IMO a lot of the pushback on CrossborderCap's claim that global liquidity has peaked is from folks who are using different data to inform "liquidity". Howell's framework is about DURATION which represents balance sheet capacity to roll debts. Most people point to M2 which DOES NOT show this, as most of its growth is from bank deposits and money market funds which have no duration, thus are largely "liquidity neutral". It's money in the system yes, but flows differently. The Fed's recent RMO policy of buying TBills is closer to duration-neutral also, until and unless they begin buying longer tenors like 2yr+ which they've hinted at. So recent Fed moves have had a very modest impact on liquidity measurements, far less than typical crisis QE. This is why people were wrong for saying QE was back. For "global liquidity" to expand in the CBC framework there needs to be a net reduction of duration in the market. On top of this, if the Fed embarks on converting its balance sheet more to TBills AND also wants to shift from MBS to treasuries (both ideas discussed by FOMC members and nominee Warsh) then it means the market has to absorb duration from the Fed, which is a net negative factor on liquidity in this same framework.(𝐓𝐗𝐌𝐂)