Inflation/Deflation

Executive Summary Autocracy Hurts Productivity Autocracy Hurts Productivity Autocracy Hurts Productivity Over the next six-to-18 months, the Xi Jinping administration will “let 100 flowers bloom” – i.e., relax a range of government policies to secure China’s economic recovery from the pandemic. The first signs of this policy are already apparent via monetary and fiscal easing and looser regulation of Big Tech. However, investors should treat any risk-on rally in Chinese stocks with skepticism over the long run. Political risk and policy uncertainty will remain high until after Xi consolidates power this fall. Xi is highly likely to remain in office but uncertainty over other personnel – and future national policy – will be substantial. Next year China’s policy trajectory will become clearer. But global investors should avoid mistaking temporary improvements for a change of Xi’s strategy or China’s grand strategy. Beijing is driven by instability and insecurity to challenge the US-led world order. The result will be continued economic divorce and potentially military conflicts in the coming decade. Russia’s reversion to autocracy led to falling productivity and poor equity returns. China is also reverting to autocratic government as a solution to its domestic challenges. Western investors should limit long-term exposure to China and prefer markets that benefit from China’s recovery, such as in Southeast Asia and Latin America. Image Bottom Line: The geopolitical risk premium in Chinese equities will stay high in 2022, fall in 2023, but then rise again as global investors learn that China in the Xi Jinping era is fundamentally unstable and insecure. Feature Chart 1Market Cheers China's Hints At Policy Easing Market Cheers China's Hints At Policy Easing Market Cheers China's Hints At Policy Easing In 1957, after nearly a decade at the helm of the People’s Republic of China, Chairman Mao Zedong initiated the “Hundred Flowers Campaign.” The campaign allowed a degree of political freedom to try to encourage new ideas and debate among China’s intellectuals. The country’s innovative forces had suffered from decades of foreign invasion, civil war, and repression. Within three years, Mao reversed course, reimposed ideological discipline, and punished those who had criticized the party.  It turned out that the new communist regime could not maintain political control while allowing liberalization in the social and economic spheres.1 This episode is useful to bear in mind in 2022 as General Secretary Xi Jinping restores autocratic government in China. In the coming year, Xi will ease a range of policies to promote economic growth and innovation. Already his administration is relaxing some regulatory pressure on Big Tech. Global financial markets are cheering this apparent policy improvement (Chart 1). In effect, Xi is preparing to let 100 flowers bloom. However, China’s economic trajectory remains gloomy over the long run – not least because the US and China lack a strategic basis for re-engagement. Chinese Leaders Fear Foreign Encroachments Mao’s predicament was not only one of ideology and historical circumstance. It was also one of China’s geopolitics. Chinese governments have always struggled to establish domestic control, extend that control over far-flung buffer territories, and impose limits on foreign encroachments. Mao reversed his brief attempt at liberalization because he could not feel secure in his person or his regime. In 1959, the Chinese economy remained backward. The state faced challenges in administration and in buffer spaces like Tibet and Taiwan. The American military loomed large, despite the stalemate and ceasefire on the Korean peninsula in 1952. Russia was turning against Stalinism, while Hungary was revolting against the Soviet Union. Mao feared that the free exchange of ideas would do more to undermine national unity than it would to promote industrialization and technological progress. The 100 flowers that bloomed – intellectuals criticizing government policy – revealed themselves to be insufficiently loyal. They could be culled, strengthening the regime. However, what followed was a failed economic program and nationwide famine. Fast forward to today, when circumstances have changed but the Chinese state faces the same geopolitical insecurities. Xi Jinping, like all Chinese rulers, is struggling to maintain domestic stability and territorial integrity while regulating foreign influence. Although the People’s Republic is not as vulnerable as it was in Mao’s time, it is increasingly vulnerable – namely, to a historic downshift in potential economic growth and a rise in international tensions (Chart 2). The Xi administration has repeatedly shown that it views the US alliance system, US-led global monetary and financial system, and western liberal ideology as threats that need to be counteracted. Chart 2China: Less Stable, Less Secure China: Less Stable, Less Secure China: Less Stable, Less Secure In addition, Russia’s difficulties invading Ukraine suggest that China faces an enormous challenge in attempting to carve out its own sphere of influence without shattering its economic stability. Hence Beijing needs to slow the pace of confrontation with the West while pursuing the same strategic aims. Xi Stays, But Policy Uncertainty Still High In 2022  2022 is a critical political juncture for China. Xi was supposed to step down and hand the baton to a successor chosen by his predecessor Hu Jintao. Instead he has spent the past decade arranging to remain in power until at least 2032. He took a big stride toward this goal at the nineteenth national party congress in 2017, when he assumed the title of “core leader” of the Communist Party and removed term limits from its constitution. This year’s Omicron outbreak and abrupt economic slowdown have raised speculation about whether Xi’s position is secure. Some of this speculation is wild – but China is far less stable than it appears. Structurally, inequality is high, social mobility is low, and growth is slowing, forcing the new middle class to compromise its aspirations. Cyclically, unemployment is rising and the Misery Index is higher than it appears if one focuses on youth employment and fuel inflation (Chart 3). The risk of sociopolitical upheaval is underrated among global investors. Chart 3AStructurally China Is Vulnerable To Social Unrest Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Chart 3BCyclically China Is Vulnerable To Social Unrest Cyclically China Is Vulnerable To Social Unrest Cyclically China Is Vulnerable To Social Unrest Yet even assuming that social unrest and political dissent flare up, Xi is highly likely to clinch another five-to-ten years in power. Consider the following points: The top leaders control personnel decisions. The national party congress is often called an “election,” but that is a misnomer. The Communist Party’s top posts will be ratified, not elected. The Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee select the members of the Central Committee; the national party congress convenes to ratify these new members. The Central Committee then ratifies the line-up of the new Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee, which is orchestrated by Xi along with the existing Politburo Standing Committee (Diagram 1). Xi is the most important figure in deciding the new leadership. Diagram 1Mechanics Of The Chinese Communist Party’s National Congress Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. There is no history of surprise votes. The party congress ratifies approximately 90% of the candidates put forward. Outcomes closely conform to predictions of external analysts, meaning that the leadership selection is not a spontaneous, grassroots process but rather a mechanical, elite-driven process with minimal influence from low-level party members, not to mention the population at large.2  The party and state control the levers of power: The Communist Party has control over the military, state bureaucracy, and “commanding heights” of the economy. This includes domestic security forces, energy, communications, transportation, and the financial system. Whoever controls the Communist Party and central government exerts heavy influence over provincial governments and non-government institutions. The state bureaucracy is not in a position to oppose the party leadership. Xi has conducted a decade-long political purge (“anti-corruption campaign”). Upon coming to power in 2012, Xi initiated a neo-Maoist campaign to re-centralize power in his own person, in the Communist Party, and in the central government. He has purged foreign influence along with rivals in the party, state, military, business, civil society, and Big Tech. He personally controls the military, the police, the paramilitary forces, the intelligence and security agencies, and the top Communist Party organs. There may be opposition but it is not organized or capable. Chart 4China: Big Tech Gets Relief ... For Now China: Big Tech Gets Relief ... For Now China: Big Tech Gets Relief ... For Now There are no serious alternatives to Xi’s leadership. Xi is widely recognized within China as the “core” of the fifth generation of Chinese leaders. The other leaders and their factions have been repressed. Xi imprisoned his top rivals, Bo Xilai and Zhou Yongkang, a decade ago. He has since neutralized their followers and the factions of previous leaders Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin. Premier Li Keqiang has never exercised any influence and will retire at the end of this year. None of the ousted figures have reemerged to challenge Xi, but potential rivals have been imprisoned or disciplined, as have prominent figures that pose no direct political threat, such as tech entrepreneur Jack Ma (Chart 4).  Additional high-level sackings are likely before the party congress. China’s reversion to autocracy grew from Communist Party elites, not Xi alone. China’s slowing potential GDP growth and changing economic model raise an existential threat to the Communist Party over the long run. The party recognized its potential loss of legitimacy back in 2012, the year Xi was slated to take the helm. The solution was to concentrate power in the center, promoting Maoist nostalgia and strongman rule. In essence, the party needed a new Mao; Xi was all too willing to play the part. Hence Xi’s current position does not rest on his personal maneuvers alone. The party has invested heavily in Xi and will continue to do so. Characteristics of the political elite underpin the autocratic shift. Statistics on the evolving character traits of Politburo members show the trend toward leaders that are more rural, more bureaucratic, and more ideologically orthodox, i.e. more nationalist and communist (Chart 5). This trend underpins the party’s behavior and Xi’s personal rule. Chart 5China: From Technocracy To Autocracy Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Chart 6China: De-Industrialization Undermines Stability China: De-Industrialization Undermines Stability China: De-Industrialization Undermines Stability Xi has guarded his left flank. By cornering the hard left of the political spectrum Xi has positioned himself as the champion of poor people, workers, farmers, soldiers, and common folk. This is the political base of the Communist Party, as opposed to the rich coastal elites and westernizing capitalists, who stand to suffer from Xi’s policies. Ultimately de-industrialization – e.g. the sharp decline in manufacturing and construction sectors (Chart 6) – poses a major challenge to this narrative. But social unrest will be repressed and will not overturn Xi or the regime anytime soon. Xi still retains political capital. After centuries of instability, Chinese households are averse to upheaval, civil war, and chaos. They support the current regime because it has stabilized China and made it prosperous. Of course, relative to the Hu Jintao era, Xi’s policies have produced slower growth and productivity and a tarnished international image (Chart 7). But they have not yet led to massive instability that would alienate the people in general. If Chinese citizens look abroad, they see that Xi has already outlasted US Presidents Obama and Trump, is likely to outlast Biden, and that US politics are in turmoil. The same goes for Europe, Japan, and Russia – Xi’s leadership does not suffer by comparison.  Chart 7China’s Declining International Image Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. External actors are neither willing nor able to topple Xi. Any outside attempt to interfere with China’s leadership or political system would be unwarranted and would provoke an aggressive response. The US is internally divided and has not developed a consistent China policy. This year the Biden administration has its hands full with midterm elections, Russia, and Iran, where it must also accept the current leadership as a fact of life. It has no ability to prevent Xi’s power consolidation, though it will impose punitive economic measures. Japan and other US allies have an interest in undermining Xi’s administration, but they follow the US’s lead in foreign policy. They also lack influence over the political rotation within the Communist Party. The Europeans will keep their distance but will not try to antagonize China given their more pressing conflict with Russia. Russia needs China more than ever and will lend material support in the form of cheaper and more secure natural resources. North Korean and Iranian nuclear provocations will help Xi stay under the radar.  There is no reason to expect a new leader to take over in China. The Xi administration’s strategy, revealed over the past ten years, will remain intact for another five-to-ten years at least. The real question at the party congress is whether Xi will be forced to name a successor or compromise with the opposing faction on the personnel of the Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee. But even that remains to be seen – and either way he will remain the paramount leader. Bottom Line: Xi Jinping has the political capability to cement another five-to-ten years in power. Opposing factions have been weakened over the past decade by Xi’s domestic political purge and clash with the United States. China is ripe for social unrest and political dissent but these will be repressed as China goes further down the path of autocracy. Foreign powers have little influence over the process. Policy Uncertainty Falls In 2023 … Only To Rise Again What will Xi Jinping do once he consolidates power? Xi’s administration has weighed heavily on China’s economy, foreign relations, and financial markets. The situation has worsened dramatically this year as the economy struggles with “A Trifecta Of Economic Woes” – namely a rampant pandemic, waning demand for exports, and a faltering housing market (Chart 8). In response the administration is now easing a range of policies to stabilize expectations and try to meet the 5.5% annual growth target. The money impulse, and potentially the credit impulse, is turning less negative, heralding an eventual upturn in industrial activity and import volumes in 2023. These measures will give a boost to Chinese and global growth, although stimulus measures are losing effectiveness over time (Chart 9).  Chart 8China's Trifecta Of Economic Woes China's Trifecta Of Economic Woes China's Trifecta Of Economic Woes Chart 9More Stimulus, But Less Effectiveness More Stimulus, But Less Effectiveness More Stimulus, But Less Effectiveness This pro-growth policy pivot will continue through the year and into next year. After all, if Xi is going to stay in power, he does not want to bequeath himself a financial crisis or recession at the start of his third term. Still, investors should treat any rally in Chinese equity markets with skepticism. First, political risk and uncertainty will remain elevated until Xi completes his power grab, as China is highly susceptible to surprises and negative political incidents this year (Chart 10). For example, if social unrest emerges and is repressed, then the West will impose sanctions. If China increases its support of Russia, Iran, or North Korea, then the US will impose sanctions.     Chart 10China: Policy Uncertainty And Geopolitical Risk To Stay High In 2022, Might Improve In 2023 China: Policy Uncertainty And Geopolitical Risk To Stay High In 2022, Might Improve In 2023 China: Policy Uncertainty And Geopolitical Risk To Stay High In 2022, Might Improve In 2023 Chart 11China Needs To Court Europe China Needs To Court Europe China Needs To Court Europe The regime will be extremely vigilant and overreact to any threats this year, real or perceived. Political objectives will remain paramount, above the economy and financial markets, and that means new economic policy initiatives will not be reliable. Investors cannot be confident about the country’s policy direction until the leadership rotation is complete and new policy guidance is revealed, particularly in December 2022 and March 2023. Second, after consolidating power, investors should interpret Xi’s policy shift as “letting 100 flowers bloom,” i.e., a temporary relaxation that aims to reboot the economy but does not change the country’s long-term policy trajectory. Economic reopening is inevitable after the pandemic response is downgraded – which is a political determination. Xi will also be forced to reduce foreign tensions for the sake of the economy, particularly by courting Europe, which is three times larger than Russia as a market (Chart 11). However, China’s declining labor force and high debt levels prevent its periodic credit stimulus from generating as much economic output as in the past. And the administration will not ultimately pursue liberal structural reforms and a more open economy. That is the path toward foreign encroachment – and regime insecurity. The US’s sanctions on Russia have shown the consequences of deep dependency on the West. China will continue diversifying away from the US. And, as we will see, the US cannot provide credible promises that it will reduce tensions. US-China: Re-Engagement Will Fail The Biden administration is focused on fighting inflation ahead of the midterm elections. But its confrontation with Russia – and likely failure to freeze Iran’s nuclear program – increases rather than decreases oil supply constraints. Hence some administration officials and outside observers argue that the administration should pursue a strategic re-engagement with China.3  Theoretically a US-China détente would buy both countries time to deal with their domestic politics by providing some international stability. Improved US-China relations could also isolate Russia and hasten a resolution to the war in Ukraine, potentially reducing commodity price pressures. In essence, a US-China détente would reprise President Richard Nixon’s outreach to China in 1972, benefiting both countries at the expense of Russia.4  This kind of Kissinger 2.0 maneuver could happen but there are good reasons to think it will not, or if it does that it will fall apart in one or two years. In 1972, China had nowhere near the capacity to deny the US access to the Asia Pacific region, expel US influence from neighboring countries, reconquer Taiwan, or project power elsewhere. Today, China is increasingly gaining these abilities. In fact it is the only power in the world capable of rivaling the US in both economic and military terms over the long run (Chart 12). Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently outlined the Biden administration’s China policy and declared that China poses “the most serious long-term challenge” to the US despite Russian aggression.5  Chart 12US-China Competition Sows Distrust, Drives Economic Divorce Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. While another decade of US engagement with China would benefit the US economy, it would be far more beneficial to China. Crucially, it would be beneficial in a strategic sense, not just an economic one. It could provide just the room for maneuver that China needs – at this critical juncture in its development – to achieve technological and productivity breakthroughs and escape the middle-income trap. Another ten-year reprieve from direct American competition would set China up to challenge the US on the global stage. That would be far too high of a strategic price for America to pay for a ceasefire in Ukraine. Ukraine has limited strategic value for the US and it does not steer US grand strategy, which aims to prevent regional empires from taking shape. In fact Washington is deliberately escalating and prolonging the war in Ukraine to drain Russia’s resources. Ending the war would do Russia a strategic favor, while re-engaging with China would do China a strategic favor. So why would the defense and intelligence community advise the Biden administration to pursue Kissinger 2.0? Chart 13US Unlikely To Revoke Trump Tariffs US Unlikely To Revoke Trump Tariffs US Unlikely To Revoke Trump Tariffs Biden could still pursue some degree of détente with China, namely by repealing President Trump’s trade tariffs, in order to relieve price pressures ahead of the midterm election. Yet even here the case is deeply flawed. Trump’s tariffs on China did not trigger the current inflationary bout. That was the combined Trump-Biden fiscal stimulus and Covid-era supply constraints. US import prices are rising faster from the rest of the world than they are from China (Chart 13). Tariff relief would not change China’s Zero Covid policy, which is the current driver of price spikes from China. And while lifting tariffs on China would not reduce inflation enough to attract voters, it would cost Biden some political credit among voters in swing states like Pennsylvania, and across the US, where China’s image has plummeted in the wake of Covid-19 (Chart 14).   Chart 14US Political Consensus Remains Hawkish On China Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Will China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. If Biden did pursue détente, would China be able to reciprocate and offer trade concessions? Xi has the authority to do so but he is unlikely to make major trade concessions prior to the party congress. Economic self-sufficiency and resistance to American pressure have become pillars of his support. Promises will not ease inflation for US voters in November and Xi has no incentive to make binding concessions because the next US administration could intensify the trade war regardless.  Bottom Line: The US has no long-term interest, and a limited short-term interest, in easing pressure on China’s economy. Continued US pressure, combined with China’s internal difficulties, will reinforce Xi Jinping’s shift toward nationalism and hawkish foreign policy. Hence there is little basis for a substantial US-China re-engagement that improves the global macroeconomic environment over the coming years. Investment Takeaways Chart 15Autocracy Hurts Productivity Autocracy Hurts Productivity Autocracy Hurts Productivity Xi Jinping will clinch another five-to-ten years in power this fall. To stabilize the economy, he will “let 100 flowers bloom” and ease monetary, fiscal, regulatory, and social policy at home. He will also court the West, especially Europe, for the sake of economic growth. However, he will not go so far as to compromise his ultimate aims: self-sufficiency at home and a sphere of influence abroad. The result will be a relapse into conflict with the West within a year or two. Ultimately a closed Chinese economy in conflict with the West will result in lower productivity, a weaker currency, a high geopolitical risk premium, and low equity returns – just as it did for Russia (Chart 15). Any short-term improvement in China’s low equity multiples will ultimately be capped. Over the long run, western investors should hedge against Chinese geopolitical risk by preferring markets that benefit from China’s periodic stimulus yet do not suffer from the break-up of the US-China and EU-Russia economic relationships, such as key markets in Latin America and Southeast Asia (Charts 16 & 17). Chart 16China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For … Latin America China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For ... Latin America China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For ... Latin America Chart 17China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For … Southeast Asia China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For ... Southeast Asia China Stimulus Creates Opportunity For ... Southeast Asia     Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1     Modern scholarship has shown that Mao intended to entrap the opposition through the 100 Flowers Campaign. For a harrowing account of this episode, see Jung Chang and Jon Halliday, Mao: The Unknown Story (New York: Anchor Books, 2006), pp. 409-17. 2     “At least 8% of CPC Central Committee nominees voted off,” Xinhua, October 24, 2017, english.www.gov.cn. 3    Christopher Condon, “Yellen Says Biden Team Is Looking To ‘Reconfigure’ China Tariffs,” June 8, 2022, www.bloomberg.com. 4       Niall Ferguson, “Dust Off That Dirty Word Détente And Engage With China,” Bloomberg, June 5, 2022, www.bloomberg.com. 5    See Antony J Blinken, Secretary of State, “The Administration’s Approach to the People’s Republic of China,” George Washington University, Washington D.C., May 26, 2022, state.gov. Additionally, see President Joe Biden’s third assertion of US willingness to defend Taiwan against China, in a joint press conference with Japan’s Prime Minister Kishida Fumio, “Remarks by President Biden and Prime Minister Kishida Fumio of Japan in Joint Press Conference,” Akasaka Palace, Tokyo, Japan, May 23, 2022, whitehouse.gov.

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

Executive Summary The default take on the economy and financial markets has been tilting increasingly bearish although the ongoing data flow has yet to pick a side. The data in the stories from the front page of The New York Times'  Saturday Business section over the Memorial Day weekend nod in the direction of a Goldilocks outcome: households have been so well fortified by their pandemic savings that their spending is holding up despite stiff price increases but innovation and automation are allowing companies to protect their profits even in a tight labor market. We remain of the view that a wage-price spiral is unlikely and therefore see a plausible path for S&P 500 margins to hold up better than expected over the rest of the year. We are looking for an opportunity to add equity exposure to our ETF portfolio to restore its overweight allocation but we won't rush to do it while the S&P 500 is within 100 points of near-term technical resistance. Putting Excess Savings To Good Use Putting Excess Savings To Good Use Putting Excess Savings To Good Use Bottom Line: We remain constructive on financial markets and the US economy over the next twelve months but are content to wait for a better tactical entry point to increase our ETF portfolio's equity exposure. Feature The Internet has drastically curtailed newspapers’ influence, but Page 1 is still not the place to go for alpha-generating investment ideas. Nearly all the juice has been squeezed from an investment idea by the time it makes it to the front page; if there’s any alpha to be found in the paper, it will be on the vitamin pages – B7, B12, D3. As Don Coxe, a favorite mentor, put it throughout his five-decade career as an investment strategist, “We don’t invest on the basis of Page 1 stories. We invest on the basis of stories on Page D7 that are going to Page 1.” Lately, the stories getting the most media airtime have accentuated the negative. Inflation is making 40-year highs; consumers are in a grim mood, at least according to the University of Michigan’s sentiment survey; the Fed was napping and may not be able to catch up; corporate profits will be the next domino to fall. Against that backdrop, we thought the front-page New York Times Saturday Business section stories reporting on coincident indicators over the Memorial Day weekend provided an interesting corrective. The data are moving fast and their positive cast may be fleeting, but the latest batch makes the case that it’s too soon to abandon our constructive market and economic view. Declining Profit Margins Might Still Beat Expectations The entire space above the fold was filled by a photograph of workers harvesting radishes. There was a large machine with moving conveyor belts behind them and as the workers bound the radishes into clumps, they tossed them onto the belt without turning their heads. Under the headline, “Farming Transformation In the Fields of California,” the article began, “It looks like a century-old picture of farming in California: a few dozen Mexican men … plucking radishes from the ground [.] But the[se] crews … represent the cutting edge of how America pulls food from the land.” “For starters, the young men … are working alongside technology unseen even 10 years ago. … [W]hat looks like a tractor retrofitted with a packing plant … carries [the radishes] through a cold wash and delivers them to be packed into crates and delivered for distribution in a refrigerated truck.” “The other change is more subtle, but no less revolutionary. None of the workers are in the United States illegally.” “Both of these transformations are driven by the same dynamic: the decline in the supply of young illegal immigrants from Mexico, the backbone of the work force picking California’s crops since the 1960s.” “The new demographic reality has sent farmers scrambling to bring in more highly paid foreign workers on temporary guest-worker visas, experiment with automation wherever they can and even replace crops with less labor-intensive alternatives.” The drying up of its inexpensive labor supply would seem to pose a mortal threat to farming profit margins. Temporary workers covered by the H-2A visa program earn two-and-a-half dollars an hour more than the $15 minimum wage applicable to local workers and must be provided with room, board and transportation to and from the fields. The industry has adapted, however, finding ways to mechanize the harvesting of crops that don’t need to meet aesthetic standards while tinkering with planting and growing techniques and genetic modifications to reduce labor intensity. Crops that resist mechanization hacks are leaving the United States for lower-cost climes as evidenced by a doubling of fruit and vegetable imports over the last five years. California acreage given over to asparagus, an especially labor-intensive crop, has fallen to 4,000 acres in 2020 from 37,000 two decades ago, while the nearby Mexican state of Sinaloa picked up the slack by increasing its harvest by around 30,000 acres. The adaptations seem to be working well for all but the formerly essential undocumented agricultural work force. As a vineyard worker who illegally crossed the border nearly 20 years ago said, “It scares me that they are coming with H-2As and … robots. That’s going to take us down.” What does this specific story have to do with corporate profit margins, a general subject of vital importance to all investors? It illustrates the difficulty employees confront in capturing and maintaining leverage when employers can radically alter the dynamic with investment. The sub-headline sums up labor’s plight well: “Growers are turning more and more to workers on seasonal visas, and mechanizing where they can. Meanwhile, labor-intensive crops are shifting south of the border.” Chart 1Input Costs Are Surging, ... Input Costs Are Surging, ... Input Costs Are Surging, ... We reiterate that a wage-price spiral is not a foregone conclusion. Neither is an onshoring bonanza. Although the aggregate first-quarter S&P 500 profit margin narrowed versus the year-ago quarter (revenue-per-share growth (13.9%) outpaced earnings-per-share growth (11.2%) by nearly three percentage points), it managed to surprise to the upside (earnings’ 7% beat was over four percentage points wider than revenues’ 2.6%), and innovation and investment may allow it to do so going forward, despite soaring materials costs (Chart 1) and upward wage pressures. After an initial pandemic surge, however, wages have failed to keep pace with inflation for the last year (Chart 2) and growth in average hourly earnings, the most timely compensation series, may have peaked (Chart 3).   Chart 2... But Wages Aren't Keeping Pace With Inflation ... ... But Wages Aren't Keeping Pace With Inflation ... ... But Wages Aren't Keeping Pace With Inflation ... Chart 3... And They May Have Already Peaked ... And They May Have Already Peaked ... And They May Have Already Peaked Households Are Not At Risk Of Drowning In Debt … The other two front-page stories challenge the narrative that high inflation will choke off consumption. “U.S. Spending Is Up Even With Buying Power Low” discussed the previous day’s release of the April Personal Income and Outlays report. The article expressed surprise that consumption rose 0.9% month-over-month when disposable income rose just 0.3% and was flat in real terms. Households squared the circle by saving less of their income, with the savings rate shrinking to 4.4%, the lowest level since the subprime boom, when it put in its all-time bottom (Chart 4). Chart 4Putting Their Cushion To Good Use Putting Their Cushion To Good Use Putting Their Cushion To Good Use Leading up to the financial crisis, households took on increasing quantities of debt to maintain their spending and the article noted that revolving loan balances (primarily credit cards) grew at their fastest rate in 24 years in March. That narrow statement is true, strictly speaking, but an investor should place it in a fuller context. Outstanding credit card and other revolving debt held by banks remains shy of its post-crisis growth trend though it did just top its previous high set in early 2020 (Chart 5). Though the article quoted an economist tut-tutting that credit card-funded spending is unsustainable, household debt service payments as a share of disposable income remain below their pre-pandemic lows and miles from their subprime-era level (Chart 6). These are fraught times, but any comparison linking US households’ financial positions with 2007 is specious. Chart 5Outstanding Card Balances Are Still Below Trend ... Outstanding Card Balances Are Still Below Trend ... Outstanding Card Balances Are Still Below Trend ... Chart 6... And Households Have Plenty Of Capacity To Take On More ... And Households Have Plenty Of Capacity To Take On More ... And Households Have Plenty Of Capacity To Take On More … Because They Were Pre-emptively Insulated From Elevated Inflation We have been tracking households’ excess pandemic savings balance since CARES Act transfer payments began to flow into individual checking and savings accounts. We estimate that households ended April with between $2.1 and 2.2 trillion more in savings than they would have had if the pandemic had not occurred. They began dipping into their stash in last year’s fourth quarter, when the savings rate first edged below its 8.3% pre-pandemic level, and have done so with increasing zest this year, trimming almost $200 billion from the excess savings peak (Table 1). They drew down almost $60 billion in April alone, indicating that half of the excess savings (our working estimate of how much will be spent) would last for eighteen months if households saved at half their pre-pandemic rate, or another nine if they didn’t save anything at all. Table 1The Excess Savings Cushion Remains Quite Large Read All About It Read All About It That’s a handy reference point to keep in mind when assessing the third front-page story, headlined, “Gas Prices Keep Surging, But Demand Isn’t Falling.” The same headline could be repurposed to top an article reporting on American Airlines’ upwardly revised second-quarter revenue outlook. American said in a filing before Friday’s open that it now expects 2Q22 revenue to exceed 2Q19 revenue (the airlines’ last pre-pandemic comparison) by 11-13%, up from its previous 6-8% guidance. A real-time Bloomberg headline accompanying the story credited the increase to “continued strength in demand and pricing.” The bottom line is that households have the means to satiate pent-up pandemic demand despite significantly higher prices. Spirited internal debates have revolved around households’ willingness to use those means. Without a similar fiscal transfer precedent, neither side can argue its case with high conviction, but the accelerating dissaving of the last six months and mounting evidence of consumers’ low sensitivity to higher airfares and gasoline prices suggest that the spending camp has the upper hand for now. Under an Occam’s razor standard, we don’t think the analysis requires anything as fancy as mental accounting gymnastics or Friedman’s permanent income hypothesis when there’s an age-old phrase that should especially resonate with the YOLO set: Easy come, easy go. ETF Portfolio Update Our cyclical ETF portfolio outperformed its benchmark by 43 basis points (bps) in May, bringing its outperformance since its January 31st launch to 87 bps. Our equity holdings accounted for the lion’s share of the value-add. Energy (XLE), our sole sector overweight, outperformed the S&P 500 by nearly 16 percentage points, while our Staples (XLP, 4-ppt underperformance) and Utilities (XLU, 4-ppt outperformance) underweights offset each other. Allocating some Discretionary exposure to outperforming homebuilders (ITB) was successful but was offset by concentrating all of our Materials exposure in metals and miners (XME). The Pure Value Index (RPV) and SmallCap 600 (IJR) overweights made undiluted positive contributions. Our high yield (JNK) overweight helped our fixed income performance, though it was held back by the allocation to variable-rate preferreds (VRP). VRP has struggled, but we still see going to the back of the creditor priority line at overcapitalized large banks as a source of alpha, and we maintain our modest allocation. We continue to seek an opportune time to remove some of the tactical restraints we imposed on the portfolio in early March. We are eager to bring the portfolio in line with BCA’s recent tactical equity upgrade to overweight but are reluctant to increase our equity exposure so close to the 4,200 resistance level that we expect will repel S&P 500 rallies in the immediate term. Friday’s selloff gave a buyer an additional 1% of headroom from the level we passed up on May 27th, but we intend to hold out for something in the neighborhood of 4,000. Investment Implications Viewed through a contrarian’s magazine-cover-indicator lens, the risk/reward profile of our constructive view has improved as the headlines’ bearish bias has become more pronounced. The zeal with which those in the bearish economic camp seized upon Walmart’s and Target’s first-quarter disappointments was revealing. Both companies’ earnings stunk – Walmart missed expectations by 12% and Target by 29% – but both companies beat revenues, by around 2%, just like their dollar-store and price-club peers who met or beat earnings expectations. Though it gave the commentariat something to do for a few days, the debate over the existence of a retail inventory glut isn’t supported by the aggregate data (Chart 7). Chart 7Retail Inventory Glut? Seriously? Retail Inventory Glut? Seriously? Retail Inventory Glut? Seriously? No one knows what’s coming next against the unprecedented macro backdrop and everyone involved in forecasting and investing should approach their work with humility right now. For an investor, that means staying within sight of the shore in terms of deviations from benchmark indexes and managing portfolios more tactically by reducing holding periods and setting, and abiding by, tight stops on opportunistic plays. A preponderance of data has yet to cast doubt on our constructive take on the economy and markets (nor has it conclusively validated it, alas). The sense that we increasingly find ourselves in the minority makes us feel better about the potential returns to our view, however, and we are sticking with it. We continue to recommend overweighting equities in a balanced portfolio, and high yield within fixed income portfolios (NB: our US Bond Strategy team recommends an equal-weight allocation to high yield) over a twelve-month time frame and are looking for a better entry point to increase our equity exposures within our ETF portfolio. Doug Peta, CFA Chief US Investment Strategist dougp@bcaresearch.com Cyclical ETF Portfolio Read All About It Read All About It

Listen to a short summary of this report.     Executive Summary Sentiment On Sterling Is Depressed Sentiment On Sterling Is Depressed Sentiment On Sterling Is Depressed The pound will suffer in the short term, setting the stage for a coiled-spring rebound. Cable is extremely cheap by most measures (Feature chart). The BoE could engineer a soft landing in the UK economy. If successful, it will annihilate sterling vigilantes, in a volte-face of the ERM crisis. We are cognizant of near-term risks. As such, we are long EUR/GBP with a target of 0.90, but will be buyers of cable at 1.20. Ultimately, the pound is undervalued on a longer-term basis. GBP/USD should touch 1.36 over the next 12-18 months. RECOMMENDATIONS INCEPTION LEVEL inception date RETURN long eur/gbp 0.846 2021-10-15 0.27 Bottom Line: The pound will likely face pressure in the near term, but will fare well over a cyclical horizon. Our 12-month target is 1.36. This target is based on a modest reversion towards PPP fair value, and some erosion in the “crisis” discount. Admittedly, sentiment on the pound is very depressed, and we could be wrong in our near-term assessment and cable has indeed bottomed. Feature Chart 1A Play On Cable Downside A Play On Cable Downside A Play On Cable Downside There has been much discussion around the premise that the pound could enter a capitulation phase, akin to an emerging market-style currency crisis. With inflation sitting at 9%, well above the Bank of England’s 2% target, the narrative is that interest rates need to rise substantially but will, at the same time, kill any recovery. The result will be a sharp fall in the pound. We began to highlight the near-term risks to cable in October of last year, going long EUR/GBP in the process, as a way to play sterling downside (Chart 1). That said, our longer-term view on the pound remained positive. In this report, we review what has changed since, and if a negative longer-term view is now warranted.   UK Balance Of Payments Almost all currency crises are rooted in a deterioration of the external balance, and this is certainly true for the UK. The trade deficit sits at 7.9% of GDP, the worst among G10 countries (Chart 2). As a result, the current account is also in deficit. That said, there are reasons for optimism. Related Report  Foreign Exchange StrategyAn Update On Sterling The Office for National Statistics (ONS) suggests that a change in methodology in January 2022 could be exarcebating the deterioration in the latest release of the trade balance. In our view, there are two key reasons why the UK’s balance of trade is worsening. The first is the oil shock – fuels constitute 11% of UK imports. Second, unprecedented fiscal stimulus led to an overshoot in goods imports. These negative forces are likely cyclical in nature, rather than structural. It is also noteworthy that most of the goods imported into the UK are machinery and transport equipment, which could go a long way in improving its productive capacity (Chart 3). Chart 2The UK Trade Balance Has Deteriorated The UK Trade Balance Has Deteriorated The UK Trade Balance Has Deteriorated Chart 3Goods Imports Have Been A Hit To The UK Trade Balance Goods Imports Have Been A Hit To The UK Trade Balance Goods Imports Have Been A Hit To The UK Trade Balance In parallel, there has been a structural improvement in the UK’s current account balance. This has mostly been driven by a rising primary income balance. In short, investments abroad are earning more, relative to domestic liabilities (Chart 4). The UK runs a large negative international investment position. Despite this, it has maintained the ability to issue debt bought by foreigners, while investing in high-return assets abroad. Secondary income has admittedly been in a structural deficit, but a falloff in transfer payments under the Brexit agreement will significantly improve this balance (Chart 5). Chart 4The UK Current Account Is Improving The UK Current Account Is Improving The UK Current Account Is Improving Chart 5A Fall In Brexit Payments Will Mend Secondary Income Is Sterling Facing Another Crisis? Is Sterling Facing Another Crisis? Finally, the pound’s share of global foreign exchange turnover is 12.8%, just behind the dollar, euro, and yen. That said, London dwarfs New York, Hong Kong, and Tokyo as a hub for foreign exchange trading (Chart 6). The pound also very much remains among the most desirable global currencies. Global allocation of FX reserves in sterling have been rising over the last decade (Chart 7). It currently stand at 4.8%, higher than the RMB at 2.8%, and all other emerging market currencies combined. Chart 6London Remains An Important Financial Center Is Sterling Facing Another Crisis? Is Sterling Facing Another Crisis? Chart 7The Pound Is Still A Reserve Currency The Pound Is Still A Reserve Currency The Pound Is Still A Reserve Currency It is noteworthy to revisit the period the pound experienced an EM-style crisis – under the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM), when cable was effectively pegged to the German mark at an expensive level. At the time, UK inflation was running hot, while German inflation was more subdued. By importing monetary policy from the Bundesbank, the BoE was able to tame inflation, but at a high cost to growth. In Germany, the reunification boom warranted much higher interest rates, which was not appropriate for the UK . Cable eventually collapsed by 32.9% peak-to-trough, as the UK ran out of foreign currency reserves. Chart 8Cable Is Very Cheap Cable Is Very Cheap Cable Is Very Cheap There are three key differences between that episode and today: The pound is freely floating. Foreign exchange markets are extremely fluid and adjust to expectations quite quickly. A collapse in the pound seems unlikely, unless the UK faces a new large exogenous shock. Inflation is running hot in many countries, not just the UK. The pound is extremely cheap, and stimulative for the economy. On a real effective exchange rate basis, the pound is at record lows (Chart 8).     Will The BoE Make A Policy Mistake? Sterling is pricing in a policy mistake by the BoE. First, inflation is well above its 2% target. Second, the labor market has tightened significantly. The unemployment rate hit a 47-year low of 3.7%, and job vacancies are low, pushing wages higher. As such, either the BoE allows inflation expectations to become unmoored, destroying the purchasing power of the pound, or kills the recovery to maintain credibility (Chart 9). Chart 9The UK Labor Market Is Tight The UK Labor Market Is Tight The UK Labor Market Is Tight While difficult, there are reasons to believe the BoE can achieve a soft landing. According to an in-house study, only one-third of the rise in UK inflation has been driven by demand-side pull, with the balance related to supply factors.1 The latter have been the usual suspects – rising energy costs, supply shortages, and even legacies of the Brexit shock (Chart 10). UK electricity prices have cratered since the opening of the 1,400MW undersea cable with Norway (Chart 11). Chart 10Most Of The Increase To UK Prices Is Supply-Driven Is Sterling Facing Another Crisis? Is Sterling Facing Another Crisis? Chart 11A Sharp Drop In Electricity Prices A Sharp Drop In Electricity Prices A Sharp Drop In Electricity Prices Second, it is likely that the neutral rate of interest in the UK is lower in a post-Brexit, post-COVID-19 world. This is visible in trend productivity growth, but even the size of the labor force has shrunk significantly. The UK workforce is down by 560,000 people since the start of the pandemic. This has been partly due to less immigration and more retirees, but the vast majority has been due to health side-effects from the pandemic, and delays in getting adequate medical care. As a result, there has barely been a recovery in the UK participation rate (Chart 12). Chart 12AThe Participation Rate In The UK Is Below Trend The Participation Rate In The UK Is Below Trend The Participation Rate In The UK Is Below Trend Chart 12BA Low Participation Rate Across Many Regions A Low Participation Rate Across Many Regions A Low Participation Rate Across Many Regions In hindsight, a least-regrets strategy to policy tightening – lift rates faster now, and then back off if financial conditions tighten sufficiently – seems appropriate. Frontloading the pace of tightening will flatten the UK gilts curve further. With most borrowing costs in the UK tied to the longer end of the curve, refinancing costs might not edge up that much, while inflation expectations will be well contained. The real canaries in the coal mine from this strategy are the economies of Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, where household debt is much more elevated (Chart 13), and the percentage of variable rate mortgages  are higher. Chart 13Household Debt Is Not Alarming In The UK Household Debt Is Not Alarming In The UK Household Debt Is Not Alarming In The UK Larger fiscal stimulus will partially offset the near-term hit from tighter monetary policy. The additional £15 billion cost-of-living package announced last month is quite substantial at 0.7% of GDP. This gives the BoE breathing room to tighten policy in the near term. The redistributionist nature of the plan – taxing windfall profits from large energy companies, and using that to subsidize consumers most in need – could be what is required to achieve a soft landing, if the energy shock is temporary. Our Global Fixed Income colleagues upgraded UK gilts to overweight last month, on the basis that market pricing further out the SONIA curve was too aggressive. In our prior report on sterling, we also suggested that market expectations for interest rate increases may have overshot. Money markets are discounting a peak in the bank rate at 2.8%. The BoE’s new Market Participants survey suggests it will peak at 1.75%. While the BoE will deliver sufficient monetary tightening to lean against near-term inflationary pressures, it will be very wary to overdo it. This is especially true if the neutral rate in the economy is much lower. What Next For The Pound? Our view is that the pound faces near-term risks but is a buy longer term. There is an old adage that credibility is hard to earn, but easy to lose. For the UK in particular, this hits the mark. The Bank of England is the oldest central bank in the world, after the Riksbank. Yes, the BoE can make a policy mistake (as it has in the past), but treating the pound as an emerging market asset is a stretch (Chart 14). That said, our Chief European Strategist, Mathieu Savary, believes stagflation is not fully priced into UK assets. In the near term, he might be right. The UK’s large trade deficit puts the onus on foreigners to dictate movements in the pound. The pound does well when animal spirits are fervent. So far, markets have bid up a substantial safe-haven premium into the dollar (Chart 15). As a proxy, the pound has been sold. Northern Ireland could also return as a thorn in the side of sterling.  Chart 14The Pound Is A Risk-On Currency Cable And EM Stocks The Pound Is A Risk-On Currency Cable And EM Stocks The Pound Is A Risk-On Currency Cable And EM Stocks Chart 15The Dollar Has A Hefty Safe-Haven Premium The Dollar Has A Hefty Safe-Haven Premium The Dollar Has A Hefty Safe-Haven Premium From a bird’s eye view, three factors tend to drive currencies – the macroeconomic environment, valuation, and sentiment. For now, markets have latched on to the GBP’s vulnerability to an EM-style crisis. That said, cable is very cheap, even accounting for elevated UK inflation. Our in-house PPP model suggests the pound could appreciate by 4% per year, over the next 10 years, just to revert to fair value (Chart 16). Chart 16Cable Is Cheap Cable Is Cheap Cable Is Cheap Admittedly, the UK desperately needs an improvement in productivity growth for further currency gains. To encourage capital inflows that the pound depends on, the UK needs to be at the forefront of disruptive technologies such as electric cars, digital currencies, 3D printing, and even innovations in gene therapy. High finance and fashion will remain relevant for London, but the need for innovation is high.  Investment Conclusions Chart 17Sentiment On Sterling Is Depressed Sentiment On Sterling Is Depressed Sentiment On Sterling Is Depressed The pound will likely face pressure in the near term, but will fare well over a cyclical horizon. Our 12-month target is 1.36. This target is based on a modest reversion towards PPP fair value, and some erosion in the “crisis” discount. Admittedly, sentiment on the pound is very depressed, and we could be wrong in our near-term assessment if cable has indeed bottomed. Our intermediate-term timing model suggests that GBP is undervalued and has bottomed. Technical indicators also warn that cable is ripe for a fervent rebound (Chart 17). Particularly, our intermediate-term technical indicator is rebounding from oversold levels. The Aussie would outperform the pound in the long term, but AUD/GBP is vulnerable to a commodity relapse in the shorter term.   Housekeeping We were stopped out of our short EUR/JPY trade for a loss of -2.78%, as oil prices and bond yields rebounded. This trade is a hedge to our pro-cyclical portfolio, so we will look to reenter it at more attractive levels. We are also lowering the stop-loss on our short RUB trade. This is a speculative bet many clients will not be able to play, but we expect it to payoff over the longer term.   Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Michael Saunders, "The route back to 2% inflation," (Speech given at the Resolution Foundation), May 9, 2022.   Trades & Forecasts Strategic View Cyclical Holdings (6-18 months) Tactical Holdings (0-6 months) Limit Orders Forecast Summary

Listen to a short summary of this report.       Executive Summary Chinese Stocks Are Relatively Cheap Chinese Stocks Are Relatively Cheap Chinese Stocks Are Relatively Cheap The Chinese economy faces a trifecta of economic woes: 1) The threat of renewed Covid lockdowns; 2) Cooling export demand; 3) A floundering housing market. Trying to reflate the Chinese housing bubble would only damage the long-term prospects of China’s economy. A much better option would be to adopt measures that boost disposable income. Not only would this help offset the drag from slowing export growth and a negative housing wealth effect, but it would also take some of the sting out of China’s zero-Covid policy. With the Twentieth Party Congress slated for later this year, the political incentive to shower the economy with cash will only intensify. Chinese equities are trading at only 10-times forward earnings and about 1-times sales. A significant upward rating for equity valuations is likely if the government adopts broad-based income-support measures. Go long the iShares MSCI China ETF ($MCHI) as a tactical trade. Bottom Line: China faces a number of economic woes, but these are fully discounted by the market. What has not been discounted is a broad-based stimulus program focused on income-support measures.   Dear Client, I will be visiting clients in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Abu Dhabi next week. No doubt, the outlook for oil prices will feature heavily in my discussions. I will brief you on any insights I learn in my report on June 17. In the meantime, I am pleased to announce that Matt Gertken, BCA’s Chief Geopolitical Strategist, will be the guest author of next week’s Global Investment Strategy report. Best regards, Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist Triple Threat The Chinese economy faces a trifecta of economic woes: 1) The threat of renewed Covid lockdowns; 2) Cooling export demand; 3) A floundering housing market. Let us discuss each problem in turn.   Problem #1: China’s Zero-Covid Policy in the Age of Omicron Chart 1China’s Lockdown Index Remains Elevated China: A Trifecta Of Economic Woes China: A Trifecta Of Economic Woes China was able to successfully suppress the virus in the first two years of the pandemic. However, the emergence of the Omicron strain is challenging the government’s commitment to its zero-Covid policy. The BA.2 subvariant of Omicron is 50% more contagious than the original Omicron strain and about 4-times more contagious than the Delta strain. While 89% of China’s population has been fully vaccinated, the number drops off to 82% for those above the age of 60. And those who are vaccinated have been inoculated with vaccines that appear to be largely ineffective against Omicron. Keeping a virus as contagious as measles at bay in a population with little natural or artificial immunity is exceedingly difficult. While the authorities are starting to relax restrictions in Shanghai, China’s Effective Lockdown Index remains at elevated levels (Chart 1). A number of domestically designed mRNA vaccines are in phase 3 trials. However, it is not clear how effective they will be. Shanghai-based Fosun Pharma has inked a deal to distribute 100 million doses of Pfizer’s vaccine, but so far neither it nor Moderna’s vaccine have been approved for use. Our working assumption is that China will authorize the distribution of western-made mRNA vaccines later this year if its own offerings prove ineffectual. The Chinese government has already signed a deal to manufacture a generic version of Pfizer’s Paxlovid, which has been shown to cut the risk of hospitalization by 90% if taken within five days of the onset of symptoms. In the meantime, the authorities will continue to play whack-a-mole with Covid. Investors should expect more lockdowns during the remainder of the year.   Problem #2: Weaker Export Growth China’s export growth slowed sharply in April, with manufacturing production contracting at the fastest rate since data collection began. Activity appears to have rebounded somewhat in May, but the new export orders components of both the official and private-sector manufacturing PMIs still remain below 50 (Chart 2). Part of the export slowdown is attributable to lockdown restrictions. However, weaker external demand is also a culprit, as evidenced by the fact that Korean export growth — a bellwether for global trade — has decelerated (Chart 3).  Chart 2China’s Export Growth Has Rolled Over China's Export Growth Has Rolled Over China's Export Growth Has Rolled Over Chart 3Softer Export Growth Is Not A China-Specific Phenomenon Softer Export Growth Is Not A China-Specific Phenomenon Softer Export Growth Is Not A China-Specific Phenomenon Spending in developed economies is shifting from manufactured goods to services. Retail inventories in the US are now well above their pre-pandemic trend, suggesting that the demand for Chinese-made goods will remain subdued over the coming months (Chart 4). The surge in commodity prices is only adding to Chinese manufacturer woes. Input prices rose 10% faster than manufacturing output prices over the past 12 months. This is squeezing profit margins (Chart 5). Chart 4Well-Stocked Shelves In The US Bode Poorly For Chinese Export Demand Well-Stocked Shelves In The US Bode Poorly For Chinese Export Demand Well-Stocked Shelves In The US Bode Poorly For Chinese Export Demand Chart 5Surging Input Costs Are Weighing On The Profits Of Chinese Commodity Users Surging Input Costs Are Weighing On The Profits Of Chinese Commodity Users Surging Input Costs Are Weighing On The Profits Of Chinese Commodity Users A modest depreciation in the currency would help the Chinese export sector. However, after weakening from 6.37 in April to 6.79 in mid-May, USD/CNY has moved back to 6.66 on the back of the recent selloff in the US dollar. Chart 6The RMB Tends To Weaken When EUR/USD Is Rising The RMB Tends To Weaken When EUR/USD Is Rising The RMB Tends To Weaken When EUR/USD Is Rising We expect the dollar to weaken further over the next 12 months as the Fed tempers its hawkish rhetoric in response to falling inflation. Chart 6 shows that the trade-weighted RMB typically strengthens when EUR/USD is rising. Chester Ntonifor, BCA’s Chief Currency Strategist, expects EUR/USD to reach 1.16 by the end of the year.   Problem #3: Flagging Property Market Chinese housing sales, starts, and completions all contracted in April (Chart 7). New home prices dipped 0.2% on a month-over-month basis, and are up just 0.7% from a year earlier, the smallest gain since 2015. The percentage of households planning to buy a home is near record lows (Chart 8). Chart 7The Chinese Property Market Has Been Cooling The Chinese Property Market Has Been Cooling The Chinese Property Market Has Been Cooling Chart 8Intentions To Buy A House Have Declined Intentions To Buy A House Have Declined Intentions To Buy A House Have Declined China’s property developers are in dire straits. Corporate bonds for the sector are, on average, trading at 48 cents on the dollar (Chart 9). Goldman Sachs estimates that the default rate for property developers will reach 32% in 2022, up from their earlier estimate of 19%. The government is trying to prop up housing demand. The PBoC lowered the 5-year loan prime rate by 15 bps on May 20th, the largest such cut since 2019. The authorities have dropped the floor mortgage rate to a 14-year low of 4.25%. They have also taken steps to make it easier for property developers to issue domestic bonds. BCA’s China strategists believe these measures will foster a modest rebound in the property market in the second half of this year. However, they do not anticipate a robust recovery – of the sort experienced following the initial wave of the pandemic – due to the government’s continued adherence to the “three red lines” policy.1 China is building too many homes. While residential investment as a share GDP has been trending lower, it is still very high in relation to other countries. China’s working-age population is now shrinking, which suggests that housing demand will contract over the coming years (Chart 10). Chart 9Chinese Property Developer Bonds Are Trading At Distressed Levels Chinese Property Developer Bonds Are Trading At Distressed Levels Chinese Property Developer Bonds Are Trading At Distressed Levels Chart 10Shrinking Working-Age Population Implies Less Demand For Housing Shrinking Working-Age Population Implies Less Demand For Housing Shrinking Working-Age Population Implies Less Demand For Housing Chinese real estate prices are amongst the highest anywhere. The five biggest cities in the world with the lowest rental yields are all in China (Chart 11). The entire Chinese housing stock is worth nearly $100 trillion, making it the largest asset class in the world. As such, a decline in Chinese home prices would generate a sizable negative wealth effect. Chart 11Chinese Real Estate Is Expensive China: A Trifecta Of Economic Woes China: A Trifecta Of Economic Woes A Silver Bullet? Trying to reflate the Chinese housing bubble would only damage the long-term prospects of China’s economy. Luckily, one does not need to fill a leaky bucket through the same hole the water escaped. As long as there is enough demand throughout the economy, workers who lose their jobs in declining sectors will eventually find new jobs in other sectors. China needs to reorient its economy away from its historic reliance on investment and exports towards consumption. The easiest way to do that is to adopt measures that boost disposable income, which has slowed of late (Chart 12). Not only would this help offset the drag from slowing export growth and a negative housing wealth effect, but it would also take some of the sting out of China’s zero-Covid policy. The authorities have not talked much about pursuing large-scale income-support measures of the kind adopted by many developed economies during the pandemic. As a result, market participants have largely dismissed this possibility. Yet, with the Twentieth Party Congress slated for later this year, the political incentive to shower the economy with cash will only intensify. Chinese equities are trading at only 10-times forward earnings and about 1-times sales (Chart 13). A significant upward rating for equity valuations is likely if the government adopts broad-based income-support measures. As we saw in the US and elsewhere, stimulus cash has a habit of flowing into the stock market; and with real estate in the doldrums, equities may become the asset class of choice for many Chinese investors. With that in mind, we are going long the iShares MSCI China ETF ($MCHI) as a tactical trade. Chart 12Disposable Income Growth Has Been Trending Lower Disposable Income Growth Has Been Trending Lower Disposable Income Growth Has Been Trending Lower Chart 13Chinese Stocks Are Relatively Cheap Chinese Stocks Are Relatively Cheap Chinese Stocks Are Relatively Cheap At a global level, a floundering Chinese property market would have been a cause for grave concern in the past, as it would have represented a major deflationary shock. Times have changed, however. The problem now is too much inflation, rather than too little. To the extent that reduced Chinese investment injects more savings into the global economy and knocks down commodity prices, this would be welcomed by most investors. China’s economy may be heading for a “beautiful slowdown.” Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on LinkedIn Twitter   Footnotes   1      The People’s Bank of China and the housing ministry issued a deleveraging framework for property developers in August 2020, consisting of a 70% ceiling on liabilities-to-assets, a net debt-to-equity ratio capped at 100%, and a limit on short-term borrowing that cannot exceed cash reserves. Developers breaching these “red lines” run the risk of being cut off from access to new loans from banks, while those who respect them can only increase their interest-bearing borrowing by 15% at most. View Matrix China: A Trifecta Of Economic Woes China: A Trifecta Of Economic Woes Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores China: A Trifecta Of Economic Woes China: A Trifecta Of Economic Woes

Executive Summary Return Of The 'Pocketbook Voter' Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign President Biden’s pledge to fight inflation ahead of the midterm elections got a boost with the Gulf Arab states pledging to increase oil production in July and August. Yet OPEC’s action should not be overrated. The Saudis are not clearly bailing out Biden … at least not yet. Biden’s other inflation-fighting tools are also limited. The Fed will hike rates, which will weigh on inflation, at least in the short run. A short-term moderation in inflation will cause big shifts in financial markets. It will not save the midterms for Democrats, but gridlock is disinflationary so the effect is the same. Inflation risks will persist over the long run.   Recommendation (Cyclical) Inception Level Inception Date Return Small Vs. Large Cap Energy 0.6485 26-JAN-22 14.2% Oil And Gas Transportation And Storage Vs. S&P 500 0.0527 30-MAR-22 16.5% Bottom Line: Expect inflation to moderate in the short run. Oil prices will be volatile. Book a 14% profit on small cap versus large cap energy stocks and a 16.5% profit on the oil and gas transportation sub-sector relative to the broad market. Feature President Biden kicked off the summer – and the midterm election campaign – by defending his record thus far and pledging a three-pronged strategy to fight inflation. His options are limited but he received a boost from OPEC right off the bat. The bottom line is that disinflationary pressures are emerging. These include congressional gridlock, which is likely to return in January 2023. Biden’s policies will not save his party from a defeat in the midterms but moderating inflation will have huge investment consequences. Biden’s Three-Pronged Plan Consumer confidence is hurting while inflation eats away at real wage growth for Americans (Chart 1). Confidence is 14% higher than when Biden took office but 17.5% lower than when it peaked in June 2021. The latest survey from the Conference Board showed another decrease in May. This is foul weather for a ruling party that already stands to suffer a major check on its power when voters go to the polls in the fall. Biden’s approval rating is likely to stabilize but only at the current low level of 41.4%. Voters are focusing on the economy more than other issues like health care, the environment, or foreign affairs (Chart 2). Chart 1Consumer Confidence And Real Wages Tumble Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Chart 2Return Of The 'Pocketbook Voter' Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign In the Wall Street Journal Biden laid out his party’s election pitch.1 First, he argued that the US economy is transitioning from rapid recovery to stable growth – i.e. that it is not going into recession. That would be good, but a recession is possible and the slowdown is politically deadly: Household Savings: Aggregate household savings have risen from $1Tn in 2019 to $3.9Tn today, which Biden cited as evidence of improving financial security. The problem is that inequality skews the picture and the average American is unlikely to feel secure. Low and middle income earners have depleted their savings or seen only a small increase (Chart 3). The Biden administration failed to improve inequality as promised while the uneven economic recovery means that lower-paid Americans do not have as much ability to buffer spending as the aggregate savings imply. They will be unhappy in November. Chart 3Normal Households No Longer Flush With Savings Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Jobs And Wages: Biden highlighted the role of his economic stimulus in lowering unemployment and argued that Americans have better paying jobs. But inflation has eroded real wages and incomes, as highlighted in Chart 1 above. Business Investment: Biden argued that business investment is brisk. But sentiment is turning. New orders of core capital goods have rolled over and capex intentions are falling (Chart 4). Manufacturing Comeback: Biden also touted the US manufacturing comeback, claiming that factory jobs are growing at fastest rate in 30 years. But again the tide is shifting against him, with the employment component of manufacturing purchasing manager indexes now signaling contraction (Chart 5). Biden, like Presidents Trump and Obama, has invested heavily in the “Buy America” re-industrialization narrative, so this trend is threatening. Chart 4Business Investment Setback Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Chart 5Manufacturing Employment Weakening Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign A recession may indeed be avoided but the risk will not go away in time for the election. A recent study showed that at today’s extremely high level of inflation and extremely low level of unemployment, the odds of recession range from 60%-70% over the next 12-24 months.2 Second, Biden promised voters that he will fight inflation with all the powers of the White House. He laid out a three-pronged approach. However, his options are fairly limited and voters will not change their minds easily over the next five months: The Fed will hike rates: Biden argued that it is the Fed’s job to fight inflation and he will not interfere with rate hikes. While Biden offered admirable verbal support for an independent and non-partisan central bank, the truth is that real interest rates have not been this low since the highly politicized Fed chairmanship of Arthur Burns (Chart 6). While Biden has no reason to discourage rate hikes at the moment, he may change his tune as rates rise, growth slows, and the presidential election approaches. So may Powell, but by then it may be too late. In short, the Fed will hike, which will weigh on inflation, but it will not help Biden win voters this fall or avoid a recession by 2024. Congress will expand capacity: Biden argued that the bipartisan infrastructure bill that he signed into law and his other legislative proposals will boost the supply side of the economy. We are moderately optimistic about Congress’s ability to pass a party-line reconciliation bill that provides subsidies for the energy sector. This could pass under the consensus-building rubric of fighting Russia and climate change at the same time. But this measure, along with Biden’s Housing Supply Action Plan, child care and elderly care subsidies, and other proposals often look more like demand-side stimulus than supply-side reforms. They would fan inflation by increasing government spending and budget deficits. Moreover the administration cannot fix broken supply chains while China remains subject to strict Covid-19 lockdowns (Chart 7). In short, Congress may pass a reconciliation bill but it would be mildly stimulating for the economy (i.e. inflationary) and none of the supply-side improvements would reduce inflation in time for the midterms. Chart 6Biden Doesn't Need To Interfere With The Fed Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Chart 7Supply Snarls Will Continue While China Struggles With Covid Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign The budget deficit will fall: Biden argued that budget consolidation will reduce inflation, pointing to this year’s estimated $1.7 trillion drop in the budget deficit and arguing that the deficit is falling lower than pre-pandemic levels. He also argued that robust tax revenues from the economic recovery justified his previous fiscal stimulus (the American Rescue Plan Act). However, the budget is merely normalizing from extreme pandemic heights – there have obviously not been any long-term fiscal reforms (Chart 8). If Congress passes a reconciliation bill then Biden may succeed at passing a minimum corporate tax, which would mark an important success. But while the fiscal drag is negative for inflation, it is also negative for the economy this year and for Biden’s party in the midterms, and long-term budget trends are inflationary. Chart 8No Sign Of Budget Control Over Long Run – Budget Deficits Are Inflationary Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign The takeaway is that the Fed’s actions are disinflationary. Congress may or may not pass a climate bill before the election, but if it does, the budget deficit will be the same or larger and the economy will be the same or slightly stimulated. In brief Biden’s anti-inflation plan is to avoid interfering at the Fed. Extremely low unemployment will not save Biden and the Democrats this election season, any more than it saved Trump and the Republicans in 2018 (Chart 9). The Fed will rein in inflation at least in the short run. The election will lead to gridlock, which will freeze fiscal policy. Bottom Line: Inflation expectations will moderate but not because of any supply-side reform or fiscal consolidation coming from the Biden administration this year. Chart 9Low Unemployment Will Not Save Democrats Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Will Biden Ease Russian Energy Tensions? No. Biden’s other avenues for reducing inflation – not addressed in his editorial – lie in the foreign policy realm. The Biden administration is turning toward foreign policy as gridlock settles over Capitol Hill. Biden’s foreign policy will be insular, reactive, and focused on the midterm elections. Could Biden facilitate ceasefire talks in Ukraine so as to ease energy pressures stemming from Russia? The short answer is no. Biden imposed an oil embargo on Russia and ultimately agreed to the EU’s embargo. Biden can afford to run large risks with Russia this year because a larger confrontation or crisis with Russia would not hurt the Democrats in the midterm elections. Indeed the best hope for the Democrats is to recreate the 1962 congressional election, when John F. Kennedy stared down Soviet leader Nikita Krushchev in the Cuban Missile Crisis in October just before the election. Kennedy’s Democrats lost four seats in the House, gained four in the Senate, and kept control of both. Biden’s approval rating is nowhere near Kennedy’s but his party’s outlook is bad enough that he may be willing to run the risk of a crisis that could lead to a favorable rally-around-the-flag effect in the fall (Chart 10). Biden’s clearance this week of the highly mobile artillery rocket system for Ukraine – despite the risk that Ukrainians would launch attacks into Russian territory – underscores this point. Bottom Line: Biden will not ease tensions with Russia ahead of the midterm to try to reduce energy prices. Chart 10Biden Can Risk A Bigger Russia Crisis Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Will Biden Lower China Tariffs? No. What about China – will Biden ease the Trump administration’s tariffs on China to reduce inflation before the midterm election? Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has repeatedly signaled support for this idea. The Trump administration marked a historic increase in US tariffs and the Biden administration has so far offered relief only for US allies (Chart 11). Again the short answer is no. Protectionist sentiment will prevail during midterm election season and US voters have turned decisively unfavorable toward China in recent years (Chart 12). The China tariffs have not been the driver for US inflation so tariff relief would bring minimal price relief while exacting a high political cost of making Biden look weak, wishy-washy on his pro-democracy values, and (according to Republicans) corrupt. Biden would be offering unilateral benefits to China without gaining Chinese trade concessions. Chart 11Biden Keeps Trump's Tariffs On China Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Chart 12Protectionist Sentiment To Prevail Amid Midterms Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Recently the Biden administration gave some indications of where it stands on China policy. Biden visited US allies in Asia Pacific and provoked China over the Taiwan Strait. Secretary of State Antony Blinken unveiled the administration’s comprehensive China policy and declared that the US would remain focused on China as the “most serious long-term challenge” despite Russia’s open belligerence in Europe.3 On paper, US-China trade relations do not look that bad. While China is falling short of its Phase One trade deal import promises, the truth is that a global recession intervened – and those promises were made under duress when the US slapped sweeping sanctions on Chinese exports. The commodity trade is booming, as is to be expected amid global energy shortages (Chart 13). The problem is that neither the US nor China has the domestic political capital to offer structural concessions in the short run, while both sides are girding for a century-long power struggle over the long run. Supply insecurity will result in the commodity trade suffering as a vast global substitution effect takes place. This is due to Russia’s energy breakup with Europe, growing Russia-China trade linkages, and ongoing US-China tensions. Global trade and US-China trade are set to slow, while China’s surge in energy imports from the US will abate for reasons of state security. Chart 13US-China Trade Faces Strategic Limits Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Bottom Line: No reduction in US tariffs on China is likely. Any reduction will have minimal macroeconomic effects and will be replaced by other punitive measures, given the underlying strategic competition and protectionist election politics. Meanwhile China’s “Zero Covid” policy will weigh on trade ties and sustain price pressures in the short run, as mentioned. Will Biden Lift Iran Sanctions? Probably Not. What about the Middle East? Can Biden convince the core OPEC states to pump more oil in lieu of Russian production? Or can Biden lift sanctions on Iran to undercut soaring gasoline prices? On this front Biden received welcome news on June 2 when Gulf Arab states promised to increase production by 638,000 barrels per day in July and August, up from an expected 430,000. At the same time news broke that Biden will visit Saudi Arabia, including potentially Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), and other Gulf partners sometime in June. There is not yet a clear understanding between Biden and MBS but it is possible that one will develop. The trigger for OPEC’s declaration is the EU oil embargo on Russia. EU is finalizing an embargo on 90% of oil imports – everything except the oil flowing through the Southern Druzhba pipeline to land-locked eastern European states. The embargo will impair Russian energy production: it could fall by as much as 2-3 million barrels per day, distribution interruptions will occur as Russia transitions to Asian buyers, and Russia’s long-term production capacity could be damaged. The result could be a destabilizing price spike. While the core OPEC states have just enough spare capacity to cover that gap in theory (Chart 14), they will not want to commit all spare capacity at once. Chart 14OPEC Spare Capacity Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign There is still a lot of uncertainty about how rapidly the embargo will be enforced, how much Russian production will suffer, whether the OPEC states will meet these new production increases (all except Saudi have been falling short), and what will be the OPEC policy beyond August. But for now it is clear that the Gulf Arab states are helping the US and EU by signaling some extra supplies at a critical time. The Gulf Arabs benefit from high oil prices and have previously ignored the G7’s pleas to increase production. But they also need to prolong the business cycle – a cycle-killing price shock from Russia is not in their interest. They are interested in keeping up revenues, maintaining domestic stability, and maintaining their position as the gatekeepers of the global oil supply and price. Secondarily, they are interested in maintaining close relations with the US, which guarantees their national security. OPEC supply easing at this juncture is obviously beneficial to Biden ahead of the US midterm election in November. But there is not yet an understanding on this front because the US is also negotiating to rejoin the 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran, which Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states oppose. Biden’s trip to the Gulf suggests that nothing is settled yet. The OPEC production increase is not proof alone that the US is breaking off talks with Iran. If the Gulf states thought the US were going to strike a deal with Iran, they might produce more oil to preempt the deal and grab more market share, which is what they did in 2014 in advance of the original 2015 US-Iran nuclear deal. The Saudis do not want US shale producers and Iranian exporters to form an unholy alliance that steals market share and compromises Saudi security. Still, we expect the US-Iran deal to fall apart. The Biden administration does not have a unified international coalition to enforce sanctions on Iran. Nor does it have the political capital or longevity to give Iran credible security guarantees that would convince it to freeze its nuclear program. Recent events support our view. The UN atomic watchdog says that Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium has risen by 30% in three months. Meanwhile the US seized an Iranian tanker off Greece, Iran seized two Greek tankers, and Greece warned about dangers to shipping in the Persian Gulf. To develop a better understanding between Biden and MBS, the US needs to assure the Saudis that it will not renew the deal with Iran. The Saudis will not provide oil at Biden’s whim but they may provide if they have satisfaction that the US will scrap the deal, or otherwise compensate them, such as through increased defense assistance (which Biden threatened to cut off when he entered office). Investors should expect OPEC to fall short of its current promises – and yet to try to provide the minimum production increases necessary to prevent a destabilizing oil spike. OPEC’s interest is to make a windfall for as long as possible, which means not killing the cycle out of greed. This policy could be positive for oil prices after the immediate downward price adjustment. But for now investors should merely expect oil volatility as the EU’s embargo enforcement, Russian retaliation, Russian oil production, OPEC implementation, and US sanctions on Iran are all up in the air. A successful US-Iran deal would deepen the drop in oil prices. But odds are 60/40 that that deal will fail, leading to an escalation of tensions in the Middle East. Biden will have to underscore the US’s red line against Iranian nuclear weaponization. Oil supply disruptions will increase in frequency across the region. Bottom Line: OPEC has given Biden’s anti-inflation campaign a boost but it is too soon to declare that oil prices will substantially abate. The US-Iran deal will likely fail, increasing Middle Eastern instability and supply risks. Investment Takeaways Given that we expect continued volatility in the oil space, we are booking a 14% gain on our long small cap energy versus large cap energy trade. We are also booking a 16.5% gain on our overweight position in the oil and gas transportation and storage sub-sector. We will revisit these trades in future reports. Overall we maintain a defensive portfolio strategy. Biden’s anti-inflation campaign is meeting with some success in the Middle East but the US confrontation with Russia and the likely failure of US-Iran talks suggests that price spikes can still kill more demand and lead to further growth upsets.   Matt Gertken Senior Vice President Chief US Political Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1     See Joseph R. Biden, Jr, “Joe Biden: My Plan for Fighting Inflation,” Wall Street Journal, May 30, 2022, wsj.com.  2     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.  3    See Antony J. Blinken, “The Administration’s Approach to the People’s Republic of China,” US Department of State, May 26, 2022, state.gov.   Strategic View Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Table A2Political Risk Matrix Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Table A3US Political Capital Index Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Chart A1Presidential Election Model Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Chart A2Senate Election Model Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign  Table A4House Election Model Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Table A5APolitical Capital: White House And Congress Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Table A5BPolitical Capital: Household And Business Sentiment Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Table A5CPolitical Capital: The Economy And Markets Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign Biden's Anti-Inflation Campaign

Executive Summary Investors face a dilemma. The faster that inflation comes down, the better it will be for valuations via a stronger rally in the bond price. But if a collapse in inflation requires a sharp deceleration in growth, the worse it will be for profits. Bond yields are likely in a peaking process, but the sharpest declines may come a few months down the road, after an unambiguous roll-over in food and energy inflation. The stock market’s valuation-driven sell-off is likely over, but the danger is that it morphs into a profits-driven sell-off. As such, the stock market will remain under pressure through 2022, though it is likely to be higher 12 months from now in June 2023. High conviction recommendation: Overweight healthcare versus basic resources. In other words, tilt towards sectors that benefit the most from rising bond prices and that suffer the least from contracting profits. New high conviction recommendation: Go long the Japanese yen. As bond yield differentials re-tighten, the yen will rally. Additionally, the yen will benefit from its haven status in a period of recessionary risk. Fractal trading watchlist: JPY/USD, GBP/USD, and Australian basic resources. If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market Bottom Line: The risk is that the valuation-driven sell-off morphs into a profits-driven sell-off. Feature In May, many stock markets reached the drawdown of 20 percent that defines a technical bear market. Yet what has caught many people off guard is that the bear market in stocks has happened during a bull market in profits. Since the start of 2022, US profits are up by 5 percent.1 The bear market in stocks has happened during a bull market in profits… so far. This shatters the shibboleth that bear markets only happen when there is a profits recession. The 2022 bear market has been a valuation-driven bear market. US profits rose 5 percent, but the multiple paid for those profits collapsed by 25 percent, taking the market into bear territory. None of this should come as any surprise to our regular readers. As we have pointed out many times, a stock market can be likened to a bond with a variable rather than a fixed income. So, just as with a bond, every stock market has a ‘duration’ which establishes which bond it most behaves like. It turns out that that long-duration US stock market has the same duration as a 30-year bond. This means that: The US stock market = (The 30-year T-bond price) multiplied by (US profits) It follows that if the 30-year bond price falls by more than profits rise, then the stock market will sell off. And if the 30-year bond price falls by much more than profits rise, then the stock market will enter a valuation-driven bear market. Therein lies the story of 2022 so far (Chart I-1). Chart I-1The Bear Market Is Valuation-Driven. Profits Are Up... For Now The Bear Market Is Valuation-Driven. Profits Are Up... For Now The Bear Market Is Valuation-Driven. Profits Are Up... For Now Just As In 1981-82, Will The Sell-Off Morph From Valuation-Driven To Profits-Driven? In Markets Echo 1981, When Stagflation Morphed Into Recession, we argued that a good template for what happens to the economy and the markets in 2022-23 is the experience of 1981-82. Does 2022-23 = 1981-82? Then, just as now, the world’s central banks were obsessed with ‘breaking the back’ of inflation, and piloting the economy to a ‘soft landing’. Then, just as now, the central banks were desperate to repair their badly damaged credibility in managing the economy. And then, just as now, an invasion-led war between two major commodity producers – Iran and Iraq – was disrupting commodity supplies and adding to inflationary pressures. In 1981, just as now, the equity market sell-off started as a valuation sell-off, driven by a declining 30-year T-bond price. Profits held up through most of 1981, just as they have so far in 2022. In September 1981, US core inflation finally peaked, with bond yields following soon after. In the current experience, March 2022 appears to have marked the equivalent peak in US core inflation (Chart I-2 and Chart I-3). Chart I-2Does September 1981... Does September 1981... Does September 1981... Chart I-3...Equal March 2022? ...Equal March 2022? ...Equal March 2022? In late 1981, when the 30-year T-bond price rebounded, the good news was that beaten-down equity valuations also reached their low point. The bad news was that just as the valuation-driven sell-off ended, profits keeled over, and the valuation-driven sell-off morphed into a profits-driven sell-off (Chart I-4). In 2022-23, could history repeat? Chart I-4In September 1981, The Sell-Off Morphed From Valuation-Driven To Profits-Driven In September 1981, The Sell-Off Morphed From Valuation-Driven To Profits-Driven In September 1981, The Sell-Off Morphed From Valuation-Driven To Profits-Driven Recession Or No Recession? That Is Not The Question History rhymes, it rarely repeats exactly. What if the 2022-23 experience can avoid the outright economic recession of the 1981-82 experience? This brings us to another shibboleth that needs to be shattered. You don’t need the economy to go into recession for profits to go into recession. To understand why, we need to visit the concept of operational leverage. Profits is a small number that comes from the difference of two large numbers: sales and the costs of generating those sales. As any company will tell you, sales can be volatile, but costs – which are dominated by wages – are sticky and much slower to change. The upshot is that if sales growth exceeds costs growth, there is a massively leveraged impact on profits growth. This is the magic of operational leverage. But if sales growth falls below sticky cost growth, the magic turns into a curse. The operational leverage goes into reverse, and profits collapse. Using US stock market profits as an example, the magic turns into a curse at real GDP growth of 1.25 percent, above which profits grow at six times the difference, and below which profits shrink at six times the difference (Chart I-5). Chart I-5A Model For US Profits Growth: (Real GDP Growth - 1.25) Times 6 A Model For US Profits Growth: (Real GDP Growth - 1.25) Times 6 A Model For US Profits Growth: (Real GDP Growth - 1.25) Times 6 Strictly speaking, we should compare US profits growth with world GDP growth because multinationals generate their sales globally rather than domestically. But to the extent that the US has both the world’s largest stock market and the world’s largest economy, it is a reasonable comparison. We should also compare both profits and sales in either nominal or real terms, rather than a mixture. But even with these tweaks, we would still find that the dominant driver of profit growth is operational leverage. ‘Recession or no recession?’ is a somewhat moot question, because even non-recessionary low growth is enough to tip profits into contraction. Therefore, the conclusion still stands – ‘recession or no recession?’ is a somewhat moot question, because even non-recessionary low growth is enough to tip profits into contraction. Such a period of low growth is now likely. If 2022-23 = 1981-82, What Happens Next? To repeat: The US stock market = (The 30-year T-bond price) multiplied by (US profits) This means that investors face a dilemma. The faster that inflation comes down, the better it will be for valuations via a stronger rally in the bond price. But if a collapse in inflation requires a sharp deceleration in growth, the worse it will be for profits. This was the precise set-up in December 1981, the equivalent of June 2022 in our historical template. In which case, what can we expect next? 1. Bond yields are likely in a peaking process, but the sharpest declines may come a few months down the road, after an unambiguous roll-over in food and energy inflation (Chart I-6). Chart I-6If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Bond Yield If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Bond Yield If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Bond Yield 2. The stock market’s valuation-driven sell-off is likely over, but the danger is that it morphs into a profits-driven sell-off. As such, the stock market will remain under pressure through 2022, though it is likely to be higher 12 months from now in June 2023 (Chart I-7). Chart I-7If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To The Stock Market 3. Long-duration defensive sectors will outperform short-duration cyclical sectors. In other words, tilt towards sectors that benefit the most from rising bond prices and suffer the least from contracting profits. As such, a high conviction recommendation is to overweight healthcare versus basic resources (Chart I-8). Chart I-8If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To Healthcare Versus Resources If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To Healthcare Versus Resources If 2022-23 = 1981-82, Then This Is What Happens To Healthcare Versus Resources 4. In foreign exchange, the setup is very bullish for the Japanese yen through the next 12 months. The yen’s recent sell-off is explained by bond yields rising outside Japan. As these bond yield differentials re-tighten, the yen will rally. Additionally, the yen will benefit from its haven status in a period of recessionary risk. A new high conviction recommendation is to go long the Japanese yen (Chart I-9). Chart I-9The Yen's Sell-Off Is Due To Bond Yields Rising Outside Japan The Yen's Sell-Off Is Due To Bond Yields Rising Outside Japan The Yen's Sell-Off Is Due To Bond Yields Rising Outside Japan Fractal Trading Watchlist Supporting our bullish fundamental case for the Japanese yen, the sell-off in JPY/USD has reached the point of fragility on its 260-day fractal structure that marked previous major turning points in 2013 and 2015 (Chart 10). Hence, a first new trade is long JPY/USD, setting the trade length at 6 months, and the profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 5 percent. Chart I-10The Sell-Off In JPY/USD Has Reached A Potential Turning Point The Sell-Off In JPY/USD Has Reached A Potential Turning Point The Sell-Off In JPY/USD Has Reached A Potential Turning Point Supporting our bearish fundamental case for resources stocks, the outperformance of Australian basic resources has reached the point of fragility on its 130-day fractal structure that marked previous turning points in 2013, 2015, and 2021 (Chart I-11). Hence, a second new trade is short Australian basic resources versus the world market, setting the trade length at 6 months, and the profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 10 percent. Chart I-11The Australian Basic Resources Sector Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Australian Basic Resources Sector Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Australian Basic Resources Sector Is Vulnerable To Reversal Finally, we are adding GBP/USD to our watchlist, given that its 260-day fractal structure is close to the point of fragility that marked major turns in 2014, 2015, and 2016. Our full watchlist of 29 investments that are at, or approaching turning points, is available on our website: cpt.bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading Watchlist: New Additions GBP/USD At A Turning Point GBP/USD At A Turning Point GBP/USD At A Turning Point Chart 1AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal   Chart 2Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Chart 3Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Chart 4US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal Chart 5BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point Chart 6Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Chart 7CNY/USD Has Reversed CNY/USD Has Reversed CNY/USD Has Reversed Chart 8CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started Chart 9Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Chart 10The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse Chart 11The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 12FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Reversing FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Reversing FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Reversing Chart 13Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Been Exhausted Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Been Exhausted Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Has Been Exhausted Chart 14The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 15The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 16Food And Beverage Outperformance Has Been Exhausted Food And Beverage Outperformance Has Been Exhausted Food And Beverage Outperformance Has Been Exhausted Chart 17The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile Chart 18The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile Chart 19A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 20Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 21Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Chart 22Cotton Versus Platinum Is Reversing Cotton Versus Platinum Is Reversing Cotton Versus Platinum Is Reversing Chart 23Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Chart 24The Rally In USD/EUR Has Ended The Rally In USD/EUR Has Ended The Rally In USD/EUR Has Ended Chart 25The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 26A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare Chart 27Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Chart 28US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities Chart 29GBP/USD At A Turning Point GBP/USD At A Turning Point GBP/USD At A Turning Point   Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1 Defined as 12-month forward earnings per share. Fractal Trading System More On 2022-23 = 1981-82, And The Danger Ahead More On 2022-23 = 1981-82, And The Danger Ahead More On 2022-23 = 1981-82, And The Danger Ahead More On 2022-23 = 1981-82, And The Danger Ahead 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed   Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations  

Executive Summary EU Embargoes Russian Oil Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) The EU imposed an embargo on 90% of Russian oil imports, which will provoke retaliation. Russia will squeeze Europe’s economy ahead of critical negotiations over the coming 6-12 months. Russian gains on the battlefield in Ukraine point to a ceasefire later, but not yet – and Russia will need to retaliate against NATO enlargement. The Middle East and North Africa face instability and oil disruptions due to US-Iran tensions and Russian interference. China’s autocratic shift is occurring amid an economic slowdown and pandemic. Social unrest and internal tensions will flare. China will export uncertainty and stagflation.  Inflation is causing disparate effects in South Asia – instability in Pakistan and Sri Lanka, and fiscal populism in India.   Asset Initiation Date Return Long Brazilian Financials / Indian Equities (Closed) Feb 10/22 22.5%  Bottom Line: Markets still face three geopolitical hurdles: Russian retaliation; Middle Eastern instability; Chinese uncertainty. Feature Global equities bounced back 6.1% from their trough on May 12 as investors cheered hints of weakening inflation and questioned the bearish consensus. BCA’s Global Investment Strategy correctly called the equity bounce. However, as BCA’s Geopolitical Strategy service, we see several sources of additional bad news. Throughout the Ukraine conflict we have highlighted two fundamental factors to ascertain regarding the ongoing macroeconomic impact: Will the war cut off the Russia-EU energy trade? Will the war broaden beyond Ukraine? Chart 1Russian-Exposed Assets Will Suffer More Russian-Exposed Assets Will Suffer More Russian-Exposed Assets Will Suffer More In this report we update our views on these two critical questions. The takeaway is that the geopolitical outlook is still flashing red. The US dollar will remain strong and currencies exposed to Russia and geopolitical risk will remain weak (Chart 1). In addition, China’s politics will continue to produce uncertainty and negative surprises this year. Taken together, investors should remain defensive for now but be ready to turn positive when the market clears the hurdles we identify. The fate of the business cycle hangs in the balance.  Energy Ties Eroding … Russia Will Retaliate Over Oil Embargo Chart 2AEU Embargoes Russian Oil Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Europe is diversifying from Russian oil and natural gas. The European Union adopted a partial oil embargo on Russia that will cut oil imports by 90% by the end of 2022. It also removed Sberbank from the SWIFT banking communications network and slapped sanctions on companies that insure shipments of Russian crude. The sanctions will cut off all of Europe’s seaborne oil imports from Russia as well as major pipeline imports, except the Southern Druzhba pipeline. The EU made an exception for landlocked eastern European countries heavily dependent on Russian pipeline imports – namely Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Bulgaria (Chart 2A).  Focus on the big picture. Germany changed its national policy to reduce Russian energy dependency for the sake of national security. From Chancellors Willy Brandt to Angela Merkel, Germany pursued energy cooperation and economic engagement as a means of lowering the risk of war with Russia. Ostpolitik worked in the Cold War, so when Russia seized Crimea in 2014, Merkel built the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. But Merkel’s policy failed to persuade Russia that economic cooperation is better than military confrontation – rather it emboldened President Putin, who viewed Europe as divided and corruptible. Chart 2BRussia Squeezes EU’s Natural Gas Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Russia’s regime is insecure and feels threatened by the US and NATO. Russia believed that if it invaded Ukraine, the Europeans would maintain energy relations for the sake of preserving overall strategic stability. Instead Germany and other European states began to view Russia as irrational and aggressive and hence a threat to their long-term security. They imposed a coal ban, now an oil ban the end of this year, and a natural gas ban by the end of 2027, all formalized under the recently announced RePowerEU program. Russia retaliated by declaring it would reduce natural gas exports to the Netherlands and probably Denmark, after having already cut off Finland, Poland, and Bulgaria (Chart 2B). As a pretext Russia points to its arbitrary March demand that states pay for gas in rubles rather than in currencies written in contracts. This ruble payment scheme is being enforced on a country-by-country basis against those Russia deems “unfriendly,” i.e. those that join NATO, adopt new sanctions, provide massive assistance to Ukraine, or are otherwise adverse. Chart 3Russia Actively Cutting Gas Flows Russia Actively Cutting Gas Flows Russia Actively Cutting Gas Flows Russia and Ukraine are already reducing natural gas exports through the Ukraine and Turkstream pipelines while the Yamal pipeline has been empty since May – and it is only a matter of time before flows begin to fall in the Nord Stream 1 pipeline to Germany (Chart 3). German government and industry are preparing to ration natural gas (to prioritize household needs) and revive 15 coal plants if necessary. Europe is attempting to rebuild stockpiles for the coming winter, when Russian willingness and capability to squeeze natural gas flows will reach a peak. The big picture is demonstrated by game theory in Diagram 1. The optimal situation for both Russia and the EU is to maintain energy exports for as long as possible, so that Russia has revenues to wage its war and Europe avoids a recession while transitioning away from Russian supplies (bottom right quadrant, each side receives four points). The problem is that this solution is not an equilibrium because either side can suffer a sudden shock if the other side betrays the tacit agreement and stops buying or selling (bottom left and top right quadrants). Diagram 1EU-Russia Standoff: What Does Game Theory Say? Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) The equilibrium – the decision sets in which both Russia and the EU are guaranteed to lose the least – is a situation in which both states reduce energy trade immediately. Europe needs to cut off the revenues that fuel the Russian war machine while Russia needs to punish and deter Europe now while it still has massive energy leverage (top left quadrant, circled). Once Europe diversifies away, Russia loses its leverage. If Europe does not diversify immediately, Russia can punish it severely by cutting off energy before it is prepared.   Russian energy weaponization is especially useful ahead of any ceasefire talks in Ukraine. Russia aims for Ukrainian military neutrality and a permanently weakened Ukrainian state. To that end it is seizing territory for the Luhansk and Donetsk People’s Republics, seizing the southern coastline and strategic buffer around Crimea, and controlling the mouth of the Dnieper river so that Ukraine is forever hobbled (Map 1). Once it achieves these aims it will want to settle a ceasefire that legitimizes its conquests. But Ukraine will wish to continue the fight. Map 1Russian Invasion Of Ukraine, 2022 Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Russia will need leverage over Europe to convince the EU to lean on Ukraine to agree to a ceasefire. Something similar occurred in 2014-15 when Russia collaborated with Germany and France to foist the Minsk Protocols onto Ukraine. If Russia keeps energy flowing to EU, the EU not only gets a smooth energy transition away from Russia but also gets to keep assisting Ukraine’s military effort. Whereas if Russia imposes pain on the EU ahead of ceasefire talks, the EU has greater interest in settling a ceasefire. Finally, given Russia’s difficulties on the battlefield, its loss of European patronage, and potential NATO enlargement on its borders, Moscow is highly likely to open a “new front” in its conflict with the West. Josef Stalin, for example, encouraged Kim Il Sung to invade South Korea in 1950. Today Russia’s options lie in the Middle East and North Africa – the regions where Europe turns for energy alternatives. Not only Libya and Algeria – which are both inherently fertile ground for Russia to sow instability –  but also Iran and the broader Middle East, where a tenuous geopolitical balance is already eroding due to a lack of strategic understanding between the US and Iran. Russia’s capabilities are limited but it likely retains enough influence to ignite existing powder kegs in these areas.   Bottom Line: Investors still face a few hurdles from the Ukraine war. First, the EU’s expanding energy embargo and Russian retaliation. Second, instability in the Middle East and North Africa. Hence energy price pressures will remain elevated in the short term and kill more demand, thus pushing the EU and the rest of the world toward stagflation or even recession. War Contained To Ukraine So Far … But Russia To Retaliate Over NATO Enlargement At present Russia is waging a full-scale assault on eastern and southern Ukraine, where about half of Donetsk awaits a decision (Map 2). If Russia emerges victorious over Donetsk in the summer or fall then it can declare victory and start negotiating a ceasefire. This timeline assumes that its economic circumstances are sufficiently straitened to prevent a campaign to the Moldovan border.1   Map 2Russia May Declare Victory If It Conquers The Rest Of Donetsk Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) There are still ways for the Ukraine war to spill over into neighboring areas. For example, the Black Sea is effectively a Russian lake at the moment, which prevents Ukrainian grain from reaching global markets where food prices are soaring. Eventually the western maritime powers will need to attempt to restore freedom of navigation. However, Russia is imposing a blockade on Ukraine, has more at stake there than other powers, and can take greater risks. The US and its allies will continue to provide Ukraine with targeting information against Russian ships but this assistance could eventually provoke a larger naval conflict. Separately, the US has agreed to provide Ukraine with the M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS), which could lead to attacks on Russian territory that would prompt a ferocious Russian reaction. Even assuming that the Ukraine war remains contained, Russia’s strategic conflict with the US and the West will remain unresolved and Moscow will be eager to save face. Russian retaliation will occur not only on account of European energy diversification but also on account of NATO enlargement. Finland and Sweden are attempting to join NATO and as such the West is directly repudiating the Putin regime’s chief strategic demand for 22 years. Finland shares an 830 mile border with Russia, adding insult to injury. The result will be another round of larger military tensions that go beyond Ukraine and prolong this year’s geopolitical risk and uncertainty. Russia’s initial response to Finland’s and Sweden’s joint application to NATO was to dismiss the threat they pose while drawing a new red line. Rather than forbidding NATO enlargement, Russia now demands that no NATO forces be deployed to these two states. This demand, which Putin and other officials expressed, may or may not amount to a genuine Russian policy change. Russia’s initial responses should be taken with a grain of salt because Turkey is temporarily blocking Finland’s and Sweden’s applications, so Russia has no need to respond to NATO enlargement yet. But the true test will come when and if the West satisfies Turkey’s grievances and Turkey moves to admit the new members. If enlargement becomes inevitable, Russia will respond. Russia will feel that its national security is fundamentally jeopardized by Sweden overturning two centuries of neutrality and Finland reversing the policy of “Finlandization” that went so far in preventing conflict during the Cold War. Chart 4Military Balances Stacking Up Against Russia Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Russia’s military options are limited. Russia has little ability to expand the war and fight on multiple fronts judging by the army’s recent performance in Ukraine and the Red Army’s performance in the Winter War of 1939. This point can be illustrated by taking the military balance of Russia and its most immediate adversaries, which add up to about half of Russian military strength even apart from NATO (Chart 4). Russian armed forces already demonstrated some pragmatism in April by withdrawing from Kyiv and focusing on more achievable war aims. Unless President Putin turns utterly reckless and the Russian state fails to restrain him, Russia will opt for defensive measures and strategic deterrence rather than a military offensive in the Baltics. Hence Russia’s military response will come in the form of threats rather than outright belligerence. However, these threats will probably include military and nuclear actions that will raise alarm bells across Europe and the United States. President Dmitri Medvedev has already warned of the permanent deployment of nuclear missiles in the Kaliningrad exclave.2 This statement points to only the most symbolic option of a range of options that will increase deterrence and elevate the fear of war. Otherwise Russia’s retaliation will consist of squeezing global energy supply, as discussed above, including by opening a new front in the Middle East and North Africa. Instability should be expected as a way of constraining Europe and distracting America. Higher energy prices may or may not convince the EU to negotiate better terms with Russia but they will sow divisions within and among the allies. Ultimately Russia is highly unlikely to sacrifice its credibility by failing to retaliate for the combination of energy embargo and NATO enlargement on its borders. Since its military options are becoming constrained (at least its rational ones), its economic and asymmetrical options will grow in importance. The result will be additional energy supply constraints. Bottom Line: Even assuming that the war does not spread beyond Ukraine – likely but not certain – global financial markets face at least one more period of military escalation with Russia. This will likely include significant energy cutoffs and saber-rattling – even nuclear threats – over NATO enlargement.   China’s Political Situation Has Not Normalized China continues to suffer from a historic confluence of internal and external political risk that will cause negative surprises for investors. Temporary improvements in government policy or investor sentiment – centered on a relaxation of “Zero Covid” lockdowns in major cities and a more dovish regulatory tone against the tech giants – will likely be frustrated, at least until after a more dovish government stance can be confirmed in the wake of the twentieth national party congress in October or November this year. At that event, Chinese President Xi Jinping is likely to clinch another ten years in power and complete the transformation of China’s governance from single-party rule to single-person rule. This reversion to autocracy will generate additional market-negative developments this year. It has already embedded a permanently higher risk premium in Chinese financial assets because it increases the odds of policy mistakes, international aggression, and ultimately succession crisis. The most successful Asian states chose to democratize and expand free markets and capitalism when they reached a similar point of economic development and faced the associated sociopolitical challenges. But China is choosing the opposite path for the sake of national security. Investors have seen the decay of Russia’s economy under Putin’s autocracy and would be remiss not to upgrade the odds of similarly negative outcomes in China over the long run as a result of Xi’s autocracy, despite the many differences between the two countries. China’s situation is more difficult than that of the democratic Asian states because of its reviving strategic rivalry with the United States. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently unveiled President Biden’s comprehensive China policy. He affirmed that the administration views China as the US’s top strategic competitor over the long run, despite the heightened confrontation with Russia.3 The Biden administration has not eased the Trump administration’s tariffs or punitive measures on China. It is unlikely to do so during a midterm election year when protectionist dynamics prevail – especially given that the Xi administration will be in the process of reestablishing autocracy, and possibly repressing social unrest, at the very moment Americans go to the polls. Re-engagement with China is also prohibited because China is strengthening its strategic bonds with Russia. President Biden has repeatedly implied that the US would defend Taiwan in any conflict with China. These statements are presented as gaffes or mistakes but they are in fact in keeping with historical US military actions threatening counter-attack during the three historic Taiwan Strait crises. The White House quickly walks back these comments to reassure China that the US does not support Taiwanese independence or intend to trigger a war with China. The result is that the US is using Biden’s gaffe-prone personality to reemphasize the hard edge (rather than the soft edge) of the US’s policy of “strategic ambiguity” on Taiwan. US policy is still ambiguous but ambiguity includes the possibility that a president might order military action to defend Taiwan. US attempts to increase deterrence and avoid a Ukraine scenario are threatening for China, which will view the US as altering the status quo and penalizing China for Russia’s actions. Beijing resumed overflights of Taiwan’s air defense identification zone in the wake of Biden’s remarks as well as the decision of the US to send Senator Tammy Duckworth to Taiwan to discuss deeper economic and defense ties. Consider the positioning of US aircraft carrier strike groups as an indicator of the high level of strategic tensions. On January 18, 2022, as Russia amassed military forces on the Ukrainian border – and the US and NATO rejected its strategic demands – the US had only one publicly acknowledged  aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean (the USS Harry Truman) whereas it had at least five US carriers in East Asia. On February 24, the day of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the US had at least four of these carriers in Asia. Even today the US has at least four carriers in the Pacific compared to at least two in Europe – one of which, notably, is in the Baltics to deter Russia from attacking Finland and Sweden (Map 3). The US is warning China not to take advantage of the Ukraine war by staging a surprise attack on Taiwan. Map 3Amid Ukraine War, US Deters China From Attacking Taiwan Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Of course, strategic tensions are perennial, whereas what investors are most concerned about is whether China can secure its economic recovery. The latest data are still disappointing. Credit growth continues to falter as the private sector struggles with a deteriorating demographic and macroeconomic outlook (Chart 5). The credit impulse has entered positive territory, when local government bonds are included, reflecting government stimulus efforts. But it is still negative when excluding local governments. And even the positive measure is unimpressive, having ticked back down in April (Chart 6). Chart 5Credit Growth Falters Amid Economic Transition Credit Growth Falters Amid Economic Transition Credit Growth Falters Amid Economic Transition Chart 6Silver Lining: Credit Impulse Less Negative Silver Lining: Credit Impulse Less Negative Silver Lining: Credit Impulse Less Negative Bottom Line: Further monetary and fiscal easing will come in China, a source of good news for global investors next year if coupled with a broader policy shift in favor of business, but the effects will be mixed this year due to Covid policy and domestic politics. Taken together with a European energy crunch and Middle Eastern oil supply disruptions, China’s stimulus is not a catalyst for a sustainable global equity market rally this year. South Asia: Inflation Hammers Sri Lanka And Pakistan Since 2020 we have argued that the global pandemic would result in a new wave of supply pressures and global social unrest. High inflation is blazing a trail of destruction in emerging markets, notably in South Asia, where per capita incomes are low and political institutions often fragile. Chart 7South Asia: Surging Inflation Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update) Sri Lanka has been worst affected (Chart 7). Inflation surged to an eye-watering 34% in April  and is expected to rise further. Surging inflation has affected Sri Lanka disproportionately because its macroeconomic and political fundamentals were weak to begin with. The tourism-dependent Sri Lankan economy suffered a body blow from terrorist attacks in 2019 and the pandemic in 2020-21. Then 2022 saw a power struggle between Sri Lanka’s President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and members of the national assembly including Prime Minister (PM) Mahinda Rajapaksa. The crisis hit a crescendo when the country defaulted on external debt obligations last month. These events weigh on Sri Lanka’s ability to transition from a long civil war (1983-2009) to a path of sustained economic development. While the political crisis has seemingly stabilized following the appointment of new Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, we remain bearish on a strategic time horizon. This is mainly because the new PM is unlikely to bring about structural solutions for Sri Lanka’s broken economy. Moreover, Sri Lanka holds more than $50 billion of foreign debt, or 62% of GDP. Another country that has been dealing with political instability alongside high inflation in South Asia is Pakistan, where inflation hit a three-year high in April (see Chart 7 above). The latest twist in Pakistan’s never-ending cycle of political uncertainty comes from the ousted Prime Minister Imran Khan. The former PM, who commands an unusual popular support group due to his fame as a cricketer prior to entering politics, is demanding fresh elections and otherwise threatening to hold mass protests. Pakistan’s new coalition government and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who came to power amid parliamentary intrigues, are refusing elections and ultimatums. From a structural perspective Pakistan is characterized by a weak economy and an unusually influential military. Now it faces high inflation and rising food prices – indeed it is one of the countries that is most dangerously exposed to the Russia-Ukraine war as it depends on these two for over 70% of its grain imports. Bottom Line: MSCI Sri Lanka has underperformed the MSCI EM index by 58.3% this year to date. Pakistan has underperformed the same index by 41.6% over the same period. Against this backdrop, we remain strategic sellers of both bourses. Instability in these countries is also one  of the factors behind our strategic assessment of India as a country with a growing domestic policy consensus. South Asia: India’s Fiscal Populism And Geopolitics Inflation is less rampant in India, although still troublesome. Consumer prices nearly jumped to an 8-year high in April (see Chart 7). With a loaded state election calendar due over the next 12-18 months, the jump in inflation naturally triggered a series of mitigating policy responses. Ban On Wheat Exports: India produces 14% of the world’s wheat and 11% of grains, and exports 5% and 7%, respectively. India’s exports could make a large profit in the context of global shortages. But Prime Minister Narendra Modi is entering into the political end of the business cycle, with key state elections due that will have an impact on the ruling party’s political standing two years before the next federal election. He fears political vulnerability if exports continue amid price pressures at home. The emphasis on food security is typical but also bespeaks a lack of commitment to economic reform. Chart 8India's Real Interest Rates Fall India's Real Interest Rates Fall India's Real Interest Rates Fall Surprise Rate Hikes: The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) increased the policy repo rate by 40 basis points at an unscheduled meeting on May 4, thereby implementing its first rate hike since August 2018. With real rates in India lower than those in China or Brazil (Chart 8), the RBI will be forced to expedite its planned rate hikes through 2022. Tax Cuts On Fuel: India’s central government also announced steep cuts in excise duty on fuel. This is another populist measure that reduces political pressures but fails to encourage the private sector to adjust.  These measures will help rein in inflation but the rate hikes will weigh on economic growth while the tax cuts will add to India’s fiscal deficit. Indeed, India is resorting to fiscal populism with key state elections looming. Geopolitical risk is less of a concern for India – indeed the Ukraine war has strengthened its bargaining position. In the short run, India benefits from the ability to buy arms and especially cheap oil from Russia while the EU imposes an embargo. But over the long run its economy and security can be strengthened by greater interest from the US and its allies, recently highlighted by the fourth meeting of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) and the launch of the US’s Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF). These initiatives are modest but they highlight the US’s need to replace China with India and ASEAN over time, a trend that no US administration can reverse now because of the emerging Russo-Chinese strategic alliance. At the same time, the Quad underscores India’s maritime interests and hence the security benefits India can gain from aligning its economy and navy with the other democracies. Bottom Line: Fiscal populism in the context of high commodity prices is negative for Indian equities. However, our views on Russia, the Middle East, and China all point to a sharper short-term spike in commodity prices that ultimately drives the world economy deeper into stagflation or recession. Therefore we are booking a 22.5% profit on our tactical decision to go long Brazilian financials relative to Indian equities.   Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com   Ritika Mankar, CFA Editor/Strategist ritika.mankar@bcaresearch.com   Chart 9Russia: GeoRisk Indicator Russia: GeoRisk Indicator Russia: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 10Other Measures Of Russian Geopolitical Risk Other Measures Of Russian Geopolitical Risk Other Measures Of Russian Geopolitical Risk Chart 11China: GeoRisk Indicator China: GeoRisk Indicator China: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 12United Kingdom: GeoRisk Indicator United Kingdom: GeoRisk Indicator United Kingdom: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 13Germany: GeoRisk Indicator Germany: GeoRisk Indicator Germany: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 14France: GeoRisk Indicator France: GeoRisk Indicator France: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 15Italy: GeoRisk Indicator Italy: GeoRisk Indicator Italy: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 16Canada: GeoRisk Indicator Canada: GeoRisk Indicator Canada: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 17Spain: GeoRisk Indicator Spain: GeoRisk Indicator Spain: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 18Australia: GeoRisk Indicator Australia: GeoRisk Indicator Australia: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 19Taiwan: GeoRisk Indicator Taiwan: GeoRisk Indicator Taiwan: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 20Korea: GeoRisk Indicator Korea: GeoRisk Indicator Korea: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 21Turkey: GeoRisk Indicator Turkey: GeoRisk Indicator Turkey: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 22South Africa: GeoRisk Indicator South Africa: GeoRisk Indicator South Africa: GeoRisk Indicator Chart 23Brazil: GeoRisk Indicator Brazil: GeoRisk Indicator Brazil: GeoRisk Indicator   Footnotes 1     Recent diplomatic flaps between core European leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky reflect Ukraine’s fear that Europe will negotiate a “separate peace” with Russia, i.e. accept Russian territorial conquests in exchange for economic relief. 2     Dmitri Medvedev explicitly states ‘there can be no more talk of any nuclear-free status for the Baltic - the balance must be restored’ in warning Finland and Sweden joining NATO. Medvedev is suggesting that nuclear weapons will be placed in this area where Russia has its Kaliningrad exclave sandwiched between Poland and Lithuania. Guy Faulconbridge, ‘Russia warns of nuclear, hypersonic deployment if Sweden and Finland join NATO’, April 14, 2022, Reuters. 3    See Antony J Blinken, Secretary of State, ‘The Administration’s Approach to the People’s Republic of China’, The George Washington University, Washington D.C., May 26, 2022, state.gov. Additionally, see President Joe Biden’s remarks on China and getting involved military to defend Taiwan in a joint press conference with Japan’s Prime Minister Kishida Fumio. ‘Remarks by President Biden and Prime Minister Kishida Fumio of Japan in Joint Press Conference’, Akasaka Palace, Tokyo, Japan, May 23, 2022, whitehouse.gov.   Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix Section III: Geopolitical Calendar

Executive Summary European Spreads Have Cheapened Up More Than US Spreads European Spreads Have Cheapened Up More Than US Spreads European Spreads Have Cheapened Up More Than US Spreads Corporate bond spreads in the US and Europe have widened since early April, with European credit taking a bigger hit because of worsening growth and inflation momentum. European corporate bond valuations look fairly cheap, both for investment grade and high-yield.  This is true in absolute terms but also relative to the US, where spread valuations are more mixed.  An easing of stagflation fears in Europe is a necessary condition for a valuation convergence with the US. The US investment grade credit curve is steep relative to the overall level of credit spreads, making longer-maturity corporates more attractive. Energy bonds offer the most compelling combination of valuation and fundamental support (from high oil prices) within US investment grade. Within US high-yield, Energy valuations look much less compelling after the recent outperformance. The best medium-term industry values in European credit are in investment grade Financials and high-yield Consumer Cyclicals & Non-Cyclicals. Bottom Line: Continue to favor both US high-yield and European investment grade corporates versus US investment grade.  Stay neutral high-yield exposure on both sides of the Atlantic.  Within Europe, stay up in quality within both investment grade and high-yield until near-term macro risks on growth & inflation subside. Feature Corporate bonds in the US and Europe have gone through a rough patch in recent weeks, underperforming government bonds in response to the “triple threat” of high inflation, tightening monetary policy and slowing growth momentum.  European credit has taken the more severe hit compared to the US, with markets pricing in greater risk premia because of additional regional threats to growth (and inflation) from the Ukraine war. In this Special Report, jointly presented by BCA Research US Bond Strategy and Global Fixed Income Strategy, we assess credit spread valuations in US and European corporates after the latest selloff, across credit tiers, maturities and industry groups.  Stay Cautious On US Corporate Bonds Chart 1US Credit Spreads US Credit Spreads US Credit Spreads In a recent Special Report, we argued in favor of a relatively defensive allocation to US corporate bonds. Specifically, we advised investors to adopt an underweight (2 out of 5) allocation to US investment grade corporates and a neutral (3 out of 5) allocation to US high-yield. Our rationale was that a flat US Treasury curve signaled that we were in the middle-to-late stages of the economic recovery. Additionally, at the time, corporate bond spreads weren’t all that attractive compared to the average levels seen during the last Fed tightening cycle (Chart 1). Spreads have widened somewhat since we downgraded our allocation and, as such, we see some scope for spread tightening during the next few months as inflation rolls over and the Fed lifts rates by no more than what is already priced in the curve. That said, with the Fed in the midst of a tightening cycle, we think it’s unlikely that spreads can stay below average 2017-19 levels for any meaningful length of time. As a result, we maintain our current cautious allocation to US corporate bonds. US High-Yield Versus US Investment Grade The recent period of US corporate bond underperformance can be split into two stages based on the relative performance of investment grade and high-yield. US investment grade underperformed junk in the early stages of the selloff (between September and mid-March), as spread widening was driven by the Fed’s shift toward a more restrictive policy stance and not a meaningful uptick in the perceived risk of a recession and/or default wave (Chart 2A). Chart 2ACorporate Bond Excess Returns* Versus Duration-Times-Spread: September 27, 2021 To March 14, 2022 Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff But recession and default fears started to ramp up in mid-March, and this caused high-yield to join the selloff (Chart 2B). In fact, US investment grade corporates managed to recoup some of their earlier losses while lower-rated junk bonds struggled to keep pace. Chart 2BCorporate Bond Excess Returns* Versus Duration-Times-Spread: March 14, 2022 To Present Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff We contend that the risk of a meaningful uptick in corporate defaults during the next 12 months is low. In fact, we estimate that the US high-yield default rate will fall to between 2.7% and 3.7% during the next year, well below the 5.2% currently priced into junk spreads. Going forward, we expect the US corporate bond landscape to be defined by increasingly restrictive monetary policy and a benign default outlook. As we noted in the aforementioned Special Report, this environment is reminiscent of the 2004-06 Fed tightening cycle when high-yield bonds performed much better than investment grade. Investors should maintain a preference for high-yield over investment grade within an otherwise defensive allocation to US corporate bonds. US Industry Groups Chart 3A shows the performance of US corporate bonds in the early stages of the recent selloff, but this time split by industry group. High-yield Energy sticks out as a strong outperformer, though we also notice that every high-yield sector performed better than its investment grade counterpart. Chart 3ACorporate Bond Excess Returns* Versus Duration-Times-Spread: September 27, 2021 To March 14, 2022 Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Chart 3B once again shows how the relative performance between investment grade and high-yield has flipped since mid-March, though we see that high-yield Energy, Transportation and Utilities have performed better than the rest of the index.  Chart 3BCorporate Bond Excess Returns* Versus Duration-Times-Spread: March 14, 2022 To Present Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Interestingly, despite the strong outperformance of high-yield Energy bonds, investment grade Energy credits performed mostly in line with other investment grade sectors. We believe this presents an excellent opportunity.  The vertical axis of Chart 4A shows our measure of the risk-adjusted spread available in each investment grade industry group. Our risk-adjusted spread is the residual after adjusting for each sector’s credit rating and duration. The horizontal axis shows each sector’s Duration-Times-Spread as a simple measure of risk. Our model shows that Financials, Technology, Energy, Utilities, Communications and Basic Industry all stand out as attractive within the investment grade corporate bond universe. We identify the investment grade Energy sector as a particularly compelling buy. Chart 4AUS Investment Grade Corporate Sector Valuation Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff In a prior report, we demonstrated, unsurprisingly, that the oil price is an important determinant of whether Energy bonds perform better or worse than the rest of the corporate index. With our commodity strategists calling for the Brent crude oil price to average $122/bbl next year, this will provide strong support to Energy bond returns. Cheap starting valuations for investment grade Energy bonds make them look even more compelling. Chart 4B repeats our valuation exercise but for high-yield industry groups. Within high-yield, we find that Financials, Transportation, Communications and Consumer sectors stand out as attractive. Interestingly, high-yield Energy bonds now look slightly expensive compared to the rest of the junk bond universe, a result of the sector’s recent incredibly strong performance. Chart 4BUS High-Yield Corporate Sector Valuation Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff US Credit Curve We define the credit curve as the difference in option-adjusted spread between the “Long Maturity” and “Intermediate Maturity” sub-indexes for each investment grade credit tier, as defined by Bloomberg. We exclude high-yield from this analysis because very few high-yield bonds are classified as “Long Maturity”. To analyze the credit curve, we observe that credit curves tend to be steeper when credit spreads are tight, and vice-versa. This is because tight spreads indicate that the perceived near-term risk of default is low. As a result, short-maturity spreads tend to be lower than spreads at the long-end of the curve. Conversely, a wide spread environment indicates that the perceived near-term risk of default is high, and this risk will be more reflected in shorter maturity credits. Charts 5A, 5B and 5C show the slopes of the credit curves for Aa, A and Baa-rated securities. Immediately we notice that credit curves are positively sloped in each case, and also that each credit curve is somewhat steeper than would be predicted based on the average spread for the overall credit tier. Chart 5AAa-Rated Credit Curve Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Chart 5BA-Rated Credit Curve Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Chart 5CBaa-Rated Credit Curve Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff This strongly suggests that investors should favor long-maturity over short-maturity US investment grade corporate bonds. European Corporates Look Cheap Vs. US Equivalents – For Patient Investors Chart 6European Credit Spreads At Past 'Non-Crisis' Peaks European Credit Spreads At Past 'Non-Crisis' Peaks European Credit Spreads At Past 'Non-Crisis' Peaks Turning to the euro area, the Bloomberg investment grade OAS and high-yield OAS currently sit at 167bps and 490bps, respectively (Chart 6). These levels are well below the peaks seen during the 2020 COVID recession and the 2011/12 European debt crisis, but are in line with the spread widening episodes in 2014/15 and 2018. Our preferred measure of credit spread valuation, 12-month breakeven spreads, show that European investment grade and high-yield spreads are in the 75th and 67th percentile of outcomes, respectively, dating back to the inception of the euro in 1998 (Chart 7).1 These are both higher compared to the breakeven percentile rankings for US investment grade (48%) and US high-yield (52%). The gap between the breakeven percentile rankings for investment grade bonds in the euro area versus the US is the widest seen over the past two decades.  That gap reflects the fact that European economic growth has softened versus the US according to the S&P Global manufacturing PMIs, while European inflation has accelerated towards very elevated US levels (Chart 8).  Chart 7European Spreads Have Cheapened Up More Than US Spreads European Spreads Have Cheapened Up More Than US Spreads European Spreads Have Cheapened Up More Than US Spreads Chart 8European Corporate Underperformance Reflects Relative Growth & Inflation European Corporate Underperformance Reflects Relative Growth & Inflation European Corporate Underperformance Reflects Relative Growth & Inflation Both of those trends are a product of the Ukraine war, which has led to a massive spike in European energy costs given the region's huge reliance on Russian energy supplies, particularly for natural gas. While the US has also suffered a massive increase in its own energy bills, the inflation spike has been higher in Europe, leading to a bigger drag on economic confidence and growth. Thus, the widening spread differential between corporate bonds in Europe relative to the US likely reflects a growth-related risk premium. Chart 9A Turning Point For European Corporate Bond Performance? A Turning Point For European Corporate Bond Performance? A Turning Point For European Corporate Bond Performance? As euro area inflation has ratcheted higher, so have expectations of ECB monetary tightening. The euro area overnight index swap (OIS) curve now discounts 172bps over the next 12 months, a huge swing from the start of 2022 when markets were expecting the European Central Bank (ECB) to stand pat on the interest rate front. In comparison, markets are pricing in another 224bps of Fed tightening over the next 12 months, even after the Fed has already delivered 75bps of tightening since March. Importantly, the gap between our 12-month discounters, which measure one-year-ahead interest rate changes discounted into OIS curves, for the US and Europe has proven to be a reliable leading indicator – by around nine months - of the relative year-over-year excess returns (on a USD-hedged basis) of European and US corporate bonds, especially for investment grade (Chart 9). The fact that this is a leading relationship suggests that the upward repricing of ECB rate expectations seen so far in 2022 is not yet a reason to turn more cyclically negative on European corporate bonds versus the US. The earlier upward repricing of expected Fed tightening is the more relevant factor, and is signaling that both US investment grade and high-yield corporates should underperform European equivalents over at least the rest of 2022.  BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy already has a recommended allocation along those lines, with an overweight to euro area investment grade and an underweight to US investment grade. While the trade has underperformed of late, the combined messages from the relative 12-month breakeven spread rankings (cheaper European valuations) and 12-month discounters (the Fed is further ahead in the tightening cycle) leads us to stick with that relative cross-Atlantic tilt. The main risk to that stance is any deterioration of the flow of energy supplies from Russia to Europe that results in a stagflationary outcome of a bigger growth slowdown with even faster inflation. That is a scenario that would make it difficult for the ECB to back down from its recent hawkish forward guidance, resulting in European corporate spreads incorporating an even wider risk premium.  Given that near-term uncertainty, we are advocating that investors maintain no relative tilt on more growth-sensitive, and riskier, European high-yield relative to the US – stay neutral on both. Stay Up In Quality On European Corporates Looking at euro area corporate debt across credit ratings and maturity buckets, there are few compelling immediate valuation stories in absolute terms, although there are potential opportunities unfolding on a relative basis.  Within investment grade, credit quality curves have steepened during the recent selloff, with lower-rated credit seeing larger spread widening (Chart 10). The gap between Baa-rated and A-rated European corporate spreads now sits at 52bps, right in the middle of the 25-75bps range since 2014. In high-yield, the gap between Ba-rated and B-rated credit spreads is 222bps, and the gap between B-rated and Caa-rated spreads is 370bps (Chart 11) – both are still below the previous peaks in those relationships seen in 2012, 2015 and 2020. Chart 10European IG Credit Quality Curve Can Steepen ##br##More European IG Credit Quality Curve Can Steepen More European IG Credit Quality Curve Can Steepen More Chart 11European HY Credit Quality Curve Still Below Previous Peaks European HY Credit Quality Curve Still Below Previous Peaks European HY Credit Quality Curve Still Below Previous Peaks For both investment grade and high-yield, there is still room for credit curves to steepen if European growth expectations continue to deteriorate. However, when looking at spread valuations across the credit quality spectrum, and across maturity buckets, euro area corporate spreads look much cheaper than US equivalents. In Chart 12, we show a snapshot of the current 12-month breakeven percentile rankings for individual credit quality tiers and maturity groups, for investment grade and high-yield in the euro area and US.  The relative attractiveness of European credit relative to the US is evident, with European spreads now at higher percentile rankings across all quality tiers and maturity buckets. The largest gaps between 12-month breakeven percentile rankings are in the +10 year maturity bucket, the AAA-rated and AA-rated investment grade credit tiers, and the Ba-rated high-yield credit tier. This suggests any trades favoring European corporates versus the US should stay up in credit quality. Chart 12Corporate Spread Valuations By Maturity & Credit Rating Favor Europe Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Comparing European & US Industry Spread Valuations When looking at the industry composition of the euro area and US corporate bond indices, there are a few major notable differences. Within investment grade, there is a greater concentration of Energy and Technology names in the US, while Financials are more represented in the European index (Chart 13).  Those same three industries also have the largest relative weightings in the high-yield indices (Chart 14), although there is also a slightly larger weighting of high-yield Transportation companies in Europe compared to the US.  This means that a bet on European credit versus the US is essentially a bet on European Financials versus US Energy and Technology. Chart 13Investment Grade Corporate Bond Market Cap Weights Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Chart 14High-Yield Corporate Bond Market Cap Weights Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff When looking at the same sector metrics that were shown earlier in this report for the US – comparing risk-adjusted spreads to Duration-Times-Spread – we find some interesting cross-Atlantic valuation differentials. For investment grade in Europe (Chart 15), only Energy and Financials have positive risk-adjusted spread valuations (after controlling for duration and credit quality), while having the highest level of risk expressed via Duration-Times-Spread. This contrasts to the US where more sectors have positive risk-adjusted spreads - Energy, Financials, Utilities, Basic Industry and Communications. Investors should favor the latter three industries in the US relative to Europe. Chart 15Euro Area Investment Grade Corporate Sector Valuation Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Within high-yield in Europe, Energy and Financials also offer positive risk-adjusted valuations, but so do Consumer Cyclicals and Consumer Non-Cyclicals (Chart 16). This lines up similarly to US high-yield valuations. The notable valuation gaps exist in Transportation and Communications, which look cheap in the US and expensive in Europe, creating potential cross-Atlantic relative value trade opportunities between those sectors (and within an overall neutral allocation to junk in both regions). Chart 16Euro Area High-Yield Corporate Sector Valuation Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Looking For Opportunities In US & European Corporates After The Recent Selloff Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 12-month breakeven spreads measure the amount of spread widening that would be necessary to make the return on corporate bonds equal to that of duration-matched government bonds over a one-year horizon.  The spread is calculated as a ratio of the index OAS and index duration for the relevant credit market. We look at the historical percentile ranking of that ratio to make a more “apples for apples” comparison of spreads that factors in index duration changes over time. Recommended Portfolio Specification Other Recommendations Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns

Executive Summary Selloffs across financial markets and evidence of decelerating growth have reminded us to play it close to the vest, but they haven't made us bearish. The stability of intermediate- and long-run inflation expectations suggests that the inflation genie has not yet gotten out of the bottle and that the Fed will be able to hold off on squashing the expansion until late 2023 or early 2024. Households' willingness to dip into their excess savings to maintain their spending in the face of inflationary pressures bodes well for the economy for the remaining year and a half that the excess savings cushion can be expected to last. The definitive causes of reduced labor force participation continue to elude researchers but we expect participation will improve over the rest of the year as the low-paid workers responsible for the exodus return to the grind. The Fed Fever Has Broken The Fed Fever Has Broken The Fed Fever Has Broken Bottom Line: Investors have no end of things to worry about, but we remain disposed to see the glass as half-full. We expect the expansion to continue at least into the second half of 2023 and that risk assets will generate positive excess returns over Treasuries and cash for the next twelve months. Feature We have begun meeting clients face-to-face again, in addition to continuing with conference calls. Our discussions with investors and colleagues highlight how uncertain the market and economic landscapes remain. Conditions remain especially uncertain and our views depend on the flow of data; as more pieces of the puzzle emerge, the way we assemble it is subject to change. Conviction Levels In Uncertain Times You are among the optimists at BCA and have been for a while. Are the equity selloff and the current slowdown making you nervous? Do you still see the glass as half-full? It’s our job to be nervous. The way we see the money management ecosystem, managers are responsible for worrying for their clients and we’re responsible for worrying for the managers. We continually ask how we could be getting it wrong and actively seek out information that challenges our view. We are neither foolish nor inexperienced enough to be overconfident; we’re always looking over our shoulder and our head has been on a swivel ever since the pandemic arrived. Related Report  US Investment StrategyIt All Depends On Whom You Ask The recent equity decline and growth deceleration have not materially changed our already low conviction level. All investment researchers look backward to look forward. That is to say that we review past interactions between macro variables and financial assets for guidance about future interactions. We even build regression models to formalize our empirical studies, though we keep them in their proper place. We know that models have blind spots and do not rely solely on them any more than we would change lanes on the highway based only on a glance at our rear-view mirrors. A central challenge of the last two-plus years has been that real-time conditions are so unusual that there is little historical framework for evaluating them. Much of what has occurred over that stretch has lacked a close precedent: vast swaths of the economy had not previously been idled in the interest of public safety; Congress did not appropriate 25% of a year’s GDP for distribution to households, businesses and state and local governments in any prior 13-month stretch; job losses had not been so starkly concentrated among unskilled workers while leaving knowledge workers largely unscathed; aggregate household savings and net worth have never risen so much, so fast; and central banks have launched campaigns that would make William McChesney Martin’s head spin, much less Walter Bagehot’s. The scope of the economic challenges and the novelty of the policy responses limit the usefulness of analytical methods that depend on the notion that the future will largely resemble the past. It is therefore too soon to tell if we should be more nervous. As we write, the S&P 500 has blasted 8% off its intraday lows five sessions ago and incoming economic data continue to resist a blanket bullish or bearish interpretation. We empathize with investors’ impatience; one would think that the key macro questions should be settled by now, given how long we’ve been discussing them. They are not settled, though, and we will revisit open debates as new data arrive. The Term Structure Of Inflation Expectations Real-time inflation prints are terrible and much more concerning than tame inflation expectations. Why are you focusing almost exclusively on inflation expectations? We have been keeping a close eye on the course of inflation expectations over time, or their term structure, ever since inflation began to emerge from its extended hibernation. As unsettling as it has been to witness 40-year highs in inflation, we have taken solace from the fact that market prices have uniformly indicated that businesses and investors expect that inflation will recede to familiar levels over the longer run. As indicated by the arrows in the right-hand column, long-term inflation expectations are considerably lower than near-term expectations as implied by the TIPS and nominal Treasury markets (Table 1, top panel) and directly indicated by CPI swaps (Table 1, bottom panel). Expressed as a continuous time series, neither the Treasury (Chart 1, top panel) nor the CPI swaps (Chart 1, bottom panel) market has wavered in its view that high inflation will not persist beyond the near term. Table 1The Inflations Expectations Curve Is Sharply Inverted Another Round Of Questions Another Round Of Questions   That is important because it suggests that neither businesses nor investors will need to adjust their strategies to accommodate a lasting upward inflection in price pressures. For businesses, that means that they don’t foresee a need to fight tooth and nail to pass along increased costs. Investors continue to be content with nominal long-term Treasury yields vastly below current year-over year inflation, investment-grade corporate yields that are about half of it and high-yield corporate yields that are a percentage point below it. Chart 1Investors And Businesses Don't Foresee A Lasting Change ... Another Round Of Questions Another Round Of Questions ​​​​​​ Chart 2... And Neither Do Households ... And Neither Do Households ... And Neither Do Households Although high inflation seems to have spooked the households responding to University of Michigan consumer sentiment survey takers, they remain unperturbed about its long-run direction. The difference between University of Michigan respondents’ long-run and near-term inflation expectations remains around multi-year lows (Chart 2), as 5-year expectations have held steady at 3% for three straight months. The inference that University of Michigan survey respondents expect high inflation to be fleeting is supported by their views on the advisability of big-ticket purchases. The share of respondents who deem it a bad time to buy a car because prices are (temporarily) high remains near all-time high levels (Chart 3, middle panel), while those who think buying now is auspicious because prices won’t come down is near all-time lows (Chart 3, top panel). The difference between the two continues to set record lows (Chart 3, bottom panel). The consensus view on consumer durables purchases is the same – now is a bad time to buy because high prices won’t last (Chart 4). The economic takeaway is that consumers are willing to bide their time until prices come back to earth and will not exacerbate upward price pressures by clamoring to buy before prices go even higher. Chart 3Consumers Are Willing To Wait Out Supply-And-Demand Imbalances, ... Consumers Are Willing To Wait Out Supply-And-Demand Imbalances, ... Consumers Are Willing To Wait Out Supply-And-Demand Imbalances, ... Chart 4... Instead Of Exacerbating Them By Rushing To Buy Now ... Instead Of Exacerbating Them By Rushing To Buy Now ... Instead Of Exacerbating Them By Rushing To Buy Now Bottom Line: Economic participants adjust their behavior based on their long-run inflation expectations. If they think the current fever will break, businesses, investors and consumers will not act in ways that fuel a self-reinforcing cycle in which high prices beget still higher prices. The longer that economic actors expect inflation pressures will abate, the greater the chance that they will. Interest Rates And The Fed You’ve been calling for interest rates to stop backing up, but it still feels like they only want to rise. It has been quite a ride from 1.72% on 10-year Treasuries from the beginning of March to 3.12% at the beginning of May, but we have gotten 40 basis points of retracement over the last three weeks (Chart 5). The nearly unanimous view that rates would keep rising was a contrarian sign that the move may have been played out. Reduced expectations for Fed rate hikes have also played a part in bringing yields down. After peaking at 3.45% on May 3rd, the day before the FOMC wrapped up its May meeting, the expected fed funds rate in twelve months is down to 3.09% (Chart 6). Chart 5The Benchmark Treasury Yield ... The Benchmark Treasury Yield ... The Benchmark Treasury Yield ... ​​​​​ Chart 6... Has Moved With Rate-Hike Expectations ... Has Moved With Rate-Hike Expectations ... Has Moved With Rate-Hike Expectations ​​​​​​ Chart 7Everything, All At Once Everything, All At Once Everything, All At Once While the prevailing view among commentators is that the Fed waited too long to begin removing monetary accommodation, financial markets have moved swiftly to price in a policy shift. Chair Powell and his colleagues have been taking every opportunity to communicate their seriousness about combating inflation and financial conditions have responded to their public relations campaign without delay (Chart 7, top panel) – yields have backed up (Chart 7, second panel), spreads have widened (Chart 7, third panel), stocks have fallen (Chart 7, fourth panel) and the dollar has surged (Chart 7, bottom panel). Our Global Investment Strategy colleagues argue that the Fed may soon perceive that tighter financial conditions threaten its soft landing goals and dial back the hawkish rhetoric if inflation eases in line with our house view. The Fed’s hawkish surprises might be behind us for the time being. Lightning Round You have argued that households will be more inclined to spend their excess pandemic savings than hoard them and that those savings will provide a buffer against inflation’s bite. The latest Personal Income Report showed that April’s savings rate was nearly half of its pre-pandemic level; are you now worried that the savings are going too fast to cushion the economy? We stand by our view that households will spend their excess savings and continue to think our guesstimate that they will spend half of them will prove to be conservative. We consider the declining savings rate – 6% in January, 5.9% in February, 5% in March and 4.4% in April, versus February 2020’s 8.3% – to be good news, indicating that socked-away stimulus payments are having the beneficial time-release effect of keeping the consumer afloat despite high inflation. We calculate that April’s accelerated consumption as a share of disposable income amounted to $60 billion of dis-savings relative to our no-pandemic baseline estimate, knocking excess savings down to $2,150 billion. At that rate, one-half of the excess balance will last for another 17 months. Will labor force participation ever get back to its pre-pandemic levels? If it doesn’t, upward wage pressures could be greater than you expect, and a wage-price spiral could be brewing. No one has satisfactorily determined why participation remains muted. It seems most likely to us that COVID fears, as indicated by the Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey, are the principal driver. Lavish stimulus measures may have played a role as well, though their tailwind has surely faded for households at the bottom rungs of the wealth and income distribution. We expect that participation will recover across the rest of the year as COVID morphs from acute threat to manageable nuisance and as the low-income workers who account for the shrinkage in the labor force (Chart 8) are pressed by financial exigency to return to the grind (Chart 9). Chart 8Those Who Have Left The Work Force ... Those Who Have Left The Work Force ... Those Who Have Left The Work Force ... ​​​​​ Chart 9... May Have To Come Back Soon ... May Have To Come Back Soon ... May Have To Come Back Soon ​​​​​​ What is your view on inflation? If you think recession fears are overblown, you must not think inflation will be bad enough over the rest of the year to induce the Fed to kill the expansion. The difference between our view and the recession-is-imminent crowd’s is merely one of timing. We expect inflation will abate enough over the rest of the year that the Fed won’t have to break up the party until late 2023/early 2024. We do think, however, that Congress and the Fed overstimulated demand in the wake of the pandemic and sowed the seeds for the eventual end of the expansion and the bull markets in equities and credit. We don’t think the overstimulation will manifest itself until late 2023 or early 2024, however, so we expect that the expansion and the bull markets in risk assets will trundle along for another year. Housekeeping We planned to dial up the risk exposures in our ETF portfolio this week, in line with BCA’s recent tactical equity upgrade to overweight from neutral. It isn’t always easy to make tactical recommendations on a weekly publication schedule and while waiting out a five-and-a-half-hour flight delay at O'Hare last Friday, we wished that we could have pushed a button to increase our equity allocation. Now that the S&P 500 has rallied over 6.5% week-to-date as we go to press, we are going to hold off on making any adjustments until next week at the earliest. With apparent short-term resistance just 1% away at 4,200 (the previous triple-bottom support level), we expect that we may find a better entry point and are willing to wait patiently for it.   Doug Peta, CFA Chief US Investment Strategist dougp@bcaresearch.com