ポリシー
Executive Summary Higher Brent Prices, Stronger Upside Bias The Fed is pacing a globally synchronized monetary-policy tightening cycle as the war in Ukraine escalates, following Russia’s mobilization of 300k reserve forces. Despite central-bank tightening, the intensification of the war increases the odds of higher inflation. This will keep the USD well bid. Russia’s threat to cut oil supplies to states observing the G7 price cap will test US and EU resolve as winter sets in. Retaliatory output cuts by Russia could send Brent crude oil prices above $200/bbl. The Biden administration remains fearful its G7 price cap and EU sanctions on Russian oil exports will spike prices. The US will make 10mm barrels of crude from its SPR available in November as a palliative. Our base case Brent forecast is slightly lower, averaging $105/bbl this year from $110/bbl, due to weaker realized prices. On the back of this, we expect 4Q22 Brent to average $106/bbl, and for 2023 to average $118/bbl, up slightly vs. last month. WTI will trade $3-$5/bbl lower. Bottom Line: The economic war pitting the EU and its allies against Russia could escalate and widen as more Russian troops pour into Ukraine. This raises the odds of expanded conflict outside Ukraine, and higher war-driven inflation. Our baseline forecast for 2023 remains intact, with a strong bias to the upside. We remain long the COMT and XOP ETFs to retain exposure to commodities. Feature The Fed is pacing a globally synchronized monetary-policy tightening cycle at a time when the war in Ukraine is escalating. Russia’s mobilization of a reported 300k reserve forces raises the spectre of an expansion of the Ukraine war – perhaps crossing into a NATO state’s border – if tactical nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons are used. This is a low-probability outcome, but it would increase the odds of significantly higher inflation should it come to pass.1 The US central bank lifted its Fed funds rate 75 bps Wednesday to a range of 3% - 3.25% – and strongly indicated further rate hikes will follow. The Fed is one of numerous banks increasing policy rates. This synchronous monetary-policy tightening has not been observed for 50 years, and raises the odds of a global economic recession, according to the World Bank.2 The World Bank notes that since 1970, recessions have been “preceded by a significant weakening of global growth in the previous year, as has happened recently,” and, importantly, “all previous global recessions coincided with sharp slowdowns or outright recessions in several major economies.” The withdrawal of monetary and fiscal support “are necessary to contain inflationary pressures, but their mutually compounding effects could produce larger impacts than intended, both in tightening financial conditions and in steepening the growth slowdown.” Markets are acting in a manner consistent with this assessment, but, in our view, need to expand the risk set to include a higher likelihood of a war widening beyond Ukraine. While this is not our base case, it is worthwhile recalling the link between war and inflation. Prior to and during the 20th century’s two world wars, then the Korean and Vietnam wars, US CPI inflation rose sharply (Chart 1).3 Price controls and tighter monetary policy were needed to address these inflationary episodes. Chart 1A Wider Ukraine War Would Stoke Inflation Stronger USD Remains Oil-Demand Headwind Fed policy will continue to push US interest rates higher, which will push the USD higher on the back of continued global demand for dollar-denominated assets. This will keep the cost of most commodities ex-US higher in local currency terms, which, all else equal, will weaken commodity demand in general, and oil demand in particular. This will be compounded if tighter monetary policy at systemically important central banks (led by the Fed) results in a global recession in 2023. This is especially true for EM oil demand: The income elasticity of EM oil consumption is 0.61, which means a 1% decrease (increase) in real EM GDP translates into a 0.61% decrease (increase) in oil demand, all else equal. In our base case, we expect global oil demand to grow 2.2mm b/d this year and 1.91mm b/d next year, roughly in line with the US EIA’s and IEA’s estimates (Chart 2). We expect EM demand will increase 1.25mm b/d this year, and 1.90mm b/d next year, accounting for almost all of global growth. As before, we expect China’s oil demand growth to be de minimus this year, on the back of its zero-tolerance COVID-19 policy. EM remains the key driver of our global oil demand assumptions, which, in our modeling, are a function of real income (GDP). Offsetting the stronger USD effects on demand is gas-to-oil switching demand, resulting from record-high LNG prices this year. This will add 800k b/d to demand globally this winter (November – March). Chart 2Global Oil Demand Holding Up Oil Supply Getting Tighter Oil supply will remain challenged this year and next, as core OPEC 2.0 – the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) – approaches the limit of what it can supply to the market and still retain sufficient spare capacity to meet unexpected supply shocks (Chart 3). Among the anticipated shocks we believe core OPEC 2.0 is aware of is the loss of 2mm b/d of Russian crude oil output over the next year, due to the imposition of EU embargoes on seaborne crude oil and refined products, which will go into effect 5 December 2022 and 5 February 2023, respectively. The continued inability of non-core OPEC 2.0 states to maintain higher production – “The Other Guys” in our nomenclature – is another foreseeable shock (Chart 4). This is becoming acute for OPEC 2.0, given The Other Guys account for most of the 3.6mm b/d of below-quota output currently registered by the producer coalition.4 This is a record gap between expected production and actual production from OPEC 2.0, which was registered in August. Chart 3Core OPEC 2.0 Conserves Supplies Chart 4'Other Guys' Production Keeps Falling Net, demand will continue to outpace supply in our base case (Chart 5, Table 1). This will require continued inventory draws for the next year or so, as core OPEC 2.0 continues to conserve supplies (Chart 6). Chart 5Demand Continues To Outpace Supply Chart 6Inventory Will Continue Drawing Table 1BCA Global Oil Supply - Demand Balances (MMb/d, Base Case Balances) To Dec23 Russian Wild Card Battlefield losses in Ukraine are forcing Russia’s military to activate some 300k reserve troops. These losses again are prompting veiled threats to deploy nuclear and perhaps chemical weapons, which drew a sharp warning from US President Biden.5 Further economic losses will begin mounting in a little more than two months, as the first of two major EU oil-import embargoes and a ban on insuring/re-insuring vessels carrying Russian crude and products takes hold. In addition, a US-led G7 price cap on Russian oil purchases will go into effect with the December embargo on seaborne crude imports into the EU.6 We continue to expect Russia will be forced to shut in ~ 2mm b/d of crude oil production by the end of next year – taking output from a little more than 10mm b/d to ~ 8mm b/d.7 Russian’s President Putin already has threatened to cut off oil supplies to anyone abiding by the G7 price cap.8 In our modeling, a unilateral 2mm b/d cut in Russian output – in addition to the lost sales from the EU embargoes and insurance/reinsurance bans – would take Brent prices above $200/bbl (Chart 7). On the downside, a severe global recession that removes 2mm b/d of demand next year could send prices below $60/bbl. Equally plausible cases for either outcome can be made, given current supply-demand fundamentals and the geopolitical backdrop discussed above. This can be seen in the lack of skew in the options markets, which is measured by the difference in out-of-the-money call and put implied volatilities (Chart 8). The skew sits close to zero at present – meaning options buyers are not giving higher odds to a sharp upside or downside move at present.9 Chart 7Higher Brent Prices, Stronger Upside Bias Chart 8Option Skew Shows Up Or Down Moves Equally Likely In our modeling and analysis, we continue to believe the balance of risk is to the upside. As can be seen in Chart 6, inventories are below the 2010-14 five-year average – OPEC 2.0’s original target when it was formed – which means KSA and the UAE will be able to respond to any demand shocks that cause unintended inventory accumulation (e.g., the sort that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic or the OPEC market-share war of 2015-16). Managing the upside risk is more difficult: KSA and the UAE are close to the limits of what they can supply and still carry sufficient spare capacity to meet unexpected production losses. KSA’s crude oil output is just over 11mm b/d, and the UAE’s is at 3.2mm b/d, according to OPEC’s Monthly Oil Market Report. This puts both within 1mm b/d of their max production capacity of 12mm and 4mm b/d. Both got close to producing at these max levels in early 2020, when Russia provoked a market share war; this was quickly reversed as a magnitude of the COVID-19 demand destruction became apparent. The only other large producer outside the OPEC 2.0 coalition capable of increasing and sustaining higher output is the US shales, which are producing at 7.8mm b/d and have pushed total US crude oil output to 12.2mm b/d (Chart 9). Leading producers in the shales have foreclosed any sharp increase in output this year, given tight labor markets and services and equipment markets in the US. Chart 9US Shales Close To Max Output Investment Implications Global crude oil markets remain tight, with demand continuing to exceed supply. The risk that the economic war pitting the EU and its allies against Russia could expand to a more kinetic confrontation involving additional states is higher, as more Russian troops are called up to serve in Ukraine. If the additional troops do not reverse Russia’s battlefield losses – or if Ukraine looks like it will win this war – Putin likely will feel cornered, and get more desperate.10 We believe Putin will first attempt to impose as much economic pain on the West as possible by cutting off all natural gas and oil flows to the EU and states and firms observing the G7 price cap. However, if that does not force the West to relent on its economic war with Russia, a war with NATO could evolve in which tactical nukes or other weapons of mass destruction are employed. At that point, Putin would have concluded there would be nothing he could do to restore Russia’s standing as a world power. Any plume – nuclear, biological or chemical (NBC) – that crosses a NATO border likely would be treated as an act of war. NATO would have to act at that point. This is not our expectation, nor is it any part of our base case. But it is a higher non-trivial risk than it was last month or last week. This raises the odds of higher war-driven inflation, as well, which will further complicate central-bank monetary policy at a time of war. Our baseline forecast remains intact, with a strong bias to the upside. We remain long the COMT and XOP ETFs to retain exposure to commodities. Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish In its September update, the US EIA reported natural gas consumption will hit record levels in 2022, increasing by 3.6 Bcf/d to just under 87 Bcf/d on average, led by increases in the electric power residential and commercial sectors (Chart 10). US natural gas consumption in the electric power sector will increase in 2022 due to limitations at coal-fired power plants and weather-driven demand. It is expected to decrease in 4Q22 and in 2023, due to more renewable electricity generation capacity. Natural gas consumption in the residential and commercial sectors for 2023 is expected to be similar as 2022 levels. Base Metals: Bullish According to Eurometaux, a consortium of European metal producers, approximately 50% of the EU’s zinc and aluminum production capacity is offline due to high power prices. More operations are expected to shut as European power prices remain elevated and metal prices drop on recessionary fears (Chart 11). The decision to reopen a smelter following a shutdown is expensive and can result in long wait times. This will make the bloc’s manufacturers heavily reliant on metal imports from other states, which likely will lead to higher pollution from these plants. Aluminum supply is particularly vulnerable to this power crisis since one ton needs an eye-watering 15 megawatt-hours of electricity – enough to power five homes in Germany for a year. Precious Metals: Neutral The Fed’s additional 75-bps rate hike will strengthen the USD and weaken gold prices. Geopolitical risk has been a tailwind for the greenback thus far, as investors rush to the USD instead of the yellow metal for safe-haven investments. If this trend continues, along with further Fed rate increases, the additional risk arising from Putin’s reserve force mobilization and possible expansion of the Ukraine war will boost the USD and leave gold in the doldrums. Chart 10 Chart 11 Footnotes 1 Please see Vladimir Putin mobilises army reserves to support Ukraine invasion, published by ft.com on September 21, 2022. 2 Please see Is a Global Recession Imminent?, published by the World Bank on September 15, 2022. The report notes, “Policymakers need to stand ready to manage the potential spillovers from globally synchronous withdrawal of policies supporting growth. On the supply-side, they need to put in place measures to ease the constraints that confront labor markets, energy markets, and trade networks.” 3 Please see One hundred years of price change: the Consumer Price Index and the American inflation experience, published by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics in April 2014. 4 Please see OPEC+ supply shortfall now stands at 3.5% of global oil demand, published 20 September 2022 by reuters.com. 5 Please see Biden warns Putin over nuclear, chemical weapons, published by politico.eu on September 17, 2022. 6 Please see EU Russian Oil Embargoes, Higher Prices, which we published on August 18, 2022, for discussion. 7 We include Russia among “The Other Guys” in our balances estimates. 8 Please see Explainer: The G7's price cap on Russian oil begins to take shape, published by reuters.com on September 19, 2022. 9 We use the standard measure of skew – i.e., the difference between 25-delta calls and puts – to determine whether option market participants are discounting a higher likelihood of an up or down move, respectively. 10 Please see CIA director warns Putin's 'desperation' over Russia's failures in Ukraine could lead him to use nukes, published by businessinsider.com on April 15, 2022. Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Trades Closed in 2022
Executive Summary There’s Value In TIPS A survey of economic and financial market indicators suggests that we are not yet close to the end of the Fed’s tightening cycle. This argues for a continued flattening of the yield curve and one more push higher in bond yields before the end of the cyclical bond bear market. While headline inflation has rolled over, there is so far little indication of a slowdown in core price appreciation. We see core CPI reaching 3.6% during the next 12 months, driven by decelerating goods prices but sticky wage growth and services inflation. The TIPS market is discounting an overly sanguine view of headline inflation for the next 12 months, and there is value in owning TIPS versus nominal Treasuries. Bottom Line: Investors should reduce portfolio duration to ‘below-benchmark’ and hold a position in 5-year/30-year Treasury curve flatteners. Investors should also overweight TIPS versus nominal Treasuries and own 2-year/10-year TIPS breakeven inflation curve flatteners. Feature US bond yields continued their ascent last week, spurred on by August’s surprisingly high core CPI print and the perception that the Fed will have to tighten policy even more quickly to bring inflation back down. Currently, the market is discounting that the Fed will lift the funds rate to 4.61% by April of next year and then bring it back down to 4.26% by the end of 2023 (Chart 1). Chart 1Rate Expectations This market-implied interest rate path would involve 225 bps of tightening at the next 5 FOMC meetings, or an average rate increase of +45 bps per meeting. With a 75 basis point rate increase looking like a lock for this week, market pricing is consistent with additional 50 basis point increases at the final two meetings of this year (November and December) and then two more 25 basis point rate hikes in Q1 2023. After that, the market anticipates that the tightening cycle will be over. Our view continues to be that the peak in the fed funds rate will occur later than April 2023 and that, while a pause in the Fed’s tightening cycle is likely at some point next year, inflation will be strong enough to preclude outright rate cuts. In terms of investment strategy, last week’s report presented empirical evidence showing that, on average, Treasury yields peak 1-2 months before the last rate hike of the cycle.1 In fact, in the seven Fed tightening cycles that we analyzed, the 10-year Treasury yield always peaked within a window spanning four months before the last rate hike and four months after (Table 1). This analysis suggests that even if the fed funds rate peaks in April, as is implied by the market, bond yields likely have one more leg higher before the end of the cyclical bear market. Table 1Timing Fed Tightening Cycles While we have been consistently highlighting that the market is not pricing-in a sufficiently high average fed funds rate for 2023, we have been recommending an ‘at benchmark’ portfolio duration stance on the view that falling inflation could briefly send bond yields lower in the near term. The 10-year Treasury yield did fall back to 2.60% on August 1, but it then rebounded quickly and has continued to head higher since. With Treasury yields unlikely to re-test those depths anytime soon, we recommend shifting to a ‘below-benchmark’ portfolio duration stance to play the final leg higher in bond yields before a US recession ends the cyclical bond bear market. The next section of this report surveys nine cyclical economic indicators and argues that the balance of evidence suggests that the fed funds rate’s peak will occur later than April 2023. Then, the final section of this report discusses our recommended TIPS investment strategy in light of last week’s CPI report and our outlook for inflation. Tracking The Tightening Cycle One of the most useful tools in our arsenal for assessing the state of the interest rate cycle is our Fed Monitor. The Fed Monitor is a composite of 47 economic and financial market variables that has been designed to output a positive value when the data recommend interest rate hikes and a negative value when rate cuts are required. Historically, the Monitor does a good job of lining up with the actual path of the fed funds rate (Chart 2). Chart 2Fed Monitor Says More Tightening Required The Fed Monitor is currently down off its highs, but at 1.03 it is well above the zero line. Looking at past tightening cycles, we find that the Monitor has averaged 0.41 on the day of the last rate hike of a cycle, with a range of outcomes spanning -0.49 to +0.93. Notably, the +0.93 upper-end of that range occurred in 1995, a time when the Fed only delivered a modest amount of policy easing before pivoting back to tightening in 1999. The variables in our Fed Monitor can be grouped into three categories: (i) economic growth variables, (ii) inflation variables and (iii) financial market variables. Interestingly, we observe that the Economic Growth component of our Monitor has dipped into negative territory while the Inflation and Financial Conditions components continue to argue for tighter policy (Chart 2, bottom 3 panels). A negative Economic Growth component suggests that we are getting closer to the end of the tightening cycle, but the Fed will likely stay hawkish and tolerate an even deeper negative reading from Economic Growth as long as inflation remains high. In addition to our Fed Monitor, we have identified nine economic indicators (some included in the Fed Monitor and some not) that are particularly relevant for the Fed’s policy stance. In this week’s report, we look at the message these indicators were sending on the day of the last rate hike of seven past tightening cycles. The indicators are: The Sahm Rule: Economist Claudia Sahm has noted that a recession always occurs when the 3-month moving average of the unemployment rate rises by more than 0.5% off its trailing 12-month low.2 We include the unemployment rate’s deviation from its 12-month low as a measure of labor market utilization. Employment Momentum: We look at the 6-month growth rate in nonfarm payrolls as a measure of momentum in the labor market. Inflation: We use 12-month core PCE as a measure of inflation that is most closely related to the Fed’s target. Inflation Momentum: To measure momentum in inflation we look at the difference between 3-month core PCE and 12-month core PCE. Labor Market Tightness: Using responses from the Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Survey, we look at the number of people who describe jobs as “plentiful” minus the number who describe jobs as “hard to get”. Economic Growth: We use the ISM Manufacturing PMI as a simple measure of the trend in aggregate demand in the US economy. Housing: To assess trends in the housing market we look at the 12-month moving average in housing starts minus the 24-month moving average. Financial Conditions: We use the Goldman Sachs Financial Conditions Index to assess whether financial conditions are accommodative or restrictive. The Yield Curve: We look at the 2-year/10-year Treasury slope to ascertain whether the bond market perceives the monetary policy stance as accommodative or restrictive. Table 2A lists the nine indicators described above and shows their values on the day of the last rate hike of seven past tightening cycles. We also include the current reading from each indicator. Finally, we shade in red every cell that we deem consistent with the Fed stopping its tightening cycle. To make this determination we compare the value on the day of the last rate hike to the median value witnessed on the day of the last hike across all seven tightening cycles. We don’t use median values for the Goldman Sachs Financial Conditions Index or the Treasury slope. Rather, we say that an inverted yield curve and a Financial Conditions reading above 100 are both consistent with the end of rate hikes. Table 2AEconomic Indicators At The End Of Fed Tightening Cycles The last column of Table 2A simply adds up the number of red cells in each row. As of today, we see that only 2 out of nine indicators are consistent with the end of the tightening cycle. The end of a tightening cycle has never occurred with less than four indicators flashing red. Table 2B takes a slightly more sophisticated approach to the same exercise. Rather than simply comparing above or below the median, we rank each indicator as a percentile relative to its value on the day of the last rate hike across seven different tightening cycles. We then combine those percentile ranks with an equal weighting to get an “End of Tightening Score”. Larger values are consistent with a greater likelihood that the tightening cycle will end and lower values are consistent with a lower likelihood. Currently, the End of Tightening Score stands at 28%, lower than on the day of the last rate hike in all of the cycles we analyzed. Table 2BEconomic Indicators At The End Of Fed Tightening Cycles: Percentile Ranks As is the case with our Fed Monitor, the closest End of Tightening Score to today’s occurred in 1995. One key difference between 1995 and today is that core inflation was running much closer to target in 1995. This gave the Fed scope to fine tune its policy stance without risking its inflation fighting credibility. That flexibility is not available to the Fed in today’s high inflation environment. Bottom Line: A survey of economic and financial market indicators suggests that we are not yet close to the end of the Fed’s tightening cycle. This argues for a continued flattening of the yield curve and one more push higher in bond yields before the end of the cyclical bond bear market. Investors should set portfolio duration to ‘below benchmark’ and maintain a position in 5-year/30-year Treasury curve flatteners.3 The TIPS Market Is Too Complacent August’s month-over-month core CPI print came in well above expectations at +0.57%, sending bond yields higher and risk assets lower last week. Zooming out, while falling gasoline prices appear to have shifted the trend in headline inflation, there is so far little evidence of a meaningful move down in core or trimmed mean measures of CPI (Chart 3). Chart 3No Slowdown In Core CPI Chart 4Core CPI Forecast In a recent Special Report, we went through the five major components of CPI (energy, food, shelter, goods and services) and came up with 12-month forecasts for both core and headline inflation.4 For core inflation, we forecast that it will fall to 3.6% during the next 12 months (Chart 4). The main driver of the drop will be a return of goods inflation to pre-pandemic levels (Chart 4, panel 3). We anticipate only a minor pullback in shelter inflation (Chart 4, panel 2) and that services inflation will remain elevated, driven by strong wage growth (Chart 4, bottom panel). Recently, we have seen some evidence that home prices and rents on new leases are decelerating, no doubt a response to high and rising mortgage rates. That said, we don’t anticipate much pass through from those trends into shelter inflation during the next 12 months. First, home price appreciation leads shelter CPI by 18 months (Chart 5A). This means that we shouldn’t expect falling home prices to meaningfully impact shelter inflation until the end of 2023. Second, rental growth on new leases as measured by Zillow and Apartment List has clearly decelerated, but it is still running much hotter than shelter CPI (Chart 5B). Given the limited historical track record, it’s very difficult to say how much (if any) of the recent deceleration in rental growth will ultimately pass through to the CPI. Chart 5AHome Prices & Shelter CPI Chart 5BDecelerating Rents In our research, we have found that measures of labor market utilization are the most important variables to include in any model of shelter inflation. For ease of forecasting, the model shown in Chart 4 and in the top panel of Chart 6 uses the unemployment rate as its measure of labor market tightness. This model works well, but it arguably understates shelter inflation because it doesn’t include a variable capturing wage growth. If we replace the unemployment rate in our model with the more comprehensive aggregate weekly payrolls measure, then we get a much tighter fit and a model that does a better job explaining the recent surge in shelter CPI (Chart 6, bottom panel).5 All in all, we conclude that our expectation that shelter inflation will fall from 6.3% to 4.7% during the next 12 months may wind up being a tad optimistic. When we combine our forecast for 3.6% core inflation with two scenarios for the oil price – a benign one based on what is priced into the futures curve and another based on the forecasts of our commodity strategists – we get an expected range of 2.1% to 4.7% for headline CPI during the next 12 months (Chart 7). According to our Golden Rule of TIPS Investing, if 12-month headline CPI comes in above the current 1-year CPI swap rate then TIPS will outperform nominal Treasuries during the 12-month investment horizon.6 Chart 6Modeling Shelter Inflation Chart 7There's Value In TIPS At present, the 1-year CPI swap rate is 2.76%, near the bottom of our expected range of outcomes for 12-month headline CPI. It seems to us that a lot of things will have to go right for inflation to come in below market expectations during the next year. For this reason, we think it makes sense for investors to overweight TIPS versus nominal Treasuries in US bond portfolios. Chart 8Own Inflation Curve Flatteners Additionally, we see a lot of value in owning TIPS breakeven curve flatteners (Chart 8). The 2-year and 10-year TIPS breakeven inflation rates are both currently 2.38%, meaning that the 2-year/10-year TIPS breakeven slope is at zero. Higher-than-expected inflation during the next 12 months will put more pressure on the front-end of the breakeven curve than the long end, flattening the curve. Further, logic dictates that an inverted inflation curve is more consistent with an environment where the Fed is fighting above-target inflation than a positively sloped one. There will come a time when it makes sense for the inflation curve to move back into positive territory, but that won’t be until the Fed has brought inflation down much closer to its target. Bottom Line: The inflation outlook priced into markets for the next 12 months is too benign. Investors should overweight TIPS versus nominal Treasuries and own TIPS breakeven inflation curve flatteners. Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “A Brief History Of Fed Tightening Cycles”, dated September 13, 2022. 2 https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ES_THP_Sahm_web_20190506.pdf 3 For more details on this curve trade please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “The Great Soft Landing Debate”, dated August 9, 2022. 4 Please see US Bond Strategy Special Report, “The Golden Rule Of TIPS Investing”, dated August 23, 2022. 5 Aggregate weekly payrolls = nonfarm employment x average weekly hours x average hourly earnings 6 Please see US Bond Strategy Special Report, “The Golden Rule Of TIPS Investing”, dated August 23, 2022. Recommended Portfolio Specification Other Recommendations Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns
Executive Summary The US inflation surprise increases the odds of both congressional gridlock and recession, which increases uncertainty over US leadership past 2024 and reduces the US’s ability to lower tensions with China and Iran. Despite the mainstream media narrative, the Xi-Putin summit reinforces our view that China cannot reject Russia’s strategic partnership. The potential for conflict in Taiwan forces China to accept Russia’s overture. For the same reason the US and China cannot re-engage their economies sustainably, even if Biden and Xi somehow manage to reduce tensions after the midterm elections and twentieth national party congress. Russia could reduce oil exports as well as natural gas, intensifying the global energy shock. Ukraine’s counter-offensive and Europe’s energy diversification increase the risk of Russian military and economic failure. The Middle East will destabilize anew and create a new source of global energy supply disruptions. US-Iran talks are faltering as expected. Russian Oil Embargo Could Deliver Global Shock Asset Initiation Date Return LONG GLOBAL DEFENSIVES / CYCLICALS EQUITIES 2022-01-20 19.1% Bottom Line: Stay long US stocks, defensive sectors, and large caps. Avoid China, Taiwan, eastern Europe, and the Middle East. Feature Several notable geopolitical developments occurred over the past week while we met with clients at the annual BCA Research Investment Conference in New York. In this report we analyze these developments using our geopolitical method, which emphasizes constraints over preferences, capabilities over intentions, reality over narrative. We also draw freely from the many valuable insights gleaned from our guest speakers at the conference. China Cannot Reject Russia: The Xi-Putin Summit In Uzbekistan Presidents Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin are meeting in Uzbekistan as we go to press and Putin has acknowledged China’s “questions and concern” about the war in Ukraine.1 They last met on February 4 when Xi gave Putin his blessing for the Ukraine invasion, promising to buy more Russian natural gas and to pursue a “no limits” strategic partnership (meaning one that includes extensive military cooperation). The meeting’s importance is clear from both leaders’ efforts to make it happen. Putin is leaving Russia despite rising domestic criticism over his handling of the Ukraine war and European energy war. Ukraine is making surprising gains in the battlefield, particularly around Kharkiv, threatening Russia’s ability to complete the conquest of Donetsk and the Donbas region. Meanwhile Xi is leaving China for the first time since the Covid-19 outbreak, despite the fact that he is only one month away from the most important political event of his life: the October 16 twentieth national party congress, where he hopes to clinch another five, ten, or fifteen years in power, expand his faction’s grip over the political system, and take over Mao Zedong’s unique title as chairman of the Communist Party. We do not yet know the full outcome of the Uzbek summit but we do not see it as a turning point in which China turns on Russia. Instead the summit reinforces our key point to investors all year: China cannot reject Russia. Russia broke energy ties with Europe and is fighting a proxy war with NATO. The Putin regime has lashed Russia to China’s side for the foreseeable future. China may not have wanted to move so quickly toward an exclusive relationship but it is not in a position to reject Russia’s diplomatic overture and leave Putin out to dry. The reason is that China is constrained by the US-led world order and like Russia is attempting to change that order and carve a sphere of influence to improve its national security. Beijing’s immediate goal is to consolidate power across the critical buffer territories susceptible to foreign interests. It has already consolidated Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong, and to some extent the South China Sea, the critical approach to Taiwan. Taiwan is the outstanding buffer space that needs to be subjugated. Xi Jinping has taken it upon himself to unify China and Taiwan within his extended rule. But Taiwanese public opinion has decisively shifted in favor of either an indefinite status quo or independence. Hence China and Taiwan are on a collision course. Regardless of one’s view on the likelihood of war, it is a high enough chance that China, Taiwan, the US, and others will be preparing for it in the coming years. Chart 1US Arms Sales To Taiwan The US is attempting to increase its ability to deter China from attacking Taiwan. It believes it failed to deter Russia from invading Ukraine – and Taiwan is far more important to US economy and security than Ukraine. The US is already entering discussions with Taiwan and other allies about a package of severe economic sanctions in the event that China attacks – sanctions comparable to those imposed on Russia. The US Congress is also moving forward with the Taiwan Policy Act of 2022, which will solidify US support for the island as well as increase arms sales (Chart 1).2 Aside from China's military preparation – which needs to be carefully reviewed in light of Russia’s troubles in Ukraine and the much greater difficulty of invading Taiwan – China must prepare to deal with the following three factors in the event of war: 1. Energy: China is overly exposed to sea lines of communication that can be disrupted by the United States Navy. Beijing will have to partner with Russia to import Russian and Central Asian resources and attempt to forge an overland path to the Middle East (Chart 2). Unlike Russia, China cannot supply its own energy during a war and its warfighting capacity will suffer if shortages occur or prices spike. 2. Computer Chips: China has committed at least $200 billion on a crash course to build its own semiconductors since 2013 due to the need to modernize its military and economy and compete with the US on the global stage. But China is still dependent on imports, especially for the most advanced chips, and its dependency is rising not falling despite domestic investments (Chart 3). The US is imposing export controls on advanced microchips and starting to enforce these controls on third parties. The US and its allies have cut off Russia’s access to computer chips, leading to Russian shortages that are impeding their war effort. Chart 2China’s Commodity Import Vulnerability Chart 3China's Imports Of Semiconductors 3. US Dollar Reserves: China is still heavily exposed to US dollar assets but its access will be cut off in the event of war, just as the US has frozen Russian, Iranian, Venezuelan, and Cuban assets over the years. China is already diversifying away from the dollar but will have to move more quickly given that Russia had dramatically reduced its exposure and still suffered severely when its access to dollar reserves was frozen this year (Chart 4). Where will China reallocate its reserves? To developing and importing natural resources from Russia, Central Asia, and other overland routes. Chart 4China's US Dollar Exposure Russia may be the junior partner in a new Russo-Chinese alliance but it will not be a vassal. Russia has resources, military power, and regional control in Central Asia that China needs. Of course, China will maintain a certain diplomatic distance from Russia because it needs to maintain economic relations with Europe and other democracies as it breaks up with the United States. Europe is far more important to Chinese exports than Russia. China will play both sides and its companies will develop parallel supply chains. China will also make gestures to countries that feel threatened by Russia, including the Central Asian members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). But the crucial point is that China cannot reject Russia. If the Putin regime fails, China will be diplomatically isolated, it will lose an ally in any Taiwan war, and the US will have a much greater advantage in attempting to contain China in the coming years and decades. Russo-Chinese Alliance And The US Dollar Many investors speculate that China’s diversification away from the US dollar will mark a severe downturn for the currency. This is of course possible, given that Russia and China will form a substantial anti-dollar bloc. Certainly there can be a cyclical downturn in the greenback, especially after the looming recession troughs. But it is harder to see a structural collapse of the dollar as the leading global reserve currency. The past 14 years have shown how global investors react to US dysfunction, Russian aggression, and Chinese slowdown: they buy the dollar! The implication is that a US wage-price spiral, a Russian détente with Europe, and a Chinese economic recovery would be negative for the dollar – but those stars have not yet aligned. Related Report Geopolitical StrategyThe Geopolitical Consequences Of The Ukraine War The reason China needs to diversify is because it fears US sanctions when it invades Taiwan. Hence reducing its holdings of US treasuries and the dollar signals that it expects war in future. But will other countries rush into the yuan and yuan-denominated bonds if Xi is following in Putin’s footsteps and launching a war of choice, with damaging consequences for the economy? A war over Taiwan would be a global catastrophe and would send other countries plunging into the safe-haven assets, including US assets. Nevertheless China will diversify and other countries will probably increase their yuan trade over time, just as Russia has done. This will be a cyclical headwind for the dollar at some point. But it will not knock the US off the premier position. That would require a historic downgrade in the US’s economic and strategic capability, as was the case with the United Kingdom after the world wars. China will continue to stimulate the economy after the party congress. A successful Chinese and global economic rebound next year – and a decision to pursue “jaw jaw” with the US and Taiwan rather than “war war” – would be negative for the dollar. Hence we may downgrade our bullish dollar view to neutral on a cyclical basis before long … but not yet and not on a structural basis. Bottom Line: Favor the US dollar and the euro over the Chinese renminbi and Taiwanese dollar. Underweight Chinese and Taiwanese assets on a structural basis. Ukraine’s Counter-Offensive And A Russian Oil Embargo Ukraine launched a counter-offensive against Russia in September and achieved significant early victories. Russians fell back away from Kharkiv, putting Izyum in Ukrainian hands and jeopardizing Russia’s ability to achieve its war aim of conquering the remaining half of Donetsk province and thus controlling the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine. Russian positions also crumbled west of the Dnieper river, which was always an important limit on Russian capabilities (Map 1). Map 1Status Of Russia-Ukraine War: The Ukrainian Counter-Offensive (September 15, 2022) Some commentators, such as Francis Fukuyama in the Washington Post, have taken the Ukrainian counter-offensive as a sign that the Ukrainians will reconquer lost territory and Russia will suffer an outright defeat in this war.3 If Russia cannot conquer the Donbas, its control of the “land bridge” to Crimea will be unsustainable, and it may have to admit defeat. But we are very skeptical. It will be extremely difficult for Ukrainians to drive the Russians out of all of their entrenched positions. US military officials applauded Ukraine’s counter-offensive but sounded a cautious note. The chief problem is that neither President Putin nor the Russian military can afford such a defeat. They will have to double down on the Donbas and land bridge. The war will be prolonged. Ultimately we expect stalemate, which will be a prelude to ceasefire negotiations. But first the fighting will intensify and the repercussions for global economy and markets will get worse. Russia’s war effort is also flagging because Europe is making headway in finding alternatives for Russian natural gas. Russia has cut off flows through the Nord Stream pipeline to Germany, the Yamal pipeline to Poland, and partially to the Ukraine pipeline system, leaving only Turkstream operating normally. Yet EU gas storage is in the middle of its normal range and trending higher (Chart 5). Chart 5Europe Handling Natural Gas Crisis Well … So Far Of course, Europe’s energy supply is still not secure. Cold weather could require more heating than expected. Russia has an incentive to tighten the gas flow further. Flows from Algeria or Azerbaijan could be sabotaged or disrupted (Chart 6). Chart 6Europe’s NatGas Supply Still Not Secure Chart 7Europe Tipping Into Recession Anyway Russia’s intention is to inflict a recession on Europe so that it begins to rethink its willingness to maintain a long-term proxy war. Recession will force European households to pay the full cost of the energy breakup with Russia all at once. Popular support for war will moderate and politicians will adopt more pragmatic diplomacy. After all they do not have an interest in prolonging the war to the point that it spirals out of control. Clearly the economic pain is being felt, as manufacturing expectations and consumer confidence weaken (Chart 7). Europe’s resolve will not collapse overnight. But the energy crisis can get worse from here. The deeper the recession, the more likely European capitals will try to convince Ukraine to negotiate a ceasefire. However, given Ukraine’s successes in the field and Europe’s successes in diversification, it is entirely possible that Russia faces further humiliating setbacks. While this outcome may be good for liberal democracies, it is not good for global financial markets, at least not in the short run. If Russia is backed into a corner on both the military and economic fronts, then Putin’s personal security and regime security will be threatened. Russia could attempt to turn the tables or lash out even more aggressively. Already Moscow has declared a new “red line” if the US provides longer-range missiles to Ukraine. A US-Russia showdown, complete with nuclear threats, is not out of the realm of possibility. Russia could also start halting oil exports, as it has threatened to do, to inflict a major oil shock on the European economy. Investors will need to be prepared for that outcome. Bottom Line: Petro-states have geopolitical leverage as long as global commodity supplies remain tight. Investors should be prepared for the European embargo of Russian oil to provoke a Russian reaction. A larger than expected oil shock is possible given the risk of defeat that Russia faces (Chart 8). Chart 8Russian Oil Embargo Could Deliver Global Shock US-Iran Talks Falter Again This trend of petro-state geopolitical leverage was one of our three key views for 2022 and it also extends to the US-Iran nuclear negotiations, which are faltering as expected. Tit-for-tat military action between Iran and its enemies in the Persian Gulf will pick up immediately – i.e. a new source of oil disruption will emerge. If global demand is collapsing then this trend may only create additional volatility for oil markets at first, but it further constrains the supply side for the foreseeable future. It is not yet certain that the talks are dead but a deal before the US midterm looks unlikely. Biden could continue working on a deal in 2023-24. The Democratic Party is likely to lose at least the House of Representatives, leaving him unable to pass legislation and more likely to pursue foreign policy objectives. The Biden administration wants the Iran deal to tamp down inflation and avoid a third foreign policy crisis at a time when it is already juggling Russia and China. The overriding constraints in this situation are that Iran needs a nuclear weapon for regime survival, while Israel will attack Iran as a last resort before it obtains a nuclear weapon. Yes, the US is reluctant to initiate another war in the Middle East. But public war-weariness is probably overrated today (unlike in 2008 or even 2016) and the US has drawn a hard red line against nuclear weaponization. Iran will retaliate to any US-Israeli aggression ferociously. But conflict and oil disruptions will emerge even before the US or Israel decide to launch air strikes, as Iran will face sabotage and cyber-attacks and will need to deter the US and Israel by signaling that it can trigger a region-wide war. Chart 9If US-Iran Talks Fail, Iraq Will Destabilize Further Recent social unrest in Iraq, where the nationalist coalition of Muqtada al-Sadr is pushing back against Iranian influence, is only an inkling of what can occur if the US-Iran talks are truly dead, Iran pushes forward with its nuclear program, and Israel and the US begin openly entertaining military options. The potential oil disruption from Iraq presents a much larger supply constraint than the failure to remove sanctions on Iran (Chart 9). A new wave of Middle Eastern instability would push up oil prices and strengthen Russia’s hand, distracting the US and imposing further pain on Europe. It would not strengthen China’s hand, but the risk itself would reinforce China’s Eurasian strategy, as Beijing would need to prepare for oil cutoffs in the Persian Gulf. Iran’s attempts to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization should be seen in this context. Ultimately the only factor that could still possibly convince Iran not to make a dash for the bomb – the military might of the US and its allies – is the same factor that forces China and Russia to strengthen their strategic bond. The emerging Russo-Chinese behemoth, in turn, acts as a hard constraint on any substantial reengagement of the US and Chinese economies. The US cannot afford to feed another decade of Chinese economic growth and modernization if China is allied with Russia and Central Asia. Of course, we cannot rule out the possibility that the Xi and Biden administrations will try to prevent a total collapse of US-China relations in 2023. If China is not yet ready to invade Taiwan then there is a brief space for diplomacy to try to work. But there is no room for long-lasting reengagement – because the US cannot simply cede Taiwan to China, and hence China cannot reject Russia, and Russia no longer has any options. Bottom Line: Expect further oil volatility and price shocks. Sell Middle Eastern equities. Favor North American, Latin American, and Australian energy producers. Investment Takeaways Recession Risks Rising: The inflation surprise in the US in August necessitates more aggressive Fed rate hikes in the near term, which increases the odds of rising unemployment and recession. US Policy Uncertainty Rising: A recession will greatly increase the odds of US political instability over the 2022-24 cycle and reduce the incentive for foreign powers like Iran or China to make concessions or agreements with the US. European Policy Uncertainty Rising: We already expected a European recession. Russia’s setbacks make it more likely that it will adopt more aggressive military tactics and economic warfare. Chinese Policy Uncertainty Rising: China will continue stimulating next year but its economy will suffer from energy shocks and its stimulus is less effective than in the past. It will likely increase economic and military pressure on Taiwan, while the US will increase punitive measures against China. It is not clear that it will launch a full scale invasion of Taiwan – that is not our base case – but it is possible so investors need to be prepared. Long US and Defensives: Stay long US stocks over global stocks, defensive sectors over cyclicals, and large caps over small caps. Buy safe-havens like the oversold Japanese yen. Long Arms Manufacturers: Buy defense stocks and cyber-security firms. Short China and Taiwan: Favor the USD and EUR over the CNY. Favor US semiconductor stocks over Taiwanese equities. Favor Korean over Taiwanese equities. Favor Indian tech over Chinese tech. Favor Singaporean over Hong Kong stocks. Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Tessa Wong and Simon Fraser, “Putin-Xi talks: Russian leader reveals China's 'concern' over Ukraine,” BBC, September 15, 2022, bbc.com. 2 US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, “The Taiwan Policy Act of 2022,” foreign.senate.gov. 3 Greg Sargent, “Is Putin facing defeat? The ‘End of History’ author remains confident,” Washington Post, September 12, 2022, washingtonpost.com. Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix
Executive Summary Liquidity Will Shrink Further In Hong Kong The HKD is facing its most critical test in several decades. While the peg is likely to survive (Feature Chart), the economic costs for Hong Kong SAR will be far reaching. Critically, monetary policy in Hong Kong SAR is being tailored behind a hawkish Fed, while economic ties with China increasingly warrant easier policy settings. This tug of war will be resolved via a reset in domestic spending and asset prices. Equity shares have been the first shoe to drop. Real estate values and consumer spending will be next. A hypothetical delinking of the peg will see the HKD depreciate since it is expensive on a real effective exchange rate basis. Longer term, the rising use of the RMB in Hong Kong SAR will render the peg a relic. It will also fit with China’s aims to internationalize the RMB.. Bottom Line: The HKD peg is likely to survive in the near term, but the economic repercussions from maintaining the linked exchange-rate system will trigger a rethinking by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) and mainland authorities. Eventually, HKD could be replaced by the CNY. For now, HKD interest rates are slated to rise further, which will have ramifications for domestic spending and asset prices. Feature Chart 1HKD Has Been Tracking Interest Rates The Hong Kong dollar (HKD) has been trading on the weak side of its convertibility band since May. In theory, this suggests there is intense pressure for the peg to be delinked, which should lead to a much weaker exchange rate. In practice, interest rates in Hong Kong have failed to keep up with the surge in US rates, which has led to widening interest rate differentials between Hong Kong and the US. As a result, investors have embarked on a massive carry trade, funding USD purchases with HKDs (Chart 1). HKD’s weakness has raised questions about whether the exchange rate could face a crisis of confidence. This will be a severe blow to the HKMA whose sole role is currency stability, with the HKD being the underlying bedrock of Hong Kong’s financial system. In this report, we suggest that the HKD will survive this crisis, just as it has navigated previous shocks since 1983. The brunt of the adjustment will be domestic, first from Hong Kong equities, but spreading to real estate and consumer spending. Longer term, the HKD might become a relic as transactions in Hong Kong are increasingly conducted in RMB. Will The Peg Be Sustained? Historically, currency pegs more often than not fail. Specific to the HKD, the peg is facing its most critical test in decades but is likely to survive for a few reasons. First, every HKD that the region of Hong Kong has ever printed is backed by USD reserves, to the tune of 1.8 times. Quite simply, FX reserves are much higher than the Hong Kong monetary base (Chart 2). This suggests the HKMA’s “convertibility promise” remains credible. Second, Hong Kong also ranks favorably when looking at the ratio of broad money supply to FX reserves. Every 42.3 cents of broad money creation can be backed by foreign currency, a ratio much higher than China and on par with Singapore (Chart 3). With a monetary base fully backed by FX reserves and a broad money-to-FX reserve ratio largely in line with other linked exchange rate systems, our bias is that the peg will remain in place at least over a cyclical horizon (12-18 months). Chart 2In Theory, The HKMA Can Defend The Peg Chart 3The HKMA Ranks Favorably To The PBoC This credibility will come at a huge cost to the domestic economy, however. By having a fixed exchange rate system and an open capital account, Hong Kong has given up control over domestic monetary policy. Consequently, it must import monetary policy from the US. As interest rates rise in the US, demand for US dollar deposits from Hong Kong concerns goes up, putting downward pressure on the exchange rate. To maintain the convertibility ratio, the HKMA must drain the system of Hong Kong dollars to lift domestic interest rates. This is quite visible not only from the drop in foreign exchange reserves, but also the drawdown in the aggregate balance of domestic banks parked at the HKMA (Chart 4). From May 11 through August, the HKMA has absorbed a total of HKD 213 billion, shrinking the aggregate balance in the banking system by more than 60%. Chart 4Liquidity Will Shrink Further In Hong Kong Historically, the aggregate balance has had to drop much more to restore an equilibrium between interest rates in the US and Hong Kong SAR. The implication is that liquidity will continue to be drained from the system to ultimately defend the peg, and local interest rates will rise. There is one important caveat: Hong Kong SAR’s net international investment position stands at 580% of GDP, much higher than broad money supply. As such, the Hong Kong SAR does not have a solvency problem. What it faces is too much domestic liquidity, which is pushing HKD interest rates lower (Chart 5). Chart 5The HKD Is Facing A Liquidity, Rather Than A Solvency Crisis Ramifications Of The USD Peg When the HKD was tied to the US dollar in 1983, it made economic sense. Hong Kong SAR’s economy was more linked via trade to the US, compared to China (Chart 6). As such, stability vis-à-vis the US dollar was a vital appeal for traders, financiers, and all industries tied to the Hong Kong hub. Since then, there has been a tectonic shift in economic dependence. Exports to China now account for almost 60% of the total, while those to the US have fallen well below 8%. Quite simply, Hong Kong SAR still imports monetary policy from the US, while it is increasingly dependent on the Chinese economy. Nonetheless, there have been a few adjustments. The use of the RMB in Hong Kong SAR has been gradually gaining momentum. RMB deposits have risen to over HKD 800bn. As a share of narrow money supply (M1), it is almost 50% (Chart 7). There are also over 140 licensed banks in Hong Kong allowed to engage in RMB-based business. Chart 6Hong Kong And China Are Tied To The Hip Chart 7Hong Kong Is Transitioning Into A Defacto RMB System These links extend beyond just banking turnover. First introduced in 2014, the southbound trading links between China and Hong Kong SAR have become a major conduit for mainland investors to gain exposure to foreign firms. The China-Hong Kong stock connect has now handled over 2.6tn RMB in cumulative flows. This represented as high as 40% of the equity turnover in Hong Kong SAR (Chart 8). Capital account transactions have also been progressively relaxed, and the issuance of RMB bonds has been rising rapidly since 2008. Chart 8Lots Of Financial Links Between The HKD and RMB Hong Kong SAR’s strengthening ties with China comes with some good news. The increase in Chinese domestic liquidity is lowering the cost of capital for local enterprises. At the same time, it might also be fuelling very low domestic interest rates, forcing locals to chase higher rates elsewhere. This does not affect the peg if people sell the RMB to buy other currencies, including the dollar or maybe even the HKD. The bad news is that Hong Kong has now become a high-beta play on China as both economies are inexorably interlinked. Chart 9 shows that consumers in Hong Kong SAR tend to have much more volatile spending patterns compared to China, especially when economic growth is about to slow. One reason is that Hong Kong concerns are highly levered notably to the property market (Chart 10). For example, the debt service ratio in Hong Kong SAR sits at 32% of disposable income, much higher than China or other indebted economies (Chart 11). This makes the economy very vulnerable to rising interest rates. Chart 9Hong Kong Is Economically More Volatile Than China Chart 10Hong Kong Cannot Escape A Hard Landing (Part 1) Chart 11Hong Kong Cannot Escape A Hard Landing (Part 2) The bottom line is that as the HKMA withdraws domestic liquidity, this will reassert downward pressure on business activity and asset prices, particularly real estate. With private consumption a whopping 65% of GDP, household deleveraging will also prove to be a formidable headwind for domestic spending. Outside interest rates, Hong Kong SAR remains a trade hub. If global trade slows down meaningfully, this will lead to a deterioration in the current account. This triple whammy from slowing global trade, rising interest rates and consumer deleveraging could prove indigestible for Hong Kong assets. Policy Options Chart 12The Government Could Bail Out Hong Kong As highlighted above, the HKD peg will remain in place for the foreseeable future, but this will come at a huge cost. The advantage of the HKD peg is that the choice of the nominal anchor, the US dollar, renders it credible. As a financial hub, this is crucial for Hong Kong. Meanwhile, such an anchor also imposes fiscal discipline since government deficits cannot be monetized by money printing. In the case where the government tries to be profligate, the rise in inflation will lower real rates and lead to capital outflows. This will force the HKMA to sell US dollars and absorb local currency. Indeed, over the past several years, government debt in Hong Kong has been close to nil (Chart 12). The drawback of a fixed exchange-rate regime is that Hong Kong SAR has relinquished control over independent monetary policy. Such a union was justified when the economic cycles between the US and Hong Kong SAR were in sync, but now the region needs easier policy settings. The roadmap of the late 1990s could be what is in store for Hong Kong SAR. In short, the peg survived but the region went through a severe internal devaluation. During the Asian crisis, property prices fell by more than 60%. If that were to occur today, it would herald a prolonged period of high unemployment and stagnant wages to realign the region’s competitiveness with its trading partners. Hong Kong SAR stocks have already borne the brunt of an internal adjustment and are trading at very cheap multiples (Chart 13). The MSCI Hong Kong stock index is composed of mostly financials (47% of market cap) and property stocks (21% of market cap). As HKD rates are rising, loan growth in Hong Kong SAR is contracting and net interest margins have collapsed (Chart 14). This does not bode well for the near-term performance of financials. Chart 13Markets Have Already Discounted A Pessimistic Scenario For Hong Kong Shares Chart 14Banks In Hong Kong Are Facing A Tough ##br##Reckoning The good news is that similar to the late 1990s, banks are unlikely to go bust. Hong Kong SAR banks are well capitalized and delinquency rates are quite low, suggesting a banking crisis is unlikely to be a source of pain for the HKD peg (Chart 15). In fact, Hong Kong SAR banks rank favorably among their global peers in terms of capital adequacy (Chart 16). Chart 15Banks In Hong Kong Are Well Capitalized (Part 1) Chart 16Banks In Hong Kong Are Well Capitalized (Part 2) Specific to the currency, Hong Kong is also running recurring current account surpluses. This is boosting its FX reserves (Chart 17). That lends credibility to the peg in the near term. The bad news is that as the domestic economy slows down, and global trade comes close to a standstill, these surpluses could evaporate. One cost to Hong Kong is that the peg to the US dollar has made HKD incrementally expensive. Our model shows that the real effective exchange for HKD is about 2.5 standard deviations above fair value (Chart 18). Our view on the US dollar is that we could see depreciation over a 12-to-18-month horizon, but an overshoot in the near term is quite likely. A drop in the US dollar will help realign competitiveness in the HKD. Meantime, the market has also been pushing the currency towards the weaker side of its convertibility band. Chart 17Balance Of Payments Remain Favorable For The HKD Chart 18The HKD Is Expensive Longer term, as Hong Kong SAR continues to become more entwined with China, a peg to the CNY will make sense. This process will be the initial step in the region’s official embrace of the RMB system. That said, the process will be gradual since the US dollar remains very much a reserve currency, and the relevance of Hong Kong SAR as a financial center hinges upon easy access to the USD. What is more likely is that any re-pegging to the RMB will come many years down the road, when the yuan has become a fully convertible currency. The de-pegging of the HKD from the USD or adjusting the peg is as much a political discussion as an economic one. Political conditions for this change are not yet present given such a change will have major ramifications for the economy of Hong Kong SAR and will likely also reverberate through financial asset prices. One can imagine a scenario where HKD yields are forced to adjust to a new nominal anchor. Investors have been convinced through almost 30 years of history to treat the HKD as a proxy for the US dollar. That said, the economic pain associated with maintaining the HKD-USD peg will ensure authorities accelerate the use of RMBs in Hong Kong, with a goal of eventually adopting the yuan as the de facto currency. Adopting a currency board akin to Singapore is another option that makes sense, especially since this would give the HKMA scope to link to cheaper currencies, such as the yen and euro. That said, this is unlikely to be politically palatable, especially for Beijing. A link to the yuan that already does this job makes sense. Finally, there is always the option to fully float the peg, but this would probably increase currency volatility. This is unlikely in the near term. The Goldilocks scenario for policymakers is when the US dollar eventually depreciates against major currencies, easing financial conditions for Hong Kong SAR concerns. This will dovetail nicely with the goals of the monetary authorities, maintain credibility while easing financial concerns for a very levered economy. Investment Conclusions The HKD peg will remain in place, but the financial dislocations will lead to significant internal devaluation in Hong Kong SAR. As US interest rates rise, the HKD will be under considerable pressure. The HKMA will have no choice but to allow HKD interest rates to rise. This will tip the property market and thrust the economy into deflation and a recession. Chinese bonds are the best hedge against this risk. Avoid property and financial shares for the time being. Were the peg to break today, the HKD will depreciate according to our valuation models. This suggests markets are right to push the HKD-linked rate towards the weaker end of the convertibility band. Despite the economic and financial pain, the HKMA will not abandon the peg. That means carry trades will continue to make money. Using the HKD as a funding currency still makes sense in the near term. In long run, the economic pain associated with maintaining the HKD-USD peg will make authorities in Beijing accelerate the use of the RMB in Hong Kong’s special administrative region. The eventual goal will be for Hong Kong SAR to adopt the yuan as its currency. Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com Qingyun Xu, CFA Associate Editor qingyunx@bcaresearch.com
Listen to a short summary of this report Executive Summary GIS Projection For The EUR/USD We went long the euro early last week, as EUR/USD hit our buy limit price of $0.99. Despite a near cut-off of Russian gas imports, European gas inventories have reached 84% of capacity – above the 80% target that the EU set for November 1st. The latest meteorological forecasts suggest that Europe will experience a warmer-than-normal winter. This will cut heating usage, likely making gas rationing unnecessary. Currencies fare best in loose fiscal/tight monetary environments. This is what Europe faces over the coming months, as governments boost income support for households and businesses, while ramping up spending on energy infrastructure and defense. For its part, the ECB has started hiking rates. Since mid-August, interest rate differentials have moved in favor of the euro at both the short and long end. Rising inflation expectations make it less likely that the ECB will be able to back off from its tightening campaign as it did in past cycles. A hawkish Fed is the biggest risk to our bullish EUR/USD view. We expect US inflation to trend lower over the coming months, before reaccelerating in the second half of 2023. However, as the August CPI report highlights, the danger is that any dip in inflation proves to be shallower and shorter-lived than previously anticipated. Bottom Line: Although significant uncertainty remains, the risk-reward trade-off favors being long EUR/USD. Our end-2022 target is $1.06. Dear Client, I will be meeting clients in Asia next week while also working on our Fourth Quarter Strategy Outlook, which will be published at the end of the month. In lieu of our regular report next Friday, you will receive a Special Report from my colleague, Ritika Mankar, discussing the sources of US equity outperformance over the past 14 years and the likely path ahead. Best Regards, Peter Berezin, Chief Global Strategist It’s Just a Clown Chart 1Investors Are Bullish The Dollar, Not The Euro The scariest part of a horror movie is usually the one before the monster is revealed. No matter how good the special effects, the human brain can always conjure up something more frightening than anything Hollywood can dream up. Investors have been conjuring up all sorts of cataclysmic scenarios for the upcoming European winter. In financial markets, the impact has been most visible in the value of the euro, which has tumbled to parity against the US dollar. Only 23% of investors are bullish the euro at present, down from a peak of 78% in January 2021 (Chart 1). Conversely, 75% of investors are bullish the US dollar. More than half of fund managers cited “long US dollar” as the most crowded trade in the latest BofA Global Fund Manager Survey (“long commodities” was a distant second at 10%). As we discuss below, the outlook for the euro may be a lot better than most investors realize. While my colleagues, Chester Ntonifor, BCA’s chief FX strategist, and Mathieu Savary, BCA’s chief European strategist, are not quite ready to buy the euro just yet, we all agree that EUR/USD will rise over the long haul. Cutting Putin Loose Natural gas accounts for about a quarter of Europe’s energy supply. Prior to the Ukraine war, about 40% of that gas came from Russia (Chart 2). With the closure of the NordStream 1 pipeline, that number has fallen to 9% (some Russian gas continues to enter Europe via Ukraine and the TurkStream supply route). Yet, despite the deep drop in Russian natural gas imports, European natural gas inventories are up to 84% of capacity – roughly in line with past years and above the EU’s November 1st target of 80% (Chart 3). Chart 2Despite A Sharp Drop In Imports Of Russian Natural Gas… Chart 3...Europeans Managed To Stock Up On Natural Gas For The Winter Season Europe has been able to achieve this feat by aggressively buying natural gas on the open market. While this has caused gas prices to soar, it sets the stage for a retreat in prices in the months ahead. European spot natural gas prices have already fallen from over €300/Mwh in late August to €214/Mwh, and the futures market is discounting a further decline in prices over the next two years (Chart 4). Chart 4The Futures Market Is Discounting A Further Decline In Natural Gas Prices Chart 5Futures Prices Of Energy Commodities Provide Some Limited Information On Where Spot Prices Are Heading Follow the Futures? Futures prices are not a foolproof guide to where spot prices are heading. As Chart 5 illustrates, the correlation between the slope of the futures curve and subsequent changes in spot prices in energy markets is quite low. Nevertheless, future spot returns do tend to be negative when the curve is backwardated, as it is now, especially when assessed over horizons of around 12-to-18 months (Table 1). Table 1Energy Commodity Spot Price Returns Tend To Be Negative When The Futures Curve Is Backwardated Our guess is that European natural gas prices will indeed fall further from current levels. The latest meteorological forecasts suggest that Europe will experience a milder-than-normal winter (Chart 6). This is critical considering that natural gas accounts for over 40% of EU residential heating use once electricity and heat generated in gas-fired plants are included (Chart 7). Chart 6Meteorological Models Suggest Above-Normal Temperatures In Europe This Winter Chart 7Natural Gas Is An Important Source Of Energy For Heating Homes In The EU A warm winter would bolster the euro area’s trade balance, which has fallen into deficit this year as the energy import bill has soared (Chart 8). An improving balance of payments would help the euro. Europe is moving quickly to secure new sources of energy supply. In less than one year, Europe has become America’s biggest overseas market for LNG (Chart 9). A new gas pipeline linking Spain with the rest of Europe should be operational by next spring. Chart 8Soaring Energy Costs Have Pushed The Euro Area Trade Balance Into Deficit Chart 9Europe Is America's Largest LNG Customer In the meantime, Germany is building two “floating” LNG terminals. It has also postponed plans to mothball its nuclear power plants and has restarted its coal-fired power plants, a decision that even the German Green Party has supported. France is aiming to boost nuclear capacity, which had fallen below 50% earlier this summer. Électricité de France has pledged to nearly double daily production by December. For its part, the Dutch government has indicated it will raise output from the massive Groningen natural gas field if the energy crisis intensifies. Fiscal Policy to the Rescue On the policy front, European governments are taking steps to buttress household balance sheets during the energy crisis, with nearly €400 billion in support measures announced so far (and surely more to come). Although these support measures will be offset with roughly €140 billion of windfall profit taxes on the energy sector, the net effect will be to raise budget deficits across the region. However, following the old adage that one should “finance temporary shocks but adjust to permanent ones,” a temporary spike in fiscal support may be just what the doctor ordered. The last thing Europe needs is a situation where energy prices fall next year, but the region remains mired in recession as households seek to rebuild their savings. Such an outcome would depress tax revenues, likely leading to higher government debt-to-GDP ratios. Get Ready For a V-Shaped Recovery Stronger growth in the rest of the world should give the euro area a helping hand. That would be good news for the euro, given its cyclical characteristics (Chart 10). The European economy is especially leveraged to Chinese growth. It is likely that the authorities will loosen the zero-Covid policy once the Twentieth Party Congress concludes next month, and new anti-viral drugs and possibly an Omicron-specific booster shot become widely available later this year. That should help jumpstart China’s economy. More stimulus will also help. Chart 11 shows that EUR/USD is highly correlated with the Chinese credit/fiscal impulse. Chart 10The Euro Is A Cyclical Currency Chart 11EUR/USD Is Highly Correlated With The Chinese Credit & Fiscal Impulse All this suggests that the prevailing view on European growth is too pessimistic. Even if Europe does succumb to a technical recession in the months ahead, it is likely to experience a V-shaped recovery. That will provide a nice tailwind for the euro. Loose Fiscal/Tight Monetary Policies: The Winning Combo for Currencies Chart 12Fiscal Policy Has Eased Structurally In The Euro Area More Than In Other Advanced Economies A tight monetary and loose fiscal policy has historically been the most bullish combination for currencies. Recall that the US dollar soared in the early 1980s on the back of Paul Volcker’s restrictive monetary policy and Ronald Reagan’s expansionary fiscal policy, the latter consisting of huge tax cuts and increased military spending. While not nearly on the same scale, the euro area’s current configuration of loose fiscal/tight monetary policies bears some resemblance to the US in the early 1980s. Even before the war in Ukraine began, the IMF was forecasting a much bigger swing towards expansionary fiscal policy in the euro area than in the rest of the world (Chart 12). The war has only intensified this trend, triggering a flurry of spending on energy and defense – spending that is likely to persist for most of this decade. The ECB’s Reaction Function After biding its time, the ECB has joined the growing list of central banks that are hiking rates. On September 8th, the ECB jacked up the deposit rate by 75 bps. Investors expect a further 185 bps in hikes through to September 2023. While US rate expectations have widened relative to euro area expectations since the August US CPI report (more on that later), the gap is still narrower than it was on August 15th. Back then, investors expected euro area 3-month rates to be 233 bps below comparable US rates in June 2023. Today, they expect the gap to be only 177 bps (Chart 13). Real long-term bond spreads, which conceptually at least should be the more important driver of currency movements, have also moved in the euro’s favor. In the past, ECB rate hikes were swiftly followed by cuts as the region was unable to tolerate even moderately higher rates. While this very well could happen again, the odds are lower than they once were, at least over the next 12 months. Chart 13Interest Rate Differentials Have Moved In Favor Of The Euro Since Mid-August Chart 14Euro Area: Inflation Expectations Have Risen Briskly For one thing, median inflation expectations three years ahead in the ECB’s monthly survey have risen briskly (Chart 14). The Bundesbank’s own survey paints an even more alarming picture, with median expected inflation over the next five years having risen to 5% from 3% in mid-2021 (Chart 15). Expected German inflation over the next ten years stands at a still-elevated 4%. Whether this reflects Germans’ heightened historical sensitivity to inflation risks is unclear, but it is something the ECB cannot ignore. Structurally looser fiscal policy has raised the neutral rate of interest in the euro area, giving the ECB more leeway to lift rates. A narrowing in competitiveness gaps across the currency bloc has also mitigated the need for the ECB to set rates based on the needs of the weakest economies in the region. Chart 16 shows that collectively, unit labor costs among the countries most afflicted by the sovereign debt crisis a decade ago have completely converged with Germany. Chart 15German Inflation Expectations Are Elevated Chart 16Europe's Periphery Has Closed The Competitiveness Gap With Germany While Italy is still a laggard in the competitiveness rankings, the ECB’s new Transmission Protection Instrument (TPI) – which allows the central bank to buy sovereign debt with less stringent conditionality than under the Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT) program – should keep a lid on sovereign spreads. This, in turn, will allow the ECB to raise rates more than it otherwise could. Hawkish Fed is the Biggest Risk to Our Bullish EUR/USD View Chart 17Supplier Delivery Times Have Fallen Sharply Tuesday’s hotter-than-expected August US CPI report pulled the rug from under the euro’s incipient rally, pushing EUR/USD back to parity. We have been flagging the risks of high inflation for several years (see, for example, our February 19, 2021 report, 1970s-Style Inflation: Yes, It Could Happen Again). Our thesis is that inflation will follow a “two steps up, one step down” pattern. We are probably near the top of those two steps now, with the next leg for inflation likely to be to the downside, driven by ebbing pandemic-related supply side-dislocations. Perhaps most notably, supplier delivery times have fallen sharply in recent months (Chart 17). These pandemic-related dislocations extend to the housing rental market. Rent inflation dropped after rent moratoriums were put in place, only to rebound forcefully once the moratoriums were lifted and the labor market tightened. Although official measures of rent inflation will remain elevated for some time, owing to lags in how they are constructed, timelier data on new rental units coming to market already point to a sharp decline in rent inflation (Chart 18). This is something that the Fed is sure to notice. Ironically, falling inflation could sow the seeds of its own demise. Nominal wage growth is currently very elevated, yet because of high inflation, real wages are still shrinking. As inflation comes down, real wage growth will turn positive. This will lift consumer sentiment, helping to buoy consumption (Chart 19). A pickup in consumer spending will cause the economy to overheat again, leading to a second wave of inflation in the back half of 2023. Chart 18Timelier Measures Of Rent Inflation Have Rolled Over Chart 19Falling Inflation Will Boost Real Wages And Consumer Confidence As we discussed in our August 18th Special Report Dispatches From The Future: From Goldilocks To President DeSantis, the Fed will respond to this second inflationary wave by hiking the Fed funds rate to 5%. This will temporarily push up the value of the dollar, a process that will only stop once the US falls into recession in 2024 and the Fed is forced to cut rates again. Our projected rollercoaster ride for EUR/USD is depicted in Chart 20. We see the euro rising to $1.06 by year-end, peaking at $1.11 in the spring of 2023, falling back to $1.05 by late 2023, and then beginning a prolonged rally in 2024. Chart 20GIS Projection For The EUR/USD Chart 21The Dollar Is Very Overvalued Against The Euro Based On PPP Chart 21 shows that the dollar is 30% overvalued against the euro based on its Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) exchange rate. Thus, there is significant long-term upside to EUR/USD. Implications for Other Currencies and Regional Equity Allocation Chart 22Stock Markets Outside The US Tend To Fare Best When The Dollar Is Weakening The strengthening in the euro that we envision over the next six months or so will be part of a broad-based dollar decline. While BCA’s Foreign Exchange Strategy service sees more upside for the euro than the pound, GBP/USD will likely follow the same trajectory as EUR/USD. The yen is one of the cheapest currencies in the world and should finally gain some traction. If China abandons its zero-Covid policy and increases fiscal support for its economy, the RMB and other EM currencies should strengthen. Stock markets outside the US tend to fare best when the dollar is weakening. This includes Europe. As Chart 22 illustrates, there is a close correlation between EUR/USD and the relative performance of European versus US stocks. Thus, an above-benchmark exposure to international markets is appropriate during the coming months. Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on LinkedIn & Twitter Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores
Executive Summary Global Manufacturing / Trade Will Contract The bar for the Fed to stop hiking rates is still very high. US inflation remains broad based. Core inflation is neither about oil and food prices nor is it about the prices of other individual items. The key variables that will determine inflation’s persistence are wages and unit labor costs. US wage growth is very elevated, and unit labor costs are soaring. Unless the US economy experiences a recession, core inflation will not drop below 3.5%. The Fed and the US stock market (and by extension global risk assets) remain on a collision course. The Fed will not make a dovish pivot until the stock market sell off, and equities cannot rally unless the Fed backs off. The imminent global trade contraction is bad news for EM stocks and currencies as well as global cyclicals. Bottom Line: A hawkish Fed amid a global trade/manufacturing recession is producing a bearish cocktail for global risk assets in general and EM risk assets in particular. Feature The majority of investors and strategists have been expecting an easing of US inflation to allow the Federal Reserve to completely halt or considerably slow the pace of its hiking cycle. For example, the Bank of America Global Fund Managers survey from September (taken before the release of the latest US CPI report) revealed that a net 79% of participants see lower inflation in the next 12 months. We at BCA’s Emerging Markets Strategy team have taken a different view. Even though we have been open to the idea that the annual rate of inflation (especially the headline measure) will drop in the months to come, we have been arguing that US core inflation will remain well above the 3.5-4% range for some time. What matters for the Fed’s policy is the level of core inflation, not just a decline in the inflation rate. With core inflation considerably above the Fed’s 2% target, we have maintained that the FOMC will uphold its hawkish bias. Consequently, global risk assets will continue selling off and the US dollar will overshoot. Analyzing the price dynamics of individual items − such as energy, food, shelter or cars – when assessing the outlook for inflation is akin to missing the forest for the trees. Chart 1US Core-Type Inflation Measures Are Very High When inflation is limited to several individual components of the consumption basket, neither central banks nor financial markets should react. This is true both when the prices of these individual components are rising (inflation) and when they are falling (deflation). However, central banks and, hence, financial markets, should respond to broad-based inflation. Therefore, investors need to look at the forest rather than focus on individual trees. In our February 18, 2022 report, we wrote the following: “US inflation has become broad based. Not only is core CPI surging but also trimmed-mean, median and sticky core consumer price inflation has risen substantially. Median and trimmed-mean price indexes would not be rocketing if inflation was limited to select goods or services. Particularly, the aforementioned measures exclude components with extreme price changes. What might have started as a narrow-based relative price shock has evolved into broad-based genuine inflation. The key to the transition from one-off inflation spikes to persistent genuine inflation is wages, more specifically unit labor costs. Unit labor costs are calculated as nominal wages divided by productivity (the latter is output per hour per employee).” All of these points remain valid today. Chart 1 shows that core, median, trimmed-mean and sticky CPI are all rising at very fast annual rates, ranging from 6% to 7.2%. Hence, underlying inflationary pressures remain broad based and persistent in the US economy. As a result, the bar for the Fed to stop hiking rates is very high. Last week, FOMC member Christopher Waller stated that he would need to see month-on-month core inflation prints of around 0.2% for a period of five to six months before he is comfortable with backing off on rate hikes. In the past three months, the monthly rates of various measures of underlying core inflation have ranged between 0.5-0.65%. Even though oil and food prices have relapsed and freight rates have plunged, US core inflation has still surprised to the upside. The point being is that core inflation is neither about oil and food prices nor is it about the prices of other individual items. We have been arguing for some time that the key variables to watch to determine whether inflation will be persistent are wages and unit labor costs. US wage growth is elevated, and unit labor costs are soaring (Chart 2). Finally, companies have raised prices at an annual rate of 8-9% (Chart 3). Chart 2US Labor Costs Have Been Surging Chart 3US Companies Have Raised Prices At An 8-9% Annual Rate US Stagflation Or Recession? Is the US economy heading into stagflation or recession? How persistent will US inflation prove to be? Over the next several months, US core inflation will prove to be sticky. So, stagflation (weak real growth and high inflation) is the likely outcome over the near term. Beyond this period, say on a 12-month horizon, the US economic outlook is less clear. Chart 4US Corporate Profit Margins Have Peaked One thing we are certain of is that faced with surging unit labor costs, US companies will attempt to raise their prices to protect their profit margins and profitability. Our proxy for US corporate profit margins signals that margins are already rolling over (Chart 4). Hence, business owners and CEOs will attempt to raise selling prices further. This will lead to one of two possible scenarios for the US economy in the months ahead. Scenario 1: If customers (households and businesses) are willing to pay considerably higher prices, nominal sales will remain very robust, and profits will not collapse, reducing the likelihood of a recession. Yet, this means that inflation will become even more entrenched, and employees will continue to demand higher wages. A wage-price spiral could unravel. The Fed will have to raise rates by much more than what is currently priced in financial markets. This is negative for US share prices. Scenario 2: If customers push back against higher prices and respond by curtailing their purchases, then sales and output volume will relapse, i.e., the economy will enter a recession. In this scenario, inflation will plummet, corporate margins will shrink (prices received will rise much less than unit labor costs) and profits will plunge. Suffering a profit squeeze, companies will lay off employees, and wage growth will decelerate sharply. Although bond yields will drop significantly, the benefit to equities will be offset by plunging corporate profits. We are not certain which of these two scenarios will prevail: it is hard to determine the point at which US consumers will push back against rising prices. Nevertheless, it is notable that in both scenarios, the outlook for stocks is poor. Bottom Line: Inflation is an inert and persistent phenomenon. The inflation genie has escaped from the bottle. When this happens, it is hard to put the genie back. In short, unless the US economy experiences a recession, core inflation will not drop below 3.5%. Still On A Collision Course On February 18 of this year, we published a piece titled A Collision In The Fog Of Inflation?, arguing that the Fed and the US equity market are on a collision course amidst the fog of inflation. Specifically, we noted that “the Fed will not make a dovish pivot until markets sell off, and markets cannot rally unless the Fed backs off.” This reasoning still applies. Barring a major US growth slump, US core inflation will not drop below 3.5%. Hence, the only way for the Fed to bring core inflation toward its 2% target is to tighten policy further. Financial conditions play a critical role in shaping the trajectory of the US economy. US domestic demand might not weaken sufficiently and, hence, US core inflation will not subside below 3.5% unless financial conditions tighten further (Chart 5). That is why a scenario in which US stocks and bonds rally despite the Fed’s continuous tightening is currently unlikely. Presently, there seems to be a dichotomy between the signal from the US yield curve and share prices. Despite the extremely inverted yield curve, US share prices have not yet fallen to new lows (Chart 6). Chart 5US Financial Conditions Have Room To Tighten Further Chart 6The US Yield Curve Is In An Equity Danger Zone Chart 7A Negative Bond Term Premium Amid High Volatility Is Paradoxical If US share prices do not break below their June lows, US interest rate expectations will rise further. The basis is that the Fed will not cut rates next year unless the economy is in recession and equities are selling off. In addition, there is a paradox in US long-term bonds. Despite exceptional inflation volatility, the Fed’s QT (reducing its bond holdings) and heightened US bond volatility, the US Treasurys’ term premium − the risk premium on bonds − is close to zero (Chart 7). That is why we expect the US bond market’s selloff to persist with 30-year yields pushing toward 4%. Consequently, US share prices will likely break below the major technical support that held up in the past 12 years (Chart 8). If the S&P 500 breaks below its June low, the next technical support is around 3200. Meanwhile, the US dollar will continue overshooting, as we argued in our recent report. Chart 8The S&P 500: Between Support And Resistance Lines Chart 9The EM Equity Index Is Still Above Its Long-Term Technical Support As for EM share prices, they will likely drop another 13-15% to reach their long-term technical support, as illustrated in Chart 9. Bottom Line: The Fed and the US stock market, and by extension global risk assets, remain on a collision course. A Global Manufacturing Recession Is Looming The latest data have corroborated our theme that global manufacturing and trade are heading into recession: Korean and Taiwanese manufacturing PMI new export orders have plunged well below the important 50 lines (Chart 10). Chinese imports for re-export are already contracting. They lead Chinese exports by three months (Chart 11). Chart 10Global Manufacturing / Trade Will Contract Chart 11Chinese Exports Are About To Shrink Chart 12Emerging Asian Currencies And Global Cyclicals-To-Defensives Stock Performance Chinese import volumes will continue shrinking, and EM ex-China domestic demand will relapse following the ongoing monetary tightening by their central banks. Finally, Emerging Asian currencies have been plunging, and such rapid and large-scale depreciation is a precursor to a global trade/manufacturing recession (Chart 12). Bottom Line: The imminent global trade contraction is bad for EM stocks and currencies as well as global cyclicals. Investment Strategy A hawkish Fed amid a global trade/manufacturing recession is producing a bearish cocktail for EM currencies and risk assets. Absolute-return investors should stay put on EM risk assets. Continue underweighting EM in global equity and credit portfolios. Emerging Asian currencies have more downside given the budding contraction in their exports and the interest rate differential moving further in favor of the US dollar. Commodity prices and commodity currencies remain at risk from the global manufacturing recession and the absence of a revival in Chinese demand. Overall, the US dollar will overshoot in the near term. We continue to short the following currencies versus the USD: ZAR, COP, PEN, PLN and IDR. In addition, we continue to recommend shorting HUF vs. CZK, KRW vs. JPY, and BRL vs. MXN. EM currency depreciation will cause EM credit spreads to widen. Odds are that EM sovereign and corporate bond yields will rise, which is a bearish signal for EM non-TMT stocks, as illustrated in Chart 13. Chart 13EM USD Bond Yields Are Instrumental For EM Share Prices Chart 14Beware Of A Breakdown in EM Tech Stocks EM technology stocks are also breaking down. The share prices of TSMC, Samsung and Tencent have all fallen below their long-term technical supports (Chart 14). This negative technical profile coupled with our fundamental assessment point to a further slide in these share prices. Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com Strategic Themes (18 Months And Beyond) Equities Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months)
In lieu of next week’s report, I will host the monthly Counterpoint Webcast on Thursday, September 22 (9:00 AM EDT, 2:00 PM BST). In this Webcast, I will discuss the near-term and longer-term prospects for all the major asset classes: stocks, bonds, sectors, commodities, currencies, and real estate. Please mark the date in your calendar, and I do hope you can join. Executive Summary Analysing the economy as the ‘non-linear system’ that it is leads to profound conclusions about how the economy and inflation are likely to unfold, and reveals that some outcomes are impossible to achieve. It is impossible to lift the unemployment rate by ‘just’ 1-2 percent. Therefore, it is impossible to depress wage inflation by ‘just’ 1 percent. The non-linear choice is to not depress wage inflation at all, or to make wage inflation slump. Presented with this non-linear choice, central banks will likely choose to make wage inflation slump, which will take core inflation well south of the 2 percent target within the next couple of years. The structural low in bond yields, the structural low in commodity prices, the structural high in stock market valuations, and the structural high in the US dollar are yet to come. It Is Impossible To Lift The Unemployment Rate By ‘Just’ 1-2 Percent Bottom Line: Inflation will slump to well below 2 percent within the next couple of years. Feature Our non-linear world often surprises our linear minds. If we discover that a small cause produces a small effect, we think that double the cause produces double the effect, and that triple the cause produces triple the effect. But in our non-linear world, double the cause could produce no effect, or half the effect, or ten times the effect. Just as important, in a non-linear world, some outcomes turn out to be impossible. In a non-linear system, some outcomes are impossible to achieve. As I will now discuss, analysing the economy as the non-linear system that it is leads to profound conclusions about how the economy and inflation are likely to unfold, and reveals that some outcomes are impossible to achieve. In A Non-Linear System, Some Outcomes Are Impossible A good physical example of a non-linear system that we can apply to inflation is to attach an elastic band to the front of a brick. And then to try pulling the brick across a table at a constant speed, say 2 mph. It’s impossible! First, nothing happens. The brick is held in place by friction. Then, at a tipping point of pulling, it starts to accelerate. Simultaneously, the friction decreases, self-reinforcing the acceleration to well above 2 mph. Meanwhile, your response – to stop pulling – happens with a lag. The result is that, the brick refuses to budge, and then it hits you in the face. Try as you might, it is impossible to pull the brick at a constant 2 mph (Figure 1 and Figure 2). Figure 1The Forces On A Brick Pulled By An Elastic Band Figure 2The Net Forces On A Brick Pulled By An Elastic Band In mathematical terms, the reduction in friction as the brick starts to move is known as ‘self-reinforcing feedback’. The lag in applying the brakes is called ‘delayed corrective feedback’. Their combined effect is to make it impossible to pull the brick at a constant 2 mph. Now, to model inflation, attach an elastic band to both the front and the back of the brick, and find a friend. Your task, ‘policy loosening’, is to accelerate the stationary brick to a steady 2 mph. The analogy being to run inflation at 2 percent. On the opposite side, your friend’s task, call it ‘policy tightening’, is what central banks are desperate to do now – to rein back an out-of-control brick heading towards your face at 10 mph. But without slowing it to a standstill, or worse, reversing direction. The analogy being to avoid outright deflation. You will discover that you can move the brick sharply forwards (and sharply backwards), but you cannot move it forwards at a steady 2 mph! The brick-on-an-elastic-band analogy explains why it is impossible for policymakers to run inflation at a constant 2 percent. Inflation either careers out of control, as now, or stays stuck below 2 percent, as it did through the 2010s. Inflation cannot run ‘close to 2 percent’. It Is Impossible To Lift The Unemployment Rate By ‘Just’ 1-2 Percent Central to the non-linearity of inflation is the non-linearity of the jobs market, in which some outcomes are impossible. Specifically, it has proved impossible to lift the unemployment rate by ‘just’ 1-2 percent. It has proved impossible to lift the unemployment rate by ‘just’ 1-2 percent. Through the past 75 years, whenever the US unemployment rate has increased by 0.6 percent, it has then gone on to increase by at least 2.1 percent from the trough. In no case has the unemployment rate risen by ‘just’ 0.6-2.1 percent. In other words, the unemployment rate nudges up by 0.5 percent or less, or it surges by 2.1 percent or more. There is no middle ground. Indeed, through more recent history the surge has been 2.5 percent or more (Chart I-1 and Chart I-2). Chart I-1It Is Impossible To Lift The Unemployment Rate By 'Just' 1-2 Percent Chart I-2It Is Impossible To Lift The Unemployment Rate By 'Just' 1-2 Percent As with the brick-on-an-elastic-band, we can explain this non-linearity through the concepts of self-reinforcing feedback combined with delayed negative feedback. At a tipping point of rising unemployment, consumers pull in their horns and slow their spending, while banks slow their lending. This constitutes the self-reinforcing feedback which accelerates the downturn. Meanwhile, as it takes time for this downturn to appear in the data, policymakers respond with a lag, and when their response eventually comes, it also acts with a lag. This constitutes the delayed negative feedback, by which time the unemployment rate has surged, with every 1 percent rise in the unemployment rate depressing wage inflation by 0.5 percent (Chart I-3 and Chart I-4). Chart I-32001-02: Every 1 Percent Rise In The Unemployment Rate Depressed Wage Inflation By 0.5 Percent Chart I-42008-09: Every 1 Percent Rise In The Unemployment Rate Depressed Wage Inflation By 0.5 Percent All of which brings me to a crucial point: The non-linearity in the jobs market implies a non-linearity in inflation control. Given that it is impossible to lift the unemployment rate by ‘just’ 2 percent, it is also impossible to depress wage inflation by ‘just’ 1 percent. The choice is to not depress wage inflation at all, or to make wage inflation slump. This presents a major dilemma for policymakers in their current battle against inflation. If they choose to not depress wage inflation at all, core inflation will remain north of 3 percent and destroy central banks’ already tattered credibility to achieve and maintain price stability (Chart I-5). In the medium term, this would un-anchor long-term inflation expectations, push up bond yields, and further destabilise the financial and housing markets. Chart I-5Wage Inflation Is Running Too Hot For The 2 Percent Inflation Target On the other hand, if central banks do choose to depress wage inflation, the non-linearity of the jobs market implies that wage inflation will slump, taking core inflation south of the 2 percent target. Central banks could pray that a surge in productivity growth might save their skins. If productivity growth surged, elevated wage inflation might still be consistent with 2 percent inflation, as it was in the early 2000s. But we wouldn’t bet on this outcome (Chart I-6). Chart I-6Don't Bet On A Repeat Of The Early 2000s Productivity Miracle Inflation Will Not Run ‘Close To 2 Percent’ To summarise then, the economy is a non-linear system, and should be analysed as such. In uniquely doing so in this report, we reach a profound conclusion. The non-linearity of the jobs market and inflation control means that it is impossible for core inflation to run ‘close to 2 percent’. Depending on which of the non-linear options that policymakers choose – to not depress wage inflation at all, or to make wage inflation slump – inflation will either remain well above 2 percent, or slump to well below 2 percent within the next couple of years. Which option will the central banks choose? My answer is that they will make wage inflation slump. This is not just to save their own skins, but a genuine belief that the worse long-term outcome for the economy would be if central banks’ credibility to maintain price stability was destroyed. To prevent this outcome, a recession is a price that they are willing to pay. Central banks will choose to make wage inflation slump. Not just to save their own skins, but because the worse long-term outcome for the economy would be if price stability was destroyed. But what if I am wrong, and they choose not to depress wage inflation? In this case, long-term inflation expectations would become un-anchored, pushing up bond yields, and crashing the financial and housing markets. In turn, this would unleash a massive deflationary impulse which would end up creating an even deeper recession. So, we would end up at the same place, albeit later and via a more circuitous route. All of which confirms some long-held views. The structural low in bond yields, the structural low in commodity prices, the structural high in stock market valuations, and the structural high in the US dollar are yet to come. Chart 1Hungarian Bonds Are Oversold Chart 2Copper Is Experiencing A Tactical Rebound Chart 3US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities Chart 4FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 5Netherlands' Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Ended Chart 6The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond At Fractal Fragility Chart 7Food And Beverage Outperformance Is Exhausted Chart 8German Telecom Outperformance Has Started To Reverse Chart 9Japanese Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 10The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Has Ended Chart 11The Strong Downtrend In The 3 Year T-Bond Has Ended Chart 12The Outperformance Of Tobacco Vs. Cannabis Is Ending Chart 13Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 14Norway's Outperformance Has Ended Chart 15Cotton Versus Platinum Has Reversed Chart 16Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Is Exhausted Chart 17USD/EUR Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 18The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Has Ended Chart 19US Utilities Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 20The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Banks Is Exhausted Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations
Executive Summary Inflation Surprise Reinforces Gridlock And Fiscal Drag A US recession is increasingly likely as the Fed will have to hike rates more aggressively in the short run to contain inflation. Recession would exacerbate US policy uncertainty during a period of peak polarization in the 2022-24 election cycle. The Fed’s struggle with inflation will become entangled in extreme US politics. The Fed will come under immense pressure to pause rate hikes earlier than warranted in 2023. The Fed could get blamed for both over-tightening and politicization. Investors should fade the risk of another Democratic sweep in the midterm elections. Republicans are still highly likely to gain control of the House, resulting in gridlock and a freeze to fiscal policy. If Democrats lose the House, their odds of retaining the White House will decline. A recession would greatly reduce their odds. In this context the US faces another tumultuous political cycle, as Republicans will stage a comeback. However, reform of the Electoral Count Act could reduce the risk of a catastrophic breakdown in the electoral system. Recommendation (Tactical) INITIATION DATE Return Long DXY (Dollar Index) Feb 23, 2022 12.6% Bottom Line: Stay long US dollar for now but prepare to downgrade to neutral. Feature BCA Research hosted our annual conference at the Plaza Hotel in New York last week. Clients heard a range of views on various topics, including US politics and policy. In this report we touch on some of the insights from the conference while providing our own views on what to expect going forward. A Politicized Federal Reserve? The real Fed funds rate stands at -2.2% today despite the Federal Reserve’s decision to hike rates by 225 basis points this year. The last time the real Fed funds rate was this low was in 1975, under the chairmanship of Arthur Burns – i.e. the epitome of a politicized Fed (Chart 1). Chart 1A Politicized Federal Reserve? Is the Fed already politicized or will it become politicized in the coming years? What would that mean for monetary policy, the economy, and financial markets? The Fed waded into political territory when it began pursuing unorthodox policies in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis and again during the Covid-19 pandemic. Ideally monetary policy sets interest rates across the economy and applies equally to all economic actors. But once the Fed began quantitative easing (bond buying) and coordinating its actions with the fiscal authorities (which had bailed out major banks), it entered the game of income and wealth redistribution. Not least because asset price inflation favors asset owners over others. Now that the Fed and other central banks have pioneered these unorthodox policies, they will continue to use them in the face of future economic and political turmoil. They will also innovate new tools to deal with each crisis. As the pandemic response highlighted, the Fed will continue down the path of redistribution, which will continue to provoke political backlash from legislators and the public. At the same time, the Fed’s policy parameters today have been reined in and disciplined by the post-pandemic inflation overshoot. For example, there is not so much excited talk today about implementing Modern Monetary Theory – debt monetization – as there was in the heady days of 2019. Instead the Fed today is focused almost exclusively on fulfilling its price stability mandate, at least until inflation gets down into the 2%-3% range. The market appears over-eager for interest rate cuts in 2023 when the Fed is expecting to continue hiking rates throughout 2023 (Chart 2). The surprise in core and headline inflation in August reinforces this point. If the Fed cannot bring inflation below 3%, what will it do? Could it accept reality and modify the inflation target to 3%? A higher inflation target has long been discussed – it would enable the Fed to stimulate more effectively in the next recession. But Chairman Jerome Powell and his monetary policy strategy review rejected the idea of raising the long-term inflation target from 2% to 3% or above – and that rejection is likely to be sustained at least until the next review in 2024. Even then a higher inflation target seems unlikely as it would be very hard to achieve politically in the wake of the inflation overshoot. Chart 2Will Fed Cut Rates Next Year? Of course, a lot can happen by 2024 and new deflationary shocks could conceivably force a change to the inflation target. What is clear to us is that the Fed still has a dovish bias that took a long time to develop and has not yet been entirely overturned by the inflation overshoot (Chart 3). Chart 3Dovish Consensus Built Up Over Time And Remains In Place For Now Meanwhile the Fed’s single-minded focus on restoring price stability will bring an entirely different set of political problems – and accusations of politicization. For example, the Fed wants tighter financial conditions – since that will help to cool the economy and bring down inflation – but cannot well speak openly about deliberately driving down stock market prices and home values. The Fed also believes that a recession with unemployment ranging from 4%-5% would not be the end of the world but it cannot well speak openly about deliberately increasing unemployment. Especially because unemployment rarely stays so low in recessions. The Fed acknowledges that it will need to pause hiking interest rates at some point, hopefully before it tightens monetary conditions so much as to trigger a recession, but it does not want to call it a “pause” since financial markets will take that as a hard stop. It could cause a premature loosening of financial conditions and be blamed for a lack of vigilance when inflation revives. Will the Fed ultimately be prevented from tightening monetary policy enough because of the pressure that higher interest rates will put on the government’s fiscal sustainability? It is entirely possible. Sustaining social programs is more popular than paying bond holders. Since the Fed pays market interest rates on reserve balances, it will stop making a profit if it hikes rates to 3.25% or above (which is slated to happen this month). Very soon the Fed will be turning a loss on its holdings, rather than remitting profits to the Department of Treasury, and it will be amply criticized for spending taxpayer money. In that case there will be plenty of ammunition from critics on all sides. When it comes to the Fed’s specific predicament in 2022-24, Chairman Powell does not want to be the next Arthur Burns, i.e. he does not want to go down in history as the chairman who made a historic mistake by not forcing inflation back into an acceptable and containable range of say 2%-3.5%. Neither he nor the Fed can afford to lose control of price stability, which would damage the US economy and the Fed’s credibility. The implication is that Powell will need to hike rates until price stability is obtained. Yet even a conservative estimate would suggest that hiking rates until inflation falls beneath 3% will require the unemployment rate to rise by more than the estimated 0.5-1.0 percentage points, likely considerably more than this, which historically implies a recession in 2023-24. Recession odds have already risen sharply as priced by the bond market, according to Jonathan LaBerge at our Bank Credit Analyst flagship service (Chart 4). Of course, recession odds have an important implication for the 2022-24 political cycle, implying that the Fed’s handling of the economy will become entangled once again in America’s extreme political polarization. Chart 4Recession Odds Rising Our past research has shown that the Fed does not pay close attention to midterm elections. The Fed is more likely to hike rates than cut rates during a midterm election year – and more likely to hike rates during a president’s first midterm election as opposed to his second. Whereas the Fed is about equally likely to cut rates as to hike them during a presidential election year. Most importantly, the Fed is more likely to hike rates during a non-election year than otherwise (Table 1). Table 1The Fed Doesn’t Care About Midterms … But Prefers To Hike In Off-Years While the Fed had no choice but to hike in 2022, supporting these data, a critical decision will emerge in 2023, when the Fed is still expected to hike but the risk of recession grows. Recessions sharply reduce the odds of the incumbent political party staying in the White House (Table 2). Moreover a recession could bring back President Trump or a Trumpist Republican candidate bent on revenge against the political establishment. The result is that the FOMC will be under immense political pressure not to overtighten monetary policy in 2023-24. In normal times, a Fed chair appointed by a Republican president could conceivably have the license to hike rates aggressively to whip inflation, knowing that if a recession occurs and a Republican comes to power, he would be likely to be reappointed. But Powell can have no such assurance from the erratic President Trump, who is still favored for the Republican nomination as things stand. Even aside from Trump, Powell and the FOMC will fear that a populist Republican Party would seek to audit the Fed or curtail its powers. Table 2Biden’s Odds Fall If Recession Occurs In sum, the Washington political establishment believes it is under attack from right-wing insurrectionists and will put immense pressure on the FOMC to avoid triggering a recession in 2023-24. This could produce an inflationary surprise. Bottom Line: A recession is likely to occur as the Fed continues hiking rates to bring inflation below 3%. This increases political uncertainty for the 2022-24 cycle. But a politicized Fed may compromise when inflation is closer to 4% for fear of a populist win in 2024. That would likely prove to be a historic monetary policy mistake, enabling long-term inflation expectations to rise substantially. Midterm Elections: Fade The “Blue Sweep” Risk While the Fed ignores midterm elections, investors are increasingly uncertain over fiscal policy and the outcome of the midterms. Will Congress become gridlocked, as we expect, or will Democrats retain control of Congress and continue the federal spending splurge that has played a large role in the inflation overshoot? Clearly the midterm races have tightened since President Biden changed his tone and started prioritizing the fight against inflation back in June. As inflation has abated, online betting markets have discounted Republican odds of victory, particularly in the Senate where they are now 36% (Chart 5). We anticipated that Biden’s approval ratings would stabilize on the passage of legislation and that the election would tighten in the final months, particularly on the back of women voters turning out to support Democrats in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to reduce abortion access. However, we also argued that gridlock would still be the most likely result based on the high odds that the House would flip to Republican control regardless of Roe. This is a consensus view that should be challenged and reassessed as November approaches. Chart 5Bookies Still Expect Gridlock In Midterms Senate elections are held statewide and are therefore more susceptible to a shift in suburban and women voters. State-level polls leave much to be desired but the overall picture is that the races are closer than they were earlier this year – and closer than the Republicans would want them to be (Charts 6A & 6B). Persistent high inflation should be the clincher in favor of Republicans but the Senate is simply too close to call at this stage. Chart 6ANeck-And-Neck Races In Senate Chart 6BNeck-And-Neck Races In Senate Yet the Senate is overrated in this election because if Democrats lose either chamber, gridlock will be the result. Gridlock is what matters most for fiscal policy and hence for investors. The gridlock view rests on the House of Representatives. While the president’s party almost always loses seats in the midterm election, losing seats is not the same as losing control. In fact, over the past 120 years, a party that controls the House and/or Senate is more likely than not to retain control in a midterm election (Chart 7). But in the post-WWII era, the president’s party is slightly more likely to lose control of the House. And in almost all midterms, the president’s party loses seats in the House. Chart 7Presidents Do Not Always Lose Control, But Dems Have Small Cushion In 2022 The key point about 2022 is that the Democrats only have a six-seat buffer in the House. In other words, losing seats is very likely to be equivalent to losing control this year. To save the House, Biden’s Democrats would have to perform as well as John F. Kennedy’s Democrats in 1962, when they only lost four House seats. Our House model predicts they will lose 21 seats (Appendix). While Democrats could beat this prediction, they would be hard pressed to lose fewer than six seats on a net basis: inflation is high and sticky, real wages and incomes have fallen, consumer confidence has fallen, the president’s approval rating is low, and approval of Congress is low. If a president’s party loses control of the House, its odds of keeping the White House in 2024 also fall (Chart 8). This is another reason for investors to expect that fiscal policy will freeze, policy uncertainty will remain high, and the Fed will be under political pressure not to hike rates aggressively in 2023-24. Chart 8Biden’s 2024 Odds Fall If He Loses The House Bottom Line: Fade the “Blue Sweep” risk in 2022. The midterm election is tightening but Republicans are still likely to win the House. Fiscal policy will remain a drag on growth and the 2024 election will become even more uncertain, putting political pressure on the Fed to avoid overtightening. Limited Big Government Another Democratic sweep would greatly reinforce the new US policy trajectory of Big Government: a trajectory that points away from the Washington Consensus and Reagan revolution toward a future of higher taxes, larger budget deficits, higher tariffs, and more extensive regulation (Chart 9).1 But Democrats will be forced to share power. This is why we call the new policy paradigm “Limited Big Government.” It is still a shift in the direction of a larger government role in the economy and society, but it is taking place within the context of the US constitutional system of checks and balances and two-party politics. We do not expect the latter two factors to disappear. Looking at the Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations together we can see that the turn toward Big Government is also compromised by vested interests: Democrats failed to increase corporate taxes, though they did put a floor under the effective tax rate by imposing a new 15% minimum tax on corporate book income. The budget deficit is normalizing after the gargantuan pandemic stimulus. But Democratic legislation will not reduce the deficit substantially over time, contrary to Biden administration propaganda. But Republicans are fiscally profligate themselves, which is clear from Trump’s term in office as well as previous periods of single-party GOP rule. Republicans joined Democrats in passing the infrastructure bill and the Chips and Science Act, which revives US industrial policy in an era of great power competition. Biden has now accepted Trump’s tariff hikes on China. While Republican leadership may push deregulation in future, they may also believe that government regulation will be required to fight back against “woke” or socially left-wing corporations. Chart 9Buenos Aires Consensus equal Spending, Taxes, Tariffs, Regulations Thus the US’s new policy paradigm is bipartisan in nature. Of course, if Republicans take the House they will turn fiscally conservative for tactical reasons. That will put a halt to the spending splurge of 2020-22. But it will not signal a new fiscally austere paradigm since full Republican control in 2025 would be highly likely to lead to another fiscal blowout. This is even more likely to be the case now that Republicans have adopted a populist and pro-working class approach. Bottom Line: The US shift away from limited government toward Big Government is entrenched even if it suffers a setback due to gridlock from 2022-24. Given that partisan checks will prevent the US from moving too radically in any direction, we dub this paradigm “Limited Big Government.” It is marginally inflationary due to the rise in taxes, spending, regulations, and tariffs. US Electoral System: A Possible Positive Surprise Our expectation that the Fed will be politicized and that populist policies will persist stems from the underlying inequality and political polarization in the United States. Yet these same factors serve to increase overall political instability and threaten to cause a fundamental breakdown in political order. Will US institutions be able to handle the strain in the coming election cycle? There can be no doubt that polarization is reaching dangerous extremes. The US has suffered two out of five contested elections in the past 22 years. The last two Republican presidential victories have occurred without gaining the popular vote. The Biden administration’s low approval creates the risk of another tight election in 2024, implying controversy over the vote count and procedure (see Appendix). Another tight election could lead to a single state’s controversy determining the outcome of the entire election. Or it could lead to an electoral college tie in which Congress would decide the election result and could decide against the popular verdict. It is not hard to think of scenarios where contested elections and social unrest get out of hand. For example, one important consequence of the January 6 rebellion is that future governments will suppress protests with force if they attempt to interfere with the electoral process or the workings of the legislature. But imagine if a Republican administration comes to power through a contested election in Congress and then suppresses the resulting protests against it? Or imagine if Democrats retain power and push their “domestic war on terrorism” far enough to provoke a low-level militant insurgency from disaffected nationalists? It is easy to think of scenarios on either side that could lead to a much greater breakdown in public order than what occurred in 2020. It is unlikely that an institutional fix will occur in time for the 2024 election. However, there is one exception on the congressional agenda: a possible revision of the Electoral Count Act of 1887. This law was designed to prevent a failure of the electoral system in the wake of the “Stolen Election” of 1876. Its main achievement was to have the governor of each state certify the electoral votes of that state before sending them to Washington. However, the law also leaves open the door for state legislatures, secretaries of state, and governors to influence their state’s electoral votes. Democrats have written a revised version of the law that would close some of the loopholes and ambiguities. So far 10 Senate Republicans have co-sponsored the bill, making it very likely they will vote for it (Table 3). If these Republicans do not change their minds in the critical hour, and if all Democrats can be brought to vote for the measure, then a 60-vote, filibuster-proof majority will exist to pass the law. Table 3Republican Senators Who Support Revising The Electoral Count Act The original Electoral Count Act took ten years to pass, so there is no reason to be overly optimistic. But if 60 votes can be found in the Senate, then the electoral system will be fortified ahead of the 2024 election and structural US political risks will be at least somewhat reduced. Bottom Line: The US faces serious social and political instability in the coming years and remains at “peak polarization.” But a bipartisan law could help solidify the electoral system prior to 2024, which would reduce some of the risk of election controversies spiraling out of control. Investment Takeaways Headline consumer price inflation for August came in at 8.3% year-on-year versus an expected 8.1%, while core inflation accelerated from 5.9% to 6.3%. Financial markets took it on the chin, with the S&P500 falling by 4.3%, due to the disappointed expectation that inflation had already peaked. This disappointment is the second of its kind this year: investors have been over-eager to call the peak in inflation. Market volatility is likely to continue through the fall as investors now expect that the Fed will hike interest rates by another 75-100 basis points in September and continue hiking until inflation falls more convincingly. Twice-bitten investors will be hesitant to endorse a third rally until they are certain that inflation is coming down – but by then a recession may already be upon them. A significant increase in unemployment is likely necessary to cool inflation, which implies recession. Higher inflation will drive real wages further into the red, which is negative for the Biden administration’s midterm campaign. Otherwise the economy looked to be improving just in time for the vote. Manufacturing and non-manufacturing employment is perking up, labor force participation is reaching pre-Covid levels, and consumer confidence ticked up in the latest data, albeit still much lower than in 2021 (Chart 10). Now the tightening of financial conditions will cool the economy and sentiment in the advance of the election, reinforcing the opposition party and the expected gridlock. Inflation may indeed be peaking but not in time for the election. Throughout this year we bet on the US dollar index. This trade is getting very toppy and net speculative positions have rolled over (Chart 11). The dollar is overvalued but its momentum remains strong given extreme macroeconomic and geopolitical uncertainty. We have put this trade on watch for a downgrade to neutral but we expect the momentum to be sustained at least through the US election and Chinese party congress this fall. Chart 10Small Bounce In Economy Will Not Save Democrats Chart 11Dollar Is Overvalued But Has Momentum Matt Gertken Senior Vice President Chief US Political Strategy mattg@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 This trajectory is the opposite of the Washington Consensus. As such, Marko Papic, the founder of BCA’s Geopolitical Strategy, has dubbed it the “Buenos Aires Consensus,” as it resembles Argentine economic policy more so than the Thatcher/Reagan policy mix. Strategic View Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Table A2Political Risk Matrix Table A3US Political Capital Index Chart A1Presidential Election Model Chart A2Senate Election Model Table A4House Election Model Table A5APolitical Capital: White House And Congress Table A5BPolitical Capital: Household And Business Sentiment Table A5CPolitical Capital: The Economy And Markets