Fixed Income

Executive Summary A Good Time For A Pause In The Bond Bear Market A Good Time For A Pause In The Bond Bear Market 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 Bonds Under Pressure From Both Inflation & Real Yields Bonds 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 Global Bond Yields Take A Breather Global Bond Yields Take A Breather 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 Rising Real Yields Where Central Banks Have Been Hiking Rising Real Yields Where Central Banks Have Been Hiking ​​​​​ Chart 4More Stable Real Yields Where CBs Are More Dovish More Stable Real Yields Where CBs Are More Dovish More Stable Real Yields Where CBs Are More Dovish ​​​​​ Chart 5Real Rate Expectations Have Risen Much Faster In The US Global Bond Yields Take A Breather Global Bond Yields Take A Breather 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 ZEW Survey Shows Weaker Growth & Inflation Expectations ZEW Survey Shows Weaker Growth & Inflation Expectations ​​​​​ Chart 7Medium-Term US Inflation Expectations Have Not Broken Out Medium-Term US Inflation Expectations Have Not Broken Out Medium-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? A Peak In US Core Inflation? A Peak In US Core Inflation? ​​​​​ Chart 9Housing Cost Inflation Is A Global Problem Housing Cost Inflation Is A Global Problem Housing 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 A Good Time For A Pause In The Bond Bear Market A 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? Canadian Growth Momentum Peaking? Canadian 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 Global Bond Yields Take A Breather Global Bond Yields Take A Breather 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 Mixed Messages On Canadian Inflation Expectations Mixed 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 The Goods-Driven Canadian Inflation Surge May Be Peaking The Goods-Driven Canadian Inflation Surge May Be Peaking ​​​​​​ Chart 15BoC Rate Hikes Will Cool Off Canadian Housing BoC Rate Hikes Will Cool Off Canadian Housing BoC 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 Global Bond Yields Take A Breather Global Bond Yields Take A Breather Chart 17Upgrade Canadian Government Bonds To Neutral Upgrade Canadian Government Bonds To Neutral Upgrade 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 Global Bond Yields Take A Breather Global Bond Yields Take A Breather The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index Global Fixed Income - Strategic Recommendations* Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Global Bond Yields Take A Breather Global Bond Yields Take A Breather Tactical Overlay Trades

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

Executive Summary The unemployment rate in the US stands at 3.6%, 0.4 percentage points below the FOMC’s estimate of full employment. Historically, the Fed’s efforts to nudge up the unemployment rate have failed: The US has never averted a recession when the 3-month average of the unemployment rate has increased by more than a third of a percentage point. Despite this somber fact, there are reasons to think it will take longer for a recession to arrive than widely believed. Unlike in the lead-up to many past recessions, the US private sector is currently running a financial surplus. If anything, there are indications that both households and businesses are set to expand – rather than retrench – spending over the coming quarters. Investors should pay close attention to the housing market. As the most interest-rate sensitive sector of the economy, it will dictate the degree to which the Fed can raise rates. The US housing market has cooled, but remains in reasonably good shape, supported by rising incomes and low home inventories. Stocks will likely rise modestly over the next 12 months as inflation temporarily dips and the pandemic recedes from view. However, equities will falter towards the end of 2023. Stocks Tend To Fare Well When There Is No Recession On The Horizon Stocks Tend To Fare Well When There Is No Recession On The Horizon Stocks Tend To Fare Well When There Is No Recession On The Horizon Bottom Line: The US may not be able to avoid a recession, but an economic downturn is unlikely until 2024. Stay modestly overweight stocks over a 12-month horizon.  Jobs Aplenty The US unemployment rate fell from 3.8% in February to 3.6% in March, bringing it close to its pre-pandemic low of 3.5%. Adding job openings to employment and comparing the resulting sum with the size of the labor force, the excess of labor demand over labor supply is now the highest since July 1969 (Chart 1). Chart 1Labor Demand Is Outstripping Labor Supply By The Largest Margin Since 1969 Is A Recession Inevitable? Is A Recession Inevitable? Granted, the labor force participation rate is still one full percentage point below where it was prior to the pandemic. If the participation rate were to rise, the gap between labor demand and supply would shrink. Some of the decline in the participation rate is permanent in nature, reflecting ongoing population aging, which has been compounded by an increase in early retirements during the pandemic (Chart 2). Some workers who dropped out will probably re-enter the workforce. Chart 3 shows that employment among low-wage workers has been slower to recover than for other groups. With expanded unemployment benefits no longer available, the motivation to find gainful employment will escalate. Chart 2Not All Of The Decline In Labor Participation During The Pandemic Was Due To Increased Early Retirements Not All Of The Decline In Labor Participation During The Pandemic Was Due To Increased Early Retirements Not All Of The Decline In Labor Participation During The Pandemic Was Due To Increased Early Retirements Chart 3Low-Wage Workers Have Not Returned In Full Force Low-Wage Workers Have Not Returned In Full Force Low-Wage Workers Have Not Returned In Full Force Nevertheless, it is doubtful that the entry of low-wage workers into the labor force will do much to reduce the gap between labor demand and supply. Low-wage workers tend to spend all of their incomes (Chart 4). Thus, while an increase in the number of low-wage workers will allow the supply of goods and services to rise, this will be counterbalanced by an increase in the demand for goods and services. Chart 4Richer Households Tend To Save More Than Poorer Ones Is A Recession Inevitable? Is A Recession Inevitable? To cool the labor market, the Fed will need to curb spending, and that can only be achieved by raising interest rates. Trying to achieve a soft landing in this manner is always easier said than done. The US has never averted a recession when the 3-month average of the unemployment rate has increased by more than a third of a percentage point. Rising unemployment tends to produce a negative feedback loop: A weaker labor market depresses spending. This, in turn, leads to less hiring and more firing, resulting in even higher unemployment. Where is the Choke Point? How high will interest rates need to rise to trigger such a feedback loop? Markets currently expect the Fed to raise rates to 3% by mid-2023 but then cut rates by at least 25 basis points over the subsequent months (Chart 5). So, the market thinks the neutral rate of interest – the interest rate consistent with a stable unemployment rate – is around 2.5%. The Fed broadly shares the market’s view. The median dot for the terminal Fed funds rate stood at 2.4% in the March Summary of Economic Projections (Chart 6). When the Fed first started publishing its dot plot in 2012, it thought the terminal rate was 4.25%. Chart 5The Markets See The Fed Funds Rate Reaching 3% Next Year Is A Recession Inevitable? Is A Recession Inevitable? Chart 6The Fed's Estimate Of The Terminal Rate Has Fallen Over The Years The Fed's Estimate Of The Terminal Rate Has FalLen Over The Years The Fed's Estimate Of The Terminal Rate Has FalLen Over The Years Low Imbalances Imply a Higher Neutral Rate We have discussed the concept of the neutral rate extensively in the past, so we will not regurgitate the issues here (interested readers should consult the Feature Section of our latest Strategy Outlook). Instead, it would be worthwhile to dwell on the relationship between the neutral rate and economic imbalances. Simply put, when an economy is suffering from major imbalances, it does not take much monetary tightening to push it over the edge. The private-sector financial balance measures the difference between what households and firms earn and spend. A recession is more likely to occur when the private-sector financial balance is negative — that is, when spending exceeds income — since households and firms are more prone to cut spending when they are living beyond their means. In the lead-up to the Great Recession, the private-sector financial balance hit a deficit of 3.9% of GDP in the US. Leading up to the 2001 recession, it reached a deficit of 5.4% of GDP. Today, the US private-sector financial balance, while down from its peak during the pandemic, still stands at a comfortable surplus of 3% of GDP. Rather than looking to retrench, households and businesses are poised to increase spending over the coming quarters (Chart 7). Private-sector financial balances are also positive in Japan, China, and most of Europe (Chart 8). Chart 7Consumers And Businesses Are Set To Spend More Consumers And Businesses Are Set To Spend More Consumers And Businesses Are Set To Spend More Chart 8Private-Sector Financial Balances Are Positive In Most Major Economies Is A Recession Inevitable? Is A Recession Inevitable? Watch Housing Chart 9Rising Interest Rates In The Early 1980s Had Much More Of A Negative Effect On Housing Than Business Investment Rising Interest Rates In The Early 1980s Had Much More Of A Negative Effect On Housing Than Business Investment Rising Interest Rates In The Early 1980s Had Much More Of A Negative Effect On Housing Than Business Investment At the 2007 Jackson Hole conference, Ed Leamer presented what turned out to be a very prescient paper. Titled “Housing is the Business Cycle,” Leamer concluded that “Of the components of GDP, residential investment offers by far the best early warning sign of an oncoming recession.” Housing is a long-lived asset, and one that is usually financed with debt. To a much greater extent than nonresidential investment, the housing sector is very sensitive to changes in interest rates. When the Fed hiked rates in the early 1980s, residential investment collapsed but business investment barely contracted (Chart 9). The jump in mortgage yields has started to weigh on housing (Chart 10). Mortgage applications for home purchases have fallen by 25% from their highs. Pending home sales have dropped. Homebuilder confidence has dipped. Homebuilder stocks are down 29% year-to-date. Housing is likely to slow further in the months ahead, even if mortgage yields stabilize. Chart 11 shows that changes in mortgage yields lead home sales and housing starts by about six months. Chart 10The Jump In Mortgage Rates Has Weighed On The Housing Market The Jump In Mortgage Rates Has Weighed On The Housing Market The Jump In Mortgage Rates Has Weighed On The Housing Market Chart 11Swings In Mortgage Rates Explain Short-Term Fluctuations In Housing Activity Swings In Mortgage Rates Explain Short-Term Fluctuations In Housing Activity Swings In Mortgage Rates Explain Short-Term Fluctuations In Housing Activity The key question for investors is whether the housing market will enter a deep freeze or merely cool down. We think the latter is more likely. The 30-year fixed mortgage rate has increased nearly two percentage points since last August, but at around 5%, it is still below the average of 6% that prevailed during the 2000-2006 housing boom (Chart 12). Image Moreover, unlike during the housing boom, when homebuilders flooded the market with houses, the supply of new homes remains contained. The nationwide homeowner vacancy rate stands at record lows. Building permits are near cycle highs (Chart 13). Granted, real home prices are close to record highs. However, relative to incomes, US home prices have not broken out of their historic range (Chart 14). Chart 13The Homeowner Vacancy Rate Is Near Record Lows The Homeowner Vacancy Rate Is Near Record Lows The Homeowner Vacancy Rate Is Near Record Lows Chart 14Homes In The US Are Relatively Cheap Homes In The US Are Relatively Cheap Homes In The US Are Relatively Cheap Home affordability is much more stretched outside of the United States. The Bank of Canada, for example, has less scope to raise rates than the Fed. Chart 15Some Signs Of Easing In Supply-Side Pressures Some Signs Of Easing In Supply-Side Pressures Some Signs Of Easing In Supply-Side Pressures Investment Conclusions As investors, we need to be forward looking. The widespread availability of Paxlovid later this year — which, in contrast to the vaccines, is effective against all Covid strains — will help boost global growth while relieving supply-chain bottlenecks. Shipping costs, used car prices, and ISM supplier delivery times have already come down from their highs (Chart 15). Central banks have either started to raise rates or are gearing up to do so. However, monetary policy is unlikely to turn restrictive in any major economy over the next 12 months. Stocks usually go up outside of recessionary environments (Chart 16). Global equities are trading at 17-times forward earnings. The corresponding earnings yield is about 630 basis points higher than the real global bond yield – a very wide gap by historic standards (Chart 17). Chart 16Stocks Tend To Fare Well When There Is No Recession On The Horizon Stocks Tend To Fare Well When There Is No Recession On The Horizon Stocks Tend To Fare Well When There Is No Recession On The Horizon Chart 17AThe Equity Risk Premium Remains Elevated (I) The Equity Risk Premium Remains Elevated (I) The Equity Risk Premium Remains Elevated (I) Chart 17BThe Equity Risk Premium Remains Elevated (II) The Equity Risk Premium Remains Elevated (II) The Equity Risk Premium Remains Elevated (II) Investors should remain modestly overweight equities over a 12-month horizon and look to increase exposure to non-US stock markets, small caps, and value stocks over the coming months. Government bond yields are unlikely to rise much over the next 12 months but will increase further over the long haul. The dollar should peak during this summer, and then weaken over the subsequent 12 months. A complete discussion of our market views is contained in our recently published Second Quarter Strategy Outlook.   Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Is A Recession Inevitable? Is A Recession Inevitable? Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores Is A Recession Inevitable? Is A Recession Inevitable?

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 The Collapse In US Homebuilder Shares Is The Mirror-Image Of The Surge In The Mortgage Rate 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 The Contrarian Downdrift In The Chinese 30-Year Bond Yield The Contrarian Downdrift In The Chinese 30-Year Bond Yield Chart I-2The Contrarian Downdrift In The Chinese 10-Year Bond Yield The Contrarian Downdrift In The Chinese 10-Year Bond Yield The 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 $350 Trillion Of Global Real Estate Can’t Swallow Higher Bond Yields $350 Trillion Of Global Real Estate Can’t Swallow Higher Bond Yields 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 US 30-Year Mortgage Rate Is Now Higher Than The Prime Residential Rental Yield The 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 US Mortgage Applications For Home Purchase Have Fallen By Almost A Fifth US 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 The Lower Demand For Home Purchase Mortgages Is Starting To Weigh On Home Construction The 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 The Lion's Share Of The Global Real Estate Boom Has Come From A Massive Uplift In Valuations The 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 The Global Bond Yield Cannot Rise Much Further Before It Destabilises The $350 Trillion Global Real Estate Market The 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 The Collapse In US Homebuilder Shares Is The Mirror-Image Of The Surge In The Mortgage Rate The 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 The Outperformance Of Basic Resources Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Basic Resources Is Vulnerable To Reversal Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Could End Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Could End Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Could End The Rally In USD/EUR Could End The Rally In USD/EUR Could End The Rally In USD/EUR Could End Chart 1The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile The 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 The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile Chart 3AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 4Canada Versus Japan Is Vulnerable To Reversal Canada Versus Japan Is Vulnerable To Reversal Canada Versus Japan Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 5Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Chart 6US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal Chart 7Bitcoin's 65-Day Fractal Support Is Holding For Now Bitcoin's 65-Day Fractal Support Is Holding For Now Bitcoin's 65-Day Fractal Support Is Holding For Now Chart 8A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 9Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 10CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started Chart 11Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Chart 12Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Chart 13Greece's Brief Outperformance To End Greece's Brief Outperformance To End Greece's Brief Outperformance To End Chart 14BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point Chart 15The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 16The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 17Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 18US Homebuilders' Underperformance Is At A Potential Turning Point US Homebuilders' Underperformance Is At A Potential Turning Point US Homebuilders' Underperformance Is At A Potential Turning Point Chart 19Fractal Trading Watch List Fractal Trading Watch List Fractal Trading Watch List Chart 20Fractal Trading Watch List Fractal Trading Watch List Fractal 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 $350 Trillion Of Global Real Estate Can’t Swallow Higher Bond Yields $350 Trillion Of Global Real Estate Can’t Swallow Higher Bond Yields $350 Trillion Of Global Real Estate Can’t Swallow Higher Bond Yields $350 Trillion Of Global Real Estate Can’t Swallow Higher Bond Yields 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed   Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations  

Executive Summary Onshore Equity Market Outflow Pressures Remain, At Least In The Near Term Onshore Equity Market Outflow Pressures Remain, At Least In The Near Term Onshore Equity Market Outflow Pressures Remain, At Least In The Near Term China’s foreign exchange (FX) reserves fell in the first three months of 2022. The reduction was the largest quarterly fall since 2016, but it is minor in absolute terms given China’s massive FX reserves.  However, the underlying drivers of the decline in the FX reserves are cause for concern. The current drawdown in FX reserves reflects losses in China’s official FX asset portfolio and increased capital outflows, which differs from in 2H20 when Chinese banks increased their FX purchases to slow the pace of the RMB appreciation. Onshore equity market net outflows will likely continue in the near term. Even though Beijing has stepped up stimulus measures, private sector sentiment and domestic demand remain subdued. The country’s zero-tolerance COVID policy will also continue to weigh down the effectiveness of the stimulus. Pressure on the bond market’s outflow will be sustained in the next 6 to 12 months as policy cycles between the US and China continue to diverge. The RMB will modestly devalue relative to the USD in the next few month. In the longer term, the RMB should be underpinned by fundamentals such as a current account surplus, positive real interest rates and a valuation cushion. Bottom Line: The drop in the first quarter FX reserves reflects losses in China’s official FX asset portfolio and increased capital outflows. Feature Chart 1The Quarterly Drop In China's FX Reserves This Year Was Largest Since 2016 The Quarterly Drop In China's FX Reserves This Year Was Largest Since 2016 The Quarterly Drop In China's FX Reserves This Year Was Largest Since 2016 Newly released data shows that China’s FX reserves dropped by US$25.8 billion to US$3.188 trillion in March. This represented a US$62 billion decrease from December 2021 and it was the largest quarterly drop since 2016 (Chart 1). The RMB also weakened slightly in March from February. The reduction in China’s FX reserves in Q1 is due to several factors, including fluctuations in the dollar versus other major currencies and the drop in market prices of foreign asset holdings. The country’s current account surplus also narrowed in the first three months of the year compared with Q4 last year. Notably, foreign holdings of Chinese local currency bonds posted a record decline in Q1 and onshore equity market outflows also accelerated. The illicit movement of capital via import over-invoicing has also picked up. We expect that the bond market outflow pressure will continue for the year and perhaps beyond as economic, inflation and monetary policy cycles in China and the US continue to diverge. Equity outflow pressures will also be sustained, at least through the next few months, while China’s COVID-induced lockdown measures in major cities significantly weaken the economic outlook. Furthermore, the country’s zero-tolerance toward COVID will continue restraining mobility in 2H22. Anticipated lockdowns will severely disrupt the local economy and weigh down the effectiveness of Chinese stimulus, which policymakers had pledged to boost. As such, we maintain our neutral position on Chinese onshore stocks and an underweight stance on Chinese investable stocks in a global portfolio. A Drawdown In FX Reserves Chart 2The Size Of Capital Outflows In Q1 Is Comparable To That In 2H20 The Size Of Capital Outflows In Q1 Is Comparable To That In 2H20 The Size Of Capital Outflows In Q1 Is Comparable To That In 2H20 Capital outflows intensified in Q1, with the magnitude similar to 2H20 (Chart 2). However, the underlying drivers of the depletion have changed. In 2H20, China’s state-owned banks strategically accumulated FX assets to slow the pace of a rising RMB, whereas the Q1 loss this year was mainly driven by fluctuations in global financial markets and weak domestic economic fundamentals. The reduction in China’s official FX reserves in the past three months was partly due to a stronger dollar versus other major currencies and price declines in China’s holdings of foreign currency assets. China's official FX reserves are marked-to-market and converted into US dollars.  The value of China’s official reserves has been significantly impacted by two factors: the dollar’s increase of more than 4% in trade-weighted terms since its trough in May last year and the simultaneous decline in prices of both global stocks and bonds in Q1 2022 (Chart 3). In addition, China’s trade surplus narrowed in the first two months of the year from Q4 2021 and has likely dipped further in March (data has not yet been released) (Chart 4).  Slower growth in China’s exports, coupled with rising global commodity prices that boosted China’s commodity import costs, has probably contributed to a smaller current account surplus, which was insufficient to offset the increased capital outflows. Chart 3The Dollar Exchange Rate And The Value Of China's Official FX Reserves The Dollar Exchange Rate And The Value Of China's Official FX Reserves The Dollar Exchange Rate And The Value Of China's Official FX Reserves Chart 4China's Trade Surplus Narrowed In Q1 This Year China's Trade Surplus Narrowed In Q1 This Year China's Trade Surplus Narrowed In Q1 This Year Meanwhile, the acceleration in capital outflows does not seem to be driven by an increase in China’s domestic banks and companies’ foreign currency holdings. It does not appear that banks have been buying foreign currencies to slow down the pace of the RMB appreciation against other currencies. As noted in a previous report since 2018 net FX purchases by China’s banks have been more tightly correlated with the spread between the CNY/USD exchange rate and the CFETS index (Chart 5, top panel). When the RMB falls relative to the USD, but not by enough to slow its increase against other trading partners, China’s banks would ramp up their FX purchases to push down the CNY/USD exchange rate and/or raise the value of other currencies in the CFETS basket (Chart 5, bottom panel). This occurred in 2H20 but does not seem to be the case this year. Chart 5No Sign Of Chinese Banks' Ramping Up FX Purchases This Year No Sign Of Chinese Banks' Ramping Up FX Purchases This Year No Sign Of Chinese Banks' Ramping Up FX Purchases This Year Chart 6FX Settlement Has Been Net Positive... FX Settlement Has Been Net Positive... FX Settlement Has Been Net Positive... Chinese companies have not increased their demands for USD either. Chart 6 shows a positive net FX settlement rate by banks on behalf of clients. This means more non-financial enterprises (such as exporters and investors) sold their foreign exchange holdings to banks than bought foreign exchange from banks.  Moreover, Chart 7 highlights that the level of Chinese firms’ short-term foreign obligations (outstanding foreign currency loans, trade credit and liquid deposits) has remained steady. This implies that domestic firms have not been rushing to buy FX to pay back their dollar-denominated debts. Chart 7…And Chinese Firms Are Not Rushing To Pay Off External Debt A Fall In China’s FX Reserves: Cause For Concern? A Fall In China’s FX Reserves: Cause For Concern? Bottom Line: Q1’s capital outflows were not driven by Chinese banks’ strategic accumulation of FX reserves to slow the pace of the RMB’s appreciation, nor by the demand for USD by Chinese companies. Accelerated Portfolio Outflows China's recent capital drain may be grouped into two categories: reduced foreign portfolio inflows (and accelerated outflows) and the illicit seepage of capital. China’s bond market contributed largely to the acceleration in Q1’s portfolio outflows. Foreign holding of Chinese bonds posted a record depletion of US$30 billion in February and March this year and the trend likely continued through April (Chart 8). As the Fed enters its hiking cycle following the March lift-off, the US-China nominal interest rate has narrowed meaningfully (Chart 9). Despite a widening inflation gap between the US and China, China’s bond market has become less attractive to global investors compared with last year (Chart 9, bottom panel). Chart 8A Record Bond Market Outflow In Q1 This Year A Record Bond Market Outflow In Q1 This Year A Record Bond Market Outflow In Q1 This Year Chart 9Rate Differentials Between China and The US Have Narrowed Substantially, In Both Nominal And Real Terms Rate Differentials Between China and The US Have Narrowed Substantially, In Both Nominal And Real Terms Rate Differentials Between China and The US Have Narrowed Substantially, In Both Nominal And Real Terms   Outflows from onshore equity market also accelerated in Q1, in part because of China’s disappointing domestic economic data, rising geopolitical tensions and risk-off sentiment among global investors. Losses of Northbound net flows reached US$7.6 billion in March, comparable to the amount in early 2020 when China was hit hard by the pandemic (Chart 10). Importantly, while service trade deficits from outbound tourism continued to narrow due to international travel restrictions, our estimate of the illicit capital seepage through import over-invoicing has gathered speed since 2H21 (Chart 11).  The sharp rise in our illicit capital outflow indicator suggests that the private sector and Chinese residents may be moving capitals offshore. Chart 10Chinese Onshore Equity Market Also Saw Substantial Investment Outflows In Q1 Chinese Onshore Equity Market Also Saw Substantial Investment Outflows In Q1 Chinese Onshore Equity Market Also Saw Substantial Investment Outflows In Q1 Chart 11Illicit Capital Outflows Picked Up Illicit Capital Outflows Picked Up Illicit Capital Outflows Picked Up   Bottom Line: The drain of capital escalated in Q1 through accelerated foreign portfolio outflows and perhaps illicit capital streaming out of the country. Investment Conclusions Chart 12Onshore Equity Market Outflow Pressures Remain, At Least In The Near Term Onshore Equity Market Outflow Pressures Remain, At Least In The Near Term Onshore Equity Market Outflow Pressures Remain, At Least In The Near Term Equity market net outflows will likely continue, at least for the next couple months while China struggles to contain the ongoing COVID flareups in major cities. We maintain our recommended neutral allocation to Chinese onshore stocks and an underweight stance on Chinese offshore stocks in a global equity portfolio (Chart 12). While China’s stimulus should be able to stabilize the economy over a cyclical time horizon (the next 6 to 12 months), the nation’s zero-tolerance COVID position poses significant downside risks to the effectiveness of policy easing. It will be harder for China to contain infections as the virus mutates and variants become more contagious. There may be more frequent and larger-scale lockdowns affecting the economy than there have been in the past two years. Meanwhile, outflow pressures on China’s bond market may carry on through the next 6 to 12 months while the economic, inflation and monetary policy cycles in the US and China continue to diverge. Although the RMB has not moved into outright expensive territory, reduced foreign portfolio flows into RMB assets and a smaller current account surplus will pose near-term downward stress on the RMB against the USD. A depreciation in the RMB would be a boon to China’s domestic economy since it will help the export sector pricing power. Beyond the near term and in the next 12 to 18 months, however, fundamentals, such as China’s current account surplus, positive real interest rates and a valuation cushion, will underpin strength in the RMB (Chart 13A & 13B). Chart 13AOnshore Equity Market Outflow Pressures Remain, At Least In The Near Term The RMB Is At Fair Value Based On Productivity Trends... The RMB Is At Fair Value Based On Productivity Trends... Chart 13B...But Is Cheap Based On Relative Prices ...But Is Cheap Based On Relative Prices ...But Is Cheap Based On Relative Prices   Jing Sima China Strategist jings@bcaresearch.com Strategic Themes Cyclical Recommendations

Executive Summary Spreads Near 2017-19 Average Spreads Near 2017-19 Average Spreads Near 2017-19 Average The main indicators that determine corporate bond performance are valuation, the cyclical/monetary environment and corporate balance sheet health. US corporate bond valuation is quite expensive. Spreads are off their post-COVID lows, but consistent with the 2017-19 average. The flat 2-year/10-year Treasury curve indicates that the cyclical/monetary backdrop is relatively poor. What’s more, the yield curve could easily invert within the next few months as the Fed tightens. This would send an even more negative signal for corporate bond returns.  Corporate balance sheets are currently in excellent shape, but their health will deteriorate within the next 12 months as profit growth slows and interest rates rise. Relative valuation favors high-yield over investment grade corporates, and high-yield has a track record of outperformance during periods of restrictive monetary conditions and strong corporate balance sheets. Bottom Line: Investors should cyclically reduce exposure to US corporate bonds while retaining a preference for high-yield over investment grade. We recommend downgrading investment grade corporates from neutral (3 out of 5) to underweight (2 out of 5) and high-yield corporates from overweight (4 out of 5) to neutral (3 out of 5). Feature Chart 1A Rapid Recovery A Rapid Recovery A Rapid Recovery US corporate bonds have had a very good run since the March 2020 peak in spreads. Investment grade corporates outperformed a duration-matched position in US Treasuries by 23% during the first 12 months of the recovery, the best 12-month excess return since 2010 (Chart 1). That same period also saw an extremely rapid re-normalization of credit spreads. It took just 11 months for the investment grade corporate index option-adjusted spread (OAS) to reach 90 bps following its March 2020 peak, and the index delivered an annualized excess return of 26% during that period. In contrast, it took 109 months for the index OAS to reach 90 bps following the 2008 recession and corporates only beat duration-matched Treasuries by an annualized 4% during that time (Table 1). Table 1US Investment Grade Corporate Bond Returns From Spread Peak Until 90 BPs Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds The outlook for US corporate bond returns looks much different today. Spreads are tighter and the Fed is rapidly removing policy accommodation. Against this backdrop, we decided last week to cyclically reduce our corporate bond exposure.1  Specifically, we recommended downgrading investment grade corporates from neutral (3 out of 5) to underweight (2 out of 5) and high-yield corporates from overweight (4 out of 5) to neutral (3 out of 5) within US bond portfolios. This Special Report discusses the rationale for our recent decision. First, we examine trends in the main indicators that determine corporate bond performance. These indicators fall into three categories: (i) valuation, (ii) cyclical/monetary indicators and (iii) balance sheet health. We then discuss the outlook for the relative performance of high-yield versus investment grade corporates. Valuation Starting with a simple examination of the average investment grade index OAS, we see that the spread has widened somewhat off its pre- and post-pandemic lows, but remains close to the average level seen between 2017 and 2019 (Chart 2). The index OAS is a reasonable gauge of value relative to recent history, but for a longer historical perspective we should adjust the index to account for its changing average credit rating and duration. To do this, we first re-weight the index to maintain a constant distribution between the different credit rating buckets. Next, we control for the index’s changing duration by calculating a 12-month breakeven spread. The 12-month breakeven spread is the spread widening that must occur during the next 12 months for the corporate index to perform in line with a duration-matched position in Treasuries. It can be approximated by dividing the index OAS by average index duration. Finally, Chart 3 presents the 12-month breakeven spread as a percentile rank since 1995. It shows that, after controlling for credit rating and duration, the investment grade corporate index has only been more expensive than current levels 24% of the time since 1995. Notice that the spread bounced off the 0% line in late-2021, indicating that it had reached all-time expensive levels. Chart 2Spreads Near 2017-19 Average Spreads Near 2017-19 Average Spreads Near 2017-19 Average Chart 3Investment Grade Valuation Investment Grade Valuation Investment Grade Valuation All in all, we can conclude that investment grade corporate bonds are quite expensive. Spreads aren’t so low that they would justify an underweight allocation in a supportive cyclical/monetary environment. But they are tight enough that it makes sense to proceed cautiously in a neutral or negative cyclical/monetary environment, like the one we are in today.   Cyclical/Monetary Indicators The slope of the yield curve is the key variable we use to assess the current state of the cyclical/monetary environment. A very flat or inverted yield curve signals a relatively restrictive monetary policy backdrop, and we have shown that such a backdrop tends to coincide with poor excess corporate bond returns. Conversely, we have found that corporate bonds perform best early in the economic recovery when the yield curve is very steep. This steep yield curve signals that monetary conditions are highly accommodative, and thus supportive of credit spread tightening. Today, the yield curve is sending a somewhat confusing message. The 2-year/10-year Treasury slope briefly inverted last week, and it remains flat at 22 bps. Meanwhile, the 3-month/10-year Treasury slope is very steep, up above 200 bps (Chart 4)! Chart 4Conflicting Signals From The Yield Curve Conflicting Signals From The Yield Curve Conflicting Signals From The Yield Curve We discussed how to interpret the signals from different yield curve segments in a recent Special Report.2 We found that the 2-year/10-year Treasury slope sends the most useful signal for corporate bond excess returns, and we therefore view current cyclical/monetary conditions as negative for corporate bonds. In Table 2 we split each of the past six economic cycles into phases based on the 2-year/10-year Treasury slope. We define Phase 1 of the cycle as the period from the end of the prior recession until the 2-year/10-year slope breaks below 50 bps. Phase 2 of the cycle encompasses the time when the slope is between 0 bps and 50 bps. Phase 3 of the cycle spans from when the yield curve inverts until the start of the next recession. Table 2US Corporate Bond Performance In Different Phases Of The Cycle Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds The table shows annualized excess returns for both investment grade and high-yield corporate bonds in each of the three phases, and those returns exhibit a clear pattern. Returns are best in Phase 1 when the yield curve is steep. They take a step down in Phase 2 when the slope is between 0 bps and 50 bps, though they usually stay positive. Negative returns are most likely in Phase 3, after the yield curve inverts. Chart 5Limited Room For Curve Steepening Limited Room For Curve Steepening Limited Room For Curve Steepening With the 2-year/10-year Treasury slope at 22 bps, we are firmly in Phase 2 of the cycle. However, we could easily see the 2-year/10-year slope invert within the next few months while a breakout above 50 bps seems less likely. In fact, there are only two ways in which the 2-year/10-year Treasury slope can steepen further from current levels. First, the market could bid up its expectation of the long-run neutral fed funds rate, pushing long-dated bond yields higher. Second, expectations for the pace of near-term Fed tightening could diminish, pulling short-dated yields down. At the long-end, the 5-year/5-year forward Treasury yield is already above survey estimates of the long-run neutral rate (Chart 5). At the front-end, the market is discounting a rapid pace of 272 bps of tightening during the next 12 months (Chart 5, bottom panel), but that pace has limited room to fall given current extremely high inflation readings. Turning back to a comparison of the signals from the 2-year/10-year slope and 3-month/10-year slope, it is worth pointing out that the 3-month/10-year slope is influenced by yield movements at the very front-end of the curve. Meanwhile, the 2-year/10-year slope is purely a function of rate expectations beyond the next two years. As a result, we can view the 3-month/10-year slope as sending a timelier signal about Fed rate hikes and cuts, while the 2-year/10-year slope gives a better reading of how the market views the ultimate economic impact of Fed actions. For example, the 3-month/10-year Treasury slope inverted in 2019 just before the Fed started cutting rates (Chart 6A). The 2-year/10-year slope, however, only briefly dipped below zero. The message from the market was that the Fed would cut rates, but those cuts would be sufficient to sustain the economic recovery. As a result, corporate bonds performed well during this period, consistent with the message from the 2-year/10-year slope. Another interesting example occurred in early 2000 (Chart 6B). This time, the 2-year/10-year Treasury slope inverted while the 3-month/10-year slope remained steep. In this case, the 3-month/10-year slope was telling us that Fed rate hikes would continue, while the 2-year/10-year slope was telling us that those hikes would eventually kill the economic recovery. Once again, corporate bonds took their cues from the 2-year/10-year Treasury slope and performed poorly during this period. Chart 6AStrong Performance In 2019 Strong Performance In 2019 Strong Performance In 2019 Chart 6BPoor Performance In 2000 Poor Performance In 2000 Poor Performance In 2000 Obviously, the current situation looks more like 2000 than 2019, but with the 2-year/10-year slope still positive there remains scope for positive excess corporate bond returns in the near-term. That said, with high odds of 2-year/10-year curve inversion within the next few months and spreads at relatively tight levels, it makes sense to scale back exposure today in advance of the worst phase of the cycle. Balance Sheet Health The final factor we consider is the health of nonfinancial corporate sector balance sheets, and in fact, this is currently the lone bright spot for corporate bond investors. Our Corporate Health Monitor (CHM), a composite indicator of six key balance sheet ratios, is deep in “improving health” territory (Chart 7). This positive signal is driven by exceptionally high Interest Coverage (Chart 7, panel 2) and Free Cash Flow-To-Debt that is just off its highs (Chart 7, panel 3). Return On Capital is up sharply since 2020 but has not recovered its previous peak (Chart 7, bottom panel). Chart 7Balance Sheets Are In Great Shape Balance Sheets Are In Great Shape Balance Sheets Are In Great Shape While corporate balance sheets are in excellent shape right now, their health will certainly deteriorate going forward as profit growth comes down off its highs and interest rates rise. The only question is whether this deterioration will happen slowly or quickly. Turning to history, two relevant periods stand out (Chart 8). First is the mid-1990s when investment grade corporate bond excess returns peaked in July 1997, 16 months before our CHM moved into “deteriorating health” territory. Conversely, the CHM sent a negative signal before the excess return peak in 2007. But even then, investment grade corporates only outperformed Treasuries by an annualized 0.8% between when the 2-year/10-year slope fell below 50 bps in 2005 and when the CHM moved above zero in 2006. In other words, investors didn’t sacrifice much return by heeding the yield curve’s signal even when the CHM was deep in “improving health” territory. Chart 8Cyclical Corporate Bond Performance Cyclical Corporate Bond Performance Cyclical Corporate Bond Performance Investment Conclusions In summary, we view corporate bond valuations as expensive, and the flat 2-year/10-year Treasury slope suggests that the economic recovery is in its mid-to-late stages. Corporate balance sheets are currently in excellent shape, but they will deteriorate going forward as profit growth slows and interest rates rise. The above three factors suggest that corporate bonds could continue to outperform duration-matched Treasuries in the near-term. However, with spreads already at tight levels, we likely aren’t sacrificing much in the way of excess returns by turning cyclically defensive today. This move also ensures that we will not be invested when the credit cycle eventually turns and corporate bond spreads move significantly wider. Retain A Preference For High-Yield Versus Investment Grade While we recommend downgrading allocations for both investment grade (from neutral to underweight) and high-yield (from overweight to neutral), we think investors should still retain a preference for high-yield corporates over investment grade. To see why, let’s return to the 2005-06 period we looked at in the previous section. The yield curve dipped below 50 bps in 2005 when the CHM was still deep in “improving health” territory, and while investment grade corporate bond returns were low during the time between the signal from the yield curve and the signal from the CHM, junk excess returns were very strong (Chart 9). This makes some sense intuitively. Higher-rated investment grade corporates responded negatively to the Federal Reserve’s removal of monetary policy accommodation, but lower-rated junk spreads stayed well bid because actual default risk was benign. It wasn’t until after the CHM rose above zero that junk bonds started to underperform. In terms of present-day valuations, much like for investment grade, junk spreads are up off their 2021 lows. However, they remain close to their pre-pandemic trough (Chart 10). We also note that the differential between high-yield and investment grade spreads was much tighter in 2006-07. Given the similarities between that period and today, we wouldn’t be surprised to see junk spreads compress further relative to investment grade. Chart 9The Bullish Case For Junk The Bullish Case For Junk The Bullish Case For Junk Chart 10High-Yield Valuation High-Yield Valuation High-Yield Valuation Another way to approach high-yield bond valuation is through the lens of our Default-Adjusted Spread. The Default-Adjusted Spread is the difference between the junk index OAS and 12-month default losses, and we have shown that it has a strong correlation with excess returns (Table 3). Specifically, a Default-Adjusted Spread above 100 bps usually coincides with positive excess junk returns versus Treasuries, and higher spreads tend to coincide with higher returns. Table 3The Default-Adjusted Spread & High-Yield Excess Returns Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds To estimate the Default-Adjusted Spread for the next 12 months we need assumptions for the default and recovery rates (Chart 11). To do this, we model the 12-month speculative grade default rate as a function of gross nonfinancial corporate leverage – total debt over pre-tax profits – and lagged C&I lending standards. We then model the 12-month recovery rate based on the default rate itself. Chart 11Default And Recovery Rate Models Default And Recovery Rate Models Default And Recovery Rate Models Corporate pre-tax profit growth was exceptionally strong during the past 12 months, and we expect it to slow significantly going forward. Profit growth can be modeled as a function of nominal GDP growth and unit labor costs (Chart 12). If we assume that nominal GDP growth comes in at 7.3% this year (the Fed’s median 2.8% real GDP estimate plus 4.5% inflation) and that unit labor cost growth rises to 6%, then profit growth will fall to 0.5% during the next 12 months. If we assume that corporate debt growth remains close to its current level (Chart 12, bottom panel), then we calculate that gross leverage will rise to 6.5 during the next 12 months. Chart 12Profit Growth Will Slow Significantly Profit Growth Will Slow Significantly Profit Growth Will Slow Significantly Table 4 shows the output from our default and recovery rate models under the base case assumption described above. It also shows results for an optimistic case where leverage is 6.0 and a pessimistic case where it is 7.0. The Default-Adjusted Spread is fairly low in the base and pessimistic cases, but it is comfortably above the key 100 bps threshold in all three scenarios. This suggests that junk bonds should deliver positive excess returns versus duration-matched Treasuries during the next 12 months. Table 4Default-Adjusted Spread Scenarios Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds   Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see US Bond Strategy Portfolio Allocation Summary, “The Beginning Of The End”, dated April 5, 2022. 2 Please see US Bond Strategy / US Investment Strategy / US Equity Strategy Special Report, “The Yield Curve As An Indicator”, dated March 29, 2022. Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns Recommended Portfolio Specification Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds Other Recommendations Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds

Executive Summary From Net Borrower To Net Lenders From Net Borrower To Net Lenders From Net Borrower To Net Lenders Yields are rising across Europe. Peripheral spreads are unlikely to experience the same violent widening as last decade. Europe now has a buyer of last resort. Italy and Spain have moved from current account deficit to current account surplus nations. However, Italy and Spain are not conducting the kind of structural reforms necessary to cause public debt-to-GDP ratios to fall back below the Maastricht Treaty criteria. Nonetheless, based on our stress tests, Italian and Spanish yields can rise significantly more before debt-servicing costs become a major problem in these nations. Economic activity, not Spanish or Italian public finances, is the true constraint on European yields. Bottom Line: German yields can rise above 2% without causing a public finance crisis in Italy and Spain. To reach this level, however, nominal growth in Europe must remain robust. As a result, any pullback in yields caused by oversold conditions in the bond market will be temporary.     Year-to-date, German 10-year yields have risen more than 80bps, while spreads have widened in the periphery. This has supercharged the interest rate moves: Italian BTP yields and Spanish Bono yields are up nearly 120bps and 110bps, respectively. As a result, Italian government bonds now offer a 2.4% yield, a level not experienced durably since the first half of 2019. Meanwhile, Spanish yields are close to 1.7%—their highest levels since 2017. Investors are increasingly concerned by the damage levied by higher yields in Southern Europe. Since 2018, Italian public debt has risen by 32% of GDP to 170% of GDP, and Spanish public debt has risen by 28% of GDP to 138% of GDP. These higher debt burdens beg the following question: How high can European yields rise before a new sovereign debt crisis engulfs the Eurozone? Private sector financial balances and the balance of payments in the periphery are now very different from what they were between 2008 and 2012. As a result, the odds of a similar crisis are much lower than last decade, which should allow German yields to rise further in the coming years. Italy and Spain have moved on from experiencing an EM-style balance of payment crisis with explosive debt market dynamics. They are now stuck in a Japanese scenario of excess private sector savings and low economic growth. “This Time Is Different” These might be the four most dangerous words in finance, but understanding the differences between the present situation and the sovereign debt crisis is essential to assessing the impact of higher yields on Italian and Spanish public finances. Chart 1From Net Borrower To Net Lenders From Net Borrower To Net Lenders From Net Borrower To Net Lenders The most important transformation in the Southern European economies is the rise in private sector savings. From 1999 to 2013, Italy’s private sector financial balance averaged 2.2% of GDP. Constant government deficits resulted in a significant national dissaving, forcing the country to borrow from abroad as expressed by a current account deficit that lasted from 2000 to 2013 (Chart 1, top panel). At the present moment, Italy’s current account is in a surplus equal to 3.5% of GDP, as private savings stand at 13% of GDP, up from 5% before COVID-19. The change is even more dramatic in Spain. The Spanish private sector financial balance was in a large deficit from 1999 to 2008, which averaged 5.6% of GDP and reached a nadir of 11.3% of GDP in 2007. As a result, Spain relied on foreign lending between 1980 and 2012, with a current account deficit that averaged 3% of GDP over that period (Chart 1, second panel). The switch from the status of foreign borrower to the status of surplus nation is fundamental. A country where excess private savings are so abundant they can finance large public deficits and still generate current account surpluses will experience more limited pressure on borrowing costs than a country that needs to borrow from abroad. Japan is a perfect example. Elevated public borrowing ends up being a vehicle to absorb private sector excess savings and does not constitute profligacy. Despite higher debt loads, Italy’s public finances seem more sustainable than those of Spain. The International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) October 2021 Fiscal Monitor forecast shows the Italian primary budget balance, both on an absolute basis and on a cyclically-adjusted basis, moving from -6% and -2.9% of GDP, respectively, closer to zero by 2026 (Chart 2). In Spain, primary budget balances, both on an absolute basis and on a cyclically-adjusted basis, are anticipated to improve from -8.9% and -3.4% of GDP, respectively, to -2.5% of GDP by 2026. Despite these deficits, the IMF also expects public debt to decrease by 10% of GDP to 146% in Italy and to remain flat at 120% of GDP in Spain (Chart 3). Importantly, in both cases, the upward pressure on public debt will be limited over the next five years because private savings are already high and unlikely to rise further. Chart 2Public Deficits Will Narrow Further Public Deficits Will Narrow Further Public Deficits Will Narrow Further Chart 3Debt Will Stay High, So Will Private Savings Debt Will Stay High, So Will Private Savings Debt Will Stay High, So Will Private Savings The role of the European Central Bank (ECB) as a backstop also contributes to creating a different environment than the one that prevailed prior to the “whatever it takes” era. Before Mario Draghi’s landmark July 2012 speech, there was no explicit buyer of last resort in the European sovereign debt market. Now, there is one, and its presence limits how rapidly private sector buyers might lose confidence in a country’s bond market and how far spreads can widen, even if the central bank buying has its own limit. In fact, Draghi’s forward guidance calmed the markets and caused a 250bps and 280bps collapse in Italian and Spanish 10-year yields before the ECB had even purchased a single BTP or Bono. The role of the ECB as a buyer of last resort remains crucial going forward. Yields in Italy and Spain are still 480bps and 600bps below their 2011-2012 peaks at a time when investors anticipate an end to the PEPP and APP purchases. Importantly, these spreads are narrower, even though the APP and the PEPP have purchased far more German and French sovereign bonds than Italian and Spanish bonds (Chart 4). As long as the ECB continues to emphasize that it maintains its optionality to support Italian and Spanish bond markets, even as its asset purchases end, peripheral spreads will not move back above 300bps, especially since Euroscepticism is not the risk it once was (Chart 5). Chart 4Germany and France, Not Spain and Italy, Dominated PEPP Buying Stress Testing Italian And Spanish Yields Stress Testing Italian And Spanish Yields Chart 5Euroscepticism on the Wane Euroscepticism on the Wane Euroscepticism on the Wane Bottom Line: As illustrated by the evolution of their current account balances, peripheral Eurozone economies have moved from deep savings deficits to a state of surplus savings. This makes them less vulnerable to the funding crises that prompted the European sovereign debt crisis. Moreover, the Eurozone now has a buyer of last resort for sovereign bonds: the post-Draghi ECB. Its presence, not its continued buying, creates the necessary insurance to limit buying strikes by the private sector, which also curtails how far Italian or Spanish spreads can widen. Long-Term Problems Abound In the long term, Italy and Spain will only be able to curtail government debt-to-GDP ratios meaningfully if trend growth recovers. This means more reforms are needed to boost productivity and labor participation rates (Chart 6). Chart 6Reforms, Not Austerity, Will Bring Debt Down Below Maastricht Levels Stress Testing Italian And Spanish Yields Stress Testing Italian And Spanish Yields Chart 7Competitiveness Problems In The Periphery Competitiveness Problems In The Periphery Competitiveness Problems In The Periphery For now, the picture remains bleak. Spain emerged out of the sovereign debt crisis with strong reform zeal. The Mariano Rajoy government reformed pensions and the labor market, which prompted a significant decline in unit labor costs compared to the Euro Area average. The pace of reforms has slowed, however, and the Pedro Sánchez government has eroded some of its predecessor’s efforts. As a result, since 2018, Spanish unit labor costs have increased once again relative to the rest of the Eurozone (Chart 7). Italy never implemented significant reforms, because it has long been beset by political paralysis. Unit labor costs are not outstripping the rest of the Eurozone, but productivity continues to lag. Economic growth in Italy and Spain will remain tepid in the coming years, which will prevent any meaningful decline in debt. The poor trend in relative competitiveness and productivity of the past few years is unlikely to be undone. Work by the OECD shows that prior to the pandemic, Spain and Italy had shifted away from being among the leading reformers in Europe. Instead, this role now falls to France, Greece, Austria, and Germany (Chart 8), which confirms last week’s analysis that France’s reform effort remains serious, even if it is less ambitious than what transpired over the past five years.  As a consequence of slow growth, investment in Spain and Italy will trail behind the rest of the Eurozone. Thus, private sector savings will remain elevated and private nonfinancial sector debt loads are unlikely to increase meaningfully (Chart 9). As a result, the public sector will continue to absorb the private sector’s excess savings, which means that the debt-to-GDP ratio could sustain more upside pressure than what either the IMF or the OECD anticipate. Chart 8Italy And Spain As Reform Laggards Stress Testing Italian And Spanish Yields Stress Testing Italian And Spanish Yields Chart 9Private Debt Is Not The Problem Private Debt Is Not The Problem Private Debt Is Not The Problem These dynamics bear a striking resemblance to what happened in Japan. They also imply that Italy and Spain will remain a drag on European growth for years to come, as long as the fundamental reasons behind the private sector’s elevated savings rate are not addressed. Bottom Line: Italian and Spanish public debt-to-GDP ratios will continue to deteriorate as reform efforts are too tepid to lift durably trend GDP growth. Their private sectors will continue to save more than they invest, which, in turn, will push government debt higher. The Italian and Spanish economies will remain a drag on European growth for the foreseeable future. Stress Test Scenarios How high can yields rise in the Eurozone before Italy and Spain experience meaningful funding stresses? We explore two scenarios: one in which 10-year yields rise by an additional 2%, and a very aggressive scenario in which they rise a whopping 5%, bringing Italian and Spanish borrowing costs in the vicinity of the European debt crisis of 2011-2012. To conduct this experiment, we use a simple approach of regressing debt-service payments as a share of GDP on the level of yields. Modeling debt payments in euros was another alternative, but yield levels are also affected by the evolution of nominal GDP. As a result, using this approach considers both the numerator and the denominator of the debt-service payment modeling. Chart 10Private Debt Is Not The Problem Private Debt Is Not The Problem Private Debt Is Not The Problem Under the first scenario, Italian 10-year yields would rise to 4.4% from 2.4% today. This is still well below the 7.5% yield recorded in late 2011. In this context, government debt servicing would reach 4.5% of GDP, which is comparable to the average that prevailed prior to the Euro Area crisis (Chart 10). This suggests that Italian yields slightly above 4% are still somewhat manageable, albeit far from ideal. Under the second scenario, 10-year BTP yields would rise to 7.4% from 2.4% today. This is comparable to the level of yields observed at the apex of the European sovereign debt crisis, but it assumes that this yield level would remain in place for a year. As a result of the higher debt load today compared to a decade ago, the resulting debt-servicing costs have reached 5.4% of GDP, which is higher than those between 2012 and 2013 (Chart 10). This scenario is clearly unsustainable and suggests that yields of this magnitude would cripple the Italian government. Moving to Spain, the dynamics are slightly different. Spain’s refinancing schedule is more front-loaded than that of Italy. As a result, using the yields on 10-year Bonos as an independent variable in our regression approach does not explain well the evolution of Spanish debt-servicing costs. Instead, a simple regression model using both 3-year and 10-year yields does a much better job, because it reflects the heavier rollover of Spanish debt. Chart 11Stress Testing Spanish Public Finances Stress Testing Spanish Public Finances Stress Testing Spanish Public Finances In the first scenario, 3-year yields would rise by 1% to 1.7% and 10-year yields would increase from 2% to 3.7%, well below the 7% yields that prevailed in 2012. As a result, the Spanish government’s debt-servicing costs would be expected to rise to 2.8% of GDP, which is well below the levels that prevailed at the apex of the European debt crisis, but still above the level that existed in the first decade following the introduction of the euro (Chart 11). While far from ideal, this level is easily manageable for the Spanish government and is comparable to the Eurozone average prior to 2008. In the second scenario, 3-year yields are assumed to rise 2.5% to 3.2% and 10-year yields to increase an extra 5% to 6.7%, still slightly shy of the 7% yields from 2012. In this scenario, debt servicing costs are expected to jump above 3.5% of GDP (Chart 11) and are unsustainable unless nominal GDP growth remains above 7% and the primary budget balance improves to zero. As a result, an increase in Bono yields toward 7% is far too high for the Spanish government to withstand. We acknowledge that, although it points to an upper bound in yields, the second scenario is highly unlikely for several reasons. First, a 500bps increase in 10-year yields would far exceed the roughly 350bps rise experienced during the sovereign debt crisis of the previous decade. More importantly, many factors have changed since then: Spain and Italy’s shift from borrowing nations to surplus savings nations, the role of the ECB as buyer of last resort, greater support for the euro across all the Eurozone nations, and greater unity among EU countries as exemplified by the NextGenerationEU (NGEU) program. The first scenario would be painful but manageable for both Italy and Spain. It suggests that peripheral yields may rise meaningfully in the coming years, especially if nominal GDP growth remains higher than it was last decade when fiscal austerity was Europe’s mantra. However, fiscal austerity was self-defeating because, the more orthodox countries tried to be, the worse their growth was, making debt arithmetic unmanageable (Chart 12). Chart 12Counterproductive Austerity Stress Testing Italian And Spanish Yields Stress Testing Italian And Spanish Yields We can go one step further. Even if Italian and Spanish spreads widen another 100bps from this point on and settle between 200bps and 300bps above German yields, European public finances can withstand German yields rising to 2%. This seems surprising, but we cannot forget the context. German yields cannot reach those levels in a vacuum. If they increase that much, it is because nominal growth is strong, which makes debt arithmetic more manageable in the European periphery. Statistically, the relationship between Spanish debt servicing costs and German yields is negative, while the link between Italian debt servicing costs and German yields is statistically low, underscoring the role of growth. However, if German yields were to rise as Europe’s nominal GDP growth settled back to last decade’s range, then Italian and Spanish debt would implode. This is a far-fetched scenario; even the recent ECB’s pivot reflects stronger nominal activity. This does not mean that German yields will rise above 2% in the next five years, but rather it highlights that economic activity, not the peripheral nations’ public finances, is the true constraint on European yields. Bottom Line: The ECB’s role as a buyer of last resort, the shift to savings surpluses in Italy and Spain, as well as the greater European unity and lower Euroscepticism prevalent across the continent limit how far spreads can rise in the periphery. In this context, Spain and Italy can withstand higher yields than those of the last decade, since these higher borrowing costs reflect stronger nominal economic activity. Ultimately, the true constraint on German yields is not the finances of Southern Europe, but rather the state of economic growth in the Eurozone. Conclusions Related Report  European Investment StrategyThe Lasting Bond Bear Market European yields continue to have significant upside, as we expect European growth to remain stronger than it was last decade even if Italy and Spain will continue to lag behind the rest of Europe. As we observed two weeks ago, Europe is no longer burdened by untimely fiscal austerity. Furthermore, the efforts to decrease the energy dependence on Russia and modernize the European economy will continue to support capex and aggregate demand. The upper band on German yields seems to be around 2%, assuming that Italian and Spanish spreads rise 100bps to 150bps over the coming years. Even the banking sector in the periphery can withstand significant upside in bond yields. BTPs and Bonos represent 11% and 6.8% of the Spanish and Italian financial sectors’ balance sheet, respectively (Chart 13). This is much higher than the role of OATs and Bunds in the French and German financial sectors, but Spanish and Italian banks have much lower NPLs and enjoy much more robust Tier-1 capital ratios than they did a decade ago (Chart 14). As a result, the doom-loop that plagued those economies ten years ago is not as pronounced. In fact, bank lending rates in Italy and Spain are now lower than they are in Germany, which contrasts greatly with the previous decade (Chart 14, bottom panel). Chart 13Exposure To The Home Country Exposure To The Home Country Exposure To The Home Country Chart 14Improved Bank Health In The Periphery Improved Bank Health In The Periphery Improved Bank Health In The Periphery Bottom Line: Bonds around the world and in Europe are massively oversold and are due for a countertrend rally. This pullback in yields, however, will be transitory. Higher trend nominal GDP growth around the world and in Europe indicates that yields have much further to rise over the next five years.   Mathieu Savary, Chief European Strategist Mathieu@bcaresearch.com Tactical Recommendations Cyclical Recommendations Structural Recommendations

Executive Summary To understand the economy and the market we must think of them as non-linear systems which experience sudden phase-shifts. The pandemic introduced phase-shifts in our lives, which led to phase-shifts in our goods demand, which led to phase-shifts in monthly core inflation. As our lives phase-shift back to normality, goods demand will phase-shift back to low growth, and monthly core inflation prints will phase-shift from ‘high phase’ to ‘low phase’. With the 12-month core US inflation rate likely to peak by June at the latest, the long bond yield is likely to peak at some point in April/May, justifying a cyclical overweight position in T-bonds. Go overweight healthcare and biotech versus resources and financials. The leadership of the equity market will once more flip from short-duration sectors to long-duration sectors. Fractal trading watchlist additions: JPY/CHF, non-life insurance versus homebuilders, US homebuilders (XHB), cotton versus platinum, healthcare versus resources, and biotech versus resources. The Bond Yield Turns About 2-3 Months Before Core Inflation The Bond Yield Turns About 2-3 Months Before Core Inflation Bottom Line: With the 12-month core US inflation rate likely to peak by June at the latest, the long bond yield is likely to peak at some point in April/May, and the leadership of the equity market will flip back to long-duration sectors such as healthcare and biotech. Feature Inflation is a non-linear system, meaning that you cannot just dial it up or down gradually like the volume on your music system. Instead of gradual changes, non-linear systems suddenly phase-shift from quiet to loud, from cold to hot, from solid to liquid, or from stability to instability (Box I-1). Box 1: A Classic Non-Linear System – A Brick On An Elastic Band To experience the sudden phase-shift in a non-linear system, attach an elastic band to a brick and try pulling it across a table. As you start to pull, the brick doesn’t move because of the friction with the table. But as you increase your pull there comes a tipping point, at which the brick does move and the friction simultaneously decreases, self-reinforcing the brick’s acceleration. Meanwhile, your pull on the elastic continues to increase as you react with a time-lag. The result is that this non-linear system suddenly phase-shifts from stability – the brick doesn’t move – to instability – the brick hits you in the face! Try as hard as you might, it is impossible to pull the brick across the table smoothly. In this non-linear system, the choice is either stability or instability. Back in 2017, in Mission Impossible: 2% Inflation – An Update, I posed a crucial question: “Given that price stability could phase-shift to instability, when should we worry about it?” I answered that “the risk remains low until the next severe downturn – when policymakers may be forced into desperate measures for a desperate situation.” The words proved prescient. Three years later, the desperate situation was a global pandemic, and the desperate measures were economic shutdowns combined with fiscal stimuluses of unprecedented scope and size.   A Phase-Shift In Our Lives Produced A Phase-Shift In Inflation Developed economy inflation has just experienced a stark non-linearity. Since 2007, the US core month-on-month inflation rate remained consistently below 3.5 percent.1 Then came the pandemic’s shutdowns combined with policymakers’ massive response, and month-on-month inflation didn’t just rise to above 3.5 percent, it phase-shifted to well over 6 percent. Developed economy inflation has just experienced a stark non-linearity. The remarkable fact is that since 2007, there have been over a hundred monthly core inflation prints below 4 percent, and nine prints above 6 percent, but just one solitary print between 4 and 6 percent! In other words, monthly core inflation shows the classic hallmark of a non-linear system. It can be cold or hot, but not warm (Chart I-1).       Chart I-1Monthly Core Inflation Shows The Classic Hallmark Of A Non-Linear System Monthly Core Inflation Shows The Classic Hallmark Of A Non-Linear System Monthly Core Inflation Shows The Classic Hallmark Of A Non-Linear System So, what caused the phase-shift in core inflation? The simple answer is a phase-shift in durable goods spending, which itself was caused by the pandemic’s shutdown of services combined with massive fiscal stimulus. Again, this is supported by a remarkable fact. Since 2007, the monthly increase in US (real) spending on durables remained consistently below 3.5 percent. Then came the pandemic’s shutdowns and stimulus checks, and the growth in durables demand didn’t just rise to above 3.5 percent, it phase-shifted to well over 8 percent.  In other words, the growth in durable goods demand also shows the classic hallmark of a non-linear system. It can be cold or hot, but not warm (Chart I-2). Chart I-2Goods Demand Shows The Classic Hallmark Of A Non-Linear System Goods Demand Shows The Classic Hallmark Of A Non-Linear System Goods Demand Shows The Classic Hallmark Of A Non-Linear System The connection between the phase-shifts in goods demand and the phase-shifts in core inflation is staring us in the face – because the three separate phase-shifts in inflation have each been associated with a preceding or contemporaneous phase-shift in goods demand, which themselves have been associated with the separate waves of the pandemic (Chart I-3). Chart I-3Phase-Shifts In Core Inflation Have Been Associated With Phase-Shifts In Goods Demand Phase-Shifts In Core Inflation Have Been Associated With Phase-Shifts In Goods Demand Phase-Shifts In Core Inflation Have Been Associated With Phase-Shifts In Goods Demand Pulling all of this together, the pandemic introduced phase-shifts in our lives – lockdown or freedom. Which led to phase-shifts in our goods demand – above 8 percent or below 3.5 percent. Which led to phase-shifts in monthly core inflation – above 6 percent or below 4 percent. The key question is, what happens next? Bond Yields Are Close To A Peak As we learn to live with the pandemic, and assuming no imminent ‘super variant’ of the virus, our lives are phase-shifting back to a semblance of normality. Which means that our spending on goods is phase-shifting back to low growth. If anything, the recent overspend on goods implies an imminent corrective underspend. At the same time, it will be difficult to compensate a phase-shift down on goods spending with a phase-shift up on services spending. This is because the consumption of services is constrained by time and biology. There is a limit to how often you can eat out, go to the theatre, or even go on vacation. The upshot is that monthly core inflation prints are likely to phase-shift from ‘high phase’ to ‘low phase’ – even if the monthly headline inflation prints are kept up longer by the commodity price spikes that result from the Ukraine crisis. Monthly core inflation prints are likely to phase-shift from ‘high phase’ to ‘low phase’. Meanwhile central banks and markets focus on the 12-month core inflation rate – which, as an arithmetic identity, is the sum of the last twelve month-on-month inflation rates.2  To establish the 12-month core inflation rate, the crucial question is: how many of the last twelve month-on-month inflation prints will be high phase versus low phase? As just discussed, the new month-on-month core inflation prints are likely to phase-shift to low phase. At the same time, the historic high phase prints will disappear from the last twelve month window. Specifically, by June 2022, the three high phase prints of April, May, and June 2021 – 10 percent, 9 percent, and 10 percent respectively – will no longer be included in the 12-month core inflation rate, with the arithmetic impact of pulling it down sharply (Chart I-4). Chart I-4The High Phase Monthly Inflation Prints Of April, May, And June 2021 Will Disappear From The 12-Month Core US Inflation Rate, Thereby Pulling It Down. The High Phase Monthly Inflation Prints Of April, May, And June 2021 Will Disappear From The 12-Month Core US Inflation Rate, Thereby Pulling It Down. The High Phase Monthly Inflation Prints Of April, May, And June 2021 Will Disappear From The 12-Month Core US Inflation Rate, Thereby Pulling It Down. Clearly, the bond market anticipates some of this ‘base effect’ on 12-month inflation. This explains why turning points in the bond yield have led by 2-3 months the turning points in the 12-month core inflation rate (Chart I-5). With the 12-month core inflation rate likely to peak by June at the latest, this suggests that – absent some new shock – the long bond yield is likely to peak at some point in April/May. Reinforcing our cyclical overweight position in T-bonds. Chart I-5The Bond Yield Turns About 2-3 Months Before Core Inflation The Bond Yield Turns About 2-3 Months Before Core Inflation The Bond Yield Turns About 2-3 Months Before Core Inflation This also carries important implications for equity investors. Rising bond yields favour short-duration equity sectors such as resources and financials versus long-duration equity sectors such as healthcare and biotech. And vice-versa. Indeed, the recent performance of resources versus healthcare and financials versus healthcare is indistinguishable from the bond yield (Chart I-6 and Chart I-7). Chart I-6The Performance of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Indistinguishable From The Bond Yield The Performance of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Indistinguishable From The Bond Yield The Performance of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Indistinguishable From The Bond Yield Chart I-7The Performance of Financials Versus Healthcare Is Indistinguishable From The Bond Yield The Performance of Financials Versus Healthcare Is Indistinguishable From The Bond Yield The Performance of Financials Versus Healthcare Is Indistinguishable From The Bond Yield With bond yields likely to peak soon, the leadership of the equity market will once more flip from short-duration sectors to long-duration sectors. Go overweight healthcare and biotech versus resources and financials. Fractal Trading Watchlist Reinforcing the fundamental analysis in the previous section, the 130-day outperformance of resources versus healthcare and biotech has reached the point of fractal fragility that has marked previous trend exhaustions, suggesting that the recent outperformance of resources is nearing an end. Also new on our watchlist is a commodity pair, cotton versus platinum, whose strong outperformance is vulnerable to reversal. And US homebuilders (XHB), whose recent underperformance is at a potential turning point. There are two new trade recommendations. First, the massive outperformance of world non-life insurance versus homebuilders is at the point of fractal fragility that has consistently marked previous turning points (Chart I-8). Hence, go short non-life insurance versus homebuilders, setting a profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 14 percent. Second, the strong underperformance of the Japanese yen is also at the point of fractal fragility that has marked several previous turning points (Chart I-9). Accordingly, go long JPY/CHF, setting a profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 4 percent. Please note that our full watchlist of 19 investments that are experiencing or approaching turning points is now available on our website: cpt.bcaresearch.com Chart I-8The Massive Outperformance Of Non-Life Insurance Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Massive Outperformance Of Non-Life Insurance Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Massive Outperformance Of Non-Life Insurance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart I-9Go Long JPY/CHF Go Long JPY/CHF Go Long JPY/CHF The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Is Vulnerable To Reversal Cotton’s Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal US Homebuilders’ Underperformance Is At A Potential Turning Point US Homebuilders' Underperformance Is At A Potential Turning Point US Homebuilders' Underperformance Is At A Potential Turning Point Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Annualized month-on-month inflation rate. 2 Strictly speaking, the 12-month inflation rate is the geometric product of the last 12 month-on-month inflation rates. Chart I-1The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile Chart I-2The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile Chart I-3AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart I-4Canada Versus Japan Is Vulnerable To Reversal Canada Versus Japan Is Vulnerable To Reversal Canada Versus Japan Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart I-5Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Chart I-6US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software Approaching A Reversal US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software Approaching A Reversal US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software Approaching A Reversal Chart I-7The Euro's Underperformance Could Be Approaching a Resistance Level The Euro's Underperformance Could Be Approaching a Resistance Level The Euro's Underperformance Could Be Approaching a Resistance Level Chart I-8A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart I-9Bitcoin's 65-Day Fractal Support Is Holding For Now Bitcoin's 65-Day Fractal Support Is Holding For Now Bitcoin's 65-Day Fractal Support Is Holding For Now Chart I-10Biotech Approaching A Major Buy Biotech Approaching A Major Buy Biotech Approaching A Major Buy Chart I-11CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started Chart I-12Financials Versus Industrials Is Reversing Financials Versus Industrials Is Reversing Financials Versus Industrials Is Reversing Chart I-13Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Chart I-14Greece's Brief Outperformance Has Ended Greece's Brief Outperformance Has Ended Greece's Brief Outperformance Has Ended Chart I-15BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point Chart I-16The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart I-17The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart I-18Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart I-19US Homebuilders' Underperformance Is At A Potential Turning Point US Homebuilders' Underperformance Is At A Potential Turning Point US Homebuilders' Underperformance Is At A Potential Turning Point   Fractal Trading System   Fractal Trades Fat-Tailed Inflation Signals A Peak In Bond Yields Fat-Tailed Inflation Signals A Peak In Bond Yields Fat-Tailed Inflation Signals A Peak In Bond Yields Fat-Tailed Inflation Signals A Peak In Bond Yields 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed   Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations