Blog Post

Sovereign bond holdings in the euro area – the impact of QE

Since the announcement of the QE programme by the European Central Bank (ECB) on 22 January 2015, national central banks have been buying government and national agency bonds. In this post we look at the effect of QE on sectoral holdings of government bonds, based on our recently updated dataset.

By: and Date: May 19, 2016 European Macroeconomics & Governance Tags & Topics

The share of domestic government bonds held by national central banks has increased, as expected, but this has coincided with only a limited decrease in holdings by domestic banks, which had increased significantly during the crisis (see here).

As of the end of April 2016, the ECB had bought 732.8 billion euros of bonds under its public sector purchase program (PSPP), of which 87.7 billion were supranational bonds and 645.1 billion were national government and agency bonds. Purchases of asset-backed securities reached 19 billion euros at the end of April, while holdings under the third covered bond purchase programme (CBPP3) amounted to 172.3 billion euros (see here for breakdowns). Starting in June 2016, the ECB will also add a corporate sector purchase programme (CSPP).

After the recent expansion of the QE programme to 80 billion euros per month, the breakdown of monthly purchases is more flexible and no longer clear ex ante. We can still get an idea of how monthly purchases are distributed by looking at the composition of purchases carried out in April 2016, the first month after the announcement of the expansion of the asset purchase programme.

In April 2016 the purchases under the asset purchase programme  amounted to 85 billion euros. Of these, 50 million euros (0.06% of the total) were under the asset-backed security purchase programme, 6.6 billion euros (7.8%) were under the covered bond purchase programme and 78.5 billion euros (92.2%) were under the public sector purchase programme. We also know that the share of supranational securities bought under the PSPP has been reduced from 12% to 10% of monthly purchases, so we can infer that supranational securities accounted for about 7.8 billion euros out of the 78 billion of PSPP in April 2016 (Figure 1).

The distribution of purchases conducted in April 2016 are more tilted towards the public sector, compared to the average distribution of the pre-existing stock. This is probably going to be transitory, as the ECB will soon start buying corporate securities.

Figure 1: Implementation of purchases as of April 2016

Source: Bruegel

Note: the share of supranational holdings (which are under full risk sharing) was lowered from 12% to 10%, so the ECB’s share of the other PSPP purchases has been increased from 8% to 10%, in order to keep the risk-shared part of the PSPP unchanged at 20% (see here for details)

The implementation of the 85 billion euros of purchases are split between the ECB and the national central banks, as shown in Figure 1. This means different regimes of risk-sharing apply to different purchases. While loss-sharing applies to the ABSPP and CBPP3, only 20% of the purchases under PSPP is subject to risk sharing (for more details, see the QE manual Claeys et al, 2015 and the 2016 update Claeys and Leandro)[1].

This division of labour is also evident when looking at how QE is impacting sectoral holdings of government debt issued by euro-area member states. A spike in the share of government bonds held by national central banks can be observed, reflecting the implementation of the QE programme (Figure 2)[2]. Comparing the outstanding government holdings of central banks as of the end of 2015 with the end of 2014, German holdings of government bonds rose substantially from 4.4 to 77.2 billion euros, while Italian holdings increased less markedly, from 102.0 to 165.2 billion euros. The French and Spanish central banks increased their holdings from around 40.0 to  155.9 and 84.9 billion euros respectively.

In percent of the total outstanding debt, this increase is offset by decreases in holdings of other institutional sectors (Table 1). In France and Italy, most of the increase of central bank holdings was offset by a decrease in other resident holdings (such as households and non-financial corporations), while in Spain it is a decrease in holdings by resident banks that offsets the increase in central bank holdings. Interestingly, net purchases by the French and German central banks correlate with net sales by foreign bondholders, rather than by domestic banks.

In conclusion, the most recent update of data on sectoral holdings of government bonds allow us to gauge the impact of the ECB’s asset purchase programme on the distribution of government debt across different holding sectors. While the increase in the share held by domestic central banks was expected, the changes in other sectors’ holdings are less obvious. The increase in the share of bonds held by national central banks is mostly offset by a decrease in holdings by other sectors, and less so by a decrease in the holdings of domestic banks. Overall, it appears that the ECB’s purchases have not yet helped reverse the marked increase in banks’ holdings of domestic government debt which happened during the crisis.

 

[1] On top of the PSPP, six National Central Banks will carry out the bond purchases under the new corporate sector programme on behalf of the Eurosystem. The ECB will coordinate the purchases and the CSPP will be subject to a full income and loss sharing regime.

[2] This is something that we did not observe at the time of the ECB’s Securities Market Programme (SMP), because those purchases were subject to full risk sharing (according to the ECB’s capital key) and thus classified as holdings from “non-residents”, from the perspective of the issuing government


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

View comments
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Pia Hüttl
dsc_1000

An update: Sovereign bond holdings in the euro area – the impact of QE

Since the ECB’s announcement of its QE programme in January 2015, national central banks have been buying government and national agency bonds. In this post we look at the effect of QE on sectoral holdings of government bonds, updating our calculations published in May and November 2016.

By: Pia Hüttl and Inês Goncalves Raposo Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: March 9, 2017
Read article More on this topic

Opinion

MariaDemertzis1 bw
Guntram B. Wolff

Eurozone QE and bank profitability: Why it is too early to taper

In the eyes of the critics, the quantitative easing programs have been of little help to growth and inflation and have instead been an attack on savers, undermining the profitability of banks and insurances. Do these arguments stand scrutiny?

By: Maria Demertzis and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: December 8, 2016
Read article Download PDF

Policy Contribution

pc-20-16_page_01European Parliament

What impact does the ECB’s quantitative easing policy have on bank profitability?

This Policy Contribution shows that the effect of the ECB’s QE programme on bank profitability has not yet had a dramatically negative effect on bank operations.

By: Maria Demertzis and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, European Parliament, Parliamentary Testimonies Date: November 30, 2016
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Pia Hüttl
Silvia Merler

An update: Sovereign bond holdings in the euro area – the impact of QE

Since the ECB’s announcement of its QE programme in January 2015, national central banks have been buying government and national agency bonds. In this post we look at the effect of QE on sectoral holdings of government bonds, based on our recently updated dataset.

By: Pia Hüttl and Silvia Merler Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: November 22, 2016
Read article Download PDF More by this author

Policy Contribution

pc15_16European Parliament

Low long-term rates: bond bubble or symptom of secular stagnation?

Yields on European sovereign bonds have reached historically low levels in 2016. This secular decline in long-term sovereign yields is not limited to the euro area. Why are interest rates currently so low? Are low long-term trates justified by fundamental factors or is it an artificial phenomenon?

By: Grégory Claeys Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, European Parliament, Parliamentary Testimonies Date: September 26, 2016
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Tommaso Aquilante
IMG_20150922_160434

Update of the EFIGE dataset

The EFIGE dataset on firms' competitivenes was recently updated by extending the panel-level balance sheet data until the year 2014. This post highlights the main features of the brand new data.

By: Tommaso Aquilante and Domenico Favoino Topic: Innovation & Competition Policy Date: August 22, 2016
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

MariaDemertzis1 bw

Companies' continue to respond to the ECB's corporate sector purchase programme

After a sharp increase in corporate bond issuance following the ECB’s announcement in March this year, corporates continue to respond to the Corporate Sector Purchase Program.

By: Maria Demertzis Topic: Finance & Financial Regulation Date: July 14, 2016
Read article Download PDF

Policy Contribution

screenshot-bruegel.org 2016-06-23 15-45-59European Parliament

The effectiveness of the European Central Bank’s Asset Purchase Programme

Since the end of 2014, inflation has been at or very close to zero. With very little ability to move the actual interest rate further into negative territory, the ECB has resorted to unconventional measures. The latest of these includes a programme to purchase corporate bonds, which started on 8 June 2016.

By: Maria Demertzis and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, European Parliament, Parliamentary Testimonies Date: June 23, 2016
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

MariaDemertzis1 bw

Corporates are responding to the new ECB corporate sector purchase programme

We have observed a sharp increase in corporate bond issuance following the ECB’s announcement in March this year, but it is too early to see the effects on investment by non-financial corporations.

By: Maria Demertzis Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: June 16, 2016
Read article More on this topic More by this author

Blog Post

Marek Dabrowski

Core and periphery: different approaches to unconventional monetary policy

Compared with the ‘core’ of the world economy, emerging markets have limited room for manoeuvre when it comes to applying unconventional monetary policy measures.

By: Marek Dabrowski Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: May 24, 2016
Read article More on this topic

Blog Post

Francesco Papadia
Guntram B. Wolff

Central banks: from omnipotence to impotence?

Like the price of financial assets, the market assessment of the capacity of central banks to achieve their price stability objective fluctuates between omnipotence and impotence. We do not agree with this binary view of the world and we examine in this post the case of the European Central Bank (ECB). We argue that the ECB still has some instruments left. It should consider moving beyond increasing sovereign debt purchases, which would be ineffective and pose risks. More important is to step up work on structural and fiscal policies.

By: Francesco Papadia and Guntram B. Wolff Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance Date: March 2, 2016
Read article Download PDF

Policy Contribution

The European Central Bank’s quantitative easing programme: limits and risksEuropean Parliament

The European Central Bank’s quantitative easing programme: limits and risks

The ECB has made a series of changes to its QE programme in order to expand the universe of purchasable assets and have more flexibility in the execution of the programme. However this might not be enough to sustain QE throughout 2017. The extension of the programme also raises questions about its potential adverse consequences.

By: Grégory Claeys and Alvaro Leandro Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance, European Parliament Date: February 15, 2016
Load more posts