A reader asked about prior studies on a flattening or inverting yield curve, wondering "what have they concluded?"
Quite a few other analysts have looked into the question. Here are two worth considering:
Bill Gross, who manages the world’s largest Bond fund — and therefore better know about this stuff – featured the chart below last month.
Gross’ conclusion? "By the time 10-year and 2-year Treasuries reach parity, as is almost
the case now, the economy is typically slowing and the Fed is at or
near the end of its tightening cycle."
Here is his relevant chart:
click for larger graphic
Courtesy of PIMco
Gross also observed that "Economists/investment managers are aware of the potency of a flattening yield curve (shown in Chart above). . . Only [former Fed Chair] Volcker, with his need to strangle inflation out of the system, persisted into negative yield curve territory for longer than a few months."
Further, I happened to come across this commentary — A Study on the Flattening Yield Curve — of post-1970 inversions.
The study’s generalized conclusions?
- Recessions have been preceded by yield curve inversions since 1970.
- lead time averages over 40 weeks.
- The S&P 500 does not do well when the yield curve is inverted (performance measured over the entire span of the inversion).
The chart accompanying that commentary shows yield curve inversions relative to the S&P500.
See the rest of the charts form various studies here.
UPDATE: December 29, 2005 1:30PM
I have made repeated references to never relying upon one lonesome single indicator, burt some of the newer reader smay have missed them. For those of you haven’t done so yet, please see Single vs. Multiple Variable Analysis in Market Forecasts . . .
UPDATE 2: December 29, 2005 3:03PM
Dave Altig of MacroBlog fame suggests NY Fed’s Arturo Estrella yield curve primer: The Yield Curve as a Leading Indicator. Its another excellent (if somewhat jargon laden) source.
Takin’ It To The Blog
PIMCo Investment Outlook, November 2005
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.