Equities

Highlights Chart 1Global Equities At Record Highs Our Stock Market Timing Model points to a heightened risk of a correction for global equities over the next few months. However, the 12-month cyclical outlook still looks reasonably good thanks to accelerating earnings growth. Monetary policy has also yet to reach restrictive levels in most economies. Beyond the next 12 months, lofty valuations (especially in the U.S.), as well as the prospect of a meaningful economic slowdown late next year, will weigh on returns. Tactically, go short the S&P 500 with a target of 7.5% and stop-loss of 2.5%. This trade will automatically expire in six weeks. Cyclically, go long the December 2017 Brent Oil futures contract. Feature Aging Bull? Global equities have been on a tear lately. The MSCI All-Country Index reached a fresh record high this week (Chart 1). The index is up 14.1% in local-currency terms and 13.3% in U.S. dollar terms since early November. Our philosophy at BCA Research is that the best market calls come from combining informed qualitative analysis with time-tested quantitative indicators. With that in mind, this week's report distills the results of our proprietary Stock Market Timing Model. Our main conclusions are only partly reassuring. While the cyclical 12-month outlook for stocks remains reasonably auspicious, our model suggests that there is an elevated risk of a near-term correction. The model is also forecasting subpar long-term returns for stocks, particularly in the U.S. where valuations have become stretched. What Predicts Stock Returns? As we have documented in past research,1 a number of empirical regularities help predict stock market returns: 1. Stocks Tend To Perform Better When Economic Growth Is Accelerating The state of the business cycle is the most important driver of stock returns over horizons of around 12 months. Our model incorporates a variety of forward-looking cyclical variables that span different parts of the economy. For example, Table 1 shows the S&P 500 has delivered an average annualized real total return of 9.8% since 1948 whenever the gap between the ISM manufacturing new orders and inventories components - based on the prior month's ISM reading - was positive. In contrast, the S&P 500 has fallen by an average of 1.2% whenever the gap was negative. In the same vein, the S&P 500 has produced an average annualized real total return of 9.2% since 2000 whenever initial unemployment claims have declined over the prior three months, while losing 3.6% whenever claims have increased. The gap between new orders and inventories fell to 6.5 in April, down from a March reading of 15.5. The downtrend in initial unemployment claims has also flattened out. The moves in the ISM manufacturing index and unemployment claims, along with other measures such as auto sales, suggest that the economy is going through a soft patch. This softening, in turn, has been reflected in a steep drop in Citi's economic surprise index (Chart 2). Table 1Stocks Tend To Perform Better When Growth Is Accelerating Chart 2Some Signs Of Softening U.S. Economic Data... Still, we would not overstate the extent of the deterioration in the growth picture. Goldman's Current Activity Indicator remains near cyclical highs (Chart 3). The Atlanta Fed's preliminary Q2 growth estimate stands at 4.2%, while the NY Fed's Nowcast stands at 2.3%. If these preliminary estimates prove to be correct, Q1 will end up being just a temporary speedbump along the road to recovery. Consistent with this, a variety of forward-looking indicators suggest that the U.S. economy will grow at an above-trend pace over the remainder of the year (Chart 4). Durable goods orders are rising, business capex intentions have surged, building permits are trending higher, and consumer confidence is strong. Chart 3...But Growth Backdrop Still Solid... Chart 4...And Forward-Looking Indicators Remain Upbeat Globally, the picture remains reasonably upbeat, as highlighted by our Global Leading Indicator (Chart 5). Growth in the euro area is particularly strong. Green shoots are also appearing in beleaguered emerging markets such as Brazil and Russia. The Chinese economy has slowed a notch, but is still in much better shape than it was at this time last year. Above-trend global growth is helping to propel corporate earnings. The Q1 earnings season is off to a strong start. According to Thomson Reuters, EPS for the S&P 500 in the first quarter is expected to increase by 14.8% from year-ago levels. 75% of companies have beat earnings estimates, compared to the long-term average of 64%. 63% of companies have beaten revenue estimates, compared to the historic average of 59%. BCA's global earnings model predicts further upside for profits over the coming months (Chart 6).2 Chart 5Global Economy Is Doing Well Chart 6More Upside For Global Earnings Bottom Line: Cyclical indicators are somewhat mixed, but generally point to further upside for global stocks. 2. Stocks Tend To Perform Better When Financial Conditions Are Easing Easy money and equity bull markets tend to go hand in hand. Since 1970, the S&P 500 has delivered a real total average annualized return of 12.9% whenever our monetary indicator - which looks at money growth, bank lending, as well as short-term and long-term rates - was above its long-term average in the prior month, but only 0.5% when the indicator was below its long-term average. Similarly, the S&P 500 has risen at a 9.6% annualized pace whenever BCA's Financial Conditions Index (FCI) - which includes such components as credit spreads, the trade-weighted dollar, oil prices, home prices, and the relative performance of bank shares - was above its 250-day moving average, while gaining only 1.4% when the FCI was below its 250-day moving average. Chart 7 shows that our U.S. FCI remains slightly above its moving average, thanks to the decline in credit spreads over the past 12 months, along with higher stock market and house prices. However, the monetary indicator has now dipped below its respective moving average due to rising rates and slower broad money growth. Chart 7Financial Conditions Still Bode Well For Equity Returns, But U.S. Rate Hikes Loom Large Looking out, monetary and financial conditions are likely to be buffeted by various crosswinds. On the one hand, business lending should recover thanks in part to a rebound in manufacturing output (Chart 8). On the other hand, consumer lending standards have been tightening for some time and delinquencies and charge-offs for auto and credit card loans have edged higher, albeit from very low levels (Chart 9). Higher interest rates are also likely to weigh on credit demand. On balance, we expect a modest tightening in U.S. financial conditions over the remainder of the year. Chart 8Business Lending Should Recover Chart 9Tightening Consumer Lending Standards Outside the U.S., financial conditions are likely to stay accommodative. Unlike the Fed, most other central banks will keep rates near rock-bottom levels. In fact, real short-term rates in the euro area and Japan could even decline as stronger GDP growth lifts inflation expectations. Bottom Line: Financial conditions are still somewhat supportive for global equities, but are likely to become less so in the U.S. as the Fed continues to hike rates. 3. Stocks Tend To Perform Better When Sentiment Is Poor But Improving Warren Buffet once famously said that the secret to being a successful investor is to be "fearful when others are greedy and greedy when others are fearful." There is no doubt that the level of sentiment can be a powerful contrarian indicator. However, our research indicates that the change in sentiment is also important in predicting equity returns. Trading rules that overweight stocks whenever sentiment over the prior weeks has improved from bearish levels, while underweighting stocks whenever sentiment has deteriorated from bullish levels, can significantly outperform a buy-and-hold strategy (Chart 10). This finding is similar to what one sees for individual stocks. As we discussed in our report on bottom-up stock picking,3 the best stocks tend to be the ones for which the consensus analyst opinion is bearish but improving. In contrast, the worst stocks are typically the ones for which the consensus analyst opinion is bullish but deteriorating. Today, market sentiment is on the bullish side (Chart 11). According to the Marketvane survey, the share of traders that expect stocks to rise over the coming weeks is only slightly below where it was during past stock market peaks. Bullish sentiment is less pronounced in the AAII's survey of individual investors. However, equity allocations among AAII members are about five points above their historic average, which limits the scope for "new money" to come into the market. Meanwhile, complacency is setting in (Chart 12). The VIX hit its lowest level in ten years this week. The Minneapolis Fed's market-based probability of a 20%+ correction in the S&P 500 has also dropped to below 10%, a level last seen during the peak of the previous bull market in 2007. Yale University's One-Year Confidence Index - which measures how likely market participants think that stocks will go up in the succeeding year - is near record levels for individual investors and at an absolute record high for institutional investors. U.S. margin debt, expressed as a share of GDP, has also risen above its 2000 and 2007 peaks. Chart 10Buy Stocks When Sentiment Is Poor But Improving Chart 11Equity Sentiment Is More Bullish Than Usual Chart 12Complacency Reigns Bottom Line: Current levels of bullish sentiment are a warning sign for equities. Should sentiment measures begin to deteriorate without a correspondingly large drop in stock prices, it will be time to head for the exit doors. 4. Stocks Tend To Perform Better In "Young" Bull Markets Following Pullbacks When is the trend your friend? The answer is over horizons of about two years. Returns tend to be positively serially correlated over this range. This means that if stocks have done well over the past two years, they are likely to continue doing well. Over shorter horizons of less than a year and longer horizons exceeding three years, the trend is not your friend - returns tend to be negatively correlated (Chart 13). Thus, if stocks have fallen over the past few weeks, they are likely to do better over the following few weeks than if they had risen. Likewise, if stocks have done well over, say, the past five years, then this is evidence that the bull market is getting long in the tooth. Obviously, these are not hard and fast rules, but they do give some guidance about what the future may have in store. The fact that the S&P 500 has done well over the past two years is a bullish sign, but the fact that the bull market is now in its eighth year and price gains have accelerated over the past few months (raising the risk of a blow-off top) are both bearish signs. The bull market is less mature outside the U.S., which works in favor of non-U.S. stocks. Relative momentum is also turning more favorable for non-U.S. markets, especially those in the euro area (Chart 14). Chart 13When Is The Trend Your Friend? Chart 14Relative Momentum Favors Non-U.S. Stocks Bottom Line: Recent price momentum is sending mixed signals for U.S. stocks, but somewhat more encouraging signals for non-U.S. stocks. 5. Stocks Tend To Perform Better When They Are Cheaply Priced Valuations are not especially useful as a short-term timing tool. However, they are by far the most useful tool for gauging long-term expected returns. This can be seen in the fact that there is a strong negative correlation between the Shiller PE ratio and subsequent real total returns (Chart 15). In the U.S., the Shiller PE ratio currently stands at 29. This is 45% above the post-1960 median and 82% above the median since 1880. If profit margins over the past 10 years had been what they were on average during the 1990s, the Shiller PE ratio would stand at 41 today - within reaching distance of its 2000 peak (Chart 16). U.S. valuations are even more stretched if one looks underneath the indices: The median NYSE stock currently trades at a higher price-to-earnings and price-to-cash flow ratio than at the 2000 peak (Chart 17). Chart 15Valuation Is The Single Best Predictor Of Long-Term Equity Returns Chart 16U.S. Valuations Are Stretched... Chart 17...Especially For The Median Stocks One could argue that a structurally lower neutral interest rate justifies a higher equilibrium PE ratio. There are plenty of reasons to challenge this argument - a lower neutral rate may foreshadow slow earnings growth, for instance - but even if one accepts its basic premise, it does not imply that stocks will do well in absolute terms. If you assume a lower discount rate in calculating the present value of future cash flows, you must also assume a lower long-term rate of return from owning stocks. You can't one have without the other. Valuations are generally more favorable outside the U.S., even if one adjusts for differences in sector weights across countries (Chart 18). Chart 18Valuations More Favorable Outside The U.S. Bottom Line: Valuations are stretched in the U.S. Long-term investors should favor non-U.S. stocks over their U.S. peers. 6. Stocks Tend To Perform Better During Certain Days And Months Of The Year Than Others No discussion of stock market-timing strategies would be complete without a few words on calendar effects (Table 2). Table 2When to Buy Stocks As with all stock market anomalies, there is a risk that any particular calendar pattern will disappear once it has been documented. For example, the "Blue Monday" effect, popularized by Yale Hirsch's 1987 book "Don't Sell Stocks On Monday," vanished soon after the book was published, only to make a comeback of sorts during the past 15 years. The so-called January Effect, which describes the tendency for stocks to do well at the start of the year, largely disappeared from the data at the turn of the century. In its place the "Santa Claus rally" was born, presumably reflecting the desire of traders to front run the January effect. Other calendar effects remain alive and well. The tendency for stocks to underperform during the summer and autumn months (the "Sell In May And Go Away" effect) is still around (Chart 19). The same goes for the so-called "turn-of-the-month effect" - the tendency for stocks to do best in the last few days and first few days of each month. Less well known is the tendency for stocks to do much better on FOMC days.4 Remarkably, the S&P 500 would be more than 50% lower today if one were to exclude all the days since 1990 when scheduled FOMC meetings took place from the return tally (Chart 20). Chart 19Sell In May And Go Away Chart 20The Fed Effect Bottom Line: High frequency, tactical investors may be able to profit from exploiting calendar effects in the data. Putting It All Together Our Stock Market Timing Model incorporates the factors discussed above. As Chart 21 illustrates, it has an admirable track record of predicting market returns. The current message from the model differs across time horizons. Tactically, over a three-month horizon, it suggests that stocks are overbought and vulnerable to a correction. This is mainly due to the sharp run-up in most global bourses over the past six months, as well as elevated levels of bullish sentiment. The fact that we are also entering the historically weak summer months is also a slight negative in our model. Cyclically, however, the picture still looks fairly reassuring: leading economic indicators and corporate earnings are in an uptrend. Financial conditions also remain accommodative. Thus, the model continues to predict modestly above-average returns for global equities over a 12-month horizon. Looking beyond the next 12 months, however, the picture begins to dim. The U.S. now accounts for over 50% of global equity market capitalization. Valuations for U.S. stocks have reached elevated levels. The U.S. economy is also approaching full employment, which means that growth will fall back to what so far has been a very anemic pace of potential GDP growth. Interest rates may also eventually reach punitive levels as the Fed continues to hike rates. All this suggests that the bullish window for global stocks, and U.S. stocks in particular, may close late next year. Two New Trades We are initiating two new trades reflecting our differing tactical and cyclical views: Tactically, go short the S&P 500 with a target of 7.5% and stop-loss of 2.5%. This trade will automatically expire in six weeks. Cyclically, go long the December 2017 Brent Oil futures contract (Chart 22). Our commodity strategists remain convinced that the supply backdrop for oil is tighter than the market is discounting. Add to that a firm demand picture, and we have a recipe for what is likely to be at least a temporary recovery in oil prices. Chart 21Message From Our Stock Market Timing Model Chart 22Go long December 2017 Brent Futures Peter Berezin, Chief Global Strategist Global Investment Strategy peterb@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see Global Investment Strategy Special Report, "Market Timing: Holy Grail Or Fool's Gold?" dated May 27, 2016, available at gis.bcaresearch.com. 2 Please see Global Alpha Sector Strategy Bi-Weekly Report, "Quarterly Review And Outlook," dated April 7, 2017, available at gss.bcaresearch.com. 3 Please see Global Investment Strategy Special Report, "Introducing ETS: A Top-Down Approach To Bottom-Up Stock Picking," dated December 3, 2015, available at gis.bcaresearch.com. 4 David O. Lucca., and Emanuel Moench, "The Pre-FOMC Announcement Drift," Federal Reserve Bank Of New York Staff Reports, August 2013. Appendix Tactical Global Asset Allocation Monthly Update We announced in late March that we are making major upgrades to our Tactical Asset Allocation Model. In the meantime, we will send you a concise update of our recommendations in the first week of every month based on a combination of BCA's proprietary indicators as well as our own seasoned judgement (Appendix Table 1). Appendix Table 1Global Asset Allocation Recommendations (Percent, Relative To Benchmark) Our tactical recommendations are based on a three-month horizon. Thus, at times, they can differ significantly from both our cyclical (12-month) and structural (12-month plus) recommendations. Compared to last month, we are cutting our tactical allocation to global stocks from +7 percentage points to zero (relative to benchmark), reflecting the heightened risk of a near-term pullback. We continue to maintain an underweight position in U.S. stocks within the equity portion of the portfolio. However, given the low-beta nature of U.S. stocks, most of the downgrade in overall equity exposure has occurred among European, Japanese, and EM bourses. We are also increasing our exposure to bonds from -9 to -6 percentage points, and increasing our tactical allocation to cash from +2 to +6 percentage points. Strategy & Market Trends Tactical Trades Strategic Recommendations Closed Trades

Highlights We are going long spot gold at tonight's closing price, given our view that inflation and inflation expectations will continue to move higher going into 2018. In the U.S., we expect higher fiscal spending and tax cuts hitting the economy next year to have a significant effect on an economy already at or very close to full employment, boosting real wages and inflationary pressures. As a safe-haven, gold also is well suited to hedging geopolitical risks, which also are rising. Lastly, gold exposure has the added benefit of providing a hedge to equity positions. Energy: Overweight. The ~ 10% correction in benchmark crude oil prices from 1Q17 levels likely has run its course, as representatives of key states that are party to the November 2016 production cut deal signal it will be extended at the upcoming May 25 meeting in Vienna. We remain long Dec/17 Brent $65/bbl calls vs. short the Dec/17 Brent $45/bbl puts, which is down $0.88/bbl, and will be getting long Dec/17 Brent $55/bbl calls vs. Dec/17 $60/bbl calls at tonight's close. We expect Dec/17 Brent to reach $60/bbl by year-end, with WTI trading ~ $2.00/bbl lower. Base Metals: Neutral. Indonesia's state mining company PT Aneka Tambang is expected to resume nickel exports, reversing a three-year ban on outgoing trade. We remain neutral base metals. Precious Metals: Neutral. We are recommending an allocation to gold outright as a strategic hedge against higher inflation, particularly emanating from the U.S., and geopolitical risk in Europe (see below). Underweight. Markets remain well stocked with indications stocks-to-use data will continue to weigh on prices. We remain bearish. Feature Recent indications inflation and inflation expectations are ticking higher will persist into 2018 (Chart of the Week). U.S. fiscal spending and tax cuts expected next year will lift real wages and boost spending power. The American economy already is at or very close to full employment, and U.S. rate hikes are lagging wage growth, which will, all else equal, boost inflation and inflation expectations (Chart 2). Although we expect the Fed to raise rates at least two more times this year - perhaps three - we believe the central bank will continue to keep rate hikes behind wage growth, and will not try to get out in front of inflation (Chart 3). Chart Of The WeekGlobal CPI Inflation Continues To Percolate Chart 2Rate Hikes Lagging Wage Growth Chart 3Fed Likely Won't Get Ahead Of Inflation On the political and geopolitical fronts, looming Italian elections are a risk that is all but being ignored by financial markets. Our colleague Marko Papic, head of BCA's Geopolitical Strategy service, identifies next February's Italian elections as "the highest probability risk to European integration at the moment," given its potential to "reignite Euro Area breakup risk."1 Political risks dog the DM economies: falling support for globalization, which will undermine the benefits of sourcing low-cost inputs (labor and capital) worldwide; tighter immigration policies, which go hand-in-hand with falling support for globalization; a predisposition to monetize debt via higher money supply; and higher minimum-wage demands as income inequality increases all raise inflation and inflation expectations in DM economies.2 This financial and political backdrop again points us toward gold in an attempt to identify safe-haven assets and hedges against the increasing likelihood of renewed inflation. In addition, while our House view does not include a marked equities correction in the near term, it is worthwhile pointing out that gold does hedge equities when they are selling off, and in bear markets generally. A corollary to this property is that in equity bull markets, gold tends to hold value, even if it underperforms stocks in absolute terms. These are powerful properties, which increase the stability of investors' portfolios. Before proceeding, it is useful to distinguish between the specifications mentioned above:3 A safe-haven asset refers to an asset that is negatively correlated (or uncorrelated) with other assets that lose value in times of financial stress. An important feature of a safe-haven asset is that it only exhibit low or negative correlation with financial assets (e.g., equities) in extremely negative market conditions, without specifying any particular behavior when markets are not under stress. In other words, both assets could be positively correlated in bull markets, as long as the correlation turns negative when financial-market conditions deteriorate. We make a distinction between the weak and strong form of safe-havens: The weak form represents an asset that is uncorrelated with the reference asset, while the strong form is negatively correlated.4 A hedge is an asset that is negatively correlated (or uncorrelated) with another asset, on average, over the time interval being examined in a particular analysis. As with safe-haven assets, there is a similar distinction between weak- and strong-form hedges. A diversifier refers to an asset that is positively, but imperfectly, correlated with another asset on average during the period of analysis. Gold Vs. Inflation During inflationary periods, assets that generate returns for investors that offset purchasing-power losses experienced by other assets in their portfolio - i.e., a store of value - traditionally have been preferred. Gold has been used as a store of value during inflationary episodes, and for this reason is viewed as a safe haven. Fundamentally, gold's supply is relatively inelastic, and consists of above-ground physical stocks comprising public and private holdings. The world gold council estimates physical gold stocks were ~ 4570.8t at the end of 2016, up 5.8% since 2010. Demand for gold was estimated at 4249.1t at the end of 2016, versus 3281t at the end of 2000. The inelasticity of gold supply makes it difficult to respond to changes in inflation - or to any shocks to the economy, for that matter - by increasing the supply over the short term, as it would be the case with any fiat currencies and other assets. For this reason, price allocates limited supply. During inflationary periods and during a macroeconomic shock, gold's price is bid up, which is the source of returns for holding gold.5 Gold often is seen as a currency; however, it lacks a central bank that can increase its supply via turning up the printing press. This makes the precious metal a so-called "hard currency," and endows it with the ability to maintain its purchasing power during periods of inflation. In addition, it is an asset that is accepted as collateral to support bank lending and margining by the BIS and numerous banks.6 In Table 1, we look at the correlation between year-on-year gold return and U.S. CPI inflation.7 We used a sample period from 1985 to now.8 On average, during the entire sample, we obtained a correlation of 26%. Within the sub-periods gold provides a hedge against inflation, but how much of a hedge depends on other financial factors - chiefly the broad USD TWI and real U.S. interest rates - affecting its performance (Chart 4). We examine these below. Table 1Gold Vs. U.S.##BR##And EU Inflation Chart 4Gold's Inflation-Hedging Properties##BR##Affected By Monetary Conditions The hedging relationship between gold returns and the CPI inflation rates does not consistently hold up in all bear markets - e.g., the GFC, when global assets became highly correlated and lost significant value. It is possible, though, that in times of financial stress or downturn, gold's ability to act as a hedge asset to U.S. equities might sometime dominates its ability to hedge inflation, leading to an ambiguous relationship with inflation during bear markets. We delve further into this below. Gold, Inflation And U.S. Monetary Conditions We typically model gold as a function of financial variables, which are sensitive to inflation and inflation expectations and to Fed policy shifts. Given our preference for modeling gold's price evolution as a function of U.S. financial variables - the broad trade-weighted (TWI) USD and real rates, in particular - we looked further into this (Chart 5). The impact of inflation on gold prices is stronger when the dollar experiences large negative shocks and depreciates, and weaker when the USD appreciates (i.e., a large positive shock).9 So, when the USD broad TWI is falling, gold is an effective hedge. When the greenback is appreciating, it is less effective. Next, we examined the ability of gold to hedge inflation risk when U.S. real rates are high and low. To do this, we used 10-year real rates and cut a long-term sample from 1990 to now into two different sub-periods: a high-rate period from 1990 to 2003, and a low-rate period from 2003 to now (Chart 6).10 Chart 5USD's Evolution Is Important To Gold,##BR##As Are U.S. Real Rates Chart 6U.S. 10-Year##BR##Real Rates During the high-real-rate period, the correlation between gold and inflation is close to zero (0), meaning gold did not act as a strong hedge against inflation, but still could have been acting as a weak hedge (meaning it's uncorrelated). Gold's hedging ability increased significantly in the low-real-rate period (Table 2). Again, this supports our theory that gold's hedging ability depends on U.S. monetary conditions, and that during periods of low real U.S. interest rates gold is an effective hedge against inflation. Table 2Gold Vs. CPI Inflation In High- And Low-Real Rate Environments Gold Vs. U.S. Equities Cutting right to the chase, gold can be used to hedge equities exposure in portfolios, as the correlation analysis in Table 3 demonstrates. Here, we are examining the hedging ability of gold relative to the U.S. stock market (proxied by the S&P 500 Total Return (TR) index). Table 3Gold's Hedging Properties Vs. Equities In our analysis, we find gold and U.S. equities are negatively correlated, on average, over the entire sample (correlation coefficient -0.19). We also tested for time-varying correlation by looking at the correlation separately in different bull- and bear-market sub-periods. Bull (bear) markets are defined as periods in which the U.S. stock index has a positive (negative) move of more than 15% and that lasts for at least 3 months.11 During both bear markets, gold's annualized compound returns were up when the S&P 500 returns were negative (Table 4). This strongly suggests gold is a safe-haven asset in time of extended weakness for equities, all else equal (i.e., we don't have a 100-year global meltdown that takes all correlations to 1.00). Interestingly, the relationship is unclear for bull markets which reflects the non-linearity in gold's hedging ability. We can conclude that during bull markets, gold tends to underperform equity markets; however, this does not imply that holding gold will lead to negative returns. Hence, gold offers protection against bear markets that offsets the costs in terms of returns during bull markets.12 Table 4Gold Hedges U.S. Equities The correlation between month-on-month gold and S&P 500TR returns corroborate the earlier finding. We find that gold is negatively correlated with U.S. equities during equity bear markets, and that it is ambiguous in equity bull markets. Bottom Line: We find gold is a good hedge during inflationary periods, particularly when the USD TWI is weak and real rates are low. We also show gold has excellent safe-haven and hedging properties versus equities (using the S&P 500TR index as a proxy). Based on this analysis, we are recommending a strategic allocation to gold, and will get long at tonight's close. Robert P. Ryan, Senior Vice President Commodity & Energy Strategy rryan@bcaresearch.com Hugo Bélanger, Research Assistant Commodity & Energy Strategy hugob@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see "Political Risks Are Understated in 2018," published on April 12, 2017, by BCA Research's Geopolitical Strategy. It is available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 2 Please see "The End Of the Anglo-Saxon Economy?" published April 13, 2016, by BCA Research's Geopolitical Strategy. It is available at gps.bcresearch.com. 3 Baur, Dirk G.; Brian M. Lucey (2010), "Is Gold a Hedge or a Safe Haven? An Analysis of Stocks, Bonds and Gold". The Financial Review 45, 217-229. 4 Baur, Dirk G.; Thomas K.J. McDermott (2010), "Is Gold a Safe Haven? International Evidence", Journal of Banking & Finance 34, 1886-1898. 5 We would note that the real price of gold increased during the Great Depression, which indicated gold's value during a period of significant deflation appears to increase, perhaps as investors fear the debasement of their currencies and the subsequent loss of purchasing power. 6 Please see Section 4 of "Basel III counterparty credit risk and exposures to central counterparties - Frequently asked questions," published by the BIS December 2012. 7 We use CPI here because it drives the payout of inflation-linked securities in the U.S. 8 We begin our analysis in 1990 for consistency throughout. We also note that several papers take note of an important structural break in U.S. inflation around 1984. Please see Batten, Jonathan A.; Cetin Ciner; Brian M. Lucey (2014), "On The Economic Determinants Of The Gold-Inflation Relation", Resources Policy 41, 101-108; and Stock, James H.; Mark W. Watson (2007), "Why Has U.S. Inflation Become Harder to Forecast?", Journal of Money, Credit and Banking 39 (supplement). For the selection of bear and bull markets, please see "Monthly Economic Report" published on April 2017, by Mackenzie investments. 9 We did this by estimating a regression to see how gold responds when the broad trade-weighted USD is trading in the 5% and 90% quantile of year-on-year U.S. dollar variation over the period 1995 to present. We did this using dummy variables to represent the impact of U.S. inflation in periods of large dollar appreciation and dollar depreciation. The model's adj-R2 is 0.45, and all coefficients are significant below 5%. 10 The mean for the high-rates period is 3.77%; for the low-rates period it is 1.07%. These rates are statistically different between these two sub-periods (using a two-tailed t-test). 11 The selection of bull and bear markets is based on Mackenzie investment analysis. Please see "Monthly Economic Report" published on April 2017, by Mackenzie investments. 12 Our results were supported by further econometric analysis of the variance properties using GARCH modeling. These results are available upon request. Investment Views and Themes Recommendations Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Commodity Prices and Plays Reference Table Trades Closed In 2017 Summary Of Trades Closed In 2016

U.S. vehicle sales have slowed markedly in recent months, disappointing more buoyant forecasts. While auto stocks reflect this weakness, there appears to be lingering optimism that auto parts makers will have a better fate: auto parts stocks have diverged positively from auto stocks. However, a similar divergence occurred in 2015, which ultimately culminated in a relapse in auto parts shares. While consumer surveys show strong vehicle buying intentions, their ability to finance these purchases is becoming more restricted. Deteriorating auto loan credit quality has forced banks to significantly tighten vehicle-related credit standards. Rising borrowing rates represent a major headwind to auto sales growth, warning that the rise in auto parts new orders is destined for a sharp reversal. Auto parts industrial production is already contracting at a steep rate, underscoring that it is only a matter of time before auto parts demand tumbles. We reiterate our underweight position. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5AUTC -DLPH, BWA, GT.

Highlights The global credit impulse is 4 months into a mini-downswing, and it is too soon to position for the next mini-upswing. The euro area economy will remain one of the better performers in a global growth pause. Underweight German bunds in a global bond portfolio. Stay long the euro, especially euro/yuan. Go long euro area Financials versus U.S. Financials, currency unhedged, as a first foray into a beaten-up sector. Feature First the good news: the ECB's latest bank lending data indicate that the euro area 6-month bank credit impulse is stabilizing after a modest but clear decline in recent months (Chart I-2). Now the bad news: the global bank credit impulse continues to weaken. The upshot is that the euro area economy - even with 1.5% growth - will remain one of the better performers in what is now a very clear global growth pause. Chart of the WeekThe Global Bond Yield Has Shown ##br##A Regular Wave Like Pattern Chart I-2The 6-Month Credit Impulse Has Stabilized In The ##br##Euro Area... But Not In The U.S. Or China How To Play The Euro Area's Economic Outperformance In a global growth pause, the best way to play euro area economic outperformance is through relative positions in the bond markets and through currencies. Specifically, underweight German bunds in a global bond portfolio but stay long the euro, especially euro/yuan. The implication for euro area equities is more ambiguous. The Eurostoxx50 has a very low exposure to Technology, which tends to perform defensively in a growth pause. Conversely, the Eurostoxx50 has a high exposure to Financials, whose relative performance reduces to a play on the bond yield (Chart I-3). Given that the global credit impulse is still weakening, it is premature to expect a sustained absolute rally in Financials anywhere. Therefore, the strong knee-jerk absolute rally in European banks after the French election first round is unlikely to last. That said, with the euro area economy likely to outperform in a global growth pause, and euro area Financials still near a 50-year relative low versus U.S. Financials, euro area bank equities can now outperform banks in other markets (Chart I-4). Chart I-3Global Bond Yield = ##br##Financials Vs. Market Chart I-4T-Bond/German Bond Spread Compression =##br## Euro Area Financials Outperform U.S. Financials As a first foray into a beaten-up sector, go long euro area Financials versus U.S. Financials, currency unhedged. (Caveat: all of this assumes that Emanuel Macron beats Marine Le Pen to the French Presidency on Sunday, as we expect.) Don't Rely On Year On Year Comparisons Nature provides many of our units of time. The earth's orbit around the sun gives us a year; the moon's orbit around the earth gives us a month; the earth's rotation on its axis gives us a day. But there is absolutely no reason why economic and financial cycles should follow nature's cycles. Yet most analysts persist at looking for patterns and cycles in economic and financial data using yearly, monthly, or daily rates of change. Unfortunately, by focusing on years, months and days, they risk completely missing some of the strongest patterns and cycles in the economy and markets. Think about a clock pendulum. If you look at it once a second, it will always seem to be in the same position, motionless. You will miss the cycle. Likewise, if an economy regularly accelerates for 6 months and then symmetrically decelerates for 6 months, the yearly rate of change will be a constant, giving the false appearance that nothing is happening. It will miss the cycle. It turns out that the global economy does indeed regularly accelerate and decelerate - and that each half-cycle averages about 8 months. The strongest evidence of this very clear oscillation comes from the remarkably regular wave like pattern in the global bond yield, illustrated in the Chart of the Week and Chart I-5 and Chart I-6. Chart I-5The Global Bond Yield Has Shown A ##br##Regular Wave Like Pattern... Chart I-6...Which Is Easier To See ##br##When Detrended Furthermore, the acceleration and deceleration of bank credit flows - as measured in the global credit impulse - also exhibits a remarkably regular wave like pattern, with each half-cycle lasting about 8 months. But crucially, a half-cycle length of less than a year means that a year on year analysis would miss this very clear oscillation. Hence, our analysis always uses the 6-month credit impulse (Chart I-7). Chart I-7The Global Credit Impulse Has Also Shown A Regular Wave Like Pattern Mini Half-Cycles Average Eight Months It is not a coincidence that the bond yield and bank credit impulse exhibit near identical half-cycle lengths. The bond yield and credit impulse cycles are inextricably embraced in a perpetual feedback loop. A higher bond yield will initiate a mini down cycle. All else being equal, the higher cost of credit will weigh on credit flows. This will slow economic growth, which will then show up in GDP (and other hard) data. The bond yield will respond by readjusting down. In turn, a lower bond yield will then initiate a mini up cycle. And so on... But each stage in the sequence comes with a delay. For a change in the cost of credit to register with households and firms and fully impact credit flows, it clearly takes time. The credit flows do not generate instantaneous economic activity either. Fully spending the credit flows also takes time. Once you accept these assumptions of internal regulating feedback combined with delays in economic response, the economy has to be a naturally-oscillating system whose half-cycle length depends on the delays in economic response. And the important point is that these delays have little connection with nature's cycles. For those who are mathematically inclined, Box I-1 shows the differential equations which define the economic mini-cycle and its half-cycle length. Box 1The Mathematics Of Mini-Cycles Still, some commentators counter that credit flows don't just depend on the cost of credit. They also depend on so-called "animal spirits" - optimism or pessimism about the future. These commentators point to sentiment and survey data which show that animal spirits have soared. Our response is yes, for credit flows, heightened animal spirits in isolation are indeed a tailwind. But any rise in the cost of credit is a headwind. It follows that the net impact on credit flows depends on the relative strengths of the tailwind from heightened animal spirits and the headwind from the higher cost of credit. It is the net effect on the 6-month credit impulse - rather than heightened animal spirits per se - that determines the cyclical direction of the economy. We would suggest that the tailwind from heightened animal spirits has been countered by an even stronger headwind - the sharpest proportional rise in borrowing costs for at least 70 years (Chart I-8). Chart I-8The Sharpest Proportional Rise In Borrowing Costs For At Least 70 Years! As anticipated in our 16th February report The Contrarian Case For Bonds, incoming GDP data from the world's largest economies - the U.S., U.K. and France - now confirm this. First quarter growth (at annualised rates) sharply decelerated to 0.7%, 1.2% and 1.0% respectively. And this is not just about so-called first quarter "residual seasonality" as 6-month growth rates have also lost momentum. The global credit impulse is 4 months into a mini-downswing; the global bond yield is 2 months into a mini-downswing. Previous half-cycles have averaged 8 months, with the shortest at around 5 months. Hence, we feel it is somewhat premature to position for the next mini-upswing. Dhaval Joshi, Senior Vice President European Investment Strategy dhaval@bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading Model* The rally in Portuguese sovereign bonds appears technically overextended. Go short Portuguese sovereign 10-year bonds versus Spanish sovereign 10-year bonds with a profit target and stop loss of 2.5% . For any investment, excessive trend following and groupthink can reach a natural point of instability, at which point the established trend is highly likely to break down with or without an external catalyst. An early warning sign is the investment's fractal dimension approaching its natural lower bound. Encouragingly, this trigger has consistently identified countertrend moves of various magnitudes across all asset classes. Chart I-9 * For more details please see the European Investment Strategy Special Report "Fractals, Liquidity & A Trading Model," dated December 11, 2014, available at eis.bcaresearch.com The post-June 9, 2016 fractal trading model rules are: When the fractal dimension approaches the lower limit after an investment has been in an established trend it is a potential trigger for a liquidity-triggered trend reversal. Therefore, open a countertrend position. The profit target is a one-third reversal of the preceding 13-week move. Apply a symmetrical stop-loss. Close the position at the profit target or stop-loss. Otherwise close the position after 13 weeks. Use the position size multiple to control risk. The position size will be smaller for more risky positions. Fractal Trading Model Recommendations Equities Bond & Interest Rates Currency & Other Positions Closed Fractal Trades Trades Closed Trades Asset Performance Currency & Bond Equity Sector Country Equity Indicators Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Interest Rate Chart II-5Indicators To Watch##br## - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch##br## - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch ##br##- Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch##br## - Interest Rate Expectations

Highlights Ongoing monetary tightening in China poses a substantial threat to EM risk assets. Yet financial markets remain highly complacent. Mind the gap between EM risk assets and commodities currencies/various commodities prices. Business conditions in EM ex-China will diverge from the U.S. and European economies and recouple to the downside with China's growth. The pillars of the EM business cycle are China, commodities, and their own domestic credit cycle, rather than the U.S. and Europe. Continue shorting/underweighting the Malaysian currency, stocks and sovereign credit. Feature Chart I-1China: Ongoing Liquidity Tightening There is one major underappreciated risk in global financial markets: China's gradual yet unrelenting monetary tightening. Though slow and measured, this policy tightening constitutes a significant risk, particularly for emerging markets. The basis is that it could trigger a disproportionally large negative effect on Chinese growth because it is taking place amid a lingering credit bubble in China.1 Mainland interbank rates and onshore corporate bond yields have risen as the People's Bank of China (PBoC) has reduced its net liquidity injections via open market operations (Chart I-1, top panel). The PBoC's monetary tightening is bound to reduce money/credit growth in China. The bottom panel of Chart I-1 demonstrates that changes in the central bank's claims on commercial banks lead by 3 months asset growth at commercial banks. Diminished liquidity injections by the PBoC will soon push commercial banks to reduce the pace of their balance sheet expansion. Asset growth/loan origination among policy banks2 has already slowed (Chart I-2). On top of this, China's regulatory tightening aimed at curbing speculative (high-risk) financial activity will also curtail commercial banks' loan origination. For example, bank regulators are forcing banks to bring off-balance-sheet assets onto their balance sheets. As a result, money/credit growth is set to decelerate meaningfully. This, in turn, will cause another slump in this credit-addicted economy. It is very probable that the mini-business cycle in China has already reached its peak - our credit and fiscal impulse heralds further drop in the manufacturing PMI (Chart I-3). Chart I-2Commercial Banks And Policy ##br##Banks' Loan Growth To Slow Further Chart I-3China's Growth Has Rolled Over While China's monetary tightening is not a direct risk to domestic demand in the U.S. or Europe, it poses an imminent risk to commodities prices and EM risk assets. Consistent with slowing Chinese manufacturing output growth, commodities prices trading in mainland China have lately tanked. Bottom Line: BCA's Emerging Markets Strategy team maintains that ongoing monetary tightening in China poses substantial risks to EM risk assets and commodities. Yet financial markets remain complacent. Perplexing Complacency It is very perplexing that EM risk assets have so far ignored the risks stemming from China's tightening and renewed relapse in commodities prices. It seems portfolio allocation into risk assets, including those in the EM universe, is pushing prices higher irrespective of a major relapse in forward-looking indicators for both China and EM growth. EM stocks, currencies and credit spreads have decoupled from a number of indicators with which they historically had a high correlation: In recent weeks, we have brought to investors' attention that an unsustainable gap has been opening between the commodities currencies index - an equal-weighted average of AUD, NZD and CAD - and both EM exchange rates and EM share prices in local currency terms (Chart I-4A & Chart I-4B). Chart I-4AHeed The Message From Commodities Currencies Chart I-4BHeed The Message From ##br##Commodities Currencies Not only have commodities currencies decisively rolled over, but also commodities prices have begun sliding. Historically, EM risk assets in general and the sovereign credit market in particular have always sold off when commodities prices have drifted lower (Chart I-5). EM equity volatility is back to its lows (Chart I-6). This corroborates reigning complacency in the marketplace. Chart I-5Commodities Prices And ##br##EM Sovereign Spreads Chart I-6A Sign Of Complacency EM sovereign and corporate spreads have also fallen to their narrowest levels in recent years (Chart I-7). Notably, our valuation model for EM corporate bonds - which is constructed based on our EM Corporate Financial Health Index - posits that EM corporate credit is very expensive (Chart I-8). Chart I-7EM Sovereign And Corporate Spreads Chart I-8EM Corporate Credit Is Expensive Finally, EM local currency bond yield spreads over U.S. Treasurys have also dropped a lot, signifying complacency on the part of EM investors (Chart I-9). Chart I-9EM Local Bond Yield Spreads ##br##Over U.S. Treasurys Are Low Bottom Line: EM financial markets are not cheap, and investors are highly complacent. Mind the gap between EM risk assets and commodities currencies/various commodities prices. Can EM Decouple From China? An oft-asked and relevant question is whether EM ex-China can decouple from China itself. Not for the time being, in our view. On the contrary, as we argued in last week's report titled Toward A Desynchronized World,3 China's slowdown will weigh on the majority of the EM investable equity, currency and credit markets. As a result, growth conditions in EM ex-China will diverge from the U.S. and European economies and recouple to the downside with China's growth. The three pillars of EM ex-China growth are commodities, China and their domestic credit cycles. The primary link is via commodities. As China's growth decelerates and its imports relapse, commodities prices will plunge (Chart I-10). Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, Russia, Malaysia and Indonesia are set to experience negative terms-of-trade shocks as commodities prices deflate. As a result, their currencies will depreciate and growth will suffer. Although Mexico is leveraged to the U.S., oil prices still matter for it. This leaves non-commodities producing economies in Asia and central Europe. The latter is too small to matter for EM benchmarks. Central Europe correlates with Europe's business cycle rather than EM. In emerging Asia, Korea and Taiwan - the largest equity market cap weights after China in the MSCI EM index - sell much more to China than to the U.S. and Europe combined. Korea's shipments to China account for 25% of total exports while those to the U.S. and Europe combined make up 22%. For Taiwan the numbers are 27% and 20%, respectively. Thailand sells to China as much as it does to the U.S. This by and large leaves only three mainstream EM economies that are not substantially exposed to China: India, the Philippines and Turkey (Table I-1). Indian and Philippine stocks are expensive, and these nations confront their own unique problems. Turkey in turn is facing major political, economic and financial predicaments. Chart I-10Industrial Metals Prices To head Lower Table I-1Export To China And U.S. In short, among mainstream EM countries, there are very few plays not exposed to China or commodities and offer a reasonable risk/return profile. Investors also often ask if commodities importing economies in Asia can rally in absolute terms when and as commodities prices drop. Chart I-11 illustrates the Korean and Taiwanese equity indexes have historically (in the past 20 years) been strongly correlated with oil and industrial metals prices. The reason is that commodity price swings partially reflect global growth conditions. Being heavily dependent on exports, Korea and Taiwan are highly sensitive to fluctuations in global growth. We expect global trade to slow down anew, driven by weakness in China/EM imports, even if U.S. and European demand remains resilient. We elaborated on this theme in last week's report.4 Therefore, Korean and Taiwanese export shipments are set to slow as well. We are not bearish on Korean and Taiwanese domestic demand - we are in fact overweight these bourses within the EM equity universe, with a focus on technology and domestic sectors. That said, consumer and business spending in these economies is relatively small in a global context to make a difference for other EM markets. In addition, given these economies' mature phase of development, the pace of their income and domestic demand growth will be moderate. Many EM countries have experienced excessive credit growth in the past 15 years, but their banking systems have not restructured - i.e. banks have not sufficiently provisioned for non-performing loans. Until they do so, domestic loan growth remains at risk of weakening. There has been modest deleveraging in Brazil, Russia and India (Chart I-12). However, there is no evidence that these economies have embarked on a new credit cycle. Chart I-11Korean And Taiwanese Stocks ##br##Correlate With Commodities Chart I-12Some Moderate Deleveraging ##br##In Brazil, Russia And India Case in point are Indian state-owned banks: their experience shows that deleveraging can be more protracted and painful than one might initially expect. The reason is that it takes time for banks to acknowledge non-performing loans, be recapitalized and get ready to boost loan growth again. In addition, Brazil and Russia are still commodities plays at the mercy of commodities price dynamics. Besides, Brazil needs to undergo painful fiscal adjustment/reforms. In other developing countries, bank loan growth remains elevated and bank loan-to-GDP ratios continue to rise (Chart I-13). In these economies, credit retrenchment and even a mild deleveraging has not yet occurred. Prominently, as EM currencies come under downward pressure, interest rates in many economies running current account deficits will be pressured higher. This will lead to a slowdown in bank credit growth and will depress demand. Finally, if it were not for the pick-up in Chinese imports, the EM ex-China business cycle and commodities prices would not have ameliorated in the past 12 months. Notably, excluding China, Korea and Taiwan, developing nations' retail sales volumes and new vehicle sales remain dormant (Chart I-14). Similarly, there has not been much recovery in capital spending and, consistently, imports of capital goods in EM ex-China, Korea and Taiwan (Chart I-15). Chart I-13No Deleveraging In Many EMs Chart I-14EM Ex-China, Korea And Taiwan: ##br##Stabilization But No Revival Chart I-15EM Ex-China, Korea And Taiwan: ##br##Not Much Of Recovery As credit growth slows or fails to pick up in these economies, domestic demand recovery will be tepid, and will certainly disappoint market expectations. Bottom Line: Given budding divergence between U.S./Europe and Chinese growth, EM ex-China growth will fail to recover and will surprise to the downside. The basis is that the pillars of the EM's business cycle are China, commodities and their own domestic credit cycle, rather than the U.S. and Europe. Arthur Budaghyan, Senior Vice President Emerging Markets Strategy arthurb@bcaresearch.com 1 Please refer to the Emerging Markets Strategy Special Reports from October 26, 2016, November, 23 2016, and January 18, 2017, the links are available on page 16. 2 Policy banks are China Development Bank, Agricultural Development Bank and Export-Import Bank of China. 3 Please refer to the Emerging Markets Strategy Weekly Report titled, "Toward A Desynchronized World", dated April 26, 2017, link available on page 16. 4 Please refer to the Emerging Markets Strategy Weekly Report titled, "Toward A Desynchronized World", dated April 26, 2017, link available on page 16. Malaysia: Not Out Of The Woods Arenewed relapse in Chinese growth later this year coupled with lower commodities prices will once again expose Malaysia's vulnerabilities. Notably, 26% of Malaysia's exports are related to commodities - mainly crude oil, natural gas, petroleum products and palm oil. Another downleg in the ringgit's value along with lower commodities prices will cause domestic interest rates to rise. However, Malaysia is in no position to tolerate higher interest rates. Leverage has risen considerably in the past ten years in Malaysia, and is very high (Chart II-1A). Indeed, the country has one of the highest debt-servicing costs in the EM universe, according to BIS data (Chart II-1B). Chart II-1A...And Debt Servicing Costs Chart II-1BHigh Leverage... If the Malaysian central bank attempts to cap interest rates by injecting local currency liquidity into the system, the ringgit will plunge even further. Chart II-2 shows that in recent years local interbank rates have tended to rise when the central bank curtailed its net liquidity injection. If on the other hand the Bank Negara of Malaysia (BNM) does not inject liquidity into the banking/financial system, interest rates will rise as the currency depreciates. Interestingly, despite strong inflows into EM generally, the BNM has continued to inject local liquidity into the economy - albeit at a slower pace than in recent years - to keep local rates tame (Chart II-2). Additionally, despite the significant growth slowdown that has occurred in the past two years in Malaysia, banks' NPLs have not risen much (Chart II-3). As banks start acknowledging loan losses and setting provisions for them, their profitability will decline, capital will be eroded, and loan origination will fall. Chart II-2BNM Has Been Injecting Liquidity ##br##To Control Interest Rates Chart II-3Malaysian Banks Haven't ##br##Acknowledged Enough Losses Yet Meanwhile, even though global trade and commodities prices have picked in the past 15 months, Malaysia's economy has failed to recover. This reflects the country's underlying economic vulnerability as the borrowing/credit spree of the past decade has come to a halt: Commercial and passenger vehicle sales are shrinking. Retail trade and employment are also still anemic. Property sales volumes and housing construction approvals are collapsing (Chart II-4). Capital expenditures are depressed (Chart II-4, bottom panel). On the external side, the semiconductor/electronics sector has boomed in Asia since early 2016, but Malaysia has failed to benefit much. Indeed, the recovery in Malaysia's electronics sector has been weak compared to other technology hubs such as Taiwan and Korea. This confirms why Malaysia has been losing market share in electronics products to Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines (Chart II-5). Chart II-4Cyclical Growth Remains Anemic Chart II-5Malaysia Is Losing Tech Market ##br##Share To Its Asian Competitors Bottom Line: Continue shorting MYR versus the U.S. dollar and the Russian ruble. Equity investors should continue to underweight Malaysian stocks within an EM equity portfolio. Relative value traders should maintain our long Russian / short Malaysia equity trade. Buy/hold Malaysian CDS or underweight this sovereign credit market within an EM credit portfolio. Ayman Kawtharani, Associate Editor aymank@bcaresearch.com Equity Recommendations Fixed-Income, Credit And Currency Recommendations

We are making room for the financials sector upgrade by trimming the health care sector to neutral. As discussed in recent weeks, a modest shift away from a defensive to a more balanced portfolio has been on our radar. At the beginning of the year we added the S&P health care equipment (HCE) index to our high-conviction overweight list for three main reasons: valuations had undershot owing to health care reform uncertainty, domestic sales were set to improve and leading indicators of foreign sourced revenue also painted a rosy picture. But some of these forces are losing their potency. The most troubling aspect has been a downturn in leading indicators of domestic demand growth. New health care facility construction has dropped sharply, warning that investment in medical equipment may soon follow suit (second panel). Consumer outlays at hospitals have nosedived on a growth rate basis. This suggests that the growth in patient visits has dried up, and may be a warning that medical equipment new order growth will also decelerate (third panel). Moreover, as outlined in recent Weekly Reports, the broad corporate sector has regained pricing power, but medical equipment suppliers have lagged (bottom panel). The implication is that our confidence in a further valuation re-rating has been dented. Take profits and downgrade to neutral, and please see yesterday's Weekly Report for more details. This brings our overall health care sector weighting to neutral.

The financials sector has given back roughly 50% of its post-election surge this year. The main culprits have been a calming in Fed interest rate hike expectations, a flattening yield curve and softening inflation expectations. Moribund credit creation has also created earnings uncertainty. Nevertheless, the corrective phase appears to be drawing to a close. The hiatus in the U.S. dollar bull market is a significant positive catalyst, if it arrests the decline in inflation expectations. The yield curve is making an effort to stabilize, suggesting that the risks of falling back close to the deflationary precipice are low. There are already signs of a positive reversal in euro area financials, which had led the U.S. financial sector on the way down after peaking late last year. The euro area has been in a deleveraging phase with acute deflationary risks, underscoring that the signal from share price stabilization in this region is worth noting. The key to a sustained recovery in sector profits is economic reacceleration. Corporate sector profits are healing as a consequence of the pickup in global final demand and the peak in the U.S. dollar, which should ensure that labor market slack does not imminently build. We recommend using this year's selloff to augment positions to overweight, via the bank index, as discussed in yesterday's Weekly Report.

GAA DM Equity Country Allocation Model Update The GAA DM Equity Country Allocation model is updated as of April 30, 2017. The model has increased its allocation to Spain at the expenses of Germany largely driven by changes in the value and technical indicators, compared to previous month as shown in Table 1. As shown in Table 2 and Charts 1, 2 and 3, Level 2 model (the allocation among the 11 non-U.S. DM countries) outperformed its benchmark by 99 basis points (bps) in April, largely a result from the overweight of the euro area versus the underweight in Japan, Canada and Australia. Level 1 model, the allocation between U.S. and non-U.S., underperformed by 13 bps in April due to the large overweight in the U.S. Overall, the aggregate GAA model outperformed its MSCI World benchmark by 15 bps in April and by 138 bps since going live. Please see also on the website http://gaa.bcaresearch.com/trades/allocation_performance. For more details on the models, please see the January 29th, 2016 Special Report "Global Equity Allocation: Introducing the Developed Markets Country Allocation Model". http://gaa.bcaresearch.com/articles/view_report/18850. Table 1Model Allocation Vs. Benchmark Weights Table 2Performance (Total Returns In USD) Chart 1GAA DM Model Vs. MSCI World Chart 2GAA U.S. Vs. Non U.S. Model (Level 1) Chart 3GAA Non U.S. Model (Level 2) GAA Equity Sector Selection Model The GAA Equity Sector Selection Model (Chart 4) is updated as of April 30, 2017. Chart 4Overall Model Performance Table 3Allocations Table 4Performance Since Going Live The growth component has become more bullish on global growth. The model has now turned overweight on materials & consumer discretionary, and underweight on utilities & healthcare. For more details on the model, please see the Special Report "Introducing The GAA Equity Sector Selection Model," July 27, 2016 available at https://gaa.bcaresearch.com. Xiaoli Tang, Associate Vice President xiaoli@bcaresearch.com Patrick Trinh, Associate Editor patrick@bcaresearch.com Aditya Kurian, Research Analyst adityak@bcaresearch.com

Feature Table 1Recommended Allocation Don't Worry About The Tepid Data Risk assets are likely to continue to grind higher. Two of the catalysts we cited for this in our most recent Quarterly1 have half happened: European political risk is lifting now that Marine Le Pen looks most unlikely to win in the second round of the French presidential election (polls give her less than 40% of the vote); and the Trump administration announced its tax cut plan (which, though details are still sparse, we expect to be passed in some form this year). As a result, the MSCI All Country World Index hit a record high in late April and the S&P 500 is only 1% below its high. But both growth and inflation have surprised somewhat to the downside in the past couple of months. The Citi Economic Surprise Index for the U.S. has fallen sharply, though surprises remain fairly positive elsewhere (Chart 1).Q1 U.S. real GDP growth came in at an annualized rate of only 0.7%. This has pushed bond yields down (with the US Treasury 10-year yield falling back to 2.2%), consequently weakening the dollar. We are not unduly worried about the tepid data. It is mainly due to technical factors. Corporate loan growth in the U.S., for example (Chart 2), mostly reflects just the lagged effect of last year's slowdown on banks' willingness to lend, as well as energy companies repaying credit lines they tapped in early 2016 when short of working capital. The weakness in auto sales (Chart 3) is most likely caused by the end of the car replacement cycle which began in 2010, rather than reflecting any generalized deterioration in consumer behavior. Moreover, there seem to be problems with seasonal adjustment of data caused by the extreme swings in the economy in 2008 and 2009: Q1 has been the weakest quarter for U.S. GDP in six out of the past 10 years, and has on average been 2.3 ppts lower than Q2.2 There were no such distortions prior to 1996. Chart 1U.S. Growth Has Surprised To The Downside Chart 2Weaker Loan Growth Is Mostly Technical... Chart 3...And The Slowdown In Autos Is Just The End Of A Replacement Cycle A consequence of the wobbly data is that markets have become too complacent about the Fed raising rates, with futures markets now projecting only about 40 bps of hikes over the next 12 months (Chart 4). Our view is that wages will gradually move up this year, pushing core PCE inflation to 2% by year end, which will cause the Fed to raise rates twice before end-2017 and once early in 2018 (though the latter rise could be postponed if the Fed starts to reduce its balance-sheet and forgoes one quarter's hike to judge the impact of this on the market). By contrast, we do not see the ECB hiking before 2019 at the earliest, with ECB President Draghi reiterating that he sees core inflation staying low and remains concerned about the fragile banking systems in peripheral European markets and about Italian politics. We also believe Bank of Japan governor Kuroda when he says he has no plans to change the BoJ's 0% target for the 10-year JGB yield. All this implies that the dollar is likely to appreciate further in the next 12 months as interest rate spreads widen (Chart 5). Chart 4Fed Is Likely To Hike Faster Than This Chart 5Interest Differentials Suggest Further Dollar Strength The next catalyst for equities to rise further could be earnings. Q1 U.S. earnings are surprising significantly on the upside, with EPS growth of 11.7% year on year and 75% of companies beating analysts' estimates.3 BCA's proprietary model suggests that S&P 500 operating earnings this year could grow by over 20% (Chart 6). If anything, upside surprises to earnings have been even stronger in the euro zone and Japan. With none of the standard indicators signaling any risk of recession over the next 12 months (Chart 7), we remain overweight equities versus bonds. We continue to warn, though, that the Goldilocks scenario of healthy growth and stable inflation may not last for long. A combination of tax cuts, wage growth accelerating as labor participation hits a ceiling, and the Fed falling behind the curve (perhaps when President Trump - given that he recently confessed "I do like a low interest rate policy" - appoints a dovish replacement for Janet Yellen as Fed Chair) could cause inflation to rise unexpectedly next year, forcing the Fed to raise rates sharply, triggering a recession in 2019. Chart 6U.S. Earnings Could Grow 20% This Year Chart 7No Sign Of A Recession On The Horizon Equities: In a risk-on environment, euro zone equities should continue to outperform, due to their higher beta (averaging 1.3 against global equities over the past 20 years, compared to 0.9 for the U.S.), more cyclical earnings, and modestly cheaper valuations (forward PE is at a 18.9% discount to the U.S.). Japanese equities should also do well as interest rates rise again globally (except in Japan where the BoJ will stick to its 0% yield target on 10-year bonds), which should push down the yen and boost earnings. We remain overweight Japanese equities on a currency-hedged basis. We are underweight EM equities, which are likely to be weighed down over the next 12 months by the stronger dollar, and by a slowdown in China which should cause commodity prices to fall. Fixed Income: We expect the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield to reach 3% by year-end: a pickup in real growth, slightly higher inflation and two more Fed hikes can easily add 70 bps to the yield over the next eight months. Euro zone yields will also rise, though not by as much. This implies a negative return from G7 sovereign bonds for the first time since 1994. We continue to prefer corporate credit, with a preference for U.S. investment-grade debt over high-yield bonds (which have stretched valuations) and over European corporate debt (which will be negatively affected by the tapering of ECB purchases next year). Currencies: As described above, we do not believe that the dollar appreciation which began in 2014 is over, due to divergences in monetary policy. We would look for a further 5-10% appreciation of the dollar over the coming 12 months, though the rise is likely to be bigger against the yen and emerging market currencies than against the euro. Commodity currencies such as the Australian dollar also look vulnerable and overvalued. The British pound will be driven by the vicissitudes of the Brexit negotiations in the short-run but looks undervalued in the long run if, as we expect, the EU eventually agrees a moderately satisfactory trade deal with the U.K. Commodities: We continue to believe that the equilibrium level for oil is $55 a barrel, and that an extension of the OPEC production agreement beyond June and a drawdown in inventories in the second half will bring WTI crude back to that level - with the risk of even $60-65 temporarily if there are any unforeseen supply disruptions. We remain more cautious on industrial commodities, which will be hurt by a mild withdrawal of monetary and fiscal stimulus in China. Following its 6.9% GDP print in Q1, Chinese growth is likely to slow moderately. However, with the Party Congress coming up in the fall, growth will not be allowed to slow excessively - and, indeed, there are signs that central government spending has begun to accelerate recently (Chart 8). We remain positive on gold as a long-term hedge against the tail risk of inflation. As our recent Special Report on Safe Havens demonstrated,4 gold has historically provided good returns during recessions, particularly those associated with high inflation (Chart 9). Chart 8China Is Withdrawing Stimulus - Or Is It? Chart 9Gold Glisters When Inflation Rises Garry Evans, Senior Vice President Global Asset Allocation garry@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see Global Asset Allocation, "Quarterly Portfolio Outlook: No Reasons To Turn Cautious," dated 3 April 2017, available at gaa.research.com 2 For detailed analysis of the problems with seasonal adjustment, please see U.S. Investment Strategy, "Spring Snapback?" dated April 24, 2017, available at usis.bcaresearch.com 3 So far about half of U.S. companies have reported. 4 Please see Global Asset Allocation, "Safe Havens: Where To Hide Next Time?" dated April 21, 2017, available at gaa.bcaresearch.com. Recommended Asset Allocation

Highlights Geopolitical tensions eased last week, but there are still a few near term hurdles to clear. Domestic policy uncertainty remains. Investors still can't seem to reconcile the disconnect between weak "hard" data and solid "soft" data. A gradual Fed may be the right response to the recent run of mixed economic data. Housing and housing-related investments led the global economy into the last recession. Housing is still on the mend. The housing sector will contribute about 0.2 percentage points and 0.5 percentage points to real GDP growth in 2017 and 2018, respectively. Investors should look to housing-related assets as a source of potential outperformance over the coming 6-12 months. Feature U.S. equity prices neared record highs and Treasury yields bounced off of their late-March low last week as near term international and domestic political risk melted away in the minds of investors. We continue to expect U.S. equities to beat bonds this year. Oil prices continue to trade near $50/bbl, and the dollar held steady amid all the news-good and bad. Both have upside over the remainder of 2017. In today's report, we examine the following key issues for investors: Since the end of the Great Recession, geopolitical risks have ebbed and flowed, and 2017 has proven to be no different. Are political risks over, or just over for now? How does the recent run of mixed U.S. data influence the Fed, and what does this mean for risky asset prices? Housing and housing-related investments led the global economy into the last recession. Where do we stand now? Are Geopolitical Concerns Over? North Korea failed to test another nuke after a nerve rattling Easter Weekend. The leadup to the presidential election in South Korea on May 9 may have motivated a part (or most) of the uptick in belligerence that we are seeing from North Korea. All leading candidates are more likely to try diplomacy and economic engagement with North Korea than to maintain the past ten years of conservative efforts to strengthen military deterrence via stronger alliances with the U.S. and Japan. In the euro area, the good news is that the polls in the first round of the French election (April 23) were correct. The bad news is that there is still another election. Macron and Le Pen face off on this Sunday (May 7), and markets are betting that the polls will be correct again given Macron's 20 point lead over Le Pen. The June parliamentary elections in France should be a non-event for U.S. financial markets; we still see Italy - where most voters favor Eurosceptic parties - as the biggest risk on the geopolitical scene in the next year or so. In the U.K., the ruling Tories look to add to their majority in June's parliamentary election, which will provide British Prime Minister Theresa May with a stronger hand to negotiate with Europe and increases the odds of a less extreme Brexit outcome (Chart 1). Chart ICGeopolitical Risk Is Ebbing...For Now Chart 1BGeopolitical Risk Is Ebbing...For Now Chart 1AGeopolitical Risk Is Ebbing...For Now There was good news and bad news on the domestic policy front last week as well. The release of the long awaited Trump tax plan and the passage of a spending bill by Congress to avert a government shutdown (at least until later this week) helped to remove some domestic political uncertainty. The bad news is that the plan was more tax cut than tax reform. The one page plan lacked detail and still has to pass muster with the House GOP. The Trump Administration may have started a trade war with Canada (over lumber) and sent trial balloons about pulling out of NAFTA (despite walking back from this position soon after). Is this "negotiator" Trump or something worse? The bad news is that tax reform, trade wars, dynamic scoring, and yes, even Obamacare will be with us until late Summer/early Fall. The good news is that the border adjustment tax may not be. The takeaway for investors is that while geopolitical concerns have not disappeared, they have ebbed, and this will support the relative performance of U.S. equities over 10-year government bonds over the coming year. Italy (not North Korea, France, or Germany) remains the biggest geopolitical risk on the horizon, but the next election there isn't until early-2018. Domestically, Trump's pro-growth agenda is advancing at a pace that is slower than many investors would prefer, but it is advancing, which we believe will continue to support a pro-cyclical asset allocation stance. Bottom Line: Geopolitical concerns have not disappeared, but they have ebbed materially to the benefit of risky asset prices. Investors should stay overweight U.S. stocks vs 10-year government bonds within a multi-asset portfolio. Mixed Data Warrants A Gradual Fed Investors still can't seem to reconcile the disconnect between weak "hard" data and solid "soft" data. The recent uptick in initial claims and the soft Q1 GDP data are the most recent examples. Investors should recall that claims are inherently noisy; a rise in claims of more than 75,000 over a 6-month period is typically needed to signal a recession. Chart 2 makes it clear that the latest wiggles on claims are not sending a recessionary signal. Chart 2Claims Are Not Even Close To Sending A Recession Signal Friday's GDP report highlighted that growth in Q1 was soft again. As we noted in last week's report, GDP growth in Q1 averaged -0.1% over the last 10 years. Q2 growth has averaged more than 2%. Q1 growth has been below Q2 in 8 of the last 10 years. 2017 is shaping up to be a repeat performance. Defense spending - identified by the Cleveland Fed as a key culprit in the unwanted seasonal weakness in Q1 GDP - fell 4% in Q1, subtracting 0.2% from growth. Inventories were also singled out by the Cleveland Fed, and they shaved 0.9% off of GDP in Q1. We expect to see a snapback in all three components of growth (GDP, defense spending and inventories) in Q2. Business capital spending, and housing were bright spots in Q1 (Chart 3). Corporate earnings are the ultimate piece of hard data. Equity prices track earnings growth over the long term. With 288 members of the S&P 500 reporting, 77% have beaten expectations on the bottom line. Healthcare, financials and technology lead the way. Weakness was evident in defensives. More impressive is the 7.1% gain in revenues in Q1 so far (Table 1). But overall, corporations appear to have pricing power. The ECI accelerated in Q1 to +2.4% year-over-year from +2.2%, but remain relatively subdued. This implies that margins will hold up, which will continue to support our view that stocks will beat bonds this year. With no Fed Chair Yellen press conference, a new set of dot plots or a new economic forecast, markets will have to be content with just the FOMC statement this week. A speech by Fed Vice Chair Fischer will be closely watched for signals about the June FOMC meeting. The market has been too quick to price out rate hikes in 2017. Expectations for rate hikes in 2018 have all but disappeared (Chart 4). We expect this gap will close - in favor of the Fed for both 2017 and 2018. We expect Treasury yields and inflation to head higher this year, despite recent soft readings on March CPI. The March PCE deflator - also due this week-is key. Chart 3Markets Shouldn't Be Surprised By Weak##br## Q1 GDP, Or What Caused It Table 1S&P 500: ##br##Q1 2017 Results* Chart 4Still Plenty Of Disagreement Between Fed ##br##And Market; Both Expect Gradual Hikes Though Bottom Line: We continue to expect the hard data to catch up to the soft data in the coming months. Financial markets have overreacted to the weak data and have been too quick to price out Fed rate hikes this year and next. The Fed is taking a gradual approach to rate hikes for a reason; the data-hard or soft-doesn't warrant an aggressive Fed. But a gradual Fed and solid profit growth strongly favor an allocation towards stocks over bonds this year. Housing: Set To Keep A "Slow-Burn" Expansion Burning Housing is one sector of the economy that stands to look relatively good over the coming few years, with some important implications for housing-related asset performance. The monthly Bank Credit Analyst recently published some research in which we split U.S. post-1950 economic cycles into three sets based on the length of the expansion phase: short (about 2 years), medium (4-6 years) and long (8-10 years). What distinguishes short from medium and long expansions is the speed at which the most cyclical parts of the economy accelerated, and the time it took unemployment to reach a full employment level. Long expansions were characterized by a drawn-out rise in the cyclical parts of the economy and a very slow return to full employment in the labor market, similar to what has occurred since the Great Recession. Chart 5 compares the current cycle (dotted lines) with the average of the 1980s and 1990s long expansions (solid lines). The cycles are all lined up with the beginning of the expansion, indicated by the first vertical line. These long "slow burn" recoveries also extended well beyond the point at which the economy first reached full employment (called late-cycle phases, shaded in Chart 5). Inflation pressures were slower to emerge in these types of recoveries, allowing the Fed to proceed cautiously when normalizing interest rates. Interestingly, earnings-per-share for S&P 500 companies expanded by an average of 18% in inflation-adjusted terms during the two late-cycle phases, despite the twin headwinds of narrowing profit margins and a strengthening dollar (the dollar appreciated by an average of 23% in trade-weighted terms). The stock market provided an impressive average real return of 25%. We are not making the case that returns will be anywhere near this level in the coming years. The starting point for valuation, for example, is much more extended than it was in previous long cycles. There are also plenty of possible sources of shocks that could end the expansion abruptly. Nonetheless, it is not going to die simply of old age. In the absence of any major shocks, this expansion may continue for a while yet. One reason is that there are no major areas of overspending that would make the economy highly vulnerable. This includes the housing sector, where investment has lagged previous slow-burn recoveries by a wide margin. A lagging housing market is not surprising given the bloated inventory of vacant homes that had to be absorbed in this cycle. The good news is that overhang appears to now be gone. The stock of unsold new and existing homes has returned to low levels by historical standards (inventories of new homes are in fact now rising, after plunging between 2006 and 2012; Chart 6). Chart 5The Current Cycle Is ##br##A "Slow Burn" Expansion Chart 6The Overhang From Housing##br## Inventories Is Gone Other positive factors include the following: Lending standards haven't eased much, but FICO scores have increased sharply, meaning that more renters now qualify for loans and thus might move from rental unit to a single family home (which generates more GDP per unit). This factor was highlighted in a recent Special Report on housing.1 Affordability is favorable, and the cost of owning is cheap relative to the cost of renting. The home-ownership rate has returned to its long-term average (Chart 6, bottom panel). If the pre-Lehman bubble in the homeownership rate has been unwound, it removes a headwind for construction activity because renting favors multi-family construction that produces less GDP per unit than single family homes. The supply of foreclosed homes onto the market has withered along with the foreclosure rate. This might not affect construction activity because it represents families simply swapping homes for other ones, but it supports home prices. Importantly, household formation is still recovering from a period in which young adults stayed with their parents for longer than normal for economic reasons. The tightening in the labor market and cyclical rebound in real disposable income growth is allowing millennials to finally move out, boosting the demand for new housing stock (Chart 7). Chart 8 presents a simple way of estimating the remaining pent-up demand for housing, based on the deviation from its 1990-2007 trend in the ratio of the number of households to the total population. A closing of the remaining gap implies an extra 540,000 housing units. Chart 7Income Growth Is Helping Young Americans To Leave The Nest Chart 8A Catch-Up Housing Construction Will Occur If This Gap Closes The equilibrium number of housing starts that cover underlying population growth plus the units lost to scrappage is estimated to be about 1.4 million annually. If the household formation 'catch up' occurs over the next two years, adding another 250,000 units per year, total demand could be 1.6 to 1.7 million in each of the next two years. This compares to the just-released March housing starts level of 1.2 million. If starts rise smoothly from today's level to 1.7 million at the end of 2018, then the housing sector will contribute about 0.2 percentage points and 0.5 percentage point to real GDP growth in 2017 and 2018, respectively (Chart 9). Chart 9A Housing Catch-Up Will Boost GDP Growth For the economy, the implication is that this already-aged expansion phase could persist for a couple of more years as long as it is not hit by a negative shock and inflationary pressures remain quiescent, allowing the Fed to proceed slowly. Bottom Line: Housing starts remain well below the equilibrium level implied by underlying household formation, and a "catch up" phase could help keep the current "slow burn" expansion burning over the coming years. Favor Housing-Related Assets The above analysis also has some favorable implications for housing-related financial assets. We originally examined the implications of a rebound in home construction in 2012, during the early phase of the recovery in housing starts.2 Our approach was to test the historical excess return performance of several financial assets as a function of key housing market variables, and concluded that housing-related financial assets were set to outperform their respective benchmarks in a bullish housing scenario over the following year (and beyond). We have updated our original analysis in this report, with a few modifications. First, we examine the relationship between key housing market variables and excess returns of housing-related assets since the onset of the U.S. economic expansion in June 2009, given the structural change in the housing market that occurred following the Great Recession. Second, our analysis is based on a more focused set of housing market indicators, given the relatively poor predictive power of new home sales and the months' supply of homes following the crisis period on housing-related asset returns. Table 2 presents the list of housing-related assets that we examined,3 along with the key housing market variables used to forecast excess returns (and whether they were significant predictors in the post-crisis era). The table highlights that most of the variables do contain useful information, with the exception of the two noted above. The rightmost column presents the share of excess returns explained by a composite model of the factors noted as significant for each asset, which varies from a low of 13% to a high of 20%. Table 2Important Predictors Of Housing-Related Asset Excess Returns* (June 2009-December 2016) Charts 10 and 11 present a set of relatively conservative assumptions for the key housing market variables shown in Table 2, based on a rise in housing starts modestly above the scrappage rate that we noted in the previous section. We assume that house price appreciation and housing affordability moderate due to further rate hikes from the Fed, that the already-elevated homebuilders' confidence index stays flat, that refi applications remain low due to the uptrend in mortgage rates, and that purchase applications rise in lockstep with housing starts. Chart 10A Set Of Conservative Assumptions... Chart 11...For Key Housing Market Variables Finally, Table 3 illustrates the predicted excess returns over the coming 12-months of the housing-related assets that we examined, along with the annualized excess returns in 2016 and over the entire sample period for the purposes of comparison. It is important to note that excess returns of corporate bonds are presented relative to duration-matched government bonds, not a speculative- or investment-grade corporate bond aggregate. Table 3Excess Returns Of Housing-Related Assets* (%) The analysis presented above highlights several important conclusions for investors: The predictive power of key housing market variables has been smaller over the course of this economic expansion than in the past economic cycle (including the recession of 2008-2009), suggesting that housing market developments were more important during the downturn than they have been during the recovery. Still, housing market data is an important driver of excess returns for housing-related assets. All of the housing-related assets that we examined are expected to outperform their respective benchmarks over the coming year, even given the relatively conservative assumptions that we have made about the pace of gains in the housing market. For the three corporate bond assets shown in Tables 2 and 3, our model predicts outperformance even relative to their respective corporate bond benchmarks, albeit only marginally in the case of investment-grade banks. With the exception of S&P 500 homebuilders and banks, the model's predicted excess returns are lower over the coming year than they have been on an annualized basis since the onset of the recovery, highlighting that housing-related assets have front-run at least some of the expected normalization in the housing market over the coming few years. However, a full rise to our equilibrium estimate of 1.7 million starts over the coming two years could potentially lead to even larger outperformance than the model would predict. Charts 12 and 13 do not suggest that valuation will be an impediment to the outperformance of housing-related assets. Chart 12Valuation Won't Be An Impediment... Chart 13...For Housing Related Assets Bottom Line: Investors should look to housing-related assets as a source of potential outperformance over the coming 6-12 months. The historical relationship between key housing market variables and the excess returns of these assets implies the latter is set to outperform even given conservative assumptions about the former. John Canally, CFA, Senior Vice President U.S. Investment Strategy johnc@bcaresearch.com Mark McClellan, Senior Vice President The Bank Credit Analyst markm@bcaresearch.com Jonathan LaBerge Vice President, Special Reports jonathanl@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see U.S. Investment Strategy Special Report "U.S. Housing: What Comes Next?", dated March 27, 2017, available at usis.bcaresearch.com 2 Please see U.S. Investment Strategy Weekly Report U-3 Or U-6?", dated February 13, 2012, available at usis.bcaresearch.com 3 Note that we have excluded fixed and floating rate home equity loan ABS from our list of housing-related assets owing to a lack of data, as well as investment-grade REITs because of a very low degree of return predictability from key indicators of the housing market