Monetario
Three cuts and done. This is very reminiscent of the 1995 and 1998 mid-cycle slowdowns. By flagging policy as being “appropriate” and “accommodative”, Fed Chair Jerome Powell indicated that the Fed will not cut rates anymore, unless global and U.S. growth…
Following the BoC’s press conference, Canadian 10-year yields collapsed 15 basis points and the CAD depreciated 0.6% versus the USD, on a day when the greenback was weak. During Governor Poloz's press conference, market participants latched on to the mention…
Highlights Declining uncertainty over policy, stabilizing growth in China and improvements in international liquidity, all will allow global economic activity to pick up in the months ahead. A weak dollar will reinforce this positive economic outlook; investors should favor pro-cyclical currencies such as the AUD, NZD and SEK. Bond yields will rise and stocks will outperform bonds on a 12- to 18-month basis. Cyclical stocks are more attractive than defensives. European stocks will outperform U.S. equities and European financials will shine. Copper is a promising buy; stay long the silver-to-gold ratio. Feature The outlook for risk assets and bond yields hinges on global economic activity. The S&P 500 has hit a new high, but our BCA Equity Scorecard Indicator remains non-committal towards stocks (Chart I-1). If global economic activity improves, the Scorecard will begin to flash a clear buy signal, but if growth deteriorates, the indicator will point towards sell. Chart I-1Stocks Could Go Either Way Cautious optimism is in order. Politics, China, liquidity conditions and the dollar collectively will determine the global economic outlook. The liquidity backdrop has significantly improved, political uncertainty should recede and China will morph from a headwind to a modest tailwind. A weak dollar will indicate that the world is healing, and also will ease global financial conditions which will facilitate economic strength. We remain committed to a positive stance on equities on a 12- to 18-month horizon, and recommend below-benchmark duration in fixed-income portfolios. Cyclicals should outperform defensives, European banks offer an attractive tactical buying opportunity and European equities will outperform their U.S. counterparts. Heightened Risks… Chart I-2Risks To The Economy And Stocks Many domestic indicators overstate the intrinsic fragility in the U.S. The Duncan LEI, which is the ratio of consumer durable spending and residential and business investment to final sales, has flattened. Therefore, the S&P 500 looks vulnerable and real GDP may contract (Chart I-2). CEO confidence and small business capex intentions warn of a looming retrenchment in household income (Chart I-2, bottom two panels). If consumer spending weakens, then a recession will be unavoidable. As worrisome as these indicators may be, we previously discussed that the major debt imbalances that often precede U.S. recessions are absent,1 the rebound in housing starts and homebuilding confidence is inconsistent with a restrictive monetary stance,2 and pipeline inflationary pressures are absent.3 Instead, business confidence and the Duncan LEI have been eroded by heightened political uncertainty and weak global manufacturing and trade. … Meet Receding Policy Uncertainty … The two biggest sources of policy uncertainty affecting markets, the Sino-U.S. trade war and Brexit, are diminishing. However, the U.S. election will continue to lurk in the background. Chart I-3Weaker Brexit Support = No Hard Brexit Support Brexit Westminster and Britain’s Supreme Court have rebuked U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s threat of a “No-Deal” Brexit. Moreover, parliamentary support for his latest plan, which essentially keeps Northern Ireland’s economy within the EU, indicates that the probability of a “No-Deal” Brexit has collapsed to less than 5%. This assessment is reinforced by the delay of Brexit to January 31, 2020. An election is scheduled for December 12 and the chance of a new referendum to vet the deal is escalating. According to Matt Gertken, BCA’s Geopolitical Strategist, an election does not increase the risk of a hard Brexit. Meanwhile, support for Brexit is near its lowest point since the June 2016 referendum (Chart I-3). Thus, a new plebiscite would not favor a “No Deal” Brexit. Sino-U.S. Trade War Chart I-4Why The Trade-War Ceasefire? The trade war truce will also greatly diminish economic uncertainty. Uncertainty created by the China-U.S. conflict accentuated the collapse in business confidence and capex intentions. The “phase one deal” announced earlier this month will likely materialize. The White House’s tactical retreat on trade is tied to U.S. President Donald Trump’s desire for a second term. He cannot risk inflicting further economic pain on his base of constituents. Weekly earnings are decreasing for workers in swing states located in the industrial rust belt, especially in those areas that Trump carried in 2016 (Chart I-4). Those swing states are most affected by the slowdown in the global manufacturing and trade sectors. Beijing is also motivated to agree to truce due to its soft economy and deflationary pressures. An easing in trade uncertainty will be positive for the domestic economy. China’s willingness to replace Carrie Lam, the embattled Chief Executive of Hong Kong, and to withdraw the extradition bill at the heart of the protests confirms its eagerness to come to an agreement with the U.S. China’s readiness to make a deal is also made evident by its increasing imports of U.S. agricultural products (Chart I-4, bottom panel). Ultimately, the U.S. will not implement tariffs in December on $160 billion of Chinese shipments. Consequently, investors and businesses should become less concerned about the chances of a worsening trade war. Moreover, chances are growing of a decrease (but not a complete annulation) of the previously imposed U.S. tariffs on China. … And A Q1 2020 Acceleration In Global Growth Global economic activity will improve in Q1 2020 because the drag from China will dissipate and global liquidity conditions will improve. Many activity indicators increasingly reflect these fundamental supports. China China’s economy has reached a new low point: Q3 annual GDP growth is at a 27-year low of 6%, capital spending is weak, industrial production and profits show little life, the labor market is soft, and imports and exports continue to contract. However, a turn in policy has materialized, which will protect the domestic economy. Moreover, this summer’s Politburo and State Council statements showed an increased willingness to reflate the economy. The global economy will accelerate in Q1 2020. Credit creation has stabilized and monetary conditions have eased (Chart I-5). Faced with producer price inflation of -1.2% and employment PMIs of 47.3 and 48.2 in the manufacturing and non-manufacturing sectors, respectively, authorities have allowed the credit impulse to improve to 26% of GDP from a low of 23.8%. In accordance with this new policy direction, the drag from the shadow banking system’s contraction will slow considerably, thanks to a stabilization in both the growth rate of deposits of non-depository financial institutions and the issuance of bonds by small financial institutions. Additionally, the emission of local government bonds will accelerate. Beijing has also meaningfully eased fiscal policy, which is its preferred reflationary tool. Policymakers have cut taxes by 2.8% of GDP in the past two years. The marginal propensity of households to consume is trying to bottom (Chart I-5, bottom). If history is a guide, the acceleration in the rate of change of public-sector capex will fuel this turnaround in China’s marginal propensity to consume, and push up BCA’s China Activity Indicator (Chart I-6). Chart I-5Overlooked Chinese Improvements Chart I-6Public Investment Matters Chart I-7A Bottom In Chinese Exports Growth? China’s economy is unlikely to bounce back as violently as in 2009, 2012 or 2016. Authorities are much more circumspect in their use of credit to reflate the economy than they were previously. Moreover, the regulatory environment will prevent a boom in the shadow banking system. Nonetheless, the fiscal push and the end of the decline in aggregate credit growth will allow the Chinese economy to stabilize and maybe pick up a bit. Therefore, China will move from a large headwind to a slight tailwind for global activity (Chart I-7, top panel). Mounting public capex also points toward a modest global recovery (Chart I-7, middle panel). Finally, the upturn in our Chinese reflation indicator, which incorporates both fiscal and monetary policy, points to a re-acceleration in U.S. capex intentions (Chart I-7, bottom panel). Global Liquidity Global liquidity conditions continue to improve and the global economy should soon respond within normal policy lags. 95% of central banks are loosening policy, which normally leads to an escalation in global activity (Chart I-8). The dominant central banks (the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan) will not tighten anytime soon. Inflation expectations in the U.S., the euro area and Japan stand at 1.9%, 1.1%, and 0.2%, respectively, well below levels consistent with a 2% inflation target. Moreover, U.S. core CPI has been perky, but both the ISM and the performance of transportation equities relative to utilities indicate that a deceleration in inflation is imminent (Chart I-9). Salaries are not yet inflationary either because U.S. real wages are growing in line with productivity (Chart I-9, bottom panel). In the euro area and Japan, realized core inflation remains at 1.0% and 0.5%, respectively, and supports the dovish message emanating from inflation expectations. Chart I-8Easier Global Policy Is Important Chart I-9If Inflation Peaks, The U.S. Economy Will Breath A Sigh Of Relief Liquidity indicators are reflecting this accommodative policy setting. The growth of U.S. and European bank deposits has reaccelerated from 2.5% to 6%, a development linked to the exit of a soft patch (Chart I-10). Moreover, BCA’s U.S. Financial Liquidity Indicator is still moving higher and flashing a resurgence in the BCA Global Leading Economic Indicator (LEI), the ISM Manufacturing Index, commodity prices, and EM export prices (Chart I-11). Finally, U.S. and global excess money reinforce the message of BCA’s U.S. Financial liquidity Indicator (Chart I-12). Chart I-10Deposits Suggest The Worst Of The Slowdown Is Behind Us Chart I-11Continued Pick-Up In Financial Liquidity The Fed will add to the supply of global liquidity by tackling the repo market’s seize-up. Depleting excess reserves and mounting financing needs among primary dealers resulted in the September surge in the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR). The Fed announced three weeks ago it would buy $60 billion per month of T-Bills and T-Notes, which will lead to a climbing stock of excess reserves. Higher excess reserves create a weaker dollar, stronger EM currencies and firming global PMIs (Chart I-13). Ultimately, EM currency strength eases EM financial conditions, which supports global growth (Chart I-13, bottom panel). Chart I-12Excess Liquidity Is Accelerating Chart I-13U.S. Excess Reserves Will Grow Again Borrowing activity in Advanced Economies is showing signs of life. Bank credit is already responding to the drop in global yields, and global corporate bond issuance in September 2019 rose to $434 billion. In the U.S., new issues of corporate bonds have also reaccelerated (Chart I-14). Global Growth Indicators Crucial indicators of global economic activity are picking up on this improving fundamental backdrop. The list includes: A sharp takeoff in the annualized three-month rate of change of capital goods orders in the U.S., the Eurozone and Japan (Chart I-15, top panel). Improvement in this indicator precedes progress in the annual growth rate of orders and in capex itself. Chart I-14Borrowers Are Responding To Easier Financial Conditions Chart I-15Some Green Shoots Are Coming Through Chart I-16Positive Market Signals A significant upturn in the Philly Fed, Empire State, and Richmond Fed manufacturing surveys for October, which sends a positive signal for the ISM Manufacturing Index (Chart I-15, second panel). Moreover, the new orders and employment components of these surveys indicate that cyclical sectors of the economy will recover and the recent deterioration in employment conditions will be fleeting. A rebound in BCA’s EM economic diffusion index, which incorporates 23 variables. Such an increase usually precedes inflections in global industrial production (Chart I-15, bottom panel). An acceleration – both in absolute and relative terms - in the annual appreciation of Taiwanese stocks. A strong and outperforming Taiwanese equity market is a harbinger of firmer PMIs (Chart I-16, top two panels). A solid performance of EM carry trades financed in yen, European luxury equities, and the relative performance of global semiconductors, materials and industrial stocks, which signal stronger global PMIs (Chart I-16, bottom three panels). Bottom Line: The global economy will accelerate in Q1 2020. A melting probability of a “No-Deal” Brexit and a truce in the Sino-U.S. trade war will allow global uncertainty to recede. Concurrently, China’s economic slowdown is ending and global liquidity conditions are improving. The Dollar As The Arbiter Of Growth Chart I-17The Dollar Is A Counter-Cyclical Currency The dollar faces potent headwinds. The greenback is a countercyclical currency; a business cycle upswing and a weak USD go hand in hand (Chart I-17). The tightness of this relationship results from a powerful feedback loop: weak growth boosts the dollar, but the dollar’s strength foments additional economic slowdown. Global liquidity and activity indicators signal a weaker dollar because they point toward an economic recovery. BCA’s U.S. Financial Liquidity Index, which foresaw a deceleration in the greenback’s rate of appreciation, is calling for an outright depreciation (Chart I-18, top panel). The expanding holdings of securities on U.S. commercial banks’ balance sheets (a key measure of liquidity) corroborates this message. According to a model based on the U.S., Eurozone, Japanese and Chinese broad money supply, the USD should significantly depreciate in the coming 12 months (Chart I-18, third panel). Finally, our EM Economic Diffusion Index validates pressures on the greenback, especially against commodity currencies (Chart I-18, bottom two panels). Chart I-18Liquidity And Growth Indicators Point To A Weaker Dollar Growth differentials support this picture. Late last year, the stimulating effect of President Trump’s tax cuts allowed the U.S. to temporarily diverge from a weak global economy, but the U.S. manufacturing sector is now succumbing to the global slowdown. Once global growth snaps back, the U.S. is likely to lag behind as fiscal policy is becoming more stimulative outside the U.S. than in the U.S. Based on historical delays, this will continue to hurt the dollar (Chart I-19, top panel). Finally, the European economy generally outperforms the U.S. when China reflates, especially if Beijing’s push lifts the growth rate of M1 relative to M2, a proxy for China’s aggregate marginal propensity to consume (Chart I-20). Europe’s greater cyclicality reflects is larger exposure to both trade and manufacturing compared with the U.S. Chart I-19A Global Growth Convergence Will Hurt The Dollar Chart I-20European Growth To Rise Vis-A-Vis The U.S. The greenback is expensive and technically vulnerable, which compounds its cyclical risk. The trade-weighted dollar is at a 25% premium to its purchasing power parity equilibrium (PPP), an overvaluation comparable to its 1985 and 2002 peaks. Moreover, our Composite Technical Indicator is overextended and has formed a negative divergence with the price of the dollar (see page 54, Section III). Finally, speculators are massively long the U.S. Dollar Index (DXY). Balance-of-payment flows also flash a significant downside in the dollar (Chart I-21). The U.S. current account deficit stands at 2.5% of GDP, but it is widening in response to the dollar’s overvaluation and the White House’s expansive fiscal policy. Since 2011, foreign direct investments (FDI) have been the main driver of the dollar’s gyrations. Last year, net FDI surged in response to profit repatriations encouraged by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, while portfolio flows stayed in neutral territory. This regulatory change had a one-off impact and FDI will begin to dry out. Therefore, financing the widening current account deficit will become harder. Finally, after years in the red, net portfolio flows into Europe have turned positive (Chart I-21, bottom panel). The USD’s depreciation will ease global financial conditions and supports growth further. In this context, interest rate differentials are noteworthy. The two-year spread in real rates between the U.S. and the rest of the G-10 has fallen significantly since October 2018. Reversals in real rates herald a weaker dollar, especially when it faces valuation, technical and flow handicaps. Moreover, European five-year forward short rate expectations are near record lows. If global growth can stabilize, then the five-year forward one-month OIS will pick up, especially relative to the U.S. An uptick will boost the EUR/USD pair and hurt the dollar (Chart I-22). Chart I-21Balance-Of-Payments Dynamics Turning Against The USD Chart I-22Relative Long-Term Rate Expectations And The Euro The three most pro-cyclical currencies in the G-10 – the AUD, NZD and SEK - strengthen the most when BCA’s Global LEI bottoms but global inflation slows (Chart I-23). The GBP will likely generate a much stronger-than-normal performance next year. Cable trades at a 22% discount to PPP. It is also 19% cheap versus short-term interest rate parity models. The absence of a “No-Deal” Brexit should allow these risk premia to dissipate and the pound to recover. The CAD is also more attractive than Chart I-23 implies. The loonie is trading 10% below its PPP, and the USD/CAD often lags the EUR/CAD, a pair that has broken down (Chart I-24). Chart I-23Currency Performance As A Function Of Growth And Inflation Chart I-24EUR/CAD Flashing A Bearish USD/CAD Signal Bottom Line: A rebound in the global manufacturing sector next year will hurt the USD. The dollar is particularly vulnerable because growth differentials between the U.S. and the rest of the world have melted, the greenback is expensive, balance-of-payment dynamics are deteriorating and interest rate differentials are becoming less supportive. The USD’s depreciation will ease global financial conditions and supports growth further. Additional Investment Implications Bond Yields Have More Upside While the short-term outlook for bonds remains murky, the 12- to 18-month outlook is unambiguously bearish. The BCA Bond Valuation Index is still consistent with much higher U.S. yields in the next 12-18 months (see Section III, page 51). BCA’s Composite Technical Indicator for T-Notes is massively overbought and sentiment, as approximated by the Long-Term Interest Rates component of the ZEW survey, is overly bullish (Chart I-25). Thus, bonds represent an attractive cyclical sell. The Fed will not cut rates aggressively enough for bonds to ignore these valuation and technical risks. Treasurys have outperformed cash by 7.5% in the past year. Based on historical relationships, the Fed needs to cut rates to zero for bonds to beat cash in the coming 12 months (Chart I-26). After this week’s Fed cut to 1.75%, our base case is none to maybe one more rate cut. Chart I-25Sentiment Points To Yield Upside Chart I-26The Fed Must Cut To Zero For T-Notes To Outperform Cash Further Bond yields will need a recession to move lower. The deviation of 10-year Treasury yields from their two-year moving average closely tracks the Swedish Economic Diffusion Index (Chart I-27, top panel). Sweden, a small, open economy highly levered to the global industrial cycle, is a good gauge of the global business cycle. The broad weakness in the Swedish economy is unlikely to worsen unless the global slowdown morphs into a deep recession. Even if global growth remains mediocre, Sweden’s Economic Diffusion Index will rise along with yields. The expansion in securities holdings of U.S. commercial banks and the stabilization in China’s credit flows both support this notion (Chart I-27, bottom panel). Financial market developments also point to higher yields. Sectors that typically capture the momentum in the global economy are perking up. For example, bottoms in the annual performance of European luxury equities or Taiwanese stocks have preceded increases in yields (Chart I-28). Chart I-27Yields Have Upside Chart I-28Key Financial Market Signals For Yields Stocks Will Outperform Bonds Our conviction is strengthening that equities will outperform bonds. The total return of the stock-to-bond ratio has upside. BCA’s Global Economic and Financial Diffusion Index has rallied sharply, which often precedes an ascent in the stock-to-bond ratio, both in the U.S. and globally (Chart I-29). Bonds are much more expensive than stocks, therefore, only a recession will allow stocks to underperform in the coming 12 to 18 months. The environment is positive for equities. BCA’s Monetary Indicator is very elevated and our Composite Sentiment Indicator shows little complacency toward stocks among investors (see Section III, page 47). Finally, the strength in the U.S. Financial Liquidity Indicator supports the S&P 500’s returns (Chart I-30). Chart I-29Cyclical Indicators Argue In Favor Of Stocks Over Bonds Chart I-30Liquidity Tailwind For The S&P 500 A few market developments are noteworthy. 55.6% of the S&P 500’s constituents have reported Q3 earnings, and 74% of those firms are beating estimates. Moreover, the market is generously rewarding firms with the largest positive earnings surprises. Additionally, the Value Line Geometric Index is forming a reverse head-and-shoulder pattern, while the relative performance of the Russell 2000 has formed a double bottom (Chart I-31). The environment also favors cyclicals relative to defensive equities. By lifting bond yields, stronger economic activity leads to a contraction in the multiples of defensives relative to cyclicals. The latter’s earnings expectations respond more positively to reviving economic activity, which creates an offset to climbing discount rates. As a result, cyclicals often outperform defensives when the stock-to-bond ratio increases, or after Taiwanese equities gain momentum (Chart I-32). Chart I-31Improving Equity Market Dynamics Chart I-32Favor Cyclicals Over Defensives Compared to other equity markets, the U.S. faces the most challenges. Our model forecasts a 3% annual drop in the S&P 500’s operating earnings in June 2020, and the deviation of U.S. equities from their 200-day moving average has greatly diverged from net earnings revisions (Chart I-33). U.S. equities have already discounted a turnaround in earnings. Moreover, the S&P 500’s margins have downside, a topic covered by BCA’s Chief Equity Strategist Anastasios Avgeriou.4 Our Composite Margin Proxy, Operating Margins Diffusion Index and Corporate Pricing Power Indicator all remain weak (Chart I-34). Downward pressure on margins will limit how rapidly earnings respond when a rebound in global economic activity lifts revenues. Finally, the S&P 500 trades at a historically elevated forward P/E ratio of 18.4, the MSCI EAFE trade at a much more reasonable 14-times forward earnings. Chart I-33Headwinds For U.S. Stocks Chart I-34Headwinds For U.S. Margins The tech sector will also weigh on the performance of U.S. equities relative to international stocks. Tech stocks represent 22.5% of the U.S. benchmark, compared with 9.7% for the euro area. Anastasios recently argued that software spending has remained surprisingly resilient despite the global economic slowdown; it will likely lag spending on machinery and structures when the cycle picks up.5 Consequently, tech earnings will lag other traditional cyclical sectors. Moreover, tech multiples will suffer when the dollar depreciates and bond yields rise (Chart I-35). As high-growth stocks, tech equities derive a large proportion of their intrinsic value from long-term deferred cash flows and their terminal value. Thus, tech multiples are highly sensitive to discount factors. Unaffected by those negatives, European equities will benefit most from the outperformance of stocks relative to bonds. A weak dollar will be the first positive for the common-currency returns of European equities. Valuations are the second tailwind. The risk premium for European equities is 300 basis points higher than for U.S. stocks. Moreover, U.S. margins will likely diminish relative to the Eurozone’s because of stronger unit labor costs in the U.S. Sector composition will also dictate the performance of European equities. Compared with the U.S., Europe is underweight tech and healthcare stocks, a defensive sector (Table I-1). Investors who favor Europe will also bet against these two sectors. Europe is a wager on the other cyclical sectors: materials, industrials, energy and financials. Chart I-35Tech P/Es Are At Risk Table I-1Europe Overweights The Correct Cyclicals European financials are particularly attractive. Negative European yields are a major handicap for European financials, but this handicap is already reflected in their price. European banks trade at a price-to-book ratio of 0.6 versus 1.3 for the U.S. This discount should be narrowing, not widening. Yields are bottoming and European loan growth is contracting at a -2% annual rate relative to the U.S. versus -8.6% five years ago. Meanwhile, the annual rate of change of European deposits is in line with the U.S. The attraction of European banks comes from the outlook for their return on tangible equity. A model shows that three variables govern European banks’ ROE: German yields, Italian spreads and the momentum of the silver-to-gold ratio (SGR). German yields impact net interest margins, Italian spreads drive peripheral financial conditions and thus, loan generation in the European periphery, and the SGR tracks the global manufacturing cycle (silver has more industrial uses than gold, but is equally sensitive to real yields), which affects loan flows in the European core. This model logically tracks the performance of European banks and financials (Chart I-36). Our positive outlook on global growth and yields, along with the fall in Italian spreads, augurs well for cheap European financial equities and banks in particular. Commodities Our constructive stance on the global business cycle and yields, plus our negative view on the greenback, is consistent with higher industrial commodity prices. Copper looks particularly attractive. Speculators are aggressively selling the metal, whose price stands at an important technical juncture (Chart I-37). Chart I-36The Drivers Of RoE Point To Higher European Bank Stock Prices Chart I-37Cooper Is An Attractive Play On Global Growth Chart I-38Favorable Technical Backdrop For Silver-To-Gold Ratio Finally, we have favored the SGR since late June. Silver is deeply oversold and under-owned relative to the yellow metal (Chart I-38). Consequently, silver’s greater industrial usage should be a potent tailwind for the SGR.6 Mathieu Savary Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst October 31, 2019 Next Report: November 22, 2019 - Outlook 2020 II. Back To The Nineteenth Century The Cold War is a limited analogy for the U.S.-China conflict; In a multipolar world, complete bifurcation of trade is difficult if not impossible; History suggests that trade between rivals will continue, with minimal impediments; On a secular horizon, buy defense stocks, Europe, capex, and non-aligned countries. There is a growing consensus that China and the U.S. are hurtling towards a Cold War. BCA Research played some part in this consensus – at least as far as the investment community is concerned – by publishing “Power and Politics in East Asia: Cold War 2.0?” in September 2012.7 For much of this decade, Geopolitical Strategy focused on the thesis that geopolitical risk was rotating out of the Middle East, where it was increasingly irrelevant, to East Asia, where it would become increasingly relevant. This thesis remains cogent, but it does not mean that a “Silicon Curtain” will necessarily divide the world into two bifurcated zones of capitalism. Trade, capital flows, and human exchanges between China and the U.S. will continue and may even grow. But the risk of conflict, including a military one, will not decline. In this report, we first review the geopolitical logic that underpins Sino-American tensions. We then survey the academic literature for clues on how that relationship will develop vis-à-vis trade and economic relations. The evidence from political theory is surprising and highly investment relevant. We then look back at history for clues as to what this means for investors. The U.S.-China conflict will not lead to complete bifurcation of the global economy. Our conclusion is that it is highly likely that the U.S. and China will continue to be geopolitical rivals. However, due to the geopolitical context of multipolarity, it is unlikely that the result will be “Bifurcated Capitalism.” Rather, we expect an exciting and volatile environment for investors where geopolitics takes its historical place alongside valuation, momentum, fundamentals, and macroeconomics in the pantheon of factors that determine investment opportunities and risks. The Thucydides Trap Is Real … Speaking in the Reichstag in 1897, German Foreign Secretary Bernhard von Bülow proclaimed that it was time for Germany to demand “its own place in the sun.”8 The occasion was a debate on Germany’s policy towards East Asia. Bülow soon ascended to the Chancellorship under Kaiser Wilhelm II and oversaw the evolution of German foreign policy from Realpolitik to Weltpolitik. While Realpolitik was characterized by Germany’s cautious balancing of global powers under Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, Weltpolitik saw Bülow and Wilhelm II seek to redraw the status quo through aggressive foreign and trade policy. Imperial Germany joined a long list of antagonists, from Athens to today’s People’s Republic of China, in the tragic play of human history dubbed the “Thucydides Trap.”9 Chart II-1Imperial Overstretch The underlying concept is well known to all students of world history. It takes its name from the Greek historian Thucydides and his seminal History of the Peloponnesian War. Thucydides explains why Sparta and Athens went to war but, unlike his contemporaries, he does not moralize or blame the gods. Instead, he dispassionately describes how the conflict between a revisionist Athens and established Sparta became inevitable due to a cycle of mistrust. Graham Allison, one of America’s preeminent scholars of international relations, has argued that the interplay between a status quo power and a challenger has almost always led to conflict. In 12 out of the 16 cases he surveyed, actual military conflict broke out. Of the four cases where war did not develop, three involved transitions between countries that shared a deep cultural affinity and a respect for the prevailing institutions.10 In those cases, the transition was a case of new management running largely the same organizational structure. And one of the four non-war outcomes was nothing less than the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the U.S. The fundamental problem for a status quo power is that its empire or “sphere of influence” remains the same size as when it stood at the zenith of power. However, its decline in a relative sense leads to a classic problem of “imperial overstretch.” The hegemonic or imperial power erroneously doubles down on maintaining a status quo that it can no longer afford (Chart II-1). The challenger power is not blameless. It senses weakness in the hegemon and begins to develop a regional sphere of influence. The problem is that regional hegemony is a perfect jumping off point towards global hegemony. And while the challenger’s intentions may be limited and restrained (though they often are ambitious and overweening), the status quo power must react to capabilities, not intentions. The former are material and real, whereas the latter are perceived and ephemeral. In a multipolar world, the U.S. will not be able to exclude China from the global system. The challenging power always has an internal logic justifying its ambitions. In China’s case today, there is a sense among the elite that the country is merely mean-reverting to the way things were for many centuries in China’s and Asia’s long history (Chart II-2). In other words, China is a “challenger” power only if one describes the status quo as the past three hundred years. It is the “established” power if one goes back to an earlier state of affairs. As such, the consensus in China is that it should not have to pay deference to the prevailing status quo given that the contemporary context is merely the result of western imperialist “challenges” to the established Chinese and regional order. Chart II-2China’s Mean Reverting Narrative In addition, China has a legitimate claim that it is at least as relevant to the global economy as the U.S. and therefore deserves a greater say in global governance. While the U.S. still takes a larger share of the global economy, China has contributed 23% to incremental global GDP over the past two decades, compared to 13% for the U.S. (Chart II-3). Chart II-3The Beijing Consensus Bottom Line: The emerging tensions between China and the U.S. fit neatly into the theoretical and empirical outlines of the Thucydides Trap. We do not see any way for the two countries to avoid struggle and conflict on a secular or forecastable horizon. What does this mean for investors? For one, the secular tailwinds behind defense stocks will persist. But what beyond that? Is the global economy destined to witness complete bifurcation into two armed camps separated by a Silicon Curtain? Will the Alibaba and Amazon Pacts suspiciously glare at each other the way that NATO and Warsaw Pacts did amidst the Cold War? The answer, tentatively, is no. … But It Will Not Lead To Economic Bifurcation President Trump’s aggressive trade policy also fits neatly into political theory, to a point. Realism in political science focuses on relative gains over absolute gains in all relationships, including trade. This is because trade leads to economic prosperity, prosperity to the accumulation of economic surplus, and economic surplus to military spending, research, and development. Two states that care only about relative gains due to rivalry produce a zero-sum game with no room for cooperation. It is a “Prisoner’s Dilemma” that can lead to sub-optimal economic outcomes in which both actors chose not to cooperate. Diagram II-1 illustrates the effects of relative gain calculations on the trade behavior of states. In the absence of geopolitics, demand (Q3) is satisfied via trade (Q3-Q0) due to the inability of domestic production (Q0) to meet it. Diagram II-1Trade War In A Bipolar World However, geopolitical externality – a rivalry with another state – raises the marginal social cost of imports – i.e. trade allows the rival to gain more out of trade and “catch up” in terms of geopolitical capabilities. The trading state therefore eliminates such externalities with a tariff (t), raising domestic output to Q1, while shrinking demand to Q2, thus reducing imports to merely Q2-Q1, a fraction of where they would be in a world where geopolitics do not matter. The dynamic of relative gains can also have a powerful pull on the hegemon as it begins to weaken and rethink its originally magnanimous trade relations. As political scientist Duncan Snidal argued in a 1991 paper, When the global system is first set up, the hegemon makes deals with smaller states. The hegemon is concerned more with absolute gains, smaller states are more concerned with relative, so they are tougher negotiators. Cooperative arrangements favoring smaller states contribute to relative hegemonic decline. As the unequal distribution of benefits in favor of smaller states helps them catch up to the hegemonic actor, it also lowers the relative gains weight they place on the hegemonic actor. At the same time, declining relative preponderance increases the hegemonic state’s concern for relative gains with other states, especially any rising challengers. The net result is increasing pressure from the largest actor to change the prevailing system to gain a greater share of cooperative benefits.11 History teaches us that trade occurs even amongst rivals and during wartime. The reason small states are initially more concerned with relative gains is because they are far more concerned with national security than the hegemon. The hegemon has a preponderance of power and is therefore more relaxed about its security needs. This explains why Presidents George Bush Sr., Bill Clinton, and George Bush Jr. all made “bad deals” with China. Writing nearly thirty years ago, Snidal cogently described the current U.S.-China trade war. Snidal thought he was describing a coming decade of anarchy. But he and fellow political scientists writing in the early 1990s underestimated American power. The “unipolar moment” of American supremacy was not over, it was just beginning! As such, the dynamic Snidal described took thirty years to come to fruition. When thinking about the transition away from U.S. hegemony, most investors anchor themselves to the Cold War as it is the only world they have known that was not unipolar. Moreover the Cold War provides a simple, bipolar distribution of power that is easy to model through game theory. If this is the world we are about to inhabit, with the U.S. and China dividing the whole planet into spheres like the U.S. and Soviet Union, then the paragraph we lifted from Snidal’s paper would be the end of it. America would abandon globalization in totality, impose a draconian Silicon Curtain around China, and coerce its allies to follow suit. But most of recent human history has been defined by a multipolar distribution of power between states, not a bipolar one. The term “cold war” is applicable to the U.S. and China in the sense that comparable military power may prevent them from fighting a full-blown “hot war.” But ultimately the U.S.-Soviet Cold War is a poor analogy for today’s world. In a multipolar world, Snidal concludes, “states that do not cooperate fall behind other relative gains maximizers that cooperate among themselves. This makes cooperation the best defense (as well as the best offense) when your rivals are cooperating in a multilateral relative gains world.” Snidal shows via formal modeling that as the number of players increases from two, relative-gains sensitivity drops sharply.12 The U.S.-China relationship does not occur in a vacuum — it is moderated by the global context. Today’s global context is one of multipolarity. Multipolarity refers to the distribution of geopolitical power, which is no longer dominated by one or two great powers (Chart II-4). Europe and Japan, for instance, have formidable economies and military capabilities. Russia remains a potent military power, even as India surpasses it in terms of overall geopolitical power. Chart II-4The World Is No Longer Bipolar A multipolar world is the least “ordered” and the most unstable of world systems (Chart II-5). This is for three reasons: Chart II-5Multipolarity Is Messy Math: Multipolarity engenders more potential “conflict dyads” that can lead to conflict. In a unipolar world, there is only one country that determines norms and rules of behavior. Conflict is possible, but only if the hegemon wishes it. In a bipolar world, conflict is possible, but it must align along the axis of the two dominant powers. In a multipolar world, alliances are constantly shifting and producing novel conflict dyads. Lack of coordination: Global coordination suffers in periods of multipolarity as there are more “veto players.” This is particularly problematic during times of stress, such as when an aggressive revisionist power uses force or when the world is faced with an economic crisis. Charles Kindleberger has argued that it was exactly such hegemonic instability that caused the Great Depression to descend into the Second World War in his seminal The World In Depression.13 Mistakes: In a unipolar and bipolar world, there are a very limited number of dice being rolled at once. As such, the odds of tragic mistakes are low and can be mitigated with complex formal relationships (such as U.S.-Soviet Mutually Assured Destruction, grounded in formal modeling of game theory). But in a multipolar world, something as random as an assassination of a dignitary can set in motion a global war. The multipolar system is far more dynamic and thus unpredictable. Diagram II-2 is modified for a multipolar world. Everything is the same, except that we highlight the trade lost to other great powers. The state considering using tariffs to lower the marginal social cost of trading with a rival must account for this “lost trade.” In the context of today’s trade war with China, this would be the sum of all European Airbuses and Brazilian soybeans sold to China in the place of American exports. For China, it would be the sum of all the machinery, electronics, and capital goods produced in the rest of Asia and shipped to the United States. Diagram II-2Trade War In A Multipolar World Could Washington ask its allies – Europe, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc. – not to take advantage of the lucrative trade (Q3-Q0)-(Q2-Q1) lost due to its trade tiff with China? Sure, but empirical research shows that they would likely ignore such pleas for unity. Alliances produced by a bipolar system produce a statistically significant and large impact on bilateral trade flows, a relationship that weakens in a multipolar context. This is the conclusion of a 1993 paper by Joanne Gowa and Edward D. Mansfield.14 The authors draw their conclusion from an 80-year period beginning in 1905, which captures several decades of global multipolarity. Unless the U.S. produces a wholehearted diplomatic effort to tighten up its alliances and enforce trade sanctions – something hardly foreseeable under the current administration – the self-interest of U.S. allies will drive them to continue trading with China. The U.S. will not be able to exclude China from the global system; nor will China be able to achieve Xi Jinping’s vaunted “self-sufficiency.” A risk to our view is that we have misjudged the global system, just as political scientists writing in the early 1990s did. To that effect, we accept that Charts II-1 and II-4 do not really support a view that the world is in a balanced multipolar state. The U.S. clearly remains the most powerful country in the world. The problem is that it is also clearly in a relative decline and that its sphere of influence is global – and thus very expensive – whereas its rivals have merely regional ambitions (for the time being). As such, we concede that American hegemony could be reasserted relatively quickly, but it would require a significant calamity in one of the other poles of power. For instance, a breakdown in China’s internal stability alongside the recovery of U.S. political stability. Bottom Line: The trade war between the U.S. and China is geopolitically unsustainable. The only way it could continue is if the two states existed in a bipolar world where the rest of the states closely aligned themselves behind the two superpowers. We have a high conviction view that today’s world is – for the time being – multipolar. American allies will cheat and skirt around Washington’s demands that China be isolated. This is because the U.S. no longer has the preponderance of power that it enjoyed in the last decade of the twentieth and the first decade of the twenty-first century. Insights presented thus far come from formal theory in political science. What does history teach us? Trading With The Enemy In 1896, a bestselling pamphlet in the U.K., “Made in Germany,” painted an ominous picture: “A gigantic commercial State is arising to menace our prosperity, and contend with us for the trade of the world.”15 Look around your own houses, author E.E. Williams urged his readers. “The toys, and the dolls, and the fairy books which your children maltreat in the nursery are made in Germany: nay, the material of your favorite (patriotic) newspaper had the same birthplace as like as not.” Williams later wrote that tariffs were the answer and that they “would bring Germany to her knees, pleading for our clemency.”16 By the late 1890s, it was clear to the U.K. that Germany was its greatest national security threat. The Germany Navy Laws of 1898 and 1900 launched a massive naval buildup with the singular objective of liberating the German Empire from the geographic constraints of the Jutland Peninsula. By 1902, the First Lord of the Royal Navy pointed out that “the great new German navy is being carefully built up from the point of view of a war with us.”17 There is absolutely no doubt that Germany was the U.K.’s gravest national security threat. As a result, London signed in April 1904 a set of agreements with France that came to be known as Entente Cordiale. The entente was immediately tested by Germany in the 1905 First Moroccan Crisis, which only served to strengthen the alliance. Russia was brought into the pact in 1907, creating the Triple Entente. In hindsight, the alliance structure was obvious given Germany’s meteoric rise from unification in 1871. However, one should not underestimate the magnitude of these geopolitical events. For the U.K. and France to resolve centuries of differences and formalize an alliance in 1904 was a tectonic shift — one that they undertook against the grain of history, entrenched enmity, and ideology.18 Political scientists and historians have noted that geopolitical enmity rarely produces bifurcated economic relations exhibited during the Cold War. Both empirical research and formal modeling shows that trade occurs even amongst rivals and during wartime.19 This was certainly the case between the U.K. and Germany, whose trade steadily increased right up until the outbreak of World War One (Chart II-6). Could this be written off due to the U.K.’s ideological commitment to laissez-faire economics? Or perhaps London feared a move against its lightly defended colonies in case it became protectionist? These are fair arguments. However, they do not explain why Russia and France both saw ever-rising total trade with the German Empire during the same period (Chart II-7). Either all three states were led by incompetent policymakers who somehow did not see the war coming – unlikely given the empirical record – or they simply could not afford to lose out on the gains of trade with Germany to each other. Chart II-6The Allies Traded With Germany ... Chart II-7… Right Up To WWI Chart II-8Japan And U.S. Never Downshifted Trade A similar dynamic was afoot ahead of World War Two. Relations between the U.S. and Japan soured in the 1930s, with the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931. In 1935, Japan withdrew from the 1922 Washington Naval Treaty – the bedrock of the Pacific balance of power – and began a massive naval buildup. In 1937, Japan invaded China. Despite a clear and present danger, the U.S. continued to trade with Japan right up until July 26, 1941, few days after Japan invaded southern Indochina (Chart II-8). On December 7, Japan attacked the U.S. A skeptic may argue that precisely because policymakers sleepwalked into war in the First and Second World Wars, they will not (or should not) make the same mistake this time around. First, we do not make policy prescriptions and therefore care not what should happen. Second, we are highly skeptical of the view that policymakers in the early and mid-twentieth century were somehow defective (as opposed to today’s enlightened leaders). Our constraints-based framework urges us to seek systemic reasons for the behavior of leaders. Political science provides a clear theoretical explanation for why London and Washington continued to trade with the enemy despite the clarity of the threat. The answer lies in the systemic nature of the constraint: a multipolar world reduces the sensitivity of policymakers to relative gains by introducing a collective action problem thanks to changing alliances and the difficulty of disciplining allies’ behavior. In the case of U.S. and China, this is further accentuated by President Trump’s strategy of skirting multilateral diplomacy and intense focus on mercantilist measures of power (i.e. obsession with the trade deficit). An anti-China trade policy that was accompanied by a magnanimous approach to trade relations with allies could have produced a “coalition of the willing” against Beijing. But after two years of tariffs and threats against the EU, Japan, and Canada, the Trump administration has already signaled to the rest of the world that old alliances and coordination avenues are up for revision. There are two outcomes that we can see emerging over the course of the next decade. First, U.S. leadership will become aware of the systemic constraints under which they operate, and trade with China will continue – albeit with limitations and variations. However, such trade will not reduce the geopolitical tensions, nor will it prevent a military conflict. In facts, the probability of military conflict may increase even as trade between China and the U.S. remains steady. Second, U.S. leadership will fail to correctly assess that they operate in a multipolar world and will give up the highlighted trade gains from Diagram II-2 to economic rivals such as Europe and Japan. Given our methodological adherence to constraint-based forecasting, we highly doubt that the latter scenario is likely. Bottom Line: The China-U.S. conflict is not a replay of the Cold War. Systemic pressures from global multipolarity will force the U.S. to continue to trade with China, with limitations on exchanges in emergent, dual-use technologies that China will nonetheless source from other technologically advanced countries. This will create a complicated but exciting world where geopolitics will cease to be seen as exogenous to investing. A risk to the sanguine conclusion is that the historical record is applicable to today, but that the hour is late, not early. It is already July 26, 1941 – when U.S. abrogated all trade with Japan – not 1930. As such, we do not have another decade of trade between U.S. and China remaining, we are at the end of the cycle. While this is a risk, it is unlikely. American policymakers would essentially have to be willing to risk a military conflict with China in order to take the trade war to the same level they did with Japan. It is an objective fact that China has meaningfully stepped up aggressive foreign policy in the region. But unlike Japan in 1941, China has not outright invaded any countries over the past decade. As such, the willingness of the public to support such a conflict is unclear, with only 21% of Americans considering China a top threat to the U.S. Investment Implications This analysis is not meant to be optimistic. First, the U.S. and China will continue to be rivals even if the economic relationship between them does not lead to global bifurcation. For one, China continues to be – much like Germany in the early twentieth century – concerned with access to external markets on which 19.5% of its economy still depend. China is therefore developing a modern navy and military not because it wants to dominate the rest of the world but because it wants to dominate its near abroad, much as the U.S. wanted to, beginning with the Monroe Doctrine. This will continue to lead to Chinese aggression in the South and East China Seas, raising the odds of a conflict with the U.S. Navy. Given that the Thucydides Trap narrative remains cogent, investors should look to overweight S&P 500 aerospace and defense stocks relative to global equity markets. An alternative way that one could play this thesis is by developing a basket of global defense stocks. Multipolarity may create constraints to trade protectionism, but it engenders geopolitical volatility and thus buoys defense spending. Second, we would not expect another uptick in globalization. Multipolarity may make it difficult for countries to completely close off trade with a rival, but globalization is built on more than just trade between rivals. Globalization requires a high level of coordination among great powers that is only possible under hegemonic conditions. Chart II-9 shows that the hegemony of the British and later American empires created a powerful tailwind for trade over the past two hundred years. Chart II-9The Apex Of Globalization Is Behind Us The Apex of Globalization has come and gone – it is all downhill from here. But this is not a binary view. Foreign trade will not go to zero. The U.S. and China will not completely seal each other’s sphere of influence behind a Silicon Curtain. Instead, we focus on five investment themes that flow from a world that is characterized by the three trends of multipolarity, Sino-U.S. geopolitical rivalry, and apex of globalization: Europe will profit: As the U.S. and China deepen their enmity, we expect some European companies to profit. There is some evidence that the investment community has already caught wind of this trend, with European equities modestly outperforming their U.S. counterparts whenever trade tensions flared up in 2019 (Chart II-10). Given our thesis, however, it is unlikely that the U.S. would completely lose market share in China to Europe. As such, we specifically focus on tech, where we expect the U.S. and China to ramp up non-tariff barriers to trade regardless of systemic pressures to continue to trade. A strategic long in the secularly beleaguered European tech companies relative to their U.S. counterparts may therefore make sense (Chart II-11). Chart II-10Europe: A Trade War Safe Haven Chart II-11Is Europe Really This Incompetent? USD bull market will end: A trade war is a very disruptive way to adjust one’s trade relationship. It opens one to retaliation and thus the kind of relative losses described in this analysis. As such, we expect that U.S. to eventually depreciate the USD, either by aggressively reversing 2018 tightening or by coercing its trade rivals to strengthen their currencies. Such a move will be yet another tailwind behind the diversification away from the USD as a reserve currency, a move that should benefit the euro. Bull market in capex: The re-wiring of global manufacturing chains will still take place. The bad news is that multinational corporations will have to dip into their profit margins to move their supply chains to adjust to the new geopolitical reality. The good news is that they will have to invest in manufacturing capex to accomplish the task. One way to articulate this theme is to buy an index of semiconductor capital companies (AMAT, LRCX, KLAC, MKSI, AEIS, BRIKS, and TER). Given the highly cyclical nature of capital companies, we would recommend an entry point once trade tensions subside and green shoots of global growth appear. “Non-aligned” markets will benefit: The last time the world was multipolar, great powers competed through imperialism. This time around, a same dynamic will develop as countries seek to replicate China’s “Belt and Road Initiative.” This is positive for frontier markets. A rush to provide them with exports and services will increase supply and thus lower costs, providing otherwise forgotten markets with a boon of investments. India, and Asia-ex-China more broadly, stand as intriguing alternatives to China, especially with the current administration aggressively reforming to take advantage of the rewiring of global manufacturing chains. Capital markets will remain globalized: With interest rates near zero in much of the developed world and the demographic burden putting an ever-greater pressure on pension plans to generate returns, the search for yield will continue to be a powerful drive that keeps capital markets globalized. Limitations are likely to grow, especially when it comes to cross-border private investments in dual-use technologies. But a completely bifurcation of capital markets is unlikely. The world we are describing is one where geopolitics will play an increasingly prominent role for global investors. It would be convenient if the world simply divided into two warring camps, leaving investors with neatly separated compartments that enabled them to go back to ignoring geopolitics. This is unlikely. Rather, the world will resemble the dynamic years at the end of the nineteenth century, a rough-and-tumble era that required a multi-disciplinary approach to investing. Marko Papic Consulting Editor, BCA Research Chief Strategist, Clocktower Group III. Indicators And Reference Charts The S&P 500 is making marginally new all-time highs. Seasonality is becoming very favorable for stock prices. However, our U.S. profit model continues to point south and expanding multiples have already driven this year’s equity gains. The S&P 500 has therefore already priced in a significant improvement in profits. Further P/E expansion will be harder to come by with bond yields set to rise. Thus, until the dollar falls and creates another tailwind for profits, stocks will not be as strong as seasonality suggests and will only make marginal new highs. Our Revealed Preference Indicator (RPI) remains cautious towards equities. The RPI combines the idea of market momentum with valuation and policy measures. It provides a powerful bullish signal if positive market momentum lines up with constructive readings from the policy and valuation measures. Conversely, if strong market momentum is not supported by valuations and policy, investors should lean against the market trend. Until global growth bottoms and boosts the earnings forecasts of our models, stock gains will stay limited. The outlook for next year remains constructive for stocks. Our Willingness-to-Pay (WTP) indicator for the U.S. continues to improve. This same indicator has recently turned lower in Japan. Meanwhile, it is deteriorating further in Europe. The WTP indicator tracks flows, and thus provides information on what investors are actually doing, as opposed to sentiment indexes that track how investors are feeling. Global yields have turned higher but they remain at exceptionally stimulating levels. Moreover, money and liquidity growth has picked up around the world, and global central banks continue to conduct very dovish policies. As a result, our Monetary Indicator remains at extremely elevated levels. Furthermore, our Composite Technical Indicator is still flashing a buy signal. Also, our BCA Composite Valuation index is still improving. As a result, our Speculation Indicator is back in the neutral zone. 10-year Treasury yields continue to rise, but they remain very expensive. Moreover, both our Bond Valuation Index and our Composite Technical Indicators are still flashing high-conviction sell signals. If the strengthening of the Commodity Index Advance/Decline line results in higher natural resource prices, then, inflation breakevens will also climb meaningfully. Therefore, the current setup argues for a below-benchmark duration in fixed-income portfolios. Weak global growth has been the key support for the dollar in recent months. On a PPP basis, the U.S. dollar remains extremely expensive. Additionally, our Composite Technical Indicator has lost momentum and has formed a negative divergence with the Greenback’s level. Moreover, the U.S. current account deficit has begun to widen anew. This backdrop makes the dollar highly vulnerable to a rebound in global growth. In fact, a breakdown in the greenback will be the clearest signal yet that global growth is rebounding for good. EQUITIES: Chart III-1U.S. Equity Indicators Chart III-2Willingness To Pay For Risk Chart III-3U.S. Equity Sentiment Indicators Chart III-4Revealed Preference Indicator Chart III-5U.S. Stock Market Valuation Chart III-6U.S. Earnings Chart III-7Global Stock Market And Earnings: Relative Performance Chart III-8Global Stock Market And Earnings: Relative Performance FIXED INCOME: Chart III-9U.S. Treasurys And Valuations Chart III-10Yield Curve Slopes Chart III-11Selected U.S. Bond Yields Chart III-1210-Year Treasury Yield ComponentsChart III-13U.S. Corporate Bonds And Health Monitor Chart III-14Global Bonds: Developed Markets Chart III-15Global Bonds: Emerging Markets CURRENCIES: Chart III-16U.S. Dollar And PPP Chart III-17U.S. Dollar And Indicator Chart III-18U.S. Dollar Fundamentals Chart III-19Japanese Yen Technicals Chart III-20Euro Technicals Chart III-21Euro/Yen Technicals Chart III-23Euro/Pound Technicals COMMODITIES: Chart III-23Broad Commodity Indicators Chart III-24Commodity Prices Chart III-25Commodity Prices Chart III-26Commodity Sentiment Chart III-27Speculative Positioning ECONOMY: Chart III-28U.S. And Global Macro Backdrop Chart III-29U.S. Macro Snapshot Chart III-30U.S. Growth Outlook Chart III-31U.S. Cyclical Spending Chart III-32U.S. Labor Market Chart III-33U.S. Consumption Chart III-34U.S. Housing Chart III-35U.S. Debt And Deleveraging Chart III-36U.S. Financial Conditions Chart III-37Global Economic Snapshot: Europe Chart III-38Global Economic Snapshot: China Mathieu Savary Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst Footnotes 1 Please see The Bank Credit Analyst "September 2019," dated August 29, 2019, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 2 Please see The Bank Credit Analyst "June 2019," dated May 30, 2019, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 3 Please see The Bank Credit Analyst "August 2019," dated July 25, 2019, available at bca.bcaresearch.com 4 Please see U.S. Equity Strategy Special Report "Peak Margins," dated October 7, 2019, available at uses.bcaresearch.com 5 Please see U.S. Equity Strategy Weekly Report "Follow The Profit Trail," dated October 15, 2019, available at uses.bcaresearch.com 6 Please see Foreign Exchange Strategy Weekly Report "On Money Velocity, EUR/USD And Silver," dated October 11, 2019, available on fes.bcaresearch.com 7 Please see BCA Research Geopolitical Strategy, “Power And Politics In East Asia: Cold War 2.0?,” September 25, 2012, “Sino-American Conflict: More Likely Than You Think,” October 4, 2013, “The Great Risk Rotation,” December 11, 2013, and “Strategic Outlook 2014 – Stay The Course: EM Risk – DM Reward,” January 23, 2014, “Underestimating Sino-American Tensions,” November 6, 2015, “The Geopolitics Of Trump,” December 2, 2016, “How To Play The Proxy Battles In Asia,” March 1, 2017, and others available at gps.bcaresearch.com or upon request. 8 Please see German Historical Institute, “Bernhard von Bulow on Germany’s ‘Place in the Sun’” (1897), available at http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/ 9 See Graham Allison, Destined For War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap? (New York: Houghton Miffin Harcourt, 2017). 10 The three cases are Spain taking over from Portugal in the sixteenth century, the U.S. taking over from the U.K. in the twentieth century, and Germany rising to regional hegemony in Europe in the twenty-first century. 11 Duncan Snidal, “Relative Gains and the Pattern of International Cooperation,” The American Political Science Review, 85:3 (September 1991), pp. 701-726. 12 We do not review Snidal’s excellent game theory formal modeling in this paper as it is complex and detailed. However, we highly encourage the intrigued reader to pursue the study on their own. 13 See Charles P. Kindleberger, The World In Depression, 1929-1939 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2013). 14 Joanne Gowa and Edward D. Mansfield, “Power Politics and International Trade,” The American Political Science Review, 87:2 (June 1993), pp. 408-420. 15 See Ernest Edwin Williams, Made in Germany (reprint, Ithaca: Cornell University Press), available at https://archive.org/details/cu31924031247830. 16 Quoted in Margaret MacMillan, The War That Ended Peace (Toronto: Allen Lane, 2014). 17 Peter Liberman, “Trading with the Enemy: Security and Relative Economic Gains,” international Security, 21:1 (Summer 1996), pp. 147-175. 18 Although France and Russia overcame even greater bitterness due to the ideological differences between a republic founded on a violent uprising against its aristocracy – France – and an aristocratic authoritarian regime – Russia. 19 See James Morrow, “When Do ‘Relative Gains’ Impede Trade?” The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 41:1 (February 1997), pp. 12-37; and Jack S. Levy and Katherine Barbieri, “Trading With the Enemy During Wartime,” Security Studies, 13:3 (December 2004), pp. 1-47.
Highlights Duration: Trade uncertainty has depressed survey measures of economic sentiment, but the hard economic data have been relatively robust. If the trade war starts to calm down during the next two months, as we expect, then the survey data will rebound, causing bond yields to move higher. Fed: With inflation expectations low, the Fed must ensure that financial conditions stay accommodative and that the economic recovery remains on track. This means that the Fed will meet market expectations and cut rates next week. Beyond that, we expect growth to improve enough that further cuts are unnecessary. Negative Convexity: This year’s large decline in yields has increased the attractiveness of negatively convex assets, in risk-adjusted terms. Investors should favor high-yield over investment grade corporates. They should also favor Agency MBS over Aaa, Aa and A rated corporates. Feature Chart 1Positive Surprises Driven By The Hard Data The next two months are crucial for the U.S economy. Measures of sentiment, on both the business and consumer side, are sending recessionary signals. However, measures of actual economic activity paint a more benign picture (Chart 1). This divergence between the “hard” and “soft” data will likely resolve itself within the next couple of months, and the outcome of U.S./China trade negotiations will play a major part in determining whether that resolution is positive or negative. On the “Hard” And “Soft” Data There is a ton of economic data available to investors these days, but all of it can generally be classified as either “soft” or “hard”. We call measures of actual economic activity, such as housing starts or retail sales, “hard” data. These are the sorts of measures used to calculate a nation’s GDP. Alternatively, we use the term “soft” data to describe survey measures where firms or consumers are asked to describe whether activity is improving or deteriorating, or whether they are becoming more or less optimistic about the future. Some examples of soft data are PMI surveys and measures of consumer confidence. Both sorts of measures have value. Soft data are usually timelier and often lead the hard data. However, they are also more prone to whipsaws. The hard data tend to be more reliable, but don’t always provide enough lead time to be actionable. The soft and hard data are sending very different signals. At present, the soft and hard data are sending very different signals. On the consumer side, core retail sales are growing at the robust year-over-year pace of 4.8%, even though consumer confidence has declined during the past year (Chart 2). On the business side, the ISM manufacturing PMI survey came in at 47.8 in September, the lowest print since 2009. However, industrial production has fallen by only 0.1% during the past year. Industrial production growth got as low as -4% during the 2015/16 period, when the ISM was at a higher level (Chart 3). Similarly, actual orders for core durable goods have barely contracted, even though CEO confidence is at recessionary levels (Chart 3, panel 2). Capacity utilization also remains fairly strong, well above its 2016 low (Chart 3, bottom panel) Chart 2Hard Vs. Soft Data: On The Consumer Side Chart 3Hard Vs. Soft Data: On The Business Side Housing is the only sector of the economy that doesn’t currently display a dichotomy between the hard and soft data. All measures of housing activity are growing strongly, a rapid snapback following last year’s weakness (Chart 4). Chart 4Housing Activity Summary Trade Negotiations Are Pivotal The soft data started to lag the hard data at around the same time as the Global Economic Policy Uncertainty index shot higher last year (Chart 5). This leads us to conclude that worries about the trade war’s negative consequences have caused sharp declines in measures of sentiment and confidence, even though the trade war’s actual impact on the hard data has been minor. This is what makes the outcome of November’s U.S./China trade talks so important. If an agreement is reached that makes it clear that no new tariffs will be implemented, we expect that would remove enough uncertainty for the soft data to improve, converging with the hard data. However, if things fall apart, then we would expect the negative survey data to eventually drag the hard data lower. Housing is the only sector of the economy that doesn’t currently display a dichotomy between the hard and soft data. Our sense at the moment is that the looming 2020 U.S. election provides enough incentive for both sides to strike a deal, but the outcome could still go either way. Last Friday’s report from our Global Investment Strategy service discussed the outlook for trade negotiations in more detail.1 For bond investors, we are confident that a removal of trade uncertainty would lead to a rebound in important soft data measures such as the ISM manufacturing PMI and the CRB Raw Industrials index. Any increase in those measures would also send bond yields sharply higher. The ratio between the CRB Raw Industrials index and Gold continues to track the 10-year Treasury yield closely (Chart 6). Chart 5Trade War Worries Affecting ##br##Sentiment Chart 6Bond Yields Will Shoot Higher Once Trade Uncertainty Dissipates Bottom Line: Trade uncertainty has depressed survey measures of economic sentiment, but the hard economic data have been relatively robust. If the trade war starts to calm down during the next two months, as we expect, then the survey data will rebound, causing bond yields to move higher. The Fed Next Week The dichotomy between hard and soft data fits nicely with how the Fed has been describing the economic outlook for most of the year. That is, an economy who’s baseline outlook is favorable but that faces some downside risks. While that outlook doesn’t immediately suggest a policy response, low inflation expectations make it pretty clear what the Fed’s course of action will be during the next few months. The 5-year/5-year forward TIPS breakeven inflation rate is currently 1.68%, well below the 2.3%-2.5% range that is consistent with the Fed’s inflation target (Chart 7). What’s more, the median 3-year inflation forecast from the New York Fed’s Survey of Consumer Expectations just hit an all-time low (Chart 7, bottom panel). The Fed must take appropriate action to drive inflation expectations higher. At present, this means that it must ensure that financial conditions stay accommodative so that the economic recovery can continue. Eventually, continued economic recovery will lead to higher realized inflation (Chart 7, panel 2), and inflation expectations will follow realized inflation higher. Chart 7Low Inflation Expectations Equals Accommodative Fed In order to keep financial conditions accommodative, the Fed must at least match the market’s current rate cut expectations. An October rate cut is more or less fully priced, and it is therefore highly likely that the Fed will cut rates next week. After that, the market is pricing in roughly 50/50 odds of a fourth rate cut in December. But those expectations will certainly change as we learn the outcome of November’s trade talks and as the economic data roll in. Ultimately, we expect that enough good news will hit the wire between now and December that a fourth rate cut will be unnecessary. But the more important message is that, as long as inflation expectations are low, the Fed will not risk upsetting market expectations. Balance Sheet Update The Fed decided not to wait until next week to unveil its revamped balance sheet policy. It didn’t really have the luxury of time, given the turmoil in money markets that we discussed in a recent report.2 The main conclusion from our report is that the Fed must inject more bank reserves into the economy if it wants to maintain control of interest rates. This is exactly what the Fed will do going forward. It announced that it will purchase Treasury bills at least until the second quarter of 2020, starting at an initial pace of $60 billion per month. It will also continue to reinvest the proceeds from maturing Treasury notes/bonds and MBS into newly issued Treasury notes/bonds. Continued economic recovery will lead to higher realized inflation. Assuming the pace of $60 billion per month stays constant, and making some other assumptions about the growth rates of non-reserve liabilities, we project that the Fed’s actions will cause the supply of reserves to rise from $1.53 to $1.63 trillion by next June, and that its securities holdings will rise from $3.59 to $4.05 trillion (see Chart 8 and Table 1). Chart 8The Fed's Balance Sheet Over Time Table 1Fed's Balance Sheet: Projections As we have argued in the past, now that the link between the Fed’s balance sheet and its interest rate policy has been severed, we see no investment implications from the Fed’s new balance sheet strategy. As per our Golden Rule of Bond Investing, changes in the fed funds rate relative to expectations will continue to drive bond yields.3 Since the Fed’s balance sheet strategy tells us nothing about its future interest rate plans, it should mostly be ignored. Bottom Line: With inflation expectations low, the Fed must ensure that financial conditions stay accommodative and that the economic recovery remains on track. This means that the Fed will meet market expectations and cut rates next week. Beyond that, we expect growth to improve enough that further cuts are unnecessary. A Good Time To Buy Negative Convexity We have repeatedly mentioned the attractiveness of high-yield bonds and Agency MBS during the past few weeks. The one thing those sectors have in common is that they are negatively convex. That is, unlike most fixed income instruments, their durations are positively correlated with yields. As a result, this year’s big drop in yields has led to large declines in duration for both high-yield and agency MBS (Chart 9). But despite this lower duration, junk spreads have remained relatively flat while MBS spreads have actually widened. In other words, expected return has not fallen even as the risk embedded in negatively convex securities has declined markedly. Chart 9Negatively Convex Products Are Attractive Last week we unveiled a new way of measuring risk for U.S. spread products.4 The Risk Of Losing 100 bps can be thought of as the number of standard deviations of annual spread change necessary for a sector to underperform duration-matched Treasuries by more than 100 basis points. A higher value means the sector is at a lower risk of losing 100 bps, and vice-versa. Chart 10 shows our new risk measure plotted against expected return for the investment grade and high-yield credit tiers, as well as for conventional 30-year Agency MBS. The y-axis shows each sector’s 12-month expected excess return, which we calculate as OAS less an adjustment for expected default losses. The x-axis shows the Risk Of Losing 100 bps. To put recent market moves in context, we show how each sector has moved within Chart 10 since spreads last troughed, about one year ago. Notice that last October, Ba and B rated junk bonds offered more expected return than Baa-rated corporates, with similar risk. Now, Ba and B offer a similar return advantage, but with much less risk. Caa-rated junk now strictly dominates the Baa sector in terms of risk and reward. Chart 10Risk-Reward Tradeoff Favors Negatively Convex Securities Turning to Agency MBS, we see again that the large fall in duration has led to a substantial risk reduction since last October. This is why we recently recommended upgrading Agency MBS at the expense of Aaa, Aa, and A corporates.5 Bottom Line: This year’s large decline in yields has increased the attractiveness of negatively convex assets, in risk-adjusted terms. Investors should favor high-yield over investment grade corporates. They should also favor Agency MBS over Aaa, Aa and A rated corporates. Ryan Swift U.S. Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see Global Investment Strategy Weekly Report, “Kumbaya”, dated October 18, 2019, available at gis.bcaresearch.com 2 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “What’s Up In U.S. Money Markets?”, dated September 24, 2019, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 3 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Special Report, “The Golden Rule Of Bond Investing”, dated July 24, 2018, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 4 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “A Perspective On Risk And Reward”, dated October 15, 2019, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 5 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Two Themes And Two Trades”, dated October 1, 2019, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com Fixed Income Sector Performance Recommended Portfolio Specification
Aspectos destacados
El mercado de divisas está bifurcado en términos de expectativas a corto plazo frente a factores a largo plazo. La corona sueca, la corona noruega y la libra esterlina son compras sólidas a largo plazo, pero podrían seguir siendo muy volátiles a corto plazo.
Seguimos enfocándonos en los cruces en lugar de apuestas directas sobre el dólar. Mantener posiciones largas en SEK/NZD, GBP/JPY y NOK/SEK. Ajustar los stops en la posición larga de GBP/JPY para proteger ganancias.
EUR/SEK debería alcanzar su techo una vez que mejore el crecimiento global.
Vender la relación oro/plata en 90, como se recomendó en el informe de la semana pasada.1
Artículo principal
Chart I-1
Una vía en un solo sentido desde 2018
Calle de sentido único desde 2018
Calle de sentido único desde 2018
De todas las monedas del G10 que seguimos, la corona sueca probablemente sea la más desconcertante. El Riksbank es uno de los pocos bancos centrales que han subido tipos este año, pero la corona sigue siendo la moneda más débil del G10. Admitimos que el desempeño del sector manufacturero sueco ha sido pésimo, y lo fue especialmente en septiembre, pero esto no ha sido una historia exclusiva de Suecia. La zona del euro, que también está experimentando una profunda recesión manufacturera, ha visto un mejor comportamiento de su moneda a pesar de un Banco Central Europeo (BCE) más dovish.
El rendimiento inferior de la corona plantea la pregunta de si esto señala una recesión manufacturera global mucho más prolongada, o si es indicativo de algo más endógeno a Suecia. Dicho de otra manera, ¿el impulso de la fortaleza de USD/SEK (e incluso USD/NOK) ha sido un dólar apreciándose, o más bien factores domésticos (Chart I-1)? Y si es lo segundo, ¿cuáles son los indicadores importantes a tener en cuenta en caso de que un giro esté a la vuelta de la esquina?
El debate entre datos blandos y datos duros
La gran pregunta para Suecia es si el sector manufacturero solo está en un proceso volátil de establecer un fondo, o si está a punto de contraerse mucho más. La producción industrial está creciendo actualmente al 4% interanual, pero la señal de los datos blandos es que debería estar contrayéndose en cifras de dos dígitos (Chart I-2, panel superior). Como tal, hay o bien una gran desconexión entre la percepción de los inversores y la realidad, o estamos al borde de un desplome manufacturero mucho más profundo. Los tipos de cambio tienden a ser extremadamente fluidos al descontar una amplia gama de datos económicos y, en el caso de Suecia, al descontar el resultado para el crecimiento global. Sin embargo, con EUR/SEK en 10.8 y USD/SEK en 9.7 – este último muy por encima de sus máximos de 2008 – es razonable asumir que cualquier cosa que no sea una recesión profunda justificará una SEK más fuerte.
Una de las ratios más consistentes para señalar un fondo en el sector manufacturero sueco en particular (y en el de la zona euro en general) es la ratio pedidos manufactureros-niveles de inventario (Chart I-2, panel inferior). La caída en septiembre fue desconcertante. Sin embargo, a diferencia del PMI manufacturero, esta ratio no está marcando nuevos mínimos, evidencia tentativa de que podríamos estar en un proceso volátil de fondo en lugar de una caída prolongada. La última vez que encontramos tal divergencia fue en 2011/2012, en el auge de la crisis de deuda europea; en esa ocasión, los datos duros suecos terminaron enviando la señal correcta para la economía en su conjunto.
El deterioro del sector manufacturero aún no ha afectado al consumo interno en general ni al mercado laboral en particular.
El deterioro del sector manufacturero aún no ha afectado al consumo interno en general ni al mercado laboral en particular. El componente de importaciones del índice PMI se mantiene muy por encima del de las exportaciones. Mientras tanto, el componente de empleo del índice PMI comenzó a estabilizarse hacia la mitad de este año, lo que significa que el crecimiento del empleo debería tocar fondo en torno al 1% aproximadamente (Chart I-3). Las exportaciones suecas están más arriba en la cadena de valor manufacturera que en la mayoría de las demás economías desarrolladas, y el sector del automóvil es bastante importante. Pero hasta ahora, la economía sueca ha resistido bastante bien la desaceleración del sector automotriz, con la producción aún registrando un 7% anual.
Chart I-2
Los datos blandos son mucho peores
Los datos cualitativos son mucho peores
Los datos cualitativos son mucho peores
Chart I-3
La demanda doméstica se mantiene bien
La demanda interna se mantiene sólida
La demanda interna se mantiene sólida
El repunte de la tasa de desempleo sueca es problemático, pero no creemos que constituya un cambio mayor en la dinámica del mercado laboral. Suecia tiene una larga historia de mayor apertura hacia solicitantes de asilo y refugiados que muchos otros países europeos. La crisis siria de hace un par de años provocó un aumento excepcional, donde el número de solicitantes de asilo se disparó a más de 150.000 o casi el 1,5% de la población total (Chart I-4). Históricamente, la inmigración ha proporcionado un gran dividendo laboral a Suecia, permitiendo que el crecimiento supere tanto al de EE. UU. como al de la zona euro. Pero esto también ha sido una fuente de desempleo friccional, mientras los nuevos migrantes se integran en la fuerza laboral.
Chart I-4
Un nuevo grupo de mano de obra que debe integrarse
Una nueva reserva de mano de obra que debe integrarse
Una nueva reserva de mano de obra que debe integrarse
Los trabajadores nacidos en el extranjero ahora constituyen alrededor del 20% de la población total, una gran parte de los cuales necesita aprender un nuevo idioma y adquirir nuevas habilidades (Chart I-5A). Este dividendo de crecimiento se cosechará durante muchos años. La integración es un tema políticamente contencioso, y por ello la ley de asilo y reunificación familiar altamente restrictiva adoptada a mediados de 2016 probablemente signifique que el auge migratorio ya ha quedado atrás. El ascenso de los Demócratas de Suecia, antiinmigración, en las elecciones de septiembre de 2018 es un ejemplo. Sin embargo, el giro de la población democrática hacia la derecha ha sido un fenómeno global, por lo que no es tan negativo para Suecia en términos relativos. Todo ello para decir que, en comparación con la mayoría de las naciones desarrolladas, Suecia aún disfruta de una perspectiva demográfica relativamente positiva (Chart I-5B).
Chart I-5A
Un enorme dividendo laboral
Un enorme dividendo laboral
Un enorme dividendo laboral
Chart I-5B
Sin un evidente precipicio demográfico
No hay un precipicio demográfico aparente.
No hay un precipicio demográfico aparente.
La afluencia de migrantes tiene un impacto mixto en la inflación. Si bien existe presión a la baja sobre los salarios, debido a un aumento en la proporción de empleo que paga salarios más bajos, todavía hay presión al alza sobre la vivienda y el consumo en respuesta al mayor número de trabajadores. Esto se suma a un impulso fiscal al aumentar el gasto del gobierno en servicios sociales. Mientras tanto, la tasa de desempleo entre las personas nacidas en el extranjero ronda el 15%. Esto significa que la curva de Phillips está plana durante los primeros años, antes de empezar a empinarse. Pero a medida que la nueva fuerza laboral finalmente se absorbe en la economía, debería comenzar a generar presiones salariales significativas.
El Riksbank entiende claramente estas dinámicas, por lo que en años anteriores su postura ha sido acomodaticia incluso cuando la economía sueca ha mantenido un buen comportamiento. Los tipos de interés se recortaron a territorio negativo en 2015 y se mantuvieron en -0.5% (por debajo del tipo de política del BCE) durante toda la recuperación global en 2016 y 2017. La flexibilización cuantitativa también se ha prolongado hasta 2020, con mucha antelación respecto al anuncio del renovado programa de compras de activos del BCE. Ambos han aflojado enormemente las condiciones monetarias en Suecia, incluso a través de una moneda más débil. De cara al futuro, hay algunas razones clave para creer que la trayectoria de menor resistencia para la corona ahora es al alza:
Una corona débil típicamente ha ayudado al sector manufacturero con un desfase de doce meses.
Una corona débil típicamente ha ayudado al sector manufacturero con un desfase de doce meses. Las divergencias negativas solo tienden a ocurrir antes de recesiones profundas. A menos que estemos en esa situación particular ahora, una mejor demanda de bienes suecos relativamente más baratos (piense Volvo frente a BMW) debería llevar a una corona más fuerte (Chart I-6).
Sí, el Riskbank ha estado llevando a cabo QE, pero el ritmo de expansión de su balance se ha ido desacelerando en trimestres recientes. USD/SEK tiende a seguir las tendencias relativas de los balances entre el Riksbank y la Fed, pero se ha abierto una cuña a favor de la corona (Chart I-7). Mientras tanto, con la Fed a punto de reexpandir su balance, esto también debería favorecer a una SEK más fuerte frente al USD.
Chart I-6
Corona sueca y manufactura
Corona Sueca Y Manufactura
Corona Sueca Y Manufactura
Chart I-7
USD/SEK y balances relativos
USD/SEK Y Balances Relativos
USD/SEK Y Balances Relativos
El mercado de la vivienda sueco se está convirtiendo en una espina para el Riksbank. Cuando se introdujeron los tipos negativos en 2015, el crecimiento de los precios de la vivienda se disparó hasta el 15% interanual (Chart I-8). Más recientemente, una limitación de la migración ha permitido cierto enfriamiento, pero el apalancamiento de los hogares suecos sigue siendo muy elevado. Con la memoria de la crisis inmobiliaria de los años 90 aún fresca, esto está haciendo que el Riksbank se sienta bastante incómodo con su postura de política actual.
El coste de acarreo es menor por estar corto en NZD comparado con estar corto en el dólar estadounidense.
Nuestra inclinación es que, aunque el gobernador Stefan Ingves prefiere renormalizar la política lo más rápido posible, dado que dirige una economía pequeña y abierta con el comercio representando un impresionante 45% del PIB, está a merced de las condiciones externas. La SEK es la moneda más barata del universo G10 y podría rebotar con fuerza ante la mínima evidencia de que el crecimiento global ha tocado fondo. Además, un crecimiento global al alza ajustará la utilización de recursos, lo que debería comenzar a impulsar las presiones inflacionarias subyacentes en Suecia (Chart I-9)
Chart I-8
Precios de la vivienda en Suecia##br## Están en burbuja
Los precios de la vivienda en Suecia están en una burbuja
Los precios de la vivienda en Suecia están en una burbuja
Chart I-9
Utilización de recursos e inflación en Suecia
Utilización de Recursos e Inflación en Suecia
Utilización de Recursos e Inflación en Suecia
En términos de estrategia de negociación con SEK, USD/SEK y NZD/SEK tienden a estar altamente correlacionados; dado que la SEK tiene una mayor beta al crecimiento global que el kiwi (Suecia exporta el 45% de su PIB frente al 27% de Nueva Zelanda). En términos relativos, la economía sueca parece haber tocado fondo en relación con la de EE. UU., lo que hace del SEK/NZD una forma atractiva de jugar la caída de USD/SEK. Mientras tanto, el coste de acarreo es menor por estar corto en NZD comparado con estar corto en el dólar estadounidense (Chart I-10). En cuanto a EUR/SEK, el cruce podría consolidarse en los niveles actuales antes de dirigirse a la baja, pero en última instancia alcanzará su pico una vez que el crecimiento global se reoriente al alza.
Chart I-10
Mantener posición larga en SEK/NZD
Mantener posición larga en SEK/NZD
Mantener posición larga en SEK/NZD
Conclusión: Mantenemos la posición larga en SEK/NZD como una apuesta de valor relativo, pero la verdadera apreciación reside en el cruce SEK/USD. Nuestra inclinación es que la debilidad de la SEK ha sido impulsada por el enfoque del mercado en datos blandos decepcionantes, mientras que los datos duros se mantienen relativamente resilientes. Una vez que quede más claro que el entorno de crecimiento global no es tan precario como sugieren las encuestas, la corona podría rebotar con fuerza.
Asuntos internos
Nuestra posición larga en GBP/JPY alcanzó un 5% esta semana. Estamos ajustando stops a 138 para proteger ganancias. También fuimos sacados de la posición corta en EUR/NOK con una pérdida del 2%. Por ahora nos mantenemos al margen. EUR/NOK cotiza ahora por encima de los niveles de recesión de 2008, lo cual solo se justifica por una recesión prolongada del crecimiento, pero la gestión del riesgo requiere paciencia por ahora. Estén atentos.
Chester Ntonifor, Estratega de Divisas chestern@bcaresearch.com
Notas a pie
1 Por favor consulte el Foreign Exchange Strategy Weekly Report, titulado “Sobre la velocidad del dinero, EUR/USD y la plata,” con fecha 11 de octubre de 2019, disponible en fes.bcaresearch.com
Divisas
Dólar estadounidense
Chart II-1
Técnicas USD 1
Análisis técnico USD 1
Análisis técnico USD 1
Chart II-2
Técnicas USD 2
Análisis técnico del USD 2
Análisis técnico del USD 2
Los datos recientes en EE. UU. han sido débiles:
Las ventas minoristas se contrajeron un 0.3% mensual en septiembre. La producción industrial cayó un 0.4% mensual.
Los precios de exportación e importación cayeron 1.6% interanual en septiembre.
El índice de sentimiento del consumidor de Michigan creció hasta 96 en octubre, desde 93.2 en el mes anterior.
El índice manufacturero NY Empire State aumentó a 4 en octubre, desde 2 en septiembre.
Los permisos de construcción e inicios de viviendas cayeron 2.7% y 9.4% mensual en septiembre, pero la recuperación de la vivienda se mantiene intacta.
Las solicitudes iniciales de subsidio por desempleo aumentaron a 214K en la semana terminada el 11 de octubre.
El índice DXY se depreció un 0.7% esta semana. El último Beige Book resumió que la economía estadounidense se expandió a un ritmo de leve a moderado. La desaceleración del sector manufacturero sigue siendo el mayor riesgo para la economía, mientras que las tensiones comerciales continúan pesando sobre el sentimiento empresarial y las intenciones de gasto de capital. El más reciente “entente” en las discusiones comerciales podría representar un cambio pivotal desde la elevada incertidumbre que prevaleció durante el verano.
Enlaces de informes:
Sobre la velocidad del dinero, EUR/USD y la plata - 11 de octubre de 2019
Preservando capital durante puntos de disturbio - 6 de septiembre de 2019
¿Ha cambiado el paisaje de las divisas? - 16 de agosto de 2019
El euro
Chart II-3
Técnicas EUR 1
EUR Análisis técnico 1
EUR Análisis técnico 1
Chart II-4
Técnicas EUR 2
EUR Análisis Técnicos 2
EUR Análisis Técnicos 2
Los datos recientes en la zona del euro siguen siendo modestos:
La inflación general cayó a 0.8% interanual en septiembre, la más baja en casi tres años. Sin embargo, la inflación subyacente aumentó a 1% interanual.
La producción industrial en la zona del euro continuó contrayéndose, un 2.8% interanual en agosto.
El sentimiento ZEW en la zona del euro cayó aún más a -23.5 en octubre, sin embargo esto está muy por encima de las expectativas de -33. El sentimiento ZEW para Alemania también cayó a -22.8 en octubre. Cabe señalar que las expectativas siguen mejorando en relación con la situación actual.
La balanza comercial en la zona del euro mejoró a €20.3 mil millones en agosto, desde €17.5 mil millones revisados a la baja en julio. Sin embargo, esto se debe principalmente a una contracción de las importaciones.
EUR/USD subió 0.9% esta semana, en parte ayudado por la amplia debilidad del dólar. La dinámica comercial en la zona del euro sigue siendo preocupante: las exportaciones cayeron un 2.2% interanual en agosto, mientras que las importaciones se desplomaron un 4.1% interanual. Notablemente, en lo que va de año, el superávit comercial de la UE con EE. UU. creció a €103 mil millones, desde €91 mil millones un año antes, mientras que el déficit comercial con China se amplió aún más a €127 mil millones desde €116 mil millones.
Enlaces de informes:
Sobre la velocidad del dinero, EUR/USD y la plata - 11 de octubre de 2019
Algunas ideas de trading - 27 de sept. de 2019
La batalla de los bancos centrales - 21 de junio de 2019
Yen japonés
Chart II-5
Técnicas JPY 1
Análisis técnico del JPY 1
Análisis técnico del JPY 1
Chart II-6
Técnicas JPY 2
Análisis técnico del JPY 2
Análisis técnico del JPY 2
Los datos recientes en Japón continúan decepcionando:
La producción industrial cayó un 4.7% interanual en agosto.
La utilización de la capacidad disminuyó un 2.9% mensual en agosto.
El yen japonés cayó 0.8% frente al dólar estadounidense esta semana. Kuroda ha vuelto a enfatizar que el BoJ no dudará en actuar si los desarrollos económicos continúan deteriorándose. Por otra parte, mientras la Fed y el BCE están en camino de expandir sus balances mediante compras de activos, queda abierta la cuestión de cuánto más puede hacer el BoJ, más allá del control de la curva de rendimientos. Mantenemos una postura larga en el yen en previsión de que hará falta un “momento Lehman” para que el BoJ actúe de forma agresiva.
Enlaces de informes:
Algunas ideas de trading - 27 de sept. de 2019
¿Ha cambiado el paisaje de las divisas? - 16 de agosto de 2019
Ajustes de cartera en un trading veraniego poco líquido - 5 de julio de 2019
Libra esterlina
Chart II-7
Técnicas GBP 1
Análisis técnico GBP 1
Análisis técnico GBP 1
Chart II-8
Técnicas GBP 2
GBP Análisis técnico 2
GBP Análisis técnico 2
Los datos recientes en el Reino Unido han sido mayormente negativos:
La tasa de desempleo ILO aumentó ligeramente a 3.9% en agosto. El crecimiento trimestral de las ganancias medias se desaceleró a 3.8%, sin embargo esto estuvo por encima de las expectativas de 3.7%.
El índice de precios minoristas creció 2.4% interanual en septiembre, una desaceleración desde 2.6% en el mes anterior.
La inflación general se mantuvo sin cambios en 1.7% interanual en septiembre, mientras que la inflación subyacente subió a 1.7% desde 1.5%.
Las ventas minoristas crecieron 3.1% interanual en septiembre, desde 2.6% en el mes anterior.
GBP/USD se disparó 3.3% esta semana por el optimismo hacia la cumbre del Consejo Europeo sobre el Brexit. Desde una perspectiva de valoración, la libra cotiza con un gran descuento respecto a su valor justo. Si las noticias positivas sobre el Brexit continúan, la libra podría seguir subiendo. Mantenemos posición larga en GBP/JPY, que está más de 5% en ganancias. Ajustar el stop a 138.
Enlaces de informes:
Algunas ideas de trading - 27 de sept. de 2019
Reino Unido: ¿Desaceleración cíclica o malestar estructural? - 20 de sept. de 2019
La batalla de los bancos centrales - 21 de junio de 2019
Dólar australiano
Chart II-9
Técnicas AUD 1
AUD Análisis técnico 1
AUD Análisis técnico 1
Chart II-10
Técnicas AUD 2
Análisis técnico del AUD 2
Análisis técnico del AUD 2
Los datos recientes en Australia han sido modestos:
La confianza empresarial NAB cayó aún más a -2, mientras que las condiciones mejoraron a 1 en el tercer trimestre.
En el frente del mercado laboral, la tasa de desempleo cayó a 5.2% en septiembre. Se crearon 14.7K empleos, consistentes en 26.2K empleos a tiempo completo y una pérdida de 11.4K empleos a tiempo parcial.
AUD/USD aumentó 0.4% esta semana. Las actas del RBA se publicaron a principios de esta semana. Curiosamente, presentan un debate agudo sobre los efectos de los tipos bajos. Por un lado, los tipos más bajos se han justificado teóricamente para lograr el pleno empleo y el objetivo de inflación. Por otro lado, algunos miembros del RBA temen que los tipos bajos puedan alimentar precios de la vivienda ya inflados. La probabilidad de otro recorte de tipos ha disminuido tras las actas del RBA.
Enlaces de informes:
Una visión contraria sobre el dólar australiano - 24 de mayo de 2019
Cuidado con los rendimientos marginales decrecientes - 19 de abril de 2019
Aún no fuera de peligro - 5 de abril de 2019
Dólar neozelandés
Chart II-11
Técnicas NZD 1
Análisis técnico del NZD 1
Análisis técnico del NZD 1
Chart II-12
Técnicas NZD 2
Análisis técnico del NZD 2
Análisis técnico del NZD 2
Los datos recientes en Nueva Zelanda han sido negativos:
Las llegadas de visitantes aumentaron 1.8% interanual en agosto, ligeramente por debajo del 2% del mes anterior.
La inflación general se desaceleró a 1.5% interanual en el tercer trimestre.
NZD/USD ha estado más o menos plano esta semana. Estrechamente ligada al crecimiento global, la moneda neozelandesa ha estado fluctuando con el vaivén de los titulares sobre el conflicto comercial EE. UU.-China. Los dos países acordaron un acuerdo parcial la semana pasada, sin embargo los detalles siguen siendo vagos. Si bien el kiwi es una moneda de alta beta, debería tener un rendimiento inferior en los cruces. Seguimos jugando la debilidad del kiwi a través del dólar australiano y la corona sueca.
Enlaces de informes:
USD/CNY y turbulencia del mercado - 9 de agosto de 2019
¿Hacia dónde va el dólar estadounidense? - 7 de junio de 2019
Aún no fuera de peligro - 5 de abril de 2019
Dólar canadiense
Chart II-13
Técnicas CAD 1
Técnicas de CAD 1
Técnicas de CAD 1
Chart II-14
Técnicas CAD 2
Análisis técnico CAD 2
Análisis técnico CAD 2
Los datos recientes en Canadá han sido relativamente fuertes:
La tasa de desempleo disminuyó aún más a 5.5% en septiembre. Además, el salario medio por hora siguió creciendo 4.3% interanual, desde 3.8% en el mes anterior. Por último, se crearon 53.7K empleos en septiembre, muy por encima de las expectativas de 10K.
Tanto la inflación general como la subyacente se mantuvieron sin cambios en 1.9% interanual en septiembre.
El dólar canadiense se apreció 1% frente al dólar estadounidense, gracias a los positivos datos de empleo del pasado viernes. Todos los ojos están puestos en las elecciones federales de este mes, que podrían ser cruciales para el futuro del sector energético canadiense y las políticas medioambientales.
Enlaces de informes:
Preservando capital durante puntos de disturbio - 6 de septiembre de 2019
Ajustes de cartera en un trading veraniego poco líquido - 5 de julio de 2019
Sobre el oro, el petróleo y las criptomonedas - 28 de junio de 2019
Franco suizo
Chart II-15
Técnicas CHF 1
CHF Técnicos 1
CHF Técnicos 1
Chart II-16
Técnicas CHF 2
Análisis técnico CHF 2
Análisis técnico CHF 2
Los datos recientes en Suiza han sido positivos:
El superávit comercial (excluyendo metales preciosos) se amplió bruscamente a CHF 2.88 mil millones en septiembre. Notablemente, las exportaciones suizas aumentaron 8.2% mensual a CHF 20.3 mil millones, lideradas por mayores ventas de productos químicos y farmacéuticos. Las importaciones suizas cayeron ligeramente 1.4% mensual a CHF 17.4 mil millones.
Los precios al productor y de importación continuaron cayendo 2% interanual en septiembre.
USD/CHF cayó 1% esta semana. El franco suizo seguirá librando una lucha entre ser una moneda defensiva y ser una herramienta de manipulación por parte del SNB. Nuestra estimación es que EUR/CHF 1.06 es un punto de estrés último. Las carteras globales deberían mantener el franco suizo como seguro, por la sencilla razón de que la moneda es un rendimiento estructural superior.
Enlaces de informes:
Notas sobre el SNB - 4 de octubre de 2019
¿Qué hacer con el franco suizo? - 17 de mayo de 2019
Cuidado con los rendimientos marginales decrecientes - 19 de abril de 2019
Corona noruega
Chart II-17
Técnicas NOK 1
NOK Análisis técnico 1
NOK Análisis técnico 1
Chart II-18
Técnicas NOK 2
Análisis técnico de NOK 2
Análisis técnico de NOK 2
Los datos recientes en Noruega han sido deprimidos:
La balanza comercial pasó a un déficit de NOK 1.2 mil millones en septiembre. Eso supone una disminución de NOK 24 mil millones interanual.
La corona noruega se ha depreciado casi 1% frente al dólar estadounidense esta semana. Los precios de la energía se han mantenido bajos en las últimas semanas. Además, la balanza comercial noruega pasó a déficit por primera vez desde noviembre de 2017. Las exportaciones se desplomaron 19.5% interanual, debido a menores ventas de productos energéticos, mientras que las importaciones aumentaron 12.9% interanual. El mensaje es claro: Noruega sigue resistiendo bien a nivel doméstico, pero la dependencia de las exportaciones de petróleo introduce volatilidad en cualquier pronóstico de crecimiento. BCA ha revisado a la baja sus proyecciones del precio del petróleo para 2019, lo que ha disminuido el atractivo de la corona noruega. Estén atentos.
Enlaces de informes:
Algunas ideas de trading - 27 de sept. de 2019
Ajustes de cartera en un trading veraniego poco líquido - 5 de julio de 2019
Sobre el oro, el petróleo y las criptomonedas - 28 de junio de 2019
Corona sueca
Chart II-19
Técnicas SEK 1
Análisis técnico del SEK 1
Análisis técnico del SEK 1
Chart II-20
Técnicas SEK 2
SEK Indicadores técnicos 2
SEK Indicadores técnicos 2
Los datos recientes en Suecia han sido neutrales:
La tasa de desempleo se mantuvo sin cambios en 7.1% en septiembre.
USD/SEK cayó 1.1% esta semana. Como la moneda con peor rendimiento del G-10 este año, la corona sueca ahora cotiza con un gran descuento respecto a su valor justo. Consulte nuestra sección principal de esta semana, que presenta un análisis en profundidad sobre la economía sueca y la corona.
Enlaces de informes:
¿Hacia dónde va el dólar estadounidense? - 7 de junio de 2019
Balanza de pagos en el G10 - 15 de febrero de 2019
Un simple ranking de atractivo para las divisas - 8 de febrero de 201
Operaciones y previsiones
Resumen de previsiones
Cartera central
Operaciones tácticas
Órdenes límite
Operaciones cerradas
Puntos destacados
El acuerdo comercial interino de "fase 1" alcanzado la semana pasada representa un avance significativo hacia una distensión en la guerra comercial entre China y EE. UU.
Independientemente de lo que ocurra después en las negociaciones del Brexit, se evitará una salida dura. Mantener posición larga en la libra.
Es probable que el crecimiento de los beneficios en EE. UU. sea plano en el tercer trimestre, en contraste con las expectativas "bottom-up" de una caída interanual.
El crecimiento de los beneficios debería repuntar a medida que el crecimiento global vuelva a acelerarse hacia fin de año.
Un crecimiento global más fuerte presionará a la baja al dólar estadounidense.
Mantener sobreponderación en acciones globales respecto a los bonos en un horizonte de 12 meses.
Las acciones cíclicas deberían comenzar a superar a las defensivas. El sector financiero finalmente tendrá su momento de gloria.
Vientos favorables del comercio
En nuestra Perspectiva estratégica del cuarto trimestre publicada hace dos semanas, argumentamos que las acciones globales habían entrado en una fase de "demuéstramelo", lo que significa que sería necesaria evidencia tangible de una desescalada en la guerra comercial y una recuperación del crecimiento global para que los índices bursátiles subieran.1
Recibimos algunas noticias positivas en el frente comercial el pasado viernes. A cambio de suspender la subida prevista de aranceles del 15 de octubre del 25% al 30% sobre $250 mil millones de importaciones chinas, China acordó comprar entre $40 y $50 mil millones de dólares de productos agrícolas estadounidenses por año, mejorar el acceso al mercado para las empresas de servicios financieros de EE. UU. y aumentar la transparencia en la gestión del tipo de cambio.
Admitimos que aún queda mucho por hacer. El texto del acuerdo aún no se ha finalizado. Ambas partes apuntan a concluir el pacto para la cumbre de la APEC en Santiago, Chile, los días 16 y 17 de noviembre. Teniendo en cuenta que quedan sin resolver una serie de cuestiones clave, incluyendo qué tipo de mecanismos de cumplimiento y resolución se incluirán en el acuerdo, son posibles más retrasos o incluso un colapso en las conversaciones.
El acuerdo interino pactado la semana pasada también aplaza la espinosa cuestión de cómo manejar las protecciones de propiedad intelectual a una "fase 2" de las negociaciones programada para comenzar poco después de que se cierre la "fase 1".
Según la independiente y bipartidista Comisión sobre el robo de la propiedad intelectual estadounidense, los productores de EE. UU. pierden entre $225 y $600 mil millones anuales por el robo de PI.2 China a menudo ha sido considerada entre los peores infractores.
Dada la importancia del tema de la PI, será necesario un progreso significativo para asegurar que no se introduzcan aranceles del 15% sobre aproximadamente $160 mil millones de importaciones chinas el 15 de diciembre.
Trump quiere un acuerdo
A pesar de los muchos obstáculos que quedan, los acontecimientos de la semana pasada aumentan significativamente las probabilidades de una distensión en la guerra comercial de 18 meses. Como autoproclamado "maestro negociador", el presidente Trump ha puesto en juego su credibilidad al describir las negociaciones como un "festival de amor", llamar al pacto comercial "el mayor y mejor acuerdo jamás hecho para nuestros grandes y patrióticos agricultores" y decir que tiene "poca duda" de que se alcanzará un acuerdo final. Al igual que hizo con el sucesor del TLCAN, el USMCA —un acuerdo que es sustantivamente similar al que reemplazó— es probable que Trump pase a modo de promoción, pregonando el nuevo acuerdo "tremendo" que ha negociado en nombre del pueblo estadounidense.
Desde el punto de vista político, esto tiene perfecto sentido. Con razón o sin ella, los votantes valoran más a Trump por su manejo de la economía que por cualquier otra cosa (Gráfico 1). Una guerra comercial prolongada socavaría la economía estadounidense y, por tanto, dañaría las perspectivas de reelección de Trump.
Gráfico 1
Trump recibe calificaciones relativamente altas por su manejo de la economía, pero no por mucho más
Kumbaya
Kumbaya
Gráfico 2
Las empresas chinas no están soportando la mayor parte de los aranceles
Kumbaya
Kumbaya
A pesar de sus afirmaciones en sentido contrario, la evidencia sugiere firmemente que son los consumidores estadounidenses, más que las empresas chinas, quienes están pagando la mayor parte de los aranceles. Gráfico 2 muestra que los precios de importación de EE. UU. desde China apenas han disminuido, aun cuando las tasas arancelarias sobre las importaciones chinas han aumentado. En la medida en que las últimas rondas de aranceles se centran en bienes chinos para los que hay poca competencia en EE. UU. o en terceros países, la capacidad de los productores chinos para repercutir el coste de los aranceles solo aumentará.
Si se implementaran todas las subidas de aranceles anunciadas, la tasa arancelaria efectiva sobre las importaciones chinas subiría desde alrededor del 15% a finales de agosto hasta un máximo del 25% en diciembre (Gráfico 3). Tal tasa arancelaria reduciría los ingresos disponibles de los hogares estadounidenses en más de $100 mil millones de dólares, borrando la mayor parte de las ganancias de los recortes fiscales de 2017. Trump no puede permitir que la guerra comercial llegue a ese punto.
Gráfico 3
Las sucesivas rondas de aranceles han empezado a acumularse
Las sucesivas rondas de aranceles han empezado a acumularse.
Las sucesivas rondas de aranceles han empezado a acumularse.
¿China adoptará una postura dura?
Un riesgo para una resolución favorable de la guerra comercial es que China vea cada vez más a Trump como desesperado por cerrar un acuerdo. Esto podría llevar a los chinos a adoptar una postura dura en las negociaciones. Aunque no se puede descartar este riesgo, lo atenuamos por tres razones:
Primero, aunque los exportadores chinos han podido mantener cierto poder de fijación de precios durante la guerra comercial, los volúmenes comerciales han sufrido, con las exportaciones a EE. UU. cayendo casi un 22% interanual en septiembre.
Segundo, como han demostrado las sanciones paralizantes contra ZTE, China sigue siendo muy dependiente de las tecnologías estadounidenses. Esto le da a Trump mucha palanca en las negociaciones comerciales.
Gráfico 4
¿Quién ganará la nominación demócrata de 2020?
Kumbaya
Kumbaya
Tercero, como al propio Trump le gusta decir, a China le resultará más fácil negociar con él durante su primer mandato que en un segundo. Esperar que Trump perdiera su intento de reelección podría haber tenido sentido para China hace unos meses cuando Joe Biden iba por delante en las encuestas; pero ahora que Elizabeth Warren ha emergido como la favorita para asegurar la nominación demócrata, esa esperanza se ha desvanecido (Gráfico 4). Como señalamos hace varias semanas, es probable que China encuentre a Warren no menos problemática en asuntos comerciales que a Trump.3
Todo esto sugiere que China, al igual que Trump, buscará formas de enfriar las tensiones comerciales en las próximas semanas.
¿Avance en el Brexit?
Cuando se cierra esta edición, las perspectivas de un acuerdo del Brexit han mejorado. Aunque los detalles aún no se han publicado, el acuerdo propuesto pondría efectivamente a Irlanda del Norte en una verdadera superposición cuántica donde está tanto en el mercado común europeo como en el Reino Unido al mismo tiempo. Esta hazaña se conseguiría manteniendo a Irlanda del Norte dentro de la jurisdicción política del Reino Unido pero aún alineada con las normas regulatorias de la UE.
Las negociaciones aún podrían torcerse. A pesar de la garantía del primer ministro Boris Johnson de que logró "un gran nuevo acuerdo", el socio de coalición de los conservadores, el Partido Unionista Democrático de Irlanda del Norte, todavía está reteniendo su apoyo al pacto. El líder laborista Jeremy Corbyn también ha rechazado el acuerdo, diciendo que es aún peor que el pacto originalmente propuesto por Theresa May.
Independientemente de lo que ocurra en los próximos días, seguimos pensando que se evitará un Brexit duro. A lo largo de todo el calvario del Brexit, hemos sostenido que no existía suficiente apoyo político dentro de la clase dirigente británica para un Brexit sin acuerdo. Esa convicción solo se ha reforzado a medida que los datos de opinión han revelado que una mayor proporción de votantes elegiría permanecer en la UE si se celebrara otro referéndum (Gráfico 5).
Hemos mantenido una posición larga en la libra frente al euro desde el 3 de agosto de 2017. La operación ha ganado un 6.6% en este periodo. Los inversores deberían mantener esta posición. Basándonos en los diferenciales de tasas de interés reales, GBP/EUR debería cotizar cerca de 1.30 en lugar del nivel actual de 1.16 (Gráfico 6). Esperamos que el cruce se mueva hacia su valor justo a medida que disminuyan aún más los riesgos de un Brexit duro.
Gráfico 5
Angustia por el Brexit: un caso de arrepentimiento por Brexit
Angustia por el Brexit: Un caso de Bremorse
Angustia por el Brexit: Un caso de Bremorse
Gráfico 6
Importante potencial alcista en la libra
Potencial Alcista Sustancial en la Libra
Potencial Alcista Sustancial en la Libra
Mejoran las perspectivas de crecimiento global
Gráfico 7
La desaceleración del crecimiento ha sido más pronunciada en los datos blandos
La desaceleración del crecimiento ha sido más pronunciada en los datos suaves
La desaceleración del crecimiento ha sido más pronunciada en los datos suaves
Gráfico 8
La producción manufacturera se recupera en medio del desplome del ISM
La producción manufacturera se recupera en medio de la caída del ISM
La producción manufacturera se recupera en medio de la caída del ISM
Una distensión en la guerra comercial y una resolución de la saga del Brexit deberían ayudar a sostener el crecimiento global. La debilidad en los datos económicos ha sido mucho más pronunciada en las medidas denominadas "blandas", como las encuestas empresariales, que en las medidas "duras" como la producción industrial (Gráfico 7). Notablemente, la producción manufacturera estadounidense se ha estabilizado en los últimos tres meses, aun cuando el índice manufacturero ISM se ha desplomado (Gráfico 8). A medida que el sentimiento se recupere, los datos blandos deberían mejorar.
Las condiciones financieras globales se han relajado significativamente en los últimos cinco meses, en gran parte gracias al giro acomodaticio de la mayoría de los bancos centrales (Gráfico 9). El número neto de bancos centrales que recortan tasas suele adelantar al PMI manufacturero global entre 6 y 9 meses (Gráfico 10). Además, la decisión de la Fed de volver a comprar bonos del Tesoro aumentará la liquidez en dólares, contribuyendo así a unas condiciones financieras más laxas.
Gráfico 9
Condiciones financieras más fáciles impulsarán el crecimiento global
Condiciones financieras más favorables impulsarán el crecimiento mundial
Condiciones financieras más favorables impulsarán el crecimiento mundial
Gráfico 10
Los efectos de la relajación de la política monetaria deberían filtrarse pronto a la economía
Los efectos de la flexibilización de la política monetaria deberían llegar pronto a la economía.
Los efectos de la flexibilización de la política monetaria deberían llegar pronto a la economía.
Un estímulo chino reforzado también debería ayudar a activar el crecimiento global. El crecimiento del dinero y del crédito en China superó las expectativas en septiembre. El PBoC ha estado recortando los requisitos de reservas, lo que ha contribuido a reducir las tasas interbancarias. Es probable que se realicen nuevos recortes a la facilidad de financiación a medio plazo durante el resto de este año. Los cambios en el crecimiento del crédito chino adelantan al crecimiento global en aproximadamente nueve meses (Gráfico 11).
Gráfico 11
El crédito chino debería apoyar la recuperación del crecimiento global
El crédito chino debería respaldar la recuperación del crecimiento mundial
El crédito chino debería respaldar la recuperación del crecimiento mundial
Mantener sobreponderación en acciones globales
Aunque el camino para finalizar un acuerdo de "fase 1" a tiempo para la cumbre de la APEC probablemente será accidentado, reiteramos nuestra recomendación de que los inversores sobreponderen acciones globales frente a bonos en un horizonte de 12 meses.
Esperamos mejorar la valoración de las acciones de mercados emergentes (EM) y europeas en las próximas semanas una vez que veamos más evidencia de que el crecimiento global está tocando fondo.
En última instancia, la trayectoria de las acciones dependerá de lo que ocurra con los beneficios. La temporada de resultados en EE. UU. comenzó esta semana. Hasta la semana pasada, los analistas esperaban que las EPS del S&P 500 disminuyeran un 4.6% en el tercer trimestre respecto al mismo trimestre del año anterior, según datos compilados por FactSet. Tenga en cuenta, sin embargo, que el crecimiento de las EPS ha superado las estimaciones en alrededor de cuatro puntos porcentuales desde 2015 (Gráfico 12). Por tanto, una apuesta razonable es que los beneficios estadounidenses se mantendrán planos este trimestre, superando una baja barrera de expectativas.
Gráfico 12
Las EPS reales generalmente han superado las estimaciones
Kumbaya
Kumbaya
Gráfico 13
Los beneficios y el PIB nominal tienden a moverse al unísono
Las ganancias y el crecimiento del PIB nominal tienden a moverse al unísono
Las ganancias y el crecimiento del PIB nominal tienden a moverse al unísono
El hecho de que el 83% de las 63 empresas del S&P 500 que han informado beneficios hasta ahora hayan superado las estimaciones —mejor que la media histórica del 64%— respalda la opinión de que las estimaciones actuales para el tercer trimestre son demasiado pesimistas.
Mirando hacia adelante, el crecimiento de los beneficios debería mejorar a medida que se acelere el crecimiento del PIB nominal (Gráfico 13).
Las acciones europeas y de mercados emergentes generalmente superan al referente global cuando el crecimiento global mejora (Gráfico 14). Esto se debe a la naturaleza más cíclica de sus mercados bursátiles. Además, como moneda contracíclica, el dólar tiende a debilitarse en un entorno de crecimiento más rápido. Un dólar más débil beneficia de manera desproporcionada a las acciones cíclicas (Gráfico 15).
Gráfico 14
Las acciones de EM y de la zona euro suelen superar cuando mejora el crecimiento global
Las acciones de los mercados emergentes y de la zona del euro suelen tener un mejor rendimiento cuando mejora el crecimiento global.
Las acciones de los mercados emergentes y de la zona del euro suelen tener un mejor rendimiento cuando mejora el crecimiento global.
Gráfico 15
Las acciones cíclicas superarán si el dólar se debilita
Las acciones cíclicas tendrán mejor desempeño si el dólar se debilita
Las acciones cíclicas tendrán mejor desempeño si el dólar se debilita
Incluiríamos a los financieros en nuestra definición de sectores cíclicos. A medida que mejore el crecimiento global, los rendimientos de los bonos a largo plazo aumentarán en el margen. Dado que los bancos centrales no tienen prisa por subir las tasas, las curvas de rendimiento se empinarán. Esto impulsará los beneficios bancarios y los precios de las acciones (Gráfico 16).
Las acciones cíclicas están actualmente bastante baratas en comparación con las defensivas (Gráfico 17). Del mismo modo, las acciones no estadounidenses son relativamente baratas en comparación con sus homólogas estadounidenses, incluso si se ajusta por diferencias en la composición sectorial entre regiones. Mientras que las acciones estadounidenses cotizan a 17.5 veces las ganancias a futuro, las acciones internacionales cotizan a un PER a futuro más atractivo de 13.7. La combinación de mayores rentabilidades por beneficios y tipos de interés más bajos en el extranjero implica que la prima de riesgo de la renta variable es aproximadamente dos puntos porcentuales más alta fuera de Estados Unidos (Gráfico 18).
Gráfico 16
Curvas de rendimiento más empinadas beneficiarán a los financieros
Curvas de rendimiento más pronunciadas beneficiarán al sector financiero
Curvas de rendimiento más pronunciadas beneficiarán al sector financiero
Gráfico 17
Las acciones cíclicas son más atractivas que las defensivas
Las acciones cíclicas son más atractivas que las defensivas
Las acciones cíclicas son más atractivas que las defensivas
Gráfico 18
La prima de riesgo de la renta variable es bastante alta, especialmente fuera de EE. UU.
La prima de riesgo de las acciones es bastante alta, especialmente fuera de Estados Unidos.
La prima de riesgo de las acciones es bastante alta, especialmente fuera de Estados Unidos.
Esperamos mejorar la valoración de las acciones de mercados emergentes (EM) y europeas en las próximas semanas una vez que veamos más evidencia de que el crecimiento global está tocando fondo.
Peter Berezin, Jefe de Estrategia Global Estrategia Global de Inversiones peterb@bcaresearch.com
Notas al pie
1Consulte Estrategia Global de Inversiones, “Perspectiva estratégica del cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado 'muéstrame',” con fecha 4 de octubre de 2019.
2 “Actualización del Informe de la Comisión sobre el Robo de la Propiedad Intelectual: El informe de la Commission on the Theft of American Intellectual Property,” The National Bureau of Asian Research, 2017.
3Consulte Global Investment Strategy Weekly Report, “Elizabeth Warren y los mercados,” con fecha 13 de septiembre de 2019.
Estrategia & tendencias del mercado
Modelo MacroQuant y puntajes subjetivos actuales
Kumbaya
Kumbaya
Recomendaciones estratégicas
Operaciones cerradas
Highlights Duration & Fed: Our late-1990s & 2015/16 roadmap for the economy still holds, but risks are mounting. Despite the risks, we expect that trade tensions will calm enough for the economic data to improve during the next few months. The result will be one more Fed rate cut this month, followed by an extended on-hold period. Investors should keep portfolio duration low in that environment. Junk Quality Spreads: This year’s divergence between the Caa/Ba quality spread and the high-yield index spread is highly unusual, but has more to do with movements in Treasury yields and changing index duration than with broader concerns about corporate credit quality. Investment Grade Risk & Reward: We present a novel approach for assessing the risk/reward trade-off among investment grade corporate bond sectors. We note that Saudi Arabian and Mexican Sovereign bonds, Foreign Agency bonds and Conventional 30-year Agency MBS look particularly attractive in risk-adjusted terms. Feature Contagion? This publication has repeatedly pointed to the late-1990s and the 2015/16 periods as appropriate comparables for today’s global growth slowdown. That is, we expect that the current spate of weakness will stay confined within the manufacturing sector and will not spread into the broader economy, leading the U.S. into recession. This call is important from an investment perspective because it implies that the Fed is not currently engaged in an easing cycle that will bring the funds rate back to zero. Rather, we anticipate only three rate cuts this year (we’ve already seen two), followed by the eventual resumption of hikes. Bond yields will not make new lows in that environment. Chart 1Manufacturing Weakness Spreading? Chart 2"Hard" Data Still Firm But some data received this month challenge our economic narrative. Specifically, September’s drop in the ISM Non-Manufacturing PMI from 56.4 to 52.6 and the year-over-year decline in the Conference Board’s survey of consumer confidence (Chart 1). Both are sending tentative signals that economic weakness might be spreading from the manufacturing sector into the broader U.S. economy. The Fed is worried about the same thing, as evidenced by this passage from the September FOMC minutes: One risk that the economy faced was that the softness recorded of late in firms’ capital formation, manufacturing, and exporting activities might spread to their hiring decisions, with adverse implications for household income and spending. Participants observed that such an eventuality was not embedded in their baseline outlook; however, a couple of them indicated that this was partly because they assumed that an appropriate adjustment to the policy rate path would help forestall that eventuality. This passage makes two important points. First, it stresses the risk of contagion from manufacturing into services and consumer spending as a precondition for recession. This risk has clearly increased, but we are not yet ready to abandon our base case outlook. For one thing, Chart 1 shows that the ISM Non-Manufacturing survey printed at 51.8 for one month in 2016, before rebounding sharply. Second, the “hard” economic data paint a much rosier picture that the “soft” survey data (Chart 2). Industrial production has already bounced off its lows and, unlike the ISM Manufacturing PMI, has not yet approached 2015/16 levels. Similarly, new orders for capital goods are much stronger than during the 2015/16 period. As for consumer spending, it continues to grow at a rapid pace despite the drop in confidence. Chart 3Expect One Rate Cut In October The most logical explanation for the divergence between “hard” and “soft” data is that business and consumer sentiment are being pulled down by concerns about the ongoing trade war. Our sense is that some positive news on that front is now required to bring the survey data back into line with the “hard” numbers. On that note, we anticipate that the looming 2020 election will provide enough incentive for President Trump to reach some sort of détente with China. In fact, as we go to press, optimism about a potential trade deal has pushed the 10-year Treasury yield up above 1.70%. If this optimism is not vindicated, then weak survey data will eventually drag the “hard” data lower. The economy is at a critical and highly uncertain juncture. Amidst so much uncertainty, and with so much hinging on near-term political decisions, how should we expect the Fed to respond? The above passage from the September FOMC minutes gives us a strong clue. It illustrates that the Fed believes that sufficiently accommodative monetary policy will help mitigate the risk of contagion from manufacturing into services and consumer spending. In other words, the Fed must help weather the current storm by ensuring that financial conditions remain supportive. This means refraining from delivering hawkish surprises to market expectations.1 The Fed believes that sufficiently accommodative monetary policy will help mitigate the risk of contagion from manufacturing into services and consumer spending. With that in mind, we note that the market has mostly priced-in an October rate cut (Chart 3), and we expect the Fed to deliver on that expectation. Assuming an October cut, the market is only pricing-in a 28% chance of another cut in December. Overall, the market is priced for 59 basis points of rate cuts during the next 12 months. We anticipate a 25 bps cut this month, followed by an improvement in the economic data that will make further cuts unnecessary. Bottom Line: Our late-1990s & 2015/16 roadmap for the economy still holds, but risks are mounting. Despite the risks, we expect that trade tensions will calm enough for the economic data to improve during the next few months. The result will be one more Fed rate cut this month, followed by an extended on-hold period. Investors should keep portfolio duration low in that environment. High-Yield Quality Spreads: Less Than Meets The Eye Corporate bonds have generally performed quite well this year, but oddly, the lowest tier of junk has not kept pace (Chart 4). Investment grade excess returns have followed a typical risk-on pattern. That is, the lowest rated / riskiest credit tiers have performed best in a bull market. However, in the high-yield space, Caa-rated debt has bucked the trend and actually underperformed the duration-matched Treasury index by 33 bps. Chart 4Caa-Rated Junk Is Not Keeping Pace Is this a potentially worrying sign for corporate spreads more generally? To consider the question, we looked at the historical relationships between quality spreads – the spread differential between low-rated and high-rated credit tiers – and the overall index spreads for both investment grade and high-yield. We found a strong positive correlation in both cases, but no leading or lagging properties. That is, quality spreads tend to follow the same trend as the overall index spread, but do not flag signs of trouble before the overall index. Nonetheless, the current divergence between the Caa/Ba quality spread and the high-yield index spread is highly unusual (Chart 5). Our sense, however, is that the divergence has less to do with concerns about credit quality and more to do with this year’s large moves in Treasury yields and changes to bond index duration. Chart 5De-Coupling In Quality Spreads... Chart 6...Is Due To Duration Specifically, we note that this year’s large decline in Treasury yields has caused junk index duration to plunge, but the drop has been greater for the Ba credit tier than the Caa credit tier (Chart 6). Ba index duration has fallen by 0.8 this year (from 4.4 to 3.5), while Caa index duration has fallen by 0.6 (3.4 to 2.8). The result is that if we control for changes in duration by looking at a 12-month breakeven spread instead of the average index option-adjusted spread (OAS), we see that the quality spread widening is roughly consistent with the overall index (Chart 6, panel 3).2 In other words, the steep drop in Treasury yields has not led to the same reduction in risk in the Caa credit tier as it has in the other junk credit tiers. Caa spreads have widened on a relative basis, as a result. This year’s large decline in Treasury yields has caused junk index duration to plunge. It’s also interesting to note that the opposite dynamic is afoot within the investment grade corporate space. The Baa/Aa quality spread is more or less consistent with the overall index spread in OAS terms (Chart 5, top panel), but the quality spread widening is exacerbated when the impact of changing duration is considered (Chart 6, panels 1 & 2). That is, index duration has lengthened by more for the upper credit tiers than it has for the Baa credit tier. This makes Baa corporates look particularly attractive in risk-adjusted terms, as we have noted in prior research.3 From a big picture perspective, it is unusual for Treasury yields to fall so much without a concurrent widening in credit risk premiums. Eventually, this anomaly will be resolved by either: Higher Treasury yields in the event that recession is avoided, or Wider credit spreads in the event of a contraction in U.S. economic activity But in the meantime, negatively convex sectors such as high-yield corporates and Agency MBS look particularly attractive on a risk-adjusted basis. These sectors have benefited from the drop in Treasury yields by seeing their durations fall. They should perform well as long as the current environment of low Treasury yields and stable credit spreads persists. We take a more detailed look at the prospects for risk-adjusted performance within the different investment grade bond sectors in the next section. Risk And Reward In Investment Grade Bond Sectors As mentioned above, in this week’s report we present a novel approach for considering the risk/reward trade-off between different investment grade sectors of the U.S. bond market. We consider 23 sectors in total: 4 corporate credit tiers Conventional 30-year Agency MBS and Agency CMBS Aaa-rated non-Agency CMBS, credit card ABS and auto loan ABS Domestic and Foreign Agency bonds Supranationals Local Authority bonds (mostly taxable munis and USD-denominated Canadian provincial debt) USD-denominated Sovereign bonds for 10 different emerging markets Reward First, we consider the reward side of the equation. We do not impose any macro view, but instead, use the average index OAS as the best estimate for each sector’s 12-month expected excess returns relative to a duration-matched position in Treasuries. Chart 7 shows the expected excess returns for each sector. Right away, the attractiveness of Mexican sovereign debt is apparent. Mexico carries an A rating, but offers a greater spread than the Baa corporate index. Chart 7Expected Returns Risk We decided to assess risk using a breakeven spread framework. We calculate a 12-month breakeven spread for each sector. This spread represents the basis point spread widening required for each sector to break even with a duration-matched position in Treasury securities on a 12-month horizon. We calculate the breakeven spread using the following equation: 0 = OAS – D(B) + 0.5*CVXs*(dYs)2 - 0.5*CVXT*(dYT)2 Where: OAS = the sector’s option-adjusted spread D = the sector’s duration B = the breakeven spread CVXs = the sector’s convexity CVXT = the convexity of a duration-matched Treasury security dYs = trailing 1-year volatility of the sector’s yield dYT = trailing 1-year volatility of the duration-matched Treasury yield Chart 8 shows each sector’s 12-month breakeven spread, and it illustrates that the breakeven spread is a sub-optimal measure of risk. In theory, the highest breakeven spreads should be the least likely to see losses, but this is obviously not the case. Baa-rated South African Sovereign debt carries the largest breakeven spread, but it should be among the riskiest of the sectors. Chart 812-Month Breakeven Spreads The missing piece of the puzzle is spread volatility. South African sovereign spreads need to widen by 39 bps before losses are incurred, while Aaa-rated credit card ABS spreads only need to widen by 13 bps. However, if spread volatility is much higher for South African sovereigns than for credit card ABS, then the sovereign sector still might be more likely to see losses. To control for this difference we calculate the standard deviation of annual spread changes for each sector, starting from May 2014 when all sectors have available data. We then divide each sector’s breakeven spread by the result. This calculation gives us a volatility-adjusted 12-month breakeven spread. In other words, it is the number of standard deviations of spread widening required for each sector to see losses on a 12-month horizon (Chart 9). Chart 912-Month Volatility-Adjusted Breakeven Spreads Risk & Reward We bring risk and reward together in Charts 10-12. Chart 10 shows expected returns on the y-axis and the vol-adjusted 12-month breakeven spread on the x-axis. Sectors plotting near the top-right of the chart give the best returns and lowest risk of losses, while sectors plotting near the bottom-left provide low expected returns and high risk of losses. Immediately, Saudi Arabian sovereigns and Foreign Agency debt stand out as offering high expected returns for their risk levels. Note that South African sovereigns plot off the charts, toward the top-left of Charts 10-12, as indicated by the arrows. Chart 10Expected Returns Vs. Risk Of Negative Excess Returns Chart 11Expected Returns Vs. Risk Of Losing 100 BPs Chart 12Expected Returns Vs. Risk Of Losing 200 BPs In Charts 11 and 12 we make one further refinement to our risk measure. In these charts, instead of calculating 12-month breakeven spreads, we calculate the spread change necessary for each sector to underperform Treasuries by 100 bps and 200 bps, respectively. Saudi Arabian sovereigns and Foreign Agency debt stand out as offering high expected returns for their risk levels. This adjustment arguably gives a more useful perspective on risk. For example, because spreads are quite narrow in the Supranational and Domestic Agency sectors, the risk of negative returns versus Treasuries is quite elevated. However, these sectors also carry high credit ratings and low spread volatility, making it exceedingly unlikely that they would deliver losses of 100 bps or more. Considering Charts 11 and 12, we look for sectors that clearly dominate other ones, i.e. plotting both higher and further to the right. Once again, Foreign Agencies and Saudi Arabian sovereigns both look very appealing. Mexican sovereign debt also offers very high expected return, and less risk that the Baa corporate sector. We would also like to point out the attractiveness of Agency MBS. As we noted in a recent report, Agency MBS offer considerably less risk than high-rated corporate debt, and similar expected returns. Note that this analysis doesn’t impose any macroeconomic view, and our sense is that the macro back-drop is more favorable for MBS spreads than for corporates.4 All in all, we reiterate our recommendation to favor Agency MBS over Aaa-, Aa- and A-rated corporate bonds. We will continue to refine this approach to measuring the risk/reward trade-off in the coming weeks, including incorporating high-yield debt into our analysis. Stay tuned. Ryan Swift, U.S. Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 For further discussion on this topic please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Act As Appropriate”, dated August 27, 2019, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 2 The 12-month breakeven spread is the spread widening required on a 12-month horizon to break even with a duration-matched position in Treasury securities. It can be approximated by dividing the option-adjusted spread by duration, as is done in Chart 6. 3 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Two Themes And Two Trades”, dated October 1, 2019, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 4 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Two Themes And Two Trades”, dated October 1, 2019, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com Fixed Income Sector Performance Recommended Portfolio Specification
Highlights In this Weekly Report, we present our semi-annual chartbook of the BCA Central Bank Monitors. All of the Monitors are now below the zero line, indicating a growing need to ease global monetary policy (Chart of the Week). Central bankers have already gone down that path in several countries over the past few months (the U.S., the euro area, Australia and New Zealand), helping sustain the powerful 2019 rally in global bond markets. Feature With the global manufacturing & trade downturn now threatening to spill over into domestic demand in the major developed markets, policymakers will need to stay dovish to stave off recession. This will keep global bond yields at depressed levels in the near term, at least until widely-followed data like manufacturing PMIs stabilize and/or there is positive news on U.S.-China trade negotiations. Chart of the WeekStrong Pressures To Ease Global Monetary Policy Yields already discount a lot of bad economic news, however, and there is a ray of hope visible in the bottoming out of our global leading economic indicator. A sustainable bottom in global bond yields, though, will require some change in the current downward growth or inflation momentum highlighted in our Central Bank Monitors. Yields already discount a lot of bad economic news, however, and there is a ray of hope visible in the bottoming out of our global leading economic indicator. A sustainable bottom in global bond yields, though, will require some change in the current downward growth or inflation momentum highlighted in our Central Bank Monitors. An Overview Of The BCA Central Bank Monitors* Chart 2Low Bond Yields Are Consistent With Our CB Monitors The BCA Central Bank Monitors are composite indicators designed to measure the cyclical growth and inflation pressures that can influence future monetary policy decisions. The economic data series used to construct the Monitors are not the same for every country, but the list of indicators generally measure the same things (i.e. manufacturing cycles, domestic demand strength, commodity prices, labor market conditions, exchange rates, etc). The data series are standardized and combined to form the Monitors. Readings above the zero line for each Monitor indicate pressures for central banks to raise interest rates, and vice versa. Through the nexus between growth, inflation, and market expectations of future interest rate changes, the Monitors do exhibit broad correlations to government bond yields in the Developed Markets (Chart 2). All of the Monitors are currently pointing in a bond-bullish direction, making them less useful as a country allocation tool within global bond portfolios. With easing pressures most intense in the euro area, given that the ECB Monitor has the lowest reading, our recommended overweight stance on core euro area government bonds (hedged into U.S. dollars) remains well supported. In each BCA Central Bank Monitor Chartbook, we include a new chart for each country that we have not shown previously. In this edition, we show the components of the Monitors, grouped into those focusing on economic growth and inflation, plotted against our central bank discounters that indicate the amount of rate cuts/hikes priced into global Overnight Index Swap (OIS) curves. Fed Monitor: Signaling A Need For More Cuts Our Fed Monitor has fallen below the zero line (Chart 3A), indicating that the Fed’s summer rate cuts were justified with more easing still required. The Monitor, however, has not yet fallen to levels seen during U.S. recessions and is more consistent with the below-trend growth periods in 2016 and the late-1990s. The views of the FOMC on U.S. monetary policy are more deeply divided now than has been seen in many years. The doves can point to slumping global growth, persistent trade uncertainty, contracting capital spending and falling inflation expectations as reasons to continue cutting rates. The hawks can look at continued labor market tightness, elevated asset prices and realized inflation rates holding near the Fed’s 2% inflation target (Chart 3B) as reasons to keep monetary policy steady. That mixed picture can be seen in the components of our Fed Monitor, with the growth components showing the biggest pressure for more rate cuts compared to more stable readings from the inflation and financial components (Chart 3C). Chart 3AU.S.: Fed Monitor Chart 3BU.S. Realized Inflation Holding Firm Chart 3CGreatest Pressure For Fed Rate Cuts From Growth Components Of Our Fed Monitor The U.S. Treasury market may have gotten ahead of itself after the latest decline in yields, which looks stretched versus the Fed Monitor. The U.S. Treasury market may have gotten ahead of itself after the latest decline in yields, which looks stretched versus the Fed Monitor (Chart 3D). We still expect the Fed to deliver just one more rate cut at the FOMC meeting at the end of October, as the “hard” U.S. data is outpeforming the “soft” data like the weak ISM surveys. That leaves Treasury yields vulnerable to some rebound if global growth stabilizes, although that is conditional on no new breakdown of the U.S.-China trade negotiations – a factor that continues to weigh on U.S. business confidence. Chart 3DTreasury Yields More Than Fully Discount Fed Easing Pressures BoE Monitor: Easier Policy Needed Our Bank of England (BoE) Monitor, which was in the “tighter money required” zone from 2016-18, has been below the zero line since April of this year (Chart 4A). The market agrees with the message from the Monitor and is now pricing in -12bps of rate cuts over the next twelve months. The relentless uncertainty surrounding Brexit has triggered sharp downgrades of growth expectations and weakened business confidence, which the BoE is now factoring into its own projections. In the August Inflation Report, the BoE lowered its 2020 inflation forecast to below 2% - no surprise given the sharp fall in realized inflation that has already occurred even as economic growth has still not yet fallen substantially below trend (Chart 4B). Chart 4AU.K.: BoE Monitor Chart 4BFalling U.K. Inflation Opens The Door To A BoE Ease Still, weakening growth components have been the main driver of the BoE Monitor into rate cut territory (Chart 4C). While a strong jobs market is helping support consumer spending, the Brexit turmoil is having a lasting impact on future growth. Since the 2016 Brexit referendum, business confidence and real business investment have collapsed which, in turn, has hurt productivity growth, as we discussed in a Special Report last month.1 Chart 4CBrexit Uncertainty + Slumping Growth = Pressure For BoE Rate Cuts The uncertainty around Brexit dominates the economic outlook and any future BoE decisions. Our Geopolitical Strategy service anticipates that Brexit will be delayed beyond October 31st. As a result, uncertainty will continue to weigh on Gilt yields, even though yields have already fallen in line with our BoE Monitor (Chart 4D). We continue to recommend an overweight stance on U.K. Gilts. Chart 4DGilt Yields Have Fallen In Line With Our BoE Monitor ECB Monitor: Intense Pressure For Easier Monetary Policy Our European Central Bank (ECB) Monitor is now well below the zero line, signaling a strong need for easier monetary policy (Chart 5A). The global manufacturing downturn has hit the export-dependent economies of the euro area hard, with Germany now likely in a technical recession. Our European Central Bank (ECB) Monitor is now well below the zero line, signaling a strong need for easier monetary policy. Despite the weaker growth momentum, there remains far less spare capacity in the euro area economy than at any time since before the 2009 global recession (Chart 5B). This is keeping realized inflation in positive territory, in contrast to what was seen during the previous downturn in 2015-16. Chart 5AEuro Area: ECB Monitor Chart 5BEuro Area Inflation Is Subdued, Despite Tight Labor Markets The ECB has already responded to the weakening growth & inflation pressures, introducing a new TLTRO program back in March and then cutting the overnight deposit rate and restarting its Asset Purchase Program in September. The latest policy moves were reported to be more contentious, with the “hard money” northern euro area countries opposed to restarting bond purchases. The new incoming ECB President, Christine Lagarde, will likely have her hands full trying to gain consensus on any further easing measures from here, even as both the growth and inflation components of our ECB Monitor indicate that more stimulus is needed (Chart 5C). Chart 5CA Consistent Message On The Need For Future ECB Easing From Growth & Inflation The big decline in euro area bond yields, which has pushed large swaths of sovereign yields into negative territory, does not look particularly stretched relative to the plunge in the ECB Monitor (Chart 5D). Without signs that the global manufacturing downturn is ending, however, euro area yields will stay mired at current deeply depressed levels. We recommend a moderate overweight on core European government bonds, on a currency-hedged basis into U.S. dollars. Chart 5DBund Rally Looks In Line With The ECB Monitor BoJ Monitor: A Rate Cut On The Horizon? Our Bank of Japan (BoJ) Monitor has drifted slightly below the zero line into “rate cut required” territory (Chart 6A). Over the past few years, the BoJ’s monetary policy has remained unchanged for the most part and its messaging has grown less dovish, citing an expanding economy. However, recent Japanese economic data shows widespread deterioration in growth momentum, as the nation has been hit hard by the global manufacturing and trade recession. Yet even with weaker growth, Japan’s unemployment rate keeps hitting all-time lows. This has not helped boost inflation much, though, with Japan’s CPI inflation still struggling to reach even the 1% level (Chart 6B). Still, the latest leg lower in our BoJ Monitor has been driven by the growth, rather than inflation, components (Chart 6C). Chart 6AJapan: BoJ Monitor Chart 6BNo Spare Capacity In Japan, But Still No Inflation Weakening confidence has resulted in significant declines in both consumer spending and business investment. Due to the struggling domestic economy, it was expected that the Abe government would postpone the scheduled consumption tax hike, but it was finally initiated on October 1st. The timing could not be worse given the ongoing contraction in global manufacturing and trade activity that has clearly spilled over into Japan’s export and industrially-focused economy. Chart 6CThe Slumping Japanese Economy Could Use Some More BoJ Assistance The BoJ will likely try and deliver some sort of easing in the next few months, but its options are limited after years of already hyper-easy policy. A modest rate cut is likely all that will be delivered, on top of a continuation of the Yield Curve Control policy. That will be enough to keep JGB yields at depressed levels (Chart 6D), even if global yields were to begin climbing. Chart 6DJGB Yields Look Fairly Valued Vs The BoJ Monitor BoC Monitor: Rate Cuts Needed, But Will The BoC Deliver? The Bank of Canada (BoC) Monitor has been below zero since April of this year, indicating a need for easier monetary policy (Chart 7A). Although the BoC has maintained its policy rate at 1.75%, dovish Fed policy and softening domestic economic growth are making it harder for the BoC to continue sitting on its hands Although the Canadian labor market remains solid, household consumption has continued to weaken alongside falling consumer confidence. However, the inflation rate for both headline and core CPI measures is still hovering near the mid-point of BoC 1-3% target range (Chart 7B). Chart 7ACanada: BoC Monitor Chart 7BRising Inflation Making The BoC’s Job Harder At the moment, our BoC Monitor is more influenced by weaker growth components than stabilizing inflation components (Chart 7C). Similar mixed messages are also evident in other data. According to the latest BoC Business Outlook Survey, the overall outlook has edged up to the historical average,2 but real capex growth remains in negative territory and manufacturing new orders are still falling. In contrast, the Canadian labor market remains tight and both wage and price inflation are holding firm. Chart 7CBoC Growth & Inflation Components Signaling Moderate Pressure To Ease Canadian government bonds have rallied strongly this year, but the yield momentum has appeared to overshoot the decline in our BoC Monitor (Chart 7D). The Canadian OIS curve is discounting -27bps of rate cuts over the next twelve months, but the BoC is not signaling that they will ease. We upgraded our recommended stance on Canadian government bonds to neutral back in May, and we see no need to alter that view without further evidence of more deterioration in Canadian growth or inflation data.3 Chart 7DCanadian Bond Rally Looks A Bit Stretched RBA Monitor: Expect Another Cut The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) Monitor has been below the zero line since September 2018, indicating a need for easier monetary policy (Chart 8A). The RBA has already delivered on that signal this year, cutting the Cash Rate twice to an all-time low of 0.75%. Markets are still expecting more, with the Australian OIS curve discounting another -29bps of cuts over the next year, although most of those cuts are expected to occur within the next six months. The signal from our RBA Monitor suggests that Australian bond yields should remain under downward pressure, although the yield momentum has been excessive relative to the fall in the Monitor. Both headline and core CPI inflation remain below the RBA’s 2-3% target range (Chart 8B), and the central bank continues to lower its inflation forecasts, suggesting an entrenched dovish bias. Chart 8AAustralia: RBA Monitor Chart 8BNo Inflation For The RBA To Worry About The latest downturn in our RBA Monitor is related to declines in both the inflation and growth components (Chart 8C). The weakness in the growth components is led by falling exports to Asia, in addition to the sharp drop in house prices in the major cities. The fall in the inflation components reflects both weak inflation expectations and spare capacity in labor markets. Chart 8CA Loud & Clear Message On The Need For RBA Easing The signal from our RBA Monitor suggests that Australian bond yields should remain under downward pressure, although the yield momentum has been excessive relative to the fall in the Monitor (Chart 8D). Australia’s economy will not begin to outperform again, however, until China’s current growth slump starts to bottom out, which is unlikely to occur until the first quarter of 2020 at the earliest. Thus, we expect the RBA to deliver another rate cut before the end of the year, justifying a continued overweight stance on Australian government bonds. Chart 8DA Lot Of Bad News Discounted In Australian Bond Yields RBNZ Monitor: More Easing To Come Our Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ) monitor remains well below zero, indicating that easier monetary policy is still required (Chart 9A). The central bank has already delivered two rate cuts this year: a -25bps cut in May and, more importantly, a shock rate cut of -50bps in August. Forward guidance remains dovish, with RBNZ Governor Adrian Orr signaling more easing is likely and even hinting at negative rates in the future. This rhetoric is reflected in the NZ OIS curve, which is pricing in a further -42bps of easing over the next twelve months. High inflation is not a constraint for the RBNZ. Both headline and core measures of inflation are currently at 1.7% (Chart 9B). As the RBNZ targets a 1-3% range over the medium term, the prospect of overshooting the 2% longer-term target will not restrict policymakers from acting as appropriate to boost growth. Chart 9ANew Zealand: RBNZ Monitor Chart 9BNZ Inflation Creeping Higher Most of the pressure to ease has come from the continued deterioration in the growth component of our RBNZ Monitor (Chart 9C), reflecting weakness in manufacturing and consumption. The manufacturing PMI is currently in contractionary territory at 48.4, having fallen almost five points since February of this year. Annual growth in retail sales has been slowing for the past two years while consumer confidence is at 7-year lows. Chart 9CWeak Growth Is The Reason RBNZ Rate Cuts Are Needed We feel confident in reiterating our bullish recommendation on NZ government bonds versus U.S. and German sovereign debt. The RBNZ Monitor suggests that policy will stay dovish for some time, while NZ yields still offer a relatively attractive yield, unlike deeply overbought Treasuries and Bunds (Chart 9D). Chart 9DStill A Bullish Case For New Zealand Government Bonds Riksbank Monitor: Watching And Waiting Our Riksbank Monitor remains very slightly below zero and the market is currently priced for -4bps of rate cuts over the next year (Chart 10A). The Riksbank has decided to hold the Repo Rate constant at -0.25% while forecasting a hike towards the end of this year or the beginning of 2020. Given the policy environment, rate cuts remain unlikely. At most, the Riksbank can further delay rate hikes if the data continues to disappoint. The Riksbank noted in its September Monetary Policy Report that the unexpectedly weak development of the labor market indicates that resource utilization will normalize sooner than expected. This is reflected in Chart 10B, where the unemployment gap is now negative. Meanwhile, inflation readings are giving a mixed signal for the central bank. While the headline CPI measure has declined precipitously year-to-date, owing to the dramatic fall in oil prices, core inflation has continued to climb steadily. Chart 10ASweden: Riksbank Monitor Chart 10BMixed Messages From Swedish Inflation As a result, the inflation components of our Riksbank monitor - driven by a spike in the Citigroup Inflation Surprise Index, wage growth hooking upward and inflation expectations holding firm around 2% - are signaling the need for tighter monetary policy (Chart 10C). However, the growth components – led by weak exports, employment, and manufacturing data - are exerting pressure in the opposite direction. This is evident in the Swedish Manufacturing PMI, which tumbled from 51.8 to 46.3 in September, deep into contractionary territory. Chart 10CThere Is A Reason Why The Riksbank Has Been On Hold Keeping in mind the inflation constraint, it remains unlikely that the Riksbank will cut rates unless the economic data disappoints more significantly to the downside. This should help put a floor under Swedish bond yields in the near term (Chart 10D). Chart 10DSwedish Yields Have Fallen Too Far, Too Fast Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com Ray Park, CFA Research Analyst ray@bcaresearch.com Shakti Sharma Research Associate shaktis@bcaresearch.com Footnotes * NOTE: All information in this report reflects our knowledge of global events as of Thursday, October 10. 1 Please see BCA Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report “United Kingdom: Cyclical Slowdown Or Structural Malaise?” dated September 20, 2019, available at gfis.bcaresearch.com. 2https://www.bankofcanada.ca/2019/06/business-outlook-survey-summer-2019/ 3 Please see BCA Global Fixed Income Weekly Report, “Reconcilable Differences” dated May 8, 2019, 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
The LPR rate is essentially the MLF rate plus bank profit margins. The market will guide the top line lending rate, while the PBoC will have control over the floor rate (MLF) through open market operations. The fact that the PBoC is keeping the MLF rate…