Sentences with phrase «not create liquidity»

The Fed does not create liquidity, it onl...

My contentions are: Securitization does not create liquidity, it only redirects it.

«@GaelicTorus It's my opinion that markets don't create liquidity; they reflect the native liquidity of the asset being traded $ $ #testidea Jun 14, 2012

They don't create liquidity, as much as steal liquidity from savers.

Not exact matches

The problem obviously is that the lack of any material liquidity in the market combined with the recent correction creates a risk that they may not see the actual cash returns for the paper gains they already booked.

Not that investors seem to worry too much for now: Korean stocks hit a six - year high two days ago, riding a wave of global liquidity created by central banks.

They do this first by depicting finance and rent - seeking privilege as part of the economy's real wealth - creating process rather than as an extractive sector, and second, by, pretending that the financial problem is only a temporary liquidity problem, not a structural problem debt of debts that can't be paid — unless the government makes up the gap at the non-financial sector's expense.

What this does is give me liquidity off my net worth whenever I need it, yet not create any taxable income.

There are no liquidity concerns, as you are not purchasing any underlying assets and platforms / brokers can create any number of different options which provides plenty of variance for traders to choose from.

The remainder of the developed world equity markets have not fared as well even as its central banks have been very involved in creating new rounds of liquidity and driving their lending rates into negative territory.

The reason is that when investors are inclined toward risk - aversion, safe liquidity is a desirable asset rather than an inferior one, so creating more of the stuff doesn't provoke speculation.

Liquidity is not magic; it can't be created or destroyed — it just travels where it is needed.

Under normal circumstances, where a few defaults don't threaten the whole economic system, and the government is running close to a balanced budget, and the Fed isn't in a liquidity trap that they themselves created, there are relationships that are useful for analyzing value in the markets.

Eliminate Keynesian idiocy, and manage the economy sensibly, balancing the budget as a normal matter, and don't use government or central bank policy to moderate it, because that only creates liquidity traps like the one we are in.

The result has been that the «resolution» of each of these financial crises created massive amounts of high - grade excess liquidity that was not withdrawn when market order was restored and provided the fuel that would produce the next credit boom and bust.

Lower liquidity usually results in a more volatile market and cause prices to change drastically; higher liquidity usually creates a less volatile market in which prices don't fluctuate as drastically.

The SEC created this new rule because open - ended mutual funds are not currently subject to requirements under federal securities law that requires them to manage their liquidity risk.

Meanwhile, Merrill's Rich Bernstein has an interesting note out arguing that the Fed's 450 basis points of tightening «has not yet severely impacted the U.S. economy» because the expanded use of credit derivatives has created an alternative source of liquidity.

Again, if you've known me for a while, you know that I believe that liquidity can't be created through securitization and derivatives.

Financing injects liquidity, and liquidity creates confidence in the short run, which can become self - reinforcing, until the cash flows can't support the assets in question, and then the markets become self - reinforcing on the downside, as buying power collapses.

Well, if there's not enough liquidity in the bond market to accommodate our desired investment, why not create it synthetically through credit default swaps?

After all, how can all this excess liquidity the Fed has been creating for the last two years not eventually translate into inflationary pressure?

As Noah Smith writes, this could create a liquidity crisis: «Liquidity in the ETF market might suddenly dry up, as everyone tries to figure out which ETFs have lots of junk and which ones don'liquidity crisis: «Liquidity in the ETF market might suddenly dry up, as everyone tries to figure out which ETFs have lots of junk and which ones don'Liquidity in the ETF market might suddenly dry up, as everyone tries to figure out which ETFs have lots of junk and which ones don't.»

Which while providing liquidity can cause problems, including reduced efficiency due to market spreads (paying middleman), and might create volatility that a carbon tax does not.

And diamond holders who have been unable to get a fair value for their stones benefit most, as the liquidity, standardization, and transparency created by CEDEX mean that they don't have to settle for low - ball offers from retailers and pawn shops anymore.

«Right in the middle of the Cash Flow stagnation, you have Bitcoin now, not just creating a new model for currency, but at the same time creating a new liquidity pool, that has been built on top of this vibrant, innovative economy, where now you see hundreds of startups, creating thousands of jobs, creating this incredible amount of innovation, in financial services, in cryptografie, in security, in distributed systems, in technology and we're only seeing the beginning of this.

Investors in a bitcoin ETF wouldn't be able to make purchases using Bitcoin but would be able to buy and sell it at its listed value, which would benefit the cryptocurrency economy by creating more liquidity in the market.

Exchanges have not opened Bitcoin Cash for deposits and withdrawals, creating liquidity issues for the coin.

An important point to note here is that Bitcoin Cash exchanges will be for - profit businesses, so if a sustainable revenue model for creating liquidity on exchanges doesn't exist, Bitcoin Cash's future becomes less certain.

Lower liquidity tends to result in a more volatile market (especially when large orders are placed), and it causes prices to change more drastically; whereas higher liquidity creates a less volatile market, and prices do not fluctuate as significantly.

Other settlement layers like Ripple, Stellar or the defunct Falcon Protocol don't actually move value and are no different than using a MySQL database... they are cryptocurrencies which may be better than bitcoin for payments but have no liquidity and address none of the above - noted use cases regarding creating decentralised fiat pegged cryptocurrencies, «great for banks but not for remittance providers» says Bitspark.

The Investor's equity is trapped in the relinquished property because it is not sold until after the replacement property is acquired which may create liquidity or financing challenges for the Investor when structuring a Reverse Exchange transaction.