Consumer
Highlights Our willingness to spend money depends on which ‘mental account’ it occupies. Once windfall income enters our ‘savings mental account’, we will not spend it. Hence, the pandemic’s windfall income receipts will have no sustained impact on spending, or on inflation. This means that US monetary tightening will be later and shallower than the market is pricing. As we learn to live with the pandemic, the massive displacement in spending patterns is normalising. This means that the abnormally high spending on durable goods has a long way to fall. Hence, today we are recommending a new 6-month position: underweight consumer discretionary plays. One easy way of expressing this is to underweight XLY (US consumer discretionary) versus XLP (US consumer staples). Fractal analysis: The US dollar, and base metals versus precious metals. Feature Chart of the WeekNo Tsunami Of Spending Despite Excess Income Many people claimed that the war chest of savings that global households accumulated during the pandemic would unleash a tsunami of spending. Well, it didn’t. For example, US consumer spending remains precisely on its pre-pandemic trend (Chart I-1 and Chart I-2). This, despite stimulus checks and other so-called ‘transfer payments’ which boosted aggregate household incomes by trillions of dollars. Indeed, paste over 2020, and you would be forgiven for thinking that there was no pandemic! Chart I-2No Tsunami Of Spending Despite Excess Income Of course, households that lost their livelihoods during the pandemic, and thus became ‘liquidity constrained’, did spend the lifeline stimulus payments that they received. Yet in aggregate, households did not spend the excess income received during the pandemic. Moreover, the phenomenon is global – the savings rate in the UK has surged near identically to that in the US (Chart I-3). Chart I-3The Savings Rate Has Surged Everywhere The excess income built up during the pandemic did not unleash a tsunami of spending. Neither will it unleash a tsunami of future spending. We can say this with high conviction because we have seen the same movie many times before. Previous tranches of stimulus and transfer payments that boosted incomes in 2004, 2008, and 2012 (though admittedly by less than in 2020) had no lasting impact on spending. Whether We Spend Or Save Money Depends On Which ‘Mental Account’ It Occupies Why do windfall income receipts not trigger a tsunami in spending? (Chart I-4) Chart I-4Stimulus Checks Had No Meaningful Impact On Spending One putative answer comes from Milton Friedman’s Permanent Income Hypothesis. Contrary to the Keynesian belief that absolute income drives spending, Friedman postulated that income comprises a permanent (expected) component and a transitory (unexpected) component. And only the permanent income component drives spending. In the permanent income hypothesis, spending is the result of estimated permanent income rather than a transitory current component. Therefore, for households that are not liquidity constrained, a windfall receipt – like a stimulus payment – will not boost spending if it does not boost estimated permanent income. Nevertheless, this theory does require households to estimate their future permanent incomes, and it is debatable if households can do this. Stimulus and transfer payments that boosted incomes in 2004, 2008, 2012, and 2020 had no lasting impact on spending. We believe that a more real-world answer to how we deal with windfalls comes not from Economics but from the field of Psychology, and the theory known as Mental Accounting Bias. Mental accounting bias states that we segment our money into different accounts, which are sometimes physical, sometimes only mental, and that our willingness to spend money depends on which mental account it occupies. This contrasts with standard economic theory which assumes that money is perfectly fungible, so that a dollar in a current (checking) account is no different to a dollar in a savings account. In practice, money is not fungible, because we attach different emotions to our different mental accounts. A dollar in our current account we will gladly spend, but a dollar in our savings or investment accounts we will not spend. Hence, the moment we move the dollar from our current account into our savings or investment account, our willingness to spend it collapses. This explains why consumption trends have no connection with windfall income receipts once those income receipts end up in our savings mental account. Pulling all of this together, the war chest of savings accumulated during the pandemic is unlikely to change the overall trend in spending. More likely, it will be used to reduce household debt, and thereby constrain the broad money supply. In effect, part of the recent increase in public debt will just end up decreasing private debt, as happened in Japan during the 1990s (Chart I-5). Chart I-5In Japan, Public Debt Ended Up Paying Down Private Debt With no permanent boost to spending, the pandemic’s windfall income receipts will have no sustained impact on inflation. As Spending Patterns Normalise, Consumer Discretionary Plays Are Vulnerable While consumer spending remains precisely on its pre-pandemic trend, the sub-components of this spending do not. Specifically, spending on durable goods stands way above its pre-pandemic trend, while spending on services languishes below trend (Chart I-6). Chart I-6The Pandemic Distorted Spending Patterns This makes perfect sense. Pandemic restrictions on socialising, interacting, and movement meant that leisure, hospitality, in-person shopping, and travel services were unavailable. Therefore, consumers just shifted their firepower to items that could be enjoyed within the pandemic’s confines; namely, durable goods. But now that shift is reversing. In turn, these massive and unprecedented shifts in spending patterns explain the recent evolution of inflation. As booming demand for durable goods created supply bottlenecks, durables prices skyrocketed (Chart I-7). Chart I-7The Pandemic Distorted Prices Remarkably though, the 10 percent spike in US durable good price through 2020-21 was the first increase in an otherwise persistently deflationary trend through this millennium (Chart I-8). As such, it was a huge aberration and as Jay Powell pointed out last week in Jackson Hole: Chart I-8The Increase In Durables Prices Was A Huge Aberration “It seems unlikely that durables inflation will continue to contribute importantly over time to overall inflation.” Meanwhile, with services simply unavailable, their prices did not fall, given that the price of something that cannot be bought is a meaningless concept. Moreover, unlike for an unbought durable good, which adds to tomorrow’s supply, an unbought service such as a theatre ticket – whose consumption is time-sensitive – does not add to tomorrow’s supply. Hence, when unavailable services suddenly became available, the initial euphoric demand for limited supply caused these service prices also to surge. But excluding such short-lived euphoria in airfares, car hire, and lodging way from home, services prices remain well-contained. This reinforces our conclusion from the first section. The pandemic’s windfall income receipts will have no sustained impact on inflation. As Jay Powell went on to say: “We have much ground to cover to reach maximum employment, and time will tell whether we have reached 2 percent inflation on a sustainable basis.” All of which means that US monetary tightening will be later and shallower than the market is pricing. Another important investment conclusion is that as we learn to live with the pandemic, the massive displacement in spending patterns is normalising. This means that the abnormally high spending on durable goods has a long way to fall. The abnormally high spending on durables has a long way to fall. Given the very tight connection between spending on durables and the relative performance of the goods dominated consumer discretionary plays in the stock market, this will weigh on consumer discretionary sectors (Chart I-9). Chart I-9As Spending Patterns Normalise, Consumer Discretionary Plays Are Vulnerable Hence, today we are recommending a new 6-month position: underweight consumer discretionary plays. One easy way of expressing this is to underweight XLY (US consumer discretionary) versus XLP (US consumer staples) (Chart I-10). Chart I-10Underweight XLY Versus XLP Fractal Analysis Update Fractal analysis suggests that the dollar’s rally since late-Spring could meet near-term resistance, given the incipient fragility on its 65-day fractal structure (Chart I-11). Chart I-11The Dollar's Rally Could Meet Near-Term Resistance A bigger vulnerability is for the strong and sustained rally in base metals versus precious metals, which is now extremely fragile on its 260-day fractal structure (Chart I-12). We are already successfully playing this through short tin versus platinum, but are adding a new expression: short aluminium versus gold. The profit target and symmetrical stop-loss are set at 13.5 percent. Chart I-12The Massive Rally In Base Metals Versus Precious Metals Is Vulnerable Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Closed Trades Asset Performance Equity Market Performance Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields ##br##- Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields ##br##- Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields ##br##- Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields ##br##- Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations
Dear Client, There will be no US Investment Strategy next week as we take our summer vacation. We will return on Monday, September 6th. We wish everyone a happy and safe conclusion to the summer. Best regards, Doug Peta Highlights Economy – COVID-19 and the official and individual responses to it continue to exert considerable influence over economic activity: We expect that labor force participation and employment will rise as people return to the workforce, provided that resurgent infection rates don’t provide a new reason to stay on the sidelines. Markets – Financial asset valuations are elevated, but a de-rating catalyst may not emerge any time soon: Massive infusions of fiscal aid and a Fed that is determined to err on the side of being too easy should support the fundamental backdrop, even as the Delta variant runs wild in communities with low vaccination rates. Strategy – Be alert, but stay the course unless policy makers change direction or their measures lose their force: We continue to expect that risk assets will outperform Treasuries and cash. Feature Labor Day, just two weeks away, will mark the unofficial end of summer in the United States and this year the end of August will mark its own milestone: eighteen months of the pandemic. COVID-19’s year-and-a-half residency has been filled with uncertainty and misdirection, but it now seems clear that it will be staying for good. It is disheartening to concede that we will have to accommodate an unwanted malign presence, especially when we seemed to be on the verge of cornering and trapping it. The emotional letdown may have accounted for the slide in consumer confidence, but it is important to note that the virus we’ll be living with indefinitely has morphed from a peril to a nuisance. One constant amidst the pandemic confusion has been the federal shock-and-awe campaign to protect the economy from its ravages. The Fed went big immediately, cutting the fed funds rate to zero, instituting $120 billion of monthly securities purchases and unveiling a range of novel programs to ease financial stresses. Before the first month was out, Congress passed the gigantic CARES Act package, raining money down on the unemployed and households in all but the top quartile of the income distribution. It followed up with a more modest stopgap measure in late December before embarking on the largest round of economic impact payments this spring. The net effect has been to do more than enough to buffer the economy from the pandemic and push any potential hangover beyond the range of our twelve-month investment timeframe. Away from the constant of the policy efforts, however, there is much that is uncertain about key elements of the economic and market outlook. We do not have a definitive answer about what the future holds for the labor market, consumption, or equity valuations. For each topic we consider what is known, what is unknown and list the series we’ll be monitoring to assess whether our base case is on track. We remain constructive on financial markets and the economy, though we recognize that our conviction levels must be lower given the lack of close empirical comparisons to the current backdrop. We will shift with the data series if they move in ways that convincingly challenge our base-case scenarios. The Work Force Known Factor(s): The pandemic has driven a reduction in labor force participation. After catching up from the cyclical damage inflicted by the Global Financial Crisis, the share of people age 16 and above who are working or looking for work has once again fallen well off its implied demographic pace (Chart 1, top panel). GDP and S&P 500 earnings are making new highs, but labor force participation is still down by 2%, after having fallen a whopping 4.9% at the April 2020 trough (Chart 1, bottom panel). Labor force participation typically slips during recessions, but the pandemic’s peak-to-trough decline was more than five times the decline experienced during the GFC, which held the previous record. Chart 1The Pandemic Washed Away A Chunk Of The Work Force Unknown Factor(s): The explosion in unemployment while communities were sheltering in place was a foregone conclusion, and it’s easy to see how people might have slipped out of the labor force as they withdrew from jobs that lost their luster. There are more job openings than unemployed people now, though (Chart 2), and there are still 3.2 million fewer people in the labor force than there were before the pandemic. The persistence of high unemployment and low participation is a mystery that no study has fully explained. The most frequently cited hypotheses involve generous unemployment insurance (UI) benefits, difficulty securing care for children or adults, and fear of infection. Chart 2The Labor Market Is Unusually Tight We are skeptical of claims that supplemental UI benefits and the additional cushion provided by the three rounds of direct payments to households are a principal driver. $3,200 per adult ($1,200 in Round 1, $600 in Round 2 and $1,400 in Round 3) is nice but it won’t replace even $10 hourly wages for more than a couple months. UI benefits can’t be blamed for the low participation rate (you can’t collect them if you drop out), and their impact on the unemployment rate may also be less than it’s been cracked up to be. We found a very weak negative relationship between state-level replacement rates (the value of average UI benefits relative to average compensation) and changes in state unemployment rates while the most generous $600 weekly federal UI benefit supplement was in effect (Chart 3). Chart 3State Unemployment Rates Were Indifferent To Replacement Rates July’s state unemployment rates were inconclusive on the question of whether exiting the federal supplemental UI benefit program reduced unemployment. The 25 states that ended their participation early (Chart 4, top panel) saw a smaller decline in their average unemployment rate than the 26 (including Washington, DC) that remain in the program (Chart 4, bottom panel), but the early-exit states had a lower starting average unemployment rate. Of the 18 states that had statistically significant month-on-month unemployment rate declines, 8 have already exited the supplement UI benefit program and 10 remain. Of the 39 states with statistically significant employment gains, 17 have already exited the supplement UI benefit program and 22 remain. We expect the end of augmented benefits in early September will give the labor market a modest boost, but curtailing benefit supplements does not appear to be a silver bullet for reducing unemployment or increasing participation. Chart 4Much Ado About Nothing Chart 5Fewer Care Options, Fewer Workers We suspect family care burdens have been more of a drag on participation and/or exiting the unemployment rolls. Young children attending school remotely had to have adult supervision, sidelining adults who could not work remotely. Similarly, many workers who relied on outside providers to care for adult family members during the day found themselves unable to work or petrified of exposing their homebound loved ones to the virus if they did. Family care burdens regularly fall more heavily on females than males and the greater decline in aggregate female participation (Chart 5, top panel) and across the below prime-age (second panel), prime-age (third panel) and above prime-age (bottom panel) categories suggests care issues are restraining employment. Infection fears likely waned with the development of effective vaccines and their initially rapid distribution, but the spread of the Delta variant may have rekindled them, especially in areas with low vaccination rates. It will take progress in vaccinating the reluctant and the dissemination of antibodies via new infections to hasten the peak in the Delta wave, which should align with a peak in infection fears. What We’re Watching: Net nonfarm payrolls gains; labor force participation; COVID-19 infections, hospitalizations and deaths; vaccinations; schools’ ability to host in-person learning; ongoing data from states exiting the federal UI benefit; approval of vaccines for children under 12. Consumption Chart 6More Came In, Less Went Out Known Factor(s): Increased income from fiscal transfers and decreased spending from activity constraints have allowed households to amass $2.3 trillion of excess pandemic savings (Chart 6). Some of the savings went to pay down outstanding debt, with households cutting their credit card balances by 14% before slowly starting to build them back up over the last few months (Chart 7). The combination of less debt and low rates has pushed debt-service burdens to their lowest level in four decades (Chart 8). Powered by savings, financial market gains and home price appreciation, household net worth grew at its fastest five-quarter rate ever from 1Q20 through 1Q21. Chart 7Households Actively De-levered During The Pandemic Chart 8Plenty Of Room To Service New Debt Unknown Factor(s): Changes in household net worth lead changes in personal consumption expenditures by two quarters, though 2020 consumption fell way short of the level predicted by the best-fit regression line. We do not know how much of last year’s consumption was lost to the pandemic and how much was merely deferred. We also don’t know where the savings rate will stabilize going forward or how much it might overshoot to the downside before settling into its new longer-run range. Simply put, we don’t know how much households will spend from their newly accumulated stash. We do know, however, that the savings rate fell steadily from the mid-seventies, when the baby boomers began entering their prime working years, to the onset of the GFC (Chart 9). In recent client meetings we have made the conservative assumption that half of the $2.3 trillion of excess savings will be spent by the end of 2022. That would amount to a tailwind equivalent to 5% of a year’s GDP and keep the US growing at well above trend in 2021 and 2022. It remains to be seen, however, how much of their excess savings households will spend and when. Chart 9The Savings Rate Will Come Down What We’re Watching: Household income, consumption, savings rate, credit card and other consumer loan balances, borrower performance, lender willingness, spending on services and spending on goods. Asset Prices Known Factor(s): Ample and immediate monetary and fiscal accommodation put a floor under financial asset prices at the beginning of the pandemic. Thanks to the policy actions, stock prices have soared, investment grade and high yield bonds have delivered solid excess returns and home prices have surged (Table 1). The S&P 500 has risen 36% on a fundamental boost from an 18% increase in forward four-quarter earnings estimates and a valuation boost in the form of a 15% forward multiple expansion (Chart 10). Investment grade and high yield spreads have tightened to near their all-time lows (Chart 11) while trailing and forecasted defaults are low and rating upgrades are outpacing rating downgrades. Table 1Riskier Assets Are Having A Great Pandemic Chart 10Fundamentals Have Taken The Baton From Valuation Unknown Factor(s): We have argued that the next four quarters’ S&P 500 earnings estimates, which project a 1.9% decline from last quarter’s annualized run rate, will have to be revised higher to align with expected nominal annualized GDP growth near 9% in the second half of this year and 6% in the first half of next year. The future direction of forward earnings multiples is a much harder call, as it is largely a function of sentiment. It is also influenced by investors’ asset allocation options, and it does not look to us like TINA is going to be dislodged any time soon, as caution at the major developed world central banks will keep interest rates from gaining much upward momentum and a surfeit of liquidity will keep fixed income spreads tight. We argued with high conviction in a recent Special Report that housing poses no immediate threat to US financial stability because banks have no more than modest exposure to residential mortgages and the loans they have made are eminently sound. We stand by that view and further note that home prices are well supported in the near term by tight supplies and limited new construction activity. Finally, mortgage rates are extremely low and though we expect they will rise, we think they will do so at a slow, grinding pace throughout the second half and across 2022. What We’re Watching: Corporate earnings, interest rates, mortgage availability, flows into and out of risky assets, Fed guidance and anything bearing on risk appetites. Chart 11Don't Look For Further Capital Gains On Bonds Investment Implications Investors’ default position seems to be to assume that policy interventions will be exposed as artifice and elevated valuations will soon deflate. Neither has happened yet, however, and it doesn’t look like either will over the next twelve months. The Fed’s measures will have an extended influence because the fed funds rate will likely be zero until at least late 2022, monetary policy works with a lag and it will be a while before policy settings become truly restrictive. As for the fiscal transfers, they’ve largely been squirreled away as excess savings and their effect will only be felt as they’re consumed and/or funneled into financial markets. We don’t see elevated valuations retreating without a catalyst, given the ocean of liquidity in the US and the rest of the major developed economies. The money has to go somewhere as rapidly accelerating home prices around the world attest. Upward pressure on asset prices, especially for homes, has been a reliable source of instability but we don’t yet have concerns in the US, where mortgages have been extended to highly rated borrowers and the banking system has comparatively little exposure to residential loans. We are not saying multiples (or spreads) will remain elevated (tight) forever. We believe that today’s high prices will suppress long-term returns. Conditions look favorable for the next twelve months, however, and we think investors should take advantage of them before the longer-term adverse consequences emerge to weigh on returns. Doug Peta, CFA Chief US Investment Strategist dougp@bcaresearch.com
Highlights Going into the new crop year, we expect the course of the broad trade-weighted USD to dictate the path taken by grain and bean prices (Chart of the Week). Higher corn stocks in the coming crop year, flat wheat stocks and lower rice stocks will leave grain markets mostly balanced vs the current crop year. Soybean stocks and carryover estimates from the USDA and International Grains Council (IGC) are essentially unchanged year-on-year (y/y). In the IGC's estimates, changes in production, trade, and consumption for the major grains and beans largely offset each other, leaving carryovers unchanged. Supply-demand fundamentals leave our outlook for grains and beans neutral. This does not weaken our conviction that continued global weather volatility will tip the balance of price risk in grains and beans over the coming year to the upside. Our strategically bearish USD view also tips the balance of price risk in grains – and commodities generally – to the upside. We believe positioning for higher-volatility weather events and a lower US dollar is best done with index products like the S&P GSCI and the COMT ETF, which tracks a version of the GSCI optimized for backwardation. Feature Chart of the WeekUSD Will Drive Global Grain Markets Chart 2Opening, Closing Grain Stocks Will Be Largely Unchanged Going into the new crop year, opening and closing stocks are expected to remain flat overall vs the current crop years, with changes in production and consumption largely offsetting each other in grain and bean markets (Chart 2).1 This will leave overall prices a function of weather – which no one can predict – and the path taken by the USD over the coming year. The IGC's forecast calls for mostly unchanged production and consumption for grains and beans globally, with trade volumes mostly flat y/y. This leaves global end-of-crop-year carryover stocks essentially unchanged at 594mm tons. The USDA expects wheat ending stocks at the end of the '21/22 crop year up a slight 0.5%; rice down ~ 4.5%, and corn up ~ 4%. Below we go through each of the grain and bean fundamentals, and assess the impact of COVID-19 on global trade in these commodities. We then summarize our overall view for the grain and bean complex, and our positioning recommendations. Rice The IGC forecasts higher global rice production and consumption, and, since they expect both to change roughly by the same amount, ending stocks are projected to remain unchanged in the '21/22 crop year relative to the current year (Chart 3). The USDA, on the other hand, is expecting global production to increase by ~ 1mm MT in the new crop year, with consumption increasing by ~ 8mm MT. This leaves ending inventories for the new crop year just under 8mm MT below '20/21 ending stocks, or 4.5%. Chart 3Global Rice Balances Roughly Unchanged Corn The IGC forecasts global corn production will rise 6.5% to a record high in the '21/22 crop year, while global consumption is expected to increase 3.6%. Trade volumes are expected to fall ~ 4.2%, leaving global carryover stocks roughly unchanged (Chart 4). In the USDA's modelling, global production is expected to rise 6.6% in the '21/22 crop year to 1,195mm MT, while consumption is projected to rise ~ 2.4% to 1,172mm MT. The Department expects ending balances to increase ~ 11mm MT, ending next year at 291.2mm MT, or just over 4% higher. Chart 4Corn Balances Y/Y Remain Flat Wheat The IGC forecasts global wheat production in the current crop year will increase by ~ 16mm MT y/y, which will be a record if realized. Consumption is expected to rise 17mm MT, with trade roughly unchanged. This leaves expected carryover largely unchanged at ~ 280mm MT globally (Chart 5). The USDA's forecast largely agrees with the IGC's in its ending-stocks assessment for the new crop year. Global wheat production is expected to increase 16.6mm MT y/y in '21/22, and consumption will rise ~ 13mm MT, or 1.7% y/y. Ending stocks for the new crop year are expected to come in at just under 292mm MT, or 0.5% higher. Chart 5Ending Wheat Stocks Mostly Unchanged Soybeans Both the IGC and USDA expect increases in soybean ending stocks for the '21/22 crop year. However, the USDA’s estimates for ending stocks are nearly double the IGC projections.2 We use the IGC's estimates in Chart 6 to depicts balances. USDA - 2021/22 global soybean ending stocks are set to increase by ~3 mm MT to 94.5 mm MT, as higher stocks from Brazil and Argentina are partly offset by lower Chinese inventories. US production is expected to make up more than 30% of total production, rising 6% year-on-year. Chart 6Higher Bean Production Meets Higher Consumption Impact Of COVID-19 On Ags Trade Global agricultural trade was mostly stable throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. China was the main driver for this resilience, accounting for most of the increase in agricultural imports from 2019 to 2020. Ex-China, global agricultural trade growth was nearly zero. During this period, China was rebuilding its hog stocks after an outbreak of the African Swine Flu, which prompted the government to grant waivers on tariffs in key import sectors, which increased trade under the US-China Phase One agreement. As a result, apart from COVID-19, other factors were influencing trade. Arita et. al. (2021) attempted to isolate the impact of COVID on global agricultural trade.3 Their report found that COVID-19 – through infections and deaths – had a small impact on global agricultural trade. Government policy restrictions and reduced mobility in response to the pandemic were more detrimental to agricultural trade flows than the virus itself in terms of reducing aggregate demand. Policy restrictions and lower mobility reduced trade by ~ 10% and ~ 6% on average over the course of the year. Monthly USDA data shows that the pandemic was not as detrimental to agricultural trade as past events. Rates of decline in global merchandise trade were sharper during the Great Recession of 2007 – 2009 (Chart 7). Many agricultural commodities are necessities, which are income inelastic. Furthermore, shipping channels for these types of commodities did not require substantial human interactions, which reduced the chances of this trade being a transmission vector for the virus, when governments declared many industries using and producing agricultural commodities as necessities. This could explain why agricultural trade was spared by the pandemic. Amongst agricultural commodities, the impact of the pandemic was heterogenous. For necessities such as grains or oilseeds, there was a relatively small effect, and in few instances, trade actually grew. For example, trade in rice increased by ~4%. The value of trade in higher-end items, such as hides, Chart 7COVID-19 Spares Ag Trade Chart 8Grains Rallied During Pandemic tobacco, wine, and beer fell during the pandemic. This was further proof of the income inelasticity of many agricultural products which kept global trade in this sector resilient. Indeed, the UNCTAD estimates global trade for agriculture foods increased 18% in 1Q21 relative to 1Q19. Over this period, Bloomberg's spot grains index was up 47.08% (Chart 8). Investment Implications We remain neutral grains and beans based on our assessment of the new crop-year fundamentals. That said, we have a strong-conviction view global weather volatility will tip the balance of price risk in grains over the coming year to the upside. Our strategically bearish USD view also tips the balance of price risk in grains – and commodities generally – to the upside. Weather-induced grain and bean prices volatility is supportive for our recommendations in the S&P GSCI and the COMT ETF, which tracks a version of the GSCI optimized for backwardation. These positions are up 5.8% and 7.9% since inception, and are strategic holdings for us. Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish US natural gas prices remain well supported by increased power-generation demand due to heat waves rolling through East and West coasts, lower domestic production and rising exports. The US EIA estimates natgas demand for July rose 3.9 bcf/d vs June, taking demand for the month to 75.8 bcf/d. Exports – pipeline and LNG – rose 0.4 bcf/d to 18.2 bcf/d, while US domestic production fell to 92.7 bcf/d, down 0.2 bcf/d from June's levels. As US and European distribution companies and industrials continue to scramble for gas to fill inventories, we expect natgas to remain well bid as the storage-injection season winds down. We remain long 1Q22 call spreads, which are up ~214% since the position was recommended April 8, 2021 (Chart 9). Base Metals: Bullish Labor and management at BHP's Escondida copper mine – the largest in the world – have a tentative agreement to avoid a strike that would have crippled an already-tight market. The proposed contract likely will be voted on by workers over the next two days, according to reuters.com. Separately, the head of a trade group representing Chile's copper miners said prices likely will remain high over the next 2-3 years as demand from renewables and electric vehicles continues to grow. Diego Hernández, president of the National Society of Mining (SONAMI), urged caution against expecting a more extended period of higher prices, however, mining.com reported (Chart 10). We remain bullish base metals generally, copper in particular, which we expect to remain well-bid over the next five years. Precious Metals: Bullish US CPI for July rose 0.5% month-over-month, suggesting the inflation spike in June was transitory. While lower inflation may reduce demand for gold, it will allow the Fed to continue its expansionary monetary policy. The strong jobs report released on Friday prompted markets and some Fed officials to consider tapering asset purchases sooner than previously expected. The jobs report also boosted an increasing US dollar. A strong USD and an increase in employment were negative for gold prices on Monday. There also were media reports of a brief “flash crash” caused by an attempt to sell a large quantity of gold early in the Asian trading day, which swamped available liquidity at the time. This also was believed to trigger stops and algorithmic trading programs, which exacerbated the move. The potential economic impact of the COVID-19 Delta variant is the only unequivocally supportive development for gold prices. Not only will this increase safe-have demand for gold, but it will also prevent the Fed from being too hasty in tapering its asset purchases and subsequently raising interest rates. Chart 9 Chart 10 Footnotes 1 The wheat crop year in the US begins in June; the rice crop year begins this month; and the corn and bean crop years begin in September. 2 Historical data indicate this difference is persistent, suggesting different methods of calculating ending stocks. The USDA estimates ending stocks for the '21/22 crop year will be 94.5mm tons, while the IGC is projecting a level of 53.8mm. 3 Please refer to ‘Has Global Agricultural Trade Been Resilient Under Coronavirus (COVID-19)? Findings from an Econometric Assessment. This is a working paper published by Shawn Arita, Jason Grant, Sharon Sydow, and Jayson Beckman in May 2021. Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Commodity Prices and Plays Reference Table Trades Closed in 2021 Summary of Closed Trades
Highlights Investors have grown enamored with online retailers (AMZN), payment processing companies (V, MA, PYPL, SQ), and social media companies (FB, SNAP). All three sectors are likely to experience headwinds over the next 12 months as life returns to normal following the pandemic. Looking further out, market saturation, increased competition, and heightened regulation all pose risks to these sectors. Internet companies in general, and social media firms in particular, will face increased scrutiny not just for their monopolistic practices, but for the mental harm they are causing young people. Just like cigarettes are heavily regulated due to their addictive qualities, the same could happen to social media. We think there is a 50/50 chance that governments will start restricting social media usage only to adults over the age of 18 by the end of the decade, a move that could decimate the sector. Global Growth Will Remain Above Trend Investors are worried about growth again. Globally, the number of Covid cases is on the rise due to the proliferation of the Delta variant (Chart 1). The ISM manufacturing index dropped to 59.5 in July, down from a high of 64.7 in March. Both of China’s manufacturing PMIs have fallen, with the new orders component of the Caixin index dipping below the 50 line. The European PMIs have also come off their highs (Chart 2). Chart 1Number Of Covid Cases On The Rise Globally Due To The Delta Variant Chart 2Manufacturing PMIs Are Off Their Highs Growth concerns have registered in financial markets (Chart 3). After climbing to 1.74% in March, the US 10-year Treasury yield has fallen back to 1.22%. Cyclical equity sectors have underperformed defensives. Growth-sensitive currencies such as the Swedish krona and the Australian dollar have weakened. We are more upbeat about global growth prospects than the consensus. As the experience of the UK demonstrates, there is little will to impose lockdowns in countries with ample access to vaccines. Strict social distancing restrictions remain a fact of life in countries lacking adequate vaccine supplies. However, the situation should improve later this year as vaccine production increases (Chart 4). Chart 3Financial Markets Trim Growth Expectations Chart 4Over 10 Billion Vaccine Doses Will Be Produced This Year Households in developed economies are sitting on US$5 trillion in excess savings, half of which reside in the United States (Chart 5). Inventories are at record low levels, which should support production over the coming quarters (Chart 6). Chart 5Households Flush With Excess Savings Chart 6Record Low Inventories Will Provide A Boost To Production Chinese policy should turn more stimulative, as the recent cut to bank reserve requirements foreshadows. With credit growth back down to 2018 lows, policymakers can afford to give the economy some juice. The 6-month credit impulse has already turned up (Chart 7). From Goods To Services While global growth should remain well above trend for the next 12 months, the composition of that growth will shift in ways that could meaningfully affect equities. As Chart 8 illustrates, aggregate US consumption has returned to its pre-pandemic trend. However, spending on goods is 11% above trend while spending on services is still 6% below trend. Chart 7Chinese Policy Is Turning More Stimulative Chart 8The Divergence Between Goods And Services Spending Households typically cut spending on durable goods during recessions, while services serve as the ballast for the economy. The opposite happened during the pandemic. As the global economy recovers, goods spending will slow while services spending will stay robust. This is critical for online retailers such as Amazon, which derive the bulk of their e-commerce revenue from selling goods. Even after its disappointing Q2 earnings report, analysts still expect Amazon to grow e-commerce sales by 17% in 2022 (Chart 9). Such a goal may be difficult to achieve, given that core US retail sales currently stand 13% above their trendline (Chart 10). Chart 9AAnalysts’ Great Expectations May Be Dashed (I) Chart 9BAnalysts’ Great Expectations May Be Dashed (II) Chart 10AUS Retail Spending Is Well Above Trend (I) Chart 10BUS Retail Spending Is Well Above Trend (II) Chart 11Screen Time Is Moderating If e-commerce spending slows, shares of payment processing companies could disappoint. Likewise, social media companies could suffer as people start going out more often. After spiking during the height of the pandemic, growth in data usage has returned to normal (Chart 11). Long-Term Risks Looking beyond the post-pandemic recovery, all three equity sectors face structural challenges that are not being fully discounted by investors. The first is market saturation. Close to three-quarters of US households have Amazon Prime accounts. Slightly over half have a Netflix account. Nearly 70% have a Facebook account. Google commands 92% of the internet search market. Together, Google and Facebook generate about 60% of all online advertising revenue. Competition is another challenge. Companies such as Amazon, Facebook, and Google dominate their respective markets. As they look for further growth, they will invariably invade each other’s turf. The result might benefit consumers, but it is unlikely to help the bottom line if it means more competitive pressures. Moreover, it is not just competition from within the tech industry that may disrupt incumbent firms. Consider payment processors. Like most other central banks, the Fed is planning to launch its own digital currency. Widely available, free-to-use Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) could thwart the ability of Visa and MasterCard to skim 2%-to-3% off of every transaction. Regulatory Pressures In recent years, tech companies have faced increased scrutiny over their alleged monopolistic practices. In contrast to Chinese tech firms, which have fallen under the thumb of the authorities, US companies have been able to evade harsh measures. Just last month, a US federal court judge dismissed a case filed by more than 40 state attorneys general arguing that Facebook’s acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp had harmed competition. In the past, evidence that companies were setting prices well above marginal costs could be used to build a case for anti-trust enforcement. Such cases are more difficult to argue today because so many online services are given away for free. Nevertheless, governments are likely to become more adept in pursuing regulatory actions. Rather than focusing simply on pricing policies, regulators are increasingly looking at the ways big tech companies use vendor data in the case of Amazon and user data in the case of Facebook and Google to maintain market dominance. Public contempt for tech companies is fueling a political backlash. According to a Gallup poll conducted earlier this year, only 34% of Americans held a favorable view of tech companies such as Amazon, Facebook, and Google, down from 46% in 2019; 45% had an unfavorable opinion, up from 33% in 2019. The shift in public sentiment over the past two years has been entirely driven by Independent and Republican voters, many of whom feel that tech companies are unfairly censoring their opinions (Table 1). The same poll revealed that the majority of Americans – including the majority of Republicans – now favor increased regulation of tech companies. Table 1American Views On Big Tech A Drug Worse Than Nicotine? Social media companies are among the most loathed within the tech sector. A Pew Research Center study conducted last year revealed that more than six times as many Americans had a negative opinion of social media as a positive one (Chart 12). The public’s disdain for social media is increasingly going beyond traditional concerns over privacy. As psychologists Jonathan Haidt and Jean Twenge recently argued in the New York Times, there is growing evidence that the pervasive use of social media is harming the mental health of the nation’s youth. The share of students reporting high levels of loneliness has more than doubled in both the US and abroad over the past decade (Chart 13). Chart 12Social Media Increasingly Vilified Chart 13Alone In The Crowd In 2019, the last year for which comprehensive data is available, nearly a quarter of girls between the ages of 12 and 17 reported experiencing a major depressive episode over the prior year, up from 12% in 2011 (Chart 14). Academic studies have shown that adolescents who use Facebook and Instagram frequently feel greater anxiety and unease than those who do not. Just like cigarettes are heavily regulated due to their addictive qualities, the same could happen to social media. Facebook and most other social media companies already restrict access to those under the age of 13, although enforcement is generally spotty. We assign a 50/50 chance that governments start restricting social media usage only to adults over the age of 18 by the end of the decade, a move that could decimate the sector. Priced For Perfection The seven companies in the three high-flying sectors mentioned in this report trade at 91-times forward earnings compared to the S&P 500’s aggregate multiple of 22. They also trade at an average price-to-sales ratio of 16 compared to 3.2 for the broader market (Chart 15). Chart 14The Rise In Depression Rates Coincided With Increased Social Media Usage Chart 15Trading At A High Multiple To Sales Such valuations can be justified only if these companies grow earnings-per-share by nearly 30% per year over the next five years, as analysts currently expect (Chart 16). However, as noted above, that may be too high a hurdle to clear. Higher bond yields represent another threat to valuations. Growth stocks are much more sensitive to changes in discount rates than value stocks. Chart 17show that tech stocks have generally outperformed the S&P 500 over the past four years whenever bond yields were falling. We expect bond yields to rebound over the coming months, with the 10-year yield rising to 1.8% by early next year. Tech is likely to lag the market in that environment. Chart 16Long-Term Growth Estimates May Be Too Optimistic For These High-Fliers Chart 17Higher Bond Yields Could Hurt Tech Stocks Trade Update Our long EM equity trade got stopped out last Tuesday before recouping some of its losses in subsequent days. We continue to expect EM stocks to bounce back later this year. That said, in keeping with this report, we see more upside for “traditional” EM sectors such as banks, industrials, energy, and materials than for EM tech (especially Chinese tech). Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist pberezin@bcaresearch.com Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores
Feature June’s economic data and second-quarter GDP indicate that China’s economic recovery may have peaked. Slight improvements in some sectors, including manufacturing investment, exports and consumption, were offset by slowing in China’s old economy, such as infrastructure and real estate. A softening economy will weigh on Chinese corporate profits in 2H21. Inflation in Producer Price Index (PPI) has likely peaked, but it remains far above its historic average. Downstream industries may benefit from low interest rates and slightly less inflationary pressures on input prices, however, their profit growth has rolled over given weakening domestic demand and base effect. Industrial profits will shift downward in 2H21, meanwhile China’s macro policy will probably disappoint investors. Last week’s GDP’s numbers show that small-to-medium enterprises (SMEs) and private-sector businesses bore the brunt of rising global commodity prices and a slow recovery in domestic household consumption and services. The data, coupled with recent policy moves, support our view that China’s leadership is focused on helping vulnerable segments of the economy rather than boosting domestic demand by broadly easing policies (Chart 1). Nonetheless, the authorities may resort to easing policy later in 2021 if export growth weakens significantly in the second half of the year. A series of Reserve Requirement Ratio (RRR) and/or interest rate cuts, increased infrastructure project approvals, and/or looser real estate regulations, will signal that China’s ongoing policy tightening cycle has ended. In recent weeks both Chinese onshore and offshore stocks slipped further in absolute terms and relative to global benchmarks (Chart 2). We continue to recommend that investors remain cautious on Chinese stocks, at least through Q3. Chart 1No Broad Easing Yet Chart 2Investors Still Cautious On China's Economy And Policy Qingyun Xu, CFA Associate Editor qingyunx@bcaresearch.com Jing Sima China Strategist jings@bcaresearch.com Q2 GDP: Recovering At A Slower Pace China’s official GDP growth, on a year-over-year basis, slowed to 7.9% in Q2 from 18.3% in Q1 (Chart 3, top panel). While Q2’s weaker reading reflects the base effect in the data, it was slightly below the market’s expectation of 8.0-8.5%. Moreover, on a sequential basis (quarter-over-quarter), Q2’s seasonally adjusted GDP growth was one of the slowest in the past decade (Chart 3, bottom panel). These figures and the underlying data highlight that China’s economic growth momentum, which historically lags the credit impulse by six to nine months, has peaked (Chart 4). However, in 1H21, China aggregate output still grew by a 5.5% average annual rate during the same period over the past two years, well within Chinese policymakers’ target of above 5% growth needed to maintain a stable economy. Meanwhile, the bifurcation in China’s economic recovery continues. While robust external demand for Chinese goods helped to underpin manufacturing output, the sector’s profit growth has lagged upstream industries. Moreover, state-owned enterprises (SOEs) are experiencing soaring profit growth whereas SMEs have struggled with rising global commodity prices and sluggish domestic consumption as discussed below. We expect that the pace in credit growth deceleration will moderate in 2H21 and interest rates will stay at historically low levels. However, the authorities are unlikely to loosen macro policies until more signs of economic weaknesses emerge. Chart 3Q2 GDP: Slowing From An Elevated Level Chart 4Chinese Economic Growth Should Soften Further In 2H21 Robust Exports, Sluggish Manufacturing Investment Chart 5Subdued Manufacturing Investment Recovery Despite Robust Exports China’s export growth in June beat market expectations, despite shipping disruptions at major ports in Guangdong province due to a resurgence in COVID-19 cases. However, the recovery in manufacturing investment was muted through most of 1H21 even though export growth was resilient (Chart 5). There are several reasons for the sluggish recovery: the RMB’s rapid appreciation in the first five months of 2021, rising inflation and the limited pricing power that Chinese exporters gained in the first half of the year likely impeded their profits and curbed their propensity to invest (Chart 6). Total export values in USD significantly outpaced those in RMB terms, suggesting that the profit gains by Chinese exporters were offset by the strengthening local currency (Chart 7). Chart 6Rapid RMB Appreciation Will Weigh On Industrial Profits Chart 7Divergence Between Exports In USD versus RMB Furthermore, manufacturers in mid-to-downstream industries have been unable to fully pass on rising input costs to domestic consumers, which is evidenced in the faster growth of manufacturing output volume compared with price increases. It contrasts with the previous inflationary cycles, where surging prices for manufactured goods surpassed output volume (Chart 8A & 8B). Chart 8AChina's Manufacturing Recovery: Stronger Volume Than Prices Chart 8BMuted Profit Margin Recovery In Manufacturing Compared With Mining June’s improvement in manufacturing investment may not advance into 2H21 without added policy support. The nearly 2% depreciation in the RMB against the dollar in recent weeks will alleviate some pressure on exporters’ profit margins. However, export prices in USD also started to weaken (Chart 9). In addition, June’s manufacturing PMI and a Chinese business school survey,1 reported a deterioration in business conditions among smaller businesses. The weaker sentiment will depress manufacturing investments since China’s manufacturing sector is dominated by private and smaller businesses (Chart 10). Chart 9Chinese Export Prices In USD Are Rolling Over Chart 10Deteriorating Business Sentiment Will Depress Manufacturing Investments Recent policy measures to keep a low interest-rate environment will help the export and manufacturing sectors by reducing operating costs. The measures are also in keeping with China’s shift from boosting its service sector to maintaining a steady share of manufacturing output in its domestic economy (Chart 11). Chart 11Maintaining A Steady Share Of Manufacturing Output In China's Economy Policy Tightening In The Old Economy Continues Chart 12Investments In Real Estate Have Lost Steam Infrastructure investment growth slowed further in June. Investments in real estate, which drove China’s economic recovery in the second half of 2020, are also losing momentum (Chart 12). The slowdown, engineered by policymakers, will likely endure for the rest of the year. Bank loans to real estate developers tumbled to a cyclical low (Chart 13). In addition, deposit and advance payments, the main source of funds for real estate projects, nose-dived along with home sales (Chart 14). Chart 13No Signs Of Looser Financing Regulations In Property Sector Chart 14Falling Home Sales Will Further Depress Real Estate Investments Chart 15Sharp Pullback In New Infrastructure Project Approvals This Year Infrastructure project approvals by the Ministry of Finance remain on a downward trend (Chart 15). Last week, China’s Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission (CBIRC) announced a new rule to stop financial institutions from lending to local government financing vehicles (LGFV) that hold off-balance sheet government debt. LGFVs are largely used by provincial governments to borrow from banks to help fund infrastructure projects. Regulations targeting the real estate sector will further dampen real estate investments in the second half of this year. Land purchases and housing starts, both leading indicators for real estate investment, have declined since February. Excavator sales and investment in construction equipment also deteriorated sharply (Chart 16). Given that housing prices remain elevated, we do not expect real estate regulations to shift to an easier tone. The deceleration in China’s old economy is reflected in imports. While the value of imports remains strong, the volume has slowed, which suggests that the surge was due to soaring commodity prices (Chart 17, top panel). In particular, the growth in China’s imports of copper and steel, on a year-over-year basis and in volume terms, contracted in June (Chart 17, bottom panel). Chart 16Construction Activities Set To Slow Further Chart 17Falling Import Volume The Key To A Consumption Recovery Retail sales picked up slightly in June following two consecutive months of decline. However, retail sales remain below their pre-pandemic level (Chart 18). Labor market dynamics and household income growth, which stayed sluggish through 1H21, hold the key to the speed and magnitude of a recovery in consumption this year (Chart 19). Chart 18Sluggish Recovery In Household Consumption Chart 19A Lackluster Consumption Recovery Due To Slow Recovery in Household Income Household precautionary savings, which remain elevated compared with their historical norms, have depressed the propensity to spend (Chart 20). While the overall unemployment rate in China’s urban centers has steadily declined this year, the rate of jobless young graduates (ages 16-24) picked up and is nearly three percentage points higher than its historical mean (Chart 21). However, the high unemployment among graduates will not encourage policymakers to stimulate the economy. The number of new graduates in both 2020 and 2021 is larger than the historical average, while the growth in new job creation has nearly recovered to that of the pre-pandemic years (Chart 22). Chart 20Households' Propensity For Precautionary Savings Remains Elevated Chart 21Rising Unemployment Rate Among Younger Workers Moreover, labor market slack among young graduates seems to be concentrated in the services sector, and this sector’s improvement is dependent on China’s domestic pandemic situation and inoculation rates rather than on stimulus (Chart 23). Chart 22Urban Job Creation Growth Still On The Mend Chart 23Interruptions In Service Sector Recovery Due To Lingering COVID Cases Elevated Inflation, Downshifting Industrial Profits Chart 24China's PPI May Have Reached A Cyclical Peak... China’s domestic inflationary pressures eased slightly in June with a small decline in both consumer and producer prices. The input price component of the manufacturing PMI, which normally leads the PPI by about three months, dropped sharply last month, which indicates that the PPI may have reached its cyclical peak (Chart 24). However, producer price inflation will likely remain elevated in the second half of the year. Although global industrial metal prices have rolled over since May, they remain at their highest level since 2011 (Chart 25). A rapid deceleration in Chinese credit growth and weakening demand in 2H21 will remove some pressure in the sizzling hot commodity market, but global supply-side constraints will limit the downside in raw material prices, at least through the next six months. Therefore, diminishing inflationary pressures on the PPI will only slightly reduce input costs for China’s mid-to- downstream manufacturers, which have been unable to pass on rising commodity prices to domestic consumers (Chart 26). As discussed earlier, Chinese export prices in both USD and RMB terms have also rolled over. Chart 25...But Global Commodity Prices Are Still Elevated Chart 26Absence Of Inflation Pass-Through Given that price changes are more important to corporate profits than volume changes, Chinese mid-to-downstream industries will continue to face downward pressure on their profit margins. Profit growth in mid-to-downstream industries consistently lagged their upstream counterparts in the past 12 months (Chart 27). Moreover, state-holding enterprises, which dominate upstream industries, have seen a 150% jump in profit growth from a year ago, while the rate of profit gains among privately owned industrial companies tumbled this year (Chart 28). Chart 27A Faster Mean Reversal In Profit Growth Among Private Companies Chart 28A Faster Mean Reversal In Profit Growth Among Private Companies Chinese policymakers will probably focus on addressing imbalances in China’s industrial sector and economy by supporting SMEs and the private sector. Meanwhile, industrial profit growth will decline in 2H21 from its V-shaped recovery last year, given weakening domestic demand and the waning base effect. Table 1China Macro Data Summary Table 2China Financial Market Performance Summary Footnotes 1The CKGSB (Cheung Kong Graduate School Of Business) Business Conditions Index (BCI) comprises four sub-indices: corporate sales, corporate profits, corporate financing environment and inventory levels. Equity Sector Recommendations Cyclical Investment Stance
Highlights From a credit perspective, the five largest banks have turned the page on the pandemic: The big banks have returned to their pre-COVID lending standards and, ex-Wells Fargo, have released 70% of the loan-loss reserves they built up in the first half of 2020. Households have a ton of dry powder to support consumption and they’re deploying it with gusto: Consumers have begun to give their plastic a workout, with first half 2021 debit and credit card spending surging well beyond first half 2019 levels. Unfortunately for bank earnings, however, consumers are paying off their balances every month and businesses are still awash in liquidity: Expectations about a second-half lending pickup are mixed. Households and businesses have plenty of cash on hand and it is unclear when they will again need to borrow. Credit performance is stellar: Banks are disappointed that the appetite for new loans is so weak, but ample cash and soaring collateral values have shrunk delinquencies and charge-offs to extremely low levels. What The Banks See Chart 1New Delinquency Lows In All Categories Another quarterly earnings season began last week with the systemically important banks (BAC, C, JPM and WFC) and USB leading the way. We review their results and their calls for insight into the broad macro backdrop as revealed by the actions and intentions of their household and business customers, borrower performance, lender willingness and the overall state of the financial system. The banks differed on whether business and consumer lending demand will revive before the year is out, but they were unanimous in the view that fiscal transfers have stunted consumer borrowing and that businesses won’t need to borrow until they work through their own excess cash holdings. The flood of cash in the system is supporting outstanding credit performance (Chart 1) and every bank released loan loss reserves and foresees releasing more if the expansion continues to follow its current course. We took the banks’ observations as confirmation of our view that the economy is in very good shape and is poised to grow far above trend well into 2022. Household spending has come roaring back, reviving the prospects for industries that languished throughout the pandemic, like dining, travel, lodging and entertainment. Businesses have raised plenty of cash from lenders and investors, but they’ve also been generating it via more efficient operations. They will help keep the momentum going as they hire, invest, and restock depleted inventories to meet surging demand. The outlook for the banks’ own stocks is not as clear. Outsized income from lumpy streams like trading and debt and equity underwriting will slow, despite full investment banking pipelines, and most of the benefit from unwinding last year’s buildup of bad debt reserves, except at Wells Fargo, has already been realized (Table 1). The banks cannot unleash their full earnings potential until loan demand recovers and interest rates rise, and their net interest income prospects were top of mind for the analyst community. We do expect the banks will get some relief as longer duration Treasury yields back up to reflect inflation’s stirrings and the economy’s strength, but we are not counting on a major inflection in lending demand. Absent a backup in yields, we do not yet see a catalyst for the five biggest banks to outperform the S&P 500 over the rest of the year. Table 1Not Many More Reserves Left To Release Households Are Spending (Chart 2), … Chart 2Consumption Is Back In A Big Way ... [C]onsumer spending from our own customers … is not only much higher than … in 2020, which you would expect, but is notably 22% higher … compared to 2019. (Moynihan, BAC CEO) [C]ombined debit and credit [card] spend was up 45% year-on-year, and more importantly up 22% versus the more normal pre-COVID second quarter of 2019. (Barnum, JPM CFO) [T]he pump is primed. … The pandemic is kind of in [consumers’] rearview mirror … and they’re raring to go. (Dimon, JPM CEO) In Branded Cards, total purchase sales were up 40% versus last year and, importantly, up 11% versus the second quarter of 2019. And in Retail Services, purchase sales also grew versus … second quarter 2019[.] So, the good news is that we’re continuing to see the recovery in spend. (Mason, C CFO) Weekly debit card spend was up every week compared to 2019 during the second quarter and areas hardest hit by the pandemic have recovered, including travel, up 11%; entertainment, up 38%; and restaurant spending, up 28% during the week ending June 25th, compared with 2019. Consumer credit card spending activity continued to increase, up 13% in the second quarter, compared to 2019. As of the week ended June 25th, travel … was the only category that has not fully rebounded to [2Q19] levels. (Scharf, WFC CEO) Sales volume trends … are encouraging. As of the end of June, total sales volumes across each of the three payments businesses exceeded comparable 2019 levels. Certain pandemic-impacted spend categories continue to lag, in particular corporate travel and entertainment. However, consumer travel and hospitality spend volumes are rebounding faster than we expected, and the pace of improvement in recent weeks has accelerated a bit. (Dolan, USB CFO) … They’re Just Not Borrowing (Yet) (Chart 3) Chart 3... While Credit Card Debt Has Been Left Behind [Mortgage balances] are only modestly down this quarter as our origination volumes are finally overcoming the payoffs. We are pleased with the trajectory through the period and that feeds into the second half of the year, … [when it will be] good to start with a trend that has reversed the past quarters’ declines. (Moynihan, BAC) [People’s behavior hasn’t changed;] [t]hey just have more cash, and so they paid off their credit cards, which is a completely responsible thing for them to do. And when they can get out and spend more money, which is starting to happen, I think you’ll see them use these lines[.] … So we’ll see where it goes, but the good news is it’s going in a different direction. (Moynihan, BAC) [W]e … believe that the … acceleration and pickup in spend is going to translate to … loan growth in [credit] card[s], but we think that pay rates are going to remain quite elevated at a minimum through the end of this year [because of households’ cash buffers (Chart 4)]. So as a result, we don’t really see revolving … balances increasing meaningfully this year[.] (Barnum, JPM) Chart 4A Mountain Of Excess Savings Looking ahead, we expect the growth in purchase sales to translate into loan growth by the end of the year as stimulus moderates and consumers return to more normal payment patterns. (Mason, C) [W]hile it’s hard to predict exactly what will happen during the second half, … we are seeing signs of green shoots with modest growth … compared to the first quarter in auto, other consumer [and] credit card. (Santomassimo, WFC CFO) You’re seeing a little bit of growth in card [balances]; although [spending] has really picked up, it hasn’t quite translated into bigger volumes given the payment rates … are still really high. I think they’ll come down and normalize eventually, but they’re still pretty high. (Santomassimo, WFC) We do expect consumer lending to get a little bit stronger, because of [consumer spending]. … [W]e saw some nice growth in the credit card space right at the end of June. And while [payment rates] continue to be elevated, I think the fact that they’re not increasing … will help credit card balances as well. And … also when we think about loan growth, auto lending continues to be very strong. (Dolan, USB) Businesses Are In Limbo [E]xcluding the PPP loan forgiveness, middle-market lending and our business banking team [serving companies with annual revenues of $5 million to $50 million] finally had a month of growth in June, the first since March 2020. (Moynihan, BAC) [O]n the commercial side, it’s really [credit] line usage. Honestly, it can’t go any lower – maybe it can, but theoretically it can’t because it’s been stuck here for a good four or five quarters. (Moynihan, BAC) [O]ur commercial committed exposures … grew quarter-over-quarter [and are] above [their] pre-pandemic level, so [businesses] are getting ready to borrow more. [R]evolver utilization is still at historic lows, but we would expect that to move up as the economy improves … [and] inventories are built across various industries. … Some of the inventory building has been hampered by trucking and ocean liner [bottlenecks, but] you could start to see it [once] some of those kinks are worked out. (Donofrio, BAC CFO) I’ve learned a lot more about ports from our customers than I ever thought I would, [and] it’s going to take a while [to iron out supply chain kinks]. … [E]verybody talks about the chip [shortage], … but it really comes down to the efficient operations of ports … and having people to work and unload the ships (Chart 5). [I]t’s still constraining, but it’s getting incrementally better, [and most of our contacts] are saying it’ll all be [resolved by] the end of the year. And we’ll see it [in lending]. (Moynihan, BAC) Chart 5US Ports Are Still Trying To Clear Backlogs C&I loans were down 1% quarter-on-quarter with lower [credit line] utilization partially offset by new middle market loan activity. (Barnum, JPM) [T]he second the economy starts to grow, … you’re going to see [middle market] loans go up because inventory, receivables and capital expenditures [will need to be financed]. (Dimon, JPM) The general view from our [business] clients is optimistic in terms of the go-forward environment. (Mason, C) [O]ne never wants to jinx these things, but we really have a fabulous pipeline heading into the second half of the year around the world and it gives you a good sense of confidence and continued momentum. (Fraser, C CEO) [T]he [investment banking] pipeline remains very strong. We expect M&A activity and the IPO markets to remain active and investment banking fees … to be up year-on-year. (Barnum, JPM) We saw investment banking close this quarter with record pipelines. (Moynihan, BAC) In the commercial bank, loans are still down and utilization rates are pretty low on a historic basis [for] lots of reasons – high liquidity, supply chain issues, demand for product in certain industries … and we haven’t really seen [loan demand] inflect yet, … [but there are] lots of good conversations. So I think people are really thinking about investments and building inventory levels over the coming quarters, but [it] will take some time before it starts to translate into loan growth. (Santomassimo, WFC) [I]t’s going to take a little bit of time for C&I [lending] to develop simply because of the amount of liquidity that customers have and are continuing to generate. (Dolan, USB) [A]cross our markets, … middle market customers are certainly much more optimistic today than they were even a quarter or two quarters ago. That usually translates into making longer-term … investments. … I do think that the supply chain is impacting it to some extent, but I think that’s more transitory. (Dolan, USB) Banks Are Ready, Willing (Chart 6) And Able (Chart 7) Chart 6Open For Business [Our] deposits are $1.9 trillion and [our] loans are $900 billion and change, and that difference has got to be put to work. And the reality is we generated $80 billion [of] deposit growth, and we got to put it to work. And that’s what we do. (Moynihan, BAC) [W]e’re going to get deposits. [They’re] going to fund loan growth. Whatever is left over will probably go in securities, but then we still have a bunch of excess liquidity, so that can be deployed as well, either in the near term or long term, depending on how we balance liquidity against capital and earnings. (Donofrio, BAC) One of the significant things that’s going on is we’ve really finished unwinding all of our credit pullbacks from the [global financial] crisis. So we’re fully back in the [home mortgage] correspondent channel. (Barnum, JPM) Chart 7Finally Putting In A Bottom? Chart 8Chrome Is The Most Precious Metal We started to tighten our credit policies in March 2020 in response to the pandemic and we have now essentially returned back to pre-COVID levels or policies, however, we continue to be thoughtful of the much higher asset prices in areas like residential real estate and auto (Chart 8). (Santomassimo, WFC) I think we mentioned this last quarter but we’re now back to fundamentally the credit box that we had on a pre-pandemic level really across all the product categories. (Dolan, USB) Investment Implications We remain bullish on the economy and risk assets as we look out six to twelve months. As the banks highlighted, consumer spending is roaring, businesses cannot go much longer without ramping up spending and hiring to meet burgeoning demand and credit performance is spectacular as borrowers and lenders are flush with cash. The S&P 500 is expensive at between 21 and 22 times forward four-quarter earnings, but the analyst consensus is projecting a highly unusual drop in earnings from the prior quarter’s annualized run rate and we expect the second quarter will produce another sizable beat along the lines of the last four quarters. Prospective returns on “safe” investment alternatives are unappealing and we continue to recommend that investors with one-year timeframes overweight equities. Chart 9Losing Ground As for the SIFI banks themselves, we think their significant outperformance versus the overall market has come to an end (Chart 9, top panel). They were ridiculously inexpensive when we were bulled up on them last spring and summer (Table 2) amidst wildly exaggerated potential credit losses but there’s no re-rating or credit performance catalyst on the horizon now. We disagree with our Counterpoint colleagues’ contention that banks are in the midst of a secular earnings decline but we do expect they will find themselves hemmed in over the rest of the year by the overabundance of capital in the financial system. As we noted last quarter, traditional intermediation isn’t very rewarding when every creditworthy borrower has more money than he or she needs. We are comfortable staying on the neutral sidelines with our US Equity Strategy team.1 Table 2Big Bank Valuations Have Mostly Normalized Doug Peta, CFA Chief US Investment Strategist dougp@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Our Global Investment Strategy team is calling for banks to outperform the overall market, as reiterated in its latest publication.
Highlights Entering 2H21, oil and metals' price volatility will rise as inventories are drawn down to cover physical supply deficits brought about by the re-opening of major economies ex-China. As demand increases and oil and metals supply become more inelastic, forward curves will backwardate further. This will weaken commodity-price correlations with the USD and boost commodity-index returns. Going into next week's OPEC 2.0 meeting, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and Russia likely will hold off on further production increases, until greater clarity around US-Iran negotiations and the return of Iran as a bona fide exporter is available. Chinese authorities will release 100k MT of copper, aluminum and zinc into tight domestic markets in July. A two-day rally followed the news. Since bottoming in March 2020, the XOP and XME ETFs covering oil and gas producers and metals miners are up ~ 218% and ~ 196%, respectively, following the ~ 230% move in crude oil and the ~ 100% rise copper prices. Higher volatility will present buying opportunities for these ETFs (Chart of the Week). We remain long commodity index exposure – S&P GSCI and COMT ETF – expecting steeper backwardations. We will go long the PICK ETF at tonight's close again, after being stopped out last week with a 23.9% return. Feature Heading into 2H21, industrial commodity markets will continue to tighten. In the case of oil, this is caused by OPEC 2.0's production-management strategy – i.e., keeping supply below demand – and capital discipline among producers in the price-taking cohort.1 Base metals, on the other hand, are tightening because demand is recovering much faster than supply.2 Re-opening of major economies will boost refined-product demand in oil markets – e.g., gasoline and jet fuel – which will leave refiners little choice but to continue drawing on inventories to cover supply shortfalls in the near term (Chart 2). Chart of the WeekResources ETFs Follow Prices Higher Chart 2Refiners Will Continue Drawing Crude Investments Base metals – particularly copper and aluminum – will remain well bid in the face of constrained supply and higher consumption ex-China. Despite China's widely anticipated decision to release strategic stockpiles of copper, aluminum and zinc next month into a tight domestic market – which we flagged last month – continued inventory draws will be required to cover physical deficits in these markets, particularly in copper (Chart 3).3 Chart 3Copper Inventories Will Draw As Demand Ex-China Rises Chart 4Steeper Backwardation, Higher Volatility Higher Vol On The Way As demand for industrial commodities increases and inventories continue to draw, forward curves will become more backwardated – i.e., material delivered promptly (next day or next week) will command a higher price than commodities delivered next month or next year: Consumers value current supply above deferred supply, and producers and merchants have to charge more to cover inventory replacement costs, which increase when prompt demand outstrips supply. The steepening of forward curves for industrial commodities will lead to higher price volatility in oil and metals markets, particularly copper: Demand will confront increasingly inelastic supply. In this evolution, prices will be forced to allocate inelastic supply as demand increases. Sometimes-sharp changes in price are required to equilibrate available supply with demand when this happens. This can be seen clearly in oil markets, but it holds true for all storable commodities (Chart 4).4 Investment Implications Industrial commodity markets are entering a more volatile phase, which will be characterized by sharp price movements up and down over the short term, as demand continues to outpace supply. Our analysis suggests this is the beginning of a more volatile phase in industrial commodity markets. The balance of risk in industrial commodity prices will remain to the upside as volatility increases. In the short term, fundamental imbalances can be addressed over a relatively short months-long horizon – i.e., OPEC 2.0 can release spare capacity over a 3-4 month interval to accommodate rising demand – so that price increases do not destroy demand as oil-exporters are rebuilding their fiscal balance sheets. Base metals markets will have a tougher time in the short run finding the supply to meet surging demand, but it can be done over the next year or so without prices getting to the point where demand-destruction sets in. Over the medium to long term, investor-owned oil and gas producers literally are being directed by policymakers, shareholders and courts toward an extended wind-down of production and investment in future production. Markets have been pricing through just such a situation in the post-COVID-19 world, with OPEC 2.0 managing supply against falling demand and still managing to reduce inventories significantly. If the world follows the IEA's pathway to a decarbonized future – in which no investment in new oil or gas production is required after 2025 – this will become the status quo for these markets going forward.5 Metals producers, on the other hand, are being encouraged to increase marketable supply at a rapid pace to accommodate demand driven by the build-out of renewable energy – chiefly wind and solar – and the grids that will be required to move this energy. Producers, however, remain reluctant to do so, fearing their capex investment to build out supply will produce physical surpluses that depress returns, similar to the last China-led commodity super-cycle. Supplying the necessary base metals to make this happen will be difficult at best, according to Ivan Glasenberg, CEO at Glencore. At this week's Qatar Economic Forum, he said copper supply will have to double between now and 2050 to meet expected demand for this critical metal. “Today, the world consumes 30 million tonnes of copper per year and by the year 2050, following this trajectory, we’ve got to produce 60 million tonnes of copper per year,” he said. “If you look at the historical past 10 years, we’ve only added 500,000 tonnes per year … Do we have the projects? I don’t think so. I think it will be extremely difficult.”6 The volatility we are expecting in oil, gas and base metals prices, will present buy-the-dip opportunities in related equities vehicles. Since bottoming in March 2020, the XOP and XME ETFs covering oil and gas producers and metals miners are up ~ 218% and ~ 196%, respectively, matching the ~ 230% move in crude oil and the ~ 100% rise in copper prices. We remain long commodity index exposure – S&P GSCI, which is up 5.9% and the COMT ETF, which is up 7.6% – expecting steeper backwardations. The trailing stop on our MSCI Global Metals & Mining Producers ETF (PICK) position recommended 10 December 2020 was elected, which stopped us out with a gain of 23.9%. We are getting long the PICK again at tonight's close. Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish Commercial crude oil stocks in the US (ex-SPR barrels) fell 7.6mm barrels w/w in the week ended 18 June 2021, according to the US EIA. Including products, US crude and product inventories were down 5.8mm barrels. US domestic crude oil production was down 100k b/d, ending the week at 11.1mm b/d. Overall product supplied, the EIA's proxy for refined-product demand, was up 180k b/d at 20.75mm b/d, which is 129k b/d below 2019 demand for the same period. At 9.44mm b/d, gasoline demand was just below comparable 2019 consumption of 9.47mm b/d, while jet-fuel demand remains severely depressed vs. comparable 2019 consumption at 1.58mm b/d (vs. 1.92mm b/d). Distillate demand (e.g., diesel fuel) for the week ended 18 June 2021 was 3.95mm b/d vs. 3.97mm b/d for the comparable 2019 period. Base Metals: Bullish Benchmark spot iron ore (62% Fe) prices are holding above $210/MT in trading this week, as demand for the steel input remains strong in China (Chart 5). The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) increased its level of intervention in the iron ore market this week, launching investigations into “malicious speculation,” vowing to “severely punish” anyone found to be engaged in such behavior, according to ft.com.7 Benchmark iron ore prices hit $230/MT in May. We continue to expect exports from Brazil to pick up in 2H21, which will push prices lower in 2H21. Precious Metals: Bullish In the aftermath of last Wednesday’s FOMC meeting gold prices lost nearly $86/oz (Chart 6). Our colleagues at BCA Research's USBS believe markets are paying too much attention to the Fed’s dot plots, and not to the central bank’s verbal guidance.8 Originally, the Fed stated that it will only start raising interest rates once a checklist of three conditions have been met. This checklist includes guidance on actual and expected inflation rates and the labor market. Gold prices did not react to Chair Powell's testimony before the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis. Ags/Softs: Neutral US spring wheat prices are rallying on the back of dry weather in the northern Plains, while forecasts for benign crop weather in the Midwest pressured soybeans lower this week, according to successfulfarming.com. Chart 5 Chart 6 Footnotes 1 Please see our most recent oil price forecasts published last week in Balance Of Risks Tilts To Higher Oil Prices. It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 2 Please see A Perfect Energy Storm On The Way published on June 3, 2021 for further discussion. 3 Please see Less Metal, More Jawboning published on May 27, 2021, which flagged China's likely decision to release strategic stockpiles of base metals. 4 Chart 4 shows implied volatility as a function of the slope of the forward curve, i.e., the difference between the 1st- and 13th-nearby futures divided by the 1st-nearby future vs implied volatilities for Brent and WTI options. This modeling extends Kogan et al (2009), mapping realized volatilities calculated using historical settlements of crude oil futures against the slope of crude oil futures conditioned on 6th- vs. 3rd-nearby futures returns (in %). Please see Kogan, L., Livdan, D., & Yaron, A. (2009), "Oil Futures Prices in a Production Economy With Investment Constraints." The Journal of Finance, 64:3, pp. 1345-1375. 5 Please see fn 2's discussion of the IEA's Net Zero by 2050, A Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector beginning on p. 5 under The Case For A Carbon Tax. 6 Please see Copper supply needs to double by 2050, Glencore CEO says published on June 23, 2021 by reuters.com. Of course, being a copper producer with large-scale base-metals projects due to come on line in the next year or so, Mr. Glasenberg could be talking his book, but as Chart 3 shows, copper has been and likely will be in physical deficits for years. 7 Please see China cracks down on iron ore market, published by ft.com on June 21, 2021. 8 Please see How To Re-Shape The Yield Curve Without Really Trying, published on June 22, 2021. Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Commodity Prices and Plays Reference Table Trades Closed in 2021 Summary of Closed Trades
Highlights Economy – Following a recession like no other, American households are flush with cash: Since COVID-19 broke out last March, real disposable income has grown at its fastest 14-month rate ever, the S&P 500 is 24% above its pre-pandemic peak and home prices are up 14%. With social distancing measures hindering consumption as income rose, savings have exploded. Markets – If the cash is spent in line with economists’ expectations, corporate profits should have little trouble topping undemanding targets: The bottom-up consensus forecast for nominal earnings contraction over the rest of the year is incompatible with real GDP growth forecasts of nearly 7%. Strategy – Stick with equities unless the Fed changes its tune: Multiple contraction looms as the main threat to equities over the next twelve months, and a shift in Fed policy is the most likely de-rating catalyst. As long as Powell and company stay the course, we will too. Feature BCA researchers’ mission is simple. We analyze the world’s major economies for insight into where financial markets are headed. On the US Investment Strategy team, we primarily use the US economy to anticipate the future direction of US equity and bond markets. Our market take drives our investment strategy views and asset allocation recommendations. With this Strategy Report, we are tweaking the format of our written output to align more clearly with our mission. We will highlight the most relevant economic takeaways and link them to expected market outcomes, with our strategy recommendations following from the forecasted outcomes. To provide more detail than US Investment Strategy’s legacy overweight/equal weight/underweight asset allocation recommendations, we will add a multi-asset ETF portfolio linking our cyclical views to specific ticker symbols. We are at work on our cyclical portfolio and will unveil it sometime over the next month. One Fantastic Recession If a visitor from space had touched down at the beginning of 2020 and spent the subsequent seventeen months boarding in an American household, he/she/they might ask why recessions have gotten such a bad rap. Savings piled up as fiscal transfers swelled household income while social distancing measures curtailed spending. Wealth got an additional boost from surging stock and bond markets and a potent rally in home prices. Put it all together, and households are on much firmer footing today than they were when the pandemic began to assert itself last March. As a first-time visitor, the space traveler may not appreciate that the pandemic recession was sui generis thanks to the unprecedented policy measures undertaken to limit its damage. For the first time in 51 years (seven recessions ago), the rate of nominal disposable income growth accelerated during a recession (Chart 1). In real terms, the pandemic period has been the best fourteen-month stretch for disposable income growth in the 70-year history of the series, reaching a level three standard deviations above the mean (Chart 2). Lavish fiscal transfers in the form of direct payments to over three-quarters of all households (Chart 3, top panel) and supplemental benefits to the unemployed (Chart 3, middle panel) cushioned the blow that would typically result from economic contraction and soaring unemployment. Chart 1Uncharacteristic Growth In Nominal Income ... Chart 2... And Unprecedented Growth In Real Income Chart 3No Adult Left Behind So far, the consequence of the policy measures has been to limit the decline in output (real 4Q20 GDP was 2.4% below its 4Q19 level, or about 4.4% below trend) and stave off a self-reinforcing wave of defaults that would have limited credit availability and hampered future growth. Going forward, the potential for households to spend some of the $2.3 trillion mountain of excess savings they’ve accumulated since March 2020 (Table 1) should turbo-charge growth across the rest of the year and keep it well above trend in 2022. Excess pandemic savings will be the primary spending driver, but equity gains (Chart 4, top panel) and home price appreciation (Chart 4, bottom panel) will help at the margin. All in all, savings and increases in financial asset and real property prices have driven an unprecedentedly rapid increase in household net worth as a share of GDP (Chart 5), feeding a remarkable buildup of dry powder to support a surge in consumption. Table 1A Great Recession For Household Savings ... Chart 4The Recession That Was Good For Asset Prices Chart 5The Pandemic Recession Did Wonders For Households' Relative Standing What Does GDP Growth Have To Do With Equity Returns? There’s a good reason why Treasury investors pay much more attention to GDP releases than equity analysts and PMs: S&P 500 returns have no near-term relationship with GDP moves. Corporate revenue growth ought to converge with the economy’s nominal growth rate over time, however, so future GDP moves could inform the future direction of S&P 500 earnings. With all the fuel households have stored up for consumption once the economy fully reopens, consensus forecasts are calling for blockbuster growth over the final three quarters of the year and solidly above-trend growth in 2022 (Table 2). Though BCA does not make economic point forecasts, we concur with the direction and magnitude of the consensus view. The top-down forecast of red-hot economic growth is seemingly incompatible with bottom-up analysts’ consensus forecast of a decline in the run rate of S&P 500 earnings. With 495 constituents having reported, calendar first quarter S&P 500 earnings are projected to come in at $49 per share. Absent seasonal adjustments, $49 equates to an annualized run rate of $196 per share. Analysts are calling for a nearly 10% sequential decline in earnings in the second quarter, to $44.49, third quarter earnings that fall about 4% shy of their first quarter level, and meager 1% and 2% increases over 1Q21 in 4Q21 and 1Q22, respectively (Table 3). Table 2Economists Predict Explosive GDP Growth ... Table 3... But Analysts Foresee Declining Earnings ... The key takeaway is that analysts expect the sum of the next four quarters of S&P 500 earnings to fall short of the first quarter’s annualized run rate. That is an unusual development in a series that has averaged double-digit expected forward growth over its 42-year life and had previously only called for earnings to shrink on three instances during the Carter Administration (Chart 6). We are in accord with widely held expectations that the economy’s sequential growth rate will peak in the second quarter and fully expect that sequential earnings growth will decelerate from the last three quarters’ torrid pace. Outright contraction, however, strikes us as highly unlikely when the economy is growing at the fastest sustained rate we expect to see over the rest of our lifetime. Chart 6... For The First Time In Four Decades Investment Strategy We view equity prices as the product of expected earnings and the multiple investors will pay for those earnings. Holding the index price-earnings (P/E) multiple constant, the S&P 500 will rise if earnings beat expectations and that beat feeds into upward revisions in future estimates or fall if they disappoint, leading to downward revisions. We expect that the S&P’s constituents will beat current expectations over the next four quarters, which simply require them to run in place. Earnings growth should not be too hard to come by when the economy is expected to expand at a 7% pace – three-and-a-half times its trend rate of growth – over the rest of 2021. That leaves the multiple investors are willing to pay for those future earnings as the swing factor. If earnings are the stolid fundamental component of equity investing, P/E multiples are the animal-spirits wild card. The current 22 multiple is expensive relative to history and potential de-rating is the biggest risk confronting equity investors (Chart 7). Chart 7Equity Multiples Are Elevated The key question is what will trigger a de-rating and when. We expect that monetary policy tightening will be the most likely catalyst and are therefore keeping a close eye on the Fed as we formulate our strategy. Our US Bond Strategy colleagues have stressed that the Fed will not hike rates until all three of its criteria (Table 4) are met. With the economy seemingly much closer to checking the inflation boxes, “maximum employment” is poised to be the final hurdle standing in the way of rate hikes. Table 4A Checklist For Liftoff We did not view the May employment situation report, released before Friday’s open, as materially changing the timeframe for attaining maximum employment. Though bond, currency and equity markets saw the approximate 100,000 March-May payrolls miss as a cue to reprice their Fed assumptions, the report fit the broad contours that we expect to remain in place over the next year: the labor market will revive as the services sector fully reopens and the restoration of child care and elder care services free those sidelined by family obligations to return to work. There are still more than 7.5 million fewer people working than there were before the pandemic (Chart 8). If payrolls expand at an average monthly clip of 500 to 750 thousand, employment progress will support tapering in the winter of 2021-22 and an initial rate hike before the end of 2022. Chart 8Still 7.6 Million People To Re-employ We do not see the sure-to-be-well-telegraphed tapering of the Fed’s asset purchases as posing a threat to equity multiples. Our first-hike-in-2022 timetable is ahead of the market’s but we do not expect meaningful de-rating over the next twelve months while investors of every stripe are stuffed with cash. If the rate-hike timetable accelerates because of unexpectedly strong growth, S&P 500 earnings estimates will have to rise to reflect it. We would expect that “numerator effect” to fully offset increases in the discount rate denominator used to the calculate the present value of expected future cash flows, as periods of rising real rates have typically been associated with better equity performance than periods of falling real rates.1 Equities would be in trouble if rates were to take off because of runaway inflation expectations rather than rising real growth. In that scenario, the future-cash-flows numerator would not be able to keep up with the rising-discount-rate denominator and it could even fall outright as profit margins were squeezed. We are continuously monitoring our inflation checklist and are vigilant for signs of enduring inflation pressures. The bottom line is that the potential emergence of inflation pressures, and the Fed’s reaction to them, are the biggest imminent threat to forward earnings multiples and equity performance. As long as the inflation coast is clear and the Fed is able to stand pat, abiding by last summer’s revised statement of long-run policy goals, we will stick with our equity overweight. Postcard From The High Street The Harry Potter store filling 20,000 square feet of retail space between Broadway and Fifth Avenue just below 22nd Street had its grand opening on Thursday. The Peta children’s attempt to visit the store on its first day came to no avail, however, as they encountered late-afternoon switchback lines around the building. Scattered showers were not enough to dampen would-be shoppers’ enthusiasm, some of whom claimed to have been waiting for six hours.2 The event highlighted two themes from last week’s Special Report: brick-and-mortar retail has not yet given up the ghost and the post-COVID period in the United States, marked by a desire to congregate, celebrate and spend, appears to have arrived. The near-term growth implications are favorable. Doug Peta, CFA Chief US Investment Strategist dougp@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see US Investment Strategy Special Report "When Will Higher Rates Hurt Stocks?" dated September 24, 2018, available at usis.bcaresearch.com 2 Harry Potter fans wait hours in the rain for NYC store opening (nypost.com)