Economy

Special Report

Executive Summary Chinese Infrastructure Investment Growth: A Slowdown Ahead Despite the authorities’ push, China’s infrastructure1  investment nominal growth2 will likely slow from the current rate of 8% to 1-3% in 2022H2, on a year-over-year basis.   Funding shortages will limit local governments’ capability to invest in traditional infrastructure fixed-asset investment (FAI), which will likely grow by only 1-2% in 2022H2. We expect China’s cheap green loans to support a 10-15% growth in tech infrastructure spending in the second half of this year. However, the scale of China’s tech infrastructure investment is too small in absolute terms to offset the weakness in traditional infrastructure spending.  Tech infrastructure plays will likely outperform traditional infrastructure plays in the long term as China continues its efforts to peak carbon emissions before 2030 and reach carbon neutrality before 2060. As new infrastructure investment will accelerate in the coming years, we are positive on the sectors of NEV and NEV charging poles. Given the still-high valuation of the sector and mounting downward pressure that the Chinese economy is currently facing, we look to buy these sectors at a better price entry point. Bottom Line: China’s infrastructure investment growth will likely slow from the current 8% rate to 1-3% in 2022H2 due to funding constraints and a shrinking pool of profitable infrastructure projects. Feature Infrastructure investment growth in China accelerated to 8% (nominal) in the first four months of this year (Chart 1, top panel). The authorities demanded that local governments execute infrastructure projects sooner and faster to offset the strong headwinds to the economy from COVID restrictions and continued property downturn. Nonetheless, China’s infrastructure investment growth will likely slow from the current annual rate (YoY) of 8% to 1-3% in 2022H2 due to funding constraints and a lack of financially feasible projects, bringing the whole year’s growth to slightly below 4%.  Although a 4% YoY growth in infrastructure investment this year would be an improvement from the 0.4% YoY contraction in 2021, it is far below the 12% average rate of infrastructure spending growth over the past decade (Chart 1). Moreover, we estimate that traditional infrastructure investment, which accounts for 95% of China’s total infrastructure spending, will only grow by 1-2% in 2022H2 (Chart 2, top panel). Chart 1Chinese Infrastructure Investment: Moderate Growth In 2022H2 Chart 2Investment Growth In 2022H2: Deceleration In Traditional Infrastructure While Acceleration In Tech Infrastructure For the tech infrastructure, we are more positive as building cutting-edge tech infrastructure– including 5G networks, data centers, artificial intelligence (AI) and Internet of Things (IoT) – has become a top development priority for China. With supportive policies and cheap green loans, we expect a 10-15% YoY growth in Chinese tech infrastructure in 2022H2 (Chart 2, bottom panel). However, the scale of China’s tech infrastructure investment is too small in absolute terms to offset the weakness in traditional infrastructure spending. After all, tech infrastructure currently only accounts for about 5% of the total Chinese nominal infrastructure FAI (Chart 3). Chart 3Breaking Down Chinese Infrastructure Investment Tech infrastructure plays will likely outperform their traditional infrastructure counterparts in the long term as China continues its efforts to peak carbon emissions before 2030 and reach carbon neutrality before 2060. As new infrastructure investment will accelerate in the coming years, we are positive on the sectors of NEV and NEV charging poles. Yet, considering China’s economy is still facing downward pressure and the sector’s valuations are still high, we look to buy these sectors at a better price entry point. Funding Constraints The recent strong rebound in Chinese infrastructure investment was mainly driven by a massive frontload of local government special purpose bond (SPB) sales, as well as funding from last year’s SPB proceeds – both funding resources will not sustain into the second half of this year.   According to the data from the Ministry of Finance, in the first five months of 2022, special bond issuance has already reached 2.03 trillion RMB, significantly higher than the 1.2 trillion RMB issued during the same period last year. In addition, there has been an estimated 1.2 trillion unused SPB proceeds from 2021 that have been carried over to 2022 to fund infrastructure spending. However, such a boost in local government funding of infrastructure investment is unsustainable. We expect Chinese infrastructure investment growth to fall back to the 1-3% range in 2022H2 due to limited financial availability and a shrinking pool of infrastructure projects. Chart 4 shows the breakdown of the major funding sources of Chinese infrastructure investment. Most of them are likely to face considerable constraints over the next six months. Chart 4Major Funding Sources Of Chinese Infrastructure Investment (1) Less Revenues Chinese local governments face tremendous shortfalls of cash, which will impede their ability to meet their nearly 30% contribution to overall infrastructure funding: Land sales by local governments contribute nearly 90% of government-managed funds (GMF3). The latter's revenues, excluding proceeds from SPB issuance, account for 16% of overall infrastructure funding. The deep contraction in home sales has depressed real estate developers’ land purchases, which has considerably reduced local government revenues (Chart 5). This will curb the ability of local governments to finance their infrastructure projects through GMFs. Although we expect a moderate rebound in property sales over the next six months from very depressed levels in recent months, the improvement in local government land sales will likely be very limited as real estate developers are still overleveraged and under severe funding constraints.   In addition to the slump in land sales, tax cuts for corporates and low-income households are also eroding local government revenues, and COVID-related expenses add to spending needs. Shrinking corporate profits will also pose downward risks to the tax revenues of local governments (Chart 6). Chart 5Government-Managed Funds: Headwinds From Falling Land Sales Chart 6Declining Government Tax##br## Revenues   The general budget of local governments,4 which contributes to about 14% of overall infrastructure financing, is extremely tight this year. In the first four months of the year,  revenues of local governments fell by about 18% from the same period last year, while their expenditures increased by 5%. As a result, the general government’s fiscal deficit will likely exceed both the 2.8% target set for this year and the 3.2% fiscal deficit of last year (Chart 7).   Chart 7Government General Budget: Large Deficit (2) Less SPB Available In H2 Chart 8Local Government Special Bond Issuance Will Decrease In 2022H2 Local government SPB issuance, which is used exclusively to fund infrastructure projects, has been another major source of financing for domestic infrastructure projects since 2016 (Chart 8).    As local governments frontloaded 56% of their 2022 SPB quota in the first five months of this year, they will have less fiscal support from SPBs in 2022H2. As net local government SPB issuance made up about 16% of overall infrastructure FAI on average in the past three years, there is quite a financing gap to be filled in 2022H2. (3) Contracting Domestic Loan Demand Domestic loans contribute to about 20% of overall infrastructure financing, with 14% from regular non-household medium-long-term (MLT) lending, and another 6% from domestic green loans. Infrastructure projects are generally long-term investments in nature and hence often require MTL loans. Presently, the impulse of non-household MLT lending is contracting (Chart 9). While not all MLT loans are used for infrastructure, sluggish MLT lending also reflects corporates’ reluctance to borrow for and invest in infrastructure projects. Strong economic headwinds due to COVID-induced lockdowns and the slumping property market, mounting local government debt, and low returns on infrastructure projects will continue to curb corporates’ demand for bank loans to fund infrastructure projects, particularly from the private sector. The “green loans”,5 which are used for but not limited to new energy infrastructure projects, will continue to grow strongly in 2022H2. In 2021, the increase in green loans for infrastructure was 1.64 trillion RMB, or a 62% increase from the previous year. In 2022, we expect new green loans could rise 50%-80% to 2.5-3 trillion RMB, with an increase of 0.6-1.1 trillion RMB in new green loans in the second half of the year. While green loans will help support the overall infrastructure investment, given their small size (green loans accounted for about 8% of China’s total infrastructure investment in 2021), they will unlikely fully offset the shortfall from other financing sources this year (Chart 10). Chart 9Sluggish Medium/Long-Term Bank##br## Lending Chart 10Green Loans: Strong Growth In 2022H2 But Still Small Amount Relative To Overall Infrastructure Investment In the long run, though, to reach peak carbon emissions by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060, China will continue to lean heavily on its banking system to accelerate green projects and infrastructure investment. (4) Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) Since 2014, PPPs have become an important financing model for Chinese local governments to fund infrastructure investments. However, to control rising local government leverage, the central government has tightened regulations on PPP projects since early 2018. Heightened scrutiny has resulted in a sharp deceleration in both PPP investment and overall infrastructure investment growth. Consequently, PPP contributions to total infrastructure FAI have been consistently declining, from over 30% in 2017 to about 4% currently (Chart 11). So far this year, the amount of signed and implemented PPP investments has been falling. While the private sector’s propensity to invest has been extremely weak, a shrinking pool of profitable infrastructure projects could be another contributing factor. The number of projects – which are in the preparation stage in the national total project entries – has been falling from its peak of 2,550 in June 2017 to only 465 in March 2022 (Chart 12). Chart 11Public-Private Partnerships Funding: Limited Growth In 2022H2 Chart 12A Shrinking Pool Of Public-Private Partnership##br## Projects (5) Other Funding Sources Local government financing vehicles (LGFV) and shadow bank borrowing were major financing sources prior to 2018. However, following the 2017/2018 financial de-risking and anticorruption campaign, local governments have scaled back their shadow bank activities significantly. Shadow banking remains in deep contraction (Chart 13). We expect only a modest pick-up in LGFV leveraging during the rest of the year, given that both the anticorruption campaign and a reshuffling of local government officials are ongoing. Chart 13Shadow Banking Will Remain In Deep Contraction In addition, policy banks could sell special sovereign bonds to help fund domestic infrastructure projects. For example, in a recent State Council meeting, Premier Li Keqiang requested policy banks to provide 800 billion RMB ($120 billion) in funding for infrastructure projects. An 800-billion-RMB additional funding, if fully invested, would only add about 0.4% growth to this year’s infrastructure spending. Bottom line: Due to funding constraints and a shrinking pool of profitable infrastructure projects, China’s infrastructure investment growth rate will likely slow from the current 8% pace to 1-3% in 2022H2. Infrastructure Investment Focus: Shifting From Traditional To New Chart 14China Is Shifting Its Focus Away From Traditional Infrastructure Development… The pace of new infrastructure (including but not limited to tech infrastructure) is set to accelerate both cyclically (in the next 6 to 12 months) and structurally (in the next 3 to 5 years), while traditional infrastructure investment growth will slow. However, over a cyclical time horizon, infrastructure investment in new economy sectors is too small to offset the weakness in spending in traditional sectors. Decelerating Investment In Traditional Infrastructure In 2022H2 And Beyond Chart 14 shows the real growth rate of railways, highways and airports has all dropped to below 3% last year. Correspondingly, investment in transport infrastructure only grew 1.4% in 2020 and 1.6% in 2021, a distinctly slower pace from 3.9% in 2018 and 3.4% in 2019. Similar growth deceleration has also occurred in the Water Conservancy, Environment & Utility Management sector. Investment growth in nominal terms this sector fell from 3.3% in 2018 and 2.9% in 2019 to 0.2% in 2020 and saw a 1.2% contraction in 2021. Most Chinese cities with large populations and/or high population density have already upgraded their sewer system in recent years and, therefore, localities have only been maintaining rather than upgrading these systems. The Water Conservancy, Environment & Utility Management sector and the Transport, Storage and Postal Service sector together account for the lion’s share (78%) of total infrastructure investment. A growth deceleration in these two sectors will likely lead to slower growth in overall infrastructure investment, compared with the first four months of this year, when both sectors grew by 7.2% and 7.4%, respectively, in nominal terms. Accelerating Investment In New Infrastructure In 2022H2 And Beyond Chart 15...To New Infrastructure Development Investment in new economy sectors–such as Electricity, Gas & Water Production and Supply, which currently accounts for about 18% of overall infrastructure investment–will remain strong in 2022H2. Investment in the subsector of ultra-high-voltage electricity transmission (UHV electricity transmission) and smart grid, as well as new electricity infrastructure, such as wind and solar power, will also continue to accelerate. The construction of 5G base stations will grow strongly in the coming years but may see a moderation in growth this year. Network operators such as China Mobile, China Unicom and China Telecom plan to build about 600,000 5G base stations, slightly lower than last year’s 650,000. The construction of new electric vehicle (NEV) charging poles accelerated because of a significant increase in NEV sales (Chart 15). Elevated oil prices and technology improvement in NEV performance have boosted NEV sales in China. As such, investment growth in NEV charging infrastructure is set to rise in the coming years. Bottom line: China’s investment focus is shifting from traditional infrastructure to new economy infrastructure. As such, we expect new infrastructure investment in tech and green energy to rise at the expense of traditional infrastructure (Chart 16). Chart 16"Green Investment" Is Rising, “Dirty Thermal” Investment Is Falling Investment Implications The infrastructure sector accounts for about 10-15% of China’s total steel consumption and about 30-40% of cement consumption (Chart 17). Chart 17A Slowdown In Chinese Infrastructure Spending Will Weigh On Steel And Cement Prices We expect China’s infrastructure investment, particularly in traditional sectors like highway construction, to slow in the second half of the year. As such, steel prices are at risk of falling further. Moreover, sluggish construction activity in property markets will be a drag on steel prices (Chart 18). Slower growth in traditional infrastructure investment in the next six months, as well as structurally will pose downward pressures on the performance of both global and Chinese onshore machinery stocks (Chart 19). Chart 18Dismal Property Markets Will Be A Drag On##br## Steel Prices Chart 19Slower Growth In Traditional Infrastructure Investment Will Weigh On Global/Chinese Machinery Stocks Chart 20Look To Buy NEV Stocks We are positive on China’s NEV sector’s structural outlook and stock performance, based on an acceleration in new economy infrastructure investment in the coming years. However, the near-term outlook on the sector’s stock performance is neutral at best. The sector’s valuations are high, considering China’s economy is still facing downward pressure due to a faltering property market, sluggish household income growth and consumption, falling export demand, as well as heightened risks of further COVID-induced lockdowns. NEV stocks will likely have more shakeouts in the coming six months before any sustainable uptrend. Hence, we look to buy these sectors at a better price entry point (Chart 20).   Ellen JingYuan He Associate Vice President ellenj@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1  Including both traditional infrastructure and tech infrastructure. For the purposes of this report, the composition of “infrastructure” includes “traditional infrastructure” and “tech infrastructure.” The “traditional infrastructure” comprises three categories – (1) Transport, Storage and Postal Service; (2) Water Conservancy, Environment & Utility Management; and (3) Electricity, Gas & Water Production and Supply. 2 Please note that all growth rates in this report are nominal growth rates. 3 According to the country’s Budget Law, the GMF budget refers to the budget for revenues and expenditures for the funds raised for specific developmental objectives. In brief, GMFs constitute de-facto off-balance-sheet government revenues and spending. 4 The general budget of local governments covers local governments’ day-to-day operation as well as local infrastructure development (mainly in four categories: Environment Protection,  Urban & Rural Community Affairs, and Affairs of Agriculture, Forest  & Irrigation and Transportation). In contrast, the government-managed funds (GMF) excluding proceeds from SPB issuance finances the big ang national-level important infrastructure projects. 5 Last November, the People’s Bank of China (PBoC) launched a carbon emission reduction facility (CERF) to offer low interest loans to financial institutions that help firms cut carbon emissions. The targeted green lending program will provide 60% of loan principals made by financial institutions for carbon emission cuts at a one-year lending rate of 1.75%. The funding will be available retroactively after the loans are made, and can be rolled over twice. Strategic Themes Cyclical Recommendations

Executive Summary Competing Forces On Global Bond Yields Bond yields in the developed world have ticked higher recently, due to a renewed increase in oil prices and the spillover effect from more hawkish policy expectations out of Europe. The competing forces of slowing global growth momentum and geopolitical uncertainty on one side, and high inflation with tightening monetary policies on the other, will keep global government bond yields rangebound over the next several months. UK investment grade corporate bonds now offer an intriguing combination of higher yields, attractive spread valuations and strong financial health. By maturity, shorter-maturity corporates offer the best value. At the industry level, spreads look most attractive for Financials. A hawkish Bank of England, both through rate hikes and upcoming outright sales of corporate debt the central bank has purchased via quantitative easing, remains a major headwind to UK corporate bond returns. Sectors most at risk to central bank sales are Water, Consumer Cyclicals and Consumer Non-Cyclicals. Bottom Line: Stay neutral on overall duration exposure in global bond portfolios. Maintain a neutral stance on UK corporates, favoring shorter-maturity bonds and Financial names, but look to upgrade once UK inflation peaks and the Bank of England pauses on tightening. Trendless, Friendless Bond Markets Chart 1Recovering From The Ukraine War Shock... Although it may not feel like it given the ferocity of some daily price swings, many important financial markets have not moved all that much, cumulatively, since the first major shock of 2022 – the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24. For example, the S&P 500 is only down around -2% from the pre-invasion level, while the VIX index of equity option volatility is at 24, seven points below the closing level on February 23 (Chart 1). The Bloomberg US investment grade corporate bond index spread is only 12bps above its pre-invasion level, down 20bps from the peak seen in mid-May. More recently, even US bond yields have shown signs of stabilization. The 10-year US Treasury yield has traded in a 2.70-3.15% range since the start of April, while the MOVE index of US Treasury option volatility has fallen by one-quarter since its most recent peak in early May. Not all markets, however, have seen this kind of relative stability. Global oil prices are trading close to post-invasion highs, as are government bond yields in Germany and the UK. High-yield credit spreads in the US and Europe are both still around 50bps above where they were pre-invasion. The DXY US dollar index is 6% above the pre-invasion level, led by the USD/JPY currency pair that has appreciated to levels last seen in 2002. Given the mix of slowing global growth momentum and ongoing geopolitical uncertainty, but with persistent high inflation and tightening global monetary policy, it is unsurprising that financial markets are having a difficult time formulating a consistent message. This is especially true for global government bond yields. Chart 2Competing Forces On Global Bond Yields Even as market-based inflation expectations have eased a bit in recent weeks, bond yields across the developed world have been unable to decline because markets continue to discount more rate hikes (Chart 2). Yet with such a significant amount of monetary tightening now priced in across all countries, global bond yields are more likely to stay rangebound over the next 3-6 months than begin a new trend. Chart 3DM Bond Yields Discounting Tight Monetary Policy 10-year government bond yields and 2-year-ahead interest rate expectations in overnight index swap (OIS) curves are trading in lockstep in the US, Europe, UK, Canada and Australia (Chart 3). This correlation indicates that longer-term bond yields have become a pure play on future policy rate expectations, rather than a reflection of rising inflation expectations as was the case in 2021. However, both yields and rate expectations are now trading close to, or even well above, plausible estimates of neutral nominal policy rates in all regions - including estimates provided by central bankers themselves. For example, in Australia, where the RBA just delivered a 50bp rate hike this week, markets are pricing in a peak Cash Rate between 3.5-4%, even with RBA Governor Philip Lowe stating that the neutral rate is likely in the 2-3% range – a view that we agree with. The situation is even more extreme in the euro area, with the euro area OIS curve now pricing in a peak policy rate between 1.5-2%, with most of that increase coming over the next 12 months. While we expect the ECB to fully exit the negative (deposit) rate era by September, rate hikes beyond that are far less likely given slowing euro area growth momentum and still-moderate euro area inflation beyond the spillover effects from energy costs. Only in the US are markets potentially underestimating the potential peak in the fed funds rate for this tightening cycle. Estimates of the longer-run (neutral) funds rate from the latest set of FOMC projections back in March ranged from 2.0-3.0%. Thus, the current level of 10-year bond yields, and 2-year-ahead rates discounted in the US OIS curve, are only at the top end of that range. It is possible that the Fed will have to raise rates to restrictive levels (i.e. above 3%) given the size of the current US inflation overshoot. More importantly, the US neutral rate is likely higher than the Fed thinks it is, possibly as high as 4% according to BCA Research’s Chief Global Strategist, Peter Berezin. We continue to see the US as the one major government bond market where there is a risk that markets are underestimating the neutral policy rate. For that reason, we remain underweight US Treasuries in the BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy model bond portfolio. Don’t Dismiss The QT Effect One other factor that has likely kept global bond yields elevated, even as global growth has softened, has been the shift away from central bank asset purchases towards quantitative tightening (QT). As policymakers have moved to slow, or even stop, the buying of government bonds, the term premium component of longer-term bond yields has risen. The moves have been quite large. Using our own in-house estimates, the term premium on 10-year government bond yields have jumped by about 100bps on average in the US, UK, Canada, Australia and Europe since the lows seen during the 2020 COVID global recession (Chart 4). The jump in term premiums is occurring at the same time as markets have moved to price in more rate hikes and a higher path for real interest rates (bottom panel). Chart 4Yields Repricing As QE Moves To QT​​​​​​ Chart 5Stay Neutral Global Duration Exposure​​​​​​ That combined effect of the upward repricing of term premiums – especially as more price-sensitive private investors replace the demand for bonds from price-insensitive central banks - but with less upward movement in already elevated interest rate expectations will keep longer-term bond yields in trading ranges during the “Global QT Phase” over at least the next six months and likely longer. That message is reinforced by our Global Duration Indicator, which is heralding a peak in global bond yield momentum over the latter half of 2022 (Chart 5). Bottom Line: Stay neutral on overall duration exposure in global bond portfolios, with yields in the major developed markets likely to stay rangebound over the next few months. Assessing The Value In UK Investment Grade Corporates Chart 6A Big Jump In UK Investment Grade Corporate Yields Global credit markets have had a rough time in 2022, and UK corporate debt is no exception. The Bloomberg UK Corporate index of investment grade corporate debt has delivered a year-to-date total return of -11%, as the index yield-to-maturity rose 174bps to 4% - the highest level since 2014 (Chart 6). Relative to UK Gilts, the results have also been grim as corporate credit spreads have widened, with the Bloomberg UK corporate index realizing an excess return of -3% since the start of the year. We have maintained a neutral stance on UK corporate bond exposure in our global model bond portfolio during the selloff. This was the result of a relative value opinion, as we have concentrated our more defensive view on global investment grade corporate debt with an underweight to US corporates. However, after the significant repricing of UK investment grade credit, it is now a good time to reassess our opinion on the asset class. Spread Valuation From a pure spread valuation perspective, UK investment grade now looks more attractive. Our preferred valuation metric – 12-month breakeven spreads - shows that the UK investment grade corporate index spread, on a duration-adjusted basis, is now in the 75th percentile of its history over the past 25 years (Chart 7). Chart 7UK Corporate Spreads Now Offer Some Value We find 12-month breakevens to a useful spread valuation measure, as they show how much spreads would need to widen to make the expected one-year-ahead return on a credit product equal to that of a duration-matched position in government bonds. In other words, breakevens measure the spread “cushion” against excess return losses from spread widening. What makes the current attractive reading on UK investment grade spread valuation so interesting is that the absolute level of spreads is still relatively low. The Bloomberg UK investment grade corporate index spread is currently 170bps, but during previous episodes where the 12-month breakeven as near the top quartile ranking – as is currently the case – the index spread ranged from 200-350bps. The reason for that relates to the index duration which, at 7.3 years, is down 1.5 years from the 2020 peak and at the lowest level since 2011. Some of that lower duration is related to the convexity effect from higher corporate bond yields. But there has also been a reduction in the average maturity of the UK investment grade corporate bond universe, with the index average maturity now at 10.4 years, down a full year lower over the past 12 months and the lowest average maturity since 1999. UK companies appear to have shortened up the maturity profile of their bond issuance, which helped reduce the riskiness (duration) of corporate bond returns to rising yields. Thus, the message from the 12-month breakevens is correct – UK investment grade corporate bond yields are attractive from a historical perspective, on a duration-adjusted basis. Chart 8UK Credit Curves Are Relatively Flat When looking within the UK investment grade universe, the messages on valuation are a bit more mixed. The UK credit curve is not particularly steep, when looking at the spread differences by credit rating within the benchmark index universe (Chart 8). There is a similar message when looking at 12-month breakevens broken down by credit rating, where there is little difference between the percentile rankings (Chart 9). However, the 12-month breakeven percentile rankings broken down by maturity buckets show that shorter-maturity bonds have noticeably higher percentile rankings than longer-maturity UK corporates (top panel). From a cross-country perspective, UK corporate breakeven percentile rankings are much higher than equivalent rankings for US corporates, but are lower than those of the euro area. Chart 9Shorter-Maturity UK Spreads Are More Attractive Corporate Financial Health Our top-down UK Corporate Health Monitor (CHM) - which uses data on non-financial corporate sector revenues, expenses and balance sheets taken from GDP accounts – has shown a very strong improvement in UK corporate financial health over the past few years (Chart 10). The biggest improvements are in the categories related to debt service, with interest coverage at the highest level since 2002 and debt coverage is at the highest level since 1999. Chart 10UK Corporates Can Withstand Higher Borrowing Rates​​​​​​ Chart 11Stay Neutral UK Corporates Until The BoE Is Done​​​​​ The message from our top-down UK CHM is similar to the conclusions from an October 2021 BoE report that analyzed the UK corporate sector from a financial stability perspective. In that report, the BoE used a bottom-up sample of 500 UK companies and concluded that corporate borrowing rates could rise as much as 400bps before the share of companies with a “distressed” interest coverage ratio below 2.5 would rise to the past historical peak. Within our top-down UK CHM, relatively wide corporate profit margins are also contributing to the strong reading on UK corporate health. Like the interest/debt coverage ratios, those margins provide some cushion to profits in the current environment of high inflation and elevated input costs for businesses. The all-in message from our UK CHM is that financial health is a fundamental tailwind for UK corporate bond performance. Monetary Policy Attractive spread valuations and strong financial health metrics would normally justify an overweight stance on any corporate bond market. However, the monetary policy cycle is also an important factor that drives corporate bond performance. Currently, with the BoE not only hiking rates but also moving to QT on asset purchases, monetary policy is a severe headwind to UK corporate bond returns. Related Report  Global Fixed Income StrategyIt’s Time To Flip The Script - Upgrade UK Gilts The annual growth rate of the BoE’s balance sheet has proven to be a reliable leading indicator of UK corporate bond annual excess returns. With the growth in the balance sheet set to turn negative in the latter half of 2022 (Chart 11), it will prove difficult for UK credit spreads to narrow in a way that will boost excess returns. The BoE’s aggressive (by its standards) rate hiking cycle, in response to UK inflation that is nearing 10% alongside a very tight labor market, remains a threat to UK economic growth that is already losing some momentum. As we discussed in a recent Special Report, the UK neutral interest rate is likely no more than 1.5-2%. If the BoE were to follow current market pricing and push Bank Rate toward 2.5%, this would be a restrictive policy stance that would likely result in a sharp growth slowdown if not a full-blown recession. Importantly, our UK Central Bank Monitor is showing signs of peaking (bottom panel), due to signs of slower economic growth and tightening financial conditions. A peak in UK inflation would help reduce the Monitor even further, and would likely correspond to a pause on BoE rate hikes – a necessary condition before we would upgrade our recommended stance on UK investment grade corporates to overweight. Some Final Thoughts On Industry Sector Valuation Our UK investment grade corporate sector valuation model is a cross-sectional analysis of individual industry/sector corporate credit spreads, after controlling for differences in duration, convexity and credit rating. The model is currently signaling that there are few compelling valuation stories with positive “risk-adjusted” spreads (Chart 12). Only Financials look cheap, while Consumer Cyclicals, Consumer Non-Cyclicals and Capital Goods are all trading at expensive risk-adjusted spreads. Chart 12Not Many Compelling Values Within UK Corporates By Industry An additional risk to UK corporate bond performance relates to the BoE’s decision to unwind its corporate bond portfolio. The BoE has announced that there will be outright sales from the corporate holdings accumulated over the past couple of years, with a goal of having the stock of debt fully unwound by the end of 2023. This is important for much of the UK investment grade corporate bond universe, where the BoE holds between 8-10%, on average, of outstanding debt (Chart 13).1 Chart 13The BoE Has Become An Important Corporate Bondholder When we compare our risk-adjusted spreads versus the BoE ownership share by sector, we conclude that Consumer Cyclicals, Consumer Non-Cyclicals and Other Utilities offer the most unattractive combination of expensive spreads and high BoE concentration (Chart 14). We recommended underweight allocations to those sectors within an overall neutral allocation to UK corporates. Chart 14BoE Asset Sales Are A Major Risk For Some UK Corporate Sectors Bottom Line: Maintain a neutral stance on UK corporates, given the mix of attractive valuations but tighter monetary policy. Favoring shorter-maturity bonds and Financial names, but look to upgrade once UK inflation peaks and the Bank of England pauses on tightening.   Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1      In Chart 13, we use the market capitalization of each sector from the Bloomberg UK corporate bond index in the numerator of all ratios shown, as a proxy for outstanding debt. GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Recommended Positioning     Active Duration Contribution: GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. Custom Performance Benchmark The GFIS Recommended Portfolio Vs. The Custom Benchmark Index Global Fixed Income - Strategic Recommendations* Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months)

Highlights Chart 1Wage Growth Is Cooling In a speech last week, Fed Governor Christopher Waller presented the theoretical underpinnings for how the Fed plans to achieve a soft landing for the US economy.1 The Fed’s hope is that tighter monetary policy will slow demand enough to reduce the number of job openings – of which there are currently almost two for every unemployed person – without leading to a significant increase in layoffs and the unemployment rate. A reduction in the ratio of job openings to unemployed will lead to softer wage growth and lower inflation. The May employment report – released last Friday – provides some evidence that the Fed’s plan may be working. In May, an increase in labor force participation led to strong employment gains and kept the unemployment rate flat. We also saw continued evidence of a deceleration in average hourly earnings (Chart 1). Fifty basis point rate hikes are all but assured at the June and July FOMC meetings, but softer wage growth and falling inflation make it more likely that the Fed will downshift to a pace of 25 bps per meeting starting in September. Feature Table 1 Recommended Portfolio Specification Table 2Fixed Income Sector Performance Investment Grade: Underweight Chart 2Investment Grade Market Overview Investment grade corporate bonds outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 79 basis points in May, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -215 bps. The average index option-adjusted spread tightened 5 bps on the month and it currently sits at 131 bps. Similarly, our quality-adjusted 12-month breakeven spread downshifted to its 45th percentile since 1995 (Chart 2). A recent report made the case for why investors should underweight investment grade corporate bonds on a 6-12 month horizon.2 The main rationale for this recommendation is that the slope of the Treasury curve is very flat, signaling that we are in the mid-to-late stages of the credit cycle. Corporate bond performance tends to be weak during such periods unless spreads start from very high levels. Despite our underweight 6-12 month investment stance, we see a high likelihood that spreads will narrow during the next few months as inflation falls and the Fed tightens by no more than what is already priced in the curve. That said, the persistent removal of monetary accommodation and flatness of the yield curve will limit how much spreads can compress. Last week’s report dug deeper into the corporate bond space and concluded that investment grade-rated Energy bonds offer exceptional value on a 6-12 month horizon.3  That report also concluded that long maturity investment grade corporates are attractively priced relative to short maturity bonds. Table 3A Corporate Sector Relative Valuation And Recommended Allocation* Table 3BCorporate Sector Risk Vs. Reward* High-Yield: Neutral Chart 3High-Yield Market Overview High-Yield underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 35 basis points in May, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -316 bps. More specifically, high-yield sold off dramatically early in the month – the junk index lagged Treasuries by 368 bps between May 1 and May 20 – but then staged a rally near the end of May, outperforming Treasuries by 333 bps between May 20 and May 31. The 12-month spread-implied default rate – the default rate that is priced into the junk index assuming a 40% recovery rate on defaulted debt and an excess spread of 100 bps – moved higher in May. It currently sits at 5.1% (Chart 3). Last week’s report reiterated our view that investors should favor high-yield over investment grade within an overall underweight allocation to spread product versus Treasuries.4 Our main rationale for this view is that there are historical precedents for high-yield bonds outperforming investment grade during periods when the yield curve is very flat but when corporate balance sheet health is strong. The 2006-07 period is a prime example. With that in mind, our outlook for corporate profit and debt growth is consistent with a default rate of 2.7% to 3.7% during the next 12 months, well below the 5.1% that is currently priced in the index. MBS: Underweight Chart 4MBS Market Overview Mortgage-Backed Securities outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 70 basis points in May, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -109 bps. We discussed the outlook for Agency MBS in a recent report.5 We noted that MBS’s poor performance in 2021 and early-2022 was driven by duration extension. Fewer homeowners refinanced their loans as mortgage rates rose, and the MBS index’s average duration increased (Chart 4). But now, the index’s duration extension is at its end. The average convexity of the MBS index is close to zero (panel 3), meaning that duration is now insensitive to changes in rates. This is because hardly any homeowners have the incentive to refinance at current mortgage rates (panel 4). The implication is that excess MBS returns will be stronger going forward. That said, we still don’t see enough value in MBS spreads to increase our recommended allocation. The average index spread for conventional 30-year Agency MBS remains close to its lowest level since 2000 (bottom panel). At the coupon level, we observe that low-coupon MBS have much higher duration than high-coupon MBS and that convexity is close to zero for the entire coupon stack. This makes the relative coupon trade a direct play on bond yields. Given that we see some potential for yields to fall somewhat during the next six months, we recommend favoring low-coupon MBS (1.5%-2.5%) within an overall underweight allocation to the sector.ext 12 months, well below the 5.1% that is currently priced in the index. Emerging Market Bonds (USD): Underweight Chart 5Emerging Markets Overview Emerging Market (EM) bonds outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 29 basis points in May, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -565 bps. EM sovereigns outperformed the Treasury benchmark by 125 bps on the month, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -664 bps. The EM Corporate & Quasi-Sovereign Index underperformed by 28 bps, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -501 bps. The EM Sovereign Index underperformed the duration-equivalent US corporate bond index by 27 bps in May. The yield differential between EM sovereigns and duration-matched US corporates remains negative (Chart 5). As such, we continue to recommend a maximum underweight allocation to EM sovereigns. The EM Corporate & Quasi-Sovereign Index underperformed duration-matched US corporates by 109 bps in May, but it continues to offer a significant yield advantage (panel 4). As such, we maintain our neutral allocation (3 out of 5) to the sector. Despite modest weakness in the trade-weighted US dollar in May, EM currencies continue to struggle (bottom panel). If the Fed tightens no more quickly than what is already priced in the curve for the next six months – as we expect – it could limit the upward pressure on the US dollar and benefit EM spreads in the near term. Municipal Bonds: Overweight Chart 6Municipal Market Overview Municipal bonds outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 61 basis points in May, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -78 bps (before adjusting for the tax advantage). We view the municipal bond sector as better placed than most to cope with the recent bout of spread product volatility. As we noted in a recent report, state & local government revenue growth has been strong and yet governments have also been slow to hire.6 The result is that net state & local government savings are incredibly high (Chart 6) and it will take some time to deplete those coffers even as economic growth slows and federal fiscal thrust turns to drag. On the valuation front, munis have cheapened up relative to both Treasuries and corporates during the past few months. The 10-year Aaa Muni/Treasury yield ratio is currently 83%, up significantly from its 2021 trough of 55%. The yield ratio between 12-17 year munis and duration-matched corporate bonds is also up significantly off its lows (panel 2). We reiterate our overweight allocation to municipal bonds within US fixed income portfolios, and we continue to have a strong preference for long-maturity munis. The yield ratio between 17-year+ General Obligation Municipal bonds and duration-matched corporates is 85%. The same measure for 17-year+ Revenue bonds stands at 92%, just below parity even without considering municipal debt’s tax advantage. Treasury Curve: Buy 5-Year Bullet Versus 2/10 Barbell Chart 7Treasury Yield Curve Overview The Treasury curve bull-steepened in May. The 2-year/10-year Treasury slope steepened 13 bps on the month and the 5-year/30-year slope steepened 22 bps. The 2/10 and 5/30 slopes now stand at 30 bps and 16 bps, respectively. In a recent Special Report we noted the unusually large divergence between flat slopes at the long end of the curve and steep slopes at the front end.7 For example, the 5-year/10-year Treasury slope is currently 1 bp while the 3-month/5-year slope is 178 bps. The divergence is happening because the market has moved quicky to price-in a rapid near-term pace of rate hikes. However, so far, the Fed has only delivered 75 bps of tightening and this is holding down the very front-end of the curve. The oddly shaped curve presents us with an excellent trading opportunity. Specifically, we recommend buying the 5-year Treasury note versus a duration-matched barbell consisting of the 2-year and 10-year notes. This trade looks attractive on our model (Chart 7) and will profit if the rate hike cycle moves more slowly than what is currently priced but lasts longer. We also continue to recommend a position long the 20-year bullet versus a duration-matched 10/30 barbell as an attractive carry trade. TIPS: Underweight Chart 8TIPS Market Overview TIPS underperformed the duration-equivalent nominal Treasury index by 144 basis points in May, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to +237 bps. The 10-year TIPS breakeven inflation rate fell 25 bps last month, but it remains above the Fed’s 2.3% - 2.5% comfort zone (Chart 8). Our TIPS Breakeven Valuation Indicator shows that TIPS remain “expensive”, but not as expensive as they were a month ago (panel 2). While TIPS have become less expensive during the past month, we think TIPS breakeven inflation rates will continue to fall during the next few months as inflation moves lower. This will be particularly true at the front-end of the curve where breakevens remain disconnected from the Fed’s target (panel 4) and where breakevens exhibit a stronger correlation with the incoming inflation data. To take advantage of falling inflation between now and the end of the year, investors should position for a steeper TIPS breakeven curve (bottom panel) and/or a flatter real (TIPS) curve. We also recommend that investors hold outright short positions in 2-year TIPS.     ABS: Overweight Chart 9ABS Market Overview Asset-Backed Securities underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 26 basis points in May, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -63 bps. Aaa-rated ABS underperformed by 26 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -59 bps. Non-Aaa ABS underperformed by 22 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -88 bps. During the past two years, substantial federal government support for household incomes caused US households to build up an extremely large buffer of excess savings. Nowhere is this more evident than in the steep drop in the amount of outstanding credit card debt that was witnessed in 2020 and 2021 (Chart 9). In 2022, consumers have started to re-lever. The personal savings rate was just 4.4% in April, the lowest print since September 2008, and the amount of outstanding credit card debt has almost recovered its pre-COVID level. But while household balance sheets are starting to deteriorate, they remain exceptionally strong in level terms. In other words, it will be some time before we see enough deterioration to cause a meaningful uptick in consumer credit delinquencies. Investors should remain overweight consumer ABS and should take advantage of the high quality of household balance sheets by moving down the quality spectrum, favoring non-Aaa rated securities over Aaa-rated ones. Non-Agency CMBS: Overweight Chart 10CMBS Market Overview Non-Agency Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 105 basis points in May, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -189 bps. Aaa Non-Agency CMBS underperformed Treasuries by 84 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -152 bps. Non-Aaa Non-Agency CMBS underperformed by 165 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -290 bps. CMBS spreads remain wide compared to other similarly risky spread products. However, after several quarters of easing, commercial real estate lending standards shifted closer to ‘net tightening’ territory in Q1 (Chart 10). This trend will bear monitoring in the coming quarters.  Agency CMBS: Overweight Agency CMBS outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 19 basis points in May, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -23 bps. The average index option-adjusted spread tightened 2 bps on the month. It currently sits at 49 bps, not that far from its average pre-COVID level (bottom panel). Agency CMBS spreads also continue to look attractive compared to other similarly risky spread products. Stay overweight. Appendix A: The Golden Rule Of Bond Investing We follow a two-step process to formulate recommendations for bond portfolio duration. First, we determine the change in the federal funds rate that is priced into the yield curve for the next 12 months. Second, we decide – based on our assessments of the economy and Fed policy – whether the change in the fed funds rate will exceed or fall short of what is priced into the curve. Most of the time, a correct answer to this question leads to the appropriate duration call. We call this framework the Golden Rule Of Bond Investing, and we demonstrated its effectiveness in the US Bond Strategy Special Report, “The Golden Rule Of Bond Investing”, dated July 24, 2018. Chart 11 illustrates the Golden Rule’s track record by showing that the Bloomberg Barclays Treasury Master Index tends to outperform cash when rate hikes fall short of 12-month expectations, and vice-versa. At present, the market is priced for 251 basis points of rate hikes during the next 12 months. Chart 11The Golden Rule's Track RecordWe can also use our Golden Rule framework to make 12-month total return and excess return forecasts for the Bloomberg Barclays Treasury index under different scenarios for the fed funds rate. Excess returns are relative to the Bloomberg Barclays Cash index. To forecast total returns we first calculate the 12-month fed funds rate surprise in each scenario by comparing the assumed change in the fed funds rate to the current value of our 12-month discounter. This rate hike surprise is then mapped to an expected change in the Treasury index yield using a regression based on the historical relationship between those two variables. Finally, we apply the expected change in index yield to the current characteristics (yield, duration and convexity) of the Treasury index to estimate total returns on a 12-month horizon. The below tables present those results, along with excess returns for a front-loaded and a back-loaded rate hike scenario. Excess returns are calculated by subtracting assumed cash returns in each scenario from our total return projections. Appendix B: Butterfly Strategy Valuations The following tables present the current read-outs from our butterfly spread models. We use these models to identify opportunities to take duration-neutral positions across the Treasury curve. The following two Special Reports explain the models in more detail: US Bond Strategy Special Report, “Bullets, Barbells And Butterflies”, dated July 25, 2017, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com US Bond Strategy Special Report, “More Bullets, Barbells And Butterflies”, dated May 15, 2018, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com Table 4 shows the raw residuals from each model. A positive value indicates that the bullet is cheap relative to the duration-matched barbell. A negative value indicates that the barbell is cheap relative to the bullet. Table 4Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Raw Residuals In Basis Points (As Of May 31, 2022) Table 5 scales the raw residuals in Table 4 by their historical means and standard deviations. This facilitates comparison between the different butterfly spreads. Table 5Butterfly Strategy Valuation: Standardized Residuals (As Of May 31, 2022) Table 6 flips the models on their heads. It shows the change in the slope between the two barbell maturities that must be realized during the next six months to make returns between the bullet and barbell equal. For example, a reading of -51 bps in the 5 over 2/10 cell means that we would expect the 5-year to outperform the 2/10 if the 2/10 slope flattens by less than 51 bps during the next six months. Otherwise, we would expect the 2/10 barbell to outperform the 5-year bullet. Table 6Discounted Slope Change During Next 6 Months (BPs) Appendix C: Excess Return Bond Map The Excess Return Bond Map is used to assess the relative risk/reward trade-off between different sectors of the US bond market. It is a purely computational exercise and does not impose any macroeconomic view. The Map’s vertical axis shows 12-month expected excess returns. These are proxied by each sector’s option-adjusted spread. Sectors plotting further toward the top of the Map have higher expected returns and vice-versa. Our novel risk measure called the “Risk Of Losing 100 bps” is shown on the Map’s horizontal axis. To calculate it, we first compute the spread widening required on a 12-month horizon for each sector to lose 100 bps or more relative to a duration-matched position in Treasury securities. Then, we divide that amount of spread widening by each sector’s historical spread volatility. The end result is the number of standard deviations of 12-month spread widening required for each sector to lose 100 bps or more versus a position in Treasuries. Lower risk sectors plot further to the right of the Map, and higher risk sectors plot further to the left. Chart 12Excess Return Bond Map (As Of May 31, 2022) Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/waller20220530a.htm 2 Please see US Bond Strategy / Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, “Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds”, dated April 12, 2022. 3 Please see US Bond Strategy / Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, “Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff”, dated May 31, 2022. 4  Please see US Bond Strategy / Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, “Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff”, dated May 31, 2022. 5 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “The Bond Market Implications Of A 5% Mortgage Rate”, dated April 26, 2022. 6 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “Echoes Of 2018”, dated May 24, 2022. 7 Please see US Bond Strategy / US Investment Strategy / US Equity Strategy Special Report, “The Yield Curve As An Indicator”, dated March 29, 2022.       Recommended Portfolio Specification Other Recommendations Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns

Executive Summary   Lower Rates Are A Tailwind For Growth Stocks We remain in the bearish camp. While the market bottom is getting closer, there are still hurdles to overcome such as elevated economic and earnings growth expectations, which need to come down to prevent new disappointments. Notably, the market focus has shifted away from inflation and has turned towards worries about growth as is evident in the falling 10-year Treasury yield. The environment of slowing growth and falling rates is a tailwind for growth stocks, warranting an upgrade of Growth to at least a benchmark weight. Technicals also signal that Growth is oversold relative to Value. The valuation differential has also moderated. However, we are wary of upgrading Growth to an outright overweight and downgrading Value to underweight as there is still plenty of economic uncertainty. We also posit that in the next several months the markets will be “fat and flat”, i.e., a bear market punctuated by rallies and pullbacks. In this environment, a balanced allocation between Growth and Value will reduce portfolio volatility and result in higher compound returns. Bottom Line: In a commentary to our chart pack report, we upgrade the Growth/Value style preference to benchmark allocation. Feature This week we provide you with a style chart pack. In this accompanying note, we will make a case for upgrading Growth and downgrading Value, bringing these style allocations to equal weight. We are booking a profit of 13% since we established the position in January 2022. We are getting closer to upgrading Growth to overweight. Performance May started as another tough month for equities, but, as they say, all’s well that ends well. After pulling back 10% since the beginning of May, and briefly touching bear market territory of -20%, the S&P 500 rebounded in the last 10 days of the month bringing the index to where it ended April. As a result, the S&P 500 was flat, and the NASDAQ was down 2.4% in May. As expected, the rally brought about a change in leadership (Chart I-1), with Consumer Discretionary and Technology leading the pack. Energy and Utilities are the only sectors that avoided rotation. Since May 20, Growth has outperformed Value by 3%. Chart I-1Recent Performance Bear Market Rally Or The Real Thing? Since the start of the May rally, investors have been debating whether it has legs. Bulls argue that we are in the early innings of a sustainable rebound in equities – after all, much of the bad news is already priced in, 45% of NYSE and 70% of NASDAQ have recently hit new 12-month lows, screaming oversold conditions, and making bottom fishing tempting  (Chart I-2). Bears consider this surge in performance a garden-variety bear market rally: Growth is slowing and none of the problems that have been haunting the markets over the past five months, such as inflation, war, China, and a hawkish Fed, have yet been resolved. Our views are closer to the bearish camp: We believe that, even if the market bottom is getting closer, there are still hurdles to overcome, such as elevated economic and earnings growth expectations, which need to come down to prevent new disappointments. As we discussed in the recent “What Is Next For Equities: They Will Be Fat And Flat” report, we believe that equities are likely to be range-bound over the next several months: A turn in inflation and a downshift in growth may ignite rallies on hopes of a gentler, data-driven Fed, and a shallower trajectory for the rate-hiking cycle  (Chart I-3). However, we argue that the Fed “put” is no longer in play and the Fed will stay focused on inflation, inadvertently puncturing any budding rallies. In addition to a hawkish Fed, investors will have to process what may become a sharp economic growth slowdown and an earnings recession in the US on the back of rising costs, a stronger dollar, and slowing global demand for US goods. Chart I-2Is Much Of The Bad News Already Priced In? Chart I-3Many Hope For A Shallower Hiking Cycle Growth Vs. Value: Shifting Positioning To Equal Weight When Growth Is Harder To Find, Growth Stocks Shine As we argued in the “Fat and Flat” report, there are multiple signs that economic growth is slowing, and that earnings growth will disappoint. Our Business Cycle Indicator, which is a compilation of soft and hard data across production, consumer, and credit dimensions, is also signaling a slowdown  (Chart I-4). Here we would like to emphasize our view: As of now, US economic growth is strong, and it is only its second derivative, i.e. a deceleration of growth, that is the root of our concerns. In a world where growth is becoming scarcer, companies that can deliver growth will shine. These are “growth” companies, i.e. large, stable companies with strong balance sheets that are able to generate positive cash flow and churn out strong earnings even under economic duress  (Chart I-5). Quality growth outperforms during slowdowns  (Chart I-6). This reasoning does not apply to speculative, barely profitable, growth companies which will fight for survival in a slow-growth world. Chart I-4We Are In A Slowdown Stage Of The Business Cycle Chart I-5Large Cap Growth Is Synonymous With Quality Chart I-6Growth Outperforms During Economic Slowdowns Of course, one might argue that economic growth has been slowing for about a year, initially by returning towards the pre-pandemic trend and, lately, as a result of monetary tightening. Yet, over the past six months, Growth has underperformed Value by nearly 11%. What is different now? First, inflation, and the monetary tightening that inevitably follows it, are the mortal enemies of growth stocks: Higher discount rates deflate the present value of future cash flows. Rising inflation and sharply rising Treasury yields are behind the recent sell-off in Growth stocks. However, recently, the market focus has shifted away from inflation, and seems to finally be turning towards worries about growth. As a result, the 10-year Treasury yield decreased from 3.12% to 2.75%, and its relentless climb may now be behind us  (Chart I-7). Lower rates are a tailwind for Growth stocks which rebounded at the first whiff of rate stabilization  (Chart I-8). Chart I-7Investors Concerns Have Shifted From Inflation To Growth Further, our research on macroeconomic regimes suggests that a turn in inflation heralds a change in market leadership from Value to Quality and Growth  (Chart I-9). Chart I-8Lower Rates Are A Tailwind For Growth Stocks Chart I-9Growth And Quality Will Lead Markets When Inflation Abates Growth Not Yet Cheap But Oversold This year’s sell-off is characterized by a multiple contraction. Growth is a poster child of this trend: Its forward multiple has decreased by 8 points, with the style currently trading at just under 20x forward earnings, which is the 61st percentile relative to its 10-year history (compare that to 28x and the 94th percentile back in January). As for Value, it also became cheaper, contracting from 16.8x in January to 14.9x (Table I-1). Table I-1Valuations And EPS Growth Expectations According to the BCA Valuations Indicator  (Chart I-10), the Growth/Value valuations spread has moderated but by itself, is not an impetus for a switch. However, looking at technicals, Growth is extremely oversold relative to Value and is at levels last seen in 2006. Why Neutral, Not Overweight? We hope we made a compelling case for shifting allocation from Value to Growth. Then why not go overweight, but just neutral? Mostly because many of the macroeconomic developments we have described are tentative and are just conjecture at this point – there is still plenty of uncertainty about inflation, rates, and the Fed monetary response. Second, while Growth stocks are supposed to grow faster than Value stocks, at the moment analysts expect them to grow at 8% and 11% respectively. We expect earnings growth expectations for Value stocks to be downgraded since they are dominated by cyclicals. However, until the new numbers are in for both styles, we need to be careful. Chart I-10Growth Is Getting Cheaper Relative To Value... It Also Appears Oversold Last, if we are right, and US equities are to test their bottom this summer in a “fat and flat” manner, there will be a frequent change in leadership, with Growth and Small outperforming during the rallies, and Value outperforming during pullbacks. Portfolios need exposure to both styles to achieve the highest compound returns as diversification reduces portfolio volatility. Once macroeconomic uncertainty dissipates, we will be able to pounce and shift Growth to overweight, and Value to underweight. For now, we are going to stay neutral out of an abundance of caution. Bottom Line Macroeconomic conditions are becoming more favorable for Growth as Treasury yields stabilize and economic growth slows, making the strong fundamentals and stable earnings of large-cap growth stocks more valuable. Growth is oversold relative to Value, and the relative performance differential of Growth vs. Value over the past six months has been staggering – it is time to book profits and prepare for the next chapter.   Irene Tunkel Chief Strategist, US Equity Strategy irene.tunkel@bcaresearch.com     S&P 500 Chart II-1Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-2Profitability Chart II-3Valuations And Technicals Chart II-4Uses Of Cash Cyclicals Vs Defensives Chart II-5Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-6Profitability Chart II-7Valuation And Technicals Chart II-8Uses Of Cash Growth Vs Value Chart II-9Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-10Profitability Chart II-11Valuations And Technicals Chart II-12Uses Of Cash Small Vs Large Chart II-13Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-14Profitability Chart II-15Valuations and Technicals Chart II-16Uses Of Cash Table A1Performance Table A2Valuations And Forward Earnings Growth   Footnotes Recommended Allocation Recommended Allocation: Addendum