Share Tweet JPMorgan has hired Borzu Masoudi from Goldman Sachs for US index flow trading in its equities department. When he joins in August, Masoudi will replace David Kim, who recently decamped for Bank of America.
JPMorgan didn’t wait long to replace a recently-departed senior equities trader.
The bank has hired Borzu Masoudi from Goldman Sachs as a trader on its US index flow trading desk, according to a person briefed on the appointment. He’ll replace David Kim, who left for Bank of America last month, the person said.
Masoudi, a vice president, is seen as a rising star in the world of equity derivatives, according to a recruiter with knowledge of the industry. He was also part of the team which allegedly made more than $200 million in profit in one day earlier this year. He’s expected to join the New York-based bank in August after spending a little more than a year at Goldman, according to his LinkedIn profile. He spent the majority of his career at Deutsche Bank.
JPMorgan’s equities business, run from London by Jason Sippel, brought in $2 billion in revenue in the first quarter, a 26% increase over the prior year. Industrywide, equities revenue rose 28% in that period, according to Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, boosted by trading in derivatives such as options or swaps. Trading has since slowed, banking executives say.
Competition for star traders has heated up this year as a rebound in volatility revived Wall Street stock-trading desks. In addition to Kim, JPMorgan also lost Seok Yoon Jeong, its head of index flow volatility trading in the US, to Citigroup in March.
JPMorgan has lagged behind rivals Morgan Stanley and Goldman for equities trading market share, though that gap is narrowing.
Join the conversation about this story »
NOW WATCH: Former Wall Street CEO reveals how most financial products designed for women completely miss the point
Related Topics: Continue Reading
You may like
Business
The bank for central banks is blaring the siren on a new debt crisis that could cause a long and painful recession The Bank for International Settlements, nicknamed the bank for central bankers, said in a report that the ballooning levels of public and private debt are creating a ‘trap’ that would be hard to escape. Although higher leverage can boost growth in the short run, it comes at the cost of deeper and longer recessions down the road, the BIS said in its 2018 annual economic report. It identified specific pockets of the market that leverage has made vulnerable, including the US commercial-real-estate market.
Ten years after a credit crisis drowned the global economy, central bankers are worried about debt.
The Bank for International Settlements, dubbed the bank for central bankers, said in its annual economic report for 2018 that the growing levels of government, corporate, and consumer borrowing create a “debt trap” that policy may not easily untangle down the road. Global debt across governments, nonfinancial corporations and households surpassed $160 trillion as at the end of 2017, according to the BIS.
The BIS placed some of the responsibility at the feet of central banks. It’s true that low interest rates and other policies, some unconventional, helped many economies recover after the financial crisis. But therein lies the trap: because growth and borrowing have become dependent on low rates, the economy, and financial valuations, are more sensitive to higher interest rates. This in turn makes it more difficult for central banks to raise rates, encouraging even more borrowing, the BIS said.
The report noted that since the financial crisis, there has been a continuous rise of public and private debt relative to gross domestic product. “Indeed, a growing body of studies documents how higher leverage, in both the private and public sectors, can boost growth in the short run, but at the cost of lower growth on average, including deeper and prolonged recessions, in the future,” the BIS said.
The BIS looked into how the financial and business cycles interact with the growth of debt. In the good times, like now, leverage boosts asset prices and helps economies grow. However, everyone from households to companies has to face a payback reckoning that gets worse when the cycle turns.
“It is evident [in the chart below] that the downswings of the financial cycle — characterised by high debt service, deleveraging and falling asset prices — are closely associated with the economic downturns that have occurred in these countries since the mid-1980s, with some of these coinciding with serious financial strains,” the BIS said.
Most vulnerable areas
The BIS further pinpointed a number of areas that are most at risk as debt levels rise. It prefaced this by noting that delicate pockets of the financial system exist even though the economy is still in an upswing.
First is nonfinancial corporate debt in the US and UK, especially, and in France and other European countries to a lesser extent.
“In the United States, in particular, corporate leverage today is at its highest level since the beginning of the millennium,” the BIS said, adding that most investment-grade companies are vulnerable to being downgraded.
The BIS also flagged US commercial real estate, where prices have recovered close to pre-crisis highs.
“Values there seem particularly vulnerable to rising long-term yields,” the bank said.
Thirdly, the BIS noted the level of non-bank, foreign-currency borrowing in emerging-market economies, which has doubled since 2008 and stands at $36 trillion. The growth rate of this debt almost tripled last year as the dollar weakened, but the economies are now exposed to a stronger dollar and a reversal of investors’ appetite to take risk.
“While the global economy has made substantial progress post-crisis and near-term prospects are positive, the path ahead is a narrow one,” the BIS said. “The risks highlight the importance of taking advantage of the current upswing to implement the necessary measures to put the expansion on a stronger footing and to rebuild policy buffers.”
SEE ALSO: JPMorgan identifies a ‘catch-all trade’ that will profit from the biggest issues confronting investors — including a trade war
Join the conversation about this story »
NOW WATCH: Learning to celebrate failure at a young age led to this billionaire’s success
Business
Jeremy Hunt said it’s ‘completely inappropriate’ for Airbus, BMW to issue Brexit warnings Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt has slammed businesses for issuing warnings about Brexit uncertainty. Hunt told the BBC that the warnings are undermining the UK’s negotiating position with the EU. He said businesses should back Theresa May during this ‘critical’ time. Lots of businesses are worried about the disastrous economic impact of a no-deal Brexit.
Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt said it was “completely inappropriate” for big businesses to issue warnings about the uncertainties around Brexit.
Speaking to the BBC, Hunt suggested that Airbus and BMW, which this week slammed the lack of clarity on a deal, are actually undermining prime minister Theresa May during her negotiations with the European Union.
He said: “I just thought it’s completely inappropriate for businesses to be making these kinds of threats for one very simple reason. We are in an absolutely critical moment in the Brexit discussions and what that means is we need to get behind Theresa May to deliver… a clean Brexit.
“The more we undermine Theresa May, the more likely we are to end up with a fudge.”
Hunt’s comments come after a week of sustained attack by business leaders on the UK government. BMW board member Ian Robertson said the firm needed clarity on the UK’s talks with the EU by the end of summer. The company employs about 8,000 people in the UK.
And earlier this week, The Times reported that Airbus was planning to leave the UK in the event of a no-deal Brexit.
Should either business move, it could cost the UK economy billions, and thousands of jobs.
The Sunday Times reported that the UK’s top five business lobby groups have warned Theresa May that businesses are queuing up to move jobs out of Britain. The groups include the CBI, the Institute of Directors, the British Chambers of Commerce, the manufacturing organisation the EEF, and the Federation of Small Business.
Hunt insisted that the “siren voices” should remain silent and let May get on with the negotiations.
He said: “[She] has the instincts of a Brexiteer but the cautious pragmatism of a remainder,” he said. “What businesses want is stability… which is exactly why she negotiated a transition deal.”
Join the conversation about this story »
NOW WATCH: Why the North Korea summit mattered even if it was ‘mostly a photo op’
Business
An artist painted a self-portrait of himself on a different drug every day — and he ended up with brain damage
In March 1995, artist Bryan Lewis Saunders began creating at least one self-portrait of himself every day.
Born in Washington D.C. but living on and off in Tennessee, in 2000 he set out to look for “experiences that might profoundly affect my perception of self” — and he came up with an experiment titled “Under The Influence” that did just that.
“Every day I took a different drug or intoxicant and drew myself under the influence,” he states on his website.
He produced a documentary called “Art of Darkness” about the experience – which, he says, left him lethargic and with “mild brain damage that wasn’t irreparable.”
Still, he said he is “still conducting this experiment but over greater lapses of time and presently only take drugs that are prescribed to me by a doctor.”
He told Business Insider that his other more recent projects include a drawing experiment where he was totally blind for 30 days straight and, of course, created a daily self portrait.
“I have done other month long drawing and life experiments too; no hearing, no talking and so on,” he said, adding that he’s “currently exploring arousal and energy.” Scroll down to see some of the most bizarre, terrifying, and incredible pictures Saunders created while on drugs.
Huffing Lighter Fluid
Heroin (dosage unknown, snorted)
Adderall (10mg)
See the rest of the story at Business Insider
Business
British trucks would be blocked from entering Europe under no-deal Brexit, industry leader warns A no-deal Brexit would ground British lorries trying to enter Europe to a halt the day after Brexit, said freight chief James Hookham. He told Business Insider that the chances are rising of a no-deal scenario which would “crucify'”small British firms with tariffs. Hookham accused the government of not taking the threat of Brexit to Britain’s borders seriously enough. “The thing that really upsets our members is when these concerns are just dismissed by politicians as trivial or insignificant,” he said.
LONDON — British lorries would be barred from entering Europe under a no-deal Brexit, according to an industry chief, who warned that British firms would be “crucified” by tariffs if Theresa May fails to secure a deal with the European Union.
James Hookham, deputy chief executive of the Freight Transport Association (FTA), told Business Insider that a no-deal Brexit would see Britain revert to an old set of international arrangements which handed Britain just 103 permits to cover the 300,000 journeys made by British trucks make to Europe every year.
That would, in essence, mean the bulk of Britain’s lorry fleet was blocked from entering Europe the day after Brexit in March next year, should May fail to secure the transitional deal which is still being negotiated. This would affect hundreds if not thousands of businesses with EU customers.
“Time is running out,” said Hookham. He said the chances of a no-deal Brexit appeared to have increased in recent weeks and described reports that British negotiators do not expect to make sufficient progress at next week’s EU summit to sign a transitional deal as “depressing.”
Speaking to BI this week, Hookham said the UK would also be compelled to reduce the number of permits to European lorries entering the country, resulting in a serious disruption to the flow of goods which Britain depends upon for food and the bulk of its trade.
He said that industry had been frustrated by ministers in May’s government who “dismissed” the reality of “detailed and complicated” problems such as those facing the freight industry.
“The thing that really upsets our members is when a lot of these concerns are just dismissed by politicians as trivial or insignificant,” he said.
“They either don’t understand what they’re talking about, which I suspect is the case, or they’ve got no basis for saying it.”
Why would British lorries be barred from entering Europe under a no-deal Brexit?
Currently, an operator licence for a lorry issued by the UK is effectively valid across the European Union on account of Britain’s single market membership. That means a British trucker with a valid licence can drive goods from Dover to Calais and all the way across Europe. The number of available licenses is unlimited.
That arrangement is set to end on Brexit day. Negotiators have not agreed on a policy to replace it. Britain, as the EU’s chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier is keen to remind his counterparts, will become a third country after Brexit. Third-country licences to operate in Europe are limited in number by an arrangement overseen by an international body called the OECD.
If we crash out without a deal, the tariffs alone would probably crucify most smaller businesses.
That arrangement means countries have to agree — either multilaterally or bilaterally — on the number of trucks allowed to pass into each other’s countries. If Britain failed to strike a deal with the EU before Brexit, it would revert to an old arrangement whereby it had 103 licences.
It would mean companies with European customers or suppliers — those importing components, or exporting products elsewhere in the EU — would be forced to try and find alternative means of shipping their products.
They would also be forced to contend with expensive tariffs under WTO rules once Britain left the EU, which Hookham said would “crucify” many small British firms.
“In what is already a very competitive European market, any permanent additional costs that British exports have to bear mean they’ve got to work even harder to stay competitive,” he said.
“If we crash out without a deal, the tariffs alone would probably crucify most smaller businesses. We need a trade deal which reduces as many of these impediments as possible.”
SEE ALSO: Everything we know about how EU citizens can apply to remain in the UK after Brexit
Join the conversation about this story »
NOW WATCH: This top economist has a radical plan to change the way Americans vote
Business
People are wildly polarized on whether they trust Facebook A new Survata survey seen by Business Insider shows that people are massively polarized about whether they trust Facebook or not. That’s after months of scandal over Cambridge Analytica’s use of Facebook data. The survey showed that Facebook ranked lower on trust than Google, YouTube, and eBay — but higher than Instagram. Survata CEO Chris Kelly said people had stronger feelings about Facebook than about Instagram, whether negative or positive.
Facebook has been making a lot of moves to show it’s more transparent in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, but people are wildly polarized about whether they trust the company.
A Survata study, seen exclusively by Business Insider, asked US consumers to rate big tech companies from one (most trusted) to five (least trusted). Survata surveyed more than 2,600 people in April and May. It’s the first time Survata has carried out the survey.
The results show that Facebook is nowhere near as trusted as Amazon, PayPal, or Microsoft — but that people do trust it more than Instagram. Instagram, of course, is owned by Facebook.
Here’s the top 15 in order of most to least trusted:
- Amazon PayPal Microsoft Apple IBM Yahoo Google YouTube eBay Pandora Facebook LinkedIn Spotify AOL Instagram
Survata CEO Chris Kelly said in emailed comments to Business Insider that Facebook was “a curious case altogether.”
“[We] found that it was very much polarizing on this question,” he said. “This study found that Facebook’s most common ratings were the extreme ends — either “1” for most trusted or “5” for least trusted. In the end, it seemed that a bit more people were extremely likely to trust Facebook than extremely distrust, so it ranked higher [than Instagram].”
Kelly also said people were more familiar with Facebook than with Instagram. So while there was more polarized opinion about Facebook, the sheer number of people who are familiar with the platform means it ranks higher than Instagram on trust.
Curiously, WhatsApp was absent from the top 15. Kelly said WhatsApp is much more popular outside the US as a messaging platform. SMS remains popular because it’s essentially free.
Asked why Amazon ranked so highly, Kelly said it was probably the firm’s focus on good customer service.
“Even though the company uses data to personalize experiences like many others, it goes to show you that having an exceptional experience can have a spillover effect into other brand impressions of your business,” he said.
“That, and you really haven’t heard of any major data scandals involving the company. And, a lot of companies trust Amazon Web Services to hold their data, so it’s definitely proven it has the tech in place for security.”
SEE ALSO: Trust in Facebook has spectacularly nosedived after its enormous data breach
Join the conversation about this story »
NOW WATCH: How Apple can fix HomePod and Siri
