Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Interest rate parity

Interest rate parity (IRP) is a core principle in and that establishes a no-arbitrage relationship between s in two countries and the and forward rates of their currencies. It asserts that the difference in nominal s between two currencies should be offset by the corresponding difference between the forward and rates, preventing risk-free profits from interest rate differentials. This condition holds under assumptions of perfect capital mobility, no transaction costs, and rational investor behavior, ensuring in global financial markets. IRP manifests in two primary forms: covered interest rate parity (CIP) and uncovered interest rate parity (UIP). CIP, which eliminates risk through forward contracts, is expressed by the formula $1 + i_d = (1 + i_f) \frac{F}{S}, where i_d is the domestic , i_f is the foreign , F is the forward , and S is the spot ; this implies that the differential equals the forward premium or discount. UIP, lacking hedging, posits that the differential equals the expected depreciation or appreciation of the domestic currency, given by $1 + i_d = (1 + i_f) \frac{E^e_{t+1}}{S}, where E^e_{t+1} is the expected future spot rate; however, UIP often fails empirically due to unobservable expectations and premia. The concept, first formalized by in 1923, underpins theories of exchange rate determination and has been empirically validated for CIP in efficient markets since the 1960s, with deviations typically attributed to transaction costs, credit risks, or crises such as the 2007–2009 global financial meltdown, where CIP spreads exceeded 200 basis points. IRP is crucial for forex trading, central bank policies, and assessing capital flows, as violations can signal market inefficiencies or barriers to . In fixed exchange rate regimes, IRP implies equal interest rates across countries to maintain parity.

Theoretical Foundations

Assumptions

Interest rate parity theory posits that equilibrium in international financial markets arises under idealized conditions that eliminate barriers to and ensure efficient pricing of differentials across currencies. These assumptions frame the model as a for understanding cross-border flows in frictionless environments, where deviations from parity would be swiftly corrected by market participants. Central to this framework is the notion that markets operate without frictions that could distort returns on comparable investments denominated in different currencies. The foundational assumptions trace their roots to early 20th-century models, particularly those developed amid the exchange rate instability following and the emergence of forward markets. played a pivotal role in formalizing these ideas in his 1923 A Tract on Monetary Reform, where he analyzed interest differentials and forward premiums as mechanisms to hedge exchange risks, emphasizing the potential for despite practical limitations like credit constraints. Subsequent theoretical developments built on this work, refining the conditions under which parity holds as a no-arbitrage principle. A core assumption is perfect capital , which stipulates that investors can freely transfer funds across borders without regulatory restrictions, taxes on capital movements, or other barriers that impede international investment. This condition ensures that domestic and foreign assets are equally accessible, allowing capital to flow instantaneously to the highest risk-adjusted return, thereby enforcing . Without such mobility, interest rate differentials could persist due to segmented markets, as observed in periods of capital controls. Another essential prerequisite is the absence of transaction costs, including brokerage fees, bid-ask spreads in and money markets, and any taxes that might erode potential profits. In this idealized setting, the marginal cost of executing cross-border transactions is zero, enabling even small deviations from to be exploited profitably and restoring . Empirical studies have highlighted how even modest costs, such as those quantified by Frenkel and Levich (1975), can create a "neutral band" around where is uneconomical. For uncovered interest rate parity specifically, the theory assumes risk neutrality among investors, meaning they do not demand a to compensate for in future exchange rates and treat expected returns across as equivalent. This implies that currency risk is diversifiable or irrelevant in aggregate, allowing interest differentials to directly reflect expected or appreciation. Keynes himself noted the role of non-exchange risks, such as and political factors, in challenging this neutrality during the . Rational expectations further underpin the model, positing that market participants form unbiased and efficient forecasts of future exchange rates based on all available information, without systematic errors that could lead to persistent deviations. This assumption aligns with the efficient markets hypothesis and is crucial for linking current interest rates to anticipated movements in uncovered . Violations, such as anchoring biases, have been explored in modern analyses but are abstracted away in the core theory. Finally, the framework presumes the immediate availability of covered interest arbitrage opportunities, whereby any misalignment between spot rates, forward rates, and interest differentials can be exploited through riskless strategies until parity is restored. This self-correcting mechanism relies on sufficient and , ensuring that arbitragers—assumed to act without delay—eliminate profitable discrepancies. In practice, as Keynes observed, the finite supply of arbitrage capital can limit this process, though the theoretical model treats it as instantaneous.

General Principle

Interest rate parity embodies the fundamental in , positing that the difference in interest rates between two countries must be offset by the expected change in their to preclude riskless profits from cross-border investments. This equilibrium ensures that investors cannot exploit discrepancies between domestic and foreign returns without bearing exchange rate risk, thereby linking monetary policies across borders through currency markets. In this framework, the spot represents the current market price of one in terms of another, while the forward allows for hedging against future fluctuations by locking in a future exchange at a predetermined rate. By using forward contracts to eliminate exchange risk, investors can compare hedged returns across , ensuring that the forward premium or discount precisely reflects differentials to maintain . From the domestic perspective, the home (denoted as i_d) applies to investments in the home , whereas the foreign (i_f) pertains to foreign -denominated assets, with exchange rates quoted as the domestic price of foreign (spot rate S and forward rate F). The equilibrium condition arises in the absence of opportunities: if the foreign exceeds the domestic rate, investors might borrow in the low-interest domestic , convert to foreign at the spot rate, invest abroad, and hedge the proceeds via a to repatriate funds. However, for no riskless profit to emerge, any potential gain from the interest differential must be exactly counterbalanced by the forward on the foreign relative to the spot rate, reflecting anticipated movements. Interest rate parity originates as an extension of domestic interest rate theories, particularly the , which decomposes nominal rates into real rates plus expected inflation; internationally, this evolves into the international Fisher effect, where nominal interest differentials across countries equal expected changes in exchange rates due to inflation disparities. This connection underscores parity's role in integrating global capital markets, with early formalization traced to Keynes's analysis of forward exchanges in the .

Covered Interest Rate Parity

Formula and Interpretation

Covered interest rate parity (CIRP) is derived from the no-arbitrage principle, which equates the returns from investing in domestic assets to the returns from investing in foreign assets while hedging exchange rate risk using a forward contract. Consider an investor with one unit of domestic currency. Investing domestically yields $1 + i_d, where i_d is the domestic interest rate over the period. Alternatively, converting to foreign currency at the spot rate S (defined as units of domestic currency per unit of foreign currency, e.g., USD per EUR) yields $1/S units of foreign currency, which, when invested at the foreign interest rate i_f, grows to (1 + i_f)/S. Hedging by selling this amount forward at rate F (domestic per foreign) returns (1 + i_f) F / S in domestic currency. Setting these returns equal to prevent arbitrage gives: $1 + i_d = \frac{F (1 + i_f)}{S} Rearranging yields the CIRP formula: F = S \frac{1 + i_d}{1 + i_f} This holds for the time horizon matching the interest rates and forward contract, such as one-year rates for a one-year forward. The formula implies that the forward premium or on the foreign equals the differential between the domestic and foreign currencies. Specifically, the forward premium is (F - S)/S = (i_d - i_f)/(1 + i_f), approximating i_d - i_f for small s. If i_d > i_f, then F > S, indicating that the forward shows of the domestic relative to , as more domestic units are needed to buy one foreign unit in the future. This relationship ensures equilibrium in markets by linking interest differentials directly to expected hedged movements. For illustration, suppose the spot rate S = 1.35 USD per GBP, with one-year domestic (USD) rate i_d = 1.1\% and foreign (GBP) rate i_f = 3.25\%. The one-year is F = 1.35 \times (1 + 0.011)/(1 + 0.0325) \approx 1.32 USD per GBP. Here, i_f > i_d, so F < S, reflecting appreciation of the domestic USD in the forward market. Conversely, if rates reverse with i_d = 3.25\% and i_f = 1.1\%, then F \approx 1.38 > S, showing domestic .

Arbitrage Mechanism

Covered interest arbitrage exploits deviations from the covered parity condition, ensuring that the forward aligns with the differential between two . When the actual forward rate F exceeds the no-arbitrage forward rate implied by parity, F_{\text{par}} = S \frac{1 + i_d}{1 + i_f} (where S is the spot in domestic per unit of foreign , i_d is the domestic , and i_f is the foreign ), arbitrageurs can risk-free by borrowing in the domestic , converting to foreign at the spot rate, investing in the foreign market, and simultaneously entering a to sell the foreign proceeds back to domestic . This yields a covered return on the foreign investment that exceeds the domestic borrowing cost, prompting capital flows that adjust rates until is restored. The covered interest arbitrage (CIA) process unfolds in coordinated steps to lock in the profit without exchange rate risk. First, an arbitrageur borrows an amount D in domestic currency at rate i_d for the period matching the forward contract, incurring a repayment obligation of D (1 + i_d). Second, the borrowed D is exchanged at the spot rate S to obtain D / S units of foreign currency. Third, this foreign amount is invested at rate i_f, maturing to (D / S) (1 + i_f) foreign units. Fourth, a forward contract is entered to sell these foreign proceeds at rate F, yielding F \cdot (D / S) (1 + i_f) in domestic currency upon settlement. The net profit arises if F \cdot (D / S) (1 + i_f) > D (1 + i_d), equivalent to F > S \frac{1 + i_d}{1 + i_f}; borrowing costs are fully accounted for in the domestic repayment, and the forward settlement ensures the foreign investment return is hedged against spot fluctuations at maturity. The symmetric strategy applies if F < F_{\text{par}}, involving borrowing foreign currency, converting to domestic at spot, investing domestically, and buying foreign currency forward to repay the loan. In efficient markets, arbitrageurs rapidly eliminate deviations from through these trades, leading to near-instantaneous of the in liquid currency pairs. Large-scale execution of CIA increases demand for the underpriced forward contracts and spot conversions, which bid up spot rates, depress forward rates, or adjust rates via pressures until the arbitrage opportunity vanishes. Historical evidence confirms this dynamic: in the , significant CIP deviations emerged in due to strict controls that restricted borrowing and forward hedging, creating persistent differentials; these anomalies largely resolved following financial in the late , as flows resumed and integrated markets more closely. Banks and hedge funds serve as the primary actors in covered interest arbitrage, leveraging their access to markets, low costs, and capacity for high-volume trades to exploit even small deviations. These institutions execute CIA at , often using cross-currency swaps as a bundled alternative to separate , , and forward transactions, thereby reinforcing market efficiency in major currencies.

Uncovered Interest Rate Parity

Formula and Expectations Hypothesis

Uncovered interest rate parity (UIRP) posits that the expected return on investments in two currencies should be equal when unhedged against exchange rate fluctuations, leading to the core formula: E[S_{t+1}] = S_t \cdot \frac{1 + i_d}{1 + i_f} where S_t denotes the current spot expressed as units of domestic per unit of foreign , E[S_{t+1}] is the expected spot rate at time t+1, i_d is the domestic risk-free , and i_f is the foreign risk-free , both over the investment period. This ensures that the unhedged return from investing domestically matches the expected return from converting to foreign currency, earning the foreign rate, and converting back, thereby eliminating opportunities under the parity condition. The expectations underlying UIRP assumes that investors are risk-neutral, implying no currency is required for bearing uncertainty, such that expected or appreciation fully offsets differentials. In this framework, UIRP links directly to covered interest rate parity by suggesting that the forward serves as an unbiased predictor of the future spot rate, F_t \approx E[S_{t+1}], as deviations would otherwise allow riskless profits when combined with hedging. However, empirical deviations from this prediction often arise because investors demand a to compensate for volatility and other uncertainties, introducing a wedge between expected and realized returns. For multi-period horizons, UIRP extends through compounding, generalizing to: E[S_{t+n}] = S_t \cdot \prod_{k=0}^{n-1} \frac{1 + i_{d,t+k}}{1 + i_{f,t+k}} where the product accounts for sequential interest accruals and expected exchange rate changes over n periods, maintaining equality of expected cumulative returns across currencies. This formulation highlights how persistent interest differentials over time influence long-term exchange rate expectations under the parity assumption.

Logarithmic Approximation

The logarithmic approximation of uncovered interest rate parity simplifies the exact condition for use in continuous-time models and empirical analysis, particularly when interest rates and expected exchange rate changes are modest in magnitude. This approximation equates the interest rate differential between two countries to the expected rate of depreciation of the domestic currency, expressed in logarithmic terms. The derivation begins with the exact uncovered interest rate parity (UIRP) relation, which equates expected returns across currencies:
$1 + i_{d,t} = (1 + i_{f,t}) \cdot \mathbb{E}_t \left[ \frac{S_{t+1}}{S_t} \right],
where i_{d,t} and i_{f,t} are the domestic and foreign nominal interest rates over the period, S_t is the spot exchange rate (units of domestic currency per unit of foreign currency), and \mathbb{E}_t[\cdot] denotes the expectation conditional on information at time t. Taking the natural logarithm of both sides yields
\ln(1 + i_{d,t}) = \ln(1 + i_{f,t}) + \ln \left( \mathbb{E}_t \left[ \frac{S_{t+1}}{S_t} \right] \right).
Applying the first-order Taylor expansion \ln(1 + x) \approx x for small x (valid when interest rates are low, as in most developed economies), this simplifies to
i_{d,t} \approx i_{f,t} + \ln \left( \mathbb{E}_t \left[ \frac{S_{t+1}}{S_t} \right] \right),
or equivalently,
i_{d,t} - i_{f,t} \approx \ln \left( \mathbb{E}_t \left[ \frac{S_{t+1}}{S_t} \right] \right) \approx \frac{\mathbb{E}_t[S_{t+1}] - S_t}{S_t}.
The interest differential thus approximates the expected logarithmic (or percentage) depreciation of the domestic currency. This log-linear form, often denoted as \Delta s_{t+1} \approx i_{d,t} - i_{f,t} where s_t = \ln S_t, facilitates tractable solutions in dynamic models.
This finds extensive application in econometric testing of UIRP, where regressions of realized log changes on interest differentials estimate the \beta in \Delta s_{t+1} = \alpha + \beta (i_{d,t} - i_{f,t}) + \epsilon_{t+1}; under UIRP, \alpha = 0 and \beta = 1. It is also central to analysis, where the strategy's approximates the interest differential under the null of UIRP (implying zero after expected ), allowing researchers to quantify anomalies from persistent profitability in low-volatility environments. For small rate differences, such as a 2% domestic-foreign differential, the implies an expected 2% of the domestic , aligning closely with discrete calculations but simplifying multi-period projections. The approximation's accuracy diminishes when interest rates or expected depreciations are large, as higher-order terms in the Taylor expansion become significant; in high-inflation or highly volatile currency settings, the exact discrete UIRP form is preferred to minimize bias in modeling exchange rate dynamics.

Real Interest Rate Parity

Definition and Conditions

Real interest rate parity (RIRP) posits that expected real interest rates should be equal across countries in an integrated global capital market, leading to long-run convergence toward a common world real rate. The real interest rate is defined as the difference between the nominal interest rate and expected inflation, approximately r = i - \pi^e, where i is the nominal rate and \pi^e is expected inflation. More precisely, the ex ante real interest rate is r = \frac{1 + i}{1 + \pi^e} - 1, so RIRP implies equality of real rates: \frac{1 + i_d}{1 + \pi_d^e} = \frac{1 + i_f}{1 + \pi_f^e}, where subscripts d and f denote domestic and foreign variables, respectively. This exact form derives from applying the Fisher equation in both countries under conditions of parity. RIRP holds under relative purchasing power parity (PPP), which assumes that the expected change in the equals the inflation differential between countries absent transportation costs or trade barriers, and uncovered interest rate parity (UIRP), which equates expected returns on uncovered foreign and domestic deposits adjusted for exchange rate expectations. Combining these, the expected change in the nominal from UIRP equals the inflation differential from PPP, yielding real rate equalization if any currency risk premium is zero or stationary. by investors and perfect substitutability of assets further underpin these assumptions, enabling to enforce parity. Under RIRP, international capital flows respond to real return differentials, directing funds toward higher real rates and thereby promoting convergence of real interest rates globally. This mechanism underscores the role of open capital markets in equalizing real returns, with empirical patterns showing increased convergence amid reduced barriers to cross-border over recent decades. From a policy perspective, central banks' regimes influence RIRP by shaping expected , which directly affects real rates; deviations from targets can disrupt parity through altered capital flows and real return alignments.

Relation to Nominal Parity

Real interest rate parity (RIRP) establishes a foundational link to uncovered interest rate parity (UIRP) when combined with relative (PPP). Under RIRP, real interest rates equalize across countries in the absence of barriers to capital mobility and with flexible prices. When relative PPP holds—implying that expected changes in the reflect differentials—RIRP and PPP together imply UIRP, as the inflation offset neutralizes expected exchange rate movements in nominal interest differentials. RIRP also connects to covered interest rate parity (CIRP) through the lens of inflation expectations and forward rate unbiasedness. If CIRP holds without arbitrage opportunities, the covered interest differential equals the forward premium, which, under the expectations hypothesis, approximates expected depreciation. For RIRP to hold in this context, the covered differential must primarily reflect differences in expected inflation rather than risk premia or other frictions, ensuring that real rates converge after adjusting for anticipated price changes. Deviations from RIRP often arise due to structural barriers, such as the presence of non-traded goods, which prevent full equalization of real rates by creating persistent real misalignments. Non-traded sectors, like services and , exhibit price rigidities that hinder , leading to real interest differentials even in integrated markets. Additionally, sticky prices amplify these deviations by delaying adjustments to nominal shocks, causing temporary or prolonged disparities in real returns across borders. In the framework of the trilemma, RIRP integrates with the trade-offs between stability, capital mobility, and monetary independence. Economies pursuing floating s and open capital accounts can maintain independent monetary policies while allowing RIRP to hold, provided PPP approximates reality and real shocks are minimal; this setup enables central banks to target domestic without nominal rate pressures from abroad. In modern extensions, particularly in emerging markets, capital controls significantly influence RIRP by distorting real interest equalization. These controls, often imposed to manage volatile inflows, create wedges in real rates by limiting and elevating premia, leading to persistent deviations from even under flexible regimes. Such frictions underscore RIRP's sensitivity to interventions in less integrated economies.

Empirical Analysis

Evidence for Covered Parity

Covered interest rate parity (CIRP) has demonstrated strong empirical support in modern financial markets, particularly since the shift to floating exchange rates in the post-1970s era. Studies analyzing major currency pairs, such as USD/EUR and USD/JPY, using and rates alongside forward contracts, consistently show deviations from CIRP averaging less than 0.1% (or 10 basis points) in normal conditions prior to the global financial crisis. This adherence is attributed to efficient mechanisms that quickly eliminate pricing discrepancies, as evidenced in data from the (BIS) Triennial Central Bank Surveys and academic analyses spanning the 1980s to early 2000s. For instance, seminal work by Frenkel and Levich examined eurocurrency deposit rates and found minimal unexploited profits, with deviations largely explained by transaction costs. Deviations are typically measured using the CIRP deviation index, defined as \left( \frac{F}{S} \right) / \left( \frac{1 + i_d}{1 + i_f} \right) - 1, where F is the forward , S is the rate, i_d is the domestic , and i_f is the foreign ; this metric quantifies the spread in percentage terms. Empirical datasets from FX swap turnover statistics and interbank rates confirm that such deviations remained negligible—often near zero—for in the decades following the 1973 collapse of Bretton Woods, reflecting high and low barriers to . Research by Akram, Rime, and Sarno further corroborated this, reporting average 3-month basis spreads below 5 basis points for USD pairs from 2000 to 2006. Rare and significant deviations have occurred during periods of market stress, such as the , when credit risk premia widened cross-currency bases to as much as -200 basis points around ' collapse, driven by counterparty risks and funding constraints in USD markets. Similarly, in early 2020 amid liquidity shocks, CIRP bases spiked negatively—for example, reaching -144 basis points for USD/JPY and -85 basis points for USD/EUR—due to heightened demand for dollar funding and reduced bank intermediation capacity. These episodes highlight temporary breakdowns linked to systemic frictions rather than fundamental inefficiencies. Central bank interventions have played a crucial role in restoring parity during these disruptions. In 2008, coordinated swap lines among major , including the and ECB, helped narrow deviations by providing dollar and alleviating risks. During the 2020 crisis, the expansion of US dollar swap facilities on March 15—allocating over $400 billion—rapidly reversed bases, turning them positive for several currencies within weeks and underscoring the effectiveness of such measures in maintaining CIRP adherence. Post-intervention data from and reports show deviations reverting to pre-stress levels, typically under 20 basis points, within months.

Evidence for Uncovered and Real Parity

Empirical tests of uncovered interest rate parity (UIRP) consistently reveal significant deviations, particularly through the forward rate bias, where the forward premium fails to predict future exchange rate changes as expected. In Fama's (1984) seminal regression analysis of major currencies from 1974 to 1982, the coefficient on the forward premium in predicting depreciation was found to be negative, implying that high-interest-rate currencies tend to appreciate rather than depreciate, generating predictable excess returns for investors. This forward rate bias has persisted, challenging the core prediction of UIRP that interest rate differentials should equal expected exchange rate changes. A prominent manifestation of UIRP failures is the profitability of carry trades, where investors borrow in low-interest-rate currencies and invest in high-interest-rate ones without hedging, reaping gains from both interest differentials and currency appreciation. The carry trade exemplifies this during the 1990s and 2000s, when persistently low Japanese interest rates (near zero post-1990s ) funded investments in higher-yielding assets like Australian dollars or currencies, yielding average annual returns exceeding 5% before unwinds, far above UIRP-implied zero profits. Such strategies profited from the non-depreciation of high-interest currencies, underscoring systematic UIRP violations over decades. Explanations for these UIRP deviations often center on time-varying risk premiums, where investors demand compensation for currency risk that fluctuates with global economic conditions. Time-varying , for instance, amplifies premiums during periods of heightened , as seen in models where investors' tolerance for volatility declines amid recessions. The "peso problem" further contributes, referring to rare, high-impact events (like sudden devaluations) that skew expectations in sample data, leading to biased estimates of parity even under . Behavioral biases, such as overconfidence in extrapolating past trends or underreaction to interest signals, also drive deviations by causing systematic forecast errors in s. Recent evidence from the 2020s reinforces the persistence of these risk premiums, with Fama-style regressions on showing coefficients remaining negative or insignificantly positive, even amid post-pandemic and differentials. For example, analyses of 2010–2022 data indicate that U.S. strength against high-yield currencies like the Australian generated excess returns of 2–4% annually, attributable to enduring premia rather than expectation errors alone. Turning to real interest rate parity (RIRP), empirical support is limited, with real rates often diverging due to underlying economic fundamentals like growth differences. Post-2008, U.S. real rates trended higher than in , reflecting superior gains from and , which widened the gap to over 1% by the mid-2010s and undermined parity assumptions. Studies across countries confirm this, finding RIRP holds weakly at best, with tests rejecting convergence in real rate differentials for pairs like U.S.-. In emerging economies, IMF analyses highlight pronounced real rate gaps, exacerbated by events like the 2013 taper tantrum, when U.S. signals triggered capital outflows and real rate spikes of 200–300 basis points in countries such as and . These gaps persisted through the , driven by credibility issues and structural vulnerabilities, with real rates in affected economies averaging 3–5% above global benchmarks despite similar expectations. Overall, RIRP evidence underscores the role of non-monetary factors in sustaining deviations, contrasting with the more arbitrage-enforced covered parity.

References

  1. [1]
    [PDF] Evidence on Financial Globalization and Crises: Interest Rate Parity
    Economists have come to define the covered interest parity condition as a measure of international capital mobility. By the start of the 21st century ...
  2. [2]
    None
    ### Interest Rate Parity: Covered and Uncovered
  3. [3]
    [PDF] COVERED INTEREST RATE PARITY
    Mar 28, 2011 · Covered Interest Rate Parity (CIP) relates the nominal interest rate in any economy, the United States say, to the nominal interest rate in ...
  4. [4]
    [PDF] CIP then and now - Bank for International Settlements
    May 29, 2017 · 6 It was John Maynard Keynes, however, writing in the Tract on Monetary Reform (1923) who popularized the expression interest rate parity.
  5. [5]
    Uncovered Interest Parity1 in: IMF Working Papers Volume 2006 ...
    Apr 1, 2006 · This paper provides an overview of the uncovered interest parity assumption. It traces the history of the interest parity concept, summarizes evidence on the ...
  6. [6]
    [PDF] International interest rate relationships: policy choices and constraints
    Perfect capital mobility. Static exchange rate expectations. Imperfect capital ... Under these assumptions international interest rate parity would always be.
  7. [7]
  8. [8]
    [PDF] Evidence on Financial Globalization and Crises: Interest Rate Parity
    In this paper, we review the theoretical basis and historical origins of the interest rate parity relationship. Empirical evidence supporting IRP became so wide ...
  9. [9]
    [PDF] Interest Rate and the Fisher Parities - NYU Stern
    International Fisher Effect (Fisher Open)​​ For two economies, the U.S. interest rate minus the foreign interest rate equals the expected percentage change in ...
  10. [10]
    Understand Covered Interest Rate Parity: Formula, Calculation, and ...
    Covered interest rate parity occurs when the spot and forward currency exchange rates of a currency pair are equal, eliminating any arbitrage opportunities.
  11. [11]
    Covered Interest Rate Parity (CIRP) - Overview, Formula, Assumptions
    Non-arbitrage condition: CIRP puts into effect a no-arbitrage condition that eliminates all potential opportunities to make risk-free profits across ...What is Covered Interest Rate... · Example of CIRP
  12. [12]
    Covered Interest Arbitrage: Unexploited Profits?
    Empirical studies of covered interest arbitrage suggest that the parity condition is not always satisfied and thus implying unexploited profit.
  13. [13]
    [PDF] CIP Deviations, the Dollar, and Frictions in International Capital ...
    May 1, 2021 · Covered interest rate parity is a no-arbitrage condition that requires the dollar interest rate in the cash market to be equal to the implied ...
  14. [14]
    Capital Controls and Interest Rate Parity: The Japanese Experience ...
    Jan 1, 1981 · The main purpose of this paper has been to examine how capital controls affected deviations from interest rate parity during the period 1978–81.
  15. [15]
    Capital Controls, Political Risk, and Deviations from Interest-Rate ...
    Abstract. It is shown that the interest differential due to political risk, given the prospect of future capital controls, depends essentially on the gross ...
  16. [16]
    [PDF] Arbitraging Covered Interest Rate Parity Deviations and Bank Lending
    1 However, the arbitrage requires banks to borrow a particular currency. When funding in that particular currency is scarce, banks need to either increase rates ...
  17. [17]
    [PDF] Exchange Rates and Interest Parity Charles Engel Working Paper ...
    This paper surveys recent theoretical and empirical contributions on foreign exchange rate determination. The paper first considers monetary models under ...Missing: origin | Show results with:origin
  18. [18]
  19. [19]
    Exchange Rates and Interest Parity | NBER
    Aug 16, 2013 · This paper surveys recent theoretical and empirical contributions on foreign exchange rate determination.
  20. [20]
    [PDF] Uncovered Interest Parity: It Works, But Not For Long
    Abstract: The failure of uncovered interest parity can be ascribed to the existence of a risk premium. The size of this risk premium may shrink to zero over ...
  21. [21]
    [PDF] Exchange Rates, Interest Parity, and the Carry Trade - Duke People
    In Section 1, I discuss the theoretical foundations of the UIP condition and the covered interest rate parity (CIP) condition.
  22. [22]
    [PDF] Testing Real Interest Parity in Emerging Markets
    Nov 1, 2006 · The real interest rate is defined as the nominal interest rate less expected inflation. ... The CADF t-bar test is applied to Equation (4) to test ...Missing: formula | Show results with:formula
  23. [23]
    [PDF] The real interest parity (RIP) condition states that the interest rate ...
    The real interest parity (RIP) condition states that the interest rate differential between two economies is equivalent to the differential between the ...Missing: formula | Show results with:formula
  24. [24]
    [PDF] Real Interest Rate Parity in Practice: Evidence from Asia-Pacific ...
    Mar 10, 2019 · Accordingly, the conventional RIRP is basically constructed upon the UIRP, real exchange rate and Fisher's equation. Using these conditions, we ...
  25. [25]
    [PDF] International Interest Rate Convergence: A Survey of the Issues and ...
    dramatic reduction in barriers to international capital flows. The article examines one further concept of interest rate convergence particularly relevant ...
  26. [26]
  27. [27]
    Currency Exchange Rates: Understanding Equilibrium Value
    If both ex ante purchasing power parity and uncovered interest rate parity held, real interest rates across all markets would be the same. This result is real ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  28. [28]
    [PDF] NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES ARE REAL INTEREST RATES ...
    joint hypotheses of uncovered interest parity and ex ante relative PPP, or the unbiasedness of forward rate forecasts and ex ante relative PPP, are also.
  29. [29]
    [PDF] Measuring Financial Integration: More Data, More Countries, More ...
    This last point highlights that real interest parity relies upon (1) the absence of impediments to capital flows. (covered interest parity), (2) perfect ...
  30. [30]
    [PDF] Exchange Rates in the Long Run: The Monetary Approach
    Covered Interest Parity (CIP):. €/$. €/$. €/$. €. $. E. E. F ii. -. +. = Real Interest Rate Parity: DM rr. = $. Purchasing power parity (PPP):. EU. US. PE.
  31. [31]
    The Nontradable Goods' Real Exchange Rate Puzzle
    The tradable component of the real exchange rate can be volatile due to relative price movements of differentiated foreign and domestic varieties of tradable ...
  32. [32]
    [PDF] Perspectives on PPP and Long-Run Real Exchange Rates
    Frenkel suggested that the failure of PPP might be attributable to some combi- nation of temporary real shocks and sticky goods prices, implicitly arguing that.<|control11|><|separator|>
  33. [33]
    [PDF] Purchasing Power Parity and the Real Exchange Rate
    Considerable differences may arise, however, where price impulses impinge heterogeneously across the various goods and services in an economy and, in particular ...
  34. [34]
    [PDF] Dilemma not Trilemma: The Global Financial Cycle and Monetary ...
    The corollary is that if there are free capital flows, it is possible to have independent monetary policies only by having the exchange rate float; and ...
  35. [35]
    [PDF] Tradeoffs among Exchange Rates, Monetary Policies, and Capital ...
    The trilemma is a tradeoff between exchange stability, monetary independence, and capital market openness, where only two of these can be mutually consistent.
  36. [36]
    [PDF] World Economy - Interest Rate Parity 1
    Equation 4 states that expected depreciation equals the expected inflation differential. Combining (4) with the uncovered interest rate parity condition (3') ...Missing: formula | Show results with:formula
  37. [37]
    [PDF] Deviations from Covered Interest Rate Parity
    In this paper, we document deviations from the CIP post crisis and investigate their causes. We show that the CIP condition is systematically and persistently ...
  38. [38]
    Covered interest parity lost: understanding the cross-currency basis
    Sep 18, 2016 · It holds that the interest rate differential between two currencies in the cash money markets should equal the differential between the forward ...
  39. [39]
    [PDF] Dollar funding costs during the Covid-19 crisis through the lens of ...
    Apr 1, 2020 · Since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, indicators of dollar funding costs in foreign exchange markets have risen sharply, approaching levels ...
  40. [40]
    [PDF] Central Bank Swap Arrangements in the COVID-19 Crisis
    and reduced deviations from covered interest parity (CIP). Dollar auctions by major central banks (BoE, ECB, BoJ and SNB) led to temporary appreciation of other ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  41. [41]
    [PDF] The New Fama Puzzle - National Bureau of Economic Research
    The Fama puzzle is the negative correlation between depreciation and forward premium. The New Fama Puzzle is when this coefficient becomes large and positive ...
  42. [42]
    [PDF] Bond Currency Denomination and the Yen Carry Trade
    Feb 18, 2010 · While standard uncovered interest rate parity theory suggests that carry trades should not be profitable, as interest rate differentials ...
  43. [43]
    [PDF] The Carry Trade - From 1990 to 2020 - Gupea
    Uncovered Interest Parity, UIP, states that it should not be possible to make profits from a carry trade (Danso, 2014). UIP and forward premium puzzle are ...
  44. [44]
    [PDF] The Failure of Uncovered Interest Parity: Is it Near-rationality in the ...
    Countries with relatively high inflation have relatively high long-term nominal interest rates and their currencies tend to secularly depreciate against the ...Missing: limitations | Show results with:limitations<|control11|><|separator|>
  45. [45]
    [PDF] Uncovered Interest Parity in Crisis - International Monetary Fund
    Uncovered interest parity (UIP) is a classic topic of international finance a critical building block of most theoretical models and a dismal empirical failure.
  46. [46]
    [PDF] Uncovered interest rate, overshooting, and predictability reversal ...
    Fama, E. (1984). Forward and Spot Exchange Rates, Journal of Monetary. Economics 14, pp. 319-338. Frankel, Jeffrey A. and Kenneth A. Froot. (1987). Using ...
  47. [47]
    [PDF] The Past, Present and Future of European Productivity
    European productivity has decelerated since the 1970s, with a widening gap with the US. It quadrupled in the 1950-1980s, but has slowed since, with a 20% gap ...
  48. [48]
    [PDF] Do real interest rates converge? Evidence from the European Union
    We test for real interest parity (RIP) in the EU25 area. Our contribution is two-fold: First, we account for the previously overlooked effects of structural ...
  49. [49]
    [PDF] Emerging Market Volatility: Lessons from The Taper Tantrum
    Sep 1, 2014 · Domestic factors include GDP growth, domestic interest rates, and the real effective exchange rate misalignment as estimated by the IMF's ...