Fixed Income
Executive Summary Global risk assets are oversold, and investor sentiment is downbeat. In this context, a technical equity rebound cannot be ruled out. However, we do not think it will be the beginning of a major cyclical rally. The Fed and the stock market remain on a collision course. An equity rally and easing financial conditions would make the Fed even more resolute to continue hiking interest rates. There are many similarities between dynamics that prevailed in US tech stocks and in previous bubbles. While it is not our baseline view, the odds of a protracted bear market are nontrivial. Resource prices and commodity plays have more downside. The History Of Financial Bubbles: Is This Time Different? Bottom Line: The decline in commodity prices and the relentless US dollar rally will ensure that EM currencies, bonds and stocks continue to sell off even if the US equity market rebounds in the near term. Feature Among the most frequently discussed topics in recent client calls are the upside and downside risks to our baseline view. We elaborate on these risks in this report. To recap, our baseline view is as follows: EM and DM stocks have another 15% downside in USD terms, the US dollar will continue overshooting and commodity prices will fall. Global yields are topping out, and the US yield curve will soon invert. Hence, defensive positioning for absolute-return investors is still warranted, and global equity and fixed-income portfolios should continue to underweight EM. The rationale is that US and EU demand for goods ex-autos, and hence global trade, is about to contract while the Fed is straightjacketed by high and broad-based inflation. China’s economy will be struggling to recover. In EM ex-China, domestic demand will relapse. Chart 1Will The S&P 500's Technical Support Hold? If one believes that the US equity bull market that began in 2009 is still alive (i.e. the March 2020 selloff is a short-lived red herring), odds are that the S&P 500 drawdown is over. The reasoning is that the S&P 500 is already down 23% from its 2021 peak, on par with the selloffs that occurred in 2011, 2015-16 and 2018 (Chart 1). However, if one believes that the structural bull market is over, the magnitude of the current equity selloff is likely to exceed the ones in 2011, 2015-16 and 2018. Hence, a bearish stance is still warranted. As we argue below, after a 12-year bull run, the excesses in the US equity market in general, and US tech stocks in particular, have become extreme. There are many signs of a bubble, or at least of a major top. Even though we risk overstaying in our negative view, our bias is that the global equity market rout is not yet over. A Bullish Scenario A (hypothetical) bullish case would look something like this: Weakening global and US growth and falling commodity prices bring down US inflation and Treasury yields. As US bond yields drop further, the S&P 500 rallies given their negative correlation of the past 18 months or so. As US inflation declines rapidly, the Fed makes a dovish pivot, reinforcing the risk asset rally and reversing the US dollar’s uptrend. Finally, Chinese stimulus produces a robust business cycle recovery in China that propels commodity prices higher and lifts the rest of EM out of the abyss. Chart 2Keep An Eye On Rising US Trimmed-Mean Inflation In our opinion, this scenario has no more than a 25% chance of playing out. Even if there are apparent signs of a US/global slowdown, elevated US core inflation and accelerating wages and unit labor costs would keep the Fed from dialing down its hawkishness Critically, even though US core PCE inflation has rolled over and will likely decline further, its trimmed-mean PCE inflation is rising (Chart 2). The latter means that inflation is broadening even as some volatile items like food, energy and used-auto prices deflate. As we have written extensively, wages and inflation are lagging variables. Despite the ongoing slowdown in the US economy, it will take many months before the underlying core inflation rate drops below 3%. We maintain that the Fed and the stock market remain on a collision course. An equity rally and easing financial conditions would make the Fed even more resolute to hike interest rates. The basis is that even if core inflation falls in the coming months, it would still be well above the Fed’s target of 2%. Notably, the Fed has recently communicated that its commitment to bring down inflation to 2% is unconditional. Chart 3The Anatomy Of The US Equity Bear Market In 2000-2002 This policy stance represents a major departure from the past several decades when the Fed was very sensitive to any tightening in financial conditions and often eased preemptively. In short, with inflation still well above its target, the Fed will, for now, err on the side of hawkishness if financial conditions ease. Importantly, US corporate profits will likely contract even if US real GDP does not shrink. As US corporate top-line growth slows and unit labor costs accelerate, profit margins will shrink. For example, the 2001-2002 recession was very mild – consumer spending did not contract at all, and housing boomed (Chart 3, top two panels). Yet, the S&P 500 operating earnings dropped by 30%, and the S&P 500 fell by 50% (Chart 3, bottom two panels). In brief, a devastating bear market does not necessarily require a hard landing. Concerning China, the recovery will likely be U-shaped rather than V-shaped with risks skewed to the downside. Finally, contracting global trade and falling commodity prices will continue, which are negative for EM currencies and assets. Notably, industry data from Taiwan’s manufacturing PMI suggest that the slowdown in the Asian and global economies is widespread. Taiwan’s substantial trade linkages with mainland China signify that the slowdown is not limited to the US and the EU but includes China too. Taiwanese PMI export orders of both semiconductor and basic material producers have plunged to 40 and 30, respectively (Chart 4). Barring a quick turnaround, global semiconductor and basic materials stocks have more downside. Even as US Treasury yields drop, the dollar will continue firming versus EM currencies, including those of Emerging Asian countries. In such a scenario, EM stocks and bonds will weaken further (Chart 5). Chart 4A Broad-Based Contraction In Global Trade Is In The Cards Chart 5A Free Fall In EM Ex-China Stocks And Currencies Bottom Line: The S&P 500 is oversold, and investor sentiment is downbeat. In this context, a technical equity rebound can occur at any moment. However, we do not think it will be the beginning of a major cyclical rally. A Bearish Case: Are US TMT Stocks A Bubble? What is a more bearish scenario than our baseline case? The bursting of bubbles or the unwinding of excesses would entail a more protracted and devastating bear market than the 15% drop in global share prices we currently expect. We can identify two major excesses in the global economy and financial system: In US TMT (Technology, Media & Entertainment and Internet & Catalog Retail) stocks and private equity In Chinese real estate. We have written extensively about property market excesses in China. Below we discuss the recent sharp selloff in commodities, which is partially linked to Chinese property construction. We also present the case for major excesses in US stocks. Chart 6 illustrates the history of bubbles of the past several decades: The Nifty-fifty (involving the 50 US large-cap stocks) bubble occurred in the 1960s and burst in the 1970s (not shown in the chart). The commodity bubble took place in the 1970s and burst in the 1980s. Japanese equity and property prices rose exponentially in the 1980s and deflated in the 1990s. The Nasdaq bubble occurred in the 1990s and was shattered in the early 2000s. Commodities/EM/China were the leaders of the 2000s, and they were devastated in the 2010s. We use iron ore in this chart because its price surged the most in the 2000s. FAANGM stocks, the Nasdaq 100 index and private equity were by far the biggest beneficiaries of the 2010s. No one can be certain about bubbles in real time because there are always superior fundamentals or persuasive stories that justify exponential price appreciation. That said, there are a lot of similarities between dynamics prevailing in US tech and private equity and in previous bubbles: In the past decade, FAANGM stocks, the Nasdaq 100 index and private equity companies registered gains comparable to the bubbles of the previous 60 years. Furthermore, as Chart 6 illustrates, the equal-weighted FAANGM index in inflation-adjusted terms rose 30-fold, much more than the bubbles of the previous decades. The Nasdaq 100 index and share prices of Blackstone, the largest private equity company, have risen by nearly 10-fold in real (inflation-adjusted terms) between 2010 and the end of 2021. Chart 6The History Of Financial Bubbles: Is This Time Different? The final phase of bubbles is often characterized by growing retail investor participation. This is exactly what happened with US tech/new economy stocks. Chart 7US TMT Stocks: Exponential Growth Rarely Ends Well Toward the end of the decade, not only retail but also institutional capital stampedes into the winners of the decade. This played out with US large-cap tech stocks as well as in private equity and private debt spaces. Inflows into private equity and private debt have been enormous. As a result of these inflows into US large-cap stocks, the market cap share of US TMT stocks as a percentage of total US market cap has surpassed 40%, its peak in 2000 (Chart 7). Bubbles often thrive during periods of low interest rates and crash when the cost of capital rises. This is exactly what has been happening in global financial markets since early 2019. The parameters of the overall US equity market were also excessive prior to this bear market. As of last year, the S&P 500 stock prices in real (inflation-adjusted) terms became as elevated relative to their long-term time trend as they were in the late 1960s and the late 1990s − the peaks of previous secular bull markets (Chart 8, top panel). Chart 8The S&P 500 and Operating Profits: A Long-Term Perspective Chart 9Equity Issuance Marks Market Tops The S&P 500’s operating earnings in real terms have surpassed two standard deviations above its time trend (Chart 8, bottom panel). Some sort of mean reversion to its long-term trend is in the cards. US corporate profits have benefited from fiscal/monetary stimulus, low labor costs and pricing power. All of these are now working against profits. Finally, new share issuance in the US mushroomed in 2021, another sign of a major top (Chart 9). Bottom Line: We are not entirely convinced that US TMT stocks are a bubble waiting to burst. Yet, the odds of this happening are nontrivial. This time might not be different. A Word On Commodities The selloff in the commodity space has been broad-based. Odds are that it will continue for the following reasons: A global business cycle downtrend is always bearish for commodity prices. In fact, oil prices are often lagging and are typically the last shoe to drop during global slowdowns. US sales of gasoline have started to contract. Besides, Saudi Arabia will likely increase its oil output and shipments following President Biden’s visit to the Kingdom next week. Chart 10Investors Have Been Long Commodity Futures As we have argued in recent months, China’s demand for commodities was contracting and, in our opinion, the rally in resource prices over the past 12 months was supported by investment demand for commodities, i.e., financial inflows into the commodity space. Many portfolios have bought commodities as an inflation hedge. When a hedge becomes a consensus trade and crowded, it stops being a hedge. Chart 10 demonstrates that net long positions in 17 commodities have been very elevated. The speed at which liquidation is taking place corroborates our thesis that it is investors not producers or consumers who have been caught being long commodities. China’s business cycle recovery will be U-shaped at best. Domestic orders point to weaker import volumes in the months ahead (Chart 11, top panel). Corporate loan demand has plunged suggesting that liquidity provisions by the PBoC might fail to produce a meaningful recovery in credit growth (Chart 11, bottom panel). Finally, technicals bode ill for commodity prices. As Chart 12 illustrates, copper prices and global material stocks have probably formed medium-term tops, and risks are skewed to the downside. Chart 11China: The Economy Is Struggling To Gain Traction Chart 12A Major Top In Commodity Prices? Bottom Line: Commodity prices and their plays have more downside. Investment Strategy The decline in commodity prices and the relentless US dollar rally will ensure that EM currencies, bonds and stocks continue to sell off even if the US equity market rebounds in the near term driven by lower Treasury yields. Global equity and fixed-income portfolios should continue underweighting EM. We also continue to short the following currencies versus the USD: ZAR, COP, PEN, PLN, PHP and IDR; as well as HUF vs. CZK, and KRW vs. JPY. Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com Strategic Themes (18 Months And Beyond) Equities Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months)
Executive Summary Our recommended model bond portfolio outperformed its custom benchmark index by +24bps in Q2/2022, improving the year-to-date outperformance to a solid +72bps. The Q2 outperformance came entirely from the credit side of the portfolio (+35bps), led by underweights to US investment grade corporates (+28bps) and EM hard currency debt (+24bps). The rates side of the portfolio was down slightly (-11bps), with gains from underweights in US and UK inflation-linked bonds (a combined +24bps) helping offset the hit from overweights to German and French government bonds (a combined -30bps). Looking ahead, we continue to see more defensive positioning in growth-sensitive credit sectors like US investment grade corporate bonds and EM hard currency debt, rather than duration management, as providing the better opportunity to generate alpha in bond portfolios over the latter half of 2022. GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Recommended Positioning For The Next Six Months Bottom Line: In our model bond portfolio, we are maintaining an overall neutral duration stance and a moderate underweight of spread product versus developed market sovereign bonds. We are, however, reducing the recommended tilts in inflation-linked bonds by upgrading US TIPS to neutral and downgrading Canadian linkers to neutral. Feature Dear Client, We are about to take a mid-summer publishing break, as this humble bond strategist moves his family into a new home in a new city. Next week, you will be receiving a report written by BCA Research’s Chief US Bond Strategist, Ryan Swift. The following week, there will be no Global Fixed Income Strategy report published. Our next report will be published on July 26, 2022. Regards, Rob Robis Bond investors are running out of places to hide to avoid losses in 2022. The total return on the Bloomberg Global Aggregate index (hedged into USD) in the second quarter of this year was -4%, nearly matching the -6% loss seen in Q1. No sector, from government bonds to corporate debt to emerging market credit, could avoid the damage caused by hawkish central bankers belated responding to the worst bout of global inflation since the 1970s. Related Report Global Fixed Income StrategyGFIS Model Bond Portfolio Q1/2022 Review & Outlook: Trading The Consolidation Phase Global inflation rates will soon peak, led by slowing growth of goods prices and commodity prices. However, inflation will remain well above central bank targets across the bulk of the developed world, supported by more domestic sources like services prices, housing costs and wages. This will limit the ability for important central banks like the Fed and ECB to quickly pivot in a more dovish direction to support weakening growth – and bail out foundering bond markets. With that backdrop in mind, we present our quarterly review of the BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy (GFIS) model bond portfolio for the second 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. Q2/2022 Model Bond Portfolio Performance: All About Credit Chart 1Q2/2022 Performance: Gains From Defensive Credit Positioning The total return for the GFIS model portfolio (hedged into US dollars) in the second quarter was -4.3%, outperforming the custom benchmark index by +24bps (Chart 1).1 In terms of the specific breakdown between the government bond and spread product allocations in our model portfolio, the former generated -11bps of underperformance versus our custom benchmark index while the latter outperformed by +35bps. In our previous quarterly portfolio performance review in April, we noted that the greater opportunities to generate outperformance for fixed income investors would come from more defensive allocations to spread product, rather than big directional moves in government bond yields. That forecast largely panned out, as global credit markets moved to price in the growing risk of a deep economic downturn. Declining nominal government bond yields provided some modest relief at the end of June, with markets modestly pricing out some of the rate hikes discounted over the next year amid deepening global recession fears. While we maintained a neutral stance on overall portfolio duration during the quarter, we did benefit from the fact that the decline in global bond yields in late June was concentrated more in lower inflation expectations than falling real yields. Thus, our underweight positioning in inflation-linked bonds, focused on the US and UK, helped add a combined +25bps of outperformance versus the benchmark (Table 1). Table 1GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Q2/2022 Overall Return Attribution 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 Q2/2022 Government Bond Performance Attribution Chart 3GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Q2/2022 Spread Product Performance Attribution By Sector Biggest Outperformers: Underweight US investment grade Industrials (+19bps) Underweight UK index-linked Gilts (+15bps) Underweight US TIPS (+9bps) Underweight US investment grade Financials (+7bps) Underweight US MBS (+6bps) Underweight US Treasuries with maturities beyond ten years (+6bps) Biggest Underperformers: Overweight euro area investment grade corporates (-19bps) Overweight German government bonds with maturities beyond ten years (-14bps) Overweight French government bonds with maturities beyond ten years (-8bps) Overweight UK Gilts with maturities beyond ten years (-6bps) Overweight US CMBS (-4bps) Chart 4 presents the ranked benchmark index returns of the individual countries and spread product sectors in the GFIS model bond portfolio for Q2/2022. 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 Q2 (red for underweight, dark green for overweight, gray for neutral). Chart 4Ranking The Winners & Losers From The GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Universe In Q2/2022 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 Q2/2022, 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 within the credit side of the benchmark portfolio universe. Notably, we were underweight EM USD-denominated Sovereigns (-1099bps), EM USD-denominated corporates (-816bps) and US investment grade corporates (-686bps) on the extreme right side of the chart. Some of our key overweight positions did relatively well, led by overweights in US CMBS (-148bps), Australian government bonds (-288bps) and euro area investment grade corporates (-378bps), all of which were on the left side of Chart 4. One of our key recommendations throughout the first half of 2022 - overweighting German government bonds (-517bps) and French government bonds (-657bps) versus underweighting US Treasuries (-283bps) - performed poorly in Q2. This was due to investors rapidly pricing in a far more aggressive series of ECB rate hikes than we expected, resulting in some convergence of US-European bond yield differentials. Importantly, core European bond yields have pulled back substantially over the last month, and by much more than US yields have declined. Most notably, the 2-year German yield, which began Q2 at minus-7bps and hit a peak of 1.2% on June 14, has now fallen all the way back to 0.4% as this report went to press. The 2-year US-Germany yield differential has already widened by 35bps in the first week of July, suggesting that our overweight core Europe/underweight US allocation is already contributing positively to the model bond portfolio returns for Q3. Bottom Line: Our model bond portfolio outperformed its benchmark index in the second quarter of the year by +24bps – a positive result coming largely from underweight positions in US corporate bonds, EM spread product and inflation-linked bonds in the US and UK. Future Drivers Of Model Bond Portfolio Returns Just as in Q2/2022, the performance of the model bond portfolio in Q3/2022 will be driven more by relative allocations between countries and spread product sectors, rather than big directional moves in bond yields or credit spreads. Overall Duration Exposure Chart 5A More Stable Backdrop For Global Bond Yields In terms of portfolio duration, we still see a stronger case for global bond yields to be more rangebound than trending, especially in the US. There has already been a major downward adjustment to global bond yields via lower inflation expectations and reduced rate hike expectations. A GDP-weighted average of major developed market 10-year inflation breakevens has already fallen from an April 2022 peak of 281bps to 216bps (Chart 5). That aggregate breakeven is now back to the levels that began 2022, before the Russian invasion of Ukraine that triggered a surge in global energy prices. We anticipate that additional declines in global inflation expectations – and the associated reductions in central bank rate hike expectations – will be harder to achieve over the latter half of 2022. “Stickier” inflation from services, housing costs and wages will remain strong enough to keep overall inflation rates above central bank targets, even as decelerating goods and commodity price inflation act to slow headline inflation rates. Our Global Duration Indicator, which is comprised of growth indicators like the ZEW expectations index for the US and Europe as well as our own global leading economic indicator, has fallen substantially and is signaling a decline in global bond yield momentum once realized inflation rates peak (Chart 6). Chart 6Our Duration Indicator Calling For Slowing Global Yield Momentum Chart 7Overall Portfolio Duration: Stay Neutral We see that as signaling more of a sideways action in bond yields over the next six months, rather than a big downward move, especially in the US. Thus, we are keeping the duration of the model bond portfolio close to that of the benchmark index (Chart 7). Government Bond Country Allocation We are sticking with our view that, for countries with active central banks (i.e. everyone but Japan), favoring markets where interest rate expectations are above plausible estimates of neutral policy rates should lead to outperformance from country allocation. In Chart 8, we show 10-year bond yields and 2-years-forward 1-month Overnight Index Swap (OIS) rates for the US, euro area, UK, Canada and Australia. The shaded regions in the chart represent estimates of the range of neutral policy rates. In the case of the US, rate expectations and Treasury yields are now below the upper level of the range of neutral fed funds rates estimates, between 2-3%, taken from the latest set of FOMC economic projections. Hence, we are sticking with an underweight stance on US Treasuries with yields offering less protection against the Fed following through on its current guidance and lifting the funds rate into restrictive territory above 3%. In the other countries, rate expectations are above the range of neutral rate estimates, which suggests that bond yields have a bit more protection against hawkish central bank actions. That leads us to stay overweight core Europe, the UK and Australia in the government bond portion of the model bond portfolio. We are only keeping Canada at neutral, however, as we suspect that the Bank of Canada is more willing than other central banks to follow the Fed’s lead on taking rates to a restrictive level to help bring down elevated Canadian inflation. For other countries, we are staying neutral on Italian government bond exposure, for now, and underweight Japan (Chart 9). Chart 8Favor Countries Where Markets Expect Above-Neutral Rates Chart 9Underweight JGBs, Stay Neutral Italy (For Now) For Italy, we await news from the July 21 ECB meeting on the details of a proposal to help support Italian bond markets in the event of additional yield increases or spread widening versus Germany. It is clear from the history of the past decade that Italian bond returns suffer when the ECB is either hiking rates or slowing the growth of its balance sheet (top panel). In other words, it is difficult to recommend overweighting Italian bonds without the support of easy ECB monetary policy. Chart 10Our Inflation-Linked Bond Country Allocations For Japan, our recommendation is strictly related to our view on the move in overall global bond yields. The Bank of Japan is bucking the worldwide trend to tighten monetary policy because core Japanese inflation remains weak. This makes Japanese government bonds (JGBs) a good place for bond investors to “hide out” in when global bond yields are rising. Given our view that global bond yield momentum will slow – in line with the signal from our Global Duration Indicator – we do not see a strong cyclical case for overweighting low-yielding JGBs. On inflation-linked bonds, we are maintaining a cautious overall stance, with commodity prices decelerating, realized inflation momentum set to soon peak and central banks signaling more tightening ahead (Chart 10). This week, we are closing out our lone overweight recommendation on inflation-linked bonds in Canada, where we downgrading to neutral (3 out of 5, see the model bond portfolio table on page 24).2 At the same time, we are neutralizing our underweight stance on US TIPS, moving the allocation to neutral. We still see shorter-term TIPS breakevens as having downside from here, but longer-maturity breakevens have already made enough of a downward adjustment, in our view. Global Spread Product Turning to credit markets, we are maintaining our moderately cautious view on the overall allocation to credit versus government bonds. Slowing global growth momentum and tightening global monetary policy is not an environment where credit spreads can narrow, especially for growth-sensitive credit like corporate bonds and high-yield (Chart 11). Having said that – the spread widening seen in US and European corporate bond markets has introduced a better valuation cushion into spreads. Our preferred measure of spread product valuation – the historical percentile ranking of the 12-month breakeven spread – shows that investment grade spreads in the euro area are now in the top quartile (85%) of its history on a risk-adjusted basis (Chart 12). US investment grade spreads are now up into the second quartile (64%), which is a big improvement from the start of 2022 but not as much as seen in Europe. Chart 11Global Monetary Backdrop Turning More Negative For Credit Chart 12Corporate Spread Valuations Have Improved In The US & Europe European credit spreads likely need to be wide as a risk premium against the numerous risks the region is facing right now – slowing growth, an increasingly hawkish ECB, soaring energy prices and the lingering uncertainties stemming from the Ukraine war. However, a lot of bad news is now discounted in European spreads and, as a result, we are maintaining our overweight stance on European investment grade corporates, especially versus US investment grade where we remain underweight. High-yield spreads on both sides of the Atlantic look more attractive on a 12-month breakeven spread basis, but also on a default-adjusted spread basis (Chart 13). Assuming a moderate increase in the high-yield default rates in the US and Europe - consistent with a sharp slowing of economic growth but no deep recession - the current level of high-yield spreads net of expected default losses over the next year is above long-run averages. It is too soon to move to an overweight stance on high-yield, with the Fed and ECB set to tighten more amid ongoing growth uncertainty, but given the improved valuation cushion we see a neutral allocation to junk in both the US and Europe as appropriate in our model portfolio. Chart 13Junk Spreads Offer Value If Recession Can Be Avoided Finally, we remain comfortably underweight emerging market USD-denominated sovereign and corporate debt. The backdrop is poor for emerging market bond returns, given slowing global growth, softening commodity prices, a tightening Fed and a strengthening US dollar (Chart 14). Chart 14Staying Cautious On EM Debt Exposure Summing It All Up The full list of our recommended portfolio allocations can be seen in Table 2. The portfolio enters the second half of 2022 with the following high-level characteristics: Table 2GFIS Model Bond Portfolio Recommended Positioning For The Next Six Months Chart 15Overall Portfolio Allocation: Underweight Spread Product Vs Governments the overall duration exposure remains at-benchmark (i.e. neutral) the portfolio has an underweight allocation to overall spread products versus government bonds, equal to four percentage points of the portfolio (Chart 15) the tracking error of the portfolio, or its expected volatility in excess of that of the benchmark, is 77bps – below our self-imposed 100bps tracking error limit (Chart 16) the portfolio now has a yield below that of the custom benchmark index, equal to -31bps on a currency-unhedged basis but a more modest “carry gap” of -10bps on a USD-hedged basis given the gains from hedging into USD (Chart 17). Chart 16Overall Portfolio Risk: Moderate Chart 17Overall Portfolio Yield: Below-Benchmark Bottom Line: Looking ahead, our model bond portfolio performance will continue to be driven by the same factors in Q3/2022 as in the previous quarter: the relative performance of US bonds versus European equivalents for both government debt and corporate bonds, and the path for emerging market credit spreads. Portfolio Scenario Analysis For The Next Six Months After making the modest changes to our inflation-linked bond allocations in the US and Canada, which can be seen in the tables on pages 23-24, we now turn to our regularly 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 the pace of global growth. Base Case (Slow Global Growth) Global growth momentum slows substantially, with firms cutting back on hiring and investing activity due to slowing corporate profit growth. An outright recession is avoided because softening energy prices help ease the drag on real spending power for consumers. China introduces more monetary and fiscal stimulus measures to boost growth. Global inflation peaks and eases on the back of slowing growth of goods prices and commodity prices, but the floor on inflation in the US and other developed markets is higher than central bank inflation targets due to sticky domestic price pressures. The Fed continues to hike at every policy meeting in H2/2022. There is a very mild bear flattening of the US Treasury curve, but with longer-term 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 28 and the fed funds rate reaches 3.25% by year-end. Resilient Growth Scenario Consumer spending surprises to the upside in the US and even Europe, as softer momentum of energy prices eases the relentless downward pressure on real incomes. Labor demand remains sold across the developed world, particularly with firms reluctant to do mass layoffs because of a perceived scarcity of quality labor. China enacts more policy stimulus with growth likely to fall below 2022 government targets. The Fed is forced to be more aggressive on rate hikes, given resilient US growth and inflation staying well above the Fed’s 2% target. The US Treasury curve bear-flattens into outright inversion, but with Treasury yields rising across the curve. The Brent oil price rises +20%, the VIX index climbs to 30, the US dollar appreciates by +3% thanks to a more aggressive Fed that lifts the funds rate to 3.75% by year-end. Recession Scenario A toxic combination of contracting corporate profits and negative real income growth drags the major developed economies into outright recession. Global inflation rates slow rapidly from current elevated levels, fueled by a rapid decline in commodity prices, but remain above central bank targets making it hard for the Fed and other major central banks to pivot dovishly to support growth. Chinese policymakers belatedly act to ease monetary and fiscal policy, but not by enough to offset the slow response from developed market policymakers. The Treasury curve moderately bull-steepens, although the absolute decline in nominal Treasury yields is relatively modest as the Fed will not pivot quickly to signaling policy easing with inflation still likely to remain above 2%. The Brent oil price falls -20%, the VIX index soars to 35, the US dollar depreciates by -3% (as lower US rates win out over slowing global growth) and the Fed pushes the funds rate to 2.75% before pausing after September. 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 18 and Chart 19, 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 18Risk Factor Assumptions For The Scenario Analysis Chart 19US Treasury Yield Assumptions For The Scenario Analysis Given our neutral overall duration stance, the return scenarios will be driven by mostly by the credit side of the portfolio. In the recession scenario where Treasury yields decline, there is a modest projected outperformance from the rates side of the portfolio coming through the underweight to low-beta JGBs. In all scenarios, financial market volatility is expected to stay at, or above, current levels as central banks will be unable to ease policy, even in the event of an actual recession, because of lingering high inflation. Thus, the return on the credit side of the model portfolio will be the main driver of performance, delivering a range of excess return outcomes between +47bps and +60bps. Bottom Line: The model bond portfolio should benefit in H2/2022 from the ongoing cautious stance on global spread product, focused on underweights to US investment grade corporates and EM hard currency debt. Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@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 We are also closing out our Canadian breakeven widening trade in our Tactical Overlay portfolio. 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*
Executive Summary Buying a home is now more expensive than renting in many parts of the world. In the US and UK, disappearing homebuyers combined with a flood of home-sellers will weigh on home prices over the next 6-12 months. Falling employment and falling house prices risk becoming a self-reinforcing negative feedback loop that turns a mild recession into a severe recession. To stop such a vicious cycle running out of control, policymakers will eventually bring down mortgage rates. For this reason, on a time horizon of 6-12 months, overweight bonds. A collapse in Chinese property development and construction activity will have negative long-term implications for commodities, emerging Asia, and developing countries that produce raw materials. Structurally underweight. On the other hand, stay structurally overweight the China 30-year government bond. Fractal trading watchlist: US Biotech versus Utilities. Buying A Home Is Now More Expensive Than Renting! Bottom Line: The decade-long global housing boom is over. Feature For the first time since 2018, the number of Brits wanting to buy a home is less than the number of Brits wanting to sell their home. The balance of homebuyers versus homes for sale is the main driver of any housing market. When multiple homebuyers are competing for a home for sale, the subsequent bidding war puts upward pressure on house prices. But when, multiple homes for sale are competing for a homebuyer, the subsequent discounting war puts downward pressure on house prices. The balance of homebuyers versus homes for sale is the main driver of any housing market. This makes the number of homebuyers versus homes for sale the best leading indicator of house prices. The recent collapse of this leading indicator in the UK warns that UK house prices are likely to soften through the remainder of 2022 and into 2023 (Chart I-1). Chart I-1With Fewer UK Homebuyers Than UK Home-Sellers, UK House Prices Are Set To Drop Homebuyers Are Disappearing While Home-Sellers Are Flooding The Market Disappearing homebuyers combined with a flood of home-sellers is also evident in the US. According to Realtor.com: “Weary US homebuyers face not only sky-high home prices but also rising mortgage rates, and that financial double whammy is hitting homebuyers hard: Compared with just a year ago, the cost of financing 80 percent of a typical home rose 57.6 percent, amounting to an extra $745 per month.” Compared with just a year ago, the cost of financing 80 percent of a typical US home rose 57.6 percent, amounting to an extra $745 per month. Unsurprisingly, US mortgage applications for home purchase have recently plunged by a third (Chart I-2) and homebuyer demand has declined by 16 percent since last June.1 Meanwhile, the inventory of homes actively for sale on a typical day in June has increased by 19 percent, the largest increase in the data history. Chart I-2With The Cost Of Financing A US Home Purchase Surging, Mortgage Applications Have Collapsed The flood of new homes on the market means that the dwindling pool of homebuyers will have more negotiating leverage on the asking price (Chart I-3 and Chart I-4). This will balance the highly lopsided negotiating dynamics in the raging seller’s market of the past two years. The shape of things to come can be seen in Austin, Texas, which was one of the hottest markets during the early pandemic real estate frenzy. Chart I-3US Homebuyers Are Disappearing... Chart I-4...While US Home-Sellers Are Flooding The Market “Prices are definitely starting to go down again… last Friday, an Austin home was listed at $825,000. The next day, at the open house, no one came. A few months ago, there would have been 20 or more buyers showing up. The sellers didn’t want to test the market, so on Sunday, they dropped it to $790,000. It sold for $760,000.” Buying A Home Is Now More Expensive Than Renting The nub of the problem for homebuyers is that the mortgage rate is higher than the rental yield. In simple terms, buying a home is now more expensive than renting (Chart I-5). The housing bulls counter that the high mortgage rate will force rental yields to adjust upwards by rents going up, but this argument is flawed. Chart I-5Buying A Home Is Now More Expensive Than Renting! The most important driver of rent inflation is the unemployment rate (inversely). Because, to put it bluntly, you need a steady job to pay the rent! Today, the Federal Reserve’s inflation problem, in a nutshell, is that rent inflation is too high even versus the tight jobs market (Chart I-6). Chart I-6The Fed Needs To Push Up Unemployment To Pull Down Rent Inflation Although the Fed cannot say this explicitly, its mechanism to bring down inflation is to push up unemployment, and thereby to pull down rent inflation, which constitutes almost half of the core inflation basket. In this case, the rental yield (rent divided by house price) would adjust upwards by the denominator – house prices – going down. The most important driver of rent inflation is the unemployment rate (inversely). Yet the housing bulls also argue that the housing boom is the result of a structural undersupply of homes. They claim that as this structural undersupply persists, it will underpin house prices. But this ‘housing shortage’ narrative is another myth, which we can debunk with two simple observations. Through the past decade, home prices have risen simultaneously and exponentially everywhere in the world. Now ask yourself, is it plausible that there could be a structural undersupply of homes everywhere in the world at the precisely the same time? If this doesn’t debunk the housing shortage narrative, then try this second observation. Through the past decade, gross rents have tracked nominal GDP. Theory says that gross rents should track nominal GDP, because the quality of the housing stock improves broadly in line with GDP, and therefore so too should rents. If there really was a structural undersupply of housing, then gross rents would be structurally outperforming nominal GDP. But that hasn’t happened in any major economy (Chart I-7). Chart I-7Rents Have Tracked GDP, So There Is No 'Structural Undersupply' Of Homes As an aside, if rents track GDP, then why do they constitute almost half of the core inflation basket? The answer is that the rents included in inflation are ‘hedonically adjusted’, meaning that are supposedly deflated for quality improvements – though there is always a niggling doubt whether the statisticians do this adjustment correctly! Pulling all of this together, the synchronized global housing boom of the past decade was not the result of a structural undersupply. Instead, it was the result of a valuation boom – meaning, plummeting rental yields, which in turn were the result of plummeting mortgage rates, which in turn were the result of plummeting bond yields. But now that mortgage rates are much higher than rental yields, this ‘virtuous’ cycle risks turning vicious. Falling employment and falling house prices risk becoming a self-reinforcing negative feedback loop that turns a mild recession into a severe recession. To stop such a vicious cycle running out of control, policymakers will eventually have no other choice than to bring down mortgage rates. For this reason, on a time horizon of 6-12 months, overweight bonds. But The Prize For The Biggest Housing Boom Goes To… China The housing booms in the UK, US and other Western economies, extreme as they are, are small fry compared to the housing boom in China. Chinese real estate, now worth $100 trillion, is by far the largest asset-class in the world. And Chinese rental yields, at around 1 percent, are well below the yield on cash. Begging the question, how can Chinese real estate valuations be in such stratospheric territory, with a yield even less than that on ‘risk-free’ cash? The simple answer is that investors have been led to believe that Chinese real estate is a risk-free investment! Without a social safety net and with limited places to park their money, Chinese savers have for years been encouraged to buy homes, in the widespread belief that property is the safest investment, whose price is only supposed to go up (Chart I-8). Chart I-8Chinese Real Estate Is Perceived To Be A 'Risk Free' Investment With the bulk of Chinese households’ wealth in property acting as a perceived economic safety net, even a 10 percent decline in house prices would constitute a major shock to the household sector’s hopes and expectations of what property is. In turn, the ensuing ‘negative wealth effect’ would be catastrophic for household spending in the world’s second largest economy. Therefore, in contrast to the US housing debacle in 2008, the Chinese government will ensure that its property market adjustment does not come from a collapse in home prices. Rather, it will come from a collapse in property development and construction activity, combined with keeping interest rates structurally low. This will have negative long-term implications for commodities, emerging Asia, and developing countries that produce raw materials. Structurally underweight. On the other hand, Chinese bonds are an excellent investment for those investors who can accept the capital control risks. Stay structurally overweight the China 30-year government bond. Fractal Trading Watchlist Biotech and Utilities are both defensive sectors, based on the insensitivity of theirs profits to economic fluctuations. But whereas Biotech is ‘long duration’, Utilities is ‘shorter duration’. Over the coming months, as the economy falters and bond yields back down, long duration defensives, such as Biotech, are likely to be the winners. This is supported by the recent underperformance reaching the point of fractal fragility that has indicated previous major turning points (Chart I-9). The recommended trade is long US Biotech versus Utilities, setting a profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 20 percent. This replaces our long US Biotech versus Tech position, which achieved its 17.5 percent profit target, and is now closed. Chart I-9Biotech Is Set To Be A Big Winner Chart 1CNY/USD Has Reversed Chart 2US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities Chart 3CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started Chart 4Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Chart 5The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse Chart 6The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 7FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Reversing Chart 8Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Been Exhausted Chart 9The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 10The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 11Food And Beverage Outperformance Has Been Exhausted Chart 12AT REVERSAL Chart 13AT REVERSAL Chart 14The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile Chart 15The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile Chart 16A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 17Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 18Norway's Outperformance Could End Chart 19Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 20Fractal Trading Watch List Chart 21The Rally In USD/EUR Could End Chart 22The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 23A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare Chart 24GBP/USD At A Turning Point Chart 25Fractal Trading Watch List Chart 26Fractal Trading Watch List Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Realtor.com gauge homebuyer demand by so-called ‘pending listings’, the number of listings that are at various stages of the selling process that are not yet sold. Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades 6-12 Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations
BCA Research’s US Bond Strategy service recommends a neutral allocation to high-yield bonds within US fixed income portfolios. High-Yield underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 591 basis points in June, dragging year-to-date excess returns…
Highlights Chart 1Are Expectations Too Dovish? The dominant market narrative has clearly shifted in the last few days. The primary concern among investors used to be that the Fed had fallen behind the curve on inflation. Now, asset prices are telling us that investors are more worried about an overly hawkish Fed and an increased risk of recession. The shift is evident in bond market prices. The yield curve is now priced for only 176 basis points of rate hikes over the next 12 months and only 90 bps of tightening over the next 24 months (Chart 1). What’s more, long-dated market-based inflation expectations have plunged to below the Fed’s target range (bottom panel). We recommend keeping portfolio duration close to benchmark for now, as bond yields could still have some downside during the next few months as both inflation and economic growth slow. That said, we suspect that the market is now pricing-in an overly dovish Fed tightening path for the next couple of years, a change that may soon warrant a shift back to below-benchmark portfolio duration. Stay tuned. Feature Table 1 Recommended Portfolio Specification Table 2Fixed Income Sector Performance Investment Grade: Underweight Chart 2Investment Grade Market Overview Investment grade corporate bonds underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 168 basis points in June, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -379 bps. The average index option-adjusted spread widened 28 bps on the month and it currently sits at 158 bps. Similarly, our quality-adjusted 12-month breakeven spread moved up to its 61st percentile since 1995 (Chart 2). A report from a few months ago made the case for why investors should underweight investment grade corporate bonds on a 6-12 month investment horizon.1 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, there’s a good chance that spreads will narrow during the next few months as inflation falls. That said, the persistent removal of monetary accommodation and flatness of the yield curve will limit how much spreads can compress. A recent 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.2 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 591 basis points in June, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -889 bps. The average index option-adjusted spread widened 172 bps on the month to reach 578 bps, 209 bps above the 2017-19 average and 41 bps above the 2018 peak. 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 June. It currently sits at 8% (Chart 3). As is the case with investment grade, there’s a good chance that high-yield spreads will stage a relief rally in the back half of this year as inflation falls. But due to the flatness of the yield curve, we think it will be difficult for spreads to move below the average seen during the last tightening cycle (2017-19). But even a move back to average 2017-19 levels would equate to roughly 11% of excess return for the junk index if it is realized over a six month period. This potential return is the main reason to prefer high-yield over investment grade in a US bond portfolio. While we maintain a neutral (3 out of 5) allocation to high-yield for now, we would be inclined to downgrade the sector if spreads tighten to the 2017-19 average or if core inflation falls back to 4%.3 MBS: Underweight Chart 4MBS Market Overview Mortgage-Backed Securities underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 63 basis points in June, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -171 bps. We discussed the outlook for Agency MBS in a recent report.4 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 during the next six months, we recommend favoring low-coupon MBS (1.5%-2.5%) within an overall underweight allocation to the sector. Emerging Market Bonds (USD): Underweight Chart 5Emerging Markets Overview Emerging Market bonds underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 182 basis points in June, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -737 bps. EM Sovereigns underperformed the Treasury benchmark by 280 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -925 bps. The EM Corporate & Quasi-Sovereign Index underperformed by 122 bps, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -617 bps. The EM Sovereign Index underperformed the duration-equivalent US corporate bond index by 99 bps in June. The yield differential between EM sovereigns and duration-matched US corporates remains negative. Further, the relative performance of EM sovereigns versus US corporates has been tracking the performance of EM currencies versus the dollar and our Emerging Markets Strategy service sees further headwinds for EM currencies in the near term (Chart 5).5 The EM Corporate & Quasi-Sovereign Index outperformed duration-matched US corporates by 1 bp in June. The index continues to offer a significant yield advantage versus duration-matched US corporates (bottom panel), and as such, we continue to recommend a neutral (3 out of 5) allocation to the sector. Municipal Bonds: Overweight Chart 6Municipal Market Overview Municipal bonds underperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 89 basis points in June, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -167 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 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 these 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 94%, 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 US corporates is 92%. The same measure for 17-year+ Revenue bonds stands at 97%, 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 bear-flattened in June. The 2-year/10-year Treasury slope flattened 26 bps on the month and the 5-year/30-year slope flattened 13 bps. The 2/10 and 5/30 slopes now stand at 4 bps and 23 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 This divergence has narrowed in recent weeks, but it remains wide by historical standards. For example, the 5-year/10-year Treasury slope is currently 0 bps while the 3-month/5-year slope is 122 bps. The divergence is happening because the market moved quickly to price-in a rapid near-term pace of rate hikes, but the Fed has only delivered 150 bps of tightening so far 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. The 5 over 2/10 butterfly spread has narrowed during the past month, but the trade continues to look attractive on our model (Chart 7). 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 246 basis points in June, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -14 bps. The 10-year TIPS breakeven inflation rate fell 31 bps on the month, landing back inside the Fed’s 2.3% - 2.5% comfort zone (Chart 8). Consistently, our TIPS Breakeven Valuation Indicator is drifting toward neutral territory, signaling that TIPS are becoming less expensive (panel 2). At the front-end of the yield curve, the 2-year TIPS breakeven inflation rate fell 57 bps in June – from 3.86% to 3.29% - and the 2-year TIPS yield rose 96 bps – from -1.33% to -0.37% (bottom 2 panels). The large drop in short-maturity breakevens is the result of increasing investor conviction that inflation has indeed peaked. In a recent report we made the case that core CPI inflation can fall to a range of 4%-5% (from its current 6.0% rate) without the Fed needing to cause a recession. We also argued that a recession will be required to push inflation from 4% back down to 2%.8 The upshot for bond investors is that TIPS breakeven inflation rates will drop further as core inflation rolls over. This will be particularly true at the front-end of the yield curve. We also noted in last week’s report that Fed policymakers have increasingly indicated a desire for positive real yields across the entire curve.9 This tells us that investors should continue to short 2-year TIPS, targeting a positive real 2-year yield. ABS: Overweight Chart 9ABS Market Overview Asset-Backed Securities outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 21 basis points in June, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -42 bps. Aaa-rated ABS outperformed by 25 bps on the month, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -33 bps. Non-Aaa ABS underperformed by 5 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -93 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 5.4% in May and the amount of outstanding credit card debt has recovered to its pre-COVID level (bottom panel). 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 5 basis points in June, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -194 bps. Aaa Non-Agency CMBS outperformed Treasuries by 12 bps on the month, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to -141 bps. Non-Aaa Non-Agency CMBS underperformed by 52 bps on the month, dragging year-to-date excess returns down to -340 bps. CMBS spreads remain wide compared to other similarly risky spread products and are currently slightly above their historic averages (Chart 10). Meanwhile, weak commercial real estate (CRE) investment continues to drive strong CRE price appreciation (panel 4). Agency CMBS: Overweight Agency CMBS outperformed the duration-equivalent Treasury index by 32 basis points in June, bringing year-to-date excess returns up to 9 bps. The average index option-adjusted spread tightened 3 bps on the month. It currently sits at 47 bps, close to its long-term average (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. Chart 11The Golden Rule's Track Record At present, the market is priced for 176 basis points of rate hikes during the next 12 months. We 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 June 30, 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 June 30, 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 -9 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 9 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 June 30, 2022) Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see US Bond Strategy / Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, “Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds”, dated April 12, 2022. 2 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. 3 For more details on this call please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “When The Dual Mandates Clash”, dated June 28, 2022. 4 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “The Bond Market Implications Of A 5% Mortgage Rate”, dated April 26, 2022. 5 Please see Emerging Markets Strategy Charts That Matter, “Beware Of Another Downleg In Risk Assets”, dated June 30, 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. 8 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “No End In Sight For Fed Tightening”, dated June 21, 2022. 9 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “When Dual Mandates Clash”, dated June 28, 2022. Recommended Portfolio Specification Other Recommendations Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns
In this <i>Strategy Outlook</i>, we present the major investment themes and views we see playing out for the rest of the year and beyond.
BCA Research’s US Bond Strategy service cautions against turning overly bullish on bonds even if you anticipate a recession within the next 6-12 months. There is a risk that the Fed’s two mandates of price stability and maximum employment could come into…
Executive Summary An Optimal Control Policy We could see some modest near-term downside in Treasury yields as inflation rolls over during the next few months, but we caution against turning overly bullish on bonds even if you anticipate a recession. An optimal control approach to monetary policy tells us that the Fed should be willing to accept a significant increase in the unemployment rate to tame inflation. The implication is that the next recession may not be met with the dramatic easing of monetary policy we have become accustomed to. Short-maturity real yields remain deeply negative, but they will move into positive territory before the end of the economic cycle. Indicators of corporate balance sheet health are not flashing red, but they are moving in the wrong direction. Bottom Line: Investors should keep portfolio duration close to benchmark, maintain a defensive posture on corporate bonds and short 2-year TIPS. The Return Of Optimal Control Bonds rallied into the close last week and, as of Monday morning, their gains have only been partially unwound. The 2-year Treasury yield is down to 3.07% from its recent high of 3.45% and the 10-year yield is down to 3.16% from its recent high of 3.49% (Chart 1). The 2-year/10-year Treasury slope remains close to inversion at 9 bps (Chart 1, bottom panel). Increasingly, the message from the Treasury market is that the Fed is no longer playing catch-up to runaway inflation. Rather, the dominant market narrative is that the Fed may have to moderate its hiking pace to avoid an economic recession. With the unemployment rate at 3.6% and nonfarm payroll growth averaging +408k during the past three months, the US economy is clearly not in a recession today. That said, leading indicators are pointing to increased risk of a downturn within the next 12 months. For example, the S&P Global Manufacturing PMI fell sharply last week from 57.0 to 52.4 (Chart 2). The more widely tracked ISM Manufacturing PMI remains elevated at 56.1, but regional Fed surveys and trends in financial conditions suggest that the ISM could dip into contractionary territory during the next few months (Chart 2, bottom 2 panels). Chart 1Treasury Yields Chart 2Recession Risk Is Rising This is obviously a tricky situation for the Fed as there is a risk that its two mandates of price stability and maximum employment could come into conflict. Not surprisingly, the Fed has a playbook for these sorts of situations, one that was described by Janet Yellen as “optimal control” in a 2012 speech.1 Under an optimal control approach to policymaking the Fed specifies a loss function that is based on deviations of inflation from its 2% target and of the unemployment rate from its estimated full employment level. Understanding that it will be impossible to perfectly achieve both of its objectives, the Fed attempts to set policy so that the output of the loss function is minimized. One example of a simple loss function was given by St. Louis Fed President James Bullard in a speech from 2014.2 That function is as follows: Distance From Goals = (π – π*)2 + (μ - μ*)2 Where: π = inflation π* = The Fed’s target inflation rate μ = the unemployment rate μ* = The Fed’s estimate of the unemployment rate consistent with full employment Chart 3An Optimal Control Policy Let’s apply Bullard’s loss function to the present-day economic situation. The top panel of Chart 3 shows the square root of the function’s output. The Fed’s goal, of course, is to get that line as close to zero as possible. First, let’s see what happens if we input the median FOMC member’s forecast for core PCE inflation and the unemployment rate. That forecast has core PCE inflation falling to 4.3% by the end of this year and it has the unemployment rate edging up to 3.7%. Not surprisingly, this scenario leads to a modest improvement in Bullard’s loss function. Now let’s examine an alternative scenario where core PCE inflation falls to 4% by the end of the year but we set the loss function to remain at its current level. That outcome can be achieved even with the unemployment rate rising to 6.68%. This scenario is instructive. It tells us that, from an optimal control perspective, the Fed would be willing to tolerate an increase in the unemployment rate all the way up to 6.68% if it meant that inflation would fall back down to 4%. Why is this example important? It’s important because it gives us some perspective on what sort of labor market pain the Fed may be willing to tolerate to tame inflation. More specifically, there is a growing sense among some market participants that the US economy will soon fall into recession and that recessions are usually accompanied by Fed rate cuts. However, the magnitude of the increase in the unemployment rate that is shown in our alternative scenario would almost certainly be classified as a recession, but an optimal control perspective tells us that the Fed shouldn’t back away from tightening if that were to occur. The bottom line is that while we could see some modest near-term downside in Treasury yields as inflation rolls over during the next few months, we caution against turning overly bullish on bonds even if you anticipate a recession within the next 6-12 months. Given where inflation is today, there are strong odds that the Fed would respond to a rising unemployment rate by simply tempering its pace of rate hikes or perhaps temporarily pausing. Optimal control tells us that we would need to see an extremely large employment shock for the Fed to consider reversing course and cutting rates. Investors should stick with ‘at benchmark’ portfolio duration for the time being. A Quick Note On Real Yields Chart 4Short 2-Year TIPS The 2-year real yield has risen to -0.70% from a 2021 low of -3.05%, but we have high conviction that it has further to run (Chart 4). At the press conference following the June FOMC meeting, Fed Chair Powell hinted that he viewed positive real yields across the entire Treasury curve as a reasonable intermediate-term goal. He then made similar claims when testifying before the Senate last week: It’s really only the very short end of the curve where our rates are still in negative territory from a real perspective. If you look further out, real rates are positive right across the curve and that’s really what you’re trying to achieve in a situation like this where we have 40 year highs in inflation.3 One way or another, we think it is highly likely that the Fed will achieve its goal of positive real yields across the entire curve. This could happen in a benign scenario where falling inflation expectations push short-maturity real yields higher. Or, it could happen in a more dramatic fashion where inflation expectations remain elevated but that only quickens the pace of Fed tightening. In that scenario, rising short-maturity nominal yields would drag real yields with them. Either way, investors should continue to hold outright short positions in 2-year TIPS. Corporate Health Check-Up In prior reports we noted the extremely good condition of corporate balance sheets, while also suggesting that balance sheet health would deteriorate going forward.4 An updated read on the status of corporate balance sheets suggests that conditions are still favorable, but much less so than even a few months ago. We begin with our Corporate Health Monitor (CHM), a composite indicator of six financial ratios calculated from the US National Accounts data for the nonfinancial corporate sector. This indicator was deep in “improving health” territory at the end of 2021, but it moved close to neutral in 2022 Q1 (Chart 5). Ratings trends, meanwhile, send a similar message. Through the end of May, upgrades continued to dramatically outpace downgrades in the investment grade space (Chart 5, panel 2), but the rate of net upgrades slowed somewhat in high-yield (Chart 5, bottom panel). Digging deeper, we find that the main culprit behind the CHM’s recent jump is a large drop in the ratio of Free Cash Flow to Total Debt (Chart 6). This drop occurred because after-tax cash flows held roughly flat in Q1 but capital expenditures surged, causing free cash flow to dip (Chart 6, panel 2). Chart 5Corporate Health Monitor Chart 6Capex Surged In Q1 This trend is confirmed by another important indicator of corporate balance sheet health, the financing gap. The financing gap is the difference between capital expenditures and retained earnings. A positive financing gap means that retained earnings are insufficient to cover capital expenditures and firms therefore have an incentive to tap debt markets. We see that the financing gap jumped sharply in Q1, from deeply negative into positive territory (Chart 7). Chart 7The Financing Gap Is Positive A positive financing gap on its own does not send a negative signal for corporate defaults. However, when a positive financing gap coincides with tightening lending standards, then an increase in the default rate becomes likely. For now, lending standards are close to unchanged (Chart 7, bottom panel), but there is a strong chance that continued Fed hiking will push them into ‘net tightening’ territory in the months ahead. Investment Implications Chart 8Attractive Value In HY Corporate balance sheet health isn’t quite flashing red, but it is certainly trending in the wrong direction. With continued Fed tightening likely to weigh on lending standards and interest coverage going forward, a defensive posture toward corporate bonds is warranted. We continue to recommend an underweight allocation (2 out of 5) to investment grade corporate bonds in US fixed income portfolios. We maintain a somewhat higher neutral (3 out of 5) allocation to high-yield bonds for the time being. This is because high-yield valuation is quite attractive, and we see potential for some near-term spread tightening as inflation rolls over (Chart 8). That said, the sector’s long-term return prospects are not good, and we will consider turning more defensive should the average high-yield spread narrow to its 2017-19 average or should core inflation move closer to our 4% target. Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/yellen20120606a.htm 2 https://www.stlouisfed.org/from-the-president/-/media/project/frbstl/stlouisfed/files/pdfs/bullard/remarks/bullardowensborokychamberofcommerce17july2014final.pdf 3 https://www.c-span.org/video/?521106-1/federal-reserve-chair-jerome-powell-testifies-inflation-economy 4 Please see US Bond Strategy / Global Fixed Income Strategy Special Report, “Turning Defensive On US Corporate Bonds”, dated April 12, 2022. Recommended Portfolio Specification Other Recommendations Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns
Executive Summary Biden Can Take Risks With Russia President Biden will make a last-ditch effort to mitigate Democratic losses in the midterm elections and the effect will be still-high policy uncertainty and erratic US behavior. Biden can take several executive actions against inflation but we do not expect them to resolve the global supply shock or to save the Democrats from a Republican takeover of Congress this fall. There is substantial risk of a direct US-Russia crisis ahead of the election that would sustain bearish sentiment. US policy remains a headwind for equities in 2022 but possibly a tailwind in 2023. A rally after the midterm is fairly likely. Recommendation (Tactical) Initiation Date Return Long DXY (Dollar Index) 23-FEB-22 8.8% Bottom Line: Maintain a defensive posture in the third quarter but look for opportunities to buy oversold assets with long-term macro and policy tailwinds. Feature President Biden and the Democratic Party will make a last-ditch effort in the third quarter to mitigate their large expected losses in the midterm elections. The president will concentrate on fighting inflation, which is weighing on wages, incomes, and consumer and business sentiment (Chart 1). Related Report US Political StrategyBiden Opens The Border Biden’s frantic efforts will induce additional market volatility. The president has a few limited tools to address global energy and supply shocks that probably will not work. Inflation will remain problematic even if it slows down over the next three months as our bond strategists expect. The odds of recession have risen sharply. Our Chief Global Strategist Peter Berezin suggests that the odds are 40% – a point underscored by inversion of some parts of the yield curve and a falling leading economic indicator (Chart 2). President Biden recently met with outside economic adviser Larry Summers and concluded that a recession is “not inevitable.” Not very comforting. Chart 1Inflation's Toll Chart 2Odds Of Recession Rising Summers, who warned Biden and the Democrats not to add $1.9 trillion in spending at the beginning of 2021, has put forward research showing recession odds at 60%-70% over the next 12-24 months.1 However, BCA’s own recession checklist is still ambivalent (Table 1). BCA’s House View is now neutral on equities. Table 1BCA Recession Checklist What could change the US policy outlook? Not much. Avoiding recession, reducing inflation, mobilizing women voters, and clashing directly with Russia could mitigate some of the Democrats’ expected losses this fall, but the outcome would probably be the same. Betting markets give a 72%probability to Democrats losing control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Our own election models show Democrats losing 22 seats in the House and two seats in the Senate (see Appendix), reinforcing our February forecast. The implication is congressional gridlock in 2023-24. Gridlock is marginally positive for the broad US equity market beginning in Q4 2022 … but marginally negative before then. Checking Up On Our Three Key Views For 2022 Our three key views for 2022 remain intact at the halfway point of the year. : 1. From Single-Party Rule To Gridlock: The Democrats are highly likely to lose control of the House of Representatives this fall, meaning that unified government will end with the lame duck legislative session in November and December. The Democrats’ fiscal 2022 budget reconciliation bill is less likely to pass now that midterm campaigning has begun. A fiscally expansive bill would add to inflation. A deficit-reducing bill – i.e. one with substantial tax hikes – would increase the odds of recession. Biden no longer has an interest in pushing the bill until he is reasonably sure a recession can be avoided. It is very hard to garner 218 votes in the House and 51 votes in the Senate now that Biden’s and Democrats’ popular support is melting down. Democrats are polling comparably to Republicans who lost 41 House seats in the 2018 midterms (Chart 3). Thus while it is still possible for Democrats to pass an energy security and climate change bill under Biden’s presidency, we have no conviction that they can do it before the midterm. More likely it would have to pass during the lame-duck session in the fourth quarter – or as a compromise law with a Republican Congress in 2023-24. Until 2025, at earliest, US government will be divided, which means that the post-election drop in policy uncertainty will be short-lived, as fears will emerge of breaching the debt ceiling in early 2023. Chart 3Democratic Party Troubles 2. From Legislative To Executive Power: With the legislature stymied, Biden will resort to executive power to keep his presidency afloat. So what will he do? Fight inflation. Biden’s anti-inflation plan consists of three prongs. The first is “letting” the Fed raise interest rates, which is well under way. The Fed hiked rates by 75 basis points on June 15 and plans to raise the Fed funds rate to 3.25% or 3.5% by end of year. The second prong is passing his Build Back Better plan and the third is consolidating the fiscal deficit. But these two options are bogged down in Congress – no new belt-tightening will occur until 2023 at earliest. So Biden’s remaining options consist of administrative maneuvers and executive orders. Biden could stop collecting the federal gas tax, although the tax has not risen since 1993 and its removal will have a marginal impact (Chart 4). He has already tapped the strategic petroleum reserve, to an unprecedented degree, without preventing the surge in prices at the pump (Chart 5). Chart 4Biden To Defer Federal Gas Tax Chart 5Strategic Petroleum Reserve Already Tapped 3. From Domestic To Foreign Policy: Part of Biden’s turn toward executive power will be a turn toward foreign policy orientation. However, before the midterm, Biden’s foreign policy will be defensive or reactive. That is, with the exception of Russia, he will attempt to placate foreign threats and mitigate the energy shock. On China, Biden is considering pulling back on some of President Trump’s extraordinary tariffs, though probably not the Section 301 tariffs related to technology theft. He has the authority to do so unilaterally just as Trump had the authority to put them on. The problem is that easing the China tariffs will have little effect on inflation, and only after the midterm, while it would weaken Biden’s political standing in the Rust Belt and undermine the US’s strategic competition with China. Tariff relief would only temporarily benefit the renminbi, if at all, given China’s need for a weak currency amid its economic slowdown (Chart 6). Hence Biden may reduce some tariffs but it will be underwhelming. Not a reliable way to bring down inflation. Chart 6Biden Can Ease China Tariffs (But Don't Bet On It) Second, Biden has proposed to ease sanctions on Iran if it will freeze its nuclear program and come back into compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal that the Trump administration rejected. But the Iranians can export oil anyway at today’s prices, they have customers in China and India, and they have immense military leverage over Iraqi production, which means they are not forced to capitulate (Chart 7). Not a reliable way to bring down inflation. Third, Biden is courting the Gulf Arab states and tinkering with easing sanctions on Venezuela and others. OPEC support is a better option than Iran/Venezuela. However, OPEC will decide when and how much support to give. The Arab states will act to prolong the global business cycle but will not base their strategy on helping Democrats win an election. Hence they may not come to the rescue as early as the third quarter (Chart 8). Chart 7Biden Can Ease Iran Sanctions (But Don't Bet On It) Chart 8Biden Casting About For Oil Providers Moreover if the Biden administration makes amends with Saudi Arabia, then Iran’s nuclear progress will steam ahead and ignite tensions in the Middle East within the year. That would vitiate the impact of increased OPEC production. Not a reliable way to bring down inflation. Biden has even sought to exempt Russia from some sanctions for the sake of reducing inflation, such as with grain exports. However, these arrangements may not last. Given Biden’s weak domestic support and given the way that the Cuban Missile Crisis helped President Kennedy to mitigate his party’s losses in 1962, Biden can afford to be confrontational and even provocative toward Russia (Chart 9). After all, Russia is already pulling levers to add to inflation. The problem is that a direct US-Russia showdown would increase inflation while heightening global risk aversion. Bottom Line: Gridlock is coming, which is marginally negative for US equities in Q3 2022 but marginally positive as early as Q4 2022 and in 2023. It is not good for equities in 2022 because of elevated uncertainty – uncertainty not so much about the election results as about the volatile and unpredictable impacts of the president’s last-ditch efforts to fight inflation. Chart 9Biden Can Take Risks With Russia Checking Up On Our Strategic Themes For The 2020s Looking beyond the short term, this year’s inflation outbreak and geopolitical events will largely reinforce our three long-term US political themes, in the following ways: 1. Millennials/GenZ Rising: In the coming 12 months, a fall in job openings due to the economic slowdown, combined with a recovering labor participation rate, could reduce wage pressures and inflation, in accordance with the Federal Reserve’s plan for a “soft landing” (Chart 10). Of course, that is not happening yet. And conversely labor participation will fall again if recession risks materialize. So there will be a lot of noise in the short run. Over the long run, a rising dependency ratio, in the context of a growing population, has inflationary implications. It decreases the pool of savings, increases the need for public investment, and increases the cost of each prime-age worker. Today the headline labor participation rate has mostly recovered but workers over the age of 55 are failing to return to pre-pandemic levels of participation, as are young people, which will keep wage pressures up (Chart 11). Chart 10The Fed's Idea Of A Soft Landing Chart 11Generational Shift In Labor Market Thus generational change will be marginally inflationary and will have powerful political effects. An increasingly multi-ethnic and educated population will hold different opinions from previous generations. Political parties will evolve to capture these voters. Underlying the shift will be the fact that government support will be necessary for the rising share of dependents, yet fiscal discipline will be necessary to restrict inflation. The current quarrel between older and younger generations will intensify before it subsides. The Silent Generation, along with the conservative Baby Boomers, will remain the decisive voting bloc in the 2022 midterm and will seek to freeze fiscal policy. That brings us to our next theme … 2. Peak Polarization: Political polarization has declined since the 2020 election, as we predicted. All voters dislike high inflation (Chart 12). However, polarization will remain at historically high levels at least over the short and medium term. Chart 12Everyone Loathes Inflation Chart 13Women’s Turnout Will MatterPolarization will remain high in part because of the generational divide, which is still very wide and underpins stark ideological divides. For example, a short-term driver of polarization will be abortion. The Supreme Court is likely, though not certain, to overturn the 1972 Roe v. Wade decision that guarantees nationwide access to abortion. If it does, protests and civil unrest will occur. Women turned out in droves against President Trump’s Republicans in the 2018 midterms and will do so again in 2022 (Chart 13), helping Democrats to mitigate some of their losses. Polarization will also remain high due to the electoral system and intra-party dynamics. While Democrats ensconce themselves in formal institutions, Republicans continue to transform into a populist party. So far in the Republican primary elections, candidates endorsed by former President Trump are winning the nomination at a 94% rate. Table 2 shows the outcomes in the GOP primary elections for the House of Representatives so far. A GOP House majority is likely to impeach President Biden for one or another reason, even though they will not be able to remove him from office. Table 2Polarization Will Stay Near Historic Peaks Over 2022-24 Cycle Today’s extreme polarization entails that congressional gridlock will return and that the US remains at high risk of social unrest, political violence, and domestic terrorism (Chart 14). A terrorist attack that affects critical infrastructure, high-level personnel, or the electoral system would lead to greater sociopolitical instability. Especially if violence tips the narrow political balance of one of the branches of government and has a concrete impact on national policy.2 Social unrest alone will hardly move markets but unrest that fundamentally damages US political stability is possible and would engender risk-aversion. Over the long run, however, the US will avoid a second civil war since Washington possesses the world’s most powerful military and intelligence apparatus, which is highly unlikely to be coopted or defeated by an extremist movement. The military swears allegiance to the constitution. For example, neither the military nor the political institutions (as opposed to individuals) showed any serious sign of breaking down during the January 6, 2021 insurrection. The vast majority of voters will recoil from any major incidents of terrorism or militancy. While opinion polls show non-negligible support for political violence, such polls need to be interpreted carefully (Chart 15). A recent study shows that these polls overstate public support for violence.3 Chart 14Major Risk Of Domestic Terrorism, Political Violence Chart 15Opinion Growing More Militant … Until Militancy Happens The emerging Russo-Chinese strategic challenge, combined with generational change, will force political elites to cooperate to prevent domestic insurrections, regime fracture, and foreign humiliation. Polarization will give way to a new American consensus which is largely directed at domestic stabilization and fighting the Second Cold War. 3. Limited Big Government: The inflation outbreak has dealt a blow to arguments in favor of unlimited government, including Modern Monetary Theory. While the US rediscovered the need for “Big Government” during the deflationary 2010s, it is already starting to rediscover the need for limited government via the inflationary 2020s (Chart 16). The next Congress will reimpose some fiscal discipline – and future governments will face some checks and balances on spending due to their fear of an inflationary surge and negative consequences at the voting booth. Unless Democrats somehow retain control of Congress this fall, they will reinforce the precedent set by the Carter administration that high inflation is politically undesirable. Chart 16Inflation Outbreak Will Limit Big Government Fiscal policy will be more expansive in the coming decade than in recent decades due to structural factors. But it will still face limitations from democratic politics, i.e. gridlock. As long as polarization does not spiral out of control, the US government will not become authoritarian or autocratic and fiscal policy will not result in Big Government Socialism or No Government Anarchism. A new compromise will be found which will be Limited Big Government. Bottom Line: Generational tensions will rise and then fall – and so will political polarization. The US faces a high risk of sociopolitical instability in the short term. The 2022 midterm will become a source of uncertainty, volatility, and a still-elevated equity risk premium. After the midterm, uncertainty and risk premiums will dissipate temporarily. But avoiding a recession will become the critical factor in maintaining policy continuity and national stability through the 2024 election cycle. Investment Takeaways BCA has shifted its House View to a neutral asset allocation stance on equities relative to bonds, as noted. US Political Strategy remains defensively positioned, as midterm elections typically provide a tailwind to defensive sectors for the first three quarters of the election year. This is also true when unified governments shift to divided governments – and in that case bond yields tend to be higher than usual (Chart 17). While the inflation outbreak makes this year different from many recent midterm years, these trends have persisted. For this reason, and our Geopolitical Strategy views, we will maintain our defensive bias in the third quarter. Chart 17Stocks Flat, Bond Yields High, Until After Midterm Elections We remain overweigh health care relative to the broad market and overweight nominal Treasuries relative to inflation-protected securities. Having said that, we are putting our long US dollar (DXY) trade on downgrade watch. We do not doubt that the dollar can go higher this year but our bearish views have come to fruition both within the US and in the geopolitical space and they are now largely priced. It may soon be time to step back and reassess, especially because interest rate differentials are turning against the dollar (Chart 18). In addition China’s government will take a pro-growth turn to try to secure the economic recovery over the next 12 months. In the energy space, we expect volatility. The Biden administration is focused on fighting inflation and could pull various levers to affect the oil market, outlined above. If Biden succeeds against expectations, then the oil price would suffer a substantial setback. Moreover OPEC has an independent interest in prolonging the business cycle now that global prices have become punitive. Hence we are neutral on oil prices and booked gains on our long energy trades for the time (Chart 19). Chart 18Put US Dollar On Downgrade Watch If inflation subsides and bond yields moderate, then growth stocks should rebound against value stocks. However, we implemented this idea prematurely earlier this year and suffered for it. Therefore we remain neutral on the question of portfolio styles for now. Our cyclical plays remain the same: long cyber security stocks, defense stocks, and infrastructure stocks. We also remain long renewable energy, although for now we only recommend it as a tactical trade (Chart 20). Chart 19Energy Prices Will Be Volatile Chart 20Stick With Cyber Security, Defense, And Renewables Matt Gertken Senior Vice President Chief US Political Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 See Lawrence H. Summers and Alex Domash, “History Suggests a High Chance of Recession over the Next 24 Months,” Harvard Kennedy School, March 15, 2022, www.hks.harvard.edu. 2 Consider the January 6 insurrection, the recent plot against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s life, the gun attack on Republican Senators in 2017, and the risk of assassinations or other extremist incidents. 3 See Sean J. Westwood et al, “Current research overstates American support for political violence,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119:12 (2022), pnas.org. Strategic View Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Table A2Political Risk Matrix Table A3US Political Capital Index Chart A1Presidential Election Model Chart A2Senate Election Model Table A4House Election Model Table A5APolitical Capital: White House And Congress Table A5BPolitical Capital: Household And Business Sentiment Table A5CPolitical Capital: The Economy And Markets