overall government control!