Stocks rise if Romney wins; bonds, if Obama does

Stocks would rally with a Romney win, because it would signal a change of direction, according to a Barclay's survey of professional investors. Stocks would sell off briefly with an Obama victory as investors would move to bonds.

Win McNamee/Pool/AP/File
Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and President Obama answer a question during the third presidential debate at Lynn University last week in Boca Raton, Fla. A new survey of investors suggests stocks would rally with a Romney win; bonds would rise if Obama is reelected.

The re-election of U.S. President Barack Obama next week would be positive for bonds, while a victory for Republican rival Mitt Romney would be better for equities, according to a survey of professional investors by Barclays.

The survey of investors who manage a combined $10 trillion-plus of assets comes as the candidates gear up for the last week of campaigning in what has become a tightly fought race, with polls suggesting that it is too close to call.

 Romney, a multimillionaire and co-founder of Bain Capital, has positioned himself as the business-friendly candidate for the Nov. 6 ballot.

 If Obama wins a second term as President, investors favor bonds but are divided about the direction of equities, the survey found. Many anticipate a “small and short-lived” equity sell-off if Obama wins and a “substantial or small” increase in equities if Romney makes it to the White House.

 “Obama’s victory would likely be perceived as preserving the status quo,” analysts at Barclays wrote in a research note. “A Romney win is more likely to suggest a change of direction to clients by way of a better growth outlook.”

Whoever wins is facing a looming “fiscal cliff”at the start of 2013, as automatic spending cuts and the expiration of Bush-era tax cuts hit the economy. (Read MoreLarry Summers Says Avoid ‘Fiscal Cliff’)

 A congressional deadlock, which could affect the government’s ability to reach a deal to avert such an outcome would concern investors most following an Obama victory, according to Barclays. (Read MoreCEOs Pressure Politicians to Get Serious on Debt)

If Romney wins, the biggest concerns would be whether he would call time on looser monetary policy by the U.S. Federal Reserve.

 Romney has stated his opposition to the Fed’s latest round of quantitative easing, also known as QE3, and to Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke seeking a third term, signaling that he may call for a change in the central bank’s policy. Monetary easing has been credited with helping to keep the U.S. economy out of a double-dip recession, although critics argue that it is ultimately putting the Fed in danger of a riskier balance sheet.

 These concerns about a Romney administration’s effect on the Fed may explain why investors expect a sell-off in bond markets after a Romney victory and a rally if Obama is successful.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.