Monetario

Highlights The backdrop for global high-yield corporates remains positive, and a rebound in global GDP and earnings will help ease leverage and interest coverage concerns. With improving global growth taking over the reins from central bank liquidity as the primary driver of high-yield returns, we have decided to reassess the sources of value using some of our key indicators for junk bonds in the US and Europe. The US and euro area appear fairly evenly matched on our valuation metrics but euro area high-yield still offers good value on an absolute basis. We are therefore increasing our recommended allocation to overweight, matching our similar stance for US high-yield. Within the euro area, stay up in quality, favoring Ba-rated credit. Retail and consumer products are attractive bounce-back sectors as Europe emerges from lockdowns later this year. Feature Chart of the WeekCentral Bank Liquidity Has Driven High Yield Outperformance The past year has been excellent for global high-yield corporate bonds. Unprecedented monetary and fiscal stimulus in response to the COVID-19 economic shock and market rout helped rapidly lower credit spreads in the final three quarters of 2020. As the vaccine rollout picked up pace and the reopening trade began to dominate earlier this year, high-yield corporates continued to perform well despite defaults hitting a post-2008 high (Chart of the Week). An improving outlook for the global economy is highly supportive for lower-rated corporate debt from a fundamental perspective, even if that same pickup in growth will put pressure on policymakers to dial back monetary accommodation. Already, growth in major central bank balance sheets – a reliable leading indicator of high yield outperformance – is slowing, with corporate spreads approaching historically tight levels. Thus, we feel it is timely to assess valuation metrics in the largest high-yield markets of the US and Europe – and the implications for regional high-yield allocations - as economic growth takes over the reins from central bank liquidity as the primary driver of spread product performance. A Cyclical Reduction In Corporate Credit Risk In its recently published Global Financial Stability Report,1 the IMF noted that the COVID-19 shock has pushed up global nonfinancial corporate leverage, measured as debt relative to GDP, to historical highs (Chart 2). Some of that rise is due to companies ramping up debt issuance over the past year in response to supportive monetary policy and favorable financial market conditions. Yet according to the IMF, about half of the rise in global corporate debt-to-GDP ratios from Q4/2019 to Q3/2020 was attributable to sharply lower output. Now, with economic growth set to stage a strong rebound this year – the IMF is forecasting global real GDP growth of 6.0% in 2021 and 4.4% in 2022 - a rising denominator should result in corporate debt-to-GDP ratios stabilizing or even falling over the next couple of years. This will help maintain a positive backdrop for corporate spread product, even if central banks like the Fed turn less dovish later this year, as we expect Corporate interest coverage, using the Refinitiv Datastream bottom-up aggregates of individual company data, paints a similar cyclical picture (Chart 3). The absolute level of coverage ratios fell sharply in 2020, accelerating pre-pandemic downtrends that had already been in place in both the US and Europe. Since Q4/2019, however, interest expense actually fell very slightly in the US, meaning that of the 1.5 point fall in the interest coverage ratio, 1.3 points can be attributed to declining corporate earnings over that period. The picture was also lopsided in the euro area, with 2.5 points of the 2.8 point decline in interest coverage over that same period attributable to falling profits. Chart 2Rising Leverage Is Not Just A Debt Story Chart 3Falling Earnings Are Responsible For The Decline In Interest Coverage Rapid improvements in economic growth momentum, fueled by reopening economies and increased fiscal stimulus (especially in the US), should lead to a cyclical rebound interest coverage ratios in both the US and Europe in 2021 and 2022. Bottom Line: The backdrop for global high yield corporates remains positive, and a rebound in global GDP and earnings will help ease leverage and interest coverage concerns. A Trans-Atlantic Comparison Of High-Yield Bond Valuations Chart 4Our Relative Overweight On US HY Has Been A Success Since March of last year, we have maintained a recommended overweight stance on US high-yield versus European equivalents (Chart 4). That was originally a relative central bank play with the Fed including US high-yield in its corporate bond buying program, in contrast to the ECB that was only buying investment grade debt. Our relative regional allocation on high-yield corporates has worked out well, with the US outperforming the euro area by 3.9 percentage points (in excess return terms versus duration-matched government debt) since the pandemic peak in credit spreads last March. Today, with high-yield spreads back near historical tight levels and the momentum of excess returns starting to peak, a forward-looking reevaluation of our US versus Europe high-yield recommendation along value grounds is in order. To conduct our reassessment of value, we look at five key areas: default-adjusted spreads; 12-month breakeven spreads; volatility-adjusted spreads; credit quality curves; and, lastly, the relative carry offered by high-yield corporates in currency-hedged and unhedged terms. Default-Adjusted Spreads As discussed earlier in the report, fiscal and monetary support have helped stave off the worst for high-yield corporates on both sides of the Atlantic, with default rates spiking far less than the amount implied by the collapse in year-over-year GDP growth (Chart 5). Forecasts for 2021 are sanguine—Moody’s expects the trailing 12-month high yield default rate to reach 4.2% in the US and 2.6% in the euro area in 2021, in line with the IMF’s sharp upward revision to growth forecasts for both regions. The outlook for default-adjusted spreads, which look at the index option-adjusted spread (OAS) net of realized default losses, is much more positive in the euro area however, given that they have a much more attractive “starting point”. The realized default-adjusted spread in the euro area was already inching into positive territory last year, as opposed to the deeply negative spread in the US (Chart 6). This alone makes it much more likely that euro area high-yield will deliver a positive return net of default losses. Chart 5The Default Picture Is Expected To Improve Chart 6Euro Area Spreads Are More Attractive On A Default-Adjusted Basis In addition, the potential range for default-adjusted spreads (combining default rates and recovery rates, see the shaded boxes in the chart) is much narrower in the euro area given the lower post-crisis volatility in default rates in that region, making outcomes in the euro area far less uncertain than in the US. Volatility-Adjusted Spreads Chart 7Falling US Spreads Have Overshot The Level Implied By Equity Volatility Another way to evaluate the attractiveness of the level of spreads, and how much further they could fall, is to compare them to standard macro volatility gauges like the US VIX and the European VSTOXX indices. Credit spreads and equity volatility are highly correlated, as both are measures of investor uncertainty that rise during risk-off episodes and vice versa. The ratio of corporate credit spreads to equity volatility, therefore, can signal if spreads appear stretched relative to the broader risk backdrop. The global rally in riskier credit has helped push down volatility-adjusted spreads for both regions, making them expensive relative to the historic mean (Chart 7). However, the divergence between volatility and high-yield spreads is much more pronounced in the US, where the volatility-adjusted spread, currently at all-time lows and 1.8 standard deviations below the mean, appears much less attractive. In contrast, while the euro area measure is still within one standard deviation of the mean and has room to fall further, as it did in 2007. 12-Month Breakeven Spreads To look at valuations in high yield corporates relative to history, we turn to our 12-month breakeven spread metrics. These measure how much spread widening is required over a one-year horizon to eliminate the yield advantage of owning corporate bonds versus a duration-matched position in government debt. We then show those breakeven spreads as a percentile ranking versus its own history, to allow comparisons over periods with differing underlying spread volatility. On this basis, there seems to be a bit more value in US high-yield spreads, with the 12-month breakeven at the 32nd percentile compared to the 18th percentile ranking for European high-yield. Both markets are not cheap on this metric, though, with the lion’s share of cyclical spread compression having already been realized (Chart 8). This additional value in the US is concentrated in the lower-quality tiers, with B-rated US HY looking most attractive (Chart 9). Chart 8US And Euro Area High-Yield Breakeven Spreads Chart 9All Credit Tier Breakeven Valuations Are In the Bottom Half Relative To History Credit Quality Curves To further inform our decision on value across credit tiers in the US and Europe, we look at credit quality curves, which measure the incremental spread pick-up earned from moving down to lower credit tiers. For example, we look at the spread differential between B-rated and Ba-rated high-yield bonds within the US or Europe. When making the comparisons, we adjust the spreads to account for duration differences between credit tier sub-indices and the overall regional high-yield index. This adjusts for slightly lower index durations as we move down in quality.2 Our colleagues at BCA Research US Bond Strategy have pointed out that the spread pickup earned from moving out of US Baa-rated bonds into Ba-rated bonds is elevated compared to typical historical levels.3 Credit quality curves in the euro area tell a similar story (Chart 10). The spread pickup from moving into Ba-rated credit is slightly higher in the euro area on a cross-country basis while there is a more attractive pickup in the US from moving further down in quality. Chart 10US & European HY Credit Quality Curves Chart 11Euro Area Caa-Rated Spreads Have Room To Fall To Pre-COVID Lows As quality curves have compressed across the board, we can also use the pre-COVID lows in these series as an anchor for how much more narrowing we could see (Chart 11). On that basis, there seems to be a bit more value left in the top two tiers of US high yield while there is more juice left in the euro area Caa-rated minus B-rated spread. The Caa-B spread differential is now quite expensive for the US, sitting -140bps below its pre-COVID low, a reflection of yield-chasing behavior by risk-seeking investors in an easy monetary policy environment. As the Fed begins to take its foot off the monetary accelerator within the next 6-12 months, as we expect, this credit tier is also most vulnerable to a repricing of default risk. Index Yield-To-Maturity Chart 12Junk Index Yields At All Time Lows The hunt for yield by fixed income investors has driven down the index yield on lower-quality credit to all-time lows in both the US and euro area (Chart 12). This dynamic has played out at a time when falling interest rate differentials between the two regions have cut down the cost of hedging US dollar (USD) exposures into euros (or, alternatively, reduced the gain from hedging euro exposures into USD). Importantly, this reduction in the gains/losses from currency hedging allows for a more honest assessment of the relative attractiveness of yields on lower-rated corporates in the US and Europe, reflecting compensation for taking credit risk rather than currency risk. With the backdrop for spread product looking positive, it is worth considering the simple carry over a twelve-month period for holding high-yield debt, in both USD-hedged and unhedged terms (Chart 13). For the overall index and the Ba-rated tier, the US dominates completely, with investors in the euro area better off holding US credit even after paying the currency hedging cost. This dynamic is flipped at the B- and Caa-rated tiers, with euro area credit appearing dominant. Chart 13US Ba-Rated Debt Is Dominant On A Carry Basis An Additional Point On High-Yield Sectors Sector composition will also be an important driver of high-yield returns going forward. In the April 2021 Global Financial Stability report, the IMF noted that global high-yield defaults in 2020 were concentrated in sectors most affected by the pandemic. On a relative basis, the US high-yield index appears more heavily weighted towards those sectors – a picture that becomes even more focused if Energy, which is the largest industry group in US high-yield, is considered as a pandemic-stricken industry (Chart 14). However, the euro area does have a slightly larger tilt towards the hard-hit Retail sector. Chart 14Oil And Gas Was Hardest-Hit In 2020 An important implication is that the sectors that suffered the most in 2020 are also the ones most poised for a snapback this year as economies reopen and growth recovers. One way to approach this from a relative valuation perspective is to look at the relative industry-level cross-country spreads between the US and Europe, compared to the change in global defaults by sector from 2019 to 2020 (Chart 15). Chart 15Sectors That Saw Rising Defaults In 2020 Are Poised For A Rebound Sectors that saw a moderate-to-high number of defaults last year, such as Retail and Consumer products, offer higher spreads in the euro area. These will also be the sectors to benefit the most from a consumption rebound as Europe exits lockdowns. On the other hand, US spreads are more attractive than European spreads for the Media and Transportation sectors that saw a big increase in defaults in 2020. Importantly, while the US Energy sector also looks more relatively attractive on that basis, much of a post-COVID recovery has already been priced in, with US high-yield energy spreads below pre-pandemic lows. Investment Conclusions Having looked at our suite of valuation metrics, euro area and US high-yield appear quite evenly matched. On a default and volatility-adjusted basis, spreads in the euro area appear to offer more value while US high-yield largely wins out on a breakeven spread and carry basis. Thus, the case for favoring US high-yield over European equivalents is no longer as compelling as it has been for much of the past twelve months. We are therefore taking profits on our long-held recommended overweight stance on US high-yield versus European high-yield. We are implementing this change by upgrading our strategic euro area high yield allocation to overweight (4 out of 5), which matches our similar overweight recommended tilt for US high-yield (see table on page 15). Within our model bond portfolio, we are “funding” that upgrade by reducing the size of our recommended overweight exposure to core European sovereign debt in Germany and France (see the model bond portfolio tables on pages 13-14). On the margin, this decision also positions us favorably with regards to the consumption driven H2/2021 recovery in euro area economies highlighted by our colleagues at BCA Research European Investment Strategy.4 Within European credit, we recommend staying up in quality, favoring the Ba-rated tier as lower quality tranches do not offer adequate compensation for the increased credit risk. Bottom Line: Rebounding global growth will help maintain a favorable backdrop for global high yield credit. The US and euro area look evenly matched on our valuation metrics, but there is still good value on offer in the euro area on an absolute basis. Increase allocations to euro area high-yield, favoring the Ba-rated credit tier and Retail and Consumer Products industries, in particular. Shakti Sharma Senior Analyst ShaktiS@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/GFSR/Issues/2021/04/06/global-financial-stability-report-april-2021 2 Please see BCA Research US Bond Strategy Report, "Ba- Rated Bonds Look Best", dated February 9, 2021, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com. 3 Note that this adjustment is made to facilitate more accurate comparisons within the credit tiers of the high-yield universe. No such adjustment is made to the Baa-rated credit spread, which is higher-quality investment grade and therefore not part of the high-yield universe. 4 Please see BCA Research European Investment Strategy Special Report, "A Temporary Decoupling", dated April 5, 2021, available at eis.bcaresearch.com. Recommendations Duration Regional Allocation Spread Product Tactical Trades Yields & Returns Global Bond Yields Historical Returns

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.

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

Highlights Global Inflation: The case for maintaining a strategic overall allocation to inflation-linked bonds (ILBs) versus nominal government debt in dedicated global fixed income portfolios remains intact. Global growth expectations are accelerating as vaccinations increase, spare capacity is increasingly being absorbed across the developed world and central banks (led by the Federal Reserve) continue to show no inclination to tighten policy anytime soon. Inflation-Linked Bond Allocations: ILB valuations, however, are no longer uniformly cheap across all countries. Real yields are now moving in a less coordinated fashion as markets try to sort out the timing and pace of eventual future central bank tightening. We recommend shifting inflation-linked bond exposure from Canada to Germany, as both markets have similar valuations but the Bank of Canada is likely to turn less dovish well ahead of the ECB. Feature Chart of the WeekMarkets Remain Unconcerned About An Inflation Overshoot The global reflation trade over the past year has been highly rewarding to investors. Equity and credit markets worldwide have delivered outstanding returns on the back of highly stimulative monetary and fiscal policies implemented to deal with the negative economic effects of COVID-19. The global INflation trade has also paid off for investors in inflation-linked bonds (ILBs), which have outperformed nominal government debt across the developed economies dating back to last spring. The rising trend for global inflation breakevens remains intact, but is approaching some potential resistance points. A GDP-weighted average of 10-year breakeven inflation rates among the major developed economies is just shy of the 2% level that has represented a firm ceiling over the past decade (Chart of the Week). At the same time, the Bloomberg consensus forecast for headline CPI inflation for that same group of countries calls for an increase to only 1.8% by year-end before slowing to 1.7% in 2022. The latest forecasts from the IMF are similar, calling for headline inflation in the advanced economies to reach 1.6% in 2021 and 1.7% in 2022. If those modest forecasts for realized inflation come to fruition, then there is likely not much more upside in inflation breakevens, in aggregate. Country selection within the ILB universe will become more important over the next 6-12 months, as divergences in growth, realized inflation and central bank reactions will lead to a more heterogeneous path for global inflation breakevens. Underlying Inflation Backdrop Still Supports Rising Breakevens On a total return basis, ILBs enjoyed an extended run of success prior to this year. The cumulative total return of the asset class (in local currency terms) between 2012 and 2020 was a whopping 61% in the UK, 25% in Canada, 22% in the US and 21% in the euro area (aggregating the individual countries in the region with inflation-linked bonds). However, the absolute performance of ILBs has been more disperse on a country-by-country basis so far in 2021. ILBs are down year-to-date in Canada (-6.2%), the UK (-5.0%) and the US (-1.4%). On the other hand, euro area ILBs have delivered a positive total return of +0.5% so far in 2021. Real bond yields have climbed off the lows in the US, UK and, most notably, Canada where the overall index yield on the Bloomberg Barclays inflation-linked bond index is now in positive territory for the first time since before the pandemic started (Chart 2). At the same time, real bond yields have been drifting lower in the euro area. These real yield moves are related to shifting perceptions of central bank responses to the global growth upturn. For example, pricing in overnight index swap (OIS) curves have pulled forward the timing and pace of future interest rate increases in the US and Canada – i.e. real policy rates will become less negative - while there has been comparatively little change in euro zone rate expectations. While the absolute returns for ILBs have become less correlated, the relative trade between nominal and inflation-linked government bonds in all countries remains intact. 10-year breakeven inflation rates have been steadily climbing in the US and UK, while depressed Japanese breakevens have crept modestly higher (Chart 3). Even Europe, where inflation has remained subdued for years, has seen a significant shift higher in inflation breakevens. (Chart 4). The turn in breakevens has occurred alongside a major change in investor perceptions of future inflation, with surveys like the ZEW showing an overwhelming majority of financial professionals expecting higher inflation in the US, Europe and the UK. Chart 2A Fading Bull Market In Inflation-Linked Bonds Chart 3A Solid Recovery In Inflation Expectations Chart 4European Inflation Expectations Starting To Normalize Inflation forecasts have shifted in response to faster global growth expectations on the back of vaccine optimism and aggressive US fiscal stimulus. Yet inflation forecasts remain modest compared to the huge growth figures expected for 2021 and 2022. In its latest World Economic Outlook published last week, the IMF upgraded its global real GDP forecast to 6.0% for 2021 and 4.4% for 2022. This represented an increase of 0.5 and 0.4 percentage points, respectively, from the last set of forecasts published back in January. While growth upgrades occurred across all major developed and emerging economies, the biggest upgrades came in the US and Canada, for both 2021 and 2022. As a result, the IMF projects the output gap in both countries to turn positive over 2022 and 2023, and be nearly closed in core Europe, Australia and Japan (Chart 5). The IMF is not projecting a major inflation surge on the back of those upbeat growth forecasts, though. While headline inflation in the US is expected to climb to 2.3% in 2021 and 2.4% in 2022, the same measure in Canada is only projected to rise to 1.7% and 2.0% over the same two years. European inflation is expected to remain subdued, reaching only 1.4% this year and drifting back to 1.2% in 2022 despite real GDP growth averaging 4.1% over the two-year period. The IMF attributes the benign inflation outcomes, even in the face of booming growth rates and the rapid elimination of output gaps, to the structural disinflationary backdrop for so-called “non-cyclical” inflation (Chart 6). The IMF defines this as the components of inflation indices that are less sensitive to changes in aggregate demand. The IMF estimates show that the contribution from non-cyclical components to overall inflation in the advanced economies had fallen to essentially zero at the end of 2020. Chart 5A Big Expected Narrowing Of Output Gaps Chart 6Non-Cyclical Components Still Weighing On Global Inflation There is considerable upside risk for the more cyclical components of inflation that could result in inflation overshooting the IMF projections (Chart 7). Chart 7Cyclical Backdrop Is Inflationary For example, in the US, the Prices Paid component of the ISM Manufacturing index remains elevated at post-2008 highs, while the year-over-year change in the Producer Price Index soared to 6% in March. Across the Atlantic, the European Commission business and consumer surveys have shown a big surge in the net balance of respondents expecting higher inflation in manufacturing and retail trade. Previous weakness in the US dollar and surging commodity prices are playing a major role in this rapid pick-up in price pressures seen in many countries. Given the current backdrop of strong global growth expectations, with actual activity accelerating as vaccinations increase and more parts of the global economy reopen, inflation pressures are unlikely to fade in the near term. With realized inflation rates set to spike due to base effect comparisons to the pandemic-fueled collapse one year ago, the upward pressure on global ILB inflation breakevens will persist in the coming months – especially with breakevens still below levels that would prompt central banks to turn less dovish sooner than expected. Bottom Line: The case for maintaining a strategic overall allocation to inflation-linked bonds (ILBs) versus nominal government debt in dedicated global fixed income portfolios remains intact. Global growth expectations are accelerating as vaccinations increase, spare capacity is increasingly being absorbed across the developed world and central banks (led by the Federal Reserve) continue to show no inclination to tighten policy anytime soon. Assessing Value In Developed Market Inflation-Linked Bonds Chart 8USD Outlook Now More Mixed Although the current backdrop remains conducive to a continuation of the rising trend in global ILB breakevens, there are factors that could begin to slow the upward momentum. The future path of the US dollar is now a bit less certain (Chart 8). While the DXY index is still down 7.4% compared to a year ago, it is up 2.4% so far in 2021. Shorter-term real interest rate differentials between the US and the other major developed markets remain dollar-bearish. At the same time, longer-term real yield differentials have risen in favor of the US (middle panel). Furthermore, US growth is outperforming other developed economies, typically a dollar-bullish factor (bottom panel). Given the usual negative correlation between the US dollar and commodity prices, a loss of downside dollar momentum could also slow the pace of commodity price appreciation. This represents a risk to additional global ILB outperformance versus government bonds. Our GDP-weighted aggregate of 10-year ILB breakevens for the major developed economies is currently just under 2% - levels more consistent with oil prices over $80/bbl than the current price closer to $60/bbl (Chart 9). Chart 9Breakevens Consistent With Much Higher Oil Prices Given some of these uncertainties over the strength of any future inflationary push from a weaker US dollar and rising commodity prices, a broad overweight allocation to ILBs across the entire developed market universe may no longer generate the same strong returns versus nominal government bonds seen over the past year. With the “easy money” already having been made in the global breakeven widening trade, country allocation within the ILB universe has now become a more important dimension for bond investors to consider. To assess the relative attractiveness of individual ILB markets, we turn to a few valuation tools. Our regression-based valuation models for 10-year ILB breakevens in the US, UK, France, Italy, Germany, Japan, Canada and Australia are all presented in the Appendix on pages 14-17. The two inputs into the model are the annual rate of change of the Brent oil price in local currency terms (as a measure of shorter-term inflation pressure) and a five-year moving average of realized headline CPI inflation (as a longer-term trend that provides a structural “anchor” for breakevens based off actual inflation outcomes). We first presented these models in April 2020, but we have now made a change in response to some of the unprecedented developments witnessed over the past year.1 Despite the strong visual correlation between the level of oil prices and inflation breakevens in most countries, we chose to use the annual growth of oil prices, rather than the level, in our breakeven models. This is because we found it more logical to compare a rate of change concept like inflation (and breakevens) to the rate of change of oil. However, the oil input into our breakeven models could produce nonsensical results during periods of extreme oil volatility that did not generate equivalent swings in breakeven inflation rates. A good example of that occurred in 2016, when the annual rate of change of the Brent oil price briefly surged toward 100%, yet 10-year US TIPS breakevens did not rise above 2% (Chart 10). An even bigger swing in oil prices has occurred over the past year, with oil prices up over +200% compared to the collapse in prices that occurred one year ago. Putting such an extreme move into our US model would have pushed the “fair value” level of the 10-year TIPS breakeven to 4% - an implausible outcome given that the 10-year breakeven has never risen to even as high as 3% in the entire 24-year history of the TIPS market. Chart 10Pass-Through Of Extreme Oil Moves Has Limits To deal with this problem, we have truncated the rate of change of oil prices in all our breakeven models at levels consistent with past peaks of breakevens. Going back to the US example, we have “capped” the rate of change of the Brent oil price at +40%, as past periods when oil price momentum was greater than 40% did not translate into any additional increase in TIPS breakevens. We then re-estimated the model using this truncated oil price series to generate fair value breakeven levels. Chart 11A Mixed Impact Of USD Moves On Non-US Breakevens We did this for all eight of our individual country breakeven models and in all cases, truncating extreme oil moves improved the accuracy of the model. Interestingly, we did not truncate the downside momentum of oil prices, as there was no obvious “cut-off” point where periods of collapsing oil prices did not generate equivalent declines in breakevens. Oil prices remain the most critical short-term variable to determine ILB breakeven valuation. While it is intuitive to think that currency movements should also have a meaningful impact on inflation (both realized and expected), the effect is not consistent across countries. For example, euro area breakevens appear to be positively correlated to the euro, while Japanese breakevens rarely rise without yen weakness (Chart 11). One other factor to consider when evaluating the value of breakevens is the possible existence of an inflation risk premium component during periods of higher uncertainty over future inflation. Such uncertainty could result in increased demand for ILBs from investors driving up the price of ILBs (thus lowering the real yield) relative to nominal yielding bonds, leading to wider breakevens that do not necessarily reflect a true rise in expected inflation. A simple way to measure such an inflation risk premium is to compare market-based breakevens to survey-based measures of inflation forecasts taken from sources like the Philadelphia Fed's Survey of Professional Forecasters and the Bank of Canada’s Survey Of Consumer Expectations. The assumption here is that the survey-based measures represent a more accurate (or, at least, less biased) depiction of underlying inflation expectations in an economy. We present these simple measures of inflation risk premia, comparing 10-year breakevens to survey-based measures of inflation expectations, in Chart 12 and Chart 13. Breakevens had been trading well below survey-based measures of inflation expectations after the negative pandemic growth shock in 2020 in all countries shown. After the steady climb in global breakevens seen over the past year, those gaps have largely disappeared, with breakevens now trading slightly above survey based inflation expectations in the US, UK and Australia. Chart 12No Major Inflation Risk Premia In These Markets Chart 13Canadian & Australian Breakevens In Line With Inflation Surveys Chart 14Assessing The Value Of Breakevens In Chart 14, we show the valuation residuals from our 10-year ILB breakeven models, along with two other measures of potential breakeven valuation: a) the distance between current breakeven levels and their most recent pre-pandemic peaks; and b) the difference between breakevens and the survey-based measures of inflation expectations. The model results show that breakevens are furthest below fair value in France, Japan and Germany, and the most above fair value in the UK and Australia. The message of undervaluation from our models is confirmed in the other two metrics for France, Japan, Germany, Canada and Italy. The overvaluation message for Australia is consistent across all three valuation metrics, while the signals are mixed for US and UK breakevens. In Japan, while the combined signals of all three valuation metrics indicate that breakevens are far too low, the very robust positive correlation between Japanese breakevens and the USD/JPY exchange rate implies that a bet on wider breakevens requires a much weaker yen. In Canada, while the 10-year breakeven does appear cheap, the real yield has also climbed faster than any of the other countries over the past several months as markets have rapidly repriced a more hawkish path for the Bank of Canada. Recent comments from Bank of Canada officials have leaned a bit hawkish, hinting at a possible taper of its bond-buying program, as the central bank appears unhappy with the renewed boom in Canadian housing values. An early tightening of monetary conditions would likely cap any additional upside in Canadian inflation breakevens. In Europe, the undervaluation of breakevens is more compelling. The ECB is likely to maintain its dovish policy settings into at least 2023, even if growth recovers later this year as increased vaccinations lead to the end of lockdowns. As shown earlier, European breakevens can continue to rise even if the euro is also appreciating versus the US dollar, especially if growth is recovering and oil prices are rising. Euro area breakevens are likely to continue drifting higher over at least the rest of 2021. Currently in our model bond portfolio, we have allocations to ILBs out of nominal government bonds in the US, France, Canada and Italy, with no allocations in Germany, Japan, Australia or the UK. After assessing our valuation measures, we are comfortable with the ILB exposure in France and Italy and lack of positions in the UK and Australia. We still see the upside case for US breakevens, with the economy reopening rapidly fueled further by fiscal policy, and the Fed likely to maintain its current highly dovish forward guidance until much later in 2021. We are reluctant to add exposure to Japanese ILBs, despite attractive valuations, as we are not convinced that USD/JPY has enough upside potential to help realize that undervaluation of Japanese breakevens. Thus, as a new change to our model portfolio this week that reflects our assessment of ILB breakeven valuations and risks, we are closing out the exposure to Canadian ILBs and adding a new position in German ILBs of equivalent size (see the model bond portfolio tables on pages 18-19). Bottom Line: ILB valuations are no longer uniformly cheap across all countries. Real yields are now moving in a less coordinated fashion as markets try to sort out the timing and pace of eventual future central bank tightening. We recommend shifting inflation-linked bond exposure from Canada to Germany, as both markets have similar valuations but the Bank of Canada is likely to turn less dovish well ahead of the ECB.   Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy Report, "Global Inflation Expectations Are Now Too Low", dated April 28, 2020, available at gfis.bcaresearch.com. Appendix Chart A1Our US 10-Year Inflation Breakeven Model Chart A2Our UK 10-Year Inflation Breakeven Model Chart A3Our France 10-Year Inflation Breakeven Model Chart A4Our Italy 10-Year Inflation Breakeven Model Chart A5Our Japan 10-Year Inflation Breakeven Model Chart A6Our Germany 10-Year Inflation Breakeven Model Chart A7Our Canada 10-Year Inflation Breakeven Model Chart A8Our Australia 10-Year Inflation Breakeven Model Recommendations The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index Duration Regional Allocation Spread Product Tactical Trades Yields & Returns Global Bond Yields Historical Returns

Highlights Duration: Treasury yields look fairly valued on several different valuation metrics and the yield curve discounts a much quicker pace of rate hikes than is currently signaled by the Fed’s “dot plot”. However, the economic data continue to beat expectations by a wide margin. This suggests that bond yields could overshoot their fair value in the near term. Maintain below-benchmark portfolio duration. Employment: The US employment boom is just getting started. Total employment is still 8.4 million below pre-pandemic levels, but 37% of missing jobs are from the Leisure & Hospitality sector where demand is about to surge. Fed: The US economy will reach the Fed’s definition of “maximum employment” in 2022. This will cause the Fed to lift rates before the end of 2022, an event that will be preceded by an announcement of asset purchase tapering either late this year or early next year. Feature Chart 1Price Pressures Building The past two weeks brought us a couple of interesting developments directly related to the Treasury market. First, long-dated Treasury yields declined somewhat, presumably because many investors concluded that the yield curve is already priced for the full extent of future Fed rate hikes. Second, we received further evidence – from March’s +916k employment report, the 12% year-over-year increase in producer prices and continued elevated readings from PMI Prices Paid indexes – that economic activity is recovering more quickly than even the most optimistic forecasters anticipated (Chart 1). These two opposing forces highlight a tension in the current outlook for US Treasury yields. Yields now look fairly valued on several different valuation metrics, a fact that justifies keeping bond portfolio duration close to benchmark. However, cyclical economic indicators are surging, a fact that suggests yields will keep rising in the near-term, causing them to overshoot fair value for a time. This week’s report looks at this tension between valuation indicators and cyclical economic indicators through the lens of our Checklist To Increase Portfolio Duration. While we think there are convincing arguments in favor of both “At Benchmark” and “Below Benchmark” portfolio duration stances on a 6-12 month investment horizon, we are deciding to stick with our recommended “Below Benchmark” stance for now, until the economic data are more in line with market expectations. Checking In With Our Checklist Back in February, following the big jump in bond yields, we unveiled a Checklist of several criteria that would cause us to increase our recommended portfolio duration stance from “Below Benchmark” to “At Benchmark”.1 As is shown in Table 1, the Checklist contains seven items that can be grouped into two categories: Valuation Indicators that compare the level of Treasury yields to some estimate of fair value Cyclical Indicators that look at whether trends in the economic data are consistent with rising or falling bond yields Table 1Checklist For Increasing Duration Valuation Indicators Chart 2Valuation Indicators As mentioned above, valuation indicators show that Treasury yields are roughly consistent with fair value, suggesting that a neutral duration stance is appropriate. First, consider the 5-year/5-year forward Treasury yield relative to survey estimates of the long-run neutral fed funds rate (Chart 2). Last week, survey estimates from the New York Fed’s Survey of Market Participants and Survey of Primary Dealers were updated to March, and while there was some upward movement in the estimated long-run neutral rate ranges, the median estimates in both surveys were unchanged from January. The result is that the 5-year/5-year forward Treasury yield remains near the top-end of its survey-derived fair value band (Chart 2, top 2 panels). Second, the same two surveys also ask respondents to forecast what the average fed funds rate will be over the next 10 years. We can derive an estimate of the 10-year term premium by subtracting those forecasts from the 10-year spot Treasury yield (Chart 2, bottom 2 panels). In this case, respondents did raise their average fed funds rate forecasts and our term premium estimates were revised down as a result. While both term premium estimates are now below their 2018 peaks, they remain elevated compared to recent historical averages. Third, we turn to the front-end of the yield curve to look at what sort of Fed rate hike path is priced into the market (Chart 3). We see that the market is currently priced for Fed liftoff in December 2022 and for a total of four 25 basis point rate hikes by the end of 2023. Only a handful of FOMC participants forecasted a similar path at the March Fed meeting. Chart 3Market Priced For December 2022 Liftoff We discussed the wide divergence between market expectations and the Fed’s “dot plot” in a recent report.2 Essentially, the divergence boils down to the Fed focusing more on actual economic outcomes while the market takes its cues from economic forecasts. We think there’s good reason for optimism about the economy, and therefore expect that the Fed will revise its interest rate forecasts higher in the coming months as the “hard” economic data improve. However, we should point out that respondents to the New York Fed’s Survey of Primary Dealers and Survey of Market Participants also have much more benign interest rate forecasts than the market, and respondents to those surveys do not share the Fed’s bias toward actual economic outcomes. Table 2 shows that the average respondent to the Survey of Market Participants only sees a 35% chance that the Fed will lift rates before the end of 2022 and the Survey of Primary Dealers displays a similar result. Table 2Odds Of A Fed Rate Hike By End Of Year The wide gap between rate hike expectations embedded in the yield curve and forecasts from both the FOMC and the New York Fed’s surveys suggests that Treasury yields are at least fairly valued, and perhaps too high. However, the most important question is whether the market’s rate hike expectations look lofty compared to our own forecast. As is explained in the below section (titled “The Employment Boom Is Just Getting Started”), we think that the jobs market will be strong enough for the Fed to lift rates before the end of 2022 and that the market’s anticipated rate hike path looks reasonable. However, even this view is only consistent with a neutral stance toward portfolio duration. Chart 4Higher Inflation Is Priced In For our final valuation indicator we focus specifically on the outlook for inflation compared to what is already priced into the forward CPI swap curve (Chart 4). The forward CPI swap curve is priced for headline CPI inflation to rise to 2.7% by May 2022 before falling back down only slightly. In reality, year-over-year headline CPI will probably spike to even higher levels during the next two months but will then recede more quickly. We think it’s reasonable to expect headline CPI inflation to be between 2.4% and 2.5% in 2022, a range consistent with the Fed’s 2% PCE target, but the forward CPI swap curve reveals that this outcome is already priced. All in all, the message from the valuation indicators in our Checklist is that a robust economic recovery is already reflected in market prices. Thus, even with our optimistic economic outlook, Treasury yields look fairly valued, consistent with an “At Benchmark” portfolio duration stance.  Cyclical Indicators While valuation indicators perform well over longer time horizons, they are notoriously bad at pinpointing market turning points. It’s for this reason that we augment our Checklist with cyclical economic indicators, specifically high-frequency cyclical economic indicators that correlate tightly with bond yields. First, we look at the ratio between the CRB Raw Industrials commodity price index and gold (Chart 5). The CRB index is a good proxy for global economic growth and gold is inversely correlated with the stance of Federal Reserve policy – gold falls when policy is perceived to be getting more restrictive and rises when policy is perceived to be easing. This ratio has shown little evidence of rolling over and further gains are likely as the economy emerges from the pandemic. We also look at other high-frequency global growth indicators like the relative performance between cyclical and defensive equities and the performance of Emerging Market currencies (Chart 5, panels 2 & 3). The trend of cyclical equity sector outperformance continues while EM currencies have shown some tentative signs of weakness. The US dollar is one particularly important indicator for bond yields. As US yields rise relative to yields in the rest of the world it makes the US bond market a more attractive destination for foreign investors. When US yields are attractive enough, these foreign inflows can stop them from rising. One good indication that US yields are sufficiently high to attract a large amount of foreign interest is when investor sentiment toward the dollar turns bullish. For now, the survey of dollar sentiment we track shows that investors are still bearish on the US dollar (Chart 5, bottom panel). Bearish dollar sentiment supports further increases in bond yields. Chart 5Cyclical Indicators Chart 6Data Surprises Still Positive Finally, we track the US Economic Surprise Index as an excellent summary indicator of the US data flow relative to market expectations. The index also correlates tightly with changes in bond yields (Chart 6). Though the index has fallen significantly from the absurd highs seen late last year, it is still elevated compared to typical historical levels. In general, bond yields tend to rise when the economic data are beating expectations, as indicated by a positive Surprise Index. All in all, we see that the cyclical indicators in our Checklist are sending a very different signal than the valuation indicators. This suggests a high probability that yields could overshoot fair value in the near term. Bottom Line: Treasury yields look fairly valued on several different valuation metrics and the yield curve discounts a much quicker pace of rate hikes than is currently signaled by the Fed’s “dot plot”. However, the economic data continue to beat expectations by a wide margin. This suggests that bond yields could overshoot their fair value in the near term. Maintain below-benchmark portfolio duration. The Employment Boom Is Just Getting Started Chart 7Defining "Maximum Employment" The Fed has conditioned the first rate hike of the cycle on both (i) 12-month PCE inflation being at or above 2% and (ii) the labor market being at “maximum employment”. As we’ve previously written, we see strong odds that the inflation trigger will be met in time for a 2022 rate hike.3 This week, we assess the likelihood that “maximum employment” will be reached in time for the Fed to lift rates next year. Fed communications have made it clear that the FOMC’s definition of “maximum employment” is equivalent to an environment where the unemployment rate is between 3.5% and 4.5% - the range of FOMC participants’ NAIRU estimates – and the labor force participation rate has made a more-or-less complete recovery to pre-pandemic levels (Chart 7). Following March’s blockbuster employment report, we update our calculations of the average monthly nonfarm payroll growth that must occur to hit “maximum employment” by different future dates (Tables 3A-3C). Table 3AAverage Monthly Nonfarm Payroll Growth Required For The Unemployment Rate To Reach 4.5% By The Given Date Table 3BAverage Monthly Nonfarm Payroll Growth Required For The Unemployment Rate To Reach 4% By The Given Date Table 3CAverage Monthly Nonfarm Payroll Growth Required For The Unemployment Rate To Reach 3.5% By The Given Date For example, to reach the Fed’s definition of “maximum employment” by December 2022, nonfarm payroll growth must average between +410k and +487k per month between now and then. To reach “maximum employment” by the end of this year, payroll growth must average between +701k and +833k over the remaining nine months of 2021. It’s probably unrealistic to expect a return to “maximum employment” by the end of this year, but we do expect at least a couple more monthly payroll reports that are even stronger than last month’s +916k. Our optimism stems from the industry breakdown of the current jobs shortfall. Table 4 shows the change in overall nonfarm payrolls between February 2020 and March 2021. In total, we see that the US economy is missing 8.4 million jobs compared to pre-pandemic. We also see that 3.1 million (or 37%) of those jobs come from the Leisure & Hospitality sector. That sector is predominantly made up of restaurants and bars, two services where demand is about to ramp up significantly as COVID vaccination spreads across the US. A few months in a row of 1 million or more jobs added is highly likely in the near future. Table 4Employment By Industry Bottom Line: We see the boom in employment as just getting started and we expect that the US economy will reach the Fed’s definition of “maximum employment” in 2022. This will cause the Fed to lift rates before the end of 2022, an event that will be preceded by an announcement of asset purchase tapering either late this year or early next year.   Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 https://www.bcaresearch.com/webcasts/detail/387 2 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “The Fed Looks Backward While Markets Look Forward”, dated March 23, 2021, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 3 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Limit Rate Risk, Load Up On Credit”, dated March 16, 2021, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com Fixed Income Sector Performance Recommended Portfolio Specification

Highlights Private-sector savings exploded during the pandemic, swelling the already large global savings glut. Reluctant to sit on excess cash, households shifted some of their funds into the stock market. With corporate buybacks outpacing new share issuance, stock prices had nowhere to go but up. Falling bond yields further supercharged equity valuations. Despite the run-up in stocks, the global equity risk premium – measured as the forward equity earnings yield minus the real bond yield – still stands at about 6%, similar to where it was in late-2009. Using a simple example, we show why investors should hold more stock than the standard 60/40 rule suggests when bond yields are still this low. While bond yields will rise further over the coming years, it is likely to be a slow process. Investors should remain bullish on stocks over a 12-month horizon, favouring non-US equities over their US peers. Did A Surfeit Of Savings Lead To A Shortage Of Assets? Real interest rates have fallen dramatically since the early 1980s (Chart 1). Economic theory posits that lower real rates discourage savings while encouraging spending. Yet, as Chart 2 shows, with the exception of the late-1990s and the mid-2000s – two periods when spending was buoyed first by the dotcom bubble and then by the housing bubble – the US private sector has run a large financial surplus; that is to say, it has consistently spent less than it earned. Private-sector financial balances in most other economies have followed a similar trend. Chart 1Real Bond Yields Have Been Trending Lower Since The 1980s Chart 2The Private Sector Has Been Mostly Running Surpluses Ben Bernanke famously cited chronic private-sector financial surpluses as evidence of a “global savings glut.” The concept of a savings glut is closely related to the concept of demand-side secular stagnation, an idea popularized by Larry Summers prior to his heel-turn towards stimulus skeptic. When the private sector is unable to find enough worthy investment projects to make use of all available savings, the economy will struggle to attain full employment, even in the presence of very low interest rates. The concept of a savings glut is also related to another, less well known, concept: a safe asset shortage. If the private sector earns more than it spends, it must, by definition, accumulate assets. In principle, governments can satiate the demand for safe assets by issuing more bonds. In practice, governments have often been reluctant to run persistently large budget deficits for fear that this could undermine their credibility. Faced with a shortage of safe assets, the private sector has stepped in to fill the void, often with disastrous consequences. Most notably, in the lead-up to the Global Financial Crisis, banks sliced and diced portfolios of risky mortgages with the goal of creating safe assets that could be sold into the market. Most financial crashes occur when investors conclude that the assets they once thought were safe are not so safe after all. This was precisely what happened to mortgage-backed securities during the 2008 mortgage meltdown. The exact same pattern repeated itself two years later when investors finally came around to the seemingly obvious conclusion that Greek government bonds were not as safe as say, German bunds. The Safe Asset Shortage In A Post-Pandemic World This brings us to the present day. After falling from 7% of GDP in 2009 to 3% of GDP in the lead-up to the pandemic, the global private-sector financial balance surged to 11% of GDP in 2020. The IMF expects the global private-sector balance to average 9% of GDP in 2021 before trending lower over the coming years. Arithmetically, the private-sector financial balance must equal the sum of the fiscal deficit and the current account balance.1 By running large budget deficits during the pandemic, governments endowed the private sector with income they otherwise would not have had. This income consisted of transfers (stimulus checks, expanded unemployment benefits, business subsidies, etc.) as well as income generated from direct government spending on goods and services. As of the end of March, we estimate that US households had accumulated about $2.2 trillion (10.5% of GDP) in savings over and above what they would have had in the absence of the pandemic. About 40% of those “excess savings” stemmed from fiscal policy with the remainder reflecting decreased consumption (Chart 3). Chart 3Lower Spending And Higher Income Have Led To Mounting Savings Chart 4Government Largesse Boosted Savings And Fattened Bank Deposits As the private sector’s financial balance increased, so did its asset holdings. Unlike in normal fiscal expansions where governments fund budget deficits by selling debt to the public, this time around, governments largely sold the debt to central banks. The money that governments received from central banks in return was then pumped into the economy, leading to a surge in bank deposits (Chart 4).   The Nature Of Stock Market “Flows” What happened to the money after it reached people’s bank accounts? A popular narrative is that some of it flowed into the stock market. While this description is technically true, it is somewhat misleading in that it conveys the false impression that there was a net inflow of money into stocks. The reality is more nuanced. When I buy some stock, I gain some shares but lose some cash. Conversely, whoever sold me the stock gains some cash and loses some shares. In aggregate, there is no change in either the number of shares or the amount of cash that investors hold. What does change is the value of the shares in relation to the cash that investors hold. My purchase must lift the share price by enough to persuade someone else to part with their shares. If the seller does not want to hold the additional cash, he or she may try to place an order to purchase a different stock that appears more attractively priced. This game of hot potato will only end when the value of the stock market rises by enough that all investors are happy with how much stock they own in relation to how much cash they hold. Rethinking The 60/40 Split The standard investment mantra is that investors should hold 60% of their portfolios in stock and the rest in cash, bonds, and other financial assets. The discussion above casts doubt on this simple rule of thumb. Suppose that Melanie holds $600 in stock and $400 in cash, and that cash earns a real interest rate of 2%. Let us also assume that Melanie requires a 4% equity risk premium. Hence, the equity earnings yield must be 6% (i.e., her $600 in stock must correspond to $36 in earnings).2 Now let us suppose that the central bank cuts the policy rate, so that the real interest rate falls to zero. In order to maintain a 4% equity risk premium, the earnings yield must decline to 4%, which implies that the value of the stock must rise to $900 ($36/0.04=$900). Thus, we have gone from a position where Melanie holds 60% of her portfolio in stock to one where she holds about 69% ($900/$1300) in stock. In other words, even though the equity risk premium did not change at all, the desired ratio of stock-to-cash rose from $600/$400=1.5 to $900/$400=2.25. Let us continue the thought experiment and imagine a scenario where the government sends Melanie and everyone else a stimulus check of $100. Now she has $500 in cash and $900 in stock. If she wants to maintain a stock-to-cash ratio of 2.25, she would need to use some of her cash to buy stock. However, since everyone else is also looking to purchase stock with their stimulus checks, before Melanie has a chance to enter a buy order, she finds that the stock in her portfolio has appreciated to $1125. Since $1125/$500 is equal to 2.25, Melanie cancels her buy order, content with the knowledge that she holds as much stock as she wants. Notice that in this simple example, neither interest rate cuts nor stimulus checks did anything to boost corporate profits. All that happened is that stock prices rose, causing the equity earnings yield to first fall from 6% to 4% after the central bank cut rates, and then fall again from 4% to 3.2% ($36/$1125) after the stimulus checks were sent out. If all of this sounds a bit familiar, it should. The sequence of events described above is precisely what has happened over the past 12 months. And not just to stock prices. As interest rates fell and cash balances swelled, other risky assets such as cryptocurrencies went to the proverbial moon. Is The Party Over? Given that fiscal stimulus has peaked and interest rates cannot be cut any further in the major economies, are stocks set to fall? Not necessarily! The amount of stock that investors choose to hold in relation to their cash balances is a function of animal spirits. While US consumer confidence rebounded in March to the highest level in a year, it still remains well below pre-pandemic levels (Chart 5). The percentage of households in The Conference Board’s survey who expect stock prices to rise over the next 12 months is still around its long-term average (Chart 6). Chart 5Stocks Could Rise Further As Confidence Recovers Chart 6The Percentage Of Households Who Expect Stock Prices To Rise Over The Next 12 Months Is Still Around Its Long-Term Average Fortunately, the US is on target to provide a vaccine shot to everyone who wants one by the end of April.3 As the economy continues to reopen, confidence will rise further. Rising confidence, in turn, may prompt investors to increase their equity holdings. Our US equity strategists expect share buybacks to exceed share issuance over the next 12 months. Thus, the value of equity portfolios will only be able to rise if share prices go up. Outside the US and the UK and a few other smaller economies, the vaccination campaign has gotten off to a rocky start. However, the pace of inoculations is set to accelerate rapidly in the second quarter, which should pave the way to faster global growth. Global equities usually outperform bonds when growth is on the upswing (Chart 7). Chart 7Stocks Usually Outperform Bonds When Economic Growth Is Strong While equity allocations have risen, they are below the level reached in 2000 (Chart 8). Back then, the global equity earnings yield was on par with the real bond yield. Today, the earnings yield is about six percentage points above the bond yield, a similar gap to what prevailed in late-2009 (Chart 9). Chart 8Stock Allocations Have Rebounded, But Remain Below Their 2000 Peak Chart 9The Equity Risk Premium Is At Levels Similar To Late-2009 Granted, today’s high equity risk premium largely reflects the exceptionally low level of bond yields. If bond yields were to move up, the equity risk premium would shrink. While we do think that bond yields will rise by more than expected in the long run, the path to higher yields is likely to be a slow one. Rate expectations 2-to-3 years out tend to move closely in line with the 10-year yield (Chart 10). Already, there is a large gap between market expectations and the Fed dots. Whereas the market expects the Fed to start lifting rates late next year, the median Fed “dot” continues to signal no rate hike at least until 2024 (Chart 11). It is unlikely that market expectations will shift towards an even more aggressive path of rate tightening unless the Fed’s dovish rhetoric turns hawkish. As we discussed in our recently published Second Quarter Strategy Outlook, we do not expect this to happen anytime soon. Thus, with monetary policy still very loose, stocks can continue to grind higher. Chart 10Bond Yields Are Unlikely To Rise Much Unless The Market Lifts Its Estimate Of Where The Fed Funds Rate Will Be 2-To-3 Years Out   Chart 11A Wide Gap Has Opened Up Between Market Expectations And The Fed Dots Regionally, we favour stock markets outside the US. Not only will overseas markets benefit from a rotation in growth from the US to the rest of the world in the second half of this year, but US corporate tax rates are almost certain to rise. We will be exploring the tax issue over the coming weeks.   Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist pberezin@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Just as the private-sector financial balance is the difference between what the private sector earns and spends, the fiscal balance is the difference between what the government earns and spends. If the fiscal balance is negative, the government runs a deficit. If the fiscal balance is positive, the government runs a surplus. Thus, added together, the private-sector financial balance and the fiscal balance simply equals the difference between what the country as a whole earns and spends which, by definition, is equal to the current account balance. One can also see this point by rewriting the equation Y=C+I+G+X-M as (Y-T)-(C+I)=(G-T)+(X-M) where T is tax revenue, Y-T is private-sector earnings, C+I is what the private sector spends on consumption and capital goods, G-T is the fiscal deficit, and X-M is the current account balance, broadly defined to include not only the trade balance but also net income from abroad. 2 The relative attractiveness of stocks can also be inferred by subtracting the real bond yield from the earnings yield on stocks in order to get an implied equity risk premium (ERP). It is necessary to subtract the real bond yield, rather than the nominal bond yield, from the earnings yield because the earnings yield provides an estimate of the real total expected return to shareholders. For further discussion on this, please see Appendix A of the Global Investment Strategy Special Report, “TINA To The Rescue?” dated August 23, 2019. 3 Mia Sato, “The US is about to reach a surprise milestone: too many vaccines, not enough takers,” MIT Technology Review, March 22, 2021. Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores

Highlights Continued upgrades to global economic growth – most recently by the IMF this week –will support higher natgas prices.  In our estimation, gas for delivery at Henry Hub, LA, in the coming withdrawal season (November – March) is undervalued at current levels at ~ $2.90/MMBtu. Inventory demand will remain strong during the current April-October injection season, following the blast of colder-than-normal weather in 1Q21 that pulled inventories lower in the US, Europe and Northeast Asia. The odds the US will succeed in halting completion of the final leg of the Russian Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline into Germany are higher than the consensus expectation.  Our odds the pipeline will not be completed this year stand at 50%, which translates into higher upside risk for natural gas prices.  We are getting long 1Q22 calls on CME/NYMEX Henry Hub-delivered natgas futures struck at $3.50/MMBtu vs. short 1Q22 $3.75/MMBtu calls at tonight's close.  The probability of Nord Stream 2 cancellation is underpriced, which means European TTF and Asian JKM prices will have to move higher to attract LNG cargoes next winter from the US, if the pipeline is cancelled (Chart of the Week). Feature As major forecasting agencies continue to upgrade global growth prospects, expectations for industrial-commodity demand – energy, bulks, and base metals – also are moving higher. This week, the IMF raised its growth expectations for this year and next to 6% and 4.4%, respectively, nearly a full percentage-point increase versus its January forecast update for 2021.1 This upgrade follows a similar move by the OECD last month.2 In the US, the EIA is expecting industrial demand for natural gas to rise 1.35 Bcf/d this year to 23.9 Bcf/d; versus 2019 levels, industrial demand will be 0.84 Bcf/d higher in 2021. For 2022, industrial demand is expected to be 24.2 Bcf/d. US industrial demand likely will recover faster than the EU's, given the expectation of a stronger recovery on the back of massive fiscal and monetary stimulus. Overall natgas demand in the US likely will move lower this year, given higher natgas prices expected this year and next will incentivize electricity generators to switch to coal at the margin, according to the EIA. Total demand is expected to be 82.9 Bcf/d in the US this year vs. 83.3 Bcf/d last year, owing to lower generator demand. Pipeline-quality gas output in the US – known as dry gas, since its liquids have been removed for other uses – is expected to average 91.4 Bcf/d this year, essentially unchanged. Lower consumption by the generators and flat production will allow US gas inventories to return to their five-year average levels of 3.7 Tcf by the end of October, in the EIA's estimation (Chart 2). Chart of the WeekUS-Russia Geopolitical Risk Underpriced Chart 2US Natgas Inventories Return To Five-Year Average US Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) exports are likely to expand, as Asian and European demand grows (Chart 3). Prior to the boost in US LNG demand from colder weather, exports set monthly records of 9.4 Bcf/d and 9.8 Bcf/d in November and December of last year, respectively, with Asia accounting for the largest share of exports (Chart 4). This also marked the first time LNG exports exceeded US pipeline exports to Mexico and Canada. The EIA is forecasting US LNG exports will be 8.5 bcf/d and 9.2 Bcf/d this year and next, versus pipeline exports of 8.8 Bcf/d and 8.9 Bcf/d in 2021 and 2022, respectively. Chart 3US LNG Exports Continue Growing Chart 4US LNG Exports Set Records In November And December 2020 US LNG exports – and export potential given the size of the resource base at just over 500 Tcf – now are of a sufficient magnitude to be a formidable force in global markets, particularly in Europe. This puts it in direct conflict with Russia, which has targeted Europe as a key market for its pipeline natural gas exports. US-Russia Standoff Looming Over Nord Stream 2 Given the size and distribution of global oil and gas production and consumption, it comes as no surprise national interests can, at times, become as important to pricing these commodities as supply-demand fundamentals. This is particularly true in oil, and increasingly is becoming the case in natural gas. That the same dramatis personae – the US and Russia – should feature in geopolitical contests in oil and gas markets also should not come as a surprise. In an attempt to circumvent transporting its natural gas through Ukraine, Russia is building a 1,230 km underwater pipeline from Narva Bay in the Kingisepp district of the Leningrad region of Russia to Lubmin, near Greifswald, in Germany (Map 1). The Biden administration, like the Trump administration and US Congress, is officially attempting to halt the final leg of the pipeline from being built, although Biden has not yet put America’s full weight into stopping it. Biden claims it will be up to the Europeans to decide what to do. At the same time, any major Russian or Russian-backed military operation in Ukraine could trigger an American action to halt the pipeline in retaliation. Map 1Nord Stream 2 Route In our estimation, there is a 50% chance that the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline will not be completed this year or go into operation as planned given substantial geopolitical risks. The $11 billion pipeline would connect Russia directly to Germany with a capacity of about 55 billion cubic meters, which, combined with the existing Nord Stream One pipeline, would equal 110 BCM in offshore capacity, or 55% of Russia's natural gas exports to Europe in 2019. The pipeline’s construction is 94% complete, with the Russian ship Akademik Cherskiy entering Danish waters in late March to begin laying pipes to finish the final 138-kilometer stretch, according to Reuters. The pipeline could be finished in early August at the pace of 1 kilometer per day.3 The Russian and German governments are speeding up the project to finish it before US-Russia tensions, or the German elections in September, interrupt the construction process again. It is not too late for the US to try to halt the pipeline through sanctions. But for the Americans to succeed, the Biden administration would have to make an aggressive effort. Notably the Biden administration took office with a desire to sharpen US policy toward Russia.4 While Biden seeks Russian engagement on arms reduction treaties and the Iranian nuclear negotiations, he mainly aims to counter Russia, expand sanctions, provide weapons to Ukraine, and promote democracy in Russia’s sphere of influence. The result will almost inevitably be a new US-Russia confrontation, which is already taking shape over Russia’s buildup of troops on the border with Ukraine, where US and Russian meddling could cause civil war to reignite (Map 2). Map 2Russia’s Military Tensions With The West Escalate In Wake Of Biden’s Election And Ukraine’s Renewed Bid To Join NATO Tensions in Ukraine are directly tied to US military cooperation with Ukraine and any possibility that Ukraine will join the NATO military alliance, a red line for Putin. Nord Stream 2 is Russia’s way of bypassing Ukraine but a new US-Russia conflict, especially a Russian attack on Ukraine, would halt the pipeline. The pipeline’s completion would improve Russo-German strategic relations, undercut US liquefied natural gas exports to Germany and the EU, and reduce the US’s and eastern Europe’s leverage over Russia (and Germany). Biden says his administration is planning to impose new sanctions on firms that oversee, construct, or insure the pipeline, and such sanctions are required under American law.5 Yet Biden also wants a strong alliance with Germany, which favors the pipeline and does not want to escalate the conflict with Russia. The American laws against Nord Stream have big loopholes and give the president discretion regarding the use of sanctions, which means Biden would have to make a deliberate decision to override Germany and impose maximum sanctions if he truly wanted to halt construction.6 This would most likely occur if Russia committed a major new act of aggression in Ukraine or against other European democracies. The German policy, under the current ruling coalition led by Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union, is to finish the pipeline despite Russia’s conflicts with the West and political repression at home. Russia provides more than a third of Germany’s natural gas imports and this pipeline would bypass eastern Europe’s pipeline network and thus secure Germany’s (and Austria’s and the EU’s) natural gas supply whenever Russia cuts off the flow to Ukraine (through which roughly 40% of Russian natural gas still must pass to reach Europe). Germany's Election And Natgas Politics Germany wants to use natural gas as a bridge while it phases out nuclear energy and coal. Natural gas has grown 2.2 percentage points as a share of Germany’s total energy mix since the Fukushima disaster of 2011, and renewable energy has grown 7.7ppt, while coal has fallen 7.3ppt and nuclear has fallen 2.5ppt (Chart 5). The German federal election on September 26 complicates matters because Merkel and the Christian Democrats are likely to underperform their opinion polls and could even fall from power. They do not want to suffer a major foreign policy humiliation at the hands of the Americans or a strategic crisis with Russia right before the election. They will insist that Biden leave the pipeline alone and will offer other forms of cooperation against Russia in compensation. Therefore, the current German government could push through the pipeline and complete the project even in the face of US objections. But this outcome is not guaranteed. The German Greens are likely to gain influence in the Bundestag after the elections and could even lead the German government for the first time – and they are opposed to a new fossil fuel pipeline that increases Russia’s influence. Chart 5Germany Sees Nord Stream 2 Gas As Bridge To Low-Carbon Economy Hence there is a fair chance that the pipeline does not become operational: either Americans halt it out of strategic interest, or the German Greens halt it out of environmental and strategic interest, or both. True, there is a roughly equal chance that Merkel’s policy status quo survives in Germany, which would result in an operational pipeline. The best case for Germany might be that the current government completes the pipeline physically but the next government has optionality on whether to make it operational. But 50/50 odds of cancellation is a much higher risk than the consensus holds. The Russian policy is to finish Nord Stream 2 while also making an aggressive military stance against the West’s and NATO’s influence in Ukraine. This would expand Russian commodity and energy exports and undercut Ukraine’s natgas transit income. It would also increase Russian leverage over Germany – and it would divide Germany from the eastern Europeans and Americans. A preemptive American intervention would elicit Russian retaliation. The Russians could respond in the strategic sphere or the economic sphere. Economically they could react by cutting off natural gas to Europe, but that would undermine their diplomatic goals, so they would more likely respond by increasing production of natural gas or crude oil to steal American market share. In any scenario Russian retaliation would likely cause global price volatility in one or more energy markets, in addition to whatever volatility is induced by the cancellation of Nord Stream 2 itself. US-Russia tensions are likely to escalate but only Ukraine and Nord Stream 2, or the separate Iranian negotiations, have a direct impact on global energy supply. If Germany goes forward with the pipeline, then Russia would need to be countered by other means. The Americans, not the Germans, would provide these “other means,” such as military support to ensure the integrity of Ukraine and other nations’ borders. The Russians may gain a victory for their energy export strategy but they will never compromise on Ukraine and they will still need to focus on the broader global shift to renewable energy, which threatens their economic model and hence ultimately their regime stability. So, the risk of a market-moving US-Russia conflict can be delayed but probably not prevented (Chart 6). Chart 6US-Russia Conflit Likely Bottom Line: The Nord Stream 2 pipeline is not guaranteed to be completed this year as planned. The US is more likely to force a halt to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline than the consensus holds, especially if Russia attacks Ukraine. If the US fails to do so, then the German election will become the next signpost for whether the pipeline will become operational. If the Americans halt the pipeline, then US-Russian conflict either already erupted or will occur sooner rather than later and will likely impact global oil or natural gas prices. Investment Implications Our subjective assessment of 50% odds the US will succeed in halting completion of the final leg of Nord Stream 2 are higher than the consensus expectation. This translates directly into higher upside risk for natural gas prices in the US and Europe later this year and next. Given our view, we are getting long 1Q22 calls on CME/NYMEX Henry Hub-delivered natgas futures struck at $3.50/MMBtu vs. short 1Q22 $3.75/MMBtu calls at tonight's close. The probability of Nord Stream 2 cancellation is underpriced, which means the odds of higher prices in the LNG market are underpriced (Chart 7). The immediate implication of our view is European TTF prices will have to move higher to attract LNG cargoes next winter from the US, if the Nord Stream 2 pipeline's final leg is cancelled. This also would tighten the Asian markets, causing the JKM to move higher as well (Chart 8). Any indication of colder-than-normal weather in the US, Europe or Asian markets would mean a sharper move higher. Chart 7Natgas Tails Are Too Narrow For Next Winter Chart 8Nord Stream 2 Cancellation Would Boost JKM Prices   Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Matt Gertken Vice President Geopolitical Strategy mattg@bcaresearch.com Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish The US and Iran began indirect talks earlier this week in Vienna aimed at restoring the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), otherwise known as the "Iran nuclear deal." All of the other parties of the deal – Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia – are in favor of restoring the deal. BCA Research believes this is most likely to occur prior to the inauguration of a new president who is expected to be a hardliner willing to escalate Iran’s demands. US President Biden can unilaterally ease sanctions and bring the US into compliance with the deal, and Iran could then reciprocate. If a deal is not reached by August it could take years to resolve US-Iran tensions. China could offer to cooperate on sanctions and help to broker negotiations following the signing of its 25-year trade deal with Iran last week. Russia likely would demand the US not pressure its allies to cancel the Nord Stream 2 deal, in return for its assistance in brokering a deal. Base Metals: Bullish Iron ore prices continue to be supported by record steel prices in China, trading at more than $173/MT earlier this week. Even though steel production reportedly is falling in the top steel-producer in China, Tangshan, as a result of anti-pollution measures, for iron ore remains stout. As we have previously noted, we use steel prices as a leading indicator for copper prices. We remain long Dec21 copper and will be looking for a sell-off to get long Sep21 copper vs. short Sep21 copper if the market trades below $4/lb on the CME/COMEX futures market (Chart 9). Precious Metals: Bullish Gold held support ~ $1,680/oz at the end of March, following an earlier test in the month. We remain long the yellow metal, despite coming close to being stopped out last week (Chart 10). The earlier sell-off appeared to be caused by a need to raise liquidity to us. We continue to expect the Fed to hold firm to its stated intent to wait for actual inflation to become manifest before raising rates, and, therefore, continue to expect real rates to weaken. This will be supportive of gold and commodities generally (Chart 10). Ags/Softs: Neutral Corn continues to be well supported above $5.50/bu, following last week's USDA report showing farmers intend to increase acreage planted to just over 91mm acres, which is less than 1% above last year's level. Chart 9 Chart 10       Footnotes 1     Please see the Fund's April 2021 forecast Managing Divergent Recoveries. 2     We noted last week these higher growth expectations generally are bullish for industrial commodities – energy, metals, and bulks.  Please see Fundamentals Support Oil, Bulks, And Metals, which we published 1 April 2021.  It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 3    For the rate of construction see Margarita Assenova, “Clouds Darkening Over Nord Stream Two Pipeline,” Eurasia Daily Monitor 18: 17 (February 1, 2021), Jamestown Foundation, jamestown.org. For the current status, see Robin Emmott, “At NATO, Blinken warns Germany over Nord Stream 2 pipeline,” Reuters, March 23, 2021, reuters.com. 4    The Democratic Party blames Russia for what it sees as a campaign to undermine the democratic West and recreate the Soviet sphere of influence. See for example the 2008 invasion of Georgia, the failure of the Obama administration’s 2009-11 diplomatic “reset,” the Edward Snowden affair, the seizure of Crimea and civil war in Ukraine, the survival of Syria’s dictator, and Russian interference in US elections in 2016 and 2020. 5    The Countering Russian Influence in Europe and Eurasia Act of 2017, and the Protecting Europe’s Energy Security Act of 2019/2020, contain provisions requiring sanctions on firms that have contributed in any way a minimum of $1 million to the project, or provide pipe-laying services or insurance. There are exceptions for services provided by the governments of the EU member states, Norway, Switzerland, or the UK. The president has discretion over the implementation of sanctions as usual. 6    The German state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern is creating a shell foundation to enable the completion of the pipeline. It can shield companies from American sanctions aimed at private companies, not sovereigns.    Investment Views and Themes Recommendations Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Commodity Prices and Plays Reference Table Summary of Closed Trades

Highlights Q1/2021 Performance Breakdown: Our recommended model bond portfolio outperformed the custom benchmark index by +55bps during the first quarter of the year. Winners & Losers: The government bond side of the portfolio outperformed by +68bps, led overwhelmingly by our underweight to US Treasuries (+63bps). Spread product allocations underperformed by -11bps, primarily due to an overweight on UK corporates (-8bps). Portfolio Positioning For The Next Six Months: We are sticking with an overall below-benchmark portfolio duration stance, given accelerating global growth momentum, expanding vaccinations and a highly stimulative fiscal/monetary policy mix. We are maintaining a moderate overweight to global spread product versus government debt, concentrated on an overweight to US high-yield given more stretched valuations in other credit sectors. On the margin, we are making the following changes to the portfolio allocations: downgrading both UK Gilts and UK investment grade corporates to neutral, while cutting the overall allocation to EM USD credit to neutral. Feature The first quarter of 2021 saw a sharp sell-off in global bond markets on the back of rising growth expectations, fueled by US fiscal stimulus and vaccine optimism. The US was near the front of the pack, with 10-year Treasuries having their biggest first quarter sell-off since 1994. Accommodative financial conditions, fueled by a highly stimulative mix of monetary and fiscal policies and improving sentiment, have lit a fire under a global economy set to reopen from pandemic lockdowns. Going forward, we expect US growth to continue leading the way, with implications for the dollar, commodity prices, and the expected path of policy rates. With that in mind, this week we are reviewing the performance of the BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy (GFIS) model bond portfolio during the first quarter of 2021. We also present our recommended positioning for the portfolio for the next six months (Table 1), as well as portfolio return expectations for our base case and alternative investment scenarios. Table 1GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Recommended Positioning For The Next Six Months As a reminder to existing readers (and to new clients), the model portfolio is a part of our service that complements the usual macro analysis of global fixed income markets. The portfolio is how we communicate our opinion on the relative attractiveness between government bond and spread product sectors. We do this by applying actual percentage weightings to each of our recommendations within a fully invested hypothetical bond portfolio. Q1/2021 Model Portfolio Performance Breakdown: Steering Clear Of Duration Chart 1Q1/2021 Performance: Bearish UST Bets Pay Off The total return for the GFIS model portfolio (hedged into US dollars) in the first quarter was -1.83%, dramatically outperforming the custom benchmark index by +55bps (Chart 1).1 This follows modest outperformance in 2020 which was driven largely by overweights on spread product initiated after the pandemic shock to markets. In terms of the specific breakdown between the government bond and spread product allocations in our model portfolio, the former generated +68bps of outperformance versus our custom benchmark index while the latter underperformed by -11bps. Our allocations to inflation-linked bonds in the US, Canada and Europe - which were a source of outperformance in 2020 - modestly underperformed this quarter (-2bps) as global real yields finally began to pick up. Our outperformance this quarter was driven overwhelmingly by our decision to go significantly underweight US Treasuries, and to position for a bearish steepening of the Treasury curve, ahead of last November’s US presidential election (Table 2). That resulted in the US Treasury allocation generating a massive +63bps of excess return in Q1/2022 as longer-term US yields surged higher. Table 2GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Q1/2021 Overall Return Attribution The size of the US underweight was unusually large as we maintained only a neutral exposure to the other “high beta” markets that are typically positively correlated to US yield moves, Canada and Australia. Although the returns for those two government bond markets were very similar to that of US Treasuries in Q1, so the choice to stay neutral even with a bearish directional view on US yields did not impact the overall portfolio performance. Overweights to the more defensive “low beta” markets of Germany, France and Japan contributed a combined +4bps. We did see some losses on nominal government bonds in peripheral Europe (Italy: -0.6bps; Spain: -1.9bps), however, with the narrowing in spreads thrown off by a botched vaccine rollout. In spread product, underperformance came from overweights to UK investment grade corporates (-8bps), US CMBS (-4bps), and EM USD-denominated corporates (-2bps). This was despite the fact that spreads for UK corporates remained flat while US CMBS spreads actually narrowed. These losses were slightly offset by the overweight to lower-rated US high-yield (+3bps) and underweight to US agency MBS (+2bps). Our spread product losses, in total return terms, highlight the importance of considering duration risk when making a call on spread product, especially at a time when sovereign yields are rising and spreads offer little “cushion”. Duration also played a big part in nominal government bond outperformance, with a whopping +43bps of our total +55bps outperformance concentrated in just US Treasuries with a maturity greater than 10 years. In other words, overweighting overall global spread product and underweighting government bonds still generated major portfolio outperformance, even if there was a more mixed bag of returns within that credit overweight. The bar charts showing the total and relative returns for each individual government bond market and spread product sector are presented in Charts 2 & 3. Chart 2GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Q1/2021 Government Bond Performance Attribution Chart 3GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Q1/2021 Spread Product Performance Attribution By Sector Biggest Outperformers: Underweight US Treasuries with a maturity greater than 10 years (+43bps), maturity between 7 and 10 years (+11bps), and with a maturity between 5 and 7 years (+7bps) Overweight US high-yield (+3bps) Underweight US agency MBS (+2bps) Overweight Italian inflation-indexed BTPs (+2bps) Biggest Underperformers: Overweight UK investment grade corporates (-8bps) Overweight US agency CMBS (-4bps) Overweight Spanish government bonds (-2bps) Chart 4 presents the ranked benchmark index returns of the individual countries and spread product sectors in the GFIS model bond portfolio for Q1/2021. Returns are hedged into US dollars (we do not take active currency risk in this portfolio) and adjusted to reflect duration differences between each country/sector and the overall custom benchmark index for the model portfolio. We have also color coded the bars in each chart to reflect our recommended investment stance for each market during Q1 (red for underweight, dark green for overweight, gray for neutral). Chart 4Ranking The Winners & Losers From The GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Universe In Q1/2021 Ideally, we would look to see more green bars on the left side of the chart where market returns are highest, and more red bars on the right side of the chart were returns are lowest. On that front, our portfolio allocations performed exceptionally well in Q1. In total return terms, the global bond market sell-off was a disaster for both government bonds and spread product. US high-yield, one of our longer-standing overweights, was the only sector to emerge unscathed, delivering a positive return of +42bps. Within our government bond allocation, the “defensive” markets—Japan (-44bps), Germany, (-261bps) and France (-371bps)—were nevertheless shaken by rising yields. On the other hand, we limited our downside by maintaining a neutral stance on the higher beta markets such as Canada (-406bps), New Zealand (-415bps), and the UK (-1389bps). Gilts sold off especially sharply as the UK outperformed global peers on COVID-19 vaccinations while inflation expectations continued to pick up. Our two underweights, US Treasuries (-426bps) and European high-yield (-426bps), were prescient. The latter market was one we chose to underweight given that spreads didn’t offer nearly enough compensation on a default-adjusted and breakeven basis. Bottom Line: Our model bond portfolio outperformed its benchmark index in the first quarter of the year by +55bps – a positive result driven by our underweight allocation to the US Treasury market and overall below-benchmark global duration stance. Future Drivers Of Portfolio Returns & Scenario Analysis Chart 5More Growth-Driven Upside For Global Yields Ahead Looking ahead, the performance of the model bond portfolio will continue to be driven predominantly by the future moves of global government bond yields, most notably US Treasuries. Our most favored leading indicators for global bond yields continue to signal more upside over at least the next six months (Chart 5). Our Global Duration Indicator, comprised of measures of future economic sentiment and momentum, remains at an elevated level. The ongoing climb in the global manufacturing PMI, which typically leads global real bond yields by around six months, suggests that the recent uptick in real yields can continue into the second half of 2021. We are still maintaining a bias towards bearish yield curve steepening across all the countries in the model bond portfolio. It is still far too soon to see bearish flattening of yield curves given the dovish bias of global central banks, many of which are actively targeting an overshoot of their own inflation targets. The US will be the first central bank to see any bearish flattening pressure, as the market more aggressively pulls forward the liftoff date of the next Fed tightening cycle in response to strong US growth, but that is an outcome we do not expect until well into the second half of 2021. With regards to country allocations within the government bond segment of the model bond portfolio, we continue to focus our maximum underweight on the US, while limiting exposure to the markets that are more sensitive to changes in US interest rates (Chart 6). Those “lower yield beta” markets (Germany, France and Japan) will continue to outperform the higher beta markets (Canada, Australia) over the latter half of 2021. We currently have Canada on “downgrade watch”, as economic momentum is accelerating and the housing bubble looks to be reflating, both of which will make the Bank of Canada turn more hawkish shortly after the Fed does. We are more comfortable keeping Australia at neutral, as Australian inflation is likely to remain too underwhelming for the Reserve Bank of Australia to turn less dovish and risk a surge in the Australian dollar. UK Gilts are a more difficult case, atypically acting like a lower beta market over the past few years. As we discussed in a Special Report published last month, we attribute the declining Gilt yield beta to the rolling shocks the UK has suffered over the past thirteen years – the 2008 global financial crisis, the 2012 euro area debt crisis, Brexit and, now, COVID-19 – that have hamstrung the Bank of England’s ability to try even modest interest rate hikes.2 With the impact of those shocks on UK growth now diminishing, we see the central bank under greater pressure to begin normalizing UK monetary policy over the couple of years. We downgraded our cyclical stance on UK Gilts and UK investment grade corporates to neutral from overweight in that Special Report and, this week, we are making the same reduction in UK weightings in our model bond portfolio (see the portfolio tables on pages 20-21). After that change, the overall duration of the model bond portfolio remains below that of the custom benchmark index, now by -0.75 years (Chart 7). Chart 6Low-Beta Markets Will Continue To Outperform USTs Chart 7Overall Portfolio Duration: Stay Below Benchmark We continue to see the dovish bias of global central bankers as being conducive to the outperformance of inflation-linked bonds versus nominal government debt (Chart 8). Yes, the “easy money” has been made betting on a recovery of inflation expectations from the bombed-out levels seen after the COVID-19 recession in 2020. However, within the major developed economies with inflation-linked bond markets, 10-year breakevens have already climbed beyond the pre-pandemic levels of early 2020 (Chart 9). The next targets are the previous cyclical highs seen in 2018 (and 2019 for the UK). Chart 8Dovish Central Banks Still Positive For Inflation-Linked Bonds Chart 9Inflation Breakevens Returning To Past Cyclical Peaks Chart 10Still A Supportive Backdrop For Global Corporates The 10-year US TIPS breakeven is already past that 2018 peak of 2.18%, and with the Fed showing no sign of concern about US growth and inflation accelerating, the 10-year US breakeven should end up moving into the high end of our expected 2.3-2.5% target range before the Fed begins to turn less dovish. Thus, we are maintaining a core allocation to linkers in the portfolio, focused on US TIPS and inflation-linked bonds in Italy, France and Canada. The same aggressive easing of global monetary policy that has been good for relative inflation-linked bond performance continues to benefit global corporate bonds. The annual rate of growth of the combined balance sheets of the Fed, ECB, Bank of Japan and Bank of England remains an excellent leading indicator of the excess returns of both global investment grade and high-yield corporates over the past decade (Chart 10). With the combined balance sheet now expanding at a 55% pace, corporate bonds are still likely to continue to outperform government debt over the remainder of 2021. Much of that expected return outperformance of corporates will come via carry rather than spread compression, though. Our preferred measure of the attractiveness of credit spreads, the historical percentile ranking of 12-month breakeven spreads, shows that only US high-yield spreads are above the bottom quartile of their history among the credit sectors in our model portfolio (Chart 11). Given the absence of spread cushion in those other markets, we are maintaining an overweight stance on US high-yield in the model bond portfolio – especially versus euro area high-yield where we are underweight - while staying neutral investment grade credit in the US and Europe. Chart 11US High-Yield: The Last Bastion Of Attractive Spreads Within the euro area, we continue to prefer owning Italian government bonds over investment grade corporates, given the European Central Bank’s more explicit support for the former through quantitative easing (Chart 12). We expect Italian yields and spreads to converge down to Spanish levels, likely within the next 6-12 months, while there is limited downside for euro area investment grade spreads given tight valuations. Chart 12Favor Italian BTPs Over Euro Area IG We are not only looking at relative valuation considerations in developed market credit. Emerging market (EM) USD-denominated credit has benefited from a bullish combination of global policy stimulus, a weakening US dollar and rising commodity prices. We have positioned for that in our model portfolio through an overall overweight stance on EM USD credit, but one that favors investment grade corporates over sovereigns. Now, with the Chinese credit impulse likely to slow in the latter half of 2021 as Chinese policymakers look to rein in stimulus, a slower pace of Chinese economic growth represents a risk to EM credit (Chart 13). The same can be said for the US dollar, which is no longer depreciating with US bond yields rising and the markets questioning the Fed’s dovish forward guidance on future rate hikes (Chart 14). A strong US dollar would also be a risk to the commodity price rally that has supported EM financial assets. Chart 13Global Policy Mix Becoming Less Supportive For EM Chart 14A Stronger USD Is A Risk For EM Corporates Vs Sovereigns Chart 15A Moderate Overweight To Spread Product Vs Government Debt In response to these growing risks to the bullish EM backdrop, we are downgrading our overall EM USD credit exposure in the model bond portfolio to neutral from overweight. We are maintaining our relative preference for EM investment grade corporates over sovereigns, however, within that overall neutral allocation. Summing it all up, we are sticking with a moderately overweight stance on global spread product versus government debt in the model portfolio, equal to four percentage points (Chart 15). That overweight comes entirely from the US high-yield allocation. After the changes made to our UK and EM positions, the tracking error of the portfolio, or its expected volatility versus that of the benchmark index, is quite low at 41bps (Chart 16). This is an unsurprising outcome given that the current positioning is focused so heavily on the US (Treasury underweight, high-yield overweight), with much of the other positioning close to neutral. That will change as 2021 progresses but, for now, our highest conviction views are in US fixed income. One final point – the relatively concentrated positioning leaves the portfolio “flat carry”, with a yield roughly equal to that of the benchmark index (Chart 17). Chart 16Limited Use Of Portfolio 'Tracking Error' Chart 17Model Portfolio Yield Close To Benchmark Scenario Analysis & Return Forecasts After making the shifts to our model bond portfolio allocations in the UK and EM, we now turn to scenario analysis to determine the return expectations for the portfolio for the next six months. On the credit side of the portfolio, we use risk-factor-based regression models to forecast future yield changes for global spread product sectors as a function of four major factors - the VIX, oil prices, the US dollar and the fed funds rate (Table 2A). For the government bond side of the portfolio, we avoid using regression models and instead use a yield-beta driven framework, taking forecasts for changes in US Treasury yields and translating those in changes in non-US bond yields by applying a historical yield beta (Table 2B). For our scenario analysis over the next six months, we use a base case scenario plus two alternate “tail risk” scenarios, based on the following descriptions and inputs: Table 2AFactor Regressions Used To Estimate Spread Product Yield Changes Table 2BEstimated Government Bond Yield Betas To US Treasuries Base case: Ongoing global vaccinations lead to more of the global economy reopening over the summer, with excess savings built up during the pandemic – augmented by ongoing fiscal support – starting to be spent. US economic growth will be most robust out of the major economies, given the additional boost from fiscal stimulus, while China implements actions to slow credit growth and the euro area lags on vaccinations. The Fed stands its ground and maintains no rate hikes until at least 2023, and US TIPS breakevens climb to levels consistent with the Fed’s 2% inflation mandate (2.3-2.5%). The US Treasury curve continues to bear-steepen, with the 10-year US yield rising to 2%. The VIX falls to 15, the US dollar is flat, the Brent oil price rises +5%, and the fed funds rate is unchanged at 0%. Optimistic case: A rapid pace of global vaccinations leads to booming growth led by the US but including a reopening euro area. Chinese policymakers tighten credit by less than expected. Markets begin to pull forward the timing and pace of future central bank interest rate hikes, most notably in the US but also in the other countries like Canada and the UK. Real bond yields continue to climb globally, but inflation breakevens stay elevated. The steepening trend of the US Treasury curve ends, and mild bear flattening begins with the 10-year reaching 2.2% and the 2-year yield climbing to 0.4%. The VIX stays unchanged at 18, the US dollar rises +5%, the Brent oil price climbs +2.5% and the fed funds rate stays unchanged. Pessimistic case: Setbacks on the pandemic, either from struggles with vaccine distribution or a surge in variant cases, lead to a slower pace of global growth momentum. Europe cannot reopen, China tightens credit policy faster than expected, and US households hold onto to excess savings amid lingering virus uncertainty. Diminished economic optimism leads to a pullback in global equity values and wider global credit spreads. The US Treasury curve bull flattens as longer-maturity yields fall in a risk-off move, with the 10-year yield moving back down to 1.5%. The VIX rises to 25, the US dollar falls -2.5% and the fed funds rate stays at 0%. The inputs into the scenario analysis are shown in Chart 18 (for the USD, VIX, oil and the fed funds rate), while the US Treasury yield scenarios are in Chart 19. The excess return scenarios for the model bond portfolio, using the above inputs in our simple quantitative return forecast framework, are shown in Table 3A (the scenarios for the changes in US Treasury yields are shown in Table 3B). Chart 18Risk Factor Assumptions For The Scenario Analysis Chart 19US Treasury Yield Assumptions For The Scenario Analysis Table 3AGFIS Model Bond Portfolio Scenario Analysis For The Next Six Months Table 3BUS Treasury Yield Assumptions For The 6-Month Forward Scenario Analysis The model bond portfolio is expected to deliver an excess return over the next six months of +46bps in the base case and +54bps in the optimistic scenario, but is only projected to underperform by -27bps in the pessimistic scenario. Bottom Line: We are sticking with an overall below-benchmark portfolio duration stance, given accelerating global growth momentum, expanding vaccinations and a highly stimulative fiscal/monetary policy mix. We are maintaining a moderate overweight to global spread product versus government debt, concentrated on an overweight to US high-yield given more stretched valuations in other credit sectors. On the margin, we are making the following changes to the portfolio allocations: downgrading both UK Gilts and UK investment grade corporates to neutral, while cutting the overall allocation to EM USD credit to neutral.   Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com   Shakti Sharma Research Associate ShaktiS@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 The GFIS model bond portfolio custom benchmark index is the Bloomberg Barclays Global Aggregate Index, but with allocations to global high-yield corporate debt replacing very high quality spread product (i.e. AA-rated). We believe this to be more indicative of the typical internal benchmark used by global multi-sector fixed income managers. 2 Please see BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy/Foreign Exchange Strategy Special Report, "Why Are UK Interest Rates Still So Low?", dated March 10, 2021, available at gfis.bcaresearch.com. Recommendations The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index Duration Regional Allocation Spread Product Tactical Trades Yields & Returns Global Bond Yields Historical Returns

Informe especial

Highlights The Eurozone economy and assets remain beholden to the global manufacturing cycle. This sensitivity reflects the large share of output generated by capex and exports. Yet, the second half of 2021 and first half of 2022 could see euro area growth follow the beat of its own drum. This is a consequence of the unique role of consumption in the COVID-19 recession. European growth will therefore outperform expectations, even if economic momentum slows outside of Europe. Consequently, the euro and Eurozone equities will outperform for the coming 12 to 18 months. Feature For the past 20 years, investors have used a simple rule of thumb to understand European growth and markets. Europe is a derivative of global growth because of its large manufacturing sector and torpid domestic economy. A reductionist approach would even argue that China’s economy is what matters most for Europe. Is this model still valid to analyze Europe? In general, this approach still holds up well. However, the nature of the 2020 COVID-19 recession suggests that the European economy could still accelerate in the second half of the year, despite a small slowdown in the Chinese economy and global manufacturing sector. The Origin Of The Pro-Cyclicality Narrative Investors in European markets have long understood that Eurozone equities outperform when the global manufacturing cycle accelerates. This pro-cyclicality of European stocks is a consequence of their heavy weighting toward cyclical and value stocks, such as industrials, consumer discretionary and financials. Chart 1German/US Spreads: Global Manufacturing Cycle Historically, European yields have also moved in a very pro-cyclical fashion. Over the past 30 years, periods when German 10-year yields rose relative to that of US Treasury Notes have coincided with an improvement in the global manufacturing sector as approximated by the ISM Manufacturing survey (Chart 1). Investors also understand that the euro is a pro-cyclical currency. Some of this behavior reflects the counter-cyclicality of the US dollar. However, if German yields rise more than US ones when global growth improves and European equities outperform under similar conditions, the euro naturally attracts inflows when the global manufacturing sector strengthens. Chart 2China Is A Key Determinant Of European Activity Ultimately, the responsiveness of the euro and European assets to global growth is rooted in the nature of the European economy. Trade and manufacturing account for nearly 40% and 14% of GDP, respectively, compared to 26% and 11% for the US. This economic specialization has made Europe extremely sensitive to the gyrations of the Chinese economy, the largest contributor to fluctuation in the global demand for capital goods. As Chart 2 highlights, European IP and PMI outperform the US when China’s marginal propensity to consume (as approximated by the growth in M1 relative to M2) picks up. Is The Pro-Cyclical Narrative Still Valid? Despite the euro area debt crisis and the slow health and fiscal policy response of European authorities to COVID-19, evidence suggests that the Eurozone’s pro-cyclicality is only increasing. Chart 3Europe Is Becoming More Sensitive To The Rest Of The World Europe Is Becoming More Sensitive To The Rest Of The World A simple statistical analysis confirms this hypothesis. A look at the beta of European GDP growth against the Global PMI reveals that the sensitivity of Eurozone growth and German growth to the Global PMI has steadily increased over the past 20 years (Chart 3, top panel). Moreover, the beta of euro area growth to the global PMI is now higher than that of the US, despite a considerably lower potential GDP growth, which means that a greater proportion of the Eurozone’s GDP growth is affected by globally-driven fluctuations. The bottom panel of Chart 3 shows a more volatile but similar relationship with Chinese economic activity. Correlation analysis confirms that Europe remains very sensitive to global factors. Currently, the rolling correlation of a regression of Eurozone GDP growth versus that of China stands near 0.7, which is comparable to levels that prevailed between 2005 and 2012. The correlation between German and Chinese GDP growth is now higher than at any point during the past two decades. Chart 4The Declining Role Of Consumption The increasing influence of global economic variables on the European economy reflects the evolution of the composition of the Eurozone’s GDP. Over the past 11 years, the share of consumption within GDP has decreased from 57% to 52%. For comparison’s sake, consumption accounts for 71% of US GDP. The two sectors that have taken the primacy away from consumption are capex and net exports, whose combined share has grown from 22% to 26% of GDP (Chart 4). This shift in the composition of GDP echoes the structural forces facing the Eurozone. An ageing population, a banking system focused on rebuilding its balance sheet, and the tackling of the competitiveness problems of peripheral economies have hurt wage growth, consumption and imports. Meanwhile, exports have remained on a stable trend, thanks to both the comparative vigor of the euro area’s trading partners and a cheap euro. Therefore, net exports expanded. Capex benefited from the strength in European exports. A Granger causality test reveals that consumption has little impact on fixed-capital formation in the euro area. However, the same method shows that fluctuations in export growth cause changes in investment. This makes sense. The variance in exports is an important contributor to the variability of Eurozone profits (Chart 5). Thus, rising exports incentivize the European corporate sector to expand its capital stock to fulfill foreign demand. The expanding share of output created by exports and capex along with the role of exports as a driver of capex explains why Europe economic activity is bound to remain so sensitive to the fluctuations in global trade and manufacturing activity. Moreover, the capex/exports interplay even affects consumption. As Chart 6 shows, the growth of euro area personal expenditures often bottoms after the annual rate of change of the new orders of capital goods has troughed, which reflects the role of exports as a driver of European income. Chart 5Profits And Exports Chart 6Consumption Doesn't Move In A Vacuum Bottom Line: European economic activity remains a high beta play on global and Chinese growth. The decrease in consumption to the benefit of exports and capex explains why this reality will not change anytime soon. 2021, An Idiosyncratic Year? In 2021, consumption will be the key input to the European economic performance, despite the long-term relationship between European GDP and foreign economic activity. This will allow European growth to narrow some of its gap with the US and the rest of the world in the second half of this year and the first half of 2022, even if the global manufacturing sector comes off its boil soon. The 2020 recession was unique. In a normal recession, capex, real estate investment, spending on durable goods and the manufacturing sector are the main contributors to the decline in GDP. This time, consumption and the service sector generated most of the contraction in output. These two sectors also caused the second dip in GDP following the tightening of lockdown measures across Europe last winter. Once the more recent wave of lockdowns is behind us, consumption will most likely slingshot to higher levels. More than the US, where the economy has been partially open for months now, Europe remains replete with significant pent-up demand. Obviously, fulfilling this demand will require further progress in the European vaccination campaign, something we recently discussed. Chart 7The Money Supply Forecasts A Rapid Recovery The surge in M1 also points to a sharp rebound in consumption once governments lift the current lockdowns (Chart 7). M1 is a much more reliable predictor of economic activity in Europe than in the US, because disintermediation is not as prevalent in the Eurozone, where banks account for 72% and 88% of corporate and household credit, respectively, compared to 32% and 29% in the US. We cannot dismiss the explosion in the money supply as only a function of the ECB’s actions. European banks are in much better shape today than they were 10 years ago. Non-performing loans have been steadily decreasing. A rise in delinquencies is likely in the coming quarters due to the pandemic; however, the EUR3 trillion in credit guarantees by governments will limit the damages to the private sector’s and banking system’s balance sheets. Moreover, the Tier-1 capital ratio of the banking system ranges between 14% for Spain and 17% for Germany, well above the 10.5% threshold set by Basel-III (Chart 8). In this context, the pick-up in money supply mirrored credit flows. Thus, even if some of that credit reflects precautionary demand, the likelihood is high that a significant proportion of the built-up cash balances will find its way into the economy. Another positive sign for consumption comes from European confidence surveys. Despite tighter lockdown measures, consumer confidence has sharply rebounded, which historically heralds stronger consumption. Moreover, according to the ECB’s loan survey, stronger consumer confidence is causing an improvement in credit demand, which foreshadows a decline in savings intentions, especially now that wage growth is stabilizing (Chart 9). Nonetheless, there is still a risk that the advance in wages peters off. The recent wage agreement reached by Germany’s IG Metall union in North Rhine Westphalia was a paltry 1.3% annual pay raise, and once the Kurzarbeit programs end, the true level of labor market slack will become evident. However, for consumption to grow, all that we need to see now is stable wage growth, even if at a low rate.  Chart 8European Banks Are Feeling Better Chart 9Confidence Points To Stronger Consumption Beyond consumption, Europe’s fiscal policy will be positive compared to the US next year. The NGEU plan will add roughly 1% to GDP in both 2021 and 2022. As a result, the Eurozone’s net fiscal drag should be no greater than 1% of GDP next year. This compares to a fiscal thrust of -7% in the US in 2022, even after factoring in the new “American Jobs Act” proposed by the Biden Administration last week, according to our US Political Strategy team. Bottom Line: The revival in European consumption in the second half of 2021 and the first half of 2022 will allow the gap between European and global growth to narrow. This dynamic will be reinforced next year, when the fiscal drag will be lower in Europe than in the US. These forces will create a rare occasion when European growth will improve despite a deceleration (albeit a modest one) in global manufacturing activity. Investment Conclusions The continued sensitivity of the euro area economy to the global industrial and trade cycle indicates that over the long-term, European assets will remain beholden to the gyrations of global growth. In other words, the euro and European stocks will outperform in periods of accelerating global manufacturing activity, as they have done over the past 30 years. The next 12 to 18 month may nonetheless defy this bigger picture, allowing European assets to generate alpha for global investors. Chart 10The Euro Will Like Idiosyncratic European Growth First, the gap between US and euro area growth will narrow over the coming 12 to 18 months, thus the euro will remain well bid, even if the maximum acceleration in global industrial activity lies behind. As investors re-assess their view of European economic activity and the current period of maximum relative pessimism passes, inflows into the euro area will accelerate and the euro will appreciate (Chart 10). Hence, we continue to see the recent phase of weakness in EUR/USD as transitory. Second, European equities have scope to outperform US ones over that window. Some of that anticipated outperformance reflects our positive stance on the euro. However, a consumption-driven economic bounce will be positive for European financials as well. Such a recovery will let investors ratchet down their estimates of credit losses in the financial system. Moreover, banks are well capitalized, thus the ECB will permit the resumption of dividend payments. Under these circumstances, European banks have scope to outperform US ones temporarily, especially since Eurozone banks trade at a 56% discount to their transatlantic rivals on a price-to-book basis. An outperformance of financials will be key for Europe’s performance. Chart 11German/US Spreads Near Equilibrium? Finally, we could enter a period of stability in US/German yield spreads over the coming months. The ECB remains steadfast at limiting the upside in European risk-free rates, as Christine Lagarde reiterated last week. However, BCA’s US bond strategist, Ryan Swift, believes US yields will enter a temporary plateau, as the Federal Reserve will not adjust rates until well after the US economy has reached full employment. Hence, the Fed is unlikely to let the OIS curve bring forward the date of the first hike currently priced in for August 2022 on a durable basis, which also limits the upside to US yields. Thus, looking at core CPI and policy rate differences, US yields have reached a temporary equilibrium relative to Germany (Chart 11).   Mathieu Savary, Chief European Investment Strategist Mathieu@bcaresearch.com