Japan

This week’s report examines the state of the global monetary tightening cycle and addresses some frequently asked questions about the Fed’s QT program. New yield curve trades are recommended for the US and German yield curves.

Stay short Greater China assets. Stay long Japanese yen. Hold back on Brazil for now but look forward to opportunities in future.

This week, we present our quarterly review of the BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy (GFIS) model bond portfolio for Q3/2022. We also discuss the model portfolio’s expected performance over next 3-6 months after our recent moves to reduce overall duration exposure and increase the underweight to US Treasuries.

This week’s <i>Global Investment Strategy</i> report titled Fourth Quarter 2022 Strategy Outlook: A Three-Act Play discusses the outlook for the global economy and financial markets for the rest of 2022 and beyond.

Executive Summary Upward Repricing Of Bond Yields Continues In this report, we discuss our move last week to shift to a below-benchmark overall global duration stance in more detail. Our strongest conviction view on developed market government bonds is underweighting US Treasuries. The outcome of last week’s FOMC meeting, where the Fed committed to a rapid shift to restrictive US monetary policy, supports that position. Our strongest conviction overweight is on Japan, with the Bank of Japan both willing and able to maintain its cap on longer-term JGB yields. We are also overweight countries where it will be difficult for central banks to lift rates as much as markets expect – core Europe, Australia and Canada. The explosion in UK bond yields, and collapse of the British pound, seen after last week’s UK “mini-budget” shows that investors have not lost the power to punish fiscal and monetary policies that are non-credible - like a massive debt-financed tax cut at a time of high inflation. As a result, the Bank of England will now be forced to raise rates much more than we had been expecting, and Gilts will remain extremely volatile in the near-term. Bottom Line: Maintain a below-benchmark overall duration stance in global bond portfolios. Stay underweight US Treasuries. Upgrade exposure to government bonds in Japan and Canada to overweight, but tactically downgrade UK Gilts to underweight until a more market-friendly policy mix leads to greater stability of the British pound. Feature We shifted our recommended stance on overall global portfolio duration to below-benchmark in a Special Alert published last week. In this report, we go into the rationale for that move in more detail, and present specific details of that shift in terms of allocations by country across the various yield curves. Related Report  Global Fixed Income StrategyReduce Global Portfolio Duration To Below-Benchmark The global inflation and monetary policy backdrops remain toxic for bond markets. Last week saw interest rate increases from multiple developed economy central banks, including the Fed and Bank of England (BoE). The magnitudes of the rate hikes unnerved bond investors, with even the likes of perennial low yielders like the Swiss National Bank and Riksbank lifting rates by 75bps and 100bps, respectively. The Fed followed up its own 75bp hike by digging in its heels on the need for additional policy tightening after the 300bps of hikes already delivered this year (Chart 1). Fed Chair Jerome Powell strongly hinted that a policy-induced US recession is likely the only way to return overshooting US inflation back to the Fed’s 2% target. This triggered a breakout of the benchmark US 10-year Treasury yield above 3.5%. But the real fireworks in global bond markets occurred after the UK government announced its “mini-budget” last Friday that included massive tax cuts to be funded by debt issuance, triggering a sharp decline in the British Pound and spike in UK Gilt yields – a move that spilled over into other bond markets, pushing government bond yields to cyclical highs in the US and euro area. Chart 1Central Banks Keep Trying To “Out-Hawk” Each Other Chart 2Yields Are Now Driven By Rate Hike Expectations, Not Inflation We had been anticipating another move upward in global bond yields for this cycle, and we shifted to a below-benchmark overall global duration stance in advance of the Fed and BoE meetings last week. We see this next move higher in yields as being driven not by rising inflation expectations but by an upward repricing of interest rate expectations, leading to additional increases in real bond yields (Chart 2). Trying to pick a top in bond yields has now become a game of forecasting the level to which policy rates must rise in the current global monetary tightening cycle. On that front, there is still scope for rate expectations, and bond yields, to move higher in most developed market countries, justifying our downgrade of our recommended overall duration exposure to below-benchmark. Shifting rate expectations also lead to the changes in country bond allocations we announced last week. Rate Expectations And Country Bond Allocations Our proxy for medium-term nominal terminal rate expectations in developed market countries, the 5-year/5-year forward overnight index swap (OIS) rate, has been tracking 10-year bond yields very closely in the US and UK and, to a lesser extent, Europe (Chart 3). In those regions, the OIS curves are pricing in an increasing medium-term level of policy rates, leading to markets repricing government bond yields higher. In the US, the OIS curve is pricing in a 2023 peak for the fed funds rate of 4.67%, but with only a modest path of rate cuts in 2024 and 2025, leading to a 5-year/5-year OIS projection of 3.36% as of Monday’s market close. After the Gilt market rout, the UK OIS curve is now pricing in a 2023 peak Bank Rate over 6%, with our medium-term nominal rate proxy settling at 3.69%. In the euro area, the OIS curve is discounting a 2023 peak in the ECB policy rate of 3.22%, with a 5-year/5-year forward OIS rate of 2.7%. For all three of those regions, the market is now pricing in the highest peak in rates for the current tightening cycle. That is not the case in Canada or Australia, where rate expectations and longer-term bond yields are still below cyclical peaks (Chart 4). Japan remains the outlier, with the Bank of Japan’s yield curve control keeping 10-year JGB yields capped at 0.25%, even with the Japan OIS curve pricing in a medium-term terminal rate of 0.75%. Chart 3Rising Yields Reflect Higher Terminal Rate Expectations Chart 4Our High-Conviction Government Bond Overweights After looking at all the repricing of interest rate expectations and bond yields, we can determine our preferred government bond allocations within our strategic model bond portfolio framework. The US Remains Our Favorite Government Bond Underweight The new set of interest rate forecasts (“the dots”) presented at last week’s Fed meeting showed that the median FOMC member was forecasting the fed funds rate to rise to 4.4% by the end of 2022 and 4.6% by the end of 2023, before falling to 3.9% and 2.9% and the end of 2024 and 2025, respectively. Those are all significant increases from the June dots, where the expectations called for the funds rate to hit 3.4% by end-2022 and 3.8% by end-2023. The median Fed forecasts are now broadly in line with the pricing in the US OIS curve for 2022-2024, although the market expects higher rates than the FOMC in 2025 (Chart 5). Chart 5USTs Still Vulnerable To Additional Fed Hawkish Surprises There has been a lot of back and forth between the Fed and the markets this year, but the market has generally lagged the Fed interest rate projections for 2023 and 2024 before last week. Market pricing is now in line with the Fed dots, as investors have adjusted to the increasingly hawkish message from Fed officials that are focused solely on slowing growth, and tightening financial conditions, in an effort to bring US inflation down. We see the US Treasury curve as still vulnerable to additional hawkish messaging from the Fed, and a potentially higher-than-anticipated peak in the funds rate versus the FOMC dots. The US consumer is facing a lot of headwinds from higher interest rates and rising food and gasoline prices. However, the latter has fallen 26% from the June 13/2022 peak and is acting as a “tax cut” that also helps reduce US inflation expectations (Chart 6). Consumer confidence measures like the University of Michigan expectations survey have already shown improvement alongside the fall in gas prices, which has boosted real income expectations according to the New York Fed’s Consumer Survey (bottom panel). Even a subtle improvement in consumer confidence due to some easing of inflation expectations can help support a somewhat faster pace of consumer spending at a time of robust labor demand and accelerating wage growth. The Atlanta Fed Wage Tracker is now growing at a year-over-year pace of 5.7%, while the ratio of US job openings to unemployed workers remains near a record high (Chart 7). Fed Chair Powell has noted that the Fed must see significant weakening of the US jobs market for the Fed to consider pausing on its current rate hike path. So far, there is little evidence pointing to a loosening of US labor market conditions that would ease domestically-generated inflation pressures. Chart 6Lower Gas Prices Can Provide A Lift To US Consumer Spending Chart 7A Tight US Labor Market Will Keep The Fed Hawkish Chart 8Stay Underweight US Treasuries We expect overall US inflation to decelerate next year on the back of additional slowing of goods inflation, but will likely settle in the 3-4% range in 2023 given stubbornly sticky services inflation and wage growth. The Fed should follow through on its current interest rate projections, with a good chance that rates will need to be pushed up even higher in response to resilient labor market conditions in the first half of 2023. The risk/reward still favors higher US Treasury yields over at least the next 3-6 months, particularly with an improving flow of US data surprises and with bond investor duration positioning now much closer to neutral according to the JPMorgan client survey (Chart 8). Bottom Line: The US remains our highest conviction strategic government bond underweight in the developed markets. Recommended Allocations In Other Countries The path for monetary policy rates outside the US shows a similar profile as in the US, with a “front loading” of rate hikes to mid-2023 followed by modest rate cuts over the subsequent two years (Chart 9). The OIS-implied path for the level of rates is nearly identical in the US, Australia and Canada. On the other hand, markets are discounting much lower of levels of policy rates in Europe and Japan compared to the US, and a considerably higher path for rates in the UK (more on that in the next section). Chart 9Markets Priced For Global 'Front-Loaded' Rate Hikes We would lean against the US-like pricing of interest rates in Australia and Canada. Based on work we published in a recent Special Report along with our colleagues at BCA Research European Investment Strategy, the neutral real interest rate (“r-star”) is estimated to be deeply negative in Australia and Canada after adjusting for the high level of non-financial debt in those countries (Table 1). That financial fragility makes it much less likely that the Bank of Canada and Reserve Bank of Australia can raise rates as much as the Fed. Table 1Some Big Swings In Our R* Estimates When Including Debt US-like interest rates would almost certainly trigger a major downturn in house prices and household wealth given the inflated housing values in those two countries – the growth of which is already slowing rapidly in response to rate hikes delivered in 2022. We are maintaining our overweight recommendation on Australian government bonds, while we upgraded Canada to overweight from neutral after last week’s duration downgrade. Chart 10Move To Overweight Japan We are also staying overweight on German and French government bonds, as the ECB is unlikely to deliver the full extent of rate increases discounted in the European OIS curve. Our estimated debt-adjusted r-star is also quite negative in the euro area, suggesting that financial fragility issues (due to high government debt in Italy and high corporate debt in France) will likely limit the ECB’s ability to continue with recent chunky rate increases for much longer. In Japan, we continue to view JGBs as an “anti-duration” instrument, given the Bank of Japan’s persistence in maintaining negative interest rates and yield curve control. That makes JGBs a good overweight when global bond yields are rising and a good underweight when global bond yields are falling (Chart 10). Given our decision to reduce our recommended duration exposure to below-benchmark, the logical follow through decision is to upgrade JGBs to overweight. The only remaining country to consider is our view on UK Gilts, which has now become more complicated. Anarchy In The UK The selloff in the UK Gilt market has been stunning in its ferocity. Dating back to last Thursday’s 50bp rate hike by the BoE, the 10-year UK Gilt yield has jumped 120bps and now sits at 4.52%. The increase in yields was identical at the front-end of the Gilt curve, with the 2-year yield jumping 120bps to 4.68%.  The surge in longer-term Gilt yields stands out to the rise in bond yields seen outside the UK, as it also incorporates an increase in our estimate of the UK term premium – a move that was not matched in other countries (Chart 11). The rise in Gilt yields was also much more concentrated in real yields compared to inflation expectations (Chart 12), as markets aggressively repriced the path for UK policy rates after the UK government’s announced debt-financed fiscal package, including £45bn of tax cuts. Chart 11Upward Repricing Of Bond Yields Continues Chart 12The Gilt Market Becomes Unhinged The UK’s National Institute for Economic And Social Research (NIESR) estimates that the combined impact of the tax cuts and additional spending measures would increase the UK government deficit by a whopping £150bn, or 5% of GDP. The NIESR also estimated that the fiscal measures, including the previously-announced plan for the UK government to cap energy price increases, would result in positive UK GDP growth in the 4th quarter and also lift annual real GDP growth to 2% over 2023-24. The UK government now faces a major credibility issue with markets on its announced fiscal plans. The sheer size of the package, coming at a time when the US economy was already operating at full employment with high inflation, invites a greater than expected monetary policy tightening response from the BoE. The UK OIS curve now forecasts a peak in rates of 6.3% in October 2023, up from the current 2.25%. That would be a massive move in rates in just one year from a central bank that has been relatively gun shy in lifting rates since the 2008 financial crisis, even during the current inflation overshoot. New UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, and her new Chancellor of the Exchequer Kwasi Kwarteng, have both noted they would prefer a mix of looser fiscal policy (aimed at boosting the supply side of the economy to lift potential growth) with tighter monetary policy that would prevent asset bubbles and inflation overshoots. While there is certainly merit in any plan designed to boost medium-term growth by lifting anemic UK productivity through supply-side reforms, the timing of the announcement could not have been worse. Just one day earlier, the BoE announced a plan to go forward with the sale of Gilts from its balance sheet accumulated during quantitative easing. The Truss government needs to find buyers for all the Gilts that must be issued to pay for the tax cuts and stimulus, but the BoE will not be one of them. In the end, however, the BoE’s expected path for interest rates matters more than the increase in Gilt supply in determining the level of Gilt yields and the slope of the Gilt curve. The NIESR estimates that the UK public debt/GDP ratio will rise to 92% by 2024-25, versus its pre-budget forecast of 88%. While that is a meaningful increase, the correlation between the debt/GDP ratio and the slope of the Gilt curve has been negative for the past few years (Chart 13, top panel). The stronger relationship is between the slope of the curve and the level of the BoE base rate (bottom panel), which is pointing to an inversion of the 2-year/30-year curve if the BoE follows market pricing and lifts rates to 6%. Our view dating back to the early summer was that a low neutral interest rate would prevent the BoE from lifting rates as much as markets were discounting without causing a deep recession, lower inflation and, eventually, a quick reversal of rate hikes. The huge UK fiscal stimulus package changes that calculus, as the nominal neutral rate that will be needed to bring UK inflation back to target is likely now much higher. We have always believed that when a thesis underlying an investment recommendation is challenged by new information, it is best to adjust the recommendation to reflect the new facts. Thus, this week, we are tactically downgrading UK Gilts to underweight in our model bond portfolio framework. We still see a significant medium-term opportunity to go overweight Gilts, as UK policy rates pushing into the 4-6% range are not sustainable. However, the BoE will likely have no choice to begin lifting rates at a much more aggressive pace to restore UK policy credibility, especially with the British pound under immense selling pressure (Chart 14). Despite rumors of an inter-meeting rate hike by the BoE this week to try and support the pound, that is likely too risky a step for the BoE to take as it would invite a battle with investors and currency speculators. Such a battle would be difficult to win without a more credible and market-friendly medium-term fiscal policy from the Truss government. Chart 13The BoE Matters More Than Debt Levels For Gilts Chart 14Tactically Move To Underweight UK Gilts   Bottom Line: We will review our UK Gilt stance once there are more clear signals of stability in the pound, but for now, we will step aside and limit our recommended exposure to Gilts – even after the huge selloff seen to date, which likely has more to go. Summarizing All The Changes In Our Model Bond Portfolio All the changes to our recommended duration exposure and country allocations after the past week, including the new weightings in our model bond portfolio, are shown in the tables on pages 14-16. To summarize: We moved the overall recommended global duration exposure to below-benchmark, and shifted the model bond portfolio duration to 0.9 years below that of the custom benchmark index. We increased the size of the US Treasury underweight, and moved Canada and Japan to overweight. We moved the UK to underweight, on top of the reduction in UK duration exposure that was part of last week’s move to reduce overall portfolio duration. We are also cutting exposure to UK investment grade corporates to underweight, as part of an overall move to reduce UK risk in the portfolio. We slightly increased the overweight in Germany. In next week’s report, we will present the quarterly performance review of our model bond portfolio and, more importantly, we will present out scenario-based return expectations after all the changes made this week. Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com     GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Recommended Positioning     Active Duration Contribution: GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. Custom Performance Benchmark The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index Global Fixed Income - Strategic Recommendations* Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months)

Special Report

Listen to a short summary of this report     Executive Summary Sales & Profit Margins: The Two Propellers That Powered The Post-GFC US Rally US equity markets underperformed the global benchmark by 10% over 2000-08. Since then, the US has outperformed the global benchmark by about 170%. So, what has driven the US’ chartbusting performance in the post-GFC period? If we break down the US’ price performance into three parts – namely price-to-earnings ratio, net profit margins, and sales – then it becomes clear that growth in the latter two elements played a key role in driving US outperformance in the post-GFC era. Can the US’ outperformance relative to global markets persist going forward? It appears unlikely that the US’ high profit margins can sustain these levels of growth going forward. Distinct from the mean reversion argument, the US’ high profit margins are unusually concentrated amongst a fistful of firms.  US firms may also find it challenging to maintain high sales growth as US GDP growth slows and given that America’s antitrust philosophy may soon undergo a once-in-a-generation change. Finally, it is worth noting that ‘sector composition’ effects played a significant role in driving US outperformance over 2008-22. Given that we expect outperforming sectors like Tech to become underperformers, this effect could become weaker going forward, thereby subverting another source of the US’ outperformance.   Bottom Line: Forecasting is a tenuous science but given that the two prime propellers of the US’ performance engine are likely to confront headwinds going forward, investors should consider reducing allocations to US equities over a longer term, strategic horizon.   Dear Client,  I am meeting clients in Asia this week while also working on our Fourth Quarter Strategy Outlook, which will be published next week, followed by my webcast the week after. In lieu of our regular report this week, you are receiving a Special Report from my colleague, Ritika Mankar, discussing the sources of US equity outperformance over the past 14 years and the likely path ahead. Best Regards,  Peter Berezin, Chief Global Strategist US Stock Market Dominance – It Wasn’t Always This Way Let us assume that you could travel back in time, and today was December 31, 2008. On this day you know that US and Japanese equity markets have underperformed the global benchmark (Chart 1). You also know that Europe (i.e., EU-27) has done marginally better than the US, while Emerging Markets (EM) have been the star outperformer. Let us further assume that by close of play today you have to deploy US$10bn across these four equity markets (across the US, Europe, Japan, and EM).  As if the task of taking this decision on the last day of this historic year was not enough, let us assume that the funds you invest must be locked in until the fall of 2022. Finally, let us add one more condition to this task – let us suppose that you have no idea how markets would perform over the 2008-22 period, but you have perfect foresight about how the nominal GDP of these four regions would look like in 2022. Specifically, you know that EM GDP will have a terrific run between 2008 to 2022, US GDP will increase but by a far less impressive degree, European GDP will grow only slightly, and Japan’s GDP would be lesser in 2022 than it was in 2008 (Chart 2).  Chart 1US Equities Underperformed The Global Benchmark By 10% Over 2000-08 Chart 2EM GDP Has More Than Doubled Since The GFC Chart 3US Equities Outperformed The Global Benchmark By About 170% Over 2008-22YTD If you were to take an investment decision based only this information, what is certain is that the fund you manage would underperform by a painful degree. This is because we now know that even though US markets had poor momentum in 2008, and the US’ GDP expansion paled relative to EM, US equity markets outperformed global markets by a wide margin since 2008 (Chart 3). On the other hand, despite positive momentum and high GDP growth, EM emerged as a distant second-best performer. Japan miraculously made it to third place despite a contraction in nominal GDP, and finally Europe ended up being the worst performer. If market momentum and GDP growth cannot explain these market movements, then what drove the US' outstanding performance in the post-GFC period? In this Special Report, we delve into answering this question in detail. The purpose of peeling the onion of the US' performance is simple – we hope to extract the insights that investors need to construct alpha-generating portfolios, in a world where forward time travel is not a possibility (yet). The US’ Performance Has Been Powered More By Earnings, Less By Valuations The two basic building blocks of any equity index are its earnings and its price-to-earnings ratio. The former captures the fundamentals backing an index, while the latter quantifies the valuation element. Breaking down the US’ performance into these two parts shows that earnings have been the prime factor that have propelled the rise of US equity markets in the post-GFC era (Chart 4). That earnings have been an important driver of the US’ outperformance becomes even more apparent when US earnings are compared to that of other major markets. For instance, the steep expansion in US earnings contrasts with the situation across the Atlantic. In Europe, earnings have trended lower relative to the global benchmark since 2008 and an increase in relative valuations has helped lend a floor to the index (Chart 5). The earnings report card for Japan and EM, on the other hand, have been surprisingly similar as earnings failed to rise meaningfully in both these geographies in the post-GFC period (Chart 6 and 7). Chart 4Earnings Have Played A Key Role In Propelling The Post-GFC US Rally Chart 5European Equities Supported More By Valuation Multiples Chart 6Earnings Growth Has Been Unimpressive In Japan Too Chart 7Earnings Have Trended Lower In EM Since 2008 In summary, the US' price-to-earnings ratio has had a meaningful role in driving US outperformance in the post-GFC period (Chart 8), but earnings expansion has played an outsized role (Chart 9). Chart 8Relative Valuation Multiples Have Played A Key Role In Supporting European Markets Chart 9Earnings Expansion In The US Has Been Phenomenal In fact, the growth in earnings in the US in the post-GFC era has been so noteworthy that if US equity market prices were to be broken down into its two building blocks i.e., earnings and price-to-earnings ratio, then the lion’s share of US equity market prices today would be attributed to its earnings (Chart 10). Expectedly, this contrasts with the situation in Europe where equity market prices have managed to stay afloat owing to a re-rating in its price-to-earnings ratio (Chart 11). These attribution analysis numbers are not meant to be taken literally, but rather, reflect the relative role played by earnings and price-to-earnings ratios in supporting the prices of regional indices. Chart 10US Equities: Supported More By Earnings Chart 11EU Equities: More Reliant On Multiples The Unsung Hero Behind The US’ Outperformance - Record Sales Expansion The index of a region can also be envisaged as the product of three elements, namely: (1) its price-to-earnings ratio; (2) its net profit margins; and (3) its sales. In other words: Price = (Price / Earnings) x (Earnings / Sales) x (Sales) While the US' healthy earnings tend to attract disproportionate investor attention, this formulation shows how a surge in US sales was the bigger driver of US outperformance (Chart 12). US profit margins experienced a sharp surge relative to global profit margins over the 2008-12 period, but then this parameter flatlined. US sales, on the other hand, have managed to register a steady march upwards over the entirety of the post-GFC period. The growth in sales of listed American corporations has in fact been so remarkable that a grand total of ten American firms now have annual sales of over $200 billion – which marks an all-time high for the US (Chart 13). Chart 12Post-GFC US Rally Powered By Record Sales Expansion Chart 13The US Is Home To Ten Firms With Revenues Of +$200bn Furthermore, the US’ lead on sales today is meaningful not only by its own historical standards, but by cross-country standards too. The rise in US sales has meant that the US is now home to half of the twenty largest listed corporations globally (Table 1). Conversely, Europe and Japan, despite being the third and fourth largest economies of the world, respectively, together account for only three names on this list. Notably however, Emerging Markets have managed to punch above their weight and are home to six of the top twenty firms by sales globally. Table 1The US Today Dominates The Global List Of Top 20 Firms By Revenue The steep rise in America’s sales in the post-GFC world is also unique because no other major market has experienced such a clear upward move in sales as the US has. Europe and Japan in fact saw their sales-per-share trend downwards in the post-GFC period (Chart 14 and Chart 15). Emerging markets  were the only other major global market where sales-per-share managed to stay steady relative to the global benchmark (Chart 16). Chart 14Europe’s Sales Have Trended Lower Post-GFC Chart 15Japan’s Sales Also Trended Lower Post-GFC Finally, thanks to the high growth in US sales, the contribution of sales to US equity prices is far higher than the contribution of its net profit margins or its price-to-earnings ratio (Chart 17). This once again is in sharp contrast to a market like Europe, where only a smidgeon of the European equity prices pie can be attributed to its sales. Chart 16EM Sales Have Expanded Marginally Post-2008 Chart 17The Main Engine That Powers US Markets Is ‘Sales’ Chart 18US Profit Margins Have Also Been Expanding Steadily Post-GFC Distinct from the role played by growing sales, the US’ stellar post-GFC performance has also been powered by growing profit margins. It is notable that the US has experienced an unusually strong upward movement in its profit margins in the post-GFC period (Chart 18). Japan is the only other region which has seen its profit margins expand post-GFC, with both Europe and EM having experienced a fall in profit margins from the levels seen in 2008. A Quick Note On Dividends: The US Lags On Dividend Yields But Leads On Buybacks Thus far we have focused on the returns generated by the US market relative to the world and the factors that drove US outperformance since the GFC. If one were to focus on the dividend yield component, then it is notable that the US lags its peers on this front. Post-GFC, the first major cresting of dividend yields globally took place in 2009-10. Then the next major move down in yields took place in 2020 (Chart 19). While globally, yields have now recovered from this last dip, the US finds itself lagging on this metric which matters for pension funds that rely on annuities (Chart 20). Not only have dividend yields in the US almost halved since the GFC, but the gap between dividend yields offered by the US and other markets has widened over the last few years. Europe however has managed to stay the undisputed leader when it comes to dividend yields through most of the 21st century. Chart 19Global Dividend Yields Have Recovered From The Post-2020 Fall Chart 20US Lags Global Markets On Dividend Yields Chart 21Pace Of Buybacks In The US Has Been Meaningful Notably, however, while the US lags its peers on dividend yields, it leads when it comes to buybacks. The latter is evident from the fact that proxy measures of shares outstanding have trended lower in the US in the post-GFC period, as compared to the rest of the world (Chart 21). Finally, it is important to note that both the growth in dividends-per-share as well as the absolute level of dividends in the US has been high. This parameter has increased by 2.4 times since 2008 and US dividends in absolute terms are nearly 5 times that of Europe’s dividends today. The only reason why dividend yields have stayed low despite this is because US equity prices have had a stellar run in the post-GFC period.     Can This Extent Of US Outperformance Persist? Having delved into the drivers of the US’ performance, we now know that a record expansion in sales and net profit margins have driven its outstanding performance in the post-GFC era. This in turn means that the probability of the US continuing to outperform over the next few years will be closely linked to its ability to maintain a lead on these two parameters. So how is the US positioned with respect to both these factors?   The US’ High Profit Margins Appear Unsustainable, For A Wide Range Of Reasons We have established the fact that expanding profit margins have been a supporting driver of the US’ outperformance in the post-GFC period. Now, the consensus view is that US profit margins are extraordinarily high and that they will eventually come down to earth. The logic for this argument is often grounded in mean reversion. We have also previously highlighted that most of the increase in US profit margins has occurred due to rising margins within the tech sector and the accompanying increase in the market cap weight of tech within benchmark indices. Chart 22US High Profit Margins Are Concentrated Amongst Top Firms Aside from these reasons, two more factors could lead to the compression of US profit margins over the next few years. Firstly, it is worth noting that the US' high profit margins are unusually concentrated amongst a handful of firms. While the US as a market is characterized by high margins at the headline level, profit margins of companies below the top tier are notably lower than that of the top tier (Chart 22). If profit margins were uniformly high across the US listed space and the divergence was low, then the probability of sustaining elevated margins would have been higher. But given that the US uniquely suffers from a high profit margin concentration problem, the probability of the sustainability of US high profit margins appears lower. Secondly, history suggests that in the globalized world that we live in, any region’s profit margins fail to persist above the global average beyond a maximum of 15 years (Table 2). This makes sense and is in line with economic theory which suggests that when profitability in a particular market is excessive, then new firms will enter this space, increase competition, and thereby exert downward pressure on the incumbents’ profit margins. Table 2Regional Profit Margins Seldom Persist Above The Global Average Beyond 15 Years Given that US profit margins have now persisted above global levels for almost 13 years, if history were to repeat itself, then it appears highly likely that US profit margins would trend towards the global average over the next 2 years.   US Sales Growth: A Peak Appears Nigh We now know that the rapid sales expansion experienced by US firms has been the prime driver of the US stock market outperformance since the GFC. However, the prognosis for this variable also appears shaky for the US. Chart 23US GDP And Sales Tend To Move In Lockstep The key macro variable which has the tightest theoretical link to the sales generated by the companies in a country is the country’s nominal GDP. Even as companies headquartered in the US end up selling to the global economy, history suggests that the link between the US’ nominal GDP and the sales generated by listed American firms are closely linked (Chart 23). Given that the pace of US nominal GDP growth is set to slow over the next few years (relative to both its past and relative to other major economies), US companies’ sales growth could end up slowing too (Chart 24). Also, given that the US revenue-to-nominal GDP ratio is already elevated, it is likely that even as the US’ nominal GDP keeps growing, the pace of conversion of this GDP into revenues will stay the same or may even diminish over the coming decade.   Chart 24US GDP Growth Is Set To Slow Then from a bottom-up perspective, we are also of the view that the US economy’s ability to spawn mega-sized companies (by sales) may become increasingly compromised over the next decade. This is because a peculiar stagnation is in the works in the middle tier of American firms, which tend to become the mega-sized corporations of tomorrow. Finally, the US' antitrust philosophy is likely to undergo a once-in-a-generation change under the Biden administration. This could mean that America’s mega-scaled firms (which have had a free run up until now) could end-up baiting regulatory attention, restricting their ability to grow sales.   US Price Performance: Strong Sector Effects Are Unlikely To Persist Chart 25Sector Composition Effect: Strongest For The US Lastly, it is worth noting that the price performance of the broad US equity index subverts the role played by “sector composition” in driving the US' outperformance. The fact that returns generated by the US benchmark are higher than the returns generated by a hypothetical US index which weights all sectors equally suggests that “sector composition” effects had a meaningful role in driving US outperformance. In fact, as compared to other major markets, the sector composition effect is the most prominent for the US (Chart 25). Another way of quantifying the role of sector effects is to compare the US’ market cap expansion relative to a global benchmark after removing the market cap of top-performing sectors. Expectedly, US outperformance relative to the global benchmark over the post-GFC period gets substantially reduced if the market cap of the three top-performing sectors (namely Information Technology, Consumer Discretionary, and Health Care) is adjusted for (Chart 26). To complicate matters, the sector composition effect in the US has been unwinding but remains high (Chart 27). Given that we expect outperforming sectors like Tech to turn into underperformers, the sector constitution effect in the US could weaken going forward, thereby subverting another source of US outperformance.  Chart 26Extent Of US Outperformance Weakens Sans Tech, Consumer Discretionary, And Health Care Chart 27Sector Composition Effect In The US Remains High Investment Conclusions The prime drivers of US outperformance relative to the global benchmark in the post-GFC period have been ascendant sales and rising net profit margins. Forecasting is a tenuous science but given that both these propellers of the US equity market engine are set to face headwinds, investors should consider reducing allocations to US equities over a longer term, strategic horizon. Ritika Mankar, CFA Editor/Strategist Ritika.Mankar@bcaresearch.com