Oil

Executive Summary China's Unemployment Over the past week we have been visiting clients along the US west coast. In this report we hit some of the highlights from the most important and frequently asked questions. Xi Jinping is seizing absolute power just as the country’s decades-long property boom turns to bust. He will stimulate the economy but Chinese stimulus is less effective than it used to be. The US and Israel are underscoring their red line against Iranian nuclear weaponization. If Iran does not freeze its nuclear program, the Middle East will begin to unravel again. The UK’s domestic instability is returning, with Scotland threatening to leave the union. Brexit, the pandemic, and inflation make a Scottish referendum a more serious risk than in the past. Shinzo Abe’s assassination makes him a martyr for a vision of Japan as a “normal country” – i.e. one that is not pacifist but capable of defending itself. Japan’s rearmament, like Germany’s, points to the decline of the WWII peace settlement and the return of great power competition. Bottom Line: Investors need a new global balance to be achieved through US diplomacy with Russia, China, and Iran. That is not forthcoming, as the chief nations face instability at home and a stagflationary global economy. Feature The world is becoming less stable as stagflation combines with great power competition. Global uncertainty is through the roof. From a macroeconomic perspective, investors need to know whether central banks can whip inflation without triggering a recession. From a geopolitical perspective, investors need to know whether Russia’s conflict with the West will expand, whether US-China and US-Iran tensions will escalate in a damaging way, and whether domestic political rotations in the US and China this fall will lead to more stable and productive economies. China: What Will Happen At The Communist Party Reshuffle? General Secretary Xi Jinping will cement another five-to-10 years in power while promoting members of his faction into key positions on the Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee. By December Xi will roll out a pro-growth strategy for 2023 and the government will signal that it will start relaxing Covid-19 restrictions. But China’s structural problems ensure that this good news for global growth will only have a fleeting effect. China’s governance is shifting from single-party rule to single-person rule. It is also shifting from commercially focused decentralization to national security focused centralization. Xi has concentrated power in himself, in the party, and in Beijing at the expense of political opponents, the private economy, and outlying regions like Hong Kong, the South China Sea, and Xinjiang. The subordination of Taiwan is the next major project, ensuring that China will ally with Russia and that the US and China cannot repair or deepen their economic partnership. Related Report  Geopolitical StrategyWill China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Xi and the Communist Party began centralizing political power and economic control shortly after the Great Recession. At that time it became clear that a painful transition away from export manufacturing and close relations with the United States was necessary. The transition would jeopardize China’s long-term economic, social, political, and geopolitical stability. The Communist Party believed it needed to revive strongman leadership (autocracy) rather than pursuing greater liberalization that would ultimately increase the odds of political revolution (democratization). The Xi administration has struggled to manage the country’s vast debt bubble, given that total debt standing has surged to 287% of GDP. The global pandemic forced the government to launch another large stimulus package, which it then attempted to contain. Corporate and household deleveraging ensued. The property and infrastructure boom of the past three decades has stalled, as the regime has imposed liquidity and capital requirements on banks and property developers to try to avoid a financial crisis. Regulatory tightening occurred in other sectors to try to steer investment into government-approved sectors and reduce the odds of technological advancement fanning social dissent. China’s draconian “zero Covid” policy sought to limit the disease’s toll, improve China’s economic self-reliance, and eliminate the threat of social protest during the year of the twentieth party congress. But it also slammed the brakes on growth. China is highly vulnerable to social instability for both structural and cyclical reasons. Chinese social unrest was our number one “Black Swan” for this year and it is now starting to take shape in the form of angry mortgage owners across the country refusing to make mortgage payments on houses that were pre-purchased but not yet built and delivered (Chart 1). Chart 1China: Mortgage Payment Boycott The mortgage payment boycott is important because it is stemming from the outstanding economic and financial imbalance – the property sector – and because it is a form of cross-regional social organization, which the Communist Party will disapprove. There are other social protests emerging, including low-level bank runs, which must be monitored very closely. Local authorities will act quickly to stop the spread of the mortgage boycott. But unhappy homeowners will be a persistent problem due to the decline of the property sector and industry. China’s property sector looks uncomfortably like the American property sector ahead of the 2006-08 bust. Prices for existing homes are falling while new house prices are on the verge of falling (Chart 2). While mortgages only make up 15% of bank assets, and household debt is only 62% of GDP, households are no longer taking on new debt (Chart 3). Chart 2China's Falling Property Prices​​​​​​ Chart 3China's Property Crisis​​​​​​ Chart 4China's Unemployment Most likely China’s property sector is entering the bust phase that we have long expected – if not, then the reason will be a rapid and aggressive move by authorities to expand monetary and fiscal stimulus and loosen economic restrictions. That process of broad-based easing – “letting 100 flowers bloom” – will not fully get under way until after the party congress, say in December. Unemployment is rising across China as the economy slows, another point of comparison with the United States ahead of the 2008 property collapse (Chart 4). Unemployment is a manipulated statistic so real conditions are likely worse. There is no more important indicator. China’s government will be forced to ease policy, creating a positive impact on global growth in 2023, but the impact will be fleeting. Bottom Line: The underlying debt-deflationary context will prevail before long in China, weighing on global growth and inflation expectations on a cyclical basis. Middle East: Why Did Biden Go And What Will He Get? President Biden traveled to Israel and now Saudi Arabia because he wants Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Arab members of OPEC to increase oil production to reduce gasoline prices at the pump for Americans ahead of the midterm elections (Chart 5). Chart 5Biden Goes To Israel And Saudi Arabia True, fears of recession are already weighing on prices, but Biden embarked on this mission before the growth slowdown was fully appreciated and he is not going to lightly abandon the anti-inflation fight before the midterm election. Biden also went because one of his top foreign policy priorities – the renegotiation of the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran – is falling apart. The Iranians do not want to freeze their nuclear program because they want regime survival and security. While Biden is offering a return to the 2015 deal, the conditions that produced the deal are no longer applicable: Russia and China are not cooperating with the US and EU to isolate Iran. Russia is courting Iran, oil prices are high and sanction enforcement is weak (unlike 2015). The Iranians now know, after the Trump administration, that they cannot trust the Americans to give credible security guarantees that will last across parties and administrations. The war in Ukraine also underscores the weakness of diplomatic security guarantees as opposed to a nuclear deterrent. Hence the joint US and Israeli declaration that Iran will never be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons. The good news is that this kind of joint statement is precisely what needed to occur – the underscoring of the red line – to try to change Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s calculus regarding his drive to achieve nuclear breakout. In 2015 Khamenei gave diplomacy a chance to try to improve the economy, stave off social unrest, prepare the way for his eventual leadership succession process, and secure the Islamic Republic. The bad news is that Khamenei probably cannot make the same decision this time, as the hawkish faction now runs his government, the Americans are unreliable, and Russia and China are offering an alternative strategic orientation. The Saudis will pump more oil if necessary to save the global business cycle but not at the beck and call of a US president. The drop in oil prices reduces their urgency. The Americans can reassure the Saudis and Israel as long as the deal with Iran is not going forward. That looks to be the case. But then the US and Israel will have to undertake joint actions to underline their threat to Iran – and Iran will have to threaten to stage attacks across the region so as to deter any attack. Bottom Line: If a US-Iran deal does not materialize at the last minute, Middle Eastern instability will revive and a new source of oil supply constraint will plague the global economy. We continue to believe a US-Iran deal is unlikely, with only 40% odds of happening. Europe: Will Russia Turn Back On The Natural Gas? Russia’s objective in cutting off European natural gas is to inflict a recession on Europe. It wants a better bargaining position on strategic matters. Therefore we assume Russia will continue to squeeze supplies from now through the winter, when European demand rises and Russian leverage will peak. If Russia allows some flow to return, then it will be part of the negotiating process and will not preclude another cutoff before winter. It is possible that Russia is merely giving Europe a warning and will revert back to supplying natural gas. The problem is that Russia’s purpose is to achieve a strategic victory in Ukraine and in negotiations over NATO’s role in the Nordic countries. Russia has not achieved these goals, so natural gas cutoff will likely continue. Russia also hopes that by utilizing its energy leverage – while it still has it – it will bring forward the economic pain of Europe’s transition away from reliance on Russian energy. In that case European countries will experience recession and households will begin to change their view of the situation. European governments will be more likely to change their policies, to become more pragmatic and less confrontational toward Russia. Or European governments will be voted out of power and do the same thing. Other states could join Hungary in saying that Europe should never impose a full natural gas embargo on Russia. Russia would be able to salvage some of its energy trade with Europe over the long run, despite the war in Ukraine and the inevitable European energy diversification. In recent months we highlighted Italy as the weakest link in the European chain and the country most likely to see such a shift in policy occur. Italy’s national unity coalition had lost its reason for being, while the combination of rising bond yields and natural gas prices weighed on the economy. The Italian bond spread over German bunds has long served as our indicator of European political stress – and it is spiking now, forcing the European Central Bank to rush to plan an anti-fragmentation strategy that would theoretically enable it to tighten monetary policy while preventing an Italian debt crisis (Chart 6). The European Union remains unlikely to break up – Russian aggression was always one of our chief arguments for why the EU would stick together. But Italy will undergo a recession and an election (due by June 2023 but that could easily happen this fall), likely producing a new government that is more pragmatic with regard to Russia so as to reduce the energy strain. Chart 6Italy's Crisis Points To EU Divisions On Russia Italy’s political turmoil shows that European states are feeling the energy crisis and will begin to shift policies to reduce the burden on households. Households will lose their appetite for conflict with Russia on behalf of Ukrainians, especially if Russia begins offering a ceasefire after completing its conquest of the Donetsk area. If Russia expands its invasion, then Europe will expand sanctions and the risk of further strategic instability will go up. But most likely Russia will seek to quit while it is ahead and twist Europe’s arm into foisting a ceasefire onto Ukraine. Bottom Line: A change of government in Italy will increase the odds that the EU will engage in diplomacy with Russia in the coming year, if Russia offers, so as to reach a new understanding, restore natural gas flows, and salvage the economy. This would leave NATO enlargement unresolved but a shift in favor of a ceasefire in Ukraine in 2023 would be less negative for European assets and the euro. UK: Who Will Replace Boris Johnson? Last week UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson fell from power and now the Conservative Party is engaging in a leadership competition to replace him. We gave up on Johnson after he survived his no-confidence vote and yet it became clear that he could not recover in popular opinion. The inflation outburst destroyed his premiership and wiped away whatever support he had gained from executing Brexit. In fact it reinforced the faction that believed Brexit was the wrong decision. Going forward the UK will be consumed with domestic political turmoil as the cost of stagflation mounts, and geopolitical turmoil as Scotland attempts to hold a second independence referendum, possibly by October 2023. Global investors should focus primarily on Scotland’s attempt to secede, since the breakup of the United Kingdom would be a momentous historical event and a huge negative shock for pound sterling. While only 44.7% of Scots voted for independence in 2014, now they have witnessed Brexit, Covid-19, and stagflation, producing tailwinds for the Scots nationalist vote (Chart 7). Chart 7Forget Bojo's Exit, Watch Scotland There are still major limitations on Scotland exiting, since its national capabilities are limited, it would need to join the European Union, and Spain and possibly others will threaten to veto its membership in the European Union for fear of feeding their own secessionist movements. But any new referendum – including one done without the approval of Westminster – should be taken very seriously by investors. Bottom Line: Johnson’s removal will only marginally improve the Tories’ ability to manage the rebellion brewing in the north. A snap election that brings the Labour Party back into power would have a greater chance of keeping Scotland in the union, although it is not clear that such a snap election will happen in time to affect any Scottish decision. The UK faces economic and political turmoil between now and any referendum and investors should steer clear of the pound. (Though we still favor GBP over eastern European currencies). Britain will remain aggressive toward Russia but its ability to affect the Russian dynamic will fall, leaving the US and EU to decide the fate of Russian relations. Japan: What Is The Significance Of Shinzo Abe’s Assassination? Former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was assassinated by a lone fanatic with a handmade gun. The significance of the incident is that Abe will become a martyr for a certain vision of Japan – his vision of Japan, which is that Japan can become a “normal country” that moves beyond the shackles of the guilt of its imperial aggression in World War II. A normal country is one that is economically stable and militarily capable of defending itself – not a pacifist country mired in debt-deflation. Abe stood for domestic reflation and a proactive foreign policy, along with the normalization of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces (JSDF). True, economic policy can become less dovish if necessary to deal with inflation. Some changes at the Bank of Japan may usher in a less dovish shift in monetary policy in particular. But monetary policy cannot become outright hawkish like it was before Abe. And Abe’s fiscal policy was never as loose as it was made out to be, given that he executed several hikes to the consumption tax. Japan’s structural demographic decline and large debt burden will continue to weigh on economic activity whenever real rates and the yen rise. The government will be forced to reflate using monetary and fiscal policy whenever deflation threatens to return. Debt monetization will remain an option for future Japanese governments, even if it is restrained during times of high inflation. Chart 8Shinzo Abe's Legacy ​​​​​​​ This is not only because Japanese households will become depressed if deflation is left unchecked but also because economic growth must be maintained in order to sustain the nation’s new and growing national defense budgets. Japan’s growing need for self defense stems from China’s strategic rise, Russia’s aggression, and North Korea’s nuclearization, plus uncertainty about the future of American foreign policy. These trends will not change anytime soon. Indeed the Liberal Democratic Party’s popularity has increased under Abe’s successor, Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, who will largely sustain Abe’s vision. The Diet still has a supermajority in favor of constitutional revision so as to enshrine the self-defense forces (Chart 8). And the de facto policy of rearmament continues even without formal revision. Bottom Line: Any Japanese leader who attempts to promote a hawkish BoJ, and a dovish JSDF, will fail sooner rather than later. The revolving door of prime ministers will accelerate. As Japan’s longest-serving prime minister, Shinzo Abe opened up the reliable pathway, which is that of a dovish BoJ and a hawkish foreign policy. This is important for the world, as well as Japan, because a more hawkish Japan will increase China’s fears of strategic containment. The frozen conflicts in Asia will continue to thaw, perpetuating the secular rise in geopolitical risk. We remain long JPY-KRW, since the BoJ may adjust in the short term and Chinese stimulus is still compromised, but that trade is on downgrade watch. Investment Takeaways Russia’s energy cutoff is aimed at pushing Europe into recession so as to force policy changes or government changes in Europe that will improve Russia’s position at the negotiating table over Ukraine, NATO, and other strategic disputes. Hence Russia is unlikely to increase the natural gas flow until it believes it has achieved its strategic aims and multiple veto players in the EU will prevent the EU from ever implementing a full-blown natural gas embargo. Chinese stimulus cannot be fully effective until it relaxes Covid-19 restrictions, likely beginning in December or next year when Xi Jinping uses his renewed political capital to try to stabilize the economy. However, China’s government powers alone are insufficient to prevent the debt-deflationary tendency of the property bust. The Middle East faces rising geopolitical tensions that will take markets by surprise with additional energy supply constraints. The implication is continued oil volatility given that global growth is faltering. Once global demand stabilizes, the Middle East’s turmoil will add to existing oil supply constraints to create new price pressures. The odds are not very high of the Federal Reserve achieving a “soft landing” in the context of a global energy shock and a stagflationary Europe and China.   Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com ​​​​​​​ Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix "Batting Average": Geopolitical Strategy Trades () Section II: Special (EDIT this Header) Section III: Geopolitical Calendar

Executive Summary Further GDP Weakness Would Push Brent Lower Markets remain alert for indications of what Russia will do next. Last week, President Vladimir Putin threatened “catastrophic consequences” if G7 states are able to impose a price cap on Russian oil sales. A sharp drop in output – more than 3mm b/d – would send prices sharply higher, and could not be replaced in 2H22. KSA and the UAE are signaling their limited ability to significantly increase oil output ahead of US President Joseph Biden’s visit to the region later this week. Our simulation of demand losses of ~500k b/d in 2H22 and ~1.0mm b/d in 2023 suggests Brent could fall $7/bbl to $108/bb in 2H22 and $8/bbl to $109/bbl in 2023, all else equal. A Russian court decision last week briefly halted flows on the Caspian Pipeline Consortium’s (CPC) 1.3mm b/d line moving Kazakh oil to the Black Sea through Russia, adding a new variable into supply-side modeling. A trivial fine was levied, but a larger message was delivered. Sporadic force majeure declarations and output losses in Libya, where Russian mercenaries actively support Khalifa Haftar’s Libyan National Army (LNA), continue to make supply assessments difficult. Bottom Line: Tight supply fundamentals will keep oil markets volatile and biased to the upside, despite recurrent recession fears overwhelming demand expectations.  While a deep recession cannot be discounted, we remain focused on the objective fact of physically tight markets, and Russia's political-economy considerations affecting the evolution of prices. Feature Anyone who has spent time in trading markets will appreciate the implications of a $65-at-$380/bbl bid-ask spread on Brent. This two-way quote represents worst cases scenarios on the demand and supply sides of the market. And huge uncertainty. The bid comes from Citi’s recession-driven view, while the offer is courtesy of JP Morgan’s worst-case supply-shock assessment – i.e., Russia pulling 5mm b/d off the market if G7 states impose a price cap on its exports.1 Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyCopper Prices Decouple From Fundamentals Of late, demand-side concerns are driving markets, along with other technical factors we discussed in last week’s report on copper: low liquidity in trading markets; elevated global policy uncertainty, as seen by the two-way quote above; worries Fed tightening will overshoot the mark as it attempts to control hotter inflation, and an expansion of Russia’s economic war that now engulfs Ukraine.2 The latter point touches on events that cross commodity markets globally: Russia is threatening “catastrophic consequences” if G7 states impose a price cap on its oil sales. This goes directly to the supply side, as it most likely entails a dramatic gesture to reduce crude oil output sharply – i.e., more than 3mm b/d – which would send prices soaring. Russia’s coffers are in excellent shape at present, given the high prices its oil, gas and coal producers have been able to fetch since it invaded Ukraine.3 In our modeling, if Russia were to cut the 2.3mm b/d of crude and condensate it sent to Europe last year, Brent prices would move above $140/bbl.4 Higher volumes taken off the market would result in higher prices. These factors all interact with each other producing feedback loops – e.g., higher uncertainty causes lower liquidity in hedging markets and wider bid-ask spreads on smaller volumes – affecting decisions on everything from capex levels to headcounts. Demand Concerns Consume Markets Last month, we lowered our Brent forecast for this year and next to $110/bbl and $117/bbl, respectively, on the back of a sharp downgrade in global growth expectations from the World Bank. The Bank’s forecast prompted us to reduce our 2022 oil demand growth forecast to 2.0mm b/d this year vs 4.8mm b/d in our January forecast, and, for next year, to 1.8mm b/d. Given the obvious concern in markets, we simulated another hit to demand of 500k b/d in 2H22 and 1.0mm b/d next year, due to a further markdown in real GDP growth. This scenario brings our demand growth expectation down to 1.5mm b/d this year and 800k b/d next year. In this simulation, the lower GDP growth takes our average price expectation for 2H22 to $108/bbl and $109/bbl next year, or $7/bbl and $8/bbl lower, respectively (Chart 1). The lower demand we model here is offset to some degree by our maintained hypothesis that OPEC 2.0 – particularly its core producers Saudi Arabia and the UAE – will temper production somewhat (Chart 2), so as not to produce very large unintended inventory accumulations (Chart 3). Chart 1Further GDP Weakness Would Push Brent Lower This concern is particularly acute if these producers receive new information that demand is slowing more than they expected. We are certain this will come up when US President Biden is in Riyadh later this week to meet Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud (MBS), to again discuss, among other things, the Kingdom’s ability and willingness to increase supply. Chart 2Core OPEC 2.0 Will Temper Production Increases... Chart 3...To Avoid Unintended Inventory Accumulations Russia Exerts Supply-Side Influence Russia is at war with Ukraine and the West – i.e., the G7 and NATO states arming and actively seeking to limit its access to revenues from the sale of hydrocarbons. Russia is treating this as a war, and it is operating on multiple fronts, in addition to its kinetic engagement with Ukrainian forces. In a market as finely balanced and uncertain as the current one, small, unexpected shifts in supply or demand can have outsized effects. Last week, for example, a decision by a Russian court briefly halted flows on the Caspian Pipeline Consortium’s (CPC) 1.3mm b/d line moving Kazakh oil to the Black Sea. This boosted prices more than 5% over the ensuing couple of days. Flows were allowed to resume after trivial fine was paid and prices fell. But a larger message was delivered. This remains a powerful lever Moscow can use at a moment’s notice to tighten supplies. Opportunities elsewhere in oil-producing provinces also are continuously cultivated by Russian operatives to influence supplies. Sporadic public demonstrations and force majeure declarations have led to output losses in Libya, where Russian mercenaries actively support Khalifa Haftar’s Libyan National Army (LNA). This continues to make supply assessments difficult. Libya currently produces ~ 650k b/d, according to the US EIA, down from ~ 1.12mm b/d in 4Q21. As in many things, Russia’s playing a game of chess with its opponents and forcing them to react to its threats and decisions. And this strategy is not limited to Ukraine, the EU or oil. For example, the seizure of Shell’s ownership in the Sakhalin-2 LNG facilities by Russia’s state-owned Gazprom was described by The Journal of Petroleum Technology (JPT) as a “backdoor” nationalization of Shell’s interest. This will have long-term consequences far removed from the Ukraine War, and could affect LNG deliveries to Japan and South Korea, which will become critical in a super-tight LNG market going into winter. This couldn’t be more timely, as Japan and South Korean – in a first-ever event – attended the end-June NATO meeting.5 Investment Implications Russia’s war against Ukraine has multiple dimensions, all of which can impact oil and gas prices going forward. Despite the obvious concerns over a deep recession reducing global oil demand – and commodity demand generally – we continue to focus on the objective fact of physically tight markets, and Russia's political-economy considerations affecting the evolution of prices. This informs our view that prices will remain volatile with a significant bias to the upside. Small, unexpected shocks in a fundamentally tight market on the supply side support our view prices will move higher.   Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com     Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish Whether the EU can avoid rationing – and fill its natural-gas storage – ahead of winter will depend on what Russia does with its exports of the gas exported on Nord Stream 1 (NS1) and other pipes (Chart 4). We believe Russia will cut off most of its exports to the EU before winter sets in. It likely will use use the current 10-day maintenance on NS1, which began Monday, as a pretext to cut supplies, in retaliation for the EU cutting off crude oil and refined products imports. President Putin of Russia most likely will offer to keep the gas flowing so inventories can be refilled, in return for the EU lifting sanctions it imposed following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Precious Metals: Bullish June headline US CPI was reported at 9.1% yoy, continuing the streak of rising prices. The Fed will need to aggressively hike rates to bring price levels lower, raising the risk of plunging the US into a recession. Recession fears will reduce long-term bond yields and should support gold prices. While high inflation is good for gold, the yellow metal saw investment outflows during May and June, as investors opt for the USD as a safe-haven asset. Ags/Softs: Neutral Food prices fell for the third straight month in June, but still are near historic highs following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.6 Wheat prices fell by 5.7% in June but was still higher by 48.5% compared to 2021 (Chart 5).7 This might be down to recession fears, or, more likely, due to better crop conditions, seasonal availability from new harvests in the northern hemisphere, and more exports from Russia. The UN’s FAO warned factors that drove global prices higher still persist. Russia is expected to harvest one of its largest wheat crops since the fall of the Soviet Union.8 According to the 2022/23 USDA outlook, there will be less supplies and consumption, higher exports and stocks.9 Chart 4 Chart 5   Footnotes 1     Please see Citigroup says oil prices could tumble to $65 by the end of the year if a recession whacks demand, published by businessinsider.com on July 5, 2022, and Oil could hit $380 if Russia slashes output over price cap, J.P.Morgan says, published by reuters.com on July 4, 2022. 2     Please see Copper Prices Decouple From Fundamentals published on July 7, 2022. 3    Please see Russia sees extra $4.5 billion in July budget revenue on higher oil prices published by reuters.com on July 5, 2022. 4    Please see Oil, Natgas Prices Set To Surge, which we published on May 19, 2022.  It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 5    Please see Japan and South Korea's Attendance at the Upcoming NATO Summit Could Worsen Global Tensions, published by time.com on June 16, 2022. 6    Please see Global food prices may be falling, but economist warns Asia’s food costs could still soar published by CNBC on July 11, 2022. 7     Please see Wheat, Corn Prices Tempered- Easing Global Food Cost Concerns published by University of Illinois on July 1, 2022 . 8    Please see Dollar rises to 20-year highs, sends grains lower published by FarmProgress on July 12, 2022. 9    Please see Grain: World Market and Trade published by USDA on July 12, 2022.   Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Trades Closed in 2022

In this <i>Strategy Outlook</i>, we present the major investment themes and views we see playing out for the rest of the year and beyond.

Executive Summary There has never been a modern era recession or sharp slowdown in which the oil price did not collapse. In a recession, the massive destruction of oil demand always overwhelms a tight supply. Across the last six recessions, the median collapse in the oil price was -60 percent, with the best case being -30 percent, and the worst case being -75 percent. Hence, in the coming recession, the oil price is likely headed to $55, with the best case being $85, and the worst case being $30. Investors should short oil, or short oil versus copper. Equity investors should underweight the oil sector versus basic resources and/or industrials and/or banks, and underweight oil-heavy equity markets such as Norway. Fractal trading watchlist: Oil versus industrials, and oil versus banks. Oil Didn’t Get The ‘Everything Sell-Off’ Memo Bottom Line: There has never been a modern era recession or sharp slowdown in which the oil price did not collapse, and this time will be no different. Feature We have just witnessed a rare star-alignment. The near-perfect line up of Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn in the heavens is a spectacular sight for the early birds who can star gaze through clear skies. And it is a rare event, which last happened in 2004. But investors have just witnessed an even rarer star-alignment. The ‘everything sell-off’ in stocks, bonds, inflation-protected bonds, industrial metals, and gold during the second quarter has happened in only one other calendar quarter out of almost 200. Making it a ‘1 in a 100’ event, which last happened way back in 1981 (Chart I-1 and Chart I-2). Chart I-1The ‘Everything Sell-Off’ In 2022… Chart I-2...Last Happened In 1981 As we detailed in our previous reports Markets Echo 1981 When Stagflation Morphed Into Recession and More On 2022-23 = 1981-82 And The Danger Ahead, a once-in-a-generation conjugation connects the ‘1 in a 100’ everything sell-offs in 1981 and 2022. The conjugation is inflation fears, exacerbated by a major war between commodity producing neighbours, and countered by aggressive rate hikes, morph into recession fears. The 1981-82 episode is an excellent blueprint for market action through 2022-23. This makes the 1981-82 episode an excellent blueprint for market action through 2022-23, and we refer readers to the previous reports for the implications for stocks, bonds, equity sectors, and currencies. Oil Didn’t Get The ‘Everything Sell-Off’ Memo But one major investment didn’t get the ‘everything sell-off’ memo. That major investment is crude oil. Even within the commodity space, oil is the outlier. In the second quarter, industrial commodity prices have collapsed: copper, -20 percent; iron ore -25 percent; tin, -40 percent; and lumber, -40 percent. Yet the crude oil price is up, +7 percent, and the obvious explanation is the Russia/Ukraine war (Chart I-3). Chart I-3Oil Didn't Get The 'Everything Sell-Off' Memo The Russia/Ukraine war is an important part of the 2022/1981 once-in-a-generation conjugation. In 1981, just as now, the full-scale invasion-led war between two major commodity producing neighbours – Iraq and Iran – disrupted commodity supplies, and thereby added fuel to an already red-hot inflationary fire. When Russia invaded Ukraine earlier this year, the oil price surged by 25 percent. Remarkably, when Iraq invaded Iran in late 1980, the oil price also surged by 25 percent. But by mid-1981, with the global economy slowing, the oil price had given back those gains. Then, as the economy entered recession in early 1982, the oil price slumped to 15 percent below its pre-war level. If 2022-23 follows this blueprint, it would imply the oil price falling to $85/barrel (Chart I-4). Chart I-4If Oil Follows The 1981-82 Blueprint, It Will Tumble To $85 There Has Never Been A Recession In Which The Oil Price Did Not Collapse Everybody knows the narrative for the oil price surge this year. In what is putatively a very tight market, the embargo of Russian oil has removed enough supply to put significant upward pressure on the price. The trouble with this story is that Russian oil will find a buyer, even if it requires a discount. Moreover, with the major buyers being China and India, it will be politically and physically impossible to police secondary sanctions. The bottom line is that Russian oil will find its way into the market. There has never been a modern era recession or sharp slowdown in which the oil price did not collapse. But the bigger problem will come from the demand side of the equation when the global economy enters, or even just flirts with, a recession. Put simply, because of massive demand destruction, there has never been a modern era recession or sharp slowdown in which the oil price did not collapse (Chart I-5 - Chart I-10). Chart I-5In The Early 80s Recession, Oil Collapsed By -30 Percent Chart I-6In The Early 90s Recession, Oil Collapsed By -60 Percent Chart I-7In The 2000 Dot Com Bust, Oil Collapsed By ##br##-55 Percent Chart I-8In The 2008 Global Financial Crisis, Oil Collapsed By -75 Percent Chart I-9In The 2015 EM Recession, Oil Collapsed By ##br##-60 Percent Chart I-10In The 2020 Pandemic, Oil Collapsed By ##br##-75 Percent Furthermore, as we explained in Oil Is The Accessory To The Murder, a preceding surge in the oil price is a remarkably consistent ‘straw that breaks the camel’s back’, tipping an already fragile economy over the brink into recession. Meaning that the oil price ends up in a symmetrical undershoot to its preceding overshoot. The result being a massive drawdown in the oil price in every modern era recession or sharp slowdown. Specifically: Early 80s recession: -30 percent Early 90s recession: -60 percent 2000 dot com bust: -55 percent 2008 global financial crisis: -75 percent 2015 EM recession: -60 percent 2020 pandemic: -75 percent What about the 1970s episode – isn’t this the counterexample in which the oil price remained stubbornly high despite a recession? No, even in the 1974 recession, the oil price fell by -25 percent.  Moreover, the commonly cited explanation for the elevated nominal price of oil through the 70s is a misreading of history. The popular narrative blames OPEC supply cutbacks related to geopolitical events – especially the US support for Israel in the Arab-Israel war of October 1973.  As neat and popular as this narrative is, it ignores the real culprit: the collapse in August 1971 of the Bretton Woods ‘pseudo gold standard’, which severed the fixed link between the US dollar and quantities of commodities. To maintain the real value of oil, OPEC countries were raising the price of crude oil just to play catch up. Meaning that while geopolitical events may have influenced the precise timing and magnitude of price hikes, OPEC countries were just ‘staying even’ with the collapsing real value of the US dollar, in which oil was priced. In terms of gold, in which oil was effectively priced before 1971, the oil price was no higher in 1980 than in 1971! (Chart I-11) Chart I-11Priced In Gold, The Oil Price Was No Higher In 1980 Than in 1971! Shorting Oil And Oil Plays Will Be Very Rewarding For Patient Investors The four most dangerous words in investment are ‘this time is different’. Today, the oil bulls insist that this time really is different because of an unprecedented structural underinvestment in fossil fuel extraction. Leaving the precariously tight oil market vulnerable to the slightest uptick in demand, or downtick in supply. Maybe. But to reiterate, in a recession, the massive destruction of oil demand always overwhelms a tight supply. In this important regard, this time will not be different. Taking the median drawdown of the last six recessions of 60 percent, and applying it to the post-invasion peak of $130, it implies that, in the coming recession, oil will plunge to $55. In a recession, the massive destruction of oil demand always overwhelms a tight supply. Of course, this is the average of a range of recession outcomes, with the best case being $85 and the worst case being $30. Still, this means that patient investors who short oil can look forward to substantial gains. Alternatively, those who want a hedged position should short oil versus copper – especially as oil versus copper is now at the top of its 25-year trading channel (Chart I-12). Chart I-12Oil Versus Copper Is At The Top Of Its 25-Year Trading Channel Equity investors should underweight the oil sector versus basic resources (Chart I-13) and/or versus industrials and/or versus banks, and underweight oil-heavy stock markets such as Norway (Chart I-14). Chart I-13Underweight Oil Versus Basic Resources Chart I-14Underweight Oil-Heavy Stock Markets Such As Norway Suffice to say, these are all correlated trades. They will all work, or they will all not work. But to repeat, this time is never different. Fractal Trading Watchlist Confirming the fundamental arguments to underweight oil plays, the spectacular recent outperformance of oil equities versus both industrials and banks has reached the point of fragility on its 260-day fractal structures that has reliably signalled previous turning points (Chart I-15). Chart I-15The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Industrials Is Exhausted We are adding oil versus banks to our watchlist, with this week’s recommendation being to underweight oil versus industrials, setting a profit target and symmetrical stop-loss of 10 percent, with a maximum holding period of 6 months. Fractal Trading Watchlist: New Additions The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Banks Is Exhausted Chart 1BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point   Chart 2Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Chart 3CNY/USD At A Potential Turning Point Chart 4US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities Chart 5CAD/SEK Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 6Financials Versus Industrials Has Reversed Chart 7The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Ended Chart 8The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Has Ended Chart 9FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 10Netherlands' Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Is Ending Chart 11The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond At Fractal Fragility Chart 12The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 13Food And Beverage Outperformance Is Exhausted Chart 14German Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 15Japanese Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 16The Strong Downtrend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Has Ended Chart 17The Strong Downtrend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile Chart 18A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 19Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 20Norway's Outperformance Has Ended Chart 21Cotton Versus Platinum Has Reversed Chart 22Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Ended Chart 23USD/EUR Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 24The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Has Ended Chart 25A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare Chart 26GBP/USD At A Potential Turning Point Chart 27US Utilities Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 28The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Banks Is Exhausted Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations  

Executive Summary Russia Squeezes EU Natural Gas Major geopolitical shocks tend to coincide with bear markets, so the market is getting closer to pricing this year’s bad news. But investors are not out of the woods yet. Russia is cutting off Europe’s natural gas supply ahead of this winter in retaliation to Europe’s oil embargo. Europe is sliding toward recession. China is reverting to autocratic rule and suffering a cyclical and structural downshift in growth rates. Only after Xi Jinping consolidates power will the ruling party focus exclusively on economic stabilization. The US can afford to take risks with Russia, opening up the possibility of a direct confrontation between the two giants before the US midterm election. A new strategic equilibrium is not yet at hand. Tactical Recommendation Inception Date Return LONG GLOBAL DEFENSIVES / CYCLICALS EQUITIES 2022-01-20 18.3% Bottom Line: Maintain a defensive posture in the third quarter but look for opportunities to buy oversold assets with long-term macro and policy tailwinds. Feature 2022 is a year of geopolitics and supply shocks. Global investors should remain defensive at least until the Chinese national party congress and US midterm election have passed. More fundamentally, an equilibrium must be established between Russia and NATO and between the US and Iran. Until then supply shocks will destroy demand. Checking Up On Our Three Key Views For 2022 Our three key views for the year are broadly on track: 1.  China’s Reversion To Autocracy: For ten years now, the fall in Chinese potential economic growth has coincided with a rise in neo-Maoist autocracy and foreign policy assertiveness, leading to capital flight, international tensions, and depressed animal spirits (Chart 1). Related Report  Geopolitical StrategyWill China Let 100 Flowers Bloom? Only Briefly. Rising incomes provided legitimacy for the Communist Party over the past four decades. Less rapidly rising incomes – and extreme disparities in standards of living – undermine the party and force it to find other sources of public support. Fighting pollution and expanding the social safety net are positives for political stability and potentially for economic productivity. But converting the political system from single-party rule to single-person rule is negative for productivity. Mercantilist trade policy and nationalist security policy are also negative. China’s political crackdown, struggle with Covid-19, waning exports, and deflating property market have led to an abrupt slowdown this year. The government is responding by easing monetary, fiscal, and regulatory policy, though so far with limited effect (Chart 2). Economic policy will not be decisive in the third quarter unless a crash forces the administration to stimulate aggressively. Chart 1China's Slowdown Leads To Maoism, Nationalism​​​​​​ Chart 2Chinese Policy Easing: Limited Effect So Far​​​​​ Chart 3Nascent Rally In Chinese Shares Will Be Dashed Once General Secretary Xi Jinping secures another five-to-ten years in power at the twentieth national party congress this fall, he will be able to “let 100 flowers bloom,” i.e. ease policy further and focus exclusively on securing the economic recovery in 2023. But policy uncertainty will remain high until then. The party may have to crack down anew to ensure Xi’s power consolidation goes according to plan. China is highly vulnerable to social unrest for both structural and cyclical reasons. The US would jump to slap sanctions on China for human rights abuses. Hence the nascent recovery in Chinese domestic and offshore equities can easily be interrupted until the political reshuffle is over (Chart 3). If China’s economy stabilizes and a recession is avoided, investors will pile into the rally, but over the long run they will still be vulnerable to stranded capital due to Chinese autocracy and US-China cold war. If the Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee are stacked with members of Xi’s faction, as one should expect, then the reduction in policy uncertainty will only be temporary. Autocracy will lead to unpredictable and draconian policy measures – and it cannot solve the problem of a shrinking and overly indebted population. If the Communist Party changes course and stacks the Politburo with Xi’s factional rivals, to prevent China from going down the Maoist, Stalinist, and Putinist route, then global financial markets will cheer. But that outcome is unlikely. Hawkish foreign policy means that China will continue to increase its military threats against Taiwan, while not yet invading outright. Beijing has tightened its grip over Tibet, Xinjiang, and Hong Kong since 2008; Taiwan and the South China Sea are the only critical buffer areas that remain to be subjugated. Taiwan’s midterm elections, US midterms, and China’s party congress will keep uncertainty elevated. Taiwan has underperformed global and emerging market equities as the semiconductor boom and shortage has declined (Chart 4). Hong Kong is vulnerable to another outbreak of social unrest and government repression. Quality of life has deteriorated for the native population. Democracy activists are disaffected and prone to radicalization. Singapore will continue to benefit at Hong Kong’s expense (Chart 5). Chart 4Taiwan Equity Relative Performance Peaked​​​​​​ Chart 5Hong Kong Faces More Troubles​​​​​​ Chart 6Japan Undercuts China China and Japan are likely to engage in clashes in the East China Sea. Beijing’s military modernization, nuclear weapons expansion, and technological development pose a threat to Japanese security. The gradual encirclement of Taiwan jeopardizes Japan’s vital sea lines of communication. Prime Minister Fumio Kishida is well positioned to lead the Liberal Democratic Party into the upper house election on July 10 – he does not need to trigger a diplomatic showdown but he would not suffer from it. Meanwhile China is hungry for foreign distractions and unhappy that Japan is reviving its military and depreciating its currency (Chart 6). A Sino-Japanese crisis cannot be ruled out, especially if the Biden administration looks as if it will lose its nerve in containing China. Financial markets would react negatively, depending on the magnitude of the crisis. North Korea is going back to testing ballistic missiles and likely nuclear weapons. It is expanding its doctrine for the use of such weapons. It could take advantage of China’s and America’s domestic politics to stage aggressive provocations. South Korea, which has a hawkish new president who lacks parliamentary support, is strengthening its deterrence with the United States. These efforts could provoke a negative response from the North. Financial markets will only temporarily react to North Korean provocations unless they are serious enough to elicit military threats from Japan or the United States. China would be happy to offer negotiations to distract the Biden administration from Xi’s power grab. South Korean equities will benefit on a relative basis as China adds more stimulus. 2.  America’s Policy Insularity: President Biden’s net approval rating, at -15%, is now worse than President Trump’s in 2018, when the Republicans suffered a beating in midterm elections (Chart 7). Biden is now fighting inflation to try to salvage the elections for his party. That means US foreign policy will be domestically focused and erratic in the third quarter. Aside from “letting” the Federal Reserve hike rates, Biden’s executive options are limited. Pausing the federal gasoline tax requires congressional approval, and yet if he unilaterally orders tax collectors to stand down, the result will be a $10 billion tax cut – a drop in the bucket. Biden is considering waiving some of former President Trump’s tariffs on China, which he can do on his own. But doing so will hurt his standing in Rust Belt swing states without reducing inflation enough to get a payoff at the voting booth – after all, import prices are growing slower from China than elsewhere (Chart 8). He would also give Xi Jinping a last-minute victory over America that would silence Xi’s critics and cement his dictatorship at the critical hour. Chart 7Democrats Face Shellacking In Midterm Elections​​​​​​ Chart 8Paring Trump Tariffs Won't Reduce Inflation Much​​​​​​ Chart 9Only OPEC Can Help Biden - And Help May Come Late Biden is offering to lift sanctions on Iran, which would free up 1.3 million barrels of oil per day. But Iran is not being forced to freeze its nuclear program by weak oil prices or Russian and Chinese pressure – quite the opposite. If Biden eases sanctions anyway, prices at the pump may not fall enough to win votes. Hence Biden is traveling to Saudi Arabia to make amends with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. OPEC’s interest lies in producing enough oil to prevent a global recession, not in flooding the market on Biden’s whims to rescue the Democratic Party. Saudi and Emirati production may come but it may not come early in the third quarter. Lifting sanctions on Venezuela is a joke and Libya recently collapsed again (Chart 9). Even in dealing with Russia the Biden administration will exhibit an insular perspective. The US is not immediately threatened, like Europe, so it can afford to take risks, such as selling Ukraine advanced and long-range weapons and providing intelligence used to sink Russian ships. If Russia reacts negatively, a direct US-Russia confrontation will generate a rally around the flag that would help the Democrats, as it did under President John F. Kennedy in 1962 – one of the rare years in which the ruling party minimized its midterm election losses (Chart 10). The Cuban Missile Crisis counted more with voters than the earlier stock market slide. 3.  Petro-States’ Geopolitical Leverage: Oil-producing states have immense geopolitical leverage this year thanks to the commodity cycle. Russia will not be forced to conclude its assault on Ukraine until global energy prices collapse, as occurred in 2014. In fact Russia’s leverage over Europe will be greatly reduced in the coming years since Europe is diversifying away from Russian energy exports. Hence Moscow is cutting natural gas flows to Europe today while it still can (Chart 11). Chart 10Biden Can Afford To Take Risks With Russia​​​​​​ Chart 11Russia Squeezes EU's Natural Gas​​​​​​ Chart 12EU/China Slowdown Will Weigh On World Russia’s objective is to inflict a recession and cause changes in either policy or government in Europe. This will make it easier to conclude a favorable ceasefire in Ukraine. More importantly it will increase the odds that the EU’s 27 members, having suffered the cost of their coal and oil embargo, will fail to agree to a natural gas embargo by 2027 as they intend. Italy, for example, faces an election by June 2023, which could come earlier. The national unity coalition was formed to distribute the EU’s pandemic recovery funds. Now those funds are drying up, the economy is sliding toward recession, and the coalition is cracking. The most popular party is an anti-establishment right-wing party, the Brothers of Italy, which is waiting in the wings and can ally with the populist League, which has some sympathies with Russia. A recession could very easily produce a change in government and a more pragmatic approach to Moscow. The Italian economy is getting squeezed by energy prices and rising interest rates at the same time and cannot withstand the combination very long. A European recession or near-recession will cause further downgrades to global growth, especially when considering the knock-on effects in China, where the slowdown is more pronounced than is likely reported. The US economy is more robust but it will have to be very robust indeed to withstand a recession in Europe and growth recession in China (Chart 12). Russia does not have to retaliate against Finland and Sweden joining NATO until Turkey clears the path for them to join, which may not be until just before the Turkish general election due in June 2023. But imposing a recession on Europe is already retaliation – maybe a government change will produce a new veto against NATO enlargement. Russian retaliation against Lithuania for blocking 50% of its shipments to the Kaliningrad exclave is also forthcoming – unless Lithuania effectively stops enforcing the EU’s sanctions on Russian resources. Russia cannot wage a full-scale attack on the Baltic states without triggering direct hostilities with NATO since they are members of NATO. But it can retaliate in other ways. In a negative scenario Moscow could stage a small “accidental” attack against Lithuania to test NATO. But that would force Biden to uphold his pledge to defend “every inch” of NATO territory. Biden would probably do so by staging a proportionate military response or coordinating with an ally to do it. The target would be the Russian origin of attack or comparable assets in the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea, Ukraine, Belarus, or elsewhere. The result would be a dangerous escalation. Russia could also opt for cyber-attacks or economic warfare – such as squeezing Europe’s natural gas supply further. Ultimately Russia can afford to take greater risks than the US over Kaliningrad, other territories, and its periphery more broadly. That is the difference between Kennedy and Biden – the confrontation is not over Cuba. Russia is also likely to take a page out of Josef Stalin’s playbook and open a new front – not so much in Nicaragua as in the Middle East and North Africa. The US betrayal of the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran opens the opportunity for Russia to strengthen cooperation with Iran, stir up the Iranians’ courage, sell them weapons, and generate a security crisis in the Middle East. The US military would be distracted keeping peace in the Persian Gulf while the Europeans would lose their long-term energy alternative to Russia – and energy prices would rise. The Iranians – who also have leverage during a time of high oil prices – are not inclined to freeze their nuclear program. That would be to trade their long-term regime survival for economic benefits that the next American president can revoke unilaterally. Bottom Line: Xi Jinping is converting China back into an autocracy, the Biden administration lacks options and is willing to have a showdown with Russia, and the Putin administration is trying to inflict a European recession and political upheaval. Stay defensive. Checking Up On Our Strategic Themes For The 2020s As for our long-term themes, the following points are relevant after what we have learned in the second quarter: 1.  Great Power Rivalry: The war in Ukraine has reminded investors of the primacy of national security. In an anarchic international system, if a single great nation pursues power to the neglect of its neighbors’ interests, then its neighbors need to pursue power to defend themselves. Before long every nation is out for itself. At least until a new equilibrium is established. For example, Russia’s decision to neutralize Ukraine by force is driving Germany to abandon its formerly liberal policy of energy cooperation in order to reduce Russia’s energy revenues and avoid feeding its military ambitions. Russia in turn is reducing natural gas exports to weaken Europe’s economy this winter. Germany will re-arm, Finland and Sweden will eventually join NATO, and Russia will underscore its red line against NATO bases or forces in Finland and Sweden. If this red line is violated then a larger war could ensue. Chart 13China Will Shift To Russian Energy Until Russia and NATO come to a new understanding, neither Europe nor Russia can be secure. Meanwhile China cannot reject Russia’s turn to the east. China believes it may need to use force to prevent Taiwan independence at some point, so it must prepare for the US and its allies to treat it the same way that they have treated Russia. It must secure energy supply from Russia, Central Asia, and the Middle East via land routes that the US navy cannot blockade (Chart 13). Beijing must also diversify away from the US dollar, lest the Treasury Department freeze its foreign exchange reserves like it did Russia’s. Global investors will see diversification as a sign of China’s exit from the international order and preparation for conflict, which is negative for its economic future. However, the Russo-Chinese alliance presents a historic threat to the US’s security, coming close to the geopolitical nightmare of a unified Eurasia. The US is bound to oppose this development, whether coherently or not, and whether alone or in concert with its allies. After all, the US cannot offer credible security guarantees to negotiate a détente with China or Iran because its domestic divisions are so extreme that its foreign policy can change overnight. Other powers cannot be sure that the US will not suffer a radical domestic policy change or revolution that leads to belligerent foreign policy. Insecurity will drive the US and China apart rather than bringing them together. For example, Russia’s difficulties in Ukraine will encourage Chinese strategists to go back to the drawing board to adjust their plans for military contingencies in Taiwan. But the American lesson from Ukraine is to increase deterrence in Taiwan. That will provoke China and encourage the belief that China cannot wait forever to resolve the Taiwan problem. Until there is a strategic understanding between Russia and NATO, and the US and China, the world will remain in a painful and dangerous transitional phase – a multipolar disequilibrium. Chart 14Hypo-Globalization: Globalizing Less Than Potential 2.  Hypo-Globalization: If national security rises to the fore, then economics becomes a tool of state power. Mercantilism becomes the basis of globalization rather than free market liberalism. Hypo-globalization is the result. The term is fitting because the trade intensity of global growth is not yet in a total free fall (i.e. de-globalization) but merely dropping off from its peaks during the phase of “hyper-globalization” in the 1990s and early 2000s (Chart 14). Hypo-globalization is probably a structural rather than cyclical phenomenon. The EU cannot re-engage with Russia and ease sanctions without rehabilitating Russia’s economy and hence its military capacity – which could enable Russia to attack Europe again. The US and China can try to re-engage but they will fail. Russo-Chinese alliance ensures that the US would be enriching not one but both of its greatest strategic rivals if it reopened its doors to Chinese technology acquisition and intellectual property theft. Iran will see its security in alliance with Russia and China. China has an incentive to develop Iran’s economy so as not to depend solely on Russia and Central Asia. Russia has an incentive to develop Iran’s military capacity so as to deprive Europe of an energy alternative. Both Russia and China wish to deprive the US of strategic hegemony in the Middle East. By contrast the US and EU cannot offer ironclad security guarantees to Iran because of its nuclear ambitions and America’s occasional belligerence. Thus the world can see expanding Russian and Chinese economic integration with Eurasia, and expanding American and European integration with various regions, but it cannot see further European integration with Russia or American integration with China. And ultimately Europe and China will be forced to sever links (Chart 15). Globalization will not cease – it is a multi-millennial trend – but it will slow down. It will be subordinated to national security and mercantilist economic theory. 3.  Populism/Nationalism: In theory, domestic instability can cause introversion or extroversion. But in practice we are seeing extroversion, which is dangerous for global stability (Chart 16). Chart 15Global Economic Disintegration​​​​​​ Chart 16Internal Sources Of Nationalism​​​​​​ Russia’s invasion of Ukraine derived from domestic Russian instability – and instability across the former Soviet space, including Belarus, which the Kremlin feared could suffer a color revolution after the rigged election and mass protests of 2020-21. The reason the northern European countries are rapidly revising their national defense and foreign policies to counter Russia is because they perceive that the threat to their security is driven by factors within the former Soviet sphere that they cannot easily remove. These factors will get worse as a result of the Ukraine war. Russian aggression still poses the risk of spilling out of Ukraine’s borders. China’s Maoist nostalgia and return to autocratic government is also about nationalism. The end of the rapid growth phase of industrialization is giving way to the Asian scourge: debt-deflation. The Communist Party is trying to orchestrate a great leap forward into the next phase of development. But in case that leap fails like the last one, Beijing is promoting “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” and blaming the rest of the world for excluding and containing China. Taiwan, unfortunately, is the last relic of China’s past humiliation at the hands of western imperialists. China will also seek to control the strategic approach to Taiwan, i.e. the South China Sea. China’s claim that the Taiwan Strait is sovereign sea, not international waters, will force the American navy to assert freedom of passage. American efforts to upgrade Taiwan relations and increase deterrence will be perceived as neo-imperialism. The United States, for its part, could also see nationalism convert into international aggression. The US is veering on the brink of a miniature civil war as nationalist forces in the interior of the country struggle with the political establishment in the coastal states. Polarization has abated since 2020, as stagflation has discredited the Democrats. But it is now likely to rebound, making congressional gridlock all but inevitable. A Republican-controlled House will find a reason to impeach President Biden in 2023-24, in hopes of undermining his party and reclaiming the presidency. Another hotly contested election is possible, or worse, a full-blown constitutional crisis. American institutions proved impervious to the attempt of former President Trump and his followers to disrupt the certification of the Electoral College vote. However, security forces will be much more aggressive against rebellions of whatever stripe in future, which could lead to episodes in which social unrest is aggravated by police repression. If the GOP retakes the White House – especially if it is a second-term Trump presidency with a vendetta against political enemies and nothing to lose – then the US will return to aggressive foreign policy, whether directed at China or Iran or both. In short, polarization has contaminated foreign policy such that the most powerful country in the world cannot lead with a steady hand. Over the long run polarization will decline in the face of common foreign enemies but for now the trend vitiates global stability. Chart 17Germany And Japan Rearming It goes without saying that nationalism is also an active force in Iran, where 83-year-old Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei is attempting to ensure the survival of his regime in the face of youthful social unrest and an unclear succession process. If Khamenei takes advantage of the commodity cycle, and American and Israeli disarray, he can make a mad dash for the bomb and try to achieve regime security. But if he does so then nationalism will betray him, since Israel and/or the US are willing to conduct air strikes to uphold the red line against nuclear weaponization. If any more proof of global nationalism is needed, look no further than Germany and Japan, the principal aggressors of World War II. Their pacifist foreign policies have served as the linchpins of the post-war international order. Now they are both pursuing rearmament and a more proactive foreign policy (Chart 17). Nationalism may be very nascent in Germany but it has clearly made a comeback in Japan, which exacerbates China’s fears of containment. The rise of nationalism in India is widely known and reinforces the trend. Bottom Line: Great power rivalry is intensifying because of Russia’s conflict with the West and China’s inability to reject Russia. Hypo-globalization is the result since EU-Russia and US-China economic integration cannot easily be mended in the context of great power struggle. Domestic instability in Russia, China, and the US is leading to nationalism and aggressive foreign policy, as leaders find themselves unwilling or unable to stabilize domestic politics through productive economic pursuits. Investment Takeaways BCA has shifted its House View to a neutral asset allocation stance on equities relative to bonds (Chart 18). Chart 18BCA House View: Neutral Stocks Versus Bonds Geopolitical Strategy remains defensively positioned, favoring defensive markets and sectors, albeit with some exceptions that reflect our long-term views. Tactically stay long US 10-year Treasuries, large caps versus small caps, and defensives versus cyclicals. Stay long Mexico and short the UAE (Chart 19). Strategically stay long gold, US equities relative to global, and aerospace/defense sectors (Chart 20). Among currencies favor the USD, EUR, JPY, and GBP. Chart 19Stay Defensive In Q3 2022​​​​​​ Chart 20Stick To Long-Term Geopolitical Trades​​​​​​ Chart 21Favor Semiconductors But Not Taiwan​​​​​ Chart 22Indian Tech Will Rebound Amid China's Geopolitical Risks​​​​​ Chart 23Overweight ASEAN Go long US semiconductors and semi equipment versus Taiwan broad market (Chart 21). While we correctly called the peak in Taiwanese stocks relative to global and EM equities, our long Korea / short Taiwan trade was the wrong way to articulate this view and remains deeply in the red. Similarly our attempt to double down on Indian tech versus Chinese tech was ill-timed. China eased tech regulations sooner than we expected. However, the long-term profile of the trade is still attractive and Chinese tech will still suffer from excessive government and foreign interference (Chart 22). Go long Singapore over Hong Kong, as Asian financial leadership continues to rotate (see Chart 5 above). Stay long ASEAN among emerging markets. We will also put Malaysia on upgrade watch, given recent Malaysian equity outperformance on the back of Chinese stimulus and growing western interest in alternatives to China (Chart 23).     Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix

Listen to a short summary of this report.     Executive Summary Higher Real Yields Have Weighed On Equity Valuations I had the pleasure of visiting clients in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Abu Dhabi last week. In contrast to the rest of the world, the mood in the Middle East was very positive. While high oil prices are helping, there is also a lot of optimism about ongoing structural reforms. Petrodollar flows are increasingly being steered towards private and public equities. EM assets stand to benefit the most. Producers in the region are trying to offset lost Russian output, but realistically, they will not be able to completely fill the gap in the near term. Today’s high energy prices have largely baked in this reality, as reflected in strongly backwardated futures curves. There was no consensus about how high oil prices would need to rise to trigger a global recession, although the number $150 per barrel got bandied about a lot. Given that most Middle Eastern currencies are pegged to the dollar, there was a heavy focus on Fed policy. Market estimates of the neutral rate in the US have increased rapidly towards our highly out-of-consensus view. Nevertheless, we continue to see modest upside for bond yields over a multi-year horizon. Over a shorter-term 6-to-12-month horizon, the direction of bond yields will be guided by the evolution of inflation. While US CPI inflation rose much more than expected in May, the details of the report were somewhat less worrying, as they continue to show significant supply-side distortions. Bottom Line: Inflation should come down during the remainder of the year, allowing the Fed to breathe a sigh of relief and stocks to recover some of their losses. A further spike in oil prices is a major risk to this view.   Dear Client, Instead of our regular report next week, we will be sending you a Special Report written by Chester Ntonifor, BCA Research’s Chief Foreign Exchange Strategist, discussing the outlook for gold. We will be back the following week with the GIS Quarterly Strategy Outlook, where we will explore the major trends that are set to drive financial markets in the rest of 2022 and beyond. As always, I will hold a webcast discussing the outlook the following week, on Thursday, July 7th. Best regards, Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist Peter in Arabia I had the pleasure of visiting clients in Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Abu Dhabi last week. This note summarizes my impressions and provides some commentary about recent market turmoil. The Mood in the Region is Very Positive In contrast to the rest of the world, the mood in the Middle East was upbeat. Obviously, high oil prices are a major contributor (Chart 1). Across the region, stock markets are still up for the year (Chart 2). Chart 1Oil Prices Have Shot Up Chart 2Middle Eastern Stock Markets Are Doing Relatively Well This Year   That said, I also felt that investors were encouraged by ongoing structural reforms, especially in Saudi Arabia where the Vision 2030 program is being rolled out. The program seeks to diversify the Saudi economy away from its historic reliance on petroleum exports. A number of people I spoke with cited the Saudi sovereign wealth fund’s acquisition of a majority stake in Lucid, a California-based EV startup, as the sort of bold move that would have been unthinkable a few years ago. I first visited Riyadh in May 2011 where I controversially delivered a speech entitled “The Coming Commodity Bust” (oil was $120/bbl then and copper prices were near an all-time high). The city has changed immensely since then. The number of restaurants and entertainment venues has increased exponentially. The ban on women drivers was lifted only four years ago. In that short time, it has become a common-day occurrence. Capital Flows Into and Out of the Region are Reflecting a New Geopolitical Reality In addition to high oil prices and structural reforms, geopolitical considerations are propelling significant capital inflows into the region. The freezing of Russia’s foreign exchange reserves sent a shockwave across much of the world, with a number of other EM countries wondering if “they are next.” Ironically, the Middle East has emerged as a neutral player of sorts in this multipolar world, and hence a safer destination for capital flows. On the flipside, the region’s oil exporters appear to be acting more strategically in how they allocate their petrodollar earnings. Rather than simply parking the proceeds of oil sales in overseas US dollar bank accounts, they are investing them in ways that further their economic and political goals. One clear trend is that equity allocations to both overseas public and private markets are rising. Other emerging markets stand to benefit the most from this development, especially EMs who have assets that Middle Eastern countries deem important – assets tied to food security being a prime example. Assuming that the current level of oil prices is maintained, we estimate that non-US oil exports will rise to $2.5 trillion in 2022, up from $1.5 trillion in 2021 (Chart 3). About 40% of this windfall will flow to the Middle East. That is a big slug of cash, enough to influence the direction of equity markets. Chart 3Oil Exporters Reaping The Benefits Of High Oil Prices Middle Eastern Energy Producers Will Boost Output, But Don’t Expect Any Miracles in the Short Term Russian oil production will likely fall by about 2 million bpd relative to pre-war levels over the next 12 months. To help offset the impact, OPEC has already raised production by 200,000 barrels and will almost certainly bump it up again following President Biden’s visit to the region in July (Chart 4). The decision to raise production to stave off a super spike in oil prices is not entirely altruistic. The region’s oil exporters know that excessively high oil prices could tip the global economy into recession, an outcome that would surely lead to much lower oil prices down the road. There was not much clarity on what that tipping point is, but the number $150 per barrel got bandied around a lot. Politics is also a factor. A further rise in oil prices could compel the US to make a deal with Iran, something the Saudis do not want to see happen. Still, there is a practical limit to how much more oil the Saudis and other Middle Eastern producers can bring to market in the near term. Today’s high energy prices have largely baked in this reality, as reflected in strongly backwardated futures curves (Chart 5). Chart 4Output Trends In The Major Oil Producers Chart 5Energy Prices On Both Sides Of The Atlantic Data on Saudi’s excess capacity is notoriously opaque, but I got the feeling that an extra 1-to-1.5 million bpd was the most that the Kingdom could deliver. The same constraints apply to natural gas. Qatar is investing nearly $30 billion to expand its giant North Field, which should allow gas production to rise by as much as 60%. However, it will take four years to complete the project. The share of Qatari liquefied natural gas (LNG) going to Europe has actually declined this year. About 80% of Qatar’s LNG is sold to Asian buyers under long-term contracts that cannot be easily adjusted. And even if those contracts could be rewritten, this would only bring limited benefits to Europe. For example, Germany has no terminals to accept LNG imports, although it is planning to build two. While there was plenty of sympathy to Europe’s plight in the region, there was also a sense that European governments had been cruising for a bruising by doubling down on strident anti-fossil fuel rhetoric over the past decade without doing much to end their dependence on Russian oil and gas. In that context, few in the region seemed willing to bend over backwards to help Europe. In the meantime, the US remains Europe’s best hope. US LNG shipments to Europe have tripled since last year. The US is now sending nearly three quarters of its liquefied gas to Europe. This has pushed up US natural gas prices, although they still remain a fraction of what they are in Europe. Huge Focus on the Fed Chart 6Most Of The Increase In Bond Yields Has Been In The Real Component Most Middle Eastern currencies are pegged to the dollar, and hence the region effectively imports its monetary policy from the US. Not surprisingly, clients were very focused on the Federal Reserve. Many expressed concern about the abrupt pace of rate hikes. One of our high-conviction views is that the neutral rate of interest in the US has risen as the household deleveraging cycle has ended, fiscal policy has become structurally looser, and a growing number of baby boomers have transitioned from working (and saving) to retirement (and dissaving). The markets have rapidly priced in this view over the course of 2022. The 5-year/5-year forward Treasury yield – a proxy for the neutral rate – has increased from 1.90% at the start of the year to 3.21% at present. Most of this increase in the market’s estimate of the neutral rate has occurred in the real component. The 5-year/5-year forward TIPS yield has climbed from -0.49% to 0.84%; in contrast, the implied TIPS breakeven inflation rate has risen from only 2.24% to 2.37% (Chart 6). Implications of Higher Bond Yields on Equity Prices and the Economy Chart 7Higher Real Yields Have Weighed On Equity Valuations As both theory and practice suggest, there is a strong negative correlation between real bond yields and equity valuations. Chart 7 shows that the S&P 500 forward P/E ratio has been moving broadly in line with the 5-year/5-year forward TIPS yield. The bad news is that there is still scope for bond yields to rise over the long haul. Our fair value estimate of 3.5%-to-4% for the neutral rate is about 25-to-75 basis points above current pricing. The good news is that a high neutral rate helps insulate the economy from a near-term recession. Recessions typically occur only when monetary policy turns restrictive. A few clients cited the negative Q1 GDP reading and the near-zero Q2 growth estimate in the Atlanta Fed GDPNow model as evidence that a US recession is either close at hand or has already begun (Chart 8). Chart 8Underlying US Growth Is Expected To Be Solid In Q2 We would push back against such an interpretation. In contrast to the -1.5% real GDP print, real Gross Domestic Income (GDI) rose by 2.1% in Q1. Conceptually, GDP and GDI should be equal, but since the two numbers are compiled in different ways, there can often be major statistical discrepancies. A simple average of the two suggests the US economy still grew in the first quarter. More importantly, real final sales to private domestic purchasers rose by 3.9% in Q1. This measure of economic activity – which strips out the often-noisy contributions from inventories, government expenditures, and net exports – is the best predictor of future GDP growth of any item in the national accounts (Table 1). Table 1A Good Sign: Real Final Sales To Private Domestic Purchasers Rose By 3.9% In Q1 As far as Q2 is concerned, real final sales to private domestic purchasers are tracking at 2.0% according to the Atlanta Fed model – a clear deceleration from earlier this year, but still consistent with a generally healthy economy. Growth will probably slow in the third quarter, reflecting the impact of higher gasoline prices, rising interest rates, and lower asset prices. Nevertheless, the fundamental underpinnings for the economy – low household debt, $2.2 trillion in excess savings, a dire need to boost corporate capex and homebuilding, and a strong labor market – remain in place. The odds of a recession in the next 12 months are quite low. Gauging Near-Term Inflation Dynamics A higher-than-expected neutral rate of interest implies that bond yields will probably rise from current levels over the long run. Over a shorter-term 6-to-12-month horizon, however, the direction of yields will be guided by the evolution of inflation. While the core CPI surprised on the upside in May, the details of the report were somewhat less worrying, as they continue to show significant supply-side distortions. Excluding vehicles, core goods prices rose 0.3% in May, down from a Q1 average of 0.7% (Chart 9). Recent commentary from companies such as Target suggest that goods inflation will ease further. Chart 9Goods Inflation Is Moderating, While Service Price Growth Is Elevated Stripping out energy-related services, services inflation slowed slightly to 0.6% in May from 0.7% in April. A deceleration in wage growth should help keep a lid on services inflation over the coming months (Chart 10). Chart 10A Deceleration In Wage Growth Should Help Keep Services Inflation Contained During his press conference, Fed Chair Powell described the rise in inflation expectations in the University of Michigan survey as “quite eye-catching.” Although long-term inflation expectations remain a fraction of what they were in the early 1980s, they did rise to the highest level in 14 years in June (Chart 11). Powell also noted that the Fed’s Index of Common Inflation Expectations has been edging higher. The Fed’s focus on ensuring that inflation expectations remain well anchored is understandable. That said, there is a strong correlation between the level of gasoline prices and inflation expectations (Chart 12). If gasoline prices come down from record high levels over the coming months, inflation expectations should drop.  Chart 11Consumer Long-Term Inflation Expectations Keep Rising, But Are Still Not At Historically High Levels Chart 12Lower Gasoline Prices Would Help Soothe Consumer Fears Over Inflation The Fed expects core PCE inflation to fall to 4.3% on a year-over-year basis by the end of 2022. This would require month-over-month readings of about 0.35 percentage points, which is slightly above the average of the past three months (Chart 13). Our guess is that the Fed may be highballing its near-term inflation projections in order to give itself room to “underpromise and overdeliver” on the inflation front. If so, we could see inflation estimates trimmed later this year, which would provide a more soothing backdrop for risk assets. Chart 13AUS Inflation Will Fall By More Than The Fed Expects If The Monthly Change In Core PCE Is Less Than 0.35% (I) Chart 13BUS Inflation Will Fall By More Than The Fed Expects If The Monthly Change In Core PCE Is Less Than 0.35% (II) Concluding Thoughts on Investment Strategy According to Bank of America, fund managers cut their equity exposure to the lowest since May 2020. Optimism on global growth fell to a record low. Meanwhile, bears outnumbered bulls by 39 percentage points in this week’s AAII poll (Chart 14). If the stock market is about to crash, it will be the most anticipated crash in history. In my experience, markets rarely do what most people expect them to do. Chart 14Sentiment Towards Equities Is Pessimistic Chart 15Global Equities Are More Attractively Valued After The Recent Sell-Off Chart 16US And European EPS Estimates Have Been Trending Higher This Year US equities are trading at 16.3-times forward earnings, with non-US stocks sporting a forward P/E ratio of 12.1 (Chart 15). Despite the decline in share prices, earnings estimates in both the US and Europe have increased since the start of the year (Chart 16). The consensus is that those estimates will fall. However, if our expectation that a recession will be averted over the next 12 months pans out, that may not happen. A sensible strategy right now is to maintain a modest overweight to stocks while being prepared to significantly raise equity exposure once clear evidence emerges that inflation has peaked. Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on        LinkedIn Twitter       View Matrix Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores

Dear Client, Next Friday we will publish a Special Report on Gold in conjunction with our colleagues in BCA Research’s Foreign Exchange and Global Investment strategy groups.  We will return to our regular schedule of publishing on Thursdays the following week, with our June 30 ESG report.  Sincerely, Robert Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist Executive Summary Brent Forecast Slightly Lower On Global Growth Downgrade The World Bank’s somewhat sanguine expectation re stagflation risks for 2023 and beyond misreads continuing pressure on commodity markets due to low capex, and disincentives to invest. If central banks are successful in cooling consumer spending via a policy-induced recession, pressure on spare capacity in oil-producing and refining markets will lessen slightly. However, higher interest rates will increase capex costs. Weaker demand from a recession will not batter crude oil prices: core-OPEC 2.0 – KSA and the UAE – and US shale producers will maintain their production-management strategies, keeping markets relatively balanced. Our forecast for 2H22 and 2023 Brent is $115/bbl and $117/bbl on average, down ~ $6 and $5/bbl from last month’s forecast. WTI will trade $3/bbl lower. Europe will enter a recession earlier than other DMs, with natural-gas shipments to the EU from the US and Russia set to decline precipitously. This will tighten food and metals markets, and keep inflation expectations elevated. Bottom Line: Low spare capacity and continued production management by core-OPEC 2.0 and US shale producers will offset lower demand, and continue to support crude and product prices. The odds of prices exceeding $140/bbl remain high. We remain long the S&P GSCI index, and the COMT and CRAK ETFs. At tonight’s close, we will get long the iShares U.S. Oil Equipment & Services ETF (IEZ). Separately, we were stopped out of our XOP, XME and PICK ETFs, with gains of 19%, 7.2% and 7.6% respectively. We will look for opportunities to re-instate them. Feature Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyOne Hot Mess: EU Energy Policy While the World Bank sharply downgraded its global growth expectations for this year and next, it nonetheless maintains a somewhat sanguine view of the risk of stagflation going forward.1 The Bank notes current market conditions closely resemble those of the last bout of prolonged stagflation in the 1970s – characterized by flat-to-lower economic growth and high inflation – but differs in important ways that reduce the likelihood of a recurrence.2 In particular, the Bank cites research indicating the proximate causes of the 1970s stagflation have mostly been addressed, and how central banks are better equipped to avoid the mistakes that produced it: Thus far, markets expect that inflation in the near future will decline, albeit remaining elevated, as global growth cools, monetary policy gets tighter, fiscal support is withdrawn, energy and food prices level off, and supply bottlenecks ease. Moreover, most commentators argue that monetary policy has the tools to return inflation to target rates over time (pp. 53-4). We disagree with this assessment, and expect stagflation risks to remain elevated. This is driven by our high-conviction view that weak capex – and, importantly, continued disincentives to invest in hydrocarbon production and refining – will keep industrial-commodity markets tight well into this decade. Base metals producers also have been parsimonious in capex allocations. The Russia-Ukraine war brought forward the capex reckoning for commodity markets and inflation by highlighting the EU’s near-total dependence on Russian oil and natural gas imports, and the risks on outsourced manufacturing and refining away from domestic markets.3 Addressing long-term policy errors and re-forging global supply chains will be expensive, and will require decades of capex investment to overcome the lack of capacity needed to meet higher demand for coal, oil and natgas. This will delay the global energy-transition to a zero- or low-carbon economy and – because exploration, production, refining and distribution of hydrocarbon-based fuels remains constrained – will keep energy markets, particularly oil, tight. As a result, these markets will be predisposed to frequent price spikes, which will lift the average cost of crude oil and refined products over the foreseeable future. Downgrading Oil Demand Again We are once again downgrading our demand expectation for this year and next, on the back of the macro forces outlined in the World Bank’s June forecast: 1) Tightening monetary policy globally, led by the Fed; 2) Higher inflation, which has been exacerbated by the Russia-Ukraine war; and 3) Supply dislocations in energy and grain markets. Global GDP growth this year is expected to be close to half that of 2021 – 2.9% in real terms vs 5.7% – and was revised sharply lower vs the Bank’s January forecast of 4% growth. On the heels of the Bank’s lower growth expectation, we lowered our 2022 oil demand growth forecast to 2.0mm b/d this year vs 4.8mm b/d in our January forecast (Chart 1). For next year, we expect oil demand to grow 1.8mm b/d. Of particular interest, China’s growth in the first five months of this year was negative – actual demand from Jan-May22 averaged 15.2mm b/d vs 15.4mm b/d last year. This reflects the demand destruction caused by the lockdowns arising from China’s COVID-19 zero-tolerance policy, and is the first time since 2009 y/y growth has fallen (Chart 2). Chart 1Oil Demand Downgraded Following Lower Growth Expectation Chart 2Oil Demand Destruction In China OPEC 2.0 Will Adjust Output We expect core-OPEC 2.0 – the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and the UAE – to continue to calibrate its supply to match the ebb and flow of demand. As a result we expect production declines among “the other guys” – i.e., member states that cannot increase supply or maintain current output – to not be fully compensated by the core producers if they see actual demand falling sharply in 2H22 and next year (Chart 3). As the supplier of the last resort, crude oil production from core-OPEC 2.0 tracks demand. This is the cohort of suppliers within OPEC 2.0 which has sufficient spare capacity to bring supply online and, importantly, is able to maintain higher levels of production in order to meaningfully influence oil markets. Chart 3Core-OPEC 2.0 Might Be Slower Offseting Declines Among "The Other Guys" All else equal, in 2023 KSA and UAE – the two core-OPEC 2.0 nations with most spare capacity within OPEC 2.0 – will need to collectively raise supply by ~ 2mm b/d relative to average oil production in 2021 to ensure inventories do not draw sharply. OPEC 2.0 has been unable to stick to the 400 kb/d monthly crude oil production increases agreed in its July 2021 meeting, as declining investment and weak governance have plagued output from member states. Most recently, Libya has closed nearly all oil fields over the course of this month and last, taking nearly 1.1 mmb/d of oil supply off the market. The difference between the actual and agreed OPEC 2.0 output increases accumulated to ~ 2.0mm b/d as of May 2022. We continue to expect Russia to be firmly in the camp of the “other guys,” with production falling 1.6mm b/d this year and 2mm b/d in 2023 (vs 2021 levels). The production lost due to not being able to fully offset lost sales to the EU following its invasion of Ukraine could approach 3mm b/d next year (vs 2021 levels), depending on how successful Russia is in finding new customers. We also expect the US shale-oil producers to continue to maintain their capital discipline, and not ramp production in response to higher prices (Chart 4). This will be critical for maintaining access to capital markets, particularly if oil demand weakens in response to a global GDP decline. Chart 4US Shale Producers Forced To Maintain Capital Discipline Markets Will Remain Balanced Our supply-demand assessments leave oil markets relatively balanced with slightly lower prices resulting from lower demand (Chart 5). Oil inventories likely rise somewhat before resuming their downward trajectory as supply and demand adjust to lower growth prospects (Chart 6). Chart 5Expect Oil Markets To Remain Balanced Chart 6Oil Inventories Will Draw Importantly, OPEC 2.0’s core producers might welcome a slight rebuilding of inventories, given the relatively low levels of spare capacity available to meet unexpected supply outages or product shortages, say, for a hurricane in the US Gulf (Chart 7). This becomes particularly acute next year, when, as mentioned above, we expect core-OPEC 2.0 will have to increase their output by 2mm b/d vs 2021 levels to balance markets. Given the dynamics of our supply-demand modeling described above, our price forecasts for 2H22 and 2023 are little changed from last month’s estimates (Chart 8). We expect 2H22 Brent prices to average $115/bbl vs $121.30/bbl. This leaves the 2022 average at $110/bbl vs. $113/bbl estimate last month. For 2023, we expect Brent to average $117/bbl vs our earlier estimate of $122/bbl. Chart 7OPEC Spare Capacity Likely Will Tighten Chart 8Brent Forecast Slightly Lower On Global Growth Downgrade These price forecasts and balances are our base case (Table 1). We do not estimate the risk premium the market is likely to impound in prices to cover the high level of uncertainty around oil, natgas and electricity prices in global markets. A sudden cut-off of Russian oil supplies to the EU could easily spike Brent prices above $140/bbl, e.g. Indeed, we continue to accord this outcome a non-trivial probability. Likewise, the Atlantic Hurricane Season starts this month, with the US Climate Prediction Center calling for a higher-than-average number of hurricanes for 2022, given above-average Atlantic temperatures and an ongoing La Niña event.4 Table 1BCA Global Oil Supply - Demand Balances (MMb/d, Base Case Balances) To Dec23 Investment Implications The World Bank’s weaker GDP growth forecast leads us to expect slightly lower demand in 2H22 and 2023. However, low spare capacity and continued production management by core-OPEC 2.0 and US shale producers will keep Brent prices close to $115-117/bbl in 2H22 and 2023, which, as our base case, is not far removed from last month’s forecasts. The odds of prices exceeding $140/bbl remain high, reflecting the razor-thin back-up supply margins available to the crude and product markets globally. We remain long the S&P GSCI index, and the COMT and CRAK ETFs. At tonight’s close, we will get long the iShares U.S. Oil Equipment & Services ETF (IEZ). We will look for opportuities to re-establish our XOP, XME and PICK ETF positions, which were stopped out with gains of 19%, 7.2% and 7.6%, respectively, over the course of this past week.   Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com     Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish European natural gas prices are surging on the back of a loss of exportable LNG volumes from the US Gulf, and on press reports Russia will cut exports to Germany on the Nord Stream (NS) 1 pipeline by ~ 40%. The US supply loss arises from an explosion to at a Freeport LNG terminal in Texas, which accounts for more than 15% of US LNG exports and takes ~ 5 bcm of gas out of the export market. Repairs reportedly will take three months. The loss of natgas supplies on NS1 is being blamed by Russia on an inability to move parts needed to repair the line from Canada due to sanctions imposed following its invasion of Ukraine in February. European gas prices – at the Title Transfer Facility (TTF) in the Netherlands and the National Balancing Point in the UK – surged on the back of this news, and were up 44.28% and 10.15% respectively from Monday’s close to Wednesday trading this week (Chart 9). US gas futures were down 13.81% this week, reflecting a back-up of pipeline natgas that will not make it to the LNG pool until repairs at Freeport are done. Base Metals: Bullish BCA’s China Investment Strategy reported a possible inflection point in household borrowing after nearly two decades of growth (Chart 10). Pandemic-induced lockdowns and declining home prices reduced households’ propensity to take on new debt. Household deleveraging could reduce demand for durables spending and real estate investment, driving down industrial metals’ demand. If deleveraging and lower demand becomes structural, China’s relevance in global metal demand likely will decline. Precious Metals: Bullish On the back of last Friday’s hot inflation data, the Federal Reserve announced a 75 bps rate hike following the June Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting. This likely will reduce the Fed’s credibility after Powell hinted at a 50 bps rate hike for the June meeting in last month’s meeting. The higher rate hike puts the Fed on a more hawkish path, risking the soft landing it has been aiming for. A US recession will be supportive for gold prices.   Chart 9 Chart 10     Footnotes 1     Please see Stagflation Risk Rises Amid Sharp Slowdown in Growth, which includes a link to the Bank’s full June 2022 update. 2     Please see discussion beginning on p. 51 of the Banks June report, “Special Focus 1, Global Stagflation.”  This focus provides a well-researched history of the evolution of inflation. 3    Please see One Hot Mess: EU Energy Policy and Commodities' Watershed Moment, which we published 26 May and on March 10, 2022, for discussion of the EU’s energy dependence on Russia. See also La Niña And The Energy Transition, published on September 30, 2021, for a discussion of refining-concentration risks – particularly for base metals refining, where roughly half of global capacity is concentrated in China. 4    Please see NOAA predicts above-normal 2022 Atlantic Hurricane Season published on May 24, 2022.   Investment Views and Themes Recommendations  New, Pending And Closed Trades WE WERE STOPPED OUT OF OUR LONG S&P OIL & GAS EXPLORATION & PRODUCTION (XOP) ETF TRADE ON JUNE 13, 2022 WITH A RETURN OF 19%. WE WERE STOPPED OUT OF OUR LONG MSCI GLOBAL METALS & MINING PRODUCERS (PICK) ETF TRADE ON JUNE 9, 2022 WITH A RETURN OF 7.56%. WE WERE STOPPED OUT OF OUR LONG SPDR S&P METALS AND MINING (XME) ETF TRADE ON JUNE 9, 2022 WITH A RETURN OF 7.17%. Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Trades Closed in 2022

Executive Summary Natural Gas Markets Eerily Quiet An eerie calm in European natural gas markets belies the state of war in Ukraine that already is producing a cutoff of Russian natgas supplies in retaliation for the EU’s oil embargo. Such cutoffs will accelerate, and send natgas prices in Europe and Asia sharply higher if they occur sooner – as we expect – rather than later. The US will continue to send most of its LNG exports to Europe. These exports are expected to average 12 Bcf/d this year, up 22% from last year’s level. Planners in Europe and Asia will want to secure as much natgas supply as possible by the end of October to refill storage for the November-March withdrawal season, which is beginning to look like another La Niña winter. The US Climate Prediction Center makes the odds of such an event, which is associated with colder-than-normal winters in the Northern Hemisphere, just over 60%. Bottom Line: European governments are preparing their citizens for natgas rationing, in the event of a cutoff of Russian gas. This will occur sooner rather than later. In its wake, EU GDP will fall, and inflation will rise as knock-on effects constrict base metals, fertilizer and food supplies. At tonight’s close, we will be getting long 1Q23 TTF futures on the ICE, expecting prices to again exceed €225/MWh. Feature Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyHigher Gasoline, Diesel Prices Ahead Russia is at war with Ukraine. NATO military support for Ukraine – with the EU at the forefront – is being maintained at a high level, and Ukrainian forces are vigorously defending their homeland.1 The EU embargoed Russian oil imports to sharply reduce funding for Russia’s war machine. Russia will be compelled to follow through on its threat to cut off pipeline gas shipments to Europe, following the embargo.2 It is highly doubtful Russia will countenance the timetable envisioned in the EU embargo, which calls for a phase-out of oil imports by yearend that removes close to 3mm b/d, or 90% of Russia’s sales into its largest market (Chart 1). Equally doubtful is the notion the EU will countenance funding Russia’s war on Ukraine over the course of such a phase-out. Our colleague Matt Gertken, who runs BCA’s Geopolitical Strategy, demonstrated that while such a phase-out schedule may be optimal for both sides – i.e., it prolongs revenue flows to Russia and gas flows to the EU – it almost surely is not an equilibrium.3 An equilibrium in this prisoners’ dilemma obtains when both sides act immediately to end their vulnerability to the other unilaterally upsetting the optimal state – i.e., endure short-term pain for long-term gain (Diagram 1). For this reason, we believe Russia’s cutoff of natgas shipments to the EU will occur sooner rather than later, to inflict maximum pain on the EU going into the coming winter season. The EU knows this, and is preparing its citizens for rationing of natgas. Chart 1EU’s Russian Oil Embargo Cuts Sales By 90% By Year-end Diagram 1The EU, Russia Prisoners’ Dilemma Russian Natgas Cutoff To The EU Underway Russia already has begun reducing natural gas supplies to the EU (Chart 2). Russian gas flows to Finland, Poland, Bulgaria, Netherlands, and Denmark were embargoed after these states refused to pay for gas in rubles (Chart 3). Russia reduced gas shipments to Germany – albeit marginally – after Shell refused to pay for natgas supplied to Germany in rubles. While this only disrupted 1.3% of total natgas consumption in Germany, it showed Russia will quickly act against what it views as “unfriendly” customers.4 Ukraine was forced to shut a gas transit point through which 8% of total Russian gas flows reach Europe, after Russian occupying forces were found to be siphoning gas, according to Gas Transmission System Operator of Ukraine (GTSOU). As a result, gas flows from Russia have taken a further hit and have not recovered (Chart 4). EU member states whose supply of Russian gas has been disrupted will need to search for alternatives. Orsted, an energy company supplying natgas to Denmark, stated it will source gas from the EU market. Given supply constraints in Europe, an increase in the number of bids on the single EU market will raise the Dutch Title Transfer Facility (TTF), all else equal. Chart 2Russia Starts Cutting Gas Flows Chart 3Russian Gas Flows To EU Falling Overall... Chart 4...Particularly Via Ukraine Higher TTF prices will direct gas flows from the US to Europe, reducing gas available for domestic consumption. LNG gas exports to Europe have maintained their upward trend since 2016 and were up by 87% (674 BCF) in 1Q22 vs the same period in 2019 (Chart 5). Chart 5US LNG Exports To Europe Surge Simultaneously, the US witnessed its largest inventory withdrawal this winter in the last four years (Chart 6). Warmer-than-normal temperatures and drought conditions in the US also are increasing domestic demand, as electricity companies are forced to substitute hydroelectric power with natgas-fired generation. Increased exports and weather phenomena have combined to push the Henry Hub contract above $9.50/MMBtu this week, the highest level since 2008. Chart 6US Natgas Inventories Slowly Filling US LNG Exports To Europe Surge Higher European prices for US natgas have disincentivized shipments to Asia, where prices – measured by the Japan Korea Marker (JKM) – have been trading below the TTF so far this year on average (Chart 7). This has allowed European gas inventories to refill at a rapid pace. As of 4 June, the EU’s working gas inventories were ~49% full and are above last year’s level for this time of the year (Chart 8). Chart 7Natural Gas Markets Eerily Quiet Chart 8European Gas Storage Refill Off To A Good Start Shanghai’s reopening will propel Chinese economic activity and demand for natgas, making an already tight global natural gas market tighter. However, the risk of rolling lockdowns in China will keep Asia’s LNG demand in check.5 LNG vessel charter rates have increased sharply since the Russia-Ukraine war began, largely on the back of European demand (Chart 9). We expect this to be a regular feature of the international gas market going forward, as more LNG export capacity is added in the US – it will rise to 12.6 Bcf/d next year, e.g. – and global demand remains strong. Chart 9Surge in LNG Charter Rates   Europe Is Critically Short LNG Infrastructure Most of the EU’s existing 158 Bcm of annual regasification capacity is located around the Iberian Peninsula (Chart 10), which is not well-connected to the rest of Europe. As a result, to substitute Russian piped gas for LNG imports, investments for import terminals and regasification capacity will be required. In its REPowerEU program the European Commission expects to move closer to complete independence from Russian fossil fuels by importing an additional 50 Bcm of LNG per year, reducing demand, and ramping up renewable energy. Germany is aiming for independence from Russian gas flows by planning a shoreside LNG terminal and ordering four Floating Storage and Regasification Units (FSRUs). The FSRUs, which are expected to come online between year-end and the start of next year will have a combined capacity under 24 Bcm per year. Chart 10Europe Needs More Re-Gasification Capacity These plans, however, are not aligned with the nation’s pathway to go carbon neutral by 2045. An environmental activist group has filed a lawsuit to halt the construction of the LNG terminal. The group also is opposed to Germany’s draft LNG acceleration bill, which will allow imports until two years before 2045.6 This reflects two problems all EU nations will face as they transition to LNG from pipeline Russian gas imports. Firstly, member states will need to invest billions of euros in new LNG capacity, and given current politics, likely will have to decide to scrap or repurpose this infrastructure in during the transition to green energy. Opposing this possibility is the high likelihood that EU states will need to enter long-term LNG contracts to ensure supply security and shield themselves from volatile natgas prices. For the immediate future, the EU likely will kick this can down the road for as long as possible. Investment Implications Back in March, Germany and Austria began preparing their citizens for natgas rationing.7 Now the IEA is warning all of Europe the likelihood of such action is increasing rapidly.8 State and local planners throughout Europe will spend the next five months or so lining up as much LNG and pipeline gas as possible going into the coming winter season. While the inventory-injection in Europe is off to a good start, planners most likely hope to exceed their minimum target for filling 80% of storage in time for the November-March withdrawal season. In addition to the risk of a Russian cutoff of supplies, planners have to account for a higher likelihood of a colder-than-normal winter, given the odds of another La Niña winter, which is associated with colder-than-normal winters in the Northern Hemisphere. The US Climate Prediction Center makes the odds of such an event – the third such event in as many years – just over 60%. If European states are forced to implement rationing of natgas, knock-on effects resulting from prioritizing human needs over industrial concerns will, once again, restrict base metals, fertilizer and food supplies. We remain long energy, metals and grains exposure via the S&P GSCI and COMT ETF as the natural-gas drama in Europe plays out. In addition, we remain long the XOP, XME, PICK, and CRAK ETFs to maintain our equity exposure to industrial commodities. At tonight’s close, we will be getting tactically long 1Q22 futures on the ICE, expecting prices to again exceed €225/MWh. This will complement our existing tactical commodity exposures in 4Q22 TTF futures.     Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com     Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish US refined product demand rose just under 4% for the week ended 3 June 2022, led by a surge in jet-fuel demand of 26.5% yoy – finishing at 1.6mm b/d vs. 1.26mm b/d the year earlier, according to the US EIA. This provides further evidence consumer pent-up demand for travel is being released, after the long shut-downs in travel caused by COVID-19 beginning in 1Q20. The surge in jet-fuel demand was enough to offset yoy declines in gasoline and distillates such as diesel fuel and heating oil of 0.9% and 2.8%, respectively. Gasoline inventories were down 800k barrels yoy, which put them 10% below their five-year average level at the end of the reporting week. Distillate inventories rose 2.6mm barrels, but this still left them 23% below their five-year average. Crude oil inventories in the US including those in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), which is being drawn down to provide charging stock to refiners, drew 7.3mm barrels, and stood at 519mm barrels. Versus year-ago levels, crude inventories including the SPR are down 17%. Base Metals: Bullish Copper production in Chile fell 9.8% yoy in April as state-owned copper giant Codelco’s monthly supply fell 6.1% yoy to 116,000 tons. In Peru, protests against mines by displaced communities have seen suspensions in copper mine production, including that of MMG-owned Las Bambas. Although the International Copper Study Group (ICSG) expects a physical surplus for refined copper markets next year, falling production in Chile and civil unrest in Peru continue to plague the rebuilding of stocks (Chart 11). Globally, a risk matrix we reproduced in a report last year showed that approximately 570 million Metric Tons of copper faced a significant ESG risk.9 This increases the risk of new copper projects being stymied by activist groups, and further curtailing future copper production.   Precious Metals: Bullish According to data from World Gold Council, gold ETFs faced net outflows in May as the USD and interest rates strengthened, following the Fed rate hikes (Chart 12). In his speech, Fed Governor Christopher Waller explained that by increasing interest rates, the Fed aims to match labor demand to supply and reduce wage growth, which in turn will lower inflation.10 This, however, does not deal with high inflation via the mechanism of elevated food and fuel prices, which will remain high as long as supply disruptions continue in these markets. Chart 11 Chart 12     Footnotes 1     Please see The Institute For The Study Of War for daily updates of the Russia-Ukraine war. 2     Please see Higher Gasoline, Diesel Prices Ahead, which we published last week, for further discussion of the EU’s embargo of Russian oil imports. The EU embargo initially will be on Russian seaborne oil imports, which will tighten global crude oil and refined-product markets further. Pipeline imports are due to phase out by year-end. Cumulatively, this will translate to a 90% decrease in Russian crude and product exports to the EU, representing ~ 3mm b/d of lost sales. Our report is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 3    Please see Energy Cutoff Continues (GeoRisk Update), published by BCA Research’s Geopolitical Strategy on June 1, 2022. It is available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 4    According to a recent report from Gemeinshcafts Diagnose institution prepared on behalf of Germany’s Federal Ministry of Economics and Climate Protection, if Russia embargos oil and gas to Germany immediately the German economy will fall into a sharp recession.  The cumulative loss to macroeconomic output in 2022 and 2023 will amount to 220 billion euros, or more than 6.5% of annual economic output. 5    For more on the risk of rolling lockdowns in China, please see Not The Time To Be A Contrarian, published by BCA’s Emerging Markets Strategy on May 19, 2022.   6    Please see Germany’s Cabinet Moves to Head Off Lawsuits Against LNG Terminals, published by The Maritime Executive on May 11, 2022 7     Please see Germany Closer To Rationing Natgas, which we published on March 31, 2022. 8    Please see Europe at risk of winter energy rationing, energy watchdog warns, published by ft.com on June 8, 2022. 9    Please see Renewables ESG Risk Grows With Demand, which we published on April 29, 2022 10   For the speech, please see  Responding to High Inflation with Some Thoughts on a Soft Landing.   Investment Views and Themes Recommendations Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Trades Closed in 2022

Executive Summary Crude Oil Prices Will Remain High The EU embargo on Russian seaborne oil imports will tighten global crude oil and refined-product markets further.  Pipeline imports are due to phase out by year-end.  This will translate to a 90% decrease in Russian crude and product exports to the EU, representing ~ 3mm b/d of lost sales. Russian crude oil production will fall to 7-8mm b/d by year-end 2023, unless the state pre-emptively cuts output before that.  This would push crude oil above $140/bbl.  We expect Russia to reduce natural gas exports to the EU in the wake of the oil embargo. Refined-product markets will remain tight, given refining capacity losses, tight crude oil markets and still-strong gasoline and diesel demand. OPEC 2.0 is expected to maintain its policy to nominally increase oil supply by 432k b/d at its meeting this week.  Actual oil output returned to the market by the coalition is ~ 1.5mm – 1.7mm b/d below nominal levels. Bottom Line: Oil markets will continue to tighten in the wake of the EU’s embargo on Russian imports this week.  Refined-product markets will remain well bid, with prices of gasoline, jet and diesel fuel close to or above record levels.  We remain long oil producers and refiners via the XOP and CRAK ETFs, along with the S&P GSCI and COMT ETF, to retain exposure to higher commodity prices and backwardation. Feature Global refined-product markets are tight and getting tighter. Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyOil, Natgas Prices Set To Surge As the Northern Hemisphere driving season gets underway, gasoline and diesel prices in the US are at record levels – up 56.55% and 70.17% respectively yoy. So are jet-fuel prices, which are up 107.97% yoy in the US. Prices are similarly robust ex-US and trading at or close to record levels. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the US permanently lost ~ 5% of total refining capacity. Currently, three of the largest refineries in the US are working on replenishing less than half of that loss by end-2023, which will take total US refining capacity to under 18.5mm b/d. US gasoline stocks are low for this time of the year. Markets expect higher demand this driving season, which unofficially ends in early September with the Labor Day weekend in the US. The US went into the Memorial Day Weekend – the start of the summer driving season – with record high motor gas prices (Chart 1). Gasoline stocks normally build in the off-season winter months. However, this year inventories are depleted (Chart 2) because of relatively high distillate “crack spreads” – gross refining margins – which incentivized refiners to produce more diesel, jet and marine fuels.1 This meant gasoline output was sacrificed in the process, which left markets tight going into the summer driving season.2 Chart 1High Gas Prices Bring In US Driving Season US distillate crack spreads are at record highs, after stocks hit a 14-year low last month (Chart 3). Reduced oil refinery capacity will constrict future supply, keeping prices elevated, which will feed into inflation. Demand destruction will be required to balance markets and bring prices lower. Chart 2Depleted Stocks Due To Low Gasoline Margins Chart 3Low Distillate Stocks Produce Record Cracks Tight Supply-Demand Fundamentals, High Prices US refined-product prices have been strengthening since 2021 due to high crude oil prices, rising demand and lower refinery capacity and utilization rates. This keeps the level of demand for refined products consistently above the level of supply, which forces refiners to pull down inventories or increase imports to cover the supply-demand gaps. Higher refined-product prices ensue as inventories fell. As a result, crack spreads were pushed higher to encourage higher output, which remains problematic because of supply-side pressure in global crude-oil markets (Chart 4). Crude oil prices account for 60% of gasoline and 49% of diesel costs, respectively.3 Last year OPEC 2.0’s production-management strategy kept the level of crude oil supply below demand, but this year additional forces are constraining output. Supply disruptions following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, lower OPEC 2.0 production, and non-OPEC capital discipline, particularly from US shale-oil producers, have combined to constrain crude-oil production. We expect continued production restraint by core OPEC 2.0 (Saudi Arabia and the UAE); lower output from the rest of the coalition; falling Russian supply due to sanctions and an EU embargo on Russian oil imports; and continued capital discipline by shale producers. These factors will offset weaker global oil demand resulting from slower GDP growth in the EU and China. Chart 4Supply Will Barely Rise Despite High Margins Volatile supply-demand dynamics will keep crude oil prices elevated this year and next (Chart 5).4 The EU’s embargo on Russian oil, in particular, will raise oil-price volatility, and leave prices upwardly biased. Lastly, we do not expect the US and Iran to renew the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which would allow ~ 1mm b/d of Iranian exports to return to the market. Chart 5Crude Oil Prices Will Remain High Tighter Product Markets Will Persist Refined-product stocks in the US and the rest of the world were low prior to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, owing to strong demand growth and weak crude-oil supply growth last year, along with lower global refining capacity. US refinery utilization rates last year and earlier this year fell as refiners undertook heavier-than-usual maintenance, which was deferred during the pandemic (Chart 6). Refiners also closed ~ 1mm b/d in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in ~ 5% of US refining capacity being shut-in at the start of 2021.5 Global refining capacity has fallen by more than 2mm b/d since the COVID-19 pandemic.6 As midterm elections approach, the Biden administration has been urging refiners to restart idle capacity to little or no avail, and has threatened to re-introduce export restrictions on crude oil in an attempt to hold down gasoline and diesel prices. Chart 6US Refiners Were Shut-In For Maintenance Gasoline markets are going into their first summer without COVID-19 restrictions since 2020. While US data for the first 3 months of 2022 suggest Americans’ gasoline consumption was more price-inelastic than in the past (Chart 7), a series of record-breaking gasoline prices recently may have been enough to start curbing US gasoline demand (Chart 8). All the same, US consumers appear to be willing to pay up for holiday breaks and get-aways, which will keep pressure on inventories during the summer driving season. Chart 7US Gasoline Demand Price Inelastic In Q1… Chart 8…But Record Breaking Prices May Change That Jet, Diesel Remain Tight, Especially In Europe The approval of an embargo on Russian oil imports into the EU earlier this week means member states on the continent that rely heavily on Russian distillate exports will remain exposed to higher refined-product prices (Chart 9).7 This will keep European diesel prices and crack spreads elevated this year and next (Chart 10). Chart 9EU Dependent On Russia For Diesel Chart 10Europe Refining Margins Will Remain Elevated Shipping markets also will continue to feel the pressure of higher prices, particularly for marine diesel fuel. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine forced insurance rates higher, which propelled shipping-rates higher in Europe and Russia (Chart 11). The EU is now slapping sanctions on insurers. In addition, the Ukraine war forced a re-routing of ships and port congestion, which led to massive supply-chain disruptions due to closures and blockades.8 High refined-product prices partly is the result of European refineries either permanently shutting in production or switching to renewable energy production when faced with low Covid-19-induced demand in 2020. In the first half of 2021, as product demand started to rise, the parabolic increase in prices of natgas – used as a fuel by refiners – was an additional headwind to refining margins. Chart 11Cost Of Shipping Crude, Products Surges As of last December, more than 800 kb/d – or 5% of the continent’s refining capacity – was permanently taken offline during the pandemic.9 As a result, OECD Europe’s refining capacity for 2022 will be 11.4 mmb/d, ~ 0.8 mmb/d below pre-pandemic levels.10 Europe will need to look elsewhere for distillates. Attempting to substitute refined products in such tight energy markets will not be cheap. Sourcing imports from other states will tighten exporters’ domestic refined product markets and dislocate distillate supply to their traditional importers, which will tighten those states’ domestic markets as well. This could lead to something similar to what we are currently witnessing in LNG markets between Europe and Asia. The US, despite having its own tight refined products market, likely will step up as an alternate supplier to fill the Russian distillate supply void for states reliant on Russian diesel, jet and marine fuels. This can be seen in the 32-month high in Gulf Coast diesel exports from the US, which are the result of stronger imports by Europe and LatAm.11 Investment Implications The EU embargo on Russian oil imports will tighten global refined-product markets. If Russia retaliates by pre-emptively cutting crude oil production by 20-30%, prices would significantly exceed our forecast of $113/bbl this year and $122/bbl next year – reaching or surpassing $140/bbl. Refined-product markets will remain well bid, with prices of gasoline, jet and diesel fuel close to or above record levels. We remain long oil producers and refiners via the XOP and CRAK ETFs, along with the S&P GSCI and COMT ETF, to retain exposure to higher commodity prices and backwardation.   Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com     Commodities Round-Up Energy: Bullish We continue to expect Russia to cut off natural gas exports to the EU in retaliation for the embargo on EU oil imports from Russia agreed this week. The timing of this cut-off is uncertain, however. As our colleague Matt Gertken notes in this week’s Geopolitical Strategy, Russia and the EU both would benefit if exports were maintained as long as possible and phased down slowly. This would provide Russia with revenues to wage war in Ukraine, while allowing Europe to avoid recession as it phases out Russian gas. This is not an equilibrium, however, as it leaves both sides exposed to a sudden reversal of the tacit understanding. In equilibrium – i.e., the strategies that guarantee the EU and Russia lose the least – both states reduce their energy trade immediately. Russia needs to show strength in the face of the EU’s embargo, and Europe needs to cut the revenues fueling Russia’s war in Ukraine, which also will deter similar aggression against member states in the future. As soon as the EU weans itself off Russian natgas, Russia’s leverage disappears. If Europe does not diversify immediately, Russia can punish it severely by cutting off energy before it is prepared. (Chart 12). In the meantime, the EU is moving heaven and earth to fill its natgas storage as quickly as possible (Chart 13). According to the GIE AGSI, the percent-full level was 46.68%  as of May 30, 2022. Precious Metals: Bullish Gold prices pared losses last Wednesday after the Federal Open Market Committee’s (FOMC) minutes of the May meeting indicated the Fed will not raise rates by more than the half percentage points markets had priced in for June and July. Recent weakness in gold prices despite heightened geopolitical uncertainty can be attributed to the Fed’s tightening cycle. Rate hikes will increase real interest rates, the opportunity cost of holding non-yielding bullion and strengthen the USD, which competes directly with gold for safe-haven demand, and will also raise the price of gold in local currencies. Base Metals: Bullish Chile’s National Institute of Statistics reported the country’s Mining Production Index fell 10.6% year-over-year (y-o-y) in April, dragging the country’s overall Industrial Production Index lower by 3.6% y-o-y. The drop in mining was due to a 9.8% fall in copper production y-o-y. The contraction in mined copper output this month follows y-o-y contractions of 15%, 7% and 7.2% in January, February and March respectively this year. Chart 12 Chart 13     Footnotes 1     The “crack spread” (or “cracks”) is an industry term for gross margins. It derives its name from the literal cracking of the bonds holding the hydrocarbon molecules of crude oil together under intense heat and pressure, and reforming them into refined products like gasoline and diesel fuel and other liquids and gases. The crack spread is the difference between the price of a refined product and crude oil in USD/bbl. 2     In this report, we focus on diesel fuel and gasoline. Low stocks, high prices and high crack spreads are a feature of jet-fuel markets as well. 3    Please see the US EIA’s May 2022 Gasoline and Fuel Update. 4    Please see Oil, Natgas Prices Set To Surge published on May 19, 2022 for our latest balances and price forecasts. 5    Please see the U.S. EIA’s 30 June, 2021 edition of This Week In Petroleum. 6    Please see White House Eyes Restarting Idle Refineries, published by ttnews.com on May 26, 2022. 7     Please see Breakingviews: Oil embargo will hurt Putin more than EU, published by reuters.com on May 31, 2022. 8    For more on this, please refer to High Food Prices Drive EM Inflation, which we published on May 12, 2022. 9    Please see Viewpoint: European refiners cautious on cusp of 2022, published by Argus Media on December 30, 2021. 10   Please see the IEA’s January 2022 Oil Market Report. 11    Please see to PADD 3 diesel exports reach 32 month high as the competition for the non-Russian molecule begins, published by Vortexa on May 4, 2022.   Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Trades Closed in 2022

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