If you read what I said then you'll literally realize how it's different. Even the btfp definition on Barron's suggests this too.

Clearly you still haven't grasped BTFP if you still beleive it's QE. Then how come stocks arent greeen 24/7? Also they dont roll over the debt forever with this, we dont know what they'll do a year from now.

> It’s QE now because they are exchanging an illiquid asset for a liquid one.

How many times bruh, it is NOT. LMAO. Just becaise its an asset swap does not make it QE. It's a temporary backstop from the fed. What's not clicking?

A year is a long way away for the Fed not to be just like - yeah keep it, which is the most likely scenario what you'll see a year from now and maybe then you can cheer QE. So no, it is not QE now because their balance sheet in this case goes down a year from now as it stands, as I have said many times just now.

QE = Banks realize a hefty gain and keep their bonds forever

BTFP = Take a mild loss but protect your depositors as Fed will give temporary liquidity.

There would be no reason for equities and bonds to drop if this was literally QE. Those definitions for QE and BTFP are nuanced so unless you don't see it in action it doesn't paint the entire picture.

Wrong. BTFP is when banks give the fed their treasuries and receive money in return, BUT AGREE TO SWAP BACK IN ONE YEAR. It looks the same on balance sheets, but it’s wildly different, especially because this deal is structured as a loan and the banks PAY overnight plus 10 bp for the privilege.

If a bank takes out 100B in BTFP, 1 year from now they will need to pay the fed 100B, plus ~4.5B in interest on the loan, AND they forfeit the ~2.5B on the treasuries interest. From the perspective of the fed, their balance sheet INCREASES by 100B right away, and then DECREASES by $107B in one year.

Literally the only reason for banks to take this loan is to give cash to depositors who are making withdrawals. It costs the bank -7% annualized. They do this to avoid realizing a -40% loss by selling treasuries to raise cash to give depositors.

Contrast this with QE, where the fed buys the treasuries from the banks for twice what they paid for them, and banks realize a 50% gain overnight and get to keep it forever.

Wildly different.

You will also not get "up to date" information anywhere on the M2 money supply.

QE is inflationary and bullish but BTFP is deflationary and hawkish. Like I said, the markets would be a lot more positive if what you thought was true.

Money printing is insanely bullish but we haven't crossed that line yet and there isnt anything that suggests such.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL

> they’ve undone the last 5 months in a matter of 2 weeks.

I dont think you understand how BTFP works. The "spike" in the balance sheet isnt QT being turned off but after the treasury interest is forfeited, the balance sheet should go back down a year from now. Again, this is literally providing temporary liquid to the banks. If QT was undone we wouldn't have a single red day this past week.

You honestly believe fed won't concoct some more bullshit to kick the can down the road as long as the massive bubble of everything still remains affordable to live under?

As long as QT is still in play this is hardly an issue. Fed might as well outright bail them out than resorting to BTFP even a year from now to avoid any stress in the financial markets as they always do.

Banks are borrowing from the fed. The fed already has cash on hand...

Unless the fed, for whatever reason, stop or cannot provide temporary liquidity then sure you can debate ifs and how's. The fact of the matter remains, BTFP is here to give temporary ease while their balance sheet should reduce a year from now.

Considering the fact that BTFP is a new isntallment in their toolkit, assumptions regarding this is nothing but a baseless conspiracy. US dollar can absolutely not be destroyed in this process because while BTFO is a deflationary process, as rate cuts kick in eventually everyone will conveniently forget about the possible problems this "would've" caused.

And trump threatened to fire him multiple times back in 2019 when he didn't cut rates

The government does not interfere with the fed and the rest are conspiracies

All of this is moot since fed is providing liquidity to these banks as needed on a loan expiring in a year.

If you're referring to the march 2020 QE/money printing program then yes but otherwise no new money has been injected into the economy since.

We've known about why this uptick is in the chart and Jpow even clarified for the idiots who are still clueless about it during the fomc meeting. Basically, with BTFP, they're lending short term liquidity to banks to cover deposits if need be. The balance sheet will go down a year from now as QT is still in play.

Paul Volcker time baby

No emojis, doesn't tell me whether or not I should buy calls or puts. Literally 0/10.

The real DD is always in the comments

No I'm talking about the September projection

Some of us actually read the SEP but all 11 members' aggregate suggests 4.6% in 2023 and 3.9% in 2024. Not bullish in the slightest either.

We've played this exact same game back in November, Jan, March, May, June, August and October rofl. But I'm sure this time is different amirite.

People should read the citibank baseline scenario for each soft/hard landing situation, it puts things into perspective.

I love this so much.