Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 88

Impact of QE on markets opposite of expected

October 2014 marks the end of the US Federal Reserve’s monetary policy it called ‘quantitative easing’ (QE) but the rest of us called plain old ‘money-printing’. The Fed’s aim was to create inflation by buying assets with newly printed money (instead of paying for them with cash raised by selling securities into the market) and crediting commercial banks’ reserve accounts in the hope that banks would increase lending to borrowers to invest and spend. A second aim was to depress the US dollar to help exporters (the theory being that money printing should devalue the currency because more paper money is chasing the same supply of assets).

There was much doom and gloom and even panic in the financial media about what QE might mean for markets. The resultant inflation or even hyper-inflation was supposed to be bad for share prices and bond prices, while the prices of inflation hedges like gold, oil and metals should soar. All this was supported by logic, theory, conventional ‘wisdom’ and the weight of opinion.

As it turns out, virtually all of the outcomes predicted by theory, logic and the shrill financial media were wrong. Driven by QE, markets did the opposite of what the conventional wisdom and weight of opinion expected. Prices of shares and bonds soared, the US dollar strengthened, and inflation and inflation hedges (gold, oil, metals) all fell.

The following diagram shows what was supposed to happen, and what did happen.

AO Chart1 141114

AO Chart1 141114

But US QE was not a failure. It prevented deflation in the US, which is far more debilitating than inflation. It also provided enough stimulus to bring US unemployment down from 10% to 6%. These benign outcomes inspired central banks in UK, Japan and now Europe to take similar action.

The following charts show the key events and impacts on markets. The first shows what was supposed to go down as a result of the massive central bank money-printing spree but went up instead.

AO Chart2 141114The second chart shows what was supposed to go up as a result of the money-printing but went down instead.

AO Chart3 141114It has been a good reminder that markets do not work according to text-book theories, nor do they follow logic. In the real world markets are driven by humans who in turn are driven by raw emotions and often illogical knee-jerk reactions to events that they perceive to be relevant. Studying these dynamics is far more difficult, interesting and rewarding than studying theory!


Ashley Owen is Joint CEO of Philo Capital Advisers and a director and adviser to the Third Link Growth Fund. This article is for general educational purposes and is not personal financial advice.

November 15, 2014

yes, deflation was the far more serious threat than inflation, although the inflation/gold bugs caught overwhelming bulk of public and media attention at the time. History will show that Bernanke was right and Greenspan wrong (although he was almost universally hailed as a god when he was in power).
Deflation should be a good thing - everybody likes paying lower prices! But if people expect lower prices next year they stop spending this year, and that stops production, investment and employment. It creates a negative spiral that requires a major shock (like an all-consuming war effort like WW2 followed by a baby boom and reconstruction boom) to break out of the spiral.
The other big difference between US and Europe is Europe's crippling extra layers of government and regulation, including and especially labour laws, welfare/pension entitlements and industry protection. It will take a lot more than money-printing by the ECB to get Europe out of its problems. So European QE (if it ever does occur it will be too late and too small) will be necessary but probably not sufficient to generate enough demand growth to restore full employment.
I don't make value judgements about whether policy actions like QE are good or bad, my main focus is on understanding impacts on investment markets and positioning portfolios to miminise losses and maximise gains.

November 15, 2014

Yes I guess a US housing bubble collapse is a fair explanation and deflation by definition is prolonged negative CPI, but could you not also argue that the Feds QE pumped things up enough to counter what would otherwise have been prolonged negative CPI? I'd be interested in your view.

November 15, 2014

Hi kevin
yes QE countered defaltionary forces. But falling house prices are not widely regarded as deflation , merely a correction from a bubble. Deflation forces came from huge excess capacity - human capacity (high unemployment), factory capacity, etc caused by the dramatic collapse in domestic and global demand.
But deflation was not a widely held fear. CPI inflation was running at 3% and 4%, the germans were running a scare campaign warning of 1923-style hyperinflation (they still are!), ATMs selling gold bars sprang up on the streets of Europe, and even the normally pro-inflation IMF advocated fiscal tightening.
The US also acted quickly to recapitalise banks but Europe is still in denial. Europe will be asleep for many years then it will just die of old age. The US has relatively good demographics (as has Australia) and this also helped in the recovery

November 15, 2014

Hi Ashley, I’m pleased you mentioned deflation, as you rightly point out, that was the key fear at the time. Whilst I’m certainly no expert, it seems to me if you view the results whilst looking through deflation glasses the results make more sense. US house prices had already deflated 30-50% depending on the state, so deflation was a real concern. In my view the QE money printing simply offset the deflationary pressures already in motion. This would explain why the popular financial media expectations did not eventuate (hyperinflation etc). As example, if bond yields are so low (due to Feds massive monthly purchases) there is almost no income derived then surely a logical expectation is investors will purchase income producing assets such as shares and the price for those shares will rise over time due demand. If the US economy was in a deflationary dive you would expect the US dollar to improve in value as it becomes worth more relative to other assets, especially given other countries were also actively depressing their currencies as well.

I’m not a fan of QE and as you say the jury is still out as to its longer term consequences, but I do think it worked as the Fed expected, it just wasn’t as the popular media expected.


Leave a Comment:



Five reasons Australian rates unlikely to follow US

Is it all falling apart for central banks?

Can quantitative tightening help the Fed fight inflation?


Most viewed in recent weeks

Lessons when a fund manager of the year is down 25%

Every successful fund manager suffers periods of underperformance, and investors who jump from fund to fund chasing results are likely to do badly. Selecting a manager is a long-term decision but what else?

2022 election survey results: disillusion and disappointment

In almost 1,000 responses, our readers differ in voting intentions versus polling of the general population, but they have little doubt who will win and there is widespread disappointment with our politics.

Now you can earn 5% on bonds but stay with quality

Conservative investors who want the greater capital security of bonds can now lock in 5% but they should stay at the higher end of credit quality. Rises in rates and defaults mean it's not as easy as it looks.

30 ETFs in one ecosystem but is there a favourite?

In the last decade, ETFs have become a mainstay of many portfolios, with broad market access to most asset types, as well as a wide array of sectors and themes. Is there a favourite of a CEO who oversees 30 funds?

Betting markets as election predictors

Believe it or not, betting agencies are in the business of making money, not predicting outcomes. Is there anything we can learn from the current odds on the election results?

Meg on SMSFs – More on future-proofing your fund

Single-member SMSFs face challenges where the eventual beneficiaries (or support team in the event of incapacity) will be the member’s adult children. Even worse, what happens if one or more of the children live overseas?

Latest Updates


'It’s your money' schemes transfer super from young to old

Policy proposals allow young people to access their super for a home bought from older people who put the money back into super. It helps some first buyers into a home earlier but it may push up prices.

Investment strategies

Rising recession risk and what it means for your portfolio

In this environment, safe-haven assets like Government bonds act as a diversifier given the uncorrelated nature to equities during periods of risk-off, while offering a yield above term deposit rates.

Investment strategies

‘Multidiscipline’: the secret of Bezos' and Buffett’s wild success

A key attribute of great investors is the ability to abstract away the specifics of a particular domain, leaving only the important underlying principles upon which great investments can be made.


Keep mandatory super pension drawdowns halved

The Transfer Balance Cap limits the tax concessions available in super pension funds, removing the need for large, compulsory drawdowns. Plus there are no requirements to draw money out of an accumulation fund.


Confession season is upon us: What’s next for equity markets

Companies tend to pre-position weak results ahead of 30 June, leading to earnings downgrades. The next two months will be critical for investors as a shift from ‘great expectations’ to ‘clear explanations’ gets underway.


Australia, the Lucky Country again?

We may have been extremely unlucky with the unforgiving weather plaguing the East Coast of Australia this year. However, on the economic front we are by many measures in a strong position relative to the rest of the world.

Exchange traded products

LIC discounts widening with the market sell-off

Discounts on LICs and LITs vary with market conditions, and many prominent managers have seen the value of their assets fall as well as discount widen. There may be opportunities for gains if discounts narrow.



© 2022 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.