Financial Markets

Highlights All four of our US Equity indicators are currently pointing in a bearish direction. Our Monetary Indicator has fallen to a three decade low, our Technical Indicator has broken into negative territory, our Valuation Indicator still signals extreme equity pricing, and our Speculation Indicator does not yet support a contrarian buy signal. Still, we do not expect a US recession over the coming year, which implies that S&P 500 revenue growth will stay positive. Nonrecessionary earnings contractions are rare, and are almost always associated with a significant contraction in profit margins. Our new profit margin warning indicator currently suggests the odds of falling margins are low, although the risks may rise later this year. Stocks are extremely expensive, but rich valuations are being driven by extremely low real bond yields, rather than investor exuberance. Valuation is unlikely to impact US stock market performance significantly over the coming year unless long-maturity bond yields rise substantially further. Technical analysis of stock prices has a long and successful history at boosting investment performance, which ostensibly suggests that investors should be paying more attention to technical conditions in the current environment. However, technical trading rules have been less helpful in expansionary environments when inflation is above average and when stock prices and bond yields are less likely to be positively correlated (as is currently the case). As such, the recent technical breakdown of the US equity market may simply reflect a reduced signal-to-noise ratio associated with these economic and financial market regimes. For now, we see our indicators as supportive of a cautious, minimally-overweight stance toward stocks within a multi-asset portfolio over the coming 6 to 12 months. Rising odds of a recession, declining profit margins, and a large increase in investor or Fed expectations for the neutral rate of interest are the most significant threats to the equity market, the risks of which should be monitored closely by investors. Feature In Section 1 of our report, we reviewed why a recession in the US is unlikely over the coming 6 to 12 months. However, we also highlighted that the risks to the economic outlook are meaningful and that an aggressively overweight stance toward risky assets is currently unwarranted. During times of significant uncertainty, investors should pay relatively more attention to long-term economic and financial market indicators with a reliable track record. In this report we begin by briefly reviewing the message from our US Equity Indicators, and then turn to a deeper examination of the top-down outlook for earnings, the determinants of rich valuation in the US stock market, and whether investors should rely on technical indicators in the current environment. We conclude that, while an indicator-based approach is providing mixed signals about the US equity market, we generally see our indicators as supportive of a cautious, minimally-overweight stance toward stocks within a multi-asset portfolio. Aside from tracking the risk of a recession, investors should be closely attuned to signs of a contraction in profit margins or shifting neutral rate expectations as a basis to reduce equity exposure to below-benchmark levels. A Brief Review Of Our US Equity Indicators Chart II-1Our Equity Indicators Are Pointing In A Bearish Direction Chart II-1 presents our US Equity Indicators, which we update each month in Section 3 of our report. We highlight our observations below: Chart II-1 shows that our Monetary Indicator has fallen to its lowest level since 1995, when the Fed surprised investors and shifted rapidly in a hawkish direction. The indicator is most acutely impacted by the speed of the rise in 10-year Treasury yields and a massive surge in the BCA Short Rate Indicator to levels that have not prevailed since the late 1970s (Chart II-2). Our Technical Indicator has recently broken into negative territory, which we have traditionally interpreted as a sign to sell stocks. The indicator has been dragged lower by a deterioration in stock market breadth across several tracked measures and by weak sentiment (Chart II-3). The momentum component of the indicator is fractionally positive but is exhibiting clear weakness. Our Valuation Indicator continues to highlight that US equities are extremely overvalued relative to their history, despite the recent sell-off in stock prices. Our Speculation Indicator arguably provides the least negative signal of our four indicators, at least from a contrarian perspective. In Q1 2021, the indicator nearly reached the all-time high set in March 2000, but it has since retreated significantly and has exited extremely speculative territory. While this may eventually provide a positive signal for stocks, equity returns have historically been below average during months when the indicator declines. Thus, the downtrend in the Speculation Indicator still points to weakness in stock prices, at least over the nearer term. Chart II-2Our Monetary Indicator Is Falling In Part Because Of Surging Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-3All Three Components Of Our Technical Indicator Are Falling In summary, all four of our US Equity indicators are currently pointing in a bearish direction, which clearly argues against an aggressively overweight stance favoring equities within a multi-asset portfolio. At the same time, we reviewed the odds of a US recession over the coming year in Section 1 of our report and argued that a recession is not likely over the coming 12 months. Thus, one key question for investors is whether a nonrecessionary contraction in earnings is likely over the coming year. We address this question in the next section of our report, before turning to a deeper examination of the relative importance of equity valuation and technical indicators. Gauging The Risk Of A Nonrecessionary Earnings Contraction Chart II-4Nonrecessionary Earnings Declines Usually Occur Due To Falling Margins Based on S&P data, there have been five cases since 1960 when 12-month trailing earnings per share fell year-over-year, while the economy continued to expand (Chart II-4). Sales per share growth remained positive in four of these cases (panel 2), underscoring that falling profit margins have been mostly responsible for these nonrecessionary earnings declines. We have noted our concern about how elevated US profit margins have become and have argued that a significant further expansion is not likely to occur over the coming 12-24 months.1 To gauge the risk of a sizeable decline in margins over the coming year, we construct a new indicator based on the seven instances when S&P 500 margins fell outside the context of a recession. This includes two cases when margins fell but earnings did not (because of buoyant revenue growth). We based the indicator on these five factors: Changes in unit labor cost growth to measure the impact of wage costs on firm profitability; Lagging changes in commodity prices as a proxy for material costs; The level of real short-term interest rates as a proxy for borrowing costs; Changes in a sales growth proxy to measure the impact of operating leverage on margins; And changes in the ISM manufacturing index to capture any residual impact on margins from the business cycle. Chart II-5The Odds Of A Nonrecessionary Profit Margin Contraction Are Currently Low Chart II-5 presents the indicator, which is shaded both for recessionary periods and the seven nonrecessionary margin contraction episodes we identified. While the indicator does not perfectly predict margin contractions outside of recessions, it did signal 50% or greater odds of a margin contraction in four of the seven episodes we examined, and signals high odds of a contraction in margins during recessions. Among the three cases in which the indicator failed to indicate falling margins during an expansion, two of those failures were episodes when earnings growth did not ultimately contract. The inability to explain the 1997-1998 margin contraction is the most relevant failure of the indicator, in addition to two false signals in 1963 and 1988. Still, the approach provides a useful framework to gauge the risk of falling profit margins, and the results provide an interesting and somewhat surprising message about the relative importance of the factors we included. We would have expected that accelerating wages would have been the most significant factor explaining nonrecessionary profit margin declines. Wages were highly significant, but they were the second most important factor behind our sales growth proxy. Lagged commodity prices were the third most significant factor, followed by real short-term interest rates. Changes in the ISM manufacturing index were least significant, underscoring that our sales growth proxy already captures most of the effect of the business cycle on profit margins. This suggests that operating leverage is an important determinant of margins during economic expansions, and that investors should be most concerned about declining profit margins when both revenue growth is slowing significantly and wage growth is accelerating. The indicator currently points to low odds of a nonrecessionary margin contraction, but this is likely to change over the coming year. We expect that all five of the factors will evolve in a fashion that is negative for margins over the coming twelve months: While the pace of its increase is slowing, median wage growth continues to accelerate, even when adjusting for the fact that 1st quartile wage growth is growing at an above-average rate (Chart II-6). Combining the latter with higher odds of at or below-trend growth this year implies that unit labor costs may rise further over the coming twelve months. Analysts expect S&P 500 revenue growth to slow nontrivially over the coming year (Chart II-7). Current expectations point to growth slowing to a level that would still be quite strong relative to what has prevailed over the past decade; however, accelerating wage costs in lockstep with decelerating revenue growth is exactly the type of combination that has historically been associated with falling margins during economic expansions. Chart II-6Wage Growth Is Accelerating... Chart II-7...And Revenue Growth Is Set To Slow​​​​​​ Although these are less impactful factors, the lagged effect of the recent surge in commodity prices will also weigh on margins over the coming year, as will rising real interest rates and a likely slowdown in manufacturing activity in response to slower goods spending. In addition to our new indicator, we have two other tools at our disposal to track the odds of a decline in profit margins over the coming year. First, Chart II-8 illustrates that an industry operating margin diffusion index does a decent job at leading turning points in S&P 500 profit margins, despite its volatility. And second, Chart II-9 highlights that changes in the sales and profit margin diffusion indexes sourced from the Atlanta Fed’s Business Inflation Expectations Survey have predicted turning points in operating sales per share and margins over the past decade. Chart II-9 does suggest that profit margins may not rise further, but flat margins are not likely to be a threat to earnings growth over the coming year if a recession is avoided (as we expect). Chart II-8Sector Diffusion Indexes Are Not Signaling A Major Warning Sign For Margins... Chart II-9...Neither Are The Atlanta Fed Business Sales And Margin Diffusion Indexes     The conclusion for investors is that the odds of a decline in profit margins over the coming year are elevated and should be monitored, but are seemingly not yet imminent. In combination with expectations for slowing revenue growth, this implies, for now, that earnings growth over the coming year will be low but positive. Valuation, Interest Rates, And The Equity Risk Premium As noted above, our Valuation Indicator continues to highlight that US Equities are extremely overvalued relative to their history. Our Valuation Indicator is a composite of different valuation measures, and we sometimes receive questions from investors asking about the seemingly different messages provided by these different metrics. For example, Chart II-10 highlights that equity valuation has almost, but not fully, returned to late-1990 conditions based on the Price/Earnings (P/E) ratio, but is seemingly more expensive based on the Price/Book (P/B) and especially Price/Sales (P/S) ratios. In our view, this apparent discrepancy is easily resolved. Relative to the P/E ratio, both the P/B and especially P/S ratios are impacted by changes in aggregate profit margins, which have risen structurally over the past two decades because of the rising share of broadly-defined technology companies in the US equity index (Chart II-11). Barring a major shift in the profitability of US tech companies over the coming year, we do not see discrepancies between the P/E, P/B, or P/S ratios as being particularly informative for investors. As an additional point, we also do not see the Shiller P/E or other cyclically-adjusted P/E measures as providing any extra information about the richness or cheapness of US equities today, as these measures tend to move in line with the 12-month forward P/E ratio (Chart II-12). Chart II-10US Equities Are Extremely Overvalued, Based On Several Valuation Metrics Chart II-11Tech Margins Have Caused Stocks To Look Especially Expensive On A Price/Sales Basis In our view, rather than focusing on different measures of valuation, it is important for investors to understand the root cause of extreme US equity prices, as well as what factors are likely to drive equity multiples over the coming year. As we have noted in previous reports, the reason that US stocks are extremely overvalued today is very different from the reason for similar overvaluation in the late 1990s. Charts II-13 and II-14 present two different versions of the equity risk premium (ERP), one based on trailing as reported earnings (dating back to 1872), and one based on twelve-month forward earnings (dating back to 1979). Chart II-12The Shiller P/E Ratio Does Not Convey Any 'New' Information About Valuation Chart II-13The Equity Risk Premium Is In Line With Its Historical Average… The ERP accounts for the portion of equity market valuation that is unexplained by real interest rates, and the charts highlight that the US ERP is essentially in line with its historical average based on both measures, in sharp contrast to the stock market bubble of the late 1990s. This underscores that historically low interest rates well below the prevailing rate of economic growth are the root cause of extreme equity overvaluation in the US (Chart II-15), meaning that very rich pricing can be thought of as “rational exuberance.” Chart II-14…In Sharp Contrast To The Late 1990s Chart II-15US Equities Are Extremely Expensive Because Bond Yields Are Extremely Low     Chart II-16The Equity Risk Premium Is Fairly Well Explained By The Misery Index Over the longer term, the risks to US equity valuation are clearly to the downside, as we detailed in our October 2021 report.2 But over the coming 6 to 12 months, US equity multiples are likely to be flat or modestly up in the US. As we noted in Section 1 of our report, a significant further rise in long-maturity bond yields will likely necessitate a major shift in neutral rate expectations on the part of investors and the Fed, which we think is more likely a story for next year than this year. And Chart II-16 highlights that the ERP has historically been well explained by the sum of unemployment and inflation (the Misery Index), which should come down over the coming several months as inflation moderates and the unemployment rate remains low. To conclude, it is absolutely the case that US equities are extremely expensive, but this fact is unlikely to impact US stock market performance significantly unless long-maturity bond yields rise substantially further. Technical Analysis Amid A Shifting Economic Regime Technical analysis of financial markets, and especially stocks, has a long history. It has also provided disciplined investors with significant excess returns over time. A simple stock / bond switching rule based on whether stock prices were above their nine-month moving average at the end of the previous month has significantly outperformed since the 1960s, earning an average excess annual return of 1.3% relative to a 60/40 stock/bond benchmark portfolio (Chart II-17). This outsized performance has come at the cost of only a minor increase in portfolio volatility. Ostensibly, then, investors should be paying more attention to equity technical conditions in the current environment, which we noted above are not positive. Our Technical Indicator has recently broken into negative territory, and the S&P 500 has clearly fallen back below its 200-day moving average. However, Chart II-17 presented generalized results over long periods of time. Over the past two decades, investors have been able to rely on a durably negative correlation between stock prices and bond yields to help boost portfolio returns from technically-driven switching rule strategies. Chart II-18 highlights that this correlation has been much lower over the past two years than has been the case since the early 2000s, raising the question of whether similar switching strategies are viable today. In addition, there is the added question of whether technical analysis is helpful to investors during certain types of economic and financial market regimes, such as high inflation environments. Chart II-17Technically-Driven Trading Rules Have Historically Provided Investors With A Lot Of Alpha Chart II-18Switching-Rule Strategies May Not Work As Well When Stock Prices And Bond Yields Are Not Positively Correlated To test whether the message from technical indicators may be relied upon today, we examine the historical returns from a technically-driven portfolio switching strategy during nonrecessionary months under four conditions that reflect the economic and political realities currently facing investors: months when both stock and bond returns are negative; months of above-average inflation; months of above-average geopolitical risk; and the 1970s, when the Misery Index was very elevated. In all the cases we consider, the switching rule is simple: whether the S&P 500 index was above its nine-month moving average at the end of the previous month. If so, the rule overweights equities for the subsequent months; if not, the rule overweights a comparatively risk-free asset. We consider portfolios with either 10-year Treasurys or 3-month Treasury bills as the risk-free asset, as well as a counterfactual scenario in which cash always earns a 1% annual rate of return (to mimic the cash returns currently available to investors). Table II-1 presents the success and whipsaw rate of the trading rule. Table II-2 presents the annualized cumulative returns from the strategy. The tables provide three key observations: As reflected in Chart II-17, both Tables II-1 and II-2 highlight that simple technical trading rules have historically performed well, and that outperformance has occurred in both recessionary and nonrecessionary periods. Relative to nonrecessionary periods overall, technical trading rules have underperformed during the particular nonrecessionary regimes that we examined. It is the case not only that these strategies have performed in inferior ways during these regimes, but also that they were less consistent signals in that they generated significantly more “whipsaws” for investors. Among the four nonrecessionary regimes that we tested, technical indicators underperformed the least during periods of above-average geopolitical risk, and performed abysmally during nonrecessionary (but generally stagflationary) months in the 1970s. Table II-1During Expansions, Technically-Driven Switching Rules Underperform… Table II-2…When Inflation Is High And When Stocks And Bonds Lose Money The key takeaway for investors is that technical analysis is likely to be helpful for investors to improve portfolio performance as we approach a recession but may be less helpful in an expansionary environment in which inflation is above average and when stock prices and bond yields are less likely to be positively correlated. Investment Conclusions Echoing the murky economic outlook that we detailed in Section 1 of our report, our analysis highlights that an indicator-based approach is providing mixed signals about the US equity market. On the one hand, all four of our main equity indicators are currently providing a bearish signal, and the risk of a nonrecessionary contraction in S&P 500 profit margins over the coming year is elevated – albeit seemingly not imminent. On the other hand, our expectation that the US will not slip into recession over the coming year implies that revenue growth will stay positive, which has historically been associated with expanding earnings. In addition, US equity multiples are likely to be flat or modestly up, and the recent technical breakdown in the S&P 500 may simply reflect a reduced signal-to-noise ratio that appears to exist in expansionary environments in which inflation is high and the stock price / bond yield correlation is near-zero or negative. Netting these signals out, we see our equity indicators as supportive of a cautious, minimally-overweight stance toward stocks within a multi-asset portfolio. The emergence of a recession, declining profit margins, and a significant increase in investor or Fed expectations for the neutral rate of interest are the most significant threats to the equity market. We will continue to monitor these risks and adjust our investment recommendations as needed over the coming several months. Stay tuned! Jonathan LaBerge, CFA Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst Gabriel Di Lullo Research Associate   Footnotes 1     Please see The Bank Credit Analyst “OUTLOOK 2022: Peak Inflation – Or Just Getting Started?” dated December 1, 2021, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 2 Please see The Bank Credit Analyst “The “Invincible” US Equity Market: The Longer-Term Outlook For US Stocks In Relative And Absolute Terms,” dated September 30, 2021, available at bca.bcaresearch.com

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

Executive Summary Allies Still Have Faith In USD The Biden administration’s use of sanctions has prompted market speculation about the longevity of the dollar. Yet the DXY has hit 100 and could break out, in the context of rising interest rates and safe-haven demand. The US’s increasingly frequent recourse to economic sanctions is a sign of growing foreign policy challenges. US rivals will continue to diversify away from dollar-denominated reserves. However, from a big picture point of view, there is no clear case that the dollar suffers from US sanctions. When global growth reaccelerates, the dollar can weaken. But until then it will remain resilient. Recommendation (Tactical) Inception Level Inception Date Return Long DXY 96.19 23-FEB-22 5.8% Bottom Line: Tactically stay long DXY and defensives over cyclicals. Feature The US’s aggressive use of sanctions against Russia, in response to its invasion of Ukraine, has prompted market speculation about the future of the global financial and monetary system. Related Report  US Political StrategyBiden's Foreign Policy And The Midterms               It is helpful to begin with facts – what we really know – before launching into grandiose predictions for the future. For example, while some analysts are predicting the demise of the US dollar’s position as the leading reserve currency, so far global investors have bid up the dollar in the face of rising policy uncertainty (Chart 1). In this report we conduct a short overview of US sanctions policy and draw a few simple investment conclusions. Chart 1US Political Risk And The Dollar US Extra-Territorialism Not Yet Hurting The USD The DXY is now trading at 101.2, above the psychological threshold of 100, suggesting that it could break out above its 2016 102.2 peak. The drivers are an expected sharp rise in real interest rates, in both absolute and relative terms, as the Federal Reserve starts on a rate hike cycle that is expected to add 225 basis points to the Fed funds rate this year alone to combat core inflation of 6.5%. This monetary backdrop must be combined with extreme global political and economic instability to explain the dollar’s potential breakout. The global situation is growing less stable, as EU-Russia energy trade breaks down while China imposes lockdowns to stop the spread of Covid-19. Over the past twenty years, the US has struggled to maintain its global leadership. Washington became distracted by wars in the Middle East and South Asia, a national property market crash and financial crisis, and a spike in political polarization and populism. The US public grew war-weary, while the US faced growing challenges from large and powerful nations that it could not confront militarily. Therefore US policymakers turned to economic tools to try to achieve their objectives: namely sanctions but also tariffs and export controls. Many economists and political scientists have warned that the US’s expanding use of economic sanctions – and broader trend of international, extra-territorial, law enforcement – would drive other countries to sell the US dollar and buy other assets, so as to reduce their vulnerability to US tools. This reasoning is sound, as we can see with Russia, which has reduced its dollar-denominated foreign exchange reserves from 41% to 16% since 2016, while increasing its gold holdings from 15% to 22% over the same period. Other major countries vulnerable to US sanctions could follow in Russia’s footsteps. However, so far, the dollar is not suffering excessively from such moves. On the contrary it is rising. The US started using sanctions aggressively with North Korea in 2005, Iran in 2010, and Russia since 2012. The dollar has fluctuated based on other factors, namely rising when the global commodity and industrial cycle was falling (Chart 2). Chart 2TWUSD And DXY Since 2000 Sanctions are a limited prism through which to examine the dollar. But if there is any observable effect of the US’s turn toward sanctions against major players like Russia in 2012 and China in 2018, it is that it has boosted the dollar rather than hurt it. Obviously that trend could change someday. But for now, as the Ukraine war dramatically heightens the US struggle with its rivals, investors should observe that the dollar is on the verge of a breakout. If the dollar continues to rise, it suggests that the US’s structural turn toward more aggressive economic and financial sanctions is not negative for the dollar. It may be neutral or positive. Cyclically the trade-weighted dollar is nowhere near its 2020 peak and could still fall short of that peak, especially if global tensions subside. But the collapse in the euro has caused the DXY to break above its 2020 peak already. Bottom Line: Stay tactically long DXY while watching whether it can break sustainably above 100 to determine whether our cyclically neutral view should be upgraded. US Sanctions On North Korea In this century, the US began to turn more aggressive in its use of sanctions when it confronted the “Axis of Evil” following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in 2003 and began to pursue a nuclear and ballistic missile program more intently. The US responded by levying serious sanctions on that state beginning in 2005. Gradually tougher US sanctions never caused a change in the North Korean regime or foreign policy. On the contrary North Korea achieved nuclear weaponization and is today outlining an expansive nuclear doctrine.  US sanctions on North Korea were never going to drive global macro trends. However, they could have had an impact on South Korean trends. Initially none of the US sanctions reversed the dollar’s decline against the Korean won. After the global financial crisis in 2008, when the dollar began an uptrend against the won, we observe periods of significant new sanctions in which the won rises and the dollar falls (Chart 3, top panel). The same can be said for the outperformance of US equities relative to South Korean equities – if sanctions had any impact, they simply reinforced the flight to US assets in a globally disinflationary context. The trend was mirrored within the US equity market by the rise of tech versus industrials (Chart 3, bottom panel). Chart 3US Sanctions On North Korea Since Covid-19, the outperformance of US tech is now being overturned by high inflation, which has triggered a vicious selloff in tech. In 2022, global growth is slowing, stagflation is taking shape, and the odds of a recession are rising. Stagflation is negative for both industrials and tech, but more so tech. However, South Korea is still suffering from a deteriorating global macro and geopolitical backdrop, as globalization falters, US-China competition rises, and the US fails to contain North Korean ambitions. Sanctions are a symptom rather than a cause.  Bottom Line: US sanctions on North Korea pose no threat to the US dollar. Tactically US industrials can continue to outperform tech but both sectors will suffer in a stagflationary context. US Sanctions On Venezuela The US has slapped sanctions on Venezuela since the early 2000s but these sanctions kicked into high gear in 2015 after President Nicolas Maduro took power and eliminated the last vestiges of democratic and constitutional order. The US recognized the opposition as the legitimate government so sanctions relief will not be easy or convenient. Sanctions have not changed the regime’s behavior, but the regime has all but collapsed and major changes could happen sooner than people expect. Moreover any short-term sanction relief prompted by high oil prices will not be sustainable: the Republican Party will oppose it, hence private US corporations will doubt its durability, and Venezuela’s failing oil industry cannot be revived quickly anyway (Chart 4, top panel).    The US has strong relations with Venezuela’s neighbor Colombia. Yet Colombia faces the greatest economic and security risks from Venezuelan instability. The US dollar vastly outstripped the Colombian peso over the past decade, consistent with the US energy sector’s underperformance (Chart 4, bottom panel). Chart 4US Sanctions On Venezuela With Covid-19, this trend reversed because of the global energy squeeze and inflationary environment. The implication was positive for the Colombian peso as well as global (and US) energy sector relative performance. But the peso only marginally improved against the dollar, while US energy outperformance is now stretched.  Bottom Line: Energy sector still enjoys macro tailwinds but it is no longer clear that US energy stocks will outperform the broad market for much longer. Favor energy by staying long US energy small caps versus large caps. Also stay long oil and gas transportation and storage sub-sector relative to the broad market. The Biden administration is unlikely to give sanction relief to Venezuela. If it does, it will be ineffective at reducing oil prices in the short term. Either way, there will be little impact on the US dollar. US Sanctions On Iran US policy toward Iran is critical to global stability and energy prices in 2022 and the coming years. US sanctions did not change Iran’s behavior alone, but in league with the P5+1 (the UK, France, China, Russia, plus Germany) sanctions forced Iran to accept limit on its nuclear program in 2015. However, the Trump administration withdrew from that agreement and imposed “maximum pressure” sanctions on Iran in 2018, leading to a sharp depreciation in the market exchange rate of the Iranian toman (Chart 5, top panel). The Saudi Arabian riyal, by contrast, is pegged to the dollar and remains steady except when oil prices collapse (Chart 5, middle panel). The Saudis still rely on the Americans for national security so they are unlikely to abandon the dollar, though they may marginally diversify their foreign exchange reserves. The Biden administration wants to rejoin the 2015 deal but first is trying to extract concessions from Iran. Iran feels limited pressure: while its currency is still weak and inflation high, Iran has not succumbed to social unrest. Iranian oil production and exports are rising amid global high prices (Chart 5, bottom panel). Ultimately Iran wants to continue to advance its nuclear program in line with the North Korean strategy. Hence Biden can rejoin the deal unilaterally if he wants to avoid Middle Eastern instability ahead of the midterm elections. But it would be a short-term, stop-gap agreement and the reduction in oil prices would be fleeting. By contrast, if Biden fails to lift Iran’s sanctions, then the risk of oil disruptions from the Middle East goes way up. Tactically investors should expect upside risks to the oil price, but that would kill more demand and weigh on global growth. Over the past decade the outperformance of US equities relative to Saudi and Emirati equities falls in line with the outperformance of US tech relative to energy sectors. As mentioned, this trend has largely run its course, although it can go further in the short run. But there is a broader trend related to growth versus value styles. The UAE’s stock market is heavily weighted toward financials, while the US is heavily weighted toward tech. The US tech sector has collapsed relative to financials (Chart 6).  Chart 5US Sanctions On Iran Chart 6US Sanctions On Iran Bottom Line: US energy and financials sectors can fare reasonably well in a stagflationary context but their outperformance relative to tech is largely priced from a cyclical point of view. US maximum pressure sanctions on Iran never hurt the US dollar. US Sanctions On Russia The US’s extraordinary sanctions against Russia in 2022 – including freezing its dollar-denominated foreign exchange reserves – have sparked market fears that countries will divest from US dollars to protect themselves from any future US sanctions. To be clear, the US has confiscated foreign enemies’ property and foreign exchange reserves in the past. True, Russia is qualitatively different from other countries, such as Iran, because it is one of the world’s great powers. Yet the US closed off all economic and financial linkages with Russia from 1949-1991 because of the Cold War, the very period when the US dollar rose to prominence as the global reserve currency. In 2022, sanctions on Russia have primarily hurt the Russian ruble, not the US dollar (Chart 7). The Russians divested from the dollar after invading Ukraine in 2014 to reduce the impact of sanctions. But they were not able to divest fast enough to prevent the 2022 sanctions from pummeling their financial system and economy. Chart 7US Sanctions On Russia Going forward Russia will be much more insulated from the US dollar but at a terrible cost to long-term productivity. The lesson for other US rivals may be to diversify away from the dollar – but that will be a secondary lesson. The primary lesson will be to take economic stability into account when making strategic security decisions. Economic stability requires ongoing engagement in the global financial system and US dollar system. US sanctions on Russia have benefited US equities and dollar relative to Russian assets as one would expect. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine exacerbated the trend. The takeaway for US investors is that the energy sector’s outperformance sector’s outperformance can continue in the short run but is becoming stretched from a cyclical perspective. Bottom Line: Investors should expect oil and the energy sector to remain strong in the short run, while tech will suffer in an inflationary and stagflationary environment. But energy may not outperform tech for much longer. US Sanctions On China US policy toward China is the critical question today. China holds $1 trillion in dollar-denominated exchange reserves and must recycle around $200 billion in current account surpluses every year into global assets. The US has imposed sweeping sanctions on Iran since 2010, Russia since 2012, and China since 2018. China began diversifying away from dollar-denominated foreign exchange reserves in 2011 in the wake of the Great Recession. The US-initiated trade war in 2018 solidified the change in China’s foreign reserve strategy. The US sanctions against Russia will further solidify it. There are some signs that US punitive measures affected the USD-CNY exchange rate but global economic cycles are far more powerful. The yuan appreciated from 2005 until the global financial crisis, during the height of US-China economic and diplomatic engagement. It depreciated through the manufacturing slowdown of 2015 and the US-China trade war. It appreciated again with the pandemic stimulus and global trade rebound. The yuan was affected by US sanctions and tariffs on the margin amid these larger macro swings (Chart 8, top panel). Still, the overarching trend since 2014 points to a rising dollar and falling yuan. Globalization is in retreat and US-China strategic competition is heating up. As with South Korea, these trends are negative for Chinese assets. US sanctions are a symptom rather than a cause of the underlying macro and geopolitical dynamics. The same point can be made with regard to US equity performance relative to Chinese – and hence US tech outperformance relative to US industrial stocks (Chart 8, bottom panel). However, as with Korea, the cyclical takeaway is to favor industrials over technology in a stagflationary environment. Chart 8US Sanctions On China Bottom Line: Tactically favor US industrials over tech until the world’s stagflationary trajectory is corrected. US-China relations are one area where US sanction policy can hurt the dollar, as China will seek to diversify over time. But so far the evidence is scant. US Sanctions And Foreign Holdings Of Treasuries Having examined US sanctions on a country-by-country basis, we should now turn toward holdings of US dollars and Treasury securities. Are US economic sanctions jeopardizing the willingness of states to hold US assets? First, Americans hold 74% of outstanding treasuries. Foreigners hold the remaining 26% (Chart 9, top panel). This is a large degree of foreign ownership that reflects the US’s openness as an economy, as well as the size of the treasury market, which makes it attractive to foreign savers who need a place to store their wealth. Of this 26%, defense allies hold about 36%. Theoretically up to 17% of treasuries stand at risk of rapid liquidation by non-allied states afraid of US sanctions. But a conservative estimate would be 6%. Notably the share of foreign-held treasuries held by non-allies has fallen from 40% in 2009 to 23% today. Non-allies are reducing their share fairly rapidly (Chart 9, middle panel). What this really means is that China and Hong Kong are reducing their share – from 26% in 2008 to 16% today. Brazil and India have maintained a steady 6% of foreign-held treasuries. Notably the offshore financial centers see a growing share, suggesting that trust in the dollar remains strong even among states and entities that wish to hide their identity. Some of the divestment that has occurred from non-allied states may be overstated due to rerouting through these third parties. Looking at the data in absolute terms, only China – and arguably Brazil – can be said with any certainty to be pursuing a dedicated policy of divesting from US dollar reserves (Chart 10). This makes sense, as China, like Russia, is engaged in geopolitical competition with the US and therefore must take precautions against future US punitive measures. But these measures are not so far generating a worldwide flight from the dollar, either at the micro level or the macro level. Chart 9Foreign Purchases Of US Treasuries Chart 10Foreigners With Large Treasury Holdings In fact, the biggest competitor to the US dollar is the euro. This is clear from looking at the share of global currency reserves – the two are inversely proportional (Chart 11). And yet it is the European Union, not the US, that could suffer a long-term loss of security, productivity, and stability as a result of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The euro is losing status as a reserve currency and the war could exacerbate that trend. Chart 11Global Reserve Currency Basket Europe does not provide protection from US sanctions. The EU, like the US, utilizes economic sanctions and the two entities share many similar foreign policy objectives. Europe is also allied with the US through NATO. When the US withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal, the EU did not withdraw, yet EU entities enforced the sanctions, as their economic linkages with the US were much more valuable than those with Iran. In the case of Russia, the two have imposed sanctions in league, as they will likely do toward other small or great powers that attempt to reshape the global order through military force. The next competitors to the dollar and euro are grouped together in Chart 11 above because they are the US’s “maritime allies,” such as Japan, the United Kingdom, and Australia. These countries will pursue a similar foreign policy to the United States and they do not offer protection from US sanctions during times of conflict or war.  The true competitor is the Chinese renminbi. The renminbi will grow as a share of global reserves. But it faces serious obstacles from China’s economic policy, currency controls, closed capital account, and geopolitical competition with the United States. Washington’s sanctions have already targeted China yet the US dollar has remained resilient.  Bottom Line: The US’s erratic foreign policy in recent decades has potentially weighed on the US’s commanding position as a global reserve currency, with its share of reserves falling from 71% in 2000 to 59% today. But US allies have mostly picked up the slack. And the dollar’s top competitor, the euro, is likely to suffer more than the dollar from the Ukraine war. Still it is true that US sanctions are alienating China, which will continue to diversify away from the dollar.  Investment Takeaways Tactically stay long the US dollar (DXY). The combination of monetary policy tightening and foreign policy challenges is driving a dollar rally that could result in a breakout.  US sanctions policy is not a convincing reason to sell the dollar in today’s context. Over the medium term dollar diversification poses a risk, although the dollar will still remain the single largest reserve currency over a long-term, strategic horizon. For further discussion see the Special Report by our Foreign Exchange Strategy and Geopolitical Strategy, “Is The Dollar’s Reserve Status Under Threat?” Given US domestic policy uncertainty in an election year, and foreign policy challenges, stay long defensive sectors, namely health care, over cyclical sectors.   Tactically our renewable energy trade has dropped sharply. But cyclically it remains attractive, as our recent Special Report with our US Equity Strategy team demonstrates. If Congress fails to succeed in promoting its new climate and energy bill, then this trade could suffer bad news in the near term. Tactically US industrials can continue to outperform the tech sector, given the stagflationary context that is developing. Energy’s outperformance, especially relative to tech, is becoming stretched, at least from a cyclical point of view. But geopolitical trends suggest oil risks are still to the upside tactically. For now, maintain exposure to high energy prices by staying long energy small caps versus large caps and O&G transportation and storage.   Matt Gertken Senior Vice President Chief US Political Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com   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 A4APolitical Capital: White House And Congress Table A4BPolitical Capital: Household And Business Sentiment Table A4CPolitical Capital: The Economy And Markets

Executive Summary A housing slowdown has begun and it will proceed in three stages. First, rising mortgage rates will lead to slowing demand. Second, weak demand will push inventories higher and cause home prices to decelerate. Finally, construction activity will trend down signaling a peak in the fed funds rate. We are at least one year away from housing signaling a peak in interest rates. Agency MBS returns will improve going forward, but the sector is still not sufficiently attractive to increase exposure. Housing Starts Are A Useful Fed Indicator Bottom Line: Maintain an underweight allocation to agency MBS within US bond portfolios and favor low coupons (1.5%-2.5%) over high coupons (3%-4.5%). Feature Chart 1The Highest Mortgage Rate Since 2011 The biggest question for investors continues to be how the economy and financial markets will react to the Federal Reserve’s hawkish pivot, a pivot that has led to sharply higher bond yields and a much flatter yield curve. However, it’s not just this re-shaping of the Treasury curve that has changed the economic landscape. The Fed’s hawkish pivot has also sent the mortgage rate back above 5% for the first time since 2011 (Chart 1). This week’s report considers what an elevated mortgage rate means for the future path of Fed rate hikes. It also updates our view on Agency MBS.   Housing Is Critical For Fed Policy Housing is probably the most important channel through which monetary policy impacts the economy. This is simply the result of the fact that monetary policy directly influences mortgage rates and mortgage rates are a major determinant of housing demand. Not only that, but empirical research has shown residential investment to be an excellent leading indicator of recession.1 Related Report  Global Fixed Income StrategyGlobal Bond Yields Take A Breather From these facts we can draw two conclusions. First, monetary policy works in large part through its influence on housing activity. Second, trends in housing activity can send important signals about the stance of monetary policy. For example, we observe that periods of Fed tightening tend to occur when the 12-month moving average of housing starts is above the 24-month moving average. Meanwhile, periods of Fed rate cuts tend to occur when the 12-month moving average of housing starts is below the 24-month moving average (Chart 2). This is a fairly reliable relationship going back to the early 1970s, the sole exception being the late-1980s when the Fed delivered a series of rate hikes as housing activity trended down. Chart 2Housing Starts Are A Useful Fed Indicator Chart 2 shows us that housing starts are currently trending higher, consistent with a period of Fed tightening. However, it also tells us that we should start to anticipate the end of the tightening cycle when the 12-month moving average of housing starts falls below the 24-month moving average. While the elevated mortgage rate will certainly slow housing activity going forward, we expect that we are still at least one year away from receiving that signal from the housing starts data. A Housing Slowdown In Three Steps We see the coming housing slowdown proceeding in three steps. First, higher mortgage rates will crimp demand. This is already starting to occur. New and existing home sales have both dipped in recent months, and mortgage purchase applications are down off their highs (Chart 3). Chart 3Phase 1: Weaker Demand Demand weakness will continue until the housing slowdown reaches its second phase. The second phase will be characterized by rising home inventories and decelerating home prices. This has still not occurred. The total inventory of new and existing homes is near its all-time low and home prices were up 18% during the 12-month period ending in January (Chart 4). The second phase of the housing slowdown is critical because builders will be incentivized to add supply as long as inventories remain low and prices remain elevated. That is, the housing slowdown will not reach its third phase – declining housing starts – until weak demand pushes inventories up and prices down, making new construction less attractive. Presently, while homebuilder equities have sold off as mortgage rates have risen, homebuilder confidence is still extremely high (Chart 5). This tells us that we are still quite far away from seeing a trend reversal in housing starts. Chart 4Phase 2: Falling Prices Chart 5Phase 3: Less Construction Bottom Line: A trend reversal in housing starts, as indicated by the 12-month moving average dipping below the 24-month moving average, will send a strong signal that the Fed is near the peak of its tightening cycle. Given that the housing slowdown is still in its early stages, we view this development as at least one year away. Agency MBS: The Rout Is Over, But It’s Still Too Soon To Buy Chart 6Poor MBS Performance Agency Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS) have performed terribly during the past year (Chart 6). Not only have the securities drastically underperformed duration-matched Treasuries, but they have also performed worse than investment grade corporate bonds and Agency-backed Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities. The chief reason for the poor performance has been the surge in bond yields and the resulting increase in Agency MBS duration. It became less attractive for homeowners to prepay their mortgages as mortgage rates rose. This caused MBS duration to extend, meaning that every further increase in yields led to a more severe drop in price. Chart 7 shows that the average duration of the conventional 30-year Agency MBS index was around 3.0 at the beginning of 2021. It is now above 6.0! The good news is that this is probably about as high as the index duration will get. The refi option on most mortgages is already out-of-the-money. That is, close to 0% of the amount outstanding of the conventional 30-year MBS index can profitably refinance with the mortgage rate at its current level (Chart 7, panel 2). We also observe that the average price of the index has fallen to well below par (Chart 7, panel 3) and the average convexity of the index is close to zero (Chart 7, bottom panel). The key point is that there is now very little convexity risk in the MBS index, so further movements in bond yields will lead to much smaller changes in index duration. Low convexity risk means that the worst of the MBS duration extension has already passed. MBS returns should be somewhat better going forward, though we still don’t recommend increasing exposure to the sector. At this juncture, the main reason to stay defensive on Agency MBS is that spreads simply don’t offer sufficient value. The average index spread versus Treasuries is close to its lowest level since 2000 (Chart 8). Interestingly, dramatic MBS underperformance didn’t lead to spread widening during the past year because MBS yields kept getting compared to longer and longer duration Treasuries as the MBS index duration extended. Chart 7The Extension Trade Is Over Chart 8MBS Spreads Are Too Tight MBS value is also relatively poor compared to investment grade rated corporate bonds. The option-adjusted spread differential between Agency MBS and investment grade corporates is close to its median since 2000 (Chart 8, panel 2). MBS value looks slightly more expensive if we adjust for index duration by using the 12-month breakeven spread (Chart 8, bottom panel). With value relative to investment grade corporates either at its historical median or slightly more expensive, we don’t see a compelling case for favoring Agency MBS over investment grade corporates. Bottom Line: MBS index duration extension has likely run its course. We therefore expect MBS returns to improve somewhat during the next 6-12 months. That said, we continue to recommend an underweight allocation to the sector as current spreads don’t justify favoring MBS over Treasuries or investment grade corporates. Take A Look At Low Coupons We think investors should consider favoring low coupons (1.5%-2.5%) within an overall underweight allocation to agency MBS. We view this recommendation as a way to position for a drop in Treasury yields between now and the end of the year. In prior reports we noted that long-dated forward Treasury yields are elevated relative to survey estimates of the long-run neutral fed funds rate, and also that we expect inflation to trend down in the coming months.2 While we continue to recommend keeping portfolio duration close to benchmark on a 6-12 month horizon, a low-coupon bias within Agency MBS is a good way to position for the possibility that falling inflation will push bond yields down. To see why, we need to simply consider that low coupon mortgages are the least likely to refinance and thus low-coupon MBS have the highest durations (Chart 9). With convexity currently close to zero for the entire coupon stack (Chart 10), MBS relative coupon positioning can really be boiled down to a play on rates and duration risk. Chart 9Agency MBS 30-Year Conventional Coupon Stack: OAS vs. Duration Chart 10Agency MBS 30-Year Conventional Coupon Stack: OAS vs. Convexity A further rise in bond yields will cause higher coupon MBS (3%-4.5%) to outperform lower coupon MBS (1.5%-2.5%), while a drop in bond yields will lead to low-coupon outperformance. Given our current macro outlook, we think it makes sense to bet on the latter. Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 https://www.nber.org/papers/w13428 2 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Peak Inflation”, dated April 19, 2022. Recommended Portfolio Specification Other Recommendations Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns

Listen to a short summary of this report.         Executive Summary Small Caps Are Looking Attractive Relative To Their Large Cap Peers Adverse supply shocks have pushed down global growth this year, while pushing up inflation. With the war raging in Ukraine and China trying to contain a major Covid outbreak, these supply shocks are likely to persist for the next few months. Things should improve in the second half of the year. Inflation will come down rapidly, probably even more than what markets are discounting. Global growth will reaccelerate as pandemic headwinds abate. The return of Goldilocks will allow the Fed and other central banks to temper their hawkish rhetoric, helping to support equity prices while restraining bond yields. Unfortunately, this benign environment will sow the seeds of its own demise. Falling inflation during the remainder of the year will lift real incomes, leading to increased consumer spending. Inflation will pick up towards the end of 2023, forcing central banks to turn hawkish again. Trade Inception Level Initiation Date Stop Loss Long iShares Core S&P Small Cap ETF (IJR) / SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY) 100 Apr 21/2022 -5% Trade Recommendation: Go long US small caps vs. large caps via the iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF (IJR) and the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY). Bottom Line: Global equities are heading towards a “last hurrah” starting in the second half of this year. Stay overweight stocks on a 12-month horizon. Push or Pull? Economists like to distinguish between “demand-pull” and “cost-push” inflation. The former occurs in response to positive demand shocks while the latter reflects negative supply shocks. In order to tell one from the other, it is useful to look at real wages. When real wages are rising briskly, households tend to spend more, leading to demand-pull inflation. In contrast, when wages fail to keep up with rising prices, it is a good bet that we have cost-push inflation on our hands. Chart 1 shows that real wages have been falling across the major economies over the past year. The decline in real wages has coincided with a steep drop in consumer confidence (Chart 2). This points to cost-push forces as the main culprits behind today’s high inflation rates. Chart 1Real Wages Are Declining Chart 2Consumer Confidence Has Soured A close look at the breakdown of recent inflation figures supports this conclusion. The US headline CPI rose by 8.5% year-over-year in March. The bulk of the inflation occurred in supply-constrained categories such as food, energy, and vehicles (Chart 3). Chart 3The Acceleration In Inflation Has Been Driven By Pandemic And War-Impacted Categories The Toilet Paper Economy When the pandemic began, shoppers rushed out to buy essential household supplies including, most famously, toilet paper. Chart 4In A Break From The Past, Goods Prices Soared During The Pandemic The toilet paper used in offices is somewhat different than the sort used at home. So, to some extent, work-from-home (and do other stuff-at-home) arrangements did boost the demand for consumer-grade toilet paper. However, a much more important factor was household psychology. People scrambled to buy toilet paper because others were doing the same. As often occurs in prisoner-dilemma games, society moved from one Nash equilibrium – where everyone was content with the amount of toilet paper they had – to another equilibrium where they wanted to hold much more paper than they previously did. What has gone largely unnoticed is that the toilet paper fiasco was replicated across much of the global supply chain. Worried that they would not have enough intermediate goods on hand to maintain operations, firms began to hoard inputs. Retailers, anxious at the prospect of barren shelves, put in bigger purchase orders than they normally would have. All this happened at a time when demand was shifting from services to goods, and the pandemic was disrupting normal goods production. No wonder the prices of goods – especially durable goods — jumped (Chart 4).   Peak Inflation? The war in Ukraine could continue to generate supply disruptions over the coming months. The Covid outbreak in China could also play havoc with the global supply chain. While the number of Chinese Covid cases has dipped in recent days, Chart 5 highlights that 27 out of 31 mainland Chinese provinces are still reporting new cases, up from 14 provinces in the beginning of February. The number of ships stuck outside of Shanghai has soared (Chart 6). Chart 527 Out Of 31 Chinese Provinces Are Reporting New Cases, Up From 14 Provinces In The Beginning Of February Chart 6The Clogged-Up Port Of Shanghai Chart 7Inflation Will Decelerate This Year Thanks To Base Effects Nevertheless, the peak in inflation has probably been reached in the US. For one thing, base effects will push down year-over-year inflation (Chart 7). Monthly core CPI growth rates were 0.86% in April, 0.75% in May, and 0.80% in June of 2021. These exceptionally high prints will fall out of the 12-month average during the next few months. More importantly, goods inflation will abate as spending shifts back toward services. Chart 8 shows that spending on goods remains well above the pre-pandemic trend in the US, while spending on services remains well below. Excluding autos, US retail inventories are about 5% above their pre-pandemic trend (Chart 9). Core goods prices fell in March for the first time since February 2021. Fewer pandemic-related disruptions, and hopefully a stabilization in the situation in Ukraine, could set the stage for sharply lower inflation and a revival in global growth in the second half of this year. How long will this Goldilocks environment last? Our guess is that it will endure until the second half of next year, but probably not much beyond then. As inflation comes down over the coming months, real income growth will rise. What began as cost-push inflation will morph into demand-pull inflation by the end of 2023. The Fed will need to resume hiking at that point, potentially bringing rates to over 4% in 2024. Chart 8Spending On Services Remains Well Below The Pre-Pandemic Trend, While Spending On Goods Is Above It Chart 9Shelves Are Well Stocked In The US Investment Implications Wayne Gretzky famously said that he always tries to skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been. Macro investors should follow the same strategy: Ask what the global economy will look like in six months and invest accordingly. The past few months have been tough for the global economy and financial markets. Last week, bullish sentiment fell to the lowest level in 30 years in the American Association of Individual Investors poll (Chart 10). Global growth optimism dropped in April to a record low in the BofA Merrill Lynch Fund Manager Survey.    Chart 10AAII Survey: Equity Bulls Are In Short Supply Chart 11The Equity Risk Premium Remains Elevated Yet, a Goldilocks environment of falling inflation and supply-side led growth awaits in the second half of the year. Even if this environment does not last beyond the end of 2023, it could provide a “last hurrah” for global equities. Despite the spike in bond yields, the earnings yield on stocks still exceeds the real bond yield by 5.4 percentage points in the US, and by 7.8 points outside the US (Chart 11). TINA’s siren song may have faded but it is far from silent. Global equities have about 10%-to-15% upside from current levels over a 12-month horizon. We recommend that investors increase allocations to non-US stock markets, value stocks, and small caps over the coming months (see trade recommendation below). Consistent with our view that the neutral rate of interest is higher than widely believed in the US and elsewhere, we expect the 10-year Treasury yield to eventually rise to around 4% in 2024. However, with US inflation likely to trend lower in the second half of this year, we do not expect much upside for yields over a 12-month horizon. If anything, the fact that bond sentiment in the latest BofA Merrill Lynch survey was the most bearish in 20 years suggests that the near-term risk to yields is to the downside.  Trade Idea: Go Long US Small Caps Versus Large Caps Small caps have struggled of late. Over the past 12 months, the S&P 600 small cap index has declined 3%, even as the S&P has managed to claw out a 5% gain. At this point, small caps are starting to look relatively cheap (Chart 12). The S&P 600 is trading at 14-times forward earnings compared to 19-times for the S&P 500. Notably, analysts expect small cap earnings to rise more over the next 12 months, as well as over the long term, than for large caps. Chart 12Small Caps Are Looking Attractive Relative To Their Large Cap Peers Chart 13Small Caps Tend To Outperform When Growth Is Picking Up And The Dollar Is Depreciating Small caps tend to perform best in settings where growth is accelerating and the US dollar is weakening (Chart 13). Economic growth should benefit from a supply-side boost later this year as pandemic headwinds fade and more low-skilled workers rejoin the labor market. With inflation set to decline, the need for the Fed to generate hawkish surprises will temporarily subside, putting downward pressure on the dollar. Investors should consider going long the S&P 600 via the iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF (IJR) versus the S&P 500 via the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY). Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on  LinkedIn Twitter   Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores

Executive Summary After having overspent on goods ex-autos over the past two years and experiencing contracting incomes in real terms, US and European households will reduce their purchases of goods ex-autos. Risks to global growth stemming from China remain to the downside. Leading indicators from Asia and global financial markets are signaling a contraction in global trade. Yet, US core inflation will not drop below 4% for the rest of this year. Consequently, the Fed will likely end up hiking rates and sounding hawkish amidst a major global trade slump. This will give rise to stagflation anxiety among investors and will be negative for global risk assets in general and EM equities, currencies and credit markets in particular. The yuan is breaking down versus the US dollar. A weaker RMB will pull down Emerging Asian as well as other EM currencies. Does This Divergence From A Historic Correlation Signify Stagflation? Bottom Line: Global equity and credit portfolios should remain defensive and continue underweighting EM. Currency investors should be positioned for another upleg in the US dollar and a downleg in EM currencies. Feature The volume of global trade is about to contract. Meantime, US inflation will remain well above the Fed’s target. This combination will produce stagflation anxiety among investors. It is impossible to know whether stagflation will be a long-lasting phenomenon in the real economy. In our view, the stagflation narrative will dominate global financial markets in the coming months. This heralds a cautious stance on global and EM risk assets. The slowdown in global manufacturing and trade will be pervasive and broad-based but will exclude auto production. The latter will in fact recover as chip/input shortages ease. The main drivers of the slowdown are (1) a mean reversion in US and European demand for goods ex-autos; (2) China’s economic woes and (3) moribund domestic demand in mainstream EM. Shrinking DM Household Demand For Goods ex-Autos Chart 1DM Household Demand For Goods ex-Autos Will Experience Mean Reversion After having overspent on goods ex-autos over the past two years and experiencing contracting income in real terms (after adjusting for inflation), US and European households will reduce their purchases of goods ex-autos. US and European consumption of goods ex-autos exploded at the onset of the pandemic two years ago and has stayed robust until now. Chart 1 illustrates that since mid-2020, the consumption of goods ex-autos was running well above its trend, which signifies excessive demand over the past two years. Such excessive demand has led to bottlenecks and shortages, giving producers an opportunity to hike prices. In a nutshell, inflation in tradable goods in the past 18 months was primarily driven by demand, not supply constraints. A portion of future goods consumption has been pulled forward, which implies that household demand for these goods has become saturated. Moreover, as the pandemic subsides, consumers are shifting their spending from goods to services. These dynamics could create an air pocket in the demand for certain goods. Chart 2DM Household Real Incomes Are Contracting Critically, US and European household income is contracting in real terms (Chart 2). Wage growth has not kept up with the surge in inflation. Due to shrinking disposable real income, consumers in advanced economies will curtail their consumption of discretionary items, primarily goods ex autos on which they have overspent during the past two years. Bottom Line: Demand for goods ex-autos will shrink in advanced economies in the next 6-12 months. This will weigh on global merchandise trade. China’s Trilemma Chinese authorities are facing an “impossible trinity” in their attempts to simultaneously achieve three objectives: (1) pursuing the dynamic zero-Covid policy, (2) delivering decent economic growth, and (3) not resorting to “irrigation-style” massive stimulus. We do not think all three objectives can be achieved. China’s economy was struggling prior to the recent lockdowns. The COVID-related restrictions have only made matters worse and have weighed heavily on economic activities and household income. Domestic orders for industrial enterprises plunged below 50, i.e., they are in contraction territory (Chart 3). These surveys, released on March 30-31, were not affected by the Shanghai lockdowns, which have proliferated since March 28. Exports orders are also contracting (Chart 4). Chart 3China: Domestic Orders Were Plunging Prior To Lockdowns Chart 4China: Exports Are Set To Contract   Further, China’s import and export volumes were contracting in January – prior to the Ukraine war and the recent lockdowns. Notably, Chart 5 highlights that prior to the recent lockdowns, import weakness was broad-based, including commodities, machinery and semiconductors. In particular, total imports in USD are flat in March compared to a year ago. With commodity prices up significantly, it is clear that import volumes in March have shrunken substantially. National disposable income per capita was growing at about 6% in nominal terms before the lockdowns (Chart 6, top panel). Household mortgage growth had decelerated considerably before lockdowns became widespread (Chart 6, bottom panel). Chart 5Chinese Imports Were Shrinking Before Lockdowns Chart 6China: Household Income And Mortgage Borrowing ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​   As the lockdowns wreak havoc on the economy and household income, and with the government not providing direct transfers to the population, household consumption will be severely affected in the months ahead. The property market remains in the doldrums and is unlikely to recover soon. As we have highlighted in previous reports, structural headwinds, continue to weigh down on the property market. Since 2009, there has been no business cycle recovery in China without the real estate market playing the leading role. Residential floor space sold was down by 20% in Q1 from a year ago (Chart 7, top panel). House prices have begun deflating in tier-3 cities. Deflation will likely spread to tier-1 and -2 cities due to a pandemic-driven decline in income and confidence. Critically, the plunge in property developers’ financing entails shrinkage in housing completion (construction work) (Chart 7, bottom panel). The latter has so far held up as authorities have been forcing developers to use their limited financing to complete projects that they had already started. The massive issuance of local government bonds will spur an acceleration in infrastructure spending. China’s government gave the green light already this year to infrastructure projects worth nearly 70% of what was allowed for the whole of last year. Yet, this might be insufficient to produce a rapid business cycle recovery in an environment of rolling lockdowns and with other segments of the economy facing challenges. Related Report  Emerging Markets StrategyGlobal Semi Stocks: More Downside Given these negative forces, the Chinese economy requires massive government stimulus in the form of direct transfers to households and SMEs – as the US offered in the spring of 2020. Yet, it does not seem that the government is rushing to provide such direct and significant stimulus. In our opinion, the policy stimulus measures announced so far by the government fall short of what is required to lift the economy. Policymakers are neither ready to abandon the dynamic zero-Covid policy nor provide “irrigation-type” stimulus, especially for households and the property market. With these two constraints, economic growth in China is set to underwhelm. Bottom Line: Risks to global growth stemming from China remain to the downside. In EM ex-China, ongoing fiscal tightening, monetary tightening in LATAM and feeble household income growth in India and ASEAN will all cap consumer spending and business investment (Chart 8). Chart 7China: Property Construction Is Set To Shrink Chart 8EM ex-China: Domestic Demand Will Remain Sluggish Signs Of A Global Trade Contraction There is already evidence to suggest that a major relapse in global manufacturing and trade is beginning: Taiwanese shipments to China are dipping into negative territory, and they lead global exports (Chart 9). Taiwanese exports to China are a good leading indicator of global trade dynamics because mainland producers order inputs from Taiwan first before they produce final goods for export. When producers located in China order less inputs, they evidently expect less in the way of production and shipments. Korea’s business survey of exporting companies indicates a substantial deterioration in their business conditions in April (Chart 10). This points to a major slump in the nation’s exports and, hence, global trade. Chart 9Global Trade Is Set To Contract Chart 10Korean Exporters Are Downgrading Their Expectations Korean and Japanese non-financial share prices have plunged despite considerable currency depreciation, which is typically positive for their competitiveness. As many of these non-financial companies are major exporters, this development points to a major downtrend in global trade. Global cyclicals have been underperforming global defensives. This dynamic has historically been a good leading indicator for the global industrial downturn (Chart 11). Finally, early cyclical stocks in the US have sold off and have substantially underperformed domestic defensives (Chart 12). This also points to a slowdown in US growth. Chart 11Global Equity Sector Performance Points To A Relapse In Global Manufacturing Chart 12Beware Of A Relapse in US Early Cyclical Stocks   Bottom Line: Leading indicators from Asian economies and global financial markets are signaling that global trade will experience a contraction and global growth will slow. Inflation Amid A Global Trade Contraction? Chart 13US Wages Are Surging in Nominal Terms Yet Shrinking In Real Terms A natural question is why worry about inflation when global trade volumes will be contracting? The primary source of anxiety in this context is US inflation and the Fed’s tightening. A decline in global trade will not be enough to bring down US core inflation substantially. By contrast, China and Asia do not face an inflation problem. US inflation worries will persist, and the Fed will likely continue to hike rates and sound hawkish for the following reasons: First, US capital expenditures by companies and household spending on services will remain robust. US services make up a larger share of the American economy and employment than do goods-producing sectors. Hence, we do not expect a broad-based recession in the US this year. Second, as we have previously noted, the US has a genuine inflation problem. American wages are accelerating, and a tight labor market will push up wage growth above 5-6% (Chart 13, top panel). Importantly, real wages in the US have contracted (Chart 13, bottom panel). Faced with a decline in purchasing power, employees will demand higher wages. The tight labor market raises the odds that companies will likely accommodate higher wages. Chart 14Unit Labor Costs Are The Key To Core Inflation Given that US productivity growth is no more than 1.5-2%, wage growth over 5-6% means that unit labor costs will be rising by more than 3-4%. This will prevent core inflation from falling a lot. Unit labor costs have historically been the main driver of core inflation in the US (Chart 14). Finally, inflation is a lagging and inert phenomenon. It takes a long time (more than six to nine months) of sub-par growth for inflation to subside. Odds are that even though global trade volumes will be contracting, the Fed will continue hiking rates and sounding hawkish because US inflationary pressures will remain acute. Bottom Line: Annual core CPI inflation will drop in the US due to the base effect and a drop in some goods prices. Yet, we expect core CPI and PCE to remain above 4% for the rest of this year. Underlying inflationary pressures have spilled over into the labor market, and the wage-price spiral has probably unraveled. Therefore, inflation cannot be reduced meaningfully without bringing economic growth down below potential growth and weakening the labor market for a few quarters. Investment Implications Shrinking global trade volumes and a hawkish Fed are bearish for global risk assets in general and EM equities, currencies and credit markets in particular. Contracting exports and a hawkish Fed are negative for the Chinese yuan and other Asian currencies. The CNY/USD exchange rate has broken below its 200-day moving average and odds are that it will depreciate further (Chart 15). Our target for CNY/USD is 6.7. The broad trade-weighted US dollar has more upside and EM currencies will depreciate. Chart 16 illustrates that investors’ net long positions in ZAR, BRL and MXN are high. Chart 15The RMB Is Breaking Down Chart 16Investors Are Long EM Commodity Currencies   Our recommended currency shorts for now are ZAR, PHP, IDR, COP, HUF, PEN and PLN. Global equity and credit portfolios should continue underweighting EM. Notably, global defensive equity sectors have been outperforming non-TMT stocks despite rising US/global bond yields (Chart 17). This is a major departure from the historical relationship and likely signifies a period of slower global growth ahead but continuous Fed tightening. Global equity managers should favor defensive stocks. Chart 17Does This Divergence From A Historic Correlation Signify Stagflation? For EM equity managers, we also recommend favoring defensive sectors like consumer staples. Presently, our country overweights are Korea, Singapore, Chinese A-shares, Mexico and Brazil. Our underweights are India, Central Europe, Indonesia, Turkey, South Africa, Colombia and Peru. In local rates, we continue recommending receiving Chinese and Malaysian 10-year swap rates, a long position in Brazilian 10-year bonds, betting on yield curve flattening in Mexico and paying Polish 10-year swap rates while receiving Czech 10-year swap rates. Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com​​​​​​​

Executive Summary In this first of a regular series of ‘no holds barred’ conversations with a concerned client we tackle the hot topic of inflation. Month-on-month US core inflation has already peaked, 12-month US core inflation is about to peak, and demand destruction will ultimately pull down headline inflation too. Given modest and slowing growth in unit labour costs, there is no imminent risk of a wage-price spiral. Surging inflation expectations are just capturing the frothiness in inflation protected bond prices that massive hedging demand is creating. This recent massive demand for inflation hedges such as inflation protected bonds and commodities will recede and take the frothiness out of their prices. On a 6-12 month horizon, underweight inflation protected bonds and commodities… …overweight conventional bonds and stocks… …and tilt towards healthcare and biotech. The Performance Of Inflation Protected Bonds Versus Conventional Bonds Just Tracks The Oil Price Bottom Line: US core inflation is about to peak, demand destruction will ultimately pull down headline inflation, and there is no imminent risk of a wage-price spiral. On a 6-12 horizon, overweight stocks and conventional bonds versus commodities and inflation protected bonds. Feature Welcome to the first of a regular series of Counterpoint reports that takes the form of a ‘no holds barred’ conversation with a concerned client. Roughly once a month, our open and counterpoint conversations will address a major question or concern for investors. This inaugural conversation tackles the hot topic of inflation. On Peak Inflation Client: Thank you for addressing my worries. Like many people right now, I am concerned about inflation. My first question is, when is inflation going to peak? CPT: The good news is that, in an important sense, inflation has already peaked. Month-on-month core inflation in the US reached a high of 0.9 percent through April-June last year. In the more recent pickup through October-January it reached a ‘lower peak’ of 0.6 percent. And in March it dropped to 0.3 percent. Client: Ok, but inflation usually refers to the 12-month inflation rate – when will that peak? CPT: The 12-month inflation rate is just the sum of the last twelve month-on-month rates. So, when the big numbers of April-June of last year drop off to be replaced by the smaller numbers of April-June of this year, the 12-month inflation rate will fall sharply (Chart I-1). Chart I-1Month-On-Month Core Inflation Has Already Peaked, And 12-Month Core Inflation Is About To Peak Client: Even if the 12-month inflation rate does peak soon, it will still be far too high. When will it return to the 2 percent target? CPT: In the pandemic era, monthly core inflation has been non-linear. Meaning it has been either ‘high-phase’ of 0.5 percent and above, or ‘low-phase’ of 0.3 percent and below. In March it returned to low-phase. If it stays in low-phase, then as an arithmetic identity, the 12-month core inflation rate will be close to its target twelve months from now. Client: So far, you have just talked about core inflation which excludes energy and food prices. What about headline inflation? Specifically, isn’t the Ukraine crisis a massive supply shock for Russian and Ukrainian sourced energy and food? Demand destruction will ultimately pull down headline inflation too. CPT: Yes, headline inflation may take longer to come down than core inflation. But supply shocks ultimately resolve themselves through demand destruction. Client: Could you elaborate on that? CPT: Sure. With fuel and food prices surging, many people are asking: do I really need to make that journey? Do I really need to keep the heating on? Can I buy a cheaper loaf of bread? So, they will cut back, and to the extent that they can’t cut back on energy and food, demand for other more discretionary items will come down, and eventually weigh on prices. Client: At the same time, the pandemic is still raging – look at what’s happening in Shanghai right now. Won’t further disruptions to supply chains just add further fuel to inflation? CPT: Yes, but to repeat, inflation that is entirely due to a supply shock ultimately resolves itself through demand destruction. On The Source Of The Inflation Crisis Client: I am puzzled. If supply shock generated inflation resolves itself, then what has caused the post-pandemic inflation to be anything but ‘transitory’? CPT: The simple answer is the pandemic’s draconian lockdowns combined with massive handouts of government cash unleashed a massive demand shock. But it wasn’t a shock in the magnitude of demand, it was a shock in the distribution of demand (Chart I-2). Chart I-2The Pandemic's Draconian Lockdowns Combined With Massive Government Stimulus Unleashed A Massive Shock In The Distribution Of Demand Client: Could you explain that? CPT: Well, we were all locked at home and flush with government supplied cash, and we couldn’t spend the cash on services. So, we spent it on what we could spend it on – namely, durable goods. This created a massive shock in the distribution of demand, out of services whose supply could easily adjust downwards, and into goods whose supply could not easily adjust upwards. Client: Can you give me some specific examples? CPT: Sure. Airlines could cut back their flights, but auto manufacturers couldn’t make more cars. So, airfares didn’t collapse but used car prices went vertical! The result being the surge in inflation. Client: Do you have any more evidence? Inflation is highest in those economies where the cash handouts and furlough schemes were the most generous, like the US and the UK. CPT: Yes, the three separate surges in month-on-month core inflation all occurred after surges in durable goods demand (Chart I-3). Additionally, inflation is highest in those economies where the cash handouts and furlough schemes were the most generous – like the US and the UK. Chart I-3The Three Surges In Month-On-Month Core Inflation All Occurred After Surges In Durable Goods Demand Client: If we get more waves of Covid, what’s to stop all this happening again? CPT: Nothing, so we should be vigilant. That said, we now have coping strategies for Covid that do not necessitate massive handouts of government cash. Also, we have already binged on durable goods, making it much harder to repeat that trick. On Wages And Inflation Expectations Client: I am still worried that if workers can negotiate much higher wages in response to higher prices, then it would threaten a wage-price spiral. CPT: Agreed, but it is technically incorrect to focus on wage inflation. The correct metric to focus on is unit labour cost inflation – which is wage growth in excess of productivity growth. In the US, this was 3.5 percent through 2021, slowing to just a 0.9 percent annual rate in the fourth quarter. So, it is not flashing danger, at least yet. Client: Ok, but what about the surge in inflation expectations. Isn’t that flashing danger? CPT: We should treat inflation expectations with a huge dose of salt, as they simply track the oil price, and therefore provide a nonsensical prediction of future inflation! (Chart I-4) Chart I-4The Tight Relationship Between The Oil Price And Inflation Expectations Is Intuitive, Appealing... And Nonsense Client: What can explain this nonsense? CPT: Simply that when the oil price is high, investors flood into inflation hedges such as inflation protected bonds. So, the surge in inflation expectations is just capturing the frothiness in inflation protected bond prices that this massive hedging demand is creating. We can see similar frothiness in some commodity prices. The recent massive demand for inflation hedges such as inflation protected bonds and commodities will recede and take the frothiness out of their prices. Client: How so? CPT: Well to the extent that commodity prices drive headline inflation, the apples-for-apples relationship should be between commodity price inflation and headline inflation, and this is what we generally see (Chart I-5). But recently, this relationship has broken down and instead we see a tighter relationship between headline inflation and commodity price levels (Chart I-6 and Chart I-7). The likely causality here is that, just as for inflation protected bonds, massive inflation hedging demand has created frothiness in some commodity prices. Chart I-5Commodity Price Inflation Usually Drives Headline Inflation, But Recently The Relationship Broke Down Chart I-6Recently, We See A Weak Relationship Between Commodity Price Inflation And Headline Inflation... Chart I-7...But A Tight Relationship Between Headline Inflation And Commodity Price Levels On The Investment Implications Client: To sum up your view then, month-on-month US core inflation has already peaked, 12-month US core inflation is about to peak, and demand destruction will ultimately pull down headline inflation. Given modest and slowing growth in unit labour costs, there is no imminent risk of a wage-price spiral, and surging inflation expectations are just capturing the frothiness in inflation protected bond prices that massive hedging demand is creating. What does this view mean for investment strategy? On a 6-12 horizon, overweight stocks and conventional bonds versus commodities and inflation protected bonds. CPT: Well given that inflation is peaking, one obvious implication is that the massive demand for inflation hedges will recede and take the frothiness out of their prices. On a 6-12 month horizon this means underweighting inflation protected bonds and commodities (Chart I-8). Chart I-8The Performance Of Inflation Protected Bonds Versus Conventional Bonds Just Tracks The Oil Price Client: What about the surge in bond yields – when will that reverse? CPT: Empirically, we have seen that bond yields turn just ahead of the turn in the 12-month core inflation rate. Hence, on a 6-12 month horizon this means overweighting bonds. Client: Finally, what does all this mean for stock markets? CPT: The weakness of stock markets this year has been entirely due to falling valuations, rather than falling profits. If the headwind to valuations from rising bond yields turns into a tailwind from falling bond yields, it will boost stocks – especially long-duration stocks with relatively defensive profits. On a 6-12 month horizon this means overweighting stocks, and our favourite sectors are healthcare and biotech. Client: Thank you very much for this open and counterpoint conversation. Fractal Trading Watchlist Due to the Easter holidays, there are no new trades this week. However, the full updated watchlist of 20 investments that are experiencing or approaching turning points is available on our website: cpt.bcaresearch.com Chart 1The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile Chart 2The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile Chart 3AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 4Canada Versus Japan Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 5Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Chart 6US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal Chart 7Bitcoin's 65-Day Fractal Support Is Holding For Now Chart 8A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 9Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 10CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started Chart 11Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Chart 12Norway's Outperformance Could End Chart 13Greece's Brief Outperformance To End Chart 14BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point Chart 15The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 16The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 17Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 18US Homebuilders' Underperformance Is At A Potential Turning Point Chart 19Fractal Trading Watch List Chart 20Fractal Trading Watch List   Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades 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 A Good Time For A Pause In The Bond Bear Market The global government bond selloff looks stretched from a technical perspective, and a consolidation phase is likely over the next few months as global growth and inflation momentum both roll over. Central banks are starting to turn more aggressive on the pace of rate hikes in the face of elevated inflation expectations, as evidenced by the 50bp rate hikes in Canada and New Zealand last week (and the likely similar move the Fed next month). However, forward pricing of policy rates over the next 12-18 months is already at or above policymaker estimates of neutral in most developed countries. Global bond yields will be capped until central banks and markets revise higher their estimates of neutral policy rates. This is more a 2023/24 story than a 2022 story. Interest rate expectations are too high in Canada. High household debt will limit the ability for the Bank of Canada to match the Fed’s rate hikes during the current tightening cycle without bursting the Canadian housing bubble. Bottom Line: Maintain a neutral stance on overall global duration exposure. Upgrade Canadian government bonds to neutral (3 out of 5) in global bond portfolios, ideally funded out of US Treasury allocations. How To Interpret Rising Real Bond Yields Chart 1Bonds Under Pressure From Both Inflation & Real Yields The sharp rise in global government bond yields seen so far in 2022 has been driven by both rising inflation expectations and higher real yields (Chart 1). The former is a function of the war-fueled surge in oil prices at a time of high realized inflation, while the latter is a consequence of expectations for tighter monetary policy to fight that inflation. The magnitude of the yield increases seen year-to-date is surprising given the downgrades to global growth expectations. Just this week, the IMF downgraded its growth forecasts for the second time this year. It now expects global growth to reach 3.6% in both 2022 and 2023, shaving 0.8 and 0.2 percentage points, respectively, from the last set of yearly forecasts made back in January. The World Bank similarly chopped its growth forecast for 2022 to 3.2% from 4.1%. Spillovers from the Russia/Ukraine war were the main factor behind the downgrades, including more aggressive monetary tightening by global central banks in response to commodity-fueled inflation. We’re already seeing a faster pace of rate hikes from developed market central banks. The Bank of Canada (BoC) and Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) lifted policy rates by 50bps last week and the Fed is signaling a similar move in May. Not all policymakers are sending hawkish signals, however. The ECB last week opted to not commit to the timing and pace of any future moves on rates, while the Bank of Japan has pledged to maintain monetary stimulus measures even in the face of a collapsing yen. Related Report  Global Fixed Income StrategyPolicymakers Face The No-Win Scenario While government bond yields have risen across the developed world so far in 2022, the drivers of the yield increase have not been the same in all countries when looking at moves in benchmark 10-year nominal and inflation-linked bonds (Chart 2). About three-quarters of the nominal yield moves seen year-to-date in the US (+134bps), Canada (+136bps) and Australia (+130bps) have come from higher real yields, while the increase in the Gilt yield (+92bps) was more of an equal split between real yields and inflation breakevens. In Germany (+102bps) and Japan (+17bps), the upward move in 10-year yields this year has all been from higher breakevens, as real yields have fallen in both countries. Chart 2Real Yields (ex-Europe/Japan) Driving Nominal Yields Higher In 2022 In the US, Canada and UK – three countries where central banks have delivered rate hikes this year and are promising to do more – real yields have been highly correlated to rising interest rate expectations for the next two years taken from overnight index swap (OIS) curves (Chart 3). Meanwhile, in Germany, Japan and Australia - where central banks have kept rates steady and not sending strong messages on when that will change – the correlation between real yields and OIS-derived interest rate expectations has not been as strong (Chart 4). Chart 3Rising Real Yields Where Central Banks Have Been Hiking​​​​​ Chart 4More Stable Real Yields Where CBs Are More Dovish​​​​​ Chart 5Real Rate Expectations Have Risen Much Faster In The US The link between interest rate expectations and real yields is intuitive after factoring in inflation expectations. In Chart 5, we show actual real interest rates (policy rates minus headline CPI inflation) in the US, euro area and UK, as well as a “market-based” measure of real interest rate expectations derived as the difference between forward rates from the nominal OIS and CPI swap curves (the dotted lines). The current path for real rates is the black dotted line, while the path as of the start of 2022 is the green dotted line. In all three countries, the market-derived path for real rates over the next decade has shifted upward since the start of the year, which is consistent with a rising path for real bond yields. Yet the largest move has been in the US where real rates are expected to average around zero over the next ten years. This lines up logically with the more hawkish messaging on rates from the Fed, leading to a repricing of the 10-year TIPS yield from -1% at the start of the year to a mere -0.04% today. By contrast, real rate expectations and real yields remain negative in the euro area and UK, as both the ECB and Bank of England have been much less hawkish compared to the Fed in terms of signaling the timing and magnitude of future rate hikes. We have long flagged deeply negative real bond yields, especially in the US, as the greatest source of vulnerability for global bond markets. Such yield levels can only be sustained in a rising inflation environment if central banks deliberately keep policy rates below inflation for a long time. The Fed was not going to allow that to happen with inflation reaching levels not seen since the early 1980s, leaving US Treasuries vulnerable to a sharp repricing of fed funds rate expectations that would drive real bond yields higher. Looking ahead, we do not expect to see much additional bearish repricing of global rate expectations and real yields over the rest of 2022, for the following reasons: Global growth momentum is slowing The combined shock of geopolitical uncertainty from the Ukraine war, high oil prices and tightening global monetary policy – in addition to the expected slump in Chinese growth due to the latest wave of COVID lockdowns – has damaged economic confidence. The April reading from global ZEW survey of professional forecasters and investors showed another modest decline in US and euro area growth expectations after the huge drop in March (Chart 6). Interestingly, the ZEW survey also showed a big decline in the net number of respondents expecting higher inflation and a small dip in the number of respondents expecting higher bond yields – both potential signals that the increase in global bond yields is ready to pause. Medium-term US inflation expectations have remained relatively contained The sharp run-up in US inflation has boosted survey-based measures of inflation expectations, although the increase has been much higher for shorter-term expectations (Chart 7). One-year-ahead inflation expectations from the University of Michigan and New York Fed consumer surveys have doubled over the past year and now sit at 6.6% and 5.4%, respectively. Yet the 5-10 year ahead inflation expectation from the Michigan survey has seen a much smaller increase and is holding stable around 3%. The 5-year/5-year forward TIPS breakeven is at even less worrisome levels and now sits at a trendline resistance level of 2.4% (bottom panel). Chart 6ZEW Survey Shows Weaker Growth & Inflation Expectations​​​​​ Chart 7Medium-Term US Inflation Expectations Have Not Broken Out​​​​​ US inflation is showing early signs of peaking Year-over-year headline US CPI inflation reached another cyclical high of 8.6% in March. However, core CPI inflation rose by a less-than-expected +0.3% on the month and the year-over-year rate of 6.5% was essentially unchanged versus the February level (Chart 8). Used car prices, a huge driver of the surge in US goods inflation in 2021, fell by a sizeable -3.8% in March, the second consecutive monthly decrease. Chart 8A Peak In US Core Inflation?​​​​​ Chart 9Housing Cost Inflation Is A Global Problem We expect US consumer spending to shift more towards services from goods over the next 6-12 months, which should lead to overall US inflation rates converging more towards lower services inflation. Services inflation is still well above the Fed’s inflation target, however, particularly with shelter inflation – one-third of the overall US CPI index – now at 5.0% and showing no signs of slowing. Chart 10A Good Time For A Pause In The Bond Bear Market Rising housing costs are not only a problem in the US, and house prices and valuations have soared across the developed world (Chart 9). This suggests that housing and rental costs will remain an important driver of underlying inflation in many countries, not just the US. Summing it all up, we continue to see conditions conducive to a period of relative global bond market stability, with government bond yields remaining rangebound over the next several months. The stimulus for higher yields – from even more hawkish repricing of central bank expectations, even higher real bond yields or additional increases in inflation expectations – is not evident. Bond yields look stretched from a technical perspective, and our Global Duration Indicator continues to signal that global yield momentum should soon peak (Chart 10). Bottom Line: Maintain a neutral stance on overall global bond portfolio duration. Upgrade Canadian Government Bonds To Neutral The Bank of Canada (BoC) hiked its policy interest rate by 50bps last week to 1%, the first rate increase of that size since 2000. The BoC also announced that it will begin quantitative tightening of its balance sheet at the end of April when it stops buying Canadian government bonds to replace maturing debt it currently owns. In the press conference explaining the move, BoC Governor Tiff Macklem noted that the central bank now saw the Canadian economy in a state of “excess demand” with inflation that was “expected to be elevated for longer than we previously thought” and that “the economy could handle higher interest rates, and they are needed.” Chart 11Canadian Growth Momentum Peaking? This is a very clear hawkish message from Macklem, who hinted that the BoC may have to lift rates above neutral for a period to bring Canadian inflation back down to the central bank’s target. We have our doubts that the BoC will be able to raise rates that far, and keep them there for long, before inflation pressures ease. The BoC Business Outlook Survey plays an important role in the central bank’s policy decisions. The survey for Q1/2022 showed dips in the overall survey, and the individual components related to sales growth expectations, investment intentions and hiring plans (Chart 11). There were even small drops in the net number of survey respondents seeing intense labor shortages and expecting faster wage growth (bottom panel). The moves in these survey components were modest, but they are important coming after the relentless upward rise since the trough in mid-2020. Importantly, this survey was conducted before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which likely provided an additional drag on business confidence. The components of the Business Outlook Survey related to prices and costs continued to show that Canadian firms are facing lingering capacity constraints and intense cost pressures from both labor and supply chain disruption. A net 80% of respondents – a survey record – report they would have some or significant difficulty meeting an unexpected increase in demand. A net 35% of respondents in the Q1/2022 survey cited “labor cost pass through” as a source of upward pressure on their output prices, a huge jump from the Q4/2022 reading of 19% (Chart 12). Also, a net 33% of respondents noted “non labor cost pass through”, i.e. higher prices due to supply chain disruption, as a source of pressure on output prices. Only a net 12% of respondents cited strong demand as a source of pressure on prices, and the net balance of respondents noting that the competitive environment was inflationary was effectively zero. Chart 12Canadian Businesses See More Cost-Push Inflation Pressures The two main messages from the Business Outlook Survey are: a) Canadian growth momentum likely cooled in Q1, and b) Canadian inflation pressures remain significant, but are more supply driven than demand driven. Overall Canadian inflation is still accelerating rapidly, with headline CPI hitting an 31-year high of 5.7% in February. Underlying measures of inflation are more subdued, but still elevated: the BoC’s CPI-trim and CPI-median measures are at 4.3% and 3.5%, respectively, both above the BoC’s 1-3% target band (Chart 13). Chart 13Mixed Messages On Canadian Inflation Expectations There are more mixed messages coming out of Canadian inflation surveys. The 1-year-ahead inflation expectation from the BoC’s Survey of Consumer Expectations climbed to 5.1% in Q1/2022 from 4.9% in Q4, while the 5-year-ahead expectation dropped to 3.2% from 3.5%. The 10-year breakeven inflation rate on Canadian inflation linked bonds is even lower, now sitting near at 2.2%. There are also very mixed signals on wage expectations, even with the Canadian unemployment rate dropping to a record low of 5.3% in March. Canadian consumers expect wage growth to reach 2.2% over the next year, below the latest reading on actual wage growth of 2.5% and far below the 5.2% growth expected by Canadian businesses (bottom panel). If medium-term consumer inflation expectations are not rising in the current high inflation environment, and consumer wage expectations are not increasing with a record-low unemployment rate, then the BoC can potentially move slower than markets expect on rate hikes over the next year if realized inflation peaks. On that front there are tentative signs of optimism. When breaking down Canadian inflation into goods and services components, both are still accelerating rapidly (Chart 14). Goods inflation reached 7.6% in February, while services inflation hit 3.8%. However, the pace of year-over-year inflation for some key durable goods components like new cars, household appliances and furniture – items that saw demand and prices increase during the worst of the pandemic – appears to have peaked (middle panel). This may be a sign that overall goods inflation is set to roll over, similarly to what we expect in the US in the coming months. Also like the US, services inflation is less likely to decelerate, as rent inflation is accelerating and the housing cost component of Canadian inflation (home replacement costs) is still expanding at a 13.2% annual rate. On that note, housing remains the key component to watch to determine the BoC’s next move, given highly levered household balance sheets exposed to house prices and higher mortgage rates. The robust strength of the Canadian housing market has driven house prices to some of the most overvalued levels among the developed economies. There is a speculative aspect to the housing boom, with Canadian households expecting house prices to appreciate by 7.1% over the next year according to the BoC consumer survey (Chart 15). Canadian housing demand has also become more sensitive to rate increases by the choice of mortgages. 30% of outstanding mortgages are now variable rate, up from 18% at the start of the pandemic in 2020 after the BoC cut rates to near-0%. Chart 14The Goods-Driven Canadian Inflation Surge May Be Peaking​​​​​​ Chart 15BoC Rate Hikes Will Cool Off Canadian Housing​​​​​​ During the BoC’s last rate hiking cycle in 2017-19, national house price inflation slowed from 15% to 0%. Policy rates had to only reach 1.75% to engineer that outcome. With household balance sheets even more levered today, and with greater exposure to variable rate mortgages, it is unlikely that a policy rate higher than the previous cycle peak will be needed to cool off house price growth – an outcome that should also dampen Canadian services inflation with its large housing related component. In addition to the rate hike at last week’s policy meeting, the BoC also announced the results of its annual revision to its estimated range for the neutral policy rate. The range is now 2-3%, up slightly from 1.75%-2.75%. The current pricing of interest rate expectations from the Canadian OIS curve has the BoC lifting rates to the high-end of that new neutral range by the first quarter of 2023, then keeping rates near those levels over at least the next five years (Chart 16). Chart 16Markets Expect The BoC To Keep Rates Elevated For Longer Chart 17Upgrade Canadian Government Bonds To Neutral We doubt the BoC will be able to raise rates all the way to 3% without inducing instability in the housing market. More importantly, the current surge in inflation is not becoming embedded in medium-term inflation and wage expectations – outcomes that would require the BoC to keep policy rates at the high end of its neutral range or even move them into restrictive territory. Turning to bond strategy, we have had Canada on “upgrade watch” in recent weeks, with rate hike expectations looking a bit too aggressive. We now see it as a good time to pull the trigger on that upgrade. Thus, this week, we are moving our recommended exposure to Canadian government bonds to neutral (3 out of 5) from underweight (Chart 17). We are “funding” that move in our model bond portfolio by reducing exposure to US Treasuries (see the tables on pages 15-16), as we see the Fed as being more likely than the BoC to deliver on the rate hike expectations discounted in OIS curves. A move to an outright overweight stance, versus all countries and not just the US, will be appropriate once Canadian inflation clearly peaks and interest rate expectations begin to decline. It is too soon to make that move now, but we will revisit that call later this year. Bottom Line: Interest rate expectations are too high in Canada with medium-term inflation expectations relatively subdued. High household debt in Canada will limit the ability for the Bank of Canada to match the Fed’s rate hikes during the current tightening cycle without bursting the Canadian housing bubble. Upgrade Canadian government bonds to neutral (3 out of 5) in global bond portfolios, ideally funded out of US Treasury allocations. Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com   GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Recommended Positioning     Active Duration Contribution: GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. Custom Performance Benchmark The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index Global Fixed Income - Strategic Recommendations* Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Tactical Overlay Trades

Executive Summary Semi Shipments-To-Inventory Ratios Are Falling In Korea And Taiwan Global semiconductor stock prices are vulnerable to the downside over the next three to six months. The global semiconductor industry has entered a cyclical slump. Demand for semis faces headwinds this year. The pandemic boom in goods (ex-auto) consumption in developed economies is likely over. Plus, households’ disposable income in these economies is contracting in real terms. In China, ongoing lockdowns are depressing household income, which will limit their discretionary spending. Nevertheless, the structural outlook for global semiconductor demand remains constructive. We are waiting for a better entry point.      Bottom Line: There is more downside in global semiconductor share prices as well as Taiwanese and Korean tech stocks. We will be looking to recommend buying semiconductor stocks when a more material deceleration in semi companies’ revenue and profits are priced in. Feature Chart 1Semi Stocks Have Been Selling off Despite Strong Revenues A small divergence between global semiconductor sales and semi stock prices has opened up (Chart 1). Although global semiconductor sales have been super strong, global semiconductor stock prices peaked in late December and have since declined by 23%. We believe the global semiconductor industry is entering into a cyclical slump. The demand for PCs/tablets/game consoles/electronic gadgets as well as commercial computers and servers – and with them semiconductor sales/shipments – had surged in the last two years.  Behind this boom was the significant increase in online activities stemming from pandemic-related lockdowns. However, these one-off factors have largely run their course. Global semiconductor demand growth currently faces headwinds and is set to slow meaningfully in H2 this year. We expect more downside in global semiconductor stock prices over the next three to six months. The five previous cyclical downturns in the global semiconductor sector resulted in share price declines that were greater than the current 23% drawdown (Table 1). Also, in four of these five cycles, the duration of the peak-to-trough period exceeded the current 3.5 months of decline from the December peak. Nevertheless, the structural outlook for global semiconductor demand remains constructive due to the increasing adoption of the 5G network, electric vehicles, data centers and IoTs. We are waiting for a better entry point later this year. Table 1Key Statistics Of Five Cyclical Downturns In Global Semiconductor Market Near-Term Demand Headwinds Chart 2Global Semis Sales Have Diverged From Global Manufacturing Cycle There has been a remarkable divergence between world semi sales and the global business cycle (Chart 2). The US ISM manufacturing new order-to-inventory ratio, a barometer of the global business cycle, dropped below 1, signaling a slowdown in US manufacturing in the coming months (Chart 2, top panel). Critically, the volume of China’s semiconductor imports started to contract recently and the growth of Chinese imports from Taiwan also plunged (Chart 3). China is the world’s largest semiconductor consumer, accounting for 35% of global semiconductor demand. The slowdown in the country’s chip demand does not bode well for the global semiconductor market. We expect the growth of semiconductor sales in all regions to decelerate considerably this year (Chart 4). Chart 3China's Semis Import Volumes Are Contracting Chart 4Semiconductor Sales Value Growth Across Regions   First, the one-off boost to demand for goods in general, and electronic devices in particular, due to global pandemic lockdowns has largely run its course. Chart 5The Pandemic Boom In PC Sales Is Largely Over Traditional PCs and tablets: Demand for traditional PCs1 and tablets surged in the past two years. This was due to the significant increase in online activities, such as working from home, business, education, e-commerce, gaming and entertainment. According to the International Data Corporation (IDC), after two consecutive years of strong growth, global traditional PC and tablet shipments experienced a 5% contraction in volume terms in 1Q2022. In addition, computer production in China – the world’s largest computer producer and exporter – also showed a significant growth deceleration (Chart 5). These data indicate that the pandemic boom in PC sales is largely over. Server demand: Another major contributor to the boom in semi demand was from the server sector. The surge in online activities resulted in greater demand for cloud services and remote work applications, both of which require computer servers to run on. However, demand growth for the server sector is also set to decelerate slightly. According to TrendForce Research, global server shipment growth will slow from over 5% year-on-year in 2021 to 4-5% this year. The global server sector and the traditional PC/tablet sectors together account for about 22% of global chip demand, based on the data from the IDC. Second, automobiles and consumer electronic goods (e.g., smartphones and home appliances), – which together account for about 42% of global semiconductor demand – will weaken this year. Both ongoing lockdowns in China and the surge in commodity prices due to the Russia-Ukraine war will exacerbate inflationary pressures and create major headwinds to household disposable income in real terms and discretionary spending around the world. Hence, global consumers will remain cautious in their spending on discretionary goods. For example, China’s household marginal propensity to consume proxy dropped to a 15-year low (Chart 6, top panel). This will translate to constrained household spending this year, leading to weaker sales in consumer electronic goods and automobiles (Chart 6, middle and bottom panel). Similarly, US real household consumption of goods ex-autos is likely to experience a mean reversion this year (Chart 7, top panel). After having bought the sheer number of goods (ex-autos) in the last two years, US consumers are likely to shift their spending towards services. Chart 6China: Consumer Spending Will Continue Disappointing​​​​​​ Chart 7Beware of A Mean-Reversion In US Real Household Consumption Of Goods ex-Autos   Plus, very high headline inflation is eroding US consumers' purchasing power (Chart 7, bottom panel). The relapse in DM goods demand will hinder the global semiconductor industry. There are already some signs of a slowdown in consumer demand. Apple was reported to have reduced its orders for its recently released iPhone SE by 20% and cut orders for AirPods by about 10 million units due to weaker-than-expected demand.2 Notably, global smartphone sales have been – and will remain – stagnant due to their longer replacement cycle.3 Chart 8Semi Shipments-To-Inventory Ratios Are Falling In Korea And Taiwan Third, inventory stockpiling also contributed to last year’s strong semiconductor sales. The length and intensity of the chip shortage which started in H2 2020 caused a broad range of customers – including the manufacturers of smartphones and other consumer electronics – to order more than they need. This inventory stockpiling caused forward inventory days for customers of semi producers to increase by 28% from last quarter to 50 days, which is near peak inventory levels experienced in the last cycle. Businesses will likely start drawing down their stockpiles, rather than increasing their semiconductors orders this year. This will also reduce semiconductor demand on the margin. The semiconductor shipments-to-inventory ratios from Korea and Taiwan have been falling, corroborating the cyclical downturn in the Asian semi industry (Chart 8). Bottom Line: We believe the global semiconductor sector has entered a cyclical slump. The sector’s sales are facing plenty of headwinds, and its growth will decelerate considerably this year. What About The Supply Shortage? The semiconductor industry has been known for its cyclicality. Periods of shortage have been followed by periods of oversupply. The latter led to declining prices, revenues, and profits for semi producers. Hence, massive expansion plans announced by the major players have indeed raised fears that the supply shortage will turn into a supply glut down the road. The global semiconductor shortage in place since late 2020 has been eased to some extent and is set to diminish considerably later this year and next year. Both a moderation in demand growth and an increase in new capacity will likely mitigate the supply tightness meaningfully. It takes about 18-24 months on average to build a new semiconductor fabrication plan. According to estimates from the Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA), the global semiconductor industry added 4 million wafers per month of manufacturing capacity between January 2020 and January 2022. 75% of this new manufacturing capacity had already come on-line as of October 2021. IC Insights also reported global installed wafer capacity increased 6.7% in 2020 and 8.6% in 2021. It also projected the capacity expansion to be 8.7% in 2022. In comparison, the annual growth rate in global installed wafer capacity was only 3.2% in 2019. Last June, industry organization SEMI estimated that construction on close to 30 new fabs will start by the end of 2022.4 Mainland China and Taiwan added the greatest number of new fabrication plants, followed by the Americas. In addition the world’s top three chip makers (TSMC, Intel and Samsung) all raised their capex plans significantly for this year (Box 1). On the whole, according to IC Insights, worldwide semiconductor capex will likely jump by 24% in 2022 to a new all-time high of $190.4 billion, up 86% from just three years earlier in 2019. BOX 1 Top 3 Chip Makers: Massive Capex Expansion Ahead TSMC doubled capex from nearly US$15bn in 2019 to US$30bn in 2021 and set aside US$40-44bn for 2022, a 33%-47% boost year-on-year. In mid-2021, Samsung’s chip manufacturing unit increased its capex plans until 2030 from US$115bn (about US$12.8 bn annually) to US$151bn (about US$16.8 bn annually), a 31% increase year-on-year. Intel increased its capex from US$14.5 billion in 2020 to $18-19 billion in 2021. This number jumped to US$25-28 billion for 2022, a 39-47% lift year-on-year. In general, massive capex at a collective level will be negative for share prices of semi producers. Announcements of capex expansion, which increase an individual company’s production capacity, could be perceived as a positive for that company. Yet, rapid capacity expansion is typically negative for the overall sector as it often leads to lower prices and profitability down the road. Chart 9Aggressive Collective Capex Ultimately Hurts Semis Stocks Given that the collective capex for the global semiconductor sector has expanded substantially, the odds of an oversupplied semiconductor market have increased. This shift will likely weigh on semiconductor stock prices (Chart 9). Bottom Line: The global semiconductor supply-demand balance is likely improving (demand is slowing and supply is rising). Massive capital spending plans will inevitably raise concerns about an eventual supply glut in the global semiconductor industry. This will weigh on global semiconductor share prices in the coming months. Taiwanese And Korean Semi Stocks Odds are that Taiwanese and Korean semi stock prices will continue falling in absolute terms. Interestingly, since early 2021 TSMC and Samsung share prices have exhibited different price patterns vis-a-vis the global semiconductor stock indexes (Chart 10). TSMC had double tops in the past 15 months and has dropped 30% in USD terms from its January peak despite posting substantial revenue growth (Chart 11, top panel). Chart 10TSMC And Samsung Stock Prices: Do Not Catch A Falling Knife Chart 11Semi Stocks in Asia: Share Prices Lead Corporate Revenues Share prices of Korean DRAM producers (Samsung and Hynix) are down over 30% in USD terms from their early 2021 peak, frontrunning the decline in our DRAM revenue proxy (Chart 11, bottom panel). In addition, even though Samsung released better-than-expected business performance for the first quarter last Thursday, it still failed to attract buyers. Both cases –TSMC and Samsung –signal that robust revenue/earnings are no longer enough to trigger a rally in semiconductor share prices. This suggests that the market is forward-looking and foresees a poor outlook. Chart 12Taiwan's New Orders-To-Client Inventories Ratio Suggests The Downturn Is Not Yet Over A slowdown in demand will lead to a deceleration in both companies’ revenue growth and profits. For TSMC, the smartphone sector still accounts for 44% of the company’s revenue. Hence, a risk is that global smartphone sales contract this year due to longer replacement cycles5 and constrained household spending as inflation curbs their purchasing power. In such a case, TSMC’s sales growth will disappoint, and the stock will likely drop toward $80 (Chart 10 on page 9). Taiwan’s new orders-to-client inventories ratio for semiconductors points to lower semi stocks in this bourse (Chart 12). For Samsung, signs of a slowdown in demand are already emerging in memory chips, reflecting slower sales, primarily of PCs. Moreover, TrendForce expects average overall DRAM pricing to drop by approximately 0-5% in 2Q22 due to marginally higher inventories and weakening demand. Equity Valuations And Investment Conclusions Chart 13Multiples Of Global Semis Stocks Are Still Elevated The global semiconductor stock index in USD terms has declined by 23% from its recent peak. The still-elevated multiples of semiconductor stocks suggest that there is more downside ahead in absolute terms (Chart 13).  One of the reasons that semi stocks have fallen could be their de-rating amid rising US bond yields. Having rallied tremendously in the past 10 years, global semis had become one of the most expensive industry groups worldwide. As a result, higher US bond yields are causing multiple compression for global semis (Chart 14). The closest comparison for the current episode is probably the 2016-2018 boom-bust cycle (Chart 15). During this period, the massive stimulus in China and the adoption of 4G smartphones/tablets had pushed up semiconductor share prices. In 2018, after the one-off adoption/replacement cycle ran out of steam, semi stocks dropped by nearly 30% amid slowing demand and rising global bond yields. By comparison, the one-off surge in global semi demand in 2020-2021 was much larger than the one in 2016-2018. Also, global semi stocks have rallied by much more and have become more expensive now compared with the 2016-18 episode. We expect a mean reversion in demand to lead to a slightly larger decline in global semi stocks than in 2018. This means that there is still about 15-20% more downside from the current level. As to allocation to semi stocks within an EM equity portfolio, we recommend maintaining a neutral allocation to Taiwan and reiterate an overweight stance on the KOSPI. These are relative calls, i.e., against the EM benchmark. We remain negative on their absolute performance. Chart 14Higher US Bond Yields = Multiple Compression For Global Semis Stocks Chart 15A Comparison With The 2016-2018 Semi Rally And Selloff Given that Korean stocks in general, and Samsung in particular, have already underperformed, further downside in their relative performance will be limited. As to the Taiwanese overall equity index and TSMC, share prices remain elevated relative to the EM benchmark. Finally, the structural outlook for global semiconductor demand remains constructive. We are waiting for a better entry point. We will be looking to recommend buying semiconductor stocks after a more material deceleration in semi companies’ revenue and profits gets priced in. Ellen JingYuan He Associate Vice President ellenj@bcaresearch.com Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1    Traditional PCs are comprised of desktops, notebooks and workstations. 2     https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Supply-Chain/TSMC-says-demand-for-sma… 3     https://www.wsj.com/articles/good-chip-results-wont-be-good-enough-1164… 4     https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Supply-Chain/Chipmakers-nightmare-Wil… 5     https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/getting-a-new-iphone-every-2-years-is-…

Executive Summary The structural downtrend in Chinese bond yields has a lot further to go, because it is helping to let the air out gently of stratospheric valuations in the real estate sector, and thereby preventing a hard landing for the Chinese economy. In the US, flagging mortgage and housing market activity is weighing on an already slowing economy. Buy US T-bonds. The long T-bond yield is close to a peak. Switch equity exposure into long-duration sectors such as healthcare and biotech. Go overweight US homebuilders versus US insurers. The peak in bond yields will also take pressure off US homebuilder shares whose recent collapse has been the mirror-image of the surge in the 30-year mortgage rate. Fractal trading watchlist: Basic resources; Switzerland versus Germany; and USD/EUR. The Collapse In US Homebuilder Shares Is The Mirror-Image Of The Surge In The Mortgage Rate Bottom Line: The global bond yield cannot rise much further before it destabilises the $350 trillion global real estate market and thereby destabilises the global economy. Feature Quietly and largely unnoticed, Chinese long-dated bond yields have been drifting lower (Chart I-1 and Chart I-2). At a time that surging bond yields elsewhere in the world have grabbed all the attention, the largely unnoticed contrarian move in Chinese bond yields through the past year is significant because of something else that has gone largely unnoticed: Chinese real estate has become by far the largest asset-class in the world, worth $100 trillion.1 Chart I-1The Contrarian Downdrift In The Chinese 30-Year Bond Yield Chart I-2The Contrarian Downdrift In The Chinese 10-Year Bond Yield Chinese Real Estate Is Trading On A Stratospheric Valuation The $100 trillion valuation of Chinese real estate market is greater than the $90 trillion global economy, is more than twice the size of the $45 trillion US real estate market and the $45 trillion US stock market, and dwarfs the $18 trillion Chinese economy. Suffice to say, Chinese real estate’s pre-eminence as the world’s largest asset-class is mostly due to its stratospheric valuation. Prime residential rental yields in Guangzhou, Shanghai, Hangzhou, Shenzhen and Beijing have collapsed to 1.5 percent, the lowest rental yields in the world and less than half the global average of 3 percent. Versus rents therefore, Chinese real estate is now twice as expensive as in the rest of the world (Chart I-3). Chart I-3Versus Rents, Chinese Real Estate Is The Most Expensive In The World To corroborate this point, while the US real asset market is worth around two times US annual GDP, the Chinese real estate market is worth more than five times China’s annual GDP! The structural downtrend in Chinese bond yields has a lot further to go. Crucially, the downward drift in Chinese bond yields is alleviating some of the pressure on the extremely highly valued Chinese real estate market – as it helps to let the air out gently of the stratospheric valuations, and thereby avoid a hard landing for the Chinese economy. Hence, the structural downtrend in Chinese bond yields has a lot further to go. The Surge In US Mortgage Rates Is Taking Its Toll Meanwhile, in the rest of the world, the surge in bond yields poses a major threat to the decade long housing boom. Versus rents, US house prices are the most expensive ever – more expensive even than during the early 2000s so-called ‘housing bubble’. For the first time since 2008, the US 30-year mortgage rate is higher than the prime residential rental yield. Until recently, the historically low rental yield on US real estate was justified by an extremely low bond yield. But the recent surge in the bond yield has changed all that. For the first time since 2008, the US 30-year mortgage rate is higher than the prime residential rental yield2 (Chart I-4). Chart I-4The US 30-Year Mortgage Rate Is Now Higher Than The Prime Residential Rental Yield The surge in US mortgage rates is taking its toll. Since the end of January, US mortgage applications for home purchase have fallen by almost a fifth (Chart I-5), and the lower demand for home purchase mortgages is starting to weigh on home construction (Chart I-6). Building permits for new private housing units were already falling in February, but a more up-to-date sign of the pain is the 35 percent collapse in US homebuilder shares. Chart I-5US Mortgage Applications For Home Purchase Have Fallen By Almost A Fifth Chart I-6The Lower Demand For Home Purchase Mortgages Is Starting To Weigh On Home Construction $350 Trillion Of Global Real Estate Can’t Swallow Higher Bond Yields Mortgage rates drive real estate rental yields because of the arbitrage between buying versus renting a similar home. Given a fixed annual budget for housing, I must choose between how much home I can buy – which depends on the mortgage rate, versus how much home I can rent – which depends on the rental yield. The arbitrage should make me indifferent between the two options. As a simple example of this arbitrage, let’s assume my annual budget for housing is $10k, and both the mortgage rate and rental yield are 4 percent. I will be indifferent between spending the $10k on interest on a $250k mortgage loan to buy the home, or spending the $10k to rent a similar $250k home. If the mortgage rate rises to 5 percent, then the maximum loan that my $10k of interest payment will afford me falls to $200k, reducing my maximum bid to buy the home. If I am the marginal bidder, then the home price will fall to $200k, so that the $10k rent on the similar valued home will also equate to a higher rental yield of 5 percent. In practice, the simple arbitrage described above is complicated by several factors: the maximum loan-to-value that a lender will offer on the home; the different transaction costs of buying versus renting; and the fact that people prefer to buy than to rent because buying a home is an investment which also provides a consumption service – shelter, whereas renting a home only provides the consumption service. Nevertheless, these complications do not diminish the overarching connection between mortgage rates and rental yields. The lion’s share of the real estate boom has come from a massive valuation uplift, which in turn has come from structurally lower bond yields. All of which brings us to the decade long global real estate boom that has doubled the value of global real estate market to an eye-watering $350 trillion, four times the size of the $90 trillion global economy. During this unprecedented boom, global rents have risen by 40 percent, tracking world nominal GDP, as they should. This means that the lion’s share of the real estate boom has come from a massive valuation uplift, which in turn has come from structurally lower bond yields (Chart I-7).    Chart I-7The Lion's Share Of The Global Real Estate Boom Has Come From A Massive Uplift In Valuations Since the global financial crisis, there has been an excellent empirical relationship between the global long-dated bond yield (US/China average) and the global rental yield. The important takeaway is that the global bond yield cannot rise much further before it destabilises the $350 trillion global real estate market and thereby destabilises the global economy (Chart I-8). Chart I-8The Global Bond Yield Cannot Rise Much Further Before It Destabilises The $350 Trillion Global Real Estate Market Some Investment Conclusions The good news is that the recent rise in the global bond yield has been limited by the downdrift in Chinese bond yields. Given the massive overvaluation of Chinese real estate, the structural downtrend in Chinese bond yields has a lot further to go. Meanwhile in the US, unless bond yields back down quickly, flagging mortgage and housing market activity will weigh on an already slowing economy. If US bond yields don’t back down quickly, the feedback from consequent slowdown in the economy will ultimately bring yields down anyway. As I explained last week in Fat-Tailed Inflation Signals A Peak In Bond Yields I do expect the long T-bond yield to back down relatively quickly. The sharp drop in US core inflation to just 0.3 percent month-on-month in March signals that inflation is peaking. Hence, medium to long term investors should be buying US T-bonds, and switching equity exposure into long-duration sectors such as healthcare and biotech. Finally, a peak in bond yields will also take pressure off US homebuilder shares whose recent collapse has been the mirror-image of the surge in the 30-year mortgage rate (Chart I-9). Hence, go overweight US homebuilders versus US insurers. Chart I-9The Collapse In US Homebuilder Shares Is The Mirror-Image Of The Surge In The Mortgage Rate Fractal Trading Watchlist Given that inflation hedging investment demand has driven at least part of the strong rally in basic resources, a peak in inflation and bond yields threatens to unwind the recent outperformance of basic resources shares. This is corroborated by the extremely fragile 130-day fractal structure (Chart I-10). Accordingly, the recommended trade is to short basic resources (GNR) versus the broad market, setting the profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 11.5 percent. This week we are also adding to our watchlist: Switzerland versus Germany; and USD/EUR. The full list of 20 investments that are experiencing or approaching turning points is available on our website: cpt.bcaresearch.com  Chart I-10The Outperformance Of Basic Resources Is Vulnerable To Reversal Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Could End The Rally In USD/EUR Could End Chart 1The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile Chart 2The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile Chart 3AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 4Canada Versus Japan Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 5Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Chart 6US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal Chart 7Bitcoin's 65-Day Fractal Support Is Holding For Now Chart 8A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 9Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 10CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started Chart 11Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Chart 12Norway's Outperformance Could End Chart 13Greece's Brief Outperformance To End Chart 14BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point Chart 15The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 16The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 17Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 18US Homebuilders' Underperformance Is At A Potential Turning Point Chart 19Fractal Trading Watch List Chart 20Fractal Trading Watch List Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 We estimate the value of Chinese real estate at the end of 2021 to be $97 trillion, comprising residential $85 trillion, commercial $6 trillion, and agricultural $6 trillion. The source is: the Savills September 2021 report ‘The total value of global real estate’, which valued the global real estate market to the end of 2020; and the February 2022 report ‘Savills Prime Residential Index: World Cities’ which allowed us to update the valuations to the end of 2021. 2 The US prime residential rental yield is the simple average of the prime residential rental yields in New York, Miami, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Source: Savills. Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades 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-5Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed   Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators 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