Insight - Goldman Sachs highlights bond trading limits

Below estimates: The Goldman Sachs office in London. Goldman has disclosed FICC sales and trading revenue of US$1.88bil, short of estimates for US$2.02bil. — Bloomberg

THE “Masters of the Universe” are a lot of things, but magicians they are not.

With all of the largest US banks except Morgan Stanley now having reported fourth-quarter earnings, it’s clear that bond traders struggled to meet expectations in the final three months of 2020.

On Tuesday, Goldman Sachs Group Inc disclosed fixed-income, currencies and commodities (FICC) sales and trading revenue of US$1.88bil, short of estimates for US$2.02bil, even as its equities trading blew forecasts out of the water, soaring by 40%.

At Bank of America Corp, FICC trading revenue was US$1.74bil, missing expectations for US$2bil. Citigroup Inc also fell short of FICC estimates, a notable blemish given that it’s one of the larger revenue-generating groups inside the bank. JPMorgan Chase & Co barely squeaked by, with FICC sales and trading revenue of US$3.95bil, topping forecasts for US$3.92bil.

Interest-rate volatility

It’s not exactly a mystery why fixed-income trading slowed. For one, interest-rate volatility remained near all-time lows in the fourth quarter, as measured by the ICE BofA MOVE Index, which is a yield-curve weighted index of the normalised implied volatility on one-month Treasury options. It temporarily lurched higher in the 30 days ahead of US elections, though the rise in benchmark yields was more subdued.

Meanwhile, US companies took a step back from issuing new debt after borrowing at a blistering pace from April through September. About US$241bil of US investment-grade corporate bonds were issued in the fourth quarter, according to data compiled by Bloomberg, compared with US$389.5bil in the third quarter and a whopping US$761bil in the second quarter.

Without as many new bonds hitting the market in the final months of 2020, traders naturally had less work. The fact that credit spreads slowly compressed week after week didn’t exactly drum up much excitement, either.

Of course, fixed-income trading was largely responsible for carrying the biggest US banks through the worst of the Covid-19 pandemic. At Goldman, FICC revenue in the first quarter of 2020 surged 68% compared with the last three months of 2019. Then its second-quarter FICC revenue soared 149% relative to a year earlier, beating even JPMorgan’s 120% gain. As I noted in July, this kind of blistering pace was never going to be sustainable.

JPMorgan chief executive officer Jamie Dimon said it best at the time: “For trading, because no one asked, cut it in half... and that’ll probably be closer to the future than if you say it’s going to still be double what it normally runs.”

Goldman’s fourth-quarter FICC revenue, at US$1.88bil, was up 6.3% year-over-year, though when compared with its huge US$4.24bil haul in the second quarter – the highest in nine years – Dimon’s back-of-the-envelope guidance looks about right.

Market reaction

All indications suggest that between the Federal Reserve’s ultra-accommodative policy stance and the federal government’s willingness to deploy additional fiscal stimulus until the Covid-19 pandemic is in the rear-view mirror, markets are neither going to experience the sharp decline of February and March nor the stunning rebound of the following months.

Goldman chief executive officer David Solomon said as much on a conference call with analysts. A lack of volatility in either direction makes life that much harder for bond traders.

On that same conference call, Stephen Scherr, Goldman’s chief financial officer, acknowledged that there “might be a less impressive opportunity set” in global markets relative to 2020. And while the bank’s asset-management arm and consumer division provide more durable revenue, “none of those are necessarily meant to be compensating factors for what could be a shortfall in global markets, ” he said.

The first week of 2021 looked as if it could be the start of a significant bond-market reversal, with benchmark 10-year Treasury yields rising by 20 basis points to 1.12%. But the selling didn’t last, prompting DoubleLine Capital chief investment officer Jeffrey Gundlach to say on Twitter that there’s a “yield peak in place, at least for the short term.”

At least outwardly, some bank executives seem to be taking the other side of that wager. “With the change in interest-rate environment, I think you could see a lot of activity in FICC, so I don’t think there’s a reason to think it’s going to decline dramatically from here, ” Paul Donofrio, Bank of America’s chief financial officer, said on Tuesday. The bank’s own interest-rate strategists are forecasting the 10-year Treasury yield to reach 1.5% by the end of the year, and some investors are starting to raise the bar to 2%. Consider me skeptical.

Putting a cap

If interest rates are indeed kept mostly in check, that most likely puts a cap on what banks can expect from their bond traders in the months ahead. For the consumer-focused institutions, lower-for-longer yields also constrain their net interest income. That probably means a heightened focus across the board on controlling expenses: At Goldman, operating costs fell 19% year-over-year, while Bank of America’s efficiency ratio topped estimates.

Investment bankers may have to pick up the slack as well. And as I wrote last week, it probably also means that the big wild card for bottom-line results in 2021 will be just how quickly the banks release credit reserves.

To get through 2020, whether it was navigating historic interest-rate volatility or helping to raise emergency cash for corporate America, bond traders had to reprise their role as “Masters of the Universe, ” a phrase from Tom Wolfe’s 1987 Wall Street novel “The Bonfire of the Vanities.” Banks certainly had a great year because of this effort. In 2021, however, bond trading looks as if it will come back to earth.

It’s up to Wall Street CEOs to figure out how to make sure their profits don’t follow the same trajectory. — Bloomberg

Brian Chappatta is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering the debt market. Views expressed here are the writer’s own.

Article type: metered
User Type: anonymous web
User Status:
Campaign ID: 18
Cxense type: free
User access status: 3

Did you find this article insightful?


Next In Business News

MyEG posts RM75.5mil net profit in Q4
ANALYSIS: Top Glove bets on pandemic boom to propel ambitious US$1.9bil HK listing
Datasonic eyes Vietnam e-passport opportunity�
Yinson's unit bags RM1.5bil solar project in India�
Deloitte to pay RM324mil in settlement over 1MDB and SRC�
BIMB Investment launches Makmur myWakaf Fund
KLCI extends gains, closes 18 points higher
MISC’s ethane carrier Seri Everest delivers cargo in China
GlobalFoundries pours US$1.4b into fab expansion
Oil rises as U.S. vaccine progress raises demand expectations

Stories You'll Enjoy