グローバル対国内
Highlights Our sense remains that the dollar is undergoing a countertrend bounce, rather than entering a new bull market. The litmus test for this view is if the DXY fails to break above the 93-94 level that marked the March highs. Stay short USD/JPY. The drop in global bond yields should give this trade a welcome fillip. Short GBP/JPY positions also make sense. We are long CHF/NZD as a play on a potential increase in currency volatility. Look to rebuy a basket of Scandinavian currencies versus the USD and EUR at a trigger point of -2% from today’s levels. Remain long silver both in absolute terms and relative to gold. Our limit buy on EUR/USD was triggered at 1.18. Place tight stops given the potential for the dollar rally to continue for the next few weeks. We also believe the change in the ECB’s framework portends another bullish tailwind for the euro beyond the near term. Feature In our webcast last week, we made the case that the recent FOMC meeting (perceived as hawkish by market participants) has not altered the longer-term downtrend in the US dollar. This week, we are revisiting some of the sentiment and technical indicators that could help gauge how high the dollar can rise in the interim. Our view remains that three fundamental forces will continue to dictate currency market trends into the year end and beyond. First, the Federal Reserve will lag other central banks in raising rates amidst a shift in economic momentum from the US towards the rest of the world. This will boost short-term interest rates outside the US and provide a floor for procyclical currencies. Second, US inflation will prove stickier compared to other countries such as the eurozone or Japan. This will depress real interest rates in the US relative to the rest of the world, and curb bond inflows. And finally, an equity market rotation towards non-US stocks will improve flows into cyclical currencies. The transition could prove volatile in the coming month or so. Equity markets remain overbought, bond yields are falling, PMIs have stopped rising, and cyclical stocks are lagging growth stocks. More widespread infection from the Delta variant of Covid-19 will continue to reprice risk to the downside. As a countercyclical currency, the dollar will be a critical variable to watch. Sentiment and technical indicators make up an important component of our currency framework and are usually good at gauging significant shifts in financial markets. Our sense remains that the dollar is undergoing a countertrend bounce, rather than entering a new bull market. The litmus test for this view is if the DXY fails to break above the 93-94 level that marked the March highs. Momentum Indicators Our momentum indicators suggest that while the dollar is very oversold, the bear market remains very much intact. The dollar advance/decline line is sitting below its 200-day moving average (Chart I-1). Historically, bull markets in the dollar have been characterized by our advance/decline line breaking both above its 200-day and 400-day moving averages. This suggests a rally towards these critical resistance levels is in play but will constitute more of a countertrend bounce. Speculators are only neutral the dollar while, admittedly, leveraged funds are very short (Chart I-2). Historically, whenever the percentage of leveraged funds that are short the dollar has dipped near 40%, a meaningful rally has ensued. There are two important offsets to this. First, as Chart I-1 suggests, the dollar is a momentum currency. As such, during the bull market of the last decade, speculators were either neutral or long the dollar. If indeed the paradigm has shifted to a decade-long bear market, we expect speculators to be either short or neutral. Meanwhile, leveraged funds are a small subset of overall open interest, suggesting they are not the elephant in the room when it comes to dictating dollar movements. Leveraged funds were short the dollar during most of the bull market run last decade. Chart I-1The US Dollar Downtrend Is Intact Chart I-2Leveraged Funds Are Short The Dollar Carry trades are relapsing anew, suggesting the environment may be becoming unfavorable for high-yielding developed and emerging market currencies. The dollar has been negatively correlated with the Deutsche Bank carry ETF, DBV, since investors ultimately dump carry trades and fly to the safety of Treasurys on any market turbulence (Chart I-3). High-beta carry currencies such as the RUB, ZAR, MXN, and BRL have been consolidating recent gains. These currencies are usually good at sniffing out a change in the investment landscape, specifically one becoming precarious for carry trades. Our carry index tends to do well when the yield spread between US Treasuries and the indexes’ constituents’ is low. As such, there is some more adjustment underway, but one of limited amplitude (Chart I-4). Chart I-3The Carry Trade Rally Is Relapsing Chart I-4Carry Trades Have Hit An Air Pocket Chart I-5Currency Volatility Is Very Low Both expected and actual currency volatility are extremely depressed. Whenever currency volatility has been this low, the dollar has staged a meaningful rally. For example, the most significant episodes were the lows of 1996-1997, 2007-2008, and 2014-2015, and early 2020 (Chart I-5). Usually, low currency volatility is a sign of complacency, while higher volatility allows for a more balanced and healthy market rotation. The nature in which currency volatility adjusts higher this time around might be the same playbook as in previous episodes. The Asian crisis of the late 90s set the stage for the dollar bear market of the 2000s. The adjustment higher in the dollar during the Global Financial crisis jumpstarted the bull market the following decade. This time around, the Covid-19 crisis might have commenced a renewed dollar bear market. If this analogy is correct, then we should be selling the dollar on strength rather than buying on weakness. It is important to remember that the policy environment remains bearish for the dollar. These include deeply negative real rates, quantitative easing (which, admittedly, will soon end), generous liquidity swap lines to assuage any dollar funding pressures abroad (Chart I-6), and a global economy on the cusp of a renewed cycle. In our portfolio, we are long CHF/NZD since this cross has historically been a good hedge against rising currency volatility (Chart I-7). So is being short AUD/JPY. Being short the GBP/JPY cross might prove even more profitable, given that the UK has been a pandemic winner this year. Chart I-6The Fed Extended Its Swap Lines Chart I-7Buy CHF/NZD As Insurance Bottom Line: The message from our momentum indicators is that the bounce in the dollar was to be expected. We remain in the camp that believes the rally will be short-lived but are opportunistically playing what could be a more volatile environment. Equity Markets Signals A potential catalyst that could trigger further upside in the dollar is an equity market correction. Both the dollar and equities tend to be inversely correlated (Chart I-8). On this front, a few equity market indicators continue to flag that the rally in the dollar has a bit further to go. Chart I-8The Dollar And Equities Move Opposite Ways Chart I-9Global Industrials Are Relapsing Anew The underperformance of cyclical stocks, especially global industrials, suggests equity markets could be entering a more volatile phase (Chart I-9). The dollar tends to strengthen when cyclical stocks are underperforming defensive ones. This is because non-US equity markets have a much higher concentration of cyclical stocks in their bourses. In more general terms, non-US markets are underperforming the US, a clear sign that the marginal dollar is rotating back towards the US (Chart I-10A and I-10B). Technology stocks have also been well bid in recent weeks, on the back of lower bond yields. These are all temporary headwinds for dollar weakness. Chart I-10ANon-US Stock Markets Are Underperforming Chart I-10BNon-US Stock Markets Are Underperforming Chart I-11US Relative Earnings Revisions Are High, But Rolling Over Earnings revisions continue to head higher across most markets, but US profit expectations are still higher compared to other countries (Chart I-11). Non-US bourses will need much higher earnings revisions to stimulate portfolio inflows, and for the dollar bear market to resume. On this front, both the euro area and emerging markets are showing only tentative improvement. The character of any selloff in equity markets will be worth monitoring. Cyclicals and value stocks are at historically bombed-out levels and could start to outperform high-flying stocks on any market reset. Bottom Line: Whether a correction ensues, or the bull market continues, requires a change in equity market leadership from defensives to cyclicals. This is a necessary condition for the dollar bear market to resume. Commodities, Bonds, And The Dollar Commodity and bond prices give important cues about the health of the global economy. For example, rising copper prices and rising yields are a sign that industrial activity is humming, which in turn points to accelerating global growth. As a counter-cyclical currency, the dollar usually weakens in this scenario. Rising gold prices are generally a sign that policy settings remain ultra-accommodative, which also points to a weaker dollar. At the FX strategy service, we tend to focus more on the internal dynamics of commodity and bond markets, which can provide early warning signs. Chart I-12The Copper-To-Gold Ratio Is Consolidating Gains The copper-to-gold ratio is important since it indicates whether the liquidity-to-growth transmission mechanism is working. A rising ratio suggests policy settings are stimulating growth, while a falling ratio is a warning shot that the environment might be becoming deflationary. Correspondingly, this ratio has tended to track the dollar closely (Chart I-12). The copper-to-gold ratio is consolidating at very high levels. This is consistent with a healthy reset, rather than a reversal in the dollar bear market. The gold/silver ratio (GSR) tends to track the US dollar, and its recent price action also appears to be a welcome reset (Chart I-13). Like copper, silver benefits from rising industrial demand, especially in the electronics and renewable energy space. A falling GSR will be a sign that the manufacturing cycle is still humming. We are short the GSR with a target of 50, and a stop-loss at 71. The bond-to-gold ratio has bounced from very oversold levels. Both US Treasurys and gold are safe-haven assets and thus are competing assets. Remarkably, the ratio of the total return in US government bonds-to-gold prices has tracked the dollar pretty well since the end of the Bretton Woods system in the early ‘70s (Chart I-14). Gold has always been considered the perfect anti-fiat asset vis-à-vis the dollar, making the bond-to-gold ratio both a good short-term and long-term sentiment indicator. For now, the bounce in the ratio is not yet worrisome. We have noticed that inflows into US government bonds have risen sharply, while those into gold are falling. This should soon reverse with the fall in US rates, and the correction in gold prices. Chart I-13The Gold-To-Silver Ratio Is Consolidating Losses Chart I-14Competing Assets And The Dollar Bottom Line: The US is ultimately generating the most inflation in the G10, which is dampening real rates, and should curtail investor enthusiasm for gold relative to US Treasurys. The underperformance of Treasurys relative to gold will be a bearish development for the dollar. A Final Word On The Euro The strategic review from the European Central Bank had three key changes. The ECB now has a symmetric 2% inflation target. This is not a game changer, since it brings it in line with other global central banks, including the Bank of Japan. House prices will meaningfully begin to impact monetary policy, as the committee eventually includes owner’s equivalent rent (OER) in the HICP index (the ECB’s preferred inflation measure) for the euro area. This could be a game changer for the ECB’s price objective. Climate change was reiterated as important for price stability. Financial stability was also repeated as an important objective. As FX strategists, the second change was the most important. Shelter constitutes 17.7% of the euro area CPI basket, but it is 32.9% of the US CPI basket (Table I-1). Meanwhile, the shelter component of both the CPI basket in the US and euro area have tracked each other (Chart I-15). Table I-1Euro Area CPI Weights Chart I-15What Will Happen To Eurozone Inflation? An adjustment in the weight of the shelter component in the euro area will boost the European CPI relative to the US and could trigger a major policy shift from the ECB in the coming years. This will especially be the in case if the current environment generates an inflationary shock. Bottom Line: The ECB will stay very accommodative in the next 1-2 years, but the change in its mandate could portend a bullish tailwind for the euro beyond the near term. Investment Implications We expect the current dollar rebound to be short-lived. As such, our strategy is as follows: Stay long other safe-haven currencies. Our preferred vehicle is the Japanese yen, which sports an attractive real rate relative to the US. Investors can also short GBP/JPY from current levels. Chart I-16The Euro, Yen And Real Rates Our limit-buy on EUR/USD was triggered at 1.18. Given our expectation that the dollar could rally in the near term, we are setting the stop-loss at the same level. However, the improvement in real rates in the euro area relative to the US could cushion any downside (Chart I-16). We are also long CHF/NZD, as a bet on rising currency volatility. Correspondingly, we are setting a limit buy on Scandinavian currencies relative to the euro and USD at a trigger level of -2%. Both gold and silver benefit from the current environment, but we prefer silver to gold, due to the former’s call option on continued improvement in global growth. We are short the gold/silver ratio from the 68 level. Overall, we expect the dollar to weaken towards the end of the year, as has been the case since the 1970s (Chart I-17). Chart I-17The Yen And Swiss Franc Are Usually Winners In H2 Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com Currencies US Dollar USD Technicals 1 USD Technicals 2 The recent data out of the US have been robust: June non-farm payrolls showed an increase of 850K jobs, versus expectations of a 700K increase. The unemployment rate was relatively flat at 5.9% in June. Factory orders came in at 1.7% year-on-year in May, in line with expectations. The US dollar DXY index is relatively flat this week, but with tremendous volatility. It was a relatively quiet week in the US, due to Independence Day, but the key theme remained a drop in US yields, with the 10-year yield moving from a high of near 1.8% this year to 1.3% currently. This move has catalyzed rallies in lower beta currencies, such as the yen and Swiss franc. The FOMC minutes released this week continue to suggest a Fed that will remain very patient in both tapering asset purchases and lifting interest rates. Report Links: Arbitrating Between Dollar Bulls And Bears - March 19, 2021 The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - March 5, 2021 Are Rising Bond Yields Bullish For The Dollar? - February 19, 2021 The Euro EUR Technicals 1 EUR Technicals 2 Recent data from the euro area were mixed: The PPI print for May came in at 9.6%, in line with expectations. Both the services and composite PMI were revised higher by 0.3 in June. At 59.2, the composite PMI is the highest in over a decade. ZEW expectations for the euro area fell sharply from 81.3 to 61.2. In Germany, there was a big decline in automotive surveys. The euro was flat this week against the dollar, despite gains overnight. The big news was the change in the ECB’s monetary policy objectives, which we discussed briefly in the front section of this report. The euro rallied on the news of three fundamental drivers in our view – real rate differentials are improving in favor of Europe, the ECB’s consideration for house price inflation could allow its price stability objective to be achieved sooner, and consideration for financial stability will be less favorable for negative interest rates. Report Links: Relative Growth, The Euro, And The Loonie - April 16, 2021 The Euro Dance: One Step Back, Two Steps Forward - April 2, 2021 On Japanese Inflation And The Yen - January 29, 2021 The Yen JPY Technicals 1 JPY Technicals 2 Recent data from Japan remains subpar, but is improving: Labor cash earnings rose 1.9% in May, in line with expectations. Household spending rose 11.6% in May, in line with expectations. The Eco Watchers Survey for June came in at 47.6 from a May reading of 38.1. The outlook component rose from 47.6 to 52.4. The yen was up by 1.6% against the USD this week, the best performer. We argued a month ago that the yen is the most underappreciated G10 currency today. The catalyst that triggered yen gains were a drop in US real rates, that favored other safe-haven currencies. Going forward, further yen gains should materialize on the back of Japan successfully overcoming the pandemic like its Western counterparts. Report Links: The Case For Japan - June 11, 2021 The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - March 5, 2021 On Japanese Inflation And The Yen - January 29, 2021 British Pound GBP Technicals 1 GBP Technicals 2 There was scant data out of the UK this week: The construction PMI rose from 64.2 to 66.3 in June. House prices remain robust, with the RICS house price balance printing an elevated 83% in June. The pound was flat this week against the USD. The new delta variant of the COVID-19 virus is gaining momentum in the UK and will likely erode some of the dividends GBP had priced in from a fast vaccine rollout. As such, short GBP positions may pay off in the near term. Shorting GBP/CHF could be an attractive near-term hedge. Report Links: Why Are UK Interest Rates Still So Low? - March 10, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Thoughts On The British Pound - December 18, 2020 Australian Dollar AUD Technicals 1 AUD Technicals 2 There was scant data out of Australia this week: The Melbourne Institute of Inflation survey came it at 3% year on year in June, from 3.3%. The RBA kept interest rates unchanged at 0.1%, reiterating its commitment to stay accommodative until inflation and wages pick up meaningfully. The AUD was down by 0.4% this week against the USD. The RBA is decisively lagging other central banks in communicating less monetary accommodation in the coming years. This will create a coiled spring response for the AUD, because the RBA will have to eventually play catchup as the global economic cycle gains momentum. Report Links: The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - March 5, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Australia: Regime Change For Bond Yields & The Currency? - January 20, 2021 New Zealand Dollar NZD Technicals 1 NZD Technicals 2 The was scant data out of New Zealand this week: ANZ commodity price index rose by 0.8% in June. The NZD was down 0.3% against the dollar this week. Our long CHF/NZD position paid off handsomely in this environment. We recommend holding onto this trade, as a reset in global rates hurts the hawkish pricing in the NZD forward curve. Report Links: How High Can The Kiwi Rise? - April 30, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Currencies And The Value-Versus-Growth Debate - July 10, 2020 Canadian Dollar CAD Technicals 1 CAD Technicals 2 Canadian data softened but remained robust: Building permits fell by 14.8% month on month in May. The Markit manufacturing PMI fell from 57 to 56.5 in June. The Canadian trade balance deteriorated from C$0.6bn to a deficit of -C$1.4bn in May. Business Outlook Survey indicator hit the highest level on record. As the Bank of Canada put it, improving business sentiment is broadening. The CAD fell by 0.8% against USD this week. The results of the BoC survey highlight that a reopening phase is categorically bullish for economic activity in general and financial prices. Until recently, the CAD was one of the best performing currencies in the G10. This is a sea change from a country that was previously a laggard in vaccination efforts. CAD should hold up well once the dollar rally fades, but other currency laggards such as SEK and JPY could do even better. Report Links: Relative Growth, The Euro, And The Loonie - April 16, 2021 Will The Canadian Recovery Lead Or Lag The Global Cycle? - February 12, 2021 The Outlook For The Canadian Dollar - October 9, 2020 Swiss Franc CHF Technicals 1 CHF Technicals 2 The was scant data out of Switzerland this week: The unemployment rate was near unchanged at 3.1% in June, from 3.0%. Total sight deposits were unchanged at CHF 712 bn on the week of July 2. The Swiss franc was up by 1.1% this week against the USD. Falling yields improved the relative appeal of the franc that has bombed out interest rates. The franc is also benefiting from the rising bout of volatility as a safe-haven currency. On this basis, we are long CHF/NZD cross, which performed well this week. Report Links: An Update On The Swiss Franc - April 9, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 The Dollar Conundrum And Protection - November 6, 2020 Norwegian Krone NOK Technicals 1 NOK Technicals 2 Data out of Norway is improving: The unemployment rate fell from 3.3% to 2.9% in July. Industrial production growth came in at 2.1% year-on-year in May. Mainland GDP rose by 1.8% month on month in May. The NOK was down by 1.8% this week against the dollar, the worst performing G10 currency. The NOK is bearing the brunt of a reset in the US dollar, but our bias is that we are nearing a buy zone. NOK is cheap, would benefit from high oil prices and the economy is on the mend. We are looking to sell EUR/NOK and USD/NOK on further strength. Report Links: The Norwegian Method - June 4, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Revisiting Our High-Conviction Trades - September 11, 2020 Swedish Krona SEK Technicals 1 SEK Technicals 2 Recent data from Sweden have been mildly positive: The Swedbank/Silf composite PMI fell from 70.2 to 66.9 in June. Industrial production came in at 24.4% year on year in May, after a rise of 26.4% in April. Household consumption jumped 8.8% year on year in April. The SEK was also up this week against the USD. Bombed-out interest rates in Sweden have also improved the appeal of the franc, given falling global bond yields. Meanwhile, the SEK remains one of the cheapest currencies in our models. Report Links: Revisiting Our High-Conviction Trades - September 11, 2020 More On Competitive Devaluations, The CAD And The SEK - May 1, 2020 Sweden Beyond The Pandemic: Poised To Re-leverage - March 19, 2020 Trades & Forecasts Forecast Summary Core Portfolio Tactical Trades Limit Orders Closed Trades
Highlights Three distinct forces are likely to make South Asia’s geopolitical risks increasingly relevant to global investors. First, India’s tensions with China stem from China’s growing foreign policy assertiveness and India’s shift away from traditional neutrality toward aligning with the US and its allies. This creates a security dilemma in South Asia, just as in East Asia. Second, India’s economy is sputtering in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, adding fuel to nationalism and populism in advance of a series of important elections. India will stimulate the economy but it could also become more reactive on the international scene. Third, the US is withdrawing from Afghanistan and negotiating a deal with Iran in an effort to reduce the US military presence in the Middle East and South Asia. This will create a scramble for influence across both regions and a power vacuum in Afghanistan that is highly likely to yield negative surprises for India and its neighbors. Traditionally geopolitical risks in South Asia have a limited impact on markets. India’s growth slowdown and forthcoming fiscal stimulus are more relevant for investors. However, a sharp rise in geopolitical risk would undermine India’s structural advantages as the West diversifies away from China. Stay short Indian banks. Feature Geopolitical risks in South Asia are slowly but surely rising. India-Pakistan and China-India are well-known “conflict-dyads” or pairings. Historically, these two sets have been fighting each other over their fuzzy Himalayan border with limited global financial market consequences. But now fundamental changes are afoot that are altering the geopolitical setting in the region. Specifically, the coming together of three distinct forces could trigger a significant geopolitical event in South Asia. The three forces are as follow: Force #1: Sino-Indian Tensions Get Real About a year ago, Indian and Chinese troops clashed in Ladakh, a disputed territory in the Kashmir region. Following these clashes China reduced its military presence in the Pangong Tso area but its presence in some neighboring areas remains meaningful. Besides the troop build-up along India’s eastern border, China is building more air combat infrastructure in its India-facing western theatre. China’s major air bases have historically been concentrated in China’s eastern region, away from the Indian border (Map 1). Consequently, India has historically enjoyed an advantage in airpower. But China appears to be working to mitigate this disadvantage. Map 1Most Of China’s Major Aviation Units Are Located Away From India Owing to China’s increased military focus along the Sino-India border, India’s threat perception of China has undergone a fundamental change in recent years. Notably, India has diverted some of its key army units away from its western Indo-Pak border towards its eastern border with China. India could now have nearly 200,000 troops deployed along its border with China, which would mark a 40% increase from last year.1 Turning attention to the Indo-Pak border, India’s problems with Pakistan appear under control for now. This is owing to the ceasefire agreement that was renewed by the two countries in February 2021. However, this peace cannot possibly be expected to last. This is mainly because core problems between the two countries (like Pakistan’s support of militant proxies and India’s control over Kashmir) remain unaddressed. History too suggests that bouts of peace between the two warring neighbors rarely last long. These bouts usually end abruptly when a terrorist attack takes place in India. With both political turbulence and economic distress in Pakistan rising, the fragile ceasefire between India and Pakistan could be upended over the next six months. In fact, two events over the last week point to the fragility of the ceasefire: Two drones carrying explosives entered an Indian air force station located in Jammu and Kashmir (i.e. a northern territory that India recently reorganized, to Pakistan’s chagrin). Even as no casualties were reported, this attack marks a turning point for terrorist activity in India as this was the first-time terrorists used drones to enter an Indian military base. Hours later, another drone attack struck an Indian base at the Ratnuchak-Kaluchak army station, the site of a major terrorist attack in 2002. Chart 1China, Pakistan And India Cumulatively Added 41 Nuclear Warheads Over 2020 Given that the ceasefire was agreed recently, any further increase in terrorist activity in India over the next six months would suggest that a more substantial breakdown in relations is nigh. Distinct from these recent tensions, China’s troop deployment along India’s eastern arm and Pakistan’s presence along India’s western arm creates a strategic “pincer” that increasingly threatens India. India is naturally concerned. China and Pakistan are allies who have been working closely on projects including the strategic China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). The CPEC is a collection of infrastructure projects in Pakistan that includes the development of a port in Gwadar where a future presence of the People's Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) is envisaged. Gwadar has the potential of providing China land-based access to the Indian Ocean. Trust in the South Asian region is clearly running low. Distinct from troop build-ups and drone-attacks, China, Pakistan, and India cumulatively added more than 40 nuclear warheads over the last year (Chart 1). China is reputed to be engaged in an even larger increase in its nuclear arsenal than the data show.2 From a structural perspective, too, geopolitical risks in the South Asian peninsula are bound to keep rising. When it comes to the conflicting Indo-Pak dyad, India’s geopolitical power has been rising relative to that of Pakistan in the 2000s. However, the geopolitical muscle of the Sino-Pak alliance is much greater than that of India on a standalone basis (Chart 2). Chart 2India Has Aligned With The QUAD To Counter The Sino-Pak Alliance China’s active involvement in South Asia is responsible for driving India’s increasing desire to abandon its historical foreign policy stance of non-alignment. India’s membership in the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (also known as the QUAD, whose other members include the US, Japan, and Australia) bears testimony to India’s active effort to develop closer relations with the US and its allies (Chart 2). India’s alignment with the US is deepening China’s and Pakistan’s distrust of India. Conventional and nuclear military deterrence should prevent full-scale war. But the regional balance is increasingly fluid which means geopolitical risks will slowly but surely rise in South Asia over the coming year and years. Force #2: A Growth Slowdown Alongside India’s Loaded Election Calendar The pandemic has hit the economies of South Asia particularly hard. South Asia historically maintained higher real GDP growth rates relative to Emerging Markets (EMs). But in 2021, this region’s growth rate is set to be lower than that of EM peers (Chart 3). History is replete with examples of a rise in economic distress triggering geopolitical events. South Asia is characterized by unusually low per capita incomes (Chart 4) and the latest slowdown could exacerbate the risk of both social unrest and geopolitical incidents materialising. Chart 3South Asian Economies Have Been Hit Hard By The Pandemic Chart 4South Asia Is Characterized By Very Low Per Capita Incomes To complicate matters a busy state elections calendar is coming up in India. Elections will be due in seven Indian states in 2022. These states account for about 25% of India’s population. State elections due in 2022 will amount to a high-stakes political battle. During state elections in 2021, the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was the incumbent in only one of the five states. In 2022, the BJP is the incumbent party in most of the states that are due for elections, which means it has the advantage but also has a lot to lose, especially in a post-pandemic environment. Elections kick off in the crucial state of Uttar Pradesh next February. Last time this state faced elections Prime Minister Narendra Modi was willing to go to great lengths to boost his popularity ahead of time. Specifically, he upset the nation with a large-scale and unprecedented de-monetization program. Given the busy state election calendar in 2022, we expect the BJP-led central government to focus on policy actions that can improve its support among Indian voters. Two policies in particular are likely to come through: Fiscal Stimulus Measures To Provide Economic Relief: India has refrained from administering a large post-pandemic stimulus thus far. As per budget estimates, the Indian central government’s total expenditure in FY22 is set to increase only by 1% on a year-on-year basis. But the expenditure-side restraint shown by India’s central government could change. With elections and a pandemic (which has now claimed over 400,000 lives in India), the central government could consider a meaningful increase in spending closer to February 2022. Map 2Northern India Views Pakistan Even More Unfavorably Than Rest Of India India’s Finance Minister already announced a fiscal stimulus package of $85 billion (amounting to 2.8% of GDP) earlier this week. Whilst this stimulus entails limited fresh spending (amounting to about 0.6% of India’s GDP), we would not be surprised if the government follows it up with more spending closer to February 2022. Assertive Foreign Policy To Ward-Off Unfriendly Neighbors: India’s northern states are known to harbor unfavorable views of Pakistan (Map 2). The roots of this phenomenon can be traced to geography and the bloody civil strife of 1947 that was triggered by the partition of British-ruled India into the two independent dominions of India and Pakistan. Given the north’s unfavorable views of Pakistan and given looming elections, Indian policy makers may be forced to adopt a far more aggressive foreign policy response, to any terrorist strikes from Pakistan or territorial incursions by China. This kind of response was observed most recently ahead of the Indian General Elections in April-May 2019. An Indian military convoy was attacked by a suicide-bomber in early February 2019 and a Pakistan-based terrorist group claimed responsibility. A fortnight later the Indian air force launched unexpected airstrikes across the Line of Control which were then followed by the Pakistan air force conducting air strikes in Jammu and Kashmir. While the next round of Pakistani and Indian general elections is not due until 2023 and 2024, respectively, it is worth noting that of the seven state elections due in India in 2022, four are in the north (Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Uttarakhand, and Himachal Pradesh). Force #3: Power Vacuum In Afghanistan The final reason to be wary of the South Asian geopolitical dynamic is the change in US policy: both the Iran nuclear deal expected in August and the impending withdrawal from Afghanistan in September. The US public has now elected three presidents on the demand that foreign wars be reduced. In the wake of Trump and populism the political establishment is now responding. Therefore Biden will ultimately implement both the Iran deal and the Afghan withdrawal regardless of delays or hang-ups. But then he will have to do damage control. In the case of Iran, a last-minute flare-up of conflict in the region is likely this summer, as the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Iran underscore their red lines before the US and Iran settle down to a deal. Indeed it is already happening, with recent US attacks against Iran-backed Shia militias in Syria and Iraq. A major incident would push up oil prices, which is negative for India. But the endgame, an Iranian economic opening, is positive for India, since it imports oil and has had close relations with Iran historically. In the case of Afghanistan, the US exit will activate latent terrorist forces. It will also create a scramble for influence over this landlocked country that could lead to negative surprises across the region. The first principle of the peace agreement between the US and Afghanistan states that the latter will make all efforts to ensure that Afghan soil is not used to further terrorist activity. However, the enforceability of such a guarantee is next to impossible. Notably, the US withdrawal from Afghanistan will revive the Taliban’s influence in the region. This poses major risks for India, which has a long history of being targeted by Afghani terrorist groups. The Taliban played a critical role in the release of terrorists into Pakistan following the hijacking of an Indian Airlines flight in 1999. Furthermore, the Haqqani network, which has pledged allegiance to the Taliban, has attacked Indian assets in the past. Any attack on India deriving from the power vacuum in Afghanistan would upset the precarious regional balance. Whilst there are no immediate triggers for Afghani groups to launch a terrorist attack in India, the US withdrawal will trigger a tectonic shift in the region. Negative surprises emanating from Afghanistan should be expected. Investment Conclusions Chart 5Indian Banks Appear To Have Factored In All Positives We reiterate the need to pare exposure to Indian assets on a tactical basis. India’s growth engine is likely to misfire over the second half of the Indian financial year. Macroeconomic headwinds pose the chief risk for investors, but major geopolitical changes could act as a negative catalyst in the current context. So we urge clients to stay short Indian Banks (Chart 5). Financials account for the lion’s share of India’s benchmark index (26% weight). India could opt for an unexpected expansion in its fiscal deficit soon. Whilst we continue to watch fiscal dynamics closely, we expect the fiscal expansion to materialize closer to February 2022 when India’s most populous state (i.e. Uttar Pradesh) will undergo elections. Over the long run, India’s sense of insecurity will escalate in the context of a more assertive China, stronger Sino-Pakistani ties, and a power vacuum in Afghanistan. For that reason, New Delhi will continue to shed its neutrality and improve relations with the US-led coalition of democratic countries, with an aim to balance China. This process will feed China’s insecurity of being surrounded and contained by a hegemonic American system. This security dilemma is a source of South Asian geopolitical risk that will become more globally relevant over time. China’s conflict with the US and western world should create incentives for India to attract trade and investment. However, its ability to do so will be contingent upon domestic political factors and regional geopolitical factors. Ritika Mankar, CFA Editor/Strategist ritika.mankar@bcaresearch.com Matt Gertken Vice President Geopolitical Strategy mattg@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Sudhi Ranjan Sen, ‘India Shifts 50,000 Troops to China Border in Historic Move’, Bloomberg, June 28, 2021, bloomberg.com. 2 Joby Warrick, “China is building more than 100 missile silos in its western desert, analysts say,” Washington Post, June 30, 2021, washingtonpost.com.
Highlights The US is withdrawing from the Middle East and South Asia and making a strategic pivot to Asia Pacific. The third quarter will see risks flare around Iran and the US rejoin the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal. The result is briefly negative for oil prices but the rise of Iran is a new geopolitical trend that will increase Middle Eastern risk over the long run. The geopolitical outlook is dollar bullish, while the macroeconomic outlook is getting less dollar-bearish due to China’s risk of over-tightening policy. Stay neutral USD and be wary of commodities and emerging markets in the third quarter. European political risk is bottoming. The German and French elections are at best minor risks. However, the continent is ripe for negative black swans, especially due to Russian aggression. Go tactically long global large caps and defensives. Feature Chart 1Three Key Views On Track (So Far) We chose “No Return To Normalcy” as the theme of our 2021 outlook. While the COVID-19 vaccine promised economic recovery, we argued that normalization would create complacency regarding fundamental changes that have taken place in the geopolitical environment. A contradiction between an improving macroeconomic backdrop and a foreboding geopolitical backdrop would develop in 2021 and beyond. The “reflation trade” has begun to lose steam as we go to press. However, global recovery will still be the dominant story in the second half of the year as vaccination spreads. The question for the third quarter and the rest of the year is whether reflation will continue. As a matter of forecasting, we think it will. But as a matter of investment strategy, we are taking a more defensive stance until China relaxes economic policy. In our annual outlook we highlighted three key geopolitical views: (1) China’s headwinds, both at home and abroad (2) US détente with Iran and pivot to Asia (3) Europe’s opportunity. All three trends are broadly on track and can be illustrated by looking at equity performance in the relevant regions for the year so far: Chinese stocks sold off, UAE stocks rallied, and European stocks rallied (Chart 1). However, these trends are not exclusively tied to absolute equity performance. The most important question is what happens to global growth and the US dollar as these three key views continue. Stay Neutral On The Dollar It paid off for us to maintain a neutral stance on the dollar. True, the global recovery and exorbitant US trade and budget deficits are bearish for the dollar and bullish for other currencies. But the greenback’s “counter-trend bounce” is proving more formidable than many investors expected. The fundamentals of the American economy and global position remain strong. Since the outbreak of COVID-19, the US has secured its recovery with fiscal policy, maintained rule of law amid a contested election, innovated and distributed vaccines, benefited from more flexible social restrictions, refurbished global alliances, and put pressure on its geopolitical rivals. In essence, the combined effect of President Trump’s and Biden’s policies has been to make America “great again” (Chart 2). From a geopolitical perspective, the dollar is appealing. Chart 2Trump-Biden Make America Great Again? In addition, the first two geopolitical views mentioned above – China’s headwinds and the US-Iran détente – imply a negative environment for China and the renminbi. The reason for the US to do a suboptimal deal with Iran, both in 2015 and 2021, is to reduce the risk of war and buy time to enable a strategic pivot to Asia Pacific. Three US presidents have been elected on the pledge to conclude the “forever wars” in the Middle East and South Asia. Biden is withdrawing US troops from Afghanistan in September. There can be little doubt Biden is committed to an Iran deal, which is supposed to free up the US’s hands (Chart 3). Meanwhile the US public and Congress are unified in their desire to better defend US interests against China’s economic and military rise. There has not yet been a stabilization of US-China policies. Biden is not likely to hold a summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping until late October at earliest – and that is a guess, not a confirmed summit. The Biden administration has completed its review of China policy and is maintaining the Trump administration’s hawkish posture, as predicted. The US and China may resume their strategic and economic dialogue at some point but it is impossible to go back to the status quo ante 2015. That was the year the US adopted a more confrontational stance toward China – a stance later supercharged by Trump’s election and trade tariffs. The hawkish consensus on China is one of the rare unifying factors in a deeply divided America. The Biden administration explicitly says the US-China relationship is now defined by “competition” instead of “engagement.”1 One exception to this neutral view on the dollar has been our decision to go long the Japanese yen and Swiss franc, which has not panned out so far. Our reasoning is that geopolitical risk will boost these currencies but otherwise the reduction of geopolitical risk will weigh on the dollar in the context of global growth recovery. So far geopolitical risk has remained subdued while the US dollar has outperformed. We are still sympathetic to these safe-haven currencies, however, as they are attractively valued as long as one expects geopolitical risks to materialize (Chart 4). Chart 3US Pivot To Asia Runs Through Iran Our third key view, that EU was the real winner of the US election last year, remains on track. This is marginally positive for the euro at the expense of the dollar. Given the above points, we favor an equal-weighted basket of the euro and the dollar relative to the renminbi (Chart 5). Chart 4Safe-Haven Currencies Attractive Chart 5Favor Euro And Dollar Over Renminbi The geopolitical outlook is dollar-bullish. The macroeconomic outlook is dollar-bearish, except that China’s economy looks to slow down. We expect China to ease policy in the second half of the year but it may come late. We remain neutral dollar in the third quarter. Wait For China To Relax Policy July 1 marks the centenary of the Communist Party of China. The main thing investors should know is that the Communist Party predates China’s capitalist phase by sixty years. The party adopted capitalism to improve the economy – it never sacrificed its political or foreign policy goals. This poses a major geopolitical problem today because the Communist Party’s consolidation of power across Greater China, symbolized by Beijing’s revocation of Hong Kong’s special status in 2019, has convinced the western democracies that China is no longer compatible with the liberal world order. China launched a 13.8% of GDP monetary-and-fiscal stimulus over 2018-20 due to the trade war and COVID-19 pandemic. So the economy is stable for the hundredth anniversary celebration. The centenary goals are largely accomplished: GDP is larger, poverty is nearly extinguished, although urban incomes are still lagging (Chart 6). General Secretary Xi Jinping will mark the occasion with a speech. The speech will contribute to his governing philosophy, Xi Jinping Thought, a synthesis of communist Mao Zedong Thought and the pro-capitalist “socialism with Chinese characteristics” pioneered by General Secretary Deng Xiaoping in the 1980s-90s. The effect is to reassert Communist Party and central government primacy after the long period of decentralization that enabled China’s rapid growth phase. It is also to endorse an inward economic turn after the four-decade export-manufacturing boom. The Xi administration’s re-centralization of policy has entailed mini-cycles of tightening and loosening control over the economy. The administration leans against the country’s tendency to gorge itself on debt and grow at any cost – until it must lean the other way for fear of triggering a destabilizing slowdown. For this reason Beijing tightened policy proactively last year, producing a sharp drop in money, credit, and fiscal expansion in 2021 that now threatens to undermine the global recovery. By our measures, any further tightening will result in undershooting the regime’s money and credit targets, i.e. overtightening, and hence threaten to drag on the global recovery (Chart 7). Chart 6China's Communist Party Centenary Goals Chart 7China Verges On Over-Tightening Policy Overtightening would be a policy mistake with potentially disastrous consequences. So the base case should be that the government will relax policy rather than undermine the post-COVID recovery. However, investors cannot be confident about the timing. The 2015 financial turmoil and renminbi devaluation occurred because policymakers reacted too slowly. One reason to believe policy will be eased is that after July 1 the government will turn its attention to the twentieth national party congress in 2022, the once-in-five-years rotation of the Central Committee and Politburo. The party congress begins at the local level at the beginning of next year and culminates in the fall of 2022 with the national rotation of top party leaders. Xi Jinping was originally slated to step down in 2022. So he needs to squash any last-minute push against him by opposing factions of the party. He may have himself named chairman of the Communist Party, like Mao before him. Most importantly he will put his stamp on the “seventh generation” of China’s leaders by promoting his followers into key positions. All of this suggests that the Xi administration cannot risk triggering a recession, even if its preferences remain hawkish on economic policy. Policy easing could come as early as the end of July. As a rule of thumb, we have noticed that the Politburo’s July meeting on economic policy is often an inflection point, as was the case in 2007, 2015, 2018, and 2020 (Table 1). Some observers claim the April Politburo meeting already signaled an easing in policy, although we do not see that. If July clearly signals relaxation, global investors will cheer and emerging market assets and commodities will rise. Table 1China’s Politburo Often Hits Inflection Point On Economic Policy In July Still we maintain a defensive posture going into the third quarter because we do not have a high level of confidence that policymakers will act preemptively. A market riot may precede and motivate the inflection point in policy. Also the negative impact of previous policy tightening will be felt in the third quarter. China plays and industrial metals are extremely vulnerable to further correction (Chart 8). Chart 8China Plays And Metals Vulnerable To Further Correction The earliest occasion for a Biden-Xi summit comes at the end of October, as mentioned. While US-China talks will occur at some level, relations will remain fundamentally unstable. While a Biden-Xi summit may improve the atmosphere and lead to a new round of strategic and economic dialogue, or Phase Two trade talks, the fact is that the US is seeking to contain China’s rise and China is seeking to break out of the strictures of the US-led world order. The global elite and mainstream media will put a lot of emphasis on the post-Trump return to diplomatic “normalcy” and summits. But this is to overemphasize style at the expense of substance. Note that the positive feelings of the Biden-Putin summit on June 16 fizzled in less than a week when Russia allegedly dropped bombs in the path of a British destroyer in the Black Sea. The US and UK were training Ukraine’s military. Britain denies any bombs were dropped but Russia says next time they will hit their target. (More on this below.) This episode is instructive for US-China relations: summitry is overrated. China is building a sphere of influence and the US no longer believes dialogue alone is the answer. Tit-for-tat punitive measures and proxy battles in China’s neighboring areas, from the Korean peninsula to the Taiwan Strait to the South and East China Seas, are the new normal. Bottom Line: Tactically, stay defensive on global risk assets, especially China plays. Strategically, maintain a constructive outlook on the cycle given the global recovery and China’s need eventually to relax monetary and fiscal policy. US-Iran Deal Likely – Then The Real Trouble Starts The US will likely rejoin the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) by August and pull out of its longest-ever war in Afghanistan in September. The US is wrapping up its “forever wars” to meet the demands of a war-weary public. Ironically, the long-term consequence is to create power vacuums that invite new geopolitical conflicts in the context of the US’s great power struggle with China and Russia. But for now a deal with Iran – once it is settled – reduces geopolitical risk by reducing the odds of military escalation in the region. The Iran talks are more significant than the Afghanistan pullout. We are confident in a deal because Biden can rejoin the 2015 deal unilaterally – it was never approved by the US Senate as a formal treaty. The Iranians will not support any militant action so aggressive as to scupper a deal that offers them the chance of reviving their economy at a critical time in the regime’s history. Reviving the deal poses a downside risk for oil prices in the third quarter though not over the long run. It is negative in the short run because investors will have to price not only Iran’s current and future production (Chart 9) but also any resulting loss of OPEC 2.0 discipline. Brent crude is trading at $76 per barrel as we go to press, above the $65-$70 per barrel average that our Commodity & Energy Strategy service expects to see over the coming five years (Chart 10). Chart 9Iran's Oil Production Will Return Chart 10Brent Price Faces Short-Term Downside Risk From Iranian Crude The oil price ceiling is enforced by the cartel of oil producers who fear that too high of prices will incentivize US shale oil production as well as the global shift to renewable energy. The Russians have always dragged their feet over oil production cuts and are now pushing for production hikes. The government needs an oil price of around $50-55 per barrel for the budget to break even. The Saudis need higher prices to break even, at $70-75 per barrel. Moscow must coordinate various oil producers, led by the country’s powerful oligarchs and their factions, which is inherently more difficult than the Saudi position of coordinating one producer, Aramco. The Russians and Saudis have maintained cartel discipline so far in 2021, as expected, because the wounds of the market-share war last year are still raw. They retreated from that showdown in less than a month. However, a major escalation in Saudi Arabia’s strategic conflict with Iran could push the Saudis to seek greater market share at Iran’s expense, as occurred before the original Iran deal in 2014-15. Hence our view that the risk to oil prices will shift from the upside to the downside in the second half of the year if the US-Iran deal is reconstituted. Over the long run, the deal is not negative for oil prices. The deal is a tradeoff for lower geopolitical risk today but higher risk in the future. The reason is that Iran’s economic recovery will strengthen its strategic hand and generate a backlash in the region. The global oil supply and demand balance will fluctuate according to circumstances but regional conflict will inject a risk premium over time. Biden’s likely decision to rejoin the 2015 deal should be seen as a delaying tactic. It is impossible to go back to 2015, when the US had mustered a coalition of nations to pressure Iran and when Iran’s “reformist” faction stood to receive a historic boost from the opening of the country’s economy. Now the US lacks a coalition and the reformists are leaving office in disgrace, with the hardliners (“principlists”) taking full power for the foreseeable future. Iran is happy to go back to complying with a deal that consists of sanctions relief in exchange for temporary limits on its nuclear program. The 2015 deal’s restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program begin expiring in 2023 and continue to expire through 2040. Biden has no chance of negotiating a newer and more expansive deal that extends these sunset clauses while also restricting Iran’s ballistic missile program and regional militant activities. He will say that easing sanctions is premised on a broader “follow on” deal to achieve these US goals. But the broader deal is unlikely to materialize anytime soon. The Iranians will commit to future talks but they will have no intention of agreeing to a more expansive deal unless forced. The country’s leaders will never abandon their nuclear program after witnessing the invasions of non-nuclear Libya and Ukraine – in stark contrast with nuclear-armed North Korea. Moreover Biden cannot possibly reassemble the P5+1 coalition with Russia and China anytime soon. The US is directly confronting these states. They could conceivably work with the US when Iran is on the brink of obtaining nuclear weapons but not before then. They did not prevent North Korea. The Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, the soon-to-be-inaugurated President Ebrahim Raisi, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, the Ministry of Intelligence, and other pillars of the regime are focused exclusively on strengthening the regime in advance of Khamenei’s impending succession sometime in the coming decade. The succession could easily lead to domestic unrest and a political crisis, which makes the 2020s a critical period for the Islamic Republic. With Tehran focused on a delicate succession, it is not a foregone conclusion that Iran will go on the offensive to expand its sphere of influence immediately after the US deal. But sooner or later a major new geopolitical trend will emerge: the rise of Iran. With sanctions removed, trade and investment increasing, and Chinese and Russian support, Iran will be capable of pursuing its strategic aims in the region more effectively. It will extend its influence across the “Shia Crescent,” including Iraq. The fear that this will inspire in Israel and the Gulf Arab states has already generated a slow-boiling war in the region. This war will intensify as the US will be reluctant to intervene. The purpose of the deal is to enable the war-weary US to reduce its active involvement in the region. The US foreign policy and defense establishment do not entirely see it this way – they emphasize that the US will remain engaged. But US allies in the Middle East will not be convinced. The region already has a taste for the way this works after the US’s precipitous withdrawal from Iraq in 2011, which lead to the rise of the Islamic State terrorist group. Biden will try not to be so precipitous but the writing is on the wall: the US will reduce its focus and commitment. A scramble for power in the region will begin the moment the ink dries on Biden’s signature of the JCPA. Israel and the Arab states are forming a de facto alliance – based on last year’s Abraham Accords – to prepare for Iran’s push to dominate the region. Even if Iran is not overly aggressive (a big if), Israel and the Gulf Arabs will overreact as a result of their fear of abandonment. They will also seek to hedge their bets by improving ties with the Chinese and Russians, making the Middle East the scene of a major new proxy battle in the global great power struggle. As a risk to our view: if the Biden administration changes course this summer and refuses to lift sanctions or rejoin the Iran deal – low but not zero probability – then tensions with Iran will explode almost instantaneously. The Iranians will threaten to close the Strait of Hormuz and a crisis will erupt in the third or fourth quarter. Bottom Line: The US will most likely rejoin the Iranian nuclear deal by August to avoid an immediate crisis or war. The Biden administration will wager that it can lend enough support to regional allies to keep Iran contained. This might work, as the Iranians will focus on fortifying the regime ahead of its leadership succession. However, Iran’s hardline leadership will see an opportunity in America’s withdrawal from its “forever wars.” Iran will increasingly cooperate with Russia and China. Iran’s conflict with Israel and Saudi Arabia will be extremely difficult to manage and will escalate over time, quite possibly creating a revolution or war in Iraq. The Gulf Arabs are already under immense pressure from the green energy revolution. Thus while oil prices might temporarily fall on the return of Iranian exports, they will later see upward pressure from a new wave of Middle Eastern instability. European Political Risk Has (Probably) Bottomed By contrast with all the above we have viewed Europe as a negligible source of (geo)political risk in 2021. European policy uncertainty is falling in Europe relative to these other powers and the rest of the world (Chart 11). Chart 11Europe's Relative Policy Uncertainty Bottoming Chart 12EU Break-Up Risk Hits Floor (Again) The risk of a break-up of the European Union has wilted and remains at historic lows (Chart 12). There is no immediate threat of any European countries emulating the UK and attempting to exit. Even Italian support for the euro has surged. Immigration flows have plummeted. European solidarity is not on the ballot in the upcoming German and French elections. Germany is choosing between the status quo and a “green revolution” that would not really be a revolution due to the constraints of coalition politics. The Greens have lost some momentum relative to their polling earlier this year but underlying trends suggest they will surprise to the upside in the September 26 vote (Charts 13A and 13B). They embrace EU solidarity, robust government spending, weariness with the Merkel regime, and concerns about climate change, Russia, China, and social justice. Chart 13AGerman Greens Will Surprise To Upside Chart 13BGerman Greens Will Surprise To Upside We expect the Greens to surprise to the upside. But as they are forced into a coalition with the ruling Christian Democrats then they will be limited to raising spending rather raising taxes (Table 2). The market will cheer this result. Table 2German Greens’ Ambitious Tax Hike Proposals If the Greens disappoint then a right-leaning government and too early fiscal tightening could become a risk – but it is a minor risk because Merkel’s hand-picked successor, the CDU Chancellor Candidate Armin Laschet, will be pro-Europe and fiscally dovish, just like the mainstream of his party under Merkel. The only limitation on this dovishness is that it would take another global shock for there to be enough votes in the Bundestag to loosen the schuldenbremse or “debt brake.” In France, President Emmanuel Macron is likely to win re-election – the populist candidate Marine Le Pen remains an underdog who is unlikely to make it through France’s two-round electoral system. In Italy, Prime Minister Mario Draghi is overseeing a national unity coalition that will dole out EU recovery funds. An election cannot be held ahead of the presidential election in January, which will be secured by the establishment parties as a major check on any future populist ruling coalition. The risk in these countries, as in Spain and elsewhere, is that neoliberal structural reform and competitiveness are falling by the wayside. Fiscal largesse is positive for securing the recovery but long-term growth potential will remain depressed (Chart 14). Chart 14European And Global Fiscal Stimulus (Updated June 2021) Europe remains stuck in a liquidity trap over the long run. It depends on the rest of the world for growth. This is a problem given that China’s potential growth is slowing and there is no ready substitute that will prop up global growth. Europe is increasingly ripe for negative “black swan” events. The power vacuum in the Middle East described above will lead to instability and regime failures that will threaten European security. Russia will remain aggressive, a reflection of its crumbling structural foundations. The Putin administration has not changed its strategy of building a sphere of influence in the former Soviet Union and pushing back against the West, as signaled by the threat to bomb ships that sail in Crimean waters – a unilateral expansion of Russia’s territorial waters following the Crimean invasion. The Biden administration is not seeking anything comparable to the diplomatic “reset” with Russia from 2009-11, which ended in acrimony. In other words, European political risk may be bottoming as we speak. Investment Takeaways Chart 15Limited Equity Upside From Likely US Infrastructure Bill US Peak Fiscal Stimulus: The Biden administration is highly likely to pass an infrastructure package through Congress, either as a bipartisan deal with Republicans or as part of the American Jobs Plan. The result is another $1-$1.5 trillion fiscal stimulus, albeit over an eight-year period, with infrastructure funding taking until 2024-25 to ramp up. Biden’s other plans probably will not pass before the 2022 midterm election, which will likely bring gridlock. Investors are well aware of these proposals and the policy setting will probably be frozen after this year. Hence there is limited remaining upside for global materials sector and US infrastructure plays (Chart 15). The extravagant US fiscal thrust of 2020-21 will turn into a huge fiscal drag in 2022 (Chart 16). The Federal Reserve, however, will remain ultra-dovish as long as labor market slack persists – regardless of who is at the helm. Chart 16US Fiscal Drag Very Large In 2022 Chart 17Go Long Large Caps And Defensives China’s Headwinds Persist: China may or may not ease policy in time to prevent a market riot. China plays and industrial metals are highly exposed to a correction and we recommend steering clear. US-Iran Deal Weighs On Oil Price: Tactically we are neutral on oil and oil plays. An Iran deal could depress oil prices temporarily – and potentially in a major way if the Saudis agree with the Russians on increasing production. Fundamentals are positive but depend on the OPEC 2.0 cartel. The cartel faces the risk that higher prices will incentivize both alternative oil providers and the green revolution. Europe’s Opportunity: We continue to see the euro and European stocks offering value. Given the troubles with Russia we favor developed Europe plays over emerging Europe. The German election would be a bullish catalyst for European assets but headwinds from China will prevail, which is negative for cyclical European stocks. The Russian Duma election, also in September, creates high potential for Russia to clash with the West between now and then. Tactically, go long global large caps and defensives (Chart 17). Matt Gertken Vice President Geopolitical Strategy mattg@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Independent Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders recently felt it was necessary to warn against a second cold war. Sanders, a democratic socialist, is a reliable indicator of the left wing of the Democratic Party and a dissenter who puts pressure on the center-left Biden administration. His fears underscore the dominance of the new hawkish consensus. Appendix China Russia UK Germany France Italy Canada Spain Taiwan – Province Of China Korea Turkey Brazil Australia
Highlights Geopolitical risk is trickling back into financial markets. China’s fiscal-and-credit impulse collapsed again. The Global Economic Policy Uncertainty Index is ticking back up after the sharp drop from 2020. All of our proprietary GeoRisk Indicators are elevated or rising. Geopolitical risk often rises during bull markets – the Geopolitical Risk Index can even spike without triggering a bear market or recession. Nevertheless a rise in geopolitical risk is positive for the US dollar, which happens to stand at a critical technical point. The macroeconomic backdrop for the dollar is becoming less bearish given China’s impending slowdown. President Biden’s trip to Europe and summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin will underscore a foreign policy of forming a democratic alliance to confront Russia and China, confirming the secular trend of rising geopolitical risk. Shift to a defensive tactical position. Feature Back in March 2017 we wrote a report, “Donald Trump Is Who We Thought He Was,” in which we reaffirmed our 2016 view that President Trump would succeed in steering the US in the direction of fiscal largesse and trade protectionism. Now it is time for us to do the same with President Biden. Our forecast for Biden rested on the same points: the US would pursue fiscal profligacy and mercantilist trade policy. The recognition of a consistent national policy despite extreme partisan divisions is a testament to the usefulness of macro analysis and the geopolitical method. Trump stole the Democrats’ thunder with his anti-austerity and anti-free trade message. Biden stole it back. It was the median voter in the Rust Belt who was calling the shots all along (after all, Biden would still have won the election without Arizona and Georgia). We did make some qualifications, of course. Biden would maintain a hawkish line on China and Russia but he would reject Trump’s aggressive foreign and trade policy when it came to US allies.1 Biden would restore President Obama’s policy on Iran and immigration but not Russia, where there would be no “diplomatic reset.” And Biden’s fiscal profligacy, unlike Trump’s, would come with tax hikes on corporations and the wealthy … even though they would fall far short of offsetting the new spending. This is what brings us to this week’s report: New developments are confirming this view of the Biden administration. Geopolitical Risk And Bull Markets Chart 1Global Geopolitical Risk And The Dollar In recent weeks Biden has adopted a hawkish policy on China, lowered tensions with Europe, and sought to restore President Obama’s policy of détente with Iran. The jury is still out on relations with Russia – Biden will meet with Putin on June 16 – but we do not expect a 2009-style “reset” that increases engagement. Still, it is too soon to declare a “Biden doctrine” of foreign policy because Biden has not yet faced a major foreign crisis. A major test is coming soon. Biden’s decision to double down on hawkish policy toward China will bring ramifications. His possible deal with Iran faces a range of enemies, including within Iran. His reduction in tensions with Russia is not settled yet. While the specific source and timing of his first major foreign policy crisis is impossible predict, structural tensions are rebuilding. An aggregate of our 13 market-based GeoRisk indicators suggests that global political risk is skyrocketing once again. A sharp spike in the indicator, which is happening now, usually correlates with a dollar rally (Chart 1). This indicator is mean-reverting since it measures the deviation of emerging market currencies, or developed market equity markets, from underlying macroeconomic fundamentals. The implication is positive for the dollar, although the correlation is not always positive. Looking at both the DXY’s level and its rate of change shows periods when the global risk indicator fell yet the dollar stayed strong – and vice versa. The big increase in the indicator over the past week stems mostly from Germany, South Korea, Brazil, and Australia, though all 13 of the indicators are now either elevated or rising, including the China/Taiwan indicators. Some of the increase is due to base effects. As global exports recover, currencies and equities that we monitor are staying weaker than one would expect. This causes the relevant BCA GeoRisk indicator to rise. Base effects from the weak economy in June 2020 will fall out in coming weeks. But the aggregate shows that all of the indicators are either high or rising and, on a country by country level, they are now in established uptrends even aside from base effects. Chart 2Global Policy Uncertainty Revives Meanwhile the global Economic Policy Uncertainty Index is recovering across the world after the drop in uncertainty following the COVID-19 crisis (Chart 2). Policy uncertainty is also linked to the dollar and this indicator shows that it is rising on a secular basis. The Geopolitical Risk Index, maintained by Matteo Iacoviello and a group of academics affiliated with the Policy Uncertainty Index, is also in a secular uptrend, although cyclically it has not recovered from the post-COVID drop-off. It is sensitive to traditional, war-linked geopolitical risk as reported in newspapers. By contrast our proprietary indicators are sensitive to market perceptions of any kind of risk, not just political, both domestic and international. A comparison of the Geopolitical Risk Index with the S&P 500 over the past century shows that a geopolitical crisis may occur at the beginning of a business cycle but it may not be linked with a recession or bear market. Risk can rise, even extravagantly, during economic expansions without causing major pullbacks. But a crisis event certainly can trigger a recession or bear market, particularly if it is tied to the global oil supply, as in the early 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s (Chart 3). Chart 3Secular Rise In Geopolitical Risk Soon To Reassert Itself While geopolitical risk is normally positive for the dollar, the macroeconomic backdrop is negative. The dollar’s attempt to recover earlier this year faltered. This underlying cyclical bearish dollar trend is due to global economic recovery – which will continue – and extravagant American monetary expansion and budget deficits. This is why we have preferred gold – it is a hedge against both geopolitical risk and inflation expectations. Tactically this year we have refrained from betting against the dollar except when building up some safe-haven positions like Japanese yen. Over the medium and long term we expect geopolitical risk to put a floor under the greenback. The bottom line is that the US dollar is at a critical technical crossroads where it could break out or break down. Macro factors suggest a breakdown but the recovery of global policy uncertainty and geopolitical risk suggests the opposite. We remain neutral. A final quantitative indicator of the recovery of geopolitical risk is the performance of global aerospace and defense stocks (Chart 4). Defense shares are rising in absolute and relative terms. Chart 4Another Sign Of Geopolitical Risk: Defense Stocks Outperform As Virus Ebbs And Military Spending Surges Can The WWII Peace Be Prolonged? Qualitative assessments of geopolitical risk are necessary to explain why risk is on a secular upswing – why drops in the quantitative indicators are temporary and the troughs keep getting higher. Great nations are returning to aggressive competition after a period of relative peace and prosperity. Over the past two decades Russia and China took advantage of America’s preoccupations with the Middle East, the financial crisis, and domestic partisanship in order to build up their global influence. The result is a world in which authority is contested. The current crisis is not merely about the end of the post-Cold War international order. It is much scarier than that. It is about the decay of the post-WWII international order and the return of the centuries-long struggle for global supremacy among Great Powers. The US and European political establishments fear the collapse of the WWII settlement in the face of eroding legitimacy at home and rising challenges from abroad. The 1945 peace settlement gave rise to both a Cold War and a diplomatic system, including the United Nations Security Council, for resolving differences among the great powers. It also gave rise to European integration and various institutions of American “liberal hegemony.” It is this system of managing great power struggle, and not the post-Cold War system of American domination, that lies in danger of unraveling. This is evident from the following points: American preeminence only lasted fifteen years, or at best until the 2008 Georgia war and global financial crisis. The US has been an incoherent wild card for at least 13 years now, almost as long as it was said to be the global empire. Russian antagonism with the West never really ended. In retrospect the 1990s were a hiatus rather than a conclusion of this conflict. China’s geopolitical rise has thawed the frozen conflicts in Asia from the 1940s-50s – i.e. the Chinese civil war, the Hong Kong and Taiwan Strait predicaments, the Korean conflict, Japanese pacifism, and regional battles for political influence and territory. Europe’s inward focus and difficulty projecting power have been a constant, as has its tendency to act as a constraint on America. Only now is Europe getting closer to full independence (which helped trigger Brexit). Geopolitical pressures will remain historically elevated for the foreseeable future because the underlying problem is whether great power struggle can be contained and major wars can be prevented. Specifically the question is whether the US can accommodate China’s rise – and whether China can continue to channel its domestic ambitions into productive uses (i.e. not attempts to create a Greater Chinese and then East Asian empire). The Great Recession killed off the “East Asia miracle” phase of China’s growth. Potential GDP is declining, which undermines social stability and threatens the Communist Party’s legitimacy. The renminbi is on a downtrend that began with the Xi Jinping era. The sharp rally during the COVID crisis is over, as both domestic and international pressures are rising again (Chart 5). Chart 5Biden Administration Review Of China Policy: More China Bashing While the data for China’s domestic labor protests is limited in extent, we can use it as a proxy for domestic instability in lieu of official statistics that were tellingly discontinued back in 2005. The slowdown in credit growth and the cyclical sectors of the economy suggest that domestic political risk is underrated in the lead up to the 2022 leadership rotation (Chart 6). Chart 6China's Domestic Political Risk Will Rise Chart 7Steer Clear Of Taiwan Strait The increasing focus on China’s access to key industrial and technological inputs, the tensions over the Taiwan Strait, and the formation of a Russo-Chinese bloc that is excluded from the West all suggest that the risk to global stability is grave and historic. It is reminiscent of the global power struggles of the seventeenth through early twentieth centuries. The outperformance of Taiwanese equities from 2019-20 reflects strong global demand for advanced semiconductors but the global response to this geopolitical bottleneck is to boost production at home and replace Taiwan. Therefore Taiwan’s comparative advantage will erode even as geopolitical risk rises (Chart 7). The drop in geopolitical tensions during COVID-19 is over, as highlighted above. With the US, EU, and other countries launching probes into whether the virus emerged from a laboratory leak in China – contrary to what their publics were told last year – it is likely that a period of national recriminations has begun. There is a substantial risk of nationalism, xenophobia, and jingoism emerging along with new sources of instability. An Alliance Of Democracies The Biden administration’s attempt to restore liberal hegemony across the world requires a period of alliance refurbishment with the Europeans. That is the purpose of his current trip to the UK, Belgium, and Switzerland. But diplomacy only goes so far. The structural factor that has changed is the willingness of the West to utilize government in the economic sphere, i.e. fiscal proactivity. Infrastructure spending and industrial policy, at the service of national security as well as demand-side stimulus, are the order of the day. This revolution in economic policy – a return to Big Government in the West – poses a threat to the authoritarian powers, which have benefited in recent decades by using central strategic planning to take advantage of the West’s democratic and laissez-faire governance. If the West restores a degree of central government – and central coordination via NATO and other institutions – then Beijing and Moscow will face greater pressure on their economies and fewer strategic options. About 16 American allies fall short of the 2% of GDP target for annual defense spending – ranging from Italy to Canada to Germany to Japan. However, recent trends show that defense spending did indeed increase during the Trump administration (Chart 8). Chart 8NATO Boosts Defense Spending The European Union as a whole has added $50 billion to the annual total over the past five years. A discernible rise in defense spending is taking place even in Germany (Chart 9). The same point could be made for Japan, which is significantly boosting defense spending (as a share of output) after decades of saying it would do so without following through. A major reason for the American political establishment’s rejection of President Trump was the risk he posed to the trans-Atlantic alliance. A decline in NATO and US-EU ties would dramatically undermine European security and ultimately American security. Hence Biden is adopting the Trump administration’s hawkish approach to trade with China but winding down the trade war with Europe (Chart 10). Chart 9Europe Spending More On Guns Chart 10US Ends Trade War With Europe? A multilateral deal aimed at setting a floor in global corporate taxes rates is intended to prevent the US and Europe from undercutting each other – and to ensure governments have sufficient funding to maintain social spending and reduce income inequality (Chart 11). Inequality is seen as having vitiated sociopolitical stability and trust in government in the democracies. Chart 11‘Global’ Corporate Tax Deal Shows Return Of Big Government, Attempt To Reduce Inequality In The West Risks To Biden’s Diplomacy It is possible that Biden’s attempt to restore US alliances will go nowhere over the course of his four-year term in office. The Europeans may well remain risk averse despite their initial signals of willingness to work with Biden to tackle China’s and Russia’s challenges to the western system. The Germans flatly rejected both Biden and Trump on the Nord Stream II natural gas pipeline linkage with Russia, which is virtually complete and which strengthens the foundation of Russo-German engagement (more on this below). The US’s lack of international reliability – given the potential of another partisan reversal in four years – makes it very hard for countries to make any sacrifices on behalf of US initiatives. The US’s profound domestic divisions have only slightly abated since the crises of 2020 and could easily flare up again. A major outbreak of domestic instability could distract Biden from the foreign policy game.2 However, American incapacity is a risk, not our base case, over the coming years. We expect the US economic stimulus to stabilize the country enough that the internal political crisis will be contained and the US will continue to play a global role. The “Civil War Lite” has mostly concluded, excepting one or two aftershocks, and the US is entering into a “Reconstruction Lite” era. The implication is negative for China and Russia, as they will now have to confront an America that, if not wholly unified, is at least recovering. Congress’s impending passage of the Innovation and Competition Act – notably through regular legislative order and bipartisan compromise – is case in point. The Senate has already passed this approximately $250 billion smorgasbord of industrial policy, supply chain resilience, and alliance refurbishment. It will allot around $50 billion to the domestic semiconductor industry almost immediately as well as $17 billion to DARPA, $81 billion for federal research and development through the National Science Foundation, which includes $29 billion for education in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, and other initiatives (Table 1). Table 1Peak Polarization: US Congress Passes Bipartisan ‘Innovation And Competition Act’ To Counter China With the combination of foreign competition, the political establishment’s need to distract from domestic divisions, and the benefit of debt monetization courtesy of the Federal Reserve, the US is likely to achieve some notable successes in pushing back against China and Russia. On the diplomatic front, the US will meet with some success because the European and Asian allies do not wish to see the US embrace nationalism and isolationism. They have their own interests in deterring Russia and China. Lack Of Engagement With Russia Russian leadership has dealt with the country’s structural weaknesses by adopting aggressive foreign policy. At some point either the weaknesses or the foreign policy will create a crisis that will undermine the current regime – after all, Russia has greatly lagged the West in economic development and quality of life (Chart 12). But President Putin has been successful at improving the country’s wealth and status from its miserably low base in the 1990s and this has preserved sociopolitical stability so far. Chart 12Russia's Domestic Political Risk It is debatable whether US policy toward Russia ever really changed under President Trump, but there has certainly not been a change in strategy from Russia. Thus investors should expect US-Russia antagonism to continue after Biden’s summit with Putin even if there is an ostensible improvement. The fundamental purpose of Putin’s strategy has been to salvage the Russian empire after the Soviet collapse, ensure that all world powers recognize Russia’s veto power over major global policies and initiatives, and establish a strong strategic position for the coming decades as Russia’s demographic decline takes its toll. A key component of the strategy has been to increase economic self-sufficiency and reduce exposure to US sanctions. Since the invasion of Ukraine in 2014, Putin has rapidly increased Russia’s foreign exchange reserves so as to buffer against shocks (Chart 13). Chart 13Russia Fortified Against US Sanctions Putin has also reduced Russia’s reliance on the US dollar to about 22% (Chart 14), primarily by substituting the euro and gold. Russia will not be willing or able to purge US dollars from its system entirely but it has been able to limit America’s ability to hurt Russia by constricting access to dollars and the dollar-based global financial architecture. Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov highlighted this process ahead of the Biden-Putin summit by declaring that the National Wealth Fund will divest of its remaining $40 billion of its US dollar holdings. Chart 14Russia Diversifies From USD In general this year, Russia is highlighting its various advantages: its resilience against US sanctions, its ability to re-invade Ukraine, its ability to escalate its military presence in Belarus and the Black Sea, and its ability to conduct or condone cyberattacks on vital American food and fuel supplies (Chart 15). Meanwhile the US is suffering from deep political divisions at home and strategic incoherence abroad and these are only starting to be mended by domestic economic stimulus and alliance refurbishment. Chart 15Cyber Security Stocks Recover Europe’s risk-aversion when it comes to strategic confrontation with Russia, and the lack of stability in US-Russia relations, means that investors should not chase Russian currency or financial assets amid the cyclical commodity rally. Investors should also expect risk premiums to remain high in developing European economies relative to their developed counterparts. This is true despite the fact that developed market Europe’s outperformance relative to emerging Europe recently peaked and rolled over. From a technical perspective this outperformance looks to subside but geopolitical tensions can easily escalate in the near term, particularly in advance of the Russian and German elections in September (Chart 16). Chart 16Developed Markets In Europe Will Outperform Emerging Europe Unless Russian Geopolitical Risk Abates Developed Europe trades in line with EUR-RUB and these pair trades all correspond closely to geopolitical tensions with Russia (Chart 17). A notable exception is the UK, whose stock market looks attractive relative to eastern Europe and is much more secure from any geopolitical crisis in this region (Chart 17, bottom panel). The pound is particularly attractive against the Czech koruna, as Russo-Czech tensions have heated up in advance of October’s legislative election there (Chart 18). Chart 17Long UK Versus Eastern Europe Chart 18Long GBP Versus CZK Meanwhile Russia and China have grown closer together out of strategic necessity. Germany’s Election And Stance Toward Russia Germany’s position on Russia is now critical. The decision to complete the Nord Stream II pipeline against American wishes either means that the Biden administration can be safely ignored – since it prizes multilateralism and alliances above all things and is therefore toothless when opposed – or it means that German will aim to compensate the Americans in some other area of strategic concern. Washington is clearly attempting to rally the Germans to its side with regard to putting pressure on China over its trade practices and human rights. This could be the avenue for the US and Germany to tighten their bond despite the new milestone in German-Russia relations. The US may call on Germany to stand up for eastern Europe against Russian aggression but on that front Berlin will continue to disappoint. It has no desire to be drawn into a new Cold War given that the last one resulted in the partition of Germany. The implication is negative for China on one hand and eastern Europe on the other. Germany’s federal election on September 26 will be important because it will determine who will succeed Chancellor Angela Merkel, both in Germany and on the European and global stage. The ruling Christian Democratic Union (CDU) is hoping to ride Merkel’s coattails to another term in charge of the government. But they are likely to rule alongside the Greens, who have surged in opinion polls in recent years. The state election in Saxony-Anhalt over the weekend saw the CDU win 37% of the popular vote, better than any recent result, while Germany’s second major party, the Social Democrats, continued their decline (Table 2). The far-right Alternative for Germany won 21% of the vote, a downshift from 2016, while the Greens won 6% of the vote, a slight improvement from 2016. All parties underperformed opinion polling except the CDU (Chart 19). Table 2Saxony-Anhalt Election Results Chart 19Germany: Conservatives Outperform In Final State Election Before Federal Vote, But Face Challenges Chart 20Germany: Greens Will Outperform in 2021 Vote The implication is still not excellent for the CDU. Saxony-Anhalt is a middling German state, a CDU stronghold, and a state with a popular CDU leader. So it is not representative of the national campaign ahead of September. The latest nationwide opinion polling puts the CDU at around 25% support. They are neck-and-neck with the Greens. The country’s left- and right-leaning ideological blocs are also evenly balanced in opinion polls (Chart 20). A potential concern for the CDU is that the Free Democratic Party is ticking up in national polls, which gives them the potential to steal conservative votes. Betting markets are manifestly underrating the chance that Annalena Baerbock and the Greens take over the chancellorship (Charts 21A and 21B). We still give a subjective 35% chance that the Greens will lead the next German government without the CDU, a 30% that the Greens will lead with the CDU, and a 25% chance that the CDU retains power but forms a coalition with the Greens. A coalition government would moderate the Greens’ ambitious agenda of raising taxes on carbon emissions, wealth, the financial sector, and Big Tech. The CDU has already shifted in a pro-environmental, fiscally proactive direction. Chart 21AGerman Greens Will Recover Chart 21BGerman Greens Still Underrated No matter what the German election will support fiscal spending and European solidarity, which is positive for the euro and regional equities over the next 12 to 24 months. However, the Greens would pursue a more confrontational stance toward Russia, a petro-state whose special relations with the German establishment have impeded the transition to carbon neutrality. Latin America’s Troubles A final aspect of Biden’s agenda deserves some attention: immigration and the Mexican border. Obviously this one of the areas where Biden starkly differs from Trump, unlike on Europe and China, as mentioned above. Vice President Kamala Harris recently came back from a trip to Guatemala and Mexico that received negative media attention. Harris has been put in charge of managing the border crisis, the surge in immigrant arrivals over 2020-21, both to give her some foreign policy experience and to manage the public outcry. Despite telling immigrants explicitly “Do not come,” Harris has no power to deter the influx at a time when the US economy is fired up on historic economic stimulus and the Democratic Party has cut back on all manner of border and immigration enforcement. From a macro perspective the real story is the collapse of political and geopolitical risk in Mexico. From 2016-20 Mexico faced a protectionist onslaught from the Trump administration and then a left-wing supermajority in Congress. But these structural risks have dissipated with the USMCA trade deal and the inability of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador to follow through with anti-market reforms, as we highlighted in reports in October and April. The midterm election deprived the ruling MORENA party of its single-party majority in the Chamber of Deputies, the lower house of the legislature (Chart 22). AMLO is now politically constrained – he will not be able to revive state control over the energy and power sectors. Chart 22Mexican Midterm Election Constrained Left-Wing Populism, Political Risk Chart 23Buy Mexico (And Canada) On US Stimulus American monetary and fiscal stimulus, and the supply-chain shift away from China, also provide tailwinds for Mexico. In short, the Mexican election adds the final piece to one of our key themes stemming from the Biden administration, US populism, and US-China tensions: favor Mexico and Canada (Chart 23). A further implication is that Mexico should outperform Brazil in the equity space. Brazil is closely linked to China’s credit cycle and metals prices, which are slated to turn down as a result of Chinese policy tightening. Mexico is linked to the US economy and oil prices (Chart 24). While our trade stopped out at -5% last week we still favor the underlying view. Brazilian political risk and unsustainable debt dynamics will continue to weigh on the currency and equities until political change is cemented in the 2022 election and the new government is then forced by financial market riots into undertaking structural reforms. Chart 24Brazil's Troubles Not Truly Over - Mexico Will Outperform Elsewhere in Latin America, the rise of a militant left-wing populist to the presidency in a contested election in Peru, and the ongoing social unrest in Colombia and Chile, are less significant than the abrupt slowdown in China’s credit growth (Charts 25A and 25B). According to our COVID-19 Social Stability Index, investors should favor Mexico. Turkey, the Philippines, South Africa, Colombia, and Brazil are the most likely to see substantial social instability according to this ranking system (Table 3). Chart 25AMexico To Outperform Latin America Chart 25BChina’s Slowdown Will Hit South America Table 3Post-COVID Emerging Market Social Unrest Only Just Beginning Investment Takeaways Close long emerging markets relative to developed markets for a loss of 6.8% – this is a strategic trade that we will revisit but it faces challenges in the near term due to China’s slowdown (Chart 26). Go long Mexican equities relative to emerging markets on a strategic time frame. Our long Mexico / short Brazil trade hit the stop loss at 5% but the technical profile and investment thesis are still sound over the short and medium term. Chart 26China Slowdown, Geopolitical Risk Will Weigh On Emerging Markets Chart 27Relative Uncertainty And Safe Havens China’s sharp fiscal-and-credit slowdown suggests that investors should reduce risk exposure, take a defensive tactical positioning, and wait for China’s policy tightening to be priced before buying risky assets. Our geopolitical method suggests the dollar will rise, while macro fundamentals are becoming less dollar-bearish due to China. We are neutral for now and will reassess for our third quarter forecast later this month. If US policy uncertainty falls relative to global uncertainty then the EUR-USD will also fall and safe-haven assets like Swiss bonds will gain a bid (Chart 27). Gold is an excellent haven amid medium-term geopolitical and inflation risks but we recommend closing our long silver trade for a gain of 4.5%. Disfavor emerging Europe relative to developed Europe, where heavy discounts can persist due to geopolitical risk premiums. We will reassess after the Russian Duma election in September. Go long GBP-CZK. Close the Euro “laggards” trade. Go long an equal-weighted basket of euros and US dollars relative to the Chinese renminbi. Short the TWD-USD on a strategic basis. Prefer South Korea to Taiwan – while the semiconductor splurge favors Taiwan, investors should diversify away from the island that lies at the epicenter of global geopolitical risk. Close long defense relative to cyber stocks for a gain of 9.8%. This was a geopolitical “back to work” trade but the cyber rebound is now significant enough to warrant closing this trade. Matt Gertken Vice President Geopolitical Strategy mattg@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Trump’s policy toward Russia is an excellent example of geopolitical constraints. Despite any personal preferences in favor of closer ties with Russia, Trump and his administration ultimately reaffirmed Article 5 of NATO, authorized the sale of lethal weapons to Ukraine, and deployed US troops to Poland and the Czech Republic. 2 As just one example, given the controversial and contested US election of 2020, it is possible that a major terrorist attack could occur. Neither wing of America’s ideological fringes has a monopoly on fanaticism and violence. Meanwhile foreign powers stand to benefit from US civil strife. A truly disruptive sequence of events in the US in the coming years could lead to greater political instability in the US and a period in which global powers would be able to do what they want without having to deal with Biden’s attempt to regroup with Europe and restore some semblance of a global police force. The US would fall behind in foreign affairs, leaving power vacuums in various regions that would see new sources of political and geopolitical risk crop up. Then the US would struggle to catch up, with another set of destabilizing consequences.
Highlights President Biden has called for the US intelligence community to investigate the origins of COVID-19 and one of Biden’s top diplomats has stated the obvious: the era of “engagement” with China is over. This clinches our long-held view that any Democratic president would be a hawk like President Trump. The US-China conflict – and global geopolitical risk – will revive and undermine global risk appetite. China faces a confluence of geopolitical and macroeconomic challenges, suggesting that its equity underperformance will continue. Domestic Chinese investors should stay long government bonds. Foreign investors should sell into the bond rally to reduce exposure to any future sanctions. The impending agreement of a global minimum corporate tax rate has limited concrete implications that are not already known but it symbolizes the return of Big Government in the western world. Our updated GeoRisk Indicators are available in the Appendix, as well as our monthly geopolitical calendar. Feature In our quarterly webcast, “Geopolitics And Bull Markets,” we argued that geopolitical themes matter to investors when they have a demonstrable relationship with the macroeconomic backdrop. When geopolitics and macro are synchronized, a simple yet powerful investment thesis can be discerned. The US war on terror, Russia’s resurgence, the EU debt crisis, and Brexit each provided cases in which a geopolitically informed macro view was both accessible and actionable at an early stage. Investors generally did well if they sold the relevant country’s currency and disfavored its equities on a relative basis. Chart 1China's Decade Of Troubles Of course, the market takeaway is not always so clear. When geopolitics and macroeconomics are desynchronized, the trick is to determine which framework will prevail over the financial markets and for how long. Sometimes the market moves to its own rhythm. The goal is not to trade on geopolitics but rather to invest with geopolitics. One of our key views for this year – headwinds for China – is an example of synchronization. Two weeks ago we discussed China’s macroeconomic challenge. In this report we discuss China’s foreign policy challenge: geopolitical pressure from the US and its allies. In particular we address President Biden’s call for a deeper intelligence dive into the origins of COVID-19. The takeaway is negative for China’s currency and risk assets. The Great Recession dealt a painful blow to the Chinese version of the East Asian economic miracle. By 2015, China’s financial turmoil and currency devaluation should have convinced even bullish investors to keep their distance from Chinese stocks and the renminbi. If investors stuck with this bearish view despite the post-2016 rally, on fear of trade war, they were rewarded in 2018-19. Only with China’s containment of COVID-19 and large economic stimulus in 2020 has CNY-USD threatened to break out (Chart 1). We expect the renminbi to weaken anew, especially once the Fed begins to taper asset purchases. Our cyclical view is still bullish but US-China relations are unstable so we remain tactically defensive. Forget Biden’s China Review, He’s A Hawk Chinese financial markets face a host of challenges this year, despite the positive factors for China’s manufacturing sector amid the global recovery. At home these challenges consist of a structural economic slowdown, a withdrawal of policy stimulus, bearish sentiment among households, and an ongoing government crackdown on systemic risk. Abroad the Democratic Party’s return to power in Washington means that the US will bring more allies to bear in its attempt to curb China’s rise. This combination of factors presents a headwind for Chinese equities and a tailwind for government bonds (Chart 2). This is true at least until the government should hit its pain threshold and re-stimulate. Chart 2Global Investors Still Wary New stimulus may not occur in 2022. The Communist Party’s leadership rotation merely requires economic stability, not rapid growth. While the central government has a record of stimulating when its pain threshold is hit, even under the economically hawkish President Xi Jinping, a financial market riot is usually part of this threshold. This implies near-term downside, particularly for global commodities and metals, which are also facing a Chinese regulatory backlash to deter speculation. In this context, President Biden’s call for a deeper US intelligence investigation into the origin of COVID-19 is an important confirming signal of the US’s hawkish turn toward China. Biden gave 90 days for the intelligence community to report back to him. We will not enter into the debate about COVID-19’s origins. From a geopolitical point of view it is a moot point. The facts of the virus origin may never be established. According to Biden’s statement, at least one US intelligence agency believes the “lab leak theory” is the most likely source of the virus (while two other agencies decided in favor of animal-to-human transmission). Meanwhile Chinese government spokespeople continue to push the theory that the virus originated at the US’s Fort Detrick in Maryland or at a US-affiliated global research center. What is certain is that the first major outbreak of a highly contagious disease occurred in Wuhan. Both sides are demanding greater transparency and will reject each other’s claims based on a lack of transparency. If the US intelligence report concludes that COVID originated from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the Chinese government and media will reject the report. If the report exonerates the Wuhan laboratory, at least half of the US public will disbelieve it and it will not deter Biden from drawing a hard line on more macro-relevant policy disputes with China. The US’s hawkish bipartisan consensus on China took shape before COVID. Biden’s decision to order the fresh report introduces skepticism regarding the World Health Organization’s narrative, which was until now the mainstream media’s narrative. Previously this skepticism was ghettoized in US public discourse: indeed, until Biden’s announcement on May 26, the social media company Facebook suppressed claims that the virus came from a lab accident or human failure. Thus Biden’s action will ensure that a large swathe of the American public will always tend to support this theory regardless of the next report’s findings. At the same time Biden discontinued a State Department effort to prove the lab leak theory, which shows that it is not a foregone conclusion what his administration will decide. The good news is that even if the report concluded in favor of the lab leak, the Biden administration would remain highly unlikely to demand that China pay “reparations,” like the Trump administration demanded in 2020. This demand, if actualized, would be explosive. The bad news is that a future nationalist administration could conceivably use the investigation as a basis to demand reparations. Nationalism is a force to be reckoned with in both countries and the dispute over COVID’s origin will exacerbate it. Traditionally the presidents of both countries would tamp down nationalism or attempt to keep it harnessed. But in the post-Xi, post-Trump era it is harder to control. The death toll of COVID-19 will be a permanent source of popular grievance around the world and a wedge between the US and China (Chart 3). China’s international image suffered dramatically in 2020. So far in 2021 China has not regained any diplomatic ground. Chart 3Death Toll Of COVID-19 The US is repairing its image via a return to multilateralism while the Europeans have put their Comprehensive Agreement on Investment with China on hold due to a spat over sanctions arising from western accusations of genocide (a subject on which China pointedly answered that it did not need to be lectured by Europeans). Notably Biden’s Department of State also endorsed its predecessor’s accusation of genocide in Xinjiang. Any authoritative US intelligence review that solidifies doubts about the WHO’s initial investigation – even if it should not affirm the lab leak theory – would give Biden more ammunition in global opinion to form a democratic alliance to pressure China (for example, in Europe). An important factor that enables the US to remain hawkish on China is fiscal stimulus. While stimulus helps bring about economic recovery, it also lowers the bar to political confrontation (Chart 4). Countries with supercharged domestic demand do not have as much to fear from punitive trade measures. The Biden administration has not taken new punitive measures against China but it is clearly not worried about Chinese retaliation. Chart 4Large Fiscal Stimulus Lowers The Bar To Geopolitical Conflict China’s stimulus is underrated in this chart (which excludes non-fiscal measures) but it is still true that China’s policy has been somewhat restrained and it will need to stimulate its economy again in response to any new punitive measures or any global loss of confidence. At least China is limited in its ability to tighten policy due to the threat of US pressure and western trade protectionism. Simultaneous with Biden’s announcement on COVID-19, his administration’s coordinator for Indo-Pacific affairs, Kurt Campbell, proclaimed in a speech that the era of “engagement” with China is officially over and the new paradigm is one of “competition.” By now Campbell is stating the obvious. But this tone is a change both from his tone while serving in President Obama’s Department of State and from his article in Foreign Affairs last year (when he was basically auditioning for his current role in the Biden administration).1 Campbell even said in his latest remarks that the Trump administration was right about the “direction” of China policy (though not the “execution”), which is candid. Campbell was speaking at Stanford University but his comments were obviously aimed for broader consumption. Investors no longer need to wait for the outcome of the Biden administration’s comprehensive review of policy toward China. The answer is known: the Biden administration’s hawkishness is confirmed. The Department of Defense report on China policy, due in June, is very unlikely to strike a more dovish posture than the president’s health policy. Now investors must worry about how rapidly tensions will escalate and put a drag on global sentiment. Bottom Line: US-China relations are unstable and pose an immediate threat to global risk appetite. The fundamental geopolitical assessment of US-China relations has been confirmed yet again. The US is seeking to constrain China’s rise because China is the only country capable of rivaling the US for supremacy in Asia and the world. Meanwhile China is rejecting liberalization in favor of economic self-sufficiency and maintaining an offensive foreign policy as it is wary of US containment and interference. Presidents Biden and Xi Jinping are still capable of stabilizing relations in the medium term but they are unlikely to substantially de-escalate tensions. And at the moment tensions are escalating. China’s Reaction: The Example Of Australia How will China respond to Biden’s new inquiry into COVID’s origins? Obviously Beijing will react negatively but we would not expect anything concrete to occur until the result of the inquiry is released in 90 days. China will be more constrained in its response to the US than it has been with Australia, which called for an international inquiry early last year, as the US is a superior power. Australia was the first to ban Chinese telecom company Huawei from its 5G network (back in 2018) and it was the first to call for a COVID probe. Relations between China and Australia have deteriorated steadily since then, but macro trends have clearly driven the Aussie dollar. The AUD-JPY exchange rate is a good measure for global risk appetite and it is wavering in recent weeks (Chart 5). Chart 5Australian Dollar Follows Macro Trends, Rallies Amid China Trade Spat Tensions have also escalated due to China’s dependency on Australian commodity exports at a time of spiking commodity prices. This is a recurring theme going back to the Stern Hu affair. The COVID spat led China to impose a series of sanctions against Australian beef, barley, wine, and coal. But because China cannot replace Australian resources (at least, not in the short term), its punitive measures are limited. It faces rising producer prices as a result of its trade restrictions (Chart 6). This dependency is a bigger problem for China today than it was in previous cycles so China will try to diversify. Chart 6Constraints On China's Tarrifs On Australia By contrast, China is not likely to impose sanctions on the US in response to Biden’s investigation, unless Biden attacks first. China’s imports from the US are booming and its currency is appreciating sharply. Despite Beijing’s efforts to keep the Phase One trade deal from collapsing, Biden is maintaining Trump’s tariffs and the US-China trade divorce is proceeding (Chart 7). Bilateral tariff rates are still 16-17 percentage points higher than they were in 2018, with US tariffs on China at 19% (versus 3% on the rest of the world) while Chinese tariffs on the US stand at 21% (versus 6% on the rest of the world). The Biden administration timed this week’s hawkish statements to coincide with the first meeting of US trade negotiators with China, which was a more civil affair. Both countries acknowledged that the relationship is important and trade needs to be continued. However, US Trade Representative Katherine Tai’s comments were not overly optimistic (she told Reuters that the relationship is “very, very challenging”). She has also been explicit about maintaining policy continuity with the Trump administration. We highly doubt that China’s share of US imports will ever surpass its pre-Trump peaks. The Biden administration has also refrained so far from loosening export controls on high-tech trade with China. This has caused a bull market in Taiwan while causing problems for Chinese semiconductor stocks’ relative performance (Chart 8). If Biden’s policy review does not lead to any relaxation of export controls on commercial items then it will mark a further escalation in tensions. Chart 7US Tarrifs Reduce China In Trade Deficit Bottom Line: Until Presidents Biden and Xi stabilize relations at the top, the trade negotiations over implementing the Phase One trade deal – and any new Phase Two talks – cannot bring major positive surprises for financial markets. Chart 8US Export Controls Amid Chip Shortage Congress Is More Hawkish Than Biden Biden’s ability to reduce frictions with China, should he seek to, will also be limited by Congress and public opinion. With the US deeply politically divided, and polarization at historically high levels, China has emerged as one of the few areas of agreement. The hawkish consensus is symbolized by new legislation such as the Strategic Competition Act, which is making its way through the Senate rapidly. Congress is also trying to boost US competitiveness through bills such as the Endless Frontier Act. These bills would subject China to scrutiny and potential punitive measures over a broad range of issues but most of all they would ignite US industrial policy , STEM education, and R&D, and diversify the US’s supply chains. We would highlight three key points with regard to the global impact of this legislation: Global supply chains are shifting regardless: This trend is fairly well established in tech, defense, and pharmaceuticals. It will continue unless we see a major policy reversal from China to try to court western powers and reduce frictions. The EU and India are less enthusiastic than the US and Australia about removing China from supply chains but they are not opposed. The EU Commission has recommended new defensive economic measures that cover supply chains in batteries, cloud services, hydrogen energy, pharmaceuticals, materials, and semiconductors. As mentioned, the EU is also hesitating to ratify the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment with China. Hence the EU is moving in the US’s direction independently of proposed US laws. After all, China’s rise up the tech value chain (and its decision to stop cutting back the size of its manufacturing sector) ultimately threatens the EU’s comparative advantage. The EU is also aligned with the US on democratic values and network security. India has taken a harder stance on China than usual, which marks an important break with the past. India’s decision to exclude Huawei from its 5G network is not final but it is likely to be at least partially implemented. A working group of democracies is forming regardless. The Strategic Competition Act calls for the creation of a working group of democracies but the truth is that this is already happening through more effective forums like the G7 and bilateral summits. Just as the implementation of the act would will ultimately depend on President Biden, so the willingness of other countries to adopt the recommendations of the working group would depend on their own executives. Allies have leeway as Biden will not use punitive measures against them: Any policy change from the EU, UK, India, and Australia will be independent of the US Congress passing the Strategic Competition Act. These countries will be self-directed. The US would have to devote diplomatic energy to maintaining a sustained effort by these states to counter China in the face of economic costs. This will be limited by the fact that the Biden administration will be very reluctant to impose punitive measures on allies to insist on their cooperation. The allies will set the pace of pressure on China rather than the United States. This gives the EU an important position, particularly Germany. And yet the trends in Germany suggest that the government will be more hawkish on China after the federal elections in September. Bottom Line: The Biden administration is unlikely to use punitive measures against allies so new US laws are less important than overall US diplomacy with each of the allies. Some allies will be less compliant with US policies given their need for trade with China. But so far there appears to be a common position taking shape even with the EU that is prejudicial to China’s involvement in key sectors of emerging technologies. If China does not respond by reducing its foreign policy assertiveness, then China’s economic growth will suffer. That drag would have to be offset by new supply chain construction in Southeast Asia and other countries. Investment Takeaways The foregoing highlights the international risks facing China even at a time when its trend growth is slowing (Chart 9) and its ongoing struggle with domestic financial imbalances is intensifying. China’s debt-service costs have risen sharply and Beijing is putting pressure on corporations and local governments to straighten out their finances (Chart 10), resulting in a wave of defaults. This backdrop is worrisome for investors until policymakers reassure them that government support will continue. Chart 9China's Growth Potential Slowing Chart 10China's Leaders Struggle With Debt China’s domestic stability is a key indicator of whether geopolitical risks could spiral out of control. In particular we think aggressive action in the Taiwan Strait is likely to be delayed as long as the Chinese economy and regime are stable. China has rattled sabers over the strait this year in a warning to the United States not to cross its red line (Chart 11). It is not yet clear how Biden’s policy continuity with the Trump administration will affect cross-strait stability. We see no basis yet for changing our view that there is a 60% chance of a market-negative geopolitical incident in 2021-22 and a 5% chance of full-scale war in the short run. Chart 11China PLA Flights Over Taiwan Strait Putting all of the above together, we see substantial support for two key market-relevant geopolitical risks: Chinese domestic politics (including policy tightening) and persistent US-China tensions (including but not limited to the Taiwan Strait). We remain tactically defensive, a stance supported by several recent turns in global markets: The global stock-to-bond ratio has rolled over. China is a negative factor for global risk appetite (Chart 12). Global cyclical equities are no longer outperforming defensives. There is a stark divergence between Chinese cyclicals and global cyclicals stemming from the painful transition in China’s bloated industrial economy (Chart 13). Global large caps are catching a bid relative to small caps (Chart 14). Chart 12Global Stock-To-Bond Ratio Rolled Over Chart 13Global Cyclicals-To-Defensives Pause Chart 14Global Large Caps Catch A Bid Versus Small Caps Cyclically the global economic recovery should continue as the pandemic wanes. China will eventually relax policy to prevent too abrupt of a slowdown. Therefore our strategic portfolio reflects our high-conviction view that the current global economic expansion will continue even as it faces hurdles from the secular rise in geopolitical risk, especially US-China cold war. Measurable geopolitical risk and policy uncertainty are likely to rebound sooner rather than later, with a negative impact on high-beta risk assets. Matt Gertken Vice President Geopolitical Strategy mattg@bcaresearch.com Coda: Global Minimum Tax Symbolizes Return Of Big Government On Thursday, the US Treasury Department released a proposal to set the global minimum corporate tax rate at 15%. The plan is to stop what Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has referred to as a global “race to the bottom” and create the basis for a rehabilitation of government budgets damaged by pandemic-era stimulus. Although the newly proposed 15% rate is significantly below President Biden’s bid to raise the US Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income (GILTI) rate to 21% from 10.5%, it is the same rate as his proposed minimum tax on corporate book income. Biden is also raising the headline corporate tax rate from 21% to around 25% (or at highest 28%). Negotiators at the OECD were initially discussing a 12.5% global minimum rate. The finance ministers of both France and Germany – where the corporate income tax rates are 32.0% and 29.9%, respectively – both responded positively to the announcement. However, Ireland, which uses low corporate taxes as an economic development strategy, is obviously more comfortable with a minimum closer to its own 12.5% rate. Discussions are likely to occur when G7 finance ministers meet on June 4-5. Countries are hoping to establish a broad outline for the proposal by the G20 meeting in early July. It is highly likely that the OECD will come to an agreement. However, it is not a truly “global” minimum as there will still be tax havens. Compliance and enforcement will vary across countries. A close look at the domestic political capital of the relevant countries shows that while many countries have the raw parliamentary majorities necessary to raise taxes, most countries have substantial conservative contingents capable of preventing stiff corporate tax hikes (Table 1, in the Appendix). Our Geopolitical strategists highlight that the Biden administration’s compromise on the minimum rate reflects its pragmatism as well as emphasis on multilateralism. Any global deal will be non-binding but the two most important low-tax players are already committed to raising corporate rates well above this level: Biden’s plan is noted above, while the UK’s budget for March includes a jump in the business rate to 25% in April 2023 from the current 19%. Ireland and Hungary are the only outliers but they may eventually be forced to yield to such a large coalition of bigger economies (Chart 15). Chart 15Global Minimum Corporate Tax Impact Is Symbolic Rather Than Concrete Thus a nominal minimum corporate tax rate is likely to be forged but it will not be truly global and it will not change the corporate rate for most countries. The reality of what companies pay will also depend on loopholes, tax havens, and the effective tax rate. Bottom Line: On a structural horizon, the global minimum corporate tax is significant for showing a paradigm shift in global macro policy: western governments are starting to raise taxes and revenue after decades of cutting taxes. The experiment with limited government has ended and Big Government is making a comeback. On a cyclical horizon, the US concession on global minimum tax is that the Biden administration aims to be pragmatic and “get things done.” Biden is also working with Republicans to pass bills covering some bipartisan aspects of his domestic agenda, such as trade, manufacturing, and China. The takeaway from a global point of view is that Biden may prove to be a compromiser rather than an ideologue, unlike his predecessors. Matt Gertken Vice President Geopolitical Strategy mattg@bcaresearch.com Roukaya Ibrahim Vice President Daily Insights RoukayaI@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Kurt M. Campbell and Jake Sullivan, "Competition Without Catastrophe," Foreign Affairs, September/October 2019, foreignaffairs.com. Section II: Appendix Table 1OECD: Which Countries Are Willing And Able To Raise Corporate Tax Rates? GeoRisk Indicator China Russia UK Germany France Italy Canada Spain Taiwan – Province Of China Korea Turkey Brazil Australia Section III: Geopolitical Calendar
ハイライト
グローバル通貨は米ドルに対して重要な水準にある。
ポジショニングの観点からは、DXY指数が89〜90を下回ると非常に弱気と判断される一方で、現在水準からの反発は3〜4％程度で抑えられるはずである。
米ドルを押し下げた主な要因は二つある：米国の実質金利の低下と、米国外で回復する経済モメンタムである。
株式市場が5月に乱高下する中で、米ドルに季節的な強さが見られる可能性がある。しかし、これは新たなドル売りポジションの機会を提供するだろう。
連邦準備制度理事会（FRB）は、現時点のインフレの上振れを一時的と見る姿勢を維持しつつ、労働市場に注目し続けるだろう。これにより、米国の実質金利は他国に比べて抑制され続ける。
新規トレード案：通貨ボラティリティ上昇を見越してCHF/NZDのロング。さらにUSD/JPYが110に触れれば売り。
特集
チャート I-1
米ドルは重要な岐路にある
ドルは重要な岐路に立っている
ドルは重要な岐路に立っている
1月から3月にかけての短期的な上昇の後、米ドルは再びテクニカルな崩壊寸前にある。DXY指数、FRBの実効実勢ドル、そして新興国通貨ベンチマークはいずれも重要な水準に位置している（チャート I-1）。崩壊が確認されれば、2020年3月に始まったドルのベア相場が継続していることになり、ドルからの投機的な資金流出を引き起こすだろう。
我々の12月の為替見通しでは、1循環的な観点（12〜18か月の時間軸）でDXYは80に向かうとの見方だった。しかし同時に、DXY指数が第1四半期に94〜95に達すると予想しており、以降も複数回にわたりその見方を補強してきた。DXY指数は93.5でピークアウトしたため、次の最もありそうな動きを検討することが有益である。これを行うために、12月の記事以降に何が変わったか、何が変わっていないかを再検討する。
投資家ポジショニングの見極め
チャート I-2
ドル・ブルは降伏している
ドル買いの強気筋が降参している
ドル買いの強気筋が降参している
2021年に入るとドル売りはコンセンサスのトレードであり、通貨は大幅に売られ過ぎていた。逆張り派にとっては強気に振る舞うことが功を奏した（チャート I-2）。その後、投資家は米ドルのショートポジションを解消し、JPYやCHFをファンディング通貨とするキャリートレードに注力している。投機筋はユーロのロングを維持しているが、その賭けの規模は未決済建玉のネット30％から現在は約10％に縮小している。GBPやCADのポジショニングは依然として高水準にあり、これら通貨はテクニカルな押し戻しに脆弱であることを示唆している。
興味深いことに、シティグループの米ドルに対するセンチメント指標は1月の底に近い。ここから見ると、直近数週間でドルショートの蓄積があったことが分かる。これが最近のドルの弱さを説明する一助となっている。
今後、ポジショニングはドルの次の動きを指し示すうえであまり有用ではないだろう。なぜならポジショニングは極端な局面でしか有効に機能しないからだ。さらに言えば、それはカウンタートレンドの動きを測るうえでのみ有用である。2000年代初頭の多くの期間、ドルのセンチメントは弱気であったが、反発は4〜6％で抑えられていた。先の十年のドル・ブル相場では、センチメントは概ね強気圏にとどまったが、ドルは脱出速度を達成した（チャート I-3）。
チャート I-3
ドルとレジームシフト
ドルとレジーム・シフト
ドルとレジーム・シフト
現時点のポジショニングから見ると、DXY指数が89〜90を下回ることは極めて弱気のサインとなる一方、現在水準からの反発は3〜4％程度で抑えられるはずだ。テクニカルな観点からドルは重要な分岐点にいる。
連邦準備制度理事会、インフレ、金利
2021年初め、金利はドルに有利な動きを続けており、これは昨年中盤から続くトレンドだった。米独10年金利差は昨年の約100ベーシスポイントの低水準から3月には200ベーシスポイント超の高水準まで拡大した。最近では金利差はドルに不利に動き始めており、これが3月以降のドル指数全般の反転を説明している。現在の米独10年スプレッドは180ベーシスポイントにある。
為替レートはインフレが通貨の購買力を侵食するため、実質金利差を反映する傾向がある。したがって名目金利に何が起きているかだけでなく、基調としてのインフレ動向を見極めることが重要である。これはインフレがしばしば遅行変数であるため複雑さを増すが、インフレの行方を把握することは通貨ストラテジーにとって非常に有用だ。
出発点として、米国は実質金利の観点で芳しくない。チャート I-4は実質金利とドルの広い相関を示している。スイス、スウェーデン、ユーロ圏のような低金利国では、米国実質金利のピークはこれら通貨の循環的な反発と一致した。円のような通貨でも、実質金利は米国と比べて好ましい。名目10年金利は10bpで、10年物のインフレスワップは23bpである。これにより日本の実質金利はほぼ100bp、米国より上回っている。
チャート I-4A
金利はドルに不利に動いた
金利はドルに対して逆に動いた
金利はドルに対して逆に動いた
チャート I-4B
金利はドルに不利に動いた
金利はドルに対して変動した
金利はドルに対して変動した
チャート I-4C
金利はドルに不利に動いた
金利は米ドルに対して動いた
金利は米ドルに対して動いた
もちろん、米国でインフレが上振れしているため、FRBが市場に伝えているより早くテーパリングを行ったり、想定より速く利上げを行ったりする可能性はある。カナダ銀行やイングランド銀行のような他の中央銀行は既に資産購入の縮小を示唆していることを考えれば驚くことではない。しかし、たとえFRBが資産購入のテーパリングを決めても、その影響が一部の市場参加者が期待するほど単純ではないだろう。
なぜかを理解するために、チャート I-5を考えてほしい。これは他の中央銀行と比較して、FRBのバランスシートのインパルスがGDP比で既に約13％縮小していることを示している。本質的に、FRBは他のG10中央銀行に比べて「ステルス的」に資産購入を縮小してきた。この動きは今年ドルをサポートしてきた。また市場はフェデラルファンド金利の見通しをFOMCの中央値よりもかなり上に織り込ませている（チャート I-6）。したがって、FRBの資産購入テーパリングの見通しは既に資産価格に織り込まれている可能性がある。
チャート I-5
FRBによるステルステーパリング？
米FRBによるステルス・テーパリングか？
米FRBによるステルス・テーパリングか？
チャート I-6
市場は既にタカ派なFRBを織り込んでいる
市場は既にタカ派のFRBを織り込んでいる
市場は既にタカ派のFRBを織り込んでいる
今後、我々のグローバル・フィクスト・インカムの同僚は、FRBが次にテーパリングすると期待される順番で既に下位に移動していることを指摘している。2 日銀と欧州中央銀行はほとんど資産購入を縮小していない。彼らが6月10日と6月18日の会合で何か重要な発表をする可能性は低いかもしれないが、市場は言葉の変更に注目し続けるだろう。
チャート I-7
浪費的な米国政府は歴史的にドルにとって弱材料だった
浪費的な米国政府は歴史的にドル安傾向にあった
浪費的な米国政府は歴史的にドル安傾向にあった
投資家がFRBのメッセージを額面どおり受け取り、FOMCがインフレの上振れを見送る姿勢を維持すると判断すれば、米国の実質金利は低迷し続け、ドルは下押しされるだろう。我々は米国のインフレが一時的か恒常的かについて確信は持っていない。しかしながら、米国経済は他の先進国よりも内需を刺激しており、生産ギャップを埋めるために必要以上の財政・金融刺激を行っているため、歴史的にはこれは米ドルにとって弱材料である（チャート I-7）。
触媒としての経済モメンタム
金融政策が国内の経済状況に合わせて調整される程度に、成長モメンタムは明らかに米国から他国へと回転している。これはECBやRBAのような他の中央銀行がBoEやBoCの歩みを追う可能性が徐々に高まっていることを示唆する。世界各地の製造業購買担当者景気指数（PMI）は米国水準を上回っており、サービスPMIが追いつくのは時間の問題である。
チャート I-8はユーロ圏のデータが継続して上振れしていることを示しており、ユーロ圏と米国の経済サプライズ・インデックスは10年ぶりの高水準にある。これは歴史的に米国よりもユーロ圏の債券利回りがやや高くなることと同義であり、通貨を支援してきた。ZEWとSentixの期待コンポーネントは今月さらに強かったことから、欧州およびドイツの成長は夏にかけて健全に推移するはずだ（チャート I-9）。
チャート I-8
欧州債利回りが上昇するための小さな窓
欧州利回り上昇の小さな機会
欧州利回り上昇の小さな機会
チャート I-9
ユーロ圏のデータは強さを保つ
ユーロ圏のデータは堅調を維持
ユーロ圏のデータは堅調を維持
中国の刺激策の減速はグローバル成長のリスクであることに同意する（我々の中国ストラテジストが指摘する通り）が、逆方向の要因も二つ働いている：
中国の刺激は長いラグを伴って経済に影響を与える。前回のサイクルでは中国のクレジットのピークは2016年にあったが、世界貿易が鈍化するのは2018年まで待たなければならなかった（チャート I-10）。これが、最大の買い手からのクレジット創出が鈍化しているにもかかわらず、コモディティ価格が後退していない理由の一端を説明する。
経済はクレジット形成だけに依存できない。ある時点で、バトンは投資家の動意（animal spirits）に渡されなければならない。マネーの回転率、つまり貨幣創出1単位あたりに何単位のGDPが生み出されるかはその一つの力である。チャート I-11は、マネーの回転率が米国外で、中国を中心に速く上昇していることを示している。
チャート I-10
中国のクレジット・インパルスは遅れて効く
中国のクレジット・インパルスは遅れて作用する
中国のクレジット・インパルスは遅れて作用する
チャート I-11
米国と比較したマネーの回転率
米国とのマネー・ベロシティ比較
米国とのマネー・ベロシティ比較
上記のトレンドにより、我々はドルの強さはカウンタートレンドの動きに過ぎず、FRBが方針転換して示唆より速く金融引き締めに動くまでは、そうした動きは逆張りすべきだと確信している。弱い世界成長の期間は我々の見方に対する別のリスクとなる。
興味深いことに、中国人民元は金利差が縮小しているにもかかわらず新たな循環的安値をつけている。2月のスペシャルレポートでは、USD/CNYは6.2に向かうと示唆したが、これは米中の金利差が縮小しても成り立つ見通しだった。もし中国の経済活動がクレジット形成の鈍化にもかかわらず比較的堅調に推移するなら、USD/CNYはさらに低下するだろう。
チャート I-12
新興市場の成長は依然として弱い
新興市場の成長は依然として弱い
新興市場の成長は依然として弱い
USD/CNYの下落は必要条件ではあるが、十分条件ではない。米国に対する相対的な観点で見ると、新興国の成長は昨年のCOVID-19リセッションの最深部よりも悪いままである（チャート I-12）。我々の新興市場ストラテジストは、EM通貨が持続的にアウトパフォームするには経済状況の改善が必要だと見ている。ワクチン接種キャンペーンが新興国に広がることがこの変化の鍵を握る可能性が高い。
ドル・ショートポジションに対する実際のリスク
現在水準でドルをショートするリスクは株式市場から生じる。
先進国通貨は自国株式の相対パフォーマンスを先行して上昇してきた。これは歴史的な相関からの逸脱である（チャート I-13）。防御的な株式を好むような株式市場のリセットが起きれば、米国株式・債券への資金流入が起きて先進国通貨にとって逆風となり、ドルを押し上げるだろう。今期の決算で米国はより強いポジティブな収益改定を享受しているのは懸念材料である。
対応して、米国のプット／コール比率は依然として非常に低く、多くの株式市場で自信過剰が支配している（チャート I-14）。
チャート I-13A
通貨は株式のアウトパフォームを先行している
通貨はエクイティのアウトパフォーマンスに先行している
通貨はエクイティのアウトパフォーマンスに先行している
チャート I-13B
通貨は株式のアウトパフォームを先行している
カレンシーはエクイティのアウトパフォーマンスに先行している
カレンシーはエクイティのアウトパフォーマンスに先行している
チャート I-14
米国株の熱狂が目立つ
米国株式にあふれる熱狂
米国株式にあふれる熱狂
チャート I-15
株式とドルは乖離している
エクイティとドルが乖離している
エクイティとドルが乖離している
市場リセットの性質を考慮することは重要だ。例えば：
世界株が調整するが、テクノロジーとヘルスケアが下落を主導する。こうしたシナリオでは、米国がこれらのディフェンシブセクターの比率が高いため、ドルは相対的に弱含みとなる（チャート I-15）。グロースやディフェンシブが主導する場合は現在進行中のようにドルが下落する。逆にバリュー株や景気循環株が下落を主導すれば反対の結果になる。
世界株が調整し、同時に債券利回りも低下する。初期反応としては米国への資金流入が加速しドルは強くなるが、これは同時に米国債利回りがドイツ国債（Bund）や日本国債（JGB）に向けて収斂するため、ドルの魅力を抑えるだろう。さらに米国の実質金利はさらに急落する。こうしたシナリオでは我々はドルの強さに対して売りを仕掛けるだろう。
世界株が調整するが利回りは上昇する。もし米国利回りが先導して上昇するなら、当初はドルが買われるが、同時に米国株からの資金流出が加速する。これが持続的な回転であるなら、最終的にはドルは下落するだろう。というのも海外市場は利回り上昇に高くレバレッジしているからである。
要するに、米国債市場は魅力的な利回りを提供しており、米国株式市場は市場調整時に防御的に振る舞う可能性がある（歴史的にもその傾向がある）。これが今日ドルをショートすることのリスクを生んでいる。
通貨ストラテジー
通貨市場は重要な岐路にある（チャート I-1
魅力的な通貨バスケットに対して引き続きUSDをショートする。この観点から我々は既にスカンジナビア通貨のロングを保有している。
ポジショニングが歪んでいることからUSD/JPYをショートする。USD/JPYは本日110で指値売りを入れている。またユーロの指値買いを1.18に引き上げている。興味深いことにEUR/JPYのクロスは数年にわたる下落トレンドを突破した。このクロスはドルと逆相関がある。
通貨ボラティリティ上昇を見越して本日CHF/NZDを買う。これは各中央銀行のテーパリング政策（FRB対他の先進国経済）に市場が悩む局面で良い保険となる（チャート I-16）。
株式市場の調整が一巡するのを待ち、その後改めてドルを全面的にショートするゴーサインが出るだろう。歴史的に5月はドルにとって良い月であり、株式にとってはボラティリティの高い月である（チャート I-17）。とはいえ、ドルのベア相場はしばしば長期サイクルで進行する。
チャート I-16
保険としてCHF/NZDを買う
保険としてCHF/NZDを買う
保険としてCHF/NZDを買う
チャート I-17
ドルと季節性
ドルと季節性
ドルと季節性
Chester Ntonifor 外国為替ストラテジスト chestern@bcaresearch.com
脚注
1 フォーリン・エクスチェンジ・ストラテジー特別レポート、"2021 Key Views: Tradeable Themes," 2020年12月4日付を参照。
2 グローバル・フィクスト・インカム・ストラテジー特別レポート、"Who Tapers Next?," 2020年12月04日付を参照。
通貨
米ドル
チャート II-1
USD テクニカル 1
米ドルのテクニカル指標 1
米ドルのテクニカル指標 1
チャート II-2
USD テクニカル 2
USDのテクニカル分析 2
USDのテクニカル分析 2
最近の米国のデータは混在している：
時間当たり平均賃金は4月に前月比0.7％改善し、予想の0.1％を上回った。
非農業部門雇用者数は4月に266千人増加し、予想の978千人や3月の770千人を大きく下回った。
失業率は3月の6％から4月に6.1％へわずかに悪化し、予想の5.8％改善から外れた。
NFIB中小企業景況感指数は3月の98.2から4月に99.8へ小幅上昇した。
4月のCPIは前年比4.2％で、予想の3.6％上昇を上回った。前月比では4月に0.8％上昇し、コンセンサスの0.2％を大きく上回った。
コアCPIは4月の前年比で3％となり、予想の2.3％を上回った。
PPIも上振れし、4月の前年比で6.2％となり、予想の5.8％上昇を上回った。
米ドルのDXY指数は今週1.3％下落した。CPIは急上昇したが、雇用は期待を大きく下回った。市場が期待するタイミングでFRBの「最大雇用」目標が達成される可能性は低く、この組み合わせ—FRBのハト派的姿勢の持続と潜在的な大幅インフレ—はドルにとって弱材料である。
レポートリンク：
Arbitrating Between Dollar Bulls And Bears - 2021年3月19日
The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - 2021年3月5日
Are Rising Bond Yields Bullish For The Dollar? - 2021年2月19日
ユーロ
チャート II-3
EUR テクニカル 1
EUR テクニカル 1
EUR テクニカル 1
チャート II-4
EUR テクニカル 2
ユーロ テクニカル 2
ユーロ テクニカル 2
ユーロ圏の最近のデータは強い：
3月のドイツ輸入は前月比6.5％と、予想の0.7％を大きく上回った。
ドイツZEW現状は5月に-40.1となり、4月の-48.8を大きく上回った。
ドイツZEW期待も5月に84.4と予想の72を上回った。
ユーロ圏全体のZEW景況感は5月に66から84へ上昇した。
Sentixの投資家信頼感は4月の13.1から5月に21へ改善し、予想の14を上回った。
Sentixの期待は36.8の過去最高に上昇した。現況は2020年2月以降で初めてプラス圏に入った。
3月の鉱工業生産は前月比0.1％増で、予想の0.7％を下回った。
ユーロは今週対米ドルで1.3％上昇した。ZEW調査の好結果は、ユーロ圏に有利な世界的な成長回転の期待を補強する。ECBが資産購入を縮小しない可能性はあるものの、力強いワクチン接種がサービス部門を中心にさらなるデータの上振れをもたらすはずだ。ユーロ圏の経済サプライズ指数（ESI）は高水準にあり、米国のESIは2020年7月のピークから急落しているのとは対照的である。
レポートリンク：
Relative Growth, The Euro, And The Loonie - 2021年4月16日
Portfolio And Model Review - 2021年2月5日
On Japanese Inflation And The Yen - 2021年1月29日
円
チャート II-5
JPY テクニカル 1
JPY テクニカル 1
JPY テクニカル 1
チャート II-6
JPY テクニカル 2
JPY テクニカル 2
JPY テクニカル 2
今週の日本のデータは乏しかった：
家計支出は3月に前月比7.2％増と、予想の2.1％増を大きく上回った。
日本の経常収支は3月に2.65兆円と、2月の2.9兆円から悪化した。
エコノミスト・ウォッチャーズ調査は4月に期待を裏切り、現状は49から39.1へ、期待は49.8から41.7へ低下した。
円は今週対米ドルで0.5％上昇した。長引く緊急事態宣言の延長は短期的に円を押し下げる圧力となるだろう。しかし、日本株と通貨が売られ過ぎの状態にあることから、本年後半にかけて円に対して慎重に楽観的である。
レポートリンク：
The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - 2021年3月5日
On Japanese Inflation And The Yen - 2021年1月29日
The Dollar Conundrum And Protection - 2020年11月6日
英国ポンド
チャート II-7
GBP テクニカル 1
GBP テクニカル 1
GBP テクニカル 1
チャート II-8
GBP テクニカル 2
英ポンド テクニカル指標 2
英ポンド テクニカル指標 2
英国の最近のデータは弱い：
建設PMIは4月に61.6とほぼ横ばいで推移した。
第1四半期のGDPは前期比で1.5％減となった。より失望的だったのは、企業設備投資が第1四半期に前期比で11.9％減、前年比で18.1％減少した点である。
3月のGDPは前月比2.1％増と強かったことから、第1四半期の落ち込みは主にロックダウンが原因であることを示唆している。
3月の製造業生産は前月比2.1％増で、1％のコンセンサスを上回った。
3月の貿易赤字は117.1億ポンドに縮小した。
ポンドは今週対米ドルで1.7％上昇した。第1四半期の弱い生産データは主に冬季のロックダウンによるものであり、3月の改善がその穴埋めを示している。制限の解除に伴い、サービス業の生産と家計消費（過剰貯蓄に起因）は製造業の最近の反発に速やかに追いつくはずだ。ただし市場は英国のワクチン接種のアウトパフォームを過大評価している可能性があり、それは小型株の過大評価として反映されている。
レポートリンク：
Portfolio And Model Review - 2021年2月5日
The Dollar Conundrum And Protection - 2020年11月6日
Revisiting Our High-Conviction Trades - 2020年9月11日
豪ドル
チャート II-9
AUD テクニカル 1
AUD テクニカル 1
AUD テクニカル 1
チャート II-10
AUD テクニカル 2
AUD テクニカル分析 2
AUD テクニカル分析 2
オーストラリアの最近のデータは良好である：
NAB企業景況感は4月に17から26へ上昇した。
NABビジネスサーベイ指数も4月に25から32へ上昇した。
小売売上高は3月に前月比1.3％増となり、予想の1.4％をわずかに下回った。
第1四半期の小売売上高は前期比で0.5％減と、推定の0.4％減を下回った。
第1四半期のCPIは前期比0.6％、前年比1.1％と予想を下回った。
AUDは今週対米ドルで1.2％上昇した。NABの景況感と企業状況指数は記録的な高さだが、オーストラリアの物価圧力は依然として弱く、ワクチン接種の進捗も遅れている。それでも設備投資意向や受注残のような先行指標は改善している。当社は主にメキシコの米国回復の近接性を活かすためにAUD/MXNをショートしている。
レポートリンク：
The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - 2021年3月5日
Portfolio And Model Review - 2021年2月5日
Australia: Regime Change For Bond Yields & The Currency? - 2021年1月20日
ニュージーランドドル
チャート II-11
NZD テクニカル 1
NZドル テクニカル分析 1
NZドル テクニカル分析 1
チャート II-12
NZD テクニカル 2
NZD テクニカル分析 2
NZD テクニカル分析 2
ニュージーランドの最近のデータは乏しかった：
電子カード小売売上高は4月に前月比4％増となり、3月の0.8％減から回復した。
食品価格指数は4月に前月比1.1％となり、3月の0％から上昇した。
NZDは今週対米ドルで0.8％上昇した。ニュージーランドの最近のポジティブなデータを踏まえ、我々のグローバル・フィクスト・インカム・ストラテジーの同僚はRBNZが2021年後半にテーパリングに動く最有力候補と判断している。ただし、Q2のインフレ期待は依然として弱く、観光部門は国境閉鎖の影響を受け続けているため、キウイに対しては慎重である。
レポートリンク：
Portfolio And Model Review - 2021年2月5日
Currencies And The Value-Versus-Growth Debate - 2020年7月10日
Updating Our Balance Of Payments Monitor - 2019年11月29日
カナダドル
チャート II-13
CAD テクニカル 1
CADのテクニカル分析 1
CADのテクニカル分析 1
チャート II-14
CAD テクニカル 2
CADのテクニカル分析 2
CADのテクニカル分析 2
カナダの最近のデータはやや失望的だった：
雇用報告は落胆させる内容だった。カナダは4月に207.1千の雇用を失い、参加率は65.2％から64.9％に低下した。
失業率も4月に7.5％から8.1％へ悪化し、予想を上回った。
Ivey PMIは4月に72.9から60.6へ低下し、予想通りの結果となった。
CADは今週対米ドルで1.35％上昇した。ルーニー（カナダドル）の数か月にわたる上昇や住宅価格の上昇にもかかわらず、CADは実効実質為替レートから見て依然割安である。原油価格の上昇は通貨を引き続き支援するはずだ。COVID-19ロックダウンの延長やワクチン接種の遅れは下振れリスクである。
レポートリンク：
Relative Growth, The Euro, And The Loonie - 2021年4月16日
Will The Canadian Recovery Lead Or Lag The Global Cycle? - 2021年2月12日
Currencies And The Value-Versus-Growth Debate - 2020年7月10日
スイス・フラン
チャート II-15
CHF テクニカル 1
CHF テクニカル 1
CHF テクニカル 1
チャート II-16
CHF テクニカル 2
CHF テクニカル 2
CHF テクニカル 2
スイスの最近のデータは中立的だった：
失業率は4月に3.3％とほぼ横ばいで、予想どおりであった。
スイス・フランは今週対米ドルで1％上昇した。実効実質為替レートは公正価値より1標準偏差低く、フランは割安である。世界貿易の回復が続けばフランは恩恵を受けるだろう。ただしSNBは過度のフラン高、特にユーロに対しては引き続き抑制する姿勢を取ると我々は考えている。したがって長期的にはフランはユーロに遅れをとると見ている。通貨ボラティリティが高まれば本日CHF/NZDのロングを仕掛ける予定だ。
レポートリンク：
Portfolio And Model Review - 2021年2月5日
The Dollar Conundrum And Protection - 2020年11月6日
On The DXY Breakout, Euro, And Swiss Franc - 2020年2月21日
ノルウェー・クローネ
チャート II-17
NOK テクニカル 1
NOK テクニカル 1
NOK テクニカル 1
チャート II-18
NOK テクニカル 2
NOK テクニカル指標 2
NOK テクニカル指標 2
ノルウェーの最近のデータは混在している：
4月のCPIは3％で、予想どおりだった。
PPI成長率は4月の前年比で22.5％を記録した。
第1四半期のGDPは前期比で0.6％低下し、推定の0.4％減を下回った。
本土ベースのGDPも第1四半期に前期比1％減と期待を下回った。
NOKは今週対米ドルで1％上昇した。第1四半期の軟調なデータは、2020年3月の安値以来の顕著なパフォーマンスを踏まえると短期的にはNOKを抑える可能性がある。それでも原油価格の上昇はNOKを支援し続けるだろう。ワクチン接種の進捗がユーロ圏並みであれば通貨の追い風となる。
レポートリンク：
Portfolio And Model Review - 2021年2月5日
Revisiting Our High-Conviction Trades - 2020年9月11日
A New Paradigm For Petrocurrencies - 2020年4月10日
スウェーデン・クローナ
チャート II-19
SEK テクニカル 1
SEK テクニカル指標 1
SEK テクニカル指標 1
チャート II-20
SEK テクニカル 2
SEK テクニカル分析 2
SEK テクニカル分析 2
最近のスウェーデンのデータはやや良好である：
失業率は3月の8.4％から4月に8.2％へ低下した。
4月のCPIは前年比2.2％、前月比0.2％で予想どおりだった。
CPIFは4月に前年比2.5％、前月比0.3％となり、いずれもコンセンサスを上回った。
SEKは今週対米ドルで2％上昇した。スウェーデンのワクチン接種の進捗はユーロ圏に僅かに劣る程度である。コモディティ主導の混雑したトレードからセンチメントが抜け出すことがあれば、近い将来の欧州回復を背景に輸出主導のSEKを支援する可能性がある。
レポートリンク：
Revisiting Our High-Conviction Trades - 2020年9月11日
Updating Our Balance Of Payments Monitor - 2019年11月29日
Where To Next For The US Dollar? - 2019年6月7日
脚注
1 フォーリン・エクスチェンジ・ストラテジー特別レポート、"2021 Key Views: Tradeable Themes," 2020年12月4日付を参照。
2 グローバル・フィクスト・インカム・ストラテジー特別レポート、"Who Tapers Next?," 2020年12月04日付を参照。
トレード＆予想
予想サマリー
コア・ポートフォリオ
タクティカル・トレード
指値注文
クローズ済みトレード
ハイライト
グローバル株式は大きな調整に非常に脆弱である。しかし景気循環的には米連邦準備制度（FRB）はインフレの上振れを容認する姿勢を取っており、世界経済は回復している。
中国の財政・信用インパルスが急低下しており、これによりグローバルの景気循環株およびコモディティは下押しを受けやすい。
短期を越えれば、中国の政治的安定の必要性が過度な政策引き締めを防ぐはずだ。リスクは前倒しになっている。
中国の国勢調査は当社のメガテーマの一つを裏付けている：中国の国内政治は不安定であり、ネガティブなサプライズをもたらし得る。
インドの州選挙は大規模なCOVID-19の波の最中に実施されたが、与党が2024年にも依然有利であることを示唆している。これは政策の継続を意味する。
景気循環派の強気バイアスを維持するが、中国が政策ミスを犯した場合には方針転換する準備をしておくこと。
特集
チャート 1
インフレ再浮上
インフレが頭をもたげる
インフレが頭をもたげる
今週、米国のコアインフレが強く出たことと、長く眠っていたインフレが再び頭をもたげることへの幅広い懸念を受けて、グローバル市場は震撼した（チャート 1）。
景気循環的には、世界経済の回復に伴い投資家は米国株から国際株へローテーションし、米ドルは下落すると引き続き見ている（チャート 2）。しかしこの見方は、新興国株が先進国株に対してアウトパフォームし始めるべきだということも含んでおり、今年これまでのところはそれが実現していない。新興市場はテクノロジーに偏っており、米国の長期金利上昇に脆弱なだけでなく、中国の景気刺激がピークに達した今、さらに困難に直面している。
チャート 2
株式市場の動揺
株式市場が動揺
株式市場が動揺
チャート 3
世界経済とセンチメントの回復
世界経済とセンチメントは回復しつつある
世界経済とセンチメントは回復しつつある
チャート 4
景気循環株対ディフェンシブの揺らぎ
グローバルのシクリカル株とディフェンシブ株が揺らいでいる
グローバルのシクリカル株とディフェンシブ株が揺らいでいる
我々が頼れる一つの事実は、COVID-19ワクチンの展開が続くことで世界的な成長回復を後押しするという点である（チャート 3）。米ドルもそれを示唆している。ドルは第1四半期に米国の相対的成長優位で反発したが、その後は下落に転じている。ドル安はディフェンシブに対して景気循環株にとってポジティブだが、景気循環株は短期的にはリフレーショントレードが過熱していることを示している（チャート 4）。
中国の成長が今や重要な焦点になる。中国の政策ミスは強気の景気循環見通しを覆すだろう。中国の金融・財政政策の引き締めは、今年我々が強調してきた主要なグローバルな政策リスクであり、今まさに顕在化している。しかし我々は引き締めの制約も指摘してきた。現時点で中国は我々のベンチマークによれば過度な引き締めの瀬戸際に立っている。さらなる引き締めが行われれば、我々は本質的によりディフェンシブな見方に転じるだろう。
本レポートではまた、中国の国勢調査の結果と、最新の大波のCOVID-19感染のもとで行われたインドの最近の州選の含意を検討する。我々はまだインドに対する強気見解を変更していないが、注視している。
中国：過度引き締めリスク
中国の問題は、対外貿易依存から内需依存への経済モデルの継続的な変化に起因している。これは習近平国家主席の台頭以前に共産党が採った戦略的決定であり、習はそれを体現し、戦略的ビジョンと米国との対立を通じて強化してきた。
北京の目標は滑らかで安定した移行を管理することだった。2015年の金融混乱や2018-19年の貿易戦争はその目標を危うくしたが、政策当局は最終的に持ちこたえた。そこへCOVID-19が発生し、1970年代以来の本格的な経済縮小をもたらした。中国はウイルスを抑え込み、貿易戦争開始から2021年のピークまでにGDP比13.8%に上る別の大規模な刺激で回復したが、今やさらに困難な移行に直面している。
チャート 5
中国の上昇する貯蓄傾向
中国の貯蓄傾向の高まり
中国の貯蓄傾向の高まり
潜在GDPが鈍化していることを考えると生活水準の改善の必要性は一層切迫している。債務の大幅な増加に鑑みると体系的な金融リスクを抑制する必要性も一層切迫している。米国が中国に対抗する民主諸国の連合を形成している今、経済の多角化の必要性も高まっている。長期預金比率などで測られる中国の家計・企業の「限界貯蓄性向」の急上昇は、国が困難に直面しアニマルスピリッツが抑えられていることの兆候である（チャート 5）。
2018-21年の大規模拡大の後、中国の財政・信用インパルスは低下に転じている。政策当局は昨年以降、緊急的な刺激を引き揚げるシグナルを出しており、その影響はハードデータに現れている。中国のマネー、クレジット、そして財政とクレジットを合わせたインパルスはいずれも、6〜9か月のラグの後に経済成長と相関する。これは中国のマネーとクレジットサイクルや経済活動を測る指標がどれであれ当てはまる（チャート 6Aおよびチャート 6B）。中国の経済モメンタムはピークに達しており、世界がワクチンと経済再開の追い風を享受しているにもかかわらず、今年後半から2022年にかけて世界経済にとって逆風となるだろう。
チャート 6A
中国の財政・信用インパルスが急落 …
中国の財政・信用インパルスが急落…
中国の財政・信用インパルスが急落…
チャート 6B
… マネー・アンド・クレジットのインパルスも同様に低下
... マネー・アンド・クレジットのインパルスも同様である
... マネー・アンド・クレジットのインパルスも同様である
財政・信用インパルスのダウンシフトは、特に国内消費向けに中国が輸入するコモディティ、マテリアル、およびその他財の需要の鈍化を予示している（中国の輸出向け製造に投入される部品や中間財の輸入は、世界の回復とともに比較的健全に見える）。このシフトは、スウェーデン株などの中国関連プレイや急騰している金属価格が調整なしに上昇を続けることを困難にするだろう（チャート 7）。投機筋のポジショニングは現時点でコモディティに偏っている。中国とそれが支配する金属市場との乖離は短期的には耐え難いように見える（チャート 8）。
チャート 7
中国のリフレーショントレードはピーク付近
中国のリフレーショントレードはピーク付近
中国のリフレーショントレードはピーク付近
チャート 8
マネーサイクルとコモディティ価格の衝突
マネーサイクルとコモディティ価格の衝突
マネーサイクルとコモディティ価格の衝突
世界的なグリーンや再生可能エネルギーシステムへの移行（すなわち脱炭素化）は銅をはじめ金属にとって強気だが、短期的には中国の需要減を補うことはできないことを、我々のエマージング・マーケッツ・ストラテジーが示している。中国の建設・産業向けの銅の国内需要は世界総需要の約56.5%を占める一方、グリーンエネルギー競争（太陽光パネル、風力発電、電気自動車の生産等）は世界需要の約3.5%にすぎない。
この数値は既存のシステムや構造の再調整やレトロフィット（例：電力網）も見込まれているためグリーン計画をやや過小評価している面はある。しかし要点は、米国および欧州の消費が大幅に増加しても、中国の銅消費が減少すればそれに逆行することだ。特に米国のインフラ計画が早くても2022年まで本格的に始動しないことを考えれば、今後12か月で中国の影響で世界の銅需要は減速するだろう。
中国の政策当局はまだ過度な引き締めを懸念している、あるいは新たに政策を緩和する意思を示したわけではない。4月末の政治局会議は12月の中央経済工作会議や3月の政府活動報告から大きな政策変更を含んでいなかった（表 1）。しかしもし差異があるとすれば、昨年の緊急感をさらに後退させつつも、地方政府幹部を隠れ債務に対して説明責任を負わせるような何らかの仕組みを示唆した点にある。含意は引き続き引き締め的な政策であり、したがって過度の引き締めリスクは依然として大きい。
表 1
中国の最近のマクロ経済政策表明：刺激の縮小
中国は過度な金融引き締めの瀬戸際にある
中国は過度な金融引き締めの瀬戸際にある
チャート 9
中国の政策引き締めのベンチマーク
中国の政策引き締めのベンチマーク
中国の政策引き締めのベンチマーク
確かに4月会議の「お茶の葉」は様々に読み取ることができる。4月の声明はマクロ経済政策指針から「必要な政策支援を維持する」という文言を外しており、これは経済への支援を減らすことを意味する可能性がある。しかし同時に、マネーサプライ（M2）とクレジット成長（社会融資総量）を名目GDP成長に合わせるという目標も外れており、これはクレジット成長の新たな上振れを許容するものと見なすこともできる。とはいえ中国人民銀行は第1四半期の金融政策報告書でこのクレジット目標を維持しており、確信は持てない。このルーブリックによれば、中国は我々がリスクを測るために用いる「過度引き締め」の瀬戸際にあることに注意されたい（チャート 9）。
過去20年の中国の政策運営に基づけば、我々は重大な転換点の発表は4月ではなく7月の政治局会議で行われると予想する。したがって4月は先の会合からの大きな変更とは見なしていないし、我々のチャイナ・インベストメント・ストラテジーも同様に見ていない。従って過度な政策引き締めは今後12か月で中国および世界経済に対する現実的なリスクであり、我々の過度引き締めチェックリストはこの点を強調している（表 2）。
表 2
中国の政策引き締めチェックリスト
中国、過度の引き締め寸前
中国、過度の引き締め寸前
中国の財政・信用のダウンシフトは、第20回党大会を控えて進行している。党大会は2022年を通じて行われ、秋に最高指導部（政治局常務委員）の交代で頂点に達する。共産党の100周年に当たる今年7月1日に向けて経済は十分に刺激されているため、政策当局は過剰を防ぐことに集中している。金融リスクの予防、反独占規制、不動産バブルの抑制が当面の命題である。企業および政府の債務不履行や破産の増加は、指導部が経済構造改革と改革を推し進める意志を裏付けており、近年これが確認されている（チャート 10）。
チャート 10
中国における創造的破壊
中国、過度な引き締め寸前
中国、過度な引き締め寸前
投資家は党大会があるからといって指導部が政策を緩和するだろうと想定してはならない。2017年の党大会の前にはむしろその逆のことが起きた。しかし、投資家はまた、中国が重要なイベントの前に自国経済を沈めるほど過度に引き締めるとも安易に想定してはならない。安定が目標となるだろう（2017年や以前の党大会でもそうであったように）──これは現行の引き締めが財政的・経済的にあまりにも痛みを伴う場合には政策緩和がいつか行われることを意味する。政策当局が転換点に達するまでは、中国関連資産は短期的に脆弱である。
ちなみに、第20回党大会の接近は政治的な暗闘や衝撃的な出来事を引き寄せるだろう。最高指導者は通常、党大会前に派閥の勢力を示すために有力なライバルを解任する。政府はまたメディア統制を強化し、事件の周辺で声を上げるか抗議するかもしれない反体制派を取り締まる。しかし2022年はその利害が一層高い。
習主席は当初2022年に退任すると見られていたが、今は退任しない見込みであり、これは少なくとも一部の反対を喚起するだろう。さらに習政権下で中国は三つの歴史的な政策革命を遂げた：強力な指導者モデルを採用し、前二代の集団指導モデルを損なったこと、経済の自給自足を重視して自由化と開放を犠牲にしたこと、そして大国としての地位を強調し米国や同盟国との協調を犠牲にしていることだ。
まとめ：中国の政策引き締めにより、グローバル株式、コモディティ、そして「中国プレイ」は大幅な調整リスクに直面している。当社のベースケースは中国が過度な引き締めを回避するというものだが、最新のマネーおよびクレジットの数値はその見方を変更する閾値に達している。これらの指標がさらに急落すれば見解を変更する必要がある。
中国の消えゆく労働力
最終的に過度な引き締めを抑制する制約の一つは、労働年齢人口の縮小による中国の潜在GDP成長の低下である。中国の第7回国勢調査が今週公表され、国とその経済に影響する深い構造変化を裏付けた。
過去10年の人口増加率は5.4%に鈍化し、1953年の最初の国勢調査以降で最低となった。出生率は2020年に1.3まで下落し、2.1の人口置換水準や2016年に一人っ子政策を緩和した際の目標1.8を下回っている。出生率は世界銀行の推計（2019年で1.7）や日本の数値よりも低い。人口1000人当たりの出生数も減少し、2020年の新生児数は1961年（大飢饉の年）以来の低水準となった。出生率は高所得国の水準に収束しており、経済発展が中国でも出産抑制の同じ効果をもたらしていることを示唆しているが、中国はこれらの国より発展段階が低い。
チャート 11
1990年代の日本より速く減少する中国の労働人口
中国、過度な金融引き締めの瀬戸際に立つ
中国、過度な金融引き締めの瀬戸際に立つ
最年少コホートの比率は16.6%から17.95%に上昇し、最年長コホートは2010年の8.9%から現在13.5%へ上昇、働き手層は75.3%から68.6%に低下した。労働年齢人口は2010年にピークに達し、過去10年で6.79ポイント減少した。対照的に日本の労働年齢人口は1992年にピークを迎え、その後の10年で2.18ポイント低下した（チャート 11）。
言い換えれば、中国は1990年代初頭に日本が経験した人口転換を経験しているが、中国の労働年齢人口はさらに速く減少する可能性がある。中国は日本が達したより低い1人当たり所得水準でこの大規模な社会経済的変化を経験している。
人口動態の課題は中国の社会経済的および政治的システムに圧力をかけるだろう。中国の奇跡は、他のアジアの奇跡と同様に、輸出製造により大量の貯蓄を生み出し、それを国家開発に再投資することを前提としていた。労働年齢人口の減少は経済発展と重なり、長期的には貯蓄率の低下をもたらすだろう。これはチャート 12に示されたように、二つの異なる中国の労働人口の図と国民貯蓄率を並べたものである。扶養比率が上昇するにつれて貯蓄率は低下し、再目的化に使える資金が減少する。資本コストは上昇し、経済構造改革は加速するだろう。
日本の場合、人口変化は1990年の金融危機と全国的な経済行動の変化と同時に起きた。貯蓄率は経済の変化とともに低下したが、生成された貯蓄は依然として投資を上回っており、これは民間需要の不足と大きな債務負担の圧力によるものであった。企業は投資と生産の拡大よりも債務圧縮に注力した（チャート 13）。これらは外部環境が良好だったときに起きたが、中国は地政学的緊張による経済的圧力が高まる文脈で同様の人口問題に直面している。
チャート 12
希少化する中国の労働者
中国の労働者が希少になりつつある
中国の労働者が希少になりつつある
チャート 13
高貯蓄が債務拡大を可能にするが、やがて債務が圧倒する
高い貯蓄が借入拡大を促し、債務が耐え難くなるまで続く
高い貯蓄が借入拡大を促し、債務が耐え難くなるまで続く
中国はこれまで破滅的な金融危機や不動産価格の崩壊を回避しており、深刻な流動性の罠に陥る事態は避けている。中国当局は不動産バブルの危険を痛感しており、したがって金融の過剰を防ぎバブル的活動を抑制することに注力している。これが過度の引き締めリスクを重大なものにしている。しかしどちらか一方の誤りはデフレへの滑落を招き得る。習政権は活動が過度に減速したり金融の不安定性が手に負えなくなりそうな時は経済を刺激してきたが、これは難しいバランス行為であり、故に我々は過度引き締めリスクを綿密に監視している。
中国の国勢調査からのその他の注目点は以下の通りである：
二人っ子政策は現時点では成功していない。
COVID-19は出生率に悪影響を与えた可能性はあるが、タイミングの点で出生数を大きく歪めるほどではない。したがってトレンドはパンデミックだけで説明できない。
急速な都市化が続いており、都市化率は64%に達し、2010年から14ポイント上昇した。
政策議論は定年年齢の引き上げ、出産に対する財政的インセンティブの提供、子育てをより手頃にするための各種価格統制（特に不動産バブルの抑制）、および地方からの移住が続く中で中小都市の不動産価格が急落しないようにする措置を強調している。
中国の少数民族人口は総人口の9%を占め、過去10年で9%成長したのに対し、漢民族は91%で5%成長にとどまった。少数民族は一人っ子（二人っ子）政策の免除対象である。しかし、新疆のような自治区では民族間緊張が発生しており、中国の少数民族政策に対する国際的な監視が強まっている。
中国の人口動態上の課題は広く知られているが、最新の国勢調査はその規模を再確認させる。中国の潜在成長率は低下しており、上昇する扶養比率は政府に対する要求を強める社会変化を示している。より大きな財政・社会支出の必要は困難な経済的トレードオフと不人気な政治的決定を必要とするだろう。経済変化と人の移動は地域間および富の格差を深めるだろう。
これらすべての点は、我々の一貫したジオポリティカル・ストラテジーのメガテーマの一つを裏付けている：中国の国内政治リスクは過小評価されている。
まとめ：中国の2020年国勢調査は、中国の上昇する社会経済的・政治的課題の根底にある人口減少を強く裏付けるものである。中国は強力な中央政府を持ち、単一支配政党の下で権力が集約され、近年様々な課題を管理してきた実績はあるが、それでも現在進行中の変化の規模は圧倒的であり、ネガティブな経済的・政治的サプライズを招くだろう。
インド：州選はモディに対する転換点ではない
インドで第2波のCOVID-19がピークにあった時期に、5州で選挙が行われた。中でも西ベンガル州の結果が最も重要だった。西ベンガルは大きな州であり、インド国会の議員のほぼ10分の1を占めている。ナレンドラ・モディ首相の与党バラティヤ・ジャナタ党（BJP）は294議席中約70%を獲得するとの目標を公言していた。
実際には、西ベンガルは地域政党であるオール・インディア・トリナムール会議（AITMC）の圧勝となった。AITMCは2期の反イナカム任期に直面していたにもかかわらず、議席数は過去最高を記録した。多くの予測を上回る結果であり、多くの世論調査が予想していなかったことが示された。
投資家はこの重要州でのBJPの敗北をどう受け止めるべきか。これはモディのパンデミック対応への反発か。2024年の総選挙で政権交代や国家政策の変更を予告するものか。そうとは言えない。ここで我々は三つの主要な示唆を挙げる：
示唆その1：BJPの成果は注目に値する
チャート 14
インド：西ベンガルで足がかりを得たBJP
中国、過度な引き締めの瀬戸際
中国、過度な引き締めの瀬戸際
BJPは西ベンガルで目標には届かなかったが、この州はBJPの地盤ではない。BJPは英語で言えばヒンディー語圏で自然な支持基盤を持つとされ、西ベンガルは非ヒンディー語圏であり、伝統的にBJPは「外部勢力」と見なされてきた。またこの州は変化を受け入れにくいことで知られている。例えばAITMC以前は左派が34年という記録的な長期政権を維持していた。このような状況下で、BJPが2021年に77議席に増やしたことは注目に値する（2016年は3議席）（チャート 14）。
この成果によりBJPは西ベンガルで主要な野党となった。これはBJPが時間をかければ伝統的な強みを持たない州でも足場を築けることを示している。歴史的に弱い州でこの成果を上げたことは、BJPが依然として無視できない勢力であることの表れだ。
示唆その2：BJPの人気は後退したが、2024年に政権を維持する見込みは依然強い
BJPに対する不満はCOVID-19対応の不手際とそれに伴う経済的困窮により高まっているが、国家レベルでBJPに代わる現実的な選択肢は存在しない。
最近の州選は、西ベンガルだけでなく、野党のインド国民会議（INC）がまだ体制を整えていないことを確認した。コングレスは西ベンガルで44議席から0議席に崩壊した。より重要なのは、コングレスが大衆にアピールする内部指導者を任命・選出する必要性と、識別可能な政策アジェンダを策定する必要性という二つの重要課題をまだ解決していない点である。
コングレスの弱さは、BJPの議席数が2019年のピークから減少する可能性があっても、我々の2024年のベースケースは依然としてBJP主導の政権がインドの政権を維持するというものであることを意味する。政策の継続性とある程度の構造改革の可能性がベースケースだ。
示唆その3：インドの地域政党の台頭
過去10年のBJPの台頭は、コングレスと地域政党の議席減少と同時に進んだ。しかし最近の州選は、BJPが地域政党の議席シェアを劇的に圧縮できないことを示している。例えば西ベンガルではBJPは単独で77議席を獲得したが、これはこの州で支配的なAITMCの犠牲になって得たものではない。一方、同月に選挙が行われた別の大州であるタミル・ナードゥでは二大地域政党の間で支配が揺れ続けている。
チャート 15
インド：BJPは2019年にピークを迎えたが2024年にも有力
中国は過度な引き締めの瀬戸際にある
中国は過度な引き締めの瀬戸際にある
2019年の総選挙では地域政党（BJPとコングレスを除く全党）のシェアは約40%から35%に低下した（チャート 15）。2024年の選挙では、BJPのピーク議席数が2019年の高水準から低下することにより、地域政党の議席シェアがやや上昇する可能性がある。
インドの地域政党の今後の台頭は単純な力学に根ざしている。BJPが2024年に二期目の現職となる可能性があるので、全国レベルでBJPに対する代替がない限り、有権者は差分的に地域政党を支持する選択をするだろう。
BJPは2024年に単独最大党として過半数を超える議席を獲得するポジションに留まるだろう。しかし与党が過半数を確保するために地域政党を取り込むシナリオも十分にあり得る。ただし2024年までは長い時間がある。COVID-19とその経済的影響への対応が、BJPが2019年の成果を超えることを難しくするだろう。次の重要な州選は2022年2月に予定されており、インド最大の州ウッタル・プラデーシュで選挙が行われる。ここでの結果は、BJPがパンデミックと経済ショックによる反イナカム効果をいかに緩和できるかを示すだろう。
結論：インドにおけるBJPの人気は揺らいでいるが劇的に崩れたわけではない。BJPは依然として2024年に過半数を超える単独最大政党になる位置にある可能性が高い。したがって当面この新興市場で政権不安は懸念されない。
中国の国内政治リスクとインドの政治的継続性を踏まえ、当面インド向けのトレードを維持する（チャート 16Aおよびチャート 16B）。ただし我々はインド全体のレビューを進めており、今後の特別レポートで顧客に結論を共有する予定である。
チャート 16A
新興国に対してインド債をロングで保有
インド債券を新興国（EM）に対してロングで維持する
インド債券を新興国（EM）に対してロングで維持する
チャート 16B
インドロング／中国ショートを堅持
インドをロング、中国をショートで貫く
インドをロング、中国をショートで貫く
投資上の示唆
短期的な安全資産トレードを維持する。天然ガス先物のロングは19.8%の利得でクローズ。
景気循環（12か月）の強気ポジションを維持し、グロースよりバリューを優先する。レアアースを含むコモディティおよび新興市場のロングを維持する。ただし、中国が我々のベンチマークに従って過度の引き締めを行った場合にはこれらのトレードをカットする準備をすること。
当面は新興国同業と比較してインドのローカル通貨建て債をオーバーウェイトし、インド株を中国株に対してロングする。だがインドに対する強気姿勢は精査中である。
チャート 17
テック売りの中で回復するサイバーセキュリティ株
サイバーセキュリティ株がテック株の暴落の中で反発
サイバーセキュリティ株がテック株の暴落の中で反発
サイバーセキュリティ株はロングで保有を継続すべきだが、地政学的「職場復帰」トレードとしてはサイバーよりも航空宇宙・防衛を引き続き好む。先週の一般的なテック売りの中でサイバーセキュリティ株はテックセクターに対して持ち直した。米国で発生した大規模なColonial Pipelineのランサムウェア攻撃は、東海岸の燃料供給の約45%を支える主要ネットワークを一時的に停止させた（チャート 17）。それでも重要インフラに対する攻撃はサイバーセキュリティが長期的なテーマであることを浮き彫りにしており、投資家はエクスポージャーを維持すべきである。サイバー株はワクチン発見以降、テック全体をアウトパフォームしている（チャート 18）。
チャート 18
サイバーセキュリティは構造的テーマである
サイバーセキュリティは長期的なテーマである
サイバーセキュリティは長期的なテーマである
Matt Gertken バイスプレジデント 地政学ストラテジー mattg@bcaresearch.com Yushu Ma リサーチ・アソシエイト yushu.ma@bcaresearch.com Ritika Mankar, CFA 編集者／ストラテジスト Ritika.Mankar@bcaresearch.com
Highlights Non-US stocks have greatly underperformed US equities over the last decade, but a leadership change might be underway. As such, equity flows could be an important factor in dictating currency trends over a cyclical horizon. The narrative in favor of non-US stocks includes a recovery in profits, cheap valuations, and a secular theme that will favor capital spending in traditionally “heavy” industries. Non-US growth should also overtake the US beyond 2021, when most of the global population is vaccinated. Cyclical currencies have historically tracked the relative performance of their respective bourses. This implies a lower dollar. Higher bond yields also present a formidable headwind for the outperformance of US stocks, relative to other markets. An outperformance of non-US bourses will be particularly favorable for the AUD, NOK, SEK, and GBP. The yen will likely play catchup towards the middle of the cycle. Feature Currencies respond to broad inflows, including into bonds, equities or foreign direct investment. For most of 2020, the dominant currency flows were from fixed income investors. As most short rates are now anchored near zero, the story is morphing towards the potential winners from a recovery, especially in the equity market sphere. Non-US stocks tend to outperform the US when the dollar is falling. That said, the causality-effect link is not so clear-cut, as we penned in our Special Report last year.1 Admittedly, a lower dollar boosts the common-currency returns for US-based investors, leading to more capital deployment in offshore markets. Meanwhile, commodities tend to do well when the dollar declines, benefiting emerging market and commodity-producing countries. Financing costs for non-US corporations borrowing in dollars are also eased. Historically, profit growth has been the ultimate driver of stock prices and profitability is more contingent on productivity gains than translation effects. This suggests the starting point for gauging relative equity flows, and the potential impact on currencies, is to evaluate which countries/economies could be primed for outperformance. Relative Growth As A Starting Point One of the key drivers of relative earnings growth between two countries is relative economic performance. Chart I-1 shows that earnings-per-share in the G10 relative to the US tended to improve when growth was shifting in favor of the rest of the world. This, in turn, has been a key driver of relative equity performance. Chart I-1Relative Profits And Relative Growth What is remarkable is that this relationship has been pretty consistent across countries, including those that have huge exposures to the global economy such as Sweden, Norway, or even the United Kingdom. In general, relative economic performance has driven relative EPS growth (Chart I-2A & 2B). The reason is that these bourses still have a sizeable dependence on the domestic economy. Chart I-3 shows that for even the most export-driven economies, exposure to domestic sales is still at least 20%. Australia, a commodity country has almost 60% of sales from domestic sources. Our bias is that non-US growth will start to outperform towards the backend of this year. This will pressure the dollar lower (Chart I-4). This conviction rests on three critical pillars: Chart I-2AA Cross Country Look At Relative Profits Growth Chart I-2BA Cross Country Look At Relative Profits Growth Chart I-3Domestic Sales Matter A Lot For Global Equity Bourses Chart I-4The Dollar Trends With ##br##Relative Growth The rest of the world will catch up in vaccination campaigns relative to the US. This is almost a fait accompli. Canada is well behind in terms of vaccination progress compared to the US or the UK (Chart I-5). But in Quebec, where BCA is headquartered, Premier François Legault has suggested that everyone who wants a vaccine will be able to get their first dose by June 24. Relative employment growth in Canada is already picking up, and the central bank has already begun tapering asset purchases ahead of the Fed. The broader message is that the service sector has been held hostage by relatively closed economies outside the US. This will change as economies open up. Producer prices (PPI) are picking up globally and the US is leading the pack. This will also rotate in favor of other economies. Producer prices first took off in the US as the sectors that benefited from the pandemic were those related to technology and healthcare. Norway also gained from the rebound in oil prices. Other countries should begin to catch up, as demand for goods and services broadens beyond the pandemic-related scope (Chart I-6). From a longer-term perspective, PPI usually peaks and troughs in the US ahead of other economies. Again, as we exit a recession, consumption tends to broaden from defensive goods towards more discretionary spending. Given that other economies are bigger producers of these discretionary items, this should start to shift relative pricing power towards these countries (Chart I-7). Non-US growth has been held hostage to cascading crises since the US housing market bust. In 2010, we had the euro area debt crisis. In 2011, the Fukushima disaster knocked down Japanese growth. In 2015, tight monetary policy in China led to a global manufacturing recession. In short, rest-of-world growth has not been able to catch breath for a decade. Chart I-5Many Countries Will Replicate The US and UK Vaccination Success Chart I-6Global PPIs Are ##br##Picking Up Chart I-7US PPI Usually Leads Other Countries The silver lining is that the COVID-19 crisis has ushered in coordinated global monetary and fiscal stimulus. For the first time in a long while, non-US growth can start to outperform, according to IMF estimates (Chart I-8). Chart I-8The IMF Expects Non-US Growth To Outperform Flows tend to gravitate to capital markets with the highest expected returns, and this is certainly the case when US versus non-US stocks are concerned. If we accept the premise that relative growth matters for equity allocations, then it also makes sense that relative equity performance will coincide with currency performance, due to portfolio flows. Across the G10 economies, getting the equity call right has usually been synonymous with having the appropriate currency strategy (Chart I-9). This is especially the case since equity flows have been supportive of the dollar (Chart I-10). Chart I-9ACurrencies And Equities Move Together Chart I-9BCurrencies And Equities Move Together Chart I-10Equity Flows Have Been Supportive Of The Dollar A More Quantitative Approach While relative growth is important, it is not the sole factor in determining which countries or sectors will outperform. Most investors have at least two other powerful tools that have stood the test of time in making equity allocations. These include the valuation starting point, and the historical return on capital. Valuation is the easiest place to start. Over time, non-US bourses have tended to outperform the US when the relative valuation starting point was attractive. This has been especially true around recessions, when leadership changes tend to occur. Chart I-11A, 11B, 11C, and 11D show that countries such as Japan, Mexico, and Germany should sport more attractive returns over the next decade compared to the US. The list is not comprehensive, but our previous work suggests this valuation tool works across many countries and various geographies. Chart I-11AValuation Matters For Long-Term Returns Chart I-11BValuation Matters For Long-Term Returns Chart I-11CValuation Matters For Long-Term Returns Chart I-11DValuation Matters For Long-Term Returns Not surprisingly, the currencies that are the most undervalued in our models also have cheap equity markets. These include the Scandinavian currencies, commodity plays, the Japanese yen, and the pound. A rerating of these markets will be synonymous with a rerating in their currencies (Chart I-12). The rise in global bond yields will also prove to be a formidable headwind for US stocks. Technology constitutes 28% of the US equity market, the largest allocation within the G10. Together with defensive sectors such as health care and consumer staples, this ratio rises to 60%. As a result, the relative performance of the US equity market has been inversely correlated to bond yields (Chart I-13). Should bond yields continue to gravitate higher over the next few years, this will lead to a powerful rotation towards more cyclical bourses. The rise in yields will be particularly favorable for deep value sectors like banks (due to rising net interest margins) and commodities (due to inflation protection). Chart I-12The Dollar Remains ##br##Expensive Chart I-13US Outperformance Has Dovetailed With Lower Bond Yields Going forward, expected return on capital will be more difficult to gauge, but countries that have a history of providing superior shareholder returns are a good place to start. For example, we know that the winners of the last decade have had the largest returns on equity, as was the case for the winners during the prior decade. Given the mammoth task of performing this exercise on a cross-country basis, and across factors, we enlisted the help of our colleagues who run BCA’s Equity Analyzer platform. The EA platform provides a BCA score of 0 to 100 for all developed market stocks, according to their ranking on 30 carefully selected and curated factors. Crunching the numbers revealed a few interesting results: A long strategy based on selecting the top decile stocks according to their EA score outperformed both domestic and global indices (Chart I-14). The quality factor has been one of the better determinants of future stock market returns. The EA quality score is based on return on equity, asset growth, accruals, and margins. On this basis, the bourses with a higher concentration of quality stocks in their indices are found outside the US (Chart I-15). Using an overall blended score, which includes not only the quality factor, but also others such as value, size, and momentum, suggests investors will be rewarded by tilting away from the US. For example, 20%-30% of stocks in Scandinavian bourses make it into the top decile EA portfolio (Chart I-16). Even if one focuses solely on growth sectors such as technology and health care, non-US companies are still more attractive (Chart I-17). Chart I-14The BCA EA Platform Allows Investors To Pick Winners Chart I-15Quality Stocks Are Heavily Weighted Outside The US Chart I-16A Composite Score Ranks US Stocks Poorly Chart I-17Lots Of Attractive Growth Stocks Outside The US In a nutshell, non-US markets are attractive from a valuation standpoint and across a swathe of other metrics that have been useful in benchmarking future returns. An outperformance of non-US stocks will favor cyclical currencies, as portfolio flows gravitate to these markets. We are already selectively long a basket of Scandinavian currencies; we will be gradually accumulating other currencies such as the GBP, the CAD, and the JPY on weakness. Specifically, the yen is becoming interesting not only as portfolio insurance, but also as a play on the cyclical Japanese market. We will be covering these currencies in depth in upcoming reports. Housekeeping Three important central banks met this week. The general tone was dovish. The Bank of England kept policy roughly unchanged, but there were three important takeaways. First, the BoE suggested any pickup in UK inflation will be transitory. Second, the BoE will slow its bond purchases, as they approach the central bank’s target. And finally, growth estimates were revised upward. Our take is that the meeting was a non-event for cable in the near term and bullish longer term. The message from the Reserve Bank of Australia was bit more dovish. They kept open the possibility of additional measures on the July 6 meeting. Our bias is that the RBA is trying to fend off deflationary pressures from a strong currency. This only delays the bullish backdrop for the AUD. Next Tuesday’s budget will provide some information about additional support to the Aussie economy. The Norges bank remains on the path to hike interest rates later this year. This supports our bullish NOK thesis. We have been reluctant to establish fresh long positions as we enter a seasonally strong month for the dollar. However, our buy list is growing as we highlighted above. For now our open positions are highlighted on page 14. Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see Foreign Exchange Strategy Special Report, "Currencies And The Value-Versus-Growth Debate," dated July 10, 2020. Currencies U.S. Dollar Chart II-1USD Technicals 1 Chart II-2USD Technicals 2 The recent data out of the US were mildly positive. The ISM Manufacturing PMI came in at 60.7 in April, well below an estimate of 65. The ISM Manufacturing New Orders Index came in at 64.3 in April, slightly below an expectation of 66.6. The trade deficit for March was -74.4B USD, in line with expectations. Personal Spending for March was 4.2% month-on-month, as expected. The dollar DXY index rose by 0.8% this week. While the PMI data for April came in on the mild side, inflationary pressures continue to build up as reflected in the robust New Orders, Backlog of Orders as well as the Prices Paid indices. That said, the Fed’s current stance is that price surges will likely be transitory. This is near-term negative for the greenback since it implies policy will not be tightened anytime soon. Report Links: Arbitrating Between Dollar Bulls And Bears - March 19, 2021 The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - March 5, 2021 Are Rising Bond Yields Bullish For The Dollar? - February 19, 2021 The Euro Chart II-3EUR Technicals 1 Chart II-4EUR Technicals 2 The recent Euro data have been mildly positive. Unemployment rate for March was 8.1%, slightly better than the predicted 8.3%. GDP fell 1.8% year-on-year, compared to an expected 2% decrease. CPI came in at 1.6% for April year-on-year, in line with expectation. German Retail Sales for March came in at 7.7% month-on-month comfortably beating a 3% expectation. Overall euro area retail sales surged 12% year-on-year in March, comfortably outpacing consensus of a 9.4% rise. The euro was down 0.9% against USD this week. However, as the weekly vaccination increase in both the US and the UK are slowing down, it continues to rise in the euro area. Infections are stabilizing in Germany and the Netherlands, and are on a downtrend in France and Italy. This puts a floor under the euro. Report Links: Relative Growth, The Euro, And The Loonie - April 16, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 On Japanese Inflation And The Yen - January 29, 2021 The Japanese Yen Chart II-5JPY Technicals 1 Chart II-6JPY Technicals 2 The recent data out of Japan have been strong. The unemployment rate for March came in at 2.6%. Industrial Production for March came in at 2.2% month-on-month, versus the estimate of -2%. Tokyo Core CPI came in at -0.2%, below market consensus. Vehicles sales surged by 22.2% year-on-year in April. The Japanese yen was flat against USD this week. A lagging vaccine campaign, rising COVID-19 case count, and the state of emergency continue to drag down sentiment towards Japan. However, the yen’s real effective exchange rate is trading at one standard deviation below fair value and our intermediate-term indicator is hinting at a rebound. Report Links: The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - March 5, 2021 On Japanese Inflation And The Yen - January 29, 2021 The Dollar Conundrum And Protection - November 6, 2020 British Pound Chart II-7GBP Technicals 1 Chart II-8GBP Technicals 2 The recent data out of UK have been positive. The Nationwide HPI for April was 7.1% higher than a year ago, beating an expectation of 5%. The BoE kept interest rates at 0.1% and its asset purchase target at £895bn. The pound was flat against the USD this week. The Bank of England kept policy on hold this week, but there were three important takeaways. First, the BoE sees any near-term pickup in inflation as temporary. This should keep a near-term lid on rate hike expectations and the pound. Second, the BoE will slow its bond purchases, as they approach the central bank’s target. And finally, growth estimates were revised upward, especially for 2022. This is bullish cable longer term. On the political front, a potential surprise of another Scottish independence may put some downward pressure on the currency. Report Links: Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 The Dollar Conundrum And Protection - November 6, 2020 Revisiting Our High-Conviction Trades - September 11, 2020 Australian Dollar Chart II-9AUD Technicals 1 Chart II-10AUD Technicals 2 The recent data out of Australia have been strong. The AIG Manufacturing Index for April came in at 61.7, higher than the prior 59.9 reading. The AIG Construction Index for April came in at 59.1, below the 61.8 print in March. The trade balance for March came in at AUD 5.6bn, below an expectation of AUD 8bn. The RBA cash rate remained at 0.1%. The Australian dollar was flat this week against the USD. The RBA provided a dovish tone at its meeting this week, extending QE until February, and kept open the possibility of additional measures on the July 6 meeting. In the near term, upbeat economic data continue to provide support for the AUD. However, the tourism industry (6% of employment) is needed to get Australia back to full employment. Our bias is that the RBA will continue to fight against an appreciating currency, until the economy reaches escape velocity. Report Links: The Dollar Bull Case Will Soon Fade - March 5, 2021 Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Australia: Regime Change For Bond Yields & The Currency? - January 20, 2021 New Zealand Dollar Chart II-11NZD Technicals 1 Chart II-12NZD Technicals 2 The recent data out of New Zealand have been strong. Employment grew by 0.6% quarter-on-quarter in Q1. The Labor Cost Index for Q1 came in at 0.4% over prior quarter, and 1.6% year-on-year. The unemployment rate for Q1 declined to 4.7%, from 4.9%. Building consents increased 17.9% month-on-month in March. The New Zealand dollar was down 0.5% against USD this week. As we indicated in our report last week, the NZD is overpriced by several measures and the elevated equity market is of particular concern. The weakening GlobalDairyTrade Price Index could potentially be a harbinger of peaking agricultural prices in the coming months. This will lead the NZD to underperform other commodity currencies. Report Links: Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Currencies And The Value-Versus-Growth Debate - July 10, 2020 Updating Our Balance Of Payments Monitor - November 29, 2019 Canadian Dollar Chart II-13CAD Technicals 1 Chart II-14CAD Technicals 2 The recent data out of Canada have been soft. The trade balance for March came in at -1.14bn CAD versus CAD 1.42bn the previous month. Building permits rose 5.7% month-on-month in March. The CAD was flat against USD this week. Despite concerns over elevated commodity prices and a vaccination campaign that is lagging other advanced economies, recent strong employment growth and the tapering of asset purchases by the BoC should continue to boost the currency, the top performing among G10 so far this year. In the near term, Canadian exports will benefit from US fiscal stimulus, which will also provide support for the loonie. Report Links: Relative Growth, The Euro, And The Loonie - April 16, 2021 Will The Canadian Recovery Lead Or Lag The Global Cycle? - February 12, 2021 Currencies And The Value-Versus-Growth Debate - July 10, 2020 Swiss Franc Chart II-15CHF Technicals 1 Chart II-16CHF Technicals 2 The recent Swiss data have been strong. The KOF Leading Indicator for April came in at 134, beating the 119.5 estimate. CPI for April came in at 0.3%. SECO Consumer Climate for Q2 came in at -18, higher than the -30 back in Q1. The Swiss franc was down 0.5% against the USD this week. The Swiss economy continues to surprise to the upside. With our intermediate-term indicator on a downward path, we remain optimistic on our long EUR/CHF position for now, despite potential upside risks to the franc given the Indian COVID-19 outbreak. Report Links: Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 The Dollar Conundrum And Protection - November 6, 2020 On The DXY Breakout, Euro, And Swiss Franc - February 21, 2020 Norwegian Krone Chart II-17NOK Technicals 1 Chart II-18NOK Technicals 2 The recent data out of Norway have been strong. The unemployment rate for April came in at 4%, from 4.2% the prior month. The house price index for April came in at 12.2% year-on-year, similar to the 12.5% reading of March. Interest rate were held at 0% by the Norges Bank. The NOK was down 1.8% against the USD this week. The krone is the winning currency since the pandemic hit, suggesting some consolidation was much due. With Norwegian inflation rising sharply above the central bank’s 2% target earlier this year, the Norges Bank reiterated during its meeting on Thursday that a rate hike later this year is well in sight. Against the backdrop of the impending European recovery this summer and Norway’s own commendable vaccination progress, we continue to be long the NOK against the USD and EUR. Report Links: Portfolio And Model Review - February 5, 2021 Revisiting Our High-Conviction Trades - September 11, 2020 A New Paradigm For Petrocurrencies - April 10, 2020 Swedish Krona Chart II-19SEK Technicals 1 Chart II-20SEK Technicals 2 The recent Swedish data have been strong. Industrial Production for March came in at 1.1% month-on-month. Year-on-year, IP is rising by 5.7%. Industrial New Orders for March came in at 10% year-on-year. GDP in Q1 was 1.1% higher than the prior quarter, beating the estimate of 0.5%. The Swedish krona was down 1.4% against the USD this week. BCA Research’s European Investment Strategy service indicated that there is significantly more upside to Swedish stocks against both Eurozone and US equities over the remainder of the cycle. Sweden is levered to the global industrial cycle with exports representing 45% of GDP. The recovery in both Europe and across the globe should continue to benefit the krona. The tapering of asset purchases by the Riksbank later this year will also provide support to the currency in the meantime. We continue to be long SEK/USD and SEK/EUR. Report Links: Revisiting Our High-Conviction Trades - September 11, 2020 Updating Our Balance Of Payments Monitor - November 29, 2019 Where To Next For The US Dollar? - June 7, 2019 Trades & Forecasts Forecast Summary Core Portfolio Tactical Trades Limit Orders Closed Trades