Why Greece shouldn’t worry about its CDS

By Felix Salmon
February 23, 2010
George Soros has wheeled out this particular argument against credit default swaps:

" data-share-img="" data-share="twitter,facebook,linkedin,reddit,google" data-share-count="true">

This isn’t the first time that George Soros has wheeled out this particular argument against credit default swaps:

The situation is aggravated by the market in credit default swaps, which is biased in favor of those who speculate on failure. Being long CDS, the risk automatically declines if they are wrong. This is the exact opposite of short-selling in equity markets, where being wrong means that the risk automatically increases.

It’s worth explaining this in a bit more detail. If you short a stock, the amount of money you can lose is theoretically unlimited. It costs you little or nothing up front, but as the losses move against you, not only do you start getting hit by margin calls, but also the realistic total downside is increasing at the same time.

For instance, let’s say you short a stock at $100, and you know that there’s a 20% chance that the stock will rise by 20%, reaching $120 per share. When that happens, you’ve lost $20 — but now there’s a 20% chance that the stock will rise by another 20%, to $144. And if it gets there, there’s a good chance that it will continue to keep on rising. No matter how high the stock goes, your downside — the amount of money you can realistically expect to lose — continues to grow.

On the other hand, let’s say you spend $100 to insure $1,000 of bonds against default — without owning the underlying bonds. And let’s say that the price of the bonds rise, and their yield falls, as worries about their creditworthiness dissipate. Then the CDS you just bought for $100 might now be worth just $80: again, you’ve lost $20. But now your downside is smaller than it used to be: in the absolute worst-case scenario, you can only lose $80, while initially the worst-case scenario was that you could lose $100.

Financial professionals like Soros tend to mark their positions to market daily — if the market moves against them, then they consider themselves to have lost money, even if they don’t exit the position. And Soros is quite right that when they do decide to hold on to their position, a short stock position which has moved against you looks riskier than a long-protection CDS position which has moved against you.

But buying CDS protection is not really equivalent to shorting a stock — it’s much closer to buying a put option on a stock. And if you do that, your risk diminishes as the market moves against you, just like it does with CDS: you can never lose more money than you initially spent on entering the position. But it’s entirely commonplace for investors to short stocks by buying puts rather than by borrowing and selling securities. Similarly, there is a developed repo market in bonds, so anybody who wants to short a bond the old-fashioned way, by borrowing it and selling it, is welcome to do so. In that case, the risk profile falls somewhere in the middle: there is a limit to how much a bond can rise in price, since the yield will never fall much below zero, and the price is very unlikely to exceed the total value of all principal and coupon payments.

Ultimately, Soros’s argument here is pretty weak. Every CDS contract has a buyer and a seller, and in general it’s the seller of protection who ends up making money: the buyer of protection is often just hedging an existing position, and not looking to profit on the short leg of the trade. Buying credit default swaps is quite an expensive thing to do, and it’s hard to make money at it except for in times of chaos or crisis. If the market in CDS was really biased in favor of those who buy protection, then credit default swaps would be an asset class in their own right, and people would buy bundles of them in the hope of making money. But that doesn’t happen — and Greece, for one, has many bigger problems on its hands to worry about what might be going on in the market for Greek CDS.


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/

You miss entirely Soros’ point that “The situation is aggravated by the market in credit default swaps, which is biased in favor of those who speculate on failure”. That is a fact that lovers of this kind of finance, like you, do not admit: CDS and their use is the problem. Particularly so if in the case of Greece they are also used by its banks.

You miss also the solution to the problem envisaged by Soros. That is partially what I have been advocating for some time: the common issuance of EU bonds.
I also still contend that the most effective solution to the present EU sovereign debt crisis would be to issue jointly EU bonds to refinance gradually all the maturing debt of the PIGS. This would not only significantly reduce the cost of financing of PIGS debt, while creating a EU bond market, but it would replace any International Monetary Fund role and/or conditional loans.
http://mgiannini.blogspot.com/2010/02/to o-and-too-many-pigs-to-bail-and-to.html
http://mgiannini.blogspot.com/2009/03/my -name-is-bond-european-union-bond.html

Posted by M.G.inProgress | Report as abusive

MG – it wasn’t but a few years ago that the market in CDS was dominated by those who speculated on stability. The world’s largest insurance company, for example. It was just free money, they thought. Then it turned out that some key assumptions were inaccurate and now everyone thinks that betting on a default is free money. I’m guessing the truth is somewhere in between.

As for Felix pointing out that buying options is not free money, I think he has the better part of this argument vs Soros. If I bought a bunch of puts and the puts lose value, I guess I could console myself by saying that “oh good, my risk in the position has decreased!” Well at least if I were worth $10 billion I might say that.

Posted by johnhhaskell | Report as abusive

Greece ought to have done a Goldman and insured itself against loss with AIG, then everything would be just peachy.

Posted by HBC | Report as abusive

Yeah, good call. Soros is an idiot, and that’s one of the dumber comments I’ve read in a while. Comparing a CDS contract to shorting a stock is stupid.

And I’m not even sure Soros is saying what you think he is–i.e., that your risk decreases when you’re wrong about a long CDS position because that’ means you’ve lost money, and thus have less to lose. I can’t really think of what else he may be talking about here, but that’s kind of a dumb statement. The thing is, there’s a greater probability you will lose, which of course is offset by the decline in price. So net to zero. If Soros thinks otherwise, then he should be throwing down billions on this blatant mispricing. And another thing, does this mean your risk increases when you are right, because the CDS contract goes up in value and you know have more to lose?

Posted by stevenstevo | Report as abusive