Rendimientos del Mercado

Highlights Chart 1Contagion? Until last week, global growth weakness had been wholly confined to the manufacturing sector. But the drop to 52.6 in September’s Non-Manufacturing PMI (from 56.4 in August) raises the specter of contagion from manufacturing into the broader U.S. economy. A further drop would be consistent with an economy headed toward recession, and run contrary to the 2015/16 roadmap that has been our base case (Chart 1). We think it is still premature to abandon the 2015/16 episode as an appropriate comparable for the current period. For one thing, the hard economic data paint a rosier picture than the PMI surveys. Industrial production and core durable goods new orders are up 2.5% and 2.3% (annualized), respectively, during the past 3 months. These data have helped drive the economic surprise index above zero, an event that usually coincides with rising yields (bottom panel). The divergence between soft and hard data makes it clear that trade uncertainties are so far having a greater impact on business sentiment than on actual production, but history tells us that these divergences don’t last long. Some positive news on the trade front will be required during the next few months to raise business sentiment and push bond yields higher. Stay tuned. Feature Investment Grade: Overweight Chart 2Investment Grade Market Overview Investment grade corporate bonds outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 42 basis points in September, before giving back 37 bps in the first week of October. We consider three main factors in our credit cycle analysis: (i) corporate balance sheet health, (ii) monetary conditions, and (iii) valuation. At present, the chief conundrum for investors is that while corporate balance sheet health is weak, the monetary environment is extraordinarily accommodative.1 On balance sheets, our top-down measure of gross leverage is elevated and rising (Chart 2). In contrast, interest coverage ratios remain solid, propped up by the Fed’s accommodative stance. With inflation expectations still very low, the Fed can maintain its “easy money” policy for some time yet. This will ensure that interest coverage stays solid and that bank lending standards continue to ease (bottom panel). This is an environment where corporate bond spreads should tighten. How low can spreads go? Our assessment of reasonable spread targets for the current environment suggests that Aaa, Aa and A-rated spreads are already fully valued, while Baa-rated spreads are 13 bps cheap (panels 2 & 3).2 We recommend focusing investment grade corporate bond exposure on the Baa credit tier, and subbing some Agency MBS into your portfolio in place of corporate bonds rated A or higher. Table 3ACorporate Sector Relative Valuation And Recommended Allocation* Table 3BCorporate Sector Risk Vs. Reward* High-Yield: Overweight Chart 3High-Yield Market Overview High-Yield outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 66 basis points in September, before giving back 117 bps in the first week of October. The junk index’s option-adjusted spread (OAS) has been fairly stable for most of the year, but the sector has become increasingly attractive from a risk/reward perspective.3 This is because the index’s negatively convex nature has caused its average duration to fall alongside declining Treasury yields. Chart 3 shows that while the index OAS has been rangebound, the 12-month breakeven spread has widened considerably.4 In other words, while junk expected returns have been stable, those expected returns now come with considerably less risk. As a result, the junk index OAS looks increasingly attractive relative to our spread target.5 Specifically, we now view the junk index OAS as 171 bps cheap (panel 3). Falling index duration also explains the divergence between quality spreads and the index OAS. Many have observed that the spread differential between Caa and Ba-rated junk bonds has widened in recent months, while the overall index OAS has been stable (panel 4). However, the divergence evaporates when we look at 12-month breakeven spreads instead of OAS (bottom panel). MBS: Neutral Chart 4MBS Market Overview Mortgage-Backed Securities outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 24 basis points in September, before giving back 25 bps in the first week of October. MBS have underperformed Treasuries by 31 bps, year-to-date. The conventional 30-year zero volatility spread held flat at 82 bps in September, as a 3 bps increase in expected prepayment losses (option cost) was offset by a 3 bps tightening in the option-adjusted spread (OAS). In last week’s report, we recommended favoring Agency MBS over Aaa, Aa and A-rated corporate bonds.6 We have three main reasons for this recommendation. First, expected compensation is competitive. The conventional 30-year MBS OAS is now 57 bps. This is above the pre-crisis average (Chart 4), and only 4 bps below the spread offered by a Aa-rated corporate bond. Aaa, Aa and A-rated corporate bond spreads also all look expensive relative to our targets. Second, risk-adjusted compensation heavily favors MBS. The 12-month breakeven spread for a conventional 30-year MBS is 21 bps. This compares to 6 bps, 8 bps and 12 bps for Aaa, Aa and A-rated corporates, respectively. Finally, the macro environment for MBS remains supportive. Mortgage lending standards have barely eased since the financial crisis (bottom panel), and most people have already had at least one opportunity to refinance their mortgage. This burnout will keep refi activity low, and MBS spreads tight (panel 2), going forward. Government-Related: Underweight Chart 5Government-Related Market Overview The Government-Related index outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 10 basis points in September, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to +163 bps. September returns were concentrated in the Foreign Agency sub-sector. These securities outperformed the Treasury benchmark by 55 bps on the month, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to +197 bps. Sovereign bonds underperformed duration-equivalent Treasuries by 6 bps in September, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to +436 bps. Local Authority and Domestic Agency debt underperformed by 1 bp and 2 bps on the month, respectively. Meanwhile, Supranationals bested the Treasury benchmark by a single basis point. Sovereign debt remains very expensive relative to equivalently-rated U.S. corporate credit (Chart 5). While the sector would benefit if the Fed’s dovish pivot eventually results in a weaker dollar, U.S. corporate bonds would also perform well in such an environment. Given the much more attractive starting point for U.S. corporate bond spreads, we find it difficult to recommend sovereign debt as an alternative. While sovereign debt in general looks expensive. USD-denominated Mexican sovereign bonds continue to look attractive relative to U.S. corporates (bottom panel). Investors should favor Mexican sovereigns within an otherwise underweight allocation to the sector as a whole. Municipal Bonds: Overweight Chart 6Municipal Market Overview Municipal bonds underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 10 basis points in September, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -57 bps (before adjusting for the tax advantage). We recommended upgrading municipal bonds from neutral to overweight in last week’s report.7  We based the decision on the increasing attractiveness of yield ratios, despite an underlying credit environment that remains supportive for munis. Municipal bond yields failed to keep pace with falling Treasury yields in recent months, and now look quite attractive as a result (Chart 6). The average Aaa-rated Municipal / Treasury (M/T) yield ratio rose 4% in September and is now back above 90%. This is well above the 81% average that prevailed in the late stages of the previous cycle, between mid-2006 and mid-2007. In fact, Aaa M/T yield ratios for every maturity are now above average pre-crisis levels. Though yield ratios still look best at the long-end of the Aaa curve (panel 2), we now recommend owning munis in place of Treasuries across the entire maturity spectrum. Fundamentally, state & local government balance sheets remain solid. We showed in last week’s report that our Municipal Health Monitor is in “improving health” territory, and noted that state & local government interest coverage is positive (bottom panel). Both of those trends are consistent with muni ratings upgrades continuing to outnumber downgrades going forward. Treasury Curve: Maintain A Barbell Curve Positioning Chart 7Treasury Yield Curve Overview The Treasury curve bear-steepened in September, and then bull-steepened sharply last week. All in all, the 2/10 Treasury slope is +12 bps, 12 bps steeper than it was at the end of August. The 5/30 slope is +67 bps, 10 bps steeper than at the end of August. Our fair value models (see Appendix B) continue to show that bullets are expensive relative to barbells across the entire Treasury curve. In particular, 5-year and 7-year maturities look very expensive compared to the short and long ends of the curve. Notice that the 2/5/10 butterfly spread, the spread between the 5-year bullet and a duration-matched 2/10 barbell, remains negative despite the recent 2/10 steepening (Chart 7). We have shown in prior research that the 5-year and 7-year maturities are the most highly correlated with our 12-month Fed Funds Discounter. Our discounter is currently at -74 bps, meaning that the market is priced for nearly three more Fed rate cuts during the next 12 months (top panel). We expect fewer cuts than that, and as such, think the Discounter is more likely to rise. 5-year and 7-year maturities would underperform the rest of the curve in that scenario. We also continue to hold our short position in the February 2020 fed funds futures contract. That contract is currently priced for 2 more rate cuts during the next 3 FOMC meetings. That outcome is possible, but our base case economic outlook is more consistent with 1 further cut, likely occurring this month. TIPS: Overweight Chart 8Inflation Compensation TIPS underperformed the duration-equivalent nominal Treasury index by 38 basis points in September, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -142 bps. The 10-year TIPS breakeven inflation rate fell 3 bps in September, and then another 2 bps last week. It currently sits at 1.51%, well below levels consistent with the Fed’s target. The divergence between the actual inflation data and inflation expectations is becoming increasingly stark. Trimmed mean PCE inflation has been fluctuating around the Fed’s target for most of the year (Chart 8). However, long-maturity TIPS breakeven inflation rates remain stubbornly low, nowhere near the 2.3% - 2.5% range that is consistent with the Fed’s target. As we have pointed out in prior research, it can take time for expectations to adapt to a changing macro environment.8 That being said, the 10-year TIPS breakeven inflation rate is currently 43 bps too low according to our Adaptive Expectations Model, a model whose primary input is 10-year trailing core inflation (panel 4). It is highly likely that the Fed will have to tolerate some overshoot of its 2% inflation target in order to re-anchor inflation expectations near desired levels. We anticipate that the committee will do so, and we maintain our view that long-dated TIPS breakevens will move above 2.3% before the end of the cycle. ABS: Underweight Chart 9ABS Market Overview Asset-Backed Securities underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 2 basis points in September, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to +72 bps. The index option-adjusted spread for Aaa-rated ABS widened 2 bps on the month. It currently sits at 36 bps, very close to its minimum pre-crisis level (Chart 9). ABS also appear unattractive on a risk/reward basis, as both Aaa-rated auto loans and credit cards have moved into the “Avoid” quadrant of our Excess Return Bond Map (Appendix C). The Map uses each bond sector’s spread, duration and volatility to calculate the likelihood of earning or losing 100 bps of excess return versus Treasuries on a 12-month horizon. At present, the Map shows that ABS offer poor expected return for their level of risk. In addition to poor valuation, the ABS sector’s credit fundamentals are shifting in a negative direction. Household interest payments continue to trend up, suggesting a higher delinquency rate in the future (panel 3). Meanwhile, senior loan officers continue to tighten lending standards for both credit cards and auto loans. Tighter lending standards usually coincide with rising delinquencies (bottom panel). All in all, the combination of poor value and deteriorating credit quality leads us to recommend an underweight allocation to consumer ABS. Non-Agency CMBS: Neutral Chart 10CMBS Market Overview Non-Agency Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 9 basis points in September, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to +227 bps. The index option-adjusted spread for non-agency Aaa-rated CMBS held flat on the month, before widening 4 bps last week. It currently sits at 75 bps, below average pre-crisis levels but above levels seen in 2018 (Chart 10). The macro outlook for commercial real estate is somewhat unfavorable, with lenders tightening loan standards (panel 4) amidst falling demand (bottom panel). Commercial real estate prices have accelerated of late, but are still not keeping pace with CMBS spreads (panel 3). Despite the poor fundamental picture, our Excess Return Bond Map shows that CMBS offer a reasonably attractive risk/reward trade-off compared to other bond sectors (see Appendix C). Agency CMBS: Overweight Agency CMBS outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 2 basis points in September, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to +90 bps. The index option-adjusted spread held flat on the month, before widening by 5 bps last week. It currently sits at 61 bps. The Excess Return Bond Map in Appendix C shows that Agency CMBS offer high potential return compared to other low-risk spread products. Appendix A - The Golden Rule Of Bond Investing We follow a two-step process to formulate recommendations for bond portfolio duration. First, we determine the change in the federal funds rate that is priced into the yield curve for the next 12 months. Second, we decide – based on our assessments of the economy and Fed policy – whether the change in the fed funds rate will exceed or fall short of what is priced into the curve. Most of the time, a correct answer to this question leads to the appropriate duration call. We call this framework the Golden Rule Of Bond Investing, and we demonstrated its effectiveness in the U.S. Bond Strategy Special Report, “The Golden Rule Of Bond Investing”, dated July 24, 2018, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com. Chart 11 illustrates the Golden Rule’s track record by showing that the Bloomberg Barclays Treasury Master Index tends to outperform cash when rate hikes fall short of 12-month expectations, and vice-versa. Chart 11The Golden Rule's Track Record At present, the market is priced for 74 basis points of cuts during the next 12 months. We anticipate fewer rate cuts over that time horizon, and therefore anticipate that below-benchmark portfolio duration positions will profit. We can also use our Golden Rule framework to make 12-month total return and excess return forecasts for the Bloomberg Barclays Treasury index under different scenarios for the fed funds rate. Excess returns are relative to the Bloomberg Barclays Cash index. To forecast total returns we first calculate the 12-month fed funds rate surprise in each scenario by comparing the assumed change in the fed funds rate to the current value of our 12-month discounter. This rate hike surprise is then mapped to an expected change in the Treasury index yield using a regression based on the historical relationship between those two variables. Finally, we apply the expected change in index yield to the current characteristics (yield, duration and convexity) of the Treasury index to estimate total returns on a 12-month horizon. The below tables present those results, along with 95% confidence intervals. Excess returns are calculated by subtracting assumed cash returns in each scenario from our total return projections. Appendix B - Butterfly Strategy Valuation The following tables present the current read-outs from our butterfly spread models. We use these models to identify opportunities to take duration-neutral positions across the Treasury curve. The following two Special Reports explain the models in more detail: U.S. Bond Strategy Special Report, “Bullets, Barbells And Butterflies”, dated July 25, 2017, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com U.S. Bond Strategy Special Report, “More Bullets, Barbells And Butterflies”, dated May 15, 2018, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com Table 4 shows the raw residuals from each model. A positive value indicates that the bullet is cheap relative to the duration-matched barbell. A negative value indicates that the barbell is cheap relative to the bullet. Table 5 scales the raw residuals in Table 4 by their historical means and standard deviations. This facilitates comparison between the different butterfly spreads. Table 6 flips the models on their heads. It shows the change in the slope between the two barbell maturities that must be realized during the next six months to make returns between the bullet and barbell equal. For example, a reading of +48 bps in the 5 over 2/10 cell means that we would only expect the 5-year to outperform the 2/10 if the 2/10 slope steepens by more than 48 bps during the next six months. Otherwise, we would expect the 2/10 barbell to outperform the 5-year bullet. Table 4Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Raw Residuals In Basis Points (As of October 4, 2019) Table 5Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Standardized Residuals (As of October 4, 2019) Table 6 Appendix C - Excess Return Bond Map The Excess Return Bond Map is used to assess the relative risk/reward trade-off between different sectors of the U.S. fixed income market. The Map employs volatility-adjusted breakeven spread analysis to show how likely it is that a given sector will earn/lose money during the subsequent 12 months. The Map does not incorporate any macroeconomic view. The horizontal axis of the Map shows the number of days of average spread widening required for each sector to lose 100 bps versus a position in duration-matched Treasuries. Sectors plotting further to the left require more days of average spread widening and are therefore less likely to see losses. The vertical axis shows the number of days of average spread tightening required for each sector to earn 100 bps in excess of duration-matched Treasuries. Sectors plotting further toward the top require fewer days of spread tightening and are therefore more likely to earn 100 bps of excess return. Chart 12Excess Return Bond Map (As Of October 4, 2019) Ryan Swift, U.S. Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Corporate Bond Investors Should Not Fight The Fed”, dated September 17, 2019, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 2 For more details on how we arrive at our spread targets please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “The Value In Corporate Bonds”, dated February 19, 2019, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 3 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Corporate Bond Investors Should Not Fight The Fed”, dated September 17, 2019, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 4 The 12-month breakeven spread is the spread widening required to break even with a duration-matched position in Treasuries on a 12-month horizon. It can be approximated by OAS divided by duration. 5 For more details on how we arrive at our spread targets please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “The Value In Corporate Bonds”, dated February 19, 2019, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 6 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Two Themes And Two Trades”, dated October 1, 2019, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 7 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Two Themes And Two Trades”, dated October 1, 2019, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 8 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Adaptive Expectations In The TIPS Market”, dated November 20, 2018, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com Fixed Income Sector Performance Recommended Portfolio Specification Corporate Sector Relative Valuation And Recommended Allocation

Aspectos destacados La desaceleración del sector manufacturero de Estados Unidos corre el riesgo de profundizarse más que en otros lugares. Esto no es bajista para el dólar estadounidense, dado que es una moneda contracíclica, pero tampoco es un desarrollo constructivo. Este estancamiento puede resolverse con una Reserva Federal más flexible, lo que deprimiría al dólar. Por ahora, mantenemos nuestro enfoque de operaciones en los cruces en lugar de apuestas directas sobre el dólar. Es probable que el Banco Nacional Suizo empiece a convertir su moneda en un arma, dada la desaceleración interna: ir largo en EUR/CHF en 1.06. Las posiciones largas en yen se han convertido en una operación consensuada, pero esperaremos un mejor punto de salida para nuestras posiciones cortas en USD/JPY. Análisis La economía suiza está entrando lentamente en deflación. La última cifra de inflación esta semana se situó en 0.1%, muy por debajo de la previsión central del SNB de 0.4% para este año. La inflación de bienes se ha detenido por completo, mientras que la inflación de servicios está ahora en su nivel más bajo desde 2016. Si se deja sin control, esto podría comenzar a desanclar las expectativas de inflación, conduciendo a un bucle de retroalimentación negativo contra el que al SNB probablemente le resultará muy difícil actuar (Gráfico I-1). Gráfico I-1 El SNB tendrá que intervenir ##br##frente a esto El SNB tendrá que actuar para contrarrestar esto El SNB tendrá que actuar para contrarrestar esto Gráfico I-2 Un franco fuerte está ejerciendo un poderoso impulso deflacionario Un franco fuerte está ejerciendo un poderoso impulso deflacionario Un franco fuerte está ejerciendo un poderoso impulso deflacionario Las tendencias globales desinflacionarias definitivamente están jugando un papel, pero la moneda fuerte ha estado en el centro de la exacerbación de estas tendencias. Como economía pequeña y abierta, los precios de los bienes comerciables son importantes para Suiza. Los precios de las importaciones están desinflándose por encima del 3% interanual, en parte impulsados por una moneda ponderada por el comercio fuerte (Gráfico I-2). Esto aumenta las probabilidades de que el SNB comience a usar la moneda para estimular las condiciones monetarias. Operación Franco Débil Gráfico I-3 ¿Cuánto tiempo puedes desafiar la fuerza ##br##de la gravedad? ¿Cuánto tiempo puedes desafiar la fuerza de la gravedad? ¿Cuánto tiempo puedes desafiar la fuerza de la gravedad? En el plano doméstico, la economía suiza se mantiene bien, pero es una cuestión abierta cuánto tiempo más seguirá desafiando la tendencia de un sector externo en ralentización. El indicador de empleo KOF está en su nivel más alto desde 2010, y el componente de expectativas sigue superando la evaluación actual. En tiempos normales, esto es un desarrollo alcista. Sin embargo, para una economía altamente orientada a la exportación, el sector manufacturero suele dictar las tendencias de la economía en general (Gráfico I-3). El PMI manufacturero se sitúa actualmente en 44.6, el peor desde la crisis financiera. Estos niveles suelen encender fuertes alarmas en los pasillos del SNB. En 2011, Suiza estaba rápidamente regresando a la deflación, habiendo escapado por poco un año antes. El SNB se dio cuenta rápidamente de que para una economía pequeña y abierta, el tipo de cambio a menudo dicta la tendencia de la inflación doméstica. Por tanto, sentarse y ver cómo el franco suizo ponderado por el comercio seguía apreciándose, especialmente dado que el euro estaba en una caída en cascada, parecía una receta para el desastre. Esto suena inquietantemente similar a hoy. Con el Banco Central Europeo reiniciando la flexibilización cuantitativa y con un SNB que dejó las tasas sin cambios en su reunión de política más reciente, la señal es que las tasas probablemente han tocado un piso. Esta visión se refuerza además por la estratificación adicional de reservas del SNB. En otras palabras, las tasas probablemente han comenzado a tambalearse en el borde de la estabilidad financiera. Esto deja a la moneda como la herramienta de política preferida. Nuestro sesgo es que el piso no oficial de 1.08-1.10 para EUR/CHF seguirá persistiendo hasta que la economía suiza salga de la deflación de forma decisiva. Sin embargo, los mercados pueden inclinar el tipo de cambio suizo hacia una sobreapreciación. Si eso ocurre, cuatro factores clave sugieren que la economía suiza necesita una moneda más débil, especialmente frente al euro: La balanza comercial suiza se ha mantenido bien frente a la desaceleración global, pero esto se ha debido en gran medida a los términos de intercambio. La balanza comercial suiza se ha mantenido bien frente a la desaceleración global, pero esto se ha debido en gran medida a los términos de intercambio (Gráfico I-4). Sin embargo, en una recesión, aunque los precios de bienes comoditizados son los primeros en caer, la desaceleración eventualmente comienza a afectar a los precios de bienes más especializados. Los bienes suizos no son fácilmente sustituibles, pero otros países como Suecia que han dejado caer su moneda se beneficiarán más de cualquier recuperación. Gráfico I-4 El aumento de los términos de intercambio ha ayudado ##br##a sostener las exportaciones El aumento de los términos de intercambio ha ayudado a sostener las exportaciones El aumento de los términos de intercambio ha ayudado a sostener las exportaciones Gráfico I-5 Un refugio ##br##de oro Un refugio de oro Un refugio de oro Parte de la mejora en la balanza comercial suiza ha sido impulsada por las exportaciones de metales preciosos. Por ejemplo, las exportaciones de metales preciosos al Reino Unido se disparan hacia nuevos máximos a medida que aumenta la demanda de almacenamiento para cuentas ETF (Gráfico I-5). Sin embargo, ha habido una falta de demanda física en Asia, mientras que los disturbios en Hong Kong están provocando que el oro sea redirigido a Suiza, luego a Londres. Esto podría terminar pronto. Nuestros modelos sugieren que el franco ahora está casi 10% sobrevaluado frente al euro. En la historia del modelo, la sobrevaloración del franco alcanza un máximo del 15%, y a menudo es seguida por intervención del SNB (Gráfico I-6). Aunque la tasa de desempleo está en 2.3%, las presiones salariales domésticas son inexistentes. Será difícil que la inflación de servicios repunte sin un aumento en las presiones salariales. Esto es improbable en los próximos seis a nueve meses. El empleo a tiempo parcial continúa dominando las ganancias de empleo, lo que significa que la necesidad de ahorros precautorios seguirá limitando el gasto. Mientras tanto, es poco probable que el sector manufacturero comience a subir los salarios antes de que se vislumbre una recuperación. Sin embargo, más recientemente, las reservas de divisas han empezado a acelerarse de nuevo y la estabilidad en la base monetaria sugiere cierto espectro de esterilización. Ha sorprendido que en la carrera global hacia tasas más bajas y en medio del potencial de devaluación global de monedas, el SNB se haya quedado sentado viendo cómo otros bancos centrales como el BCE y el Riksbank le comían parte de su mercado. El mensaje del presidente del Banco Nacional Suizo, Thomas Jordan, ha sido muy claro: las tasas de interés podrían rebajarse más, junto con una intervención poderosa en el mercado de divisas si fuera necesario. Esto quizá sugiera algo de desacuerdo dentro del consejo de gobierno. Gráfico I-6 El franco está ##br##sobrevaluado El franco es caro El franco es caro Gráfico I-7 ¿Está el SNB esterilizando la acumulación de reservas? ¿Está el SNB esterilizando la acumulación de reservas? ¿Está el SNB esterilizando la acumulación de reservas?   Curiosamente, el SNB no ha tenido que ampliar significativamente su balance en los últimos años. Parte de la razón es que la desaceleración del comercio global redujo la demanda natural de francos, lo que hizo que el SNB ya no acumulase reservas de divisas a un ritmo desenfrenado. Esto ha ayudado a drenar el exceso de liquidez del sistema y a renormalizar la política en cierta medida. Esto significa que el margen de maniobra para más intervención en FX se ha reabierto. Sin embargo, más recientemente, las reservas de divisas han empezado a acelerarse de nuevo, y la estabilidad en la base monetaria sugiere cierto espectro de esterilización (Gráfico I-7). Económicamente, el SNB debe caminar por una delgada línea entre un entorno predominantemente deflacionario en Suiza y una ratio deuda/PIB en aumento que lo sitúa entre los más altos del G-10. Muy poco estímulo y la economía corre el riesgo de entrar en una espiral deuda-deflación, ya que las expectativas de inflación continúan fuertemente ancladas a la baja. Demasiado estímulo, y el resultado será la acumulación de desequilibrios, llevando eventualmente a una crisis. Análisis posterior al tope cambiario Aunque el SNB puede favorecer la depreciación encubierta del franco, existen tanto restricciones políticas como económicas para un tope absoluto. La buena noticia es que las fuerzas económicas están cediendo a medida que la economía se desacelera. Mientras tanto, ya había un coro creciente de descontento entre políticos de derecha en 2014, específicamente entre los del Partido Popular Suizo (SVP) que querían que el banco central dejara de comprar divisas y aumentara significativamente sus tenencias de oro en su lugar. Con el SVP actualmente por delante en las encuestas de opinión de cara a las elecciones de este mes, esto probablemente seguirá siendo una restricción. La buena noticia es que nuevas cuestiones como el cambio climático han pasado a primer plano, más que si Suiza debería comenzar a respaldar sus reservas vía oro (Gráfico I-8). El riesgo clave de un tope es que si el euro cae sustancialmente, invitará a la especulación de nuevo en la economía suiza. Este riesgo es claramente inaceptable tanto para los políticos suizos como para el SNB, por lo que en 2015 se volvió a introducir la asimetría bidireccional en el sistema. Gráfico I-8 ¡Al Partido Popular Suizo le ##br##encantará esto! ¡Al Partido Popular Suizo le gustará esto! ¡Al Partido Popular Suizo le gustará esto! Gráfico I-9 Un reajuste ##br##saludable Un reajuste saludable Un reajuste saludable En el lado positivo, la especulación en el mercado inmobiliario se ha limpiado en cierta medida. El crecimiento de las viviendas en alquiler, que usualmente constituye la mayor parte de las viviendas de inversión, se ha estancado, y esto se desvía positivamente del crecimiento de las viviendas ocupadas por sus propietarios. El mensaje es claro: medidas macroprudenciales como un tope en las segundas viviendas así como estándares de préstamo más estrictos han ayudado (Gráfico I-9). En 2015, el SNB sorprendió inteligentemente al mercado abandonando el piso EUR/CHF. Esto ayudó a reequilibrar el mercado ya que los inversores europeos que utilizaban la opción del SNB para especular con propiedades en Zúrich y Ginebra fueron desincentivados una vez que el euro se colapsó. La demanda de bienes raíces suizos se ha estabilizado en gran medida desde entonces, eliminando esta fuente clave de riesgo para el SNB. La restricción del SVP sobre la inmigración ha anulado una fuente significativa de demanda. Las tasas de vacancia de propiedades en alquiler han comenzado a aumentar de forma notable. Más importante aún, las tasas de vacancia de propiedades en alquiler han comenzado a aumentar de forma notable. Esto suele conducir a precios de la vivienda más bajos, con un rezago de aproximadamente 12 meses (Gráfico I-10). Con el SVP poco probable de volverse más pro-inmigración en el corto plazo, esto probablemente seguirá siendo un viento en contra (Gráfico I-11). Esto sugiere que el capital político para que el SNB use la depreciación encubierta de la moneda para estimular la economía es elevado, especialmente mientras la economía global sigue atrapada en una recesión manufacturera. Un historial de superávits presupuestarios sugiere que el SVP es poco probable que apruebe políticas fiscalmente expansivas significativas en el corto plazo. Gráfico I-10 La desaceleración de la migración está frenando la demanda de vivienda La desaceleración de la migración está frenando la demanda de viviendas La desaceleración de la migración está frenando la demanda de viviendas Gráfico I-11 La desaceleración de la fuerza laboral está frenando la demanda de vivienda Una fuerza laboral en desaceleración está frenando la demanda de vivienda Una fuerza laboral en desaceleración está frenando la demanda de vivienda Las reclamaciones sobre los balances bancarios por parte de extranjeros son relativamente bajas, lo que significa que el riesgo de una entrada de capital en el mercado inmobiliario con un tipo de cambio más bajo es bajo (Gráfico I-12). Con los márgenes de préstamo bancario probablemente deprimidos durante los próximos años, algunas entradas extranjeras en el sector inmobiliario ayudarían, junto con medidas macroprudenciales más estrictas. Gráfico I-12 Los bancos tienen bajas obligaciones hipotecarias extranjeras Los bancos tienen bajos pasivos hipotecarios en el extranjero. Los bancos tienen bajos pasivos hipotecarios en el extranjero. Sobre EUR/CHF y USD/CHF Suiza cumple con todas las características de una moneda refugio. Su gran posición de inversión internacional neta de 115% del PIB genera enormes entradas de ingresos. Mientras tanto, el aumento de la productividad a lo largo de los años ha llevado a un superávit estructural en su balanza comercial y a un valor justo creciente para la moneda. En consecuencia, el franco ha tendido a tener un sesgo al alza a lo largo de los años, supercargado durante periodos de aversión al riesgo (Gráfico I-13). Mientras tanto, los costes de cobertura para operaciones cortas en CHF son menos atractivos que hace un año. Podrían volverse más prohibitivos, pero hasta entonces sugerimos prudencia a la hora de ponerse corto con el franco frente al euro o al USD (Gráfico I-14). Nuestro sesgo, sin embargo, es que el SNB comenzará a inclinarse de forma significativa contra el franco en 1.06. Gráfico I-13 Riesgo: el franco suizo tiende ##br##a apreciarse Riesgo: el franco suizo tiende a apreciarse Riesgo: el franco suizo tiende a apreciarse Gráfico I-14 Los costos de cobertura son ##br##prohibitivos Los costos de cobertura son prohibitivos Los costos de cobertura son prohibitivos   Conclusiones de inversión Gráfico I-15 Los principales vientos favorables para el dólar han alcanzado su punto máximo Los principales vientos de cola del dólar han tocado techo Los principales vientos de cola del dólar han tocado techo Seguimos centrados en operaciones en los cruces, y mantener seguro en cartera al franco suizo sigue siendo lo más indicado. Nuestro objetivo en el informe de esta semana fue destacar que los inversores y operadores quizá no quieran exceder su estancia, y por tanto mantener un ojo atento a señales tentativas de reversión. Típicamente, la divergencia de crecimiento entre EE. UU. y el resto del mundo ha sido una buena variable explicativa para las fluctuaciones de mediano plazo en el dólar. Por tanto, la desaceleración en el PMI manufacturero de EE. UU. suele presagiar un mal augurio para el dólar (Gráfico I-15). El franco tiende a comportarse bien en los cruces durante los mercados alcistas del dólar y mal durante los mercados bajistas del dólar. Sin embargo, hay ajustes benignos y malignos, y una caída en el PMI manufacturero de EE. UU., impulsada por un crecimiento global mucho más lento, parece del tipo maligno. Lo que necesitaremos ver, si la narrativa del dólar débil ha de materializarse, es la estabilización del sector manufacturero de EE. UU., mientras el sector manufacturero del resto del mundo se inclina al alza. Esto también debilitará al franco en los cruces. Manténganse atentos.   Chester Ntonifor, Estratega de divisas chestern@bcaresearch.com Monedas Dólar estadounidense Gráfico II-1 Técnicas USD 1 USD: Análisis técnico 1 USD: Análisis técnico 1 Gráfico II-2 Técnicas USD 2 Análisis técnico del USD 2 Análisis técnico del USD 2 Hubo una avalancha de publicaciones de datos en EE. UU., cuyo balance fue negativo: El PCE general se mantuvo sin cambios en 1.4% interanual en agosto. El PCE subyacente aumentó a 1.8% interanual. El índice de gestores de compra de Chicago cayó a 47.1 en septiembre desde 50.4 en agosto. El índice empresarial manufacturero de la Fed de Dallas cayó a 1.5 en septiembre desde 2.7 en agosto. El PMI manufacturero ISM se desplomó a 47.8 en septiembre, el segundo mes consecutivo por debajo de 50. Además, el PMI no manufacturero ISM cayó a 52.6 en septiembre desde 56.4, muy por debajo de las expectativas de 55. Cabe decir que el PMI compuesto Markit subió a 51 frente a 50.7 del mes anterior. Las nóminas no agrícolas ADP estuvieron por debajo de las expectativas con 135K en septiembre, frente a 157K en agosto. El crecimiento mensual de los pedidos de bienes duraderos se ralentizó a 0.2% en agosto. Los pedidos de fábrica se contrajeron 0.1% intermensual en agosto. El índice DXY subió inicialmente 0.6%, luego se desplomó, perdiendo 0.4% esta semana. El deterioro tanto del ISM manufacturero como del no manufacturero suscitó preocupaciones sobre una recesión inminente. Tenemos el informe de empleo este viernes, que es uno de los últimos pilares de apoyo para una política de la Fed relativamente agresiva. En el frente de la política monetaria, la Fed reanudará la expansión del balance. El aumento de la oferta de dólares se sumará a las fuerzas que podrían eventualmente tirar del dólar a la baja. Enlaces a informes: Preservando capital durante puntos de disturbios - 6 de septiembre de 2019 ¿Ha cambiado el panorama de las divisas? - 16 de agosto de 2019 USD/CNY y la turbulencia del mercado - 9 de agosto de 2019 El euro Gráfico II-3 Técnicas EUR 1 EUR Análisis técnico 1 EUR Análisis técnico 1 Gráfico II-4 Técnicas EUR 2 EUR Análisis técnicos 2 EUR Análisis técnicos 2 Los datos recientes en la zona euro han sido negativos: La inflación sigue contenida en los países de la zona euro en agosto. La inflación general en la zona euro cayó a 0.9% interanual desde 1%. En Francia, la inflación general descendió a 1.1% interanual desde 1.3%. En España, cayó a 0.1% interanual desde 0.3%. En Alemania, también disminuyó a 1.2% interanual desde 1.4%. La tasa de desempleo en la zona euro disminuyó marginalmente a 7.4% en agosto desde 7.5%. El indicador de sentimiento económico en la zona euro cayó a 101.7 en septiembre desde 103.1. El índice de precios al productor cayó 0.8% interanual en agosto. El crecimiento de las ventas minoristas se mantuvo prácticamente sin cambios en 2.1% interanual en agosto. EUR/USD aumentó 0.6% esta semana. En el frente de la inflación, la caída más pronunciada del IPC en los países centrales en lugar de los periféricos sugiere que los esfuerzos redistributivos necesarios para mantener la zona euro unida están funcionando en cierta medida. El presidente del BCE, Mario Draghi, pidió un “estímulo liderado por la inversión a nivel de la zona euro” en un discurso en Atenas el martes por la noche, pero la realidad es que los países periféricos ya están utilizando tasas más bajas para desplegar capital. Los analistas de J.P. Morgan han mejorado la recomendación sobre las acciones europeas esta semana. Si los flujos hacia fondos de renta variable comienzan a subir, es probable que el euro se recupere frente al dólar estadounidense. Enlaces a informes: Algunas ideas de operaciones - 27 de septiembre de 2019 La batalla de los bancos centrales - 21 de junio de 2019 EUR/USD y la tasa de interés neutral - 14 de junio de 2019 Yen japonés Gráfico II-5 Técnicas JPY 1 Análisis técnico del JPY 1 Análisis técnico del JPY 1 Gráfico II-6 Técnicas JPY 2 Análisis técnico del JPY 2 Análisis técnico del JPY 2 Los datos recientes en Japón han sido decepcionantes: Se publicó esta semana la muy importante encuesta Tankan. Hubo un deterioro tanto en las perspectivas manufactureras como de servicios en el tercer trimestre, pero, para ser justos, estuvo por encima de las expectativas. Los planes de gasto de capital (capex) se mantuvieron relativamente elevados. La producción industrial se contrajo 4.7% interanual en agosto. Las ventas minoristas aumentaron 2% interanual en agosto, pero le restamos importancia debido al aumento del impuesto al consumo. Los inicios de viviendas disminuyeron 7.1% interanual en agosto. Los pedidos de construcción cayeron 25.9% interanual (estos últimos son extremadamente volátiles). La tasa de desempleo se mantuvo sin cambios en 2.2% en agosto. La ratio de puestos vacantes por solicitantes también se mantuvo sin cambios en 1.59. La confianza del consumidor cayó a 35.6 en agosto, desde 37.1 en julio. Hemos discutido extensamente la importancia de esto en el marco de la equivalencia ricardiana. El PMI de servicios cayó a 52.8 en septiembre, aunque aún por encima del territorio expansivo de 50. USD/JPY cayó 1% esta semana. En el reciente Resumen de Opiniones, el BoJ destacó los riesgos de una menor demanda externa debido al crecimiento económico retrasado. En el lado positivo, diversas contramedidas están previstas para mitigar los efectos negativos del aumento del impuesto. Seguimos siendo positivos respecto al yen japonés como cobertura refugio con un riesgo limitado a la baja. Enlaces a informes: Algunas ideas de operaciones - 27 de septiembre de 2019 ¿Ha cambiado el panorama de las divisas? - 16 de agosto de 2019 Ajustes de cartera en un mercado veraniego escaso - 5 de julio de 2019 Libra esterlina Gráfico II-7 Técnicas GBP 1 Análisis técnico GBP 1 Análisis técnico GBP 1 Gráfico II-8 Técnicas GBP 2 Análisis técnicos de GBP 2 Análisis técnicos de GBP 2 Los datos recientes en el Reino Unido han sido mixtos: El crecimiento del PIB aumentó a 1.3% interanual en el segundo trimestre. Sin embargo, en base trimestral, el PIB se contrajo 0.2% en el segundo trimestre. El déficit por cuenta corriente se redujo a £25.2 mil millones en el segundo trimestre, desde £33.1 mil millones en el primero. Los precios de la vivienda a nivel nacional crecieron 0.2% interanual en septiembre, comparado con 0.6% en agosto. El PMI manufacturero Markit aumentó a 48.3 en septiembre desde 47.4; el PMI de construcción cayó a 43.3 desde 45; el PMI de servicios cayó por debajo de 50 a 49.5. GBP/USD aumentó 0.8% esta semana. El primer ministro Boris Johnson dio un discurso esta semana e introdujo los detalles de una propuesta de Brexit que fue un blanco fácil para las críticas en este embrollo. Otro retraso del Brexit y una reelección parecen muy probables. La mejora en el PMI manufacturero Markit refleja una mayor confianza por la menor probabilidad de un Brexit duro en nuestra opinión. Recientemente mejoramos la perspectiva para el Reino Unido y nos posicionamos largo en GBP/JPY. Manténgase en ella. Enlaces a informes: Algunas ideas de operaciones - 27 de septiembre de 2019 Reino Unido: ¿desaceleración cíclica o malestar estructural? - 20 de septiembre de 2019 La batalla de los bancos centrales - 21 de junio de 2019 Dólar australiano Gráfico II-9 Técnicas AUD 1 Análisis técnico AUD 1 Análisis técnico AUD 1 Gráfico II-10 Técnicas AUD 2 Análisis técnico AUD 2 Análisis técnico AUD 2 Los datos recientes en Australia han sido mixtos: La inflación general se ralentizó de 1.7% a 1.5% interanual en septiembre. El crédito del sector privado creció 2.9% interanual en agosto. El PMI manufacturero AiG aumentó a 54.7 en septiembre desde 53.1 en agosto. El PMI de servicios AiG aumentó marginalmente a 51.5 desde 51.4. El PMI manufacturero del Commonwealth cayó ligeramente a 50.3, desde un 50.9 corregido al alza en agosto. El PMI de servicios del Commonwealth se mantuvo prácticamente sin cambios en 52.4. Los permisos de construcción siguen contrayéndose un 21.5% interanual en agosto. Las exportaciones cayeron 3% intermensual en agosto, mientras que las importaciones permanecieron sin cambios. El superávit comercial se redujo a A$5.9 mil millones desde A$7.3 mil millones. AUD/USD cayó 1.3% inicialmente tras el RBA, luego se recuperó con la debilidad general del dólar estadounidense, quedando plano esta semana. El RBA recortó las tasas de interés otros 25 puntos básicos el martes, y declaró que “la economía australiana está en un punto de inflexión suave.” Tasas más bajas, aunque no totalmente trasladadas a las hipotecas, podrían ayudar a estabilizar el mercado inmobiliario en cierta medida y aumentar el crecimiento salarial. Mantenemos una postura procíclica y seguimos siendo positivos respecto al dólar australiano. Enlaces a 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 estamos fuera del bosque - 5 de abril de 2019 Dólar neozelandés Gráfico II-11 Técnicas NZD 1 NZD Análisis técnico 1 NZD Análisis técnico 1 Gráfico II-12 Técnicas NZD 2 Análisis técnico del NZD 2 Análisis técnico del NZD 2 Los datos recientes en Nueva Zelanda han sido en su mayoría negativos: Los permisos de construcción aumentaron 0.8% intermensual en agosto. La perspectiva de actividad cayó 1.8% intermensual en septiembre. La confianza empresarial cayó aún más a -53.5 en septiembre, desde -52.3 en agosto. NZD/USD aumentó 0.3% esta semana. La última Encuesta Trimestral de Opinión Empresarial, realizada por el Instituto de Investigación Económica de Nueva Zelanda, ha mostrado que las condiciones empresariales apuntan a una mayor desaceleración de la actividad económica. El sector manufacturero sigue siendo el más problemático. Además, las empresas son cautelosas a la hora de expandirse, debido a la combinación de fuertes presiones de costos y débil poder de fijación de precios. Australia ha recortado las tasas, dando munición a sus vecinos antipodales para seguir su ejemplo. La probabilidad de recortes de tasas por parte del RBNZ en su próxima reunión de política del 13 de noviembre alcanzó el 100%: 90% para un recorte de 25 pb y 10% para 50 pb. Enlaces a informes: USD/CNY y la turbulencia del mercado - 9 de agosto de 2019 ¿Hacia dónde va el dólar estadounidense? - 7 de junio de 2019 Aún no estamos fuera del bosque - 5 de abril de 2019 Dólar canadiense Gráfico II-13 Técnicas CAD 1 Aspectos técnicos de CAD 1 Aspectos técnicos de CAD 1 Gráfico II-14 Técnicas CAD 2 Detalles técnicos de CAD 2 Detalles técnicos de CAD 2 Los datos recientes en Canadá han sido mixtos: En base mensual, el PIB se estancó en julio. En base interanual, el crecimiento del PIB se desaceleró de 1.5% a 1.3% en julio. El PMI manufacturero Markit aumentó a 51 en septiembre, desde 49.1 en agosto. La confianza Bloomberg Nanos aumentó a 57.8 para la semana terminada el 27 de septiembre. Los precios de las materias primas cayeron 1.8% intermensual en agosto. USD/CAD aumentó 0.5% esta semana. El crecimiento del PIB canadiense en julio fue impulsado por el sector servicios. La divergencia fue de 2.5% interanual en julio para el PIB de servicios, mientras que el PIB de bienes continuó deteriorándose, contrayéndose 1.8% interanual. El PIB en el sector energético, una industria clave en el país, cayó 3.4% interanual en julio, afectado por las fluctuaciones en los precios del petróleo. Además, como señalan nuestros colegas en Estrategia de Commodities y Energía, la diferencia de precio entre el crudo canadiense y el WTI probablemente se profundice aún más, posiblemente alcanzando un descuento de $20/bbl en el primer trimestre de 2020, debido a restricciones de transporte en el oeste. Enlaces a informes: Preservando capital durante puntos de disturbios - 6 de septiembre de 2019 Ajustes de cartera en un mercado veraniego escaso - 5 de julio de 2019 Sobre el oro, el petróleo y las criptomonedas - 28 de junio de 2019 Franco suizo Gráfico II-15 Técnicas CHF 1 CHF Técnicos 1 CHF Técnicos 1 Gráfico II-16 Técnicas CHF 2 Análisis técnico del CHF 2 Análisis técnico del CHF 2 Los datos recientes en Suiza han sido negativos: El indicador adelantado KOF cayó a 93.2 en septiembre. Las ventas minoristas reales se contrajeron 1.4% interanual en agosto. El PMI manufacturero cayó a 44.6 en septiembre desde 47.2 en agosto. La inflación general disminuyó a 0.1% interanual en septiembre, desde 0.3%. USD/CHF aumentó 0.7% esta semana. Si bien la economía suiza está fuertemente vinculada a los desarrollos globales especialmente los de la zona euro, el saldo positivo de la cuenta corriente la hace menos vulnerable en términos relativos. Seguimos favoreciendo al franco como cobertura de refugio. Tratamos el franco en la sección principal de esta semana. Enlaces a informes: ¿Qué hacer con el franco suizo? - 17 de mayo de 2019 Cuidado con los rendimientos marginales decrecientes - 19 de abril de 2019 Balanza de pagos en el G10 - 15 de febrero de 2019 Corona noruega Gráfico II-17 Técnicas NOK 1 NOK Análisis técnico 1 NOK Análisis técnico 1 Gráfico II-18 Técnicas NOK 2 NOK Indicadores técnicos 2 NOK Indicadores técnicos 2 Hay escasos datos de Noruega esta semana: Las ventas minoristas se mantuvieron sin cambios en agosto. USD/NOK se apreció 0.3% esta semana. La reciente caída en los precios del petróleo ha dejado nuestra operación de cesta petro como desfavorable, lastrada por la rápida recuperación de la instalación petrolera en Arabia Saudí y las preocupaciones de demanda ante una posible recesión. Dicho esto, continuamos sobreponderando los precios de la energía y la corona noruega. La tensión inminente en el Medio Oriente podría llevar a una mayor escalada, lo que volvería a interrumpir los suministros de petróleo y elevaría los precios del mismo. Enlaces a informes: Algunas ideas de operaciones - 27 de septiembre de 2019 Ajustes de cartera en un mercado veraniego escaso - 5 de julio de 2019 Sobre el oro, el petróleo y las criptomonedas - 28 de junio de 2019 Corona sueca Gráfico II-19 Técnicas SEK 1 Análisis técnico del SEK 1 Análisis técnico del SEK 1 Gráfico II-20 Técnicas SEK 2 SEK Indicadores técnicos 2 SEK Indicadores técnicos 2 Los datos recientes en Suecia han sido negativos: Las ventas minoristas crecieron 2.7% interanual en agosto, comparado con un crecimiento anual de 3.9% en julio. El PMI manufacturero se desplomó a 46.3 en septiembre, desde 52.4 en agosto. USD/SEK aumentó 0.5% esta semana. Mientras el componente de empleo del PMI aumentó a 52.4 desde 51.9, el índice de nuevos pedidos se desplomó por debajo de 50 hasta 45.8. La relación nuevos pedidos-inventario también continúa disminuyendo, lo que suele preceder al PMI manufacturero de la zona euro por unos meses. Este es uno de los puntos de datos clave que seguimos, por lo que estamos atentos al mensaje de este indicador. Enlaces a informes: ¿Hacia dónde va el dólar estadounidense? - 7 de junio de 2019 Balanza de pagos en el G10 - 15 de febrero de 2019 Una clasificación sencilla de atractividad para las monedas - 8 de febrero de 2019 Operaciones y previsiones Resumen de previsiones Cartera principal Operaciones tácticas Órdenes límite Operaciones cerradas

Aspectos destacados PRONÓSTICOS DEL MERCADO Perspectiva estratégica del cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado "muéstrame" Por favor, proporcione únicamente el texto traducido en su respuesta, sin comentarios ni formato adicional. Perspectiva estratégica del cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado "muéstrame" Por favor, proporcione únicamente el texto traducido en su respuesta, sin comentarios ni formato adicional. Estrategia de inversión: Los mercados han entrado en una fase de “muéstrame”. Serán necesarios mejores datos económicos y avances significativos en las negociaciones comerciales para que las acciones suban de forma sostenible. Creemos que se producirán ambas condiciones previas. Hasta entonces, los activos de riesgo podrían sufrir presión. Asignación global de activos: Los inversores deberían sobreponderar acciones frente a bonos en un horizonte de 12 meses, pero mantener posiciones de efectivo por encima de lo normal en el corto plazo como cobertura contra riesgos a la baja. Renta variable: Las acciones de mercados emergentes y europeas superarán al resto una vez que el crecimiento global toque fondo. Los sectores cíclicos, incluidos los financieros, también comenzarán a superar a los defensivos cuando el ciclo de crecimiento cambie. Bonos: Los bancos centrales permanecerán dovish, pero los rendimientos subirán modestamente por un crecimiento global más fuerte. Favorezca el crédito corporativo high-yield sobre los bonos gubernamentales. Divisas: Como moneda contracíclica, el dólar estadounidense debería alcanzar su pico más adelante este año. Materias primas: Los precios del petróleo y de los metales industriales subirán. Los precios del oro han entrado en una fase de consolidación, pero deberían brillar de nuevo a finales del próximo año o en 2021 cuando la inflación finalmente se dispare. Destacado Estimado cliente, En lugar de este informe, ofrecí un seminario web el lunes 7 de octubre a las 10:00 AM EDT, en el que analicé los principales temas y perspectivas de inversión que, en mi opinión, se desarrollarán durante el resto del año y más allá. Atentamente, Peter Berezin, estratega global jefe   I. Perspectiva macro global Una fase de prueba para la economía mundial La economía mundial ha llegado a una encrucijada crítica. El crecimiento se ha ralentizado desde principios de 2018, alcanzando lo que muchos considerarían una “velocidad de estancamiento”. Este es el punto en el que la debilidad económica empieza a alimentarse a sí misma, pudiendo desencadenar una recesión. ¿Empeorará la desaceleración del crecimiento? Nuestra hipótesis es que no. Las condiciones financieras globales se han relajado significativamente en los últimos cuatro meses, gracias en parte al giro dovish de la mayoría de los bancos centrales. Condiciones financieras más laxas suelen ser favorables para el crecimiento global (Gráfico 1). Nuestro indicador líder global se ha recuperado, principalmente debido a una mejora marginal en los datos de los mercados emergentes (Gráfico 2). Gráfico 1 El alivio de las condiciones financieras impulsará el crecimiento global Condiciones Financieras Más Favorables Impulsarán el Crecimiento Global Condiciones Financieras Más Favorables Impulsarán el Crecimiento Global Gráfico 2 El LEI global se ha recuperado de sus mínimos Global LEI se ha alejado de sus mínimos Global LEI se ha alejado de sus mínimos     Una cuestión importante es si la debilidad en el sector manufacturero se extenderá al sector de servicios, mucho más grande. Hay alguna evidencia de que esto está ocurriendo, siendo la publicación de ayer del ISM no manufacturero, más débil de lo esperado, el último ejemplo. No obstante, la desaceleración de la actividad del sector servicios ha sido hasta ahora limitada (Gráfico 3). Incluso en Alemania, con su amplia base manufacturera, el PMI del sector servicios se mantiene en territorio expansivo. Esta es una diferencia clave con los periodos 2001/02 y 2008/09, cuando la actividad del sector servicios colapsó al mismo tiempo que la manufacturera. Gráfico 3A El sector servicios se ha debilitado menos que la industria (I) El sector de servicios se ha moderado menos que la industria manufacturera (I) El sector de servicios se ha moderado menos que la industria manufacturera (I) Gráfico 3B El sector servicios se ha debilitado menos que la industria (II) El sector servicios se ha moderado menos que la industria manufacturera (II) El sector servicios se ha moderado menos que la industria manufacturera (II) La desaceleración provocada por los automóviles Si se preguntara a la mayoría de los inversores las razones detrás de la desaceleración manufacturera, probablemente citarían la guerra comercial o la campaña de desapalancamiento de China. Ambas son razones válidas, pero hay un culpable menos conocido: el sector automotriz. Según WardsAuto, las ventas mundiales de automóviles cayeron más del 5% en la primera mitad del año, con diferencia la mayor caída desde la Gran Recesión (Gráfico 4). La producción disminuyó aún más. Gráfico 4 La debilidad del sector automotriz ha agravado la caída de la industria manufacturera La debilidad del sector automotriz ha exacerbado la desaceleración del sector manufacturero. La debilidad del sector automotriz ha exacerbado la desaceleración del sector manufacturero. Gráfico 5 La demanda de automóviles en EE. UU. se está recuperando La demanda de automóviles en EE. UU. se está recuperando La demanda de automóviles en EE. UU. se está recuperando   La debilidad en el sector automotriz mundial refleja una variedad de factores. Requisitos de emisiones más estrictos, incentivos fiscales que expiran, efectos rezagados de normas más estrictas para préstamos automotrices y las tensiones comerciales han desempeñado un papel. Además, la caída de los precios de la gasolina en 2015/16 probablemente adelantó algunas compras de automóviles. Esto sugiere que la desaceleración manufacturera mundial de 2015/16 pudo haber contribuido a sembrar las semillas de la actual. El hecho de que la producción de automóviles esté cayendo más rápido que las ventas es alentador porque significa que se están agotando los inventarios excedentes. Las normas de concesión de préstamos para automóviles en EE. UU. han comenzado a normalizarse, con los bancos informando de una demanda más fuerte de préstamos automotrices en la última Encuesta de Oficiales de Crédito Senior (Gráfico 5). En China, las ventas de automóviles han tocado fondo después de haber caído hasta un 14% a principios de este año (Gráfico 6). La tasa de propiedad de automóviles en China es una quinta parte de la de EE. UU., una cuarta parte de la de Japón y un tercio de la de Corea (Gráfico 7). Dado el bajo punto de partida, es probable que las ventas de automóviles chinas reanuden su tendencia secular al alza. Gráfico 6 El sector automotriz en China está encontrando un suelo El sector automotriz en China está encontrando un suelo El sector automotriz en China está encontrando un suelo Gráfico 7 China: perspectivas estructurales favorables para los automóviles China: La perspectiva estructural para los autos es alentadora China: La perspectiva estructural para los autos es alentadora   La guerra comercial: ¿Hacia una détente? Gráfico 8 Un ciclo manufacturero de tres años bastante regular Un ciclo de fabricación de tres años bastante regular Un ciclo de fabricación de tres años bastante regular Los ciclos manufactureros suelen durar alrededor de tres años: 18 meses de crecimiento desacelerado seguidos por 18 meses de crecimiento al alza (Gráfico 8). En la medida en que el PMI manufacturero global alcanzó su pico en la primera mitad de 2018, deberíamos estar cerca del final de la actual contracción. Por supuesto, mucho depende de los desarrollos en política. Al cierre de esta edición, se han reanudado las negociaciones de alto nivel entre EE. UU. y China. Si bien es imposible predecir el resultado de estas conversaciones, parece que ambas partes tienen incentivos para desescalar el conflicto comercial. Los votantes valoran mucho más a Trump por su gestión de la economía que por cualquier otra cosa, incluida su gestión de las negociaciones comerciales con China (Gráfico 9). Una guerra comercial prolongada dañaría el crecimiento de EE. UU. y debilitaría la bolsa. Ambos factores socavarían las perspectivas de reelección de Trump. Gráfico 9 Trump recibe calificaciones razonablemente altas por su gestión de la economía, pero no por mucho más Perspectiva estratégica para el cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado "Muéstrame Perspectiva estratégica para el cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado "Muéstrame Gráfico 10 ¿Quién ganará la nominación demócrata de 2020? Perspectiva estratégica del cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado 'muéstrame Perspectiva estratégica del cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado 'muéstrame China también quiere reforzar el crecimiento. Por difícil que haya sido para el liderazgo chino lidiar con Donald Trump, intentar asegurar un acuerdo comercial con él después de que sea reelegido sería aún más complicado. Esto sería especialmente cierto si Trump pensara que los chinos intentaron sabotear su candidatura a la reelección. Incluso si Trump llegara a perder la elección, no está claro que China termine con alguien más dócil en asuntos comerciales. ¿Realmente querría el gobierno chino negociar sobre normas medioambientales y derechos humanos con la presidenta Warren, sobre quien los mercados de apuestas ahora creen que tiene más posibilidades de convertirse en la candidata demócrata que Joe Biden (Gráfico 10)? La iniciativa de los demócratas para destituir al presidente Trump hace que una resolución comercial sea algo más probable. Primero, llama la atención sobre los dudosos negocios de Joe Biden (y su hijo) en Ucrania, lo que asesta un golpe al candidato estadounidense preferido por China. Segundo, hace que Trump esté más inclinado a querer dejar atrás el enfrentamiento con China para poder concentrar sus energías en asuntos internos. ¿Más estímulo chino? Estratégicamente, China tiene un fuerte incentivo para estimular su economía con el fin de apuntalar el crecimiento y ganar mayor influencia en las negociaciones comerciales. El impulso crediticio chino tocó fondo a finales de 2018. El impulso precede a la producción manufacturera nominal china y a la mayoría de los demás indicadores de actividad por unos nueve meses (Gráfico 11). Hasta ahora, la magnitud del alivio crediticio/fiscal de China está lejos de igualar el estímulo que se desató sobre la economía en 2015/16 y 2008/09. Esto se debe en parte a que las autoridades hoy están más preocupadas por niveles excesivos de deuda que entonces, pero también porque la economía está en mejor forma. El choque de la guerra comercial no ha sido ni de lejos tan grave como la Gran Recesión – recuerde que las exportaciones chinas a EE. UU. representan solo el 2,7% del PIB en términos de valor añadido. A diferencia de 2015/16, cuando China perdió más de 1 billón de dólares en reservas externas, las salidas de capital han permanecido contenidas en esta ocasión (Gráfico 12). Gráfico 11 El estímulo chino debería impulsar el crecimiento global El estímulo chino debería impulsar el crecimiento mundial El estímulo chino debería impulsar el crecimiento mundial Gráfico 12 China: sin salidas de capital importantes China: Sin grandes salidas de capital China: Sin grandes salidas de capital Los datos del PMI chino, mejores de lo esperado, publicados a principios de esta semana ofrecen un rayo de esperanza. No obstante, a la luz de los decepcionantes números de actividad de agosto, es probable que China aumente el ritmo del estímulo en los próximos meses. Las autoridades ya han reducido los requisitos de reservas bancarias. Esperamos que recorten las tasas de política monetaria en los próximos meses. También adelantará la emisión de bonos locales, lo que debería ayudar a impulsar el gasto en infraestructura. El crecimiento europeo debería mejorar Una recuperación del crecimiento global ayudará a Europa más adelante este año. Alemania, con su economía dependiente del comercio, se beneficiará más. Gráfico 13 Los diferenciales han disminuido en el sur de Europa Los diferenciales se han estrechado en todo el sur de Europa Los diferenciales se han estrechado en todo el sur de Europa Gráfico 14 Un crecimiento monetario más rápido presagia un buen crecimiento del PIB en la zona euro Un crecimiento más rápido de la masa monetaria augura un buen crecimiento del PIB en la zona del euro. Un crecimiento más rápido de la masa monetaria augura un buen crecimiento del PIB en la zona del euro. La caída de los diferenciales soberanos también debería respaldar al sur de Europa (Gráfico 13). El diferencial del bono italiano a 10 años respecto al bund alemán se ha estrechado casi un punto porcentual desde mediados de agosto, llevando el rendimiento del bono italiano a 10 años al 0,83%. Los bonos griegos a 10 años ahora rinden menos que los bonos del Tesoro de EE. UU. (el PMI manufacturero griego es actualmente el más fuerte del mundo). Con el BCE volviendo al mercado a comprar deuda soberana y corporativa, las tasas de interés deberían mantenerse bajas. El crecimiento del dinero en la zona euro, que adelanta el crecimiento del PIB, ya se ha acelerado (Gráfico 14). Los préstamos bancarios al sector privado deberían seguir acelerándose. Una modesta dosis de estímulo fiscal también ayudará. La Comisión Europea estima que el impulso fiscal en la zona euro aumentará en 0,5% del PIB en 2019 (Gráfico 15). Suponiendo, de manera conservadora, un multiplicador fiscal de uno, esto impulsaría el crecimiento de la zona euro en medio punto porcentual. Debido a los retrasos entre los cambios en la política fiscal y su impacto en la economía real, la mayor parte de las ganancias en el crecimiento del PIB ocurrirá durante el resto de este año y en 2020. Gráfico 15 El estímulo fiscal en la zona euro también impulsará el crecimiento El estímulo fiscal de la zona del euro también impulsará el crecimiento El estímulo fiscal de la zona del euro también impulsará el crecimiento Gráfico 17 Angustia por el Brexit: un caso de 'Bremorse' Angustia por el Brexit: Un caso de Bremorse Angustia por el Brexit: Un caso de Bremorse Gráfico 16 Reino Unido: la incertidumbre del Brexit está lastrando el crecimiento Reino Unido: la incertidumbre del Brexit lastra el crecimiento Reino Unido: la incertidumbre del Brexit lastra el crecimiento En el Reino Unido, la incertidumbre del Brexit continúa lastrando el crecimiento. La inversión empresarial en el Reino Unido se ha visto especialmente afectada (Gráfico 16). El primer ministro Boris Johnson sigue insistiendo en que sacará al Reino Unido de la UE con o sin acuerdo a finales de octubre. Nosotros restamos importancia a su fanfarronería. El Tribunal Supremo ya negó su intento de cerrar el Parlamento. El público está teniendo dudas sobre la conveniencia del Brexit (Gráfico 17). Aunque no tenemos una opinión firme sobre los giros exactos de la saga del Brexit, mantenemos que las probabilidades de un Brexit sin acuerdo son bajas. Esto es una buena noticia para el crecimiento del Reino Unido y para la libra. Japón: autogol Los recientes datos japoneses no han sido alentadores: los pedidos de máquinas-herramienta cayeron un 37% interanual en agosto. Las exportaciones se contrajeron más del 8%, con importaciones registrando una caída del 12%. La lectura del PMI de septiembre expuso un mayor deterioro en la manufactura, con el índice cayendo a 48.9 desde 49.3 en agosto. Además, la producción industrial se contrajo más de lo esperado en agosto, cayendo un 1% respecto al mes anterior y cerca del 5% interanual. La incertidumbre en torno a las negociaciones comerciales EE. UU.-China, así como las propias tensiones de Japón con la vecina Corea del Sur, también han pesado sobre la economía japonesa. La actividad industrial japonesa mejorará a finales de este año a medida que el crecimiento global se recupere. Pero el gobierno no ha ayudado a las perspectivas de crecimiento al aumentar el impuesto al consumo el 1 de octubre. Si bien varias compensaciones mitigarán el efecto total de la subida impositiva, sigue suponiendo un endurecimiento injustificado de la política fiscal. El PIB nominal apenas ha aumentado desde principios de los años 90. Lo que Japón necesita son políticas que aumenten la renta nominal. Esas políticas reflacionarias podrían ser la única forma de estabilizar la ratio deuda/PIB sin empujar a la economía de nuevo a una espiral deflacionaria.1  EE. UU.: resistiendo Gráfico 18 EE. UU. tiene una menor participación de la industria manufacturera que la mayoría de las demás economías desarrolladas Perspectiva estratégica para el cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado de "muéstrame Perspectiva estratégica para el cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado de "muéstrame La economía de EE. UU. se ha comportado relativamente bien durante la última desaceleración económica global, en parte porque la manufactura representa una menor proporción del PIB que en la mayoría de las otras economías (Gráfico 18). Según el modelo GDPNow de la Fed de Atlanta, el PIB real se encamina a crecer a un ritmo cercano a la tendencia del 1.8% en el tercer trimestre (Gráfico 19). El consumo personal aumentará alrededor de un 2.5%, después de haber crecido un 4.6% en el segundo trimestre. El gasto del consumidor debería mantenerse robusto, respaldado por el aumento de los salarios. La tasa de ahorro personal también permanece elevada, lo que debería ayudar a amortiguar a los hogares ante cualquier choque adverso (Gráfico 20).   Gráfico 19 El crecimiento de EE. UU. se ha debilitado, pero sigue cerca de la tendencia Perspectiva estratégica para el cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado "muéstrame Perspectiva estratégica para el cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado "muéstrame La inversión residencial finalmente parece estar girando la esquina. Los inicios de viviendas, los permisos de construcción y las ventas de viviendas han aumentado. Dada la estrecha relación entre las tasas hipotecarias y la construcción de viviendas, la actividad de construcción debería acelerarse en los próximos trimestres (Gráfico 21). La baja oferta y las bajas tasas de vacancia, el aumento de la formación de hogares y la accesibilidad razonable auguran bien para el mercado inmobiliario (Gráfico 22). Gráfico 20 La tasa de ahorro tiene (mucho) margen para caer, según la relación histórica con la riqueza La tasa de ahorro tiene (mucho) margen para bajar, a juzgar por la relación histórica con la riqueza La tasa de ahorro tiene (mucho) margen para bajar, a juzgar por la relación histórica con la riqueza Gráfico 21 La vivienda en EE. UU. se recuperará La vivienda en EE. UU. se recuperará La vivienda en EE. UU. se recuperará Gráfico 22 Vivienda en EE. UU.: sobre una base sólida Vivienda en EE. UU.: Sobre una base sólida Vivienda en EE. UU.: Sobre una base sólida Gráfico 23 Los planes de inversión de EE. UU. han caído desde sus máximos, pero están lejos de niveles recesivos Los planes de capex de EE. UU. han retrocedido desde sus máximos, pero distan mucho de niveles recesivos. Los planes de capex de EE. UU. han retrocedido desde sus máximos, pero distan mucho de niveles recesivos. En contraste con la inversión residencial, la inversión empresarial sigue lastrada por la recesión manufacturera, un dólar fuerte y la incertidumbre de la política comercial. Los pedidos básicos de bienes duraderos disminuyeron en agosto. Las encuestas sobre intenciones de capex también se han debilitado, aunque siguen muy por encima de niveles recesivos (Gráfico 23). El índice ISM manufacturero alcanzó su nivel más bajo desde julio de 2009 en septiembre. Los componentes internos del informe no fueron tan malos como el titular. El componente pedidos nuevos/inventarios, que adelanta al ISM por dos meses, volvió a territorio positivo. La débil lectura del ISM también contrasta con el más optimista PMI manufacturero Markit de EE. UU., que subió a su nivel más alto desde abril. Estadísticamente, el PMI de Markit hace un mejor trabajo en seguir las medidas oficiales de la producción manufacturera, los pedidos fabriles y el empleo en EE. UU. que el ISM. En conjunto, es probable que la economía de EE. UU. experimente un crecimiento modestamente más fuerte a finales de este año, a medida que la recesión manufacturera global llegue a su fin, mientras que el fuerte gasto del consumidor y un mercado inmobiliario en mejora refuercen la demanda interna. II. Mercados financieros Asignación global de activos Los mercados han entrado en una fase de “muéstrame”. Serán necesarios mejores datos económicos y avances significativos en las negociaciones comerciales para que las acciones suban de forma sostenible. Por ello, los inversores deberían mantener posiciones de efectivo mayores de lo normal por el momento para protegerse contra riesgos a la baja. Gráfico 24 Las acciones superarán a los bonos si el crecimiento se recupera Las acciones superarán a los bonos si el crecimiento se recupera Las acciones superarán a los bonos si el crecimiento se recupera Afortunadamente, cualquier retroceso en los precios de los activos de riesgo probablemente será temporal. Si las tensiones comerciales disminuyen y el crecimiento global se recupera más adelante este año, como esperamos, las acciones y los productos de spread deberían superar con creces a los bonos gubernamentales en un horizonte de 12 meses (Gráfico 24). Admitimos que hay muchas cosas que podrían trastocar esta recomendación optimista a 12 meses: el crecimiento global podría seguir deteriorándose; la guerra comercial podría intensificarse; shocks de oferta podrían hacer que los precios del petróleo vuelvan a dispararse; el Reino Unido podría acabar saliendo de la UE en un escenario de “Brexit duro”; y, por último, Elizabeth Warren u otro candidato de la izquierda radical podría acabar convirtiéndose en el próximo presidente de EE. UU. La pregunta clave para los inversores hoy es si estos riesgos ya están completamente descontados en los mercados financieros. Creemos que sí. Gráfico 25 muestra nuestras estimaciones de la prima de riesgo de la renta variable global (ERP), calculada como la diferencia entre el rendimiento por beneficios y el rendimiento real de los bonos. Nuestros cálculos sugieren que las acciones siguen pareciendo bastante baratas en comparación con los bonos. Gráfico 25A Las primas de riesgo de acciones siguen siendo bastante altas (I) Las primas de riesgo de la renta variable siguen siendo bastante altas (I) Las primas de riesgo de la renta variable siguen siendo bastante altas (I) Gráfico 25B Las primas de riesgo de acciones siguen siendo bastante altas (II) Primas de Riesgo de Renta Variable Siguen Siendo Bastante Altas (II) Primas de Riesgo de Renta Variable Siguen Siendo Bastante Altas (II) Se podría protestar que la ERP es alta solo porque los rendimientos de los bonos ultra bajos de hoy reflejan perspectivas de crecimiento muy pobres. Hay algo de verdad en esa afirmación, pero no tanto como se podría pensar. Si bien el crecimiento del PIB tendencial ha caído en EE. UU. durante la última década, los rendimientos de los bonos han descendido aún más. La brecha entre el crecimiento potencial del PIB nominal de EE. UU., según estima la Oficina de Presupuesto del Congreso, y el rendimiento del Tesoro a 10 años se acerca a dos puntos porcentuales, el más alto desde 1979 (Gráfico 26). Gráfico 26 Los rendimientos de los bonos han caído más que el crecimiento tendencial del PIB nominal Los rendimientos de los bonos han caído más que el crecimiento nominal tendencial del PIB Los rendimientos de los bonos han caído más que el crecimiento nominal tendencial del PIB A nivel global, la tendencia del crecimiento del PIB apenas ha cambiado desde 1980, en gran medida porque los mercados emergentes de más rápido crecimiento ahora constituyen una mayor parte de la economía mundial (Gráfico 27). Para las grandes empresas multinacionales, el crecimiento global, más que el crecimiento doméstico, es la medida más relevante del impulso económico. Medición de los rendimientos futuros de la renta variable Una ERP alta simplemente indica que las acciones son atractivas en términos relativos respecto a los bonos. Para estimar el rendimiento prospectivo de las acciones en términos absolutos, se debe observar el nivel absoluto de las valoraciones. Gráfico 27 La tendencia del crecimiento global se ha mantenido estable gracias al mayor crecimiento de los mercados emergentes gráfico 27 La tendencia del crecimiento global se ha mantenido estable gracias a los mercados emergentes de más rápido crecimiento. La tendencia del crecimiento global se ha mantenido estable gracias a los mercados emergentes de más rápido crecimiento. Gráfico 28 S&P 500: todo el aumento de los márgenes se ha producido en el sector tecnológico S&P 500: Todo el aumento de los márgenes se ha producido en el sector de TI S&P 500: Todo el aumento de los márgenes se ha producido en el sector de TI Como argumentamos en un informe reciente titulado “¿TINA al rescate?”,2 el rendimiento por beneficios puede usarse como proxy del rendimiento total real esperado de la renta variable. Empíricamente, la evidencia parece confirmarlo: desde 1950, el rendimiento por beneficios de las acciones estadounidenses ha promediado 6.7%, en comparación con un rendimiento total real del 7.2%. Hoy, el ratio PE trailing y el forward para las acciones estadounidenses se sitúan en 21.1 y 17.4, respectivamente. Usando un promedio simple de ambos como guía para rendimientos futuros, las acciones estadounidenses deberían ofrecer un rendimiento total real a largo plazo del 5.2%. Si bien esto está por debajo de su media histórica, sigue siendo un rendimiento bastante aceptable. Se podría argumentar que este cálculo sobreestima los rendimientos prospectivos de la renta variable porque el rendimiento por beneficios de EE. UU. está temporalmente inflado por márgenes de beneficio anormalmente altos. El problema con este argumento es que prácticamente todo el aumento de los márgenes del S&P 500 se ha producido en un solo sector: tecnología. Fuera del sector tecnológico, los márgenes del S&P 500 no están lejos de su media histórica (Gráfico 28). Si los márgenes elevados del sector tecnológico reflejan cambios estructurales en la economía global —como la aparición de empresas “winner-take-all” que se benefician de potentes efectos de red y poder de fijación de precios monopolístico— podrían permanecer elevados en el futuro previsible.   Asignación regional y sectorial de renta variable El rendimiento por beneficios es aproximadamente dos puntos porcentuales mayor fuera de EE. UU., lo que sugiere que las acciones no estadounidenses superarán a sus pares estadounidenses a largo plazo. En el espacio de mercados desarrollados, Alemania, España y Reino Unido parecen especialmente baratas. En el ámbito de los mercados emergentes, China, Corea y Rusia destacan por estar muy atractivamente valoradas (Gráfico 29). A nivel sectorial, las acciones cíclicas parecen más atractivas que las defensivas (Gráfico 30). Gráfico 29 Las acciones de EE. UU. parecen caras en comparación con sus pares Perspectiva estratégica para el cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado "muéstrame Perspectiva estratégica para el cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado "muéstrame Gráfico 31 El crecimiento económico impulsa las acciones en un horizonte de 12 meses El crecimiento económico impulsa las acciones en un horizonte de 12 meses El crecimiento económico impulsa las acciones en un horizonte de 12 meses Gráfico 30 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 32 Las acciones de mercados emergentes y de la zona euro suelen superar cuando mejora el crecimiento global Las acciones de EM y de la Zona del Euro suelen tener un mejor rendimiento cuando mejora el crecimiento global. Las acciones de EM y de la Zona del Euro suelen tener un mejor rendimiento cuando mejora el crecimiento global. Las valoraciones son útiles principalmente como guía para los rendimientos a largo plazo. En un horizonte de, digamos, 12 meses, los factores cíclicos —es decir, lo que sucede con el crecimiento, las tasas de interés y los tipos de cambio— importan más (Gráfico 31). Afortunadamente, nuestras vistas cíclicas generalmente coinciden con nuestra evaluación de las valoraciones. Un crecimiento global más fuerte, un dólar más débil y precios de las materias primas en alza deberían beneficiar a las acciones cíclicas frente a las defensivas. En la medida en que los mercados de acciones de los mercados emergentes y europeos tienen una mayor inclinación hacia sectores cíclicos que las acciones estadounidenses, los primeros deberían terminar superando a los segundos (Gráfico 32). Incluiríamos a los financieros en nuestra lista de sectores a mejorar antes de fin de año una vez que el crecimiento global comience a reaccelerarse. La caída de los rendimientos ha perjudicado los beneficios bancarios (Gráfico 33). El lastre sobre los márgenes de interés netos debería retroceder a medida que los rendimientos empiecen a subir. Los bancos europeos, que actualmente cotizan a solo 7.6 veces ganancias forward, 0.6 veces valor contable y ofrecen un jugoso rendimiento por dividendo del 6.3%, podrían comportarse especialmente bien (Gráfico 34). Gráfico 33A Rendimientos de bonos más altos y curvas de rendimiento más empinadas beneficiarán a los financieros (I) Mayores rendimientos de los bonos y curvas de rendimiento más empinadas beneficiarán al sector financiero (I) Mayores rendimientos de los bonos y curvas de rendimiento más empinadas beneficiarán al sector financiero (I) Gráfico 33B Rendimientos de bonos más altos y curvas de rendimiento más empinadas beneficiarán a los financieros (II) Mayores rendimientos de los bonos y curvas de rendimiento más pronunciadas beneficiarán al sector financiero (II) Mayores rendimientos de los bonos y curvas de rendimiento más pronunciadas beneficiarán al sector financiero (II) Como ilustra el Gráfico 35, una apuesta por los financieros es similar a una apuesta por las acciones de valor. El crecimiento ha superado al value durante los últimos 12 años, pero es de esperar un cierto respiro para el value en los próximos 12 a 18 meses. Gráfico 34 Los bancos europeos son atractivos Los bancos europeos son atractivos Los bancos europeos son atractivos Gráfico 35 ¿Está el 'value' dando la vuelta? ¿Está el valor dando la vuelta? ¿Está el valor dando la vuelta?   Renta fija Gráfico 36A Los rendimientos deberían subir con un crecimiento más fuerte (I) Los rendimientos deberían aumentar con un crecimiento más robusto (I) Los rendimientos deberían aumentar con un crecimiento más robusto (I) Los bancos centrales dovish y, por el momento, la inflación todavía contenida ayudarán a mantener a raya los rendimientos de los bonos gubernamentales durante los próximos 12 meses. No obstante, los rendimientos subirán desde los niveles deprimidos actuales gracias a un crecimiento global más fuerte (Gráfico 36).     Gráfico 36B Los rendimientos deberían subir con un crecimiento más fuerte (II) Los rendimientos deberían aumentar con un crecimiento más sólido (II) Los rendimientos deberían aumentar con un crecimiento más sólido (II) Los rendimientos de los bonos tienden a subir o bajar dependiendo de si los bancos centrales ajustan las tasas más o menos de lo anticipado (Gráfico 37). Los inversores actualmente esperan que la Fed recorte las tasas otros 80 puntos básicos en los próximos 12 meses. Si bien creemos que la Fed reducirá las tasas en 25 puntos básicos el 30 de octubre, no anticipamos más recortes después de esa fecha. Los 75 puntos básicos acumulados en recortes durante este ciclo de relajación equivaldrán a la cantidad de alivio entregada durante las dos desaceleraciones intermedias de los años 90 (1995/96 y 1998). En conjunto, es probable que el rendimiento del Tesoro estadounidense a 10 años vuelva al rango bajo del 2% hacia mediados de 2020. Gráfico 37A Un crecimiento económico más fuerte ejercerá presión al alza sobre los rendimientos de los bonos gubernamentales (I) Un crecimiento económico más fuerte ejercerá presión al alza sobre los rendimientos de los bonos gubernamentales (I) Un crecimiento económico más fuerte ejercerá presión al alza sobre los rendimientos de los bonos gubernamentales (I) Gráfico 36B Un crecimiento económico más fuerte ejercerá presión al alza sobre los rendimientos de los bonos gubernamentales (II) Un crecimiento económico más fuerte ejercerá presión al alza sobre los rendimientos de los bonos del gobierno (II) Un crecimiento económico más fuerte ejercerá presión al alza sobre los rendimientos de los bonos del gobierno (II) Gráfico 38 Los rendimientos de los bonos gubernamentales de EE. UU. son más procíclicos que los rendimientos en el extranjero Los rendimientos de los bonos del gobierno de EE. UU. son más procíclicos que los rendimientos en el extranjero Los rendimientos de los bonos del gobierno de EE. UU. son más procíclicos que los rendimientos en el extranjero A diferencia de las acciones estadounidenses, que tienden a tener una beta baja comparadas con las acciones en el extranjero, los bonos estadounidenses poseen una beta alta. Esto significa que los rendimientos del Tesoro de EE. UU. suelen subir más que los rendimientos en el extranjero cuando los rendimientos de los bonos globales, en conjunto, aumentan, y caen más cuando los rendimientos globales disminuyen (Gráfico 38).  Además, los bonos del Tesoro de EE. UU. rinden actualmente menos que otros mercados de bonos una vez que se tienen en cuenta los costes de cobertura de divisa (Tabla 1). Si los rendimientos de EE. UU. subieran más que los del extranjero durante los próximos 12 a 18 meses, esto restaría aún más rentabilidad a los bonos del Tesoro. Como resultado, los inversores deberían infraponderar los Treasuries dentro de una cartera global de bonos gubernamentales. Un crecimiento global más fuerte debería mantener a raya los diferenciales de crédito corporativo. Los estándares de concesión de préstamos para préstamos comerciales e industriales en EE. UU. han vuelto a terreno de relajación, lo cual suele ser alcista para el crédito corporativo (Gráfico 39). Según nuestros estrategas de bonos de EE. UU., los diferenciales corporativos high-yield y, en menor medida, los diferenciales de grado de inversión calificados como Baa, siguen siendo más amplios de lo que justifican los fundamentos económicos (Gráfico 40).3 Los bonos de grado de inversión mejor calificados, en contraste, ofrecen menos valor relativo. Tabla 1 Mercados de bonos en el mundo desarrollado Perspectiva estratégica para el cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado de "muéstrame Perspectiva estratégica para el cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado de "muéstrame Gráfico 39 La relajación de los estándares de préstamo augura bien para el crédito corporativo Normas de Préstamo Más Flexibles Son una Buena Señal para el Crédito Corporativo Normas de Préstamo Más Flexibles Son una Buena Señal para el Crédito Corporativo Gráfico 40 Empresas de EE. UU.: enfoque en crédito Baa y high-yield Empresas de EE. UU.: enfoque en Baa y crédito de alto rendimiento Empresas de EE. UU.: enfoque en Baa y crédito de alto rendimiento     Más allá de los próximos 18 meses, existe una alta probabilidad de que la inflación comience a moverse de forma material al alza. La tasa de desempleo en el G7 ha caído a mínimos de varias décadas (Gráfico 41). La proporción de economías desarrolladas que han alcanzado el pleno empleo ha alcanzado un nuevo máximo de ciclo (Gráfico 42). Por mucho que se hable de que la curva de Phillips está muerta, el crecimiento salarial se ha mantenido estrechamente correlacionado con el exceso de mano de obra (Gráfico 43). Gráfico 41 Las tasas de desempleo siguen tendiendo a la baja Las tasas de desempleo siguen disminuyendo Las tasas de desempleo siguen disminuyendo Gráfico 42 Mercados desarrollados: el pleno empleo alcanza nuevos máximos de ciclo Mercados desarrollados: pleno empleo alcanza nuevos máximos del ciclo Mercados desarrollados: pleno empleo alcanza nuevos máximos del ciclo Gráfico 43 La curva de Phillips está viva y vigente La curva de Phillips sigue viva y coleando La curva de Phillips sigue viva y coleando A medida que los salarios sigan subiendo, los precios empezarán a moverse al alza, lo que podría desencadenar una espiral salario-precio. La Fed, y eventualmente otros bancos centrales, tendrán que empezar a subir las tasas en ese momento. Una vez que las tasas entren en territorio restrictivo, las acciones caerán y los diferenciales de crédito se ampliarán. Podría producirse una recesión global en 2022. Divisas y materias primas Gráfico 44 El dólar es una moneda contracíclica El dólar es una moneda contracíclica El dólar es una moneda contracíclica El dólar estadounidense es una moneda contracíclica, lo que significa que tiende a moverse en la dirección opuesta al ciclo económico global (Gráfico 44). No tenemos una visión firme sobre la dirección del dólar en el corto plazo en este momento, pero esperamos que el billete verde comience a debilitarse hacia fin de año a medida que el crecimiento global empiece a recuperarse. EUR/USD debería aumentar hasta alrededor de 1.13 hacia mediados de 2020. GBP/USD subirá a 1.29. USD/CNY volverá a 7. USD/JPY probablemente se mantendrá estable, reflejando la naturaleza defensiva del yen y el lastre sobre el crecimiento japonés por la subida del impuesto al consumo. El dólar ponderado por el comercio continuará depreciándose hasta finales de 2021, tras lo cual un Fed más agresiva y una desaceleración del crecimiento global harán que el dólar vuelva a apreciarse. Durante el periodo en el que el dólar se debilite, los precios de las materias primas subirán (Gráfico 45). Gráfico 45 La debilidad del dólar beneficia a las materias primas La debilidad del dólar favorece a las materias primas La debilidad del dólar favorece a las materias primas Los estrategas de materias primas de BCA son particularmente alcistas sobre el petróleo en un horizonte de 12 meses (Gráfico 46). Ven los precios del Brent subiendo hasta 70 $/barril para final de este año y promediando 74 $/bbl en 2020, basándose en la expectativa de que un crecimiento global más fuerte y la disciplina en la producción reducirán los niveles de inventario petrolero. La capacidad de reserva de la OPEP –la diferencia entre lo que el cártel es capaz de producir y lo que realmente produce– está actualmente por debajo de su promedio histórico (Gráfico 47). Las reservas de crudo también han tendido a bajar dentro de la OCDE. Las propias reservas de Arabia Saudí han caído más del 40% desde su pico en 2015 (Gráfico 48). Gráfico 46 El déficit de oferta continuará Déficit de suministro continuará Déficit de suministro continuará Gráfico 47 Disponibilidad limitada de capacidad de reserva para compensar interrupciones Perspectiva estratégica del cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado "muéstrame Perspectiva estratégica del cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado "muéstrame Gráfico 48 Principales reservas estratégicas de petróleo Principales Reservas Estratégicas de Petróleo Principales Reservas Estratégicas de Petróleo Precios del petróleo más altos deberían beneficiar a monedas como el dólar canadiense, la corona noruega, el rublo ruso y el peso colombiano. Finalmente, unas palabras sobre el oro. Cerramos nuestra posición larga en oro el 29 de agosto con una ganancia del 20.5% en 20 semanas. Seguimos viendo el oro como una excelente cobertura a largo plazo contra una inflación más alta. En el corto plazo, sin embargo, el alza de los rendimientos de los bonos puede quitar impulso al oro, aunque un dólar más débil ayude al lingote en cierta medida. Reanudaremos nuestra posición larga en oro hacia finales del próximo año o en 2021 una vez que la inflación comience a despegar.   Peter Berezin, estratega global jefe Estrategia Global de Inversiones peterb@bcaresearch.com Notas al pie 1Consulte el Informe semanal de Estrategia Global de Inversiones, “¿Los altos niveles de deuda son deflacionarios o inflacionarios?” con fecha 15 de febrero de 2019. 2Consulte el Informe especial de Estrategia Global de Inversiones, “¿TINA al rescate?” con fecha 23 de agosto de 2019. 3Consulte el Informe semanal de Estrategia de Bonos de EE. UU., “Los inversores en bonos corporativos no deberían enfrentarse a la Fed,” con fecha 17 de septiembre de 2019. Estrategia & tendencias del mercado Modelo MacroQuant y puntuaciones subjetivas actuales Perspectiva estratégica para el cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado "muéstrame Perspectiva estratégica para el cuarto trimestre de 2019: un mercado "muéstrame Operaciones tácticas Recomendaciones estratégicas Operaciones cerradas

Informe especial

In late-summer 2010, we published a Special Report overviewing long-term U.S. equity sector relative performance during deflationary periods. Since then, inflation – core PCE deflator to be more specific – only briefly flirted with the Federal Reserve’s 2% target in mid-2018, while long-term inflation expectations never managed to re-anchor higher. Worrisomely, there are now budding signs that inflation will weaken in the coming quarters rather than rear its ugly head. Pundits – us included – are still waiting for inflationary pressures to finally pass-through. Worrisomely, there are now budding signs that inflation will weaken in the coming quarters rather than rear its ugly head (Chart 1). The late-2018 tightening in financial conditions will exert downward pressure on year-over-year CPI growth, albeit with a slight lag (top panel, Chart 1). More broadly, the ongoing deceleration in the U.S. economy, as evidenced by the sharp decline in the ISM manufacturing PMI (and most of its subcomponents), represents a serious headwind for inflation (second panel, Chart 1). Given weak global growth, the appreciating U.S. dollar – a countercyclical currency – will also weigh on inflation going forward (not shown). Further, we don’t view the recent perky inflation prints as sustainable. In fact, core goods CPI – which accounts for 25% of core CPI and has been the main driver lately – is expected to roll over and contract over the next 18 months (third panel, Chart 1). Chart 1Still Looking For Inflation? U.S. Equity Strategy’s corporate pricing power proxy has also sharply sunk corroborating that the path of least resistance is lower for core inflation (bottom panel, Chart 1). In other words, if Marty McFly could ride the DeLorean to travel back in time once more, he would certainly approve of deflation/disinflation being a major equity theme at BCA, and would even ask us to delve deeper into our prior analysis. That is precisely what we do in this Special Report. We acknowledge the current disinflationary trend and provide more details on the historical relative performance of the different equity sectors in such periods. We introduce a simple trading rule based on these deflationary episodes, which we define as two or more consecutive quarters of negative corporate sector price deflator growth (Chart 2). We treat single quarters of positive growth within broader deflationary trends as outliers, which translate into the occasional quarterly rebounds within the shaded areas. Chart 2Deflationary Periods The next pages provide some more color on the sectors historical relative performance. Notably, we add a brief overview of the annualized returns realized by heeding the signals from two consecutive quarters of negative corporate sector price deflator growth. Since 1960, there have been 27 such signals, with a median duration of 15 months and the shortest one being six months. As such, we feel comfortable using 6-, 12- and 24-month horizons to go long (short) the sectors we identified did well during deflationary (inflationary) periods, whenever signaled. Table 1 summarizes the results of this empirical exercise. Table 1 Sector Relative Performance And Deflation (From 1960 To Present) Our hypothesis during disinflationary periods is that defensives outshine cyclicals. The results for the GICS11 relative sector performance are consistent with our hypothesis. Specifically, following our deflationary signal, defensives are up 1.4% on a 6-month horizon, while cyclicals are down 2.5%. We also note an inflection point around the 12-month mark as cyclicals start to recover their losses moving from -2.5% to just -0.21%, while defensives are giving up their gains moving from 1.38% to 0.76%. This finding is consistent with the median deflation period duration of 15 months, as highlighted earlier. Similarly, if we look 24 months out, we observe that cyclicals are outperforming the market by 0.5% (largely driven by tech), and defensives are lagging the market by -1.2% (dragged by telecom and utilities) signaling that the market has recovered. Diagram 1Performance Time Line Importantly, we are currently in a deflationary environment as defined by our two-quarter signal that commenced mid-2018, and U.S. Equity Strategy has been actively reducing cyclical exposure over the past six months and highlighting that investors should be cautious on the prospects of the broad equity market. Turning back to Table 1, we also see some divergences in the GICS1 sector performance vs. some of our expectations. Utilities should outperform during disinflation periods, owing to two factors: (1) steady cash flow growth, (2) falling interest rates boost the allure of high yielding competing assets. Another notable outlier is the S&P consumer discretionary index. Specifically, the roughly 2% underperformance in the six months following our deflationary signal took us by surprise, as discretionary spending should at the margin get a boost from declining interest rates. To conclude, we also present a time line that summarizes results from Table 1 as well as the sector specific comments. Importantly, the time line is a road map that should be only used “as a rule of thumb” guide to navigate a deflationary environment. Keep in mind, that even though the median duration for a deflationary period is 15 months, it can still last anywhere from just under a year to over four years. As always, context is key. Finally, stay tuned for an update on our traditional U.S. equity sector profit margin outlook report that is due in the upcoming months. What follows are additional details of our analysis on a per sector basis, along with charts on sector specific pricing power and revenue turnover.     Jeremie Peloso, Research Analyst JeremieP@bcaresearch.com   Arseniy Urazov, Research Associate ArseniyU@bcaresearch.com   Consumer Staples (Overweight) The S&P consumer staples index performs well during deflationary periods. Likely explanatory variables are the safe haven status of this index along with an ongoing industry consolidation. Our sector pricing power proxy reveals that staples have not experienced a contraction in pricing power since 2003. While relative share prices are staging a recovery, they are still one standard deviation below the historical time trend. Further gains are likely given impressive returns on a 6-, 12-, and 24-month time horizon following our deflationary signal. We remain overweight the S&P consumer staples index. Energy (Overweight) Among the cyclical sectors, S&P energy is the second largest underperformer, declining 3.4% on average in relative terms in the six months following our deflationary signal. The underperformance is also evident in our PP proxy. Energy companies’ PP declines right as the economy enters deflation, which is consistent with our expectations, as oil plays a key role in virtually any inflation/deflation measure. One caveat at the current juncture is the recent oil price spike that may serve as a catalyst to unlock excellent value in bombed out energy equities. As a result of the drone attacks on Saudi Arabia’s production and refining facilities we expect geopolitical premia to get built into crude oil prices on a sustained basis. We are currently overweight the S&P energy index. Health Care (Overweight) During deflationary periods the S&P health care sector has outperformed the broad market, similar to its defensive sibling, the S&P consumer staples sector. On top of the safe haven nature of the health care industry, pricing power has never crossed below the zero line during the entire history of the data series. This remarkable feat also applies to the sector’s sales growth. We are currently overweight the S&P health care index. Industrials (Overweight) On the eve of deflation, industrials equities start wrestling with two opposing forces: cheapened raw materials versus slowing economic activity. In the end, economic softness wins the tug-of-war as this deep cyclical index underperforms the market on 6-, 12- and 24-month time horizon by -1.4%, -1.0% and -0.5%, respectively. The sector’s pricing power usually displays a sharp decline as we enter a deflationary zone weighing on industrials revenue prospects and thus relative performance. We are currently overweight the S&P industrials sector. Financials (Overweight) Being an early cyclical sector, it is not surprising that the S&P financials sector tends to underperform the broad market on 6-, 12- and 24-month horizon following our two-quarter deflation signal. The largest underperformance for financials comes late into the deflationary period. In fact, had we excluded utilities from our analysis, the S&P financials sector would have been the worst performing sector across the board on a 12- and 24-month time horizon. The heavyweight banks subgroup accounting for roughly 42% of the S&P financials market capitalization weight explains the underperformance. As a reminder banks underperform when the price of credit is falling owing to deflation/disinflation. Given that our fixed income strategists expect a selloff in the bond market, we remain overweight the S&P financials index. Technology (Neutral – Downgrade Alert) Back in 2010, we reiterated that tech equities were deflationary winners, a fact that has not changed since then. The frenetic pace of innovation in and of itself, has prepared the sector to cope with episodes of deflation. Within cyclicals, technology is by far the best performing sector in our Table 1, but the present-day geopolitical and trade tensions compel us to be neutral on the sector with a potential downgrade coming down the line via a software subgroup downgrade. Tech pricing power is resilient during deflationary episodes. However, tech sales growth, which appears to have peaked for the cycle, swings violently, warning of potential turbulence ahead if a down oscillation is looming. We are neutral the S&P technology sector, which is also on our downgrade watch list. Telecommunication Services (Neutral) Traditionally defensive telecom services stocks have been struggling recently, saddled with rising debt, fighting to remain relevant and avoid becoming a “dumb pipe”. The industry’s pricing power proxy also highlights the point as telecom companies never managed to regain their footing since the GFC. Another important point is that the index materially underperforms the market across all the time horizons we examined returning: -1.5%, -2.0% and -4.4%. Our hypothesis was that telecom carriers should outperform during deflationary periods owing to stable cash flow growth generation and a high dividend yield profile. But, empirical evidence shows the opposite. Likely, the four decades-long sustained underperformance of this now niche safe haven industry suggests that sector specific dynamics are at fault. We are currently neutral the S&P telecommunication services index. Materials (Underweight) Despite the massive demand from China and, more generally, from the EM complex for commodities over the past several years, the S&P materials sector never actually managed to break free from its structural downtrend. The sector is one of the major disinflationary losers as evident from the chart. Importantly, since the mid-70s, most of the periods when materials managed to outperform the broad market occurred outside the shaded areas and recessions. On average, materials sector pricing power also tends to decline sharply when global growth weakens, as is currently the case. And, with a slight delay, materials sector revenue growth will likely suffer a setback, warning that revenue growth has crested for the cycle. We reiterate our recent downgrade of the S&P materials sector to underweight. Consumer Discretionary (Underweight – Upgrade Alert) Contrary to our hypothesis, S&P consumer discretionary stocks underperform during disinflationary periods that weigh on interest rates. Likely decelerating economic activity trumps that fall in interest rates and consumers gravitate toward staple goods and services and away from discretionarfy purchases. Table 1 reveals that consumer discretionary stocks actually suffer the most early in a deflationary period (-2.0%), and then sharply recover 12 months out and turn marginally positive (0.1%). We are currently underweight the S&P consumer discretionary index, but have it on upgrade alert as a potential buying opportunity. Utilities (Underweight) As for the final sector of this Special Report, we had highlighted that the S&P utilities is a notable outlier in our analysis as it does not behave according to our expectations. Likely, some industry specific dynamics are at play as high-yielding safe haven utilities stocks severely underperform during deflationary periods. The sector returns -3.5%, -4.3%, and -4.5% versus the broad marekt on a 6-, 12, and 24-month time horizon, respectively. In theory, two factors should have pushed the relative share price higher: (1) steady cash flow growth and (2) falling interest rates, both of which boost the allure of high yielding competing assets. Neither one was sufficient to break away from the structural downtrend that has been haunting the sector over the years. We are currently underweight the S&P utilites index.   Footnotes 1    We are using GICS 2 Telecommunication Services index instead of the parent GICS 1 Communication Services index due to the lack of data as the index was only recently introduced.

Highlights Portfolio Strategy The contracting manufacturing sector that rekindled recession fears, the harsh reality of the Sino-American trade war weighing on profits, downbeat business confidence and mushrooming capex slowdown signals all warn that investors should tread carefully in the historically difficult equity market months of September and October. It no longer pays to be overweight gold mining equities as sentiment is stretched, the restarting of global QE will likely reverse or at least halt the drubbing in global yields and the U.S. dollar inverse correlation should reassert itself and weigh on global gold miners. EM and China ills, deflating global producer pricing power, export blues and souring financial statement metrics underscore that materials stocks have ample downside. Recent Changes Trim the Global Gold Mining index to neutral, today. Downgrade the S&P Materials sector to underweight, today. Table 1 Feature Equities broke out of their trading range last week, but in order for this short-covering rally to become durable, and for volatility to subside, either global growth needs to turn the corner and alleviate recession fears or the trade war needs to de-escalate materially. On the recession front Central Banks (CBs) are doing their utmost to reflate their respective economies, but the early stages of looser monetary policy have been insufficient to change the global growth trajectory. With regard to the trade war, markets cheered the news that talks between the U.S. and China will resume in September and October. The dates for talks are conveniently chosen to follow the September FOMC meeting and the October 1 70th anniversary of the People's Republic of China. The latter date implies that Washington is considering delaying the October 1 tariff hike – and it could imply that Washington does not anticipate any violent suppression of Hong Kong protesters by that time. However, the harsh reality is that the two sides are just “kicking the can down the road”. The longer the Sino-American trade war takes to conclude, the more likely it will serve as a catalyst for a repricing of risk significantly lower (top panel, Chart 1). A technical correction may be necessary to force Trump to reduce the trade pressure significantly. Even if the October 1 tariff hike is postponed it will remain a source of uncertainty ahead of the final tariff tranche slated for December 15. The bond market may offer some clues as to the extent that the escalating trade war will eventually get reflected into stocks (bottom panel, Chart 1). The equity transmission mechanism is through the earnings avenue. Simply put, rising trade uncertainty deals a blow to global trade that boosts the U.S. dollar which in turn makes U.S. exports uncompetitive in global markets, deflates the commodity complex and with a lag weighs on SPX earnings. Chart 1Tracking Trade Uncertainty Speaking of the economically hypersensitive manufacturing sector, last week’s ISM release made for grim reading, further fueling recession fears (the New York Fed now pegs the recession probability just shy of 38% by next August). Not only did the overall survey fall below the boom/bust line (middle panel, Chart 2), but also new orders collapsed. In fact, the drubbing in new orders is worrying and it signals that the economy is going to get worse before it gets better (top panel, Chart 2). Tack on the simultaneous rise in inventories, and the sinking new orders-to-inventories ratio (not shown) warns of additional manufacturing ills in the coming months. Importantly, export orders suffered the steepest losses plunging to 43.3. The last three times that this trade-sensitive survey subcomponent was in such a steep freefall were in 1998, 2001 and 2008, when the SPX suffered peak-to-trough losses of 20%, 49% and 57%, respectively. In fact, since the history of the data, ISM manufacturing export orders have never been lower with the exception of the GFC (Chart 3). Such a retrenchment will either mark the bottom for equities or is a harbinger of a steep equity market correction. We side with the latter as the odds of President Trump striking a real trade deal (including tech) with China any time soon are low. Chart 2Like Night Follows Day Similar to the ISM manufacturing/non-manufacturing divergence (bottom panel, Chart 2), business confidence is trailing consumer conference by a wide mark. Historically this flaring chasm has been synonymous with a sizable loss of momentum in the broad equity market (Chart 4). One plausible explanation is that as business animal spirits suffer a setback, CEOs are quick to prune/postpone capex plans and, at the margin, corporations retrench and short-circuit the capex upcycle. Chart 3Export Carnage Chart 4Mind The Gap Circling back to last week’s capex update, national accounts corroborate the financial statement data deceleration, and in some cases contraction, in capital outlays (Chart 5). As a reminder our thesis is that the EPS-to-capex virtuous upcycle is morphing into a vicious down cycle.1 This week, we downgrade a deep cyclical sector by taking profits in a niche subgroup that has served as a reliable portfolio hedge. Crucially, tech investment, that comprises almost 30% of total investment according to national accounts, is decelerating, R&D and other intellectual property investment have also hooked down, non-residential structures are on the verge of contraction, and industrial, transportation and other equipment –that have the largest weight in U.S. capex – are also quickly losing steam (Chart 6). Chart 5Capex Blues Chart 6All Capex Segments… In more detail, Charts 7 & 8 further break down capital outlays in the respective categories and reveal that worrisomely the investment spending slowdown is broad based. Chart 7…Have Rolled Over… Chart 8…Except For One Adding it all up, the contracting manufacturing sector that rekindled recession fears, the harsh reality of the Sino-American trade war weighing on profits, downbeat business confidence and mushrooming capex slowdown signals all warn that investors should tread carefully in the historically difficult equity market months of September and October. As a reminder, this is U.S. Equity Strategy service’s view and it contrasts with BCA’s sanguine equity market house view. This week, we downgrade a deep cyclical sector by taking profits in a niche subgroup that has served as a reliable portfolio hedge. Downgrade Materials To Underweight… Heightened economic and trade policy uncertainty has claimed the S&P materials sector as one of its victims (Chart 9). Given that our Geopolitical Strategy service’s base case remains that there will be no Sino-American trade deal by the U.S. November 2020 election, there is more downside for materials stocks and we are downgrading this niche deep cyclical sector to a below benchmark allocation.2 Beyond the U.S./China trade war inflicted wounds that materials stocks have to nurse, there are four major headwinds that they will also have to contend with in the coming months. Chart 9Trade Uncertainty Sinking Materials First, the emerging markets (EM) in general and China in particular are in a prolonged soft patch that predates the Sino-American trade war. EM stocks and EM currencies are both deflating at an accelerating pace warning that relative share prices will suffer the same fate (Chart 10). Nothing epitomizes the infrastructure spending/capex cycle more than China’s insatiable appetite for commodities and the news on that front remains dire. The Li Keqiang index continues to emit a distress signal and that is negative for materials top line growth (bottom panel, Chart 10). Second, global inflation is in hibernation and select EM producer price inflation growth series are on the verge of contraction or already outright contracting. Chinese raw materials wholesale prices are in the deflation zone and warn that U.S. materials sector profits will underwhelm (Chart 11). Chart 10Bearish EM… Chart 11…And China Backdrops Base metal prices are a real time indicator of the wellness of the S&P materials sector. Currently, base metals are deflating both on the back of a firming U.S. dollar and contracting global manufacturing. Such a commodity price backdrop is dampening prospects for a profit-led materials sector relative share price recovery (top & middle panels, Chart 12). Third, the materials exports outlook is darkening. Apart from the deflating effect the appreciating U.S. dollar has on commodities it also clips basic materials companies’ exports prospects. How? It renders materials related exports uncompetitive in international markets leading to market share losses. Netting it all out, EM and China ills, deflating global producer pricing power, export blues and souring financial statement metrics underscore that materials stocks have ample downside. Chart 12Weak Pricing Power And Declining Exports In addition, the latest ISM export order subcomponent plunged to multi-year lows reflecting trade war pessimism and falling global end-demand. The implication is that the export relief valve is closed for materials equities (bottom panel, Chart 12). Finally, materials sector financial statement metrics are moving in the wrong direction. Net debt-to-EBITDA is rising anew and interest coverage has likely peaked for the cycle at a time when free cash flow generation has ground to a halt (Chart 13). U.S. Equity Strategy’s S&P materials sector profit growth model encapsulates all these moving parts and warns that a severe profit contraction phase looms (Chart 14). Chart 13Financial Statement Red Flags Chart 14Model Says Sell Netting it all out, EM and China ills, deflating global producer pricing power, export blues and souring financial statement metrics underscore that materials stocks have ample downside. Bottom Line: The time is ripe to downgrade the S&P materials sector to underweight. …Via Trimming Gold Miners To Neutral The way we are executing this downgrade in the materials sector to an underweight stance is by trimming the global gold mining index to a benchmark allocation. Our thesis that gold stocks serve as a sound portfolio hedge remains intact and underpinned when: economic and trade policy uncertainty are on the rise (top panel, Chart 15) global CBs start cutting interest rates and in some cases doubling down on negative interest rates currency wars are overheating Nevertheless, what has changed is the price, and we deem that global gold miners that have gone parabolic are in desperate need of a breather. The top panel of Chart 16 shows that gold stocks have rallied 58% since the May 5, 2019 Trump tweet. This outsized four-month relative return is remarkable and likely almost fully reflects a very dovish Fed and melting real U.S. Treasury yields (TIPS yield shown inverted, bottom panel, Chart 15). A much needed pause for breath is required before the next leg of the relative rally resumes, and we opt to move to the sidelines. Chart 15Positive Backdrop… Chart 16…But Reflected In Prices Moreover, on the eve of the ECB’s September meeting, were President Mario Draghi to re-commence QE in the form of sovereign and corporate bond purchases as markets participants expect, counterintuitively a selloff in the bond markets would confirm that QE and its signaling is working (bottom panel, Chart 16). Ergo, this would likely exert upward pressure on global interest rates including the U.S., especially given the one-sided positioning in the respective global risk free assets. The implication is that the shiny metal and global gold miners would suffer a setback as real yields would rise further. As a reminder, gold bullion yields nothing and gold mining equities next to nothing, thus when competing safe haven assets at the margin start yielding higher, investors flee gold and gold miners and flock to risk free assets. Sentiment toward gold and global gold miners is stretched. Gold ETF holdings are at multi-year highs (second panel, Chart 17) and gold net speculative positions are at a level that has marked previous reversals. In addition, bullish consensus on gold is near 72%, a percentage last reached in 2012 (third & bottom panels, Chart 17). Similarly, relative share price momentum is also warning that global gold mining equities are currently extended (bottom panel, Chart 18). Chart 17Extreme… Chart 18…Sentiment Finally, while the bond market’s view of 100bps in Fed cuts in the next 12 months should have undermined the trade-weighted U.S. dollar, it has actually defied gravity and slingshot to fresh cycle highs. This is a net negative both for gold and gold mining equities as the underlying commodity is priced in U.S. dollars and enjoys an inverse correlation with the greenback. The implication is that the multi-decade inverse correlation will hold and will likely pull down gold and gold mining equities at least in the short-run (U.S. dollar shown inverted, Chart 19). In sum, the exponential rise in global gold miners is in need of a breather. Sentiment is stretched, the restating of global QE will likely reverse or at least halt the drubbing in global yields and the U.S. dollar inverse correlation should reassert itself and weigh on relative share prices Chart 19Gold Miners/Dollar Correlation Re-establishment Risk Bottom Line: Downgrade the global gold mining index to neutral, but stay tuned.   Anastasios Avgeriou, U.S. Equity Strategist anastasios@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1      Please see U.S. Equity Strategy Weekly Report, “Capex Blues” dated September 3, 2019, available at uses.bcaresearch.com 2      Please see The Bank Credit Analyst Special Report, “Big Trouble In Greater China” dated August 29 , 2019, available at bca.bcaresearch.com Current Recommendations Current Trades Size And Style Views Stay neutral cyclicals over defensives   (downgrade alert) Favor value over growth Favor large over small caps

Informe especial

HighlightsEuropean fiscal stimulus will not drive European equity outperformance – Europe needs China to open the stimulus taps.Our mega-theme of European integration continues – the continent is politically stable.The U.S.-China trade war is an opportunity for Europe. Any Sino-American trade deal is unlikely to resolve tech disputes. Go long European tech stocks versus American.The euro has room to grow as a global reserve currency given the dollar’s mounting structural flaws. Look for an opportunity to go long EUR/USD on a strategic basis within the near future.FeatureTalk of European fiscal stimulus is accelerating as investors look for reasons to take advantage of depressed European valuations (Chart 1) and traditional late-cycle outperformance relative to the U.S. (Chart 2). We are skeptical of the thesis. Chart 1European 'Cheapness' An Obvious Inducement  Chart 2Euro Stocks Outperform Late In The Cycle Europe is a price taker, not a price maker, when it comes to global growth. In order for investors to generate alpha from an overweight Europe position, the rest of the world needs to pick up the slack and reverse the current decline in economic fundamentals. That will require policy action on the behalf of the Fed, the Trump administration, and – most relevant to Europe – Chinese fiscal policy.That said, long-term investors should start thinking about increasing exposure to Europe. Not only is the continent well priced relative to the rest of the world, but it may have two more things going for it. First, political risks remain low. Second, Europe stands to gain in any prolonged China-U.S. confrontation. The flipside risk is that it stands to lose enormously in any temporary resolution as well.Europe Is A Derivative – Not A Source – Of Global Growth…Despite accounting for 16% of global GDP, the Euro Area generates an ever-shrinking proportion of the annual incremental change in global GDP (Chart 3). This is not surprising, given that the world has undergone significant transformation due to China’s industrialization and the growth of EM economies. Chart 3Europe’s Contribution To Global Growth Declining China’s imports today drive Euro Area manufacturing PMI broadly and Chinese retail sales drive German manufacturing orders specifically (Chart 4). As such, it is critically important to watch Chinese total social financing (TSF) impulse, which closely leads Europe’s exports to China by six months (Chart 5). Chart 4Europe And Germany Rely On China  Chart 5China's Credit Cycle Drives EU Exports  The problem is that the Chinese credit impulse has only tepidly recovered and implies more downside to European exports ahead. In addition, hopes of a rebound in Chinese retail sales have been dashed (Chart 6). The jump in auto sales in June was the result of heavy discounts offered by manufacturers and dealers to clear inventory before new emission standards came into effect on July 1. Due to the frontloading, car sales are now declining in what is traditionally an off-season for car purchases in China. While the worst may be over, weakness could linger for months. Chart 6China's Retail Sales Flashing Red The bottom line is that without an upturn in global growth, Europe will remain in the doldrums. The good news is that BCA’s Chief Strategist Peter Berezin expects precisely such a development in the second half of 2019.1 The bad news is that Chinese credit stimulus appears to be weighed down by a combination of impaired transmission mechanisms and policymaker unwillingness to launch an old-school credit orgy (Chart 7). This is creating a highly unusual – for this cycle – development where China is not playing its usual counter-cyclical role amidst the global manufacturing cycle (Chart 8). Chart 7China's Credit Stimulus Restrained Thus Far  Chart 8Beijing Goes On Strike As Global Spender Without more Chinese stimulus, European fiscal spending won’t be that meaningful.As such, it is difficult to get excited about European growth. As we discussed in last week’s missive, Europe is moving gingerly towards more fiscal spending. However, it has already done so this year, with fiscal thrust at 0.46% of GDP, the highest figure since 2009 (Chart 9). Did anyone notice? Not really. Chart 9Headwinds Overpower EU's Strong Fiscal Thrust Moreover Euro Area countries have to submit their 2020 budgets in early Q4 to the European Commission. It is unlikely that these proposals will be meaningful, given that there is not yet enough panic to spur massive stimulus.Bottom Line: Yes, Europe will provide more fiscal spending in 2020. But it will remain at the mercy of global growth given its high-beta nature.…But At Least It Is Not Falling Apart!   That said, not all is disappointing on the Old Continent. For one, the aforementioned fiscal thrust at least prevented a deeper slowdown this year – and the drop-off in thrust next year will be less dramatic as budgets turn more accommodative.Meanwhile political risk is falling. Anti-establishment parties are either cleaning up their act, putting on a tie, and becoming part of the establishment, or they are losing power. Our long-held thesis that European integration would persist into the next decade remains well-supplied with empirical evidence.2On the Euroskepticism front, much of the hype today surrounds the collapse of the Five Star Movement (M5S) coalition with the League in Italy. The formerly Euroskeptic M5S has shed its critique of European integration and has decided to partner with the center-left and pro-establishment Democratic Party (PD).This is merely the tip of the iceberg. Several key developments throughout 2019 have signaled to investors that the Euroskeptic moment has passed. For a plethora of data and polling to support this view, please refer to our May report on the European Parliament (EP) election. Here we merely survey the latest developments:European Parliament Election: As expected in our EP election forecast, the May contest was a non-event. Support for the euro and the EU is trending higher (Chart 10 and 11), and 73% of Euroskeptic seats are held by Eastern European or U.K. MEPs (Chart 12), both irrelevant for EU policy.3  Chart 10Even Italy Swings In Favor Of Euro  Chart 11Public Opinion Supports The Union  Chart 12Euroskepticism Overstated Random Elections: We rarely cover politics in Denmark or Finland, but the two Nordic countries have been at the forefront of the anti-establishment, right-wing, evolution in Europe. As such, the elections in Denmark (in June) and Finland (in April) were relevant. The Danish People’s Party (DPP) – one of the original “People’s Parties,” founded in 1995 – was massacred, losing 21 seats in the 179-seat legislature.In Finland, the moderately Euroskeptic Finns similarly saw a disappointing – if not as disastrous – performance.Finally, Austrian election on September 29 will likely see the other Europe’s prominent right-wing, Euroskeptic, party – the Freedom Party of Austria (FPO) – decline below 20% for the first time since 2008. Chart 13Macron Recovering In Polls France: Our high conviction view in February that the Yellow Vest protest would ultimately dissipate proved correct. President Emmanuel Macron has also seen a recovery in polling. Although tepid, at least he appears to be diverging from the trajectory of his disastrously unpopular predecessor François Hollande (Chart 13).The good news for Macron is that he continues to lead Marine Le Pen by double digits in the theoretical 2022 second round. While this represents a considerable improvement for Le Pen from her 2017 performance, the fact is that she has had to adjust her policies and rebrand the National Front in order to close the gap with Macron. The party is now called the National Rally and has publicly revised its stance towards both the EU and the euro.4The events in France, Denmark, Finland, and Austria have largely gone unnoticed amidst the China-U.S. trade war, attacks against Federal Reserve independence, and general breakdown in global institutions and paradigms. But they reveal that Euroskepticism in Europe is evolving from a definitive one – in or out – to a much more nuanced position.For students of history, this is not a surprise. European integration has always been a push-pull process. Charles de Gaulle famously caused a total breakdown in integration during the 1965 “Empty Chair Crisis” when France recalled its representative in Brussels and refused to take its seat on the Council.De Gaulle was a Euroskeptic in so far as he believed that European integration was a national, not a supra-national process.5 It could proceed apace, but only if controlled by national capitals. As such, he warred with the Commission all the time. However, de Gaulle did not want to eliminate European integration as he understood its geopolitical and economic imperative. He simply wanted to shape the process to fit French interests.Absolutist Euroskepticism – the idea that all European institutions ought to be replaced by national ones – is an alien idea to the post-World War Two continent, one imported from the nineteenth century. The irony of Brexit, therefore, is that the most vociferous supporters of an absolute end to the EU integrationist project are now abandoning their fellow absolutists on the continent.Geopolitical and structural factors are also pushing European Euroskeptics to evolve from absolutists to modern-era Gaullists. We have identified most of these factors before, but they are worth repeating:Europe has a geopolitical imperative to integrate. In a multipolar world dominated by global powers like the U.S. and China – and with Russia, India, Japan, Iran, and Turkey playing an increasingly independent role – European states are not large enough on their own to defend their economic and geopolitical interests. Chart 14Geopolitical Forces Behind Integration The purpose of integration is to aggregate the geopolitical power of Europe’s individual states amidst rising global multipolarity. Chart 14 is a stylized visualization of what European integration is attempting. It illustrates that the average BCA Geopolitical Power Index (GPI) score of an EMU-5 country is well below that of a BRIC state.6 By aggregating their geopolitical power, European states retain some semblance of relevance in the world.Obviously this is merely a thought experiment as European integration is not aggregation and never will be. Not only is aggregation politically unfeasible, but there is also a lot of double counting in simply adding GPI scores of European states. Nonetheless, the point is that European countries are asymptotically moving from the average to the aggregate score. Chart 15No Basis For Fascism In Great Recession No, the Nazis are not coming. Europe has managed to recover from a generational financial crisis. Pessimists point to the depth of the crisis to explain why Europe is unsustainable, with angst matching the severity of the downturn. However, analogizing to the 1930s is folly. First, Europe’s shared memories of the ravages of populism act as antibodies preventing precisely the same infection from breaking out on the continent.7 Second, the European financial crisis was simply nowhere close to the depth of the Great Depression that rocked Germany as it descended into National Socialism (Chart 15). As for the argument that the European Central Bank fed populism through unorthodox policy easing, the tide of populism would have been much more formidable if Europe had been allowed to sink into deeper recession and deflation.Europeans are just not that desperate. Europe scores much better than the U.S. (or the U.K.) when it comes to the balance between the median income and middle-income share of total population. Chart 16 shows that most Euro Area economies have around 70% of their population in the middle-income bracket. Those that fall short nonetheless hug the line of best fit closely (Italy, Spain, Greece, and the Baltic States). The U.S., on the other hand, has one of the highest median income levels, but with barely 50% of the population considered in the middle-income. Meaning that a lot of the people below the median line are far below it. This is a recipe for actual populist political outcomes (President Trump), as opposed to artificial ones (Italy). Chart 16U.S. At Greater Risk Of Populism Than EU European populism is artificial, U.S. populism is actual.What of the risks in Europe? For example, investors are concerned about mounting Target2 imbalances. Here we agree with our colleague Dhaval Joshi, who has pointed out that growing imbalances in Europe’s monetary system will only further constrain centrifugal forces among the nations.Target2 has seen a steady outflow of Italian cash to German banks as the ECB’s QE saw respective central banks purchase domestic bonds (Chart 17). This means that the Bank of Italy holds assets – BTPs – denominated in Italian euros, while the Bundesbank has a new liability to German banks denominated in German euros. EMU dissolution would be too painful due to this mismatch. Target2 is therefore not a threat to the EMU, but rather a Gordian Knot that can only be unraveled with immense pain and violence.That said, there may be an upcoming headline risk in Europe: the end of Chancellor Merkel’s reign. In our view, Merkel’s role in stabilizing Europe is greatly overstated. Her dithering and lack of conviction caused several crises to descend into chaos amidst the sovereign debt imbroglio. As such, an infusion of new blood will be positive for Europe. The populist threat is also overstated, with the Alternative for Germany (AfD) performing relatively tepidly in the polls. In fact, the liberal, Europhile, Greens are starting to gain votes (Chart 18). As such, an early election in Germany would create volatility and uncertainty but would not undermine our secular thesis on Europe. Chart 17Gordian Knot Supports Integration  Chart 18Germany Not Falling To Populism Bottom Line: There is an ever-strengthening case for the sustainability of the Euro Area and European integration well into the next decade.From Geopolitical Gambit To A Geopolitical Safe-Haven?At this point, we have built a strong case for why Europe will remain a high-beta play on global growth that is unlikely to collapse. As such, investors should plow into Europe when the rest of the world is doing well with confidence that the continent will not descend into chaos.The U.S.- China trade war offers an intriguing opportunity for Europe.This is largely underwhelming as an investment thesis. Could there be something more exciting to the story given a slew of well-known headwinds to European growth from demographics, low productivity, and regulatory malaise?The trade war between the U.S. and China does offer an intriguing opportunity for Europe.There appears to be an interesting development where European equities outperform those of the U.S. during periods of trade war turbulence (Chart 19). The outperformance is not major, but it is highly counterintuitive. Chart 19Europe Outperforms Amid Trade War Shocks As is understood, Europe is a high-beta play on global growth. Presumably, investors should abandon high-growth derivative plays when trade war accelerates. It is one of the reasons that EM equities and EM FX suffer whenever trade war accelerates.So why is Europe different? Because European exporters generally compete with their American counterparts (and Japanese and South Korean) for Chinese market share. And if China retaliates against U.S. companies, European companies stand to benefit, potentially massively.Take Boeing and Airbus. Boeing expects China to demand 7,700 new airplanes over the next two decades, an order valued at $1.2 trillion. It would be disastrous to the U.S. airline industry if the entirety of that order went to Airbus and its subsidiaries.8 According to the latest news reports, China has slowed down its airplane procurement to a crawl as it awaits the outcome of the dispute with the U.S.9 It is predictably using the procurement decision as leverage in the negotiations. Chart 20Europe To Lose If China Strikes U.S. Deal Yet this “substitution effect” thesis is a double-edged sword for Europe. A resolution of the trade war between the U.S. and China would likely include a massive purchase of U.S. agricultural, commodity, and manufacturing goods: the so-called “Beef and Boeings” deal. China bears often point out that such a massive purchase will negatively impact China’s current account, which is barely in surplus thanks to China’s trade surplus with the U.S. (Chart 20). This is false. Chinese policymakers are not suicidal. The last thing China needs is a balance of payments crisis due to a trade deal with the U.S.China would simply rob Peter to pay Paul, pulling its orders of soy from Brazil and Airbus from Europe in order to make a deal with the U.S. As such, it is highly likely that European capital goods exporters would suffer in any trade war resolution between China and the U.S.That said, a substantive trade deal that resolves all U.S.-China tensions is extremely unlikely. The U.S. and China are not just commercial rivals, they are also geopolitical rivals. As such, the tech conflict between the U.S. and China will continue well beyond any resolution of the trade war. This could create an opportunity for Europe’s traditionally beleaguered tech stocks to finally outperform their American counterparts (Chart 21). Chart 21Go Long EU Tech Versus U.S. Tech Bottom Line: A deterioration of the U.S.-China trade relationship would be a boon for European exporters. Short of a total breakdown of U.S.-China trade, however, European tech stocks may finally begin outperforming their U.S. counterparts thanks to the open distrust between U.S. and China.In addition, U.S. technology firms are likely going to face a slew of regulatory challenges over the next decade. While not necessarily negative, these challenges will nonetheless create new headwinds for the sector.10 We are therefore initiating a structural theme of being long European tech relative to U.S.Investment ImplicationsAre there any broader themes to be extracted from the combined geopolitical forecasts presented in this report? Europe will not collapse, and it may benefit from the souring of U.S.-China geopolitical and economic relations.Long euro is an obvious theme. As our colleague Dhaval Joshi has recently pointed out, the chasm between monetary policies of the Fed and the ECB has become a major geopolitical risk. This is because it has depressed the euro versus the dollar by at least 10 percent – based on the ECB’s own competitiveness indicators. The exchange rate distortion stemming from polarized monetary policies is the culprit for the euro area’s huge trade surplus with the United States (Chart 22).In the short term, EUR/USD may have reached its practical (and geopolitically acceptable) lows. Yes, the ECB is readying another round of monetary stimulus on September 12, but the fiscal policy counterpart is likely to be tepid and thus fail to (yet again) take advantage of historically depressed borrowing costs on the continent. The September 12 ECB meeting may therefore be a “sell the rumor, buy the news” event for EUR/USD. Chart 22Monetary Policy Accounts For Bilateral Surplus  Chart 23U.S. Rivals Buying Gold, Ditching Dollar On the more cyclical and secular horizon, we see an opportunity for the euro to reestablish some of its lost reserve currency status due to the geopolitical conflict between China and the U.S. Washington’s willingness to use trade and financial sanctions for geopolitical benefit has given pause to central bank authorities around the world in using dollars as a reserve currency. Purchases of gold for FX reserve have surged, particularly among America’s geopolitical rivals (Chart 23), as our colleague Chester Ntonifor has recently pointed out.As we argued in a report entitled “Is King Dollar Facing Regicide?” the euro has some catch-up potential. In 1990, the combined currencies of the countries that today comprise the Euro Area accounted for 35% of total composition of global currency reserves. Today, the figure is merely 20% (Chart 24). Chart 24Euro Has Plenty Of Room To Grow As Reserve Currency Could Europe supply the world with enough euros to replace USD as a reserve currency? This is highly unlikely. However, at the margin, an expansion of European liquidity is possible, particularly if Germany finally learns to love fiscal expansion and if European policymakers capitulate on the issuance of Eurobonds. However, such a lack of euro liquidity is not negative for the euro. The world could soon experience a situation where the demand for non-USD liquid assets dramatically increases due to the politicization of America’s reserve currency status while the supply of USD-alternatives remains relatively low. This should be positive for the only true alternative to the USD as a global reserve currency: the euro.As such, we will be looking to initiate a strategic long EUR/USD position, potentially sometime this fall as the ECB and FOMC meetings take place and the risk of a no-deal Brexit is averted. We do not expect the massive monetary policy divergence between Europe and the U.S. to continue, while the Euro Area’s political stability, and the broader geopolitical demand for a non-USD reserve currency, create more long-term tailwinds for the euro.Marko PapicConsulting Editor, BCA Research              Chief Strategist, Clocktower GroupHousekeepingOur high-conviction view that no-deal Brexit odds were overrated has been confirmed by the recent events in the U.K. parliament. We are going long GBP-USD with a tight stop-loss of 3%. Since we expect further volatility – with an election likely and the Conservative Party performing well in the polls and monopolizing the Brexit vote in a first-past-the-post system – we will sell at the $1.30 mark.Footnotes1 Please see Global Investment Strategy, “Trade War: The Storm Before The Calm,” dated August 9, 2019, available at gis.bcaresearch.com.2 Please see Geopolitical Strategy, “Europe's Geopolitical Gambit: Relevance Through Integration,” dated November 3, 2011, available at gps.bcaresearch.com.3 The reason we extracted the U.K. Euroskeptics from the calculation is because with Brexit nigh, the U.K. members of European Parliament are no longer policy relevant. As for Central European Euroskeptics, we extracted them because they are irrelevant for EU policy as they hail from member states that – in truth – nobody seriously thinks would ever leave the EU.4 Ahead of the May EP election, National Rally electoral platform focused on “local, ecological, and socially responsible production." The party advocates combining environmentalism with protectionism, creating an ecological custom barrier at the EU’s doorstep which would defend the European market from products manufactured or produced with less environmentally friendly processes. On the matters of EU membership, the party now advocates a more traditionally Euroskeptic line, a purely Gaullist form of Euroskepticism that seeks to curb – or, at best, abolish – the EU Commission and replace its legislative prerogative by giving the Council of the EU all legislative powers. 5  Please see Julian Jackson, De Gaulle (Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2018).6 We chose to use EMU-5 in the chart because it focuses on the top-five economies in the Euro Area: France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the Netherlands. If we focused on the overall average EMU score, even one we weighed by population, the results would be even more stark in terms of loss of importance.7 And, worryingly, the U.S. lacks precisely the same shared memory of how wild pendulum swings of polarization can descend into extreme nationalism or left-wing extremism.8 Airbus would not have the capacity to fulfill that entire order today. However, demand creates its own supply, giving Airbus a reason to surge capex and reap the profits.9 Please see Reuters, “Exclusive: Boeing CEO eyes major aircraft order under any U.S.-China trade deal.”10 Please see Geopolitical Strategy, “Is The Stock Rally Long In The FAANG?,” dated August 1, 2018 and “Surviving A Breakup: The Investor’s Guide To Monopoly-Busting In America,” dated March 20, 2019, available at gps.bcaresearch.com.

Highlights The lingering global manufacturing recession and the substantial drop in U.S. bond yields have been behind the decoupling between both EM stocks and the S&P 500, and cyclical and defensive equities. Neither the most recent economic data, nor the relative performance of global cyclicals, China-related plays and high-beta markets herald a broad-based and lasting risk-on phase in global markets. On the contrary, economic and market signposts continue to indicate either further bifurcation in global markets or a risk-off period. We review some of our long-standing themes and associated recommendations. Feature Global financial markets have become bifurcated. On one hand, numerous segments of global financial markets leveraged to global growth, including EM stocks, have already sold off (Chart I-1). On the other hand, share prices of growth companies, defensive stocks and global credit markets have remained resilient. Chart I-2 shows that a similar divergence has taken place within EM asset classes: EM share prices have plummeted while EM corporate credit excess returns have not dropped much. Chart I-1Bifurcated Equity Markets Chart I-2Bifurcated Markets In EM   How to explain this market bifurcation? Financial markets sensitive to global trade and manufacturing cycles have been mirroring worsening conditions in global trade and manufacturing. Some of the affected segments include: Global cyclical equity sectors. Emerging Asia manufacturing-related currencies (KRW, TWD and SGD) versus the U.S. dollar (Chart I-3). EM and DM commodity currencies (Chart I-4). Chart I-3Total Return (Including Carry): KRW, TWD And SGD Vs. USD Chart I-4EM And DM Commodity Currencies   Industrial and energy commodities prices. U.S. high-beta stocks as well as U.S. small caps (Chart I-5). Chart I-5U.S. High-Beta Stocks DM bond yields.  Crucially, the current global trade and manufacturing downturns have taken place despite robust U.S. consumer spending. In fact, our theme for the past several years has been that a global business cycle downturn would occur despite ongoing strength in American household spending. The rationale has been that China and the rest of EM combined are large enough on their own to bring down global trade and manufacturing, irrespective of strength in U.S. consumer spending. At the current juncture, one wonders whether such a market bifurcation is justified. It is not irrational. The basis for decoupling between cyclical and defensive equities has been U.S. bond yields. The substantial downshift in U.S. interest rate expectations has led to a re-rating of non-cyclicals and growth company stocks. Corporate bonds have also done well, given the background of a falling risk-free rate. Will the current market bifurcation continue? Or will these segments in global financial markets recouple and in which direction? What To Watch China rather than the U.S. has been the epicenter of this slowdown, as we have argued repeatedly in the past. Hence, a major rally in global cyclical equities and EM risk assets all hinge on a recovery in the Chinese business cycle. The basis for decoupling between cyclical and defensive equities has been U.S. bond yields. The substantial downshift in U.S. interest rate expectations has led to a re-rating of non-cyclicals and growth company stocks. Even though Caixin’s PMI for China was slightly up in August, many other economic indicators remain downbeat: The latest hard economic data out of Asia suggest that global trade/manufacturing continues to contract. Korea’s total exports in August contracted by 12.5% from a year ago, and its shipments to China plunged by 20% (Chart I-6). The import sub-component of China’s manufacturing PMI is not showing signs of amelioration (Chart I-7). The mainland’s import recovery is very critical to a revival in global trade and manufacturing. Chart I-6Korean Exports: No Recovery Chart I-7Chinese Imports To Remain Weak Chart I-8German Manufacturing Confidence German manufacturing IFO business expectations and current conditions both suggest that it is still early to bet on a global trade recovery (Chart I-8). Newly released August data points reveal that U.S., Taiwanese, and Swedish manufacturing new export orders continue to tumble. To gauge whether bifurcated markets will recouple and whether it will occur to the downside or the upside, investors should watch the relative performance of China-exposed markets, global cyclicals and high-beta plays – the ones that have already sold off substantially. The notion is as follows: These markets’ relative performance will likely bottom before their absolute performance recovers. If so, their relative performance will likely foretell the outlook for their absolute performance. Concerning share prices of growth companies, defensive equity sectors and credit markets, these segments are at risk because of expensive valuations and crowded investor positioning. In other words, they could sell off even if a global recession is avoided. Concerning share prices of growth companies, defensive equity sectors and credit markets, these segments are at risk because of expensive valuations and crowded investor positioning. To assess the outlook for global cyclicals and China-related plays, we are monitoring the following financial market indicators: The Risk-On/Safe-Haven currency ratio is the average of high-beta commodity currencies such as the CAD, AUD, NZD, BRL, CLP and ZAR total return (including carry) indices relative to the average of JPY and CHF total returns (including carry). This ratio is dollar-agnostic. This ratio is making a new cyclical low (Chart I-9). Hence, it presently warrants a negative view on global growth, China’s industrial sector and commodities. Global cyclical equity sectors seem to be on the edge of breaking down versus defensives (Chart I-10). This ratio does not signal ameliorating global growth conditions. Chart I-9The Risk-On/Safe-Haven Currency Ratio Chart I-10Global Cyclicals Versus Defensives Chart I-11U.S. High-Beta Stocks Versus S&P 500 Finally, U.S. high-beta stocks continue to underperform the S&P 500 (Chart I-11). This is consistent with overall U.S. growth deceleration. Bottom Line: Neither the most recent economic data, nor the relative performance of global cyclicals, China-related plays and high-beta markets herald a broad-based and lasting risk-on phase in global markets. On the contrary, economic and market signposts continue to foreshadow either further bifurcation in global markets or a risk-off period. Continue trading EM stocks and currencies on the short side, and underweighting EM risk assets versus DM. Our Investment Themes And Positions Some of our open positions often run for years because they reflect our long-standing themes. Our core theme has for some time been that a global trade/manufacturing recession will be generated by a growth relapse in China. To capitalize on this theme, we have been recommending a short EM stocks / long 30-year U.S. Treasurys strategy since April 2017. This recommendation has produced a 25% gain since its initiation (Chart I-12). Continue betting on lower local interest rates in emerging economies where the central bank can cut rates despite currency depreciation. To implement this theme, we have been recommending receiving swap rates in Korea and Chile for the past several years. Our reluctance to recommend an outright buy on local bonds stems from our bearish view on both currencies – the Korean won and Chilean peso. In fact, we have been shorting both the KRW and the CLP against the U.S. dollar. Chart I-13 shows that swap rates in Korea and Chile have dropped substantially since our recommendations to receive rates in these countries. More rate cuts are forthcoming in these economies, and we are maintaining these positions. Chart I-12EM Stocks Have Massively Underperformed U.S. Bonds Chart I-13Continue Receiving Rates In Korea And Chile   We have been bearish on EM banks in general and Chinese banks in particular. We have expressed these themes in a number of ways: Short EM and Chinese / long U.S. bank stocks. Short EM banks / long EM consumer staples (Chart I-14). Within Chinese banks, we have been short Chinese medium and small banks / long large ones. All these strategies remain valid. In credit markets, we have been favoring U.S. corporate credit versus EM sovereign and corporate credit. Ability to service debt is better among U.S. debtors than EM/Chinese borrowers. We have been playing this theme in the following ways: Underweight EM sovereign and corporate credit / overweight U.S. investment-grade corporates (Chart I-15). Chart I-14Short EM Banks / Long EM Consumer Staples Chart I-15Underweight EM Credit / Overweight U.S. Investment-Grade Corporates   Underweight Asian high-yield corporate credit / overweight emerging Asian investment-grade corporates. As a bet on a deteriorating political and business climate in Hong Kong, in our Special Report on Hong Kong SAR from June 27, we reiterated the following positions: Short Hong Kong property stocks / long Singapore equities. Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com   Mexico: Crying Out For Policy Easing The Mexican economy is heading into a full-blown recession. Most segments of the economy are in contraction, and leading indicators point to further downside. Both manufacturing and non-manufacturing PMIs are well below 50 (Chart II-1). Monetary policy remains too restrictive: Nominal and real interest rates are both very high and plunging narrow money (M1) growth is signaling  further downside in economic activity (Chart II-2). Chart II-1The Economy Is Deteriorating Chart II-2Narrow Money Points To Negative Growth   An inverted yield curve signifies that the central bank is behind the curve and foreshadows growth contraction (Chart II-3). Fiscal policy has tightened as the government has remained committed to achieving a primary fiscal surplus of 1% of GDP in 2019 (Chart II-4, top panel). Consequently, nominal government expenditures have been curbed (Chart II-4, bottom panel). The government’s fiscal stimulus has not been large and has been implemented too late. Chart II-3A Message From The Inverted Yield Curve Chart II-4Fiscal Policy Has Tightened A Lot   Finally, business confidence is extremely low due to uncertainty over President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s (AMLO) policies towards the private sector. The president is attempting to revive business confidence, but it will take time. Chart II-5Mexico Versus EM: Domestic Bonds And Sovereign Credit Our major theme for Mexico has been that both monetary and fiscal policies are very tight. Consequently, we have been recommending overweight positions in Mexican domestic bonds and sovereign credit relative to their respective EM benchmarks. (Chart II-5). Recessions are bad for share prices, but in tandem with prudent macro policies, they can be positive for fixed-income markets. Meanwhile, we have been favoring the Mexican peso relative to other EM currencies due to the fact that AMLO is not as negative for the country as was initially perceived by markets. With inflation falling and the Federal Reserve cutting rates, Banxico will ease further. Yet, it will likely cut rates slower than warranted by the economy. The longer the central bank takes to ease, the lower domestic bond yields will drop. Concerning sovereign credit, investors should remain overweight Mexico within an EM credit portfolio. Mexico’s fiscal position is healthier, and macroeconomic policies will be more prudent relative to what the market is currently pricing. We continue to believe concerns about Pemex’s financing and its impact on government debt are overblown, as we discussed in detail in our previous Special Report. In July, the government released an action plan for Pemex financing. We view this plan as marginally positive. To supplement this plan, the government can use the $14.5 billion federal budget stabilization fund to fill in financing shortfalls in the coming years. Importantly, the starting point of Mexican public debt is quite low, which will allow the government to finance Pemex in the years to come by borrowing more from markets. Recessions are bad for share prices, but in tandem with prudent macro policies, they can be positive for fixed-income markets. Lastly, our overweight recommendation in Mexican stocks has not played out. However, we are maintaining it for the following reasons: Chart II-6 illustrates that when Mexican domestic bond yields decline relative to EM ones (shown inverted on Chart II-6), Mexican share prices usually outperform their EM counterparts in common currency terms. Consistent with our view that Mexican local currency bonds will outperform their EM peers, we expect Mexican stocks to outpace the EM equity benchmark. The Mexican bourse’s relative performance against EM often swings with the relative performance of EM consumer staples versus the EM equity benchmark. This is due to the large share of consumer staples stocks in Mexico (34.5%) compared to that in the EM benchmark (7%). Consumer staples stocks are beginning to outpace the EM equity index, raising the odds of Mexican equity outperformance versus its EM peers (Chart II-7). Chart II-6Local Bond Yields And Relative Stocks: Mexico Versus EM Chart II-7Consumer Staples Have A Large Weight In Mexican Bourse   We do not expect a major rally in this nation’s stock market given the negative growth outlook. Our bet is that Mexican share prices - having already deflated considerably - will drop less in dollar terms than the overall EM equity index. Bottom Line: We continue to recommend an overweight stance on Mexican sovereign credit, domestic bonds and equities relative to their respective EM benchmarks. The main risk to the Mexican peso stems from persisting selloff in EM currencies. Traders’ net long positions in the MXN are elevated posing non-trivial risk (Chart II-8). We have been long MXN versus ZAR but are taking profit today. This trade has generated a 9.7% gain since March 29, 2018. A plunging oil-gold ratio warrants a caution on this cross rate in the near term (Chart II-9). Chart II-8Investors Are Long MXN Chart II-9Take Profits On Long MXN / Short ZAR Trade   Juan Egaña, Research Associate juane@bcaresearch.com Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com Footnotes   Equities Recommendations Currencies, Credit And Fixed-Income Recommendations

Informe especial

Feature BCA Research (aka The Bank Credit Analyst) published its first report in 1949, a remarkable 70 years ago. This probably makes us the longest-running independent investment research firm in the world. As we age, it is normal to occasionally reflect on how the world has changed over the course of our lives. It is an interesting exercise in the case of BCA. We need to start with a little history. The Bank Credit Analyst began life as a small-circulation newsletter produced by Hamilton Bolton, a Montreal-based money manager. He had been sending out investment commentary to his clients for some time and was encouraged to start catering to a wider audience. Bolton was a visionary because he was one of the few market analysts at that time to understand the importance of money and credit in driving economic and market cycles. In those days, banks were the dominant financial intermediary, so an analysis of flows through the banking system provided accurate and leading signals about economic and market trends. That is why he named his new service “The Bank Credit Analyst”. Bolton developed a series of monetary-based indicators that allowed him to make some great market calls. He passed away in 1967, but his valuable contribution to financial research was acknowledged in 1987 when the CFA Institute posthumously awarded him the prestigious “Outstanding Contribution to Investment Research Award”.1 Hamilton Bolton was a product of his times in that his worldview was influenced heavily by having lived through the Great Depression. Like many of his generation, he had a strong aversion to excessive debt growth, and was highly sensitive to any buildup of financial imbalances that could tip the economy back into a severe downturn. In fact, widespread fears of renewed depression did not really fade until the late 1950s. That psychology helps explain why policymakers were complicit in allowing inflation to take hold in the 1960s because there is a common tendency to fight the last war. As long as depression/deflation is seen as the primary threat, then there will be complacency about inflation risks. Does This Sound Familiar? Let’s look at some of the conditions that existed in 1949, when The Bank Credit Analyst started publication. The U.S. long-term Treasury yield had been capped at 2.5% since April 1942. At the request of the Treasury Department, the Fed had given up control of the money supply by buying whatever bonds were needed to keep yields below 2.5%, in order to support the financing of war-inflated budget deficits. The level of federal debt was down from its wartime peak of 106% of GDP, but was still at a historically high 77.5%. The European and Japanese economies were in a complete mess, having been devastated during the war. As already noted, fears of renewed deflation and depression were prevalent. Inflation was tame with the U.S. personal consumption deflator declining by 0.8% in 1949 and rising by only 1.2% in 1950. There was considerable geopolitical upheaval. Most notably, the Cold War intensified as Russia extended its control over East Europe and other countries. Mao Zedong founded the People’s Republic of China in October 1949 after his communist forces defeated the Kuomintang led by Chiang Kai-shek. There were serious border clashes between North and South Korea in August 1949, a prelude to the North’s invasion in June 1950. It does not require a huge stretch of the imagination to see some parallels with the current environment. We currently are having (or have had): Massive central bank purchases of government debt (i.e. quantitative easing) and the explicit pegging of bond yields by the Bank of Japan. A huge increase in government debt levels, albeit not because of war-related spending. In a remarkable coincidence, U.S. federal debt reached 77.8% of GDP in fiscal 2018, almost exactly the same level as in 1949. The European and Japanese economies are moribund. However, unlike in 1949, this reflects structural forces, not war-related devastation. There are widespread fears about the long-run economic growth outlook, well captured by the secular stagnation thesis, promoted by Larry Summers. Central bankers are concerned that inflation is too low. Geopolitical concerns abound. These include U.S.-China tensions, Brexit, Korea (again), rising populism and Russia’s more aggressive stance on the world stage. In the end, the fears of 70 years ago that the world might slip back into depression proved unfounded. The 1950s and 1960s, for the most part, turned out to be golden decades for consumers, businesses and equity investors. Unfortunately, this does not mean that we can look forward to a repeat experience in the decades ahead, because we must now turn to the major differences between the present and the past. The Past Worked Out Just Fine The conditions for an economic boom in the 1950s and 1960s could hardly have been better. The U.S. armed forces employed more than 12 million men and women at the end of WWII, 7.6 million of whom were stationed overseas. After the war, these people were desperate to get back to a normal life, with civilian jobs, marriage and children. The inevitable result was a population boom and a surge in growth as pent-up demand for housing and consumer goods was unleashed. It was all aided by the 1944 G.I. Bill that provided low-cost mortgages and many other benefits. The improvement in economic growth boosted government tax receipts and, coupled with a drop in defense spending, this kept fiscal finances in check. During the 1950s and 1960s, the federal deficit averaged less than 1% of GDP and debt had fallen to less than 30% of GDP by 1969. This occurred despite a surge in federal infrastructure spending, helped by the Federal Highway Act of 1956 that authorized the construction of an interstate highway system. Meanwhile, the economy did not appear to be impeded by tax rates that were far above current levels. The reconstruction of the European economies was a monumental task that was beyond the financing capabilities of those shattered countries. However, between 1948 and 1951, the U.S. European Recovery Program (The Marshall Plan) transferred $100 billion in 2018 dollars to aid the recovery effort and this helped Europe get back on its feet. There also was a huge amount of U.S. aid to support the rebuilding of Japan. Economic growth in Japan averaged almost 9% a year in the 1950s and more than 10% in the 1960s. In Germany, the comparable figures were 7.7% and 4.2%. The growth of the world economy also was boosted by steady reductions in tariffs during the 1950s and 60s. The most notable was the Kennedy Round of 1964-67 that achieved a 38% weighted average drop in tariffs. Protectionism was in strong retreat in the decades after WWII. Finally, a word on the markets. At the end of 1949, the S&P 500 was trading at seven times trailing earnings while the dividend yield was at 6¾%. The market’s earnings yield of 14% compared to a 2.2% yield on 30-year Treasuries. In other words, stocks were incredibly cheap. Moreover, when the 1951 Treasury-Federal Reserve Accord ended the bond peg, yields inevitably rose steadily over the subsequent years, making bonds a poor investment. In the 1950s, U.S. equities delivered real compound returns of 16.6% a year compared to -3.3% for 30-year bonds. In the 1960s, the annualized real returns were a still-respectable 5.3% for stocks and -1.4% for bonds. In sum, the two decades after the launch of the BCA were a very favorable time and it was largely due to a very depressed starting point. However, the current environment is very different to that of 70 years ago. It’s a Different Picture Now Perhaps the most important difference with the past is the demographic outlook. In contrast to the post-WWII baby boom, the U.S. and most other developed economies face bleak population dynamics. Almost all developed economies – and many emerging ones – have seen the birth rate drop below replacement levels with the result that population growth has slowed dramatically. In many cases, populations are in actual decline – especially in the important working-age segment. That deprives economic growth of its main driver. The annual potential growth of U.S. real GDP averaged 4% in the 1950s and 4.3% in the 1960s. Potential growth in the next decade will average only 1.8% a year, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). And it will be even lower in Europe and Japan. As far as pent-up demand is concerned, the picture also is very different. While the consumer industry works hard to develop new must-have goods and services, the reality is that demand is satiated for a lot of products. For example, in 2017, there were 259 million registered private and commercial autos and trucks in the U.S. compared to only 225 million licensed drivers. In 1950, the number of licensed drivers (62 million) far exceeded the number of registered vehicles (48 million). And it is hard to believe that the ownership penetration of most consumer durables has much upside. Turning to government finances, the current environment of bloated deficits and debt significantly constrains the room for fiscal stimulus. Yes, there is constant talk of the need for more infrastructure spending, but this has proven very difficult to implement without offsetting cuts in other spending or measures to boost revenues. The U.S. is saddled with unprecedented peacetime fiscal deficits and the CBO projects that federal debt will approach 100% of GDP within ten years, even without factoring in another recession. The comparison between the free trade era of the 1950s and 60s and the current situation speaks for itself. It is unclear at this stage just how far the move toward protectionism will go, but one thing seems clear. The rush toward globalization that followed the breakup of the Soviet Union and the entry of China into the global trading system is in retreat. This shows up not only in rising tariffs, but also in declining cross-border direct investment flows and increased antipathy to large-scale international migration. The irony is that the developed world needs more immigration to offset the weak growth in resident populations. What about the markets? The stock market certainly is not cheap, the way it was 70 years ago, with the S&P 500 trading at more than 18 times trailing operating earnings. Low interest rates are providing support, but future returns are likely to be in low single figures in a world where economic growth is moderate and there is little scope for profit margins and/or multiples to expand. Prospects for bonds do look somewhat similar to the situation in the early 1950s. Then, there was only one way for yields to go once the Fed’s peg ended. Today, yields will only fall sustainably if the economy sinks into a protracted downturn. We will get another recession in the next few years and yields could certainly hit new lows at that point. But the resulting policy response – both fiscal and monetary – seems almost certain to lead to higher inflation down the road. That would not bode well for the bond outlook, as was the case between the second half of the 1960s and the early 1980s. Concluding Thoughts Hamilton Bolton was fortunate to launch his new investment service ahead of a powerful economic revival and an almost two-decade bull market in stocks. He did not live long enough to witness the inflation upturn and volatile economic environment of the 1970s and 1980s, but BCA’s monetary focus allowed it to prosper during that period. Under the leadership of Tony Boeckh, the company’s then owner and Editor-in-Chief, BCA was strident in warning investors about the buildup of inflationary pressures and the dangers this posed for markets. During this time, BCA also developed the concept of the Debt Supercycle which helped investors understand the complex forces driving policy and the economic/market cycles. If Bolton was alive today, he would be horrified at the state of the world. He would not be able to understand how investors could be so complacent in the face of record government deficits and debt and by what he would regard as the reckless behavior of central banks. At the same time, he would be able to identify with the renewed focus on weak growth and deflation risks. The bottom line is that he would be advising investors to be extremely cautious. Investors currently are semi-obsessed with the timing of the next recession as that would be the signal to significantly downgrade risk assets. The official BCA stance is that a recession is not imminent and this creates a window for stocks to outperform. This matters for those investors who need to be concerned with relative performance. It is painful to sit on the sidelines if markets keep rising and you underperform your peers. However, for those more concerned with absolute performance, and that was true of most investors in Bolton’s time, the upside potential currently seems unattractive relative to the downside risks. Unfortunately, economists have a poor track record of forecasting recessions and bear markets thus often come as a complete surprise. Yes, low interest rates provide a floor under stocks, with the dividend yield comfortably above the 10-year Treasury yield. But rates are low for a reason: the economy and thus corporate earnings face major downside risks. Against this background, I would tend to side with what I imagine Bolton would say: this is a time to focus on capital preservation rather than taking risks to maximize returns. Let me try to end on a more positive note. As noted earlier, the long-term outlook turned out much better than Bolton probably anticipated 70 years ago. What could make that true this time around? Some things cannot be changed, at least over the next decade: adverse demographic trends, high ownership of consumer goods, and high levels of government debt. Geopolitical developments could go either way – for the better or worse – so I will make no predictions there. The one savior would be a marked revival in productivity because, ultimately, that is the only real source of rising living standards. Technology is changing rapidly and there are lots of exciting innovations. But to make a significant and lasting difference it will require more than developments such as autonomous vehicles or 3-D printing. We will need a new General Purpose Technology (GPT) that has a profound impact on the way economies and societies are structured. Previous examples include the steam engine, electricity and of course the internet. Perhaps Artificial Intelligence will do the trick, but that does not seem likely to be a near-term cure. Chart 1Then (1949) And Now (2019) In closing, we can be sure of one thing. The world changed in ways Hamilton Bolton could not have conceived and that also will be true for us today. BCA will endeavor to evolve with the times as it has done over the past 70 years and we look forward to keep helping our clients prosper in a complex and ever-changing world. 1949 – A Very Momentous Year Hamilton Bolton launches The Bank Credit Analyst The Peoples Republic of China, the Federal Republic of Germany and the German Democratic Republic (East Germany) are founded Indonesia gains independence from the Netherlands The civil war in Greece ends NATO is established The Geneva Convention is agreed The Soviet Union detonates its first atomic bomb Apartheid becomes official policy in South Africa Alfred Jones creates the first hedge fund The first non-stop circumnavigation of the world by an aircraft occurs The first commercial jet airliner, the De Havilland Comet, has its maiden flight EDSAC – the first practicable stored-program computer runs its first program at Cambridge University Products introduced that year included Lego, the 45 rpm record, the first Porsche car and the Xerox photocopier. George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984 is published People born include Ivana Trump, Jeremy Corbyn, Benjamin Netanyahu, Meryl Streep and Bruce Springsteen 2019 – Not So Much Chaotic politics in the U.K., Italy and many other countries Trade wars   Martin H. Barnes, Senior Vice President Economic Advisor mbarnes@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Previously known as the Nicholas Molodovsky Award  

Highlights Sovereign bond yields have cratered over the last few months, … : Over the last three months, 10-year yields in the U.S., France, Germany, Switzerland and Australia have fallen by 71, 64, 53, 54, and 67 basis points, respectively. … and the Treasury curve has experienced a significant bull flattening, … : Month-to-date total returns for the Barclays Bloomberg Long, Intermediate and 1-3-Year Treasury Indexes are 9.2%, 1.6% and 1.1%, respectively. … indicating that the bond market thinks more rate cuts are in store: The textbook interpretation of an inverted curve is that monetary policy is too tight and needs to be loosened, but technical factors have amplified the flattening pressure. Is the bond market reacting to weakening growth prospects, or uber-dovish central banks?: The answer has implications well beyond the fixed-income universe. It could mean the difference between an economic slowdown and a market melt-up. Feature BCA researchers convened last week for our monthly View Meeting, much of which was given over to the global decline in sovereign bond yields. Does their plunge owe more to weakening growth prospects or central banks’ synchronized dovish pivot? There have surely been elements of both; after all, central banks wouldn’t be so dovish if they weren’t concerned about the growth outlook. It is clear to our fixed-income strategists that the yield move has overshot the data, however, and they mainly attribute the overshoot to monetary policy. No central bank wants a stronger currency while confronting a demand deficiency aggravated by trade tensions and a global manufacturing slowdown. The New York Times Business section put the prevailing policy winds into living color in a nearly full-page, four-column graphic spotlighting the 32 central banks that have cut their policy rate so far this year.1 The pell-mell rush to cut rates is emblematic of a global scramble for competitiveness. No central bank wants its economy to be caught without a buffer while other economies are busily reinforcing theirs. The Message From The Bond Market Trade tensions are a legitimate threat to global economic growth already challenged by a downswing in the global manufacturing cycle. A recession is a possibility, but it is hardly a foregone conclusion. We agree with our fixed-income colleagues that the yield selloff has overrun the economic fundamentals. Last week’s preliminary European manufacturing PMIs suggested that manufacturing may finally be stabilizing, and there is still no evidence that the manufacturing downturn has infected the services sector (Chart 1). A recession is hardly a foregone conclusion. 10-year Treasury yields have been falling sharply since their 3.25% peak in early November, and the current leg down is the third in a series of sharp declines (Chart 2, top panel). Global sovereign yields have followed the same pattern (Chart 2, bottom panel), but the latest plunge is as much a reflection of ubiquitous easing biases as it is of new concerns about economic weakness. That may sound like a minor point, of interest only to macro specialists, but it has import for all investors. If the yield decline isn’t signaling new softness, then easier financial conditions will be free to act as a tailwind for risk assets. Chart 1Services Are Holding Up ... Chart 2A Brief Inversion ... But Yields Are Freefalling Neither investment-grade (Chart 3, top panel) nor high-yield corporate bond spreads evince any particular concern about the economy (Chart 3, bottom panel). Although they’ve ticked up, they remain near the bottom of their post-crisis range, and are nowhere near the levels they reached in 2011-12, during the federal budget showdown/U.S. downgrade and the flare-up of the Eurozone crisis, or in 2015-16, during the last manufacturing recession. With banks still easing lending standards for corporate and industrial borrowers (Chart 4), spreads won’t undergo a systematic widening. Borrowers do not default as long as there is a lender willing to roll over their maturing obligations, so tighter credit standards are a precondition for spread-widening cycles. Chart 3No Sign Of Stress Among Corporate Borrowers ... Chart 4... And Banks Aren't Applying Any Pressure The Message From The Housing Market Chart 5Lower Rates Have Yet To Impact Housing ... We have been disappointed by residential investment’s muted response to the significant year-to-date decline in mortgage rates (Chart 5, bottom panel). The trajectory of starts and permits (Chart 5, top panel) hasn’t changed, new and existing home sales haven’t perked up (Chart 5, second panel), and mortgage purchase applications (Chart 5, third panel) appear not to have heard the news that rates are much lower. We thought that the swift fall in mortgage rates would promote more residential investment than it has to date. There is a difference, however, between disappointing growth and a full-on contraction. With affordability remaining high relative to history (Chart 6), and apartment rents exceeding monthly mortgage payments in several locales (Chart 7), housing demand should remain well supported. There are no excesses in the housing market in terms of inventory or oncoming supply that would make housing a source of economic or financial instability. Inventory relative to the number of households is bumping around its all-time lows (Chart 8), and cumulative household formations have easily outstripped housing starts since the crisis broke (Chart 9). Structural factors like a lack of supply geared to first-time and first-move-up buyers, and the ravenous appetite of pools of capital purchasing single-family homes for rent, are squeezing out some would-be buyers, but housing is not about to induce a recession. There are plenty of things for investors to be concerned about, but the housing market isn’t one of them. Chart 6... Though They Have Placed Homeownership In Easier Reach Chart 8... Inventories Are At Record Lows, ... The View From Broad And Wall We concede that stocks are not behaving as if all is well. Big daily swings are not a feature of healthy markets, and eight of this month’s sixteen sessions have registered moves of at least 1%. The second quarter’s 3% year-over-year earnings growth is three percentage points better than the consensus expected when earnings season kicked off, however, and despite the single-day moves, the S&P 500 has spent all but the first day of the month in a well-defined range between 2,825 and 2,945 (Chart 10). The market may be jumpy from one day to the next, but investors have not been concerned enough to engage in sustained selling. The equity market’s verdict on housing is more optimistic than ours. Inspired by earnings reports, the S&P 1500 Homebuilders Index have broken out to a new 52-week high (Chart 11). Retailers were the stars of last week’s earnings releases, with Lowe’s, Nordstrom and Target posting double-digit percentage gains after reporting numbers that failed to live up to investors’ worst fears. Equities are validating the view that the U.S. consumer is alive and kicking. Chart 11Homebuilder Stocks Have Broken Out The GDP Outlook Chart 12Capex Intentions: Elevated But Slipping If consumers are well positioned, the U.S. economy should be, too. Consumption accounts for two-thirds of the U.S. economy, with investment and government spending equally dividing the other third. Federal expenditures amount to about 40% of government spending, and between this year’s fiscal thrust and next year’s hotly contested presidential election, D.C. can be counted upon to do its part for the economy. At the state and local level, healthy household income should support state sales and income tax receipts, while still-rising home prices will provide the property taxes to keep municipal coffers full. That leaves fixed asset investment as the economy’s Achilles heel. We are confident, as noted above, that residential investment will not decline enough to pose a problem for the economy, but corporate investment is in the crosshairs of the uncertainty surrounding the multiple trade squabbles. The NFIB survey and the regional Fed surveys indicate that capital expenditure plans are rolling over, even if they remain at a fairly high level (Chart 12). Our base case remains that investment will not fall enough to offset robust consumption and trend-level government spending, but a marked worsening in trade tensions could erode business confidence enough to drag the economy below stall speed. Busted Thesis In our mutual-fund days, we followed one rule without exception. If our thesis for owning a stock was disproved, we got rid of the stock without a backward glance. We no longer manage money, but our clients do, and we try to set a good example, especially in the inevitable instances when things go wrong. We are closing out our agency mREIT recommendation on the ground that we got the rates call underpinning it very wrong. Things went wrong with our agency mortgage REIT recommendation right from the get-go. In retrospect, we should have waited until the FOMC meeting dust settled before putting on a curve-dependent position. We are closing it out now, though, because we recommended the group in anticipation of a steeper yield curve. Given that we think it will take some time for investors to become convinced that a recession is not imminent, and given that mechanical factors may push yields even lower, we do not expect sustained curve steepening for several months. Although we only held it for four weeks, the recommendation left a mark. Through Thursday’s close, our defined subset of agency mREITs lost 11%, while the S&P 500 is down 3.1% and the Barclays High Yield Index is flat. We’re taking our medicine and moving on, but we will take another look at the group when the curve eventually does begin to steepen. Investment Implications Even if recession fears are overblown, as we and a majority of our colleagues believe, it will likely take some time for investors to overcome their concerns. That leads us to believe that equities may be unable to make new highs in the near term, and that Treasury yields have more downside risk than upside risk in the next few months, as rising convexity2 compels investors following asset-liability management strategies to seek out long-maturity bonds. The yield point may sound complex and esoteric, but our Global Fixed Income Strategy team increasingly believes it’s a key to understanding the negative-yield phenomenon and is researching the issue for an upcoming Special Report. Monetary accommodation is not a silver bullet. If the economy has already flipped from expansion to contraction, modest rate cuts parceled out at a deliberate pace will be insufficient to turn things around, and equities and spread product will suffer. If the expansion remains intact, however, rate cuts will help shore up the economy at the margin and quite possibly fuel a new phase of the bull markets in risk assets. Our money is on the latter, and we expect that this bull cycle has one more burst in it that will allow it to sprint to the finish line like the majority of its predecessors. Doug Peta, CFA Chief U.S. Investment Strategist dougp@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1 Smialek, Jeanna and Russell, Karl, “Rates Are Falling Again. That May Be Dangerous.” New York Times, August 17, 2019, p. B1. 2 Duration measures a bond’s sensitivity to changes in interest rates. Convexity measures duration’s sensitivity to changes in interest rates, which increases as rates fall. Investors like life insurers and pension funds, who match the duration of their investment portfolios with the duration of their liabilities, are forced to increase the duration of their bond holdings at an increasing rate as interest rates fall.

Informe especial

Highlights The plunge in government bond yields means that There Is No Alternative to stocks: TINA. As long as bond yields stay reasonably low, stocks will continue to climb the proverbial wall of worry. Global equities are quite cheap compared with bonds. This suggests that stock market returns could be quite strong over the next couple of years, as PE multiples rise in order to narrow the gap between bond yields and earnings yields. While cheap in relative terms, global equities are modestly expensive in absolute terms. Thus, long-term absolute stock market returns are likely to be subpar, even if they are reasonably high in the near term. U.S. stocks are noticeably more expensive than their overseas peers. Differences in sector composition can explain some of the valuation gap, but not all of it. We intend to upgrade EM and European stocks later this year once global growth begins to reaccelerate. Feature Falling Bond Yields Have Made Stocks More Attractive After peaking last year, global bond yields have plunged anew (Chart 1). To a large extent, the decline in yields has been driven by the slowdown in global growth. Chart 2 shows that there is a strong correlation between government bond yields and manufacturing purchasing manager indices. Chart 1Global Bond Yields Sinking Chart 2The Decline In Bond Yields Driven By Slower Global Growth   Chart 3Dividend Yields Are Higher Than Bond Yields Globally As we discussed last week, global growth should stabilize and recover over the remainder of the year, which will cause bond yields to move somewhat higher. Nevertheless, yields are poised to stay low by historic standards – at least until inflation picks up significantly, which is unlikely to occur during the next 12 months. The fact that government bond yields in many countries are negative in real terms – and indeed, negative in nominal terms in Japan and across much of Europe – implies that the only way investors can hope to generate decent returns is by taking on more risk. This means moving further down the quality ladder in the fixed-income space, as well as turning to historically riskier asset classes such as equities. The allure that equities have in today’s low rate environment even has a name: TINA – There Is No Alternative. The S&P 500 dividend yield is currently 1.98%, 37 bps above the yield on 10-year Treasury notes. To put things in perspective, even if S&P 500 companies did not increase cash dividends at all for the next ten years, the real value of the index would still have to fall by 26% (assuming 2% inflation) for bonds to outperform stocks. The gap between dividend yields and bond yields is even greater abroad (Chart 3).   TINA’s Critics That may seem like a very low bar for success, but there are plenty of prognosticators who think stocks will still fail to clear it. TINA’s detractors offer two arguments to justify their skepticism: Today’s low interest rates are simply a reflection of poor economic growth prospects. Even if one believed that lower interest rates warrant higher equity multiples, the stock market has already priced that in. John Hussman eloquently summarized these arguments in a recent report: Another danger for investors here is the willingness to accept offensively speculative valuations on the argument that bond yields are low. The empirical fact is that bond yields are tightly correlated with nominal GDP growth. But as one can demonstrate using any discounted cash flow model, if interest rates are low because growth rates are also low, no valuation premium is “justified” by the low interest rates at all. Long-term returns will already be lower, commensurate with the lower interest rates, by virtue of the lower growth rate itself. A valuation premium then just adds insult to injury.           – John Hussman, “Questions we hear a lot,” Hussman Market Comment, (January 2019). John Hussman is a perspicuous market observer, but there are two flaws in his logic here. The first one is factual. Despite his claim to the contrary, U.S. bond yields have actually fallen more than trend nominal GDP growth over the past decade (Chart 4). The current gap between U.S. potential nominal GDP growth, as estimated by the Congressional Budget Office, and the 10-year Treasury yield is over two percentage points, the highest since 1979. Chart 4Bond Yields Have Fallen More Than Trend Nominal GDP Growth Chart 5The Trend In Global Growth Has Remained Steady Thanks To Faster-Growing EM At the global level, trend GDP growth has barely changed, largely because faster-growing emerging markets now make up a larger share of the global economy (Chart 5). For large multinational companies, global growth, rather than domestic growth, is the more relevant measure. If trend global GDP growth has not fallen, why are real interest rates so low? The answer is that the world is still awash with savings. As Chart 6 illustrates, an increase in desired savings will lead to a decline in real rates, even if underlying growth does not change.   No Free Lunch The second error is more subtle. Hussman discusses earnings growth and GDP growth as though they are one in the same. However, there is no long-term mechanism that magically bestows faster earnings growth on firms just because trend economic growth accelerates. Earnings growth and GDP growth are tightly correlated over the course of a business cycle because rising demand allows firms to spread fixed costs over a larger amount of output, thus increasing so-called operational leverage. But if a firm wishes to grow earnings over the long run, it has to invest in new technology and new capacity. That takes real resources — resources that could otherwise be distributed to shareholders. An example might clarify this point. Consider two firms, each with a market value of $1 million and $100,000 in earnings. Firm A distributes all its earnings to shareholders in the form of dividends. Firm B pays no dividend. Rather, it invests all its earnings in trying to grow the business. Which firm would you rather own? There is actually no simple answer to this question. If you invest in Firm A and the share price remains unchanged because the company has done nothing to grow its business, you will still receive a 10% dividend yield. You will not receive a dividend by investing in Firm B. However, if the company is able to grow earnings by 10% and the price-earnings ratio remains unchanged, the share price will rise by 10%. In both cases, you make a 10% return. The point is that there is no free lunch. Firms in fast-growing economies will be able to avail themselves of expanding domestic markets, but they will need to spend money to grow their businesses. They are also likely to face stiffer competition from new entrants. This is a key reason why Jay Ritter and other economists have shown that there is no clear correlation between long-term economic growth and shareholder returns (Chart 7). Priced For Perfection? One thing that Hussman gets completely right is that absolute long-term equity returns depend on the absolute level of valuations rather than how expensive stocks are in relation to bonds. A decline in the discount rate will increase the present value of future earnings, thus leading to a temporary period of abnormally high returns. However, once equity valuations have reset to a higher level, returns will be permanently lower. In other words, falling interest rates simply shift returns from the future into the present (Chart 8). The key question for investors is where we are in this process. If stock valuations have yet to fully adjust to the decline in interest rates, near-term returns could still be quite strong, even if they do come at the expense of subsequent returns. There is good reason to think this adjustment has yet to play out fully. The forward PE ratio for U.S. stocks is currently 16.5. If one were to use the earnings yield as a proxy for expected returns (see Appendix A for details), one would expect U.S. equities to generate long-term annualized real total returns of 6.1%. Outside the U.S., the forward PE ratio stands at 12.7, implying an expected return of 7.8% (Chart 9). Chart 10 shows that the equity risk premium in the U.S. based on the forward PE ratio remains quite high, indicating that the earnings yield has not fallen as much as one would have expected based on the decline in real bond yields. The equity risk premium is even higher outside the U.S., reflecting both the fact that valuations are cheaper abroad and interest rates are generally lower. Chart 10AEquity Risk Premia Remain Quite High (I) Chart 10BEquity Risk Premia Remain Quite High (II)   Are PE Ratios Biased Down? One legitimate criticism of the forward PE ratio is that it relies on analyst earnings estimates, which tend to be too optimistic. That analysts tend to be too bullish is undeniable (Chart 11). However, even if one were to use the trailing PE ratio, the implied long-term expected real total return would still be 4.8% in the U.S. and 7.1% abroad. Chart 11Analysts Are Usually Too Optimistic Moreover, as Chart 12 illustrates, projected 12-month earnings growth is currently below its historic average both in the U.S. and abroad. Thus, to the extent that forward PE ratios are biased downwards, that bias is arguably smaller than in the past. Chart 12Earnings Growth Estimates Are Not Excessive Today Chart 13Cyclically-Adjusted PEs Point To Subpar Absolute Future Returns   A further criticism of both trailing and forward PE ratios is that they do not take into account cyclical factors that could either flatter or depress earnings. For example, if profit margins are temporarily inflated, standard PE ratios will tend to show that stocks are cheaper than they really are. One way to address this issue is to use a moving average for earnings. The most popular tool for doing so is the Shiller PE ratio (also known as the cyclically-adjusted PE ratio, or CAPE). It divides the value of today’s stock market index by the average of real earnings over the past ten years. The Shiller PE ratio currently points to below-average, but still positive, real returns for stocks over the coming years (Chart 13). S&P 500 Margins Versus Economy-Wide Margins Some stock market bears charge that the Shiller PE ratio does not go far enough in eliminating the upward bias to earnings. They point out that even though S&P 500 profit margins were very depressed following the Global Financial Crisis, the 10-year average of margins is now well above its historic norm (Chart 14). Chart 14U.S.: 10-Year Average Of Margins Is Now Well Above Its Historic Norm John Hussman’s preferred measure, the Margin-Adjusted PE ratio, tries to control for this alleged problem by adjusting earnings using the economy-wide profit-to-GDP ratio. It suggests that future returns will be lower than those implied by the Shiller PE ratio. The problem with Hussman’s approach is that S&P 500 profits have increasingly become disconnected from economy-wide profits. Chart 15 shows that pre-tax profits have trended lower as a share of GDP in recent years, a move that has been mirrored in the rise in employee compensation. However, no such decline has occurred for S&P 500 profits. Chart 15The Recent Decline In U.S. Pre-Tax Profits Has Been Mirrored In The Rise In Employee Compensation Chart 16S&P 500: All Of The Increase In Margins Has Occurred In The IT Sector S&P 500 margins have stayed elevated partly because U.S. multinationals are less exposed to domestic wage pressures. Margins have also been propped up by the fact that the largest companies in the index increasingly operate like natural monopolies. It is perhaps no surprise that all of the increase in S&P 500 margins over the past few decades has been due to soaring profits in the IT sector (Chart 16). If this represents a true structural change, S&P margins could remain high by historic standards. Investment Implications Different valuation measures can generate different results. As such, we would not get too hung up on the precise expected return forecast that any one particular valuation indicator produces. Appendix B shows long-term return projections for various stock markets using a composite valuation measure based on price-to-trailing earnings, price-to-forward earnings, price-to-cash flow, price-to-sales, price-to-book, Tobin’s Q, stock market capitalization-to-GDP, and dividend yield. Three broad conclusions stand out: First, global equities are quite cheap compared with bonds. This suggests that stock market returns could be quite strong over the next couple of years, as PE multiples rise in order to narrow the gap between bond yields and earnings yields. We recommend that asset allocators overweight stocks relative to government bonds on a 12-to-18 month horizon. Second, global equities are modestly expensive in absolute terms. Thus, long-term stock market returns are likely to be subpar, even if they are reasonably high in the near term. Put differently, while equities will trump bonds over the long haul, both asset classes will deliver uninspiring absolute returns compared with their long-term history. Third, U.S. stocks are noticeably more expensive than their overseas peers. Differences in sector composition can explain some of the valuation gap, but not all of it. As Chart 17 illustrates, if one were to calculate the forward PE of say, European stocks, using U.S. sector weights, the former would still be significantly cheaper than the latter. We intend to upgrade EM and European stocks later this year once global growth begins to reaccelerate.   APPENDIX A The Earnings Yield As A Proxy For Expected Shareholder Returns  APPENDIX B CHART 1 Equities: Composite Valuation Indicators Versus Subsequent 10-Year Real Annualized Returns Peter Berezin,  Chief Global Strategist Global Investment Strategy  peterb@bcaresearch.com MacroQuant Model And Current Subjective Scores