Economy

Special Report

Executive Summary US Deficits Will Rise Before They Fall The Inflation Reduction Act combined with the Chips and Science Act will add $88 billion to the budget deficit through FY2027. The two bills would only reduce the deficit by $11.1 billion by 2031. The deficit that year will be $2 trillion.    Hence Congress’s latest actions add to the deficit in the short run and are effectively deficit-neutral over the long run. That is not disinflationary.  Gridlock is still the likeliest outcome of the midterm elections. That is disinflationary for 2023-24 because fiscal policy freezes. Whether gridlock will persist after 2024 is unknown. Federal investments in US computer chips and renewable energy could enhance productivity over the long run. That could well be disinflationary … but the magnitude and timing are unknown. Overall, US social spending, industrial spending, defense spending, and government intervention are rising as the nation-state responds to social unrest and geopolitical conflict. Inflation will depend on many things, but this policy trend is not disinflationary. Close Recommendation (Tactical) Closing Level CLOSING DATE Return Long US Treasuries Vs. TIPS 1.3768 AUG 12, 2022 1.53%   Bottom Line: Close long US Treasuries relative to TIPS. But stay long the US dollar. Biden’s legislative victories underscore our strategic themes of Limited Big Government and Peak Polarization – and are not disinflationary.  Feature President Biden’s approval rating ticked up to 40% after a series of policy wins, including the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act and the Chips and Science Act. These bills reinforce our strategic theme of Limited Big Government, i.e. a rising role for the state within the US’s free market context. When Biden unveiled his anti-inflation agenda back in June we argued that his only real options to reduce inflation before the midterm elections hinged on other people: namely the Federal Reserve, the Saudis, the Iranians, and also Capitol Hill. With regard to Congress, we expected Democrats to pass a budget reconciliation bill. We saw that they were repackaging this bill as an “inflation reduction” measure to improve their election prospects. But we argued that it would not fight inflation in any substantive way.1 Now that the bill is on the way to Biden’s desk, it is only fair to ask: What will be the impact? Will it reduce inflation or not? The short version is no. The bill does not stand alone but is part of the Biden administration’s “last-ditch effort” to pass two major bills before the midterms. These two laws are deficit-neutral at best but slightly stimulative in the short run – and hence marginally inflationary. These laws could prove disinflationary over the long run, as investments in semiconductors and renewable energy should drive innovation. But that is hard to predict. We are optimistic on that front but for the foreseeable future the effects are neutral or inflationary. To understand this view, we need to review BCA’s stance on inflation overall and then discuss the legislation. The BCA View On Inflation BCA sees this year’s inflationary bout as both a cyclical and a structural phenomenon. The cyclical rise in inflation stemmed from the pandemic and the ensuing economic stimulus. This cycle is peaking now. Commodity prices are moderating and goods spending has fallen two-thirds of the way back to where it stood prior to the pandemic, suggesting that inflation will take a step back. At very least inflation has stopped skyrocketing (Chart 1). Yet the structural drivers of inflation will persist. Chart 1Inflation Rolls Over ... For Now The long-term inflation thesis hinges first and foremost on global population trends. Fewer prime-age workers as a share of the population means that the price of a prime-age worker goes up. It also hinges on the decline in the global glut of savings, the rise of mercantilism and trade protectionism (i.e. hypo-globalization), and the conclusion of household deleveraging in the wake of the 2008 crisis. Structurally looser fiscal policy – soft budgets – also plays a role. The decay of the liberal world order since 2008 financial crisis entails that western governments face the combined threats of social unrest at home and great power competition abroad. These governments’ answer is to take a more active role in the economy to appease popular wrath, improve energy security, and bulk up national defense. The result will be larger deficits. Larger budget deficits reduce the savings available to the private sector and constrain future supply, feeding into inflation. The result is that, in the United States, the neutral rate of interest will likely prove to be higher than expected, monetary conditions will be looser than expected in real terms, and hence the economy will overheat. At least until central banks and fiscal authorities impose austerity.  Bottom Line: Inflation is a cyclical and structural phenomenon in the United States. Cyclically inflation is starting to moderate as various factors from the pandemic and fiscal stimulus wear off. But structurally inflation will be a persistent problem due to population aging, the end of the savings glut, hypo-globalization, geopolitical conflict, and a rising government role in the economy. New Laws Do Not Cut The Deficit Until 2027 At Best Now we can put the Biden administration’s policy into context. The stagflationary cyclical backdrop poses a severe challenge for the ruling Democratic Party. Midterm elections are only three months away and yet headline inflation is still running at 8.5% and core inflation is rising unabated at 5.9% year-on-year. The median voter suffers from high inflation in the form of falling real income and wages. Yet the Democratic legislative agenda has focused on increasing spending, which adds to inflation.  If US gasoline prices continue to moderate, the median household’s inflation expectations will come down – and that is a positive short-term development for Democrats (Chart 2). That is why President Biden went to Saudi Arabia with his tail between his legs to beg for more crude oil production. That is why he is trying to do a deal with Iran too (though there our view is pessimistic). That is why he has urged Europe to wait until after the midterm to implement full oil sanctions on Russia. Hence also the Senate repackaged the -$4 trillion “Build Back Better” spending splurge as a +$300 billion “Inflation Reduction” fiscal reform. But will the Inflation Reduction Act truly reduce inflation? Will it affect the cyclical or structural drivers mentioned above?  Chart 2Inflation Expectations Moderating The title of the bill alone should prompt investors to be skeptical. The bill does not meaningfully reduce budget deficits. According to the Democratic Party it will generate $300 billion in savings over 10 years, mostly as a result of capping drug costs that Medicare pays to hospitals on behalf of about 64 million Americans. However, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget provides a more realistic scenario in which the savings amount to $160 billion, or about half as much as advertised (Table 1).2 The CBO estimates the bill will reduce the budget deficit by $100 billion over 10 years, one third of the official selling point. Table 1What Is Inside The Inflation Reduction Act Of 2022? Table 2 shows the CBO’s baseline estimates of the US budget deficit outlook as of July 2021, May 2022, and August 2022 (i.e. the latter with the new legislation). The trend line with the reconciliation bill is virtually indistinguishable from the May estimate (Chart 3). Table 2US Budget Balance Projections Before/After The Inflation Reduction Act Chart 3What Deficit Reduction? Table 3 shows the specific change in the budget deficit for each year, illustrated in Chart 4. The bill modestly reduces the deficit in 2023 but increases the deficit in subsequent years until 2028. When the bill’s savings peak at $41 billion in 2031, they will shave off 2% of the $2 trillion deficit. Table 3Change In US Deficit Due To Inflation Reduction Act And Chips And Science Act In other words, the deficit reduction will not occur until after the 2028 election – by which time it will be swamped by other political and economic factors. In addition, the bipartisan Chips and Science Act will add $47.5 billion to the budget deficit through FY2026 and $79.3 billion through FY2031. Combining them shows that Congress is still adding to spending despite today’s 5.9% core inflation reading – while delaying the miniscule deficit reduction until the latter part of the decade. Credit should be given to the Democrats for offsetting their new spending with revenue increases. But in realistic terms Congress’s latest actions are deficit-neutral at best. The question was how to pay for the desired spending rather than how to impose budget consolidation. Austerity is politically impractical in the context of left-wing and right-wing populism. Chart 4US Deficits Will Rise Before They Fall The new fiscal spending makes sense given the strategic predicament that the US faces. But it should flag to investors that the only real fiscal discipline on the horizon will come after the midterm election, when Congress is gridlocked and fiscal policy is basically frozen. Bottom Line: The Inflation Reduction Act combined with the Chips and Science Act will add about $88 billion to the budget deficit through FY2027. The two bills only reduce the growth of the budget deficit by $11.1 billion by 2031. They will not reduce investors’ inflation expectations over the next five years. Cyclical inflation expectations will fall for other reasons – such as Fed rate hikes, the slowdown in global growth, and looming gridlock. Reducing Drug Prices And EV Prices Is Not Generally Disinflationary What about the sector effects of the Inflation Reduction Act? Could they be disinflationary? The bill raises a minimum corporate tax rate of 15% to pay for renewable energy subsidies, it bulks up the Internal Revenue Service’s tax collecting capabilities to pay for an expansion of Obamacare subsidies, and it empowers Medicare to negotiate pharmaceutical prices, creating revenue savings for the federal government.   Theoretically caps on drug prices will push prices down, while subsidies to buy electric vehicles (EV) will incentivize Americans to buy those cars and expand the domestic EV supply chain. Hence Democrats can at least claim to be reducing drug price inflation and arguably EV price inflation. Drug price caps are popular and could increase social stability. Electric car subsidies are less popular but tap into demands for domestic manufacturing and action on climate change. Neither will generate substantial opposition in the voting booth. However, the general level of prices will not fall as a result of these sector-specific interventions. Spending on motor vehicles is around 4.2% of total personal consumption expenditure (Chart 5, first panel). Spending on prescription drugs is around 3.2% of total personal consumption expenditure (Chart 5, second panel). Hence the bill could at maximum affect 7.4% of total consumer spending. But only certain drugs will face price caps and only EVs will be subsidized, so the effect is even narrower than that. Spending on cars grew by 1.7% between 2003-20, in line with economic growth. Drug spending grew faster, in line with an aging society, at 2.9% over the same period (Chart 6). Normally the contribution to inflation is negligible for cars but higher-than-average for drugs. True, after Covid-19 car prices surged while drug prices fell below average, but that process should normalize (Chart 7).  Chart 5The Role Of Cars And Drugs In Inflation Chart 6Growth Of Car And Drug Spending Chart 7Change In Car And Drug Prices Only 20 drugs will be eligible for Medicare negotiation per year. The top 20 drugs amount to around 18% of the pharmaceutical market. The new government-negotiated prices will begin to take effect in 2027. The effect will be to dampen domestic manufacturers’ incentive to produce generics, leading to supply constraints or substitution effects (e.g. imports). Hence overall drug prices will not fall as much as expected. The US lacks universal healthcare coverage, so price controls represent an economic transfer between corporations or between corporations and government – not between corporations and consumers. Capping drug prices will benefit insurers directly and consumers only indirectly. The profit will change from the hands of Big Pharma to Big Insurance (managed healthcare providers) (Chart 8). Incidentally big insurers will also benefit from the bill’s expansion of the Obamacare subsidies. Of course, Obamacare enrollees will see a marginal increase in disposable income – especially lower-income individuals, who have a higher propensity to consume. This is positive from the perspective of social stability but likely to be inflationary, not disinflationary. Lower insurance premiums mean more spending cash. Chart 8Big Insurance Versus Big Pharma As for the bill’s green subsidies, EVs account for about 5.6% of cars sold. Subsidies will encourage the production of EVs and accelerate the growth of EV market share. The point is to make EV prices competitive with other cars since EVs are more costly to make, especially if they are to be made domestically. Non-EVs may have to lower their prices but, as we have seen, car inflation is not a major contributor to general inflation, at least not in normal times. Of course, no electric vehicles will qualify for the new rebate immediately. The law requires a large share of qualifying electric cars to be manufactured in North America, or at least not to be produced in “countries of concern” such as China. China is still the leader in making critical components of EVs, especially batteries. Such policies are not conducive to the most efficient manufacturing methods and lowest consumer prices. Rather they seek to shift supply chains to allied countries or to “onshore” them within the United States for strategic reasons, even at a higher cost to consumers. As such the new law reflects the US’s newfound populism, economic nationalism, industrial policy, and trade protectionism. It epitomizes the connection between great power competition and hypo-globalization, prioritizing supply chain resilience at the expense of economic efficiency. That makes sense from a national security point of view but is not likely to be disinflationary – quite the opposite. The bipartisan Chips and Science Act will dovetail with these measures to revive US industrial policy, steer capital into priority projects, and encourage domestic investment. This law and the climate change subsidies are federal investments that should boost productivity and enhance the supply side of the economy. We are optimistic over the long run regarding the productivity enhancements that could accrue from the government’s historic shift to re-initiate these kinds of investments. The space program in the 1960s may be too optimistic but it is still analogous. The US is already in the midst of Cold War II.  If a major breakthrough in renewable energy eventually occurs that is tied to investments from the Inflation Reduction Act, then it will justify the bill’s anti-inflation moniker. But that remains to be seen. In the meantime, these investments will quicken US economic activity when the economy is already at full employment and inflation is running hot. Bottom Line: Cars do not contribute much to inflation in normal times and this bill gives subsidies to make electric cars in the US, which is not optimal for costs. Drugs contribute positively to inflation but Medicare caps will not lower drug prices until 2027 and general price effects are debatable. Overall, social unrest and great power competition are leading to greater government involvement in the economy, which is marginally inflationary. Economic Slowdown Is Disinflationary What will be the effect of this legislation on the midterm election campaign? Economic sentiment improved over the past month, even among Republicans. That led to a drop in polarization for the right reasons, i.e. a resilient economy, rather than the wrong reasons, i.e. the universal loathing of inflation (Chart 9). Polarization will stay near peak levels during the 2022-24 election campaign but the bipartisan Chips Act, the Biden administration’s adoption of hawkish foreign policy on trade and China, and the administration’s attempt to pursue at least a deficit-neutral approach to the budget reinforce our “Peak Polarization” theme. Long-term US policy consensus is developing beneath the still extreme polarization in the short term. Business activity is improving, which has contributed to the equity rally on the basis that the Fed is achieving a “soft landing” (Chart 10). We expect a hard landing due to the combination of negative macro and geopolitical factors but the latest data brings a positive surprise. Chart 9Economic Sentiment Ticks Up ... Even Among Republicans Chart 10Business Activity Improves In the short term, Biden and the Democrats will benefit from passing legislation (“getting things done”) and piggybacking on the fact that inflation is rolling over and the economy is showing some positive surprises. Biden’s approval rating is showing signs of stabilizing, albeit at a low level (Chart 11). The two parties are neck and neck in congressional ballot, with Democrats taking back the lead again from Republicans (Chart 12). If this trend continues it will mitigate the Democrats’ losses in the midterms. The Senate is competitive. Chart 11Biden’s Approval Will Perk Up At Least Somewhat Chart 12US Parties Neck And Neck In Generic Congressional Ballot If inflation rolls over, real wages will improve, which will boost consumer confidence and, if it comes by October, could  help the Democrats further (Chart 13). Chart 13Uptick In Real Wage Would Boost Consumer Confidence Still, Democrats are likely to lose the House of Representatives in the midterms, as the ruling party usually loses seats and Democrats only have a five-seat margin. In other words, we would fade the emerging “Blue Sweep” risk (i.e. risk that Democrats keep control of both houses of Congress). A sweep is possible but unlikely, especially because many of Biden’s foreign policy problems can still come back to haunt him before the midterm. Two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth usually results in an official recession. The jury is still out. Bankruptcies are ticking up and unemployment has nowhere to go but up (Chart 14). The stagflationary environment will probably persist through the midterm. Biden will face a rocky road to re-election. Chart 14Yet Unemployment And Bankruptcy Will Rise Investment Takeaways Inflation expectations began to roll over due to the global slowdown, the drop in commodity prices, and the Fed’s rate hikes, but structural factors suggest inflation will remain a problem over the long run. The Inflation Reduction Act will not be implemented in time to have any effect on prices in 2022. It will slightly reduce the budget deficit next year but expand the deficit from FY2024-27. Combined with the Chips and Science Act the effect is slightly stimulative or inflationary until FY2028 at earliest.   The bill increases policy uncertainty ahead of the midterms. Democrats will be able to take credit for any moderation of inflation through October and hence the election will become more competitive. But the election outcome is still highly likely to be congressional gridlock. Gridlock is disinflationary in 2023-24 because it implies that fiscal policy will shift to neutral – or even that real deficit reduction will occur if Biden compromises with a partially or wholly Republican congress. Structurally the US suffers from an imbalance of savings and investment. The global savings glut more than filled the gap and prevented inflation for several decades. Now the society is aging, the savings glut is depleting, globalization is retreating, and governments need to maintain spending to address high domestic and foreign challenges. US policy is forming a new consensus (“Peak Polarization”) that includes a larger role for government within the US context (“Limited Big Government”) in order to fight against social instability and geopolitical threats. The result is inflationary or at least not disinflationary. A high-tech and/or green energy productivity boom is possible and would combat the structural drivers of inflation. We are optimistic but the disinflationary impact is not forthcoming immediately and much remains to be seen.   Matt Gertken Senior Vice President Chief US Political Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com Jesse Anak Kuri Associate Editor jesse.kuri@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1     Specifically we argued that the bill would be “mildly stimulating for the economy (i.e. inflationary) and none of the supply-side improvements would reduce inflation in time for the midterms.” We also implied that the act would probably not correct the US’s long-term rise in budget deficits as a share of GDP. 2     The difference has to do with the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Obamacare subsidies were expanded during the pandemic. The reconciliation bill will spend about $100 billion on extending the subsidies by three years. But it will be politically difficult for future congresses to revoke these subsidies. Hence the CBO assumes they will become permanent.   Strategic View Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months)   Table A2Political Risk Matrix Table A3US Political Capital Index Chart A1Presidential Election Model Chart A2Senate Election Model  Table A4House Election Model Table A5APolitical Capital: White House And Congress Table A5BPolitical Capital: Household And Business Sentiment Table A5CPolitical Capital: The Economy And Markets  

Executive Summary Then And Now Investors are fixated on inflation; for now, the peak in US CPI is a positive for global stocks. However, this tailwind could easily transform into fear if inflation becomes deflation. The risk of deflation is greater than investors currently appreciate. In the early 1920s, the policy-driven inflation of World War One quickly morphed into a violent deflationary shock, which prompted a severe bear market. Even in the absence of the gold standard, many contemporary factors parallel those that were apparent before 1921. As a result, if commodity prices do not stabilize by year-end, investors will start to worry about deflation. This fear could prompt another sell-off in stocks, which would be particularly painful in Europe. Buy protection against deflation while it is cheap by selling EUR/JPY. Continue to favor defensive over cyclical equities. Bottom Line: The deflation risk for 2023 is greater than the investment community currently appreciates. While it remains a tail risk, it is an underpriced one. As a result, investors should use the current rebound in stocks to buy protection against deflation.     Last week, the NASDAQ entered a new bull market following a decline in US inflation. European stocks have rallied too, albeit considerably less so, only rising 12.5% since their July 5th low. We have participated in this rally, having taken a more constructive view on European equities and other risk assets since our return from a trip visiting clients in Europe. Related Report  European Investment StrategyQuestions From The Road The decline in US inflation is likely to remain a tailwind for global equities in the near future. The pandemic-related factors that spiked inflation in the past quarters are ebbing, and commodity inflation is decreasing. However, BCA’s US bond strategists expect this window to be short-lived. Labor market tightness and strong rents suggest that core CPI will stabilize around 4%. Nonetheless, as long as this window is open, stocks should remain bid. Investors expecting the demise of this current rebound continue to pin their view on stubborn inflation. While sticky inflation is an undeniable risk, it is a threat well understood by the market. However, another danger lurks, which is much less appreciated by investors: deflation. Investors currently underestimate its odds, when deflation could prove even more damaging to the market than sticky inflation. Remembering 1921 Chart 1The 1921 Bear Market The most famous period of deflation in US economic history is the Great Depression. This is not, however, an appropriate parallel. The 1921 recession, at which time deflation hit a historical low of 16% per annum, is the more direct potential equivalent to today. It was accompanied by a 47% crash in the market that brought the Shiller P/E to five (Chart 1, top panel). At the end of WWI, the stock market experienced a rapid rally, with the Dow Jones jumping 58% from its low in March 1918 to its peak in November 1919. In that time frame, inflation was robust, with headline CPI averaging 16% between 1917 and 1920. Inflation was high because of a combination of factors: The war had forced a substantial loosening of fiscal policy with the Federal debt rising from 2.7% of GDP in 1916, before the entry of the US in the conflict, to 32.9% in 1921. The money supply experienced an unprecedented surge. At the beginning of the war, the US was a neutral party and European powers purchased large quantities of US goods. The resulting trade surplus pushed the US stock of gold from $1.5bn in 1914 to $2.6bn in 1920. Meanwhile, to help finance the government’s wartime expenditures, the newly created Federal Reserve expanded its banknote issuance and its claims on the banking system, which meant that Fed money rose from 21% of high-power money in April 1917 to 59% by November 1918. As a result of these two concurrent trends, the money supply doubled between 1916 and June 1920. The Fed was slow to remove the accommodation. The New York discount rate, which had fallen from 6% to 4% as war broke out in Europe, was only increased to 4.75% in the Spring of 1918 and stayed there until January 1920. The global economy was facing potent supply constraints. Large swaths of the European capital stock had been destroyed by the war, at the same time as the US economy had been redesigned to supply military goods, not consumer goods. As a result, inflation remained perky in 1919 and 1920, despite the end of the conflict. The fiscal and monetary supports suddenly ended in 1920, and the economy entered a vicious contraction that caused industrial production to plunge by 36% in 1921 and deflation to hit 16% (Chart 1, second and third panel). The fiscal easing suddenly shifted toward fiscal rectitude under the administration of Warren Harding, which greatly hurt domestic demand in 1921. Additionally, the inflow of gold from the war period morphed into outflow, as European powers enjoyed trade surpluses after their currencies fell 60% to 30% against the dollar between 1919 and the start of 1921. Moreover, the Fed increased the discount rate to 6% in 1920 and cut back the ratio of Fed money to gold, which caused M2 to swing from a 20% growth annual growth rate in Q1 1920 to a 7% contraction in Q3 1921. Simultaneously, corporate borrowing rates soared (Chart 1, fourth and fifth panel) The shock of stagflation and the associated deep output contraction caused the Dow Jones to collapse by 47% from late 1919 to August 1921. The market only stabilized once deflationary pressures ebbed, after the Fed had cut back the discount rate to 6% and around the same time when commodity prices began to firm up. By the end of the bear market, the reconstituted S&P 500 was trading at a cyclically-adjusted P/E of 5.2, and profits had fallen 81% from their 1916 peak. Bottom Line: The 1921 bear market was one of the most violent of the twentieth century. It was caused by an economic contraction and deep deflation that engulfed the US economy after the monetary and fiscal support of WWI had been removed. It only ended once deflationary forces began to ebb, after commodity prices found a floor. What Are The Parallels? At first glance, the parallels between 1921 and today seem negligible. Yes, inflation was raging in 1920, but deflation was a direct consequence of the gold standard that forced a rapid contraction in high-powered money, especially as gold fled the US in 1921. Chart 2Inflationary Fiscal And Monetary Policy The similarities, however, are remarkable too. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the economy was subjected to similar conditions as that of the US around WWI. The US economy witnessed a massive explosion of fiscal stimulus that pushed the Federal deficit from 5% in 2019, to 10% and 6% of GDP in 2020 and 2021, respectively. Moreover, the Federal Reserve generated extremely accommodative monetary conditions during and after the pandemic, when its balance sheet more than doubled and M2 grew by 41% (Chart 2). Additionally, the global economy has witnessed extraordinary supply-side disruptions that have added to inflationary pressures created by the extreme push to aggregate demand from fiscal and monetary policy.1 Chart 3The Money Supply Is Contracting However, as in 1921, these forces are moving in the opposite direction. The fiscal thrust in the US was deeply negative in 2021 and 2022, when fiscal policy subtracted 4% and 2% from GDP growth, respectively. Moreover, the Fed’s policy tightening campaign is exceptionally aggressive. The Fed has increased rates by 2.25% in five months, and, based on the OIS curve, will push up interest rates by an additional 1.3% by the year-end (Chart 3). As a result, the recent contraction in M2 has further to run, even if the US economy is not constrained by its golden tethers (Chart 3, bottom panel). Between 1920 and 1921, investors had trouble judging how far the Fed would tolerate money contraction, which is again the case. Chart 4The Dollar Is Deflationary While the gold standard has been dissolved, the recent wave of dollar strength creates deflationary forces that are similar to the bullion anchor in the 1920s. In the US, the strength in the dollar is limiting imported inflation. US import prices have rolled over, a trend likely to continue. Once converted in USD, Chinese PPI is almost contracting today, which is no small matter when China is the marginal supplier of goods for the world (Chart 4). A strong dollar is deflationary for the global economy, not just that of the US. A rising greenback hurts commodity prices and also tightens global liquidity conditions. Already, the dollar-based liquidity is contracting and EM FX reserves – which are a form of high-powered money similar to gold flows in the 1920s – are tanking, even after adjusting for the confiscation of Russian reserves in the wake of the Ukrainian conflict (Chart 4, bottom panel). To defend their currencies as the dollar rallies, EM central banks are forced to tighten policy, which hurts their domestic economies. This phenomenon is also visible in advanced economies. The weak euro has played a role inching the ECB toward aggressive rate hikes, while the Riksbank and the Swiss National Bank are both lifting interest rates to fight the inflationary impact of their currencies falling against the greenback. Global supply constraints are also defusing. The price of shipping commodities and goods around the world is declining meaningfully (Chart 5). Meanwhile, deliveries by suppliers are accelerating globally, which is contributing to a very rapid easing of our indicator of US Supply Constraints (Chart 5, bottom panel). Beyond these parallels with the early 1920s, demand is already weakening globally. Hampered by the current rise in living costs, households have begun to reduce the volume of goods they purchase, while companies have maintained robust production schedules. As a result, inventories are swelling around the world (Chart 6). Historically, the best cure for elevated inventories is lower prices. Chart 5Easing Supply Constraints Chart 6Inventories And Weak Demand Are Deflationary Bottom Line: There is no guarantee that deflation will become the prevailing force in the global economy. However, the risk is there—and this threat is woefully underappreciated by the investment community. At this current juncture, investors are welcoming lower commodity prices as they take the edge off ebullient inflation. However, if commodity prices do not stabilize by year-end, then investors will begin to worry about deflation. As the 1921 experience showed, deflation is very painful for stocks because it is so negative for profits. While the absence of the gold standard means that the deep deflation of 1921 is extremely unlikely, a period of deflation would nonetheless have a very negative impact on stocks, since they trade at 29 times cyclically-adjusted earnings, not 6.2 times, as was the case in November 1919. What Does This Mean For European Assets? A bout of global deflation would be especially painful for European equities. European equities are more cyclical than their US counterparts, which means that they often underperform when global growth is weak and global export prices of manufactured goods are falling (Chart 7). In other words, a deflationary shock in the US would be felt more acutely in the European market than in that of the US. Additionally, the euro would likely weaken further. Already, the European money impulse (the change in M1 flows) is contracting, which augurs poorly for European economic activity (Chart 8). The addition of a deflationary shock to the weak domestic backdrop would prompt further outflows from Europe, which would hurt the euro even more. Chart 7European Stocks Hate Deflationary Busts Chart 8European Activity Is Weak Chart 9A Value Trap? Finally, with respect to the European cyclicals-to-defensive ratio, our Combined Mechanical Valuation Indicator suggests that European cyclicals have purged their overvaluation relative to their defensive counterparts (Chart 9). However, in previous deflationary outbreaks such as those in 1921 or the 1930s, cyclicals deeply underperformed defensive equities, no matter how cheap they became. This time around, we would expect the same outcome from cyclicals. Moreover, even if investors do not price in a deflationary risk early next year, European cyclicals remain hampered by the deceleration in the Chinese economy and the energy rationing that will hit Europe this winter. As a result, we continue to fade any rebound in the European cyclicals-to-defensives ratio. Bottom Line: Even if a deflationary shock is a risk that is more likely to emanate from the US, European markets will not be immune. The European economy is already weak, and the cyclicality of European equities creates greater vulnerability to deflation. Thus, while deflation in 2023 is a tail risk, investors should use the current rebound in global risk assets to buy protection cheaply. Selling EUR/JPY and favoring defensive European markets continue to make sense in light of this risk.   Mathieu Savary, Chief European Strategist Mathieu@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1Another similarity is that the Spanish Flu was decimating the population from late WWI to 1921.   Tactical Recommendations Cyclical Recommendations Structural Recommendations

Listen to a short summary of this report.     Executive Summary Chart 1The Dollar Has Broken Below The First Line Of Support The softer CPI print in the US boosted growth plays and pushed the DXY index below its 50-day moving average (Feature Chart). This suggests CPI numbers will remain the most important print for currency markets in the coming weeks and months. If US inflation has peaked, then the market will price a less aggressive path for Fed interest rates, which will loosen support for the dollar. At the same time, other G10 central banks are still seeing accelerating inflation. This will keep them on a tightening path. This puts the DXY in a tug of war. On the downside, the Fed could turn less hawkish. On the other hand, currencies such as the EUR, GBP and even SEK face high inflation but deteriorating growth. This will depress real rates. Within this context, the most attractive currencies are those with relatively higher real rates, and a real prospect of a turnaround in growth. NOK and AUD stand out as potential candidates. Our short EUR/JPY trade has been performing well in this context. Stick with it.  RECOMMENDATIONS INCEPTION LEVEL inception date RETURN Short EUR/JPY 141.20 2022-07-21 3.29 Bottom Line: Our recommended strategy is a neutral dollar view over the next three months, until it becomes clear inflation has peaked and global growth has bottomed. Feature The DXY index peaked at 108.64 on July 14 and has dropped to 105.1 as we go to press. There have been two critical drivers of this move. First, the 10-year US Treasury yield has fallen from 3.5% to 2.8%. With this week’s all important CPI release, which showed a sharp deceleration in the headline measure, bond yields may well stabilize at current levels for a while. Second, the drop in energy prices has boosted the JPY, SEK and EUR, which are heavily dependent on imported energy. Related Report  Foreign Exchange StrategyA Montreal Conversation On FX Markets Another development has been happening in parallel – as US inflation upside surprises have crested, so has the US price impulse relative to its G10 counterparts (Chart 1). To the extent that this eases market pricing of a hawkish Fed (relative to other G10 central banks), it will continue to diminish upward pressure on the dollar. Much will depend on the incoming inflation prints both in the US, and abroad. With the DXY having broken below its 50-day moving average, the next support level is at 103.6. This is where the 100-day moving average lies, which the dollar tested twice this year before eventually bouncing higher (Chart 2). The next few sections cover the important data releases over the last month in our universe of G10 countries, and implications for currency strategy. What is clear is that most foreign central banks are committed to their tightening campaign, which argues for a neutral stance towards the DXY for now. Chart 1US Inflation Momentum Has Rolled Over Chart 2The Dollar Has Broken Below The First Line Of Support US Dollar: Consolidation Chart 3The Conditions For A Fed Hike Remain In Place The dollar DXY index is up 10% year to date. Over the last month, the DXY index is down 2.1% (panel 1). Incoming data continues to make the case for a strong dollar. Job gains are robust. In June, the US added 372K jobs. The July release was even stronger at 528K jobs. This pushed the unemployment rate to a low of 3.5% (panel 2). Wages continue to soar. Average hourly earnings came in at 5.2% year-on-year in July. The Atlanta Fed wage growth tracker continues to edge higher across all income cohorts (panel 3). The June CPI print was above expectations at 9.1% for headline, with core at 5.9%. The July print for headline that came out this week was 8.5%, below expectations of 8.7%. At 5.9%, the core measure is still well above the Fed’s target (panel 4). June retail sales remained firm, but consumer sentiment continues to weaken. While the University of Michigan current conditions index increase from 53.8 to 58.1 in June, this is well below the January 2020 level of 115. Correspondingly, the Conference Board consumer confidence index fell from 98.7 to 95.7 in July. On June 17, the Fed increased interest rates by 75bps, as expected. The US entered a second consecutive quarter of GDP growth contraction in Q2, falling by an annualized 0.9%. The ISM manufacturing index was flat in July suggesting Q3 GDP is not starting on a particularly strong foot. The Atlanta Fed Q3 GDP growth tracker is, however, printing 2.5%. Unit labor costs are soaring, rising 10.8% in Q2. This is sapping productivity growth, which fell 4.6% in Q2.  The key for the dollar’s outlook is the evolution of US inflation and the labor market. For now, inflation remains sticky, and wages are rising. Meanwhile, labor market conditions remain robust. This will keep the Fed on a tightening path in the near term. We initially went short the DXY index but were stopped out. We remain neutral in the short term, though valuation keeps us bearish over a long-term horizon. The Euro: A European Hard Landing Chart 4The Euro Is At Recession Lows The euro is down 9.2% year to date. Over the last month, the euro is up 2.7%, having faced support a nudge below parity. Incoming data continues to suggest weak economic conditions, with a stagflationary undertone: The ZEW Expectations Survey for July was at -51.1, the lowest reading since 2011 (panel 1). The current account remains in a deficit, at -€4.5bn in May. Consumer confidence continues to plunge. The July reading of -27 is the worst since the 2020 Covid-19 crisis (panel 2). Despite the above data releases, the ECB surprised markets by raising rates 50bps. CPI continues to surprise to the upside. The preliminary CPI print for July came in at 8.9%, well above the previous 8.6% print. PPI in the euro area was at 35.8% in June, a slight decline from the May reading (panel 3). The German Ifo business expectations index fell to 80.3 in July. Historically, that has been consistent with a manufacturing PMI reading of 45 (panel 4). The Sentix confidence index stabilized in August but remains very weak at -25.2. This series tends to be trending, having peaked in July last year. We will see if the next few months continue to show stabilization. The ECB mandate dictates that it will continue to fight soaring inflation. As such, it may have no choice but to generate a Eurozone-wide recession. This is the key risk for the euro since it could push EUR/USD below parity again. We continue to sell the EUR/JPY cross. In a risk-off environment, EUR/JPY will collapse. In a risk-on environment, like this week, the yen can still benefit since it is oversold. Meanwhile, investors remain overwhelmingly bearish (panel 5). The Japanese Yen: Quite A Hefty Rally Chart 5Some Green Shoots In Japan The Japanese yen is down 13.4% year-to-date, the worst performing G10 currency (panel 1). Over the last month, the yen is up 3.3%. Incoming data in Japan has been worsening as the rising number of Covid-19 cases is hitting mobility and economic data. According to the Eco Watcher’s survey, sentiment among small and medium-sized Japanese firms deteriorated in July. Current conditions fell from 52.9 to 43.8. The outlook component also declined from 47.6 to 42.8. Machine tool order momentum, one of our favorite measures of external demand, continues to slow. Peak growth was at 141.9% year-on-year in May last year. The preliminary reading from July was at 5.5% (panel 2). Labor cash earnings came in at 2.2% year-on-year, a positive sign. Household spending also rose 3.5%. Rising wages could keep inflation momentum rising in Japan (panel 3). On that note, the Tokyo CPI report for July was also encouraging, with an increase in the core-core measure from 1% to 1.2%. The Tokyo CPI tends to lead nationwide measures. The labor market remains robust. Labor demand exceeds supply by 27%. The Bank of Japan kept monetary policy on hold on July 20th, a policy move that makes sense given incoming data. The BoJ still views a large chunk of inflation in Japan as transitory. For inflation to pick up, wages need to rise. While they are rising, inflation expectations remain well anchored, suggesting little rationale for the BoJ to shift (panel 4). That said, the yen is extremely cheap after being the best short this year (panel 5).  British Pound: Coiled Spring Below 1.20? Chart 6Cable Is Vulnerable The pound is down 9.8% year to date. Over the last month, the pound is up by 2.5%. Sterling broke below a soft floor of 1.20, but quickly bounced back and is now sitting at 1.22, as sentiment picked up (panel 1). We find the UK to have an even bigger stagflation problem than the eurozone. CPI came in at 9.4% in June. The RPI came in at 11.8%. PPI was at 24%. All showed an acceleration from the month of May (panel 2). Nationwide house price inflation has barely rolled over unlike other markets, increasing from 10.7% in June to 11% in July. The Rightmove national asking price was 9.3% higher year-on-year in July, compared to 9.7% in June (panel 3). Meanwhile, mortgage approvals have been in steady decline over the last two years, which points toward stagflation. Retail sales excluding auto and fuel fell 5.9% year-on-year in June, the weakest reading since the Covid-19 crisis. Consumer confidence is lower than in 2020 (panel 4). Trade data continues to be weak, which has dipped the current account towards decade lows (panel 5). The external balance is the biggest driver of the pound, given the huge deficit. The above environment has put the BoE in a stagflationary quagmire. Last week, they raised rates by 50 bps suggesting inflation is a much more important battle than growth. Politically, the resignation of Prime Minister Boris Johnson, and broader difficulties for the Conservative Party, is fueling sterling volatility. We are maintaining our long EUR/GBP trade as a bet that at 1.03, the euro has priced in a recession (well below the 2020 lows), but sterling has not. On cable, 1.20 will prove to be a long-term floor but it will be volatile in the short term.  Australian Dollar: A Contrarian Play Chart 7Relatively Solid Domestic Conditions In Australia The AUD is down 2.3% year-to-date. Over the last month, the AUD is up 5.3%. AUD is fast approaching its 200-day moving average. If that is breached, it could signal that the highs of this year, above 76 cents, are within striking distance (panel 1). Inflation is accelerating in Australia. In Q2, the inflation reading was 6.1%, while the trimmed-mean and weighted-median measures were above the central bank’s 1-3% band (panel 2). As a result, the RBA stated the benchmark rate was “well below” the neutral rate. It increased rates by an additional 50bps in August, lifting the official cash rate to 1.85%. Further rate increases are likely. There are a few reasons for this. First, labor market conditions are the most favorable in decades. In June, unemployment reached 3.5%, its lowest level in 50 years, against a consensus of 3.8% (panel 3). The participation rate also increased to 66.8% in June from 66.7%, which has pushed the underutilization rate to multi-decade lows (panel 4). Despite this, consumer confidence continued its decline in August, dropping to 81.2 from 83.8. A pickup in Covid-19 cases and high consumer prices are the usual suspects. Beyond the labor market, monetary policy seems to be having the desired effect. Demand appears to be slowing as retail sales grew 0.2% month-on-month in June from 0.9%. Home loan issuance declined by 4.4% in June, driven by a 6.3% decline in investment lending. House price growth continued to decline in July, particularly in densely populated regions like Sydney and Melbourne. The manufacturing sector remains strong, with July PMI coming in at 55.7, suggesting the RBA might just be achieving a soft landing in Australia.  The external environment was largely favorable for the AUD in June, as the trade balance increased substantially by A$17.7bn with commodities rallying early in the month. However, commodity prices are rolling over. The price of iron for example, is down 24% from its peak in June. This will likely weigh on the trade balance going forward (panel 5). A weakening external environment are near-term headwinds for the AUD, but we will be buyers on weakness (panel 6).  New Zealand Dollar: Least Preferred G10 Currency Chart 8Near-Term Risks To NZD The NZD is down 6.1% this year. Over the last month, it is up 5% (panel 1). The Reserve Bank of New Zealand raised its official cash rate (OCR) in July by 50bps to 2.5%, in line with market expectations. Policymakers maintained their hawkish stance and guided towards increased tightening until monetary conditions can bring inflation within its target range of 1-3%. Inflation rose in Q2 to 7.3% from a 7.1% forecast, largely driven by rising construction and energy prices (panel 2). As of the latest data, monetary policy appears to be continuing to have the desired effect on interest rate sensitive parts of the economy. REINZ home sales declined 38.1% year-on-year in June. Home price growth continues to roll over (panel 3). The external sector continues to slow. Dairy prices, circa 20% of exports, saw a 12% drop in early August after remaining flat in July. The 12-month trailing trade balance remains in deficit. This is most likely due to a substantial slowdown in Chinese economic activity, given that China is an important trade partner with New Zealand. What is important is that the RBNZ’s “least regrets” approach seems to be working. Despite a cooling economy, sentiment seems to be stabilizing. ANZ consumer confidence improved to 81.9 in July from 80.5. Business confidence also improved to -56.7 from -62.6 (panel 4). Ultimately, the NZD is driven by terms of trade, as well as domestic conditions (panels 1 and 5). Thus, short-term headwinds from a deteriorating external sector do not make us buyers of the currency for now, though a rollover in the dollar will help the kiwi.  Canadian Dollar: Lower Oil, Hawkish BoC Chart 9The BoC Will Stay On A Hawkish Path The CAD is down 1.2% year to date. Over the last month, it is up 1.8%. The Canadian dollar did not fully catch up to oil prices on the upside. Now that crude is rolling over, CAD remains vulnerable, unless the dollar continues to stage a meaningful decline (panel 1). Canadian data has been rather mixed over the last month. For example: There have been two consecutive months of job losses. This is after a string of positive job reports. In July, Canada lost 31K jobs. In June, it lost 43K. The reasons have been mixed, from women dropping out of the labor force, to lower youth participation (the participation rate fell), but this is a trend worth monitoring (panel 2). CPI growth remains elevated and is accelerating both on headline and core measures(panel 3). Building permits and housing starts have started to roll over, as house price inflation continues to lose momentum. June housing starts were at 274K from 287.3K. June building permits also fell 1.5% month-on-month though annual inflation is still outpacing house price growth (panel 4). The Canadian trade balance is improving, hitting a multi-year high of C$5.05 bn in June. This has eased the need for foreign capital inflows. The BoC raised rates 100bps in July, the biggest interest rate increase in one meeting among the G10. Unless the labor market continues to soften, the BoC will continue to focus on inflation, which means more rate hikes are forthcoming. The OIS curve is pricing a peak BoC rate of 3.6% in 9 months (panel 5). Two-year real rates are still higher in the US compared to Canada. And the loonie has lost the tailwind from strong WCS oil prices. As such, unless the dollar softens further, the loonie will remain in a choppy trading pattern like most of this year.  Swiss Franc: A Safe Haven Chart 10The Franc Will Remain Strong Against The Euro For Now CHF is down 3.2% year-to-date and up 4.3% in the past month. The Swiss franc has been particular strong against the euro, with EUR/CHF breaching parity (panel 1). Switzerland remains an island of relative economic stability in the G10. Although slowing, the manufacturing PMI was a healthy 58 in July. The trade surplus was up to CHF 2.6bn in June, despite a strong franc. While most European countries are preparing for a tough winter with energy rationing, prospects for Switzerland, which derives only 13% of its electricity from natural gas, look more favorable.  Still, as a small open economy, Switzerland is feeling the impact of global growth uncertainty. The KOF leading indicator dropped to 90.1 in August with a sharp decline in the manufacturing component. This broader measure suggests the relative resilience of the manufacturing sector might not last long (panel 2). Consumer confidence also fell to the lowest level since the onset of the pandemic. Swiss headline inflation stabilized at 3.4% in July. The core measure rose slightly to the SNB’s 2% target (panel 3). The UBS real estate bubble index rose sharply in Q2, suggesting inflation is not only an imported problem. Labor market conditions also remain tight, with the unemployment rate at 2%, a two-decade low. The SNB will continue to embrace currency strength while inflation risks persist (panel 4), as can be seen by the decline in sight deposits and FX reserves (panel 5). The market is still pricing in another 50 bps hike in September although August inflation data that comes out before the meeting will likely be critical for that decision. CHF is one of the most attractive currencies in our ranking. Despite the recent outperformance, CHF is still down year-to-date against the dollar. A rise in safe-haven demand, and a possible energy crunch in winter will be supportive, especially against the euro.  Norwegian Krone: Oil Fields Are A Jewel Chart 11NOK Will Reap Dividends From Energy Exports NOK is down 7.4% year-to-date and up 7.1% over the last month. It is also up 4.2% versus the euro, despite softer oil prices (panel 1). Inflation in Norway continues to accelerate. In July, CPI grew 6.8% year-on-year, above the market consensus and the Norges Bank’s forecast. Underlying inflation jumped sharply to an all-time high of 4.5%, compared to the Bank’s 3.2% forecast made just over a month ago (panel 2). These figures are adding pressure on the central bank to increase the pace of interest rate hikes, with 50bps looking increasingly likely at the meetings in August and September. NOK jumped on the inflation news. The housing market is starting to show signs of slowing with prices down 0.2% on the month in July, the first decrease since December. This, together with household indebtedness (panel 3), makes the task of policy calibration challenging. Our bias is that a persistently tight labor market and strong wage growth (panel 4) will allow the bank to focus on inflation. Economic activity remains robust in Norway but is softening. The manufacturing PMI fell to 54.6 in July, while industrial production was down 1.7% month-over-month in June. Consumer demand remains frail with retail sales and household consumption flat in June from the previous month. On a more positive note, trade surplus remains near record levels and is likely to stay elevated as high European demand for Norwegian energy is likely to last at least through the winter (panel 5). As global risk sentiment picked up, the krone became the best performing G10 currency over the past month. If the risk appetite reverses, the currency is likely to feel some turbulence. Swedish Krona: Cheap, But No Catalysts Yet Chart 12SEK = EUR On Steroids SEK is down 10% year-to-date and up 5.6% over the past month. The vigorous rebound highlights just how oversold the Swedish krona is (panel 1). The Swedish economy grew 1.4% in Q2 from the previous three months, rebounding from a 0.8% contraction in the first quarter. This is impressive, given high energy prices and a slowdown in global economic activity. Going forward, growth is likely to slow. In July, the services and manufacturing PMIs declined, and consumer confidence fell sharply to the lowest reading in almost 30 years. Retail sales were down 1.2% month-on-month in June. The housing market is also feeling the pain of rising borrowing costs (panel 2). The Riksbank’s latest estimate sees a 16% decline in prices by the end of next year.  For now, inflation is still accelerating in Sweden. CPIF, the Riksbank’s preferred measure, increased from 7.2% to 8.5% in June. Headline inflation rose from 7.3% to 8.7% (panel 3). Headline inflation is likely to decline in July, given the drop in the price component of the PMIs, but inflation will remain well above target. This will keep real rates weak (panel 4). This suggests that the Riksbank is facing the same conundrum as the ECB: accelerate policy tightening and tip the economy towards recession or remain accommodative and risk inflation becoming more entrenched. Our bias is that the Riksbank is likely to frontload rate hikes as currently priced in the OIS curve, with a 50 bps hike in September, ahead of major labor union wage negotiations (panel 5). Much like the NOK, the Swedish krona rebounded strongly in the past month on global risk-on sentiment. Fundamentally, the krona remains more vulnerable to external shocks due to higher energy dependency and a strong dollar. Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com Artem Sakhbiev Research Associate artem.sakhbiev@bcaresearch.com Thierry Matin Research Associate thierry.matin@bcaresearch.com   Trades & Forecasts Strategic View Cyclical Holdings (6-18 months) Tactical Holdings (0-6 months) Limit Orders Forecast Summary

Listen to a short summary of this report.     Executive Summary Significant Savings Provide A Moat Around Consumers Three mega moats will protect the US economy over the next 12 months: 1) A high number of job openings; 2) Significant pent-up demand; and 3) Strong Fed credibility, which has kept bond yields from rising more than they otherwise would have in response to higher inflation. Ironically, a recession will only occur when investors start believing that a recession will not occur. Without more economic optimism, real yields will not rise into restrictive territory. The double-dip 1980/82 recessions, the 1990-91 recession, the 2001 recession, and the 2007-09 Great Recession were all preceded by an almost identical 21-to-23-month period of a flat unemployment rate. The unemployment rate has been fairly stable since March when it hit 3.6%. Given the three moats, we suspect that it will move sideways well into next year. At that point, the trajectory of inflation will determine the path for the unemployment rate and the broader economy. Inflation will fall significantly over the coming months thanks to lower food and energy prices and easing supply-chain pressures. However, falling inflation could sow the seeds of its own demise. As prices at the pump and the grocery store decline, real wage growth will turn positive. This will bolster consumer confidence, leading to more spending, and ultimately, a reacceleration in core inflation.​​​​ Bottom Line: Stocks will rise over the next six months as recession risks abate, but then decline over the subsequent six months as it becomes clear that the Fed has no intention of cutting rates in 2023 and may even need to raise them further. On balance, we recommend a neutral exposure to global equities over a 12-month horizon.   Don’t Bet on a US Recession Just Yet Many investors continue to expect the US economy to slip into recession this year. The OIS curve is discounting over 100 basis points in rate cuts starting in 2023, something that would probably only happen in a recessionary environment (Chart 1). In contrast to the consensus view, we think that the US will avoid a recession. This is good news for stocks in the near term because it means that earnings estimates, which have already fallen meaningfully this year, are unlikely to be cut any further (Chart 2). It is bad news for stocks down the road because it means that rather than cutting rates in 2023, the Fed could very well have to raise them. Chart 1Investors Expect Fed Tightening To Give Way To An Easing Cycle In 2023 These two conflicting considerations lead us to expect stocks to rise over the next six months but then to fall over the subsequent six months. As such, we recommend an above-benchmark exposure to global equities over a short-term tactical horizon but a neutral exposure over a 12-month horizon. Three mega moats will protect the US economy over the next 12 months: 1) A high number of job openings; 2) Significant pent-up demand; and 3) Strong Fed credibility, which has kept bond yields from rising more than they otherwise would have in response to higher inflation. Let’s explore each in turn.   Moat #1: A High Number of Job Openings While job openings have fallen over the past few months, they are still very high by historic standards (Chart 3). In June, there were 1.8 job openings for every unemployed worker, up from 1.2 in February 2020. At the peak of the dotcom bubble, there were 1.1 job openings per unemployed worker. A high job openings rate means that many workers who lose their jobs will have little difficulty finding new ones. This should keep the unemployment rate from rising significantly as labor demand cools on the back of higher interest rates. Some investors have argued that the ease with which companies can advertise for workers these days has artificially boosted reported job openings. We are skeptical of this claim. For one thing, it does not explain why the number of job openings has risen dramatically over the past two years since, presumably, the cost of job advertising has not changed that much. Moreover, the Bureau of Labor Statistics bases its estimates of job openings not on a tabulation of online job postings but on a formal survey of firms. For a job opening to be counted, a firm must have a specific position that it is seeking to fill within the next 30 days. This rules out general job postings for positions that may not exist. We are also skeptical of claims that increased layoffs could significantly push up “frictional” unemployment, a form of unemployment stemming from the time it takes workers to move from one job to another. There is a great deal of churn in the US labor market (Chart 4). In a typical month, net flows in and out of employment represent less than 10% of gross flows. In June, for example, US firms hired 6.4 million workers. On the flipside “separations” totaled 5.9 million in June, 71% of which represented workers quitting their jobs. Chart 3A High Level Of Job Openings Creates A Moat Around The Labor Market Chart 4Labor Market Churn Tends To Increase As Unemployment Falls   In fact, total separations (and hence frictional unemployment) tend to rise when the labor market strengthens since that is when workers feel the most emboldened to quit. The reason that the unemployment rate increases during recessions is not because laid-off workers need time to find a new job but because there are simply not enough new jobs available. Fortunately, that is not much of a problem today.   Moat #2: Significant Pent-Up Demand US households have accumulated $2.2 trillion (9% of GDP) of excess savings since the start of the pandemic, most of which reside in highly liquid bank deposits (Chart 5). Admittedly, most of these savings are skewed towards middle- and upper-income households who tend to spend less out of every dollar of income than the poor (Chart 6). Nevertheless, even the top 10% of income earners spend about 80% of their income (Chart 7). This suggests that most of these excess savings will be deployed, supporting consumption in the process. Chart 5Significant Savings Provide A Moat Around Consumers Chart 6Unlike The Poor, Middle-To-Upper Income Households Still Hold Much Of Their Pandemic Savings Some commentators have argued that high inventories will restrain production, even if consumer spending remains buoyant. We doubt that will happen. While retail inventories have risen of late, the retail inventory-to-sales ratio is still near all-time lows (Chart 8). Moreover, real retail sales have returned to their pre-pandemic trend (Chart 9A). Overall goods spending is still above trend, but has retraced two-thirds of its pandemic surge with little ill-effect on the labor market (Chart 9B). Chart 7Even The Wealthy Spend Most Of Their Income Chart 8Retail Inventory-To-Sales Ratios Have Rebounded, But Remain Low Chart 9ASpending On Goods Has Been Normalizing (I) Chart 9BSpending On Goods Has Been Normalizing (II) The latest capex intention surveys point to a deceleration in business investment (Chart 10). Nevertheless, we doubt that capex will decline by very much. Following the dotcom boom, core capital goods orders moved sideways for two decades (Chart 11). The average age of the nonresidential capital stock rose by over two years during this period (Chart 12). Excluding investment in intellectual property, business capex as a share of GDP is barely higher now than it was during the Great Recession. Not only is there a dire need to replenish the existing capital stock, but there is an urgent need to invest in new energy infrastructure and increased domestic manufacturing capacity. Chart 10Capex Intentions Have Dipped Chart 11Capex Has Been Moribund For The Past Two Decades (I) With regards to residential investment, the homeowner vacancy rate has fallen to a record low. The average age of US homes stands at 31 years, the highest since 1948. Chart 13 shows that housing activity has weakened somewhat less than one would have expected based on the significant increase in mortgage rates in the first six months of 2022. Given the recent stabilization in mortgage rates, the chart suggests that housing activity should rebound by the end of the year. Chart 12Capex Has Been Moribund For The Past Two Decades (II) Chart 13Housing Activity Should Rebound On The Back Of Low Vacancy Rates, An Aging Housing Stock, And Stabilizing Mortgage Rates Moat #3: Strong Fed Credibility Even though headline inflation is running at over 8% and most measures of core inflation are in the vicinity of 5%-to-6%, the 10-year bond yield still stands at 2.87%. Two things help explain why bond yields have failed to keep up with inflation. First, investors regard the Fed’s commitment to bringing down inflation as highly credible. The TIPS market is pricing in a rapid decline in inflation over the next two years (Chart 14). The widely-followed 5-year, 5-year forward TIPS inflation breakeven rate is still near the bottom end of the Fed’s comfort zone. Chart 14AWell-Anchored Long-Term Inflation Expectations Have Kept Bond Yields From Rising More Than They Would Have Otherwise Chart 14BWell-Anchored Long-Term Inflation Expectations Have Kept Bond Yields From Rising More Than They Would Have Otherwise Households tend to agree with the market’s assessment. While households expect inflation to average over 5% over the next 12 months, they expect it to fall to 2.9% over the long term. As Chart 15 illustrates, expected inflation 5-to-10 years out in the University of Michigan survey is in line with where it was between the mid-1990s and 2015. This is a major difference from the early 1980s, when households expected inflation to remain near 10%. Back then, Paul Volcker had to engineer a deep recession in order to bring long-term inflation expectations back down to acceptable levels. Such pain is unlikely to be necessary today. Chart 15Households Expect Inflation To Come Back Down Chart 16Markets Think That The Real Neutral Rate Is Low The second factor that is suppressing bond yields is the market’s perception that the real neutral rate of interest is quite low. The 5-year, 5-year TIPS yield – a good proxy for the market’s estimate of the real neutral rate – currently stands at 0.40%, well below its pre-GFC average of 2.5% (Chart 16). Ironically, a recession will only occur when investors start believing that a recession will not occur. Without more economic optimism, real yields will not rise into restrictive territory. When Will the Moats Dry Up? The US unemployment rate is a mean-reverting series. When unemployment is very low, it is more likely to rise than to fall. And when the unemployment rate starts rising, it keeps rising. In the post-war era, the US has never avoided a recession when the unemployment rate has risen by more than one-third of a percentage point over a three-month period (Chart 17). Chart 17When Unemployment Starts Rising, It Usually Keeps Rising ​​​​​With the unemployment rate falling to a 53-year low of 3.5% in July, it is safe to say that we are in the late stages of the business-cycle expansion. When will the unemployment rate move decisively higher? While it is impossible to say with certainty, history does offer some clues. Remarkably, the double-dip 1980/82 recessions, the 1990-91 recession, the 2001 recession, and the 2007-09 Great Recession were all preceded by an almost identical 21-to-23-month period of a flat unemployment rate (Chart 18 and Table 1). Coincidentally, the Covid-19 recession was also preceded by 22 months of a stable unemployment rate. To the extent that the economy was not showing much strain going into the pandemic, it is reasonable to assume that the unemployment rate would have continued to move sideways for most of 2020 had the virus never emerged. Chart 18The Bottoming Phase Of The Unemployment Rate Has Only Begun Inflation is the Key The unemployment rate has been fairly stable since March when it hit 3.6%. Given the three moats discussed in this report, we suspect that it will move sideways well into next year. At that point, the trajectory of inflation will determine the path of the unemployment rate and the broader economy. As this week’s better-than-expected July CPI report foreshadows, inflation will fall significantly over the coming months, thanks to lower food and energy prices and easing supply-chain pressures. The GSCI Agricultural Index has dropped 24% from its highs and is now below where it was before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (Chart 19). Retail gasoline prices have fallen 19% since June, with the futures market pointing to a substantial further decline over the next 12 months. In general, there is an extremely strong correlation between the change in gasoline prices and headline inflation (Chart 20). Supplier delivery times have also dropped sharply (Chart 21). Chart 19Agricultural Prices Have Started Falling Chart 20Headline Inflation Tends To Track Gasoline Prices Falling inflation could sow the seeds of its own demise, however. As prices at the pump and the grocery store decline, real wage growth will turn positive. That will bolster consumer confidence, leading to more spending (Chart 22). Core inflation, which is likely to decrease only modestly over the coming months, will start to accelerate in 2023, prompting the Fed to turn hawkish again. Stocks will falter at that point. Chart 21Supplier Delivery Times Have Declined Chart 22Falling Inflation Will Boost Real Wages And Consumer Confidence Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on LinkedIn and Twitter     Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores

Executive Summary Unit Labor Costs, Not Oil Prices, Are The Key To US Core Inflation Inflation is not about oil, food or used car prices. Looking at prices of individual components of a consumer basket is akin to missing the forest for the trees. Despite the latest drop in US headline inflation, various core CPI measures continue trending up and registered considerable month-on-month rises in July. Wages and, more specifically, unit labor costs are the true measure of genuine and persistent inflation. US wage growth is very elevated, and the pace of unit labor cost gains has surged to a 40-year high. The conditions for sustainable and persistent disinflation in the US are not yet present. US inflation will prove to be much stickier and more entrenched than many market participants presently believe. The recovery in China will be U- rather than V-shaped, with risks tilted to the downside. The mainland’s property market breakdown is structural, not cyclical. Excesses are very large, and problems are snowballing, rendering the enacted policy stimulus insufficient. Bottom Line: US core inflation lingering above 4% and easing financial conditions will compel the Fed to continue hiking rates. This will cap global risk asset prices and put a floor under the US dollar.  We continue to recommend an underweight allocation to EM in global equity and credit portfolios. Consistently, we are also reluctant to chase EM currencies higher. Feature The bullish macro narrative circulating in the investment community is that conditions for a cyclical rally in global risk assets have fallen into place. Specifically: US inflation will drop sharply as US growth has crested and commodity prices have plunged; The Fed is nearing the end of a tightening cycle; China has stimulated sufficiently, and its economy is about to recover, which will boost economic conditions among its trading partners in general and EM in particular. These assumptions along with the fact that the S&P 500 index has found support at a 3-year moving average – a proven line of defense – suggest that US share prices have likely bottomed (Chart 1). Are we witnessing déjà vu of the 2011, 2016, 2018 and 2020 market bottoms? Chart 1Déjà Vu? Is 2022 Like The 2011, 2016 And 2018 Bottoms In The S&P 500? We have reservations about all of the above fundamental conjectures. We elaborate on these reservations in this report. On the whole, we contend that the current environment is different, and the roadmaps of all post-2009 equity market bottoms are not necessarily currently applicable. BCA’s Emerging Markets Strategy team believes that (1) US consumer price inflation is much more entrenched and will prove stickier than is commonly believed; and (2) the Chinese property market’s breakdown is structural, not cyclical; hence, the recovery will not gain traction easily.  Is This The End Of The US Inflation Problem? Not Quite This week’s US inflation data confirmed that headline CPI inflation has probably peaked: prices in several categories plunged. However, inflation is not about oil, food or used car prices. Chart 2 reveals that historically there have been several episodes whereby core inflation remains elevated despite plunging oil prices. Chart 2US Core Inflation Does Not Always Follow Oil Prices Looking at price dynamics among the individual components of the CPI basket is akin to missing the forest for the trees. Inflation is a very inert and persistent phenomenon. Underlying inflation does not change its direction often and/or quickly. That is why we believe that it is premature to celebrate the end of the US inflation problem. A few observations on this matter: Despite the drop in US headline inflation, various core CPI measures − like trimmed-mean CPI, median CPI and core sticky CPI − all continue trending up and registered substantial month-on-month rises in July (Chart 3). The range of core inflation based on these annual and month-month annualized rates is between 4-7%. In brief, the rate of genuine/sticky inflation is well above the Fed’s 2% target. Given its unconditional commitment to bringing inflation down to 2%, the Fed will continue hiking interest rates ceteris paribus. Chart 3US Core CPI Measures Are Still Very High Chart 4US Wages Growth Has Been Surging   We continue to emphasize that wages and, more specifically, unit labor costs are the true measures of persistent and genuine inflation. We have written at length about why wages and unit labor costs are more important to inflation than oil or food prices. US wage growth is very elevated and is accelerating (Chart 4). Unit labor costs, calculated as hourly wages divided by productivity, have also been surging to a 40-year high (Chart 5, top panel). Chart 5Unit Labor Costs, Not Oil Prices, Are The Key To US Core Inflation The reason for this very strong wage growth and swelling unit labor costs is the very tight labor market. The bottom panel of Chart 5 demonstrates that labor demand is still outpacing labor supply by a wide margin. Hence, wage inflation will not subside until the unemployment rate rises meaningfully. Bottom Line: Conditions for sustainable and persistent disinflation in the US are not yet present.  Inflation will prove to be much stickier and more entrenched than many market participants presently believe. Core inflation lingering above 4% and easing financial conditions will compel the Fed to continue hiking rates. This will cap risk asset prices and put a floor under the US dollar.   China: Is This Time Different? If one believes that China’s current business cycle is similar to all previous ones seen since 2009, odds are that a buying opportunity in China-related financial markets is at hand. Chart 6 illustrates that the credit and fiscal spending impulse leads the business cycle by about nine months. Given that this impulse bottomed late last year, a trough in the Chinese business cycle is due. Chart 6Is A Recovery In China's Business Cycle Imminent? It is always risky to suggest that this time is different. Nevertheless, at the risk of being wrong, we contend that a combination of (1) property markets woes, (2) an impending export contraction, and (3) the dynamic zero-COVID policy will reduce the multiplier effect of current stimulus measures. Hence, a meaningful recovery in economic activity will likely fail to materialize in the coming months. The challenges facing the mainland property market are now well known. Yet, excesses are very large, and problems are snowballing, making policy stimulus insufficient. In particular: Authorities are contemplating bailout funds for property developers in the range of RMB 300-400 billion to enable them to complete housing that has been pre-sold. This is not sufficient financing for overall property construction. Table 1How Large Are Property Developers Bailout Funds? Table 1 illustrates that these amounts are equal to just 3-4% of annual fixed-asset investment in real estate excluding land purchases, 1.5-2% of total financing of developers, and 3-4% of the advance payments that property developers received for pre-sold housing in 2021. Property developers will not be receiving any cash upon the completion and delivery of presold housing units because they were paid in advance. Hence, without liquidating their other assets, homebuilders cannot repay the bailout financing. Consequently, only state financing can work here because, from the viewpoint of providers of this financing, this scheme de-facto means throwing good money after bad. The property industry in China is extremely fragmented. This makes bailouts difficult to organize and execute. There are officially about 100,000 property developers in China. The overwhelming majority of them are not state-owned companies. Plus, the two largest property developers, Evergrande (before defaulting) and Country Garden, had only 3.8% and 3.3% of market share respectively in 2020. The failure of homebuilders to complete and deliver pre-sold housing units could unleash a death spiral for them. In recent years, 90% of housing units have been pre-sold, i.e., buyers made advance payments/prepayments, often taking out mortgages (Chart 7, top panel). Witnessing the inability of developers to deliver on presold units, a rising number of people may decide to wait to buy. The largest source of developers’ financing – advance payments for pre-sold housing units – might very well dry up. This source has accounted for 50% of real estate developers’ total financing in recent years (Chart 7, bottom panel). In brief, a vicious cycle is possible. The lack of financing for homebuilders bodes ill for construction activity (Chart 8). Chart 7China: Housing Presales And Pre-Payments Are Critical To Developers Chart 8Lack Of Homebuilder Financing = Shrinking Construction Activity Chart 9Chinese Property Developers Are Extremely Leveraged Besides, property developers are very leveraged with an assets-to-equity ratio close to nine (Chart 9). They have grown accustomed to borrowing heavily to accumulate real estate assets. They have been starting but not completing construction (Chart 10, top panel). We have been referring to this phenomenon as the biggest carry trade in the world. The bottom panel of Chart 10 shows two different measures of residential floor space inventories held by property developers. One measure subtracts completed floor space from started floor space, and another one deducts sold floor space from started floor space. On both measures, residential inventories are enormous. In theory, they could raise funds by selling their real estate assets. However, if they all try to sell simultaneously, there will not be enough buyers, and asset prices will plunge, which could lead to a full-blown debt deflation spiral. The last time the real estate market was similarly distressed in 2014-15, the central bank launched the Pledged Supplementary Lending (PSL) facility. This was effectively a QE program to monetize housing. This was the reason why housing recovered strongly in 2016-2017. There is currently no such program up for discussion. On the whole, odds are that the current property market breakdown is structural, not cyclical. Financial markets – the prices of stocks and USD bonds of property developers – convey a similar message and continue to plunge (Chart 11). Chart 10Excessive Property Inventories Chart 11No Green Light From Property Stocks And Corporate Bond Prices Chart 12There Has Been No Recovery In China Without A Revival in Real Estate Without an improvement in the housing market, a meaningful business cycle recovery is unlikely in China. Chart 12 illustrates that all recoveries in the Chinese broader economy since 2009 occurred alongside a revival in property sales. The importance of the property market goes beyond its size. Rising property prices lift household and business confidence, boosting aggregate spending and investment. The sluggish housing market and falling house prices will impair consumer and business confidence. This, along with uncertainty related to the dynamic zero-COVID policy, will dent consumer spending and private investments. Finally, the upcoming contraction in Chinese exports will dampen national income growth. Taken together, the multiplier effect of stimulus in the upcoming months will be lower than it has been in previous periods of stimulus. There are two areas that will see meaningful improvement in the coming months: infrastructure spending and autos. BCA’s China Investment Strategy service discussed the outlook for auto sales in a recent report. Chart 13Green Shoots In China's Infrastructure Investment On the infrastructure front, there has been mixed evidence of an improvement in activity. The top and middle panels of Chart 13 demonstrate that Komatsu machinery’s operational hours and the number of approved infrastructure projects might be bottoming. However, the installation of high-power electricity lines has fallen to a 15-year low (Chart 13, bottom panel).   As we elaborated in last month’s report, the new financing/stimulus for infrastructure development will not result in new investments. Rather, it will by and large offset the drop in local government (LG) revenues from land sales this year. In short, there is little new stimulus for infrastructure beyond what was approved in the budget plan earlier this year. Bottom Line: The recovery in China will be U- rather than V-shaped, with risks tilted to the downside. Investment Recommendations Our bias is that the rebound in global risk assets could last for a few more weeks. The basis is that investor positioning in risk assets was very light when this rebound began. Plus, falling oil prices could reinforce the idea among investors that US inflation is no longer a problem. Looking beyond the next several weeks, the outlook for global and EM risk assets is dismal. Markets will realize that the Fed cannot halt its tightening with core inflation well above 4-5%. Hawkish Fed policy and contracting global trade will boost the US dollar and weigh on cyclical assets. We continue to recommend an underweight allocation to EM in global equity and credit portfolios. Consistently, we are also reluctant to chase EM currencies higher. EM local bonds offer value, as we have argued over the past couple of months, but for now we prefer to focus on yield curve flattening trades. We continue betting on yield curve flattening/inversion in Mexico and Colombia and are long Brazilian 10-year domestic bonds while hedging the currency risk. In addition, we recommend investors continue receiving 10-year swap rates in China and Malaysia.   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)

Special Report

Executive Summary Iron Ore & Steel Prices: Facing Downward Pressure Global iron ore and steel supply is likely to grow faster than demand over the next six months. As a result, the prices of both metals will likely fall. Chinese steel output will likely rebound moderately in the absence of government-mandated steel production cutbacks. In the meantime, mainland steel demand will continue to contract because of its crumbling property sector. Global steel output excluding China will contract over the next six months on the back of weakening industrial demand for steel. Even though Chinese iron ore consumption may rise moderately over the next six months, its imports will not improve much because of robust growth in domestic iron ore production. Furthermore, global iron ore demand excluding China will decline as steel demand and output contract. In the intervening six months, global iron ore production growth will rise. This will lead to an oversupplied iron ore market.  Bottom Line: Both iron ore and steel prices will likely deflate over the next several months. Therefore, Chinese steel share prices as well as global mining and steel stocks have more downside.   China’s demand for iron ore and steel are key to their respective price outlooks because these metals account for about 70% of global iron ore imports and over 50% of global steel consumption. Considerable reduction in Chinese steel output (hence, demand for iron ore) and rising domestic iron ore supply have resulted in a contraction in Chinese iron ore imports since last June. In the meantime, domestic steel demand weakened sharply, primarily because of plunging property construction. The upshot has been lower domestic steel prices (Chart 1). This report evaluates the direction of iron ore and steel prices over the next six months. Chart 1Crumbling Property Sector: Lower Steel Demand Ahead Chart 2Iron Ore & Steel Prices: Facing Downward Pressure We expect Chinese steel output to rise in the absence of government-mandated production cuts and on positive profit margins. This will lift Chinese iron ore imports. In the meantime, Chinese steel demand will likely continue to contract. Thus, steel prices will continue falling over the next several months (Chart 2, top panel). For iron ore, an increase in Chinese imports will not be enough to offset contracting global demand. As a result, the price of iron ore will face downward pressure over the coming months (Chart 2, bottom panel). From The Chinese Steel Market… The Chinese steel market may experience an increasing oversupply over the next six months. Chinese Steel Supply Chinese steel production is likely to rise moderately in the next six months.  First, there are no government-mandated cuts in steel production currently in place. Chart 3Mandated Steel Output Cuts In 2021: Unlikely Repeat In 2022H2 Last June, Chinese authorities ordered steel mills to cut output from record levels in a bid to restrain carbon emissions. This resulted in a 15% year-on-year drop in Chinese crude steel1 output and a 10% year-on-year decline in Chinese steel products production during 2021H2 (Chart 3). In 2022Q1, to ensure smog-free skies in February as China hosted the 2022 Winter Olympic Games, some steel producers were again ordered to cut their production. As a result, the year-on-year decline of Chinese steel output and steel product output for 2022Q1 were at 10% and 5%, respectively. In 2022Q2, however, the picture is more of a mixed bad. While many small firms increased volumes, medium and large sized steel producers voluntarily chose to reduce their output. As a result, China’s steel output is remains in contraction. Further, tightness in electricity supply over the summer curbed any potential recovery in steel output. Over the next six months, we expect decreasing voluntary cuts and easing electricity supply will lift steel output moderately. Chart 4Steelmakers' Profit Margins: Low, Albeit Still Positive Second, overall profit margins for Chinese steel producers are still positive, albeit at a low level (Chart 4). Even at a very low profit margin, steel producers in China still tend to produce steel as much as they can to cover their very large fixed costs. In other words, if they do not produce, they will experience greater losses.  In addition, given deteriorating employment conditions in the broader economy, maintaining employment has become a major focus of local governments. The latter will guide state-owned enterprises (SOEs) – many steel mills are SOEs or government-affiliated – to raise output and employment. For now, the government has simply asked steel producers to cut their production voluntarily, rather than mandating cuts as authorities did last year and earlier this year. In brief, in the absence of government-mandated steel output reduction, some producers will opt to increase their output to cover their fixed costs and maintain/increase employment. Will the Chinese government demand mandated cuts again later this year? We believe the odds are low. Last year, the mandated cuts were the result of more aggressive emissions reduction targets, with a deadline at the end of 2025 for the Chinese steel sector. In February of this year, the authorities extended this deadline to 2030 to grant its steel sector the ability to reach peak emissions. This will allow a gradual output reduction instead of a sharp reduction in mills with high-emission steel-producing capacity. With such a deadline extension already in place, the government is unlikely to implement mandated steel output cuts again. Chinese Steel Demand Chinese steel consumption will likely continue to contract over the next six months. Chart 5 shows that 58% of Chinese steel consumption is from building and construction, which mainly comprises the property sector and the infrastructure sector. Based on our estimate, Chinese steel demand will decline about 3.8% over the next six months, mainly dragged down by the shattered property market (Table 1). Chart 5Chinese Steel Consumption Composition Table 1Chinese Steel Demand Growth Estimates Chart 6Property Market is in a Crisis The property sector is the largest steel consumer, accounting for about 35% of Chinese steel consumption. This sector is going through a crisis, and there are no signs of improvement yet. Property sales, new construction, and completion are all in a deep and unprecedented contraction (Chart 6, panels 1, 2, and 3). Even the commodity building floor space under construction entered contraction for the first time in at least the past two decades (Chart 6, bottom panel). Both central and local governments have implemented policies to revive the property sector since late last year. Following a wave of mortgage boycotts, the July 28 Central Politburo meeting demanded local governments to ensure those sold-but-unfinished housing projects to be completed. However, due to the extreme shortage of funding faced by real estate developers and the fragmented nature of this industry in China, it will take time to get the current property sector crisis resolved. Nonetheless, we expect supportive policies will work to some extent. We expect the year-on-year contraction in property construction to narrow to 10% over the next six months from about 13% in the past six months. Chart 7Infrastructure Sector: The Main Supportive Force for Chinese Steel Demand The infrastructure sector is another major source for Chinese steel demand (Chart 7). The sector contributes about 23% of Chinese steel consumption. Although the traditional infrastructure investment shows a solid 10% growth, we only assume 7% of growth in the sector’s steel demand. This is because, within the traditional infrastructure sector, two heavy steel consuming subsectors –railway and highway constructions – will register slower growth in their respective investments than overall infrastructure. Chart 8Steel Demand In the Machinery Sector: Likely to Remain In Contraction The 2016-2019 Boom: Only Sales Excavators And Cranes Hit A New High... Machinery production, the third largest steel consuming sector, will remain in contraction because of the depressed property market. Sales of major construction equipment – excavators, loaders, and cranes – have declined 36%, 23%, and 50% year-on-year in 2022H1 (Chart 8). With continuing weakness in the property market, we expect steel demand from machinery producers to be in a similar contraction (10%) over the next six months. Autos and electric appliances together account for about 7.3% of Chinese steel consumption. Weekly data shows Chinese auto sales are in a recovery phase (Chart 9). We expect the sector’s steel use to increase by 8% year-on-year over the next six months based on our projections from our research on the auto industry. Affected by the faltering domestic property market, the outlook for electric appliances is also dismal. The output of air conditioners, freezers, refrigerators, and washing machines is contracting (Chart 10). The expected contraction in global demand for consumer goods will ensure a continuous drop in their production in China, the largest world producer of white goods. We expect these sectors' steel consumption growth to improve from a 9% contraction in 2022H1 to a 5% contraction over the next six months. Chart 9Steel Demand From Auto Sales is Recovering Chart 10Steel Demand by Electric Appliances: Smaller Contraction Ahead Chart 11Steel Demand in Other Sectors: Will Likely Stay in Contraction Other sectors that consume steel include many industrial goods, such as civil steel ships and containers. The shipping industry has boomed during the past two years because of a global increase in goods demand. This also significantly increased demand for metal containers, and to a lesser extent, civil steel ships between 2020 and 2021 (Chart 11). As global trade volumes contract over the next six months, we expect steel consumption in these other sectors to contract by 3% over the same period. What about external demand for Chinese steel? Chinese steel products exports, which account for about 5% of the country’s steel products output, will grow moderately in the next six months. Historically, the Chinese government had provided a VAT rebate of around 13% to encourage steel exports. Last year, it removed such export tax rebates on various steel products in a bid to slow domestic carbon emissions. Chart 12Chinese Steel Exports: Moderate Growth Ahead However, this has not considerably reduced Chinese steel exports. Chinese exports of steel products only had a year-on-year contraction from January to April 2022, largely because of COVID-related shutdowns, and then experienced considerable growth during May-July of the same year (Chart 12). At the same time, Chinese imports of steel products have been contracting since last May. This pattern shows the strong global competitiveness of Chinese steel products. We expect moderate growth in Chinese steel products exports over the next six months, which will be much lower than last year’s growth. In 2021, Chinese steel products exports surged by 25% year-on-year, as steel exporters rushed to export their products to take advantage of the rebates before its removal. Bottom Line: Chinese steel supply is likely to exceed demand over the next six months. This will result in an oversupplied steel market in China, exerting downward pressure on steel prices. …To The Global Iron Ore Market Chart 13Chinese Steel Production: Largely Determines the Country's Iron Ore Imports Iron ore is mainly used in the steel-making process. Limited iron ore supplies within China mean that about 80% of the country’s iron ore demand are satisfied by imports. As a result, variations in Chinese steel production largely determine swings in Chinese iron ore imports (Chart 13). Based on our expectations of the Chinese steel market, we can provide our supply-demand analysis for the global iron ore market. Global Iron Ore Demand While rebounding Chinese steel output will lift the nation’s iron ore consumption, iron ore demand from the rest of the world will shrink materially. Net-net, global iron ore demand will weaken, albeit only marginally over the next six months. Steel production is declining in the world outside China. We expect such contraction will continue into early 2023, as the pandemic-triggered overspending on goods ex-autos reverses (Chart 14). In addition, in Europe, energy rationing and sky-high energy prices will likely lead to defunct mills as a response to reducing their output; hence, their iron ore consumption will tank. Given that Europe accounts for about 10% of world steel production and nearly 50% of its steel production is using electric furnaces,2 this will reduce global iron ore demand. Last year, global steel production excluding China increased by 13% year-on-year, the highest growth since 2011 (Chart 15). This is much higher than the average 2% growth during 2017-2019, reflecting the overconsumption of goods by advanced economies in 2021. Indeed, steel production has already declined for four consecutive months. We expect a year-on-year contraction of about 5% global steel production in the world excluding China over the next six months. Chart 14The World Outside China: Steel Output Will Continue Declining Chart 15Falling DM PMI Signals Weaker Steel Output in the World Outside China Scrap steel is one substitute for iron ore in the steel-making process, but, this time, there will be limited replacement from scrap steel in China. Tight supply of scrap steel and relatively high scrap steel prices will make iron ore more appealing than scrap steel as feedstock for Chinese steel producers over the next several months. Scrap prices are currently high relative to both steel product prices and imported iron ore prices (Chart 16). Chart 16Iron Ore Substitute in China: Limited Scrap Steel Demand in 2022H2 Chart 17China: Domestic Iron Ore Output is Rising Global Iron Ore Supply Global iron ore supply will rise slightly over the next six months. Chinese iron ore output is set to continue increasing as well (Chart 17, top panel). The authorities plan to boost domestic iron ore output by 6.5% per year until 2025. Profit margins for Chinese producers are currently at a multi-year high (Chart 17, bottom panel). This will encourage domestic iron ore production over the next six months.  Currencies in global major iron ore producing countries (Brazil, Australia and South Africa) have depreciated considerably. As a result, iron ore prices in these countries in local currency terms are currently still elevated. This will incentivize more iron ore production and exports by producers in these countries. Bottom Line: Global iron ore supply will increase slightly, while demand will contract slightly over the next six months. This will be negative for iron ore prices. Investment Implications Chart 18Global Mining Stocks and Steelmaker Stock Prices: More Downside Ahead Avoid Global Steel And Mining Stocks For Now Both iron ore and steel prices will likely deflate over the next six months. Hence, global mining stocks and steelmakers stock prices will experience more downside in the coming months (Chart 18). Global ex-China steel producers have benefited from strong steel demand in DM and from surging steel prices (Chart 15 above). As we expect that DM demand for consumer goods will contract over the next six months, steel prices will drop, weighing on global steelmakers’ share prices.  Concerning equity valuations, global mining and steel stocks trade at very low trailing P/E ratios. However, for highly cyclical stocks, such a low trailing P/E ratio is often a sign of peak profits. At peaks of cycles, share prices drop first, while EPS remains elevated, as it is a backward-looking variable. In fact, more often than not, buying these stocks when the P/E ratio is very high and selling them when the P/E ratio is very low has been a very profitable strategy. In short, a low P/E ratio for mining share prices and steel producers is not a reason to be long these stocks. The direction of both the global industrial cycle and steel and iron ore prices is what matters. On both counts, the outlook remains downbeat for now.   Ellen JingYuan He Associate Vice President ellenj@bcaresearch.com     Footnotes 1     According to the World Steel Association, crude steel is defined as steel in its first solid (or usable) form, including ingots, semi-finished products (billets, blooms, slabs), and liquid steel for castings. 2     The electric furnace is using electricity and scrap steel to produce crude steel. As Europe is facing energy constraint, this will likely affect European steel output greatly. Strategic Themes Cyclical Recommendations

Executive Summary Realized Real Interest Rates Must Rise Policymakers must continue engineering higher real interest rates, and tighter financial conditions, to help cool off growth and bring down overshooting inflation. This will inevitably lead to inverted yield curves across most of the developed world, following the recent trend of US Treasuries. US growth expectations remain overly pessimistic, which opens up the potential for more near-term bond-bearish upside data surprises like the July employment and ISM Services reports. The Bank of England – under increasing political pressure for its relatively timid response to the massive UK inflation overshoot – is now forecasting a long policy-induced recession as the only way to tame UK inflation expected to reach 13% by year-end. Expect UK Gilts to be a relative outperformer within developed bond markets over the next 12-18 months. Bottom Line: Stay overweight UK Gilts versus US Treasuries in global bond portfolios, but increase exposure to yield curve flattening in both countries. The Fed and Bank of England are both on course to push monetary policy into restrictive, growth-damaging territory. Don’t Get TOO Comfortable Taking Risk In a bit of a summer surprise, global financial markets have been staging a mild recovery from the stagflationary doom that prevailed during the first half of 2022. In the US, the S&P 500 index is up 14% from the year-to-date intraday low reached on June 16, with the VIX index back down to low-20s zone last seen in April (Chart 1). High-yield corporate bond spreads in the US and euro area are down 97bps and 36bps, respectively, since that mid-June trough in US equities. Even emerging market equities and credit – the most unloved of asset classes in 2022 – have stabilized. Related Report  Global Fixed Income StrategyIt’s Time To Flip The Script - Upgrade UK Gilts Some of this risk rally is surely short-covering, but there are some valid reasons to be less pessimistic on growth-sensitive risk assets. In the US, where the back-to-back contractions in GDP in the first two quarters of the year have stoked recession fears, the latest data releases have seen upside surprises suggesting an expanding, not contracting, economy (Chart 2). The July ISM non-manufacturing (services) index rose +1.4 points in July to 56.7, a broad-based move that included increases in Production, New Orders and New Export Orders. Core durable goods orders rose +0.5% in June for the second straight month. The biggest surprise was the July Payrolls report, which showed a whopping +528,000 increase in employment – over twice the expected gain of +250,000 – with a downtick in the unemployment rate to 3.5%. Chart 1Stepping Back From The Recessionary Abyss​​​​​​ Chart 2The US Recession Talk May Have Been Premature​​​​​​ Chart 3Goods Inflation Pressures Easing There was also some good news on the inflation front in the latest US data. The Prices Paid components of both the ISM manufacturing and non-manufacturing indices showed big declines, 18.5pts and 7.8pts respectively, in July, continuing the downtrends that began in the latter half of 2021 (Chart 3). This is not just a US story. The Prices Paid components of the S&P Global manufacturing PMIs in the euro area, the UK, Japan and China have also been falling. Lower global commodity prices, particularly for oil, are playing a large role in the pullback in reported business input costs. The Supplier Deliveries components of both ISM reports also fell on the month, continuing a trend seen throughout 2022 as global supply chain pressures have eased. Combined with the drop in the Prices Paid data, global PMIs are sending a strong message - inflationary pressures on the traded goods side of the global economy are finally easing. Slower goods inflation, however, does not provide an all-clear for risk assets on a cyclical basis. Non-goods price pressures are showing little sign of peaking across most of the developed world. Labor markets remain tight, and both wage inflation and services inflation rates continue to accelerate in the major economies of the US, UK and euro area at a pace well above central bank inflation targets (Chart 4). Until these domestic sources of inflation show signs of peaking, central banks will continue to push up policy rates to slow growth, generate higher unemployment and, eventually, bring domestically driven inflation back down to central bank targets. Expect the so-called Misery Index, summing headline inflation and the unemployment rate, to remain elevated across the major developed economies until negative real interest rates begin to rise through a combination of more nominal rate hikes and, eventually, slower inflation (Chart 5). Chart 4Domestic Inflation Pressures Accelerating​​​​​ Chart 5Realized Real Interest Rates Must Rise​​​​​​As we discussed in last week’s report, bond markets were getting way ahead of themselves in pricing in aggressive rate cuts in 2023, especially in the US. This was setting up for a potential move higher in yields on any positive data news. Within the “Big 3” developed economies, US Treasuries look most vulnerable to a rebound in bond yield momentum, judging by what looks like a true bottom in the mean-reverting Citigroup US Data Surprise Index (Chart 6). The flow of data surprises is more mixed in the euro area and UK and is not yet at the stretched extremes that would signal a sustainable increase in bond yields. Taken at face value, this fits with our current recommendation to underweight the US, and overweight core Europe and the UK, within global government bond portfolios. With central banks now on track to push policy rates into restrictive territory, there is the potential for additional flattening of already very flat yield curves across the Big 3. Forward rates are not priced for additional curve flattening in those markets, looking at both the 2-year/10-year and 5-year/30-year government bond curves (Chart 7). This makes positioning for more curve flattening in the US, UK and euro area a positive carry trade by leaning against the pricing of forward rates. Chart 6Greater Potential For Bond-Bearish Data Surprises In The US​​​​​​ Chart 7Increase Exposure To Curve Flattening In The 'Big 3' We are adjusting the positioning within the BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy Model Bond Portfolio this week to benefit from the trend towards additional curve flattening in the US, the UK and core Europe (Germany and France). With the 2-year/10-year curve already inverted by -45bps in the US, we see better value by adding flattening exposure between the 5-year and 30-year points – a curve segment that is not yet in inversion. In the UK and euro area, we see a case for positioning for flattening across the entire yield curve. Bottom Line: Stay overweight both UK Gilts and core European government bonds versus US Treasuries in global bond portfolios, but increase exposure to yield curve flattening in all countries. The Fed and Bank of England are both clearly on course to push monetary policy into restrictive, growth-damaging territory, and the ECB may be forced to do the same. Painful Honesty From The Bank Of England The Bank of England (BoE) delivered its largest rate hike since 1995 last week, raising Bank Rate by 50bps to 1.75%. Planned sales of UK Gilts accumulated by the BoE during the quantitative easing phase of pandemic stimulus, at a pace of £10bn per quarter starting in September, were also announced. While those moves were largely expected by markets, the BoE’s new set of economic forecasts contained quite a shocker – an expectation of recession starting in Q4 of this year, running through the end of 2023 (Chart 8). The UK unemployment rate is expected to rise substantially from the current 3.8% to 6.3% by Q3/2025. Chart 8Brutal Honesty In The Latest BoE Forecasts​​​​​​ Chart 9Energy Prices Driving BoE Inflation Forecasts We are hard pressed to remember the last time a major central bank announced a forecast of a prolonged economic downturn as part of its baseline scenario to bring inflation to its target. Such is the predicament that the BoE finds itself in, with headline UK inflation expected to soar to 13% by the end of 2022 – a mere 11 percentage points above the central bank’s inflation target. The BoE has been forced to sharply ratchet up that expected peak in UK inflation at both the May and August policy meetings this year. This is largely due to the massive increase in UK energy prices with the Energy component of the UK CPI index up over 50% in year-over-year terms. According to analysis published in the BoE August 2022 Monetary Policy Report, the direct impact of higher energy prices was projected to account for roughly half of that expected 13% peak in UK inflation this year (Chart 9). At the same time, falling energy prices embedded into futures curves are expected to full unwind that effect in 2023. The BoE’s recession call is also conditioned on a market-implied path for interest rates, with a 2023 peak in Bank Rate of just over 3% priced into the UK OIS curve. Looking beyond the energy price surge, there are signs that the BoE will not have to tighten as aggressively as interest rate markets are currently expecting. Our BoE Monitor, constructed using growth, inflation and financial market variables that would typically pressure the central bank to tighten or loosen monetary policy, has clearly peaked (Chart 10). All three components of the Monitor have rolled over, although inflation pressures remain the strongest contributor to the elevated absolute level of the Monitor. From a growth perspective, there are many reasons to expect the UK economy to enter a recession without much more prodding from BoE rate hikes (Chart 11): Chart 10Our BoE Monitor Sees Easing Cyclical Pressure To Raise Rates​​​​​​ Chart 11A Broad-Based Slowing Of UK Growth​​​​​​ Both the S&P Global manufacturing and services PMIs are on target to soon fall below the 50 level that indicates positive growth (top panel) Consumer confidence has collapsed as surging inflation has overwhelmed household income growth, leading to a contraction in retail sales volume growth (middle panel) The BoE’s Agents’ Survey of individual businesses shows a sharp deterioration in business investment spending plans (bottom panel). Yet even with growth clearly slowing already, the sheer magnitude of the inflation overshoot is forcing markets to discount a fairly aggressive path for UK interest rates over the next year. This is not only evident in the OIS curve, but also in the BoE’s own Market Participants Survey (MPS) of UK investors. According to the just released August MPS, the median expectation is for Bank Rate to peak at 2.5% next year (Chart 12). This is a sizeable increase from the previous expected peak of 1.75% from the last MPS in May, but is still below the discounted peak in rates from the OIS curve of 3.1%. The bigger news is that the, according to the August MPS, the median survey participant now believes that the neutral range for Bank Rate is now 2-2.5%, up from the 1.5-2.0% range in the May MPS. Therefore, the August MPS forecasted peak Bank Rate of 2.5% is only at the high end of neutral and not restrictive. Yet both the OIS curve and the August MPS expect the BoE to immediately pivot from rate hikes to rate cuts in the second half of 2023. Chart 12UK Interest Rate Markets Have Adjusted Neutral Rate Expectations Chart 13The BoE Is Facing Severe Public Scrutiny The notion that the BoE would pivot so quickly next year, when their own forecasts still call for UK inflation to be over 9% in the third quarter of 2023, seem somewhat optimistic. Especially with the BoE under tremendous public and political pressure because of runaway UK inflation. The leading candidate to become the next UK Prime Minister, Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, has already gone on record stating that she would look to change the BoE’s remit as Prime Minister to focus solely on keeping inflation low. Meanwhile, the latest BoE Inflation Attitudes Survey shows more respondents are now dissatisfied with the BoE than satisfied (Chart 13). 1-year-ahead inflation expectations from that same survey are now at 4.6%, while 5-year/5-year forward breakevens from UK index-linked Gilts are still at 3.8%. With inflation expectations still so elevated, and with the BoE’s own forecasts calling for headline UK inflation to not fall back to the 2% BoE target until Q3/2024, it is unlikely that the BoE will revert to rate cuts as quickly as markets expect – especially given the accelerating wage dynamics in the UK labor market. According to the BoE’s measure of “underlying” wage growth, which adjusts headline wage inflation data for pandemic effects from furloughs and shifting labor composition, wages are growing at a 4.2% year-over-year rate (Chart 14). The BoE’s own modeling work indicates that 2.9 percentage points of that wage growth is due to the level of short-term inflation expectations, with only 0.9 percentage points coming from productivity growth. Thus, the BoE cannot let its foot off the monetary brake until short-term inflation expectations fall substantially from current elevated levels – especially with employment indicators still pointing to a very tight supply-constrained, post-COVID UK labor market. Chart 14A Wage-Price Spiral In The UK? Given that interplay of rising headline inflation, elevated inflation expectations and tight labor markets, the BoE will likely be forced to begin unwinding the current rate hiking cycle later than markets expect. This will eventually lead to an inversion of the UK Gilt yield curve as the BoE pushes policy rates to restrictive territory and the UK economy falls into recession faster than other countries (like the US). Chart 15Stay Overweight UK Gilts, With A Curve Flattening Bias We still believe that the Fed is more likely than the BoE to fully follow through on market-discounted rate hikes over the next year, which was a major reason why we upgraded our cyclical recommendation on UK Gilts to overweight back in May. However, with the BoE now under more pressure to wring high inflation out of the UK economy by keeping policy tighter for longer, we also see value in positioning for that eventual inversion of the UK Gilt curve (Chart 15). We see the sequencing as being inversion first, and relative Gilt outperformance later, although we do not expect the relative performance of Gilts to worsen with the UK economy set to enter recession before other major economies. Importantly, the forward rates in the Gilt curve are still priced for a somewhat steeper yield curve, making curve flattening trades along the entire curve attractive as positive carry trades that pay you to wait for the eventual policy driven inversion. The 2-year/10-year and 2-year/30-year flatteners look particularly attractive from that carry-focused perspective. Bottom Line: The BoE– under increasing political pressure for its relatively timid response to the massive UK inflation overshoot – is now forecasting a long policy-induced recession as the only way to tame UK inflation expected to reach 13% by year-end. Expect UK Gilts to be a relative outperformer within developed bond markets over the next 12-18 months, and enter positive carry Gilt curve flatteners now to benefit from the inevitable inversion of the curve.   Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@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)

Executive Summary High profile economists Larry Summers and Olivier Blanchard have recently cast doubt on the Federal Reserve’s claim that a soft landing is possible for the US economy. We explore the arguments from both sides of the debate and conclude that the economic data will likely support the Fed’s soft landing thesis during the next six months. However, the unemployment rate will rise more significantly as we move deeper into 2023 and the Fed continues to run a restrictive monetary policy. This report also provides an update on our recommended portfolio duration and high-yield positioning, and suggests a tweak to our recommended positioning across the Treasury curve. Specifically, we advise clients to enter a duration-matched position long the 5/30 barbell and short the 10-year bullet. The Beveridge Curve Bottom Line: Investors should keep portfolio duration close to benchmark and maintain a neutral (3 out of 5) allocation to high-yield bonds. Investors should also exit positions long the 2-year bullet versus a duration-matched cash/5 barbell and enter a position long a 5/30 barbell versus the 10-year bullet. Feature This week’s report digs into a recent macro debate between two high profile economists – Larry Summers and Olivier Blanchard – and the Federal Reserve about whether a “soft landing” is possible for the US economy. We summarize the debate below and offer our own thoughts on its implications for investment strategy. But first, we provide a quick update on our recent thinking about US bond portfolio construction, including a change to our recommended yield curve positioning. Positioning Update Portfolio Duration In recent reports we have written that we would reduce our recommended portfolio duration stance from “at benchmark” to “below benchmark” if the 10-year Treasury yield falls to 2.5% or if core inflation converges to our 4%-5% estimate of its underlying trend (Chart 1).1 The 10-year yield came close to hitting our 2.5% trigger last week but then quickly reversed course. It moved even higher after Friday’s extremely strong employment report, and it now sits at 2.78%. We are sticking with our plan. Despite July’s blockbuster job gains, trends in both initial and continuing jobless claims suggest that the unemployment rate is more likely to rise than fall during the next few months (Chart 2). Supply chain indicators also point toward falling inflation (Chart 2, bottom panel). Against this backdrop, it wouldn’t be too surprising to see bond yields experience another downleg. Chart 1Stay Neutral For Now Chart 2Unemployment Has Bottomed High-Yield Turning to credit, we continue to recommend an underweight allocation to spread product (including investment grade corporate bonds) versus Treasuries, but with a slightly higher allocation (neutral) to high-yield. We think that high-yield spreads can tighten in the near-term as recession fears are allayed and inflation rolls over. However, the medium-to-long run macro environment is negative for spread product and we will be quick to reduce junk exposure if spreads reach their 2017-19 average (Chart 3) or if core inflation converges with our 4%-5% estimate of trend. Chart 3Tracking The Junk Rally Treasury Curve Chart 4Buy A 5/30 Flattener Finally, this week we tweak our recommended yield curve positioning by closing our prior recommendation: long 2-year bullet versus duration-matched cash/5 barbell, and by initiating a new trade: long 5/30 barbell versus a duration-matched 10-year bullet. We only initiated that 2 over cash/5 trade a couple weeks ago on the view that 2/5 Treasury curve inversions don’t tend to last very long.2 However, it has since become clear that our timing was premature. In fact, we probably shouldn’t anticipate a significant 2/5 steepening until the Fed’s tightening cycle is near its end, which we do not believe to be the case. Instead, we recommend that investors shift into a duration-matched position that is overweight a 5/30 barbell versus the 10-year bullet. This trade offers a positive yield differential of 16 bps (Chart 4) and will profit from a flattening of the 5-year/30-year Treasury slope. The 5/30 slope has steepened in recent weeks, but further steepening is only likely to occur near the end of a Fed tightening cycle. Given that we see significant further tightening ahead, it’s much more likely that the 5/30 slope will fall to zero or even turn negative (Chart 4, top panel). The Battle Of The Beveridge Curves Our battle begins with a speech from Fed Governor Christopher Waller that was given back in May.3 In that speech, Waller made the case for why the large number of job vacancies gave him “reason to hope that policy tightening in current circumstances can tame inflation without causing a sharp increase in unemployment.” Waller’s argument was based on the historical relationship between the job vacancy rate and the unemployment rate, a relationship known as the Beveridge Curve (Chart 5). In essence, Waller’s argument for a “soft landing” boils down to the observation that the Beveridge Curve shown in Chart 5 has shifted up since the pandemic. That is, since March 2020 we have consistently seen more job vacancies for any given unemployment rate. His contention is that, as economic activity slows, rather than moving to the right along the Beveridge Curve, the curve will shift down toward its pre-pandemic level. In other words, the job vacancy rate will decline significantly without a large uptick in the unemployment rate. Chart 5The Beveridge Curve Objection! In a paper published this month, Olivier Blanchard, Alex Domash and Larry Summers (BDS) take issue with Waller’s claims from two different angles, a theoretical one and an empirical one.4 First, from a theoretical perspective, BDS describe three factors that lead to either movements along the Beveridge Curve or shifts in the curve itself. 1) Economic Activity. Stronger economic activity leads to more job vacancies and a lower unemployment rate. In other words, a shift to the left along the Beveridge Curve, illustrated as the journey from point A to point B in Chart 6. Chart 6An Illustrated Beveridge Curve 2) Matching Efficiency. If available jobs are a worse match for the skills of the unemployed labor force, then it will lead to a higher job vacancy rate for any given unemployment rate. In other words, a shift up in the Beveridge Curve from point B to point C in Chart 6. 3) Reallocation Intensity. If people switch jobs more frequently, then there will also tend to be more vacancies for any given level of unemployment. Again, this would shift the Beveridge Curve up from point B to point C in Chart 6. Using a model and data from the JOLTS survey, BDS attempt to decompose how much of these three factors have contributed to the current positioning of the Beveridge Curve. The authors estimate that economic activity has increased significantly since the end of 2019, but also that the labor market’s matching efficiency has declined, and that reallocation intensity has increased (Chart 7). Chart 7An Illustrated Beveridge Curve   While monetary tightening can weaken economic activity, it cannot change the labor market’s matching efficiency or its reallocation intensity. Therefore, the authors argue, unless matching efficiency and reallocation intensity naturally revert to their pre-COVID levels, weaker economic activity will manifest as a movement to the right along the post-2020 Beveridge Curve, leading to a higher unemployment rate. This, in our view, is the crux of the “soft landing” debate. Are the recent changes in labor market matching efficiency and reallocation intensity temporary or permanent? Next, we move to BDS’ empirical arguments. The authors construct a time series of the job vacancy rate going back to the 1950s and then examine changes in both the job vacancy rate and the unemployment rate following cyclical peaks in the vacancy rate. Their results show that a falling job vacancy rate almost always coincides with a rising unemployment rate (Table 1). In other words, if history is any guide, it is very unlikely that the Fed will be able to push the job vacancy rate down without seeing an increase in unemployment. Table 1Average Change In The Unemployment Rate And The Vacancy Rate After A Peak In The Vacancy Rate That said, the authors’ results also reveal a dynamic known as the Beveridge Loop. Notice in Table 1 that a drop in the vacancy rate leads to a much smaller increase in the unemployment rate during the first six months following the vacancy rate peak than it does during the first 12 months or first 24 months. In other words, there is some empirical validity to Fed Governor Waller’s argument that the early impact of Fed tightening will be felt primarily through a falling job vacancy rate. The 2018/19 Example We can illustrate the Beveridge Loop with a recent example, one that interestingly was not included in BDS’ empirical analysis. The job vacancy rate peaked in November 2018 and then trended lower until the pandemic struck in early 2020. Interestingly, this 2018-19 drop in the job vacancy rate occurred alongside a modest decline in the unemployment rate. Chart 8 shows what the Beveridge Curve looked like during this period. Notice that, rather than moving back to its January 2018 point in a straight line, the Beveridge Curve formed a loop after peaking in November 2018. Chart 8The 2018/19 Beveridge Loop What allowed the labor market to achieve this “soft landing” in 2018/19? The most likely answer is that labor force participation rose significantly during this period (Chart 9). The influx of workers into the labor force allowed the unemployment rate to keep falling even as continuing unemployment claims bottomed out. Chart 9The 2018/19 Soft Landing The BCA Verdict Our view is that the incoming economic data will appear to validate the Fed’s “soft landing” view during the next six months, but that the unemployment rate will start to rise more significantly as we move deeper into 2023. As we have stated in prior reports, a significant increase in the unemployment rate will eventually be required to tame inflation, but that increase likely won’t occur as soon as many market participants expect.5 In essence, we anticipate a large Beveridge Loop. A loop that, in fact, appears to already be forming (Chart 5). We have shown that the empirical evidence supports the idea that a Beveridge Loop will occur during the early stages of a slowdown. Further, theory and empirical evidence demonstrate that the Beveridge Curve is convex. This suggests that the Beveridge Loop could be particularly large in this cycle given that the vacancy rate is starting from such a high level. Perhaps the bigger question, though, is whether the Beveridge Curve will re-converge with its pre-pandemic level during the next 6-12 months. On this question we side more with Blanchard, Domas and Summers. While we think that matching efficiency can continue to improve along its current trend (Chart 7, panel 2), the widespread adoption of work-from-home suggests that the labor market has probably experienced a permanent increase in reallocation intensity. On matching efficiency, the best evidence for continued improvement comes from a breakdown of employment by industry (Table 2). Notice that the three sectors (other than government) that have experienced the greatest job losses since the pandemic – Health Care, Leisure & Hospitality and Other Services – also have three of the highest job openings rates. This suggests that there shouldn’t be a permanent friction between matching those missing workers to available jobs. Table 2Employment By Industry Finally, working from our 2018/19 example, we can assess the likelihood that an increase in labor force participation will cushion the upside in the unemployment rate. Here, we see some potential for the prime age participation rate to rise back to its pre-COVID level, but the re-entry of recently retired workers over the age of 55 is more in doubt. Overall, it’s highly unlikely that the overall participation rate will re-gain its pre-pandemic level (Chart 10). Chart 10Labor Force Participation The bottom line is that the next six months will likely look more like a soft landing than a hard one. The job vacancy rate will fall quickly and the unemployment rate will stay relatively low, causing the Beveridge Curve to form a large loop. However, the Beveridge Curve will not revert to its pre-COVID level any time soon. As we move deeper into 2023, the Beveridge Curve will stop looping and the unemployment rate will rise significantly.   Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Recession Now Or Recession Later?”, dated July 26, 2022. 2 Please see US Bond Strategy / Global Fixed Income Strategy Weekly Report, “A Low Conviction US Bond Market”, dated July 12, 2022. 3https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/files/waller20220530a.pdf 4https://www.piie.com/publications/policy-briefs/bad-news-fed-beveridge-space#:~:text=The%20Federal%20Reserve%20seeks%20to,together%20and%20remain%20unlikely%20now. 5 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Three Conjectures About The US Economy”, dated July 19, 2022. Recommended Portfolio Specification Other Recommendations Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns

S&P 500 Chart 1Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart 2Profitability Chart 3Valuations And Technicals Chart 4Uses Of Cash Cyclicals Vs Defensives Chart 5Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart 6Profitability Chart 7Valuation And Technicals Chart 8Uses Of Cash Growth Vs Value  Chart 9Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart 10Profitability Chart 11Valuations And Technicals Chart 12Uses Of Cash Small Vs Large Chart 13Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart 14Profitability Chart 15Valuations and Technicals Chart 16Uses Of Cash Table 1Performance Table 2Valuations And Forward Earnings Growth Recommended Allocation