Developed Countries

The latest quarter has been positive for small caps which started regaining ground against their large cap peers. This size bias has been adding alpha to our portfolio since the mid-August 2016 inception (top panel). The NFIB small business survey, despite falling in the most recent release, remains very close to its decade-high and should continue to underpin small caps (second panel). Still, small business owner optimism stands in contrast to small business profitability which has lagged larger peers since the GFC (third panel). The growth in unfilled jobs and coincident rise in compensation is a likely culprit (fourth panel). The latest NFIB survey gives us cause to think margins may be set to turn up as planned price hikes relative to planned compensation increases have risen to a two-year high (bottom panel). Historically, this margin proxy has been positively correlated with small cap margins suggesting that the margin gap between small and large caps may soon narrow. Overall, normalizing profitability, combined with tax reform that should disproportionally benefit small firms, keeps us on the side of small versus large caps.

Highlights Tipping points tend to occur when too many long-term value investors are uncharacteristically behaving like short-term momentum traders. Long IBEX35 versus Eurostoxx50 constitutes a good tactical trade. The underperformance of Spanish equities appears excessively pessimistic. Euro/dollar is technically extended by about 4 cents. The near term event risk is the ECB meeting on October 26, when a taper of asset purchases which extends well beyond 12 months might be regarded as dovish. But in the medium term, euro/dollar will head well north of 1.30. Underweight Basic Materials equities relative to the market as a tactical trade. Feature Spain: Red Herring Or Red Flag? Long Spanish equities is an excellent tactical trade provided that the imbroglio in Catalonia turns out to be a red herring. The IBEX35 index is at a classic tipping point of excessive short-term (negative) groupthink and herding (Chart of the Week). Chart Of The WeekThe Underperformance Of Spanish Equities Seems Excessive But is the imbroglio in Catalonia a red herring? Most likely, yes. As my colleague Marko Papic, BCA Chief Geopolitical Strategist points out, any unilateral declaration of independence from Catalonia would be vacuous if it lacked international legitimacy, or the ability to enforce it with arms. German sociologist Max Weber famously defined a nation's sovereignty as a "monopoly over the use of legitimate force." Unlike the Basque separatists, Catalan separatists have never resorted to force. A descent into violence remains unlikely because the Catalan independence movement is mainly a bourgeois, middle and upper class intellectual vision. The majority of Catalonia's working class are neither Catalan, nor support independence. Any unilateral declaration of independence would also lack political credibility because the opponents of independence largely boycotted the recent referendum to avoid giving it legitimacy. The vote for independence comprised only 37% of the electorate, meaning that popular support for independence remains questionable. The real (and unspoken) reason for the independence referendum was that it was the only glue holding together the Junts Pel Si (Together For Yes) four party coalition forming Catalonia's regional government. Without this glue, the two nationalist parties from opposite sides of the ideological spectrum would not be in bed with each other. And it is unclear whether this unholy alliance can stay entwined. To sum up, Catalan independence is an intellectual vision which at the moment lacks political and implementation credibility. For the imbroglio to become a full-blown crisis, the Catalan government, or militant groups, or the Spanish government would have to escalate tensions with the use of force. We do not expect this to happen. So the underperformance of Spanish equities appears excessively pessimistic, and long IBEX35 versus Eurostoxx50 constitutes a good 3-month trade (Chart I-2 and Chart I-3). Chart I-2The IBEX 35 And Euro Stoxx 50 Have Parted Company Chart I-3The IBEX 35 Has Catch-Up Potential Identifying Tipping Points Of Price Trends Let's take this opportunity to review how we identify such tipping points of excessive groupthink and herding. Tipping points tend to occur when too many long-term value investors are uncharacteristically behaving like short-term momentum traders. Instead of dispassionately investing on the basis of value, long-term investors get sucked into chasing a price trend, and thereby amplify it. These price trends reach exhaustion when there are no more value investors left to suck in, and at the margin, someone wants to get out. The following analysis describes the tipping point of a price uptrend, but exactly the same analysis applies in reverse to the tipping point of a price downtrend. When a financial asset price starts to rise, the momentum trader's natural inclination is to chase the price rise, and buy. Conversely, the long-term value investor's natural inclination, ordinarily, is to lean against the price rise, and sell. The two investors interpret the same information in polar opposite ways because they have very different time horizons. Importantly, their different interpretations of the same information - stemming from their different time horizons - allow the momentum trader and the value investor to trade with one another in very large volume at the current price. This is what creates a healthy market with plentiful liquidity. Now consider what happens when a long-term value investor flips out of character and acts like a momentum trader. With the numerical balance shifting to the momentum traders, the price has to move up to balance buy and sell orders. As more and more value investors defect to momentum trading, the price uptrend gathers steam. This uptrend is exhausted when the long-term value investors have all joined the trend. Regular readers know that we identify these tipping points by comparing the behaviour of investors with 'short-term' 1-day horizons and investors with 'long-term' 65-day horizons. For any financial asset, a near term price reversal is likely to occur when its 65-day fractal dimension hits a lower limit of 1.25 (Chart I-4), which we have found to be the 'universal constant of finance'.1 Chart I-4When The Valuation Framework Changes, It Is More Difficult To Assess Tipping Points At this remarkably consistent limit, the long-term investor reverts back to character, realises the stock is now overvalued and wants to sell. The trouble is that everybody has already joined the trend. To sell, there needs to be a buyer. But who will buy at the current price? Usually, the answer is nobody. The marginal buyer will be a new category of investor: an 'ultra-long term' value investor - let's say, with a 130-day horizon - who stayed true to character and refused to join the uptrend. As this investor knows that the stock is overvalued at the current price, he will only provide liquidity at the 'correct' lower price. So this is the tipping point at which the price trend reverses. Occasionally, there is another possibility. The ultra-long term value investor could also join the trend at the current price. This might happen when the valuation framework for an investment is especially uncertain, leaving long-term value investors extremely disoriented and unable to assess the 'correct' price. An important conclusion is that when the valuation framework for an investment is undergoing a major change, it is much more difficult to assess the tipping point of a price trend. Which brings us to the euro. Is The Euro Overbought? Through the second half of 2014 and early 2015, the euro was in a major downtrend as the ECB first signalled and then implemented its QE program. On several occasions, the 65-day downtrend seemed technically exhausted but after only minor reversals, the downtrend continued (see Chart I-4 again). Even after the 130-day downtrend seemed exhausted at the start of 2015, it persisted into the spring (Chart I-5). The reason was that as the ECB moved into the uncharted territory of QE, ZIRP and NIRP, the valuation framework for the euro also moved into uncharted territory. Without a reliable valuation anchor, longer and longer term investors jumped on the euro bear bandwagon. Chart I-5The Euro Is Overbought, But The Reversal Might Be Minor Today, we face the mirror-image situation. The euro has been in a major uptrend for most of 2017 as the ECB has signalled a recalibration of its extraordinary monetary easing. But though the 65-day uptrend seemed exhausted in the early summer, the uptrend continued as longer term investors joined the trend. Just as in 2014-15, the question today is: at a major turning point in ECB policy, what is the most reliable valuation anchor? For us, the best explanatory model for euro/dollar is the expected difference in ECB versus Fed policy rates 5 years ahead. As this differential compressed from -230 bps to -160 bps, euro/dollar rallied in perfect lockstep from 1.03 to 1.15. However, the subsequent rally has deviated from the expected policy rate differential, suggesting that the euro's uptrend is indeed overdone by about 4 cents. But in the medium term, the much bigger question is: what will happen to the expected policy rate differential? As we explained in Positioning For A Sea-Change2 the differential must eventually compress to around -40 bps, because this is the mid-point of a very well established multi-decade cycle (Chart I-6 and Chart I-7). In which case, euro/dollar must eventually head well north of 1.30 (Chart I-8). Chart I-6The Euro Area - U.S. Average ##br##Interest Rate Differntial = -40 bps... Chart I-7...Because The Euro Area-U.S. ##br##Inflation Differential = -40 bps Chart I-8An Expected Interest Differential ##br##Of -40 bps Means EUR/USD Goes North Of 1.30 To be clear, north of 1.30 is the medium term direction of travel, and the journey will not be a straight line. The near term event risk is the ECB meeting on October 26, when the central bank will very likely announce a recalibration of its monetary policy. A taper of asset purchases which extends well beyond 12 months might be regarded as dovish, as it would delay the timing of policy rate normalisation. In which case, euro/dollar could retest 1.15. Finally, and very briefly, Chart I-9 shows the major equity sector most at risk of a price trend reversal is Basic Materials. Although global growth seems healthy and synchronized, materials equities seem to have run much too far ahead, especially relative to other cyclical equity sectors. We recommend tactically underweighting Basic Materials relative to the market. Chart I-9Tactically Underweight Basic Materials Dhaval Joshi, Senior Vice President Chief European Investment Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see the European Investment Strategy Special Report, "The Universal Constant Of Finance," September 25 2014, available at eis.bcaresearch.com. 2 Published on September 7 2017 and available at eis.bcaresearch.com. Fractal Trading Model* As decribed in the main body of this report, this week’s new trade recommendation is to go long Spain’s IBEX35 versus the Eurostoxx50 with a profit target/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-10 * 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 Fractal Trading Model 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. 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 - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations

Highlights Looking into 2018, the major risk factors driving gold - inflation and inflation expectations; fiscal and monetary policy; and geopolitics - will, on balance, continue to favor gold as a strategic portfolio hedge. We expect gold will provide a good hedge against rising inflation. However, this will be partially mitigated by Fed rate hikes next year. On the back of tighter U.S. monetary policy, our macroeconomists expect a recession by 2H19, possibly earlier in 2019, which likely would be sniffed out by equity markets as early as 2H18. Our analysis indicates gold will provide a good hedge against this expected recession and the associated equity bear market.1 Lastly, geopolitical risks from (1) U.S.-North Korea tensions, (2) trade protectionism of the Trump administration and (3) ongoing conflicts in the Middle East will support gold prices next year, given the metal's safe-haven properties. Energy: Overweight. At the end of 3Q17, our open energy recommendations were up 45%, led by our long Dec/17 WTI $50/bbl vs. $55/bbl Call spread. We closed out our long Brent recommendations in 3Q17 for an average gain of 116%. (Please see p. 13 for a summary of trades closed in 3Q17). Base Metals: Neutral. Our tactical short Dec/17 copper position ended 3Q17 up 6%. We are placing a trailing stop at $3.10/lb. Precious Metals: Neutral. Our long gold portfolio hedge ended 3Q17 up 4.3%. The balance of risks continues to favor this as a strategic position, which we discuss below. Ags/Softs: Neutral. We lifted our weighting on ags - particularly grains - to neutral last week. Our long corn/short wheat position is up 1.2%. Feature Chart of the WeekInflation And U.S. Financial Variables##BR##Explain Gold Prices Inflation and U.S. financial variables - particularly the USD broad trade-weighted index (TWIB), and real rates - are the main factors explaining the evolution of gold prices (Chart of the Week).2 Subdued inflation and low unemployment - a decoupling of the so-called Phillips Curve relationship that drives central-bank models of the macroeconomy - have dominated the macro landscape this year (Chart 2). We expect that current low inflation, positive growth, and low interest rates will remain in place for the next 12 months (Chart 3). Although economies such as the U.S. are growing above trend, inflation has remained weak due to a redistribution of demand through imports from countries with spare capacity, according to BCA's Global Investment Strategy.3 This is expected to continue in the near term to end-2018. However, we expect the USD to gradually strengthen, as the Fed cautiously normalizes policy rates, while other systemically important central banks remain accommodative relative to the U.S. central bank (Chart 4). Further falls in the unemployment rate will push the U.S. economy into the steep end of the Phillips Curve. Weak capex in the post-Global Financial Crisis (GFC) era means demand for labor will increase as low unemployment - and associated higher wages - encourage higher consumer spending. This will cause inflation to lift next year or early 2019. Chart 2A Decoupling Of The Phillips Curve Relationship? In such an environment, any U.S. tax cuts - which we still expect by the end of 1Q18 - will simply add fuel to the inflationary fire, and lift inflation expectations for next year and beyond. As BCA's Geopolitical Strategy team puts it, the tax cuts are a "form of modest stimulus ... (which), this far into the economic cycle, could have a significant effect."4 With unemployment at or below levels consistent with full employment in the U.S. and little slack of any sort, it would not take much in the way of fiscal stimulus to further pressure inflation. Chart 3No Pressure From Inflation Or U.S. Financial##BR##Variables...For Now Chart 4A Strengthening U.S. Dollar Will##BR##Keep The Pressure Off Gold Inflation vs. Fed Hikes In the face of the rising inflation we expect next year, gold's appeal will increase. As our previous research reveals, gold's correlation with inflation is strengthened during periods of low real rates, i.e., the difference between nominal rates and inflation. This is a perfect context for gold. However, gold's ability to hedge inflation risks to portfolios will be partially hampered by a more-hawkish Fed. As inflation finally takes off, the Fed will feel confident to hike rates more aggressively. More than anything, this will put a bid under the USD, as U.S. interest-rate differentials vs. other currencies rise in favor of the dollar. In addition, real rates will rise as the Fed gains confidence it can lift policy rates without doing serious harm to the U.S. economy, and follows thru with its normalization. Thus, the gold market will be facing two opposing forces: On the one hand, gold will be an attractive inflation hedge as inflationary pressures build up. On the other, as the Fed begins to tighten to respond to those inflationary pressures, gold will lose its appeal in the face of rising real rates and a strong dollar. Chart 5Fed Will Ease Pressure Off Gold##BR##If It Gets Ahead Of Inflation The timing of the Fed's rate hikes will be critical to the evolution of gold prices next year and beyond. We previously assumed that rate hikes will remain behind wage growth, which would be supportive of gold prices as inflation picks up. However, if the Fed begins hiking ahead of any realized uptick in inflation, this would create a stronger-than-expected headwind for gold (Chart 5). While we expect inflation to take off in 2H18, our House view calls for 2 to 3 hikes by then. This is a risk to our gold view. Longer term, Fed rate hikes could trigger a feedback loop that will make it difficult for the U.S. central bank policy to support low unemployment rates. As real rates rise, increased unemployment will lead households to spend less. Lower demand will force firms to reduce hiring. The accompanying slowing of U.S. growth will disseminate to the rest of the world, pushing the global economy into a shallow recession as early as 2H19. In all likelihood, this higher-inflation/higher-policy-rate period will be sniffed out by equity markets before the economy actually enters a recession, leading to a bear market. Somewhat counterintuitively, this will favor gold as a portfolio hedge, as we discuss below. Bottom Line: As U.S. unemployment continues falling, inflation will re-emerge, as predicted by the Philips Curve trade-off so important to central-bank policy. Gold then will face two opposing forces. Its inflation hedging properties will be partially hamstrung by rising real U.S. rates and a strengthening USD. Nevertheless, we will turn bullish gold towards the end of next year as signs of an equity bear market emerge. Gold Will Outperform In An Equity Bear Market Our modelling indicates gold is an exceptional safe-haven during downturns in equity markets.5 It is especially attractive in equity bear markets because its returns during such episodes are negatively correlated with the U.S. stock market. This relationship with equities does not hold in bull markets -- gold prices typically rise during such periods, but at a slower rate than equities (Table 1). Table 1Gold's Ability To Hedge U.S. Equities In a Special Report titled "Safe Havens: Where To Hide Next Time?" BCA's Global Asset Allocation Strategy team looked at the performance of nine safe-haven assets and found, on average, they are negatively correlated with equities in every bear market since 1972.6 Although the current equity bull market still has room to run, recessions and bear markets tend to coincide (Chart 6). If the economy goes into recession in 2H19, equities could peak as early as the end of next year.7 Chart 6Bear Markets Usually Precede Recessions Gold's role as a global portfolio hedge during bear markets would thus support the hypothesis that the metal could enter a bull market as soon as end-2018 when equity markets start pricing in a recession (Chart 7). Things could get interesting at this point, since a clear indication the economy is entering into a recession likely will cause "traumatized" central bankers to turn overly dovish. This would add support to the gold market longer term.8 Chart 7Gold Outperforms During Recessions##BR##And Geopolitical Crises Correlations between safe havens decline during bear markets, as our GAA strategists found when they compared correlations by dividing the assets into three "buckets": currencies, inflation hedges, and fixed-income instruments. In this analysis, our GAA team found that gold outperformed TIPS and Farmland in the inflation-hedge bucket.9 Bottom Line: Gold is an exceptional hedge against downturns in equity markets. The bear market preceding the late-2019 recession we expect will put a bid under gold. The eventual turn to the dovish side by central bankers will further support the metal. Gold Will Hedge Geopolitical Risks A confluence of elevated geopolitical risks next year will drive part of gold's performance. BCA's Geopolitical Strategy (GPS) group has highlighted the following three themes investors need to track going into next year: U.S.-China Tensions: Our geopolitical strategists believe that the Korean conflict is a derivative of a more important secular trend of U.S.-China tensions. They estimate the risk of total war on the Korean peninsula at less than 3% and believe that the market impact of North Korea's provocations has peaked in the late summer. Nevertheless, they warn against complacency, as the underlying tensions over Pyongyang's nuclear program remain unresolved and North Korea could break with its past patterns.10 If the North stages attacks against U.S. or Japanese assets, or international shipping or aircraft, for instance, it could cause a larger safe-haven rally than what we witnessed earlier this year. At the very least, geopolitically induced volatility may return as U.S. President Trump tries to convince the world that war is a real option - a critical condition for establishing a "credible threat" of war with which to influence North Korean behavior - and as the U.S. and China spar over other issues. Trump's protectionism: Trump's campaign promised significant trade-protectionism. While he has not yet acted on those promises, the risk is that he returns to them next year.11 These policies could impact the gold market by: a. Feeding fears that the United States is abandoning the global liberal order; b. Intensifying U.S. trade tensions and strategic distrust with China; c. Pressuring U.S. domestic inflation via higher import prices. This risk will become even more elevated if the Trump administration and Congress fail to pass any tax legislation this year. Our geopolitical strategists believe that such a failure, while not their baseline scenario, would drive Trump to focus on his foreign policy and trade agenda more intently, especially ahead of the midterm elections in November next year, which would increase safe-haven flows. 3. Mideast Troubles: While we are not alarmist about the Middle East, the risk of market-relevant conflicts will be higher over the coming 12 months than over the previous year, following the fall of ISIS. The latter gave reason for various regional powers to cooperate, while its absence will revive their grievances with each other. Kurdish assertiveness is a key consequence, highlighted by last month's Kurdish independence referendum.12 Iraqi forces have pushed ISIS out of major Iraqi cities and the slowdown in the fight against ISIS could push Iraqi forces to focus on regaining the province of Kirkuk. Kirkuk, which is home to major oil fields and reserves, has been under Kurdish control since 2014 when the Peshmerga forces there captured it from ISIS. As ISIS ceases to be a threat, Baghdad will try to regain control of these precious oil fields. The Kurdish conflict, as well as Trump's pressure tactics against Iran, will increase geopolitical risks in oil-producing (hence market-relevant) areas. Chart 82017 Risks Were Overstated In a recent study investigating how different "safe-havens" assets react to political and financial events, our GPS colleagues found that gold provides the best average returns following a major geopolitical event (Chart 7).13 Our House geopolitical view has maintained that political risks in 2017 were overstated. This was particularly the case in Europe, where much of the risk was exaggerated and merely the product of linear extrapolation from the outcomes of the U.K. referendum on EU membership and the U.S. presidential election. As such, we do not expect any European break-up risk to support gold prices next year. Although elevated Italian Euroscepticism is one lingering European risk that could impact gold markets, we see this as a long-term risk rather than a market catalyst arising from the Italian general election in May next year. Reflecting our view, the policy uncertainty index has fallen drastically in the last two months (Chart 8). Bottom Line: Elevated political risks in 2018 will further support the gold market. Most notable on our geopolitical strategists' minds are continued U.S.-China tensions (most notably over Korea), Trump's protectionist policies, and potential conflicts in the Middle East. Roukaya Ibrahim, Associate Editor Commodity & Energy Strategy RoukayaI@bcaresearch.com Hugo Bélanger, Research Assistant HugoB@bcaresearch.com Robert P. Ryan, Senior Vice President Commodity & Energy Strategy rryan@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see Commodity & Energy Strategy Weekly Report "Go Long Gold As A Strategic Portfolio Hedge," dated May 4, 2017, available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 2 Our results show 1% increase in U.S. YoY CPI, 5 year real rates, and USD TWI are associated with a 4% increase, 0.18% decline and a 0.21% decline in gold prices, respectively. The adjusted R2 is 0.88. 3 Please see the Global Investment Strategy Outlook "Fourth Quarter 2017: Goldilocks And The Recession Bear," dated October 4, 2017, available at gis.bcaresearch.com. 4 Please see Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report "Is King Dollar Back," dated October 4, 2017, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 5 We use the S&P 500 Total Return (TR) index as a proxy for U.S. equities. 6 Please see Global Asset Allocation Special Report "Safe Havens: Where To Hide Next Time?," dated April 21, 2017, available at gaa.bcaresearch.com. 7 Please see Global Asset Allocation Quarterly Portfolio Outlook, dated October 2, 2017, available at gaa.bcaresearch.com. 8 Please see the Global Investment Strategy Outlook "Fourth Quarter 2017: Goldilocks And The Recession Bear," dated October 4, 2017, available at gis.bcaresearch.com. 9 Please see Global Asset Allocation Special Report "Safe Havens: Where To Hide Next Time?," dated April 21, 2017, available at gaa.bcaresearch.com. 10 Please see BCA Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report, "Insights From The Road - The Rest Of The World," dated September 6, 2017, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 11 Please see BCA Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report, "Political Risks Are Understated In 2018," dated April 12, 2017, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 12 Armed conflict in the Middle East usually lead to a sharp rally in gold prices. Please see Table 1 from Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report, "Can Pyongyang Derail The Bull Market?," dated August 16, 2017, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 13 Please see Geopolitical Strategy Special Report, "Geopolitics And Safe Havens," dated November 11, 2015, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 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

Underweight While we have turned positive on the broad industrials complex and remain constructive on most transports, we continue to recommend investors avoid the S&P airlines index. A costly price war between the low cost carriers and the largely-restructured legacy airlines means airfares are stuck in deflation. The industry has been here before, and recently too. 2015 was a tumultuous year that saw pricing collapse as the ultra-low cost carriers entered the traditional hubs, triggering a scramble for market share. As a result, airlines have not been able to make price increases stick, even in the face of soaring jet fuel costs that eat into profits (second panel). At the same time as cash generation appears most threatened, the industry is in the midst of an expensive fleet renewal. The result is predictable; the hard deleveraging work the industry put in over the course of this decade is being unwound (third panel). This should, in turn, raise risk premiums and reverse the recent upturn in valuation multiples (bottom panel). Bottom Line: With no end in sight to the price war and outsized capacity additions likely to throw fuel on the fire, we think investors should stay away from the S&P airlines index. Accordingly, we reiterate our underweight recommendation; please see Monday's Weekly Report for additional details. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5AIRL - DAL, LUV, AAL, UAL, ALK.

Dear Client, This week, in addition to this regular Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report, we decided to send you a collaborative report we penned with BCA's Energy Sector Strategy. My colleague Matt Conlan runs the service, which blends BCA's macroeconomic framework with his bottom-up expertise in the energy sector. Matt's service is one of the few that our firm publishes with specific company recommendations. In the report titled "King Salman Goes To Moscow, Bolsters OPEC 2.0," Matt argues that the emerging détente between Russia and Saudi Arabia will strengthen OPEC 2.0 and provide a structural tailwind for BCA's bullish view on energy. I highly recommend that you check out the research Matt and his team produce at nrg.bcaresearch.com. All the very best, Marko Papic Senior Vice President, Geopolitical Strategy Highlights Easier fiscal policy and tighter monetary policy is bullish for U.S. equities; The Dec. 12 Alabama Senate race could be a game changer in U.S. politics; Trump's anti-immigration policies could boost inflation; Our Catalan view is bearing out. Go long Spain's IBEX 35 / short Eurostoxx 50. Separately, book profits on our China volatility trade and our long China big bank trade. Feature "Buy In May And Enjoy Your Day!" has been our mantra throughout the summer. Despite the doom and gloom in the media surrounding the Mueller investigation, North Korea, Trump's legislative agenda, the French elections, Brexit, and so on, the S&P 500 is up 16% and global equities are up 10.8%. Our April 23 Weekly Report bearing the same cheery title focused on three overstated risks:1 European politics - massively overstated; U.S. politics - all noise, no signal; Brexit - irrelevant for global investors. We have also cautioned investors throughout the year to worry, but not to obsess, about North Korea. Yes, it is a risk.2 Yes, it will continue to buoy safe haven assets on occasion.3 But it is extremely unlikely to produce total war and therefore has lost some market relevance as assets have adjusted to the higher geopolitical volatility on the Korean Peninsula under the Trump regime.4 We are not reiterating these calls just to pat ourselves on the back. Rather, our point is to emphasize that there is nothing supernatural about the ongoing bull market. It has not "ignored" geopolitical risks. Rather, geopolitical risks on hand have not developed in a market-relevant way. The bottom line here is that geopolitics is not voodoo. It is not an "error term," a disturbance in an elegant model that can go awry at any moment because "one cannot forecast politics." Investors can systematically analyze geopolitics just as they do the economy or the markets. When geopolitical risks are overstated, as they have been since the beginning of the year, recognizing the mispricing can generate significant alpha. Going forward, however, geopolitics will likely play a headwind for the market. We are particularly concerned with three dynamics: The upcoming party congress in China may signal a shift towards more growth-stalling reforms, as we have been writing all year. The Trump administration could make a hard turn towards a more populist agenda, particularly on trade, if it fails to enact any legislative successes this year. A plethora of political risks in emerging markets (EM) - with the usual suspects of Brazil, South Africa, and Turkey on top of our list - could re-surface in 2018 if China is not firing on all cylinders. We will be focusing on these three risks to markets until the end of 2017 and beyond. This week, however, we focus on upcoming tax legislation in the U.S. First, a reason to be optimistic ("easier fiscal policy, tighter monetary policy" is a winning policy combination). Then, a reason to be pessimistic (Alabama). Finally, a few words about inflation from a political perspective and a quick word on Catalonia. Easy Fiscal, Tighter Monetary Policy Mix - What Does It Mean? If our base case view on tax legislation is correct, U.S. equities should gain double-digit returns from current levels. Our colleague Anastasios Avgeriou, Chief Strategist of BCA's U.S. Equity Strategy, believes that the passage of stimulative tax legislation would serve as a catalyst to further fuel the blow-off phase in equities. In his latest Weekly Report, Anastasios presents empirical evidence suggesting that easy fiscal policy outweighs the drag from Fed interest rate tightening.5 Filtering the post-World War Two era for periods of easing fiscal and tightening monetary policies during economic expansions is revealing. Anastasios defines easy fiscal policy as periods with a positive fiscal thrust and tight monetary policy as a rising fed funds rate. Fiscal thrust is the year-over-year change in the cyclically-adjusted fiscal balance as a percentage of potential GDP (shown inverted on the bottom panel of Chart 1). While such a policy mix is a rare occurrence, it has happened seven times since the mid-1950s (shaded areas, Chart 1).6 All iterations resulted in positive returns, with the SPX rising on average by over 16%. Table 1 details all seven periods that have an average duration of 16 months. For sectoral implications of such an "easier fiscal, tighter monetary" policy mix, we encourage our clients to peruse the work of BCA's U.S. Equity Strategy. On the other hand, the demand for fiscal stimulus usually rises during times of high volatility, unlike today (Chart 2). Investors have become acutely aware of the political difficulties of stimulating the economy late in the economic cycle. We now turn to some emerging risks to our sanguine view on tax policy. Chart 1Easy Fiscal + Tight Money##br## = Buy SPX Table 1SPX Returns During Periods Of Loose##br## Fiscal And Tight Monetary Policy Chart 2Fiscal Stimulus Usually##br## Comes With High Volatility Bottom Line: If our base case view holds, and Republicans pass mildly stimulative tax legislation, the blow-off phase in equities should continue. "Alabama, You Got The Weight On Your Shoulders" The market continues to doubt that the Trump administration can pass significant tax legislation over the next six-to-nine months. The gap in the probabilities assigned to such an outcome by the market and ourselves has narrowed over the past two weeks, generating alpha on several of our "Trump Reflation" trades (Chart 3). But skepticism abounds. Chart 3Signs Of Life For 'Trump Reflation' Trades We have spent the entire year pushing against the skepticism, but there is now an actual reason to worry. The December 12 Alabama Senate special election - being held to elect a replacement for former Senator Jeff Sessions, now the U.S. Attorney General - has become a premier league event. Former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore won the Republican primary against a candidate backed by the Republican establishment and President Trump. The reason the Alabama special election is of global significance is because the Republicans are already down to essentially 50 votes in the Senate. The rhetorical war between President Donald Trump and Senator Bob Corker (R - Tennessee) has reached epic proportions, with the latter insinuating via twitter that the president was an adult baby. Corker has announced his retirement from the Senate, which increases the probability that he will go out by refusing to support the president's agenda across all fronts.7 This now makes two GOP senators that want nothing to do with President Trump's agenda. John McCain (R - Arizona) has harbored ill will since the presidential campaign and has twice played the spoiler in the effort to repeal Obamacare. Further complicating matters is the role of former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon, who strongly backed Moore when nobody in the Republican establishment would. If Moore should remain loyal to Bannon beyond the election, it would mean that Trump's former campaign strategist would become the kingmaker on tax legislation. Bannon's departure from the White House was cheered by the markets, as it signaled victory for the "Goldman Sachs clique" and the trio of generals managing President Trump's foreign policy over Bannon's populist "Breitbart clique." We do not think that Bannon is opposed to stimulative tax policy. Yes, he has branded his ideology "economic nationalism," but his media empire, Breitbart, has so far stayed away from attacking the Republican tax plan. Instead, Bannon and Moore could hold out on supporting tax policy until they see movement on other pillars of the populist agenda, namely on immigration policy. As such, Moore's Alabama victory would complicate the horse-trading surrounding tax legislation, and elevate Bannon's standing on Capitol Hill, but it would not be a death knell for stimulus. The actual death knell for tax reform would be if Moore actually lost the December 12 Alabama special election. Moore's views are generally considered to be staunchly conservative, even for Alabama, and therefore a shock defeat cannot be ignored.8 Polls are limited, but most show Moore leading the Democratic candidate Doug Jones by only 5%-8%. This in a state where Republican Senate candidates have defeated their Democrat counterparts by an astounding average of 36% in the last decade! If Jones were to win, Republicans would be down to 51 Senators. Given the staunch opposition to Trump by Corker and McCain, this would effectively end the tax legislation push. Not all is negative for the tax push in Washington. The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a budget resolution that includes steep spending cuts as well as reconciliation instructions for tax legislation. This now sets in motion the reconciliation process by which Republicans can pass tax legislation with merely 51 votes in the Senate. Of the 18 GOP representatives who voted against the budget resolution, only three were from the 31-member Freedom Caucus, which is rhetorically committed to fiscal conservativism. This is very bullish for tax cuts as it means that the Freedom Caucus is toeing the line of its Chair Mark Meadows (R - North Carolina) who has been hinting since the spring that he would have no problem with budget-busting tax cuts. The majority of Republicans who voted against the budget resolution were from highly-taxed "Blue States," suggesting that the real point of contention for Republicans in the House was the proposal to end the state and local tax deduction. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has already signaled that the White House is willing to compromise on this particular revenue offset. Bottom Line: The December 12 Alabama special election now has global market relevance. A defeat for GOP candidate Roy Moore would be a massive game changer. It would reduce the Republican majority in the Senate to 51 votes, putting in danger President Trump's tax agenda given the staunch opposition from Senators Corker and McCain. What Can Politics Do To Inflation? The greatest surprise to the markets this year has been lackluster inflation data in the U.S. Both headline and core data have been disappointing (Chart 4). This is particularly puzzling as the U.S. has closed its output gap and unemployment has fallen below the low reached in 2007 (Chart 5). Chart 4U.S. Inflation Has Disappointed... Chart 5...Which Is Puzzling At Full Employment One possible explanation is that the U.S. has been importing deflation from abroad. The U.S. imports around 12.5% of GDP worth of goods and 2.8% of GDP worth of services (Chart 6). However, the import price deflator has been growing at 2.7% so far this year and yet inflation has been nonexistent (Chart 6, bottom panel). Export prices have grown by 5% in 2017, from the lows of -15% amidst the commodity bust in 2015 (Chart 7). Chart 6The U.S. Is Not Importing Deflation Chart 7Global Export Prices Are Rising Another explanation is that structural changes in the labor market - globalization and the fall in the unionization rate - have eroded the bargaining power of workers (Chart 8). When combined with the shock of the 2008 Great Recession, workers may simply be happy to have a job and are therefore delaying asking of a raise or switching to a higher-paying, but higher-risk, job. As a result, the economy may have closed its output gap, but with no inflationary effects coming from the low unemployment figures. Chart 8Globalization Suppressed U.S. Wages Further restricting wage gains may be the high number of migrants - legal or illegal (Chart 9). The foreign born population in the U.S. is at an all-time high of 43.2 million, although unauthorized migration has come down from around 12 million prior to the GFC to 11.3 million in 2016. The conventional wisdom is that most immigrants are uneducated, competing with blue collar laborers and suppressing wages at the lower income levels. However, this is a stereotype stuck in the 1980s. Today's migrants are as educated as Americans: 29.7% have a Bachelor's degree or higher, compared with just over 30% Americans in general (Chart 10). Chart 9Immigration Helps Explain Weak Wage Growth Chart 10Immigrants Not Stealing Low-Skill Jobs The point is that immigration has evolved along with the U.S. economy. With 78% of the U.S. economy based in services, the modern migrant has had to keep up with the educational requirements of the American job market. The Trump administration could be a game-changer for the skilled, legal immigration into the U.S. First, President Trump ordered a full review of the high-skilled, H-1B immigration visa in April. Second, President Trump asked Congress in August to curb legal migration by sharply curtailing family reunification while keeping immigration based on job skills roughly the same. Third, anti-immigrant rhetoric - as well as restrictions to family reunification down the line - could influence highly-skilled migrants to choose job opportunities in countries like Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, instead of in the U.S. Bottom Line: Investors often think of fiscal policy as the main vehicle through which politicians can influence inflation. However, the U.S. economy has been enjoying, since the 1980s, the combined effect of rapidly expanding immigration and a parallel increase in the educational attainment of incoming migrants. In a way, the influx of skilled migrants has been an important supply side reform for the U.S. economy. The Trump administration could influence immigration either directly, through policies to curb it, or indirectly, through creating a general atmosphere that redirects some of the flows to other developed economies. Spain: Fade Catalan Risks As we have expected since 2014, the prospects for Catalan independence remain slim.9 As we go to press, Catalan President Carles Puigdemont has backed away from his earlier hints toward a unilateral declaration of independence. Instead, he has succumbed to domestic and international pressure and told the regional parliament that he has "suspended" any declaration in order to begin negotiations with Madrid. Puigdemont's decision to suspend something that has not happened is not only illogical but also ineffectual. The Catalan pro-independence government is trying to force Madrid to be the "bad guy" and refuse negotiations; Spain has refused any discussion of independence. But slight narrative shifts and "gotcha" politics will not work in this case. While Puigdemont is playing checkers with Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, the rest of Europe is playing chess. International recognition of Catalan independence is not forthcoming. And without it, Catalonia will not become independent. As we have extensively written, we strongly believe that investors should fade secessionism risk in Spain. First, the independence process in Catalonia falls far short of the democratic ideals established in similar referendums in the developed world, particularly in Scotland (2014), Montenegro (2006), and Quebec (1980 and 1995) (Table 2). The pro-independence government has been unable to significantly boost turnout figures from 2014, no doubt due to interference by the federal authorities. However, even if the pro-independence Catalans were to receive mediation from the EU, the outcome would likely be to strengthen Madrid's hand. For example, when the EU negotiated the 2006 divorce between Serbia and Montenegro, it required a supermajority of 55% in order to recognize the result of the Montenegro independence referendum. As an integrationist project, the EU has an anti-secession bias. Table 2Catalan Independence Demand Exaggerated By Low Voter Turnout Second, the French government has come out forcefully against Catalan independence, as we suspected it would. This is particularly important for Catalonia as it is nestled between Spain and France.10 It is quite likely that, were Catalans somehow to enforce their independence, both European powers would close their borders to Catalan travel and trade. In addition, French European Affairs Minister Nathalie Louiseau has repeated Madrid's assertion that by choosing independence Catalonia would automatically be kicked out of the EU. Third, Madrid is unlikely to make another mistake as the disastrous attempt to disrupt the independence referendum. Images of civilians being dragged through the streets of an advanced European economy while attempting to vote - even if the referendum was constitutionally illegal - shocked the world. Spanish officials have already offered rather tepid apologies for the police action, suggesting that a re-run of the heavy-handed actions is not to be expected. For investors who disagree with us, we suggest an empirical way to test our thesis. Chart 11 shows that only 34.7% of Catalans support independence. These are not pro-Madrid polls. They are the product of the Centre d'Estudis d'Opinió, which is affiliated with the Catalan (currently staunchly pro-independence) government and has been conducting polls on the issue of independence since 2005. Even if the level of support for independence is off in this data, the direction gives us valuable insight into the support for secession. The data clearly suggests that (A) the majority of Catalans have never supported independence and that (B) support for independence peaked in 2013, at the height of Spain's economic crisis, and has been in steady decline since then. That said, Chart 11 also shows that the other 57.5% of Catalans are not necessarily "pro-Spain." In fact, 30.5% support Catalonia remaining in its current form of an autonomous region, with considerable sovereignty devolved to the province. Another 21.7% favor a federal state, which would be a step in the direction of even greater sovereignty. Investors should watch the polls to see whether voters who previously favored federal or autonomous status have begun to shift towards independence, especially in light of the crackdown against the referendum by Madrid. Centre d'Estudis d'Opinió normally releases its third series of polls in October, which would mean that investors will have an update from the official polling agency soon. That said, we are willing to put our geopolitical views on the line. An unwarranted selloff in Spanish equities on the back of increased Catalonia-related geopolitical risk has created an opportunity for a market neutral trade: long Spanish IBEX 35/short Eurostoxx 50. This is a market neutral way to express our view that Catalonia does not pose a grand geopolitical risk as it will remain an integral part of Spain and thus the EU. Importantly, adding a hedge to this pair trade would also make sense for certain investors. Chart 12 shows that EUR/USD and relative Spanish equity performance are joined at the hip. Currently an uncharacteristically wide gap has opened. Thus, putting on this equity pair trade and simultaneously going short EUR/USD on the expectation of a convergence, should generate alpha, as the geopolitical dust settles. Chart 11The Silent Majority Fears Independence Chart 12Expect A Convergence Bottom Line: Fade geopolitical risks in Spain. For those with risk appetite, buy Spanish equities at any sign of geopolitical risk premium. Housekeeping With the Communist Party convening for the nineteenth National Party Congress over the next week, we think the time is opportune to book profits on two trades: our long China ETF volatility index, for a gain of 17.72%, and our long Chinese Big Five state-owned banks versus small and medium-sized banks, for a gain of 11.63%. We will revisit these trades in an upcoming report. Marko Papic, Senior Vice President Chief Geopolitical Strategist marko@bcaresearch.com Jesse Anak Kuri, Research Analyst jesse.kuri@bcaresearch.com Anastasios Avgeriou, Vice President U.S. Equity Strategy & Global Alpha Sector Strategy anastasios@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see BCA Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report, "Buy In May And Enjoy Your Day," dated April 26, 2017, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 2 Please see BCA Geopolitical Strategy Special Report, "North Korea: Beyond Satire," dated April 19, 2017, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 3 Please see BCA Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report, "Can Pyongyang Derail The Bull Market?" dated August 16, 2017, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 4 Please see BCA Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report, "Insights From The Road - The Rest Of The World," dated September 6, 2017, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 5 Please see BCA U.S. Equity Strategy Weekly Report, "Can Easy Fiscal Offset Tighter Monetary Policy?" dated October 9, 2017, available at uses.bcaresearch.com. 6 Omitted from the sample are brief periods in the early-1960s, early-1970s, and twice in the early-1980s as they were very close to the end of recessions. 7 We suspect that Senator Corker is planning a centrist challenge to President Trump in the 2020 GOP presidential primaries. 8 "Staunchly conservative" does not do justice to Moore's ideological orientation. He was removed from his position as Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court twice for failing to follow federal law. In both cases, Moore chose to inform his actions as the Chief Justice through Biblical scripture, rather than the U.S. Constitution. 9 Please see BCA Geopolitical Strategy and European Investment Strategy Special Report, "Secession In Europe: Scotland And Catalonia," dated May 14, 2014, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 10 Yes, we are aware that Catalonia also borders Andorra. However, given that French President Emmanuel Macro is the co-prince of Andorra, and that Andorra is a microstate, this fact is largely irrelevant and would in no way aid Catalan independence. However, you have now learned that the French President is automatically a co-prince of another country. And that there is such a thing as a "co-prince." Therefore, this footnote has not been a complete waste of your time.

Highlights EM currencies are fairly valued at the moment - they are neither cheap nor expensive. Unit labor cost-based REER is a superior currency valuation measure to those based on consumer and producer prices. Based on this measure, the U.S. dollar is not expensive - rather its valuation is neutral. When valuations are neutral, directional market indicators are more imperative than valuations. We expect directional indicators to favor the U.S. dollar and the euro versus EM currencies. In Turkey, inflation is breaking out - the currency, stocks and bonds will be under assault (page 9). The Philippines economy is overheating warranting policy tightening. Share prices are at risk (page 16). Feature EM currencies have recently begun to sell off. Does this represent a major reversal, or just a pause in a bull market? Our bias is that it is the former. In this week's report, we discuss the valuation aspect of foreign exchange markets. One of the oft-cited bullish arguments for EM currencies is that they are cheap. Similarly, the contention goes that the U.S. dollar is expensive. Our exchange rate valuation measures do not support these claims. According to our most favored currency valuation measure - the real effective exchange rate (REER) based on unit labor costs - the U.S. dollar is currently fairly valued (Chart I-1). More specifically, the greenback is not cheap, per se, but it is not expensive either. Meanwhile, the euro is at its fair value and the yen is undervalued (Chart I-2). The source of this data is the IMF. Below we elaborate in detail why we believe the unit labor cost-based REER valuation measure is superior to those based on consumer or producer prices. Chart I-1The U.S. Dollar Is Neither Cheap Nor Expensive Chart I-2The Euro Is Fairly Valued, The Yen Is Cheap As to EM currencies, there is no data on REER based on unit labor costs across all EM countries. The IMF and OECD have data for only a few developing countries, shown in Chart I-3A and Chart I-3B. With the exception of the Mexican peso and the Polish zloty, EM currencies shown in these charts are not cheap. Chart I-3AEM Currencies Are Not Universally Cheap Chart I-3BEM Currencies Are Not Universally Cheap In the absence of unit labor cost-based REER for EM, we deduce EM currency valuations in a number of ways: First, if the U.S. dollar, the euro and yen are not expensive, EM currencies by definition cannot be cheap. Second, provided exchange rates of commodities-producing advanced countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Canada and Norway are still expensive, according to unit labor cost-based REER (Chart I-4A and Chart I-4B), it is fair to argue that currencies of commodities-producing EM economies probably are not cheap as well given they move in tandem with their advanced countries peers. Chart I-4ACAD Is At Fair Value, NOK Is Slightly Expensive Chart I-4BAUD & NZD Are Expensive Third, Chart I-5 illustrates consumer and producer prices-based REER for EM. Excluding China, Korea and Taiwan, the equity market cap-weighted EM REER based on the average of consumer and producer prices is at its historical mean (Chart I-5). This denotes that EM currencies are by and large fairly valued. Notably, the BRL is slightly above its fair value, according to the REER based on average of consumer and producer prices (Chart I-6, top panel). Similarly, the same measure for the RUB and ZAR is no longer depressed after the appreciation witnessed in both currencies over the past 18 months (Chart I-6, middle and bottom panels). Chart I-5EM Ex-China, Korea And Taiwan: ##br##Exchange Rates Valuations Are Neutral Chart I-6EM High-Yielding ##br##Currencies Are Not Cheap All in all, we conclude that EM currencies are fairly valued at the moment - they are neither cheap nor expensive. This message is also corroborated by current account profiles across EM economies. In many developing countries, current account balances have improved, but are still in deficit. Consistently, the U.S. current account deficit excluding oil is at 1.75%, and with oil is at 2.4% of GDP - not wide at all. So, the current account does not presage that the greenback is expensive. Importantly, when valuations are neutral, they do not necessarily prevent the market from either rallying or selling off. Neutral valuations in any market have little impact on the market outlook. Thereby, we conclude that valuations are not an impediment for both EM currencies and the U.S. dollar to move in any given direction. When valuations are neutral, directional market indicators are more imperative than valuations. The best directional indicators for EM currencies have been commodities prices and the EM business cycle. Chart I-7 illustrates the EM aggregate currency index has historically correlated with commodities prices and EM industrial production. If commodities prices relapse and the EM business cycle slows down, as we expect, EM currencies will depreciate. As to U.S. bond yields and the greenback, we believe U.S. interest rate expectations will rise and the U.S. dollar will strengthen, at least, relative to EM currencies. That said, there has been no historical correlation between high-yielding exchange rates such as the BRL and ZAR and their interest rate differential over the U.S. (Chart I-8). Chart I-7These Factors Drive ##br##EM Exchange Rates Chart I-8Interest Rate Differential And ##br##Exchange Rates: No Correlation The euro and European currencies have the least downside versus the U.S. dollar. Hence, we expect EM currencies to weaken materially versus both the dollar and the euro (Chart I-9). Bottom Line: EM currencies are neither cheap nor expensive. We expect commodities prices to relapse and U.S. interest rate expectations to rise. This warrants a material down leg in EM currencies. We continue recommending a short position in a basket of the following currencies: ZAR, TRY, BRL, MYR and IDR versus the U.S. dollar. Investors, who are not comfortable being long the U.S. dollar, can short these same EM currencies versus the euro. Our overweights within the EM currency space are the TWD, THB, RMB, RUB, MXN, PLN and CZK. The Superior Currency Valuation Measure Unit labor cost-based REER is a superior currency valuation measure to those based on consumer and producer prices. The key idea behind currency valuation measures in general is to gauge competitiveness. Rising consumer and producer prices relative to trading partners signifies deteriorating competitiveness, and usually entails more expensive currency valuations. However, nowadays, labor costs in many economies, especially advanced ones, represent the largest cost component, even for manufacturing businesses. Therefore, it makes sense to compare wages across trading partners, not consumer and producer prices. However, rising wages in a country relative to its trading partners do not always signify worsening competitiveness. Wages might be rising, but productivity of employees may well be growing faster than wages. Therefore, true labor costs for businesses are not wages, but unit labor costs. Unit labor costs equal wages divided by productivity. They show the labor cost per unit of output. To estimate an economy's true competitiveness, one should compare its unit labor costs relative to its trading partners. REER based on unit labor cost does that. Hence, this measure captures two critical variables to competitiveness: wages and productivity. On the whole, unit labor costs measure competitiveness better than consumer and producer prices. Therefore, we argue that REER based on unit labor costs is superior to those based on consumer and producer prices. For comparison purposes, Chart I-10 illustrates the two REER measures for the U.S. dollar. Chart I-9EM Currencies Versus The USD And Euro Chart I-10U.S. Dollar: Two Valuation Measures Based on the above analysis, we conclude that the greenback and the euro are fairly valued, while the Japanese yen is cheap. In addition, EM currency valuations are neutral and currencies of commodities producing advanced countries are modestly expensive. Arthur Budaghyan, Senior Vice President Emerging Markets Strategy arthurb@bcaresearch.com Turkey: Ride The Sell-Off Turkish stocks were among the best performing equity markets worldwide in the January-August period of this year before relapsing by 16% in U.S. dollar terms since September 1st (Chart II-1). We remain bearish/underweight Turkish financial markets. A Genuine Inflation Breakout Despite the currency being stable since the beginning of the year, inflation has been rising. Core consumer price inflation has surpassed 10% for the first time in the past 14 years (Chart II-2). Chart II-1Turkish Stocks Have More Downside Chart II-2Turkey: Inflation Is Breaking Out The country's double-digit wage growth is not supported by productivity gains. The latter has been stagnant (Chart II-3, top panel). Consequently, unit labor costs have surged in both the manufacturing and services sectors (Chart II-3, bottom panel). This combination of strong wage growth paired with low productivity growth depresses companies' profit margins. This in turn will force businesses to raise prices. Provided stimulus-propelled domestic demand is robust, businesses will succeed in raising their prices leading to escalating inflation. Typically, when a country is witnessing heightening inflationary pressures, the natural policy response should be monetary and/or fiscal tightening. However, Turkish authorities have been doing the opposite - running loose monetary and fiscal policies: Government expenditure excluding interest payments have accelerated significantly (Chart II-4). The rise in government spending has been partially funded by commercial banks - the latter's holdings of government bonds have been growing, boosting money supply, as a result. Chart II-3Turkey: Surging Unit Labor Costs Chart II-4Turkey: Fiscal Expenditures Are Booming This year the Turkish authorities have been able to generate growth through the recapitalization of the Credit Guarantee Fund. The aim of this fund is to incentivize banks to lend by essentially assuming credit risk on loans extended to small and medium enterprises. Under this scheme, the government has effectively given a green light to flood the economy with credit, in turn, boosting economic growth. So far, the scheme has been responsible for the creation of TRY 200 billion, or 7% of GDP, worth of new credit out of the TRY 250 billion limit. This TRY 250 billion is considerable as it compares with a total of TRY 367 billion worth of loan origination by commercial banks last year. Turkey's banking system has been relying on enormous amounts of liquidity provisions by the central bank (Chart II-5, top panel) to sustain its ongoing credit boom and strong economic growth. On the whole, the central bank's net liquidity injections into the banking system continue to increase rapidly. Interestingly, the nature of the central bank's funding of commercial banks has increasingly shifted away from open market operations and more towards direct lending to banks (Chart II-5, bottom panel). Adding all the liquidity facilities - the intraday, overnight and late window facilities - the Central Bank Of Turkey's outstanding funding to banks is TRY 86 billion, or 3% of GDP, abnormally elevated relative to the data series' history. This entails that monetary policy is loose even though the price of liquidity provided by the central bank to banks has been rising. Consistently, local currency bank loan growth stands at 25% (Chart II-6, top panel). Chart II-5Central Bank Of Turkey's Liquidity Injections Chart II-6Turkey Is Experiencing A Credit Binge On the whole, commercial banks are requiring more and more liquidity, and the CBT is continuously supplying it. These injections maintain liquidity in the banking system to a sufficiently high level that allow money/credit creation by commercial banks to continue mushrooming (Chart II-6, bottom panel). Fiscal and monetary policies are overly simulative and the country's twin - fiscal and current account - deficit is widening (Chart II-7). The widening current account deficit - which is a form of hidden inflation - substantiates the case of an inflation outbreak in Turkey. Remarkably, despite extremely strong exports due to the robust growth in the Euro Area, Turkey's current account deficit has been unable to narrow at all. This confirms excessive growth in domestic demand. In regard to currency valuation, Chart II-8 demonstrates that the lira is not cheap, especially according to unit labor cost-based REER. It is therefore questionable how long Turkish exports can remain competitive if unit labor costs continue mushrooming at a rapid pace. Chart II-7Turkey: Widening Twin Deficit Chart II-8The Lira Is Not Cheap Bottom Line: Despite high inflation, the Turkish authorities have opted to stimulate the economy further, aiming to boost short-term growth at all costs. The outcome will be an inevitable inflation outbreak. The Monetary Regime And Exchange Rate Chart II-9Excessive Money Printing Is Bearish For Lira The monetary regime in Turkey will lead to a major lira depreciation: The money multiplier - calculated as broad local currency money divided by banks' excess reserves at the central bank - has been rising sharply since 2012 (Chart II-9, top panel). This measure illustrates the degree of leverage banks have assumed. Also, the money multiplier reveals how much broad money/purchasing power banks have created per unit of liquidity provided by the central bank. To put into perspective the vast amount of money that has been created, the bottom panel of Chart II-9 demonstrates that the current net level of foreign exchange reserves (currently US$ 32 billion) covers only 11% of broad local currency money M3. Not only is excessive money creation bearish for the currency but it is also highly inflationary. As inflation rises, residents' desire to convert their deposits from local to foreign currency will increase, further exerting downward pressure on the lira. In fact, this is already happening - households' foreign currency deposits - measured in U.S. dollars - are growing at rapid annual pace of 13%. Given this inflationary backdrop and the risk of further depreciation, interest rates will have to rise. This will inevitably trigger another NPL cycle. Banks are very under-provisioned for non-performing loans (NPL). NPLs have not risen, and NPL provisions are also very low (Chart II-10). Both are set to rise considerably, and banks' capital and ability to expand credit will be severely undermined. Lastly, higher interest rates will be negative for loan growth and bank's profitability. Bank stocks are starting to roll-over. Given the extent to which they have decoupled from interest rates, we believe there is much more downside (Chart II-11). Chart II-10Turkey: A New NPL Cycle Will Start Chart II-11Turkish Bank Stocks Have Considerable Downside The current monetary policy stance is unsustainable. Inflation is breaking out and this is bearish for Turkish financial markets. Box 1 on page 15 addresses the geopolitical dimension of Turkey's recent spat with the U.S. Investment Conclusions We expect policy makers to remain behind the curve amid rising inflation and this will weigh on the lira. As such, we suggest currency traders who are not shorting the lira to do so at this time. We remain short the lira versus the U.S. dollar but the lira will continue to plummet versus the euro too. A weaker lira will undermine U.S. dollar and euro returns on Turkish stocks and domestic bonds. Dedicated EM equity investors as well as those overseeing EM fixed income and credit portfolios should continue to underweight Turkish assets within their respective EM universes. Stephan Gabillard, Senior Analyst stephang@bcaresearch.com BOX 1 Turkey's Unstable Geopolitical Position On the political front, the recent spat with the U.S. over visas is just another sign of how far Turkey has descended into the geopolitical unknown. The U.S. has closed its visa offices as a response to the detention of a Turkish national working for the U.S. consulate in Istanbul by the local authorities. The arrest was made over alleged links to Fethullah Gulen, the cleric that Turkish authorities blame for the July 2016 botched coup. That Gulen remains the obsession of Turkish authorities is a clear sign that President Recep Tayyip Erdogan continues to feel threatened. Whether the Gulen threat is real or imagined is not for us to determine. But it is clear that Turkey remains a deeply divided country. The April 2017 constitutional referendum giving the president greater powers barely passed, despite numerous reports of irregularities. As BCA's Geopolitical Strategy posited following the vote, the referendum did nothing to reinforce Erdogan's power or reduce domestic tensions.1 It would only deepen his instinct to use "rally-around-the-flag" strategy by emphasizing external threats to quell domestic opposition. Now Turkey finds itself at the crossroad on three different fronts: Iraq: Neighboring Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) has just held an independence referendum, prompting Erdogan to threaten military action against the Iraqi Kurds. Although no regional or global power overtly supports KRG's moves towards independence, Turkey is under pressure to respond in order to snuff out any secessionist ambitions by the Kurds in Turkey and Syria. Syria: President Erdogan has also threatened invasion of the self-declared Kurdish canton of Afrin in northwestern Syria. The enclave is held by the U.S.-allied People's Protection Units (YPG), which fought against the Islamic State in Syria. According to various news reports, Turkish troops are amassing on the border with Syria for the intervention. This could put the Turkish military in direct contact with Russian troops, which have a presence in Afrin. The West: Relations with the West, with whom Turkey remains in a formal military alliance (NATO) remain in the doldrums. Aside from the visa spat with the U.S., Turkey's relations with Europe, and Germany in particular, are at their lowest point in years. Bottom Line: In a month's time, Turkey may have invaded both Syria and Iraq while simultaneously hitting a low point in its relationship with traditional Western allies. At the very least, this complicated geopolitical environment will make it difficult for Ankara to focus on the economy. At its greatest, it is a recipe for geopolitical overreach, military disaster, domestic crisis, or any combination of all three. Marko Papic, Senior Vice President Chief Geopolitical Strategist marko@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see BCA Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report, "What About Emerging Markets?," dated May 3, 2017, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. The Philippines: An Overheating Economy Requires Policy Tightening Since early 2016, the Philippine stock market has been massively lagging the EM benchmark (Chart III-1, top panel). Similarly, the Philippine peso has been extremely weak, recording new lows versus the U.S. dollar, despite the broad-based EM currency rally (Chart III-1, bottom panel). In fact, the symptoms of this economy and its financial markets are consistent with an overheating economy that is expanding above potential, and where inflationary pressures are heightening. Going forward, inflation will keep rising and the central bank will have to tighten monetary policy meaningfully. These developments will weigh on Philippine growth and financial markets. Consumer price inflation, both headline and core, are rising briskly and currently stand at 3% - in the middle of the central bank's 2-4% target (Chart III-2). With the policy rate at 3%, this entails that real rates have dropped to zero. Chart III-1Philippine Stocks Relative ##br##To EM Have Underperformed Chart III-2Philippine Inflation ##br##Is Creeping Higher The Central Bank of the Philippines (BSP) has kept monetary policy too easy for too long. It injected liquidity into the banking system on various occasions in 2013-2014 and 2016-2017 via its banking liquidity management tool - the Special Deposit Account (Chart III-3, top panel). These liquidity injections incentivized commercial banks to create enormous amounts of credit in the economy (Chart III-3, middle and bottom panels). Booming credit growth in turn is creating excessive purchasing power in the economy, resulting in a current account deficit for the first time since 2000. In addition, the fiscal deficit is now widening (Chart III-4). Chart III-3Credit Growth Is Rampant Chart III-4Philippines Twin Deficit On the wage front, non-agriculture workers' salaries are accelerating, pushing unit labor costs higher (Chart III-5). Remarkably, despite real GDP growth of about 6.5% since 2014, consumer staples EPS growth is on the verge of contracting. It seems that costs (including wages) have been mushrooming while productivity gains have been lagging. This also corroborates the overheating thesis. With Philippines' inflationary dynamics intensifying, the BSP will have to tighten monetary policy. In fact, the top panel of Chart III-3 shows that the BSP has already begun its tightening cycle by withdrawing some banking liquidity via its Special Deposit Account. In addition, interest rate hikes by the central bank are also an option. Monetary tightening amid very strong loan growth will lead a meaningful slowdown in the economy. Loan growth deceleration will affect primarily capital spending and the property market. Both segments are cooling off (Chart III-6). Chart III-5Philippines: Wages Are Accelerating Chart III-6Cyclical Slowdown On The Horizon Importantly, banks' net interest margins have been falling - a trend that will likely continue due to potential liquidity tightening and higher policy rates (Chart III-7, top panel). This, along with slow loan growth and rising NPL provisions, will intensify banks' EPS contraction (Chart III-7, bottom panel). Chart III-8 illustrates that both NPL and NPL provisions as a percent of total loans are at their lowest level since 1997. Higher borrowing costs following a decade-long lending boom, necessitates higher NPL provisions. Chart III-7Banks' Interest Rate Margins And Profits Chart III-8Bank NPLs To Rise Along With Provisions NPLs are likely to emanate from the real estate and construction sectors. Loans to these two sectors account for 20% of total bank loans. Hence, higher interest rates are negative for banks and real estate stocks which, together, account for 40% of the Philippines MSCI index market cap. If the central bank decides not to tighten, however, the economy will continue to overheat and bond yields - as well as the currency - will sell-off. Such a scenario is equally bearish for the equity market. Philippines equity valuations are elevated and, hence, are not priced for any of these scenarios. For dedicated EM equity investors, we continue recommending a neutral allocation to this bourse. We are reluctant to underweight this stock market because the Philippines remains less leveraged to China and the commodities cycle vis-à-vis other emerging markets (EM). Besides, it has already considerably underperformed the EM equity benchmark. Therefore, it might not underperform substantially relative to other EM countries - if and when commodities start selling off as a result of a growth slowdown in China. Within ASEAN, we favor Thailand, underweight Malaysia and are neutral on the Philippines, Indonesia, and India relative to the EM equity benchmark. Ayman Kawtharani, Associate Editor ayman@bcaresearch.com Equity Recommendations Fixed-Income, Credit And Currency Recommendations

In the past few weeks, we have tweaked our cyclical portfolio exposure by downgrading early-cyclical consumer discretionary stocks to a benchmark allocation and lifting the late cyclical industrials complex to overweight. We recommend a new long S&P industrials/short S&P consumer discretionary sector pair trade to exploit the growing performance gap between the two. Four key drivers underpin our warming up to this late over early cyclical pair trade: interest rates, relative sentiment, relative demand and relative export backdrop. Higher interest rates represent a sizable hindrance to consumer spending (top panel) as rates on consumer credit rise in lockstep with fed hikes. While C&I loan pricing also suffers a setback, capital goods producers can bypass banks and raise debt in the bond markets. Relative sentiment readings also suggest that industrials manufacturers have the upper hand as the overall ISM manufacturing survey (second panel) is easily outpacing consumer confidence readings. These readings are echoed in relative demand in the form of a sustained capital expenditure upcycle, at a time when PCE growth is anemic at best (third and fourth panels). Finally, with foreign revenue exposure at 38% of revenues for industrials versus 24% for the consumer discretionary sector, the year-to-date breakdown in the greenback gives the edge to industrials. Adding up, all four key macro variables signal that the time is ripe for a new industrials versus discretionary pair trade; initiate a long S&P industrials/short S&P consumer discretionary sector pair trade, and please see yesterday’s Weekly Report for additional details.

Highlights Year One Performance: The GFIS recommended model bond portfolio returned 1.1% (hedged into USD) in its first year of existence, slightly underperforming the custom benchmark index by -2bps. Our bearish duration tilts were a drag on performance, while our overweights to U.S. corporate debt were a major contributor. Risk Management Lessons: The maximum overweight to low-beta, but low-yielding, Japanese Government Bonds was a drag on performance by reducing the portfolio yield. This highlights the classic bond management trade-off between controlling portfolio risks, like duration or tracking error, and maximizing sources of return, like interest income. Future Drivers Of Returns: Over the next 6-12 months, we expect the model portfolio returns to again benefit mostly from our below-benchmark duration stance (as global bond yields grind higher) and from our overweight stance on U.S. corporates (as the U.S. economy maintains a solid pace of growth). Feature In September of 2016, we introduced a new element to the BCA Global Fixed Income Strategy (GFIS) service - our recommended model bond portfolio.1 This represented a bit of a departure from the usual macroeconomic analysis and forecasting of financial markets that has been the hallmark of BCA. Yet we felt that it was important to add an actual portfolio, with specific allocations and weightings, given the needs and constraints faced by our readers. With so many of our clients being traditional fixed income managers (or multi-asset managers) who measure investment performance versus benchmark indices, we felt that it was important to have a way to communicate our views within a framework akin to what they deal with each day. Even for clients who are not professional bond managers, the model portfolio can be useful as a way to express how much we prefer one bond market (or sector) versus others. It also gives us a forum to discuss portfolio management issues as an addition to the macro analysis. So far, the reception from clients to this new addition to the GFIS service has been a warm one, and we look forward to additional feedback in the months and years ahead. With the model portfolio just passing its first birthday, we are dedicating this Weekly Report to an overview of the final Year One performance numbers. We will evaluate our winning and losing recommendations, look back at the lessons learned as the model portfolio framework has evolved, and identify what we expect will be the biggest drivers of performance in Year Two based on our current views. Year One Model Portfolio Performance: Winners & Losers Chart 1GFIS Model Portfolio Performance The GFIS model portfolio produced a total return of 1.09% (hedged into U.S. dollars) over first full year since inception on September 20, 2016 (Chart 1). This essentially matched the performance of our custom benchmark index, with the model portfolio lagging by a mere -2bps.2 In terms of the breakdown between government bonds and credit (spread product), the former underperformed the benchmark by -18bps while the latter outperformed by +16bps. A more traditional period to evaluate investment performance is on a calendar year-to-date basis. We also show the 2017 year-to-date (YTD) numbers in Chart 1, measured from January 1st to October 3rd. Over that time period, the total returns are much higher - the model portfolio has returned 2.78%, lagging the index by -6bps. This higher absolute return is mostly due to the strong outperformance of corporate bond markets and the decline in government bond yields seen since March. Broadly speaking, that breakdown of returns lines up with what were our largest strategic market calls: to be underweight overall portfolio duration and overweight U.S. corporate bond exposure (bottom panel). This is obviously a welcome property to see in our returns, which we hope will always line up with our desired tilts! When looking at the detailed decomposition of the returns on the government bond side of the portfolio (Table 1), however, a few points stand out: Table 1A Detailed Breakdown Of The GFIS Model Portfolio The underperformance on the government bond side of the portfolio (Chart 2) came from underweight positions at the long-end (maturities beyond seven years) of yield curves in the U.S. (-4bps), U.K. (-5bps), Germany (-5bps) and, most notably, France (-18bps). Chart 2GFIS Model Portfolio Government Bond Performance Attribution By Country The underweight position in Italy, across the curve, generated another -7bps of underperformance, although this was paired against an overweight to Spanish government bonds that positively contributed to returns (+3bps). Overweights to bonds in the middle and shorter ends of yields curves (maturities less than seven years) positively contributed to returns in the U.S. (+6bps), Germany (+2bps) and France (+2bps). Our significant overweight to Japanese government bonds, intended as a way to reduce portfolio duration by increasing exposure to a market with a low beta to global bond yields, also helped boost performance (+8bps). The conclusion? By concentrating our recommended duration underweights on longer-maturity bonds, and raising the weightings on shorter-maturity government debt, we imparted a bearish curve steepening bias on top of the reduced duration exposure. It is no surprise that our recommended government bond allocations underperformed during the bull-flattening move in global yield curves seen earlier this year. By contrast, the returns on the credit (spread) product allocations within the GFIS model portfolio tell a more positive story (Chart 3): Chart 3GFIS Model Portfolio Spread Product Performance Attribution The outperformance came from our overweight allocations to U.S. Investment Grade (IG) corporate debt, focused on Financials (+14bps) and Industrials (+4bps), and U.S. High-Yield (HY), concentrated on Ba-rated (+13bps) and B-rated (+8bps) bonds. U.S. Mortgage-Backed Securities (MBS) were a laggard during the first year of the model bond portfolio (-12bps), which largely came from an ill-timed tactical move to overweight in the 4th quarter of 2016. More recently, our underweight stance on MBS has been only a modest drag on the total return of the portfolio since the peak in U.S. bond yields back in March. Our decisions to reduce exposure to Euro Area IG (-5bps) and HY (-2bps) corporate debt earlier in the year, and our more recent decision to downgrade Emerging Market (EM) sovereign (-1bp) and corporate debt (-4bps), were both small negative contributors to performance. Summing it all up, our spread product allocations performed well because of the overweight to U.S. IG and HY corporates. The underweights in Euro Area and EM credit were set up as relative value allocations versus U.S. equivalents, so the underperformance versus the benchmark should be viewed against the substantial outperformance from U.S. corporates. The MBS underperformance was small on a YTD basis, but we see an opportunity for that to soon turn around, as we discuss later. Bottom Line: The GFIS recommended model bond portfolio returned 1.1% (hedged into USD) in its first year of existence, slightly underperforming the custom benchmark index by -2bps. Our bearish duration tilts were a drag on performance, while our overweights to U.S. corporate debt were a major contributor. Lessons Learned On Risk Management As the first year of the GFIS model portfolio progressed, we added elements to the framework to help us manage the overall risk of the portfolio. Specifically, we began to include a tracking error calculation to show the relative volatility of the portfolio to its benchmark.3 When we first introduced that tracking error back in April, we were running far too little risk in the portfolio given the relatively modest position sizes (Chart 4). Rather than be an "index hugger", we decided to increase the sizes of all our relative tilts (Chart 5), and the tracking error rose accordingly from a mere 25bps to over 60bps. This is still below the 100bps limit that we decided to impose on the relative volatility of the model portfolio, but we were comfortable not running less-than-maximum risk given that valuations on many spread products were not extraordinarily cheap. The time to max out a risk budget is early in the credit cycle when spreads are wide, not when the cycle is far advanced and spreads are relatively tight. Yet one lesson that was learned in Year One was that too much focus on tracking error can result in lost opportunities to boost the performance of the portfolio. As part of our strategic call to maintain a below-benchmark overall duration stance, we upgraded Japan to maximum overweight in the model portfolio back on July 4th.4 With Japanese Government Bonds (JGBs) having such a low beta to yield changes in the overall Developed Markets (Chart 6), adding more Japan exposure was a way to get more defensive on duration in a way that would also boost our desired tracking error (since we were adding more of an asset less correlated to the other government bonds in the portfolio). Chart 4Tracking Error Of##BR##The Model Portfolio Chart 5Allocations Between##BR##Government Bonds & Spread Product Chart 6Are JGBs The##BR##Optimal Duration Hedge? Yet by increasing the allocation to low-beta JGBs, we were also adding exposure to "no-yield" JGBs. The overall yield of the model portfolio suffered as a result, fully offsetting the bump to the portfolio yield from the increase in allocations to spread product in April (Charts 7 & 8). With the benefit of hindsight, increasing the allocation even more to something like U.S. HY corporate bonds would have a been a more prudent way to redirect government bond exposure to a low-beta market that would have boosted the overall portfolio yield (Chart 9). Chart 7Too Much Japan##BR##In The Portfolio ... Chart 8... Offsetting The Yield Pick-Up##BR##From Spread Product Chart 9There Is Not Enough Yield##BR##In The Model Portfolio Going forward, we will pay more attention to managing the portfolio yield more actively as another piece of our model bond portfolio framework that can help boost expected returns. Bottom Line: The maximum overweight to low-beta, but low-yielding, Japanese Government Bonds was a drag on performance by reducing the portfolio yield. This highlights the classic bond management trade-off between controlling portfolio risks, like duration or tracking error, and maximizing sources of return, like interest income. The Outlook For The Next Year Looking towards the next twelve months, the biggest expected drivers of returns in our model bond portfolio are expected to come from the following allocations: Below-benchmark overall duration exposure: We are sticking to our guns on the future direction of global bond yields, which have more room to rise over the next 6-12 months. The coordinated global economic upturn is showing little sign of slowing, with leading indicators still rising and pointing to upward pressure on real bond yields (Chart 10). At the same time, inflation expectations in the developed economies remain too low relative to current levels of inflation (bottom panel). Thus, we expect government bond yield curves to bear-steepen as central banks will respond slowly to the rise in inflation. This will benefit the steepening bias we have in the model portfolio from the underweights in longer maturity buckets in the U.S., Europe and the U.K. (Chart 11). Chart 10Future Drivers Of Performance:##BR##Below-Benchmark Duration Chart 11An Unexpected##BR##Bull Flattening This Year Overweight U.S. corporate bonds (both IG and HY): Looking over the indicators from our U.S. Corporate Bond Checklist, the backdrop is not yet pointing to a period of expected underperformance for U.S. corporates (Chart 12). While balance sheet fundamentals do appear stretched, as indicated by our Corporate Health Monitor (2nd panel), the overall stance of U.S. monetary conditions is neutral (3rd panel), while bank lending standards are not yet restrictive (4th panel). We expect the Fed to deliver another 25bp rate hike in December, and at least another 2-3 hikes in 2018, which will shift monetary conditions into more restrictive territory. A very rapid rise in the U.S. dollar would worsen this trend, but we expect only a moderate grind higher in the greenback as the Fed slowly delivers additional rate hikes and non-U.S. growth remains robust. While the solid global economic backdrop should benefit all growth-sensitive assets like corporate debt, we see more attractive relative valuations on U.S. corporates versus Euro Area or EM equivalents. The upcoming tapering of asset purchases by the European Central Bank (ECB) also represents a major risk to Euro Area corporate debt, as the ECB will be slowing the pace of its corporate bond buying. One other sector that can potentially boost the portfolio performance in Year Two versus Year One is U.S. MBS. Our colleagues at our sister service, U.S. Bond Strategy, now see MBS valuations as looking attractive to other U.S. spread product like IG corporates (Chart 13).5 The relative option-adjusted spreads (OAS) on MBS and U.S. IG are a good leading indicator of the relative performance of the two asset classes and current spread levels should lead to a better return profile for MBS over IG. Another factor benefitting MBS is the continued rising trend in U.S. bond yields (and mortgage rates) that we expect over the next 6-12 months, which will reduce mortgage prepayments that would weigh on MBS returns (bottom panel). Chart 12Future Drivers Of Performance:##BR##Overweight U.S. Corporates Chart 13Upgrade U.S. MBS##BR##To Neutral This week, we are upgrading our MBS allocation to neutral from underweight in our model portfolio. However, given that our allocations to U.S. corporates are already fairly significant, we are choosing to "fund" the MBS upgrade by lowering our weighting on U.S. Treasuries (see the model portfolio allocations on Page 14). Bottom Line: Over the next 6-12 months, we expect the model portfolio returns to again benefit mostly from our below-benchmark duration stance (as global bond yields grind higher) and from our overweight stance on U.S. corporates (as the U.S. economy maintains a solid pace of growth). We are also now more constructive on valuations on U.S. MBS, thus we are upgrading our allocation to neutral at the expense of U.S. Treasuries. Robert Robis, Senior Vice President Global Fixed Income Strategy rrobis@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see BCA Global Fixed Income Model Special Report, "Introducing Our Recommended Global Fixed Income Portfolio", dated September 20th, 2016, available at gfis.bcaresearch.com. 2 The GFIS model portfolio custom benchmark index can most simply be described as the Barclays Global Aggregate Index, but with allocations to global high-yield corporate debt replacing very highly-rated spread product. We believe this to be more indicative of the typical internal benchmark used by global multi-sector fixed income managers. 3 Please see BCA Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, "Adding A Risk Management Framework To Our Model Bond Portfolio", dated June 20th 2017, available at gfis.bcareseach.com. 4 Please see BCA Global Fixed Income Strategy Weekly Report, "Central Banks Are Now Playing Catch-Up", dated July 4th 2017, available at gfis.bcaresearch.com. 5 Please see BCA U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, "Dollar Watching: Yet Another Debate", dated October 10th 2017, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com. The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index Appendix - Selected Sectors From The GFIS Model Portfolio Recommendations Duration Regional Allocation Spread Product Tactical Trades Yields & Returns Global Bond Yields Historical Returns

Highlights Duration: The global economic recovery is more synchronized than at any time since 2011. This suggests that foreign demand will be less of an impediment to the bond bear market and that Treasury yields will rise once U.S. data start to surprise on the upside. Stay at below-benchmark duration. MBS: Agency MBS option-adjusted spreads have widened significantly and no longer look expensive. With Treasury yields moving higher and mortgage refinancings likely to stay depressed, we advise upgrading MBS from underweight to neutral. Economy & Inflation: The U.S. economic data are starting to outperform beaten-down expectations. Survey data point to further GDP acceleration in the second half of this year and we expect inflation will soon follow growth higher. Feature Chart 12-Factor Treasury Model The relationship between the global breadth of economic growth, the value of the dollar and the outlook for Treasury yields has been a running theme in this publication.1 To summarize, stronger global growth pressures bond yields higher (and vice-versa). But how that growth is distributed across different countries matters as well. For example, if global growth is mostly concentrated in the U.S., then yield spreads will widen between the U.S. and the rest of the world and the dollar will appreciate as money pours in from overseas. Investors then respond to a stronger dollar by downgrading their U.S. growth and rate hike expectations. This caps the upside in long-dated U.S. Treasury yields. Conversely, if global growth is more evenly spread out throughout the world, then the dollar will come under less upward pressure when U.S. growth accelerates and Treasury yields can rise further. We developed a simple two-factor model to show how the trade-off between global growth and the exchange rate impacts the U.S. 10-year Treasury yield (Chart 1). The model uses the Global Manufacturing PMI as its proxy for global growth and a survey of bullish sentiment toward the dollar as its proxy for growth synchronization. So far this year, the Global PMI has moved higher and sentiment toward the dollar has become less bullish. Both developments have bond-bearish implications and our model now pegs fair value for the 10-year Treasury yield at 2.65%, 28 bps above the current 10-year yield. In Sync The Global PMI came in at 53.2 in September, the same as in August, but still a strong reading compared to recent history (Chart 2). But the most stunning detail of the September PMI releases is that 33 out of the 36 countries we track had PMIs above the 50 boom/bust line. As a result, our Global PMI Diffusion Index hit 90% for only the second time since 2011 (Chart 2, panel 1). The elevated reading of our diffusion index leads us to two market related observations. First, stronger growth outside of the U.S. explains why the 10-year Treasury yield is only 8 bps lower than at the start of the year despite U.S. economic data that have severely undershot expectations (Chart 2, bottom panel). Second, it suggests that when U.S. economic data inevitably start to surprise on the upside - a process which is only now beginning (see Economy & Inflation section below) - the dollar will appreciate by less than it would have when our PMI diffusion index was near 50. This removes a huge impediment from the bond bear market. In Chart 3 we see that the recent peak in 7-10 year U.S. bond yields occurred at 2.54% on Dec 16th. On that same date the spread between 7-10 year U.S. bond yields and average 7-10 year yields in the rest of the world was 178 bps, and bullish sentiment toward the dollar was above 80%. With the global recovery now more synchronized than it was last year, we anticipate that by the time U.S. yields take out that prior peak, the yield spread and dollar bullish sentiment will still be lower than they were last December. This means that less foreign capital will be encouraged into the U.S. and yields will rise even further. Chart 2Broad Based Recovery Chart 3Spreads Less Of A Constraint Where Is Growth Coming From? Considering the major economic blocs, the biggest change during the past year has been the surging Eurozone PMI (Chart 4). The U.S. PMI is still firmly above the 50 boom/bust line but has actually moderated in 2017. The Japanese PMI is similarly entrenched above 50 and while the Chinese PMI was weak earlier this year, it has rebounded during the past four months. At roughly 20%, China carries the largest weight in the Global PMI. The outlook for the Chinese economy is therefore crucial for the path of bond yields. On that note, while the Chinese PMI has been strong in recent months, a couple of warning signs are beginning to flash (Chart 5). Chart 4Global Manufacturing PMIs Chart 5Chinese Monetary Conditions Commodity prices - which correlate strongly with Chinese PMI - have declined since early September, although they remain above levels seen last year and do not yet pose a major risk. What's more important is that monetary conditions are starting to tighten (Chart 5, panel 2). If tighter monetary conditions persist, then we should expect growth to slow. The mild tightening in monetary conditions that has already occurred will probably lead to some near-term moderation in Chinese growth. But our China Investment Strategy service thinks it's unlikely that monetary conditions will tighten enough to cause a meaningful slowdown.2 Our China strategists note that with GDP growth within the government's target range, inflation exceedingly low and signs that financial excesses have been reigned in, there should not be much appetite for draconian policy tightening. We would also add that the causes of this year's tightening in monetary conditions have been relatively benign. The monetary conditions index shown in Chart 5 has fallen because the trade-weighted RMB is no longer depreciating and because real interest rates have moved a tad higher. Crucially, the RMB has only stabilized, it is not appreciating in trade-weighted terms. Also, the nominal policy rate remains flat at a low level. The increase in real interest rates resulted purely from weaker consumer price inflation. Bottom Line: The global economic recovery is more synchronized than at any time since 2011. This suggests that foreign demand will be less of an impediment to the bond bear market and that Treasury yields will rise once U.S. data start to surprise on the upside. Stay at below-benchmark duration. Buy The News In MBS Last week we upgraded our allocation to Agency MBS from underweight to neutral, noting that spreads had become more attractive during the past few months. In all likelihood this is the result of the market pricing in the wind-down of the Fed's balance sheet.3 With the Fed's plans now well known (and unlikely to change), there is an opportunity to increase MBS exposure from a more attractive starting point. After having sold the rumor, we think it's time to buy the news. The Value Proposition Chart 6OAS Look Attractive To be clear, we are not forecasting stellar excess returns from Agency MBS. But with spreads compressed across the entire U.S. fixed income universe, we would note that the option-adjusted spread (OAS) differential between conventional 30-year Agency MBS and investment grade corporate bonds (in duration-matched terms) has risen back to levels last seen in 2014 (Chart 6). The lagged OAS differential is a decent predictor of relative returns between MBS and corporate credit, and at current levels it suggests that MBS could even outperform corporate bonds at some point during the next 12 months (Chart 6, panel 2). This year's decline in Treasury yields has also biased OAS differentials between MBS and corporate bonds wider. Because of negative convexity, MBS duration is positively correlated with yields (Chart 6, bottom panel). If yields rise from here, as we expect they will, then MBS duration will also extend. This means that MBS OAS will start to appear less and less attractive relative to duration-matched comparables. In other words, MBS are less likely to cheapen relative to other spread product in an environment of rising Treasury yields. The Drivers Of MBS Spreads A simplified formula for excess MBS returns, relative to duration-matched Treasuries, could be written as follows: Excess Return = Starting OAS - Duration*(Change in nominal spread) + 0.5*Convexity*(Change in yield) 2 That is, OAS is the correct measure of MBS carry because it adjusts for expected losses due to prepayments. However, it is the change in the nominal spread (not the OAS) that will determine capital gains and losses during the investment horizon. On that note, we observe that nominal MBS spreads have rarely been tighter during the past 30 years (Chart 7). However, it is also hard for us to see a catalyst for significantly wider nominal spreads during the next 6-12 months. The two factors that correlate most closely with nominal MBS spreads are credit spreads and mortgage refinancings. Chart 7Nominal MBS Spreads Are Driven By Credit Spreads And Refinancings On credit spreads, we have repeatedly outlined why they are unlikely to widen materially in the absence of more significant inflationary pressure.4 As for refis, we are also hard pressed to see much upside for three main reasons: First, changes in mortgage rates are the number one driver of refinancings (Chart 8). Refis only increase when mortgage rates fall, making the proposition of refinancing more attractive. As yields rise during the next 6-12 months, refis will stay low. Second, the distribution of outstanding mortgages across the coupon stack impacts how sensitive refis are to changes in rates. The second panel of Chart 8 shows our measure of "moneyness", aka the dispersion of outstanding mortgages around the current coupon rate.5 Given today's dispersion levels we can calculate that even if the current coupon mortgage rate falls back to its recent low of 2.24%, our measure of moneyness would not get back to its late-2016 peak. For our moneyness indicator to rise back to 2013 levels the current coupon mortgage rate would have to fall all the way to 1.68%. Needless to say, we would characterize that risk as low. Third, the final factor that can impact the pace of mortgage refinancing is the seasoning of outstanding mortgages. Typically, we think of mortgages between 30 and 60 months old as being the most likely to refinance. Given that net mortgage origination was close to zero between 30 and 60 months ago and that mortgage purchase applications were at multi-year lows (Chart 9), most of the outstanding mortgage universe probably falls outside of this zone. Chart 8Refis Will Stay Low Chart 9Most Mortgages Are Not Yet Seasoned Bottom Line: Agency MBS option-adjusted spreads have widened significantly and no longer look expensive. With Treasury yields moving higher and mortgage refinancings likely to stay depressed, we advise upgrading MBS from underweight to neutral. Economy & Inflation Bring On The Upside Surprises As was alluded to in the opening section of this report, after have disappointed expectations year-to-date, we are just now starting to see U.S. economic data surprise to the upside (see Chart 2). The most recent datapoints that caught our eye were the ISM manufacturing and non-manufacturing PMIs.6 Our inclination is to mostly ignore last Friday's employment report as an outlier due to the recent hurricanes.7 The ISM non-manufacturing survey jumped to 59.8 in September, its highest level since 2005. Taken together with other survey indicators that tend to track GDP growth - the BCA Beige Book Indicator and the BCA Composite New Orders Indicator - the case is quite strong for further GDP acceleration in the third and fourth quarters (Chart 10). Of course the pressing issue for bond markets is whether that growth acceleration translates into higher inflation. On that note, we would suggest that the weak inflation we have seen during the past six months was a reaction to the growth slowdown witnessed in 2015 and the first half of 2016. The stronger ISM manufacturing index, in particular, sends a powerful signal that inflation is poised to put in a bottom (Chart 11). Chart 10Survey Indicators Of U.S. Growth Chart 11Inflation Lags Growth Bottom Line: The U.S. economic data are starting to outperform beaten-down expectations. Survey data point to further GDP acceleration in the second half of this year and we expect inflation will soon follow growth higher. Ryan Swift, Vice President U.S. Bond Strategy rswift@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, "Dollar Watching: Another Update", dated January 31, 2017, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 2 Please see China Investment Strategy Special Report, "On A Higher Note", dated October 5, 2017, available at cis.bcaresearch.com 3 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Portfolio Allocation Summary, "Return Of The Trump Trade", dated October 3, 2017, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 4 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, "Won't Back Down", dated September 26, 2017, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 5 For each coupon bucket in the Bloomberg Barclays Conventional 30-year Agency MBS index we calculate the squared deviation between its coupon and the current coupon rate. We then weight those squared differences by the market capitalization of each coupon bucket. 6 These are different than the Markit PMI that is included in our 2-factor Treasury model. 7 Please see BCA Daily Insights, "U.S. Jobs Report: All Noise, No Signal", dated October 6, 2017, available at din.bcaresearch.com Fixed Income Sector Performance Recommended Portfolio Specification

Highlights It's ok to ignore the September jobs report. Is the small cap comeback sustainable? Assessing the threat to the consumer from higher rates and oil prices. The ISM is over 60, now what? Feature Risk assets outperformed again last week, as the S&P 500, the dollar, and the 10 year- Treasury yield all moved higher. Oil was an exception, as WTI dipped back below $50 per barrel, but BCA's Commodity & Energy Strategy service expects WTI to end the year over $55/bbl. Small-cap stocks outperformed as well and conditions are in place for the rise in small caps to continue. The rise in risk assets in recent weeks occurred alongside a marked improvement in the Citi Economic Surprise Index (Chart 1), which moved into positive territory last week for the first time since April, despite the impacts of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma. Chart 1S&P And 10 Year Treasury Yield Tracks Economic Surprise The lack of impact from the hurricanes on the economic data is surprising. Before Hurricane Harvey made landfall, the Atlanta Fed GDP Now reading for Q3 was 3.4%, but moved as low as 2.1% in late September as the August economic data was reported. The most recent Atlanta Fed forecast pegged Q3 GDP at 2.5%. The 60+ readings on September's manufacturing ISM composite and 70+ reading on prices were notably strong, as was the 18.6 million reading on September vehicle sales, the strongest in 12 years. That said, the impact of the storms was evident in the employment data released last week (See below). U.S. Jobs Report: All Noise, No Signal U.S. nonfarm payrolls fell 33,000 in September, which was entirely due to the hurricanes. According to the BLS, 1.47 million workers could not show up for their jobs due to the weather. Because this data series is not seasonally adjusted, one cannot simply add it back to the headline payrolls number. Unfortunately, the separate household survey does not help to shed any better light on the state of the labor market. The household survey is known to be much more volatile than the establishment survey. This was quite apparent with the 906,000 surge in jobs, which followed a 74,000 decline in the previous month. The outsized and unbelievable surge in household employment was the main reason for the decline in the jobless rate to 4.2% from 4.4%. The labor force actually grew by a hefty 575,000 and the participation rate rose to 63.1%, the highest since March 2014 (Chart 2). The 0.5% m/m gain in average hourly earnings needs to be discounted as well. Employment in the low-paying leisure and hospitality sector fell by 111,000 in September, helping to boost the aggregate average hourly wage. As these workers return to their jobs, average hourly wages will correct lower. Bottom Line: Investors should ignore the September jobs report. The 3-month average of payrolls growth from June to August was 172K. This is probably the best gauge of underlying jobs growth and this pace is above the trend growth in the labor force. To the extent that the Fed believes the tightening labor market will push inflation to its 2% target, the calculus for the December FOMC should not change after today's report. Small Caps Make A Comeback Rising prospects for tax cuts have lifted the Trump trades, including small-cap equities. We first initiated an overweight to small caps on November 14, 20161 (Chart 3). Since then, small caps have underperformed large by 162 bps, but not uniformly. The trade was successful from the start through to late January, but faded by late summer along with the prospects for Trump's tax cuts. Starting in mid-August, small cap made a comeback as odds of the tax cut troughed. Chart 2The September Jobs Report Is More Noise Than Signal Chart 3The Trump Trades Are Back On Several factors support our overweight view. According to BCA's U.S. Equity Strategy service S&P 600 valuation indicator, small caps are even more undervalued today than when we last discussed them in June2 (Chart 4). Moreover, the Cyclical Capitalization Indicator (CCI) moved sharply into positive territory following the U.S. election despite a modest dip in subsequent months (Chart 5). In addition, small cap stocks have been a reliably high-beta segment of U.S. capital markets since the middle of the last economic cycle (Chart 5, panel 2). That characteristic of small caps argues for a bullish stance given our upbeat view on growth and our overweight positions in U.S. equities versus bonds. BCA's outlook for regulation, inflation, the dollar, the Fed and the consumer also favor small over large caps. Trump has already made significant progress in slowing the pace of new regulations,3 which has long been a concern for small businesses. We expect inflation to move back to 2% in the coming quarters and then begin to climb higher in 2018. Chart 6 shows that small caps often thrive when inflation accelerates. BCA's outlook is that the dollar will see modest appreciation over the next 12 months. Small-cap stocks are less sensitive to dollar movements than large caps. Gradually rising rates will not impede small caps and credit conditions remain favorable. Finally, small caps are more closely linked to the consumer than the S&P 500, and BCA's view on household spending remains upbeat. Chart 4Small Caps Are Cheap, But Not Historically Cheap Chart 5Our CCI Supports Small Caps Chart 6Accelerating Inflation Usually Supports Small Caps Despite the upbeat prospects for small caps, some risks linger. Tighter credit conditions for consumers and businesses, an abrupt pullback in housing that would trigger a consumer retrenchment, persistent weakness in the dollar, and a "risk off" environment would see small caps underperform large caps. Bottom Line: It is too early to abandon our bullish bias toward small caps. Conditions remain in place for small caps to outpace large caps. Favorable valuation and encouraging prospects for Trump's pro-small business platform are key to BCA's view, as our favorable outlook for the U.S. consumer. Will Higher Rates And Oil Prices Crush The Consumer? Supports remain in place for continued strength in U.S. consumer spending despite rising interest rates and oil prices. That support was confirmed by September's reports on employment and vehicle sales, and August's personal income and spending data, all released in the past two weeks. However, investors should be aware of hurricane-related distortions in the August and September figures.4 Moreover, BCA's position is reinforced by elevated readings on consumer confidence and booming household net worth statistics, and record high FICO scores (Chart 7). The conditions that crushed the consumer ahead of the 2007-2008 recession are not in place and will not be for some time. Chart 8 shows that at 41%, household purchases of essentials as a percentage of disposable income are near an all-time low and have dropped by 1.3 percentage points since 2012. In contrast, spending on necessities rose by a record 3.5% in the five years ending in 2008, matching the bruising impact of higher rates, surging inflation and soaring oil prices seen by the end of 1980. Wrenching consumer-driven economic downturns ensued after both episodes. We see gradual increases ahead for both oil prices and interest rates, but nothing that would trigger the collapse of the consumer.5 Furthermore, BCA forecasts only a modest rise in inflation and an acceleration in wage growth; both will provide a boost to disposable income. Personal tax cuts as part of the plan Trump proposed last month would also enhance incomes. Chart 7Plenty Of Support For The Consumer Chart 8Consumer In Good Shape Despite Rise In Oil, Rates BCA's research shows that sustainable capital spending cycles get underway only when businesses see evidence that consumer final demand is on the upswing. The latest reading on the manufacturing ISM composite and the 60+ readings on the new orders component of ISM since February suggest that managements are starting to note the robust pace of consumer spending. Signals From Elevated ISM Readings September's numbers on the ISM manufacturing index support BCA's case for accelerating corporate profits in the coming quarters. The ISM is a good proxy for industrial production, which in turn tracks S&P 500 sales. The recent strong data on ISM suggests that IP should pick up in the next six months (Chart 9). A rollover in the 12-month change in IP would challenge our constructive stance on earnings. While a decline is possible given that the index is already lofty, the leading components of the ISM, including the new orders index and the new orders-to-inventory ratio, indicate that the ISM will remain above 50 in the months ahead (Chart 10). Chart 9Favorable Macro Backdrop For Earnings And Sales Chart 10ISM Components Suggest IP Poised To Accelerate Some investors question how long the composite and new orders indices will remain beyond 60 and what that will mean for risk assets. Additionally, the second 70+ reading on the ISM Prices index this year challenges the notion that inflation is dormant. Other investors are concerned about what will happen after these ISM components are so elevated. Others may fear that the index will soon fall below 50. We analyze the historical periods when the ISM and its sub-indexes were above the 60 threshold, and then what happens to the returns of risk assets 12 months after they fall below the 60 threshold (Chart 11A, Chart 11B and Chart 11C). Chart 11AComposite ISM And Risk Assets Chart 11BISM New Orders And Risk Assets Chart 11CISM Prices And Risk Assets Historically, the relative performance of large cap equities to Treasuries is typically poor when the ISM Manufacturing Composite Index is over 60, but investment-grade credit outperforms and both gold and oil usually gain. The performance of these assets is similar even excluding the period around the 1973 OPEC oil embargo and the 1987 stock market crash (Chart 11A and Appendix Table 1). The ISM Manufacturing Composite Index ticked up to 60.8 in September, the first 60+ reading since 2004. The indicator also reached 60 three times in the 1970s and twice in the 1980s, and it stayed above 60 on average for 8 months. The last time it breached 60, it remained at that level for 6 months (December 2003 through June 2004). That interval, along with most of the others, was accompanied by tightening monetary policy and accelerating inflation late in the latter half of economic cycles. Gold and oil perform strongly in the 12 months after ISM Composite Index goes below 60, large-cap equities barely do better than Treasuries, while investment-grade credit underperforms. Surprisingly, high-yield bonds and small-cap stocks outperform 12 months after the ISM falls back below 60, although the sample size is limited. In 1974-1975, the economy was in recession. In all but one other instance (the mid- 1980s), the economy was in a late stage of the cycle, nearing full employment and inflation was on the rise. Risk assets also are strong performers when the New Orders component of the ISM exceeds the 60 threshold (Chart 11B and Appendix Table 2). Moreover, the episodes are more numerous (14 since 1971 versus only 6 for the composite) but, on average, they persist as long as the signal from the ISM Composite. New Orders have been above 60 since February 2017 (7 months), just shy of the 46-year average (8 months). Large cap equities and credit (both investment-grade and high-yield) have outperformed Treasuries, and gold has climbed since February. This performance matches the historical pattern when the New Orders index exceeds 60. In the past 8 months, the underperformance of small caps and the drop in oil prices in that span runs counter to history. The performance of risk assets in the year after the new orders index moves below 60 is mixed, at best. In these periods, while the S&P 500 outperforms Treasuries on average, and small caps outperform large caps, credit underperforms. The big winners when the New Orders index is falling from over 60 are gold (average 14% gain) and oil (22%). Chart 11C and Appendix Table 3 shows the performance of risk assets when the ISM Prices index is greater than 70 and then 12 months after the index crosses below 70. Gold and oil are standouts in the first case, and small cap tends to outperform large. Note that 3 of these 11 episodes coincided with recessions (early 1970s, 1980 and 2008) and 1 occurred during the 1987 stock market crash. Small-cap equities continue to outperform as the Prices index fades, and returns on gold and oil are muted. High-yield bonds underperform Treasuries when the ISM Prices index dips back below 70, and the total return on investment-grade corporate struggles, but it beats Treasuries. Moreover, 3 of these 11 occurred during recessions (early 1980s, 2001, 2008-2009). Separately, there has been a tight relationship between the 12-month change in the 10-year Treasury yield and both the overall ISM, the New Orders and Prices component of the ISM in the past 25 years (Chart 12). Nonetheless, the relationship between the ISM Prices component and the 10-year Treasury has broken down since oil prices peaked in 2014. The 12-month jump in ISM Prices surge in 2016 was met with a decline in Treasury yields. Prior to that, a rise in Prices index was almost always accompanied by a move higher in bond yields. BCA's view is that the ISM manufacturing Composite will remain elevated (although not necessarily more than 60 in the months ahead), supporting our bullish stance on corporate sales and earnings. However, if we are wrong and the ISM dips below 60 and then down to 50, would that signal a downturn and concomitant selloff in risk assets? The ISM has a mixed track record as a leading indicator of recessions (Chart 13). Since 1948, the ISM has provided 9 false signals, using 3 consecutive months below 50 as the indication of an economic decline. Furthermore, 5 of the 9 examples occurred since 1985, as the U.S. economy became less reliant on manufacturing. In the 6 instances that the ISM warned of contractions, the average lead time was 4 months. In the 4 other economic slumps, the ISM moved and stayed below 50 for 3 consecutive months only after the start of recession. The lag averaged 4 months. This was the case in the 2007-2009 episode when the ISM did not send a recession signal until May 2008, 5 months after the official start of the downturn. Chart 1210 Year Treasury Vs. ISM Chart 13The Rocky Relationship Between ISM And Recessions Bottom Line: Elevated readings on ISM support BCA's view that profit growth will accelerate for a few more quarters while the recent rise in the ISM Prices index confirms the move higher in Treasury yields. Stay overweight stocks versus bonds and underweight duration. John Canally, CFA, Senior Vice President U.S. Investment Strategy johnc@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see BCA's U.S. Investment Strategy Weekly Report, "Easier Fiscal, Tighter Money?," November 14, 2016. Available at usis.bcaresearch.com. 2 Please see BCA's U.S. Investment Strategy Weekly Report, "Waiting For The Turn," June 26, 2017. Available at usis.bcaresearch.com. 3 Please see BCA's U.S. Investment Strategy Weekly Report, "Still Waiting for Inflation, "August 14, 2017. Available at usis.bcaresearch.com. 4 Please see BCA's U.S. Investment Strategy Weekly Report, "Shelter From the Storm," September 5, 2017. Available at usis.bcaresearch.com. 5 Please see The Bank Credit Analyst Monthly Report, "Global Debt Titanic Collides With Fed Iceberg?," February 2017. Available at bca.bcaresearch.com. Appendix: Table 1 Table 2 Table 3