Is QE the answer?

Although the chances of a ‘QE’ program being implemented in Frankfurt on Thursday are remote at best, the chances of a program being implemented in the coming six months are above 50%. 

Source: Bloomberg

Feeble inflation data and weak activity reads in manufacturing and services, coupled with Mario Draghi’s comments at the June meeting highlight that QE is certainly a policy tool of the future.

The question is how have markets responded to QE programs that have been implemented across the globe? There are three key examples of market reactions to QE which include the US, the UK and Japan. However, I will concentrate on the US and Japan as they provide perfect counter views of QE responses.

The US

There is no doubting the response the US market has had to QE, after having been part of monetary policy from the Fed for just over five years now. The bull market rally has no doubt been sustained by the program and when you compare the expansion of the Fed’s balance sheet to the S&P, the correlation is near enough to perfect and has seen the US markets averaging 20% appreciation in price terms over this time.

However, what has been interesting from the US’ experiences is that earnings growth in the first year was flat to negative and took until the second year of the program to see earnings growth and a further six to nine months to actually see stretched multiples decline to more ‘normalised’ levels. The counter to this is that multiples had been punished in the GFC and were coming from a low base; the expansion in ‘09 and ’10 were certainly not what most market commentators would call stretched, for example when QE1 started  the S&P was trading on a forward P/E of 10.1 times. In Europe however, the STOXX currently trades 14 times forward earnings – a possible limiting factor to the appreciation expected, based on the US response?


In the early 2000s, the BoJ undertook a program to try to break Japan out of is one and a half decades of deflation (which is probably a more comparable case considering the fear of deflation in the periphery). The initial reaction to the purchasing of Japanese government bonds (JGB) was optimism which saw the Nikkei up, however this was not sustained and the markets fell away as deflation was unable to be broken and earnings growth was unresponsive.

This is the fear around Europe; deflation once it takes hold is near enough to impossible to break out of. The lack of sustained growth since the lowering of rates, coupled with the persistent slide in inflation and the lack of earnings recovery in the banks particularly, could suggest the Japanese experience may be the outcome of a QE program in Europe.

However unlike Japan, Europe has acted swiftly in comparison, although nowhere near as decisive as the US or as quick Europe moved on monetary policy inside a year by dropping rates by 300 basis points. Japan took nine years to assume zero interest rates and almost 12 years to enact a QE program. Also the Japanese markets were trading on 23 times earnings, which is substantially higher than the European markets. However, the eurozone does have more characteristics to that of Japan in the early 2000s, rather than the US.

I reiterate that we don’t expect the ECB to adopt a QE policy this week, however if and when it does history shows that responses to these programs have been mixed at best; on current data Europe looks like heading the way of Japan rather than the US.

Ahead of the Australian open

Two pieces of data we will be watching from an Australian-centric point of view: the GDP print and Glenn Stevens’ speech. The expectations for second quarter GDP is 0.4%, down from 1.1% in the first, which will see year-on-year numbers coming in at 3% according to estimates, from 3.5%. Net exports and the performance of the non-mining space are the things to watch as the mining slowdown is sure to filter through.

Glenn Stevens’ speech will be interesting  as he is speaking at a luncheon for the Committee of Economic Development of Australia; if there is Q&A he is likely to be pressed on the AUD, housing and future growth  - things the market has being dying to hear.

We are currently calling the ASX 200 down seven points to 5651, however after reaching a six-year closing high yesterday on next to no major news, this could be easily reversed.

This information has been prepared by IG, a trading name of IG Markets Limited. In addition to the disclaimer below, the material on this page does not contain a record of our trading prices, or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instrument. IG accepts no responsibility for any use that may be made of these comments and for any consequences that result. No representation or warranty is given as to the accuracy or completeness of this information. Consequently any person acting on it does so entirely at their own risk. Any research provided does not have regard to the specific investment objectives, financial situation and needs of any specific person who may receive it. It has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such is considered to be a marketing communication. Although we are not specifically constrained from dealing ahead of our recommendations we do not seek to take advantage of them before they are provided to our clients. See full non-independent research disclaimer and quarterly summary.

Find articles by analysts

Een artikel zoeken

Form has failed to submit. Please contact IG directly.

  • Ik wens per e-mail informatie van IG Group bedrijven te ontvangen over handelsideeën en IG's producten en diensten.

Voor meer informatie over hoe wij uw gegevens mogelijk kunnen gebruiken, bekijkt u ons Privacy- en toegangsbeleid en onze privacy website.

CFD’s zijn complexe instrumenten en brengen vanwege het hefboomeffect een hoog risico mee van snel oplopende verliezen. 79% van de retailbeleggers lijdt verlies op de handel in CFD’s met deze aanbieder.
Het is belangrijk dat u goed begrijpt hoe CFD's werken en dat u nagaat of u zich het hoge risico op verlies kunt permitteren.
CFD’s zijn complexe instrumenten en brengen vanwege het hefboomeffect een hoog risico mee van snel oplopende verliezen.