Investors don't think the safest bonds of all are a sure thing anymore
With deficit concerns swirling, the market for the safest government bonds has been volatile.
Bloomberg reported on Monday that top fixed income firms are staging a "buyers' strike."
Investors are hesitant to buy bonds with long maturities amid doubts about the US fiscal position.
A corner of the ultra-safe US Treasury market is losing its shine amid concerns about America's long-term fiscal health.
It's an increasingly worrisome situation given the importance of Treasurys as a component of long-term portfolios for millions of Americans, as well as their role as an investment safe haven during times of turbulence.
The market for US bonds with the longest maturities has seen a pronounced slowdown in the last few weeks. Bloomberg wrote on Monday that top fixed income firms, including Pimco and Jeffrey Gundlach's DoubleLine Capital, have been staging a "buyers' strike" of 30-year debt in favor of shorter-dated bonds.
This embedded content is not available in your region.
It continues a trend of investors balking at the idea of essentially lending the US government money for decades. A weak auction of 20-year bonds last month saw tepid demand, resulting in the highest yield on the bond since 2020.
Pimco was already whittling its exposure to longer-dated bonds, it wrote at the end of 2024.
"We have been reducing allocations to longer-dated bonds, which we find relatively less attractive. Over time, and at scale, that's the kind of investor behavior that can fulfill the bond vigilante role of disciplining governments by demanding more compensation," the bond firm wrote at the time, adding it was seeing better risk-reward in bonds with shorter maturities.
Indeed, the bond vigilantes that Pimco hinted at have been credited with sending yields higher this year amid trade war and deficit angst.
And more recently, KKR warned that investors shouldn't count on government debt to be the "shock absorbers" that they've relied on to shield them from volatility in the past.
In fact, the market for the debt has been so volatile that it's possible the US Treasury could reduce or even cancel future sales of 30-year bonds to stabilize yields, JPMorgan Asset Management's fixed income head, Bob Michele, said in a TV interview last week. Michele added that the 10-year and 30-year bonds are trading more like risk assets.
"I'm concerned it's going to get worse before it gets better," Michele said of the bond market volatility.
The next auction of 30-year bonds is scheduled for June 12.
The 30-year yield is back below 5% this week after climbing above that threshold to the highest level since 2008 in May. However, the concerns that drove yields up haven't abated.
America's fiscal position is still an issue, and the GOP budget bill that passed through the House of Representatives in May could add trillions to the national deficit. Meanwhile, the US is now without a top-tier credit rating after Moody's downgraded its government debt in May.
"We have witnessed what can happen with interest rates if investors are concerned about the fiscal health of an economy," Verdence Capital Advisors CIO, Megan Horneman, said in a recent note. "It is important to remember that long-term rates are tied to net interest costs and many loans, especially mortgages." She added that the coming 30-year auction would be highly important.
But it's not just the US that's seeing investors demand more compensation to hold long-term debt. Governments around the world are seeing yields spiral higher while investors protest heavy government spending and a rapid pace of borrowing.
Read the original article on Business Insider
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Doritos and Skittles could carry ‘not recommended for human consumption' warning labels in certain parts of the US
Some of America's favorite snacks may be banned in certain parts of the U.S. if the packaging does not warn about certain ingredients. New legislation in Texas would warn consumers in the state about ingredients that are 'not recommended for human consumption' in other countries, but still allowed in the U.S., Bloomberg reported. More than 40 ingredients, from synthetic food dyes to bleached flour, would require warning labels on the products' packaging starting in 2027, if the bill is signed into law. The legislation would affect snacks and candies such as Nacho Cheese Doritos, Little Bites Chocolate Chip Muffins, Skittles, M&Ms and Sour Patch Kids Watermelon, as well as breakfast cereals and sodas such as Froot Loops, Cinnamon Toast Crunch and Mountain Dew. If the bill is signed by Governor Greg Abbott, it would affect snacks sold statewide. This could also open the door for a nationwide switch-up. Bloomberg reported that companies forced to comply with state regulations often chose to roll out changes across the whole country to streamline production. Abbott has less than 20 days to sign the bill, and it's unclear whether he will. His press secretary, Andrew Mahaleris, told Bloomberg before the bill was sent to the governor: 'Abbott will continue to work with the legislature to ensure Texans have access to healthy foods to care for themselves and their families and will thoughtfully review any legislation they send to his desk.' If the bill is signed into law, there are instances when the state-mandated labeling won't be required: if the Food and Drug Administration or Department of Agriculture deems an ingredient safe, restricts its use or bans it after September 1. Industry groups and companies, including food and drink makers and retail giant Walmart, had sent a letter to Texas lawmakers 'in strong opposition' to the bill. 'As it's written, the food labeling provision in this bill casts an incredibly wide net — triggering warning labels on everyday grocery items based on assertions that foreign governments have banned such items, rather than on standards established by Texas regulators or by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration,' read the letter, which had circulated on social media. The letter warned that this potential change 'could destabilize local and regional economies at a time when businesses are already fighting to keep prices down, maintain inventory, and avoid layoffs.' If the bill did get signed into law, it would be a win for not only Texas lawmakers but Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a vocal critic of certain chemicals in food like synthetic dyes. Supporters of the Texas bill have claimed that Kennedy backs the legislation, Bloomberg reported. According to the outlet, Texas Representative Lacey Hull claimed she received a call from the HHS secretary when it passed.
CNBC
16 minutes ago
- CNBC
Sen. Ron Johnson rips into 'immoral' GOP spending bill: 'I can't accept it'
Republican Sen. Ron Johnson on Wednesday blasted President Donald Trump's "one big, beautiful bill" as "immoral" and "grotesque," and reiterated that he will vote against it unless his GOP colleagues make major changes. "This is immoral, what us old farts doing to our young people," Johnson said on CNBC's "Squawk Box" after sounding alarms that the massive tax-and-spending-cut bill would add trillions of dollars to national deficits. "This is grotesque, what we're doing," Johnson said. "We need to own up to that. This is our moment." "I can't accept the scenario, I can't accept it, so I won't vote for it, unless we are serious about fixing it," he continued. Johnson has been among the Senate's loudest GOP critics of the budget bill that narrowly passed the House last month. Johnson and other fiscal hawks have taken aim over its impact on the nation's debt. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated later Wednesday that the bill would add $2.4 trillion to the national debt over the next decade. Johnson has proposed splitting the bill into two parts, though Trump insists on passing his agenda in a single package. "The president and Senate leadership has to understand that we're serious now," Johnson said of himself and the handful of other GOP senators whose opposition to the bill could imperil its chances. "They all say, 'Oh, we can pressure these guys.' No, you can't." Republicans hold a narrow 53-47 majority in the Senate, so they can only afford to lose a handful of votes to get the bill passed in a party-line vote. "Let's discuss the numbers, and let's focus on our children and grandchildren, whose futures are being mortgaged, their prospects are being diminished by what we are doing to them," Johnson said. Johnson's comments came one day after Elon Musk ripped into the spending bill, calling it a "disgusting abomination" that will lead to exploding deficits. The White House brushed aside Musk's comments. Johnson said that Musk's criticisms bolster the case against the bill. "He's in the inside, he showed ... President Trump how to do this, you know, contract by contract, line by line," Johnson said of Musk. "We have to do that." Johnson said that his campaign against the bill in its current form is not a "long shot," because he thinks there are "enough" Republican senators will will vote against the bill. "We want to see [Trump] succeed, but again, my loyalty is to our kids and grandkids," he said. "So there's enough of us who have that attitude that very respectfully we just have say, 'Mr. President, I'm sorry, 'one, big, beautiful bill' was not the best idea," he added.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republican leaders push back on Musk ‘abomination' criticism of Trump bill
Republican congressional leaders pushed back Wednesday on Elon Musk's harsh criticism of President Donald Trump's signature budget bill as a fiscally dangerous 'disgusting abomination.' Sen. John Thune and Rep. Mike Johnson both aggressively defended Trump's sprawling Big Beautiful Bill even as a non-partisan congressional watchdog group said it would add 2.4 trillion to the national debt, seemingly bolstering Musk's point. 'I think he's flat wrong, and I've told him as much,' Johnson, the House Speaker, told reporters at a news conference Thune, the Senate majority leader, likewise downplayed the influence of Musk, who recently left the administration after a mostly failed effort to slash spending using his Department of Government Efficiency. 'Obviously [Musk] has some influence, got a big following on social media,' Thune said. 'There are going to be a lot of people who share commentary about this, and we just got to make sure we're doing everything we can to get our arguments out there.' So far Trump himself has not commented on Musk's withering attack on his top priority of his second term in office, a measure that would cut trillions in taxes and reduce spending by a significant, but much smaller, amount. Musk, who was until recently considered the most powerful person in Washington next to Trump, showed no signs of softening his attack on Trump's bill. 'This is debt slavery for the American people,' Musk tweeted Wednesday, after he said he could no longer stay silent about the impact of the bill. The Congressional Budget Office, the most respected non-partisan arbiter of budget impacts, issued a report saying the bill as passed by the House would increase deficits by $2.4 trillion over the next decade. The CBO also estimates the bill's provisions would cause 10.9 million people to lose their health insurance under the bill by 2034. The package would reduce federal outlays, or spending, by nearly $1.3 trillion over that period, while cutting taxes by $3.75 trillion, the watchdog group said. The vast majority of the tax savings will go to the ultra-wealthy and big business. Musk and other fiscal hawks want the bill to cut spending by far more, or cut taxes by much less, in order to avoid further swelling the national debt. But many moderate Republicans fear deep spending cuts, especially to health programs, could spark massive blowback against them at the ballot box in the midterm elections and beyond. GOP leaders need to bridge the gaping divide to win the virtually unanimous support of Republican lawmakers in both chambers of Congress needed to pass the bill under the intricate reconciliation process.
