Economy

Executive Summary China’s Daily New COVID Cases And City Lockdowns, 2020 To Present The ongoing wave of local Omicron infections and city lockdowns pose the largest macro risk in China post Q1 2020. The current lockdowns in major cities - including Shanghai - may shave one percentage point from China’s 2022 GDP growth. Restrictions on activity and travel in Shanghai and surrounding areas in the Yangtze River Delta have led to severe supply-chain disruptions, created by both port and highway transportation congestion and manufacturing plant shutdowns. Unlike in 2H20, chances are lower for a quick and strong post-lockdown recovery in China’s economy and stock prices because the nation’s policy easing will be less aggressive and is less effective than two years ago. The scale of China’s monetary easing will be smaller than in H1 2020 given the Fed is rising interest rates. The country’s fiscal balance sheet is also in worse shape than in 2020, particularly at the local level.  Bottom Line: The wave of lockdowns in China’s major cities will pose substantial risks to China’s economy this year. The post-lockdown recovery will likely be more muted than in 2H20 because there is limited room for the country to stimulate its economy and policy easing measures will likely be less effective than two years ago.   Chart 1China's Daily New COVID Cases And City Lockdowns, 2020 To Present The ongoing lockdowns linked to the spike in Omicron and China’s zero tolerance towards COVID are exacting a heavy toll on China’s economy. While the situation is fluid and official data is lagging, China’s economy faces the largest macro risk since early 2020. In the past four months, China has imposed more lockdowns, with full and partial mobility restrictions, than in the past two years combined (Chart 1). In particular, this round of citywide shutdowns occurred in some of China’s largest and most prosperous cities, such as Shanghai and Shenzhen, and several manufacturing hubs including Jilin province and cities in the Yangtze River Delta region. Furthermore, the post-lockdown recovery this year will likely be more muted than two years ago. Beijing has less room to ease policy and stimulate the economy than in early 2020. In addition, policy easing measures will be less effective in boosting domestic demand, given that private sector sentiment was already downbeat prior to the lockdowns and the country’s zero-COVID policy may lead to more stringent confinement measures in the rest of the year. Serious Economic Implications China’s aggregate economy is suffering significant damage from the current round of city- and province-wide lockdowns in some of China’s most populous and prosperous regions. Chart 2The Economic Impact From Hubei Lockdown In Q1 2020 Economic data following the shutdown of Hubei province in early 2020 can serve as a roadmap to illustrate what to expect from lockdowns in Shanghai, which accounts for 4% of China’s GDP and is the same size as Hubei. During a 60-day lockdown in Q1 2020, Hubei’s retail sales growth nose-dived by 43 percentage points (ppt) and fixed-asset investment growth tumbled by 83ppt in Q1 2020 compared with the previous three months (Chart 2). The aggregate economy in Hubei shrank by 40% in Q1 2020 from a year ago and the decline likely reduced Chinese GDP growth by 1.5% in that quarter alone (Chart 3). The lockdown also dragged Hubei’s government revenues, tourism income and corporate profits into a deep contraction for 2020 (Chart 4). Chart 3The Economic Impact From Hubei Lockdown In Q1 2020 Chart 4The Economic Impact From Hubei Lockdown In Q1 2020 A recent study estimating the economic impact of lockdowns by analyzing the flow of intercity trucking found that freight traffic would plummet by 54% under a full lockdown for a month, versus a 20% drop under a partial lockdown. In addition, the ripple effect of a lockdown would be felt by surrounding cities. According to the article, if the four most important economic centers of the country - Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen - are shut down for one month at the same time, then their real income in that month would decrease by a whopping 61%. Meanwhile, the national real income in the same period would shrink by 8.6%, which translates into a 1ppt decline in China’s annual GDP growth. The scenario that China’s four major cities would be locked down was inconceivable before the onset of Omicron. However, as of April 15, it is estimated that local cities that have experienced full or partial lockdowns account for about 40% of China’s GDP, affecting more than 250 million residents. As such, the aggregate economic losses from the current round of lockdowns could reach 1ppt of China’s 2022 GDP growth. Bottom Line: The economic impact from the current lockdowns has the potential to reduce China’s GDP growth by 1ppt in 2022. Supply Chain Disruptions Shanghai’s lockdown has had economic repercussions on the Yangtze River Delta region, an important manufacturing hub and key supplier in the automobile and electronic equipment industries. Cross-regional travel restrictions have led to supply-chain disruptions through transportation blockades and manufacturing plant shutdowns. These obstacles include: Table 1Top Ten Ports In China Increased port congestion. The Ports of Shanghai and its nearby Ningbo handle nearly 30% of China’s total ocean shipping volume and are key barometers of China’s foreign trade and logistics chain (Table 1). Data from VesselsValue shows an almost fivefold increase in the number of ships waiting to load or discharge at Shanghai in the second half of March (Chart 5). Port congestion worsened in April after the Shanghai lockdown began on March 28. Chart 5Ships Waiting To Load Or Discharge At Shanghai Port Chart 6Chinese Suppliers' Delivery Times Have Lengthened Road transport blockades. Road traffic in the Yangtze River Delta has been restricted, causing significant delays in suppliers’ delivery times (Chart 6). By April 7, nationwide vehicle logistics freight flow fell by 32% from a year ago and plunged more than 80% in the Shanghai area. Highway traffic mobility tracked by Gaode dipped to the same level as in early 2020. Production suspensions. A significant number of businesses from automakers Tesla and Volkswagen to notebook manufacturer Quanta Computer Inc. reportedly suspended operations at their Shanghai plants to comply with government restrictions for virus control. ​​​​​​​The city, together with Jilin and Guangdong provinces, account for more than 30% of China’s auto production. Even if employees at auto and chip makers in Shanghai can return to production plants and work through a “closed-loop” system whereby they live on-site and test regularly, a more serious challenge would be how manufacturers can secure trucks to get materials and products delivered on time.1 Supply-chain disruptions are starting to impact China’s trade. The country’s import growth in nominal value in March dropped sharply to a 0.1% contraction (on a year-on-year basis) (Chart 7). Even though China’s exports in March expanded by 14.7% from a year ago, exports are below that of its Asian manufacturing neighbors, such as South Korea and Vietnam (Chart 8). Chart 7Chinese Import Growth Fell Into Contraction In March Chart 8China's Export Growth Has Dropped Below That Of Vietnam And South Korea Bottom Line: The Shanghai lockdown is having spillover effects on the Yangzte River Delta region through supply-chain disruptions. Strong Post-Lockdown Rebound? Chart 9China Will Need A Stimulus That Is Comparable To 2020 China’s economic growth and stock prices will unlikely repeat the quick and strong recovery registered following the early 2020 lockdown. Beijing has stepped up policy supports, but the challenges from both domestic conditions and the external environment are greater than in 2020. Thus, the country’s stimulus (measured by credit growth including local government bond issuance) will need to at least be similar to that of two years ago to shore up the economy (Chart 9). We are skeptical about both the magnitude and effectiveness of the stimulus in 2022, despite policymakers’ mounting efforts to support the economy. Therefore, we maintain a cautious view on Chinese risk assets (in both onshore and offshore markets).  Our view is based on the following: There may be more frequent shutdowns of business activity as China continues upholding its zero-COVID approach.  Even as we go to press, a few cities that recently recovered from COVID outbreaks have failed to resume their business and social activities. A flareup of COVID cases in the low double digits has dragged cities back to either mass COVID testing or partial city lockdowns. China’s COVID-containment measures escalated when the country’s business activity was already weak which was vastly different from prior to Q1 2020 when the economy was improving (Chart 10). Sentiment among the corporate and household sectors has been beaten down following two years of struggling with COVID, and the sectors’ propensities to invest or spend have been further dampened from last year’s harsh regulatory crackdowns (Chart 11).  Chart 10Business Cycle Was On A Downtrend When Omicron Hit... Chart 11...Sentiment Among Private Sector Has Been Downbeat Input costs are much higher now than two years ago, while demand is weaker (Chart 12). Global energy and commodity prices will remain elevated this year, while external demand for Chinese manufactured goods will dwindle (Chart 13). China’s exports as a share of the global total peaked in July last year; a strong RMB and frequent supply-chain disruptions will likely reduce competitiveness of Chinese exports. Chart 12Elevated Input Costs, Subdued Domestic Demand Chart 13Demand For Chinese Export Goods Will Likely Dwindle This Year Granted the Fed’s tightening, unless China is willing to tolerate meaningful currency depreciation, the PBoC has limited room to cut interest rates. The US Federal Reserve is expected to raise interest rates by 270bps over the coming 12 months, which will further tighten US dollar liquidity conditions and may exacerbate capital flows out of emerging economies. China’s 10-year government bond yield in nominal terms dropped below that of the US for the first time in a decade, prompting global investors to offload Chinese bonds at a record pace (Chart 14). The PBoC refrained from a policy rate cut last week. The move underwhelmed investors and was a sign that the central bank may be cautious in adopting a monetary policy stance that further diverges from the Fed.  Chart 14A Record Bond Market Outflow In Q1 This Year Chart 15Growth In Gov Revenue From Land Sales In Deep Contraction The room for further fiscal expansion is also more limited than two years ago as local governments are more constrained by funding. An expansionary fiscal policy in the past two years has pushed local governments’ debt ratios2 up by more than 20 percentage points to above the international standard of 100%, while the property market slump has led to a deep contraction in local government revenues from land sales (Chart 15). ​​​​​​​ Bottom Line: Business activity will likely rebound when restrictions are eventually lifted, and the existing and/or forthcoming stimulus will work their way into the economy. However, the above mentioned hurdles suggest that China has limited room to further loosen its monetary and fiscal policies compared with two years ago, and the effectiveness of policy easing on the economy will be more muted. Jing Sima China Strategist jings@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes   1     Recently the consumer and auto division head of Huawei Technologies warned that “If Shanghai cannot resume production by May, all of the tech and industrial players that have supply chains in the area will come to a complete halt, especially the automotive industry.” "China’s Auto Industry May Grind to a Halt Amid Shanghai Lockdown", Caixin Global 2     Measured by local governments’ total debt including general and special-purpose bonds, divided by their overall fiscal balance. ​​​​​​​ Strategic Themes Cyclical Recommendations

Executive Summary A Good Time For A Pause In The Bond Bear Market The global government bond selloff looks stretched from a technical perspective, and a consolidation phase is likely over the next few months as global growth and inflation momentum both roll over. Central banks are starting to turn more aggressive on the pace of rate hikes in the face of elevated inflation expectations, as evidenced by the 50bp rate hikes in Canada and New Zealand last week (and the likely similar move the Fed next month). However, forward pricing of policy rates over the next 12-18 months is already at or above policymaker estimates of neutral in most developed countries. Global bond yields will be capped until central banks and markets revise higher their estimates of neutral policy rates. This is more a 2023/24 story than a 2022 story. Interest rate expectations are too high in Canada. High household debt will limit the ability for the Bank of Canada to match the Fed’s rate hikes during the current tightening cycle without bursting the Canadian housing bubble. Bottom Line: Maintain a neutral stance on overall global duration exposure. Upgrade Canadian government bonds to neutral (3 out of 5) in global bond portfolios, ideally funded out of US Treasury allocations. How To Interpret Rising Real Bond Yields Chart 1Bonds Under Pressure From Both Inflation & Real Yields The sharp rise in global government bond yields seen so far in 2022 has been driven by both rising inflation expectations and higher real yields (Chart 1). The former is a function of the war-fueled surge in oil prices at a time of high realized inflation, while the latter is a consequence of expectations for tighter monetary policy to fight that inflation. The magnitude of the yield increases seen year-to-date is surprising given the downgrades to global growth expectations. Just this week, the IMF downgraded its growth forecasts for the second time this year. It now expects global growth to reach 3.6% in both 2022 and 2023, shaving 0.8 and 0.2 percentage points, respectively, from the last set of yearly forecasts made back in January. The World Bank similarly chopped its growth forecast for 2022 to 3.2% from 4.1%. Spillovers from the Russia/Ukraine war were the main factor behind the downgrades, including more aggressive monetary tightening by global central banks in response to commodity-fueled inflation. We’re already seeing a faster pace of rate hikes from developed market central banks. The Bank of Canada (BoC) and Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) lifted policy rates by 50bps last week and the Fed is signaling a similar move in May. Not all policymakers are sending hawkish signals, however. The ECB last week opted to not commit to the timing and pace of any future moves on rates, while the Bank of Japan has pledged to maintain monetary stimulus measures even in the face of a collapsing yen. Related Report  Global Fixed Income StrategyPolicymakers Face The No-Win Scenario While government bond yields have risen across the developed world so far in 2022, the drivers of the yield increase have not been the same in all countries when looking at moves in benchmark 10-year nominal and inflation-linked bonds (Chart 2). About three-quarters of the nominal yield moves seen year-to-date in the US (+134bps), Canada (+136bps) and Australia (+130bps) have come from higher real yields, while the increase in the Gilt yield (+92bps) was more of an equal split between real yields and inflation breakevens. In Germany (+102bps) and Japan (+17bps), the upward move in 10-year yields this year has all been from higher breakevens, as real yields have fallen in both countries. Chart 2Real Yields (ex-Europe/Japan) Driving Nominal Yields Higher In 2022 In the US, Canada and UK – three countries where central banks have delivered rate hikes this year and are promising to do more – real yields have been highly correlated to rising interest rate expectations for the next two years taken from overnight index swap (OIS) curves (Chart 3). Meanwhile, in Germany, Japan and Australia - where central banks have kept rates steady and not sending strong messages on when that will change – the correlation between real yields and OIS-derived interest rate expectations has not been as strong (Chart 4). Chart 3Rising Real Yields Where Central Banks Have Been Hiking​​​​​ Chart 4More Stable Real Yields Where CBs Are More Dovish​​​​​ Chart 5Real Rate Expectations Have Risen Much Faster In The US The link between interest rate expectations and real yields is intuitive after factoring in inflation expectations. In Chart 5, we show actual real interest rates (policy rates minus headline CPI inflation) in the US, euro area and UK, as well as a “market-based” measure of real interest rate expectations derived as the difference between forward rates from the nominal OIS and CPI swap curves (the dotted lines). The current path for real rates is the black dotted line, while the path as of the start of 2022 is the green dotted line. In all three countries, the market-derived path for real rates over the next decade has shifted upward since the start of the year, which is consistent with a rising path for real bond yields. Yet the largest move has been in the US where real rates are expected to average around zero over the next ten years. This lines up logically with the more hawkish messaging on rates from the Fed, leading to a repricing of the 10-year TIPS yield from -1% at the start of the year to a mere -0.04% today. By contrast, real rate expectations and real yields remain negative in the euro area and UK, as both the ECB and Bank of England have been much less hawkish compared to the Fed in terms of signaling the timing and magnitude of future rate hikes. We have long flagged deeply negative real bond yields, especially in the US, as the greatest source of vulnerability for global bond markets. Such yield levels can only be sustained in a rising inflation environment if central banks deliberately keep policy rates below inflation for a long time. The Fed was not going to allow that to happen with inflation reaching levels not seen since the early 1980s, leaving US Treasuries vulnerable to a sharp repricing of fed funds rate expectations that would drive real bond yields higher. Looking ahead, we do not expect to see much additional bearish repricing of global rate expectations and real yields over the rest of 2022, for the following reasons: Global growth momentum is slowing The combined shock of geopolitical uncertainty from the Ukraine war, high oil prices and tightening global monetary policy – in addition to the expected slump in Chinese growth due to the latest wave of COVID lockdowns – has damaged economic confidence. The April reading from global ZEW survey of professional forecasters and investors showed another modest decline in US and euro area growth expectations after the huge drop in March (Chart 6). Interestingly, the ZEW survey also showed a big decline in the net number of respondents expecting higher inflation and a small dip in the number of respondents expecting higher bond yields – both potential signals that the increase in global bond yields is ready to pause. Medium-term US inflation expectations have remained relatively contained The sharp run-up in US inflation has boosted survey-based measures of inflation expectations, although the increase has been much higher for shorter-term expectations (Chart 7). One-year-ahead inflation expectations from the University of Michigan and New York Fed consumer surveys have doubled over the past year and now sit at 6.6% and 5.4%, respectively. Yet the 5-10 year ahead inflation expectation from the Michigan survey has seen a much smaller increase and is holding stable around 3%. The 5-year/5-year forward TIPS breakeven is at even less worrisome levels and now sits at a trendline resistance level of 2.4% (bottom panel). Chart 6ZEW Survey Shows Weaker Growth & Inflation Expectations​​​​​ Chart 7Medium-Term US Inflation Expectations Have Not Broken Out​​​​​ US inflation is showing early signs of peaking Year-over-year headline US CPI inflation reached another cyclical high of 8.6% in March. However, core CPI inflation rose by a less-than-expected +0.3% on the month and the year-over-year rate of 6.5% was essentially unchanged versus the February level (Chart 8). Used car prices, a huge driver of the surge in US goods inflation in 2021, fell by a sizeable -3.8% in March, the second consecutive monthly decrease. Chart 8A Peak In US Core Inflation?​​​​​ Chart 9Housing Cost Inflation Is A Global Problem We expect US consumer spending to shift more towards services from goods over the next 6-12 months, which should lead to overall US inflation rates converging more towards lower services inflation. Services inflation is still well above the Fed’s inflation target, however, particularly with shelter inflation – one-third of the overall US CPI index – now at 5.0% and showing no signs of slowing. Chart 10A Good Time For A Pause In The Bond Bear Market Rising housing costs are not only a problem in the US, and house prices and valuations have soared across the developed world (Chart 9). This suggests that housing and rental costs will remain an important driver of underlying inflation in many countries, not just the US. Summing it all up, we continue to see conditions conducive to a period of relative global bond market stability, with government bond yields remaining rangebound over the next several months. The stimulus for higher yields – from even more hawkish repricing of central bank expectations, even higher real bond yields or additional increases in inflation expectations – is not evident. Bond yields look stretched from a technical perspective, and our Global Duration Indicator continues to signal that global yield momentum should soon peak (Chart 10). Bottom Line: Maintain a neutral stance on overall global bond portfolio duration. Upgrade Canadian Government Bonds To Neutral The Bank of Canada (BoC) hiked its policy interest rate by 50bps last week to 1%, the first rate increase of that size since 2000. The BoC also announced that it will begin quantitative tightening of its balance sheet at the end of April when it stops buying Canadian government bonds to replace maturing debt it currently owns. In the press conference explaining the move, BoC Governor Tiff Macklem noted that the central bank now saw the Canadian economy in a state of “excess demand” with inflation that was “expected to be elevated for longer than we previously thought” and that “the economy could handle higher interest rates, and they are needed.” Chart 11Canadian Growth Momentum Peaking? This is a very clear hawkish message from Macklem, who hinted that the BoC may have to lift rates above neutral for a period to bring Canadian inflation back down to the central bank’s target. We have our doubts that the BoC will be able to raise rates that far, and keep them there for long, before inflation pressures ease. The BoC Business Outlook Survey plays an important role in the central bank’s policy decisions. The survey for Q1/2022 showed dips in the overall survey, and the individual components related to sales growth expectations, investment intentions and hiring plans (Chart 11). There were even small drops in the net number of survey respondents seeing intense labor shortages and expecting faster wage growth (bottom panel). The moves in these survey components were modest, but they are important coming after the relentless upward rise since the trough in mid-2020. Importantly, this survey was conducted before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which likely provided an additional drag on business confidence. The components of the Business Outlook Survey related to prices and costs continued to show that Canadian firms are facing lingering capacity constraints and intense cost pressures from both labor and supply chain disruption. A net 80% of respondents – a survey record – report they would have some or significant difficulty meeting an unexpected increase in demand. A net 35% of respondents in the Q1/2022 survey cited “labor cost pass through” as a source of upward pressure on their output prices, a huge jump from the Q4/2022 reading of 19% (Chart 12). Also, a net 33% of respondents noted “non labor cost pass through”, i.e. higher prices due to supply chain disruption, as a source of pressure on output prices. Only a net 12% of respondents cited strong demand as a source of pressure on prices, and the net balance of respondents noting that the competitive environment was inflationary was effectively zero. Chart 12Canadian Businesses See More Cost-Push Inflation Pressures The two main messages from the Business Outlook Survey are: a) Canadian growth momentum likely cooled in Q1, and b) Canadian inflation pressures remain significant, but are more supply driven than demand driven. Overall Canadian inflation is still accelerating rapidly, with headline CPI hitting an 31-year high of 5.7% in February. Underlying measures of inflation are more subdued, but still elevated: the BoC’s CPI-trim and CPI-median measures are at 4.3% and 3.5%, respectively, both above the BoC’s 1-3% target band (Chart 13). Chart 13Mixed Messages On Canadian Inflation Expectations There are more mixed messages coming out of Canadian inflation surveys. The 1-year-ahead inflation expectation from the BoC’s Survey of Consumer Expectations climbed to 5.1% in Q1/2022 from 4.9% in Q4, while the 5-year-ahead expectation dropped to 3.2% from 3.5%. The 10-year breakeven inflation rate on Canadian inflation linked bonds is even lower, now sitting near at 2.2%. There are also very mixed signals on wage expectations, even with the Canadian unemployment rate dropping to a record low of 5.3% in March. Canadian consumers expect wage growth to reach 2.2% over the next year, below the latest reading on actual wage growth of 2.5% and far below the 5.2% growth expected by Canadian businesses (bottom panel). If medium-term consumer inflation expectations are not rising in the current high inflation environment, and consumer wage expectations are not increasing with a record-low unemployment rate, then the BoC can potentially move slower than markets expect on rate hikes over the next year if realized inflation peaks. On that front there are tentative signs of optimism. When breaking down Canadian inflation into goods and services components, both are still accelerating rapidly (Chart 14). Goods inflation reached 7.6% in February, while services inflation hit 3.8%. However, the pace of year-over-year inflation for some key durable goods components like new cars, household appliances and furniture – items that saw demand and prices increase during the worst of the pandemic – appears to have peaked (middle panel). This may be a sign that overall goods inflation is set to roll over, similarly to what we expect in the US in the coming months. Also like the US, services inflation is less likely to decelerate, as rent inflation is accelerating and the housing cost component of Canadian inflation (home replacement costs) is still expanding at a 13.2% annual rate. On that note, housing remains the key component to watch to determine the BoC’s next move, given highly levered household balance sheets exposed to house prices and higher mortgage rates. The robust strength of the Canadian housing market has driven house prices to some of the most overvalued levels among the developed economies. There is a speculative aspect to the housing boom, with Canadian households expecting house prices to appreciate by 7.1% over the next year according to the BoC consumer survey (Chart 15). Canadian housing demand has also become more sensitive to rate increases by the choice of mortgages. 30% of outstanding mortgages are now variable rate, up from 18% at the start of the pandemic in 2020 after the BoC cut rates to near-0%. Chart 14The Goods-Driven Canadian Inflation Surge May Be Peaking​​​​​​ Chart 15BoC Rate Hikes Will Cool Off Canadian Housing​​​​​​ During the BoC’s last rate hiking cycle in 2017-19, national house price inflation slowed from 15% to 0%. Policy rates had to only reach 1.75% to engineer that outcome. With household balance sheets even more levered today, and with greater exposure to variable rate mortgages, it is unlikely that a policy rate higher than the previous cycle peak will be needed to cool off house price growth – an outcome that should also dampen Canadian services inflation with its large housing related component. In addition to the rate hike at last week’s policy meeting, the BoC also announced the results of its annual revision to its estimated range for the neutral policy rate. The range is now 2-3%, up slightly from 1.75%-2.75%. The current pricing of interest rate expectations from the Canadian OIS curve has the BoC lifting rates to the high-end of that new neutral range by the first quarter of 2023, then keeping rates near those levels over at least the next five years (Chart 16). Chart 16Markets Expect The BoC To Keep Rates Elevated For Longer Chart 17Upgrade Canadian Government Bonds To Neutral We doubt the BoC will be able to raise rates all the way to 3% without inducing instability in the housing market. More importantly, the current surge in inflation is not becoming embedded in medium-term inflation and wage expectations – outcomes that would require the BoC to keep policy rates at the high end of its neutral range or even move them into restrictive territory. Turning to bond strategy, we have had Canada on “upgrade watch” in recent weeks, with rate hike expectations looking a bit too aggressive. We now see it as a good time to pull the trigger on that upgrade. Thus, this week, we are moving our recommended exposure to Canadian government bonds to neutral (3 out of 5) from underweight (Chart 17). We are “funding” that move in our model bond portfolio by reducing exposure to US Treasuries (see the tables on pages 15-16), as we see the Fed as being more likely than the BoC to deliver on the rate hike expectations discounted in OIS curves. A move to an outright overweight stance, versus all countries and not just the US, will be appropriate once Canadian inflation clearly peaks and interest rate expectations begin to decline. It is too soon to make that move now, but we will revisit that call later this year. Bottom Line: Interest rate expectations are too high in Canada with medium-term inflation expectations relatively subdued. High household debt in Canada will limit the ability for the Bank of Canada to match the Fed’s rate hikes during the current tightening cycle without bursting the Canadian housing bubble. Upgrade Canadian government bonds to neutral (3 out of 5) in global bond portfolios, ideally funded out of US Treasury allocations. Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com   GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Recommended Positioning     Active Duration Contribution: GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. Custom Performance Benchmark The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index Global Fixed Income - Strategic Recommendations* Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Tactical Overlay Trades

Executive Summary Above Fair Value March’s CPI report will mark peak inflation for 2022. We recommend several ideas to profit from peak inflation. First, investors should keep portfolio duration close to benchmark. The bond market is fairly priced for the likely near-term pace of rate hikes, and long-dated forward yields are now above fair value. Second, investors should underweight TIPS versus nominal Treasuries. They should also favor inflation curve steepeners, real yield curve flatteners and outright short positions in 2-year TIPS. Third, investors should favor the 5-year nominal Treasury note relative to a duration-matched barbell consisting of the 2-year and 10-year notes. The Fed published its plan for shrinking its balance in the minutes from the last FOMC meeting. We estimate that the Fed will be able to shrink its balance sheet at its intended pace for at least the next two years before it is forced to stop. Bottom Line: Investors should position for peak inflation by keeping portfolio duration close to benchmark, by underweighting TIPS versus nominal Treasuries and by favoring the 5-year nominal Treasury note versus the 2-year and 10-year. Feature Chart 1Base Effects Kick In Next Month Last week’s March CPI report showed that 12-month core consumer price inflation came in at 6.44%, a level that will almost certainly mark the peak for the year. Several reasons justify our peak inflation call. First, base effects will send year-over-year core CPI sharply lower during the next three months (Chart 1). Monthly core CPI growth rates were 0.86%, 0.75% and 0.80% in April, May and June 2021 (Chart 1, bottom panel). These exceptionally high prints will roll out of the 12-month average during the next three months. Second, monthly core CPI grew 0.32% in March, a significant step down from the 0.5%-0.6% range that had been the norm since October. If monthly core CPI growth rates remain between 0.3% and 0.4% from now until the end of the year, then 12-month core CPI will fall to a range of 4.19% to 5.13%. We think that trends in the major components of core inflation make this outcome likely, and we could even see inflation falling to below that range. Chart 2 shows the contributions of shelter, goods and services (ex. shelter) to overall core CPI. Chart 2Monthly Core Inflation By Major Component Starting with core goods, we see that prices fell in March for the first time since February 2021. This represents an important inflection point. Core goods, particularly autos, have been the principal driver of current extremely high inflation rates (Chart 3), and these prices will continue to fall in the coming months as supply chain issues are resolved and as goods spending reverts to its pre-pandemic trend (Chart 3, bottom panel). Few dispute that core goods inflation will be weaker going forward. However, one critical question is whether the impact from falling goods prices will simply be offset by the rising cost of services. There was indeed some evidence for this in March. Core services (ex. shelter) prices rose 0.71% in March, up from 0.55% in February. While this is a strong print, it was not sufficient to prevent a drop in overall core inflation from 0.51% to 0.32%. What’s more, March’s core services print was heavily influenced by a surge in airfares that represents a rebound from steep declines seen near the end of last year. With airfares excluded, core services inflation would have only come in at 0.50% in March (Chart 4). Chart 3Goods Inflation Chart 4Services & Shelter Inflation Finally, we turn to the outlook for shelter inflation. Monthly shelter inflation has rebounded to above its pre-COVID levels, but its acceleration has abated during the past few months (Chart 4, bottom panel). Trends in home prices and some indicators of market rents suggest that shelter inflation has some further near-term upside.1 However, shelter inflation is also very sensitive to the economic cycle and the unemployment rate. With that in mind, rapid shelter inflation during the past 12 months is mostly explained by the fact that the unemployment rate fell by almost 2.5%! With the labor market already close to full employment, this sort of cyclical economic improvement will not be repeated during the next 12 months. All in all, we think monthly shelter inflation will average close to its current level during the next nine months. Bottom Line: March’s CPI report marked an inflection point for inflation. Year-over-year inflation will fall sharply during the next few months and will settle close to 4% by the end of the year. Profiting From Peak Inflation Portfolio Duration We have been recommending an “at benchmark” portfolio duration stance in US bond portfolios since mid-February, yet Treasury yields have continued their upward march during the past two months. Our sense is that bond yields now look somewhat too high, and some pullback is likely as inflation moves lower during the next few months. First, let’s consider that the bond market is priced for 262 bps of tightening during the next 12 months (Chart 5), the equivalent of more than ten 25 basis point rate hikes at the next eight FOMC meetings. Our view is that this pricing is close to fair. Chart 5Rate Expectations A 50 basis point rate hike at the May FOMC meeting is now a near certainty. The minutes from the last meeting revealed that “many” participants would have preferred a 50 bps increase in March, but uncertainty surrounding the war in Ukraine prevented that view from becoming consensus. The Treasury curve has also re-steepened significantly during the past few weeks, a development that will ease any concerns about near-term over-tightening. It’s also worth noting that the precedent for a 50 bps hike has now been set by the Reserve Bank of New Zealand and the Bank of Canada. Both central banks lifted their policy rates by 50 bps at their most recent meetings. Chart 6Above Fair Value Beyond May, we expect to see more 25 basis point rate hikes than 50 basis point hikes. Falling inflation will ease some of the Fed’s urgency and the Fed will continue to tighten policy with the goal of getting the fed funds rate close to estimates of the long-run neutral rate by the end of the year. A 25 basis point rate increase at every meeting after May would bring the fed funds rate to a range of 2.0% - 2.25% by the end of the year, just below the Fed’s median estimate of the long-run neutral rate (2.4%). One additional 50 bps hike would bring the funds rate right up to neutral, and such a path would still be consistent with what is currently priced in the curve. Meanwhile, bond pricing at the long end of the yield curve now looks a touch cheap. The 5-year/5-year forward Treasury yield – a market proxy for the long-run neutral rate – has moved up to 2.87%, significantly above survey estimates of the long-run neutral rate (Chart 6). Some pullback closer to survey levels is likely as inflation trends lower. Bottom Line: Keep portfolio duration close to benchmark. Front-end pricing looks fair and long-dated forward yields are somewhat too high. TIPS Perhaps the most obvious way to profit from peak inflation in 2022 is by shorting TIPS versus nominal Treasuries. The 10-year TIPS breakeven inflation rate has risen to 2.91%, well above the Fed’s target range of 2.3%-2.5% (Chart 7). The combination of Fed tightening and falling inflation will send this rate back toward the Fed’s target between now and the end of the year. However, the potential downside in the 10-year TIPS breakeven inflation rate is nothing compared to the 2-year rate. The 2-year TIPS breakeven inflation rate is 4.4% (Chart 7, panel 2) and this short-maturity rate is much more sensitive to the incoming inflation data. Finally, long-maturity TIPS breakeven inflation rates look elevated compared to survey estimates of long run inflation. The 5-year/5-year forward TIPS breakeven inflation rate is currently 2.46%, above the range of estimates from the New York Fed’s Survey of Primary Dealers (Chart 7, bottom panel). In addition to underweight positions in TIPS versus nominal Treasuries, we continue to see the opportunity for an outright short position in 2-year TIPS. The 2-year TIPS yield has risen significantly since the end of last year, but this has been driven by a rising 2-year nominal yield (Chart 8). Going forward, the 2-year TIPS yield still has room to rise but it’s increase will be driven less by a rising nominal yield and more by a falling 2-year TIPS breakeven inflation rate. Chart 7Inflation Expectations Chart 8Sell 2-Year TIPS Consistent with our view that the cost of short-maturity inflation compensation has more downside than the cost of long-maturity inflation compensation, we view positions in 2-year/10-year inflation curve steepeners and 2-year/10-year TIPS curve flatteners as likely to profit during the next nine months (Chart 8, bottom panel). Bottom Line: Investors should underweight TIPS versus nominal Treasuries. They should also position in inflation curve steepeners and real yield curve flatteners and hold outright short positions in 2-year TIPS. Nominal Treasury Curve Chart 9Go Long 5yr Versus 2/10 One final idea is for investors to take a long position in the 5-year Treasury note versus a short position in a duration-matched barbell consisting of the 2-year and 10-year notes. This 5 over 2/10 trade currently offers an attractive 18 bps of yield pick-up, which is much higher than we normally see when the 2-year/10-year Treasury slope is this flat (Chart 9). In fact, a simple model of the 2/5/10 butterfly spread versus the 2-year/10-year slope shows the 5-year bullet to be very cheap relative to history (Chart 9, panel 2). This position will profit from continued 2-year/10-year curve steepening, or more likely, it will profit if the 2-year/10-year slope remains near its current level but the 2-year/5-year slope flattens as the Fed tightening cycle progresses (Chart 9, panel 3). Bottom Line: The recent steepening trend in the 2-year/10-year Treasury slope is likely exhausted, but the 5-year Treasury yield is too high relative to the current 2-year/10-year slope. Investors should go long the 5-year bullet versus a duration-matched 2-year/10-year barbell. The Fed’s Balance Sheet Plan The minutes from the March FOMC meeting revealed the Fed’s plan for shrinking its balance sheet. This plan will likely be put into action at either the May or June FOMC meeting. Specifically, the Fed intends to allow a maximum of $60 billion of Treasuries and $35 billion of MBS to passively run off its portfolio each month. The Fed also hinted that it may decide to start with lower caps and raise them up to the $60 billion and $35 billion targets over a period of three months. However, with the market already well positioned for Quantitative Tightening (QT), this phase-in period will probably not be deemed necessary. For its Treasury securities, the Fed intends to allow a maximum of $60 billion of coupon securities to run off its portfolio each month. If fewer than $60 billion of coupon securities are maturing that month, then the Fed will redeem T-bills to reach the $60 billion target. For MBS, the Fed’s $35 billion per month cap will probably not be binding. Given the slow pace of mortgage refinancings, which will only slow further as interest rates rise, it is unlikely that there will be many months with more than $35 billion of maturing MBS. In fact, some recent Fed research estimated that average MBS runoff will be closer to $25 billion per month going forward.2 Assuming the Fed’s plan starts in June and that MBS runoff averages $25 billion per month, we calculate that the Fed’s Treasury holdings and total assets will still be above pre-COVID levels in 2026 (Chart 10). More important than the Fed’s total assets, however, are the total reserves supplied to the banking system. It is the amount of reserves, after all, that determine whether the Fed can maintain adequate control over interest rates. If too few reserves are supplied, then the fed funds rate will threaten to break above the upper end of the Fed’s target band and the Fed will be forced to increase reserves by either re-starting purchases or engaging in repo transactions. This is exactly what happened when the Fed was forced to abandon its last QT effort in September 2019 (Chart 11). Chart 10Fed Asset Projections Chart 11Reserve Projections Making a few additional assumptions about the growth rate of currency-in-circulation and the size of the Treasury’s General Account, we are able to forecast the path for reserves going forward (Chart 11, top panel). We estimate that reserves will fall to roughly $2 trillion by the end of 2025, still slightly above the levels that caused problems in fall 2019. Ultimately, neither us nor the Fed knows exactly what level of reserves will be adequate to maintain control of interest rates going forward. The Fed will track usage of its new Standing Repo Facility as it shrinks its balance sheet. If usage of the repo facility increases, that will be the sign that the Fed has done enough QT and it is time to start slowly increasing the balance sheet once again. Given the recently published pace of runoff, we think this won’t be story for at least another two years.   Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 For more details please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “A Soft Landing Is Still Possible”, dated March 15, 2022. 2 https://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/speeches/2022/log220302 Recommended Portfolio Specification Other Recommendations Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns