Federal Reserve Economic Data

The FRED® Blog

Bond yields shaken and/or stirred

Bond markets usually adhere to this logic: If a corporate bond is deemed to have a higher risk of default than another, it should have a higher return. Yet, bonds can deviate from this supposedly elementary wisdom. The graph shows yields for four grades of corporate bonds: AAA, AA, A, and BBB. Most of the time, their yields are ranked this way from bottom to top—but not always. There are two reasons for deviations. 1. The maturity composition, or the average maturity of the bonds, within each category can differ substantially. Indeed, yield is more than just risk; it’s also a reward for allowing cash to remain illiquid. 2. Many bonds have the option to be called (i.e., redeemed) before maturity, and the likelihood of this happening may differ across risk grades. In an environment where interest rates are expected to move, both of these situations can matter. The graph shows frequent deviations from the risk ratings for the AAA and AA bond pools. Occasionally the yield for AAA bonds even gets close to the yield for A bonds.

How this graph was created: Search for “US corporate effective yield” and select the series you want. Click on “Add to Graph.” Then order the series by risk rating using the “move up / move down” buttons at the bottom of the “Edit Data Series” tabs so that the legends are ordered appropriately.

Suggested by Christian Zimmermann

View on FRED, series used in this post: BAMLC0A1CAAAEY, BAMLC0A2CAAEY, BAMLC0A3CAEY, BAMLC0A4CBBBEY

The elusive 2% inflation target

The collective wisdom in monetary policy circles identifies the optimal inflation rate as somewhere between 1% and 3%, with 2% being a popular target. Ideally, in normal times, this range provides sufficient wiggle room for real prices and wages to adjust if their nominal counterparts are a bit rigid—typically in the downward direction. In other words, let’s say wages and prices don’t readily decrease, be it for technical or psychological reasons. Then it’s best to have a little bit of inflation so that, even if nominal wages and prices stay constant, they can still decrease in relative terms if that’s what’s required for markets to stay in equilibrium. More inflation is not ideal, though, because of the significant associated costs: for example, if prices need to be readjusted frequently or allocations between cash and financial assets become distorted.

So how well do central banks throughout the world achieve this goal? The graph shows the G7 countries, which all target an inflation rate of around 2%. It looks like only Japan is capable of getting inflation high enough right now, which is ironic because Japan has suffered from deflation or zero inflation for over a decade. Of course, this collective “failure” may be related to the past year’s large decrease in commodity prices, especially oil. Unless this trend continues over the next year, we should see inflation rates getting closer to where central bankers want them.

How this graph was created: The data shown in the graph are from the OECD’s Main Economic Indicators. The most direct way to find them is to search for “oecd cpi monthly growth rate from previous period.” Select the series you want and use the “Add to Graph” button to display them. Finally, restrict the sample period to the past five years.

Suggested by Christian Zimmermann

View on FRED, series used in this post: CPALTT01CAM659N, CPALTT01DEM659N, CPALTT01FRM659N, CPALTT01GBM659N, CPALTT01ITM659N, CPALTT01JPM659N, CPALTT01USM659N

Riding the macroeconomic fluctuations

At the Federal Reserve, we follow closely the aggregate fluctuations in the U.S. economy, including the behavior of labor markets in general and the unemployment rate in particular. Our key policy instrument is the federal funds rate, which is used to influence all other interest rates, especially short-term rates, and thereby influence financial, labor, and goods markets to achieve our mandate of price stability and full employment.

Not surprisingly, some markets are more sensitive than others to both the cyclical behavior of the aggregate fluctuations and to monetary policy conducted by the Fed. Among those sensitive markets is the one for durable goods. The graph above illustrates this by showing total monthly sales of cars (thick blue line) from the late 1970s to today. Notice how volatile this series is, as spikes of high sales occur fairly often during the sample period. There’s also a clear pattern related to the unemployment rate (red line): Car sales plummet during periods of increasing unemployment, most notably during recessions (shaded bars).

But unemployment is far from the whole story. As the graph shows, car sales are also driven by two of the major costs of buying a car: the cost of gasoline (orange dashed line, right axis) and interest rates. The graph shows the bank prime loan rate (green line), which is used to set the interest rate charged for most car loans. Clearly, even when unemployment is low and declining, a rise in interest rates and the cost of gasoline is associated with a decline in car sales.

How this graph was created: First search for “total vehicle sales” and select the seasonally adjusted series. To highlight this series relative to the rest, select a solid line style with width 4. Next, use the “Add Data Series” option to search for and select “U.S. civilian unemployment rate”; again, select the seasonally adjusted series to keep the graph smoother. Next, add the series “bank prime loan rate” and “consumer price index for all urban consumers: gasoline.” To compare the time behavior of these series within the graph, place the y-axis for the last series on the right side. Finally, adjust the line colors and patterns to taste.

Suggested by Alexander Monge-Naranjo

View on FRED, series used in this post: CUSR0000SETB01, MPRIME, TOTALSA, UNRATE


Back to Top