Leave a comment

dafydd May 15 2010, 02:52:00 UTC
The Federal Funds Rate isn't quite zero.

Also, the Federal Funds Rate and Discount Rate only apply to overnight loans. So, effectively, banks only get 1/365th of that 3.5% interest...

(Interestingly, The Fed is privately held, but turns over its profits to the US Treasury. In 2009, that profit was $45 Billion returned to the people of the United States.)

Reply

unixronin May 15 2010, 03:30:01 UTC
The article seems to imply only a handful of banks get that 0% rate. I don't know if that's correct.

It does put a bit of a different complexion on it if it applies only to overnight rates though. Of course, one could argue that daily churn doesn't actually cost the bank anything; they just have to make the same transaction 365 times a year.

$45 billion annual profit from the Fed isn't to be sneezed at. Unfortunately it's a drop in the bucket of current spending.

Reply

dafydd May 15 2010, 04:06:39 UTC
The investorwords.com site says The Fed doesn't directly set the rate, but makes its preferences known through selective buying and selling. I'd call it analogous to being the dealer at a poker table where the players can lend to each other. If one player were getting a flat 0%, I suspect the other players would want to know why.

Reply

dafydd May 15 2010, 04:10:53 UTC
Also, I've only skimmed the article, because I clocked almost 55 hours this week and I'm exhausted. I did note that he was approaching hysteria regarding last week's half-hour crash, but fails to mention the automated trading holds that would have stopped all trading had the markets sunk much lower than they did.

I don't remember what the percentage-drop triggers are, but I do recall the NYSE saying it had a half-hour hold and a 4-hour hold built in to its computers, and that two half-hour holds in a day would result in all trading stopped for the day.

Reply

unixronin May 15 2010, 14:56:12 UTC
The "Flash Crash" was pretty interesting in a lot of ways, I think, not least because some of the stop-loss triggers apparently did not work, and because the NASDAQ selectively chose to retroactively cancel some, but not all, of the trades involved.

I have no doubt there will be more investigation.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up