Inflation/Deflation

Highlights Portfolio Strategy Firming operating metrics, a capex upcycle, rock bottom valuations and deeply oversold conditions all suggest that it no longer pays to be bearish Big Pharma. Upgrade to neutral, today. A looming M&A boom, excess liquidity leaking into biotech stocks, extremely pessimistic Wall Street analysts’ forecasts and severe undervaluation, all suggest that now is the time to go against the grain and overweight biotech equities. Recent Changes Lift the S&P pharmaceuticals index to neutral and remove it from the high-conviction underweight list cementing gains of 12.6% and 10.3% respectively. Boost the S&P biotech index to overweight today. Both of these moves also lift the S&P health care sector to an above benchmark allocation. Table 1 Feature The bulls have taken full control of the equity market and propelled almost every index to fresh all-time highs despite a muted earnings season. Not only are the SPX, the DOW industrials and transports, the NASDAQ composite and the NASDAQ 100 all flirting with uncharted territory, but also more obscure indexes like the Value Line Arithmetic (gauging the average US stock) and Geometric (gauging the median US stock) indexes have also cleared the all-time high bar (Chart 1). On a stock level, bellwether AAPL – the largest stock in the world – has yet to make the leap to new highs despite a blowout profit report and gargantuan buyback announcement, which is cause for near-term concern. Given that the Fed orchestrated this once in a lifetime bonanza, it is also the Fed that can spoil this party, at least temporarily, by removing the proverbial punchbowl. Peering toward the back half of the year, our view remains that the Fed will have to relent and taper asset purchases as inflation will be rearing its ugly head not in a transitory, but more on a semi-permanent fashion. Importantly, the USD can further fan this inflationary impulse. Chart 2 shows that US real GDP expectations are trouncing the rest of the world (ROW) as we first showed in early March. Similarly the ISM manufacturing dichotomy compared with the ROW PMIs is as good as it gets. While this would typically call for a surge in the greenback, counterintuitively we think the path of least resistance is lower for the US dollar as the US economy reaches an inflection point versus the ROW mid-year. Crudely put, if the USD merely ticked up on such a wide economic differential, once Europe and Japan play catch up as the vaccine rollouts and economic reopening smoothen up, then investors will likely flee the US dollar. Chart 1All Time Highs Everywhere Chart 2Relative Growth Expectations At A Zenith With regard to stock market dynamics, this is welcome news for revenue growth, especially for internationally sourced SPX sales that garner a 40% share of total revenues. Since the US dollar floated in the early 1970s, the inverse correlation has increased between top line S&P 500 growth and the greenback (Chart 3). The implication is that a US dollar debasing from current levels will further boost the allure of companies that can raise selling prices. On that front our Corporate Pricing Power Indicator (CPPI) that we recently updated has been on a tear, underscoring that sales growth will soon follow suit (Chart 4). Chart 3Depreciating USD A Boon For SPX Sales Chart 4Rising Inflation Will Boost Revenues Tack on optimistic Chief Executives, and the picture brightens further for SPX revenue prospects. Inflation breakevens also corroborate the messages from our soaring CPPI and surging business confidence (Chart 4). One level down to the SPX GICS1 sector level, Charts 5, 6 & 7 highlight sales growth expectations, with deep cyclicals reigning supreme –especially the energy complex– and defensives the clear laggards (all sectors are compared with the broad market). On the early cyclical front, consumer discretionary equities are forecast to grow sales by 500bps more than the SPX, while financials are slated to trail the overall market by 500bps. Chart 5Consumer Discretionary… Chart 6…And Deep Cyclicals… Chart 7…Have The Upper Hand With regard to the contribution to SPX sales growth for calendar 2021, Table 2 details sector sales growth, sector sales weight, all ranked by sector contribution to SPX sales growth. Chart 8 highlights that consumer discretionary, energy and health care comprise roughly half of the increase in overall revenue growth for 2021. Adding industrials and tech to the mix and these five sectors explain 80% of this year’s projected top line growth contribution to the SPX. Table 2SPX GICS1 Sector Sales Analysis Chart 8Sector Contribution To 2021 SPX Sales Growth Drilling further into industry sub-groups and for inclusion purposes, Table 3 shows our universe of coverage, ranking GICS1 sectors by 12-month forward sales growth and then re-ranking by sub-groups always from highest-to-lowest. Table 3Identifying S&P 500 Sector Sales Growth Leaders And Laggards Circling back to investment implications and gelling everything together, what should investors do given this backdrop? If portfolio managers can stomach volatility and sail through the seasonally weak month of May, then holding the line and sitting tight is the appropriate strategy. However, if investors cannot stomach the bout of volatility that is likely looming, then playing some defense would make sense. We stand closer to the latter camp, and this week we take profits on a defensive group and lift exposure to neutral and boost another beaten down health care sub-group to overweight. These two moves also lift the S&P health care sector to an above benchmark allocation. Exiting The ER The bearish undertones haunting the S&P pharmaceuticals index are well ingrained in investors’ minds and our portfolio has also handsomely benefited from avoiding this key health care industry group. However, it no longer pays to be negative Big Pharma and today we book gains of 12.6% and lift exposure to neutral, and also take this index out of our high-conviction underweight list locking in gains of 10.3% since the early December inception. Chart 9 shows that likely all the adverse news is priced in rock bottom valuations and extremely oversold technical conditions. In fact, the pharma forward P/E ratio is trading at a 40% discount to the SPX and all time low since the GICS reclassification of sectors took place in the early 1990s! While such drubbing is warranted, as this defensive index has to contend an economy exiting recession and also a near unanimous outcry against industry pricing power gains, the easy money has been made on the short/underweight side. This de-rating has coincided with a collapse in relative forward profit growth, on a 12-month and five-year basis, both of which are probing all-time lows (Chart 10). The implication is that the EPS bar is so low it is nearly guaranteed that Big Pharma will surpass it. Such extreme pessimism is contrarily positive and if there is even a whiff of positive profit news, an explosive rally will take root. Chart 9Unloved And Under-owned Chart 10Analysts Have Given Up On Pharma Encouragingly, our macro EPS growth models signal that pharma profits have a strong pulse and will outshine the overall market in the coming year (Chart 11). We recently highlighted the near perfect inverse correlation of the relative share price ratio with the US leading economic indicator and the US ZEW. Similarly, we have shown in the recent past that a number of subcomponents of the ISM manufacturing survey also move inversely with pharma relative profitability. Now that the ISM is at a zenith, staying bearish pharmaceutical stocks will likely prove offside. Meanwhile, Chart 12 shows that the fed funds rate impulse is neither contracting nor weighing on relative share prices. Similarly, the bond market has already priced in two hikes in two years, warning that the relative share price ratio risk/reward tradeoff is slowly shifting to the overweight column. Chart 11Out Of The Ward On the operating front, Big Pharma is investing anew with capex gone parabolic (bottom panel, Chart 13). The last time pharma capital outlays rose over 20%/annum was in the early 1990s! Chart 12There Is A Pulse Chart 13Capex To The Rescue? Industry shipments are climbing roughly at a double digit clip and pharma output is also expanding smartly, underscoring that soon industry productivity will also ascend, which is a boon for profits (Chart 14). Tack on the export relief valve pharma manufacturers are enjoying of late, and factors are falling into place for an earnings led rebound in pharma equities (second panel, Chart 14). Finally, the top panel of Chart 15 highlights that demand for pharmaceuticals in as upbeat as ever and has been significantly diverging from relative share prices. The implication is that this steep gulf will narrow via a catch up phase in the latter. Chart 14Glimmers Of Hope Chart 15Upbeat Demand, But Deflation Is A Tough Pill To Swallow Nevertheless, before getting outright bullish this heavyweight health care sub-group, there are two significant (and related) offsets. Industry pricing power is under attack and will remain in duress until it reaches a new equilibrium (middle panel, Chart 15). As a result, pharmaceutical profit margins have been in an almost uninterrupted multi year squeeze, warranting only a neutral allocation to Big Pharma manufacturers, until these dark profit clouds clear (bottom panel, Chart 15). Netting it all out, firming operating metrics, a capex upcycle, rock bottom valuations and deeply oversold conditions all signal that it no longer pays to be bearish Big Pharma. Upgrade to neutral, today. Bottom Line: Crystalize gains in the S&P pharma index of 12.6% since inception and lift exposure to neutral. We are also removing it from the high-conviction underweight list locking in gains of 10.3% since inception. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5PHARX– JNJ, PFE, MRK, LLY, BMY, ZTS, CTLT, VTRS, PRGO. Buy Biotech Stocks Against The Grain We recommend investors buy the budding recovery in biotech stocks, and today we are boosting the S&P biotech index to an above benchmark allocation. Rising interest rates have dampened demand for biotech stocks as these high growth stocks should command a lower multiple on the back of a rising discount rate (top panel, Chart 16). Add on waning US dollar liquidity and the relative underperformance phase gets explained away (bottom panel, Chart 16). However, there still remains a sizable gap between relative profits and relative share prices. If our four-pronged bullish thesis that we detail below pans out, then a catch up phase looms in crushed biotech stocks (Chart 17). Chart 16Bearish Story Well Documented Chart 17Peculiarly Wide GapFirst, we posit that this highly fragmented industry is prime for consolidation. Even in the large cap S&P 500 biotech index there is scope for M&A activity. Not only intra-industry mergers, but also cash rich and drug pipeline extension thirsty Big Pharma is lurking in the shadows ready to deploy their cash hoard. Already, there is an ongoing mini M&A boom and given the recent biotech firms’ success stories in the race to discover the COVID-19 vaccine, they command a high profile in investment banking board rooms (Chart 18). Second, as long as the Fed remains committed to ZIRP and margin debt balances continue to balloon, some of this excess liquidity will flow toward biotech stocks that are more speculative than their safe-haven health care brethren. Historically, relative margin debt balances and relative share prices have been joined at the hip, and the message from spiking margin debt uptake is to expect a similar rebound in biotech equities (Chart 19). Chart 18M&A Boom Is Bullish Chart 19Speculative Excesses Go Hand-In-Hand With Biotech Stocks Third, the sell side has thrown in the towel on the prospects of the S&P biotech index. Relative sales growth expectations are negative, relative 12-month and five-year forward growth numbers are sinking like a stone and probing all-time lows (Chart 20). All this analyst pessimism is gaining steam at a time when the S&P biotech dividend yield is 2.5%, roughly 100bps higher than the 10-year US Treasury yield and 125bps higher than the SPX dividend yield (bottom panel, Chart 20). Finally, not only the relatively large dividend yield gap signals that biotech stocks are cheap, but on a forward P/E basis the S&P biotech index trades at a whopping 50% discount to the SPX (fourth panel, Chart 20). Our Valuation Indicator has collapsed to levels that have marked prior bull phases going back 25 years and similarly technicals are as downbeat as ever (Chart 21). Chart 20Low Threshold To Overcome Chart 21Cheap And Oversold In sum, a looming M&A boom, excess liquidity leaking into biotech stocks, extremely pessimistic Wall Street analysts’ forecasts and severe undervaluation, all signal that now is the time to go against the grain and overweight biotech equities. Bottom Line: Lift the S&P biotech index to overweight, today. This upgrade along with the S&P pharma upshift to neutral also lift the S&P health care sector to overweight. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5BIOTX– AMGN, ABBV, GILD, VRTX, REGN, ALXN, BIIB, INCY.       Anastasios Avgeriou US Equity Strategist anastasios@bcaresearch.com   Current Recommendations Current Trades Strategic (10-Year) Trade Recommendations Size And Style Views February 24, 2021 Stay neutral cyclicals over defensives January 12, 2021  Stay neutral small over large caps June 11, 2018 Long the BCA Millennial basket  The ticker symbols are: (AAPL, AMZN, UBER, HD, LEN, MSFT, NFLX, SPOT, ABNB, V). January 22, 2018 ​​​​​​​Favor value over growth

Highlights Sweden’s economic recovery is robust and will deepen. Policy is accommodative. Very few advanced economies will benefit as much from the global economic rebound. The labor market will tighten, capacity utilization will increase, and inflation will rise faster than the Riksbank forecasts. On a one- to two-year investment horizon, the SEK is a buy against both the USD and the EUR. Despite their pronounced outperformance, Swedish stocks possess significantly more upside against both Eurozone and US equities over the remainder of the cycle. Swedish industrials will beat their competitors in both these markets. Nonetheless, China’s policy tightening creates a meaningful tactical risk, which selling Norwegian stocks can hedge. Italy’s fiscal plan constitutes a new salvo in Europe’s efforts to avoid last decade’s mistakes. Feature Last week, the Swedish Riksbank did not follow in the footsteps of the Norges Bank. The Swedish central bank acknowledged that the economy is performing better than anticipated and that the housing market is gaining in strength; yet, it refrained from hinting at any forthcoming adjustment to its policy rate or the pace of its asset purchase program. The positive outlook for the Swedish economy will force the Riksbank to tighten policy significantly before the ECB. As a result, we expect the Swedish Krona to outperform the euro and the US dollar. Moreover, investors should continue to overweight Swedish equities due to their large exposure to industrials and financials, even if they have already significantly outperformed the Euro Area. Sweden’s Economic Outlook The Swedish economy will accelerate, which will put pressure on resource utilization and fan inflationary risk in the years ahead. The degree of stimulus supporting Sweden is consequential. Chart 1A Dual Labor Market On the fiscal front, the government support measures that have been announced since the beginning of the COVID-19 crisis currently amount to SEK420bn, or SEK197bn for 2020 (4% of GDP), and SEK223bn for 2021 (4.5% of GDP). Moreover, generous labor market protection and part-time employment schemes meant that the number of employees in permanent employment contracts remained stable during the pandemic (Chart 1). Thus, the bulk of the rise in Swedish unemployment came from workers on fixed-term contracts. Monetary policy remains very accommodative as well. The Riksbank left its repo rate unchanged at 0% through the crisis, but cut its lending rate from 0.75% to 0.1%. More importantly, the Swedish central bank is aggressively injecting liquidity into the economy. It set up a SEK500bn funding-for-lending facility in order to incentivize bank lending to the nonfinancial private sector, and started a SEK700bn QE program, which as of Q1 2021 had purchased SEK380bn securities and which will purchase another SEK120bn in Q2, with covered bonds issued by banks accounting for 70% of it. As a result, the amount of securities held on the Riksbank balance sheet will nearly triple by year end (Chart 2). Chart 2The Riksbank Is Open For Business Beyond the monetary and fiscal stimulus, many factors point to greater economic strength for Sweden. Despite a slow start to the process, as of last week, nearly 30% of the Swedish population had received at least one vaccine dose, which is broadly in line with vaccination rates prevalent in France or Germany. Crucially, the pace of vaccination is accelerating at a rate of 13% per week. Even if this second derivative slows, more than 70% of the population will have received at least one dose by this summer. Thus, greater mobility is in the cards during the second quarter, which will boost household spending. Chart 3The Wealth Effect The housing market also favors a pick-up in consumption. The HOX housing price index is growing at a 15% annual rate, its fastest expansion in over 5 years. As a result of the wealth effect, this rapid appreciation is consistent with a swift improvement in the growth rate of household expenditures (Chart 3). Moreover, spending on durable goods now stands 1.3% above its pre-pandemic levels, while spending on non-durables is back to pre-pandemic levels. This context suggests that increased mobility translates into greater spending. The industrial sector remains a particularly bright spot in the Swedish economy. Sweden is extremely sensitive to the global industrial and trade cycle, because exports represent 45% of GDP. Moreover, the highly cyclical intermediate and capital goods comprise 56% of the country’s foreign shipments, which accentuates the beta of the Swedish economy. BCA Research remains optimistic about the global industrial cycle. Sweden will reap a significant dividend. Already the Swedish PMI points to stronger industrial production, and the index’s exports component is roaring ahead (Chart 4). The potential for a greater uptake in consumption, capex, and durable goods spending in the rest of the EU (Sweden’s largest trading partner) bodes well for the Swedish manufacturing sector. Additionally, if the collapse in the US inventory-to-sales ratio is any indication for the rest of the world, a global restocking cycle is forthcoming, which will further boost Swedish industrial activity (Chart 4, bottom panels). Finally, global public infrastructure plans are on the rise, which will also help Sweden. Chart 4Sweden Is well Placed Chart 5Brightening Labor Market Prospects In this context, the Swedish labor market should tighten significantly in the approaching quarters. Already, job vacancies are rebounding, and redundancy notices have normalized, which matches both the GDP growth surprise in Q1 and the continued rise in the NIER Sweden Economic Tendency Indicator. Furthermore, the employment component of the PMIs stands at 58.9 and is consistent with a sharp improvement in job growth over the coming year (Chart 5). The expected labor market growth will contribute to an increase in capacity utilization, which will place upward pressure on wages and inflation. When the 12-month moving average of US and Eurozone imports rises, so does the Riksbank Resource Utilization Indicator, because global trade has such a pronounced effect on the Swedish economy (Chart 6). Meanwhile, greater resource utilization leads to accelerated inflation, greater labor shortages, and rising unit labor costs (Chart 7).  Chart 6CAPU Will Rise Chart 7The Coming Pressure Buildup Bottom Line: As a result of generous stimulus and the global economic recovery, the Swedish economy is set to continue its rebound. Consequently, employment and capacity utilization will improve meaningfully, which will lead to a resurgence of inflation and wages in the coming 24 months. Investment Implications On a 12 to 24 months horizon, we remain positive on the Swedish krona and Swedish equities. Fixed Income And FX Chart 8Three Hikes By 2025 The backend of the Swedish OIS curve only discounts 75bps of hikes by 2025. This pricing is too modest (Chart 8). The Swedish economy will rebound further as the vaccination campaign advances, and rising house prices and household indebtedness will fan growing long-term risk to financial stability, both of which suggest that the Riksbank will have to change its tack in 2022. The great likelihood that the Fed will start tapering off its asset purchase toward the end this year, that the ECB will follow sometime in 2022, and that the Norges Bank will be increasing interest rates next year will give more leeway to the Swedish central bank. A wider Sweden/Germany 10-year government bond spread is not an appealing vehicle to play a more hawkish Riksbank down the road. This spread hit a 23-year high in March and now rests at 62bps or its 98th percentile since 2000. Moreover, the terminal rate proxy embedded in the German money market curve is currently so low that the spread between Sweden’s and the Eurozone’s terminal rate proxy stands near a record high. Hence, German yields already embed much more pessimism than Swedish ones. Nonetheless, BCA recommends a below benchmark duration exposure within the Swedish fixed-income space, as we do for other government bond markets around the world.1 A bullish bias toward the SEK is a bet on the Riksbank that offers a very appealing risk/reward ratio, according to BCA Research’s Foreign Exchange Strategy strategists.2 The krona is very cheap against both the euro and the US dollar, trading at 9% and 29% discounts to purchasing power parity, respectively. Moreover, the Swedish current account stands at 5.2% of GDP, compared to 2.3% and -3.1% for the Euro Area and the US, creating a natural underpinning under the SEK. Chart 9The SEK Loves Growth Over the coming 12 to 24 months, cyclical forces favor selling EUR/SEK and USD/SEK on any strength. The SEK is one of the most cyclical G-10 currencies and has one of the strongest sensitivities to the US dollar. Hence, our positive global economic outlook and our FX strategists negative view on the greenback are synonymous with a weak USD/SEK. These same factors also mean that the krona will appreciate more than the euro, as the negative correlation between EUR/SEK and our Boom/Bust Indicator and global earnings growth illustrate (Chart 9). Equities We also like Swedish equities, but the state of the Swedish economy and the evolution of the Riksbank policy surprise have a limited impact on Swedish equities. The Swedish bourse is mostly about the evolution of the global business cycle. The Swedish benchmark heightened sensitivity to the global business cycle reflects its massive overweight in deep cyclicals, with industrials, financials, consumer discretionary, and materials accounting for 38.4%, 26.1%, 9.7% and 3.7% of the MSCI index respectively, or 78% altogether (Table 1). As a result, BCA’s preference for global cyclicals at the expense of defensives and this publication’s fondness for the recovery laggards like the industrial and financial sectors automatically translate into a favorable bias toward Sweden’s stocks.3 Table 1Mamma Mia! That’s A Lot Of Cyclicals Valuations offer a more complex picture, but they do not diminish our predilection for Sweden. Swedish equities trade at a discount to US stocks but at a premium to Euro Area ones (Chart 10). However, Swedish stocks offer higher RoEs and profit margins than both the US and the Euro Area, while also sporting lower leverage (Chart 11). Thus, their valuation premium to Euro Area stocks is warranted and their discount to US ones is excessive, especially when rising yields hurt the relative performance of the growth stocks that dominate US indexes. Chart 10Swedish Discounts And Premia Chart 11Profitable Sweden The outlook for Swedish earnings is appealing, both in absolute and relative terms. The Swedish market’s extreme sensitivity to global economic activity means that Sweden’s EPS increase and beat US profits when the Riksbank Resource Utilization Indicator expands (Chart 12). These relationships are artefacts of the Swedish economy’s pro-cyclicality, which causes capacity utilization to interweave tightly with the global business cycle (Chart 6). Chart 12The Winner Takes It All Chart 13Better Capex Play Than You Global capex and infrastructure spending favor Swedish equities compared to Euro Area ones. Over the past thirty years, Sweden’s stocks have outperformed those of the Eurozone when capital goods orders in the advanced economies have expanded (Chart 13). This reflects the Swedish benchmark’s large overweight in industrials, a sector that is the prime beneficiary of global capex. Capital goods orders are recovering well, and their growth rate can climb higher, especially as western multinationals announce capex plans and as governments from the US to Italy intend to ramp up infrastructure spending. Moreover, the large pent-up demand for durable goods in the Eurozone further enhances the potential of industrial firms, and thus, of Swedish equities.4  Chart 14Another Sign Of Pro-Cyclicality BCA Research’s positive cyclical stance on commodities offers another reason to overweight Sweden’s market relative to that of the US and the Euro Area. Our Commodity and Energy Strategy sister service anticipates significant further upside for natural resources, especially base metals, over the remainder of the business cycle.5 Commodity prices still have room to rally, because demand will grow as the global economy continues to recover and because the supply of natural resources has been constrained by a decade of low investment. As a result, rising metal prices will symptomatize strong economic activity around the world and will incentivize capex in commodity extraction, both of which will boost the revenue of industrial firms. Furthermore, commodity price inflation often corresponds with rising yields, which boosts financials as well. These relationships explain the Swedish stocks’ outperformance of US and Eurozone stocks, when natural resource prices rally, despite the former’s low exposure to materials (Chart 14). At the sector level, the appeal of Swedish industrials relative to those of the Eurozone and the US completes the rationale to favor Swedish equities in a global portfolio. Swedish industrials are just as profitable as US ones and are more so than Euro Area ones, while having significantly lower leverage than either of them (Chart 15). Additionally, for the past two years, the EPS growth of Swedish industrials has bested that of US and Eurozone ones. Yet, their forward P/E ratio trades in line with the US and the Euro Area, while the sell-side’s long-term relative earnings growth estimate is too depressed (Chart 16). The same observations are valid when comparing Swedish industrials to French or German ones. Hence, in the context of a global business cycle upswing, buying Swedish industrials while selling their US and Euro Area competitors is an appealing pair trade, especially since it also involves short USD/SEK and short EUR/SEK bets. Chart 15Attractive Swedish Industrials... Chart 16...And Not Expensive Despite our optimism toward Swedish stocks on a 12 to 24 months basis, investors must hedge a near-term risk. Chinese authorities are aiming to contain financial excesses and trying to restrain credit growth. As we showed four weeks ago, China’s excess reserve ratio is contracting, which points toward a slowdown in the Chinese credit impulse.6 Historically, such a development can hurt global cyclicals, and thus, also Swedish equities. However, BCA Research’s China strategists believe that Beijing will not kill off the Chinese business cycle; thus, the recent disappointment in the Chinese PMI is transitory.7   Chart 17Industrials vs Materials: Europe vs China Materials more than industrials will suffer the brunt of a China slowdown, as the re-opening trade and capex cycle among advanced economies will create a buffer for the latter. Indeed, the performance of global industrials relative to materials stocks correlates with the evolution of the spread between the Euro Area and Chinese PMI (Chart 17). Thus, we recommend selling Norwegian equities to hedge the tactical risk inherent in an overweight on Sweden. As Table 1 above shows, Norway overweighs materials and energy (two sectors greatly exposed to China), hence, a temporary pullback in commodity prices should hurt Norwegian stocks more than Swedish ones. Bottom Line: The SEK is an inexpensive and attractive vehicle to bet on both the global business cycle strength and the Swedish economic recovery. Thus, investors should use any rebound in EUR/SEK and USD/SEK to sell these pairs. Moreover, Swedish stocks greatly overweight cyclical sectors, particularly industrials and materials. This sectoral profile renders Swedish equities as attractive bets on the global economy. Additionally, Swedish shares display alluring operating metrics. As a result, we recommend investors go long Swedish industrials relative to those of the US and Euro Area. They should also overweight Swedish equities against the US and the Eurozone. Consequent to some China-related tactical risks, an underweight stance on Norwegian stocks constitutes an attractive hedge to this Swedish exposure. A Few Words On Italy’s National Recovery And Resilience Plan Mario Draghi’s plan to revive the Italian economy, announced last week, is an important marker of Europe’s changing relationship with fiscal policy. Last decade, excessive austerity contributed to subpar growth, ultimately firing up concerns about debt sustainability in many peripheral economies, and fueled risk premia in Italy and Spain. Under the cover of the current crisis, and in the face of the changing political winds in Brussel and Berlin where fiscal rectitude is not the mantra it once was, national European governments are beginning to propose ambitious fiscal stimulus plans. The National Recovery and Resilience program illustrates these dynamics. The EUR248bn plan is a testament to the importance of the NGEU recovery program as well as the REACT EU recovery fund. Through these facilities, the EU will contribute EUR191.5bn to the fiscal plan via grants and loans. Italy will contribute the remainder of the funds. While the total amount disbursed over the next six years corresponds to 14% of Italy’s 2019 GDP, the Draghi government estimates that the program will add 3.2 percentage points to GDP between 2024 and 2026. Importantly, markets are not rebelling. Despite expectations that Italy would continue to run an accommodative fiscal policy, the BTP/Bund spreads remain stable. We can expect this trend of greater stimulus to be mimicked around the EU. Spain is another large recipient of the NGEU program, and it too is likely to increase stimulus beyond what the EU will fund. France will hold an election in May 2022, and President Macron has all the incentives to stimulate the economy between now and then. If, as we wrote last week, Germany shifts to the left in September, then this outcome will be guaranteed. Bottom Line: The Draghi plan is the first salvo of greater fiscal stimulus in the EU. This trend will help Eurozone growth improve relative to the US over the coming few years. Despite a loose fiscal policy, BTPs and other peripheral bonds will continue to outperform on the back of declining risk premia.   Mathieu Savary, Chief European Investment Strategist Mathieu@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1Please see Global Fixed Income Strategy “GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Q1/2021 Performance Review & Current Allocations: Grand Reopening,” dated April 6, 2021, available at gfis.bcaresearch.com 2Please see Foreign Exchange Strategy “2021 Key Views: Tradeable Themes,” dated December 4, 2020, available at fes.bcaresearch.com 3Please see European Investment Strategy “Summer Of ‘21,” dated March 22, 2021, available at eis.bcaresearch.com 4Please see European Investment Strategy “Winds Of Change: Germany Goes Green,” dated April 23, 2021, available at eis.bcaresearch.com 5Please see Commodity & Energy Strategy “Industrial Commodities Super-Cycle Or Bull Market?” dated March 4, 2021, available at ces.bcaresearch.com 6Please see European Investment Strategy “The Euro Dance: One Step Back, Two Steps Forward,” dated March 29, 2021, available at eis.bcaresearch.com 7Please see China Investment Strategy “National People’s Congress Sets Tone For 2021 Growth,” dated March 17, 2021, available at cis.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

Highlights The kiwi will continue to benefit from a pandemic-free recovery and normalization in monetary policy from the RBNZ. However, the kiwi is becoming expensive according to most of our models. This will begin to impact growth via the trade channel. For the rest of the year, the NZD/USD could hit 75 cents, but will likely underperform other developed market currencies. Feature Chart I-1NZD And Relative Economic Growth New Zealand has been one of the few countries to get the COVID-19 pandemic under control in short order. Since June of last year, the number of new infections has been practically zero. The vaccination program is lagging most other developed countries, but the authorities expect most citizens will be inoculated by the end of this year. The travel bubble with Australia has opened up the service sector to a recovery that remains the envy of most other developed economies. The New Zealand dollar has responded in tandem with the improvement in domestic conditions (Chart I-1). While the USD is up this year, NZD has still appreciated by about 1% against the dollar. From the March lows last year, the kiwi is up 22%, only trailing the Australian dollar and Norwegian krone within the G10. In this report, we explore the outlook for the kiwi, looking at key drivers such as the pandemic, the commodities boom, and the prospect for monetary policy amidst a hot housing market. In our view, the NZD still faces upside, but less so than other developed market currencies. A Robust Recovery Together with Singapore and Australia, Bloomberg ranks New Zealand as one of the safest places to be during the pandemic. This has allowed the manufacturing PMI in New Zealand to hit fresh highs, easily surpassing very robust activity in the US. Relative economic performance between New Zealand and its trading partners has tended to define the trend in the currency. The services sector is still trailing behind, as most of the world remains under lockdown (Chart I-2). However, a travel bubble has opened up with Australia, and it is fair to assume that service-sector activity is a coiled spring ready to rebound, especially as tourism constitutes a non-negligible share of New Zealand GDP (Chart I-3). Chart I-2A Recovery In Services Underway Chart I-3Tourism Will Boost NZ GDP Employment in New Zealand has already seen a sizeable recovery. The unemployment rate hit 4.9% in December, very close to the Reserve Bank of New Zealand’s (RBNZ) own estimate of NAIRU. Next week’s release should show an even more robust rebound. Inflation remains well contained at 1.5%, but as the economy begins to bump against supply-side constraints, this should change. The quarterly employment survey showed that wages are rising at a 4% clip. Eventually, a labour market that has fully recovered, burgeoning inflationary pressures and an economy open for business will mean the need for the RBNZ to maintain emergency monetary policy settings will be eliminated. A Terms-Of-Trade Boom While the domestic economy has benefited from strong government support, and very accommodative monetary policy settings, the external environment has also provided a gentle tailwind for the New Zealand economy. Over the last few decades, one of the key primary drivers of the NZD exchange rate has been terms of trade. New Zealand’s top exports are predominantly in agricultural commodities. Strong export growth has boosted the trade balance, both in volume and price terms (Chart I-4). An increasing trade balance naturally means that NZDs are being buffeted with demand. China has led the pack in imports from New Zealand vis-à-vis other countries by simple virtue of the fact that the authorities started injecting stimulus much earlier on, which helped ease domestic financing conditions. China is also New Zealand’s biggest export market. While the credit impulse in China is set to slow this year, demand for foodstuffs is less sensitive compared to demand for other higher-beta commodities. This will support New Zealand exports. At the same time, there has been a supply component to the boom in agricultural commodity prices. Adverse weather has impacted the planting season for many agricultural goods. As a result, stock-to-use ratios have begun to roll over, particularly in some of the goods that New Zealand exports (Chart I-5). This is likely to reverse, as farmers take advantage of higher prices and increase productivity. Chart I-4A Terms Of Trade ##br##Boom Chart I-5Falling Stocks Have Boosted Agricultural Prices In a nutshell, the outperformance of the kiwi has been a combination of supply shocks in the agricultural market, and an economy that has had an impressive rebound. Going forward, the kiwi should continue to do well versus the dollar as economic momentum picks up. The Housing Mandate Housing prices in New Zealand have been on a tear (Chart I-6). As a result, the government has mandated that house price considerations be tied into monetary policy decisions. The direct implication of this is that interest rates in New Zealand are set to increase. In the coming months, the labor market mandate for the RBNZ is about to become a lot tougher, because of the opposing forces between financial and economic stability. Tightening monetary policy too fast and too soon will expose the economy to a potential relapse in growth. But allowing housing prices to continue to become unaffordable for most residents is both politically untenable and economically unsustainable. The end game is likely to be as follows: The RBNZ will be quick to tighten monetary policy on domestic grounds and housing market concerns. This will provide a further boost to the kiwi. Yields in New Zealand are already among the highest in the G10, which will only accelerate with tighter monetary conditions. By the same token, the Chinese economy will likely slow as the credit impulse is peaking. This means New Zealand domestic growth will become more important for the NZD than external conditions. Countries with relatively easier monetary policy will see some benefit. Particularly, the Reserve Bank of Australia might lag the RBNZ. If this eventually benefits the Aussie economy, it might hurt the AUD/NZD cross now, but might make way for fresh long positions later (Chart I-7). Chart I-6A Housing Market Boom Chart I-7Where Next For AUD/NZD? Historically, housing prices in New Zealand have correlated quite strongly with the exchange rate. If the RBNZ is successful in engineering lower housing prices, it will also succeed in weakening the NZD (Chart I-8). Chart I-8House Prices And The Kiwi We were stopped out of our long AUD/NZD trade last week for a modest profit of 2.3%. We are standing aside for the time being, but will be buyers of the cross at 1.05. This will likely be realized towards the end of this year when optimism on the kiwi is likely to peak. How High Can The NZD Bounce? Another reason why the rise in the NZD might soon face strong upside resistance is valuation. Usually, a rise in the NZD over a cycle goes uninterrupted until the cross becomes expensive. On this basis, the kiwi might soon peak. Our purchasing power parity (PPP) models point to a 10% overvaluation in the New Zealand dollar (Chart I-9) versus the USD. Chart I-9The NZD Is Expensive One of our favorite metrics for the kiwi’s fair value is its real effective exchange rate relative to its terms of trade. On this basis, the New Zealand dollar is around fair value. On a longer-term real effective exchange rate basis (REER), the kiwi is 7.4% expensive, or 0.7 standard deviation above the mean (Chart I-10). Chart I-10The NZD Is Expensive The equity market in New Zealand looks particularly vulnerable. Heavily weighted in defensive sectors, this bourse will be particularly vulnerable to a rise in yields that will derail potential equity inflows (Chart I-11). Chart I-11Kiwi Stocks Are Expensive Chart I-12CHF/NZD Could Rise With Volatility Another opportunity is to buy the CHF/NZD cross, which looks attractive at current levels (Chart I-12). Should markets experience some form of turbulence, the cross will benefit. Meanwhile, CHF/NZD just dipped to the upward sloping trend line that has dictated support levels for this cross since 2007. Thus, we recommend investors initiate a long position in CHF/NZD.   Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com Currencies U.S. Dollar Chart II-1USD Technicals 1 Chart II-2USD Technicals 2 The data out of the US were mildly positive this week. Quarter-on-quarter annualized GDP growth came in at 6.4% in Q1, rising from 4.3% in the previous quarter. Initial jobless claims fell to 553K in the week ended April 23, from 566K the previous week. Consumer Confidence for April came in at 121.7 beating the expected 113. The S&P/Case-Shiller House Price Index rose 11.9% year-on-year in February. Fed maintained the target range for the Fed Funds rate at 0 to 0.25%. The US dollar DXY index was flat this week. Although the dollar advanced earlier in the week with treasury yields posting small gains, it weakened on Wednesday ahead of the Fed meeting. Compared to the record-breaking preliminary PMIs of last Friday, milder data this week and the dovish tone of the Fed aren’t helping the downward trend of the dollar. Report Links: Arbitrating Between Dollar Bulls And Bears - March 19, 2021 The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - March 5, 2021 Are Rising Bond Yields Bullish For The Dollar? - February 19, 2021 The Euro Chart II-3EUR Technicals 1 Chart II-4EUR Technicals 2 Recent euro area data have been soft. The IFO Business Climate Index inched up only 0.2 points to 96.8 and disappointed expectations of a much more significant increase to 97.8.  The BNB Business Barometer of Belgium surprised to the upside and jumped to a decade high of 4.4 from a revised 1.04. The German GfK Consumer Confidence contracted to -8.8 for May and the French Consumer Confidence stayed the same in April. The euro strengthened by 0.5% against the US dollar this week. The uneven data out of Europe reflects differences in COVID restrictions throughout the region. Tighter measures were announced in some German regions and Belgium is easing restrictions. However, overall, we remain optimistic on the outlook for the entire region as the accelerating vaccination effort should support the economy reopening this summer. We are long EUR/CHF. Report Links: Relative Growth, The Euro, And The Loonie - April 16, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 On Japanese Inflation And The Yen - January 29, 2021 The Japanese Yen Chart II-5JPY Technicals 1 Chart II-6JPY Technicals 2 The data out of Japan was scant this week. Bank of Japan maintained interest rates at -0.1%. Retail Sales in March grew 5.2% year-on-year, beating forecasts of 4.7%. The Japanese yen weakened by 0.5% this week. Due to the current state of emergency throughout the country, the Bank of Japan is ready to further ease monetary policy as needed and warned of the likelihood for consumption to stay depressed. That said, our intermediate term indicator is hinting at a rebound in the currency. Report Links: The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - March 5, 2021 On Japanese Inflation And The Yen - January 29, 2021 The Dollar Conundrum And Protection - November 6, 2020 British Pound Chart II-7GBP Technicals 1 Chart II-8GBP Technicals 2 The data out of the UK this week was positive. The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) retail sales volume balance rose to 20 in April from -45 in March, recording the sharpest growth since 2018. The British pound rose by 0.7% against the US dollar this week. The strong retail sales numbers came amidst lockdowns being lifted. While May will continue to see further restrictions eased, cable faces threats from its own success so far this year as well as UK’s recent political turmoil. Also, both the speculative positioning and our intermediate-term indicator are at elevated levels.  Report Links: Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 The Dollar Conundrum And Protection - November 6, 2020 Revisiting Our High-Conviction Trades - September 11, 2020 Australian Dollar Chart II-9AUD Technicals 1 Chart II-10AUD Technicals 2 The data out of Australia have been soft lately. CPI in Q1 rose 0.6% versus Q4 last year, below the expected 0.9%. The year-on-year growth of 1.1% also undershot the 1.4% forecast. Trimmed mean CPI grew 0.3% on the prior quarter and 1.1% versus a year ago, both failing to beat expectations.  The Q1 export price index rose 11.2% over the prior quarter, compared to the 5.5% rise in Q4. The Australian dollar rose by 1% against the US dollar this week. In addition to both CPI measures disappointing to the downside, a foreseeable peak in the commodity market driven by the slowdown in China can also be a downward drag on the currency especially when the sentiment on the Aussie is elevated. We are short AUD/MXN and were stopped out of our long AUD/NZD trade. Report Links: The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - March 5, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Australia: Regime Change For Bond Yields & The Currency? - January 20, 2021 New Zealand Dollar Chart II-11NZD Technicals 1 Chart II-12NZD Technicals 2 The data out of New Zealand have been neutral. Trade Balance in March improved by NZD 33M over a month ago and NZD 1690M a year ago.  ANZ business confidence came in at -2 in April, higher than the -4.1 the prior month. The New Zealand dollar strengthened by 1% against the US dollar this week. We discuss the kiwi at length in the front section of this week’s report. The conclusion is that NZD faces near-term upside, but will lag other procyclical currencies over the longer term. Report Links: Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Currencies And The Value-Versus-Growth Debate - July 10, 2020 Updating Our Balance Of Payments Monitor - November 29, 2019 Canadian Dollar Chart II-13CAD Technicals 1 Chart II-14CAD Technicals 2 The data out of Canada this week continue to be positive. Both Retail Sales and Core Retail Sales in February grew 4.8% over the prior month, comfortably exceeding the expectations of 3.7% and 4% growth, respectively. The Canadian dollar rose 0.8% against the US dollar this week. The loonie reacted positively to the strong retail numbers as it continues its path upward on strong inflation data of recent months and a hawkish Bank of Canada. However, even as the COVID case count appears to have peaked, there remains downside risks of very elevated commodity prices and our intermediate-term indicator still just off a recent peak. Report Links: Relative Growth, The Euro, And The Loonie - April 16, 2021 Will The Canadian Recovery Lead Or Lag The Global Cycle? - February 12, 2021 Currencies And The Value-Versus-Growth Debate - July 10, 2020 Swiss Franc Chart II-15CHF Technicals 1 Chart II-16CHF Technicals 2 There was scant data out of Switzerland this week. ZEW expectations for April came in at 68.3, slightly higher than the 66.7 from the prior month. The Swiss franc rose 0.4% against the US dollar this week. While the waning of investors’ sentiment and net speculative positioning may point to some softening in the near term, the recent COVID crisis in India can provide support to this risk-off currency. We are long EUR/CHF. Report Links: Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 The Dollar Conundrum And Protection - November 6, 2020 On The DXY Breakout, Euro, And Swiss Franc - February 21, 2020 Norwegian Krone Chart II-17NOK Technicals 1 Chart II-18NOK Technicals 2 The data out of Norway this week was positive. Core Retail Sales came in unchanged in March versus the prior month, but beat expectations of a 0.9% decline. The Norwegian krone was 0.8% higher against the USD this week. Norway fits the bill in terms of a post-pandemic boom. New COVID-19 cases are under control, the economy is rebounding, oil prices are strong and the central bank is on a path the raise interest rates this year. Being long the NOK is one of our strongest convictions calls in FX. We are long NOK/USD and NOK/EUR. Report Links: Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Revisiting Our High-Conviction Trades - September 11, 2020 A New Paradigm For Petrocurrencies - April 10, 2020 Swedish Krona Chart II-19SEK Technicals 1 Chart II-20SEK Technicals 2 Data out of Sweden this week have been mixed.  The Riksbank maintained the policy rate at 0%. Trade Balance in March came in at SEK4.1B versus SEK6B in the prior month. Retail sales in March grew by 2.6% month-on-month and 9.1% year-on-year, both an improvement versus the prior period. The unemployment rate in March rose to 10% versus 9.7% the prior month. The Swedish Krona strengthened 0.5% against the US dollar this week, continuing its upward momentum throughout April. The recent accommodative signals from the Riksbank meeting were within expectations amidst elevated COVID case counts and restrictions. Despite its commendable gains so far this month, we remain optimistic on this high beta currency as the eurozone recovery and global reflation are in sight. Report Links: Revisiting Our High-Conviction Trades - September 11, 2020 Updating Our Balance Of Payments Monitor - November 29, 2019 Where To Next For The US Dollar? - June 7, 2019 Trades & Forecasts Forecast Summary Core Portfolio Tactical Trades Limit Orders Closed Trades

Highlights Developed economies continue to transition towards a post-pandemic state. Europe has further to go, but it is lagging the US at a constant rate and is thus merely delayed – not on a different path. This ongoing transition is also reflected in the global macro data, which continues to surprise to the upside. Widespread optimism about the outlook for economic activity and earnings over the coming year has led some investors to ask whether an imminent peak in the rate of growth could be a potentially negative inflection point for richly valued risky asset prices. Using our global leading economic indicator as a guide, we find that a peak in growth momentum in and of itself is not likely to be enough of a catalyst for meaningful risky asset underperformance versus government bonds. A sizeable shock to sentiment would likely be required, causing either a very serious growth slowdown, outright fears of recession, or some other event that negatively impacts earnings growth or raises the equity risk premium (“ERP”). We can identify several candidates for such a shock, including the emergence of new, vaccine-resistant variants of COVID-19, the impact of higher taxes on earnings, overtightening in China, and a potentially hawkish shift in monetary policy in the developed world. But none of these risks individually appears to be likely enough to warrant reducing cyclical portfolio exposure. We continue to expect positive absolute single-digit returns from stocks over the coming 6-12 months, and would recommend that investors remain overweight stocks versus bonds in a multi-asset portfolio. We remain overweight global ex-US equities vs. the US, but expect that euro area stocks will have to do the heavy lifting, driven either by the underperformance of global technology stocks or the outperformance of euro area financials. Within a fixed-income portfolio, we recommend a modestly short duration stance, but do so primarily on a risk-adjusted basis. Feature Chart I-1Europe Is Behind The US, But On The Same Path Over the past month, developed economies have continued to transition towards a post-pandemic state. While the number of new confirmed COVID-19 cases remains relatively high on a per capita basis in the US and Europe, there continues to be significant progress on the vaccination front in all Western advanced economies. Europe continues to lag the US and the UK in terms of the share of the population that has received at least one dose of vaccine, but Chart I-1 highlights that the gap has remained constant at approximately six weeks (to the US). Panel 2 of Chart I-1 highlights that the US and UK both experienced either falling or a stable number of new cases once the number of first doses reached current European levels; Israel required significant further gains in the breadth of vaccinations before it altered COVID-19’s transmission dynamics in that country, but this appears to have occurred because of a much higher pace of spread earlier this year. The negative impact on advanced economies from reduced services activity is strongly linked to pandemic control measures (such as stay-at-home orders, curfews, forced business closures, etc). We have argued that, outside of the US, the implementation and removal of these measures is being driven by the impact of the pandemic on the medical system, rather than the sheer number of new cases and deaths. Chart I-2 highlights that, based on this framework, Europe still has further to go – current per capita hospitalizations remain much higher in France and Italy than in the US, UK, or Canada. But the nature of the disease means that hospitalizations begin to fall even if case counts remain relatively stable, and fall rapidly once new cases trend lower. Given the steady gains that European countries are making in providing first vaccine doses to their populations, it seems likely that hospitalizations there will peak sometime in the coming four to six weeks. This underscores that Europe is not on a different path than that of the US, it is simply further behind in the process (and will ultimately catch up). The transition towards a post-pandemic state is also reflected in the global macro data, which continues to positively surprise in all three major economies (Chart I-3). In Europe, the April services PMI rose back above the 50 mark, April consumer confidence surprised to the upside, and February retail sales came in better than expected (Table I-1). In the US, the March services PMI was also very strong, the labor market continued to meaningfully improve, and several measures of inflation surprised to the upside. Chart I-2Euro Area Hospitalizations Remain High, But Will Soon Decline Chart I-3The Macro Data Continues To Positively Surprise   Table I-1Services PMIs And The Labor Market Continue To Meaningfully Improve Chart I-4China's Current Contribution To Global Demand Is Strong In China, the recent tick higher in the surprise index likely reflects the recognition of some data series whose release was delayed due to the Chinese New Year, as well as significant base effects (compared with Q1 2020) in many data series recorded in year-over-year terms. On a quarter-over-quarter basis, Chinese economic activity decelerated last quarter to 0.6% from the upwardly revised 3.2% in Q4 2020 – which was below the anticipated 1.4% q/q. Still, Chinese RMB-denominated import growth closely matches (lagging) data on global exports to China (in US$ terms), with the former suggesting that China’s current contribution to global external demand remains strong (Chart I-4). This is also consistent with rising producer prices, which had fallen back into deflationary territory last year (panel 2). Peaking Growth Momentum: Should Investors Be Worried? The continued increase in the number of vaccine doses administered, positive data surprises, and bullish global growth forecasts for this year have understandably led to extremely optimistic investor sentiment. It has also naturally raised the question of “what could go wrong?”, with some investors pointing to an imminent peak in the rate of growth as a potentially negative inflection point for richly valued risky asset prices. Chart I-5 addresses this question by examining 12 episodes of waning growth momentum since 1990, defined as an identifiable peak in our global leading economic indicator. Panel 2 shows the 12-month rate of change in the relative performance of global equities versus a US$-hedged 7-10 year global Treasury index. Chart I-5Is Peaking Growth Momentum A Risk For Stocks? At first blush, the chart does support the notion that a peak in growth momentum is generally negative for risky asset prices. The subsequent 12-month relative return from stocks versus bonds following a peak in the LEI has been negative in 8 out of the 12 episodes, suggesting that the risks of an equity correction are currently quite elevated. However, there is more to the story than this simple calculation implies (Table I-2). First, two of the twelve episodes saw the global LEI peak in the context of an eventual US recession, so it is not surprising that stocks underperformed bonds in those episodes. Second, out of the six non-recessionary episodes, only two of them involved significant underperformance, in 2002 and in 2015. Table I-2Peak Growth Momentum Is An Insufficient Catalyst For Equity Underperformance US equities underperformed in the former case because of the persistently damaging impact of corporate excesses that built up during the dot-com bubble, and predominantly global ex-US equities underperformed bonds in the latter case because of a combination of the significant impact on global CAPEX from the 2014 dollar and oil price shock, as well as a major decline in global bond yields. In the four other non-recessionary examples of equity underperformance, stocks only modestly underperformed bonds, and often this occurred in the context of significant events: surprising Fed hawkishness in 1994, the Asian financial crisis in 1997, a major slowdown in China in 2013, and the combination of a domestically-driven Chinese economic slowdown coupled with the Sino/US trade war in 2017/2018. The key point for investors is that a peak in growth momentum is in and of itself not enough of a catalyst for meaningful risky asset underperformance versus government bonds. A sizeable shock to sentiment would likely be required, causing either a very serious growth slowdown, outright fears of recession, or some other event that negatively impacts earnings growth or raises the equity risk premium (“ERP”). What Else Could Go Wrong? There are four other plausible risks that we can identify to a bullish stance towards risky assets over the coming 6-12 months. We discuss each of these risks below. New COVID-19 Variants Chart I-6 highlights that bottom up analysts expect global earnings per share to be 12% higher than their pre-pandemic level in 12-months’ time. This expectation is driven by extraordinarily easy fiscal and monetary policy, but also the view that vaccination against COVID-19 will allow social distancing policies to end and services activity to fully recover. However, as India is clearly – and tragically – demonstrating at present, the emerging world is lagging in terms of vaccinating its population. India’s per capita case count has soared (Chart I-7), which is surprising given that the country’s COVID-19 infection rate has been significantly below that of more advanced economies over the past year. It is therefore likely that India’s case count explosion is due to new variants of the disease, and periodic outbreaks in less developed countries – as well as vaccine hesitancy in more developed economies – risks the emergence of even newer variants that may be partially or substantially vaccine-resistant. Chart I-6Earnings Expectations Already Price In A Normalization In Services Activity Chart I-7India's COVID-19 Situation Is Tragic, And Concerning   New variants of COVID-19 may prove to be less deadly, but the economic impact of the pandemic has come mainly from its potential to collapse the medical system via high rates of serious illness requiring hospitalization, not strictly from its lethality. As such, potentially new vaccine-resistant variants of the disease resulting in similar or higher rates of hospitalization pose a risk to a bullish economic outlook. Taxation Both corporate and individual tax rates are set to rise in the US over the coming 12-18 months which, at first blush, could certainly qualify as a non-recessionary event that negatively impacts earnings or raises the ERP. Corporate taxes are set to rise first as part of the American Jobs Plan, which our political strategists have argued will probably take the Biden administration most of this year to pass. The plan involves a proposed increase in the domestic corporate income tax rate to 28% from 21%, a higher minimum tax on foreign profits, and a 15% minimum tax on “book income”. In addition, as part of the American Families Plan, Biden is proposing to increase the top marginal income tax rate for households earning $400,000 or more to 39.6% (from 37%), and to substantially increase the capital gains tax rate for those earning $1 million or more from a base rate of 20% to 39.6%. The 3.8% tax on investment income that funds Obamacare would be kept in place, which would bring the total capital gain tax rate to 43.4% for that income group. Peter Berezin, BCA’s Chief Global Strategist, made two points about higher corporate taxes in a recent report.1 First, he noted that the changes would likely result in an 8% decline in forward earnings if passed as currently proposed, but that various tax credits as well as opposition to a 28% corporate tax rate from Democratic Senator Joe Manchin would likely cap the impact at 5%. Second, he argued that the behavior of 12-month forward earnings and the performance of stocks that benefitted the most from President Trump’s corporate tax cuts suggest that very little impact from these changes has been priced in. Peter argued in his report that the effect of strong economic growth will likely offset the negative impact of higher taxes on earnings, and we are inclined to agree. Chart I-8 highlights that a 5% reduction in 12-month forward earnings would reduce the equity risk premium by roughly 20-25 basis points, which would not be disastrous on its own. Still, the fact that these changes have not been priced in means that corporate tax hikes could be a more meaningful driver of lower stock prices if the impact is ultimately larger than we currently expect or if the growth outlook suddenly shifts in a negative direction. In terms of changes to individual taxes, our sense is that the proposed increase in the capital gains tax rate is more significant than the modest proposed change to the top marginal income tax rate for higher-income households. For individuals earning $1 million or more, Chart I-9 highlights that the proposed change to the capital gains rate would bring it to the highest level seen since the late 1970s. Given the rich valuation of equities, it seems inconceivable that such a change would not trigger some short-term selling of equities to lock in long-term gains at lower tax rates. Chart I-8Higher Corporate Taxes Will Only Modestly Reduce the Equity Risk Premium Chart I-9Biden's Capital Gains Tax Proposal Would Lead To Some Selling Of Stocks...   But like upcoming changes to corporate taxes, we see the potential for higher taxes on wealthy individuals as a risk to the equity market and not as a likely driver of stock prices over a cyclical time horizon. First, our political strategists see 50/50 odds that the American Families Plan will be passed this year, meaning that short-term tax avoidance selling may be postponed until 2022. In addition, Chart I-10 highlights that over the longer term, the relationship between the maximum capital gains tax rate and the ERP is weak or nonexistent. The chart highlights that the perception of a positive relationship rests entirely on the second half of the 1970s, when the maximum capital gains tax rate was between 30-40%. However, it seems clear from the chart that the stagflationary environment of that period was responsible for a high ERP, as the capital gains rate fell from 1977 to 1982 without any significant decline in risk premia. It took until the end of the 1982 recession and the beginning of the structural disinflationary period for the equity risk premium to decline, suggesting that there is effectively no relationship between the two (and therefore no reason to believe that higher capital gains taxes will lead to sustained declines in stock market multiples). Chart I-10…But The Effect Would Not Likely Last Overtightening In China Chart I-11Leading Indicators Of China's Economy Are Pointing Down, Not Up Even though Chart I-4 highlighted that Chinese import demand is currently strong, we expect China’s growth impulse to weaken in the second half of the year. Chart I-11 highlights that our leading indicator for China’s Li Keqiang index has done a good job of predicting Chinese import growth, and the indicator is now in a clear downtrend. Panel 2 presents the components of the indicator, and shows that all three are trending lower. Monetary conditions are potentially rebounding from extremely weak levels (due to past deflation and a rise in the RMB versus the US dollar and other Asian currencies), but money supply and credit measures are deteriorating. Leading indicators for China’s economy are deteriorating because Chinese policymakers have already tightened liquidity conditions in response to the country’s rebound from the pandemic and following a surge in the credit impulse. The 3-month repo rate returned to pre-pandemic levels in the second half of last year (Chart I-12), and consequently the private sector credit impulse (particularly that of corporate bond issuance) fell despite robust medium-to-long term loan growth. Chart I-12Chinese Interest Rates Have Already Returned To Pre-COVID Levels We noted in our January report that China’s credit impulse has consistently followed a 3½-year cycle since 2010, and this year has been no different. This cycle is not exogenous or mystical; it has been caused by the repeated “oversteering” of activity by Chinese policymakers who frequently oscillate between the need to fight deflation and the strong desire to curb additional private sector leveraging. Our base case view is that policymakers will not accidentally overtighten the economy, and that the credit impulse will settle somewhere between late 2019 levels and the peak rate reached in the latter half of last year. But the risk of significant oversteering cannot be ruled out, and will likely remain a downcycle risk for investors for several years to come. A Hawkish Shift In Monetary Policy In Developed Markets Last week the Bank of Canada announced that it would taper its pace of government debt purchases from 4 billion to 3 billion CAD per week. The announcement was noteworthy for many investors, as it suggested that asset purchase reductions could also be announced by the Fed and other major central banks by the end of the second or third quarter. Many investors are sensitive to the tapering question because of what transpired during the “Taper Tantrum” episode of 2013. During an appearance before Congress in late May of that year, then Chair Ben Bernanke stated that the Fed could “step down” the pace of its asset purchases in the next few FOMC meetings if economic conditions continued to improve. The result was that 10-year Treasurys fell roughly 10% in total return terms over the subsequent three-month period. While stocks rallied in response to the growth-positive implications of the move, this occurred from a much higher ERP starting point than exists today. The risk, in the minds of some investors, is that tapering today could thus lead to a correction in stock prices. There are two counterpoints to this view. First, bonds have already sold off meaningfully over the past several months in response to a significant improvement in the economic outlook, and investors already expect the Fed to raise interest rates earlier than it is publicly forecasting. It is thus difficult to see how an announcement of tapering from the Fed would significantly alter the outlook for monetary policy over the coming 6-18 months. Chart I-13Another Taper Tantrum-Like Selloff Would Necessitate Higher Expectations For R-star Second, it is notable that the “Taper Tantrum” began at yield levels at the front end of the curve that are roughly similar to what prevails today. 5-year/5-year forward bond yields stood at roughly 3% at the beginning of the “Tantrum”, compared with 2.3% today. Chart I-13 highlights how high forward bond yields would need to rise in order to generate another selloff of similar magnitude from 10-year Treasury yields (roughly 3.65%). In our view, a rise to this level over the coming year is essentially impossible without a major shift in investor expectations about the natural rate of interest. We highlighted the risk of such a shift in last month’s report,2 but for now it would likely necessitate hard evidence of little-to-no permanent damage to the labor market from the pandemic. This is not our base case view, but it will be an important possibility to monitor as the decisive end to social distancing and other pandemic control measures draws nearer. Investment Conclusions As noted above, there are several identifiable risks to a bullish outlook for risky assets, but none of these risks individually appear to be likely. Given this, we continue to expect positive absolute single-digit returns from stocks over the coming 6-12 months, and would recommend that investors remain overweight stocks versus bonds in a multi-asset portfolio. We favor value versus growth stocks, cyclical versus defensive sectors, and small versus large cap stocks, although there is more return potential over the coming year in value versus growth than the latter two positions. We also remain short the US dollar over a cyclical time horizon. Within a global equity portfolio, we remain overweight global ex-US equities vs the US, but this position has moved against us over the past two months. Chart I-14 highlights that global ex-US equities have given back all of their October – January gains versus US equities, most of which has occurred since late-February. The chart also highlights that all of this underperformance has been driven by emerging market stocks, as euro area equity performance has been mostly stable year-to-date. Chart I-15 highlights that EM underperformance has occurred both in the broadly-defined tech sector as well as when measured in ex-tech terms. To us, this suggests that EM stocks are responding to the deterioration in leading indicators for the Chinese economy that we noted above, which implies that they are not likely to lead global ex-US equity performance higher over the course of the year barring an imminent shift in Chinese policy. We continue to expect that euro area stocks will have to do the heavy lifting, driven either by the underperformance of global technology stocks or the outperformance of euro area financials – which are extremely cheap relative to US banks and have much further scope for earnings to normalize as the pandemic draws to a close. Chart I-14Emerging Markets Have Caused Global Ex-US Stocks To Underperform Chart I-15EM's Underperformance Has Been Broad-Based   As a final point, investors should note that we are recommending a modestly short duration stance within a fixed-income portfolio, but that we make this recommendation primarily on a risk-adjusted basis. Chart I-16 highlights that Treasury market excess returns (relative to cash) have historically been driven by whether the Fed funds rate increases by more or less than what is currently priced into the market. Over the past 12 months, the Treasury index has very substantially underperformed cash without a hawkish surprise, and the rate path that is currently implied by the OIS curve is already more hawkish than the Fed is (for now) projecting. On this basis, a neutral duration stance could be justified, but we would still prefer a modestly short duration stance due to the risk of a potential increase in investor expectations for the neutral rate of interest late this year or in early 2022. Chart I-16Policy Rate Surprises Tend To Drive The Duration Call Jonathan LaBerge, CFA Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst April 29, 2021 Next Report: May 27, 2021   II. In COVID’s Wake: Government Debt And The Path Of Interest Rates The US fiscal outlook has deteriorated substantially over the past two decades, as a consequence of the fiscal response to both the global financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic. US government debt-to-GDP is now nearly as high as it was at the end of the Second World War, and is projected by the US Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to explode higher over the coming 30 years. Some investors argue that extreme levels of government debt now virtually guarantee that interest rates will remain structurally low, and we test this claim alongside a scenario that limits the projected rise in the primary deficit. We find that US fiscal reform, when it eventually occurs, will likely be negative for health care stocks. We also note that even in a scenario where the US limits the size of its future primary budget deficit, net interest outlays will likely rise to elevated levels compared to history. A comparison with the Canadian experience in the 1990s suggests a structurally negative outlook for the US dollar, from an overvalued starting point. Finally, we note that the US fiscal outlook does not necessarily prevent an increase in interest rates over the coming few years in a scenario where investors raise their expectations for the neutral rate of interest, a possibility that we discussed in last month’s report. This scenario is not our base case view, but it is plausible and should actively be monitored by investors over the coming one to two years. For now, we do not expect that rising interest rates pose a risk to stocks over the coming 6-12 months. Investors should remain cyclically overweight equities within a multi-asset portfolio, and should maintain a below-benchmark level of duration on a risk-adjusted basis. In 2001, US government debt held by the public as a share of GDP stood at 31.5%, after having fallen roughly 16 percentage points from early 1993 levels. Today, as a result of both the global financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, the debt to GDP ratio has risen to a whopping 100%, and is projected to rise meaningfully higher over the coming decades. In this report we review the long-term US fiscal outlook in the wake of the pandemic, with a focus on the implications for interest rates. Some investors argue that extreme levels of government debt now virtually guarantee that interest rates will remain structurally low, and we test this claim alongside a scenario that limits the projected rise in the primary deficit. We find that US fiscal reform, when it eventually occurs, will likely be negative for health care stocks, whose fundamental performance has outstripped that of the broad equity market since the mid-1990s (reflecting pricing power that stands to be curtailed through regulation). We also note that even in a scenario where the US limits the size of its future primary budget deficit, net interest outlays will likely rise to elevated levels compared to history. A comparison with the Canadian experience in the 1990s suggests a structurally negative outlook for the US dollar, from an overvalued starting point. Finally, we note that the US fiscal outlook does not necessarily prevent an increase in interest rates over the coming few years in the hypothetical scenario that we described in last month’s report,3 i.e., an environment where the narrative of secular stagnation is challenged and investor expectations for the neutral rate rise closer to trend rates of economic growth. This scenario is not our base case view, but it is plausible and should actively be monitored by investors over the coming one to two years. For now, investors should remain cyclically overweight equities within a multi-asset portfolio, and should maintain a below-benchmark level of duration on a risk-adjusted basis. Debt Sustainability, And The CBO’s Baseline Projection When analyzing the US fiscal outlook, the Congressional Budget Office’s Long-Term Budget Outlook report is typically the reference point for investors. The report provides annual projections for the budget deficit and the debt-to-GDP ratio for the next three decades, as well as a breakdown of the projected deficit into its primary (i.e., non-interest) and net interest components. Charts II-1 and II-2 present the most recent baseline projections from the CBO, which clearly present a dire long-term outlook. The deficit and debt-to-GDP ratio are projected to be relatively stable over the next decade, but explode higher over the subsequent 20 years. In 2051, the CBO’s baseline projects that the budget deficit will be roughly 13% of GDP, with net interest costs accounting for approximately two-thirds of the deficit. Chart II-1The CBO’s Fiscal Outlook Is Extremely Negative Chart II-2In 2051, The CBO Projects A 13% Annual Budget Deficit In order to understand what is driving the CBO’s dire long-term budget and debt forecast, it is important to review the government debt sustainability equation shown below. The equation highlights that the change in a government’s debt-to-GDP ratio is approximately equal to 1) the primary deficit plus 2) net interest costs as a share of GDP, the latter being defined as the product of last year’s debt-to-GDP ratio and the difference between the average interest rate on the debt and the rate of GDP growth. Δ Debt-To-GDP Ratio ≈ Primary Deficit As A % Of GDP4 + (r-g)*(Prior Period Debt-To-GDP Ratio) Where: r = Average interest rate on government debt and g = Nominal GDP growth The equation highlights that expectations of a persistently rising debt-to-GDP ratio must occur either because of expectations of a persistent primary deficit, or expectations that interest rates will persistently exceed the rate of economic growth (or some combination of the two). This underscores why debt sustainability analysis often focuses on the primary budget balance, as a country’s debt-to-GDP ratio will be stable if no primary deficit exists and interest costs are at or below the prevailing rate of economic growth. Chart II-3 illustrates the source of the CBO’s projected rise in debt-to-GDP beyond 2031, by presenting the two components of the debt sustainability equation alongside the projected annual change in the debt-to-GDP ratio. The chart makes it clear that while the CBO is forecasting a sizeable primary deficit to continue, it is projected to grow at a slower pace than the debt-to-GDP ratio itself. The increasing rate at which the debt-to-GDP ratio is projected to grow in the latter years of the CBO’s forecast period is clearly driven by the interest rate component, meaning that “r” is projected to be greater than “g”. Chart II-4 presents this point directly, by highlighting that the CBO is forecasting the average interest rate on government debt to exceed that of nominal GDP growth in 2038, and to continue to exceed growth (by an increasing amount) thereafter. Chart II-3Decomposing The CBO's Projected Change In The Debt-To-GDP Ratio Chart II-4The CBO's Projections Rest, In Part, On Rates Eventually Exceeding Growth   Three Adjustments To The CBO’s Baseline We make three adjustments to the CBO’s baseline in order to assess how the US fiscal outlook shifts under an interest rate path that is different than that projected by the CBO. First, we adjust the CBO’s projected budget deficit over the coming few years based on deficit forecasts from our US Political Strategy service following the passage of the American Recovery Plan act.5 Chart II-5We Test The Effect Of An Initially Higher, But More Sustainable, Rate Path Next, we adjust the interest component of the total budget deficit based on a new path for short- and long-term interest rates that models a scenario in which the neutral rate of interest rises to, but not above, GDP growth (Chart II-5). In last month’s report we outlined a scenario in which this could feasibly occur,3 and the hypothetical path for interest rates shown in Chart II-5 thus incorporates both the negative budgetary impact of an earlier rise in interest rates and the positive budgetary impact of “r” never rising above “g”. We explicitly exclude any crowding out effect on long-term interest rates, based on the view that term premia are likely to remain muted in a world of low potential economic growth, unless a fiscal crisis appears to be imminent (see Box II-1). Box II-1 Arguing Against The CBO’s Crowding Out Assumption The CBO’s projection that interest rates will ultimately rise above the rate of economic growth rests on the view that increased government spending will absorb savings that would otherwise finance private investment (a “crowding out” effect). We agree that crowding out can occur over the course of the business cycle, especially in a scenario where increased government spending pushes output above its potential (creating a cyclical acceleration in inflation and eventually an increase in interest rates). But the CBO is assuming that high government debt-to-GDP ratios will crowd out private investment on a structural basis, and on this basis we disagree. First, Chart Box II-1 highlights that there is essentially no empirical relationship across countries between a country’s debt-to-GDP ratio and its long-term government bond yield. Japan is a clear outlier in the chart, but including Japan implies that the relationship is negative, not positive. Chart Box II-1There Is No Empirical Relationship Between Debt-To-GDP And Interest Rates In addition, given that central banks directly control interest rates at the short-end of the curve, a structural crowding out effect can only manifest itself in the form of an elevated term premium embedded in longer-term government bond yields. Our bet is that term premia are likely to stay low in a world of low falling nominal growth, as evidenced by the experience of the past decade.6 Finally, we model the impact of two changes, beginning in 2031, that would work towards reducing the primary deficit: an increase in average government revenue to 20% of GDP (its peak level reached in 2000), and a slower pace of increase on major health care program spending. Despite the fact that population aging will increase mandatory spending on social security and health care over the coming three decades, the CBO has highlighted that the majority of the increase in spending towards these programs is projected to occur due to rising health care costs per person (Chart II-6). We thus model the impact of medical care cost control by limiting the rise in net mandatory outlays on health care programs between 2021 and 2051 to roughly half of what the CBO baseline projects. This adjustment does not prevent mandatory spending on health care programs from rising, given the strong political challenges involved in limiting spending increases that are caused by an aging population. Chart II-6The US Structural Primary Balance Is Heavily Impacted By Medical Costs Charts II-7 and II-8 illustrate how these three adjustments impact the long-term US fiscal outlook. Relative to the CBO’s baseline projections, the American Recovery Plan (ARP) budget deficit forecasts from our US Political Strategy service imply that the debt-to-GDP ratio will be approximately three to four percentage points higher over the very near term, and roughly ten points higher over the long term. Chart II-7Even With Higher Rates, The Fiscal Outlook Is Meaningfully Less Bad… Relative to this new baseline, an increase in interest rates to, but not above, the projected rate of nominal economic growth increases the debt-to-GDP ratio by an additional ten percentage points (20 points higher versus the CBO’s baseline) in the middle of the forecast period, but it lowers the debt-to-GDP ratio over the longer run by eliminating the effect of outsized interest rates magnifying a persistent primary deficit. Still, the debt-to-GDP ratio is projected to rise to a whopping 207% of GDP by 2051 in this scenario, with a budget deficit in excess of 10% of GDP. The third adjustment shown in Charts II-7 and II-8 underscores the impact on the US fiscal outlook of actions aimed at reducing the primary deficit. Increases in government revenue and the prevention of rising health care costs per person results in the debt-to-GDP ratio that is 64 percentage points lower in 2051 than in our normalized interest rate scenario. The budget deficit in this scenario still increases to approximately 6% of GDP thirty years from today, but in this case most of the deficit is due to the net interest component rather than the primary deficit, meaning that the debt-to-GDP ratio would be increasing at a much slower rate if interest rates were no higher than the rate of economic growth. Chart II-8 highlights that net interest spending in this scenario would rise to 4.5% of GDP, which would be meaningfully higher than the prior high of roughly 3% in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Chart II-8...With Higher Taxes And Medical Cost Control Chart II-9A Meaningful, But Not Unprecedented, Rise In Net Interest Outlays But that is far from unprecedented or necessarily consistent with a fiscal crisis. Chart II-9 also shows that Canada’s public debt charges rose to 6.5% of GDP in the early 1990s without triggering a public debt crisis. It is true that Canada subsequently embarked on a painful fiscal consolidation program in order to reduce its public debt burden, but this, in part, occurred because of a cyclically-adjusted primary deficit of approximately 3% - twice as large as that projected for the US in 2051 in our adjusted scenario shown in Charts II-7 and II-8. Revenue And Health Care Cost Reform Our third adjustment to the CBO’s long-term budget outlook involved changes to revenue and health care cost control to reduce the US’ projected primary deficit. Are these adjustments achievable? In our view, the answer is yes: As noted above, our scenario modeled these changes taking place a decade from today, which allows for policymakers and stakeholders to have a substantial amount of time to act and adjust to these changes. On the revenue front, we noted above that US government revenue has reached 20% of GDP in the past, in the year 2000. Chart II-10 highlights that while raising taxes will likely reduce US competitiveness, the US maintains a sizeable tax advantage relative to other advanced economies, and that this was true prior to the tax cuts that took place under the Trump administration. On the health care cost front, Chart II-11 highlights that US healthcare expenditure is much larger as a share of GDP than other countries, which was not the case prior to the 1980s. Chart II-12 highlights that this cost difference is entirely due to inpatient (i.e., hospital) and outpatient (i.e., drug) costs. While it is not clear what form it will take, it seems likely that future reforms by policymakers to eliminate rising health care costs per person will occur and can be achieved. Chart II-10The US Government Can Afford To Raise Revenue Chart II-11The US Spends Much More On Health Care Than Other Countries   Chart II-12The US Significantly Outspends The World On Hospital And Drug Costs The key point for investors is not whether these changes should or should not occur, but whether there are any feasible scenarios in which spiraling government debt and interest payments are avoided without the Fed purposely maintaining monetary policy at levels persistently below the rate of economic growth – and thus risking major inflationary pressure. Our analysis above highlights that there are; the question is when policymakers will choose to act and in what form. A potential tipping point may be when US government spending on net interest as a % of GDP exceeds its prior high, which occurs in 2026 in the scenario modeled in Chart II-8. In a scenario where reforms fail to materialize or where financial markets force policymakers to act, a fiscal risk premium could certainly emerge in longer-term government bond yields, which could lead the Fed to maintain lower short-term interest rates than it otherwise would. But this scenario is only likely to emerge after interest rates converge towards rates of economic growth, as US government debt will remain highly serviceable for some time if "r" remains meaningfully lower than "g". Investment Conclusions There are three potential investment implications of our research. First, the fact that rising medical costs have such a significant impact on the CBO’s projections of the primary deficit implies that fiscal reform, when it eventually occurs, will be negative for US health care stocks. Chart II-13 highlights that US health care sector earnings have outperformed broad market earnings since the mid-1990s, and that the sector has consistently delivered an above-average return on equity. This historical performance likely reflects the sector’s pricing power, which stand to be curtailed through regulatory efforts in a world where rising health care costs per person collide with fiscal belt-tightening. Interestingly, Chart II-12 highlighted that US per capita spending on medical goods is not significantly higher than in other developed markets, suggesting that the health care equipment & supplies industry may fare better over a very long term time horizon than overall health care. Second, Charts II-7 and II-8 highlighted that even if the US does raise revenue as a share of GDP and limits excessive growth in medical costs, a primary deficit will still exist and net interest outlays will still rise to elevated levels compared to what has historically been the case. We noted that Canada experienced a higher public debt burden in the 1990s and did not suffer from a fiscal crisis, but Chart II-14 highlights that the fiscal situation did weigh on the Canadian dollar, which progressively traded 10-20% below its PPP-implied fair value level over the course of the 1990s. Thus, the implication is that eventual fiscal reform in the US may be structurally negative for the US dollar, from an overvalued starting point (panels 3 and 4 of Chart II-14). Chart II-13Eventual Fiscal Reform Will Likely Be Negative For Health Care Stocks Chart II-14The US Fiscal Outlook, Even With Some Reforms, Is Dollar-Negative   Finally, our scenario analysis highlights that very elevated levels of government debt do not guarantee that interest rates will remain structurally low, especially over the next decade when the US primary deficit is projected to remain relatively stable. For investors focused on forecasting the direction of 10-year Treasury yields from the perspective of valuation, it should be noted that the next decade is the relevant projection period for the Fed funds rate, not what occurs to net interest outlays in the two decades that follow. Over the very long run, it is true that there may ultimately be very strong political pressure on the Fed to keep interest rates below the prevailing rate of economic growth, as policymakers in 2030 will be able to avoid a structural adjustment to the primary deficit of roughly 1.1-1.3% of GDP for every percentage point that average interest rates on government debt are below nominal GDP growth. However, we noted above that this pressure is unlikely to build before the second half of this decade even in a scenario where interest rates rise significantly over the coming few years, and it remains an open questions whether the Fed will acquiesce to this pressure given its strong potential to fuel excess private sector leveraging. Over the coming one to two years, the key conclusion is that the US fiscal outlook is not likely to prevent an increase in interest rates over the coming few years in the hypothetical scenario that we described in last month’s report, i.e., an environment where the narrative of secular stagnation is challenged and investor expectations for the neutral rate rise closer to trend rates of economic growth. This remains a risk to our overweight stance towards risky assets and is not our base case view. But it does highlight the importance of monitoring long-dated rate expectations over the coming year, and argues, on a risk-adjusted basis, for a below-neutral duration stance within a fixed-income portfolio. Jonathan LaBerge, CFA Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst III. Indicators And Reference Charts BCA’s equity indicators highlight that the “easy” money from expectations of an eventual end to the pandemic have already been made. Our technical, valuation, and sentiment indicators are very extended, highlighting that investors should expect positive but more modest returns from stocks over the coming 6-12 months. Our monetary indicator has aggressively retreated from its high last year, reflecting a meaningful recovery in government bond yields. The indicator remains above the boom/bust line, however, highlighting that monetary policy remains supportive for risky asset prices. Forward equity earnings already price in a complete earnings recovery, but for now there is no meaningful sign of waning forward earnings momentum. Net revisions remain positive, and positive earnings surprises have risen to their strongest levels on record. Within a global equity portfolio, EM stocks have dragged down global ex-US performance, likely in response to deteriorating leading indicators for the Chinese economy. This implies that they are not likely to lead global ex-US equity performance higher over the course of the year barring an imminent shift in Chinese policy. We continue to expect that euro area stocks will have to do the heavy lifting, driven either by the underperformance of global technology stocks or the outperformance of euro area financials – which are extremely cheap relative to US banks and have much further scope for earnings to normalize as the pandemic draws to a close. The US 10-Year Treasury yield has edged lower over the past month, after having risen to levels that were extremely technically stretched. Despite this pause, our valuation index highlights that bonds are still expensive, and that yields could move higher over the cyclical investment horizon. We expect the rise to be more modest than our valuation index would imply, but we would still recommend a modestly short duration stance within a fixed-income portfolio. Commodity prices, particularly copper, lumber, and agricultural commodities, are screaming higher. This reflects bullish cyclical conditions, but also pandemic-induced supply shortages that are likely to wane later this year. Commodity prices are technically extended and sentiment is extremely bullish for most commodities, suggesting that a breather in commodity prices is likely at some point over the coming several months. US and global LEIs remain in a solid uptrend, and global manufacturing PMIs are strong. Our global LEI diffusion index has declined significantly, but this likely reflects the outsized impact of a few emerging market countries (whose vaccination progress is lagging). Strong leading and coincident indicators underscore that the global demand for goods is robust, and that output is below pre-pandemic levels in most economies because of very weak services spending. The latter will recover significantly later this year, as social distancing and other pandemic control measures disappear. EQUITIES: Chart III-1US Equity Indicators Chart III-2Willingness To Pay For Risk Chart III-3US Equity Sentiment Indicators   Chart III-4Revealed Preference Indicator Chart III-5US Stock Market Valuation Chart III-6US Earnings Chart III-7Global Stock Market And Earnings: Relative Performance Chart III-8Global Stock Market And Earnings: Relative Performance   FIXED INCOME:   Chart III-9US Treasurys And Valuations Chart III-10Yield Curve Slopes Chart III-11Selected US Bond Yields Chart III-1210-Year Treasury Yield ComponentsChart III-13US Corporate Bonds And Health Monitor Chart III-14Global Bonds: Developed Markets Chart III-15Global Bonds: Emerging Markets   CURRENCIES: Chart III-16US Dollar And PPP Chart III-17US Dollar And Indicator Chart III-18US Dollar Fundamentals Chart III-19Japanese Yen Technicals Chart III-20Euro Technicals Chart III-21Euro/Yen Technicals Chart III-22Euro/Pound Technicals   COMMODITIES: Chart III-23Broad Commodity Indicators Chart III-24Commodity Prices Chart III-25Commodity Prices Chart III-26Commodity Sentiment Chart III-27Speculative Positioning   ECONOMY: Chart III-28US And Global Macro Backdrop Chart III-29US Macro Snapshot Chart III-30US Growth Outlook Chart III-31US Cyclical Spending Chart III-32US Labor Market Chart III-33US Consumption Chart III-34US Housing Chart III-35US Debt And Deleveraging   Chart III-36US Financial Conditions Chart III-37Global Economic Snapshot: Europe Chart III-38Global Economic Snapshot: China   Jonathan LaBerge, CFA Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst Footnotes 1 Please see Global Investment Strategy "Taxing Woke Capital," dated April 16, 2021, available at gis.bcaresearch.com 2 Please see The Bank Credit Analyst Special Report "R-star, And The Structural Risk To Stocks," dated March 31, 2021, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 3 Please see The Bank Credit Analyst Special Report "R-star, And The Structural Risk To Stocks," dated March 31, 2021, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 4 Presented in this fashion, a budget deficit (surplus) is recorded with a positive (negative) sign. 5 For more information, please see US Political Strategy report “Biden’s Pittsburgh Speech And Legislative Agenda,” dated April 1, 2021, available at usp.bcaresearch.com 6 Please see “Term premia: models and some stylised facts”, by Cohen, Hördahl, and Xia, BIS Quarterly Review, September 2008.

En lugar del informe de estrategia de la próxima semana, presentaré el primer webcast de Counterpoint titulado ‘Mega-Temas, Choques Venideros y Mejores Operaciones’. Espero que pueda unirse. Aspectos destacados La teoría económica estándar asume que el dinero es perfectamente fungible. Pero en la práctica, el dinero no es fungible, porque las personas asignan diferentes emociones a sus cuentas mentales de ingresos y ahorros. Esto se conoce como 'sesgo de contabilidad mental'. El sesgo de contabilidad mental significa que es más probable que utilicemos la enorme acumulación de ahorros acumulada durante la pandemia para pagar deudas que para gastar. El sesgo de contabilidad mental también significa que estamos pagando en exceso por las acciones de alto rendimiento. Los inversores a largo plazo deberían evitar los bancos y deberían evitar el 'value'. Calculada correctamente, la prima de riesgo de la renta variable ahora es casi inexistente. Los rendimientos de los bonos a largo plazo de EE. UU. tienen mucho más margen para bajar que para subir. Lista breve de operaciones fractales: acciones frente a bonos, PKR y acciones de Nueva Zelanda. Artículo principal Gráfico de la semana El consumo se explica por los salarios... El consumo se explica por los salarios... El consumo se explica por los salarios... Gráfico de la semana ...no por los cheques de estímulo ...No mediante cheques de estímulo ...No mediante cheques de estímulo Muchos economistas predicen que, una vez que las economías vuelvan a abrir completamente, la enorme acumulación de ahorros de los hogares acumulada durante la pandemia desatará un tsunami de gasto de los hogares. Pero los economistas no son las personas adecuadas para hacer esta predicción. La respuesta a si los hogares gastarán o no su acumulación de ahorros no pertenece al ámbito de la Economía. Pertenece al ámbito de la Psicología. Si gastamos dinero depende de la 'cuenta mental' que ocupe En Una anomalía importante en el mercado de bonos señalamos que la propensión a gastar a partir del ingreso es alta, pero la propensión a gastar a partir de la riqueza es baja. Esto significa que si el ingreso no gastado se gasta depende de si los hogares lo clasifican como ingreso adicional o como riqueza adicional. Esto planteó una pregunta de seguimiento. ¿Cómo puede la decisión de gastar dinero depender de si alguien lo clasifica como ingreso o como riqueza? La respuesta proviene de la Psicología y de un fenómeno conocido como 'sesgo de contabilidad mental'. El psicólogo y premio Nobel Daniel Kahneman señala que categorizamos nuestro dinero en diferentes cuentas, que a veces son físicas y otras veces solo mentales, y que existe una jerarquía clara en nuestra disposición a recurrir a estas cuentas para gastar. Existe una jerarquía clara en nuestra disposición a gastar a partir de nuestras 'cuentas mentales'. En la cima de la jerarquía está nuestro salario mensual, seguido por el dinero en nuestra cuenta corriente. Estas cuentas de 'ingreso' estamos dispuestos a gastarlas. Más abajo en la jerarquía están nuestra cuenta de ahorros y nuestra cartera de inversión. Estas cuentas de 'ahorro' o de 'riqueza' no estamos dispuestos a gastarlas. La teoría económica estándar asume que el dinero es perfectamente fungible, de modo que una libra en una cuenta corriente no es diferente a una libra en una cuenta de ahorros. Pero en la práctica, el dinero no es fungible, porque las personas asignan diferentes emociones a sus cuentas mentales de ingresos y ahorros. Cuando transferimos dinero de nuestros salarios o de nuestra cuenta corriente a nuestra cuenta de ahorros, nuestra disposición a gastarlo se derrumba. Esto explica por qué el consumo sigue de cerca a los salarios que dominan nuestra cuenta mental de ingresos, pero no tiene una conexión significativa con los cheques de estímulo que en gran medida terminan en nuestra cuenta mental de ahorro (Gráfico de la semana y Gráfico I-2). Gráfico I-2 Los cheques de estímulo no tuvieron un impacto significativo en las tendencias de consumo Los cheques de estímulo no tuvieron un impacto significativo en las tendencias de consumo. Los cheques de estímulo no tuvieron un impacto significativo en las tendencias de consumo. Sin embargo, aunque no estemos dispuestos a gastar nuestra cuenta mental de ahorros, sí estamos dispuestos a reducir la deuda con ella. De hecho, al darse cuenta de esta conexión emocional entre nuestros ahorros y nuestra deuda, muchos prestamistas ofrecen hipotecas que 'compensan' una cuenta de ahorros contra la deuda hipotecaria. Uniendo todo esto, es improbable que la acumulación de ahorros de los hogares acumulada durante la pandemia impulse las tendencias de consumo. Es más probable que se utilice para reducir la deuda de los hogares. En tal caso, parte del reciente aumento de la deuda pública terminará simplemente pagando deuda privada, como ocurrió en Japón durante la década de 1990 (Gráfico I-3). Gráfico I-3 En Japón, la deuda pública terminó pagando la deuda privada En Japón, la deuda pública acabó pagando la deuda privada En Japón, la deuda pública acabó pagando la deuda privada Esto presagia problemas para el crecimiento de los activos bancarios. El 'value' no ofrece valor El sesgo de contabilidad mental también explica el fenómeno dominante en los mercados financieros de los últimos años: la llamada 'búsqueda de rendimiento'. A primera vista, la búsqueda de rendimiento tiene sentido, pero al pensarlo más profundamente la distinción entre rendimiento y apreciación del capital es irracional. Al igual que con el ingreso y la riqueza, el dinero que proviene del rendimiento de una inversión y el dinero que proviene de su apreciación de capital es perfectamente fungible (suponiendo un tratamiento fiscal igual). Sin embargo, en la práctica, muchos inversores ponen el rendimiento y la apreciación de capital en cuentas mentales separadas, clasificando el rendimiento de una inversión como dinero para gastar y su capital como dinero para ahorrar. Por lo tanto, esos inversores —por ejemplo, los jubilados— que quieren que sus activos generen dinero para su cuenta mental de gasto tienen un sesgo irracional hacia inversiones que generan rendimiento. Mientras que aquellos inversores que quieren que sus activos aumenten su cuenta mental de ahorro tienen un sesgo hacia inversiones que generan crecimiento de capital. Para reiterar, dado que el dinero es perfectamente fungible, estas cuentas mentales son irracionales. En circunstancias normales, estos sesgos irracionales no son un problema porque hay suficientes inversiones disponibles tanto para la cuenta mental de gasto como para la de ahorro. Pero en los últimos años, los activos que normalmente generarían el ingreso seguro para la cuenta de gasto —efectivo y bonos del gobierno— ya no lo están haciendo. Por lo tanto, en la estampida por el rendimiento, los inversores fijados en el ingreso han sufrido una visión de túnel peligrosa. Al fijarse en el rendimiento de una acción en lugar de en su rendimiento total prospectivo, los inversores en busca de rendimiento están pagando en exceso por acciones de alto rendimiento y, por lo tanto, sacrificando su riqueza a largo plazo. Al fijarse en el rendimiento de una acción en lugar de en su rendimiento total prospectivo, los inversores están pagando en exceso por acciones de alto rendimiento. Un caso concreto. El rendimiento por beneficios futuros del 8 por ciento en el sector financiero global parece ofrecer considerablemente más valor que el 5 por ciento en salud y el 3,5 por ciento en tecnología. Pero lo que realmente importa es cómo ese rendimiento por beneficios futuros se traduce en la rentabilidad total prospectiva. En esta base, el aparente valor en los financieros resulta ser una ilusión. Utilizando la relación posterior a la crisis financiera entre el rendimiento por beneficios futuros y la rentabilidad prospectiva, los financieros de alto rendimiento estaban, hasta hace muy poco, valorados para ofrecer una rentabilidad inferior a la de la tecnología de bajo rendimiento. Y los financieros siguen valorados para ofrecer una rentabilidad inferior a la de la salud de menor rendimiento. Para ofrecer la misma rentabilidad a largo plazo que la salud, la valoración de los financieros tendría que disminuir en un 20 por ciento (Gráfico I-4 - Gráfico I-6). Gráfico I-4 Rendimiento por beneficios del 8 % en financieros = una rentabilidad prospectiva del 2 % El rendimiento por ganancias del 8% de las financieras = un rendimiento prospectivo del 2% El rendimiento por ganancias del 8% de las financieras = un rendimiento prospectivo del 2% Gráfico I-5 Rendimiento por beneficios del 5 % en salud = una rentabilidad prospectiva del 8 % La rentabilidad por beneficios del 5 % del sector sanitario = Una rentabilidad prospectiva del 8 % La rentabilidad por beneficios del 5 % del sector sanitario = Una rentabilidad prospectiva del 8 % Gráfico I-6 La tecnología está cara La tecnología es cara La tecnología es cara Por lo tanto, el sesgo de contabilidad mental es un doble golpe para los bancos. Presagia problemas para el crecimiento de los activos bancarios y hace que los inversores paguen en exceso por acciones de alto rendimiento. Esto crea la paradoja definitiva de la inversión. La característica definitoria del 'value' es que ¡no ofrece valor! Los inversores a largo plazo deberían evitar los bancos y deberían evitar el value. Los rendimientos de los bonos de EE. UU. tienen más margen para bajar que para subir El análisis anterior también tiene importantes implicaciones sobre el enfoque correcto para valorar las acciones y, específicamente, la prima de riesgo de la renta variable, es decir, la rentabilidad excesiva prospectiva de las acciones frente a los bonos de alta calidad. El enfoque común e incorrecto es tomar el rendimiento por beneficios futuros de las acciones y restar el rendimiento del bono a 10 años. Utilizando un rendimiento por beneficios futuros de EE. UU. del 4,5 por ciento, esto sugeriría que la prima de riesgo de la renta variable es un cómodo 3 por ciento frente al rendimiento nominal del bono del 1,5 por ciento. O un muy cómodo 5,5 por ciento frente al rendimiento real del bono de -1 por ciento. El error evidente de este enfoque es que está restando peras de manzanas. El rendimiento del bono a 10 años es la rentabilidad que recibirás del bono durante los próximos 10 años. Pero como acaba de ver, el rendimiento por beneficios futuros no es la rentabilidad que recibirás de las acciones durante los próximos 10 años. Para restar peras de peras debemos primero traducir el rendimiento por beneficios futuros en una rentabilidad total prospectiva a 10 años. La traducción actual resulta ser una rentabilidad nominal del 2 por ciento (Gráfico I-7 - Gráfico I-8) o una rentabilidad real del 0 por ciento (Gráfico I-9 - Gráfico I-10). Comparando estas con los rendimientos nominales o reales de los bonos, encontramos que la prima de riesgo de la renta variable es casi inexistente. Gráfico I-7 Convierta el rendimiento por beneficios en una rentabilidad nominal prospectiva... Convertir el rendimiento por beneficios en un rendimiento nominal prospectivo... Convertir el rendimiento por beneficios en un rendimiento nominal prospectivo... Gráfico I-8 …para descubrir que la prima de riesgo de la renta variable es casi inexistente …Para descubrir que la prima de riesgo de la renta variable es casi inexistente …Para descubrir que la prima de riesgo de la renta variable es casi inexistente Gráfico I-9 Convierta el rendimiento por beneficios en una rentabilidad real prospectiva... Convierte el rendimiento de las ganancias en un rendimiento real prospectivo... Convierte el rendimiento de las ganancias en un rendimiento real prospectivo... Gráfico I-10 ...para descubrir que la prima de riesgo de la renta variable es casi inexistente ...Descubrir que la prima de riesgo accionario es casi inexistente ...Descubrir que la prima de riesgo accionario es casi inexistente La prima de riesgo de la renta variable casi inexistente significa que las acciones están altamente valoradas y que esta valoración elevada depende de que los rendimientos de los bonos no aumenten significativamente. Además, no solo las acciones están altamente valoradas. Como señalamos en El camino hacia la inflación termina en la deflación, la valoración de 300 billones de dólares de bienes raíces globales también depende en gran medida de que los rendimientos de los bonos no aumenten significativamente. Las acciones están altamente valoradas y esa valoración elevada depende de que los rendimientos de los bonos no aumenten significativamente. Concluimos que, desde los niveles actuales, los rendimientos de los bonos a largo plazo de EE. UU. tienen mucho más margen para bajar que para subir. Candidatos para una reversión de la contratendencia El fuerte repunte de las acciones frente a los bonos desde el mínimo de la pandemia ha alcanzado un punto de fragilidad fractal similar al visto al final de la corrida alcista de 2013 y al final de la caída de principios de 2020 (Gráfico I-11). Como tal, el repunte actual merece una pausa. Gráfico I-11 El repunte de las acciones frente a los bonos merece una pausa El repunte de las acciones frente a los bonos necesita un respiro. El repunte de las acciones frente a los bonos necesita un respiro. En la región de Asia Pacífico, observamos que el reciente fuerte desempeño de la rupia pakistaní es susceptible a una venta en contra-tendencia (Gráfico I-12). Gráfico I-12 Subponderar el PKR Infraponderar el PKR Infraponderar el PKR Por último, el mercado de valores de Nueva Zelanda, ultra defensivo, ha tenido un rendimiento muy inferior durante el último año. Pero la fragilidad en sus estructuras fractales de 130 y 65 días sugiere que está listo para una sobreperformance contraria (Gráfico I-13). Gráfico I-13 Sobreponderar Nueva Zelanda Sobrepeso en Nueva Zelanda Sobrepeso en Nueva Zelanda En consecuencia, la recomendación de esta semana es sobreponderar Nueva Zelanda frente al mundo, estableciendo el objetivo de beneficio y el stop-loss simétrico en 4 por ciento.   Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Sistema de Trading Fractal Operaciones fractales Recomendaciones a 6 meses Recomendaciones estructurales Operaciones fractales cerradas Operaciones cerradas Rendimiento de activos Rendimiento del mercado de renta variable   Indicadores a observar - Rendimientos de los bonos Gráfico II-1 Indicadores a observar - Rendimientos de los bonos - ##br##Área del euro Indicadores a vigilar - Rendimientos de los bonos - Zona del euro Indicadores a vigilar - Rendimientos de los bonos - Zona del euro Gráfico II-2 Indicadores a observar - Rendimientos de los bonos - ##br##Europa fuera del Área del euro Indicadores a vigilar - Rendimientos de los bonos - Europa (fuera de la zona euro) Indicadores a vigilar - Rendimientos de los bonos - Europa (fuera de la zona euro) Gráfico II-3 Indicadores a observar - Rendimientos de los bonos - ##br##Asia Indicadores a seguir - Rendimientos de bonos - Asia Indicadores a seguir - Rendimientos de bonos - Asia Gráfico II-4 Indicadores a observar - Rendimientos de los bonos - ##br##Otros desarrollados Indicadores a vigilar - Rendimientos de bonos - Otros mercados desarrollados Indicadores a vigilar - Rendimientos de bonos - Otros mercados desarrollados   Indicadores a observar - Expectativas de tipos de interés Gráfico II-5 Indicadores a observar - Expectativas de tipos de interés Indicadores a Vigilar - Expectativas de Tasas de Interés Indicadores a Vigilar - Expectativas de Tasas de Interés Gráfico II-6 Indicadores a observar - Expectativas de tipos de interés Indicadores a vigilar - Expectativas de tasas de interés Indicadores a vigilar - Expectativas de tasas de interés Gráfico II-7 Indicadores a observar - Expectativas de tipos de interés Indicadores a vigilar - Expectativas de tasas de interés Indicadores a vigilar - Expectativas de tasas de interés Gráfico II-8 Indicadores a observar - Expectativas de tipos de interés Indicadores a seguir - Expectativas de las tasas de interés Indicadores a seguir - Expectativas de las tasas de interés    

Aspectos destacados Duración: El ritmo de las subidas de tipos que actualmente cotiza el mercado es razonable. Sin embargo, vemos altas probabilidades de que las expectativas del mercado aumenten en los próximos meses, como resultado de la continuidad de sólidos datos económicos y de que la Fed comience a hablar de reducir sus compras de activos. Los inversores deberían mantener la duración de la cartera por debajo del índice de referencia. MBS: Los MBS siguen siendo poco atractivos en comparación con otros productos de spread estadounidenses. Pero dentro de una asignación infraponderada a MBS, tiene sentido una inclinación hacia cupones altos. Inflación: La inflación interanual del IPC se vio impulsada al alza por efectos de base en marzo, pero el informe también mostró evidencia de crecientes presiones inflacionarias más allá de los simples efectos de base. Tema Tras una caída considerable el pasado jueves, los rendimientos del Tesoro están ahora significativamente por debajo de sus máximos recientes. El rendimiento del Treasury a 10 años alcanzó un máximo de 1.74% el 31 de marzo.º pero terminó la semana pasada en solo 1.59%. Lo que hace que la caída sea desconcertante es que los rendimientos han bajado a pesar de una serie de datos económicos estadounidenses muy sólidos (Gráfico 1). Este desarrollo reciente se parece al famoso enigma de los bonos de 2004/05, cuando el presidente de la Fed Alan Greenspan luchó por entender por qué los rendimientos de los Treasuries a largo plazo estaban cayendo incluso cuando la Fed aumentaba las tasas a corto plazo.1 Hoy, los inversores también están luchando por entender por qué los rendimientos a largo plazo están cayendo, solo que esta vez el “enigma” es que lo hacen frente a datos económicos fuertes. Desde nuestro punto de vista, ambos enigmas tienen la misma respuesta: el mercado ya ha descontado gran parte de las noticias. El 29 de junio.º de 2004 – el día antes de la primera subida de tipos de ese ciclo – la curva del overnight index swap (OIS) estaba valuada para 243 pb de subidas de la Fed en los siguientes 12 meses. La Fed llegó a aplicar 200 pb de subidas durante ese periodo, algo menos de lo que esperaba el mercado. En ese entorno es totalmente consistente que los rendimientos de los bonos cayeran (Gráfico 2). Gráfico 1 Rendimientos a la baja pese a datos económicos sólidos Rendimientos a la baja por datos sólidos Rendimientos a la baja por datos sólidos Gráfico 2 El enigma de los bonos 2004/05 El enigma de los bonos 2004/05 El enigma de los bonos 2004/05 Hoy, la curva OIS cotiza que la Fed elevará las tasas por encima del límite de cero en diciembre de 2022 y que habrá un total de 86 pb de subidas para finales de 2023 (Gráfico 3). Dado el nuevo régimen de Objetivo de Inflación Promedio (Average Inflation Targeting) de la Fed, este tipo de ciclo de subidas solo se alcanzará si hay una recuperación económica de EE. UU. muy fuerte. Los datos entrantes de EE. UU. hasta ahora confirman esa narrativa, pero no han sido lo bastante fuertes como para elevar aún más las expectativas de tipos. Gráfico 3 El mercado cotiza despegue en diciembre de 2022 El mercado descuenta un despegue en diciembre de 2022 El mercado descuenta un despegue en diciembre de 2022 Como escribimos en el informe de la semana pasada, creemos que las expectativas de subidas de tipos que actualmente tiene el mercado parecen razonables.2 Sin embargo, vemos un riesgo significativo de que podrían aumentar en los próximos meses a medida que continúe la rápida recuperación económica de EE. UU. y la Fed empiece a alejarse de su mensaje extremadamente acomodaticio. Gráfico 4 EE. UU. alcanzará 75% de vacunación mucho antes de septiembre Estados Unidos alcanzará el 75% de vacunación mucho antes de septiembre Estados Unidos alcanzará el 75% de vacunación mucho antes de septiembre Por ejemplo, el presidente de la Fed, Jay Powell, ha dicho repetidamente que es demasiado pronto para hablar sobre la reducción de las compras de activos de la Fed. Nos preocupa, sin embargo, que este tono pueda dar a los inversores una falsa sensación de seguridad. Si la recuperación económica continúa al ritmo actual, esperamos plenamente que la Fed empiece a hablar sobre la reducción este año y que inicie el proceso ya sea a finales de 2021 o a principios de 2022. La semana pasada, el presidente de la Fed de St. Louis, Jim Bullard, dijo que se sentiría cómodo iniciando conversaciones sobre la reducción cuando el 75%-80% de la población de EE. UU. haya sido vacunada. Estimamos que si las vacunaciones continúan a un ritmo lineal, alcanzaremos el 75% de vacunación para septiembre (Gráfico 4). Dado el ritmo exponencial de vacunaciones hasta la fecha, es probable que lleguemos al 75% mucho antes de septiembre. La conclusión es que vemos el ritmo de subidas de tipos que actualmente cotiza el mercado como razonable. Sin embargo, también vemos altas probabilidades de que las expectativas del mercado aumenten en los próximos meses, como resultado de la continuidad de sólidos datos económicos y de que la Fed empiece a hablar de reducir sus compras de activos. Los inversores deberían mantener la duración de la cartera por debajo del índice de referencia. MBS: Mantenerse en cupones altos No sorprende que la apuesta por la reflación haya sido beneficiosa para los activos de riesgo. Dentro de la renta fija estadounidense, los productos de spread en general han superado a los Treasuries desde que los rendimientos tocaron suelo en agosto pasado. Sin embargo, ciertos sectores de spread han tenido mejor desempeño que otros. Por ejemplo, los Agency Mortgage-Backed Securities no lo han hecho tan bien. Los MBS convencionales Agency a 30 años solo han superado a una posición en títulos del Tesoro con duración equivalente por 73 pb desde que los rendimientos tocaron suelo el 4 de agosto.º de 2020 (Gráfico 5). Esto se compara con 446 pb de sobrerendimiento para los corporativos con calificación Aaa, 342 pb de sobrerendimiento para los corporativos con calificación Aa (Gráfico 5, panel 2) y 232 pb de sobrerendimiento para Agency CMBS (Gráfico 5, panel 3). Solo los ABS de consumo con la notoria calificación de bajo riesgo Aaa han ofrecido menos sobrerendimiento que los Agency MBS (Gráfico 5, panel inferior). Aunque los Agency MBS no han tenido un buen desempeño en conjunto, ciertos segmentos de la escala de cupones han entregado rendimientos en exceso decentes. Específicamente, los MBS de cupones altos lo han hecho mucho mejor que los de cupones bajos durante el reciente repunte de los rendimientos. Desde el pasado agosto, los MBS con cupón 4% han superado a los Treasuries con duración equivalente por 176 pb y los cupones 4.5% han superado por 257 pb. Mientras tanto, los cupones de 2.5% han quedado rezagados por 10 pb y los cupones de 3% han quedado rezagados por 15 pb (Gráfico 6). Gráfico 5 Rendimiento de productos de spread desde el mínimo de los rendimientos de bonos Desempeño del producto de spread desde el punto más bajo de los rendimientos de los bonos Desempeño del producto de spread desde el punto más bajo de los rendimientos de los bonos Gráfico 6 Favorecer cupones premium en un entorno de tipos al alza Prefiera cupones premium en un entorno de tasas al alza Prefiera cupones premium en un entorno de tasas al alza La divergencia en el desempeño entre cupones altos y bajos se explica fácilmente por las características de riesgo de esos bonos. Al observar la diferencia entre los cupones de 2.5% y 4%, por ejemplo, vemos que los cupones de 2.5% tienen una duración significativamente mayor y una convexidad significativamente menor (Gráfico 6, los dos paneles inferiores). La mayor duración significa que la subida de los rendimientos perjudica más a los cupones de 2.5% y la menor convexidad significa que la subida de los rendimientos hará que la brecha entre la duración del cupón 2.5% y la del 4% se amplíe aún más. En resumen, un entorno de rendimientos al alza es terrible para los MBS de cupones bajos. A la inversa, una alta duración y baja convexidad son atributos deseables en un entorno de rendimientos a la baja. Si los rendimientos de los bonos caen de forma considerable en el futuro, entonces los MBS de cupones bajos superarán a los de cupones altos. Gráfico 7A muestra cómo el spread ajustado por opciones (OAS) varía con la duración a lo largo de la escala de cupones convencionales Agency MBS a 30 años. Vemos que los cupones más bajos tienen las duraciones más altas y los OAS más bajos. Los cupones premium tienen duraciones bajas y OAS altos. Gráfico 7A Pila de cupones MBS agency convencionales a 30 años: OAS vs. duración Un Nuevo Enigma Un Nuevo Enigma Gráfico 7B muestra cómo el OAS varía con la convexidad a lo largo de la escala de cupones. Aquí vemos que los cupones de 2%, 2.5% y 3% tienen las convexidades más negativas. Esto tiene sentido ya que esos cupones están más próximos a la tasa hipotecaria actual del 3.04%. Un aumento adicional en la tasa hipotecaria haría que esos cupones fueran menos propensos a refinanciarse, provocando una extensión significativa de las duraciones. A la inversa, una caída en la tasa hipotecaria llevaría a más refinanciaciones para esos cupones, provocando que las duraciones se acorten. Nótese que los MBS con cupón 1.5% tienen una convexidad relativamente alta. Esto se debe a que la refinanciación ya es poco atractiva para esos bonos y la duración del índice de 1.5% ya se ha extendido. Gráfico 7B Pila de cupones MBS agency convencionales a 30 años: OAS vs. convexidad Un nuevo enigma Un nuevo enigma Dado nuestro punto de vista de que los rendimientos del Tesoro de EE. UU. estarán planos o al alza en los próximos 6-12 meses, recomendamos una inclinación hacia cupones altos dentro de los Agency MBS. Específicamente, los cupones de 2%, 2.5% y 3% tienen mayor margen para la extensión de la duración en un entorno de rendimientos al alza y deben evitarse. Los cupones de 4% y 4.5%, por otro lado, son menos negativos en convexidad y están mejor preparados para capear la tormenta de rendimientos al alza. En un entorno de rendimientos planos, los cupones que mejor se comportarán probablemente serán aquellos con los OAS más amplios. Esto hace que los cupones de 4% y 4.5% parezcan mucho más atractivos que los cupones de 1.5%, aunque tengan convexidades similares. En general, recomendamos poseer los cupones de 4% y 4.5% dentro de la escala de cupones convencionales Agency MBS a 30 años y evitar los cupones de 2%, 2.5% y 3%. Un último punto que vale la pena mencionar es que también seguimos recomendando una asignación infraponderada a MBS dentro de una cartera de bonos de EE. UU. Es decir, aunque los MBS de cupones altos se ven mejor que los de cupones bajos, todo el sector resulta poco atractivo en comparación con alternativas como los ABS de consumo, los Agency CMBS e incluso los bonos corporativos de grado de inversión. Gráfico 8 muestra una versión de nuestro Excess Return Bond Map, una guía visual que es útil para evaluar rápidamente la relación riesgo/recompensa entre distintos productos de spread estadounidenses.3 El Mapa muestra el OAS como medida de rendimiento esperado en el eje Y, y una medida propietaria de riesgo llamada “Risk Of Losing 100 Bps” en el eje X. Un número más alto en el eje X indica menos riesgo de perder 100 pb y viceversa. Gráfico 8 Mapa de rendimiento en exceso de bonos Un nuevo enigma Un nuevo enigma Nuestro Mapa de Bonos deja claro que solo los MBS con cupón 4% y 4.5% se acercan a ofrecer un equilibrio riesgo/recompensa comparable al de otros sectores de spread. Los cupones MBS por debajo del 4% ofrecen un rendimiento esperado demasiado bajo dado el nivel de riesgo. Conclusión: Mantener infraponderación en MBS dentro de una cartera de bonos de EE. UU., pero favorecer los cupones de 4% y 4.5% sobre los cupones de 2%, 2.5% y 3% dentro de la escala de cupones Agency MBS. IPC de marzo: más que un efecto de base Era bien sabido antes de la publicación del IPC de marzo de la semana pasada que la cifra de inflación interanual iba a ser muy alta. Esto se debe a efectos de base que persistirán hasta fines de mayo. Es decir, la inflación de 12 meses está destinada a aumentar a medida que las cifras mensuales negativas de inflación de marzo, abril y mayo de 2020 salgan de la muestra móvil de 12 meses. Las cifras de inflación interanual sí aumentaron bruscamente en marzo (Gráfico 9). El IPC general a 12 meses saltó de 1.68% a 2.64% y el IPC subyacente a 12 meses aumentó de 1.28% a 1.65%. Los efectos de base ejercen menos influencia sobre el IPC de media recortada, y ese índice solo subió de 2.04% a 2.12%. La brecha entre el IPC subyacente a 12 meses y el IPC de media recortada a 12 meses sigue siendo amplia, pero debería cerrarse en mayo cuando se agoten los efectos de base del año pasado (Gráfico 9, panel inferior). Gráfico 9 Inflación anual Inflación anual Inflación anual Gráfico 10 Inflación mensual Inflación mensual Inflación mensual Pero los efectos de base fueron solo parte de la historia la semana pasada. La inflación mes a mes también fue muy fuerte para las medidas general, subyacente y de media recortada. El IPC general subió 0.62% en marzo, el IPC subyacente subió 0.34% y la media recortada subió 0.24% (Gráfico 10). Para poner esos números en contexto, si esas cifras mensuales se repitieran en abril y mayo, el IPC general a 12 meses aumentaría hasta 4.75% en mayo y el IPC subyacente a 12 meses aumentaría hasta 2.79%. Incluso si asumimos tasas de inflación más típicas del 0.15% para abril y mayo, aún esperaríamos que el IPC general a 12 meses alcance 3.77% en mayo y que el IPC subyacente a 12 meses alcance 2.41%. En conjunto, el mensaje del informe del IPC de marzo es que la economía está mostrando señales de crecientes presiones inflacionarias más allá de los simples efectos de base. Anteriormente hemos escrito sobre la abundante evidencia de cuellos de botella tanto en los sectores de bienes como de servicios, y ahora parece que esos cuellos de botella aparecen en los datos de precios.4 No hay duda de que la inflación a 12 meses caerá algo entre mayo y fines de año. Sin embargo, anticipamos que la inflación todavía estará cerca del objetivo de la Fed a fines de 2021. Esto ciertamente será así si las cifras mensuales de inflación se mantienen consistentes con la lectura de marzo. La principal implicación para la inversión de esta visión es que la baja inflación no impedirá que la Fed reduzca sus compras de activos ya sea a finales de este año o a principios del próximo, y tampoco impedirá que la Fed suba las tasas en 2022. Notas al pie 1 Comentarios de Greenspan: https://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/hh/2005/february/testimony.htm 2 Consulte el Informe semanal de estrategia de bonos de EE. UU., “Overshoot Territory”, fechado el 13 de abril de 2021, disponible en usbs.bcaresearch.com 3 Para más detalles sobre el Bond Map, consulte la página 16 de US Bond Strategy Portfolio Allocation Summary, “It’s A Boom!”, fechado el 6 de abril de 2021, disponible en usbs.bcaresearch.com 4 Consulte el Informe semanal de estrategia de bonos de EE. UU., “Limit Rate Risk, Load Up On Credit”, fechado el 16 de marzo de 2021, disponible en usbs.bcaresearch.com   Ryan Swift Estratega de bonos de EE. UU. rswift@bcaresearch.com Desempeño del sector de renta fija Especificación de cartera recomendada

Aspectos destacados Gráfico de la semana ¿Se está transfiriendo a Canadá el manto del oso de los bonos? ¿Se está pasando el manto del oso de los bonos a Canadá? ¿Se está pasando el manto del oso de los bonos a Canadá? Bonos del Tesoro de EE. UU.: La subida sostenida de los rendimientos de los bonos estadounidenses ha dejado a los bonos con vencimientos más largos en una posición de sobreventa. Sin embargo, el impulso subyacente del crecimiento y la inflación sigue siendo bajista para los bonos y es probable que la Fed comience a preparar el mercado más adelante este año para una reducción de las compras de activos en 2022. Mantener una postura defensiva a medio plazo respecto a los bonos del Tesoro de EE. UU. (duración por debajo del índice de referencia y una asignación de país con infraponderación). Canadá: La economía canadiense está ganando un impulso positivo significativo, con un ritmo de vacunación más rápido que aumenta el optimismo a pesar de una tercera ola de COVID-19. Ahora vemos un riesgo creciente de que el Banco de Canadá cambie a una postura de política menos acomodaticia en los próximos meses, liderado por una reducción de sus compras de bonos, quizá incluso antes de que la Fed haga lo mismo (Gráfico de la semana). Rebajar la calificación de los bonos gubernamentales canadienses a infraponderación en las carteras globales de renta fija. Bonos del Tesoro de EE. UU.: La pausa que refresca Gráfico 2 La tendencia alcista del rendimiento del Tesoro de EE. UU. se ha detenido La tendencia alcista del rendimiento del UST se ha pausado La tendencia alcista del rendimiento del UST se ha pausado Tras liderar la caída del mercado global de bonos gubernamentales en los últimos meses, los rendimientos de los bonos del Tesoro de EE. UU. se han calmado últimamente. El rendimiento a 10 años del Tesoro ha caído 14 pb desde el pico más reciente de 1,74% alcanzado el 31 de marzo, mientras que el rendimiento del Tesoro a 30 años ha caído 16 pb desde el pico de 2,45% alcanzado el 18 de marzo. Estos movimientos se han concentrado en el componente de rendimiento real, con las expectativas de inflación estables, ya que los rendimientos TIPS a 10 y 30 años han bajado -15 pb y -20 pb, respectivamente, desde las fechas de esos picos en rendimientos nominales (Gráfico 2). La tendencia a la baja de los rendimientos estadounidenses se ha producido en medio de un explosivo repunte de los datos económicos de EE. UU. Las ventas minoristas subieron +9,8% en marzo respecto a febrero y un asombroso +27,7% en términos interanuales. Las encuestas regionales de manufactura de la Fed mostraron resultados muy robustos para abril, con el índice Empire State de Nueva York alcanzando su nivel más alto desde octubre de 2017 y el índice principal de la Fed de Filadelfia disparándose a un nivel no visto desde 1973. Esto sigue a los muy fuertes datos de nóminas y del ISM de marzo publicados a principios de abril. Sin embargo, los datos económicos de EE. UU. no son unánimemente positivos. Las últimas lecturas de la encuesta de confianza del consumidor de la Universidad de Michigan y de la encuesta de optimismo de pequeñas empresas de la NFIB se mantienen muy por debajo de los picos previos a la pandemia (Gráfico 3). La inflación anual del IPC subyacente apenas aumentó 0,2 puntos porcentuales en marzo hasta el 1,6%, un movimiento débil en comparación con el repunte impulsado por el efecto base que llevó la inflación anual del IPC general del 1,7% en febrero al 2,6%. Gráfico 3 Algunos mensajes mixtos de los datos recientes de EE. UU. Algunos mensajes mixtos de los datos recientes de EE. UU. Algunos mensajes mixtos de los datos recientes de EE. UU. Gráfico 4 Menos sorpresas positivas en los datos de EE. UU. Menos sorpresas positivas en los datos de Estados Unidos Menos sorpresas positivas en los datos de Estados Unidos El flujo general de datos económicos de EE. UU. ha sido decepcionante frente a las expectativas elevadas, como lo evidencia la caída casi ininterrumpida del índice de sorpresas de datos de EE. UU. de Citigroup desde su pico en julio de 2020 (Gráfico 4). Este indicador se correlacionaba de forma fiable con el impulso de los rendimientos del Tesoro antes del brote de COVID-19 y ahora, dado el combo alcista de crecimiento derivado del optimismo por las vacunas y el estímulo fiscal, el mercado de bonos vuelve a centrarse en cómo evolucionan los datos de EE. UU. frente a las expectativas y qué significa eso para las futuras acciones de la Fed en materia de política monetaria. La máxima dirección de la Fed sigue enviando un mensaje coherente sobre la política, sin aumentos de tasas esperados antes de 2024 y sin indicios de cuándo podría comenzar la reducción del estímulo cuantitativo (QE). Sin embargo, algunos funcionarios de la Fed han empezado a mostrarse algo más vocales sobre su nivel de comodidad con la postura de política acomodaticia actual y los riesgos asociados para la estabilidad financiera y la inflación. La semana pasada, el presidente de la Fed de Dallas, Robert Kaplan, señaló que le gustaría ver a la Fed comenzar a retirar su apoyo a la economía "a la primera oportunidad". El presidente de la Fed de St. Louis, James Bullard, fue aún más específico, señalando que una vez que la proporción de estadounidenses vacunados alcance niveles de "inmunidad de rebaño" del 75-80%, será el momento para que la Fed debata la reducción del QE. Por el momento, sin embargo, no hay necesidad de que la Fed actúe de forma preventiva. Nuestro Monitor de la Fed, compuesto por datos económicos, de inflación y de mercados financieros que señalarían presión para que la Fed afloje o endurezca la política, se encuentra en un nivel neutral (Gráfico 5). Nuestro descontador de la Fed a 12 meses, que mide el cambio en las tasas de interés en el próximo año que está implícito en la curva de swaps de tipo interbancario overnight de EE. UU. (OIS), está en 7 pb, coherente con una Fed que mantiene el statu quo. La última lectura de este mes de la Encuesta de Distribuidores Primarios de la Fed de Nueva York (y la Encuesta de Participantes del Mercado) no mostró cambios en la expectativa mediana de largo plazo para la tasa de fondos federales del 2,25% que ha prevalecido durante el último año (panel medio), pese a una fuerte recuperación en las expectativas de crecimiento de EE. UU. Gráfico 5 Las valoraciones de los UST están algo tensas Valoraciones de UST algo estiradas Valoraciones de UST algo estiradas El precio de mercado del próximo movimiento de la Fed sigue siendo relativamente benigno, sin expectativa de subida hasta febrero de 2023. Esto sugiere que la pausa en la tendencia de aumento de los rendimientos del Tesoro fue esencialmente el mercado adelantándose un poco al precio de rendimientos a más largo plazo más altos. Esto puede verse al observar diversas medidas de valoración. Por ejemplo, el rendimiento forward a 5 años/5 años del Tesoro ahora se sitúa en 2,4%, que está en el extremo alto del rango de expectativas de la tasa de fondos federales a más largo plazo de la encuesta a distribuidores primarios. Además, varias medidas de la prima por plazo en los rendimientos del Tesoro a 10 años han vuelto a niveles por encima de cero no vistos desde el ciclo de subidas de la Fed de 2016-2018, incluso sin que la Fed haya señalado la necesidad de endurecer la política en respuesta al aumento de las expectativas de inflación. A pesar de estas señales de valoraciones algo tensas a corto plazo para los UST, todavía no hay indicios de que los grandes inversores globales en bonos estén cómodos aumentando su exposición a los Tesoro de EE. UU. Por ejemplo, pese a que los rendimientos de los Treasuries a 10 años (cobertura en euros y yenes) parecen históricamente atractivos en comparación con los rendimientos casi nulos de los bonos del gobierno japonés y los rendimientos negativos de los bonos alemanes, los datos de flujos de capital del Tesoro estadounidense muestran que los inversores extranjeros siguen siendo vendedores netos de Treasuries (Gráfico 6). Es posible que esos compradores extranjeros necesiten más evidencia de una disminución sostenida en la volatilidad de los bonos estadounidenses antes de mover dinero a los Treasuries, donde las pérdidas por duración derivadas de mayores rendimientos podrían anular la ganancia por rendimiento de entrar en bonos estadounidenses. Aunque las valoraciones están algo estiradas para los Treasuries, los aspectos técnicos parecen muy sobrevendidos. Tanto la desviación del rendimiento del Tesoro a 10 años respecto a su media móvil de 200 días, como la tasa de cambio a 6 meses del índice de retorno total Bloomberg Barclays US Treasury, están en niveles que solo se han visto cuatro veces desde 2010 (Gráfico 7). Las encuestas de posicionamiento de duración a clientes de JP Morgan y el índice de sentimiento de Tesoro de Market Vane también se acercan a extremos bajistas posteriores a 2010. Cabe señalar que ambas medidas alcanzaron extremos aún más bajistas durante la segunda mitad del ciclo de endurecimiento de la Fed de 2026-2018, por lo que existe potencial de que el sentimiento sobre los Tesoro se vuelva aún más bajista una vez que la Fed empiece a endurecer la política monetaria, un escenario que parece cada vez más probable en los próximos 6-12 meses. Gráfico 6 Aún no hay demanda extranjera por UST Sin ofertas extranjeras por los USTs (por ahora) Sin ofertas extranjeras por los USTs (por ahora) Gráfico 7 Los UST están técnicamente sobrevendidos USTs Están Técnicamente Sobrevendidos USTs Están Técnicamente Sobrevendidos Seguimos esperando que una economía estadounidense robusta y una inflación al alza obliguen a la Fed a comenzar a preparar el mercado en la segunda mitad de 2021 para una reducción del QE en 2022, con la primera subida de tasas del próximo ciclo de endurecimiento llegando a finales de 2022. Dado que ese resultado parece en gran medida coherente con el precio actual del mercado, en medio de aspectos técnicos sobrevendidos, es probable que los rendimientos del Tesoro continúen moviéndose lateralmente al menos durante las próximas semanas. Sin embargo, hay poco que sugiera que los rendimientos han alcanzado techo y estén a punto de entrar en una nueva tendencia bajista, dado el ritmo acelerado de vacunación en EE. UU. que aumenta el optimismo sobre un eventual fin de la etapa estadounidense de la pandemia. Manténgase defensivo respecto a la exposición a los Tesoro de EE. UU., ya que el aumento cíclico de los rendimientos aún no ha terminado. Conclusión: La subida sostenida de los rendimientos de los bonos estadounidenses ha dejado a los bonos con vencimientos más largos en una posición de sobreventa. Sin embargo, el impulso subyacente del crecimiento y la inflación sigue siendo bajista para los bonos y es probable que la Fed comience a preparar el mercado más adelante este año para la reducción de las compras de activos en 2022. Mantener una postura defensiva a medio plazo respecto a los bonos del Tesoro de EE. UU. (duración por debajo del índice de referencia y una asignación de país con infraponderación). Canadá: Rebajar a infraponderación En un Informe Especial publicado en febrero junto con nuestros colegas de BCA Foreign Exchange Strategy, expusimos el caso para colocar la deuda gubernamental canadiense en "observación de rebaja" en las carteras globales de renta fija.1 Esperábamos que los rendimientos de los bonos canadienses continuaran subiendo junto con el aumento de los rendimientos globales y, por tanto, mantuvimos nuestra recomendación de exposición de duración por debajo del índice de referencia dentro de Canadá. Gráfico 8 Canadá: Un mercado de bonos de alta beta una vez más Canadá: un mercado de bonos de alta beta una vez más Canadá: un mercado de bonos de alta beta una vez más Sin embargo, concluimos que era demasiado pronto para cambiar a una postura de infraponderación total sobre los bonos gubernamentales canadienses con los casos de COVID-19 aún azotando el país, el programa de vacunación comenzando muy lentamente y el programa de QE del Banco de Canadá (BoC) impidiendo que los bonos canadienses volvieran a su estado habitual de "alta beta" dentro de los mercados de bonos de economías desarrolladas. Ahora parece que fuimos demasiado cautelosos en ese aspecto. Los bonos gubernamentales canadienses han sido uno de los mercados con peor desempeño en lo que va del año dentro del índice Bloomberg Barclays Global Government, registrando un retorno en moneda local de -4,1% - peor que el retorno de -3,5% obtenido por los bonos del Tesoro de EE. UU. hasta ahora en 2021.2 Está claro que los bonos gubernamentales canadienses vuelven a ser un mercado más sensible a los movimientos de las tasas de interés globales (Gráfico 8). En ese Informe Especial de febrero, expusimos tres factores que podrían empujar al BoC a pasar a una postura de política menos dovish, y más bajista para los bonos, más rápido de lo que esperábamos. Gran parte de esa lista ya ha comenzado a materializarse. 1) Buenas noticias sobre el despliegue de la vacuna Lamentablemente, Canadá está sufriendo una tercera ola de casos de COVID-19 que ha llevado a la provincia más poblada de la nación, Ontario, a implementar el confinamiento más severo visto hasta ahora durante la pandemia. Sin embargo, el ritmo de vacunación también ha aumentado, con la proporción de canadienses que han recibido al menos una dosis siendo ahora del 21% (Gráfico 9), superior al del conjunto de la Unión Europea (UE). Canadá está administrando ahora más vacunas diarias que tanto el Reino Unido como la UE. El ritmo acelerado de las vacunaciones ya está proporcionando un gran impulso a la confianza económica canadiense. El índice de confianza del consumidor Bloomberg Nanos está en un máximo histórico (Gráfico 10), mientras que la Encuesta de Perspectivas Empresariales del BoC para la primavera de 2021 fue increíblemente sólida. Dos tercios de las empresas de esa encuesta esperan que las ventas superen los niveles previos a la pandemia, incluso con el reciente repunte de casos de COVID-19. Gráfico 9 Mejora en el despliegue de vacunas en Canadá Algunas historias bajistas sobre bonos de ambos lados del paralelo 49 Algunas historias bajistas sobre bonos de ambos lados del paralelo 49 Gráfico 10 Optimismo en auge Optimismo en auge Optimismo en auge La Encuesta de Consumidores del BoC del primer trimestre de 2021 mostró niveles similares de optimismo. El 74% de los canadienses encuestados de entre 25 y 54 años planean participar en niveles de actividad social y económica iguales o superiores a los previos a la pandemia una vez que la mayoría esté vacunada (Gráfico 11). Una mayoría neta (18%) de los encuestados planea gastar más en los tipos de servicios "de alto contacto" no disponibles durante la pandemia, como viajes, cine y comer en restaurantes, una vez que la mayoría esté vacunada (Gráfico 12). Gráfico 11 Los canadienses están listos para divertirse de nuevo Algunas historias bajistas sobre bonos desde ambos lados del paralelo 49 Algunas historias bajistas sobre bonos desde ambos lados del paralelo 49 Todos los datos de encuestas canadienses envían un mensaje claro: un despliegue de vacunación más rápido conducirá a un gasto mucho más rápido por parte de consumidores y empresas. 2) Señales de riesgos para la estabilidad financiera El amor de los canadienses, altamente endeudados, por los bienes raíces siempre ha preocupado al BoC. Aunque una combinación de recorte de las tasas de política a cero y el aumento del QE ayudó a estabilizar los mercados financieros canadienses durante el shock pandémico de 2020, también ha desencadenado un nuevo auge de la especulación inmobiliaria. Según la encuesta de consumidores Bloomberg Nanos, el 67% de los canadienses ahora espera que los precios de la vivienda se revaloricen. La demanda de viviendas ha dado un impulso a la economía canadiense a través de un aumento en los inicios de viviendas nuevas (la inversión residencial representa el 8% del PIB real canadiense), mientras empuja la inflación nacional de los precios de la vivienda nuevamente por encima del 10% (Gráfico 13). Gráfico 12 Un aumento del gasto "de alto contacto" espera a la inmunidad de rebaño canadiense Algunas historias bajistas sobre bonos desde ambos lados del paralelo 49 Algunas historias bajistas sobre bonos desde ambos lados del paralelo 49 A medida que los hogares canadienses ya endeudados contraen más deuda para participar en otra fiesta nacional de compra de viviendas, el BoC debe ahora preocuparse por los riesgos de estabilidad financiera derivados de un aumento demasiado rápido del valor de la vivienda. Gráfico 13 Otro auge inmobiliario canadiense Otro auge inmobiliario canadiense Otro auge inmobiliario canadiense En un discurso reciente, la subgobernadora del BoC, Toni Gravelle, señaló que el BoC tuvo que introducir QE en 2020 para ayudar a combatir la disfunción relacionada con el COVID en una variedad de mercados financieros canadienses, incluidos los bonos gubernamentales donde la liquidez se secó.3 Gravelle también señaló que el BoC comenzaría a reducir el QE una vez que quedara claro que los mercados financieros ya no necesitaban el apoyo del QE. Con las acciones canadienses en auge y los diferenciales de los bonos corporativos canadienses cerca de los niveles más bajos de la última década (Gráfico 14), parece evidente que el BoC puede comenzar a reducir su programa de compra de bonos gubernamentales si ya no es necesario y probablemente esté alimentando otra burbuja inmobiliaria. 3) Estímulo fiscal adicional de gran envergadura El gobierno liberal gobernante de Canadá del primer ministro Justin Trudeau entregó una gran cantidad de estímulo fiscal a la economía canadiense afectada por la pandemia en 2020. En el presupuesto federal 2021/22 anunciado ayer, se introdujo otro gran paquete de gasto, equivalente a 101.000 millones de dólares canadienses o 4,2% del PIB canadiense durante los próximos tres años. El gasto fue descrito como otro paquete de ayuda por COVID, pero incluyó muchos programas a largo plazo como cuidado infantil nacional, aumento del salario mínimo e incremento de las inversiones verdes. Según las proyecciones del último World Fiscal Monitor del FMI, el "empujón fiscal" para Canadá –el cambio en el saldo primario cíclicamente ajustado como proporción del PIB– se proyectó que pasara de un estímulo de +9% en 2020 a un lastre de -2% en 2021 (Gráfico 15). El gasto anunciado en el último presupuesto eliminará efectivamente ese lastre durante los próximos tres años. Esto proporcionará un gran impulso a una economía que ya probablemente verá un fuerte crecimiento pospandemia. Gráfico 14 El QE del BoC ya no es necesario La QE del BoC ya no es necesaria La QE del BoC ya no es necesaria Gráfico 15 Ahora no se espera arrastre fiscal en 2021 Algunas historias bajistas sobre bonos de ambos lados del Paralelo 49 Algunas historias bajistas sobre bonos de ambos lados del Paralelo 49 Gráfico 16 Los rendimientos reales canadienses son demasiado bajos Los rendimientos reales canadienses son demasiado bajos Los rendimientos reales canadienses son demasiado bajos Dada la combinación de aumento de las vacunaciones, el repunte de la confianza, un renovado auge inmobiliario y mercados financieros en alza, será difícil para el BoC mantener su configuración de política actual por mucho más tiempo. Este es un banco central que accedió a hacer QE con reticencia el año pasado y numerosos funcionarios del BoC han declarado –incluso en los peores días de la pandemia global– que comenzarían a retirar la acomodación una vez que ya no fuera necesaria. Los mercados de tasas de interés ya han pasado a descontar un ciclo de endurecimiento completo del BoC. La curva OIS canadiense ahora descuenta el "despegue" (una subida completa de 25 pb) en octubre de 2022, con 163 pb de subidas de tasas descontadas hasta finales de 2024 (Gráfico 16). La trayectoria proyectada de las tasas está por debajo de las previsiones de inflación del BoC hasta 2023. Por tanto, se espera que la tasa de política real implícita canadiense permanezca negativa durante los próximos dos años, aunque el BoC estima que el rango de la tasa de política neutral es del 1,75% al 2,75%, es decir, -0,25% a +0,75% en términos reales después de restar el punto medio de la banda objetivo de inflación del BoC del 1-3%. En otras palabras, los mercados de tasas de interés canadienses son vulnerables a cualquier cambio del BoC en una dirección menos dovish, como parece cada vez más probable en algún momento de los próximos meses. Nuestro Monitor del BoC se está alejando rápidamente de la zona de "se requiere política más acomodaticia" (Gráfico 17), y la rápida mejora en la situación del empleo canadiense sugiere que el BoC estará bajo más presión para comenzar a señalar un camino hacia la retirada del apoyo de la política. Esto comenzará con un anuncio de reducción de las compras de QE, quizás incluso antes de cualquier señal de la Fed de que hará lo mismo (Gráfico 18). Esto justifica una postura más cautelosa sobre la exposición a la renta fija canadiense. Gráfico 17 Rebajar los bonos gubernamentales canadienses a infraponderación Rebajar a infraponderados los bonos del Gobierno de Canadá Rebajar a infraponderados los bonos del Gobierno de Canadá Gráfico 18 ¿Podría el BoC comenzar a reducir antes que la Fed? ¿Podría el BoC comenzar a reducir sus compras de activos antes que la Fed? ¿Podría el BoC comenzar a reducir sus compras de activos antes que la Fed? Aunque un anuncio de reducción del BoC antes que la Fed probablemente presionaría al alza al dólar canadiense frente al dólar estadounidense, sería algo con lo que el BoC podría convivir si la economía estuviera ganando fuerza rápidamente, especialmente porque nuestros estrategas de divisas creen que el "loonie" está infravalorado. Por tanto, estamos rebajando formalmente nuestra asignación estratégica recomendada a los bonos gubernamentales canadienses a infraponderación (2 de 5, ver la tabla en la página 16). También mantenemos nuestra recomendación de exposición de duración por debajo del índice de referencia dentro de las carteras dedicadas a bonos canadienses. También estamos reduciendo la asignación a Canadá a infraponderación en nuestra cartera modelo de bonos y colocando los ingresos tanto en EE. UU. como en la Europa central (ver páginas 14-15). Conclusión: La economía canadiense está ganando un impulso positivo significativo, con un ritmo de vacunación más rápido que aumenta el optimismo a pesar de una tercera ola de COVID-19. Ahora vemos un riesgo creciente de que el Banco de Canadá cambie a una postura de política menos dovish en los próximos meses, liderado por una reducción de sus compras de bonos. Rebajar los bonos gubernamentales canadienses a infraponderación en las carteras globales de renta fija.   Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com Notas al pie 1 Consulte el Informe Especial de BCA Research Foreign Exchange Strategy/Global Fixed Income Strategy, "¿La recuperación canadiense liderará o se rezagará respecto al ciclo global?", fechado el 12 de febrero de 2021, disponible en fes.bcaresearch.com y gfis.bcaresearch.com. 2 Ese rendimiento canadiense es prácticamente el mismo después de cubrirse a dólares estadounidenses, por lo que ese rendimiento en moneda local se puede comparar con el rendimiento del mercado de Tesoro denominado en dólares estadounidenses. 3https://www.bankofcanada.ca/2021/03/market-stress-relief-role-bank-canadas-balance-sheet Recomendaciones La cartera recomendada por GFIS frente al índice de referencia personalizado Algunos relatos bajistas sobre bonos de ambos lados del paralelo 49 Algunos relatos bajistas sobre bonos de ambos lados del paralelo 49 Duración Asignación regional Productos de spread Operaciones tácticas Rendimientos & retornos Rendimientos de bonos globales Rentabilidades históricas

Highlights On a timeframe of a few years, a net deflationary shock is a near-certainty even if we do not know its precise nature or its precise timing. Hence, investors must build such a deflationary shock or shocks into their long-term investment strategy. Specifically: The 10-year T-bond yield will ultimately reach zero, and the 30-year T-bond yield will ultimately reach 0.5 percent. For patient investors, this presents a mouth-watering 100 percent return on the long-duration T-bond. The structural bull market in equities will continue until T-bond yields reach their ultimate low. Patient equity investors should steer towards ‘growth’ sectors that will surge on the ultimate low in T-bond yields. Fractal trade shortlist: Taiwan versus China, Netherlands versus China, and Sweden versus Finland. Feature Chart I-1For Long-Term Investors, A Shock Is A Near-Certainty Predicting shocks is easy. The precise nature and timing of shocks is not predictable, but the statistical distribution of shocks is highly predictable. This means that the longer our investment timeframe, the more certain we are of encountering at least one shock – even if we cannot predict its precise nature or timing. Many economists and strategists blame their forecasting errors on shocks, such as the pandemic, which they point out are ‘unforecastable.’ Absent the shocks, they argue, their predictions of the economy and the markets would have turned out right. This is a valid excuse for short-term forecasting errors, but it is not a valid excuse for long-term forecasting errors. On a long-term horizon, encountering a major shock, or several major shocks, is a near-certainty. Hence, economists and strategists who are not incorporating the well-defined statistical distribution of shocks into their long-term investment forecasts and strategies are making a mistake. Individual Shocks Are Not Predictable In the 21 years of this century so far, there have been five shocks whose economic/financial consequences have been felt worldwide: the dot com bust (2000); the global financial crisis (2007/8); the euro debt crisis (2011/12); the emerging markets recession (2014/15); and the global pandemic (2020). To these we can add two wide-reaching political shocks: the Brexit vote (2016); and Donald Trump’s shock victory in the US presidential election (2016). In total, this constitutes seven shocks, four economic/financial, two political, and one natural (Chart I-2). Chart I-2The Seven Global Shocks Of The Century (So Far) Some people argue that economic/financial shocks are predictable, because they arise from vulnerabilities in the economy or financial markets, which should be easy to spot. Unfortunately, though such vulnerabilities are obvious in hindsight, the greatest economic minds cannot see them in real time. The greatest economic minds cannot see economic vulnerabilities. Infamously, on the eve of the global financial crisis, Ben Bernanke was insisting that “there’s not much indication that subprime mortgage issues have spread into the broader mortgage market.” Equally infamously, on the eve of the euro debt crisis, Mario Draghi was asking “what makes you think that the ECB must become lender of last resort to governments to keep the eurozone together?” (Chart I-3 and Chart I-4) Chart I-3Bernanke Couldn't See The GFC Chart I-4Draghi Couldn't See The Euro Debt Crisis Which begs the question, what is the current vulnerability that today’s great economic minds cannot see? As we have documented many times, most recently in The Rational Bubble Is Turning Irrational, the current vulnerability is the exponential relationship between rising bond yields and the risk premiums on equities and other risk-assets (Chart I-5 and Chart I-6). Meaning that $500 trillion of risk-assets are vulnerable to any substantial further rise in bond yields. Chart I-5A 1.5 Percent Decline In The Bond Yield Had A Smaller Impact On The Earnings Yield When The Bond Yield Started At 4 Percent... Chart I-6...Than When The Bond Yield Started ##br##At 3 Percent The second type of shock – political shocks – should be predictable as they mostly arise from well-defined events such as elections and referenda, which an army of political experts analyses ad nauseam. Yet the greatest political minds could not see Brexit or President Trump coming. Indeed, even ‘Team Brexit’ didn’t see Brexit coming, because it had no plan on how to implement Brexit once the vote was won. The third type of shocks – natural shocks – are clearly unpredictable as individual events. Nobody knows when the next major pandemic, earthquake, volcano eruption, tsunami, solar flare, or asteroid strike is going happen. Yet, to repeat, while the precise nature and timing of shocks is not predictable, the statistical distribution of shocks is highly predictable. The Statistical Distribution Of Shocks Is Highly Predictable The good news is that shocks follow well-defined statistical ‘power laws’ which allow us to accurately forecast how many shocks to expect in any long timeframe. The 7 shocks experienced through the past 21 years equates to a shock every three years on average, or 3.33 shocks in any 10-year period. The expected wait to the next shock is three years. The next few paragraphs delve into some necessary mathematics, but don’t worry, you don’t need to understand the maths to appreciate the key takeaways. If the past 21 years is representative, we propose that the number of shocks in any 10-year period follows a so-called Poisson distribution with parameter 3.33. From this distribution, it follows that the probability of going through a 5-year period without a shock is just 19 percent, and the probability of going through a 10-year period without a shock is a negligible 4 percent (Chart of the Week). The result is that if you are a long-term investor, then encountering a shock is a near-certainty and should be built into your investment strategy. How can we test our assumption that the number of shocks follows a Poisson distribution? The maths tells us that if the number of shocks follows a Poisson distribution with parameter 3.33, then the ‘waiting time’ between shocks follows a so-called Exponential distribution also with parameter 3.33. On this basis, 63 percent of the waits between shocks should be up to three years, 23 percent should be four to six years, and 14 percent should be over six years. Now we can compare this expected distribution with the actual distribution of waits between the 7 shocks encountered so far in this century. We find that the theory lines up closely with the practice, validating our assumption of a Poisson distribution (Chart I-7 and Chart I-8). Chart I-7The Theoretical Waiting Time Between Shocks… Chart II-8…Is Close To The Actual Waiting Time Between Shocks To repeat the key takeaways, on a long-term timeframe, encountering at least one shock is a near-certainty, and the expected wait to the next shock is three years. A Shock Is A Near-Certainty, And It Will End Up Deflationary Nevertheless, there remains a pressing question: Will the next shock(s) be deflationary or reflationary? It turns out that all shocks end up with both deflationary and reflationary components: either a deflationary impulse followed by a reflationary backlash or, as we highlighted in The Road To Inflation Ends At Deflation, a reflationary impulse followed by a deflationary backlash. But the crucial point is that the deflationary component will swamp the reflationary component. In the seven shocks of this century so far, six have been deflationary impulses with a weaker reflationary backlash; and one – the reflation trade of 2017-18 – was a reflationary impulse with a stronger deflationary backlash. It is our high conviction view that in the next shock(s), the deflationary component will continue to hold the upper hand (Chart I-9). Chart I-9Each Shock Has A Deflationary And Reflationary Component... But The Deflationary Component Tends To Dominate The simple reason is that as financial asset prices, real estate prices, and debt servicing costs get addicted to ever lower bond yields, the economy and financial markets cannot tolerate bond yields reaching previous tightening highs and, just like all addicts, need a new extreme loosening to feel any stimulus. This means that when the next shock comes – as it surely will – it will require lower lows and lower highs in the bond yield cycle. Let’s sum up. On a timeframe of a few years, a shock is a near-certainty even if we do not know its precise nature – economic/financial, political, or natural – or its precise timing. Furthermore, the shock will be net deflationary. Hence, investors must build such a deflationary shock or shocks into their long-term investment strategy. Specifically: The 10-year T-bond yield will eventually reach zero, and the 30-year T-bond yield will ultimately reach 0.5 percent. For patient investors, this constitutes a mouth-watering 100 percent return on the long-duration T-bond. The 10-year T-bond yield will eventually reach zero. The structural bull market in equities will continue until T-bond yields reach their ultimate low. Patient equity investors should tilt towards ‘growth’ sectors that will surge on the ultimate low in T-bond yields. Candidates For Countertrend Reversals This week we have noticed an unusual decoupling among the tech-heavy markets of Taiwan, Netherlands, and China (Chart I-10). Chart I-10An Unusual Decoupling Between Tech-Heavy Netherlands And China Among these three markets, the strong short-term outperformance of both Taiwan and Netherlands are due to supply bottlenecks in the semiconductor sector that have boosted Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing and ASML, but we expect these bottlenecks ultimately to resolve.  On this basis and combined with extremely fragile 130-day fractal structures, Taiwan versus China and Netherlands versus China are vulnerable to reversals (Chart I-11 and Chart I-12). Chart I-11Underweight Taiwan Versus China Chart I-12Underweight Netherlands Versus China Our first recommended trade is to underweight Netherlands versus China, setting a profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 5 percent. Another outperformance that looks fragile on its 130-day fractal structure is Sweden versus Finland, driven by industrials and financials versus energy and materials (Chart I-13). Chart I-13Underweight Sweden Versus Finland Our second recommended trade is to underweight Sweden versus Finland, setting a profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 4.7 percent.   Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Asset Performance Equity Market Performance   Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - ##br##Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - ##br##Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - ##br##Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - ##br##Other Developed   Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations    

Dear Client, Next week I will be hosting a series of Roundtable discussions with BCA’s clients in both Europe and Asia. Our next report published on April 28th will be a recap of my observations from these meetings. Best regards, Jing Sima China Strategist Highlights The sharp uptick in Chinese producer prices should be transitory, unlikely to trigger a policy response. There are two scenarios under which Chinese manufacturers’ profit margins will benefit: either Chinese exporters will raise export prices and pass input costs onto American customers, or the RMB will depreciate versus the US dollar and commodities prices will experience a setback. The second scenario is more likely in the next 3-6 months. After a pandemic-driven boost in 2020, US imports from China will likely moderate in the second half of 2021 and into 2022. President Biden’s grand infrastructure spending plan, even if approved later this year, will not be a game changer for China’s exports or economy. The strength in the USD may intensify in the near term, and Chinese policymakers will be happy to allow the RMB to depreciate mildly. Stay underweight Chinese stocks. Feature Last week’s China’s producer price index (PPI) was more elevated than the market expected. However, it does not warrant a policy response, given that the increase was mostly driven by supply constraints rather than an overheating domestic economy. Chinese manufacturers have had a tough time passing on mounting input prices to customers, which raises the question about how profit margins will be maintained. For exporters, the answer may be a combination of increasing export prices in USD terms and depreciating the RMB.  The rate of growth in US demand for Chinese export goods may moderate in the second half of 2021 and into 2022 after a pandemic-driven boost in 2020. China’s economic growth and interest rate differentials with the US will continue to narrow in the rest of this year. We expect the RMB to face headwinds against the USD, at least in the next quarter or two. Meanwhile, global investors should continue to underweight Chinese stocks. The PBoC Will Not React To Supply-Side Price Pressures Chart 1Marchs Strong PPI Does Not Reflect An Overheating Domestic Economy Despite above-expectation readings in China’s PPI, the domestic economy shows no signs of overheating. The upside pressure on producer prices reflects the impact of both the global rally in commodities and base effects (Chart 1). In March, strength in the PPI was also accentuated by seasonality due to a resumption in construction and real estate activity following the Chinese New Year holiday. While base effects and global supply bottlenecks will continue to buoy PPI prints throughout Q2, these effects are likely transitory and would not justify a policy response. At 0.4% year-over-year in March, core CPI remains significantly below the central bank’s 3% target and does not indicate any demand-side pressure. Instead, the inability for Chinese producers to pass on higher input prices to consumers highlights the relatively subdued state of domestic demand (Chart 1, bottom panel). Chart 2Current Macro Policy Works To Cap The Upsides In Both The Price And Quantity Of Money At this point there are little signs that rising producer prices are spilling over to consumer prices. We expect Chinese authorities to continue its current policy trajectory, which intends to keep a steady interbank rate while keeping money supply growth at or below the rate of nominal GDP expansion (Chart 2). China’s Deteriorating Terms Of Trade Chinese export prices climbed slightly in USD terms, but not by enough to offset the RMB’s relentless appreciation from the second half of last year, as indicated by falling export prices in RMB terms (Chart 3). A deteriorating terms of trade (ToT), defined as export prices relative to import costs, means that Chinese producers must export a greater number of units to purchase the same number of imports (Chart 4).  The declining ToT can be a powerful deflationary force for China’s manufacturing sector. Chart 3Chinese Export Prices Are Rising In USD Terms But Falling In Local Currency Terms Chart 4Terms Of Trade Have Been Falling Chart 5Chinese Output Prices Lead US Consumer Inflation By A Year While there are limited choices for China to improve its ToT, manufacturers could raise export prices in USD terms and “recycle” cost-push inflation back to the US. Chinese PPI normally leads US consumer inflation by 12 to 18 months (Chart 5). Hence, it is possible that the US will see import prices from China picking up more momentum by the middle of next year. The RMB’s performance is a key macro driver for manufacturing-related output prices. A depreciation in the RMB can be a meaningful reflationary force for manufacturers. There has been a clear negative correlation between the trade-weighted RMB and Chinese manufacturers' output prices and industrial profits, as shown in Chart 6. In this scenario, the USD will continue to appreciate against the RMB and possibly emerging market currencies, a headwind to global trade (Chart 7). Chart 6A Falling RMB Can Be Reflationary To Chinese Producers Chart 7A Stronger USD Will Be Headwinds For Global Trade Maintaining a strong RMB can partly mitigate the pain stemming from escalating commodity import prices.  However, in our view it is the least preferred option by policymakers. In previous cycles a rapidly strengthening RMB did not have a major impact on Chinese exporters' competitiveness, mainly because declines in commodities prices effectively offset a rising RMB (Chart 8 and Chart 9). Therefore, Chinese exporters did not need to boost prices in USD terms to maintain their profit margins. Chart 8RMB Appreciations Did Not Hurt Chinas Share In Global Trade Chart 9...Because Declines In Commodities Prices Were Able To Offset A Rising RMB Bottom Line: Chinese exporters can either raise prices and pass the inflation onto American customers, or the PBoC will allow further depreciation in the RMB to maintain Chinese producers’ competitiveness. Appreciating the RMB is the least preferred option. Don’t Count On A US Buying Spree  Market participants in China are pricing in large windfalls from the US$1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan and proposed US$2.4 trillion American Jobs Plan.1 A positive export tailwind in Q1 this year boosted China’s economic activity beyond what measures of domestic money and credit would have predicted, as shown in Chart 10. However, given the strongly positive relationship between the export sector and real investment in China, it is concerning that any deceleration in US demand for Chinese export goods would seriously challenge the sanguine view for China’s economy this year (Chart 11). Chart 10Export Strength Appears To Be Propping Up The LKI Chart 11China's Export Sector Is Highly Investment-Intensive Moreover, US demand for Chinese export goods is subject to several countervailing forces, at least in the second half of 2021: The USD currently benefits from widening real interest differentials and stronger US growth relative to the rest of the world. For the next quarter or two, persistent strength in the USD and US Treasury yields will be headwinds to global trade and may cause a temporary setback for the global manufacturing sector (Chart 7 on Page 4). Residential and business investment in the US may not regain much vigor despite large stimulus checks. Our colleagues at BCA US Investment Strategy expect US residential investment to match the long-run trend growth, but the increase will be largely offset by below-trend growth in non-residential investment. More working-from-home options will continue to drive demand for single-family homes in the suburbs and beyond. On the other hand, demand will suffer for office space in central business districts and dwellings in urban centers. Brick-and-mortar retail construction is also going to crater. Consumption for goods in the US may also see below-trend growth in the second half of 2021 and into 2022, whereas the service sector will benefit most from the coming recovery in US business and social activities. Table 1 shows that goods spending rose in 2020 despite an overall decline in consumption, because households dramatically shifted their consumption into goods from services. As such, 2020’s pandemic-driven dividend for Chinese exporters is likely to become a drag on tradeable goods exports to the US in 2021 and/or 2022. Table 1US Consumer Spending Gap Is Almost Entirely On The Services Side It is also important for investors to put the US$2.4 trillion infrastructure spending budget proposed in the American Jobs Plan into prospective. The US lags far behind China in infrastructure spending. In the past 10 years, US public infrastructure investment (federal and state combined) has declined to an average of about $450 billion.2 This compares with China’s US $1.9 trillion yearly spending on infrastructure (Chart 12). China currently consumes seven to eight times more industrial metals than the US (Chart 13). As such, even if the US infrastructure investment plan will be approved later this year, it is unlikely to be a game changer for global commodity prices or Chinese exports. Chart 12Infrastructure Spending, China Vs. The US Chart 13US Consumption Of Industrial Metals Is Too Small Relative To China The proposed US$1.2 trillion spending on the US nation’s roads, bridges, green spaces, water, electricity, and universal broadband will be spread over the next eight years.  The additional $150 billion per annum to the US public infrastructure investment will only boost the US spending from 24% to about 32% of China’s annual infrastructure investment. Furthermore, the fiscal multiplier effect from the extra public spending on investment from the US private sector and overall economy may not be as positive as the market has priced in, depending on the size of corporate tax hikes in the final bill. Bottom Line: After a pandemic-driven boost in 2020, growth in US imports from China will likely moderate in the second half of 2021 and into 2022. The proposed infrastructure spending plan in the US will benefit Chinese exports, but the magnitude of the windfall may be disappointing. Investment Implications As discussed in a previous report, rising US bond yields will have a muted effect on their Chinese counterparts. Tightened regulations on the real estate industry and a new round of environmental protection laws in China will continue to suppress the domestic credit demand.  As a result, interest rate differentials between China and the US will continue to narrow. The strength in the USD has not run its course and the RMB will face slight depreciation pressures in Q2 and possibly into Q3. A declining RMB will provide reflationary benefits to China’s industrial profits, but with about a six-month time lag. In the meantime, we recommend global investors to continue underweighting Chinese stocks (Chart 14A and 14B). Chart 14AContinue Underweighting Chinese Stocks Chart 14BContinue Underweighting Chinese Stocks   Jing Sima China Strategist jings@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1According to the OECD, recent US stimulus will boost US GDP growth by almost 3 percentage points in the first full year (from 2021Q2 to 2022Q2). The knock-on effect from the stimulus on other economies is projected to be significant, including a half percentage point addition to China’s GDP during the same period. 2The Congressional Budget Office estimated that combined federal, state and local spending on infrastructure was (in 2019 dollars) $441 billion as of 2017. Cyclical Investment Stance Equity Sector Recommendations