Bond yields and equities – it takes two to tango

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


In recent months inflation expectations have been on the rise both in India and the developed markets and its impact has been felt on bond yields globally, central bank QE (quantitative easing) notwithstanding. Since then a new narrative has been taking hold amongst some market bulls. This new narrative is that the long-term correlation between bond yields and equities is positive, and hence is not a cause for alarm among equity investors. If expectations of better growth is driving inflation upwards and results in a rise in yields, then it reflects optimism on the economy and equities are likely to do well in such a scenario, is their argument. Is there data to support these claims? Is increase in bond yield actually good or bad for equities?

Inconsistent narratives

When movement of bond yields in any direction is used as a justification for equities to go up, then you must become circumspect. Since the launch of monetary stimulus last year globally by central banks and the crash in bond yields and deposit rates, the narrative that was used to justify a bull case for equities (which played out since the lows of March 2020) was that there is no alternative to equities. Hence, when bond yields actually start moving up as they have since early part of this year, an alternative for equities is actually emerging. So, market bulls have now shifted the narrative to why increase in bond yields this time is positive for equities as in their view bond yields are rising in anticipation of better economic growth. Well actually by this logic, last year bond yields fell in anticipation of a recession, so ideally it should have been negative for equities, right? Logic is the casualty when goal posts are changed.

Economic theory vs reality

Theoretically, increase in bond yields is negative for equities. This is for four reasons.

One, increase in yields will make borrowing costs more expensive and will negatively impact the profits of corporates and the savings of individuals who have taken debt.

Two, increase in bond yields is on expectations of inflation and inflation erodes the value of savings. Lower value of savings, implies lower purchasing power, which will affect demand for companies.

Three, increase in bond yields makes them relatively more attractive as an investment option; and four, higher yields reduce the value of the net present value of future expected earnings of companies. The NPV is used to discount estimates of future corporate profits to determine the fundamental value of a stock. The discounting rate increases when bond yields increase, and this lowers the NPV and the fundamental value of the stock.

What does reality and data indicate to us? Well, it depends on the period to which you restrict or expand the analysis (see table). For example if you restrict the analysis to the time when India had its best bull market and rising bond yields (2004-07), the correlation between the 10-year G-Sec yield and Nifty 50 (based on quarterly data from Bloomberg) was 0.78. However if you extend your horizon and compare for the 20 year period from beginning of 2001 till now, the correlation is negative 0.15. The correlation for the last 10 years is also negative 0.75.

In the table, we have taken 4 year periods since 2000 and analysed the correlation, on the assumption that investors have a 3-5 year horizon. The correlation is not strong across any time period except 2004-07 . It appears unlikely we will see the kind of economic boom of that period right now. That was one of the best periods in global economy since World War 2, driven by Chinese spending and US housing boom as compared to current growth driven by monetary and fiscal stimulus, the sustainability of which is in doubt in the absence of stimuli. This apart, Nifty 50 was trading at the lower end of its historical valuation range then versus at around its highest levels ever now. Inflationary pressures too are higher now. In this backdrop, the case for a strong positive correlation between equities and bond yields is weak.

What it means to you

What this implies is that the data is not conclusive and claims that bond yields and equities are positively correlated cannot be used as basis for investment decisions. At best, one can analyse sectors and stocks and invest in those that may have a clear path to better profitability when interest rates increase for specific reasons. For example, a company having a stronger balance sheet can gain market share versus debt-laden competitors; market leaders with good pricing power can gain even when inflation is on the rise.

A final point to ponder upon is whether a market rally that has been built on the premise that there is no alternative to equities in ultra-low interest rate environment, can make a transition without tantrums to a new paradigm of higher interest rates even if that is driven by optimism around growth. An increase in Fed expectations for the first interest rate increase a full two years from now, caused temporary sell-offs across equites, bonds and emerging market currencies, till comments from Fed Governor calmed the markets. These may be indications of how fragile markets are to US interest rates and yields.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

RBI prescribes qualifications for MDs, WTDs of urban cooperative banks, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The Reserve Bank on Friday prescribed educational qualifications and ‘fit and proper’ criteria for managing directors (MDs) and whole-time directors (WTDs) of primary urban cooperative banks and barred MPs and MLAs from these posts.

Issuing the guidelines for appointment of MDs and WTDs, the RBI said MPs, MLAs and representatives of municipal corporations will not be eligible to hold such positions in the primary urban cooperative banks (UCBs).

It further said the MD/WTD should be a post graduate or have qualifications in finance discipline. He or she could be either chartered/cost accountant, MBA (finance) or have a diploma in banking or cooperative business management.

The person should not be below 35 years of age or more than 70 years, it added.

“The person shall have a combined experience of at least eight years at the middle/senior management level in the banking sector (including the experience gained in the concerned UCB) or non-banking finance companies engaged in lending (loan companies) and asset financing,” the notification said.

Besides MPs, MLAs and representatives of municipal corporations and local bodies, persons engaged in business, trade or having substantial interest in any company too will not be eligible for appointment to such positions.

Regarding the tenure of appointment, it said the person can be appointed for a maximum of five years and will be eligible for re-appointment.

However, it said the MD or WTD will not hold the post for more than 15 years. After that, the person, if necessary, may be re-appointed after a three-year cooling period.

It further said the “UCBs whose existing MD/CEO has completed a tenure of five years may approach RBI either to seek re-appointment of the incumbent, if he/she is eligible, or for appointment of a new MD/CEO, within a period of two months…”.

In case a UCB decides to terminate the services of MD/ WTD before the expiry of tenure, it will have to seek prior approval of the Reserve Bank.

The directions are applicable to all Primary (Urban) Co-operative Banks, the RBI said.

In a separate circular, the RBI mandated the appointment of Chief Risk Officer (CRO) by UCBs with asset size of Rs 5,000 crore and above.

It is necessary that every UCB focuses its attention on putting in place appropriate risk management mechanism commensurate with its business profile and strategic objectives, it said.

“In this connection, it has been decided that all UCBs having asset size of Rs 5,000 crore or above, shall appoint a Chief Risk Officer (CRO). The Board must clearly define the CRO’s role and responsibilities and ensure that he/she functions independently,” the circular said.

The CRO should have direct reporting lines to MD/CEO or Board or the Risk Management Committee of the Board (RMC), it added.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

RBI’s short-term paper devolves; 10-year G-Sec unsubscribed

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Government securities (G-Sec) prices dropped on Friday as the weekly G-Sec auction saw the short-term paper devolve on primary dealers (PDs) and the 10-year paper going unsubscribed.

Price of the benchmark 2030 G-Sec (coupon rate: 5.85 per cent) declined about 12 paise over the previous close, with its yield going up about 2 basis points. This paper was last traded at ₹98.725 (yield: 6.0285 per cent).

Bond yields and price are inversely related and move in opposite directions.

At the auction of the 2023 G-Sec (4.26 per cent), almost 97 per cent of the notified amount of ₹3,000 crore devolved on PDs. PDs are financial intermediaries which support the Government’s market borrowing programme and improve the secondary market liquidity in G-Secs.

Though the RBI received 99 bids aggregating ₹18,782 crore against the notified amount of ₹14,000 crore at the auction of the 10-year G-Sec, it neither accepted any bids nor did it devolve the paper on PDs.

The only paper that got fully subscribed was the 2061 G-Sec (6.76 per cent). In fact, green shoe amount of ₹48.454 crore was accepted over and above the notified amount of ₹9,000 crore.

Hardening yields

Marzban Irani, CIO-Fixed Income, LIC Mutual Fund, said: “In last few days, yields have been hardening at short end. With inflation inching upwards, Brent crude up…there are fewer bidders for short papers. Probably due to this the paper got devolved.”

Irani observed that volumes in the existing 10- year benchmark are dropping on expectations of a new benchmark being issued. Probably, the bids were at uncomfortable levels, resulting in RBI not accepting any bids at the auction of this paper.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

RBI’s heavy lifting helping govt borrow at lower cost

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) had clearly saved the day for the government in helping it borrow money at lower cost during the January-March 2021 quarter, despite spike in its borrowings, the latest quarterly public debt management report showed.

The government announced additional borrowing of ₹80,000 crore for FY21 in the Budget on February 1 this year, which led to a situation where the market found it difficult to absorb the supply. The yields also reacted negatively due to high fiscal deficit proposed in FY22 and higher-than-projected fiscal deficits for coming year.

Besides, rising crude prices and the gross borrowing amount of ₹12.06 lakh crore — more than market expectations — contributed to the hardening of the yields.

However, it is the RBI’s Monetary Policy Committee which gave comfort to the market by keeping Repo rate unchanged at 4 per cent at its meeting on February 5 and also announced the continuing with accommodative stance as long as necessary — atleast during the current financial year (2020-21) and into the next financial year (2021-22), the report highlighted.

OMO, G-Sec and Yield

The continuous announcement of Open Market Operations (OMO) by RBI, the US Federal Open Market Committee’s to keep interest rates near zero through 2023, lower demand by the real sector, cancellation of G-sec auction in the last week of March supported the yield, the quarterly public debt management report released by the Finance Ministry on Friday highlighted.

Commenting on the finance ministry’s report, Madan Sabnavis, Chief Economist, CARE Ratings, told BusinessLine: “Public debt management report of the government released today shows that the RBI played a critical role in managing the yield curve in FY 21 and hence facilitated a large government borrowing programme. While the room to lower repo rate below 4 per cent was limited large purchase of around ₹3 lakh crore of OMOs as well as operation twist (where different maturities are bought and sold) combined with TLTROs helped to stabilise the yields at a time when there was too much paper in the market”.

He highlighted that the same scene continues this year too with the RBI overtly stating that one of the objectives of the monetary policy is to manage the yield curve.

Liquidity woes

Meanwhile, a report from CARE Ratings on Friday highlighted that ₹26,000-crore government paper auctioned by the RBI on Friday saw a mixed response. Once again, the response to the 5.85 per cent 2030 paper was negative and it went unsubscribed. There have been two earlier occasions when the ten-year paper devolved on the primary dealers.

The market is still demanding more from the government given the large borrowing programme as well as the rising inflation trend, according to CARE Ratings. Since the beginning of the pandemic last year, the RBI has had to face the challenge of providing enough liquidity to finance the increased government borrowing without allowing interest rates and bond yields to rise. The central bank continues to face the same challenge in the current fiscal too, say economists.

The other major concern is that despite adequate liquidity infusion and reduction in interest rates, the growth of credit has remained at a low pace.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

RBI extends restrictions on PMC Bank further till Dec 31

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has extended the validity of its Directions to the scam-hit Punjab and Maharashtra Co-operative (PMC) Bank for a further period from July 1 to December 31, 2021, subject to review.

RBI extended the validity of its directions by six months, taking into account the time required for completion of various activities involved in the process of rescuing the bank.

The central bank, in a statement, said certain proposals were received in response to the expression of interest (EOI) floated in November 2020 by PMC Bank for its reconstruction.

“After careful consideration, the proposal from Centrum Financial Services Ltd. (CFSL) along with Resilient Innovation Pvt. Ltd. (BharatPe) has been found to be prima facie feasible.

SFB proposal

“Accordingly, in specific pursuance to their offer dated February 1, 2021, in response to the EOI, RBI has, on June 18, 2021, granted “in-principle” approval, valid for 120 days, to CFSL to set up a small finance bank (SFB)…,”RBI said in a statement.

Once the SFB is floated, PMC Bank would be merged into it.

Jaspal Bindra, Executive Chairman, Centrum Group, said that CFSL and BharatPe, equal partners in the proposed SFB, will together commit ₹900 crore to their joint venture in the first year.

As and when required, the partners will commit ₹900 crore more. The minimum paid-up net worth requirement for starting an SFB is only ₹200 crore.

Chander Purswani, President, PMC Depositors Forum, emphasised that the central bank must ensure that retail depositors get all their savings back.

Currently, withdrawals from PMC Bank are capped at ₹1 lakh per depositor for the entire duration that it is under RBI Directions. The bank has been under Directions with effect from the close of business on September 23, 2019.

The bank got into trouble due to fraud/ financial irregularities associated with huge exposure, which according to reports was at 73 per cent of its total advances, to a real estate group and manipulation of its books of accounts.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

RBI issues norms for dividend distribution by NBFCs

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The board will have to keep in mind long-term growth plans of the NBFC while declaring dividend. NFBCs will also have to report details of dividend declared during the financial year to the RBI.

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on Thursday came out with dividend distribution guidelines for non-banking finance companies (NBFCs) in order to infuse greater transparency and uniformity in the practice. The regulator has mandated that net NPA ratio of the NBFC concerned should be less than 6% in each of the last three years for declaring dividend.

Similarly, the RBI has prescribed applicable regulatory capital requirement in different types of NBFCs. For example, a deposit taking NBFCs will need to have a minimum capital adequacy ratio of 15%. However, for housing finance companies, the tier-I and tier-II capital should not be less than 13% as on March 2020, 14% as on March 2021 and 15% as on March 2022 for declaring dividend.

The guidelines also prescribe ceilings on dividend payout ratios for NBFCs. The maximum dividend payout ratio could be 60% for an NBFC which is a core investment company. However, there is no ceiling specified for NBFCs that do not accept public funds and do not have any customer interface. The proposed dividend should include both dividend on equity shares and compulsorily convertible preference shares eligible for inclusion in Tier 1 capital, the RBI said.

The board will have to keep in mind long-term growth plans of the NBFC while declaring dividend. NFBCs will also have to report details of dividend declared during the financial year to the RBI. The board of directors of the NBFC, while considering the proposals for dividend, will take into account supervisory findings of the RBI on divergence in classification and provisioning for NPAs.

In December 2020, the RBI had invited suggestions on draft guidelines on dividend payout for NBFCs. The guidelines issued on Thursday shall be effective for declaration of dividend from the profits of the financial year ending March 31, 2022, and onwards.

Get live Stock Prices from BSE, NSE, US Market and latest NAV, portfolio of Mutual Funds, Check out latest IPO News, Best Performing IPOs, calculate your tax by Income Tax Calculator, know market’s Top Gainers, Top Losers & Best Equity Funds. Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

Financial Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel and stay updated with the latest Biz news and updates.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

RBI links NBFC dividend payout to capital, NPA norms

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The Reserve Bank of India has linked declaration of dividend by non-banking finance companies (NBFCs) to their meeting minimum prudential norms on capital and bad loans.

The RBI also set the maximum payout ratio as part of its guidelines on distribution of dividend by NBFCs. The RBI said the guidelines, aimed at infusing greater transparency and uniformity in the payout practice, will be effective for declaration of dividend from the financial year ending March 31, 2022.

Board oversight

While considering a dividend proposal, the board has to take into account supervisory findings of the RBI (National Housing Bank for housing finance companies) on divergence in classification and provisioning for non-performing assets (NPAs).

The board must also consider any qualification in the auditor’s report to the financial statements, as also the long-term growth plans of the NBFC.

NBFCs (other than standalone primary dealers or SPDs) need to meet the mandated capital requirement for each of the three previous financial years, including the financial year for which the dividend is proposed.

For example, every deposit-taking NBFC is required to maintain a minimum capital ratio (of Tier I and Tier II capital) of not be less than 15 per cent of its aggregate risk weighted assets on-balance sheet and of risk adjusted value of off-balance sheet items.

Net NPA and other criteria

The net NPA ratio shall be less than 6 per cent in each of the last three years, including as at the close of the financial year for which the dividend is proposed.

NBFCs and HFCs have to transfer to the reserve fund not less than 20 per cent of their net profit every year as disclosed in the profit and loss account and before any dividend is declared.

Banking expert V Viswanathan said that since NPAs could go up in view of the Covid pandemic effect on borrowers, the RBI is tryingto ensure that NBFCs and HFCs with net NPAs above 6 per cent do not declare dividend but increase their internal accruals.

Dividend payout ceilings

In case the net profit for the relevant period includes any exceptional and/or extraordinary profits/income or the financial statements are qualified (including ‘emphasis of matter’) by the statutory auditor that indicates an overstatement of profit, the same has to be reduced from the net profits while determining the dividend payout ratio (DPR).

There is no ceiling DPR for NBFCs that do not accept public funds and do not have any customer interface. The maximum DPR for core investment companies and SPDs is 60 per cent, that for NBFCs is 50 per cent.

The RBI said an NBFC (other than an SPD) that does not meet the prudential requirement for each of the last three financial years, may be eligible to declare dividend, subject to a cap of 10 per cent, and certain conditions.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Jewellers can now repay part of gold loan in physical gold, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The RBI on Wednesday asked banks to provide an option to jewellery exporters and domestic manufacturers of gold jewellery to repay a part of Gold (Metal) Loans (GML) in physical gold. As per the extant instructions, banks authorised to import gold and designated banks participating in Gold Monetisation Scheme, 2015 (GMS) can extend GML to jewellery exporters or domestic manufacturers of gold jewellery.

GML is repaid in Indian rupees, equivalent to the value of the yellow metal borrowed.

Now, the Reserve Bank has reviewed the norms.

As per an RBI circular, “Banks shall provide an option to the borrower to repay a part of the GML in physical gold in lots of one kg or more.” subject to certain conditions.

One of the conditions is that the GML has been extended out of locally sourced or GMS-linked gold.

Also, the repayment had to be made using locally sourced IGDS (India Good Delivery Standard)/ LGDS (LBMA’s Good Delivery Standards) gold; and the yellow metal has to be delivered on behalf of the borrower to the bank directly by the refiner or a central agency without the borrower’s involvement.

Another condition is that the loan agreement should contain details of the option to be exercised by the borrower, acceptable standards and manner of delivery of gold for repayment.

RBI also asked banks to suitably incorporate all aspects into the board-approved policy governing GML along with concomitant risk management measures.

“Besides, the banks shall continue to monitor the end-use of funds lent under GML.” RBI added.

In 2015, the government had launched the Gold Monetisation Scheme to mobilise the yellow metal held by households and institutions in the country.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

RBI penalises three Maharashtra-based co-operative banks, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The Reserve Bank of India on Wednesday imposed a total penalty of Rs 8 lakh on three Maharashtra-based co-operative banks for deficiencies in regulatory compliance. A penalty of Rs 4 lakh has been imposed on Excellent Co-operative Bank, Mumbai, and Rs 2 lakh each on Janseva Sahakari Bank Limited, Pune and The Ajara Urban Co-operative Bank, Ajara (Kolhapur).

The penalty on Excellent Co-operative Bank was imposed for contravention of the directions issued by RBI on ‘Maintenance of Deposit Accounts’ and ‘Know Your Customer (KYC)’.

Janseva Sahakari Bank was fined for contravention of the direction issued by on KYC.

The central bank said the penalty on The Ajara Urban Co-operative Bank has been imposed for contravention of direction on ‘Maintenance of Deposit Accounts’.

The RBI said the penalty was imposed on the three lenders based on deficiencies in regulatory compliance and is not intended to pronounce upon the validity of any transaction or agreement entered into by them with their customers.

Follow and connect with us on , Facebook, Linkedin



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Borrowers to get option to repay a part of the Gold (Metal) Loan in physical gold

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has asked banks to provide jewellery exporters/ domestic manufacturers of gold jewellery an option to repay a part of the Gold (Metal) Loan (GML) in physical gold in lots of one kg or more.

Currently, these loans are repaid in Rupees, equivalent to the value of gold borrowed, on the relevant date/s.

The option to the borrower to repay a part of the GML in physical gold in lots of one kg or more can be given, subject to conditions that the GML has been extended out of locally sourced/ GMS (Gold Monetisation Scheme)-linked gold; and repayment is made using locally sourced IGDS (India Good Delivery Standard)/ LGDS (LBMA’s Good Delivery Standards) gold.

Also read: How savings were impacted by Covid second wave

The other conditions that have been prescribed are that the gold is delivered on behalf of the borrower to the bank directly by the refiner or a Central agency, acceptable to the bank, without the borrower’s involvement; the loan agreement contains details of the option to be exercised by the borrower, acceptable standards and manner of delivery of gold for repayment; and the borrower is apprised upfront, in a transparent manner, of the implications of exercising the option.

The Central bank asked banks to suitably incorporate the above aspects into the board-approved policy governing GML along with concomitant risk management measures. The banks shall continue to monitor the end-use of funds lent under GML.

As per the extant instructions, nominated banks authorised to import gold and designated banks participating in Gold Monetization Scheme, 2015 (GMS) can extend Gold (Metal) Loans (GML) to jewellery exporters or domestic manufacturers of gold jewellery.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

1 58 59 60 61 62 95