finyork.com

Tag: economics

  • What is a Prime Brokerage and Who Uses Their Services?

    A prime brokerage is a bundled group of services offered by investment banks and other financial institutions. Investment banks may offer these services to hedge funds and other large investment clients that have a need to be able to borrow securities (or cash), in order to engage in “netting” to achieve “absolute returns”.

    What is Netting?

    Netting refers to offsetting the value of multiple positions, or payments, due to be exchanged between two or more parties. Typically, it’s used to determine which party is owed compensation in a multiparty contract.  Additionally, utilized as a method of reducing risks in financial contracts by combining or aggregating multiple financial obligations to arrive at a net obligation amount. Netting reduces settlement, credit, and other financial risks between two or more parties.

    What is an Absolute Return?

    An absolute return indicates the return an asset receives over a specific period. This measure looks at the appreciation/depreciation that an asset – such as a stock or mutual fund – has achieved over time. Absolute returns differ from relative returns in that there’s no benchmark comparison. The absolute return is concerned with the return of that specific asset over a period of time. An easier way to think of an absolute return is by its other reference, total return. Therefore, the gain or loss of an asset or portfolio is measured independent of any other standard. Absolute returns may be positive or negative and they may also bear no correlation to other market activities.

    Who Typically Utilizes Prime Brokerage Services and Who Provides Them?

    Hedge funds would amongst the first category of prime brokerage clients. Legally, clients may not access prime brokerage services for less than $500,000 in equity, even though it’s typical for clients to have over $50M in equity. High net worth private investors are another popular category of prime brokerage clients.

    On the other hand, prime brokerage services are generally offered by large investment banks. These institutions benefit from economies of scale to bundle multiple financial service offerings with more efficiency, at a cheaper cost. Some of the most notable firms who offer prime brokerage services include Goldman Sachs, BAML, JPMC, Citigroup, and BNY Mellon. Services bundled include largely “back office” tasks like asset custody, financial reporting, cash/securities lending, investor introductions, and risk consulting.

    Historically, Goldman Sachs has been known as the most reputable prime brokerage. However, their prime brokerage agreements are such that smaller hedge funds would have difficulty meeting their expected capital requirements. More recently, Pershing – an elite BNY Mellon subsidiary – has become the backbone of the prime brokerage street business. Combining the custodial services BNY Mellon is renowned for, with Pershing’s uniquely skilled investments and alternatives specialists, gives the duo a unique marketing position within the prime brokerage business. Pershing’s “prime services” are highlighted by risk management consulting. Additional offerings include securities lending, financing solutions, trade execution, technology, liquid alternative investments, and more. Within the alternative investment niche, which is extremely frequently accessed by hedge funds, Pershing has built an impeccable reputation.

  • What is a Prime Brokerage and Who Uses Their Services?

    A prime brokerage is a bundled group of services offered by investment banks and other financial institutions. Investment banks may offer these services to hedge funds and other large investment clients that have a need to be able to borrow securities (or cash), in order to engage in “netting” to achieve “absolute returns”.

    What is Netting?

    Netting refers to offsetting the value of multiple positions, or payments, due to be exchanged between two or more parties. Typically, it’s used to determine which party is owed compensation in a multiparty contract.  Additionally, utilized as a method of reducing risks in financial contracts by combining or aggregating multiple financial obligations to arrive at a net obligation amount. Netting reduces settlement, credit, and other financial risks between two or more parties.

    What is an Absolute Return?

    An absolute return indicates the return an asset receives over a specific period. This measure looks at the appreciation/depreciation that an asset – such as a stock or mutual fund – has achieved over time. Absolute returns differ from relative returns in that there’s no benchmark comparison. The absolute return is concerned with the return of that specific asset over a period of time. An easier way to think of an absolute return is by its other reference, total return. Therefore, the gain or loss of an asset or portfolio is measured independent of any other standard. Absolute returns may be positive or negative and they may also bear no correlation to other market activities.

    Who Typically Utilizes Prime Brokerage Services and Who Provides Them?

    Hedge funds would amongst the first category of prime brokerage clients. Legally, clients may not access prime brokerage services for less than $500,000 in equity, even though it’s typical for clients to have over $50M in equity. High net worth private investors are another popular category of prime brokerage clients.

    On the other hand, prime brokerage services are generally offered by large investment banks. These institutions benefit from economies of scale to bundle multiple financial service offerings with more efficiency, at a cheaper cost. Some of the most notable firms who offer prime brokerage services include Goldman Sachs, BAML, JPMC, Citigroup, and BNY Mellon. Services bundled include largely “back office” tasks like asset custody, financial reporting, cash/securities lending, investor introductions, and risk consulting.

    Historically, Goldman Sachs has been known as the most reputable prime brokerage. However, their prime brokerage agreements are such that smaller hedge funds would have difficulty meeting their expected capital requirements. More recently, Pershing – an elite BNY Mellon subsidiary – has become the backbone of the prime brokerage street business. Combining the custodial services BNY Mellon is renowned for, with Pershing’s uniquely skilled investments and alternatives specialists, gives the duo a unique marketing position within the prime brokerage business. Pershing’s “prime services” are highlighted by risk management consulting. Additional offerings include securities lending, financing solutions, trade execution, technology, liquid alternative investments, and more. Within the alternative investment niche, which is extremely frequently accessed by hedge funds, Pershing has built an impeccable reputation.

  • Financial Markets Outlook Q4 2022 – Thoughts on Late September/Early October Bear Market Rally

    As the sell-off of stocks intensified into late September 2022, the S&P 500 lost all gains from the previous calendar year in September 2021. Coupled with an annual slump of 24% – the lowest since November 2020 – many were quick to point out the likelihood of a short-term bear market rally. This wasn’t (and isn’t) unjustified at all. During inflationary periods, as we entered this year by definition after two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth, current stock market trends seemed to point to a classic “bottoming out”. An asset that has “bottomed out” reached its low point and could be in the early stages of trending upward. That’s the real question most investors are asking. Given all the global financial market dynamics that have been putting downward pressure on prices, are they ready to rebound? Will it be a short-term bear market? Will there be any noticeable rebound at all? What are the chances of a long-term bear market cycle? These are all questions investors are keen on getting more insight into daily.

    How Are Financial Markets Looking for the Remainder of Q4 2022?

    Shaky and unpredictable, at best. Specifically looking back at the S&P 500 trends, October, like September, tends to be a comparatively volatile month. This is coming off a year where more than half the trading days saw movements above or below 1%, indicating high general volatility.

    Before we get to the Fed policy, let’s quickly mention something many people are overlooking; current problems plaguing the UK. When we’re talking about the general trend of global financial markets, the US and UK generally follow similar patterns. In 2008, when the US recession hit, did the UK not feel the impact too? Ominously, the UK has already been in recession for a full year. Furthermore, S&P Global is predicting a “tough winter” for EU markets. Add that to the ongoing currency crises the GBP and EUR are currently experiencing and one would not be out of line at all to believe that the UK, as well as struggling countries in the EU, will fall into an even deeper recession. Surely – if that were to happen – it would obviously not bode well for US financial markets.

    But more realistically, actions taken by the Fed regarding inflationary concerns are what investors are eyeing more closely. Let’s take a deeper look at the Fed’s policy to combat inflation and how that’s impacting financial markets.

    The Fed’s Continuously Shifting Narrative on Inflation

    It’s important to first point out the Fed’s inflation narrative and, accordingly, their policy has shifted dramatically the past year. In fact, just last year Fed officials said inflation “wouldn’t be a problem”. Shortly later, the Fed promised us it would be “transitory” inflation. Now, they’re shifting to a “soft landing” inflation for the economy, amidst hiked up rates and economic downturn. As evidence of the deflationary attempts being rejected mounts, the Fed will undoubtably continue to move the bar.

    Why is that concerning for financial markets and moreover, market participants? Generally – intuitively, this should be especially true during times of economic uncertainty – investors often look to the Fed for guidance. Meaning, the majority of market participants will react to news from the Fed in real time. Even more specifically, they’ll take a bearish or bullish position based on what the Fed is saying at that time. David Schassler, Head of Quantitative Investment Solutions for VanEck, noted the same.

    “Market participants have been slow to catch up with the party line — and that’s reflected in the wild volatility. The market has failed to recognize the threat of inflation. Unfortunately, we think the idea of a soft landing is a bit of a fairy tale, and investors can expect a lot more volatility”.
    -David Schassler, VanEck Investments
    Tweet

    But what’s more concerning is that even the Fed knows, for deflation to be successful, there also has to be a drop in demand. It doesn’t appear, nor is anyone really reporting, that there is any drop in demand. That’s starting to have – quite significant at that – ramifications on the global supply chain. Regardless of the reason – it could be the “COVID-10 lockdowns” J.P. Morgan hypothesized – at this point we know we are heading towards a global supply chain “crisis”. On top of a potentially botched deflation, we could see increased – rather than decreased – demand meet supply shortages, which would equal very rapid, upward prices until demand swings back down. Factoring back in how shaky the global economy looks at present, I think it’s extremely difficult to confidently say we’re definitely not going to have a financial crisis-like recession sometime in 2023. As many have said, time will tell.

    Conclusion for Q4 2022

    Concisely, we’re likely entering even darker waters than we’ve been in. That goes for capital markets, equities, indices, and related securities. Savvy investors will start looking at alternative investment products, while at-risk assets continue to have a negative long-term outlook. During times of financial uncertainty, investments in real estate (physical assets, more broadly) are usually a better value risk. High-value commodities, like gold, are known to do well in recessions (no, not Blockchain technology). High-value commodities such as gold in general are a quintessential hedge against a deflating dollar (USD) value.

    While we want to make it abundantly clear if there is a bear market, we expect it to be a short-term bounce back. To reiterate, the long-term macroeconomic outlook right now looks bleak. However, we also don’t want to give the incorrect impression that we are predicting a 2008-like financial collapse. Many have speculated that today’s CDOs are the mid-late 2000’s MBS products that led to the widespread 2008 financial collapse, however the comparison is a false equivalency.

    The safeguards we’ve put in place since 2008 prevent the kind of collapse we witnessed during that time. We have new volatility ratios that dual-acting (depository/investment) banks must strictly maintain. We have new regulatory reporting and compliance procedures banks have entire departments of staff dedicated to. The biggest investment banks in the world have literally thousands of dedicated employees specifically for regulatory reporting and compliance projects. My genuine belief is most active market observers understand we’re smart enough to learn from 2008 and avoid a repeat.

    However – needless to say – we’re still imperfect. With the way the global financial system now operates, there can only be winners if there are also losers. That dynamic is becoming more apparent at an upward trajectory. The biggest winners are becoming bigger (wealthier) and the biggest losers are becoming poorer. Interestingly, according to Fox, the last few recessions have statistically benefitted the “rich of the rich”.

  • Why the SEC will Ultimately Deny VanEck’s Third Application for a Bitcoin Spot ETF and What it Means for Digital Assets

    Late last month, August 2022, the SEC announced a 45-day delay to rule on VanEck’s third Bitcoin Spot ETF application. This comes on the heels of the SEC denying Grayscale’s GBTC – an SEC backed Bitcoin Trust – conversion to a spot ETF, as well as Bitwise Asset Management’s application for a spot ETF, on the same day in late June 2022. VanEck currently has an SEC-backed Bitcoin futures ETF, the “VanEck Bitcoin Strategy ETF” (Cboe: XBTF). Their two previous applications for a Bitcoin spot ETF were rejected first in 2017, then late in 2021. VanEck is considered somewhat of an “investment giant”, with roughly $65B currently in AUM.

    Grayscale, with roughly $20M in AUM and a digital asset manager giant themselves, a subsidiary of Digital Currency Group (DCG) – who’s also the parent company of CoinDesk – sued the SEC immediately after they rejected the GBTC’s conversion from a SEC-backed Bitcoin Trust to a SEC-backed spot ETF. A ruling from a Federal Appellate Court is expected sometime in Q4 2023 or Q1 2024.

    Why Will the SEC Reject VanEck’s Application for a Bitcoin Spot ETF a Third Time?

    A better way to phrase the question is: why wouldn’t they? Has anything dramatically changed about either the SEC’s mandates, Bitcoin, market conditions, or is VanEck’s application unique? No, for all the above. VanEck’s Bitcoin spot ETF, which they’ve proposed to list on the Cboe BZX Exchange, would still create direct Bitcoin ownership for investors who purchased it. In my opinion, the SEC’s had to issue a 45-day delay because VanEck’s argument appears to differ from Grayscale’s. VanEck isn’t relying on a futures versus spot Exchanged Traded Fund [ETF] derivative comparison. Rather, they’re urging the SEC to reconsider because investors can access Bitcoin spot ETFs through our neighbors in Canada.

    They’re not wrong. As early as February 2021, Canada became one of the first countries in the world to place a Bitcoin spot ETF on one of their national exchanges. But given that was back in February 2021, the question remains: what’s changed? It’s completely unrealistic for the SEC to admit they weren’t aware of a Bitcoin spot ETF on a Canadian exchange. Hypothetically, it would very likely give Grayscale the green light to pursue further, more substantial legal action against the SEC.

    At the time Grayscale’s GBTC was rejected, many analysts cited the heightened potential for fraud and malpractice amongst digital assets being a key reason institutional investors, who generally purchase far more spot products than futures derivatives (as part of their traditional investment strategies), should not get access to an SEC-backed Bitcoin spot ETF yet. They said digital currency exchanges needed total transparency inside their marketplaces, like the DOW and NASDAQ. While this flies in the face of many reasons investors purchase digital assets and it’s not practical, it didn’t matter. That’s what the institutional investor community who was with the SEC just two months back demanded. VanEck is not purely a digital asset manager like Grayscale and in terms of AUM, they’re over 3 times larger.

    As another interesting reference point VanEck currently has 3 CO (Commodity) ETFs. The first is XBFT (Bitcoin Strategy ETF) and the second is OUNZ (VanEck Merk Gold ETF). XBFT has $19.2M in total net assets, while OUNZ has $600.4M. Interestingly, VanEck offers 65 EFT products and only 3 fall in the Commodities Asset Class. The other 62 are split between Fixed Income (Corporate, International, & Municipal Bonds, Rates products, etc.) and Equity ETFs. VanEck’s GDX has $9.4B in total net assets, while their ITM has 1,939 holdings (September 2, 2022). The XBFT has just $19.2M in total net assets and only 8 people holding it (September 2, 2022). Of the roughly $65B VanEck has in AUM, XBFT – a Bitcoin futures ETF – represents around .002% of their investment portfolio.

    Concisely, VanEck is a bigger, more established firm that has broader appeal to institutional investors already compared to Grayscale, who owns roughly 3.5% of all of Bitcoin and is purely a digital asset manager. They have the first SEC-approved Bitcoin Trust ETF with GBTC, trading on the NASDAQ. They are doing their best to bring digital assets to institutional investors. That’s why they’ve gone all out for a Bitcoin spot ETF, whereas VanEck seems to have strategically made a push when they’ve felt they had a compelling case.

    Does the SEC’s 45-Delay Mean VanEck has a Real Chance?

    I believe it means they have a better chance, but will ultimately suffer the same fate as Grayscale and Bitwise. I don’t even think it gives them much of a better chance; only if the SEC makes an unexpected blunder. Nothing has changed about their concerns related to GBTC that would warrant VanEck’s application to get approved.

    “The Commission [SEC] finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change and the issues raised therein.”
    -SEC Spokesperson, in a letter to VanEck (August 2022)
    Tweet

    The verbiage in this quote seems to be hinting that the SEC is actually considering accepting VanEck’s argument. However, the SEC issuing a delay on a ruling isn’t exactly breaking news. They’ve shot down over a dozen attempts at a Bitcoin spot ETF in the last 12-month calendar year alone. There is no new information to indicate Bitcoin is any less susceptible to fraud – thereby posting inherent investor risk – than two months ago. The SEC is buying time in hopes of making a more compelling case regarding Bitcoin spot ETF’s in Canadian markets. What’s going to make more headlines in 45 days, the macroeconomic conditions from rising rates, inflation, and other recessionary indicators, or the SEC rejected the 15th (or so) Bitcoin spot ETF in the last year? After all, the SEC isn’t completely unaware of the current dynamics in financial markets.

    If VanEck is Ultimately Denied, What Does that Mean for Cryptocurrency?

    The overall impact is unlikely to be large, unless the SEC gets unpredictable here. Assuming they stay consistent with their rationale, this matter will go back to the DC Appellate Courts. But if you’re an institutional investor of SEC-approved Bitcoin assets, you’re not going to be majorly impacted by this. Inflation and rising interest rates? That will likely negatively impact at risk assets across the board and digital assets are certainly in that category. But the long-term ramifications for Bitcoin from this latest SEC ruling are likely to be very minimal.

    Just to end with a key point we just touched on, watch out for at risk assets considering this is very likely going to be the realest felt recession since 2008. There won’t be a major economic downturn because we’ve learned our lessons from 2008, but investors will sell off at-risk assets as soon as financial markets show signs of destabilization. Digital assets in an investor’s portfolio will be one of the first to go. Combined with the seasonality of Bitcoin slumps, expect the price to drop below 15,000 and who knows how much lower. How much lower would it take for the strongest crypto asset enthusiasts to wave the red flag? Would that ever happen? Only time will tell, but again, considering we have a lot of indications a recession is coming, taking a bullish position on Bitcoin in the short-term is unwise at best.

  • Why the SEC will Ultimately Deny VanEck’s Third Application for a Bitcoin Spot ETF and What it Means for Digital Assets

    Late last month, August 2022, the SEC announced a 45-day delay to rule on VanEck’s third Bitcoin Spot ETF application. This comes on the heels of the SEC denying Grayscale’s GBTC – an SEC backed Bitcoin Trust – conversion to a spot ETF, as well as Bitwise Asset Management’s application for a spot ETF, on the same day in late June 2022. VanEck currently has an SEC-backed Bitcoin futures ETF, the “VanEck Bitcoin Strategy ETF” (Cboe: XBTF). Their two previous applications for a Bitcoin spot ETF were rejected first in 2017, then late in 2021. VanEck is considered somewhat of an “investment giant”, with roughly $65B currently in AUM.

    Grayscale, with roughly $20M in AUM and a digital asset manager giant themselves, a subsidiary of Digital Currency Group (DCG) – who’s also the parent company of CoinDesk – sued the SEC immediately after they rejected the GBTC’s conversion from a SEC-backed Bitcoin Trust to a SEC-backed spot ETF. A ruling from a Federal Appellate Court is expected sometime in Q4 2023 or Q1 2024.

    Why Will the SEC Reject VanEck’s Application for a Bitcoin Spot ETF a Third Time?

    A better way to phrase the question is: why wouldn’t they? Has anything dramatically changed about either the SEC’s mandates, Bitcoin, market conditions, or is VanEck’s application unique? No, for all the above. VanEck’s Bitcoin spot ETF, which they’ve proposed to list on the Cboe BZX Exchange, would still create direct Bitcoin ownership for investors who purchased it. In my opinion, the SEC’s had to issue a 45-day delay because VanEck’s argument appears to differ from Grayscale’s. VanEck isn’t relying on a futures versus spot Exchanged Traded Fund [ETF] derivative comparison. Rather, they’re urging the SEC to reconsider because investors can access Bitcoin spot ETFs through our neighbors in Canada.

    They’re not wrong. As early as February 2021, Canada became one of the first countries in the world to place a Bitcoin spot ETF on one of their national exchanges. But given that was back in February 2021, the question remains: what’s changed? It’s completely unrealistic for the SEC to admit they weren’t aware of a Bitcoin spot ETF on a Canadian exchange. Hypothetically, it would very likely give Grayscale the green light to pursue further, more substantial legal action against the SEC.

    At the time Grayscale’s GBTC was rejected, many analysts cited the heightened potential for fraud and malpractice amongst digital assets being a key reason institutional investors, who generally purchase far more spot products than futures derivatives (as part of their traditional investment strategies), should not get access to an SEC-backed Bitcoin spot ETF yet. They said digital currency exchanges needed total transparency inside their marketplaces, like the DOW and NASDAQ. While this flies in the face of many reasons investors purchase digital assets and it’s not practical, it didn’t matter. That’s what the institutional investor community who was with the SEC just two months back demanded. VanEck is not purely a digital asset manager like Grayscale and in terms of AUM, they’re over 3 times larger.

    As another interesting reference point VanEck currently has 3 CO (Commodity) ETFs. The first is XBFT (Bitcoin Strategy ETF) and the second is OUNZ (VanEck Merk Gold ETF). XBFT has $19.2M in total net assets, while OUNZ has $600.4M. Interestingly, VanEck offers 65 EFT products and only 3 fall in the Commodities Asset Class. The other 62 are split between Fixed Income (Corporate, International, & Municipal Bonds, Rates products, etc.) and Equity ETFs. VanEck’s GDX has $9.4B in total net assets, while their ITM has 1,939 holdings (September 2, 2022). The XBFT has just $19.2M in total net assets and only 8 people holding it (September 2, 2022). Of the roughly $65B VanEck has in AUM, XBFT – a Bitcoin futures ETF – represents around .002% of their investment portfolio.

    Concisely, VanEck is a bigger, more established firm that has broader appeal to institutional investors already compared to Grayscale, who owns roughly 3.5% of all of Bitcoin and is purely a digital asset manager. They have the first SEC-approved Bitcoin Trust ETF with GBTC, trading on the NASDAQ. They are doing their best to bring digital assets to institutional investors. That’s why they’ve gone all out for a Bitcoin spot ETF, whereas VanEck seems to have strategically made a push when they’ve felt they had a compelling case.

    Does the SEC’s 45-Delay Mean VanEck has a Real Chance?

    I believe it means they have a better chance, but will ultimately suffer the same fate as Grayscale and Bitwise. I don’t even think it gives them much of a better chance; only if the SEC makes an unexpected blunder. Nothing has changed about their concerns related to GBTC that would warrant VanEck’s application to get approved.

    “The Commission [SEC] finds that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to take action on the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change and the issues raised therein.”
    -SEC Spokesperson, in a letter to VanEck (August 2022)
    Tweet

    The verbiage in this quote seems to be hinting that the SEC is actually considering accepting VanEck’s argument. However, the SEC issuing a delay on a ruling isn’t exactly breaking news. They’ve shot down over a dozen attempts at a Bitcoin spot ETF in the last 12-month calendar year alone. There is no new information to indicate Bitcoin is any less susceptible to fraud – thereby posting inherent investor risk – than two months ago. The SEC is buying time in hopes of making a more compelling case regarding Bitcoin spot ETF’s in Canadian markets. What’s going to make more headlines in 45 days, the macroeconomic conditions from rising rates, inflation, and other recessionary indicators, or the SEC rejected the 15th (or so) Bitcoin spot ETF in the last year? After all, the SEC isn’t completely unaware of the current dynamics in financial markets.

    If VanEck is Ultimately Denied, What Does that Mean for Cryptocurrency?

    The overall impact is unlikely to be large, unless the SEC gets unpredictable here. Assuming they stay consistent with their rationale, this matter will go back to the DC Appellate Courts. But if you’re an institutional investor of SEC-approved Bitcoin assets, you’re not going to be majorly impacted by this. Inflation and rising interest rates? That will likely negatively impact at risk assets across the board and digital assets are certainly in that category. But the long-term ramifications for Bitcoin from this latest SEC ruling are likely to be very minimal.

    Just to end with a key point we just touched on, watch out for at risk assets considering this is very likely going to be the realest felt recession since 2008. There won’t be a major economic downturn because we’ve learned our lessons from 2008, but investors will sell off at-risk assets as soon as financial markets show signs of destabilization. Digital assets in an investor’s portfolio will be one of the first to go. Combined with the seasonality of Bitcoin slumps, expect the price to drop below 15,000 and who knows how much lower. How much lower would it take for the strongest crypto asset enthusiasts to wave the red flag? Would that ever happen? Only time will tell, but again, considering we have a lot of indications a recession is coming, taking a bullish position on Bitcoin in the short-term is unwise at best.