Search Results

SORT BY: PREVIOUS / NEXT
Keywords:treasury securities OR Treasury securities 

Discussion Paper
Information on Dealer Activity in Specific Treasury Issues Now Available

The New York Fed has long collected market information from its primary dealer trading counterparts and released these data in aggregated form to the public. Until recently, such data have only been available for broad categories of securities (for example, Treasury bills as a group) and not for specific securities. In April 2013, the Fed began releasing data on some specific Treasury issues, allowing for a more refined understanding of market conditions and dealer behavior.
Liberty Street Economics , Paper 20130826

Working Paper
The Federal Reserve's Portfolio and its Effect on Interest Rates

We explore the historical composition of the Federal Reserve's Treasury portfolio and its effect on Treasury yields. Using data from 1985 to 2016, we show that the divergence of the composition of the Federal Reserve's portfolio from overall Treasury securities outstanding is associated with a statistically significant effect on interest rates. In aggregate, when the Federal Reserve's portfolio has shorter maturity than overall Treasury debt outstanding, measures of the term premium are higher at all horizons; likewise, when the Federal Reserve's portfolio has longer maturity, term premiums ...
Finance and Economics Discussion Series , Paper 2017-075

Report
Fragility of Safe Asset Markets

In March 2020, safe asset markets experienced surprising and unprecedented price crashes. We explain how strategic investor behavior can create such market fragility in a model with investors valuing safety, investors valuing liquidity, and constrained dealers. While safety investors and liquidity investors can interact symbiotically with offsetting trades in times of stress, liquidity investors’ strategic interaction harbors the potential for self-fulfilling fragility. When the market is fragile, standard flight-to-safety can have a destabilizing effect and trigger a “dash-for-cash” by ...
Staff Reports , Paper 1026

Speech
Comments on “A Skeptical View of the Impact of the Fed’s Balance Sheet”: remarks at the 2018 U.S. Monetary Policy Forum, New York City

Remarks at the 2018 U.S. Monetary Policy Forum, New York City.
Speech , Paper 275

Discussion Paper
Has Treasury Market Liquidity Improved in 2024?

Standard metrics point to an improvement in Treasury market liquidity in 2024 to levels last seen before the start of the current monetary policy tightening cycle. Volatility has also trended down, consistent with the improved liquidity. While at least one market functioning metric has worsened in recent months, that measure is an indirect gauge of market liquidity and suggests a level of current functioning that is far better than at the peak seen during the global financial crisis (GFC).
Liberty Street Economics , Paper 20240923

Report
The Federal Reserve’s Market Functioning Purchases

In March 2020, massive customer selling of U.S. Treasury securities and agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS) triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic overwhelmed dealers’ capacity to intermediate trades, contributing to a marked deterioration of market functioning. The Federal Reserve promptly took numerous steps to address the market disruptions, including the initiation of market functioning purchases of Treasury securities and agency MBS. Purchases quickly expanded to over $100 billion per day as the Fed announced plans to buy securities “in the amounts needed” to support market ...
Staff Reports , Paper 998

Newsletter
How the U.S. Treasury Futures Market and the Basis Trade Could Be Affected by the Treasury Clearing Mandate: Part 2—The Possible Role of Cross-Margining

In part 2 of this Chicago Fed Letter series, I delve further into the implications of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) recent mandate requiring transactions for both U.S. Treasury cash securities and repurchase agreements (repos) to be cleared and settled through an authorized central counterparty (CCP). In part 1, I provided a primer on the Treasury futures market and the Treasury cash–futures basis trade and touched on the possible impact of the SEC mandate on both. Here, I explain in greater detail how the mandate could affect the cost and functioning of the basis ...
Chicago Fed Letter , Volume 517 , Pages 8

Report
The Netting Efficiencies of Marketwide Central Clearing

Market disruptions in response to the COVID pandemic spurred calls for the consideration of marketwide central clearing of Treasury securities, which might better enable dealers to intermediate large customer trading flows. We assess the netting efficiencies of increased central clearing using nonpublic Treasury TRACE transactions data. We find that central clearing of all outright trades would have lowered dealers’ daily gross settlement obligations by roughly $330 billion (60 percent) in the weeks preceding and following the market disruptions of March 2020, but nearly $800 billion (70 ...
Staff Reports , Paper 964

Newsletter
How the U.S. Treasury Futures Market and the Basis Trade Could Be Affected by the Treasury Clearing Mandate: Part 1—A Primer

A recent mandate by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) aims to improve the resilience and transparency of markets for U.S. Treasury cash securities and repurchase agreements (repos) by requiring transactions for both be cleared and settled through an authorized central counterparty (CCP). I explore the implications of this mandate for Treasury markets and central clearing in a two-part Chicago Fed Letter series. Part 1 is a primer on Treasury futures and the Treasury cash–futures basis trade—two key features of the Treasury markets that could also be affected by the mandate.
Chicago Fed Letter , Volume 516 , Pages 8

Report
U.S. Treasury Market Functioning from the GFC to the Pandemic

This article examines U.S. Treasury securities market functioning from the global financial crisis (GFC) through the Covid-19 pandemic given the ensuing market developments and associated policy responses. We describe the factors that have affected intermediaries, including regulatory changes, shifts in ownership patterns, and increased electronic trading. We also discuss their implications for market functioning in both normal times and times of stress. We find that alternative liquidity providers have stepped in as constraints on dealer liquidity provision have tightened, supporting ...
Staff Reports , Paper 1146

FILTER BY year

FILTER BY Content Type

Discussion Paper 15 items

Working Paper 7 items

Report 6 items

Speech 6 items

Journal Article 4 items

Newsletter 3 items

show more (1)

FILTER BY Author

Fleming, Michael J. 18 items

Keane, Frank M. 4 items

McInish, Thomas H. 4 items

Neely, Christopher J. 4 items

Planchon, Jade 4 items

Martin, Antoine 3 items

show more (60)

FILTER BY Jel Classification

G1 12 items

G12 11 items

G18 9 items

E44 8 items

E52 6 items

E4 5 items

show more (21)

FILTER BY Keywords

Treasury securities 42 items

COVID-19 9 items

Federal Reserve 5 items

Agency securities 4 items

Large-Scale Asset Purchases (LSAP) 4 items

Monetary Policy 4 items

show more (127)

PREVIOUS / NEXT