Category: Market Action

Comrade Peace-Price made the punitive taxation of vilified institutions official:

“My commitment is to recover every single dime the American people are owed,” Obama said in a statement released this morning. “My determination to achieve this goal is only heightened when I see reports of massive profits and obscene bonuses at the very firms who owe their continued existence to the American people.”

The levy would be based on bank liabilities and be imposed starting June 30 on companies such as Citigroup Inc., American International Group Inc. and Bank of America Corp. The administration estimates it will raise $90 billion over a minimum of 10 years, said an administration official, who briefed reporters on the condition of anonymity.

As discussed yesterday, the bulk of TARP costs have been for carmakers and individuals, but since when have facts influenced a demagogue?

The SEC has released a Concept Release on Equity Market Structure:

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is conducting a broad review of the current equity market structure. The review includes an evaluation of equity market structure performance in recent years and an assessment of whether market structure rules have kept pace with, among other things, changes in trading technology and practices. To help further its review, the Commission is publishing this concept release to invite public comment on a wide range of market structure issues, including high frequency trading, order routing, market data linkages, and undisplayed, or “dark,” liquidity. The Commission intends to use the public’s comments to help determine whether regulatory initiatives to improve the current equity market structure are needed and, if so, the specific nature of such initiatives.

Meanwhile, the Fed has released a Report to Congress on the Case for a Role for the Federal Reserve in Bank Supervision:

Besides the experience at the Federal Reserve, international developments suggest that a central bank role in supervision can be important. For example, many have suggested that the problems with Northern Rock in the United Kingdom were compounded by a lack of clarity regarding the distribution of powers, responsibilities, and information among the Bank of England, the U.K. Financial Services Authority, and the U.K. Treasury. In response, the Bank of England was given statutory responsibilities in the area of financial stability, its powers to collect information from banks were augmented, and many have called for it to be given increased supervisory authority. In the European Union, a new European Systemic Risk Board is being established under which national central banks and the European Central Bank will play a central role in efforts to protect the financial system from systemic risk. More broadly, in most industrial countries today the central bank has substantial bank supervisory authorities, is responsible for broad financial stability, or both.

There was not a lot of price action in the preferred share market today, at it seems to have found some kind of level after the large gains of early January: PerpetualDiscounts were down 8bp, while FixedResets gained 4bp, on reasonable volume. The day was enlivened by the successful launch of BAM.PR.R.

The Fed’s reintermediation has been good business:

The Federal Reserve paid a record $46.1 billion to the U.S. Treasury last year as aggressive bond purchases and lending to fight the financial crisis swelled its net income by 46.8 percent.

The Fed’s payment represents an increase of $14.4 billion over its 2008 contribution and was the largest since the U.S. central bank was launched in 1914. Its 2009 net income of $52.1 billion also was a record.

The SEC wants to take a more paternalistic approach to investors:

The Securities and Exchange Commission voted to propose banning a practice in which brokers provide investors with unsupervised access to an exchange or alternative trading system.

Chairman Mary Schapiro said so-called naked sponsored access, in which a customer bypasses the pre-trade controls of their brokers and access markets directly, may expose the market and firms that offer the service to too much risk.
…
Aite Group LLC, a financial services research firm in Boston, said in a December report that sponsored access represents about half of U.S. equities trading, with unfiltered access accounting for 38 percent.

Comrade Peace-Prize wants the banks to pay for the carmaker bail-out:

The fees, expected to be spread over as many as 10 years, will be based on the leverage or amount of liability each firm has, said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Obama will outline his proposal to raise as much as $120 billion at an event at the White House tomorrow, according to the official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The final cost of the fees will be based on total losses from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, which administration officials expect to drop from the current Treasury estimate of $120 billion. The White House declined to provide a list of banks that would be targeted.
…
The U.S. is unlikely to recoup its investment in insurer American International Group Inc. or automakers General Motors Corp. and Chrysler Group LLC. Those losses and money spent to stem mortgage foreclosures are estimated to be about $120 billion.

According to the latest TARP report:

To date, Treasury-OFS has provided approximately $76 billion in loans and equity investments to GM , Chrysler, and their respective financing entities.

According to Table 7 of the report, the total cost of TARP is now estimated to be $68.5-billion, of which $30.4-billion is the “Automotive Industry Financing Program” and $27.1-billion is the “Home Affordable Modification Program” (HAMP has been previously mocked on PrefBlog). If you add in the Fed’s reintermediation profits, aid to the financial system has been zero. I think, if anything, the financial industry should get a medal, or at least a large bonus: the whole point of recessions is to point out who’s been doing things wrong and the big finger points at the carmakers.

Why should we subsidize them? Because they’re good jobs. Why are they good jobs? Because they’re subsidized.

Philip Angelides, head of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission and recently treasuror of the financially troubled state of California, said today that portfolio managers are stupid and must have their trades approved by sell-side smiley-boys:

Lloyd Blankfein, the head of Goldman Sachs Group Inc., failed to own up to his firm’s role in selling mortgage securities that helped trigger the global credit crisis, said the chairman of the panel investigating the financial meltdown.

“Mr. Blankfein himself never admitted that there was any responsibility of Goldman Sachs to make sure the products themselves were good products,” Philip Angelides, chairman of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, told reporters after a hearing in Washington today. “That’s very troublesome.”

I find it very troublesome that morons like Angelides are permitted to walk around without a keeper. What’s next? Fining securities firms for selling commercial paper that defaults? Or for selling auction rate securities that suddenly (surprise!) become illiquid? It’s ridiculous.

The market had another down day, with PerpetualDiscounts giving up 4bp total return and FixedResets losing 14bp, on good volume

PerpetualDiscounts now yield 5.75%, equivalent to 8.05% interest at the standard equivalency factor of 1.4x. Long Corporates continue to yield near-as-dammit to 6.0%, so the Pre-Tax Interest-Equivalent spread (also called the Seniority Spread) is now about 205bp, a slow (albeit appreciated!) tightening from the January 6 level of 212bp.

The Kansas City Financial Stress Index declined in December but it still above pre-crisis levels.

Comrade Peace-Prize’s plans for a punitive bank tax are getting clearer:

The plan is to have revenue from the fee dedicated to deficit reduction and to cover the amount that the Treasury Department estimates it will lose from TARP, which is $120 billion. Details will be contained in the fiscal 2011 budget that Obama will submit to Congress next month, the official said.

The government’s $700 billion rescue plan contributed to a record $1.4 trillion deficit last year.

Tax experts, who discussed the possibilities before the president’s plan was disclosed, say all of the administration’s structural options, which include an income surtax, an excise tax, or a fee pegged on the value of assets or some other measure, are likely to be so porous that financial institutions would be able to sidestep most of them.

Not to worry! The FDIC is always willing to grandstand:

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., in a bid to help align bank pay practices with risk management, is considering whether to link compensation with fees the agency charges lenders to support the fund protecting deposits.

The FDIC board today voted 3-2 to seek comment for 30 days on the proposal on bank compensation before deciding whether to begin a formal rule-making process, which may take several months.

“This is clearly a contributor to the crisis and to the losses we are suffering,” FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair said.

With all this micromanagement, soon the financial system will be as well run as, say, Toronto’s water distribution!

Hedge funds are increasingly operating as shadow-banks:

Today, hedge fund firms are loaning a record amount of money to unprofitable and bankrupt companies, according to New York-based HedgeFund.net. As banks that are recovering from the credit crackup avoid financing companies in distress, hedge fund firms are filling the gap, says Sean Egan, president of Haverford, Pennsylvania- based Egan-Jones Ratings Co.

Some hedge funds and other nonbank lenders charge interest rates as high as 19 percent in this mostly unregulated corner of the debt market, according to a survey by Malibu, California- based Pepperdine University’s Graziadio School of Business and Management. Firms also layer on fees, including costs as high as 12 percent of the loan for monitoring the value of a borrower’s collateral assets, according to the survey. Some lenders demand closing charges of up to 4 percent.

The preferred share market backtracked a bit today, with PerpetualDiscounts down 2bp and FixedResets losing 27bp – taking their median weighted average yield all the way up to 3.56%! Perhaps three new issues in two days (AER, 6.50%+375, BPO, 6.15%+307 and FTS, 4.25%+145) is just a bit too much, too fast. Volume was heavy.

Having prepared the ground with a programme of vilification, Comrade Obama is suggesting a supertax on banks:

President Barack Obama is considering a fee on financial services companies for inclusion in the budget plan he’s set to release next month as a way to cut the federal deficit, an administration official said.

Obama has vowed to halve the deficit, which was $1.4 trillion last year in part because of stimulus spending, the costs of war in Iraq and Afghanistan and bailouts of financial institutions and companies such as the automakers General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC.

One wonders whether Mayor Bloomberg will have the same courage as Boris Johnson:

The Tory mayor has written to the chair of the Commons Treasury select committee, John McFall, to urge him to open an immediate inquiry into the government’s plans for a new tax on bankers’ bonuses, the 50p top tax rate, which will primarily affect London and the UK’s financial sector, and regulatory changes.
…
The mayor estimates that up to 9,000 staff, many highly skilled, could leave the UK, potentially costing the exchequer over £1.2bn in lost tax and national insurance contributions annually – although the latest predictions are that the government could take in £2bn from the bonus tax.

Johnson said that, although London would remain one of the most attractive cities to do business in, “these ‘salami-slicing’, shortsighted proposals could potentially and permanently damage the competitiveness of London as a financial centre by driving away the city’s unique cluster of highly skilled people, ideas and expertise.”

The Canadian preferred share market was able to eke out a small gain on the day, with PerpetualDiscounts up 3bp and FixedResets up 4bp, as volume remained good.

One way of recruiting in a bonus-hostile environment is to double base pay:

London’s investment banks are luring back traders and analysts they lost to brokerage firms during the credit crisis, compensating for lower bonuses by as much as doubling base salaries.
…
The hires show how London’s investment banks are regrouping after boutique firms poached traders during the credit crisis with the promise of greater job security and a bonus. London’s investment banks cut about 49,000 jobs and logged more than $560 billion of writedowns during the credit crisis, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Brokers including Eden Financial Ltd. and Liberum Capital Ltd. added sales traders and analysts to win clients from rivals that had received taxpayer bailouts.
…
While bankers are considering their options on relocating to Germany or Switzerland to avoid the tax, [headhunter Jason] Kennedy said the bonus levy isn’t an issue for traders and bankers looking to move after April to larger firms because the government has said the charge will apply only to this year’s bonuses.

Holy smokes, this market’s on wheels. PerpetualDiscounts were up 46bp today and FixedResets gained 11bp, this being accomplished in a fairly well-behaved manner – there are only eight entries on the performance highlights table. Volume eased off a bit, but was still reasonably respectable.

Assiduous Reader prefhound points out that I didn’t reproduce his chart when appending his comment to the January 4 post. Well, it’s reproduced now!

A grizzled and cynical old lawyer once told me that the first thing you learn in law school is that a contract is holy. The first thing you learn as a practicing lawyer is that a contract is where you start. And, it appears, Citigroup is as duplicious as any of them:

Last June, Citi was supposed to pay five former senior executives millions in severance payouts, but what the bank decided to do, instead, was not make those payment. The ex-employees were owed about $100 million (half of which had been paid out) but not wanting to be compared to AIG which, at the time, was in the midst of receiving death threats over bonuses, Citi chose to inform the group that it shouldn’t count on the remainder of the cash.

Deferred compensation at banks will give a massive competitive advantage to hedge funds and shadow banks.

Another zippetty-doo-dah-day for Canadian Preferreds, with PerpetualDiscounts up 33bp and FixedResets up 1bp. Volume was good.

A long comment by Assiduous Reader prefhound has been appended to the January 4 post.

The Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City has released the TEN Magazine, Winter 2010 with feature articles:

• “How Will Unemployment Fare Following the Recession?”
• LIVESTOCK’S LONG ROAD: Recession, global pullback weigh on producers
• COMING HOME : Resurgence of working-age residents may boost rural economies
• RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGES AND COMMUNITY BANKS: Smaller insured financial institutions see less decline

Preferred shares continued their rally, with PerpetualDiscounts up 22bp and FixedResets gaining 6bp – which took the median weighted average yield for that index down to 3.49%. PerpetualDiscounts now yield 5.80%, equivalent to 8.12% interest at the standard equivalency factor of 1.4x. Long Corporates continue to yield 6.0%, so the pre-tax interest-equivalent spread is now 212bp, continuing to tighten from its December 31 figure of 220bp. Volume was good.

On December 31 I mentioned the scourge of windmill-promoting enviro-weenies. I now see there is a huge run to the trough in the UK:

The U.K. is targeting 15 percent of energy from renewable sources in 2020, of which 70 percent will have to come from offshore projects, according to the Carbon Trust.

The Crown Estate is seeking to add 25,000 megawatts in the third round, up from a combined 8,000 megawatts in the first rounds, and estimates potential market investment at 100 billion pounds. The U.K. has nine operating offshore farms with capacity of about 690 megawatts, enough for 400,000 homes, according to the British Wind Energy Association.

This disingenuous organization claims:

The BWEA Chief Executive rebutted claims about wind energy as ‘bizarre pseudo-science’, specifically she pointed out that:

• •There is no Government subsidy for building wind farms. As much as £2 billion of private investment has been made in the UK wind industry.
• •The support mechanism – Renewable Obligations Certificates (ROC) – is only available for electricity that wind farms have already produced and supplied to utilities
• •In 30 years of monitoring there have been no days when the wind has not blown throughout the UK.
• •Wind farms generate power for approximately 85% of the time.
• •The wind supplies over 2 GW of electricity in the UK, which is 1.5% of UK electricity needs.

Point three is the most entertaining, although point one is most objectionable.

An organization called No Wind Farm At Parham did some credible calculations to determine the monetary value to the pseudo-industry of the ROC system:

Seventy percent is even more than the figure I calculated for Ontario, but it should be noted that the Ontario figure is only the headline number; I feel confident that a thorough investigation would reveal less honest subsidies.

Unfortunately, this is one of the (many) areas of modern politics in which the average interested citizen will never, ever hear a rational and informative debate. The vested interests have taken over – and when the trough is as full as it is, the piggies will defend it to the death.

Sorry for all this windmill news – just call me Don Quixote – but there’s not much of interest to report that is more directly relevant to fixed income! It’s not like last year at this time when news was, shall we say, somewhat more gripping. Besides, the windmill story was on Bloomberg, so there!

It was a happy day for preferred share owners, as Floaters continued their stunning ascent, PerpetualDiscounts gained 32bp and FixedResets gained 4bp (yields down to 3.52%!) on heavy volume.

An unsigned article in the Globe had some interesting quotes from Dr. Robert Schiller:

In early 2000, the Yale University economics professor’s soon-to-become hugely influential book, Irrational Exuberance, was about to hit bookshelves – illuminating the world on how market bubbles form and how they burst. The book essentially foretold the popping of the dot-com bubble only a few months later.

Now, in the aftermath of the second major stock market collapse in less than a decade, Mr. Shiller is again being asked to help explain why stocks have become so volatile.
…
Mr. Shiller’s less-than-comforting answer: We’re mostly doing it to ourselves.

“I think it has to do with a different world view that we have adopted. We’re much more of an investing culture, all over the world, really, than we were in the past. There’s much more of an expectation of volatility.”

Mr. Shiller says our mass psychology is much more one of speculation and risk-taking than it was a generation or two ago. We’ve come to rely on rising markets to create our wealth and well-being, at the expense of savings.

With all respect to Dr. Schiller, I can’t help but feel that his judgement is somewhat harsh – or, at least, that part of the judgement that the Globe saw fit to publish.

We are living in an age of profound disruptive technologies. Computers … before 1980 they didn’t have much impact. Sure, mainframes made many things possible that hadn’t been possible in 1960; but they had nowhere near the impact on everyday business that they do now. Telecom … just having cheap telecom is in itself disruptive, and it only started getting cheap in the early 1990’s. Who had a cell-phone in 2000? The Internet … you can say what you like about the excesses of the Tech Bubble, but if you claim that the Internet is not a profoundly disruptive technology I won’t listen any more.

I claim that dayto-day business has been more disrupted in the past thirty years than at any other time in human history. And it seems to me that this will inevitably lead to market volatility. I’ll also note that it probably directly and indirectly allows charlatans to achieve influence in financial markets, but maybe that’s just my personal hobby-horse.

The politicization of corporate finance is picking up steam:

Bondholders with 70 percent of YRC’s $150 million of 8.5 percent notes due in April offered to tender, meeting the required threshold, the company said yesterday in a statement. That’s an increase over the 59 percent that participated by Dec. 29. Holders of 88 percent of all of the company’s outstanding bonds, with a face value of $470 million, participated in the exchange, the company said.

YRC’s $150 million of 8.5 percent notes rose 4.8 cents to 65.1 cents on the dollar yesterday, according to Trace, the bond-price reporting system of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

“The most difficult bondholders to deal with were investors with credit-default swaps that paid off if the company went bankrupt,” Zollars, 62, said in a telephone interview. “It doesn’t seem right that individual investors would make money against companies surviving, particularly in this economy.”
…
The “risk of public rebuke,” along with “even more legislative threats” to the market for credit-default swaps resulting from the bankruptcy of a large employer of organized labor, helped the exchange pass, CreditSights Inc. analyst Sam Goodyear in New York wrote in a report yesterday.

Hoffa said the YRC debt exchange marked “our first time doing a campaign like this where we really had to get into high finance.”

“It’s a new breakthrough for labor unions working on Wall Street to make something happen,” Hoffa said yesterday. “It’s very positive for a major company.”

There’s not enough detail in the story to take a view: maybe the exchange offer was simply a good deal; maybe CDS prices and physicals were aligned so that the CDS writers had incentive to do asset swaps with holders of physicals and then tender; maybe – as I think happened with CIT – prices aligned so that writing protection was hugely profitable for the banks, who then had extra incentive to work on the tender; it could be a lot of things.

More interesting, though, is the role of organized labour, particularly in view of GM’s sweetheart deal. Extrapolate these trends long enough and maybe you’ll eventually have mid-size companies courting the unions in order to have more political clout when things get dangerous!

In highly surprising news, artificial government inspired demand has caused prices of senior sub-prime tranches to jump:

Only months after it was started, the U.S. program designed to purge debts of no immediate discernable value from the balance sheets of troubled banks has helped transform the frozen debt into a money-maker as the bonds have rallied. Bank of America Corp. and Citigroup Inc., who received 22 percent of the $418.7 billion American taxpayers loaned to troubled financial institutions, boosted holdings on their trading books of home- loan bonds that lack government guarantees while investors were raising cash for the program, according to Federal Reserve data.

Charlotte, North Carolina-based Bank of America along with Citigroup, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs Group Inc., all based in New York, added a combined $2.74 billion of the debt, for which there were few buyers as recently as March, to their short-term trading assets during the third quarter, up 13 percent from the second quarter, the most-recent data show.
…
Prices for some of the securities that the funds were supposed to buy have almost doubled since March. The rally was fueled in part by traders jumping in before PPIP funds could get off the ground, said Steve Kuhn, who helps oversee about $440 million of mortgage-bond investments for Pine River Capital Management LLC in Minnetonka, Minnesota.

“Anytime people know there’s a buyer coming, they position for that, and that’s clearly what happened here,” said Kuhn, who is co-manager of the Nisswa Fixed Income Fund.

In between a motivated buyer and a motivated seller … how’s that for a trader’s dream?

The new year got off to a roaring start, with PerpetualDiscounts up 33bp and FixedResets gaining 10bp, taking the yield of the latter down to 3.57%. Volume was moderate.

Update: Assiduous Reader prefhound writes in and says:

I am quite fond of Prof Shiller (no “c”) and irrational exuberance. It was he and his database that taught me the basics of long run rational stock market return expectations as the sum of Dividends + Inflation + Real EPS Growth + Changes in P/E. The reason we can’t expect the 10% returns of the 20th century from stocks are than Dividends are now 2% not 4+% and we can’t reasonably continue to expect the P/E to grow by 1% per year.

Thus, the forward outlook for gross stock returns BEFORE fees is 2% yield + 2% inflation + 1.6% + 0 = 5.6%. That is a big problem for pension plans and the CPP (which assumes more like 7+%). AND it is a great opportunity for taxable pref share investors and prefblog! Who needs stock volatility when you can get the same return with lower volatility from discount prefs and augment it with sensible switching trades?

Anyway, I mention rational expectations as a forward to another reason why I respect Shiller: the long run Real EPS growth rate does not fluctuate very much and did not fluctuate hugely around innovations like computers etc that you mention. Indeed, early innovative companies were not that profitable until recently. Competition ensures that ROE on a national scale does not vary due to innovation in the medium to long run. P/E might (and did — skyrocketing from 7.5 for the S&P-500 in 1979 to 35 in 2000).

With respect to volatility, Shiller may be right about the short-term casino-like behaviour being more common today, but I don’t see any effect on volatility. The recent credit crunch saw VIX (S&P-500 index volatility) rise to similar levels as in the 1987 crash and ease off. Volatility itself fluctuates over time (which is why there are derivatives on VIX): long run Vix data for 24 years doesn’t show a gradual decline or increase — it shows periods of spikes, mounds and retreats — and it is mean reverting. [It is hard to check out CBOE data which currently goes back only to 1990, but the old VXO precursor started in 1986 — I have an older CBOE spreadsheet with it. Even since 1990 you can see the same picture — but the VXO levels went as high as 150 on Oct 19, 1987].

Secondly on the volatility side, I’m not sure about the strength of the seemingly attractive argument about more casino-like behaviour being the “cause” of “extra volatility” not even observed.

My sense is there is more trading volume than their used to be (turnover), but that many buys are broadly matched by sells (by funds and other institutional investors, for example). As John Bogle, founder of Vanguard, often notes — weve gone from individual stock owners to mutual fund owners over 40 years. Mutual fund owners don’t change their asset mix that rapidly to affect market volatility. When they switch from Fund A to Fund B so their “advisor” can continue to receive a trailer fee there is no net buying or selling to affect market volatility.

My guess is that the “herd instinct” is as alive and as operative in amateur and professional investors alike as it ever was, and that explains why volatility is more or less the same as it has been for (at least) 25 years of the VIX.

Indeed, using Shiller’s database of 140 years of S&P monthly average data, one can show that the average annual volatility has no discernible trend over a much longer period – other than frequent spikes (see figure). Let’s not lose the forest for studying one tree in detail!

[Note: To get volatility of a magnitude comparable to VIX (which uses daily data), multiply the standard deviation in this figure by about 2.5]

I’m not sure if you and Prof. Shiller and I are all talking about the same “volatility”. VIX is a measure calculated daily using option data; I think Shiller’s comments relate more to boom-bust cycles and their frequency and severity.

Update 2010-1-6: prefhound points out that I didn’t reproduce his chart:

Click for big

… but I must say that I am not a big fan of standard deviation as a measure of volatility. Not for this kind of stuff, anyway.

James Hamilton of Econbrowser has an excellent post on the Fed and the proposed term deposit facility:

We sometimes describe fiscal policy as determining the overall level of the public debt, while monetary policy determines the composition of that debt between money and interest-bearing federal obligations. By that definition, the Fed has clearly now entered the realm of implementing fiscal policy, by issuing debt directly in the form of interest-bearing reserves, reverse repos, and now term deposits.
…
But I fear that as this marriage between fiscal and monetary policy becomes consummated, an amicable divorce is not the most likely outcome.

My advice would be the sooner the Fed can return to plain vanilla central banking, the better.

I have heard reports that driving in the country has become a process of counting windmills … but I have my own way of counting. Say a standard wind farm has the following specifications:

The facility is expected to be completed in one year at a cost of CA$285 million, and will generate 300 GWh of wind energy a year from 43 Siemens 2.3 MW turbines.

So each turbine costs about $7-million bucks and generates about 7.5 GWh electricity per year. Ontario will pay 13.5 cents per kWh for on-shore wind. A profligate energy user (i.e., somebody who uses a toaster while the kitchen light is on) will pay 6.7 cents per kWh. So the loss to Smitherman’s ex-ministry is … call it 7 cents per kWh … and remember, we have assumed that transmission and administration is free, never mind the fact that wind power needs back-up plants built, and will accrue extra costs as this back-up switches on and off.

So, a loss of 7 cents per kWh on 7.5GWh annually is … um … carry three … 52.5 megacents per annum; in more familiar units, over half a million bucks. Enjoy the view! And remember – it’s not just empty-headed feel-goodism … it’s also an exciting new class of parasitic pseudo-industry creating jobs for pseudo-entrepreneurs!

The US Municipal Bond Insurance market is still trying to find its feet:

Insured bonds reached a peak of 57.1% of new issuance in 2005, but as most insurers were downgraded after they unsuccessfully ventured into the hazardous territory of structured finance, that number dwindled to just 8.7% this month, according to Thomson Reuters.
…
But responding to claims that the insurance market has a much-diminished future, Dominic Frederico, chief executive officer of Assured Guaranty Ltd., has a pretty simple reply.

“If there are naysayers, I would say, ‘Okay, then: explain my third quarter,’ ” he told investors in a conference call last month.

Assured, which operates the only two legacy insurers to have made it through the recession with investment-grade ratings, saw operating earnings — excluding net-realized investment gains and losses — jump to $70 million last quarter, compared to $26 million in the third quarter of 2008.

Preferred shares closed the year strongly on light volume, with PerpetualDiscounts up 26bp and FixedResets gaining 13bp.

PereptualDiscounts closed yielding 5.85%, equivalent to 8.19% interest at the standard equivalency factor of 1.4x. Long Corporates closed yielding 6.0% – maybe just a hair over – so the pre-tax interest-equivalent spread (also called the Seniority Spread) is about 220bp, a slight tightening from the December 16 and November 30 figures of 225bp.