Analyzing the 2013 Taper Tantrum: Key Causes and Market Effects

Search Fintrev

Search our guides, reviews and glossary.

The 2013 taper tantrum was the sharp rise in U.S. Treasury yields, and the sell-off in bonds and emerging-market assets, that followed Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke’s signal in May 2013 that the Fed might slow its quantitative easing (QE) bond purchases at some future date. The panic came before any tapering happened. Markets were reacting to a change in expected policy, not to an actual cut in purchases.

What Led to the Taper Tantrum

After the 2008 financial crisis, the Fed cut short-term rates to near zero and turned to quantitative easing: large-scale purchases of Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities. The aim was to push down longer-term interest rates, keep credit flowing and support spending and investment. Through several rounds of QE the Fed’s balance sheet roughly tripled from about $1 trillion, making the central bank one of the largest buyers of U.S. government debt.

The third round, QE3, began in late 2012 at $85 billion a month ($45 billion in Treasuries and $40 billion in mortgage-backed securities) with no fixed end date. Investors priced bonds, and to a degree stocks, on the assumption that this steady demand would continue. QE was always meant to be temporary, and many economists worried that prolonged stimulus could weaken the dollar or fuel inflation. “Tapering” was the planned exit: gradually lowering the monthly purchase amount so the economy would lean less on Fed support.

How the 2013 Episode Unfolded

• May 22, 2013: In congressional testimony, Bernanke said the Fed could reduce the pace of purchases “in the next few meetings” if economic data kept improving.
• June 19, 2013: At a press conference he sketched a possible path: begin slowing purchases later in 2013 and end them around mid-2014. Yields jumped again.
• September 2013: With the 10-year yield near 3%, the Fed surprised markets by deciding not to taper yet, citing tighter financial conditions.
• December 2013: The Fed announced a $10 billion reduction, to $75 billion a month, starting in January 2014.
• October 2014: Net asset purchases ended.
• December 2015: The first rate hike after the crisis.

Why Investors Sold Treasury Bonds

If the largest buyer was going to buy less, bond prices would likely fall. Investors who expected lower prices sold first, pushing prices down immediately. Because bond prices and yields move in opposite directions, yields rose.

Hypothetical example (annual coupons, held to maturity): a 10-year bond with a $1,000 face value and a 2% coupon trades at $1,000 when market yields are 2%. If yields on comparable bonds rise to 3%, the bond’s price must fall until its 2% coupon delivers a 3% return:

Price = 20 × [1 − 1.03^−10] / 0.03 + 1,000 / 1.03^10 ≈ 170.60 + 744.09 = $914.70

A one-point rise in yields cuts about 8.5% from the bond’s value. Moves of roughly that size in 2013 explain why the reaction was so sharp for funds holding long-dated Treasuries. Higher Treasury yields also lifted mortgage rates, because many lending rates are priced off government bond yields.

Effects on Stocks and Emerging Markets

Many commentators feared stocks would fall, since QE was widely seen as supporting equity prices. Instead, the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the S&P 500 had only a temporary decline in mid-2013 and went on to finish the year with strong gains. Purchases continued at full size through 2013, and the Fed kept stressing that tapering depended on the data and that rates would stay low long after QE ended. Once investors absorbed that message, equity markets steadied.

Emerging markets took more damage. Higher U.S. yields made dollar assets more attractive, and investors pulled money from countries that relied on foreign capital to fund current-account deficits. Brazil, India, Indonesia, South Africa and Turkey became known as the “Fragile Five.” India’s rupee hit a record low against the dollar in August 2013, and the Reserve Bank of India and other central banks responded with rate increases and capital measures.

Tapering vs. Tightening vs. Quantitative Tightening

These terms are often confused:

• Tapering reduces the pace of new asset purchases. The balance sheet still grows, just more slowly.
• Rate tightening raises the federal funds rate, the Fed’s short-term policy rate.
• Quantitative tightening (QT) shrinks the balance sheet by letting bonds mature without reinvesting the proceeds, as the Fed did from 2017 to 2019 and again from 2022.

Lessons and Limitations

When tapering finally started in 2014, long-term yields drifted lower rather than spiking. This was partly because markets had already priced it in and partly because the Fed’s communication had become clearer. The episode showed that a hint about future policy can move prices more than the policy itself. Central banks since then have generally announced exit plans well in advance, and the Fed’s approach to tapering in 2021 is often cited as an example.

The standard story has limits. Yields were also rising in 2013 because U.S. economic data were improving, so not all of the move can be credited to Bernanke’s remarks. The term is also used loosely today for any bond sell-off tied to central bank signals, which can blur the specific 2013 conditions: an open-ended QE program, near-zero rates and heavy emerging-market dependence on foreign funding.

The Bottom Line

Bond investors, mortgage borrowers and anyone holding emerging-market assets can learn from 2013, because yields jumped on expected Fed policy months before purchases actually slowed. When tapering began in 2014, long-term yields drifted lower because markets had priced it in and Fed communication had improved. Central bank signals deserve close attention, and some of the 2013 rise also reflected stronger U.S. economic data.