Home History Information Secretariat Contact

Central Banks And Modern Day Forex


Losing the ability to dictate trading ranges after the 80's seem to be no impact to central banks, as they have stoutly preserved their major role in today's forex market. Every forex trader needs to know the following; Today's foreign exchange markets have endured a lot since the dark days of the Bretton Woods Accord, when traders would lock currencies together at a range of only 1%. In the past 30 odd years, the globalization of the economies, the technological breakthroughs and the staggering growth in investment funds and commodity trading advisors have expanded the daily trading volume in forex to trillions of dollars.

Processing payments is among a variety of reasons why central banks may involve forex. However, traders shift focus to market interventions when it comes to forex exchange. People usually wonder if central banks are involved in profiteering at all, because of the way they manipulate specific currencies when foreign exchange is at the summit and lowest point. While they are often successful in the long run, and usually lose out on the short and medium terms, major central banks never speculate in forex. Their trades are usually done to keep exchange rates away from dangerous levels, which will negatively impact exporters, or to restore orderly conditions in the market.

Unsterilized interventions or naked interventions only consist of plain foreign exchange. The Fed, for example, only conducts forex with countries with external currencies like Japan and Europe. Besides its effects on foreign exchange rates, an intervention has a rather unpopular down side to major central bankers its effect in the monetary supply. In this case, significant adjustments must be made in interest rates and prices and at all levels of the economy. Moreover, unsterilized interventions usually lead to a long-standing outcome.

On the contrary, sterilized interventions dissolve smoothly into the money supply, which makes them a better alternative. Sterilized interventions are made for short to medium term growths, which are very beneficial when it comes to foreign exchange.

Interventions can be very beneficial, but are also risky for traders at the same time. Interventions can be both damaging and beneficial at the same time, so understanding the concept behind it is very important. Central banks have the ability to intervene when necessary in order to grant liquidity, protect specific levels, delay the trends, and even reverse them. Because central banks promptly answer to compromising trends, traders are restricted from expecting a mechanical approach.

A disaster or any form of crisis can affect one or more currency pairs, either in terms of full instability or with just one side of the pair disappearing and throw the market into chaos. In case one side of the pair goes astray, central banks are there to supply it and keep the market running. On second thought, this will not always be the case for all banks. And even if they do, the banks only obligation is to simply provide a safe exit point for traders, and not completely alter the market with short term results.

Central banks are not capable of completely shifting the direction of the market, making interventions the only way for them to influence the trends. Acceleration in volatility tends to have a relative effect to momentum funds, which further fuels its flight. Central banks will then pursue the speed, but not the direction, of the trends. For example, a bank will purchase in small amounts at varied times to control the down turn. So as to take advantage of the intervention, traders discharge their funds by the end of the intervention and buy it back later.