Shantaram P. Hegde Ben Branch imultaneous spot and futures trading in T-bills permits investors to construct S a combination of spot and futures positions that is a close substitute for a corresponding pure spot bill position. If the net returns on the spot-futures combination exceed the comparable
Cash-futures arbitrage and forward-futures spreads in the treasury bill market
โ Scribed by Linda Allen; Thom Thurston
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 1988
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 590 KB
- Volume
- 8
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0270-7314
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
โฆ Synopsis
ersistent discrepancies between implied forward rates on the yield curve P and corresponding futures rates have been widely observed. For instance, in one of our samples, eight week-ahead forward-future spreads averaged nearly 70 discount basis points before 1982 and have since averaged about 30 basis points (see Figure ). Spreads of these magnitudes are usually rationalized as manifestations of market inefficiencies or transactions cost. However, the observation that the spreads are at least predominantly positive' suggests something more is at work.
The observations above appear curious given the presence of leveraged investors (such as securities dealers). securities dealers who seem unlikely to behave inefficiently, are subject to low transactions cost. Assuming they act efficiently, the explanation for substantial forward-futures spreads must be found in the terms at which securities dealers can borrow and lend in order to set up arbitrage positions.
As we shall demonstrate, it is these terms which appear to "drive" (i.e., explain the existence and magnitude of) forward-futures spreads. The market requires there be a positive spread between the dealer rep0 rate over the riskfree Treasury bill rate for the same term (the financing cost spread). Further, this spread will systematically determine the size of the forward-futures spread. We find that the predictive power of the financing cost spread is substantial, despite deficiencies in our database which consists of daily averages for repos and Treasury bills and closing prices for futures. This database is, in part, inferior to those using intra-day prices (notably that of Elton, Gruber, and Rentzler (1984)* but has an advantage over this and other studies in that it 'In the case of the spreads calculated for Figure , and for those appearing later in this paper, a total of 100 calculated forward minus futures spreads, there are only eight negative ones, whose maximum absolute value is eight discount basis points (see Table ). Since the data used in this paper are approximative, (see footnote 12). even these exceptions could easily be due to data error. 21ntra-day prices are not available for term repurchase agreements.
๐ SIMILAR VOLUMES
## Futures Market Destabilize the Treasury Bond Cash Market? Gary A. Bortz I. INTRODUCTION everal market professionals and economists have suggested that financial fu-S tures markets may be contributing to the volatility of interest rates. The most prevalent argument is that futures markets are i
S tling rapidity. This remarkable growth has fueled itself to a large extent with 'See Branch (1978), Capozza and Cornell (1979), Lang and Rasche (1978), Poole (1978), Puglisi (1978), Rendleman and Carabini (1979), and Vignola and Dale (1979, 1980). All of these articles are reprinted in Gay and Kol
F evaluate the economic benefits of futures markets is to examine their effects on the intertemporal allocation of resources. This issue was studied by DeCanio (1980) and Stein (1981Stein ( , 1986) ) who showed that the economic benefits of futures trading can be measured by the ex-post welfare loss
## Abstract The paper conducts a regression analysis utilizing both futures and cash market prices and net orderflow to determine where price discovery takes place as well as the forces at play that influence the location. Specifically, given the strong theoretical linkage between the U.S. Treasury