Developed Countries

Highlights Please note that we will publish a Special Report on the Asian semiconductors cycle on Monday November 11. The risk to our negative stance on EM stocks is that DM share prices will continue advancing, pulling EM equities higher. If the MSCI EM Equity Index breaks decisively above our stop buy level instituted two weeks ago, we will reverse our stance on the absolute performance of EM. Nevertheless, we assign high odds that EM share prices will underperform DM even in a global equity rally. Hence, we are not changing our underweight recommendation on EM within a global equity portfolio. In the 2012-14 period, EM stocks underperformed their DM counterparts despite the global equity rally. Feature Chart I-1China: A Tale Of Two Manufacturing PMIs In our October 24 weekly report, we instituted a buy stop on the MSCI EM Equity Index at 1,075. The index is currently flirting with this level. If EM stocks break decisively above this level, our buy stop will be triggered. Such a technical breakout will signify that this EM equity rally will likely be sustained in the medium term, and that investors should play it. What would be the rationale behind this rally? Is it the rise in China’s Caixin manufacturing PMI or an imminent trade deal between the U.S. and China? Or is it a recovery in the global business cycle? The top panel of Chart I-1 shows that China’s Caixin and NBS manufacturing PMIs have decoupled. The Caixin PMI is compiled through a survey of about 500 companies, while the NBS measure is based on about 3000 companies. Neither one appears to have a consistently better track record than the other. For this reason, to tackle the issues of excessive volatility and false signals from both measures, we prefer to look at their average. The bottom panel of Chart I-1 illustrates the average of the two. The takeaway is that China’s manufacturing PMI has indeed improved, but only modestly. Further, non-manufacturing PMI – also the average of the Caixin and the NBS figures – has dropped to 2015 lows (Chart I-2). Hence, Chinese PMIs are not sending an unequivocal message that the mainland economy is recovering. Chart I-2China: Non-Manufacturing PMI Is At Its 2015 Low On one hand, the business cycle in China as well as global trade and manufacturing have not yet improved. On the other, share prices often lead markets, and waiting for economic data often results in missing the turning points. In this week’s report, we present both the bullish market signals and the lack of evidence of an economic recovery in China/EM, global trade and manufacturing. Finally, we elaborate why an enduring global equity rally does not always lead to EM equity relative outperformance versus DM. Bullish Market Signals… The motive for our buy stop on the EM Equity Index is the number of bullish market signals that currently suggest the global equity rally could be sustainable, and hence playable. First, DM share prices have been trading well – equity market actions in the U.S., Europe and Japan have been characteristic of a bull market since early October. Specifically, companies that have missed analysts’ earnings estimates have seen their share prices do quite well, often rising markedly in the days following their earnings announcements. Share prices of companies that have beaten analysts’ expectations have literally surged. This is typical of a genuine bull market. Technical patterns are also positive for U.S. equities. U.S. small caps, S&P 500 high-beta stocks and FAANG share prices have all bounced from major support levels. Second, technical patterns are also positive for U.S. equities. U.S. small caps, S&P 500 high-beta stocks and FAANG share prices have all bounced from major support levels and are attempting to break out (Chart I-3). Finally, the U.S. stock-to-bond ratio has also failed to break below one of its long-term moving averages and has rebounded (Chart I-4). When a 200-day or long-term moving average holds, it often marks a major reversal. Chart I-3Bullish Patterns In U.S. Equities Chart I-4A Bull Market In U.S. Stocks-To-Bonds Ratio   All these signals imply a bullish trajectory for U.S. and other DM share prices. At the current juncture, we are giving the benefit of the doubt to the market and ready to reverse our stance on EM performance in absolute terms when our buy stop is triggered. Apart from these technical signals and market actions, U.S. economic fundamentals remain healthy. In particular, U.S. households have decent balance sheets, their income and spending growth is quite robust, the banking system is healthy, and nationwide property markets are picking up following a soft spot early this year. Although American manufacturing and capital spending have been weak, these relapses primarily reflect negative demand from the rest of the world and business confidence deterioration due to the U.S.-China trade confrontation. The latter will be partially reversed by the forthcoming U.S.-China trade deal. Chart I-5China Not U.S. Drives EM Profits Cycles At the same time, there is a lack of meaningful green shoots in global trade and manufacturing (we discuss this in more detail below). Altogether, one can explain this equity rally as being driven by subsiding fears of a U.S. recession, Federal Reserve easing and the improvement on the U.S.-China trade front.  That said, our negative view on EM has not been contingent on a U.S. recession, Fed policy or the U.S.-China trade confrontation. As such, improvements on these fronts do not constitute sufficient basis for us to change our fundamental stance on EM. The empirical evidence that U.S. growth is not driving EM growth in general and EM corporate profitability in particular emanates from the following: U.S. imports and EM corporate earnings cycles have not been correlated since 2011 (Chart I-5, top panel). EM earnings-per-share cycles have instead been driven by Chinese imports since 2009 (Chart I-5, bottom panel). Hence, it is China’s domestic demand that drives broader EM profit cycles. As we elaborate below, there is little evidence of improvement in the mainland’s business cycle, its imports, and commodities prices. Bottom Line: There are numerous bullish signals from DM equity markets. The risk to our negative stance on EM is as follows: If DM share prices continue to rally, they will drag EM stocks and other risk assets higher. …But Global Growth Has Not Yet Improved Chart I-6No Clear Bullish Signal From Currency Markets Several key financial market signals, as well as soft and hard data, are not yet indicating that a recovery is already underway in global trade and manufacturing. Nor do they point to an improvement in China/EM economies. Our Risk-On/Safe-Haven currency ratio1 has rebounded but has not yet broken above its neckline (Chart I-6, top panel). This indicator had formed a classic head-and-shoulders pattern before breaking down. The jury is still out on whether the recent rebound is a false start or the beginning of a cyclical advance. We put a lot of emphasis on this indicator because (1) it is very strongly correlated with EM share prices, (2) it captures both risk-on and risk-off periods in global financial markets, (3) it leads the global business cycle, and (4) it is agnostic to the U.S. dollar’s trend. In a similar vein, the broad trade-weighted U.S. dollar has weakened but has not yet broken through key moving averages to conclude that it has definitively entered a bear market. With the exception of China’s Caixin manufacturing PMI, there are few green shoots in global manufacturing. Manufacturing PMIs in Japan, Korea, Singapore and Taiwan are all still below the 50 boom-bust line (Chart I-7, top and middle panels). Meanwhile, manufacturing PMIs in the ASEAN region have plunged (Chart I-7, bottom panel). Critically, EM per-share earnings are contracting at a rate of 10% from a year ago. Notably, the leading indicators for EM corporate profits – China’s domestic orders of 5,000 industrial companies and narrow money (M1) growth – signal a tentative bottoming of EM corporate profit growth only in early 2020 (Chart I-8). Chart I-7Outside China, Asian Manufacturing PMIs Are Weak Chart I-8Leading Indicators For EM EPS Growth   In the majority of developing economies, corporate per-share earnings are contracting or stagnating in local currency terms (Chart I-9). Our Risk-On/Safe-Haven currency ratio has rebounded but has not yet broken above its neckline. “Hard” economic data out of EM/China and global trade remain downbeat as well. For example, Chinese construction activity and capital goods imports as well as Japanese foreign machine tool orders are all shrinking at double-digit rates from a year ago (Chart I-10, top and middle panels). Korea’s October exports contracted by 15% from a year earlier (Chart I-10, bottom panel).   Chart I-9Individual EM Country EPS In Local Currency Terms Chart I-10China Capex And Global Trade: Double Digit Contraction   Finally, the import sub-component of China’s NBS manufacturing PMI remains well below the 50 boom-bust line. Chinese demand is of paramount importance for industrial metals. China accounts for 50% of industrial metals demand, while the U.S. accounts for only about 7%. The very subdued bounce in commodities in general and industrial metals prices in particular, are confirming a lack of recovery in Chinese intake of raw materials (Chart I-11). EM share prices, including emerging Asian stocks, have the highest correlation with global materials stocks (Chart I-12). The rationale for this tight relationship between emerging Asian equities and commodities is that both are leveraged to the Chinese business cycle, as we discussed in our recent report, EM: Perceptions Versus Reality. It is difficult to envision EM share prices staging a cyclical bull market when commodities prices are flat to down. Chart I-11Chinese Imports PMI And Industrial Metals Chart I-12Emerging Asian Stocks And Global Materials: Moving In Tandem   Bottom Line: The key variables driving EM share prices are China’s credit and business cycles, its imports and global trade. There are few green shoots in China/EM business cycles and global trade. This is why we believe even if this global equity rally is sustained, EM equities will underperform DM ones. We elaborate on this below. Can EM Underperform DM In A Bull Market? Chart I-132012-14: EM Underperformed During Global Bull Market BCA’s Emerging Markets Strategy team’s view on global equity allocation is as follows: Even if DM equities enter a sustainable bull market, odds are that EM stocks will underperform. This scenario will likely resemble the 2012-14 episode that was characterized by the following: DM share prices were in a strong bull market following the European credit crisis and the global markets selloff in 2011 (Chart I-13, top panel). Global trade and manufacturing bottomed in late 2012 and accelerated in 2013 (Chart I-13, third panel). Yet, this global trade and manufacturing improvement did little to support EM share prices, currencies and commodities prices. In 2012-14, EM equities were range-bound in absolute terms and significantly underperformed their DM peers (Chart I-13, second panel). In short, EM stocks were low beta relative to global stocks during that period. Besides, commodities prices were falling and EM currencies were depreciating versus the U.S. dollar (Chart I-13, bottom panel). The cause of such poor EM performance was two-fold: First, the recovery in China’s business cycle and its imports was tame. Second, many EM economies were suffering from poor domestic fundamentals following the 2009-2011 credit and cheap money booms. We expect any growth improvement in China to be muted, resembling the 2012 growth stabilization rather than the 2016 recovery. The top panel of Chart I-14 illustrates that China’s manufacturing PMI oscillated between 48 and 52 in 2012-2014 when the global manufacturing cycle rebounded and DM growth improved. This occurred despite China’s large stimulus in 2012 (Chart I-14, bottom panel). Chart I-14Chinese PMI And Credit And Fiscal Stimulus In line with the subdued recovery in China’s business cycle at the time, EM corporate profits did not recover much in the 2012-2014 period (please refer to Chart I-8 on page 7). We expect EM currencies to depreciate versus the U.S. dollar even if global share prices continue rallying. This will resemble the 2012-14 scenario. Notably, EM equity underperformance versus DM escalated in the spring of 2013 during the Fed’s Taper Tantrum when EM currencies plunged and EM fixed-income markets sold off. Yet, the Fed’s Taper Tantrum was not the only reason for EM currency depreciation. As demonstrated in the bottom panel of Chart I-13 on page 10, EM ex-China currencies’ total return was strongly correlated with commodities prices. Currently, many EM countries do not suffer from the same malaises they did in 2012-14, namely, high inflation and large current account deficits. On the contrary, very low nominal growth, i.e., enduring deflationary pressures, is the foremost problem in many EM countries such as India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Korea, Brazil, Mexico and Russia. These deflationary pressures are due to very sluggish domestic demand, weak/unhealthy banking systems and falling commodities prices. This backdrop indicates that these economies are not in a position to withstand either higher global borrowing costs or lower commodities prices. Their currencies will depreciate with either higher global bond yields or falling commodities prices. Even if DM equities enter a sustainable bull market, odds are that EM stocks will underperform. Hence, a scenario of firming U.S. and European demand – which would warrant higher bond yields – amid still weak Chinese growth – which would push commodities prices lower – would be very negative for EM currencies. Chart I-15Outperformance By Euro Area And Value Stocks Does Not Always Herald EM Outperformance Chart I-16EM Vs. DM: Relative Share Prices Are Tracking Relative EPS Finally, EM stocks’ relative performance versus global stocks does not always coincide with the relative performance of euro area or value stocks (Chart I-15). This entails that outperformance by euro area and global value stocks does not always herald EM outperformance versus the global equity benchmark. Bottom Line: Regardless the direction of global share prices, we expect EM stocks to underperform DM equities in the next several months. Relative equity performance is driven by relative EPS trends, as illustrated in Chart I-16. The corporate earnings outlook is worse in EM than in the U.S., euro area and Japan.   Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1 Average of CAD, AUD, NZD, BRL, RUB, CLP, MXN & ZAR total return indices relative to average of CHF & JPY total returns.   Equities Recommendations Currencies, Credit And Fixed-Income Recommendations

Overweight While our overweight call in the S&P biotech index is offside, it is more than offset by the concurrent underweight call we have on the S&P pharma index. But, biotech stocks are now in the recovery ward as the sector made a U-turn in early October and has been rallying ever since. The rebound coincides with the return of M&A activity following the dramatic 50% contraction since the recent peak in dollar terms (middle panel) and completely disappearing premia (bottom panel). As a reminder this is a key theme behind our preference for biotech stocks that big pharma is still on the hunt for (for additional details please refer to our mid-February Weekly Report). Meanwhile, the divergence between biotech’s relative share prices and 10-year Treasury yields has been extreme and is unsustainable. The upshot is that there is plenty of scope for relative share prices to rally further and narrow the gap, despite the recent selloff in the bond market (top panel, 10-year Treasury yield shown inverted). News on the earnings front is also positive as most of the major players have reported a solid quarter.   Bottom Line: We continue to recommend a barbell approach preferring the S&P biotech index at the expense of big pharma. The ticker symbols for the stocks in the S&P biotech index are: BLBG: S5BIOT – ABBV, AMGN, GILD, BIIB, CELG, VRTX, REGN, ALXN, INCY. ​​​​​​​

Highlights Global: Global growth momentum is bottoming out, leading indicators are improving, inflation is subdued, and central bankers are biased to maintain accommodative monetary policies. This is a bullish “sweet spot” for financial markets, suggesting further upside for global risk assets like equities and corporate credit, especially relative to government bonds. US: The overall US economy is weathering the storm from the global manufacturing slump, which is showing signs of bottoming out.  Stay below-benchmark on US Treasury duration, with an initial yield target of 2.25% for the benchmark 10-year. Canada: The Bank of Canada is hinting that “insurance” rate cuts may be needed, but with the Canadian economy and inflation both remaining resilient, the central bank is more likely to keep rates steady until global growth improves.  Stay neutral on Canadian government bonds, for now, but prepare to move to underweight in early 2020. Feature After knocking on the door several times in recent weeks, global equity markets are finally enjoying a true breakout.  In the U.S., the S&P 500 is setting new all-time highs on a daily basis, while equities in Europe and emerging markets (EM) are also registering solid gains. There is no conflicting signal from global corporate credit markets where spreads remain stable, or from the volatility space with measures like the US VIX index hovering near the 2019 lows. Chart Of The WeekThings Are Looking Up Despite this positive price action, many remain skeptical that this “risk rally” is sustainable.  Just last week, a headline in the Financial Times declared that the “U.S. stock market’s new highs baffles investors”. We find that reluctance to accept the equity market strength to be even more baffling, as the current macro backdrop is a perfect “sweet spot” for risk assets to do well.  Global economic momentum is bottoming out, with improving leading indicators suggesting better days lie ahead for growth.  A majority of central banks worldwide have eased monetary policy over the past several months, providing a more supportive liquidity backdrop for financial markets.  The world’s most important central bank, the Federal Reserve, has delivered a cumulative -75bps of rate cuts since July, helping to cool off the US dollar, which is now flat on a year-over-year basis in trade-weighted terms (Chart Of The Week).  A softening dollar is also often a signal that global growth is improving, as it indicates a shift in capital flows into more economically-sensitive non-U.S. markets like Europe and EM.  Thus, a weaker greenback combined with better global growth prospects should help lift global bond yields by raising depressed inflation expectations (middle panel).  The “sweet spot” of accelerating growth and easy money will support the continued outperformance of global equities and credit over government bonds, in an environment of gently rising bond yields. Yet with policymakers worldwide still playing the stimulus game, fearful of persistent negative impacts on growth from the U.S.-China trade dispute and other political uncertainties, it will take a large and sustained increase in inflation expectations before there is any shift to a more hawkish global policy bias.  This is critical for bond markets, as a much bigger move higher in global bond yields would require not just a pricing out of rate cut expectations, but the pricing in of future rate hikes. Such a repricing will not occur before there is clear evidence that global growth, broadly speaking, is accelerating for a sustained period and not just stabilizing in a few countries. The earliest we can envision such a hawkish shift for global monetary policy would be late in 2020, led by the Fed signaling a removal of some of the “insurance” rate cuts of 2019.  Until that happens, the “sweet spot” of accelerating growth and easy money will support the continued outperformance of global equities and credit over government bonds, in an environment of gently rising bond yields. The Art Of Analyzing Economic Data At Turning Points Typically, at turning points in the global growth cycle, there are always data available to support the arguments of both optimists and pessimists. That is certainly the case today, where so-called “hard” economic data that is reported with a lag (i.e. exports, durable goods orders) remains weak, but leading indicators are starting to improve. For example, the global manufacturing PMI data for October released last week shows the following (Chart 2): strong pickup in China, with the Caixin manufacturing PMI now up to 51.7; slight improvement in the US ISM manufacturing index, which rose from 47.8 to 48.3 in the month but remains below the 50 boom/bust line; bounce in the U.K. Markit manufacturing PMI index, rising from 48.3 to 49.6; the slightest of increases in the overall euro area Markit manufacturing PMI, from 45.7 to 45.9, still below the 50 line but showing marginal improvement in the critical German PMI; Continued weakness in the Japanese Markit manufacturing PMI, which fell to 48.4. The relative message from the PMIs fits with the signals sent from the OECD leading economic indicators (LEI) for those same countries, with the China LEI strengthening the most and the LEIs in Europe and Japan still struggling. The US is a mixed bag, with the ISM ticking up but the LEI languishing. There is, however, a sign of optimism in the export sub-index of the ISM manufacturing data. That measure surged nine points in October from 41.0 to 50.4, signaling a potential bottoming of the overall ISM index within the next three months (Chart 3).  While the ISM exports index is volatile, the modest improvement seen in the export order series from the China manufacturing PMI over the past few months (bottom panel) suggests that there may be a more significant improvement in global trade activity brewing – as signaled by the improvement in our global LEI index. Another possible explanation for the reduction in U.S. capital spending is slowing growth in corporate profits, which is related to a number of factors beyond the impact of tariffs and the trade war. Chart 2Global PMIs Are A Mixed Bag Chart 3Momentum Turning For The Trade Warriors? Bottom Line: Global growth momentum is bottoming out, leading indicators are improving, inflation is subdued, and central bankers are biased to maintain accommodative monetary policies. This is a bullish “sweet spot” for financial markets, suggesting further upside for global risk assets like equities and corporate credit, especially relative to government bonds. US Capital Spending Slowdown:  Only A Cautious Pause Chart 4Rising Uncertainty? Or Just Slowing Profit Growth? For growth pessimists in the US, a modest boost to “soft” data like the ISM does not allay their concerns about a broadening US economic slowdown. The trade war with China and the global manufacturing recession have had a clear negative impact on business confidence when looking at measures like the Conference Board CEO survey.  At the same time, US capital spending has contracted in real terms during the 2nd and 3rd quarter of 2019.  A logical inference would be to say that uncertainty over the trade war has led to a reduction in capex. Another possible explanation for the reduction in U.S. capital spending is slowing growth in corporate profits, which is related to a number of factors beyond the impact of tariffs and the trade war. Like the fading impact of the 2018 U.S. corporate tax cuts (that helped trigger a surge in after-tax earnings growth) and the squeeze on profit margins from higher labor costs. On a year-over-year basis, US profit growth has slowed from nearly 25% in 2018 to 1.8% in the 3rd quarter (a projection based on the 76% of S&P 500 companies that have already reported).  The real non-residential investment spending category from the US GDP accounts has slowed alongside profits, from 6.8% to 1.3% on a year-over-year basis (Chart 4). At the same time, annual growth in US non-farm payrolls has slowed only modestly from 1.91% to 1.4%, with average hourly earnings growth falling from a 2019 peak of 3.4% to 3.0% in October. Given the tightness of the US labor market, with firms continuing to report difficulties in finding quality labor, it should come as no surprise that employment and wages have not slowed as much as capital spending, despite the sharp downturn in profit growth.  Businesses that see their earnings getting squeezed will seek to protect profits by cutting back on investment and hiring activity. With a tight labor market, however, cutting capital spending is an easier and less costly decision than laying off workers, as it may be even harder to re-hire those employees if the economy starts to improve once again. With the US Treasury curve no longer inverted, after -75bps of Fed rate cuts and with longer-dated Treasury yields starting to increase, the US economy is stepping back from the recessionary abyss that worried investors during the summer. That can also be seen when breaking down the US non-residential investment data into its broad sub-components (Chart 5).  On a contribution-to-growth basis, the only part of US investment spending that is outright contracting year-over-year is Structures. There is still modest positive annual growth in Equipment investment, although that did contract on a quarter-on-quarter basis in Q3/2019. The Intellectual Property Products category (which includes Software, in addition to Research & Development) continues to expand at a steady pace. Chart 5Slowing US Capex Focused On Structures Chart 6The Fed Has Dis-Inverted The UST Curve So similar to signals from global PMIs and LEIs, the U.S. capital spending and employment data are sending a mixed message about U.S. growth. Yes, capital spending has slowed but the bulk of the deceleration has come in the component where canceling or delaying investment plans is easiest – buildings and construction. It is not necessarily an indication that a deeper economic downturn is unfolding. Similar cutbacks in Structures investment, without a broader decline in overall capital spending, occurred in 2013 and 2015/16.  During the past two U.S. recessions in 2001 and 2008, however, all categories of capital spending contracted. If we look at the breakdown of the contribution to US investment spending today, the backdrop looks more like those non-recessionary years. With the US Treasury curve no longer inverted, after -75bps of Fed rate cuts and with longer-dated Treasury yields starting to increase, the US economy is stepping back from the recessionary abyss that worried investors during the summer (Chart 6).  The trade détente between the US and China will help boost depressed business confidence, especially with global growth already showing signs of bottoming out. This, along with a softer US dollar and some easing of wage pressures, will help put a floor underneath US corporate profit growth. Treasury yields have more upside from here, as markets are still priced for -25bps of Fed rate cuts over the next year that is unlikely to happen if the US economy rebounds, as we expect.  Bottom Line:  The overall US economy is weathering the storm from the global manufacturing slump, which is showing signs of bottoming out.  Stay below-benchmark on US Treasury duration, with an initial yield target of 2.25% for the benchmark 10-year. The Bank Of Canada’s Newfound Caution Is Unwarranted Chart 7Canada Is A High-Beta Bond Market The Bank of Canada (BoC) has been one of the few central banks to resist the shift towards easier global monetary policy in 2019.  This has resulted in Canadian government bonds trading at relatively wide yield spreads to other countries in the developed world, even as global growth has slowed in 2019 (Chart 7).  With global growth now set to improve over the next 6-12 months, Canada’s historic status as a “high yield beta” bond market during periods of rising global yields suggests that Canadian government bonds should underperform in 2020. However, in the press conference following last week’s policy meeting, BoC Governor Stephen Poloz noted that the BoC was “mindful that the resilience of Canada’s economy will be increasingly tested as trade conflicts and uncertainty persist.” Poloz even revealed that an “insurance” rate cut was discussed at the policy meeting, although the BoC Governing Council decided against it.  This is similar language to that parroted by the more dovish global central bankers over the past several months, raising the risk that Canada could be a lower-beta bond market if the Canadian economy falters. That outcome seems unlikely, given the indications of improving growth momentum, occurring alongside tight labor markets and stable inflation: The RBC/Markit Canadian manufacturing PMI has climbed from a trough of 49 in May to 51 in October, indicating that real GDP growth accelerated in Q3 (Chart 8, top panel); The BoC’s Autumn 2019 Business Outlook Survey (BoS) showed that an increasing share of firms are reporting labor shortages, coinciding with a sharp pickup in the annual growth rate of average weekly earnings to just over 4% (middle panel); Core inflation measures remain right at the midpoint of the BoC’s 1-3% target range, although breakeven inflation rates from Canadian Real Return Bonds remain closer to the bottom end of that range (bottom panel); After a long period of adjustment, house prices and housing activity are showing some signs of recovery in response to easier financial conditions, rising household incomes and improved affordability (Chart 9); Chart 8Resilience In Canadian Growth & Inflation Chart 9Canadian Housing Showing Improvement Canadian investment spending is set to pick up, as the Autumn 2019 BoS reported a modest improvement in overall business sentiment and an increase in capital spending plans with a growing number of firms facing capacity pressures (Chart 10). Our bias is to downgrade Canadian government bonds to underweight heading into 2020, as we expect a return to their typical high-beta status during a period of accelerating global growth and rising bond yields. Chart 10Signs Of Life For Canadian Capex? Looking forward, reduced U.S.-China trade tensions should provide a boost to Canadian capex. Firms that had previously held off in the past few months due to the slowdown in the economy, caused partially by worries over global trade, will start to invest again. The BoC’s updated forecasts in the latest Monetary Policy Report released last week showed that the central bank expects Canadian exports to resume their expansion in 2020 – despite Governor Poloz’s stated concerns over global growth. Oil and gas exports are expected to improve as pipeline and rail capacity gradually expand, while consumer goods excluding automobiles should remain strong. Improvement in Chinese economic activity would provide a meaningful lift to Canadian exports, as Chinese imports from Canada are still contracting at a double-digit rate (Chart 11).  More importantly, Canadian exports to the country’s largest trade partner, the US, have already stabilized and should accelerate as the US economy gains momentum in the next 6-12 months. As Governor Poloz mentioned during the press conference, the BoC's decisions are not going to be directly influenced by political events such as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s recent re-election. Yet the odds of Canadian fiscal stimulus have shot up after Trudeau could only secure a minority government in the Canadian Parliament. Any fiscal stimulus is starting from a healthier place with the budget deficit currently at only -1% of GDP and the net government debt-to-GDP ratio falling towards a low 40% level (Chart 12).  Expected fiscal stimulus will provide an incremental boost to Canadian growth in 2020. Chart 11The Global Trade Slump Has Hurt Canada Chart 12Canada Can Afford A Fiscal Stimulus Net-net, the Canadian economy appears to be in good shape, with momentum starting to improve.  Inflation remains close to the BoC target, with rising pressures stemming from a tight labor market. This is not a backdrop that would be conducive to an “insurance” rate cut in December or even in early 2020.  Only -18bps of rate cuts over the next twelve months are discounted in the Canadian Overnight Index Swap (OIS) curve. Yet there is only a 16% chance of a -25bp cut expected at the December 2019 meeting, according to Bloomberg.  In other words, the markets are not taking the threat of a BoC rate cut seriously – a view that we agree with. Chart 13Stay Neutral On Canadian Government Bonds We suspect that Governor Poloz’s comments about a potential BoC policy ease were more designed to take some steam out of the strengthening Canadian dollar (Chart 13), which was threatening a major breakout going into last week’s BoC meeting.  We would be surprised if a rate cut was delivered at the December 2019 BoC meeting, but the dovish message sent last week does raise the possibility that the BoC could shock us. For now, we are choosing to stick with our neutral recommendation on Canadian government bonds, but we will re-evaluate after the December 4 BoC meeting. Our bias is to downgrade Canadian government bonds to underweight heading into 2020, as we expect a return to their typical high-beta status during a period of accelerating global growth and rising bond yields. Bottom Line: The Bank of Canada is hinting that “insurance” rate cuts may be needed, but with the Canadian economy and inflation both remaining resilient, the central bank is more likely to keep rates steady until global growth improves.  Stay neutral on Canadian government bonds, for now, but prepare to move to underweight in early 2020. A Brief Follow Up To Our US MBS Versus IG Corporates Recommendation Chart 14Spread Targets Reached - Downgrade US IG To Neutral In last week’s report, we made the case for raising allocations to US Agency MBS while reducing exposure to higher-quality US investment grade (IG) corporate credit.1 We implemented the trade in our model bond portfolio, lowering our recommended allocation to US IG and increasing the weighting to US Agency MBS.  We now see a case for shifting to a formal strategic recommendation, upgrading US Agency MBS to overweight (a ranking of 4 out of 5 in the tables on page 14) and downgrading US IG to neutral (3 out of 5).  The rationale for the shift is based on valuation. Our colleagues at BCA Research US Bond Strategy calculate spread targets for each credit tier within US IG (Aaa, Aa, A and Baa). The targets are determined using a methodology that ranks the option-adjusted spread (OAS) of the Bloomberg Barclays index for each credit tier relative to its history, while controlling for the “phase” of the economic cycle as determined by the slope of the US Treasury yield curve.2 The latest rally in IG has driven the OAS for all tiers below those targets, with the Baa tier looking less expensive than the others (Chart 14).  As a result, we now advise only a neutral allocation to US IG corporates, with a preference for the Baa credit tier. Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com Ray Park, CFA Research Analyst ray@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1Please see BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy Weekly Report, “Big Mo(mentum) Is Turning Positive”, dated Oct 29, 2019, available at gfis.bcaresearch.com 2For details on how those spread targets are determined, please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “The Value In Corporate Bonds”, dated February 19, 2019, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com Recommendations The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index Duration Regional Allocation Spread Product Tactical Trades Yields & Returns Global Bond Yields Historical Returns

Underweight The S&P semi equipment index has made the headlines reaching fresh cycle-highs. While bulls would buy this breakout, we are sticking our heads out and recommend selling the strength and warn that the S&P semi equipment cycle-high looks like a mania (please refer to Chart 8 from this Monday’s Weekly Report). Deflating DRAM prices, which also serve as our industry’s pricing power proxy, highlight that demand remains deficient both for semis and semi equipment. Historically, the sector’s relative profit expectations and pricing power have moved in lockstep and the current message is to fade sell-side analysts’ buoyancy (bottom panel). Moreover, the plunge in overall tech capex growth (especially excluding software) further dims an already bleak semi equipment profit outlook. Bottom Line: This week we downgraded the S&P semi equipment index to underweight, but given the industry’s volatility we also set a 10% stop loss. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG – S5SEEQ – AMAT, LRCX, KLAC. For additional details, please refer to this Monday’s Weekly Report.