Developed Countries

Highlights Economy – A range of economic and fundamental indicators are at such high levels that deceleration is inevitable: US growth will peak any day if it hasn’t done so already. Markets – Financial markets typically pay closer heed to direction than level: All else equal, we prefer direction to level as well, but levels are likely to remain elevated for a while even as deceleration takes hold, and investors should take that into account when assessing the outlook. Strategy – Remain overweight equities and credit in multi-asset portfolios: Risk assets are likely to continue to generate positive excess returns over Treasuries and cash despite moderating growth. Feature COVID-19’s arrival ushered in a wave of extremes in monetary and fiscal policy measures, economic data and financial markets. Everywhere investors look, data series are at unusually outlying levels. Inflation pressures are more intense than they have been in decades, as measured by consumer price indexes and a range of business surveys. Household net worth has advanced at its fastest-ever five-quarter pace despite the record setback that began the pandemic, S&P 500 earnings growth has demolished analyst expectations over the last five quarters, the federal government has injected a head-spinning amount of fiscal stimulus into the economy and the Fed has done all it seemingly could to cushion the pandemic’s economic blow. Much of the growth has resulted from Herculean stimulus measures that cannot be maintained on a rate-of-change basis. The slowdown in fiscal and monetary thrust implies that economic growth, along with several other series that are viewed as significant financial market drivers, will soon peak if they haven’t already. The looming deceleration has kindled a recurring debate among BCA researchers: What matters most for financial markets, level or direction? The answer to the most challenging questions in markets and economics is often “it depends,” and that’s the way we view the level-versus-direction debate. We’d position a portfolio based on direction if key series were just breaking above or below trend levels with robust momentum, but it’s a more nuanced decision when they are slowing from exceedingly high levels and a modestly decelerating pace should have them still sitting well above trend this time next year. Our view, then, is that the interaction between level and direction will drive markets going forward. Given that we have cited a range of levels in support of our bullish stance, however, it is prudent to ask how good might be too good for reliably mean-reverting series. We therefore examine the empirical record of how S&P 500 returns have interacted with the level and direction of the unemployment rate, earnings-per-share growth, and interest rates. We conclude that the humble level matters as well as the more celebrated rate of change and that deceleration will not spell the end of the equity bull market. The Unemployment Rate We used the unemployment rate as a proxy for the impact of macroeconomic changes on S&P 500 returns. While the unemployment rate is quite variable from month to month, it tends to follow a clear pattern over longer periods of time, rising very rapidly to cyclical peaks before meandering its way to cyclical troughs. Over the series’ 73-year history, there have been eleven complete rising phases and it is currently in its eleventh declining phase (Chart 1). Owing to unemployment’s established pattern – it takes the elevator up and the stairs down, flipping equity indexes’ pattern on its head – the eleven rising phases have spanned 30% of the nearly 900 months while the falling phases currently total 70% of them. Chart 1Unemployment Takes The Elevator Up And The Stairs Down A simple compilation of one-month forward S&P 500 returns based on the level of the unemployment rate has a clear theme – stocks do well when the rate is at least one standard deviation above the mean (about 7.4% or higher) and poorly when it is one or more standard deviations below it (about 4.2% or lower) (Chart 2, left side). A compilation based on the month-to-month direction of the unemployment rate – up, down or unchanged – also favors rising unemployment, though it is unclear what investors should conclude from the fact that rising and falling both outperform unchanged (Chart 2, right side). Chart 2The S&P 500 Is Sensitive To Anticipated Turns In Unemployment We think the analysis is much improved if the unemployment rate is combined with its direction as indicated by the cycle phase. The interaction of level and phase provides more information than the simple message that high unemployment is good for equities and low unemployment is bad. Applying the rising or falling unemployment rate phase to the ranges shown in Chart 2, we find that direction matters quite a lot within four of the five ranges, where the annualized return differs by thirteen to sixteen percentage points based on the underlying trend (Table 1). Table 1Level And Direction Tell The Most Compelling Story Equities are just coming off their bottom, on balance, when the unemployment rate exceeds a standard deviation above its mean and is still rising. Direction is everything when the rate is below its mean (5.8%). When it’s falling, there’s plenty of money to be made in an expanding economy before the Fed has designs on removing the punch bowl, though once the rate is a standard deviation below the mean (4.2% or lower), the equity top is near. Once the unemployment rate rises off the bottom, even though it’s still at an unusually low level, the equity tide has already begun to go out. Losses are in store until the rate gets back above the mean, signaling future improvement. Chart 3Up, Up And Away It is important to recognize that we can only demarcate the unemployment rate’s phases in retrospect. There is no telling with certainty in real time how far a nascent trend will go. We do expect, however, in line with every FOMC voter, that the unemployment rate is likely to approach the vicinity of last cycle’s lows before the current phase ends. If that expectation is realized, there is a stretch of downward movement ahead (a good chunk of the 1.7% standard deviation, though July claimed 50 basis points of it) that has empirically been quite favorable for the S&P 500. The speed with which it covers the ground from here to 4% or below is unknown. Given the tremendous pent-up demand for labor, as evidenced by a record high job openings rate (Chart 3), the unemployment rate may come down much faster than it normally does. The level-and-direction analysis makes it clear that 5.9% and falling has provided an auspicious backdrop for equity investors, and the Fed’s more relaxed reaction function may allow the economy to run a little hotter than it normally would once unemployment falls below its natural rate. All in all, the empirical record of the relationship between the unemployment rate and equities suggests that stocks have room to run while the labor market improves. Earnings The unemployment rate may not be too low for equities to continue to rally, but is earnings growth too good for stocks’ own good? It doesn’t appear to be, given the historical interaction between forward one-quarter S&P 500 performance and the speed and acceleration of growth in trailing four-quarter earnings. We use trailing earnings because they exhibit extended trends that highly variable sequential changes in single-quarter data do not. Since 1948, trailing four-quarter operating earnings have experienced eleven complete double-digit declines from cycle peaks and eleven complete earnings growth phases, while beginning a new growth phase in the first quarter (Chart 4). Chart 4Steady Growth With Occasional Hiccups The chart shows that four-quarter earnings have grown in a pattern that features extended growth phases punctuated by concentrated declines that are occasionally severe. This pattern is the mirror image of the unemployment rate’s and S&P 500 earnings have been in a growth phase three out of every four quarters on the way to an annualized growth rate of 6.4%. Since P/E multiples are a mean-reverting series, stocks need to grow earnings to rise over time, but there is little difference in lagged S&P 500 returns when earnings are in growth or contraction mode (Chart 5). The disparity widens within each broad phase when we considered the growth rates – deceleration has been better for stock prices than acceleration within expansion phases, while a slowing rate of decline has been a tremendous catalyst when earnings are in a contraction phase. Chart 5More Money Is Made From Terrible To Bad Than From Good To Great To explore S&P 500 index performance during acceleration and deceleration phases within growth ranges, we repeated the unemployment rate analysis. The return disparities for different earnings ranges were not nearly as clear cut as they were for different unemployment ranges, but acceleration was good for near-term equity returns in the middle of the earnings growth distribution, while deceleration trumped acceleration at growth rates plus or minus three quarters of a standard deviation from the mean (Table 2). Table 2Headed Out Of The Earnings Sweet Spot The muddled empirical record does not point to a clear path for S&P 500 returns over the next few quarters. We assign a very low probability to a recession over the next year, virtually ensuring that the growth phase that began last quarter will continue. If actual earnings turn out to be somewhat close to the current consensus expectation, however, all subsequent quarters in this growth phase will be decelerating, and deceleration within growth phases (Table 2, circled three outcomes) has previously yielded below-average price returns. Trailing four-quarter earnings growth appears sustainable over the next year, however, and history is hardly sounding an alarm. Interest Rates We have already examined the relationship between moves in real 10-year Treasury yields and equity performance in a dedicated Special Report.1 The executive summary is that the level of real rates has exerted a greater influence on S&P 500 returns than their direction. The empirical evidence suggests that stocks generally outperform when real rates are rising, though they hit a wall once the real 10-yield exceeds estimated potential real GDP growth. They also underperform at the other extreme, as extremely negative real rates tend to be associated with dire economic conditions, but potentially frightening weakness is not a feature of today’s negative real-rate backdrop. Per the potential-GDP-rule-of-thumb, the nominal 10-year Treasury yield that would begin to crimp economic activity is around 4.5-5%, assuming potential GDP growth of 1.75-2% and annual inflation with a central tendency near 3%. It is very difficult to see the 10-year yield exceeding one-half of that threshold level in the next twelve months. Though a yield backup to 2% or above over the next year would likely have significant implications for relative returns within the S&P 500, we do not think it would spell the end of the equity rally. The bottom line, then, is that we do not believe that interest rates are at a level that makes equities especially vulnerable. Price-earnings multiples may well contract if real rates rise in line with our expectations, but we expect that earnings and earnings estimates would rise enough to offset the de-rating pressure. Investment Implications Mean reversion is a bedrock investment concept, and it helps explain why the level of variables that impact equity returns can be deceiving. When key variables reach extremes, the potential of an abrupt reversal increases. Financial markets are additionally forward discounting mechanisms and the rate of change – a variable’s “second derivative” – may offer more insight into its future path than its existing position. It is easy to see why investors typically favor direction over level when looking ahead. Level does not always take a back seat to direction, however, and we think a consideration of how level and direction interact is important when assessing the current landscape. Economic growth will surely slow from double or triple its long-run trend level, earnings will surely stop beating estimates by three or four times the maximum magnitude of the previous 32 quarters, nonfarm payrolls won’t expand by 900,000 every single month (though they may for much of the rest of this year) and a range of other variables won’t keep setting records. But deceleration from record highs will not necessarily spell the end of the rallies in risk assets. While important variables remain at elevated levels, equities and credit are likely to continue to generate excess returns. Extraordinary monetary and fiscal accommodation, combined with remarkably swift and successful action to blunt the threat of COVID-19, have carried financial markets for the last year-plus and we don’t think they’re finished yet. Doug Peta, CFA Chief US Investment Strategist dougp@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see the September 24, 2018 US Investment Strategy Special Report, "When Will Higher Rates Hurt Stocks?", available at usis.bcaresearch.com.

Highlights The DXY index appears to be following the seasonal pattern of strengthening in the summer and weakening towards year-end. In this context, the most attractive vehicles to play a decline in the dollar are the Scandinavian currencies over the longer term, and the yen in the very near term. Our composite attractiveness model ranks the US dollar and the NZ kiwi as the least attractive currencies, particularly on the basis of valuation. Our limit buy on long AUD/NZD was triggered at 1.05. Pessimism on the Aussie is becoming overdone, while the economy could stage a coiled spring rebound once vaccination rates improve. Feature Chart I-1Was Dollar Strength Seasonal? Since July 20, the DXY index has been consolidating its gains, and appears to be following the general seasonal pattern of strengthening in the summer, and eventually weakening towards year-end (Chart I-1). With this as a backdrop, it is instructive to revisit our attractiveness ranking, and highlight which currencies might benefit most from a dollar decline. Our framework is based on three major vectors –   the macroeconomic environment, valuation, and sentiment. Our macro vector tracks relative economic strength as measured by relative PMIs and real interest rate differentials. Other factors such as a country’s basic balance and external vulnerability are also considered. In our valuation vector, we consider a swathe of models including PPP, more high-frequency indicators such as our intermediate-term timing model, as well as longer-term models based on relative productivity trends. Finally, we also consider positioning to gauge if our view is mainstream or out of consensus. Using this framework, the most attractive vehicles to play a decline in the dollar are the Scandinavian currencies over the longer term, and the yen more near term, if rates remain well behaved. Meanwhile, the US dollar and the kiwi rank as the least attractive currencies, particularly on the basis of valuation (Chart I-2). Chart I-2An Attractiveness Ranking Of Currencies Macroeconomic Environment: Real Interest Rates Chart I-3The US Sports A Very Negative Real Yield On the short tenors, the US is among those sporting  the most negative real rates (Chart I-3). But what is interesting is that we know that there is a divergence in how various central banks are treating their inflation overshoot relative to the Federal Reserve. For example, both Norway and New Zealand have negative 2-year real rates, but their central banks are on track to lift short rates this year. However, the telegraphed messages from the Fed are that there will be no interest rate increases until 2023. This will push US real rates towards becoming more negative vis-à-vis other G10 countries. In our report titled Which Rates Matter For Currencies, we suggested that the recent decline in US Treasury yields should curtail strong inflows into US fixed income. This should ease upward pressure on the dollar. Macroeconomic Environment: Basic Balance Chart I-4Basic Balances Across The G10 The basic balance is one of the most important determinants of a currency’s attractiveness, simply because it captures the ebb and flow of demand for a country’s domestic assets. In a nutshell, the basic balance is the sum of the current account surplus and long-term investments. Trade surpluses underpin underlying demand for a country’s goods and services, while capital account surpluses suggest a country’s assets are under high demand. As such, persistent basic balance surpluses are usually associated with an appreciating currency and vice versa. There has been a sea change in the basic balances across the G10, a fact we highlighted in our recent report titled On The Fed Shift, And Balance Of Payments. One of those shifts involves Australia  seeing tremendous improvement in its basic balance surplus. In terms of rankings, Sweden sports the best basic balance surplus in the G10, followed by Australia and the euro area (Chart I-4). Meanwhile, the US ranks the worst in terms of basic balances, a big vulnerability for the currency. Macroeconomic Environment: External Debt A country’s external debt situation tends to only matter during crises. Therefore, in the current context of global fiscal and monetary stimulus, as well as generous Fed swap lines to assuage any dollar funding pressures abroad, external (especially USD) debt does not pose a significant threat for currencies. In an absolute sense, external debt as a share of GDP is highest in the UK, Switzerland, and Sweden (Chart I-5). However, what matters most often for vulnerability are net external assets rather than gross liabilities. Based on this measure, Japan, Norway, Canada, Switzerland and Sweden are the most attractive countries, based on net external assets (Chart I-6). Chart I-5External Debt In The G10 Chart I-6Net International Investment In The G10 Valuation: Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) Our PPP valuation model is our default in terms of evaluating a currency’s fair value, since by definition, it reveals price arbitration between any two countries.  Chart I-7The Dollar Is Expensive As we have documented, our model offers unique insight into a true PPP fair value, since it accounts for the fact that consumer price baskets tend to differ in composition from one country to the next. In order to get closer to an apples-to-apples comparison across countries, two adjustments are necessary. First, categorizing the consumer price index (CPI) into five major groups. In most cases, this breakdown captures 90% of the national CPI basket. This includes food, restaurants, and hotels (1), shelter (2), health care (3), culture and recreation (4), and energy and transportation (5). The second adjustment is to test the significance of individual price ratios, with the exchange rate as the dependent variable. This allows us to observe the most influential price ratios that help explain variations in the exchange rate. As a control strategy, we use a weighted average combination of the five groups to form a synthetic relative price ratio. If, for example, shelter is 33% in the US CPI basket, but 19% in the Swedish CPI basket, relative shelter prices will represent 26% of the combined price ratio. This allows for a uniform cross-country comparison, as opposed to using the national CPI weights. The results show the US dollar as overvalued, especially versus the Scandinavian currencies and the yen (Chart I-7). The results are based on the synthetic relative price ratio. Valuation: Intermediate-Term Timing Model (ITTM) Our ITTM is our favored model in the short term, because it gives signals with much higher frequency. Back in 2016, when we developed this indicator, it proved useful in helping global portfolio managers increase their Sharpe ratio in managing currency exposure. The idea was quite simple: For every developed world country, there were three key variables that influenced the near-term path of its exchange rate versus the US dollar: Interest Rate Differentials: We have elaborated at length that interest rate differentials are a key driver for currencies. Given that we get interest rates in real time, they are great inputs into any high-frequency model. Inflation Differentials: Inflation destroys the purchasing power of a currency, both in theory and practice (Chart I-8).  Assuming no transactional costs, the price of a dishwasher cannot be relatively high and rising in New York versus Manila. Either the US dollar needs to fall, the Philippine peso needs to rise, or a combination of the two has to occur to equalize prices across borders. Risk Factor: Exchange rates are risk assets. Ergo, the ebb and flow of risk aversion will have an impact on currencies, which is particularly the case for commodity exporters. We will be releasing a revamped version of our trading model in the coming weeks, incorporating results from ITTM. In a nutshell, our ITTM models have been a very good timing tool. And the signal today is to overweight JPY, AUD, SEK, and NOK in the G10 space (Chart I-9). Chart I-8Inflations and Currencies Chart I-9The Dollar Is Expensive Shorter Term Valuation: Long-Term Fair Value Model Chart I-10The Dollar Is Not Attractive Longer Term Our long-term FX models try to capture the movement in exchange rates over a business cycle (3-5 years, let’s say). Included in these models are much slower-moving variables like productivity differentials, and cumulative changes in the current account and basic balance. These models cover 22 currencies, incorporating both G10 and emerging market FX markets. We did an overhaul in these models this year, to account for rising Chinese productivity. Similar to our ITTM models, the longer-term valuation indicator favors the Scandinavian currencies, the yen, and the Aussie dollar (Chart I-10). Sentiment: Speculative Positioning The final consideration in our ranking is sentiment. In general, the dollar is a momentum currency and as such, you want to be long when bullish consensus and/or net speculative positioning is low and rising. Chart I-11 shows that the dollar has failed to break above its major trendlines, at the same time when bullish consensus on the dollar is rising (Chart I-12). This warns that a powerful countertrend reversal could be underway. Chart I-11The Dollar And Momentum Chart I-12The Dollar And Sentiment   According to CFTC data, the most shorted currencies are the Australian dollar and Japanese yen (Chart I-13). In our framework, these are the currencies slated to stage very powerful countertrend reversals, given we put the pandemic behind us. Chart I-13Everyone Is Long The Greenback Housekeeping Chart I-14AUD/NZD and Relative Rates Our long AUD/NZD position was triggered this week at 1.05. The messaging from the RBA and the RBNZ have been vastly different, whereby the former is cautious about the rising Delta variant infection rate, and the latter is focused on financial stability admist a bubbly housing market. On a relative policy basis, our bias is that the likelihood of rates adjusting higher than market expectations is higher in Australia than in New Zealand (Chart I-14). As we are  eventually going to put the virus behind us, underappreciated currencies such as the AUD could stage a mean-reversion rally.   Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com Trades & Forecasts Forecast Summary Core Portfolio Tactical Trades Limit Orders Closed Trades

With two thirds of the S&P 500 companies reported Q2-2021 earnings, it becomes abundantly clear that the US experienced a rigorous economic revival in the second quarter of this year. Combination of loose fiscal and monetary policy, economic reopening, pent up demand and well-to-do US consumer and global growth acceleration are just some of the factors underpinning robust top- and bottom-line growth. Analysts keep revising their forward estimates higher, not lower as earnings season was rolling on – a rather unusual phenomenon (see chart). Zooming into the sector data is also instructive. On the earnings’ front, the Consumer Discretionary and the Financials sectors are leading the market surprise factor higher with 31% and 25% growth respectively. 96% of the technology companies and 95% of the financial companies have beaten the analyst targets, suggesting that expectations were rather low despite the upgrades. In comparison, 78% and 73% of companies beating expectation in the Materials and Energy sectors, look measly. At the same time, Materials are the clear cyclical laggards with a surprise factor of 7%. These results are consistent with our equity investment themes: China slowdown: Underweight Materials as demand for metals is waning Consumers flush with cash: Overweight the Consumer Discretionary sector Rate stabilization: Overweight growth sectors and underweight value (growth sectors, such as Technology and Communications Services are ahead of the value sectors, such as Materials, Energy and Utilities) Economic growth peaking at the end of Q2-2021: Financials outperforming as geared to economic growth acceleration. Bottom Line: With more than 2/3 of S&P 500 reported, the earnings season will likely finish on a high note.

Highlights China’s July Politburo meeting signaled that policy is unlikely to be overtightened. The Biden administration is likely to pass a bipartisan infrastructure deal – as well as a large spending bill by Christmas. Geopolitical risk in the Middle East will rise as Iran’s new hawkish president stakes out an aggressive position. US-Iran talks just got longer and more complicated. Europe’s relatively low political risk is still a boon for regional assets. However, Russia could still deal negative surprises given its restive domestic politics. Japan will see a rise in political turmoil after the Olympic games but national policy is firmly set on the path that Shinzo Abe blazed. Stay long yen as a tactical hedge. Feature Chart 1Rising Hospitalizations Cause Near-Term Jitters, But UK Rolling Over? Our key view of 2021, that China would verge on overtightening policy but would retreat from such a mistake to preserve its economic recovery, looks to be confirmed after the Politburo’s July meeting opened the way for easier policy in the coming months. Meanwhile the Biden administration is likely to secure a bipartisan infrastructure package and push through a large expansion of the social safety net, further securing the American recovery. Growth and stimulus have peaked in both the US and China but these government actions should keep growth supported at a reasonable level and dispel disinflationary fears. This backdrop should support our pro-cyclical, reflationary trade recommendations in the second half of the year. Jitters continue over COVID-19 variants but new cases have tentatively peaked in the UK, US vaccinations are picking up, and death rates are a lot lower now than they were last year, that is, prior to widescale vaccination (Chart 1). This week we are taking a pause to address some of the very good client questions we have received in recent weeks, ranging from our key views of the year to our outstanding investment recommendations. We hope you find the answers insightful. Will Biden’s Infrastructure Bill Disappoint? Ten Republicans are now slated to join 50 Democrats in the Senate to pass a $1 trillion infrastructure bill that consists of $550 billion in new spending over a ten-year period (Table 1). The deal is not certain to pass and it is ostensibly smaller than Biden’s proposal. But Democrats still have the ability to pass a mammoth spending bill this fall. So the bipartisan bill should not be seen as a disappointment with regard to US fiscal policy or projections. The Republicans appear to have the votes for this bipartisan deal. Traditional infrastructure – including broadband internet – has large popular support, especially when not coupled with tax hikes, as is the case here. Both Biden and Trump ran on a ticket of big infra spending. However, political polarization is still at historic peaks so it is possible the deal could collapse despite the strong signs in the media that it will pass. Going forward, the sense of crisis will dissipate and Republicans will take a more oppositional stance. The Democratic Congress will pass President Joe Biden’s signature reconciliation bill this fall, another dollop of massive spending, without a single Republican vote (Chart 2). After that, fiscal policy will probably be frozen in place through at least 2025. Campaigning will begin for the 2022 midterm elections, which makes major new legislation unlikely in 2022, and congressional gridlock is the likely result of the midterm. Republicans will revert to belt tightening until they gain full control of government or a new global crisis erupts. Table 1Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill Likely To Pass Chart 2Reconciliation Bill Also Likely To Pass Chart 3Biden Cannot Spare A Single Vote In Senate Hence the legislative battle over the reconciliation bill this fall will be the biggest domestic battle of the Biden presidency. The 2021 budget reconciliation bill, based on a $3.5 trillion budget resolution agreed by Democrats in July, will incorporate parts of the American Jobs Plan that did not pass via bipartisan vote (such as $436 billion in green energy subsidies), plus a large expansion of social welfare, the American Families Plan. This bill will likely pass by Christmas but Democrats have only a one-seat margin in the Senate, which means our conviction level must be medium, or subjectively about 65%. The process will be rocky and uncertain (Chart 3). Moderate Democratic senators will ultimately vote with their party because if they do not they will effectively sink the Biden presidency and fan the flames of populist rebellion. US budget deficit projections in Chart 4 show the current status quo, plus scenarios in which we add the bipartisan infra deal, the reconciliation bill, and the reconciliation bill sans tax hikes. The only significant surprise would be if the reconciliation bill passed shorn of tax hikes, which would reduce the fiscal drag by 1% of GDP next year and in coming years. Chart 4APassing Both A Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill And A Reconciliation Bill Cannot Avoid Fiscal Cliff In 2022 … Chart 4B… The Only Major Fiscal Surprise Would Come If Tax Hikes Were Excluded From This Fall’s Reconciliation Bill Chart 5Biden Stimulus Overshadowed By China Policy Tightening ... But China Is Now Marginally Easing There are two implications. First, government support for the economy has taken a significant step up as a result of the pandemic and election in 2020. There is no fiscal austerity, unlike in 2011-16. Second, a fiscal cliff looms in 2022 regardless of whether Biden’s reconciliation bill passes, although the private economy should continue to recover on the back of vaccines and strong consumer sentiment. This is a temporary problem given the first point. Monetary policy has a better chance of normalizing at some point if fiscal policy delivers as expected. But the Federal Reserve will still be exceedingly careful about resuming rate hikes. President Biden could well announce that he will replace Chairman Powell in the coming months, delivering a marginally dovish surprise (otherwise Biden runs the risk that Powell will be too hawkish in 2022-23). Inflation will abate in the short run but remain a risk over the long run. Essentially the outlook for US equities is still positive for H2 but clouds are forming on the horizon due to peak fiscal stimulus, tax hikes in the reconciliation bill, eventual Fed rate hikes (conceivably 2022, likely 2023), and the fact that US and Chinese growth has peaked while global growth is soon to peak as well. All of these factors point toward a transition phase in global financial markets until economies find stable growth in the post-pandemic, post-stimulus era. Investors will buy the rumor and sell the news of Biden’s multi-trillion reconciliation bill in H2. The bill is largely priced out at the moment due to China’s policy tightening (Chart 5). The next section of this report suggests that China’s policy will ease on the margin over the coming 12 months. Bottom Line: US fiscal policy is delivering, not disappointing. Congress is likely to pass a large reconciliation bill by Christmas, despite no buffer in the Senate, because Democratic Senators know that the Biden presidency hangs in the balance. China’s Khodorkovsky Moment? Many clients have asked whether China’s crackdown on private business, from tech to education, is the country’s “Khodorkovsky moment,” i.e. the point at which Beijing converts into a full, autocratic regime where private enterprise is permanently impaired because it is subject to arbitrary seizure and control of the state. The answer is yes, with caveats. Yes, China’s government is taking a more aggressive, nationalist, and illiberal stance that will permanently impair private business and investor sentiment. But no, this process did not begin overnight and will not proceed in a straight line. There is a cyclical aspect that different investors will have to approach differently. First a reminder of the original Khodorkovsky moment. After the Soviet Union’s collapse, extremely wealthy oligarchs emerged who benefited from the privatization of state assets. When President Putin began to reassert the primacy of the state, he arbitrarily imprisoned Khodorkovsky and dismantled his corporate energy empire, Yukos, giving the spoils to state-owned companies. Russia is a petro state so Putin’s control of the energy sector would be critical for government revenues and strategic resurgence, especially at the dawn of a commodity boom. Both the RUB-USD and Russian equity relative performance performed mostly in line with global crude oil prices, as befits Russia’s economy, even though there was a powerful (geo)political risk premium injected during these two decades due to Russia’s centralization of power and clash with the West (Chart 6). Investors could tactically play the rallies after Khodorkovsky but the general trend depended on the commodity cycle and the secular rise of geopolitical risk. Chart 6Russia's 'Khodorkovsky Moment' Was A Geopolitical Turning Point...But Russian Assets Benefited From Oil Bull Market For A While Longer President Xi Jinping is a strongman and hardliner, like Putin, but his mission is to prevent Communist China from collapsing like the Soviet Union, rather than to revive it from its ashes. To that end he must reassert the state while trying to sustain the country’s current high level of economic competitiveness. Since China is a complex economy, not a petro state, this requires the state-backed pursuit of science, technology, competitiveness, and productivity to avoid collapse. Therefore Beijing wants to control but not smother the tech companies. Hence there is a cyclical factor to China’s regulatory crackdown. A crackdown on President Xi Jinping’s potential rivals or powerful figures was always very likely to occur ahead of the Communist Party’s five-year personnel reshuffle in 2022, as we argued prior to tech exec Jack Ma’s disappearance. Sackings of high-level figures have happened around every five-year leadership rotation. Similarly a crackdown on the media was expected. True, the pre-party congress crackdowns are different this time around as they are targeted at the private sector, innovative businesses, tech, and social media. Nevertheless, as in the past, a policy easing phase will follow the tightening phase so as to preserve the economy and the mobilization of private capital for strategic purposes. The critical cyclical factor for global investors is China’s monetary and credit impulse. For example, the crackdown on the financial sector ahead of the national party congress in 2017 caused a global manufacturing slowdown because it tightened credit for the entire Chinese economy, reducing imports from abroad. One reason Chinese markets sold off so heavily this spring and summer, was that macroeconomic indicators began decelerating, leaving nothing for investors to sink their teeth into except communism. The latest Politburo meeting suggests that monetary, fiscal, and regulatory policy is likely to get easier, or at least stay just as easy, going forward (Table 2). Once again, the month of July has proved an inflection point in central economic policy. Financial markets can now look forward to a cyclical easing in regulation combined with easing in monetary and fiscal policy over the next 12-24 months. Table 2China’s Politburo Prepares To Ease Policy, Secure Recovery Despite all of the above, for global investors with a lengthy time horizon, the government’s crackdown points to a secular rise of Communist and Big Government interventionism into the economy, with negative ramifications for China’s private sector, economic freedoms, and attractiveness as a destination for foreign investment. The arbitrary and absolutist nature of its advances will be anathema to long-term global capital. Also, social media, unlike other tech firms, pose potential sociopolitical risks and may not boost productivity much, whereas the government wants to promote new manufacturing, materials, energy, electric vehicles, medicine, and other tradable goods. So while Beijing cannot afford to crush the tech sector, it can afford to crush some social media firms. Chart 7China's Crackdown On Private Sector Reinforces Past Decade's Turn Away From Liberal Reform China’s equity market profile looks conspicuously like Russia’s at the time of Khodorkovsky’s arrest (Chart 7). Chinese renminbi has underperformed the dollar on a multi-year basis since Xi Jinping’s rise to power, in line with falling export prices and slowing economic growth, as a result of economic structural change and the administration’s rolling back Deng Xiaoping’s liberal reform era. We expect a cyclical rebound to occur but we do not recommend playing it. Instead we recommend other cyclical plays as China eases policy, particularly in European equities and US-linked emerging markets like Mexico. Bottom Line: The twentieth national party congress in 2022 is a critical political event that is motivating a cyclical crackdown on potential rivals to Communist Party power. Chinese equities will temporarily bounce back, especially with a better prospect for monetary and fiscal easing. But over the long run global investors should stay focused on the secular decline of China’s economic freedoms and hence productivity. What Happened To The US-Iran Deal? Our second key view for 2021 was the US strategic rotation from the Middle East and South Asia to Asia Pacific. This rotation is visible in the Biden administration’s attempt to withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan while rejoining the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran. However, Biden here faces challenges that will become very high profile in the coming months. The Biden administration failed to rejoin the 2015 deal under the outgoing leadership of the reformist President Hassan Rouhani. This means a new and much more difficult negotiation process will now begin that could last through Biden’s term or beyond. On August 5, President Ebrahim Raisi will take office with an aggressive flourish. The US is already blaming Iran for an act of sabotage in the Persian Gulf that killed one Romanian and one Briton. Raisi will need to establish that he is not a toady, will not cower before the West. The new Israeli government of Prime Minister Naftali Bennett also needs to demonstrate that despite the fall of his hawkish predecessor Benjamin Netanyahu, Jerusalem is willing and able to uphold Israel’s red lines against Iranian nuclear weaponization and regional terrorism. Hence both Iran and its regional rivals, including Saudi Arabia, will rattle sabers and underscore their red lines. The Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz will be subject to threats and attacks in the coming months that could escalate dramatically, posing a risk of oil supply disruptions. Given that the Iranians ultimately do want a deal with the Americans, the pressure should be low-to-medium level and persistent, hence inflationary, as opposed to say a lengthy shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz that would cause a giant spike in prices that ultimately kills global demand. Short term, the US attempt to reduce its commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan will invite US enemies to harass or embarrass the Biden administration. The Taliban is likely to retake control of Afghanistan. The US exit will resemble Saigon in 1975. This will be a black eye for the Biden administration. But public opinion and US grand strategy will urge Biden to be rid of the war. So any delays, or a decision to retain low-key sustained troop presence, will not change the big picture of US withdrawal. Long term, Biden needs to pivot to Asia, while President Raisi is ultimately subject to the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who wants to secure Iran’s domestic stability and his own eventual leadership succession. Rejoining the 2015 nuclear deal leads to sanctions relief, without requiring total abandonment of a nuclear program that could someday be weaponized, so Iran will ultimately agree. The problem will then become the regional rise of Iranian power and the balancing act that the US will have to maintain with its allies to keep Iran contained. Bottom Line: The risk to oil prices lies to the upside until a US-Iran deal comes together. The US and Iran still have a shared interest in rejoining the 2015 deal but the time frame is now delayed for months if not years. We still expect a US-Iran deal eventually but previously we had anticipated a rapid deal that would put downward pressure on oil prices in the second half of the year. What Comes After Biden’s White Flag On Nord Stream II? Our third key view for 2021 highlighted Europe’s positive geopolitical and macro backdrop. This view is correct so far, especially given that China’s policymakers are now more likely to ease policy going forward. But Russia could still upset the view. Italy has been the weak link in European integration over the past decade (excluding the UK). So the national unity coalition that has taken shape under Prime Minister Mario Draghi exemplifies the way in which political risks were overrated. Italy is now the government that has benefited the most from the overall COVID crisis in public opinion (Chart 8). The same chart shows that the German government also improved its public standing, although mostly because outgoing Chancellor Angela Merkel is exiting on a high note. Her Christian Democrat-led coalition has not seen a comparable increase in support. The Greens should outperform their opinion polling in the federal election on September 26. But the same polling suggests that the Greens will be constrained within a ruling coalition (Chart 9). The result will be larger spending without the ability to raise taxes substantially. Markets will cheer a fiscally dovish and pro-European ruling coalition. Chart 8European Political Risk Limited, But Rising, Post-COVID The chief risk to this view of low EU political risk comes from Russia. Russia is a state in long-term decline due to the remorseless fall in fertility and productivity. The result has been foreign policy aggression as President Putin attempts to fortify the country’s strategic position and frontiers ahead of an even bleaker future. Chart 9German Election Polls Point To Gridlock? Now domestic political unrest has grown after a decade of policy austerity and the COVID-19 pandemic. Elections for the Duma will be held on September 19 and will serve as the proximate cause for Russia’s next round of unrest and police repression. Foreign aggressiveness may be used to distract the population from the pandemic and poor economy. We have argued that there would not be a diplomatic reset for the US and Russia on par with the reset of 2009-11. We stand by this view but so far it is facing challenges. Putin did not re-invade Ukraine this spring and Biden did not impose tough sanctions canceling the construction of the Nord Stream II gas pipeline to Germany. Russia is tentatively cooperating on the US’s talks with Iran and withdrawal from Afghanistan. The US gave Germany and Russia a free point by condoning the NordStream II. Now the US will expect Germany to take a tough diplomatic line on Russian and Chinese aggression, while expecting Russia to give the US some goodwill in return. They may not deliver. The makeup of the new German coalition will have some impact on its foreign policy trajectory in the coming years. But the last thing that any German government wants is to be thrust into a new cold war that divides the country down the middle. Exports make up 36% of German output, and exports to the Russian and Chinese spheres account for a substantial share of total exports (Chart 10). The US administration prioritizes multilateralism above transactional benefits so the Germans will not suffer any blowback from the Americans for remaining engaged with Russia and China, at least not anytime soon. Russia, on the other hand, may feel a need to seize the moment and make strategic gains in its region, despite Biden’s diplomatic overtures. If the US wraps up its forever wars, Russia’s window of opportunity closes. So Russia may be forced to act sooner rather than later, whether in suppressing domestic dissent, intimidating or attacking its neighbors, or hacking into US digital networks. In the aftermath of the German and Russian elections, we will reassess the risk from Russia. But our strong conviction is that neither Russian nor American strategy have changed and therefore new conflicts are looming. Therefore we prefer developed market European equities and we do not recommend investors take part in the Russian equity rally. Chart 10Germany Opposes New Cold War With Russia Or China Bottom Line: German and European equities should benefit from global vaccination, Biden’s fiscal and foreign policies, and China’s marginal policy easing (Chart 11). Eastern European emerging markets and Russian assets are riskier than they appear because of latent geopolitical tensions that could explode around the time of important elections in September. Chart 11Geopolitical Tailwinds To European Equities What Comes After The Olympics In Japan? Japan is returning to an era of “revolving door” prime ministers. Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga’s sole purpose was to tie up the loose ends of the Shinzo Abe administration, namely by overseeing the Olympics. After the games end, he will struggle to retain leadership of the Liberal Democratic Party. He will be blamed for spread of Delta variant even if the Olympics were not a major factor. If he somehow retains the party’s helm, the October general election will still be an underwhelming performance by the Liberal Democrats, which will sow the seeds of his downfall within a short time (Chart 12). Suga will need to launch a new fiscal spending package, possibly as an election gimmick, and his party has the strength in the Diet to push it through quickly, which will be favorable for the economy. For the elections the problem is not the Liberal Democrats’ popularity, which is still leagues above the nearest competitor, but rather low enthusiasm and backlash over COVID. Abe’s retirement, and the eventual fall of Abe’s hand-picked deputy, does not entail the loss of Abenomics. The Bank of Japan will retain its ultra-dovish cast at least until Haruhiko Kuroda steps down in 2023. The changes that occurred in Japan from 2008-12 exemplified Japan’s existence as an “earthquake society” that undergoes drastic national changes suddenly and rapidly. The paradigm shift will not be reversed. The drivers were the Great Recession, the LDP’s brief stint in the political wilderness, the Tohoku earthquake and Fukushima nuclear crisis, and the rise of China. The BoJ became ultra-dovish and unorthodox, the LDP became more proactive both at home and abroad. The deflationary economic backdrop and Chinese nationalism are still a powerful impetus for these trends to continue – as highlighted by increasingly alarming rhetoric by Japanese officials, including now Shinzo Abe himself, regarding the Chinese military threat to Taiwan. In other words, Suga’s lack of leadership will not stand even if he somehow stays prime minister into 2022. The Liberal Democrats have several potential leaders waiting in the wings and one of these will emerge, whether Yuriko Koike, Shigeru Ishiba, or Shinjiro Koizumi, or someone else. The popular and geopolitical pressures will force the Liberal Democrats and various institutions to continue providing accommodation to the economy and bulking up the nation’s defenses. This will require the BoJ to stay easier for longer and possibly to roll out new unorthodox policies, as with yield curve control in the 2010s. Japan has some of the highest real rates in the G10 as a result of very low inflation expectations and a deeply negative output gap (Chart 13). Abenomics was bearing fruit, prior to COVID-19, so it will be justified to stay the course given that deflation has reemerged as a threat once again. Chart 12Japan: Back To Revolving Door Of Prime Ministers Chart 13Japan To Keep Fighting Deflation Post-Abe Bottom Line: The political and geopolitical backdrop for Japan is clear. The government and BoJ will have to do whatever it takes to stay the course on Abenomics even in the wake of Abe and Suga. Prime ministers will come and go in rapid succession, like in past eras of political turmoil, but the trajectory of national policy is set. We would favor JGBs relative to more high-beta government bonds like American and Canadian. Given deflation, looming Japanese political turmoil, and the secular rise in geopolitical risk, we continue to recommend holding the yen. These views conform with those of BCA’s fixed income and forex strategists. Investment Takeaways China’s policymakers are backing away from the risk of overtightening policy this year. Policy should ease on the margin going forward. Our number one key forecast for 2021 is tentatively confirmed. Base metals are still overextended but global reflation trades should be able to grind higher. The US fiscal spending orgy will continue through the end of the year via Biden’s reconciliation bill, which we expect to pass. Proactive DM fiscal policy will continue to dispel disinflationary fears. Sparks will fly in the Middle East. The US-Iran negotiations will now be long and drawn out with occasional shows of force that highlight the tail risk of war. We expect geopolitics to add a risk premium to oil prices at least until the two countries can rejoin the 2015 nuclear deal. Germany’s Green Party will surprise to the upside in elections, highlighting Europe’s low level of geopolitical risk. China policy easing is positive for European assets. Russia’s outward aggressiveness is the key risk.   Matt Gertken Vice President Geopolitical Strategy mattg@bcaresearch.com

Weekly Performance Update For the week ending Thu Aug 05, 2021 The Market Monitor displays the trailing 1-quarter performance of strategies based around the BCA Score. For each region, we construct an equal-weighted, monthly rebalanced portfolio consisting of the top 3 stocks per sector and compare it with the regional benchmark. For each portfolio, we show the weekly performance of individual holdings in the Top Contributors/Detractors table. In addition, the Top Prospects table shows the holdings that currently have the highest BCA Score within the portfolio. For more details, click the region headers below to be redirected to the full historical backtest for the strategy. BCA US Portfolio Total Weekly Return BCA US Portfolio S&P500 TRI 0.16% 0.24% Top Contributors   IT:US ANAT:US IPG:US TX:US DELL:US Weekly Return 37 bps 17 bps 13 bps 7 bps 5 bps Top Detractors   EOG:US SCCO:US EPD:US COKE:US GPC:US Weekly Return -12 bps -12 bps -11 bps -10 bps -9 bps Top Prospects   TX:US SC:US ESGR:US SIM:US MPLX:US BCA Score 98.74% 97.90% 97.72% 95.28% 95.08% BCA Canada Portfolio Total Weekly Return BCA Canada Portfolio S&P/TSX TRI -0.66% 0.34% Top Contributors   DCBO:CA CSU:CA LNF:CA RUS:CA L:CA Weekly Return 23 bps 13 bps 12 bps 10 bps 6 bps Top Detractors   POU:CA CS:CA PXT:CA QBR.A:CA TOU:CA Weekly Return -30 bps -27 bps -18 bps -17 bps -15 bps Top Prospects   CS:CA ELF:CA CFP:CA TOU:CA PXT:CA BCA Score 99.08% 97.59% 97.07% 95.45% 94.41% BCA UK Portfolio Total Weekly Return BCA UK Portfolio FTSE 100 TRI 1.51% 0.71% Top Contributors   MXCT:GB EMG:GB SXS:GB GROW:GB DOTD:GB Weekly Return 27 bps 24 bps 21 bps 20 bps 19 bps Top Detractors   BAKK:GB DRX:GB RIO:GB DEC:GB RMG:GB Weekly Return -23 bps -14 bps -12 bps -7 bps -5 bps Top Prospects   SVST:GB VVO:GB NLMK:GB POLR:GB CTH:GB BCA Score 99.35% 98.65% 96.88% 96.06% 95.95% BCA Eurozone Portfolio Total Weekly Return BCA EMU Portfolio MSCI EMU TRI 1.14% 1.26% Top Contributors   HLAG:DE ERF:FR ARTO:FR ALESK:FR VGP:BE Weekly Return 48 bps 40 bps 28 bps 19 bps 14 bps Top Detractors   FDJ:FR FLUX:BE TFI:FR ROTH:FR STR:AT Weekly Return -16 bps -13 bps -10 bps -8 bps -7 bps Top Prospects   STR:AT FDJ:FR IPS:FR EDNR:IT TFI:FR BCA Score 98.58% 98.38% 98.08% 97.05% 96.87% BCA Japan Portfolio Total Weekly Return BCA Japan Portfolio TOPIX TRI -1.12% 0.08% Top Contributors   4694:JP 5021:JP 8595:JP 7716:JP 8630:JP Weekly Return 20 bps 15 bps 8 bps 8 bps 7 bps Top Detractors   1419:JP 3459:JP 2208:JP 9945:JP 2124:JP Weekly Return -40 bps -25 bps -24 bps -15 bps -11 bps Top Prospects   9436:JP 6960:JP 2208:JP 5930:JP 4966:JP BCA Score 99.88% 99.75% 99.73% 99.55% 99.02% BCA Hong Kong Portfolio Total Weekly Return BCA Hong Kong Portfolio Hang Seng TRI 1.06% -0.42% Top Contributors   316:HK 6118:HK 691:HK 973:HK 98:HK Weekly Return 48 bps 33 bps 20 bps 15 bps 12 bps Top Detractors   1083:HK 3799:HK 990:HK 148:HK 590:HK Weekly Return -16 bps -14 bps -12 bps -10 bps -5 bps Top Prospects   1277:HK 98:HK 215:HK 691:HK 2877:HK BCA Score 99.96% 98.79% 98.24% 97.99% 97.44% BCA Australia Portfolio Total Weekly Return BCA Australia Portfolio S&P/ASX All Ord. TRI 0.19% 1.10% Top Contributors   MAQ:AU OCL:AU JLG:AU BLX:AU EZL:AU Weekly Return 36 bps 26 bps 20 bps 19 bps 16 bps Top Detractors   GRR:AU MGX:AU MHJ:AU MAU:AU IDX:AU Weekly Return -61 bps -34 bps -26 bps -22 bps -14 bps Top Prospects   MGX:AU GRR:AU MHJ:AU BFG:AU EZL:AU BCA Score 99.48% 99.45% 99.25% 97.33% 96.44%