The Great Delay: Deconstructing the 12-Week Lag Between Global Liquidity and Asset Prices

A Modern Framework for Global Liquidity

The empirical observation that shifts in global liquidity lead the performance of risk assets by approximately one fiscal quarter is a cornerstone of modern macro-financial analysis. Prominent practitioners such as Michael Howell of CrossBorder Capital and Raoul Pal of Real Vision have demonstrated a remarkably consistent correlation, with changes in liquidity preceding major moves in indices like the Nasdaq, as well as assets like cryptocurrencies and gold, by roughly 12 to 13 weeks.¹ Understanding the cause of this delay requires moving beyond simplistic notions of "money printing" and dissecting the intricate plumbing of the global financial system. The lag is not a simple friction but an emergent property of a multi-stage transmission mechanism, involving the operational realities of central banks, the balance sheet constraints of dealers, the mechanics of wholesale funding markets, and, most critically, the decision-making cycles of the institutional investors who ultimately move markets. This report provides an exhaustive, step-by-step analysis of this transmission process, identifying the specific sources of friction and delay at each stage that collectively account for the observed ~12-week lag.

Beyond M2: Defining Liquidity as Funding Capacity

To accurately trace the path of liquidity, one must first adopt a definition that reflects the structure of the modern financial system. Traditional monetary aggregates such as M2, which primarily track currency in circulation and retail bank deposits, are largely measures of money within the real economy. While relevant for consumer price inflation, they are insufficient for analyzing today's financial markets.³ The global financial crisis of 2008 provided a stark lesson: major institutions like Lehman Brothers did not fail for a lack of deposits, but because their access to wholesale funding markets—specifically the repo market—evaporated overnight.

This paradigm shift necessitates a more sophisticated definition of liquidity, one centered on the concept of funding capacity. As articulated by Michael Howell, liquidity is not the cost of capital (i.e., interest rates) but the capacity of capital, determined by the assets-side of credit providers' balance sheets.⁵ It is a measure of the ability and willingness of the financial system to extend credit and fund the purchase of assets. This modern liquidity pool is a vast, wholesale measure that begins where conventional retail money definitions end. CrossBorder Capital estimates this pool at approximately $170 trillion, a figure nearly double the world's Gross Domestic Product (GDP), highlighting that the financial economy operates on a scale far exceeding the real economy.⁵

Within this framework, it is essential to differentiate between two types of liquidity:

• Funding Liquidity: This refers to the speedy and reliable access to cash, or the ability to borrow. It is the lifeblood of financial institutions.⁵

• Market Liquidity: This describes the ability to buy or sell a significant volume of an asset quickly without causing a major dislocation in its price.⁵

The core thesis of the global liquidity model is that funding liquidity is the primary driver of market liquidity. When financial institutions have ample and easy access to funding, they are more willing and able to provide market liquidity, take on risk, and extend credit, which ultimately fuels asset price appreciation.

The Three Pillars of Global Liquidity

This comprehensive measure of global liquidity is not monolithic. It is sourced from three distinct but interconnected pillars, a framework developed by CrossBorder Capital and echoed in the work of institutions like the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).⁴

1. Central Bank Liquidity: This is the foundational layer, the ultimate source of high-powered money. It is primarily determined by the size and composition of the balance sheets of the world's major central banks, including the US Federal Reserve (Fed), the European Central Bank (ECB), the People's Bank of China (PBoC), and the Bank of Japan (BoJ). Importantly, a nuanced view requires adjusting the raw balance sheet size for key accounts that sequester liquidity. For instance, in the US, funds held in the Treasury General Account (TGA) or parked in the Fed's Overnight Reverse Repurchase (RRP) facility represent cash that has been drained from the private financial system and is not available to fund assets.⁹ Thus, a decline in the TGA or RRP balance, even with a static Fed balance sheet, constitutes a liquidity injection.

2. Private Sector Supply: This is the largest component and represents the credit created by the private financial system. It encompasses lending from traditional commercial banks but, more critically, the activities of the "shadow banking" system. This includes credit creation through collateral-based wholesale funding, most notably in the repo markets.⁵ The ability of private institutions to leverage their balance sheets and create credit is a massive multiplier of the initial liquidity provided by central banks. This process is deeply intertwined with the availability of high-quality collateral, such as government bonds.¹¹

3. Cross-Border Flows: In a globalized financial system, money is fungible and flows across borders in search of safety and return.³ These net foreign flows are a critical third source of liquidity for any given domestic market.⁸ An influx of foreign capital can significantly ease local financial conditions, while an outflow can cause a sharp tightening. The BIS's Global Liquidity Indicators (GLIs) place a strong emphasis on this component, specifically tracking cross-border credit in major currencies. Their research notes that this international component often serves as the
   marginal source of financing during boom-bust cycles, making it a key indicator of financial vulnerability.¹²

The Global Liquidity Index (GLI): A Case Study in Measurement

To operationalize this framework, practitioners rely on sophisticated indices. The CrossBorder Capital Global Liquidity Index (GLI) serves as a prime example. It is not a simple aggregation but a complex statistical construct. The methodology starts with raw data from approximately 80 economies, monitoring the three pillars described above. It then employs statistical techniques, using factors expressed as z-scores, to create diffusion-like indices that capture not just the level but also the momentum or rate of change of liquidity.⁸ This approach reveals that global liquidity moves in discernible cycles, which Howell estimates to be roughly five to six years in duration.²

Complementing this private-sector view, the BIS publishes its own GLIs. These indicators focus on tracking credit extended to non-bank borrowers, covering both bank loans and funding from global bond markets.¹⁴ The BIS places a special focus on foreign currency credit (in US dollars, euros, and yen) provided to borrowers outside of those currency areas, recognizing that these cross-border credit dynamics are a potent channel for the transmission of global financial conditions.¹²

The evolution from simple M2 tracking to these complex, multi-faceted indices reflects the lessons learned from the 2008 crisis. It acknowledges that in a collateral-based, globally interconnected financial system, the true measure of liquidity lies in the capacity of wholesale funding markets and the health of institutional balance sheets. This sophisticated understanding is the necessary starting point for deconstructing the ~12-week lag.

Stage 1 of Transmission: Central Bank Operations and the Primary Dealer Nexus (Timeframe: Weeks 0-1)

The journey of liquidity begins with a central bank action, typically through Open Market Operations (OMOs) or, more recently, large-scale asset purchase programs known as Quantitative Easing (QE). This initial injection is a highly concentrated transaction that, while electronically instantaneous, encounters its first set of frictions within the very institutions designed to transmit it.

The Mechanics of Liquidity Injection

When a central bank like the US Federal Reserve decides to inject liquidity, it does not drop money from a helicopter. Instead, it conducts an asset swap in the open market.¹⁶ In a QE operation, the Fed purchases securities (typically US Treasuries and mortgage-backed securities) from a select group of financial institutions. The Fed pays for these securities by crediting the reserve accounts that these institutions hold at the central bank.¹⁸ This process is electronic and immediate: the selling institution's balance sheet changes composition, with an asset (the bond) being replaced by another asset (central bank reserves), but its total size may not change initially.

The institutions on the other side of these transactions are not random banks; they are the Primary Dealers. In the United States, this is a group of approximately two dozen banks and securities broker-dealers designated by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York as its official trading counterparties.²⁰ These firms have specific obligations, including the requirement to participate consistently in all US Treasury auctions and to act as counterparties for the Fed's OMOs as it implements monetary policy.²² This exclusive arrangement means that Primary Dealers are the first recipients of newly created reserves, placing them at the very apex of the liquidity transmission pyramid.⁸

The First Friction: Primary Dealer Balance Sheet Constraints

The transmission of this new liquidity from the Primary Dealers to the rest of the financial system is not a frictionless, passive process. The dealers are not simply pipes; they are profit-maximizing entities operating under significant regulatory constraints. When a dealer sells a Treasury to the Fed and receives reserves in return, its balance sheet expands. This expansion immediately brings regulatory capital requirements into focus, most notably the Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) in the US. The SLR measures a bank's Tier 1 capital relative to its total leverage exposure, which includes all on-balance-sheet assets.

An influx of reserves from QE increases a dealer's total assets, thereby "using up" its balance sheet capacity as measured by the SLR. If a dealer is close to its regulatory limit, its ability to further expand its balance sheet—by making new loans or increasing its market-making activities—is impaired.²⁵ Tighter regulatory constraints can therefore act as a significant bottleneck at the very source of liquidity creation. A dealer flush with new reserves may be forced to use them to shrink other assets or be unable to deploy them aggressively until it can augment its capital base.

This creates the first, albeit minor, delay in the system. The initial liquidity injection is not a uniform "spraying of cash" but a highly targeted asset swap with a small club of institutions. The aggregate health, risk appetite, and regulatory constraints of these specific dealers act as the initial gatekeeper for the velocity of transmission. The process is not Fed creates money -> markets go up. Rather, it is Fed creates reserves -> Primary Dealer balance sheet expands -> Dealer assesses regulatory capital constraints -> Dealer's treasury and risk departments decide how to deploy new funding capacity. This internal decision-making and balance sheet management process, which happens within a few large firms, constitutes the first micro-lag, typically lasting from a few hours to a few days.

Stage 2: The Interbank & Repo Markets – Liquidity Propagation (Timeframe: Weeks 1-4)

Once the Primary Dealers have absorbed the initial injection of reserves, the liquidity begins its journey into the wider global financial system. This propagation is not direct but occurs through a layered chain of intermediation, primarily centered on the wholesale funding markets. This stage introduces the first set of significant, multi-week delays as the initial spark of liquidity is transformed into a broader easing of financial conditions.

The "Double-Decker" Model of Global Banking

The transmission of liquidity across borders can be understood through the "double-decker" model of international banking, a framework developed in research by Hyun Song Shin and others at the BIS and NBER.¹¹ This model outlines a three-stage process for cross-border capital flows:

1. Stage 1: Global Banks Raise Wholesale Funding. Large, globally active banks (which include the Primary Dealers) raise funds in major financial centers, for instance, by borrowing from money market funds.

2. Stage 2: Global Banks Lend to Local Banks. These global banks then channel this funding to other, often smaller, local banks in different jurisdictions. This is the essence of the cross-border lending that the BIS GLIs track.

3. Stage 3: Local Banks Lend to Local Borrowers. Finally, the local banks use this cross-border funding to extend credit to their domestic customers, including corporations and households.

This layered structure demonstrates that liquidity transmission is a chain of intermediation, not a direct injection. At each link in this chain, a lending decision must be made, and each decision point introduces potential friction and delay.

The Procyclical Leverage Cycle

A bank's decision to expand its lending is not an automatic consequence of receiving more reserves or having access to cheaper funding. It is governed by the procyclical nature of bank leverage.¹¹ Bank leverage—and thus the willingness to lend—tends to build up during economic booms when risk appetite is high and confidence is strong. Conversely, during downturns or periods of uncertainty, banks deleverage, hoard liquidity, and tighten lending standards, even if the central bank is actively trying to ease policy.

An injection of liquidity from the central bank increases a bank's capacity to lend, but its willingness to do so is a separate decision. This decision is based on a complex mix of factors, including internal risk models, the perceived creditworthiness of borrowers, the expected profitability of new loans, and the institution's overall outlook on the economy. Because these assessments are made independently by thousands of financial institutions around the globe, their collective response is not synchronized. This creates a significant lag as the initial central bank signal slowly percolates through the risk management and credit committees of the entire banking system. The ~12-week lag is therefore an average outcome, highly dependent on the prevailing risk environment. A liquidity injection into a fearful, risk-off market may be largely hoarded or used to repair balance sheets, leading to a much longer lag, whereas an injection into a confident, risk-on market will be leveraged up and transmitted much more rapidly.

The Repo Market: The System's Circulatory Core

The primary venue for the propagation of liquidity from the dealers to the broader system is the repurchase agreement (repo) market. The repo market is the heart of the wholesale funding system, where financial institutions conduct short-term, collateralized borrowing and lending.²⁷ In a typical transaction, a firm needing cash (e.g., a dealer financing its inventory of bonds) sells securities to a cash-rich institution (e.g., a money market fund) with an agreement to buy them back at a slightly higher price at a future date, often the next day.²⁸ The price difference represents the interest on the loan, known as the repo rate.

When Primary Dealers are flush with reserves from a central bank operation, their capacity to lend in the repo market (acting as the cash provider) or their need to borrow is altered. This increase in the supply of funding puts downward pressure on repo rates, making it cheaper for other institutions to finance their activities. This easing of funding costs is the mechanism through which the central bank's initial action is transmitted to the broader financial system.

However, a critical source of delay arises from the tenor structure of the repo market. While much attention is paid to the overnight repo rate, a substantial portion of the market consists of term repo, where the loan maturity extends for weeks or even months.³¹ A recent ECB study using highly granular data found that for non-centrally cleared transactions, only 50% of dollar-denominated repos and a mere 26% of euro-denominated repos are overnight.³¹

This tenor mismatch is a crucial piece of the puzzle. An injection of liquidity today will have an immediate impact on the overnight rate. However, a bank or dealer that has secured funding for the next 30, 60, or 90 days via a term repo contract will not benefit from this easing until its existing, more expensive funding matures and needs to be rolled over. When this staggered rollover process is aggregated across the entire financial system, it creates a natural, structural lag. The full impact of the central bank's action is not felt as a single event but as a rolling wave of repricing that unfolds over the course of a fiscal quarter.

The Hidden Multiplier: Collateral Chains and Rehypothecation (Timeframe: Weeks 2-8)

Beyond the direct lending of the interbank and repo markets lies a more opaque and complex mechanism that acts as a massive, hidden amplifier of global liquidity: the creation and propagation of collateral chains. This process, often referred to as collateral re-use or rehypothecation, is central to the functioning of the modern shadow banking system. It is also a significant source of the transmission delay, as the "velocity" of collateral is far from infinite.

Collateral is the New Money

In the contemporary financial system, particularly after the trust-destroying crisis of 2008, nearly all significant wholesale financing is secured by collateral.⁴ The ability to post high-quality, liquid assets—primarily government bonds—is what determines an institution's access to funding. The amount of credit the system can create is therefore a function not just of the monetary base, but of the available stock of acceptable collateral and the intensity with which it is used.

This has a dual implication for central bank actions like QE. On one hand, QE injects cash reserves into the banking system, an easing action. On the other hand, it removes high-quality collateral (government bonds) from the private sector, which, in isolation, could be seen as a tightening action as it reduces the pool of assets available for pledging. However, the dominant effect is typically the increase in bank balance sheet capacity, which fuels the system's ability to create collateralized credit.

Collateral Velocity and Rehypothecation

The key concept for understanding this hidden multiplier is "collateral velocity," a term extensively analyzed in IMF research by Manmohan Singh.³² A single, pristine government bond is not simply pledged once and then locked away. It is often re-used multiple times in a series of transactions, creating what are known as "collateral chains."

The process typically begins when a hedge fund or asset manager pledges securities to its prime broker (a large dealer bank) to obtain financing for its investment strategies. The prime broker, under the terms of its agreement, gains the right to rehypothecate—that is, to re-pledge or re-use—that same collateral in its own name to secure its own funding.³⁵ For example, the prime broker might pledge the hedge fund's bond in the repo market to borrow cash from a money market fund. That money market fund might then engage in a securities lending transaction, lending the bond to another dealer who needs it to cover a short position.

Through this process, a single dollar of "source collateral" can underpin multiple dollars of secured financing throughout the system. The total volume of financial lubrication is therefore a product of the amount of source collateral multiplied by its velocity (the number of times it is re-used).³³ This network of interlocking claims and obligations is a massive, though largely invisible, component of global liquidity.³⁶

Frictions in the Chain: The Source of Significant Delay

The process of building and extending these collateral chains is far from instantaneous and represents a major contributor to the overall ~12-week lag. The "velocity" of collateral is not a fixed parameter but a dynamic variable that takes weeks to build momentum.

• Operational and Legal Delays: Each link in a collateral chain is a discrete transaction that requires time to execute. It involves negotiating and signing legal agreements, such as the Global Master Repurchase Agreement (GMRA) for repo trades.³⁰ Collateral must be valued, transferred between custodians, and subjected to ongoing margin calls if its value fluctuates. This operational workflow, repeated thousands of times across the system, introduces inherent delays.³⁵

• Counterparty Risk Assessment and Haircuts: Transmission is not automatic; it is based on trust. At each step, the collateral taker must assess the creditworthiness of the collateral giver. This determines the "haircut" applied—the percentage discount to the collateral's market value. For example, a lender might only provide $98 of cash for every $100 of Treasury collateral, implying a 2% haircut. In times of stress or uncertainty, trust diminishes, counterparties become more selective, and haircuts increase, effectively reducing the amount of credit a given piece of collateral can support. When liquidity conditions begin to ease, it takes time for this trust to be rebuilt and for haircuts to compress, slowing the expansion of collateral chains.³²

• Propagation and Sourcing Time: When new liquidity and funding capacity enter the system via central bank actions, it takes time for this to translate into higher collateral velocity. A hedge fund must first decide to increase its leverage. It then sources collateral and pledges it to its prime broker. The prime broker's collateral management or treasury desk must then identify a use for this new collateral, find a suitable counterparty, negotiate the terms of a new repo or securities lending trade, and execute the transaction. This entire "manufacturing process" of liquidity—from raw funding capacity to a finished, funded position supported by a multi-link collateral chain—unfolds over weeks, not days.

The ~12-week lag, from this perspective, is not merely a delay but reflects the rebuilding time for the financial system's intricate web of trust, legal agreements, and operational linkages. A liquidity injection is not akin to pouring water into a bucket. It is more like providing raw materials to a vast, decentralized factory (the collateral intermediation system). This factory must process the materials, re-tool its assembly lines (credit and legal agreements), and ship the finished products (funded credit). This complex, iterative process is a primary reason why the effects of a policy change take a full fiscal quarter to become fully manifest in asset prices.

The Final Mile: The Institutional Investor Decision Cycle (Timeframe: Weeks 6-13+)

While the plumbing of the wholesale funding and collateral markets explains the initial weeks of delay, the final and most significant component of the ~12-week lag is rooted in the operational, behavioral, and governance structures of the large institutional investors who command the vast majority of global capital. The signal of increased liquidity may be generated in the financial plumbing, but it is the slow, deliberate reaction of these end-users that ultimately translates that signal into a sustained trend in asset prices.

The Quarterly Institutional Clock

The largest pools of capital—pension funds, endowments, sovereign wealth funds, insurance companies, and large mutual funds—do not operate with the agility of a retail day trader. Their actions are governed by formal, structured, and periodic processes designed to ensure prudence and accountability.³⁹

At the heart of this process is the investment committee. This body, composed of trustees, executives, and sometimes external experts, is responsible for setting the long-term strategic asset allocation, hiring and firing external managers, and approving any significant tactical shifts in the portfolio.⁴¹ Crucially, these committees do not meet daily or weekly. The standard cadence for these pivotal meetings is

quarterly.⁴¹

This institutional inertia creates a natural and highly predictable 1-to-3-month lag in the deployment of capital. An internal analyst team or an external consultant might identify a durable shift in the global liquidity environment in the first month of a quarter. They would then spend the next several weeks preparing research, building models, and formulating a recommendation. This proposal would be submitted for the agenda of the next investment committee meeting, which might not occur until the end of the quarter. Only after the committee deliberates and grants its approval can the portfolio managers begin executing the new strategy.

This quarterly rhythm is not a coincidence; it is the fundamental pulse of the institutional investment world. It aligns with the fiscal reporting calendar of corporations (quarterly earnings), the performance reporting cycle of fund managers (quarterly letters to investors), and the broader economic data release schedule. This alignment anchors the decision-making process to a three-month cycle, providing a powerful explanation for the observed ~12-week lag between a macro signal's formation and the large-scale capital flows that follow.²

The Rebalancing Effect

Many large institutional portfolios are managed according to a strict strategic asset allocation (SAA), such as the traditional 60% equity, 40% bond model. As market movements cause the value of these asset classes to fluctuate, the portfolio's actual weights will "drift" away from their targets.⁴⁴ To manage this risk, institutions periodically

rebalance their portfolios by selling assets that have become overweight and buying those that are underweight.⁴³

This rebalancing is often conducted on a fixed schedule, typically quarterly or annually.⁴⁵ In the early stages of a liquidity-driven rally, as risk assets like equities begin to outperform bonds, a quarterly rebalancing discipline would compel a fund to sell its outperforming equities and buy more underperforming bonds. This can act as a counter-cyclical force, dampening the initial price move and contributing to the lag. The more powerful, trend-following flows tend to come not from mechanical rebalancing, but from a strategic decision by the investment committee to

change the target allocation itself—for example, shifting from a 60/40 to a 65/35 mix—a decision made within the quarterly cycle.

The Hedge Fund Reaction Function

While hedge funds are often perceived as being more nimble, many of the largest and most influential funds, particularly systematic macro and quantitative strategies, are not designed to react to single data points or fleeting market moves. Their models are built to identify durable, statistically significant trends or regime shifts.⁴⁶

This process of signal validation is a core part of their risk management and another source of delay. A model needs to observe a sustained increase in a metric like the Global Liquidity Index, or a persistent decline in funding costs across multiple tenors, for several consecutive weeks before it confirms that a new, tradable regime has emerged and the signal is not just market noise.⁴⁶ This deliberate process prevents the fund from being "whipsawed" by short-term volatility.

Furthermore, some hedge funds face structural constraints that influence their time horizon. Funds with investor lockup periods may feel pressure to demonstrate strong short-term performance to attract and retain capital. This can create a "limits to arbitrage" situation, where a manager might be hesitant to fully commit to a longer-term macro theme (like a liquidity cycle upswing) until the trend is unambiguously established and widely recognized, for fear of short-term underperformance.⁴⁹

Behavioral Finance and Overcoming Inertia

Finally, institutional decision-making is not immune to the behavioral biases that affect all human endeavors. Investment committees can be susceptible to groupthink, where a consensus forms around the views of the most senior or vocal members, stifling dissent.⁵⁰

Confirmation bias can lead members to seek out and overweight information that supports their existing worldview while dismissing contradictory evidence.⁵⁰

Loss aversion, the tendency to feel the pain of a loss more acutely than the pleasure of an equivalent gain, can create a powerful bias toward inaction and maintaining the status quo.⁵²

Overcoming this potent combination of institutional and behavioral inertia requires a powerful, persistent, and unambiguous signal. A single day's market rally or one positive economic data point is easily dismissed. However, the slow, steady, multi-week buildup of global liquidity and the corresponding broad-based easing of financial conditions—propagating through the repo and collateral markets as described in previous sections—is precisely the kind of overwhelming evidence needed to force a committee to re-evaluate its assumptions and approve a change in strategy at its next quarterly meeting.⁵⁵

Synthesis: A Step-by-Step Timeline of the ~12-Week Delay

The ~12-week lag between the creation of global liquidity and its ultimate impact on risk asset prices is the cumulative result of a multi-stage process. It represents the time required for a micro-level policy action to cascade through the complex layers of the global financial system, accumulating enough force and consensus to trigger a macro-level shift in institutional capital allocation. The following timeline deconstructs this process, attributing specific delays to the distinct mechanisms and actors at each stage.

Weeks 0-2: The Spark - Central Bank Action & Primary Dealer Absorption

The process begins with a net liquidity injection by a major central bank, such as the Federal Reserve initiating a new round of QE or the US Treasury drawing down its cash balance at the TGA. Central bank reserves are created on the balance sheets of Primary Dealers electronically and almost instantaneously.

• Delay Source: The initial friction is minor but crucial. It stems from the internal balance sheet management processes within the Primary Dealer firms. Upon receiving new reserves, their treasury and risk departments must assess the impact on regulatory capital ratios like the Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR). Their capacity to immediately deploy this new liquidity into the broader system is constrained by their existing balance sheet health and regulatory headroom. This absorption and assessment phase introduces a delay of a few days to a week.²⁵

Weeks 2-6: Propagation - The Repo Market and Early Collateral Churn

The new liquidity begins to seep from the concentrated circle of dealers into the wider interbank system. The primary conduit for this propagation is the repo market, where the increased availability of funding from dealers puts downward pressure on short-term borrowing costs.

• Delay Source: The most significant delay in this stage comes from the tenor structure of the repo market. While overnight repo rates respond quickly, a large portion of the market operates on term contracts lasting from one week to three months or more.³¹ The broad easing of financial conditions only occurs gradually, as these older, more expensive term contracts mature and are rolled over at the new, lower rates. Simultaneously, the "source" collateral that underpins the system begins its journey through rehypothecation chains. However, collateral velocity is still low as it takes time for this new capacity to be sourced, pledged, and re-used throughout the system.³³

Weeks 6-10: Confirmation - The Signal Becomes a Trend

By this point, the easing of financial conditions is no longer a fleeting event but a persistent, broad-based phenomenon. The signal is now strong and clear enough to be identified as a durable trend by the sophisticated models of quantitative hedge funds and the analytical frameworks of institutional strategists.

• Delay Source: This phase is characterized by analysis and preparation, not action. Systematic funds complete their signal validation process, confirming that the shift is not just statistical noise.⁴⁶ Analysts at pension funds, endowments, and mutual funds conduct their due diligence, preparing detailed reports and presentations for their superiors and investment committees. They build the case for a strategic shift in capital allocation, but the capital itself remains stationary.

Weeks 10-13+: The Execution - Institutional Capital is Deployed

This is the final and most decisive stage, where the potential energy built up in the financial system is converted into the kinetic energy of market-moving capital flows. This stage is almost entirely driven by the quarterly institutional clock.

• Delay Source: Investment committees at the world's largest investment funds convene for their scheduled quarterly meetings.⁴¹ They review the analysis prepared in the previous stage, debate the merits of a strategic change, and formally approve new portfolio mandates. Once approved, portfolio managers receive their new orders. To avoid causing excessive market impact, they do not execute these large orders all at once. Instead, they scale into their new positions deliberately over days and weeks. It is the cumulative weight of this widespread, synchronized, but carefully executed institutional buying that becomes visible as a sustained, multi-week rally in risk assets like the Nasdaq, cryptocurrencies, and gold.¹

The table below provides a summary of this entire transmission mechanism, linking each phase to its key actors, mechanisms, and sources of delay.

In conclusion, the ~12-week delay is not a mystery but a logical, albeit complex, outcome of the modern financial architecture. It is the time it takes for a policy signal to navigate the plumbing of the wholesale funding markets and, critically, to be processed and acted upon by the slow-moving but immensely powerful institutional asset allocators who are the ultimate arbiters of asset prices.

Works cited

1. Raoul Pal: Bitcoin Could Hit $450000 In Liquidity-Driven Supercycle - TradingView, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.tradingview.com/news/newsbtc:8475a7901094b:0-raoul-pal-bitcoin-could-hit-450-000-in-liquidity-driven-supercycle/

2. Bitcoin price rallies as global liquidity growth accelerates — Analysts, accessed July 5, 2025, https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-price-rallies-as-global-liquidity-growth-accelerates-analysts

3. How Global Liquidity Affects the Economy - Growth Manifesto Podcast, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.growthmanifesto.com/podcast/michael-howell

4. Global Liquidity vs. Debt Maturity Wall: What Investors Need to Know About 2025, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.financialsense.com/blog/21092/global-liquidity-vs-debt-maturity-wall-what-investors-need-know-about-2025

5. Global Liquidity | Wealthion, accessed July 5, 2025, https://wealthion.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Liquidity_Howell_Presentation_Wealthion.pdf

6. ReSolve Riffs with Michael Howell on Liquidity & its Multi-Dimensional Impacts on Markets and the Economy, accessed July 5, 2025, https://investresolve.com/podcasts/resolve-riffs-with-michael-howell-on-liquidity-its-multi-dimensional-impacts-on-markets-and-the-economy/

7. Revisiting the role of central banks as liquidity providers – old and new challenges, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.riksbank.se/globalassets/media/rapporter/pov/filer-fore-2017/artiklar/rap_pov_artikel_3_160922_eng.pdf

8. Measuring Liquidity: The Global Liquidity Indexes (GLI), accessed July 5, 2025, https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/sprchp/978-3-030-39288-8_13.html

9. Global Liquidity Index Explained (How to Use it in Investing) - Stopsaving.com, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.stopsaving.com/global-liquidity-index-explained/

10. Global Liquidity Index — Wskaźnik autorstwa QuantitativeAlpha - TradingView, accessed July 5, 2025, https://pl.tradingview.com/script/lG8KoR4f-Global-Liquidity-Index/?comments_sort=rating

11. Capital Flows, Cross-Border Banking and Global Liquidity - National ..., accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w19038/w19038.pdf

12. BIS global liquidity indicators: methodology - Bank for International ..., accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.bis.org/statistics/gli/gli_methodology.pdf

13. Global Liquidity and Drivers of Cross-Border Bank Flows - International Monetary Fund (IMF), accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2014/wp1469.pdf

14. Global liquidity indicators - overview | BIS Data Portal, accessed July 5, 2025, https://data.bis.org/topics/GLI

15. About global liquidity indicators - Bank for International Settlements, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.bis.org/statistics/dataportal/gli.htm

16. Open-market operation | Central Bank, Monetary Policy, Interest Rates | Britannica Money, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/money/open-market-operation

17. What Are Open Market Operations (OMOs), and How Do They Work? - Investopedia, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/o/openmarketoperations.asp

18. Lesson summary: monetary policy (article) - Khan Academy, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.khanacademy.org/economics-finance-domain/ap-macroeconomics/ap-financial-sector/monetary-policy-apmacro/a/monetary-policy

19. How a Central Bank Executes Monetary Policy | OpenStax Macroeconomics 2e, accessed July 5, 2025, https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-fmcc-macroeconomics/chapter/how-a-central-bank-executes-monetary-policy/

20. Primary Dealer: Definition, Function, Examples - Investopedia, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/primarydealer.asp

21. The Primary Dealer Credit Facility - Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.sifma.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/SIFMA-Primary-Dealer-Fact-Sheet.pdf

22. Administration of Relationships with Primary Dealers - Federal Reserve Bank of New York, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/pridealers_policies.html

23. Primary Dealers - Federal Reserve Bank of New York - EliScholar, accessed July 5, 2025, https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6145&context=ypfs-documents2

24. Primary Dealers in Government Securities - IMF eLibrary, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.elibrary.imf.org/downloadpdf/display/book/9781589063792/9781589063792.pdf

25. The Effect of Primary Dealer Constraints on Intermediation in the Treasury Market, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/research-department-working-paper/2024/the-effect-of-primary-dealer-constraints-on-intermediation-in-the-treasury-market.aspx

26. Capital Flows, Cross-Border Banking and Global Liquidity, accessed July 5, 2025, https://uh.edu/~bsorense/capital_flows_global_liquidity%20by%20SHIN.pdf

27. Repo market functioning - Bank for International Settlements, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.bis.org/publ/cgfs59.pdf

28. BlackRock Cash Management | Understanding Repurchase Agreements, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.blackrock.com/cash/en-us/insight-and-education/understanding-repurchase-agreements

29. What is the repo market, and why does it matter? - Brookings Institution, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-is-the-repo-market-and-why-does-it-matter/

30. Frequently Asked Questions on Repo - ICMA, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.icmagroup.org/assets/documents/Regulatory/Repo/Repo-FAQs-January-2019.pdf

31. The international dimension of repo: five new facts - European Central Bank, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpwps/ecb.wp3065~ade8a75bc2.en.pdf

32. A Map of Collateral Uses and Flows - Office of Financial Research (OFR), accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.financialresearch.gov/working-papers/files/OFRwp-2016-06_Map-of-Collateral-Uses.pdf

33. The (Other) Deleveraging; by Manmohan Singh; IMF Working Paper ..., accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2012/wp12179.pdf

34. Financial system - The Economics of Collateral-Chains - International Monetary Fund (IMF), accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.imf.org/external/np/res/docs/2012/010112.pdf

35. 10. What is 'rehypothecation' of collateral? - ICMA, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.icmagroup.org/market-practice-and-regulatory-policy/repo-and-collateral-markets/icma-ercc-publications/frequently-asked-questions-on-repo/10-what-is-rehypothecation-of-collateral/

36. Shadow Banking: Economics and Policy; by Stijn Claessens, Zoltan ..., accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2012/sdn1212.pdf

37. Shadow Banking and Market Based Finance, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2017/09/13/sp091417-shadow-banking-and-market-based-finance

38. Collateral, Netting and Systemic Risk in the OTC Derivatives Market ..., accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2010/wp1099.pdf

39. Forming an Investment Committee | World, accessed July 5, 2025, https://worldadvisors.com/blog/employer/forming-an-investment-committee

40. Five Best Practices for Public Pension and OPEB Committees - Fiducient Advisors, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.fiducientadvisors.com/blog/best-practices-for-public-pension-and-opeb-committees

41. Building a Successful Investment Committee - Conrad Siegel, accessed July 5, 2025, https://conradsiegel.com/building-a-successful-investment-committee/

42. 10 Benefits of Leveraging the Expertise of an Investment Committee, accessed July 5, 2025, https://aldeninvestmentgroup.com/blog/10-benefits-of-leveraging-the-expertise-of-an-investment-committee/

43. What Does the End of the Quarter Mean for Portfolio Management? - Investopedia, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/122214/what-does-end-quarter-mean-portfolio-management.asp

44. The benefits of rebalancing your asset allocation over time, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.rbcgam.com/en/ca/learn-plan/investment-basics/when-to-review-rebalance-your-portfolio/detail

45. What Is the Optimal Portfolio Rebalancing Strategy? - Articles ..., accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.advisorperspectives.com/articles/2025/04/29/what-optimal-portfolio-rebalancing-strategy

46. How timeliness beats speed with hedge fund analytics - Kx Systems, accessed July 5, 2025, https://kx.com/blog/timliness-beats-speed-hedge-fund-analytics/

47. Hedge Fund Strategies: The What, When, and How - iCapital, accessed July 5, 2025, https://icapital.com/insights/hedge-funds/hedge-fund-strategies-the-what-when-and-how/

48. The AI-Powered Hedge Fund: How Machine Learning is Reshaping Investment Strategies, accessed July 5, 2025, https://kensoninvestments.com/resources/the-ai-powered-hedge-fund-how-machine-learning-is-reshaping-investment-strategies/

49. Hedge funds, signaling, and optimal lockups, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.runi.ac.il/media/gnkmftmv/hedge-funds-signaling-and-optimal-lockup.pdf

50. Behavioral finance: How biases can affect your investing decisions - U.S. Bank, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.usbank.com/investing/financial-perspectives/investing-insights/what-is-behavioral-finance.html

51. 5 Behavioral Biases That Can Impact Your Investing Decisions, accessed July 5, 2025, https://online.mason.wm.edu/blog/behavioral-biases-that-can-impact-investing-decisions

52. The Role of Behavioral Finance in Investment Decision-Making - Hamptons Group, accessed July 5, 2025, https://hamptonsgroup.com/blog/role-of-behavioral-finance-investment-decision-making

53. Behavioral Finance: Several Key Effects of Investor Decision-Making - SHS Web of Conferences, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/pdf/2024/08/shsconf_icdde2024_01017.pdf

54. What Is Behavioral Finance, and How Can It Impact Investing Decisions? - Mercer Advisors, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.merceradvisors.com/insights/investing/what-is-behavioral-finance-and-how-can-it-impact-investing-decisions/

55. Investment Decisions and Behavioral Finance | Harvard Kennedy School, accessed July 5, 2025, https://www.hks.harvard.edu/educational-programs/executive-education/investment-decisions-and-behavioral-finance