Commodities & Energy Sector
Highlights The EM equity benchmark’s concentration in the top six stocks – that in turn correlate with US FAANGM – has risen substantially. Hence, the outlook for US mega-cap stocks will continue to significantly impact the EM equity benchmark. US FAANGM stocks have been closely tracking the trajectory of – and share many other similarities with – previous bubbles. Hence, it is risky to dismiss the mania thesis. That said, it is impossible to know how long this equity mania will last, how far it will go and what will trigger its volte-face. Odds of a repeat of the 2015 boom-bust cycle in Chinese equities are low. The rally in Chinese stocks and commodities might be due for a pause. Feature Concentration Risk Chart 1EM: Mega-Caps Stocks Versus The Equal-Weighted Index The EM equity index's hefty gains since the late-March lows have largely been at the hands of about six stocks: Alibaba, Tencent, TSMC, Samsung, Naspers and Meituan-Dianping (Chart 1). The latter is a Chinese web-service platform company, while Naspers derives 75% of its revenue from its equity ownership in Tencent and 25% from a Russian internet company. For ease of reference, we refer to the big four (Alibaba, Tencent, Samsung and TSMC) as EM ATST. Table 1 illustrates that the top six companies combined account for about 24.3% of the MSCI EM equity market cap. For comparison, US FAANGM (Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Google and Microsoft) account for 25% of the S&P 500 market cap. The remainder of the EM equity universe – including all Chinese, Korean and Taiwanese stocks other than the six mega caps listed above – has rallied less (Chart 1). This is very similar to the dynamics in the US equity market, where the equally-weighted index has substantially diverged from the FAANGM index (Chart 2). Table 1Market Cap Weights & Performance Since March Lows Chart 2US: FAANGM Versus The Equal-Weighted Index Table 2MSCI EM Stocks: Country Weights The EM ATST’s exponential rise has also boosted their respective country weightings in the MSCI EM equity benchmark. Table 2 demonstrates that China, Korea and Taiwan together account for 65% of the EM benchmark, India for 8% and all other 22 countries combined for 27%. Note that the market cap ($1.7 trillion) of the remaining 22 countries is almost as large as the market cap of the top six EM individual stocks. On the whole, concentration in the EM benchmark is as high as ever. Apart from global trade and Chinese growth, there are two other forces that will define the direction of EM mega-cap stocks: (1) rising geopolitical tensions between the US and China, and (2) a continuous mania or bust in “new economy” stocks. We discuss the latter in the following section. Escalating tensions between the US and China, including North Korea’s potential assault on South Korea, pose risks to Chinese, Korean and Taiwanese stocks. This is one of the critical reasons why we have been reluctant to chase these markets higher, despite upgrading our outlook on Chinese growth. If these bourses relapse, their sheer weight in the EM benchmark will pull the index down. The EM equity index’s outperformance in recent weeks has been due to the surge in both EM mega-cap stocks and Chinese share prices more broadly. Bottom Line: The EM equity benchmark concentration has risen substantially due to outsized gains in several “new economy” stocks. What’s more, the EM equity index’s outperformance in recent weeks has been due to the surge in both EM mega-cap stocks and Chinese share prices more broadly (we discuss the latter below). If the global mania in “new economy” stocks persists, EM ATST could well drive the overall EM equity index higher. Conversely, if “new economy” shares roll over for whatever reason, the EM equity benchmark’s advance will reverse. A Bubble Or Not? An assessment of the sustainability of the rally in US FAANGM stocks is critical for investors in the EM equity benchmark if for no other reason than the concentration hazard. We present the following considerations in assessing whether the FAANGM and EM ATST rally is or is not a mania: First, the exponential rally in FAANGM stocks is not a new phenomenon: It has been taking place over the past 10 years. Our FAANGM index – an equal-weighted average of six stocks (Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, Google and Microsoft) – has increased 20-fold in real (inflation-adjusted) US dollar terms since January 2010. Its rise is on par with the magnitude of the bull market in the Nasdaq 100 index in the 1990s and Walt Disney in the 1960s, and well exceeds other bubbles, as illustrated in Chart 3. All price indexes on Chart 3 are shown in real (inflation-adjusted) terms. Chart 3Each Decade = One Mania All these manias and bubbles started with excellent fundamentals, and price gains were initially justified. Toward the end of the decade, however, their outsized gains attracted momentum chasers and speculators, catapulting share prices exponentially higher. Second, a financial mania requires: (1) solid past performance; (2) a story that can capture investors’ imaginations, and (3) plentiful liquidity. The “new economy” stocks fit all of these criteria: They have delivered super-sized performance over the past 10 years; They easily capture ordinary people’s imaginations – the average person on the street knows that FAANGM and EM ATST stocks benefit from people working from home and spending more time online; The Federal Reserve and many other central banks are injecting enormous amounts of liquidity into their respective economies. Third, there is a striking similarity between the FAANGM rally and previous bubbles: The mania-subjects of the preceding decades assumed global equity leadership early in their respective decade, rose steadily throughout, and went exponential at the very end of the decade. The latest parabolic surge in FAANGM stocks along with its duration (10 years of global equity outperformance and leadership) and magnitude (20-fold price appreciation in real inflation-adjusted terms) conspicuously resembles those of previous bubbles. Interestingly, the majority of previous bubbles peaked and tumbled around the turn of each decade, the exception being Walt Disney – the Nifty-Fifty bubble of the 1960s – which rolled over in 1973. Given FAANGM stocks have been closely tracking the trajectory of previous bubbles, it will not be surprising if 2020 ends up marking the peak for “new economy” stocks. Fourth, the last exponential upleg in the tech and telecom bubble of 1999-2000 occurred amid a one-off demand surge for tech hardware and software. The Y2K scare – worries that computers and networks around the world might malfunction on the New Year/new millennium eve – spurred many companies to order new hardware and upgrade their systems and networks. As a result, there was a one-off boom in orders in the global technology industry in the fourth quarter of 1999 and first quarter of 2000. Chart 4Orders For Computers And Electronics Have Remained Resilient Investors extrapolated this one-off demand surge into the future, mistaking it for recurring growth. As a result, they assigned extremely high valuations to these tech stocks in the first quarter of 2000. Similarly, since March, working and shopping from home has sharply increased demand for web services, online shopping, cloud computing and tech hardware. The top panel of Chart 4 demonstrates that US manufacturing orders for computers and electronic products did not contract in the March-May period, while orders for capital goods have plunged since March. Similarly, Taiwanese exports – which are heavy on tech hardware – are holding up well despite the crash in global trade (Chart 4, bottom panel). Some of this demand strength is structural, but part of it is one-off and non-recurring. Certainly, one should not extrapolate their recent growth rates into the future. However, investors are prone to extrapolation and chasing winners. Fifth, valuations of US FAANGM and EM ATST are elevated. Trailing P/E ratios for EM ATST stocks are shown in Table 3. Table 3Price-To-Earnings For Top 6 EM Stocks All in all, provided both US FAANGM and EM ATST consist of admirable companies with great competitive advantages and business models, it is tempting to dismiss the bubble argument. Nevertheless, there are enough similarities with previous manias to compel investors to be vigilant. Even great companies have a fair price, and substantial price overshoots will not be sustainable. We sense a growing number of investors deem US FAANGM and EM ATST stocks as invincible. When some stocks are regarded as unbeatable, their top is not far. Our major theme for the past decade – elaborated in the report, How To Play EM In The Coming Decade1 published in June 2010 – has been as follows: Sell commodities / buy health care and technology. Until 2019, we were recommending being long EM tech/short EM resource stocks. Unfortunately, since 2019, the corrections in EM “new economy” stocks have proved to be too short and fleeting, and we were unable to buy-in. Their share prices have lately gone parabolic: They are now in a full-blown mania phase. As to global equity leadership change from growth to value stocks, we maintain that major leadership rotations typically occur during or at the end of an equity selloff, as we elaborated in our October 3, 2019 report (Charts 5 and 6). Chart 5EM vs DM: Leadership Rotation Requires Market Turbulence Chart 6Growth vs Value: Leadership Rotation Requires Market Turbulence Apparently, the February-March selloff did not produce a shift in equity leadership. Barring a major selloff, “new economy” stocks will likely continue to lead. Chart 7Fed Rate Cuts Did Not Prevent The S&P 500 Bubble From Unravelling Finally, easy money policies encourage speculation and contribute to the build-up of manias. However, when a bubble starts unravelling, low interest rates are often unable to avert the bust. For example, when the tech bubble began bursting in 2000, the Fed cut rates aggressively and US bond yields plunged. Yet, low interest rates did not prevent tech share prices from deflating further (Chart 7). Bottom Line: It is impossible to know how long this equity mania will last, how far it will go and what will trigger its volte-face. One thing is certain: there is a lot of froth – particularly in terms of valuation and positioning – in these “new economy” stocks. Yet, these excesses could last longer and get larger. A Mania In Chinese Equities? Many commentators have rushed to compare the latest surge in Chinese stocks with the exponential advance in the first half of 2015. We do not think this rally will go on without interruption for another five months like it did back then. Our rationale is as follows: The Chinese authorities are much more vigilant now, and they will try to induce periodic corrections to avoid another mania and bust similar to those that occurred five years ago. The Chinese authorities are much more vigilant now, and they will try to induce periodic corrections to avoid another mania and bust similar to those that occurred five years ago. Both China’s MSCI Investable and CSI 300 equity indexes are retesting their previous highs (Chart 8). In the past they failed to break above these levels, and this time is likely to be no different, at least for now. The latest spike is more likely to be the final hurrah before a setback. Critically, the 12-month forward P/E ratio for China’s MSCI Investible index has also risen to its previous peaks (Chart 9, top panel). This has occurred with little improvement in the 12-month forward EPS (Chart 9, bottom panel). In short, share prices have run ahead of the business cycle and are already pricing in a lot of profit recovery. Chart 8Chinese Stocks Are At Their Previous Highs Chart 9Chinese Investable Stocks: A Rally Driven By P/E Expansion Chart 10Chinese Onshore Stocks: A Two-Tier Market Most of the rally since the March lows has been due to “new economy” stocks. Share prices of “old economy” companies did not do that well before July. Tech stocks in the onshore market have gone parabolic (Chart 10, top panel). This contrasts with lackluster performance of materials, industrials, and property stocks (Chart 10, bottom panels). Critically, in the onshore market, tech stocks are trading at the following trailing P/E ratios: the market cap-weighted P/E is 155, and the median P/E is 60. Needless to say, these valuations are outright expensive. Bottom Line: Odds of a repeat of the 2015 boom-bust cycle are low. The rally in Chinese stocks might be due for a pause. On June 18, we upgraded Chinese stocks to overweight from neutral within the EM benchmark, a recommendation that remains intact. We have a much lower conviction on the absolute performance of Chinese stocks in the near-run. China And Commodities An important question to address is whether the rally in commodities in general and copper in particular are signals of a sustainable recovery in the mainland economy. Without a doubt, economic conditions in China have been improving, and infrastructure spending has been accelerating. However, the magnitude of the upswing in copper prices is excessive relative to the strength of the Chinese economy. The spike in resource prices in general and copper in particular has been due to three forces: (1) China’s unprecedented super-strong imports; (2) global investors buying commodities; and (3) output cuts. It is highly unlikely that commodity demand in China is this strong. In our opinion, this reflects restocking. Chart 11 shows that Chinse imports of copper and copper products surged by 100% in June from a year ago, while imports of steel products increased by 100% and oil import volumes rose by 34%. It is highly unlikely that commodity demand in China is this strong. In our opinion, this reflects restocking. Provided cheap credit availability, wholesalers, intermediaries or users of commodities have rushed to buy before prices rise further. In the case of copper, it will take several months before the real economy absorbs that much of the red metal. Hence, China’s copper imports are poised to relapse in the coming months. Chart 12 illustrates that investors’ net long positions in copper have risen to their highest level since early 2019. Consistently, the July Bank of America/Meryl Lynch Global Fund Manager Survey revealed that as of early July, portfolio managers had built up their largest net long positions in commodities since July 2011. Not only oil but also copper and iron ore prices have benefitted from production declines. Due to surging COVID infections, Chile and Peru have sharply reduced copper output and Brazil has curtailed iron ore production. Chart 11Chinese Imports Of Commodities Have Surged Chart 12Investors Have Gone Long Copper Simultaneous buying of commodities by China and global investors as well as production cuts have considerably benefited resource prices as of late. Our suspicion is that commodities inventories in China have become elevated. This entails reduced purchases by China, and by extension an air pocket in commodities prices in the months ahead. Bottom Line: The rally in resources in general and copper in particular is at risk of a correction. We remain long gold/short copper. Investment Strategy In absolute terms, the risk-reward of EM share prices is not attractive. However, as we have argued in the past two months, FOMO (fear-of-missing-out) mania forces could take share prices higher. The timing of a reversal is never easy especially when a FOMO-driven mania is alive. For now, for asset allocators we reiterate a below-benchmark allocation in EM stocks within a global equity portfolio. However, a breakdown in the trade-weighted US dollar will prompt us to upgrade EM within the global equity benchmark (Chart 13). The broad trade-weighted dollar is teetering on an edge but has not yet broken down (Chart 14). In sum, global equity portfolios should be ready to upgrade their EM allocation to neutral on signs that the broad trade-weighted US dollar is breaking down. Chart 13EM vs DM: Is The Downtrend Intact? Chart 14The Broad Trade-Weighted Dollar Is On An Edge As we argued last week, the US dollar could weaken against DM currencies amid the next selloff in global share prices. This is why last week we switched our short positions in an EM currency basket from the US dollar to an equally-weighted basket of the euro, the Swiss franc and Japanese yen. This strategy remains valid. The US dollar is at risk versus DM currencies. However, EM exchange rates may not be out of the woods, given their poor fundamentals on the one hand and potential geopolitical risks in North Asia on the other. We are neutral on both EM local currency bonds and EM sovereign and corporate credit. Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see Emerging Markets Strategy Special Report "How To Play EM In The Coming Decade," dated June 10, 2010. Equities Recommendations Currencies, Credit And Fixed-Income Recommendations
Lumber prices have surged recently, boosted by record-low mortgage rates, which have spurred a rise in mortgage applications for purchases to a post-GFC high. Moreover, homebuyers traffic has been quickly recovering, which fueled a significant pick-up in…
Highlights In this report, we initiate coverage of the EU Emission Trading System’s (ETS) CO2 allowances. We expect this policy-driven cap-and-trade market to become central to the market-driven pricing mechanism for CO2 fundamentals. Futures on EU CO2 emissions allowances will resume their rally – and surpass the €30 level seen in July 2019 – as ETS allowances supplies tighten in September. Global CO2 emissions are projected to fall 8% this year – 2.6 billion MT (2.6 gigatonnes, or Gt) – as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, based on IEA modeling. If realized, this would be up to six times the decline in CO2 emissions following the Global Financial Crisis (GFC). The speed at which actual CO2 emissions return to pre-COVID-19 levels will be a function of how quickly global growth recovers, and the intensity of “green” investments. Post-COVID-19, the rebound in emissions could be sharply higher, as has been the case with previous global downturns. Following the GFC, CO2 emissions recovered all of the year-on-year (y/y) decline in 2009 by 2010 (Chart of the Week). As with any COVID-19-related projection, uncertainty – to the upside and downside – dominates our outlook. Chart of the WeekCOVID-19 Crushes Global CO2 Emissions Feature The EU’s CO2 emissions market is designed to achieve policy goals – i.e., reducing the carbon footprint of utilities and manufacturers in Europe. As tempting as it may be to view the surge in EU CO2 emission allowances futures as a harbinger of a powerful recovery in European economic growth, such hopes would be misplaced (Chart 2).1 The sharp rally in part reflects the expected decrease in the volume of CO2 emission allowances that will be available for trading over the September 2020 – August 2021 period. In line with its policy mandates, the ETS reduced this volume by 0.33 Gt following a May 2020 meeting, bringing the total volume available for trade in the year beginning in September to ~ 1.32 Gt.2 The EU’s CO2 emissions market is designed to achieve policy goals – i.e., reducing the carbon footprint of utilities and manufacturers in Europe – vs. pricing those emissions purely as a function of supply-demand fundamentals. Chart 2CO2 Allowances Rally Reflects Anticipated Supply Squeeze CO2 Emissions As is the case with industrial commodities – particularly oil, base metals, iron ore and steel – non-OECD markets dominate CO2 emissions. CO2 is the largest greenhouse gas (GHG) emitted into the atmosphere, and the largest share – almost two-thirds – of it is accounted for by fossil fuel use in industrial and transportation processes (Chart 3). CO2 emissions are closely tied to oil consumption. In non-OECD economies, this means they are closely tied to GDP, as the income elasticity of oil consumption for EM economies is ~ 0.65, meaning a 1% increase in income translates to a 0.65% increase in oil demand. In DM, transportation and electric generation drive hydrocarbon usage. In non-OECD and OECD markets, we model emissions as a function of oil consumption and financial variables (Chart 4). Chart 3Fossil-Fuel CO2 Dominates GHG Emissions It comes as no surprise that commodity prices generally are highly correlated with CO2 emissions, given the markets in which they trade are continually responding to supply-demand shifts in industrial and consumer markets. This can be seen in our Global Commodity Factor, which extracts the common factor across 28 real commodity prices (Chart 5). Chart 4CO2 Emissions Trend With GDP, Oil Consumption As is the case with industrial commodities – particularly oil, base metals, iron ore and steel – non-OECD markets dominate CO2 emissions (Chart 6). Chart 5CO2, Commodity Prices Closely Aligned Chart 6Non-OECD Economies Dominate CO2 Emissions Within this category, China accounts for ~ 45% of non-OECD CO2 emissions post-GFC, and close to 28% of global emissions, according to BP’s 2020 Statistical Review.3 China’s heavy reliance on coal-fired power generation and heating drive its CO2 emissions (Chart 7, top panel). Asia as a whole accounts for ~ 19 Gt of CO2 emissions, or 53% of the global total, while the US and Europe account for 18% and 17%, respectively.4 US CO2 emissions are driven by electric generation and transport, as the bottom panel of Chart 7 shows. Chart 7Electric Generation And Heating Drive China’s CO2 Emissions EU CO2 Emission Allowances The ETS also will force the overall number of emission allowances to contract at a 2.2% rate p.a. beginning next year. In the 21st century, ICE EUA futures prices have not followed actual EU CO2 emissions (Chart 8). This is not unexpected, given this market largely is a policy-driven market, not a fundamentally driven market. The ETS runs a cap-and-trade system covering ~ 45% of the EU’s GHG emissions, which limits emissions by more than 11,000 power stations, industrial plants and other heavy energy-use applications. Until 2019, the ETS adjusted supplies of emissions allowances by literally removing surpluses from the market resulting from overallocations of supplies via its free allocations and auctions. Thereafter, the ETS Market Stability Reserve (MSR), began absorbing unallocated emissions allowances to keep prices from falling to the point that investment in CO2 abatement would be disincentivized.5 Chart 8Two Ships In The Night: EU CO2 Emissions and EUA Futures As ETS system surplus allocations are reduced, we expect this market will more closely reflect the actual supply and demand for CO2 allowances. The ETS also will force the overall number of emission allowances to contract at a 2.2% rate p.a. beginning next year, versus the 1.74% p.a. contraction observed over the 2013-2020 period, in order, it says, to keep the GHG emissions falling to policy levels set for 2030. Even with its flaws vis-à-vis a true commodity market driven by supply-demand fundamentals, the ETS’s CO2 emissions allowances market is extremely important as a source of information regarding the state of the world. Last year, Reuters’s Refinitiv service estimated that of the $164 billion worth of CO2 emissions traded globally 90% was accounted for by the European market.6 As ETS system surplus allocations are reduced, we expect this market will more closely reflect the actual supply and demand for CO2 allowances. This will allow it to generate a market-clearing price for emissions allowances, which will be a valuable data point for global markets, especially when it comes to allocating capital to reducing GHG emissions. The ETS is retaining the right to issue free allocations, so that participants in the system are not disadvantaged by other jurisdictions not subject to the stringent requirements imposed by the ETS. Bottom Line: The ETS’s CO2 emission allowances will resume the rally launched in March 2020, as the supply of allowances contracts beginning in September. We are not ready to recommend any positions in this market, but will continue to follow and write about it going forward, expecting it will become not only a viable market but an important source of information of the market-clearing price of CO2 emissions. Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Hugo Bélanger Associate Editor Commodity & Energy Strategy HugoB@bcaresearch.com Fernando Crupi Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy FernandoC@bcaresearch.com Commodities Round-Up Energy: Overweight Brent and WTI prices have been moving side-ways since June at ~ $41/bbl and $39/bbl, respectively. Fundamentals are tightening but fear of a second wave of COVID-19 infections weighs on prices. Bakken shale-oil producers could struggle to restart drilling and production activities after a court ordered the closure of the basin’s crucial Dakota Access pipeline – responsible for moving ~ 600k b/d – due to insufficient environmental checks. As previously shut-in production comes back on line, regional prices could remain under pressure to incentivize additional crude-by-rail volumes – at close to double the transportation costs – out of the basin, keeping prices below producers’ breakevens (Chart 9). Base Metals: Neutral Copper prices continue moving up as economic activity in China recovers (Chart 10). Prices are now 32% higher vs. March lows. Large metal-producing countries in Latin America have been hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic. This puts supply at risk and could have lasting impacts as needed investment in new mines is delayed. In fact, Codelco announced it is suspending construction at its El Teniente mine in Chile due to rising COVID-19 cases in the region. Copper could enter a persistent supply-deficit period if demand remains in its upward trend. Precious Metals: Neutral Gold prices crossed $1,800/oz on Tuesday, reaching their highest level since 2011. The yellow metal’s rally continues to be fueled by record Western investment demand. ETFs inflows in June reached 104 tons, pushing gold-backed ETF volumes and AUM to new highs. Globally, ETF holdings’ tonnage increased by 25% ytd. This more than offsets the collapse in physical demand from China and India. Going forward, we expect a lower US dollar will support income growth in EM countries, providing additional demand for gold. Ags/Softs: Underweight The latest USDA Acreage report surprised the market, with corn producers planting 5 million less acres than their intentions in March. This large decline caused corn futures to rally to 3-month highs. Since then, the market has focused on adverse weather, hoping dryness in major corn producing areas would reduce corn yields. However, that didn’t materialize. Forecasts are showing less intense heat in the Midwest crop belt and futures are losing some ground compared to recent highs. The market is now awaiting Friday’s USDA Supply and Demand report. With exports on pace to come in slightly below the USDA estimate for the year and a much-reduced planting area, we expect corn ending stocks to be well below the June estimate of 3.32 Bn bushels. Chart 9Bakken Crude Prices Are Falling Vs WTI Chart 10China's Economic Growth Supports Copper Prices Footnotes 1 These futures are the EUA contracts for delivery of Carbon Emission Allowances at the Union Registry, which was set up to account “for all allowances issued under the EU emissions trading system (EU ETS).” Contracts for delivery of these allowances are traded on ICE Futures Europe’s platform. 2 Please see ETS Market Stability Reserve to reduce auction volume by over 330 million allowances between September 2020 and August 2021 published by the European Commission May 8, 2020. 3 Please see bp Statistical Review of World Energy 2020: a pivotal moment published June 17, 2020. 4 Please see CO2 and Greenhouse Gas Emissions published by Our World in Data, a collaboration between researchers at the University of Oxford, and the non-profit organization Global Change Data Lab, in December 2019. 5 Surpluses have been a feature of the market since 2009. Please see Market Stability Reserve published by the European Commission. 6 Please see Value of global CO2 markets hit record 144 billion euros in 2018: report published January 16, 2019 by reuters.com. Investment Views and Themes Recommendations Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Trade Recommendation Performance In 2020 Q1 Commodity Prices and Plays Reference Table Trades Closed In 2020 Summary of Closed Trades
BCA Research's Commodity & Energy Strategy service has initiated coverage of the EU Emission Trading System’s (ETS) CO2 allowances. They expect this policy-driven cap-and-trade market to become central to the market-driven pricing mechanism for CO2…
The combination of falling domestic production, steady consumption growth, and the ongoing structural shift to cleaner sources of energy will require greater imports of natural gas by European consumers. Critically, Europe’s natural gas consumption might…
Highlights Silver will outperform gold in 2H20, as industrial production and consumer-product demand revives on the back of the massive global stimulus deployed to reverse the hit to aggregate demand inflicted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Silver’s physical supply growth largely is a by-product of base-metals mining, specifically copper, zinc and lead. As mining capex for these base metals is reduced in response to weaker demand, silver’s physical surplus will continue to contract. On the demand side, a pick-up in industrial activity will benefit silver more than gold, given its relatively higher share of industrial consumption. The gold/silver ratio most likely contracts from its current level of 99 over the remainder of the year, given our expectation gold will appreciate 7% in 2H20 and finish the year at $1,900/oz, while silver is expected to appreciate ~ 16% ending 2020 at $21/oz. Elevated economic and political uncertainty – chiefly escalating US-China and US-Europe trade tensions – likely will keep a bid under gold and the USD. This could limit the rally in commodities (ex-gold) generally. We are getting long December 2020 COMEX silver at tonight’s close. Feature While silver is sensitive to the same financial variables driving gold’s performance – chiefly real rates, the broad trade-weighted USD, inflation and inflation expectations – it is far more responsive to the evolution of the real economy. When investors seek a safe haven in especially volatile or highly uncertain markets, silver is not their first choice. Nor is it the go-to portfolio diversifier investors seek out to hedge against higher inflation or inflation expectations. Investors typically turn to the USD and gold when risks rise (Chart of the Week).1 While silver is sensitive to the same financial variables driving gold’s performance – chiefly real rates, the broad trade-weighted USD, inflation and inflation expectations – it is far more responsive to the evolution of the real economy than gold: More than half of silver’s demand is accounted for by industrial applications – e.g., solar panels, batteries and electronics, vs. ~ 10% for gold (Chart 2). Chart of the WeekUSD, Gold Attract Investors In Volatile, Uncertain Markets Chart 2Silver Is More Responsive To the Real Economy Than Gold Gold is a far deeper market than silver (Chart 3). Greater two-way flow on the bid and offer – augmented by the greater involvement of institutions and central banks in those flows – makes the gold market more efficient in terms of processing financial and economic information. Because of this, gold prices and gold options’ implied volatility are useful parameters for following investors’ (and central banks’) assessments of future economic conditions. Silver tends to overshoot and undershoot in its response to the arrival of new economic and financial information – e.g., economic shocks like the COVID-19 outbreak (Chart 4).2 Chart 3Gold Market Is Deeper Than Silver ... Chart 4... Making Gold Less Volatile Relative To Silver Because silver is sensitive to the same financial variables driving gold, it can attract more retail speculative interest when the larger investment narrative favors gold as a portfolio hedge. All the same, because silver is sensitive to the same financial variables driving gold, it can attract more retail speculative interest when the larger investment narrative favors gold as a portfolio hedge. For this reason, it is difficult to recommend silver as a long-term portfolio hedge. It is, however, useful in expressing a view on short-term economic and financial expectations. Supply Growth Will Be Subdued Mining output of silver is largely a by-product of copper, zinc and lead mining, as the white metal often is found in deposits of these ores. Because of the COVID-19-induced base-metals demand destruction, miners most likely will reduce capex at least for this year (Chart 5).3 This will cause mine production to fall, which will reduce the rate of growth in supply, even with recycling remaining fairly constant (Chart 6). As a result, the white metal’s physical surplus is expected to continue contracting relative to demand this year (Chart 7). Chart 5Expect Lower Base-Metals Capex To Reduce Silver Supply Growth Chart 6Falling Supplies Of Silver Will Tighten Physical Balances Chart 7Silver’s Supply Surplus Likely Will Contract Demand Follows The Real Economy Slightly more than half of silver demand is accounted for by industrial applications (Chart 8). Gold’s industrial-applications share is ~ 10%, as noted above. This keeps the silver-to-gold ratio closely aligned with global industrial production (Chart 9). Chart 8Industrial Usage Dominates Silver Demand Chart 9Silver Prices Closely Tied To Global Industrial Production The massive fiscal and monetary stimulus deployed by governments and central banks globally certainly raises the odds of an overshoot, as demand revives and miners are reducing capex (Chart 10).4 Against this backdrop, a better-than-expected recovery in commodity demand cannot be ruled out. However, it is important to emphasize that – given the profound uncertainty dogging commodities generally – a severe undershoot also is possible. Chart 10Massive Global Stimulus Could Cause Metals (Silver Included) To Overshoot Silver Poised To Outperform In modeling prices, we capture silver’s safe-haven vs. industrial demand using precious and industrial metals prices (Chart 11). Historically, silver has been as substitute to gold for investors seeking lower-cost exposure to precious metals. This implies silver will follow gold in times of decreasing real rates, rising inflation and/or increasing economic uncertainty. Following a sharp increase in gold prices, silver becomes an attractive safe-haven asset and gets bid up until the disequilibrium between both variables closes. These series are cointegrated in the long-run. On the other hand, silver prices are more responsive to the global industrial cycle than gold. Thus, it partly follows the same underlying trend as industrial metals – mainly copper – prices. Chart 11BCA's Silver Model: Rally Expected The model shown in Chart 11 leads us to expect silver prices will outperform gold prices in 2H20. We expect silver to end the year at $21/oz, a 16% increase over the next six months, versus $1,900/oz for gold (up 7%). Given our assessment of these respective markets, we are recommending a long December 2020 COMEX silver position at tonight’s close. We are remaining long gold, as it is more likely to respond favorably to the additional fiscal and monetary stimulus such a turn of events would prompt. Bottom Line: Silver is a thinner market than gold and is more subject to higher volatility. In an environment of historically high global economic policy uncertainty, rising Sino-US and -European trade tensions, and the economic destruction wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic, this amounts to a significant risk for investors (Chart 12). While our modeling indicating silver should outperform gold in 2H20 inclines us to go long December 2020 silver, this could be upended by another wave of COVID-19-induced lockdowns in systematically important economies. This would stop a global economic recovery dead in its tracks. For this reason, we are remaining long gold, as it is more likely to respond favorably to the additional fiscal and monetary stimulus such a turn of events would prompt. Chart 12Heightened Economic Uncertainty Elevates Risk To Silver Positions Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Hugo Bélanger Associate Editor Commodity & Energy Strategy HugoB@bcaresearch.com Commodities Round-Up Energy: Overweight Expectations of a deal allowing Libya’s National Oil Corporation (NOC) to resume oil production at some of its fields have increased, following reports of discussions between the Government of National Accord (GNA), the NOC and regional countries overseen by the United Nations and the United States.5 Nonetheless, restarting production will be gradual, as the lack of elementary maintenance since the start of the conflict left pipelines corroding and storage facilities collapsing. Base Metals: Neutral The Baltic Dry Index (BDI) rebounded by more than 300% from its May 2020 low, led by rising iron ore exports to China (Chart 13). As Chinese economic growth resumes, iron ore and base metals demand is expected to increase in 2H20. However, some of the recent support to shipping markets is due to China’s restocking of iron ore, which will fade as inventories return to desired levels. While we expect the BDI to end the year higher, a near-term pullback is possible, given iron ore and freight rates appear to have overshot to the upside. Precious Metals: Neutral The risk of an incessantly strong US dollar remains a headwind to gold and silver prices. The dollar benefits from mounting global economic uncertainty. Thus, the risk of a severe second COVID-19 infection wave, escalating Sino-US and US-European tensions, and the upcoming US election could increase economic and market volatility in 2H20 and keep the dollar in its bull market, which began in 2011, intact (Chart 14). Ags/Softs: Underweight The USDA this week reported farmers rated 73% of corn planted this season in good to excellent condition for the week ended Jun 28, vs. 56% last year. Soybeans were rated 71% vs 54% in good to excellent condition last year. Winter wheat bucked the year-on-year improvement trend, with 52% of the crop in good to excellent condition vs. 63% last year. Chart 13BDI Rebounding Sharply Chart 14Elevated Policy Uncertainty Supports Gold Footnotes 1 We have noted the anomalous correlation between the broad trade-weighted USD and gold during periods of elevated uncertainty in pervious research. See, e.g., Global Economic Policy Uncertainty Lifts Gold And USD Together, which we published October 24, 2019, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic’s outbreak. This correlation has increased in the wake of the pandemic. 2 For an excellent discussion of information processing by markets, please see Timmerman, Allan and Clive W.J. Granger (2004), “Efficient market hypothesis and forecasting,” International Journal of Forecasting, 20:1, pp. 15 27. 3 Please see PwC’s Mine 2020, Resilient and Resourceful, June 2020 report for discussion of miners’ capex intensions. 4 We would note in passing OPEC 2.0 – the oil-production coalition led by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and Russia – faces a similar problem in our estimation: It is attempting to sharply lower crude oil output against a highly stimulative global fiscal and monetary backdrop. The risk that the stimulus is insufficient to revive demand is very real, but a faster-than-expected recovery would spike prices to the upside if demand revives before the producer coalition can increase supply sufficiently to absorb that demand. 5 Please see Libya's NOC confirms international talks on resuming oil output published by reuters.com June 29, 2020.. Investment Views and Themes Recommendations Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Trade Recommendation Performance In 2020 Q1 Commodity Prices and Plays Reference Table Trades Closed In 2020 Summary of Trades Closed Trades
BCA Research's Commodity & Energy Strategy service's model indicates that silver will outperform gold in 2H20. They recommend going long the December 2020 COMEX silver contract. We expect silver to end the year at $21/oz, a 16% increase over the next…