PIB nominal lento puede influir decisiones de la Fed

Genevieve Signoret & Patrick Signoret

Scott Krisiloff de Avondale Asset Management observa que, si bien en el segundo trimestre el PIB real de EE UU se aceleró en términos intertrimestrales (a 1.7% anualizado desde 1.1%) e interanuales (a 1.4% desde 1.3%), el PIB nominal siguió desacelerándose en términos interanuales, llegando a 2.9% en T2 desde 3.1% en T1 (y un máximo reciente de 5.2% en T1 2012). Ni el nivel ni la tasa de crecimiento del PIB nominal son objetivos específicos de la política monetaria de la Fed. No obstante, sugiere Krisiloff (con cautela), algunos en el FOMC podrían querer fortalecer el PIB nominal estimulando la tasa de inflación mediante una prolongación de QE3.

Scott Krisiloff:

The slower nominal growth could be cause for some concern if you believe that the US is relatively over-levered and can de-lever nominal debts through nominal GDP growth. If you subscribe to this view of the world, you may see QE as an attempt to stoke inflation to aid this process, so nominal GDP growth is an important factor to consider.

As we continue to await a possible tapering of QE, below is a look at the relationship between nominal GDP and interest rates. Both measures are effectively a function of the same two factors: growth and inflation, and going back to the 1950s, the yield on the 10 year Treasury note has generally tracked the same path as the year over year change in nominal GDP.

Although interest rates have ticked up, the drop in nominal GDP growth may suggest that significantly higher rates are not justified for now. However, remember markets are forward looking and economic data is backward. Just because higher rates aren’t justified for now doesn’t mean they won’t be justified in the future.

Fuente: Avondale Asset Management.

Comentarios: Deje su comentario.