Monetary Matters with Jack Farley Sep 19, 2026 · recorded Sep 9, 2026 1h 8m 44m saved
With David Busch, Chief Investment Officer of Trajan Wealth
Insurance companies and public pension plans were the buyers who took the 30-year Treasury off the government's hands. David Busch says they have put somewhere between 7% and 15% of their assets into private credit instead, which pays a floating rate and therefore carries almost no interest-rate sensitivity.
The usual explanation for a long bond near 5% is the deficit. Busch's explanation is that the buyer left, and that nothing has replaced it.
"The natural buyer of the 30-year is insurance companies, public pension plans, sovereign wealth funds and so on."
Busch spent 18 years as a fixed income portfolio manager before taking charge of investments at Trajan Wealth, a family office with offices in 16 states, and he is one of the few people who has been sent a private credit fund's loan tape and read it.
The full interview is covered here so you can skip it. 68 minutes of audio, 24 minutes of reading.
Here are the 15 takeaways that matter.
Key Takeaways
The natural buyers of the 30-year are insurers, pension plans and sovereign wealth funds, and they have moved part of the portfolio into private credit
He has heard allocations run from 7% of an insurer's assets to 12% or 15%
Private credit pays more because it carries more credit risk, and most funds will not show an investor the schedule of loans behind it
The Treasury's bigger buybacks are a signal rather than support, at $2 billion against roughly $1.2 trillion of daily trading
Buying old bonds back at 60 to 70 cents and reissuing at par cuts the headline debt number without cutting the interest bill
Treasuries work as a portfolio offset again, and his own range is three to five years, not 20 or 30
Tariffs and the Middle East conflict are what is driving inflation, and he thinks retailers would keep prices up even if both ended
Higher borrowing costs have not slowed the AI buildout, which he describes as "pedal down"
The selloff in software stocks is overdone, because he does not expect most Americans to ask a chatbot to do their taxes
Entry-level jobs are what AI takes first, not whole companies
Power and rare earth minerals are the binding constraint on data centers, with China controlling 70% to 80% of the minerals
He has largely kept clients out of private credit, and describes his job as playing defense as much as offense
1. Why Rates Are Still High
Farley opened with the move itself: the 10-year yield up about 60 basis points over six months, the 30-year up a lot more, and a question about whether any of it matters. Busch gave three causes and put supply first.
Three things are pushing yields up, and the debt stock is the first
Really, what's causing rates to rise is a combination of factors. One, we have 40 trillion dollars in outstanding US Treasury debt, and that has grown over the last 15 20 years, but more recently, it's ramped up.
David Busch
The second is inflation, which he traced to two events rather than to the economy: the conflict with Iran and the oil and gas prices that followed it, and the tariffs, most recently with Canada.
Tariffs raise the price of imported goods first
So tariffs are initially inflationary because they increase the price of goods imported from these different countries and energy obviously flows through the whole economy
David Busch
He acknowledged that the Federal Reserve targets core PCE, which strips out food and energy, and said consumers feel it anyway at the grocery store and the gas pump. The third cause is the wave of investment-grade corporate issuance raising money for AI data centers, which competes for the same money that would otherwise buy government bonds.
Corporate bonds crowd out Treasuries
But it acts as kind of a crowding out effect meaning that investors now have a choice to buy Treasuries
David Busch
2. Rates Inside Every Valuation
Asked at what level yields become a problem for stocks, Busch started with the arithmetic that sits under every equity valuation model.
The discount rate is in every model
Rates are embedded in almost every valuation calculation that we use.
David Busch
Higher risk-free yields make bonds a genuine alternative to shares, which compresses the extra return investors demand for owning equities. They also raise the cost of financing a project and the cost of rolling over debt.
Multiples get harder to justify
As a result, PE multiples become harder to justify as corporate borrowing costs rise and that capex hurdle rate rises.
David Busch
The companies most exposed, he said, are the ones carrying the most debt. Farley pushed back on the textbook. The discounted cash flow argument is true in theory, he said, and almost nobody trades on it.
Two investors actually discount cash flows
I think there are just about two investors in the world who actually do that in practice.
Jack Farley
The two he named were Aswath Damodaran, the New York University valuation professor, and Warren Buffett. Yields and share prices have both risen since March, which is not what the model predicts. Busch's answer was earnings: profits at the hyperscalers and at the companies building AI infrastructure have kept pace, so the market has been able to absorb higher rates. He expects the focus to shift from how much is being spent to whether the spending pays, saying the market will turn from the size of the capital spending to "the monetization of that capex". On the policy path he was blunt: rates are "here to stay higher for longer", and nothing has given the Federal Reserve a reason to start cutting, with inflation sticky and the most recent jobs data showing an expanding labor market.
3. Silicon Valley Isn't Slowing
Farley put his own view on the table. Technology executives who believe AI is the future are not going to stop building because borrowing costs went from 6% to 6.7%, and he doubted they would stop at 8% or 9% either.
He sees no change in the commentary
But I'm not seeing that reaction function from the C-suite in Silicon Valley.
Jack Farley
Busch agreed, and said nothing in recent large-cap technology earnings suggested a slowdown.
The reports read as full speed
In fact, it seems to be pedal down.
David Busch
He placed the buildout in what he called "a repeating pattern across technological booms", running from railroads to electricity to personal computers to the internet. The infrastructure gets built, a set of companies profits from building it, and then comes what he calls the third order, which is who adopts the technology quickly and captures the efficiency. That third group is what he says he is watching for.
4. Transitory or Embedded
Farley asked whether the inflation pressure is temporary or structural. Busch took both sides, and he hedged the answer explicitly.
The case for temporary rests on two events ending
I think a lot of it can be deemed transitory.
David Busch
A ceasefire in the Middle East that reopened shipping lanes would bring energy prices down, and that flows into consumer and producer costs. Setting the trade wars and tariffs aside would work the same way. His objection to his own argument is the behavior of retailers, who would be sitting on a lower cost of goods and a decision about what to do with it.
He does not expect prices to come back down
And my hunch is, and this is just a hunch, is that most retailers wouldn't drop prices.
David Busch
They would keep the price and take the margin, he said, which leaves the higher price level embedded in the economy. What is then needed is wage growth to catch up with the cost of goods and services that has already risen.
5. Who Buys the 30-Year
This is the section the episode is named for. Farley asked who actually defends the 10-year and the 30-year in size, ruling out hedge funds and speculators, and noted that the institutions that loved the 10-year at 1.5% seem uninterested at 4.7% or 4.8%.
The buyer list for the 30-year is short
The natural buyer of the 30-year is insurance companies, public pension plans, sovereign wealth funds and so on. So those are sort of the natural buyers of the 30-year. Beyond that, there's there's not a lot of natural buyers out there.
David Busch
The same is largely true of the 20-year. The 10-year is different, he said, because mutual funds and money managers buy there too. He then gave the level.
Where the 30-year was trading
And so the 30-year, it did cross the 5.3% back in August. We're currently at about a 529 yield on the 30-year.
David Busch
Higher yields should make the 30-year more attractive to its natural buyer. What has changed is that the same pool of money now has other places to go: private credit funds and investment-grade corporate issuance. Busch's conclusion was uncomfortable and he said so, prefacing it with "I hate to frame it this way": what brings the money back may be a shock rather than a price. His words were that "there may have to be a catalyst that forces investors to seek the shelter of a US Treasury versus an IG corporate or a private credit type facility."
Against that, he pointed out that the United States is still the largest economy and the Treasury curve is still the benchmark curve for the world, so buyers exist. Farley's summary of the position was shorter: "Now it's at five. And where are they? What are their phone numbers? Let's give them a call."
6. Insurers Cut Their Duration
An insurer runs its balance sheet the way a bank does, matching assets against liabilities. The liabilities are future annuity and life insurance payouts; the assets are the premiums, invested. Historically that meant investment-grade corporates, Treasuries and government agency paper, with a small allocation to high yield.
Private credit changed the mix, because it pays more and because it is sold as senior secured and first lien. Busch said some of those funds are lending against collateral he would be careful with, naming litigation finance and loans backed by a software company's intellectual property.
A higher yield is a higher risk, every time
So, so anytime, and this is true for any segment of the market, anytime you're getting a yield that's higher, you're there's embedded risk within that higher yield. And so it's not a risk-free tradeoff.
David Busch
Farley built a model to make the point. Take an insurer selling life policies to people averaging 53 years old, paying out shortly before 80. That is a liability duration of roughly 23 years, which used to be matched with 20- and 30-year Treasuries.
The asset side went to zero duration
Now, they're plowing into private credit which has a duration of zero.
Jack Farley
Farley also relayed a figure from Bank of America: 10-year rolling annualized returns on Treasuries of 15 years and longer are "the lowest ever in American history", worse than 1959. That is the show's research, not the guest's claim.
Busch's answer was that the bulk of the portfolio is still duration matched, and a slice is not.
The allocation he has seen runs to 15%
I've heard it range from 7% of the assets in an insurance company or private credit all the way out to closer to 12 to 15%.
David Busch
That slice raises profitability, which lets the insurer write cheaper premiums or offer a higher cap rate on a fixed index annuity, which in turn attracts more customers. He framed the four risks in a bond portfolio as an equalizer with four sliders.
The four dials on a bond portfolio
The bond nerds out there will say, well, there's more than this, but essentially, it's liquidity, it's credit, it's duration, and it's convexity risk.
David Busch
Duration is the change in a bond's price for a change in interest rates; convexity is the change in the duration itself. Farley walked the audience through the practical version: a 30-year bond loses far more on a given rise in yields than a two-year does. Busch added the part that makes both safe if held to maturity.
Price risk is not principal risk
So a 30-year bond has a greater change in market value given a change in interest rates.
David Busch
Prepayment makes it messier. A callable bond or a mortgage-backed security can change duration depending on which way rates move.
A mortgage bond's duration moves with rates
So a mortgage back security could have a duration of three years but it could also have a duration of 10 years depending on which direction interest rates move.
David Busch
The trade insurers made, in his description, is that they "turned down the duration risk, the convexity risk, and turned up liquidity and credit risk."
7. Bonds as Ballast Again
Farley raised the standard argument for owning bonds, which is that they rise when shares fall, and the years when both fell together. Busch said the correlation between stocks and bonds "has historically ranged from 0 to 0.5", so periods of moving together are normal rather than a breakdown. The clearest recent case was the Fed's fastest hiking cycle, when bonds sold off across the curve and equities fell at the same time.
What has changed is the starting yield. Busch said he thinks the diversification works again because the income is there to cushion the price move, and because Treasuries have a credit quality nothing else matches.
Government paper is what wins a credit shock
So in that scenario, Treasuries would likely outperform anything that has a credit component associated with it.
David Busch
Investment-grade corporates, high yield and private credit would all take a drawdown if credit spreads widened. His own preference is three to five years, and he will stretch to seven. He will not go out to 20 or 30. For a retail client, he noted, the benchmark to think about is the Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index, whose duration is roughly six years. The extra benefit right now is a curve that slopes upward again, which lets an investor buy a five-year, hold it as it becomes a three-year, sell it and reinvest, provided the curve stays where it is.
8. Everyone Is Bearish Bonds
Farley made the sentiment case with a warning attached: being contrarian for its own sake is not an argument, and the crowd is often right. Then he gave his evidence. Of the largest ETF for long-dated Treasuries he said "the AUM is $10.2 billion", against a figure he remembered as twice that, and his read of the mood was that "it does feel like everyone is bearish Treasuries".
Busch agreed, and named what is driving it: the debt outstanding, and the fact that the government is now issuing at much higher yields, so "our borrowing rates are significantly higher" than they were.
9. The Buyback Signal
The Treasury had announced larger buybacks of older long-dated bonds to support liquidity in them, and the first of the bigger operations had run that day.
The size went up, and the first one was larger still
So the initial announcement was increasing the buybacks from two billion to four billion. I believe today which is September 9th that they actually bought back six billion.
David Busch
Busch's point is that the market is not reading this as a bid for bonds. It is reading it as a statement about who is worried.
The market is trading the message, not the money
But what's happening there is the bond vigilantes of the world are using that as a signal that the US Treasury Secretary himself is concerned about, rising yields and the demand for those longerdated Treasuries.
David Busch
The scale is the reason it cannot be anything else.
The whole program is rounding error against daily volume
The daily trade volume in Treasuries is roughly 1.2 trillion plus.
David Busch
Farley noted that long-dated yields rose that day anyway, and said he would no more fight the Treasury than fight the Fed. Busch agreed, crediting the phrase "don't fight the Fed" to Marty Zweig, and said he had heard the buyback-and-bill-issuance combination compared to Operation Twist. The mechanics look similar to him; the volume does not.
He then explained which bonds are illiquid and why. Roughly 70% of daily Treasury trading is in the most recently issued bonds, the on-the-runs, and another 15% or so in what traders call "the olds and double olds", the first and second issues before that.
Almost all the trading sits in the newest bonds
And so when you think about that dynamic, it could be 80 to 85% of daily trade volume or plus is in on the runs and then first and second off the runs.
David Busch
Which leaves the older bonds stranded
So some of these Treasuries that were issued, 10 years ago or five years ago, there may not be a natural buyer because they're lower coupon and they're sort of sitting there.
David Busch
Scott Bessent's offer to buy those back is what supports them. Busch said the Treasury Secretary has also floated using the Treasury General Account, the government's checking account at the Fed, to fund some of the buying.
10. Buying Back Below Par
Farley worked through the arithmetic out loud, using a 20-year bond issued five years ago that now trades at $77, and asked how buying it back reduces anything if the Treasury has to issue at $100 to pay for it. The answer is that the discount is the point: $100 of new issuance retires roughly $130 of old face value.
Busch's own framing was that the Treasury Secretary has very few tools. He cannot change spending, raise taxes or cut outlays, which leaves issuance and buybacks. The TGA holds between $800 billion and $1 trillion, and he does not expect all of it to be used. Buying at 60 to 70 cents and reissuing at par shifts the maturity profile and shaves the face value outstanding.
The interest bill does not move
Total interest payment, total interest outlays won't change because of this dynamic, but it can help reduce the total notional outstanding incrementally.
David Busch
It may even rise slightly, depending on the yields involved. So the benefit is presentational, and Busch said so twice.
What is being managed is the headline
It's all headline risk is what I'm saying.
David Busch
Farley took it the obvious step further, saying he could imagine the political use of a smaller debt number.
A debt reduction is a quotable number
I could see President Trump being quite pleased with a headline reduction of the US debt.
Jack Farley
Busch's view of the underlying problem is that neither party can run on fixing it.
Nobody wins an election promising austerity
And the other thing I'll say is, when we think about government debt outstanding and the $40 trillion number, really there's no candidate that can win an election on austerity.
David Busch
That leaves two options, on his account: grow out of the debt, or manage the stock of it, which is the only lever the Treasury Secretary holds.
11. Gold, Bitcoin, the Dollar
Farley set out the gold argument that follows from a deficit nobody will cut, then asked why the same logic would not make equities a hedge, since shares are priced in the currency being printed. Busch went at the premise instead.
Gold and oil contracts are both priced in dollars, and the dollar is still the reserve currency. The usual chain of reasoning runs from higher rates to a vulnerable economy to buying gold, and it misses what a rate rise does to the money supply.
Tightening makes each dollar worth more
Where that logic breaks down is that when the Fed raises rates, they're taking dollars out of the system. And so the buying power of a dollar actually improves
David Busch
That is why gold sometimes falls alongside equities when the Fed tightens. He described gold as an asset class with no cash flows, so there is no valuation model to point at, only supply and demand and its history as an inflation hedge and a store of safety. He said he has heard the same argued for Bitcoin, and had the same question about both.
The case needs a trigger nobody has named
But my question is what's going to be the catalyst that causes the dollar to sell off dramatically
David Busch
Sovereign wealth funds selling Treasuries would do it, or investors moving into other currencies and markets. For now, he said, the dollar is strong despite higher rates and worries about the economy.
12. The Software Selloff
Busch's equity view starts with the same condition as his market view: as long as earnings support valuations, the trend holds. The sectors he flagged as vulnerable to rates are the levered ones — financials, insurers, banks and real estate investment trusts. The sector he finds most interesting is the one that sold off when AI adoption began.
His example is Intuit, the tax software company. He pointed out that he has access to Claude, ChatGPT and Grok, and is not going to build his own tax software with any of them.
He does not see households doing their own taxes with a chatbot
I just don't see a scenario where the majority of Americans are asking like a Claude or a ChatGPT or whatever to do their taxes for them.
David Busch
Farley interjected that Busch's own financial sophistication is higher than that of 99% of the population, which is the point: if he would not do it, most people will not. Estate planning is the same case, Busch said, because each state's laws differ and a rough draft from a model is not the same as a document that complies with them. He expects those software companies to adopt AI themselves, improve margins, and employ fewer people doing it. On the selloff, his conclusion was that "a lot of those sectors are overdone" and that the sector is "likely oversold".
Farley added the valuation.
Software is at its cheapest in a decade
But I think in particular, like if people listening to this, they think that AI is totally fake and it's a bubble, then I think software stocks are going to do really well because they're trading at their cheapest valuations in 10 years.
Jack Farley
He drew a distinction inside the sector. ServiceNow and the cybersecurity names sold off, then told the market they were AI beneficiaries and recovered, with some cybersecurity stocks at all-time highs. Intuit has not made that pitch, and has not rebounded as far.
Farley asked whether the financial data terminals are at risk, naming Capital IQ, Refinitiv, FactSet, Bloomberg and Tradeweb. Busch said the data is only half of what a terminal sells.
He would not give up the terminal
I don't know if I could live without my Bloomberg.
David Busch
The other half is the network. The messaging and email functions get him to a specific trader, economist or strategist in seconds, and a team of engineers building an in-house version would have neither those connections nor the data itself, because "that data license can be costly."
13. Where AI Actually Bites
Asked which industries could be severely disrupted, Busch named one.
Software is the sector at risk
Software would be the biggest one and that's why I think we saw a lot of the selloff.
David Busch
Everywhere else he expects adoption rather than destruction: banks and insurers running more efficient workflows, with fewer staff and higher profitability, and AI-assisted robotic surgery for knee replacements and other procedures. His real concern is the entry-level job. In investment banking, an analyst is hired to write pitch books through version after version, and the documents can now be fed to a model that does a reasonable job of it.
The first rung is what disappears
So, do we need those entry-level analysts that are coming in?
David Busch
Farley read the answer back to him: the concern is the labor share, not company earnings. Busch agreed, and said the question of how graduates get their first step into corporate work is what has to be answered over the next five to ten years. His own advice, if he were in college now, would be to ask whether the degree provides a skill set that works in an AI environment.
14. Powering the Buildout
Asked for an overweight or underweight on the direct beneficiaries, Busch said the buildout pulls in materials, industrials, utilities and energy suppliers at once. The constraint is electricity.
Power is the binding constraint
And one of the biggest risks there is the energy that's going to be required to power these data centers.
David Busch
States and cities are already pushing back on data centers because of the power and cooling they need. His view on supply is that no single source covers it.
It takes everything, including wind and solar
I'm a firm believer that it's going to take a portfolio of energy source approach and that can include kind of the traditional natural resources like coal, natural gas, oil, but also the green technology
David Busch
The gap in the US energy mix is nuclear
The one area that has been underdeveloped in the US economy is nuclear power.
David Busch
He is following the companies building small modular reactors for exactly this use. The second constraint is materials. China controls 70% to 80% of the world's rare earth minerals, he said, and the United States has the oil, through production and relationships in the Middle East and Venezuela, which leaves the two countries in a standoff where each has what the other needs.
The answer is negotiation plus new supply
And so we're going to have to go to the negotiation table, but potentially also find other sources of those rare earth minerals and that can be in the form of new mines that are open.
David Busch
He read the administration's interest in Greenland the same way.
Greenland was about the minerals
It's also likely why President Trump was talking about Greenland so heavily when he was first elected is because of the rare earth minerals there.
David Busch
The other source is recycling: pulling the components out of old PCs and server stacks and refining them again.
15. Defense on Private Credit
Farley asked for the practitioner's view rather than the commentator's, since Busch is the one taking the calls from private credit funds who want his clients. The answer started with where the skepticism comes from.
Eighteen years in bonds is where the caution starts
I'm naturally skeptical and that comes from being a bond portfolio manager which I spent 18 years of my career being a fixed income portfolio manager.
David Busch
The marketing promises "equity-like returns" while describing the risk as a bond's, which he treats as a contradiction: the extra return is paid for with extra risk somewhere. Many of these products are interval funds, which take money whenever an investor offers it and limit the exit.
Getting out is capped at 5% a quarter
And most of them offer like 5% of NAV for redemption every single quarter.
David Busch
If redemptions rise, an investor who asks for money back gets a pro rata share of what the fund is willing to redeem. The diligence question he puts to every fund is whether he can see the loan tape, meaning the schedule of loans and their performance.
Most of the time the answer is no
In a lot of instances, you cannot get a loan tape.
David Busch
A couple of the large funds did send him one, which he said he was grateful for. In public markets the equivalent arrives automatically: non-agency commercial and residential mortgage-backed securities come with a remittance statement showing the underlying loans, and banks report in aggregate to their regulators and the Fed. Private credit is where that visibility stops.
Then he described the pattern he watches for, which is about who is being sold to and when.
Retail gets the product when the institutions want out
They hand off to the institutional buyers and then ultimately the institutional buyers are looking for liquidity. They're looking for an outlet and that's typically when the stuff gets pitched to retail investors.
David Busch
Which makes his job defensive
So my role is just as much playing defense on the behalf of our clients as it is on offense.
David Busch
Trajan Wealth has "largely avoided private credit in general". It holds a couple of credit-related products where the firm's investment committee signed off after diligence on both the manager and the strategy, and where it can see the health of the underlying loans. Farley asked whether the disclosure in publicly traded business development companies such as Ares Capital is enough; Busch's test is simpler than a standard, and he stated it as a question: "is the data publicly available if not how do I get my hands on it."
Bonus Insights
A loan tape, defined. Farley stopped the conversation to ask what the term means.
A loan tape is just a schedule of the loans
David Busch
It typically shows 30, 60 and 90 days delinquent, defaults, and real estate owned, meaning collateral the lender has seized and is working through. Borrower names are usually withheld.
On Blackstone and the two shapes of private credit. Busch separated business development companies from private credit funds run by the same manager, using Blackstone as the example: the BDC is one vehicle, and the funds beside it each carry their own investment theme and collateral.
Trajan Wealth, in his description, is a family office offering wealth management, estate planning and tax planning under one roof, with offices in what he believes is 16 states, and clients ranging from the mass affluent to the ultra high net worth. The firm's site is trajanwealth.com.
On large language models and liability. Farley pointed out that a model tells you at the bottom of the screen that it can make mistakes, while buying a software package means somebody rebates you, fixes it, or in theory can be sued.
On being contrarian. Farley's own caveat on the sentiment trade, before he made it:
You don't always want to be contrarian just for the sake of being contrarian.
Jack Farley
On his own use of AI. Busch has used these tools since 2023 to streamline personal and work processes, and describes them as a tool in the toolkit rather than a replacement, on the view that people will keep wanting a human expert to sign off on the plan.
An anecdote from a high school football game. Busch said a friend he ran into last week was working on automating the back-office processes of service companies while the crews are out doing the work, which he offered as evidence of how broadly adoption is happening.
Busch's bottom line is that the long end of the Treasury market lost its natural buyer to a product that pays more and discloses less, and that the answer for a portfolio is not to chase the yield into private credit but to own three-to-five-year government bonds at a price that finally pays for waiting.
Products, Companies & Tools Mentioned
Trajan Wealth (Busch's firm, a family office with offices in 16 states offering wealth management, estate planning and tax planning under one roof)
iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF (The biggest ETF for long-dated Treasuries; Farley cited its size, which he gave as "$10.2 billion", as evidence that everyone is bearish Treasuries)
Intuit (His example of a software company sold off on AI fears he thinks are overdone, because he does not expect households to build their own tax software)
Claude, ChatGPT and Grok (The tools he has access to and uses, and the ones he says will not be asked to do most Americans' taxes or estate plans)
ServiceNow (Farley's example of a software company that sold off, told the market it was an AI beneficiary through agents, and rebounded, unlike Intuit)
Bloomberg (He said he does not know if he could live without the terminal; the data is half the value, the instant messaging that reaches a trader or economist in seconds is the other half)
S&P Global's Capital IQ, FactSet, LSEG's Refinitiv and Tradeweb (The financial data platforms Farley asked about; Busch's answer is that a rival would still have to pay for the data license)
Blackstone (His example of a manager that runs both a business development company and separate private credit funds, each with its own theme and collateral)
Ares Capital (The largest publicly traded BDC, raised by Farley as the case where loans, yields and amounts outstanding are disclosed)
Bank of America (Source of the figure Farley read out: 10-year rolling annualized returns on Treasuries of 15 years and longer are the lowest in American history)
Bloomberg US Aggregate Bond Index (The benchmark he says a retail bond investor sits against, with a duration of roughly six years)
Books & Resources Mentioned
The Treasury's September buyback increase (The announcement behind the whole buyback discussion: liquidity support operations in longer-dated coupons raised from $2 billion to at least $4 billion per operation from 9 September)
Treasury buyback announcements and results (Where the operations Busch described, including the size actually bought back, are published)
Operation Twist (The 1960s policy of buying long-dated bonds and funding it at the short end, which Busch says he has heard the buyback program compared to)
Trajan Wealth's leadership page (The show's own link for Busch's background, in the episode notes)
Listen to the full episode
🔴 YouTube | 🟣 Apple Podcasts
Watch the full episode:
More David Busch interviews and podcast appearances
If this was worth your time, send it to someone who has to have a view on this.
Get the latest market chatter as it happens: