Price pressure in the government bond market

R. Greenwood, Dimitri Vayanos
{"title":"Price pressure in the government bond market","authors":"R. Greenwood, Dimitri Vayanos","doi":"10.1257/AER.100.2.585","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What determines the term structure of interest rates? Standard economic theory links the interest rate for maturity T to the willingness of a representative agent to substitute consumption between times 0 and T. The standard model contrasts sharply with a more informal view based on investors’ preferred habitat, proposed by John Culbertson (1957) and Franco Modigliani and Richard Sutch (1966). According to the preferred-habitat view, there are investor clienteles with preferences for specific maturities, and the interest rate for a given maturity is influenced by the demand of the corresponding clientele and the supply of bonds with that maturity. For example, the typical clientele for long-term bonds are pension funds. An increase in their demand would be expected to raise prices of long-term bonds and thus lower long-term interest rates. In short, preferred habitat implies that there is price pressure in the bond market. While the preferred-habitat view has intuitive appeal, it has not entered into the academic mainstream, typically being relegated to a paragraph in MBA-level textbooks. One reason for this is the mixed findings in early empirical studies of the term structure. Specifically, between 1962 and 1964, the US Treasury and Federal Reserve raised the supply of short-term government debt while simultaneously lowering the supply of long-term debt. This program, known as Operation Twist, aimed to raise shortterm interest rates, and so improve the balance of payments, while also lowering long-term rates to stimulate private investment. A number of papers evaluated Operation Twist, and while they reached different conclusions, none found strong evidence that the operation was effective in flattening the term structure (e.g., Modigliani Price Pressure in the Government Bond Market","PeriodicalId":359449,"journal":{"name":"LSE Research Online Documents on Economics","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"277","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSE Research Online Documents on Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1257/AER.100.2.585","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 277

Abstract

What determines the term structure of interest rates? Standard economic theory links the interest rate for maturity T to the willingness of a representative agent to substitute consumption between times 0 and T. The standard model contrasts sharply with a more informal view based on investors’ preferred habitat, proposed by John Culbertson (1957) and Franco Modigliani and Richard Sutch (1966). According to the preferred-habitat view, there are investor clienteles with preferences for specific maturities, and the interest rate for a given maturity is influenced by the demand of the corresponding clientele and the supply of bonds with that maturity. For example, the typical clientele for long-term bonds are pension funds. An increase in their demand would be expected to raise prices of long-term bonds and thus lower long-term interest rates. In short, preferred habitat implies that there is price pressure in the bond market. While the preferred-habitat view has intuitive appeal, it has not entered into the academic mainstream, typically being relegated to a paragraph in MBA-level textbooks. One reason for this is the mixed findings in early empirical studies of the term structure. Specifically, between 1962 and 1964, the US Treasury and Federal Reserve raised the supply of short-term government debt while simultaneously lowering the supply of long-term debt. This program, known as Operation Twist, aimed to raise shortterm interest rates, and so improve the balance of payments, while also lowering long-term rates to stimulate private investment. A number of papers evaluated Operation Twist, and while they reached different conclusions, none found strong evidence that the operation was effective in flattening the term structure (e.g., Modigliani Price Pressure in the Government Bond Market
政府债券市场的价格压力
什么决定了利率的期限结构?标准经济理论将期限T的利率与代表代理人在0和T之间替代消费的意愿联系起来。标准模型与John Culbertson(1957)、Franco Modigliani和Richard Sutch(1966)提出的基于投资者偏好栖息地的更非正式的观点形成鲜明对比。根据偏好生境观点,存在对特定期限有偏好的投资者客户,特定期限的利率受到相应客户需求和该期限债券供应的影响。例如,长期债券的典型客户是养老基金。它们需求的增加预计会提高长期债券的价格,从而降低长期利率。简而言之,首选栖息地意味着债券市场存在价格压力。虽然首选栖息地的观点具有直观的吸引力,但它并没有进入学术主流,通常被归入mba级别教科书的一个段落。造成这种情况的一个原因是,对期限结构的早期实证研究结果好坏参半。具体来说,在1962年至1964年间,美国财政部和美联储增加了短期政府债务的供应,同时减少了长期债务的供应。这一被称为扭转操作(Operation Twist)的计划旨在提高短期利率,从而改善国际收支,同时降低长期利率,以刺激私人投资。许多论文对扭转操作进行了评估,虽然他们得出了不同的结论,但没有发现强有力的证据表明该操作在平坦期限结构方面是有效的(例如,政府债券市场的莫迪利亚尼价格压力)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信