Oggi abbiamo letto molti commenti "Post Draghi meeting" sia sui giornali sia da parte di vari analisti, ma quello più interessante e serio è quello dei trader di Goldman che vi segnaliamo di seguito.
L'inglese ci pare semplice anche per i non esperti, al più c'è sempre il traduttore di google, ma se dobbiamo riassumerlo in italiano in una righia crediamo che la prima sia più che sufficiente:
"Noi non crediamo che l'annuncio – di Draghi – sia stato deludente e che le forti vendite sui mercati azionari siano esagerate………".
_We don't believe that the annoucement was disappointing and that the sell-off in the equity market in particular was overdone. Participants were looking for a hard figure on programme size and more details on mezzanine guarantees. We would argue that Draghi was never going to announce a number: for such a broad, open-ended programme he would want to retain optionality. Secondly, with the
French and Germans resisting guarantees, it's premature to expect clarity on this issue at this time.
The ECB set a trajectory for the ABSPP at the September meeting. We are still on that trajectory. Besides the inclusion of Greek assets, there wasn't really anything unexpected vis a vis our view post the September meeting. Indeed, spreads in the ABS market ended the day relatively unchanged on the day.
A oft heard criticism is that ABSPP is just a funding programme (since capital relief is minimal) and this doesn't help in a system that's already awash with liquidity. The critical difference is ABSPP is a funding programme that has the potential to repair the credit transmission channel._
_Eurozone banks have approximately 300bn of retained deals which can be sold into ABSPP. But are the banks incentivised to sell? They are presently funding their assets very cheaply through the MRO. There is clearly some benefit to terming out the funding (as opposed to rolling short term trades) but we believe there is also scope for the ECB to change the terms of the funding to encourage banks to sell. Actions could include higher margins, larger haircuts or simply restricting the use of self-issued ABS as collateral. The ECB is in control of this calculus.
On the investor side, we believe the signalling function of the ECB's buying is important. European ABS is still viewed as tainted goods by a large proportion of the historic buyer-base, despite the robust performance through the economic cycle. With the ECB acting as a "lead order", we believe that more private investors will be encouraged to particpate. Contrary to many a fear, there could actually be a crowding-in effect. This could extend to mezzanine for investors deeming seniors too tight. Guarantees therefore, could be less important than presently envisaged._
Another key element of the recovery is the presence of non-bank financial institutions. They should be encouraged to originate credit since they can be confident there is a buyer of the senior slice. Since they need to retain 5%, there is a control function for credit quality. This non-bank origination will serve the ECB's objective of increasing credit formation to the real economy and also help rebalance the financial system away from the banks. Going forward, in the short-term we'll likely see the secondary market move towards a dichotomy between eligible and non-eligible assets.
In the longer-term, regulatory reform is needed for ABS market to be fully functional and not dependent on ECB financing. Such reform is likely to take up to 2-3 years. ABSPP gives the system time for this process that might not otherwise be there.
The long run goal is to have a system where banks can create credit in a sustainable manner. The ECB is kick-starting this process.
