Search

In this paper, we investigate the dynamic response of stock market volatility to changes in monetary policy. Using a vector autoregressive model, our findings reveal a significant and asymmetric response of stock returns and volatility to monetary policy shocks. Although the increase in the volatility risk premium, futures-trading volume, and leverage appear to contribute to a short-term increase in volatility, the longer-term dynamics of volatility are dominated by monetary policy's effect on fundamentals. The estimation results from a bivariate VAR-GARCH model suggest that the Fed does not respond to the stock market at a high frequency, but they also suggest that market participants' uncertainty regarding the monetary stance affects stock market volatility.

Using federal funds futures data, we show the importance of surprise communication as a component of monetary policy for U.S. macro variables, both before and after 2008. While Gürkaynak et al. (2005) stress the importance of monetary policy communication for asset prices, much of the subsequent VAR literature attributes all effects of monetary policy on macro variables to surprise changes in the policy rate. Instead, we distinguish between monetary policy action and "communication shocks" (surprise announcements about future policy moves), both orthogonal to internal Fed information. To do so,we use a decomposition of futures price movements exploiting variation across contract maturities. In a monthly sample from 1994 to 2008, our results indicate that it is mainly communication shocks - as opposed to actual rate-change surprises - that affect production in the ways traditionally associated with monetary policy shocks.We also use Eurodollar futures to cover the zero-lower bound period and find strong effects on inflation for long-horizon communication shocks.

A growing literature has begun to use overnight indexed swap (OIS) rates to measure market expectations of future short-term interest rates. In this paper, I assess the empirical success of OIS rates in predicting the future path of monetary policy. I first compare US OIS rates to federal funds futures (FFFs), which have regularly been used to construct financial market-based measures of interest rate expectations. For the 2002-2016 period, I find that 1 to 11-month OIS rates provide measures of investors' interest rate expectations that are as good as those from comparable-horizon FFFs contracts. More generally, I find that, on average, 1 to 24-month US, UK, Eurozone and Japanese OIS rates accurately measure expectations of future short-term interest rates. To date, many methods used by monetary economists rely on FFFs data to measure monetary policy expectations. This has limited the application of these methods to US data only. Motivated by the results in this paper, researchers can look to OIS rates as a globally-comparable measure of monetary.

This paper examines the impact of conventional and unconventional monetary policy on energy prices, using an event study with intraday data. Three measures for monetary policy surprises are used: 1) the surprise change to the current federal funds target rate, 2) the surprise component to the future path of policy, and 3) the unanticipated announcements of future large-scale asset purchases (LSAPs). Estimation results show that monetary policy news has economically important and highly significant effects on the level and volatility of energy futures prices and their trading volumes. I find that, on average, a hypothetical unanticipated 100 basis point hike in the federal funds target rate is associated with roughly a 3 percent decrease in West Texas Intermediate oil prices. I also document that, in a narrow window around the Federal Open Market Committee meeting, the Federal Reserve's LSAP1 and LSAP2 programs have a cumulative financial market impact on crude oil equivalent to an unanticipated cut in the federal funds target rate of 155 basis points. Monetary policy affects oil prices mostly by affecting the value of the U.S. dollar exchange rate. Intraday energy prices also respond to news announcements about the U.S. macroeconomy and inventories. The daily responses are never significant, except in the case of inventory news.

This paper provides a dynamic analysis of the responsiveness of asset markets to monetary policy path revisions. In an era of increased transparency and gradualism in policy making, one might expect an increased response to path revisions in asset markets as the policy actions become more predictable over longer horizons. Using federal funds futures contracts to extract near-term path revisions, we find that the responsiveness of Treasury securities to path revisions is significantly asymmetric, increasing during cycles of tightenings and declining during easings. This is consistent with the earlier literature that documents asymmetric effects of monetary policy on output.

This paper provides a dynamic analysis of the responsiveness of asset markets to monetary policy path revisions. In an era of increased transparency and gradualism in policy making, one might expect an increased response to path revisions in asset markets as the policy actions become more predictable over longer horizons. Using federal funds futures contracts to extract near-term path revisions, we find that the responsiveness of Treasury securities to path revisions is significantly asymmetric, increasing during cycles of tightenings and declining during easings. This is consistent with the earlier literature that documents asymmetric effects of monetary policy on output.

We use data from the Federal Funds Futures market to show that exchange rates respond to only the surprise component of an actual US monetary policy change and we illustrate that failure to disentangle the surprise component from the actual monetary policy change can lead to an underestimation of the impact of monetary policy, or even to a false rejection of the hypothesis that monetary policy impacts exchange rates. Unlike the recent contributions to the literature on exchange rates and monetary policy news, our testing method avoids the imposition of assumptions regarding exchange rate market efficiency. We also add to the debate on how quickly exchange rates respond to news by showing that the exchange rates under study absorb monetary policy surprises within the same day as the news are announced.

This paper shows that exchange rates respond to only the surprise component of an actual US monetary policy change and that failure to disentangle the surprise component from the actual monetary policy change can lead to an underestimation of the impact of monetary policy, or even to a false acceptance of the hypothesis that monetary policy has no impact on exchange rates. This finding implies that there is a need for reexamining the empirical analyses of asset price responses to macro news that do not isolate the unexpected component of news from the expected element. In addition, we add to the debate on how quickly exchange rates respond to news by showing that the exchange rates under study absorb monetary policy surprises within the same day as the news are announced.