Mega temas

Informe especial

In the previous Tinkering With Inflation Special Report, we outlined our structural view for US inflation, namely that over the next 10 years inflation will surprise to the upside largely driven by politicians re-discovering the magic of fiscal spending. In today’s Special Report, we look at structural GICS1 sector-level implications for portfolio allocation courtesy of the looming inflationary flux, but with a major caveat. Over the years we have published numerous reports answering the question of “what to buy and what to sell” when inflation comes and goes. But, the key criticism is that our previous inflationary analysis included data from the current disinflationary era. In other words, the data was capturing the effects of reflation (i.e. inflationary spikes within the broader deflationary megatrend), rather than effects of the pure-play inflation (i.e. inflationary spikes within the broader inflationary trend). Up until recently, such analysis was well-fit for the macro environment investors were in, but given our structurally inflationary view, it pays to take a closer look at the relative GICS1 sector performance during “true” inflationary periods. The shaded areas in Chart 1 display five pure-play inflationary periods that we analyse in this Special Report. Importantly, we also treat the very first iteration with a big grain of salt as it was catalyzed by a one-off event: excessive Department of Defense (DoD) Vietnam War and Star War spending, which in turn skewed relative sector performance results (similarly to how relative sector performance during the recent pandemic-induced recession is not indicative of the typical recessionary sector performance). The Line In The Sand Before we proceed with our sectorial analysis, we must first distinguish between moves in core CPI that constitute deflation and inflation. We rely on empirical data and examine in detail the relationship between core CPI inflation, interest rates, and equites. Starting with equites, we find that the S&P 500 P/E multiple typically peaks when core CPI inflation reaches 2.3% and begins to decline once inflation climbs above 2.5% (Chart 2). At this level the market no longer finds the prospect of investing in long duration assets attractive. The investment horizon shortens as well as the multiple market participants are willing to pay for future earnings. The only adjustment we make to the 2.5% number is instead of looking at a specific inflection level, we turn it into a range of 2.3-2.7%. Chart 1True Inflationary Episodes Chart 2Inflation And The P/E Multiple Next, we bring fixed income into the picture and look at the correlation between SPX returns and changes in the 10-year US Treasury yield. The changes in this correlation help to distinguish between deflationary and inflationary environments due to different causality routes that exist from bonds to stocks, versus from stocks to bonds. A concrete example will help to clarify the point. When bond yields rise, they push stock prices down resulting into a negative causal correlation from yields to stocks. On the other hand, if stocks fall, then the central bank has to cut rates to protect the stock market, and in doing so it lowers yields. The end result is a positive causal correlation from stocks to yields. Negative correlation: yields rise ➜ DCF discount factor rises ➜ stocks fall Positive correlation: stocks fall ➜ central bank cuts rates ➜ yields fall Every central bank has to make the choice in which one of these two structural casual loops they operate as they can only protect one asset: either the bond market from inflation or the stock market from deflation. The choice of that key asset reveals the inflationary vs. deflationary regime. The bottom panel of Chart 3 illustrates this interplay. The top panel of Chart 3 also plots our 2.3%-2.7% inflation/deflation core CPI inflection range. Every time core CPI approached this critical range, the correlation between SPX returns and changes in the 10-year yield snapped to zero in preparation for a structural paradigm shift. This empirical exercise further illustrates that the 2.3-2.7% band in core CPI is the border between inflation and deflation. Chart 3The Border Line What follows is a select GICS1 sector return/positioning analysis during bouts of actual inflation. We also mainly focus on cyclical sectors since positioning within defensive GICS1 sectors is not driven by inflation, but instead it is dictated by global growth dynamics, which are beyond the scope of this Special Report.   Arseniy Urazov Senior Analyst ArseniyU@bcaresearch.com   Positioning For True Inflation: S&P Consumer Discretionary It is no secret that consumers don’t like CPI inflation as it erodes purchasing power via a multitude of channels. High interest rates that go toe to toe with inflation make big item purchases more challenging due to the higher cost of credit, hence weighing on end-demand for consumer discretionary stocks. Also, there is only so much cost pressures companies can pass onto the US consumer. The implication is that there comes a time when the entire S&P consumer discretionary sector is forced to sacrifice margins and profits. Chart 4 shows our consumer drag indicator that encapsulates both of these factors. Our thesis is that should true inflation return, the underperformance period is likely to be more severe compared with previous historical episodes (Chart 6). The reason for such a grim forecast has to do with the present-day sector composition. Following the inclusion of TSLA in this GICS1 sector, the combined exposure to AMZN and TSLA is 53% (Chart 5). Chart 4Inflationary Headwinds Chart 5Overconcentration Chart 6Inflation & Consumer Discretionary Equities Both of these companies are effectively a long duration trade, which disproportionately benefited from low rates via the multiple expansion channel. Should inflation return to the system and end the era of low rates, both TSLA and AMZN will fall out of investor’s favor and heavily weigh on the overall S&P consumer discretionary sector. Finally, the bottom panel of Chart 6 shows the impressive run consumer discretionary stocks had since the beginning of the millennium rising by over 100% in relative terms. The rise is also in sharp contrast to the performance from 1975 to 2000 when the sector was range bound. The implication is that should an inflation-induced normalization period take root, the risk/reward in the S&P consumer discretionary sector will lie to the downside. Bottom Line: The S&P consumer discretionary sector will underperform in an inflationary world. Positioning For True Inflation: S&P Financials Similar to their early cycle brethren consumer discretionary stocks, investors should shy away from financials when the inflation genie is out of the bottle. Outside of the anomaly Vietnam War/Moon Landing period, Chart 7 reveals that inflation is a major headwind for financials. Chart 7Inflation & Financials Equities There are several avenues through which it hurts the sector. The first one is the yield curve. When the Fed raises short term rates to combat inflation, it flattens the curve. The end result is that the yield curve is flatter during an inflationary era, meaning that the spread between borrowing and lending narrows for the banking sector and results in a net interest margins squeeze. As a result, profitability drops, and stock prices fall (Chart 7, bottom panel). Inflation also hurts S&P financials due to the mismatch between banks' assets and liabilities. A typical bank has longer maturity for its receipts stream than for its liabilities. Consequently, as inflation rises, it reduces the future net inflow because creditors demand higher interest rates, while the returns earned by the bank on its current loan book is mostly fixed by existing contracts. The net result is lower bank equity and subsequently lower stock prices. The example below adds more color to the argument. Table 1 shows a stylized example of a balance sheet for a commercial bank over the course of three years with the following assumptions: Table 1The Effect Of Inflation Inflation from Year 1 to Year 2 is 5%, but it increases from Year 2 to Year 3 to 10% The bank's contracts with creditors mature in 1 year, while loans mature in 2 years Reserve requirements against all deposits are 10% Nominal interest rates on loans stand at 5% Interest rates on deposits stand at 4.5% Cash account is ignored as it doesn’t affect qualitative results The bank starts in Year 1 and extends $1,000 worth of loans maturing in two years with a 5% rate and receives $1,000 worth of deposits that grow at 4.5% per year and mature next year. The bank also has 10% ($100) of its liabilities in reserves. The difference between assets and liabilities is the bank’s equity or market value, which is also $100. Next year, the bank receives $50 (5% of $1000) in income from the loans it extended in Year 1, but a portion of this income has to be moved to reserves as the value of deposits increased by $45 (4.5% of $1000). Thus, the final value of loans is $1050 minus ($45 times the 10% reserve requirement), which equals $1045.5. The bank’s nominal equity value also increased to $105, but when adjusted for inflation it remains the same as in Year 1. Now, expected inflation for Year 3 changes from 5% to 10%, and since deposits have matured, creditors renegotiate them at a new rate of 10%, while the loans that were issued in Year 1 remain contractually bind to the original 5%. Crunching the numbers for Year 3 using new interest rates reveals that both the nominal and real value of a bank’s equity decreased due to the maturity mismatch between its assets and liabilities. Of course, the bank could have extended new loans in Year 2 at the higher 10% rate, but it would have only reduced the drop in equity value, but not eliminated it, so for the sake of simplicity we ignored that option. What this exercise showed is the second avenue through which inflation weighs on banks, and by extension, financials equities. Bottom Line: It pays to shy away from the S&P financials sector during bouts of inflation. Positioning For True Inflation: S&P Energy The S&P energy index is a classic inflation beneficiary as true inflationary impulses are synonymous with oil price surges. Chart 8 highlights how this commodity-driven sector was quick to react to all six inflationary spurts, besting the market during each of them. Chart 8Inflation & Energy Equities Moreover, deglobalization is likely to provide a boost to relative energy prices over a multi-year time horizon as the number of proxy wars in South America and the Middle East will likely increase, undercutting global oil supply. Hence, the geopolitical risk premia in crude oil will also rise boosting the allure of energy stocks. Finally, for investors who are choosing between energy and materials equites to express their near-term inflationary view, we would recommend sticking to the S&P Energy index in light of our unfolding China slowing down view. Chart 9 also depicts how China's dominance in the materials market is nearly absolute compared to the one in energy space. Hence, materials equities are more sensitive to the China weakness story, and investors should at the margin prefer energy equities over materials. Stay tuned for an upcoming report that will explore this idea in greater depth and recommend a new intra-commodity complex pair trade. Bottom Line: The S&P energy sector will outperform the market should deflation recede. Chart 9China And Commodities   Positioning For True Inflation: S&P Industrials The S&P industrials sector is located in the middle of the economic value chain and thus it has diminishing power to pass on inflationary cost increases especially energy related ones. At the same time, capital goods producers have other corporations as their end-demand user, which means that they suffer less from inflation than sectors at the far end of the value chain like consumer discretionary. Chart 10 shows how relative performance of the S&P industrials sector is “neither here nor there” when examining inflationary spikes. Chart 10Inflation & Industrials Equities However, taking a closer look, we do note a shorter-term pattern that unfolds within every inflationary period. The S&P industrials index outperforms in the early stages of an inflationary spike, but then gives up its gains as inflation re-accelerates. There is an intuitive explanation for this dynamic. As deflation recedes giving way to inflation, industrial stocks are able to pass on the initial price increases to their customers thus preserving margins and profits. But as inflation persists, the fact that industrials companies are located in the middle of the economic value chain becomes a headwind as they are no longer able to pass on costs increases, which in turn gets reflected in falling relative stock prices. Bottom Line: Keep the S&P industrials index in the overweight basket early on into an inflationary spike, but do not overstay your welcome as inflation endures. Positioning For True Inflation: S&P Materials Typically, inflationary pressures first manifest themselves in higher raw material costs as rising demand from increased economic growth outpaces supply, benefiting materials equities. At the same time, the fact that materials stocks are the first link in the economic value chain allows them to efficiently pass on price increases, whereas other sectors at the end of the value chain like S&P consumer discretionary typically have the hardest time doing so (Chart 11). Chart 11Inflation & Materials Equities The current deflationary environment has proven rocky for the S&P materials sector as it sits at the second lowest level in history following the dotcom-formed “Mariana Trench”. Should our forecast for an inflationary revival prove accurate, materials producers will be prime beneficiaries with ample upside potential. The mean relative share price ratio during the previous inflationary cycle (1960-1996) is 0.25. Today, materials are sitting at the 0.12 mark, which makes a 100%+ rise a reasonable structural forecast. Bottom Line: Materials are a secular buy in an inflationary world. Positioning For True Inflation: S&P Technology On the surface, the S&P technology sector appears to be a textbook candidate to short during inflation, but empirical data disagrees with the theory. The top panel of Chart 12 shows that there have only been two clean periods when tech underperformed during true inflationary periods (1974-1976 and 1987-1990). On the other hand, in 1977 – the year that had a very significant inflationary spike – technology stocks managed to outpace the broad market by a wide margin. Chart 12Inflation & Technology Equities The reason for such inconsistent performance is due to the fact that the sector is sensitive to two opposing forces: multiple contraction and real economic growth. It is well-know that currently technology stocks represent the longest duration sector within the S&P 500, but they also enjoy inelastic demand profile. In other words, corporations cannot put their guard down and fully trim CAPEX and R&D expenses even during recessions because if they do, their competition will steam roll ahead. The same holds for the consumer sector. While some tech gadgets are luxury goods, consumers cannot simply postpone their PC, phone, and software related expenses as those are necessity goods. In short, the S&P technology index is not a pure-play cyclical sector as inelastic demand profile for its goods from other economic agents gives the sector some inflation-proof properties. Given that the upcoming inflationary impulse will be fiscal-driven, we would not rush to put tech stocks in the underweight basket. Instead, we opt to stick with a neutral allocation to underscore this tug of war effect between the two forces. Bottom Line: Relative technology performance in an inflationary world will depend on whether real economic growth can compensate for multiple contraction. Stick with a benchmark allocation. So What? In this Special Report we examined how investors should be positioned for true inflation rather than reflation. Some of the key differences are the following: financials switch from being a buy during reflation to a sell during true inflation, industrials are flat when looking at the entire inflationary spike, but they outperform in the early innings and underperform in the later stages of inflation, and finally technology is not a clear underperformer as this sector is caught between two opposing forces. Now circling back to our structural inflationary view, while it will take time for the current deflationary megatrend to make a full U-turn, the incoming post-recessionary spike driven by fiscal spending and heating up of the US economy will make for the right environment to test whether last century’s inflationary correlations will still hold. Our portfolio is appropriately positioned to test this hypothesis with an overweight toward inflationary winners and a neutral weight in inflationary losers (Table 2). As a reminder we have the S&P financials sector on downgrade alert. Table 2Current Portfolio Positioning For completion purposes, Chart A1 in the Appendix on the next page also provides historical performance for defensive GICS1 sectors during true inflationary periods. Bottom Line: Investors should overweight true inflationary winners as the incoming CPI flux will unlock excellent value in those sectors.   Appendix Chart A1Appendix         Footnotes  

Highlights US natural gas prices will remain well supported over the April-October injection season, as the global economic expansion gains traction, particularly in Europe, which also is refilling depleted storage levels. China's natgas demand is expected to rise more than 8% yoy, and EM Asia consumption also will be robust, which will revive US liquified natural gas (LNG) exports. Exports of US light-sweet crude into the North Sea Brent pricing pool – currently accounting for close to half the physical supply underpinning the global oil-price benchmark – also will increase over the course of the year, particularly in the summer, when maintenance will markedly reduce the physical supply of crudes making up the Brent index. At the margin, coal demand will increase in the US, as industrial natgas demand and LNG exports incentivize electric generators to favor coal. Higher-than-expected summer temperatures in the US also would boost coal demand.  This will be tempered somewhat in Europe, where carbon-emissions rights traded through €50/MT for the first time this week on the EU's Emission Trading System (ETA). We expect US LNG and oil exports to revive this year (Chart of the Week) and remain long natgas in 1Q22. Feature The importance of US LNG and crude oil exports out of the US Gulf to the global economy is only now becoming apparent. As demand for these fossil fuels grows and the supply side continues to confront a highly uncertain risk-reward tradeoff, their importance will only grow. In natgas markets, US LNG cargoes out of the US Gulf balanced demand coming from Asia and Europe this past winter, which was sharply colder than expected and stretched supply chains globally. As a widening economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic spurs industrial, residential and commercial demand, and inventories in Europe and Asia are re-built in preparation for next winter, US LNG exports will be called upon to meet increasing demand, particularly since they are priced attractively vs regional importing benchmarks, with differentials vs the US presently $4+/MMBtu vs Europe and $5+/MMBtu vs Asia (Chart 2).1 Chart of the WeekUS LNG, Oil Export Growth Will Rebound Chart 2Lower US Natgas Prices Encourage LNG Exports In oil markets, an ongoing kerfuffle in the pricing of Brent Blend brought about by falling North Sea crude oil production makes American light-sweet crude oil exports from the Gulf (i.e., WTI produced mostly in the Permian Basin) account for almost half of the physical supplies in this critical benchmark-pricing market.2 US LNG Exports Will Increase US natural gas prices will remain well supported as the global economic expansion gains traction, and the US and Europe open the April-October injection season well bid (Chart 3). US inventories are expected to end the Apr-Oct injection season at just over 3.7 TCF according to the EIA, very close to where they ended the 2020 injection season. Chart 3US, Europe Rebuild Storage Higher US LNG exports, industrial, commercial and residential demand will be offset by lower consumption from electric generators this year, netting to a slight decline in overall demand. The EIA expects generators to take advantage of lower generating costs to be had burning coal to produce electricity, a view we share given the current differentials in the forward curves for each fuel (Chart 4).3 On the supply side, the EIA's expecting output to remain unchanged from last year at just under 91.5 BCF/d in 2021. Higher LNG exports, even as generator demand is falling, pushes prices higher this year – averaging $3.04/MMBtu this year – which leads to a slight increase in output in 2022. For our part, we continue to expect higher prices during the November-March heating season than currently are clearing the market and remain long 1Q22 $3.50/MMBtu calls vs. short $3.75/MMbtu calls. As of Tuesday night, when we mark to market, this position was up 20.8% since inception on 8 April 2021. Chart 4Lower Prices Will Favour Increased Coal Demand Natgas demand could surprise on the upside during the injection season if air-conditioning demand comes in stronger than expected and production remains essentially unchanged this year. This could reduce LNG exports and slow the rate of inventory refill in the US, which could further advantage coal as a burner fuel for generators in the US. The US National Weather Service's Climate Prediction Center expects above-average temperatures for most of the US population centers this summer (Chart 5). This could become a semi-permanent feature of the market if current temperature trends persist (Chart 6). Based on analyses’ run by the NOAA's National Centers for Environmental Information, 2021 "is very likely to rank among the ten warmest years on record," with lower (6%) odds of ranking in the top five hottest years on record.4 Chart 5Odds Of Hotter Summer Rising Chart 6Higher Global Temperatures Could Become A Recurring Phenomenon The Crude Kerfuffle As the Chart of the Week shows, US exports of light-sweet crude oil peaked at ~ 3.7mm b/d in February 2020, just before the COVID-19 pandemic hit the world full force. Exports out of the US Gulf – i.e., WTI priced against the Midland, TX, gathering hub – accounted for ~ 95% of these volumes. With exports currently running ~ 2.5mm b/d, more than 1mm b/d of readily available export capacity remains in place. Additional volumes will be developed as dredging of the Corpus Christi, TX, progresses. While the surge in US crude oil production has subsided in the wake of the pandemic, it most likely will revive as the markets return to normal operating procedure, additional dredging operations are completed, and storage facilities are built out.5 Existing and additional export capacity of the US's light-sweet crude could not arrive at a more opportune time for the Brent market, which remains in a state of uncertainty as to whether markets will have to adjust to CIF contracts or a work-around to the existing FOB pricing regime, which can be augmented to accommodate increasing WTI volumes.6 This will have to be sorted, as this is the future of the market's most important pricing index (Chart 7). The buildout in crude-oil exporting capacity – and natgas LNG exporting capacity, for that matter – ideally accommodates shale-oil- and -gas assets, which can be ramped up quickly to meet demand, and ramped down quickly as demand falters. The quick payback – 2 to 3 years – on these investments allow the producers to expand and contract output without the massive risks longer-lived conventional assets impose. As OPEC 2.0's spare capacity is returned to the market, this will be a welcome feature of a market that most likely will require oil and gas supplies for decades, despite the uncertainty attending oil-and-gas capex during the transition to a low-carbon energy future. Chart 7Permian Replaces North Sea Losses Bottom Line: As the future of hydrocarbons evolves, the LNG and crude oil exported from the US Gulf will occupy an increasingly important role in these markets. Oil and gas producers are making capex decisions under increasingly uncertain conditions, which favor exactly the type of resources that have propelled the US to the position of the world's largest producer of these fuels – i.e., shale-oil and -gas. Production from these resources can be ramped up and down quickly as prices dictate, and have quick paybacks (2-3 years), which means capital is not tied up for decades as a return is earned.7   Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com   Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish OPEC 2.0 begins returning 2mm b/d to the market this month, expecting to be done by July. Half of these volumes are accounted for by Saudi Arabia, which voluntarily cut output by 1mm b/d earlier in the year to help balance the market. In line with our maintained hypothesis that OPEC 2.0 prefers prices inside the $60-$70/bbl price band, we expect the return of curtailed production to be front-loaded so as to bring prices down from current levels approaching $70/bbl for Brent (Chart 8). If, as we expect, demand recovers sooner than expected as Europe leans into its vaccination program, additional barrels will be returned to the market to get prices closer to a $60-$65/bbl range. Base Metals: Bullish The International Copper Study Group (ICSG) forecast copper mine production will increase by ~ 3.5% in 2021 and 3.7% in 2022, after adjusting for historical disruption factors. This forecasted increase – after three years of flat mined production growth – is due to a ramp-up of recently commissioned and new copper mines becoming operational in 2021. An improvement in the pandemic situation by 2022 will also boost mined copper production, according to the ICSG. 2020 production remained flat as recoveries in production in some countries due to constrained output in 2019 balanced the negative impacts of the pandemic in others. In Chile, the largest copper producer, state-owned Codelco and Collahuasi reported strong results in March. However, this was countered by a continued downturn at BHP’s Escondida. The world’s largest copper mine saw a drop in production for the eighth consecutive month. This mixed output resulted in a decline in total production of 1.2% year-on-year in March. Precious Metals: Bullish COMEX palladium touched a record high during intraday trading on Tuesday, reaching $3,019/oz due to continued tight market conditions (Chart 9). On the supply side, Nornickel is recovering from flooded mines, which occurred in February. By mid-April, one of the two affected mines was operating at 60% capacity; however, the company's other mine is only expected to come back online by early June. On the demand side, strength in US vehicle sales and a global economic recovery from the pandemic buoyed the metal used in catalytic converters. Palladium prices closed at $2,981.60/oz on Tuesday. Ags/Softs: Neutral Corn again traded above $7/bu earlier in the week on the back of drought-like dry weather conditions in Brazil's principal growing regions and surging US exports, according to Farm Futures. Chart 8 Chart 9   Footnotes 1     Stronger demand from China – where consumption is expected to rise more than 8% yoy – and EM Asia will continue to support LNG demand through the year.  S&P Global Platts Analytics expects Chinese natural gas demand to reach 12,713 Bcf in 2021, up 8.4% from the previous year.  Chinese national oil company Sinopec is slightly more conservative in its outlook, expecting gas demand of ~ 12,006-12,184 Bcf in 2021, up 6-8% from 2020.  China’s average annual increase in natural gas demand is expected to exceed 716 Bcf in the 14th FYP and reach 15,185 Bcf in 2025. 2     Please see CIF Brent Benchmark? published 3 March 2021 by the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies for a discussion. 3    In Chart 3, we plot a rough measure of coal- vs natgas-fired generation economics for these fuels based on their average operating heat rates published by the EIA. We would note that a carbon tax would erase much of the benefit accruing to coal at this point in time. 4    Please see NOAA's Global Climate Report - March 2021. 5    Please see Low Rider - Corpus Christi's Ship Channel Dredging Will Streamline Crude Oil Exports published by RBN Energy 3 May 2021. 6    The OIES analysis cited above concludes, "… the volumes of the FOB deliverable crudes are diminishing and some change, bolstering the contract is certainly needed. The most likely compromise is to retain the existing FOB Brent with an inclusion of CIF WTI Midland assessment, netted back to an FOB equivalent North Sea value."  We agree with this assessment.  Please see CIF Brent Benchmark? published 3 March 2021 by the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, p. 8. 7     Please see Is shale activity actually profitable? Size matters, says Rystad published 7 February 2019.   Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Commodity Prices and Plays Reference Table Trades Closed in 2021 Summary of Closed Trades

Highlights Massive slack in the US labour market means that the current uplift in US inflation is highly likely to fade by the end of the year. On a long-term horizon, investors should own US T-bonds. Equity investors should fade the reflation trade… …and rotate into the unloved defensive sectors such as healthcare, consumer staples, and personal products. These sector preferences imply an overweight to developed markets (DM) versus emerging markets (EM). On a 6+ month horizon, overweight US T-bonds versus German bunds. Fractal trade shortlist: France versus Japan; corn versus wheat; timber; and building materials. Feature Chart of the WeekMillions Of People Have Dropped Out Of The US Labour Market The near 40 percent of Americans not in the labour market is the highest level in 50 years. Moreover, the exodus out of the labour market during the pandemic was on an unprecedented scale in the modern era. This means that we should treat the US unemployment rate with a huge dose of salt, because it does not include the millions of people that have dropped out of the labour market (Chart I-1). Even the headline 14 million plunge in the number of US unemployed is deceptive, because it is almost entirely due to the furloughed workers that have returned to their jobs (Chart I-2). Chart I-2Furloughed Workers Have Returned To Their Jobs... Worryingly, the additional 2 million ‘permanent unemployed’ has barely budged from its pandemic peak and the number of economically inactive stands 5.5 million higher (Chart I-3). Meanwhile, population growth is increasing the potential labour force. In combination, underemployment in the US labour market amounts to around 10 million people. Chart I-3...But The Numbers Of Permanent Unemployed And Inactive Remain Elevated To its credit, the Federal Reserve is acutely aware of this. Last week, Chair Jay Powell pointed out that: “We’re a long way from full employment, payroll jobs are 8.4 million below where they were in February of 2020…these were people who were working in February of 2020. They clearly want to work. So those people, they’re going to need help” Implicit is the Fed’s belief that the massive slack in the US labour market will keep structural inflation depressed. And that the coming increases in inflation will be short-lived. Travel And Hospitality Cannot Move The Inflation Needle Some people argue that pent-up demand for things that we couldn’t do under social restrictions – such as travel and eat out – will unleash a major inflation. The flaw in this argument is that these things account for a tiny part of the inflation basket. For example, airfares are weighted at a negligible 0.6 percent in the US consumer price index (CPI). Eating out at (full service) restaurants is weighted at just 3 percent. So, even if these prices were to surge, they would barely move the overall inflation needle. By far the biggest component in US inflation is rent of shelter, weighted at 33 percent in the CPI and 42 percent in the core CPI. By far the biggest component in US inflation is rent of shelter, weighted at 33 percent in the CPI and 42 percent in the core CPI. The lion’s share of rent of shelter is so-called ‘owner-equivalent rent’, weighted at 24 percent in the CPI and 30 percent in the core CPI.1  Owner-equivalent rent is the hypothetical cost that homeowners incur to consume their own home, obtained by surveying a sample of homeowners. In the US, this hypothetical cost tracks actual rents. So, we can say that the biggest driver of US inflation is rent inflation (Chart I-4). Chart I-4Owner-Equivalent Rent Inflation Tracks Actual Rent Inflation Rent inflation has consistently outperformed the rest of the inflation basket. Hence, to get overall inflation to a persistent 2 percent, rent inflation must get to 3 percent and stay there – meaning a persistent 1.5 percent higher than it is now (Chart I-5). Chart I-5Core Inflation At 2 Percent Requires Rent Inflation At 3 Percent What drives rent inflation? The answer is the permanent unemployment rate. This is because the ability to pay rent relies on the security of having a permanent job. Empirically, a one percent decline in the permanent unemployment rate lifts rent inflation by one percent (Chart I-6). Chart I-6A 1 Percent Decline In The Permanent Unemployment Rate Lifts Rent Inflation By 1 Percent Pulling this together, the US permanent unemployment rate needs to fall by about 1.5 percent for core inflation to reach the Fed’s target persistently. Put another way, most of the additional 2 million permanent unemployed need to find work. Yet history teaches us that this will take a long time. The Post-Pandemic Productivity Boom Will Be Disinflationary When an industry sheds millions of jobs in a recession, it tends to substitute that labour input permanently with a new productivity-boosting technology or strategy. For example, after the Great Depression the smaller craft-based auto producers shut down permanently, while those that had adopted labour-saving mass production survived. The result was a major restructuring of the auto productive structure. Another example was the ‘typing pool’, a ubiquitous feature of office life until the late 1990s. After the dot com bust, the wholesale roll-out of Microsoft Word wiped out these typing jobs. It takes years for excess labour to get fully absorbed into a post-recession economy. Hence, the flip side of a post-recession productivity boom is that displaced workers need to re-skill, or even change career – requiring a long time for the excess labour to get absorbed into the restructured economy. After the dot com bust, it took four years. After the global financial crisis, it took six years (Chart I-7). Chart I-7How Long Does It Take To Absorb The Permanent Unemployed? The post-pandemic experience will be no different. In fact, compared to a common-or-garden recession, the pandemic has accelerated wider-reaching changes to the way that we live, work, and interact. This means that it might take even longer for the economy to attain the central bank’s goal of ‘full employment.’ Again, to its credit, the Federal Reserve is acutely aware of this. As Jay Powell went on to say: “It’s going to be a different economy. We’ve been hearing a lot from companies looking at deploying better technology and perhaps fewer people, including in some of the services industries that have been employing a lot of people. It seems quite likely that a number of the people who had those service sector jobs will struggle to find the same job, and may need time to find work” In summary, elevated permanent unemployment will subdue rent inflation. And subdued rent inflation will constrain overall inflation once the current supply bottlenecks clear. On a long-term horizon, investors should own US T-bonds. Equity investors should fade the reflation trade, and rotate into the unloved defensive sectors such as healthcare, consumer staples, and personal products. These sector preferences imply an overweight to developed markets (DM) versus emerging markets (EM). US And European Inflation Will Converge US and European inflation rates are not measured on an apples-for-apples basis. European inflation excludes the largest component in the US inflation basket – owner-equivalent rent (OER). To repeat, OER is the hypothetical cost that homeowners incur to consume their own home. European statisticians do not like to include any hypothetical item in the inflation basket that does not have a market price. So, euro area inflation includes actual rents, but it excludes OER. On an apples-for-apples comparison, inflation rates in the US and the euro area have been near-identical for many years. This means that US core inflation has a 30 percent higher weighting to an item that has persistently inflated at well above 2 percent. If we strip out OER, then the core inflation rates in the US and the euro area have been near-identical for many years (Chart I-8).2 Chart I-8On An Apples-For-Apples Comparison, Inflation In The US And Euro Area Are Near-Identical Alternatively, what if we include OER in euro area inflation? Despite European rent controls, actual rents have persistently outperformed core inflation. Hence, OER would likely outperform by even more. We can infer that including OER would have lifted euro area inflation very close to US inflation (Chart I-9). Chart I-9Omitting Owner-Equivalent Rent Has Depressed Euro Area Inflation All of this may sound like a petty academic difference, but this petty academic difference has generated huge economic and political consequences. As OER has boosted inflation in the US versus Europe, US and euro area monetary policy have diverged much more than they should. Which means US and euro area bond yields have diverged much more than they should. Which has structurally weakened the euro. Which has spawned the near $200 billion trade surplus for the euro area versus the US. And all because of a petty academic difference! What happens next? If, as we expect, US shelter inflation remains depressed then the major difference between US and euro area inflation will vanish. Reinforcing this will be a catch-up in euro area growth as the delayed roll-out of vaccinations takes effect. On this basis, a stand-out opportunity on a 6+ month investment horizon is yield convergence between US T-bonds and German bunds. Overweight US T-bonds versus German bunds. Candidates For Countertrend Reversals Corn prices have surged on increased demand from China combined with supply shortages resulting from poor weather in Brazil. This has caused an odd divergence between corn and wheat prices, which is now susceptible to a sharp correction (Chart I-10). Chart I-10The Rally In Corn Versus Wheat Is Vulnerable To Reversal Likewise, timber prices have boomed on the back of increased housebuilding demand combined with supply bottlenecks. But as these bottlenecks clear and/or higher bond yields cool demand, the sector is vulnerable to an aggressive reversal given its fragile fractal structure (Chart I-11). Chart I-11Timber Prices Are Vulnerable To Reversal To play this, our first recommended trade is to short the Invesco Building and Construction ETF (PKB) versus the Healthcare SPDR (XLV), setting the profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 15 percent (Chart I-12). Chart I-12Short Building And Construction (PKB) Versus Healthcare (XLV) Finally, within stock markets, the recent divergence of France versus Japan is highly unusual given that the two markets have near-identical sector compositions. This divergence has taken France versus Japan to the top of its multi-year trading range (Chart I-13). Chart I-13Short France Versus Japan Hence, our second recommended trade is to short France versus Japan (MSCI indexes), setting the profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 4.8 percent. Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 The PCE has broadly similar weights as the CPI. 2 We have approximated the removal of OER by removing the whole shelter component. Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Closed 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, In addition to our regular report, this week we are sending a Special Report written by my colleague Lucas Laskey from BCA Research’s Equity Analyzer service titled “Is The Reopening Trade Closed?”. The report discusses the state of the reopening trade through the lens of Equity Analyzer's factor model. I hope you find the report insightful. Additionally, please join us next week on Friday, May 7, 2021 at 10am EDT as I moderate a debate between my colleagues Arthur Budaghyan, BCA Research’s Chief Emerging Market Strategist, and Robert Ryan, Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist. Titled “A Debate On Commodities,” Arthur and Bob will discuss the outlook for commodities, touching on the trajectory both DM and China/EM growth will follow, the path for the US dollar, and other cyclical and structural forces currently shaping commodity markets. During the webcast, Arthur and Bob will highlight the areas they disagree on and the reasons behind their differing views. Best regards, Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist Highlights Bitcoin is on a collision course with ESG. ESG interests will win out. Widespread adoption of cryptocurrencies, if it were to happen, would erode the purchasing power of traditional money, while robbing governments of billions of dollars in seigniorage revenue. Governments have already begun to take steps to thwart such an outcome. Restrictions on the use of cryptocurrencies will only increase over the coming years. The rollout of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) represents an existential threat not only to cryptos, but potentially to credit card companies and online payment processors such as PayPal, Square, Venmo, WeChat Pay, and Alipay. Shorting cryptocurrencies, meme stocks, or any other high-flying asset is risky business. Fortunately, there is a way to flip the usual risk-reward from going short on its head. Rather than facing unlimited losses and a maximum gain of only 100% of the initial position, we outline a shorting strategy that caps the loss at 100% but allows for unlimited gains. Bitcoin’s Questionable ESG Record Crypto critics have often blamed cryptocurrencies for facilitating illicit transactions and enlarging the world’s carbon footprint. There is some truth to both claims. Motivated to avoid detection, online scammers, smugglers, and terrorists have been drawn to cryptocurrencies. Cryptos have also been used to evade capital controls and conceal wealth from the tax authorities. On the environmental side, Bitcoin mining now consumes more energy than entire countries such as Sweden, Argentina, and Pakistan (Chart 1). Moreover, about 70% of Bitcoin mining currently takes place in China, mainly using electricity generated by burning coal. A lot of the remaining mining occurs in countries such as Russia and Iran with questionable governance records. Chart 1How Dare You, Bitcoin Cryptos And Inequality One criticism of Bitcoin that is less frequently mentioned is its role in exacerbating wealth inequality. We are not just talking about the small number of “whales” who amassed huge fortunes by buying or mining Bitcoin shortly after it was created. If these whales sell their coins at today’s prices and the price of  Bitcoin eventually crashes, those early investors will have ended up profiting at the expense of smaller investors who bought at the top. While such a transfer of income may be unsavory, it is not much different from what happens when someone sells a high-flying stock to the proverbial bagholder just as the stock is peaking. The more interesting question is what happens if Bitcoin prices do not crash. It might be tempting to think that in such a scenario, no one would be worse off. But that is incorrect. There would still be losers, and importantly, these losers would consist of people who never bought or sold Bitcoin in their lives. To see why, ask yourself who suffers from counterfeit currency. One possibility is shopkeepers who inadvertently accept counterfeit cash and find themselves stuck with worthless money. But even if the counterfeit money is never detected, there would still be losers: Fake money dilutes the value of genuine money, making everyone who holds the genuine money worse off. Crypto evangelists like to argue that cryptocurrencies offer protection against the “debasement of fiat money.” Ironically, the widespread adoption of cryptocurrencies could produce a self-fulfilling cycle that leads to just such an inflationary outcome. If enough people decide to swap fiat currencies for cryptos, the dollar and other fiat monies could become “hot potatoes.” The price of cryptos would rise in relation to dollars. Feeling more wealthy, crypto holders would spend some of their wealth on goods and services. As long as the economy is operating below potential, this would not be such a bad thing since increased spending would generate more output and employment. However, once the output gap disappears, more spending would result in higher inflation. The purchasing power of fiat currencies would decline. The Empire Strikes Back Will governments allow such a massive transfer of wealth from holders of fiat currencies to holders of crypto currencies to occur? It seems highly unlikely. In order to entice people to hold on to their fiat currency bank deposits, central banks would have to raise interest rates. Debt-strapped governments would not like that. Governments also generate significant revenue from their ability to print currency and then exchange it for goods and services. For the US, this “seigniorage revenue” is around $100 billion per year (Chart 2). No government will want to part with this revenue. A financial system where loans and deposits are denominated in cryptocurrencies would be highly unstable. Even if the supply of each individual cryptocurrency were capped, the rise and fall of competing cryptocurrencies could still result in large shifts in the aggregate cryptocurrency money supply. Moreover, wild swings in cryptocurrency prices, both versus fiat currencies and one another, could destroy any semblance of price stability. The value of bank loans made in Bitcoin or other cryptos would experience great fluctuations. Powerless to issue cryptocurrencies themselves, central banks would not be able to provide unlimited liquidity support to commercial banks as they do now. The situation would resemble the US in the late 19th century when myriad currencies competed with one another and the financial system veered from one crisis to another (Chart 3). Chart 2Governments Will Not Part With Seigniorage Revenue Chart 3An Inelastic Money Supply Historically Led To More Banking Crises   What Is It Good For? One might argue that the ultimate aim of cryptocurrencies is not to displace fiat money. Okay, but if Bitcoin can never truly function as a medium of exchange or a unit of account, what exactly underpins its utility as a store of value? At least with gold, you get an extremely rare metal, forged in the collision of neutron stars billions of years ago, that has great aesthetic value. With cryptos, you get fairy dust. In past reports, we referred to Bitcoin as a “solution in search of a problem.” In retrospect, that characterization was much too charitable. Bitcoin is a problem in search of a problem. Whereas the Visa network can process over 20,000 transactions per second, the Bitcoin network can barely process five (Chart 4). Bitcoin transactions take 10 minutes-to-an hour to complete compared to just a few seconds for most debit or credit card transactions. The average fee for a Bitcoin transaction is around $30. This fee has been rising, not falling, over the past few years (Chart 5). Chart 4Bitcoin: The Speed Of Transactions, Or Lack Of It Chart 5Bitcoin: The Cost Per Transaction Is Rising     Look Out Below Table 1A Growing List Of Cryptocurrency Bans Cryptos are heading for a world of pain. ESG concerns will force companies to step back from their newfound infatuation with these magic beans. Meanwhile, governments will tighten the screws on cryptocurrencies while rolling out their own digital monies. As my colleague Chester Ntonifor pointed out last week, a growing list of countries have already moved to ban Bitcoin transactions (Table 1). In addition, most G10 central banks have outlined their own digital currency plans (Map 1). Not only will Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) squeeze out decentralised cryptocurrencies, they will also pose an existential risk to credit card companies and online payment processors such as PayPal, Square, Venmo, WeChat Pay, and Alipay. Map 1Many Central Banks Are Planning A Digital Currency The Risk Of Shorting Bitcoin These days, there is no shortage of ways to short Bitcoin. Many cryptocurrency platforms permit short selling. In addition, one can bet against Bitcoin through the futures market. To the extent that the fortunes of companies such as Coinbase are tied to the crypto market, one can also express a short view on cryptos through listed equities. Yet, shorting cryptos is a risky strategy. Cryptocurrencies do not have any intrinsic value. What you think a Bitcoin is worth depends on what others think it is worth and vice versa. At present, the value of all Bitcoins that have ever been issued is about $1 trillion. Eighteen cryptocurrencies have valuations exceeding $10 billion (Table 2). The market capitalization of all cryptocurrencies in circulation stands at $2 trillion. In contrast, the value of all the gold that has ever been mined is around $10 trillion (Chart 6). It is certainly possible that euphoric investors will push up the value of cryptocurrencies to the point that they are collectively worth more than all the gold in the world. Table 2Close To 20 Cryptos Have A Market Cap In Excess Of US$10bn Chart 6Gold Versus Cryptocurrencies     To guard against this risk, one needs a prudent strategy for shorting not just high-flying cryptocurrencies, but any security whose price can rise significantly. Luckily, such a strategy exists. How To Short Without Losing Your Shorts Clients sometimes ask me what I invest my money in. The answer is that most of my liquid wealth is held in publicly traded US small cap stocks. I have been investing in this space for over two decades (prior to joining Goldman, I even wrote a blog about it). I used my knowledge of stock picking to develop an early version of BCA’s Equity Analyzer. David Boucher and his team have since transformed it into a powerful, state-of-the-art stock selection service. Table 3Don’t Be Like Melvin Shorting small cap stocks is risky business. To limit the risk, I have employed a strategy that flips the usual risk-reward from shorting on its head. Normally, when you short a stock, your gain is capped at 100% of the initial position whereas your potential loss is unlimited. With my shorting technique, your potential loss is capped at 100% while your potential gain is unlimited. To illustrate how the strategy works, let us consider shorting one particular overpriced “meme” stock that has been in the news a lot this year. I won’t single out the name of the company, other than to note that it begins with “G” and ends with “stop.” At the time of writing, this mystery stock was trading at $180 per share. Suppose you shorted 1,000 shares at that price. The basic idea is to then short 2% more shares if the price falls by 1% and cover 2% of your shares if the price rises by 1%. So, in this case, you would increase your short position to 1020 shares if the price were to fall to around $178 but cover 20 shares (leaving you with 980 shares short) if the price were to rise to $182. Table 3 shows the number of shares you would need to be short for any given price between $5 and $360. If the price of the shares were to fall to $10 (double what it was last August), the strategy would generate roughly $3,060,000 in profits.1 In contrast, if the price were to rise to $360 per share, the strategy would incur a loss of $90,000. Even if the price went to infinity, the most you would lose is $180,000. There are a number of challenges to implementing this strategy: 1) It requires frequent trading; 2) gap downs and gap ups in the price could meaningfully hurt the results; 3) it is not always possible to short a stock and even when it is, the borrowing costs could be high, etc. Nevertheless, as a “rule of thumb,” I have found this strategy to be extremely effective in mitigating risk.   Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist pberezin@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1    Notice that the profit of $3,060,000 from going short 1,000 shares in the case where the price of the stock falls from $180 to $10 is equal to 17 times the initial short position of $180,000 (i.e., $3,060,000 divided by 180,000 is 17). This is exactly the same return that one would earn if one went long the stock and the price rose from $10 to $180. In this case, the profit would also be equal to 17 times the initial investment (i.e., $1,800,000-$100,000 divided by $100,000 is 17). Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores

Highlights Biden’s first 100 days are characterized by a liberal spend-and-tax agenda unseen since the 1960s. It is not a “bait and switch,” however. Voters do not care about deficits and debt. At least not for now. The apparent outcome of the populist surge in the US and UK in 2016 is blowout fiscal spending. Yet the US and UK also invented and distributed vaccines faster than others. US growth and equities have outperformed while the US dollar experienced a countertrend bounce. While growth will rotate to other regions, China’s stimulus is on the wane. Of Biden’s three initial geopolitical risks, two are showing signs of subsiding: Russia and Iran. US-China tensions persist, however, and Biden has been hawkish so far. Our new Australia Geopolitical Risk Indicator confirms our other indicators in signaling that China risk, writ large, remains elevated. Cyclically we are optimistic about the Aussie and Australian stocks. Mexico’s midterm elections are likely to curb the ruling party’s majority but only marginally. The macro and geopolitical backdrop is favorable for Mexico. Feature US President Joe Biden gave his first address to the US Congress on April 28. Biden’s first hundred days are significant for his extravagant spending proposals, which will rank alongside those of Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society, if not Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal, in their impact on US history, for better and worse. Chart 1Biden's First 100 Days - The Market's Appraisal The global financial market appraisal is that Biden’s proposals will turn out for the better. The market has responded to the US’s stimulus overshoot, successful vaccine rollout, and growth outperformance – notably in the pandemic-struck service sector – by bidding up US equities and the dollar (Chart 1). From a macro perspective we share the BCA House View in leaning against both of these trends, preferring international equities and commodity currencies. However, our geopolitical method has made it difficult for us to bet directly against the dollar and US equities. Geopolitics is about not only wars and trade but also the interaction of different countries’ domestic politics. America’s populist spending blowout is occurring alongside a sharp drop in China’s combined credit-and-fiscal impulse, which will eventually weigh on the global economy. This is true even though the rest of the world is beginning to catch up in vaccinations and economic normalization. As for traditional geopolitical risk – wars and alliances – Biden has not yet leaped over the three initial foreign policy hurdles that we have highlighted: China, Russia, and Iran. In this report we will update the view on all three, as there is tentative improvement on the Russian and Iranian fronts. In addition, we will introduce our newest geopolitical risk indicator – for Australia – and update our view on Mexico ahead of its June 6 midterm elections. Biden’s Fiscal Blowout From a macro point of view, Biden’s $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) was much larger than what Republicans would have passed if President Trump had won a second term. His proposed $2.3 trillion American Jobs Plan (AJP) is also larger, though both candidates were likely to pass an infrastructure package. The difference lies in the parts of these packages that relate to social spending and other programs, beyond COVID relief and roads and bridges. The Republican proposal for COVID relief was $618 billion while the Republicans’ current proposal on infrastructure is $568 billion – marking a $3 trillion difference from Biden. In reality Republicans would have proposed larger spending if Trump had remained president – but not enough to close this gap. And Biden is also proposing a $1.8 trillion American Families Plan (AFP). Biden’s praise for handling the vaccinations must be qualified by the Trump administration’s successful preparations, which have been unfairly denigrated. Similarly, Biden’s blame for the migrant surge at the southern border must be qualified by the fact that the surge began last year.1 A comparison with the UK will put Biden’s administration into perspective. The only country comparable to the US in terms of the size of fiscal stimulus over 2019-21 so far – excluding Biden’s AJP and AFP, which are not yet law – is the United Kingdom. Thus the consequence of the flare-up of populism in the Anglo-Saxon world since 2016 is a budget deficit blowout as these countries strive to suppress domestic socio-political conflict by means of government largesse, particularly in industrial and social programs. However, populist dysfunction was also overrated. Both the US and UK retain their advantages in terms of innovation and dynamism, as revealed by the vaccine and its rollout (Chart 2). Chart 2Dysfunctional Anglo-Saxon Populism? No sharp leftward turn occurred in the UK, where Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his Conservatives had the benefit of a pre-COVID election in December 2019, which they won. By contrast, in the US, President Trump and the Republicans contended an election after the pandemic and recession had virtually doomed them to failure. There a sharp leftward turn is taking place. Going forward the US will reclaim the top rank in terms of fiscal stimulus, as Biden is likely to get his infrastructure plan (AJP) passed. Our updated US budget deficit projections appear in Chart 3. Our sister US Political Strategy gives the AJP an 80% chance of passing in some form and the AFP only a 50% chance of passing, depending on how quickly the AJP is passed. This means the blue dashed line is more likely to occur than the red dashed line. The difference is slight despite the mind-boggling headline numbers of the plans because the spending is spread out over eight-to-ten years and tax hikes over 15 years will partially offset the expenditures. Much will depend on whether Congress is willing to pay for the new spending. In Chart 3 we assume that Biden will get half of the proposed corporate tax hikes in the AJP scenario (and half of the individual tax hikes in the AFP scenario). If spending is watered down, and/or tax hikes surprise to the upside, both of which are possible, then the deficit scenarios will obviously tighten, assuming the economic recovery continues robustly as expected. But in the current political environment it is safest to plan for the most expansive budget deficit scenarios, as populism is the overriding force. Chart 3Biden’s Blowout Spending Biden’s campaign plan was even more visionary, so it is not true that Biden pulled a “bait and switch” on voters. Rather, the median voter is comfortable with greater deficits and a larger government role in American life. Bottom Line: The implication of Biden’s spending blowout is reflationary for the global economy, cyclically negative for the US dollar, and positive for global equities. But on a tactical time frame the rotation to other equities and currencies will also depend on China’s fiscal-and-credit deceleration and whether geopolitical risk continues to fall. Russia: Some Improvement But Coast Not Yet Clear US-Russia tensions appeared to fizzle over the past week but the coast is not yet clear. We remain short Russian currency and risk assets as well as European emerging market equities. Tensions fell after President Putin’s State of the Nation address on April 21 in which he warned the West against crossing Russia’s “red lines.” Biden’s sanctions on Russia were underwhelming – he did not insist on halting the final stages of the Nord Stream II pipeline to Germany. Russia declared it would withdraw its roughly 100,000 troops from the Ukrainian border by May 1. Russian dissident Alexei Navalny ended his hunger strike. Putin attended Biden’s Earth Day summit and the two are working on a bilateral summit in June. Chart 4Russia's Domestic Instability Will Continue De-escalation is not certain, however. First, some US officials have cast doubt on Russia’s withdrawal of troops and it is known that arms and equipment were left in place for a rapid mobilization and re-escalation if necessary. Second, Russian-backed Ukrainian separatists will be emboldened, which could increase fighting in Ukraine that could eventually provoke Russian intervention. Third, the US has until August or September to prevent Nord Stream from completion. Diplomacy between Russia and the US (and Russia and several eastern European states) has hit a low point on the withdrawal of ambassadors. Fourth, Russian domestic politics was always the chief reason to prepare for a worse geopolitical confrontation and it remains unsettled. Putin’s approval rating still lingers in the relatively low range of 65% and government approval at 49%. The economic recovery is weak and facing an increasingly negative fiscal thrust, along with Europe and China, Russia’s single-largest export destination (Chart 4). Putin’s handouts to households, in anticipation of the September Duma election, only amount to 0.2% of GDP. More measures will probably be announced but the lead-up to the election could still see an international adventure designed to distract the public from its socioeconomic woes. Russia’s geopolitical risk indicators ticked up as anticipated (Chart 5). They may subside if the military drawdown is confirmed and Biden and Putin lower the temperature. But we would not bet on it. Chart 5Russian Geopolitical Risk: Wait For 'All Clear' Signal Bottom Line: It is possible that Biden has passed his first foreign policy test with Russia but it is too soon to sound the “all clear.” We remain short Russian ruble and short EM Europe until de-escalation is confirmed. The Russian (and German) elections in September will mark a time for reassessing this view. Iran: Diplomacy On Track (Hence Jitters Will Rise) While Russia may or may not truly de-escalate tensions in Ukraine, the spring and summer are sure to see an increase in focus on US-Iran nuclear negotiations. Geopolitical risks will remain high prior to the conclusion of a deal and will materialize in kinetic attacks of various kinds. This thesis is confirmed by the alleged Israeli sabotage of Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility this month. The US Navy also fired warning shots at Iranian vessels staging provocations. Sporadic attacks in other parts of the region also continue to flare, most recently with an Iranian tanker getting hit by a drone at a Syrian oil terminal.2 The US and Iran are making progress in the Vienna talks toward rejoining the 2015 nuclear deal from which the US withdrew in 2018. Iran pledged to enrich uranium up to 60% but also said this move was reversible – like all its tentative violations of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPA) so far (Table 1). Iran also offered a prisoner swap with the US. Saudi Arabia appears resigned to a resumption of the JCPA that it cannot prevent, with crown prince Mohammed bin Salman offering diplomatic overtures to both the US and Iran. Table 1Iran’s Nuclear Program And Compliance With JCPA 2015 Still, the closer the US and Iran get to a deal the more its opponents will need to either take action or make preparations for the aftermath. The allegation that former US Secretary of State John Kerry’s shared Israeli military plans with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif is an example of the kind of political brouhaha that will occur as different elements try to support and oppose the normalization of US-Iran ties. More importantly Israel will underscore its red line against nuclear weaponization. Previously Iran was set to reach “breakout” capability of uranium enrichment – a point at which it has enough fissile material to produce a nuclear device – as early as May. Due to sabotage at the Natanz facility the breakout period may have been pushed back to July.3 This compounds the significance of this summer as a deadline for negotiating a reduction in tensions. While the US may be prepared to fudge on Iran’s breakout capabilities, Israel will not, which means a market-relevant showdown should occur this summer before Israel backs down for fear of alienating the United States. Tit-for-tat attacks in May and June could cause negative surprises for oil supply. Then there will be a mad dash by the negotiators to agree to deal before the de facto August deadline, when Iran inaugurates a new president and it becomes much harder to resolve outstanding issues. Chart 6Iran Deal Priced Into Oil Markets? Hence our argument that geopolitics adds upside risk to oil prices in the first half of the year but downside risk in the second half. The market’s expectations seem already to account for this, based on the forward curve for Brent crude oil. The marginal impact of a reconstituted Iran nuclear deal on oil prices is slightly negative over the long run since a deal is more likely to be concluded than not and will open up Iran’s economy and oil exports to the world. However, our Commodity & Energy Strategy expects the Brent price to exceed expectations in the coming years, judging by supply and demand balances and global macro fundamentals (Chart 6). If an Iran deal becomes a fait accompli in July and August the Saudis could abandon their commitment to OPEC 2.0’s production discipline. The Russians and Saudis are not eager to return to a market share war after what happened in March 2020 but we cannot rule it out in the face of Iranian production. Thus we expect oil to be volatile. Oil producers also face the threat of green energy and US shale production which gives them more than one reason to keep up production and prevent prices from getting too lofty. Throughout the post-2015 geopolitical saga between the US and Iran, major incidents have caused an increase in the oil-to-gold ratio. The risk of oil supply disruption affected the price more than the flight to gold due to geopolitical or war risk. The trend generally corresponds with that of the copper-to-gold ratio, though copper-to-gold rose higher when growth boomed and oil outperformed when US-Iran tensions spiked in 2019. Today the copper-to-gold ratio is vastly outperforming the oil-to-gold on the back of the global recovery (Chart 7). This makes sense from the point of view of the likelihood of a US-Iran deal this year. But tensions prior to a deal will push up oil-to-gold in the near term. Chart 7Biden Passes Iran Test? Likely But Not A Done Deal Bottom Line: The US-Iran diplomacy is on track. This means geopolitical risk will escalate in May and June before a short-term or interim deal is agreed in July or August. Geopolitical risk stemming from US-Iran relations will subside thereafter, unless the deadline is missed. The forward curve has largely priced in the oil price downside except for the risk that OPEC 2.0 becomes dysfunctional again. We expect upside price surprises in the near term. Biden, China, And Our Australia GeoRisk Indicator Ostensibly the US and Russia are avoiding a war over Ukraine and the US and Iran are negotiating a return to the 2015 nuclear deal. Only US-China relations utterly lack clarity, with military maneuvering in the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea and tensions simmering over the gamut of other disputes. Chart 8Biden Still Faces China Test The latest data on global military spending show not only that the US and China continue to build up their militaries but also that all of the regional allies – including Japan! – are bulking up defense spending (Chart 8). This is a substantial confirmation of the secular growth of geopolitical risk, specifically in reaction to China’s rise and US-China competition. The first round of US-China talks under Biden went awry but since then a basis has been laid for cooperation on climate change, with President Xi Jinping attending Biden’s virtual climate change summit (albeit with no bilateral summit between the two). If John Kerry is removed as climate czar over his Iranian controversy it will not have an impact other than to undermine American negotiators’ reliability. The deeper point is that climate is a narrow basis for US-China cooperation and it cannot remotely salvage the relationship if a broader strategic de-escalation is not agreed. Carbon emissions are more likely to become a cudgel with which the US and West pressure China to reform its economy faster. The Department of Defense is not slated to finish its comprehensive review of China policy until June but most US government departments are undertaking their own reviews and some of the conclusions will trickle out in May, whether through Washington’s actions or leaks to the press. Beijing could also take actions that upend the Biden administration’s assessment, such as with the Microsoft hack exposed earlier this year. The Biden administration will soon reveal more about how it intends to handle export controls and sanctions on China. For example, by May 19 the administration is slated to release a licensing process for companies concerned about US export controls on tech trade with China due to the Commerce Department’s interim rule on info tech supply chains. The Biden administration looks to be generally hawkish on China, a view that is now consensus. Any loosening of punitive measures would be a positive surprise for Chinese stocks and financial markets in general. There are other indications that China’s relationship with the West is not about to improve substantially – namely Australia. Australia has become a bellwether of China’s relations with the world. While the US’s defense commitments might be questionable with regard to some of China’s neighbors – namely Taiwan (Province of China) but also possibly South Korea and the Philippines – there can be little doubt that Australia, like Japan, is the US’s red line in the Pacific. Australian politics have been roiled over the past several years by the revelation of Chinese influence operations, state- or military-linked investments in Australia, and propaganda campaigns. A trade war erupted last year when Australia called for an investigation into the origins of COVID-19 and China’s handling of it. Most recently, Victoria state severed ties with China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Despite the rise in Sino-Australian tensions, the economic relationship remains intact. China’s stimulus overweighed the impact of its punitive trade measures against Australia, both by bidding up commodity prices and keeping the bulk of Australia’s exports flowing (Chart 9). As much as China might wish to decouple from Australia, it cannot do so as long as it needs to maintain minimum growth rates for the sake of social stability and these growth rates require resources that Australia provides. For example, global iron ore production excluding Australia only makes up 80% of China’s total iron ore imports, which necessitates an ongoing dependency here (Chart 10). Brazil cannot make up the difference. Chart 9China-Australia Trade Amid Tensions Chart 10China Cannot Replace Australia This resource dependency does not necessarily reduce geopolitical tension, however, because it increases China’s supply insecurity and vulnerability to the US alliance. The US under Biden explicitly aims to restore its alliances and confront autocratic regimes. This puts Australia at the front lines of an open-ended global conflict. Chart 11Introducing: Australia GeoRisk Indicator (Smoothed) Our newly devised Australia GeoRisk Indicator illustrates the point well, as it has continued surging since the trade war with China first broke out last year (Chart 11). This indicator is based on the Australian dollar and its deviation from underlying macro variables that should determine its course. These variables are described in Appendix 1. If the Aussie weakens relative to these variables, then an Australian-specific risk premium is apparent. We ascribe that premium to politics and geopolitics writ large. A close examination of the risk indicator’s performance shows that it tracks well with Australia’s recent political history (Chart 12). Previous peaks in risk occurred when President Trump rose to power and Australia, like Canada, found itself beset by negative pressures from both the US and China. In particular, Trump threatened tariffs and the Australian government banned China’s Huawei from its 5G network. Today the rise in geopolitical risk stems almost exclusively from China. There is potential for it to roll over if Biden negotiates a reduction in tensions but that is a risk to our view (an upside risk for Australian and global equities). Chart 12Australian GeoRisk Indicator (Unsmoothed) What does this indicator portend for tradable Australian assets? As one would expect, Australian geopolitical risk moves inversely to the country’s equities, currency, and relative equity performance (Chart 13). Australian equities have risen on the back of global growth and the commodity boom despite the rise in geopolitical risk. But any further spike in risk could jeopardize this uptrend. Chart 13Australia Geopolitical Risk And Tradable Assets An even clearer inverse relationship emerges with the AUD-JPY exchange rate, a standard measure of risk-on / risk-off sentiment in itself. If geopolitical risk rises any further it should cause a reversal in the currency pair. Finally, Australian equities have not outperformed other developed markets excluding the US, which may be due to this elevated risk premium. Bottom Line: China is the most important of Biden’s foreign policy hurdles and unlike Russia and Iran there is no sign of a reduction in tension yet. Our Australian GeoRisk Indicator supports the point that risk remains very elevated in the near term. Moreover China’s credit deceleration is also negative for Australia. Cyclically, however, assuming that China does not overtighten policy, we take a constructive view on the Aussie and Australian equities. Biden’s Border Troubles Distract From Bullish Mexico Story The biggest criticism of Biden’s first 100 days has been his reduction in a range of enforcement measures on the southern border which has encouraged an overflow of immigrants. Customs and Border Patrol have seen a spike in “encounters” from a low point of around 17,000 in 2020 to about 170,000 today. The trend started last year but accelerated sharply after the election and had surpassed the 2019 peak of 144,000. Vice President Kamala Harris has been put in charge of managing the border crisis, both with Mexico and Central American states. She does not have much experience with foreign policy so this is her opportunity to learn on the job. She will not be able to accomplish much given that the Biden administration is unwilling to use punitive measures or deterrence and will not have large fiscal resources available for subsidizing the nations to the south. With the US economy hyper-charged, especially relative to its southern neighbors, the pace of immigration is unlikely to slacken. From a macro point of view the relevance is that the US is not substantially curtailing immigration – quite the opposite – which means that labor force growth will not deviate from its trend. What about Mexico itself? It is not likely that Harris will be able to engage on a broader range of issues with Mexico beyond immigration. As usual Mexico is beset with corruption, lawlessness, and instability. To these can be added the difficulties of the pandemic and vaccine rollout. Tourism and remittances are yet to recover. Cooperation with US federal agents against the drug cartels is deteriorating. Cartels control an estimated 40% of Mexican territory.4 Nevertheless, despite Mexico’s perennial problems, we hold a positive view on Mexican currency and risk assets. The argument rests on five points: Strong macro fundamentals: With China’s fiscal-and-credit impulse slowing sharply, and US stimulus accelerating, Mexico stands to benefit. Mexico has also run orthodox monetary and fiscal policies. It has a demographic tailwind, low wages, and low public debt. The stars are beginning to align for the country’s economy, according to our Emerging Markets Strategy. US and Canadian stimulus: The US and Canada have the second- and third-largest fiscal stimulus of all the major countries over the 2019-21 period, at 9% and 8% of GDP respectively. Mexico, with the new USMCA free trade deal in hand, will benefit. US protectionism fizzled: Even Republican senators blocked President Trump’s attempted tariffs on Mexico. Trump’s aggression resulted in the USMCA, a revised NAFTA, which both US political parties endorsed. Mexico is inured to US protectionism, at least for the short and medium term. Diversification from China: Mexico suffered the greatest opportunity cost from China’s rise as an offshore manufacturer and entrance to the World Trade Organization. Now that the US and other western countries are diversifying away from China, amid geopolitical tensions, Mexico stands to benefit. The US cannot eliminate its trade deficit due to its internal savings/investment imbalance but it can redistribute that trade deficit to countries that cannot compete with it for global hegemony. AMLO faces constraints: A risk factor stemmed from politics where a sweeping left-wing victory in 2018 threatened to introduce anti-market policies. President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (known as AMLO) and his MORENA party gained a majority in both houses of the legislature. Their coalition has a two-thirds majority in the lower house (Chart 14). However, we pointed out that AMLO’s policies have not been radical and, more importantly, that the midterm election would likely constrain his power. Chart 14Mexico’s Midterm Election Looms These are all solid points but the last item faces a test in the upcoming midterm election. AMLO’s approval rating is strong, at 63%, putting him above all of his predecessors except one (Chart 15). AMLO’s approval has if anything benefited from the COVID-19 crisis despite Mexico’s inability to handle the medical challenge. He has promised to hold a referendum on his leadership in early 2022, more than halfway through his six-year term, and he is currently in good shape for that referendum. For now his popularity is helpful for his party, although he is not on the ballot in 2021 and MORENA’s support is well beneath his own. Chart 15AMLO’s Approval Fairly Strong MORENA’s support is holding at a 44% rate of popular support and its momentum has slightly improved since the pandemic began. However, MORENA’s lead over other parties is not nearly as strong as it was back in 2018 (Chart 16, top panel). The combined support of the two dominant center-right parties, the Institutional Revolutionary Party and the National Action Party, is almost equal to that of MORENA. And the two center-left parties, the Democratic Revolution Party and Citizen’s Movement, are part of the opposition coalition (Chart 16, bottom panel). The pandemic and economic crisis will motivate the opposition. Chart 16MORENA’s Support Holding Up Despite COVID Traditionally the president’s party loses seats in the midterm election (Table 2). Circumstances are different from the US, which also exhibits this trend, because Mexico has more political parties. A loss of seats from MORENA does not necessarily favor the establishment parties. Nevertheless opinion polling shows that about 45% of voters say they would rather see MORENA’s power “checked” compared to 41% who wish to see the party go on unopposed.5 Table 2Mexican President’s Party Tends To Lose Seats In Midterm Election While the ruling coalition may lose its super-majority, it is not a foregone conclusion that MORENA will lose its majority. Voters have decades of experience of the two dominant parties, both were discredited prior to 2018, and neither has recovered its reputation so quickly. The polling does not suggest that voters regret their decision to give the left wing a try. If anything recent polls slightly push against this idea. If MORENA surprises to the upside then AMLO’s capabilities would increase substantially in the second half of his term – he would have political capital and an improving economy. While the senate is not up for grabs in the midterm, MORENA has a narrow majority and controls a substantial 60% of seats when its allies are taken into account. In this scenario AMLO could pursue his attempts to increase the state’s role in key industries, like energy and power generation, at the expense of private investors. Even then the Supreme Court would continue to act as a check on the government. The 11-seat court is currently made up of five conservatives, two independents, and three liberal or left-leaning judges. A new member, Margarita Ríos Farjat, is close to the government, leaving the conservatives with a one-seat edge over the liberals and putting the two independents in the position of swing voters. Even if AMLO maintains control of the lower house, he will not be able to override the constitutional court, as he has threatened on occasion to do, without a super-majority in the senate. Bottom Line: AMLO will likely lose some ground in the lower house and thus suffer a check on his power. This will only confirm that Mexican political risk is not likely to derail positive underlying macro fundamentals. Continue to overweight Mexican equities relative to Brazilian.   Matt Gertken Vice President Geopolitical Strategy mattg@bcaresearch.com   Appendix 1 The market is the greatest machine ever created for gauging the wisdom of the crowd and as such our Geopolitical Risk Indicators were not designed to predict political risk but to answer the question of whether and to what extent markets have priced that risk. Our Australian GeoRisk Indicator (see Chart 11-12 above) uses the same simple methodology used in our other indicators, which avoid the pitfall of regression-based models. We begin with a financial asset that has a daily frequency in price, in this case the AUD, and compare its movement against several fundamental factors – in this case global energy and base metal prices, global metals and mining stock prices, and the Chilean peso. Australia is a commodity-exporting country. It is the largest producer of iron ore and is among the largest producers of coal and natural gas. It is also a major trading partner for China. Due to the nature of its economy the Australian dollar moves with global metal and energy prices and the global metals and mining equity prices. Chile, another major commodity producer also moves with global metal prices, hence our inclusion of the peso in this indicator. The AUD has a high correlation with all of these assets, and if the changes in the value of the AUD lag or lead the changes in the value of these assets, the implication is that geopolitical risk unique to Australia is not priced by the market. We included the peso as Chile is not as affected as Australia by any conflict in the South China Sea or Northeast Asia, which means that a deviation of the AUD from CLP represents a unique East Asia Pacific risk. Our indicator captures the involvement of Australia in a few regional and international conflicts. The indicator climbed as Australia got involved in the East Timor emergency and declined as it exited. It continued declining even as Australia joined the US in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, which showed that investors were unperturbed by faraway wars, while showing measurable concern in the smaller but closer Timorese conflict. Risks went up again as the nation erupted in labor protests as the Howard government made changes to the labor code. We see the market pricing higher risk again during the 2008 financial crisis, although it was modest and Australia escaped the crisis unscathed due to massive Chinese stimulus. Since then, investors have been climbing a wall of worry as they priced in Northeast Asia-related geopolitical risks. These started with the South Korean Cheonan sinking and continued with the Sino-Japanese clash over the Senkaku islands. They culminated with the Chinese ADIZ declaration in late 2013. In 2016, Australia was shocked again when Donald Trump was elected, and investor fears were evident when the details of Trump-Turnbull spat were made public. The risk indicator reached another peak during the trade wars between the US and the rest of the world. Investors were not worried about COVID-19 as Australia largely contained the pandemic, but the recent Australian-Chinese trade war pushed the risk indicator up, giving investors another wall of worry. If the Biden administration forces Australia into a democratic alliance in confrontation with autocratic China then this risk will persist for some time.   Jesse Anak Kuri Associate Editor Jesse.Kuri@bcaresearch.com We Read (And Liked) ... The Narrow Corridor: States, Societies, And The Fate Of Liberty This book is a sweeping review of the conditions of liberty essential to steering the world away from the Hobbesian war of all against all. In this unofficial sequel to the 2012 hit, Why Nations Fail: The Origins Of Power, Prosperity, And Poverty, Daron Acemoglu (Professor of Economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology) and James A. Robinson (Professor of Global Conflict Studies at the University of Chicago) further explore their thesis that the existence and effectiveness of democratic institutions account for a nation’s general success or failure. The Narrow Corridor6 examines how liberty works. It is not “natural,” not widespread, “is rare in history and is rare today.” Only in peculiar circumstances have states managed to produce free societies. States have to walk a thin line to achieve liberty, passing through what the authors describe as a “narrow corridor.” To encourage freedom, states must be strong enough to enforce laws and provide public services yet also restrained in their actions and checked by a well-organized civil society. For example, from classical history, the Athenian constitutional reforms of Cleisthenes “were helpful for strengthening the political power of Athenian citizens while also battling the cage of norms.” That cage of norms is the informal body of customs replaced by state institutions. Those norms in turn “constrained what the state could do and how far state building could go,” providing a set of checks. Though somewhat fluid in its definition, liberty, as Acemoglu and Robinson show, is expressed differently under various “leviathans,” or states. For starters, the “Shackled Leviathan” is a government dedicated to upholding the rule of law, protecting the weak against the strong, and creating the conditions for broad-based economic opportunity. Meanwhile, the “Paper Leviathan” is a bureaucratic machine favoring the privileged class, serving as both a political and economic brake on development and yielding “fear, violence, and dominance for most of its citizens.” Other examples include: The “American Leviathan” which fails to deal properly with inequality and racial oppression, two enemies of liberty; and a “Despotic Leviathan,” which commands the economy and coerces political conformity – an example from modern China. Although the book indulges in too much jargon, it is provocative and its argument is convincing. The authors say that in most places and at most times, the strong have dominated the weak and human freedom has been quashed by force or by customs and norms. Either states have been too weak to protect individuals from these threats or states have been too strong for people to protect themselves from despotism. Importantly, many states believe that once liberty is achieved, it will remain the status quo. But the authors argue that to uphold liberty, state institutions have to evolve continuously as the nature of conflicts and needs of society change. Thus society's ability to keep state and rulers accountable must intensify in tandem with the capabilities of the state. This struggle between state and society becomes self-reinforcing, inducing both to develop a richer array of capacities just to keep moving forward along the corridor. Yet this struggle also underscores the fragile nature of liberty. It is built on a precarious balance between state and society; between economic, political, and social elites and common citizens; between institutions and norms. If one side of the balance gets too strong, as has often happened in history, liberty begins to wane. The authors central thesis is that the long-run success of states depends on the balance of power between state and society. If states are too strong, you end up with a “Despotic Leviathan” that is good for short-term economic growth but brittle and unstable over the long term. If society is too strong, the “Leviathan” is absent, and societies suffer under a pre-modern war of all against all. The ideal place to be is in the narrow corridor, under a shackled Leviathan that will grow state capacity and individual liberty simultaneously, thus leading to long-term economic growth. In the asset allocation process, investors should always consider the liberty of a state and its people, if a state’s institutions grossly favor the elite or the outright population, whether these institutions are weak or overbearing on society, and whether they signify a balance between interests across the population. Whether you are investing over a short or long horizon, returns can be significantly impacted in the absence of liberty or the excesses of liberty. There should be a preference among investors toward countries that exhibit a balance of power between state and society, setting up a better long-term investment environment, than if a balance of power did not exist.   Guy Russell Research Analyst GuyR@bcaresearch.com GeoRisk Indicator China Russia UK Germany France Italy Canada Spain Taiwan – Province Of China Korea Turkey Brazil Australia Footnotes 1 "President Biden’s first 100 days as president fact-checked," BBC News, April 29, 2021, bbc.com. 2 "Oil tanker off Syrian coast hit in suspected drone attack," Al Jazeera, April 24, 2021, Aljazeera.com. 3 See Yaakov Lappin, "Natanz blast ‘likely took 5,000 centrifuges offline," Jewish News Syndicate, jns.org. 4 John Daniel Davidson, "Former US Ambassador To Mexico: Cartels Control Up To 40 Percent Of Mexican Territory," The Federalist, April 28, 2021, thefederalist.com. 5 See Alejandro Moreno, "Aprobación de AMLO se encuentra en 61% previo a campañas electorales," El Financiero, April 5, 2021, elfinanciero.com. 6 Penguin Press, New York, NY, 2019, 558 pages. Section III: Geopolitical Calendar

Highlights Rising CO2 emissions on the back of stronger global energy growth this year will keep energy markets focused on expanding ESG risks in the buildout of renewable generation via metals mining (Chart of the Week).   EM energy demand is expected to grow 3.4% this year vs. 2019 levels and will account for ~ 70% of global energy demand growth.  Demand in DM economies will fall 3% this year vs 2019 levels.  Overall, global demand is expected to recover all the ground lost to the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the IEA.  Rising energy demand will be met by higher fossil-fuel use, with coal demand increasing by more than total renewables generation this year and accounting for more than half of global energy demand growth. Demand for renewable power will increase by 8,300 TWh (8%) this year, the largest y/y increase recorded by the IEA.  As renewables generation is built out, demand for bulks (iron ore and steel) and base metals will increase.1  Building that new energy supply will contribute to rising CO2, particularly in the renewables' supply chains. Feature Energy demand will recover much of the ground lost to the COVID-19 pandemic last year, according to the IEA.2 Most of this is down to successful rollouts of vaccination programs in systemically important economies – e.g., China, the US and the UK – and the massive fiscal and monetary stimulus deployed to carry the global economy through the pandemic. The risk of further lockdowns and uncontrolled spread of variants of the virus remains high, but, at present, progress continues to be made and wider vaccine distribution can be expected. The IEA expects a global recovery in energy demand of 4.6% this year, which will put total demand at ~ 0.5% above 2019 levels. The global rebound will be led by EM economies, where demand is expected to grow 3.4% this year vs. 2019 levels and will account for ~ 70% of global energy demand growth. Energy demand in DM economies will fall 3% this year vs 2019 levels. Overall, global demand is expected to recover all the ground lost to the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the IEA. Chart of the WeekGlobal CO2 Emissions Will Rebound Post-COVID-19 Coal demand will lead the rebound in fossil-fuel use, which is expected to account for more than total renewables demand globally this year, covering more than half of global energy demand growth. This will push CO2 emissions up by 5% this year. Asia coal demand – led by China's and India's world-leading coal-plant buildout over the past 20 years – will account for 80% of world demand (Chart 2). Chart 2China, India Lead Coal-Fired Generation Buildout Demand for renewable power will post its biggest year-on-year gain on record, increasing by 8,300 TWh (8%) this year. This increase comes at the back of roughly a decade of an increasing share of electricity from renewables globally (Chart 3). As renewables generation is built out, demand for bulks (iron ore and steel) and base metals will increase.3 Building that new energy supply will contribute to rising CO2, particularly in the renewables' supply chains. Chart 3Share of Electricity From Renewables Has Been Increasing ESG Risks Increase With Renewables Buildout Governments have pledged to invest vast sums of money into the green energy transition, to reduce fossil fuels consumption and deforestation, thus curbing temperature increases. In addition, banks have pledged trillions will be made available to support the buildout of renewable technologies over the coming years. The World Bank, under the most ambitious scenarios considered (IEA ETP B2DS and IRENA REmap), projects that renewables, will make up approximately 90% of the installed electricity generation capacity up to 2050. This analysis excludes oil, biomass and tidal energy. (Chart 4). Building these renewable energy sources will be extremely mineral intensive (Chart 5). Chart 4Renewables Potential Is Huge … While we have highlighted issues such as a lack of mining capex and decreasing ore grades in past research – both of which can be addressed by higher metals and minerals prices – the environmental, social and governance (ESG) risks posed by mining are equally important factors for investors, policymakers and mining companies to consider.4 The mining industry generally uses three principal sources of energy for its operations – diesel fuel (mostly in moving mined ore down the supply chain for processing), grid electricity and explosives. Of these three, diesel and electricity consumption contributes substantially to mining’s GHG emissions. In the mining stage, land clearing, drilling, blasting, crushing and hauling require a considerable amount of energy, and hence emit the highest amounts of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Chart 5… As Are Its Mineral Requirements The Environmental Impact Of Mining Under the scenarios depicted in Chart 5, copper suppliers could be called on to produce approximately 21mm MT of the red metal annually between now and 2050, which is equivalent to a 7% annual increase of supplies vs. the 2017 reference year shown in the chart. Mining sufficient amounts of copper, a metal which is critical to the renewable energy buildout, both in terms of quantity and versatility, will test miners' and governments' ability to extract sufficient amounts of ore for further processing without massively damaging the environment or indigenous populations' habitats (Chart 6). Chart 6Copper Spans All Renewables Technologies A recent risk analysis of 308 undeveloped copper orebodies found that for 180 of the orebodies – roughly equivalent to 570mm MT of copper – ore-grade risk was characterized as moderate-to-high risk.5 High risk implies a lower concentration of metal in the ore deposits. Mining in ore bodies with lower copper grades will be more energy intensive, and thus will emit more greenhouse gases. Table 1 is a risk matrix of the 40 mines that have the most amount of copper tonnage in this analysis: 27 of these mines displayed in the matrix have a medium-to-high grade risk. Table 1Mining Risk Matrix Another analysis established a negative relationship between the ore-grade quality and energy consumption across mines for different metals and minerals.6 This paper found that, as ore grade depletes, the energy needed to extract it and send it along the supply chain for further processing is exponentially higher (Chart 7). Lastly, a recent examination found that in 2018, primary metals and mining accounted for approximately 10% of the total greenhouse gases. Using a case study of Chile, the world’s largest producer of the red metal, the researchers found that fuel consumption increased by 130% and electricity consumption per unit of mined copper increased by 32% from 2001 to 2017. This increase was primarily due to decreasing ore grades.7 As ore grades continue to fall, these exponential relationships likely will persist or become more significant. Chart 7Energy Use Rises As Ore Quality Falls Bottom Line: While technology can improve extraction, it cannot reduce the minimum energy required for the mining process. This increased energy use will contribute to the total amount of CO2 and other GHGs emitted in the process of extracting the ores required to realize a low-carbon future. Trade-Off Between CO2 Emissions And Economic Development A recent Reuters analysis highlights the gap between EM and DM from the perspective of their renewable energy transition priorities.8 Of the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), “Taking action to combat climate change” takes precedence over the rest for DM economies. This is largely because they have already dealt with other energy and income intensive SDGs such as improvements in healthcare and poverty reduction. The large scale of unmet energy demand in developing countries poses a huge challenge to controlling CO2 emissions. The populations of these countries are growing fast and are projected to continue increasing over the next three decades. Rising populations, make the issue of a "green-energy transition" extremely dynamic – i.e., not only do EM economies need to replace existing fossil fuels, but they also need to add enough extra zero-emission fuel sources to meet the growth in energy demand. Bottom Line: Coupled with the increased amount of energy required to mine the same amount of metal (due to lower ore grades), rising energy demand resulting from a burgeoning population in EM economies - which use fossil fuels to meet their primary needs - will require more metals to be mined for the renewable energy transition. This will further increase the amount of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions from mine activity, and increase the risk to indigenous populations living close-by to the sources of this new metals supply. ESG risks will increase as a result, presenting greater challenges to attracting funding to these efforts.   Ashwin Shyam Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com   Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish OPEC 2.0 was expected to stick with its decision to return ~ 2mm b/d of supply to the market at its ministerial meeting Wednesday. Markets remain wary of demand slowing as COVID-19-induced lockdowns persist and case counts increase globally. The production being returned to market includes 1mm b/d of voluntary cuts by Saudi Arabia, which could, if needs be, keep barrels off the market if demand weakens. Base Metals: Bullish Front-month COMEX copper is holding above $4.50/lb, after breaching its 11-year high earlier this week. The proximate cause of the initial lift above that level was news of a strike by Chilean port workers on Monday protesting restrictions on early pension-fund drawdowns, according to mining.com. After a slight breather, prices returned to trading north of $4.50/lb by mid-week. Last week, we raised our Dec21 COMEX copper price forecast to $5.00/lb from $4.50/lb. Separately, high-grade iron ore (65% Fe) hit record highs, while the benchmark grade (62% Fe) traded above $190/MT earlier in the week on the back of lower-than-expected production by major suppliers and USD weakness. Steel futures on the Shanghai Futures Exchange hit another record as well, as strong demand and threats of mandated reductions in Chinese steel output to reduce pollution loom (Chart 8). Precious Metals: Bullish Rising COVID cases, especially in India, Brazil and Japan are increasing gold’s safe-haven appeal (Chart 9). The US CFTC, in its Commitment of Traders (COT) report for the week ending April 20, stated that speculators raised their COMEX gold bullish positions. At the end of the two-day FOMC meeting, the Fed decided against lifting interest rates and withdrawing support for the US economy. However, officials sounded more optimistic about the economy than they did in March. The decision did not give any sign interest rates would be lifted, or asset purchases would be tapered against the backdrop of a steadily improving economy.  Net, this could increase demand for gold, as inflationary pressures rise. As of Tuesday’s close, COMEX gold was trading at $1778/oz. Ags/Softs: Neutral Corn and bean futures settled down by mid-week after a sharp rally earlier. After rising to a new eight-year high just below $7/bushel due to cold weather in the US, and fears a lower harvest in Brazil will reduce global grain supplies, corn settled down to ~ $6.85/bu at mid-week trading. Beans traded above $15.50/bu earlier in the week, their highest since June 2014, and settled down to ~ $15.36/bu by mid-week. Attention remains focused on global supplies. The uptrend in grains and beans remains intact. Chart 8 Chart 9   Footnotes 1     Please see Renewables, China's FYP Underpin Metals Demand, published 26 November 2020, for further discussion.  It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 2     Please see Global Energy Review 2021, the IEA's Flagship report for April 2021. 3    Please see Renewables, China's FYP Underpin Metals Demand, published 26 November 2020, for further discussion.  It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 4    We discussed these capex issues in last week's research, Copper Headed Higher On Surge In Steel Prices, which is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 5    Please see Valenta et al.’s ‘Re-thinking complex orebodies: Consequences for the future world supply of copper’ published in 2019 for this analysis. 6    Please see Calvo et. al.’s ‘Decreasing Ore Grades in Global Metallic Mining: A Theoretical Issue or a Global Reality?’ published in 2016 for this analysis. 7     Please see Azadi et. al.’s ‘Transparency on greenhouse gas emissions from mining to enable climate change mitigation’ published in 2020 for this analysis. 8    Please see John Kemp's Column: CO2 emission limits and economic development published 19 April 2021 by reuters.com.   Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Commodity Prices and Plays Reference Table Trades Closed in 2021 Summary of Closed Trades

Informe especial

Highlights Cryptocurrencies have a long march ahead to be able to displace fiat currencies. While cryptocurrencies are improving tremendously as a medium of exchange, they lag fiat as a store of value and a unit of account. Contrary to popular belief, fiat money has outperformed anti-fiat assets over time as a store of value. Many central banks will replicate the advantages and success of bitcoin through the issuance of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). Cryptocurrencies are unlikely to disappear anytime soon and can be wonderful speculative investments. However, conservative investors should stick with gold and silver. Feature Chart I-1Spectacular Returns From Cryptocurrencies The rise in the prices of various cryptocurrencies1 has taken many investors by surprise. $1000 invested in bitcoin at the start of 2012 is worth around $10 million today. If you were lucky enough to get in on the first day of trading, when it was worth a fraction of a cent, your initial $1000 investment will be worth around $60 billion today. Meanwhile, many other cryptocurrencies are also sporting legendary returns, not even replicable in the most obscure corners of the options market (Chart I-1). There is some merit to cryptocurrencies, or more specifically, blockchain technology that is the bedrock of their invention. In this decentralized, peer-to-peer system, the need for an intermediary to validate transactions and arbitrate disputes is eliminated. This can greatly reduce transaction costs, especially when compared to banking/legal fees. The autonomy and anonymity that comes with their use is also a desirable feature. For example, anti-fiat enthusiasts welcome the fact that the creation, distribution, and use of cryptocurrencies is outside the purview of central banks. As this asset class continues to garner popularity and capture the imagination of investors, the implications run the gamut from potential future returns (or losses) to the impact on other asset classes. For currency investors, the key question is whether any of these seemingly attractive features have a sizeable impact on the value and use of other developed market currencies. In short, will cryptocurrencies displace fiat? To answer this question, we have to start from the very basic definition of what money is.  Is Bitcoin Money? The three basic functions of money are a store of value, unit of account and a medium of exchange. On at least two of these three basic functions, bitcoin fails. Bitcoin has been improving as a medium of exchange. The ability to swap fiat currency into bitcoins and back is fairly easy. More importantly, more and more merchants are accepting bitcoin as a form of payment. Globally, the turnover of cryptocurrencies is about $200 billion or roughly 3% of overall foreign exchange turnover. This is higher than daily trading in the Mexican peso, the New Zealand dollar, and the Swedish krona, an impressive feat (Chart I-2). This is also evidenced by the rise in the market capitalization of cryptocurrencies, to around $2 trillion today (Chart I-3). Chart I-2An Improving Medium Of Exchange Chart I-3Gold Versus Cryptocurrencies However, as Peter Berezin, our Chief Global Strategist has pointed out, this does not necessarily trump the use of fiat money.2  The Visa network, for example, handles over 5,000 times more transactions a second than the bitcoin mempool (the pool of unconfirmed transactions). Meanwhile, if one were to take a vacation in exotic places like Manila or Mumbai, what medium of exchange will one hold? Cryptocurrency, gold or the US dollar? Experience tells us you will be much better off holding greenbacks or even gold. Bitcoin is certainly not a store of value. The drawdown in cryptocurrency prices has been around 80% a year or 40%-50% over three months. This is much more volatile than currencies such as the Turkish lira or Argentinian peso, from countries fraught with political instability and economic fragility (Chart I-4). It appears that the lack of central bank oversight is a vice and not a virtue. Stability in a currency allows for confidence in savings, future purchases, and investment decisions. A monetary system based on cryptocurrencies deprives citizens of this basic tenet.   Chart I-4Bitcoin Is A Poor Store Of Value Bitcoin’s inherent volatility also makes it unsuitable as a unit of account. Prices quoted in bitcoin units will need to be revised daily. Although not a parallel comparison, this is reminiscent of hyperinflationary Zimbabwe, where retail store prices were adjusted several times a day to reflect the rapid depreciation in the currency. This is hardly a monetary regime suitable for the developed world, or any other economy for that matter. In a nutshell, cryptocurrencies do not yet satisfy the basic functions of money. Yes, they are portable, divisible, fungible and in limited supply. However, they have yet to gain wider acceptance, and are not a store of value nor a unit of account. As such, they remain speculative investments rather than money. The Demise Of Fiat Is Exaggerated Even if bitcoin is not money, the question remains whether it should be held in currency portfolios as insurance against fiat money debasement. After all, central bank quantitative easing since the global financial crisis has benefited other monetary assets such as gold and silver. Should investors also accumulate cryptocurrencies? The answer will depend on the type of investor. Dedicated currency investors need not worry about bitcoin. As a starting point, the US dollar very much remains the reserve currency today. About 60% of global reserve allocation is in USD. This position has often been challenged over the last few decades but has never been threatened (Chart I-5). This puts cryptocurrencies a long way from the starting line. Chart I-5The US Dollar Remains King It is worth noting that over time, fiat assets have done much better than anti-fiat alternatives. Using Bank of England data from the 19th century, we can see that over time, government bonds did much better than gold, or even stocks and real estate (Chart I-6). The reason is that most currencies provide a yield, while cryptocurrencies and gold do not. Chart I-6Fiat Versus Anti-Fiat Assets Chart I-7The DXY Has Faced Strong Resistance At 100 If one is worried about the path of the US dollar (like us), there are many other established fiat currencies to choose from. Since 2015, global allocation of FX Reserves to US dollars has fallen from almost 66% to around 60% today. The rotation has favored other currencies such as the Japanese yen, Chinese yuan and even gold (Chart I-7). From a longer-term perspective, this will place a durable floor under developed market currencies. Cryptocurrencies Versus Gold The degree to which cryptocurrencies can benefit from a shift away from dollars will depend on whether private investors or central banks drive the outflows. Central banks have a natural imperative to defend fiat currencies, since these are the very tools they use to implement monetary policy. As such, when diversifying out of dollars, their choice is other fiat currencies or gold, the latter having been a monetary standard for centuries. Private investors, some wanting to cut the cord to a centralized monetary system, may chose cryptocurrencies. Since the peak in the DXY index in 2020, both gold and US Treasuries are down significantly, while bitcoin has catapulted to new highs (Chart I-8). This has occurred because of a change in leadership, where the biggest sellers of US Treasuries have not been official concerns, but private investors (Chart I-9). Foreign central banks still dominate the holding of US Treasuries, to the tune of 60% versus 40% for private investors (bottom panel). But the bulk of outflows has been coming from private investors. Chart I-8Bitcoin Thrives When Mainstream Havens Are Rolling Over Chart I-9A Treasury Liquidation From ##br##Private Investors Central banks (the biggest holders of US Treasuries) tend to have stronger hands. This is because central banks are ideological while private investors can be swayed by momentum. For example, China and Russia have a geopolitical imperative to diversify out of dollars. As a result, Russia now has almost 25% of its foreign exchange reserves in gold and China almost 4%. A conservative investor looking to diversify out of fiat currency should naturally choose gold, which is backed by strong buyers. For more speculative investors, a simple rule of thumb could work: Buy cryptocurrencies when they drop 50% and sell when they overtake their previous highs. As we showed in Chart I-3, cryptocurrencies drop at least 40%-50% every year or so, providing ample opportunity to accumulate long positions. It is worth noting that my colleagues have a different approach. Dhaval Joshi, who heads our Counterpoint product, suggests holding cryptocurrencies in inverse proportion to their relative volatility to gold. In other words, given that bitcoin is three times more volatile than gold, your anti-fiat portfolio should have a 25% allocation to cryptocurrencies.3 Peter Berezin, our Chief Global Strategist, will not touch bitcoin. We tend to agree that cryptocurrencies could be a playable mania but would not recommend this asset class for the longer term. Central Bank Digital Currencies   One argument for why cryptocurrencies may not survive over the longer term is that there is a natural limit to how much widespread acceptance they will achieve before central banks start clamping down on them. The first reason will be due to the loss in seigniorage revenue for central banks. Between 2009 and 2019, the US and China generated about $140bn a year in seigniorage revenue (Chart I-10). These are non-negligible sums, which the rapid proliferation of cryptocurrencies threaten. Moreover, as the turnover in cryptocurrencies overtakes global trading in various domestic currencies, many countries are moving to ban bitcoin transactions (Table I-1). Chart I-10Seigniorage Revenue Is Significant Table 1A Rising List Of Cryptocurrency Bans Second, the use of cryptocurrencies can encourage the proliferation of illegal activities. This is a well-known flaw, and something governments will push back against. Meanwhile, many central banks are moving to establish their own digital currencies. Some of these could be based off the same blockchain technology that underpins bitcoin. This will provide many of the advantages of using a cryptocurrency without some of the known pitfalls. Map I-1 highlights that most G10 central banks have a digital currency plan. Map I-1Many Central Banks Are Planning A Digital Currency Some advocates for bitcoin point to its limited supply (21 million coins) as evidence for monetary prudence. Even the gold standard had more flexibility, since gold mining expanded about 2% a year. Yet that still proved to be extremely deflationary. A monetary standard that includes both paper currency and CBDCs provides the flexibility that central bankers need to smooth out economic cycles. A bitcoin-based standard will take us back to the middle ages. Once CDBCs become mainstream, the need for alternative cryptocurrencies will not disappear but fall greatly. This will also happen as the number of cryptocurrencies being created will likely balloon, given the very impressive price rallies in recent years. The IPO of Coinbase, an exchange for trading cryptocurrencies, may have heralded the peak in sentiment. Investment Conclusions The dollar faces many headwinds over the next 12 months. A rebound in global growth that begins to favor non-US economies will benefit pro-cyclical currencies. The Federal Reserve’s liquidity injections have assuaged the dollar shortage that held markets hostage last year. Interest rates are now moving against the dollar. Meanwhile, the greenback is expensive (Chart I-11), with a negative balance of payments backdrop. Chart I-11The US Dollar Is Expensive Chart I-12Hold Precious Metals Our favorite vehicles to play against coming weakness in the dollar have been the Scandinavian currencies, precious metals and commodity currencies. Within the precious metals sphere, we like both gold and silver but are short the gold/silver ratio as a hedged trade with little downside and much upside (Chart I-12). In particular, precious metals benefit from reserve diversification out of US dollars. In this light, cryptocurrencies could have intermittent rallies. However, given the regulatory and structural issues they face, we will not be holders for the long term.   Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 We use bitcoin and cryptocurrencies interchangeably in this text. We do acknowledge that there are various other cryptocurrencies and these are shown in Chart 1. 2 Please see Global Investment Strategy Special Report, "Bitcoin: A Solution In Search Of A Problem," dated February 26, 2021. 3 Please see Counterpoint Strategy Special Report, "Why Cryptocurrencies Are Here To Stay And Bitcoin Is Worth $120,000," dated April 8, 2021. Currencies U.S. Dollar Chart II-1USD Technicals 1 Chart II-2USD Technicals 2 March housing starts came in at 1.7 million, versus expectations of 1.6 million. This was a 19.4% month-on-month rise. Building permits were equally strong at 1.8 million for the month of March. The University of Michigan sentiment indicator rose to 86.5 in April from 84.9. The jump in the current conditions component from 93 to 97.2 was noteworthy. Initial jobless claims continue to decline, coming in at 547K for the week of April 17. Existing home sales remained strong at 6 million, even though they fell 3.7% month-on-month. The DXY Index fell by 0.3% this week. Speculators pared back a bit of their bullish positioning on the dollar. The overhang of a risk-off event continues to anchor dollar bulls, but interest rate differentials are now moving against the greenback. 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 mixed. The trade balance came in at €18.4 billion in February, versus €24.2 billion the previous month. This supported a current account balance of €25.9 billion. Construction output fell 5.8% year-on-year in February. Consumer confidence came in at -8.1 in April, versus -10.8 in March. The euro rose by 0.3% this week. The ECB kept monetary policy on hold this week, leaving the deposit facility rate at -0.5% and the marginal lending facility at 0.25%. This garnered little market reaction. With a few euro area countries under lockdown, this was the correct stance. Covid-19 will continue to dictate the near-term path of policy and the euro, but we remain bullish longer term. 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 Japanese Yen Chart II-5JPY Technicals 1 Chart II-6JPY Technicals 2 Recent data from Japan have been robust. Exports surged 16.1% year-on-year in March. Imports were also robust at +5.7% year-on-year. This boosted the trade balance to ¥298 billion. Tokyo condominiums for sale are rising 45% year-on-year. Supermarket sales rose 1.3% year-on-year in March. This is a tentative but positive sign of a consumption recovery. The Japanese yen rose 0.6% this week. The yen has been the best performing currency this week, a sign that sentiment was overly bearish and the currency was much oversold. Our intermediate-term indicator remains at bombed-out levels and speculators are still short the yen. This provides further upside for this defensive currency. As a portfolio hedge, we are short EUR/JPY. 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 There was an avalanche of positive data from the UK this week. Rightmove house prices came in at 5.1% year on year in April. The labor report was mixed. While the UK lost 73 thousand jobs in February, this was below expectations of a 145 thousand loss. Core CPI came in at 1.1% in March. The RPI index came in at 1.5% year-on-year, in line with expectations. The CBI business optimism survey came in at 38 in April, versus -22 the previous month. Cable rose by 0.4% this week. The UK economy continues to benefit from its strong vaccination campaign. With the prospect of the rest of the world catching up, this trade is now long in the tooth. In short, we are neutral the pound in the short term, but remain bullish longer-term. 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 There was scant data out of Australia this week. The NAB business confidence index came in at 17 in Q1 versus 14 the prior quarter. The Australian dollar fell by 0.6% against the US dollar this week. The Aussie came out of the Covid-19 crisis as one of the best performing currencies, so some measure of consolidation is to be expected. Our intermediate-term indicator continues to blast downward, while sentiment towards the Aussie remains quite elevated. However, we believe that this will be a healthy consolidation in what could prove to be a multi-year bull market in the Australian dollar. 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 There was scant data out of New Zealand this week. CPI came in at 1.5% in Q1, in line with expectations. The Kiwi fell by 0.2% against the US dollar this week. Like Australia, New Zealand has managed the Covid-19 crisis quite well and the new travel bubble between the two countries will help lift economic activity. From a technical perspective however, room for further consolidation in the Kiwi remains. Our intermediate-term indicator continues to drift lower, while speculators are slightly long the cross. In our models, the Kiwi also appears overvalued. We were long AUD/NZD but were stopped out this week for modest profits. We will look to reestablish the trade. 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 recent data out of Canada has been quite strong. Foreigners continue to flock into Canadian capital markets, to the tune of C$8.5bn in February. Housing starts came in at 335 thousand in March, the highest since the 70s. The Teranet house price index rose 10.8% year-on-year in March. The CPI release for March was better than expected. Headline was at 2.2%, the core median was at 2.1% and the trimmed mean came in at 2.2%. The Canadian dollar rose by 0.3% this week. The Bank of Canada kept rates on hold, but trimmed asset purchases. This follows a very generous budget from the Liberal party earlier this week. The loonie loved the news and Canadian government bonds sold off. We remain bullish CAD/USD on valuation grounds, spillovers from US fiscal stimulus and a constructive oil backdrop.  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 The recent data out of Switzerland has been quite strong. Producer and import prices fell by 0.2% year-on-year in March. This is a tremendous improvement from the previous 1.1% drop. M3 money supply continues to expand at a robust 5.6% clip. Exports rose 4.5% month-on-month in March. Watch exports surged 37% year-on-year. The Swiss franc rose 0.5% this week. The Swiss franc is the second best performing currency this week after the yen. With US interest rates stabilizing, the rationale for CHF carry trades is slowly fading. Our intermediate-term indicator shows the franc at bombed-out levels, and speculators are still short. This provides some margin for further upside. We are long EUR/CHF, but with very tight stops. 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 There was scant data out of Norway this week. Industrial confidence came in at 8.2 in Q1, versus a prior reading of 3.1. The Norwegian krone was flat against the US dollar this week. Norway is setting the tone in terms of what monetary policy and sovereign wealth management could look like for many countries in the coming years. First, the Norges Bank announced they would be testing digital currency solutions over the coming two years. This is the way forward for central banks. Second, the sovereign wealth fund, the biggest in the world, is using its influence to effect policy changes towards the environment. Should the returns from its investments pay off in the years ahead, this could generate powerful repatriation flows for Norway. We are strategically bullish the NOK. 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 There was no data out of Sweden this week. The Swedish krona rose by 0.2% this week. Swedish 2-year real rates recently punched above US levels, suggesting downward pressure on the krona should soon be abating. Our intermediate-term indicator suggests weakness in the krona is mostly done, while the currency appears cheap in most of our models. The handicap for Sweden is successfully dealing with the pandemic, after having a model that stood apart from what other countries were following. Over the longer-term, we are bullish SEK, just like the NOK, against both the euro and the dollar. 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

Informe especial

Aspectos destacados Es probable que Los Verdes obtengan el control del gobierno de Alemania en las elecciones federales del 26 de septiembre. Al menos serán muy influyentes en la nueva coalición. Alemania ha logrado muchas de sus metas geopolíticas a largo plazo dentro de la UE. Existe consenso sobre políticas monetarias y fiscales acomodaticias y una política medioambiental beligerante. Los mayores cambios vendrán desde el exterior. La relación entre EE. UU. y Alemania es más difícil. Aunque ambos se oponen a la agresión rusa y china, Alemania se resistirá a la agresión estadounidense. Los Demócratas Cristianos tienen un 65% de probabilidad de permanecer en el gobierno, lo que limitaría la controvertida y ambiciosa agenda fiscal de Los Verdes. La probabilidad del 35% de una coalición de izquierdas adelantará el estímulo fiscal para favorecer la recuperación. La economía muestra signos de mejora y un relajamiento fiscal liderado por Los Verdes supercargará la recuperación. Sin embargo, la política de coalición probablemente no abordará la mala demografía de Alemania, la productividad en deterioro y los altos ahorros excedentes. En términos cíclicos, sobreponderar bonos periféricos europeos frente a los bunds; EUR/USD; y acciones italianas y españolas frente a las alemanas. Análisis Gráfico 1 Los alemanes recurren a una mujer joven y a una ecologista Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Alemania está a punto de convertirse en el primer país importante gobernado por un partido verde. Como mínimo, las elecciones alemanas del 26 de septiembre verán una sorpresa en la que el partido gobernante rinda por debajo de lo esperado y Los Verdes por encima de lo esperado (Gráfico 1). En un 30%, los mercados de apuestas en línea están subestimando las probabilidades de que Annalena Baerbock se convierta en la primera canciller verde en 2022, y la primera canciller elegida proveniente de un tercer partido (Gráfico 2). La “cuestión alemana” —el problema de cómo unificar Alemania y al mismo tiempo mantener la paz con los vecinos— estuvo en el corazón de Europa durante los últimos dos siglos, pero hoy parece sustancialmente resuelta: una Alemania pacífica y unificada está en el centro de una Europa mayormente pacífica y en gran parte unificada. Hay una serie de riesgos en el horizonte, pero debe reconocerse este trasfondo positivo. Gráfico 2 El mercado despierta ante la candidatura de Baerbock a la cancillería Vientos de Cambio: Alemania se Vuelve Verde Vientos de Cambio: Alemania se Vuelve Verde Todos los escenarios más probables para las elecciones alemanas reforzarán la situación actual al perpetuar políticas que apuntan a la solidaridad de la zona euro. Incluso el giro verde ya está en marcha, aunque un gobierno liderado por Los Verdes lo supercargará. No obstante, las elecciones de este año son importantes porque anuncian un giro hacia la izquierda en Alemania y darán forma a la política fiscal, energética, industrial y comercial durante, al menos, los próximos cuatro años. Un barrido de izquierdas generaría entusiasmo en el mercado de acciones a corto plazo —una sorpresa fiscal positiva que supercargaría el rebote pospandemia— pero, a largo plazo, traería mayor incertidumbre política porque supondría una ruptura con el pasado y posiblemente un cambio económico estructural (Gráfico 3). Los Verdes están a favor de aumentos sustanciales en impuestos y regulación, así como de grandes cambios en la política industrial y energética. En ausencia de un barrido de izquierdas, la política de coalición será confusa y las políticas actuales de Alemania continuarán. Gráfico 3 Aumento de la incertidumbre sobre la política alemana Aumenta la incertidumbre política en Alemania Aumenta la incertidumbre política en Alemania Independientemente de lo que ocurra dentro de Alemania, el entorno geopolítico es cada vez más peligroso. Alemania intentará evitar verse arrastrada a las grandes luchas de poder de EE. UU. con Rusia y China, pero puede que no tenga elección. La geopolítica de Alemania La dificultad de la unificación alemana está en el centro de la historia europea moderna. Debido a la gran y productiva población germanoparlante, la unificación en 1871 supuso una amenaza de seguridad para los vecinos, culminando en las guerras mundiales. La reunificación pacífica de Alemania tras la Guerra Fría creó el potencial para que la UE tuviera éxito y estableciera paz y prosperidad en el continente. Este arreglo ha sobrevivido a desafíos recientes. La relación de Alemania con la UE estuvo amenazada por la crisis financiera, la Primavera Árabe y la oleada migratoria, el Brexit y los aranceles comerciales del presidente Trump. Pero al final estos eventos consolidaron la realidad de que Alemania y Europa están fortaleciendo sus lazos frente a presiones externas. Alemania consiguió lo que buscaba desde hace tiempo —la preeminencia en el continente— al evitar un papel militar, mantenerse junto a Francia en lo económico y evitar el conflicto con Rusia. Dado que Alemania ha alcanzado muchas de sus metas estratégicas de larga data, no ha sucumbido a una reacción nacionalista en la última década como sí ocurrió en EE. UU. y el Reino Unido. Sin embargo, Alemania no es inmune al populismo o al sentimiento anti-establecimiento. Los dos principales bloques políticos, los Demócratas Cristianos y los Socialdemócratas, han sufrido pérdida de apoyo popular en elecciones recientes, obligándolos a formar una gran coalición juntos. El sentimiento anti-establecimiento en Alemania ha movido al electorado hacia la izquierda, a favor de Los Verdes. Los Verdes han ido subiendo inexorablemente durante la última década y ahora han tomado el impulso a solo cinco meses de las elecciones (Gráfico 4). Aun así, Los Verdes en Alemania son básicamente un partido político establecido. Participan en 11 de 16 gobiernos estatales y actualmente ocupan la posición principal en Baden-Württemberg, el tercer estado más poblado y productivo de Alemania. Entre 1998 y 2005 participaron en el gobierno, manchándose con reformas estructurales neoliberales y despliegues militares en el extranjero. Además, Los Verdes no pueden gobernar en solitario, sino que deberán gobernar en coalición, lo que moderará sus políticas más controvertidas. Gráfico 4 Auge de Los Verdes, tropiezo de los Demócratas Cristianos Los Verdes se disparan, los Demócratas Cristianos flaquean Los Verdes se disparan, los Demócratas Cristianos flaquean Hoy Alemania marcha al compás de Francia y la UE cumpliendo tres condiciones clave: plena acomodación monetaria (los desafíos del tribunal constitucional alemán al Banco Central Europeo son ineficaces), plena acomodación fiscal (la canciller Angela Merkel accedió a la emisión conjunta de deuda y a un control laxo de déficits en medio de la crisis del COVID-19, además de políticas robustas de energía verde) y plena acomodación en seguridad (el rearme alemán existe dentro del contexto de la OTAN y las aspiraciones de seguridad europeas se emprenden en sintonía con los franceses). Estas condiciones no cambiarán en las elecciones de 2021 incluso si Los Verdes llegaran al poder al frente de una coalición de izquierdas. Conclusión: Alemania ha prácticamente alcanzado sus grandes objetivos estratégicos de unificar y liderar Europa. Ningún gobierno alemán desafiará esta situación y todos los gobiernos alemanes se esforzarán por solidificarla. Los mayores riesgos para este arreglo provienen del exterior más que del interior. ¿El retorno de la cuestión alemana? La posición geopolítica de Alemania puede resumirse en el Gráfico 5, que muestra las opiniones populares hacia distintos países e instituciones. Los alemanes ven positivamente a la UE y a instituciones globales como las Naciones Unidas y menos a la OTAN. Ven de forma desfavorable a todo lo demás. Tienen una opinión desfavorable hacia Rusia, pero no de manera dramática, lo que muestra su falta de interés en un conflicto con Rusia: no quieren ser el campo de batalla ni las murallas de otra gran guerra europea. No les gustan Estados Unidos y China aún más, y con igual intensidad. Aunque las actitudes hacia EE. UU. han mejorado desde las elecciones de 2020, la desfavorabilidad neta es significativa. Gráfico 5 ¿Alemania más favorable hacia Rusia que hacia EE. UU.? Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Desde la crisis financiera global, y especialmente desde la invasión rusa de Ucrania en 2014, Alemania ha reforzado su ejército. Este aumento se realiza bajo el estímulo de Estados Unidos y en consonancia con los aliados de la OTAN, que reaccionan a la acción militar rusa para restaurar su esfera de influencia en el antiguo espacio soviético (Gráfico 6). No obstante, el gasto militar de Alemania sigue por debajo del objetivo de la OTAN del 2% del PIB. No se la verá como una amenaza para sus vecinos mientras permanezca integrada con Francia y Europa y orientada a disuadir a Rusia. Gráfico 6 Alemania y la OTAN aumentan el gasto militar Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Gráfico 7 Vigilar las relaciones ruso-alemanas por grietas en el edificio europeo Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde La agresividad de Rusia debería seguir empujando a alemanes y europeos a estrechar sus lazos. Esto podría cambiar si Putin apuesta por la diplomacia en lugar de la coerción militar, ya que entonces podría dividir a Alemania del este de Europa. La posibilidad es clara por la insistencia actual de Rusia y Alemania en completar el gasoducto Nord Stream 2 a pesar de las objeciones de EE. UU. y de Europa del Este. El gasoducto está previsto que se complete para septiembre, justo a tiempo para las elecciones —en no poca medida porque Los Verdes se oponen—. Si EE. UU. insiste en detener el gasoducto, estallaría una crisis con Rusia que humillaría a Merkel y a los Demócratas Cristianos. Pero EE. UU. podría abstenerse de hacerlo ante amenazas militares rusas (las probabilidades son 50/50). El despliegue ruso de más de 100.000 tropas en la frontera con Ucrania este año —y ahora supuestamente ordenando su regreso a la base para el 1 de mayo— equivale a una prueba de las relaciones ruso-alemanas. Putin puede ampliar fácilmente la huella rusa en Ucrania y las tensiones permanecerán elevadas al menos hasta las elecciones legislativas rusas en septiembre. Los alemanes responderían a otra invasión con sanciones, aunque probablemente suavizando las sanciones más duras propuestas por los estadounidenses. Lo que realmente cambiaría el juego sería una conquista rusa de toda Ucrania. Esto es poco probable —precisamente porque uniría firmemente a Alemania, a los europeos y a los estadounidenses contra Rusia, con pérdidas económicas y desventajas estratégicas para ésta (Gráfico 7). El ascenso de China también debería mantener a Alemania vinculada a Europa. Los alemanes temen el avance tecnológico y manufacturero de China, incluida la participación china en infraestructuras y redes digitales. Los Verdes critican la forma en que los bienes chinos intensivos en carbono socavan los precios de los bienes alemanes bajos en carbono. Baerbock favorece tarifas de ajuste por carbono, un término elegante para aranceles. Sin embargo, los alemanes quieren mantener relaciones comerciales con China y no temen mucho su poder militar. Por tanto, existe el riesgo de una ruptura entre EE. UU. y Alemania en la cuestión china. Si Alemania llegara a alinearse consistentemente con Rusia y China frente a las objeciones estadounidenses, correría el riesgo de atraer atención hostil de EE. UU. y de otros europeos, que eventualmente temerían que el poder alemán se volviera excesivo al formar relaciones con gigantes fuera de la UE. Pero este no es hoy el riesgo principal. EE. UU. está cortejando a Alemania y buscando renovar la alianza transatlántica. Mientras tanto, Alemania necesita el apoyo estadounidense contra las prácticas comerciales de China y la amenaza militar rusa. Las relaciones EE. UU.-Alemania mejorarán a menos que EE. UU. obligue a Alemania a un conflicto abierto con las potencias autocráticas. Conclusión: La relación entre EE. UU. y Alemania es más difícil ahora que en el pasado, pero comparten el interés de disuadir la agresión rusa y las ambiciones tecnológicas y comerciales de China. El intento de Biden de confrontar a estas potencias de manera multilateral está limitado por la aversión al riesgo de Alemania. Escenarios para las elecciones de 2021 Hay varios escenarios realistas para el resultado electoral alemán. Nuestra expectativa de que Los Verdes formarán gobierno se basa en una serie de factores fundamentales. La opinión pública ahora se ha desplazado claramente a favor de nuestra perspectiva, con Los Verdes ganando impulso a solo cinco meses de las elecciones. Agrupar los partidos en bloques ideológicos muestra que la carrera está empatada. Nuestra apuesta es que el momentum se romperá a favor de la oposición verde, que explicamos a continuación. Mientras tanto, los Demócratas Libres deberían desempeñarse bien, robando votos a los Demócratas Cristianos. La derecha Alternativa für Deutschland (AfD), aunque no obtiene buenos resultados, es lo suficientemente persistente como para arañar algunos votos a los Demócratas Cristianos. Estos son votos “perdidos” para los conservadores, ya que ninguno de los demás partidos se unirá a ellos en una coalición (Gráfico 8). Gráfico 8 El votante medio de Alemania se desplaza a la izquierda El votante medio de Alemania se desplaza hacia la izquierda El votante medio de Alemania se desplaza hacia la izquierda Los Demócratas Cristianos muestran todos los signos de un gobierno agotado y vulnerable. Han estado en el poder durante 16 años y su desempeño en elecciones estatales y federales se ha erosionado recientemente, incluso este año (Tabla 1). El público es susceptible a la poderosa idea de que es hora de un cambio. La aprobación de la canciller Merkel sigue rondando el 60%, pero está en caída libre, y su legado exitoso no es suficiente para salvar a su partido, que muestra todos los signos de pánico: problemas de sucesión, indecisión, luchas internas, escándalos de corrupción. Los Verdes serán unos izquierdistas “impuestos-y-gasto”, pero la coalición importa en términos de lo que realmente se puede legislar (Tabla 2).1 Tabla 1A Los Demócratas Cristianos caen, Los Verdes suben, en elecciones estatales recientes Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Tabla 1B Los Demócratas Cristianos caen, Los Verdes suben, en elecciones estatales recientes Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Tabla 2 Plataformas políticas del Partido Verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde El hecho de que los Demócratas Cristianos y su partido hermano bávaro, la Unión Social Cristiana, hayan tenido una contienda tan dura por el candidato a canciller es un mal presagio. Además, las élites del partido optaron por la opción segura del sucesor escogido por Merkel, Armin Laschet, en lugar del más popular Markus Söder (Gráfico 9), en una división que probablemente perseguirá al partido más adelante este año. Gráfico 9 Demócratas Cristianos y Unión Social Cristiana divididos antes de las elecciones Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Laschet ha recibido un repunte en las encuestas con la nominación, pero será temporal. No había destacado en ninguna encuesta previa a la nominación. Gráfico 10 El descontento apunta a un cambio de gobierno Vientos de Cambio: Alemania se Vuelve Verde Vientos de Cambio: Alemania se Vuelve Verde Ha discutido abiertamente con Merkel y la coalición sobre la gestión de la pandemia. En cualquier caso, no fue su primera opción de sucesor —esa fue Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, que cayó en desgracia por controversias sobre el más mínimo indicio de cooperación con la AfD. Existe un problema manifiesto para llenar los zapatos de Merkel. Aún más importante que las luchas internas por la coalición es el hecho de que Alemania, como el resto del mundo, ha sufrido un shock histórico en su economía y sociedad. La pandemia y la recesión se agravaron luego por una mala implementación de la vacunación. El descontento general es alto, otra señal negativa para el partido en el poder (Gráfico 10). Por supuesto, las elecciones aún están a cinco meses. La vacuna hará su recorrido, la economía se reabrirá y los consumidores mejorarán su confianza —véase más abajo el giro macro muy positivo que Alemania debería esperar entre ahora y las elecciones. Los votantes en gran medida han apoyado medidas pandémicas estrictas y Merkel aún tendrá una larga influencia. Los Demócratas Cristianos y la Unión Social Cristiana han gobernado la Alemania moderna durante todo el periodo salvo 15 años y no han caído por debajo del 33% del voto popular desde la reunificación. Los Verdes con frecuencia han generado más energía en las encuestas que en las urnas. Con estos puntos en mente, ofrecemos los siguientes escenarios electorales con nuestras probabilidades subjetivas: Coalición Verde-Rojo-Rojo – Los Verdes gobiernan sin los Demócratas Cristianos – 35% de probabilidad. Coalición Verde-Negro – Los Verdes gobiernan con los Demócratas Cristianos – 30% de probabilidad. Coalición Negro-Verde – Los Demócratas Cristianos gobiernan con Los Verdes – 25% de probabilidad. Gran coalición (status quo) – Los Demócratas Cristianos gobiernan sin Los Verdes – 10% de probabilidad. Nuestras probabilidades subjetivas se basan en las encuestas de opinión y las apuestas en línea citadas arriba, pero ajustadas por el impulso de Los Verdes, las divisiones internas de los Demócratas Cristianos, el factor “es hora de un cambio” y la presencia de un shock económico y social exógeno histórico. Pueden ocurrir sorpresas geopolíticas antes de las elecciones, pero lo más probable es que refuercen a Los Verdes, ya que han adoptado una postura beligerante contra Rusia y China. Conclusión: Es probable que Los Verdes lideren el próximo gobierno alemán, pero como mínimo tendrán una gran influencia. Impactos políticos de los escenarios electorales La composición de la coalición gobernante determinará los parámetros de la nueva política. La política fiscal cambiará según el resultado electoral —tanto el gasto como los impuestos. Los Verdes serán unos izquierdistas “impuestos-y-gasto”, pero la coalición importa en términos de lo que realmente se puede legislar.2 La idea de Los Verdes es “dirigir” el proceso de reconstrucción mediante la política medioambiental. Pero si la izquierda carece de una mayoría sólida, las medidas más controvertidas y punitivas de Los Verdes no pasarán. Las políticas transformadoras recaerán con fuerza sobre las clases bajas (Gráfico 11). Gráfico 11 La ambiciosa política climática encontrará resistencia Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Las disposiciones políticas de los distintos candidatos a canciller ayudan a ilustrar el alto grado de consenso político en Alemania. La Tabla 3 analiza a los candidatos según si son “beligerantes” (activos u ofensivos) o “palomas” (pasivos o defensivos) en un área política determinada. Lo que destaca es el acuerdo entre los distintos candidatos a pesar de las diferencias partidarias. Nadie es un halcón fiscal o monetario. Solo Baerbock puede clasificarse como beligerante en comercio.3 Nadie es beligerante en inmigración. Casi todos son beligerantes en la lucha contra el cambio climático. Y las actitudes se están volviendo más escépticas respecto a Rusia y China, aunque no abiertamente beligerantes. Tabla 3 Consenso político entre los candidatos a canciller de Alemania Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Alemania no abandonará sus iniciativas verdes incluso si Los Verdes rinden por debajo de lo esperado. La actual gran coalición impulsó un paquete climático debido a la presión popular incluso con Los Verdes en la oposición. Los alemanes son considerablemente más proambientales que otros europeos (Gráfico 12). El giro verde también está ocurriendo en todo el mundo. EE. UU. ahora se une a la carrera verde mientras que China se reafirma por sus propias razones. Véase el Apéndice para los objetivos y medidas verdes actuales, que se han actualizado tras una oleada de anuncios antes de la cumbre climática del Día de la Tierra de Biden los días 22 y 23 de abril. Gráfico 12 A los alemanes les importa aún más el medio ambiente que a otros europeos Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Cualquier coalición aumentará el gasto más que los impuestos, ya que se centrará en la recuperación económica post-COVID. Ha habido un largo preludio al giro fiscal proactivo de Alemania —tiene permanencia y no debe descartarse. Una coalición demócrata-cristiana trataría de restaurar la disciplina fiscal antes que de otro modo, pero solo hay un 5% de probabilidad de que tenga el poder para hacerlo según los escenarios anteriores. El resto de Europa se sentirá motivado a gastar agresivamente mientras los límites fiscales de la UE estén en pausa en 2022, especialmente si el gobierno alemán toma un giro más acomodaticio. Más aún que EE. UU. y el Reino Unido, Alemania se está alejando del Consenso de Washington neoliberal. Pero los alemanes no están experimentando ningún tipo de oleada de polarización y populismo al estilo estadounidense. Al menos, no todavía. Podría ser un riesgo a largo plazo, dependiendo del destino de los Demócratas Cristianos, la AfD y diversos desarrollos internos y externos. Conclusión: Alemania tiene un consenso nacional que consiste en políticas monetarias, fiscales, comerciales y migratorias acomodaticias y una política medioambiental beligerante (pro-verde). Alemania se vuelve menos pacífica en conflictos geopolíticos con Rusia y China. Dado que es probable un gobierno de coalición, este consenso probablemente determinará la política real tras las elecciones de este año. Algunas cosas están claras independientemente de la coalición gobernante. Primero, Alemania busca la demanda interna como nueva fuente de crecimiento, para reequilibrar su economía y profundizar la integración europea. Segundo, Alemania acelera su impulso hacia la energía verde. Tercero, Alemania no puede aceptar estar en medio de una nueva guerra fría con Rusia. Cuarto, Alemania tiene una política ambivalente hacia China. Perspectiva macro de Alemania Incluso antes de considerar el panorama fiscal más amplio, las perspectivas de la actividad económica alemana durante los próximos 12 a 24 meses ya eran positivas. Nuestro escenario base para las elecciones de septiembre, que prevé un gobierno de coalición liderado por el Partido Verde, solo confirma esta visión optimista. Sin embargo, Alemania sigue afrontando desafíos estructurales significativos y, hasta ahora, no ha habido consenso político para abordar adecuadamente estos vientos en contra estructurales. Los Verdes ofrecen algunas soluciones, pero no todas sus propuestas son constructivas y mucho dependerá de su fuerza parlamentaria. Mirando al corto plazo… La economía alemana se beneficiará de la continua recuperación del ciclo económico global, que es una visión en el núcleo de la perspectiva actual de BCA Research.4 Alemania sigue siendo una potencia comercial y manufacturera, y por tanto cosechará un dividendo significativo del repunte manufacturero global continuado. La manufactura y el comercio representan el 20% y el 88% del PIB alemán, el porcentaje más alto de cualquier economía importante. Alternativamente, según la OCDE, la demanda exterior de bienes alemanes representa casi el 30% del valor agregado doméstico, una participación incluso mayor que la de una economía más pequeña como Corea (Gráfico 13). Además, vehículos de carretera, maquinaria y otros equipos de transporte, así como productos químicos y afines, representan el 53% de las exportaciones alemanas. Estos productos son particularmente sensibles al ciclo económico global. Por tanto, mejorarán el desempeño de la economía alemana durante los próximos dos años. El comercio con el resto de Europa constituye otro impulso para la economía alemana en el futuro. Los envíos al área del euro y al resto de la UE representan el 34% y el 23% de las exportaciones alemanas, o un 57% en total. Ahora mismo, la economía rezagada de Europa es un lastre para Alemania; sin embargo, Europa tiene más demanda reprimida que EE. UU., y el consumo de bienes duraderos se disparará una vez que avance la campaña de vacunación (Gráfico 14). Esto creará un beneficio significativo para Alemania, pues esperamos que el consumo europeo aumente notablemente en los próximos 12 a 18 meses.5 Gráfico 13 Alemania depende del comercio global Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Gráfico 14 Europa tiene más demanda reprimida que EE. UU. Europa Tiene Más Demanda Acumulada Que Estados Unidos Europa Tiene Más Demanda Acumulada Que Estados Unidos Gráfico 15 Progreso en la vacunación Progreso de la vacunación Progreso de la vacunación Las fuerzas internas también apuntan a una economía alemana fuerte, no solo factores externos. El ritmo de vacunación se acelera rápidamente en Alemania (Gráfico 15). El anuncio reciente de la compra de 50 millones de dosis adicionales para el trimestre y hasta 1.8 mil millones de dosis más durante los próximos dos años por parte de la UE apunta a mejoras adicionales. Un esfuerzo de vacunación más amplio catalizará los vientos favorables subyacentes al consumo. Los ingresos de los hogares alemanes también avanzarán significativamente. El programa Kurzarbeit fue fundamental para contener la tasa de desempleo durante la crisis, que solo alcanzó un pico del 6.4% desde el 5% a principios de 2020. Sin embargo, el programa no pudo evitar una fuerte caída en las horas totales trabajadas del 7%, ya que por definición forzó a seis millones de empleados a trabajar menos horas (Gráfico 16). Uno de los grandes beneficios del programa es que evita una ruptura del vínculo entre trabajadores y empleadores. Así, la economía sufre menos desempleo friccional a medida que la actividad se recupera y los ingresos de los hogares no sufren daños duraderos. Mientras tanto, es probable que el gobierno alemán extienda el apoyo a hogares y empresas como resultado del uso retrasado del freno de la deuda. Los Verdes proponen revisar el freno de la deuda en lugar de restablecerlo en 2022 como prometen los conservadores. Gráfico 16 Kurzarbeit salvó la situación Kurtzarbeit salvó el día Kurtzarbeit salvó el día La fortaleza del balance de los hogares alemanes significa que tendrán capacidad para gastar estos ingresos crecientes. Los precios de la vivienda residencial están subiendo a un ritmo anual del 8%, lo que empuja la ratio activos/ingreso disponible a niveles récord. Mientras tanto, la ratio deuda/activos y el nivel de tipos de interés también son muy bajos, lo que significa que la carga de servicio de las obligaciones existentes es mínima (Gráfico 17). En este contexto, el gasto en bienes duraderos se acelerará, lo que impulsará el gasto cíclico total, incluso si los hogares alemanes no gastan gran parte de los EUR 120.000 millones en ahorros excedentes acumulados durante el último año. Como muestra el Gráfico 18, mientras que el gasto en bienes duraderos de EE. UU. ya ha superado sus máximos previos al COVID, el de Alemania continúa cercano a su tendencia a largo plazo. Por tanto, cuando la economía se reabra este verano, y aumenten los ingresos y el empleo, el consiguiente aumento de la confianza del consumidor permitirá una recuperación del gasto cíclico. Gráfico 17 Sólidos balances de los hogares Sólidos balances de los hogares Sólidos balances de los hogares Gráfico 18 Alemania también tiene más demanda reprimida que EE. UU. Alemania también tiene más demanda acumulada que Estados Unidos Alemania también tiene más demanda acumulada que Estados Unidos Gráfico 19 Mensaje positivo de muchos indicadores Mensaje Positivo de Muchos Indicadores Mensaje Positivo de Muchos Indicadores Varios indicadores económicos ya apuntan hacia el próximo auge económico alemán. Los pedidos manufactureros son fuertes y la confianza en la mayoría de los sectores está aumentando. Mientras tanto, el optimismo del consumidor forma un fondo, y las matriculaciones de coches nuevos están subiendo rápidamente. Lo más positivo es que las existencias de productos terminados se han desplomado, lo que sugiere que la producción aumentará para satisfacer la demanda futura (Gráfico 19). Conclusión: La economía alemana está lista para acelerar en la segunda mitad del año y hacia 2022. Como es habitual, Alemania disfrutará de un saludable dividendo por el robusto crecimiento global, pero el programa de vacunación en expansión, así como las sólidas relaciones empleado-empleador, los fuertes balances de los hogares y la demanda reprimida por bienes duraderos también impulsarán la economía doméstica. Nuestro escenario base, de que la política fiscal se mantendrá acomodaticia tras un giro político a la izquierda en Berlín en septiembre, solo supercargará esta recuperación inevitable. … y a largo plazo En contraste con la brillante perspectiva a corto plazo, las perspectivas a largo plazo para la economía alemana siguen siendo pobres. Las políticas de cualquier nueva coalición gobernante probablemente no abordarán los problemas de la mala demografía de Alemania, la productividad en deterioro y los altos ahorros excedentes. Existe potencial para un impulso de productividad en el contexto de una carrera global por la energía verde y las tecnologías avanzadas, pero por ahora eso sigue siendo una especulación. El problema más obvio que enfrenta Alemania es su población envejecida, contrarrestada por una tasa de fecundidad de solo 1.6. En el transcurso de las próximas tres décadas, la ratio de dependencia de Alemania aumentará hasta el 80%, impulsada por un incremento de la ratio de dependencia de ancianos del 20% (Gráfico 20). La población en edad laboral se reducirá un 18% para 2050, lo que recortará el crecimiento potencial del PIB. Las perspectivas de crecimiento de la productividad alemana también son pobres. El crecimiento de la productividad de Alemania ha estado en declive a largo plazo, cayendo del 5% en 1975 a menos del 1% en 2019. Contrariamente a ideas comunes, entre 1999 y 2007, el crecimiento de la productividad laboral alemana solo igualó al de Francia o España; desde 2008, ha quedado rezagada respecto a estas dos naciones, aunque ha superado a Italia. Una razón crucial para el escaso rendimiento de la productividad alemana es la falta de inversión. Parte de esto refleja la austera política fiscal del país. Por ejemplo, en 2019 la inversión pública de Alemania se situó en el 2.4% del PIB, lo que se compara pobremente con el promedio de la OCDE del 3.8%, o incluso con el de EE. UU., donde la inversión pública fue del 3.6% del PIB. Esta mala estadística ni siquiera toma en cuenta la depreciación del stock de capital público alemán. Desde la introducción del euro, la inversión pública neta ha promediado un 0.03% del PIB. El mayor problema sigue siendo el nivel municipal. De 2012 a 2019, la inversión neta a nivel federal y estatal promedió 0.2% del PIB, mientras que la inversión neta municipal restó 0.2% del PIB en promedio. Esperemos que el nuevo gobierno pueda abordar esta deficiencia de la economía alemana. Los Verdes son los más proactivos, pero enfrentarán obstáculos. El problema mayor para la productividad alemana es la inversión de las empresas (capex). Las inversiones corporativas han sido bajas en este país. Desde la introducción del euro, la contribución de la intensidad de capital a la productividad en Alemania ha igualado a la de Italia y ha rendido menos que Francia y España. Como resultado, la antigüedad del stock de capital alemán está en un nivel récord y se sitúa muy por encima de la media de EE. UU. o la eurozona (Gráfico 21). Gráfico 20 Alemania tiene una demografía pobre Germany Has Poor Demographics Germany Has Poor Demographics Gráfico 21 El stock de capital de Alemania está envejeciendo El stock de capital de Alemania está envejeciendo. El stock de capital de Alemania está envejeciendo. La composición del capex alemán agrava la desventaja de productividad. Según un estudio del Bundesbank, la contribución a la productividad laboral del gasto en capital en tecnologías de la información y la comunicación (TIC) promedió 0.05 puntos porcentuales anuales entre 2008 y 2012. En esta métrica, Alemania quedó por detrás de Francia y EE. UU., pero superó a Italia. De 2013 a 2017, la contribución de la inversión en TIC a la productividad cayó a 0.02 puntos porcentuales, aún por debajo de Francia y EE. UU., pero en línea con Italia. Al observar el nivel absoluto de inversión en TIC o capital basado en el conocimiento (KBC), se pone de manifiesto el desafío de Alemania. En 2016, la inversión total en equipo TIC, software y bases de datos, I+D y productos de propiedad intelectual, y otros activos KBC (que incluyen capital organizativo y formación) representó menos del 8% del PIB. En Francia, EE. UU. o Suecia, estos desembolsos representaron el 11%, 12% y 13% del PIB, respectivamente (Gráfico 22, panel superior). Esta falta de inversión perjudica directamente la capacidad de innovación de Alemania. El panel inferior del Gráfico 22 muestra que, para las ocho categorías más importantes de patentes TIC (que representan el 80% del total), Alemania se queda sorprendentemente atrás respecto a EE. UU., Japón, Corea o China. Gráfico 22 Alemania rezaga en inversión TIC Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Una fuente importante de la desventaja de Alemania en inversión en TIC y KBC proviene de las pequeñas empresas, que han sido particularmente reacias a desplegar capital. Un estudio de la OCDE muestra que, entre 2010 y 2019, la brecha en la adopción de herramientas y actividades TIC entre las pequeñas y grandes empresas de Alemania se deterioró respecto al promedio de la OCDE (Gráfico 23). La falta de inversión de capital de riesgo probablemente exacerba estos problemas. En 2019, la inversión de capital de riesgo representó el 0.06% del PIB de Alemania. Esto está por debajo del nivel de inversión de riesgo en Francia o el Reino Unido (0.08% y 0.1% del PIB, respectivamente), y mucho por debajo de Corea del Sur, Canadá, Israel o EE. UU. (0.16%, 0.2%, 0.4% y 0.65%, respectivamente). Los Verdes afirman que crearán nuevos fondos de capital de riesgo, pero su capacidad en este dominio es cuestionable. Gráfico 23 Las rezagadas capacidades TIC de las pequeñas empresas alemanas Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Dado que es probable que el crecimiento de la productividad de Alemania siga siendo inferior al del resto de la OCDE y que esté por detrás incluso del de Francia o Reino Unido, la única manera de que Alemania proteja su competitividad será controlar los costes. Esto significa que Alemania no puede permitir que su reciente pérdida de competitividad continúe mucho más (Gráfico 24). Por tanto, el bajo crecimiento de la productividad limitará los salarios reales en Alemania. Gráfico 24 La competitividad de Alemania está en declive La competitividad de Alemania está disminuyendo La competitividad de Alemania está disminuyendo Esta restricción salarial impactará negativamente el consumo. Más allá de un repunte en los próximos 12 a 24 meses, el consumo alemán probablemente permanecerá deprimido, como lo estuvo en la primera década y media del siglo, tras las reformas laborales Hartz IV que también perjudicaron los salarios reales. Los Verdes, por su parte, pretenden aumentar las prestaciones sociales, elevar el salario mínimo y reducir la aplicación de Hartz IV. Conclusión: Los ahorros excedentes de Alemania seguirán siendo amplios de forma estructural. Sin un repunte significativo en capex, las empresas no financieras alemanas seguirán siendo prestamistas netas. Mientras tanto, los hogares que se preocuparon por su futuro financiero en un mundo de bajo crecimiento salarial real también continuarán ahorrando una parte significativa de sus ingresos. En consecuencia, los ahorros excedentes que Alemania desarrolló desde el cambio de milenio están aquí para quedarse (Gráfico 25). En otras palabras, Alemania seguirá exhibiendo un gran superávit por cuenta corriente y ejercerá una influencia deflacionaria sobre Europa y el resto del mundo. La política prescrita por los distintos partidos que concurren a las elecciones de septiembre no necesariamente resultará en leyes nuevas que reviertan los problemas de bajo capex y baja inversión TIC. Los Verdes empeorarán la sobre-regulación de la economía. Salvo una revolución política que tenga éxito en todos sus objetivos (tarea difícil), podemos esperar más de lo mismo para Alemania —es decir, una economía en declive lento. Gráfico 25 Demasiados ahorros, no suficientes inversiones Demasiado ahorro, no suficientes inversiones Demasiado ahorro, no suficientes inversiones Gráfico 26 Alemania destaca en energía renovable Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Dicho esto, existen algunos puntos brillantes. Alemania se está convirtiendo en líder en energías renovables y puede capitalizar la ampliación de esta tendencia para ampliar su mercado de exportación (Gráfico 26). Implicaciones para la inversión Mercados de bonos La perspectiva económica para Alemania y la eurozona en su conjunto es consistente con infraponderar los bunds alemanes dentro de las carteras de renta fija europeas. Los bunds se encuentran entre los mercados de bonos más caros del mundo, lo que los hará extremadamente vulnerables a sorpresas económicas positivas en Europa a finales de este año, especialmente si la política fiscal alemana se relaja más tras las elecciones de septiembre (Gráfico 27). Además, una política fiscal alemana más laxa debería ayudar a los bonos periféricos europeos, especialmente a los baratos BTP italianos que el BCE actualmente compra agresivamente. Por tanto, continuamos sobreponderando BTPs y añadimos bonos griegos y portugueses a la lista. Gráfico 27 Los bunds alemanes son caros Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Gráfico 28 Los rendimientos alemanes ya incorporan bastante pesimismo sobre Europa Los rendimientos alemanes ya incorporan bastante pesimismo sobre Europa. Los rendimientos alemanes ya incorporan bastante pesimismo sobre Europa. En relación con los bonos del Tesoro de EE. UU., las perspectivas para los bunds son más complejas. Por un lado, el BCE no endurecerá la política tanto como la Fed más adelante en este ciclo; además, es probable que la inflación europea permanezca por debajo de los niveles de EE. UU. este año y a lo largo del ciclo económico. Por otro lado, los bunds ya incorporan una prima de término y una proxy de tasa terminal real significativamente más baja que los Treasury Notes (Gráfico 28). En balance, el servicio de Estrategia Global de Renta Fija de BCA Research considera que los bunds deberían rendir mejor que los Treasurys este año, porque tienen una beta más baja, que es una característica valiosa en un entorno de aumento de rendimientos.6 Vigilaremos de cerca los riesgos alrededor de esta visión, porque es probable que la recuperación económica europea sea el catalizador para la próxima subida de rendimientos globales, caso en el que los bunds alemanes podrían temporalmente tener un rendimiento inferior. En términos estructurales, mientras no se aborden los problemas de productividad de Alemania desde Berlín, los bunds alemanes probablemente seguirán siendo un ancla para los rendimientos globales. Alemania permanecerá inundada de ahorros excedentes, que actuarán como un ancla deflacionario, a la vez que limitarán el alza a largo plazo de las tasas reales europeas. Los ahorros excedentes resultan en un gran superávit por cuenta corriente; así, Alemania continuará exportando sus ahorros al extranjero y actuará como un factor que contenga los rendimientos globales. El euro La perspectiva a medio plazo apunta a una apreciación significativa del euro. Nuestra expectativa de una sorpresa positiva de crecimiento europea y alemana en los próximos 12 meses es coherente con una mejoría del euro. El hecho de que los inversores hayan estado moviendo fondos fuera de la Eurozona hacia EE. UU. a un ritmo casi constante durante los últimos 10 años sólo da credibilidad a este argumento (Gráfico 29). Nuestra visión sobre la política fiscal alemana contribuye al brillo del euro. Mayores déficits presupuestarios alemanes ayudan a la actividad económica europea y reducen las primas de riesgo en la Eurozona. Este proceso es doblemente positivo para el euro. Primero, menores primas de riesgo en la periferia invitan a entradas de capital hacia la eurozona, especialmente porque los rendimientos griegos, portugueses, italianos o españoles ofrecen mejor valor que las alternativas. Segundo, un crecimiento más fuerte y primas de riesgo más bajas alivian la presión sobre el BCE como único reflacionador de la Eurozona. En el margen, este proceso debería impulsar la proxy de tasa terminal extremadamente deprimida para Europa y ayudar al EUR/USD. La robusta actividad económica global añade atractivo al euro, más allá de las fuerzas nacionales positivas en juego en Europa. El dólar es una moneda contracíclica; por tanto, los repuntes del ciclo económico global coinciden con un dólar débil, lo que aumenta el atractivo de EUR/USD. No obstante, si el impulso del crecimiento global emana de EE. UU., entonces el dólar puede fortalecerse. Este fenómeno estuvo en juego en el primer trimestre de 2021. Sin embargo, el liderazgo del crecimiento global está llamado a alejarse de EE. UU. en los próximos 12 meses, lo que implica que la relación inversa normal entre el dólar y el crecimiento global se reasentará en beneficio del euro. La dinámica europea de la balanza de pagos consolidará la atracción del euro. El superávit por cuenta corriente de Alemania y de la Eurozona seguirá siendo amplio, especialmente en comparación con el déficit gemelo en expansión que afecta a EE. UU. Más allá de los próximos 12 a 24 meses, la falta de vigor estructural de la economía alemana y europea probablemente moverá al euro hacia una moneda refugio, como el yen y el franco suizo. Una fuerte balanza de pagos y bajos tipos de interés (todos síntomas de ahorros excedentes) son las características definitorias de las monedas de financiación, y serán atributos permanentes de la zona euro si las reformas no abordan su malestar de productividad. La posición internacional neta de la Eurozona ya está aumentando y su baja inflación dará un sesgo al alza estructural a las estimaciones de paridad de poder adquisitivo del euro (Gráfico 30). Esos desarrollos ya han sido evidentes en Japón y Suiza, y probablemente extinguirán la prociclicidad del euro con el paso del tiempo. Gráfico 29 Los inversores ya infraponderan activos europeos Los inversores ya están infraponderados en activos europeos Los inversores ya están infraponderados en activos europeos Gráfico 30 Sesgo al alza en el valor justo del euro Sesgo Alcista En El Valor Razonable Del Euro Sesgo Alcista En El Valor Razonable Del Euro Gráfico 31 Alemania no ha superado al resto de la Eurozona Alemania no ha superado al resto de la eurozona Alemania no ha superado al resto de la eurozona Acciones alemanas En términos absolutos, el DAX y las acciones alemanas aún poseen un amplio potencial alcista en los próximos 12 a 24 meses. BCA Research mantiene una postura positiva sobre las acciones, y un mercado de alta beta como Alemania puede beneficiarse.7 Además, la elevada sensibilidad de las acciones alemanas a la actividad económica global acentúa su atractivo. A BCA Research le gustan las acciones europeas, y las alemanas no son la excepción.8 La cuestión más compleja es cómo posicionar las acciones alemanas dentro de una cartera de acciones europea. Tras un rendimiento masivo entre 2003 y 2012, las acciones alemanas se han movido en línea con el resto de la Eurozona desde entonces (Gráfico 31). Además, las acciones alemanas ahora cotizan con descuento en todos los principales indicadores de valoración respecto al resto de la Eurozona (Gráfico 31, panel inferior). Las fuerzas macro globales que dictan las perspectivas de las acciones alemanas respecto al resto de la Eurozona envían actualmente mensajes contradictorios. Por un lado, las acciones alemanas normalmente superan cuando suben los precios de las materias primas o cuando el euro se aprecia (Gráfico 32). Por otro lado, sin embargo, las acciones alemanas también rinden menos cuando suben los rendimientos globales, o tras periodos en los que caen las reservas excedentes de China, como estamos presenciando hoy. Con esta falta de claridad de las fuerzas globales, la respuesta a la pregunta sobre el rendimiento relativo de Alemania yace en la dinámica económica europea. Alemania está perdiendo competitividad respecto al resto de la Eurozona (Gráfico 24 página 22), lo que sugiere que las acciones alemanas se beneficiarán menos que sus pares de un euro más fuerte en comparación con su desempeño en la última década. Además, las acciones alemanas baten cuando el PMI manufacturero alemán sube respecto al del conjunto de la eurozona. La brecha entre el PMI manufacturero de Alemania y el de la eurozona está cercana a máximos históricos y es probable que se reduzca a medida que el resto de la Eurozona se ponga al día. Esto debería influir en el desempeño de las acciones alemanas (Gráfico 33). Gráfico 32 Antecedentes globales mixtos para el rendimiento relativo de Alemania Panorama Global Mixto Para el Rendimiento Relativo de Alemania Panorama Global Mixto Para el Rendimiento Relativo de Alemania Gráfico 33 Una recuperación económica europea perjudicaría a las acciones alemanas Una recuperación económica europea perjudicaría a las acciones alemanas Una recuperación económica europea perjudicaría a las acciones alemanas Finalmente, la dinámica sectorial puede ser el árbitro definitivo. La Tabla 4 destaca la limitada diferencia en ponderaciones sectoriales entre Alemania y el resto de la Eurozona, lo que ayuda a explicar la estabilidad en el rendimiento relativo durante los últimos nueve años. Sin embargo, la varianza es mayor entre Alemania y naciones europeas específicas. En este enfoque, la postura negativa de BCA sobre las acciones de crecimiento se correlaciona con una sobreponderación de Alemania respecto a los Países Bajos. Además, nuestra perspectiva positiva sobre los financieros y los rendimientos de los bonos sugiere que Alemania debería tener un rendimiento inferior respecto a las acciones italianas y españolas. Tabla 4 Desglose sectorial en las principales bolsas europeas Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde   Matt Gertken Vice President Geopolitical Strategy mattg@bcaresearch.com   Mathieu Savary, Chief European Investment Strategist Mathieu@bcaresearch.com Apéndice: compromisos globales de política climática Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Vientos de cambio: Alemania se vuelve verde Notas a pie de página 1 Véase Matthew Karnitschnig, "Los conservadores alemanes atrapados en ‘el pantano’," Politico, 24 de marzo de 2021, politico.eu. 2 Los Verdes están interesados en una gama de impuestos, incluido un impuesto al carbono, un impuesto sobre servicios digitales y un impuesto sobre transacciones financieras. También les interesan las cuotas industriales que exigirían a los fabricantes de acero y de automóviles vender cierta proporción de acero neutro en carbono y vehículos eléctricos. Véase una excelente entrevista con la Sra. Baerbock en Ileana Grabitz y Katharina Schuler, "No tengo que convertir al conductor de SUV en Prenzlauer Berg," Zeit Online, 2 de enero de 2020, zeit.de. 3 Véanse sus comentarios a Zeit Online. 4 Véase el Panorama de la estrategia de inversión global de BCA Research "Panorama de estrategia del segundo trimestre de 2021: ¿Viene la inflación?", fechado el 26 de marzo de 2021, disponible en gis.bcareseach.com. 5 Véase el Informe Especial de Estrategia de Inversión Europea de BCA Research "Un desacoplamiento temporal", fechado el 5 de abril de 2021, disponible en eis.bcareseach.com. 6 Véase el Informe de Estrategia de Renta Fija Global de BCA Research "Más duro, mejor, más rápido, más fuerte", fechado el 16 de marzo de 2021, disponible en gfis.bcareseach.com. 7 Véase el Panorama de la estrategia de renta global de BCA Research "Panorama de estrategia del segundo trimestre de 2021: ¿Viene la inflación?", fechado el 26 de marzo de 2021, disponible en gis.bcareseach.com. 8 Véase el Informe de Estrategia de Renta Europea de BCA Research "Tiempo y atracción", fechado el 12 de abril de 2021, disponible en eis.bcareseach.com.

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