Economy

Executive Summary Our recommended model bond portfolio outperformed its custom index by a robust +48bps in Q1/2022 – an impressive performance given the significant uncertainties stemming from the Ukraine war, surging commodity prices and hawkish central banks. This outperformance came entirely from the rates side of the portfolio (+52bps) as global government bond yields surged, driven by a large underweight to US Treasuries. The credit side of the portfolio was largely unchanged versus the benchmark (-4bps). Looking ahead, we see global bond yields as being more rangebound over the next six months. A lot of rate hikes in 2022 are already discounted (most notably in the US) and global inflation is likely to decelerate in Q2 & Q3. As the global monetary tightening cycle evolves, positioning more defensively in global credit, rather than duration management, will provide the better opportunity to generate alpha in bond portfolios. GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Recommended Positioning For The Next Six Months Bottom Line: In our model bond portfolio, we are downgrading US investment grade corporates to underweight, and reducing high-yield exposure in the US and Europe to neutral. We are also reducing inflation-linked bond allocations in the US and euro area to underweight versus nominals. Feature The first three months were horrific for global bond markets. The Bloomberg Global Aggregate index delivered a total return of -6.2%, the second worst quarter since 1990. No sector, from government bonds to corporate debt to emerging market spread product, was immune to the pressures from soaring energy prices, war-driven uncertainty and hawkish central bankers belated responding to the worst bout of global inflation since the 1970s. Related Report  Global Fixed Income StrategyOur Model Bond Portfolio Strategy To Begin 2022: Choosing Our Battles Wisely That toxic cocktail for bond returns may lose some potency in the coming months if a de-escalation of the Ukraine tensions can be reached. However, the bigger drivers of bond market volatility – high global inflation and the monetary tightening necessary to combat it – are more likely to linger for longer than expected. Government bond yields are unlikely to fall much in this environment. Increasingly, global credit spreads, especially for corporate debt in the US, will face intensifying widening pressure as central banks rapidly dial back pandemic-era monetary accommodation, led by the US Federal Reserve. With that in mind, we present our quarterly review of the BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy (GFIS) model bond portfolio for the first quarter of 2022. We also present our recommended positioning for the portfolio for the next six months, as well as portfolio return expectations for our base case and alternative investment scenarios. As a reminder to existing readers (and to new clients), the model portfolio is a part of our service that complements the usual macro analysis of global fixed income markets. The portfolio is how we communicate our opinion on the relative attractiveness between government bond and spread product sectors. We do this by applying actual percentage weightings to each of our recommendations within a fully invested hypothetical bond portfolio. Q1/2022 Model Bond Portfolio Performance: Regional Allocation Drives Outperformance Chart 1Q1/2022 Performance: Big Gains From Rising Bond Yields The total return for the GFIS model portfolio (hedged into US dollars) in the third quarter was -4.6%, outperforming the custom benchmark index by +48bps (Chart 1).1 In terms of the specific breakdown between the government bond and spread product allocations in our model portfolio, the former generated +52bps of outperformance versus our custom benchmark index while the latter underperformed by -4bps. In an extremely negative quarter for fixed income both in terms of the breadth and depth of losses, our regional allocation choices helped us continue generating outperformance after we transitioned to a neutral overall portfolio duration stance in mid-February. Throughout the quarter, we maintained a significant underweight on US Treasuries in the portfolio, even after we tactically upgraded our duration tilt. We expected US government debt to still underperform that of other developed markets, even in an environment where the rise in global bond yields was due for a breather. Our rationale worked – admittedly helped by the inflationary shock of the Russian invasion of Ukraine - with the US Treasury part of our portfolio generating a whopping +63bps of outperformance (Table 1). Table 1GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Q1/2022 Overall Return Attribution Meanwhile, our biggest government bond overweights were in Europe, a market we expected to perform defensively in a portfolio context. We were obviously caught offside on this call as energy prices and inflation expectations in Europe surged in response to the Ukraine conflict. In total, our portfolio lost -30bps in active return terms in euro area government bonds, with the losses spread evenly between the core and periphery. We did staunch the bleeding somewhat by reducing our allocation to the periphery in the last two weeks of the quarter and using the proceeds to fund an increased allocation to European investment grade corporates. The European corporate index spread has tightened -23bps since that switch. Turning to the credit side of the portfolio, the most successful position was our underweight tilt on emerging market (EM) USD-denominated corporates (+10bps) and sovereigns (+9bps) during a catastrophic quarter for EM risky assets driven by the conflict as well as weakness in the Chinese economy. We sustained losses from our overweight on US CMBS (-11bps) which was broadly offset by gains from our underweight on US MBS (+10bps). Lastly, while we were hurt by the sell-off in euro area high-yield (-13bps), where we were overweight to start 2022, we did scale back some of that exposure towards the end of the quarter when markets started to discount the risk of a “worst case” scenario of direct NATO intervention in Ukraine. The bar charts showing the total and relative returns for each individual government bond market and spread product sector in our model portfolio are presented in Charts 2 & 3. Chart 2GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Q1/2022 Government Bond Performance Attribution Chart 3GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Q1/2022 Spread Product Performance Attribution By Sector Biggest Outperformers: Underweight US Treasuries with a maturity greater than 10 years (+23bps) Underweight UK Gilts with a maturity greater than 10 years (+14bps) Underweight US treasuries with a maturity between 3 and 5 years (+12bps) Biggest Underperformers: Overweight euro area high-yield corporates (-13bps) Overweight US CMBS (-11bps) Overweight Spanish Bonos (-5bps) Chart 4 presents the ranked benchmark index returns of the individual countries and spread product sectors in the GFIS model bond portfolio for Q1/2022. Returns are hedged into US dollars (we do not take active currency risk in this portfolio) and adjusted to reflect duration differences between each country/sector and the overall custom benchmark index for the model portfolio. We have also color coded the bars in each chart to reflect our recommended investment stance for each market during Q1 (red for underweight, dark green for overweight, gray for neutral). Chart 4Ranking The Winners & Losers From The GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Universe In Q1/2022 Ideally, we would look to see more green bars on the left side of the chart where market returns are highest, and more red bars on the right side of the chart were returns are lowest. That pattern largely held true in Q1/2022, especially at the tail ends of the chart. During a quarter where all the major asset classes in our portfolio lost money on a hedged and duration-matched basis, we outperformed by selectively underweighting the worst performers. Notably, we were underweight UK Gilts (-1280bps) and EM Sovereigns (-1103bps) on the extreme right side of the chart. We were also underweight US Treasuries (-531bps) which, despite being in the middle of Chart 4, contributed hugely to our portfolio outperformance due to their large market cap weighting in the benchmark index. Broadly, this means that, except for Europe and Australia, our highest conviction calls worked in our favor during the quarter. Bottom Line: Our model bond portfolio outperformed its benchmark index in the third quarter of the year by +48bps – a positive result coming largely from underweight positions in US Treasuries, UK Gilts, and EM credit. Changes To Our Model Bond Portfolio Allocations The uncertainty stemming from the Russia/Ukraine conflict led us to temporarily neutralize many of the recommended exposures in the model bond portfolio. We not only moved to neutral on overall portfolio duration, we also neutralized individual country yield curve tilts and inflation-linked bond allocations. While the situation remains fluid, the worst-case scenarios of the conflict expanding beyond the borders of Ukraine appear to have been avoided. This leads us to reconsider where to once again take active risks on the rates side of the portfolio. Chart 5Our Duration Indicator Calling For Slowing Global Yield Momentum Duration On overall portfolio duration, we are maintaining a neutral (“at benchmark”) stance in the portfolio. Our Global Duration Indicator is currently signaling that the strong upward momentum of global bond yields should fade over the next few months (Chart 5). Slowing global growth expectations – a trend that was already in place prior to the Ukraine conflict - are the major reason why our Duration Indicator has turned lower. The war-fueled surge in energy prices has helped push global bond yields higher through rising inflation breakevens, which also prompted central banks – most notably the Fed and the Bank of England (BoE)- to signal a need for a faster pace of interest rate hikes in 2022 despite softening growth momentum. Looking ahead, that strong link between oil prices and bond yields will not be broken until there is some sort of de-escalation of the Ukraine conflict, which does not appear imminent. This supports a near-term neutral overall duration stance. Yield Curve Allocations In terms of yield curve exposure, we see some opportunities to adjust allocations (Chart 6). US curves have inverted and UK curves are flirting with inversion as markets are pricing in more Fed/BoE tightening, while curves in Germany and France have bear-steepened with longer-term inflation expectations going up faster than shorter-term interest rate expectations. In the US and UK, the yield curve flattening also reflects the “front loading” of Fed/BoE rate hike expectations. Overnight index swap (OIS) curves are pricing in 190bps of rate hikes in the US, and 134bps in the UK, by the end of 2022. This is followed quickly by rate cuts discounted in H2/2023 and 2024 in both countries. We see it as more likely that both central banks will deliver fewer hikes than discounted in 2022 and but will push rates to higher levels than priced by the end of 2024. That leads us to add a mild steepening bias into our US and UK government bond allocations in the model bond portfolio. We offset that by inserting a flattening bias in the German and French yield curve allocations to keep the overall portfolio duration at 7.5 years, matching that of the custom benchmark index (Chart 7). Chart 6Curve Flattening In The US & UK Is Overdone​​​​​ Chart 7Overall Portfolio Duration: Stay Neutral​​​​​ Chart 8No Change To Our Country Allocations To Begin Q2/22 Country Allocations Turning to our country allocations, we see no need to make major changes right now (Chart 8). We still prefer to maintain an underweight stance on countries that are more likely to see multiple central bank rate hikes in 2022 (the US, UK, Canada) versus those that are less likely (Germany, France, Japan, Australia). We are also staying neutral on Italian and Spanish government bonds with the ECB set to taper the pace of its asset purchases in Q2. Less ECB buying raises the risk that higher yields will be required to entice private sector buyers to buy Italian and Spanish debt with a smaller central bank backstop. Inflation-Linked Bonds Our Comprehensive Breakeven Inflation (CBI) indicators assess the potential for a significant move in 10-year breakeven inflation rates, based on deviations from variables that typically correlate with breakevens like oil prices or survey-based measures of inflation expectations. At the moment, none of the CBIs for the eight countries in our model bond portfolio are below zero (Chart 9), which would be a signal that breakevens are too low and can move higher. Chart 9Inflation-Linked Bond Exposure: Reduce Europe & The US, Increase Canada Canada has the lowest CBI, and last week, we added a tactical trade to go long 10-year Canadian inflation breakevens. We will add that position to our model bond portfolio this week, moving the Canadian “linkers” allocation to overweight versus nominal Canadian government bonds (within an overall underweight allocation to Canada in the model bond portfolio). On the other side of our CBI rankings are countries where the CBIs are well above zero and breakevens are more stretched: Germany, Italy, France and the US. We are currently neutral inflation-linked bonds in those four countries, but strictly as a hedge against the war-fueled risks of further increases in oil prices. Now, however, 10-year breakevens have widened to levels that already factor in more expensive oil, even with oil prices struggling to break out to new highs. As a result, we are downgrading the allocation to linkers in Germany, Italy, France and the US to underweight within the model bond portfolio (Chart 10). Corporate Bonds The most meaningful changes we are making to our model bond portfolio, and in our strategic investment recommendations, are to our corporate bond allocations: We are downgrading US investment grade corporate bond exposure from neutral to underweight (2 out of 5) We are downgrading US high-yield corporate bond exposure from overweight to neutral (3 out of 5) We are also downgrading euro area high-yield exposure from overweight to neutral (3 out of 5) Credit spreads across the developed market and EM space have fully unwound the surge seen after Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24 (Chart 11). We had turned more cautious on global spread product exposure in early March because of the war-fueled shock to energy prices and investor sentiment. We viewed this as a bigger issue for European and EM credit, with Europe heavily reliant on Russian energy supplies and EM market liquidity impacted by bans on trading of Russian assets. We therefore reduced exposures to European high-yield and EM hard currency debt in the model bond portfolio. Chart 10Our Inflation-Linked Bond Country Allocations Now, while markets have become more sanguine about the prospects of a long war that can more directly draw in Western forces, a bigger threat to financial market stability has emerged – more aggressive tightening of global monetary policy led by the Fed. Chart 11Global Credit Spreads Have Returned To Pre-Invasion Levels​​​​​​ Chart 12Global Monetary Backdrop Turning More Negative For Credit Already, the move away from quantitative easing by the Fed, ECB and BoE has led to a negative impulse for global credit returns (Chart 12). Excess returns for the Bloomberg Global Corporate and High-Yield indices are now essentially flat on a year-over-year basis, and the riskiest credit tiers of both indices are seeing the greater spread widening (bottom panel). Another indicator of tightening monetary policy, the flat US Treasury curve, is also signaling a poor environment for US credit market returns. Our colleagues at our sister service, BCA Research US Bond Strategy, have noted that when the 2-year/10-year US Treasury curve flattens below +25bps, the odds of US investment grade credit outperforming duration-matched Treasuries decline sharply. Dating back to 1973, the average excess return (over Treasuries) for the Bloomberg US investment grade index over the twelve months after the 2/10 curve flattens below +25bps is -0.56%. The 2/10 US Treasury curve is now inverted at -3bps, even with the Fed having only delivered a single +25bp rate hike so far in the current cycle. This is a highly unusual occurrence, as the Treasury curve typically inverts after the Fed has delivered multiple rate hikes in a tightening cycle. Bond investors are clearly “front-running” the Fed in discounting aggressive rate hikes in 2022 in response to US inflation near 8%. We think the Fed will deliver fewer hikes than markets are discounting this year, but will do more in 2023 and 2024. Yet the message from the now-inverted yield curve, and what it means for corporate bond performance, is too powerful to ignore. This underpins our decision to downgrade our recommended allocation to US investment grade to underweight. We do not, however, see a need to move the allocations for other corporate bond markets as aggressively. The credit spread widening seen so far in 2022 in the US and Europe – a trend that was already in place before the start of the Ukraine war – has restored more value to European corporate spreads compared to US equivalents. That can be seen when looking at our preferred measure of spread valuations, 12-month breakeven spreads.2 The historical percentile ranking of the 12-month breakeven spread is 63% for euro area investment grade and a much lower 23% for US investment grade (Chart 13). The absolute level of the euro area ranking justifies maintaining an overweight stance on euro area investment grade, both in absolute terms and relative to US investment grade. A smaller gap exists for high-yield, where the euro area 12-month breakeven spread percentile ranking is 50% versus 33% in the US. Those lower percentile rankings justify no higher than a neutral allocation to high-yield on either side of the Atlantic. On the surface, maintaining a higher allocation to US high-yield over US investment grade does appear counter-intuitive in an environment where the US Treasury curve is inverted and investors are growing increasingly worried that the Fed will need to engineer a major growth slowdown to cool inflation. However, that same high inflation helps to maintain a fast enough pace of nominal economic growth to limit the default risk for riskier borrowers. Moody’s estimates that the default rate for high-yield corporates will reach 3.1% in the US and 2.6% in Europe by year-end. Using those estimates, we can calculate a default-adjusted spread, or the current high-yield spread minus one-year-ahead expected default losses. That spread is currently 134bps in the US and 206bps in Europe, both well above the low end of the long-run range and closer to the long-run average (Chart 14). Those are levels that are consistent with a neutral allocation to high-yield in both regions, as current spreads offer a decent cushion in an environment of relatively low default risk. Chart 13More Attractive Spread Levels In Europe Vs. US​​​​​​ Chart 14Low Default Risk Helps Support High-Yield Valuations​​​​​​ Chart 15Persistent Headwinds To EM Credit Performance Emerging Markets Finally, we continue to see more reasons to be cautious on EM USD-denominated credit, given the lack of support from typical fundamental drivers (Chart 15). Weak Chinese growth, slowing commodity price momentum (on a year-over-year basis), and a firm US dollar are all factors that weigh on EM economic growth and the ability to service hard-currency debt. We are maintaining an underweight allocation to EM USD-denominated sovereign and corporate debt in our model bond portfolio. Indications that China is ready to introduce more fiscal and monetary stimulus, and/or if the Fed’s messaging turned less hawkish – and less US dollar bullish – would be the signals necessary for us to consider an EM upgrade. Summing It All Up The full list of our recommended portfolio allocations after making all of the above changes can be seen in Table 2. The changes leave the portfolio with the following high-level characteristics: Table 2GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Recommended Positioning For The Next Six Months Chart 16Overall Portfolio Allocation: Underweight Spread Product Vs Governments the overall duration exposure remains at-benchmark (i.e. neutral) the portfolio has now flipped to an underweight stance on the exposure of spread product to government bonds, equal to four percentage points of the portfolio (Chart 16) the tracking error of the portfolio, or its expected volatility in excess of that of the benchmark, is 80bps – a level similar to that before the changes were made and still well below our self-imposed 100bps tracking error limit (Chart 17) the portfolio now has a yield below that of the custom benchmark index, equal to 2.51% (Chart 18). Chart 17Overall Portfolio Risk: Moderate​​​​​​ Chart 18Overall Portfolio Yield: Below-Benchmark​​​​​​ The changes leave the portfolio much more exposed to a widening of global credit spreads than a rise in government bond yields – a desired outcome with bond yields already discounting a lot of tightening but credit spreads still at historically tight levels. Bottom Line: As the global monetary tightening cycle evolves, positioning more defensively in global credit, rather than duration management, will provide the better opportunity to generate alpha in bond portfolios. We are expressing that by cutting the exposure to corporate bonds in our model bond portfolio. Portfolio Scenario Analysis For The Next Six Months After making all the specific changes to our model portfolio weightings, which can be seen in the tables on pages 23-25, we now turn to our regular quarterly scenario analysis to determine the return expectations for the portfolio for the next six months. On the credit side of the portfolio, we use risk-factor-based regression models to forecast future yield changes for global spread product sectors as a function of four major factors - the VIX, oil prices, the US dollar and the fed funds rate (Table 3A). For the government bond side of the portfolio, we avoid using regression models and instead use a yield-beta driven framework, taking forecasts for changes in US Treasury yields and translating those in changes in non-US bond yields by applying a historical yield beta (Table 3B). Table 3AFactor Regressions Used To Estimate Spread Product Yield Changes Table 3BEstimated Government Bond Yield Betas To US Treasuries For our scenario analysis over the next six months, we use a base case scenario plus two alternate “tail risk” scenarios. In the current environment, our scenarios center around developments in the Ukraine/Russia conflict and the impacts on uncertainty and commodity-fueled inflation. Base Case There is no further escalation of the Ukraine/Russia conflict, possibly resulting in a temporary ceasefire. Oil prices pull back on a lower war risk premium, helping lower inflation expectations. Global realized inflation peaks during Q2/2022, alongside some moderation of global growth in lagged response to high energy prices. Within that slower pace of global growth, the US outperforms Europe while Chinese growth remains weak because of COVID lockdowns (although that will eventually lead to more stimulus from Chinese policymakers). The Fed delivers 100bps of rate hikes by July, starting with a 50bp increase at the May meeting, before pausing at the September meeting in response to slowing US inflation and growth. There is a mild bear flattening of the US Treasury curve, but yields remain broadly unchanged over the full six month scenario period with the Fed not hiking by more than currently discounted. The Brent oil price retreats by -10%, the US dollar modestly appreciates by 2%, the VIX stays close to current levels at 20 and the fed funds rate reaches 1.5%. Escalation Scenario The is no reduction in Ukraine war tensions, with increased Russian aggression resulting in greater NATO military involvement. The risk premium in oil prices increases, delaying the expected peak in global inflation until the second half of 2022. Inflation expectations remain elevated. Global growth weakens more than in the base case scenario because of higher energy prices, but with US growth still outperforming Europe. China’s economy remains weighed down by COVID lockdowns and an inadequate fiscal/monetary/credit policy response. The Fed is forced to be more aggressive because of high inflation expectations, delivering 150bps of hikes by September. The US Treasury curve bear-flattens, but with Treasury yields rising across the curve through wider TIPS breakevens and greater-than-expected rate hikes keeping real yields stable. The Brent oil price rises +25%, the VIX index climbs to 30, the US dollar appreciates by +5% thanks to slowing global growth and a more aggressive move by the Fed to push the funds rate to 2%. De-Escalation Scenario There is a full and lasting ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine. The war risk premium in oil prices collapses, allowing global inflation to peak in Q2 and then decline rapidly. Global growth sentiment improves because of lower energy prices and diminished worries about a wider world war. European growth outperforms US growth (relative to expectations) as European natural gas prices decline. China responds faster than expected to the latest COVID wave with more aggressive policy stimulus. Lower inflation allows the Fed to be more patient on rate hikes, delivering only 75bps of hikes by July before pausing. The Treasury curve moderately bull-steepens, although the absolute decline in nominal Treasury yields is fairly small as lower TIPS breakevens are partially offset by higher real yields (as growth sentiment improves). The Brent oil price falls -20%, the VIX index drifts down to 18, and the US dollar depreciates by -3% as global growth improves and the Fed pushes the funds rate to a less-than-expected 1.25% by July. The excess return scenarios for the model bond portfolio, using the above inputs in our simple quantitative return forecast framework, are shown in Table 4A. The US Treasury yield assumptions are shown in Table 4B. For the more visually inclined, we present charts showing the model inputs and Treasury yield projections in Chart 19 and Chart 20, respectively. Table 4AGFIS Model Bond Portfolio Scenario Analysis For The Next Six Months Table 4BUS Treasury Yield Assumptions For The 6-Month Forward Scenario Analysis Chart 19Risk Factor Assumptions For The Scenario Analysis​​​​​​ Chart 20US Treasury Yield Assumptions For The Scenario Analysis​​​​​​ Given our neutral overall portfolio duration stance, and the mild changes in nominal bond yields implied by our forecasts, it should not be surprising that the rates side of the portfolio is expected to not contribute any excess return in Q2 and Q3. However, Fed rate hikes – which push up yields on spread product in the forecasting regressions – result in negative credit returns in all scenarios (especially in the cases where the VIX is expected to rise). Thus, the return on the credit side of the model portfolio, where we are now underweight credit risk, will be the main driver of performance, delivering a range of excess return outcomes between +29bps and +53bps. Bottom Line: The next six months will be about locking in the significant gains in our model bond portfolio performance from rising bond yields, and transitioning to outperforming via wider credit spreads in US investment grade and EM hard currency debt.   Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com Shakti Sharma Senior Analyst ShaktiS@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1      The GFIS model bond portfolio custom benchmark index is the Bloomberg Barclays Global Aggregate Index, but with allocations to global high-yield corporate debt replacing very high-quality spread product (i.e. AA-rated). We believe this to be more indicative of the typical internal benchmark used by global multi-sector fixed income managers. 2     12-month breakeven spreads compare the option-adjusted spread (OAS) of a credit market or sector to its duration, using Bloomberg bond index data. The breakeven spread is the amount of spread widening that must occur over a one-year horizon to make the total return of a credit instrument equal to that of duration-matched risk-free government 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)  

Executive Summary Tighter Financial Conditions May Affect Growth Inflation Outlook: Inflation is becoming entrenched, spreading beyond a few pandemic-related items to “sticky price” categories. A wage-price spiral and unmoored inflation expectations translate into upside risk to the 2.5% consensus core PCE forecast. Consumer Spending: Americans are being forced to allocate a larger proportion of income towards food and gas, shifting consumption away from discretionary spending. As such, consumer spending alone may not be able to keep the economy afloat. On a 50bps hike: The rate hike increments are less important than the message the Fed is sending out to the market: Talking up 50 bp rate rises, the Fed is signaling that is it laser-focused on inflation, which is reassuring. Tightening and the economy: Aggressive monetary tightening will lead to slower economic growth, but this is not yet reflected in consensus economic growth forecasts. Recession Coming? Economic growth is slowing but off high levels, and recession is not imminent.  Our recession indicator does not flash danger. However, we are watching out for a growth disappointment. Bottom Line: In a commentary to our bi-monthly sector chart pack report, we provide answers to the most frequently asked questions on the state of the US economy.  Feature Performance Markets never cease to surprise. In March, US equities staged an unexpected rally despite the backdrop of a hawkish Fed, raging inflation, surging energy prices, and a war in the heart of Europe. The reversal was broad-based, not leaving a single sector in the red (Chart I-1). The S&P 500 has regained 9% since the market bottom on March 8, 2022 and is only 5.5% off its all-time high. The NASDAQ has rebounded 13%. Is this rally sustainable? In a report a couple of weeks ago, we aimed to answer this question. We recommended patience, although many ingredients, such as attractive valuations and oversold technical conditions, were already in place. Our reasons for patience were that: Economic growth expectations are still elevated and bottom-up earnings growth forecasts need to come down, to reflect slowing growth, a tighter monetary regime, and higher commodities and energy prices. Our view is unchanged. This week was a busy one: A media interview with The Deep Dive, and two virtual conferences in Australia, one run by Insider Network and the other by Equity Forum. In today’s cover report for our sector chartpack, we answer questions we received from the media and conference audience, that we believe will be of interest to clients. Chart I-1Powerful Rebound Questions And Answers The Consumer Price Index (CPI) increased by 7.9% and the PCE price index, the Fed’s preferred measure of inflation, came in at 6.4% in February – readings not seen since 1982. What is your outlook on inflation? Inflation will come down, assisted by the arithmetic of the base effect. However, it is unlikely to revert to levels that the Fed and the US consumer will consider acceptable. Moreover, inflation could surprise further to the upside. The concern is that inflation is becoming entrenched. It has spread beyond a few pandemic-related items to goods for which prices are usually sticky (Chart I-2). There are also clear signs that price increases are feeding through to wage increases. Real wage growth remains negative at -2%, while demand for labor is robust – there are 1.7 open jobs per job seeker, and companies are raising wages to retain talent (Chart I-3). Subsequently, they will raise prices to pass on cost increases to customers. These are fertile conditions for a wage-price spiral, with inflation becoming even more entrenched. Chart I-2Even Sticky Prices Are Now Rising Chart I-3Rising Wages Are In Lockstep With Rising Prices Further, inflation expectations have become unmoored: According to a University of Michigan survey, consumers expect prices to rise by 5.5% over the next year, and by more than 3% a year over five to 10 years (Chart I-4). Concerningly, the upward adjustment in inflation expectations is relentless. The war in Ukraine exacerbates many causes of inflation: Its indirect effects are shortages of raw materials, energy, and shipping disruptions (Chart I-5). Chart I-4Inflation Expectations Are Unmoored Chart I-5Supply Chains Remain Disrupted Consensus forecasts for US core PCE inflation see it coming down to 2.5% by next year. The risk is that it could exceed that. Bottom Line: Inflation will come down but may not normalize any time soon. What is the effect of food and energy inflation on consumer spending? Negative real wage growth bites into consumer purchasing power, sapping confidence (Chart I-6). It does not help that food and energy prices are up by 8% and 14% respectively year over year (Chart I-7). However, the rising price of necessities has the most pronounced effect on low earners: Food accounts for more than a quarter of the after-tax income of the lowest quintile of earners, falling to just over five percent of income for top earners (Chart I-8). As many Americans are forced to allocate a larger proportion of income towards food and gas, they have to shift consumption away from discretionary spending. Thus, a high price for gasoline does not necessarily suppress demand for gasoline but rather reduces demand for, say, fast-food meals. Chart I-6High Inflation Saps Consumer Confidence Chart I-7Food And Energy Prices Have Surged This change in a spending basket explains a slowdown in consumer spending: PCE increased only 0.2% month-on-month in February, which is underwhelming compared to the 0.7% expected. It also explains rising credit-card balances (Chart I-9). Chart 8Rising Cost Of Food Cuts Into Discretionary Spending... Chart I-9Many Consumers Are Struggling At the same time, we know that US consumers have $2.3 trillion in excess savings – which are clearly not uniformly distributed across income groups. This nice stash of cash provides a solid consumer spending cushion for the US economy, but it may not be up to the challenge of keeping the economy afloat single-handedly. Bottom Line: For now, the US consumer is in good shape but there are cracks in the foundation as lower-income Americans are clearly struggling with rising food and gas prices. Fed Chair Jerome Powell noted last week that the Fed could raise rates from the traditional 25 basis points per meeting to 50 basis points if necessary. Do you think 50 basis points will have much of an impact on inflation or on the real economy? The Fed has gotten way behind the curve. In retrospect, it should have raised rates last summer – and it now understands its error. Its first hike this cycle came only when the economy had already over-heated (Chart I-10). At long last, the Fed, despite its dual objective, is laser-focused on inflation. As with most central banks, signaling is presumably more important than action – remember the famous Mario Draghi’s “whatever it takes.” Talking up 50 bp rate rises, the Fed is signaling that “the inflation cop is back in town.”  And while it will be hard for the Fed to put the inflation genie back in the bottle, it is reassuring that it will at least try. As for a potential 50-basis-point rate rise, for now it does not present an immediate threat to the real economy: Real rates remain negative and monetary conditions are fairly loose, while the neutral rate (that elusive r-star) is still quite a ways off from where the rates are now (Chart I-11). Bottom Line: The rate hike increments are less important than the message the Fed is sending out to the market. Chart I-10The Fed Is Behind The Curve Chart I-11The Market Expects The Fed To Move Aggressively To Combat Inflation What will be the effect of monetary tightening on economic growth? Related Report  US Equity StrategyHave US Equities Hit Rock Bottom? While early on, rate hikes can be shrugged off by a strong economy, over time, tighter financial conditions necessary to combat inflation, augur badly for growth. While financial conditions are still loose, they have already tightened on the back of higher long-term rates, widening credit spreads, and a strengthening dollar. The Goldman Sachs Financial Conditions Index points to the ISM Manufacturing Index falling below 50 later this year (Chart I-12).  However, as we have pointed out in our “Have We Hit Rock Bottom Yet?” report, GDP growth forecasts do not reflect tighter monetary conditions and higher commodity prices (Chart I-13). The Atlanta Fed Nowcast points to only 0.9% annualized growth in Q1, yet consensus expectations have barely budged. Bottom Line: Aggressive monetary tightening will lead to slower economic growth. Chart I-12Tighter Financial Conditions May Affect Growth Chart I-13The GDP Forecasts Have Not Been Revised Down To Reflect New Challenges Investors are increasingly worried that the US is heading for a recession. What are your views?  As my colleague, US Investment Strategist Doug Peta has put it: “Fed Chair Powell is attempting to steer the US economy between the Scylla of a recession and the Charybdis of entrenched high inflation.” Indeed, the Fed has a narrow margin of error for achieving a “soft landing.” The war in Ukraine makes the Fed’s objective even more challenging. Alan Blinder, a former Fed economist and current Princeton University professor who has a forthcoming book on monetary and fiscal policy history over the past 60 years, says the Fed has just once in the last 11 tightening periods nailed a “perfect soft landing” – in the early 1990s. But twice more, in the mid-1960s and early 1980s, the central bank raised interest rates without sparking an official recession—and such “soft-ish” landings, he said in a recent presentation, are not all that rare.1 This is a track record we find disturbing. However, we share Powell’s view that “the probability of a recession within the next year is not particularly elevated… all signs are that this is a strong economy and, indeed, one that will be able to flourish… in the face of less accommodative monetary policy.” We concur. A recession is unlikely in the next 12 months or so. The US economy is in the midst of a classic slowdown stage of the business cycle: Growth is still strong albeit slowing, inflation is elevated, liquidity is (still) abundant, capacity utilization is high, and the unemployment rate is low (Table 1). The American consumer is unhappy but has not tightened purse strings much yet. Importantly, growth is slowing off high levels so this stage can take a long time (Chart I-14). Table I-1Stages Of The Business Cycle Doug Peta’s simple recession indicator, built from components that have reliably provided an advance warning, reinforces this conclusion. The 3-month/10-year segment of the yield curve is not yet close to inverting (Chart I-15). Chart I-14The Business Cycle Indicator Signals Slowdown Chart I-1510-Year Treasury Yield Less 3-Months Treasury Bills Segment Is Not Inverted The year-over-year change in the Conference Board’s Leading Economic Index is way above the zero line that has signaled past recessions (Chart I-16). The ISM Manufacturing PMI is well above 50. The Fed funds rate is nowhere near its equilibrium/neutral level, which we judge to be north of 3%, and it is highly unlikely to get there by the end of the year (Chart I-17). Chart I-16The LEI YoY% Is Way Above Zero Chart I-17The Fed Funds Rate Is Far From Neutral Excluding the pandemic, recessions over the last 50-plus years have occurred only when all three components sound the alarm; not one is flashing red now and not one is likely to do so during 2022. Bottom Line: We are watching out not for a recession, but for a growth disappointment.   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 Communication Services Chart II-5Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-6Profitability Chart II-7Valuations And Technicals Chart II-8Uses Of Cash Consumer Discretionary Chart II-9Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-10Profitability Chart II-11Valuations And Technicals Chart II-12Uses Of Cash Consumer Staples Chart II-13Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-14Profitability Chart II-15Valuations And Technicals Chart II-16Uses Of Cash Energy Chart II-17Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-18Profitability Chart II-19Valuations And Technicals Chart II-20Uses Of Cash Financials Chart II-21Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-22Profitability Chart II-23Valuations And Technicals Chart II-24Uses Of Cash Health Care Chart II-25Sector vs Industry Groups Chart II-26Profitability Chart II-27Valuations And Technicals Chart II-28Uses Of Cash Industrials Chart II-29Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-30Profitability Chart II-31Valuations And Technicals Chart II-32Uses Of Cash Information Technology Chart II-33Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-34Profitability Chart II-35Valuations And Technicals Chart II-36Uses Of Cash Materials Chart II-37Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-38Profitability Chart II-39Valuations And Technicals Chart II-40Uses Of Cash Real Estate Chart II-41Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-42Profitability Chart II-43Valuations And Technicals Chart II-44Uses Of Cash Utilities Chart II-45Macroeconomic Backdrop Chart II-46Profitability Chart II-47Valuations And Technicals Chart II-48Uses Of Cash Table II-1Performance Table II-2Valuations And Forward Earnings Growth Footnotes 1     "Recession Risks Are Rising. Can the Fed Stick a Soft Landing?" Barron's (barrons.com)   Recommended Allocation Recommended Allocation: Addendum 

Special Report

Executive Summary Cheap Or Expensive? President Emmanuel Macron will be re-elected.French growth will slow in the coming quarters but will also remain solid beyond that horizon.France’s reform push will continue, particularly pension reforms and efforts to reduce inefficiencies. However, austerity is unlikely to materialize.French stocks will underperform once energy inflation peaks. Consumer discretionary and staples have run ahead of themselves relative to the broad market and to their European peers. French small-cap stocks and aerospace and defense equities are attractive.RecommendationsINCEPTIONDATERETURN (%)COMMENTBuy French Small-Caps Equities / Sell French Large-Caps Equities (*)04/04/2022 CyclicalSell French Consumer Equities Relative to French Benchmark (*)04/04/2022 CyclicalOverweight French Aerospace & Defense**04/04/2022 Structural  Bottom Line: A second Macron presidency will not boost the appeal of French large-cap equities, even if it helps French long-term growth. Investors should underweight the French market in Europe via a large underweight in French consumer discretionary and consumer staple stocks. However, investors should overweight French defense names as well as small-cap equities.FeatureThe French presidential election is upon us. President Emmanuel Macron ambitious pro-growth and pro-business reform agenda in 2017 tackled the roots of the French malaise of the past decades. Our conviction that Macron would win a second mandate has survived challenges such as the “Yellow Vest Movement” in 2019 and then COVID-19.  Now, with the shock of the Ukraine war, the evidence still suggests he will win the upcoming election.  Chart 1Five More Years Of Macron Macron is the favorite with 53% of voting intentions against Marine Le Pen in the second round of the election (Chart 1). Even a potential Russian interference in the French election wouldn’t change the outcome of such a duel, which we discussed at length last summer.  Since then, Macron’s advantages over Le Pen have only strengthened, boosted by his handling of Omicron and the Ukraine/Russia crisis while the center-right and the far-right battle each other (Chart 1, bottom panel).Macron also took the unofficial leadership of Europe after Angela Merkel exited the stage. He managed to breathe new life into the European Union (EU), bringing forth greater unity. As a result, the current war in Ukraine and elevated energy prices have made this political rendez-vous more relevant. Chart 2Less Euroscepticism Helps Macron The main axis of Macron’s next term is to make France a more independent nation within a stronger Europe. This is a paradox, but what it means is that he is capitalizing on the current geopolitical climate of great power struggle and hypo-globalization. France is breaking with its tradition of Euroscepticism to secure its national interests within a closer European bloc (Chart 2).True, the French economy will not be spared from the current stagflation episode and growth will slow in the near term. However, France is in a better position to withstand the energy shock than most of its European peers.After Macron is re-elected, his political capital will be replenished and his structural reform effort will continue, albeit with modifications to deal with the post-pandemic and post-Ukraine environment. Fiscal and monetary policies remain very accommodative. As a result, Macron has a favorable chance of reforming France further. Pension reform as well as the green and digital transitions will improve France’s economic competitiveness over the long run.2017 vs. 2022: One Pandemic, One Recession, And One War Later Chart 3The French Economy Will Surprise To The Upside France was badly hit by COVID-19. However, appropriate fiscal policy and strong domestic demand are driving the recovery (Chart 3). While most sectors are expected to recover fully by 2023, a few sectors, such as automotive, aeronautics, and tourism, still lag behind pre-pandemic levels (Chart 3, panel 2). On the upside, France appears to be doing better than the other major European economies (Chart 3, bottom panel). Moreover, about 1.5% of GDP worth of leftover funds from emergency measures and the recovery plan are to be deployed in 2022.The Ukrainian conflict challenges this positive backdrop. Growth forecasts for 2022 were revised to 2.8% from 4%. The impact from elevated energy prices is projected to reduce annual GDP growth by 0.7% and to trim an additional 0.2% once international spillovers are factored in (Table 1). Nonetheless, France is not as vulnerable to Russian energy as Germany and Italy (Chart 4). For now, Russia-EU energy flow continues, although the threats are rising. Germany once again rejected an energy boycott when Biden visited Europe two weeks ago, but it is also preparing for the eventuality that gas flows may dry up, which highlights the fluidity of the situation. Table 1Impact Of High Energy Prices  Chart 4Low Vulnerability To Russian Energy… The direct consequences of the conflict on French exports are limited. Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus represent 1.2% of French exports, or EUR12 billion, most of which comes from transport equipment and other manufactured goods (Table 2). Table 2… And Low Trade Exposure  The evolution of the Chinese economy is another major external influence on French growth. France is exposed to the deceleration of the Chinese manufacturing PMI induced by the slowdown in Chinese credit growth. The recent closing of cities like Shanghai or Shenzhen because of the spread of the Omicron variant will accentuate near-term risks. However, Chinese policymakers want to stabilize growth by the time the Communist Party reshuffles this fall and the credit impulse is trying to bottom, which will help French exports to China improve later this year or next (Chart 5).Higher inflation is another consequence of supply disruptions and elevated energy prices caused by the Ukrainian war. For now, this is not a pressing concern in France. Headline inflation came in at 5.1%, well below the European average (Table 3). The government intervened to shield consumers from rising energy prices by handing out energy vouchers, freezing gas prices until the end of the year, and cutting electricity taxes. Chart 5France Is Sensitive To The Chinese Economy  Table 3Lower Inflation In France  Chart 6French Households Accumulated Plenty Of Excess Savings This is good news for French households, as it preserves some of their purchasing power, especially when compared to Spanish households that suffer an inflation rate of 9.8%. However, it is not enough to prevent consumer confidence from crumbling. From Table 1, consumer spending is projected to fall by 1%. Yet, French consumers benefit from their large savings, accumulated during the pandemic (Chart 6). Unlike the US, where the household savings rate has already gone back to pre-pandemic levels, the savings rate in France is still high. Households can use those excess savings to mitigate elevated energy prices.With respect to employment, the generous French furlough scheme contributed to this accumulation of savings by limiting the rise in unemployment (Chart 7). Therefore, the French labor market was resilient throughout the crisis and has recovered quickly. Labor force participation exceeds its pre-crisis level by about 0.5%. Youth unemployment reached its lowest level since the 1980s, at 14.8 %, in part because of the 2017 labor and vocational reforms. Moreover, labor market conditions are now tighter than they were pre-pandemic and firms are increasingly complaining about labor shortages (Chart 8). The business sector still expects employment growth to remain as robust as it was in 2018. As a result, French wage growth will firm up before the year-end. Chart 7The French Labor Market Has Recovered...  Chart 8...And Is Showing Signs Of Tightening   The corporate sector has several reasons to be optimistic (Chart 9). The emergency measures prevented widespread corporate defaults and bank lending remained supportive through the crisis. Profit margins are high. Additionally, conducting business in France is becoming easier. Business creation has continued to rise (Chart 9, bottom panel) and FDI projects were up 32% in 2021, making France the largest investment destination in Europe. Nonetheless, the rise in non-financial gross corporate debt is concerning, even though the increase in net debt was limited by the jump in bank deposits during the crisis (Chart 10). Chart 9France Is Becoming More Business Friendly  Chart 10Corporate Debt Is A Concern Bottom Line: French growth will decelerate in the coming quarter in response to the Ukrainian crisis, but it will remain stronger than that of its European peers. In the second half of the year, stronger demand recovery in hard-hit sectors, Chinese stimulus, European fiscal support, pent-up demand, and a declining energy drag will allow growth to recover markedly.Reforms: Take 2(022)The series of recent crises highlight several weaknesses in the French economy. The pandemic revealed how vulnerable and underfunded the French health sector is. It also underscored that digitalization is inadequate in French firms. The Ukraine/Russia conflict is mixed: it underscores the energy dependence of European countries and highlights the need for greater defense spending, even if France is already less dependent than others and manufactures state of the art military equipment.Related ReportEuropean Investment StrategyFrance: More Than Just A Déjà-VuIn both crises, the French social welfare state played a crucial role as an automatic stabilizer. The IMF estimates that stabilizers absorbed about 80% of the household income shock during the pandemic, while government spending to contain high energy prices amounted to €15.5 billion since last fall.The fiscal response to these crises caused a large addition to the public debt, which already stands at 115% of GDP. Furthermore, at 55% of GDP before COVID, France’s public expenditure ratio was already one of the highest in the Eurozone (Chart 11). For now, the debt burden is manageable because low interest rates make France’s debt arithmetic benign. However, such an elevated share of output controlled by the government increases resource misallocation and hurts productivity, meaning it weighs on potential GDP growth.Low interest rates are not guaranteed in the future. Putting France’s debt on a sustainable path requires structural reforms (Chart 12). Already, the OECD estimates that the 2017-2018 labor-market and tax reforms have generated positive economic spillovers across all income levels (Chart 12, bottom panel). Chart 11Public Debt Just Got Bigger  Chart 12Structural Reforms & Pubic Debt Going forward, reducing debt and cutting spending will be hard considering France’s energy and defense structural goals. Macron’s political party, En Marche!, may perform well in this year’s legislative election, but it is unlikely to achieve the sweeping victory that it saw in 2017. Macron will therefore be forced to compromise to build a coalition in favor of structural reform. His strength in the Assembly will be the chief uncertainty and critical determinant of his ability to achieve his key reform goals in the coming five years. As a result, Macron will focus on lifting French trend growth further by encouraging digital and green transitions. Beyond pension reforms, fiscal austerity will be limited to ensure the social acceptability of structural reforms.In the rest of this section, we focus on the two most important reforms proposed by Macron for his second mandate: pensions and economic competitiveness plans. Reducing public spending is needed to alleviate the burden on resources created by the massive size of the French government, but France’s strategic needs outstrip Macron’s ability to slash spending.French Pension System: Too Generous Table 4Public Spending Comparison Pension represents 14% of GDP compared with 10% in Germany (Table 4). Expenditures on pension explains 35% of the difference on total public spending between France and the Euro Area.Reforming the pension system is a sensitive topic in France. It arguably cost Nicolas Sarkozy his re-election bid in 2012. Yet, pension reforms are essential. The current system is complex and fragmented, with 42 different types of coexisting pensions, each with its own calculation rules. Chart 13Pension Reform Is Long Overdue Additionally, it does not reflect the ageing of the population (Chart 13). Employment among the 55-64 age cohort is only 56% in France, compared to 62% in the OECD average. Also, the effective retirement age in France is 60.8, compared with an average of 65 in Europe. Furthermore, replacement rates (pension / last salaries) are high, which puts an unsustainable burden on the state’s finances.According to the French think tank Institut Montaigne, progressively pushing the retirement age to 65 would save €7.7 billion per year by 2027 and €18 billion per year by 2032. Overall, the government would save around €50 billion per year through such pension adjustments and simplification reforms as well as by operating cost reductions. This would largely finance Macron’s investment to improve competitiveness, digitalization, the green transition, and national defense.Transitioning To Reduce InefficienciesTo boost long-term growth, an important prong of Macron’s project is the €100 billion “France Relance” recovery plan. It is part of the NGEU pandemic relief funds and includes €30 billion for green transition (including measures to improve energy performance of buildings, to increase rail freight, and to support businesses to make the transition). It also includes €34 billion for competitiveness and innovation (tax cuts and support for digitalization). Chart 14French Handicap: Productivity This plan is a band-aid if the many inefficiencies undermining France’s productivity are not tackled (Chart 14). The uptake of digital technologies is uneven and lags far behind other developed nations with respect to cloud computing and the internet of things. Small businesses perform particularly poorly (Chart 15). As a result, the French tech sector has become a priority of Macron’s government. The “France 2030” investment plan unveiled in October 2021, worth €30 billion over five years, aims to foster industrial and tech “champions of the future.” It intends to lift business creation in the tech sector. Nonetheless, this is easier said than done; picking low-hanging fruits will help productivity but matching the prowess of the US is highly unlikely.Another problem is the inefficiency of French R&D. Government support for business R&D is elevated but does not translate into high R&D intensity (Chart 16). This problem is not unique to France: R&D returns across the EU do not match those of the US. Addressing France’s bureaucratic and extremely centralized management structure could tackle some of this hindrance (Chart 16, bottom panel). Chart 15France Is Digitally Lagging …  Chart 16… And Full Of Inefficiencies When it comes to the green transition, Macron focuses on three axes: renewable energies, energy efficiency, and electric vehicles.Macron wants a “massive deployment” of renewable energies. A new plan for the construction of additional nuclear reactors will be implemented, since it is the only solution that allows France to reduce its carbon emissions quickly. Alongside this plan for electricity generation, a strategy will be put in place to increase energy efficiency. This is where the support to electric vehicle production and adoption comes in (Chart 17).Reforming energy taxes is another avenue to generate greater revenues, such as from higher carbon pricing, and this would help finance more green investments. Eliminating fossil fuel subsidies, for which France spends significantly more than its peers, and streamlining tax collectioncould yield 1% in annual savings by 2027 (Chart 18). Moreover, increasing carbon prices to EUR65 per ton by 2030 would contribute to France’s environmental goals and provide additional revenue. Chart 17French EV-olution  Chart 18More Green Taxes Bottom Line: The re-election of President Macron portends another reform push in France. The large public debt load threatens national long-term economic prospects. Hence, increasing potential GDP growth is paramount. True, Macron’s majority in the Assemblée Nationale will decrease, which will limit the scope of the next reform round. Nonetheless, France will implement pension reforms that can both increase the size of the labor force and finance further initiatives. Moreover, France will push forward with efforts to streamline tech investment, increase spending in the nuclear electricity production, and boost energy efficiency.Investment ImplicationsThe investment implications of a second Macron mandate are manifold. First, investors should remain overweight the French tech sector compared to that of the rest of the Eurozone because of the boost to earnings from greater public investment. Chart 19Small-Caps, Big Upside French small-cap stocks will also benefit from reforms. French small-cap equities have become oversold relative to their large-cap counterparts, falling 30% in relative terms since their late 2017 peak (Chart 19). Part of that underperformance anticipated the drag on French households from spiking energy prices. However, French households are more insulated from the impact of high inflation than their US or European counterparts. Moreover, the previous set of reforms boosted lower- and middle-class income (Chart 12 on page 9). Consequently, French consumer confidence will grow compared to that in the US and China, which helps the relative performance of French small-cap shares (Chart 19, panel 2). Rising German yields and an eventual stabilization in the euro will also buoy these stocks (Chart 19, bottom two panels).French industrials equities will be another sector to enjoy a dividend from Macron’s policy initiatives. The “France 2030” plan involves an increase in capex. The build-up in nuclear power under the green transition plan is also positive for industrial earnings. These policies will favor domestic spending, which bolsters French industrial stocks.Last week, we described the tailwinds for European aerospace and defense equities.  The same logic holds true for French aerospace and defense names, which are our favorite plays within the French industrial complex. Chart 3 on page 3 highlighted that the aerospace sector is among the major areas of the economy for which gross value added has yet to recoup its pandemic losses. The gradual re-opening of the global economy will create an important tailwind for the sector. Moreover, France is the fourth-largest global defense exporter. Thus, the French defense industry will profit from the upside in global military spending.Related ReportGeopolitical StrategyFrance: Macron (And Structural Reforms) Still Favored In 2022In this context, French aerospace and defense stocks should outperform not only the overall French market, but also their industrial peers (Chart 20). Since we already favor aerospace and defense equities within the Euro Area, the overweight of French aerospace and defense shares does not translate into an overweight compared to their European competitors. The position of French large-cap stocks within a European portfolio is more complex. They are unlikely to exhibit any significant net impact from Macron’s reform push. French equities have outperformed the rest of Europe already. Most of this outperformance reflected sectoral biases; the French market overweights industrial and consumer stocks. However, the country effect explains the recent outperformance of French equities (Chart 21). The country effect can be approximated by comparing French stocks to the rest of the European market on a sector-neutral basis. Chart 20Favor French Aerospace & Defense  Chart 21Country Effect Explains The Recent Outperformance Of French Equities  The lower vulnerability of the French economy to higher energy prices compared to the rest of Europe explains this outcome (see Chart 4 on page 4). The outperformance of French consumer stocks (which account for nearly a third of the index) relative to their European competitors added to the country effect as well.An end to the energy spike is likely to arrest the outperformance of French equities. Over the past six years, Brent crude oil prices expressed in euros as well as oil and gas inflation have supported the performance of French equities relative to German ones much better than core inflation or bond yields (Chart 22). The forward earnings of French equities compared to those of the Eurozone market closely track energy markets (Chart 23). Essentially, the French market biases and the country’s low reliance on imported energy are valuable hedges when stagflation fears are rampant (Chart 24). Chart 22The End Of The French Reign Draws Near  Chart 23Supply Shock Lifted French Earnings  The best vehicle to underweight French large-cap stocks is to underweight French consumer stocks compared to the Euro Area MSCI benchmark. French equities outperformed the rest of Europe by a greater extent than relative earnings would have implied, which resulted in a small P/E expansion (Chart 25). However, when consumer stocks are excluded, French stocks have performed in line with the rest of the Euro Area and have underperformed relative earnings, which has caused a derating of the French market excluding consumer stocks (Chart 25, bottom two panels). Chart 24French Equities Thrive When Stagflation Fears Are High  Chart 25Cheap Or Expensive?  French consumer equities have become very expensive. Their relative performance has completely decoupled from earnings compared to their Eurozone competitors and their relative valuation has expanded to two sigma above its past 20 years average (Chart 26). Measured against the French broad equity market, the same dynamics can be observed (Chart 26, bottom two panels). These divergences are unsustainable and the most likely catalyst for their correction is the rapid decline in global consumer confidence (Chart 27). Chart 26French Consumer Equities Are Expensive  Chart 27Crumbling Consumer Confidence Does Not Bode Well For French Consumer Stocks   Bottom Line: The best direct bets on President Macron’s re-election are to overweight French small-cap stocks compared to large-cap ones and to favor aerospace and defense stocks within the French market. Investors should also underweight French stocks in Europe. However, to do so, investors should underweight French consumer stocks and maintain a benchmark weight for the other French sectors compared to their allocation in the Eurozone benchmark. Traders should buy Euro Area consumer staples and consumer discretionary stocks and sell French ones. Jeremie Peloso,Associate EditorJeremieP@bcaresearch.comMathieu Savary,Chief European StrategistMathieu@bcaresearch.comFootnotes

Executive Summary US inflation is running at its highest level in over four decades. Although we expect it will soon peak, it appears certain to remain above the Fed’s 2% target level for an extended period. The war in Ukraine and COVID’s assault on China could give rise to a new round of supply disruptions that keep inflation at very high levels even after the initial wave of bottlenecks is cleared. Long-term price stability may best position an economy to achieve its potential, but real S&P 500 earnings have grown twice as fast when CPI inflation is above its mean than they have when it is below its mean. Historically, inflation has only begun to squeeze nominal earnings growth at two-standard-deviation extremes. Meaningful equity de-rating has been a feature when inflation exceeds its mean, however, and investors will have to be alert for any signs that TINA might be losing its grip on financial markets. We do not think that low-to-no-yield Treasuries or cash yet offer an appealing alternative, but animal spirits are always subject to change. Bumping Up Against Tactical Limits Bottom Line: The question of how to navigate an inflationary environment is likely to be with investors across 2022 and beyond. We continue to recommend overweighting equities over our cyclical 6-12-month timeframe, but risks are heightened and we will change course if conditions dictate. Feature With consumer prices rising at a clip not seen in over 40 years, inflation is a hot-button topic for anyone with even a passing interest in the US economy. The relentless series of upside inflation surprises have investors preoccupied with finding havens. To help get a handle on where to invest against varying inflation backdrops, we divided inflation into five regimes since the consumer price index (CPI) was launched in 1947: extreme inflation (an annualized quarter-over-quarter rate more than two standard deviations above its mean), high inflation (more than one but less than or equal to two standard deviations above the mean), moderate inflation (up to one standard deviation above the mean), moderately low inflation (one standard deviation below the mean up to the mean) and deflation (two standard deviations below the mean up to one standard deviation below the mean). Related Report  US Investment StrategyThe Last Line Of Inflation Defense (Is Holding Fast) We reviewed the performance of S&P 500 operating earnings, earnings multiples and returns in each CPI regime to see how equities have responded to inflation over the last 75 years. We then reviewed the available total return data for Treasuries, investment-grade corporate bonds and high-yield corporate bonds and analyzed them alongside equity total returns. The empirical record enhances our confidence in earnings growth, but the S&P 500 currently trades at nearly 20 times forward four-quarter earnings, and it is especially vulnerable to de-rating, given that contracting valuations have been the driver of underperformance when inflation exceeds its mean. We find it hard to contemplate overweighting fixed income over the next year when nominal yields are so far below the rate of inflation. It may require a modest leap of faith to believe that equity multiples can maintain their cruising altitude, but the odds are very long that a 10-year Treasury note yielding 2.4% will protect its owner’s purchasing power when prices might rise by 3.5% to 4.5% over the next year. The positive real returns that Treasuries have delivered in high-inflation environments since 1984 were achieved over a lengthy stretch in which inflation compensation at the date of purchase repeatedly topped actual inflation to maturity. Today it appears as if ex-ante inflation compensation is likely to prove woefully inadequate and we are skeptical that bonds can live up to their historical return patterns. 75 Years Of Inflation Data Chart 1 shows 299 quarters of annualized inflation data in standard deviation increments since the CPI was constructed in 1947. The shape of the distribution bears out the notion that prices are sticky to the downside; the population mean is well above the median as the high-inflation right tail is longer and fatter than the deflationary left tail. Across the CPI’s entire history, inflation has averaged 3.52% on an annualized quarter-over-quarter basis with a standard deviation (“sigma”) of 3.55%. Based on those parameters, we define extremely high inflation as CPI increases above 10.62% (17 instances), high inflation as 7.08% to 10.62% (22 instances), moderately high inflation as 3.53% to 7.07% (82 instances), moderately low inflation as -0.02% to 3.52% (155 instances), disinflation as -3.57% to -0.03% (21 instances) and deflation as less than -3.57% (2 instances). Chart 1The Complete Annualized CPI Distribution Inflation And Equities We examined movements in operating earnings, trailing multiples and closing prices for the S&P 500 in each of the six inflation regimes, though we discarded the outlier deflation bucket for insufficient data. In the extreme (greater-than-two-sigma) inflation scenario, S&P 500 earnings initially surged amidst the early postwar period’s pent-up demand explosion before going backwards in the Korean War inflation, the sharp 1973-75 recession and the Volcker double dip (Chart 2, dark solid line). An expanding P/E multiple (dashed line) helped to mitigate the blow from shrinking earnings, but equity investors endured sharp real declines (bottom panel, light solid line). Chart 2Extreme Inflation Squashes Earnings The one-to-two-sigma high-inflation scenario is a mirror image of the extreme inflation scenario. Nominal earnings growth surged (Chart 3, top panel) and managed to hold up well in real terms (Chart 3, bottom panel), but the index’s multiple de-rated at a vicious 15.5% annualized rate, sticking investors with double-digit real losses. 70% of this regime played out from 1973 to 1982 and it also spanned some of 1990-91 and great recessions. The last two data points occurred in 2021, when flat multiples allowed equities to benefit from robust earnings growth, but previously melting multiples illustrate the peril for equities if monetary tightening induces a hard landing. Chart 3High Inflation: Surging Nominal Earnings, Fierce De-Rating The zero-to-one-sigma moderate-inflation scenario has fostered such robust earnings growth that even a steady de-rating headwind cannot hold back equity returns (Chart 4). Despite spanning the entire 1973-74 recession and the early stages of the global financial crisis, the moderate-inflation regime has been solidly conducive to growth. Chart 4Moderate Inflation Is Great For Growth Just over half of the quarters have met our minus-one-to-zero-sigma moderately low inflation standard. They have featured subpar nominal earnings growth, but a benign inflation backdrop has helped them close the gap with mean real growth and a re-rating tailwind has pushed real annualized S&P 500 price returns above 7% (Chart 5). Most of the post-crisis period has unfolded against a moderately low inflation backdrop, which has been good for equity investors even as concerns about tepid growth lingered. Chart 5Moderately Low Inflation Is The Enduring Equity Sweet Spot The minus-two-to-minus-one-sigma deflationary backdrop in which the price level contracts has featured even weaker aggregate growth, but a 10% annualized re-rating boost has allowed equities to deliver double-digit returns (Chart 6). One would expect growth to wither when the price level is deflating but ex-1Q20, when the pandemic halted activity in its tracks, growth in this phase has topped growth in every other phase. That counterintuitive result illustrates that inflation is a lagging indicator that exerts a heavy influence on monetary policy, which impacts the economy with a lag, while markets are forward looking. The ends of the inflation distribution are likely to mark inflection points where momentum reverses. Chart 6Once Prices Deflate, The Danger Has Already Passed Our survey of equity performance across inflation regimes has shown that inflation is much better for earnings growth than disinflation/deflation until it reaches extreme levels. Nominal earnings have grown three times as fast and real earnings have grown twice as fast when inflation is above its 3.52% mean than when it’s below it (Table 1). The fundamental tailwind that comes with perky inflation is almost entirely offset by multiple contraction, however, just as the growth drag from low inflation is offset by multiple expansion. We don’t think investors should be unduly worried that inflation will squash growth this year, but they do need to be alert to anything that might presage de-rating. Table 1Inflation And Earnings, Multiples, And Returns Inflation And Bonds To fill out the asset allocation picture, we also reviewed the performance of the Bloomberg US Treasury, US Corporate and US High Yield Total Return Indices. Table 2 tracks annual nominal and real total returns for all three indices, along with the S&P 500, since the second half of 1983, when the high-yield index was launched. The distribution of CPI changes from 1983 forward is more concentrated about the mean than the entire population distribution beginning in 1947 and nearly 80% of observations fall within one standard deviation of the mean, so the tail distributions have comparatively few observations. Table 2Inflation, Treasuries And Spread Product Nonetheless, the extant tail observations suggest that high yield’s positive carry failed to generate positive excess returns over Treasuries in high-inflation environments while spread widening and increased defaults caused them to lag Treasuries amidst extreme deflation. Investment grade also lagged Treasuries in the tails, albeit by a smaller margin than high yield. High yield comfortably outperformed within the core minus-one-to-plus-one-sigma range, when equities also shined. The bottom line is that Treasuries have provided welcome ballast to multi-asset portfolios in both high-inflation and deflationary episodes over the last 40 years. They were even bigger winners from late 1972, when the Treasury and corporate indexes began, through late 1983, sporting annualized real returns that beat those of high-grade corporates and the S&P 500 by five and eight percentage points, respectively, when inflation exceeded its mean. We question the applicability of the empirical record in the current environment, however, as ex-ante inflation compensation routinely outstripped ex-post inflation over the four-plus decades that it was compiled. Even as the 10-year yield has recently flirted with 2.5%, we expect that the inflation compensation embedded in long-duration bonds will prove inadequate to preserve bondholders’ purchasing power over the bonds’ remaining life. Portfolio Construction The findings from our inflation review do not spur us to make any changes to the ETF portfolio. We continue to believe that the near-term foundations of the US economy are strong and will support above-trend growth over our six- to twelve-month investment timeframe. US growth is at risk from the war in Ukraine and the ongoing COVID-19 revival and aggressive Fed tightening could stifle the effects of past fiscal and monetary stimulus measures that have not yet been felt. We are actively monitoring global geopolitical and public health developments, along with the Fed, though we think it will be difficult for Chair Powell and company to surprise hawkishly over the rest of this year. We believe the moves we made four weeks ago, when we temporarily closed out our equity overweight, reduced our cyclicals-over-defensives positioning, dialed back our value and small-cap overweights, initiated direct exposure to the metals and mining space via the XME ETF and trimmed our Treasury underweight, will protect the portfolio adequately against ongoing inflationary surges and sporadic growth headwinds. The direct homebuilder exposure we took on via the ITB ETF at that time has weighed on performance, but we are sticking with it as we believe the widespread pessimism about the industry’s prospects has gotten way overdone. The labor market remains robust, as the March employment report and the February JOLTS release reiterated last week, less pecunious households are flush with excess pandemic savings and the wealthy are reveling in an unprecedented surge in household net worth. The global situation merits tactical caution, and it looks as if the S&P 500 has hit the top of its near-term range (Chart 7, top panel) while the VIX may have reached a near-term bottom (Chart 7, bottom panel), but our sanguine cyclical view remains intact. Chart 7Equities May Have Reached Another Short-Term Turning Point ETF Portfolio Review - March The cyclical ETF portfolio returned 1.26% in March (Appendix Table), outperforming its benchmark by a modest 8 basis points (“bps”). Our bond underweight was auspicious as yields rose across all maturities last month. Overweighting the riskier segments of the fixed-income market – junk bonds and preferred stocks via the VRP ETF – generated 14 bps of relative performance. However, our equity positioning chipped away at those gains. We underweighted Utilities, March’s top performing sector, and overweighted value, which lagged. Our large Energy overweight mitigated those drags, leaving us with positive net alpha. Since inception two months ago, the portfolio’s value-added stands at 18 bps.   Doug Peta, CFA Chief US Investment Strategist dougp@bcaresearch.com Jennifer Lacombe Associate Editor JenniferL@bcaresearch.com Cyclical ETF Portfolio