Return to Question

The value of higher presently outgoing cash flows is less important than the value of future incoming cash flows. This sounds to be the case for intertemporal rate marginal substitution (eg: pensions), a model to model a margin and not the whole rate. But, from the computational point of view, it can be seen as marking to the future market rather than marking to the presently observed market prices, in order to do (spreads/model) calibration.

Since the real cash presence in the transactions is the main issue, in addition to the present netting system one should consider additional netting, the one of all the electronic /credit cards/checks based (software) cash flows, with formulae to be different for the software and non-software settlement. With this additional netting in place, from the portfolio's owner point of view the non-software could be considered observed values. The negative ones will be discounted at the effective funding rate (the by-principal-weighted average of all the incoming/positive non-software flows) and the positive ones (deposited) should be discounted at the average investing rate (the weighted-by-principal return rate of all the non-software future flows).

The presently observed negative interest rates seem to increase in magnitude with the term. Because the increase in magnitude of negative interest rate can be justified by an increase in the perceived credit risk, the momentum profitability will drive the future investments, leading at the observed market rate. For the high risk, momentum profitability decreases with size, so the non-software volume might be capped by the specific credit rating of the portfolio's owner (entity).

Moreover, the amount which can be borrowed by an entity is limited. Depositing now might be treated as collateral to borrowing in the future, therefore involved in calculations with an associated haircut. This might lead to a maximum depositing amount, with the magnitude of negative interest rates increment depending on the left size of the deposit-able amount. Portfolio-specific negative interest rates need to be modeled taking into account not only the time, but also the frequency and the magnitude of the non-software flows.

The value of higher presently outgoing cash flows is less important than the value of future incoming cash flows. This sounds to be the case for intertemporal rate marginal substitution (eg: pensions), a model to model a margin and not the whole rate. From computational point of view, it can be seen as marking to the future market rather than marking to the presently observed market prices; with calculations to be done not in the base currency but into a different unit, not even necessarily a currency, and fit the number of such units at future times.

Because the increase in magnitude of negative interest rate can be justified by an increase in the perceived credit risk, the momentum profitability will drive the future investments, leading at the observed market rate. For the high risk, momentum profitability decreases with size, so the A1 available volume might be capped by the specific credit rating of the portfolio's owner (entity).Moreover, the amount which can be borrowed by an entity is limited. Depositing now might be treated as collateral to borrowing in the future, therefore involved in calculations with an associated haircut. This might lead to a maximum depositing amount, with the magnitude of negative interest rates increment depending on the left size of the deposit-able amount.

The discounting curves are generally inferred from zero coupon bonds, especially for short rates, where such zero coupon bonds exist. Given the recent governmental interest rate bonds, this implies that the discounting curve has to be negative, at least for short rates. But the negative interest rates modelling with a Japanese style inverted yield curve might not be optimal, given that it is based on the historically known inverse curves. They were due to short rates becoming larger than the longs ones and short positive rates stopped to increase by the government stepping in and lowering them. Such a move cannot be done and also, the considered credit quality might not be the same at the terms considered when comparing short-term to long-term interest rates. The presently observed negative interest rates seem to increase in magnitude with the term. It might be a possibility for their modelling to follow the one for positive rates, without taking care of the sign, modelling just the magnitude, via imaginary rates, that become negative the moment they are observed.

Because the increase in magnitude of negative interest rate can be justified by an increase in the perceived credit risk, the momentum profitability will drive the future investments, leading at the observed market rate. For the high risk, momentum profitability decreases with size, so the non-software volume might be capped by the specific credit rating of the portfolio's owner (entity).

The discounting curves are generally inferred from zero coupon bonds, especially for short rates, where such zero coupon bonds exist. Given the recent governmental interest rate bonds, this implies that the discounting curve has to be negative, at least for short rates. It might be a possibility for their modelling to follow the one for positive rates, without taking care of the sign, modelling just the magnitude, via imaginary rates, that become negative the moment they are observed. But the negative interest rates modelling with a inversed(/mirrored in the region of negativity) Japanese style yield curve might not be optimal, given that it is based on the historically known inverse curves. The historical Japanese curves were due to short rates becoming larger than the longs ones and short positive rates stopped to increase by the government stepping in and lowering them. Such a move (lower the magnitude of negative rates) is difficult to be done, due to reserves constrains. In addition, the credit quality of the issuer might not be constant at the terms considered when comparing short-term to long-term interest rates. 

The presently observed negative interest rates seem to increase in magnitude with the term. Because the increase in magnitude of negative interest rate can be justified by an increase in the perceived credit risk, the momentum profitability will drive the future investments, leading at the observed market rate. For the high risk, momentum profitability decreases with size, so the non-software volume might be capped by the specific credit rating of the portfolio's owner (entity).