Japan

Highlights The dollar has entered a structural bear market but is at risk of a countertrend bounce.  The catalyst for such a bounce will be the underperformance of G10 economies, specifically the euro area relative to the US. The immediate trigger is a renewed surge in infections in the euro area. Eventually, in a post-COVID-19 world, the structural growth rate of the euro area should improve relative to the US. The Federal Reserve’s resolve to allow for an inflation overshoot will amplify the global supply of dollars. This will lead to a self-reinforcing spiral of better global growth, and a weaker dollar. Emerging market currencies have underperformed the drop in the dollar but will play catch up. We continue to recommend a three-pronged strategy for playing dollar shorts: Hold Scandinavian currencies, precious metals (especially silver and platinum), and the Japanese yen as insurance. We were stopped out of our tactical short GBP position. Stand aside for now. Our FX model remains dollar bearish and is recommending shorting the DXY for the month of September. Feature August is seasonally a strong month for the dollar (and other safe-haven currencies, for that matter), but this year bucked that trend. Despite the DXY index punching below key support levels since the March highs and becoming very oversold, the downtrend continued in August unabated. Technically, it suggests that the forces against the US dollar are quite powerful. Our trade basket has benefitted tremendously from the drop in the dollar this year, and we continue to advocate short dollar positions over a 12-month horizon. That said, we had tried playing a tactical bounce in the DXY via a short GBP position last month and got stopped out. September remains a seasonally weak month for the pound, but the dollar also tends to be weak against most other procyclical currencies (Chart I-1). As such, our bias is that while the dollar is due for a countertrend bounce, it might not be a playable one. Technical indicators also suggest that the dollar is likely to consolidate losses in the weeks ahead.  Technical indicators also suggest that the dollar is likely to consolidate losses in the weeks ahead. Our intermediate-term indicator is oversold, and speculators are quite short the cross (Chart I-2). However, any bounce should be used as an opportunity to establish fresh short positions, as the DXY is likely to punch below 90 by year end. Chart I-1September Is A Good Month For Dollar Shorts Chart I-2Rising Number Of ##br##Dollar Bears What Are The Catalysts For A Countertrend Bounce? While the dollar has entered a structural bear market, two catalysts are lining up which could trigger a countertrend bounce: The Eurozone, which was well into its reopening phase, has been hit hard by a second wave of COVID-19. Meanwhile, new infections in the US have started to flatten out (Chart I-3). As a result, economic momentum, which was higher outside the US, has rolled over. Improving relative economic performance between the US and other G10 countries could be a key catalyst behind dollar strength (Chart I-4). It is true that the number of new deaths in both France and Spain remain low compared to the surge in the number of new cases. But, while it might ease draconian government lockdowns, citizens are likely to have concerns and may pay heed to the potential of being infected (and dying). This could slow economic activity. Chart I-3US Cases Are ##br##Flattening Chart I-4Economic Momentum Rolling Over Outside The US The US stock market is overstretched and is at risk of a more significant correction in the near term, which could introduce some volatility in global bourses and buffet the dollar. The fall in the DXY has been a mirror image of the rise in the S&P 500 (Chart I-5). Renewed geopolitical tensions between China and the US as well as the upcoming US presidential election are sources of risk, and a catalyst to hedge short positions. Historically, the dollar has tended to rise with both increasing equity and geopolitical risk premia. This is the benefit of being a reserve currency. Chart I-5The Dollar & S&P 500 In a nutshell, the US economy had been relatively weak compared to the rest of the world. Tentative August data is showing that this trend may now be reversing. While one cannot use one data point to extrapolate a trend, it is worth monitoring. What Does The Federal Reserve Shift Mean For The Dollar? Beyond a countertrend rally, the balance of forces are still stacked against the US dollar. The Fed’s pivot to target average inflation will only accentuate these forces. In a special report this week, our fixed income strategists outlined the major takeaways from the Fed’s policy shift.1 In a nutshell, the Fed will now allow for an inflation overshoot on a going-forward basis. Part of the reason the US dollar outperformed from 2011 on was because economic growth was relatively better, which allowed interest rates to be higher. With economic growth in the US held hostage by the pandemic, the Fed has been forced to drop rates to zero, effectively wiping out the nominal US interest rate advantage (Chart I-6). The fall in the DXY has been a mirror image of the rise in the S&P 500. Going forward, we know two things. First, the Fed (or any other central bank for that matter) will not raise rates anytime soon. But more importantly, the Fed has telegraphed that they will allow for an inflation overshoot. This means that real rates in the US are bound to become even more negative. It is impressive that countries like Switzerland and Japan, with negative policy rates, have much higher real rates than the US today (Chart I-7). This does not bode well for the dollar. Chart I-6Interest Rates In The US Have Collapsed Chart I-7Real Yields Could Be Lowest In The US Has The Euro Rallied Too Fast? The rise in the euro has certainly stirred discussion among policymakers and investors, with some commentators pointing to some measures of the trade-weighted currency being near record highs. While the euro certainly has scope to correct towards the 1.15-1.16 level, this should be used to accumulate long positions. In our view, there is little indication that currency strength is becoming a headwind for the economy. Indeed: The euro area continues to sport a very healthy trade and current account surplus, a sign that the euro remains very competitive among its trading partners (Chart I-8). This is remarkable in a world of slowing global trade. Correspondingly, the euro still remains 12% undervalued against our fair value purchasing power parity (PPP) models (Chart I-9) Chart I-8Is This An Expensive Currency? Chart I-9The Euro Is Cheap Much ink is being spilled over the fact that headline inflation in the euro area fell below zero for the first time since 2016. Quickly forgotten is that a fall in inflation actually increases the fair value of the currency in a PPP framework. It also makes European goods more competitive. In the long term, that could be the difference between whether foreigners buy Cadillacs or BMWs. The structural appreciation in the trade-weighted Swiss franc is a case in point. As intra-European trade represents a large share of cross-border transactions, currency considerations become more of a moot point. In 2019, most member states had a share of intra-EU exports of between 50% and 75% (Chart I-10). Chart I-10Europe Exports A Lot To Europe Going forward, an agreement on the mutualization of European debt means we can begin to expect more synchronized business cycles as fiscal stabilizers kick in.2  The reality is much more complicated, of course, but the biggest roadblock to mutualized debt (which is that it could never happen) has been toppled. This will allow the neutral rate of interest in the euro area to head higher (Chart I-11). The reason is that both fiscal and monetary policy can now be synchronized across member states: Chart I-11Can Euro Area Growth Accelerate? The European Central Bank and European Commission have successfully lowered the cost of capital in the euro area, probably well below the return on capital. With Italian and Spanish bond yields now collapsing towards those in the core, liquidity is flowing to where it is most needed, significantly curtailing euro break-up risk. Social distancing might remain in place for a while, meaning services will suffer more than manufacturing. More importantly, a huge proportion of the service sectors in the euro area is tied to tourism (Chart I-12), while it remains domestic in places like the US. So, as the tourism season wanes and we get into the winter months where social distancing is all the more important, the underlying trend growth in manufacturing could be higher. A more drawn-out services recovery raises the prospect that countries geared more towards manufacturing such as Europe, Japan and China, could experience better growth (Chart I-13). Chart I-12Tourism Is Important For Europe Chart I-13Higher Service Share In The US This will occur at a time when European equities, especially those in the periphery, are very cheap. Part of the reason is that most Eurozone bourses are heavy in cyclical stocks that are well into a 10-year relative bear market.3 A re-rating of cyclical stocks, especially banks and energy, relative to defensives could be the catalyst that carries the next leg of the euro rally. This could push the EUR/USD towards 1.25. Does Abe’s Resignation Change The Yen’s Outlook? Chart I-14More Jobs, More Savings Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s health has pushed him to resign from office. The front runner from the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), Yoshihide Suga, is likely to be his successor. Suga-san has publicly said he would like to continue with “Abenomics” and even enhance it. As such, the status-quo is more likely than a draconian policy change, as argued by our geopolitical colleagues.4 That said, there is a narrative floating around that he could be more of a fiscal hawk. Our belief is that economic forces are usually more powerful than political ones over the long term. And the economic force holding Japan hostage right now is the real threat of a deflationary spiral, which will send the yen higher and lead into a negative self-reinforcing feedback loop. Japanese companies certainly do not appreciate an excessively stronger yen, due to negative translation effects on profits. And neither does the Japanese government, since it is deflationary, and high government debt levels cannot be inflated away. With Japan having one of the highest real rates in the G10 right now, Suga-san’s more moderate fiscal stance might be overcome by a powerful deflationary wave in Japan. It is remarkable that while Japan had been able to keep a lid on the pandemic, it did see a short resurgence of new cases. That has since subsided, but it remains a clear reminder to the public that going out to spend money is risky business. As a result, the worker’s saving ratio continues to surge as unemployment rises and consumer confidence drops (Chart I-14). This is a trend any politician will find very difficult to ignore. As Suga-san stumbles to establish his stance, the yen could rise. Emerging market (EM) currencies such as the BRL, ZAR, INR, or even until recently the CNY, have lagged behind the drop in the DXY index. As we outlined in our weekly report in June, we remain yen bulls.5 This view rests on three pillars. First, Japan has one of the highest real rates in the G10, meaning outflows from Japanese fixed income investors will fall. Second, the yen is very cheap relative to the US dollar. And finally, during dollar bear markets, the yen more often than not outperforms the USD. This suggests holding a long yen position is a “heads I win, tails I do not lose much” proposition. EM Currencies Have Underperformed, Why? A lot of skepticism on the dollar rally has centered on the fact that emerging market (EM) currencies such as the BRL, ZAR, INR, or even until recently the CNY, have lagged behind the drop in the DXY index (Chart I-15). While this has been a historically rare event, so has the pandemic. As a result, we have witnessed a few economic shifts: Chart I-15EM Currencies Are Lagging Since 2014-2015, central banks have been aggressively trying to diversify out of dollar reserves. Unfortunately for most currencies, their alternative has been other safe-haven assets such as gold and the yen. IMF reserve data show that both the yen and gold have borne the brunt of dollar diversification. This trend has been supercharged in 2020, with the addition of the euro (Chart I-16). To put this in perspective, Russia now over 24% of its FX reserves in gold versus under 3% in 2008. Russia has very little dollar reserves. China has risen from less than half a percentage point of gold reserves in 2008 to over 3%. Imagine if China were to shift half of its gargantuan Treasury holdings into alternative assets? The perfect “robust” portfolio in simple terms has been a 60/40 one: 60% in equities, 40% in bonds. This has delivered low volatility and exceptional returns. But with government fixed income rates near zero, managers are now looking for alternatives. Gold and precious metals look like a perfect candidate in a world where central banks want to asymmetrically generate inflation (Chart I-17). Chart I-16Diversification Out Of Dollars Into Gold Chart I-17Would You Bet On US Bonds Or Gold At Zero Rates?     The pandemic raged in a lot of EM countries while it was falling in DM. This has weakened EM fundamentals relative to their developed-market peers. The EM Markit PMI index has been falling sharply relative to that in the US, a sea-change from what we saw earlier this year (Chart I-18). As a result, many EM central banks have aggressively cut rates, narrowing interest rate differentials with the US. In their latest report, our emerging market colleagues contend that EM fundamentals remain poor, but could improve Chart I-18EM Relative Growth Relapsing EM currencies have a lot going for them. First, some are extremely cheap by historical standards. This should greatly help ease financial conditions. Second, our technical indicator shows that the dollar decline is becoming a lot more broad-based at the margin (Chart I-19). The percentage of countries with rising exchange rates versus the dollar has surged. Within EM, we continue to favor precious metal producers (in line with our BCA Research bullish precious metals view) and oil producers, versus a basket of oil consumers. Chart I-19Dollar Drawdown More Widespread The Message From Our Trading Model Our FX trading model remains bearish on the US dollar for the month of September. It has upgraded Australia and Norway, while downgrading New Zealand (Chart I-20). The white paper for the model can be found here. Chart I-20AModel Recommendations For September Chart I-20BModel Recommendations For September Our bias, however, is that the dollar is due for a tactical bounce. We tried to implement this via a short GBP position but were thrown offside. So far, the UK PMI continues to outperform both that of the US and the euro area, suggesting the UK economy has been relatively more resilient to the pandemic. As such, we prefer to tighten stops on our profitable trades as a way to manage risk.   Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see US Bond Strategy and Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, "A New Dawn For US Monetary Policy", dated September 1, 2020. 2 Please see Foreign Exchange Strategy Weekly Report, "EUR/USD And The Neutral Rate Of Interest", dated June 14, 2019. 3 Please see Foreign Exchange Strategy Special Report, "Currencies And The Value-Vs Growth Debate", dated July 10, 2020. 4 Please see Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report, "Abenomics Will Smell As Sweet By Any Other Name", dated September 4, 2020. 5 Please see Foreign Exchange Strategy Weekly Report, "An Update On The Yen", dated June 12, 2020. Currencies U.S. Dollar Chart II-1USD Technicals 1 Chart II-2USD Technicals 2 Recent data in the US has been solid: The Markit manufacturing PMI rose from 50.9 to 53.1 in August. The ISM manufacturing PMI also climbed from 54.2 to 56, expanding for a fourth straight month. Notably, the ISM new orders index soared from 61.5 to 67.6. The goods trade deficit widened to $79.32 billion from $70.99 billion in July. Initial jobless claims decreased to 881K for the week ending August 28th. The DXY index recovered by 1% this week, supported by promising PMI releases. In the long run however, our bias is that the USD might be on the verge of a long bear market. Diminished advantage of interest rate differentials, higher twin deficits and negative sentiment all point to a lower dollar going forward. Report Links: A Simple Framework For Currencies - July 17, 2020 DXY: False Breakdown Or Cyclical Bear Market? - June 5, 2020 Cycles And The US Dollar - May 15, 2020 The Euro Chart II-3EUR Technicals 1 Chart II-4EUR Technicals 2 Recent data in the euro area have been negative: The Markit manufacturing PMI remained flat at 51.7 in August while the services PMI fell from 54 to 50.5. Headline consumer price inflation fell from 0.4% to -0.2% year-on-year in August. Headline inflation sank from 1.2% to 0.4%. Moreover, producer prices decreased by 3.3% year-on-year in July. The unemployment rate ticked up from 7.7% to 7.9% in July. The euro fell by 1.2% against the US dollar this week. The negative inflation rate raises questions about ECB’s baseline inflation scenario and inflation forecasts, putting more pressure on the ECB to adopt a more dovish stance ahead of the monetary policy meeting next week.  Report Links: On The DXY Breakout, Euro, And Swiss Franc - February 21, 2020 Updating Our Balance Of Payments Monitor - November 29, 2019 On Money Velocity, EUR/USD And Silver - October 11, 2019 Japanese Yen Chart II-5JPY Technicals 1 Chart II-6JPY Technicals 2 Recent data in Japan have been mostly negative: The manufacturing PMI increased from 45.2 to 47.2 in August, while the services PMI slipped to 45 from 45.4. Retail trade fell by 2.8% year-on-year in July, following a 1.3% decline the previous month. Moreover, industrial production plunged by 16.1% year-on-year in July after an 18.2% decrease in June.  Construction orders fell by 22.9% year-on-year in July. Housing starts also plunged by 11.4%. The jobs-to-applicants ratio fell from 1.11 to 1.08 in July. The unemployment rate increased from 2.8% to 2.9%. The Japanese yen remained flat against the US dollar this week. We continue to favor the Japanese yen as fears grow for a second wave of COVID-19. Moreover, Japan now sports the second highest real interest rates in the G10 universe. Report Links: The Near-Term Bull Case For The Dollar - February 28, 2020 Building A Protector Currency Portfolio - February 7, 2020 Currency Market Signals From Gold, Equities And Flows - January 31, 2020 British Pound Chart II-7GBP Technicals 1 Chart II-8GBP Technicals 2 Recent data in the UK have been positive: The manufacturing PMI rose to a 30-month high of 55.2 in August from 53.3 in July. The services PMI also increased to 58.8 from 56.5 the previous month. Mortgage approvals increased by 66.3K in July, up from 39.9K in June. Housing prices grew by 3.7% year-on-year in August. The British pound appreciated by 0.9% against the US dollar this week. While the latest PMI release showed fast expansion in the manufacturing sector for the month of August, the employment outlook remained unfavorable. Moreover, COVID-19 and Brexit uncertainties remain headwinds for the British pound. Report Links: Updating Our Balance Of Payments Monitor - November 29, 2019 A Few Trade Ideas - Sept. 27, 2019 United Kingdom: Cyclical Slowdown Or Structural Malaise? - Sept. 20, 2019 Australian Dollar Chart II-9AUD Technicals 1 Chart II-10AUD Technicals 2 Recent data in Australia have been mostly negative: GDP slumped by 7% quarter-on-quarter in Q2, the worst figure on record, confirming the nation’s first recession in almost 30 years. The commonwealth manufacturing PMI increased from 48.8 to 49.4 in August. Exports tumbled by 4% month-on-month while imports surged by 7% monthly in July. The trade surplus shrank by A$3.6 billion to A$4.6 billion. Building permits increased by 6.3% year-on-year in July, following a 15.8% contraction the previous month. AUD/USD fell by 1.6% this week. The RBA left its interest rate unchanged at 0.25% on Tuesday. However, it has increased the size of the term funding facility and extended the banks’ access to low-cost funding through the end of June 2021. Report Links: On AUD And CNY - January 17, 2020 Updating Our Balance Of Payments Monitor - November 29, 2019 A Contrarian View On The Australian Dollar - May 24, 2019 New Zealand Dollar Chart II-11NZD Technicals 1 Chart II-12NZD Technicals 2 Recent data in New Zealand has been mixed: The ANZ business confidence index increased marginally from -42.4 to -41.8 in August, while the activity outlook index slipped from -17 to -17.5. Building permits fell by 4.5% month-on-month in July. The goods terms of trade index rose by 2.5% quarter-on-quarter in Q2. The New Zealand dollar depreciated by 0.7% against the US dollar this week. In the Wellington speech this Wednesday, RBNZ Governor Adrian Orr said that “We strongly believe that the best contribution we can make to our monetary and financial stability mandates is ensuring we head off unnecessarily low inflation or deflation, and high and persistent unemployment”, suggesting a more dovish stance in the coming monetary policy reviews. Report Links: Currencies And The Value-Versus-Growth Debate - July 10, 2020 Updating Our Balance Of Payments Monitor - November 29, 2019 Place A Limit Sell On DXY At 100 - November 15, 2019 Canadian Dollar Chart II-13CAD Technicals 1 Chart II-14CAD Technicals 2 Recent data in Canada has been mostly negative: Annualized GDP slumped by 38.7% quarter-on-quarter in Q2.  The manufacturing PMI rose to 55.1 in August from 52.9 the previous month. Building permits fell by 3% month-on-month in July. Exports rose to C$45.4 billion from C$40.9 billion in July. Imports also increased to C$47.9 billion from C$42.5 billion. The trade deficit widened by C$0.9 billion to C$2.5 billion. The Canadian dollar depreciated by 0.6% against the US dollar this week. The contraction in Q2 GDP is more than twice as bad as the lowest point reached during the GFC. On the positive side, the June monthly GDP increase of 6.5%, compared with the previous month, is showing signs of recovery with the easing of COVID-19 restrictions at the end of Q2. Report Links: Currencies And The Value-Versus-Growth Debate - July 10, 2020 More On Competitive Devaluations, The CAD And The SEK - May 1, 2020 A New Paradigm For Petrocurrencies - April 10, 2020 Swiss Franc Chart II-15CHF Technicals 1 Chart II-16CHF Technicals 2 Recent data in Switzerland have been mixed: The KOF leading indicator surged from 86 to 110.2 in August. Real retail sales increased by 4.1% year-on-year in July. The manufacturing PMI increased from 49.2 to 51.8 in August. Headline consumer prices remained in deflation territory at -0.9% year-on-year in August. The Swiss franc remained flat against the US dollar this week. The SNB Governing Board Member Andrea Maechler said on Tuesday that negative interest rates are “extremely important” for Switzerland. Being deeply in deflation for seven consecutive months, Switzerland now sports the highest real rate in G10.   Report Links: On The DXY Breakout, Euro, And Swiss Franc - February 21, 2020 Currency Market Signals From Gold, Equities And Flows - January 31, 2020 Portfolio Tweaks Before The Chinese New Year - January 24, 2020 Norwegian Krone Chart II-17NOK Technicals 1 Chart II-18NOK Technicals 2 Recent data in Norway have been negative: The current account surplus narrowed to NOK 20.5 billion in Q2 from NOK 27 billion in the same quarter last year, the smallest surplus since the fourth quarter of 2017. The Norwegian krone depreciated by 2.2% against the US dollar this week, making it the worst-performing G10 currency. That said, we remain positive on the Norwegian krone. Our FX model indicator for the NOK increased from 1 to 2 for the month of September, signaling a strong buy for the currency and pushing the sentiment component up from neutral to long. Report Links: A New Paradigm For Petrocurrencies - April 10, 2020 Building A Protector Currency Portfolio - February 7, 2020 On Oil, Growth And The Dollar -  January 10, 2020 Swedish Krona Chart II-19SEK Technicals 1 Chart II-20SEK Technicals 2 Recent data in Sweden have been mixed: GDP fell by 7.7% year-on-year in Q2, or 8.3% quarter-on-quarter, the steepest contraction on record. The manufacturing PMI increased from 51.4 to 53.4 in August, the fourth consecutive month of manufacturing expansion. The new orders index surged from 52.2 to 56. The Swedish krona fell by 1.1% against the US dollar this week. As one of the most pro-cyclical currencies, the Swedish krona will benefit the most from the global business cycle recovery. Moreover, the SEK is still trading at a tremendous discount against its fair value, as compared to the US dollar. We continue to overweight the Nordic basket to both USD and EUR but are tightening the stop loss this week amidst potential market volatilities. Report Links: Updating Our Balance Of Payments Monitor - November 29, 2019 Where To Next For The US Dollar? - June 7, 2019 Balance Of Payments Across The G10 - February 15, 2019 Trades & Forecasts Forecast Summary Core Portfolio Tactical Trades Limit Orders Closed Trades

Highlights Abenomics was working – prior to trade war and COVID-19 – and it will remain Japan’s economic policy setting, albeit in a new guise. This is true even if a dark horse candidate wins the Liberal Democratic Party’s leadership race. Japan’s strategic alliance with the United States is based on a shared interest to balance China’s rise and will not change regardless of the 2020 and 2021 elections. Abe failed to make peace with Russia, but Russo-Japanese relations remain the bellwether of a revolution in Russian policy toward China. We are far from that now. Stay long JPY-USD. The yen’s safe haven properties will buoy it during the coming three-to-six months of extreme political risk. The dollar is set to fall in the medium term due to US debt monetization, twin deficits, and global growth recovery. Feature Japanese equities have rallied despite trailing their American and global counterparts (Chart 1). Yet the good news for markets is now coinciding with the emergence of political uncertainty, as Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, now the longest-serving in Japan’s history, announced he will step down due to illness. Abe’s departure marks the end of a chapter in the country’s modern history and raises questions about the future of “Abenomics,” the eponymous economic policy consisting of ultra-dovish monetary policy, accommodative fiscal policy, and neoliberal structural reforms aimed at lifting productivity and growth. Chart 1Japan's Rally Trails Global Counterparts Chart 2… As Longest-Serving Prime Minister Steps Down Japanese leaders rarely last as long as Abe so the market will likely have to familiarize itself with more churn in top-level government policies going forward (Chart 2). But will the churn change the secular direction? No. Abenomics: A Concise Post-Mortem Chart 3Population And Workforce Decline The driver of Abenomics was not Abe, or his central bank Governor Haruhiko Kuroda, or even the long-dominant Liberal Democratic Party. It was geopolitics – an accumulation of social, political, economic, and strategic pressures demanding that the ruling elite shake up decades-long policies in pursuit of the national interest. Everyone knows that Japan’s population is aging and shrinking, but the key to understanding the Abe era is the recognition that the 2008 global financial crisis coincided almost exactly with the peak in Japan’s total population. This came 18 years after the working age population’s peak in the very year of Japan’s own financial crisis (Chart 3). The first crisis triggered Japan’s slide into price deflation; the second crisis threatened the permanent entrenchment of deflation along with a series of existential threats to the wellbeing of the nation. The driver of Abenomics was geopolitics, not Abe. First came global recession in 2008. Next the institutional ruling party – Liberal Democrats – fell from power for the first substantial period of time in modern memory in 2009. Then China fully emerged as a great power, brandishing its new foreign policy assertiveness and igniting a maritime-territorial clash and minor trade war from 2010 (Chart 4). Japan’s decline reached its nadir with a literal nuclear meltdown, following the devastating Tohoku earthquake and tsunami in 2011. The country’s strategic import dependency combined its ongoing financial instability, as shuttered nuclear plants required a surge in high-priced energy imports that wiped away Japan’s all-important current account surplus (Chart 5). Chart 4Geopolitical Status Anxiety Chart 5Nuclear Meltdown And Resource Anxiety The Liberal Democrats returned to power in a sweeping election victory after this ill-fated experiment with opposition rule. Party leader Shinzo Abe was relatively popular and willing to oversee a drastic overhaul of stale policies. Abenomics was never going to solve all of Japan’s deep structural challenges – population decline, massive debt, overregulation, lifetime employment. But its critics failed to recognize that the country had hit rock-bottom and policymakers had no choice but to stimulate, reform, and open up the economy. Otherwise they would go straight back into the political wilderness at the next election.1 Abenomics was about as successful as an overhyped political policy program can be: The economic boom drew in workers from all parts of society, particularly women, whose participation rate soared (Chart 6). Abe flung open the doors to immigration in a traditionally xenophobic country, attracting Chinese, Vietnamese, and Filipinos to live and work in Japan (Chart 7). Chart 6Abe Got People To Work Chart 7Abe Broke The Taboo On Immigration Kuroda at the Bank of Japan flew into action with aggressive asset purchases, triggering a sharp devaluation of the yen (Chart 8). Nominal GDP growth and core CPI trends both improved, critical to easing debt burdens, lowering real rates, stimulating economic activity, and shaking off the deflationary mindset (Chart 9). Chart 8Abe Kicked The BoJ Into Action Chart 9Abe Combatted Deflation Stagnant wages finally started to grow, with an extremely tight labor market (Chart 10). This was all the more remarkable due to the simultaneous surge in foreign workers. Corporate investment stabilized and turned upward, finally overcoming the long decline since 1990 (Chart 11). Chart 10Wage Growth Improved (Until Trade War, Pandemic) Chart 11Abe Revived Corporate Investment Abe also opened the door to foreign trade, taking on powerful vested interests, including his own party’s base, to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) along with the United States in a bid to create an advanced new trade framework that sidestepped China. Chart 12Abe Opened The Doors, A Bonus With Or Without Trade War When US President Donald Trump pulled out of the bloc in accordance with his protectionist campaign promises, Abe led the charge in preserving it. Japan stands to benefit from opening up these markets whether the US-China trade war continues or not (Chart 12). This was generally effective leadership, but none of it happened by sheer force of personality. It happened because Japan glimpsed the specter of national failure in 2011 under the combined weight of internal malaise and external domination. Economic revival was as much about shoring up Japan’s national security as it was about improving Japanese lives and livelihoods. Abenomics was the economic component of a broader national revival. The goal was to become a “normal” nation, capable of self-defense and independent policy, and a pro-active world power at that. China’s rise and a distracted US will pressure Japan to maintain Abe’s policies. The drivers of Japan’s political earthquake in 2011 are not spent. COVID-19 dashed many of Abe’s gains in the fight against deflation. China’s rise is a greater challenge than ever before. The US is even more divided and distracted. The next prime minister would not be able to change course even if he wanted to do so. Suganomics, Kishidanomics … Ishibanomics? Chart 13Still No Alternative To Institutional Ruling Party The Liberal Democrats and their longtime coalition partners, New Komeito, have not only lost about 5% of popular support since their triumphant comeback in 2012, standing at 40% support today – and with some improvement since 2017. More importantly, their nearest rivals all poll under 5% of the popular vote (Chart 13). There is no political competition as yet. The ruling party will choose a new leader with little fanfare. Abe’s Chief Cabinet Secretary and chosen successor Yoshihide Suga is the frontrunner as we go to press. Political uncertainty, such as it is in Japan, will emerge ahead of the September 2021 election. Abe’s retirement and the aftermath of the global recession create an opening for disgruntled factions and opposition parties to challenge the ruling party. It will not succeed but it will portend a less predictable period in the absence of a unifying figure like Abe. In fact, Abe’s influence peaked in July 2019 when he lost a single-party super-majority in the House of Councillors, the upper house of parliament (Chart 14). The 2021 election now raises the prospect of additional erosion of support. Chart 14US-Japan Alliance Versus China Will Persist Opposition is particularly likely if Suga attempts to achieve Abe’s major unfinished task: the revision of Article Nine of the constitution to countenance Japan’s de facto armed forces and right to self-defense. At very least Suga will mark the return of the “revolving door,” in which weak prime ministers come and go in rapid succession. The top candidates for the leadership race lack differentiation: the leading contenders are dovish on monetary and fiscal policy, hawkish on national security and foreign policy, just like Shinzo Abe (Table 1). The exception is former Defense Minister Shigeru Ishiba, but a close examination of his statements and actions suggests that he does not pose a real risk to the policy status quo (Box 1 at bottom). Should Ishiba rise to power, now or later, we would be buyers of any risk premium in financial markets on his account. Table 1The Return Of The Revolving Door The prime minister over the 2021-22 period will have the occasion to appoint up to four members of the Bank of Japan’s Policy Board (Table 2). Theoretically, the appointment of neutral or less dovish candidates could lead to a 5-4 majority on the board by 2023. But this is very unlikely. Table 2Dovish BoJ Is Here To Stay First, it would require all vacant seats to be filled with members who hold hawkish views, which would mark a sharp departure from the current thinking both within the BoJ and the LDP. Second, Kuroda is still governor and could hold that post until 2028. Third, Japan’s economic demands will still require easy monetary policy, as the population will still be shrinking and the country’s vast debt pile will remain a burden. Fiscal austerity is impossible. There is no reason to expect Abe’s successors to be fiscal hawks either. Abe proved to be more of a hawk than expected, by going forward with statutory increases to the consumption tax rate. These are now complete, at 10%, with no future tax hikes scheduled. If Abe managed to create small positive surprises in fiscal thrust throughout his term despite this effort at fiscal consolidation, then his successor should be able to do so in the wake of COVID-19 without any consolidation as yet on the books (Chart 15). Chart 15Despite Mistakes, Fiscal Thrust Surprised To Upside Chart 16Fiscal Austerity Impossible Fiscal austerity is impossible as nearly 60% of the budget is dedicated to social spending for the graying and shrinking society as well as interest payments on the national debt – leaders will continue to avail themselves of the ancient imperial practice of tokusei, or debt forgiveness, rather than draconian spending cuts or tax increases that would drag down the economy and hence increase the debt even faster (Chart 16). Of course, the major failure of Abenomics will still dog Abe’s successors over the long run: the inability to lift Japanese productivity. Despite Abe’s attempts to shake up the labor market, spark corporate investment, reform corporate governance, and open up the economy to foreign trade, productivity has still declined, underperforming both the EU and the UK (Chart 17). Japan will continue to depend heavily on foreign demand, especially Chinese demand. In the short term this is positive, since China’s deleveraging campaign and the COVID-19 shock are giving way to another major bout of Chinese fiscal and credit stimulus. China will be forced to keep stimulating to cope with its secular slowdown and manufacturing dislocation. Japan is still a cyclical economy and stands to benefit (Chart 18). Chart 17No Quick Fix For Poor Productivity Chart 18Chinese Stimulus Will Be Steady In the long run, however, Japan’s future darkens considerably when its own demographic decline and deflationary tendencies are coupled with China’s inheritance of these same trends. The Communist Party is doubling down on import substitution and foreign policy assertiveness, ensuring that trade and strategic conflict with the US will escalate over time. Japan will remain allied with the United States, out of its own strategic interest, but will pay the price in periodic headwinds to growth. Its ability to relocate manufacturing to Japan is limited in all but the most sophisticated of industries. It will have to embrace ever more unorthodox monetary and fiscal policy while investing heavily in new technologies and emerging markets ex-China in search of growth. Geopolitically speaking, Shinzo Abe helped the United States formulate its new strategic plan of promoting a “free and open Indo-Pacific” and the spirit of this policy will outlive Abe and President Trump. The US’s “pivot to Asia” began under the Democratic Party, which will rejoin the Trans-Pacific Partnership, with a few tweaks, if it returns to power. The US and Japan are both interested in forming a grand coalition of nations surrounding China to contain its ambitions, whether military, political, or technological. China would be naïve not to see the quadrilateral security dialogue between these countries and India and Australia as the blueprint of a naval alliance designed to contain it. The Taiwan Strait, the South and East China Seas, Vietnam, the Philippines, and the Korean Peninsula will become the sites of “proxy battles” as the US and Japan strive to contain China. Japan will retain its safe haven status – in both the geopolitical and financial sense – while other countries will see a higher geopolitical risk premium. Japanese and Korean trade tensions will persist, unless the US takes a leadership role in strengthening the trilateral relationship. Russia has chosen to throw in its lot with China, which will not change anytime soon. But if Abe’s successor is able to get peace negotiations back on track, in pursuit of another of Abe’s major unfinished initiatives, then this would serve as an important bellwether of Russia’s own fear of China’s growing power. Investment Takeaways Chart 19Japanese Stocks Look Attractive... Japanese equities are exceedingly cheap and hence attractive over the long run, given that a new global business cycle is beginning and governments around the world are committed to providing as much support as they are able. At a dividend yield of less than 2.5%, the real return on Japanese stocks over the next ten years could be 20% (Chart 19). However, over the next three-to-six months, the world faces extreme uncertainty over the US election and rapidly deteriorating US-China relations. The Japanese economy is slowing and monetary policy, at the zero lower bound, will play a marginal role. The yen is set to appreciate as a safe-haven in this environment (Chart 20), and until there is a total divergence of the inverse correlation of the yen and Japanese equities, the latter will struggle to outperform those of other developed markets on a sustained basis. Chart 20... But Yen Rally Will Continue Matt Gertken Vice President Geopolitical Strategy mattg@bcaresearch.com Box 1: Ishiba Is Not A Real Risk To The Policy Status Quo Shigeru Ishiba, while not favored to succeed Abe in the short run, is a compelling Japanese politician and one of the few Liberal Democratic leadership candidates who would mark a change with Abe, as Table 1 above indicates. If Ishiba looks to become prime minister, now or later, he would create some financial market jitters primarily because he would not symbolize seamless policy continuity. He is a major rival of Abe and has publicly criticized Abenomics, including in his 2018 book.2 He is reputed to be a hawk on monetary and fiscal policy. However, a close look at his record shows that he is not ideological and would not revolutionize Japanese national policy once in office. Ishiba is a careful and rational thinker and an institutional and establishment LDP politician. Both Ishiba and his father (Jiro Ishiba) were scions of the Tanaka/Takeshita factions whose base was agriculture, construction industry, defense industry, and the postal service.3 His is not the background of a radical fiscal hawk. One of Ishiba’s major concerns is generating growth outside of the major cities, but he does not take a slash and burn approach to the central government budget. For example, at a forum on Abenomics, the director of the Japanese Civilization Institute spoke with Ishiba in his capacity as Minister of Regional Revitalization. The moderator gave Ishiba the opportunity to denounce excess government spending and promote central spending cuts, saying, “Maybe you must arrange fiscal discipline more appropriately. Then, you can supply that money to regional areas.” Ishiba responded drily, “But I think regional areas must make their own money too.” The yen could rally on a bout of political uncertainty if Ishiba at any time looks likely to become LDP leader and he criticizes excessively easy economic policies. But, as we noted above in the report above, the BoJ Policy Board, not the prime minister’s office, will set monetary policy – and Ishiba would struggle to stack the board with hawks due to institutional resistance. Moreover in the wake of a global recession, the next prime minister will not have much ability to drive parliament into budget cuts or tax hikes. Ishiba would more likely seek to pursue deregulation. If he insisted on austerity, the economy would slump and his premiership would be ruined. Chances are he would listen to his advisers. The one policy that concerns Ishiba above all is national defense and security. Ishiba previously served as defense minister and was known for his hawkish tone, particularly over disputes in the East China Sea and domestic protests against the country’s new security law. More recently he differed with Abe’s constitutional revision – not over the need to normalize Japan’s self-defense forces, but because Abe tried to avoid an explicit mention of Japan’s right to maintain armed forces. If anything, Ishiba would be inclined to increase military spending. Yet his foreign policy is not a risk to the markets, beyond rhetoric, as he is also more willing to engage China than some other LDP leaders. Footnotes 1 In truth, something of a national awakening had already begun in the early 2000s under Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. This is reflected in the improvement of the fertility rate from 2005. But it fell to Abe to pick up where Koizumi had left off, fighting deflation and strengthening Japan’s international position. 2 See "Abe’s rival to declare bid to become Japan’s next leader," Nikkei, July 13, 2018, asia.nikkei.com. See a campaign synopsis at ishiba.com. 3 See Jojin V. John, "Developments in Japanese Politics: LDP Presidential Election and the Future of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe," Indian Council of World Affairs, August 29, 2018, icwa.in

Special Report

Feature Feature ChartThe Sales Of Makeup And Perfumes Collapsed, But The Sales Of Hair Care And Skin Care Grew The pandemic era is diminishing our close quarters intimacy with people, which raises a fascinating question. In a world of social and physical distancing, widespread use of face coverings, and virtual meetings on Zoom or Skype, is it still important to look good? Is it important to smell good? And perhaps the most fascinating question of all: is it important to feel good? The so-called ‘lipstick effect’ is a putative counter-cyclical phenomenon during recessions in which the demand for small treats and pick-me-ups increases while other spending is shrinking. One theory is that it is based on the basic human desire to feel good, even during hard times. When budgets are squeezed, people simply cut out large extravagances and substitute them with small luxuries, epitomised by lipstick. The lipstick effect was first recorded during the Great Depression. Between 1930 and 1933, unemployment in Germany surged to six million. But thanks to the booming demand for its cosmetics, the German firm Beiersdorf could boast that it did not have to lay off a single worker. Across the Atlantic, the same was true. When US economic output shrank by a third, cosmetics were one of the few products whose sales grew. The lipstick effect was also observed during the Great Recession. Between September 2008 and January 2009 when US consumer spending shrank, the sales of cosmetics bucked the downtrend, and grew (Chart I-2).  Chart I-2Cosmetics Sales Grew In The 2008 Recession... The Lipstick Effect Is Working In An Evolved Form Fast forward to 2020, and the pandemic-induced economic slump is the one recession in which we would expect not to observe the lipstick effect. After all, if you are in lockdown, or must maintain physical distancing with other people, or must wear a face covering when near other people, what is the point of wearing makeup or perfume? The sales of cosmetics and fragrances collapsed in the 2020 recession… Just as we would expect, between February and April this year, the US sales of cosmetics and fragrances collapsed by 18 percent, exactly in line with the plunge in US consumer spending. On the face of it, the lipstick effect does not work under a facemask (Chart I-3). Chart I-3...But Shrank In The 2020 Recession Yet on closer examination, the lipstick effect is working, albeit in an evolved form. While the sales of makeup and perfumes have collapsed in 2020, the sales of skincare and haircare products are growing (Chart I-1). As the pandemic took hold and forced hair and beauty salons to shutter, people replaced salon visits with at-home care routines. And interestingly, even in the Great Recession of 2008-09, the US sales of haircare and non-cosmetic personal products outperformed the sales of cosmetics (Chart I-4-Chart I-7). Chart I-4Hair Care And Skin Care Sales Grew In The 2008 Recession... Chart I-5...And Grew In The 2020 ##br##Recession Chart I-6Total Personal Products Sales Grew In The 2008 Recession... Chart I-7...And Have Held Up Well In The 2020 Recession In fact, 60 percent of the total beauty market comprises skincare and haircare products compared with 30 percent for makeup and perfumes (Chart I-8). It turns out that the cosmetics and personal products firms that have a diversified exposure to all segments of the beauty market are the ones that outperform in hard times as well as good. And it turns out that these companies are European. Chart I-8Skin Care And Hair Care Dominates The Beauty Market The European Cosmetics Sector Is Outperforming In hard times, the European cosmetics sector, led by L’Oréal, has consistently outperformed the US cosmetics sector, led by Estee Lauder, and the Japanese cosmetics sector, led by Shiseido. In hard times, the European cosmetics sector, led by L’Oréal, has consistently outperformed. Specifically, the 12-month forward earnings for the European cosmetics sector barely declined in the 2008-09 recession and have barely declined in the 2020 recession. In contrast, the forward earnings for the US and Japanese cosmetics sectors collapsed both then and now (Chart I-9). Chart I-9The European Cosmetics Sector Has Been Recession-Proof Furthermore, the latest quarterly reports show that while operating profits for L’Oréal are down by around 20 percent from a year ago, the operating profits for Estee Lauder and Shiseido have slumped by more than 80 percent.1 As a result, the L’Oréal share price took a much smaller hit than those of Estee Lauder and Shiseido in both the 2008 and the 2020 stock market crashes (Chart I-10 and Chart I-11). Chart I-10L’Oréal Took A Smaller Hit Than Estee Lauder And Shiseido In 2008… Chart I-11…And In ##br##2020 An important reason for L’Oréal’s consistent outperformance is its diversified product range. L’Oréal acknowledges that for both its consumer products and luxury divisions “the health crisis triggered a sharp deceleration in the makeup market”. But the hit to makeup was counterbalanced by continued strong growth in skin care thanks, for example, to the launch of serums in its Revitalift range. Additionally, its hair care products grew thanks to Fructis Hair Food plus very strong performance in the “highly dynamic home-use hair colour market”.  Estee Lauder confirms that “Covid-19 and its various impacts have influenced consumer preferences due to the closures of offices, retail stores and other businesses and the significant decline in social gatherings”. While the demand for makeup and fragrance has slumped, the demand for skin care and hair care products has been more resilient. The trouble is that hair care accounts for less than 4 percent of Estee Lauder’s total sales. Meanwhile, the collapse in makeup sales has forced goodwill asset impairments to several of its makeup brands causing the 80 percent collapse in its overall profits. Likewise, Shiseido blames the 83 percent slump in its operating profits largely on “a product mix deterioration” which outweighed prompt cost-saving measures in response to the rapid deterioration of the market environment. Another vulnerability is that Shiseido’s sales are highly concentrated in Asia. By comparison, L’Oréal benefits from geographical diversification, with sales almost equally split between Europe, the Americas, and Asia (Table I-1). Table I-1L’Oréal Benefits From Geographical Diversification The European Personal Products Sector Is Also Outperforming Turning to the general personal products sector, the leading companies are Unilever and Beiersdorf in Europe, Procter & Gamble, Colgate-Palmolive, and Kimberly Clark in the US, and Kao in Japan. In the personal products sector too, Europe has consistently outperformed the US and Japan. In the personal products sector too, Europe has consistently outperformed the US and Japan. Indeed, while the European sector’s profits have steadily grown through the past decade, the US sector’s profits have been going nowhere since the mid-2010s (Chart 1-12). Chart I-12The European Personal Products Sector’s Profits Have Grown Through The Past Decade   One reason for the European personal products sector’s reliable growth is that both Unilever and Beiersdorf are highly exposed to the beauty sector – in fact, Unilever has an even larger market share than Estee Lauder (Chart I-13). And as we have just seen, a diversified exposure to all segments of the beauty sector – makeup, fragrances, skin care, and hair care – should produce resilient growth in all economic backdrops. Pre-pandemic, and potentially once the pandemic is over, makeup and fragrances were/will be the growth drivers. Whereas during the pandemic, skin care and hair care are the drivers. Chart I-13Unilever Is A Big Player In Beauty A final point is that despite the superior and safer growth prospects of the European cosmetics and personal products companies, they are not generally more richly valued than their peers in the US and Japan (Table I-2 and Table I-3). Table I-2The European Cosmetics Sector Is Not More Expensive Table I-3The European Personal Products Sector Is Not More Expensive To sum up, for the pandemic era and beyond, the European cosmetics and personal products sector is well set for diversified growth via product mix, price points, and regional exposures. And it is relatively well valued versus its peers elsewhere in the world. As such, the sector – dominated by L’Oréal, Unilever, and Beiersdorf – should remain a core holding in an investment portfolio.   Dhaval Joshi Chief European Investment Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com   Mohamed El Shennawy Research Associate mohamede@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 The most recent quarterly report for Estee Lauder is due on August 20. But at the time of writing the latest quarterly report was to the end of June 2020 for L’Oréal and to the end of March 2020 for Estee Lauder and Shiseido.

Special Report

Dear clients, This week we are sending you a Research Note on balance of payments across the G10, authored by my colleague Kelly Zhong. With unprecedented monetary and fiscal stimulus, balance-of-payment dynamics will become an even more important driver of currencies over the next few years. That said, while the US current account is in deficit, the short dollar narrative is beginning to capture investor imagination, suggesting the call is rapidly becoming consensus. We are in the consensus camp, but are going short GBP today, as a bet on a short-term reversal. As for cable, the recent rally has gotten ahead of potential volatility in the coming months, even though it is cheap. Finally, we are lowering our target on the short gold/silver trade to 65, but tightening the stop-loss to 75. I hope you find the report insightful. Chester Ntonifor, Vice President Foreign Exchange Strategy Highlights COVID-19 has turned the world upside down this year, and severely impaired global trade. Global trade values plunged by 5% quarter-on-quarter in the first quarter, and are forecasted to have slumped by 27% in the second quarter. Most countries have also seen negative foreign direct investment (FDI) growth in the first few months of 2020. Global FDI inflows are forecasted to fall by 40% this year and drop by an additional 5-10% next. While all countries have been hit by COVID-19, the economic damage appears particularly pronounced in countries heavily reliant on foreign funding. Feature COVID-19 has turned the world upside down in 2020. The global economy headed into recession following a decade-long expansion. While many economies are starting to ease restriction measures, the possibility of a second wave remains a big downside risk to the global economy. If history is any guide, the Spanish flu during the early 1900s came in three waves, the second of which brought the most severe damage. Undoubtedly, international trade has been under severe pressure this year. Global trade volumes plunged by 5% in the first quarter, and are expected to be down 27% in the second quarter from their levels in the final three months of 2019. Moreover, the path of recovery remains uncertain as the pandemic continues to disrupt global supply chains and weaken consumer confidence. According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), it may take until late 2021/early 2022 for global trade to recover to pre-pandemic levels (Chart 1). As reinvested earnings make up more than half of total FDI, squeezed earnings this year will have a direct impact on FDI in the aftermath of COVID-19.  Global FDI inflows rebounded in 2019, reaching a total of $1.5 trillion, as the effect of the 2017 US tax reforms waned and US repatriation declined. This year, however, most countries have seen negative FDI growth rates in the first few months in 2020. According to UNCTAD, global FDI inflows are forecast to plunge by 40%, bringing total FDI inflows below the US$1 trillion level for the first time since 2005 (Chart 2). Unfortunately, as reinvested earnings make up more than half of total FDI, squeezed earnings this year will have a direct impact on FDI in the aftermath of COVID-19. Typically, FDI flows bottom only six to 18 months after the end of a recession. FDI inflows are forecast to decline further by another 5-10% in 2021. Chart 1Steep Decline In Trade Volumes In 1H'20 Chart 2Global FDI Projected To Fall Through 2021 While all economies have been hit by COVID-19, the impact varies by region. Emerging market countries, particularly those linked to commodities and manufacturing-intensive industries, appear to be have been hit harder by the crisis. This makes sense, given trade is much more volatile than services or consumption. Chart 3 shows that while exports make up less than 30% of GDP in the US, they amount to over 130% of GDP in Thailand and Malaysia, and over 300% of GDP in Singapore and Hong Kong. Chart 3Reliance On Trade Differ Across Countries Going forward, the recoveries might be uneven as well. Prior to COVID-19, global trade flows were already facing many challenges, including trade disputes, geopolitical tensions and rising protectionism. COVID-19 may have just supercharged two megatrends: Technology and Innovation: The pool of investments concentrated on exploiting raw materials and cheap labor is shrinking, while those promoting technology and ESG are becoming crucial. De-globalization: Policymakers in many countries are promoting more regulation and intervention, especially in key industries related to national security and health care. This suggests COVID-19 might represent a tipping point, making balance of payments all the more important for currencies, as investors become more discerning between countries and sectors with a high return on capital and those without. The euro area, Switzerland, Australia and Sweden sport the best basic balance surpluses.  In this report, we look at the balance-of-payment dynamics in the G10. The most important measure for us is the basic balance, which takes the sum of the current account and net long-term capital inflows. Our rationale is that these tend to measure the underlying competitiveness of a currency more accurately than other balance of payment measures. On this basis, the euro area, Switzerland, Australia and Sweden sport the best basic balance surpluses. The US is the worst (Chart 4). Below, we visit some of key drivers behind these trends. Chart 4Basic Balances Across G10 United States Chart 5US Balance Of Payments The US basic balance is deteriorating again (Chart 5). The key driver has been a decline in foreign direct investment. If this trend continues, this could further undermine the US currency. The US remains the world’s largest FDI recipient, attracting US$261 billion in 2019, which is almost double the size of FDI inflows into the second largest FDI recipient – China – with US$141 billion of inflows last year. However, cross-border flows have since fallen off a cliff after the waning effect of the one-time tax dividend introduced at the end of 2017. The lack of mega-M&A deals has also been a contributing factor. The trends in the trade balance have been flat, despite a push by the Trump Administration to reduce the US trade deficit and rejuvenate the US economy. The most recent second-quarter data show a deterioration from -2.3% of GDP to -2.8%. The trade deficit with China did drop by 21% to $345 billion in 2019, however, US companies quickly found alternatives from countries that are not affected by newly imposed tariffs, particularly from Southeast Asia: The US trade deficit with Vietnam jumped by 30%, or $16.3 billion, in 2019. More recently, exports have plunged much faster than imports, further widening the US trade deficit. On portfolio flows, the most recent TIC data show that US Treasurys continued to be shunned by foreigners in May. In short, the US balance-of-payment dynamics are consistent with our bearish dollar view. Euro Area Chart 6Euro Area Balance Of Payments A rising basic balance surplus has been one of the key pillars underpinning a bullish euro thesis. Of course, an apex in globalization will hurt this thesis, but the starting point for the euro area is much better than many of its trading partners. The trade surplus in the euro area was not spared from COVID-19 – it plunged to €9.4 billion in May from €20.7 billion the same month last year, as the pandemic hit global demand and disrupted supply chains. Exports tumbled by 29.5% year-on-year to €143.3 billion while imports declined by 26.7% to €133.9 billion. Even in this dire scenario, the trade surplus still remains a “healthy” 1.8% of GDP, buffeting the current account (Chart 6). Foreign direct investment inflows have regained some ground in recent years, with the improvement accelerating in recent months. FDI inflows surged by 18% in 2019, reaching US$429 billion. Outflows also rose by 13% in 2019, led by a large increase in investment by multinationals based in the Netherlands and Germany. Going forward, FDI is sure to drop, but this will not be a European-centric problem. Portfolio flows have started to reverse, but have not been the key driver of the basic balance. This is because ever since the European Central Bank introduced negative interest rates in 2014, portfolio outflows have been persisted. This also makes sense since Europeans need to recycle their excess savings abroad. In sum, despite the headwinds to global trade and investment, the basic balance remains at a healthy 2.9% of GDP, which bodes well for the euro. Japan Chart 7Japan Balance Of Payments A key pillar for the basic balance in Japan has been the current account balance, which has been buffeted over the years by income receipts from Japan’s large investment positions abroad. Going forward, this could make the yen very attractive in a world less reliant on global trade. Japanese exports tumbled by 26.2% year-on-year in June, led by lower sales in transport equipment, motor vehicles and manufactured goods. However, the slowing export trend was well in place before the pandemic. Exports had been declining for 18 consecutive months before COVID-19 dealt the final blow. Imports also fell by 14% year-on-year in June, led by lower energy prices. On the service side of the income equation, foreign visitors to Japan dropped by 99.9% from over 2.5 million in January to less than 2,000 in May. That equates to about 2% of the Japanese population. Despite all this, Japan still sports a healthy current account surplus, at 4% of GDP (Chart 7). In 2019, Japan remained the largest investor in the world, heavily recycling its current account surplus. FDI outflows from Japanese multinationals surged by 58% to a record US$227 billion, including US$104 billion in cross-border M&A deals. Notable mentions include Takeda acquiring Shire (Ireland) for US$60 billion, and SoftBank Group acquiring a stake in WeWork (the US) for US$6 billion. In terms of portfolio investments, foreign bond purchases have eased of late as global interest rates approach zero. Higher real rates are now being found in safe-haven currencies like the Swiss franc and the Japanese yen, which is supportive for the yen. Overall, the basic balance in Japan is at nil, in perfect balance between domestic savings and external investments. United Kingdom Chart 8UK Balance Of Payments The key development in the UK’s balance-of-payment dynamics is that a cheap pound combined with the pandemic appear to have stemmed the decline in the trade balance. The UK has run a current account deficit each year since 1983. This has kept the basic balance mostly negative (Chart 8). That could change if the marginal improvement in trade is durable and meaningful. The current account deficit further widened to £21.1 billion, or 3.8% of GDP, in the first quarter, of which the goods trade balance was more volatile than usual. Since May, the goods trade balance has been slowly recovering to £2.8 billion, but has been offset by the services trade deficit. The primary income deficit also widened in the first quarter as offshore businesses rushed to preserve cash buffers. Foreign direct investment in the UK has been improving of late, currently sitting at 3.7% of GDP. This is encouraging, given the steep post-Brexit drop. Going forward, we continue to favor the British pound over the long term due to its cheap valuation. However, we are going short today, as a play on a tactical dollar bounce. More on this next week.       Canada Chart 9Canada Balance Of Payments The Canadian basic balance has been flat for over a decade, as the persistent current account deficit has continuously been financed by FDI inflows and portfolio investment (Chart 9). This is a vote of confidence by investors over longer-term returns on Canadian assets. Canada is one of the largest exporters of crude oil, meaning the fall in resource prices generated a big dent in export incomes. However, the country is slowly on a recovery path. Exports increased 6.7% month-on-month in May, helping narrow the trade deficit to C$0.7 billion. More importantly, a positive net international investment position means that positive income flows into Canada are buffeting the current account balance. In 2019, Canada was the 10th largest FDI recipient in the world, with FDI inflows increasing to US$50 billion. Today, the basic balance stands at a surplus of 1% of GDP.               Australia Chart 10Australia Balance Of Payments Australia’s trade balance has been rapidly improving since the 2016 bottom, and has been the primary driver of an improving basic balance. While exports fell as the pandemic hit a nadir, imports fell more deeply. This allowed the trade surplus to widen in the first six months of the year compared to last year. Australia has long had a current account deficit, as import requirements to help drive investment opportunities were not met by domestic savings. With those projects now bearing fruit, the funding requirement has greatly eased. This has buffeted the current account balance, which turned positive for the first time last year following a 35-year-long deficit, and continues to rocket higher (Chart 10). Going forward, Australia’s trade balance and current account balance are likely to continue increasing as Australia has a comparative advantage in exports of resources, especially LNG, which is consistent with the ESG megatrend. Australia is also introducing major reforms to its foreign investment framework to protect national interests and local assets from acquisitions. Meanwhile, net portfolio investment remains negative, suggesting the current account surplus is being recycled abroad. In short, we believe the Aussie dollar has a large amount of running room, based on its healthy basic balance surplus of 4% of GDP. New Zealand Chart 11New Zealand Balance Of Payments Compared to its antipodean neighbour, the New Zealand basic balance has been flat for many years, but has seen recent improvement (Chart 11). The trade balance was boosted by goods exports, which were up NZ$261 million, while imports were down NZ$352 million in the first quarter of this year. The rise in goods exports was led by an increase in fruit (mainly kiwifruit), milk, powder, butter and cheese. More recently, due to the ease of lockdown measures, exports increased by 2.2% year-on-year in June while imports marginally rose by 0.2%, further enhancing New Zealand’s trade balance. The primary income deficit widened to NZ$2.2 billion in the first quarter due to less earnings on foreign investment. Moreover, the secondary income deficit also widened, driven by a smaller inflow of non-resident withholding tax. Despite this, the current account deficit narrowed to NZ$1.6 billion in the first quarter, or 2% of GDP, the smallest deficit since 2016.  New Zealand received $5.4 billion in FDI flows in 2019, rising from only $2 billion in 2018. Most FDI inflows arrived from Canada, Australia, Hong Kong and Japan. Impressively, according to the World Bank’s 2020 Doing Business Report, New Zealand ranked first out of 190 countries due to its openness and business-friendly economy, low levels of corruption, good protection of property rights, political stability and favorable tax policies. Portfolio investment inflows also increased by NZ$11.8 billion.  The improvement in the backdrop of New Zealand’s basic balance will allow it to outperform the US dollar. As a tactical trade, however, we are short the kiwi versus the CAD. The basis is that relative terms of trade favor the CAD for now. Switzerland Chart 12Switzerland Balance Of Payments Switzerland’s basic balance is almost always in surplus, driven by a structural uptrend in the trade balance (Chart 12). This has allowed the trade-weighted Swiss franc to outperform on a structural basis. We expect this trend to continue. As a country consistently running high surpluses, Switzerland also tends to invest more in foreign assets. Over the years, these smart investments have helped buffet the current account. Overall, in the first three months of this year, the current account balance stood at CHF 17.4 billion, or 11.2% of GDP. In terms of the net international investment position, both stocks of assets and liabilities fell by CHF 110 billion and CHF 42 billion, respectively in the first quarter, due to falling equity prices globally. The net international investment position fell by CHF 67 billion to CHF 745 billion in the January-March period. That said, Switzerland continued to deploy capital abroad in the first quarter, which should help buffet the current account going forward. The positive balance-of-payment backdrop has created a headache for the Swiss National Bank. As such, the SNB will likely continue to intervene in the foreign exchange markets to calm appreciation in the franc. We believe the franc will continue to outperform the USD in the near term, but underperform the euro.  Norway Chart 13Norway Balance Of Payments Norway has a very open economy, with trade representing over 70% of GDP, and it has been hit quite hard by COVID-19 this year. The trade surplus started to plunge sharply due to falling energy prices at the beginning of the lockdown (Chart 13). More recently, Norway posted its first trade deficit in May since last September, which carried over to June, as exports fell more than imports. Thanks to increases in income receipts from abroad, the current account balance remained flat at NOK 66.1 billion in the first quarter. With persistent current account surpluses, Norway has long been a capital exporter. However, the FDI outflow and inflow gap is gradually closing. In 2019, net FDI was -3.5% of GDP. In the first quarter of this year, it was -3.3%. Portfolio outflows have also softened over the years, as the current account balance has narrowed. There was, however, a trend change in the first three months of this year - Norway’s purchases of foreign bonds, surged as investors switched to safer assets. Ultimately, we remain NOK bulls due to its cheap valuation. As economies gradually reopen and ease lockdown measures, the recovery in energy prices will push the Norwegian krone back toward its fair value.     Sweden Chart 14Sweden Balance Of Payments Sweden maintained its trade surplus with the rest of the world throughout the first few months of 2020 (Chart 14). Imports fell more than exports amid the pandemic. The goods trade balance almost doubled from the fourth quarter of 2019 to SEK 68.8 billion in the first quarter of 2020. The primary income surplus also increased by SEK 10 billion to SEK 42.2, further strengthening the current account and bringing the total current account surplus to SEK 80.6 billion, or 4% of GDP. Both FDI inflows and outflows have been increasing in Sweden, but the net number was slightly negative. In the first quarter of 2020, FDI inflows rose by SEK 51.6 billion while FDI outflows increased by SEK 100.6 billion. In terms of portfolio investment, Swedish investors reduced their portfolio investment abroad by SEK 141 billion in the first quarter, while foreigners decreased their portfolio investment in Sweden by SEK 45.8 billion. In conclusion, the Swedish krona remains one of our favorite longs due to its increasing basic balance surplus (4% of GDP) and its cheap valuation. We are long the Nordic basket (NOK and SEK) against both the euro and the US dollar. Kelly Zhong Research Analyst kellyz@bcaresearch.com Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com Footnotes   Trades & Forecasts Forecast Summary Core Portfolio Tactical Trades Limit Orders Closed Trades

Highlights Global Bond Yields: The growing divide between falling negative real bond yields and rising inflation expectations in the US and other major developed economies may be a sign of investors pricing in slower long-run potential economic growth in the aftermath of the COVID-19 recession – and, thus, lower equilibrium real interest rates. Stay overweight inflation-linked bonds versus nominal equivalents. Currency-hedged spread product: A broad ranking of currency-hedged global spread product yields, adjusted for volatility and credit quality, shows that the most attractive yields (hedged into USD, EUR, GBP and JPY) are on offer in emerging market USD-denominated investment grade corporates and high-yield company debt in the US and UK. Feature Global bond yields are testing the downside of the narrow trading ranges that have persisted since May. As of last Friday, the yield on the Bloomberg Barclays Global Treasury index was at 0.41%, only 3 basis points (bps) above the 2020 low seen back in March. The 10-year US Treasury yield closed yesterday at 0.56%, only 6bps above the year-to-date low. Chart of the Week Concerns about global growth, with the number of new COVID-19 cases still surging in the US and new breakouts occurring in countries like Spain and Australia, would seem to be the logical culprit for the decline in yields. The first reads on global GDP data for the 2nd quarter released last week were historically miserable, with declines of -33% (annualized) in the US and -10% in the euro area (non-annualized). That represents a very deep hole of lost output, literally wiping out several years of growth. Even with the sharp improvements seen recently in cyclical indicators like global manufacturing PMIs, especially in China and Europe, a return to pre-pandemic levels of global economic output is many years away. Central banks will have no choice but to keep policy rates near 0% for at last the next couple of years, as is the current forward guidance provided by the Fed, ECB and others. Lower global bond yields may simply be reflecting the reality that it will take a long time to heal the economic wounds from the pandemic. However, there may be a more insidious reason why bond yields are falling. Investors may be permanently marking down their expectations for long-term potential economic growth, and equilibrium interest rates, in response to the devastation caused by the COVID-19 recession. Last week, Fitch Ratings lowered its estimates for long-term potential GDP growth, used to determine sovereign credit ratings, by 0.5 percentage points for the US (now 1.4%), 0.5 percentage points for the euro area (now 0.7%) and 0.7 percentage points in the UK (now 0.7%).1 These are declines similar in magnitude to the plunge in the OECD’s potential growth rate estimates seen after the 2009 Great Recession (Chart of the Week). Bond yields in the US and Europe witnessed a fundamental repricing in response, with nominal 5-year yields, 5-years forward breaking 200bps below the 4-6% range that prevailed in the US and Europe during the decade prior to the Great Recession. A similar re-rating of global bond yields to structurally lower levels may now be happening, with investors now believing that central banks will have difficulty raising rates much (if at all) in the future - even after the pandemic has ended. The Message From Declining Negative Real Bond Yields Chart 2The Real Rate/Breakevens Divergence Continues The typical signals about economic growth from government bond yields are now less clear because of the aggressive policy responses to the COVID-19 crisis. 0% policy rates, dovish forward guidance on the timing of any future rate increases, large scale asset purchases (QE), and more extreme measures like yield curve control to peg bond yields, have all acted to suppress the level and volatility of nominal global bond yields. Within those calm nominal yields, however, the dynamic that has been in place since May - rising inflation breakevens and falling real bond yields – is growing in intensity. The 10-year US TIPS real yield is now at a new all-time low of -1.02%, while the 10-year TIPS breakeven is now up to 1.58%, the highest since February before the pandemic began to roil financial markets (Chart 2). Similar trends are evident in most other major developed economy bond markets, with the gap between falling real yields and widening breakevens growing at a notably faster pace in Canada and Australia. More often than not, longer-term real yields tend to move in the same direction as inflation expectations when economic growth is improving. The former responds to faster economic activity, often with an associated pick up in private sector credit demand. At the same time, rising inflation expectations discount higher economic resource utilization (i.e. lower unemployment) and confidence that inflation will start to pick up. A deeply negative correlation between longer-term real yields and inflation expectations is unusual, but not unprecedented. A deeply negative correlation between longer-term real yields and inflation expectations is unusual, but not unprecedented. In Chart 3, we show the range of rolling three-year correlations between 10-year inflation-linked (real) government bond yields and 10-year inflation breakevens in the US, Germany, France, Italy, the UK, Japan, Canada and Australia for the post-crisis period. The triangles in the chart are the latest three-year correlation, while the diamonds are a more recent measure showing the 13-week correlation. There are a few key takeaways from this chart: Chart 3Negative Real Yield/Breakevens Correlations Are Not Unprecedented All countries shown have experienced a sustained period of negative correlation between real yields and inflation breakevens; The correlation has mostly been positive in Australia and has always been negative in Japan; Most importantly, the deeply negative correlations seen over the past three months – with rising breakevens all but fully offsetting falling real yields – are at or below the range of historical experience for all countries shown. Chart 4TIPS Yields May Stay Negative For Some Time In the current virus-stricken world, where many businesses that have closed during the pandemic may never reopen, there will be abundant spare global economic capacity for several years. In the US, measures of spare capacity like the unemployment gap (the unemployment rate minus the full-employment NAIRU rate) have been a reliable leading directional indicator of the long-run correlation between real TIPS yields and TIPS breakevens over the past decade (Chart 4). The surge in US unemployment seen since the spring, which has pushed the jobless rate into double-digit territory, suggests that the current deeply negative correlation between US real yields and inflation breakevens can persist over the next 6-12 months. Given the large increases in unemployment seen in other countries, the negative correlations between real yields and inflation breakevens should also continue outside the US. As for inflation expectations, those remain correlated in the short-run to changes in oil prices and exchange rates in all countries. On that front, there is still some room for breakevens to widen to reach the fair value levels implied by our models.2 A good conceptual way to think about inflation breakevens on a more fundamental level, however, is as a “vote of confidence” in a central bank’s monetary policy stance. If investors perceive policy settings to be too tight, markets will price in slower growth and lower inflation expectations, and vice versa. Every developed market central bank is now setting policy rates near or below 0% - and promising to keep them there until at least the end of 2022. Thus, the trend of rising global inflation breakevens can continue as a reflection of very dovish central banks that will be more tolerant of increases in inflation and not tighten policy pre-emptively. Currently, real 10-year inflation-linked bond yields are below the New York Fed’s estimates of the neutral real short-term rate, or “r-star”, in the US and the UK (Chart 5), as well as in the euro area and Canada (Chart 6).3 In the US and euro area, real yields have followed the broad trend of r-star, but the gap between the two is relatively moderate with r-star estimated to be only 0.5% in the US and 0.2% in the euro zone (where the ECB is setting a negative nominal interest rate on European bank deposits at the central bank – a policy choice that the Fed has been very reluctant to consider). Chart 5Negative Real Bond Yields Are Below R* In The US & UK ... Chart 6... As Well As In The Euro Area & Canada A more interesting study is in the UK where 10yr inflation-linked Gilt yields have fallen below -2.5%, but without the Bank of England implementing any negative nominal policy rates. In the UK, inflation expectations have been relatively high – running in the 2.5-3% range prior to the COVID-19 recession – as the Bank of England has consistently kept overnight interest rates below actual CPI inflation since the 2008 financial crisis. Thus, nominal Gilt yields have stayed relatively low for longer, as real yields and inflation expectations have remained negatively correlated for a long period with the Bank of England maintaining a consistently negative real policy rate. Chart 7Spillovers From Negative TIPS Yields Into Other Assets If the Fed were to do the same in the US, keeping the funds rate very low even as inflation rises, then a similar dynamic could take place where real TIPS yields continue to fall and TIPS breakevens continue to rise as the market prices in a sustained negative real fed funds rate. That may already be happening, with Fed Chair Jerome Powell hinting last week that the Fed is in the process of completing its inflation strategy review – with a shift towards rate hikes occurring only after realized inflation has sustainably increased to the Fed’s 2% target. A forecast of inflation heading to 2% because of falling unemployment will no longer be enough.4 Other factors may be at work depressing real bond yields while boosting inflation expectations, such as the massive QE bond buying programs of the Fed, ECB and other central banks. Yet even QE programs are essentially an aggressive form of forward guidance designed to drive down longer-term bond yields by lowering expectations of future interest rates. In sum, it is increasingly likely that the current phase of negative global real bond yields may become longer lasting if markets believe that equilibrium real policy rates are now negative. Bond investors will expect central banks to sit on their hands and do nothing in that environment, even if inflation starts to increase. This not only has implications for bond markets, but other asset classes as well based on what is happening in the US. The steady decline in the in the 10-year US TIPS yield has boosted the valuation of assets that typically have been considered inflation hedges, like equities and gold (Chart 7). The fall in TIPS yields also suggests that more weakness in the US dollar is likely to come over the next 6-12 months – another reflationary factor that should help lift global inflation expectations and boost the attractiveness of inflation-linked bonds. The current phase of negative global real bond yields may become longer lasting if markets believe that equilibrium real policy rates are now negative. Bottom Line: The growing divide between falling negative real bond yields and rising inflation expectations in the US and other major developed economies may be a sign of investors pricing in slower long-run potential economic growth in the aftermath of the COVID-19 recession – and, thus, lower equilibrium real interest rates. Stay overweight inflation-linked bonds versus nominal equivalents. Searching For Value In Global Spread Product Last week, we looked at the impact of currency hedging on the attractiveness of government bond yields across the developed markets.5 We concluded that US Treasuries still offered superior yields to most other countries’ sovereign bonds, even with the US dollar in a weakening trend and after hedging out currency risk. We also presented a cursory look at the relative attractiveness of the major global spread product categories in that report, but without factoring in any considerations on the relative credit quality or volatility between sectors. This week, we will look at the relative value of global spread products hedged into USD, GBP, EUR and JPY, but after controlling for those credit and volatility risks. We conducted a similar analysis in early 2018,6 ranking the currency-hedged yields for a wide variety of global spread products by the ratio of yields to trailing volatility. This time, instead of looking at the just that simple valuation metric, we use regression models to make a judgment on how under- or over-valued spread products are relative to their “fair value”. To recap the methodology of this analysis, we take the Bloomberg Barclays index yield-to-maturity (YTM) for each spread product category, hedged into the four currencies used in this analysis, and divide it by the annualized trailing volatility of those yields over both short-term (1-year) and long-term (3-year) windows. In order to hedge the yields into each currency, we used the annualized differentials between spot and 3-month forward exchange rates, which is the all-in cost of hedging. We then compare those currency-hedged, volatility-adjusted yields to two measures of risk: the index credit rating and duration times spread (DTS) for each spread product. Table 1 summarizes the attractiveness of each product when hedged into different currencies. The rank is based on the average of four different valuation measures.7 The higher the rank, the more attractive the sector is in terms of yield relative to risk measures such as both short-term and long-term volatilities, credit ratings, and DTS. Table 1Ranking Currency-Hedged, Risk-Adjusted Global Spread Product Yields A few interesting points come from the table: Emerging market (EM) USD-denominated investment grade (IG) corporate debt ranks at or near the top of the rankings, for all currencies; the opposite holds true for EM USD-denominated sovereign bonds Almost all European spread products rank poorly for non-euro denominated investors US & UK high-yield (HY) rank highly for all currencies US real estate related assets (MBS and CMBS) also rank well for all investor groups In general, US products are more attractive than European credit sectors. This is mainly because US spread products offer higher yields than European ones even after accounting for volatility and the weakening US dollar. Almost all European spread products rank poorly for non-euro denominated investors. Chart 8 shows the unhedged YTM on the x-axis and the option-adjusted spread (OAS) on the y-axis (Table 2 contains the abbreviations used in this chart and all remaining charts in this report). Unsurprisingly, the YTM and OAS follow a very tight linear relationship. However, when yields are hedged into different currencies and risk measures are factored in, the result changes. Chart 8Global Spread Product Yields & Spreads Charts 9A to 12B show the details of spread product analysis with different currency hedges and risk factors. To limit the number of charts shown, we show only currency-hedged yields adjusted by long-term trailing volatility (the rankings do not change significantly when using a shorter-term volatility measure). The y-axis in all charts shows the volatility-adjusted yields, while the x-axis shows credit ratings and DTS. Sectors that are close to upper-right in each chart are more attractive (undervalued), while spread products that are close to bottom-left are less attractive (overvalued). Chart 9AGlobal Spread Product Yields, Hedged Into USD, Adjusted For Credit Quality Chart 9BGlobal Spread Product Yields, Hedged Into USD, Adjusted For Duration-Times-Spread Chart 10AGlobal Spread Product Yields, Hedged Into EUR, Adjusted For Credit Quality Chart 10BGlobal Spread Product Yields, Hedged Into EUR, Adjusted For Duration-Times-Spread Chart 11AGlobal Spread Product Yields, Hedged Into GBP, Adjusted For Credit Quality Chart 11BGlobal Spread Product Yields, Hedged Into GBP, Adjusted For Duration-Times-Spread Chart 12AGlobal Spread Product Yields, Hedged Into JPY, Adjusted For Credit Quality Chart 12BGlobal Spread Product Yields, Hedged Into JPY, Adjusted For Duration-Times-Spread Table 2Global Spread Products In Our Analysis An interesting result is that when comparing the three major high-yield products (US-HY, EMU-HY and UK-HY), US-HY is the most attractive in USD terms, but UK-HY is more attractive when hedged into GBP, EUR, and JPY. Another observation is that higher quality bonds such as government-related and agency debt in the US and euro area are overvalued and less attractive given how low their yields are, regardless of their low volatility. The results from this analysis may differ from our current recommendations. For example, we currently only have a neutral recommendation on EM corporates, but based on this analysis, EM corporates offer the most attractive return in USD terms. This analysis is purely based on YTM and traditional risk factors without considering other concerns that could make EM assets riskier such as the spread of COVID-19 in major EM countries. However, these rankings do line up with our major spread product call of overweighting US IG and HY corporate debt versus euro area equivalents. Based on this analysis, EM corporates offer the most attractive return in USD terms.  Bottom Line: A broad ranking of currency-hedged global spread product yields, adjusted for volatility and credit quality, shows that the most attractive yields (hedged into USD, EUR, GBP and JPY) are on offer in emerging market USD-denominated investment grade corporates and high-yield company debt in the US and UK.   Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com   Ray Park, CFA Research Analyst ray@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1https://www.fitchratings.com/research/sovereigns/coronavirus-impact-on-gdp-will-be-felt-for-years-to-come-27-07-2020 2 Please see BCA Global Fixed Income Strategy Weekly Report, "How To Play The Revival Of Global Inflation Expectations", dated June 23, 2020, available at gfis.bcaresarch.com. 3 We use the French 10-year inflation-linked bond as the proxy for the entire euro area, as this is the oldest inflation-linked bond market in the region and thus has the most data history. 4https://www.wsj.com/articles/fed-weighs-abandoning-pre-emptive-rate-moves-to-curb-inflation-11596360600?mod=hp_lead_pos6 5 Please see BCA Research Weekly Report, “What A Weaker US Dollar Means For Global Bond Investors”, dated July 28, 2020, available at gfis.bcaresarch.com. 6 Please see BCA Global Fixed Income Strategy Weekly Report, "Policymakers Are Now Selling Put Options On Volatility, Not Asset Prices", dated March 6, 2018, available at gfis.bcareseach.com. 7 Hedged YTM/Short-term trailing volatility vs. Credit Rating; Hedged YTM/Long-term trailing volatility vs. Credit Rating; Hedged YTM/Long-term trailing volatility vs. Duration; Hedged YTM/Long-term trailing volatility vs. Duration. Recommendations The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index Duration Regional Allocation Spread Product Tactical Trades Yields & Returns Global Bond Yields Historical Returns

Highlights Butterflies & Yield Curve Models: With bond market volatility now back to the subdued levels seen prior to the COVID-19 market turbulence earlier in 2020, it is a good time to update our global yield curve valuation models to look for attractive butterfly trade ideas. Valuations: The models generally indicate that flattener trades offer better value across all countries. Our medium-term strategic bias, however, is towards steeper yield curves with policy rates on hold and depressed global inflation expectations likely to continue drifting higher over the latter half of the year. Yield Curve Trades: We are initiating the first set of yield curve trades within our rebooted Tactical Trade Overlay: going long a 7-year bullet vs. a 5-year/10-year barbell in the US; long a 2-year/30-year barbell vs. a 5-year bullet in France; long a 5-year/30-year barbell vs. a 10-year bullet in Italy; and long a 3-year/20-year barbell vs. a 10-year bullet in the UK. Feature In a Special Report published back in February of this year, we dusted off our model-based framework to find value in trades focused on the shape of government bond yield curves.1 By comparing the market-implied short-term interest rate expectations extracted from our curve models to our own macro views, we are able to come up with actionable buy or sell signals across the yield curve in nine developed markets: the US, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, the UK, Japan, Canada, and Australia. Table 1Most Attractive Butterfly Trades Given the extreme market turbulence around the time we published that report, as the full scope of the COVID-19 pandemic was becoming evident, we chose not to recommend any curve trades from our models until global volatility subsided to acceptable levels. The vigorous action from central banks to manipulate bond yields since then - quantitative easing, aggressive forward guidance, outright yield curve control in Japan and Australia, and other unconventional monetary policy measures - introduced another layer of difficulty in implementing successful curve trades using models estimated in more normal times. With global bond market volatility now back down to pre-COVID levels, we feel that the time is right to use our curve models to help identify opportunities. Specifically, we are implementing new recommended yield curve trades in the US, France, Italy, and the UK. Table 1 shows the most attractive butterfly trades across all the markets covered in this analysis. Note that three of the four trades we are initiating include very long-dated bonds where yields are less susceptible to direct central bank influence. The only exception is our US long 7-year bullet vs. 5-year/10-year barbell trade, the reasoning for which we outline later in this report. Three of the four trades we are initiating include very long-dated bonds where yields are less susceptible to direct central bank influence. The only exception is our US long 7-year bullet vs. 5-year/10-year barbell trade. Before delving into our analysis proper, a quick note: in the interest of brevity, we will limit ourselves to a simple explanation of butterfly strategies and our yield curve models in this report. For those interested in a deeper explanation of the curve modeling framework, please refer to our February 25, 2020 Special Report. A Recap On Butterflies And An Update On Our Yield Curve Models A butterfly fixed income strategy involves two main components: a barbell (a weighted combination of long-term and short-term bonds) and a bullet (a medium-term bond that sits within the yield curve segment selected in the barbell). To implement a butterfly strategy, a bond investor would go long (short) the barbell while simultaneously going short (long) the bullet. By weighting the combination of the long- and short-term bonds in the butterfly such that the weighted sum of their duration equals the duration of the medium-term bond in the bullet, we achieve immunization to parallel shifts in the yield curve. At the same time, due to the relatively higher duration of the longer-term component of the butterfly, we get exposure to specific changes in the slope of the yield curve. In general, the barbell will outperform the bullet in a flattening yield curve environment, and vice-versa. Chart of the WeekButterfly Spreads & Yield Curves To actually decide how, and on which parts of the yield curve, to implement our butterfly strategies, we make use of our yield curve models. These models rely on the positive relationship typically observed between the butterfly spread and the slope of the yield curve. When the curve steepens, the butterfly spread widens, and vice-versa (Chart of the Week). This has to do with mean reversion: as the curve steepens, it increases the odds that the curve will flatten in the future since it cannot steepen indefinitely. Consequently, investors will ask for greater compensation to enter a curve steepener trade when the curve is already steepening. As a result, we can create simplified models of the yield curve by regressing any butterfly spread on its corresponding curve slope. Deviations from these fair value models indicate which butterfly strategies are cheap or expensive. However, the model output does not by itself constitute a buy or sell signal and must be integrated with our macro view on the slope of the curve. For example, a butterfly strategy with an expensive bullet implies that there is already a certain amount of steepening discounted in the yield curve. If the yield curve flattens, or even steepens by an amount smaller than what is discounted in the yield curve over the investment horizon, the barbell will outperform, as expected. However, if we see more steepening than is discounted in the yield curve, the bullet will outperform, even though it was already at relatively expensive levels. Therefore, it is crucial to integrate our macro view on how much the curve will steepen or flatten over the investment horizon into our curve trade selection framework. In recent reports, we have emphasized our high-conviction view that global inflation expectations will drift higher in the coming months, driven by reflationary fiscal and monetary policy and a continued rebound in global commodity prices (most notably, oil).2 However, a rise in inflation expectations does not necessarily translate to a “one-to-one” rise in nominal yields if it is offset by a compression in real bond yields. To disentangle this, we look at the 3-year rolling betas of nominal 10-year government bond yields to the corresponding 10-year breakeven inflation rates using inflation-linked bonds (Chart 2). The data suggest a currently weaker relationship between inflation expectations and nominal yields, with all betas well below their post-crisis maxima. Our overall macro bias is towards a global steepening in yield curves, but given our strong belief in a rebound in inflation expectations, we would be more willing to enter steepener trades in higher-beta regions such as Germany, Canada, the US, and Australia where it is more likely that a rise in inflation expectations will translate to higher nominal yields. Conversely, we are less hesitant to enter flatteners in the lower-beta regions such as the UK, France, Italy, and Japan. Chart 2The Link Between Nominal Yields And Inflation Expectations Has Weakened When we said earlier this year that we were “dusting off” our yield curve models, that was not just a figure of speech. The models date back originally to 2002, meaning that they are old enough to vote—perhaps even for a popular rapper. Even though we have been refining and updating it along the way, one of our concerns was that this model was estimated for a pre-crisis sample period before near-zero rates became ubiquitous in developed markets. Our overall macro bias is towards a global steepening in yield curves, but given our strong belief in a rebound in inflation expectations, we would be more willing to enter steepener trades in higher-beta regions such as Germany, Canada, the US, and Australia. To test that the curve relationships within our models are maintained when global central banks are pinning policy rates near 0%, we have re-estimated all the regressions for the post-financial crisis period from 2009 to 2017 when most central banks kept rates near the zero bound. Chart 3 shows the results for the representative 2-year, 5-year and 10-year portions of the yield curve. On the whole, the coefficients are weaker but still positive with the exception of Japan, where many years of zero rates and quantitative easing have caused the 2-year/5-year/10-year butterfly spread to become largely unmoored from the 2-year/10-year slope. Chart 3Looking For Structural Shifts In Our Yield Curve Models Therefore, we still see value in our curve modeling approach, even in the current environment where central banks are likely to be on hold for a period measured in years, not months. Bottom Line: Butterfly strategies are an effective way to position for changes in the slope of the yield curve without exposure to shifts in the curve. Our current strategic bias is to expect steepening of developed market yield curves through rising longer-term inflation expectations, but our global yield curve models indicate better value in most flattening trades. Thus, we need to be extremely selective in recommending trades based on the results of our yield curve models. Yield Curve Models And Trades By Region In the remaining pages of this report, we present the current read-outs from of our yield curve models for each of the major developed markets. More specifically, we provide the deviations from fair value for different combinations of bullets and barbells and highlight the most attractive butterfly strategy. The deviations from fair value shown in Tables 2-10 are standardized to facilitate comparisons between the different butterfly combinations. In addition, for each country we provide a quick assessment of the performance of these butterfly strategies over time by applying a simple mechanical trading rule. Every month, we enter the most attractive butterfly strategy, i.e. the one with the highest absolute standardized deviation from its model fair value. The overall message from the models is that barbells appear attractive relative to bullets across all the countries shown. However, we will only initiate trades in cases where the model output and our macro outlook complement each other. US Looking solely at our model output, US Treasury curve flatteners appear most attractive, with the long 3-year/30-year barbell vs. 5-year bullet trade displaying the greatest deviation from fair value with a residual of -1.55 (Table 2). However, we are inclined to agree with our colleagues at BCA Research US Bond Strategy on how to interpret Treasury curve valuation in the current environment. They argue that even though steepeners in the US are currently expensive, valuations can become even more overstretched with the Fed signaling no rate increases for at least the next two years and the market priced for an extended period of near-zero rates.3 Table 2US: Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Standardized Residuals Our fundamental bias is towards US Treasury curve steepening, with the Fed locking down the front end of the curve and rising inflation expectations putting upward pressure on longer-term yields. Thus, we are entering into the long 7-year bullet vs. 5/10 barbell trade which has a small but positive model residual of +0.17. That represents a better valuation starting point than the other US butterfly spreads, and is therefore a more efficient and profitable way to position for steepeners becoming even more expensive going forward. As highlighted earlier, nominal yields in the US are also more sensitive to rising inflation expectations—another reason to enter into a curve steepener. The specific securities used to execute this trade, as well as the weights for the barbell component used to the make both legs of the trade duration-equivalent, can be found on Page 27 within our Tactical Trade Overlay table. Nominal yields in the US are also more sensitive to rising inflation expectations—another reason to enter into a curve steepener.  The 7-year bullet appears just 1bp cheap according to our model and would only underperform its counterpart given a flattening in the 5-year/10-year Treasury slope greater than 22bps, which we believe is unlikely given the reasons outlined above (Chart 4A). Chart 4AUS 5/7/10 Spread Fair Value Model Chart 4BUS Butterfly Strategy Performance Following the mechanical trading rule has delivered steady returns with only a few periods of negative year-over-year returns (Chart 4B). Germany The most attractively valued butterfly combination on the German yield curve is going long the 1-year/30-year barbell and shorting the 5-year bullet, which is almost one standard deviation above its model-implied fair value, with a standardized residual of -0.97 (Table 3). Table 3Germany: Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Standardized Residuals The 5-year bullet appears 29bps expensive according to our model and would only outperform its counterpart given a steepening in the 1-year/30-year German curve slope greater than 50bps (Chart 5A). Chart 5AGermany 1/5/30 Spread Fair Value Model Chart 5BGermany Butterfly Strategy Performance Following the mechanical trading rule has been quite profitable, delivering consistently positive year-over-year returns for all but the initial period of our sample (Chart 5B). France The most attractively valued butterfly combination on the French OAT yield curve is going long the 2-year/30-year barbell and shorting the 5-year bullet (Table 4). This combination is a little less than one standard deviation over its model-implied fair value with a standardized residual of -0.84. Nominal yields in France are also relatively less correlated with inflation expectations, which makes this a prime candidate for a flattener trade. The specific securities used to execute this trade, as well as the weights for the barbell component used to the make both legs of the trade duration-equivalent, can be found on Page 27 within our Tactical Trade Overlay table. Table 4France: Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Standardized Residuals The 5-year bullet appears 21bps expensive according to our model and would only outperform its counterpart given a steepening in the 2-year/30-year French curve slope greater than 48bps (Chart 6A). Chart 6AFrance 2/5/30 Spread Fair Value Model Chart 6BFrance Butterfly Strategy Performance As with Germany, following the mechanical trading rule in the French OAT market has also been profitable, with only three periods of negative year-over-year returns in our sample period (Chart 6B). Italy And Spain In Italy, the most attractively valued butterfly combination is going long the 5-year/30-year barbell and shorting the 10-year bullet – a combination with a standardized residual of -0.79 (Table 5). In Spain, going long the 3-year/30-year barbell and short the 5-year bullet seems most attractive with a standardized residual of -0.83 (Table 6). Of the two peripheral euro area countries, we are choosing to put on a trade in the relatively larger and more liquid Italian government bond market. As with France, Italian nominal yields also display a relatively low beta to inflation breakevens. The specific securities used to execute this trade, as well as the weights for the barbell component used to the make both legs of the trade duration-equivalent, can be found on Page 27 within our Tactical Trade Overlay table. Table 5Italy: Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Standardized Residuals Table 6Spain: Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Standardized Residuals In Italy, the 10-year bullet appears 22bps expensive according to our model and would only outperform its counterpart given a steepening in the 5-year/30-year Italian curve slope greater than 153bps (Chart 7A). Following the mechanical trading rule in Italy has yielded strong excess returns, with only one very short period of negative year-over-year returns in our sample period (Chart 7B).  As with Italy, following the mechanical trading rule in Spain has yielded some of the strongest excess returns on a cumulative and year-over-year basis. Chart 7AItaly 5/10/30 Spread Fair Value Model Chart 7BItaly Butterfly Strategy Performance In Spain, the 5-year bullet appears 14bps expensive according to our model and would only outperform its counterpart given a steepening in the 3-year/30-year Spanish curve slope greater than 47bps (Chart 8A). As with Italy, following the mechanical trading rule in Spain has yielded some of the strongest excess returns on a cumulative and year-over-year basis (Chart 8B). Chart 8ASpain 3/5/30 Spread Fair Value Model Chart 8BSpain Butterfly Strategy Performance UK On the UK Gilt yield curve, the most attractive butterfly combination is holding a 3-year/20-year barbell versus a 10-year bullet, which currently displays a standardized residual of -1.08 (Table 7). As with France and Italy, not only is this flattener trade attractively valued, the UK is also one of the countries where inflation breakevens are relatively less correlated with nominal yields, making this another excellent candidate for our Tactical Trade Overlay. The specific securities used to execute this trade, as well as the weights for the barbell component used to the make both legs of the trade duration-equivalent, can be found on Page 27. Table 7UK: Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Standardized Residuals The 10-year bullet appears 13bps expensive according to our model and would only outperform its counterpart given a steepening in the 3-year/20-year Gilt curve slope greater than 52bps (Chart 9A). Chart 9AUK 3/10/20 Spread Fair Value Model Chart 9BUK Butterfly Strategy Performance Following the mechanical trading rule in the UK has produced consistent returns on a year-over-year basis (Chart 9B). Canada The most attractively valued butterfly combination on the Canadian yield curve is favoring the 5-year/30-year barbell versus the 7-year bullet, which currently displays a standardized residual of -1.41 (Table 8). Table 8Canada: Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Standardized Residuals The 7-year bullet appears 7bps expensive according to our model and would only outperform its counterpart given a steepening in the 5-year/30-year Canadian curve slope greater than 42bps (Chart 10A). Chart 10ACanada 5/7/30 Spread Fair Value Model Chart 10BCanada Butterfly Strategy Performance Following the mechanical trading rule in Canada has historically been a good strategy, but we do note two periods of minor losses in 2013 and 2019 (Chart 10B). Japan The most attractively valued butterfly combination on the JGB yield curve is the 5-year/20-year barbell versus the 7-year bullet, which currently has a standardized residual of -1.03 (Table 9). As we noted earlier, however, valuations in the JGB market are likely distorted due to the Bank of Japan’s long-running programs of quantitative easing, zero policy rates and Yield Curve Control that aims to keep the 10-year JGB yield around 0%. Table 9Japan: Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Standardized Residuals The 7-year bullet appears 6bps expensive according to our model and would only outperform its counterpart given a steepening in the 5-year/20-year Japan curve slope greater than 23bps (Chart 11A). Following our mechanical trading rule has produced decent returns, especially given the dormant nature of the JGB market, with only a couple minor periods without positive year-over-year returns. Chart 11AJapan 5/7/20 Spread Fair Value Model Chart 11BJapan Butterfly Strategy Performance Following our mechanical trading rule has produced decent returns, especially given the dormant nature of the JGB market, with only a couple minor periods without positive year-over-year returns (Chart 11B). Australia The most attractively valued butterfly combination on the Australian yield curve is going long the 2-year/10-year barbell versus the 7-year bullet, displaying a standardized residual of -1.73 (Table 10). Table 10Australia: Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Standardized Residuals The 7-year bullet appears 15bps expensive according to our model and would only outperform its counterpart given a steepening in the 2-year/10-year Australian curve slope greater than 101bps (Chart 12A). Chart 12AAustralia 2/7/10 Spread Fair Value Model Chart 12BAustralia Butterfly Strategy Performance Compared to the other markets in our analysis, following the mechanical trading rule in Australia has not produced stellar returns (Chart 12B). However, excess returns on a year-over-year basis have been positive barring two periods.   Shakti Sharma Research Associate ShaktiS@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, "Global Yield Curve Trades: Follow The Butterflies", dated February 25, 2020, available at gfis.bcaresearch.com. 2 Please see BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy Weekly Report, "How To Play The Revival Of Global Inflation Expectations", dated June 23, 2020, available at gfis.bcaresearch.com. 3 Please see BCA Research US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, "Take A Look At High-Yield Technology Bonds", dated June 23, 2020, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com. Recommendations The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index ​​​​​​​ Duration Regional Allocation Spread Product Tactical Trades Yields & Returns Global Bond Yields Historical Returns