Equities

Executive Summary   Lower Rates Are A Tailwind For Growth Stocks We remain in the bearish camp. While the market bottom is getting closer, there are still hurdles to overcome such as elevated economic and earnings growth expectations, which need to come down to prevent new disappointments. Notably, the market focus has shifted away from inflation and has turned towards worries about growth as is evident in the falling 10-year Treasury yield. The environment of slowing growth and falling rates is a tailwind for growth stocks, warranting an upgrade of Growth to at least a benchmark weight. Technicals also signal that Growth is oversold relative to Value. The valuation differential has also moderated. However, we are wary of upgrading Growth to an outright overweight and downgrading Value to underweight as there is still plenty of economic uncertainty. We also posit that in the next several months the markets will be “fat and flat”, i.e., a bear market punctuated by rallies and pullbacks. In this environment, a balanced allocation between Growth and Value will reduce portfolio volatility and result in higher compound returns. Bottom Line: In a commentary to our chart pack report, we upgrade the Growth/Value style preference to benchmark allocation. Feature This week we provide you with a style chart pack. In this accompanying note, we will make a case for upgrading Growth and downgrading Value, bringing these style allocations to equal weight. We are booking a profit of 13% since we established the position in January 2022. We are getting closer to upgrading Growth to overweight. Performance May started as another tough month for equities, but, as they say, all’s well that ends well. After pulling back 10% since the beginning of May, and briefly touching bear market territory of -20%, the S&P 500 rebounded in the last 10 days of the month bringing the index to where it ended April. As a result, the S&P 500 was flat, and the NASDAQ was down 2.4% in May. As expected, the rally brought about a change in leadership (Chart I-1), with Consumer Discretionary and Technology leading the pack. Energy and Utilities are the only sectors that avoided rotation. Since May 20, Growth has outperformed Value by 3%. Chart I-1Recent Performance Bear Market Rally Or The Real Thing? Since the start of the May rally, investors have been debating whether it has legs. Bulls argue that we are in the early innings of a sustainable rebound in equities – after all, much of the bad news is already priced in, 45% of NYSE and 70% of NASDAQ have recently hit new 12-month lows, screaming oversold conditions, and making bottom fishing tempting  (Chart I-2). Bears consider this surge in performance a garden-variety bear market rally: Growth is slowing and none of the problems that have been haunting the markets over the past five months, such as inflation, war, China, and a hawkish Fed, have yet been resolved. Our views are closer to the bearish camp: We believe that, even if the market bottom is getting closer, there are still hurdles to overcome, such as elevated economic and earnings growth expectations, which need to come down to prevent new disappointments. As we discussed in the recent “What Is Next For Equities: They Will Be Fat And Flat” report, we believe that equities are likely to be range-bound over the next several months: A turn in inflation and a downshift in growth may ignite rallies on hopes of a gentler, data-driven Fed, and a shallower trajectory for the rate-hiking cycle  (Chart I-3). However, we argue that the Fed “put” is no longer in play and the Fed will stay focused on inflation, inadvertently puncturing any budding rallies. In addition to a hawkish Fed, investors will have to process what may become a sharp economic growth slowdown and an earnings recession in the US on the back of rising costs, a stronger dollar, and slowing global demand for US goods. Chart I-2Is Much Of The Bad News Already Priced In? Chart I-3Many Hope For A Shallower Hiking Cycle Growth Vs. Value: Shifting Positioning To Equal Weight When Growth Is Harder To Find, Growth Stocks Shine As we argued in the “Fat and Flat” report, there are multiple signs that economic growth is slowing, and that earnings growth will disappoint. Our Business Cycle Indicator, which is a compilation of soft and hard data across production, consumer, and credit dimensions, is also signaling a slowdown  (Chart I-4). Here we would like to emphasize our view: As of now, US economic growth is strong, and it is only its second derivative, i.e. a deceleration of growth, that is the root of our concerns. In a world where growth is becoming scarcer, companies that can deliver growth will shine. These are “growth” companies, i.e. large, stable companies with strong balance sheets that are able to generate positive cash flow and churn out strong earnings even under economic duress  (Chart I-5). Quality growth outperforms during slowdowns  (Chart I-6). This reasoning does not apply to speculative, barely profitable, growth companies which will fight for survival in a slow-growth world. Chart I-4We Are In A Slowdown Stage Of The Business Cycle Chart I-5Large Cap Growth Is Synonymous With Quality Chart I-6Growth Outperforms During Economic Slowdowns Of course, one might argue that economic growth has been slowing for about a year, initially by returning towards the pre-pandemic trend and, lately, as a result of monetary tightening. Yet, over the past six months, Growth has underperformed Value by nearly 11%. What is different now? First, inflation, and the monetary tightening that inevitably follows it, are the mortal enemies of growth stocks: Higher discount rates deflate the present value of future cash flows. Rising inflation and sharply rising Treasury yields are behind the recent sell-off in Growth stocks. However, recently, the market focus has shifted away from inflation, and seems to finally be turning towards worries about growth. As a result, the 10-year Treasury yield decreased from 3.12% to 2.75%, and its relentless climb may now be behind us  (Chart I-7). Lower rates are a tailwind for Growth stocks which rebounded at the first whiff of rate stabilization  (Chart I-8). Chart I-7Investors Concerns Have Shifted From Inflation To Growth Further, our research on macroeconomic regimes suggests that a turn in inflation heralds a change in market leadership from Value to Quality and Growth  (Chart I-9). Chart I-8Lower Rates Are A Tailwind For Growth Stocks Chart I-9Growth And Quality Will Lead Markets When Inflation Abates Growth Not Yet Cheap But Oversold This year’s sell-off is characterized by a multiple contraction. Growth is a poster child of this trend: Its forward multiple has decreased by 8 points, with the style currently trading at just under 20x forward earnings, which is the 61st percentile relative to its 10-year history (compare that to 28x and the 94th percentile back in January). As for Value, it also became cheaper, contracting from 16.8x in January to 14.9x (Table I-1). Table I-1Valuations And EPS Growth Expectations According to the BCA Valuations Indicator  (Chart I-10), the Growth/Value valuations spread has moderated but by itself, is not an impetus for a switch. However, looking at technicals, Growth is extremely oversold relative to Value and is at levels last seen in 2006. Why Neutral, Not Overweight? We hope we made a compelling case for shifting allocation from Value to Growth. Then why not go overweight, but just neutral? Mostly because many of the macroeconomic developments we have described are tentative and are just conjecture at this point – there is still plenty of uncertainty about inflation, rates, and the Fed monetary response. Second, while Growth stocks are supposed to grow faster than Value stocks, at the moment analysts expect them to grow at 8% and 11% respectively. We expect earnings growth expectations for Value stocks to be downgraded since they are dominated by cyclicals. However, until the new numbers are in for both styles, we need to be careful. Chart I-10Growth Is Getting Cheaper Relative To Value... It Also Appears Oversold Last, if we are right, and US equities are to test their bottom this summer in a “fat and flat” manner, there will be a frequent change in leadership, with Growth and Small outperforming during the rallies, and Value outperforming during pullbacks. Portfolios need exposure to both styles to achieve the highest compound returns as diversification reduces portfolio volatility. Once macroeconomic uncertainty dissipates, we will be able to pounce and shift Growth to overweight, and Value to underweight. For now, we are going to stay neutral out of an abundance of caution. Bottom Line Macroeconomic conditions are becoming more favorable for Growth as Treasury yields stabilize and economic growth slows, making the strong fundamentals and stable earnings of large-cap growth stocks more valuable. Growth is oversold relative to Value, and the relative performance differential of Growth vs. Value over the past six months has been staggering – it is time to book profits and prepare for the next chapter.   Irene Tunkel Chief Strategist, US Equity Strategy irene.tunkel@bcaresearch.com     S&P 500 Chart II-1Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-2Profitability Chart II-3Valuations And Technicals Chart II-4Uses Of Cash Cyclicals Vs Defensives Chart II-5Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-6Profitability Chart II-7Valuation And Technicals Chart II-8Uses Of Cash Growth Vs Value Chart II-9Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-10Profitability Chart II-11Valuations And Technicals Chart II-12Uses Of Cash Small Vs Large Chart II-13Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-14Profitability Chart II-15Valuations and Technicals Chart II-16Uses Of Cash Table A1Performance Table A2Valuations And Forward Earnings Growth   Footnotes Recommended Allocation Recommended Allocation: Addendum 

Listen to a short summary of this report.       Executive Summary Chinese Stocks Are Relatively Cheap The Chinese economy faces a trifecta of economic woes: 1) The threat of renewed Covid lockdowns; 2) Cooling export demand; 3) A floundering housing market. Trying to reflate the Chinese housing bubble would only damage the long-term prospects of China’s economy. A much better option would be to adopt measures that boost disposable income. Not only would this help offset the drag from slowing export growth and a negative housing wealth effect, but it would also take some of the sting out of China’s zero-Covid policy. With the Twentieth Party Congress slated for later this year, the political incentive to shower the economy with cash will only intensify. Chinese equities are trading at only 10-times forward earnings and about 1-times sales. A significant upward rating for equity valuations is likely if the government adopts broad-based income-support measures. Go long the iShares MSCI China ETF ($MCHI) as a tactical trade. Bottom Line: China faces a number of economic woes, but these are fully discounted by the market. What has not been discounted is a broad-based stimulus program focused on income-support measures.   Dear Client, I will be visiting clients in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Abu Dhabi next week. No doubt, the outlook for oil prices will feature heavily in my discussions. I will brief you on any insights I learn in my report on June 17. In the meantime, I am pleased to announce that Matt Gertken, BCA’s Chief Geopolitical Strategist, will be the guest author of next week’s Global Investment Strategy report. Best regards, Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist Triple Threat The Chinese economy faces a trifecta of economic woes: 1) The threat of renewed Covid lockdowns; 2) Cooling export demand; 3) A floundering housing market. Let us discuss each problem in turn.   Problem #1: China’s Zero-Covid Policy in the Age of Omicron Chart 1China’s Lockdown Index Remains Elevated China was able to successfully suppress the virus in the first two years of the pandemic. However, the emergence of the Omicron strain is challenging the government’s commitment to its zero-Covid policy. The BA.2 subvariant of Omicron is 50% more contagious than the original Omicron strain and about 4-times more contagious than the Delta strain. While 89% of China’s population has been fully vaccinated, the number drops off to 82% for those above the age of 60. And those who are vaccinated have been inoculated with vaccines that appear to be largely ineffective against Omicron. Keeping a virus as contagious as measles at bay in a population with little natural or artificial immunity is exceedingly difficult. While the authorities are starting to relax restrictions in Shanghai, China’s Effective Lockdown Index remains at elevated levels (Chart 1). A number of domestically designed mRNA vaccines are in phase 3 trials. However, it is not clear how effective they will be. Shanghai-based Fosun Pharma has inked a deal to distribute 100 million doses of Pfizer’s vaccine, but so far neither it nor Moderna’s vaccine have been approved for use. Our working assumption is that China will authorize the distribution of western-made mRNA vaccines later this year if its own offerings prove ineffectual. The Chinese government has already signed a deal to manufacture a generic version of Pfizer’s Paxlovid, which has been shown to cut the risk of hospitalization by 90% if taken within five days of the onset of symptoms. In the meantime, the authorities will continue to play whack-a-mole with Covid. Investors should expect more lockdowns during the remainder of the year.   Problem #2: Weaker Export Growth China’s export growth slowed sharply in April, with manufacturing production contracting at the fastest rate since data collection began. Activity appears to have rebounded somewhat in May, but the new export orders components of both the official and private-sector manufacturing PMIs still remain below 50 (Chart 2). Part of the export slowdown is attributable to lockdown restrictions. However, weaker external demand is also a culprit, as evidenced by the fact that Korean export growth — a bellwether for global trade — has decelerated (Chart 3).  Chart 2China’s Export Growth Has Rolled Over Chart 3Softer Export Growth Is Not A China-Specific Phenomenon Spending in developed economies is shifting from manufactured goods to services. Retail inventories in the US are now well above their pre-pandemic trend, suggesting that the demand for Chinese-made goods will remain subdued over the coming months (Chart 4). The surge in commodity prices is only adding to Chinese manufacturer woes. Input prices rose 10% faster than manufacturing output prices over the past 12 months. This is squeezing profit margins (Chart 5). Chart 4Well-Stocked Shelves In The US Bode Poorly For Chinese Export Demand Chart 5Surging Input Costs Are Weighing On The Profits Of Chinese Commodity Users A modest depreciation in the currency would help the Chinese export sector. However, after weakening from 6.37 in April to 6.79 in mid-May, USD/CNY has moved back to 6.66 on the back of the recent selloff in the US dollar. Chart 6The RMB Tends To Weaken When EUR/USD Is Rising We expect the dollar to weaken further over the next 12 months as the Fed tempers its hawkish rhetoric in response to falling inflation. Chart 6 shows that the trade-weighted RMB typically strengthens when EUR/USD is rising. Chester Ntonifor, BCA’s Chief Currency Strategist, expects EUR/USD to reach 1.16 by the end of the year.   Problem #3: Flagging Property Market Chinese housing sales, starts, and completions all contracted in April (Chart 7). New home prices dipped 0.2% on a month-over-month basis, and are up just 0.7% from a year earlier, the smallest gain since 2015. The percentage of households planning to buy a home is near record lows (Chart 8). Chart 7The Chinese Property Market Has Been Cooling Chart 8Intentions To Buy A House Have Declined China’s property developers are in dire straits. Corporate bonds for the sector are, on average, trading at 48 cents on the dollar (Chart 9). Goldman Sachs estimates that the default rate for property developers will reach 32% in 2022, up from their earlier estimate of 19%. The government is trying to prop up housing demand. The PBoC lowered the 5-year loan prime rate by 15 bps on May 20th, the largest such cut since 2019. The authorities have dropped the floor mortgage rate to a 14-year low of 4.25%. They have also taken steps to make it easier for property developers to issue domestic bonds. BCA’s China strategists believe these measures will foster a modest rebound in the property market in the second half of this year. However, they do not anticipate a robust recovery – of the sort experienced following the initial wave of the pandemic – due to the government’s continued adherence to the “three red lines” policy.1 China is building too many homes. While residential investment as a share GDP has been trending lower, it is still very high in relation to other countries. China’s working-age population is now shrinking, which suggests that housing demand will contract over the coming years (Chart 10). Chart 9Chinese Property Developer Bonds Are Trading At Distressed Levels Chart 10Shrinking Working-Age Population Implies Less Demand For Housing Chinese real estate prices are amongst the highest anywhere. The five biggest cities in the world with the lowest rental yields are all in China (Chart 11). The entire Chinese housing stock is worth nearly $100 trillion, making it the largest asset class in the world. As such, a decline in Chinese home prices would generate a sizable negative wealth effect. Chart 11Chinese Real Estate Is Expensive A Silver Bullet? Trying to reflate the Chinese housing bubble would only damage the long-term prospects of China’s economy. Luckily, one does not need to fill a leaky bucket through the same hole the water escaped. As long as there is enough demand throughout the economy, workers who lose their jobs in declining sectors will eventually find new jobs in other sectors. China needs to reorient its economy away from its historic reliance on investment and exports towards consumption. The easiest way to do that is to adopt measures that boost disposable income, which has slowed of late (Chart 12). Not only would this help offset the drag from slowing export growth and a negative housing wealth effect, but it would also take some of the sting out of China’s zero-Covid policy. The authorities have not talked much about pursuing large-scale income-support measures of the kind adopted by many developed economies during the pandemic. As a result, market participants have largely dismissed this possibility. Yet, with the Twentieth Party Congress slated for later this year, the political incentive to shower the economy with cash will only intensify. Chinese equities are trading at only 10-times forward earnings and about 1-times sales (Chart 13). A significant upward rating for equity valuations is likely if the government adopts broad-based income-support measures. As we saw in the US and elsewhere, stimulus cash has a habit of flowing into the stock market; and with real estate in the doldrums, equities may become the asset class of choice for many Chinese investors. With that in mind, we are going long the iShares MSCI China ETF ($MCHI) as a tactical trade. Chart 12Disposable Income Growth Has Been Trending Lower Chart 13Chinese Stocks Are Relatively Cheap At a global level, a floundering Chinese property market would have been a cause for grave concern in the past, as it would have represented a major deflationary shock. Times have changed, however. The problem now is too much inflation, rather than too little. To the extent that reduced Chinese investment injects more savings into the global economy and knocks down commodity prices, this would be welcomed by most investors. China’s economy may be heading for a “beautiful slowdown.” Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on LinkedIn Twitter   Footnotes   1      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. View Matrix Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores

Executive Summary Return Of The 'Pocketbook Voter' President Biden’s pledge to fight inflation ahead of the midterm elections got a boost with the Gulf Arab states pledging to increase oil production in July and August. Yet OPEC’s action should not be overrated. The Saudis are not clearly bailing out Biden … at least not yet. Biden’s other inflation-fighting tools are also limited. The Fed will hike rates, which will weigh on inflation, at least in the short run. A short-term moderation in inflation will cause big shifts in financial markets. It will not save the midterms for Democrats, but gridlock is disinflationary so the effect is the same. Inflation risks will persist over the long run.   Recommendation (Cyclical) Inception Level Inception Date Return Small Vs. Large Cap Energy 0.6485 26-JAN-22 14.2% Oil And Gas Transportation And Storage Vs. S&P 500 0.0527 30-MAR-22 16.5% Bottom Line: Expect inflation to moderate in the short run. Oil prices will be volatile. Book a 14% profit on small cap versus large cap energy stocks and a 16.5% profit on the oil and gas transportation sub-sector relative to the broad market. Feature President Biden kicked off the summer – and the midterm election campaign – by defending his record thus far and pledging a three-pronged strategy to fight inflation. His options are limited but he received a boost from OPEC right off the bat. The bottom line is that disinflationary pressures are emerging. These include congressional gridlock, which is likely to return in January 2023. Biden’s policies will not save his party from a defeat in the midterms but moderating inflation will have huge investment consequences. Biden’s Three-Pronged Plan Consumer confidence is hurting while inflation eats away at real wage growth for Americans (Chart 1). Confidence is 14% higher than when Biden took office but 17.5% lower than when it peaked in June 2021. The latest survey from the Conference Board showed another decrease in May. This is foul weather for a ruling party that already stands to suffer a major check on its power when voters go to the polls in the fall. Biden’s approval rating is likely to stabilize but only at the current low level of 41.4%. Voters are focusing on the economy more than other issues like health care, the environment, or foreign affairs (Chart 2). Chart 1Consumer Confidence And Real Wages Tumble Chart 2Return Of The 'Pocketbook Voter' In the Wall Street Journal Biden laid out his party’s election pitch.1 First, he argued that the US economy is transitioning from rapid recovery to stable growth – i.e. that it is not going into recession. That would be good, but a recession is possible and the slowdown is politically deadly: Household Savings: Aggregate household savings have risen from $1Tn in 2019 to $3.9Tn today, which Biden cited as evidence of improving financial security. The problem is that inequality skews the picture and the average American is unlikely to feel secure. Low and middle income earners have depleted their savings or seen only a small increase (Chart 3). The Biden administration failed to improve inequality as promised while the uneven economic recovery means that lower-paid Americans do not have as much ability to buffer spending as the aggregate savings imply. They will be unhappy in November. Chart 3Normal Households No Longer Flush With Savings Jobs And Wages: Biden highlighted the role of his economic stimulus in lowering unemployment and argued that Americans have better paying jobs. But inflation has eroded real wages and incomes, as highlighted in Chart 1 above. Business Investment: Biden argued that business investment is brisk. But sentiment is turning. New orders of core capital goods have rolled over and capex intentions are falling (Chart 4). Manufacturing Comeback: Biden also touted the US manufacturing comeback, claiming that factory jobs are growing at fastest rate in 30 years. But again the tide is shifting against him, with the employment component of manufacturing purchasing manager indexes now signaling contraction (Chart 5). Biden, like Presidents Trump and Obama, has invested heavily in the “Buy America” re-industrialization narrative, so this trend is threatening. Chart 4Business Investment Setback Chart 5Manufacturing Employment Weakening A recession may indeed be avoided but the risk will not go away in time for the election. A recent study showed that at today’s extremely high level of inflation and extremely low level of unemployment, the odds of recession range from 60%-70% over the next 12-24 months.2 Second, Biden promised voters that he will fight inflation with all the powers of the White House. He laid out a three-pronged approach. However, his options are fairly limited and voters will not change their minds easily over the next five months: The Fed will hike rates: Biden argued that it is the Fed’s job to fight inflation and he will not interfere with rate hikes. While Biden offered admirable verbal support for an independent and non-partisan central bank, the truth is that real interest rates have not been this low since the highly politicized Fed chairmanship of Arthur Burns (Chart 6). While Biden has no reason to discourage rate hikes at the moment, he may change his tune as rates rise, growth slows, and the presidential election approaches. So may Powell, but by then it may be too late. In short, the Fed will hike, which will weigh on inflation, but it will not help Biden win voters this fall or avoid a recession by 2024. Congress will expand capacity: Biden argued that the bipartisan infrastructure bill that he signed into law and his other legislative proposals will boost the supply side of the economy. We are moderately optimistic about Congress’s ability to pass a party-line reconciliation bill that provides subsidies for the energy sector. This could pass under the consensus-building rubric of fighting Russia and climate change at the same time. But this measure, along with Biden’s Housing Supply Action Plan, child care and elderly care subsidies, and other proposals often look more like demand-side stimulus than supply-side reforms. They would fan inflation by increasing government spending and budget deficits. Moreover the administration cannot fix broken supply chains while China remains subject to strict Covid-19 lockdowns (Chart 7). In short, Congress may pass a reconciliation bill but it would be mildly stimulating for the economy (i.e. inflationary) and none of the supply-side improvements would reduce inflation in time for the midterms. Chart 6Biden Doesn't Need To Interfere With The Fed Chart 7Supply Snarls Will Continue While China Struggles With Covid The budget deficit will fall: Biden argued that budget consolidation will reduce inflation, pointing to this year’s estimated $1.7 trillion drop in the budget deficit and arguing that the deficit is falling lower than pre-pandemic levels. He also argued that robust tax revenues from the economic recovery justified his previous fiscal stimulus (the American Rescue Plan Act). However, the budget is merely normalizing from extreme pandemic heights – there have obviously not been any long-term fiscal reforms (Chart 8). If Congress passes a reconciliation bill then Biden may succeed at passing a minimum corporate tax, which would mark an important success. But while the fiscal drag is negative for inflation, it is also negative for the economy this year and for Biden’s party in the midterms, and long-term budget trends are inflationary. Chart 8No Sign Of Budget Control Over Long Run – Budget Deficits Are Inflationary The takeaway is that the Fed’s actions are disinflationary. Congress may or may not pass a climate bill before the election, but if it does, the budget deficit will be the same or larger and the economy will be the same or slightly stimulated. In brief Biden’s anti-inflation plan is to avoid interfering at the Fed. Extremely low unemployment will not save Biden and the Democrats this election season, any more than it saved Trump and the Republicans in 2018 (Chart 9). The Fed will rein in inflation at least in the short run. The election will lead to gridlock, which will freeze fiscal policy. Bottom Line: Inflation expectations will moderate but not because of any supply-side reform or fiscal consolidation coming from the Biden administration this year. Chart 9Low Unemployment Will Not Save Democrats Will Biden Ease Russian Energy Tensions? No. Biden’s other avenues for reducing inflation – not addressed in his editorial – lie in the foreign policy realm. The Biden administration is turning toward foreign policy as gridlock settles over Capitol Hill. Biden’s foreign policy will be insular, reactive, and focused on the midterm elections. Could Biden facilitate ceasefire talks in Ukraine so as to ease energy pressures stemming from Russia? The short answer is no. Biden imposed an oil embargo on Russia and ultimately agreed to the EU’s embargo. Biden can afford to run large risks with Russia this year because a larger confrontation or crisis with Russia would not hurt the Democrats in the midterm elections. Indeed the best hope for the Democrats is to recreate the 1962 congressional election, when John F. Kennedy stared down Soviet leader Nikita Krushchev in the Cuban Missile Crisis in October just before the election. Kennedy’s Democrats lost four seats in the House, gained four in the Senate, and kept control of both. Biden’s approval rating is nowhere near Kennedy’s but his party’s outlook is bad enough that he may be willing to run the risk of a crisis that could lead to a favorable rally-around-the-flag effect in the fall (Chart 10). Biden’s clearance this week of the highly mobile artillery rocket system for Ukraine – despite the risk that Ukrainians would launch attacks into Russian territory – underscores this point. Bottom Line: Biden will not ease tensions with Russia ahead of the midterm to try to reduce energy prices. Chart 10Biden Can Risk A Bigger Russia Crisis Will Biden Lower China Tariffs? No. What about China – will Biden ease the Trump administration’s tariffs on China to reduce inflation before the midterm election? Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has repeatedly signaled support for this idea. The Trump administration marked a historic increase in US tariffs and the Biden administration has so far offered relief only for US allies (Chart 11). Again the short answer is no. Protectionist sentiment will prevail during midterm election season and US voters have turned decisively unfavorable toward China in recent years (Chart 12). The China tariffs have not been the driver for US inflation so tariff relief would bring minimal price relief while exacting a high political cost of making Biden look weak, wishy-washy on his pro-democracy values, and (according to Republicans) corrupt. Biden would be offering unilateral benefits to China without gaining Chinese trade concessions. Chart 11Biden Keeps Trump's Tariffs On China Chart 12Protectionist Sentiment To Prevail Amid Midterms Recently the Biden administration gave some indications of where it stands on China policy. Biden visited US allies in Asia Pacific and provoked China over the Taiwan Strait. Secretary of State Antony Blinken unveiled the administration’s comprehensive China policy and declared that the US would remain focused on China as the “most serious long-term challenge” despite Russia’s open belligerence in Europe.3 On paper, US-China trade relations do not look that bad. While China is falling short of its Phase One trade deal import promises, the truth is that a global recession intervened – and those promises were made under duress when the US slapped sweeping sanctions on Chinese exports. The commodity trade is booming, as is to be expected amid global energy shortages (Chart 13). The problem is that neither the US nor China has the domestic political capital to offer structural concessions in the short run, while both sides are girding for a century-long power struggle over the long run. Supply insecurity will result in the commodity trade suffering as a vast global substitution effect takes place. This is due to Russia’s energy breakup with Europe, growing Russia-China trade linkages, and ongoing US-China tensions. Global trade and US-China trade are set to slow, while China’s surge in energy imports from the US will abate for reasons of state security. Chart 13US-China Trade Faces Strategic Limits Bottom Line: No reduction in US tariffs on China is likely. Any reduction will have minimal macroeconomic effects and will be replaced by other punitive measures, given the underlying strategic competition and protectionist election politics. Meanwhile China’s “Zero Covid” policy will weigh on trade ties and sustain price pressures in the short run, as mentioned. Will Biden Lift Iran Sanctions? Probably Not. What about the Middle East? Can Biden convince the core OPEC states to pump more oil in lieu of Russian production? Or can Biden lift sanctions on Iran to undercut soaring gasoline prices? On this front Biden received welcome news on June 2 when Gulf Arab states promised to increase production by 638,000 barrels per day in July and August, up from an expected 430,000. At the same time news broke that Biden will visit Saudi Arabia, including potentially Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), and other Gulf partners sometime in June. There is not yet a clear understanding between Biden and MBS but it is possible that one will develop. The trigger for OPEC’s declaration is the EU oil embargo on Russia. EU is finalizing an embargo on 90% of oil imports – everything except the oil flowing through the Southern Druzhba pipeline to land-locked eastern European states. The embargo will impair Russian energy production: it could fall by as much as 2-3 million barrels per day, distribution interruptions will occur as Russia transitions to Asian buyers, and Russia’s long-term production capacity could be damaged. The result could be a destabilizing price spike. While the core OPEC states have just enough spare capacity to cover that gap in theory (Chart 14), they will not want to commit all spare capacity at once. Chart 14OPEC Spare Capacity There is still a lot of uncertainty about how rapidly the embargo will be enforced, how much Russian production will suffer, whether the OPEC states will meet these new production increases (all except Saudi have been falling short), and what will be the OPEC policy beyond August. But for now it is clear that the Gulf Arab states are helping the US and EU by signaling some extra supplies at a critical time. The Gulf Arabs benefit from high oil prices and have previously ignored the G7’s pleas to increase production. But they also need to prolong the business cycle – a cycle-killing price shock from Russia is not in their interest. They are interested in keeping up revenues, maintaining domestic stability, and maintaining their position as the gatekeepers of the global oil supply and price. Secondarily, they are interested in maintaining close relations with the US, which guarantees their national security. OPEC supply easing at this juncture is obviously beneficial to Biden ahead of the US midterm election in November. But there is not yet an understanding on this front because the US is also negotiating to rejoin the 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran, which Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states oppose. Biden’s trip to the Gulf suggests that nothing is settled yet. The OPEC production increase is not proof alone that the US is breaking off talks with Iran. If the Gulf states thought the US were going to strike a deal with Iran, they might produce more oil to preempt the deal and grab more market share, which is what they did in 2014 in advance of the original 2015 US-Iran nuclear deal. The Saudis do not want US shale producers and Iranian exporters to form an unholy alliance that steals market share and compromises Saudi security. Still, we expect the US-Iran deal to fall apart. The Biden administration does not have a unified international coalition to enforce sanctions on Iran. Nor does it have the political capital or longevity to give Iran credible security guarantees that would convince it to freeze its nuclear program. Recent events support our view. The UN atomic watchdog says that Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium has risen by 30% in three months. Meanwhile the US seized an Iranian tanker off Greece, Iran seized two Greek tankers, and Greece warned about dangers to shipping in the Persian Gulf. To develop a better understanding between Biden and MBS, the US needs to assure the Saudis that it will not renew the deal with Iran. The Saudis will not provide oil at Biden’s whim but they may provide if they have satisfaction that the US will scrap the deal, or otherwise compensate them, such as through increased defense assistance (which Biden threatened to cut off when he entered office). Investors should expect OPEC to fall short of its current promises – and yet to try to provide the minimum production increases necessary to prevent a destabilizing oil spike. OPEC’s interest is to make a windfall for as long as possible, which means not killing the cycle out of greed. This policy could be positive for oil prices after the immediate downward price adjustment. But for now investors should merely expect oil volatility as the EU’s embargo enforcement, Russian retaliation, Russian oil production, OPEC implementation, and US sanctions on Iran are all up in the air. A successful US-Iran deal would deepen the drop in oil prices. But odds are 60/40 that that deal will fail, leading to an escalation of tensions in the Middle East. Biden will have to underscore the US’s red line against Iranian nuclear weaponization. Oil supply disruptions will increase in frequency across the region. Bottom Line: OPEC has given Biden’s anti-inflation campaign a boost but it is too soon to declare that oil prices will substantially abate. The US-Iran deal will likely fail, increasing Middle Eastern instability and supply risks. Investment Takeaways Given that we expect continued volatility in the oil space, we are booking a 14% gain on our long small cap energy versus large cap energy trade. We are also booking a 16.5% gain on our overweight position in the oil and gas transportation and storage sub-sector. We will revisit these trades in future reports. Overall we maintain a defensive portfolio strategy. Biden’s anti-inflation campaign is meeting with some success in the Middle East but the US confrontation with Russia and the likely failure of US-Iran talks suggests that price spikes can still kill more demand and lead to further growth upsets.   Matt Gertken Senior Vice President Chief US Political Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1     See Joseph R. Biden, Jr, “Joe Biden: My Plan for Fighting Inflation,” Wall Street Journal, May 30, 2022, wsj.com.  2     See Lawrence H. Summers and Alex Domash, “History Suggests a High Chance of Recession over the Next 24 Months,” Harvard Kennedy School, March 15, 2022, www.hks.harvard.edu.  3    See Antony J. Blinken, “The Administration’s Approach to the People’s Republic of China,” US Department of State, May 26, 2022, state.gov.   Strategic View Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Table A2Political Risk Matrix Table A3US Political Capital Index Chart A1Presidential Election Model Chart A2Senate Election Model  Table A4House Election Model Table A5APolitical Capital: White House And Congress Table A5BPolitical Capital: Household And Business Sentiment Table A5CPolitical Capital: The Economy And Markets

Executive Summary What Will Be The Implications Of China’s Common Prosperity Policies? On the one hand, Chinese stocks are oversold, equity valuations are attractive and investor sentiment is downbeat. This means that a lot of bad news has already been priced into Chinese share prices, which is positive from a contrarian perspective. On the other hand, the government remains committed to its dynamic zero-COVID policy and will resort to lockdowns whenever there is an outbreak. The Omicron variants have extremely high transmission rates, which means that the probability of new lockdowns is non trivial. Hence, the biggest risk to Chinese share prices is renewed outbreaks and lockdowns – developments which are impossible to forecast. That is why, in our opinion, Chinese stocks are facing fat tails risks. Infrastructure spending will recover modestly in H2 2022. The property sector rebound will be very muted. Chinese exports will contract. The structural outlook is unfriendly for shareholders of platform companies. The known unknowns are: Will the dynamic zero-COVID policy be successful in containing the virus? Will “animal spirits” among consumers and businesses be revived? Will western investors come back to Chinese stocks? The RMB is facing near-term risks as its interest rate differential versus the US dollar dips deeper into negative territory. Bottom Line: For absolute return investors, one way to play such a bifurcated market outlook is to buy out-of-money call options and out-of-money put options simultaneously while maintaining a core / benchmark allocation in Chinese stocks. We maintain our long A-shares / short investable Chinese stocks strategy. Feature As strict lockdowns in key cities are lifted, the Chinese economy is bound for a snap back. Consumer spending will improve, and the government’s infrastructure push will revive capital spending modestly. What does this mean for Chinese stocks? Numerous crosscurrents make the current outlook for Chinese stocks hard to navigate. This report elaborates on variables that we can forecast and those we cannot. Odds of a material rally are not insignificant, but the probability of another relapse is not trivial either. That is why Chinese stocks presently have fat tails. For absolute return investors, one way to play such a bifurcated market outlook is to buy out-of-money call options and out-of-money put options simultaneously while maintaining a core/ benchmark allocation in Chinese stocks. The rationale for maintaining a neutral position is that Chinese share prices could also be range-bound in the coming months. In other words, positives could offset negatives, and the fat tails outcomes might not transpire. In regard to relative performance and regional allocation, we continue to recommend that emerging market portfolios overweight Chinese A-shares and maintain a neutral stance on investable stocks. Meanwhile, global equity portfolios should remain neutral on A-shares while underweighting investable ones. This positioning is consistent with our overall EM allocation – we continue to recommend underweighting EM within a global equity portfolio. What We Know Equity Valuations And Investor Sentiment Are Depressed To begin with, there are a number of indicators that point to low equity valuations and depressed investor sentiment towards Chinese stocks: Analysts’ net EPS revisions for both Chinese A-shares and investable stocks have plunged deep into negative territory (Chart 1). Chinese net EPS revisions are also low relative to EM and global stocks (Chart 2). Chart 1Sentiment On Chinese Stocks Is Downbeat Chart 2Net EPS Revisions: China vs. EM And China vs. Global Stocks   The average of the NBS manufacturing PMI new orders and backlog of orders suggests that A-shares EPS will shrink considerably (Chart 3). A-share valuations have become attractive. Our composite valuation indicator points to below average valuations (Chart 4, top panel). This indicator is based on three variables: (1) median multiples; (2) 20% trimmed-mean multiples; and (3) equal-weighted multiples. The latter uses equal weights rather than market cap weights for sub-sectors in the calculation. Chart 3China: Corporate Profits Are Contracting Chart 4Chinese A-Shares Are Attractive   In turn, each component is constructed using the averages of the trailing P/E, forward P/E, price-to-cash earnings, price-to-book value (PBV) and price-to-dividend ratios. The 20%-trimmed mean excludes the top 10% and the bottom 10% of sub-sectors, i.e., it removes outliers. Our cyclically adjusted P/E ratio for A-shares currently stands at close to one standard deviation below its mean (Chart 4, bottom panel). The trailing and forward P/E ratios for the equal-weighted A-share index are 18 and 12, respectively. As to the investable universe, any valuation measure for the index is not useful because banks and SOEs continue to be “cheap” for a reason. In turn, internet stocks are fallen angels and their past valuations are not a good roadmap for the future. We discuss the structural outlook for their profitability below. Chart 5Chinese Investable Stocks Have Reached Technical Support Lines Finally, Chinese equities have become oversold. Investable non-TMT share prices are back to their lows of the past 12 years while TMT/growth stocks are at their long-term moving average (Chart 5). In sum, a lot of bad news has already been priced into Chinese share prices, which is positive from a contrarian perspective. Dynamic Zero-COVID Policy We have a very high conviction level that the government will remain committed to its dynamic zero-COVID policy for now. COVID cases in Shanghai and Beijing have declined following the lockdowns. This will only embolden authorities to pursue their dynamic zero-COVID policy and resort to lockdowns whenever outbreaks occur. Consistent with the dynamic zero-COVID policy, the government will inject more stimulus into the economy to offset the negative impact of past and potential future lockdowns. With inflation very subdued, the central government will not shy away from stimulating demand. In fact, the PBoC is allegedly resorting to “window guidance”, i.e., instructing banks to increase their loan origination. However, we do not have a high conviction view on: (1) whether lockdowns could prevent the virus from spreading and (2) whether stimulus will lift household and business confidence and their willingness to consume and invest. See more on this below. Infrastructure Investment Will Recover Modestly So far, the data does not suggest that a recovery in infrastructure investment is underway. Chart 6 illustrates that the number of investment projects approved by National Development and Reform Commission and the length of newly installed electricity transmission lines are not yet rising (Chart 6). Also, steel bar and cement prices are falling despite low output of these materials (Chart 7). This signifies very weak demand. Chart 6Few Signs of Recovery In Infrastructure Investment Chart 7Falling Prices of Raw Materials = Weak Demand   Furthermore, land sales make up 40% of local government revenue and the value of land sales is down substantially from a year ago. Lower land sales weighing on local government finances and their ability to spend. Nevertheless, odds are that the central government will force local governments to boost infrastructure investment modestly by providing more funding and increasing their special bond issuance quota. For example, Beijing ordered state-owned policy banks to set up an 800 billion yuan ($120 billion) line of credit for infrastructure projects. Chart 8A Snapback in Home Sales Is Possible That said, a revival in traditional infrastructure investment will be more muted than it has been in past cycles. Beijing has been very clear in recent years that local governments should not pursue inefficient debt-fueled infrastructure spending, to the point that local officials have been warned that they will be held responsible for debt-financed spending during their lifetime, i.e., even after they retire from their positions. This risk – and the lack of funding due to the shortfall in land sales – will structurally limit local governments’ capacity and drive to invest in traditional infrastructure.  The Property Sector Rebound Will Be Muted Residential property sales will likely tick up after having crashed by 30% in the past 12 months (Chart 8). Yet, this will be a mean-reversion rebound rather a full-fledged cyclical recovery. Even though authorities have been easing restrictions for property buyers, any rebound in home sales and construction activity will be modest for the following reasons: The economic slump of the past 12 months and recent lockdowns have weighed on household incomes, which will hinder demand. Housing remains unaffordable for many households who live in poor conditions. Meanwhile, many affluent households already own multiple properties. A lack of confidence in the outlook for house prices will reduce high-income household’s willingness to invest in new properties. Even though restrictions have eased, property developers – which have experienced a major crackdown, are still overleveraged, and face uncertain housing demand – will be reluctant to increase their debt and start new projects. Rather, the lack of funding for property developers points to a major drop in completions in the near term (Chart 9). As we argued in the report titled China: Is The Property Carry Trade Over?, the real estate market is experiencing a structural breakdown, rather than a cyclical one. The performance of property developers stocks supports this hypothesis (Chart 10, top panel). As such, any recovery will be tame and fragile. Chart 9Shrinking Property Developer Funding = Less Housing Completion Chart 10Structural Breakdowns in Stocks And Bonds Of Property Developers   In addition, the prices of property developers offshore bonds remain in a clear downtrend (Chart 10, bottom panel). Exports Are Set To Contract Chinese exports will contract in H2 2022 due to reduced spending on goods in the US and Europe as well as in the developing world. Specifically, in the US and euro area, consumption of goods ex-autos boomed during the pandemic and will revert to their means as households spend more on services and less on goods (Chart 11). Declining real household disposable income will also reinforce this trend (Chart 12). Chart 11US and Euro Area ex-Auto Goods Consumption Will Shrink Chart 12US And Euro Area Household Real Disposable Income Is Contracting     In fact, US retail inventory of goods ex-autos has already surged (Chart 13). As retailers cut back on their new orders, Chinese exports will contract materially. Chart 13US Retail Goods ex-Auto Inventories Have Swelled In addition, domestic demand in developing economies will also disappoint. EM household spending on consumer goods will underwhelm as more of their income is spent on food and energy. Also, high and rising local interest rates will curb credit origination in mainstream emerging economies. Consequently, their capital spending, employment and income growth will remain subdued. In China, exports as a share of GDP has increased to 19% from 17.5% in 2019. Hence, a contraction in exports will be painful for the overall economy. The Structural Outlook Is Unfriendly For Shareholders Of Platform Companies The government has toned down its rhetoric and its actions related to platform/internet companies. However, we view this development as a tactical rather than a structural change. The key economic policymaker Liu He made market friendly statements towards platform companies on March 16 and May 17 when their share prices were plunging. We believe that the aim of his comments was solely to calm the market and restore investor confidence. We maintain that the structural outlook for shareholders of platform companies remains negative for the following reasons: Higher uncertainty about their business model = higher equity risk premium = lower equity multiples. The government will be regulating their profitability like those of monopolies and oligopolies, which justifies lower multiples. These companies will be performing social duties – i.e. redistributing profits from shareholders to the Chinese people. Beijing’s involvement in their management and the prioritization of national and geopolitical objectives over shareholder interests. Risks of delisting from US stock exchanges are significant. Common prosperity policies pose a risk to the broader corporate sector. These policies will redistribute national income from corporates to households. Chart 14 illustrates that the share of employee compensation has been rising and the share of corporate profits in national income has been falling since 2011-12. These trends will be reinforced by common prosperity policies in the coming years. This is an negative development for shareholders of Chinese companies. Chart 14What Will Be The Implications Of China's Common Prosperity Policies? The Known Unknowns Will The Dynamic Zero-COVID Policy Be Successful? The biggest risk to Chinese share prices is renewed virus outbreaks and lockdowns. It is impossible to forecast these risks. That is why, in our opinion, Chinese stocks are facing fat tail risks. On the one hand, Omicron variants have extremely high transmission rates, making the virus very hard to contain. On the other hand, the government has shown that its dynamic zero-COVID policy has for now succeeded in containing the virus in both Shanghai and Beijing. It is certain, however, that the Chinese economy will incur considerable costs to prevent Omicron from spreading. In addition to the financial costs of ongoing widespread testing, there are also logistical impediments and inefficiencies that these testing and verification policies introduce, even in the absence of lockdowns.  Will “Animal Spirits” Among Consumers And Businesses Revive? Another major unknown is whether confidence among consumers and businesses will recover so that they resume spending. If private sector sentiment remains weak, then stimulus measures will have a low multiplier. In other words, the ongoing stimulus will likely fail to boost economic activity. Our proxies for marginal propensity to spend by households and enterprises have been very depressed (Chart 15). Other sentiment/confidence surveys convey the same message. Further, credit demand is non-existent. Banks have lately been buying corporate acceptance bills to fulfill their loan quota (Chart 16). Chart 15Chinese Households And Enterprises Are Reluctant To Spend More Chart 16China: Banks Bought Refinancing Bills in April To Make Their Loan Quota   Critically, the property market has always been a key determinant of overall consumer and business sentiment. Since 2008, there has been no recovery in the Chinese economy without a recovery of property sales, prices and construction (Chart 17). We are doubtful that property sales and construction will stage a strong recovery in the next six to nine months. Thus, our bias is that the multiplier effect of Chinese stimulus will underwhelm in the coming months. Will Western Investors Come Back To Chinese Stocks? Geopolitical tensions between the US and China and the events around the US-Russia clash reduce the likelihood that western investors will come back to Chinese markets, even as growth prospects improve. Chart 18 demonstrates that foreign investors have only marginally reduced their holdings of Chinese onshore stocks (A-shares) and bonds. These data encompass not only western investors, but also investors from other emerging Asian countries. Chart 17China: Housing Cycle = Business Cycle Chart 18Foreigners Sold A Small Portion Of Their Onshore Equity and Bond Holdings   The risk is that western investors will use any rebound in Chinese shares to reduce their exposure. This will weigh on investable stocks and preclude any significant and durable rally. A Word On The Exchange Rate The RMB will remain volatile in the coming months and will likely depreciate further against the US dollar: Shrinking exports will weigh on foreign exchange availability from exporters. With Asian currencies depreciating against the US, Beijing will be willing to tolerate moderate and gradual yuan depreciation against the greenback to maintain its export competitiveness. The one-year interest rate differential between China and the US has recently turned negative which has probably triggered a shift of deposits from RMB into the USD (Chart 19). In Hong Kong, deposits have recently begun shifting from yuan to HKD, i.e., USD (Chart 20). This development has coincided with the China-US, and hence, China-HK, interest rate differential turning negative. Chart 19China-US: The Interest Rate Differential Has Turned Negative Chart 20A Shift From RMB To HKD or USD Deposits   Finally, there will be more foreign capital outflows if either (1) COVID outbreaks and, hence, lockdowns persist, or (2) US-China tensions escalate. As Chart 18 above illustrates, foreign portfolio capital outflows have so far been modest. Bottom Line: The near-term outlook for the US dollar remains positive as the Fed maintains its hawkish stance. Consistently, the RMB will struggle in the near term but its multi-year outlook is positive. Investment Recommendations The outlook for Chinese stocks is characterized by fat tails. Odds of a material rally are not insignificant but also the probability of another relapse is not trivial either. For absolute return investors, one way to play such a bifurcated market outlook is to buy out-of-money call options and out-of-money put options simultaneously while maintaining a core / benchmark allocation in Chinese stocks. In regard to relative performance /regional allocation, we continue to recommend that emerging market portfolios overweight Chinese A-shares and maintain a neutral stance towards investable stocks. Meanwhile, global equity portfolios should remain neutral on A-shares while underweighting investable ones. This positioning is in-line with our overall EM allocation – we continue to recommend underweighting EM within a global equity portfolio. Consistently, we maintain our long A-shares / short investable Chinese stocks strategy. Onshore government bond yields will continue sliding as the main problem in China is deflation and weak growth, not inflation. The RMB is facing near term risks as its interest rate differential versus the US dollar dips deeper into negative territory. Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com

Executive Summary Investors face a dilemma. The faster that inflation comes down, the better it will be for valuations via a stronger rally in the bond price. But if a collapse in inflation requires a sharp deceleration in growth, the worse it will be for profits. Bond yields are likely in a peaking process, but the sharpest declines may come a few months down the road, after an unambiguous roll-over in food and energy inflation. The stock market’s valuation-driven sell-off is likely over, but the danger is that it morphs into a profits-driven sell-off. As such, the stock market will remain under pressure through 2022, though it is likely to be higher 12 months from now in June 2023. High conviction recommendation: Overweight healthcare versus basic resources. In other words, tilt towards sectors that benefit the most from rising bond prices and that suffer the least from contracting profits. New high conviction recommendation: Go long the Japanese yen. As bond yield differentials re-tighten, the yen will rally. Additionally, the yen will benefit from its haven status in a period of recessionary risk. Fractal trading watchlist: JPY/USD, GBP/USD, and Australian basic resources. If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market Bottom Line: The risk is that the valuation-driven sell-off morphs into a profits-driven sell-off. Feature In May, many stock markets reached the drawdown of 20 percent that defines a technical bear market. Yet what has caught many people off guard is that the bear market in stocks has happened during a bull market in profits. Since the start of 2022, US profits are up by 5 percent.1 The bear market in stocks has happened during a bull market in profits… so far. This shatters the shibboleth that bear markets only happen when there is a profits recession. The 2022 bear market has been a valuation-driven bear market. US profits rose 5 percent, but the multiple paid for those profits collapsed by 25 percent, taking the market into bear territory. None of this should come as any surprise to our regular readers. As we have pointed out many times, a stock market can be likened to a bond with a variable rather than a fixed income. So, just as with a bond, every stock market has a ‘duration’ which establishes which bond it most behaves like. It turns out that that long-duration US stock market has the same duration as a 30-year bond. This means that: The US stock market = (The 30-year T-bond price) multiplied by (US profits) It follows that if the 30-year bond price falls by more than profits rise, then the stock market will sell off. And if the 30-year bond price falls by much more than profits rise, then the stock market will enter a valuation-driven bear market. Therein lies the story of 2022 so far (Chart I-1). Chart I-1The Bear Market Is Valuation-Driven. Profits Are Up... For Now Just As In 1981-82, Will The Sell-Off Morph From Valuation-Driven To Profits-Driven? In Markets Echo 1981, When Stagflation Morphed Into Recession, we argued that a good template for what happens to the economy and the markets in 2022-23 is the experience of 1981-82. Does 2022-23 = 1981-82? Then, just as now, the world’s central banks were obsessed with ‘breaking the back’ of inflation, and piloting the economy to a ‘soft landing’. Then, just as now, the central banks were desperate to repair their badly damaged credibility in managing the economy. And then, just as now, an invasion-led war between two major commodity producers – Iran and Iraq – was disrupting commodity supplies and adding to inflationary pressures. In 1981, just as now, the equity market sell-off started as a valuation sell-off, driven by a declining 30-year T-bond price. Profits held up through most of 1981, just as they have so far in 2022. In September 1981, US core inflation finally peaked, with bond yields following soon after. In the current experience, March 2022 appears to have marked the equivalent peak in US core inflation (Chart I-2 and Chart I-3). Chart I-2Does September 1981... Chart I-3...Equal March 2022? In late 1981, when the 30-year T-bond price rebounded, the good news was that beaten-down equity valuations also reached their low point. The bad news was that just as the valuation-driven sell-off ended, profits keeled over, and the valuation-driven sell-off morphed into a profits-driven sell-off (Chart I-4). In 2022-23, could history repeat? Chart I-4In September 1981, The Sell-Off Morphed From Valuation-Driven To Profits-Driven Recession Or No Recession? That Is Not The Question History rhymes, it rarely repeats exactly. What if the 2022-23 experience can avoid the outright economic recession of the 1981-82 experience? This brings us to another shibboleth that needs to be shattered. You don’t need the economy to go into recession for profits to go into recession. To understand why, we need to visit the concept of operational leverage. Profits is a small number that comes from the difference of two large numbers: sales and the costs of generating those sales. As any company will tell you, sales can be volatile, but costs – which are dominated by wages – are sticky and much slower to change. The upshot is that if sales growth exceeds costs growth, there is a massively leveraged impact on profits growth. This is the magic of operational leverage. But if sales growth falls below sticky cost growth, the magic turns into a curse. The operational leverage goes into reverse, and profits collapse. Using US stock market profits as an example, the magic turns into a curse at real GDP growth of 1.25 percent, above which profits grow at six times the difference, and below which profits shrink at six times the difference (Chart I-5). Chart I-5A Model For US Profits Growth: (Real GDP Growth - 1.25) Times 6 Strictly speaking, we should compare US profits growth with world GDP growth because multinationals generate their sales globally rather than domestically. But to the extent that the US has both the world’s largest stock market and the world’s largest economy, it is a reasonable comparison. We should also compare both profits and sales in either nominal or real terms, rather than a mixture. But even with these tweaks, we would still find that the dominant driver of profit growth is operational leverage. ‘Recession or no recession?’ is a somewhat moot question, because even non-recessionary low growth is enough to tip profits into contraction. Therefore, the conclusion still stands – ‘recession or no recession?’ is a somewhat moot question, because even non-recessionary low growth is enough to tip profits into contraction. Such a period of low growth is now likely. If 2022-23 = 1981-82, What Happens Next? To repeat: The US stock market = (The 30-year T-bond price) multiplied by (US profits) This means that investors face a dilemma. The faster that inflation comes down, the better it will be for valuations via a stronger rally in the bond price. But if a collapse in inflation requires a sharp deceleration in growth, the worse it will be for profits. This was the precise set-up in December 1981, the equivalent of June 2022 in our historical template. In which case, what can we expect next? 1. Bond yields are likely in a peaking process, but the sharpest declines may come a few months down the road, after an unambiguous roll-over in food and energy inflation (Chart I-6). Chart I-6If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Bond Yield 2. The stock market’s valuation-driven sell-off is likely over, but the danger is that it morphs into a profits-driven sell-off. As such, the stock market will remain under pressure through 2022, though it is likely to be higher 12 months from now in June 2023 (Chart I-7). Chart I-7If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market 3. Long-duration defensive sectors will outperform short-duration cyclical sectors. In other words, tilt towards sectors that benefit the most from rising bond prices and suffer the least from contracting profits. As such, a high conviction recommendation is to overweight healthcare versus basic resources (Chart I-8). Chart I-8If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To Healthcare Versus Resources 4. In foreign exchange, the setup is very bullish for the Japanese yen through the next 12 months. The yen’s recent sell-off is explained by bond yields rising outside Japan. As these bond yield differentials re-tighten, the yen will rally. Additionally, the yen will benefit from its haven status in a period of recessionary risk. A new high conviction recommendation is to go long the Japanese yen (Chart I-9). Chart I-9The Yen's Sell-Off Is Due To Bond Yields Rising Outside Japan Fractal Trading Watchlist Supporting our bullish fundamental case for the Japanese yen, the sell-off in JPY/USD has reached the point of fragility on its 260-day fractal structure that marked previous major turning points in 2013 and 2015 (Chart 10). Hence, a first new trade is long JPY/USD, setting the trade length at 6 months, and the profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 5 percent. Chart I-10The Sell-Off In JPY/USD Has Reached A Potential Turning Point Supporting our bearish fundamental case for resources stocks, the outperformance of Australian basic resources has reached the point of fragility on its 130-day fractal structure that marked previous turning points in 2013, 2015, and 2021 (Chart I-11). Hence, a second new trade is short Australian basic resources versus the world market, setting the trade length at 6 months, and the profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 10 percent. Chart I-11The Australian Basic Resources Sector Is Vulnerable To Reversal Finally, we are adding GBP/USD to our watchlist, given that its 260-day fractal structure is close to the point of fragility that marked major turns in 2014, 2015, and 2016. Our full watchlist of 29 investments that are at, or approaching turning points, is available on our website: cpt.bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading Watchlist: New Additions GBP/USD At A Turning Point Chart 1AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal   Chart 2Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Chart 3Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Chart 4US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal Chart 5BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point Chart 6Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Chart 7CNY/USD Has Reversed Chart 8CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started Chart 9Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Chart 10The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse Chart 11The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 12FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Reversing Chart 13Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Been Exhausted Chart 14The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 15The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 16Food And Beverage Outperformance Has Been Exhausted Chart 17The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile Chart 18The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile Chart 19A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 20Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 21Norway's Outperformance Could End Chart 22Cotton Versus Platinum Is Reversing Chart 23Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Chart 24The Rally In USD/EUR Has Ended Chart 25The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 26A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare Chart 27Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Chart 28US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities Chart 29GBP/USD At A Turning Point   Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1 Defined as 12-month forward earnings per share. Fractal Trading System 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed   Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations  

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