Fed's bond buying hasn't boosted stocks, McKinsey study finds

SAN FRANCISCO Wed Nov 13, 2013 7:02pm EST

A view shows an eagle sculpture on Federal Reserve building, on the day it will release minutes of Federal Open Market Committee from August 1, 2012, in Washington August 22, 2012. REUTERS/Larry Downing

A view shows an eagle sculpture on Federal Reserve building, on the day it will release minutes of Federal Open Market Committee from August 1, 2012, in Washington August 22, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Larry Downing

Related Topics

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - There is no evidence that the Federal Reserve's massive bond-buying effort has led U.S. stock prices higher, according to a report released on Wednesday by the economics research arm of McKinsey & Company.

Instead, study co-authors Richard Dobbs and Susan Lund found that the biggest impact of quantitative easing by the world's major central banks has been the cost-savings delivered to governments. Since 2007, bond-buying programs in the United States, the UK and the euro zone have reduced costs for governments by a total of $1.6 trillion.

The finding will come as a surprise to many investors who attribute the rise in stock prices in the United States and elsewhere since the 2007-2009 financial crisis at least in part to easy central bank policies.

All told, major central banks have added $4.7 trillion to their balance sheets over the past five years in an effort to push down long-term borrowing costs while keeping short-term interest rates low.

The findings are sure to resonate among central bankers as they debate when and how fast they may be able to scale down the monetary stimulus they have used to keep deflation at bay and try and pull ravaged economies from the depths of recession.

Higher stock prices are often thought to boost household spending because of the wealth effect -- as net worth rises with gains in equity portfolios, people part more freely with their cash.

But quantitative easing does not appear to be driving this kind of wealth effect through rising equity prices, the McKinsey researchers found.

The major boost comes from massive savings to governments that have freed them to borrow and spend more than they otherwise would have, translating to fewer jobs lost than otherwise, the researchers found.

"In practice, the biggest beneficiary has not been Main Street or Wall Street, but it has been the government," Dobbs said in an interview.

That outsized benefit suggests that when the time comes for central banks to reduce quantitative easing, the biggest risk is from rising costs to governments as interest rates increase, and the possibility that governments would then be forced to cut spending.

Already central bankers in the United States and elsewhere have blamed overly austere fiscal policies for hindering what might otherwise be brisker recoveries.

"The most obvious thing that central banks are worried about is, what will be the impact on government finances, and will the tax increases that come from a better economy be enough to offset the rising interest rates -- or will we see government being squeezed into more austerity?" Dobbs said.

(Reporting by Ann Saphir; Editing by Leslie Adler)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (3)
Afrodo wrote:
In two years, since the Q.E.’s started, the wealth effect for the top 7% of populous is + 28%
…..for the middle class is – 4%.
It is not who you know !?

Nov 13, 2013 7:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
cheeze wrote:
You think so, we’ll just wait and see what happens when the Fed eases up. interest rates rise, the market tanks, and thousands go into forclosure. it’s amazing how disconnected the powers of decision are from the working middle class. Has anyone thought of how scarce the average joe’s salary increases are in this economy? As the middle becomes more poor, governments expense for assistance will continues to grow. another cause of the great idea called “nafta”.

Nov 13, 2013 7:33pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gunste wrote:
Why is it then that any mention of the Fed pulling back on QE causes a stutter in the markets, until it is denied. The Fed’s bond buying, keeping interest rates near zero, discourages saving (negative interest rates) and has worked to push more people into speculative investment – the stock market. I suspect the bubble that has been built will pop sometime.

Nov 14, 2013 12:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.