Money/Credit/Debt

Highlights Duration: Treasury yields will continue to rise as a December Fed rate hike is priced in. A surge in bullish dollar sentiment between now and December would cause us to back away from our below-benchmark duration stance. Spread Product: Maintain a neutral allocation to spread product, favoring convexity over credit risk. A surge in bullish dollar sentiment between now and December would cause us to downgrade spread product relative to Treasuries. TIPS: The increased sensitivity of TIPS breakevens to core inflation argues for a continued overweight position in TIPS relative to nominal Treasuries. Sovereign Debt: Continue to favor U.S. corporate credit over USD-denominated sovereign government debt within a neutral allocation to spread product. Feature About one month ago, we outlined how we expected our investment strategy to evolve over the remainder of this year and into 2017.1 Our continued expectation that the Fed will lift rates in December leads us to maintain below-benchmark portfolio duration and a neutral allocation to spread product2 until a December rate hike has been fully discounted by the market. Chart 1Dollar Sentiment: A Key Indicator Dollar Sentiment: A Key Indicator Dollar Sentiment: A Key Indicator Beyond December, our investment strategy will depend largely on how the dollar responds to an upward re-rating of rate expectations. Strong dollar appreciation would likely cause us to reverse our below-benchmark duration stance and become even more cautious on spread product. Conversely, a tame dollar could mean that the sell-off in bonds and rally in spreads have further to run. The dollar has appreciated by close to +2% since early September and bullish sentiment toward the dollar has also edged higher (Chart 1). However, so far the increases appear muted compared to the rapid dollar appreciation that occurred in the run-up to last December's rate hike. The reason we care about the dollar is that a stronger currency represents a tightening of financial conditions that acts to depress expectations of future economic growth. This can spell trouble for risk assets and also lower the market-implied odds of future rate hikes. For example, spread product was performing well last year until rate hike expectations started to move higher in late October. As the market began to anticipate a December Fed rate hike, it did not take long for the combination of higher rate expectations and increasingly bullish dollar sentiment to weigh on risk assets (Chart 2). The Market Vane survey of bullish sentiment toward the dollar surged above 80% last December, and this tightening of financial conditions is what prompted the sell-off in spread product and sharp decline in Treasury yields that kicked off 2016. Chart 2More Bullish Dollar Sentiment Is A Risk For Spread Product More Bullish Dollar Sentiment Is A Risk For Spread Product More Bullish Dollar Sentiment Is A Risk For Spread Product With last year's example in mind, the relevant question for current investment strategy is: How much dollar appreciation can the market tolerate before Treasury yields reverse their uptrend and credit spreads start to widen? To answer that question we make an assessment of U.S. and global growth relative to this time last year. All else equal, if U.S. growth is improved compared to last year, then it should require a greater dollar appreciation to have a similar impact on yields and spreads. Relatedly, if the growth outlook outside of the U.S. is improved, then it would mean that the dollar's reaction to rising U.S. rate expectations might not be as strong. On this note, there is some evidence pointing toward a more resilient U.S. and global economy than at this time last year. In the U.S., our preferred leading indicators suggest that growth contributions from capital spending, housing, net exports, government spending and inventories should all move higher in the coming quarters (Chart 3). This should act to offset a likely moderation in consumer spending growth (Chart 4). All in all, the domestic U.S. growth outlook appears similar to - if not slightly better than - what was seen at this time last year. There is more cause for optimism in the global growth indicators. The aggregate global PMI and LEI are tracking close to levels seen last year, but rising diffusion indexes suggest that further increases are likely (Chart 5). Already, manufacturing PMIs in all the major economic blocs have entered clear uptrends (Chart 5, bottom two panels). This suggests that the global growth outlook is actually much brighter than at this time last year, and improved diffusion indexes suggest that the global recovery has also become more synchronized. Chart 3U.S. Growth Outlook Improving... bca.usbs_wr_2016_10_25_c3 bca.usbs_wr_2016_10_25_c3 Chart 4...Outside Of Consumer Spending bca.usbs_wr_2016_10_25_c4 bca.usbs_wr_2016_10_25_c4 Chart 5Global Growth On The Upswing Global Growth On The Upswing Global Growth On The Upswing The implication of a U.S. economic outlook that is broadly similar to last year and an improved outlook for global growth is that the U.S. dollar may not react as strongly to rising Fed rate hike expectations in 2016 as it did in 2015. If this turns out to be the case, then the performance of spread product should also be more resilient and the uptrend in Treasury yields is less likely to reverse. Bottom Line: We continue to track the dollar and dollar sentiment closely to inform our near-term investment strategy. While dollar sentiment has edged higher, it has not yet reached the elevated levels seen last year. A more synchronized global growth recovery makes such a spike in bullish dollar sentiment less likely this time around. What Is A High Pressure Economy? Chart 6What A "High Pressure Economy" Looks Like bca.usbs_wr_2016_10_25_c6 bca.usbs_wr_2016_10_25_c6 Fed Chair Janet Yellen introduced a new buzzword to the market two weeks ago when she suggested in a speech3 that "it might be possible to reverse the adverse supply-side effects [of the financial crisis] by temporarily running a 'high-pressure economy' with robust aggregate demand and a tight labor market." Some investors took this to mean that the Fed would be increasingly tolerant of inflation overshooting its 2% target. We think this interpretation is incorrect, although we do think that Yellen's description of a "high pressure economy" provides a lot of information about the Fed's reaction function. More than anything, Yellen's speech was a response to recent trends in the labor market. The downtrend in the unemployment rate started to abate late last year, even though the economy has continued to add jobs at an average pace of just under +200k per month. A sharp rebound in the labor force participation rate has prevented the unemployment rate from falling, despite robust job growth (Chart 6). It is this dynamic that Yellen refers to when she talks about a "high pressure economy". Essentially, her theory suggests that, despite the low unemployment rate, the economy might be able to continue to add jobs without inflation spiking higher. Put differently, the unemployment rate might be less useful as an input to the Fed's forecast of future inflation than in past cycles. The key implication for investors is that if the Fed doesn't trust the unemployment rate to provide a signal about future inflation, then it is forced to rely on the actual inflation data for guidance. In our view, core PCE and core CPI inflation are now the two most important inputs to the Fed's reaction function. On that note, while last week's September core CPI release was soft, both core CPI and core PCE remain in uptrends that began in early 2015. Further, diffusion indexes suggest that these uptrends will persist (Chart 7). The Fed's increased focus on core inflation also has implications for our TIPS call. The sensitivity of TIPS breakevens to realized core inflation has shifted higher since the Great Recession (Chart 8). In our view, this has occurred because of how the zero-lower-bound on interest rates has constrained the Fed's ability to influence investor expectations. Chart 7The Inflation Uptrend Is Intact bca.usbs_wr_2016_10_25_c7 bca.usbs_wr_2016_10_25_c7 Chart 8TIPS Breakevens & Core Inflation TIPS Breakevens & Core Inflation TIPS Breakevens & Core Inflation When the fed funds rate was well above the zero-lower-bound, investors could reasonably assume that the Fed would act to offset any temporary price shocks. As such, long-maturity TIPS breakevens remained in a relatively narrow range and were mostly influenced by perceptions about the stance of Fed policy. In a zero-lower-bound world, investors can reasonably question whether the Fed has the ability to offset a deflationary price shock. As such, inflation expectations are increasingly driven by the actual inflation data rather than the Fed. With the Fed and the market both increasingly taking their cues from the actual inflation data, it means that the Fed will likely remain sufficiently accommodative for core PCE to return to target and also that TIPS breakevens will move higher alongside the trend in realized inflation. Bottom Line: The increased sensitivity of TIPS breakevens to core inflation argues for a continued overweight position in TIPS relative to nominal Treasuries. Sovereign Credit: A Dollar Story Chart 9Sovereign Debt & The Dollar Sovereign Debt & The Dollar Sovereign Debt & The Dollar As noted above, in the current environment the path of the U.S. dollar takes on increased importance for our entire portfolio strategy. However, there is one sector of the fixed income market where the dollar is always paramount - USD-denominated sovereign debt. Specifically, we refer to the Barclays Sovereign index which consists of the U.S. dollar denominated debt of foreign governments, mostly emerging markets.4 In the long-run, the performance of sovereign debt relative to equivalently-rated and duration-matched U.S. corporate credit tends to track movements in the dollar and bullish sentiment toward the dollar (Chart 9). When the dollar appreciates it makes USD-denominated debt more expensive to service from the perspective of a foreign issuer, and therefore causes sovereign debt to underperform domestic alternatives. As stated above, we do not anticipate a near-term spike in the dollar, like what was witnessed near the end of last year. However, given that the Fed is much further along in its tightening cycle than other major central banks, the long-run bull market in the U.S. dollar should remain intact. This will continue to be a major headwind for sovereign debt. Further, the recent performance of sovereign debt relative to U.S. credit has bucked its traditional correlations with the dollar. Notice that the beta between sovereign excess returns and the dollar has moved into positive territory (Chart 9, bottom two panels). Historically, the correlation does not remain at these levels for long and sovereign debt should underperform as the more typical negative correlation is re-established. At present, there is not even an attractive valuation argument for sovereign debt relative to U.S. credit. The spread differential between the Sovereign index and an equivalently-rated, duration-matched U.S. credit index is well below zero (Chart 10), and only the USD-debt of Hungary, South Africa, Colombia and Uruguay offer spreads that appear attractive relative to the U.S. Credit index (Chart 11). Chart 10No Spread Pick-Up In Sovereigns No Spread Pick-Up In Sovereigns No Spread Pick-Up In Sovereigns Chart 11USD-Denominated Sovereign Debt By Issuing Country Dollar Watching: An Update Dollar Watching: An Update Bottom Line: Continue to favor U.S. corporate credit over USD-denominated sovereign government debt within a neutral allocation to spread product. Ryan Swift, Vice President U.S. Bond Strategy rswift@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see U.S. Bond Strategy Weekly Report, "Dollar Watching", dated September 13, 2016, available at usbs.bcaresearch.com 2 We favor negatively convex assets (MBS) over credit within a neutral allocation to spread product, on the view that negatively convex assets will outperform as yields head higher in advance of a December rate hike. In anticipation of a December Fed rate hike we are also maintain a short position in the December 2017 Eurodollar futures contract as well as positions in 2/10 and 10/30 curve flatteners. The three trades have returned: +20bps, -23bps and +4bps respectively. 3 http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/yellen20161014a.htm 4 The largest issuers in the Barclays Sovereign Index are: Mexico (22%), Philippines (14%) and Colombia (11%). Fixed Income Sector Performance Recommended Portfolio Specification

Highlights Our protector portfolio is a combination of assets that have a low or negative correlation with equities that give investors some downside protection. Replacing cash and/or Treasuries with our protector portfolio in 60-30-10 or 60-40 benchmark portfolios would have produced superior returns since 2011. We continue to advocate allocating investments to our protector portfolio in the near term as it represents an effective hedge against immediate risks such as a negative market reaction to the upcoming elections and/or disappointing third quarter profits. Feature Both equities and bonds are under pressure, as a higher likelihood of a December interest rate hike is beginning to be priced in at the same time as nervousness about Q3 earnings results has intensified. This confluence of factors - less liquidity and earnings disappointment - has been the central argument of our defensive portfolio stance for some time: any handoff from liquidity to growth would be shaky, and potentially premature. Indeed, as we wrote in the September 26 Weekly Report, liquidity conditions will largely remain favorable for risk assets for some time because even with a December rate hike, interest rates are well below equilibrium, i.e. are not restrictive. However, equity investors will suffer through bouts of earnings disappointments, similar to the chronic disappointment in GDP growth. As we show in Chart 1, throughout the economic recovery, expectations for economic growth have been revised lower and are only now finally in line with what we expect is close to reality. As highlighted in last week's report, investors' expectations about earnings are most likely to undergo the same fate because profit margins will remain a lasting headwind: investors have not yet adjusted to this new reality (Chart 2). That will hold equity gains to low single digits, at best. Chart 1Years Of One-Way (Down) Revisions bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c1 bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c1 Chart 2Earnings Set To Disappoint? bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c2 bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c2 Overall, our view is that the economic backdrop is stable as there are low odds of a recession-inducing monetary tightening occurring, and we do not see any other negative shocks that are concerning enough to trigger a recession. Still, above and beyond our worry about profit disappointments, many client queries are currently focused on U.S. election risks. On September 26, we warned of market volatility leading up to the election, since investors may continue to assign too low odds of a Trump Presidential win. However, we would expect markets to quickly recover - at least until Trump reveals his true policy colors. We took a page from the market reaction to Brexit as a possible guideline to the outcome of Trump winning the election, i.e. the election is ultimately won by a non-status quo candidate. Investors will recall that the post-vote U.K. equity market reaction to Brexit was short-lived but savage. However, the uncertainty around the upheaval of institutions and structures in the euro area and the U.K. are far greater than the election of a non-conformist U.S. President within an institutionally sound system with checks and balances. All of that said, we recognize that we could be wrong and that the U.S. election has taken over the pole position on investors' list of concerns. More specifically, investors are worried about negative financial market fallout from a Trump win.1 So, how should investors hedge the downside risk of these election results? And for that matter, what about other near-term risks? Protector Portfolio Explained This publication has been advocating for some time that investors hold some portion of their capital in a protector portfolio (currently a combination of TIPS, gold and the U.S. dollar). The goal is to find assets with a low or negative correlation to U.S. equities and offer a measure of protection against a steep selloff in stocks. As Chart 3 shows, a portfolio of 60/30/10, where 10% is placed in the protector portfolio, would have outperformed a traditional 60/30/10 allocation in which the 10% is held in straight cash since 2011 (in a ZIRP world). A 60/40 allocation where 40% is placed in the protector portfolio also beats a 60/40 stock/Treasury allocation since 2011. Chart 3Protector Portfolio Enhances Performance ##br## Since 2011 Protector Portfolio Enhances Performance Since 2011 Protector Portfolio Enhances Performance Since 2011 Chart 4Protector Components Are ##br## Negatively Correlated With S&P 500 bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c4 bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c4 The three assets included in our protector portfolio were chosen with specific risks in mind: USD: As the main global reserve currency, the U.S. dollar benefits when global risk aversion is on the rise. Admittedly, when fears have emanated from U.S. soil, the dollar has performed less well compared to other safe-haven assets, such as the Swiss franc and/or Swiss bonds. Nonetheless, for U.S. investors, investing in one's home currency can provide a natural hedge/advantage. In Chart 4, we show the one-year correlation between USD and S&P 500 equity returns. Since 2009, the correlation has been negative and the implication is that by holding USD, investors are already implicitly defensive. Gold: Gold traditionally does well in times of extreme geopolitical uncertainty and also as a hedge against inflation. More recently, gold has done less well as a hedge because the negative correlation between equity prices and gold broke down from 2011 until earlier this year (Chart 4). Gold has once again become negatively correlated with equity prices and we believe it will be an effective safe-haven asset should inflation become a concern. TIPS: Both 10-year TIPS and nominal Treasuries are negatively correlated with U.S. equity returns and both provide some measure of insurance in risk-off periods/phases of economic disappointment. Nonetheless, we prefer TIPS at the moment since they offer a measure of protection against a back-up in inflation expectations (also Chart 4). In sum, our protector portfolio is a combination of assets that are uncorrelated enough with equities to give investors some protection against a range of downside risks. Protector Portfolio: But Beware Buy And Hold Chart 5Protector Buy And Hold Will Not Work bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c5 bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c5 As Chart 2 has shown, our protector portfolio has outperformed both a 60-30-10 and 60-40 portfolio in recent years. However, longer -term performance has been less outstanding (Chart 5). Indeed, adding a constant proportion of safe-haven assets to a balanced portfolio over an extended period underperforms the balanced portfolio benchmark for long stretches of time: there are non-negligible costs associated with holding safe-haven assets over prolonged periods. The bottom line is that timing plays a critical part in investing in safe-haven assets. Owning a fixed share of protector portfolio assets over long horizons will not beat a traditional buy and hold strategy, although superior returns over cash offer a compelling case in a NIRP world. We continue to recommend that investors hedge against downside risk in the form of the protector portfolio - or simply by choosing the safe haven that most closely corresponds as a hedge to the specific risk at hand. However, it is important to know that safe-haven assets fall in and out of favor through time and the protector portfolio will at some point no longer be justified, and/or its components will need to be adjusted. For example, only after 2000 did Treasuries start providing a good hedge against equity corrections. The contrary is true for gold - it acted as one of the most secure investments during corrections until that time, but then became correlated with S&P 500 total returns from 2012-early 2016. That said, gold's coefficient has turned negative again, and it should be viewed as an all-weather safe haven, especially if deflation risks begin to dissipate. The Most Relevant Safe Haven In Case Of A Policy Mistake Chart 6Fed Policy Mistake? Buy Protector Portfolio bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c6 bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c6 As we wrote above, our base investment case is that the prospect of less liquidity and the risk of an earnings disappointment mean that investors should keep a defensive portfolio stance and be prepared for pullbacks in equities in the single digits. However, the Minutes of the latest FOMC meeting highlight that a fairly low threshold has been set for a December interest rate rise. If financial market participants interpret incoming economic information more bearishly than the Fed, then a December rate hike risks being perceived by investors as a policy mistake. Under this scenario, risk assets could be set for a much greater fall, buoying the case for further portfolio insurance. Which safe havens will outperform? We take our cue from the market reaction to the December, 2015 rate hike. In that episode, equity prices fell 12%. The protector portfolio in its current configuration2 increased 10%. The bulk of the appreciation was due to a strong run in gold prices (surely helped in part by massive woes in China) and TIPS (Chart 6). We believe that this basket of assets would once again offer an important buffer against equity losses associated with a policy mistake. The Most Relevant Safe Haven For A Trump Win If a Trump win triggers a correction in risk assets, we would expect the U.S. dollar to rally due to Trump policy uncertainty and heightened geopolitical risk. We noted above that USD does not always rally when a stress event occurs on U.S. soil. However, in the past several weeks, the performance of the dollar as well as Treasury yields has been linked to Trump's probability of winning the election. Whenever the odds of a Trump presidency rise, these risk-off assets have appreciated. And The Most Relevant Lessons From The Election Cycle This month's Geopolitical Strategy Special Report 3 provides a final forecast and implications for the elections. As we note above, we agree that a Trump win is a red herring in terms of the key issues investors face. But we also agree with our geopolitical strategists that there are several important lessons from the election cycle that may have long term ramifications for investors. Below, we highlight the most relevant for financial market participants: The median voter has moved to the left on economic policy. Trump's victory over an army of seasoned, relatively orthodox GOP contenders in the primary exposed the fact that the party's grassroots voters no longer care deeply about fiscal austerity and no longer wish to tolerate the corporate incentive for importing cheap labor. Similarly, demographic trends favoring millennials and minorities (who tend to vote left on economic policies), portends a shift by which the GOP attempts to capture left-leaning voters. Fiscal conservatism (and social conservatism, for that matter) will have less to show by way of official party machinery. The 2016 election campaign has amplified the notion that the news media works in narratives. These narratives work as a filter that preempts and distorts the presentation and, to some extent, reception of facts. This phenomenon was influential in Trump's rise - the first "Twitter" candidacy - as well as his recent decline. Investors cannot be too wary of what the mainstream press or financial "smart money" says about any particular political trend or event. It is essential to separate the wheat from the chaff by using empirics and looking at macro and structural factors to identify the constraints rather than the preferences of candidates or politicians. U.S. Economy: Neither Hot Nor Cold The NFIB survey of small business survey ranks as one of our preferred indicators of U.S. business confidence. The employment related indicators serve as a key input into our payroll model; questions about the pricing environment often provide a good leading/coincident gauge about inflation trends, and; as Chart 7 shows, the labor cost versus pricing series provides an excellent leading indicator for the profit margin outlook. The latter remains in a downtrend, reinforcing our message that profit margins will remain a headwind to earnings growth for still some time. Overall, small business optimism has been generally flat this year, after peaking in late 2014. It is somewhat discouraging that "demand" as a most important problem is no longer falling. Consumption has been one of the more robust areas of growth in the past several years and we expect consumption to continue to outshine other areas of the economy. However, even here, the data should be monitored closely. Chart 7Small Business Concerns (Part 1) bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c7 bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c7 Chart 8Small Business Concerns (Part 2) bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c8 bca.usis_wr_2016_10_17_c8 Retail sales (excluding gasoline and autos) growth has been slowing throughout 2016 and September data did not buck this trend (Chart 8). Results among retailers varied substantially, with growth strongest at building supply stores, sporting goods stores, vehicle dealers and furniture stores. Laggards include electronics and appliance stores - segments that are still under siege from falling prices. The bottom line is that in aggregate, consumption is holding up reasonably well and should continue to do so, as long as employment gains and modest wage growth remain intact. Stay tuned. Lenka Martinek Vice President, U.S. Investment Strategy lenka@bcaresearch.com 1 Our Geopolitical Strategy service concurs that a Trump win is a red herring, i.e. is unlikely to occur and is a distraction from more relevant issues. For more insight, please see Geopolitical Strategy Monthly Report "King Dollar: The Agent Of Righteous Retribution", dated October, 2016, available at gps.bcaresearch.com 2 At the time, the protector portfolio performed slightly less well, as 30-year government bonds were used instead of TIPS. 3 Please see Geopolitical Strategy Special Report "U.S. Election: Final Forecast & Implications", dated October 12, 2016, available at gps.bcaresearch.com Market Calls

Highlights It is premature to position for an equity market handoff from liquidity to growth. Cyclical sectors have overshot the mark in recent months. There is scant evidence from macro variables that cyclical sector earnings validation will materialize, especially if the U.S. dollar continues its stealth appreciation. Defensive sectors are primed to resume their market leadership role. Feature Rotational Correction Beneath the surface, equity markets have behaved as if a handoff to growth from liquidity is underway. Since July, defensives have not benefited from the broad market consolidation and increased volatility (Chart 1). Instead, cyclical sectors have celebrated the easing in financial conditions in recent months. The bounce in oil prices, commensurate narrowing in corporate bond spreads and firming inflation expectations have provided enough fuel for cyclical vs. defensive outperformance. Other financial markets appear to corroborate such a view. The equity-to-bond ratio has firmed. Inflation expectations have risen, partly reflecting commodity price appreciation. Gold prices are down. The Fed is itching to lift interest rates. Long-term global government bond yields have climbed. Even the U.S. dollar is testing the top end of its recent range (Chart 1). All of these factors would suggest that the growth outlook is steadily improving. If so, then a rethink of our defensive portfolio positioning would be imperative. Sectoral trends have reached a critical point. Defensive sectors have unwound overbought conditions, and are close to hitting oversold levels (Chart 2). The interest rate-sensitive consumer discretionary, financials and utilities sectors have already hit deeply oversold levels on the latest blip up in Treasury yields (Chart 2). Cyclical sectors are just starting to roll over from overbought levels. Chart 1The U.S. Dollar Is A Critical Influence The U.S. Dollar Is A Critical Influence The U.S. Dollar Is A Critical Influence Chart 2End Of Rotational Correction? bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c2 bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c2 These dynamics reflect a rotational equity market correction. Indeed, there have been many episodes in the past few years when countertrend sector swings occurred, but each was fleeting and the economy's need for liquidity stayed as strong as ever, ultimately propelling defensive shares back to a leadership position. Is this time different? Below, we revisit a range of indicators that we use to help forecast and time durable shifts in the cyclical vs. defensive trade off. Cyclical Vs. Defensive Checklist Update In our March, 2016 Special Report on cyclical vs. defensive sector strategy, we outlined a checklist of factors that would trigger the need for more aggressive positioning rather than simply riding out the anticipated countertrend move: Broad-based U.S. dollar weakness, particularly against emerging market currencies in countries with large current account deficits. An end to Chinese manufacturing sector deflation. A decisive upturn in global manufacturing purchasing manager's indexes. A return to growth in global export volumes and prices. A resynchronization in global profitability such that U.S. profits were not the only locomotive. A rebound in global inflation expectations. China credibly addressing banking sector weakness to the point where economic growth can reaccelerate rather than move laterally. Of this checklist, items 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7 remain unfulfilled, while items 3 and 6 have moved from a deep negative to a more neutral setting. Financial Variables Offer Modest Cyclical Sector Hope... Financial variables that typically lead the cyclical vs. defensive share price ratio have improved, on the margin, as noted in our March 29th Special Report. Commodity prices bounced on the back of the pause in the U.S. dollar rally, aided more recently by hopes for oil market supply restraint, while developed world equities have lagged behind their emerging market counterparts. The latter is notable, because goods producing cyclical sectors have a tight link with manufacturing-intensive emerging market economies (Chart 3). However, we do not recommend extrapolating these financial market messages, especially since the greenback and commodity prices are starting to reverse. It is also worth noting the bounce in emerging market currencies has been modest, and pales in comparison with the scale of the previous slide (Chart 3). In other words, we are not convinced that EM currency moves are signaling that countries are gaining better access to global funding. Moreover, the back up in global bond yields has not yet produced any meaningful steepening in the U.S. yield curve, which would be a reliable confirming indication that U.S. growth expectations were improving. At the moment, the yield curve is signaling that defensive sectors are now undershooting (Chart 4). Chart 3Some Financial Variables Have Firmed... bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c3 bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c3 Chart 4... But Not All bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c4 bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c4 ... But There Is Still A Dearth Of Fundamental Support Financial variables are only useful when confirmed by economic variables. Global manufacturing surveys have stabilized, but are oscillating around the boom/bust line rather than recording incremental gains. Inventory destocking may have finally run its course, based on the trough in the U.S. business sales-to-inventory ratio (Chart 5, top panel), but it is premature to forecast improvement in final demand. Keep in mind that ex consumption, the U.S. economy is in recession. Heavy truck sales have been an excellent business cycle indicator for decades. Truck orders tend to be an early indicator for activity. Heavy truck orders peaked in 2015, and the shipments-to-inventory ratio is heading rapidly toward recession levels (Chart 5). The risk is that employment cools. Corporate employment decisions are profit-motivated. Wages are currently rising much faster than nominal GDP. That is never a good environment for the labor market (Chart 6). True, wages are up, but productivity is down. While broad-based labor market weakness has yet to materialize, the risks are skewed to the downside. Sinking profits and rising wages warn that the unemployment rate is headed higher (shown inverted, Chart 6). Goods producing employment is rolling over relative to service sector employment, which is often a leading indicator of cyclical vs. defensive relative performance momentum (Chart 7, middle panel). Chart 5Cyclicals Have Overshot Fundamentals bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c5 bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c5 Chart 6Buy Cyclicals When The Economy Overheats bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c6 bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c6 Chart 7Mixed Signals bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c7 bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c7 The time to tilt portfolios in favor of cyclical sectors is when profits and profit margins are expanding at a rate such that the labor market is steadily tightening, creating a self-reinforcing consumption/economic feedback loop that feeds into rising inflation pressures, i.e. when the corporate sector is in a position of financial strength. Defensives often outperform when the unemployment rate is rising. Consumers are still much stronger than the corporate sector, and should remain so even if job growth recedes. Consumer balance sheets have been repaired and savings rates are up. Conversely, the BCA Corporate Health Monitor is deep in deteriorating health territory (Chart 5), as profits are contracting and free cash flow is eroding. That divergence is reflected in economic data. For instance, the producer price index is still deep in deflation relative to the consumer price index, albeit the rate of decay has lessened. The upshot is that a meaningful pricing power advantage exists for businesses that sell to consumers rather than to other businesses. Defensives are much more consumer-oriented than deep cyclical sectors, and move in line with relative pricing power (Chart 7). Little Help From Abroad It does not appear as if external forces will take up any slack from lackluster U.S. growth. The all important emerging market PMI has edged back to the boom/bust line, reflecting the tailwind from monetary easing. However, emerging market inventories have spiked in the last two months (shown inverted, Chart 8), warning against getting too excited about growth. It is notable that emerging markets, and China, have failed to begin deleveraging (Chart 9). Chart 8Global: From Negative To Neutral bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c8 bca.uses_sr_2016_10_17_c8 Chart 9A Bearish Credit Impulse A Bearish Credit Impulse A Bearish Credit Impulse The global credit impulse is negative, especially in commodity-dependent developing economies (Chart 9). It is no wonder that global export prices continue to deflate, and export volumes have slipped back into negative territory (Chart 10). The message is that developed country domestic demand is not yet sufficiently robust to boost global final demand. Instead, growth will continue to be redistributed through foreign exchange resets. While China has opened the fiscal taps, the economic outlook is still only for stabilization rather than growth acceleration. Money growth has surged and the Chinese Keqiang index has climbed off its lows (Chart 11), but we are reluctant to extrapolate these signals. Chart 10Still Deflating Still Deflating Still Deflating Chart 11Not Ready To Bet On China Acceleration Not Ready To Bet On China Acceleration Not Ready To Bet On China Acceleration Credit growth continues to sink and loan demand remains anemic (Chart 11). The speed of the debt build up since the financial crisis has been breathtaking, and undoubtedly included capital misallocation. While the unknown scale of the non-performing loan implications for the banking system is cause for concern, it is notable that the growth in fixed asset investment projects started has rolled over (Chart 11), and the authorities recently introduced measures to curb house price inflation. The Chinse manufacturing sector price deflator is still below zero (Chart 11). Now that the U.S. dollar is perking back up, the pressure on the authorities to reduce prices and/or further devalue the yuan will increase, representing another headwind for global cyclical companies, especially given the recent relapse in exports. Another bout of deflationary stress would cause risk premiums to rise for global cyclical equities, which garner a significant portion of revenue from abroad. Interest coverage is already razor thin, and free cash flow growth is deeply negative (Chart 12). U.S.-sourced profits are still outpacing earnings from the rest of the world, despite the pause in the U.S. dollar bull market over the past year. Now that the U.S. dollar is quietly grinding higher, the outlook is for ongoing U.S. profit outperformance. That is conducive to defensive sector outperformance (Chart 13). In all, it appears as if a technical adjustment has occurred in equity markets, rather than a fundamentally-driven trend change. In fact, the cyclical vs. defensive share price ratio appears to now be overshooting after having undershot. Worrisomely, most of this overshoot reflects a surge in tech stocks, and to a lesser extent, energy, as both industrials and materials have rolled over in relative performance terms (Chart 14). We expect leadership to revert back to non-cyclical sectors once the current rotational correction has run its course, given the lack of confirmation from the bulk of the macro variables on our checklist. Chart 12Risk Premiums Will Stay High Risk Premiums Will Stay High Risk Premiums Will Stay High Chart 13No Turn Yet No Turn Yet No Turn Yet Chart 14Deep Cyclicals: A One Trick Pony Deep Cyclicals: A One Trick Pony Deep Cyclicals: A One Trick Pony Bottom Line: Now is not the time to chase momentum in recent outperformers, as defensives are about to reclaim the leadership role from cyclical sectors, based on a broad range of macro, valuation and financial market indicators.

Highlights Global liquidity conditions are set to tighten in the months ahead. This could add some fire to a dollar rally, especially against EM and commodity currencies. The GBP has become the new anti-dollar, reflected by its strong sensitivity to the greenback. Financing the U.K.'s large current-account deficit is a difficult task when global liquidity tightens, the layer of political uncertainty now makes it a herculean labor. While the pound is now attractive as a long-term play, it still possesses plenty downside risk. A quick look at EUR/SEK, NOK/SEK, GBP/CAD, and AUD/JPY. Feature Global liquidity conditions have begun to tighten. This development is likely to send the dollar higher and inflict serious damage on EM and commodity currencies. The pound's weakness fits nicely into this larger story. Not only is the current political climate in the British Isles prompting investors to think twice about buying British assets, but a tightening in global liquidity makes financing the U.K. current account deficit even more onerous. This adjustment demands a cheaper GBP. Global Yields: A Step Forward, Half A Step Backward The main reason why global liquidity conditions are tightening is the recent back up in global bond yields. In normal circumstances, a 39 basis-point (bp), a 24bp, and a 16bp back-up in 10-year Treasury yields, JGB yields, and bund yields, respectively, would not represent much of a problem. But today is anything but normal. The shift in global monetary policy has been behind the back-up in yields. In aggregate, global central banks are about to begin decreasing their purchases of securities. This will not only lift interest rates on government paper, but it will also raise rates for private-sector borrowing, especially as global risk premia have been depressed by an effect known as TINA - or "There Is No Alternative" (Chart I-1). The Fed too is in the process of lifting global bond yields. For one thing, U.S. labor market slack is dissipating and we are starting to witness rising wage pressures (Chart I-2). As such, we expect the Fed to raise its policy rate in December, and to further push rates higher in 2017 and 2018. Given that only 62 basis points of hike are priced in until the end of 2019, there is scope for U.S. bond yields to rise. Chart I-1Central Banks Are Contributing##br## To Tightening Liquidity Central Banks Are Contributing To Tightening Liquidity Central Banks Are Contributing To Tightening Liquidity Chart I-2U.S. Labor Market Is ##br##Showing Signs Of Tightening U.S. Labor Market Is Showing Signs Of Tightening U.S. Labor Market Is Showing Signs Of Tightening In terms of investor sentiment, despite the recent back-up in long bond yields, investors remain surprisingly upbeat on the outlook for T-bonds (Chart I-3). This, combined with their still-poor valuations, is another reason to be worried about the outlook for U.S. and global bonds for the remainder of the year. Finally, we expect U.S. real rates to have more upside than non-U.S. rates. Why? The U.S. output gap is arguably narrower than that of Europe or Japan. Moreover, the U.S. economy has deleveraged more than the rest of the G10. With U.S households enjoying strong real income growth, strong balance sheet positions, and with banks easing their lending standards to households, U.S. private-sector debt levels can expand vis-à-vis those of other developed economies. This will lift U.S. relative real rates (Chart I-4). Chart I-3Upside For ##br##Yields Upside For Yields Upside For Yields Chart I-4Real Rate Differentials Should ##br##Move In The Dollar's Favor Real Rate Differentials Should Move In The Dollar's Favor Real Rate Differentials Should Move In The Dollar's Favor What does this all mean for currency markets? As we highlighted last week, we expect the U.S. dollar to display more upside, potentially rising by around 10% over the next 18 months. We also expect more tumultuous times to re-emerge in the EM space. Rising real rates have been a bane for EM assets in this cycle. This is because EM growth has been dependent on EM financial conditions, which themselves, have been a function of global liquidity conditions (Chart I-5). Exacerbating our fear, the recent narrowing in EM spreads has not been reflective of EM corporate health. This suggests that EM borrowing costs and financial conditions are at risk of a shakeout (Chart I-6). Chart I-5Global Liquidity Conditions Will Hurt EM Global Liquidity Conditions Will Hurt EM Global Liquidity Conditions Will Hurt EM Chart I-6EM Spreads Are Priced For Perfection EM Spreads Are Priced for Perfection EM Spreads Are Priced for Perfection This obviously leads us to worry about commodity currencies as well. For one, they remain tightly linked with EM equities, displaying a 0.82 correlation with that asset class since 2000. Moreover, as Chart I-7 and Table I-1 illustrate, commodity currencies are tightly linked with the dollar and EM spreads. Thus, a combo of a higher dollar and deteriorating EM financial conditions could do great harm to the AUD, the NZD, and the NOK. Interestingly, SEK and GBP are also two potential big casualties of any such development. Chart I-7The GBP Has Become The Anti-Dollar The Pound Falls To The Conquering Dollar The Pound Falls To The Conquering Dollar Table I-1Currency Sensitivities To Key Factors, Since 2014 The Pound Falls To The Conquering Dollar The Pound Falls To The Conquering Dollar That being said, these dynamics contain the seeds of their own demise. As they are deflationary shocks, EM and commodity sell-offs are likely to elicit a dovish response from global policymakers. This will limit the upside for yields, implying that any tightening in global liquidity conditions is likely to prompt another reflationary push early in 2017. Bottom Line: Global rates still have more upside from here. U.S. real rates could rise the most as the Fed is now confronted with an increasingly tight labor market. Moreover, the U.S. economy possesses the strongest structural fundamentals in the G10. Together, this set of circumstances is likely to boost the dollar, especially at the expense of EM, commodity currencies, and the pound. GBP: Another Arrow In The Eye Nine hundred and fifty years ago to this day, King Harold, the last Anglo-Saxon King of England, died on the battlefield at Hastings from an arrow to the eye.1 The kingship of Norman William the Conqueror ushered a long and complex relationship between the British Isles and the rest of the continent. Over the past two weeks, the fall in the pound has been a dramatic story. The collapse of the nominal effective exchange rate to a nearly 200-year low, is a clear indication that the battle between the U.K. and the rest of the EU is inflicting long-term damage on the kingdom (Chart I-8). The key shock to the pound remains political. PM May made it clear that Brexit means Brexit. Additionally, elements of her discourse, such as wanting firms to list their foreign-born employees, are raising fears among the business community that the Conservatives are taking a very populist, anti-business slant that could weigh on the long-term prospects for British growth. True, these policies may never see the light of day. But across the Channel, the EU partners are taking a hardline approach to Brexit negations. Investors cheered the announcement on Wednesday that PM Theresa May will allow deeper scrutiny from parliament before triggering Brexit. Altogether, this mostly means that the cacophony over the future of the U.K. will only grow louder. Thus, we expect political headline risks to remain a strong source of uncertainty. These political games are poisonous for the pound. The U.K. is highly dependent on FDI inflows to finance it large current account deficit of nearly 6% of GDP (Chart I-9). Not knowing the status of the U.K. vis-à-vis the common market heightens any risk premium on investments in the U.K. Also, any shift of rhetoric toward a more populist discourse increases the risk that regulations could be implemented that either hurt the future profitability of British firms or increase their cost of capital. At the margin, this makes the U.K. less attractive to foreign investors. Chart I-8Something Evil This Way Comes bca.fes_wr_2016_10_14_s1_c8 bca.fes_wr_2016_10_14_s1_c8 Chart I-9The U.K. Needs Capital The U.K. Needs Capital The U.K. Needs Capital This has multiple implications. The pound remains highly sensitive to global liquidity trends, a fact highlighted by its extremely elevated sensitivity to EM spreads. The pound will also remain correlated with EM equity prices. This suggests that if a rising dollar acts as a lever to tighten global liquidity conditions, the pound will continue to be the currency with the largest beta to USD. In other words, investors will continue to express bullish-dollar views through the pound. Domestic dynamics are also problematic. The recent fall in the pound is lifting British inflationary pressures, a reality picked up by our Inflation Pressure Gauge (Chart I-10). In normal times, this could have lifted the pound as investors would have expected a response by the BoE. Today, however, the British credit impulse is very weak, in part reflecting the lack of confidence toward the future of the U.K. (Chart I-10, bottom panel). Hence, the BoE is not responding to these inflationary pressures. This combo is very bearish for the pound. It means that British real rates are falling, especially vis-à-vis the U.S. (Chart I-11). The U.K. is now in a vicious circle where the more the pound falls, the higher British inflation expectations go, which depresses British real rates and puts additional selling pressure on the pound. In other words, the U.K. is in the opposite spot of where Japan was in the spring of 2016. Chart I-10Stagflation Light! Stagflation Light! Stagflation Light! Chart I-11A Vicious Circle For GBP A Vicious Circle For GBP A Vicious Circle For GBP What is the downside for the pound? On a 52-week rate of change basis, the pound is not as oversold as it was at long-term bottoms like in 1985, 1993, or 2009. More concerning, long-term bottoms are also characterized by the 2-year rate of change staying oversold for a prolonged period, which again, has yet to be the case (Chart I-12). On the valuation front, GBP/USD is cheap, trading at a 25% discount to its PPP. However, in 1985, the pound was trading at a 36% discount to PPP (Chart I-13). The uncertainty around the future of the British economy is much higher today than in 1985. A move away from the pro-business Thatcherite policies of the 1980s, could result in a GBP discount similar to that of 1985. The sensitivity of the pound to the dollar amplifies the probability that such a scenario materializes. This could imply a GBP/USD toward 1.1-1.05 at its bottom. Chart I-12GBP/USD: Not Oversold Enough GBP/USD: Not Oversold Enough GBP/USD: Not Oversold Enough Chart I-13GBP/USD Valuation GBP/USD Valuation GBP/USD Valuation When is that bottom likely to emerge? With the strong downward momentum currently weighing on the pound, and the progressive un-anchoring of market based inflation expectations in the U.K., the bottom in the pound is a moving target. Moreover, Dhaval Joshi, who runs our European Investment Strategy service, has written about the fractal dimension as a tool to identify turning points in a trend. When the fractal dimension hits 1.25, a reversal in the trend is likely. Essentially, this metric measures group-think. When both short-term and long-term investors end up uniformly expressing the same views, liquidity dries up as there are fewer and fewer sellers for each buyer (or vice-versa).2 Currently GBP/USD's fractal dimension has not yet hit that stage. While the 3-6 months risk-reward ratio for the pound remains poor, the pound is now attractive as a long-term buy. The recent collapse in real rates and sterling has massively eased monetary conditions in the U.K. (Chart I-14). Also, even if valuations are a poor guide of near term returns, the 25% discount currently experienced by the pound suggests that on a one- to two-year basis, holding the GBP will be a rewarding bet. What about EUR/GBP? EUR/GBP has moved out of line with its historical link to real-rate differentials (Chart I-15). However, the pound's beta to the dollar is twice as high as that of the euro. Moreover, the pound is many times more sensitive to EM spreads than the euro. This suggests that our view of a strong dollar and tightening EM liquidity conditions are likely to weigh on GBP more than on the EUR for the next few months. Thus we believe it is still too early to short EUR/GBP. In fact EUR/GBP could flirt with 0.95. Chart I-14A Glimmer of Hope For The Long-Term A Glimmer of Hope For The Long-Term A Glimmer of Hope For The Long-Term Chart I-15EUR/GBP Has Overshot Fundamentals EUR/GBP Has Overshot Fundamentals EUR/GBP Has Overshot Fundamentals Bottom Line: While the pound is cheap, it can cheapen further. Not only is the pound being hampered by the political quagmire surrounding Brexit, but the strong sensitivity of the pound to the dollar and EM spreads are two additional potent headwinds for the British currency. Altogether, while the pound is most likely a long-term buy at current levels, it could still experience significant downside in the near term. We remain long gold in GBP terms. Four Chart Reviews Four long-term price charts caught our eye this week. First is EUR/SEK. As Chart I-16 shows, despite the valuation, economic momentum, and balance of payments advantages for the SEK, EUR/SEK broke out. We think this reflects the SEK's strong sensitivity to the dollar and brewing EM risks. A move to slightly above 10 on this cross is likely. Second, while we remain positive on NOK/SEK, the next few weeks may prove challenging. As Chart I-17 illustrates, NOK/SEK is about to test a potent downward sloping trend line, exactly as it is becoming overbought. With NOK being slightly more sensitive to the dollar than SEK, punching above this trend line will require much firmer oil prices. While our energy strategists see oil in the mid- to upper-$50s for next year, they worry that the recent rally to $52/bbl may have been too violent and is already eliciting a supply response from U.S. shale producers. Chart I-16EUR/SEK Can Rise Higher EUR/SEK Can Rise Higher EUR/SEK Can Rise Higher Chart I-17Big Ceiling Above Big Ceiling Above Big Ceiling Above Third, since the early 1980s, GBP/CAD has formed long-term bottom in the 1.5 region, a zone we expect to be tested again (Chart I-18). While CAD is more sensitive to commodity prices than the GBP, it is much less sensitive to the USD and EM spreads than the British currency. Also, the loonie does not suffer from a massive political handicap. That being said, each time the 1.5 zone has been hit, GBP/CAD slingshots higher. We recommend buying GBP/CAD at that level. Finally, since 1991, AUD/JPY has been strongly mean-reverting in a trading band between 60 and 110 (Chart I-19). Any blow-up in EM in the next few months is likely to prompt this cross to hit the low end of this band once again. Chart I-18GBP/CAD: Target 1.5 GBP/CAD: Target 1.5 GBP/CAD: Target 1.5 Chart I-19AUD/JPY: A Model Of Mean Reversion AUD/JPY: A Model Of Mean Reversion AUD/JPY: A Model Of Mean Reversion Mathieu Savary, Vice President Foreign Exchange Strategy mathieu@bcaresearch.com 1 This story of his death is now considered more a legend than an historical event, but we like this story. 2 Please see European Investment Strategy Special Report, "Fractals, Liquidity & A Trading Model", dated December 11, 2014, available at eis.bcaresearch.com Currencies U.S. Dollar Chart II-1USD Technicals 1 USD Technicals 1 USD Technicals 1 Chart II-2USD Technicals 2 USD Technicals 2 USD Technicals 2 Policy Commentary: "We're at a point where the economic expansion has plenty of room to run. Inflation's a little bit below our target, rather than above our target... so, I think we can be quite gentle as we go in terms of gradually removing monetary policy accommodation" - Federal Reserve Bank of New York President William Dudley (October 12, 2016) Report Links: The Dollar: The Great Redistributor - October 7, 2016 Long-Term FX Valuation Models: Updates And New Coverages - September 30, 2016 Global Perspective On Currencies: A PCA Approach For The FX Market - September 16, 2016 The Euro Chart II-3EUR Technicals 1 EUR Technicals 1 EUR Technicals 1 Chart II-4EUR Technicals 2 EUR Technicals 2 EUR Technicals 2 Policy Commentary: "Due to the role of global inflation, more stimulus is needed than in the past to deliver their domestic mandates; and where, due to the falling equilibrium interest rates, their ability to deliver that stimulus is more constrained" - ECB Executive Board Member Yves Mersch (October 12, 2016) Report Links: The Dollar: The Great Redistributor - October 7, 2016 Long-Term FX Valuation Models: Updates And New Coverages - September 30, 2016 Clashing Forces - July 29, 2016) The Yen Chart II-5JPY Technicals 1 JPY Technicals 1 JPY Technicals 1 Chart II-6JPY Technicals 2 JPY Technicals 2 JPY Technicals 2 Policy Commentary: "Since the employment situation has continued to improve, no further easing of monetary policy may be necessary... at any rate, I would like to discuss this thoroughly with other board members at our monetary policy meeting" - BoJ Board Member Yutaka Harada (October 12, 2016) Report Links: The Dollar: The Great Redistributor - October 7, 2016 Long-Term FX Valuation Models: Updates And New Coverages - September 30, 2016 How Do You Say "Whatever It Takes" In Japanese? - September 23, 2016 British Pound Chart II-7GBP Technicals 1 GBP Technicals 1 GBP Technicals 1 Chart II-8GBP Technicals 2 GBP Technicals 2 GBP Technicals 2 Policy Commentary: "If the MPC and other monetary authorities hadn't eased policy - if they had failed to accommodate the forces pushing down on the neutral real rate - the performance of the economy and equity markets, and the long-term prospects for pension funds, would probably have been worse" - BoE Deputy Governor Ben Broadbent (October 5, 2016) Report Links: The Dollar: The Great Redistributor - October 7, 2016 Long-Term FX Valuation Models: Updates And New Coverages - September 30, 2016 Messages From Bali - August 5, 2016 Australian Dollar Chart II-9AUD Technicals 1 bca.fes_wr_2016_10_14_s2_c9 bca.fes_wr_2016_10_14_s2_c9 Chart II-10AUD Technicals 2 AUD Technicals 2 AUD Technicals 2 Policy Commentary: "Inflation remains quite low. Given very subdued growth in labor costs and very low cost pressures elsewhere in the world, this is expected to remain the case for some time" - RBA Monetary Policy Statement (October 3, 2016) Report Links: Long-Term FX Valuation Models: Updates And New Coverages - September 30, 2016 Global Perspective On Currencies: A PCA Approach For The FX Market - September 16, 2016 Messages From Bali - August 5, 2016 New Zealand Dollar Chart II-11NZD Technicals 1 NZD Technicals 1 NZD Technicals 1 Chart II-12NZD Technicals 2 NZD Technicals 2 NZD Technicals 2 Policy Commentary: "Interest rates are at multi-decade lows, and our current projections and assumptions indicate that further policy easing will be required to ensure that future inflation settles near the middle of the target range" - Reserve Bank Assistant Governor John McDermott (October 11, 2016) Report Links: Long-Term FX Valuation Models: Updates And New Coverages - September 30, 2016 Global Perspective On Currencies: A PCA Approach For The FX Market - September 16, 2016 The Fed is Trapped Under Ice - September 9, 2016 Canadian Dollar Chart II-13CAD Technicals 1 CAD Technicals 1 CAD Technicals 1 Chart II-14CAD Technicals 2 CAD Technicals 2 CAD Technicals 2 Policy Commentary: "Policy is having its effects. And obviously we have room to maneuver but its not a great deal of room to maneuver and fortunately we have a different mix of policy today and the fiscal effects we talked about should be showing up in the data any time now" - BoC Governor Stephen Poloz (October 8, 2016) Report Links: The Dollar: The Great Redistributor - October 7, 2016 Long-Term FX Valuation Models: Updates And New Coverages - September 30, 2016 Global Perspective On Currencies: A PCA Approach For The FX Market - September 16, 2016 Swiss Franc Chart II-15CHF Technicals 1 CHF Technicals 1 CHF Technicals 1 Chart II-16CHF Technicals 2 CHF Technicals 2 CHF Technicals 2 Policy Commentary: "We feel [negative interest rates and currency market interventions] is actually how we can ensure our mandate, namely by making the Swiss franc less attractive" - SNB Vice President Fritz Zurbruegg (October 12, 2016) Report Links: Long-Term FX Valuation Models: Updates And New Coverages - September 30, 2016 Global Perspective On Currencies: A PCA Approach For The FX Market - September 16, 2016 Clashing Forces - July 29, 2016 Norwegian Krone Chart II-17NOK Technicals 1 NOK Technicals 1 NOK Technicals 1 Chart II-18NOK Technicals 2 NOK Technicals 2 NOK Technicals 2 Policy Commentary: "Review [of the monetary policy framework] is in order... I would, however, emphasise that our experience of the current framework is positive. This suggests a need for adjustments rather than a regime change" - Norgest Bank Governor Oeystein Olsen (October 11, 2016) Report Links: The Dollar: The Great Redistributor - October 7, 2016 Long-Term FX Valuation Models: Updates And New Coverages - September 30, 2016 Global Perspective On Currencies: A PCA Approach For The FX Market - September 16, 2016 Swedish Krona Chart II-19SEK Technicals 1 SEK Technicals 1 SEK Technicals 1 Chart II-20SEK Technicals 2 SEK Technicals 2 SEK Technicals 2 Policy Commentary: "We have all the tools but there are limits since the repo rate and additional bond purchases can produce undesired side-effects... We don't really know for how long future interest rate cuts will work in an effective way." - Riksbank Deputy Governor Cecila Skingsley (October 7, 2016) Report Links: Long-Term FX Valuation Models: Updates And New Coverages - September 30, 2016 Dazed And Confused - July 1, 2016 Grungy Times - A Replay Of The Early 1990s? - June 10, 2016 Trades & Forecasts Forecast Summary Core Portfolio Tactical Trades Closed Trades

We are pleased to share this <i>Special Report</i> rolling out our Global ETF Strategy (GETF) service's model ETF portfolios.
We are in the latter stages of developing the digital interface that will serve as the central nervous system for the GETF service and are excited to be rolling it out next month. In the meantime, the GETF team has embarked on its regular bi-weekly publication schedule. An ETF Primer <i>Special Report</i> will follow on October 26. It will discuss ETF architecture, operation and trading, and is meant to help investors determine how they can best deploy ETFs to accomplish their tactical and strategic goals.

The U.S. dollar's corrective/consolidation phase is over, and it is about to rally. The risk-reward for EM stocks and currencies is extremely unattractive. We are reiterating our recommendation to short a basket of ZAR, BRL, TRY, MYR, IDR and CLP versus the U.S. dollar. There is a value opportunity in the Mexican peso. Go long MXN versus ZAR. Also, double down on the long MXN / short BRL trade.

Deutsche Bank's woes highlight a much wider malaise within European banks: under-capitalisation and under-profitability. We explain why getting the banks right is crucial to a successful investment strategy in equity, bond and currency markets.

Investors are overstating the legal and political constraints to "helicopter money"; The BoJ and BoE have few legal hurdles, whereas the ECB would have to get creative to stay within the existing law; Inflation-phobia in Germany will wane if the choice becomes euro survival; The BoJ has already laid the framework for debt monetization with its Sept. 21 decision; The risk is that debt monetization is a difficult policy to restrain once unleashed; Our long-term bet is bullish on an inflation comeback and Japanese risk assets. The helicopters are coming. The global appetite for outright debt monetization, i.e. "helicopter money," appears small today. However, the research philosophy at BCA's Geopolitical Strategy holds that policymakers respond readily to constraints and rarely get to pursue their preferences. As such, we approach every issue from the perspective of what policymakers have to do, not what they want to do. That is why we perked up when the Bank of Japan announced a new monetary policy framework on Sept. 21. The central bank says it will target the yield curve rather than the monetary base in its quest to increase inflation, reduce real interest rates, spur growth, and catapult Japan out of its long-lived liquidity trap. Assuming the policy evolves, as is typically the case, and comes to be accompanied by more ambitious fiscal spending, as we think will happen, it helps clear the way to debt monetization in all but name.1 Our colleague Peter Berezin, Chief Strategist of BCA's Global Investment Strategy, has shown how policymakers may end up dining at the trough of "money printing" (Charts 1 and 2).2 Chart 1As Long As Credit##br## Expands Faster Than Income ... bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c1 bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c1 Chart 2... Debt Burdens Will Remain High bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c2 bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c2 To summarize, Peter argues that: The BoJ and the ECB may find themselves in a situation where they have no choice but to implement heterodox monetary policy, and that may happen relatively soon. Negative interest rate policy (NIRP) has failed to increase inflation and demand, leaving intact the global deflationary tail risk and forcing policymakers and investors to ask, "What next?" Japan is stuck in a liquidity trap. Therefore orthodox monetary policy will not increase inflation and demand. Fiscal policy is needed (Charts 3 and 4). There are high political and economic constraints to raising tax rates in Japan. Hence there is little scope for fiscal stimulus that does not increase indebtedness. In the euro area, a return of the sovereign debt crisis cannot be discounted, once the lagged effects of the massive decline in bond yields and credit spreads, a weaker euro, and lower oil prices dissipate in the future. Helicopter money may become politically appealing as a way in which to boost inflation and demand in order to assuage the political costs of painful structural reforms. Chart 3Japan Is In##br## A Liquidity Trap Japan Is In A Liquidity Trap Japan Is In A Liquidity Trap Chart 4Fiscal Stimulus Will Not Drive Up##br## Interest Rates In A Liquidity Trap Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics We agree - and yet the politics can be tricky. In this analysis, we ask, What are the legal and political hurdles to debt monetization, and what are the political risks of pursuing such a policy? We believe that investors may be overstating the constraints to ultra-unorthodox monetary policy. However, we also share the view of our colleague Martin Barnes that debt monetization would entail significant "mischief," including higher political and geopolitical risks.3 Helicopter Shopping Monetary financing (i.e. "helicopter money") can be implemented in various ways.4 Whatever option is chosen, the chief advantage is that "Ricardian Equivalence" does not apply.5 This means that even as the government issues new debt, households and corporates will not restrict their spending and investing on the expectation that taxes will eventually have to go up. Debt monetization avoids this demand-suppressing phenomenon because central bank money is irredeemable, which leads to a permanent increase in the monetary base and should therefore lead to higher inflation and demand. Helicopter money is fiscal stimulus financed by monetary means (hence the term "monetary financing"). Even handing cash directly to households is ultimately a form of fiscal stimulus, equivalent to a tax cut. Critically, and unlike the latter, helicopter money does not involve any increase in government debt levels. There are several forms of monetary financing worth expanding on: Perpetual QE: The government issues government bonds and sells them to financial market participants in order to increase public expenditures or cut taxes. Beforehand, the central bank assures the public that it will buy the same amount of debt in the open market and will never sell it back again. Since bonds are normally redeemable, Ricardian Equivalence is avoided only if the central bank can credibly commit itself never to sell the purchased bonds to the open market. Then it does not matter whether the central bank cancels these bonds or rolls them over when they mature.6 Haircut on existing debt: Central banks could take a haircut on their existing holdings of government bonds, letting a large part of the public debt disappear and giving governments more scope for fiscal stimulus. This would result in a loss on the central bank balance sheet, which it would obviate by creating money out of thin air. Direct lending to government: Governments could issue perpetual zero-coupon bonds and sell them directly to the central bank. This would allow for fiscal stimulus financed by a permanent increase in the monetary base without a balance sheet loss for the central bank. Lending to a public institution: Instead of direct lending, governments could sell perpetual zero-coupon bonds to a public institution (like an infrastructure bank). The central bank would then purchase those bonds from this public institution on the secondary market. This would avoid legal prohibitions, such as those in the euro area, against direct financing of government expenditure. "Trillion dollar coin": Governments could mint a high-value coin and sell it to the central bank. This measure was discussed during the United States fiscal cliff negotiations in 2012 as a way for the president to avoid a debt crisis caused by political brinkmanship with the legislature. "Citizenship credit": Governments could issue "citizenship credits" to all households, which the central bank would then buy for a set price. This fictitious asset swap would result in increased household wealth and could thus have a larger effect on demand than the above measures.7 The evidence from past tax cuts and stimulus measures suggests that households will spend at least 20 cents of every dollar received.8 Pure helicopter drops: The most radical solution would be to print money and distribute it directly to households. In theory, this would lead to a balance sheet loss on part of the central bank because no asset would be received in return. But, in reality, as Peter Berezin points out, from the central bank's point of view "money" is merely a bond which never matures and pays no interest. By definition, such a bond has a present value of zero. From the perspective of the household receiving the money, a one-dollar bill has a present value of $1. The use of actual helicopters to deliver the cash is optional. Legal Constraints One of our guiding principles during the euro area sovereign debt crisis was to ignore any argument that relied purely on the legal architecture at hand. "Laws are meant to be broken," particularly by those who penned them in the first place. Nonetheless, legal architecture is important in so far as it suggests which type of monetary financing is more or less likely in which economy. Table 1 examines the legal constraints that major central banks face when trying to adopt the aforementioned strategies. Based on our subjective read of the "strictness" of the respective institutional constraints, we assign each central bank a number between one and four. The higher the number, the more difficult it is to implement helicopter money legally. Table 1Legal Constraints To Debt Monetization In Developed Markets Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics Only direct lending to the government is strictly prohibited by most major central banks. For the Bank of Japan and the Bank of England not even this is the case, resulting in a very low legal constraint index score. In Japan, central bank governor Haruhiko Kuroda has recently said that "directly underwriting government bonds and monetizing fiscal deficits" is either illegal or "should not be done."9 However, the legal constraints seem relatively slight. Article 5 of Japan's Public Finance Law stipulates that "in special circumstances the BoJ shall be able to lend money within the amount approved by the Diet resolution." Articles 38.1 and 43.1 of the Bank of Japan Act allow the BoJ, in effect, to do whatever it deems necessary so long as it obtains the authorization of the prime minister and minister of finance. Hence, it is appropriate to conclude that legal constraints for the BoJ are minimal and that helicopter money could be implemented. This view is supported by the BoJ's Sept. 21 decision. The same conclusion can be drawn for the U.K. The existing "ways and means" facility is nothing other than direct government borrowing from the BoE. Even EU rules allow this facility, so the option remains open even if Brexit should ultimately fail to take place.10 The euro area is a more complicated case. Regarding the prohibition of debt monetization, Article 132.1 of the Treaty of Lisbon is very strict. However, Article 132.2 (the very next paragraph) provides a possible loophole, since it allows lending to a publicly owned credit institution.11 Therefore, a "European infrastructure fund" could be set up that would have access to the ECB's monetary financing and could deploy fiscal stimulus throughout the currency union. The ECB's Emergency Liquidity Assistance (ELA) facility - which provides funding to solvent euro area credit institutions facing liquidity problems - could be another way to avoid prohibitions against direct monetary financing by the ECB.12 The responsibility for the supply of ELA funding lies with national central banks, not the ECB. The ECB can only stop an ELA facility already under way with a two-thirds majority vote in its Governing Council. The ECB has argued in previous opinions that the ELA cannot be used to subvert the Article 123 prohibition against monetary financing, but circumstances may eventually alter those opinions.13 Most critically, national central banks provide liquidity under the ELA in exchange for collateral whose terms they set themselves (such as haircuts based on quality). As such, the national central bank could provide its financial institutions - including, say, a public infrastructure bank - with printed money in exchange for snow globes and comic books. And the ECB could stand aside and watch it all happen, with the Austrian and German members of the ECB Board feigning opposition with token votes against the Governing Council. Another possible loophole for the ECB arises from its Targeted Long Term Refinancing Operations (TLTRO). Under the guise of TLTRO, the ECB could provide perpetual zero-coupon loans to private banks while contractually binding them to extend these loans to any euro area citizen. Economist Eric Lonergan refers to this measure as cash transfers to households intermediated by banks.14 Finally, Article 20 of the Statutes of the ECB allows the Governing Council, by a two-thirds majority, to decide upon other operational methods of monetary control (besides the ones explicitly mentioned) in order to achieve price stability. In other words, if the ECB deems that its price stability mandate is threatened, it could vote itself the power to use helicopters. The alternative to stretching the existing law is to change it.15 Hence we will now assess the ease by which central bank rules can be changed. The possibility to amend the law is what earned the Fed a low legal constraint index in Table 1 above, since the key article has been amended several times in history. Furthermore, the proviso under which the Fed was allowed to purchase bonds directly from the Treasury was only ruled out in 1979.16 Far more difficult to change is the relevant part of the Lisbon Treaty, since that would require unanimity in the European Council and ratification by all member states, which would involve their domestic politics.17 This could be a major obstacle regarding any amendments to Article 132, as we elucidate below. Europeans will likely have to work within the rules available to them, which we think are quite malleable anyway. Finally, Sweden, unlike the United Kingdom, is bound to the Lisbon Treaty and receives no exception for direct lending to the government. Furthermore, the prohibition of monetary financing is also stated in the Sveriges Riksbank Act, making it even more complex to amend the law. The other two options - distributing cash to households and minting a high-value coin - are also of dubious legality in the Swedish case. Therefore, the Riksbank has in our view the highest legal constraints to helicopter money. Bottom Line: Legal constraints to debt monetization are far smaller than one would initially think. This is especially the case for the BoJ and BoE. The ECB would have to get creative in order to work within the law, but its statutes have wide enough holes for any helicopter to fly through. In addition, if one takes into account the raft of controversial, unconventional monetary and fiscal policies undertaken in the euro area in the recent past (Table 2), one is tempted to say, "Where there's a will, there's a way"! Table 2Europe: The Hurdle To Heterodoxy Is Low Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics Political Constraints A policy as controversial as debt monetization requires political capital for implementation. In economies where legal and political constraints exist, a crisis will be necessary to overcome them. As such, we agree with our colleague Martin Barnes, who has argued that debt monetization is step three of a process where step two is a deep economic crisis.18 The constraints are not uniform across economies. Countries where households mostly struggle with the twin ills of debt and deflation would welcome higher inflation, but those where households are mostly savers would naturally not. On the other hand, even savers who depend on interest-bearing income for retirement would likely favor unorthodox monetary policy that allows interest rates to rise eventually. We therefore look at three broad factors when assessing the political constraints to monetary financing: Overall trust in monetary institutions; Household savings rate; Financial asset composition of households. Japan The two main factors that led to high saving rates in Japan, i.e. sharply rising incomes and favorable demography, have vanished (Chart 5). Japanese household savings rates have declined dramatically since the 1980s (Chart 6).19 Of course, Charts 7 and 8 show that the financial net worth of households is still massive and hence Japanese households may still prefer low inflation rates.20 But the population's aversion to inflation may not be as great as is assumed by conventional wisdom. Chart 5Japan's Demographic Dividend Is Over ... Japan's Demographic Dividend Is Over ... Japan's Demographic Dividend Is Over ... Chart 6... Leading To A Savings Rate Decline bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c6 bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c6 Chart 7Japanese Households Are Still Wealthy Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics Chart 8Japan: Public Debt Vs. Private Wealth bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c8 bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c8 After all, Japanese households suffer in a low interest-rate environment because their financial assets are mainly composed of rate-sensitive products (Chart 9). Moreover, high government debt levels risk imperiling future entitlement spending. As such, the public may support policies that inflate away government debt so that the public sector can pay out pensions in future. Chart 9Only American Pensioners Are Ambivalent About The Pain Of Low Interest Rates Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics For the past four years, policies to boost inflation in Japan have received strong popular support. How else can we explain the continued political success of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and his government, the most impressive run in twenty-first century Japan (Chart 10)? The inflation goal of Abenomics is clearly stated, not obfuscated by technocratic jargon, so it cannot simply be said that the public has been deceived. At the very least it suggests that the public understands the tradeoffs between inflation and deflation and is starting to favor the former over the latter as the household sector draws closer and closer to net debtor status. Europe The economies of the euro area have substantially different household saving rates. As such, political constraints to monetary financing are not equal across the currency union. Households in countries like Germany and France save a large fraction of their disposable income. In Spain and Italy, only a fraction of income is saved, whereas Greek and Portuguese households are net borrowers (Chart 11). Unsurprisingly, German trust in the ECB seems to be highly negatively correlated with increases in money supply (Chart 12). On the other hand, trust in the ECB in the peripheral states has recovered somewhat since the various efforts by the central bank to support their economies (Chart 13) through non-conventional monetary policy. Chart 10If Abenomics Is So Unpopular,##br## Why Is Abe Popular? bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c10 bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c10 Chart 11Discrepancy In Savings##br## Rates In The Euro Area Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics Chart 12Germans Fret About Easy Money bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c12 bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c12 Chart 13Trust In ECB Recovering bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c13 bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c13 Many pundits and commentators have also pointed out that Germans will not accept higher inflation rates due to traumatic history. The 1922-23 hyperinflation is often blamed for the eventual collapse of the Weimar Republic. But this is a false narrative. The Weimar Republic did not suffer hyperinflation because of money printing but because its manufacturing base was destroyed by the First World War. This massive supply loss was exacerbated by the French and Belgian occupation of the Ruhr in January 1923 as punishment for unpaid reparations. This was a German industrial region where much of its surviving capacity was located. The cumulative loss of supply caused a price shock that the central bank attempted to assuage with money printing. Money printing was therefore primarily a consequence of a massive decline in supply, leading to rampant price inflation. In fact, it was the austerity policies of Chancellor Heinrich Brüning following the Great Depression that led to the rise of populism in Germany, not the money printing undertaken a decade earlier. At the moment, this narrative may not be the dominant one in Germany. But historical interpretations can change on a dime when circumstances demand it. The fact remains that the ECB has effectively pursued an activist monetary policy despite the supposed resistance of Germany. How do we explain this? First, EU integration remains a geopolitical priority for Germany, as well as other European states. Individual European countries are no longer capable of exerting a significant global influence independently and have sought to aggregate geopolitical power as a result.21 Whether the project will succeed may be debatable, but the reality that it has sound geopolitical logic is not. Second, Germany's export-oriented economy is particularly vulnerable to protectionism and competitive currency devaluation by its top trade partners. These policies are precisely what Berlin would suffer if it were to abandon its currency-union peers by choosing "exit" over the printing press. Italy and France would immediately devalue their currencies against the new Deutschmark, and would likely impose outright trade barriers and tariffs subsequently. In short, if Germany will not help sustain the low financing costs of France and Italy through currency union, then it will be denied access to their markets. Founders of the EU understood this dynamic, which is why multiple (unsuccessful) attempts were made to peg European currencies, first to the U.S. dollar, and later to the Deutschmark, prior to the advent of the euro. We suspect that if the euro area's sovereign-debt crisis were to arise anew, German policymakers would have to explain the tradeoff between staying true to historical narratives on hyperinflation and sustaining Germany's export-addicted economy to their public. The contest is not even close. Historical revisions would be revised. In addition, German households are, much like their Japanese peers, dependent on high interest rates for saving (see Chart 9 above). As such, they may eventually relent to a set of unorthodox policies that raises interest rates in future. Nevertheless, regardless of German history and geopolitics, the reality is that the German public is not ready for monetary financing today. As such, we suspect that the ECB will only fire up the helicopters once the integrity of the euro area is threatened anew. Thankfully for ECB policymakers, Japan will likely have already undertaken such heterodox monetary policy by that time, allowing the ECB to piggyback on BoJ efforts. The U.S. In contrast to Japan and the euro area, deflation is not as much of a risk in the United States and interest rates have not been pushed into negative territory (Chart 14). Therefore, the case for debt monetization is much weaker. In addition, U.S. households are increasingly preferring saving instead of spending (Chart 15), a dynamic that may impede the transmission mechanism of helicopter drops, which ultimately rely on household spending. Chart 14Inflation Remains Low, But Has Bottomed Inflation Remains Low, But Has Bottomed Inflation Remains Low, But Has Bottomed Chart 15U.S. Households Prefer To Save bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c15 bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c15 Despite their preferences for more savings, however, the actual savings rate for the bottom 90% households in terms of wealth is essentially zero. In fact, most U.S. households are concerned about poor job prospects, low wage growth, and high debt levels. How else can we explain the support for Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders?22 As such, the aggregate household savings rate may not be the best measure of political constraints to monetary financing in the U.S. It may overstate the preferences of the minority of the population that actually saves. The United Kingdom Chart 16Public Is Satisfied With BoE bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c16 bca.gps_sr_2016_09_26_c16 As in the U.S., interest rates remain positive in the U.K. In addition, growth is tolerable and the unemployment rate is near the BoE's definition of full employment (5%). Therefore, pressure for drastic measures is weak, albeit higher after the Brexit referendum shock than before. According to Chart 16, individuals are satisfied with the BoE and trust the bank to take the appropriate measures to achieve the inflation target, thus giving the BoE high political capital. British households would suffer under lower interest rates because they are heavily reliant on pension funds and life insurance for income (see Chart 9 above). Therefore, one could argue that they would rather support helicopter money than negative interest rates. Mark Carney, the BoE governor, has ruled out helicopter money even since the Brexit vote, arguing that the available stimulus tools are sufficient and "there's not a need for such flights of fancy here in the UK."23 Hence the chances of debt monetization may be low for now, assuming that the likely post-referendum recession is not very deep. However, they would increase if a shock were to hit the British economy. Just such a shock could occur after the U.K. formally exits the EU, which may still be two years away. Switzerland Swiss households save a high fraction of their net income (see Chart 6 above). In addition, the Swiss government's debt-to-GDP ratio is very low (34% as of 2015). Therefore, the current deflation is not as much of a burden for Switzerland as it would be for indebted countries. On the other hand, negative interest rates weigh heavily on pension funds, which account for a large fraction of households' financial assets (see Chart 9 above). Moreover, the overvalued Swiss franc drags on the Swiss economy. Instead of buying euros to stabilize the EUR/CHF exchange rate, the SNB could distribute this money to households. Swiss Trade, a powerful union representing the interests of 3,800 retail companies and over 10% of the Swiss labor force, has made this demand. So far, however, this kind of pressure from domestic interest groups has not made any difference. The situation could change if another sovereign-debt crisis were to hit the euro area and put further upside pressure on the Swiss franc, a safe haven asset. Sweden The Swedish population has great trust in national institutions, especially in the Riksbank.24 Its political capital is therefore large. Nevertheless, since there is no danger of deflation and the economy is doing well, it would be hard to justify such extreme policy measures. Moreover, Swedish households increased their savings rate drastically in the last few years (see Chart 6 above), making them more averse to inflation than they were a decade ago. In addition, there is no pressure for higher interest rates, since households are heavily invested in equities (see Chart 9 above), which profit from low interest rates. Political constraints are thus very high. Bottom Line: Our analysis shows that Japan has the lowest legal and political constraints to debt monetization, and recent events suggest it has begun laying the framework. In addition, if another euro crisis were to occur, the ECB and the SNB might be forced to join the BoJ in mustering the helicopters. On the other hand, it would be rather surprising in the short and medium term if the Fed, BoE, or Riksbank took concrete steps toward debt monetization. Uncharted Waters? Would helicopter money mark a dangerous voyage into uncharted waters? Not really. Western governments used debt monetization several times in the twentieth century. During the Second World War, various countries printed money to finance war costs. In the U.S., debt monetization continued after the war with the Fed purchasing government bonds directly from the Treasury from time to time. It was only in April 1979 that these purchases ceased.25 An even more striking example is Italy, which monetized its debt down to 1981: the Bank of Italy was actually forced by law to purchase all public debt not taken up by the market.26 In Canada, the Bank of Canada financed public debt down to the 1970s. Between 1935 and 1939, the BoC funded a remarkable two thirds of public debt and, during the Second World War, fiscal and monetary policy effectively merged. Inflation never exceeded 5% until the early 1970s, indicating that monetary financing can contribute to positive non-inflationary economic outcomes if conditions (and management) are right.27 Another example of a successful implementation of helicopter money is the expansionary policy undertaken by former Japanese Finance Minister Takahashi Korekiyo between 1932 and 1936. His debt monetization program is said to be the prime reason why Japan recovered so quickly from the Great Depression. At the same time, the example is instructive about the risks of helicopter money: Takahashi was ultimately assassinated by the military when he changed course on debt monetization, and the whole episode fed into Japan's slide into fascism.28 To these substantial risks, we will now turn. Bottom Line: Helicopter money is not merely theoretical. Major economies - including responsible ones like Canada and Italy - used debt monetization into the late twentieth century. Dangers Of Releasing The Kraken Chart 17Unlimited Resources ##br## Undermine Democracy Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics Unleash The Kraken: Debt Monetization And Politics Democracy is a process by which various interest groups and segments of the population bargain over limited resources. Democracies are successful because they institutionalize the bargaining process so that it legitimizes the decisions over who gets what. Countries with unlimited resources tend to be authoritarian regimes (Chart 17). This phenomenon is referred to as the "resource curse" and is well documented in political science. Essentially, countries that are endowed by massive natural resources can distribute the wealth to all interest groups and all segments of the population, thus obviating the need to institutionalize any part of their bargaining process. The ruling elite stays in power because it can keep buying off the population and stave off demands for representation.29 We are not saying that Japan or Europe would turn fascist because of helicopter money, but rather that it will be difficult to restrain the policy once it is unleashed. When resources become unlimited, how would democratically-elected policymakers manage to limit them? It is easy to tell various interest groups - pensioners, veterans, single mothers, low-income households - that they cannot receive what they want when the resources are limited. But the danger of helicopter money is that once the decision is taken to drop the cash from the air, the decision of who gets money for what will become extremely politicized and polarizing. Proponents argue that just as monetary policy has become independent of government, so too can fiscal policy. For example, the central bank could decide how much fiscal spending is needed to achieve its inflation target and then print the requisite amount, leaving it up to political decision-makers to decide how to divvy out the manna from heaven. The problem is that monetary policy has already become politicized in a number of countries, mainly in the emerging markets, and pressure has been mounting in the developed world. That pressure would become extraordinary once central banks start creating resources from thin air. The essence of representative government - popular control of fiscal powers - would erode. Our colleague Dhaval Joshi, Chief Strategist of European Investment Strategy, has also posited that the population could easily lose trust in institutions, even the currency itself, if the experiment gets out of control.30 This is unlikely in its first iteration, but it could happen if the process becomes politicized, which we think would happen. The other problem is that the effort to print money could become a source of geopolitical conflict if it produces a competitive debt monetization regime. For example, if the BoJ implements helicopter money and weakens the yen, China could counter by devaluing the renminbi. Since there are natural limits to how much money can be printed before inflation takes off, and neither country would want to destroy the value of its currency, the two sides might seek to counter helicopter devaluations via protectionism. Bottom Line: Debt monetization and helicopter money would short-circuit the democratic process itself. The entire point of representative government and democratic institutions is to allow for bargaining over limited resources. Once the option of unlimited resources becomes real, it will be very difficult to decide who gets to benefit. It would take a very strong government indeed - perhaps an authoritarian one - to impose limits. Investment Implications Debt monetization is not going to be fully implemented in any major economy until a serious economic crisis arrives. As such, this research effort is largely exploratory. We have presented a list of legal and political constraints that we believe will determine the sequence and the form of helicopter money in major economies. We agree with our colleague Peter Berezin that Japan may attempt some form of debt monetization in 2017-18. The monetary policy framework is already being laid. In the long term, the world is slowly moving away from its current deflationary paradigm. On the geopolitical front, we are seeing less, not more, globalization. Global multipolarity is a constraint to geopolitical stability, and this is as true today it has been over the past 200 years. We identified this trend in a 2014 Special Report, "The Apex Of Globalization: All Downhill From Here," which we encourage our clients to re-read.31 On a shorter timeline, we are seeing policymakers move away from austerity and towards greater willingness to use fiscal policy. The U.S. presidential election is instructive, as the issues of budget deficits and debt sustainability have been completely ignored throughout the campaign, despite their prominence as recently as 2012. Other major economies, including Europe, are moving away from austerity. More government spending, less globalization, and more unorthodox monetary policy all point to the end of the current deflationary era. As a play on this theme, we would recommend that investors take long positions on Japanese and German inflations swaps. We also think that it is time to turn structurally bullish on gold.32 In addition, we recommend going short JPY/long USD, even though markets will initially test the BoJ and drive the yen higher. We are renewing our strategic long Japanese stocks trade, hedged for currency, to capitalize on the ongoing paradigm shift in Japan that we identified in 2012.33 Nicola Grass, Contributing Author Marko Papic, Managing Editor marko@bcaresearch.com 1 Specifically, the BoJ pledged to keep the 10-year JGB yield at around zero, at least until inflation stabilizes at a rate above 2%. This decision amounts to a commitment to correct past inflation undershoots and to keep 10-year yields at zero regardless of the supply of new debt. Please see "Japan: Don't Count Abenomics Out," in Geopolitical Strategy Monthly Report, "Who's Afraid Of Big Bad Trump," dated August 10, 2016, and Geopolitical Strategy Special Report, "Japan: The Emperor's Act Of Grace," dated June 8, 2016, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 2 Please see Global Investment Strategy Weekly Report, "Helicopter Money" A Semi-Hostile Q&A," dated May 13, 2016, "Escape from the Land of The Rising Yen," dated April 15, 2016, "Japan: On The Road to Debt Monetization," dated February 5, 2016, and Global Investment Strategy Outlook, "Ten Predictions For The Rest Of The Year," dated April 1, 2016, available at gis.bcaresearch.com. In addition, please see Foreign Exchange Strategy Weekly Report, "Down the Rabbit Hole," dated April 15, 2016 available at fes.bcaresearch.com. 3 Please see The Bank Credit Analyst Special Report, "The Case Against More Monetary Mischief," dated August 16, 2016, available at bca.bcaresearch.com. 4 The term helicopter money refers to the statement by Milton Friedman in his 1969 paper "The Optimum Quantity of Money," where he proposes that a central bank could throw money out of a helicopter to increase inflation. 5 The "Ricardian Equivalence" theory suggests that individuals are forward looking and thus will assess that today's tax cuts or fiscal expenditure must be financed by tomorrow's higher tax burden. Since the intertemporal budget constraint is binding, rational individuals will not necessarily increase their current consumption even while benefiting from expansionary fiscal policy. 6 See Willem H. Buiter, "The Simple Analytics of Helicopter Money: Why It Works - Always," Economics E-Journal 8 (2014), pp. 1-38. Available at dx.doi.org. 7 Please see Global Investment Strategy Weekly Report, "Escape from the Land of The Rising Yen," dated April 15, 2016, available at gis.bcaresearch.com. 8 Please see Laura Jaramillo and Alexandre Chailloux, "It's not all Fiscal: Effects of Income, Fiscal Policy, and Wealth on Private Consumption," IMF Working Paper 15/112 (May 2015), available at www.imf.org. 9 Please see Bank of Japan, "'Comprehensive Assessment' of the Monetary Easing: Concept and Approaches," dated September 5, 2016, available at www.boj.or.jp/en. 10 According to Protocol No. 15, Article 10 of the Lisbon Treaty, the "Government of the United Kingdom may maintain its 'ways and means' facility with the Bank of England if and so long as the United Kingdom does not adopt the euro." 11 Article 132.2 of the Treaty of Lisbon: "Paragraph 1 shall not apply to publicly owned credit institutions which, in the context of the supply of reserves by central banks, shall be given the same treatment by national central banks and the European Central Bank as private credit institutions." 12 ECB, "Emergency liquidity assistance (ELA) and monetary policy," dated 2016, available at www.ecb.europa.eu. 13 Please see ECB, "Opinion of the European Central Bank of 21 November 2008," dated November 21, 2008, https://www.ecb.europa.eu/ecb/legal/pdf/en_con_2008_74_f.pdf. 14 Eric Lonergan, "Legal helicopter drops in the Eurozone,"dated February 24, 2016, available at www.philosophyofmoney.net. 15 Various academics argue that an explicit allowance of monetary financing would not undermine the independence of central banks as long as governments decide how the money will be spent and central banks decide how much money to print. See Buiter (above, note 4) and Adair Turner, "The Case for Monetary Finance - An Essentially Political Issue," 16th Jacques Polak Annual Research Conference (2015), available at www.imf.org. See also "Helicopter Ben" Bernanke, "Some Thoughts on Monetary Policy in Japan," Federal Reserve, Speech at Japan Society of Monetary Economics, dated May 31, 2003, available at www.federalreserve.gov. 16 Please see U.S. Code 355, "Purchase and sale of obligations of National, State, and municipal governments," Legal Information Institute, accessed 2016, available at www.law.cornell.edu. 17 Title 6, Article 48.6 of the Lisbon Treaty. 18 Please see footnote 3 above. 19 The longstanding Japanese household opposition to inflation has been shifting in recent years, as revealed by voter behavior since 2012. Yet some elements of the trend persist, as in the BoJ's public survey in April 2016, in which over 80% of respondents argued that a general price increase would be unfavorable. Please see Martin Feldstein, "Japan's Savings Crisis," Project Syndicate, dated September 24, 2010, available at www.project-syndicate.org. 20 See Bank of Japan, "Results of the 65th Opinion Survey on the General Public's Views and Behavior (March 2016 Survey)," dated April 18, 2016, available at www.boj.or.jp/en. 21 Please see Geopolitical Strategy Special Report, "The Euro And (Geo)politics," dated February 11, 2015, and Geopolitical Strategy Special Report, "Europe's Geopolitical Gambit," dated November 2011, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 22 Please see BCA Geopolitical Strategy Special Report, "The End Of The Anglo-Saxon Economy," dated April 13, 2016, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 23 Please see Will Martin, "Carney: We Will Take 'Whatever Action Is Needed,'" Business Insider UK, dated August 4, 2016, available at uk.businessinsider.com, and Jake Cordell, "Mark Carney dismisses helicopter money as a 'compounding Ponzi scheme,'" City AM, dated April 19, 2016, available at www.cityam.com. 24 Please see European Commission, "Introduction Of The Euro In The Member States That Have Not Yet Adopted The Common Currency," Flash Eurobarometer 418 (May 2015), p.44, available at ec.europa.eu. 25 Kenneth Garbade, "Direct Purchases of U.S. Treasury Securities by Federal Reserve Banks," Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Staff Report No.684, 2014, available at www.newyorkfed.org. 26 Guido Tabellini, "Central bank reputation and the monetization of deficits: The 1981 Italian monetary reform," Economic Inquiry 25 (1987), p.185-200, available at onlinelibrary.wiley.com. 27 Josh Ryan-Collins, "Is Monetary Financing Inflationary? A Case Study of the Canadian Economy, 1935-75," Levy Economics Institute, Working Paper No. 848 (2015), available at www.levyinstitute.org. 28 Myung Soo Cha, "Did Korekiyo Takahashi Rescue Japan from the Great Depression?" Hitotsubashi University, Institute of Economic Research Discussion Paper Series No. A395, dated September 30, 2000, available at hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp. 29 Please see Jeffrey Sachs and Andrew Warner, "Natural Resource Abundance and Economic Growth," NBER Working Paper 5398 (December 1995), available at www.nber.org. 30 Please see European Investment Strategy Weekly Report, "The Case Against Helicopters," dated May 5, 2016, available at eis.bcaresearch.com. 31 Please see BCA Geopolitical Strategy Special Report, "The Apex Of Globalization: All Downhill From Here," dated November 12, 2014, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 32 Please see footnote 2 above. 33 Please see BCA Geopolitical Strategy Special Report, "Japan's Political Paradigm Shift: Invest Implications," dated December 21, 2012, available at gps.bcaresearch.com.

The Fed delivered a "hawkish hold." Remain tactically short U.S. equities and position for a stronger dollar. Meanwhile, the Bank of Japan laid out a radical overhaul: The new framework is consistent with price-level targeting and debt monetization. Long-term investors should position for a weaker yen and higher Japanese equity prices. Also, stay structurally underweight Japanese bonds: Zero is a resting point, rather than a final destination, for 10-year JGB yields.

Without saying it, the BoJ introduced a price level target. While the announcement underwhelms in the details, its key implication is that the BoJ wrote a blank check to the government. Increased talk of cooperation between the government and the BoJ suggests more fiscal easing will materialize, which will ultimately hurt the yen. In the short term, markets will test the BoJ and the government's resolve.