Europe

Informe especial

Highlights House prices are rising rapidly across the developed markets, in response to the extraordinary monetary and fiscal policy stimulus implemented to fight the pandemic. Evidence points to the house price surge being driven by monetary policy that has left real interest rates far below equilibrium levels. Supply factors are a secondary cause of the house price boom. Financial stability risks stemming from rising house prices are less acute than the pre-2008 experience, as overall household leverage has grown more slowly during the pandemic and global banks are better capitalized. Rapidly rising house prices are forcing some central banks to turn less accommodative earlier than expected. The recent hawkish turns by the Bank of Canada and Reserve Bank of New Zealand may be canaries in the coal mine for other central banks – perhaps even the Fed – if house prices and household leverage start rising together. Feature The COVID-19 pandemic led to the sharpest economic recession since World War II, alongside an enormous rise in unemployment. Consensus expectations call for the output gap to be closed (or mostly closed) in most advanced economies by the end of this year, but it remains an open question how quickly these economies will be able to return to full employment amid potentially permanent shifts in demand for office space and goods sold at physical, “brick and mortar” retail locations. Despite this sizeable and swift economic shock, house price appreciation accelerated last year in the developed world. Chart 1 highlights that US house prices rose at an 18% annualized pace in the second half of 2020, whereas they accelerated at a high-single digit pace in developed markets ex-US (on a GDP-weighted basis). This, in conjunction with a sharp rise in the household sector credit-to-GDP ratio (Chart 2), has unnerved some investors while raising questions about the implications for monetary policy. Chart 1House Prices Are Surging Around The World Chart 2Rising Fears About Deteriorating Household Balance Sheets Before we discuss the investment implications of the global housing boom, however, we must first accurately determine the reasons why it is happening. The Work-From-Home Effect: Less Than Meets The Eye When analyzing the surprising behavior of the housing market last year, the working-from-home effect brought upon by the pandemic emerges as an obvious factor potentially explaining house price gains. Last year, following recommended or mandatory stay-at-home orders from governments, most office-based businesses rapidly shifted to work-from-home arrangements as an emergency response. However, in the month or two following the beginning of stay-at-home orders, several national US surveys found many office workers preferred the flexibility afforded by work-from-home arrangements. Many employers, correspondingly, found that the productivity of their employees did not suffer while working from home, or that it even improved. Several prominent corporations in the US have subsequently made some work-from-home options permanent, or even allowed employees to work from offices in a different city than they did prior to the pandemic. Newfound work-from-home options have undoubtedly created new demand for housing, and thus explained the surge in house prices seen over the past year in the minds of some investors. However, in our view, evidence from the US, the UK, and France suggests that the work-from-home effect better explains differences in price gains across housing types and within large metropolitan areas, rather than aggregate or national-level changes in house prices. Chart 3 provides some quantification of the impact of work-from-home policies by plotting US resident migration patterns by city. This data has been compiled by CBRE, and the impact of COVID is shown as the change in net move-ins from 2019 to 2020 per 1000 people. This helps control for the underlying migration pattern that existed in US cities prior to the pandemic. Chart 3Work From Home Policies Have Impacted Migration Trends… The chart highlights that the negative migration impact from COVID has been mostly concentrated in New York City and the three most populous cities on the West Coast (by metro area): Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle. And yet, Chart 4 highlights that house price inflation in these four cities has accelerated to a double-digit pace, only modestly below the national average. Chart 4...But Cities With Outward Migration Still Have Very Strong House Price Gains The house price indexes shown in Chart 4 represent aggregate, metro area trends, and clearly some regions within these metro areas have experienced house price deceleration or outright deflation versus gains in areas outside the urban core. But Chart 5 highlights that house prices have declined in Manhattan basically in line with the change in net move-ins as a share of the population, underscoring that double-digit metro area-wide house price gains appear to be vastly disproportionate to changes in net migration. Similarly, Chart 6 highlights that rents decelerated in the US over the past year but remained in positive territory and grew at a 3.5% annualized rate from February to April. Chart 5In Manhattan, House Prices Have Tracked Net Migration Chart 6Rent Costs Have Decelerated, But Have Not Contracted Evidence from Paris and London also suggests that a work-from-home effect is insufficient to explain broad house price gains. Panel 1 of Chart 7 highlights that house prices in France have accelerated significantly, but that apartment prices have decelerated only fractionally in lockstep. Panel 2 shows that the acceleration in house prices does reflect a work-from-home effect, as prices have risen faster in inner Parisian suburbs. Panel 3, however, highlights that Parisian apartment prices, the dominant property type in the urban core, have decelerated modestly. Chart 8 highlights that house price gains have not even decelerated in greater London; they have been merely been modestly outstripped by gains in Outer South East (outside of the Outer Metropolitan Area). Chart 7In France, Parisian Apartment Prices Are Simply Lagging, Not Falling Chart 8In The UK, Greater London Property Prices Are Accelerating     The Policy Effect: The Fundamental Driver Of The Housing Market Despite the broader location flexibility that work-from-home policies now provide to potential homeowners, it seems inconceivable that the housing market would have responded in the manner that it has over the past year given the size of the economic shock brought on by the pandemic without significant support from policy. Above-the-line fiscal measures to the pandemic have totaled in the double-digits in advanced economies (Chart 9), and monetary policy has contributed to easier financial conditions via rate cuts, asset purchases, and sizeable programs to support financial market liquidity. Chart 9There Has Been A Massive Fiscal Policy Response To The Crisis In fact, Charts 10-13 present compelling evidence that fiscal and monetary policy have been the core drivers of significant house price gains over the past year. Charts 10 and 11 plot the above-the-line fiscal response of advanced economies against the year-over-year growth rate in house prices as well as its acceleration (the change in the year-over-year growth rate). The charts show a clearly positive relationship, with a stronger link between the pandemic fiscal response and the acceleration in house prices. Chart 10Differences In Last Year’s Fiscal Response… Chart 11…Help Explain Differences In House Price Gains Chart 12Pre-Pandemic Differences In The Monetary Policy Stance… Chart 13…Do An Even Better Job Of Explaining 2020 House Price Gains   Charts 12 and 13 highlight the even stronger link between house prices and the pre-pandemic monetary policy stance in advanced economies, defined as the difference between each country’s 2-year government bond yield and its Taylor Rule-implied policy interest rate as of Q4 2019. We construct each country’s Taylor Rule using the original specification, with core consumer price inflation, a 2% inflation target, and real potential GDP growth as the definition of the real equilibrium interest rate. The charts make it clear that easy monetary policy strongly explains house price gains in 2020, particularly the year-over-year percent change rather than its acceleration. This makes sense, given that monetary policy was already quite easy in many countries at the onset of the pandemic – meaning that changes were less pronounced than they would have been had interest rates been higher. The explanation that emerges from Charts 10-13 is that historic fiscal easing, combined with an easy starting point for monetary policy – that became even easier last year – enabled demand from work-from-home policies to manifest during an extremely severe recession. We agree that work-from-home policies have shifted the geographic preferences of some home buyers and likely provided a new source of net demand from renters in urban cores purchasing homes in outlying areas. But we strongly doubt that the net effect of work-from-home policies in the midst of an extreme shock to economic activity would have caused the rise in house prices that we have observed, certainly not to this level, without major support from policy. This underscores that policy, and not the work-from-home effect, has and will likely remain the core driver of the global housing market. The Supply Effect: Mostly A Red Herring Chart 14Countries Fall Into Two Groups In Terms Of The Relative Trend In Real Residential Investment One perennial question that emerges when analyzing the housing market, particularly in markets with outsized house price gains, is the impact of constrained supply. It is frequently argued that constrained supply is squeezing prices higher in many markets, and that the appropriate policy solution to extreme house price gains is to enable widespread housing construction – not to raise interest rates. We do not rule out the potential impact of constrained supply in certain cities or regional housing markets, and we have highlighted in previous research that a positive relationship does exist between population density in urban regions and median house price-to-income ratios.1 But as a broad explanation for supercharged house price gains, the supply argument appears to fall flat. Chart 14 presents the most standardized measure of cross-country housing supply available for several advanced economies, the trend in real residential investment relative to real GDP over time. These series are all rebased to 100 as of 1997, prior to the 2002-2007 US housing market boom. The chart makes it clear that advanced economies generally fall into two groups based on this metric: those that have seen declines in real residential investment relative to GDP, especially after the global financial crisis (panel 1), and those that have experienced either an uptrend in housing construction relative to output or have seen a flat trend (panel 2). If scarce housing supply was the core driver of outsized house price gains, then we would expect to see stronger gains in the countries shown in panel 1 and smaller gains in the countries shown in panel 2. In fact, mostly the opposite is true: Charts 15 and 16 highlight that the relationship between the level of these indexes today relative to their 1997 or 2005 levels is positively related to the magnitude of house price gains last year, suggesting that housing market supply has generally been responding to demand over the past decade. The US and possibly New Zealand stand as possible exceptions to the trend, suggesting that relatively scarce supply may be boosting prices even further in these markets beyond what fiscal and monetary policy would suggest. Chart 15Countries That Have Seen A Stronger Pace Of Residential Investment… Chart 16…Have Experienced Stronger House Price Gains   Chart 17Is This Not Enough Supply, Or Too Much Demand? As a final point about the inclination of investors to gravitate towards supply-side arguments related to the housing market, Chart 17 presents a simple thought experiment. The chart shows a simple housing supply-demand curve diagram, in a scenario where the demand curve for housing has shifted out more than the supply curve has (thus raising house prices). Is this a scenario in which supply is too tight? Or is it a case in which demand is too strong? In our view, the tight supply answer is reasonable in circumstances where the increase in demand is normal or otherwise sustainable. But Charts 10-13 clearly showed that housing demand is being boosted by easy policy, which in the case of some countries has occurred for years: interest rates have remained well below levels that macroeconomic theory would traditionally consider to be in equilibrium, and this has occurred alongside significant household sector leveraging (Chart 18). As such, in our view, investors should be more inclined to view the global housing market as generally being driven by demand-side rather than supply-side factors. This Is Not 2007/08 … Yet We highlighted in Chart 2 above that the household sector debt-to-GDP ratio increased sharply last year, which has raised some questions about debt sustainability among investors. For the most part, the rise in this ratio actually reflects denominator effects (namely a sharp contraction in nominal GDP) rather than a huge surge in household debt. Chart 19 shows BIS data for the annual growth in total household debt in developed economies was roughly stable last year, at least until Q3 (the most recent datapoint available from the BIS). Chart 18Low Interest Rtaes Have Fueled Household Leveraging Chart 19Total Credit Growth Has Been Stable, But Mortgage Credit Growth Is Accelerating Chart 20US Mortgage Growth Is Picking Up, As Repayments Slow Consumer Credit Growth But Chart 19 shows the recent trend in total household debt, which masks diverging mortgage and non-mortgage debt trends. In the US, euro area, Canada, and Sweden, household mortgage debt has accelerated to varying degrees, underscoring that households have likely paid down non-mortgage debt with some of the savings that they have accumulated from a significant reduction in spending on services. Chart 20 shows this effect directly in the case of the US; mortgage debt growth accelerated by roughly 1.5 percentage points in the second half of the year, whereas consumer credit growth (made up of student loans, auto loans, credit cards, and other revolving credit) decelerated significantly. This aligns with data showing that US households have used some of their savings windfall to pay down their credit card balances. This changing mix within household debt - less higher-interest-rate consumer credit, more lower-interest-rate collateralized mortgage debt – could, on the margin, help mitigate financial stability risks from the housing boom by moderating overall debt service burdens. The starting point for the latter matters, though, in accurately assessing the risks from rising house prices and increased mortgage debt, particularly in countries where household debt levels are already high. According to data from the BIS, the US already has one of the lowest household debt service ratios (7.6%) among the developed economies (Chart 21).2 This compares favorably to the double-digit debt service ratios in the “higher-risk” countries like Canada (12.6%), Sweden (12.1%) and Norway (16.2%). On top of that, US commercial banks have become far more prudent with mortgage loan underwriting standards since the 2008 financial crisis. The New York Fed’s Household Debt and Credit report shows that an increasing majority of mortgage lending made by US banks since the 2008 crisis has been to those with very high FICO credit scores (Chart 22). This is in sharp contrast to the steady lending to “subprime” borrowers with poor credit scores that preceded the 2008 financial crisis. The median FICO score for new mortgage originations as of Q1 2021 was 788, compared to 707 in Q4 2006 at the peak of the mid-2000s US housing boom. Chart 21Diverging Trends In Global Household Debt Servicing Costs Chart 22US Banks Have Become More Prudent With Mortgage Lending   US bank balance sheets are also now less directly exposed to a fall in housing values. Residential loans now represent only 10% of the assets on US bank balance sheets, compared to 20% at the peak of the last housing bubble (Chart 23). This puts the US in the “lower-risk” group of countries in Europe, the UK and Japan where mortgages are less than 20% of bank balance sheets. This compares favorably to the “higher risk” group of countries where residential loans are a far larger share of bank assets (Chart 24), like Canada (32%), New Zealand (49%), Sweden (45%) and Australia (40%). Chart 23Banks Have Limited Direct Exposure To Housing Here Chart 24Banks Are Far More Exposed To Housing Here   Like nature, however, the financial ecosystem abhors a vacuum. “Non-bank” mortgage lenders have filled the void from traditional US banks reducing their lending to lower-quality borrowers, and they now represent around two-thirds of all US mortgage origination, a big leap from the 20% origination share in 2007. Non-bank lenders have also taken on growing shares of new mortgage origination in other countries like the UK, Canada and Australia. Chart 25Global Banks Can Withstand A Housing Shock Non-bank lenders do not take deposits and typically fund themselves via shorter-term borrowings, which raises the potential for future instability if credit markets seize up. These lenders also, on average, service mortgages with a higher probability of default, so they are exposed to greater credit losses when house prices decline. However, the risk of a full-blown 2008-style commercial banking crisis, with individual depositors’ funds at risk from a bank failure, are reduced with a greater share of riskier mortgage lending conducted by non-bank entities. This is especially true with global commercial banks far better capitalized today, with double-digit Tier 1 capital ratios (Chart 25), thanks to regulatory changes made after the Global Financial Crisis. Net-net, we conclude that the overall financial stability implications of the current surge in house prices in the developed economies are relatively modest on average. The acceleration in mortgage growth has occurred alongside reductions in non-mortgage growth, at a time when banks are better able to withstand a shock from any sustained future downturn in house prices. However, if house prices continue to accelerate and new homebuyers are forced to take on ever increasing amounts of mortgage debt, financial stability issues could intensify in some countries. Services spending will recover in a vaccinated post-COVID world, as economies reopen and consumer confidence improves, which will likely end the trend of falling non-residential consumer debt offsetting rising mortgage debt in countries like the US and Canada. Overall levels of household debt could begin to rise again relative to incomes, building up future financial stability risks when central banks begin to normalize pandemic-related monetary policies – a process that has already started in some countries because of the housing boom. The Monetary Policy Implications Of Surging House Prices Rapidly appreciating house prices are becoming an area of concern for policymakers in countries like Canada and New Zealand, where the affordability of housing is becoming a political, as well as an economic, issue. In the case of New Zealand, the government has actually altered the remit of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) to more explicitly factor in the impact of monetary policy on housing costs. The Bank of Canada announced in April that it would taper its pace of government debt purchases and signaled that its decision was based, at least in small part, on signs of speculative behavior in Canada’s housing market. Macroprudential measures like limiting loan-to-value ratios of new mortgage loans are a policy option that governments in those countries have already implemented to try and cool off housing demand. Yet while such measures can help alleviate demand-supply mismatches in certain cities and regions, the efficacy of such measures in sustainably slowing the ascent of house prices on a national scale is unclear. In the April 2021 IMF Global Financial Stability Report, researchers estimated that, for a broad group of countries, the implementation of a new macro-prudential measure designed to cool loan demand reduced national household debt/GDP ratios by a mere one percentage point, on average, over a period encompassing four years.3 If macroprudential measures are that ineffective in sustainably reducing demand for mortgage loans, then the burden of slowing house price appreciation will have to fall on the more blunt instruments of monetary policy. Importantly, surging house price inflation is not likely to give a boost to realized inflation measures – an important issue given the current backdrop of rapidly rising realized inflation rates in many countries. Housing costs do represent a significant portion of consumer price indices in many developed countries, ranging from 19% in New Zealand to 33% in the US (Chart 26), with the euro area being the outlier with housing having a mere 2% weighting in the headline inflation index. Chart 26A Limited Impact On Actual Inflation From Housing Yet those so-called “housing” categories overwhelmingly measure only housing rental costs and not actual house prices. This is an important distinction because rents – which are often imputed measures like in the US and not even actual rental costs - are rising at a far slower pace than actual house prices in most countries, so the housing contribution to realized inflation is relatively modest. So the good news is that booming house prices will not worsen the acceleration of realized global inflation that has concerned investors and policymakers in 2021. Yet that does not mean that central bankers will not be forced to tighten policy to cool off red-hot housing demand that is clearly being fueled by persistently negative real interest rates. In Chart 27 and Chart 28, we show both nominal and real policy interest rates for the “lower risk” and “higher risk” country groupings that we described earlier. The real policy rates are nominal policy rates versus realized headline CPI inflation. The dotted lines in the charts represent the future path of rates discounted by markets. Specifically, the projection for nominal rates is taken from overnight index swap (OIS) forward curves, while the projection for real rates is calculated by subtracting the discounted path of inflation expectations extracted from CPI swap forwards. Chart 27Markets Discounting Negative Real Rates For The Next Decade Chart 28Negative Real Rates Are Unsustainable During A Housing Bubble   There are two key takeaways from these charts: Real policy interest rates are at or very close to the most deeply negative levels seen since the 2008 financial crisis. Markets are discounting that real rates will be at or below 0% for most of the next decade. Admittedly, there is room for debate over what the equilibrium level of real interest rates (a.k.a. “r-star”) should be in the coming years. However, we deem it a major stretch to believe that real rates need to be persistently low or negative for the next ten years to support even trend growth across the developed economies. In our view, the current boom in housing demand and mortgage borrowing provides clear evidence that negative real rates are below equilibrium and, thus, are stimulating credit demand. Thus, the only way for a central bank to cool off housing demand will be to raise both nominal and, more importantly, real interest rates. Canada and New Zealand will be the “canaries in the coal mine” among developed market central banks for such a move. According to the latest Bank of Canada Financial Stability Review, nearly 22% of Canadian mortgages are highly levered, with a loan-to-value ratio greater than 450%, a greater share of such mortgages than during the 2016/17 housing boom (Chart 29). Canadian house prices have risen to such an extent that home prices in major cities like Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal are among the most expensive in North America.4  Stunningly, a recent Bloomberg Nanos opinion poll revealed that nearly 50% of Canadians would support Bank of Canada rate hikes to cool off the red-hot housing market (Chart 30). The central bank will be unable to resist the pressure to use monetary policy to slam on the brakes of the housing market – investors should expect more tapering and, eventually, rate hikes from the Bank of Canada over at least the next couple of years. Chart 29Canadians Are Leveraging Up To Buy Expensive Homes Chart 3050% Of Canadians Want A Rate Hike To Cool Housing   In New Zealand, worsening housing affordability has reached a point where a 20% down payment on the median national house price is equal to 223% of median disposable income (Chart 31). This is forcing more first-time home buyers to take on levels of mortgage debt that the RBNZ deems highly risky (top panel). Like the Bank of Canada, the RBNZ will prove to be one of the most hawkish central banks in the developed world over the next couple of years as the central bank follows their newly-revised remit to try and cool off housing demand in New Zealand. Who is next? Housing values, measured by the ratio of median national house prices to median national household incomes, are rising in the US and UK but are still below the peaks of the mid-2000s housing bubble (Chart 32). Meanwhile, housing is becoming more expensive across the euro area, but not in a consistent manner, with valuations in Germany and Spain having increased far more than in France or Italy. Housing valuations have actually improved in Australia over the past couple of years on a price-to-income basis. The most likely candidates for a housing-related hawkish turn are in Scandinavia, with housing valuations in Sweden and Norway closing in on Canada/New Zealand levels. Chart 31New Zealand Housing Is Wildly Unaffordable Chart 32Global House Price/Income Ratios Are Trending Higher   Investment Conclusions The current acceleration in global house prices is an inevitable outcome of the extraordinary monetary and fiscal easing implemented during the pandemic. Higher realized inflation is pushing real rates deeper into negative territory in many countries, fueling the demand for housing. Central banks in countries with more stretched housing valuations will be forced to turn more hawkish sooner than expected, leading to tapering and, eventually, rate hikes to cool housing demand. This has negative implications for government bond markets in countries where housing is more expensive and real yields remain too low, like Canada, New Zealand and Sweden (Chart 33). Investors should limit exposure to government bonds in those markets over the next 6-12 months. Chart 33Negative Real Yields & Expensive Housing Valuations – An Unsustainable Mix Bond markets in countries where house prices are not rising rapidly enough to force policymakers to turn more hawkish more quickly – like core Europe, Australia and even Japan - are likely to be relative outperformers. The US and UK are “cuspy” bond markets, as housing valuations are becoming more expensive in those two countries but the Fed and Bank of England are not facing the same domestic political pressure to use monetary policy tools to fight the growing unaffordability of housing. That could change, though, if overall household leverage begins to rise alongside house price inflation as the US and UK economies emerge from the pandemic. Current pricing in OIS curves shows that markets expect the RBNZ and Bank of Canada to begin hiking rates in May 2022 and September 2022, respectively (Table 1). This is well ahead of expectations for “liftoff” from other developed markets central banks, including the Fed in April 2023. The cumulative amount of rate hikes following liftoff to the end of 2024 is highest in Canada, New Zealand, the US and Australia. Those are also countries with currencies that are trading at or above the purchasing power parity levels derived from our currency strategists’ valuation models. This highlights the difficult choice that central bankers facing housing bubbles must confront, as the rate hikes that will help cool off housing demand will lead to currency appreciation that could impact other parts of their economies like exports and manufacturing. Table 1Hawkish Central Banks Must Live With Currency Strength Tracking the second-round economic consequences of eventual monetary policy actions to control excessive house price inflation, particularly in “higher risk” countries, is likely to be the subject of future Bank Credit Analyst / Global Fixed Income Strategy reports. Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist Jonathan LaBerge, CFA Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst   Footnotes 1 Please see Global Investment Strategy "Canada: A (Probably) Happy Moment In An Otherwise Sad Story," dated July 14, 2017, available at gis.bcaresearch.com 2 Importantly, the BIS debt service ratios include the payment of both principal and interest, thus making it a true measure of debt service costs that includes repayment of borrowed funds – a critical issue in countries with high loan-to-value ratios for home mortgages. 3 Please see page 46 of Chapter 2 of the April 2021 IMF Global Financial Stability Report, which can be found here: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/GFSR/Issues/2021/04/06/global-financial-stability-report-april-2021 4 “Vancouver, Toronto and Hamilton are the least affordable cities in North America: report”, CBC News, May 20, 2021

Informe especial

Highlights House prices are rising rapidly across the developed markets, in response to the extraordinary monetary and fiscal policy stimulus implemented to fight the pandemic. Evidence points to the house price surge being driven by monetary policy that has left real interest rates far below equilibrium levels. Supply factors are a secondary cause of the house price boom. Financial stability risks stemming from rising house prices are less acute than the pre-2008 experience, as overall household leverage has grown more slowly during the pandemic and global banks are better capitalized. Rapidly rising house prices are forcing some central banks to turn less accommodative earlier than expected. The recent hawkish turns by the Bank of Canada and Reserve Bank of New Zealand may be canaries in the coal mine for other central banks – perhaps even the Fed – if house prices and household leverage start rising together. Feature The COVID-19 pandemic led to the sharpest economic recession since World War II, alongside an enormous rise in unemployment. Consensus expectations call for the output gap to be closed (or mostly closed) in most advanced economies by the end of this year, but it remains an open question how quickly these economies will be able to return to full employment amid potentially permanent shifts in demand for office space and goods sold at physical, “brick and mortar” retail locations. Despite this sizeable and swift economic shock, house price appreciation accelerated last year in the developed world. Chart II-1 highlights that US house prices rose at an 18% annualized pace in the second half of 2020, whereas they accelerated at a high-single digit pace in developed markets ex-US (on a GDP-weighted basis). This, in conjunction with a sharp rise in the household sector credit-to-GDP ratio (Chart II-2), has unnerved some investors while raising questions about the implications for monetary policy. Chart II-1House Prices Are Surging Around The World Chart II-2Rising Fears About Deteriorating Household Balance Sheets Before we discuss the investment implications of the global housing boom, however, we must first accurately determine the reasons why it is happening. The Work-From-Home Effect: Less Than Meets The Eye When analyzing the surprising behavior of the housing market last year, the working-from-home effect brought upon by the pandemic emerges as an obvious factor potentially explaining house price gains. Last year, following recommended or mandatory stay-at-home orders from governments, most office-based businesses rapidly shifted to work-from-home arrangements as an emergency response. However, in the month or two following the beginning of stay-at-home orders, several national US surveys found many office workers preferred the flexibility afforded by work-from-home arrangements. Many employers, correspondingly, found that the productivity of their employees did not suffer while working from home, or that it even improved. Several prominent corporations in the US have subsequently made some work-from-home options permanent, or even allowed employees to work from offices in a different city than they did prior to the pandemic. Newfound work-from-home options have undoubtedly created new demand for housing, and thus explained the surge in house prices seen over the past year in the minds of some investors. However, in our view, evidence from the US, the UK, and France suggests that the work-from-home effect better explains differences in price gains across housing types and within large metropolitan areas, rather than aggregate or national-level changes in house prices. Chart II-3 provides some quantification of the impact of work-from-home policies by plotting US resident migration patterns by city. This data has been compiled by CBRE, and the impact of COVID is shown as the change in net move-ins from 2019 to 2020 per 1000 people. This helps control for the underlying migration pattern that existed in US cities prior to the pandemic. Chart II-3Work From Home Policies Have Impacted Migration Trends… The chart highlights that the negative migration impact from COVID has been mostly concentrated in New York City and the three most populous cities on the West Coast (by metro area): Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle. And yet, Chart II-4 highlights that house price inflation in these four cities has accelerated to a double-digit pace, only modestly below the national average. Chart II-4...But Cities With Outward Migration Still Have Very Strong House Price Gains The house price indexes shown in Chart II-4 represent aggregate, metro area trends, and clearly some regions within these metro areas have experienced house price deceleration or outright deflation versus gains in areas outside the urban core. But Chart II-5 highlights that house prices have declined in Manhattan basically in line with the change in net move-ins as a share of the population, underscoring that double-digit metro area-wide house price gains appear to be vastly disproportionate to changes in net migration. Similarly, Chart II-6 highlights that rents decelerated in the US over the past year but remained in positive territory and grew at a 3.5% annualized rate from February to April. Chart II-5In Manhattan, House Prices Have Tracked Net Migration Chart II-6Rent Costs Have Decelerated, But Have Not Contracted Evidence from Paris and London also suggests that a work-from-home effect is insufficient to explain broad house price gains. Panel 1 of Chart II-7 highlights that house prices in France have accelerated significantly, but that apartment prices have decelerated only fractionally in lockstep. Panel 2 shows that the acceleration in house prices does reflect a work-from-home effect, as prices have risen faster in inner Parisian suburbs. Panel 3, however, highlights that Parisian apartment prices, the dominant property type in the urban core, have decelerated modestly. Chart II-8 highlights that house price gains have not even decelerated in greater London; they have been merely been modestly outstripped by gains in Outer South East (outside of the Outer Metropolitan Area). Chart II-7In France, Parisian Apartment Prices Are Simply Lagging, Not Falling Chart II-8In The UK, Greater London Property Prices Are Accelerating     The Policy Effect: The Fundamental Driver Of The Housing Market Despite the broader location flexibility that work-from-home policies now provide to potential homeowners, it seems inconceivable that the housing market would have responded in the manner that it has over the past year given the size of the economic shock brought on by the pandemic without significant support from policy. Above-the-line fiscal measures to the pandemic have totaled in the double-digits in advanced economies (Chart II-9), and monetary policy has contributed to easier financial conditions via rate cuts, asset purchases, and sizeable programs to support financial market liquidity. Chart II-9There Has Been A Massive Fiscal Policy Response To The Crisis In fact, Charts II-10-II-13 present compelling evidence that fiscal and monetary policy have been the core drivers of significant house price gains over the past year. Charts II-10 and II-11 plot the above-the-line fiscal response of advanced economies against the year-over-year growth rate in house prices as well as its acceleration (the change in the year-over-year growth rate). The charts show a clearly positive relationship, with a stronger link between the pandemic fiscal response and the acceleration in house prices. Chart II-10Differences In Last Year’s Fiscal Response… Chart II-11…Help Explain Differences In House Price Gains Chart II-12Pre-Pandemic Differences In The Monetary Policy Stance… Chart II-13…Do An Even Better Job Of Explaining 2020 House Price Gains   Charts II-12 and II-13 highlight the even stronger link between house prices and the pre-pandemic monetary policy stance in advanced economies, defined as the difference between each country’s 2-year government bond yield and its Taylor Rule-implied policy interest rate as of Q4 2019. We construct each country’s Taylor Rule using the original specification, with core consumer price inflation, a 2% inflation target, and real potential GDP growth as the definition of the real equilibrium interest rate. The charts make it clear that easy monetary policy strongly explains house price gains in 2020, particularly the year-over-year percent change rather than its acceleration. This makes sense, given that monetary policy was already quite easy in many countries at the onset of the pandemic – meaning that changes were less pronounced than they would have been had interest rates been higher. The explanation that emerges from Charts II-10-II-13 is that historic fiscal easing, combined with an easy starting point for monetary policy – that became even easier last year – enabled demand from work-from-home policies to manifest during an extremely severe recession. We agree that work-from-home policies have shifted the geographic preferences of some home buyers and likely provided a new source of net demand from renters in urban cores purchasing homes in outlying areas. But we strongly doubt that the net effect of work-from-home policies in the midst of an extreme shock to economic activity would have caused the rise in house prices that we have observed, certainly not to this level, without major support from policy. This underscores that policy, and not the work-from-home effect, has and will likely remain the core driver of the global housing market. The Supply Effect: Mostly A Red Herring Chart II-14Countries Fall Into Two Groups In Terms Of The Relative Trend In Real Residential Investment One perennial question that emerges when analyzing the housing market, particularly in markets with outsized house price gains, is the impact of constrained supply. It is frequently argued that constrained supply is squeezing prices higher in many markets, and that the appropriate policy solution to extreme house price gains is to enable widespread housing construction – not to raise interest rates. We do not rule out the potential impact of constrained supply in certain cities or regional housing markets, and we have highlighted in previous research that a positive relationship does exist between population density in urban regions and median house price-to-income ratios.1 But as a broad explanation for supercharged house price gains, the supply argument appears to fall flat. Chart II-14 presents the most standardized measure of cross-country housing supply available for several advanced economies, the trend in real residential investment relative to real GDP over time. These series are all rebased to 100 as of 1997, prior to the 2002-2007 US housing market boom. The chart makes it clear that advanced economies generally fall into two groups based on this metric: those that have seen declines in real residential investment relative to GDP, especially after the global financial crisis (panel 1), and those that have experienced either an uptrend in housing construction relative to output or have seen a flat trend (panel 2). If scarce housing supply was the core driver of outsized house price gains, then we would expect to see stronger gains in the countries shown in panel 1 and smaller gains in the countries shown in panel 2. In fact, mostly the opposite is true: Charts II-15 and II-16 highlight that the relationship between the level of these indexes today relative to their 1997 or 2005 levels is positively related to the magnitude of house price gains last year, suggesting that housing market supply has generally been responding to demand over the past decade. The US and possibly New Zealand stand as possible exceptions to the trend, suggesting that relatively scarce supply may be boosting prices even further in these markets beyond what fiscal and monetary policy would suggest. Chart II-15Countries That Have Seen A Stronger Pace Of Residential Investment… Chart II-16…Have Experienced Stronger House Price Gains   Chart II-17Is This Not Enough Supply, Or Too Much Demand? As a final point about the inclination of investors to gravitate towards supply-side arguments related to the housing market, Chart II-17 presents a simple thought experiment. The chart shows a simple housing supply-demand curve diagram, in a scenario where the demand curve for housing has shifted out more than the supply curve has (thus raising house prices). Is this a scenario in which supply is too tight? Or is it a case in which demand is too strong? In our view, the tight supply answer is reasonable in circumstances where the increase in demand is normal or otherwise sustainable. But Charts II-10-II-13 clearly showed that housing demand is being boosted by easy policy, which in the case of some countries has occurred for years: interest rates have remained well below levels that macroeconomic theory would traditionally consider to be in equilibrium, and this has occurred alongside significant household sector leveraging (Chart II-18). As such, in our view, investors should be more inclined to view the global housing market as generally being driven by demand-side rather than supply-side factors. This Is Not 2007/08 … Yet We highlighted in Chart II-2 above that the household sector debt-to-GDP ratio increased sharply last year, which has raised some questions about debt sustainability among investors. For the most part, the rise in this ratio actually reflects denominator effects (namely a sharp contraction in nominal GDP) rather than a huge surge in household debt. Chart II-19 shows BIS data for the annual growth in total household debt in developed economies was roughly stable last year, at least until Q3 (the most recent datapoint available from the BIS). Chart II-18Low Interest Rates Have Fueled Household Leveraging Chart II-19Total Credit Growth Has Been Stable, But Mortgage Credit Growth Is Accelerating Chart II-20US Mortgage Growth Is Picking Up, As Repayments Slow Consumer Credit Growth But Chart II-19 shows the recent trend in total household debt, which masks diverging mortgage and non-mortgage debt trends. In the US, euro area, Canada, and Sweden, household mortgage debt has accelerated to varying degrees, underscoring that households have likely paid down non-mortgage debt with some of the savings that they have accumulated from a significant reduction in spending on services. Chart II-20 shows this effect directly in the case of the US; mortgage debt growth accelerated by roughly 1.5 percentage points in the second half of the year, whereas consumer credit growth (made up of student loans, auto loans, credit cards, and other revolving credit) decelerated significantly. This aligns with data showing that US households have used some of their savings windfall to pay down their credit card balances. This changing mix within household debt - less higher-interest-rate consumer credit, more lower-interest-rate collateralized mortgage debt – could, on the margin, help mitigate financial stability risks from the housing boom by moderating overall debt service burdens. The starting point for the latter matters, though, in accurately assessing the risks from rising house prices and increased mortgage debt, particularly in countries where household debt levels are already high. According to data from the BIS, the US already has one of the lowest household debt service ratios (7.6%) among the developed economies (Chart II-21).2 This compares favorably to the double-digit debt service ratios in the “higher-risk” countries like Canada (12.6%), Sweden (12.1%) and Norway (16.2%). On top of that, US commercial banks have become far more prudent with mortgage loan underwriting standards since the 2008 financial crisis. The New York Fed’s Household Debt and Credit report shows that an increasing majority of mortgage lending made by US banks since the 2008 crisis has been to those with very high FICO credit scores (Chart II-22). This is in sharp contrast to the steady lending to “subprime” borrowers with poor credit scores that preceded the 2008 financial crisis. The median FICO score for new mortgage originations as of Q1 2021 was 788, compared to 707 in Q4 2006 at the peak of the mid-2000s US housing boom. Chart II-21Diverging Trends In Global Household Debt Servicing Costs Chart II-22US Banks Have Become More Prudent With Mortgage Lending   US bank balance sheets are also now less directly exposed to a fall in housing values. Residential loans now represent only 10% of the assets on US bank balance sheets, compared to 20% at the peak of the last housing bubble (Chart II-23). This puts the US in the “lower-risk” group of countries in Europe, the UK and Japan where mortgages are less than 20% of bank balance sheets. This compares favorably to the “higher risk” group of countries where residential loans are a far larger share of bank assets (Chart II-24), like Canada (32%), New Zealand (49%), Sweden (45%) and Australia (40%). Chart II-23Banks Have Limited Direct Exposure To Housing Here Chart II-24Banks Are Far More Exposed To Housing Here   Like nature, however, the financial ecosystem abhors a vacuum. “Non-bank” mortgage lenders have filled the void from traditional US banks reducing their lending to lower-quality borrowers, and they now represent around two-thirds of all US mortgage origination, a big leap from the 20% origination share in 2007. Non-bank lenders have also taken on growing shares of new mortgage origination in other countries like the UK, Canada and Australia. Chart II-25Global Banks Can Withstand A Housing Shock Non-bank lenders do not take deposits and typically fund themselves via shorter-term borrowings, which raises the potential for future instability if credit markets seize up. These lenders also, on average, service mortgages with a higher probability of default, so they are exposed to greater credit losses when house prices decline. However, the risk of a full-blown 2008-style commercial banking crisis, with individual depositors’ funds at risk from a bank failure, are reduced with a greater share of riskier mortgage lending conducted by non-bank entities. This is especially true with global commercial banks far better capitalized today, with double-digit Tier 1 capital ratios (Chart II-25), thanks to regulatory changes made after the Global Financial Crisis. Net-net, we conclude that the overall financial stability implications of the current surge in house prices in the developed economies are relatively modest on average. The acceleration in mortgage growth has occurred alongside reductions in non-mortgage growth, at a time when banks are better able to withstand a shock from any sustained future downturn in house prices. However, if house prices continue to accelerate and new homebuyers are forced to take on ever increasing amounts of mortgage debt, financial stability issues could intensify in some countries. Services spending will recover in a vaccinated post-COVID world, as economies reopen and consumer confidence improves, which will likely end the trend of falling non-residential consumer debt offsetting rising mortgage debt in countries like the US and Canada. Overall levels of household debt could begin to rise again relative to incomes, building up future financial stability risks when central banks begin to normalize pandemic-related monetary policies – a process that has already started in some countries because of the housing boom. The Monetary Policy Implications Of Surging House Prices Rapidly appreciating house prices are becoming an area of concern for policymakers in countries like Canada and New Zealand, where the affordability of housing is becoming a political, as well as an economic, issue. In the case of New Zealand, the government has actually altered the remit of the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) to more explicitly factor in the impact of monetary policy on housing costs. The Bank of Canada announced in April that it would taper its pace of government debt purchases and signaled that its decision was based, at least in small part, on signs of speculative behavior in Canada’s housing market. Macroprudential measures like limiting loan-to-value ratios of new mortgage loans are a policy option that governments in those countries have already implemented to try and cool off housing demand. Yet while such measures can help alleviate demand-supply mismatches in certain cities and regions, the efficacy of such measures in sustainably slowing the ascent of house prices on a national scale is unclear. In the April 2021 IMF Global Financial Stability Report, researchers estimated that, for a broad group of countries, the implementation of a new macro-prudential measure designed to cool loan demand reduced national household debt/GDP ratios by a mere one percentage point, on average, over a period encompassing four years.3 If macroprudential measures are that ineffective in sustainably reducing demand for mortgage loans, then the burden of slowing house price appreciation will have to fall on the more blunt instruments of monetary policy. Importantly, surging house price inflation is not likely to give a boost to realized inflation measures – an important issue given the current backdrop of rapidly rising realized inflation rates in many countries. Housing costs do represent a significant portion of consumer price indices in many developed countries, ranging from 19% in New Zealand to 33% in the US (Chart II-26), with the euro area being the outlier with housing having a mere 2% weighting in the headline inflation index. Chart II-26A Limited Impact On Actual Inflation From Housing Yet those so-called “housing” categories overwhelmingly measure only housing rental costs and not actual house prices. This is an important distinction because rents – which are often imputed measures like in the US and not even actual rental costs - are rising at a far slower pace than actual house prices in most countries, so the housing contribution to realized inflation is relatively modest. So the good news is that booming house prices will not worsen the acceleration of realized global inflation that has concerned investors and policymakers in 2021. Yet that does not mean that central bankers will not be forced to tighten policy to cool off red-hot housing demand that is clearly being fueled by persistently negative real interest rates. In Chart II-27 and Chart II-28, we show both nominal and real policy interest rates for the “lower risk” and “higher risk” country groupings that we described earlier. The real policy rates are nominal policy rates versus realized headline CPI inflation. The dotted lines in the charts represent the future path of rates discounted by markets. Specifically, the projection for nominal rates is taken from overnight index swap (OIS) forward curves, while the projection for real rates is calculated by subtracting the discounted path of inflation expectations extracted from CPI swap forwards. Chart II-27Markets Discounting Negative Real Rates For The Next Decade Chart II-28Negative Real Rates Are Unsustainable During A Housing Bubble   There are two key takeaways from these charts: Real policy interest rates are at or very close to the most deeply negative levels seen since the 2008 financial crisis. Markets are discounting that real rates will be at or below 0% for most of the next decade. Admittedly, there is room for debate over what the equilibrium level of real interest rates (a.k.a. “r-star”) should be in the coming years. However, we deem it a major stretch to believe that real rates need to be persistently low or negative for the next ten years to support even trend growth across the developed economies. In our view, the current boom in housing demand and mortgage borrowing provides clear evidence that negative real rates are below equilibrium and, thus, are stimulating credit demand. Thus, the only way for a central bank to cool off housing demand will be to raise both nominal and, more importantly, real interest rates. Canada and New Zealand will be the “canaries in the coal mine” among developed market central banks for such a move. According to the latest Bank of Canada Financial Stability Review, nearly 22% of Canadian mortgages are highly levered, with a loan-to-value ratio greater than 450%, a greater share of such mortgages than during the 2016/17 housing boom (Chart II-29). Canadian house prices have risen to such an extent that home prices in major cities like Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal are among the most expensive in North America.4  Stunningly, a recent Bloomberg Nanos opinion poll revealed that nearly 50% of Canadians would support Bank of Canada rate hikes to cool off the red-hot housing market (Chart II-30). The central bank will be unable to resist the pressure to use monetary policy to slam on the brakes of the housing market – investors should expect more tapering and, eventually, rate hikes from the Bank of Canada over at least the next couple of years. Chart II-29Canadians Are Leveraging Up To Buy Expensive Homes Chart II-3050% Of Canadians Want A Rate Hike To Cool Housing   In New Zealand, worsening housing affordability has reached a point where a 20% down payment on the median national house price is equal to 223% of median disposable income (Chart II-31). This is forcing more first-time home buyers to take on levels of mortgage debt that the RBNZ deems highly risky (top panel). Like the Bank of Canada, the RBNZ will prove to be one of the most hawkish central banks in the developed world over the next couple of years as the central bank follows their newly-revised remit to try and cool off housing demand in New Zealand. Who is next? Housing values, measured by the ratio of median national house prices to median national household incomes, are rising in the US and UK but are still below the peaks of the mid-2000s housing bubble (Chart II-32). Meanwhile, housing is becoming more expensive across the euro area, but not in a consistent manner, with valuations in Germany and Spain having increased far more than in France or Italy. Housing valuations have actually improved in Australia over the past couple of years on a price-to-income basis. The most likely candidates for a housing-related hawkish turn are in Scandinavia, with housing valuations in Sweden and Norway closing in on Canada/New Zealand levels. Chart II-31New Zealand Housing Is Wildly Unaffordable Chart II-32Global House Price/Income Ratios Are Trending Higher   Investment Conclusions The current acceleration in global house prices is an inevitable outcome of the extraordinary monetary and fiscal easing implemented during the pandemic. Higher realized inflation is pushing real rates deeper into negative territory in many countries, fueling the demand for housing. Central banks in countries with more stretched housing valuations will be forced to turn more hawkish sooner than expected, leading to tapering and, eventually, rate hikes to cool housing demand. This has negative implications for government bond markets in countries where housing is more expensive and real yields remain too low, like Canada, New Zealand and Sweden (Chart II-33). Investors should limit exposure to government bonds in those markets over the next 6-12 months. Chart II-33Negative Real Yields & Expensive Housing Valuations – An Unsustainable Mix Bond markets in countries where house prices are not rising rapidly enough to force policymakers to turn more hawkish more quickly – like core Europe, Australia and even Japan - are likely to be relative outperformers. The US and UK are “cuspy” bond markets, as housing valuations are becoming more expensive in those two countries but the Fed and Bank of England are not facing the same domestic political pressure to use monetary policy tools to fight the growing unaffordability of housing. That could change, though, if overall household leverage begins to rise alongside house price inflation as the US and UK economies emerge from the pandemic. Current pricing in OIS curves shows that markets expect the RBNZ and Bank of Canada to begin hiking rates in May 2022 and September 2022, respectively (Table II-1). This is well ahead of expectations for “liftoff” from other developed markets central banks, including the Fed in April 2023. The cumulative amount of rate hikes following liftoff to the end of 2024 is highest in Canada, New Zealand, the US and Australia. Those are also countries with currencies that are trading at or above the purchasing power parity levels derived from our currency strategists’ valuation models. This highlights the difficult choice that central bankers facing housing bubbles must confront, as the rate hikes that will help cool off housing demand will lead to currency appreciation that could impact other parts of their economies like exports and manufacturing. Table II-1Hawkish Central Banks Must Live With Currency Strength Tracking the second-round economic consequences of eventual monetary policy actions to control excessive house price inflation, particularly in “higher risk” countries, is likely to be the subject of future Bank Credit Analyst / Global Fixed Income Strategy reports. Jonathan LaBerge, CFA Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist Footnotes 1 Please see Global Investment Strategy "Canada: A (Probably) Happy Moment In An Otherwise Sad Story," dated July 14, 2017, available at gis.bcaresearch.com 2 Importantly, the BIS debt service ratios include the payment of both principal and interest, thus making it a true measure of debt service costs that includes repayment of borrowed funds – a critical issue in countries with high loan-to-value ratios for home mortgages. 3 Please see page 46 of Chapter 2 of the April 2021 IMF Global Financial Stability Report, which can be found here: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/GFSR/Issues/2021/04/06/global-finan… 4 “Vancouver, Toronto and Hamilton are the least affordable cities in North America: report”, CBC News, May 20, 2021

Highlights The number one risk to our upbeat view on European economic activity and assets is a Chinese economic slowdown. The second most important risk to our view is a potential deterioration in the global credit impulse, even outside of China. The third major risk is that the current bout of US inflation proves to be permanent, which, paradoxically, would prompt a deflationary shock for the global economy. Despite these risks, we maintain our favorable view on European assets over the coming 12 to 18 months. However, favoring industrials over materials, and financials over other cyclicals, Swedish equities and peripheral bonds in balanced portfolios mitigate some of these risks. Do not expect the ECB to announce a tapering of its asset purchases at the June meeting. The ECB will lag well behind the Fed and the BoE. Buy European steepeners and US flatteners as a box trade. Feature Over the past three weeks, a sustained marketing push gave us the opportunity to interact intensively with a large subset of our clients (albeit virtually, courtesy of COVID-19). Generally, our positive stance on European assets was well received, but investors are loosely committing themselves to this view and very few are willing to make an aggressive bet on Europe. In fact, in most meetings, we spent more time than usual discussing the risks to our upbeat view on Europe and European cyclical equities. Three risks to our 12- to 18-month view standout. The first is a serious slowdown in Chinese growth. The second is a greater-than-anticipated impact on economic activity as a result of a deterioration in DM credit impulses. The third is stronger-than-expected US inflation. An also-ran was the risk that the current vaccines do not protect against the two variants of the COVID-19 virus dominant in India. However, an increasing body of recent scientific studies demonstrates that this is not the case; hence, this risk has been lowered to minor. Risk #1: A Chinese Slowdown Authorities in China have been constricting credit policy over the past six months. The key tools used have been a regulatory tightening in shadow-banking activities and real estate transactions, moral suasion on small banks to limit the expansion of their loan books, and slowing liquidity injections in the interbank system. Beijing’s policy tightening reflects the following two worries. First, the financial stability risk has increased meaningfully over the past 16 months. China’s corporate debt-to-GDP has increased 13 points to 163%, and is among the highest for major economies (Chart 1). Moreover, Chinese policymakers remain concerned by the middle-income trap, which would become an increasingly likely outcome if the stability of the country’s financial and banking system were compromised. Second, the latest round of stimulus has worsened wealth inequalities. House prices have been robust, yet household disposable income growth is still low by the yardstick of the past 40 years (Chart 2). Thus, a large proportion of China’s population has experienced a decline in housing affordability. Chart 1China"s Financial Stabilitiy Risk Chart 2Chinese Households Are Not Doing That Well The Chinese economy recently started to feel the impact of the policy tightening. China’s April retail sales data missed expectation by 7.2%, and, as our China Investment Strategy colleagues have observed, the demand side of the economy has lagged behind the recovery in supply ever since China re-opened last year. Credit trends confirm this assessment. The decline in the excess reserve ratio of the Chinese banking system is consistent with the recent deterioration in the credit impulse, which accelerated in April (Chart 3). Since the Great Financial Crisis, weaker Chinese credit flows herald softer global industrial activity and trade (Chart 3, bottom panel). The Chinese slowdown could become a major problem for the European economy and its asset markets. As we recently showed, the sensitivity of European economic activity to global growth has been steadily increasing over the past 20 years (Chart 4). Moreover, the spread between M1 and M2 money supply growth in China best explains the gap between European industrial activity and that of the US (Chart 4, middle and bottom panels). Essentially, M1 minus M2 approximates the Chinese private sector’s marginal propensity to consume, because it captures how fast demand deposits are growing relative to savings deposits. Thus, the recent decline in China’s marginal propensity to consume constitutes a bad omen for European activity and profit growth, both in absolute terms and relative to the US. Chart 3A Policy-Induced Slowdown Chart 4Europe Is More Exposed Than The US The slowdown in China’s economy will hurt European asset prices via multiple channels. Importantly, cyclical stocks are expensive and overbought compared to defensive ones. A meaningful decline in Chinese growth could result in a deep fall in the cyclicals-to-defensives ratio, which would hurt the pro-cyclical EUR/USD exchange rate (Chart 5). A weaker China might also create a significant fall in global yields, because it would hurt global growth, accentuate deflationary forces, and upset investor sentiment. European stocks underperform US equities when global yields decline (Chart 6). Chart 5The Euro Is Pro-Cyclical Chart 6A Key Threat To European Stocks Despite the dire impact that a Chinese economic slowdown normally causes on European growth and assets, this outcome remains a risk and not a base case (albeit, the top risk in our view). First, today is one of the rare occasions when global and European economic activity can decouple from China. The Euro Area’s vaccination campaign is gaining steam, which will allow a re-opening of the economy this summer (Chart 7). The vast pent-up demand in durable goods evident in Europe and the positive impact of the European monetary expansion on the contribution of consumer expenditure to real GDP growth also create powerful offsets (Chart 8). Chart 8European Pent-Up Demand As An Offset Chart 7Improving Vaccine Rollout The global industrial cycle is more buffered than usual against a Chinese economic slowdown. The collapse in the inventory-to-sales ratios around the world will fuel several quarters of restocking, which will boost the global manufacturing sector (Chart 9). Moreover, governments across advanced economies are unleashing large-scale infrastructure plans, such as the $2 trillion bill proposed by the Biden administration in the US or the EUR250 billion budget proposal by the Draghi government in Italy. As the EUR750 billion NGEU funds are disbursed, the tailwind to infrastructure spending will only grow (Chart 10). Additionally, the current spurt in inflation around the world is a relative price shock driven by scarcity created during the pandemic. This price shock incentivizes companies to expand production and capacity to meet demand. As a result, global capex intentions are rising, which will create an additional offset to China. Chart 9Restocking Ahead Chart 10More Fiscal Support This Way Comes Finally, constraints on Chinese policymakers limit to how far Chinese growth will decelerate. The Chinese Communist Party Congress, in which the make-up of the politburo is determined for the next five years, takes place in October 2022. However, the weak growth rate of household disposable income creates a headache for China’s leadership. While another round of massive stimulus is unlikely to shore up household disposable income (it has not worked thus far), Beijing will not take the chance to generate another deflationary shock. This constraint creates a natural floor under the growth deceleration that Beijing can tolerate. Thus, while a policy mistake is still possible, it is not our base case scenario. Investment Implication Faced with the aforementioned dynamics, BCA recommends that investors with a short-term investment horizon go neutral on cyclical equities relative to defensive ones. Practically, this means that EUR/USD is likely to continue to churn between 1.18 and 1.235 for the coming two to three months. Additionally, European equities are likely to move sideways relative to their US counterparts over this period. Within cyclical equities, we favor industrials over materials. Commodity prices, and thus the materials sector, are the most exposed to China. Meanwhile, the outlook for infrastructure spending and capex in DM economies has a greater impact on industrial stocks than on materials ones. Technically, industrials remain toward the bottom of their upward-slopping trend channel relative to materials, which suggests further catch up is likely (Chart 11). We also favor European financials over the rest of the cyclical sectors. The negative impact of a greater-than-expected Chinese economic slowdown on global yields will hurt financials. Nonetheless, domestic economic activity affects financials more than it influences the more internationally focused industrials and materials sectors. Thus, if the Eurozone service PMI can slingshot higher, a result of the re-opening of the economy this summer, then European financials will outperform industrials and materials stocks even if the Chinese economy slows (Chart 12). Moreover, financials trade at a large discount compared to these other two cyclical sectors (Chart 12). Chart 11Overweight Industrials Vs Materials Chart 12Financials As A Protection Against China Finally, we continue to favor Swedish equities. Industrials and financials account for 65% of the Swedish MSCI benchmark compared to 30% for that of the Euro Area. Therefore, they are particularly exposed to the positive outlook on global infrastructure spending and capex. Moreover, Swedish equities generate a return on equity of 15%, compared to 6% for the Eurozone stocks. To protect against the risk created by a weakening Chinese economy, we recommend investors hedge a long / overweight bet on Sweden with a short / underweight position in Norwegian equities that massively over-represent energy and materials. Risk #2: A Global Credit Impulse Deterioration According to the BIS data, the global credit impulse is on the verge of deteriorating, even outside of China. The G10 plus China annual credit impulse is elevated and peaking (Chart 13, left). Meanwhile, quarterly credit impulses in the US, the Euro Area, and China are negative (Chart 13, right), which often leads to turning points in the annual change in credit flows. Chart 13A Global Credit Impulse Problem Chart 13A Global Credit Impulse Problem A deterioration in the credit impulse could result in a sharp slowdown in global economic growth, because the deceleration in credit creation is broad-based among the major economies. If global growth decelerates, then European economic activity will also suffer. Table 1Essential Sector Breakdowns The impact on European financial markets will come from lower yields. A growth deceleration prompted by a falling credit impulse will put downward pressure on yields and will hurt the performance of value stocks relative to growth equities. Cyclical equities will also underperform defensive ones. In this scenario, European stocks will lag behind their US counterparts because of their relative sectoral biases (Table 1). Within the European benchmark, Tech-heavy Dutch stocks would perform best once yields begin to decline. The effect on growth of the slowing credit impulse remains a risk and not a base case scenario. Last year’s surge in credit intake mostly reflected precautionary demand. Companies around the world tapped their credit lines or the capital markets early in the crisis to build liquidity buffers. They then continued to borrow to take advantage of the exceptionally low interest rates that prevailed throughout most of the year. Similarly, a large proportion of household borrowing amounted to debt refinancing. As a result, last year’s explosion in credit growth had a limited impact on spending. Thus, the credit impulse’s decline in advanced economies should minimally hurt aggregate demand in the coming months. Investment Implication Investors can protect against this risk by overweighting Italian and Spanish bonds in a balanced portfolio. First, these instruments continue to offer better value than other government bonds around the world. Moreover, if global growth turns out to be weaker than expected, the ECB might have to increase the envelope of the PEPP program, which has greatly benefited peripheral bonds. Moreover, the NGEU and REACT EU program buttress weaker European sovereign borrowers. Therefore, yield-hungry global investors will resume their aggressive purchase of the high-yielding peripheral bonds if global interest rates decline anew because of softening economic activity. Risk #3: Stronger Than Expected US Inflation BCA’s house view is that the current surge in global and US inflation is transitory, even if the pressures could last a few months before ebbing. It is mainly a consequence of inadequate aggregate supply in the face of a sudden surge in demand. We cannot be dogmatic about the inflation risk. The price-components of all the major activity surveys in the world are rising, and, in the US, the inflation expectations of households have risen meaningfully (Chart 14). If an inflation mentality were to take root, then core CPI would not decelerate toward yearend. Stronger-than-expected US core CPI would put significant upward pressure on Treasury yields. First, long-dated inflation expectations could begin to converge to the breakeven rates in the shorter tenors of the curve (Chart 15). More importantly, the Fed would become more hawkish sooner. This faster policy tightening would lift the OIS curve and result in higher real yields as well. Chart 14Are Inflation Expectations Becoming Unmoored? Chart 15Long-Dated Market-Based Inflation Expectations Still Lag The euro would therefore weaken, and the dollar would rally across the board. European inflationary pressures are limited compared to those of the US. The Eurozone suffers from a larger output gap due to the lagging nature of the European recovery, which more timid fiscal stimulus and Europe’s late start to the vaccination campaign compounded. Consequently, the ECB will not match the Fed’s faster tightening of policy, even in this scenario. Higher US TIPS yields and a stronger dollar would ultimately be deflationary blows to global growth. The dollar would directly tighten EM financial conditions. Higher real yields would destabilize stretched equity prices around the world. The resulting shock to global financial conditions would cause a major slowdown in global growth to occur much earlier than we currently foresee. While yields would rise at first, they would end 2022 at much lower levels than we currently expect because of this deflationary outcome. This combination would be very harmful to European equities, both in absolute terms and relative to the global benchmark. At first, European stocks would probably briefly fare well. Once investors begin to digest the deleterious impact of stronger inflation on global growth, however, the pro-cyclical European market will begin to suffer. Tighter EM financial conditions and underperforming financials will only accentuate the European stock market ills. Much stronger inflation is a risk and not a base case for now, because the current bout of inflation is transitory. The supply-side of the economy is already responding to the signal created by higher prices. Firms are set to increase their inventories and capex intentions are moving higher. Moreover, many of the bottlenecks constraining global supply chains will loosen, as the global economy re-opens in response to the international vaccination campaign. Additionally, current labor shortages in low-wage industry will also dissipate, once the $300 weekly support by the US government ends after the month of September. Thus, the supply of labor will also pick up in the fourth quarter of 2021. Moreover, the Fed could remain tolerant of an inflation overshoot, which would limit the pain of its impact. That being said, there is a real inflation risk due to the global deterioration in the dependency ratio and the shift to the left in terms of the economic preferences of the median voter. However, this danger is backdated to 2024 and beyond, once global labor markets are closer to full employment. Investment Implication There is little protection in our current set of recommendations against this risk, but this is a smaller threat than the previous two risks. However, when viewed alongside the first and second set of risks, the combined probability of a dangerous outcome for the market in general and for Europe in particular has grown compared to six months ago. Thus, while the jury is still out on these questions, it makes sense to de-risk portfolios temporarily, until the reward-to-risk ratio has once again improved. Hence, a tactical neutral stance on cyclical relative to defensive equities and on Europe relative to the rest of the world is appropriate for now. Will The ECB Join The BoC? At its April meeting, the Bank of Canada jolted the market by announcing a much earlier-than-anticipated start to its tapering program. We do not believe that the ECB will follow up at its June meeting. In a recent report, BCA’s Global Fixed-Income Strategy team highlighted the constraint that will prevent the ECB from adjusting policy next month.  The main factors are as follows: The results from the ECB’s strategic review have yet to be announced. Adjusting policy before an eventual change in the inflation mandate of the central banks creates an unnecessary risk of policy whipsaw. Yet another policy flip-flop would further mar the ECB’s credibility. Chart 16The ECB Does Not Want To Upend Credit Growth Loan growth in Europe is slowing down, led by France. However, Italian credit activity is improving in response to the generous TLTRO uptake in the southern economy (Chart 16). At this juncture, a rapid policy adjustment would threaten the recovery, while Europe has yet to re-open. Italian spreads remain fragile. The ECB’s asset purchases are an important contributor to the easing in financial conditions across the periphery. The recent 25bps widening in the BTP-Bund spread is a reminder that European fixed-income markets are not fully tension-free. Thus, a rapid removal of support could prompt a reflex selloff in Italian bonds. The subsequent tightening in financial conditions would unnecessarily feed deflationary pressures in Europe. The euro is strong. If the ECB unsettled the market and removed monetary accommodation as fast or even faster than the Fed, the euro’s rally would suddenly accelerate. This would generate a powerful deflationary shock for Europe that would force the ECB to adjust its inflation forecasts downward. Chart 17Especially When China Creates A Threat The Chinese economy is weak, which increases uncertainty around European economic outcome via the trade channel (Chart 17). Instead, the meetings in the back half of the year are much more likely candidates for the ECB to begin talking about its tapering program. By then, the European economic re-opening will have taken place, to which growth will have responded. The results of the ECB’s strategic reviews will have been announced. Finally, plans will have been ratified for the usage of NGEU funds across the EU, and thus, fiscal clarity will improve. Even if the ECB starts talking before yearend of terminating the PEPP, its communications will indicate that the program’s full envelope will be deployed within the original time frame. Thus, the PEPP program will be in place until the end of March 2022. Moreover, to prevent a rapid deterioration in bank credit, the ECB will continue to provide generous financing to deposit-taking institutions via the TLTRO program. Under these circumstances, the ECB is unlikely to increase its deposit rate before 2014. These views imply that the ECB policy tightening (both on the balance sheet and interest rate fronts) will lag behind that of the Fed, the BoE, the Norges Bank, and the Riksbank. Only the BoJ and the SNB will move after the ECB. The continued involvement of the ECB in the European fixed-income market, along with the elevated likelihood that we remain years away from the first rate hike, confirms that an overweight stance in European peripheral bonds is appropriate. We also continue to overweight corporate credit within European fixed-income portfolios. Our fixed-income colleagues also share these views. Chart 18Justifying A Box Trade Finally, the German yield curve should steepen compared to that of the US. Even if the ECB lags well behind the Fed when it comes to tightening policy, the current terminal rate proxy embedded in the EONIA curve is too low (Chart 18). Meanwhile, the earlier lift-off date for interest rates in the US relative to the Euro Area points to rising short rates west of the Atlantic. In this context, a box trade buying steepeners in Europe and flatteners in the US is appropriate, especially since it generates a positive carry of 167 bps (hedged into USD).   Mathieu Savary, Chief European Investment Strategist Mathieu@bcaresearch.com Cyclical Recommendations Structural Recommendations Currency Performance Fixed Income Performance Government Bonds Corporate Bonds Equity Performance Major Stock Indices Geographic Performance Sector Performance Closed Trades

Aspectos destacados ¿Reducción del BCE?: Los temores de los inversores de que el BCE pueda seguir al Banco de Canadá y al Banco de Inglaterra y comenzar a reducir sus compras de bonos antes de lo esperado – quizá ya en la reunión de política monetaria del próximo mes – están fuera de lugar. Lo último que desea ver el BCE es el repunte del euro y de los rendimientos de los bonos italianos que seguramente seguiría a cualquier movimiento para comenzar de forma preventiva a reducir la acomodación monetaria en respuesta a un crecimiento y una inflación europeos más rápidos. Estrategia de bonos de la zona euro: Mantenemos nuestras recomendaciones actuales sobre bonos europeos: sobreponderar Europa dentro de las carteras globales de renta fija - favoreciendo a los soberanos y corporativos periféricos frente a la deuda gubernamental de los países del núcleo - y, además, sobreponderar los bonos ligados a la inflación en Francia, Italia y Alemania, donde los breakevens están infravalorados. También proponemos una nueva operación táctica para desvanecer la valoración actual del mercado sobre subidas de tipos del BCE, tomando una posición larga en el contrato de futuros de tipos de interés Euribor de diciembre de 2023. Reportaje Estimado cliente, La próxima semana publicaremos conjuntamente un Informe Especial, en el que discutiremos las implicaciones para la inversión del actual boom inmobiliario global, con nuestros colegas de la publicación mensual Bank Credit Analyst. Recibirá ese informe el viernes 28 de mayo. Volveremos al calendario semanal habitual de publicaciones el martes 1 de junio. - Rob Robis Gráfico de la semana Un aumento decepcionante de los rendimientos de los bonos europeos Un repunte decepcionante en los rendimientos de los bonos europeos Un repunte decepcionante en los rendimientos de los bonos europeos Para la reunión de política monetaria del próximo mes, la presidenta del Banco Central Europeo (BCE), Christine Lagarde, planea supuestamente invitar a los miembros del Consejo de Gobierno a reunirse en persona por primera vez desde el inicio de la pandemia. Eso añade un subtexto interesante a una reunión que sin duda incluirá un debate sobre cuánta ayuda monetaria sigue siendo necesaria para una Europa cada vez más vacunada que está saliendo de las profundidades del COVID-19. Según las actas de la última reunión del BCE en abril, algunos funcionarios del BCE ya han señalado que los riesgos para el crecimiento económico y las expectativas de inflación ahora estaban “inclinados al alza”. Con la mejora de la confianza económica en Europa, los rendimientos de los bonos europeos han subido en respuesta (Gráfico de la semana). El rendimiento de referencia del bund alemán a 10 años se sitúa ahora en -0.11%, 46 puntos básicos en lo que va de año, aunque la mitad de ese movimiento se ha producido en el último mes. El repunte de los rendimientos no se ha limitado a los países del núcleo como Alemania y Francia: el rendimiento del bono gubernamental italiano a 10 años ha subido hasta el 1.11%, más del doble del nivel con el que empezó 2021 (0.52%). Las expectativas de inflación han aumentado con fuerza, y el swap del IPC a 5 años/5 años a plazo del euro se sitúa ahora en 1.63%, un nivel no visto desde diciembre de 2018. Estos aumentos de los rendimientos han estado rezagados respecto a los grandes movimientos observados en otros países; los rendimientos de los bonos gubernamentales a 10 años en EEUU y Canadá han registrado incrementos en lo que va de año de 72 y 90 puntos básicos, respectivamente. En esos países, los rendimientos se han disparado debido al aumento de las expectativas de inflación y a las preocupaciones por una reducción ("tapering") de las compras de bonos por parte de los bancos centrales, preocupaciones que resultaron ser acertadas en el caso de Canadá, donde el Banco de Canadá anunció, de hecho, un ritmo más lento de compras de bonos el mes pasado. En nuestra opinión, aún es demasiado pronto para que el BCE contemple un cambio hacia una postura de política menos acomodaticia. Este mensaje lo corrobora nuestro Monitor del BCE, que ha subido pero aún no señala la necesidad de una política monetaria más restrictiva. La venta masiva de bonos en Europa parece un caso de "demasiado, demasiado rápido". El BCE ahora tiene mucho que considerar Los datos económicos recientes de la zona del euro no solo han alcanzado la fortaleza anterior visible en EEUU, sino que en algunos casos han vuelto a niveles no vistos en muchos años. El componente de expectativas de la encuesta ZEW alemana se disparó casi 14 puntos en mayo y se encuentra ahora en niveles no vistos desde 2000. El PMI manufacturero de Markit alcanzó un máximo histórico de 62.9 en abril. El índice de confianza del consumidor de la Comisión Europea para la zona del euro está casi de vuelta a los niveles previos a la pandemia (Gráfico 2), lo que augura una recuperación continuada del PMI de servicios de Markit. Las noticias más positivas sobre la pandemia están impulsando el aumento de las expectativas de crecimiento. El ritmo de nuevos casos de COVID-19 ha caído de forma constante, y en Italia —una de las regiones más afectadas durante los primeros meses de la pandemia— se registra ahora la tasa más baja de nuevos casos desde octubre (en base móvil de 7 días). Mientras tanto, el ritmo de las vacunaciones se ha acelerado después de un despliegue inicial lento; el número de dosis diarias administradas (por cada 100 personas) es ahora mayor en Alemania, Francia e Italia que en EEUU (Gráfico 3). Gráfico 2 El crecimiento europeo se está recuperando El crecimiento europeo se está recuperando El crecimiento europeo se está recuperando Gráfico 3 Aceleración de la vacunación en Europa Aceleración de la inoculación en Europa Aceleración de la inoculación en Europa Gráfico 4 ¿Cuánta capacidad ociosa hay en Europa? ¿Cuánta capacidad excedente hay en Europa? ¿Cuánta capacidad excedente hay en Europa? El rápido aumento de las vacunaciones está preparando a Europa para una recuperación sólida de la recesión en forma de doble caída impulsada por los confinamientos en el 4T/2020 y 1T/2021. La Comisión Europea mejoró sus previsiones de crecimiento para la zona del euro la semana pasada, y ahora se espera que el PIB real crezca un 4.3% en 2021 y un 4.4% en 2022, frente a las previsiones anteriores del 3.8% en ambos años. Se espera que todos los países de la zona del euro vuelvan al nivel de producción económica previo a la pandemia para finales de 2022, una cifra potenciada por un aumento de la inversión pública a través del paquete Next Generation EU (NGEU), que se espera comience a desembolsar fondos a finales de este verano. Sin duda el BCE revisará al alza sus propias previsiones en la reunión de junio, tanto para el crecimiento económico como para la inflación. Las perspectivas para esta última probablemente se convertirán en la mayor fuente de debate dentro del Consejo de Gobierno del BCE. A pesar de la recuperación bastante coordinada de los datos de encuestas como los PMI manufactureros, persiste una amplia divergencia en las tasas de desempleo —y en las medidas de capacidad ociosa, en términos generales— dentro de la zona del euro (Gráfico 4). Esto dificultará que el BCE determine si el actual aumento de la inflación realizada, que ha llevado el crecimiento anual de la inflación HICP general hacia el nivel del 2% en muchas naciones de la eurozona, puede persistir cuando países como Italia y España siguen sufriendo un desempleo muy elevado. La amplia dispersión de las tasas de desempleo dentro de la zona del euro también sugiere que el nivel actual de los tipos de política (en o por debajo del 0%) es apropiado. Una métrica simple para medir la “amplitud” de la fortaleza del mercado laboral europeo es observar el porcentaje de países de la zona del euro que tienen una tasa de desempleo por debajo de la estimación de la OCDE del NAIRU.1 Esa métrica se correlaciona bien con una estimación del nivel apropiado de los tipos de interés a corto plazo de la zona del euro generada por una Regla de Taylor básica. Actualmente, solo el 43% de los países de la eurozona superan el pleno empleo, lo que es consistente con un tipo de política del BCE alrededor del 0% (Gráfico 5). Gráfico 5 Los tipos de política cercanos al 0% siguen siendo apropiados Las tasas de política cercanas al 0% siguen siendo apropiadas Las tasas de política cercanas al 0% siguen siendo apropiadas Una parte ligeramente mayor de países (47%) está experimentando una aceleración en el crecimiento salarial (panel inferior). Esto podría significar que algunas de las estimaciones del NAIRU para los países individuales son demasiado bajas, lo que encajaría con la aceleración del crecimiento salarial en toda la zona del euro observada desde 2015. Sin embargo, dado que tantos países de la zona del euro aún están absorbiendo el aumento del desempleo generado por la pandemia, llevará algún tiempo al BCE obtener una lectura lo bastante clara sobre la dinámica del mercado laboral para determinar si deben realizarse ajustes necesarios en la política monetaria. La “amplitud” de las tendencias de los datos no solo se correlaciona con medidas teóricas de tipos de interés como la Regla de Taylor. Las decisiones reales de política del BCE están motivadas por el grado en que un mayor crecimiento y la inflación son evidentes en toda la zona del euro. En el Gráfico 6 mostramos una métrica similar a las medidas de amplitud del mercado laboral del Gráfico 5, pero usando otros datos económicos y de inflación. Específicamente, mostramos el porcentaje de países de la zona del euro que están experimentando: Gráfico 6 El BCE normalmente endurece cuando el crecimiento Y la inflación son generalizados El BCE suele endurecer la política monetaria cuando el crecimiento y la inflación son generalizados. El BCE suele endurecer la política monetaria cuando el crecimiento y la inflación son generalizados. a) Un impulso de crecimiento acelerado, indicado por un indicador económico líder de la OCDE que es superior al nivel de hace un año; b) Un impulso de inflación acelerado, comparando la última lectura de la inflación HICP general con la de hace un año; c) Inflación relativamente alta, medida por la inflación HICP general por encima del objetivo del BCE de “algo por debajo del 2%”. Mirando todos los periodos anteriores de endurecimiento monetario del BCE desde la creación del euro en 1998 —que han tomado la forma de subidas efectivas de los tipos de interés o una tendencia plana o decreciente en el balance del BCE—, queda claro que el BCE no endurece sin que al menos el 75% de los países de la zona del euro experimenten tanto un aceleramiento del crecimiento económico como de la inflación. Las subidas reales de tipos se producen cuando al menos el 75% de los países tenían una inflación por encima del 2%, como ocurrió durante los ciclos alcistas de 2000, 2005-2007 y 2011. Más recientemente, el BCE pausó la expansión de su balance en 2017 cuando el crecimiento y la inflación se aceleraron, pero no realizó ajustes en los tipos de política porque solo el 50% de los países tenían una inflación por encima del 2%. Hoy, esencialmente todos los países de la zona del euro están viendo un impulso de crecimiento en aceleración en comparación con los niveles deprimidos por la pandemia de hace un año. El 59% de la zona del euro está experimentando una inflación más rápida, una cifra que probablemente aumente a medida que más países reabran tras los confinamientos en medio de un aumento de los precios mundiales de las materias primas. Sin embargo, solo el 12% de los países de la zona del euro tienen una inflación general por encima del 2%, lo que sugiere que la inflación realizada aún no es lo bastante fuerte como para desencadenar incluso un ajuste del balance del BCE, basándonos en la experiencia de 2017. No apueste a una reducción del BCE en junio Por tanto, a juzgar por el comportamiento pasado del BCE, un anuncio para reducir las compras de bonos en la reunión de política de junio sería muy prematuro. Un escenario más probable es que una mejora de las previsiones de crecimiento e inflación del BCE provoque una discusión sobre qué hacer con las distintas partes del estímulo monetario del BCE: la flexibilización cuantitativa, los programas de financiación bancaria como los TLTRO, así como los tipos de interés de política. No obstante, será imposible que el Consejo de Gobierno del BCE alcance conclusiones sobre sus próximos pasos en la reunión de junio porque la propia naturaleza del objetivo de inflación del BCE podría cambiar pronto. El BCE está actualmente llevando a cabo una revisión de su estrategia de política monetaria —la primera desde 2003— que tiene previsto completarse a finales de este año. Se espera algún ajuste del objetivo de inflación del BCE para permitir más flexibilidad, pero aún no está claro cómo será ese cambio. ¿Podría el BCE seguir el ejemplo de la Reserva Federal y pasar a un régimen de “objetivo de inflación promedio”, tolerando excesos de la meta de inflación tras periodos de inflación por debajo del objetivo? El economista jefe del BCE, Philip Lane, señaló en marzo que “había una lógica muy sólida” en el nuevo enfoque de la Fed. También dijo que las “historias de inflación muy diferentes” en algunos países europeos pueden dificultar alcanzar un acuerdo sobre cualquier sistema que permita incluso periodos temporales de inflación más alta.2 Más recientemente, el gobernador del Banco de Finlandia, Olli Rehn —un miembro moderado del Consejo de Gobierno que fue considerado candidato a la actual presidencia del BCE— se manifestó a favor de que el BCE cambiara a un objetivo de inflación promedio al estilo de la Fed para Europa en una reciente entrevista con el Financial Times.3 Rehn señaló que un enfoque similar al de la Fed en busca del desempleo máximo “tiene sentido en el contexto actual de una tasa natural de interés más baja.” Rehn continuó describiendo la redacción actual del objetivo de inflación del BCE como que ha “generado una percepción de asimetría” de modo que “el 2 por ciento se percibe como un techo y eso está amortiguando las expectativas de inflación”. Imaginamos que Jens Weidmann, del Bundesbank, se opondría vehementemente a cualquier movimiento para cambiar el objetivo de inflación del BCE para tolerar incluso un periodo temporal de inflación por encima del 2%. La inflación general alemana HICP ya alcanzó el 2.1% en abril, con más aumentos probables a medida que la economía alemana se reabra tras prolongados confinamientos. Sin embargo, incluso si Weidmann no se atrincherara contra cualquier “aflojamiento” del objetivo de inflación del BCE, la inminente conclusión de la revisión de la estrategia del BCE hace muy poco probable que cualquier cambio de política —como una reducción de compras— pueda anunciarse de forma creíble antes de entonces. Si se va a tolerar una inflación más alta, ¿para qué molestarse en reducir compras? Más allá de la revisión de la estrategia de inflación, hay otros factores que podrían pesar en las deliberaciones del BCE sobre el próximo movimiento de política monetaria: Endurecimiento de la política en China: China – el mayor socio comercial de Europa – ha visto que sus responsables políticos comienzan a frenar el crecimiento del crédito y el gasto fiscal, tras permitir un auge del endeudamiento en 2020 para ayudar a impulsar el crecimiento durante la pandemia. Nuestra medida del impulso crediticio en China adelanta la tasa de crecimiento anual de las exportaciones europeas a China por alrededor de nueve meses (Gráfico 7), y está avisando de una desaceleración drástica de las exportaciones en la segunda mitad de este año. Esto representa un riesgo a la baja para el crecimiento de la zona del euro, particularmente en países que exportan más a China como Alemania. Desaceleración del crecimiento de los préstamos: La tasa de crecimiento anual del conjunto de la concesión de crédito bancario en la zona del euro alcanzó un máximo del 12.2% en febrero y ahora ha bajado al 10.9% (Gráfico 8). Gran parte del debilitamiento se ha producido en Alemania y Francia, países que habían registrado una gran utilización de la financiación bancaria subsidiada a través de los TLTRO del BCE. Los incentivos de precios establecidos por el BCE para el último programa de TLTRO fueron muy atractivos, y parece que los bancos alemanes y franceses aprovecharon la financiación barata para aumentar la actividad de préstamo. Esto hace que la interpretación económica de los datos de préstamos bancarios sea más desafiante para el BCE, especialmente con el crecimiento de los préstamos en Italia —y el uso de TLTRO— acelerándose ahora. Gráfico 7 Señales de alarma para la demanda de exportaciones europeas Señales de advertencia para la demanda de exportaciones europeas Señales de advertencia para la demanda de exportaciones europeas Gráfico 8 Los TLTRO del BCE se están centrando en Italia Las LTRO del BCE se están centrando en Italia. Las LTRO del BCE se están centrando en Italia. Gasto del NGEU: Como se mencionó antes, se espera que los desembolsos del NGEU de €750bn (también conocido como “fondo de recuperación”) comiencen a finales de este año, pendiente la aprobación por parte de la UE de las propuestas de inversión de los gobiernos. Los fondos del NGEU están destinados a financiar iniciativas que puedan impulsar el crecimiento económico futuro, como inversiones en programas digitales y verdes. La mayoría de los países de la zona del euro ya han presentado sus propuestas, encabezadas por la solicitud de Italia de €192bn. Gráfico 9 El NGEU dará un gran impulso al crecimiento europeo durante los próximos cinco años Perspectivas del BCE: Caminando sobre cáscaras de huevo Perspectivas del BCE: Caminando sobre cáscaras de huevo Gráfico 10 El impacto del NGEU se concentrará en la primera fase El impacto del NGEU se concentrará al principio. El impacto del NGEU se concentrará al principio. Un estudio reciente de S&P Global concluyó que las inversiones del NGEU podrían aumentar el crecimiento agregado de la zona del euro entre 1.3 y 3.9 puntos porcentuales, de forma acumulada, entre 2021 y 2026 (Gráfico 9).4 Ese mismo estudio también señaló que los impactos del gasto estarán concentrados en los próximos dos años (Gráfico 10). El gobierno italiano cree que la inversión del NGEU podría duplicar la anémica tasa de crecimiento tendencial de Italia hasta el 1.5%. Muchos funcionarios del BCE han señalado que el NGEU es el tipo de estímulo fiscal estructural que hace menos necesario mantener una política monetaria altamente acomodaticia. Sin embargo, hasta que las propuestas del NGEU no se finalicen y las cantidades finales aprobadas no se desembolsen, el BCE no podrá ajustar sus previsiones económicas para tener en cuenta más inversión pública. Dadas todas estas incertidumbres inmediatas, incluida la capacidad de Europa para reabrir con éxito tras los confinamientos por la pandemia, no vemos un escenario plausible en el que el Consejo de Gobierno del BCE pueda concluir en la reunión de política de junio que era necesario un cambio inmediato en las herramientas y la orientación de la política monetaria actual. Conclusión: Los temores de los inversores de que el BCE pueda seguir al Banco de Canadá y al Banco de Inglaterra y comenzar a reducir sus compras de bonos antes de lo esperado – quizás ya en la reunión de política del próximo mes – están fuera de lugar. Probables próximos movimientos del BCE e implicaciones para la inversión Aunque es poco probable un anuncio de reducción en junio por parte del BCE, es bastante posible algún indicio sobre un movimiento futuro. El BCE es conocido por preparar a los mercados con mucha antelación ante cualquier cambio de política, por lo que la declaración oficial tras la reunión de junio —así como la rueda de prensa de la presidenta del BCE, Lagarde— podría contener pistas sobre lo que el BCE hará a continuación. Gráfico 11 La flexibilización del BCE adopta muchas formas La flexibilización del BCE adopta muchas formas La flexibilización del BCE adopta muchas formas Cabe la posibilidad de que en junio se debata qué pasará con el Programa de Compras de Emergencia Pandémica (PEPP), que está previsto que finalice el próximo marzo. Consideramos más probable que el tema se plantee en la reunión de política de septiembre, cuando habrá más claridad sobre el éxito de la reapertura de la economía europea y sobre el tamaño final aprobado de los fondos NGEU, lo que determinará la necesidad de mantener un programa de compras de activos introducido por el shock del COVID-19. Sin duda existen muchas opciones de política entre las que el BCE puede elegir cuando decida reducir la acomodación. Hay varios tipos de interés de política que podrían ajustarse. Aunque es probable que cuando el BCE intente subir los tipos por próxima vez, el primer tipo en moverse sea el tipo de depósito a la noche, que actualmente está en -0.5% y representa el “suelo” para los tipos de interés a corto plazo en Europa (Gráfico 11). Sin embargo, las subidas de tipos no se producirán antes de que se reduzcan o deshagan las herramientas del balance, lo que significa que las compras de activos se reducirán primero. Los participantes del mercado son bien conscientes de ese orden de opciones de política, ya que actualmente en la curva de swaps de tipo overnight europea (OIS) se descuenta una trayectoria muy plana para los tipos de interés a corto plazo. La diferencia entre las tasas a plazo en las curvas OIS y los swaps de IPC puede usarse como un proxy para la valoración a futuro en mercado de las tasas de interés reales. Actualmente, la tasa de política real implícita por el mercado para el BCE se espera que se mantenga entre -2% y -1% durante la próxima década (Gráfico 12). Dicho de otro modo, los mercados están descontando una trayectoria muy plana para los tipos de política del BCE que permanecerán por debajo de la inflación esperada durante los próximos diez años. Aunque la tasa real natural de interés en Europa probablemente sea muy baja dado el bajo crecimiento tendencial, una tasa real tan baja como -2% descuenta muchas malas noticias estructurales para la economía europea. En comparación, la última estimación del NY Fed de la tasa real natural (r-star) para Europa —calculada en el 2T/2020 antes de que la volatilidad económica en torno a la pandemia hiciera la estimación de r-star menos fiable— fue positiva en +0.6%. La prolongada trayectoria de expectativas de tasas reales negativas en Europa explica en gran medida la persistencia de rendimientos reales negativos en la curva de rendimiento de referencia del gobierno alemán. En pocas palabras, hay poca creencia de que el BCE alguna vez pueda articular un ciclo de subidas de tipos completo —un resultado con el que los inversores de renta fija japoneses están muy familiarizados. Dada la preocupación constante del BCE por el nivel del euro y su papel en el impacto sobre el crecimiento y las expectativas de inflación europeas, los mercados tienen razón al pensar que será difícil para el BCE subir los tipos mucho sin provocar una apreciación no deseada de la divisa. No es coincidencia que el euro haya estado consistentemente infravalorado en términos de paridad de poder adquisitivo (PPP) desde que el BCE pasó a una política de tipos de interés negativos en 2014 (Gráfico 13). Gráfico 12 Los mercados esperan tasas reales negativas en Europa durante la próxima década Los mercados esperan tasas reales europeas negativas durante la próxima década Los mercados esperan tasas reales europeas negativas durante la próxima década De cara al futuro, el BCE deberá ser prudente al señalizar cualquier cambio en la política monetaria, incluida una reducción de compras, que obligue a los mercados a revisar al alza la trayectoria futura de los tipos de interés europeos y dé un fuerte impulso al euro. Gráfico 13 Los bajos tipos del BCE mantienen al euro infravalorado Bajas tasas del BCE mantienen al euro infravalorado Bajas tasas del BCE mantienen al euro infravalorado Eso significa que los rendimientos reales de los bonos europeos probablemente seguirán profundamente negativos durante al menos la segunda mitad de 2021, con cualquier aumento adicional del rendimiento nominal procedente de mayores expectativas de inflación (Gráfico 14). Esto limitará cuánto más pueden subir los rendimientos de los bonos europeos desde los niveles actuales. Gráfico 14 Resumen de la estrategia de bonos europeos Resumen de la estrategia de bonos europeos Resumen de la estrategia de bonos europeos Seguimos creyendo que los rendimientos de los bonos del núcleo europeo se comportarán con una “beta de bajo rendimiento” respecto a los rendimientos del Tesoro estadounidense durante al menos la segunda mitad de 2021 y probablemente hasta 2022, cuando esperamos que la Fed comience a reducir sus compras de bonos. Por tanto, mantenemos nuestra recomendación estratégica de sobreponderar los bonos gubernamentales del núcleo europeo frente a los bonos del Tesoro de EEUU en las carteras globales de bonos. Simplemente vemos mayores probabilidades de que se produzca una reducción en EEUU que en Europa, y que la Fed sea más propensa a ejecutar posteriores subidas de tipos tras la reducción que el BCE. Seguimos recomendando una postura de duración moderadamente por debajo del índice de referencia dentro de carteras dedicadas de bonos europeos, aunque si el rendimiento del bund alemán a 10 años sube significativamente a territorio positivo, probablemente consideraríamos aumentar nuestra exposición de duración europea sugerida. También mantenemos nuestra sobreponderación recomendada en bonos europeos ligados a la inflación, ya que los diferenciales breakeven en Alemania, Francia e Italia son los únicos que permanecen por debajo de su valor justo en nuestra suite de modelos de valoración globales. En crédito europeo, seguimos recomendando sobreponderar productos con spread frente a bonos soberanos. Esto incluye bonos gubernamentales italianos y españoles, así como deuda corporativa tanto investment grade como high yield. El momento de volverse más bajista en esos mercados será cuando el BCE comience a reducir sus compras de activos, ya que los spreads de crédito tienden a ensancharse durante los periodos en que el crecimiento del balance del BCE se está desacelerando (Gráfico 15). Esperamos que cuando el BCE finalmente decida reducir compras, la cifra neta de TLTROs probablemente se mantenga cerca de los niveles actuales (introduciendo nuevos TLTROs para reemplazar a los que expiran). Esto garantizará que los costes de financiación en los países más frágiles, como Italia, no se disparen por el doble efecto de la reducción de la compra de bonos italianos por parte del BCE y el acceso disminuido a la financiación bancaria barata del BCE. Una última nota – estamos introduciendo una nueva operación en nuestra cartera Tactical Overlay en la página 19 esta semana, como forma de contrarrestar la valoración del mercado de un BCE más agresivo. Una subida de 10 puntos básicos – el tamaño más probable de cualquier primer intento del BCE por subir los tipos – ya está descontada en la curva OIS alrededor de mediados de 2023. Para finales de 2023, casi 25 puntos básicos de subidas están descontados en las curvas de tipos a plazo. No esperamos que el BCE suba los tipos en 2023, pero incluso si se incrementaran, es improbable que se entreguen 25 puntos básicos acumulados en seis meses. Por tanto, recomendamos abrir una posición larga en el contrato de futuros Euribor a 3 meses de diciembre de 2023 a un precio de entrada de 100.27 (Gráfico 16). Gráfico 15 La reducción del BCE sería mala noticia para el crédito europeo El tapering del BCE sería una mala noticia para el crédito europeo El tapering del BCE sería una mala noticia para el crédito europeo Gráfico 16 Tomar posición larga en futuros Euribor dic/2023 Comprar futuros Euribor dic/2023 Comprar futuros Euribor dic/2023 Conclusión: Lo último que desea ver el BCE es el repunte del euro y de los rendimientos de los bonos italianos que seguramente seguiría a cualquier movimiento para comenzar de forma preventiva a reducir la acomodación monetaria en respuesta a un crecimiento y una inflación europeos más rápidos. Mantenemos nuestras recomendaciones actuales sobre bonos europeos: sobreponderar Europa dentro de las carteras globales de renta fija - favoreciendo a los soberanos y corporativos periféricos frente a la deuda gubernamental de los países del núcleo - y, además, sobreponderar los bonos ligados a la inflación en Francia, Italia y Alemania, donde los breakevens están infravalorados.   Robert Robis, CFA Jefe de Estrategia de Renta Fija rrobis@bcaresearch.com Notas al pie 1 NAIRU es un acrónimo de la expresión inglesa "Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment" (tasa de desempleo que no acelera la inflación). 2 Los comentarios de Lane proceden de una entrevista de amplio alcance con el Financial Times publicada el 16 de marzo de 2021, que puede consultarse aquí: https://www.ft.com/content/2aa6750d-48b7-441e-9e84-7cb6467c5366 3 Los comentarios de Rehn se publicaron a principios de este mes, el 9 de mayo, y pueden consultarse aquí: https://www.ft.com/content/05a12645-ceb2-4cd5-938e-974b778e16e0 4 El informe de S&P Global, titulado “Next Generation EU Will Shift European Growth Into A Higher Gear”, puede consultarse aquí: https://www.spglobal.com/ratings/en/research/articles/210427-next-generation-eu-will-shift-european-growth-into-a-higher-gear-1192994 Recomendaciones La cartera recomendada por GFIS frente al índice de referencia personalizado Perspectiva del BCE: Caminando sobre cáscaras de huevo Perspectiva del BCE: Caminando sobre cáscaras de huevo Duración Asignación regional Producto de spread Operaciones tácticas Rendimientos y rentabilidades Rendimientos de bonos globales Rentabilidades históricas

Informe especial

Aspectos destacados El BCE no está reprimiendo las tasas de interés ni penalizando a los ahorradores. La Zona Euro no muestra ninguno de los síntomas asociados con la represión financiera. Los excesos de ahorro global mantienen deprimidas las tasas de EE. UU. Si las tasas de EE. UU. son bajas, entonces las tasas europeas deben ser más bajas debido a problemas estructurales en la economía de la región, independientemente de las preferencias del BCE. Estructuralmente, todavía no hay argumentos para que los rendimientos europeos aumenten de forma significativa respecto al resto del mundo. A pesar de fuerzas positivas durante el próximo año o dos, las entidades financieras europeas seguirán rindiendo por debajo a largo plazo. Las utilities europeas superarán a las estadounidenses. El euro se está transformando en un refugio seguro como el yen y el franco suizo. Artículo Al mantener tasas de interés cortas negativas, el Banco Central Europeo está llevando a cabo una represión financiera severa, que distorsiona las tasas de retorno y penaliza a los ahorradores. Este es un estribillo común entre muchos aseguradores y gestores de planes de pensiones que invierten en Europa y entre un gran número de políticos de la región. Gráfico 1 ¿La represión financiera del BCE? ¿La represión financiera del BCE? ¿La represión financiera del BCE? A primera vista, esta crítica es acertada. Durante los últimos cinco años, las tasas de política negativas han obligado a que los rendimientos de los Bunds, considerados refugio seguro, coticen muy por debajo del crecimiento del PIB nominal del Área del Euro (Gráfico 1). Además, la tasa real de depósito del BCE sigue estando muy por debajo de la estimación de Holston, Laubach-Williams de R-star (la tasa de interés neutral real). Si vamos más allá de estas observaciones superficiales, está lejos de estar claro que el BCE esté llevando a cabo represión financiera o distorsionando las tasas del mercado más que otros grandes bancos centrales globales. ¿Es represión financiera? El BCE no está realizando represión financiera; más bien, está respondiendo a potentes fuerzas económicas en Europa y más allá que están deprimendo las tasas de interés. La definición de represión financiera es crucial para esta evaluación. La represión financiera implica que las autoridades monetarias suprimen activamente las tasas de interés en beneficio de los prestatarios y usuarios del capital a expensas de los ahorradores, cuyas inversiones libres de riesgo ofrecen entonces tasas de retorno inferiores. Siguiendo esta definición, la represión financiera muestra estos síntomas claros: Una tasa de ahorro baja. Las tasas suprimidas no compensan adecuadamente a los ahorradores por renunciar al consumo. Por tanto, es menos probable que aparten dinero. Una acumulación significativa de deuda. Las tasas de interés reales están por debajo del valor de mercado justo, lo que subsidia el endeudamiento. Una expansión significativa de la oferta monetaria. La oferta monetaria se expande rápidamente en respuesta a una fuerte demanda de crédito en la economía. Abundantes gastos de capital. Los ahorradores deben asumir más riesgo financiero para obtener rendimientos adecuados de sus activos, lo que comprime las primas por riesgo. Las tasas internas de retorno deprimidas aumentan el valor presente neto de los proyectos de inversión y, por tanto, hacen que las inversiones representen una gran parte del producto. Un déficit por cuenta corriente. El saldo por cuenta corriente de una nación equivale a sus ahorros menos sus inversiones. Al deprimir el ahorro y estimular las inversiones, la represión financiera resulta en un déficit por cuenta corriente o en un deterioro pronunciado del saldo por cuenta corriente. Un crecimiento del PIB por encima de la tendencia. Al deprimir el ahorro y aumentar las inversiones, la represión financiera eleva el gasto cíclico y obliga al PIB a situarse por encima de su potencial. El problema para los comentaristas que sostienen que el BCE está llevando a cabo represión financiera es que la Zona Euro no cumple ninguno de estos criterios. En primer lugar, el crecimiento del dinero y del crédito en la Zona Euro ha sido muy inferior al de EE. UU. desde la crisis del euro, a pesar de que las tasas de política del BCE han estado constantemente por debajo de la tasa de los fondos federales. Además, desde que el BCE redujo las tasas a cero, el ritmo de creación de dinero y crédito se ha desacelerado significativamente en comparación con sus tendencias previas a la crisis (Gráfico 2). En segundo lugar, el PIB real per cápita del Área del Euro, el PIB nominal per cápita y el deflactor del PIB también se han quedado rezagados un 4,6%, 5,2% y 5%, respectivamente, respecto a los de EE. UU. desde que el BCE redujo las tasas de interés a cero (Gráfico 3). Además, el crecimiento de estas variables se ha desacelerado significativamente durante este periodo, lo que es coherente con una demanda de crédito deprimida. Adicionalmente, a pesar del rendimiento inferior de los indicadores de actividad europeos en comparación con los de EE. UU. desde la introducción de la moneda común, los bonos gubernamentales europeos se han comportado exactamente en línea con los de EE. UU. (Gráfico 3, panel inferior) y, por tanto, han superado en términos reales. Esto es inconsistente con una represión financiera por parte del BCE. Gráfico 2 Las tendencias de dinero y crédito en Europa son demasiado moderadas... Las tendencias monetarias y crediticias en Europa son demasiado moderadas... Las tendencias monetarias y crediticias en Europa son demasiado moderadas... Gráfico 3 ... También lo son las tendencias de volumen de producción y precios ... También lo son las tendencias del volumen de producción y de los precios. ... También lo son las tendencias del volumen de producción y de los precios. Por último, la Zona Euro mantiene un superávit por cuenta corriente del 2,3% del PIB, que ha crecido en 4,1 puntos porcentuales del PIB desde finales de 2008. Esta es la señal más clara de que los ahorros de la Zona Euro se han vuelto excesivos en relación con la inversión, a pesar del aumento de los déficits gubernamentales tras la pandemia de COVID-19. Los excesos de ahorro no suelen asociarse con bancos centrales que distorsionan artificialmente las tasas de interés. Conclusión: Los desarrollos económicos en la Zona Euro no se corresponden con lo que cabría anticipar si el BCE estuviera reprimiendo las tasas de interés. La tasa de crecimiento del dinero y del crédito se ha desacelerado estructuralmente tanto en términos absolutos como en comparación con la de EE. UU. La misma desaceleración es evidente en el producto real y nominal por persona, así como en los niveles de precios. Finalmente, el superávit por cuenta corriente de la Zona Euro se ha ampliado, lo que pone de manifiesto que los ahorros han crecido en exceso respecto a las inversiones. La Zona Euro necesita tasas de interés más bajas que EE. UU. El BCE debe fijar tasas de interés adecuadamente bajas, si los rendimientos de EE. UU. son bajos en toda la curva. En cierto sentido, el argumento de que la Reserva Federal está llevando a cabo represión financiera es más sólido que el argumento contra el BCE. En los últimos doce años, el producto nominal y real per cápita ha crecido con más solidez en EE. UU., mientras que la expansión del dinero y el crédito y la inflación también han sido más fuertes. EE. UU. mantiene un déficit por cuenta corriente persistente del 3,1% del PIB, lo que también indica que no está sobradas de ahorros internos. Gráfico 4 Quizá la Reserva Federal está reprimiendo las tasas de interés Quizás la Fed esté reprimiendo las tasas de interés Quizás la Fed esté reprimiendo las tasas de interés Incluso podríamos argumentar que el caso de que la Fed esté reprimiendo las tasas de interés se está volviendo más fuerte. El déficit presupuestario federal se ha ampliado hasta el 19% del PIB, incluso cuando la tasa de desempleo cae en picado (Gráfico 4). Además, el crecimiento trimestral del PIB de EE. UU. ha promediado un 8,5% desde el cuarto trimestre de 2020 y, según las estimaciones del consenso de Bloomberg, se prevé que promedie un 6,3% para el resto del año. La inflación en EE. UU. también es fuerte. La inflación subyacente anual del IPC alcanzó el 3% en abril; la inflación subyacente mensual fue del 0,92%, o una tasa anualizada del 11,6%, la lectura más fuerte en casi 40 años. Sin embargo, incluso en EE. UU., el argumento de que la Fed está reprimiendo las tasas de interés es en última instancia débil, a pesar de la fortaleza económica mencionada. La Fed está acomodando presiones del mercado global que son mayores que las de la economía estadounidense. En otras palabras, incluso si la Fed no fijara las tasas cortas, las tasas de interés de EE. UU. serían bajas en toda la curva debido a los excesos de ahorro globales. Gráfico 5 Demasiados ahorros en todas partes Demasiado ahorro en todas partes Demasiado ahorro en todas partes Los excesos de ahorro en todo el mundo constituyen una fuerza gravitacional excepcionalmente potente que ancla las tasas globales en niveles bajos. Como muestra el Gráfico 5, desde principios de la década de 1990, el ahorro privado global ha superado a la inversión por un acumulado equivalente al 163% del PIB. El déficit público acumulado, que ha representado el 99% del PIB mundial, ha sido demasiado pequeño para absorber completamente este excedente de ahorro. El desequilibrio resultante ejerce presión a la baja sobre la inflación global (consecuencia de la demanda por debajo de la oferta) y sobre las tasas de interés reales, lo que implica que deprime las tasas de interés nominales en toda la curva. Las tasas de EE. UU. también sienten el efecto compresor de rendimiento de estos excesos de ahorro globales, incluso si la economía estadounidense no genera ahorros excedentarios por sí misma (mantiene un déficit por cuenta corriente). Los principales bancos centrales de mercados desarrollados están retirando una mayor proporción del flotante de refugio seguro de sus jurisdicciones que la Fed (Gráfico 6). La escasez resultante de valores refugio significa que los productos de renta fija estadounidenses siguen siendo la salida natural para los inversores globales que buscan seguridad y liquidez. Así, a pesar de la falta de excesos de ahorro en EE. UU., los rendimientos del Tesoro han cotizado por debajo del crecimiento del PIB nominal el 55% del tiempo durante los últimos 30 años, sin importar lo fuerte que esté la actividad estadounidense o lo amplios que sean los déficits federales. Si la Fed tiene poca opción más que aceptar tasas de interés bajas en EE. UU., entonces la Zona Euro debe aceptar tasas incluso más bajas debido a sus grandes excesos de ahorro. Como ilustra el Gráfico 7, los diferenciales de tasas a 2 y 10 años (tanto en términos nominales como reales) entre la Zona Euro y EE. UU. siguen la brecha entre el déficit por cuenta corriente de EE. UU. y el superávit por cuenta corriente de Europa. Gráfico 6 Los Treasuries son el único refugio abundante del mundo Los bonos del Tesoro son el único refugio abundante del mundo Los bonos del Tesoro son el único refugio abundante del mundo Gráfico 7 Los excesos de ahorro de Europa justifican tasas más bajas en toda la curva El exceso de ahorro en Europa justifica tasas más bajas en toda la curva El exceso de ahorro en Europa justifica tasas más bajas en toda la curva El menor rendimiento del capital en la Zona Euro es otra fuerza que deprime las tasas respecto a EE. UU. (Gráfico 8). Este menor rendimiento del capital refleja los siguientes problemas estructurales de las economías europeas: Exceso de stock de capital. Las naciones periféricas de la Zona Euro tienen stocks de capital anormalmente grandes en relación con sus PIB (Gráfico 9). Como hemos argumentado anteriormente, esta característica significa que Europa sufre grandes cantidades de capital mal asignado, lo que perjudica el rendimiento del capital. Gráfico 8 El capital no es recompensado en Europa El capital no se recompensa en Europa El capital no se recompensa en Europa Gráfico 9 ¡Demasiado capital! ¡Demasiado capital! ¡Demasiado capital! Stock de capital envejecido. No solo el stock de capital de la Zona Euro es demasiado grande en relación con el tamaño de su economía, sino que también es más antiguo que el de EE. UU. (Gráfico 10). Un stock de capital envejecido, especialmente en un mundo donde el gasto en TIC es una de las fuentes clave de innovación y crecimiento, perjudica aún más el rendimiento del capital en el Área del Euro. Ratio incremental de producción respecto al capital más bajo (Gráfico 11). El Área del Euro genera significativamente menos producción por unidad de inversión que EE. UU. Esto confirma la noción de que el capital está mal asignado y que se utiliza de forma menos productiva que en EE. UU. Gráfico 10 El capital de Europa también está envejeciendo La capital de Europa también está envejeciendo La capital de Europa también está envejeciendo Gráfico 11 Pobre utilización del capital Utilización deficiente del capital Utilización deficiente del capital Gráfico 12 El problema de productividad inferior de Europa El problema de la baja productividad en Europa El problema de la baja productividad en Europa La fuerza final que limita las tasas europeas en comparación con las de EE. UU. es la menor tasa de crecimiento potencial del Área del Euro. La población de la Zona Euro está envejeciendo y comenzará a contraerse en 2030. Además, el crecimiento de la productividad multifactorial es más débil que en EE. UU. (Gráfico 12). Un menor crecimiento potencial del PIB acentúa el descuento en la tasa neutral de interés del Área del Euro en comparación con EE. UU. Conclusión: A pesar del vigor económico relativo de EE. UU., los excesos de ahorro global reducen las tasas estadounidenses en toda la curva. El BCE no tiene más opción que aceptar tasas europeas aún más bajas, porque la economía europea sufre de mayores excesos de ahorro que EE. UU.: su rendimiento del capital es inferior y su tasa neutral de interés se ve lastrada por un crecimiento potencial del PIB más bajo. Conclusiones de inversión Para que las tasas europeas eviten el destino de Japón y para evitar sufrir muchas décadas más ancladas cerca de cero, deben producirse algunos cambios importantes. Primero, a nivel global, los excesos de ahorro deben disminuir. Esto permitirá que las tasas de interés globales aumenten, especialmente las de EE. UU. Incluso si las tasas de la Zona Euro continúan cotizando con un descuento respecto a EE. UU., los rendimientos refugio en Europa subirían en términos absolutos. La caída en la proporción global de trabajadores respecto a personas dependientes, sobre todo en China, donde el censo de población de 2020 acaba de resaltar la tendencia, es un factor que apunta a una posible disminución gradual del ahorro global. Por el momento, absorber los excesos de ahorro significa que la política fiscal global debe seguir siendo acomodaticia. Aunque las autoridades fiscales de todo el mundo siguen mostrando mayor gasto que tras la Gran Crisis Financiera, no hay garantía de que no vuelvan a sus viejos hábitos. De hecho, el servicio de Global Investment Strategy mostró recientemente que la política fiscal de EE. UU. está a punto de convertirse en una restricción al crecimiento el próximo año más que lo que fue en 2020 y 2021 (Gráfico 13).  Un factor a vigilar es el cambio internacional en las preferencias de los votantes hacia políticas económicas de izquierda, lo que a menudo resulta en un gasto fiscal más generoso. Si esta tendencia persiste, entonces los déficits fiscales globales se cerrarán más lentamente de lo que disminuirán los ahorros del sector privado. Este proceso será tanto inflacionario a largo plazo como impondrá presión al alza sobre las tasas de interés reales en todo el mundo. Pero los excesos fiscales del momento actual pueden obligar a los partidos de oposición a restringir el gasto siempre que lleguen al poder. Gráfico 13 ¿Se convertirá la política fiscal global en un viento en contra? El BCE no está a cargo El BCE no está a cargo En segundo lugar, para reducir el diferencial entre las tasas de la Zona Euro y las de EE. UU., el Área del Euro debe abordar su baja tasa de retorno del capital. Prácticamente, esto significa que gran parte del exceso de stock de capital que lastra los rendimientos europeos debe ser amortizado. Hacerlo requerirá más fusiones y adquisiciones transfronterizas dentro de los sectores en la Zona Euro. Sin embargo, el proceso de reconocimiento de pérdidas sobre capital no viable será deflacionario. Por tanto, para facilitar estas amortizaciones de activos, la política fiscal y la política monetaria de la región deben primero permanecer extremadamente acomodaticias. Está lejos de estar seguro que las autoridades europeas resistan la tentación de volver a sus antiguas prácticas. Un infraponderación estructural en las acciones financieras europeas sigue siendo apropiada. Incluso si la Zona Euro promulga las reformas necesarias para permitir las amortizaciones de activos periféricos requeridas para aumentar los rendimientos del capital a largo plazo, en el interín estas reformas serán deflacionarias. En consecuencia, pase lo que pase, los rendimientos de la Zona Euro se mantendrán muy por debajo de los de EE. UU. durante años. Además, es poco probable que la demanda de crédito europea supere a la del resto del mundo en los próximos años. En este contexto, la rentabilidad sobre recursos propios (RoE) de los bancos europeos seguirá siendo baja. Por lo tanto, nuestra recomendación actual de sobreponderar este sector solo es válida como una jugada a corto plazo sobre la recuperación económica global y no es una recomendación estratégica. En cambio, las utilities europeas superarán estructuralmente a sus homólogas estadounidenses. Las utilities europeas ofrecen mayor RoE que las estadounidenses y presentan una estructura de apalancamiento más saludable (Gráfico 14). Además, las utilities europeas cotizan con descuentos respecto a las firmas estadounidenses en términos de precio/valor contable, precio/flujo de caja, precio/ventas y rendimiento por dividendo (Gráfico 15). Adicionalmente, como apuestas de rendimiento, unas tasas europeas estructuralmente más bajas respecto a las de EE. UU. favorecerán a las utilities europeas a largo plazo. Gráfico 14 Las utilities europeas ofrecen métricas operativas más atractivas... Las empresas de servicios públicos europeas ofrecen métricas operativas más atractivas... Las empresas de servicios públicos europeas ofrecen métricas operativas más atractivas... Gráfico 15 ... Y están más atractivamente valoradas que las estadounidenses ... Y Tienen Precios Más Atractivos Que Los De EE. UU. ... Y Tienen Precios Más Atractivos Que Los De EE. UU. Finalmente, el euro se negociará cada vez más como una moneda refugio, al igual que el yen y el franco suizo. Primero, tras una década de prueba por fuego, la integración y la solidaridad de la UE han ganado en lugar de perder impulso y el riesgo de ruptura de la UE ha quedado limitado al Brexit. Segundo, aunque la economía de la Zona Euro es procíclica, lo son también las economías suiza y japonesa. En cambio, la tasa de ahorro estructuralmente elevada del Área del Euro y su saldo por cuenta corriente están transformando esta economía en un acreedor neto, con una posición de inversión internacional neta positiva equivalente a -0,1% del PIB. Además, la baja inflación del bloque seguirá ejerciendo presión al alza sobre el valor justo a largo plazo del euro. Si añadimos las bajas tasas de interés del Área del Euro, entonces el euro probablemente se comportará cada vez más como una moneda de financiación. Por tanto, si bien el euro se beneficiará de la debilidad del USD pronosticada por nuestros estrategas de divisas, se desempeñará peor que monedas más procíclicas como la SEK, la NOK o la GBP, que no sufren los mismos males que la Zona Euro.   Mathieu Savary, Jefe de Estrategia de Inversión para Europa Mathieu@bcaresearch.com