Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:04am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:04am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:04am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:04am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:04pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:04am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:04am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:04pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:04pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
Non-Economic Questions of the Day
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
The Stress Test Blind Alley
Apr 24 20098:04am EDT -
Happy Hour
Apr 23 20099:04pm EDT -
Recovery Without Rebalancing
Apr 23 20096:04pm EDT -
The Shape of Your Recession
Apr 23 20095:04pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

How Lucrative Are Repos?
As 130/30 funds and other long-short plays become increasingly popular, the quantity of short-selling going on in the stock market is only likely to increase. That, in turn, means that the amount of stock lending (repos) going on is going to increase as well: before you can sell a stock you don't own, you have to borrow it from an institutional investor of some sort.
Early last week, I speculated that the income from such stock lending might be "the secret to making money running index funds", but I'm still far from clear on just how profitable a repo desk can be. One commenter said that "for most straight-up index funds, stock lending (repo) is the primary method of both covering costs and potentially exceeding the benchmark," but are we just talking a couple of basis points here, or could it be by quite some margin?
Veryan Allen, in his latest post, notes parenthetically that a mutual fund's holdings "can be lent out to cover the indexation cost" – which implies that although repos might make a bit of money, it's not very much. The actual number shouldn't be hard to work out: it's just the proportion of mutual-fund stocks which are lent out at any given time, multiplied by the average lending rate on those securities. Does anybody know what either of those two numbers might be?






