Energy

Executive Summary EU Embargoes Russian Oil The EU imposed an embargo on 90% of Russian oil imports, which will provoke retaliation. Russia will squeeze Europe’s economy ahead of critical negotiations over the coming 6-12 months. Russian gains on the battlefield in Ukraine point to a ceasefire later, but not yet – and Russia will need to retaliate against NATO enlargement. The Middle East and North Africa face instability and oil disruptions due to US-Iran tensions and Russian interference. China’s autocratic shift is occurring amid an economic slowdown and pandemic. Social unrest and internal tensions will flare. China will export uncertainty and stagflation.  Inflation is causing disparate effects in South Asia – instability in Pakistan and Sri Lanka, and fiscal populism in India.   Asset Initiation Date Return Long Brazilian Financials / Indian Equities (Closed) Feb 10/22 22.5%  Bottom Line: Markets still face three geopolitical hurdles: Russian retaliation; Middle Eastern instability; Chinese uncertainty. Feature Global equities bounced back 6.1% from their trough on May 12 as investors cheered hints of weakening inflation and questioned the bearish consensus. BCA’s Global Investment Strategy correctly called the equity bounce. However, as BCA’s Geopolitical Strategy service, we see several sources of additional bad news. Throughout the Ukraine conflict we have highlighted two fundamental factors to ascertain regarding the ongoing macroeconomic impact: Will the war cut off the Russia-EU energy trade? Will the war broaden beyond Ukraine? Chart 1Russian-Exposed Assets Will Suffer More In this report we update our views on these two critical questions. The takeaway is that the geopolitical outlook is still flashing red. The US dollar will remain strong and currencies exposed to Russia and geopolitical risk will remain weak (Chart 1). In addition, China’s politics will continue to produce uncertainty and negative surprises this year. Taken together, investors should remain defensive for now but be ready to turn positive when the market clears the hurdles we identify. The fate of the business cycle hangs in the balance.  Energy Ties Eroding … Russia Will Retaliate Over Oil Embargo Chart 2AEU Embargoes Russian Oil Europe is diversifying from Russian oil and natural gas. The European Union adopted a partial oil embargo on Russia that will cut oil imports by 90% by the end of 2022. It also removed Sberbank from the SWIFT banking communications network and slapped sanctions on companies that insure shipments of Russian crude. The sanctions will cut off all of Europe’s seaborne oil imports from Russia as well as major pipeline imports, except the Southern Druzhba pipeline. The EU made an exception for landlocked eastern European countries heavily dependent on Russian pipeline imports – namely Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Bulgaria (Chart 2A).  Focus on the big picture. Germany changed its national policy to reduce Russian energy dependency for the sake of national security. From Chancellors Willy Brandt to Angela Merkel, Germany pursued energy cooperation and economic engagement as a means of lowering the risk of war with Russia. Ostpolitik worked in the Cold War, so when Russia seized Crimea in 2014, Merkel built the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. But Merkel’s policy failed to persuade Russia that economic cooperation is better than military confrontation – rather it emboldened President Putin, who viewed Europe as divided and corruptible. Chart 2BRussia Squeezes EU’s Natural Gas Russia’s regime is insecure and feels threatened by the US and NATO. Russia believed that if it invaded Ukraine, the Europeans would maintain energy relations for the sake of preserving overall strategic stability. Instead Germany and other European states began to view Russia as irrational and aggressive and hence a threat to their long-term security. They imposed a coal ban, now an oil ban the end of this year, and a natural gas ban by the end of 2027, all formalized under the recently announced RePowerEU program. Russia retaliated by declaring it would reduce natural gas exports to the Netherlands and probably Denmark, after having already cut off Finland, Poland, and Bulgaria (Chart 2B). As a pretext Russia points to its arbitrary March demand that states pay for gas in rubles rather than in currencies written in contracts. This ruble payment scheme is being enforced on a country-by-country basis against those Russia deems “unfriendly,” i.e. those that join NATO, adopt new sanctions, provide massive assistance to Ukraine, or are otherwise adverse. Chart 3Russia Actively Cutting Gas Flows Russia and Ukraine are already reducing natural gas exports through the Ukraine and Turkstream pipelines while the Yamal pipeline has been empty since May – and it is only a matter of time before flows begin to fall in the Nord Stream 1 pipeline to Germany (Chart 3). German government and industry are preparing to ration natural gas (to prioritize household needs) and revive 15 coal plants if necessary. Europe is attempting to rebuild stockpiles for the coming winter, when Russian willingness and capability to squeeze natural gas flows will reach a peak. The big picture is demonstrated by game theory in Diagram 1. The optimal situation for both Russia and the EU is to maintain energy exports for as long as possible, so that Russia has revenues to wage its war and Europe avoids a recession while transitioning away from Russian supplies (bottom right quadrant, each side receives four points). The problem is that this solution is not an equilibrium because either side can suffer a sudden shock if the other side betrays the tacit agreement and stops buying or selling (bottom left and top right quadrants). Diagram 1EU-Russia Standoff: What Does Game Theory Say? The equilibrium – the decision sets in which both Russia and the EU are guaranteed to lose the least – is a situation in which both states reduce energy trade immediately. Europe needs to cut off the revenues that fuel the Russian war machine while Russia needs to punish and deter Europe now while it still has massive energy leverage (top left quadrant, circled). Once Europe diversifies away, Russia loses its leverage. If Europe does not diversify immediately, Russia can punish it severely by cutting off energy before it is prepared.   Russian energy weaponization is especially useful ahead of any ceasefire talks in Ukraine. Russia aims for Ukrainian military neutrality and a permanently weakened Ukrainian state. To that end it is seizing territory for the Luhansk and Donetsk People’s Republics, seizing the southern coastline and strategic buffer around Crimea, and controlling the mouth of the Dnieper river so that Ukraine is forever hobbled (Map 1). Once it achieves these aims it will want to settle a ceasefire that legitimizes its conquests. But Ukraine will wish to continue the fight. Map 1Russian Invasion Of Ukraine, 2022 Russia will need leverage over Europe to convince the EU to lean on Ukraine to agree to a ceasefire. Something similar occurred in 2014-15 when Russia collaborated with Germany and France to foist the Minsk Protocols onto Ukraine. If Russia keeps energy flowing to EU, the EU not only gets a smooth energy transition away from Russia but also gets to keep assisting Ukraine’s military effort. Whereas if Russia imposes pain on the EU ahead of ceasefire talks, the EU has greater interest in settling a ceasefire. Finally, given Russia’s difficulties on the battlefield, its loss of European patronage, and potential NATO enlargement on its borders, Moscow is highly likely to open a “new front” in its conflict with the West. Josef Stalin, for example, encouraged Kim Il Sung to invade South Korea in 1950. Today Russia’s options lie in the Middle East and North Africa – the regions where Europe turns for energy alternatives. Not only Libya and Algeria – which are both inherently fertile ground for Russia to sow instability –  but also Iran and the broader Middle East, where a tenuous geopolitical balance is already eroding due to a lack of strategic understanding between the US and Iran. Russia’s capabilities are limited but it likely retains enough influence to ignite existing powder kegs in these areas.   Bottom Line: Investors still face a few hurdles from the Ukraine war. First, the EU’s expanding energy embargo and Russian retaliation. Second, instability in the Middle East and North Africa. Hence energy price pressures will remain elevated in the short term and kill more demand, thus pushing the EU and the rest of the world toward stagflation or even recession. War Contained To Ukraine So Far … But Russia To Retaliate Over NATO Enlargement At present Russia is waging a full-scale assault on eastern and southern Ukraine, where about half of Donetsk awaits a decision (Map 2). If Russia emerges victorious over Donetsk in the summer or fall then it can declare victory and start negotiating a ceasefire. This timeline assumes that its economic circumstances are sufficiently straitened to prevent a campaign to the Moldovan border.1   Map 2Russia May Declare Victory If It Conquers The Rest Of Donetsk There are still ways for the Ukraine war to spill over into neighboring areas. For example, the Black Sea is effectively a Russian lake at the moment, which prevents Ukrainian grain from reaching global markets where food prices are soaring. Eventually the western maritime powers will need to attempt to restore freedom of navigation. However, Russia is imposing a blockade on Ukraine, has more at stake there than other powers, and can take greater risks. The US and its allies will continue to provide Ukraine with targeting information against Russian ships but this assistance could eventually provoke a larger naval conflict. Separately, the US has agreed to provide Ukraine with the M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS), which could lead to attacks on Russian territory that would prompt a ferocious Russian reaction. Even assuming that the Ukraine war remains contained, Russia’s strategic conflict with the US and the West will remain unresolved and Moscow will be eager to save face. Russian retaliation will occur not only on account of European energy diversification but also on account of NATO enlargement. Finland and Sweden are attempting to join NATO and as such the West is directly repudiating the Putin regime’s chief strategic demand for 22 years. Finland shares an 830 mile border with Russia, adding insult to injury. The result will be another round of larger military tensions that go beyond Ukraine and prolong this year’s geopolitical risk and uncertainty. Russia’s initial response to Finland’s and Sweden’s joint application to NATO was to dismiss the threat they pose while drawing a new red line. Rather than forbidding NATO enlargement, Russia now demands that no NATO forces be deployed to these two states. This demand, which Putin and other officials expressed, may or may not amount to a genuine Russian policy change. Russia’s initial responses should be taken with a grain of salt because Turkey is temporarily blocking Finland’s and Sweden’s applications, so Russia has no need to respond to NATO enlargement yet. But the true test will come when and if the West satisfies Turkey’s grievances and Turkey moves to admit the new members. If enlargement becomes inevitable, Russia will respond. Russia will feel that its national security is fundamentally jeopardized by Sweden overturning two centuries of neutrality and Finland reversing the policy of “Finlandization” that went so far in preventing conflict during the Cold War. Chart 4Military Balances Stacking Up Against Russia Russia’s military options are limited. Russia has little ability to expand the war and fight on multiple fronts judging by the army’s recent performance in Ukraine and the Red Army’s performance in the Winter War of 1939. This point can be illustrated by taking the military balance of Russia and its most immediate adversaries, which add up to about half of Russian military strength even apart from NATO (Chart 4). Russian armed forces already demonstrated some pragmatism in April by withdrawing from Kyiv and focusing on more achievable war aims. Unless President Putin turns utterly reckless and the Russian state fails to restrain him, Russia will opt for defensive measures and strategic deterrence rather than a military offensive in the Baltics. Hence Russia’s military response will come in the form of threats rather than outright belligerence. However, these threats will probably include military and nuclear actions that will raise alarm bells across Europe and the United States. President Dmitri Medvedev has already warned of the permanent deployment of nuclear missiles in the Kaliningrad exclave.2 This statement points to only the most symbolic option of a range of options that will increase deterrence and elevate the fear of war. Otherwise Russia’s retaliation will consist of squeezing global energy supply, as discussed above, including by opening a new front in the Middle East and North Africa. Instability should be expected as a way of constraining Europe and distracting America. Higher energy prices may or may not convince the EU to negotiate better terms with Russia but they will sow divisions within and among the allies. Ultimately Russia is highly unlikely to sacrifice its credibility by failing to retaliate for the combination of energy embargo and NATO enlargement on its borders. Since its military options are becoming constrained (at least its rational ones), its economic and asymmetrical options will grow in importance. The result will be additional energy supply constraints. Bottom Line: Even assuming that the war does not spread beyond Ukraine – likely but not certain – global financial markets face at least one more period of military escalation with Russia. This will likely include significant energy cutoffs and saber-rattling – even nuclear threats – over NATO enlargement.   China’s Political Situation Has Not Normalized China continues to suffer from a historic confluence of internal and external political risk that will cause negative surprises for investors. Temporary improvements in government policy or investor sentiment – centered on a relaxation of “Zero Covid” lockdowns in major cities and a more dovish regulatory tone against the tech giants – will likely be frustrated, at least until after a more dovish government stance can be confirmed in the wake of the twentieth national party congress in October or November this year. At that event, Chinese President Xi Jinping is likely to clinch another ten years in power and complete the transformation of China’s governance from single-party rule to single-person rule. This reversion to autocracy will generate additional market-negative developments this year. It has already embedded a permanently higher risk premium in Chinese financial assets because it increases the odds of policy mistakes, international aggression, and ultimately succession crisis. The most successful Asian states chose to democratize and expand free markets and capitalism when they reached a similar point of economic development and faced the associated sociopolitical challenges. But China is choosing the opposite path for the sake of national security. Investors have seen the decay of Russia’s economy under Putin’s autocracy and would be remiss not to upgrade the odds of similarly negative outcomes in China over the long run as a result of Xi’s autocracy, despite the many differences between the two countries. China’s situation is more difficult than that of the democratic Asian states because of its reviving strategic rivalry with the United States. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently unveiled President Biden’s comprehensive China policy. He affirmed that the administration views China as the US’s top strategic competitor over the long run, despite the heightened confrontation with Russia.3 The Biden administration has not eased the Trump administration’s tariffs or punitive measures on China. It is unlikely to do so during a midterm election year when protectionist dynamics prevail – especially given that the Xi administration will be in the process of reestablishing autocracy, and possibly repressing social unrest, at the very moment Americans go to the polls. Re-engagement with China is also prohibited because China is strengthening its strategic bonds with Russia. President Biden has repeatedly implied that the US would defend Taiwan in any conflict with China. These statements are presented as gaffes or mistakes but they are in fact in keeping with historical US military actions threatening counter-attack during the three historic Taiwan Strait crises. The White House quickly walks back these comments to reassure China that the US does not support Taiwanese independence or intend to trigger a war with China. The result is that the US is using Biden’s gaffe-prone personality to reemphasize the hard edge (rather than the soft edge) of the US’s policy of “strategic ambiguity” on Taiwan. US policy is still ambiguous but ambiguity includes the possibility that a president might order military action to defend Taiwan. US attempts to increase deterrence and avoid a Ukraine scenario are threatening for China, which will view the US as altering the status quo and penalizing China for Russia’s actions. Beijing resumed overflights of Taiwan’s air defense identification zone in the wake of Biden’s remarks as well as the decision of the US to send Senator Tammy Duckworth to Taiwan to discuss deeper economic and defense ties. Consider the positioning of US aircraft carrier strike groups as an indicator of the high level of strategic tensions. On January 18, 2022, as Russia amassed military forces on the Ukrainian border – and the US and NATO rejected its strategic demands – the US had only one publicly acknowledged  aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean (the USS Harry Truman) whereas it had at least five US carriers in East Asia. On February 24, the day of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the US had at least four of these carriers in Asia. Even today the US has at least four carriers in the Pacific compared to at least two in Europe – one of which, notably, is in the Baltics to deter Russia from attacking Finland and Sweden (Map 3). The US is warning China not to take advantage of the Ukraine war by staging a surprise attack on Taiwan. Map 3Amid Ukraine War, US Deters China From Attacking Taiwan Of course, strategic tensions are perennial, whereas what investors are most concerned about is whether China can secure its economic recovery. The latest data are still disappointing. Credit growth continues to falter as the private sector struggles with a deteriorating demographic and macroeconomic outlook (Chart 5). The credit impulse has entered positive territory, when local government bonds are included, reflecting government stimulus efforts. But it is still negative when excluding local governments. And even the positive measure is unimpressive, having ticked back down in April (Chart 6). Chart 5Credit Growth Falters Amid Economic Transition Chart 6Silver Lining: Credit Impulse Less Negative Bottom Line: Further monetary and fiscal easing will come in China, a source of good news for global investors next year if coupled with a broader policy shift in favor of business, but the effects will be mixed this year due to Covid policy and domestic politics. Taken together with a European energy crunch and Middle Eastern oil supply disruptions, China’s stimulus is not a catalyst for a sustainable global equity market rally this year. South Asia: Inflation Hammers Sri Lanka And Pakistan Since 2020 we have argued that the global pandemic would result in a new wave of supply pressures and global social unrest. High inflation is blazing a trail of destruction in emerging markets, notably in South Asia, where per capita incomes are low and political institutions often fragile. Chart 7South Asia: Surging Inflation Sri Lanka has been worst affected (Chart 7). Inflation surged to an eye-watering 34% in April  and is expected to rise further. Surging inflation has affected Sri Lanka disproportionately because its macroeconomic and political fundamentals were weak to begin with. The tourism-dependent Sri Lankan economy suffered a body blow from terrorist attacks in 2019 and the pandemic in 2020-21. Then 2022 saw a power struggle between Sri Lanka’s President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and members of the national assembly including Prime Minister (PM) Mahinda Rajapaksa. The crisis hit a crescendo when the country defaulted on external debt obligations last month. These events weigh on Sri Lanka’s ability to transition from a long civil war (1983-2009) to a path of sustained economic development. While the political crisis has seemingly stabilized following the appointment of new Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, we remain bearish on a strategic time horizon. This is mainly because the new PM is unlikely to bring about structural solutions for Sri Lanka’s broken economy. Moreover, Sri Lanka holds more than $50 billion of foreign debt, or 62% of GDP. Another country that has been dealing with political instability alongside high inflation in South Asia is Pakistan, where inflation hit a three-year high in April (see Chart 7 above). The latest twist in Pakistan’s never-ending cycle of political uncertainty comes from the ousted Prime Minister Imran Khan. The former PM, who commands an unusual popular support group due to his fame as a cricketer prior to entering politics, is demanding fresh elections and otherwise threatening to hold mass protests. Pakistan’s new coalition government and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who came to power amid parliamentary intrigues, are refusing elections and ultimatums. From a structural perspective Pakistan is characterized by a weak economy and an unusually influential military. Now it faces high inflation and rising food prices – indeed it is one of the countries that is most dangerously exposed to the Russia-Ukraine war as it depends on these two for over 70% of its grain imports. Bottom Line: MSCI Sri Lanka has underperformed the MSCI EM index by 58.3% this year to date. Pakistan has underperformed the same index by 41.6% over the same period. Against this backdrop, we remain strategic sellers of both bourses. Instability in these countries is also one  of the factors behind our strategic assessment of India as a country with a growing domestic policy consensus. South Asia: India’s Fiscal Populism And Geopolitics Inflation is less rampant in India, although still troublesome. Consumer prices nearly jumped to an 8-year high in April (see Chart 7). With a loaded state election calendar due over the next 12-18 months, the jump in inflation naturally triggered a series of mitigating policy responses. Ban On Wheat Exports: India produces 14% of the world’s wheat and 11% of grains, and exports 5% and 7%, respectively. India’s exports could make a large profit in the context of global shortages. But Prime Minister Narendra Modi is entering into the political end of the business cycle, with key state elections due that will have an impact on the ruling party’s political standing two years before the next federal election. He fears political vulnerability if exports continue amid price pressures at home. The emphasis on food security is typical but also bespeaks a lack of commitment to economic reform. Chart 8India's Real Interest Rates Fall Surprise Rate Hikes: The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) increased the policy repo rate by 40 basis points at an unscheduled meeting on May 4, thereby implementing its first rate hike since August 2018. With real rates in India lower than those in China or Brazil (Chart 8), the RBI will be forced to expedite its planned rate hikes through 2022. Tax Cuts On Fuel: India’s central government also announced steep cuts in excise duty on fuel. This is another populist measure that reduces political pressures but fails to encourage the private sector to adjust.  These measures will help rein in inflation but the rate hikes will weigh on economic growth while the tax cuts will add to India’s fiscal deficit. Indeed, India is resorting to fiscal populism with key state elections looming. Geopolitical risk is less of a concern for India – indeed the Ukraine war has strengthened its bargaining position. In the short run, India benefits from the ability to buy arms and especially cheap oil from Russia while the EU imposes an embargo. But over the long run its economy and security can be strengthened by greater interest from the US and its allies, recently highlighted by the fourth meeting of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) and the launch of the US’s Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF). These initiatives are modest but they highlight the US’s need to replace China with India and ASEAN over time, a trend that no US administration can reverse now because of the emerging Russo-Chinese strategic alliance. At the same time, the Quad underscores India’s maritime interests and hence the security benefits India can gain from aligning its economy and navy with the other democracies. Bottom Line: Fiscal populism in the context of high commodity prices is negative for Indian equities. However, our views on Russia, the Middle East, and China all point to a sharper short-term spike in commodity prices that ultimately drives the world economy deeper into stagflation or recession. Therefore we are booking a 22.5% profit on our tactical decision to go long Brazilian financials relative to Indian equities.   Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com   Ritika Mankar, CFA Editor/Strategist ritika.mankar@bcaresearch.com   Chart 9Russia: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 10Other Measures Of Russian Geopolitical Risk Chart 11China: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 12United Kingdom: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 13Germany: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 14France: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 15Italy: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 16Canada: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 17Spain: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 18Australia: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 19Taiwan: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 20Korea: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 21Turkey: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 22South Africa: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 23Brazil: GeoRisk Indicator   Footnotes 1     Recent diplomatic flaps between core European leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky reflect Ukraine’s fear that Europe will negotiate a “separate peace” with Russia, i.e. accept Russian territorial conquests in exchange for economic relief. 2     Dmitri Medvedev explicitly states ‘there can be no more talk of any nuclear-free status for the Baltic - the balance must be restored’ in warning Finland and Sweden joining NATO. Medvedev is suggesting that nuclear weapons will be placed in this area where Russia has its Kaliningrad exclave sandwiched between Poland and Lithuania. Guy Faulconbridge, ‘Russia warns of nuclear, hypersonic deployment if Sweden and Finland join NATO’, April 14, 2022, Reuters. 3    See Antony J Blinken, Secretary of State, ‘The Administration’s Approach to the People’s Republic of China’, The George Washington University, Washington D.C., May 26, 2022, state.gov. Additionally, see President Joe Biden’s remarks on China and getting involved military to defend Taiwan in a joint press conference with Japan’s Prime Minister Kishida Fumio. ‘Remarks by President Biden and Prime Minister Kishida Fumio of Japan in Joint Press Conference’, Akasaka Palace, Tokyo, Japan, May 23, 2022, whitehouse.gov.   Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix Section III: Geopolitical Calendar

Listen to a short summary of this report.       Executive Summary Recession Checklist US stocks were down almost 20% at their lowest point in May. Any lower and they would be pricing in recession. Central banks will raise rates to or above neutral to ensure that inflation comes back down to their targets. This will cause growth to slow. Markets will now start to worry more about faltering growth than about high inflation. In our recession checklist (see Table), no indicator is yet pointing to recession, but some may do so soon. The jury is likely to be out for some time on whether there will be a recession in the next 12-18 months. In the meantime, equities are likely to move sideways, amid high volatility. Bottom Line: Investors should stay cautiously positioned for now, with only a neutral weighting in equities, and tilts towards more defensive markets and sectors. We recommend a large holding in cash to allow for funds to be redeployed quickly when there is a better entry-point.   The narrative driving global markets has shifted from worries about inflation, to fretting about the risk of recession. Although headline inflation remains high (8.3% year-on-year in the US and 8.1% in the eurozone), inflation pressures have clearly peaked (for now, at least): Broad measures, such as the US trimmed-mean PCE, have started to ease significantly (Chart 1).  Recommended Allocation Chart 1Inflationary Pressures Are Starting To EaseBut now signs are emerging of a slowdown in economic growth. The Citigroup Economic Surprise Indexes in all the major regions have turned down (Chart 2), and global industrial production is falling year-on-year (albeit partly because of lingering supply-side bottlenecks) (Chart 3).   Chart 2Global Growth Is Turning Down Chart 3IP Growth Has Turned Negative Equity markets – with US stocks down 19% from their peak to the May low, and global stocks 17% – are pricing in a slowdown, but not yet a recession. As we have often argued, it is almost unheard of to have a bear market (defined as a greater than 20% decline in US stocks) without a recession – the last time that happened was in 1987 (and all on one day, Black Monday) (Chart 4). Note from the chart how often stocks correct by 19-20%, on concerns about recession, without tipping into a bear market. That is where we stand today. Chart 4US Stocks Don't Fall More Than 20% Without A Recession Table 1Recession Checklist So the key question is: Will we have a recession over the next 12-18 months? We have dug out the recession checklist we last used in 2019 (Table 1). While none of the indicators are yet clearly pointing to recession, several may do so by year-end (Chart 5). And there are a number of warning signs starting to flash. The US housing market – the most interest-rate sensitive part of the economy – could soon see home prices falling, after the 200 BPs rise in the 30-year mortgage rate since the start of the year (Chart 6). Wages have failed to rise in line with inflation, which has led to retail sales falling year-on-year in real terms (Chart 7). And there are even some signs that companies are slowing their hiring, presumably on worries about the durability of the recovery: In the latest ISM surveys, the employment component fell to close to 50 (Chart 8). Chart 5Some Recession Indicators Look Worrying Chart 6Housing Is The Most Vulnerable Sector Chart 7Real Retail Sales Are Falling Chart 8Signs That Companies Are Growing Wary Of Hiring? The strongest argument against there being a recession is the $2.2 trillion of excess savings held by US households (and $5 trillion among households in all major developed economies). The argument is that, even if interest rates rise and real wage growth is negative, consumers can continue to spend by dipping into these accumulated savings. But there are some problems here. The savings are highly concentrated among the rich, who have a lower propensity to spend (Chart 9). Because of “mental accounting” biases, people may think only of current income, not savings, when considering how much to spend. And, as spending shifts back from goods to services, now that pandemic rules are largely over (Chart 10), spending on manufactured products is likely to fall below trend (since many purchases were brought forward). But it is hard to catch up on previously missed services spending (you can’t take three vacations this year to make up for those you missed in 2020 and 2021), and so services spending will, at best, only return to trend. Chart 9The Rich Have All The Money Chart 10Can Services Take Over From Goods Spending?     Meanwhile, central banks will be focused on fighting inflation. All of them are expected to take rates to or above neutral over the next 12 months (Chart 11) – implying a squeeze on aggregate demand. Although inflation may be peaking, it is still well above most central banks’ comfort zones. In the US, for example, the FOMC expects core PCE to ease to 4.1% by year-end and 2.6% by end-2023, but that is still higher than its 2% target. The Fed is likely to remain focused on the upside risks to inflation: From rising services prices (Chart 12), and the risk of a price-wage spiral (Chart 13). BCA Research’s bond strategists expect the Fed to hike by 50 BPs at each of the next two meetings (in June and July), and then to revert to 25 BPs a meeting, as long as it is clear by then that inflation is trending down.1 Chart 11Rates Are Going To Or Above Neutral Everywhere Chart 12Inflation Risks: Rising Services Prices...Our conclusion is that the jury is out on the probability of recession – and is likely to stay out for a while. So far this year, equities and bonds have both performed poorly – with a 60:40 equity/bond portfolio producing the worst start to a year in three decades (Chart 14). Equities have wobbled because of tight monetary policy and worries about slowing growth; bonds because of inflation concerns. This is likely to remain the case until there is more clarity about the risk of recession. In this environment, we expect global equities to move sideways, with significant volatility – falling on signs of weakening growth, but rallying on hopes that the Fed may change its course.2  Chart 13...And A Price-Wage Spiral Chart 14Nowhere To Hide This Year We continue, therefore, to recommend fairly cautious portfolio positioning, with a neutral weight in global equities (and a preference for defensive country and sector allocations). Investors should keep a healthy holding in cash, giving them dry powder to use when a better entry-point into risk assets presents itself. Fixed Income: Bond yields have fallen over the past month, with the US 10-year Treasury yield slipping to 2.8% from 3.1% in early May. As per BCA Research’s Golden Rule of Bond Investing, the level of yields will be determined by whether the Fed (and other central banks) surprise dovishly or hawkishly relative to market expectations (Chart 15).3 The Fed is likely to hike slightly less this year than the market is pricing in, but may continue to raise rates beyond mid-2023, compared to a market expectation of rate cuts then (see Chart 11, panel 1 above). This points to the 10-year yield remaining broadly flat for the rest of this year, but possibly rising after that. Historically, rates tend to peak in line with trend nominal GDP growth (Chart 16). This means that, if the expansion continues for another couple of years, the 10-year yield could reach 4%. We, therefore, recommend an underweight on bonds. However, government bonds do now represent a good hedge again, with strong capital gain in the event of recession (Table 2). We recommend a neutral weight on government bonds within the fixed-income category. Chart 15The Golden Rule Of Bond Investing Chart 16Rates Tend To Peak In Line With Trend Nominal GDP Growth Table 2Government Bonds Now Offer Good Returns In A Recession Chart 17Credit Now Offers Attractive Valuations The recent rise in credit spreads has opened some opportunities. Valuations for both investment-grade (IG) and high-yield (HY) bonds are now attractive again, with all but the highest-quality bonds trading at a breakeven spread higher than the long-run median (Chart 17). The likelihood of defaults is rising, however, so we lower our weighting in HY (whilst remaining slightly overweight) and raise the weight in IG, also to a small overweight. We fund this by cutting our recommendation in Emerging Market debt to underweight. Credit, especially in the US, now offers tempting returns as long as the economy avoids recession, and is a relatively low-risk way to gain exposure to upside surprises.   Chart 18US Performance Has Lagged This Year Equities: US relative equity performance has been a little disappointing year-to-date, dragged down by the performance of the IT sector (Chart 18).  Nonetheless, we stick to our overweight, given the market’s lower beta and the likely greater resilience of the US economy. Among sectors, we raise our weighting in Energy to overweight from neutral. Our energy strategists recently lifted their forecast for end-2022 Brent crude to $120 from $90, and raise the possibility of even $140 (see below for more on why). Despite the sharp outperformance of Energy stocks over the past six months, the sector has barely registered net inflows – presumably because of ESG (Chart 19). As we argued in a recent report, oil producers could be the new “sin stocks”, making the sector attractive over the next few years to investors who do not have ethical restraints on investing in it. We fund the overweight in Energy by lowering our weighting in Industrials to neutral. Capex is a late-cycle play and capital-goods makers benefited as manufacturers rushed to increase production during the recent consumer boom. But signs are now emerging that companies are becoming more cautious on capex (Chart 20). Chart 19Weak Flows Into The Energy Sector Despite Strong Performance Chart 20Companies Are Becoming More Cautious On Capex Commodities: China’s growth remains very weak and, although commodity prices have started to fall (with copper down 9% and iron ore 11% in Q2), they have not yet caught up with the slowdown in Chinese imports (Chart 21). The key question is whether China will now roll out a big stimulus. Given the government’s determination to persevere with the zero-Covid policy, and its need to achieve the 5.5% GDP growth target this year, it will eventually have no choice. But it is reluctant to trigger another housing boom, and there are doubts about how effective stimulus would be given the property market’s dysfunction. For now, we remain cautious on the Materials sector, and on commodities as an alternative asset – though the long-term structural story (because of the build-out of alternative energy) remains strong. Oil and natural-gas prices are likely to remain high due to disruptions in supply from Russia. Russia will probably have to shut 1.6 m b/d of production following the EU embargo on Russian oil imports. The EU is rushing to build up natural-gas inventories before the winter, in case Russia bans gas exports to Europe in retaliation (Chart 22). Higher oil prices are positive for the Energy sector, and for countries such as Canada (whose equity market we raise to neutral, funding this by trimming the overweight in the US). Chart 21Commodity Prices Dragged Down By Weak Chinese Growth Chart 22The EU Will Need To Buy Lots Of Natural Gas Currencies: Momentum, cyclical factors, and interest-rate differentials still favor the US dollar. Although the Fed will not raise rates quite as much as futures are pricing in, other central banks – especially the ECB and the Reserve Bank of Australia – will miss by more (Table 3). Nevertheless, the USD looks very overvalued (Chart 23) and speculators are long the currency. This means that, once global growth bottoms, there could be a sharp depreciation in the dollar. We remain neutral on the USD. Our preferred defensive currency is the CHF, since the other usual safe haven, the JPY, will remain depressed if, as we expect, the Bank of Japan persists with its yield curve control, limiting the 10-year JGB yield to 0.25%. Table 3Most Central Banks Will Not Hike As Much As Futures Predict Chart 23US Dollar Is Very Overvalued Garry Evans, Senior Vice President Global Asset Allocation garry@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1     Please see US Bond Strategy Report, “Echoes Of 2018” dated May 24, 2022. 2     BCA Research’s US equity strategists call this a “Fat and Flat” market. Please see “What Is Next For US Equities? They Will Be Fat And Flat”. 3     Please see “Updating Our Global Golden Rule Of Bond Investing As Inflation Momentum Peaks” for an explanation of how the Golden Rule works in different countries.   Recommended Asset Allocation Model Portfolio (USD Terms)

Executive Summary Inflationary Pressures To Fade The biggest problem for the European economy is surging inflation. Inflation has eroded household real disposable income and is hurting consumption. Inflation is set to roll over this summer, which should allow European economies to begin recovering in the fourth quarter of 2022. The ECB is likely to pause after exiting negative interest rates in Q3. European credit is becoming more attractive, but the risks to our view of European growth could still cause major problems for this asset class. Swiss stocks are vulnerable to a pullback relative to German ones. In France, President Emmanuel Macron is likely to get a legislative majority in June.     Bottom Line: European growth should recover after inflation rolls over this summer. The peak in inflation will allow the ECB to pause after its deposit rate gets to zero. Despite this positive view, the large risks hanging over Europe suggest prudence is still warranted.   European assets are rebounding in conjunction with the decline in risk aversion visible around global markets. The euro is catching a welcome bid too. However, as we wrote last week, while the conditions are falling in place to see a rally in Europe, too many risks continue to lurk in the background.  Therefore, we maintain our conservative approach to European markets, and we still recommend a defensive portfolio. Related Report  European Investment StrategyDon’t Be A Hero To shift to a less defensive stance, we want first to observe a peak in European inflation. Inflation represents the greatest problem for the European economy. If inflation continues to surge, the purchasing power of households will deteriorate further and the ECB will ratchet up its hawkish rhetoric, which will cause considerable mayhem in the European economy.   A Reprieve For Europe? Only when the income suppressing impact of inflation recedes will European growth strengthen. Chart 1Paying More For The Same Higher prices continue to hurt European consumption. As witnessed in the US, European retail sales are rising in nominal terms (Chart 1). However, households are not consuming more; they are spending more to purchase the same amount of goods, which is illustrated by the stagnation in retail sales volumes over the past twelve months. Households are not increasing the size of their consumption baskets, because their incomes are not keeping up with inflation. Unlike in the US, Eurozone households never saw their real disposable income spike during the pandemic because European governments focused on preserving jobs rather than distributing large handouts to households. As a result, European real disposable income began to lag its pre-pandemic trend (Chart 2). As the economy recovered, disposable income did not converge back to trend. Now that food and energy prices have spiked, the gap between real disposable income and its trend is only widening. Wages are not coming to the rescue either. The European labor market has been incapable of generating the same kind of wage growth that the US labor market has enjoyed. Even the recent uptick in negotiated wages is not as strong as it seems. German workers benefited from a one-off payment that caused wages to spike by 6.7%, elevating the Euro Area average to 2.8% from 1.6%. However, without that adjustment, German underlying wage growth fell from 3.9% to 1.6% (Chart 3), which means that the underlying European wage only rose by 2%. Chart 2Inflation Destroys Purchasing Power Chart 3Not As Strong As It Seems The distinction between one-off payments and underlying wages matters. As per Milton Friedman’s permanent income hypothesis, households are unlikely to shift their consumption pattern based on a temporary boost to income. They will save it, or in today’s case, use their one-off payment to cover their food and energy price increases. If today’s wage boost is not repeated, but inflation remains elevated, consumption will suffer. Europe’s tourism industry would be another major beneficiary from the peak in inflation. Prior to the pandemic, tourism contributed to 13%, 14% and 9% of the Italian, Spanish, and French economies, respectively. This sector was decimated during the pandemic after travel came to a halt. We are seeing positive signs emerge on this front. In the spring of 2021, nights spent at hotels were 80% below their spring 2019 levels for the Euro Area (Chart 4). As of March 2022, this variable is now between 15% and 30% below their March 2019 levels in Italy and France, respectively. Moreover, Google Mobility indices for the retail and recreation sectors have almost fully recovered (Chart 5). Thus, we can expect these trends to gather steam once inflation slows, because it will free up household disposable income. Europe’s periphery is particularly well placed to benefit from this eventual positive development. Chart 4Improving Tourism Sector Chart 5Mobility Pick-Up Positively, European inflation will peak soon. Commodity prices remain elevated, but commodity inflation has decelerated significantly. Hence, the commodity impulse is consistent with an imminent decline in Euro Area HICP (Chart 6). A simulation using BCA’s Commodity & Energy forecast for Brent, which also assumes that European natural gas prices will continue to hover around EUR100/MWh and that EUR/USD will hit 1.1 by year-end, confirms that energy inflation will swoon (Chart 7). Even if we assume a sudden surge in energy prices due to a Russian natural gas cutoff, energy inflation will recede in the second half of 2022 after spiking this summer. Chart 6Peak Inflation? Chart 7Beware The Russia Cutoff Risk Chart 8Less Pressure From The Consumer Of Last Resort Beyond the energy market, global forces also point toward a peak in European inflation in the coming months. The surge in US goods consumption over the past 24 months was felt globally and generated inflationary pressures in Europe as well. However, US durable goods consumption is declining (Chart 8). As a result, this important driver of European inflation will recede. Bottom Line: European consumption will not recover until inflation peaks. Without a deceleration in inflation, household disposable income will remain weak and consumers will remain careful. The good news is that European inflation is still on track to begin its descent this summer, which will boost the prospect for consumer spending and tourism. ECB Update: A Fall Pause? In a blog post last Monday, ECB president Christine Lagarde confirmed that the central bank will lift interest rates in July and will push the deposit rate to zero by September. Chart 9Too Much Priced In The economy is likely able to handle those two rate hikes. Our ECB monitor highlights the need to remove monetary accommodation in the Eurozone (Chart 9). Moreover, the German 2-/10-year yield curve has steepened this year, despite the hawkish shift in the ECB’s rhetoric, which confirms that monetary conditions are extremely accommodative. We expect the ECB to pause its rate hike campaign after exiting negative rates this fall to reassess economic conditions. Constraints on the ECB remain potent. If the central bank ignores these limiting factors, a policy mistake will ensue. Inflation is likely to decelerate by the end of the summer, which will undercut the hawks driving the consensus at the Governing Council today. Inflation is the factor pushing the ECB Monitor higher right now, not growth conditions (Chart 9, second panel). Thus, the case for lifting rates will weaken considerably when inflation slows. Growth is unlikely to have recovered enough by September to justify additional rate hikes after inflation slows. The expected improvement in consumption and household finances discussed earlier will be embryonic by the end of the summer and will not offer a clear case to lift rates further. Instead, the ECB will still have to juggle the tightening in financial conditions created by wider bond spreads in the European periphery and the impact of China’s slowdown on European exports. Meanwhile, capex is unlikely to strengthen meaningfully as long as global trade softens. As a result, we stay long the June 2023 Euribor futures. An extended pause after the September meeting will prevent the ECB from hiking rates as much as money markets expect over the coming twelve months (Chart 9, bottom panel). If the ECB goes ahead and continues to lift rates in the fall and early winter, the European economy will weaken considerably more and the previous rate hikes will have to be undone. Both scenarios are bullish for the June 2023 Euribor contract. Bottom Line: The ECB is likely to pause after pushing its deposit rate to zero in the third quarter in order to reassess economic conditions. Inflation is the main factor behind higher rates, and it will peak this summer. Meanwhile, the economy is still not strong enough to justify significantly higher interest rates. The market’s pricing in the ESTR curve is much too aggressive considering this context. Stay long June 2023 Euribor futures. Credit Update: Don’t Be A Hero Chart 10Cautious In Absolute Terms, Positive On Relative Performance Credit markets are experiencing a second episode of spread widening this year. The first episode was triggered by the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. The current one reflects strong inflation, weaker growth prospects, and the ECB’s policy shift. Year-to-date, European investment grade and high-yield corporate bond option-adjusted spreads have widened by 74bps and 188bps, respectively (Chart 10, top panel). As we wrote last week, if the global economic situation were to stabilize, then European assets would be a buy at current levels. This is especially true for European credit. Beyond attractive valuations, corporate bond issuers’ balance sheets are in good shape and the default risk is low.   However, the same risks that prevent us from being buyers of the euro and European stocks today also hang over the credit market. Specifically, a further deterioration of the energy flows between Russia and the EU and/or a policy mistake, whereby the ECB delivers the seven rate hikes priced in the overnight index swap market, would cause spreads to widen meaningfully from their current elevated levels. Therefore, we recommend investors remain on the sidelines and wait for a safer entry point over the coming weeks. Once inflation has peaked and stagflation/recession fears recede, then credit spreads will have ample room to narrow, especially if the ECB decides to pause after lifting the deposit rate to 0% (Chart 10, second panel). In the meantime, expected policy rate differentials are still supportive of an overweight on European credit relative to US credit (Chart 10, bottom panel). Bottom Line: European spreads are most likely peaking. However, the same risks that hang over EUR/USD and European equities prevent us from buying this asset class just yet. Swiss Stocks Are Getting Expensive Chart 11Swiss Stocks Getting Ahead Of Earnings The defensive Swiss market has greatly outperformed its Euro Area counterpart this year. However, the recent bout of Swiss outperformance has been completely dissociated from the trend in Swiss EPS relative to those of the Euro Area (Chart 11). Now, Swiss equities are particularly expensive and sport multiples 45% greater than the P/E ratio of the Eurozone MSCI benchmark. This bifurcation between the relative performance of Swiss stocks and their relative earnings represents a trading opportunity. Specifically, Swiss shares look vulnerable against German ones, which have been seriously beaten down in recent years. Chart 12Priced For The Apocalypse Swiss stocks have been re-rated on the back of many forces. First, the valuations of Swiss stocks relative to German ones have risen in tandem with the Eurozone’s headline and core inflation (Chart 12, top and second panel). Swiss relative valuations have also benefited from the significant tailwind created by higher 2-year rates in the Eurozone (Chart 12, third panel) and from the weakness in the euro (Chart 12, fourth panel). Finally, Swiss relative valuations seem to have already priced in a significant deterioration in European manufacturing activity, which would have lifted their appeal as a defensive play (Chart 12, bottom panel). We recommend selling Swiss stocks against German ones. We anticipate European inflation to peak this summer. Our ECB view is consistent with a decline in Germany’s 2-year bond yields. We also expect the euro to bottom and, even though we have written about a deterioration in European manufacturing activity, the recent explosion of Swiss multiples relative to German ones looks overdone. This trade may be seen as our first attempt to dip our toe into cyclical assets, even if we generally favor capital preservation over risk taking at this juncture. Bottom Line: The outperformance of Swiss equities is overextended and is already pricing in a dire outcome for European economies. Selling Swiss shares relative to German stocks is an attractive way to add tentatively some risk to a European portfolio. France Update: Likely Legislative Majority For Macron Chart 13French Polls Suggest Macron Will Get His Legislative Majority President Emmanuel Macron’s political party, Renaissance (previously En Marche!), may surprise to the upside in this year’s legislative election. An aggregate of recent polls (Chart 13) suggests that the presidential coalition (which includes Renaissance and its allies) will obtain between 295 and 340 seats in the Assemblée Nationale, more than the 289 seats needed to achieve a majority. The odds of seeing an historically low voter turnout should also play in the French president’s favor. Chart 14Favor French Small-Caps & Avoid Consumer Stocks Macron will not have to compromise to build a coalition in favor of his reform agenda, which bodes well for French productivity and trend growth. This election should not have an impact on French assets beyond that. We continue to recommend investors favor French small-caps, as they will benefit from an improvement in domestic consumer confidence and an eventual strengthening in the euro (Chart 14). Meanwhile, we still see more downside for French consumer stocks (Chart 14, bottom panel).   Mathieu Savary, Chief European Strategist Mathieu@bcaresearch.com Jeremie Peloso, Editor/Strategist JeremieP@bcaresearch.com Tactical Recommendations Cyclical Recommendations Structural Recommendations

Listen to a short summary of this report.         Executive Summary The US Inflation Surprise Index Has Rolled Over Global equities are nearing a bottom and will rally over the coming months as inflation declines and growth reaccelerates. While equity valuations are not at bombed-out levels, they have cheapened significantly. Global stocks trade at 15.3-times forward earnings. We are upgrading tech stocks from underweight to neutral. The NASDAQ Composite now trades at a forward P/E of 22.6, down from 32.9 at its peak last year. The 10-year Treasury yield should decline to 2.5% by the end of the year, which will help tech stocks at the margin. The US dollar has peaked. A weakening dollar will provide a tailwind to stocks, especially overseas bourses. US high-yield spreads are pricing in a default rate of 6.2% over the next 12 months, well above the trailing default rate of 1.2%. Favor high-yield credit over government bonds within a fixed-income portfolio.   Bottom Line: The recent sell-off in stocks provides a good opportunity to increase equity allocations. We expect global stocks to rise 15%-to-20% over the next 12 months. Back to Bullish We wrote a report on April 22nd arguing that global equities were heading towards a “last hurrah” in the second half of the year as a Goldilocks environment of falling inflation and supply-side led growth emerges. Last week, we operationalized this view by tactically upgrading stocks to overweight after having downgraded them in late February. This highly out-of-consensus view change, coming at a time when surveys by the American Association of Individual Investors and other outfits show extreme levels of bearishness, has garnered a lot of attention. In this week’s report, we answer some of the most common questions from the perspective of a skeptical reader.   Q: Inflation is at multi-decade highs, global growth is faltering, and central banks are about to hike rates faster than we have seen in years. Isn’t it too early to turn bullish? A: We need to focus on how the world will look like in six months, not how it looks like now. Inflation has likely peaked and many of the forces that have slowed growth, such as China’s Covid lockdown and the war in Ukraine, could abate.   Q: What is the evidence that inflation has peaked? And may I remind you, even if inflation does decline later this year, this is something that most investors and central banks are already banking on. Inflation would need to fall by more than expected for your bullish scenario to play out. A: That’s true, but there is good reason to think that this is precisely what will happen.  Overall spending in the US is close to its pre-pandemic trend. However, spending on goods remains above trend while spending on services is below trend (Chart 1). Services prices tend to be stickier than goods prices. Thus, the shift in spending patterns caused goods inflation to rise markedly with little offsetting decline in services inflation. To cite one of many examples, fitness equipment prices rose dramatically, but gym membership fees barely fell (Chart 2). Chart 1Total US Consumer Spending Is Almost Exactly At Its Pre-Pandemic Trend, But The Composition Of Spending Remains Skewed Chart 2Asymmetries Matter: Firms Manufacturing Sports Equipment Jacked Up Prices, But Gyms Barely Cut Prices As goods demand normalizes, goods inflation will come down. Meanwhile, the supply of goods should increase as the pandemic winds down, and hopefully, a detente is reached in Ukraine. There are already indications that some supply-chain bottlenecks have eased (Chart 3). Q: Even if supply shocks abate, which seems like a BIG IF to me, wouldn’t the shift in spending towards services supercharge what has been only a modest acceleration in services inflation so far? A: Wages are the most important driver of services inflation. Although the evidence is still tentative, it does appear as though wage inflation is peaking. The 3-month annualized growth rate in average hourly earnings for production and nonsupervisory workers slowed from 7.2% in the second half of 2021 to 3.8% in April (Chart 4). Assuming productivity growth of 1.5%, this is consistent with unit labor cost inflation of only slightly more than 2%, which is broadly consistent with the Fed’s CPI inflation target.1 Chart 4Wage Pressures May Be Starting To Ease Moreover, a smaller proportion of firms expect to raise wages over the next six months than was the case late last year according to a variety of regional Fed surveys (Chart 5). The same message is echoed by the NFIB small business survey (Chart 6). Consistent with all this, the US Citi Inflation Surprise Index has rolled over (Chart 7).   Chart 6... Small Business Owners Included Chart 7The US Inflation Surprise Index Has Rolled Over   Q: What about the “too cold” risk to your Goldilocks scenario? The risks of recession seem to be rising. A: The market is certainly worried about this outcome, and that has been the main reason stocks have fallen of late. However, we do not think this fear is justified, certainly not in the US (Chart 8). US households are sitting on $2.3 trillion excess savings, equal to about 14% of annual consumption. The ratio of household debt-to-disposable income is down 36 percentage points from its highs in early 2008, giving households the wherewithal to spend more. Core capital goods orders, a good leading indicator for capex, have surged. The homeowner vacancy rate is at a record low, suggesting that homebuilding will be fairly resilient in the face of higher mortgage rates.   Q: It seems like the Fed has a nearly impossible task on its hands: Increase labor market slack by enough to cool the economy but not so much as to trigger a recession. You yourself have pointed out that the Fed has never achieved this in its history. A: It is correct that the unemployment rate has never risen by more than one-third of a percentage point in the US without a recession occurring (Chart 9). That said, there are three reasons to think that a soft landing can be achieved this time. Chart 9When Unemployment Starts Rising, It Usually Keeps Rising First, increasing labor market slack is easier if one can raise labor supply rather than reducing labor demand. Right now, the participation rate is nearly a percentage point below where it was in 2019, even if one adjusts for increased early retirement during the pandemic (Chart 10). Wages have risen relatively more at the bottom end of the income distribution. This should draw more low-wage workers into the labor force. Furthermore, according to the Federal Reserve, accumulated bank savings for the lowest-paid 20% of workers have been shrinking since last summer, which should incentivize job seeking (Chart 11). Chart 10Labor Participation Has Further Scope To Recover Chart 11Depleted Savings Will Force More Lower-Wage Workers Into The Labor Market Second, long-term inflation expectations remain well contained, which makes a soft landing more likely. Median expected inflation 5-to-10 years out in the University of Michigan survey stood at 3% in May, roughly where it was between 2005 and 2013 (Chart 12). Median expected earnings growth in the New York Fed Survey of Consumer Expectations was only slightly higher in April than it was prior to the pandemic (Chart 13). Chart 12Consumer Long-Term Inflation Expectations Have Risen But Remain Relatively Low Chart 13US Consumers Do Not Expect Wages To Grow At A Much Higher Rate Than In The Pre-Pandemic Period A third reason for thinking that a soft landing may be easier to achieve this time around is that the US private-sector financial balance – the difference between what the private sector earns and spends – is still in surplus (Chart 14). This stands in contrast to the lead-up to both the 2001 and 2008-09 recessions, when the private sector was living beyond its means.   Q: You have spoken a lot about the US, but the situation seems dire elsewhere. Europe may already be in recession as we speak! A: The near-term outlook for Europe is indeed challenging. The euro area economy grew by only 0.8% annualized in the first quarter. Mathieu Savary, BCA’s Chief European Strategist, expects an outright decline in output in Q2. To no one’s surprise, the war in Ukraine is weighing on European growth. The Bundesbank estimates that a full embargo of Russian oil and gas would reduce German real GDP by an additional 5% on top of the damage already inflicted by the war (Chart 15). Chart 14The US Private-Sector Financial Balance Remains In Surplus Chart 15Germany’s Economy Will Sink Without Russian Energy While such a full embargo is possible, it is not our base case. In a remarkable about-face, Putin now says he has “no problems” with Finland and Sweden joining NATO, provided that they do not place military infrastructure in their countries. He had previous threatened a military response at the mere suggestion of NATO membership. In any case, there are few signs that Putin’s increasingly insular and dictatorial regime would respond to an oil embargo or other economic incentives. The wealthy oligarchs who were supposed to rein him in are cowering in fear. It is also not clear if Europe would gain any political leverage over Russia by adopting policies that push its own economy into a recession. It is worth noting that the price of the December 2022 European natural gas futures contract is down 39% from its peak at the start of the war (Chart 16). It is also noteworthy that European EPS estimates have been trending higher this year even as GDP growth estimates have been cut (Chart 17). This suggests that the analyst earnings projections were too conservative going into the year. Chart 16European Natural Gas Futures Are High But Below Their Peak Chart 17European And US EPS Estimates Have Been Trending Higher This Year Chart 18Chinese Property Sector: Signs Of Contraction Q: What about China? The lockdowns are crippling growth and the property market is in shambles. A: There is truth to both those claims. The government has all but said that it will not abandon its zero-Covid policy anytime soon, even going as far as to withdraw from hosting the 2023 AFC Asian Cup. While the number of new cases has declined sharply in Shanghai, future outbreaks are probable. On the bright side, China is likely to ramp up domestic production of Pfizer’s Paxlovid drug. Increased availability of the drug will reduce the burden of the disease once social distancing restrictions are relaxed. As far as the property market is concerned, sales, starts, completions, as well as home prices are all contracting (Chart 18). BCA’s China Investment Strategy expects accelerated policy easing to put the housing sector on a recovery path in the second half of this year. Nevertheless, they expect the “three red lines” policy to remain in place, suggesting that the rebound in housing activity will be more muted than in past recoveries.2  Ironically, the slowdown in the Chinese housing market may not be such a bad thing for the rest of the world. Remember, the main problem these days is inflation. To the extent that a sluggish Chinese housing market curbs the demand for commodities, this could provide some relief on the inflation front.   Q: So bad news is good news. Interesting take. Let’s turn to markets. You mentioned earlier that equity sentiment was very bearish. Fair enough, but I would note the very same American Association of Individual Investors survey that you cited also shows that investors’ allocation to stocks is near record highs (Chart 19). Shouldn’t we look at what investors are doing rather than what they’re saying? A: The discrepancy may not be as large as it seems. As Chart 20 illustrates, investors may not like stocks, but they like bonds even less. Chart 19Individual Investors Still Hold A Lot Of Stock   Chart 20B... But They Like Bonds Even Less Chart 21Global Equities Are More Attractively Valued After The Recent Sell-Off Global equities currently trade at 15.3-times forward earnings; a mere 12.5-times outside the US. The global forward earnings yield is 6.7 percentage points higher than the global real bond yield. In 2000, the spread between the earnings yield and the real bond yield was close to zero (Chart 21). It should also be mentioned that institutional data already show a sharp shift out of equities. The latest Bank of America survey revealed that fund managers cut equity allocations to a net 13% underweight in May from a 6% overweight in April and a net 55% overweight in January. Strikingly, fund managers were even more underweight bonds than stocks. Cash registered the biggest overweight in two decades.   Q: Your bullish equity bias notwithstanding, you were negative on tech stocks last year, arguing that the NASDAQ would turn into the NASDOG. Given that the NASDAQ Composite is down 29% from its highs, is it time to increase exposure to some beaten down tech names? A: Both the cyclical and structural headwinds facing tech stocks that we discussed in These Three High-Flying Equity Sectors Could Come Crashing Back Down To Earth and The Disruptor Delusion remain in place. Nevertheless, with the NASDAQ Composite now trading at 22.6-times forward earnings, down from 32.9 at its peak last year, an underweight in tech is no longer appropriate (Chart 22). A neutral stance is now preferable.   Chart 22Tech Stock Valuations Have Returned To Earth Q: I guess if bond yields come down a bit more, that would help tech stocks? A: Yes. Tech stocks tend to be growth-oriented. Falling bond yields raise the present value of expected cash flows more for growth companies than for other firms. While we do expect global bond yields to eventually rise above current levels, yields are likely to decline modestly over the next 12 months as inflation temporarily falls. We expect the US 10-year yield to end the year at around 2.5%.   Q: A decline in US bond yields would undermine the high-flying dollar, would it not? A: It depends on how bond yields abroad evolve. US Treasuries tend to be relatively high beta, implying that US yields usually fall more when global yields are declining (Chart 23). Thus, it would not surprise us if interest rate differentials moved against the dollar later this year. Chart 23US Treasuries Have A Higher Beta Than Most Other Government Bond Markets It is also important to remember that the US dollar is a countercyclical currency (Chart 24). If global growth picks up as pandemic dislocations fade and the Ukraine war winds down, the dollar is likely to weaken. Chart 24The Dollar Is A Countercyclical Currency A wider trade deficit could also imperil the greenback. The US trade deficit has increased from US$45 billion in December 2019 to US$110 billion. Equity inflows have helped finance the trade deficit, but net flows have turned negative of late (Chart 25). Finally, the dollar is quite expensive – 27% overvalued based on Purchasing Power Parity exchange rates.   Q: Let’s sum up. Please review your asset allocation recommendations both for the next 12 months and beyond. A: To summarize, global inflation has peaked. Growth should pick up later this year as supply-chain bottlenecks abate. The combination of falling inflation and supply-side led growth will provide a springboard for equities. We expect global stocks to rise 15%-to-20% over the next 12 months. Historically, non-US stocks have outperformed their US peers when the dollar has been weakening (Chart 26). EM stocks, in particular, have done well in a weak dollar environment Chart 26Non-US Stocks Will Benefit From A Weaker US Dollar Chart 27The Market Is Too Pessimistic On Default Risk Within fixed-income portfolios, we recommend a modest long duration stance over the next 12 months. We favor high-yield credit over safer government bonds. US high-yield spreads imply a default rate of 6.2% over the next 12 months compared to a trailing 12-month default rate of only 1.2% (Chart 27). Chart 28Falling Inflation Will Buoy Consumer Sentiment Our guess is that this Goldilocks environment will end towards the end of next year. As inflation comes down, real wage growth will turn positive. Consumer confidence, which is now quite depressed, will improve (Chart 28). Stronger demand will cause inflation to reaccelerate in 2024, setting the stage for another round of central bank rate hikes.   Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on           LinkedIn Twitter       Footnotes 1    The Federal Reserve targets an average inflation rate of 2% for the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index. Due to compositional differences between the two indices, CPI inflation has historically averaged 30-to-50 basis points higher than PCE inflation. This is why the Fed effectively targets a CPI inflation rate of 2.3%-to-2.5%. 2    The People’s Bank of China and the housing ministry issued a deleveraging framework for property developers in August 2020, consisting of a 70% ceiling on liabilities-to-assets, a net debt-to-equity ratio capped at 100%, and a limit on short-term borrowing that cannot exceed cash reserves. Developers breaching these “red lines” run the risk of being cut off from access to new loans from banks, while those who respect them can only increase their interest-bearing borrowing by 15% at most. Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores

Executive Summary Loss Of Russian Production Will Lift Brent With German imports of Russian oil close to 10% of its total requirements – following an impressive decline from 35% pre-invasion – we expect the EU to declare an embargo on Russian oil imports this week or next. Smaller states – e.g., Hungary and Slovokia – will be granted embargo waivers; their import volumes will not affect the EU effort. Russia will be forced to shut in ~ 1.6mm b/d of production, rising to 2mm b/d next year (vs. pre-invasion levels). Demand will fall as Brent prices surpass $120/bbl by 2H22, in our revised base case. Prices above $140/bbl are likely if Russia immediately halts EU oil exports. Our revised forecast calls for Brent to average $113/bbl this year, and $122/bbl next year. WTI will trade $3/bbl lower. Per earlier threats, Russia will cut EU natgas exports following the EU embargo. Benchmark euro natgas prices will go back above €225/MWh, and trigger an EU recession. Bottom Line: An EU embargo on Russian oil imports is close. Brent crude will rally above $120/bbl by 2H22, with $140/bbl or higher likely, depending on how quickly Russia reacts to the EU oil embargo. Eurozone natgas will trade above €225/MWh again. We remain long the S&P GSCI index, the COMT ETF, and the XOP and CRAK ETFs to retain exposure to higher prices. We are getting long 1Q23 ICE Brent futures and 4Q22 TTF futures at tonight's close. Feature Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyDie Cast By EU: Inflation, Recession Risks Rise The stage is set for the EU to announce an embargo on Russian oil imports this week or next. Odds of an EU embargo being declared sooner rather than later increased, in our view, in the wake of Germany's success in cutting Russian oil imports by more than half in a very short period – from ~ 35% prior to Russia's invasion of Ukraine on 24 February to ~ 12% earlier this month (Chart 1). Further reductions in Russian oil imports we expect from Germany will make it easier for the EU's largest economy to walk away from Russian crude and product imports sooner rather than later.1 Other EU member states already stand with Germany on the issue of an embargo on Russian imports. Those that do not – Hungary and Slovakia, e.g. – do not import Russian oil on a scale that can meaningfully derail EU solidarity on the embargo, which means waivers for these states can be expected to keep the embargo on track. In addition, four of the Five-Eyes states – the US, UK, Australia and Canada – already have imposed embargoes on Russian oil imports. Chart 1EU Energy Import Dependency (2021) Russian Shut-ins Will Tighten Supply The immediate fallout of the EU embargo will be to accelerate the rate at which Russia is forced to shut in production, as increasing volumes of its oil remain stranded on the water looking for a home. We reckon 1mm b/d or so of Russian crude oil output already has been cut. This will continue to increase. Russia will be forced to shut in ~ 1.6mm b/d of crude output this year, rising to 2mm b/d next year (averages vs. pre-invasion levels), in our modelling. This takes Russian oil production down to 8.4mm b/d this year, on average, and 8.0mm b/d next year.2 As more and more Russian crude is shut in, the pipelines carrying Urals and Eastern Siberia-Pacific Ocean (ESPO) crude from the Siberian oil fields to ports will fill, along with inventory in the ports where ships are loaded for export. When storage and pipelines fill, the only alternative Russian producers will have will be to shut in crude and condensate production. While some states obviously will benefit from the increasing availability of Russian crude on offer at 30% discounts or more – e.g., India and China – there is a limit as to how much surplus Russian output they can take in. China, in particular, will not want to jeopardize long-term contracts with key suppliers – e.g., the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) – nor will India, which will limit the total volumes both are willing to take from Russia longer term. Security of supply becomes an increasingly important consideration as Russia's oil output continues a long-term decline going forward: Costs were rising prior to Russia's invasion of Ukraine from 2008 to 2019. Falling drilling efficiency and production, were accompanied by rising water cuts – i.e., the amount of water being produced drilling for oil – in Russia's largest fields, which rose to as high as 86%. Shutting production from these older fields will force hard choices as to whether these fields are ever revived.3 Demand Will Be Stressed Shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine, the country's Energy Ministry Alexander Novak warned the EU it would cut off natural gas pipeline supplies being sent to the continent, in retaliation for embargoing oil imports.4 Oil exports of close to 5mm b/d accounted for just under half of Russia's revenue from energy exports last year, with OECD Europe representing half of that amount.5 For Russia, oil exports are far more important than gas exports, which will incline it to immediately cut pipeline flows to Europe as soon as an oil embargo is announced. For the EU, natgas exports from Russia are critical to the economies of its member states (Chart 2). The EU imported ~ 155 bcm of natgas from Russia in 2021, or just over 40% of its total natgas consumption. Germany's share amounted to 45 bcm, or 45% of domestic gas use . If, as we expect, the EU is close to announcing its oil embargo on Russia, an immediate retaliation from Moscow in the form of a cutoff of pipeline exports to the EU most likely will follow. This will throw the EU into a recession, as natgas prices surge. Chart 2Losing Russia's Natgas Will Be Painful For EU Revised Forecast Reflects Falling Russian Output We are revising our Brent forecast and crude oil balances in line with our expectation Russian oil output will decline meaningfully. As noted above, we now expect Russian crude oil output to fall to 8.4mm b/d this year and 8.0mm b/d in 2023. This pushes non-core OPEC 2.0 production – which now includes Russia – lower, as a result (Chart 3). We moved Russia out of the core OPEC 2.0 producer group, given the production declines we expect this year and next, and into the "Other Guys" group. Our base case demand reflects a shift in OECD vs. non-OECD consumption estimates, with the OECD gaining incrementally, while EM demand (via non-OECD consumption) falls incrementally (Chart 4). Chart 3Falling Russia Output Pushes Non-Core OPEC 2.0 Output Lower Chart 4DM Demand Shifts Higher, EM Shifts Lower The lower EM demand growth reflects weaker China oil consumption resulting from the country's zero-COVID policy. In addition, because we expect Russia to act quickly on cutting off EU natgas exports, benchmark TTF natgas prices will move back above €225/MWh. Higher oil and natgas prices in the EU will lead to recession later this year. How quickly this shows up depends on how quickly Russia reacts to an EU oil embargo. In addition, a strong USD – bid higher by global economic uncertainty and safe-haven demand – will pushing the local-currency costs of refined products like gasoline, diesel and jet fuel higher, also will contribute to lower EM demand (Chart 5). Chart 5USD Remains Well Bid In our base case, we expect a tighter market on balance (Chart 6). Oil inventories remain under pressure, owing to falling as Russian output and declines in production outside core OPEC 2.0 and the US (Chart 7). We cannot rule out additional SPR releases from the US or IEA to offset tightening global inventories. Chart 6Global Balances Tighten Chart 7Inventories Draw As Supply Tightens Our forecast for Brent this year has been lifted on the back of a much stronger expectation of an EU oil embargo against Russia. This will result in 2mm b/d of Russian production being shut in by next year, which will not be fully replaced (Table 1). We are lifting our Brent forecast to $110/bbl for 2022, and $115/bbl for next year as a result (Chart 8). Chart 8Loss Of Russian Production Will Lift Brent Table 1BCA Global Oil Supply - Demand Balances (MMb/d, Base Case Balances) To Dec23 Investment Implications An EU embargo on Russian oil imports is close at hand, in our view. Brent crude will rally above $120/bbl by 2H22, with $140/bbl or higher possible, depending on Russia's reaction to the EU oil embargo. We expect Brent prices to average $113/bbl this year, and $122/bbl in 2023. WTI will trade $3/bbl lower on average. Eurozone natgas will trade above €225/MWh again and stay at elevated levels, likely moving higher following a Russian cutoff of natgas supplies to the continent. This will throw the EU into recession. We remain long the S&P GSCI index, the COMT ETF, and the XOP and CRAK ETFs to retain exposure to higher prices. We are getting long 1Q23 ICE Brent futures and TTF natgas futures at tonight's close. A word of caution is in order: We are assuming Russia will follow through on its threat to shut off natgas exports to the EU in the event of an embargo against importing its oil is declared. This, we believe, is Russia's red line. If the EU fails to declare an embargo, or if Russia fails to follow through on its threat to cut off gas supplies in the wake of an EU oil embargo of its exports we will have to re-assess our outlook.   Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com     Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish European natural gas inventories are building at a rapid rate, as competition from Asia – typically led by Chinese demand – remains weaker than in previous seasons. EU natgas storage stood at ~446 MWh as of May 16, 2022, the latest available reports indicate (Chart 9). The EU has weathered two extremely difficult winters in 2020-21 and 2021-22. Natgas storage levels were drawn hard to meet space heating demand, which, owing to a winter energy crisis in China at the time, forced European buyers into a competition for liquified natural gas (LNG) during the former period. Following unexpected spring-summer demand in 2021 when cold weather lingered in Europe and wind power generation fell sharply, storage owners again were hard pressed to secure LNG to rebuild storage levels going into this past winter, which caused European TTF natgas prices to soar, as demand surged (Chart 10). With the threat of a cutoff of Russian natgas hanging over the EU, there is a singular focus right now on getting storage as full as possible ahead of next winter. The EU aims to replace two-thirds of Russian gas imports before yearend. Precious Metals: Bullish The Fed has adopted a more hawkish rhetoric, as it acts more aggressively to reduce US inflation. Interest rates have increased from near-zero levels in March to 0.75%, and BCA’s US Bond strategy service expects two more 50 bps rate hikes in June and July. Post July, rate hikes will depend on the Fed’s assessment of inflation, inflation expectations and financial conditions. The Fed faces the risk of either remaining behind the inflation curve or sparking a recession in case it’s either not hawkish enough, or too hawkish. Base Metals: Bullish High power prices in Europe will continue to plague refined base metals production in the continent and keep refined metal prices buoyed. LME Europe aluminum stocks are close to 17-year lows. In China – whose metal smelters were also hit by high power prices in 2021 – aluminum smelting has revived, with the country reportedly producing a record amount of primary aluminum in April. Lockdowns, however, have reduced economic activity, demand for the metal and its domestic price. China has taken advantage of this arbitrage opportunity, sending most of its primary aluminum exports to Europe. This aluminum price spread between the two states has contributed to China’s steady rise in primary aluminum exports this year, after having exported nearly none in 2020 and 2021. Chart 9 Chart 10Dutch Title Transfer Facility Going Down     Footnotes 1     German officials have stated the country will wind down all oil imports from Russia by year end, even if the rest of the EU does not join it in an embargo.  We highly doubt Germany will act alone, given the support an embargo already has received from EU member states.  Please see Germany to Stop Russian Oil Imports Regardless of EU Sanctions, published by bloomberg.com on May 15, 2022. 2     Our expectation for shut-in volumes is lower than the IEA's, which sees Russia being forced to shut in 3mm b/d of production by 2H22.  We continue to monitor this closely via satellite and reporting services and will adjust our estimates as needed.  Obviously, if the IEA is correct oil markets will tighten even more than we expect. 3    Please see "The Future of Russian Oil Production in the Short, Medium, and Long Term," published by the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies in September 2019.  The OIES study notes production in Russia's highest-producing area – the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous (KMA) district – actually fell 15% between 2008-19, even as drilling activity surged 66%.  While output in 2018 rose due to intensified oil recovery (IOR), the OIES noted that the water cut rose sharply in 2018 as well in the KMA district. 4    Please see Russia warns of $300 oil, threatens to cut off European gas if West bans energy imports, published by cnbc.com on March 8, 2022.  The article notes Novak threatened to close the Nord Stream 1 pipeline delivering gas to Germany in retaliation for an EU oil embargo.  Almost three-quarters of Russia's natgas exports were sent to Europe prior to its invasion of Ukraine.  Natgas export revenues accounted for $62 billion of the $242 billion funding Russia's budget last year, while crude oil revenues made up $180 billion (just under 75%). 5    Please see Die Cast By EU: Inflation, Recession Risks Rise, which we published on May 5, 2022.  It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com.   Investment Views and Themes Recommendations Strategic Recommendations Trades Closed in 2022

Special Report

Executive SummaryIn this report, we look at recent macroeconomic developments through the lens of the business cycle, inflation, and Treasury yield regimes to select winning sectors and styles.The US economy is currently in the slowdown stage of the business cycle, with all of its hallmark attributes, such as slowing growth, elevated inflation, and rising rates.We find that, despite being a real asset, equity performance deteriorates when inflation is on the rise. However, once inflation goes past its apex, the equity rebound is swift.During periods when both inflation and rates are rising, the Energy and Materials sectors tend to outperform, while the Financials and Consumer Discretionary sectors lag.The market is currently in a “high inflation and rising rates” regime but is about to transition to the “inflation is high but falling” regime, and today’s winners may turn into tomorrow’s losers. The new winners are likely to be the Financials, Consumer Discretionary, and Technology sectors.Bottom Line: As inflationary regimes shift, investors can tilt the odds of positive returns in their favor by taking a granular approach to sector selection. So far, 2022 has not been a welcoming year for investors.  All at once, slowing growth, surging inflation, impending monetary tightening, soaring energy prices, lockdowns in China, and a war in the heart of Europe have been thrown at them.With so much happening, it is difficult to separate signal from noise in the cross-currents of economic data. To make sense of the markets, we will look at recent developments through the lens of macroeconomic regimes, focusing on the stages of the business cycle, level and change in inflation, and the direction of Treasury yields.The Business Cycle Is In A Slowdown StageThe business cycle is a cornerstone of any investment decision as it underpins the fundamentals, and preordains the types of assets likely to outperform based on their level of risk and sensitivity to economic growth. The stage of the business cycle is a succinct way to summarize a wide range of economic data, such as capacity utilization, growth, policy, credit conditions, and valuation (Table 1). Table 1Business Cycle Is In A Slowdown Stage While we are barraged with somewhat contradictory economic data, it is still fair to say that we are currently in the middle of the slowdown stage of the business cycle. Our proprietary business cycle indicator, constructed from a mix of soft and hard data across multiple economic dimensions, is trending down, consistent with that position (Chart 1). Furthermore:Growth is slowing, albeit off high levels, and the most recent disappointing ISM PMI is just another case in point. More concerning is that the new orders-to-inventories ratio has plunged (Chart 2);Unemployment is at a 2-year low of 3.6%, and there are currently two job openings per job seeker;Capacity utilization is high;Inflation is elevated;The Fed has commenced a monetary tightening cycle. Chart 1Economic Growth Is Slowing  Chart 2ISM PMI Disappointed As such, during slowdown stage of a business cycle, returns tend to be lower than during recovery and expansion, while volatility is elevated (Chart 3).Chart 3During A Slowdown, Equity Returns Are Paltry, While Volatility Is Elevated If equities are set to deliver pedestrian returns, we need to be more discerning in our sector and style selection. In an environment of slowing growth, growth stocks, large caps, and defensives tend to outperform (Chart 4).  However, we have all observed that Growth has not fared that well due to rapidly rising interest rates and soaring inflation. In order to better understand the implication of the macroeconomic backdrop for equities, we need to drill further down into the inflation and interest-rate regimes.Chart 4During A Slowdown, Quality, Growth, And Defensives Outperform Inflation And Rates RegimesHigh Inflation: Then And NowThe recent spike in inflation came as a shock to most money managers – the last time inflation hit this level was in the 1980s, which predated their investment careers.In the wake of major oil shocks, oil prices quadrupled in 1973-74 and doubled in 1979-80. The combination of high inflation with weak economic growth, fueled by repeated supply shocks, gave rise to the phenomenon of “stagflation”, i.e., soaring inflation accompanied by stagnating economic growth and high unemployment.The high inflation we are living through now was brought about by the pandemic, which ushered in unprecedented fiscal and monetary easing, soaring demand for consumer goods, and a disrupted global supply chain. More recently, inflation has been further exacerbated by the indirect effects of the war in Ukraine, such as skyrocketing energy, food, and materials prices. Despite the challenges of the current period, economic growth is still robust, and unemployment is at historically low levels. Energy and materials prices have soared, but not to the same extent as in the 1970s. And while economic growth is slowing, and stagflation is a risk, it is hardly inevitable.To ensure a more precise study of the sector and style analysis, we will separate the 1970-1984 period and look at it as a template for the performance of equities during a stagflation regime. We will use the 1984 to 2022 period to analyze sector performance during more ordinary inflation regimes.Equities Hate ItEquities are a real asset and, theoretically, should not be affected by inflation – sales and earnings growth are reported in nominal terms, and underlying economic growth is, by far, more important than inflation.Of course, reality is often different from theory, and businesses hate inflation: Not only do they have difficulty budgeting and planning ahead, but they are also often not able to convert sales growth into earnings growth, i.e., their costs may grow faster than their revenues. According to the most recent NFIB survey, 31% of small businesses consider inflation their biggest problem compared to 1-2% in 2019.In addition, high inflation is a harbinger of a hawkish Fed and rising interest rates. Hence, on balance, high inflation is bad news for equities (Chart 5). As inflation climbs, equity returns decline, as multiples contract in anticipation of lower earnings and higher discount rates (Chart 6). Chart 5Equities Underperform In A High-Inflation Environment  Chart 6High Inflation Leads To Multiple Contraction Investing In Periods Of High-Inflation And Rising RatesHigh inflation is often accompanied by rising rates both because of strong economic growth and imminent monetary tightening which aims to arrest growth to combat inflation. As a result, high inflation comes hand in hand with elevated risk aversion and the repricing of more economically sensitive areas of the market.Indeed, when inflation is high (>3.5%) and rates are rising, median three-month equity returns are outright negative, and positive three-months returns occur less than 50% of the time (Chart 7). To beat the market, we need to tilt the return distribution in our favor.Chart 7We Are In High Inflation / Rising Rates Regime When inflation is elevated (above 3.5%) and Treasury yields are climbing, the most appropriate portfolio stance is a tilt toward all-weather defensive sectors like Consumer Staples and Health Care, which hold their own in an environment of slowing growth, as well as sectors that command significant pricing power (Chart 8). The following is a brief summary of the winners and losers. Chart 8Sector Performance In High Inflation / Rising Rates Regime High Inflation/Rising Rate WinnersEnergy: High oil prices are often one of the culprits behind runaway inflation, with the exception of the mid-1980s episode when Saudi Arabia drowned the world in oil, causing a collapse in oil prices, while inflation was on the rise. The energy sector has significant pricing power as it is upstream of the supply chain and can pass on costs to customers (Chart 9). This sector also benefits from high operating leverage. Outperformance usually peaks when inflation turns.Health Care: Health Care stocks tend to outperform when overall consumer prices advance. The non-cyclical nature of health care services reflects their resilience against economic volatility, irrespective of the direction of pricing pressures (Chart 10).  Over the past few years, health care companies have struggled, mostly because of the pressure exerted on pharma by hospitals, insurers, and the government. However, recently, the sector’s pricing power has turned because of pent-up demand for medical procedures. Chart 9The Energy Sector Wields Significant Pricing Power  Chart 10Pricing Power Of The Health Care Sector Has Picked Up Thanks To Pent-up Demand Consumer Staples: Historically, Consumer Staples have outperformed during periods of high inflation (Chart 11). Just like Health Care, this is a non-cyclical sector, because the demand for necessities is inelastic. While this sector is experiencing challenges because of the rising prices of raw materials, it is able to pass on its costs to customers, who have to allocate an increasing share of their budget to necessities. It has also helped multinationals in the S&P 500 index, as they invest in brand building, which now aids them to differentiate their offerings even when consumers are under duress.Utilities: Utilities is another quintessential defensive sector, with a stable revenue stream, significant pricing power, and profitability controlled by the regulators.    Of course, one might argue that this is a highly leveraged sector which may be hurt by rising borrowing costs.  However, it fares well, as regulators have a target return-on-investment for utilities companies, thus allowing them to raise prices to offset rising costs.  Furthermore, with high inflation, long-term debt is smaller in real terms.  Chart 11Consumer Staples Companies Have Invested In Brand-building High Inflation/Rising Rates LosersConsumer Discretionary companies underperform in an environment of high and rising inflation as inflation reduces consumers’ purchasing power and forces them to shift spending away from discretionary goods and services, and toward necessities. The high negative correlation of the sector with the Consumer Drag Indicator is a case in point (Chart 12). Further, rising interest rates often follow high inflation, and weigh on demand for durable goods that require financing.Financials: High inflation is a headwind for the sector because monetary tightening which follows on the heels of high inflation tends to flatten the yield curve, affecting banks’ Net Income Margins (NIM), or the spread between loans and deposits. Inflation also hurts S&P Financials due to the mismatch between bank assets and liabilities. A typical bank has longer maturity for its assets (loans) than for its liabilities (deposits). Consequently, as inflation rises, this reduces the future net inflow because creditors demand higher interest rates, while the returns earned by the bank on its current loan book are mostly fixed by existing contracts. Chart 12Raging Inflation Cuts Into Consumers' Discretionary Spending Inflation Will Turn Soon (Hopefully), And So Will Sector PerformanceInflation is likely to fade somewhat over the coming quarters, as supply chains normalize, and consumer demand wanes because of saturation and elevated prices. Arithmetic will also help, i.e., the base effect will kick in. Also, aggressive monetary policy is likely to slow economic growth and demand for labor further. With all of that, inflation will trend down but will reach the elusive 2% only years from now.However, when it comes to inflation, it is both the level of inflation and the direction of change that matter. While, overall, high inflation is bad for equities, it is necessary to differentiate between “inflation high and rising” and “inflation high and falling” regimes (Chart 13). As such, it is likely that we are about to shift into the “inflation is above 3.5% but falling” regime, where the median three-month return is 3.0% and returns are positive 69% of the time. We do anticipate a rebound in equities once the tighter monetary regime is priced in, and inflation shows signs of abating.Chart 13When Inflation Turns, Equities Will Rebound With the Fed assuming an active role, we believe that going forward, equity returns will be more of a function of the monetary tightening cycle than of inflation. However, falling inflation readings may slow the pace of monetary tightening, or even put the Fed on hold.According to our analysis of sector performance in the “inflation is above 3.5% and is falling” regime, Energy and Materials will be the first sectors to reverse recent gains. The Consumer Discretionary sector is likely to rebound as pressure on consumer purses eases. Financials will also be among sectors that outperform in this regime, since fading inflation will help with asset/liability management. Consumer Staples and Health Care are likely to keep their outperformance going as inflation will continue to be an issue.Last, while empirical analysis does not show that the Technology sector outperforms when inflation is falling, we believe this will be the case based on the simple assumption that falling inflation will imply a lower discount rate (Chart 14). In this regime, we also anticipate a rotation from Value to Growth, and from Large to Small (Chart 15). Chart 14New Inflation Regime Will Usher In New Winners  Chart 15Changes In Inflation Regimes Brought About Market Rotations Stagflation: Magnifying Glass On The 1970sStagflation, along with a recession, is now on investors’ minds – concern about the Fed making a policy mistake. After all, the Fed is already behind the curve, and it is hard to put the inflation genie back into the bottle. What would happen then?In this case, just as in the 1970s, we will see continued growth slowdown accompanied by raging inflation (Chart 16). Back then, equities pulled back every time inflation was on the rise (Chart 17), with Energy, Materials, and Health Care outperforming.The market rebounded at the first signs of inflation abating, reversing sector performance, and turning losers into winners, i.e., Consumer Discretionary and Real Estate started outperforming (Chart 18).Chart 16In The 1970s’ Stagflation Crushed Equities  Chart 17Energy And Materials Were Biggest Winners In the "Inflation High And Rising" Regime...  Chart 18...But They Gave Back Their Gains In "Inflation High But Falling" Regime Bottom LineWe are in a slowdown stage of the business cycle, and Quality, Defensives, and Growth are expected to outperform. However, high inflation has mixed up all the cards and sent Growth into a tailspin. High inflation is unfavorable, not only for Growth but also for equities in general, even though they are a real asset. However, investors can shift the odds of positive returns in their favor by taking a granular approach to sector selection suitable for different inflation regimes.The market is currently in a “high inflation and rising rates” regime, with Energy and Materials outperforming. However, we are about to transition into the “inflation is high but falling” regime, and today’s winners may turn into losers. Defensives is the only group which holds up across all high inflation regimes, thanks to its earnings resilience even in the face of slowing growth.  Irene TunkelChief Strategist, US Equity Strategyirene.tunkel@bcaresearch.com 

Special Report

Executive Summary Europe's Largest Import Bill: Oil The EU crossed the Rubicon this week, proposing to eliminate Russian oil imports within six months. The speed of putting the sanctions into effect, and Russia’s retaliation, will be critical to whether the world endures continued inflationary pressures or whether a global recession ensues. Russia indicated it will launch its own round of sanctions in the near future, which could profoundly affect not only global oil and gas markets, but once again induce input price shocks to electricity markets – which will hit firms and households again with higher prices – and agricultural markets. Turmoil in commodity markets has opened a policy debate over whether the world will be forced to migrate to a new monetary order based on access to commodities and control of commodity flows, which would replace the fiat-money architecture that succeeded the post-WWII Bretton Woods system. This debate draws together numerous trends – the centrality of commodities to price levels and inflation; central-bank policy; failed regulation at commodity exchanges; and commodity scarcity due to weak capex. Bottom Line: Commodity markets are changing rapidly as fundamentals adapt to supply tightness and an extremely erratic demand recovery.  However, this does not mark the beginning of a new Bretton Woods era.  Markets adapt quickly to changing fundamentals and that will continue. Feature With its proposal this week to ban the import of Russian oil, the EU crossed the Rubicon and now will prepare for an escalation of its economic war with Russia. Oil imports are, by far, the EU's largest energy import expense, and Russia is its largest supplier (Chart 1). Russian natural gas exports to Europe account for 74% of its total natgas exports, although natgas comprises a much smaller share of Russia’s revenue than oil (Chart 2). In a pecuniary sense, oil is far more important, but in an economic sense gas is more meaningful for Europe. Chart 1Europe's Largest Import Bill: Oil Chart 2Russia's Largest Market: Europe Russia produced 10.1mm b/d of crude and condensates in 2021. Of the 4.7mm b/d of this that Russia exported, OECD Europe was its largest customer, at 50% of total, according to the US EIA. If Russia's production is curtailed by roughly 1mm b/d this year and next year due to sanctions, we estimate Brent prices could reach $120/bbl. Losing 1.8mm this year and another 700k b/d next year could push Brent prices above $140/bbl (Chart 3). On the natgas side, one-third of the ~ 25 Tcf of Russian production last year was exported via pipeline or as LNG, based on 2021 data from the EIA. This amounted to almost 9 Tcf. Most of this – 74% – was exported via pipeline to the OECD Europe. These are dedicated volumes flowing through Russia's network into Europe. Until the Power of Siberia pipeline is expanded – likely over the next 2-3 years — this gas will not be available for export. Chart 3Losing Russian Oil Exports Will Push Prices Sharply Higher Oil and gas exports last year accounted for close to 40% of the Russian government's budget. Crude and product revenue last year came in at just under $180 billion, while pipeline and LNG shipments of natgas accounted for close to $62 billion of the Russian government's revenues. Clearly, the stakes are extremely high for Russia if Europe embargoes oil imports. Escalation Of Economic War Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak last month threatened to shut off Russian exports of natural gas if the EU cut off oil imports. Whether – or how quickly – that threat is acted upon will be critical for Europe. Speculation around the EU's proposal to embargo oil imports of all kinds from Russia centers on the ban becoming effective by the end of this week, with a six-month phase-down of imports.1 It is still possible that the sanctions will be vetoed and revised. But with Germany changing its position and now willing to embargo oil, it is only a matter of time before the majority of the EU cuts off Russian oil imports. In response, Russia will launch its own round of embargoes, which could profoundly affect not only global oil and gas markets, but once again induce input-price shocks to electricity markets – which will hit household budgets and base-metals smelters and refiners – and agricultural markets, given the large share of natgas in fertilizers (Chart 4). It is not difficult to imagine base-metals refining operations closing again in Europe, along with crop-planting delays rising.2 On the back of this collateral damage from the cut-off of Russian oil and gas exports, we would expect inflation and inflation expectations to take another leg up. This comes against a backdrop in which central banks led by the US Fed already have initiated a rate-hiking program to address inflation that is running far hotter than previously forecast. Chart 4Tight Natgas Markets Drive Fertilizer/Grain Prices Higher Power, Fertilizer, Base Metals Could Be Shocked By Russian Cut-Offs Policymakers Reassess Commodities This turmoil in commodity markets has ignited a policy debate over whether the world will be forced to migrate to a new monetary order. The new order, so the argument goes, would be based on access to commodities and control of commodity flows and would replace the fiat-money architecture that succeeded the post-WWII Bretton Woods system. This debate draws together numerous trends – the centrality of commodities to price levels and inflation; central-bank policy; failed regulation at commodity exchanges; non-USD invoicing and funding; and commodity scarcity – particularly in industrial commodities like oil, natgas and metals due to weak capex over almost a decade. The debates around these different crises are being framed around the heightened geopolitical awareness of the critical role of commodities in the language of financial markets. This is a novel innovation; however, it essentially is an argument by analogy and can obfuscate underlying causes and effects. Bretton Woods III In The Offing? Following WW II, the US and other advanced economies launched the Bretton Woods system, under which the US would operate and maintain a commodity-money regime – i.e., the gold standard – that maintained convertability of USD to gold upon demand. This post-World War II Bretton Woods (BW) system – call it BWI – remained in place until the early 1970s and made the USD the preeminent currency in the world during that period. Literally, the system, operated by the Fed, made the USD "as good as gold." That didn't last, as US domestic exigencies – the Vietnam War and the War on Poverty – forced the US to abandon gold-convertibility and adopt a fiat-money system to finance these multiple wars. Nevertheless the dollar retained its centrality to global markets. Call this fiat system BWII. As of 2022, the dollar remains the world’s dominant reserve currency, accounting for ~ 60% of the $12.25 trillion of foreign exchange reserves, according to IMF data (Chart 5).3 As a vehicle currency, it accounts for close to 90% of daily FX trading – amounting to ~ $6 trillion/day of turnover. The dollar also is the preeminent funding and invoice currency. Trade invoicing denominated in USD accounts for 93% of imports and 97% of exports worldwide. Chart 5USD Remains Dominant Reserve Currency According to the WTO, global trade in 2019 (just before the COVID-19 pandemic) was just shy of $19 trillion (Chart 6). This global dominance of the USD means the dollar’s funding-currency role “mediates the transmission of U.S. monetary policy to global financing conditions.”4 This has been the case for the 23 years since the creation of the euro, including the periods before and after the 2008 global financial crisis. Chart 6USD Dominates World Trade The dollar’s importance to the global economy has only grown since the BWI era.5 Obstfeld notes US gross external assets and liabilities relative to GDP “grow sharply (but roughly commensurately) up until the global financial crisis, reaching ratios to GDP in the neighborhood of 150 percent. Since then, assets have levelled off but liabilities have continued to grow.” The dollar faces a range of challenges, as we discuss below, but any discussion must begin with its resilience as the top currency – a resilience that spans the creation of the euro, the rise of China, vast US budget and trade deficits, multiple rounds of quantitative easing, and political instability in Washington. A Return To Commodity-Based Money? The full power of the Fed's role at the center of the global monetary system – as a reserve currency and as the preeminent medium for funding and invoicing trade – was revealed following the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. The US froze Russian foreign reserves, denied it access to the international SWIFT payments system, and imposed sanctions on Russian firms and individuals, and anyone trading with them. Following the US actions, Russia's economy was partially frozen out of global trade, banking and finance. Western partners abandoned their Russian investments, taking their capital and technology out of the country. Outside of the sanctions, individual firms such as refiners, shippers and trading companies “self-sanctioned” their dealings with Russia, and refused to handle inbound or outbound Russian commodities. Given the US capability revealed, and the threat posed to other countries should the US sanction them in a likely manner, new risks to the dollar system will emerge. The primacy of the USD, and the Fed's role in maintaining its central banking position to the world, are by no means assured. Indeed, other states – namely China – will try to insulate themselves from similar sanctions. India is apparently willing to trade with Russia in rubles. Saudi Arabia is exploring being paid in RMB for oil exports to China and a wide range of states could increase their acceptance of RMB at least to cover their growing trade with China. China has been pushing hard to have its RMB recognized and used as a global reserve currency, and a trade-invoicing and trade-funding currency. For this to happen, China also would have to allow its currency to become a vehicle currency – i.e., the anchor leg in FX trading. Zoltan Pozsar, a Credit Suisse analyst, recently penned an article exploring the new terrain exposed by the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the US and EU responses.6 For Pozsar, "Commodity reserves will be an essential part of Bretton Woods III, and historically wars are won by those who have more food and energy supplies – food to fuel horses and soldiers back in the day, and food to fuel soldiers and fuel to fuel tanks and planes today." Pozsar avers that his formulation of Bretton Woods III will reverse the disinflation created by globalization, and "serve up an inflationary impulse (de-globalization, autarky, just-in-case hoarding of commodities and duplication of supply chains, and more military spending to be able to protect whatever seaborne trade is left)." These conclusions are similar to conclusions we have reached over the course of the past few years, as it became increasingly apparent that the US was losing geopolitical clout relative to rising powers, mainly China, and that the international system was becoming multipolar and unstable. The Ukraine war confirmed the new environment of Great Power Rivalry. Nation-states will indeed amass and hoard commodities as they will need to gird for battle as this rivalry heats up. Preparation for war and war itself are historically inflationary (Chart 7). Chart 7War And Preparation For War Are Inflationary However, countries still have to pay for commodities in a currency that exporters are willing to receive. Yet the biggest global oil and food exporters depend on the US for their security, except Russia. Even in base metals the US wields extraordinary influence over the non-aligned exporters. These states could reduce their dollar invoicing to cover their share of trade with countries outside the West, but their national security alliances and partnerships imply a hard-to-change view on which economies and currencies will be most stable over the long run. The dollar is again preeminent. China unquestionably wants to diversify away from the dollar. But China’s trade partners will have a limit on how much yuan cash they are willing to hold. If they want to recycle this cash into China’s economy, China must open its capital account. But this would reduce the Communist Party’s control of the domestic economy due to the Impossible Trinity (the yuan would have to float freely). So until China makes this change, the world is stuck in today’s monetary system. By contrast, if China totally closes its system due to domestic or foreign political threats, then the world faces a recession and investors will not be rushing to sell the dollar. For now China is trying to have it both ways: maintaining large foreign exchange reserves while gradually diversifying away from the dollar (Chart 8). China selling off its Treasury holdings and dollar reserves, which began in the aftermath of the Great Recession, is the biggest monetary shift since 1999, when the euro emerged and China’s purchases of Treasuries began to surge due to trade surpluses on the back of its joining the WTO. But there is little basis for China or anyone else to abandon fiat currencies and return to the gold standard. Fiat currencies enable states to control the money supply and hence to try to control their economies and societies. The Chinese are the least likely to abandon fiat currency given their laser focus on employment, manufacturing, and social stability. China is a commodity importer, so that if it seeks to amass commodities as strategic reserves in the midst of a commodity boom, it will pay top price. This means the yuan would need to be kept strong. But in fact China is allowing the yuan to depreciate, as it would face higher unemployment and instability if domestic demand were further suppressed by a rising yuan. China is already undergoing a painful transition away from export orientation – and Beijing has already acknowledged that de-industrialization should slow down because it poses a sociopolitical threat (Chart 9). A monetary revolution that strengthens the yuan at the expense of the dollar would force an immediate conclusion to China’s transition away from export-manufacturing. That would be politically destabilizing. Chart 8China Diversifies from USD - But Closed Capital Account Prevents Global RMB Chart 9Stronger RMB Would De-Industrialize China At Great Political Risk If China or other countries attempt to create a commodity base for their currencies, but simultaneously try to prevent a fixed exchange rate that constrains their money supply, then there will be little difference from a fiat currency regime. Today’s major reserve currency issuers already possess reserves of physical wealth (e.g. commodities) beneath their flexible monetary policy regimes – this dynamic would not inherently change. Of course, Europe, Japan, and the United Kingdom are the leading providers of reserve currencies outside the US and yet they are relatively lacking in commodity reserves. If global investors begin chasing currencies primarily on the basis of commodity reserves, the USD will not suffer the most, as the United States is a resource-rich country. China’s policy and strategy may become clearer after the twentieth party congress this fall, but most likely the current contradictions will persist. China will want to prolong the period of economic engagmeent with the West for as long as possible even as it prepares for a time when engagement is utterly broken. While China knows that the US will pursue strategic containment, and US-China engagement is over, it also knows that European leaders have a different set of interests. They have enough difficulty dealing with Russia and are not eager to expand their sanctions to China. Yet switching from dollar to euro reserves offers China little protection against sanctions in any major confrontation in the coming years. A radical decision by China to buy high and sell low (realize big losses on Treasuries and buy high-priced commodities) would show that Beijing is expecting Russian-style confrontation with the West immediately, which would scare foreign investors away from China. Net foreign direct investment in China has surged since the downfall of the Trump presidency (Chart 10). But that process would reverse as companies saw China going down Russia’s path and disengaging from the global monetary system. In that context, western governments would also penalize their own companies for investing in a geopolitical rival that was apparently preparing for conflict (while buttressing Russia). In short, private capital will flee countries that abandon the global financial system because that would be an economically inefficient decision taken for reasons of state security, and hence it would imply higher odds of conflict. Wealthy nations see China’s and other emerging markets’ foreign exchange reserves as “collateral” against asset seizures and geopolitical risks: if China reduces the collateral, private capital will feel less secure flowing into China.7 Chart 10If China Abandonds USD To Prepare For Sanctions, FDI Will Reverse Ultimately China will try to wean itself off the dollar – but it will keep doing so gradually to avoid a catastrophic social and economic change at home and abroad. This is continuation of post-2008 status quo. An accelerated shift away from USD will be interpreted by global actors as preparation for war (just like Russia’s shift). This will drive investors to swap Chinese assets for American or other assets. History suggests that USD devaluations followed US wars and budget expansions. Investors should wait until the next US military adventure, in Iran or elsewhere, before expecting massive dollar depreciation. If the US pursues an offshore balancing strategy, as it appears to be doing today, then other countries will become less stable and the dollar will remain appealing as a safe haven. Bottom Line: Russia’s and China’s diversification away from the dollar over the past decade has not caused global flight from the dollar. International trust in the economy and government of Russia and China is not very high. The euro, the viable alternative to the dollar, is less attractive in the face of the Ukraine war and broader geopolitical instability. The path toward monetary revolution is for China to open up its capital account, make its currency convertible, and sell USD assets while appreciating the yuan. Yet China’s leaders have not embarked on this course for fear of domestic instability. In lieu of that, the current monetary regime continues.     Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com     Footnotes 1     Please see Brussels proposes EU import ban on all Russian oil published by ft.com on May 4, 2022 for summary of the EU's export-ban proposals. 2     Please see our report from March 31, 2022 entitled Germany Closer To Rationing Natgas for further discussion. It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 3    See Obstfeld, Maurice (2020), Global Dimensions of U.S. Monetary Policy, International Journal of Central Banking, 16:1, pp. 73-132. 4    Obstfeld (2020, p. 113). 5    Obstfeld (2020, p. 77-78). 6    Please see Pozsar, Zoltan (2022), "Money, Commodities, and Bretton Woods III," published by Credit Suisse Economics. 7     For the “collateral” interpretation of US dollar-denominated foreign exchange reserves, see Michael P. Dooley, David Folkerts-Landau, and Peter M. Garber, “US Sanctions Reinforce The Dollar’s Dominance,” NBER Working Paper Series 29943, April 2022, nber.org.  

Executive Summary German GeoRisk Indicator Russia and Germany have begun cutting off each other’s energy in a major escalation of strategic tensions. The odds of Finland and Sweden joining NATO have shot up. A halt to NATO enlargement, particularly on Russia’s borders, is Russia’s chief demand. Tensions will skyrocket. China’s reversion to autocracy and de facto alliance with Russia are reinforcing the historic confluence of internal and external risk, weighing on Chinese assets. Geopolitical risk is rising in South Korea and Hong Kong, rising in Spain and Italy, and flat in South Africa. France’s election will lower domestic political risk but the EU as a whole faces a higher risk premium. The Biden administration is doubling down on its defense of Ukraine, calling for $33 billion in additional aid and telling Russia that it will not dominate its neighbor. However, the Putin regime cannot afford to lose in Ukraine and will threaten to widen the conflict to intimidate and divide the West. Trade Recommendation Inception Date Return LONG GLOBAL DEFENSIVES / CYCLICALS EQUITIES 2022-01-20 14.2% Bottom Line: Stay long global defensives over cyclicals. Feature Chart 1Geopolitical Risk And Policy Uncertainty Drive Up Dollar The dollar (DXY) is breaking above the psychological threshold of 100 on the back of monetary tightening and safe-haven demand. Geopolitical risk does not always drive up the dollar – other macroeconomic factors may prevail. But in today’s situation macro and geopolitics are converging to boost the greenback (Chart 1). Global economic policy uncertainty is also rising sharply. It is highly correlated with the broader trade-weighted dollar. The latter is nowhere near 2020 peaks but could rise to that level if current trends hold. A strong dollar reflects slowing global growth and also tightens global financial conditions, with negative implications for cyclical and emerging market equities. Bottom Line: Tactically favor US equities and the US dollar to guard against greater energy shock, policy uncertainty, and risk-aversion. Energy Cutoff Points To European Recession Chart 2Escalation With Russia Weighs Further On EU Assets Russia is reducing natural gas flows to Poland and Bulgaria and threatening other countries, Germany is now embracing an oil embargo against Russia, while Finland and Sweden are considering joining NATO. These three factors are leading to a major escalation of strategic tensions on the continent that will get worse before they get better, driving up our European GeoRisk indicators and weighing on European assets (Chart 2). Russia’s ultimatum in December 2021 stressed that NATO enlargement should cease and that NATO forces and weapons should not be positioned east of the May 1997 status quo. Russia invaded Ukraine to ensure its military neutrality over the long run.1 Finland and Sweden, seeing Ukraine’s isolation amid Russian invasion, are now reviewing whether to change their historic neutrality and join NATO. Public opinion polls now show Finnish support for joining at 61% and Swedish support at 57%. The scheduling of a joint conference between the country’s leaders on May 13 looks like it could be a joint declaration of their intention to join. The US and other NATO members will have to provide mutual defense guarantees for the interim period if that is the case, lest Russia attack. The odds that Finland and Sweden remain neutral are higher than the consensus holds (given the 97% odds that they join NATO on Predictit.org). But the latest developments suggest they are moving toward applying for membership. They fear being left in the cold like Ukraine in the event of an attack. Russia’s response will be critical. If Russia deploys nuclear weapons to Kaliningrad, as former President Dmitri Medvedev warned, then Moscow will be making a menacing show but not necessarily changing the reality of Russia’s nuclear strike capabilities. That is equivalent to a pass and could mark the peak of the entire crisis. The geopolitical risk premium would begin to subside after that. Related Report  Geopolitical StrategyLe Pen And Other Hurdles (GeoRisk Update) However, Russia has also threatened “military-political repercussions” if the Nordics join NATO. Russia’s capabilities are manifestly limited, judging by Ukraine today and the Winter War of 1939, but a broader war cannot entirely be ruled out. Global financial markets will still need to adjust for a larger tail risk of a war in Finland/Sweden in the very near term. Most likely Russia will retaliate by cutting off Europe’s natural gas. Clearly this is the threat on the table, after the cutoff to Poland and Bulgaria and the warnings to other countries. In the near term, several companies are gratifying Russia and paying for gas in rubles. But these payments violate EU sanctions against Russia and the intention is to wean off Russian imports as soon as possible. Germany says it can reduce gas imports starting next year after inking a deal with Qatar. Hence Russia might take the initiative and start reducing the flow earlier. Bottom Line: If Europe plunges into recession as a result of an immediate natural gas cutoff, then strategic stability between Russia and the West will become less certain. The tail risk of a broader war goes up. Stay cyclically long US equities over global equities and tactically long US treasuries. Stay long defense stocks and gold. Stay Short CNY At the end of last year we argued that Beijing would double down on “Zero Covid” policy in 2022, at least until the twentieth national party congress this fall. Social restrictions serve a dual purpose of disease suppression and dissent repression. Now that the state is doubling down, what will happen next? The economy will deteriorate: imports are already contracting at a rate of 0.1% YoY. The manufacturing PMI has fallen to 48.1  and the service sector PMI to 42.0, indicating contraction. Furthermore, social unrest could emerge, as lockdowns serve as a catalyst to ignite underlying socioeconomic disparities. Hence the national party congress is less likely to go smoothly, implying that investors will catch a glimpse of political instability under the surface in China as the year progresses. The political risk premium will remain high (Chart 3). Chart 3China's Confluence Of Domestic And Foreign Risk Weighs On Stocks And Currency While Chairman Xi Jinping is still likely to clinch another ten years in power, it will not be auspicious amid an economic crash and any social unrest. Xi could be forced into some compromises on either Politburo personnel or policy adjustments. A notable indicator of compromise would be if he nominated a successor, though this would not provide any real long-term assurance to investors given the lack of formal mechanisms for power transfer. After the party congress we expect Xi to “let 100 flowers bloom,” meaning that he will ease fiscal, regulatory, and social policy so that today’s monetary and fiscal stimulus can work effectively. Right now monetary and fiscal easing has limited impact because private sector actors are averse to taking risk. Easing policy to boost the economy could also entail a diplomatic charm offensive to try to convince the US and EU to avoid imposing any significant sanctions on trade and investment flows, whether due to Russia or human rights violations. Such a diplomatic initiative would only succeed, if at all, in the short run. The US cannot allow a deep re-engagement with China since that would serve to strengthen the de facto Russo-Chinese strategic alliance. In other words, an eruption of instability threatens to weaken Xi’s hand and jeopardize his power retention. While it is extremely unlikely that Xi will fall from power, he could have his image of supremacy besmirched. It is likely that China will be forced to ease a range of policies, including lockdowns and regulations of key sectors, that will be marginally positive for economic growth. There may also be schemes to attract foreign investment. Bottom Line: If China expands the range of its policy easing the result could be received positively by global investors in 2023. But the short-term outlook is still negative and deteriorating due to China’s reversion to autocracy and confluence of political and geopolitical risk. Stay short CNY and neutral Chinese stocks. Stay Short KRW South Koreans went to the polls on March 9 to elect their new president for a five-year term. The two top candidates for the job were Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung. Yoon, a former public prosecutor, was the candidate for the People Power Party, a conservative party that can be traced back to the Saenuri and the Grand National Party, which was in power from 2007 to 2017 under President Lee Myung-bak and President Park Geun-hye. Lee, the governor of the largest province in Korea, was the candidate for the Democratic Party, the party of the incumbent President Moon Jae-in. Yoon won by a whisker, garnering 48.6% of the votes versus 47.8% for Lee. The margin of victory for Yoon is the lowest since Korea started directly electing its presidents. President-elect Yoon will be inaugurated in May. He will not have control of the National Assembly, as his party only holds 34% of the seats. The Democratic Party holds the majority, with 172 out of 300 seats. The next legislative election will be in 2024, which means that President Yoon will have to work with the opposition for a good two years before his party has a chance to pass laws on its own. President-elect Yoon was the more pro-business and fiscally restrained candidate. His nomination of Han Duck-soo as his prime minister suggests that, insofar as any domestic policy change is possible, he will be pragmatic, as Han served under two liberal administrations. Yoon’s lack of a majority and nomination of a left-leaning prime minister suggest that domestic policy will not be a source of uncertainty for investors through 2024. Foreign policy, by contrast, will be the biggest source of risk for investors. Yoon rejects the dovish “Moonshine” policy of his predecessor and favors a strong hand in dealing with North Korea. “War can be avoided only when we acquire an ability to launch pre-emptive strikes and show our willingness to use them,” he has argued. North Korea responded by expanding its nuclear doctrine and resuming tests of intercontinental ballistic missiles with the launch of the Hwasong-17 on March 24 – the first ICBM launch since 2017. In a significant upgrade of North Korea’s deterrence strategy, Kim Yo Jong, the sister of Kim Jong Un, warned on April 4 that North Korea would use nuclear weapons to “eliminate” South Korea if attacked (implying an overwhelming nuclear retaliation to any attack whatsoever). Kim Jong Un himself claimed on April 26 that North Korea’s nuclear weapons are no longer merely about deterrence but would be deployed if the country is attacked. President-elect Yoon welcomes the possibility of deploying of US strategic assets to strengthen deterrence against the North. The hawkish turn is not surprising considering that North-South relations failed to make any substantive improvements during President Moon’s five-year tenure as a pro-engagement president. South Koreans, especially Yoon’s supporters, are split on whether inter-Korean dialogue should be continued. They are becoming more interested in developing their own nuclear weapons or at the very least deploying US nuclear weapons in South Korea. Half of South Korean voters support security through alliance with the US, while a third support security through the development of independent nuclear weapons. The nuclear debate will raise tensions on the peninsula. An even bigger change in South Korea’s foreign policy is its policy towards China. President-elect Yoon has accused President Moon of succumbing to China’s economic extortion. Moon had established a policy of “three No’s,” meaning no to additional THAAD missiles in South Korea, no to hosting other US missile defense systems, and no to joining an alliance with Japan and the United States. By contrast, Yoon’s electoral promises include deploying more THAAD and joining the Quadrilateral Dialogue (US, Japan, Australia, India). Polls show that South Koreans hold a low opinion of all of their neighbors but that China has slipped slightly beneath Japan and North Korea in favorability. Even Democratic Party voters feel more negative towards China. While negative attitudes towards China are not unique to Korea, there is an important difference from other countries: the Korean youth dislike China the most, not the older generations. Negative sentiment is less tied to old wounds from the Korean war and more related to ideology and today’s grievances. Younger Koreans, growing up in a liberal democracy and proud of their economic and cultural success, have been involved in campus clashes against Chinese students over Korean support for Hong Kong democrats. Negative attitudes towards China among the youth should alarm investors, as young people provide the voting base for elections to come, and China is the largest trading partner for Korea. Korea’s foreign policy will hew to the American side, at risk to its economy (Chart 4). Chart 4South Korean Geopolitical Risk Rising Under The Radar President-elect Yoon’s policies towards North Korea and China will increase geopolitical risk in East Asia. The biggest beneficiary will be India. Both Korea and Japan need to find a substitute to Chinese markets and labor, which have become less reliable in recent years. South Korea’s newly elected president is aligned with the US and West and less friendly toward China and Russia. He faces a rampant North Korea that feels emboldened by its position of an arsenal of 40-50 deliverable nuclear weapons. The North Koreans now claim that they will respond to any military attack with nuclear force and are testing intercontinental ballistic missiles and possibly a nuclear weapon. The US currently has three aircraft carriers around Korea, despite its urgent foreign policy challenges in Europe and the Middle East. Bottom Line: Stay long JPY-KRW. South Korea’s geopolitical risk premium will remain high. But favor Korean stocks over Taiwanese stocks. Stay Neutral On Hong Kong Stocks Hong Kong’s leadership change will trigger a new bout of unrest (Chart 5). Chart 5Hong Kong: More Turbulence Ahead On April 4, Hong Kong’s incumbent Chief Executive, Carrie Lam, confirmed that she would not seek a second term but would step down on June 30. John Lee, the current chief secretary of Hong Kong, became the only candidate approved to run for election, which is scheduled to be held on May 8. With the backing of the pro-Beijing members in the Election Committee, Lee is expected to secure enough nominations to win the race. Lee served as security secretary from when Carrie Lam took office in 2017 until June 2021. He firmly supported the Hong Kong extradition bill in 2019 and National Security Law in 2020, which provoked historic social unrest in those years. He insisted on taking a tough security stance towards pro-democracy protests. With Lee in power, Hong Kong will face more unrest and tougher crackdowns in the coming years, which will likely bring more social instability. Lee will provoke pro-democracy activists with his policy stances and adherence to Beijing’s party line. For example, his various statements to the news media suggest a dogmatic approach to censorship and political dissent. With the adoption of the National Security Law, Hong Kong’s pro-democracy faction is already deeply disaffected. Carrie Lam was originally elected as a popular leader, with notable support from women, but her popularity fell sharply after the passage of the extradition bill and National Security Law, as well as her mishandling of the Covid-19 outbreak. Her failure to handle the clashes between the Hong Kong people and Beijing damaged public trust in government. Trust never fully recovered when it took another hit recently from the latest wave of the pandemic. Putting another pro-Beijing hardliner in power will exacerbate the trend. Hong Kong equities are vulnerable not merely because of social unrest. During the era of US-China engagement, Hong Kong benefited as the middleman and the symbol that the Communist Party could cooperate within a liberal, democratic, capitalist global order. Hence US-China power struggle removes this special status and causes Hong Kong financial assets to contract mainland Chinese geopolitical risk. As a result of the 2019-2020 crackdown, John Lee and Carrie Lam were among a list of Hong Kong officials sanctioned by the US Treasury Department and State Department in 2020. Now, after the Ukraine war, the US will be on the lookout for any Hong Kong role in helping Russia circumvent sanctions, as well as any other ways in which China might further its strategic aims by means of Hong Kong. Bottom Line: Stay neutral on Hong Kong equities. Favor France Within European Equities French political risk will fall after the presidential election, which recommits the country to geopolitical unity with the US and NATO and potentially pro-productivity structural reforms (Chart 6). France is already a geopolitically secure country so the reduction of domestic political risk should be doubly positive for French assets, though they have already outperformed. And the Russia-West conflict is fueling a risk premium regardless of France’s positive developments. Chart 6France's Domestic Political Risk Will Subside But Russian War Will Keep Geopolitical Risk Elevated The French election ended with a solid victory for the political establishment as we expected. President Emmanuel Macron gaining 58% of the vote to Marine Le Pen’s 42%. Macron beat his opinion polling by 4.5pp while Le Pen underperformed her polls by 4.5pp. A large number of voters abstained, at 28%, compared to 25.5% in 2017. The regional results showed a stark divergence between overseas or peripheral France (where Marine Le Pen even managed to get over half of the vote in several cases) and the core cities of France (where Macron won handily). Macron had won an outright majority in every region in 2017. Macron did best among the young and the old, while Le Pen did best among middle-aged voters. But Macron won every age group except the 50 year-olds, who want to retire early. Macron did well among business executives, managers, and retired people, but Le Pen won among the working classes, as expected. Le Pen won the lowest paid income group, while Macron’s margin of victory rises with each step up the income ladder. Macron’s performance was strong, especially considering the global context. The pandemic knocked several incumbent parties out of power (US, Germany) and required leadership changes in others (Japan, Italy). The subsequent inflation shock now threatens to cause another major political rotation in rapid succession, leaving various political leaders and parties vulnerable in the coming months and years (Australia, the UK, Spain). Only Canada and now France marked exceptions, where post-pandemic elections confirmed the country’s leader. The Ukraine war constitutes yet another shock but it helped Macron, as Le Pen had objective links and sympathies with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Macron’s timing was lucky but his message of structural reform for the sake of economic efficiency still resonates in contemporary France, where change is long overdue – at least compared with Le Pen’s proposal of doubling down on statism, protectionism, and fiscal largesse. The French middle class was never as susceptible to populism as the US, UK, and Italy because it had been better protected from the ravages of globalization. Populism is still a force to be reckoned with, especially if left-wing populists do well in the National Assembly, or if right-wing populists find a fresher face than the Le Pen dynasty. But the failure of populism in the context of pandemic, inflation, and war suggests that France’s political establishment remains well fortified by the economic structure and the electoral system. Whether Macron can sustain his structural reforms depends on legislative elections to be held on June 12-19. Early projections are positive for his party, which should keep a majority. Macron’s new mandate will help. Le Pen’s National Rally and its predecessors may perform better than in the past but that is not saying much as their presence in the National Assembly has been weak. Bottom Line: France is geopolitically secure and has seen a resounding public vote for structural reform that could improve productivity depending on legislative elections. French equities can continue to outperform their European peers over the long run. Our European Investment Strategy recommends French equities ex-consumer stocks, French small caps over large caps, and French aerospace and defense.   Favor Spanish Over Italian Stocks Chart 7Italian And Spanish Political Risk Will Rise But Favor Spanish Stocks What about Spain? It is still a “divided nation” susceptible to a rise in political risk ahead of the general election due by December 10, 2023 (Chart 7). In the past few months, a series of strategic mistakes and internal power struggles have led to a significant decline in the popularity of Spain’s largest opposition party, the People’s Party. Due to public infighting and power struggle, Pablo Casado was forced to step down as the leader of the People’s Party on February 23, as requested by 16 of the party’s 17 regional leaders. It is yet to be seen if the new party leader, Alberto Nunez Feijoo, can reboot People’s Party. The far-right VOX party will benefit from the People Party’s setback. The latter’s misstep in a regional election (Castile & Leon) gave VOX a chance to participate in a regional government for the very first time. Hence VOX’s influence will spread and it will receive greater recognition as an important political force. Meanwhile the ruling Socialist Worker’s Party (PSOE) faces anger from the public amid inflation and high energy prices. However, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez’s decision to send offensive military weapons to Ukraine is widely supported among major parties, including even his reluctant coalition partner, Unidas Podemos. The People’s Party’s recent infighting gives temporary relief to the ruling party. The Russia-Ukraine issue caused some minor divisions within the government but they are not yet leading to any major political crisis, as nationwide pro-Ukraine sentiment is largely unified. The Andalusia regional election, which is expected this November, will be a check point for Feijoo and a pre-test for next year’s general election. Andalusia is the most populous autonomous community in Spain, consisting about 17% of the seats in the congress (the lower house). The problem for Sanchez and the Socialists is that the stagflationary backdrop will weigh on their support over time. Bottom Line: Spanish political risk is likely to spike sooner rather than later, though Spanish domestic risk it is limited in nature. Madrid faces low geopolitical risk, low energy vulnerability, and is not susceptible to trying to leave the EU or Euro Area. Favor Spanish over Italian stocks. Stay Constructive On South Africa The political and economic status quo is largely unchanged in South Africa and will remain so going into the 2024 national elections. Fiscal discipline will weaken ahead of the election, which should be negative for the rand, but the global commodity shortage and geopolitical risks in Russia and China will probably overwhelm any negative effects from South Africa’s domestic policies. Rising commodity prices have propped up the local equity market and will bring in much-needed revenue into the local economy and government coffers. But structural issues persist. Low growth outcomes amid weak productivity and high unemployment levels will remain the norm. The median voter is increasingly constrained with fewer economic opportunities on the horizon. Pressure will mount on the ruling African National Congress (ANC), fueling civil unrest and adding to overall political risk (Chart 8). Chart 8South Africa's Political Status Quo Is Tactically Positive For Equities And Currency Almost a year has passed since the civil unrest episode of 2021. Covid-19 lockdowns have lifted and the national state of disaster has ended, reducing social tensions. This is evident in the decline of our South Africa GeoRisk indicator from 2021 highs. While we recently argued that fiscal austerity is under way in South Africa, we also noted that fiscal policy will reverse course in time for the 2024 election. In this year’s fiscal budget, the budget deficit is projected to narrow from -6% to -4.2% over the next two years. Government has increased tax revenue collection through structural reforms that are rooting out corruption and wasteful expenditure. But the ANC will have to tap into government spending to shore up lost support come 2024. Already, the ANC have committed to maintaining a special Covid-19 social-grant payment, first introduced in 2020, for another year. This grant, along with other government support, will feature in 2024 and possibly beyond. Unemployment is at 34.3%, its highest level ever recorded. The ANC cannot leave it unchecked. The most prevalent and immediate recourse is to increase social payments and transfers. Given the increasing number of social dependents that higher unemployment creates, government spending will have to increase to address rising unemployment. President Cyril Ramaphosa is still a positive figurehead for the ANC, but the 2021 local elections showed that the ANC cannot rely on the Ramaphosa effect alone. The ANC is also dealing with intra-party fighting. Ramaphosa has yet to assert total control over the party elites, distracting the ANC from achieving its policy objectives. To correct course, Ramaphosa will have to relax fiscal discipline. To this outcome, investors should expect our GeoRisk indicator to register steady increases in political risk moving into 2024. The only reason to be mildly optimistic is that South Africa is distant from geopolitical risk and can continue to benefit from the global bull market in metals. Bottom Line: Maintain a cyclically constructive outlook on South African currency and assets. Tight global commodity markets will support this emerging market, which stands to benefit from developments in Russia and China. Investment Takeaways Stay strategically long gold on geopolitical and inflation risk, despite the dollar rally. Stay long US equities relative to global and UK equities relative to DM-ex-US. Favor global defensives over cyclicals and large caps over small caps. Stay short CNY, TWD, and KRW-JPY. Stay short CZK-GBP. Favor Mexico within emerging markets. Stay long defense and cyber security stocks. We are booking a 5% stop loss on our long Canada / short Saudi Arabia equity trade. We still expect Middle Eastern tensions to escalate and trigger a Saudi selloff.   Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com Jesse Anak Kuri Associate Editor Jesse.Kuri@bcaresearch.com Yushu Ma Research Analyst yushu.ma@bcaresearch.com Guy Russell Senior Analyst GuyR@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1   The campaign in the south suggests that Ukraine will be partitioned, landlocked, and susceptible to blockade in the coming years. If Russia achieves its military objectives, then Ukraine will accept neutrality in a ceasefire to avoid losing more territory. If Russia fails, then it faces humiliation and its attempts to save face will become unpredictable and aggressive. Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix Geopolitical Calendar

Special Report

Dear Client, This week, we present our inaugural report on ESG investing and the global energy transition. Henceforth, we will be publishing this research on the last Thursday of every month. Our principal ESG focus will be on the Environmental aspects of climate change, and the policies and actions undertaken to arrest the rise in the Earth's temperature via decarbonization. To date, the goal of Environmental policy in many jurisdictions – e.g., the US and EU – has been to disincentivize exploration, production, refining and transportation investment in hydrocarbons. At the same time, it has strongly incentivized investment in renewable-power generation. This has produced volatile marginal effects, forcing commodity markets to allocate increasingly scarce energy and metals supplies against a backdrop of increasing demand. It is at this nexus where investment opportunities will emerge. ESG's Social and Governance pillars are slower-moving change agents, with long-duration effects. Human-rights failures can destroy lives and lead to social unrest. Failed corporate governance and national governance can sharply alter firms' abilities and willingness to invest in environmentally responsible resource development. Failure in both dimensions can profoundly affect commodity supply-demand balances, and imperil the energy transition. Much of what passes for ESG measurement and compliance is self-reported – when data are available – and differs little from PR or virtue signaling. This is starting to change. Over the next 2-3 years, we expect a continued increase in government involvement in standardizing ESG reporting – cf, the SEC's recent proposal for reporting Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions, and an increased focus on carbon pricing, which we believe will require a global carbon tax or carbon-price floor. This will be needed to incentivize investment in renewables and carbon-reduction and -capture technology, given the near-impossibility of harmonizing local and regional carbon-trading schemes. Otherwise climate clubs – i.e., trading blocs comprising states with shared ESG goals – will emerge, which will further fragment global trade. We are hopeful you will find this research useful in your decision making and investing. Bob Ryan Managing Editor, Commodity & ESG Strategy Executive Summary Fossil Fuels Dominate Global Energy Mix Whether or not the SEC's proposal to disclose Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions and other risk factors by firms it regulates will be adopted in whole or in part, we are confident it foreshadows deeper government involvement in the ESG arena in the near term in the US and EU. Carbon pricing will become increasingly important in global climate-change policy. We believe this will require a global carbon tax or carbon-price floor to incentivize investment in renewables and carbon-reduction and -capture technology. Failure to agree on at least a carbon price floor over the next 2-3 years almost surely will lead to the formation of climate clubs. In such clubs, like-minded states with similarly rigorous carbon-pricing and ESG disclosure requirements will allow trade among each other, but will levy tariffs against firms in states lacking such policies. Bottom Line: Governments are approaching a reckoning on their commitments to reduce or slow CO2 and greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions. These are meant to hold the rise in the Earth's temperature to less than 2° C, or to approach the 1.5° C goal of the Paris Agreement. Reporting mandates like the EU's and the SEC's proposed CO2/GHG reports will help, as will increased subsidies and tax support for carbon-capture and hydrogen technology. However, a global carbon tax or carbon-price floor will be required to incentivize the investment needed to meet climate-change goals. Feature Voluntary programs and self-reporting are not reducing the concentration of CO2 and other GHGs fast enough to stay on track to meet Paris Agreement targets of holding the rise in the Earth's temperature to less than 2° C vs, pre-industrial levels, or preferably to 1.5° C. Over the next couple of years, we believe states will have to mandate additional ESG reporting – particularly on CO2 and other GHG emissions – and will require audits of programs and reports connected to GHG emissions, given the scope of what they are trying to accomplish. The EU got the ball rolling on reporting emissions, and now the US SEC is proposing new regulations as well. These will require the firms it regulates to disclose Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions and other climate-related factors that constitute material risks to revenues and profits.1 Regardless of whether this proposal makes it through the legislative process, firms with operations in the EU will have to comply with similar reporting requirements if similar proposals are approved. Growing Energy Demand Fuels Higher CO2 Emissions World electricity demand – the principal focus of the global energy transition – grew 6% last year, on the back of strong GDP growth and weather-related demand. 2021 saw the highest electricity demand growth recorded by the IEA in the post-GFC recovery that began in 2010, amounting to 1,500 Twh year-on-year. Coal covered more than half of the growth in global electricity demand last year, and has constituted a major chunk of the electricity mix over a longer historical sample. Based on data starting in 2000, the world – primarily EM – has been net positive coal-fired power capacity (Chart 1) which reached an all-time high in 2021 as well, rising 9% y/y, while gas-fired generation grew 2%. The increase in fossil fuel generation pushed CO2 emissions globally up almost 6% to record highs. Renewable generation grew by 6% last year and is expected to meet most of the increase in electricity demand over the 2022-24 period with 8% p.a. growth, according to the IEA. Coal demand surged on the back of robust economic growth and weather-related factors, which helped propel global CO2 emissions to a record high at just over 36 billion MT in 2021, according to the IEA. This reversed the downturn in 2020 caused by the COVID-19 pandemic (Chart 2). Higher methane and nitrous oxide emissions, plus CO2 released by oil and gas flaring, lifted total energy-related GHG emissions to record levels last year as well. Chart 1Coal-Fired Power Has Been A Constant Chart 2Fossil Fuels Dominate Global Energy Mix We find evidence of a long-run relationship between real GDP and carbon dioxide emissions (Chart 3). This likely plays out through cointegration between oil consumption with real GDP, a relationship we exploit when estimating our monthly oil balances. While the income elasticity for emerging economies reliant on manufacturing – e.g., India and China – is positive, for the EU, a bloc of developed nations, that elasticity turns negative. This is consistent with the hypothesis of the Environmental Kuznets Curve, which states that initial increases in GDP per capita are associated with environmental degradation, however, beyond a point, income increases are associated with lower environmental damage.2 Interesting, as well, is the lack of any cointegration between GDP and US CO2 emissions. That may be due to the increased use of natgas vs. coal, and the fact that the energy intensity of US GDP continues to fall. Energy demand levels, including electricity, continues to exceed renewables supply. So even though renewable-energy generation growth is expected to meet 90% of energy demand growth from 2022 to 2024, the accumulation of CO2 and other GHGs will continue keeping the level of pollutants rising over that period. Chart 3CO2 Closely Tied To GDP   Recent research on global CO2 emissions growth for different countries based on historical values for population, GDP per capita and carbon intensity (measured as CO2 emissions per unit of GDP) projects median annual CO2 emissions in 2100 will be 34 Gigatons (Chart 4).3 This is significantly higher than the emissions required to keep temperature increases under 2° C by the end of the forecast period. The forecast is accompanied by four other CO2 emission scenarios provided by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Chart 4CO2 Projected Increases Overshoot Paris Agreement Targets Carbon Tax Needed One of our high-conviction views is governments worldwide need to agree a global carbon tax that can be applied directly to CO2 emissions.4 If a global carbon tax cannot be agreed, a global carbon-price floor also could be used to incentivize the investment needed to meet climate-change goals. An IMF analysis entitled "Five Things To Know About Carbon Pricing" published in September notes: "An international carbon price floor can be strikingly effective. A 2030 price floor of $75 a ton for advanced economies, $50 for high-income emerging market economies such as China, and $25 for lower-income emerging markets such as India would keep warming below 2°C with just six participants (Canada, China, European Union, India, United Kingdom, United States) and other G20 countries meeting their Paris pledges." There may be legitimate grounds for arguing over the point at which the tax is collected – i.e., at the production or consumption stages – but, in our view, this would be far superior (and quicker to implement) than trying to harmonize the different carbon-trading schemes worldwide. In addition, the revenues generated by the tax would allow governments to protect the interests of lower-income constituencies, which are most adversely affected by such regressive taxes. We also have maintained failure to agree a carbon tax of some form over the next 2-3 years almost surely will lead to the formation of climate clubs, a notion pioneered by William Nordhaus, the 2018 Nobel Laurate.5 In Nordhaus's clubs, like-minded states with similarly rigorous carbon-pricing and ESG disclosure requirements will allow trade among each other, but will levy tariffs against firms in states lacking such measures. There is some evidence China already is preparing for this eventuality by limiting the export of high-carbon products to consumer states with strong climate-protection laws. For example, the EU last year rolled out a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), which it describes as "a climate measure that should prevent the risk of carbon leakage and supports the EU's increased ambition on climate mitigation, while ensuring WTO compatibility."6 Investment Implications Governments are moving quickly to address shortcoming in existing CO2 and GHG reduction policies. Among other things, the EU and US are proposing mandatory reporting on these emissions covering Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. In addition, China is refining its five-year plan to limit high-carbon exports, so that it does not run afoul of the EU's CBAM. We expect more of such measures going forward, as CO2 and GHG emissions continue to accumulate in the atmosphere at a rate that cannot be offset by existing policy.   Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com     Footnotes 1     Scope 1 covers GHG emissions firms directly generate on their own; Scope 2 applies to emissions indirectly created a purchasing electricity and other forms of energy; and Scope 3 covers indirect emissions produced up and down the firms' supply chain.  These are deemed to be material risks that could impact firms' revenues and profitability, hence necessary information for investors and market participants generally.  Please see SEC Proposes Rules to Enhance and Standardize Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors, published by the SEC on March 21, 2022. 2     For more information on this, please see ScienceDirect’s page on the Environmental Kuznets Curve.  3    Please see Country-based rate of emissions reductions should increase by 80% beyond nationally determined contributions to meet the 2 degree Celsius target (Liu and Rafter, 2021), published in Nature. 4    Please see Surging Metals Prices And The Case For Carbon-Capture, which we published on May 13, 2021. It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 5    Please see Nordhaus, William (2015), "Climate Clubs: Overcoming Free-riding in International Climate Policy," American Economic Review 105:4, pp. 1339–1370. 6    Please see Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism: Questions and Answers, published by the European Commission on July 14, 2021. See also China issues guidelines under 14th 5-year plan to limit high-carbon product exports, published by S&P Global Platts on April 7, 2022. Platts notes this likely will be China's first FYP to include limits on "high-carbon products from the (refining and petrochemical) industry amid China's carbon neutrality journey. This comes amid expectations that foreign countries may levy tariffs like the EU's Cross Border Adjustment Mechanism, or CBAM, on such products in the future." Investment Views and Themes Recommendations Strategic Recommendations Trades Closed in 2022  

Highlights Several factors point to both an improvement and a deterioration in economic and financial market conditions, underscoring that the 6- to 12-month investment outlook is unavoidably uncertain. On the one hand, the US will likely avoid a recession over the coming year, slowing headline inflation will boost real wages and lower the equity risk premium, bond yields will not move much higher this year, and US services spending will support consumption as the pandemic continues to recede in importance. These are positive factors that will work to support economic activity and risky asset prices. On the other hand, the US will likely experience a recession scare focused on the housing market, the European economy may contract, Omicron’s spread in China threatens a further rise in shipping costs and a trade shock for Europe, and US inflation expectations may unanchor despite a falling inflation rate. For now, investors should remain minimally-overweight stocks over a 6- to 12-month time horizon, although that assessment may change in either a bullish or bearish direction over the coming several months. Within a global equity allocation, we recommend that investors maintain a neutral regional stance. The larger risk of a recession in Europe than in the US would normally imply that investors should be overweight US stocks, but euro area stocks have already underperformed global stocks significantly since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Within a fixed-income portfolio, we recommend that investors maintain a modestly short duration stance despite our forecast that long-maturity bond yields will not increase much this year. More nimble investors should be neutral duration, and should test a long stance if US data releases begin to exhibit meaningfully negative surprises. The US dollar is likely to strengthen over the near term, but we expect it to be lower a year from today. The Scourge Of Harry Truman US President Truman famously lamented the need for “one-handed” economists. His complaint reflected how essential it is for economic policymakers to receive clear advice about the best path forward. Investors understandably have even less tolerance for ambiguity than Truman did about the macro landscape and the attendant investment implications. However, there are times when the economic and financial market outlook is unavoidably uncertain. The current economic and geopolitical environment easily qualifies as one of those instances. Several factors point to both an improvement and a deterioration in economic and financial market conditions, which we review in detail below. The likely avoidance of a recession in the US over the coming year suggests that investors should remain minimally-overweight stocks over a 6- to 12-month time horizon, although that assessment may change in either a bullish or bearish direction over the coming several months. What Could Go Right The US Will Likely Avoid A Recession Over The Coming Year Chart I-1The Odds Of A US Recession Are Currently Low We downgraded our odds of an above-trend 2022 growth scenario in last month’s report,1 but noted that a stagflation-lite environment of below-trend growth and above-target inflation was a more likely outcome than recession. We based this assessment on our view that the US neutral rate of interest is likely higher than the Fed and investors expect, which we discussed at length in past reports.2 Chart I-1 highlights that our recession probability indicator also supports this view, as it does not yet signal that a recession is on the horizon.3 Table I-1 highlights the components of the model (which is significantly influenced by the Conference Board’s LEI), and shows that the model is not providing a meaningful warning signal. The Fed funds rate component of the model will likely flash red next month following the FOMC meeting, and we have listed it as providing a warning signal in Table I-1. But rising rates themselves have not proven to be a particularly timely indicator of a recession; this is similarly true with rising inflation expectations and oil prices. We noted in last month’s report that a surge in oil prices has not been an especially consistent indicator of a recession since 2000. Table I-1The Components Of Our Recession Model Are Not Yet Flashing A Warning Sign The yield curve component of the model is based on the spread between the 10-year Treasury yield and the 3-month T-bill yield in order to minimize false recession signals, and we agree that the 10-year / 2-year spread has better leading properties. But even the latter curve measure has recently moved back into positive territory (Chart I-2), which will certainly qualify as a false yield curve signal if a recession is avoided over the coming 18 months. Within the components of the Conference Board’s LEI, Table I-1 highlights that there have been signs of weakness from the manufacturing sector, consumer expectations, and the credit market. Chart I-3 aggregates the deviation of six of these components from their trend, and shows that they have indeed been consistent with a significant slowdown in economic activity. Chart I-2The 2/10 Yield Curve Is No Longer Inverted Chart I-3The Weakest Components Of The Conference Board's LEI Are Not Yet Signaling A Recession However, two caveats are warranted. First, part of this weakness reflects the ongoing shift from goods to services spending, unraveling the massive surge in goods spending that occurred during the pandemic (Chart I-4). Second, Chart I-3 highlights that similar weaknesses occurred in the past outside of the context of a recession, most notably in 1995/1996, in the aftermath of the 1994 bond market crisis; in 1998/1999, following the Long-Term Capital Management (LTCM) crisis; in 2015, following the collapse in oil prices; and, finally, in 2018/2019, in response to the Trump administration’s trade war. None of these instances resulted in a contraction in output. Headline Inflation Is Likely To Come Down Headline consumer price inflation is currently extremely high in the US. Rising prices do not just reflect energy, food, or pandemic-related effects. Chart I-5 highlights that trimmed mean CPI and PCE inflation rates have accelerated significantly since last summer, and are currently running at 6% and 3.6% year-over-year rates, respectively. Chart I-4Part Of The Weakness In Manufacturing Activity Indicators Reflects A Shift In Spending From Goods To Services Chart I-5There Is More To High Inflation Than Food, Energy, And Pandemic-Related Effects... However, it seems likely that inflation has peaked in the US (or is about to do so), even abstracting from base effects.Chart I-6 highlights that the one-month rate of change in trimmed mean measures seemingly peaked in October and January, and shows that the level of used car prices also appears to be trending lower (panel 2). The ongoing shift away from goods to services spending noted above will also push core ex-COVID-related consumer prices lower. Finally, BCA’s Commodity & Energy strategy service is forecasting that Brent crude oil prices will average roughly $90/bbl for the remainder of the year, which would likely bring US gasoline prices back toward $3.50/gallon and will lower both headline inflation and energy passthrough effects to core prices (Chart I-7). Chart I-6... But The Rate Of Headline Inflation Has Likely Peaked Chart I-7Our Forecast For Oil Implies US Gasoline Prices Will Fall     A meaningful deceleration in inflation will help reverse some of the recent decline in real wage growth that has occurred, and will likely lower the equity risk premium (see Section 2 of this month’s report).   Long-Maturity Bond Yields Will Not Move Much Higher This Year Chart I-8Our Inflation Probability Model Is Signaling Core Inflation That Is Roughly In Line With The Fed's Latest Forecast Chart I-8 highlights that our inflation probability model is currently signaling core PCE inflation of roughly 4.3% over the coming year. This is only moderately above the Fed’s forecast for this year, suggesting that a moderation in the rate of inflation makes it more likely that the Fed will raise rates in line with, or only moderately above, what was projected in the March Summary of Economic Projections (1.9% by the end of this year, and 2.8% by the end of 2023). By contrast, Chart I-9 highlights that the OIS curve is pricing the Fed funds rate at 80 basis points higher by the end of this year than what the Fed projected in March, suggesting that the bar for further hawkish surprises is quite high. We agree that the Fed will likely front-load a good portion of its planned tightening this year, and we agree that a 50 basis point hike is likely next month and also possibly in June. However, it is quite possible that the Fed will ultimately raise rates over the coming year at a slower pace than investors currently anticipate, which would lower yields at the front end of the curve. Chart I-9The Bar For Further Hawkish Surprises From The Fed Is Quite High If short-maturity yields are flat or trend modestly lower over the coming year, then a significant further rise in long-maturity yields would likely necessitate a major shift in neutral rate expectations on the part of investors or the Fed. We believe that such a shift will eventually occur, as the economic justification for long-maturity bond yields well below trend rates of economic growth disappeared in the latter half of the last economic expansion. However, we noted in last month’s Special Report that a low neutral rate outlook has become entrenched in the minds of investors and the Fed, and is only likely to change once the Fed funds rate rises meaningfully and a recession does not materialize.4 BCA’s fixed-income team currently recommends that investors maintain a neutral duration stance; the Bank Credit Analyst service is more inclined to recommend a modestly short stance. However, the key point for investors is that another significant rise in long-maturity bond yields is unlikely over the coming year, which is positive for economic activity and investor sentiment. The Pandemic Will Recede In Importance, Supporting Services Spending Chart I-10COVID Hospitalizations And Deaths Remain Low In The DM World While the pandemic is clearly not over in China (discussed below), it is likely to continue to recede in importance in the US and other highly vaccinated, and relatively highly exposed DM economies. Despite the fact that confirmed cases of COVID-19 have risen in the DM world in March and April, Chart I-10 highlights that there has been very little increase in ICU patients or deaths. A recent study from the US CDC suggests that 58% of the US population overall and more than 75% of younger children have been infected with the SARS-COV-2 virus since the start of the pandemic.5 When combined with a vaccination rate close to 70%, that signals an extraordinarily high national immunity to severe illness from the disease. Chart I-11 also highlights that deliveries of Pfizer’s Paxlovid continue to climb in the US, a drug that seemingly works against all known variants and has been found to reduce hospitalizations from COVID significantly if taken within the first five days of symptoms. Given that the decline in services spending that we showed in Chart I-4 has been clearly linked to the pandemic, we expect that a slowing pandemic will continue to support services spending. Goods spending is normally a more forceful driver of economic activity than is the case for services spending, but the magnitude of the recent contribution to growth from services spending has been absolutely unprecedented in the post-World War II economic environment (Chart I-12). This underscores that a continued recovery in services spending relative to its pre-pandemic trend will provide a ballast to overall consumer spending as goods spending continues to normalize. Chart I-11Paxlovid To The Rescue! Chart I-12Real Services Spending Will Continue To Be A Forceful Driver Of US Economic Activity What Could Go Wrong The US Will Likely Experience A Recession Scare Chart I-13US Housing Affordability Has Cratered, In Large Part Due To Surging House Prices Despite our view that the US economy will avoid a recession over the coming year, it seems likely that investors will experience a recession scare at some point over the coming 6 to 12 months. Even though it has recently moved back into positive territory, the inversion of the 2-10 yield curve has set the scene for a recessionary overtone to any visible weakness in the US macro data over the coming months. We noted above that the manufacturing and goods-producing sectors of the US economy are likely to slow as spending returns to services. More importantly, the extremely sharp increase in mortgage rates will likely cause at least a temporary slowdown in US housing activity, even if that slowdown does not ultimately prove to be contractionary.Chart I-13 highlights that the recent increase in mortgage rates will cause US housing affordability to deteriorate back to 2007 levels. While rising mortgage rates will be the proximate cause of this deterioration in affordability, panel 2 highlights that the real culprit has been a significant increase in house prices relative to income. There is strong evidence pointing to the fact that US real residential investment has been too weak since the global financial crisis (GFC).6 We agree that high prices will likely spur additional housing construction (which will support growth). But over the nearer-term, the sharp deterioration in affordability may imply that house price appreciation will have to fall below the rate of income growth, which would represent a very sharp correction in house price gains that would almost assuredly appear recessionary for a time. The European Economy May Contract We have discussed the risk of a European recession in past reports, and noted that it would be almost certain to occur in a scenario in which Russia’s energy exports to Europe were to be completely cut off. We continue to see this as an unlikely scenario, although the odds have increased significantly of late in light of Russia’s halt of gas supplies to Bulgaria and Poland and Germany’s apparent acceptance of an oil embargo against Russia. However, Chart I-14 highlights that a recession, at least a technical one, may occur in Germany even if its imports of Russian natural gas are not interrupted. The chart shows that the German IFO business climate indicator for manufacturing has deteriorated more than the Markit PMI has, and panel 2 highlights that IFO-reported service sector sentiment is considerably worse than what was suggested by the Markit services PMI. Chart I-15 highlights that European stocks are not fully priced for a European recession, either in relative or absolute terms. This underscores the risk to global equities if real euro area growth falls meaningfully below current consensus expectations of 1.9% this year. Chart I-14German Business Sentiment Suggests A Possible Recession Chart I-15Euro Area Stocks Are Not Fully Priced For A European Recession Omicron Will Continue To Spread In China Table I-2The Ports Of Shanghai and Ningbo Are Quite Important To Chinese Trade Flows Confirmed cases of COVID-19 have surged in China over the past two months, and it is now clear that the country’s zero-tolerance policy will fail to contain the spread of the disease. We initially downgraded the odds of our above-trend growth scenario in our January report specifically in response to the risk that the Omicron variant of the virus posed to China.7 That risk that is now manifesting itself most acutely in Shanghai, but also increasingly in other coastal and northeastern provinces. Chart I-16COVID Restrictions In China Are Causing Significant Delays In Suppliers' Delivery Times China’s COVID surge has two implications for the global economic and financial market outlook. The first is that the surge has led to increased port congestion and shipping delays, which clearly threaten to cause a further rise in global shipping costs. We have noted in past reports that shipping costs from China to the West Coast of the US surged following the one month shutdown of the port of Yantian last year. Table I-2 highlights that the ports of Shanghai and nearby Ningbo handle nearly 30% of China’s total ocean shipping volume. Chart I-16 highlights that road traffic restrictions in the Yangtze River Delta have caused significant delays in suppliers’ delivery times, further raising the risk of bottlenecks that may take months to clear. Chart I-17China's Battle With Omicron Further Raises The Risk Of A Euro Area Recession The second implication of China’s COVID surge is that China’s contribution to global growth is at risk of declining significantly further, at least for a time. If Chinese economic activity slows sharply in response to the lockdowns and a further spread of the disease, we fully expect Chinese policymakers to provide further stimulus to support household income in line with what occurred in DM countries two years ago. In addition, some investors have argued that reduced commodity demand from China is actually desirable in the current environment, as it would further reduce inflationary pressure in the US and other developed economies. However, Chart I-17 highlights that Chinese import growth has already slowed very significantly, which has clearly impacted euro area exports. European exports to China are not predominantly commodity-based, and it is yet unclear whether the form of stimulus that Chinese policymakers will introduce will be particularly import-intensive. As such, China’s failure to contain Omicron further adds to the risk of the European recession we noted above, and threatens our view that US headline inflation will trend lower this year. Inflation Expectations May Unanchor Despite Slowing Inflation We discussed above that US inflation will decelerate this year and that this may allow the Fed to raise interest rates at a slower pace than currently expected by market participants. One risk to this view is the possibility that inflation expectations may unanchor to the upside, despite an easing in inflation. Even though inflation expectations have not trended in a different direction than actual inflation since the GFC, Chart I-18 highlights that this has occurred in the past (from 2001-2006). In our view, the level of inflation that is likely to prevail over the coming two years will be an extremely important determinant of whether inflation expectations break above their post-2000 range. For now, Chart I-18 highlights that the Fed’s expectation for core inflation this year is reasonable, but it remains an open question whether core inflation will decelerate below 3% next year as the Fed is forecasting. This is notable, because US core PCE inflation peaked at a rate of 2.6% during the 2002-2007 economic expansion, which is the period when stable long-dated inflation expectations were prevalent. Chart I-19 highlights that market-based inflation expectations are currently challenging or have risen above their 2004-2014 average. We noted in last month’s report that long-dated household inflation expectations will be historically low, even if inflation decelerates in line with what near-dated CPI swaps are forecasting. Chart I-18Inflation Expectations May Still Unanchor Even If The Inflation Rate Comes Down Chart I-19Market-Based Inflation Expectations May Soon Rise Above Pre-GFC Range   The bottom line for investors is that a slowing of inflation over the coming several months may not be enough to prevent long-term inflation expectations from rising. That raises the risk of an even more aggressive pace of interest rates than currently expected by investors, because the Fed is determined to avoid repeating the mistakes of the 1970s when rising inflation expectations led to a wage-price spiral that required years of comparatively tight monetary policy to correct. By contrast, the Fed will view a temporary income-statement recession stemming from a sharp rise in interest rates as the lesser of two evils. A recession to prevent a long-lasting wage-price spiral would also probably be better for investors over the longer run, but a recession would clearly imply a significant decline in risky asset prices at some point over the coming two years were it to occur. Investment Conclusions Chart I-20Despite The Risks Facing Europe, Euro Area Stocks Are Not A Clear Underweight Candidate From the perspective of allocating to risky assets, the most important question for investors to answer is whether the US is likely to experience a recession over the coming year. As we noted above, in our view the answer is “no”, which implies that US earnings growth will remain positive and that investors should not be underweight stocks within a global multi-asset portfolio. It is true that earnings can decline outside of the context of a recession, but we discuss in Section 2 of our report that this has almost always been associated with a significant contraction in profit margins. The factors that have historically been associated with a nonrecessionary decline in profit margins may occur later this year, but our indicators so far point more to flat margins rather than a significant decline. For now, investors should remain minimally-overweight stocks over a 6 to 12 month time horizon, although that assessment may change in either a bullish or bearish direction over the coming several months. Within a global equity allocation, we recommend that investors maintain a neutral regional allocation. The larger risk of a recession in Europe than in the US would normally imply that investors should be overweight US stocks, but euro area stocks have already underperformed global stocks significantly since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Chart I-15 highlighted that they will underperform further if euro area growth turns negative. It is not clear, however, if that risk warrants an underweight stance today, especially considering the enormous valuation advantage offered by euro area stocks versus their US counterparts and the fact that the euro has already fallen to a five-year low (Chart I-20). Chart I-21Favor A Neutral Stance Towards Cyclical Stocks Versus Defensives Within the dimensions of the equity market, Chart I-21 highlights that the outperformance of cyclicals versus defensives was already late at the onset of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and that the uptrend in relative performance has seemingly ended. Still, a moderately overweight stance toward stocks overall does not especially support an underweight stance toward cyclicals; therefore, we recommend a neutral stance over the coming year. We continue to recommend that investors (modestly) favor value stocks over growth stocks on the basis of better value and as a hedge against potentially higher long-maturity yields, although we acknowledge that most of the outsized outperformance of growth stocks during the pandemic has already reversed. Despite their recent underperformance, we continue to favor global small-cap stocks over their large-cap peers, as they are now unequivocally inexpensive and have seemingly already priced in a likely recession scare in the US later this year (Chart I-22). Within a fixed-income portfolio, we recommend that investors maintain a modestly short duration stance despite our forecast that long-maturity bond yields will not increase much this year. We are wary of recommending a neutral duration stance given the possibility that investors or the Fed may upwardly revise their neutral rate expectations earlier than we anticipate; however, investors are also likely to see long-maturity yields come down for a time in response to a housing market slowdown over the coming several months. More nimble investors should be neutral duration, and should test a long stance if US data releases begin to exhibit meaningfully negative surprises. Finally, while we are bearish toward the dollar on a 6- to 12-month time horizon, it is likely to strengthen over the near term. Chart I-23 highlights that our composite technical indicator for the US dollar is now clearly in overbought territory. We expect that a downtrend will begin once the war in Ukraine reaches a durable conclusion and clarity about the economic impact of the spread of Omicron in China – and the likely policy response – emerges. Chart I-22The Selloff In Small Caps Seems Overdone Chart I-23US Dollar And Indicator The Dollar Is Ripe For A Major Pullback Beyond Likely Near-Term Strength   Jonathan LaBerge, CFA Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst April 28, 2022 Next Report: May 26, 2022 II. The US Equity Market: A Fundamental, Technical, And Value-Based Review All four of our US Equity indicators are currently pointing in a bearish direction. Our Monetary Indicator has fallen to a three decade low, our Technical Indicator has broken into negative territory, our Valuation Indicator still signals extreme equity pricing, and our Speculation Indicator does not yet support a contrarian buy signal. Still, we do not expect a US recession over the coming year, which implies that S&P 500 revenue growth will stay positive. Nonrecessionary earnings contractions are rare, and are almost always associated with a significant contraction in profit margins. Our new profit margin warning indicator currently suggests the odds of falling margins are low, although the risks may rise later this year. Stocks are extremely expensive, but rich valuations are being driven by extremely low real bond yields, rather than investor exuberance. Valuation is unlikely to impact US stock market performance significantly over the coming year unless long-maturity bond yields rise substantially further. Technical analysis of stock prices has a long and successful history at boosting investment performance, which ostensibly suggests that investors should be paying more attention to technical conditions in the current environment. However, technical trading rules have been less helpful in expansionary environments when inflation is above average and when stock prices and bond yields are less likely to be positively correlated (as is currently the case). As such, the recent technical breakdown of the US equity market may simply reflect a reduced signal-to-noise ratio associated with these economic and financial market regimes. For now, we see our indicators as supportive of a cautious, minimally-overweight stance toward stocks within a multi-asset portfolio over the coming 6 to 12 months. Rising odds of a recession, declining profit margins, and a large increase in investor or Fed expectations for the neutral rate of interest are the most significant threats to the equity market, the risks of which should be monitored closely by investors. In Section 1 of our report, we reviewed why a recession in the US is unlikely over the coming 6 to 12 months. However, we also highlighted that the risks to the economic outlook are meaningful and that an aggressively overweight stance toward risky assets is currently unwarranted. During times of significant uncertainty, investors should pay relatively more attention to long-term economic and financial market indicators with a reliable track record. In this report we begin by briefly reviewing the message from our US Equity Indicators, and then turn to a deeper examination of the top-down outlook for earnings, the determinants of rich valuation in the US stock market, and whether investors should rely on technical indicators in the current environment. We conclude that, while an indicator-based approach is providing mixed signals about the US equity market, we generally see our indicators as supportive of a cautious, minimally-overweight stance toward stocks within a multi-asset portfolio. Aside from tracking the risk of a recession, investors should be closely attuned to signs of a contraction in profit margins or shifting neutral rate expectations as a basis to reduce equity exposure to below-benchmark levels. A Brief Review Of Our US Equity Indicators Chart II-1Our Equity Indicators Are Pointing In A Bearish Direction Chart II-1 presents our US Equity Indicators, which we update each month in Section 3 of our report. We highlight our observations below: Chart II-1 shows that our Monetary Indicator has fallen to its lowest level since 1995, when the Fed surprised investors and shifted rapidly in a hawkish direction. The indicator is most acutely impacted by the speed of the rise in 10-year Treasury yields and a massive surge in the BCA Short Rate Indicator to levels that have not prevailed since the late 1970s (Chart II-2). Our Technical Indicator has recently broken into negative territory, which we have traditionally interpreted as a sign to sell stocks. The indicator has been dragged lower by a deterioration in stock market breadth across several tracked measures and by weak sentiment (Chart II-3). The momentum component of the indicator is fractionally positive but is exhibiting clear weakness. Our Valuation Indicator continues to highlight that US equities are extremely overvalued relative to their history, despite the recent sell-off in stock prices. Our Speculation Indicator arguably provides the least negative signal of our four indicators, at least from a contrarian perspective. In Q1 2021, the indicator nearly reached the all-time high set in March 2000, but it has since retreated significantly and has exited extremely speculative territory. While this may eventually provide a positive signal for stocks, equity returns have historically been below average during months when the indicator declines. Thus, the downtrend in the Speculation Indicator still points to weakness in stock prices, at least over the nearer term. Chart II-2Our Monetary Indicator Is Falling In Part Because Of Surging Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-3All Three Components Of Our Technical Indicator Are Falling In summary, all four of our US Equity indicators are currently pointing in a bearish direction, which clearly argues against an aggressively overweight stance favoring equities within a multi-asset portfolio. At the same time, we reviewed the odds of a US recession over the coming year in Section 1 of our report and argued that a recession is not likely over the coming 12 months. Thus, one key question for investors is whether a nonrecessionary contraction in earnings is likely over the coming year. We address this question in the next section of our report, before turning to a deeper examination of the relative importance of equity valuation and technical indicators. Gauging The Risk Of A Nonrecessionary Earnings Contraction Chart II-4Nonrecessionary Earnings Declines Usually Occur Due To Falling Margins Based on S&P data, there have been five cases since 1960 when 12-month trailing earnings per share fell year-over-year, while the economy continued to expand (Chart II-4). Sales per share growth remained positive in four of these cases (panel 2), underscoring that falling profit margins have been mostly responsible for these nonrecessionary earnings declines. We have noted our concern about how elevated US profit margins have become and have argued that a significant further expansion is not likely to occur over the coming 12-24 months.8 To gauge the risk of a sizeable decline in margins over the coming year, we construct a new indicator based on the seven instances when S&P 500 margins fell outside the context of a recession. This includes two cases when margins fell but earnings did not (because of buoyant revenue growth). We based the indicator on these five factors: Changes in unit labor cost growth to measure the impact of wage costs on firm profitability; Lagging changes in commodity prices as a proxy for material costs; The level of real short-term interest rates as a proxy for borrowing costs; Changes in a sales growth proxy to measure the impact of operating leverage on margins; And changes in the ISM manufacturing index to capture any residual impact on margins from the business cycle. Chart II-5The Odds Of A Nonrecessionary Profit Margin Contraction Are Currently Low Chart II-5 presents the indicator, which is shaded both for recessionary periods and the seven nonrecessionary margin contraction episodes we identified. While the indicator does not perfectly predict margin contractions outside of recessions, it did signal 50% or greater odds of a margin contraction in four of the seven episodes we examined, and signals high odds of a contraction in margins during recessions. Among the three cases in which the indicator failed to indicate falling margins during an expansion, two of those failures were episodes when earnings growth did not ultimately contract. The inability to explain the 1997-1998 margin contraction is the most relevant failure of the indicator, in addition to two false signals in 1963 and 1988. Still, the approach provides a useful framework to gauge the risk of falling profit margins, and the results provide an interesting and somewhat surprising message about the relative importance of the factors we included. We would have expected that accelerating wages would have been the most significant factor explaining nonrecessionary profit margin declines. Wages were highly significant, but they were the second most important factor behind our sales growth proxy. Lagged commodity prices were the third most significant factor, followed by real short-term interest rates. Changes in the ISM manufacturing index were least significant, underscoring that our sales growth proxy already captures most of the effect of the business cycle on profit margins. This suggests that operating leverage is an important determinant of margins during economic expansions, and that investors should be most concerned about declining profit margins when both revenue growth is slowing significantly and wage growth is accelerating. The indicator currently points to low odds of a nonrecessionary margin contraction, but this is likely to change over the coming year. We expect that all five of the factors will evolve in a fashion that is negative for margins over the coming twelve months: While the pace of its increase is slowing, median wage growth continues to accelerate, even when adjusting for the fact that 1st quartile wage growth is growing at an above-average rate (Chart II-6). Combining the latter with higher odds of at or below-trend growth this year implies that unit labor costs may rise further over the coming twelve months. Analysts expect S&P 500 revenue growth to slow nontrivially over the coming year (Chart II-7). Current expectations point to growth slowing to a level that would still be quite strong relative to what has prevailed over the past decade; however, accelerating wage costs in lockstep with decelerating revenue growth is exactly the type of combination that has historically been associated with falling margins during economic expansions. Chart II-6Wage Growth Is Accelerating... Chart II-7...And Revenue Growth Is Set To Slow​​​​​​ Although these are less impactful factors, the lagged effect of the recent surge in commodity prices will also weigh on margins over the coming year, as will rising real interest rates and a likely slowdown in manufacturing activity in response to slower goods spending. In addition to our new indicator, we have two other tools at our disposal to track the odds of a decline in profit margins over the coming year. First, Chart II-8 illustrates that an industry operating margin diffusion index does a decent job at leading turning points in S&P 500 profit margins, despite its volatility. And second, Chart II-9 highlights that changes in the sales and profit margin diffusion indexes sourced from the Atlanta Fed’s Business Inflation Expectations Survey have predicted turning points in operating sales per share and margins over the past decade. Chart II-9 does suggest that profit margins may not rise further, but flat margins are not likely to be a threat to earnings growth over the coming year if a recession is avoided (as we expect). Chart II-8Sector Diffusion Indexes Are Not Signaling A Major Warning Sign For Margins... Chart II-9...Neither Are The Atlanta Fed Business Sales And Margin Diffusion Indexes     The conclusion for investors is that the odds of a decline in profit margins over the coming year are elevated and should be monitored, but are seemingly not yet imminent. In combination with expectations for slowing revenue growth, this implies, for now, that earnings growth over the coming year will be low but positive. Valuation, Interest Rates, And The Equity Risk Premium As noted above, our Valuation Indicator continues to highlight that US Equities are extremely overvalued relative to their history. Our Valuation Indicator is a composite of different valuation measures, and we sometimes receive questions from investors asking about the seemingly different messages provided by these different metrics. For example, Chart II-10 highlights that equity valuation has almost, but not fully, returned to late-1990 conditions based on the Price/Earnings (P/E) ratio, but is seemingly more expensive based on the Price/Book (P/B) and especially Price/Sales (P/S) ratios. In our view, this apparent discrepancy is easily resolved. Relative to the P/E ratio, both the P/B and especially P/S ratios are impacted by changes in aggregate profit margins, which have risen structurally over the past two decades because of the rising share of broadly-defined technology companies in the US equity index (Chart II-11). Barring a major shift in the profitability of US tech companies over the coming year, we do not see discrepancies between the P/E, P/B, or P/S ratios as being particularly informative for investors. As an additional point, we also do not see the Shiller P/E or other cyclically-adjusted P/E measures as providing any extra information about the richness or cheapness of US equities today, as these measures tend to move in line with the 12-month forward P/E ratio (Chart II-12). Chart II-10US Equities Are Extremely Overvalued, Based On Several Valuation Metrics Chart II-11Tech Margins Have Caused Stocks To Look Especially Expensive On A Price/Sales Basis In our view, rather than focusing on different measures of valuation, it is important for investors to understand the root cause of extreme US equity prices, as well as what factors are likely to drive equity multiples over the coming year. As we have noted in previous reports, the reason that US stocks are extremely overvalued today is very different from the reason for similar overvaluation in the late 1990s. Charts II-13 and II-14 present two different versions of the equity risk premium (ERP), one based on trailing as reported earnings (dating back to 1872), and one based on twelve-month forward earnings (dating back to 1979). Chart II-12The Shiller P/E Ratio Does Not Convey Any 'New' Information About Valuation Chart II-13The Equity Risk Premium Is In Line With Its Historical Average… The ERP accounts for the portion of equity market valuation that is unexplained by real interest rates, and the charts highlight that the US ERP is essentially in line with its historical average based on both measures, in sharp contrast to the stock market bubble of the late 1990s. This underscores that historically low interest rates well below the prevailing rate of economic growth are the root cause of extreme equity overvaluation in the US (Chart II-15), meaning that very rich pricing can be thought of as “rational exuberance.” Chart II-14…In Sharp Contrast To The Late 1990s Chart II-15US Equities Are Extremely Expensive Because Bond Yields Are Extremely Low     Chart II-16The Equity Risk Premium Is Fairly Well Explained By The Misery Index Over the longer term, the risks to US equity valuation are clearly to the downside, as we detailed in our October 2021 report.9 But over the coming 6 to 12 months, US equity multiples are likely to be flat or modestly up in the US. As we noted in Section 1 of our report, a significant further rise in long-maturity bond yields will likely necessitate a major shift in neutral rate expectations on the part of investors and the Fed, which we think is more likely a story for next year than this year. And Chart II-16 highlights that the ERP has historically been well explained by the sum of unemployment and inflation (the Misery Index), which should come down over the coming several months as inflation moderates and the unemployment rate remains low. To conclude, it is absolutely the case that US equities are extremely expensive, but this fact is unlikely to impact US stock market performance significantly unless long-maturity bond yields rise substantially further. Technical Analysis Amid A Shifting Economic Regime Technical analysis of financial markets, and especially stocks, has a long history. It has also provided disciplined investors with significant excess returns over time. A simple stock / bond switching rule based on whether stock prices were above their nine-month moving average at the end of the previous month has significantly outperformed since the 1960s, earning an average excess annual return of 1.3% relative to a 60/40 stock/bond benchmark portfolio (Chart II-17). This outsized performance has come at the cost of only a minor increase in portfolio volatility. Ostensibly, then, investors should be paying more attention to equity technical conditions in the current environment, which we noted above are not positive. Our Technical Indicator has recently broken into negative territory, and the S&P 500 has clearly fallen back below its 200-day moving average. However, Chart II-17 presented generalized results over long periods of time. Over the past two decades, investors have been able to rely on a durably negative correlation between stock prices and bond yields to help boost portfolio returns from technically-driven switching rule strategies. Chart II-18 highlights that this correlation has been much lower over the past two years than has been the case since the early 2000s, raising the question of whether similar switching strategies are viable today. In addition, there is the added question of whether technical analysis is helpful to investors during certain types of economic and financial market regimes, such as high inflation environments. Chart II-17Technically-Driven Trading Rules Have Historically Provided Investors With A Lot Of Alpha Chart II-18Switching-Rule Strategies May Not Work As Well When Stock Prices And Bond Yields Are Not Positively Correlated To test whether the message from technical indicators may be relied upon today, we examine the historical returns from a technically-driven portfolio switching strategy during nonrecessionary months under four conditions that reflect the economic and political realities currently facing investors: months when both stock and bond returns are negative; months of above-average inflation; months of above-average geopolitical risk; and the 1970s, when the Misery Index was very elevated. In all the cases we consider, the switching rule is simple: whether the S&P 500 index was above its nine-month moving average at the end of the previous month. If so, the rule overweights equities for the subsequent months; if not, the rule overweights a comparatively risk-free asset. We consider portfolios with either 10-year Treasurys or 3-month Treasury bills as the risk-free asset, as well as a counterfactual scenario in which cash always earns a 1% annual rate of return (to mimic the cash returns currently available to investors). Table II-1 presents the success and whipsaw rate of the trading rule. Table II-2 presents the annualized cumulative returns from the strategy. The tables provide three key observations: As reflected in Chart II-17, both Tables II-1 and II-2 highlight that simple technical trading rules have historically performed well, and that outperformance has occurred in both recessionary and nonrecessionary periods. Relative to nonrecessionary periods overall, technical trading rules have underperformed during the particular nonrecessionary regimes that we examined. It is the case not only that these strategies have performed in inferior ways during these regimes, but also that they were less consistent signals in that they generated significantly more “whipsaws” for investors. Among the four nonrecessionary regimes that we tested, technical indicators underperformed the least during periods of above-average geopolitical risk, and performed abysmally during nonrecessionary (but generally stagflationary) months in the 1970s. Table II-1During Expansions, Technically-Driven Switching Rules Underperform… Table II-2…When Inflation Is High And When Stocks And Bonds Lose Money The key takeaway for investors is that technical analysis is likely to be helpful for investors to improve portfolio performance as we approach a recession but may be less helpful in an expansionary environment in which inflation is above average and when stock prices and bond yields are less likely to be positively correlated. Investment Conclusions Echoing the murky economic outlook that we detailed in Section 1 of our report, our analysis highlights that an indicator-based approach is providing mixed signals about the US equity market. On the one hand, all four of our main equity indicators are currently providing a bearish signal, and the risk of a nonrecessionary contraction in S&P 500 profit margins over the coming year is elevated – albeit seemingly not imminent. On the other hand, our expectation that the US will not slip into recession over the coming year implies that revenue growth will stay positive, which has historically been associated with expanding earnings. In addition, US equity multiples are likely to be flat or modestly up, and the recent technical breakdown in the S&P 500 may simply reflect a reduced signal-to-noise ratio that appears to exist in expansionary environments in which inflation is high and the stock price / bond yield correlation is near-zero or negative. Netting these signals out, we see our equity indicators as supportive of a cautious, minimally-overweight stance toward stocks within a multi-asset portfolio. The emergence of a recession, declining profit margins, and a significant increase in investor or Fed expectations for the neutral rate of interest are the most significant threats to the equity market. We will continue to monitor these risks and adjust our investment recommendations as needed over the coming several months. Stay tuned! Jonathan LaBerge, CFA Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst Gabriel Di Lullo Research Associate III. Indicators And Reference Charts As discussed in this month’s Section 2, BCA’s equity indicators do not paint an optimistic picture for stock prices. Our monetary indicator is at its weakest point in almost three decades, our valuation indicator continues to highlight that stocks are overvalued, and both our sentiment and technical indicators have broken down. An eventual easing in the latter two measures will ultimately prove positive for equities, but this will likely happen only once they reach extremes. Investors should be at most modestly overweight stocks versus bonds over the coming year. Forward equity earnings are likely pricing in too much of an increase in earnings per share over the coming year. Net earnings revisions and net positive earnings surprises have rolled over considerably, although there is no meaningful sign yet of a decline in the level of forward earnings. Earnings growth is more likely than not to be positive over the coming year, but will be modest. Within a global equity portfolio, we recommend a neutral stance towards cyclicals versus defensives, as well as a neutral regional equity stance. Euro area stocks are not a clear underweight candidate despite the risk of a European recession. Within a fixed-income portfolio, the 10-Year Treasury Yield has very little further upside over the coming year, arguing for a modestly short duration stance. We do not believe that the Fed will end up raising rates to a level higher than investors are forecasting over the coming year. Commodity prices continue to rise in a broad-based fashion following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and our composite technical indicator highlights that they remain significantly overbought. We expect oil and food prices to come down over the coming year, but there is a risk to that assessment. Russia aggression has very likely sped up Europe’s decarbonization timeline, suggesting that investors should be tactically, cyclically, and structurally bullish on industrial metals prices. US and global LEIs have rolled over from very elevated levels. Our global LEI diffusion index has declined very significantly, but this likely reflects the outsized impact of a few emerging market countries. Leading and coincident indicators remain decently strong, and we do not expect a recession in the US over the coming year. However, the odds of a stagflationary-lite outcome of above-target inflation and at-or-below-trend growth have increased because of the war. EQUITIES: Chart III-1US Equity Indicators Chart III-2Willingness To Pay For Risk Chart III-3US Equity Sentiment Indicators Chart III-4US Stock Market Breadth Chart III-5US Stock Market Valuation Chart III-6US Earnings Chart III-7Global Stock Market And Earnings: Relative Performance Chart III-8Global Stock Market And Earnings: Relative Performance FIXED INCOME: Chart III-9US Treasurys And Valuations Chart III-10Yield Curve Slopes Chart III-11Selected US Bond Yields Chart III-1210-Year Treasury Yield ComponentsChart III-13US Corporate Bonds And Health Monitor Chart III-14Global Bonds: Developed Markets Chart III-15Global Bonds: Emerging Markets CURRENCIES: Chart III-16US Dollar And PPP Chart III-17US Dollar And Indicator Chart III-18US Dollar Fundamentals Chart III-19Japanese Yen Technicals Chart III-20Euro Technicals Chart III-21Euro/Yen Technicals Chart III-22Euro/Pound Technicals COMMODITIES: Chart III-23Broad Commodity Indicators Chart III-24Commodity Prices Chart III-25Commodity Prices Chart III-26Commodity Sentiment Chart III-27Speculative Positioning ECONOMY: Chart III-28US And Global Macro Backdrop Chart III-29US Macro Snapshot Chart III-30US Growth Outlook Chart III-31US Cyclical Spending Chart III-32US Labor Market Chart III-33US Consumption Chart III-34US Housing Chart III-35US Debt And Deleveraging Chart III-36US Financial Conditions Chart III-37Global Economic Snapshot: Europe Chart III-38Global Economic Snapshot: China Jonathan LaBerge, CFA Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst Gabriel Di Lullo Research Associate Footnotes 1     Please see The Bank Credit Analyst "April 2022," dated March 31, 2022, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 2     Please see The Bank Credit Analyst "Do Excess Savings Explain Low US Interest Rates?" dated March 31, 2022, and "R-star, And The Structural Risk To Stocks," dated March 31, 2021, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 3  Please see US Investment Strategy/ US Bond Strategy Special Report "Gauging The Risk Of Recession: Slowdown Or Double-Dip?" dated August 16, 2010, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 4    Please see The Bank Credit Analyst "Do Excess Savings Explain Low US Interest Rates?" dated March 31, 2022, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 5    Clarke, KE, JM Jones, Y Deng, et al. Seroprevalence of Infection-Induced SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies — United States. September 2021–February 2022. 6    Please see The Bank Credit Analyst "Global House Prices: A New Threat For Policymakers," dated May 27, 2021, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 7     Please see The Bank Credit Analyst "January 2022," dated December 23, 2021, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 8    Please see The Bank Credit Analyst “OUTLOOK 2022: Peak Inflation – Or Just Getting Started?” dated December 1, 2021, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 9    Please see The Bank Credit Analyst “The “Invincible” US Equity Market: The Longer-Term Outlook For US Stocks In Relative And Absolute Terms,” dated September 30, 2021, available at bca.bcaresearch.com