Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:26 am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:45 am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:00 am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:36 am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:37 pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:41 am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:32 am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:29 pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:09 pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:47 am 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

Icelandic CDS Datapoints of the Day
The CDS auctions for Iceland's failed banks are all over now, and the results are up at creditfixings.com.
| Bank | Inside Market Midpoint | Open interest | Final price |
|---|---|---|---|
Landsbanki senior | |||
Landsbanki subordinated | |||
Kaupthing senior | |||
Kaupthing subordinated | |||
Glitnir senior | |||
Glitnir subordinated |
For an explanation of what this all means, see here. But these numbers are definitely weird. Here's just a few questions thrown up by them:
- After the first round of the auction, the open interest is always to sell -- there are more sellers than buyers. Yet after the second round, in three of the six cases the settlement price has gone up rather than down, as you would expect. Why would it do that?
- The clearing price for Kaupthing's debt -- which, we can assume, is the market's best guess as to its risk-adjusted recovery value -- is significantly higher than the other two, despite the fact that Kaupthing was the most leveraged of the three banks. How come? All I can think of is that the market was concentrating on Kaupthing's UK assets, such as investment bank Singer and Friedlander, while in the case of Landsbanki the market was looking more at the UK liabilities, from the bank's Icesave operation.
- Why was the inside market midpoint for all three banks' subordinated debt so high -- and how come there were people willing to pay 2.375 cents on the dollar for Kaupthing's sub debt in particular, when the senior debt is trading in single digits? After all, the senior debt has to be paid out in full, at par, before subordinated bondholders get anything at all.
I suspect that the answer to all of these questions is something I like to think of as the Law of Small Numbers: in financial markets, assets always behave very weirdly when their price approaches zero. Clearly, the CDS market is no exception.
Comments
If you are commenting using a Facebook account, your profile information may be displayed with your comment depending on your privacy settings. By leaving the 'Post to Facebook' box selected, your comment will be published to your Facebook profile in addition to the space below.





