Example collocations logo

Volatility in sentence

690 examples of Volatility in a sentence

Producing countries have also tried to contain price volatility by forming international cartels.
If producing and consuming countries in grain markets could cooperatively agree to refrain from such government intervention – probably by working through the World Trade Organization – world price volatility might be lower.
This has kept short- and long-term interest rates low (and even negative in some cases, such as Europe and Japan), reduced the volatility of bond markets, and lifted many asset prices (including equities, real estate, and fixed-income private- and public-sector bonds).
They held large inventories of these assets, thus providing liquidity and smoothing excess price volatility.
In short, though central banks’ creation of macro liquidity may keep bond yields low and reduce volatility, it has also led to crowded trades (herding on market trends, exacerbated by HFTs) and more investment in illiquid bond funds, while tighter regulation means that market makers are missing in action.
Herding in the opposite direction occurs, but, because many investments are in illiquid funds and the traditional market makers who smoothed volatility are nowhere to be found, the sellers are forced into fire sales.
But, over time, the longer central banks create liquidity to suppress short-run volatility, the more they will feed price bubbles in equity, bond, and other asset markets.
There has been a longstanding discussion about whether new derivative markets, which provide such financial hedging, tend to increase preexisting financial markets’ volatility.
Mayhew concluded that it is rather difficult to tell whether derivative markets worsen financial-market volatility, because their creation tends to come when existing financial markets already are more volatile, or can be predicted to become so.
Moreover, he found that there is no evidence that derivative markets create volatility in underlying cash markets; in fact, they may even reduce it.
The effect on underlying financial markets’ volatility may not even be the right question to consider in deciding whether to permit new derivative products.
Add to that efforts to liberalize the capital account and internationalize the renminbi, and some exchange-rate volatility can be expected.
And we should explore whether a system of global rules aimed at reducing the volatility of capital flows would be useful.
Each day seems to bring fresh headlines about an unfolding crisis – whether it is migration, economic volatility, security, or climate change.
Both schools of thought share a focus on fundamentals, unlike a third – and, in my opinion, highly plausible – view: that the asset-price volatility we have been seeing has little or nothing to do with changes in fundamentals.
But, to the extent that they contain a stop-loss element – and they often do – they will cause bouts of selling into declining markets, and that in turn will amplify volatility.
A little volatility is a good thing, both to discourage speculative capital flows and to put the fear of God into investors looking for the next Greenspan-Bernanke put.
When does a little “good” volatility turn into excessive “bad” volatility?
While the only safe bet is continuing high volatility, we are at an unusual juncture where the short- and long-term trends appear to be very different.
Once established, the ICU would tax persistent surpluses and deficits symmetrically, to annul the negative feedback mechanism between unbalanced capital flows, volatility, inadequate global aggregate demand, and unnecessary unemployment distributed unevenly around the world.
Financial volatility rose, unsettling investors; stocks went on a rollercoaster ride, ending substantially lower; government bond yields plummeted, and lenders found themselves in the unusual position of having to pay for the privilege of holding an even bigger amount of government debt (almost one-third of the total).
And while relative calm has returned to financial markets, the three causes of volatility are yet to dissipate in any meaningful sense.
Intra-day volatility rose in virtually every segment of global financial markets; adverse price contagion became more common as more vulnerable entities contaminated the stronger ones; and asset-market correlations were rendered less stable.
In the wake of this volatility, markets have recently regained a more stable footing.
Indeed, the more frequent the bouts of financial volatility in the months to come, the greater the risk that it will lead consumers to become more cautious about spending, and prompt companies to postpone even more of their investment in new plant and equipment.
If the handoff fails, the financial volatility experienced earlier this year will not only return; it could also turn out to have been a prologue for a notable risk of recession, greater inequality, and enduring financial instability.
The popularity of the tax (named for the late Nobel laureate economist James Tobin, for whom its aim was to reduce exchange-rate volatility in currency markets) reflects widespread animus directed at the financial sector, but it far exceeds any real benefits that the tax would deliver.
Lowering volatility and sopping up excess liquidity can be beneficial, but there are risks here as well: regulators can easily overshoot the mark, leaving financial markets with weakened capacity for price discovery and too little liquidity.
The downside risk of capital-account liberalization, after all, is higher exchange-rate volatility, and even countries with sound liquidity positions could not prevent a run on their reserves.
The downside risk of higher volatility for the rupee is aggravated by some serious problems, including a deficit running at 6% of GDP and the strategic stand-off with Pakistan.
BackNext