Are 2 More Rate Increases Realistic? Probably Not

Several strategists are not sold on the Fed’s two-hike scenario, while the futures market expects just one.


Did not see that one coming.

Make that two, as in the number of additional quarter-point raises in the rest of 2023 that the Federal Reserve’s policymaking panel signaled Wednesday.

But there is significant skepticism among strategists and futures investors that this will happen. The benchmark rate, which the Fed left unchanged Wednesday, is now in a band from 5.0% to 5.25%.

The Federal Open Market Committee indicated that its short-term interest rate benchmark would be in a range of 5.5% to 5.75% by year-end, implying two separate increases of a quarter percentage point each, or one half-point boost. Of the 19 committee members, 12 projected the rate to hit that level—using a scatter-plot graphic called the “dot plots.” But their written statement was less hawkish.

Want the latest institutional investment industry
news and insights? Sign up for CIO newsletters.

At his news briefing Wednesday, Fed Chair Jerome Powell said the committee expects further tightening would be appropriate “somewhat further” in 2023, although he did not detail by how much. Fed policymakers skipped an increase at their meeting this week to assess how their steady rate-raising campaign since March 2022 is playing out in the economy and in reducing inflation.

Come December, the futures market gives 45% odds of one hike, to a 5.25%-5.5% band, while 38% believe it will stay the same as now.

In a research note, Jeffrey Roach, chief economist for LPL Financial, noted that the FOMC statement said “policy firming that may be appropriate. They do not say more tightening will be appropriate.”

Bloomberg economists called the dot plots “a jawboning tool” designed to tamp down hopes for rate decreases. It anticipates that the actual increases will be lower than the dot plots suggest.

In the eyes of Ronald Temple, chief market strategist at Lazard, the dot plots may be misleading and any boosts unlikely to occur: “The Fed is clearly signaling that rate cuts are not on the near-term horizon. Reluctance to signal an end to rate hikes makes sense, given both the higher core inflation estimates.”

At most, according to Ian Shepherdson, chief economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics, the Fed will do one more increase. He wrote: “By September, we think the case for further hikes will have weakened markedly, so a July hike will be the last.”

Beyond all this, the enormous surge in rates over the past 15 months is a lot more drastic than two more quarter-point rises, in the view of Charlie Ripley, senior investment strategist for Allianz Investment Management. He stated that “another one or two rate hikes should not do much to change the trajectory of the economy, and the bar to raise rates further down the road is likely to get even higher.”

Pensions, Asset Managers Broadly Support Tick-Size, Access Fee Updates

The SEC proposed reducing exchange access fees and pricing increments for tick-constrained symbols in December 2022.


An industry survey conducted by IEX Group Inc. found that most institutional investors support reducing price increments for tick-constrained symbols to half-penny increments, as well as reducing the exchange access fee cap.

The Securities and Exchange Commission proposed an update to Rule 612 of Reg NMS in December 2022. It proposed reducing price increments from whole-penny to half-penny, fifth-of-a-penny or 10th-of-a-penny. The IEX survey found that 74% of institutional investors would support half-penny increments for tick-constrained symbols, while 68% and 77% opposed fifth-penny and 10th-penny increments, respectively.

The IEX survey contained responses from 217 institutional investors out of 1,200 who were contacted, according to Ronan Ryan, the president of IEX Group.

For more stories like this, sign up for the CIO Alert newsletter.

This proposal was one of four SEC proposals from December 2022. The Rule 605 updates, which would require monthly quality-of-execution reports from broker/dealers, and the Rule 612 update on pricing increments are the most popularly accepted in the financial industry, while Regulation Best Execution and the Order Competition Rule have been widely criticized.

Incremental Change

IEX also aggregated the comment letters sent to the SEC for Reg NMS Rule 612 and found that 21 of the 22 asset managers and all 13 pension funds that submitted letters supported half-penny increments.

The 13 supportive pension funds included CalPERS, CalSTRS and the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan.

Among the supportive asset managers were BlackRock, the Vanguard Group and Invesco. T. Rowe Price did not offer specific feedback to the half-penny proposal, writing, “We do not know the correct size for varying securities.”

T. Rowe Price’s letter did object to narrower ticks, stating, “We have seen overly narrow ticks contribute to behaviors that are not in the best interests of long-term institutional investors such as sub-penny jumping of trading queues, less incentive to quote, and more flickering and fading of quotes.”

IEX’s Ryan notes that $.002 and $.001 pricing increments “likely takes it too far” for many in the financial industry, on both the buy and sell sides. He explains that reducing increments too far could overwhelm exchanges and managers with more quotes and messages. Bundling large numbers of shares into single orders would also be more difficult.

There is also some apprehension about changing too much too quickly. Ryan explains that many firms have an attitude of “let’s do half a penny and see where this goes.” Increments of $.005 are something of a “Goldilocks” solution that allows some symbols more pricing flexibility without fragmenting pricing by too much.

Exchange Fees

The Rule 612 proposal would also reduce the cap on exchange access fees. Currently, exchanges cannot charge more than $.30 per 100 shares to access their quotes. Ryan explains that this rule was created to protect investors from monopolistic exchanges.

The fee cap was set in 2005 and was based on market pricing at that time, but most trading volume is still near that cap today, despite gains in efficiency and technology in the meantime, according to Ryan. The new SEC proposal would reduce this cap to $.10 per 100 shares. Ryan says this a relatively simple change that exchanges could handle and implement quickly.

According to the IEX survey, 83% of institutional investors either agree (46%) or strongly agree (37%) with reducing access fees, with only 5% opposing a reduction.

Of the 22 asset managers, 20 support this element of the proposal. Dimensional Fund Management did not address the issue in its letter, and State Street Global Advisers wrote that further research was needed on this issue: “We recommend conducting empirical tests to examine whether a reduction in the access fee cap is beneficial to competition and liquidity in the market.” This response was listed as “mixed” by IEX.

The 13 pension funds listed were, again, unanimous and in favor of reducing access fees.

Tags: , , , , , ,

«