Risk Update: Equities in a rising rate environment

Introduction: As markets prepare for likely Fed rate hikes, concerns have grown regarding the possible implications for equity valuations. While no one can say with certainty what will ultimately transpire, a combination of history and theory does provide some guidance. Specifically, when the Fed is raising rates in response to improving or normalizing growth, rising rates tend to be positive for equities. Alternatively when the Fed is raising rates to lower inflation by slowing growth, rising rates are usually bad for equities. Currently, we are in the former state, and although short-term correlations can be noisy, we anticipate rising yields to reflect improving growth prospects and therefore to be at least modestly constructive for equities.

The Theory: One way to think about the Fed’s policy choices is to decompose interest rates into three different regimes; 1) the long run neutral rate, or as it is now commonly referred to as r*; 2) rates below this level; and 3) rates above this level. The neutral rate can be thought of as the “Goldilocks” rate because it is the real rate of interest (nominal rate less inflation) which allows the Fed to achieve simultaneously its policy target of full employment while maintaining inflation close to the 2% target. Any higher level of interest rates should lower economic growth, thereby increasing unemployment. Any rate below the neutral rate should stimulate growth, increasing inflation. In theory, this neutral rate is equal to the potential real growth rate of the economy. In the U.S., potential real growth has been estimated to be between 2% – 3% over the last several decades, suggesting r* has been approximately 2% – 3% and corresponding to nominal rates of around 4% – 5% (real rate plus expected inflation).

The Data: Figure 1 below, aided by the regression line, builds upon the relationship between real rates and growth, highlighting the impact on equity price movements. In the chart, we’ve plotted the correlations between movements in the implied real yield of 10-year Treasury rates versus price movements in the S&P 500.1 Note that when real rates are low, reflecting monetary accommodation, correlations tend to be positive, meaning rising yields are associated with positive equity price movements while declining yields are associated with falling equity prices. This is consistent with the theory described above. When growth slows, the Fed lowers rates and equity prices decline reflecting the slower growth. As growth recovers, the Fed raises rates to prevent an overheating economy and above-target inflation, and equity prices rise reflecting the improving growth. As yields approach the presumed neutral level, correlations decline to near zero. At higher levels of real rates, likely reflecting efforts by the Fed to dampen growth, correlations are more likely to turn negative.

Figure 1: 36-Month Average Real 10-Year Yields Verses Correlations

When the Fed needs to attack inflation, policies are designed to raise rates above the long-term neutral rate, slowing growth and dampening equity performance. Once inflation has been restrained sufficiently, rates are lowered and equity markets improve reflecting the more accommodative policy. In Figure 2, we provide a time series of the relationship of these correlations. It’s worth pointing out that in the 1970’s and 1980’s, most policy actions involved combatting inflation. Since the mid 1990’s, policy actions have been almost exclusively in response to slowing growth.

Figure 2: Rolling 36-Month Correlation (S&P Return Versus Real 10-Year Change)

Bottom line: There are no guarantees, but if history and theory provide any guidance, the process of rate normalization should be positive to neutral for equity markets. This is not to suggest that correlations will not exhibit some volatility over shorter time periods such as weeks or months, but over longer time periods historical relationships appear likely to be maintained. Additionally, the neutral rate may be lower now than in recent history, suggesting that positive effects from improving growth may be more modest than in the past. The challenge for policy makers will be negotiating a path to normalization that doesn’t tip the economy into recession, something we intend to monitor very closely.

Read this article in pdf

Inquiries or comments concerning this article may be addressed to:

Robert Lee, Ph.D.
Director of Risk Management and Strategic Analysis
Pavilion Advisory Group Inc.

Travis Simon, CFA
Senior Research Analyst
Pavilion Advisory Group Inc.

 

Disclaimer: This publication is not to be construed as a solicitation, an offer, or an investment recommendation to buy, sell or hold any securities. Any returns discussed represent past performance and are not necessarily representative of future returns, which will vary. The opinions, information, estimates and projections, and any other material presented in this document are provided as of this date and are subject to change without notice. Some of the opinions, information, estimates and projections, and other material presented in this document may have been obtained from numerous sources and while we have made reasonable efforts to ensure that the content is reliable, accurate and complete, we have not independently verified the content nor do we make any representation or warranty, express or implied, in respect thereof. We accept no liability for any errors or omissions which may be contained herein and accept no liability whatsoever for any loss arising from any use of or reliance on this report or its contents. © 2017 Pavilion Advisory Group Inc. All rights reserved. This publication may not be reproduced, distributed or copied, in whole or in part, in any form, without the written consent of Pavilion Advisory Group Inc.