Economic Growth

Special Report

Executive Summary Autocracy Hurts Productivity Over the next six-to-18 months, the Xi Jinping administration will “let 100 flowers bloom” – i.e., relax a range of government policies to secure China’s economic recovery from the pandemic. The first signs of this policy are already apparent via monetary and fiscal easing and looser regulation of Big Tech. However, investors should treat any risk-on rally in Chinese stocks with skepticism over the long run. Political risk and policy uncertainty will remain high until after Xi consolidates power this fall. Xi is highly likely to remain in office but uncertainty over other personnel – and future national policy – will be substantial. Next year China’s policy trajectory will become clearer. But global investors should avoid mistaking temporary improvements for a change of Xi’s strategy or China’s grand strategy. Beijing is driven by instability and insecurity to challenge the US-led world order. The result will be continued economic divorce and potentially military conflicts in the coming decade. Russia’s reversion to autocracy led to falling productivity and poor equity returns. China is also reverting to autocratic government as a solution to its domestic challenges. Western investors should limit long-term exposure to China and prefer markets that benefit from China’s recovery, such as in Southeast Asia and Latin America. Bottom Line: The geopolitical risk premium in Chinese equities will stay high in 2022, fall in 2023, but then rise again as global investors learn that China in the Xi Jinping era is fundamentally unstable and insecure. Feature Chart 1Market Cheers China's Hints At Policy Easing In 1957, after nearly a decade at the helm of the People’s Republic of China, Chairman Mao Zedong initiated the “Hundred Flowers Campaign.” The campaign allowed a degree of political freedom to try to encourage new ideas and debate among China’s intellectuals. The country’s innovative forces had suffered from decades of foreign invasion, civil war, and repression. Within three years, Mao reversed course, reimposed ideological discipline, and punished those who had criticized the party.  It turned out that the new communist regime could not maintain political control while allowing liberalization in the social and economic spheres.1 This episode is useful to bear in mind in 2022 as General Secretary Xi Jinping restores autocratic government in China. In the coming year, Xi will ease a range of policies to promote economic growth and innovation. Already his administration is relaxing some regulatory pressure on Big Tech. Global financial markets are cheering this apparent policy improvement (Chart 1). In effect, Xi is preparing to let 100 flowers bloom. However, China’s economic trajectory remains gloomy over the long run – not least because the US and China lack a strategic basis for re-engagement. Chinese Leaders Fear Foreign Encroachments Mao’s predicament was not only one of ideology and historical circumstance. It was also one of China’s geopolitics. Chinese governments have always struggled to establish domestic control, extend that control over far-flung buffer territories, and impose limits on foreign encroachments. Mao reversed his brief attempt at liberalization because he could not feel secure in his person or his regime. In 1959, the Chinese economy remained backward. The state faced challenges in administration and in buffer spaces like Tibet and Taiwan. The American military loomed large, despite the stalemate and ceasefire on the Korean peninsula in 1952. Russia was turning against Stalinism, while Hungary was revolting against the Soviet Union. Mao feared that the free exchange of ideas would do more to undermine national unity than it would to promote industrialization and technological progress. The 100 flowers that bloomed – intellectuals criticizing government policy – revealed themselves to be insufficiently loyal. They could be culled, strengthening the regime. However, what followed was a failed economic program and nationwide famine. Fast forward to today, when circumstances have changed but the Chinese state faces the same geopolitical insecurities. Xi Jinping, like all Chinese rulers, is struggling to maintain domestic stability and territorial integrity while regulating foreign influence. Although the People’s Republic is not as vulnerable as it was in Mao’s time, it is increasingly vulnerable – namely, to a historic downshift in potential economic growth and a rise in international tensions (Chart 2). The Xi administration has repeatedly shown that it views the US alliance system, US-led global monetary and financial system, and western liberal ideology as threats that need to be counteracted. Chart 2China: Less Stable, Less Secure In addition, Russia’s difficulties invading Ukraine suggest that China faces an enormous challenge in attempting to carve out its own sphere of influence without shattering its economic stability. Hence Beijing needs to slow the pace of confrontation with the West while pursuing the same strategic aims. Xi Stays, But Policy Uncertainty Still High In 2022  2022 is a critical political juncture for China. Xi was supposed to step down and hand the baton to a successor chosen by his predecessor Hu Jintao. Instead he has spent the past decade arranging to remain in power until at least 2032. He took a big stride toward this goal at the nineteenth national party congress in 2017, when he assumed the title of “core leader” of the Communist Party and removed term limits from its constitution. This year’s Omicron outbreak and abrupt economic slowdown have raised speculation about whether Xi’s position is secure. Some of this speculation is wild – but China is far less stable than it appears. Structurally, inequality is high, social mobility is low, and growth is slowing, forcing the new middle class to compromise its aspirations. Cyclically, unemployment is rising and the Misery Index is higher than it appears if one focuses on youth employment and fuel inflation (Chart 3). The risk of sociopolitical upheaval is underrated among global investors. Chart 3AStructurally China Is Vulnerable To Social Unrest Chart 3BCyclically China Is Vulnerable To Social Unrest Yet even assuming that social unrest and political dissent flare up, Xi is highly likely to clinch another five-to-ten years in power. Consider the following points: The top leaders control personnel decisions. The national party congress is often called an “election,” but that is a misnomer. The Communist Party’s top posts will be ratified, not elected. The Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee select the members of the Central Committee; the national party congress convenes to ratify these new members. The Central Committee then ratifies the line-up of the new Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee, which is orchestrated by Xi along with the existing Politburo Standing Committee (Diagram 1). Xi is the most important figure in deciding the new leadership. Diagram 1Mechanics Of The Chinese Communist Party’s National Congress There is no history of surprise votes. The party congress ratifies approximately 90% of the candidates put forward. Outcomes closely conform to predictions of external analysts, meaning that the leadership selection is not a spontaneous, grassroots process but rather a mechanical, elite-driven process with minimal influence from low-level party members, not to mention the population at large.2  The party and state control the levers of power: The Communist Party has control over the military, state bureaucracy, and “commanding heights” of the economy. This includes domestic security forces, energy, communications, transportation, and the financial system. Whoever controls the Communist Party and central government exerts heavy influence over provincial governments and non-government institutions. The state bureaucracy is not in a position to oppose the party leadership. Xi has conducted a decade-long political purge (“anti-corruption campaign”). Upon coming to power in 2012, Xi initiated a neo-Maoist campaign to re-centralize power in his own person, in the Communist Party, and in the central government. He has purged foreign influence along with rivals in the party, state, military, business, civil society, and Big Tech. He personally controls the military, the police, the paramilitary forces, the intelligence and security agencies, and the top Communist Party organs. There may be opposition but it is not organized or capable. Chart 4China: Big Tech Gets Relief ... For Now There are no serious alternatives to Xi’s leadership. Xi is widely recognized within China as the “core” of the fifth generation of Chinese leaders. The other leaders and their factions have been repressed. Xi imprisoned his top rivals, Bo Xilai and Zhou Yongkang, a decade ago. He has since neutralized their followers and the factions of previous leaders Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin. Premier Li Keqiang has never exercised any influence and will retire at the end of this year. None of the ousted figures have reemerged to challenge Xi, but potential rivals have been imprisoned or disciplined, as have prominent figures that pose no direct political threat, such as tech entrepreneur Jack Ma (Chart 4).  Additional high-level sackings are likely before the party congress. China’s reversion to autocracy grew from Communist Party elites, not Xi alone. China’s slowing potential GDP growth and changing economic model raise an existential threat to the Communist Party over the long run. The party recognized its potential loss of legitimacy back in 2012, the year Xi was slated to take the helm. The solution was to concentrate power in the center, promoting Maoist nostalgia and strongman rule. In essence, the party needed a new Mao; Xi was all too willing to play the part. Hence Xi’s current position does not rest on his personal maneuvers alone. The party has invested heavily in Xi and will continue to do so. Characteristics of the political elite underpin the autocratic shift. Statistics on the evolving character traits of Politburo members show the trend toward leaders that are more rural, more bureaucratic, and more ideologically orthodox, i.e. more nationalist and communist (Chart 5). This trend underpins the party’s behavior and Xi’s personal rule. Chart 5China: From Technocracy To Autocracy Chart 6China: De-Industrialization Undermines Stability Xi has guarded his left flank. By cornering the hard left of the political spectrum Xi has positioned himself as the champion of poor people, workers, farmers, soldiers, and common folk. This is the political base of the Communist Party, as opposed to the rich coastal elites and westernizing capitalists, who stand to suffer from Xi’s policies. Ultimately de-industrialization – e.g. the sharp decline in manufacturing and construction sectors (Chart 6) – poses a major challenge to this narrative. But social unrest will be repressed and will not overturn Xi or the regime anytime soon. Xi still retains political capital. After centuries of instability, Chinese households are averse to upheaval, civil war, and chaos. They support the current regime because it has stabilized China and made it prosperous. Of course, relative to the Hu Jintao era, Xi’s policies have produced slower growth and productivity and a tarnished international image (Chart 7). But they have not yet led to massive instability that would alienate the people in general. If Chinese citizens look abroad, they see that Xi has already outlasted US Presidents Obama and Trump, is likely to outlast Biden, and that US politics are in turmoil. The same goes for Europe, Japan, and Russia – Xi’s leadership does not suffer by comparison.  Chart 7China’s Declining International Image External actors are neither willing nor able to topple Xi. Any outside attempt to interfere with China’s leadership or political system would be unwarranted and would provoke an aggressive response. The US is internally divided and has not developed a consistent China policy. This year the Biden administration has its hands full with midterm elections, Russia, and Iran, where it must also accept the current leadership as a fact of life. It has no ability to prevent Xi’s power consolidation, though it will impose punitive economic measures. Japan and other US allies have an interest in undermining Xi’s administration, but they follow the US’s lead in foreign policy. They also lack influence over the political rotation within the Communist Party. The Europeans will keep their distance but will not try to antagonize China given their more pressing conflict with Russia. Russia needs China more than ever and will lend material support in the form of cheaper and more secure natural resources. North Korean and Iranian nuclear provocations will help Xi stay under the radar.  There is no reason to expect a new leader to take over in China. The Xi administration’s strategy, revealed over the past ten years, will remain intact for another five-to-ten years at least. The real question at the party congress is whether Xi will be forced to name a successor or compromise with the opposing faction on the personnel of the Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee. But even that remains to be seen – and either way he will remain the paramount leader. Bottom Line: Xi Jinping has the political capability to cement another five-to-ten years in power. Opposing factions have been weakened over the past decade by Xi’s domestic political purge and clash with the United States. China is ripe for social unrest and political dissent but these will be repressed as China goes further down the path of autocracy. Foreign powers have little influence over the process. Policy Uncertainty Falls In 2023 … Only To Rise Again What will Xi Jinping do once he consolidates power? Xi’s administration has weighed heavily on China’s economy, foreign relations, and financial markets. The situation has worsened dramatically this year as the economy struggles with “A Trifecta Of Economic Woes” – namely a rampant pandemic, waning demand for exports, and a faltering housing market (Chart 8). In response the administration is now easing a range of policies to stabilize expectations and try to meet the 5.5% annual growth target. The money impulse, and potentially the credit impulse, is turning less negative, heralding an eventual upturn in industrial activity and import volumes in 2023. These measures will give a boost to Chinese and global growth, although stimulus measures are losing effectiveness over time (Chart 9).  Chart 8China's Trifecta Of Economic Woes Chart 9More Stimulus, But Less Effectiveness This pro-growth policy pivot will continue through the year and into next year. After all, if Xi is going to stay in power, he does not want to bequeath himself a financial crisis or recession at the start of his third term. Still, investors should treat any rally in Chinese equity markets with skepticism. First, political risk and uncertainty will remain elevated until Xi completes his power grab, as China is highly susceptible to surprises and negative political incidents this year (Chart 10). For example, if social unrest emerges and is repressed, then the West will impose sanctions. If China increases its support of Russia, Iran, or North Korea, then the US will impose sanctions.     Chart 10China: Policy Uncertainty And Geopolitical Risk To Stay High In 2022, Might Improve In 2023 Chart 11China Needs To Court Europe The regime will be extremely vigilant and overreact to any threats this year, real or perceived. Political objectives will remain paramount, above the economy and financial markets, and that means new economic policy initiatives will not be reliable. Investors cannot be confident about the country’s policy direction until the leadership rotation is complete and new policy guidance is revealed, particularly in December 2022 and March 2023. Second, after consolidating power, investors should interpret Xi’s policy shift as “letting 100 flowers bloom,” i.e., a temporary relaxation that aims to reboot the economy but does not change the country’s long-term policy trajectory. Economic reopening is inevitable after the pandemic response is downgraded – which is a political determination. Xi will also be forced to reduce foreign tensions for the sake of the economy, particularly by courting Europe, which is three times larger than Russia as a market (Chart 11). However, China’s declining labor force and high debt levels prevent its periodic credit stimulus from generating as much economic output as in the past. And the administration will not ultimately pursue liberal structural reforms and a more open economy. That is the path toward foreign encroachment – and regime insecurity. The US’s sanctions on Russia have shown the consequences of deep dependency on the West. China will continue diversifying away from the US. And, as we will see, the US cannot provide credible promises that it will reduce tensions. US-China: Re-Engagement Will Fail The Biden administration is focused on fighting inflation ahead of the midterm elections. But its confrontation with Russia – and likely failure to freeze Iran’s nuclear program – increases rather than decreases oil supply constraints. Hence some administration officials and outside observers argue that the administration should pursue a strategic re-engagement with China.3  Theoretically a US-China détente would buy both countries time to deal with their domestic politics by providing some international stability. Improved US-China relations could also isolate Russia and hasten a resolution to the war in Ukraine, potentially reducing commodity price pressures. In essence, a US-China détente would reprise President Richard Nixon’s outreach to China in 1972, benefiting both countries at the expense of Russia.4  This kind of Kissinger 2.0 maneuver could happen but there are good reasons to think it will not, or if it does that it will fall apart in one or two years. In 1972, China had nowhere near the capacity to deny the US access to the Asia Pacific region, expel US influence from neighboring countries, reconquer Taiwan, or project power elsewhere. Today, China is increasingly gaining these abilities. In fact it is the only power in the world capable of rivaling the US in both economic and military terms over the long run (Chart 12). Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently outlined the Biden administration’s China policy and declared that China poses “the most serious long-term challenge” to the US despite Russian aggression.5  Chart 12US-China Competition Sows Distrust, Drives Economic Divorce While another decade of US engagement with China would benefit the US economy, it would be far more beneficial to China. Crucially, it would be beneficial in a strategic sense, not just an economic one. It could provide just the room for maneuver that China needs – at this critical juncture in its development – to achieve technological and productivity breakthroughs and escape the middle-income trap. Another ten-year reprieve from direct American competition would set China up to challenge the US on the global stage. That would be far too high of a strategic price for America to pay for a ceasefire in Ukraine. Ukraine has limited strategic value for the US and it does not steer US grand strategy, which aims to prevent regional empires from taking shape. In fact Washington is deliberately escalating and prolonging the war in Ukraine to drain Russia’s resources. Ending the war would do Russia a strategic favor, while re-engaging with China would do China a strategic favor. So why would the defense and intelligence community advise the Biden administration to pursue Kissinger 2.0? Chart 13US Unlikely To Revoke Trump Tariffs Biden could still pursue some degree of détente with China, namely by repealing President Trump’s trade tariffs, in order to relieve price pressures ahead of the midterm election. Yet even here the case is deeply flawed. Trump’s tariffs on China did not trigger the current inflationary bout. That was the combined Trump-Biden fiscal stimulus and Covid-era supply constraints. US import prices are rising faster from the rest of the world than they are from China (Chart 13). Tariff relief would not change China’s Zero Covid policy, which is the current driver of price spikes from China. And while lifting tariffs on China would not reduce inflation enough to attract voters, it would cost Biden some political credit among voters in swing states like Pennsylvania, and across the US, where China’s image has plummeted in the wake of Covid-19 (Chart 14).   Chart 14US Political Consensus Remains Hawkish On China If Biden did pursue détente, would China be able to reciprocate and offer trade concessions? Xi has the authority to do so but he is unlikely to make major trade concessions prior to the party congress. Economic self-sufficiency and resistance to American pressure have become pillars of his support. Promises will not ease inflation for US voters in November and Xi has no incentive to make binding concessions because the next US administration could intensify the trade war regardless.  Bottom Line: The US has no long-term interest, and a limited short-term interest, in easing pressure on China’s economy. Continued US pressure, combined with China’s internal difficulties, will reinforce Xi Jinping’s shift toward nationalism and hawkish foreign policy. Hence there is little basis for a substantial US-China re-engagement that improves the global macroeconomic environment over the coming years. Investment Takeaways Chart 15Autocracy Hurts Productivity Xi Jinping will clinch another five-to-ten years in power this fall. To stabilize the economy, he will “let 100 flowers bloom” and ease monetary, fiscal, regulatory, and social policy at home. He will also court the West, especially Europe, for the sake of economic growth. However, he will not go so far as to compromise his ultimate aims: self-sufficiency at home and a sphere of influence abroad. The result will be a relapse into conflict with the West within a year or two. Ultimately a closed Chinese economy in conflict with the West will result in lower productivity, a weaker currency, a high geopolitical risk premium, and low equity returns – just as it did for Russia (Chart 15). Any short-term improvement in China’s low equity multiples will ultimately be capped. Over the long run, western investors should hedge against Chinese geopolitical risk by preferring markets that benefit from China’s periodic stimulus yet do not suffer from the break-up of the US-China and EU-Russia economic relationships, such as key markets in Latin America and Southeast Asia (Charts 16 & 17). Chart 16China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For … Latin America Chart 17China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For … Southeast Asia     Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1     Modern scholarship has shown that Mao intended to entrap the opposition through the 100 Flowers Campaign. For a harrowing account of this episode, see Jung Chang and Jon Halliday, Mao: The Unknown Story (New York: Anchor Books, 2006), pp. 409-17. 2     “At least 8% of CPC Central Committee nominees voted off,” Xinhua, October 24, 2017, english.www.gov.cn. 3    Christopher Condon, “Yellen Says Biden Team Is Looking To ‘Reconfigure’ China Tariffs,” June 8, 2022, www.bloomberg.com. 4       Niall Ferguson, “Dust Off That Dirty Word Détente And Engage With China,” Bloomberg, June 5, 2022, www.bloomberg.com. 5    See Antony J Blinken, Secretary of State, “The Administration’s Approach to the People’s Republic of China,” George Washington University, Washington D.C., May 26, 2022, state.gov. Additionally, see President Joe Biden’s third assertion of US willingness to defend Taiwan against China, in a joint press conference with Japan’s Prime Minister Kishida Fumio, “Remarks by President Biden and Prime Minister Kishida Fumio of Japan in Joint Press Conference,” Akasaka Palace, Tokyo, Japan, May 23, 2022, whitehouse.gov.

Listen to a short summary of this report.     Executive Summary Sentiment On Sterling Is Depressed The pound will suffer in the short term, setting the stage for a coiled-spring rebound. Cable is extremely cheap by most measures (Feature chart). The BoE could engineer a soft landing in the UK economy. If successful, it will annihilate sterling vigilantes, in a volte-face of the ERM crisis. We are cognizant of near-term risks. As such, we are long EUR/GBP with a target of 0.90, but will be buyers of cable at 1.20. Ultimately, the pound is undervalued on a longer-term basis. GBP/USD should touch 1.36 over the next 12-18 months. RECOMMENDATIONS INCEPTION LEVEL inception date RETURN long eur/gbp 0.846 2021-10-15 0.27 Bottom Line: The pound will likely face pressure in the near term, but will fare well over a cyclical horizon. Our 12-month target is 1.36. This target is based on a modest reversion towards PPP fair value, and some erosion in the “crisis” discount. Admittedly, sentiment on the pound is very depressed, and we could be wrong in our near-term assessment and cable has indeed bottomed. Feature Chart 1A Play On Cable Downside There has been much discussion around the premise that the pound could enter a capitulation phase, akin to an emerging market-style currency crisis. With inflation sitting at 9%, well above the Bank of England’s 2% target, the narrative is that interest rates need to rise substantially but will, at the same time, kill any recovery. The result will be a sharp fall in the pound. We began to highlight the near-term risks to cable in October of last year, going long EUR/GBP in the process, as a way to play sterling downside (Chart 1). That said, our longer-term view on the pound remained positive. In this report, we review what has changed since, and if a negative longer-term view is now warranted.   UK Balance Of Payments Almost all currency crises are rooted in a deterioration of the external balance, and this is certainly true for the UK. The trade deficit sits at 7.9% of GDP, the worst among G10 countries (Chart 2). As a result, the current account is also in deficit. That said, there are reasons for optimism. Related Report  Foreign Exchange StrategyAn Update On Sterling The Office for National Statistics (ONS) suggests that a change in methodology in January 2022 could be exarcebating the deterioration in the latest release of the trade balance. In our view, there are two key reasons why the UK’s balance of trade is worsening. The first is the oil shock – fuels constitute 11% of UK imports. Second, unprecedented fiscal stimulus led to an overshoot in goods imports. These negative forces are likely cyclical in nature, rather than structural. It is also noteworthy that most of the goods imported into the UK are machinery and transport equipment, which could go a long way in improving its productive capacity (Chart 3). Chart 2The UK Trade Balance Has Deteriorated Chart 3Goods Imports Have Been A Hit To The UK Trade Balance In parallel, there has been a structural improvement in the UK’s current account balance. This has mostly been driven by a rising primary income balance. In short, investments abroad are earning more, relative to domestic liabilities (Chart 4). The UK runs a large negative international investment position. Despite this, it has maintained the ability to issue debt bought by foreigners, while investing in high-return assets abroad. Secondary income has admittedly been in a structural deficit, but a falloff in transfer payments under the Brexit agreement will significantly improve this balance (Chart 5). Chart 4The UK Current Account Is Improving Chart 5A Fall In Brexit Payments Will Mend Secondary Income Finally, the pound’s share of global foreign exchange turnover is 12.8%, just behind the dollar, euro, and yen. That said, London dwarfs New York, Hong Kong, and Tokyo as a hub for foreign exchange trading (Chart 6). The pound also very much remains among the most desirable global currencies. Global allocation of FX reserves in sterling have been rising over the last decade (Chart 7). It currently stand at 4.8%, higher than the RMB at 2.8%, and all other emerging market currencies combined. Chart 6London Remains An Important Financial Center Chart 7The Pound Is Still A Reserve Currency It is noteworthy to revisit the period the pound experienced an EM-style crisis – under the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM), when cable was effectively pegged to the German mark at an expensive level. At the time, UK inflation was running hot, while German inflation was more subdued. By importing monetary policy from the Bundesbank, the BoE was able to tame inflation, but at a high cost to growth. In Germany, the reunification boom warranted much higher interest rates, which was not appropriate for the UK . Cable eventually collapsed by 32.9% peak-to-trough, as the UK ran out of foreign currency reserves. Chart 8Cable Is Very Cheap There are three key differences between that episode and today: The pound is freely floating. Foreign exchange markets are extremely fluid and adjust to expectations quite quickly. A collapse in the pound seems unlikely, unless the UK faces a new large exogenous shock. Inflation is running hot in many countries, not just the UK. The pound is extremely cheap, and stimulative for the economy. On a real effective exchange rate basis, the pound is at record lows (Chart 8).     Will The BoE Make A Policy Mistake? Sterling is pricing in a policy mistake by the BoE. First, inflation is well above its 2% target. Second, the labor market has tightened significantly. The unemployment rate hit a 47-year low of 3.7%, and job vacancies are low, pushing wages higher. As such, either the BoE allows inflation expectations to become unmoored, destroying the purchasing power of the pound, or kills the recovery to maintain credibility (Chart 9). Chart 9The UK Labor Market Is Tight While difficult, there are reasons to believe the BoE can achieve a soft landing. According to an in-house study, only one-third of the rise in UK inflation has been driven by demand-side pull, with the balance related to supply factors.1 The latter have been the usual suspects – rising energy costs, supply shortages, and even legacies of the Brexit shock (Chart 10). UK electricity prices have cratered since the opening of the 1,400MW undersea cable with Norway (Chart 11). Chart 10Most Of The Increase To UK Prices Is Supply-Driven Chart 11A Sharp Drop In Electricity Prices Second, it is likely that the neutral rate of interest in the UK is lower in a post-Brexit, post-COVID-19 world. This is visible in trend productivity growth, but even the size of the labor force has shrunk significantly. The UK workforce is down by 560,000 people since the start of the pandemic. This has been partly due to less immigration and more retirees, but the vast majority has been due to health side-effects from the pandemic, and delays in getting adequate medical care. As a result, there has barely been a recovery in the UK participation rate (Chart 12). Chart 12AThe Participation Rate In The UK Is Below Trend Chart 12BA Low Participation Rate Across Many Regions In hindsight, a least-regrets strategy to policy tightening – lift rates faster now, and then back off if financial conditions tighten sufficiently – seems appropriate. Frontloading the pace of tightening will flatten the UK gilts curve further. With most borrowing costs in the UK tied to the longer end of the curve, refinancing costs might not edge up that much, while inflation expectations will be well contained. The real canaries in the coal mine from this strategy are the economies of Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, where household debt is much more elevated (Chart 13), and the percentage of variable rate mortgages  are higher. Chart 13Household Debt Is Not Alarming In The UK Larger fiscal stimulus will partially offset the near-term hit from tighter monetary policy. The additional £15 billion cost-of-living package announced last month is quite substantial at 0.7% of GDP. This gives the BoE breathing room to tighten policy in the near term. The redistributionist nature of the plan – taxing windfall profits from large energy companies, and using that to subsidize consumers most in need – could be what is required to achieve a soft landing, if the energy shock is temporary. Our Global Fixed Income colleagues upgraded UK gilts to overweight last month, on the basis that market pricing further out the SONIA curve was too aggressive. In our prior report on sterling, we also suggested that market expectations for interest rate increases may have overshot. Money markets are discounting a peak in the bank rate at 2.8%. The BoE’s new Market Participants survey suggests it will peak at 1.75%. While the BoE will deliver sufficient monetary tightening to lean against near-term inflationary pressures, it will be very wary to overdo it. This is especially true if the neutral rate in the economy is much lower. What Next For The Pound? Our view is that the pound faces near-term risks but is a buy longer term. There is an old adage that credibility is hard to earn, but easy to lose. For the UK in particular, this hits the mark. The Bank of England is the oldest central bank in the world, after the Riksbank. Yes, the BoE can make a policy mistake (as it has in the past), but treating the pound as an emerging market asset is a stretch (Chart 14). That said, our Chief European Strategist, Mathieu Savary, believes stagflation is not fully priced into UK assets. In the near term, he might be right. The UK’s large trade deficit puts the onus on foreigners to dictate movements in the pound. The pound does well when animal spirits are fervent. So far, markets have bid up a substantial safe-haven premium into the dollar (Chart 15). As a proxy, the pound has been sold. Northern Ireland could also return as a thorn in the side of sterling.  Chart 14The Pound Is A Risk-On Currency Cable And EM Stocks Chart 15The Dollar Has A Hefty Safe-Haven Premium From a bird’s eye view, three factors tend to drive currencies – the macroeconomic environment, valuation, and sentiment. For now, markets have latched on to the GBP’s vulnerability to an EM-style crisis. That said, cable is very cheap, even accounting for elevated UK inflation. Our in-house PPP model suggests the pound could appreciate by 4% per year, over the next 10 years, just to revert to fair value (Chart 16). Chart 16Cable Is Cheap Admittedly, the UK desperately needs an improvement in productivity growth for further currency gains. To encourage capital inflows that the pound depends on, the UK needs to be at the forefront of disruptive technologies such as electric cars, digital currencies, 3D printing, and even innovations in gene therapy. High finance and fashion will remain relevant for London, but the need for innovation is high.  Investment Conclusions Chart 17Sentiment On Sterling Is Depressed The pound will likely face pressure in the near term, but will fare well over a cyclical horizon. Our 12-month target is 1.36. This target is based on a modest reversion towards PPP fair value, and some erosion in the “crisis” discount. Admittedly, sentiment on the pound is very depressed, and we could be wrong in our near-term assessment if cable has indeed bottomed. Our intermediate-term timing model suggests that GBP is undervalued and has bottomed. Technical indicators also warn that cable is ripe for a fervent rebound (Chart 17). Particularly, our intermediate-term technical indicator is rebounding from oversold levels. The Aussie would outperform the pound in the long term, but AUD/GBP is vulnerable to a commodity relapse in the shorter term.   Housekeeping We were stopped out of our short EUR/JPY trade for a loss of -2.78%, as oil prices and bond yields rebounded. This trade is a hedge to our pro-cyclical portfolio, so we will look to reenter it at more attractive levels. We are also lowering the stop-loss on our short RUB trade. This is a speculative bet many clients will not be able to play, but we expect it to payoff over the longer term.   Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Michael Saunders, "The route back to 2% inflation," (Speech given at the Resolution Foundation), May 9, 2022.   Trades & Forecasts Strategic View Cyclical Holdings (6-18 months) Tactical Holdings (0-6 months) Limit Orders Forecast Summary

Executive Summary Equities Are Closer To Capitulation The market appears to be moving away from concerns about inflation toward worries about slowing growth. The initial stage of the sell-off in risky assets, pricing in tighter monetary policy, may now be complete. The next and final stage of the bear market will be pricing in a global growth slump. Slowing growth is not yet built into consensus expectations, neither for earnings nor GDP – downgrades and negative surprises are in store. The US consumers are under duress and are unlikely to lend a “spending hand” to support economic growth. Inflation is easing. Positive inflation surprises will ignite powerful rallies but are unlikely to alter the trajectory of monetary policy. The Fed “put” is no longer at play – falling equities will help the Fed tame inflation via the “wealth effect”. The next chapter for the market is down but in a “fat and flat” manner, with “growth disappointment” equity sell-off being punctuated by short-lived rallies on hopes that the Fed may change its course. Our updated Equities Capitulation Scorecard is marginally more positive on equities but is still signaling that not all conditions for a sustainable rebound are yet met.​​​​​​ Bottom Line: Repricing of tighter monetary policy is likely complete. The next leg down for equities will be pricing in slower economic growth and a potential earnings recession. We expect the market to be “fat and flat” over the next few months, i.e., alternating between pullbacks and short-lived rallies. Monetary Tightening Is Probably Priced In Until now, the sell-off in equity markets was a repricing of tighter monetary conditions. One may argue that most of the damage has been done: Since the beginning of the year, the NASDAQ is down 30% while the S&P is down 20%. Nearly 34% of stocks in the S&P 500, and 14% of stocks in the NASDAQ are trading below their 200-day moving average. Does this mean that the sell-off is over and that hawkish Fed fears are overdone? After all, over the past few days, Fed rate expectations appear to have topped out (Chart 1), and Treasury yields have come down 37 bps from their recent peak to 2.75% (Chart 2). Monetary conditions have tightened substantially year to date, although more tightening is still on the way (Chart 3). The Citi Inflation Surprise Index has turned decisively down (Chart 4) and some of the series most affected by supply chain bottlenecks, such as shipping costs, have been deflating. Chart 1Fed Rate Expectations Have Stabilized Chart 2Treasury Yield Has Come Down Chart 3Financial Conditions Are Getting Tighter Chart 4Inflation Is Starting To Surprise To The Downside Is it clear sailing for longer-duration assets like growth equities? Not so fast: While much adversity has been priced in, a sustainable rebound in equities is probably still elusive. Worries About Economic Growth Are Starting To Dominate The Market Narrative We posit that long-term rates have come down because the markets have moved on from worries about raging inflation and the hawkish Fed to concerns about a downshift in growth both in the US and globally. As such, both earnings and economic growth disappointments are on the cards, potentially leading the markets down further. Overall, the next phase of the sell-off in global risk assets will likely be characterized by heightened growth worries. This phase will also mark the final chapter of this bear market. Thunder Clouds On The Horizon During the J.P. Morgan Investor Day, Jamie Dimon, in his otherwise upbeat speech, said that there are “thunder clouds on the horizon.” Indeed, the list of investor concerns is long: A global growth slowdown, build-up of inventories, inflation damaging consumer purchasing power, the soaring costs of raw materials, declining corporate profitability, tightening monetary conditions and, to top it all, a stronger dollar. However, from Dimon’s standpoint, these are just that: Clouds that could dissipate at any time. Of course, there is always a chance that things will turn out better than expected, and a “softish landing” is on the cards. We hope Dimon is right… Economic Growth Surprises To The Downside For now, our working assumption is that the economy is still strong, but growth is decelerating. To us, this is a story about the second derivative. The troubling part is that slowing growth is not yet built into consensus expectations: It is confounding that GDP growth forecasts have still barely budged from the beginning of the year and do not yet reflect all the headwinds listed above (Chart 5). Moreover, the Q1-2022 GDP revision has shown that growth was weaker than initially reported, with the latest reading of -1.5%, growth reduced by investments weaker than initially anticipated.  The Atlanta Fed Nowcast GDP tracker points to only 1.8% annualized growth in Q2-2022. Elevated expectations are setting investors up for disappointment, which will lead to the next leg of the sell-off. The Citigroup Economic Surprise Index has recently shifted into negative territory (Chart 6). Chart 5GDP Forecasts Need To Be Revised Down Further Chart 6Economic Data Disappoints What is the evidence of slowing growth? Walking down the main street of any major city and seeing restaurants overflowing with customers and people buzzing in and out of shops, one may think that the economy is booming. Yet, there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. The ISM PMI is on a downward trajectory, hitting 55 in May, which was also 2.4 points below consensus. The S&P Global (former Markit) May flash PMI readings have also declined from 59.2 in April to 57.5 in May. This is hardly surprising: As night follows day, monetary tightening leads to slowing growth (Chart 7). Inventory overhang: It is noteworthy that the ISM PMI new orders-to-inventories ratio (NOI) is in a free-fall: It is foreshadowing further weakness in manufacturing activity as demand for durable goods is fading (Chart 8). May durable goods orders were also soft. Chart 7Monetary Tightening Leads To Slower Growth Chart 8Inventories Are Building Up   Freight volumes are also contracting, pointing to weakening growth, and are consistent with the NOI ratio (Chart 9). Global growth is also slowing as evidenced by the contraction in global trade volumes (Chart 10): US and European demand for goods ex-autos is shrinking following the pandemic binge, while China’s recovery has been delayed. Chart 9Freight Volumes Also Point To Weaker Growth Chart 10Global Export Volumes Are Set To Shrink Economic growth is slowing, and more negative surprises are in store. Earnings Growth Expectation Have Gotta Come Down While the stock market is not the economy, they are closely intertwined. One of the key differences between the two, however, is that the US economy is dominated by services, while the S&P 500 has higher exposure to goods. With the current demand for services outstripping demand for goods, the economy should fare better than the market (Chart 11). Therefore, it does not bode well for S&P 500 earnings expectations that the Q1-2022 GDP revision flagged earnings contracting 2.3% on a quarter-on-quarter basis, under the weight of slowing sales and rising costs. And while the S&P 500 Q1-22 results were just fine, the ratio of negative/positive guidance for Q2-22 was roughly two to one. Slowing growth at home and abroad, rising costs of raw materials and wages, as well as fading demand for goods will weigh on earnings over the balance of the year (Chart 12). Chart 11Slowing Growth Will Weigh On Earnings Chart 12US EPS Expectations Have Not Yet Been Downgraded Also, there is the not-so-small issue of a strong dollar, which has gained nearly 13% since January 2021. This makes US goods more expensive and also reduces companies’ bottom lines via the currency translation effect. According to our rough estimates, every percentage change in the USD reduces earnings growth by roughly 33 bps, i.e., 4.3% off earnings caused by the entire dollar move. We expect slower top-line growth and shrinking profit margins to translate into flat to negative real earnings growth over the next 12 months. Importantly, US economic growth does not need to contract for a profit recession to take hold. However, S&P 500 EPS expectations have not yet been downgraded and 12-month forward EPS growth expectations are at about 10%; despite the recent market rout, US stocks have not yet priced in negative profit growth. However, either downgrades or earnings disappointments are coming, neither of which bodes well for US equity performance. Earnings growth expectations need to come down to reflect reality on the ground.   Valuations Are Only Optically Cheap And one more salient point: If earnings expectations are set to unrealistically high levels, then the recent forward multiple of the S&P 500 is not 17x, but 2 to 3 points higher, and, voilà, US equities no longer look cheap. Will US Consumers Save The Day? Perhaps things are not as dire as we describe. After all, US consumers are healthy, their balance sheets are pristine, and retail sales look good. There is also the not-so-small issue of $2.2 trillion in excess savings. This argument rings true. Chart 13Negative Real Wage Growth Is Sapping Consumer Confidence However, inflation continues to put pressure on US consumers. Negative real wage growth is sapping their confidence (Chart 13) and is cutting into their purchasing power. Soaring inflation also makes people concerned about the future as they watch their life savings melt away. Underwhelming reports from Walmart and Target are cases in point: Lower-income consumers are shifting spending away from discretionary items and towards necessities. Strong reports from Dollar General and Family Dollar indicate that many Americans are price sensitive and are shopping around. Home Depot commented that fewer customers walked through its doors (but the ones that did, tended to spend more in nominal terms). And retail sales are reported in nominal terms: Rising prices inflate growth rates. Indeed, excess savings may help achieve the “soft landing.” However, there are early signs that either many lower-income Americans have spent the money, or their savings accounts are earmarked for a rainy day, and many people aim to spend only what they earn. However, higher-income Americans are still willing to spend, but this group is shifting spending away from goods and towards services, which is consistent with strong results from the US airline carriers, which report a significant gain in pricing power. A similar message came from both Nordstrom and Macy’s. Clearly, American consumers are highly heterogeneous, and there is a significant bifurcation between “haves” and “have nots.” It is, however, concerning that many of the wealthier Americans have lost a significant percentage of their nest eggs in the stock market. The theory goes that the wealth effect is one of the main mechanisms through which monetary tightening affects consumer demand (Chart 14). It stands to reason that it is only a matter of time (unless the stock market rebounds) before even the wealthier cohorts start tightening their belts, dampening demand for consumer services. Chart 14Nest Eggs Are Dwindling Another obvious implication is the effect of dwindling investments on the housing market: Americans are watching their down payments disappear, with cash buyers subject to the same negative forces. The US consumer is under duress, and the more embedded the inflation and the deeper the market rout, the greater proportion of the US population is affected, making them less and less likely to lend a “spending hand” to support economic growth.  Inflation Will Turn: Too Little, Too Late One may also argue that inflation will turn, which would help both the economy and the markets, and will reset the Fed trajectory. Inflation will come down assisted by the arithmetic of the base effect. Supply chain bottlenecks are clearing, shipping costs are coming down, and demand is weakening – all of these developments point to inflation coming down over the next few months. However, this process may be rather slow: Inflation permeates the entire economy (Chart 15), and there are also signs that a vicious wage-price spiral is taking hold (Chart 16). Therefore, inflation is unlikely to revert to levels that the Fed and the US consumer will consider acceptable any time soon. Chart 15Inflation Is Broad-based And It Will Take Time For It To Revert To Acceptable Levels Chart 16Wage-Price Spiral Is Taking Hold Just recently, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell reiterated the Fed’s commitment to hiking interest rates until core consumer price inflation gets closer to 2%. Notably, in his speech at a WSJ event on May 17, Powell noted: “This is not a time for tremendously nuanced readings of inflation… We need to see inflation coming down in a convincing way. Until we do, we’ll keep going.” Given that US core consumer price inflation is currently at around 6.2%, a mere rollover in core inflation from current levels will not be enough for the Fed to tone down its hawkishness. While we believe that the Fed will be steadfast in its objective to combat inflation, any positive news on inflation will be perceived by a hopeful market as a sign that the Fed may alter its course, which would lead to a rally, only to be punctured by the negative news from either growth or the Fed. Positive inflation surprises will ignite powerful rallies but are unlikely to alter the trajectory of monetary policy. The Fed “Put” Is No More The Fed “put” is no longer at play as the Fed has signaled that it cares far more about combating inflation than the performance of the stock market. In fact, falling equities will play into Powell’s hand as a negative wealth effect is likely to put a lid on inflationary pressures, with the wealthier Americans paying the toll.   When Bad News Is Good News We make a case that disappointing growth will be the next chapter of this market saga. One might wonder if poor growth readings would actually be perceived by the market as a positive: Not only does disappointing growth put downward pressure on Treasury yields but also creates an expectation that the Fed will pause and monetary policy will end up looser than initially projected. Our take is that stable or lower rates will offer support for equities, and that is the reason why we conclude that the first stage of the repricing is complete. Will slower growth invite a more gentle and considerate Fed? We don’t think so as the Fed has already telegraphed that it now aims for a “softish landing” and that fighting inflation will incur some “pain”. Investment Implications Chart 17In 1980-82, The Market Was "Fat And Flat" We expect the market to be “fat and flat” over the next few months, i.e., alternating between pullbacks and short-term rallies. Rallies are frequent during bear markets and other severe corrections and are generally significant in magnitude. Markets showed a similar pattern in 1980-1982 as Chairman Volker was battling inflation (Chart 17). The bull market took hold only in 1982. Rallies will follow pullbacks because the market is not yet ready for a sustainable rebound. This first leg of the correction was pricing in tighter monetary policy. The next leg down will be the market pricing in slowing growth both at home and abroad, corporate earnings disappointments, and weakening consumer demand. Over the next few months, the market is likely to trend down but in a “fat and flat” manner, with “growth disappointment” equity sell-off being punctuated by fast and furious rallies on hopes that inflation is abating, and that a gentler, data-driven Fed would be more supportive of the economy and the markets. Thus, with markets looking oversold, a short-lived rally is now likely. It will be accompanied by a change in leadership: Energy and Materials will give back gains, while Big Tech and other cyclicals will bounce. And US equities may still plumb new lows on the back of economic growth or earnings growth disappointments. The market will also not take it kindly if inflation turns out to be stickier than expected and is accompanied by slowing growth: Stagflation is one of the most challenging regimes for US equities (Chart 18). Sticky inflation would call for an even more aggressive rate hiking cycle. Chart 18Stagflation Would Be The Worst Possible Outcome For The Markets Table 1Equities Are Closer To Capitulation We believe that a sustainable rebound will take place once most of the negative “news” is priced in. Compared to two months ago, we conclude that the first part of the adjustment process, i.e., pricing in tighter monetary policy, has run its course. Now it is a matter of adjusting growth expectations. Our “Equities Capitulation” scorecard (“Have We Hit Rock Bottom” report), adds up to -1, a slightly less negative reading than the -2 just a few weeks ago — but a reading which still signals negative equity returns (Table 1). We conclude that staying close to the benchmark, with a small tilt towards defensive growth, remains the most sensible strategy.   Bottom Line The first stage of the market correction is probably complete and tighter monetary policy is getting priced in. The next leg down for equities will be pricing in slower economic growth and a potential earnings recession. We expect the market to be “fat and flat” over the next several months as rallies ignited by soothing inflation readings are punctured by growth disappointments and a resolute Fed.   Irene Tunkel Chief Strategist, US Equity Strategy irene.tunkel@bcaresearch.com Recommended Allocation Recommended Allocation: Addendum

Listen to a short summary of this report.         Executive Summary US Financial Conditions Have Tightened Significantly This Year US financial conditions have tightened by enough that the Fed no longer needs to talk up interest rate expectations. If inflation decelerates faster than anticipated over the coming months, as we expect will be the case, the Fed’s messaging will soften further. Bond yields in the US and abroad are likely to fall over the next 6-to-12 months, even if they do rise over a longer-term horizon. Stay overweight stocks, favoring non-US equities over their US peers. We are closing our short 10-year Gilts trade, initiated at a yield of 0.85%, for a gain of 7.5%. We are also opening a new trade going long Canadian short-term interest rate futures versus their US counterparts. Investors expect Canadian rates to exceed US rates in 2024, which seems unlikely to us given that the Canadian housing market is much more sensitive to higher rates than the US market. Bottom Line: After having tightened significantly over the past seven months, financial conditions should loosen modestly during the remainder of the year. This should benefit risk assets. Fed Focused on Financial Conditions Chart 1Tighter Financial Conditions Will Hurt Growth Like many central banks, the Fed sees financial conditions as a key driver of the real economy. While there are many financial conditions indices (FCIs), most include bond yields, credit spreads, equity prices, and the exchange rate as inputs. Higher bond yields, wider credit spreads, lower equity prices, and a strong currency all lead to tighter financial conditions and a weaker economy, and vice versa. Goldman’s US FCI is especially popular among market participants. It is calibrated so that 100 bps in tightening corresponds, all things equal, to a 100 basis-point decline in US real GDP growth over the subsequent four quarters. The Goldman FCI has tightened by 212 bps since the start of the year and by 225 points from its loosest level in November 2021. If the historic relationship between the FCI and the economy holds, the tightening in financial conditions would be enough to push US growth to a below-trend pace by the second quarter of 2023. In fact, the tightening in the Goldman FCI over the past 12 months already suggests that the manufacturing ISM will fall below 50 (Chart 1).  Along the same lines, the Chicago Fed’s Adjusted National FCI, which measures financial conditions relative to current economic conditions, has moved slightly into restrictive territory. Aside from a brief period at the outset of the pandemic, the index has been consistently in expansionary territory since early 2013 (Chart 2). Chart 2The Chicago Fed Financial Conditions Index Has Moved Into Slightly Restrictive Territory Other data are consistent with the message from the FCIs. Most notably, growth estimates for the US and for other major economies have come down over the past few months (Chart 3). Economic surprise indices have also fallen, especially in the US.   Chart 3AGrowth Forecasts Have Softened As Economic Data Have Surprised To The Downside (I) Chart 3BGrowth Forecasts Have Softened As Economic Data Have Surprised To The Downside (II) Mission Accomplished? Chart 4The Fed Expects To Lift Rates Above Its Estimate Of Neutral Given the recent tightening in financial conditions and weaker growth expectations, the Fed is likely to soften its tone. Already this week, Atlanta Fed President Raphael Bostic suggested that the Fed could pause raising rates in September in order to assess the impact of the Fed’s tightening campaign. The Fed minutes also conveyed a sense of flexibility and data-dependence about the timing and magnitude of future hikes once rates reach 2%. It’s worth stressing that the Fed expects rates to rise in 2023 to about 40 bps above its estimate of the terminal rate (Chart 4). Jawboning rate expectations higher would potentially undermine the Fed’s goal of achieving a soft landing for the economy. Inflation Will Dictate How Much Easing Lies Ahead There is a big difference between not wanting financial conditions to tighten further and wanting them to loosen. The Fed would only want to see an easing in financial conditions if inflation were to fall faster than expected. Chart 5 shows how the year-over-year change in the core PCE deflator would evolve over the remainder of the year depending on different assumptions about the month-over-month change in the deflator. The Fed would be able to reach its expectation of year-over-year core PCE inflation of 4.1% for end-2022 if the month-over-month change averages 0.33%. Monthly core PCE inflation averaged 0.3% in February and March and is expected to clock in at around the same level for April once the data is released tomorrow. Chart 5AUS Inflation Will Fall By More Than The Fed Expects If The Monthly Change In Core PCE Is Less Than 0.3% (I) Chart 5BUS Inflation Will Fall By More Than The Fed Expects If The Monthly Change In Core PCE Is Less Than 0.3% (II) Regardless of tomorrow’s data print, as we discussed last week, we expect the monthly inflation rate to average less than 0.3 in the back half of the year. If that happens, inflation will surprise to the downside relative to the Fed’s expectations. Consistent with the observation above, market-based inflation expectations have already declined. The 5-year TIPS inflation breakeven has fallen from 3.64% in March to 2.98% at present. The widely watched 5-year/5-year forward breakeven rate is back down to 2.29%, at the bottom of the Fed’s comfort zone of 2.3%-to-2.5% (Chart 6).1 The Citi US Inflation Surprise Index has also rolled over (Chart 7). Chart 6Market-Based Inflation Expectations Have Come Down Of Late Chart 7The US Inflation Surprise Index Has Rolled Over Financial Conditions  Abroad Financial conditions indices in the other major developed economies have tightened somewhat less than in the US because equities represent a smaller share of household net worth abroad and also because most currencies have weakened against the US dollar (Chart 8). Nevertheless, with growth momentum having already deteriorated sharply, central banks are signaling a more balanced approach towards policy normalization. Chart 8Financial Conditions Have Tightened More In The US Than Elsewhere This Year ECB: Wait and See? In a blog post published on Monday, Christine Lagarde observed that inflation expectations have risen from pre-pandemic levels, implying that real policy rates are currently lower than they were two years ago. In her mind, this warrants ending net purchases under the Asset Purchase Programme early in the third quarter. It also warrants raising the deposit rate by 25 bps at both the July and September meetings, bringing it back to zero from -0.5% at present. Beyond then, Lagarde was circumspect about what should be done, stressing the need for “gradualism, optionality and flexibility.” She noted that “The euro area is clearly not facing a typical situation of excess aggregate demand or economic overheating … Both consumption and investment remain below their pre-crisis levels, and even further below their pre-crisis trends.” She then added: “The outlook is now being clouded by the negative supply shocks hitting the economy … households’ expectations of their future financial situation dropped to their second-lowest level on record in March and remained close to that level in April.” The market expects the ECB to raise rates by 170 bps over the next 12 months, bringing the deposit rate to 1.2% by mid-2023 (Chart 9). BCA’s Global Fixed Income team, led by Rob Robis, foresees only 50 bps of tightening over the next 12 months. Chart 9Markets Expect Rates To Rise The Most In The Anglo-Saxon World The UK, Canada, and Australia: Frothy Housing Markets Will Limit Rate Hikes The Bank of England (BoE) hiked rates by 90 bps over the past 12 months. The UK OIS curve is priced for another 140 bps of rate hikes over the next year. According to the BoE’s forecasting models, this would raise the unemployment rate by two percentage points while lowering inflation to below 2% within the next two-to-three years. In our opinion, that is more tightening than the BoE would like to see. BCA’s strategists expect the BoE to deliver only another 75 bps of hikes over the next year. Chart 10Buildup In Leverage And Frothy Housing Markets Pose A Challenge To Monetary Policy In Some Developed Market Countries The Canadian economy has been quite strong, with the unemployment rate falling to 5.2% in April, the lowest since 1974. The Canadian OIS curve is discounting 195 bps of interest rate hikes over the next 12 months, substantially more than the 150 bps of tightening our fixed income team foresees. By mid-2024, investors expect Canadian policy rates to be about 25 bps above US rates. This seems unreasonable to us, and as of this week, we are expressing this view by going long the June 2024 3-month Canadian Bankers’ Acceptance (BAX) futures contract (BAM4) versus the corresponding 3-month US SOFR futures contract (SFRM4). A more liquid option is to simply go long the 10-year Canadian government bond versus the 10-year US Treasury note. At present, Canadian 10-year government bonds are yielding  5 bps more than their US counterparts. Unlike in the US, where household debt has fallen over the past 14 years, debt in Canada has risen, fueled by a massive housing boom (Chart 10). High indebtedness and the prevalence of variable rate/short-term fixed-rate mortgages will limit the ability of the BoC to raise rates. The Australian OIS curve is currently discounting 262 bps of rate hikes over the next year which, if realized, would take the cash rate to 3.3% – a level last seen in 2013 when the neutral rate in Australia was much higher by the RBA’s own reckoning. BCA’s fixed income strategists expect only 150 bps of tightening over the next 12 months. Japan: Yield Curve Control Will Continue Chart 11Japan: Long-Term Inflation Expectations Are Far Lower Than In The Rest Of The World The Bank of Japan expects inflation excluding fresh food prices to remain at about 2% in the second half of 2022, but then to slow to 1.1% in the fiscal year starting April 2023. The Japan OIS curve is discounting almost no tightening over the next 12 months. Long-term inflation expectations are far lower in Japan than in any other major economy, which makes ultra-low rates a necessity for the foreseeable future (Chart 11). China: Outright Easing Chart 12Covid Restrictions Have Eased Only Modestly In China China faces a trifecta of problems: A weakening housing market; slowing external demand for manufactured goods; and the ongoing threat of Covid-related lockdowns. Despite a steep drop in the number of new Covid cases over the past month, China’s lockdown index has only eased modestly, as the authorities continue to fret about the next outbreak (Chart 12). The leadership in Beijing has responded with policy easing. The PBoC lowered the 5-year loan prime rate by 15 bps last week, the largest such cut since 2019. This followed a cut in the floor rate for first-home mortgages that was announced on May 15. BCA’s China strategists believe these measures will arrest the deep contraction in the property market but will not spark a full-blown recovery due to the ongoing commitment of the government to the “three red lines” policy.2  In normal times, a Chinese real estate slump would be a cause of grave concern for global investors. These are not normal times, however. Public enemy number one these days is inflation. A weaker Chinese property market would curb commodity demand, thus helping to cool inflation. That would be a welcome development for global investors. Investment Conclusions Global financial conditions have tightened to the point that betting on ever-higher rates, at least for the next 12 months, no longer makes sense. If global inflation decelerates faster than anticipated during the remainder of the year, as we expect will be the case, central banks will dial back the hawkish rhetoric.  We took partial profits on our short 10-year Treasury trade earlier this month (initiated at a yield of 1.45%). As of this week, consistent with the earlier decision of BCA’s fixed income strategists to upgrade UK Gilts, we are closing our short 10-year Gilt position (initiated at a yield of 0.85%) for a gain of 7.5%. The coming Goldilocks environment of falling inflation and supply-side led growth will buttress equities. We expect global stocks to rise 15%-to-20% over the next 12 months, with non-US markets outperforming the US. Looking further out, the fate of Goldilocks will rest on where the neutral rate of interest resides. If the neutral rate in the US turns out to be substantially lower than 2.5%, then any growth recovery will falter as the lagged effects of restrictive monetary policy work their way through the economy. Conversely, if the neutral rate turns out to be substantially higher than 2.5%, then inflation will reaccelerate as the economy overheats. Given the choice, we would wager on the latter outcome. Thus, while we expect global bond yields to decline over a 12-month horizon, we foresee them rising over a 2-to-5-year time frame. Similarly, while stocks will strengthen over the next 12 months, they are likely to encounter another bout of turbulence starting late next year or in 2024 as central banks initiate a second round of rate hikes.   Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on           LinkedIn Twitter     Footnotes 1     The Federal Reserve targets an average inflation rate of 2% for the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index. The TIPS breakeven is based on the CPI index. Due to compositional differences between the two indices, CPI inflation has historically averaged 30-to-50 basis points higher than PCE inflation. This is why the Fed effectively targets a CPI inflation rate of 2.3%-to-2.5%. 2      The People’s Bank of China and the housing ministry issued a deleveraging framework for property developers in August 2020, consisting of a 70% ceiling on liabilities-to-assets, a net debt-to-equity ratio capped at 100%, and a limit on short-term borrowing that cannot exceed cash reserves. Developers breaching these “red lines” run the risk of being cut off from access to new loans from banks, while those who respect them can only increase their interest-bearing borrowing by 15% at most. Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores

Executive Summary KRW vs JPY: A Play On Global Slowdown And Lower US Bond Yields Global financial markets appear to be moving away from inflation worries to pricing in a major growth slump. Global growth is downshifting, and financial markets have not yet priced this in. Given that the US dollar is a countercyclical currency, it will remain firm despite lower US growth and interest rate expectations. Emerging Asian currencies will drop further. A new currency trade: Go long the JPY versus the KRW. The global macro outlook, currency valuations and technicals suggest that this trade offers a good risk-reward profile.   Recommendation INITIATION DATE RETURN Short KRW / Long JPY 2022-05-26   Bottom Line: Global equity and credit investors should stay defensive. EM share prices and credit markets (USD bonds) are not yet out of the woods. US bond yields will likely roll over and bonds will outperform stocks in the near-term.     Global financial markets appear to be moving away from worries about inflation to pricing in a major growth slump. The recent simultaneous drop in US Treasury yields and US share prices indicate that the market theme is shifting from inflation to a growth scare. Chart 1A Sign of Peak In Bond Yields Interestingly, high-yielding currencies such as AUD, NZD, and CAD have recently started underperforming low-yielding JPY and CFH (Chart 1, top panel). The former are a play on global growth while the latter are vulnerable to rising US interest rates. Thus, the financial markets’ theme seems to be moving from inflation to weaker growth. The facts that this currency ratio correlates with 10-year US Treasury yields and has rolled over at its previous peaks signal that investors’ global growth concerns will likely intensify (Chart 1, top and bottom panels). As such, this currency ratio and US bond yields will continue drifting lower. Overall, the next phase of the selloff in global risk assets will likely be characterized by heightened growth worries. This phase will also mark the final chapter of this bear market. A pertinent question for investors is whether global risk assets have already priced in a global growth slump. Is A Global Slowdown Priced In? Our hunch is that the unfolding global economic slowdown is not yet fully priced in global financial markets. Chart 2Global Export Volumes Are Set To Shrink In the near term, global share prices will continue to falter and odds are rising that US bond yields are putting in a major top. In short, global stocks will underperform US bonds, and the USD dollar will remain firm: First, global trade volumes are heading into contraction (Chart 2). Global export volumes are set to contract as US and European demand for goods ex-autos shrinks following the pandemic binge. Meanwhile, China’s recovery has been delayed to Q3. We discussed the reasons why we expect global exports will contract in H2 2022 in our April 21 report. Declining global trade volumes will support the greenback in the near term because the broad trade-weighted US dollar does well when global growth is weakening. Besides, US dollar liquidity is rapidly decelerating, which is also positive for the broad-trade weighted US dollar (the latter is shown inverted in Chart 3). Second, US rail carload is contracting, pointing to weakening growth in America (Chart 4). Chart 3No Sign Of Reversal In Trade-Weighted USD Chart 4US Growth Is Downshifting Related Report  Emerging Markets StrategyA Whiff Of Stagflation? This does not mean that a US recession is imminent. Yet, as we discussed in past reports US corporate profits can contract modestly even if GDP slows but does not contract. Third, US EPS expectations have not yet been downgraded and 12-month forward EPS growth expectations are at about 10% (Chart 5). Similarly, although our forward-looking indicator for EM EPS points to a contraction 12-month forward EPS growth expectations are still at 10% (Chart 6). Chart 5US EPS Expectations Have Not Yet Been Downgraded Chart 6EM EPS Are Set To Contract We expect slower top line growth and shrinking profit margins to cause US and EM corporate profits to contract by about 5% and 10-15%, respectively, in the next 12 months. In brief, neither US nor EM stocks have priced in negative profit growth. Fourth, Chart 7 illustrates that slowing global broad money growth is typically associated with a compression in the P/E ratio of global equities. As of now, there are no sign of reversal in global broad money growth and equity multiples. Chart 7Will Global Equity Multiple Compression Continue? Chart 8US Stocks Are Set To Underperform US Treasurys In Near Term Finally, sentiment towards US stocks is very elevated relative to sentiment towards US Treasurys (Chart 8, top panel). Yet, the composite momentum indicator for the US stock-to-bond ratio is breaking below the zero line (Chart 8, bottom panel). This breakdown warns of a period of equity underperformance versus US Treasurys, which would be consistent with pricing in a material economic slowdown. As US growth slows, will the Fed back off from its hawkish rhetoric? Yes, it will tone down its hawkishness at a certain point – but it will not do so immediately. The basis is that even though core US inflation will roll over, it will remain well above 4% versus the Fed’s 2% target. Importantly, wages are a lagging variable, and they will surprise to the upside in the near-term amid tight labor market conditions. This will lead the Fed to err on the hawkish side to manage upside risks to inflation and inflation expectations. All in all, the Fed is not about to do a policy U-turn in the near term. Therefore, we maintain our view that the Fed and stock markets remain on a collision course. Bottom Line: Global growth is downshifting, and financial markets have not yet priced this in. As a result, US bond yields will likely roll over and bonds will outperform stocks in the near term. The US dollar as a countercyclical currency will remain firm despite lower US growth and interest rate expectations. Emerging Asian Currencies Will Depreciate Further Asian export volumes will contract in H2 2022. This is negative for emerging Asian currencies. Chart 9Emerging Asian Currencies And Global Manufacturing Cycle Emerging Asian exchange rates correlate with global trade and global manufacturing cycles, and these currencies will depreciate as global consumer goods demand shrinks (Chart 9). We use an equally-weighted average of KRW, TWD, SGD, THB, PHP and MYR versus the USD to measure the performance of emerging Asian currencies. We exclude the CNY and JPY as they exhibit different dynamics. Chinese imports of various goods and commodities were already contracting in March, prior to the broadening of mainland lockdowns (Chart 10). Weak demand from China will weight on other Asian economies. The CNY is likely to weaken a bit more versus the US dollar due to the challenges facing the Chinese economy. This will reinforce further depreciation in emerging Asian currencies. Relative share prices of global cyclicals versus defensives also point to more downside in emerging Asian currencies (Chart 11). Chart 10Chinese Imports Were Contracting Prior Lockdowns Chart 11Emerging Asian Currencies Correlate With Global Cyclicals-Defensives Equity Ratio   Bottom Line: An impending contraction in Asian export shipments is negative for emerging Asian currencies. A New Trade: Long Japanese Yen / Short Korean Won One way to play the global trade contraction and peak in US interest rate expectations themes is to go long the JPY / short the KRW: The Korean won typically depreciates versus the Japanese yen when (1) the global manufacturing cycle enters a downtrend and (2) US bond yields decline (Chart 12). These two macro forces are about to transpire and will help the JPY to outperform the KRW. Chart 12KRW vs JPY: A Play On Global Slowdown And Lower US Bond Yields Chart 13Trade-Weighted Yen Is At Its Historic Lows The Japanese yen has already depreciated significantly versus both the USD and the Korean won. In fact, the trade-weighted yen is close to its historic lows (Chart 13). In addition, investors are very short the yen (Chart 14). The overhang of short positions could cause a violent reversal in the JPY/USD exchange rate.   The Japanese yen is extremely cheap according to the real effective exchange rate based on unit labor costs (Chart 15, top panel). By that same measure, the Korean won is not cheap (Chart 15, bottom panel). Chart 14Investors Are Very Short Yen Chart 15The Yen Is Much Cheaper Than The Korean Won   Bottom Line: We recommend that investors go long the JPY versus the KRW. The global macro outlook, currency valuations and technicals suggest that this trade offers a good risk-reward profile. On February 2, 2022, we booked profits on our short KRW/long USD position, which we initiated on March 25, 2021. Investment Recommendations Global equity and credit investors should stay defensive. EM share prices and credit markets (USD bonds) are not yet out of the woods. US bond yields are likely peaking. Favor bonds over stocks within both global and EM balanced portfolios. Although the US dollar’s bull market is advanced, a final upleg is likely. Stay short the following EM currencies versus the US dollar: ZAR, PLN, HUF, COP, PEN, PHP and IDR. Consistently, emerging Asian currencies have more downside. A major buying opportunity in EM local currency bonds will emerge once the US dollar begins its descent.   Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com Strategic Themes (18 Months And Beyond) Equities Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months)

Highlights The economic and financial market developments that have occurred over the past month are consistent with several of the risks that we identified in our recent reports. We warned in our April report that the outlook for equities had deteriorated meaningfully since the beginning of the year and recommended that investors maintain, at most, a very modest overweight toward stocks in a global multi-asset portfolio. We see the performance of the equity market over the past month as reflecting the beginning of the recession scare that we warned was coming. Still, several factors continue to suggest that this is indeed a scare, and not an actual recession. Section 2 of this month’s report reviews the US housing market for signs of an imminent recession. While a slowdown in the housing market is clearly underway, we do not yet see signs that this slowdown is recessionary. It remains an open question how forcefully Russia is willing to weaponize its natural gas exports in response to a seemingly imminent European embargo on Russian oil, and whether Russia will deploy this strategy now or later. For now, our base case view is that the euro area economy will slow and will probably contract in Q2, but it will avoid a debilitating energy-driven recession. China’s zero-tolerance COVID policy has failed to contain the disease, and it is now clear that more and more outbreaks will occur across the country over the coming months. Our base case view is that additional fiscal & monetary support is forthcoming if the spread of the disease progresses as we expect. We are likely to downgrade our outlook for global economic activity as well as our recommended allocation to risky assets if it does not materialize. Our profit margin warning indicators have deteriorated over the past month, and it is now our view that a contraction in S&P 500 margins is likely. Still, a major decline should be avoided, and we expect that S&P 500 earnings will grow at a low, single-digit rate over the coming year. We continue to recommend a marginally overweight stance towards risky assets over the coming 6-12 months, along with a neutral regional equity stance, a modestly overweight stance towards value over growth, an overweight stance towards small caps, a modestly short duration stance within a fixed-income portfolio, and short US dollar positions. Not Out Of The Woods Yet Chart I-1In May, Global Stocks Nearly Fell Into Bear Market Territory May was a painful month for the equity market. Globally, stocks fell more than 4% in US$ terms, led by the US. May’s selloff pushed global stocks close to bear market territory relative to their early-January high (Chart I-1), a threshold that was breached in intra-day terms in the US last week. We warned in our April report that the outlook for equities had deteriorated meaningfully since the beginning of the year and recommended that investors maintain, at most, a very modest overweight toward stocks in a global multi-asset portfolio. In our view, the economic and financial market developments that occurred over the past month are consistent with several of the risk we identified in our recent reports. We continue to recommend that investors remain minimally overweight risky assets. Our view that investors should not be underweight risky assets hinges on three expectations: the avoidance of a US recession over the coming year, a continuation of Russian natural gas exports to key gas-reliant European countries, and the announcement from Chinese policymakers of either significant additional stimulus in its traditional form or income-support policies of the type that prevailed in developed economies in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Confirmation of these expectations is likely to push us to upgrade our recommended stance toward risky assets, especially if equities continue to sell off in response to growth fears. Conversely, we are likely to recommend downgrading risky assets to neutral or underweight if evidence mounts that our expectations are unlikely to materialize. A US Recession Scare Is Underway We noted in last month’s report that the US economy would likely avoid a recession over the coming year, but that a recession scare was quite likely. We emphasized a probable slowdown in the housing market as the locus of investors’ recessionary concern, and the US housing market data is indeed now surprising significantly to the downside (Chart I-2). We see the performance of the equity market over the past month as reflecting the beginning of the recession scare that we warned was coming. Chart I-3 highlights that the composition of the US equity selloff since the beginning of the year has looked quite unlike the growth-driven selloffs that occurred over the past decade, in that real bond yields have been a strong driver of the decline in stocks. By contrast, May’s decline has looked more like a typical growth scare, with real bond yields somewhat cushioning the impact of a significant rise in the equity risk premium. Chart I-2The US Housing Market Is Clearly Slowing Chart I-3May’s Selloff Was Driven By Growth Fears, Not Rising Interest Rates   Chart I-4 highlights that it is not just the housing market that is worrying investors. The chart shows that the Conference Board’s US leading economic indicator (LEI) is slowing quite sharply, in line with previous episodes of a major growth scare. And while the weakest components of the LEI modestly improved on average in April, Chart I-5 highlights that the collapse in real wage growth alongside the recently severe underperformance of consumer stocks has fed concerns that high inflation has eroded household purchasing power – and that a contraction in real spending is imminent. Chart I-4A Serious US Growth Scare Is Underway Chart I-5The Decline In Real US Wage Growth Has Caused A Major Selloff In Consumer Stocks     In Section 2 of this month’s report we provide further analysis supporting the view that the US housing market will not drive the US economy into recession. But we do continue to believe that a slowdown in housing activity is likely, and that concerns about a housing-driven recession will linger. Still, several factors continue to suggest that the US is experiencing a recession scare, and not an actual recession: The Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow model is currently predicting US real GDP growth that is only modestly below trend in Q2, and the overall estimate continues to be dragged significantly lower by a sizably negative contribution from the change in inventories (Chart I-6). Without this negative inventories effect, the Atlanta Fed’s model would be forecasting real annualized growth of over 3%. After having decelerated significantly in the second half of last year because of a broadening in consumer price inflation, Chart I-7 highlights that real personal consumption expenditures reaccelerated and real personal income ex-transfers stabilized in Q1. Chart I-6No Sign Of A Major Decline In Q2 Consumer Spending Chart I-7Real Income Growth Is Stabilizing, And Real Consumer Spending Is Accelerating     US manufacturing industrial production surged in April, led by motor vehicle production (Chart I-8, panel 1). It is true that industrial production is a coincident indicator and thus does not necessarily argue against the idea that a recession is imminent. A pickup in vehicle production is encouraging, however, as it suggests that the 15% surge in the level of new car prices over the past year that contributed to the erosion in household real incomes may be set to reverse (panel 2). Chart I-8A Pickup In Auto Production Should Help Lower Car Prices And Improve Consumer Purchasing Power Services spending is likely to improve, as deliveries of Pfizer’s Paxlovid antiviral drug continue to ramp up and vaccines are eventually approved for children under the age of six. Charts I-9A and I-9B highlight several real services spending categories that remain below their pre-pandemic levels, which in our view have been clearly linked to the pandemic and are not likely to be permanently lower. Americans have not likely stopped going to the gym, amusement parks, movies, live concerts, or the dentist, nor have their stopped needing to put elderly relatives in nursing care homes. They are also highly unlikely to stop traveling. There is some internal debate at BCA about the impact that working-from-home trends will have on the level of services spending, but we would note that essentially all of the spending categories shown in Charts I-9A and I-9B have exhibited uptrends that only appear to have been affected by consumer responses to the Delta and Omicron waves of the pandemic. Widely-available treatment options that reduce the fatality rate of the disease close to that of the flu are likely to be perceived by the public as an effective end of the pandemic, boosting spending on lagging categories of services spending. Chart I-9AAn Eventual End To The Pandemic… Chart I-9B…Will Cause A Further Improvement In Services Spending     Based on high-frequency data from OpenTable, the number of seated diners in US restaurants is not exhibiting any major warning signs for US consumer spending (Chart I-10). Real spending in restaurants has been strongly correlated with overall real personal consumption expenditures over the past two decades, and thus Chart I-10 is not suggesting that a collapse in overall spending is imminent. Chart I-10High-Frequency Data Does Not Yet Show A Major Pullback In US Consumer Spending As a final point concerning the risk of recession in the US, investors should note that the recent behavior of inflation expectations is encouraging and points to a potentially imminent peak in Fed hawkishness. Over the past few months, we have expressed our concern about the pace of increase in long-dated household inflation expectations. We highlighted last month that long-term market-based inflation expectations were also exhibiting some potential signs of becoming unanchored. However, Chart I-11 highlights that the momentum of long-dated household inflation expectations is now starting to flag, and that long-term market-based inflation expectations recently decreased in response to escalating growth fears. Chart I-12 clearly shows a slowing pace of core consumer prices, which will act to restrain further significant increases in long-dated inflation expectations. Chart I-11Long-Dated Inflation Expectations Point To A Potentially Imminent Peak In Fed Hawkishness Chart I-12Core Inflation Momentum Is Clearly Slowing     Chart I-13 highlights that investors expect the Fed to raise the policy rate by the end of the year to a level even higher than what Jerome Powell implied during the Fed’s May press conference: a target range for the Fed funds rate of 2.5-2.75%, corresponding to two more 50 basis point hikes and three 25 basis point hikes during the FOMC’s September, November, and December meetings. Chart I-13Expectations For Fed Rate Hikes This Year Are Likely To Come Down If Inflation Continues To Moderate It is likely that the market’s expectation for rate hikes this year will fall over the coming few months if the monthly pace of core inflation continues to slow. The Fed itself may soon signal a less intense pace of tightening than Powell recently implied – a perspective that we feel is supported by the minutes of the May FOMC meeting. That would allow the US economy to “digest” the recent adjustment in interest rates with less uncertainty about the economic outlook, which would lower the odds that a “mid-cycle slowdown” morphs into a full-blown recession. A Debilitating Energy-Driven Recession In Europe Is Not In The Cards, For Now The key issue pertaining to the European economic outlook remains the question of whether Europe’s imports of Russian natural gas will be interrupted. A European embargo of Russian oil now seems likely, which would likely cause Russian oil production to decline. Our Commodity & Energy strategy service now expects Brent oil to trade at $120/bbl on average for the remainder of the year, $5/bbl higher than current levels (Chart I-14). We agree with our Commodity & Energy Strategy team’s updated oil price forecast, but we have a different view about the odds that Russia will respond to a European oil embargo by cutting its natural gas exports to the EU. We still think this is a risk, not yet a likely event, although it may still occur later in the year. A full and immediate cutoff of natural gas exports to gas-dependent European countries such as Germany and Italy would not only destabilize the Russian economy by substantially reducing its current account surplus, it would also cause a severe recession in Europe through a combination of gas rationing to industries by government decree and surging energy prices (Chart I-15). Chart I-14A European Embargo Of Russian Oil Will Cause Brent To Rise To $120/bbl Chart I-15A Full Cutoff Of Russian Natural Gas Would Cause A Severe European Recession   That could erode European voters’ willingness to provide military support for Ukraine, but it could instead backfire and galvanize European public opinion against Russia – and remove leverage that may be potentially used to secure a ceasefire agreement that will preserve its military gains in eastern Ukraine. Chart I-16Europe Is Replenishing Its Gas Storage, But It Cannot Yet Withstand A Full Cutoff Russia may respond to an oil embargo by throttling the amount of natural gas exported to key European countries in a fashion that raises natural gas prices and prevents European countries from building up sufficient storage for the upcoming winter – a process that is underway but is far from complete (Chart I-16). But it remains an open question how forcefully Russia is willing to weaponize its natural gas exports, and whether it will deploy this strategy now or later. For now, our base case view is that the euro area economy will slow and will probably contract in Q2, but it will avoid a debilitating energy-driven recession. China: The Only Way Out Is Through Among the three pillars of the global economy – the US, China, and Europe – the last is arguably the least important. Today, the US and China are the core drivers of global demand, and we are therefore more concerned about the economic impact of China’s zero-tolerance COVID policy than we are about a slowdown or mild recession in Europe. Given how contagious the Omicron variant of COVID-19 has shown itself to be, and given how widespread recent outbreaks have been, it is now clear that China’s zero-tolerance policy has failed to contain the disease and that more and more outbreaks will occur across the country over the coming months. Despite public statements to the contrary, we suspect that Chinese policymakers are well aware of this situation, but are constrained by the consequences of removing the zero-tolerance policy. Recent studies suggest that China could face intensive care demand that is sixteen times existing capacity and upwards of 1.5 million deaths by removing the policy,1 roughly 1.5 times the cumulative amount of deaths that have occurred in the US during the pandemic. But the economic consequences of maintaining the zero-tolerance policy will also be severe, and therefore also likely represent a constraint on policymakers. Charts I-17 and I-18 show that China’s labor market and industrial sector have already slowed sharply over the past few months, at a pace and magnitude that is unlikely to be politically sustainable for much longer. In addition, Chart I-19 shows that China’s credit impulse fell meaningfully in April. Chart I-17China’s Labor Market Is Cratering… Chart I-18…As Is Its Manufacturing Sector       Chart I-19More Fiscal & Monetary Support Will Be Needed In China Soon, If COVID-19 Cases Continue To Spread This would be tolerable if the decline in activity was likely to be short-lived as it was at the very beginning of the pandemic, but we no longer see this as a probable outcome. We acknowledge that reported cases of COVID-19 have steadily declined in cities in the Yangtze River region, and we agree that the Shanghai lockdown may soon end for a time. But we doubt that this will mark the end of outbreaks in the region, or prevent major outbreaks from occurring in other parts of the country. If China cannot relax its zero-tolerance policy or tolerate the degree of economic weakness entailed by its continued application, then additional fiscal and monetary support is likely. While China’s leadership has stepped up its pro-growth policy measures, as evidenced by the recent cut in the 5-year loan prime rate, we strongly suspect that more support will be needed. This support may take the form of traditional stimulus via local government spending, or it may involve the introduction of income-support policies of the kind that prevailed in developed economies in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Chart I-20The Chinese Housing Market Is Slowing Significantly, Lowering The Risk Of Speculation From Income Support Policies Chinese policymakers who are eager to prevent another significant releveraging of the economy and who want to avoid another major deterioration in housing affordability may perhaps be forgiven for seeing the developed economy experience with these programs as a poor roadmap to follow. House prices have exploded in most advanced economies during the pandemic, which has significantly contributed to a major decline in affordability. However, with the benefit of hindsight, Chinese policymakers would likely be able to recalibrate any income support program to avoid some of the excesses that occurred in DM countries, such as policies that caused aggregate disposable income to increase in the US and Canada during the pandemic. In addition, Chart I-20 highlights that the starting point for the Chinese property market is one in which house prices are seemingly poised to contract at the worst pace since late 2014 / early 2015. The latter suggests that Chinese policymakers have more ability to support household income without causing an explosion in house prices and speculative activity than DM policymakers did in 2020. Regardless of its form, it is the view of the Bank Credit Analyst service that China cannot avoid the provision of significant additional fiscal/monetary support if it maintains its zero-tolerance COVID policy for the remainder of the year given our assumption that potentially major outbreaks will continue. It is our base case view that additional support is forthcoming over the coming weeks and months if the spread of the disease progresses as we expect. We are likely to downgrade our outlook for global economic activity as well as our recommended allocation to risky assets if it does not materialize. US Corporate Profits In A Nonrecessionary Slowdown Scenario Chart I-21US Forward Earnings Very Rarely Fall While The Economy Continues To Expand Chart I-3 highlighted that the US equity market selloff in May shifted from one that was strongly driven by rising real government bond yields to one in which a rising equity risk premium was the dominant driver. And yet, the chart showed that there has been no negative contribution to US stock prices from falling earnings expectations, with expected earnings having continued to rise since the beginning of the year. While it may seem counterintuitive to investors that forward earnings expectations are not falling in the middle of a major growth scare, Chart I-21 highlights that this is not abnormal. The chart highlights that forward earnings expectations rarely decline outside of the context of a recession, because actual earnings typically do not decline when the economy is expanding. This means that the potential for earnings to decline shows up as a rise in the equity risk premium during growth scares, which is what has generally occurred since the beginning of the year (excluding energy, forward EPS estimates have fallen slightly this year). In last month’s Section 2, we noted that nonrecessionary earnings declines almost always occur because of contractions in profit margins. We argued that risks to US equity margins might rise later this year. In fact, since we published our report last month, some of these risks have already materialized: our new profit margin warning indicator has jumped significantly (Chart I-22), and our sector profit margin diffusion index has fallen below the boom/bust line (Chart I-23). As such, it is now our view that a contraction in S&P 500 profit margins is likely over the coming year, which contrasts with analyst EPS growth expectations of 9.5% and sales per share growth expectations of 8% (meaning that analysts are currently forecasting a margin expansion). Chart I-22A Contraction In S&P 500 Profit Margins... Chart I-23...Now Looks Likely     Will a likely contraction in profit margins cause an outright decline in earnings over the coming year? Investors should acknowledge that this is a risk, but for now our answer is no. Chart I-24For Now, A Severe Contraction In Margins Does Not Seem Probable Taken at face value, our sector diffusion index shown in Chart I-23 suggests that profit margins are set to decline by 2 percentage points over the coming year, which would indeed imply a 7-8% contraction in earnings per share assuming 8% revenue growth. However, the index is much better at predicting inflection points in profit margins than the magnitude of the change; in several cases over the past three decades the model correctly predicted a decline in profit margins, but implied a much larger change in margins than what actually occurred. In addition, our model shown in Chart I-22 has yet to cross above the 50% mark into probable territory, and Chart I-24 highlights that net earnings revisions and net positive earnings surprises are falling but have not yet reached levels that would be consistent with a major margin decline. In sum, we expect that S&P 500 earnings will grow at a low, single-digit rate over the coming year given our expectation of a nonrecessionary slowdown scenario. This implies that US equity returns will be uninspiring over the coming year, but they will be likely be positive and will likely beat the returns offered from bonds. Investment Strategy Recommendations Considerable uncertainty remains about the global economic and financial market outlook, and there are several identifiable risks that would warrant an underweight stance towards risky assets were they to materialize. We agree that an aggressively overweight stance is not justified. Chart I-25Without A Recession, The US Equity Risk Premium Is Very Likely To Decline However, the fact that corporate profits do not usually fall while the economy is expanding underscores why investors should be reluctant to significantly cut their risky asset exposure unless a recession appears likely. Without a recession, the US equity risk premium is very likely to decline (Chart I-25), meaning that 10-year Treasury yields closer to 4% or a significant contraction in profit margins would be required for US stocks to post negative returns over the coming 6-12 months. We would not rule out either of these outcomes, but we also do not think that they are probable. To conclude, it is fair to say that global investors are not out of the woods yet, but we continue to recommend a marginally overweight stance towards risky assets on the basis that the US will avoid a recession over the coming year, Russia is not yet likely to push Europe into a debilitating recession, and China will further ease fiscal & monetary policy to support growth. In addition to a modest overweight towards stocks in a multi-asset portfolio, we continue to recommend the following: A neutral regional equity stance, with global ex-US equities on upgrade watch in response to an improvement in the European economic outlook and further fiscal & monetary support in China. The recent passive outperformance of global ex-US stocks has occurred mainly because US stocks have fallen more than global stocks, which have “caught up” to mounting US and global growth fears. As such, ex-US stocks have outperformed for the wrong reasons, and investors should wait for durable signs of an improving global growth outlook and a falling US dollar before shifting in favor of a global ex-US equity stance. A modestly overweight stance towards value over growth stocks on the basis of better valuation. However, most of the pandemic-related outperformance of growth stocks has already reversed (Chart I-26), suggesting that the outperformance of value is getting late. An overweight stance toward global small-cap stocks over their large-cap peers, as they are now unequivocally inexpensive and have remained resilient as global growth fears have intensified (Chart I-27). Chart I-26Modestly Favor Value Stocks Due To Better Valuation, But The COVID Effects On Equity Style Have Mostly Reversed Chart I-27Small Cap Stocks Have Recently Proven Resilient, And Are Extremely Cheap   A modestly short duration stance within a fixed-income portfolio. Short US dollar positions, as the dollar is clearly benefiting from growth fears that will wane. In addition, the US dollar is very expensive, and extremely overbought. Concerning our recommended duration stance, we acknowledge that a slower pace of rate hikes than what investors currently expect and a slowing pace of inflation would normally argue for a long duration stance. But we do not expect the Fed to stop raising interest rates unless a recession seems likely, and a slower but steady path of tightening, in conjunction with easing inflation, makes it more likely that the US economy will be able to “digest” the recent adjustment in rates without tipping into recession. This, in turn, increases the odds that the Fed funds rate will peak at a higher level than investors currently expect, which should ultimately push long-maturity yields higher rather than lower. On balance, this suggests that investors should be modestly short duration, even if long-maturity bond yields move temporarily lower over the coming few months. Long-duration positions are perhaps reasonable on a 0-3 month time horizon, but over a 6-12 month time horizon we continue to recommend a modestly short stance. Jonathan LaBerge, CFA Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst May 26, 2022 Next Report: June 30, 2022 II.  Is The US Housing Market Signaling An Imminent Recession? The Fed’s hawkish shift over the past six months has caused a sharp increase in US interest rates. In this report we examine the US housing market for signs of an imminent recession, given the housing sector’s strong interest rate sensitivity. In addition to a severe contraction in real home improvement spending, there are several other housing-related indicators that are ostensibly pointing in a bearish direction. The growth in total home sales and the MBA mortgage application purchase index are already in negative territory, housing affordability has deteriorated meaningfully, and the National Association of Home Builders’ (NAHB) housing market index is falling sharply. However, the breadth of house prices and building permits, consumer surveys, housing equity sector relative performance, and the fact that mortgage rates have likely peaked for the year point to a more optimistic outlook for housing. At a minimum, they do not yet suggest that the current slowdown in housing-related activity is recessionary. Structural factors are also supportive of the pace of housing construction in the US. While a slowdown in the housing market is clearly underway, it is not occurring after a period of excessive housing construction. The opposite is true: the US and several other developed market economies have underbuilt homes over the past decade. This should limit the drag on economic growth from housing-related activity, and reduces the odds that a housing market slowdown will morph into a housing-driven US recession. Chart II-1The Fed's Hawkish Shift Has Caused An Extremely Sharp Rise In Interest Rates The Fed’s hawkish shift over the past six months has caused US interest rates to rise at an extremely rapid pace. Panel 1 of Chart II-1 highlights that the spread between the US 2-year Treasury yield and the 3-month T-bill yield reached a 20-year high in early April of this year. Panel 2 shows that the two-year change in the 30-year mortgage rate will reach the highest level since the early 1980s by the end of this year if mortgage rates remain at their current level. Over the longer run, it is the level of interest rates that matters more than their change. However, changes in interest rates and other key financial market variables are also important drivers of economic activity, especially when they happen very rapidly. Given the speed of the recent adjustment in US interest rates, and the fact that the Fed funds rate will have likely reached the Fed’s neutral rate forecast by the end of this year, investors have understandably become concerned about the potential for a recession in the US. In this report we examine the US housing market for signs of an imminent recession, given the housing sector’s strong interest rate sensitivity. We conclude that while a slowdown in the housing market is clearly underway, several signs suggest that this slowdown is not recessionary. Investors should remain laser-focused on the pace of housing-related activity over the coming 6-12 months, but for now our assessment of the housing market is consistent with a modest overweight stance towards stocks within a multi-asset portfolio. A Brief Review Of The Housing Sector’s Contribution To Growth Table II-1 highlights the importance of the housing sector as a driver/predictor of US recessions. This table highlights that real residential investment is not a particularly important contributor to real GDP growth during nonrecessionary quarters, but it is the only main expenditure component exhibiting negative growth on average in the year prior to a recession.2 Table II-1Real Residential Investment Tends To Contract In The Year Prior To A Recession When examining the contribution to economic growth from the housing sector, investors and housing market analysts often fully equate real residential investment with housing construction. In fact, while direct construction of housing units accounts for a sizeable portion of the contribution to growth from housing, it is just one of four components. This is an important point, as one of the often-overlooked elements of real residential investment has strongly leading properties and is currently providing a very negative signal about the housing sector. Chart II-2 breaks down what we consider as aggregate real “housing-related activity”, and Chart II-3 presents the contributions to annualized quarterly growth in housing activity from the four components. For the sake of completeness, we include personal consumption expenditures on furnishings and household equipment as part of housing-related activity, alongside the two main components of real residential investment: permanent site construction (including single and multi-family properties), and “other structures.” In reality, “other structures” is not predominantly accounted for by the construction of different types of residential properties; it is almost entirely composed of spending on home improvements and brokerage commissions on the sale of existing residential properties. Chart II-2Housing Construction Is An Important Part Of Residential Investment, But There Are Other Contributing Factors Chart II-3Home Improvement Spending And Brokerage Commissions Also Drive Residential Investment     Aside from the link between existing home sales and the general demand for newly-built homes, the prominence of brokerage commissions in other residential structures investment helps explain why existing home sales are strongly correlated with real residential investment (Chart II-4, panel 1). Given that a distributed lag of monthly housing starts maps closely to permanent site construction (panel 2), starts and existing home sales explain a good portion of the contribution to growth from housing-related activity. Of the two remaining components of housing-related activity, Chart II-5 highlights that personal consumption expenditures on furniture and household equipment generally coincide with the pace of housing construction and new home sales. We take this to mean that the consumption component of housing-related activity is typically a derivative of the decision to build a new home or sell an existing one. Chart II-4Existing Home Sales Explain Commissions, And Housing Starts Explain Permanent Site Construction Chart II-5The Pace Of Contraction In Home Improvement Spending Is Worrying   What is not coincident with construction and existing home sales is residential home improvement: Panel 2 of Chart II-5 highlights that it has strongly leading properties, and is currently contracting at its worst rate since the 2008 recession. Data on real home improvement spending is only available quarterly from 2002, so the ability to compare the current situation to previous housing market cycles is limited. But the pace of contraction is worrying and underscores that investors should be on the lookout for corroborating signs of a major contraction in the housing market. Is The Housing Data Sending A Recessionary Signal? In addition to the severe contraction in real home improvement spending shown in Chart II-5, there are several other housing-related indicators that are ostensibly pointing in a bearish direction. In particular, Chart II-6 highlights that both the growth in total home sales and the MBA mortgage application purchase index are already in negative territory, that housing affordability has deteriorated meaningfully, and that the National Association of Home Builders’ (NAHB) housing market index is falling sharply. However, there are also several signs pointing to a more optimistic outlook for housing, or at least indicating that the current slowdown in housing-related activity is not recessionary. We review these more optimistic indicators below. The Breadth Of House Prices And Building Permits In sharp contrast to previous periods of serious housing market weakness and/or recessionary periods, there is no sign yet of a major slowdown in US house price appreciation including cities with the weakest gains. In fact, Chart II-7 highlights that house prices have recently been reaccelerating on a very broad basis after having slowed in the second half of last year, which hardly bodes poorly for new home construction. Chart II-6A US Housing Sector Slowdown Is Certainly Underway Chart II-7No Sign Yet Of A Major Deceleration In House Prices   It is true that US house price data is somewhat lagging, so it is quite likely that price weakness is forthcoming. However, there has been no sign of a major slowdown in prices through to March 2022, by which point 30-year mortgage rates had already risen 200 basis points from their 2021 low. More importantly, Chart II-8 highlights that a state-by-state diffusion index of authorized housing permits has done a very good job at leading the growth in permits nationwide, and is currently not pointing to a contraction in activity. Chart II-9 presents explanatory models for the growth in US housing starts and total home sales based on our state permits diffusion index, pending home sales, the change in mortgage rates, and housing affordability. The chart underscores that a contraction in housing activity is not what these variables would predict, even though starts and sales should be growing at a much more modest pace than what has prevailed on average over the past two years. Chart II-8Our Building Permits Diffusion Index Leads Housing Construction Activity, And Is Not Pointing To A Major Slowdown Chart II-9Reliably Leading Indicators Of Construction And Home Sales Do Not Point To A Recessionary Outcome     Consumer Surveys The University of Michigan consumer survey shows that consumers feel it is the worst time to buy a home since the early-1980s (Chart II-10), which seems like a clearly negative sign for the housing market and an indication of the likely impact of tighter policy on housing-related activity. And yet, panel 2 highlights that this is the result of the fact that house prices in the US have surged during the pandemic, not that mortgage rates have risen too high. It is true that the number of survey respondents citing “interest rates are too high” is rising sharply, but this factor as a share of all “bad time to buy” reasons given is not meaningfully higher than it was in 2018, 2011, or 2006. It is clear that high prices are also the culprit for why consumers report that it is a bad time to buy large household durables and not that large household durables are unaffordable or that interest rates are too high (Chart II-11). Chart II-10Nearly The Worst Time To Buy A Home, Mostly Due To Prices (Not Interest Rates) Chart II-11Same Story For Large Household Durables   It may seem counterintuitive for investors to see Charts II-10 and II-11 as in any way positive for the housing market. But, to us, the notion that elevated house prices are the main source of poor affordability supports the idea that a normalization of the housing market will occur through a combination of marginally lower demand, a slower pace of house price appreciation, and a sustained pace of housing market construction. This implies that existing home sales may be weaker than housing construction over the coming year, but the latter will help to support the contribution to overall economic growth from housing-related activity. Housing Sector Relative Performance Despite the significant slowdown in real home improvement spending and the recent decline in the NAHB’s housing market index, Chart II-12 highlights that home improvement retail and homebuilding stocks have not exhibited significantly negative abnormal returns over the past year – as they did in 1994/1995 and in the lead up to the global financial crisis. The chart, which presents a rolling 1-year “Jensen’s alpha” measure for both industries, attempts to capture the risk-adjusted performance of the industry versus the S&P 500. While the chart shows that both industries have generated negative alpha over the past year, the magnitude does not appear to be consistent with a recession. In the case of homebuilder stocks in particular, negative abnormal returns over the past year should have been meaningfully worse given the year-over-year change in mortgage rates. Chart II-13 highlights that homebuilder performance has not been cushioned by a deep valuation discount in advance of the rise in mortgage rates. Chart II-12Housing-Related Equity Sectors Are Not Warning Of A Housing-Driven Recession Chart II-13Homebuilders Were Not Excessively Cheap Before Mortgage Rates Spiked   In short, the important takeaway for investors is that the relative performance of housing-related stocks is not yet consistent with a housing-led US recession. Mortgage Rates Are Not Restrictive, And Have Likely Peaked As we highlighted in Chart II-1, the two-year change in the US 30-year conventional mortgage rate will be the largest in history by the end of this year, save the Volcker era, if the mortgage rate remains at its current level. However, it is not just the change in interest rates that matters for economic activity, but rather also the level. Encouragingly, Chart II-14 highlights that the level of mortgage rates has not yet risen into restrictive territory relative to the economy’s underlying potential rate of growth. In addition, it appears that mortgage rates have overreacted to the expected pace of monetary tightening – and thus have likely peaked for this year. Two points support this view: First, panel 2 of Chart II-14 highlights that the 30-year mortgage rate is one standard deviation too high relative to the 10-year Treasury yield, underscoring that the former has overshot. And second, Chart II-15 highlights that the mortgage rate is still too high even after controlling for business cycle expectations, current coupon MBS yields, and bond & equity market volatility. Chart II-14Mortgage Rates Are Not Yet Restrictive, But Have Likely Peaked For The Year Chart II-15No Matter How You Slice It, US Mortgage Rates Are Stretched   Structural Factors Supporting Housing Construction Chart II-16The US And Several Other DM Countries Have Underbuilt Homes Since The Global Financial Crisis Our analysis above points to a scenario in which the housing market slows in a nonrecessionary fashion, supported by relatively buoyant construction activity. Structural factors, which are mostly a legacy of the global financial crisis, are also supportive of the pace of housing construction in the US and other developed market economies. We presented Chart II-16 in our June 2021 Special Report, which shows the most standardized measure of cross-country housing supply available for several advanced economies: the trend in real residential investment relative to real GDP over time. These series are all rebased to 100 as of 1997, prior to the 2002-2007 US housing market boom. The chart makes it clear that advanced economies generally fall into two groups based on this metric: those that have seen declines in real residential investment relative to GDP, especially after the global financial crisis (panel 1) and those that have experienced either an uptrend in housing construction relative to output or a flat trend (panel 2). The US, along with the euro area, the UK, and Japan, all belong to the first group, with commodity-producing and Scandinavian countries belonging to the second group. The point of the chart is that the US and most other major DM economies have seemingly experienced a chronic undersupply of homes in the wake of the global financial crisis, which should continue to support housing construction activity even if demand for housing is slowing because of a sharp increase in mortgage rates. Given that the trend in real residential investment to GDP is a somewhat crude metric of housing supply, Chart II-17 presents a more precise measure for the US. It shows the standardized trend in permanent site residential structures investment (both single- and multi-family) relative to both the US population and the number of households. The chart makes it clear that the US vastly overbuilt homes from the late-1990s to 2007, but also vastly underbuilt since 2008. Relative to the number of households, real permanent site residential structures investment is still half of a standard deviation below its long-term average – even after the surge in construction that occurred in 2020. Chart II-18 highlights a similar message: it shows that the US homeowner vacancy rate (the proportion of the housing stock that is vacant and for sale) was at a 66-year low at the end of the first quarter. Chart II-19 shows that the monthly supply of existing one-family homes on the market is also at a multi-decade low, but that the supply of new homes for sale spiked in April. Chart II-17More Precise Home Supply Measures Underscore That The US Needs To Build More Houses Chart II-18The Homeowner Vacancy Rate Is Extremely Low     At first blush, this spike in the monthly supply of new homes relative to sales is quite concerning, as it has risen back to levels that prevailed in 2007. One point to note is that the increase in new home inventory relates to homes still under construction; the inventory of completed homes for sale remains quite low. In addition, from the perspective of a homebuilder, a rise in the monthly supply of new homes relative to home sales is only concerning if it translates into a significant increase in the amount of time to sell a completed home, as has historically been the case (Chart II-20). Chart II-19Existing Home Inventories Remain Low Relative To Sales... Chart II-20...And Higher New Home Inventories Are Not Affecting Time-To-Sale Of Completed Homes   Chart II-20 highlights that a fairly significant divergence between these two series has emerged over the past decade. Despite roughly five-six months’ supply of new home inventory on average since 2012, the median number of months required to sell a new home rarely exceeded four. In early-2019 the monthly supply of new homes also spiked, and a relatively modest and nonrecessionary slowdown in housing starts was sufficient to prevent any meaningful rise in the amount of time required to sell a newly completed home. Notably, the models that we presented in Chart II-9 led the slowdown in total home sales and starts in late-2018/early-2019, and they are not pointing to a major contraction today. The key point for investors is that while a slowdown in the housing market is clearly underway, it is not occurring after a period of excessive housing construction. In fact, the opposite is true: despite a surge in construction during the pandemic, it remains below its historical average relative to the population and especially the number of households. This should act to limit the drag on economic growth from housing-related activity, and therefore reduces the odds that a housing market slowdown will morph into a housing-driven US recession. Investment Implications We noted in our May report that the inversion of the 2-10 yield curve has set a recessionary tone to any weakness in US macroeconomic data, and that a recession scare was likely. Recent negative housing market data surprises underscore that a slowdown in the US housing market is clearly underway, and that this will likely feed recessionary concerns for a time. Investors should continue to be highly focused on the evolution of US macro data when making asset allocation decisions over the coming 6-12 months, as the current economic and financial market environment remains highly uncertain. This should include a strong focus on the housing market, as consumer surveys highlight that the overall impact of falling real wages and high house prices could cause a more pronounced slowdown in housing-related activity than we expect – and that the change and level of interest rates would imply. Nevertheless, our analysis of the historical predictors of housing construction and sales points to the conclusion that the ongoing housing market slowdown is not likely to be recessionary in nature. This, in conjunction with the factors that we noted in Section 1 of our report, support maintaining a modest overweight towards stocks within a multi-asset portfolio over the coming 6-12 months. Jonathan LaBerge, CFA Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst III. Indicators And Reference Charts BCA’s equity indicators generally paint a pessimistic picture for stock prices. Our monetary indicator is at its weakest level in almost three decades, and our valuation indicator highlights that stocks are still expensive. Meanwhile, both our sentiment and technical indicators have broken down, and have not yet reached levels that would indicate an imminent reversal. Investors should be, at most, very modestly overweight stocks versus bonds over the coming year. Equity earnings will likely rise over the coming year if the US economy avoids a recession (as we expect), but analysts are pricing in too much growth over the coming year. A contraction in profit margins is now likely, signaling that earnings will grow at a low single-digit pace. Net earnings revisions are falling, but are not yet signaling a large enough decline in margins that would cause earnings to contract even in the face of positive revenue growth. Within a global equity portfolio, we recommend a neutral regional equity allocation. The recent passive outperformance of global ex-US stocks has occurred mainly because US stocks have fallen more than global stocks, which have “caught up” to mounting US and global growth fears. Investors should wait for durable signs of an improving global growth outlook and a falling US dollar before shifting in favor of a global ex-US equity stance. Within a fixed-income portfolio, long-duration positions are reasonable on a 0-3 month time horizon given that 10-year Treasurys are significantly oversold. But over a 6-12 month time horizon, we continue to recommend a modestly short stance. A slower but steady path of tightening, in conjunction with easing inflation, makes it more likely that the US economy will be able to “digest” the recent adjustment in rates without tipping into recession. This should ultimately push long-maturity yields higher rather than lower. Our composite technical indicator for commodity prices continues to highlight that commodities are overbought. Still, the geopolitical situation continues to favor higher energy prices, as a seemingly imminent European oil embargo against Russia will likely lower Russian oil production.  Additional fiscal & monetary support in China is likely to cause a renewed rally in industrial metals, although they may fall in the nearer-term as COVID-19 cases continue to spread across China. We remain structurally bullish on industrial metals prices given that Russia’s aggression has sped up Europe’s decarbonization timeline. US and global LEIs remain in positive territory but have now rolled over significantly from very elevated levels. Our global LEI diffusion index is now rising, which may herald a stabilization in our global LEI. Manufacturing PMIs are falling in the US and globally, but have not yet fallen below the boom/bust line and are far from levels normally consistent with a recession. EQUITIES: Chart III-1US Equity Indicators Chart III-2Willingness To Pay For Risk Chart III-3US Equity Sentiment Indicators     Chart III-4US Stock Market Breadth Chart III-5US Stock Market Valuation Chart III-6US Earnings Chart III-7Global Stock Market And Earnings: Relative Performance Chart III-8Global Stock Market And Earnings: Relative Performance FIXED INCOME: Chart III-9US Treasurys And Valuations Chart III-10Yield Curve Slopes Chart III-11Selected US Bond Yields Chart III-1210-Year Treasury Yield ComponentsChart III-13US Corporate Bonds And Health Monitor Chart III-14Global Bonds: Developed Markets Chart III-15Global Bonds: Emerging Markets CURRENCIES: Chart III-16US Dollar And PPP Chart III-17US Dollar And Indicator Chart III-18US Dollar Fundamentals Chart III-19Japanese Yen Technicals Chart III-20Euro Technicals Chart III-21Euro/Yen Technicals Chart III-22Euro/Pound Technicals COMMODITIES: Chart III-23Broad Commodity Indicators Chart III-24Commodity Prices Chart III-25Commodity Prices Chart III-26Commodity Sentiment Chart III-27Speculative Positioning ECONOMY: Chart III-28US And Global Macro Backdrop Chart III-29US Macro Snapshot Chart III-30US Growth Outlook Chart III-31US Cyclical Spending Chart III-32US Labor Market Chart III-33US Consumption Chart III-34US Housing Chart III-35US Debt And Deleveraging Chart III-36US Financial Conditions Chart III-37Global Economic Snapshot: Europe Chart III-38Global Economic Snapshot: China Jonathan LaBerge, CFA Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst Gabriel Di Lullo Research Associate Footnotes 1     Cai, J. . et al., Modeling Transmission Of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron in China, Nature Medicine. May 10, 2022. 2     This is aside from the contribution to growth from imports, which mechanically subtract from consumption and investment when calculating GDP.

Listen to a short summary of this report.         Executive Summary The US Inflation Surprise Index Has Rolled Over Global equities are nearing a bottom and will rally over the coming months as inflation declines and growth reaccelerates. While equity valuations are not at bombed-out levels, they have cheapened significantly. Global stocks trade at 15.3-times forward earnings. We are upgrading tech stocks from underweight to neutral. The NASDAQ Composite now trades at a forward P/E of 22.6, down from 32.9 at its peak last year. The 10-year Treasury yield should decline to 2.5% by the end of the year, which will help tech stocks at the margin. The US dollar has peaked. A weakening dollar will provide a tailwind to stocks, especially overseas bourses. US high-yield spreads are pricing in a default rate of 6.2% over the next 12 months, well above the trailing default rate of 1.2%. Favor high-yield credit over government bonds within a fixed-income portfolio.   Bottom Line: The recent sell-off in stocks provides a good opportunity to increase equity allocations. We expect global stocks to rise 15%-to-20% over the next 12 months. Back to Bullish We wrote a report on April 22nd arguing that global equities were heading towards a “last hurrah” in the second half of the year as a Goldilocks environment of falling inflation and supply-side led growth emerges. Last week, we operationalized this view by tactically upgrading stocks to overweight after having downgraded them in late February. This highly out-of-consensus view change, coming at a time when surveys by the American Association of Individual Investors and other outfits show extreme levels of bearishness, has garnered a lot of attention. In this week’s report, we answer some of the most common questions from the perspective of a skeptical reader.   Q: Inflation is at multi-decade highs, global growth is faltering, and central banks are about to hike rates faster than we have seen in years. Isn’t it too early to turn bullish? A: We need to focus on how the world will look like in six months, not how it looks like now. Inflation has likely peaked and many of the forces that have slowed growth, such as China’s Covid lockdown and the war in Ukraine, could abate.   Q: What is the evidence that inflation has peaked? And may I remind you, even if inflation does decline later this year, this is something that most investors and central banks are already banking on. Inflation would need to fall by more than expected for your bullish scenario to play out. A: That’s true, but there is good reason to think that this is precisely what will happen.  Overall spending in the US is close to its pre-pandemic trend. However, spending on goods remains above trend while spending on services is below trend (Chart 1). Services prices tend to be stickier than goods prices. Thus, the shift in spending patterns caused goods inflation to rise markedly with little offsetting decline in services inflation. To cite one of many examples, fitness equipment prices rose dramatically, but gym membership fees barely fell (Chart 2). Chart 1Total US Consumer Spending Is Almost Exactly At Its Pre-Pandemic Trend, But The Composition Of Spending Remains Skewed Chart 2Asymmetries Matter: Firms Manufacturing Sports Equipment Jacked Up Prices, But Gyms Barely Cut Prices As goods demand normalizes, goods inflation will come down. Meanwhile, the supply of goods should increase as the pandemic winds down, and hopefully, a detente is reached in Ukraine. There are already indications that some supply-chain bottlenecks have eased (Chart 3). Q: Even if supply shocks abate, which seems like a BIG IF to me, wouldn’t the shift in spending towards services supercharge what has been only a modest acceleration in services inflation so far? A: Wages are the most important driver of services inflation. Although the evidence is still tentative, it does appear as though wage inflation is peaking. The 3-month annualized growth rate in average hourly earnings for production and nonsupervisory workers slowed from 7.2% in the second half of 2021 to 3.8% in April (Chart 4). Assuming productivity growth of 1.5%, this is consistent with unit labor cost inflation of only slightly more than 2%, which is broadly consistent with the Fed’s CPI inflation target.1 Chart 4Wage Pressures May Be Starting To Ease Moreover, a smaller proportion of firms expect to raise wages over the next six months than was the case late last year according to a variety of regional Fed surveys (Chart 5). The same message is echoed by the NFIB small business survey (Chart 6). Consistent with all this, the US Citi Inflation Surprise Index has rolled over (Chart 7).   Chart 6... Small Business Owners Included Chart 7The US Inflation Surprise Index Has Rolled Over   Q: What about the “too cold” risk to your Goldilocks scenario? The risks of recession seem to be rising. A: The market is certainly worried about this outcome, and that has been the main reason stocks have fallen of late. However, we do not think this fear is justified, certainly not in the US (Chart 8). US households are sitting on $2.3 trillion excess savings, equal to about 14% of annual consumption. The ratio of household debt-to-disposable income is down 36 percentage points from its highs in early 2008, giving households the wherewithal to spend more. Core capital goods orders, a good leading indicator for capex, have surged. The homeowner vacancy rate is at a record low, suggesting that homebuilding will be fairly resilient in the face of higher mortgage rates.   Q: It seems like the Fed has a nearly impossible task on its hands: Increase labor market slack by enough to cool the economy but not so much as to trigger a recession. You yourself have pointed out that the Fed has never achieved this in its history. A: It is correct that the unemployment rate has never risen by more than one-third of a percentage point in the US without a recession occurring (Chart 9). That said, there are three reasons to think that a soft landing can be achieved this time. Chart 9When Unemployment Starts Rising, It Usually Keeps Rising First, increasing labor market slack is easier if one can raise labor supply rather than reducing labor demand. Right now, the participation rate is nearly a percentage point below where it was in 2019, even if one adjusts for increased early retirement during the pandemic (Chart 10). Wages have risen relatively more at the bottom end of the income distribution. This should draw more low-wage workers into the labor force. Furthermore, according to the Federal Reserve, accumulated bank savings for the lowest-paid 20% of workers have been shrinking since last summer, which should incentivize job seeking (Chart 11). Chart 10Labor Participation Has Further Scope To Recover Chart 11Depleted Savings Will Force More Lower-Wage Workers Into The Labor Market Second, long-term inflation expectations remain well contained, which makes a soft landing more likely. Median expected inflation 5-to-10 years out in the University of Michigan survey stood at 3% in May, roughly where it was between 2005 and 2013 (Chart 12). Median expected earnings growth in the New York Fed Survey of Consumer Expectations was only slightly higher in April than it was prior to the pandemic (Chart 13). Chart 12Consumer Long-Term Inflation Expectations Have Risen But Remain Relatively Low Chart 13US Consumers Do Not Expect Wages To Grow At A Much Higher Rate Than In The Pre-Pandemic Period A third reason for thinking that a soft landing may be easier to achieve this time around is that the US private-sector financial balance – the difference between what the private sector earns and spends – is still in surplus (Chart 14). This stands in contrast to the lead-up to both the 2001 and 2008-09 recessions, when the private sector was living beyond its means.   Q: You have spoken a lot about the US, but the situation seems dire elsewhere. Europe may already be in recession as we speak! A: The near-term outlook for Europe is indeed challenging. The euro area economy grew by only 0.8% annualized in the first quarter. Mathieu Savary, BCA’s Chief European Strategist, expects an outright decline in output in Q2. To no one’s surprise, the war in Ukraine is weighing on European growth. The Bundesbank estimates that a full embargo of Russian oil and gas would reduce German real GDP by an additional 5% on top of the damage already inflicted by the war (Chart 15). Chart 14The US Private-Sector Financial Balance Remains In Surplus Chart 15Germany’s Economy Will Sink Without Russian Energy While such a full embargo is possible, it is not our base case. In a remarkable about-face, Putin now says he has “no problems” with Finland and Sweden joining NATO, provided that they do not place military infrastructure in their countries. He had previous threatened a military response at the mere suggestion of NATO membership. In any case, there are few signs that Putin’s increasingly insular and dictatorial regime would respond to an oil embargo or other economic incentives. The wealthy oligarchs who were supposed to rein him in are cowering in fear. It is also not clear if Europe would gain any political leverage over Russia by adopting policies that push its own economy into a recession. It is worth noting that the price of the December 2022 European natural gas futures contract is down 39% from its peak at the start of the war (Chart 16). It is also noteworthy that European EPS estimates have been trending higher this year even as GDP growth estimates have been cut (Chart 17). This suggests that the analyst earnings projections were too conservative going into the year. Chart 16European Natural Gas Futures Are High But Below Their Peak Chart 17European And US EPS Estimates Have Been Trending Higher This Year Chart 18Chinese Property Sector: Signs Of Contraction Q: What about China? The lockdowns are crippling growth and the property market is in shambles. A: There is truth to both those claims. The government has all but said that it will not abandon its zero-Covid policy anytime soon, even going as far as to withdraw from hosting the 2023 AFC Asian Cup. While the number of new cases has declined sharply in Shanghai, future outbreaks are probable. On the bright side, China is likely to ramp up domestic production of Pfizer’s Paxlovid drug. Increased availability of the drug will reduce the burden of the disease once social distancing restrictions are relaxed. As far as the property market is concerned, sales, starts, completions, as well as home prices are all contracting (Chart 18). BCA’s China Investment Strategy expects accelerated policy easing to put the housing sector on a recovery path in the second half of this year. Nevertheless, they expect the “three red lines” policy to remain in place, suggesting that the rebound in housing activity will be more muted than in past recoveries.2  Ironically, the slowdown in the Chinese housing market may not be such a bad thing for the rest of the world. Remember, the main problem these days is inflation. To the extent that a sluggish Chinese housing market curbs the demand for commodities, this could provide some relief on the inflation front.   Q: So bad news is good news. Interesting take. Let’s turn to markets. You mentioned earlier that equity sentiment was very bearish. Fair enough, but I would note the very same American Association of Individual Investors survey that you cited also shows that investors’ allocation to stocks is near record highs (Chart 19). Shouldn’t we look at what investors are doing rather than what they’re saying? A: The discrepancy may not be as large as it seems. As Chart 20 illustrates, investors may not like stocks, but they like bonds even less. Chart 19Individual Investors Still Hold A Lot Of Stock   Chart 20B... But They Like Bonds Even Less Chart 21Global Equities Are More Attractively Valued After The Recent Sell-Off Global equities currently trade at 15.3-times forward earnings; a mere 12.5-times outside the US. The global forward earnings yield is 6.7 percentage points higher than the global real bond yield. In 2000, the spread between the earnings yield and the real bond yield was close to zero (Chart 21). It should also be mentioned that institutional data already show a sharp shift out of equities. The latest Bank of America survey revealed that fund managers cut equity allocations to a net 13% underweight in May from a 6% overweight in April and a net 55% overweight in January. Strikingly, fund managers were even more underweight bonds than stocks. Cash registered the biggest overweight in two decades.   Q: Your bullish equity bias notwithstanding, you were negative on tech stocks last year, arguing that the NASDAQ would turn into the NASDOG. Given that the NASDAQ Composite is down 29% from its highs, is it time to increase exposure to some beaten down tech names? A: Both the cyclical and structural headwinds facing tech stocks that we discussed in These Three High-Flying Equity Sectors Could Come Crashing Back Down To Earth and The Disruptor Delusion remain in place. Nevertheless, with the NASDAQ Composite now trading at 22.6-times forward earnings, down from 32.9 at its peak last year, an underweight in tech is no longer appropriate (Chart 22). A neutral stance is now preferable.   Chart 22Tech Stock Valuations Have Returned To Earth Q: I guess if bond yields come down a bit more, that would help tech stocks? A: Yes. Tech stocks tend to be growth-oriented. Falling bond yields raise the present value of expected cash flows more for growth companies than for other firms. While we do expect global bond yields to eventually rise above current levels, yields are likely to decline modestly over the next 12 months as inflation temporarily falls. We expect the US 10-year yield to end the year at around 2.5%.   Q: A decline in US bond yields would undermine the high-flying dollar, would it not? A: It depends on how bond yields abroad evolve. US Treasuries tend to be relatively high beta, implying that US yields usually fall more when global yields are declining (Chart 23). Thus, it would not surprise us if interest rate differentials moved against the dollar later this year. Chart 23US Treasuries Have A Higher Beta Than Most Other Government Bond Markets It is also important to remember that the US dollar is a countercyclical currency (Chart 24). If global growth picks up as pandemic dislocations fade and the Ukraine war winds down, the dollar is likely to weaken. Chart 24The Dollar Is A Countercyclical Currency A wider trade deficit could also imperil the greenback. The US trade deficit has increased from US$45 billion in December 2019 to US$110 billion. Equity inflows have helped finance the trade deficit, but net flows have turned negative of late (Chart 25). Finally, the dollar is quite expensive – 27% overvalued based on Purchasing Power Parity exchange rates.   Q: Let’s sum up. Please review your asset allocation recommendations both for the next 12 months and beyond. A: To summarize, global inflation has peaked. Growth should pick up later this year as supply-chain bottlenecks abate. The combination of falling inflation and supply-side led growth will provide a springboard for equities. We expect global stocks to rise 15%-to-20% over the next 12 months. Historically, non-US stocks have outperformed their US peers when the dollar has been weakening (Chart 26). EM stocks, in particular, have done well in a weak dollar environment Chart 26Non-US Stocks Will Benefit From A Weaker US Dollar Chart 27The Market Is Too Pessimistic On Default Risk Within fixed-income portfolios, we recommend a modest long duration stance over the next 12 months. We favor high-yield credit over safer government bonds. US high-yield spreads imply a default rate of 6.2% over the next 12 months compared to a trailing 12-month default rate of only 1.2% (Chart 27). Chart 28Falling Inflation Will Buoy Consumer Sentiment Our guess is that this Goldilocks environment will end towards the end of next year. As inflation comes down, real wage growth will turn positive. Consumer confidence, which is now quite depressed, will improve (Chart 28). Stronger demand will cause inflation to reaccelerate in 2024, setting the stage for another round of central bank rate hikes.   Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on           LinkedIn Twitter       Footnotes 1    The Federal Reserve targets an average inflation rate of 2% for the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index. Due to compositional differences between the two indices, CPI inflation has historically averaged 30-to-50 basis points higher than PCE inflation. This is why the Fed effectively targets a CPI inflation rate of 2.3%-to-2.5%. 2    The People’s Bank of China and the housing ministry issued a deleveraging framework for property developers in August 2020, consisting of a 70% ceiling on liabilities-to-assets, a net debt-to-equity ratio capped at 100%, and a limit on short-term borrowing that cannot exceed cash reserves. Developers breaching these “red lines” run the risk of being cut off from access to new loans from banks, while those who respect them can only increase their interest-bearing borrowing by 15% at most. Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores

Special Report

Dear Client, This week, the US Bond Strategy service is hosting its Quarterly Webcast (May 17 at 9:00 AM EDT, 14:00 PM BST, 15:00 PM CEST and May 18 at 9:00 HKT, 11:00 AEST). In addition, we are sending this Quarterly Chartpack that provides a recap of our key recommendations and some charts related to those recommendations and other areas of interest for US bond investors. Please tune in to the Webcast and browse the Chartpack at your leisure, and do let us know if you have any questions or other feedback. To view the Quarterly Chartpack PDF please click here. Best regards, Ryan Swift, US Bond Strategist

Executive Summary Global inflation will peak sometime in the next few months, a process that has likely already begun in the US. This will give policymakers some breathing room to turn less hawkish, a more credible stance given softening global growth momentum and increased financial market volatility. Our Global Golden Rule of Bond Investing suggests that overall government bond returns should turn positive over the next year, but with widening divergences across countries for our base case scenarios. Projected government bond return expectations over the next 12 months look most attractive in Australia, Germany and the UK – where far too many rate hikes are priced in – compared to the US, where the Fed is more likely to follow through on most, but not all, discounted rate increases. Japan has the lowest expected returns, and the defensive properties of “low-beta” JGBs will be less necessary with global yield momentum set to peak in the latter half of 2022. Our Global Golden Rule Base Case Scenarios For The Next 12 Months Bottom Line: The return expectations over the next year stemming from our Global Golden Rule suggest the following country allocation recommendations in global government bond portfolios: maintain overweights in Australia, Germany and the UK, stay underweight the US and neutral Canada, but downgrade Japan to underweight. Feature Chart 1A Pause In The Global Bond Bear Market Global bond markets may finally be showing signs of settling down after a painful period of rising yields and high volatility. Government bond yields across the developed economies have fallen substantially over the past week as equity and credit markets have sold off, in a typical risk-off response to increased concerns over global growth momentum. For example, benchmark 10-year government yields have fallen by -32bps both the US and UK, -25bps in Germany and -22bps in Canada since the cyclical intraday high was reached on May 9. These moves are modest in the context of the cyclical bond bear market, with the Bloomberg Global Treasury index still down -12.1% year-to-date and -14.4% on a year-over-year basis (Chart 1). That painful selloff has been driven by expectations of intense monetary tightening in response to surging global inflation. However, last week’s release of US Consumer Price Index data for April confirmed that US goods inflation has peaked, a trend that we expect to follow suit in other countries (Chart 2). That will leave inflation momentum, and eventual interest rate hikes, to be driven more by domestic services inflation that will prove to be less correlated across countries over the next 6-12 months (Chart 3). Chart 2Inflation & Rate Hike Expectations Have Become Correlated. . .​​​​​​ Chart 3. . .Making Our Global Golden Rule All About Inflation​​​​​​ With that in mind, we revisit our framework for linking government bond returns to monetary policy outcomes versus expectations, the Global Golden Rule of Bond Investing. A Brief Overview Of The Global Golden Rule In September 2018, we published a Special Report introducing a government bond return forecasting methodology called the “Global Golden Rule.” This was an extension of a framework introduced by our sister service, US Bond Strategy, that links US Treasury returns (versus cash) to changes in the fed funds rate that were not already discounted in the US Overnight Index Swap (OIS) curve.1 The historical results convincingly showed that investors who "get the Fed right" by making correct bets on changes in the funds rate versus expectations were very likely to make the right call on the direction of Treasury yields and Treasury returns. Related Report  Global Fixed Income StrategyRevisiting Our Global Golden Rule Of Bond Investing We discovered that relationship also held in other developed market countries. This gave us a framework to help project expected global bond returns simply based on a view for future central bank interest rate moves versus market expectations.2 Specific details on the calculation of the Global Golden Rule can be found in those original 2018 papers. In the following pages, we present the latest results of the Global Golden Rule for the US, Canada, Australia, the UK, the euro area and Japan. The set-up for the chart shown for each country is the same. We show the 12-month policy rate “surprise”, defined as the actual change in the central bank policy rate over the preceding 12-months versus the expected 12-month change in the policy rate from a year earlier extracted from OIS curves (a.k.a. our 12-month discounters). We then compare the 12-month policy rate surprise to the annual excess return over cash (treasury bills) of the Bloomberg government bond index for each country. We also show the 12-month policy rate surprise versus the 12-month change in the government bond index yield. The very strong historical correlation between those latter two series is the backbone of the Global Golden Rule framework. After that, we present tables showing expected yield changes and excess returns for various maturity points, as well as the overall government bond index, derived from the Global Golden Rule regressions. The expected change in yield is derived from regressions on the policy rate surprises, with different estimations done for each maturity point. In the tables, we show the results for different scenarios for changes in policy rates. For example, the row in the return tables labeled “+25bps” would show the expected yield changes and excess returns if the central bank for that particular country lifts the policy interest rate by +25bps over the next 12 months. Showing these scenarios allows us to pick the one that most closely correlates to our own expectation for central bank actions, translating that into government bond return expectations. Global Golden Rule: US Chart 4Risk/Reward Favors Less UST-Bearish Fed'Surprises' US Treasuries have delivered a painful loss of -7.8% versus cash over 12 months. Bearish outcomes of such magnitude were last seen during 1994 and 1999 when the Fed was aggressively lifting the funds rate. The Fed delivered a smaller hawkish surprise over the past year than those 1990s episodes, with a trailing 12-month policy rate surprise of -72bps. Thus, the Golden Rule underestimated losses realized by US Treasuries, as US bond yields moved to price in far more Fed tightening than what was expected one year ago. The US OIS curve now discounts +229bps of rate hikes over the next 12 months, taking the fed funds rate to 3.3% (Chart 4). That is a more aggressive profile than was laid out in the March 2022 Fed “dots”, where the median FOMC member projection called for the funds rate to climb to 2.8% in 2023. That means there is less scope for Fed rate hikes to surprise versus market expectations that are already very hawkish, at a time when US growth and inflation momentum is rolling over. Our base case calls for the Fed to deliver +200bps of rate increases over the next year, +50bps at the next two policy meetings followed by +25bps at the subsequent four meetings. That outcome produces a Golden Rule forecast of the overall US Treasury index yield falling -13bps, generating a total return of +3.73% (Tables 1 & 2). Table 1US: Government Bond Index Total Return Forecasts Over The Next 12 Months Table 2US: Expected Changes In Treasury Yields Over The Next 12 Months Global Golden Rule: Canada Chart 5Canadian Bonds Selloff After A Hawkish BoC Canadian government bonds have sold off hard over the past 12 months, delivering an excess return over cash of -7.5% (Chart 5). That loss reflects the Bank of Canada’s (BoC) hawkish turn, but is a less severe outcome compared to other developed economy government bond markets that saw a major repricing of rate hike expectations like the US and Australia. Losses in the Canadian government bond market were consistent with the +34bps of hawkish surprises delivered by the BoC, which tightened by +75bps on a 12-month basis versus the +41bps expected by markets in May 2021. Rate expectations are highly aggressive on a forward basis. The Canadian OIS curve now discounts 210bps of interest rate increases over the next 12 months. However, high household debt in Canada, fueled by a relentlessly expanding housing bubble, will limit the ability of the BoC to match the Fed’s rate hikes over the next 6-12 months. Higher debt levels also imply a lower nominal neutral rate of interest, as the BoC has less room to hike before debt servicing costs become overly burdensome for overleveraged Canadian consumers. Our base case is that the BoC will deliver +150bps of tightening over the next 12 months. This produces a Golden Rule forecast of a decline in the overall Canadian government bond index yield of -17bps, delivering a projected total return of 4.52% (Tables 3 & 4). Table 3Canada: Government Bond Index Total Return Forecasts Over The Next 12 Months Table 4Canada: Expected Changes In Government Bond Yields Over The Next 12 Months Global Golden Rule: Australia Chart 6Aggressive Rate Hike Expectations On A Forward Basis For Australia Australian government bonds have delivered a negative excess return over cash of -9.6% over the past year (Chart 6). This is the biggest sell-off among all the countries covered in our Global Golden Rule framework. The magnitude of those realized losses far exceeded what would have been predicted by the Golden Rule a year ago, with the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) delivering only a modest hawkish surprise. An unexpectedly high Australian headline inflation print of 5.1% in Q1 of this year led the RBA to deliver a surprise +25bps rate hike in April. This created a mild hawkish policy rate surprise of -17bps over the past 12 months, as only +8bps of tightening had been discounted in the Australian OIS curve in May 2021. The Australian OIS curve is now discounting 292bps of rate hikes over the next year, taking the cash rate to just over 3% - a level last seen in 2013 when the neutral rate in Australia was much higher by the RBA’s own reckoning. The RBA appears confident in the Australian economy, forecasting the unemployment rate to reach a 50-year low around 3.5% in 2023. However, we believe the RBA will be more measured in its pace of rate increases over the next year than markets expect, as global traded goods inflation cools and Australian wages are still not overheating. According to the Golden Rule projections, our base case of +150bps of tightening will produce a decline in Australian government bond index yield of -92bps, delivering a projected total return of 9.29% (Tables 5 & 6). Table 5Australia: Government Bond Index Total Return Forecasts Over The Next 12 Months Table 6Australia: Expected Changes In Government Bond Yields Over The Next 12 Months Global Golden Rule: UK Chart 7The BoE Will Hike Less Than Markets Expect UK government bonds have gotten hit hard over the past year, delivering a negative excess return over cash of -7.9% - one of the worst performances seen over the past quarter century (Chart 7). The size of that loss was in line with the Global Golden Rule forecasts, given the magnitude of the rate shock seen in the UK. The Bank of England (BoE) hiked rates by 90bps over the past 12 months, which was a hawkish surprise of -79bps compared to what was discounted one year earlier. The UK OIS curve is now priced for another +139bps of rate hikes over the next year. This would take the BoE’s Bank Rate to 2.4%, a level that would push the UK unemployment rate up by two percentage points and lower UK inflation to below 2% within the next 2-3 years, according to the BoE’s own forecasting models. As we discussed in our report last week, where we upgraded our stance on UK Gilts to overweight, the neutral level of UK policy rates is between 1.5-2%, at best, with UK potential growth barely above 1%. Thus, markets are already pricing in a very restrictive monetary policy stance from the BoE that is unlikely to be fully delivered before UK growth and inflation decline sharply. Our base case calls for the BoE to deliver only another +75bps of hikes over the next year, which will produce a fall in the UK government bond index yield of -21bps and a total return of 4.12% (Tables 7 & 8). Table 7UK: Government Bond Index Total Return Forecasts Over The Next 12 Months Table 8UK: Expected Changes In Gilt Yields Over The Next 12 Months Global Golden Rule: Germany Chart 8German Bunds Stand To Gain From An ECB Dovish Surprise German government bonds suffered major losses over the past year, underperforming cash by -8.5% over the past year. We saw no policy surprise from the European Central Bank (ECB) over that time relative to market expectations (Chart 8). The dramatic sell-off instead reflected surging expectations of future tightening as the euro area faces an energy-driven inflation spike. The trailing 12-month policy rate surprise for Germany (and the overall euro area) remains stuck near zero. However, markets now expect a very aggressive move by the ECB, discounting a full +156bps of tightening over the next 12 months. This would push the ECB’s main refinancing rate to levels last seen in the disastrous tightening cycle during the 2011 European debt crisis. As argued by our colleagues at BCA Research European Investment Strategy, the euro area is heading into a growth slowdown and energy inflation looks set to peak. Even if the hawks are able to sway the ECB Governing Council to begin hiking rates this summer, the slowing trajectory of growth and inflation make it highly unlikely that the ECB will deliver the full amount of tightening currently discounted. Our base case is that the ECB will deliver only +50bps of tightening over the next 12 months, enough to push the deposit rate out of negative territory to 0%. As shown in Tables 9 & 10, this is consistent with the Germany government bond index yield falling -55bps, delivering an index return of 5.07% over a 12-month horizon. Table 9Germany: Government Bond Index Total Return Forecasts Over The Next 12 Months Table 10Germany: Expected Changes In Bund Yields Over The Next 12 Months Global Golden Rule: Japan Chart 9The Upside On A BoJ Dovish Surprise Is Limited Japanese government bonds (JGBs) have delivered an excess return versus cash of -1.8% over the past twelve months (Chart 9). The policy rate surprise was flat as the Bank of Japan (BoJ) kept the policy rate unchanged at -0.1%. Admittedly, the Golden Rule framework is poorly suited to project Japanese bond returns. The BoJ has been unable to lift policy rates for many years, while instituting yield curve control on 10-year JGBs since 2016 to anchor yields near zero. With no variability on policy rates or bond yields, a methodology that links bond returns to unexpected policy interest rate changes will have poor predictive power. However, rates traders are making some attempt to challenge the BoJ’s ultra-dovish posture. The Japan OIS curve now discounts +9bps of tightening, approximately enough to push the policy rate to zero, over the next 12 months. With the yen weakening rapidly and the cost of imported energy elevated, consumer price inflation in Tokyo (excluding fresh food) hit the BoJ’s 2% target in April. However, as evidenced in the minutes of the March BoJ meeting, policymakers see a sustainable inflation overshoot as unlikely. Our base case is the “Flat” scenarios shown in Tables 11 & 12, with the BoJ keeping policy rates unchanged for the next twelve months and delivering a slight dovish surprise. That generates a Golden Rule forecast of a -6bps fall in the Japanese government bond index yield, with a total return projection of 0.87%. Table 11Japan: Government Bond Index Total Return Forecasts Over The Next 12 Months Table 12Japan: Expected Changes In JGB Yields Over The Next 12 Months Investment Implications Of The Global Golden Rule Projections For all the countries discussed above, our base case calls for the respective central banks to deliver less tightening than markets are discounting over the next year. This suggests that government bonds should be expected to deliver positive returns versus cash, even as we expect multiple rate increases from all central banks except the BoJ. While this could argue for an above-benchmark duration stance at the overall global level, we prefer to translate the Global Golden Rule results via country allocations – as we have greater conviction on relative central bank moves in the current high inflation environment – while keeping overall global duration exposure at neutral. The return outcomes for our base case scenarios for the six countries in our Global Golden Rule framework are presented in Table 13. We show the expected returns both in local currency and hedged into US dollars, the latter allowing a comparison in common currency terms. In our base case scenarios, we expect Australian and German government bonds to deliver the strongest performance over the next year, followed by the UK, Canada, the US and Japan. Table 13Our Global Golden Rule Base Case Scenarios For The Next 12 Months Chart 10Downgrade 'Defensive' Low-Yield-Beta JGBs To Underweight Our UK upgrade to overweight last week was a change to our strategic call on Gilts. Based on the results from our Global Golden Rule update, increased exposure to UK Gilts should be “funded” in a global bond portfolio by reducing exposure to Japan, with JGBs expected to deliver the weakest returns. Cutting JGB exposure also fits with the signal from our Global Duration Indicator, which is heralding a peak in global bond yield momentum in the latter half of 2022 (Chart 10). JGBs are typically a good “defensive” overweight country allocation in an environment of rising global bond yields. Persistently low Japanese inflation prevents the BoJ from credibly signaling rate hikes when other central banks like the Fed are lifting rates in response to stronger growth or overshooting inflation as is currently the case. The relative performance of Japan versus the Bloomberg Global Treasury benchmark index (in USD-hedged terms) is highly correlated to the year-over-year momentum of the overall level of global bond yields. With our Duration Indicator signaling a peak in yield momentum, we expect JGBs, which continue to exhibit a very low “beta” to changes in global bond yields, to underperform. Thus, this week we are downgrading our strategic allocation to Japan from overweight (4 out of 5) to underweight (2 out of 5). We view this as an offsetting recommendation to our UK upgrade from last week, while leaving our other country allocations unchanged. The result is that our country recommendations now line up with the expected returns from our Global Golden Rule, as can be seen in Table 13. That includes leaving the recommended US Treasury exposure at underweight, as we expect the Fed to deliver the smallest dovish surprise out of the central banks discussed in this report. We are adding both of the view changes made over the past two weeks, upgrading the UK and downgrading Japan, to our model bond portfolio as seen on pages 20-21. Bottom Line: Our Global Golden Rule suggests that developed market government bonds are expected to deliver positive returns over the next year as softening inflation momentum leads central banks to not fully deliver discounted rate hikes. Return expectations look most attractive in Australia, Germany and the UK, especially compared to the US and Japan.     Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com Shakti Sharma Senior Analyst ShaktiS@bcaresearch.com Deborah Acri Research Associate deborah.acri@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1      Please see BCA Research US Bond Strategy Special Report, "The Golden Rule Of Bond Investing", dated July 24, 2018, available at usbs.bcarearch.com. 2     Please see BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, "The Global Golden Rule Of Bond Investing", dated September 25, 2018, available at gfis.bcaresearch.com. GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Recommended Positioning     Active Duration Contribution: GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. Custom Performance Benchmark The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index Global Fixed Income - Strategic Recommendations* Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Tactical Overlay Trades

Special Report

Executive Summary Favor ASEAN And The Philippines Southeast Asia is suffering from fading macro and geopolitical tailwinds but there are still investment opportunities on a relative basis. The peace dividend, globalization dividend, and demographic dividend are all eroding and will continue to erode, though there are relative winners and losers. The Philippines and Thailand are most secure; the Philippines and Indonesia are least dependent on trade; and the Philippines and Vietnam have the highest potential GDP growth. Geopolitical risk premiums have risen for Russia, Eastern Europe, China, and will rise for the Middle East. This leaves ASEAN states as relatively attractive emerging markets. Trade Recommendation Inception Date Return LONG PHILIPPINES / EM EQUITIES 2022-05-12   LONG ASEAN / ACW EQUITIES 2022-05-12   Bottom Line: ASEAN’s geopolitical outlook is less ugly than many other emerging markets. Cyclically, go long ASEAN versus global equities and long Philippine equities versus EM. Feature Chart 1Hypo-Globalization A Headwind For Trading States The Philippines elected its second “strongman” leader in a row on May 9, provoking the usual round of editorials about the death of liberalism. Investors know well by now that such political narratives do as much to occlude economic reality as to clarify it. Still, there is a fundamental need to understand the changing global political order since it will ultimately impact the investment landscape. If the global order stabilizes – e.g. US-Russia and US-China relations normalize – then trade and investment may recover from recent shocks. A new era of “Re-Globalization” could ensue. Asia Pacific would be a prime beneficiary as it is full of trading economies (Chart 1). Related Report  Geopolitical StrategySecond Quarter Outlook 2022: When It Rains, It Pours By contrast, if Great Power Rivalry escalates further, then trade and investment will suffer, the current paradigm of Hypo-Globalization will continue, and East Asia’s frozen conflicts from 1945-52 will thaw and heat up. Asian states will have to shift focus from trade to security and their economies will suffer relative to previous expectations. How will Southeast Asia fare in this context? Will it fall victim to great power conflict, like Eastern Europe? Or will it keep a balance between the great powers and extract maximum benefits? Three Dividends Three dividends have underpinned Southeast Asia’s growth and prosperity in recent decades: 1.  Peace Dividend – A relative lack of war and inter-state conflict. 2.  Globalization Dividend – Advantageous maritime geography and access to major economies. 3.  Demographic Dividend – Young demographics and strong potential GDP growth. All three of these dividends are eroding, so the macro and geopolitical investment case for ASEAN has weakened relative to twenty years ago. Nevertheless in a world where Russia, China, and the Gulf Arab markets face a higher and persistent geopolitical risk premium, ASEAN still offers attractive investment opportunities, particularly if the most geopolitically insecure countries are avoided. Peace Dividend Favors The Philippines And Thailand Since the end of the US and Chinese wars with Vietnam, military conflicts in Southeast Asia have been low intensity. Lack of inter-state conflict encouraged economic prosperity and security complacency. The five major Southeast Asian nations saw military spending decline since the 1990s and only Vietnam spends more than 2% of GDP (Chart 2). Chart 2Peace Brought Prosperity Unfortunately that is about to change. China has large import dependencies, an insufficient tradition of sea power, and feels hemmed in by its geography and the US alliance system. Beijing’s solution is to build and modernize its navy and prepare for potential conflict with the US, particularly over Taiwan. The result is rising tension across East Asia, including in Southeast Asia and the South China Sea. The ASEAN states fear China will walk over them, China fears they will league with the US against China, and the US tries to get them to do exactly that. Hence ASEAN’s defense spending has not kept up with its geopolitical importance and will have to rise going forward. Consider the following: Vietnam risks conflict with China. Vietnam has the most capable and experienced naval force within ASEAN due to its sporadic conflicts with China. Its equipment is supplied mainly by Russia, pitting it squarely against China’s Soviet or Soviet-inspired equipment. But Russia-China ties are tightening, especially after Russia’s divorce with Europe. While Vietnam will not reject Russia, it is increasingly partnering with the United States. The pandemic added to the Vietnamese public’s distrust of China, which is ancient but has ramped up in recent years due to clashes in the South China Sea. While Vietnam officially maintains that it will never host the US military, it is tacitly bonding with the US as a hedge against China. Yet Vietnam does not have a mutual defense treaty with the US, so it is vulnerable to Chinese military aggression over time. Indonesia distances itself from China. Rising security tensions are also forcing Indonesia to change its strategy toward China. Indonesia lacks experience in naval warfare and is not a claimant in the territorial disputes in the South China Sea. It is reluctant to take sides due to its traditionally non-aligned diplomatic status, its military culture of prioritizing internal stability (which is hard to maintain across thousands of islands), and China’s investment in its economy. However, China is encroaching on Indonesia’s exclusive economic zone and Indonesia has signaled its displeasure through diplomatic snubs and high-profile infrastructure contracts. Indonesia is trying to bulk up its naval and air capabilities, including via arms purchases from the West. Malaysia distances itself from China. Malaysia and the Philippines have the weakest naval forces and both face pressure from China’s navy and coast guard due to maritime-territorial disputes. But while the Philippines gets help from the US and its allies and partners, Malaysia has no such allies. Traditionally it was non-aligned. Instead it utilizes economic statecraft, as it has often done against more powerful countries. It recently paused Chinese economic projects in the country to conduct reviews and chose Ericsson over Huawei to build the 5G network. Ongoing maritime and energy disputes will motivate defense spending. The Philippines preserves alliance with United States. Outgoing President Rodrigo Duterte tried but failed to strengthen ties with China and Russia. Beijing continued to swarm the Philippines’ economic zone with ships and threaten its control of neighboring rocks and reefs. Ultimately Duterte renewed his country’s Visiting Forces Agreement with the US in July 2021. The newly elected President “Bong Bong” Marcos is even less likely to try to pivot away from the US. Instead the Philippines will work with the US to try to deter China. Thailand preserves alliance with United States. Thailand is the most insulated from the South China Sea disputes and often acts as mediator between China and other ASEAN states. However, Thailand is also a formal US defense ally and assisted with logistics during the Korean and Vietnamese wars. While US military aid was suspended after the 2014 military coup, non-military aid from the US continued. The State Department certified Thailand’s return to democracy in 2019, relations were normalized, and the annual Cobra Gold exercise resumed in 2020. The US’s hasty normalization shows Thailand’s importance to its regional strategy. On their own, the ASEAN states cannot counter China – they are simply outgunned (Chart 3). Hence their grand strategy of balancing Chinese trade relations with American security relations. Chart 3Outgunned By China Chart 4Opinion Shifts Against China In recent decades, with the US divided and distracted, they sought to entice China through commercial deals, in hopes that it would reduce its encroachments on the high seas. This strategy failed, as China’s expansion of economic and military influence in the region is driven by China’s own imperatives. Beijing’s lack of transparency about Covid-19 also sowed distrust. As a result, public opinion became more critical of China and defensive of national sovereignty (Chart 4). Southeast Asia will continue trading with China but changing public opinion, the US-China clash, and tensions in the South China Sea will inject greater geopolitical risk into this once peaceful and prosperous region. Military weakness will also lead the ASEAN states to welcome the US, EU, Japan, and Australia into the region as economic and security hedges against China. This trend risks inflaming regional tensions in the short run – and China may not be deterred over the long run, since its encroachments in the region are driven by its own needs and insecurities. Decades of under-investment in defense will result in ASEAN rearmament, which will weigh on fiscal balances and potentially economic competitiveness. Investors should not take the past three decades of peace for granted. Bottom Line: Vietnam (like Taiwan) is in a geopolitical predicament where it could provoke China’s wrath and yet lacks an American security guarantee. The Philippines and Thailand benefit from American security guarantees. Indonesia and Malaysia benefit from distance from China. All of these states will attempt to balance US and China relations – but in the future that means devoting more resources to national security, which will weigh on fiscal budgets and take away funds from human capital development. Waning Globalization Dividend Favors Indonesia And The Philippines All the ASEAN states rely heavily on both the US and China for export markets. This reliance grew as trade recovered in the wake of the global pandemic (Chart 5). Now global trade is slowing down cyclically, while US-China power struggle will weigh on the structural globalization process, penalizing the most trade-dependent ASEAN states relative to their less trade-dependent neighbors. So far US-China economic divorce is redistributing US-China trade in a way that is positive for Southeast Asia. China is rerouting exports through Vietnam, for example, while the US is shifting supply chains to other Asian states (Chart 6). The US will accelerate down this path because it cannot afford substantively to reengage with China’s economy for fear of strengthening the Russo-Chinese bloc. Chart 5Trade Rebounded But Hypo-Globalization Will Force Domestic Reliance​​​​​ Chart 6ASEAN’s Exports To US Surge Ahead Of China’s Hence the US will become more reliant on Southeast Asian exporters. Whatever the US stops buying from China will have to be sourced from other countries, so countries that export a similar basket of goods will benefit from the switch. Comparing the types of goods that China and ASEAN export to the US, Thailand is the closest substitute for China, whereas Malaysia is the farthest (Chart 7). That is not to say that Malaysia will suffer from US-China divorce. It is already ahead of China in exporting high-tech goods to the US, which is the very reason its export profile is so different. In 2020, 58% of Malaysia’s exports to the US are high-tech versus 35% for China’s. At the same time, Southeast Asian exports to China may not grow as fast as expected – cyclically China’s economy may accelerate on the back of current stimulus efforts, but structurally China is pursuing self-sufficiency and import substitution via a range of industrial policies (“Made in China 2025,” “dual circulation,” etc). These policies aim to make Chinese industrials competitive with European, US, Japanese, and Korean industrials. But they will also make China more competitive with medium-tech and fledging high-tech exports from Southeast Asia. Thus while China will keep importing low value products and commodities, such as unrefined ores, from Southeast Asia, imports of high-tech products will be limited due to China’s preference for indigenous producers. US export controls will also interfere with ASEAN’s ability to export high-tech goods to China. (In order to retain their US trade, in the face of Chinese import substitution, ASEAN states will have to comply with US export controls at least partially.) Even the low-to-medium tech goods that China currently imports from Southeast Asia may not grow as fast in the coming years as they have in the past. The ten provinces in China with the lowest GDP per capita exported a total of $129 billion to the world in 2020, whereas China’s imports from the top five ASEAN states amounted to $154 billion USD in 2020 (Chart 8). If Beijing insists on creating a domestic market for its poor provinces’ exports, then Southeast Asian exports to China will suffer. China might do this not only for strategic sufficiency but also to avoid US and western sanctions, which could be imposed for labor, environmental, human rights, or strategic reasons. Chart 7The US Sees Thailand And Vietnam As Substitutes For China​​​​​​ Chart 8China Threatens ASEAN With Import Substitution​​​​​​ Chart 9Trade Rebound Increased Exposure To US, China China, unlike the US during the 1990s and 2000s, cannot afford to open up its doors and become a ravenous consumer and importer of all Asia’s goods. This would be a way to buy influence in the region, as the US has done in Latin America. But China still has significant domestic development left to do. This development must be done for the sake of jobs and income – otherwise the Communist Party will face sociopolitical upheaval. Malaysia, Vietnam, and Thailand are the most vulnerable to China’s dual circulation strategy because of their sizeable exports to China, which stand at 12%, 15% and 7.6% of GDP respectively (Chart 9). Even though the Southeast Asian states have formed into a common market, and have joined major new trade blocs such as the CPTPP and RCEP, they will not see unfettered liberalization within these agreements – and they will not be drawn exclusively into China’s orbit. Instead they will face a China that wishes to expand export market share while substituting away from imports. The US and India, which are not part of these new trade blocs, will still increase their trade with ASEAN, as they will seek to substitute ASEAN for China, and ASEAN will be forced to substitute them for China. Thus globalization will weaken into regionalization and will not provide as positive of a force for Southeast Asia as it did over the 1980s-2000s. Going forward, the new paradigm of Hypo-Globalization will weigh on trade-dependent countries like Malaysia, Vietnam, and Thailand relative to their neighbors. Within this cohort, Malaysia and the Philippines will benefit from selling high-tech goods to the US, while Thailand and Vietnam will benefit from selling low- and mid-tech goods. China will remain a huge and critical market for ASEAN states but its autarkic policies will drive them to pursue other markets. Those with large and growing domestic markets, like Indonesia and the Philippines, will weather hypo-globalization better than their neighbors. Vietnam, Malaysia, and Thailand are all extremely dependent on foreign trade and hence vulnerable if international trade linkages weaken. Bottom Line: Global trade is likely to slow on a cyclical basis. Structurally, Hypo-Globalization is the new paradigm and will remove a tailwind that super-charged Southeast Asian development over the past several decades. Indonesia and the Philippines stand to suffer least and benefit most. Potential Growth Dividend Favors The Philippines And Vietnam Countries that can generate endogenous growth will perform the best under hypo-globalization. Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam have the largest populations within ASEAN. But we must also take into account population growth, which contributes directly to potential GDP growth. A domestic market grows through population growth and/or income growth. For example, China benefitted from its growing population but now must switch to income generation as its population growth is stagnating. In Southeast Asia, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Indonesia have the highest population growth, while Thailand has the lowest. Thai population growth is even weak compared to China. The total fertility rate reinforces this trend – it is highest in Philippines but lowest in Thailand (Chart 10). A population that is too young or too old needs significant support that diverts resources away from the most productive age group. Philippines and Indonesia have the lowest median age, while Thailand has the highest. The youth of Indonesia and Philippines will come of age in the next decade, augmenting labor force and potential GDP growth. By contrast, Vietnam and especially Thailand, like China, will be weighed down by a shrinking labor force in the coming decade (Chart 11). Chart 10Fertility Rates Robust In ASEAN ​​​​​​ Chart 11Falling Support Ratio Weighs On Thailand, Vietnam​​​​​​ Hence Indonesia and Philippines will prosper while Thailand, and to some extent Vietnam, lack the ability to diversify away from trade through domestic market growth. Malaysia sits in the middle: it is trade dependent and has the smallest population, but it has a young and growing population, and its labor force is still growing. Yet falling population growth is not a disaster if productivity and income growth are high. Productivity trends often contrast with population trends: Indonesia had the weakest productivity growth despite having a large, young, and growing population, while Vietnam had the strongest growth, despite a population slowdown. In fact Vietnam has the strongest productivity growth in Southeast Asia, at a 5-year, pre-pandemic average of 6.3%, followed by the Philippines (Chart 12A). By comparison China’s productivity growth averaged between 3%-6.6%, depending on the data source. Chart 12AProductivity And Potential GDP​​​​​​ Chart 12BProductivity And Potential GDP​​​​​​ Chart 13Capital Formation Favors Philippines Productivity growth adds to labor force growth to form potential GDP. In 2019, Philippines had the highest potential GDP growth at 6.9%, followed by the Vietnam at 6.8%, Indonesia at 5.6%, Malaysia at 3.9% and Thailand at 2.3%. In comparison China’s potential GDP growth was 3.6%-5.9%, again depending on data. Thailand is undoubtedly the weakest from both a population and productivity standpoint, while the Philippines has strength in both (Chart 12B). Countries invest in their economies to increase productivity. In 2019, Vietnam recorded the highest growth in grossed fixed capital formation at around 10.6%, followed by Indonesia at 6.9%, Philippines at 6.3%, and Thailand at 2.2%. Gross fixed capital formation has rebounded from the contractions countries suffered during the pandemic lockdowns in 2020 (Chart 13). Bottom Line: The Philippines has strong potential GDP growth, but Indonesia is not far behind as it invests in its economy. Vietnam has the highest investment and productivity growth, but its demographic dividend is waning. Malaysia is slightly better than Thailand because it has a growing population, but it has stopped investing and it is as trade dependent as Thailand. Thailand is weak on all accounts: it is trade dependent, has a shrinking population, and has a low potential GDP growth. Investment Takeaways Bringing it all together, ASEAN is witnessing the erosion of key dividends (peace, globalization, and demographics). Yet it offers attractive investment opportunities on a relative basis, given the permanent step up in geopolitical risk premiums for other major emerging markets like Russia, eastern Europe, China, and (soon) the Gulf Arab states (Charts 14A & 14B). Indeed the long under-performance of ASEAN stocks as a bloc, relative to global stocks, has recently reversed. As investors recognize China’s historic confluence of internal and external risks, they increasingly turn to ASEAN despite its flaws. Chart 14AASEAN Will Continue To Outperform China The US and China will use rewards and punishments to try to win over ASEAN states as strategic and economic partners. Those that have a US security guarantee, or are most distant from potential conflict, will see a lower geopolitical risk premium. Chart 14BASEAN Will Continue To Outperform China​​​​​​ Chart 15Favor The Philippines The Philippines is the most attractive Southeast Asian market based on our criteria: it has an American security guarantee, domestic-oriented growth, and high productivity. Populism in the Philippines has come with productivity improvements and yet has not overthrown the US alliance. Philippine equities can outperform their emerging market peers (Chart 15). Indonesia is the second most attractive – it does not have direct territorial disputes with China, maintains defense ties with the West, is not excessively trade reliant, and keeps up decent productivity growth. It is vulnerable to nationalism and populism but its democracy is effective overall and the regime has maintained general political stability after near-dissolution in 1998. Thailand is geopolitically secure but lacking in potential growth. Vietnam has high potential growth but is geopolitically insecure over the long run. Investors should only pursue tactical investments in these markets. We maintain our long-term favorable view of Malaysia, although it is trade dependent and productivity has weakened. In future reports we will examine ASEAN markets in greater depth and with closer consideration of their domestic political risks.   Jesse Anak Kuri Associate Editor Jesse.Kuri@bcaresearch.com Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com   Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix