Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “There are an amazing number of good ideas and interesting points made in Unintended Consequences. The thinking underlying it, and the obvious depth of understanding of the author, are very impressive.” - Steven Levitt, coauthor of Freakonomics; 2004 John Bates Clark Medal
  • “Unintended Consequences represents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the Financial Crisis to date.” - Andrei Shleifer, 1999 John Bates Clark Medal Winner
  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
  • “A full-throated defense of economic dynamism.” - The Wall Street Journal
  • “Unintended Consequences provides a provocative interpretation of the causes of the global financial crisis and the policies needed to return to rapid growth. Whether you agree or not, this analysis is well worth reading.” - Nouriel Roubini, New York University; Chairman, Roubini Global Economics
  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
  • “…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
  • “Unintended Consequences is full of substance, it is one of the must-read books of the year, and once I finish it I will be giving it a second read through right away.” - Tyler Cowen, Professor, George Mason University
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
  • “…a comprehensive explanation of the modern economy.” - Julian Robertson, Founder, Tiger Management
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences
Buy the Books
  • Macro Roundup
  • About Roundup
  • About Ed Conard
  • Highlights
  • Topics
  • Subscribe
Edward Conard
  • twitter
  • facebook
  • linkedin
  • youtube
  • Email
  • Text Message (SMS)
  • Twitter/X
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • WhatsApp Message
Subscribe to Macro Roundup Emails
  • Mentions 513
  • Primary focus 248
Showing 248 database articles primarily about Financial Markets
Currently filtering by:
  • Remove Financial Markets
  • Remove "primary topics only" restriction
  • Remove 'Database'
Show all 7,326 articles
For whatever topics you select (currently: Financial Markets):
Choose search scope

Your importance filter 'Database' shows fewer articles.

Remove filters to see full article counts

Geopolitics and technology threaten Americas financial dominance

AI Summary. China's share of global GDP has risen from 3.6% to 15.5%, yet its financial influence remains limited. The article argues that the US dollar's dominance is being eroded as emerging markets seek alternatives, driven by America's use of economic sanctions and the rise of technology-driven financial systems.

Matthieu Favas The Economist
Date Posted:
May 15, 2020
Is Database:
Database

China’s share of global GDP has surged from 3.6% in 2000 to 15.5%, yet its financial influence remains limited. @MatthieuFavas

Are sanctions and new financial technology eroding dollar dominance?

Core argument: China's share of global GDP rose from 3.6% in 2000 to 15.5%, yet its financial influence remains limited.

The market capitalization of the world's 30 largest banks highlights a shift in financial power, with geopolitical tensions and technological advancements challenging America's dominance. China's share of global GDP has surged from 3.6% in 2000 to 15.5%, yet its financial influence remains limited. The U.S. dollar's dominance is being eroded as emerging markets seek alternatives, driven by America's aggressive use of economic sanctions and the rise of tech-driven financial systems. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbates these trends, potentially leading to a fragmented global trade landscape and diminishing trust in America's financial leadership, as regional powers like China gain influence.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. China's share of global GDP rose from 3.6% in 2000 to 15.5%, yet its financial influence remains limited.
  2. The U.S. dollar's dominance is eroding as emerging markets seek alternatives, driven by America's use of economic sanctions and the rise of tech-driven financial systems.
  3. The COVID-19 pandemic compounds these trends, pointing toward a fragmented global trade landscape and diminishing trust in America's financial leadership as regional powers such as China gain influence.

Matthieu Favas, "Geopolitics and technology threaten America’s financial dominance,"The Economist, May 7, 2020, https://www.economist.com/special-report/2020/05/07/geopolitics-and-technology-threaten-americas-financial-dominance

Geopolitics and technology threaten America’s financial dominance

In January an American former general spoke at a gathering of senior global financiers. Used to thinking about strategy and hard power, he warned that America is dealing poorly with its most complex array of threats since the cold war—from Iran and Russia to the novel coronavirus. But he also spoke of a much less visible threat: how, through its aggressive use of economic sanctions, America is misusing its clout as the predominant financial power, thereby pushing allies and foes alike towards building a separate financial architecture. “I’m not sure of the decider-in-chief’s appreciation for how the financial system works,” he said. That a former general would be thinking about the global financial system says much about how significant that danger has become.

The system is made up of the institutions, currencies and payment tools that dictate how the invisible liquidity feeding the real economy flows around the world. America has been its pulsating centre since the second world war. Now, though, repeated missteps, and China’s growing pull, have begun to tear at the seams. Many assume the status quo is too entrenched to be challenged, but that is no longer the case. A separate financial realm is forming in the emerging world, with different pillars and a new master.

The hegemon-in-waiting financially, as geopolitically, is China, whose rapid rise is tugging away at the system. The country today accounts for 15.5% of global gdp, up from 3.6% in 2000. Its economy, the world’s second-largest, is deeply woven within the fabric of global trade. Yet it weighs little in the financial system. China sees correcting this asymmetry as crucial to gaining great-power status. “The dollar dominance is being hollowed out from underneath,” says Tom Keatinge of rusi, a think-tank. The covid-19 crisis threatens to give centrifugal forces a decisive boost.

The system’s first pillar was laid in 1944 with the founding of the World Bank, the imf and the global monetary order at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire. Having supplied weapons to allies throughout the war, America owned most of the planet’s gold, in which it priced its wares. Much of Europe and Asia lay in ruins. The interwar system of floating exchange rates had proved dysfunctional. It was thus decided that all currencies would be linked to the dollar, and the dollar tied to gold. That made the greenback the world’s new reserve currency. Two decades later the rising economic heft of Japan and Germany, coupled with vast money-printing by America during the Vietnam war, made the pegs untenable. The system disintegrated, but the “dollar standard” survived.

In the 1970s America also gained sway over the plumbing system that underpins global payments. American banks, then barred from operating outside state borders, teamed up to develop interbank messaging systems and nationwide atm networks. Lenders also clubbed together to form credit-card “schemes”—associations setting the rules and systems through which members settle payments in plastic. Those worlds merged when two major card networks (soon rechristened Visa and MasterCard) bought the two largest atm firms to expand overseas. By allowing individuals to shop anywhere, cards and cash machines became the dominant infrastructure for moving small sums of money across the world.

A revolution soon ensued in large-value transfers. In the old “telex” system, a cross-border payment between banks required the exchange of a dozen messages in free text, a process prone to human error. In 1973 a group of banks joined to create swift, an automated messaging service assigning a unique code to every bank branch. It became the lingua franca for wholesale payments.

New technology boosted America’s banks, which became better equipped to follow clients overseas, and its capital markets, helped by the digitalisation of paper assets. Having rebuilt, savings-rich Japan and Germany parked their dollars in treasury bonds. A housing boom spawned asset-backed securities. Between 1980 and 2003, America’s stock of securities grew from 105% to three times gdp, forming the international springboard for its investment banks. After a regulatory big bang in the 1990s, they merged with commercial banks. By 2008, 35 firms had become the big four—Citigroup, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America—the last prong of America’s financial dominance.

America’s pull within the system remains huge. When disasters strike, the dollar surges. It is still the world’s safest store of value and its chief means of exchange. That makes the institution that mints it the metronome of global markets. In 2008 America’s Federal Reserve avoided a general cash crunch worldwide by offering “swap lines” to rich-world central banks, allowing them to borrow dollars against their own currencies. When panic gripped markets again this March, the Fed expanded the offer to some emerging countries. In April it widened it further, allowing most central banks and international institutions to exchange their American debt securities against greenbacks, thus stalling the stampede.

The world’s financial plumbing remains under America’s thumb, too. swift’s 11,000 members across the world ping each other 30m times daily. Most international transactions they make are ultimately routed through New York by American “correspondent” banks to chips, a clearing house that settles $1.5trn of payments a day. Visa and Mastercard process two-thirds of card payments globally, according to Nilson Report, a data firm. American banks capture 52% of the world’s investment-banking fees.

All change

Three things are driving change. First, the “push” factor of geopolitics. America’s centrality allows it to cripple rivals by denying them access to the world’s liquidity supply. Yet until recently it refrained from doing so. The financial system was seen as neutral infrastructure for promoting trade and prosperity. The first cracks appeared after 2001, when America started using it to choke funding for terrorism. Organised crime and nuclear proliferators soon joined the list. It persuaded allies by presenting such groups as threats to international security and the integrity of the financial system, says Juan Zarate, a former adviser to George W. Bush who designed the original programme.

Geopolitics and technology threaten Americas financial dominance: Extended Excerpt Image 1


The arsenal gained potency under Barack Obama. After Russia’s invasion of Crimea in 2014, America punished oligarchs, companies and entire sectors of an economy twice the size of previous targets. “Secondary” sanctions were imposed on other countries’ companies that traded with blacklisted entities. President Donald Trump has since elevated the system for use as a weapon and used it against allies. In December it targeted firms building a pipeline bringing Russian gas into Europe. In March it toughened sanctions against Iran even as others channelled aid to the country. The arsenal hardly feels impartial: since 2008 America has fined European banks $22bn, out of $29bn in total. In 2019 it designated new sanction targets 82 times, says Adam Smith of Gibson Dunn, a law firm.

Sanctions are now increasingly used in conjunction with other restrictions to throttle China. The Department of Commerce maintains a jumble of lists of entities with which other firms cannot deal. One of them, the “unverified” list, bans exports to companies about which the ministry has questions. It has grown from 51 names in 2016 to 159 in March. Chinese entities make up two-thirds of additions. Other departments are also racing to be seen as the toughest on China.

In the short run the opaque nature of the whole system maximises the impact of sanctions. But it also creates a strong incentive for others to seek workarounds, and technology is increasingly providing the tools needed to build them.

Such advances result from the second driver of the new trends: the “pull” factor of attempts to meet the needs in emerging economies. Tech firms have sights on the world’s 2.3bn people with little access to financial services. Helped by plentiful capital and permissive rules, they have created cheap-to-run systems they are starting to export. Some also aim to enable commerce in regions where credit cards are rare but mobile phones common. Propped up by their huge home market, China’s “superapps” run ecosystems in which users spend their way without using actual money.

It helps that many emerging markets, not just China, are keen on a rebalancing. Most borrow abroad, and price their exports, in dollars. America was once the biggest buyer. Whenever the dollar rose, demand would follow, making up for costlier debt. But a stronger dollar now means China, their chief trading partner, can afford less stuff. So demand falls just when repaying loans gets dearer. And the stakes have risen: emerging markets’ stock of dollar debt has doubled since 2010, to $3.8trn.

The third factor helping insurgents is covid-19, which could lead to a tipping-point. Already hobbled by rising tariffs, global trade is likely to fragment further. As disruption far away causes local shortages, governments want to shorten supply chains. That will give regional powers like China more room to write their own rules. The economic fallout in America—not least the fiscal impact of its $2.7trn stimulus measures—could dent confidence in its ability to repay debt, which underpins its bonds and currency.

Most important, the crisis harms other countries’ trust in America’s fitness to lead. It ignored early warnings and botched its initial response. China is guilty of worse—its own missteps helped export covid-19 in the first place. Yet it managed to curb cases fast and is now broadcasting a narrative of domestic competence. America’s ability to guarantee global prosperity is the glue that holds the financial order together. With its legitimacy badly hit, renewed assaults on the system seem inevitable. On the front line are the dollar-system’s foot soldiers, the banks.

  • Financial Markets
  • Comparisons
    • Cross-country
    • Historical
  • Monetary Policy
    • Banking
Previous articleMay 15, 2020Humanitys immense impact on Earths climate and carbon cycleThe imbalance will persist, with CO2 levels stabilizing near the 21st century’s peak, maintaining elevated temperatures & impacting crops & ice caps.Next articleMay 18, 2020We spent the lockdown sorting American voters into 380,000 distinct groupsBiden now leads Trump by 10 points among white voters, a 15-point improvement from 2016.
Showing 247 database articles primarily about Financial Markets

Earnings Will Be Spectacular. It May Not Be Enough

AI Summary. Corporate profit margins, long regarded as one of the economy's most reliably mean-reverting series, have risen continuously so far this century. Measured through the national income accounts used in calculating GDP, profits now take a larger share of the economy than on the eve of the 1929 crash.

John Authers Bloomberg
Date Posted:
October 8, 2026
Is Database:
Database

Since 2000, post-tax corporate profits as a share of GDP have trended upward across cyclical setbacks and are now near an all time high, above their 1929 level.

Have corporate profit margins stopped reverting to the mean?

Core argument: Corporate profits measured in the National Income and Product Accounts take a larger share of the U.S. economy than on the eve of the 1929 Great Crash.

Throughout the 20th century, profit margins were regarded as one of the purest mean-reverting series in the economy. So far this century, however, margins have done nothing but rise. Measured with the National Income and Product Accounts, part of the GDP calculation, profits are currently taking a bigger share of the economy even than on the eve of the Great Crash in 1929. The series comes with a lag, so we can assume the profit share on this basis is comfortably at a record by now.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Corporate profits measured in the National Income and Product Accounts take a larger share of the U.S. economy than on the eve of the 1929 Great Crash.
  2. Profit margins were regarded throughout the 20th century as one of the purest mean-reverting series in the economy, yet so far this century they have done nothing but rise.
  3. The National Income and Product Accounts profits series comes with a lag, so the profit share on this basis can be assumed to be comfortably at a record.

Related Articles:

  • US Focus: The Effect Of Soaring Profits — US nominal pre-tax corporate profits in the national accounts grew 23% over the past year, a pace not seen outside post-recession spikes since the mid-2000s. Wider margins were the key driver, as domestic profit growth far exceeded the 8% rise in corporate value added, pushing margins near all-time highs while the labor share hit new lows.
  • The Post‑COVID Decline in the Labor Share — The share of US national income paid to workers fell 1.6 percentage points below its pre-pandemic level, reaching a post-war low. The authors find this decline stems mainly from changes within industries rather than shifts in activity across sectors, following cyclical patterns seen in earlier recessions.
  • Are US Corporate Profit Margins Too High? — US after-tax non-financial corporate profit margins remain elevated by historical standards, estimated at 7.6% versus a post-1949 high of 8.2%, while employee pay as a share of non-financial corporate gross value added has fallen from 66% to 56%. One argument holds that subdued demographic growth leads companies to prioritize maximizing margins over expanding capacity.
  • Financial Markets
  • GDP
  • Productivity
  • Workforce
    • Inequality
    • Wages/Income

The Bond Market Reckoning Has Only Begun

AI Summary. The gap between French and German 10-year government bond yields has widened at a pace matched only during the euro zone sovereign debt crisis. France and the UK have less room than the US to close deficits with tax increases, as tax revenues equal 43.9% of GDP in France and 35.3% in the UK versus 25.2% in the US.

John Authers Bloomberg
Date Posted:
September 30, 2026
Is Database:
Database

The spread between 10-year French OATs and German Bunds has widened at a pace seen only during the eurozone sovereign-debt crisis. John Authers warns that France “satisfies all the classic conditions for a major debt crisis.”

Do high tax burdens limit France and the UK's deficit options?

Core argument: The spread of 10-year French OATs over German Bunds has risen at a pace matched only during the worst days of the euro-zone sovereign debt crisis in 2011 and 2012, fueling talk of a second crisis centered in Paris.

Only in the worst days of the euro zone’s sovereign debt crisis, in 2011 and 2012, has the [spread of 10-Year French OATS over German Bunds] risen so fast. Talk of a second euro-zone crisis, this time with an epicenter in Paris, is growing, and it’s easy to see why. Why is this more of a problem for France and the UK? Beyond their deficits, they also shoulder much higher tax burdens than the US. Tax revenues are 25.2% of GDP in the US, the lowest of the major developed economies - but 35.3% in the UK and 43.9% in France. It’s hard to imagine after decades of tax-cutting, but a US politician could deal with the deficit fairly easily with a tax hike. It’s not clear that option is open to French lawmakers, even if they could somehow persuade voters to go along with them. The populist politicians of left and right, who currently look well placed in next year’s presidential elections, are in any case unlikely to try.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. The spread of 10-year French OATs over German Bunds has risen at a pace matched only during the worst days of the euro-zone sovereign debt crisis in 2011 and 2012, fueling talk of a second crisis centered in Paris.
  2. Tax revenues equal 25.2% of GDP in the US, the lowest among major developed economies, versus 35.3% in the UK and 43.9% in France, leaving American politicians more room to close the deficit with a tax hike.
  3. Populist politicians of left and right, currently well placed for France’s presidential election, are unlikely to attempt tax increases to address the deficit.

Related Articles:

  • French PM to Freeze Emmanuel Macron’s Pension Reform Until 2027 — France's prime minister said he would suspend the plan to raise the retirement age to 64 until the next presidential election, while asking parties to agree on other savings. He outlined a €30bn package of spending cuts and tax rises to cut the deficit to 4.7% of national output from 5.4%.
  • Soaring Bond Yields, Gaping Deficits and Towering Debts: What Could Go Wrong? — An analysis of 22 rich countries estimates that if each refinanced its entire debt at current five-year bond yields, Britain would need the largest primary surplus to stabilize its debt-to-GDP ratio, about 1.5%, followed by Italy at 1.4%, France at 1.2% and America at 1%.
  • Global Debt Report 2026 — Gross central government borrowing across OECD countries rose 7% to a record $17tn, about 23% of GDP, and is projected to reach roughly $18tn, or 24% of GDP. The United States and Japan account for close to 80% of the area's refinancing requirements, with the US share rising from 57% to 70%.
  • Financial Markets
  • Fiscal Policy
    • Fiscal Deficits
    • Government Spending
    • Taxation
  • GDP
  • Politics

Foreign Capital Flows Into US Stocks Hit Record As Appetite For Debt Fades

AI Summary. Foreign investors made a record $942bn in net purchases of US stocks and investment fund shares over 12 months, the highest rolling 12-month total in Treasury data going back to 1985. Foreign demand for US debt securities moved in the opposite direction, falling to a net $188bn in the second quarter from $314bn in the first.

Michael Taffe and George Steer Financial Times
Date Posted:
September 28, 2026
Is Database:
Database

Foreign investors bought a record net $426B of US equities and fund shares in Q2, up 62% y/y, part of a record $942B in the 12 months through July. Overseas investors bought a net $188B of US debt securities in Q2, down from $314B in Q1.

Are foreign investors shifting from US debt into US stocks?

Core argument: Foreign investors made a record $942bn in net purchases of US equities and investment fund shares in the 12 months to July, the highest rolling 12-month total in Treasury data going back to 1985.

Foreign investors made a record $942bn in net purchases of US equities and investment fund shares in the 12 months to July, accelerating a shift in overseas investment towards American stocks and away from debt. The flows represented the highest rolling 12-month total in Treasury data going back to 1985. Net purchases of US equities and investment fund shares by foreign investors jumped to $426bn in the second quarter, up 62% from the same period in 2025, and surpassing the previous quarterly record of $299bn in 2022, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Foreign demand for US debt moved in the opposite direction. Overseas investors bought a net $188bn of US debt securities in the second quarter, down from $314bn in the first.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Foreign investors made a record $942bn in net purchases of US equities and investment fund shares in the 12 months to July, the highest rolling 12-month total in Treasury data going back to 1985.
  2. Net foreign purchases of US equities and investment fund shares reached $426bn in the second quarter, up 62% from the same period in 2025 and above the prior quarterly record of $299bn in 2022, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
  3. Overseas investors bought a net $188bn of US debt securities in the second quarter, down from $314bn in the first.

Related Articles:

  • World’s Unusually High Dollar Exposure Risks Fueling Selloff — Pension funds and insurers in Canada, Denmark, Australia, Taiwan, Japan and Finland hedged just 41% of their foreign-currency exposure, the lowest share since at least 2015. With some of the largest holders of US assets carrying little protection against a weaker dollar, the currency is at risk of steeper declines if sentiment turns.
  • Foreign Investors Prefer US Stocks To Treasuries As Debt Worries Grow — International flows into US stocks averaged 2.8% of US GDP over a year, overtaking flows into US Treasuries at 2% of GDP for the first time this century outside brief episodes during the Covid-19 pandemic and after the global financial crisis, according to Deutsche Bank analysis of US Treasury data.
  • A Catalyst For The AI Bubble Break — Historically, controlling for valuations, a 1% rise in the share of the market represented by initial public offerings has been associated with roughly a 4% decline in prices. With large artificial-intelligence company listings expected and share issuance exceeding buybacks, equity supply could shift from shrinking about 1% a year to growing near 5%, implying returns roughly 20% below average.
  • Financial Markets
  • GDP
    • Savings Glut/Trade Deficit

De-reservification, Not De-dollarization

AI Summary. Much of the official-sector inflow into the U.S. now comes from investors who are not traditional reserve managers, and those flows remain heavily tilted toward the dollar and toward risk assets rather than Treasuries. The author argues this shift in the global investor base helps explain why Treasuries trade at a discount while the dollar retains a premium.

Brad Setser and Alex Etra Council on Foreign Relations
Date Posted:
September 16, 2026
Is Database:
Database

The stock of global dollar reserves has been roughly stable over the past decade. The world is not moving away from the dollar: dollar assets are shifting from official holdings of Treasurys towards private and quasi-sovereign holdings of risk assets.

Why do Treasuries trade at a discount while the dollar keeps premium?

Core argument: Most official-sector inflows into the U.S. come from investors who are not classic reserve managers, and those flows remain heavily tilted toward the dollar, so any real de-dollarization would likely begin among these investors.

Most of the current flow into the US from the “official” sector is coming from investors who are not classic reserve managers. Those flows remain heavily tilted toward the dollar, at least for now. Any real de-dollarization would likely occur first among these investors. Put differently, the dollar’s global role is increasingly as a source of returns, not a source of safety. The foreign bid, private and public, is for risk, not for Treasuries. It is currently fashionable in some circles to point to the diminution of the “convenience yield” on Treasuries even while the U.S. dollar continues to enjoy such a privilege. But the shift in the global investor base and their apparent portfolio preference for U.S. risk assets in lieu of Treasuries may help explain the divergence between the convenience yield on Treasuries and the convenience yield on the USD.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Most official-sector inflows into the U.S. come from investors who are not classic reserve managers, and those flows remain heavily tilted toward the dollar, so any real de-dollarization would likely begin among these investors.
  2. The dollar’s global role is increasingly as a source of returns rather than safety, with the foreign bid, private and public, directed at risk assets rather than Treasuries.
  3. The shift in the global investor base toward U.S. risk assets in lieu of Treasuries may help explain the divergence between the convenience yield on Treasuries and that on the dollar, and suggests the “profit dollar” is likely trading at a historical premium.

Related Articles:

  • Financial Innovation and the International Monetary System — The dollar accounts for 59% of cross-border payments messaged through SWIFT, far ahead of the euro's 14%, and its share of foreign exchange turnover has risen gradually to about 90% of the 200% total since 2010. Official holdings of U.S. Treasuries have leveled off near $4tn while foreign private holdings rose from $1tn to over $5tn.
  • Foreign Investors Prefer US Stocks To Treasuries As Debt Worries Grow — International flows into US stocks averaged 2.8% of US GDP over a year, overtaking flows into US Treasuries at 2% of GDP for the first time this century outside brief episodes during the Covid-19 pandemic and after the global financial crisis, according to Deutsche Bank analysis of US Treasury data.
  • World’s Unusually High Dollar Exposure Risks Fueling Selloff — Pension funds and insurers in Canada, Denmark, Australia, Taiwan, Japan and Finland hedged just 41% of their foreign-currency exposure, the lowest share since at least 2015. With some of the largest holders of US assets carrying little protection against a weaker dollar, the currency is at risk of steeper declines if sentiment turns.
  • Financial Markets
  • GDP
    • Savings Glut/Trade Deficit
  • Monetary Policy

Foreign Investors Prefer US Stocks To Treasuries As Debt Worries Grow

AI Summary. International flows into US stocks averaged 2.8% of US GDP over a year, overtaking flows into US Treasuries at 2% of GDP for the first time this century outside brief episodes during the Covid-19 pandemic and after the global financial crisis, according to Deutsche Bank analysis of US Treasury data.

Emily Herbert and Ian Smith Financial Times
Date Posted:
September 15, 2026
Is Database:
Database

International net flows into US equities reached 2.8% of GDP in the year through June, exceeding net inflows into Treasuries of 2% of GDP. Outside brief episodes during the pandemic and the aftermath of the GFC, this is the first time this century that equity inflows have surpassed Treasury inflows.

Are foreign investors now buying more US stocks than Treasuries?

Core argument: Foreign inflows into US stocks averaged 2.8% of US GDP in the year to June, overtaking Treasuries at 2% of GDP, according to Deutsche Bank analysis of US Treasury data.

International flows into US stocks reached 2.8% of US GDP on average in the year to June, overtaking Treasuries — at 2% of GDP — for the first time this century outside brief episodes in the Covid-19 pandemic and the aftermath of the global financial crisis, according to analysis of US Treasury data by Deutsche Bank. The change reflects the ever-growing lure of the US stock market, with the S&P 500 on track for a fourth straight year of double-digit gains. Powering the rally has been vast AI investment, which is driving profit margins to new highs, according to FactSet data stretching back to 2009.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. Foreign inflows into US stocks averaged 2.8% of US GDP in the year to June, overtaking Treasuries at 2% of GDP, according to Deutsche Bank analysis of US Treasury data.
  2. Deutsche Bank’s analysis marks the first time this century that foreign equity flows have exceeded Treasury flows, outside brief episodes during the Covid-19 pandemic and the aftermath of the global financial crisis.
  3. The S&P 500 is on track for a fourth straight year of double-digit gains, powered by vast AI investment that is driving profit margins to new highs, according to FactSet data stretching back to 2009.

Related Articles:

  • World’s Unusually High Dollar Exposure Risks Fueling Selloff — Pension funds and insurers in Canada, Denmark, Australia, Taiwan, Japan and Finland hedged just 41% of their foreign-currency exposure, the lowest share since at least 2015. With some of the largest holders of US assets carrying little protection against a weaker dollar, the currency is at risk of steeper declines if sentiment turns.
  • Foreigners Rebuff ‘Sell America’ and Buy a Net $1.6 Trillion in Assets — Treasury Department data show overseas investors bought a net $1.55tn of long-term US financial assets, up from $1.18tn the prior year, including $720bn in equities and just under $409bn in Treasury notes and bonds. China was a net seller of $208.6bn, with its Treasury holdings ending at $683.5bn.
  • The Global Balance Sheet 2026: Imbalance And Divergence — Only 20% of global household wealth growth came from net new investment in real assets such as machinery, housing, infrastructure and intellectual property, down from a 30% average over the prior quarter century. Nearly 60% came from asset prices rising faster than inflation and negative net worth in other sectors.
  • Financial Markets
  • GDP

Interest Rates and Stock Prices: An Old Debate Resurfaces!

AI Summary. An estimate of the intrinsic 10-year US Treasury rate, built from actual inflation and real economic growth, far exceeded the actual 10-year Treasury rate after inflation surged, and that gap has since narrowed to roughly 4.75% actual versus 5.41% intrinsic.

Aswath Damodaran Musing on Markets
Date Posted:
September 14, 2026
Is Database:
Database

Damodaran’s “intrinsic” 10-year Treasury rate—calculated as US real GDP growth plus inflation—has broadly tracked the nominal 10-year Treasury yield since 1962. As of early September 2026, the 10-year yield of ~5% was 41bp below his 5.41% intrinsic-rate estimate.

Do long-term Treasury rates line up with inflation and growth fundamentals?

Core argument: As of September 2026, the US 10-year Treasury rate stood at 4.75% while the intrinsic 10-year rate was 5.41%, a gap of 66 basis points.

[The graph shows] the actual inflation rates and real GDP growth rates for the US, going back to 1962, and [the implied] intrinsic 10-year treasury rate (the cumulative column) and actual 10-year treasury rate each year. When inflation surged in 2022, interest rates went up, but since the rates that I am tracking are long term rates, the intrinsic risk free rate vastly exceeded the actual rate that year, but the difference has narrowed over time, and almost dissipated by September 2026 (when the US 10-year treasury bond rate was [5%] and and the intrinsic ten-year rates yielded 5.41%).

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. As of September 2026, the US 10-year Treasury rate stood at 4.75% while the intrinsic 10-year rate was 5.41%, a gap of 66 basis points.
  2. When inflation surged in 2022, the intrinsic risk-free rate vastly exceeded the actual 10-year Treasury rate, and that difference has narrowed since.
  3. The intrinsic 10-year Treasury rate is built from actual US inflation and real GDP growth rates going back to 1962 and compared against the actual 10-year Treasury rate each year.

Related Articles:

  • The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2026 to 2036 — The Congressional Budget Office projects the federal deficit will grow from $1.9tn (5.8% of GDP) to $3.1tn (6.7%) over a decade, above the 3.8% averaged over the past 50 years, with rising net interest costs driving much of the increase. Federal debt held by the public is projected to rise from 101% to 120% of GDP.
  • US 30-Year Bonds Erase Gains From Treasury’s Buyback Surprise — US Treasuries erased nearly all gains that followed the Treasury Department's surprise decision to increase buybacks of longer-dated bonds, with the 30-year yield rising above 5.27% and the 10-year touching 4.71%. The reversal signals the move has done little to ease concern about surging government debt.
  • Annual Economic Report — Public debt in advanced economies has risen steadily, limiting governments' ability to cushion higher energy prices. Cyclically adjusted primary deficits averaged 1.9% of GDP in advanced economies since 2022 versus 1.1% over the two preceding decades, and 1.8% in emerging markets versus 0.1% from 2000–2019.
  • Financial Markets
  • Fiscal Policy
    • Fiscal Deficits
    • Government Spending
  • GDP
  • Monetary Policy
© Copyright 2026 Coherent Research Institute · All Rights Reserved · Privacy · Terms