Currencies

Executive Summary If a loss of wealth persists for a year or more, it hurts the economy. The recent $40 trillion slump in global financial wealth is larger than that suffered in the pandemic of 2020, the global financial crisis of 2008, and the dot com bust of 2000-01. Partly countering this slump in global financial wealth is a $20 trillion uplift in global real estate wealth. However, Chinese home prices are already stagnating. And the recent disappearance of US and European homebuyers combined with a flood of home-sellers warns that US and European home prices will cool over the next 6 months. With the loss of wealth likely to persist, it will amplify a global growth slowdown already in train, aided and abetted by central banks that are willing to enter recession to slay inflation. The optimal asset allocation over the next 6-12 months is: overweight bonds, neutral stocks, and underweight commodities. A variation on this theme is: overweight conventional bonds and stocks versus inflation-protected bonds and commodities. Fractal trading watchlist: US telecoms versus utilities, and copper. We Have Just Suffered The Worst Loss Of Financial Wealth In A Generation Bottom Line: On a 6-12 month horizon, overweight bonds, neutral stocks, and underweight commodities. Feature Since the end of last year, the world has lost $40 trillion of financial wealth, evenly split between the crashes in stocks and bonds (Chart I-1). The slump in financial wealth, both in absolute and proportionate terms, is the worst suffered in a generation, larger than that in the pandemic of 2020, the global financial crisis of 2008, and the dot com bust of 2000-01.1 Chart I-1Global Stocks And Global Bonds Have Both Slumped By $20 Trillion Partly countering this $40 trillion slump in global financial wealth is a $20 trillion uplift in global real estate wealth. But in total, the world is still $20 trillion ‘asset poorer’ than at the end of last year. Given that global GDP is around $100 trillion, we can say that we are asset poorer, on average, by about one fifth of our annual income. Does this loss of wealth matter? A Loss Of Wealth Matters If It Persists For A Year Or More Some argue that we shouldn’t worry about the recent slump in our wealth, because we are still wealthier than we were, say, at the start of the pandemic (Chart I-2). Yet this is a facile argument. Whatever loss of wealth we suffer, there is always some point in the past against which we are richer! Chart I-2We Have Just Suffered The Worst Loss Of Financial Wealth In A Generation Another argument is that people do not care about a short-lived dip in their wealth. This argument has more truth to it. For example, in the extreme event of a flash crash, an asset price can drop to zero and then bounce back in the blink of an eyelid. In this case, most people would be oblivious, or unconcerned, by this momentary collapse in their wealth. But people do care if the slump in their wealth becomes more prolonged. How long is prolonged? The answer is, if the slump persists for a year or more. Why a year? Because that is the timeframe over which governments, firms, and households make their income and spending plans. Governments and firms do this formally in their annual budgets that set tax rates, wages, bonuses, and investment spending. Households do it informally, because their wages, bonuses, and taxes – and therefore disposable incomes – also adjust on an annual basis. Into this yearly spending plan will also come any change in wealth experienced over the previous year. For example, firms often do this formally by converting an asset write-down to a deduction from profits, which will then impact the firm’s future spending. This illustrates that what impacts your spending is not the level of your wealth, but the yearly change in your wealth. Spending Is Impacted By The Change In Wealth The intellectual battle here is between Economics and Psychology. The economics textbooks insist that it is the level of your wealth that impacts your spending, whereas the psychology and behavioural finance textbooks insist that it is the change in your wealth that impacts your spending. (Chart I-3and Chart I-4). In my view, the psychologists and behavioural finance guys have nailed this better than the economists, through a theory known as Mental Accounting Bias. Chart I-3The Change And Impulse Of Stock Market Wealth Are Both Negative Chart I-4The Change And Impulse Of Bond Market Wealth Are Both Negative Nobel Laureate psychologist Daniel Kahneman points out that we categorise our money into different accounts, which are sometimes physical, sometimes only mental – and that there is a clear hierarchy in our willingness to spend these ‘mental accounts’. Put simply, we are willing to spend our income mental account, but we are much less willing to spend our wealth mental account. Still, wealth can generate income through interest payments and dividends, which we are willing to spend. Clearly, the level of income generated will correlate with the amount of wealth – $10 million of wealth will likely generate much more income than $1 million of wealth. So, economists get the impression that it is the level of wealth that impacts spending, but the truth is that it is the income generated by the wealth that impacts spending.    We are willing to spend our income ‘mental account’, but we are much less willing to spend our wealth ‘mental account’. What about someone like Amazon founder Jeff Bezos who has immense wealth but seemingly negligible income – Mr. Bezos receives only a token salary, and his huge holding of Amazon shares pays no dividend – how then can we explain his largesse? The answer is that Mr. Bezos’ immense wealth generates tens of billions in trading income. So again, it is his income that is driving his spending. Wealth also generates an ‘income substitute’ via capital gains. For example, you should be indifferent between a $100 bond giving you $2 of income, or a $98 zero-coupon bond maturing in one year at $100, giving you $2 of capital gain. In this case the capital gain is simply an income substitute and fully transferred into the spending mental account. Nowhere is this truer than in China, where the straight-line appreciation in house prices through several decades has allowed homeowners to regard a reliable capital gain as an income substitute (Chart I-5). Which justifies rental yields on Chinese housing that are the lowest in the world and lower even than the yield on risk-free cash. In other words, which justifies a stratospheric valuation for Chinese real estate. Usually though, we tend to transfer only a proportion of our capital gains or losses into our spending mental account. As described previously, a firm will do this formally by transferring an asset write-down into the income statement. And households will do it informally by transferring some proportion of their yearly change in wealth into their spending mental account. The important conclusion is that spending is impacted by the yearly change in wealth. Meaning that spending growth is impacted by the yearly change in the yearly change in wealth, known as the wealth (1-year) impulse, where a negative impulse implies negative growth. Cracks Appearing In The Housing Market Given the recent slump in financial wealth, the global financial wealth impulse is in deeply negative territory. Yet by far the largest part of our wealth comprises housing, meaning the value of our homes2 (Chart I-6). In China, the recent stagnation of house prices means that the housing wealth impulse has turned negative. Elsewhere in the world though, the recent boom in house prices means that the housing wealth impulse is still positive, meaning a tailwind – albeit a rapidly fading tailwind – to spending (Chart I-7 and Chart I-8). Chart I-6Housing Comprises By Far The Largest Part Of Our Wealth Chart I-7Chinese House Prices Have Stagnated, US House Prices Have Surged Chart I-8The Chinese Housing Wealth Impulse Is Negative, The US Housing Wealth Impulse Is Fading In China, the recent stagnation of house prices means that the housing wealth impulse has turned negative. Still, as we explained in The Global Housing Boom Is Over, As Buying Becomes More Expensive Than Renting, the disappearance of homebuyers combined with a flood of home-sellers is a tried and tested indicator that US and European home prices will cool over the next 6 months. US new home prices have already suffered a significant decline in June (Chart I-9). Some of this is because US homebuilders are building smaller and less expensive homes. Nevertheless, it seems highly likely that the non-China housing wealth impulse will also turn negative later this year. Chart I-9US New Home Prices Fell Sharply In June To be clear, the wealth impulse is just one driver of spending growth. Nevertheless, it does have the potential to amplify the growth cycle in either direction. With global growth clearly slowing, and central banks willing to enter recession to slay inflation, the rapidly fading global wealth impulse will amplify the slowdown. Therefore, the optimal asset allocation over the next 6-12 months is: Overweight bonds. Neutral stocks. Underweight commodities. A variation on this theme is: Overweight conventional bonds and stocks versus inflation-protected bonds and commodities. Fractal Trading Watchlist After a 35 percent decline since March, copper has hit a resistance point on its short-term fractal structure, from which it could experience a countertrend move. Hence, we are adding copper to our watchlist. Of note also, the underperformance of US telecoms versus utilities has reached the point of fragility on its 260-day fractal structure that has signalled previous major turning points in 2012, 2014, and 2017 (Chart I-10). Hence, the recommended trade is long US telecoms versus utilities, setting a profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 8 percent. Chart I-10US Telecoms Versus Utilities Are At A Potential Turnaround Fractal Trading Watchlist: New Additions Copper’s Selloff Has Hit Short-Term Resistance Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1     The value of global equities has dropped by $20tn to $80tn, the value of global bonds by $20tn to around $100tn, while the value of global real estate has increased by $20tn to an estimated $370tn. 2     Strictly speaking, housing wealth should be measured net of the mortgage debt that is owed on our homes. But as the wealth impulse is a change of a change, and mortgage debt changes very slowly, it does not matter whether we calculate the impulse from gross or net housing wealth. Chart 1CNY/USD At A Potential Turning Point Chart 2Copper's Selloff Has Hit Short-Term Resistance Chart 3US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities Chart 4CAD/SEK Is Reversing Chart 5Financials Versus Industrials Has Reversed Chart 6The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Ended Chart 7The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Has Ended Chart 8FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 9Netherlands' Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Ended Chart 10The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond At Fractal Fragility Chart 11The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 12Food And Beverage Outperformance Is Exhausted Chart 13German Telecom Outperformance Has Started To Reverse Chart 14Japanese Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 15ETH Is Approaching A Possible Capitulation Chart 16The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Has Ended Chart 17The Strong Downtrend In The 3 Year T-Bond Has Ended Chart 18A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 19Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 20Norway's Outperformance Has Ended Chart 21Cotton Versus Platinum Has Reversed Chart 22Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Is Exhausted Chart 23USD/EUR Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 24The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Has Ended Chart 25A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare Chart 26GBP/USD At A Potential Turning Point Chart 27US Utilities Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 28The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Banks Is Exhausted   Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades 6-12 Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area     Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed     Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations     Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations    

Special Report

Executive Summary Dollar Still The Largest Global Reserve Currency The rise of cryptocurrencies like stablecoins theoretically pose risks to fiat currencies and their general use. In the US, the Federal Reserve will look to adopt a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) – a digital dollar – this decade, to stave off these risks and usher in a new era of central bank money. A digital dollar would likely be integrated as seamlessly as possible into the current monetary regime, thereby maintaining an intermediated role played by existing financial sector actors as well as operating alongside existing circulating currency. The US dollar will eventually face rising competition from digital currencies, both at home and abroad. While other central banks make headway into developing their own CBDCs, China is by far the most advanced. China’s digital yuan will not resolve all of China’s problems with internationalizing its currency but it will create new opportunities. Public and political pushback will occur and will slow adoption of a digital dollar. Gridlock in 2023 may prove to be another headwind. To adopt a digital dollar, politicians will need to work along bipartisan lines to ensure the US remains at the forefront of digital and monetary innovation, especially as foreign competition on CBDCs rises. Recommendation (Tactical) Initiation Date  Return Long DXY (Dollar Index) 23-FEB-22 10.7% Bottom Line: Policymakers will adopt a CBDC – a digital dollar – this decade. Political pushback may slow adoption, but foreign competition will overcome domestic constraints. Feature Technological innovation over the past decade has given rise to a new asset class – digital assets. Investors are most familiar with cryptocurrencies, and to a lesser extent, non-fungible tokens and decentralized finance-based lending, among others. These assets have witnessed a boom and bust over the past few years (Chart 1). Chart 1Manias: Then And Now Cryptocurrencies have been touted to have money-like characteristics, the most popular being Bitcoin, and others like stablecoins. Stablecoins are mostly used as a medium of exchange between fiat money and cryptocurrencies and vice versa. They are pegged to fiat money and often backed by highly liquid traditional assets1 to maintain their pegs. But cryptocurrencies do not exhibit the traits of durable money today. However, the technological innovation of digital currency represents a natural evolution of money that is irreversible and could someday possess the main characteristics of money: a medium of exchange, a unit of account, and store of value. Cryptocurrencies with money-like qualities theoretically pose a challenge to fiat currencies, i.e. those issued by governments that are not backed by any underlying real asset but rather by trust in government institutions, including the treasury and central bank. Not that trust is a poor basis for a currency. But that trust could fail and new trust could be placed in cryptocurrencies. Governments could eventually lose control of the money supply and payments system, suffer from financial instability, fail to provide regulatory oversight, or fail to prevent the illicit use of digital assets for criminal gain. The same technology driving growth in digital assets has led central banks the world around to research and in some cases develop CBDCs. For an introductory guide to CBDCs, see BCA’s “The Investor’s Guide To Central Bank Digital Currencies.” CBDC research and development are at varying stages across the world’s central banks.2 In the US, the Federal Reserve (Fed) continues to research a CBDC (digital dollar) and its use-case, or justification for being. The Fed has made no commitment to designing a digital dollar anytime soon. But we bet that the Fed’s position will change in coming years. Introducing a digital dollar will reduce the various risks associated with cryptocurrencies whilst also creating efficiencies in the US economy. These efficiencies will also transverse into cross-border efficiencies. Globally, central banks are showing increasing activity in developing CBDCs and introducing a digital dollar would help the Fed maintain monetary dominance across the world while staving off cryptocurrencies, especially stablecoins. The Fed won’t sit idle as a global monetary revolution unfolds. But the policy front is fraught with challenges. Policy makers in the US have expressed mixed views on adopting a digital dollar. Some suggest the Fed would exercise even more control over monetary policy than it does today. Others note risks to consumer data privacy, which could be exploited by government. Public opinion is also mixed with no clear understanding of or need for a digital dollar. Commercial bank business interests may come under attack too, with a digital dollar scalping profit margins from banks, depending on the type and extent of the CBDC operating model employed. Ultimately, the US will want to maintain its position as the global monetary leader. Continued dollar dominance in the global economy is strategically advantageous for the US, especially in a hypo-globalizing world (Chart 2). Ensuring ongoing monetary dominance while rooting out domestic competition from stablecoins will be aided by adopting a digital dollar. Chart 2Dollar Still Dominating Global Reserves Bottom Line: The Fed will most likely adopt a digital dollar within the decade. The Fed And A Digital Dollar The Fed has been actively researching a digital dollar for several years with growing research on design, implementation, and necessity. As it stands, the Fed has not committed to introducing a digital dollar in the foreseeable future. But what would a digital dollar look like and what role would it play in the economy if the Fed decided to introduce one? CBDC Model Briefly, the Fed could choose from three different CBDC operating models: unilateral, synthetic, or intermediated (Diagram 1). A unilateral model would mean the Fed performs all CBDC related functions including direct interaction with end-users. A synthetic model would mean non-Fed actors issuing money backed by Fed assets. Diagram 1Three CBDC Operating Models Realistically, a unilateral and synthetic digital dollar are unlikely. The former would crowd out traditional banking services, while the latter would let actors other than the Fed issue money, violating the Federal Reserve Act. Hence the Fed will most likely pursue an intermediated CBDC model. This model entails digital dollar issuance by the Fed but includes a role for private sector firms to interact with end-users. The intermediary role would be filled by financial firms but also other types of companies such as payment service providers and mobile phone operators. This means the Fed would not totally crowd out existing players across the payment and financial services space. An intermediated model would require the central bank to regulate and oversee other actors, which adds an extra layer of legal and operational complexity to implementation. But it is the model most consistent with the US’s combination of federal government and liberal capitalism, and the model cited by the Fed to most likely be adopted.3 The intermediated model will align with the current two-tier system currently in place (Diagram 2). Digital dollars will feature in both wholesale and retail transactions. Wholesale involves commercial banks and regulated financial intermediaries, while retail involves individuals and non-financial businesses. The model would also operate alongside existing paper money. A digital dollar would be a liability on the Fed, denominated in dollars, and would form an integral part of base money supply (M0). It would be distributed like, and act as a complement to, dollar bills and could be used in transactions conducted in currency and reserves. It would be legal tender just like the paper dollar. Diagram 2Two-Tier Monetary Regime System Digital Dollar Needs The Fed has stated that a digital dollar should, among other things, meet certain criteria before adoption (Table 1). Some of these criteria are already met. Others will be met with adoption. A digital dollar will benefit households, businesses, and the economy at large. For example, a digital dollar would enhance payment transparency, thereby supporting the Fed’s objective to promote safe and efficient payments. And depending on design choices, digital transactions could offer degrees of traceability and aggregate payment data could be analyzed in real time to provide insights into economic health and activity. Table 1Fed Criteria For CBDC Adoption Further, a digital dollar would promote diversification of the payments system, thereby increasing the safety and efficiency of US payment infrastructure. It may also attract new actors offering services related to the digital dollar, spurring financial innovation and fostering financial integration. The payments system is already broadly efficient but adding another layer of digitization with a digital dollar would mean that the US economy would be better positioned for the evolution of the digital economy over the next decade and beyond. The need for broad stakeholder support will be a difficult criterion to meet, however. There would need to be more engagement with the public, inter-government agencies, and Congress. For now, these “needs” outlined by the Fed are more than half met, signaling that a digital dollar could come to fruition within the decade from a policy perspective. International advances on this front will spur US policy makers into action even if they are disinclined. Bottom Line: The needs outlined by the Fed to adopt a digital dollar have been mostly met which ticks off one of the policy implementation checkboxes. There are gains to be had across the economy by introducing a digital dollar, ranging from a more efficient payments system to financial inclusion and decreasing transactions costs. Domestic Competition The proliferation of stablecoins has been noted by government agencies around the world. The Fed too has been keeping note. By the end of 2021, stablecoins had a relatively small market capitalization compared to the broader cryptocurrency market, approximately 6%. Now, stablecoins account for almost 16% of cryptocurrency market capitalization. But trading volumes point to stablecoins having a much larger role in transactions (Chart 3). Stablecoins resolve some of the problems of faith and trust that bedevil cryptocurrencies not backed by traditional assets. Chart 3Stablecoins Rise In Popularity Stablecoins pose two key threats that a digital dollar will essentially nullify: Systemic risk: A growing stablecoin market that is increasingly backed by traditional, high liquid assets could create systemic risk in traditional asset markets. An excessive rise or fall in demand for stablecoins would cause volatility in the liquid assets that back them. Moreover, for example, a fire sale in the stablecoin market would cause demand to fall excessively relative to the backing asset. Prices between stablecoins and the backing asset would diverge, potentially breaking the peg and resulting in further price divergence. And more broadly, high volatility from crypto markets can penetrate traditional or risk-free markets. A digital dollar would render stablecoins unnecessary, allowing cryptocurrency users to transact and convert digital dollars to cryptocurrency while enjoying the backing of the Fed on the value of digital dollars. Cross-border transactions: Stablecoins are also increasingly used for cross-border transactions. According to Fed data, the US pays 5.4% in fees on average per cross-border transaction, which also takes several days to settle. Stablecoins settle almost instantaneously and have much lower transaction fees. So too can a digital dollar. It would settle just as quickly as a stablecoin, if not quicker, and reduce transaction costs for cross-border payments. And because stablecoins are designed to maintain their pegs, they have more potential than cryptocurrencies to act as mediums of exchange outside of the crypto market and economy, potentially threatening the ongoing use of fiat money. Bottom Line: The Fed will design a CBDC around its existing monetary and payments system to allow for seamless integration. There are not many reasons holding back digital dollar adoption from a point of need and benefit. By adopting a digital dollar, the Fed will also fight off the growing risk of stablecoins, which could pose a threat to the use-case of fiat money in everyday life. Other Central Banks On The March The authority to issue money is an important element of economic power. History is replete with examples of currency competition both within countries and between them. CBDC research and development are picking up speed across central banks (Charts 4A and 4B). China is the world leader with its digital yuan, as we discuss below. Design and implementation of CBDCs will follow in coming years just like in the case of the digital yuan. If the theoretical payoffs to adopting a CBDC are met by real-world green shoots, then foreign CBDCs could pose a threat to continued dollar dominance in the global monetary and economic system, namely if countries can draw down their dependence on dollar reserves. Chart 4ACentral Banks Paying More Attention To CBDCs Chart 4BCentral Banks Paying More Attention To CBDCs Central Bank Competition Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has noted this challenge in recent remarks explaining that any implementation of a “US central bank digital currency must support the prominent role the dollar plays in the global financial system.”4 The Fed is on the same page as the Treasury noting that any CBDC should be used to preserve the dominant international role of the dollar. The dollar is the world’s most widely used currency for payments and investments and serves as the world’s premier reserve currency. The dollar’s international role allows the US to influence the practices and standards of the global monetary and economic system. Basically, when the US constricts the supply of dollars in response to domestic conditions, the rest of the world suffers tighter monetary conditions, and when the US expands the supply, the rest of the world enjoys looser conditions, almost regardless of what other nations want or need. Central banks have made their policy goals clear in respect to developing a CBDC. Some central banks look to expand financial inclusion, market access, and their payments system while others are looking to compete with one another (Table 2). Canada, China, and Sweden want to gain a local and international market advantage for their currencies by introducing CBDCs. Table 2CBDC Policy Goals Of Central Banks China Leading CBDC Race, But… At this early stage, China’s digital yuan poses the largest threat to a digital dollar on the international stage. It is the most prominent CBDC project at this current juncture. The digital yuan entered beta testing at the end of 2020 in parts of the country. Wider testing across provinces is being phased in. China’s monetary endeavors began with the Cross-Border Inter-Bank Payment Service in 2015. The digital yuan will be positioned as an extension of this system to promote the national currency and fight global dollar dominance. But how big of a challenge could a digital yuan mount? The answer is not much, not now. China is the world’s largest trading partner but the renminbi accounts for less than 3% of the world’s reserve currency (Chart 5). The disparity between trade and currency status in the global economy reflects a lack of global trust in the renminbi and is a cause for concern for China. China is structurally invested in the dollar-dominated financial system and hence vulnerable to American influence by means of that system. Chart 5Global Renminbi Reserves Are Low The digital yuan would support more debt issuance based on cost and payment incentives to debt holders when financing BRI projects. This will help drive the use of the digital yuan going forward. For example, China can assert its influence over countries with Chinese debt by having them accumulate digital yuan reserves to pay back loans. China can even provide countries with concessions on loans to promote its digital yuan. Concessions on Chinese debt may lead to easier uptake, therefore promoting issuance. If the cost of switching to the digital yuan is low, countries will see no benefit in continuing their trade transactions with China in US dollars. Using the digital yuan as the currency of invoice to disburse loans can make these transactions more transparent and manageable. This could also allow for more state control over funds, an attractive scenario for China. However, China’s monetary ambitions face serious constraints. Lack of trust in the currency is the most critical challenge for internationalization of the yuan, digital or otherwise. Even if the digital yuan project is five to ten years ahead of the curve, countries still opt to hold the dollar over the yuan in any type of crisis, as has been amply demonstrated in history, and over a range of global shocks since 2019. Hence digital yuan adoption will require guarantees from Chinese institutions. But these same institutions have struggled to internationalize the paper renminbi. Lack of openness, transparency, and convertibility are persistent problems. Bottom Line: Central banks around the world are gearing up to introduce CBDCs in coming years. Some are looking to promote financial inclusivity. Others like China’s digital yuan want to chip away at the dollar’s global dominance. Digital versions of fiat currencies will have to demonstrate substantial economic and trade efficiencies in order to encourage diversification away from the US dollar, since there is no inherent reason a digital version of a nation’s currency would increase trust beyond what is already established. But those efficiencies could take shape, which would put pressure on the US to respond. The US faces significant monetary challenges over the long run, including from CBDCs. But the US is a technological power and will eventually respond by developing its own CBDC. Pushback Against A Digital Dollar The Fed has stated that it would only pursue a digital dollar in the context of broad public and cross-governmental support. However, neither the public nor congress broadly support one at present. Public opinion is uneducated on the issue and therefore highly malleable depending on leadership and events. Public Opinion Is Non-Supportive Across age groups, people do not know enough about digital currencies and think it is a bad idea to introduce a digital dollar (Chart 6). A 2020 poll found that only 13% of respondents approved of a digital dollar.5 Low approval is becoming a trend. However, the same poll showed that 38% of respondents think the US dollar is backed by gold, bonds, or oil. Addressing poor monetary literacy among the public would help to improve public support of a digital dollar. US households say they are more likely to trust traditional financial institutions than government agencies to safeguard their personal data (Chart 7). A digital dollar will grant the Fed and federal government far-reaching information regarding the everyday financial transactions of households. Trust in government has been declining and a digital dollar underpinned by a central ledger system would provoke consumer privacy lobby groups and government activists to fight and protest adoption (Chart 8). Chart 6Popular Support For A Digital Dollar Is Lacking Chart 7Households Trust Government Less Than Financial Institutions Chart 8Trust In Government Has Been Waning Chart 9Inflation Outbreak Will Limit Big Government About half of the US public already view the government as “doing too much” (Chart 9). The explosive inflation of 2020-22 will slow the underlying ideological shift to the political left, potentially limiting support for a digital dollar. Public opinion has been shifting for decades in favor of more government involvement in people’s day-to-day lives (Chart 10), but that trend may well stall now that excess of government creates tangible negatives for household pocketbooks (inflation). The bigger of a problem the Fed has in taming inflation in 2022-23, the bigger the political backlash will be. Federal solutions will suffer as a result. This is our theme of “Limited Big Government,” since the role of the state will increase relative to the past 40 years but still within an American context of checks and balances. Chart 10People Have Favored Government Involvement Bottom Line: There is no clear public demand for the digitization of the dollar at present. A major financial or economic disruption stemming from the monetary system or digital assets may be necessary to call public attention to the question. Meanwhile the private sector will drive innovation and the federal government will react to try to maintain domestic stability and international competitiveness. These data support the Fed taking an intermediated approach to cbdc when forced to take action. Policymakers Will Resist Policymakers are divided over the idea of a digital dollar. Senator Ted Cruz introduced a bill in March 2022 to “prohibit the Federal Reserve from offering products or services directly to individuals, maintaining accounts on behalf of individuals, or issuing a central bank digital currency directly to an individual.”6 Cruz has yet to receive widespread party support on the bill but he could get the backing from more GOP members if Republicans take over Congress, as expected, this November. Some Republicans and Democrats have favored cryptocurrencies while others have not, advocating for crypto-mining and crypto start-ups in progressive-left and libertarian right states. But the center-left and center-right might lean more toward cryptocurrency regulation and digital dollar adoption. Coalitions may need to be formed on the topic of a digital dollar, in parties and between parties. A digital dollar will cause a level of disruption, which will affect both the Democrats and Republicans. Government gridlock will create challenges to digital dollar adoption too. The upcoming mid-term elections favor the GOP. Both the House and the Senate are expected to flip in favor of the GOP in 2023. The “Blue Sweep” policy setting will end and only the White House will remain in Democrat control. Republicans have a shot at flipping the White House in 2024, which could see a “Red Sweep.” This scenario may slow adoption of a digital dollar but it will only preclude the unilateral cbdc model, not the intermediated model. The period of 2023-24 is too soon for adoption of a digital dollar anyway but the fact is that gridlock will delay the process until external factors force US action. Bottom Line: Public and political pushback will slow the adoption of a digital dollar. Politicians will need to work along bipartisan lines to ensure the US remains at the forefront of digital and monetary innovation but this will be difficult in a highly polarized country and will likely depend on foreign competition. Investment Takeaways We avoided cryptocurrencies during the irrational exuberance over the past two years. We expect governments to regulate the sector in order to preserve a monopoly over money supply and hence geopolitical interests. With monetary conditions tightening, we expect continued volatility in the crypto space. The US dollar remains strong tactically but is nearing its peak cyclically. We remain long but have put the currency on downgrade watch as the market more fully prices a range of bad news this year. On the global stage, the US dollar will remain the premier reserve currency despite cyclical ups and downs. The current macroeconomic backdrop is negative for the US financial sector (Chart 11). Mergers and acquisitions are drying up while regulatory risks loom. Initial public offerings are also slowing, while trading volume is low. Consumers had already accumulated debt earlier in the cycle and with rising interest rates amid a more challenging job environment, growth in loans and ultimately bank profits will slow. The commercial banking sector faces challenges during the upcoming transitional period of disruptive innovation and regulatory uncertainty. We believe the Fed and policymakers in general will want to cause as little disruption as possible, by integrating any digital dollar with the traditional finance sector as seamlessly as possible. However, transitions, especially those digital in nature, bring with them high uncertainty in the financial sector and elsewhere. Chart 11Financial Sector Facing Macro Headwinds     Guy Russell Senior Analyst guyr@bcaresearch.com     Footnotes 1     Stablecoins are backed by various assets and means. Fiat money, commodities, other cryptocurrencies and by algorithmic means are some examples. 2     See The Bank For International Settlements, Central Bank Digital Currencies: Executive Summary, September 2021, bis.org. 3    See The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Money and Payments: The U.S.Dollar in the Age of Digital Transformation, January 2022, federalreserve.gov. 4    See U.S. Department Of The Treasury, Remarks from Secretary of the Treasury Janet L. Yellen on Digital Assets, April 2022, treasury.gov. 5    See Cointelegraph, Most Americans are against a digital dollar CBDC, survey reveals,september 25, 2020, cointelegraph.com 6    See Ted Cruz’s Proposed Bill to amend the Federal Reserve Act to prohibit the Federal reserve banks from offering certain products or services directly to an individual, and for other purposes, March 2022, cruz.senate.gov.   Strategic View Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months)   Table A2Political Risk Matrix Table A3US Political Capital Index Chart A1Presidential Election Model Chart A2Senate Election Model  Table A4House Election Model Table A5APolitical Capital: White House And Congress Table A5BPolitical Capital: Household And Business Sentiment Table A5CPolitical Capital: The Economy And Markets

Executive Summary China: Can The Economy Recover Without Housing Revival The rebound in China’s business activity in June reflects the release of pent-up demand from the economic reopening after lockdowns in April and May. China’s credit growth recovered meaningfully in June due to large local government (LG) bond issuance. Private sector sentiment and credit demand remain sluggish. Home sales relapsed in the first two weeks of July after a one-off improvement in June, corroborating that the housing market’s fundamentals remain gloomy. Despite posting strong growth in June, Chinese exports are facing strong headwinds from weakening external demand. A contraction in exports is very likely in the second half of this year. Chinese domestic demand remains weak. Renewed rolling lockdowns are likely in view of the escalating Covid-19 cases related to a more infectious Omicron subvariant. The RMB will probably continue to depreciate relative to the US dollar in the next few months. Bottom Line: Investors should maintain a neutral stance on Chinese onshore stocks and an underweight stance on investable stocks in a global equity portfolio. The risk-reward profile of Chinese onshore and offshore stocks in absolute terms is not yet attractive.   Chart 1High-Frequancy(Daily) Economic Indicators The recent recovery in economic activity in June mainly reflects the release of pent-up demand after reopening from lockdowns in April and May. Odds are that this rebound will fade. The relapse in house sales and slowdown in steel production during the first two weeks of July suggest that China’s economy is still struggling to gain traction (Chart 1). China’s business cycle recovery will be more U shaped rather than a repeat of the V-shaped resurgence experienced following the early 2020 lockdown. At that time, a quick and strong revival in the property market and exports shored up China’s recovery in 2H20. In contrast, the economy’s progress in the second half of this year will be dragged down by shrinking exports, weak consumption and depressed demand for housing. China’s recovery will be more U shaped than V shaped for the following reasons: New financing schemes for infrastructure investment recently announced by authorities will not lead to a surge in infrastructure investments in 2H22. The basis is that these new funding sources will largely offset a shortfall in local government (LG) revenues from this year’s land sales, as we discussed in last week’s report. Thus, there will be little new stimulus for infrastructure beyond what was already approved in the budget plan earlier this year. Rolling lockdowns will persist as long as China’s stringent dynamic zero-Covid policy remains in place. The recent flare-up of the more infectious Omicron BA.5 subvariant cases in a few cities raise the likelihood of more lockdowns. The number of cities under mobility restrictions or some form of lockdown climbed during the second week of July (Chart 2). These cities account for around 11% of China’s GDP. The rolling lockdowns will continue to disrupt the economy. Private sector sentiment remains in the doldrums. The willingness to spend or invest among households and enterprises remains very depressed (Chart 3). This will ensure that the multiplier effect of fiscal and credit stimulus will be small. Chart 2The Odds Of Renewed Lockdowns Are Rising Chart 3Sluggish Sentiment Among Chinese Households And Enterprises Chart 4China: Can The Economy Recover Without Housing Revival Since 2008 there has been no recovery in the mainland economy without buoyant real estate construction and surging property prices (Chart 4).  Chinese exports are set to contract as the demand for goods from US and European consumers continues to shrink. ​​​​​ Bottom Line: In absolute terms, the risk-reward profile of Chinese stocks is not yet attractive. We continue to recommend that investors maintain a neutral stance on China’s onshore stocks and underweight allocation on Chinese investable stocks within a global equity portfolio.   Qingyun Xu, CFA Associate Editor qingyunx@bcaresearch.com   Peeling Off Credit Data Chart 5June's Credit Growth Was Largely Driven By LG Bond Issuance June’s strong credit growth was again driven by large LG bond issuance (Chart 5, top panel). Consequently, the credit impulse – calculated as a 12-month change in the flow of total social financing (TSF) as a percentage of nominal GDP – is much more muted when LG bond issuance is excluded (Chart 5, bottom panel). Medium- to long-term corporate loan growth only ticked up in June, but short-term bill financing has dropped dramatically (Chart 6). While it is difficult to quantify, it is highly likely that the modest upturn in corporate credit flow was due to (1) corporates’ pent-up demand for financing after the spring lockdowns and (2) the PBoC’s moral suasion used to boost the banks’ credit origination. Meanwhile, a PBoC survey released on June 29-30, showed that loan demand for all types of industrial enterprises plunged sharply in Q2, suggesting that sentiment is very weak among corporates (Chart 7). Chart 6Corporate Loan Growth Improved In June... Chart 7… But Corporate Loan Demand Remains Very Weak Household loan demand, which is highly correlated with home sales, remains shaky too (Chart 8, top panel). Medium- to long-term consumer loans continued to plunge, and the annual change in household loan origination remains negative (Chart 8, bottom panel). Chart 8Household Loan Demand Is Still Depressed Chart 9The Credit And Fiscal Impulse Will Be Moderate Overall, our projections for the combined credit and fiscal spending impulse for the rest of this year suggest that the aggregate fiscal and credit impulse will be improving but will be smaller than in 2020, 2016, 2013 and 2009 (Chart 9). Property Market: A Vicious Cycle Unfolding Home sales relapsed in the first two weeks of July after a one-off rebound in June. The weakness was broad-based across all city tiers. This implies that June’s bounce was driven by pent-up demand after lockdowns and does not represent a sustained revival (Chart 10). Sentiment among home buyers remains downbeat. The percentage of households planning to buy homes slipped further according to the PBoC’s urban household survey released on June 29 (Chart 11, top panel). Moreover, the percentage of households expecting home prices to rise has dived to the lowest level since early 2015 according to the same survey (Chart 11, bottom panel). Chart 10No Snapback In Housing Sales Chart 11Downbeat Sentiment Among Home Buyers Chart 12Real Estate Developers' Deteriorating Funding Will Further Dampen Housing Construction Property developers are caught in a vicious cycle.  Financing has not strengthened because the “three red lines” policy remains in place, and developers’ borrowing from banks shows no signs of amelioration (Chart 12, top panel). Critically, the plunge in the sector’s financing is resulting in shrinking housing completions (Chart 12, bottom panel). As property developers are suffering from liquidity shortages, they are dragging on existing construction projects. The upshot is that many Chinese cities are seeing delays in the completion of new homes. The latter is depressing buyers’ sentiment, generating a reluctance to buy properties, and curtailing deposits and advances to developers. In recent years, deposits and advances accounted for 50% of property developers’ financing. Without a substantial improvement in their financing, developers will not be in a position to service their excessive debts and deliver houses they have presold in the recent years. The latter will undermine their financing, closing the vicious cycle. In short, real estate developers’ liquidity shortfalls are evolving into solvency problems. These will continue dampening construction activity. An Export Contraction Ahead China’s exports were robust in June as supply chain and logistic disruptions faded. This was corroborated by last month’s advance in suppliers’ delivery times and production subindexes of China’s official Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) (Chart 13). Chart 13Chinese Logistics And Backlog Orders Pressures Have Eased In June Yet, China’s new exports orders remain in contractionary territory (Chart 14). Moreover, the softness of Shanghai’s export container freight index is also signaling weakness in China’s exports (Chart 15).   Chart 14External Demand For Chinese Export Goods Will Be Dwindling Chart 15Signs Of Moderation In China's Exports The shift in consumer spending in developed economies from manufactured goods to services has created headwinds for Chinese exports. US and European consumption of goods (ex-autos) is set to decline below its long-term trend (Chart 16). Given that retail inventories in the US have skyrocketed well above their pre-pandemic trend, US demand for consumer goods and, hence, Chinese exports will dwindle significantly when US retailers start to destock (Chart 17). Falling real household disposable income in the US and Europe will also fortify the downward trend in demand for consumer goods that China is a major producer of. Therefore, we expect shrinking Asian and Chinese exports in the second half of this year. Chart 16Developed Economies’ Household Demand For Goods ex-Autos Will Shrink Chart 17Well-Stocked Shelves In The US Bode Poorly For Chinese Exports Very Sluggish Domestic Demand Both consumer spending and capital expenditure remain in the doldrums. Traditional infrastructure investments picked up strongly in June, while investments in the real estate sector weakened further (Chart 18). Contracting exports will weigh on investments in manufacturing. Even as infrastructure investment recovers modestly, the downtrend in manufacturing and property fixed-asset investments will cap China’s capital spending in 2H22. Capital spending in traditional infrastructure, real estate and manufacturing account for 24%, 19% and 31% of fixed-asset investment, respectively. Chart 18Shrinking Real Estate Investment Will Remain A Drag On Chinese Investment Growth In 2H Chart 19Contracting Import Volume Reflects China's Sluggish Domestic Demand Imports for domestic consumption (excluding imports for processing and re-exports) are a good proxy for domestic demand trajectory. In June, import volumes contracted deeply at 12% on a year-on-year basis, reflecting sluggish domestic demand (Chart 19). Worryingly, import volume contraction is widespread from key commodities to semiconductors and capital goods (Chart 20A and 20B). Chart 20ABroad-Based Contraction In Imports Chart 20BBroad-Based Contraction In Imports Chart 21Rising New Covid Cases In China Will Constrain Domestic Consumption Recovery Moreover, the recent increase in Covid-19 cases and ensuing lockdowns in China will curb household consumption and the service sector’s activities in the next few months (Chart 21). Newly released labor market data show a mixed picture. The nationwide urban survey-based unemployment rate fell in June, but the unemployment rate among younger workers surged to the highest point since data collection began in 2018 (Chart 22, top panel). Reflecting weak employment conditions, new urban job creation in the first half of the year withered compared with the same period last year (Chart 22, bottom panel). Rapidly deteriorating income prospects are reinforcing households’ downbeat sentiment. A PBoC survey released on June 29 shows that confidence of future income in Q2 plummeted to its lowest level during the past two decades, while the preference for more saving deposits soared to the highest level since data collection began in 2002 (Chart 23). The latter entails that households’ consumption recovery will be gradual and halting, at best, in the second half of this year.  Chart 22Skyrocketed Unemployment Rate Among Young Workers Is A Big Problem Of Chinese Labor Market Chart 23Low Confidence In Future Income Contributes To Households' Unwillingness To Consume The RMB Is Facing Downside Risks In The Near Term Chart 24RMB Is Still Vulnerable The RMB has depreciated by about 6% against the US dollar since March, and we believe this trend will continue in the next few months. China’s interest rate differential versus the US dollar has fallen deeper into negative territory, and the gap may widen even more given that the inflation and monetary policy cycles in China and the US will continue to diverge (Chart 24, top panel). Thus, Chinese fixed-income market outflow pressures could endure this year (Chart 24, bottom panel). Moreover, as discussed in the section above, Chinese exports are set to shrink in the second half of the year. This will also weigh on the RMB. Notably, Chinese companies have started to increase their demand for USD. The net FX settlement rate by banks on behalf of clients has fallen below zero, albeit only marginally (Chart 25). This means more non-financial enterprises (such as exporters and investors) bought from than sold foreign currency to banks (Chart 25, bottom panel). Furthermore, foreign outflows from the onshore equity market have resumed and will likely be sustained, at least through the next few months (Chart 26). Foreign investors will likely flee from Chinese onshore stocks as global stocks continue selling off and China’s economic recovery disappoints in the second half of this year. Chart 25Contracting Exports Will Weigh On The RMB Chart 26Onshore Equity Market Foreign Outflow Pressures Remain, At Least In The Near Term Chinese Equity Market Technicals: Tell-Tale Signs Chart 27A-Shares Has Not Broken Above 200-Day Moving Average The rebound in China’s onshore CSI 300 stock index had been obstructed at its 200-day moving average (Chart 27). A failure to break above this technical resistance would imply non-trivial downside – a retest of its recent lows, at least. The relative performance of the MSCI China All-Share Index – which includes all onshore- and offshore-listed stocks – versus the global equity index has petered off at its previous troughs (Chart 28). This is a tell-tale sign of a major relapse. Chart 28A Tell-Sign Of Major Downtrend Chart 29Chinese Tech Stocks Still Appear Fragile The Hang Seng Tech index – which tracks Chinese offshore tech stocks/platform companies – has also failed to break above its 200-day moving average (Chart 29). This entails that the bear market in these share prices might not be yet over. Chart 30Two Large-Cap Chinese Stocks China’s two largest stocks (by market capitalization) – Tencent and Alibaba – may not be out of the woods:  Alibaba has failed at its 200-day moving average (Chart 30, top panel). Tencent has failed to rebound at all (Chart 30, bottom panel). Odds are it will likely drop more.   Table 1China Macro Data Summary Table 2China Financial Market Performance Summary Footnotes Strategic Themes Cyclical Recommendations

Listen to a short summary of this report.     Executive Summary The TIPS Market Foresees A Sharp Deceleration In Inflation TIPS breakevens are pointing to a rapid decline in US inflation over the next two years. If the TIPS are right, the Fed will not need to raise rates faster than what is already discounted over the next six months. Falling inflation will allow real wages to start rising again. This will bolster consumer confidence, making a recession less likely. The surprising increase in analyst EPS estimates this year partly reflects the contribution of increased energy profits and the fact that earnings are expressed in nominal terms while economic growth is usually expressed in real terms. Nevertheless, even a mild recession would probably knock down operating earnings by 15%-to-20%. While a recession in the US is not our base case, it is for Europe. A European recession is likely to be short-lived with the initial shock from lower Russian gas flows counterbalanced by income-support measures and ramped-up spending on energy infrastructure and defense. We are setting a limit order to buy EUR/USD at 0.981. Bottom Line: Stocks lack an immediate macro driver to move higher, but that driver should come in the form of lower inflation prints starting as early as next month. Investors should maintain a modest overweight to global equities. That said, barring any material developments, we would turn neutral on stocks if the S&P 500 were to rise above 4,050. US CPI Surprises to the Upside… Again        Investors hoping for some relief on the inflation front were disappointed once again this week. The US headline CPI rose 1.32% month-over-month in June, above the consensus of 1.1%. Core inflation increased to 0.71%, surpassing consensus estimates of 0.5%. The key question is how much of June’s report is “water under the bridge” and how much is a harbinger of things to come. Since the CPI data for June was collected, oil prices have dropped to below $100/bbl. Nationwide gasoline prices have fallen for four straight weeks, with the futures market pointing to further declines in the months ahead. Agriculture and metals prices have swooned. Used car prices are heading south. Wage growth has slowed to about 4% from around 6.5% in the second half of last year. The rate of change in the Zillow rent index has rolled over, albeit from high levels (Chart 1). The Zumper National Rent index is sending a similar message as the Zillow data.  All this suggests that inflation may be peaking. The TIPS market certainly agrees. It is discounting a rapid decline in US inflation over the next few years. This week’s inflation report did little to change that fact (Chart 2). Chart 1Some Signs That Inflation Has Peaked Chart 2Investors Expect Inflation To Fall Rapidly Over The Next Few Years TIPS Still Siding with Team Transitory If the TIPS market is right, this would have two important implications. First, the Fed would not need to raise rates more quickly over the next six months than the OIS curve is currently discounting (although it probably would not need to cut rates in 2023 either, given our higher-than-consensus view of where the US neutral rate lies) (Chart 3). The second implication is that real wages, which have declined over the past year, will start rising again as inflation heads lower. Falling real wages have sapped consumer confidence. As real wage growth turns positive, confidence will improve, helping to bolster consumer spending (Chart 4). To the extent that consumption accounts for nearly 70% of the US economy – and other components of GDP such as investment generally take their cues from consumer spending – this would significantly raise the odds of a soft landing.  Chart 3The Fed Is Signaling That It Will Raise Rates To Almost 4% In 2023 Chart 4Positive Real Wage Growth Will Provide A Boost To Consumer Confidence Chart 5Long-Term Inflation Expectations Remain Well Anchored Of course, the TIPS market could be wrong. Bond traders do not set prices and wages. Businesses and workers, interacting with each other, ultimately determine the direction of inflation. Yet, the view of the TIPS market is broadly in sync with the view of most households and businesses. Expected inflation 5-to-10 years out in the University of Michigan survey has risen since the pandemic began, but at about 3%, it is close to where it was for most of the period between 1995 and 2015 (Chart 5). As we pointed out in our recently published Third Quarter Strategy Outlook, and as I discussed in last week’s webcast, the fact that long-term inflation expectations are well anchored implies that the sacrifice ratio – the amount of output that must be forgone to bring down inflation by a given amount — may be quite low. This also raises the odds of a soft landing. Investors Now See Recession as the Base Case Our relatively sanguine view of the US economy leaves us in the minority camp. According to recent polling, more than 70% of US adults expect the economy to be in recession by year-end. Within the investment community, nearly half of retail traders and three-quarters of high-level asset allocators expect a recession within the next 12 months (Chart 6). Chart 6Many Investors Now See Recession As Baked In The Cake Reflecting the downbeat mood among investors, bears exceeded bulls by 20 points in the most recent weekly poll by the American Association of Individual Investors (Chart 7). A record low percentage of respondents in the New York Fed’s Survey of Consumer Expectations believes stocks will rise over the next year (Chart 8). Chart 7Bears Exceed The Bulls By A Wide Margin Chart 8Households Are Pessimistic On Stocks Resilient Earnings Estimates Admittedly, while sentiment on the economy and the stock market has soured, analyst earnings estimates have yet to decline significantly. In fact, in both the US and the euro area, EPS estimates for 2022 and 2023 are higher today than they were at the start of the year (Chart 9). What’s going on? Part of the explanation reflects the sectoral composition of earnings. In the US, earnings estimates for 2022 are up 2.4% so far this year. Outside of the energy sector, however, 2022 earnings estimates are down 2.2% year-to-date and down 2.9% from their peak in February (Chart 10). Chart 9US And European EPS Estimates Are Up Year-To-Date Another explanation centers on the fact that earnings estimates are expressed in nominal terms while GDP growth is usually expressed in real terms. When inflation is elevated, the difference between real and nominal variables can be important. For example, while US real GDP contracted by 1.6% in Q1, nominal GDP rose by 6.6%. Gross Domestic Income (GDI), which conceptually should equal GDP but can differ due to measurement issues, rose by 1.8% in real terms and by a whopping 10.2% in nominal terms in Q1. Chart 10Soaring Energy Prices Have Boosted Earnings Estimates How Much Bad News Has Been Discounted? Historically, stocks have peaked at approximately the same time as forward earnings estimates have reached their apex. This time around, stocks have swooned well in advance of any cut to earnings estimates (Chart 11). At the time of writing, the S&P 500 was down 25% in real terms from its peak on January 3. Chart 11Unlike In Past Cycles, Stocks Peaked Well Before Earnings This suggests that investors have already discounted some earnings cuts, even if analysts have yet to pencil them in. Consistent with this observation, two-thirds of investors in a recent Bloomberg poll agreed that analysts were “behind the curve” in responding to the deteriorating macro backdrop (Chart 12). Chart 12Most Investors Expect Analyst Earnings Estimates To Come Down Nevertheless, it is likely that stocks would fall further if the economy were to enter a recession. Even in mild recessions, operating profits have fallen by about 15%-to-20% (Chart 13). That is probably a more severe outcome than the market is currently discounting. Chart 13Even A Mild Recession Could Significantly Knock Down Earnings Estimates Subjectively, we would expect the S&P 500 to drop to 3,500 over the next 12 months in a mild recession scenario where growth falls into negative territory for a few quarters (30% odds) and to 2,900 in a deep recession scenario where the unemployment rate rises by more than four percentage points from current levels (10% odds). On the flipside, we would expect the S&P 500 to rebound to 4,500 in a scenario where a recession is completely averted (60% odds). A probability-weighted average of these three scenarios produces an expected total return of 8.3% (Table 1). This is enough to warrant a modest overweight to stocks, but just barely. Barring any material developments, we would turn neutral on stocks if the S&P 500 were to rise above 4,050. Table 1A Scenario Analysis For The S&P 500 What’s the Right Framework for Thinking About a European Recession? Whereas we would assign 40% odds to a recession in the US over the next 12 months, we would put the odds of a recession in Europe at around 60%. With a recession in Europe looking increasingly probable, a key question is what the nature of this recession would be. The pandemic may provide a useful framework for answering that question. Just as the pandemic represented an external shock to the global economy, the disruption to energy supplies, stemming from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, represents an external shock to the European economy. In the initial phase of the pandemic, economic activity in developed economies collapsed as millions of workers were forced to isolate at home. Over the following months, however, the proliferation of work-from-home practices, the easing of lockdown measures, and ample fiscal support permitted growth to recover. Eventually, vaccines became available, which allowed for a further shift to normal life. Just as it took about two years for vaccines to become widely deployed, it will take time for Europe to wean itself off its dependence on Russian natural gas. Earlier this year, the IEA reckoned that the EU could displace more than a third of Russian gas imports within a year. The more ambitious REPowerEU plan foresees two-thirds of Russian gas being displaced by the end of 2022. In the meantime, some Russian gas will be necessary. Canada’s decision over Ukrainian objections to return a repaired turbine to Germany for use in the Nord Stream 1 gas pipeline suggests that a full cutoff of Russian gas flows is unlikely. Chart 14The Euro Is 26% Undervalued Against The Dollar Based On PPP During the pandemic, governments wasted little time in passing legislation to ease the burden on households and businesses. The European energy crunch will elicit a similar response. Back when I worked at the IMF, a common mantra in designing lending programs was that one should “finance temporary shocks but adjust to permanent ones.” The current situation Europe is a textbook example for the merits of providing income support to the private sector, financed by temporarily larger public deficits. The ECB’s soon-to-be-launched “anti-fragmentation” program will allow the central bank to buy the government debt of Italy and other at-risk sovereign borrowers without the need for a formal European Stability Mechanism (ESM) program, provided that the long-term debt profile of the borrowers remains sustainable. Get Ready to Buy the Euro All this suggests that Europe could see a fairly brisk rebound after the energy crunch abates. If the euro area recovers quickly, the euro – which is now about as undervalued against the dollar as anytime in its history (Chart 14) – will soar. With that in mind, we are setting a limit order to buy EUR/USD at 0.981.   Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on  LinkedIn & Twitter   Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores

In lieu of next week’s report, I will host the monthly Counterpoint Webcast on Monday, July 25. Please mark the date in your calendar, and I do hope you can join. Executive Summary Central banks face a ‘Sophie’s choice’. Inflation at 2 percent, or full employment? If they choose inflation at 2 percent, they will have to take the economy into recession. To take the economy into recession, bond yields and energy prices do not need to move any higher. They just need to stay where they are. The stock market has not yet discounted a recession. With stocks and bonds having become equally ‘cheaper’ this year, but stocks now vulnerable to substantial downgrades to their profits, stocks are likely to underperform bonds over the coming 6-12 months. In the event of recession followed by plunging inflation, a valuation uplift for bonds will also underpin stock prices and limit further downside in absolute terms. The biggest loser will be commodities. On a 6-12 month horizon, the optimal asset allocation is: overweight bonds, neutral stocks, underweight commodities. Fractal trading watchlist: Ethereum. The Bear Market Is A Valuation Bear Market. Profits Are Not Discounting A Recession… Yet Bottom Line: On a 6-12 month horizon, overweight bonds, neutral stocks, underweight commodities. Feature The Greek mythological sea monsters, Scylla and Charybdis, sat on opposite sides of the narrow Strait of Messina, with one monster likened to a shoal of rocks, the other to a vortex. Avoiding the rocks meant getting too close to the vortex, and avoiding the vortex meant getting too close to the rocks. In today’s stock market, if Scylla is the monster of high bond yields, then Charybdis is the monster of falling profits. Whether the stock market can safely navigate these twin monsters without further damage depends on a sequence of questions. In today’s stock market, if Scylla is the monster of high bond yields, then Charybdis is the monster of falling profits. If the market can escape high bond yields, can it also escape falling profits? The answer to this depends on a second question. Can central banks guide inflation back to 2 percent without taking the economy into recession? The answer to this depends on a third question. Is 2 percent inflation still consistent with full employment? Central Banks Face A ‘Sophie’s Choice’ – Low Inflation, Or Full Employment? In the US, the main transmission mechanism from employment to inflation is through so-called ‘rent of shelter’. Because, to put it bluntly, you need a steady job to pay the rent. And rent comprises 41 percent of the core inflation basket. For the past couple of decades, the Fed could have its cake and eat it: full employment and inflation running close to 2 percent. This was because full employment was consistent with rent of shelter inflation running at 3.5 percent, which itself was consistent with core inflation running at 2 percent. The Fed faces a ‘Sophie’s choice’. Inflation at 2 percent, or full employment? If it chooses inflation at 2 percent, then the Fed will have to take the economy into recession. But recently, there has been a phase-shift between the employment market and rent of shelter inflation. The current state of full employment equates to rent of shelter inflation running not at 3.5 percent, but at 5.5 percent (Chart I-1). Chart I-1Central Banks Face A 'Sophie's Choice' - Low Inflation, Or Full Employment? Hence, the Fed faces a ‘Sophie’s choice’. Inflation at 2 percent, or full employment? If it chooses inflation at 2 percent, the unemployment rate will have to rise by 2 percent. Meaning, the Fed will have to take the economy into recession. The Economy Tries The ‘Cold Pressor Test’ To take the economy into recession, bond yields and energy prices do not need to move any higher – they just need to stay where they are. This is because the damage from elevated bond yields and energy prices doesn’t come just from their level. It comes from their level multiplied by the length of time that they stay elevated. Try putting your hand in a bucket of ice water. For the first few seconds, or even tens of seconds, you will not feel any discomfort. After a few minutes though, the pain becomes excruciating. This so-called ‘cold pressor test’ tells us that your discomfort results not just from the temperature level of the ice water, but equally from the length of time that you keep your hand in it. Likewise, a short-lived spike in the mortgage rate or in the price of natural gas, or a short-lived collapse in your stock market wealth will not cause any discomfort. But the longer the mortgage rate stays elevated, and more and more people are buying or refinancing a home at a much higher rate, the greater becomes the economic pain. In the same vein, most Europeans will not notice the sky-high prices of natural gas in the summer when the heating is off. But come the cold of October and November, many people will have to choose literally between physical or economic pain. Some commentators counter that the “war chest of savings” accumulated during the pandemic will buffer households against higher mortgage rates and energy prices. We strongly disagree. The savings accumulated during the pandemic just added to, and became indistinguishable from, other wealth. Yet now, in case you hadn’t noticed, wealth has been pummelled. In case you hadn’t noticed, wealth has been pummelled. The impact of wealth on spending is a huge topic which we will expand upon in a future report. In a nutshell, most spending comes from income and income proxies. Wealth generates income, but it also generates an income proxy via capital gain. So, to the extent that wealth can drive spending growth, the biggest contributor comes from the change in capital gain, also known as the ‘wealth impulse’. Unfortunately, the wealth impulse is now in deeply negative territory (Chart I-2). Chart I-2The Wealth Impulse Is In Deeply Negative Territory The Stock Market Has Not Yet Discounted A Recession Coming back to the stock market, does the 2022 bear market mean that it has already discounted a recession? No, this year’s bear market is entirely due to a collapse in valuations. Since the start of the year, US profit expectations have held up. If the bear market were front running profit downgrades, then it would be underperforming its valuation component, but it is not. The counterargument is that analysts are notoriously slow to downgrade their profit estimates. Isn’t the bear market the ‘real-time’ stock market ‘front running’ big downgrades to these profit estimates? Again, no. If the market were front running profit downgrades, then it would be underperforming its valuation component, but it is not (Chart I-3). Chart I-3The Bear Market Is A Valuation Bear Market. Profits Are Not Discounting A Recession...Yet The bear market in the S&P 500 has near-perfectly tracked the bear market in its valuation component, the 30-year T-bond price. The valuation component of the S&P 500 is the 30-year T-bond price because the duration of the S&P 500 equals the duration of the 30-year T-bond. Several clients have asked how to prove that the duration of the S&P 500 equals that of the 30-year T-bond. We can do it either a difficult theoretical way, or an easy empirical way. The difficult theoretical way is to take the projected cashflows, and calculate the weighted average time to those cashflows, where the weights are the discounted values of those cashflows. The much easier empirical way is to show that the S&P 500 tracks its profits multiplied by the 30-year T-bond price more faithfully than if we use a shorter maturity bond, such as the 10-year T-bond (Chart I-4 and Chart I-5) Chart I-4The S&P 500 Tracks Profits Multiplied By The 30-Year T-Bond Price More Faithfully... Chart I-5...Than Profits Multiplied By The 10-Year T-Bond Price One important upshot is that any valuation comparison of the S&P 500 with a bond other than the 30-year T-bond is a fundamental error of duration mismatch. Most strategists compare the S&P 500 with the 10-year T-bond because it is convenient. But the duration mismatch makes this ‘apples versus oranges’ valuation comparison one of the most common mistakes in finance. Overweight Bonds, Neutral Stocks, Underweight Commodities All of this is important to answer a crucial question about stock market valuations. With the stock market 20 percent down this year when expected profits have held up, it might appear that stocks have become much cheaper. The truth is more nuanced. Relative to expected profits over the next 12 months the US stock market is indeed much cheaper (Chart I-6). The caveat is that these expected profits are vulnerable to substantial downgrades in the event of a recession. Chart I-6The US Stock Market Is Cheaper Versus Expected Profits, But These Profits Are Too Optimistic Chart I-7The US Stock Market Is Not Cheaper Versus The 30-Year T-Bond But relative to the equal duration 30-year T-bond, the US stock market is not cheaper. Since, the start of the year, the uplift in the stock market’s (forward earnings) yield is precisely the same as the that on the 30-year T-bond yield (Chart I-7).  Relative to the equal duration 30-year T-bond, the US stock market has not become cheaper. With stocks and bonds having become equally ‘cheaper’ this year, but stocks now vulnerable to substantial downgrades to their profits, stocks are likely to underperform bonds over the coming 6-12 months. The good news is that a valuation uplift for bonds will also underpin stock prices, and limit further downside in absolute terms. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for commodities, whose real prices are still close to the upper end of their 40-year trading range (Chart I-8) Chart I-8The Real Price Of Metals Is Still At The Upper End Of Its 40-Year Trading Range In the event of recession followed by plunging inflation, the biggest winner will be bonds and the biggest loser will be commodities. Therefore, on a 6-12 horizon, the optimal asset allocation is: Overweight bonds. Neutral stocks. Underweight commodities. Fractal Trading Watchlist This week we are adding Ethereum to our watchlist, as its 130-day fractal structure is approaching the capitulation point that signalled previous major trend reversals in 2018 (a bottom) and 2021 (a top). The full watchlist of 27 investments that are approaching, or at, potential trend reversals is available on our website: cpt.bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading Watchlist: New Additions Chart I-9Fractal Trading Watch List Chart 1CNY/USD At A Potential Turning Point   Chart 2US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities Chart 3CAD/SEK Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 4Financials Versus Industrials Has Reversed Chart 5The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Ended Chart 6The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Has Ended Chart 7FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 8Netherlands' Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Is Ending Chart 9The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond At Fractal Fragility Chart 10The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 11Food And Beverage Outperformance Is Exhausted Chart 12German Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 13Japanese Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 14ETH Is Approaching A Possible Capitulation Chart 15The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Has Ended Chart 16The Strong Downtrend In The 3 Year T-Bond Has Ended Chart 17A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 18Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 19Norway's Outperformance Has Ended Chart 20Cotton Versus Platinum Has Reversed Chart 21Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Ended Chart 22USD/EUR Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 23The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Has Ended Chart 24A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare Chart 25GBP/USD At A Potential Turning Point Chart 26US Utilities Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 27The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Banks Is Exhausted Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades 6-12 Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed   Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations