産業

Highlights Portfolio Strategy The trade-weighted U.S. dollar’s appreciation along with the still souring manufacturing data are weighing on SPX profit growth, at a time when heightened geopolitical uncertainty and a looming reversal in financial conditions has the potential to wreak havoc on stock prices. Stay cautious on the prospects of the broad equity market on a cyclical 9-12 month time horizon. Firming operating metrics, the resilient U.S. dollar, compelling valuations and depressed technicals, all signal that there is an exploitable tactical trading opportunity in a long S&P industrials/short S&P tech pair trade, irrespective of the trade war outcome. A tentative tick up in EM and China data along with improving relative operating metrics signal that the time is ripe to initiate a long machinery/short semis pair trade. Recent Changes Initiate a long S&P Industrials/short S&P Tech pair trade on a tactical three-to-six month time horizon, today. Initiate a long S&P Machinery/short S&P Semiconductors pair trade on a tactical three-to-six month time horizon, today. Feature The S&P 500 oscillated violently again last week, as the barrage of declining economic data, heightened trade war-related volatility and political upheaval dominated the news flow. While the Fed remains the backstop of last resort, we doubt additional interest rate cuts, which are already aggressively priced in the bond market, will boost lending and entice CEOs to invest in capital expenditure projects. Investors have to stay patient and disciplined, let this economic slowdown play out and allow for the natural healing of the economy. As a reminder, the ISM manufacturing index has been decelerating for twelve months and only been below the boom bust line for two. If history is an accurate guide, an additional three-to-six months of manufacturing pain are in store before a definitive bottom is in place (bottom panel, Chart 1). Such a macro backdrop, still warrants caution on the prospects of the broad equity market. Chart 1Allow Time For Economic Healing Beginning in August, a number of BCA publications became a tad more cautious on risk assets. Following our October editorial view meeting last week, this cautiousness was cemented with a tactical downgrade of global equities to neutral from previously overweight in the BCA House View matrix. While this marks a clear shift toward this publication’s less sanguine view of the U.S. equity market adopted during the summer, BCA's cyclical 12-month House View remains overweight global equities. Worryingly, the majority of the indicators we track continue to emit distress signals and warn that the SPX has further downside (Chart 2), especially absent profit growth. Importantly, we first correctly posited last May that the back half of the year global growth reacceleration was in jeopardy and would go on hiatus courtesy of rising policy uncertainty.1 Such a backdrop would boost the U.S. dollar and simultaneously take a bite out of SPX EPS.2 Chart 2Soft Data Red Flag Last week we highlighted that the U.S. dollar is the most important indicator to monitor given its global deflationary/reflationary properties. Were the greenback to maintain its year-to-date gains, it will continue to dent SPX profitability via P&L translation loss effects and likely sustain the profit recession into early 2020 (trade-weighted U.S. dollar shown inverted, bottom panel, Chart 3). Chart 3Greenback Weighing On Profits U.S. Equity Strategy’s S&P 500 four-factor macro EPS growth model remains downbeat (middle panel, Chart 4). Were we to isolate the U.S. dollar as a single variable and re-run the regression it is clear that additional greenback appreciation will further weigh on SPX profit growth (bottom panel, Chart 4). Meanwhile, the easing in financial conditions and drubbing of the 10-year Treasury yield since the Christmas Eve lows is already reflected in the 23% jump in the forward PE multiple, which explains over 90% of the SPX’s rise since the Dec 24, 2018 trough (top & middle panels, Chart 5). In other words, for multiples to expand anew, financial conditions would have to further ease, which in our view is a tall order (bottom panel, Chart 5). Chart 4EPS Model Warrants Caution Chart 5Financial Conditions Are The Forward P/E This week we are initiating two related pair trades to exploit the mispricing of the trade war within the deep cyclical sector universe.  Thus, we would lean against the narrative that easy financial conditions are not fully reflected into stocks. In contrast, our worry is that junk spreads are on the verge of a breakout and such a backdrop would tighten financial conditions and aggravate an SPX drawdown (junk OAS shown inverted, Chart 6). Adding it all up, the trade-weighted U.S. dollar’s appreciation along with the still souring manufacturing data are weighing on SPX profit growth, at a time when heightened geopolitical uncertainty and a looming reversal in financial conditions has the potential to wreak havoc on stock prices. Stay cautious on the prospects of the broad equity market on a cyclical 9-12 month time horizon. This week we are initiating two related pair trades to exploit the mispricing of the trade war within the deep cyclical sector universe. Chart 6Watch Junk Spreads Initiate A Long Industrials/Short Tech Pair Trade… Ever since the Sino-American trade war started in March 2018, the market has punished industrials, but tech has escaped unscathed. While the global growth soft patch preceded the U.S./China trade spat, courtesy of the Fed’s tightening cycle and Chinese policymakers’ slamming on the brakes, the trade war has served as a catalyst to aggressively shed deep cyclical equities except for tech stocks (Chart 7). We think this misalignment presents a playable opportunity to generate alpha by going long industrials/short tech, irrespective of the trade war’s outcome. In other words, this market neutral trade will be in the black either because the trade spat gets resolved or because there will effectively be no “real” deal including intellectual property and the tech sector. If the two sides manage to iron out their differences and strike a deal, industrials stocks should benefit from a greater catch-up phase because they have been depressed over the past two years, while tech stocks are near relative all-time highs. In contrast, a “no deal” scenario, should also re-concentrate investors’ minds and lead to a relative selling in tech stocks versus their already beaten-down deep cyclical peers: industrials. Chart 7Bifurcated Deep Cyclicals Market Chart 8Lots Of Bad Trade War News Reflected In Prices Chart 8 shows the drubbing in relative share prices as three key macro drivers have felt the trade war’s wrath. In more detail, were a deal to get struck, growth expectations will reverse course and a bond market sell-off will almost immediately reflect such an improvement in the global macro backdrop. Rising interest rates on the back of a reflationary/inflationary impulse are a boon for industrials and a bane for high growth tech stocks (top panel, Chart 8). Similarly, the middle panel of Chart 8 highlights that the ISM manufacturing survey should climb above the boom/bust line and outshine the San Francisco Fed’s Tech Pulse Index (that comprises “coincident indicators of activity in the U.S. information technology sector”3) on news of a successful deal. Finally, relative capital expenditure outlays should also veer in favor of industrials as previously mothballed infrastructure projects will come out of hibernation (bottom panel, Chart 8). In contrast, tech capex has been resilient of late with analytics, security and cloud computing being the most defensive capex corner, leaving little room for additional relative capex gains. Taking the opposite side i.e. a “no deal”, we doubt the metrics we depict in Chart 8 would sink that much further. If anything we believe that there is an element of exhaustion and relative share prices would jump on news of a breakdown in trade talks as tech sector fire sales would trump the sell-off in already depressed industrials. Meanwhile, the U.S. dollar and relative share prices have been steeply diverging recently and this gap will likely narrow via a catch-up phase in the latter (top & middle panels, Chart 9). According to Factset’s latest data the S&P industrials sector garners 37% of its sales from abroad, whereas the S&P information technology sector’s foreign exposure stands at 57% of total revenues.4 Therefore, given this 20% delta, a rising greenback should be beneficial to the more domestically geared industrials stocks (bottom panel, Chart 9). On the operating front, industrials also have the upper hand. The relative wage bill is sinking like a stone (shown inverted, middle panel, Chart 10) at a time when relative selling price inflation is holding its own (top panel, Chart 10). The upshot is that a relative profit margin jump is in store in the coming months which should boost the relative share price ratio (bottom panel, Chart 10). Chart 9Unsustainable Divergence Chart 10Industrials Have The Upper Hand U.S. Equity Strategy’s proprietary relative Cyclical Macro Indicators and relative profit growth models capture all these drivers and both signal that an industrials versus tech earnings-led outperformance phase looms into year end (Chart 11). Chart 12 shows that the relative earnings breadth and relative net earnings revisions are both deep in negative territory. In terms of technicals, the relative percentage of groups trading with a positive 52-week rate of change has hit the lowest level in the past two decades (second panel, Chart 12) and our composite relative technical indicator is roughly one standard deviation below the historical mean (bottom panel, Chart 11). Chart 11Profit Models And...  Chart 12...Washed Out Breadth Say Buy Industrials At The Expense Of Tech Finally, relative valuations are also bombed out. Our relative valuation indicator has been in a six-year uninterrupted drop, falling from two standard deviations above the mean to one standard deviation below the mean (fourth panel, Chart 11). Such entrenched bearishness in relative value is unwarranted. Bottom Line:  Firming operating metrics, the resilient U.S. dollar, compelling valuations and depressed technicals, all signal that there is an exploitable tactical trading opportunity in a long S&P industrials/short S&P tech pair trade, irrespective of the trade war outcome. …And A Long Machinery/Short Semis Pair Trade A more speculative and higher octane vehicle to explore this trade war-related mispricing is via a long S&P machinery/short S&P semiconductors pair trade. Most of the drivers mentioned above also hold true in this subsector market-neutral trade. However, in this section we will drill deeper in the China/EM drivers. The Emerging Asia leading economic indicator (EALEI) has plummeted to levels last hit around the 1998 LTCM bailout (top panel, Chart 13). While more pain is likely in the coming months as global trade has ground to a halt, we doubt the carnage in the EALEI can continue indefinitely. In fact, a tentative trough in the Emerging Markets (EM) manufacturing PMI heralds a brighter outlook for relative share prices (bottom panel, Chart 13). Chart 13Same Trade War Theme, Different Vehicles To Play It Chart 14China...  Encouragingly, China’s fiscal and credit impulse also signals that a bottom in relative share prices is likely already in place. If this leading indicator proves accurate in the coming months, then relative share prices can spike 20% near the late-2018 highs (Chart 14).   Chinese money supply growth is showing some signs of life and capital committed to infrastructure spending is coming out of hibernation. Goldman Sachs’ China current activity indicator is on a similar upward trajectory, underscoring that the path of least resistance is higher for relative share prices (Chart 15). Chart 15...Holds The Key Chart 16Firming Final Demand... On the operating front, relative new orders and relative shipment growth have both ticked higher (top & middle panels, Chart 16). Importantly, our relative demand proxy suggests that the relative end-demand backdrop is also firming. Using Caterpillar’s global sales to dealers data compared with global chip sales reveals that a wide gap has formed between relative share prices and our relative demand gauge (bottom panel, Chart 16). If our thesis pans out in the upcoming three-to-six months then machinery will trounce semis. Finally, relative pricing power corroborates that machinery demand has the upper hand versus semiconductor final demand. The Commodity Research Bureau’s raw industrials index is climbing relative to Asian DRAM prices. The upshot is that the compellingly valued relative share price ratio will gain steam in the months ahead (Chart 17). In sum, a tentative up-tick in EM and China data along with improving relative operating metrics signal that the time is ripe to initiate a long machinery/short semis pair trade. Bottom Line: Initiate a long S&P machinery/short S&P semiconductors pair trade today. The ticker symbols for the stocks in the S&P machinery and S&P semis indexes are: BLBG – S5MACH – CAT, DE, ITW, IR, CMI, PCAR, PH, SWK, FTV, DOV, XYL, IEX, WAB, SNA, PNR, FLS, and BLBG – S5SECO – INTC, TXN, NVDA, AVGO, QCOM, MU, ADI, AMD, XLNX, QRVO, MCHP, MXIM, SWKS, respectively. Chart 17...Is A Boon To Relative Pricing Power Key Risk To Monitor One important risk to both of our newly recommended market-neutral trades is China. We recently touched base with our ex-Chief Geopolitical Strategist and currently Chief Strategist at the Clocktower Group, Marko Papic. He warned us that all bets would be off because: “I think we will look back at the recession of 2020 and it will be known as the “China recession”. Basically, China just decided to stop playing, pick up its toys, and go home”. If Marko’s wise words were to ring true, then such a Chinese policy shift will truly be a game changer with negative global economic growth implications. With regard to our pair trades, they would both be offside.   Anastasios Avgeriou, U.S. Equity Strategist anastasios@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1      Please see BCA U.S. Equity Strategy Weekly Report, “Consolidation” dated May 21, 2019, available at uses.bcaresearch.com. 2      Please see BCA U.S. Equity Strategy Weekly Report, “On Edge” dated May 13, 2019, available at uses.bcaresearch.com. 3      https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/indicators-data/tech-pulse/ 4      https://www.factset.com/hubfs/Resources%20Section/Research%20Desk/Earnings%20Insight/EarningsInsight_100419A.pdf Current Recommendations Current Trades Size And Style Views Stay neutral cyclicals over defensives   (downgrade alert) Favor value over growth Favor large over small caps (Stop 10%)

終点 終点 アンダーウェイト 輸送セクターは最近大きく売られており、特にヘビー級の S&P レイルロード・インデックスが先導して下落しています。当社のアンダーウェイト見解は大いに奏功しており、今後数か月にさらに利益が見込めます。今週の陰鬱なISMの製造業調査は、国際的な不調が米国経済に波及するという投資家の意識を再び強める触媒となり、貿易戦争が鉄道貨物を含む運輸サービスに深刻な打撃を与えていることを浮き彫りにしました（第二・第三パネル）。その示唆するところは、リスクプレミアムが拡大し続け、相対的な鉄道株の株価は下方修正を余儀なくされるということです。加えて、業界の価格決定力が減速していること（下段パネル）を考慮すると、業績を端緒とした相対株価比の売りが起こる可能性が高まっています。 結論：引き続き S&P レイルロード・インデックスを回避してください。 このインデックスに含まれる銘柄のティッカーシンボルは次のとおりです: BLBG: S5RAIL - UNP, CSX, NSC, KSU.​​​​​​​

特別レポート

2010年晩夏、我々はデフレーション期における米国株式のセクター間相対パフォーマンスを概観するスペシャルレポートを公表しました。それ以降、インフレーション—より具体的にはコアPCEデフレーター—は2018年中頃に連邦準備制度理事会（FRB）の2％目標と短く“戯れ”たに過ぎず、長期のインフレ期待は高い水準へ再定着することはありませんでした。 憂慮すべきことに、インフレが今後数四半期で頭をもたげるのではなく、むしろ弱まる兆候が出始めています。 評論家たち—我々も含めて—は依然としてインフレ圧力が最終的に浸透するのを待っています。憂慮すべきことに、インフレが今後数四半期で頭をもたげるのではなく、むしろ弱まる兆候が出始めています（チャート1）。 2018年後半の金融状況の引き締まりは、若干のラグを伴って前年比CPI成長率を下押しするでしょう（上段、チャート1）。より広く見れば、ISM製造業PMIの急落（およびそのほとんどのサブコンポーネントに見られる動き）が示すように、米国経済の継続的な減速はインフレにとって深刻な逆風です（第2パネル、チャート1）。 世界的な成長の弱さを受け、逆循環通貨である米ドルの上昇も今後のインフレを抑制する要因となるでしょう（図示せず）。さらに、最近の力強いインフレ数値を我々は持続可能とは見なしていません。実際、コア・グッズCPI—コアCPIの25％を占め、最近の主な牽引役になっている—は、今後18か月でピークアウトして縮小する見込みです（第3パネル、チャート1）。 チャート1 まだインフレを探しているのか？ まだインフレを探していますか？ まだインフレを探していますか？ U.S. エクイティ・ストラテジーの企業の価格決定力（プライシング・パワー）代理指標も急落しており、コアインフレの下落が最も抵抗の少ない経路であることを裏付けています（下段、チャート1）。 言い換えれば、もしマーティ・マクフライが再びデロリアンに乗って過去へ戻れるなら、デフレーション／ディスインフレーションがBCAにおける主要な株式テーマであることを確かに支持し、我々に以前の分析をさらに掘り下げるよう頼むでしょう。本レポートはまさにその作業です。 我々は現在のディスインフレ傾向を認め、そのような期間における各株式セクターの歴史的相対パフォーマンスの詳細を示します。我々は単純なトレーディングルールを紹介します。デフレ期を企業部門価格デフレーターの成長が2四半期以上連続でマイナスとなる期間と定義しています（チャート2）。より広いデフレ傾向の中で単発のプラス成長四半期は外れ値として扱い、塗りつぶされた期間内の時折の四半期反発として扱います。 チャート2 デフレーション期 デフレ期 デフレ期 次のページでは、各セクターの歴史的相対パフォーマンスについてさらに詳述します。特筆すべきは、企業部門価格デフレーターの成長が2四半期連続でマイナスとなったシグナルに従うことで得られた年率換算リターンの概要を短く示す点です。1960年以降、そのようなシグナルは27回あり、中央値の継続期間は15か月、最短は6か月でした。したがって、我々は6か月、12か月、24か月の投資期間を用いて、デフレーション期に好成績を示したセクターをロング、インフレ期に好成績を示したセクターをショートすることに自信を持っています。 表1はこの実証的検証の結果を要約したものです。 表1 セクター相対パフォーマンスとデフレーション（1960年〜現時点） デフレ環境下におけるセクターのパフォーマンス：バック・トゥ・ザ・フューチャー？ デフレ環境下におけるセクターのパフォーマンス：バック・トゥ・ザ・フューチャー？ 我々の仮説は、ディスインフレーション期にはディフェンシブがサイクリカルを上回るというものです。GICS11の相対セクターパフォーマンスはこの仮説と一致しています。具体的には、我々のデフレシグナルに続き、ディフェンシブは6か月で1.4％上昇する一方、サイクリカルは2.5％下落します。12か月時点では転換点が見られ、サイクリカルは-2.5％から-0.21％へと損失を回復し始め、ディフェンシブは1.38％から0.76％へと利得を手放します。この結果は前述の中央値である15か月のデフレ期間と整合します。同様に、24か月先を見ると、サイクリカルが0.5％で市場をアウトパフォームしており（主にテクノロジーが牽引）、ディフェンシブは-1.2％で市場に劣後している（通信とユーティリティが足を引っ張る）、すなわち市場が回復していることを示唆しています。 図1 パフォーマンス・タイムライン デフレの世界におけるセクター・パフォーマンス：バック・トゥ・ザ・フューチャー？ デフレの世界におけるセクター・パフォーマンス：バック・トゥ・ザ・フューチャー？ 重要なのは、我々の定義する2四半期シグナルにより2018年中頃に始まったデフレーション環境下に我々は現在いるということであり、U.S. エクイティ・ストラテジーは過去6か月にわたってサイクリカルのエクスポージャーを積極的に削減し、幅広い株式市場の見通しに対して投資家に慎重であるべきことを強調してきました。 再び表1に戻ると、GICS1のセクターパフォーマンスには我々の期待と異なるいくつかの乖離も見られます。ユーティリティーズはディスインフレーション期にアウトパフォームするはずで、理由は2つあります：(1) 安定したキャッシュフロー成長、(2) 低下する金利が高利回りの代替資産の魅力を高めるためです。もう一つの注目すべき外れ値はS&P コンシューマー・ディスクリショナリー指数です。具体的には、我々のデフレシグナル後の6か月で約2％のアンダーパフォームが見られ、これは金利低下が辺際で裁量的支出を押し上げるはずという我々の期待を覆すものでした。 結論として、我々は表1の結果とセクター別コメントを要約したタイムラインも提示します。重要なのは、このタイムラインはデフレーション環境をナビゲートするための「経験則」としてのみ使うべきロードマップであるという点です。中央値が15か月であっても、デフレーション期間は1年足らずから4年以上まで幅があります。常に文脈が重要です。 最後に、今後数か月内に予定している我々の従来の米国株式セクターの利益率見通しレポートの更新にご期待ください。 以下は各セクター別の追加分析の詳細と、セクター別の価格決定力および売上回転率に関するチャートです。     Jeremie Peloso, リサーチアナリスト JeremieP@bcaresearch.com   Arseniy Urazov, リサーチアソシエイト ArseniyU@bcaresearch.com   コンシューマー・ステープルズ（オーバーウェイト） 生活必需品 生活必需品 S&P コンシューマー・ステープルズ指数はデフレーション期に良好なパフォーマンスを示します。この指数の避難先としての性格と、業界の継続的な再編が説明要因と考えられます。 当社のセクター価格決定力代理指標は、ステープルズが2003年以降、価格決定力の収縮を経験していないことを示しています。 相対株価は回復基調にありますが、依然として歴史的トレンドを下回る1標準偏差の位置にあります。デフレシグナル後の6か月、12か月、24か月の驚異的なリターンを考えれば、さらなる上昇が期待されます。 我々はS&P コンシューマー・ステープルズ指数をオーバーウェイトで推奨します。 コンシューマー・ステイプルズ コンシューマー・ステイプルズ エネルギー（オーバーウェイト） エネルギー エネルギー サイクリカル群の中で、S&P エネルギーは2番目に大きなアンダーパフォーマーであり、我々のデフレシグナル後6か月で平均して相対的に3.4％下落します。 このアンダーパフォーマンスは当社の価格決定力（PP）代理指標にも明確に表れています。エネルギー企業のPPは経済がデフレに入ると同時に低下します。これは、原油がほぼ全てのインフレ／デフレ指標において重要な役割を果たすという我々の予想と一致します。 ただし現時点での注意点として、最近の原油価格の急騰は、暴落したエネルギー株に格好の価値機会をもたらす触媒となり得ます。サウジアラビアの生産・精製施設に対するドローン攻撃の結果、地政学的プレミアムが原油価格に持続的に織り込まれることを我々は想定しています。 我々は現時点でS&P エネルギー指数をオーバーウェイトで推奨します。 エネルギー エネルギー ヘルスケア（オーバーウェイト） ヘルスケア ヘルスケア デフレーション期において、S&P ヘルスケア・セクターはS&P コンシューマー・ステープルズと同様に市場をアウトパフォームしています。 ヘルスケア産業の避難先的性格に加え、価格決定力はデータ系列の全期間を通じてゼロラインを下回ったことがありません。この顕著な実績は同セクターの売上成長にも当てはまります。 我々は現時点でS&P ヘルスケア指数をオーバーウェイトで推奨します。 ヘルスケア ヘルスケア インダストリアルズ（オーバーウェイト） インダストリアルズ インダストリアルズ デフレーションの瀬戸際では、インダストリアル株は2つの相反する力に直面します：原材料の値下がりと経済活動の減速です。 最終的には経済の軟化が勝ち、この深いサイクリカル指標は6か月、12か月、24か月でそれぞれ-1.4％、-1.0％、-0.5％と市場に対してアンダーパフォームします。 このセクターの価格決定力はしばしばデフレーション域に入ると鋭く低下し、インダストリアルズの収益見通しと相対パフォーマンスに重しをかけます。 我々は現時点でS&P インダストリアルズ・セクターをオーバーウェイトで推奨します。 インダストリアルズ インダストリアルズ ファイナンシャルズ（オーバーウェイト） 金融 金融 早期に反応するサイクリカルセクターであるため、我々の2四半期デフレシグナル後、S&P ファイナンシャルズ・セクターが6か月、12か月、24か月で市場にアンダーパフォームするのは驚くべきことではありません。 ファイナンシャルズの最大のアンダーパフォーマンスはデフレーション期の後半に現れます。実際、もしユーティリティーズを分析から除外していたなら、S&P ファイナンシャルズは12か月および24か月の両期間で最も成績の悪いセクターになっていたでしょう。 約42％を占めるヘビーウェイトの銀行サブグループがこのアンダーパフォーマンスを説明します。思い出していただきたいのは、銀行はデフレーション／ディスインフレーションによってクレジットの価格が下落する際にアンダーパフォームするという点です。 当社のフィクスト・インカム・ストラテジストは債券市場の売りを予想しているため、我々はS&P ファイナンシャルズ指数をオーバーウェイトで維持します。 金融 金融 テクノロジー（ニュートラル – 格下げ注意） テクノロジー テクノロジー 2010年に我々はテック株がデフレーション期の勝者であると再確認しましたが、これは現在も変わっていません。革新の猛烈なペース自体が、セクターをデフレーションの局面に耐えうるものにしています。 サイクリカル内では、テクノロジーは表1で圧倒的に最良のパフォーマーですが、現在の地政学的および貿易緊張は我々に同セクターをニュートラルとすることを促しています。将来的にソフトウェアのサブグループの格下げを通じた本格的な格下げが到来する可能性があります。 テックの価格決定力はデフレーション期でも頑強です。しかし、サイクルでピークアウトしたように見えるテックの売上成長は激しく振れるため、下振れ局面が近づくと潜在的な乱高下を警告しています。 我々はS&P テクノロジー・セクターをニュートラルとし、格下げ監視リストに載せています。 テクノロジー テクノロジー テレコミュニケーション・サービス（ニュートラル） テレコミュニケーション・サービス テレコミュニケーション・サービス 伝統的にディフェンシブであるテレコム・サービス株は近年苦戦しており、債務の増加に悩まされ、「ダムパイプ（単なる通信路）」にならないよう重要性を維持しようともがいています。 業界の価格決定力代理指標も同様の点を強調しており、テレコム各社は世界金融危機（GFC）以来、地盤を取り戻すことができていません。 もう一つ重要な点は、この指数が我々が検証した全ての期間で市場に対して著しくアンダーパフォームしていることです：-1.5％、-2.0％、-4.4％。我々の仮説では、テレコム事業者は安定したキャッシュフロー生成と高い配当利回りプロファイルのためデフレーション期にアウトパフォームするはずでしたが、実証的事実は逆を示しています。 おそらく、この数十年にわたる持続的なアンダーパフォーマンスは、もはやニッチ化したこの避難先産業のセクター固有のダイナミクスに原因があることを示唆しています。 我々は現時点でS&P テレコミュニケーション・サービス指数をニュートラルとします。 テレコミュニケーション・サービス テレコミュニケーション・サービス マテリアルズ（アンダーウェイト） 資料 資料 ここ数年の中国および一般的に新興市場複合体からのコモディティ需要の大きさにもかかわらず、S&P マテリアルズ・セクターは構造的な下降トレンドから脱却できていません。 このセクターはディスインフレーションの主要な敗者の一つであり、チャートからも明らかです。重要なのは、1970年代中盤以降、マテリアルズが市場をアウトパフォームしたほとんどの期間は塗りつぶされた領域や景気後退の外側で発生している点です。 平均して、グローバル成長が弱まるとマテリアルズの価格決定力は急落する傾向があり、僅かな遅れを伴って同セクターの売上成長も後退する可能性が高く、サイクルの売上成長は既にピークアウトしたことを示唆しています。 我々はS&P マテリアルズ・セクターの最近の格下げを受け、アンダーウェイトを繰り返します。 資料 資料 コンシューマー・ディスクリショナリー（アンダーウェイト – 格上げ注意) コンシューマー・ディスクリショナリー コンシューマー・ディスクリショナリー 我々の仮説に反して、S&P コンシューマー・ディスクリショナリー株は金利を押し下げるディスインフレーション期においてアンダーパフォームします。おそらく、経済活動の減速が金利低下を上回り、消費者はディスクリショナリーな購入からステープルズ系の商品・サービスへと寄り添うためです。 表1は、コンシューマー・ディスクリショナリー株が実際にはデフレーション期の初期に最も打撃を受け（-2.0％）、その後12か月で急速に回復しわずかにプラス（0.1％）に転じることを示しています。 我々は現時点でS&P コンシューマー・ディスクリショナリー指数をアンダーウェイトとしていますが、買い機会の可能性として格上げ注意リストに載せています。 コンシューマー・ディスクリショナリー コンシューマー・ディスクリショナリー ユーティリティーズ（アンダーウェイト） ユーティリティ ユーティリティ 本スペシャルレポートの最後のセクターとして、S&P ユーティリティーズは我々の分析で顕著な外れ値であり、期待通りに振る舞わないことを指摘していました。おそらく業界固有のダイナミクスが働いており、高利回りの避難先であるユーティリティーズ株はデフレーション期に大きくアンダーパフォームしています。 同セクターは6か月、12か月、24か月でそれぞれ市場に対して-3.5％、-4.3％、-4.5％のリターンです。理論的には、相対株価を押し上げるはずの2つの要因がありました：(1) 安定したキャッシュフロー成長、(2) 低下する金利は高利回りの代替資産の魅力を高める、の両方です。 しかし、どちらも長年にわたる構造的な下降トレンドからの脱却には十分ではありませんでした。 我々は現時点でS&P ユーティリティーズ指数をアンダーウェイトとします。 ユーティリティ ユーティリティ   脚注 1    GICS 1の親インデックスであるCommunication Services指数は最近導入されたためデータが不足しており、代わりにGICS 2のテレコミュニケーション・サービス指数を使用しています。

ディフェンス・フォートレス ディフェンス・フォートレス 最近のサウジのアラムコの石油生産および精製資産に対する攻撃は石油業界に大きな混乱をもたらし、当初はKSAの生産量の約570万バレル/日が失われました。 エネルギー株は地政学的リスク・プレミアム拡大の直接的な受益者ですが（こちらの月曜日のウィークリー・レポートをご参照ください）、間接的な受益者としては工業セクターのサブインデックス、BCAのS&Pディフェンス・グループがあります。 これらのピュアプレイのディフェンス銘柄は、米国およびグローバルの株式ポートフォリオにおいて必須の銘柄であり、その理由は当社がこのセクターに関してトランプ氏の当選直前に発表した重要な論考、ブラザーズ・イン・アームズ1で指摘した三つの主要因、すなわち世界的な再軍備、世界的な宇宙開発競争、及びサイバーセキュリティの脅威にあります。 現在、表面化しつつある中東の緊張はさらにエスカレートする可能性が高く、資産市場に織り込まれている地政学的リスク・プレミアムを押し上げるでしょう。その結果、最初の理由である世界的な軍拡競争は、中東でエスカレートする見込みであり、これはサウジアラビアや米国による潜在的な報復措置だけでなく、今後同様のドローン攻撃を抑止するためのサウジアラビアによる対空防衛ミサイルの強化にも基づいています。 結論： 地政学的緊張の高まりと業界収益へのさらなる大幅な押し上げの見通しを踏まえ、当社はBCAディフェンス・インデックスに対して戦術的な高い確信度のオーバーウェイトを再確認するとともに、サイクリカルおよび構造的なオーバーウェイトの推奨を継続します。BCAディフェンス・インデックスに含まれる銘柄のティッカーシンボルは次のとおりです：LLL, LMT, NOC, GD and RTN。 脚注 1      BCAの米国株式ストラテジー特別レポート、“ブラザーズ・イン・アームズ” （2016年10月31日付）、uses.bcaresearch.comで入手可能です。  

景気循環の傷はまだ癒えていない 景気循環の傷はまだ癒えていない ニュートラル - 格下げ警戒 輸送業界は景気の先行指標であり、輸送サービス需要の増加は景気の堅調化と同義であり、その逆も同様です。最近のフェデックスの決算は、運輸セクターの健全性（第2パネル）と米国経済、特に景気循環性の高い製造業セクターについての警戒信号を点灯させました。同社は世界的なマクロ環境の弱さを理由に挙げ、通期の利益見通しを大幅に下方修正しました。 フェデックスはまた、中国との貿易協定が存在しないことが貨物の自由な移動を複雑にすると指摘（下段のパネル）しており、米中間の不確実性が長引くほど世界貿易の成長が回復するのに時間を要すると述べています。エアフレイト株にとっての救いは業界の価格決定力の回復でしたが、セクターのインフレが今後数か月で鈍化する明確な兆候が増えてきています（第3パネル）。 当社は以前のフェデックスの利益警告を受けて、S&P エアフレイト＆ロジスティクス指数を高い確信を持つオーバーウェイト・リストから外して以降、同指数についてニュートラルのスタンスを取ってきましたが、現在この輸送サブグループと輸送株全体の指数を格下げ監視リストに入れています。 結論：当社はS&P 輸送株指数に対してニュートラルの立場を維持していますが、現在は格下げ警戒中です。輸送セクター内における当社のバーベル・ストラテジーは引き続き維持しており、航空株をオーバーウェイト、エアフレイト＆ロジスティクスをニュートラル（ただし現在は格下げ警戒中）、鉄道株をアンダーウェイトとしています。続報にご注目ください。 ​​​​​​​

Underweight BCA U.S. Equity Strategy’s electrical components & equipment (EC&E) three-factor earnings model did an excellent job in anticipating the recent breakdown in the S&P EC&E index (top & bottom panels). First, the trade-weighted dollar has broken out to fresh cyclical highs. Historically, relative share prices and the greenback are tightly inversely correlated and the current weak global growth message that the U.S. dollar is emitting is bearish for the S&P EC&E index (U.S. dollar shown inverted, second panel). This global growth soft patch is not only negative for new orders owing to deficient foreign demand, but the appreciating currency also makes EC&E exports less competitive in the global market place (U.S. dollar shown inverted, third panel). For details on the other two driver’s behind our bearish S&P EC&E index stance, please refer to our most recent Weekly Report. Bottom Line: We reiterate our underweight recommendation for the S&P EC&E index. The ticker symbols for the stocks in the index are: BLBG: S5ELCO – AME, EMR, ETN, ROK.   ​​​​​​​

Highlights Portfolio Strategy The sustained global growth slowdown, widening junk spreads, along with the risk of a U.S. recession becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy suggest that caution is still warranted in the broad equity market on a 3-12 month time horizon. Weakening consumer sentiment, softening hotel industry operating metrics that point to a margin squeeze, anemic relative outlays on lodging and a decelerating ISM non-manufacturing index, all signal that more pain lies ahead for the S&P hotels, resorts & cruise lines index.   Waning industry operating metrics, a bearish signal from our EPS growth model along with the mighty U.S. dollar warns against bottom fishing in the S&P electrical components & equipment (EC&E) index.  Recent Changes There are no changes to the portfolio this week. Table 1 Feature The S&P 500 traded in an uncharacteristically tight range last week before falling apart on Friday on the back of a re-escalation in the U.S./China trade war. Worries of recession also resurfaced. Not only did the MARKIT flash manufacturing PMI break below the 50 expansion/contraction line, but it also pulled down the MARKIT flash services PMI survey that barely held above the boom/bust line. Adding insult to injury, the 10/2 yield curve slope inverted anew last week further fanning these recession fears. Worrisomely, consumer sentiment took a hit recently according to the University of Michigan survey (top panel, Chart 1). Importantly, what caught our attention was the following commentary: “The main takeaway for consumers from the first cut in interest rates in a decade was to increase apprehensions about a possible recession. Consumers concluded, following the Fed’s lead, that they may need to reduce spending in anticipation of a potential recession.” While the consumer is the last and most significant pillar standing for the U.S. economy, reflexivity may spoil the party and a recession may become a self-fulfilling prophecy. This is the message the bond market is sending and it is warning that the path of least resistance is a lot lower for stocks (bottom panel, Chart 1). Chart 1“The First Cut Is The Deepest” Economists are also downgrading their U.S. real GDP growth estimates and that forecast now stands at 2.3% for the current year according to Bloomberg. While the recession alarm bells are not sounding off, these downward revisions bode ill for stocks (Chart 2)  Chart 2Watch Out Down Below Moving to another part of the fixed income market, stress is slowly building in the high yield market especially given the recent tick up in bankruptcies and the blind sides that cove-lite loans now pose to bond investors. As a reminder, the U.S. high yield option adjusted spread (OAS) troughed last September and continues to emit a distress signal for the broad equity market (junk OAS shown inverted, top panel, Chart 3). Chart 3Mind The Gaps With regard to global growth, it is still missing in action, and given that Dr. Copper is on the verge of a breakdown, a global growth recovery is a Q1/2020 story at the earliest. This week we update a consumer discretion­ary subindex and also highlight an industrials sector subgroup. Chart 4SPX: The Next Shoe To Drop? Chart 5Risk To View Other financial market variables concur that global growth is elusive. J.P. Morgan’s EM FX index has broken down and EM equities are also hanging from a thread. The EM high yield OAS has broken out signaling that the risk off phase has yet to fully run its course (EM junk OAS shown inverted, bottom panel, Chart 4). Finally, there is a short-term risk to our cautious equity market view. Indiscriminate buying in U.S. Treasurys has now pushed the 10-year yield down almost 180bps from last November’s peak deeply in overvalued territory. While such a move is not unprecedented, buying may be exhausted and in need of at least a short-term breather (Chart 5).     Netting it all out, the sustained global growth slowdown, widening junk spreads, along with the risk of a U.S. recession becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy suggest that caution is still warranted in the broad equity market on a 3-12 month time horizon. As a reminder, this is U.S. Equity Strategy’s view, which contrasts BCA’s sanguine equity market house view. This week we update a consumer discretionary subindex and also highlight an industrials sector subgroup. Empty Spaces When the consumer is worried about a possible recession as the latest survey revealed, the knee jerk reaction is to tighten the purse strings and marginally retrench. The latest University of Michigan consumer sentiment survey made for grim reading and such souring in confidence will continue to weigh on lodging equities (Chart 6). As a result, we remain underweight the niche S&P hotels, resorts & cruise lines consumer discretionary subgroup. When the consumer is worried about a possible recession as the latest survey revealed, the knee jerk reaction is to tighten the purse strings and marginally retrench. Chart 6Stay Checked Out Of Hotels   Already discretionary retail sales have taken the back seat and non-discretionary retail sales are in the driver’s seat. In fact, the top panel of Chart 7 shows that the relative retail sales backdrop has plunged to levels last seen during the GFC, warning that relative share prices have ample room to fall. Drilling deeper in the consumption data is instructive. Lodging outlays are decelerating and are also trailing overall PCE. The implication is that relative profits will likely underwhelm sustaining the 18-month long de-rating phase (middle & bottom panels, Chart 7). On the operating front the news is equally dour. While selling prices are expanding, the relentless construction binge will lead to a mean reversion sooner rather than later (bottom panel, Chart 8).   Chart 7De-rating Phase To Gain Steam Chart 8Margin Squeeze Looming   Tack on the ongoing assault from the new sharing economy unicorns like Airbnb, and industry pricing power will remain in check in coming quarters. Similarly, the ISM non-manufacturing price subcomponent is warning that a deflation scare is looming in the lodging industry (second panel, Chart 8). Not only are selling prices under attack, but also labor-related input costs are on fire. The sector’s wage inflation is climbing at a 3.9%/annum pace or roughly 120bps higher that the overall employment cost index (third panel, Chart 8). Taken together, there are high odds that a profit margin squeeze will weigh on profits and on relative share prices (top panel, Chart 8). Importantly, the overall ISM services survey best encapsulates the bearish backdrop of the S&P hotels, resorts & cruise lines index. Historically, relative share prices have been moving in tandem with the ISM non-manufacturing survey and the current message is that selling pressures on relative share prices will persist in the coming months (Chart 9). Chart 9Heed The Message From The ISM Services Survey In sum, weakening consumer sentiment, softening hotel industry operating metrics that point to a margin squeeze, anemic relative outlays on lodging and a decelerating ISM non-manufacturing index signal that more pain lies ahead for the S&P hotels, resorts & cruise lines index. Bottom Line: Continue to avoid the S&P hotels, resorts & cruise lines index. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5HOTL – MAR, HLT, RCL, CCL, NCLH. Short Circuited The S&P EC&E index broke down recently (top panel, Chart 10) and we reiterate our underweight recommendation in this industrials sector subgroup. While it is tempting to bottom fish here especially given oversold technical and bombed out valuations (bottom panel, Chart 11), a number of the indicators we track suggest that more losses are around the corner. Chart 10Sell The Weakness Chart 11Good Reasons For Valuation Discount   First the trade-weighted dollar has broken out to fresh cyclical highs despite the collapse in the 10-year yield. Historically, relative share prices and the greenback are tightly inversely correlated and the current weak global growth message the U.S. dollar is emitting is bearish for the S&P EC&E index (U.S. dollar shown inverted, middle panel, Chart 10). This global growth soft patch is not only negative for new orders owing to deficient foreign demand, but the appreciating currency also makes EC&E exports less competitive in the global market place (U.S. dollar shown inverted, bottom panel, Chart 10). Second, while industry new orders have been resilient, the massive inventory buildup dwarfs new order growth and warns that a deflationary liquidation phase is looming (middle panel, Chart 11). In fact, the recent drubbing in the ISM manufacturing prices paid subcomponent portends a deflationary industry phase (third panel, Chart 12). Adding it all up, waning industry operating metrics, a bearish signal from our EPS growth model along with the mighty U.S. dollar warns against bottom fishing in the S&P EC&E index. Other operating metrics are also warning that EC&E profits will underwhelm. Industry weekly hours worked have plunged and sell-side analysts have been aggressively cutting EPS estimates (bottom panel, Chart 13). On the productivity front, executives have not adjusted labor cost structures to lower running rates yet (second panel, Chart 13) and, thus, our EC&E productivity gauge (industrials production versus employment) is contracting which bodes ill for industry earnings (third panel, Chart 13). Chart 12Weak Profit Backdrop Chart 13Deteriorating Operating Metrics   Finally, our S&P EC&E EPS growth model does an excellent job in encapsulating all these moving parts and is signaling that the path of least resistance is lower for EPS growth in the coming months (bottom panel, Chart 12). Adding it all up, waning industry operating metrics, a bearish signal from our EPS growth model along with the mighty U.S. dollar warns against bottom fishing in the S&P EC&E index. Bottom Line: Stay underweight the S&P EC&E index. BLBG: S5ELCO – AME, EMR, ETN, ROK.     Anastasios Avgeriou, U.S. Equity Strategist anastasios@bcaresearch.com   Current Recommendations Current Trades Size And Style Views Favor value over growth Favor large over small caps

特別レポート

Highlights China’s infrastructure investment growth rate could rebound moderately from its current nominal 3% pace, but will remain well below the double-digit rate it has registered for most of the past decade.  A lack of funding for local governments and their financing vehicles will somewhat cap the upside in infrastructure fixed-asset investment (FAI) in the next six to nine months. Special bond issuance will be insufficient to ensuring a major recovery in infrastructure spending. Investors should tread cautiously on infrastructure plays in financial markets. Feature Chart I-1Chinese Infrastructure Investment: Double-Digit Growth Again? Nominal infrastructure investment growth in China has slowed from over 15% in 2017 to 3% currently (Chart I-1). This is the weakest growth rate since 2005 excluding the late 2011-early 2012 period. Over the past decade, each time the Chinese economy experienced a considerable slowdown, infrastructure construction was ramped up to revive growth. Infrastructure spending growth skyrocketed in 2009 and was also boosted in 2012. In 2015-2016, it was not allowed to decelerate with the issuance of nearly RMB 2 trillion of special infrastructure bonds. This time the government has also reacted. Since mid-2018, the Chinese authorities have dramatically raised local governments’ special bonds balance limits, prompted local governments to front-load their issuance this year, and also encouraged the private sector to participate in public-private partnership (PPP) infrastructure projects. Will Chinese infrastructure FAI growth accelerate over the next six to nine months from its current nominal 3% pace to double digits? The short answer is no. We believe Chinese infrastructure investment growth could rebound moderately in the next six to nine months, but will still remain below the double-digit growth seen in the past and well below the 18% average growth of the past 15 years. For purposes of this report, the composition of “infrastructure” includes three categories – (1) Transport, Storage and Postal Service, (2) Water Conservancy, Environment & Utility Management, and (3) Electricity, Gas & Water Production and Supply. Chart I-2 presents the breakdown of the nominal infrastructure FAI by category. Funding Constraint Preceding both the 2011-2012 and 2018 infrastructure investment slumps, the Chinese central government increased its scrutiny on local government debt and tightened funding conditions for infrastructure projects. As a result, all three categories of infrastructure spending experienced a sharp deceleration (Chart I-3). Overall, financing and qualitative limitations that Beijing imposes on local government infrastructure spending hold the key to the outlook. We believe Chinese infrastructure investment growth could rebound moderately in the next six to nine months, but will still remain below the double-digit growth seen in the past and well below the 18% average growth of the past 15 years. Looking forward, without a considerable recovery in available financing, there will be no meaningful rebound in Chinese infrastructure investment and construction activity. For now, we are not very optimistic on financing. Chart I-4 shows the breakdown of the major funding sources of Chinese infrastructure investment. All of them are likely to face considerable funding constraints over the next six to nine months. Chart I-3Chinese Infrastructure Investment Growth Has Decelerated Across The Board   1. Self-Raised Funds Self-raised funds contribute nearly 60% of overall infrastructure funding. They include net local government special bond issuance, PPP financing and government-managed funds’ (GMFs) revenues excluding proceeds from special bond issuance. A. Local government special bond issuance, which is exclusively used to fund infrastructure projects, has been the major source of financing for local governments in the past 12 months. The authorities significantly boosted net local government bond issuance to RMB 1.2 trillion in the first six months of this year from only RMB 361 billion in the same period in 2018. However, the amount of special bond issuance in the second half of this year will unlikely be significant enough to boost infrastructure FAI greatly. First, the central government has not only set a limit on the aggregate local government special bond balance, but it also set limits for each of the 31 provinces/provincial-level cities.1 In the past three years, nearly all provinces did not use up their special bond issuance quotas. This resulted in an outstanding aggregate amount of special bonds of only about 85% of the limit.2 In both 2017 and 2018, local governments were left with RMB 1.1 trillion special bond issuance quota unused for that year. Second, based on the limit on outstanding amount special bonds set by the central government for the end of 2019, local governments could issue another RMB 0.8-1 trillion of special bonds in the second half of this year. In comparison, in 2018, the issuance was heavily concentrated in the second half of the year with RMB 1.6 trillion. Our estimate shows there will be only RMB 400-600 billion increase in net total special bond issuance in 2019 versus 2018.3 This will translate into a merely 2-3% growth in Chinese infrastructure investment. Third, net local government special bond issuance made up only 15% of overall infrastructure FAI over the past 12 months. Hence, there is still a huge financing gap to be filled (Chart I-5). B. Public-private partnerships (PPP) are unlikely to meet the financing shortage either. PPPs have become an important financing model for Chinese local governments to fund infrastructure investments since 2014. Nevertheless, to control rising local government debt risks, the central government has tightened regulations on PPP projects since early last year. A series of tightened rules have resulted in a sharp deceleration in both PPP investment and overall infrastructure investment growth. Consequently, PPPs contributions to total infrastructure FAI have plunged from over 30% in 2017 to 10% currently (Chart I-6). Chart I-5Special Bond Issuance Accounted For Only 15% Of Infrastructure FAI Chart I-6Public-Private Partnerships: Too Small To Meet The Financing Shortage   So far, the rules on PPP projects on local governments remain tight. In March, the central government tightened its rule on local government participation in PPP projects. The new rule states that, if a local government has already spent more than 5% of its overall general expenditures on PPP projects excluding sewage and waste disposal PPP projects, it will not be allowed to invest in any new PPP projects. Before March, the threshold was over 10%. In early July, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) demanded all PPP projects undertake a thorough feasibility study. The NDRC emphasized that PPP projects that do not follow standard procedures will not be allowed. Chart I-7Government-Managed Funds: Headwinds From Falling Land Sales C. Government-managed funds (GMF) excluding special bond issuance accounts, which contribute about 15% of overall infrastructure financing, are also facing constraints. According to the country’s Budget Law, the GMF budget refers to the budget for revenues and expenditures of the funds raised for specific developmental objectives. In brief, GMFs constitute de-facto off-balance-sheet government revenues and spending. Land sales by local governments are one major revenue source for GMFs. Contracting property floor space sold is likely to depress real estate developers’ land purchases, further reducing local governments’ revenues from selling land (Chart I-7). This will curb local governments’ ability to finance their infrastructure projects through GMFs. 2. Domestic Loans Domestic loans contribute to about 15% of overall infrastructure financing. Infrastructure projects are generally long term in nature. Presently, the impulse of non-household medium- and long-term (MLT) lending has stabilized but has not yet improved (Chart I-8). While not all of MLT loans are used for infrastructure, sluggish MLT lending reflects commercial banks’ reluctance to finance infrastructure projects. We believe a decelerating economy, mounting local government debt, and often-low returns on infrastructure projects will continue to constrain loan funding of infrastructure projects from both banks and the private sector. 3. General Government Budget The general government budget (which includes central and local governments) accounts for about 15% of overall infrastructure financing. The general budget is also facing headwinds from declining revenue due to recent tax cuts and lower corporate profit growth (Chart I-9). Chart I-8Sluggish Medium/Long-Term Bank Lending Chart I-9Government General Budget: Large Deficit   Bottom Line: Funding constraints will likely linger, making any recovery in Chinese infrastructure investment growth moderate over the next six to nine months. Local government special bonds will not be a game-changer. Their net issuance accounted for only 15% of overall infrastructure FAI over the past 12 months. While local governments could issue another RMB 0.8-1 trillion of special bonds in the second half of 2019, it would be well below the RMB 1.4 trillion of special bond issuance that was rolled out in the second half of 2018. FAI In Transportation: In Nominal Terms… The transportation sector accounts for about 31% of total Chinese infrastructure investment. It includes railway, highway, urban public transit, air and water transport. Table I-1 shows the 13th five-year (2016-2020) transportation investment plan released by the government in February 2017,4 which excludes urban public transit. The authorities planned to invest RMB 15 trillion in the transportation sector over the five-year period between 2016 and 2020, with highways accounting for over half of the investment, followed by railways (23%), air transportation (4.3%) and water transportation (3.3%). The table also shows our calculation of the realized investment amount in these four sub-sectors for the period of January 2016 to June 2019. Local government special bonds will not be a game-changer. Their net issuance accounted for only 15% of overall infrastructure FAI over the past 12 months. Table I-1 suggests the remaining FAI for the transportation sector for the July 2019 to December 2020 period will be considerably smaller than the FAI amount over the past 18 months. This entails a major drag on infrastructure investment at least over the next 18 months. It is important to emphasize that this is conditional on the central planners in Beijing sticking to their five-year plan for infrastructure FAI. As of now, there has been no announcement of revisions to these five-year FAI targets. Bottom Line: China has already completed the overwhelming majority of its planned transportation FAI for 2016-2020. Consequently, without revisions to the targets and budgets by central planners in Beijing, transportation investment will likely contract year-on-year over the next 18 months. …And Real Terms Table I-2 summarizes the 2020 targets for major Chinese infrastructure development (urban rail transit, railway, highway and airport) in real terms. Chart I-10Transportation 2020 Targets: Not Far Away In real terms, the annual growth of transportation infrastructure will likely be 4.2% in both 2019 and 2020. We illustrated in the previous section that the five-year budget plan had been front-loaded, leaving a very small budget for transportation investment over the next 18 months. This may suggest that without considerably exceeding the budget, transportation infrastructure will fail to achieve the 4.2% annual growth in real terms both this year and next. In brief, more funding should be dispatched/allowed by the central planners in Beijing for infrastructure FAI not to shrink. Second, urban rail transit, high-speed railways, highways and airports will reach their respective 2020 targets, while non-high-speed railway construction will likely be a little bit off its 2020 target. Third, based on the 2020 targets, urban rail transit will enjoy very fast growth over the next one and a half years. Fourth, the growth of high-speed railways and highways will be very low, at around 1-2% in real terms (Chart I-10). Finally, while the number of airports will increase at a faster pace, their contribution to overall infrastructure investment will remain insignificant as they only account for about 1.4% of overall infrastructure investment. Bottom Line: In real terms, transport infrastructure growth will likely be only about 4% over the next six to nine months. Future Infrastructure Investment Focus Urban rail transit, environmental management and public utility management will likely be the major driving forces for Chinese infrastructure investment over the next 18 months. Urban rail transit line length will likely register fast growth of around 10% over the next six to nine months. As the central government enforces increasingly stringent rules on environmental protection, investment in environmental management will likely experience continued growth acceleration (Chart I-11). China has already completed the overwhelming majority of its planned transportation FAI for 2016-2020. Consequently, without revisions to the targets and budgets by central planners in Beijing, transportation investment will likely contract year-on-year over the next 18 months. Meanwhile, as the country’s urbanization continues and more townships and city suburbs become urbanized,5 public utility management investment will also grow moderately. Public utility management investment, contributing a massive 45% of overall infrastructure investment, includes sewer systems, sewer treatment facilities, waste treatment and disposal, streetlights, city roads construction, parks, bridges and tunnels in the city. Investment Implications Investors should not hold their breath expecting a major upswing in infrastructure FAI and a major rally in related financial markets. Chinese steel demand is sensitive to construction of railways and urban rail transit lines (Chart I-12, top panel). In turn, mainland cement demand is dependent on highway construction (Chart I-12, bottom panel). Chart I-11Environment Management: Will Continue Booming Chart I-12Chinese Infrastructure Spending Will Moderately Boost Steel & Cement Demand...   Chart I-13...And Steel & Cement Prices At The Margin The infrastructure sector accounts for about 10-15% of total Chinese steel use, and about 30-40% of Chinese cement consumption. Nevertheless, given that we believe Chinese infrastructure spending will only have a moderate recovery, the positive effect on steel and cement prices will be muted as well (Chart I-13). The same holds true for spending on industrial machinery, equipment, chemicals and various materials. Notably, risks to this baseline scenario of a muted recovery are to the downside because of the lack of funding. Barring a substantial increase in the special bond issuance quota this year or a major credit binge, infrastructure FAI growth could in fact stall. Ellen JingYuan He, Associate Vice President ellenj@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1  Please note that the central government only set the special bond balance limit (not the quota) for local governments. The often-cited “quota” in the news is derived by calculating the difference between the current limit and the previous year’s limit. The “quota” used in this report is the difference between the current special bond balance limit and the actual special bond balance of the previous year end. 2  At the end of 2018, Chinese special bond balance was RMB 7.4 trillion, only 85.8% of the special bond balance limit of RMB 8.6 trillion. This ratio was 84.6% in 2017 and 85.5% in 2016. On average, the ratio was 85.3% in the past three years. 3  Given that the central government is aiming to somewhat stimulate infrastructure spending by increasing special bond issuance, we assume special bond balance at the end of 2019 to reach 88%-90% of the limit (RMB 10.8 trillion) that it has set for 2019. This will be higher than the 85% average of the past three years. In turn, this means that the special bond balance at the end of this year will likely be RMB 9.5-9.7 trillion. Since the balance at the end of last year was RMB 7.4 trillion, this results that net special bond issuance will be around RMB 2.1-2.3 trillion in 2019. Given the net special bond issuance last year was RMB 1.7 trillion, it follows that there will only be a RMB 400-600 billion increase in total special bond issuance in 2019 versus 2018. 4  Please see www.gov.cn/xinwen/2017-02/28/content_5171576.htm, published February 28, 2017, by the Chinese central government website. 5  Please see Emerging Markets Strategy/China Investment Strategy Special Report “Industrialization-Driven Urbanization In China Is Losing Steam,” dated January 2, 2019, available on ems.bcaresearch.com