Estados Unidos
Highlights The US dollar is likely to weaken over the next 12 months as global growth accelerates and the narrowing in real interest rate differentials continues to thwart the greenback. Theoretically, the relationship between exchange rates and budget deficits is indeterminate. Whether or not a larger budget deficit leads to a weaker currency ultimately depends on how the central bank responds and what other countries are doing. Today, the Fed is effectively capping nominal yields through unlimited bond purchases and aggressive forward guidance. As such, the passage of a new US fiscal stimulus package should mitigate deflationary fears, reduce real rates, and put modest downward pressure on the dollar. While a disorderly dollar selloff cannot be ruled out, it is a low-probability scenario at the moment. A major dollar decline would require that realized inflation increases dramatically, which is unlikely at a time when unemployment is still so elevated. Moreover, to the extent that the US economy is operating below its potential, increased fiscal stimulus will lead to higher private-sector savings. Higher private-sector savings, in turn, will limit any deterioration in the current account balance. Investors should remain overweight global equities over a 12-month horizon, favoring cheaper non-US stocks and cyclical sectors. Beep Beep In the classic Road Runner cartoon, Wile E. Coyote has a habit of inadvertently running off a cliff, stopping for a moment in mid-air to look down, only to realize that there is nothing beneath him. Like the coyote, the US economy has gone over the fiscal cliff. The extra $600 a week in emergency federal unemployment benefits have lapsed. The small business Paycheck Protection Program has stopped accepting new applications, while state and local governments face a massive cash crunch. President Trump’s executive orders, if implemented, will mitigate some of the fiscal tightening. However, it is probable that they will be challenged in court. And even if the states are able to get the new unemployment benefit program up and running quickly – which seems doubtful – the $44 billion in federal funding for the program, which was taken from the Department of Homeland Security’s Disaster Relief Fund, will run out in six weeks. The stimulative effect of the adjustment to payroll taxes is also likely to be limited, given that the President’s order only defers tax liabilities until next year, rather than forgiving them altogether. So why hasn’t the stock market reacted negatively to the withdrawal of large-scale fiscal stimulus? The answer is that investors are assuming that Congress will manage to cobble together a deal over the coming days that resolves the shortcomings in Trump’s executive orders. Given that voters favor more stimulus, some sort of a deal is more likely than not (Table 1). However, with the stock market near record highs, the impetus for Trump to seek a compromise with Congress is not yet at hand. Risk assets may need to suffer a setback to catalyze an agreement. Table 1Majority Continues To Support Expanded Unemployment Insurance Still Sticking With Our Overweight 12-Month View On Stocks Despite our near-term concerns, we continue to recommend that investors overweight equities on a 12-month horizon. While stocks are not particularly cheap, they are not expensive either. The MSCI All-Country World index is trading at 18-times calendar 2021 earnings. The forward PE ratio based on projected 2021 earnings is 21 in the US and 15 outside the US. Even if one allows for the likelihood that earnings estimates are overly optimistic – as they usually are – the earnings yield on stocks is about six percentage points above the real yield on bonds. This suggests that the equity risk premium is still quite high, compensating investors for earnings risk (Chart 1). Meanwhile, sentiment towards stocks remains downbeat. Bears outnumbered bulls by 12 percentage points in this week’s American Association of Individual Investors sentiment poll (Chart 2). On average, bulls have exceeded bears by 8 percentage points in the 33-year history of this survey. Stocks are more likely to go up than down when sentiment is bearish. Chart 1Favor Equities Over Bonds Over A 12-Month Horizon Chart 2Many Investors Are Bearish On Stocks Dollar: Stick With The Herd Chart 3The Dollar Has Started Breaking Down Bears also outnumber bulls in surveys of sentiment towards the dollar (Chart 3). Does that mean that one should position for a stronger greenback? No. The dollar is a high momentum currency (Chart 4). Unlike in the case of equities, being a contrarian has been a losing strategy for trading the dollar. The dollar is more likely to weaken when sentiment is bearish and the currency is trading below its moving averages, as is currently the case (Chart 5). Chart 4The Dollar Is A High Momentum Currency Chart 5Trading The Dollar: The Trend Is Your Friend The US Dollar Is Normally A Risk-Off Currency Chart 6The US Economy Is Less Cyclical Than Those Of Its Trading Partners What are the implications of a weaker dollar for risk assets? Just like bond yields can either fall for risk-on reasons (i.e., when monetary policy turns dovish) or fall for risk-off reasons (i.e., when deflationary pressures set in), a weakening in the US dollar can either be a risk-on or a risk-off event. Historically, the dollar has traded as a risk-off currency. This is partly because the US Treasury market is one of the most liquid and safest in the world. When investors panic, they flock to Treasuries, which raises the demand for dollars. In contrast, when investors feel emboldened to take on more risk, they tend to sell dollars. The US economy is less cyclical than those of its trading partners (Chart 6). While the US benefits from stronger global growth, the rest of the world benefits even more. Thus, when global growth accelerates, capital tends to flow from the US to other economies, hurting the dollar in the process. Moreover, changes in interest-rate differentials can affect the value of the dollar. For example, at the start of 2019, euro area 2-year real rates were 221 basis points below comparable US rates. Today, they are 19 basis points above US rates, representing a net swing of 240 basis points. If anything, the dollar has fallen less than one would have anticipated based on changes in interest rate differentials (Chart 7). Chart 7AInterest Rate Differentials Do Not Favor The Dollar Chart 7BInterest Rate Differentials Do Not Favor The Dollar Will Bloated Fiscal Deficits Undermine The Dollar? To the extent that the recent dollar selloff has been driven by stronger global growth and a more dovish Fed, it is not surprising that risk assets have rallied. However, an increasing number of commentators have begun to wonder whether the next leg of the dollar bear market could be less benign than the one that preceded it. The US dollar will weaken over the next 12 months. This weakness will mainly stem from “risk-on” forces, namely stronger global growth and a very dovish Fed. Stephen Roach has argued that soaring budget deficits will push the US current account further into deficit, while America’s disengagement from the rest of the world will undermine the dollar’s reserve status. He reckons that the dollar could plunge by 35% “sooner rather than later.” I agree with Stephen that the dollar faces a variety of long-term challenges. However, I do not think these challenges will be the primary drivers of the dollar over the next 12 months or so. A Simple Framework For Thinking About Currencies To understand why, let me describe a simple two-country framework that I have found to be very useful for thinking about currencies’ sensitivity to various macroeconomic forces. This framework, which draws on the seminal work of Rudi Dornbusch in the 1970s,1 relies on two “equilibrium conditions”: A long-run equilibrium condition that says that the price of a comparable basket of goods and services should be the same across countries. This implies, for example, that if the price level in Country A rises relative to Country B by say 10%, then Country A’s currency should eventually depreciate by 10% relative to Country B’s. A short-run equilibrium condition that says that the expected risk-adjusted return on investment assets should be the same across countries. This implies that all excess returns are arbitraged away. Suppose that interest rates and inflation are initially the same in Country A and B, but that A suddenly and unexpectedly decides to run a larger budget deficit for the next ten years. What will happen to the value of A’s currency? The answer depends on how Country A’s central bank reacts; specifically, on whether real interest rates end up going up or down in response to the bigger budget deficit. First, let us consider an extreme situation where investors believe that Country A’s central bank will not hike interest rates at all in response to the larger budget deficit, but that annualized inflation will nevertheless rise by 2% over the following decade due to the additional aggregate demand from easier fiscal policy. In that case, the price level in Country A will end up being 20% higher than previously expected after a decade, implying that A’s currency would have to fall immediately by 20% (Chart 8 – left-hand side column). Chart 8Short- And Long-Run Moves In Currencies Under Various Inflation And Interest Rate Scenarios The reason Country A’s currency has to fall by 20% at once, rather than grinding lower by 2% per year for ten years, is that we are assuming that interest rates in the two countries remain equal. If Country A’s currency were to fall slowly, Country B’s bonds would earn a higher return in common-currency terms during the entire period when Country A’s exchange rate was trending lower. This would violate the second equilibrium condition. Thus, this framework implies that only unanticipated changes to policy can lead to discrete (i.e., step function) changes in exchange rates. Let us now consider a different scenario where the central bank in Country A, rather than accommodating easier fiscal policy, immediately moves to neutralize the stimulative impact of a larger budget deficit by hiking interest rates by two full percentage points. Since there is no net impact on aggregate demand, inflation expectations in Country A do not change.2 Country A’s exchange rate does change, however: it immediately appreciates by 20% (Chart 8 – middle column). This appreciation is necessary to engender the expectation of a subsequent two percentage point per year depreciation in A’s exchange rate. The ensuing slow depreciation in A’s currency offsets the additional two percentage points in interest that A’s bonds pay over B’s bonds. One can easily imagine intermediate cases. For example, suppose Country A’s central bank raises interest rates by only one percentage point, which results in A’s price level rising by 5% over the subsequent decade relative to B’s price level. As the right-hand side column of Chart 8 shows, A’s exchange rate would initially appreciate by 5%, but then depreciate by one percent every year for a decade, ultimately finishing 5% below where it started. An Added Wrinkle: Portfolio Balance Effects Before we apply this framework to the outlook for the US dollar, we need to discuss something that is central to Stephen Roach’s thesis, which is the role of portfolio balance effects. In the discussion above we said nothing about current account deficits, US indebtedness to the rest of the world, or the dollar’s reserve currency status. This is because we assumed that investors would be indifferent between holding Country A's and B’s bonds as long as they offered the same expected returns after accounting for projected exchange rate movements. In reality, financial assets are not perfectly substitutable. Changes in “portfolio balance” – the quantity and composition of assets available to the public – is likely to have an effect on returns. Thus, if Country A’s government issues more debt in order to finance a wider budget deficit, investors may demand a higher return to induce them to hold that additional debt. This extra return is likely to be larger if there is more uncertainty about the path of inflation. In the context of the first example discussed above, Country A’s exchange rate may have to fall by more than 20%. A weakening of Country A’s exchange rate would allow investors in B to purchase the same number of Country A bonds but at a lower cost when measured in B’s currency. Moreover, by undershooting its long-term fair value – and thus creating expectations of an appreciation in its currency – Country A can increase the appeal of its bonds. The expected appreciation of A’s exchange rate following a big depreciation effectively compensates investors with a risk premium for owning A’s bonds. This is why we phrased our second equilibrium condition in terms of “risk-adjusted” returns rather than simply expected returns. What All This Means For The Dollar Chart 9Rising Budget Deficits Do Not Automatically Translate Into A Weaker Dollar The key insight from our analysis is that the relationship between budget deficits and exchange rates is indeterminate. If the Fed adopts a hawkish stance in order to keep inflation from accelerating, like Paul Volcker’s Fed did in the early 1980s, the dollar could rise (Chart 9). In contrast, if the Fed keeps rates on hold in the face of rising budget deficits, the dollar is more likely to weaken. Arguably, this is what happened in the early 2000s following the Bush tax cuts. The downward pressure on the dollar would intensify if, as per our discussion of portfolio balance effects, investors started demanding a higher risk premium to hold US assets. Today, the Fed is effectively capping nominal bond yields through unlimited bond purchases and aggressive forward guidance committing to easy policy for years. Jay Powell has gone as far as to say that “we’re not even thinking about thinking about raising rates.” As such, the passage of a new US fiscal stimulus package would mitigate deflationary fears, reduce real rates, and put modest downward pressure on the dollar. Chart 10Labor Market Slack Will Keep Inflation In Check Chart 11Inflation Expectations Tend To Track Realized Inflation Could further dollar weakness morph into a disorderly dollar selloff which hurts, rather than helps, global equities and other risk assets? While such an outcome cannot be ruled out, it is a low-probability scenario for the moment. For one thing, the US output gap – the difference between what the economy can potentially produce and what it is producing now – is very large. Inflation is unlikely to rise significantly if there is still a fair amount of labor market slack (Chart 10). Historically, inflation expectations have tended to track actual inflation (Chart 11). If the latter remains contained for the next few years, so will the former. What about the possibility that bigger budget deficits will produce much larger current account deficits? It is certainly true that if private-sector savings did not change, a bigger budget deficit would reduce national savings, leading to a larger current account deficit. It is also true that US external liabilities now far exceed foreign assets, reflecting the fact that the US has run a current account deficit every year since 1982 (Chart 12). Chart 12Many Decades Of Current Account Deficits Have Led To A Negative Net International Investment Position For The US Fortunately, things are not quite as bleak for the dollar as they seem, at least for now. Despite a net international investment position of negative 56% of GDP, the US still generates substantially more income from its overseas assets than it pays to service its liabilities (Chart 13). This reflects the fact that US foreign liabilities are mainly comprised of low-yielding government bonds, while its assets largely consist of higher-yielding equities and foreign direct investment (Chart 14). Chart 13The US Generates More Income From Its Overseas Assets Than It Pays On Its Liabilities Chart 14A Breakdown Of US Assets And Liabilities Chart 15Government Transfers Primarily Boosted Personal Savings This Year With Little External Spillovers So Far Moreover, to the extent that the US economy is operating below its potential, fiscal stimulus will lead to higher private-sector savings. Higher private-sector savings, in turn, will reduce the need for the US to source capital from abroad. If the government transfers money to households and they save it, private-sector savings will rise by the same amount that government savings fall. If households spend the money, GDP and national income will rise. The resulting increase in income will boost savings.3 This is precisely what has happened this year: The fiscal deficit has soared, private-sector savings have exploded, and the trade balance has basically gone sideways (Chart 15). Granted, to the extent that some of the spending will be directed towards imports, the current account deficit will widen over the coming months. However, stronger growth will also increase corporate profitability. This could attenuate any capital outflows from the US, thus preventing the dollar from falling as much as it otherwise would have. Investment Conclusions Chart 16Global Equities Tend To Outperform Bonds When Global Growth Is Strengthening And The Dollar Is Weakening The US dollar will weaken over the next 12 months. This weakness will mainly stem from “risk-on” forces, namely stronger global growth and a very dovish Fed. Global equities have generally outperformed bonds when global growth is strengthening, and the dollar is weakening (Chart 16). Non-US stocks, cyclical stocks, value stocks, and small caps all tend to fare best in a weaker dollar environment (Chart 17). These stocks are also quite cheap compared to their counterparts: US stocks, defensive stocks, growth stocks, and large caps (Chart 18). Chart 17ANon-US Stocks, Cyclical Stocks, Value Stocks, And Small Caps Perform Better When The Dollar Is Falling… Chart 17BNon-US Stocks, Cyclical Stocks, Value Stocks, And Small Caps Perform Better When The Dollar Is Falling… Chart 18… And They Are Cheap To Boot Looking further out, the outlook for equities is less rosy. Stagflationary pressures could emerge in 2023 or thereabouts as unemployment falls to pre-pandemic levels and supply-side constraints begin to bite. If that were to happen, profit margins would come under pressure, sending equities lower. It is not clear how the US dollar would perform in that environment. On the one hand, a risk-off environment would tend to favor the greenback. On the other hand, if the Fed is perceived as being too slow to tame inflation, the dollar could sink. Of course, much depends on what is happening in other economies. Exchange rates are relative prices. If inflation rises everywhere, the big winners from higher inflation would not be other fiat currencies, but hard currencies such as gold. That is why we continue to recommend that investors stay long the yellow metal. Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Current MacroQuant Model Scores Footnotes 1 Rudiger Dornbusch, “Expectations And Exchange Rate Dynamics,” The Journal of Political Economy, (84:6), December 1976. return to text 2 We are assuming that the central bank in Country A takes into account the impact that a stronger currency will have on aggregate demand when choosing the appropriate level of interest rates that neutralizes the effect of easier fiscal policy. return to text 3 For example, suppose households spend 75 cents of every dollar the government transfers to them exclusively on domestically-produced goods and services. If a government transfers $100 to households, $25 will be saved while the remaining $75 will be spent, thereby generating an additional $75 in GDP and income for the economy. Of the additional $75 in income, 25% ($18.75) will be saved while 75% ($56.25) will be spent. It is straightforward to show that if this process continues indefinitely, a total of 75+0.75*75+0.75^2*75+0.75^3*75+…=75/(1-0.75)=$300 in GDP and income will be generated. This means that private-sector savings will increase by 25+0.25*300=$100, which is exactly equal to the decline in government savings. Private-sector savings would rise by less than $100 if a portion of the spending was directed to imports. For instance, if households spent 15 cents of every dollar of income on imports, GDP would rise by 60+0.60*60+0.60^2*60+0.60^3*60+…=60/(1/1-0.60)=$150, while private savings would rise by 25+0.25*150=$62.50. return to text
Unemployment insurance claims (UICs) fell below one million for the first time since March 14, coming in at 963,000 and beating expectations of 1.1 million. The labor market is improving on the margin which is promising. All eyes are now set on Washington as…
The US core consumer price index (CPI excluding food and fuel) came in at a surprising 0.6% month-on-month. The three-month annualized rate of change showed up at a perky 3.22%. The year-on-year reading was 1.57%. The upside surprise in inflation sent US bond…
BCA Research's Geopolitical Strategy service concludes that investors should be prepared for a risk-off episode in the near term in case Congress fails to compromise on a major new fiscal stimulus. Ultimately the US Congress will pass a major stimulus bill…
Former Vice President Joe Biden has picked Senator Kamala Harris of California as his running mate on the Democratic Party ticket in the US presidential race. Harris is not a surprise. This choice does not change the 2020 election equation – vice presidents…
Dear Client, In lieu of our regular report next week, we are sending you a Special Report from my colleague Chester Ntonifor, Foreign Exchange Strategist. Chester will share his outlook on the Hong Kong Dollar. I hope you will find his report insightful. Please note that next week’s report will be published on Friday, August 21. Best regards, Jing Sima, China Strategist Highlights President Trump's ban of China-based apps marks a new front in the Sino-US tech war. There is no change in our strategic views. The impact on both China’s aggregate economic growth outlook and the financial markets should be limited on a cyclical basis. Consider overweight Chinese offshore ex-TMT stocks and onshore semiconductor stocks within a global equity portfolio, against a backdrop of escalating hostilities in the tech sphere. Feature Chart 1Five Chinese Companies Are Mentioned In The New "Clean Network" Initiative Geopolitical risks again stirred up volatility last week in China’s equity markets. President Trump issued two executive orders to take effect in 45 days, banning US transactions with the Chinese-owned social media apps TikTok and WeChat. Shares in Tencent, the China-based Internet giant that owns WeChat, have plummeted by 11% in China’s offshore market following the ban announcement (Chart 1). The event underscores that technology is at the root of a power struggle between the US and China. The struggle will likely be exploited by Trump as the US presidential election nears and Trump’s polling numbers lag. However, we remain constructive on Chinese stocks over the next 6 to 12 months. Although the latest development remains highly fluid, the tensions should not have a material impact on the cyclical outlook for China’s aggregate economy or financial markets. This will be the case as long as the situation does not degenerate into an outright tariff increase on Chinese export goods or other strategic actions with the potential to cause major economic damage. Given rising downside risks to Chinese tech company stocks in the near term, we recommend investors hold a neutral position on Chinese tech giant company equities versus their global peers. Instead, investors should overweight Chinese “old economy” stocks as well as sectors that are greatly benefited from policy support. We initiate two trades today: long MSCI China ex-TMT versus MSCI Global ex-TMT;1 and long domestic semiconductor stocks versus global semiconductor benchmark. A New Front In Tech War It is likely that the US will implement the ordered bans in some way. Banning TikTok wasn’t a surprise because the US had amply signaled its displeasure with the app in preceding months. The social media company has rapidly gained US market share and hence access to American users’ data. Its parent company ByteDance is based in Beijing and therefore subject to China’s cybersecurity laws, a major source of bilateral tensions. The company originated in a Chinese acquisition of an American company, another irritant for the Trump administration. The US is now pressuring TikTok’s US operations to sell the app to an American-based company such as Microsoft. Regarding Trump’s executive order on WeChat and Tencent, it is not clear what “transactions” with Tencent will be disallowed from the US market.2 Additionally, US officials later appeared to backpedal and limit the scope of the executive order on Tencent to only the WeChat app. We have a few preliminary observations on the evolving situation: It is unknown how far the executive action will go regarding Tencent. The Internet titan gets less than 5% of its revenues from outside China, according to its 2019 financial statement. However, Tencent has many prominent investments in the US gaming and music industries. The US Commerce Department has 45 days to interpret and enforce the directive. The vague language in the executive order provides the US with enough legal space to deprive Tencent of US technologies in those sectors, and would severely curtail Tencent’s online gaming business, which is its main engine of growth. The bans underscore the US administration’s intention to extend tech hostilities with China by denying Chinese tech companies the access to compete and expand globally. Last week, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced a five-pronged “Clean Network” initiative that would scrub Chinese companies from US telecommunications networks entirely.3 China, for its part, has been progressively banning US social media giants since 2009. China has not announced any retaliatory actions since the executive orders were issued. Top Chinese policymakers seem to have shifted gears from a tit-for-tat retaliation to a carefully calibrated diplomatic reaction that does not ramp up tensions further. Moreover, there is a sizeable contingent of top Chinese policymakers pushing for reconciliation with the US. We think that China’s senior leaders prefer to dial down the current conflict and take a wait-and-see approach until after the US presidential election in November. Nevertheless, the next two to three months will be unpredictable as the election nears and Trump’s polling numbers lag behind his rival Joe Biden. Bottom Line: China’s leading Internet and tech companies are embroiled in a US-China feud. Pressures will likely intensify with other tech companies potentially also targeted. For now, stay neutral on leading Chinese tech company stocks within a global equity portfolio. Stick With The Knowns Chinese tech company stock prices will likely be extremely volatile in the short run. Nevertheless, we are staying the course with our constructive cyclical view on overall Chinese stocks and we do not recommend any one-way bets on the market during the next two to three months. China’s financial markets have been shaken by negative surprises relating to frictions with the US. However, investors cheer on even the slightest easing of tensions between the two countries. Last Friday’s volatile trading was a good example: initial confusion over the ban’s scope in Trump’s order led to a more than 10% plunge in Tencent stock during morning trading in the Hong Kong market, but the losses were cut in half after the US indicated the ban only affected the WeChat app. Chart 2Chinese Tech Company Stocks Rallied Through Most Of The Trade War Economic policy support from the Chinese government and “national team” can also distort the short-term price trend in tech equities. These stocks have risen by more than 20% in both the onshore and offshore markets since the beginning of 2018, despite the deteriorating US-China relationship (Chart 2). While we are neutral on tech company stocks, we recommend overweight Chinese “old economy” stocks and remain constructive on domestic sectors that are beneficiaries of government policy support. We are initiating two trades: long MSCI China ex-TMT versus MSCI Global ex-TMT; and long domestic semiconductor stocks versus global semiconductor benchmark. The reflationary efforts since early this year facilitated a strong rebound in China’s industrial sector activities and profits (Chart 3). In turn, China’s ex-tech "old economy" stocks have outperformed relative to their global peers. Even though the handful of tech titans account for roughly 35% of the investable market capitalizations, MSCI China stock prices excluding tech titans have decisively broken out of their 200-day moving average, which suggests there is still sufficient support to our constructive view on the overall investable index (Chart 4). Chart 3Investors Have Been Focusing On China's Stimulus And Economic Recovery Chart 4Chinese "Old Economy" Stocks Have Prevailed Of Late Our cyclical overweight view on China’s domestic stocks also remains unchanged. The domestic market is much more sensitive to the trend in monetary conditions, credit growth and economic cycles than the investable market. As we pointed out in last week’s report,4 monetary conditions are accommodative and credit and economic growth remain in an uptrend. This underscores that China’s domestic stocks have more upside potential than investable stocks, even in an escalating geopolitical risk environment. Chart 5Chinese Semis Are On Fire Lastly, more pressure from the US and the West to curb the advancement of Chinese technology will only encourage the leadership to double down on supporting state-led technology programs. This argues for a more bullish view on Chinese tech companies that focus on the domestic market, at least on a cyclical basis (Chart 5). Last week the State Council updated its policy, supporting two strategically important sectors: integrated circuits and software. The central government has had policies in place to support these two sectors since 2000 and updates its support policies every decade or so. Last week's updated version will allow chip companies to enjoy even more tax exemptions and favorable financing than the first set of support policies. China has clearly stepped up its promotion of self-sufficiency and redoubled its efforts to thwart any pressures meant to restrain its technological progress. As pointed out by our Geopolitical Strategy team,5 the U.S. and its allies control 95% of the global semiconductor market (Chart 6). Nonetheless, China is the world’s largest importer, accounting for about one-third of global semiconductor sales, making it the largest consumer of semiconductors (Chart 7). Chart 6China’s Chip Makers Are Still Small Fry Chart 7China Accounts For 60% Of Global Semiconductor Demand Chart 8Made In China 2025 Targets In brief, China relies a lot on imported semiconductors and is working to mitigate this dangerous vulnerability. The Made in China 2025 program estimates that China will produce 70% of its demand for integrated circuits by 2030 (Chart 8). Bottom Line: China’s domestic industrial sector will continue to recover in the next 6 to 12 months. The nation’s semiconductor industry will get a boost from recently shored-up government policy supports. Overweight these sectors in the face of expanding tensions from the US tech war against China. Jing Sima China Strategist jings@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1TMT stocks include information technology prior to December 2018, and include media & entertainment and internet & direct marketing retail sectors after December 2018. 2Please see the orders: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-addressing-threat-posed-tiktok/ and https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-addressing-threat-posed-wechat/ 3https://www.state.gov/announcing-the-expansion-of-the-clean-network-to-safeguard-americas-assets/ 4Please see China Investment Strategy Weekly Report "China Macro And Market Review," dated August 5, 2020, available at cis.bcaresearch.com 5Please see China Investment Strategy Special Report "U.S.-China: The Tech War And Reform Agenda," dated December 12, 2018, available at cis.bcaresearch.com Cyclical Investment Stance Equity Sector Recommendations
Former Vice President Joe Biden’s picking Senator Kamala Harris of California as his running mate is not a surprise. It does not change the 2020 election equation – vice presidents rarely do and she does not hail from a swing state. Still, the pick prevents Biden from making an unforced error, such as former National Security Adviser Susan Rice, who would have done more to motivate Republican opposition than Democratic support. Other candidates were also flawed either in experience or in the constituencies they could energize to turn out to vote. Harris will ensure that Biden’s bid to connect with African American voters and women remains intact. Biden won the Democratic primary due to a strong showing among Black voters, who will be motivated to vote by this year’s social unrest over poor race relations in the United States and pandemic-induced high unemployment. One of the best electoral college scenarios for Democrats is to recreate the Obama/Biden ticket of 2008-12 – a traditional Democrat along with a younger progressive who is also a minority (Chart 1). That’s what the Biden/Harris ticket recreates. Chart 1Biden/Harris A Solid Electoral College Strategy, But Not A Game Changer Still, Michelle Obama would have clinched the election for Biden – Kamala Harris does not. Thus Trump’s odds of winning remain at 35%. Our Quantitative Election Model shows upside risk, giving Trump a 42% chance (Chart 2). Chart 2Quant Model Shows Trump With 42% Chance Of Winning Trump’s comeback hinges on three factors: whether Republican Senators arrive at a new coronavirus fiscal package that boosts the economy and stock market; whether COVID-19 outbreak continues to subside; and whether this year’s increase in the murder rate in US cities improves suburban voters’ views of Trump’s fitness for re-election. Bottom Line: The ongoing stimulus hiccup remains the near-term risk to the rally. Republicans are likely to concede to a large fiscal package in the end but the timing is unclear and markets are getting jittery. The market would also normally fall by 10% or more by the time of the election in a presidential election year in which the ruling party is overthrown. Furthermore, Trump is at risk of becoming a “lame duck,” which would escalate geopolitical risks to the market (especially with Iran and China). Taken as a whole, we maintain a defensive tactical position until the stimulus goes through. Matt Gertken Vice President Geopolitical Strategy mattg@bcaresearch.com
Negotiations on a new round of US fiscal stimulus appear to have stalled. Financial markets are complacent for now, but the longer the stalemate continues, the more likely it is that investors will take notice. The fact of the matter is that the US economy…
Highlights Nominal Yields: Nominal Treasury yields will move modestly higher during the next 6-12 months with the increase concentrated at the long-end of the curve. Investors should keep portfolio duration close to benchmark and enter duration-neutral yield curve steepeners. Inflation Compensation: Remain overweight TIPS versus nominal Treasuries for now, but we anticipate getting an opportunity to tactically reverse this position near the end of the year. Investors should also position in flatteners across the inflation compensation curve, as both a near-term and long-term trade. Real Yields: The outlook for the level of real yields is highly uncertain, particularly at the long-end of the curve. However, as long as the reflation trade continues, real yield curve steepeners should perform well whether real yields are rising or falling. US Economy: Another stimulus bill is required in order to extend the economic recovery and prolong the reflation trade in financial markets. The President’s executive orders are not sufficient. The pressure on Congress to reach a compromise deal is high, and we expect one to be announced in the coming days. Feature Chart 1Reflation Pushes Real Yields Lower Market movements during the past couple of months are consistent with an environment of economic reflation. Equities and commodity prices are up, the US dollar is down, spread product has outperformed Treasuries and TIPS breakeven inflation rates have widened. This “reflation trade” is the result of global economic recovery and highly accommodative Fed policy, the latter being particularly important. In fact, Fed policy has been so accommodative that bonds are the one asset class that has so far bucked the broader reflationary trend. Nominal Treasury yields dipped during the past few weeks, as rising inflation expectations were more than offset by plunging real yields (Chart 1). Our base case expectation is that, broadly speaking, the reflation trade will continue. Global economic growth will improve during the next 6-12 months and Fed policy will remain highly accommodative. In this week’s report we consider how to position for that outcome in US rates markets. In the process, we provide trade recommendations for the nominal, real and inflation compensation curves. We also consider the main risk to our reflationary view: The possibility that further US fiscal stimulus is too little or arrives too late. Positioning For Reflation Chart 2More Downside In Short-Maturity Real Yields Back in April, we explained how the Fed’s zero-lower-bound interest rate policy can lead to unusual movements in bond markets, particularly in how real bond yields respond to broader market trends.1 The importance of the zero lower bound is easily seen through the lens of the Fisher Equation – the equation that connects nominal yields, real yields and inflation expectations. Real Yield = Nominal Yield – Inflation Expectations If the Fed is expected to hold the nominal short rate steady for a long period of time, then nominal bond yields won’t move around very much in response to the economy. Necessarily, this means that increases in inflation expectations must be matched by falling real yields. Chart 1 shows how this has played out for 10-year yields, but the dynamic is even more pronounced at the short-end of the curve where the Fed has greater control over nominal rate expectations (Chart 2). With these relationships in mind, we consider the outlooks for the nominal, inflation compensation and real yield curves. Nominal Treasury Curve Chart 3Fed Guidance Has Crushed Nominal Rate Vol As is alluded to above, fed funds rate expectations drive nominal Treasury yields. Treasury yields rise when the market revises its rate expectations up and fall when the market revises its expectations down. But what happens when the Fed signals that the funds rate will stay pinned at its current level, even as inflationary pressures mount? What happens is that nominal bond yields become increasingly insensitive to fluctuations in economic data and rate volatility plunges (Chart 3). Not surprisingly, this decline in rate volatility has been more pronounced at the front-end of the curve than at the long-end (Chart 3, bottom panel). This is because the Fed’s rate guidance exerts more influence over short maturities. The market might be very confident that the fed funds rate will stay at its current level for the next year or two, but it will be less confident about rate expectations five or ten years down the road. The conclusion we draw is that the Fed’s dovish rate guidance will prevent a large increase in nominal bond yields, even as the reflation trade rolls on. But at some point, rising inflation expectations will cause the market to price-in policy firming at the long-end of the curve and long-maturity nominal Treasury yields will move somewhat higher. Historically, nominal bond yields usually move in the same direction as TIPS breakeven inflation rates (Chart 4). Chart 4Nominal Yields And Inflation Expectations Are Positively Correlated While this base case outlook calls for flat-to-slightly higher Treasury yields, we recommend keeping portfolio duration close to benchmark on a 6-12 month investment horizon. The reason for this caution is that significant downside risks to our base case economic scenario remain (see section “Avoiding Deflation” below). Chart 5Bullets Trade Expensive When Rates Are Pinned At Zero Instead, we recommend positioning for the continuation of the reflation trade via duration-neutral yield curve steepeners. The nominal yield curve will respond to global economic recovery by steepening because the market will price-in eventual policy tightening at the long-end of the curve before it prices-in near-term policy tightening at the front-end of the curve. Specifically, we suggest buying the 5-year bullet and shorting a duration-neutral barbell consisting of the 2-year and 10-year notes. This trade is designed to profit from steepening of the 2/10 yield curve.2 The one problem with our proposed trade is that it is not cheap. The 5-year bullet yield is below the 2/10 barbell yield and the 5-year bullet trades as expensive on our yield curve model (Chart 5). However, we note that the 5-year looked much more expensive at the height of the last zero-lower-bound episode in 2012. In today’s similar environment, we anticipate a return to similar valuation levels. Bottom Line: Nominal Treasury yields will move modestly higher during the next 6-12 months with the increase concentrated at the long-end of the curve. Investors should keep portfolio duration close to benchmark and enter duration-neutral yield curve steepeners. Inflation Compensation Curve Chart 6Adaptive Expectations Model Almost by definition, the continuation of the reflation trade means that the cost of inflation compensation will rise (i.e. TIPS breakeven inflation rates will move higher), and we remain positioned for that outcome. However, at least according to our Adaptive Expectations Model, the inflation component of bond yields could have a more difficult time rising going forward. Our model, which is based on several different measures of realized inflation, shows that the 10-year TIPS breakeven inflation rate is more or less at its fair value (Chart 6). In other words, further upside from here is contingent upon rising inflation. Fortunately, rising inflation seems likely during the next few months. Month-over-month headline CPI bottomed in April (Chart 7), the oil price is trending up (Chart 7, panel 2) and core inflation has undershot relative to the trimmed mean (Chart 7, panel 3). All of this suggests that our model’s fair value will move higher during the next few months. Chart 7Inflation Has Bottomed But beyond the near-term snapback that we anticipate, a wide output gap in the United States will prevent inflation from entering a sustainable uptrend as we head into 2021. After all, our Pipeline Inflation Indicator remains deep in deflationary territory (Chart 7, bottom panel). At some point near the end of this year, we anticipate getting an opportunity to move tactically underweight TIPS versus nominal Treasuries, once breakevens start to look expensive on our model. Our Adaptive Expectations Model shows that the 10-year TIPS breakeven inflation rate is more or less at its fair value. A higher conviction long-run trade relates to the slope of the inflation curve. At present, the 10-year CPI swap rate remains somewhat above the 2-year rate, but we eventually expect this slope to invert (Chart 8). With the Fed explicitly targeting a temporary overshoot of its 2% inflation target, it would make sense for the cost of short-maturity inflation protection to trade above the cost of long-maturity inflation protection. This would mark a significant break from historical trends, but this is also true of the Fed’s new policy approach. Chart 8Inflation Curve Will Invert Bottom Line: Remain overweight TIPS versus nominal Treasuries for now, but we anticipate getting an opportunity to tactically reverse this position near the end of the year. Investors should also position in flatteners across the inflation compensation curve, as both a near-term and long-term trade. Real Yield Curve Chart 9Buy Real Yield Curve Steepeners At the beginning of this report we noted that the combination of stable nominal rate expectations and rising inflation expectations has led to a steep decline in real Treasury yields. This decline has been more severe at the short-end of the curve, which has resulted in real yield curve steepening (Chart 9). At the long-end of the curve, the outlook for the level of real yields is highly uncertain, even under the assumption that the reflation trade continues. If 10-year nominal rate expectations hold steady, then continued reflation will lead to a further decline in the 10-year real yield. However, as discussed above, long-dated nominal rate expectations will eventually follow inflation expectations higher. If that adjustment to long-dated rate expectations outpaces the increase in expected inflation compensation, then the 10-year real yield will move up as well. The outlook for the short-end of the curve is more certain. Two-year nominal rate expectations are unlikely to budge anytime soon. This means that the continuation of the reflation trade will send the cost of 2-year inflation protection higher and the 2-year real yield lower. For this reason, we would rather take a position in real yield curve steepeners than an outright position on the level of real yields. In fact, as long as the reflation trade continues, the real yield curve should steepen whether the absolute level of real yields is rising or falling. It is only in a renewed deflation scare where we would expect the real yield curve to flatten, as occurred back in March. As long as the reflation trade continues, real yield curve steepeners should perform well whether real yields are rising or falling. Bottom Line: The outlook for the level of real yields is highly uncertain, particularly at the long-end of the curve. However, as long as the reflation trade continues, real yield curve steepeners should perform well whether real yields are rising or falling. Avoiding Deflation The first part of this report talked about how to position in rates markets assuming that the global economic recovery remains on track and that the so-called reflation trade continues. While this is our base case scenario, it is by no means a certainty. In fact, this view is contingent upon continued US fiscal stimulus that is sufficient to sustain household income and prevent a snowballing of foreclosures and bankruptcies. March’s CARES act did a more-than-admirable job supporting household income. In fact, disposable household income rose 7.2% in the four month period between March and June compared to the four months that preceded the COVID recession (Chart 10). This is a far greater increase than what was seen in the first four months of the 2008 recession (dashed line in Chart 10, panel 2), despite the fact that the hit to wage compensation has been worse (dashed line in Chart 10, bottom panel). Chart 11A confirms that, without the CARES act, the hit to disposable income would have been substantial. Chart 10Income Well Supported... So Far Chart 11ADisposable Personal Income Growth And Its Drivers I The problem is that the main income supporting provisions of the CARES act have either been paid out or have expired. Chart 11B shows the impact on disposable income of the CARES act’s different provisions. The two most important were: The Economic Impact Payments: The one-time $1200 stimulus checks. The Pandemic Unemployment Compensation Payments: The extra $600 per week that was added to unemployment benefits. Chart 11BDisposable Personal Income Growth And Its Drivers II The Economic Impact Payments have all been delivered, and the Pandemic Unemployment Compensation Payments expired at the end of July. Based on the information that has been released about the ongoing negotiations over a follow-up stimulus bill, we expect that a compromise deal will be large enough to keep disposable income at or above pre-recession levels.3 However, a compromise is proving difficult. Congress’ foot dragging prompted President Trump to announce several executive orders of questionable legality in an attempt to deliver some stimulus. However, even if the executive orders are followed, the boost to household income will be meager without another bill. The President’s executive order to extend the extra unemployment benefits appropriates only $44 billion from the Disaster Relief Fund and asks states to contribute the rest. Many states will be unable to contribute anything, and an extra $44 billion amounts to only 8% of the income support provided by the CARES act. State & local government aid must be addressed in the new stimulus bill. The other urgent area that must be addressed in a follow-up stimulus bill is aid for state & local governments. State & local government spending fell 5.6% (annualized) in the second quarter, as governments have been forced to impose harsh austerity in the face of collapsing tax revenues (Chart 12). This is one area where the Democrats and Republicans are still far apart. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that states need $555 billion to close COVID-related budget shortfalls.4 The Democrats’ initial proposal contained $1.13 trillion for states, the Republicans’ initial offer left out state & local government aid altogether. Chart 12State & Local Governments Need A Bailout Bottom Line: Another stimulus bill is required in order to extend the economic recovery and prolong the reflation trade in financial markets. The President’s executive orders are not sufficient. The pressure on Congress to reach a compromise deal is high, and we expect one to be announced in the coming days. Based on the numbers that have been floated, that deal will contain sufficient income support to keep households afloat and the recovery on track. Appendix A: Buy What The Fed Is Buying The Fed rolled out a number of aggressive lending facilities on March 23. These facilities focused on different specific sectors of the US bond market. The fact that the Fed has decided to support some parts of the market and not others has caused some traditional bond market correlations to break down. It has also led us to adopt of a strategy of “Buy What The Fed Is Buying”. That is, we favor those sectors that offer attractive spreads and that benefit from Fed support. The below Table tracks the performance of different bond sectors since the March 23 announcement. We will use this to monitor bond market correlations and evaluate our strategy’s success. Table 1Performance Since March 23 Announcement Of Emergency Fed Facilities Footnotes 1 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Negative Oil, The Zero Lower Bound And The Fisher Equation”, dated April 28, 2020, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 2 To understand why this trade profits in an environment of yield curve steepening please see US Bond Strategy Special Report, “Bullets, Barbells And Butterflies”, dated July 25, 2017, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 3 In their initial proposals, House Democrats offered $435 billion in Economic Impact Payments and $437 billion for expanded unemployment benefits. The Senate Republicans offered $300 billion for Economic Impact Payments and $110 billion for expanded unemployment benefits. For context, the CARES act authorized $293 billion for Economic Impact Payments and $268 billion for expanded unemployment benefits. For more details on the ongoing budget negotiations please see Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report, “A Tech Bubble Amid A Tech War”, dated July 31, 2020, available at gps.bcaresearch.com 4 https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/states-continue-to-face-large-shortfalls-due-to-covid-19-effects Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Fixed Income Sector Performance Recommended Portfolio Specification

