Inflation/Deflation

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

In lieu of next week’s report, I will be presenting a webcast titled ‘The 5 Big Mispricings In The Markets Right Now, And How To Profit From Them’. I do hope you can join. Executive Summary Just as the railway timetables set in train the First World War, central bank timetables for aggressive rate hikes are setting in train a global recession. Demand is already cool, so aggressive rate hikes will take it to outright cold. The risk is elevated because central banks are desperate to repair their damaged credibility on fighting inflation, and it may be their last chance. Inflationary fears and hawkishness from central banks are weighing on bonds and stocks, and it may take some weeks, or months, for inflation fears to recede. But we could be approaching a turning point. By the summer, core inflation should be receding. Furthermore, the fractal structures of the sell-offs in both the 30-year T-bond and the tech-heavy NASDAQ index are approaching points of extreme fragility that have signalled inflection points. Fractal trading watchlist: 30-year T-bond, NASDAQ, FTSE 100 versus Euro Stoxx 50, Netherlands versus Switzerland, and Petcare (PAWZ). US Inflation Is Hot, But Demand Is Not US Inflation Is Hot, But Demand Is Not US Inflation Is Hot, But Demand Is Not Bottom Line: Tactically cautious, but long-term investors who do not need to time the market bottom should overweight bonds and overweight long-duration defensive equities versus short-duration cyclical equities – for example, overweight US versus non-US equities. Feature The First World War, the historian AJP Taylor famously argued, was “imposed on the statesmen of Europe by railway timetables.” Taylor proposed that the railways and their timetables were so central to troop mobilisation – and specifically, the German Schlieffen Plan – that a plan once set in motion could not be stopped. “Once started the wagons and carriages must roll remorselessly and inevitably to their predestined goal.” Otherwise, the whole process would unravel, and an opportunity to demonstrate military credibility would be lost that might never come again. Today, could a global recession be imposed upon us by central bank timetables for aggressive rate hikes? Just as it was difficult to unwind the troop mobilisation that led to the Great War, it will be difficult to back down from the aggressive rate hikes that the central banks have timetabled, at least in the near term. Otherwise, an opportunity to demonstrate inflation fighting credibility would be lost that might never come again.  Just as the railway timetables set in train the First World War, central bank timetables for aggressive rate hikes may set in train  another global recession. Unfortunately, central banks do not have precision weapons. Quite the contrary, monetary tightening is a blunt instrument which works by cooling overall demand. But demand is already cool, as evidenced by the contraction of the US economy in the first quarter. In their zeal to repair their damaged credibility on fighting inflation, the danger is that central banks take the economy from cool to outright cold. Granted, the US economy was dragged down by a drop in inventories and net exports. But even US domestic demand – which strips out inventories and net exports – is barely on its pre-pandemic trend (Chart I-1). Meanwhile, the euro area economy is still 5 percent below its pre-pandemic trend (Chart I-2). To reiterate, by hiking rates aggressively into economies that are at best lukewarm, central banks are risking an outright recession. Chart I-1US Inflation Is Hot, But Demand Is Not US Inflation Is Hot, But Demand Is Not US Inflation Is Hot, But Demand Is Not Chart I-2Euro Area Inflation Is Hot, But Demand Is Not Euro Area Inflation Is Hot, But Demand Is Not Euro Area Inflation Is Hot, But Demand Is Not Our Three-Point Checklist For A Recession Has Three Ticks My colleague Peter Berezin has created a three-point checklist for a recession: The build-up of an imbalance makes the economy vulnerable to downturn. A catalyst exposes this imbalance. Amplifiers exacerbate the downturn. Is there a major imbalance? You bet there is. The post-pandemic 26 percent overspend on durable goods in the US constitutes one of the greatest imbalances in economic history. Other advanced economies also experienced unprecedented binges on durable goods. The catalyst that is exposing this major imbalance is the realisation that durable goods are, well, durable. So, if you overspent on durables in 2020/21, then the risk is that you symmetrically underspend in 2022/23 (Chart I-3). The post-pandemic 26 percent overspend on durable goods in the US constitutes one of the greatest imbalances in economic history. Meanwhile, a future underspend on goods cannot be countered by an overspend on services because the consumption of services is constrained by time, opportunity, and biology. There is a limit to how often you can eat out, go to the movies, or go to the doctor (Chart I-4). Indeed, for certain services, an underspend will persist, because we have made some permanent post-pandemic changes to our lifestyles: for example, hybrid office/home working and more online shopping and online medical care. Chart I-3An Overspend On Goods Can Be Corrected By A Subsequent Underspend... An Overspend On Goods Can Be Corrected By A Subsequent Underspend... An Overspend On Goods Can Be Corrected By A Subsequent Underspend... Chart I-4...But An Underspend On Services Cannot Be Corrected By A Subsequent Overspend ...But An Underspend On Services Cannot Be Corrected By A Subsequent Overspend ...But An Underspend On Services Cannot Be Corrected By A Subsequent Overspend Finally, the amplifier that will exacerbate the downturn is monetary tightening. If central banks follow their railway timetables for aggressive rate hikes, a goods downturn will magnify into an outright recession. So, in Peter’s three-point checklist, we now have tick, tick, and tick. Inflation Is Hot, But Demand Is Not If economic demand is at best lukewarm, then what caused the post-pandemic inflation that central banks are now fighting? The simple answer is massive fiscal stimulus combined with the equally massive shift in spending to durable goods. Locked at home and flush with government supplied cash, we couldn’t spend it on services, so we spent it on goods. This created a massive shock in the distribution of demand, out of services whose supply could easily adjust downwards, and into goods whose supply could not easily adjust upwards. For example, airlines could cut back their flights, but auto manufacturers couldn’t make more cars. So, airfares didn’t collapse but used car prices went vertical! The causality from stimulus payments to durable goods spending to core inflation is irrefutable. The causality from stimulus payments to durable goods spending to core inflation is irrefutable. The biggest surges in US durable goods spending all coincided with the government’s stimulus checks (Chart I-5). And the three separate surges in month-on-month core inflation all occurred after surges in durable goods demand (Chart I-6). As further proof, core inflation is highest in those economies where the stimulus checks and furlough schemes were the most generous – like the US and the UK. Chart I-5Stimulus Checks Caused The Surges in Durable Goods Spending Stimulus Checks Caused The Surges in Durable Goods Spending Stimulus Checks Caused The Surges in Durable Goods Spending Chart I-6The Surges In Durable Goods Spending Caused The Surges In Core Inflation The Surges In Durable Goods Spending Caused The Surges In Core Inflation The Surges In Durable Goods Spending Caused The Surges In Core Inflation What Does All This Mean For Investment Strategy? Our high conviction view is that the pandemic’s inflationary impulse combined with the Ukraine war will turn out to be demand-destructive, and thereby ultimately morph into a deflationary impulse. Yet central banks are all pumped up to demonstrate their inflation fighting credibility. Given that this credibility is badly damaged, it may be their last opportunity to repair it before it is shattered forever. To repeat, just as the railway timetables set in train the First World War, central bank timetables for aggressive rate hikes may set in train another global recession. That said, a recession is not inevitable. The interest rate that matters most for the economy and the markets is not the policy rate that central banks want to hike aggressively, it is the long-duration bond yield. A lower bond yield can underpin both the economy and the financial markets, just as it did during the pandemic in 2020. But to the extent that the bond market is following the real economic data, we are in a dangerous phase. Because, as is typical at an inflection point, the real data will be noisy and ambiguous. Meaning it may take some weeks, or months, for inflation fears to be trumped by growth fears. On March 10th, in Are We In A Slow-Motion Crash? we predicted:  “On a tactical (3-month) horizon, the inflationary impulse from soaring energy and food prices combined with the choke on growth from sanctions will weigh on both the global economy and the global stock market. As such, bond yields could nudge higher, the global stock market has yet to reach its crisis bottom, and the US dollar will rally” That prediction proved to be spot on! Recession, or no recession, we are still in a difficult period for markets because inflationary fears and hawkishness from central banks are weighing on bonds and stocks, while buoying the US dollar. As such, tactical caution is still warranted. Fractal structures of the sell-offs in both the 30-year T-bond and the tech-heavy NASDAQ index are approaching points of extreme fragility. But we could be approaching a turning point. By the summer, core inflation should be receding. Furthermore, the fractal structures of the sell-offs in both the 30-year T-bond and the tech-heavy NASDAQ index are approaching points of extreme fragility that have reliably signalled previous inflection points (Chart I-7 and Chart I-8). Chart I-7The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart I-8The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The advice for long-term investors who do not need to time the market bottom is: Bonds will ultimately rally. Overweight the 30-year T-bond and the 30-year Chinese bond. Equities will be conflicted between slowing growth which will weigh on cyclical profits, and falling bond yields which will buoy long-duration valuations.  Therefore, overweight long-duration defensive sectors and markets versus short-duration cyclical sectors and markets. For example, overweight US versus non-US equities. Fractal Trading Watchlist As just discussed, the sell-offs in the 30-year T-bond and the NASDAQ are approaching points of fractal fragility that have signalled previous turning points. Hence, we are adding both investments to our watchlist. Also added to our watchlist is the outperformance of the FTSE100 versus Euro Stoxx 50, and the underperformance of Netherlands versus Switzerland, both of which are approaching potential reversals. Our final addition is Petcare (PAWZ). After a stellar 2020, Petcare gave back most of its gains in 2021. But this underperformance is now approaching a point of fragility which might provide a new entry point. There are no new trades this week, but the full watchlist of investments at, or approaching, turning points is available on our website: cpt.bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading Watchlist: New Additions A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Vulnerable To Reversal FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Vulnerable To Reversal FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Vulnerable To Reversal Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Close To Exhaustion Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Close To Exhaustion Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Close To Exhaustion 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 Reversing Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing 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 7A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 8Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 9CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started Chart 10Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Chart 11Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Chart 12Greece's Brief Outperformance To End Greece's Brief Outperformance To End Greece's Brief Outperformance To End Chart 13BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point Chart 14The 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 15The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse Chart 16Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 17US Homebuilders' Underperformance Has Reached A Potential Turning Point US Homebuilders' Underperformance Has Reached A Potential Turning Point US Homebuilders' Underperformance Has Reached A Potential Turning Point Chart 18Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Chart 19The Rally In USD/EUR Could End The Rally In USD/EUR Could End The Rally In USD/EUR Could End Chart 20The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 21A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare Chart 22FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Vulnerable To Reversal FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Vulnerable To Reversal FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 23Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Close To Exhaustion Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Close To Exhaustion Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Close To Exhaustion Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades Central Bank ‘Railway Timetables’ Are Dragging Us Into Recession Central Bank ‘Railway Timetables’ Are Dragging Us Into Recession Central Bank ‘Railway Timetables’ Are Dragging Us Into Recession Central Bank ‘Railway Timetables’ Are Dragging Us Into Recession 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  

Executive Summary A True Bond Bear Market, USD-Hedged Or Unhedged A True Bond Bear Market, USD-Hedged Or Unhedged A True Bond Bear Market, USD-Hedged Or Unhedged The US dollar has appreciated in 2022, most notably against the euro and Japanese yen. The rally has been more muted against the currencies of major US trading partners like the Canadian dollar and Chinese yuan. The dollar strength to date has had minimal impact on US inflation and will not force any adjustment in the Fed’s hawkish path on interest rates. The weakness of the euro and yen versus the USD will not turn the ECB or Bank of Japan more hawkish, given the lack of visible pass-through from currency depreciation to domestic inflation in Europe and Japan. The two largest owners of US Treasuries, China and Japan, have not increased Treasury purchases in response to higher US yields and a firmer US dollar. Geopolitical tensions and a desire to diversify out of US assets will continue to limit China buying of US Treasuries. Even higher US yields will be needed to compensate Japanese investors for higher bond and currency volatility at a time when the cost to hedge USD exposure is high and rising. Bottom Line: An appreciating US dollar is not yet a reason to expect a peak in US inflation or Treasury yields, or a change in ECB/BoJ policy. Maintain a neutral global duration stance and continue to underweight US Treasuries versus German Bunds and JGBs. Feature The strengthening US dollar (USD) has gotten the attention of investors, with the DXY index up +8.1% since the start of 2022 and threatening a major breakout from the range that has prevailed since 2016 (Chart 1). There have been notable moves in the major currencies that are in the DXY index, especially the euro (EUR) and Japanese yen (JPY). EUR/USD now sits at 1.05 and is threatening a move towards the parity level last seen in 2002. USD/JPY has seen a stunningly rapid increase to the current 130 level, rising 15 big figures in just two months. On a broader basis, the USD rally has been less impressive. The Federal Reserve’s nominal broad trade-weighted dollar index is up a more modest +3.7%  year-to-date (Chart 2). Currencies of the major US trading partners have seen less impressive moves versus the dollar compared to the euro and yen. The Canadian dollar is down -1.9%, while the Mexican peso is flat, versus the dollar so far in 2022. Even the tightly managed Chinese currency (CNY) has belatedly joined the depreciation party, with USD/CNY up +4% since mid-April. Chart 1USD Breaking Out Against The Majors USD Breaking Out Against The Majors USD Breaking Out Against The Majors ​​​​​ Chart 2Smaller FX Moves From The Larger US Trade Partners Smaller FX Moves From The Larger US Trade Partners Smaller FX Moves From The Larger US Trade Partners ​​​​​​ For bond markets, the move towards a stronger US dollar is relevant if a) it is sustainable; b) it helps cool off the overheating US economy; and c) it induces capital flows into US Treasuries. On all three counts, the current bout of dollar strength has not been enough to reverse the upward trajectory of US Treasury yields, in absolute terms and relative to government bonds in Europe and Japan. Multiple Drivers Of The USD Rally First and foremost, the latest appreciation of the USD has been about rising US interest rate expectations. The Fed’s increasingly hawkish rhetoric in response to surging inflation has forced a sharp upward adjustment of both the near-term and medium-term path for US bond yields. This has been most evident in the real yield component of yields, with the yield on the 10-year inflation-protected TIPS now in positive territory at +0.15% - a big increase from the -0.5 to -1% range that has prevailed during the past two years of the COVID pandemic. Related Report  Global Fixed Income StrategyWe’re All Yield Chasers Now The momentum of the USD rally, with a +13.6% year-over-year gain in the DXY index, has been robust compared to the outright level of US bond yield spreads versus the major developed markets, especially after adjusting for realized inflation differentials (Chart 3). This reflects other USD-bullish factors beyond US interest rate expectations. The US dollar typically behaves as a defensive currency, appreciating during periods of slowing global growth and/or rising investor risk aversion. Both are happening at the same time right now, boosting the safe haven appeal of the US dollar. Global growth expectations are depressed, with the ZEW survey of investment professionals back down to the pandemic lows of 2020 (Chart 4, top panel).1 Worries about slowing growth and high inflation, and the rapid tightening of global monetary policies needed to combat that inflation, are also weighing on investor confidence. US equity market volatility has picked up and investors are paying up to protect their portfolios via options - the VIX index is back above 30 and the CBOE put/call ratio is at a two-year high (middle panel). Chart 3A Big USD Rally Fueled By Wider Real Yield Differentials A Big USD Rally Fueled By Wider Real Yield Differentials A Big USD Rally Fueled By Wider Real Yield Differentials ​​​​​​ Chart 4Slowing Global Growth & Rising Risk Aversion Weighing On USD Slowing Global Growth & Rising Risk Aversion Weighing On USD Slowing Global Growth & Rising Risk Aversion Weighing On USD ​​​​​​ This “perfect storm” of USD-bullish factors – rising US interest rate expectations, slowing global growth expectations and increased investor nervousness – has pushed to USD to a level that now appears stretched. BCA Research’s US Dollar Composite Technical Indicator, which combines measures of breadth, momentum, sentiment and trader positioning, is now at an overbought extreme that has heralded past US dollar reversals (bottom panel). Bottom Line: The rising US dollar now discounts a lot of Fed tightening, growth pessimism and investor fear. Conditions for a reversal are in place if any of those USD-bullish factors lose influence, most notably Fed expectations. USD Strength Does Not Impact The Outlook For The Fed, ECB Or BoJ Chart 5A True Bond Bear Market, USD-Hedged Or Unhedged A True Bond Bear Market, USD-Hedged Or Unhedged A True Bond Bear Market, USD-Hedged Or Unhedged USD strength has made life even more difficult of bond investors, at a time when returns across the fixed income universe have suffered because of the duration-related losses from rising bond yields. The Bloomberg Global Treasury index is down -12.2% so far in 2022, and down -18% from the 2020 peak, on a currency-unhedged basis (Chart 5). The returns are not much better this year on a USD-hedged basis, down -6.8% since the start of the year. The latter is suffering from both duration losses and the rising cost to hedge the US dollar. An investor hedging USD exposure into JPY must pay an annualized 165bps (using 3-month currency forwards), while hedging USD exposure into EUR costs 200bps. Those hedging costs primarily reflect higher US interest rate expectations versus Europe and Japan. They will only come down when markets believe that the Fed will stop raising interest rates and begin to easy policy. It is not clear that the current bout of USD strength, on its own, is enough to change the Fed’s plans. Typically, a substantially stronger US dollar would lead the Fed along a less hawkish path, as it would act to slow imported inflation pressures. However, this is not a typical Fed cycle with US headline CPI inflation at a 41-year high of 8.5%. A huge part of that US inflation overshoot is due to global supply squeezes that have impacted the prices of traded goods and commodities. On a rate-of-change basis, the appreciating US dollar is coinciding with some slowing of commodity price momentum, but less so for goods prices. The index of world export prices compiled by the CPB Research Bureau in the Netherlands is up +12.2% on a year-over-year basis, a rapid pace that typically exists during periods of US dollar depreciation (Chart 6, top panel). The annual growth of the CRB commodity index is +17.2%, down from the peak of +54.4% in June 2021, and has roughly tracked the acceleration of the US dollar (middle panel). Yet even with the moderation of commodity inflation, the US dollar strength seen to date has not been enough to slow overshooting global goods price inflation – a necessary condition for central banks like the Fed to turn less hawkish (bottom panel). We do expect global goods price inflation to moderate over the rest of 2022, especially in the US, as post-pandemic consumer spending patterns shift away from goods back towards services. This will be a demand-related story, however, not a USD-strength-related story. Until there is more decisive evidence that goods inflation is slowing meaningfully, the Fed will be forced to deliver on its latest hawkish rhetoric. This includes shifting to a path of hiking rates by 50bps per meeting and moving towards a faster reduction of the Fed’s balance sheet. Right now, there is not much evidence suggesting that the stronger dollar should derail that trajectory (Chart 7): Chart 6USD Strength Not Helping To Slow Global Inflation USD Strength Not Helping To Slow Global Inflation USD Strength Not Helping To Slow Global Inflation ​​​​​ Chart 7The Fed Will Remain Hawkish, Despite A Firmer USD The Fed Will Remain Hawkish, Despite A Firmer USD The Fed Will Remain Hawkish, Despite A Firmer USD ​​​​​​ Non-oil import prices are expanding at a +7.5% pace and accelerating in the face of a firmer US dollar that would normally coincide with slowing import price growth (top panel) The overall level of US financial conditions – which includes not only the currency but other variables like equity prices and corporate bond yields - remains stimulative, both in absolute terms and relative to the level of the trade-weighted US dollar (middle panel). One area of concern is the widening US trade deficit, now nearly -5% of GDP in nominal terms (bottom panel). That wider deficit is primarily related to the combination of strong import demand (and soaring import prices) and soft export demand given slowing global growth. A stronger US dollar does not help reverse either of those trends. However, it is difficult for the Fed to isolate the impact of the currency on the trade deficit given the other non-currency-related factors weighing on US export and import demand (i.e. weaker exports because of the Ukraine war and China COVID lockdowns). In sum, the US dollar strength seen so far does not change our expectations on the path of US inflation, and the pace of Fed tightening, over the next 6-12 months. We still see the Fed delivering multiple rate hikes, but less than the 298bps discounted in the US overnight index swap (OIS) curve over the next year. Conversely, the weakness of the euro and yen versus the US dollar does not change our outlook for the ECB and Bank of Japan. We see both central banks not delivering anything close to the rate hikes discounted in OIS curves. Chart 8Not Much Inflation From A Weaker Euro & Yen Not Much Inflation From A Weaker Euro & Yen Not Much Inflation From A Weaker Euro & Yen On a trade-weighted basis, the euro is only down -5% over the past year - a modest move in comparison to soaring euro area inflation, which hit +7.5% on a headline basis and +3.5% on a core basis in April (Chart 8, middle panel). The ECB is under pressure to end its asset purchases very quickly and begin raising rates, but the euro does not appear to be a reason to accelerate the ECB’s timetable. In Japan, the very rapid weakening of the yen has generated shockingly little inflation, especially in the current environment of strong global goods/commodities inflation. The trade-weighted yen is down -12.7% on a year-over-year basis, yet Japan’s “core-core” CPI index that excludes food and energy prices remains in deflation hitting -0.7% in March – a move exaggerated by plunging mobile phone prices, but still very weak compared to the path of the yen and global goods prices. OIS curves are currently discounting 183bps of ECB rate hikes and 9bps of Bank of Japan rate hikes over the next year. We recommend fading that pricing by staying overweight core Europe and Japan in global bond portfolios, especially versus the US where the Fed is far more likely to follow through on discounted rate hikes. Bottom Line: The dollar strength to date has had minimal impact on US inflation and will not force any adjustment in the Fed’s hawkish path on interest rates. At the same time, the weakness of the euro and yen versus the USD will not turn the ECB or Bank of Japan more hawkish, given the lack of visible pass-through from currency depreciation to domestic inflation in Europe and Japan. Can Foreign Investors Replace Fed Treasury Buying? Chart 9UST Demand Shifting To More Price-Sensitive Buyers UST Demand Shifting To More Price-Sensitive Buyers UST Demand Shifting To More Price-Sensitive Buyers For bond investors, the role of non-US demand for US Treasuries has always been a source of mystery that is often used to explain yield movements. Rumors of flows from major emerging market currency reserve managers or large Asian pension funds has often been used to justify a bullish or bearish view on Treasuries – even when hard data that could prove the existence of such flows is published with long lags that make it useless for timely analysis. The impact of potential foreign bond buying on US Treasury yields has been less influential over the past couple of years. Fed buying via quantitative easing (QE) has swamped all other sources of demand for Treasuries. With the Fed now in a rate hiking cycle that will also lead to a rapid start of quantitative tightening (QT) this summer, the question of who will replace the Fed’s demand for US Treasuries becomes once again relevant for the future path of US bond yields beyond the expected path of the fed funds rate. Already, there has been an adjustment in the term premium for longer-term US Treasury yields – the component of bond yield valuation that would be most impacted by large flows - as the Fed has slowed its pace of bond buying (Chart 9). The New York Fed’s estimates of the term premium on the 10-year Treasury yield reached deeply depressed levels – around -100bps - at the peak of the Fed’s pandemic QE program in 2020. As the US economy has recovered from the 2020 COVID recession, US interest rate expectations have increased but so have estimates of the term premium, which are now back to zero or even slightly positive. The Fed’s QE bond buying has been purely volume driven, with the size and timing of the purchases announced well in advance. The Fed is often called a “price insensitive” buyer since its buying is done without any consideration of yield levels. Other Treasury investors, including foreign buyers, are more price sensitive, with demand influenced by the level of yields. According to the TIC database on US capital flows produced by the US Treasury Department, net foreign buying of Treasuries has picked up, totaling +$346 billion over the 12 months to the most recently available data from February 2022 (Chart 10). That increase has entirely come from private investors, as so-called “official” flows have been flat. Chart 10China Remains On A UST Buyer's Strike China Remains On A UST Buyer's Strike China Remains On A UST Buyer's Strike ​​​​​​ Chart 11European Buying Of USTs Set To Peak? European Buying Of USTs Set To Peak? European Buying Of USTs Set To Peak? ​​​​​​ The latter is a continuation of the trend seen over the past few years where China, the nation with the second largest holdings of US Treasuries, has stopped buying them. This is a decision rooted in both geopolitics and economics. Smaller trade surpluses mean China has fewer new currency reserves to invest, while worsening Sino-US tensions have led Chinese authorities to diversify existing reserve holdings away from US Treasuries into gold and other assets. Looking ahead, China is unlikely to significantly ramp up its Treasury purchases despite more attractive US yields and Chinese policymakers tolerating some mild currency weakness versus the US dollar. Beyond China, demand for Treasuries from Europe and Japan has picked up but remains moderate by historical standards. For European investors, there has been a major swing in the TIC data, moving from a net outflow (on a 12-month running total basis) of -$194 billion in December 2020 to a net inflow of +$24 billion in February 2022 (Chart 11, top panel). Typically, net inflows into Treasuries are linked to the FX-hedged spread between US and German government debt. Specifically, when the hedged 10-year Treasury-Bund spread widens to a level between 100-150bps, the flows from Europe into Treasuries begin to improve (middle panel) When that hedged spread narrows to zero or lower, the flows turn the other way and European demand for Treasuries begins to wane. That is typically followed by a widening of the unhedged Treasury-Bund spread (bottom panel). With the current FX-hedged Treasury-Bund spread now at zero, a result of the high cost of hedging US dollars into euros given elevated US rate expectations, we expect European demand for Treasuries to diminish over the rest of 2022. This will help support a wider Treasury-Bund spread as the Fed delivers far more rate hikes than the ECB. For Japan, the largest holder of Treasuries, there has only been a stabilization of outflows over the 12 months to February 2022 (Chart 12, top panel). Past periods of large net inflows from Japan into US Treasuries have occurred when the hedged 10-year US Treasury-JGB spread has approached 200bps (middle panel). With the current spread at only 112bps, Japanese investor demand for Treasuries is unlikely to return without a significant increase in US yields. Chart 12UST Yields Not Attractive Enough To Induce More Japanese Demand UST Yields Not Attractive Enough To Induce More Japanese Demand UST Yields Not Attractive Enough To Induce More Japanese Demand ​​​​​​ Chart 13Foreign Bond Investing Is Too Volatile For Japanese Investors Right Now Foreign Bond Investing Is Too Volatile For Japanese Investors Right Now Foreign Bond Investing Is Too Volatile For Japanese Investors Right Now More timely weekly capital flow data from Japan shows that Japanese investors have been reluctant to move money into foreign bonds (Chart 13). Elevated levels of bond/rate volatility, and currency volatility given the huge rally in USD/JPY, have made large Japanese bond investors more cautious on increasing foreign bond allocations, even on a currency-hedged basis. If bond/FX volatility subsides, Japanese investors will become “better buyers” of foreign bonds once again. However, Japanese investors may opt to increase allocations to European bonds rather than US Treasuries, with European yields at comparable levels to US Treasuries in JPY-hedged terms (Tables 1-4). For example, a 30-year German Bund hedged into yen now yields 1.46%, compared to a JPY-hedged 30-year US Treasury yield of 1.33%. Table 12-Year Developed Market Government Bond Yields, Hedged Into USD, EUR & JPY Recent USD Strength Is Not Bond Bullish Recent USD Strength Is Not Bond Bullish Table 25-Year Developed Market Government Bond Yields, Hedged Into USD, EUR & JPY Recent USD Strength Is Not Bond Bullish Recent USD Strength Is Not Bond Bullish Table 310-Year Developed Market Government Bond Yields, Hedged Into USD, EUR & JPY Recent USD Strength Is Not Bond Bullish Recent USD Strength Is Not Bond Bullish Table 430-Year Developed Market Government Bond Yields, Hedged Into USD, EUR & JPY Recent USD Strength Is Not Bond Bullish Recent USD Strength Is Not Bond Bullish Bottom Line: Foreign demand for US Treasuries is unlikely to accelerate enough to replace diminished Fed QE purchases over the next 6-12 months, given high USD-hedging costs and elevated Treasury yield volatility. Non-US investors will not help bring an end to the US bond bear market. Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1      The Global ZEW expectations series shown in Chart 4 is an equal-weighted average of the individual expectations series for the US and euro area. GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Recommended Positioning     Active Duration Contribution: GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. Custom Performance Benchmark Recent USD Strength Is Not Bond Bullish Recent USD Strength Is Not Bond Bullish The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index Global Fixed Income - Strategic Recommendations* Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Recent USD Strength Is Not Bond Bullish Recent USD Strength Is Not Bond Bullish Tactical Overlay Trades

Highlights Chart 1Past Peak Inflation Past Peak Inflation Past Peak Inflation The Fed is all set to deliver a 50 basis point rate hike when it meets this week and with inflation still well above target Chair Powell will be keen to re-affirm the Fed’s commitment to tighter policy. However, with the market already priced for a 3% fed funds rate by the end of this year – 267 bps above the current level – we don’t see much scope for further hawkish surprises during the next eight months. Core PCE inflation posted a monthly growth rate of 0.29% in March. This is consistent with an annual rate of 3.6%, below the Fed’s median 4.1% forecast for 2022. Slowing economic activity between now and the end of the year will also weigh on inflation going forward (Chart 1). All in all, we see the Fed delivering close to (or slightly less) than the amount of tightening that is already priced into the curve for 2022. US bond investors should keep portfolio duration close to benchmark. Feature Table 1 Recommended Portfolio Specification Table 2Fixed Income Sector Performance No More Hawkish Surprises No More Hawkish Surprises Investment Grade: Underweight Chart 2Investment Grade Market Overview Investment Grade Market Overview Investment Grade Market Overview Investment grade corporate bonds underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 140 basis points in April, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -292 bps. The average index option-adjusted spread widened 19 bps on the month to reach 135 bps, and our quality-adjusted 12-month breakeven spread moved up to its 48th percentile since 1995 (Chart 2). In a recent report we made the case for why investors should underweight investment grade corporate bonds on a 6-12 month horizon.1 First, we noted that while investment grade spreads had jumped off their 2021 lows, they remained close to the average level from 2017-19 (panel 2). Spreads have widened even further during the past two weeks, but they are not sufficiently attractive to entice us back into the market given the stage of the economic cycle. The 2-year/10-year Treasury slope has un-inverted, but it remains very flat at 19 bps. The flat curve tells us that we are in the mid-to-late stages of the economic cycle. Corporate bond performance tends to be weak during such periods unless spreads start from very high levels. Finally, we noted in our recent Special Report that corporate balance sheets are in excellent shape. In fact, total debt to net worth for the nonfinancial corporate sector has fallen to its lowest level since 2008 (bottom panel). Strong corporate balance sheets will prevent spreads from rising dramatically during the next 6-12 months, but with profit growth past its cyclical peak, balance sheets will look considerably worse by this time next year. Table 3A Corporate Sector Relative Valuation And Recommended Allocation* Table 3BCorporate Sector Risk Vs. Reward* No More Hawkish Surprises No More Hawkish Surprises High-Yield: Neutral Chart 3High-Yield Market Overview High-Yield Market Overview High-Yield Market Overview High-Yield underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 187 basis points in April, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -281 bps. The average index option-adjusted spread widened 54 bps on the month to reach 379 bps. The 12-month spread-implied default rate – the default rate that is priced into the junk index assuming a 40% recovery rate on defaulted debt and an excess spread of 100 bps – shifted up to 4.7% (Chart 3). As we discussed in our recent Special Report, a very flat yield curve sends the same negative signal for high-yield returns as it does for investment grade.2 However, we maintain a neutral allocation to high-yield bonds compared to an underweight allocation to investment grade bonds for three reasons. First, relative valuation remains favorable for high-yield. The spread advantage in Ba-rated bonds over Baa-rated bonds continues to trade significantly above its pre-COVID low (panel 3). Second, there are historical precedents for high-yield bonds outperforming investment grade during periods when the yield curve is very flat but when corporate balance sheet health is strong. The 2006-07 period is a prime example. Finally, we calculate that the junk index spread embeds an expected 12-month default rate of 4.7%. Given our macroeconomic outlook, we expect the high-yield default rate to be in the neighborhood of 3% during the next 12 months. This would be consistent with high-yield outperforming duration-matched Treasuries.     MBS: Underweight Chart 4MBS Market Overview MBS Market Overview MBS Market Overview Mortgage-Backed Securities underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 105 basis points in April, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -178 bps. We discussed the incredibly poor performance of Agency MBS in last week’s report.3 We noted that MBS’ poor performance has been driven by duration extension. Fewer homeowners refinanced their loans as mortgage rates rose, and the MBS index’s average duration increased (Chart 4). But now, the index’s duration extension is at its end. The average convexity of the MBS index is close to zero (panel 3), meaning that duration is now insensitive to changes in rates. This is because hardly any homeowners have the incentive to refinance at current mortgage rates (panel 4). The implication is that excess MBS returns will be stronger going forward. That said, we still don’t see enough value in MBS spreads to increase our recommended allocation. The average index spread for conventional 30-year Agency MBS remains close to its lowest level since 2000 (bottom panel). At the coupon level, we observe that low-coupon MBS have much higher duration than high-coupon MBS and that convexity is close to zero for the entire coupon stack. This makes the relative coupon trade a direct play on bond yields. Given that we see potential for yields to fall somewhat during the next six months, we recommend favoring low-coupon MBS (1.5%-2.5%) within an overall underweight allocation to the sector. Emerging Market Bonds (USD): Underweight Chart 5Emerging Markets Overview Emerging Markets Overview Emerging Markets Overview Emerging Market (EM) bonds underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 92 basis points in April, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -592 bps. EM Sovereigns underperformed the Treasury benchmark by 181 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -779 bps. The EM Corporate & Quasi-Sovereign Index underperformed by 37 bps, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -474 bps. The EM Sovereign Index underperformed duration-equivalent US corporate bonds by 2 bps in April. The yield differential between EM sovereigns and duration-matched US corporates remains negative. As such, we continue to recommend a maximum underweight allocation (1 out of 5) to EM sovereigns. The EM Corporate & Quasi-Sovereign Index outperformed duration-matched US corporates by 79 bps in April (Chart 5). This index continues to offer a significant yield advantage versus US corporates (panel 4). As such, it makes sense to maintain a neutral allocation (3 out of 5) to the sector. The EM manufacturing PMI fell into contractionary territory in March (bottom panel). The wide divergence between US and EM PMIs will pressure the US dollar higher relative to EM currencies. This argues for the continued underperformance of hard currency EM assets. Municipal Bonds: Overweight Chart 6Municipal Market Overview Municipal Market Overview Municipal Market Overview Municipal bonds underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 17 basis points in April, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -139 bps (before adjusting for the tax advantage). We view the municipal bond sector as better placed than most to cope with the recent bout of spread product volatility. Trailing 4-quarter net state & local government savings are incredibly high (Chart 6) and it will take some time to deplete those coffers even as economic growth slows and federal fiscal thrust turns into drag. On the valuation front, munis have cheapened up relative to both Treasuries and corporates during the past few months. The 10-year Aaa Muni/Treasury yield ratio is currently 94%, up significantly from its 2021 trough of 55%. The yield ratio between 12-17 year munis and duration-matched corporate bonds is also up significantly off its lows (panel 2).    We reiterate our overweight allocation to municipal bonds within US fixed income portfolios, and we continue to have a strong preference for long-maturity munis. The yield ratio between 17-year+ General Obligation Municipal bonds and duration-matched corporates is 94%. The same measure for 17-year+ Revenue bonds stands at 99%, just below parity even without considering municipal debt’s tax advantage. Treasury Curve: Buy 5-Year Bullet Versus 2/10 Barbell Chart 7Treasury Yield Curve Overview Treasury Yield Curve Overview Treasury Yield Curve Overview The Treasury curve rose dramatically and steepened in April. The 2-year/10-year Treasury slope steepened 15 bps, from 4 bps to 19 bps. Meanwhile, the 5-year/30-year slope steepened 2 bps, from 2 bps to 4 bps. In a recent Special Report we noted the unusually large divergence between flat slopes at the long end of the curve and steep slopes at the front end.4 For example, the 5-year/10-year Treasury slope is -3 bps while the 3-month/5-year slope is 209 bps. This divergence is happening because the market has moved quickly to price-in a rapid near-term pace of rate hikes that will end in roughly one year. However, so far, the Fed has only delivered 25 bps of those hikes (with another 50 bps due tomorrow) and this is holding down the very front-end of the curve. The oddly shaped curve presents us with an excellent trading opportunity. Specifically, we recommend buying the 5-year Treasury note versus a duration-matched barbell consisting of the 2-year and 10-year notes. This trade looks attractive on our model (Chart 7) and will profit if the rate hike cycle moves more slowly than what is currently priced but lasts longer, as is our expectation. We also continue to recommend a position long the 20-year bullet versus a duration-matched 10/30 barbell as an attractive carry trade. TIPS: Underweight Chart 8TIPS Market Overview TIPS Market Overview TIPS Market Overview TIPS outperformed the duration-equivalent nominal Treasury index by 113 basis points in April, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to +387 bps. The 10-year TIPS breakeven inflation rate rose 3 bps on the month to reach 2.90% and the 5-year/5-year forward TIPS breakeven inflation rate rose 12 bps to reach 2.47%. The 10-year TIPS breakeven inflation has moved up to well above the Fed’s 2.3%-2.5% comfort zone (Chart 8) and the 5-year/5-year forward breakeven rate is at the top-end of that range. Concurrently, our TIPS Breakeven Valuation Indicator has shifted into “expensive” territory (panel 2). In a recent report we made the case for why inflation has already peaked for the year.5  Given that outlook and the message from our valuation indicator, it makes sense to underweight TIPS versus nominal Treasuries on a 6-12 month horizon. In addition to trending down, we expect the TIPS breakeven inflation curve to steepen as inflation heads lower between now and the end of the year. This is because short-maturity inflation expectations are more tightly linked to the incoming inflation data than long-maturity expectations. Investors can position for this outcome by entering inflation curve steepeners or real (TIPS) yield curve flatteners. We also continue to recommend holding an outright short position in 2-year TIPS. ABS: Overweight Chart 9ABS Market Overview ABS Market Overview ABS Market Overview Asset-Backed Securities underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 7 basis points in April, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -38 bps. Aaa-rated ABS underperformed by 5 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -32 bps. Non-Aaa ABS underperformed by 16 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -67 bps. During the past two years, substantial federal government support for household incomes has caused US households to build up an extremely large buffer of excess savings. During this period, many households have used their windfalls to pay down consumer debt and credit card debt levels have fallen to well below pre-COVID levels (Chart 9). Though consumer credit growth has rebounded, debt levels are still low. This indicates that the collateral quality backing consumer ABS remains exceptionally strong. This also indicates that while surging gasoline prices will weigh on consumer activity in the coming months, household balance sheets are starting from such a good place that we don’t expect a meaningful increase in consumer credit delinquencies. Investors should remain overweight consumer ABS and should take advantage of the high quality of household balance sheets by moving down the quality spectrum, favoring non-Aaa rated securities over Aaa-rated ones. Non-Agency CMBS: Overweight Chart 10CMBS Market Overview CMBS Market Overview CMBS Market Overview Non-Agency Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 6 basis points in April, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -84 bps. Aaa Non-Agency CMBS underperformed Treasuries by 2 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -69 bps. Non-Aaa Non-Agency CMBS underperformed by 18 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -128 bps. CMBS spreads remain wide compared to other similarly risky spread products. Further, last week’s Q1 GDP report confirmed that commercial real estate (CRE) investment remains weak (Chart 10, panel 4). Weak investment will continue to support CRE price appreciation (panel 3) which will benefit CMBS spreads. Agency CMBS: Overweight Agency CMBS underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 4 basis points in April, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -43 bps. The average index option-adjusted spread widened 2 bps on the month. It currently sits at 50 bps, not that far from its average pre-COVID level (bottom panel). Agency CMBS spreads also continue to look attractive compared to other similarly risky spread products. Stay overweight. Appendix A: The Golden Rule Of Bond Investing We follow a two-step process to formulate recommendations for bond portfolio duration. First, we determine the change in the federal funds rate that is priced into the yield curve for the next 12 months. Second, we decide – based on our assessments of the economy and Fed policy – whether the change in the fed funds rate will exceed or fall short of what is priced into the curve. Most of the time, a correct answer to this question leads to the appropriate duration call. We call this framework the Golden Rule Of Bond Investing, and we demonstrated its effectiveness in the US Bond Strategy Special Report, “The Golden Rule Of Bond Investing”, dated July 24, 2018. Chart 11 illustrates the Golden Rule’s track record by showing that the Bloomberg Barclays Treasury Master Index tends to outperform cash when rate hikes fall short of 12-month expectations, and vice-versa. At present, the market is priced for 296 basis points of rate hikes during the next 12 months. Chart 11The Golden Rule's Track Record The Golden Rule's Track Record The Golden Rule's Track Record We can also use our Golden Rule framework to make 12-month total return and excess return forecasts for the Bloomberg Barclays Treasury index under different scenarios for the fed funds rate. Excess returns are relative to the Bloomberg Barclays Cash index. To forecast total returns we first calculate the 12-month fed funds rate surprise in each scenario by comparing the assumed change in the fed funds rate to the current value of our 12-month discounter. This rate hike surprise is then mapped to an expected change in the Treasury index yield using a regression based on the historical relationship between those two variables. Finally, we apply the expected change in index yield to the current characteristics (yield, duration and convexity) of the Treasury index to estimate total returns on a 12-month horizon. The below tables present those results, along with excess returns for a front-loaded and a back-loaded rate hike scenario. Excess returns are calculated by subtracting assumed cash returns in each scenario from our total return projections. No More Hawkish Surprises No More Hawkish Surprises Appendix B: Butterfly Strategy Valuations The following tables present the current read-outs from our butterfly spread models. We use these models to identify opportunities to take duration-neutral positions across the Treasury curve. The following two Special Reports explain the models in more detail: US Bond Strategy Special Report, “Bullets, Barbells And Butterflies”, dated July 25, 2017, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com US Bond Strategy Special Report, “More Bullets, Barbells And Butterflies”, dated May 15, 2018, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com Table 4 shows the raw residuals from each model. A positive value indicates that the bullet is cheap relative to the duration-matched barbell. A negative value indicates that the barbell is cheap relative to the bullet. Table 4Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Raw Residuals In Basis Points (As Of April 29, 2022) No More Hawkish Surprises No More Hawkish Surprises Table 5 scales the raw residuals in Table 4 by their historical means and standard deviations. This facilitates comparison between the different butterfly spreads. Table 5Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Standardized Residuals (As Of April 29, 2022) No More Hawkish Surprises No More Hawkish Surprises Table 6 flips the models on their heads. It shows the change in the slope between the two barbell maturities that must be realized during the next six months to make returns between the bullet and barbell equal. For example, a reading of -56 bps in the 5 over 2/10 cell means that we would expect the 5-year to outperform the 2/10 if the 2/10 slope flattens by less than 56 bps during the next six months. Otherwise, we would expect the 2/10 barbell to outperform the 5-year bullet. Table 6Discounted Slope Change During Next 6 Months (BPs) No More Hawkish Surprises No More Hawkish Surprises Appendix C: Excess Return Bond Map The Excess Return Bond Map is used to assess the relative risk/reward trade-off between different sectors of the US bond market. It is a purely computational exercise and does not impose any macroeconomic view. The Map’s vertical axis shows 12-month expected excess returns. These are proxied by each sector’s option-adjusted spread. Sectors plotting further toward the top of the Map have higher expected returns and vice-versa. Our novel risk measure called the “Risk Of Losing 100 bps” is shown on the Map’s horizontal axis. To calculate it, we first compute the spread widening required on a 12-month horizon for each sector to lose 100 bps or more relative to a duration-matched position in Treasury securities. Then, we divide that amount of spread widening by each sector’s historical spread volatility. The end result is the number of standard deviations of 12-month spread widening required for each sector to lose 100 bps or more versus a position in Treasuries. Lower risk sectors plot further to the right of the Map, and higher risk sectors plot further to the left. Chart 12Excess Return Bond Map (As Of April 29, 2022) No More Hawkish Surprises No More Hawkish Surprises   Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see US Bond Strategy / Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, “Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds”, dated April 12, 2022. 2 Please see US Bond Strategy / Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, “Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds”, dated April 12, 2022. 3 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “The Bond Market Implications Of A 5% Mortgage Rate”, dated April 26, 2022. 4 Please see US Bond Strategy / US Investment Strategy / US Equity Strategy Special Report, “The Yield Curve As An Indicator”, dated March 29, 2022. 5 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Peak Inflation”, dated April 19, 2022. Recommended Portfolio Specification Other Recommendations   Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns

Executive Summary Rampant talk of a wage-price spiral is premature, ginned up by media reports about union organizing successes and union negotiators’ wins. Recent agreements negotiated by unions have not lit an inflationary fuse, as all major compensation series are contracting in real terms. The full sweep of US labor market history, buttressed by the history of the last four decades, suggests that labor has a steep hill to climb to reverse its fortunes. The president has a bully pulpit and the executive branch has a lot of enforcement levers at its disposal, but the judicial and legislative branches are powerful counterweights and the state-level climate is decidedly unfriendly to workers. Labor could regain the upper hand but we’ve been underwhelmed by its victories thus far in the pandemic. We will not believe that it’s turned the tide until we see definitive evidence. The Labor Tide Is Out The Labor Tide Is Out The Labor Tide Is Out Bottom Line: Investors assume that a wage-price spiral is inevitable, or has already begun, at their own peril. The playing field is still heavily tilted in employers’ favor and mainstream media has exaggerated labor’s pandemic gains. Feature Dear Client, This Special Report, updating and elaborating upon our view of the likelihood of a US wage-price spiral, will be our last written output until Monday, May 23rd. We are vacationing this week and we will be holding our quarterly webcast on May 16th in lieu of a publication. Please join us with your questions on the 16th to make it a fully interactive event. Best regards, Doug Peta The term “wage-price spiral” is being increasingly bandied about by the media, broker-dealers and independent strategists and economists. The talk has been prevalent enough that a significant proportion of investors seem to believe a spiral is inevitable if it hasn’t already begun. There is more to the history of US labor market relations than the stagflation seventies and early eighties, however, and we are tempted to see the early-thirties-to-late-seventies New Deal era as the anomaly and the Reagan era that began in 1981 as the rule. Much may hinge on just how much the administration of the “most pro-union president you’ve ever seen” will be able to accomplish when it faces the prospect of the loss of its Congressional majorities in six months. After restating our framework for thinking about the origins and outcomes of strikes and lockouts, we examine the outcomes of the pandemic-era work stoppages tracked by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The BLS’ database only covers strikes involving at least 1,000 workers, effectively limiting its scope to strikes involving large union locals. Though the database is not comprehensive, we strongly believe that the incidence of large strikes and their outcomes offer meaningful insight into the evolving balance of power between employees and employers. Our conclusion is that management retains the upper hand; it will take more than a pandemic and one friendly administration’s term to turn the tables. Strikes Occur When One Side Overplays Its Hand Chart 1The Strike-Slack Link Has Been Shattered The Strike-Slack Link Has Been Shattered The Strike-Slack Link Has Been Shattered Strikes (and lockouts) occur when labor and management cannot reach a mutually acceptable settlement, often because at least one side overestimates its bargaining power. It is easy to agree when labor and management hold similar views about each side’s relative position, as when both perceive that one of them is considerably stronger. In that case, a settlement favoring the stronger side can be reached quickly, especially if the stronger side exercises some restraint and does not seek to impose terms that the weaker side can scarcely abide. Restraint is rational in repeated games like employer-employee bargaining, especially if the stronger party recognizes that its advantage is not permanent. 40 years of waxing management power, however, may have imbued both sides with a sense that employers have insurmountable structural advantages. Since the early eighties, private sector union membership has withered, taboos against hiring strikebreakers have disappeared, the Federal bench has been filled with judges disposed to see things from management’s perspective, and state legislatures have increasingly weakened union protections to attract businesses. Since the Reagan administration took office, the incidence of major work stoppages (Chart 1, top panel) has ceased to correlate with the state of labor market slack (Chart 1, bottom panel). With the JOLTS, consumer confidence and NFIB surveys indicating that the pandemic has made it as easy as it has ever been to find a job (and extremely difficult to fill one), it is notable that so few unionized employees are playing their trump card of withholding their labor to extract concessions from their employers. Related Report  US Investment StrategyLabor Strikes Back, Part 2: Where Strikes Come From And Who Wins Them With the link between labor market tightness and strikes severed, game theory offers the best insight into the origin of strikes. We posit a simple framework in which each side can hold any of five perceptions of its own bargaining power, resulting in a total of 25 possible joint perceptions. Labor (L) can believe it is way stronger than Management (M), L >> M; stronger than Management, L > M; roughly equal, L ≈ M; weaker than Management, L < M; or way weaker than Management, L << M. Management also holds one of these five perceptions, and the interaction of the two sides’ perceptions establishes the path negotiations will follow. Limiting our focus to today’s prevailing conditions, Figure 1 displays only the outcomes consistent with labor’s belief that it has the upper hand. For completeness, the exhibit lists all of management’s potential perceptions, but we deem the three away from the extremes to be most likely. Record job openings and quits rates (Chart 2) should convince even the most cocksure management negotiators that the landscape has tilted at least a little in labor’s favor. On the other hand, four consecutive decades of victories will make it hard for all but the most objective management negotiators to believe that the tables have completely turned. Figure 1Lots Of Room For Disagreement Wage-Price Spiral? Not So Fast Wage-Price Spiral? Not So Fast Chart 2It's A(Labor)Seller's Market... It's A(Labor)Seller's Market... It's A(Labor)Seller's Market... The Availability Of Substitutes Chart 3... And Mothballed Supply Is Coming Back On Line ... And Mothballed Supply Is Coming Back On Line ... And Mothballed Supply Is Coming Back On Line Ultimately, leverage derives from the availability of substitutes. If employees can easily switch jobs and obtain better terms because employers are actively competing for scarce labor inputs, they should be able to extract concessions simply by threatening to strike. If employers can replace union members with cheaper non-union workers, substitute cheaper foreign labor for domestic labor while meeting less onerous working standards, or invest in automation to reduce the need for human inputs, employees will have little recourse but to accept whatever terms management dictates. The prevailing view is that there are precious few substitutes for domestic labor. The pandemic has exposed global supply chains' inherent vulnerability, forcing businesses to consider onshoring some functions. The labor market is exceedingly tight, as early retirements and the Great Resignation will suppress labor availability into the intermediate term. Quickening increases in labor force participation among those aged 55 to 59 (Chart 3, top panel) and 60 and 64 (Chart 3, bottom panel), however, are casting doubt on the narrative. We additionally expect that younger workers will not be able to hold themselves aloof from the work force indefinitely in the absence of new fiscal transfers. The explosion in nominal wage growth lends credence to the prevailing view (Chart 4). But none of the three main series, average hourly earnings (Chart 5, top panel), the Atlanta Fed wage tracker (Chart 5, middle panel) or the Employment Cost Index (Chart 5, bottom panel) is keeping pace with inflation. A wage-price spiral, as commonly understood, results when wages and consumer prices chase each other higher in something like a game of tag. Average hourly earnings got the game going in 2020, when essential workers received hazard pay for braving infection risks, but they’ve lagged consumer prices ever since. Chart 4Nominal Wages Are Surging ... Nominal Wages Are Surging ... Nominal Wages Are Surging ... ​​​​​​ Chart 5... But They're Not Keeping Up With Inflation ... But They're Not Keeping Up With Inflation ... But They're Not Keeping Up With Inflation ​​​​​​ This Is Not The Sixties And Seventies The wage-price spiral gained momentum when the unemployment rate spent eleven consecutive years (1964 through 1974) below or just barely above the CBO’s estimate of its natural rate (Chart 6, bottom panel). That helped feed consistently positive real wage gains through the seventies whenever the economy was expanding (Chart 6, top panel). Upward price pressures were stoked by profligate government spending (funding the war in Vietnam concurrently with Great Society programs) and a complacent Fed. The pandemic fiscal and monetary backdrop may look uncomfortably familiar, but today’s workers are far less equipped to turn it to its advantage. Chart 6The Wage-Price Spiral Of The Seventies Was A Long Time In The Making The Wage-Price Spiral Of The Seventies Was A Long Time In The Making The Wage-Price Spiral Of The Seventies Was A Long Time In The Making Union membership is way down from the mid-to-late sixties (Chart 7), leaving unions with far fewer resources and much less of a corner on available labor. They also have less public support, less likelihood of benefiting from sympathy strikes or other support from unionized workers elsewhere in the chain and little to no lived experience with striking. They confront better organized and more determined opposition, as business concentration has reduced competition for their services to the point of establishing near-monopsonies in localized labor markets. The only way to confront the monopsony power of very few buyers is to organize a monopoly of suppliers, but private-sector union membership is mired at post-Depression lows despite The New York Times’ and other outlets’ relentless cheerleading. Chart 7It's Hard To Be An Influencer When You're Hemorrhaging Followers It's Hard To Be An Influencer When You're Hemorrhaging Followers It's Hard To Be An Influencer When You're Hemorrhaging Followers I Walked A Picket Line For Four Weeks And All I Got Was This Lousy T-Shirt If workers are to change their fortunes (Chart 8), they need to achieve large-scale victories that win national attention, inspiring other workers to challenge management and laying out a roadmap for their own success. With that in mind, we examined the BLS’ detailed compilation of work stoppages since the beginning of 2020 to see what strikes were able to achieve. If striking reveals that labor truly has the whip hand, employers should accede en masse to employees’ demands, signaling that a broad compensation reset is afoot. Chart 8The Hazard-Pay Pop Was Short Lived The Hazard-Pay Pop Was Short Lived The Hazard-Pay Pop Was Short Lived After backing out graduate student attempts to escape indentured servitude as sub-minimum-wage instructors, we examined the outcomes of the 22 large-scale strikes since 2020 (Table 1). In terms of base wage and salary gains, the results were decidedly underwhelming. Two of the union walkouts produced nothing (Swedish Medical Centers, 2020, and Kaiser Permanente Oakland sympathy strike, 2021) and prospects are not favorable for the United Mine Workers’ strike against Warrior Met Coal (2021) that is entering its fourteenth month. Public workers’ walkouts generally yielded nothing more than compensation increases around the Fed’s 2% annual inflation target. Teachers and front-line healthcare workers touted agreements to reduce class sizes, increase support staffs, formalize hazard pay and stockpile personal protective equipment but they’ve fallen further behind economically. Table 1Large-Scale Pandemic-Era Strikes Wage-Price Spiral? Not So Fast Wage-Price Spiral? Not So Fast Private-sector workers have fared better, though one must often squint to see it. Kellogg’s cereal plant workers hit a home run, gaining cost-of-living adjustments on top of nominal salary increases, better retirement benefits and an accelerated path for new employees to transition to the more remunerative legacy employee tier, all without making a single concession. Seattle’s unionized carpenters also did well for themselves, gaining three 4.5% annual raises and a 50% increase in hourly parking reimbursements (no small matter in a full-to-bursting coastal city). Their fellows got some cash in their pockets via one-time bonuses for ratifying their deals, but whether they’ll be better off on an inflation-adjusted basis by the time they expire is an open question. In reading about the walkouts, negotiations and settlements, we were struck by how long it had been since many of these union locals had walked off the job. Minneapolis teachers last struck in 1970; the last nationwide Kellogg’s strike was in 1972; the UAW hadn’t struck John Deere since 1986; aside from a one-day 2017 walkout, Sacramento teachers hadn’t struck since 1989; and United Steelworkers hadn’t walked out from Allegheny Technologies in 30 years. Perhaps an unfamiliarity with striking among union leadership and rank-and-file made the unions timid and inclined to settle a little sooner than may have been optimal. Perhaps they were starting on the back foot and anchoring to that position, as many of the unions trumpeted that they refused management's concession demands. Workers in this round of negotiations may have been more concerned about working conditions than money and simply wanted to be heard and seen after running the COVID infection gauntlet. There’s no guarantee that will last, but it’s a good sign for corporate margins and municipal budgets in the near term. Management showed little inclination to cede its advantages: hospitals brought in temporary replacements like pricey traveling nurses at a cost far exceeding the raises unions sought, the two-tier compensation system for legacy and newer workers largely remains intact and companies preferred one-time bonuses to salary increases to pacify employees. It’s possible that workers simply lack much leverage; after securing 2% annual raises for 2020 and 2021 that woefully failed to keep pace with inflation, St. Paul teachers agreed to an eleventh-hour deal for 2022-23 that will provide another two years of 2% raises, though they also won $3,000 retention bonuses/recognition awards for their trouble. Looking Ahead When watching future negotiations between employers and unions, we will be looking out for the fate of the two-tier compensation model and the balance between salary/wage increases and one-time bonuses. Two-tier compensation has allowed employers to drive a wedge between senior employees and their successors. The model incents grandfathered employees to ratify deals that preserve their above-market compensation and benefits at the expense of less senior employees. “We can’t afford to pay all of you like UAW workers in the ‘70s and ‘80s, but we want to reward those who’ve demonstrated their loyalty to the company …” (and will disappear by attrition over the next ten years or so, bending our cost curve way down in real terms). We are also watching the mix of base salary and wage increases and bonus payments. We think of the former as akin to a public company’s dividends and the latter to their stock buybacks. Dividend payments (and wages) are sticky on the downside, as companies don’t want to signal financial weakness by cutting them and employees are loath to see their nominal pay decline. Once dividends and base salaries are raised, it’s hard to cut them. Buybacks, on the other hand, are purely discretionary and shareholders don’t count on them year after year. The same goes with bonuses – future base wages and salaries are a rigid function of previous base wages and salaries, but bonus payments are a one-off that don’t get directly factored into ongoing compensation. We thought John Deere’s agreement with the UAW preserved the status quo to management’s benefit. Per the terms of the new six-year contract, workers got splashy odd-year raises of 10%, 5% and 5%, interspersed with even-year bonuses. The compounded annual growth rate of their base pay is therefore 3.3% over the life of the contract [(1.1*1.05*1.05)^(1/6) – 1]. We’d bet the 3.3% growth will yield very close to zero real gains, and it seems like the 8.5% signing bonus workers received for ratifying the contract was a reasonable up-front price for Deere to pay to lock in six years of nearly flat real increases. The company must pay bonuses in years 2, 4 and 6 as well, but that might be a small price to pay to preserve the divide between workers hired before and after 1997. By the time the deal is up, the least senior of the expensive legacy employees will have been punching the clock for 30 years and their numbers will be thinning at a rapid rate. Ruth Milkman, a sociologist of labor and labor movements who has written or collaborated on over a dozen books in her half-century career, was recently asked when she last felt hopeful about workers’ outlook. After laughing, she said, “I remember when Obama was elected and I made a fool of myself predicting a big labor resurgence.”1 In a pattern reminiscent of Lucy pulling the football away from Charlie Brown, labor hopes pinned on the Obama administration failed to be realized. The Biden administration can direct the Department of Justice, Department of Labor, National Labor Relations Board and OSHA to enforce the laws on the books more vigorously, but it can’t write new ones without both houses of Congress and the Senate lacks the president's appetite to do so. “It’s a story of endless disappointments,” according to Milkman, “and it seems like that’s where we are now, too.” We will believe in labor’s renaissance only after we see it. The course of labor negotiations since the pandemic in no way suggests that a wage-price spiral is inevitable, nor that it is probable. Doug Peta, CFA Chief US Investment Strategist dougp@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1      https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/17/magazine/unions-amazon.html. Accessed 4/27/22.

Listen to a short summary of this report.       Executive Summary Second Fastest Hiking Cycle Ever? Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Can the Fed achieve a soft landing, bringing inflation back to its 2% target without causing growth to slow significantly below trend? It has managed this only once in the past (in 2004). Every other cycle triggered a recession or, at best, a fall in the PMI to below 50. Recession is not a certainty. A higher neutral rate than in the past – partly due to the build-up of household savings – means the economy may be unusually robust this time. But the risk is high. We recommend a neutral weighting in equities, with a tilt to more defensive positioning: Overweight the US, and a focus on quality and defensive growth sectors. China’s slowdown is particularly worrying. We expect the RMB to fall, which will put downward pressure on other Emerging Markets. Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Bottom Line: Investors should maintain low-risk portfolio positioning until the outcome of the sharp tightening of financial conditions is clearer.     Recommended Allocation Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record The key to the performance of financial markets over the next year is whether the Fed and other central banks can kill inflation without killing economic growth. This is not impossible. But the risk that aggressive tightening of monetary policy triggers a recession – or at best a sharp slowdown – is high. Investors should maintain relatively low-risk portfolio positioning. If the Fed raises rates in line with what the futures market is projecting – by 286 basis points over the next 12 months – it will be the second fastest tightening on record, after only the “full Volcker” of 1980-1981 (Chart 1). Other central banks, even in countries and regions with much weaker growth than the US, are predicted to tighten almost as aggressively (Table 1). At the same time, the Fed will start to run down its balance-sheet rapidly; we estimate its holdings of US Treasurys will fall by more than $1 trillion by end-2023 (Chart 2). What was the impact on the economy of previous Fed hiking cycles? It varied, but on only one occasion in the past 50 years (2004) was there neither a recession nor a fall of the Manufacturing ISM to below 50 in the two years or so following the first hike (Table 2).1 The ISM (and other global PMIs) falling to below 50 is important because that is typically the dividing line between equities outperforming bonds and vice versa (Chart 3). Chart 1Second Fastest Hiking Cycle Ever? Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Table 1Futures Projected Interest Rate Hikes Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Chart 2Fed Balance-Sheet Will Shrink Rapidly Too Fed Balance-Sheet Will Shrink Rapidly Too Fed Balance-Sheet Will Shrink Rapidly Too Table 2What Happened To The Economy In Fed Hiking Cycles Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Chart 3Will PMIs Fall Below 50? Will PMIs Fall Below 50? Will PMIs Fall Below 50?  A recent paper by Alex Domash and Larry Summers showed that, since 1955, when US inflation was above 4% and unemployment below 5%, there was a 73% probability of recession over the next four quarters, and 100% over the next eight quarters (Table 3). On each of the three occasions when inflation was above 5% and unemployment below 4% (as is the case now), recession followed within a year. How could the Fed avoid a hard landing? Inflation could come down quickly, which would allow the Fed to ease back on tightening. As consumption switches back to services from durables, and the supply side succeeds in increasing production, the price of manufactured goods could fall (Chart 4). There were signs of this happening already in March, when US durables prices fell by 0.9% month-on-month. The problem, however, is that because of rising energy costs and lockdowns in China, the supply-side response has been delayed. The fall in semiconductor and shipping costs, which we previously argued would happen this year, is not yet clearly coming through (Chart 5). There are also signs of a price-wage spiral, with US wages rising (with a lag) in line with prices (Chart 6). Table 3This Level of Inflation And Unemployment Usually Leads To Recession Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Chart 4Can The Price Of Durables Now Fall? Can The Price Of Durables Now Fall? Can The Price Of Durables Now Fall? Chart 5Supply-Side Recovery Delayed? Supply-Side Recovery Delayed? Supply-Side Recovery Delayed? The economy could be more robust than in the past, leaving it unscathed by higher rates. Our model of the equilibrium level of short-term rates is 3.2%, well above the Fed’s estimate of 2.4% (Chart 7). Our colleague Peter Berezin has argued that the neutral rate could be as high as 4%.2 In particular, the $2 trillion-plus of excess US household savings (equal to 10% of GDP) could support consumption for some years even if real wage growth is negative (Chart 8). However, there are already signs that higher rates are hurting the housing market, the most interest-rate sensitive part of the economy. The average US 30-year fixed-rate mortgage rate has risen to 5.1% from 3.2% since the start of the year. This is negatively impacting home sales and mortgage applications (Chart 9). Moreover, even if the Fed can succeed in raising rates without killing the expansion, the markets – for a while – will worry that it cannot. Chart 6A Price-Wage Spiral? A Price-Wage Spiral? A Price-Wage Spiral? Chart 7Rates Are Still A Long Way Below Neutral Rates Are Still A Long Way Below Neutral Rates Are Still A Long Way Below Neutral Chart 8Excess Savings Could Support The Economy Excess Savings Could Support The Economy Excess Savings Could Support The Economy Chart 9Higher Rates Already Impacting Home Sales Higher Rates Already Impacting Home Sales Higher Rates Already Impacting Home Sales There are clear signs of a slowdown in the global economy. Europe may already be in recession, with sentiment indicators collapsing to recessionary levels (Chart 10). More esoteric indicators, which have historically signaled slowing growth ahead, such as the Swedish new orders/inventories ratio, are also flashing a warning signal (Chart 11). Global financial conditions have tightened at the fastest pace since 2008 (Chart 12). Corporate earnings forecasts have started to be revised down for the first time in this cycle (Chart 13). Chart 10Is Europe Already In Recession? Is Europe Already In Recession? Is Europe Already In Recession? Chart 1111. Signs Of Trouble Ahead 11. Signs Of Trouble Ahead 11. Signs Of Trouble Ahead Chart 12Financial Conditions Have Tightened Significantly Financial Conditions Have Tightened Significantly Financial Conditions Have Tightened Significantly Chart 13Corporate Earnings Forecasts Being Revised Down Corporate Earnings Forecasts Being Revised Down Corporate Earnings Forecasts Being Revised Down But what of the argument that investors have already turned ultra-pessimistic and that all the bad news is in the price? Global equities are down only 14% from their historic peak, barely in correction territory. It is true that sentiment (historically a contrarian indicator) is very poor, with twice as many respondents to the American Association of Individual Investors’ weekly survey expecting the stock market to fall over the next six months as expect it to rise (Chart 14). But, despite investor pessimism, there are few signs that investors have made their portfolios more defensive. The same AAII survey shows little decline in equity weightings, and no big shift into cash (Chart 15). Chart 14Investors Are Very Pessimistic... Investors Are Very Pessimistic... Investors Are Very Pessimistic... Chart 15...But Haven't Moved More Defensive ...But Haven't Moved More Defensive ...But Haven't Moved More Defensive Equities: The US is the best house on a tough street. Growth is likely to remain more robust than in the euro area or Japan. The US stock market has a lower beta (Chart 16). And, while the US is more expensive, valuations do not drive the 12-month relative performance of stocks and, anyway, the US premium valuation can be justified by higher ROE and the lower volatility of profits (Chart 17). Emerging markets continue to look vulnerable to the slowdown in China and tighter US financial conditions (Chart 18). We remain underweight. Chart 16US Stocks Are Lower Risk US Stocks Are Lower Risk US Stocks Are Lower Risk Chart 17US Premium Valuation Is Justified Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Monthly Portfolio Update: Can The Fed Achieve A Soft Landing? Hint: It Doesn’t Have A Good Track Record Chart 18Tightening Financial Conditions Are Bad For EM Tightening Financial Conditions Are Bad For EM Tightening Financial Conditions Are Bad For EM Chart 19Consumer Staples Are Defensive Consumer Staples Are Defensive Consumer Staples Are Defensive Chart 20IT Earnings Will Continue To Grow Strongly IT Earnings Will Continue To Grow Strongly IT Earnings Will Continue To Grow Strongly Within sectors, our preference remains for quality and defensive growth. Consumer staples tend to outperform when PMIs are falling (Chart 19) and are supported by attractive dividend yields. Information Technology is a more controversial overweight, given that it is expensive and sensitive to rising rates. Nevertheless, investment in tech hardware and software is likely to continue, giving the sector strong structural earnings growth in coming years (Chart 20). Currencies: The dollar has risen by 7.3% year-to-date driven by interest-rate differentials and the Fed being expected to be more aggressive than other central banks. But we are only neutral, since the Fed will probably not raise rates by as much as the market is pricing in, and because the dollar looks very overvalued (Chart 21). We lower our recommendation on the Chinese yuan to underweight. Interest-rate differentials with the US clearly point to it falling further – also the outcome desired by the authorities to help bolster growth (Chart 22). The likely CNY weakness will put further downward pressure on other EM currencies, particularly in Asia, given their high correlation to the Chinese currency (Chart 23). Chart 21The Dollar Is Very Overvalued The Dollar Is Very Overvalued The Dollar Is Very Overvalued Chart 22Rate Differentials Point To A Weaker RMB... Rate Differentials Point To A Weaker RMB... Rate Differentials Point To A Weaker RMB... Chart 23...Which Is Bad News For Other EM Currencies ...Which Is Bad News For Other EM Currencies ...Which Is Bad News For Other EM Currencies Fixed Income: With the 10-year US Treasury yield at 2.9% and that in Germany at 0.9%, there is a stronger argument for marginally raising weightings in government bonds. We are neutral on government bonds within the (underweight) fixed-income category. Remember, though, that real yields are still negative: -0.1% in the US and -2.1% in Germany. We do not expect long-term rates to rise much over the next 6-9 months, and so remain neutral on duration. The “golden rule of bond investing” says that government bond returns are driven by whether the central bank is more or less hawkish than expected over the next 12 months (Chart 24). We would expect the Fed to be slightly less hawkish than currently forecast. US high-yield bonds offer an attractive yield pick-up – as long as US growth does not collapse. In a way, HY bonds are like defensive equities, given their high correlation with equities but beta only one-third that of equities (Chart 25). Chart 24Will The Fed Be More Or Less Hawkish Than Expected? Will The Fed Be More Or Less Hawkish Than Expected? Will The Fed Be More Or Less Hawkish Than Expected? Chart 25High Yield Bonds Are Like MinVol Equities High Yield Bonds Are Like MinVol Equities High Yield Bonds Are Like MinVol Equities Chart 26Russian Oil Is Going Cheap Russian Oil Is Going Cheap Russian Oil Is Going Cheap Commodities: Oil prices are likely to fall back to around $90 a barrel by year-end, as demand softens and increased supply (from Saudi Arabia, UAE, and North American shale, and maybe from Venezuela and Iran) enters the market. But the risk is to the upside if this extra supply does not emerge. In particular, possible bans on Russian oil and gas into the European Union (or Russia blocking sales) could disturb the market. It will take time for Russia’s 11 million b/d of oil production, which used to go mainly to Europe, to be rerouted to Asia. This is why the Urals benchmark is at a 30% discount to Brent (Chart 26). The long-term story for industrial commodities remains good, but there is downside risk – especially for iron ore and steel – from China’s slowdown (Chart 27). Gold is an obvious hedge against geopolitical risks and high inflation. But over the past 20 years, it has been negatively correlated to real interest rates and the US dollar, suggesting upside is capped. There is a chance, however, that the relationship between rates and gold breaks down, as it did in the 1970s and 1980s (Chart 28). We, therefore, remain neutral on gold, believing that a moderate holding is a good diversifier for portfolios. Chart 27Chinese Slowdown Is Negative For Commodities Chinese Slowdown Is Negative For Commodities Chinese Slowdown Is Negative For Commodities Chart 28Will Gold Start To Behave As It Did Before 1990? Will Gold Start To Behave As It Did Before 1990? Will Gold Start To Behave As It Did Before 1990? Garry Evans, Senior Vice President Global Asset Allocation garry@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1         In 2015, the ISM was already below 50 when the Fed hiked in December. 2         Please see Global Investment Strategy Report, “Is A Higher Neutral Rate Good Or Bad For Stocks?” dated March  18, 2022. Recommended Asset Allocation Model Portfolio (USD Terms)

Executive Summary China's Demand Was Very Weak before Lockdowns China's Demand Was Very Weak Before Lockdowns China's Demand Was Very Weak Before Lockdowns The selloff in risk assets is not over. Stay defensive. Stagflation fears will continue gripping financial markets. Global trade volumes are set to contract, but the Fed has little maneuvering room as US core inflation is well above its target. Commodity prices are at an important juncture. The plunge in Chinese material stock prices is a warning sign for global materials because China is by far the largest consumer of raw materials (excluding oil), accounting for about 50-55% of global industrial metal demand. The rally in EM commodity plays like Latin America and South Africa is at risk of a major reversal. Bottom Line: Global equity and credit portfolios should underweight EM equities and credit, respectively. The rally in the US dollar might be the final upleg before a major downtrend sets in. However, this final rally will be considerable, and the greenback will likely overshoot. A buying opportunity in EM local currency bonds will present itself after EM currencies hit a bottom versus the US dollar. Feature Global and EM risk assets will remain under selling pressure. This Charts That Matter report contains charts that will help investors navigate treacherous financial markets by shedding light on the following key issues: How much more downside in stocks? Chart 1 displays EM share prices in USD terms alongside their long-term moving averages. If EM equities break below the current technical support line, the next one implies that there is 20-25% further downside in EM stocks. For the S&P500, the next technical support is at 3650-3750. Our Equity Capitulation Indicators for both the S&P500 and EM stocks remain above their previous (2010-2020) lows (Charts 5 and 6 below). In addition, equity market breadth is deteriorating. Fundamental problems with financial markets are linked to mounting stagflation fears. Global trade volumes are set to contract in H2 due to a decline in US and European household spending on goods ex-autos and a delayed recovery in China as we discussed in last week’s report. In turn, US wage growth is accelerating, which will push up unit labor costs. US core inflation will likely drop due to base effects, but will remain above 3.5-4%, which far exceeds the Fed’s 2-2.25% target. Chart 1EM Share Prices: Their Long-Term Moving Averages Served As A Support In Bear Markets EM Share Prices: Their Long-Term Moving Averages Served As A Support In Bear Markets EM Share Prices: Their Long-Term Moving Averages Served As A Support In Bear Markets Chart 2 illustrates that stagflation fears have already gripped financial markets. Global defensive equity sectors have recently been outperforming global non-TMT stocks despite rising US and global bond yields (Chart 2). This is a major departure from the historical relationship between the two and likely foreshadows a period of continuous Fed tightening despite slower global growth. Global equity managers should favor defensive stocks as they will continue to outperform under the two most likely scenarios: (1) either these stagflation dynamics continue; or (2) a growth scare will dominate, during which US bond yields could drop. Chart 2Does This Divergence From A Historic Correlation Signify Stagflation? Does This Divergence From A Historic Correlation Signify Stagflation? Does This Divergence From A Historic Correlation Signify Stagflation? The US dollar continues to climb, and its strength has recently become very broad-based – extending to commodity currencies and Asian currencies. As we show in Charts 46-48 below, the US dollar has more upside.   Commodity prices are at an important juncture. On the one hand, supply shortages and risks to further supply disruptions could continue to support resource prices. On the other hand, demand will disappoint. Shrinking US and European consumer spending on goods ex-autos, contracting Chinese commodity intake and weakness in EM ex-China demand all suggest that global commodity consumption will decline in the months ahead. In our March 10 report, we noted that commodity prices would be volatile and this view has been validated: commodity prices swings have been extreme over the past two months. More recent evidence points to lower resource prices. Chart 3 shows that over the past 200 years raw material prices in real US dollar terms (deflated by US headline CPI) have oscillated around a well-defined downtrend. The pandemic surge in commodity prices has pushed them to two standard deviations above their time-trend. Historically, commodity rallies (and even their secular bull markets) ended when prices reached this threshold. Hence, odds are that industrial commodities might hit a soft spot. Energy prices remain a wild card due to geopolitics. It is critical to note that the raw materials price index shown in Chart 3 does not include energy, gold and semi-precious metals (the footnote of Chart 3 lists commodities included in this aggregate). Chart 3Raw Material Prices (In Real Terms) Are At The Upper End Of A 200-Year Downtrend Raw Material Prices (In Real Terms) Are At The Upper End Of A 200-Year Downtrend Raw Material Prices (In Real Terms) Are At The Upper End Of A 200-Year Downtrend Finally, Chart 4 demonstrates that Chinese materials stocks have plunged. We read this as a warning sign for global materials because China is by far the largest consumer of raw materials (excluding oil), accounting for about 50-55% of global industrial metal demand. Chart 4Chinese Material Stocks Are Signaling Trouble For Global Materials Chinese Material Stocks Are Signaling Trouble For Global Materials Chinese Material Stocks Are Signaling Trouble For Global Materials Investment Recommendations Stay defensive. Global equity and credit portfolios should underweight EM equities and credit, respectively. The rally in the US dollar might be the final upleg before a major downtrend sets in. However, this final rally will likely be considerable, i.e., the greenback will likely overshoot. The CNY has broken down versus the US dollar and our target is 6.70-6.75 for now. A depreciating yuan is bearish for Asian and EM currencies. We continue to recommend short positions in the following EM currencies versus the US dollar: ZAR, COP, PEN, HUF, IDR, PHP and PLN. A buying opportunity in EM local currency bonds will present itself when EM currencies hit a bottom versus the US dollar.   Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com   US And EM Equity Capitulation Indicators These indicators have not reached their lows of 2010, 2011, 2018 and 2020. The magnitude of the S&P500 selloffs in 2011 and 2018, were 19.5% and 19.8%, respectively. Hence, our best guess for the size of a S&P500 drawdown in this selloff is about 20%. This puts the potential S&P500 low at 3800-3850. The latter is consistent with the technical support (3-year moving average) that held up in 2011, 2016 and 2018 (Chart 5, top panel).  Chart 5 US And EM Equity Capitulation Indicators US And EM Equity Capitulation Indicators Chart 6 US And EM Equity Capitulation Indicators US And EM Equity Capitulation Indicators Components Of Our US Equity Capitulation Indicator Not all components of our US Equity Capitulation Indicator have reached their previous lows. Odds are that US share prices will drop further. US equity valuations are still expensive, geopolitical risks are elevated, and inflation and inflation expectations are extremely high, which will limit the Fed’s maneuvering room. Chart 7 Components Of Our US Equity Capitulation Indicator Components Of Our US Equity Capitulation Indicator Chart 8 Components Of Our US Equity Capitulation Indicator Components Of Our US Equity Capitulation Indicator Components Of Our EM Equity Capitulation Indicator Similarly, the components of our EM Equity Capitulation Indicator have not reached their previous lows. The share of industry groups above their 200-day moving average, analysts’ net EPS revisions as well as the momentum and equity sentiment indicators remain above prior troughs. Further downside in EM share prices is likely.  Chart 9 Components Of Our EM Equity Capitulation Indicator Components Of Our EM Equity Capitulation Indicator Chart 10 Components Of Our EM Equity Capitulation Indicator Components Of Our EM Equity Capitulation Indicator S&P500 Overlays With Previous Geopolitical Crises The most recent examples of geopolitical shocks include the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, the oil embargo of 1973 in response to the Yom Kippur War and the Gulf War of 1990. The magnitude of the S&P 500 selloff was 28% in 1962, 23% in 1973 and 20% in 1990. Today, the S&P 500 is down only 12.8% from its peak. Based on the above three profiles, the current selloff in US stocks has further to go. This also means that non-US equities, including EM, will continue to suffer.  Chart 11 S&P500 Overlays With Previous Geopolitical Crises S&P500 Overlays With Previous Geopolitical Crises Chart 12 S&P500 Overlays With Previous Geopolitical Crises S&P500 Overlays With Previous Geopolitical Crises Chart 13 S&P500 Overlays With Previous Geopolitical Crises S&P500 Overlays With Previous Geopolitical Crises Table 1 No Relief From Market Blues No Relief From Market Blues Various EM Equity Indexes: Deteriorating Breadth Various EM equity indexes have been in a bear market. The deterioration has been broadening as recent leaders such as commodity producers and Taiwanese stocks have been gapping down. Yet, not all bourses are very oversold. We published a Special Report on semiconductors on April 14 arguing that semi stocks face more downside. Share prices of commodity producers have recently corrected, and, as we argue above, odds of a further drop are non-trivial. What are the odds that the overall EM equity index undershoots? See the next section.  Chart 14 Various EM Equity Indexes: Deteriorating Breadth Various EM Equity Indexes: Deteriorating Breadth Chart 15 Various EM Equity Indexes: Deteriorating Breadth Various EM Equity Indexes: Deteriorating Breadth Chart 16 Various EM Equity Indexes: Deteriorating Breadth Various EM Equity Indexes: Deteriorating Breadth Chart 17 Various EM Equity Indexes: Deteriorating Breadth Various EM Equity Indexes: Deteriorating Breadth EM Undershoot Is Likely Sentiment towards EM equities has fallen significantly, but it is not yet at previous lows. Similarly, there is still room for EM net EPS revisions by bottom-up analysts to fall further. Finally, platinum prices point to more downside in EM non-TMT share prices.  Chart 18 EM Undershoot Is Likely EM Undershoot Is Likely Chart 19 EM Undershoot Is Likely EM Undershoot Is Likely Chart 20 EM Undershoot Is Likely EM Undershoot Is Likely EM Bond Yields And Share Prices Historically, rising EM corporate USD bond yields and EM local currency bond yields led to a selloff in EM share prices. Unless EM USD and local currency bond yields start falling on a sustainable basis, EM equities will continue to struggle. Chart 21 EM Bond Yields And Share Prices EM Bond Yields And Share Prices Chart 22 EM Bond Yields And Share Prices EM Bond Yields And Share Prices Rising US Corporate Bond Yields Are Bearish For US Stocks Rising US corporate borrowing costs point to lower US share prices. Corporate bond yields could increase because of either rising US Treasury yields or widening credit spreads. Furthermore, bearish US equity market technicals are presently reinforcing this downbeat outlook for US stocks.  Chart 23 Rising US Corporate Bond Yields Are Bearish For US Stocks Rising US Corporate Bond Yields Are Bearish For US Stocks Chart 24 Rising US Corporate Bond Yields Are Bearish For US Stocks Rising US Corporate Bond Yields Are Bearish For US Stocks Chart 25 Rising US Corporate Bond Yields Are Bearish For US Stocks Rising US Corporate Bond Yields Are Bearish For US Stocks The S&P500 EPS Can Contract Outside Of A Recession Let’s recall what happened in 2000-2001 in the US. Real GDP contracted only slightly, household spending in real terms did not contract at all, and the housing market was booming. Yet, the S&P 500 operating EPS plunged by 30% and the stock index was down by 50%. In 1966, even though real and nominal GDP did not contract, the S&P500 operating EPS shrank by about 5% and share prices fell by 22%. This episode is the best analogy for US economic and financial market dynamics over the near term.  Chart 26 The S&P500 EPS Can Contract Outside Of A Recession The S&P500 EPS Can Contract Outside Of A Recession Chart 27 The S&P500 EPS Can Contract Outside Of A Recession The S&P500 EPS Can Contract Outside Of A Recession US Stagflation Scare US wage growth is accelerating, and unit labor costs are surging. The latter will make inflation sticky and hurt corporate profit margins. Besides, US consumer demand for goods ex-autos will shrink following a two-year period of overspending. This combination will produce a stagflation scare – a period when corporate profits are weak, but the Fed has little maneuvering room as core inflation is well above its target.  Chart 28 US Stagflation Scare US Stagflation Scare Chart 29 US Stagflation Scare US Stagflation Scare Chart 30 US Stagflation Scare US Stagflation Scare Chart 31 US Stagflation Scare US Stagflation Scare Global Trade Volumes Will Shrink Taiwanese shipments to China – which lead global exports – have started to contract. Korea’s business survey of exporting companies reveals that business conditions deteriorated substantially in April. Global cyclicals have been underperforming global defensives. Finally, early cyclical stocks in the US have sold off and have substantially underperformed domestic defensives. This also points to a slowdown in US growth. Chart 32 Global Trade Volumes Will Shrink Global Trade Volumes Will Shrink Chart 33 Global Trade Volumes Will Shrink Global Trade Volumes Will Shrink Chart 34 Global Trade Volumes Will Shrink Global Trade Volumes Will Shrink Chart 35 Global Trade Volumes Will Shrink Global Trade Volumes Will Shrink China’s Economy Requires Much More Aggressive Stimulus In China, monetary and fiscal stimulus have so far been insufficient to produce a major economic recovery given the headwinds from the property sector and the harsh lockdowns. The enacted fiscal stimulus has mainly been for infrastructure spending, and it does not include direct fiscal transfers to households who are losing income due to the lockdown. On the monetary front, the credit impulse – excluding local government bond issuance (which is counted in our fiscal spending impulse) – has barely bottomed.  Chart 36 China's Economy Requires Much More Aggressive Stimulus China's Economy Requires Much More Aggressive Stimulus Chart 37 China's Economy Requires Much More Aggressive Stimulus China's Economy Requires Much More Aggressive Stimulus Chart 38 China's Economy Requires Much More Aggressive Stimulus China's Economy Requires Much More Aggressive Stimulus Chart 39 China's Economy Requires Much More Aggressive Stimulus China's Economy Requires Much More Aggressive Stimulus China Has Been A Drag On Global Trade Chinese domestic demand was extremely weak even prior to the recent lockdowns in Shanghai. Chinese import volumes of various commodities, machinery, industrials goods and semiconductors were contracting as of March. Lockdowns and associated income/profit losses will further depress domestic demand. Chart 40 China Has Been A Drag On Global Trade China Has Been A Drag On Global Trade Chart 41 China Has Been A Drag On Global Trade China Has Been A Drag On Global Trade Chinese Property Woes Are Worsening Housing floor space sold in April is down by 50% from a year ago. Households are reluctant to borrow and buy, and property developers’ financing has dried up. All these point to shrinking construction activity. Chart 42 Chinese Property Woes Are Worsening Chinese Property Woes Are Worsening Chart 43 Chinese Property Woes Are Worsening Chinese Property Woes Are Worsening Chart 44 Chinese Property Woes Are Worsening Chinese Property Woes Are Worsening Chart 45 Chinese Property Woes Are Worsening Chinese Property Woes Are Worsening The US Dollar Has More Upside Our view on the greenback has played out well, and more upside is likely. The CNY has broken down against the dollar and it will reach at least 6.70-6.75. One exception to a strong US dollar might be the yen, as the trade-weighted yen has fallen to its previous lows. However, a rebound in the yen from current levels requires  a stabilization of US bond yields.  Chart 46 The US Dollar Has More Upside The US Dollar Has More Upside Chart 47 The US Dollar Has More Upside The US Dollar Has More Upside Chart 48 The US Dollar Has More Upside The US Dollar Has More Upside Chart 49 The US Dollar Has More Upside The US Dollar Has More Upside EM Currencies: Do Not Catch A Falling Knife EM currencies remain at risk. They are not cheap, and the recent rebound has faltered with many EM exchange rates unable to break above their technical resistance vis-à-vis the USD. However, we expect the US dollar to top and EM currencies to bottom later this year. Stay tuned.  Chart 50 EM Currencies: Do Not Catch A Falling Knife... Yet EM Currencies: Do Not Catch A Falling Knife... Yet Chart 51 EM Currencies: Do Not Catch A Falling Knife... Yet EM Currencies: Do Not Catch A Falling Knife... Yet EM Credit Markets: More Spread Widening Ahead EM and US credit spreads are not particularly wide and will likely widen further. China’s corporate USD bonds remain in a bear market. The two key drivers of EM credit spreads are the business cycle and exchange rates. EM growth will continue to disappoint, and EM currencies will relapse versus the US dollar. Hence, investors should be patient before buying/overweighting EM credit.  Chart 52 EM Credit Markets: More Spread Widening Ahead EM Credit Markets: More Spread Widening Ahead Chart 53 EM Credit Markets: More Spread Widening Ahead EM Credit Markets: More Spread Widening Ahead Chart 54 EM Credit Markets: More Spread Widening Ahead EM Credit Markets: More Spread Widening Ahead Chart 55 EM Credit Markets: More Spread Widening Ahead EM Credit Markets: More Spread Widening Ahead EM Domestic Bonds: A Buying Opportunity Down The Road The EM GBI domestic bonds total return index in USD terms has broken down and near-term weakness is likely. Meanwhile, EM local currency bond yields have risen significantly, and they offer good value. That said, a buying opportunity in local currency bonds will transpire only after their currencies bottom. Chart 56 EM Domestic Bonds: A Buying Opportunity Down The Road EM Domestic Bonds: A Buying Opportunity Down The Road Chart 57 EM Domestic Bonds: A Buying Opportunity Down The Road EM Domestic Bonds: A Buying Opportunity Down The Road No Relief From Market Blues No Relief From Market Blues No Relief From Market Blues No Relief From Market Blues Footnotes    

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

Executive Summary Using the real yield on inflation protected bonds as a gauge of the long-term real interest rate is possibly the biggest mistake in finance. The ultra-low real yield on inflation protected bonds captures nothing more than a stampede for inflation protection overwhelming a tiny supply of inflation protected bonds. The long-term real interest rate embedded in the US bond and US stock markets is likely to be significantly higher than the -0.2 percent real yield on US inflation protected bonds. Long-term investors should overweight conventional bonds and stocks versus inflation protected bonds. On a 6-12 month horizon, overweight both US bonds and US stocks. With core inflation on the cusp of rolling over and global growth decelerating, the end is in sight for the sell-offs both in long duration bonds and in the stock market. Fractal trading watchlist: High dividend stocks, and MSCI Hong Kong versus MSCI China. The Low ‘Real Bond Yield’ Just Reflects A Massive Demand For Inflation Protection The Low 'Real Bond Yield' Just Reflects A Massive Demand For Inflation Protection The Low 'Real Bond Yield' Just Reflects A Massive Demand For Inflation Protection Bottom Line: The end is in sight for the sell-offs both in long duration bonds and in the stock market. Feature “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so” One of my favourite quotes, ostensibly attributed to Mark Twain, warns us that trouble doesn’t come from what you don’t know. Rather, trouble comes from what you think you know for certain but turns out to be wrong. In economics and finance the “what you know for sure that just ain’t so” is the long-term real interest rate. In economics and finance the “what you know for sure that just ain’t so” is the long-term real interest rate. The long-term real interest rate is arguably the most fundamental concept in economics and finance. It encapsulates the risk-free real return on savings, and it is embedded in the returns offered by all assets such as bonds and equities. The trouble is, the way that most people quantify the long-term real interest rate turns out to be wrong. Specifically, most people define the long-term real interest rate as the real yield on (10-year) inflation protected bonds, which now stands at -0.2 percent in the US and -2.3 percent in the UK. US and UK inflation protected bonds will of course deliver the negative long-term real returns that their yields offer. So, most people believe that the long-term real interest rate is still depressed, permitting many rate hikes from the Federal Reserve and Bank of England before monetary policy becomes ‘restrictive’, and providing a massive cushion to asset valuations before they become expensive.This commonly held belief is arguably the biggest mistake in finance. The Long-Term Real Interest Rate Is Not What You Think The biggest mistake in finance stems from the confluence of two factors: first, the inflation protected bond market is the only true hedge against inflation; and second, it is tiny. Compared with the $45 trillion US equity market and the $25 trillion T-bond market, the Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS) market is worth just $1.5 trillion. Many other economies do not even have an inflation protected bond market! The ultra-low real yield on inflation protected bonds captures nothing more than the massive imbalance between huge demand for inflation hedges and tiny supply. When the price level surges, as it has recently, stock and bond investors have a fiduciary duty to seek an inflation hedge, even if they are shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted (Chart I-1). With at least $70 trillion worth of investors all wanting a piece of the $1.5 trillion TIPS market, the demand for TIPS surges, meaning that their real yield collapses. Therefore, the ultra-low real yield on inflation protected bonds captures nothing more than the massive imbalance between huge demand for inflation hedges and tiny supply. Chart I-1When The Price Level Surges, Investors Flood Into Inflation Protected Bonds When The Price Level Surges, Investors Flood Into Inflation Protected Bonds When The Price Level Surges, Investors Flood Into Inflation Protected Bonds The proof comes from the perfect positive correlation between the oil price and so-called ‘inflation expectations.’ As a surging oil price drives down the 10-year TIPS yield relative to the 10-year T-bond yield, this difference in yields – which is the commonly accepted definition of expected inflation through 2022-32 – also surges (Chart I-2and Chart I-3). This perfect positive correlation also applies to the so-called ‘5-year, 5-year forward’ inflation rate, the expected inflation rate through 2027-32 (Chart I-4). Chart I-2Inflation Expectations Just Track The Oil Price Inflation Expectations Just Track The Oil Price Inflation Expectations Just Track The Oil Price Chart I-3Inflation Expectations Are Just A Mathematical Function Of The Oil Price Inflation Expectations Are Just A Mathematical Function Of The Oil Price Inflation Expectations Are Just A Mathematical Function Of The Oil Price Chart I-4Even The ‘5-Year, 5-Year Forward’ Inflation Expectation Just Tracks The Oil Price Even The '5-Year, 5-Year Forward' Inflation Expectation Just Tracks The Oil Price Even The '5-Year, 5-Year Forward' Inflation Expectation Just Tracks The Oil Price Yet this observed positive correlation between the oil price and inflation expectations is nonsensical, because the reality is the exact opposite! The higher the price level at a given moment, the lower will be the subsequent inflation rate. This is just basic maths. The subsequent inflation rate is the future price divided by the current price, so dividing by a higher price results in a lower number. The empirical evidence over the last 50 years confirms this. The higher the oil price, the lower the subsequent inflation rate (Chart I-5). Chart I-5But A Higher Oil Price Means Lower Subsequent Inflation But A Higher Oil Price Means Lower Subsequent Inflation But A Higher Oil Price Means Lower Subsequent Inflation As the price level surges, subsequent inflation declines, both in theory and in practice. Hence, we should subtract a smaller number from the nominal bond yield to get a higher long-term real interest rate. In other words, all else being equal, the impact of a higher price level is to lift the long-term real interest rate. To repeat, the very low real yield on inflation protected bonds just captures the stampede of inflation hedging demand overwhelming a tiny supply (Chart I-6). Given this distortion, the real yield on inflation protected bonds is likely not the long-term real interest rate embedded in the much larger bond and stock markets. Right now, the long-term real interest rate embedded in the bond and stock markets is likely to be significantly higher than the -0.2 percent real yield on TIPS. Chart I-6The Low ‘Real Bond Yield’ Just Reflects A Massive Demand For Inflation Protection The Low 'Real Bond Yield' Just Reflects A Massive Demand For Inflation Protection The Low 'Real Bond Yield' Just Reflects A Massive Demand For Inflation Protection To which the obvious rejoinder is: if the real yield embedded in conventional bonds and stocks is much higher than in inflation protected bonds, why does the market not arbitrage it away? The simple answer is that the market will arbitrage it away, but in slow motion. This is because the mispricing between expected and realised inflation will crystallise in real time, and not ahead of it. Nevertheless, this slow motion arbitrage provides a compelling opportunity for patient long-term investors. Overweight conventional bonds and stocks versus inflation protected bonds. The Best Way To Value The Stock Market Given that we cannot use the yield on inflation protected bonds as a reliable measure of the long-term real interest rate embedded in stock prices, it is also a big mistake to value equities versus the real bond yield. In The Case Against A ‘Super Bubble’ (And The Case For) we explained the much better way to value equities. The basic idea is that the cashflows of any investment can be condensed into one future ‘lump sum payment’. So, we just need to know the size of this lump sum payment, and then to calculate its present value. The US stock market tracks (the 30-year T-bond price) multiplied by (profits expected in the year ahead). For a stock market, the size of the payment just tracks current profits multiplied by ‘a structural growth constant’, and the present value just tracks the value of an equal duration bond. For example, the duration of the US stock market is the same as that of the 30-year T-bond, at around 25 years.1  It follows that the US stock market price should track: (The 30-year T-bond price) multiplied by (profits expected in the year ahead) multiplied by (a structural growth constant) To the extent that the structural growth outlook for profits does not change, we can simplify the expression to: (The 30-year T-bond price) multiplied by (profits expected in the year ahead) This approach might seem simplistic, yet it perfectly explains the US stock market’s evolution both over the past 40 years (Chart I-7) and over the past year (Chart I-8). Specifically, in 2022 to date, the major drag on the US stock market has been the sell-off in the 30-year T-bond. Chart I-7The US Stock Market = The 30-Year T-Bond Price Times Profits (40 Year Chart) The US Stock Market = The 30-Year T-Bond Price Times Profits (40 Year Chart) The US Stock Market = The 30-Year T-Bond Price Times Profits (40 Year Chart) Chart I-8The US Stock Market = The 30-Year T-Bond Price Times Profits (1 Year Chart) The US Stock Market = The 30-Year T-Bond Price Times Profits (1 Year Chart) The US Stock Market = The 30-Year T-Bond Price Times Profits (1 Year Chart) For the foreseeable future, we expect profit growth to be lacklustre, keeping the 30-year T-bond price as the dominant driver of the US stock market. With core inflation on the cusp of rolling over and global growth decelerating, the end is in sight for the sell-off in long duration bonds and therefore for the sell-off in the stock market. On a 6-12 month horizon, overweight both US bonds and US stocks. Fractal Trading Watchlist This week, we note that the MSCI index outperformance of Hong Kong versus Chinese has reached a point of fragility on its 260-day fractal structure that has signalled previous major turning points in 2015, 2016, 2018, 2019, and 2020. Therefore, we have added this to our watchlist of investments that are at or approaching turning points, which is available in full on our website: cpt.bcaresearch.com We also highlight that the strong rally in high dividend stocks (the ETF is HDV) is vulnerable to correction if, as we expect, bond yields stabilise or reverse (Chart I-9). Accordingly, the recommended trade is to short high dividend stocks (HDV) versus the 10-year T-bond, setting the profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 6 percent. Chart I-9The Outperformance Of High Dividend Stocks Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of High Dividend Stocks Is Vulnerable To Reversal Fractal Trading Watch List The Outperformance Of High Dividend Stocks Is Vulnerable To Reversal Fractal Trading Watch List The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal 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 Reversing Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing 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 Has Started To Reverse The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse 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 Has Reached A Potential Turning Point US Homebuilders' Underperformance Has Reached A Potential Turning Point US Homebuilders' Underperformance Has Reached A Potential Turning Point Chart 19Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Chart 20The Rally In USD/EUR Could End The Rally In USD/EUR Could End The Rally In USD/EUR Could End Chart 21The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 The duration of any investment quantifies how far into the future its cashflows lie, by averaging those cashflows into one theoretical future ‘lump sum’. Defined mathematically, it is the weighted average of the times of its cashflows, in which the weights are the present values of the cashflows. For a bond, the duration also equals the percentage change in the bond price for every 1 percent change in its yield. Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades This Is The Biggest Mistake In Finance: The Real Interest Rate This Is The Biggest Mistake In Finance: The Real Interest Rate This Is The Biggest Mistake In Finance: The Real Interest Rate This Is The Biggest Mistake In Finance: The Real Interest Rate 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  

Executive Summary Economic Growth in Q2 Will Be Much Softer Economic Growth In Q2 Will Be Much Softer Economic Growth In Q2 Will Be Much Softer China’s GDP headline growth in Q1 was better than consensus, but it does not capture the full economic impact of ongoing city lockdowns. Other than infrastructure investment, business activity data from March shows a broad-based slowing in growth momentum. Manufacturing investment decelerated, while both real estate investment and retail sales contracted from a year ago. Exports in value terms continued to grow rapidly through March. However, the resilient rate of expansion is unsustainable given a weakening global manufacturing cycle and softening external demand for goods. China’s domestic supply-chain disruptions will also weigh on its export sector’s activity. Home sales contracted sharply in the first three weeks of April, particularly in larger cities. The lockdowns, coupled with poor funding dynamics among real estate developers, suggest that the real estate sector will remain a huge drag on China’s economy this year. Bottom Line: Even though business activities will resume after the lockdown restrictions are lifted, we do not expect China’s economy to rebound quickly and strongly as it did in 2H20. From a cyclical perspective, we continue to recommend a neutral allocation to Chinese onshore stocks in a global portfolio.   A slew of economic data released during the past two weeks suggests that the negative effects from the COVID-induced lockdowns in China’s largest and most prosperous cities are starting to emerge. The closings, which will likely continue through the end of April, are causing disruptions in both production and demand just as the economy was already in a business downcycle. Other than infrastructure spending, business activity data from March illustrates a broad-based slowing in growth momentum. The longer-term impact of the citywide shutdowns is still to come. Related Report  China Investment StrategyThe Cost Of China’s Zero-COVID Strategy The economic benefits of Beijing’s enhanced stimulus measures will be delayed to 2H22 at the earliest. Moreover, as we discussed in our last week’s report, the post-lockdown recovery in the second half of this year will be much more muted than in H2 2020 . The external environment is less reflationary than in 2H20; China’s domestic demand and sentiment among corporates and households were already declining prior to the latest lockdowns. The deteriorating economic outlook will continue to depress the absolute performance of Chinese onshore stocks in the coming months (Chart 1). Furthermore, against a backdrop of rising US Treasury yields, the interest rate differentials between China and US have become negative for the first time in a decade. A yield disadvantage, coupled with risk-averse sentiment across global financial markets, has discouraged portfolio flows into China. We expect foreign investment outflows to continue in the near term before China’s economy stabilizes sometime in 2H22 (Chart 2). Chart 1Deteriorating Domestic Economic Fundamentals Are The Main Risk To Chinese Onshore Stocks... Deteriorating Domestic Economic Fundamentals Are The Main Risk To Chinese Onshore Stocks... Deteriorating Domestic Economic Fundamentals Are The Main Risk To Chinese Onshore Stocks... Chart 2...And Have Triggered Substantial Foreign Investment Outflows ...And Have Triggered Substantial Foreign Investment Outflows ...And Have Triggered Substantial Foreign Investment Outflows From a cyclical perspective, we maintain our neutral position on Chinese onshore stocks in a global portfolio. Qingyun Xu, CFA Associate Editor qingyunx@bcaresearch.com China’s Credit Conditions: Amble Supply Versus Lack Of Demand Although broad credit growth accelerated in March from the previous month, the improvement mainly reflects a sharp increase in local government bond issuance. Bank loan growth on a year-over-year basis has not improved yet. Loan demand for infrastructure investments escalated, supported by front-loaded fiscal supports in Q1 (Chart 3). However, private-sector credit demand remains very weak. The acceleration in the credit impulse –calculated as a 12-month difference in the annual change in credit as a percentage of nominal GDP –is much more muted when excluding local government bond issuance (Chart 4). Chart 3Infrastructure-Related Bank Loans And Investments Picked Up Sharply In Q1 Infrastructure-Related Bank Loans And Investments Picked Up Sharply In Q1 Infrastructure-Related Bank Loans And Investments Picked Up Sharply In Q1 Chart 4The Rebound In Credit Impulse Is Much More Muted When Excluding Local Government Bond Issuance The Rebound In Credit Impulse Is Much More Muted When Excluding Local Government Bond Issuance The Rebound In Credit Impulse Is Much More Muted When Excluding Local Government Bond Issuance Sentiment among the corporate and household sectors has plunged to a multi-year low, following two years of stringent COVID-containment measures and last year’s regulatory clampdowns (Chart 5). Furthermore, the corporate sector’s propensity to invest weakened sharply in Q1, despite much looser monetary conditions (Chart 6). A worsening private sector’s sentiment suggests that demand for credit is unlikely to pick up imminently. Chart 5Private-Sector Demand For Credit Remains in The Doldrums... Private-Sector Demand For Credit Remains in The Doldrums... Private-Sector Demand For Credit Remains in The Doldrums... Chart 6...And Unlikely To Turn Around Imminently Despite Accommodative Monetary Conditions ...And Unlikely To Turn Around Imminently Despite Accommodative Monetary Conditions ...And Unlikely To Turn Around Imminently Despite Accommodative Monetary Conditions Chart 7Significant Foreign Investment Outflows In China's Onshore Bond Market Significant Foreign Investment Outflows In China's Onshore Bond Market Significant Foreign Investment Outflows In China's Onshore Bond Market The PBoC announced a 25bps cut in its reserve requirement ratio (RRR) rate on April 15, but has kept its policy rate unchanged. The move was below the market’s expectation of a 50bps RRR cut and/or a policy rate cut. While we still expect that the PBoC will trim the loan prime rate (LPR) in Q2, the recent acceleration in the RMB’s devaluation may make the central bank more cautious in reducing rates and further diverging from the hawkish US Fed and other major central banks  (Chart 7). China GDP: Above-Expectation Growth In Q1, Mounting Concerns In Q2 China’s year-over-year GDP growth in Q1 accelerated to 4.8% from 4.0% in Q4 last year, beating the market expectation of a 4.2% increase. The Q1 growth was mainly supported by strong infrastructure investments and exports (Chart 8). On a sequential basis, however, seasonally adjusted GDP growth in Q1 was 1.3% (non-annualized), slower than Q4’s reading of 1.6% and below its historical mean (Chart 9). Meanwhile, private- sector investment and household consumption remain subdued and activity in the housing sector worsened. Chart 8Economic Growth In Q1 Was Underpinned By Infrastructure Investments And Exports Economic Growth In Q1 Was Underpinned By Infrastructure Investments And Exports Economic Growth In Q1 Was Underpinned By Infrastructure Investments And Exports Chart 9Q1 GDP Growth On A Sequential Basis Is Below Its Historical Mean Q1 GDP Growth On A Sequential Basis Is Below Its Historical Mean Q1 GDP Growth On A Sequential Basis Is Below Its Historical Mean The negative effect from broadening city-wide lockdowns and more supply-chain disruptions in Shanghai and surrounding cities in the Yangtze River Delta region will be much larger in Q2 than in Q1. We expect that year-over-year GDP growth in Q2 will drop well below 4%, sharply down from the 4.8% growth recorded in Q1. Furthermore, the aggregate economic impact from the lockdowns could reduce China’s real GDP growth in 2022 by 1ppt, which poses substantial risks to the country’s 5.5% annual growth target for this year. Exports Growth Set To Decelerate Although the growth of exports in value terms remained resilient in March, China’s exports will be challenged this year by the softening global demand for goods and domestic COVID-induced disruptions in the supply chain. A recent PBoC survey of 5,000 industrial enterprises shows that overseas orders dived sharply (Chart 10). In addition, global cyclical stocks have underperformed defensives. The underperformance has historically been a good leading indicator of a global manufacturing downturn, which will likely lead to a decline in demand for Chinese exports (Chart 11). The weakening external demand is also reflected in softening US demand and falling personal consumption expenditures on goods ex-autos (Chart 12).   Chart 10Overseas Orders For Chinese Industrial Enterprises Dived Sharply Overseas Orders For Chinese Industrial Enterprises Dived Sharply Overseas Orders For Chinese Industrial Enterprises Dived Sharply Chart 11Global Equity Sector Performance Points To A Relapse In Global Manufacturing Global Equity Sector Performance Points To A Relapse In Global Manufacturing Global Equity Sector Performance Points To A Relapse In Global Manufacturing Furthermore, China’s imports for processing trade, which historically has been highly correlated with China’s total exports growth, decelerated sharply in March. The drop heralds a slowdown in the growth of Chinese exports in the coming months (Chart 13). Chart 12External Demand For Chinese Export Goods Will Likely Dwindle External Demand For Chinese Export Goods Will Likely Dwindle External Demand For Chinese Export Goods Will Likely Dwindle Chart 13Slowing Processing Imports Point To A Deceleration In Chinese Export Growth Slowing Processing Imports Point To A Deceleration In Chinese Export Growth Slowing Processing Imports Point To A Deceleration In Chinese Export Growth   Port congestions and supply-chain disruptions worsened in April after the Shanghai lockdown began on March 28. COVID-related supply-chain disruptions in China’s key ocean ports and reduced shipping volumes will curtail activity of the country’s export sector in the short term. Real Estate Sector Will Remain A Drag On China’s Economy March’s data reflects a broad-based deterioration in housing market activities (Chart 14). The growth in real estate investment rolled over, and all floor space indicators contracted further in March. Moreover, households’ sentiment in the property market remains lackluster (Chart 15). Funding among real estate developers has plummeted to an all-time low, which will continue to dampen housing construction activities (Chart 16). Chart 14A Broad-based Deterioration In Housing Market Indicators In March A Broad-based Deterioration In Housing Market Indicators In March A Broad-based Deterioration In Housing Market Indicators In March Chart 15Housing Market Sentiment Shows Little Signs Of Revival Housing Market Sentiment Shows Little Signs Of Revival Housing Market Sentiment Shows Little Signs Of Revival Chart 16Housing Construction Activities Are Set To Slow Further Housing Construction Activities Are Set To Slow Further Housing Construction Activities Are Set To Slow Further Chart 17Home Sales Worsened In April Amid COVID Flareups In Major Cities Home Sales Worsened In April Amid COVID Flareups In Major Cities Home Sales Worsened In April Amid COVID Flareups In Major Cities The March housing transaction data only captures some early indications from the recent round of lockdowns. The negative upshot on home sales will be greater in April. Figures for high-frequency floor space sold show a substantial weakening in home sales, particularly in tier-one and tier-two cities, through the first three weeks of April (Chart 17). The shrinkage in home sales will likely continue through Q2 and poses a significant risk for property investment and construction activities in H2. Regional governments are allowed to initiate their own housing policies, therefore, an increasing number of regional cities have slashed mortgage rates and/or down payment thresholds (Chart 18). However, the easing measures have failed to shore up demand for housing. In addition, pledged supplementary lending, which the government used to monetize massively excess inventories in the 2015/16 market, resumed its downtrend in March after a short-lived rebound earlier this year (Chart 19). Chart 18More Regional Cities Have Eased Local Housing Policies Expect A Much Weaker Economy In Q2 Expect A Much Weaker Economy In Q2 Chart 19PSL Injections Resumed Downward Trend In March PSL Injections Resumed Downward Trend In March PSL Injections Resumed Downward Trend In March Subdued Domestic Demand And Household Consumption Chart 20Strong Pickup In Infrastructure Investment Growth Failed To Offset The Deceleration In Manufacturing And Real Estate Investments Strong Pickup In Infrastructure Investment Growth Failed To Offset The Deceleration In Manufacturing And Real Estate Investments Strong Pickup In Infrastructure Investment Growth Failed To Offset The Deceleration In Manufacturing And Real Estate Investments China’s domestic demand remained weak in March and will likely worsen in the next few months when more negative fallout from the recent lockdowns spill over to the aggregate economy.   Infrastructure investments picked up strongly in March. However, robust infrastructure investments were insufficient to fully offset the weakness in capital spending in the real estate and manufacturing sectors (Chart 20). The sluggish housing market and a deceleration in exports growth will likely slow China’s capital spending further in Q2. Growth in China’s imports in value terms contracted slightly in March; this was the first time since September 2020. Meanwhile, import growth in volume terms contracted sharply amid weak domestic demand and the early effects of supply-chain disruptions (Chart 21). Moreover, imports of major commodities in volume shrank deeper in March (Chart 22).  Chart 21Chinese Imports Value Growth Fell Into Contraction In March Chinese Imports Value Growth Fell Into Contraction In March Chinese Imports Value Growth Fell Into Contraction In March Chart 22The Volume Of China's Key Commodity Imports Contracted Further In March The Volume Of China's Key Commodity Imports Contracted Further In March The Volume Of China's Key Commodity Imports Contracted Further In March Household consumption has been a laggard in China’s economy in the past two years and the wave of city lockdowns are taking a heavy toll on consumption. Retail sales growth contracted in March, for the first time since August 2020 (Chart 23). Notably, online sales of goods also slowed to a multi-year low, highlighting not only subdued demand but also COVID-related logistic interruptions. Chart 23Retail Sales Growth Slipped Below Zero Retail Sales Growth Slipped Below Zero Retail Sales Growth Slipped Below Zero Chart 24Tame Core And Service CPIs Also Reflect Sluggish Household Demand Tame Core And Service CPIs Also Reflect Sluggish Household Demand Tame Core And Service CPIs Also Reflect Sluggish Household Demand Weakening core and service CPI readings also reflect a lackluster demand from consumers (Chart 24). We expect that the ongoing lockdowns will continue to weigh on service sector activity and household consumption, at least for the next couple of months (Chart 25). In addition, labor market dynamics are worsening rapidly and the nationwide urban unemployment rate rose to its highest level since mid-2020. The employment situation will also curb household consumption in the medium-term (Chart 26). Chart 26Labor Market Situation Is Deteriorating Sharply Labor Market Situation Is Deteriorating Sharply Labor Market Situation Is Deteriorating Sharply Chart 25Surging COVID Cases And Stringent Countermeasures Will Continue To Curb Service Sector Activities Surging COVID Cases And Stringent Countermeasures Will Continue To Curb Service Sector Activities Surging COVID Cases And Stringent Countermeasures Will Continue To Curb Service Sector Activities Table 1China Macro Data Summary Expect A Much Weaker Economy In Q2 Expect A Much Weaker Economy In Q2 Table 2China Financial Market Performance Summary Expect A Much Weaker Economy In Q2 Expect A Much Weaker Economy In Q2   Footnotes Strategic Themes Cyclical Recommendations