Month: September 2025

I have updated the post regarding the GWO new issue.

With the new issues from GWO and POW coming out, one has to wonder whether there will be more. But today DBRS rated some sub-debt from Enbridge:

DBRS Limited (Morningstar DBRS) assigned a credit rating of BBB with a Stable trend to Enbridge Inc.’s (Enbridge or the Company) issuance of $1.0 billion, 5.15% Fixed-to-Fixed Rate Subordinated Notes (the Hybrid Notes), due December 17, 2055. Enbridge intends to use the net proceeds from the sale of the Hybrid Notes to repay short-term debt, partially fund capital projects and, if applicable, for other general corporate purposes of the Corporation and its affiliates.

The credit rating assigned to this newly issued debt instrument is based on the credit rating of an already-outstanding debt series of the above-mentioned debt instrument. Please refer to the most recent Morningstar DBRS press release dated June 27, 2025 https://dbrs.morningstar.com/research/457133/ for more information, including all relevant disclosures.

The rating listed above is based on the Final Term Sheet dated September 15, 2025; the Trust Indenture dated October 20, 1997 and information provided by Enbridge to Morningstar DBRS as of September 15, 2025.

Fitch rated it too:

Fitch Ratings has assigned a ‘BBB-‘ rating to Enbridge Inc.’s (ENB) offering of CAD-denominated junior subordinated notes. Proceeds from the offering will be used for existing debt repayment and general corporate purposes. Fitch currently rates ENB’s Long-Term Issuer Default Rating (IDR) ‘BBB+’ with a Stable Rating Outlook.

The ratings reflect the Enbridge family’s large size, diversity, and stability and visibility of expected cash flows. The ‘BBB+’ IDR considers Fitch’s view of the constructive regulation supporting ENB’s various franchises, including natural gas distribution (utility), crude oil transportation and natural gas transmission in Canada and the U.S. Leverage is appropriate for the rating, and Fitch expects it to remain comfortably within the boundaries for the rating over the forecast period.

The Stable Outlook reflects expectations for supportive supply/demand fundamentals underlying the vast majority of ENB’s businesses.

Well, we didn’t need any more Enbridge preferreds anyway! Not that we need more GWO/POW preferreds either, but still!

The FOMC released its statement:

Recent indicators suggest that growth of economic activity moderated in the first half of the year. Job gains have slowed, and the unemployment rate has edged up but remains low. Inflation has moved up and remains somewhat elevated.

The Committee seeks to achieve maximum employment and inflation at the rate of 2 percent over the longer run. Uncertainty about the economic outlook remains elevated. The Committee is attentive to the risks to both sides of its dual mandate and judges that downside risks to employment have risen.

In support of its goals and in light of the shift in the balance of risks, the Committee decided to lower the target range for the federal funds rate by 1/4 percentage point to 4 to 4‑1/4 percent. In considering additional adjustments to the target range for the federal funds rate, the Committee will carefully assess incoming data, the evolving outlook, and the balance of risks. The Committee will continue reducing its holdings of Treasury securities and agency debt and agency mortgage‑backed securities. The Committee is strongly committed to supporting maximum employment and returning inflation to its 2 percent objective.

In assessing the appropriate stance of monetary policy, the Committee will continue to monitor the implications of incoming information for the economic outlook. The Committee would be prepared to adjust the stance of monetary policy as appropriate if risks emerge that could impede the attainment of the Committee’s goals. The Committee’s assessments will take into account a wide range of information, including readings on labor market conditions, inflation pressures and inflation expectations, and financial and international developments.

Voting for the monetary policy action were Jerome H. Powell, Chair; John C. Williams, Vice Chair; Michael S. Barr; Michelle W. Bowman; Susan M. Collins; Lisa D. Cook; Austan D. Goolsbee; Philip N. Jefferson; Alberto G. Musalem; Jeffrey R. Schmid; and Christopher J. Waller. Voting against this action was Stephen I. Miran, who preferred to lower the target range for the federal funds rate by 1/2 percentage point at this meeting.

No surprise in the action; not much surprise that Trump’s … muse? puppet? … dissented dovishly. I’m pleased to see that Waller didn’t join him – Waller is, or was, considered a contender for governor:

Federal Reserve Governor Christopher Waller is emerging as a top candidate to be the central bank’s next chair, Bloomberg News reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter.

Waller has met with members of President Donald Trump’s team, who are impressed with him, though he has not met with the president, Bloomberg News reported. A Fed spokesperson had no comment.

Waller dissented in July as did Bowman, who was recentely elevated to regulatory honcho. As I said at the time, those dissents were justifiable but disquieting; their non-dissents in today’s meeting is a good, though not definitive, sign.

These people are at the top of their profession; I’ve never met them, but can well imagine that their legacy is important to them. Nobody wants to be mentioned in the same breath as Arthur Burns! Except maybe Miran …

The dotPlot is, as always, fascinating:

Matt Egan had a great comment on CNN’s ‘live chat’:

Let’s talk about that dot plot. One dot was conspicuously low. A lone Fed official — this is done anonymously — penciled in sub-3% rates THIS year. We don’t know for sure who but I would bet that official rhymes with “siren.”

The post regarding the POW new issue has been updated.

PerpetualDiscounts now yield 5.67%, equivalent to 7.37% interest at the standard conversion factor of 1.3x. Long corporates yielded 4.82% on 2025-9-17, so the pre-tax interest-equivalent spread (in this context, the “Seniority Spread”) is now 255bp, a small (and perhaps spurious) widening from the 250bp reported September 10.

Canadian inflation wasn’t as bad as expected:

Canada’s inflation rate rose to 1.9 per cent in August, increasing by less than economists had forecasted and solidifying expectations of an interest rate cut on Wednesday.

Statistics Canada reported on Tuesday that the annual inflation rate rose from 1.7 per cent in July. The acceleration in headline inflation was driven by a smaller annual decrease gasoline prices in August relative to July.
…
The Bank of Canada’s key measures of inflation continued to hover around three per cent last month. Meanwhile, inflation excluding gasoline prices rose by 2.4 per cent, down slightly from the previous three months.
…
Food prices rose by 3.4 per cent, compared with 3.3 per cent in July. Shelter costs increased at a slower pace of 2.6 per cent, down from 3 per cent the previous month.

And the market reacted:

Credit market-based probabilities of a Bank of Canada rate cut on Wednesday rose following the release of Canadian inflation numbers this morning – which overall were modestly softer than expected.

Based on trading in overnight index swaps markets, traders now see about a 93% chance of a quarter point cut on Wednesday, up from about 87% prior to the inflation report, according to LSEG data.
…
Here, in detail, is how implied probabilities of future interest rate moves stood in swaps markets after the inflation report. The current overnight rate is 2.75 per cent. While the bank moves in quarter-point increments, credit market implied rates fluctuate more fluidly and are constantly changing. Columns to the right are percentage probabilities of future rate moves.

Pre-Announcement

Post-Announcement

Erika McEntarfer, former commissioner at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, provided some commentary on her firing:

Her lecture at the Levy Economics Institute at Bard College, her alma mater, comes as questions swirl about the integrity of government data as Trump has sought greater control of the agency and tariffs appear to be hurting the economy.
…
“Firing your chief statistician is a dangerous step,” she said. “That’s an attack on the independence of an institution arguably as important as the Federal Reserve for economic stability. It has serious economic consequences, but that they would do this with no warning — it made no sense.”

“Messing with economic data is like messing with the traffic lights and turning the sensors off. Cars don’t know where to go, traffic backs up at intersections,” she said, a nod to the concerns many economists have raised since her firing.

Before her firing, McEntarfer’s biggest concern with the monthly jobs reports and other economic reports the BLS publishes was funding shortfalls that made it harder to conduct surveys that inform the data, she said. That’s been especially true as response rates to the agency’s surveys have fallen. But that has not impacted the accuracy of the data, she said.

“But after the events of the last six weeks, I’m afraid we have to fear for the (data) dependence of the agencies themselves.”
…
On Tuesday, McEntarfer said that late-responding firms were the principal reason for the negative revision that preceded her firing. That dynamic was explained by McEntarfer and her staff during their monthly pre-jobs report briefing to the White House.

She told White House economists that revisions as large as the May and June jobs data tend to occur “when the economy slows,” she said. During the briefing, White House officials asked her: Was the skew disproportionately among small firms, and when was the last time this happened?

“It was a pretty broad-based, negative skew,” she said, noting that the last time this happened was in the early months of the pandemic. Businesses were likely responding late to the survey “because they’re just too busy trying to stay alive.”

Quality costs money, Mr. Trump!