Equities
Highlights For the time being, our cyclical stance is to underweight the globally-sensitive Energy, Materials and Banks sectors versus Healthcare - in both the equity and credit asset-class. Combined with our expectation of a weakening pound/euro, this necessarily means the following European equity market allocation: Overweight: France, Ireland, U.K., Switzerland and Denmark. Neutral: Germany, Netherlands and Sweden. Underweight: Italy, Spain, and Norway. We anticipate shifting to a more cyclical sector (and country) allocation by the late summer, especially on dips. Feature It is worth reminding readers that picking mainstream equity markets1 is overwhelmingly about the industry sectors and dominant stocks that you are buying, wittingly or unwittingly. Picking equity markets is seldom about the prospects of the underlying domestic economies or head-to-head valuations.2 Chart of the WeekGlobal Energy Has Just Tracked The Global 6-Month Credit Impulse (Down) The usual top-down approach to picking stock markets ignores two dominant features of these markets. First, they have huge variations in their sector exposures. Second, large industry sector groups like Energy, Banks, Healthcare and Technology tend to move en masse under the influence of global or regional rather than domestic drivers. The combination of these two features means that for most stock markets, the sector (and dominant company) impact swamps the effect that comes from the domestic economy. Right now, by far the most important consideration for country pickers is the relative outlook for the globally-sensitive Energy and Banks sectors versus the more defensive Healthcare. As an example, consider the choice between Spain and Switzerland. Spain's IBEX is at the mercy of its huge weighting to Banks, dominated by Santander and BBVA; while Switzerland's SMI is at the mercy of its similarly dominant weighting in the Healthcare sector, via Novartis and Roche. Box I-1 - Sector Skews That Drive Country Relative Performance For major equity indexes in the euro area, the dominant sector skews that drive relative performance are as follows: Germany (DAX) is overweight Chemicals, underweight Banks (Chart 2). France (CAC) is underweight Banks and Basic Materials (Chart 3). Italy (MIB) is overweight Banks (Chart 4). Spain (IBEX) is overweight Banks (Chart 5). Netherlands (AEX) is overweight Technology, underweight Banks (Chart 6). Ireland (ISEQ) is overweight Airlines (Ryanair) which is, in effect, underweight Energy (Chart 7). And for major equity indexes outside the euro area: The U.K. (FTSE100) is effectively underweight the pound (Chart 8). Switzerland (SMI) is overweight Healthcare, underweight Energy (Chart 9). Sweden (OMX) is overweight Industrials (Chart 10). Denmark (OMX20) is overweight Healthcare and Industrials (Chart 11). Norway (OBX) is overweight Energy (Chart 12). The U.S. (S&P500) is overweight Technology, underweight Banks (Chart 13). It follows that if Banks underperform Healthcare, it is highly likely that Spain's IBEX will underperform Switzerland's SMI, irrespective of the performances of the Spanish and Swiss domestic economies. For long-term investors, the large skews in sector exposure also mean that a head-to-head comparison of country valuations can be very misleading. At first glance, Spain, trading on a forward price to earnings (PE) multiple of 15.5, appears 15% cheaper than Switzerland, trading on a multiple of over 18. But this head-to-head difference just reflects the impact of forward PEs of Banks at 11 and Healthcare at 18. The Bank sector's lower multiple does not necessarily make it better value than Healthcare. Unlike two developed economies - whose long-term growth prospects tend to be broadly similar - two industry sectors could end up experiencing very different structural growth outcomes. Which would justify very different multiples. Despite its low multiple, a structural underweight to Banks might nonetheless be a good strategy if the sector's structural growth outlook is poor. In such a case, the low multiple is potentially a value trap. Picking Stock Markets The Right Way To reiterate, the decision to overweight or underweight a mainstream equity index should not be based on your view of the country's underlying economy - unless, of course, the country is the potential source of a major tail-risk event. Instead, the decision should be based on your over-arching sector view, combined with the country's skews to specific dominant stocks and sectors (Box I-1). Chart I-2, Chart I-3, Chart I-4, Chart I-5, Chart I-6, Chart I-7, Chart I-8, Chart I-9, Chart I-10, Chart I-11, Chart I-12 and Chart I-13 should leave readers in absolutely no doubt. A market's dominant sector skew is by far the most important determinant of its relative performance. Chart I-2Germany (DAX) Is Overweight Chemicals,##br## Underweight Banks Chart I-3France (CAC) Is Underweight Banks##br## And Basic Materials Chart I-4Italy (MIB) Is Overweight Banks Chart I-5Spain (IBEX) Is Overweight Banks Chart I-6Netherlands (AEX) Is Overweight Technology,##br## Underweight Banks Chart I-7Ireland (ISEQ) Is Overweight Airlines (Ryanair) ##br##Which Is, In Effect, Underweight Energy Chart I-8The U.K. (FTSE100) Is Effectively ##br##Underweight The Pound Chart I-9Switzerland (SMI) Is Overweight Healthcare, ##br##Underweight Energy Chart I-10Sweden (OMX) Is ##br##Overweight Industrials Chart I-11Denmark (OMX20) Is Overweight ##br##Healthcare And Industrials Chart I-12Norway (OBX) Is ##br##Overweight Energy Chart I-13The U.S. (S&P500) Is Overweight Technology, ##br##Underweight Banks Which brings us to the key consideration for country allocation right now: how to allocate to the sectors that feature most often in the skews: Energy and Banks versus Healthcare. For Energy relative performance, note the very strong recent connection with the global 6-month credit impulse. The downswing in the impulse - heralding a very clear growth pause - lines up with the setback in energy and resource prices and the underperformance of these globally-sensitive equity sectors (Chart of the Week and Chart I-14). Meanwhile, in the most recent mini-cycle, Banks' relative performance is tracking the bond yield almost tick for tick (Chart I-15). There are two reasons. For banks, lower bond yields presage both slimmer net interest margins and weaker economic growth. Chart I-14Commodity Price Inflation Is Just Tracking ##br##The Global 6-Month Credit Impulse Chart I-15Financials Are Just Tracking ##br##The Bond Yield So for both Energy and Banks relative performance the overriding question is: when will this mini-downswing end? To answer this question, we note that we are 4-5 months into the global mini-downswing, whose average duration tends to be around 8-9 months. On this basis, now is a little too early to switch to an aggressively pro-cyclical sector allocation. But we would look for potential opportunities by the late summer, especially on sharp dips. Hence, for the time being our cyclical stance is to underweight the globally-sensitive Energy (and Materials) and Banks versus Healthcare. Combined with our expectation of a weakening pound/euro, this necessarily means the following European country allocation: Overweight: France,3 Ireland, U.K., Switzerland and Denmark. Neutral: Germany, Netherlands, and Sweden. Underweight: Italy, Spain, Netherlands and Norway. Clearly, if you have a different cyclical and over-arching sector view, you will arrive at a different country allocation. That's fine. The important point is that the stock and sector skew approach is the right way to pick between mainstream equity indexes. Financials Drive The European Credit Market Finally, an over-arching sector view is also highly relevant for the European corporate credit market. In the euro area, the credit market is heavily skewed towards bank and other financial sector bonds, which account for almost half of euro area corporate bonds by value. By comparison, the U.S. credit market is not so skewed to one dominant sector. Hence, the outlook for the European credit asset-class hinges on the prospects for one sector: Financials (Chart 16). With the European high yield credit spread already close to a 20-year low, we would again wait for a better opportunity before adding aggressively to the European credit asset-class. Chart I-16Mirror Image: European High Yield Credit Spread And Bank Equity Prices Dhaval Joshi, Senior Vice President European Investment Strategy dhaval@bcaresearch.com 1 In the developed world. 2 Please also see the three European Investment Strategy Special Reports 'Picking 5 European Countries The Right Way' November 13, 2014, 'Picking Countries The Right Way: Part 2' March 26, 2015 and 'Picking Countries The Right Way: Part 3' November 12, 2015. 3 But expect a small near-term countertrend underperformance in the CAC40. See page 11. Fractal Trading Model* There are no new trades this week. Last week's trade, long nickel / short palladium has made an encouraging countertrend move at the classic limit of a trend. For any investment, excessive trend following and groupthink can reach a natural point of instability, at which point the established trend is highly likely to break down with or without an external catalyst. An early warning sign is the investment's fractal dimension approaching its natural lower bound. Encouragingly, this trigger has consistently identified countertrend moves of various magnitudes across all asset classes. Chart I-17 The post-June 9, 2016 fractal trading model rules are: When the fractal dimension approaches the lower limit after an investment has been in an established trend it is a potential trigger for a liquidity-triggered trend reversal. Therefore, open a countertrend position. The profit target is a one-third reversal of the preceding 13-week move. Apply a symmetrical stop-loss. Close the position at the profit target or stop-loss. Otherwise close the position after 13 weeks. Use the position size multiple to control risk. The position size will be smaller for more risky positions. * For more details please see the European Investment Strategy Special Report "Fractals, Liquidity & A Trading Model," dated December 11, 2014, available at eis.bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading Model Recommendations Equities Bond & Interest Rates Currency & Other Positions Closed Fractal Trades Trades Closed Trades Asset Performance Currency & Bond Equity Sector Country Equity Indicators Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Interest Rate Chart II-5Indicators To Watch##br## - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch##br## - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch##br## - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch##br## - Interest Rate Expectations
The Empire State Manufacturing and Philadelphia Fed Business Outlook surveys typically move in lockstep and their message last week was united; the domestic outlook for manufacturing is exceptionally strong. Both surveys have historically been reliable indicators for industrial machinery orders, which have only recently turned positive (second panel). A softer U.S. dollar too should lift demand with roughly 40% of revenues derived internationally. Capacity utilization should not present a roadblock to much higher production, as it remains below normal for this stage in the order cycle (third panel). As utilization rates firm, pricing power should gain strength. Despite the improving outlook, valuations have been stuck in neutral, as earnings estimates are rising faster than relative share prices. Importantly, the relative forward P/E remains well below previous bull market peaks (fourth panel). Stay overweight. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5INDM - ITW, IR, SWK, PH, FTV, DOV, PNR, XYL, SNA, FLS.
Neutral The S&P hypermarkets index has been a stalwart performer YTD, outshining both the broad consumer staples universe and the overall market by a wide margin. However; this impressive run-up is unsustainable. Three main headwinds suggest that some caution is warranted: soft pricing power, likely further aggravated by new German competitors expanding in/entering the U.S. market, the ongoing and recently escalated assault from online retailers and finally, improved consumer spending. These factors imply that profit margins will remain under chronic pressure, but concerns could become more acute on a cyclical basis. Consumer goods import prices have surged in recent months (second panel), and the depreciating U.S. dollar is likely to sustain this uptrend. Cutthroat competition means that retailers will likely absorb these rising costs, to the detriment of profit margins. Further, livelier consumer spending would warn of additional headwinds (third panel), as higher incomes boost the incentive for consumers to "trade up" and shop at higher ticket stores. Netting it out, we recommend booking modest profits and downgrading exposure in the S&P hypermarkets index to neutral. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5HYPC - WMT, COST.
Neutral One quarter ago, we posited that the consolidation phase in the broad consumer discretionary sector restored value and created an attractive entry point and an upgrade in the S&P restaurants sub-index provided an attractive way to execute that thesis. This view has largely played out, as restaurant shares have bested the market by double digits since March 20th. We doubt there is any more upside left. The National Restaurant Association's Restaurant Performance Index fell to the boom/bust 100 line and downside momentum has accelerated (second panel). Leading indicators of profit margins have also eroded. An uptick in commodity input costs and multi-decade highs in the industry's wage bill, which are running at close to 10% annual growth, stand in marked contrast with soft industry pricing power. Our restaurants profit margin gauge captures all of these forces and warns that a squeeze looms (third panel). In sum, the playable rally in the S&P restaurants index has run its course and a profit recovery is fully discounted in frothy valuations. We recommend booking profits of 11% in the S&P restaurants index and moving to a benchmark allocation. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5REST - MCD, SBUX, YUM, DRI, CMG.
Highlights Rising equity prices, low and falling bond yields and stable credit spreads are all consistent with today's low growth and inflation backdrop, where the Fed can take its time raising rates. The FOMC is looking through the inflation shortfall for now and is sticking with its rate hike plan. Lower oil prices are the key driver of plunging market-based inflation expectations. We expect the Fed to begin to trim its balance sheet later this year, and be a modest negative for Treasury prices. The latest readings on the health of household balance sheet from the Fed's flow of funds accounts reinforce our view that the consumer sector will provide solid support for the U.S. economy through 2017; the student loan debt situation is not a source of financial systemic risk. Feature We first outlined our view that U.S. assets were in a policy sweet spot back in September 2016, noting that the monetary policy sweet spot won't end for risk assets until interest rates climb above the equilibrium rate. Nine months later, policy remains in the sweet spot, thanks to a beneficial combination of moderate economic growth, healthy corporate profit growth, stable margins and low inflation. Last week's CPI report was disconcerting, but did reinforce the notion that the Fed can take its time. Thus, when investors ask: "How can equity prices and bond prices both be moving higher?" Our answer is: "Because we are still in the sweet spot." Low And Slow Wins The Day Investors are wondering how the equity market can hold up given that the bond market and the dollar appear to be signaling sluggish economic growth. We look at it another way. Rising equity prices, low and falling bond yields and stable credit spreads are all consistent with today's low growth and inflation backdrop, where the Fed can take its time raising rates. The FOMC reaffirmed its intended path for rates at last week's meeting (see below). If the Fed's modest forecasts for growth and inflation are met, the central bank will raise rates gradually and begin to shrink its balance sheet. The implication for investors is that the recent outperformance of stocks over bonds accompanied by positive correlations between the two can persist for some time. Lessons from the 1950s and 1990s are helpful in illustrating this point. During the 1950s (Chart 1A, the Fed was gradually raising rates, but inflation and long rates remained low. Even as rates edged higher, stocks outperformed bonds, despite a booming economy that was near full employment. In the 1990s, long bond yields fell even as equity prices surged. Inflation was well contained for most of that decade (Chart 1B). Chart 1ABond Yields, Stocks, Inflation And The Fed In The 1950s... Chart 1B...And In The 1990s At what point will bond market become a problem for stocks? Charts 2 and 3 show that low inflation and low rates are both critical to keeping stock and bond yields positively correlated. The 4.25% level on the 10-year Treasury is a critical level to watch based on the historical relationship between Treasury yields and stock-bond correlations. However, the reason for rising bond yields is as important as the level of yields. An increase in long-dated Treasury yields associated with a pickup in real growth is less of a threat to equities than a rise in yields due to an uptick in inflation, because the latter invites a more aggressive Fed tightening cycle. Chart 3 shows that core inflation around or below 2% supports a positive correlation between stock and bond yields. As inflation begins to move from 2 to 3%, the relationship fluctuates, and above 3% there are very few periods of positive correlation. All signs point to a depressed inflation environment over the next year, which is one of the keys to keeping bond yields and stock prices positively correlated. We expect core CPI to move back up to 2% in the medium term, and the Fed agrees. The central bank's latest forecast puts inflation at just 2% for the next two years and in the long run. Bottom Line: Stocks can handle rising bond yields as long as higher yields are driven by better growth and not inflation. With inflation low and bonds yields at 2.15%, we are a long way from where bond yields become a problem for the stock market. FOMC: Sticking With The Roadmap For Now It was a wild ride in the Treasury market last week as bonds first rallied hard on the heels of some data releases, before selling off after the FOMC failed to deliver a fully "dovish hike". May retail sales were decent below the surface. The "control group" measure that feeds into the GDP figures was flat in May, but was revised up to a 0.6% gain in April (Chart 4). The result was a solid 4.3% annualized gain over the past three months. This suggests that, although not booming, consumer spending growth is solid in the second quarter. U.S. household balance sheets are in solid shape, as we highlight below. The FOMC was probably not swayed by this report. The CPI report was another story (Chart 5). The energy component pulled down the headline rate as expected, but the softening of inflation is widespread in the index. The annualized 3-month rate of change in the core rate fell virtually to zero in May. Disinflation can be seen in areas that have little to do with the output gap, such as shelter and medical care. But it is also showing up in other services, a segment of the CPI that is most highly correlated with wage growth and labor market pressure. The sudden broad-based change in direction is difficult to explain and, at a minimum, presents a challenge to the view that the U.S. economy is approaching its non-inflationary limits. Chart 4Consumer Spending##BR##Remains Solid Chart 5Disinflation In Core Services##BR##Is A Challenge To Fed's View Bonds rallied heading into the FOMC meeting on the view that the Fed would deliver a rate hike as promised, but would revise down the "dot plot" or, at a minimum, would play up concerns about the inflation undershoot. In the event, the Fed did neither. Chart 6Labor Market Continues To Tighten The statement acknowledged the disappointing inflation readings, but also revealed a determination to normalize interest rates in the face of a tight labor market. In the press conference, Chair Yellen downplayed the inflation shortfall, pointing to some one-off factors. She stressed that the FOMC makes policy for the "medium term," and should not over-react to short-term wiggles in the data. Given the tight labor market, the Fed Chair argued that the conditions are in place for inflation to move higher. Indeed, the median FOMC forecast for headline and core inflation was revised down for this year only; the outlook for 2018 and 2019 was left unchanged at 2%. Growth was revised up a little for 2017. We agree with the FOMC that the labor market is tight enough to gradually push up inflation. The underlying trend in wage growth has accelerated from 1.2% in 2010 to 2.4% today according to our wage tracker, in line with the narrowing of the unemployment gap over the period (Chart 6). The FOMC trimmed its estimate of the full-employment level of unemployment by 0.1 percentage points to 4.6%, but it revised down its forecast for the actual unemployment rate by a larger 0.3 percentage points over the next two years. This means that the projected amount of excess labor demand is now greater than in the March projection. By itself, this should make the FOMC more predisposed to tightening, especially since financial conditions have been easing. That said, the May CPI report was admittedly disconcerting due to the broad-based nature of the disinflationary pulse. This is contrary to Chair Yellen's assertion that the inflation disappointment reflects one-off factors. The May CPI report could be a head-fake, related to normal randomness in the data. But it is not clear why there would be a sudden and widespread moderation of inflation. Inflation Expectations Plunge A large portion of the decline in long-term Treasury yields since March reflected a decline in inflation expectations. The 10-year CPI swap rate has dropped by 35 basis points over the period. BCA's fixed-income strategists point out that the decline in long-term inflation expectations has been widespread across the major countries, irrespective of whether or not actual inflation is trending up or down.1 Given all these diverging signals within the national inflation data, it is odd that there has been such a uniform decline in inflation expectations across the major bond markets. That leads us to look to the oil price decline as the main driver. Weaker energy prices have been part of a broader move lower in commodity prices that is likely related to less reflationary monetary and fiscal policies out of the world's biggest commodity consumer, China. However, our commodity strategists have noted that export and import volumes in the emerging economies accelerated sharply in the first quarter of 2017. Given that there is a strong correlation between trade volumes and oil demand in the emerging markets, this bodes well for a rebound in global oil demand. Combined with the "OPEC 2.0" production cuts, the demand-supply balance in world oil markets is likely to turn positive in the months ahead, which will allow oil prices to return to a range close to $60/bbl by year-end. A move in oil prices back to that level would help arrest the downturn in overall commodity price indices, and stabilize goods CPI inflation in the developed economies in the latter half of 2017. This should also boost global inflation expectations and bond yields, especially since inflation expectations have fallen too far relative to underlying non-energy inflation pressures. This forecast also applies to the U.S. bond market, although one cannot blame the deceleration in inflation entirely on energy in this case. We expect inflation to move higher in line with the tight labor market, but we may have to change our view if service sector inflation continues to move lower in the next few of months. Balance Sheet News Chart 7Main Risk To Bond Yields Is To The Upside The Fed also provided some details on plans to shrink the balance sheet in terms of the size of the monthly "run off". If the economy evolves as the Fed expects, the balance sheet will start to shrink later this year. Reducing the Fed's balance sheet will be negative for Treasury prices as we argued in the May 22, 2017 Weekly Report, but the impact of this adjustment on its own will be modest. As the FOMC dials back monetary stimulus it will be concerned with overall monetary conditions, including short-term rates, long-term rates and the dollar. If long-term rates and/or the dollar rise too quickly, policymakers will moderate the pace of rate hikes and use forward guidance to talk down the long end of the curve so as to avoid allowing financial conditions get too tight, too quickly (i.e. the term premium would rise, but would be partly offset by a lower expected path for the fed funds rate). Thus, the path of short-term rates is dependent on the dollar and the reaction of the long end of the curve. The bottom line is that the FOMC is looking-through the inflation shortfall for now and is sticking with its rate hike plan. The evolution of inflation in the coming months will obviously be key. Nonetheless, given that only one more rate hike is expected over the next year, inflation expectations are back to U.S. pre-election levels, and that the 10-year U.S. term premium is well below zero again, it appears that the main risk for bond yields is to the upside (Chart 7). The equity market should benefit in the short-term to the extent that market expectations for a flatter rate hike cycle are driven by lower inflation expectations, rather than a slower growth outlook. If we are correct that inflation expectations will bounce later this year, the associated bond sell-off may present a small headwind for stocks. Nonetheless, we do not believe this will derail the rally in risk assets until inflation has reached the Fed's 2% target, and bond yields and the dollar are significantly higher. The Consumer Comeback Continues The latest readings on the health of household balance sheet from the Fed's flow of funds accounts reinforce our view that the consumer sector will provide solid support for the U.S. economy through 2017 and beyond. Household net worth continues to rise and is well above average at this point in a long expansion (Chart 8). While the total wealth effect for consumer spending is lagging behind prior cycles, it remains supportive. Debt to income ratios are at multi-decade lows. The result of the ongoing balance sheet repair is that FICO scores have hit an all time high (Chart 8, panel 4). The most recent Fed Senior Loan Officer's Survey also suggests that the banking sector is willing to lend to households and that consumers themselves are open to borrowing, although household demand for loans has weakened in recent quarters (Chart 9). Chart 8Support For Consumer Remains In Place Chart 9Senior Loan Officers Survey Still Supportive Consumer spending intentions also remain in an uptrend, and while consumers do not always do what they say, the 10-year high readings on "plans to buy" a house and a car are telling. (Chart 10, panels 1 and 2). Overall measures of consumer confidence also remain at 16 year highs (Chart 10, panel 3). Chart 10Consumers Are In A Good Mood The sturdy labor market, modest wage growth, and low inflation are all factors that support a solid pace of real income growth, adding another support to the spending backdrop (Chart 10, panel 4). Rising rates do not pose a threat to spending for two main reasons, at least in the early stages of the Fed tightening cycle. First, we expect Fed rate hikes to be gradual this year and next, putting only modest upward pressure on longer-dated Treasury yields that anchor consumer loan rates for mortgages, autos, and personal loans. Our colleagues in The Bank Credit Analyst concluded that household interest payment burdens will rise only modestly, and from a low level, in the next couple of years even if borrowing rates increase immediately by 100bps for today's levels. According to their analysis, it would require a much more significant shock, i.e. 300bps or greater, to move interest payments as a share of GDP back toward historical averages.2 We continue to receive many questions from clients on the risks posed by the rise in student debt levels. The Bank Credit Analyst publication covered the topic in a comprehensive report back in November 2016.3 The key takeaway from that report for investors was that student debt is a modest drag for economic growth, but is not a source of risk for U.S. government finances and does not represent the next subprime crisis. More than half a year later, our conclusions remain the same, though the concern among investors has not abated. A recent report4 by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York provides some data on student loans through Q1 2017. More specifically, the report noted that student debt levels continued to rise in Q4 2016 and Q1 2017, and that student loan delinquencies remain high by historical standards but moved sideways in recent years. We will continue to monitor the student loan and all other forms of consumer indebtedness as we assess the risks in the U.S. economy. However, the elevated level of student loan delinquencies does not change our overall assessment of the impact of student loans on the economy and the financial system. Student loans are only a mild economic headwind, and do not represent a source of financial systemic risk. Bottom Line: The consumer - a key driver of the U.S. economy and corporate earnings - will provide a solid backdrop for the economy through 2017 and beyond. This climate will allow the Fed to raise rates one more time this year and begin to pare its balance sheet. The solid underpinnings for the consumer will sustain corporate earnings growth and, ultimately, higher stock prices. John Canally, CFA, Senior Vice President U.S. Investment Strategy johnc@bcaresearch.com Mark McClellan, Senior Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst markm@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see BCA Global Fixed Income Strategy Weekly Report "Alternative Facts In The Bond Market," dated June 13, 2017, available at gfis.bcaresearch.com. 2 Please see The Bank Credit Analyst Special Report "Global Debt Titanic Collides With Fed Iceberg?," dated February 2017, available at bca.bcaresearch.com. 3 Please see The Bank Credit Analyst Special Report "Student Loan Blues: Can't Replay What I Borrowed," dated October 2016, available at bca.bcaresearch.com. 4 Please see "Quarterly Report On Household Debt And Credit", dated May 2017, available at https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/interactives/householdcredit/data/pdf/HHDC_2017Q1.pdf
Highlights Portfolio Strategy The rally in the S&P restaurants index has run its course and a profit recovery is fully discounted. Lock in profits and downgrade to neutral. Intensified inter-industry competition, the onslaught of online retailers and a rebounding U.S. economy are stiff headwinds for hypermarket stocks. Sell positions down to neutral. Recent Changes S&P Restaurants - Downgrade to neutral, booking profits of 11%. S&P Hypermarkets - Downgrade to neutral. Table 1 Feature The S&P 500 remained resilient in the face of the fourth Fed interest rate hike and the drubbing in the tech sector. The latter is notable given that a select few stocks have contributed roughly one quarter of the overall market's gains this year, and signals that money is not leaving equities en masse, but is merely rotating into other sectors. This suggests that consolidation rather than correction is the main watchword. Our view remains that stocks are in a sweet spot: a lack of inflation pressures has kept long-term interest rates at bay, despite decent economic momentum and rising corporate profits. The latter have been driven by impressive corporate pricing power gains (see Chart 1 from last week's Weekly Report), creating an ideal equity market scenario whereby the business sector can grow profits without any corresponding consumer price inflation pressures. Investors are likely to extrapolate this goldilocks equity scenario for a while longer, given that our Reflation Gauge (RG), a combination of oil prices, Treasury yields and the U.S. dollar, has exploded to the highest level since 2010 and just shy of all-time highs. The RG leads both the U.S. economic surprise index and equity sentiment (Chart 1). If economic activity begins to reaccelerate, as we expect and irrespective of tax reform success, the window is open for additional equity market gains. Meanwhile, the mini sector rotation that commenced two weeks ago is a healthy development and may not be a precursor to a more vicious and widespread correction. In recent Weekly Reports, we have shown that our Equity Market Internal Dynamics Indicator was signaling that upward momentum in the broad market was well supported by the character of market participation (see Chart 2 from the May 15th Weekly Report). Chart 1Coiled Spring Chart 2Healthy Rotation Chart 2 shows that lately the small/large ratio has sprung back to life. Growth/value stalled near the previous all-time peak, and capital has flowed out of frothy tech stocks and into the cheaper and more economic-sensitive financials sector. Against a backdrop of a budding rebound in domestic economic data, this recent market rotation is likely to stay intact. That view is corroborated by the collapse in correlations among stocks and overall assets. The CBOE's implied correlation index has fallen to fresh cyclical lows, which suggests that investors have become increasingly discerning and that earnings fundamentals/valuations should become the primary drivers of stock market returns. Keep in mind that empirical evidence shows that receding stock correlations also underpin the broad equity market (top & bottom panels, Chart 2). All of these fluctuations signal that the broad equity market is more likely to build a base before it resumes its advance to new cyclical highs, rather than suffer an imminent and major correction. As such, we continue to slowly and deliberately recalibrate our portfolio away from its previously heavy bias toward defensives. This week we make two consumer-related shifts. Restaurants: Beware Of Heartburn One quarter ago we posited that the consolidation phase in the broad consumer discretionary sector restored value and created an attractive entry point. Washed out technicals and an upswing in industry earnings fundamentals supported our thesis (Chart 3). An upgrade in the S&P restaurants sub-index to overweight provided an attractive way to execute that thesis. This view has largely played out, as restaurant shares have bested the market by double digits since March 20th. Is there any more upside left to this impressive quarterly relative return? We doubt it. While we remain constructive on the overall consumer discretionary sector (Chart 4), we recommend crystalizing gains of 11% in the S&P restaurants index and downshifting to neutral. Chart 3Stay ##br##The Course... Chart 4...As Our Consumer Drag ##br## Indicator Is Flashing Green Q1 industry conference calls revealed that improved store traffic and better offerings boosted same-store sales, and relative share prices followed suit from a technically depressed level. That caused sell side analysts to modestly lift relative EPS forecasts, but a valuation re-rating still explains the bulk of the stock price surge (Chart 5). We are reluctant to pay a 40% premium to the broad market on a 12-month forward P/E basis. The National Restaurant Association's Restaurant Performance Index fell to the boom/bust 100 line and downside momentum has accelerated (second panel, Chart 5). Worrisomely, the Current Situation Index (not shown) of the same survey was in the contraction zone for "the sixth time in the last seven months". Similarly, the Expectations Index also decelerated, heralding an uncertain dining outlook. Indeed, demand for away from home dining is on the decline in absolute terms and compared with overall retail sales and consumption (middle panel, Chart 6). This suggests that the first quarter increase in store traffic may not be sustainable (top panel, Chart 6). The recent spike in restaurant construction expenditures will further dilute same-store sales growth opportunities (bottom panel, Chart 6). Chart 5Too Expensive Chart 6Do Not Overstay Your Welcome Leading indicators of profit margins have also eroded. An uptick in commodity input costs and 8% growth in the industry's wage bill, stand in marked contrast with anemic industry pricing power. Our restaurants profit margin gauge captures all of these forces and warns that a squeeze looms (Chart 7). Nevertheless, it is not all bad news. The improvement in consumer finances should counterbalance some of the casual dining industry's deficient demand hiccups. Rising household net worth makes consumers feel wealthier, and therefore increases their marginal propensity to spend. Importantly, the $15-$35K income cohort also expects a sizable boost to their take home pay, according to the latest Conference Board survey data (not shown). Importantly, the earnings headwind from foreign sales exposure has likely morphed into a profit tailwind. U.S. dollar softness is not only evident against G10 currencies, but also emerging market (EM) FX rates (Chart 8). In addition, healthy EM domestic demand is the mirror image of fickle U.S. final demand. EM central banks are easing monetary policy - whereas the Fed hiked for a fourth time this cycle last week - in order to rekindle EM consumer spending/growth. As a result, EM restaurant sales should improve (Chart 8). Chart 7Rising Input Costs ##br##Are Eating Into Margins Chart 8Export ##br## Relief Valve In sum, the playable rally in the S&P restaurants index has run its course and a profit recovery is fully priced in frothy valuations. The V-shaped rebound in share prices has outpaced fundamental improvements, and a consolidation/corrective phase is inevitable. Bottom Line: While we remain overweight the S&P consumer discretionary sector, we recommend booking profits of 11% in the S&P restaurants index (MCD, SBUX, YUM, DRI, CMG), and moving to a benchmark allocation. Time To Downgrade Hypermarkets While investors have shed anything retail related year-to-date (YTD), big box retailers have been a positive exception. In fact, the S&P hypermarkets index has been a stalwart performer YTD, outshining both the broad consumer staples universe and the overall market. Is this impressive run-up sustainable? The short answer is no. Three main headwinds suggest that some caution is warranted now that index outperformance has eliminated the previous valuation appeal: soft pricing power likely further aggravated by new German competitors expanding in/entering the U.S. market, the ongoing assault from online retailers and the improving U.S. economy, especially consumer spending. These factors imply that profit margins will remain under chronic pressure, but concerns could become more acute on a cyclical basis. Consumer goods import prices have surged in recent months (Chart 9), and the depreciating U.S. dollar is likely to sustain this uptrend. Cutthroat competition means that retailers will likely absorb these rising costs, to the detriment of profit margins. While food prices are making an effort to exit the deflation zone, ALDI and Lidl, two deep-pocketed German competitors are entering the U.S. retail scene, reportedly with massive expansion plans. Tesco, Sainsbury's and ASDA in the U.K., Carrefour in Europe and Woolworth's and Coles in Australia continue to feel the wrath of German retailers. Consequently, it would be dangerous to extrapolate the nascent improvement in retail food CPI. All of this is likely to sustain the profit margin squeeze (Chart 9). Further, the online retail onslaught will continue to escalate. The Amazon juggernaut appears unstoppable. The latest news that it will take over Whole Foods Market confirms that even grocery sales are now seriously on its radar screen. Chart 10 shows that non-store retail sales continue to grow at a much faster pace than traditional retailers. The greater the market share gains for online retailers, the larger the downward pressure on hypermarkets relative profitability (relative retail sales shown inverted, second panel, Chart 10). Chart 9Margin Pressures Chart 10Beware Online Retailers' Onslaught Under such a tough operating backdrop we are reluctant to pay a premium valuation for this safe haven sector. Worrisomely, soft revenue growth argues against a further a valuation re-rating (Chart 11). Finally, macro forces required to spur better revenue no longer exist. The U.S. economy has entered a self-reinforcing recovery. While personal consumption expenditures have underwhelmed of late, buoyant job certainty and a vibrant housing market are boosting consumer confidence. Before long, consumers should loosen their purse strings and indulge anew. Historically, a lively consumer spending backdrop has been inversely correlated with relative share prices (PCE is shown inverted, Chart 12). Similarly, Federal tax coffers have started to refill following a one year hiatus (bottom panel, Chart 12). The implication is that incomes and profits are expanding, boosting the incentive for consumers to "trade up" and shop at higher ticket stores. Nevertheless, some partial offsets exist. The lower income consumer is the industry's main clientele and low interest rates, low gasoline prices and soaring income confidence for this consumer cohort should cushion store traffic woes (third panel, Chart 13). Chart 11Derating ##br## Warning Chart 12Improving Economy = ##br## Bad Omen For Hypermarkets Chart 13Positive ##br##Offsets Meanwhile, the overall retail sales price deflator has tentatively troughed, albeit it continues to deflate. Given the high volume nature of the hypermarket industry, any small positive change in pricing power tends to have a meaningful impact on sales growth (second panel, Chart 13). Multi-year highs in overall income growth signals that on average consumers will have more disposable income. The bottom panel of Chart 13 shows that income growth has been a reliable indicator for hypermarket EPS. Adding it up, this is an opportune time to book modest profits and downgrade exposure in the S&P hypermarkets index to neutral. Intensified inter-industry competition, the onslaught of online retailers and a rebounding U.S. economy argue against extrapolating recent optimism far into the future. Bottom Line: Downgrade the S&P hypermarkets index to a benchmark allocation (WMT, COST). Current Recommendations Current Trades Size And Style Views Favor small over large caps and stay neutral growth over value.
Biotech stocks have been on a wild ride over the past four years, and are now on the downside of a deflating bubble. There are high odds that the index will fall further before reaching fundamental support levels. Sales growth rates have declined to 5-year lows, reflecting a downturn in pricing power and drug consumption. As noted in previous research, consumers are allocating less to health care outlays, and drug exports are falling. Sagging top-line growth prospects will continue to exert downward pressure on valuations. We remain underweight. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5BIOTX-AMGN, ABBV, GILD, CELG, BIIB, REGN, ALXN, VRTX.
Highlights Our "fair value" models incorporate prevailing domestic risk-free interest rates and long-term earnings, which provide an assessment on market valuation levels from a historical perspective. Hong Kong and Chinese A shares are substantially "undervalued" compared with their respective "fair values," while Taiwanese and Chinese investable stocks are roughly "fairly valued" according to our models. The PBoC will continue to enforce deleveraging in the financial sector through liquidity tightening. However, without genuine inflation pressures and any sign of economic overheating, the "deleveraging" process is likely to remain gradual, and its impact on growth will continue to be closely monitored by the authorities. Feature Investors have become increasingly concerned about the rapid expansion of U.S. equity multiples. By some measures, the market appears frothy by historical standards. The forward price-to-earnings ratio for U.S. stocks currently stands at about 18 times, and the cyclically adjusted PE (CAPE), or the Shiller PE for U.S. stocks, is over 26 times - both of which are substantially higher than historical norms (Chart 1). The red-hot performance and elevated valuation levels of the U.S. tech sector has brought back memories of the Internet mania of the late 1990s, which in part triggered a mini-meltdown in the NASDAQ last Friday. Beyond Valuation Indicators Compared with American bourses, other major markets are more reasonably valued, particularly emerging markets, including stocks in the greater China region. EM stocks are trading at about 13 times forward earnings, compared with 18 times for the U.S. (Chart 2). Similarly, forward PE ratios for Taiwan, Chinese A shares and Chinese investable stocks are all at around 13 times, and 16 times for Hong Kong. In addition, our calculations show that CAPEs for Taiwan and Chinese domestic A shares are both about 18 times, 12 times for Hong Kong stocks and a mere 8 times for investable Chinese shares, compared with over 26 times for the U.S. market. Chart 1U.S. Stocks: Valuation Looks Stretched Chart 2Greater China Markets Are Much Cheaper While these valuation indicators are useful to identify potential value plays globally, they do have limitations from a historical perspective. Stocks, as an asset class, compete with other assets, and therefore, the valuation levels of competing asset classes need to be taken into consideration. More specifically, inflation, monetary policy and interest rates determine the "risk free" discount factor for valuing equities. Historically the fed funds rate has been a defining factor for U.S. stock multiples. The famed "Fed model" argues that forward earnings yields should track 10-year Treasury yields (Chart 3). On both accounts, U.S. stocks do not look exceptionally expensive, considering exceedingly low interest rates. In fact, U.S. stocks' earnings yields have diverged with "risk free" rates since the Global Financial Crisis. This offers a glimmer of hope that U.S. stocks are not immediately vulnerable, even if interest rates continue to rise, unless higher rates tilt the U.S. economy into recession, which in turn leads to a major contraction in equity earnings. A Fair Value Assessment This week we incorporate interest rates into the valuation matrix for Greater China markets. Our "fair value" models incorporate prevailing domestic risk-free interest rates and long-term earnings, providing an assessment on market valuation levels from a historical perspective. Our models suggest that Hong Kong and Chinese A shares are substantially "undervalued" compared with their respective "fair values," while Taiwan and Chinese investable stocks are roughly "fairly valued." Hong Kong The Hong Kong market is currently standing at one standard deviation below its long-term "fair value," underscoring more upside potential in prices (Chart 4). In fact, the current reading matches that of the early 1980s, which marked the beginning of a dramatic bull market that lasted several decades, despite some sharp pullbacks. This comparison of course does not take into consideration that the Hong Kong market graduated from an electrifying developing market with excessive gains and risks into a developed one, and therefore a "fair-value" assessment based on historical norms could be misleading. Overall, Hong Kong stocks appear cheap, but a replay of a mega bull market is not realistic. Chart 3U.S. Stocks Do Not Appear Expensive ##br##Considering Interest Rate Chart 4Hong Kong Stocks Are Deeply Undervalued ##br##Compared With 'Fair Value' Taiwan Taiwanese stocks currently are almost exactly "fairly valued," according to our model (Chart 5). Our indicator has been hovering around current levels in recent years, despite price gains, due to improved earnings and more importantly, lower interest rates. Taiwanese local government bond yields are the lowest among the Greater China economies, and therefore our fair-value assessment of Taiwanese stocks' can change quickly if interest rates rise. Overall, Taiwanese stocks do not appear particularly appealing from a valuation perspective, especially compared with other bourses in the region. Chinese Investable Shares Chinese investable shares, although still deeply undervalued by most conventional valuation yardsticks, are now roughly "fairly valued" according to our model (Chart 6). In fact, this asset class was deeply undervalued in the early 2000s, followed by parabolic price moves that transformed into a feverish mania in 2007, but they have not been unduly cheap by this matrix in recent years. We suspect this is likely due to the high earnings volatility of this asset class, attributable to its heavy concentration in highly cyclical sectors such as energy and materials. Furthermore, investor sentiment on Chinese investable stocks swings dramatically, pushing their valuation indicators routinely to overshoot or undershoot extremes. Currently, investors are still skeptical on China's macro profile, and Chinese investable shares are likely under-owned by investors. We continue to expect this asset class to be positively re-rated, but the current situation does not appear too extreme compared with historical episodes. Chart 5Taiwanese Stocks Are Roughly 'Fairly Valued' Chart 6Chinese Investable Shares Are No Longer 'Undervalued' Chinese A shares Chart 7Chinese A Shares Appear Deeply Undervalued The Chinese domestic market, however, scores surprisingly high on our "fair value" assessment. The broad A-share index is well below its historical "fair value" level, and has in fact continued to improve (i.e. fall deeper into undervalued territory) since last year along with rising stock prices and a sharp spike in local bond yields (Chart 7). Although A shares historically have rarely been cheap in a global comparison, this asset class is now well below its historical average valuation levels, underscoring room for mean reversion. Moreover, Chinese local government bond yields are the highest among the Greater China economies. Any decline in bond yields will make A shares more attractive to local investors. In short, Taiwanese stocks appear to be the least attractive in our "fair value" assessment, both compared with other bourses in the region and from their own historical perspective. Hong Kong stock valuations look appealing. We continue to favor H shares over A shares to play the Chinese reflation cycle, but the tide could soon shift. A shares are still trading at a premium compared to their H-share counterparts, but the A-H premium has shrunk to 25% from 45% early last year. We will be looking for an opportunity to lift our bullish rating on A shares at the expense of H shares in the coming weeks. Stay tuned. A Word On Macro Numbers And The PBoC Most of China's macro numbers for May released on Wednesday have come in largely as expected. Taken together, the macro data confirm that the economic momentum has softened, but growth remains stable, as growth rates of capital spending, industrial production and retail sales have remained largely unchanged. A more disconcerting development is the continued decline in broad money growth, which decelerated from 10.5% in April to 9.6% in May, a new record low, underscoring continued pressure from the authorities to enforce financial deleveraging, which could further inflict downward pressure on the economy. The saving grace, however, is that bank loan growth remains stable, which means that the slowdown is mainly due to a contraction in off-balance sheet "shadow banking" activity. Meanwhile, broad money growth currently is well below the official target, which reduces the odds of further escalation in tightening measures. Furthermore, inflationary pressure is muted. While headline consumer price inflation (CPI) did pick up slightly to 1.5% in May compared with 1.2% in April, it is still exceedingly low (Chart 8). Moreover, the recent sharp decline in food prices in the wholesale market suggests that food CPI will come in much weaker next month, which will lead to a further decline in headline CPI, likely to below 1%, a further departure from the official CPI estimate (Chart 9). Chart 8Chinese Food Inflation Will Drop Sharply Chart 9Headline Inflation Is Chronically Below Official Estimate As this report goes to press, the Fed has just announced a 25 basis point rate hike, a widely anticipated move. As far as China is concerned, domestic factors are the top priority for the PBoC's decision-making considerations. On this front, there is no reason for the central bank to hasten its tightening. For now, we expect the PBoC will continue to enforce deleveraging in the financial sector through liquidity tightening. However, without genuine inflation pressures and any sign of economic overheating, the "deleveraging" process is likely to remain gradual, and its impact on growth will continue to be closely monitored by the authorities. As such, there is no case at the moment for monetary overkill that could risk major growth disappointments. We will follow up on these issues in the coming weeks. Yan Wang, Senior Vice President China Investment Strategy yanw@bcaresearch.com Cyclical Investment Stance Equity Sector Recommendations
The signal from communications equipment stocks continues to worsen. Communications equipment pricing power is experiencing decade-high decline rates and the ratio of new orders to inventories has rolled over, both of which indicate the early stages of an inventory clear-out with production declines not far behind. Cisco Systems’ recent layoff announcement confirms an inventory oversupply. A liquidation phase will be exacerbated by woes at two important buying groups; telecom carriers, the primary customer group, remain engaged in a severely deflationary price war which makes increased capex unlikely, while the U.S. federal government remains shrouded in uncertainty with respect to budget outlays. All of this points to a shrinking top line, ongoing weakening in profitability and continued underperformance. We reiterate our recent downgrade to underweight. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5COMM - CSCO, HRS, MSI, JNPR, FFIV.