Measuring the Boost From Quantitative Easing
After yesterday's Federal Open Market Committee announcement I decided to research the impact of quantitative easing on the U.S. market. It seems so normal now, but open market buying of treasuries and mortgage-backed securities as a means to stimulate the economy had not been done at any time in the 95 years between the founding of the Fed in December 1913 and the initiation of QE. So, Bernanke's plan was a grand experiment, and I have always been of the opinion that it was designed to produce a stimulation of wealth in the U.S. by inflating stock market values. Regardless of intent, such stimulation has certainly occurred.
As QE1 was announced on the morning of November 25th, 2008, I downloaded S&P 500 performance data from the prior day to yesterday's close. My spreadsheet, as always, started with data on row 2 and the last data point was row 2,222. Yes, the numerology is striking. So, as of the end of the day today, the QE era will have run for 2,222 days. As Chair Yellen confirmed that the Fed will begin its balance sheet unwind in October, I believe the 2,222 day period represents a fair measurement period for the impact of QE.
Obviously it is going to take years for the Fed to reduce the System Open Market Account held at the New York Fed to pre-Crisis levels. This is no fire sale, but as of the most recent data, the SOMA stood at $4,235,841,283.00 (yes, the NY Fed measures it to the exact dollar.) So, that's a large matzoh ball hanging out there, and it is reasonable to wonder how the market will react to a Fed that is contractionary on a monetary basis for the first time in more than 10 years.
First, though, one has to assess how the first 2,222 days of quantitative easing have impacted the S&P 500. In the time period from November 24th, 2008 to September 20, 2017 the S&P 500 has risen 194.5%. That is a rocking performance and the average annual gain over that period was...of course...22% (22.07% to be exact.) Yes, twos are everywhere.
A more sophisticated financial mind would measure the compound annual growth rate of the market, and in the QE period that CAGR has been 14.5%. These returns--22.1% simple, 14.5% compounded--have been well above historical norms. Legendary NYU finance professor Aswath Damodaran has measured the return of the S&P 500 over historical eras. For the period 1928-2016 the average annualized total return was 11.45% and the compound growth rate was 9.53%. The numbers I ran for the S&P 500 do not include dividends, so adding in the average yield in recent years -- 2% is a reasonable, round figure -- implies that the QE period has produced an average annual return of more than double that of the modern stock market. Yes, another two.
So, that's the question facing the markets now. Is the market going to keep growing at twice its normal pace as the Fed begins to cease its dollar-flooding of the U.S. economy? My guess is no. The concept of reversion to mean is a very relevant one to today's markets, although QE has lasted so long that I am not sure the young folks on trading desks even know what "the mean" is. The S&P 500 has risen 11.78% thus far in 2017, and adding in about 1.5% of year-to-date yield puts the return above Professor Damodaran's calculation of the long-term average gain of 11.45%. A reversion to mean would mean a correction -- another unfamiliar term for youngsters working in these markets -- and in tomorrow's column I will explore factors that could cause such a market pullback to occur in the fourth quarter.