1
00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:03,000
Speaker 1: Rich Clarendo, Global Economic Advisor of HIMCO. Of course, former

2
00:00:03,320 --> 00:00:06,400
Speaker 1: feder Reserve Vice chair joins us now from Zerich. Rich,

3
00:00:06,480 --> 00:00:09,040
Speaker 1: great to see you, perfect person to talk to. What

4
00:00:09,080 --> 00:00:11,600
Speaker 1: did you make of yesterday in aggregate.

5
00:00:11,640 --> 00:00:15,040
Speaker 2: Well, it was an interesting meeting. Obviously, no great decision.

6
00:00:15,240 --> 00:00:19,160
Speaker 2: I think the DOTS came in on the hawkish side,

7
00:00:19,160 --> 00:00:21,919
Speaker 2: with only one cut penciled in this year versus three

8
00:00:22,440 --> 00:00:22,920
Speaker 2: in March.

9
00:00:23,040 --> 00:00:24,599
Speaker 3: That's what I thought going.

10
00:00:24,360 --> 00:00:26,480
Speaker 2: Into the meeting was more likely.

11
00:00:26,480 --> 00:00:28,280
Speaker 3: I thought it would be a cross close calls. It was.

12
00:00:28,320 --> 00:00:31,680
Speaker 2: Obviously in some ways the Fed got trumped yesterday by

13
00:00:31,760 --> 00:00:37,720
Speaker 2: the data. The CPI numbers were very FED friendly. The

14
00:00:37,760 --> 00:00:41,519
Speaker 2: core number was soft, headline was around zero, and so

15
00:00:41,560 --> 00:00:43,720
Speaker 2: it's interesting that even though you could argue the Fed

16
00:00:44,200 --> 00:00:47,040
Speaker 2: on net was hawkish, it was on Netta Davis day

17
00:00:47,120 --> 00:00:49,159
Speaker 2: in markets given the CPI report.

18
00:00:49,520 --> 00:00:53,080
Speaker 1: So is are the dots old news given the fact

19
00:00:53,080 --> 00:00:56,240
Speaker 1: that we've got updated CPI which is maybe a little

20
00:00:56,280 --> 00:00:57,440
Speaker 1: bit more benign and positive.

21
00:00:58,200 --> 00:01:01,160
Speaker 3: Great question. You know, they could be they could be stale. Now.

22
00:01:01,240 --> 00:01:04,520
Speaker 2: The Chair did acknowledge, as certainly was the case when

23
00:01:04,520 --> 00:01:06,840
Speaker 2: I was there, that members of the committee do have

24
00:01:06,920 --> 00:01:09,479
Speaker 2: a chance on the day of the meeting, and yesterday

25
00:01:09,560 --> 00:01:13,640
Speaker 2: after the CPI number came out to revise their dots.

26
00:01:13,400 --> 00:01:14,399
Speaker 3: If they choose to.

27
00:01:14,560 --> 00:01:16,520
Speaker 2: He didn't want to go into whether or not folks

28
00:01:16,560 --> 00:01:20,560
Speaker 2: actually had to the extent they didn't. And certainly if

29
00:01:20,560 --> 00:01:23,480
Speaker 2: we get more numbers like this than they could be

30
00:01:23,640 --> 00:01:26,240
Speaker 2: a stale. But I more or less think that right

31
00:01:26,280 --> 00:01:28,760
Speaker 2: now they are in data dependent mode. I know it

32
00:01:28,800 --> 00:01:31,039
Speaker 2: sounds tripe, but I think they need to see a

33
00:01:31,040 --> 00:01:34,720
Speaker 2: lot more good inflation data to have the confidence to cut.

34
00:01:34,920 --> 00:01:37,800
Speaker 1: How far through that journey do you think we all, though,

35
00:01:38,040 --> 00:01:41,039
Speaker 1: rich We've talked about and Chris Wallace talks about this,

36
00:01:41,160 --> 00:01:43,520
Speaker 1: the need to see a series of data prints that

37
00:01:43,600 --> 00:01:45,840
Speaker 1: are pointing in the right direction to take us in

38
00:01:45,880 --> 00:01:46,720
Speaker 1: the right direction.

39
00:01:47,560 --> 00:01:48,440
Speaker 3: How big a tick in the.

40
00:01:48,440 --> 00:01:52,080
Speaker 1: Bulx kind of down that road are we given the

41
00:01:52,080 --> 00:01:53,840
Speaker 1: CPI data that we got yesterday.

42
00:01:54,120 --> 00:01:56,240
Speaker 2: Well, I certainly think we're going to need a guy.

43
00:01:56,280 --> 00:01:57,960
Speaker 2: We're going to need They are going to need more

44
00:01:58,040 --> 00:02:00,360
Speaker 2: data than just the one more set of print will

45
00:02:00,400 --> 00:02:03,560
Speaker 2: get before the July meeting, which I believe is July

46
00:02:03,960 --> 00:02:07,320
Speaker 2: thirty first, And since there's no meeting in August, I

47
00:02:07,320 --> 00:02:10,920
Speaker 2: think the soonest practical time to even think about a

48
00:02:10,960 --> 00:02:13,880
Speaker 2: possible rate cut would be the September meeting, and then

49
00:02:13,919 --> 00:02:15,720
Speaker 2: my own judgment is a lot would have to go

50
00:02:15,840 --> 00:02:19,919
Speaker 2: right between. Then we'll get numbers for June and July

51
00:02:20,040 --> 00:02:23,160
Speaker 2: and CPI for August, and so if you had three

52
00:02:23,240 --> 00:02:28,239
Speaker 2: more numbers like what we got yesterday, then September could

53
00:02:28,320 --> 00:02:32,519
Speaker 2: be could be possible. But I think barring that, we're

54
00:02:32,520 --> 00:02:35,960
Speaker 2: probably looking at either November or December, and that's more

55
00:02:36,080 --> 00:02:38,000
Speaker 2: or less I think where market pricing is.

56
00:02:39,560 --> 00:02:42,480
Speaker 1: Right now, I'm assuming December is probably more likely given

57
00:02:42,480 --> 00:02:44,560
Speaker 1: the politics that's going to be happening in November. Yeah,

58
00:02:44,560 --> 00:02:45,080
Speaker 1: that'd be correct.

59
00:02:45,280 --> 00:02:48,520
Speaker 2: Yeah, Indeed, the November meeting if I look at the

60
00:02:48,560 --> 00:02:51,120
Speaker 2: calendar correctly, Guy, the November meeting this year is the

61
00:02:51,200 --> 00:02:58,040
Speaker 2: day after the election, which obviously could make sense if

62
00:02:58,080 --> 00:03:00,000
Speaker 2: it's a close call to do that in December.

63
00:03:00,120 --> 00:03:00,440
Speaker 3: Yeah.

64
00:03:01,200 --> 00:03:03,840
Speaker 1: In terms of how we think of this in aggregate reach,

65
00:03:03,919 --> 00:03:07,040
Speaker 1: the sort of the totality of the cuts while the

66
00:03:07,080 --> 00:03:10,880
Speaker 1: cuts come later, seems to be largely intact. We're going

67
00:03:10,919 --> 00:03:12,520
Speaker 1: to get to the same place, We're just going to

68
00:03:12,560 --> 00:03:14,639
Speaker 1: take longer to get there. Is that the right way

69
00:03:14,680 --> 00:03:15,440
Speaker 1: of thinking about this?

70
00:03:16,240 --> 00:03:20,359
Speaker 2: Yeah, that was exactly And indeed the Chair more or

71
00:03:20,440 --> 00:03:23,679
Speaker 2: less made that point yesterday in the press conference. It's

72
00:03:23,720 --> 00:03:26,760
Speaker 2: fewer cuts this year than they thought in March, but

73
00:03:26,880 --> 00:03:30,800
Speaker 2: they added an additional cut to twenty twenty five and

74
00:03:30,880 --> 00:03:33,400
Speaker 2: an additional cut to twenty twenty six, so they actually

75
00:03:33,560 --> 00:03:36,200
Speaker 2: end up now Again, the further out you go in

76
00:03:36,240 --> 00:03:42,400
Speaker 2: the projections really the less informative they are. And so

77
00:03:42,840 --> 00:03:45,320
Speaker 2: and you saw the chair yesterday and the press conference

78
00:03:45,640 --> 00:03:48,200
Speaker 2: sort of remind folks of that of that point. But yes,

79
00:03:48,240 --> 00:03:51,400
Speaker 2: if you just take the dots literally, they literally get

80
00:03:51,440 --> 00:03:53,600
Speaker 2: to the same place they did in March, but just

81
00:03:54,160 --> 00:03:58,080
Speaker 2: with more of it back loaded, and again assuming that

82
00:03:58,120 --> 00:04:01,840
Speaker 2: the inflation data does break their way Ageah. The other

83
00:04:01,920 --> 00:04:05,240
Speaker 2: interesting thing about yesterday, when I think he was pressed

84
00:04:05,240 --> 00:04:09,520
Speaker 2: by a reporter about cutting with inflation running at two

85
00:04:09,560 --> 00:04:12,840
Speaker 2: point six or two point seven percent, I think what

86
00:04:12,880 --> 00:04:16,000
Speaker 2: they had was inflation running at two point eight by

87
00:04:16,040 --> 00:04:19,320
Speaker 2: the end of the year. You know, the Chair made

88
00:04:19,360 --> 00:04:21,240
Speaker 2: some reference to that on the exact quote. You know,

89
00:04:21,360 --> 00:04:23,800
Speaker 2: that would be a pretty good place to be. Now,

90
00:04:23,880 --> 00:04:26,560
Speaker 2: obviously the Fed is targeting two percent inflation, but it

91
00:04:26,560 --> 00:04:30,240
Speaker 2: does reinforce this message. We've had a PIMCO for some time,

92
00:04:30,560 --> 00:04:32,640
Speaker 2: not only for the Fed but the ECB and the

93
00:04:32,640 --> 00:04:35,520
Speaker 2: Bank of England and others that they're really operating in

94
00:04:35,560 --> 00:04:38,640
Speaker 2: a two point something range on inflation, and once it

95
00:04:38,680 --> 00:04:41,039
Speaker 2: gets there and they think it's falling, they can begin

96
00:04:41,120 --> 00:04:44,360
Speaker 2: to cut and cut in tandem with declining inflation.

97
00:04:45,680 --> 00:04:48,360
Speaker 1: Is the focus on inflation the Fed obviously, and you

98
00:04:48,640 --> 00:04:50,520
Speaker 1: reference a couple of other central banks that the FED

99
00:04:50,600 --> 00:04:54,159
Speaker 1: has a dual mandate. Is the focus on inflation? Is

100
00:04:54,200 --> 00:04:57,440
Speaker 1: the balance kind of sixty forty inflation versus what's happening

101
00:04:57,480 --> 00:04:59,280
Speaker 1: with the labor market? How do you think the kind

102
00:04:59,279 --> 00:05:01,960
Speaker 1: of the mix of of inputs there thinking about works

103
00:05:02,040 --> 00:05:02,560
Speaker 1: right now?

104
00:05:02,960 --> 00:05:05,279
Speaker 2: That's a great question, because I actually think it's quite

105
00:05:05,360 --> 00:05:09,000
Speaker 2: important in this cycle. I think it was clear back

106
00:05:09,040 --> 00:05:12,080
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty two and three that when inflation was

107
00:05:12,120 --> 00:05:15,040
Speaker 2: too darn high, they were, in essence a single mandate

108
00:05:15,080 --> 00:05:19,640
Speaker 2: central bank. Charr Pell even acknowledged that Jackson hole in

109
00:05:20,240 --> 00:05:24,000
Speaker 2: twenty two that raising rates could cause us some pain.

110
00:05:24,080 --> 00:05:24,960
Speaker 3: We haven't seen that.

111
00:05:25,000 --> 00:05:29,760
Speaker 2: It's been a very, very rapid and so far painless disinflation.

112
00:05:30,480 --> 00:05:32,640
Speaker 2: And you got a question yesterday about whether or not

113
00:05:32,680 --> 00:05:36,520
Speaker 2: they would cut rates preemptively because they were forecasting a

114
00:05:36,600 --> 00:05:39,800
Speaker 2: softening economy. And arise in the unemployment rate, and he

115
00:05:39,880 --> 00:05:42,000
Speaker 2: didn't commit to doing that. He said they want to

116
00:05:42,000 --> 00:05:44,559
Speaker 2: try to avoid that. On the other hand, they also

117
00:05:44,600 --> 00:05:47,159
Speaker 2: want to avoid a situation where they declare a mission

118
00:05:47,200 --> 00:05:50,760
Speaker 2: accomplished and then have to be hiking rates next year

119
00:05:50,800 --> 00:05:54,600
Speaker 2: because inflation rebounds. And so my guess is that on net,

120
00:05:55,080 --> 00:05:57,520
Speaker 2: they're going to really need to see some tangible evidence

121
00:05:57,560 --> 00:06:02,440
Speaker 2: of economic slowing before they actually cut, absent some better

122
00:06:02,520 --> 00:06:03,440
Speaker 2: news on inflation.

123
00:06:04,080 --> 00:06:06,200
Speaker 1: It's the trade that everybody seems to have on. Is

124
00:06:06,279 --> 00:06:11,160
Speaker 1: the steepener everybody's anticipation we get right cuts the fiscal

125
00:06:11,200 --> 00:06:15,200
Speaker 1: position probably means the back end remains reasonably elevated, and

126
00:06:15,200 --> 00:06:17,039
Speaker 1: that's the trade that everybody seems to want to have on.

127
00:06:17,279 --> 00:06:21,039
Speaker 1: Yet we've seen very little movements in the spread two

128
00:06:21,200 --> 00:06:23,680
Speaker 1: tens for really quite some time. Whilst it is the

129
00:06:23,720 --> 00:06:26,240
Speaker 1: beginning of the year, Really when does that kick off?

130
00:06:26,240 --> 00:06:29,160
Speaker 1: When does that if that trade is the right trade,

131
00:06:29,160 --> 00:06:31,880
Speaker 1: when do you think it starts to really materialize and work.

132
00:06:32,480 --> 00:06:35,200
Speaker 2: Really good point, because we obviously we have an inverted

133
00:06:35,240 --> 00:06:37,479
Speaker 2: curve and we have now for nearly two years, so

134
00:06:37,640 --> 00:06:40,919
Speaker 2: I think that's close to a record at PIMCO. We

135
00:06:40,920 --> 00:06:43,400
Speaker 2: don't believe inverted curves are the new normal. The curve

136
00:06:43,400 --> 00:06:46,159
Speaker 2: will resteeping, So in that sense, it is the good

137
00:06:46,200 --> 00:06:50,560
Speaker 2: trade to have on over the next several years. As

138
00:06:50,560 --> 00:06:53,080
Speaker 2: in anything in financial markets, markets will try to get

139
00:06:53,080 --> 00:06:56,440
Speaker 2: ahead of the inflection point. So sometimes you know, it's

140
00:06:56,440 --> 00:06:58,840
Speaker 2: better to look at those opportunities not so much in

141
00:06:58,960 --> 00:07:02,560
Speaker 2: spot space, but in forward space, so essentially the way

142
00:07:02,839 --> 00:07:05,520
Speaker 2: when our market's pricing them, the curve will steepen, and

143
00:07:05,560 --> 00:07:09,880
Speaker 2: to try to look for opportunities there. But you know,

144
00:07:09,920 --> 00:07:11,920
Speaker 2: there's a lot of money on the sidelines right now,

145
00:07:11,960 --> 00:07:15,440
Speaker 2: for example, in money market mutual funds, and my sense

146
00:07:15,600 --> 00:07:17,680
Speaker 2: is that once we do get that first cut, or

147
00:07:17,720 --> 00:07:20,880
Speaker 2: once it more or less gets priced in one hundred percent,

148
00:07:21,280 --> 00:07:24,080
Speaker 2: you will see you will see start to see a

149
00:07:24,080 --> 00:07:28,280
Speaker 2: lot of moving in the direction of the steepening bias.

150
00:07:29,040 --> 00:07:32,520
Speaker 1: Rich You're in Europe, you're in Zurich. We're watching quite

151
00:07:32,520 --> 00:07:35,640
Speaker 1: a lot of political consternation here in Europe, and I'm

152
00:07:35,720 --> 00:07:40,440
Speaker 1: just wondering how you're thinking about how investors, how portfolio

153
00:07:40,480 --> 00:07:43,680
Speaker 1: managers should be thinking about political risk right now. It

154
00:07:43,720 --> 00:07:46,440
Speaker 1: suddenly seems to have inserted itself into the debate in

155
00:07:46,480 --> 00:07:48,600
Speaker 1: a way that it hasn't for a while. We're sitting

156
00:07:48,640 --> 00:07:51,200
Speaker 1: it in France right now. We've seen in some emerging markets.

157
00:07:51,240 --> 00:07:53,760
Speaker 1: We're all looking so carefully at what is going to

158
00:07:53,760 --> 00:07:56,280
Speaker 1: happen in November in the United States. How are you,

159
00:07:56,320 --> 00:07:59,520
Speaker 1: guys at PIMCO, how are you thinking about kind of

160
00:07:59,520 --> 00:08:02,720
Speaker 1: trying to navigate that and what is the best advice

161
00:08:02,760 --> 00:08:05,239
Speaker 1: you've got? How are you thinking about what that process

162
00:08:05,280 --> 00:08:05,960
Speaker 1: is going to look like?

163
00:08:06,320 --> 00:08:06,560
Speaker 3: Well?

164
00:08:06,600 --> 00:08:10,880
Speaker 2: It certainly it was a focus of our recent secular form.

165
00:08:10,920 --> 00:08:14,040
Speaker 2: You know, we are certainly now moving into a multipolar world.

166
00:08:14,160 --> 00:08:17,360
Speaker 2: More than sixty percent of the world GDP is in

167
00:08:17,440 --> 00:08:19,440
Speaker 2: countries that are having or have had elections.

168
00:08:19,480 --> 00:08:19,840
Speaker 3: This year.

169
00:08:19,880 --> 00:08:23,640
Speaker 2: We've seen surprises on both side. You know, a surprise

170
00:08:23,720 --> 00:08:26,240
Speaker 2: in India where Modi did not get the support expected.

171
00:08:26,320 --> 00:08:29,240
Speaker 2: On the other hand in Mexico where Shinbaum got more

172
00:08:29,280 --> 00:08:33,080
Speaker 2: support than expected. Obviously an early election in the UK

173
00:08:33,320 --> 00:08:38,560
Speaker 2: Macron now indicating elections for the parliament in France, the

174
00:08:38,600 --> 00:08:39,520
Speaker 2: European Parliament.

175
00:08:39,800 --> 00:08:42,040
Speaker 3: We could go on and on for several segments.

176
00:08:42,040 --> 00:08:44,160
Speaker 2: The way we look at it at PIMCO guys that

177
00:08:44,200 --> 00:08:47,840
Speaker 2: there's always some element of geopolitical risk. But I think

178
00:08:47,840 --> 00:08:50,000
Speaker 2: you'd have to argue now, given that we have a

179
00:08:50,000 --> 00:08:52,120
Speaker 2: hot war in Europe and in the Middle East and

180
00:08:52,160 --> 00:08:55,760
Speaker 2: the geopolitical risk, it just emphasizes that this is a volatile,

181
00:08:56,360 --> 00:08:59,120
Speaker 2: uncertain world and what we're doing is trying to put

182
00:08:59,160 --> 00:09:02,600
Speaker 2: together for our clob gcience robust portfolios that that are

183
00:09:02,640 --> 00:09:06,800
Speaker 2: that are that do well in all circumstances. It's a challenge,

184
00:09:06,840 --> 00:09:09,280
Speaker 2: but I think there are opportunities there which.

185
00:09:09,080 --> 00:09:11,040
Speaker 1: I couldn't have thought of a more perfect person to

186
00:09:11,080 --> 00:09:14,720
Speaker 1: talk to, to digest and analyze. Thank you yesterday, CPI

187
00:09:14,840 --> 00:09:17,440
Speaker 1: the Fed genuine pleasure, sir, Thank you very much. Indeed

188
00:09:17,760 --> 00:09:21,439
Speaker 1: we always appreciate your time. Richard Clarida, global Economic Advisor

189
00:09:21,440 --> 00:09:25,080
Speaker 1: at PIMCO and of course former Federal Reserve Vice Chair