Policy

Executive Summary Markets Priced For A Restrictive Level Of Australian Rates Markets Priced For A Restrictive Level Of Australian Rates Markets Priced For A Restrictive Level Of Australian Rates The neutral interest rate in Australia is lower than in past cycles, for several reasons: low potential growth, weak productivity, high household debt and inflated housing valuations. Interest rate markets are discounting a very aggressive monetary tightening cycle in Australia, with the RBA Cash Rate expected to reach 2.6% by end-2022 and 3.1% by end-2023. Australian inflation will peak in H2/2022, and the RBA will not need to raise rates beyond the midpoint of the RBA's estimated neutral range of 2-3%. The Australian dollar has not responded to rising interest rate expectations or high commodity prices, largely due to weak Chinese growth. The Aussie is cheap and has upside if China delivers more economic stimulus. The newly-elected Labor-led government will not be able to pursue its ambitious social and environmental agenda without finding more revenue to offset the inflationary impact of larger budget deficits. Expect modest fiscal stimulus, with increased spending, but also minor tax hikes for multinational corporations and high-income earners. Bottom Line: For global bond investors, an overweight allocation to Australian government bonds is warranted with the RBA likely to disappoint aggressive market rate hike expectations. For currency investors, the undervalued Australian dollar is an attractive play on an eventual rebound of Chinese growth. Feature The month of May has been eventful for investors in Australia. The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) delivered its first interest rate hike since 2010 on May 3, a move that markets had expected but which was much earlier than the RBA’s prior forward guidance. The May 21 federal election returned the Labor party to power for the first time since 2013. These events introduce new risks for the Australian economy and financial markets, altering a policy backdrop that had been highly stimulative - and, more importantly, highly predictable - during the pandemic but must now change in response to the new reality of high inflation. In this Special Report, jointly published by BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy, Foreign Exchange Strategy and Geopolitical Strategy, we discuss the investment implications of the start of the monetary tightening cycle and the new government in Australia. Our main conclusions: markets are somehow pricing in both too many RBA rate hikes and not enough currency upside for the Australian dollar, while expectations for major fiscal policy changes should be tempered. Will The RBA Kill The Economic Recovery? Australian government bonds have been one of the worst performers in the developed world so far in 2022 (Chart 1), delivering a total return of -9.1% in AUD terms, and -9% in USD-hedged terms, according to Bloomberg. The benchmark 10-year yield now sits at 3.20%, up +142bps since the start of the year but off the 8-year intraday high of 3.6% reached in early May. Australia has historically been a “high-beta” bond market that sees yields rise more when global bond yields are rising. That is a legacy of the days when the RBA had to push policy rates to levels that exceeded other major central banks like the Fed during global tightening cycles. But by the RBA’s own admission, the neutral policy interest rate is now lower than in previous years, perhaps no more than 0% in real terms according to RBA Governor Philip Lowe. Our RBA Monitor, which consists of economic and financial variables that typically correlate to pressure on the RBA to tighten or ease policy, has been signaling since mid-2021 that higher interest rates were increasingly likely (Chart 2). However, markets have moved to price in a very rapid and aggressive tightening, with a whopping 268bps of rate hikes discounted over the next year in the Australian overnight index swap (OIS) curve. Chart 1Australian Bond Yields Have Surged Vs Global Peers Australian Bond Yields Have Surged Vs Global Peers Australian Bond Yields Have Surged Vs Global Peers ​​​​​ Chart 2Markets Expect Very Aggressive RBA Tightening Markets Expect Very Aggressive RBA Tightening Markets Expect Very Aggressive RBA Tightening ​​​​​​ The growth component of the RBA Monitor will likely soon ease up with the OECD leading economic indicator for Australia in a clear downtrend (bottom panel). However, the inflation component of the RBA Monitor will stay elevated for longer given current high inflation - headline CPI inflation in Australia hit a 20-year high of 5.1% in Q1/2022 - and the tight Australian labor market. Even with those robust inflation pressures, markets are pricing in a peak level of interest rates that appears far more restrictive than the RBA is willing, and likely able, to deliver. We see three primary reasons for this. Weak Potential Growth Implies A Lower Neutral Rate The OIS curve is priced for the RBA Cash Rate staying between 3-4% over the next decade (Chart 3). The real policy rate (adjusted by CPI swap forwards as the proxy for inflation expectations), is expected to average around 1% over that same period. Those are the highest “terminal rate” estimates among the G10 economies. At the press conference following the May 3 rate hike, RBA Governor Lowe noted that “it’s not unreasonable to expect that the normalization of interest rates over the period ahead could see interest rates rise to 2.5%”. Lowe said that was the midpoint of the RBA’s 2-3% inflation target, thus the expected normalization of policy rates would take the inflation-adjusted real rate to 0%. That is a far cry from the more aggressive increase in real rates discounted in the Australian OIS and CPI swap curves. Lowe also noted that a real rate above 0% “over time […] would require stronger productivity growth in Australia.” On that front, the data is not suggesting that the RBA will need to reconsider its views on the neutral real interest rate anytime soon. The 5-year annualized growth rate of labor productivity is an anemic -0.8%, down from the mid-2010s peak of around 1.5% and far below the late-1990s peak of around 2.5% (Chart 4). Chart 3Markets Priced For A Restrictive Level Of Australian Rates Markets Priced For A Restrictive Level Of Australian Rates Markets Priced For A Restrictive Level Of Australian Rates ​​​​​ Chart 4A Powerful Structural Reason For A Lower Australian Neutral Rate A Powerful Structural Reason For A Lower Australian Neutral Rate A Powerful Structural Reason For A Lower Australian Neutral Rate ​​​​​ Chart 5The Australian Housing Cycle Is Peaking The Australian Housing Cycle Is Peaking The Australian Housing Cycle Is Peaking Assuming a pre-pandemic growth rate of the working age population of between 1-1.5%, and productivity around 0.5%, Australia’s potential GDP growth rate is, at best, around 2% (middle panel) and is likely even lower than that. The working-age population growth rate fell to 0% during the pandemic due to migration restrictions that have yet to be lifted. However, population growth had already been slowing pre-COVID due to falling birth rates and reduced worker visa caps in 2018-19. High Household Debt Raises Interest Rate Sensitivity Of Consumer Demand Sluggish trend growth is not the only reason why Australia’s neutral interest rate is lower than markets are discounting. Given elevated housing valuations and aggressive lending practices, highly indebted Australian households are now more sensitive to rate increases than in years past. Australian mortgage lenders began aggressively issuing shorter-term (typically 3-year) fixed rate mortgages in 2020 after the collapse in bond yields due to the initial COVID shock, to entice borrowers to lock in low interest rates. This raised the share of new fixed rate mortgages from a historic average around 15% of all new mortgages to nearly 50%. Since the RBA ended its yield curve control policy last November, which targeted 3-year bond yields, 3-year fixed mortgage rates have surged from 2.93% to 4.34%. That already has had an impact on housing demand - home price growth has peaked in the major cities according to CoreLogic, while building approvals are contracting on a year-over-year basis (Chart 5). As the surge of fixed rate mortgage loans begin to mature in 2023, Australian homeowners will see a major spike in refinancing costs, both for fixed rate and variable rate lending. This trend should weaken home demand, and house price inflation, even further. Inflation Will Soon Peak The RBA expects softer house price inflation to help slow overall Australian inflation rates. The central bank is projecting headline CPI inflation to fall from the latest 5.1% to 4.3% by June 2023 and 2.9% by June 2024 (Chart 6). That would still be a level near the top of the RBA target band, but the downtrend could be even faster than that. As in many other countries, the latest surge in Australian inflation has been led by a rapid increase in goods prices related to severe demand/supply mismatches at a time of global supply chain bottlenecks. Australian goods inflation hit an 31-year high of 6.6% in Q1/2022, essentially matching the housing component of the CPI index (Chart 7). Yet with US goods inflation having already peaked, as have global shipping costs, it is likely that Australia goods inflation will soon follow suit. This will lower headline Australian inflation to levels more consistent with services inflation, which reached 3% in Q1/2022. Chart 6The RBA Sees Persistent Above-Target Inflation The RBA Sees Persistent Above-Target Inflation The RBA Sees Persistent Above-Target Inflation That floor in more domestically-driven services inflation will also be influenced by the pace of wage growth in Australia. The latest reading on the best wage indicator Down Under, the Wage Price Index, showed that year-over-year wage growth only reached 2.4% in Q1/2022. Chart 7Australia Goods Inflation Should Soon Peak Australia Goods Inflation Should Soon Peak Australia Goods Inflation Should Soon Peak ​​​​​ This is a surprisingly low outcome given the tightness of the Australian labor market with the unemployment rate at an all-time low of 3.9% (Chart 8). Depressed labor supply is not a factor keeping the unemployment rate low, as the labor force participation rate and hours worked are both above pre-pandemic levels. Prior to the rate hike at the May 3 policy meeting, the RBA had been highlighting soft wage growth as a reason to delay the start of the monetary tightening cycle. After the May meeting, RBA Governor Lowe noted that according to the RBA’s “liaison” surveys of Australian businesses, nearly 40% of respondents said they were giving wage increases above 3%. The RBA believes that wage growth in the 3-4% range is consistent with Australian inflation remaining within the RBA’s 2-3% target band, a condition that was deemed necessary before rate hikes could begin. The message from the RBA liaison surveys was enough to trigger the start of the tightening cycle. While the Australia OIS curve is priced for an aggressive series of rate hikes, and shorter-term interest rate expectations are elevated, there is less inflationary concern priced into medium-term inflation expectations. The 5-year/5-year forward Australia CPI swap is at 2.2%, down -15bps since the start of 2022 and barely within the RBA target band. Some of that is a global factor – the 5-year/5-year forward US TIPS breakeven has declined by -44bps over just the past month. However, the Australia 5-year/5-year forward CPI swap peaked at the start of the year, just as Australian interest rate expectations began to ratchet higher (the 2-year Australia government bond yield was 0.35% at the start of 2022 and now sits at 2.61%). An increasing amount of discounted rate hikes, occurring alongside falling inflation expectations, is a sign that markets are incrementally pricing in a restrictive monetary policy. We agree with RBA Governor Lowe’s assessment that the neutral nominal Cash Rate is, at best, 2.5%. Thus, the current discounted peak in the Cash Rate of 3.2% would be restrictive. Very strong consumer spending growth at a time when inflation was already high could be a sign that a restrictive monetary stance is now necessary. However, the outlook for Australian consumption is not without risks. Consumer confidence has plunged alongside declining purchasing power, as wage growth has lagged the inflation upturn (Chart 9). While the expectation is that inflation will peak and wage growth will pick up over the latter half of 2022, it is still uncertain if the relative moves will be large enough to give a meaningful lift to real wage growth and consumer spending power. Chart 8Medium-Term Inflation Expectations Falling, Despite Low Unemployment Medium-Term Inflation Expectations Falling, Despite Low Unemployment Medium-Term Inflation Expectations Falling, Despite Low Unemployment ​​​​​​ Chart 9Headwinds For The Australian Consumer Headwinds For The Australian Consumer Headwinds For The Australian Consumer ​​​​​​ The RBA believes that consumer spending will be supported by the high level of savings, with the household saving rate currently at 13.6%. Yet the high level of household debt means that debt service burdens will rise as interest rates move higher, which may limit the degree to which Australian consumers run down savings to fuel greater consumer spending. Another reason why a more restrictive monetary policy could be needed is if there was a substantial loosening of fiscal policy that was fueling faster growth, especially at a time when inflation was already overshooting. This makes an analysis of the latest election results highly relevant to the path of Australian interest rates. Bottom Line: Markets are pricing in a shift to a restrictive level of interest rates in Australia, an outcome that is not necessary with inflation set to peak at a time of high household leverage. Labor Party Takes Power With Limited Political Capital Australia’s federal election on May 21 brought a Labor Party government into power, headed by new Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. National policy is unlikely to change substantially. Australia has low political risk but high geopolitical risk – meaning that domestic politics are manageable for investors but China’s conflict with the West and other geopolitical events are revolutionizing Australia’s place in the world. The previous Liberal-National Coalition government had been in power since 2013, had never found a stable leader, and had been buffeted by a series of external shocks: a commodity bust, China trade conflict, the COVID-19 pandemic, and inflation. Hence it is no surprise that Labor came back to power – it almost did so in 2019. However, Labor’s popularity is questionable. The new government does not have a robust political mandate: Labor will fall short of a single-party majority (or will have a very thin majority at best): As we go to press, Labor won 74 seats out of 151 in the House of Representatives. A party needs 76 seats for a majority. Labor will likely rely on three Green Party seats and some of the 10 independents to pass legislation. These minor parties will have considerable influence. Labor’s popular vote share is underwhelming: Labor won 32.8% of the popular vote, down from 33.3% in 2019, and beneath the 36% of the vote won by the outgoing Liberal-National Coalition (Table 1). The Green Party rose to 12% of the vote. While this only translates to three seats in parliament, the Greens will hold the balance of power. Table 1Australian Federal Election Results, 2022 The New Normal In Australia The New Normal In Australia Labor does not control the Senate: A bill requires a majority vote in both the House and Senate for passage. A majority requires 38 seats, but Labor and the Greens are currently slated to fall short at 36 seats. Hence, as in the House, the Labor Party will rely on “cross-bench” votes from minor parties to get a majority for bills. Labor won through pragmatism and moderation: Having suffered a surprise defeat in 2019, the Labor Party adopted a more moderate and pragmatic tone in the current election. Prime Minister Albanese campaigned on a motto of “safe change,” declared that he was “not woke,” and adopted a relatively hawkish tilt on trade and foreign policy (China relations) and immigration (“boat people”). Labor has limited room for maneuver in international relations: China’s economy is slowing down and stimulus does not work as well as it used to. China’s political system is reverting to autocracy and the Xi Jinping administration is attempting to carve a sphere of influence in the region, increasing long-term security threats to Australia in Southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands. China has declared a “no limits” strategic partnership with a belligerent Russia, leaving the US no option but to pursue containment strategy against both powers. Prime Minister Albanese has already met with President Biden and the Quadrilateral Dialogue to emphasize Australia’s need to counter China’s newly assertive foreign policy. While Albanese may attempt to reduce trade tensions with China, any such moves will be heavily constrained. Inflation, not climate change, brought Labor to power: The media is hailing the election as a historic shift on the question of climate change and climate policy. But popular opinion has not changed much on this topic in recent years and the election results only partially support the thesis. A better explanation is that the pandemic and its inflationary aftermath galvanized opposition to the ruling Liberal-National Coalition. Hence both fiscal policy and climate policy – the most important areas of change – will be constrained by inflation. Chart 10Australia Cannot Cut Defense Amid China Challenge The New Normal In Australia The New Normal In Australia There are two key policy takeaways from the above assessment: First, on fiscal policy, the new Labor-led government will face limitations due to inflation and the macroeconomic cycle. It will likely respond to inflation – the crisis that got it elected – even though China’s slowdown will produce negative surprises for global and Australian growth. The government will not be able to cut defense spending given the geopolitical setting (Chart 10). That means it will also not be able to pursue its ambitious social and environmental agenda without finding more revenue to offset the inflationary impact of larger budget deficits. Tax hikes are coming for multinational corporations and high-income earners. In terms of the size of the fiscal impact, the Labor Party promised spending increases worth AUD$18.9 billion (1.0% of GDP), to be offset by tax hikes amounting to AUD$11.5 billion in new revenue (0.6% of GDP). The result would be an AUD$7.5 billion increase in the budget deficit (0.4% of GDP) – a net fiscal stimulus (Chart 11). Currently the IMF projects a 1.84% fiscal drag in the cyclically adjusted budget deficit for 2023, so Labor’s plans would reduce that drag by 0.4%. However, the fiscal plans will change once the new Treasurer James Chalmers produces a new budget proposal in October. Comparison with a like-minded economy is therefore useful to put the policy change into perspective. Canada’s politics shifted from center-right to center-left in 2015 and the left-leaning government at that time put forward an agenda similar to Australia’s Labor Party today. Ultimately the budget balance declined from 0.17% to -0.45% of GDP from peak to trough (Chart 12). This 0.62% of GDP stimulus provides a point of comparison. Yet inflation was not a constraint on government spending at that time. The new Australian government may not exceed that size of stimulus in an inflationary context. But it could easily surpass it if the global economy falls back into recession. Chart 11Australian Labor’s Proposed Fiscal Stimulus The New Normal In Australia The New Normal In Australia ​​​​​​ Chart 12Canada Offers Clue To Size Of Australian Stimulus The New Normal In Australia The New Normal In Australia ​​​​​​ Second, on climate policy, the new ruling coalition probably will pass major climate legislation, given the importance of Greens and left-leaning independents. But Labor will have to constrain the smaller parties’ climate ambitions to preserve popular support in areas where fossil fuel industries remain strong. Australia consumes substantially more carbon per capita than other developed economies and will continue to rely on fossil fuel exports for growth. In other words, climate policy will bring incremental rather than radical change. Bottom Line: If a global recession is avoided, then the new government’s counter-cyclical fiscal policies may work. If not, they will produce a double whammy for the Australian economy: new corporate and resource taxes on top of a slowdown in exports. The AUD As A Shock Absorber Despite a higher repricing of the interest rate curve in Australia, and elevated commodity prices, the Australian dollar (AUD) has been very soft. Part of the story is broad-based US dollar strength that has sapped any potential rebound in the AUD. More specifically, a survey of the key drivers of the AUD unveils the main source of currency weakness, by process of elimination: The divergence in monetary policy between the RBA and the Fed? No. Clearly, that has not been a driver this time around as the RBA is expected to lift rates to 3.2% over the next 12 months, in line with market pricing for rate hikes from the Federal Reserve. The commodity cycle? No. Commodity prices are softening, after being in a supply-driven bull market. As a premier resource producer, the Australian economy is intricately intertwined with the outlook for coal, iron ore, copper and even liquefied natural gas prices. As Chart 13 highlights, the AUD has massively deviated from the level implied by rising terms of trade for Australia. This is a departure from a historical correlation that has been in place since the end of the Bretton Woods system. Resource booms tend to be either demand or supply driven, or a combination of both. This time around supply restrictions have played a major role. The message from the AUD is that it responds much better to improving demand conditions. Global and relative growth dynamics? YES: The overarching driver of a weak AUD as hinted above has been slowing Chinese demand. The Zero COVID-19 policy in China has led to a drastic reduction in import volumes. This is hurting Australia’s external balance at the margin, as Chinese import volumes contract (Chart 14). Chart 13The AUD Has Lagged Terms Of Trade The AUD Has Lagged Terms Of Trade The AUD Has Lagged Terms Of Trade ​​​​​ Chart 14The AUD Is Very Sensitive To China The AUD Is Very Sensitive To China The AUD Is Very Sensitive To China There are two key takeaways from the above analysis. First, the hawkish path for interest rates priced for the RBA is not yet reflected in a weak AUD. This implies that currency and bond markets are on a collision course. Either the RBA ratifies market pricing and triggers a coiled spring rebound in the AUD, or hawkish expectations will be tempered as inflationary pressures moderate. Second, the AUD will be very sensitive to any improvement in Chinese demand, the overarching driver of currency weakness. We expect the Chinese authorities to ramp up credit stimulus, to offset weakening demand from the Zero COVID-19 policy. The AUD has historically been very sensitive to changes in Chinese money and credit variables (Chart 15). From a fundamental perspective, a lot of pessimism is embedded in the Aussie dollar. Australian GDP has already recovered above pre-pandemic levels and could be on a path to achieve escape velocity if China recovers. Chinese fiscal and monetary policy should be eased going forward. Chinese bond yields have already dropped, reflecting an easing in domestic financial conditions. Meanwhile, Australia’s commodity exposure is well suited for a green energy shift. Besides being relatively competitive in supplying the types of raw materials that China needs and wants, (higher-grade ore, which is more expensive, but pollutes less, and is in high demand in China), Australia is a big exporter of liquefied natural gas, whose prices have been soaring in recent months and is critical in the Russia-Ukraine conflict and green energy shift (Chart 16). This will provide a multi-year tailwind for Australian export volumes and terms of trade. Chart 15The Chinese Economy Could Be Bottoming The Chinese Economy Could Be Bottoming The Chinese Economy Could Be Bottoming ​​​​​ Chart 16Australia Is Resource Superstar Australia Is Resource Superstar Australia Is Resource Superstar ​​​​​ Bottom Line: BCA Research Foreign Exchange Strategy went long AUD at 72 cents. In the near term, this position could prove quite volatile as markets try to discern a clear path for global growth. But given cheap valuations and beaten down sentiment, it should prove profitable in the longer term. Investment Conclusions For Fixed Income Investors Chart 17Australian Government Bond Investment Recommendations Australian Government Bond Investment Recommendations Australian Government Bond Investment Recommendations Our careful analysis of Australian growth, inflation, the RBA’s likely next moves leads us to the following investment conclusions for Australian bonds (Chart 17): Maintain neutral duration exposure within dedicated Australian bond portfolios (for now): On a forward basis, the entire Australian yield curve is converging to that discounted 3.5% peak in the Cash Rate (top panel). Eventually, Australian bond yields will fall once inflation clearly peaks in H2/2022 and markets realize that the RBA will not be hiking as fast as expected, justifying an above-benchmark duration tilt. Until then, Australian bond yields will be rangebound, especially with the RBA no longer buying bonds via quantitative easing, leaving more bond issuance to be absorbed by private investors. Underweight Australian inflation-linked bonds versus nominal-paying government bonds: Inflation will soon peak, and the discounted RBA stance is too hawkish – a recipe for lower inflation breakevens. Overweight Australian government bonds within global bond portfolios: Australia has returned to its “high-yield-beta” status, which means that an overweight stance is warranted when global bond yields are stable or falling. BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy’s Global Duration Indicator, a growth-focused leading indicator of the momentum of global bond yields, is signalling a more stable backdrop for global yields over the rest of 2022. The Duration Indicator is also a fine leading indicator of the relative return performance of Australian government bonds (middle panel) and is supportive of an overweight stance on Australian debt. Go Long December 2022 Australia Bank Bill futures: This is a tactical trade (i.e. investment horizon of no more than six months), based on the extreme pricing of rate hikes by year-end. The market price of the December 2022 futures contract is currently 97.11, or an implied interest rate of 2.89% compared to the current RBA Cash Rate of 0.35%. That contract is priced for far too many rate hikes than will be delivered over the remaining seven RBA meetings of 2022.   Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com Chester Ntonifor Chief Foreign Exchange Strategist ChesterN@bcaresearch.com Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com

Executive Summary Markets Priced For A Restrictive Level Of Australian Rates Markets Priced For A Restrictive Level Of Australian Rates Markets Priced For A Restrictive Level Of Australian Rates The neutral interest rate in Australia is lower than in past cycles, for several reasons: low potential growth, weak productivity, high household debt and inflated housing valuations. Interest rate markets are discounting a very aggressive monetary tightening cycle in Australia, with the RBA Cash Rate expected to reach 2.6% by end-2022 and 3.1% by end-2023. Australian inflation will peak in H2/2022, and the RBA will not need to raise rates beyond the midpoint of the RBA's estimated neutral range of 2-3%. The Australian dollar has not responded to rising interest rate expectations or high commodity prices, largely due to weak Chinese growth. The Aussie is cheap and has upside if China delivers more economic stimulus. The newly-elected Labor-led government will not be able to pursue its ambitious social and environmental agenda without finding more revenue to offset the inflationary impact of larger budget deficits. Expect modest fiscal stimulus, with increased spending, but also minor tax hikes for multinational corporations and high-income earners. Bottom Line: For global bond investors, an overweight allocation to Australian government bonds is warranted with the RBA likely to disappoint aggressive market rate hike expectations. For currency investors, the undervalued Australian dollar is an attractive play on an eventual rebound of Chinese growth. Feature The month of May has been eventful for investors in Australia. The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) delivered its first interest rate hike since 2010 on May 3, a move that markets had expected but which was much earlier than the RBA’s prior forward guidance. The May 21 federal election returned the Labor party to power for the first time since 2013. These events introduce new risks for the Australian economy and financial markets, altering a policy backdrop that had been highly stimulative - and, more importantly, highly predictable - during the pandemic but must now change in response to the new reality of high inflation. In this Special Report, jointly published by BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy, Foreign Exchange Strategy and Geopolitical Strategy, we discuss the investment implications of the start of the monetary tightening cycle and the new government in Australia. Our main conclusions: markets are somehow pricing in both too many RBA rate hikes and not enough currency upside for the Australian dollar, while expectations for major fiscal policy changes should be tempered. Will The RBA Kill The Economic Recovery? Australian government bonds have been one of the worst performers in the developed world so far in 2022 (Chart 1), delivering a total return of -9.1% in AUD terms, and -9% in USD-hedged terms, according to Bloomberg. The benchmark 10-year yield now sits at 3.20%, up +142bps since the start of the year but off the 8-year intraday high of 3.6% reached in early May. Australia has historically been a “high-beta” bond market that sees yields rise more when global bond yields are rising. That is a legacy of the days when the RBA had to push policy rates to levels that exceeded other major central banks like the Fed during global tightening cycles. But by the RBA’s own admission, the neutral policy interest rate is now lower than in previous years, perhaps no more than 0% in real terms according to RBA Governor Philip Lowe. Our RBA Monitor, which consists of economic and financial variables that typically correlate to pressure on the RBA to tighten or ease policy, has been signaling since mid-2021 that higher interest rates were increasingly likely (Chart 2). However, markets have moved to price in a very rapid and aggressive tightening, with a whopping 268bps of rate hikes discounted over the next year in the Australian overnight index swap (OIS) curve. Chart 1Australian Bond Yields Have Surged Vs Global Peers Australian Bond Yields Have Surged Vs Global Peers Australian Bond Yields Have Surged Vs Global Peers ​​​​​ Chart 2Markets Expect Very Aggressive RBA Tightening Markets Expect Very Aggressive RBA Tightening Markets Expect Very Aggressive RBA Tightening ​​​​​​ The growth component of the RBA Monitor will likely soon ease up with the OECD leading economic indicator for Australia in a clear downtrend (bottom panel). However, the inflation component of the RBA Monitor will stay elevated for longer given current high inflation - headline CPI inflation in Australia hit a 20-year high of 5.1% in Q1/2022 - and the tight Australian labor market. Even with those robust inflation pressures, markets are pricing in a peak level of interest rates that appears far more restrictive than the RBA is willing, and likely able, to deliver. We see three primary reasons for this. Weak Potential Growth Implies A Lower Neutral Rate The OIS curve is priced for the RBA Cash Rate staying between 3-4% over the next decade (Chart 3). The real policy rate (adjusted by CPI swap forwards as the proxy for inflation expectations), is expected to average around 1% over that same period. Those are the highest “terminal rate” estimates among the G10 economies. At the press conference following the May 3 rate hike, RBA Governor Lowe noted that “it’s not unreasonable to expect that the normalization of interest rates over the period ahead could see interest rates rise to 2.5%”. Lowe said that was the midpoint of the RBA’s 2-3% inflation target, thus the expected normalization of policy rates would take the inflation-adjusted real rate to 0%. That is a far cry from the more aggressive increase in real rates discounted in the Australian OIS and CPI swap curves. Lowe also noted that a real rate above 0% “over time […] would require stronger productivity growth in Australia.” On that front, the data is not suggesting that the RBA will need to reconsider its views on the neutral real interest rate anytime soon. The 5-year annualized growth rate of labor productivity is an anemic -0.8%, down from the mid-2010s peak of around 1.5% and far below the late-1990s peak of around 2.5% (Chart 4). Chart 3Markets Priced For A Restrictive Level Of Australian Rates Markets Priced For A Restrictive Level Of Australian Rates Markets Priced For A Restrictive Level Of Australian Rates ​​​​​ Chart 4A Powerful Structural Reason For A Lower Australian Neutral Rate A Powerful Structural Reason For A Lower Australian Neutral Rate A Powerful Structural Reason For A Lower Australian Neutral Rate ​​​​​ Chart 5The Australian Housing Cycle Is Peaking The Australian Housing Cycle Is Peaking The Australian Housing Cycle Is Peaking Assuming a pre-pandemic growth rate of the working age population of between 1-1.5%, and productivity around 0.5%, Australia’s potential GDP growth rate is, at best, around 2% (middle panel) and is likely even lower than that. The working-age population growth rate fell to 0% during the pandemic due to migration restrictions that have yet to be lifted. However, population growth had already been slowing pre-COVID due to falling birth rates and reduced worker visa caps in 2018-19. High Household Debt Raises Interest Rate Sensitivity Of Consumer Demand Sluggish trend growth is not the only reason why Australia’s neutral interest rate is lower than markets are discounting. Given elevated housing valuations and aggressive lending practices, highly indebted Australian households are now more sensitive to rate increases than in years past. Australian mortgage lenders began aggressively issuing shorter-term (typically 3-year) fixed rate mortgages in 2020 after the collapse in bond yields due to the initial COVID shock, to entice borrowers to lock in low interest rates. This raised the share of new fixed rate mortgages from a historic average around 15% of all new mortgages to nearly 50%. Since the RBA ended its yield curve control policy last November, which targeted 3-year bond yields, 3-year fixed mortgage rates have surged from 2.93% to 4.34%. That already has had an impact on housing demand - home price growth has peaked in the major cities according to CoreLogic, while building approvals are contracting on a year-over-year basis (Chart 5). As the surge of fixed rate mortgage loans begin to mature in 2023, Australian homeowners will see a major spike in refinancing costs, both for fixed rate and variable rate lending. This trend should weaken home demand, and house price inflation, even further. Inflation Will Soon Peak The RBA expects softer house price inflation to help slow overall Australian inflation rates. The central bank is projecting headline CPI inflation to fall from the latest 5.1% to 4.3% by June 2023 and 2.9% by June 2024 (Chart 6). That would still be a level near the top of the RBA target band, but the downtrend could be even faster than that. As in many other countries, the latest surge in Australian inflation has been led by a rapid increase in goods prices related to severe demand/supply mismatches at a time of global supply chain bottlenecks. Australian goods inflation hit an 31-year high of 6.6% in Q1/2022, essentially matching the housing component of the CPI index (Chart 7). Yet with US goods inflation having already peaked, as have global shipping costs, it is likely that Australia goods inflation will soon follow suit. This will lower headline Australian inflation to levels more consistent with services inflation, which reached 3% in Q1/2022. Chart 6The RBA Sees Persistent Above-Target Inflation The RBA Sees Persistent Above-Target Inflation The RBA Sees Persistent Above-Target Inflation That floor in more domestically-driven services inflation will also be influenced by the pace of wage growth in Australia. The latest reading on the best wage indicator Down Under, the Wage Price Index, showed that year-over-year wage growth only reached 2.4% in Q1/2022. Chart 7Australia Goods Inflation Should Soon Peak Australia Goods Inflation Should Soon Peak Australia Goods Inflation Should Soon Peak ​​​​​ This is a surprisingly low outcome given the tightness of the Australian labor market with the unemployment rate at an all-time low of 3.9% (Chart 8). Depressed labor supply is not a factor keeping the unemployment rate low, as the labor force participation rate and hours worked are both above pre-pandemic levels. Prior to the rate hike at the May 3 policy meeting, the RBA had been highlighting soft wage growth as a reason to delay the start of the monetary tightening cycle. After the May meeting, RBA Governor Lowe noted that according to the RBA’s “liaison” surveys of Australian businesses, nearly 40% of respondents said they were giving wage increases above 3%. The RBA believes that wage growth in the 3-4% range is consistent with Australian inflation remaining within the RBA’s 2-3% target band, a condition that was deemed necessary before rate hikes could begin. The message from the RBA liaison surveys was enough to trigger the start of the tightening cycle. While the Australia OIS curve is priced for an aggressive series of rate hikes, and shorter-term interest rate expectations are elevated, there is less inflationary concern priced into medium-term inflation expectations. The 5-year/5-year forward Australia CPI swap is at 2.2%, down -15bps since the start of 2022 and barely within the RBA target band. Some of that is a global factor – the 5-year/5-year forward US TIPS breakeven has declined by -44bps over just the past month. However, the Australia 5-year/5-year forward CPI swap peaked at the start of the year, just as Australian interest rate expectations began to ratchet higher (the 2-year Australia government bond yield was 0.35% at the start of 2022 and now sits at 2.61%). An increasing amount of discounted rate hikes, occurring alongside falling inflation expectations, is a sign that markets are incrementally pricing in a restrictive monetary policy. We agree with RBA Governor Lowe’s assessment that the neutral nominal Cash Rate is, at best, 2.5%. Thus, the current discounted peak in the Cash Rate of 3.2% would be restrictive. Very strong consumer spending growth at a time when inflation was already high could be a sign that a restrictive monetary stance is now necessary. However, the outlook for Australian consumption is not without risks. Consumer confidence has plunged alongside declining purchasing power, as wage growth has lagged the inflation upturn (Chart 9). While the expectation is that inflation will peak and wage growth will pick up over the latter half of 2022, it is still uncertain if the relative moves will be large enough to give a meaningful lift to real wage growth and consumer spending power. Chart 8Medium-Term Inflation Expectations Falling, Despite Low Unemployment Medium-Term Inflation Expectations Falling, Despite Low Unemployment Medium-Term Inflation Expectations Falling, Despite Low Unemployment ​​​​​​ Chart 9Headwinds For The Australian Consumer Headwinds For The Australian Consumer Headwinds For The Australian Consumer ​​​​​​ The RBA believes that consumer spending will be supported by the high level of savings, with the household saving rate currently at 13.6%. Yet the high level of household debt means that debt service burdens will rise as interest rates move higher, which may limit the degree to which Australian consumers run down savings to fuel greater consumer spending. Another reason why a more restrictive monetary policy could be needed is if there was a substantial loosening of fiscal policy that was fueling faster growth, especially at a time when inflation was already overshooting. This makes an analysis of the latest election results highly relevant to the path of Australian interest rates. Bottom Line: Markets are pricing in a shift to a restrictive level of interest rates in Australia, an outcome that is not necessary with inflation set to peak at a time of high household leverage. Labor Party Takes Power With Limited Political Capital Australia’s federal election on May 21 brought a Labor Party government into power, headed by new Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. National policy is unlikely to change substantially. Australia has low political risk but high geopolitical risk – meaning that domestic politics are manageable for investors but China’s conflict with the West and other geopolitical events are revolutionizing Australia’s place in the world. The previous Liberal-National Coalition government had been in power since 2013, had never found a stable leader, and had been buffeted by a series of external shocks: a commodity bust, China trade conflict, the COVID-19 pandemic, and inflation. Hence it is no surprise that Labor came back to power – it almost did so in 2019. However, Labor’s popularity is questionable. The new government does not have a robust political mandate: Labor will fall short of a single-party majority (or will have a very thin majority at best): As we go to press, Labor won 74 seats out of 151 in the House of Representatives. A party needs 76 seats for a majority. Labor will likely rely on three Green Party seats and some of the 10 independents to pass legislation. These minor parties will have considerable influence. Labor’s popular vote share is underwhelming: Labor won 32.8% of the popular vote, down from 33.3% in 2019, and beneath the 36% of the vote won by the outgoing Liberal-National Coalition (Table 1). The Green Party rose to 12% of the vote. While this only translates to three seats in parliament, the Greens will hold the balance of power. Table 1Australian Federal Election Results, 2022 The New Normal In Australia The New Normal In Australia Labor does not control the Senate: A bill requires a majority vote in both the House and Senate for passage. A majority requires 38 seats, but Labor and the Greens are currently slated to fall short at 36 seats. Hence, as in the House, the Labor Party will rely on “cross-bench” votes from minor parties to get a majority for bills. Labor won through pragmatism and moderation: Having suffered a surprise defeat in 2019, the Labor Party adopted a more moderate and pragmatic tone in the current election. Prime Minister Albanese campaigned on a motto of “safe change,” declared that he was “not woke,” and adopted a relatively hawkish tilt on trade and foreign policy (China relations) and immigration (“boat people”). Labor has limited room for maneuver in international relations: China’s economy is slowing down and stimulus does not work as well as it used to. China’s political system is reverting to autocracy and the Xi Jinping administration is attempting to carve a sphere of influence in the region, increasing long-term security threats to Australia in Southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands. China has declared a “no limits” strategic partnership with a belligerent Russia, leaving the US no option but to pursue containment strategy against both powers. Prime Minister Albanese has already met with President Biden and the Quadrilateral Dialogue to emphasize Australia’s need to counter China’s newly assertive foreign policy. While Albanese may attempt to reduce trade tensions with China, any such moves will be heavily constrained. Inflation, not climate change, brought Labor to power: The media is hailing the election as a historic shift on the question of climate change and climate policy. But popular opinion has not changed much on this topic in recent years and the election results only partially support the thesis. A better explanation is that the pandemic and its inflationary aftermath galvanized opposition to the ruling Liberal-National Coalition. Hence both fiscal policy and climate policy – the most important areas of change – will be constrained by inflation. Chart 10Australia Cannot Cut Defense Amid China Challenge The New Normal In Australia The New Normal In Australia There are two key policy takeaways from the above assessment: First, on fiscal policy, the new Labor-led government will face limitations due to inflation and the macroeconomic cycle. It will likely respond to inflation – the crisis that got it elected – even though China’s slowdown will produce negative surprises for global and Australian growth. The government will not be able to cut defense spending given the geopolitical setting (Chart 10). That means it will also not be able to pursue its ambitious social and environmental agenda without finding more revenue to offset the inflationary impact of larger budget deficits. Tax hikes are coming for multinational corporations and high-income earners. In terms of the size of the fiscal impact, the Labor Party promised spending increases worth AUD$18.9 billion (1.0% of GDP), to be offset by tax hikes amounting to AUD$11.5 billion in new revenue (0.6% of GDP). The result would be an AUD$7.5 billion increase in the budget deficit (0.4% of GDP) – a net fiscal stimulus (Chart 11). Currently the IMF projects a 1.84% fiscal drag in the cyclically adjusted budget deficit for 2023, so Labor’s plans would reduce that drag by 0.4%. However, the fiscal plans will change once the new Treasurer James Chalmers produces a new budget proposal in October. Comparison with a like-minded economy is therefore useful to put the policy change into perspective. Canada’s politics shifted from center-right to center-left in 2015 and the left-leaning government at that time put forward an agenda similar to Australia’s Labor Party today. Ultimately the budget balance declined from 0.17% to -0.45% of GDP from peak to trough (Chart 12). This 0.62% of GDP stimulus provides a point of comparison. Yet inflation was not a constraint on government spending at that time. The new Australian government may not exceed that size of stimulus in an inflationary context. But it could easily surpass it if the global economy falls back into recession. Chart 11Australian Labor’s Proposed Fiscal Stimulus The New Normal In Australia The New Normal In Australia ​​​​​​ Chart 12Canada Offers Clue To Size Of Australian Stimulus The New Normal In Australia The New Normal In Australia ​​​​​​ Second, on climate policy, the new ruling coalition probably will pass major climate legislation, given the importance of Greens and left-leaning independents. But Labor will have to constrain the smaller parties’ climate ambitions to preserve popular support in areas where fossil fuel industries remain strong. Australia consumes substantially more carbon per capita than other developed economies and will continue to rely on fossil fuel exports for growth. In other words, climate policy will bring incremental rather than radical change. Bottom Line: If a global recession is avoided, then the new government’s counter-cyclical fiscal policies may work. If not, they will produce a double whammy for the Australian economy: new corporate and resource taxes on top of a slowdown in exports. The AUD As A Shock Absorber Despite a higher repricing of the interest rate curve in Australia, and elevated commodity prices, the Australian dollar (AUD) has been very soft. Part of the story is broad-based US dollar strength that has sapped any potential rebound in the AUD. More specifically, a survey of the key drivers of the AUD unveils the main source of currency weakness, by process of elimination: The divergence in monetary policy between the RBA and the Fed? No. Clearly, that has not been a driver this time around as the RBA is expected to lift rates to 3.2% over the next 12 months, in line with market pricing for rate hikes from the Federal Reserve. The commodity cycle? No. Commodity prices are softening, after being in a supply-driven bull market. As a premier resource producer, the Australian economy is intricately intertwined with the outlook for coal, iron ore, copper and even liquefied natural gas prices. As Chart 13 highlights, the AUD has massively deviated from the level implied by rising terms of trade for Australia. This is a departure from a historical correlation that has been in place since the end of the Bretton Woods system. Resource booms tend to be either demand or supply driven, or a combination of both. This time around supply restrictions have played a major role. The message from the AUD is that it responds much better to improving demand conditions. Global and relative growth dynamics? YES: The overarching driver of a weak AUD as hinted above has been slowing Chinese demand. The Zero COVID-19 policy in China has led to a drastic reduction in import volumes. This is hurting Australia’s external balance at the margin, as Chinese import volumes contract (Chart 14). Chart 13The AUD Has Lagged Terms Of Trade The AUD Has Lagged Terms Of Trade The AUD Has Lagged Terms Of Trade ​​​​​ Chart 14The AUD Is Very Sensitive To China The AUD Is Very Sensitive To China The AUD Is Very Sensitive To China There are two key takeaways from the above analysis. First, the hawkish path for interest rates priced for the RBA is not yet reflected in a weak AUD. This implies that currency and bond markets are on a collision course. Either the RBA ratifies market pricing and triggers a coiled spring rebound in the AUD, or hawkish expectations will be tempered as inflationary pressures moderate. Second, the AUD will be very sensitive to any improvement in Chinese demand, the overarching driver of currency weakness. We expect the Chinese authorities to ramp up credit stimulus, to offset weakening demand from the Zero COVID-19 policy. The AUD has historically been very sensitive to changes in Chinese money and credit variables (Chart 15). From a fundamental perspective, a lot of pessimism is embedded in the Aussie dollar. Australian GDP has already recovered above pre-pandemic levels and could be on a path to achieve escape velocity if China recovers. Chinese fiscal and monetary policy should be eased going forward. Chinese bond yields have already dropped, reflecting an easing in domestic financial conditions. Meanwhile, Australia’s commodity exposure is well suited for a green energy shift. Besides being relatively competitive in supplying the types of raw materials that China needs and wants, (higher-grade ore, which is more expensive, but pollutes less, and is in high demand in China), Australia is a big exporter of liquefied natural gas, whose prices have been soaring in recent months and is critical in the Russia-Ukraine conflict and green energy shift (Chart 16). This will provide a multi-year tailwind for Australian export volumes and terms of trade. Chart 15The Chinese Economy Could Be Bottoming The Chinese Economy Could Be Bottoming The Chinese Economy Could Be Bottoming ​​​​​ Chart 16Australia Is Resource Superstar Australia Is Resource Superstar Australia Is Resource Superstar ​​​​​ Bottom Line: BCA Research Foreign Exchange Strategy went long AUD at 72 cents. In the near term, this position could prove quite volatile as markets try to discern a clear path for global growth. But given cheap valuations and beaten down sentiment, it should prove profitable in the longer term. Investment Conclusions For Fixed Income Investors Chart 17Australian Government Bond Investment Recommendations Australian Government Bond Investment Recommendations Australian Government Bond Investment Recommendations Our careful analysis of Australian growth, inflation, the RBA’s likely next moves leads us to the following investment conclusions for Australian bonds (Chart 17): Maintain neutral duration exposure within dedicated Australian bond portfolios (for now): On a forward basis, the entire Australian yield curve is converging to that discounted 3.5% peak in the Cash Rate (top panel). Eventually, Australian bond yields will fall once inflation clearly peaks in H2/2022 and markets realize that the RBA will not be hiking as fast as expected, justifying an above-benchmark duration tilt. Until then, Australian bond yields will be rangebound, especially with the RBA no longer buying bonds via quantitative easing, leaving more bond issuance to be absorbed by private investors. Underweight Australian inflation-linked bonds versus nominal-paying government bonds: Inflation will soon peak, and the discounted RBA stance is too hawkish – a recipe for lower inflation breakevens. Overweight Australian government bonds within global bond portfolios: Australia has returned to its “high-yield-beta” status, which means that an overweight stance is warranted when global bond yields are stable or falling. BCA Research Global Fixed Income Strategy’s Global Duration Indicator, a growth-focused leading indicator of the momentum of global bond yields, is signalling a more stable backdrop for global yields over the rest of 2022. The Duration Indicator is also a fine leading indicator of the relative return performance of Australian government bonds (middle panel) and is supportive of an overweight stance on Australian debt. Go Long December 2022 Australia Bank Bill futures: This is a tactical trade (i.e. investment horizon of no more than six months), based on the extreme pricing of rate hikes by year-end. The market price of the December 2022 futures contract is currently 97.11, or an implied interest rate of 2.89% compared to the current RBA Cash Rate of 0.35%. That contract is priced for far too many rate hikes than will be delivered over the remaining seven RBA meetings of 2022.   Robert Robis, CFA Chief Fixed Income Strategist rrobis@bcaresearch.com Chester Ntonifor Chief Foreign Exchange Strategist ChesterN@bcaresearch.com Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com

Executive Summary EU Surprises Carbon Market With Increased CO2 Emission Allowance Supply EU Surprises Carbon Market With Increased CO2 Emission Allowance Supply EU Surprises Carbon Market With Increased CO2 Emission Allowance Supply The EU's failed foreign policy – premised on ever-deeper engagement with the Soviet Union and, after it collapsed, Russia – will drive its hot mess of an energy policy for years. In the short term, the EU's REPowerEU scheme proposed last week to fund the decoupling from Russia will lift its green-house gas (GHG) emissions, if the sale of €20 billion of EU Emission Trading System (ETS) allowances goes forward. Markets traded lower over the week, to make room for the higher ETS pollution-permit supply. This could increase the volume of allowances sales needed to reach the €20 billion target. Another €10 billion investment in natgas pipelines also will be funded. Longer-term, the acceleration of the EU's renewable-power build-out via so-called Projects of Common Interest (PCI) will get an €800 billion boost, with another round of funding to be proposed for early next year. EU funding will lift base metals and steel prices – raising the cost of the renewables build-out – and keep fossil-fuels well bid.   Bottom Line: The REPowerEU scheme will increase volatility in the EU's ETS market, and add significant new demand to base metals and fossil-fuel markets. The propensity of EU policymakers to interfere in its ETS market makes it unattractive. We remain long the S&P GSCI index, and the COMT, XOP, XME and PICK ETFs expecting higher base metals, oil and gas prices. Tactically, we are getting long 4Q22 Brent calls struck at $120/bbl, anticipating an EU embargo of Russian oil imports. Feature Over the past three decades, foreign policy for the EU largely was set by Germany, the organization's most powerful economy. Successive generations of German politicians championed the idea that the West could bring the former Soviet Union – and later Russia – into the modern world of global trade through Ostpolitik, which had, at its core, a belief in the power of trade to effect political and economic change.1 This change-through-trade policy survived the Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union and rise of Russia from its ashes. It also survived Russia's first invasion of Ukraine in 2014. Indeed, following that invasion, Russia marked the completion of its Nord Stream 2 (NS2) natural gas pipeline – running parallel to NS1 – in September of last year. If NS2 were up and running now, it would have increased Russian gas flows into the EU and its revenue flows.2 As our Geopolitical Strategists noted, Germany even got the Biden administration to agree in summer 2021 to set aside any sanctions so that Germany could operate NS2 with Russia. Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyDie Cast By EU: Inflation, Recession Risks Rise Yet Russia did not share the German commitment to economic engagement within a US-led liberal international order. Russia's second invasion of Ukraine in February was a bridge too far, and catalyzed the EU's response, again led by Germany, to de-couple from Russia in the energy sector. The EU's reversal of a failed foreign policy, which produced its dependence on Russian energy, leaves it with a hot mess of an energy policy that is evolving rapidly. In its wake, volatility in the EU carbon-trading market has ensued, along with the promise of an accelerated doubling-down on renewable-energy generation. Higher Emissions, Lower Emissions Prices Last week, the EU proposed its REPowerEU scheme, which is meant to enable the decoupling of the EU from Russian energy dependence by funding hundreds-of-billions-of-euros in new energy investments over coming years.3 Chart 1EU Surprises Carbon Market With Increased CO2 Emission Allowance Supply EU Surprises Carbon Market With Increased CO2 Emission Allowance Supply EU Surprises Carbon Market With Increased CO2 Emission Allowance Supply In a history heavily laden with paradox, this new scheme will lift the EU's green-house gas (GHG) emissions – including CO2 – if the sale of €20 billion of EU Emission Trading System (ETS) allowances goes forward.4 So, in the breach, the EU is willing to significantly relax its environmental goals – the E in ESG – to begin undoing its failed foreign policy. Markets already are making room for this increased ETS pollution-permit supply, which, as allowances prices weaken, will require additional supplies to reach the €20 billion target (Chart 1). This will lead to higher coal and fossil fuel usage during Germany's hot-mess de-coupling with Russia. In addition to raising funds by selling pollution permits, the EU will invest another €10 billion in natgas pipelines. This will help counter the likely loss of Russian gas when it embargoes Russian oil imports, but will take time (a few years) to actually put in the ground.5 The additional pipe would address one of the EU's weakest energy links: the lack of pipeline capacity to transport liquified natural gas (LNG) inland once it arrives in Europe. Europe pushed hard to re-load natgas inventories ahead of the coming winter season, and appears to have made progress in this regard (Chart 2). Europe was a strong bid for LNG in the first four months of this year, according to Refinitiv reporting.6 LNG imports were up 58% over the first four months of this year, totaling 45.3mm MT. This kept European natgas prices elevated vs. Asia (Chart 3). Chart 2Europe Re-Loads Storage One Hot Mess: EU Energy Policy One Hot Mess: EU Energy Policy Chart 3Europe Outbids Asia For LNG One Hot Mess: EU Energy Policy One Hot Mess: EU Energy Policy The back-and-forth between the Asian and European markets will continue for the rest of this year, particularly going into the Northern Hemisphere's summer, when demand for natgas in Asia, in particular, will remain strong. REPowerEU Will Boost Base Metals Demand Longer term, the EU's REPowerEU proposal, if approved, will accelerate the EU's renewable-power build-out via so-called Projects of Common Interest (PCI). The proposal contains €800 billion to support new renewable-energy proposals, with another round of funding proposed for early next year.   The doubling down by the EU on renewables will lift base metals and steel prices as soon as the REPowerEU program starts funding investments in renewable technology and short-term projects like pipeline buildouts (maybe sooner as hedges are placed). Given the tightness already apparent in the base metals markets, this will raise the price of critical materials – copper, aluminum, steel – and will, in the process, keep fossil-fuels well bid: large capital projects do not get done without a lot of diesel and gasoline being consumed.7  The EU is not alone in its desire to accelerate renewables investment: The US is funding a similar build-out, as is China, which will be accelerating its infrastructure and renewables investments. The constraint on all of these programs to build out renewables is low capex in base metals (Chart 4), and oil and gas (Chart 5). This has kept the level of supply from quickly responding to increased demand, which keeps these markets in sharp backwardations. Market tightness in metals and energy will be compounded by stronger bids from the three largest economic centers in the world – the EU, US and China.Chart 4Weak Capex Holds Base Metals Supply Growth Down … One Hot Mess: EU Energy Policy One Hot Mess: EU Energy Policy Investment Implications Chart 5… And Oil + Gas Supply Growth One Hot Mess: EU Energy Policy One Hot Mess: EU Energy Policy The EU's REPowerEU scheme is not a done deal, but we give it high odds of being adopted. It will increase volatility in the EU's ETS market, and add significant new demand to base metals and fossil-fuel markets. In terms of where to take risk, now that this proposal has been floated, we would avoid getting long carbon permits traded on the EU's ETS carbon market, given the propensity of policymakers to meddle excessively, which, in and of itself, is a risk that is difficult – if not impossible – to forecast. However, we do continue to favor being long the S&P GSCI index, and the COMT, XOP, XME and PICK ETFs expecting higher base metals, oil and gas prices. On a tactical basis, we are getting long 4Q22 Brent calls struck at $120/bbl at tonight's close, anticipating an EU embargo of Russian oil imports. 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 officials involved in negotiations to restore the Iran nuclear deal appear to be signaling US interests could be served by agreeing such a deal.8 Allowing Iran back into the market as a bona fide oil exporter would return ~ 1mm b/d or more to global crude markets by year-end.  This would partly reverse the higher prices we expect in the wake of an EU to embargo Russian oil imports this week.  Presently, oil markets are rallying as the necessity for Russia to shut in oil production post-embargo is discounted (Chart 6).9 That said, a deal to allow Iran back into export markets would dampen the move we expect in the wake of an EU embargo. The market will remain tight after a US-Iran deal, but this might be attractive to the Biden administration as mid-terms approach, and to the EU, as it also would reduce the funds available for Russia to wage war on Ukraine.  On a tactical basis, we are getting long 4Q22 Brent calls struck at $120/bbl at tonight's close, anticipating the EU embargo.  We will close this position out if the US and Iran reinstate the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which would allow Iran to resume oil exports.   Precious Metals: Bullish The World Platinum Investment Council (WPIC) projects a 2022 surplus of 627 koz, slightly lower than the previous forecast of 657k oz for this period. This year, strong automotive demand is expected to be offset by reductions in jewellery and industrial demand. Car manufacturers’ switch from Russian palladium to platinum – as they self-sanction – will bullish for platinum. Russia accounts for ~40% of global palladium mined output. The organization predicts lower mine supply caused primarily by supply-chain bottlenecks and COVID-19 restrictions. Nornickel, one of the world’s largest platinum miners is expected to reduce mined output on the back of supply-chain disruptions due to Russian sanctions.    Base Metals: Bullish Iron ore prices rose on the wider than anticipated cut in China’s benchmark interest rate for mortgages on May 20th (Chart 7). The upcoming easing of lockdowns in Shanghai will further boost iron ore prices, as markets expect Chinese economic activity to pick up. However, if China sticks to its zero-COVID policy, lockdowns will continue to occur in different cities and regions. BCA’s Emerging Markets Strategy expects these ‘rolling lockdowns’ to last at least until the end of this year. This will affect manufacturing and steel production, primary iron ore demand drivers. Iron ore’s reliance on China’s economic health means price of the industrial metal will not meaningfully rise this year, barring a supply shortfall. Chart 6 Brent Prices Going Up Brent Prices Going Up Chart 7 BENCHMARK IRON ORE 62% FE, CFR CHINA (TSI) GOING DOWN BENCHMARK IRON ORE 62% FE, CFR CHINA (TSI) GOING DOWN     Footnotes 1     Please see The Former Chancellor Who Became Putin’s Man in Germany, published by the New York Times 23 April 2022.  This is an excellent precis of the history of German-Russian trade vis-à-vis the career of former German chancellor Gerhard Schröder, who held the office from 1998 – 2005.  The deep energy relationship with Russia began in the late 1960s under the chancellorship of Willy Brandt.  As much as 55% of Germany's gas needs were supplied by Russia prior to its invasion of Ukraine 24 February 2022.  Now its Russian gas imports are closer to 20%; Germany and the EU are scrambling to eliminate any and all energy trade with Russia, beginning with reducing gas imports by two-thirds this year, and likely embargoing all oil imports by year-end. 2     Russia completes Nord Stream 2 construction, gas flows yet to start, published by reuters.com 10 September 2021. 3    Please see REPowerEU: A plan to rapidly reduce dependence on Russian fossil fuels and fast forward the green transition* published by the European Commission 18 May 2022.  Energy accounted for 62% of the EU's Russian imports in 2021, just under €100 billion worth of gas (40%), oil (27%) and coal (46%), according to the European Commission's tally in In focus: Reducing the EU’s dependence on imported fossil fuels published 20 April 2022.  In 2011, energy accounted for 77% of the EU's imports from Russia. 4    Please see Felix K. Chang's report Legacy of Ostpolitik: Germany's Russia Policy and Energy Security published by the Foreign Policy Research Institute in May 2014.  This includes a summary of the paradoxical nature of Germany's Ostpolitik policy following Russia's first invasion of Ukraine. 5    Please see German economy minister expects EU embargo on Russian oil 'within days' -ZDF, published by reuters.com 23 May 2022. 6    Please see LNG momentum swinging back to Asia as Europe demand eases: Russell published by reuters.com on 24 May 2022. 7     Please see Tight Commodity Markets: Persistently High Inflation, which we published 24 March 2022.  It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 8    Please see Analysis: Subtle shift in U.S. rhetoric suggests new Iran approach published by reuters.com 24 May 2022, and German economy minister expects EU embargo on Russian oil 'within days' -ZDF, published by reuters.com 23 May 2022. 9    Please see Oil, Natgas Prices Set To Surge, which we published last week. Investment Views and Themes Recommendations Strategic Recommendations Trades Closed in 2022 Summary of Closed Trades

Executive Summary Chart 1Quant Model Prediction Vs. Past Outcomes Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Complementing the US Political Strategy Quantitative Presidential And Senate Election Models, we introduce our Quantitative House Of Representatives Election Model. Our House election model measures the expected change in seats that will be won or lost by the incumbent party (Democratic Party) in the midterm election. The model predicts that Democrats will lose 21 seats, giving up control of the House and resulting in political gridlock from 2023 to 2025 even if the Democrats somehow hold onto the Senate. The “Blue Sweep” policy setting is effectively over. In a last ditch effort, Democrats will look to pass a budget reconciliation bill before the election. Post-midterm, financial markets will see gridlock as a marginal positive in 2023, as long as inflation levels off. In the very near term, however, US equities still face formidable hurdles that should warrant investors taking a defensive position. ​​​ Asset Initiation Date Return Long DXY (Dollar Index) 2022-02-23 6.1% Bottom Line: Stay tactically defensive until US election risk subsides and global macro risks stabilize.     The 2020 US election was hotly contested and future elections, like the upcoming 2022 midterm election, will be closely watched by investors. BCA’s US Political Strategy has introduced two quantitative models over the past year that aim to predict both the Presidential election in 2024 and the Senate election in 2022.  In this report we introduce our House election model, so that we now provide readers with a quantitative model-based estimate for all three major US elections. With the 2022 midterms scheduled for November 8, our House model provides valuable insight into control of Congress in 2023-24. In the 2020 election the Democrats held onto the House while winning the Senate and the White House – the so-called “Blue Sweep.” But the Democrats lost 13 House seats while the GOP gained 14, leaving a mere five-seat margin for President Biden today (221 versus 208 seats today, with six vacancies). In 2022, markets expect Republicans to take control of the House and Senate given the well-established pattern that the president’s party performs badly in midterm elections.1 Our House model agrees, and points to the Democrats losing 21 seats later this year. The Model And Variables Our House model uses a simpler modelling approach than our Presidential and Senate models. Unlike those two models, we do not predict any state level outcomes, nor do we assign a probability to any predictions. For starters, House elections do not occur at the state level but rather at the level of congressional districts. Secondly, we are primarily interested in the overall control of the House rather than individual elections. Therefore our model predicts the number of seats the incumbent party will lose or gain (seat swing), and hence its control of the House.  Our model is based off a simple linear regression. Uniquely, in our suite of three models, our House model does not include any economic variables. Rather, the model is based off three independent political variables that explain our dependent variable. Due to data constraints on one of our independent variables, our sample size is limited to 20 observable House elections, from 1982-2020. Our model is defined as: Change In House Seatsi= β0+β1Var1i+β2Var2i+β3Var3i+εi Change In House Seats. This is the dependent variable in the model and what we aim to predict. A negative change means the incumbent party will lose seats while a positive change means the incumbent party will win seats. Congressional approval (Var1). This variable measures the public’s approval rating on “how congress is doing its job.” We take the average net approval rating (approval less disapproval) in an election year. A positive net rating supports the incumbent party in gaining seats while a negative rating does the opposite.  Generic congressional ballot (Var2). The generic congressional ballot asks people which party they are likely to vote for in Congress in a given election. We take the average net support rate in an election year (that being whichever party leads the other in congressional ballot polling). The larger the president’s party’s deficit on the generic ballot rate, the more House seats it tends to lose. Defending House seats (Var3). The last independent variable is inspired by work from Sabato’s Crystal Ball.2 This measures the number of House seats defended by the incumbent president’s party in an election year. The more seats to defend, the more seats tend to be lost. One variable we omitted is presidential approval. Readers might find this surprising as presidential job approval ratings have tended to correlate reasonably well with House seats gained and lost in midterm elections. Our reason for excluding this variable is that three explanatory variables explain a high degree of variation in the dependent variable. Combined, our three variables explain more than 80% of the variation in the dependent variable. This is more than satisfactory from a statistical standpoint and keeps the model simplistic in nature. Democrats To Lose The House As it stands, our election model predicts that Democrats will lose control of the House in 2022 (Table 1). The Democrats are predicted to lose 21 seats. This prediction is based off current values of our independent variables as calculated and shown below. For the number of defending House seats, we allocate two of three vacant seats to the Democrats to defend.3 This adds up to 224 seats. Table 1Quant Model Predicts A Democrat Loss Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model For this report, we are only concerned with election outcomes pertaining to midterm elections. In this regard, our model’s prediction is in line with historical outcomes for the president’s party (Chart 1). That is, the president’s party almost always loses House seats in a midterm election. While our model does not provide any probability measure for the predicted outcome, it is in line with market expectations that Democrats will lose the House later in the year. Currently, market implied odds for the Democrats to retain the House are just 16%, as opposed to 87% for Republicans to gain control (Chart 2). Most other private forecasts for the House also point to Democrats losing control.4  Chart 1Quant Model Prediction Vs. Past Outcomes Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Chart 2Republicans Overwhelmingly Favored To Take The House Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Back Testing Our Model Chart 3In-Sample Back Testing Results Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Our House model performs well during in-sample back testing. For in-sample testing, we test our model over our entire sample period (1982-2020) but show results for midterm election outcomes only. Our model correctly predicted the direction of seat change (positive or negative) for 80% of outcomes, missing the direction of seat swing for just the 1998 and 2002 midterm elections (Chart 3). The latter two elections are the only two in the post-WWII period in which the president’s party gained seats and this was due to exceptional circumstances (i.e. the Dotcom Bubble and the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks). During this same test, when our model correctly predicted the directional change in seat swing, it only over-predicted the change once (in 1986), highlighting a more conservative forecast over time. In 2022, given the stagflationary economic backdrop and President Biden’s weak approval rating, the voting public may very well punish the Democrats harder in November than our model expects. Chart 4Out-Sample Back Testing Results Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model During out-sample back testing, we look at a sample period of 2002-2018, comprising of just five midterm elections. Our model correctly predicts the direction of seat swing in 80% of the midterm elections, just like our in-sample testing showed (Chart 4). 2002 is again a standout election where our model incorrectly predicted the direction of seat swing. Closing In On Election Day The midterm election is approximately five months away. Our Senate model predicts the Democrats will lose control of the Senate. Our House model suggests Democrats will lose the lower chamber too. This view is in line with the consensus across markets, forecasters, and historical outcomes. Given the poor showing by Democrats in the 2020 House election, this House prediction will be hard to change. The Senate race could still see some surprises, such as via the Supreme Court. But all in all the “Blue Sweep” of 2020 is already over. The headwinds against the president’s party have gained even more momentum in the context of high inflation, falling consumer confidence, and low real wages. These factors were not measured in our model, but they do form a basis for voting intentions in elections. Coupled with President Biden’s low approval ratings, in general and in specific policy areas like the economy, the Democratic party will need to pull off  a political “Hail Mary” to retain the Senate, let alone the House, later this year. Investment Takeaways President Biden and the Democrats may look to the 1934, 1962, 1998, and 2002 elections for proof that the ruling party can perform well in the midterms. But 1998 was a period of nearly unprecedented peace and prosperity, while 2002 came in the wake of a historic attack on the homeland. The 1934 election reinforced a crisis-era government and as such could serve as a model for Biden, but today’s situation is not as dire as the Great Depression. The 1962 analogy is perhaps the best, since Biden, like President Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis, could conceivably benefit from an escalating showdown with Russia this fall. But Kennedy’s Democrats still lost a net of four seats in the House that year – and Kennedy’s approval rating was above 60% while Biden’s is barely 40%. COVID-19 was an unprecedented shock that continues to play out across the economic and political environment in the US. But while the Republicans suffered from the pandemic itself, the Democrats now own the stagflationary aftermath. Democratic enthusiasm should revive a bit from now until the election, but it would take a massive shock to reverse the general trend. There is a strong correlation between opinion polling in the beginning of the year and the midterm election results. Facing a shellacking, Democrats will make one last-ditch effort to pass a budget reconciliation bill before the election. Given the energy crisis in Europe, there is potential for Biden’s renewable energy subsidies to be repackaged into a general “energy security” bill that drops the former hostility to fossil fuels. This could be matched with limited tax changes, including the 15% minimum corporate tax rate that Biden negotiated with other countries. Otherwise US fiscal policy will virtually freeze even if the Senate stays in Democratic hands. Taxes will no longer be able to rise from 2023 but spending will not be subject to cuts. Heading into 2024, gridlock will be reinforced by our presidential quant election model’s slightly higher odds of Democrats retaining the White House, which we think are underestimated at present. Hence Biden is lined up to retain veto power even if Democrats squander the House and Senate in 2022, as long as his administration avoids a recession. Financial markets will see gridlock as a marginal positive in 2023, as long as inflation levels off. In the very near term, however, US equities still face formidable hurdles that will keep us on the sidelines. Global growth is wobbly. Global supply chains remain constrained, affecting growth outcomes and adding to elevated price levels. China’s zero-covid policy and the absence of a credible plan for US-China tariff reduction and economic re-engagement continue to weigh on sentiment. Fed rate hikes are still generating uncertainty. The Middle East is unstable and likely to bring additional energy supply disruptions. Lastly, the Russia-Ukraine war has yet to come to a ceasefire and Russia is likely to reduce energy supplies to Europe in retaliation for Germany’s energy ban and NATO enlargement. With this backdrop in mind, we remain tactically defensive. We see the potential for improvement after the US election brings a reduction in policy uncertainty – as long as geopolitical risks and inflation also stabilize.   Guy Russell Senior Analyst GuyR@bcaresearch.com   Statistical Appendix Some clients may be curious to read through our model’s estimated regression coefficients as well as conditional forecasts given certain levels of our independent variables. These are discussed herein: Regression Coefficients As mentioned earlier, our model is estimated exclusively by political variables. The beta coefficients for the three explanatory variables are shown below alongside their t-statistics and p-values. All three of these variables tested statistically significant at 5% and 10% levels. The regression’s R-squared value is 0.8183, meaning that the explanatory variables help explain 81.83% of the variation in the dependent variable (Table A1). Clients can recreate the model’s prediction by multiplying the current level of each variable as it stands today by that variable’s respective beta coefficient and adding the constant at the end of the equation. Be sure to follow the methodology explained earlier in the text if such an exercise is of interest. Also, conditional forecasts can be created by holding certain parameters constant should clients want to better understand what differing levels of the three explanatory variables may imply for the change in House seats. Table A1Regression Coefficients Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Conditional Forecasts We will create simple conditional forecasts for two explanatory variables. Let’s start with the net congressional approval variable. Forecasts will be generated with data intervals calculated over the course of President Biden’s first term in office so far. The lowest net congressional approval rating was -67 ppt and the highest was -25 ppt. We will use 10 ppt intervals between -20 ppt an -70 ppt. Shading indicates the current level for the variable input. Table A2Conditional Forecasts Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model In Table A2, we hold our other explanatory variables constant at their prevailing levels while we assume differing levels for the net congressional approval variable. We will apply this method to conditional forecasts using the net generic congressional ballot. Table A2 shows us that a more negative net congressional approval rate suggests the president’s party will lose more House seats. Of course, the Democrats cannot lose a fraction of a seat (only whole seats), but this conditional forecast illustrates the point of the variable’s impact on the overall outcome. Table A3Conditional Forecasts Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Changing to the net generic congressional ballot, our conditional forecast for values ranging from -2 ppt to + 5 ppt are shown in Table A3. This range shows the high and low of the net generic congressional ballot through President Biden’s first term in office. Shading indicates the current level for the variable input. Like before, the results in Table A3 shows us that a more negative net generic congressional ballot suggests the president’s party will lose more House seats. Again, the Democrats cannot lose a fraction of a seat. But the results in Table A3 show that changes in House seats are more sensitive to changes in the net generic congressional ballot variable compared to the net congressional approval variable. This is due to two reasons: The net generic congressional ballot variable is a strong predictor of House election outcomes. It’s larger beta value indicates it’s high degree of sensitivity for the dependent variable, implying that it is the most important variable in our model, and that changes to it have the largest impact on the modelled outcome, that is predicted changes in House seats.   Footnotes 1     See The American Presidency Project. "Seats in Congress Gained/Lost by the President's Party in Mid-Term Elections," October 29, 2018. presidency.ucsb.edu 2     See Kyle Kondik, “The Kinds of Seats that Flip in Midterms,” Sabato’s Crystal Ball, May 11, 2022, UVA Center For Politics, centerforpolitics.org. 3    For our 2022 prediction, we allocate vacant House seats evenly between Democrats and Republicans. For example, if there are six vacant seats, each party will be allocated three seats to defend on top of the House seats that they already occupy. If there are an odd number of vacant seats, for example three, each party will receive one seat added to their count, then the incumbent party will receive the remaining seat. 4    See fivethirtyeight.com, 270towin.com and racetowh.com, among others. Strategic View Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Table A2Political Risk Matrix Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Table A3US Political Capital Index Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Chart A1Presidential Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Chart A2Senate Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Table A4APolitical Capital: White House And Congress Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Table A4BPolitical Capital: Household And Business Sentiment Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model ​​​​​​​ Table A4CPolitical Capital: The Economy And Markets Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model Introducing The US Political Strategy Quantitative House Election Model ​​​​​​​

Executive Summary First IG, Then HY First IG, Then HY First IG, Then HY Corporate bonds are following the 2018 roadmap. Investment grade underperformed Treasuries as interest rate expectations rose from low levels, then junk joined the selloff once rate expectations moved above estimates of neutral. Inflation is too high for the Fed to abandon its tightening cycle, as it did in 2018/19, but the Fed will move more slowly than what is priced in the curve for 2022. Underlying economic growth is stronger than it was in 2018 and corporate balance sheets are in better shape. That being the case, even a modest dovish surprise from the Fed will be sufficient for corporate bond returns to form a bottom. Municipal bonds are attractively priced versus both Treasuries and credit, and state & local government balance sheets are in excellent condition. Stay overweight.   Bottom Line: We maintain our cautious stance on corporate bonds for the time being, but are now on upgrade watch. Signs of peaking inflation and/or dovish signals from the Fed could cause us to increase exposure in the relatively near term. Stay tuned.  Feature The similarities between recent market action and what occurred in 2018 are striking. Back in 2018, the Fed was in the process of lifting the policy rate back toward estimates of neutral. The yield curve flattened as a result, and investment grade corporate bonds responded to the removal of policy accommodation by underperforming duration-matched Treasuries (Chart 1). Chart 1The 2018 Experience The 2018 Experience The 2018 Experience Despite the Fed’s actions, high-yield initially performed well in 2018. That is, until the market started to believe that the Fed would over-tighten. Recession fears increased in late 2018 as near-term rate expectations surpassed estimates of neutral and high-yield sold off sharply, giving back all of its gains from earlier in the year and then some. Now let’s turn to the present day (Chart 2). Once again, investment grade corporates underperformed Treasuries as near-term rate expectations moved higher and the yield curve flattened. For its part, high-yield performed well during the early stages of the interest rate adjustment but returns plunged once 12-month forward rate expectations moved above survey estimates of neutral. Chart 2First IG, Then HY First IG, Then HY First IG, Then HY What’s Different This Time? While we think the 2018 roadmap is a good one, it’s important to consider the differences between 2018 and today before drawing any firm conclusions about future credit market performance. The first obvious difference is that the Fed had already been lifting rates for some time in 2018. In fact, the fed funds rate was above 2%. Today, the Fed is still in the early stages of its tightening cycle and the fed funds rate is only 0.83%. We think this difference is less significant than it initially appears because the level of the fed funds rate itself is less important than the perceived restrictiveness of monetary policy. Today, the market is priced for the fed funds rate to hit 3.18% in 12 months, higher than at any point in 2018 (Chart 3). We also see that the Treasury slope beyond the 2-year maturity point is about as flat today as it was in 2018 (Chart 3, bottom panel). This strongly suggests that the market perceives monetary policy as about as restrictive today as it was in late 2018. The second difference we identify is that inflation is much higher today than it was in 2018 (Chart 4). This is potentially bad news for future credit market performance. High inflation gives the Fed a strong incentive to keep lifting rates even if risky assets sell off. In 2018, the Fed reversed course on its tightening cycle once broad financial conditions tightened into restrictive territory. That’s an easy decision to make when inflation is close to 2%. It’s much more difficult to do with inflation where it is now. Chart 3Monetary Conditions Are Similar Monetary Conditions Are Similar Monetary Conditions Are Similar Chart 4Inflation Is Much Higher … Inflation Is Much Higher ... Inflation Is Much Higher ... High inflation makes it unlikely that the Fed will pull a 180 on its tightening cycle. But on the flipside, today’s strong underlying economic growth means that a complete reversal on rate hikes is probably not necessary to avoid a recession. Just look at the labor market. Labor market utilization, as measured by both the unemployment rate and the prime-age employment-to-population ratio, is in a similar place today as it was in 2018 (Chart 5). However, despite a tight labor market, job growth is running at a much stronger pace this year. Nonfarm payroll gains have averaged 523 thousand during the past three months. In 2018, in a similarly tight labor market, monthly job growth averaged just 191 thousand. Now turn to housing, arguably the most important channel through which interest rates impact the economy. In a prior report we identified that the 12-month moving average of housing starts dipping below the 24-month moving average is a good indicator for the end of a Fed rate hike cycle.1 In 2018, our housing starts indicator was barely positive. Today, it is extremely elevated (Chart 5, bottom panel). Chart 5… But Growth Is Much Stronger ... But Growth Is Much Stronger ... But Growth Is Much Stronger The key point is that with employment growth and housing starts trending at much better levels than in 2018, we can conclude that the Fed has a fair amount of scope to tighten policy before threatening to push the economy into recession. The upshot for corporate bond markets is that the threshold for Fed capitulation is also different. While a full backtracking away from rate hikes was necessary to avoid a recession and spur corporate bond outperformance in 2018, both the economy and financial markets likely require less of a Fed reversal today. The final difference we identify between 2018 and today relates to the health of corporate balance sheets (Chart 6). Compared to 2018, nonfinancial corporations are carrying much less debt as a percentage of net worth, have significantly higher interest coverage and are benefiting from net ratings upgrades. Much like with the labor market and housing indicators, there’s every reason to believe that corporations are better equipped to handle higher interest rates today than they were in 2018. Chart 6Balance Sheets Are Healthier Balance Sheets Are Healthier Balance Sheets Are Healthier The Way Forward If we look back at Chart 1, we see that the 2018 roadmap is for the Fed to abandon its tightening cycle, leading to a sharp drop in near-term rate expectations and a V-shaped bottom in excess corporate bond returns. We won’t get such a swift Fed reversal this year, but there are strong odds that the Fed will lift rates by less than what is currently discounted in the market between now and the end of 2022. As we noted in last week’s Webcast, we expect the Fed to deliver two more 50 basis point rate hikes (in June and July) before shifting to 25 bps per meeting increments in September once it’s clear that inflation is trending down (Chart 7).2  We also see potential for relief at the long-end of the yield curve, where 5-year/5-year forward Treasury yields have room to fall back toward survey estimates of the long-run neutral rate (Chart 8). Chart 7Rate Expectations Rate Expectations Rate Expectations Chart 8Yields Above Fair Value Yields Above Fair Value Yields Above Fair Value It’s also worth noting that corporate bond valuations have improved markedly during the past few weeks. The 12-month breakeven spread for investment grade corporates is back above its historical median, and the junk index is priced for a 6.3% default rate during the next 12 months (Chart 9). Investment grade and high-yield index spreads are also now well above their respective 2017-19 averages, as is the spread differential between high-yield and investment grade (Chart 10). Chart 9Corporate Bond Valuation Corporate Bond Valuation Corporate Bond Valuation Chart 10Favor HY Over IG Favor HY Over IG Favor HY Over IG The bottom line is that we are slowly turning more positive on corporate bonds. Falling inflation will cause the Fed to tighten by less than what is expected this year, and it will soon become apparent that – as was the case in 2018 – the US economy is not close to tipping into recession. Spreads also present an increasingly attractive opportunity. That said, with the Fed still poised to deliver 100 bps of tightening within the next two months, we are not yet ready to abandon our relatively cautious corporate bond allocation. We maintain our underweight (2 out of 5) allocation to investment grade corporate bonds and our neutral (3 out of 5) allocation to high-yield, but we are now firmly on upgrade watch. Signs of peaking inflation and/or signals that the Fed will pivot to a hiking pace of 25 bps per meeting could cause us to increase our recommended corporate bond exposure in the relatively near term. Stay tuned. Seek Refuge In Municipal Bonds While we wait for clearer signs of a bottom in corporate credit, investors can more confidently deploy capital in the municipal bond market. Municipal / Treasury yield ratios have jumped in recent weeks, and they are now back above post-2010 averages across the entire yield curve (Chart 11). Long-maturity municipal bonds are even trading at a before-tax premium relative to US Treasuries (Chart 11, top 2 panels). Municipal bonds are also trading at above-average yields relative to credit rating and duration-matched corporate bonds (Chart 12). This is despite the recent back-up we’ve witnessed in corporate bond spreads. Chart 11Muni / Treasury Yield Ratios Muni / Treasury Yield Ratios Muni / Treasury Yield Ratios Chart 12Munis Cheap Versus Credit Munis Cheap Versus Credit Munis Cheap Versus Credit Not only are munis attractively priced versus both Treasuries and corporates, but state & local government balance sheet indicators show that municipal credit quality is sky high (Chart 13). Tax revenues have accelerated since the pandemic, but state & local governments have remained cautious about spending their windfalls. Despite being flush with cash, state & local governments have re-hired only a small fraction of the employees that were let go during the pandemic (Chart 13, panel 2). The result of this lack of spending is that state & local government net savings are the highest they’ve been in years (Chart 13, panel 3). Chart 13State & Local Government Health State & Local Government Health State & Local Government Health Bottom Line: Municipal bonds are attractively valued versus both Treasuries and investment grade corporates, and state & local government balance sheets are in superb condition. Investors should overweight municipal bonds in US fixed income portfolios.   Ryan Swift US Bond Strategist rswift@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 Please see US Bond Strategy Weekly Report, “The Bond Market Implications Of A 5% Mortgage Rate”, dated April 26, 2022. 2 https://www.bcaresearch.com/webcasts/detail/537 Recommended Portfolio Specification Other Recommendations Treasury Index Returns Spread Product Returns

Executive Summary Indian Voter’s Economic Miseries Are Ascendant Indian Voter's Economic Miseries Are Ascendant Indian Voter's Economic Miseries Are Ascendant India has a strong strategic geopolitical position but is likely to face turbulence in the short term. This is because India remains expensive, and investors worry if the record political stability shown by India since 2014 can last. We highlight that the ruling Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) may lose some seats in the near term. India’s most populous states could witness a few cases of social conflict as economic miseries grow. India may also temporarily resort to a degree of fiscal populism. But the BJP will be able to hold power for a third consecutive term in 2024, that too with a simple majority. The burst of fiscal populism will be temporary. Moreover, the next tier of India’s most populous states are well-positioned to drive India’s growth story in the long run. We urge investors to tactically short India / long Brazil financials given that India may see some turbulence in the short run. Strategic investors should consider long India tech / short China tech. Trade Recommendation Inception Date Return SHORT INDIA / LONG BRAZIL FINANCIALS 2022-02-10 12.5% Bottom Line: The ruling political party in India may face some political setbacks in the short term. It could even resort to fiscal populism. But the ruling party in a base case, should be able to retain power for a third term in 2024. On a tactical timeframe we advise caution on India but remain constructive on a strategic horizon. Feature The woods are lovely, dark and deep, But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep. – Robert Frost, Stopping By Woods On A Snowy Evening (New Hampshire, 1923)   The protagonist in this famous poem is overwhelmed by the beauty of the wintry woods, but then must stay vigilant about the here and now. The situation that confronts an investor into India today, is surprisingly similar. India has a strong strategic geopolitical position, a position that has strengthened following the Ukraine war. However, Indian markets might face turbulence in the short term. This is because India remains expensive and its ability to keep promises (about high degrees of political stability or about its fiscal discipline) could be tested on a tactical time horizon. In specific, investors with exposure to India worry about three politico-economic challenges: The Anti-Incumbency Challenge Related Report  Geopolitical StrategyIndia's Politics: Know When To Hold 'Em, Know When To Fold 'Em 13 September 2013 is a key date in India’s modern history. On this day the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) announced Narendra Modi as BJP’s prime ministerial (PM) candidate just a few months ahead of the 2014 general elections. From 13 September 2013 till date, MSCI India has incidentally outperformed MSCI EM by a resounding 94.8%. In 2013, markets celebrated the rise of the Modi-led BJP government since such a dispensation was new, and it promised to deliver structural reform. But now when general elections will be held in 2024, the BJP must deal with a middling report card on reforms and a two-term anti-incumbency to boot. Given this clients worry if 2024 could see India go back to an era of coalition governments? The Fiscal Challenge India under BJP has displayed impressive degrees of fiscal discipline. With rising inflation now adding to Indian voters’ miseries and with a loaded state election calendar due in 2023, investors ask if India’s notable streak of fiscal fortitude can last? The Demographics Challenge As China’s weak demographic future becomes clearer, India’s youthful demographics keep attracting paeans. This is partially responsible for the fact that India has traded at a five-year average premium of 54.5% to China on forward price to earnings. With increasing reports of communal violence and inflation-related protests breaking out in India, investors also worry about India’s so-called demographic dividend and how best to play the game? In a foundational GPS Special Report published in 2018 we had made the point that, “Predicting political outcomes is difficult, but to generate geopolitical alpha investors should focus on ‘beating the spread’ not predicting the match winner”. At a time when there is much uncertainty about India’s immediate future, we highlight three key base case predictions with respect to India. By highlighting these key predictions, we hope investors can position themselves for generating geopolitical alpha. We conclude the report with actionable investment recommendations. India’s High Political Stability, Likely To Stay In 2024 Chart 1Bhartiya Janata Party’s (BJP) Win In India In 2014 Was Historic Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... The Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) stormed into power in 2014. Its assumption of power under PM Modi’s leadership was historic. This is because this was the first time since 1984 that a single political party had managed to secure a simple majority on its own steam (Chart 1). The rise of BJP in this resurrected avatar marked a structural break from the past, in three distinct ways: End To Instability Of Nineties: The rise of BJP 2.0 in 2014 marked an end to the political instability seen in the nineties when governments struggled to complete their full five-year terms. This is a problem that India’s South Asian neighbors like Sri Lanka and Pakistan are yet to overcome. End Of Coalition Politics Of Early 2000s: BJP’s rise in 2014 also marked an end to the coalition politics of the early 2000s. While three coalition governments in India managed to complete their five-year terms from 1999-2014, the reform agenda over this period was often held at ransom by smaller coalition partners. India’s ability to break away from coalition governments back in 2014 was commendable given that several developing countries as well as developed countries still have coalition governments at the helm. Regime Continuity: The BJP’s rise in 2014 and their re-election in 2019 meant that the same political party was able to hold power in India (that too with a simple majority) for a decade. Other EMs have not seen this quality of continuity over the last few years.  Owing to this streak of unprecedented political stability that India has been able to offer since 2014, India has attracted a high premium relative to democratic EM peers (Chart 2). But with India’s general elections due in 2024, investors into India are keen to know if India will continue to attract this high political stability premium. This worry is justified for two sets of reasons: (1)    The last time any government in India was able to pull off three consecutive full five-year terms, was way back in the sixties. There is no recent precedent to BJP’s pursuit for a third consecutive term in India. (2)   The most recent election held in India’s largest state i.e., Uttar Pradesh saw the BJP retain power but saw its seat count fall by 18%. This, investors worry could be an indicator of BJP losing traction in the politically critical region of northern India. Reading the tea leaves left behind after all recent elections suggests that India is most likely to see a single political party maintain a simple majority for a third consecutive term in 2024. BJP’s footprint northern in India will be dented owing to anti-incumbency. But despite this, the BJP should be able to maintain a simple majority at the national level in 2024. This is because the BJP appears to be working on deploying a crucial strategy i.e., to offset declines in north India with gains elsewhere. India’s northern states account for 45% of India’s population. Whilst the BJP’s rise in 2014 was pivoted on this geography, its ability to retain power beyond a decade will be dependent on its ability to offset losses in India’s sprawling north with gains in other large states. Interestingly, the BJP’s predecessor i.e., the Congress party had to deal with the reciprocal of this problem. The Congress party stayed in power for a decade (from 2004-14) owing to support from southern and western Indian states. But then the Congress party’s reign could not last beyond a decade because it failed to break into northern India (Chart 3); at a time when it was losing popularity in India’s west and south. Chart 2India Has Been Trading At A Premium To EM Democracies India Has Been Trading At A Premium To EM Democracies India Has Been Trading At A Premium To EM Democracies ​​​​​​ Chart 3Congress Party-Led UPA Alliance Could Not Break Into North India Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... ​​​​​​ The fact that the BJP is now working to straddle both i.e. (1) its traditional base in the north and west as well as (2) new geographies in the east and south is evident from the recent election results: 2019 General Elections: Even as BJP’s seat count in the north Indian states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar fell in 2019 (Chart 3) it managed to offset this decline by increasing presence in India’s east (in states like West Bengal and Orissa) and in India’s south (in states like Karnataka and Telangana). Consequently, the share of BJP’s seats accounted for by major states outside north India notably increased in 2019 from 2014 (Chart 4). Recent State Elections: The BJP has evidently been able to offset losses in its core northern base (in states like Uttar Pradesh), by increasing its presence in India’s east (in states like West Bengal and Bihar) (Chart 5). Chart 4BJP Is Growing Its Influence Outside North India Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... ​​​​​​ Chart 5BJP Is Offsetting Losses In North With Gains In East Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... ​​​​​​ Chart 6In a Base Case, BJP Should Cross The Halfway Mark At 2024 General Elections Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... In fact, it is critical to note that state elections are due in Gujarat in December 2022, where the BJP is highly likely to lose seat share as it faces a five-term anti-incumbency. Given that Gujarat as a region too is part of BJP’s core voter base, BJP’s seat losses in Gujarat could trigger a wave of selling on India’s bourses. If this leads India’s expensive valuations to be driven down, then this could present a buying opportunity because as long as the BJP keeps compensating for losses in traditional constituencies with inroads into newer realms (like say Karnataka where state elections are due in May 2023 or in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh where elections are due in end-2023); BJP’s standalone seat count in 2024 is highly likely to cross the half-way mark (Chart 6). To conclude, we re-iterate our constructive outlook on India on a strategic horizon, in view of the high probability of regime continuity lasting in this EM beyond a decade. In a worst-case scenario, we expect a BJP-led coalition to assume power in India in 2024 but this coalition too will be stable and should need the support of a maximum of two regional parties. Bottom Line: The BJP will lose seat share in parts of north and west India but should be able to retain power in 2024 by offsetting these losses with gains in India’s east and south. Most recent election results confirm that the BJP is working meticulously to make this formula work. If BJP’s political losses in its traditional constituencies triggers a market correction, then this should be used as a buying opportunity by strategic investors. Fiscal Risks In India Are Not Dead; They Will Surface, Before Receding Again In 1952 when India’s first national assembly was formed, left-leaning parties were the mainstay of India’s national politics. Back then a left-of-center party i.e., the Congress Party was in power with +70% seats in the national assembly. Then, the leftist Communist Party of India (CPI) was the second largest political party. As the decades went by left-leaning policies kept losing importance in India but the left-of-center national parties influenced Indian politics in a big way right up until 2014. Cut to 2014, the rise of the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) meant that the mainstay of Indian politics now became right-of-center politics. Left-leaning parties became too insignificant to matter at the national level with the Congress Party and the Communist Party of India (M) now cumulatively accounting for only about 11% seats in the national assembly. India’s political pendulum swinging to the right was accompanied by another key development i.e., India’s fiscal management became more prudent (Chart 7). Doles and transfer payments were restrained, and efforts were also made to shore-up tax revenues. But does the BJP-led transition to right-of-center politics mean that left-of-center politics in India are dead, as are the associated risks of fiscal populism? The Indian bond market seems to think so. India’s 10-year bond yield is up only 85 bps since 1 Jan 2020 to date, which is lower than a 106 bps increase seen in the US or 573 bps increase seen in a large emerging market like Brazil. Notwithstanding the superior fiscal discipline maintained by BJP-led governments so far, it is worth asking if this streak of fiscal resilience can last over the next two years? We highlight that even as the right-of-center BJP will remain a force to reckon with, we expect the BJP’s fiscal policy to temporarily swerve to the left owing to three sets of reasons: Miseries Breed Populism: It is true that recent BJP-led governments have maintained superior fiscal discipline (Chart 7). However high levels of inflation are known to feed populist tendencies of governments globally. India will be no exception to this trend because economic miseries of India’s median voter have worsened over the last six months (Chart 8). Chart 7BJP Led Governments Have Maintained Tighter Fiscal Deficits In India Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... ​​​​​​ Chart 8Economic Miseries Of India's Median Voter Have Been Worsening Economic Miseries Of India's Median Voter Have Been Worsening Economic Miseries Of India's Median Voter Have Been Worsening ​​​​​​ Chart 9Government Spends Tend To Pick Up In The Run-Up To General Elections Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Political Cycle: History also suggests that there is a cyclical element to fiscal laxity in India. Populism as a theme tends to become more defined in the two years leading to a general election (Chart 9). This cyclicality in fiscal expansion could also be driven by the fact that India tends to have a loaded state election calendar in the year just before a general election. Competition: As the BJP’s reign matures, it will increasingly face competition from regional parties (Chart 10). Given that most major regional political parties in India operate on the segment between the center and the left of political spectrum (Chart 10), BJP may see sense in metamorphosizing its fiscal policy into one which is closer to the left, albeit temporarily. Chart 10Regional Parties Like SP And AAP Could Grow Their National Footprint Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Chart 11India’s Debt Levels Are High And Rising Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... It is worth noting that as compared to major EMs, India’s debt levels are high today (Chart 11). Against this backdrop an expansion of India’s fiscal deficit could result in turbulence in Indian markets. Bottom Line: The BJP is highly likely to temporarily switch to an expansive fiscal policy stance in the run up to the 2024 general elections. This shift will be driven by the need to retain power in the face of rising miseries of its median voter and to overcome competition from influential regional players. Most Populous Regions, May Not Necessarily Be Drivers Of India’s Growth The ‘demographic dividend’ narrative is often used to justify a bullish stance on India. But such a narrative oversimplifies India’s investment case and may even yield poor investment outcomes. India’s demographics power its consumption engine, but the same demographics can also be a liability sometimes. This is because while India is young, its populace is also poor and large. The combination of a massive population (that creates pressure on limited resources) and nascent institutions (that are yet to ensure a fair use of resources) is at the heart of corruption in India. For instance, the coming to light of the 2G-spectrum scam a decade ago on 16 November 2010 saw Indian markets correct by 6% over the next ten days. Hence ‘corruption’ is one of the ways in which India’s demographics can end-up being a drag on India’s investment returns. Chart 12Six Indian States Account For India’s Political Nucleus Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... With China’s population likely to have peaked last year, India’s population which is likely to peak in the 2040s - keeps attracting investor interest. In this report we peel the onion around India’s demographics in a way that allows investors to make the most of its demographics, whilst avoiding pitfalls associated with the same. We highlight that paradoxically; India’s most populous states may not be the main drivers of India’s growth over the next decade. On the other hand, investing in the ‘next eight’ most populous states, could present a superior opportunity to profit from India’s demographics. Six Indian states account for more than half of India’s population (Chart 12) and each of these states are larger than Germany or Turkey in terms of population (Map 1). Despite being populous, these states could emerge as flashpoints of social conflict over the next decade. This is because it is possible that these states’ economic growth fails to be brisk enough to meet aspirations of its vast populace. Early signs of this phenomenon are evident from the fact that these states’ share in India’s population has been rising, but their share in national income has fallen (Chart 13). Today these six states account for more than half of India’s population but generate less than half of its national GDP (Chart 14). Map 1India’s Most Populous States, May Not Necessarily Lead On Growth Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Chart 13Most Populous States Of India, Are Not Necessarily Leading On Growth Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... ​​​​​​ Chart 14Next Eight Largest States Of India Are Economically Dynamic Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... ​​​​​​ Despite accounting for the lion’s share of India’s population, these six states’ growth potential could be compromised by: Economic Weakness: Primary sectors account for an unusually large share of the local economies of the most populous states today (Chart 15). Social Complexity: Most of the populous states are also characterized by greater social complexity as compared to other Indian states (Chart 16). In other words, their populations are young but are also poor and more heterogenous, which in turn exposes these states to a higher risk of social conflict. Chart 15Primary Activities Account For A Large Chunk Of Populous States’ GDP Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... ​​​​​​ Chart 16The Risk Of Social Conflict Is Higher, In The More Populous States Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... ​​​​​​ ​​​Leverage: The debt to GDP ratio of the more populous states often tends to be higher too (Chart 17).​​​​​​​ Now contrary to the situation in India’s most populous states, India’s ‘next eight’ largest states (by population) could emerge as hubs of economic dynamism (Map 1). This is because: Faster Growth: These states' share in national GDP is growing faster than the pace at which their share in India’s population is growing (Chart 13). As of today, the next eight states account for less than a third of India’s population but more than a third of India’s national income (Chart 14). Fewer Constraints: The next eight most populous states have more modern economic structures (Chart 15), lower risk of social conflict (Chart 16) and mildly superior public finances (Chart 17). Last but not the least, the ‘next eight’ states are poised favorably from a political perspective as well. This is because the Bhartiya Janta Party (i.e., BJP) has a weak footprint in these states (Chart 18) and will be keen to offer supportive economic policies to win over their median voter. Chart 17More Populous States, Also Can Be More Leveraged Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... ​​​​​​ Chart 18Next Eight Most Populous States Likely To Attract More Political Attention Going Forward Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... Indian Politics: The Woods Are Lovely... ​​​​​​ Bottom Line: While the demographic dividend that India enjoys is real, its benefits will not be spread uniformly across India’s geographies. For instance, some of the most populous states of India could lag on the growth front. To profit from India’s demographics and yet mitigate risks associated with the same, we urge investors to build portfolios that maximize exposure to the second tier of populous states in India. Investment Conclusion The Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) in India appears set to emerge as the first party in India’s modern history to retain power beyond a decade with a simple majority. But to pull off this rare feat, it will have to metamorphosize and may exhibit some changes such as: Develop a focus on regions that are outside its core constituency, in a bid to offset anti-incumbency in its core constituencies. Sharpen its policy focus on the next tier of populous states, given that some of these states have greater growth potential and given that the BJP’s footprint in the second tier of populous states has room to grow. Adopt an expansive fiscal policy in the run up to the 2024 elections, to combat the rising economic miseries of India’s median voter. To play these dynamics, we urge clients to consider the following trades: Strategic Trades For clients with a holding period mandate of more than 12 months, we urge such investors to go strategically long Indian tech / short Chinese tech (Chart 19). The trade allows investors to play the unique and high degrees of political stability that India will offer on a strategic horizon. Chart 19Strategic Trade: Long Indian Tech / Short Chinese Tech Strategic Trade: Long Indian Tech / Short Chinese Tech Strategic Trade: Long Indian Tech / Short Chinese Tech ​​​​​​ Chart 20Tactical Trade: Short India / Long Brazilian Financials Tactical Trade: Short India / Long Brazilian Financials Tactical Trade: Short India / Long Brazilian Financials ​​​​​​ Moreover, it is notable the Indian tech industry’s key bases are concentrated in Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. All three states fall within the next tier of populous states of India. Thus, this trade allows investors to maximize exposure to both an economically vibrant region and sector of India. Tactical Trades For investors with a holding period mandate of less than 12 months, a trade that can be activated to profit from India’s short-term geopolitical risks is to short India / long Brazilian Financials (Chart 20). This allows investors to profit from the cyclical risks that will affect India (1) as commodity prices stay high and (2) as rising economic miseries fan fiscal risks.​​​​​​​   Ritika Mankar, CFA Editor/Strategist ritika.mankar@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 The US Inflation Surprise Index Has Rolled Over Goldilocks: A Skeptical Q&A Goldilocks: A Skeptical Q&A Global equities are nearing a bottom and will rally over the coming months as inflation declines and growth reaccelerates. While equity valuations are not at bombed-out levels, they have cheapened significantly. Global stocks trade at 15.3-times forward earnings. We are upgrading tech stocks from underweight to neutral. The NASDAQ Composite now trades at a forward P/E of 22.6, down from 32.9 at its peak last year. The 10-year Treasury yield should decline to 2.5% by the end of the year, which will help tech stocks at the margin. The US dollar has peaked. A weakening dollar will provide a tailwind to stocks, especially overseas bourses. US high-yield spreads are pricing in a default rate of 6.2% over the next 12 months, well above the trailing default rate of 1.2%. Favor high-yield credit over government bonds within a fixed-income portfolio.   Bottom Line: The recent sell-off in stocks provides a good opportunity to increase equity allocations. We expect global stocks to rise 15%-to-20% over the next 12 months. Back to Bullish We wrote a report on April 22nd arguing that global equities were heading towards a “last hurrah” in the second half of the year as a Goldilocks environment of falling inflation and supply-side led growth emerges. Last week, we operationalized this view by tactically upgrading stocks to overweight after having downgraded them in late February. This highly out-of-consensus view change, coming at a time when surveys by the American Association of Individual Investors and other outfits show extreme levels of bearishness, has garnered a lot of attention. In this week’s report, we answer some of the most common questions from the perspective of a skeptical reader.   Q: Inflation is at multi-decade highs, global growth is faltering, and central banks are about to hike rates faster than we have seen in years. Isn’t it too early to turn bullish? A: We need to focus on how the world will look like in six months, not how it looks like now. Inflation has likely peaked and many of the forces that have slowed growth, such as China’s Covid lockdown and the war in Ukraine, could abate.   Q: What is the evidence that inflation has peaked? And may I remind you, even if inflation does decline later this year, this is something that most investors and central banks are already banking on. Inflation would need to fall by more than expected for your bullish scenario to play out. A: That’s true, but there is good reason to think that this is precisely what will happen.  Overall spending in the US is close to its pre-pandemic trend. However, spending on goods remains above trend while spending on services is below trend (Chart 1). Services prices tend to be stickier than goods prices. Thus, the shift in spending patterns caused goods inflation to rise markedly with little offsetting decline in services inflation. To cite one of many examples, fitness equipment prices rose dramatically, but gym membership fees barely fell (Chart 2). Chart 1Total US Consumer Spending Is Almost Exactly At Its Pre-Pandemic Trend, But The Composition Of Spending Remains Skewed Total US Consumer Spending Is Almost Exactly At Its Pre-Pandemic Trend, But The Composition Of Spending Remains Skewed Total US Consumer Spending Is Almost Exactly At Its Pre-Pandemic Trend, But The Composition Of Spending Remains Skewed Chart 2Asymmetries Matter: Firms Manufacturing Sports Equipment Jacked Up Prices, But Gyms Barely Cut Prices Asymmetries Matter: Firms Manufacturing Sports Equipment Jacked Up Prices, But Gyms Barely Cut Prices Asymmetries Matter: Firms Manufacturing Sports Equipment Jacked Up Prices, But Gyms Barely Cut Prices As goods demand normalizes, goods inflation will come down. Meanwhile, the supply of goods should increase as the pandemic winds down, and hopefully, a detente is reached in Ukraine. There are already indications that some supply-chain bottlenecks have eased (Chart 3). Q: Even if supply shocks abate, which seems like a BIG IF to me, wouldn’t the shift in spending towards services supercharge what has been only a modest acceleration in services inflation so far? A: Wages are the most important driver of services inflation. Although the evidence is still tentative, it does appear as though wage inflation is peaking. The 3-month annualized growth rate in average hourly earnings for production and nonsupervisory workers slowed from 7.2% in the second half of 2021 to 3.8% in April (Chart 4). Assuming productivity growth of 1.5%, this is consistent with unit labor cost inflation of only slightly more than 2%, which is broadly consistent with the Fed’s CPI inflation target.1 Image Chart 4Wage Pressures May Be Starting To Ease Wage Pressures May Be Starting To Ease Wage Pressures May Be Starting To Ease Image Moreover, a smaller proportion of firms expect to raise wages over the next six months than was the case late last year according to a variety of regional Fed surveys (Chart 5). The same message is echoed by the NFIB small business survey (Chart 6). Consistent with all this, the US Citi Inflation Surprise Index has rolled over (Chart 7).   Chart 6... Small Business Owners Included ... Small Business Owners Included ... Small Business Owners Included Chart 7The US Inflation Surprise Index Has Rolled Over The US Inflation Surprise Index Has Rolled Over The US Inflation Surprise Index Has Rolled Over   Q: What about the “too cold” risk to your Goldilocks scenario? The risks of recession seem to be rising. A: The market is certainly worried about this outcome, and that has been the main reason stocks have fallen of late. However, we do not think this fear is justified, certainly not in the US (Chart 8). US households are sitting on $2.3 trillion excess savings, equal to about 14% of annual consumption. The ratio of household debt-to-disposable income is down 36 percentage points from its highs in early 2008, giving households the wherewithal to spend more. Core capital goods orders, a good leading indicator for capex, have surged. The homeowner vacancy rate is at a record low, suggesting that homebuilding will be fairly resilient in the face of higher mortgage rates.   Q: It seems like the Fed has a nearly impossible task on its hands: Increase labor market slack by enough to cool the economy but not so much as to trigger a recession. You yourself have pointed out that the Fed has never achieved this in its history. A: It is correct that the unemployment rate has never risen by more than one-third of a percentage point in the US without a recession occurring (Chart 9). That said, there are three reasons to think that a soft landing can be achieved this time. Image Chart 9When Unemployment Starts Rising, It Usually Keeps Rising When Unemployment Starts Rising, It Usually Keeps Rising When Unemployment Starts Rising, It Usually Keeps Rising First, increasing labor market slack is easier if one can raise labor supply rather than reducing labor demand. Right now, the participation rate is nearly a percentage point below where it was in 2019, even if one adjusts for increased early retirement during the pandemic (Chart 10). Wages have risen relatively more at the bottom end of the income distribution. This should draw more low-wage workers into the labor force. Furthermore, according to the Federal Reserve, accumulated bank savings for the lowest-paid 20% of workers have been shrinking since last summer, which should incentivize job seeking (Chart 11). Chart 10Labor Participation Has Further Scope To Recover Labor Participation Has Further Scope To Recover Labor Participation Has Further Scope To Recover Chart 11Depleted Savings Will Force More Lower-Wage Workers Into The Labor Market Depleted Savings Will Force More Lower-Wage Workers Into The Labor Market Depleted Savings Will Force More Lower-Wage Workers Into The Labor Market Second, long-term inflation expectations remain well contained, which makes a soft landing more likely. Median expected inflation 5-to-10 years out in the University of Michigan survey stood at 3% in May, roughly where it was between 2005 and 2013 (Chart 12). Median expected earnings growth in the New York Fed Survey of Consumer Expectations was only slightly higher in April than it was prior to the pandemic (Chart 13). Chart 12Consumer Long-Term Inflation Expectations Have Risen But Remain Relatively Low Consumer Long-Term Inflation Expectations Have Risen But Remain Relatively Low Consumer Long-Term Inflation Expectations Have Risen But Remain Relatively Low Chart 13US Consumers Do Not Expect Wages To Grow At A Much Higher Rate Than In The Pre-Pandemic Period US Consumers Do Not Expect Wages To Grow At A Much Higher Rate Than In The Pre-Pandemic Period US Consumers Do Not Expect Wages To Grow At A Much Higher Rate Than In The Pre-Pandemic Period A third reason for thinking that a soft landing may be easier to achieve this time around is that the US private-sector financial balance – the difference between what the private sector earns and spends – is still in surplus (Chart 14). This stands in contrast to the lead-up to both the 2001 and 2008-09 recessions, when the private sector was living beyond its means.   Q: You have spoken a lot about the US, but the situation seems dire elsewhere. Europe may already be in recession as we speak! A: The near-term outlook for Europe is indeed challenging. The euro area economy grew by only 0.8% annualized in the first quarter. Mathieu Savary, BCA’s Chief European Strategist, expects an outright decline in output in Q2. To no one’s surprise, the war in Ukraine is weighing on European growth. The Bundesbank estimates that a full embargo of Russian oil and gas would reduce German real GDP by an additional 5% on top of the damage already inflicted by the war (Chart 15). Chart 14The US Private-Sector Financial Balance Remains In Surplus The US Private-Sector Financial Balance Remains In Surplus The US Private-Sector Financial Balance Remains In Surplus Chart 15Germany’s Economy Will Sink Without Russian Energy Goldilocks: A Skeptical Q&A Goldilocks: A Skeptical Q&A While such a full embargo is possible, it is not our base case. In a remarkable about-face, Putin now says he has “no problems” with Finland and Sweden joining NATO, provided that they do not place military infrastructure in their countries. He had previous threatened a military response at the mere suggestion of NATO membership. In any case, there are few signs that Putin’s increasingly insular and dictatorial regime would respond to an oil embargo or other economic incentives. The wealthy oligarchs who were supposed to rein him in are cowering in fear. It is also not clear if Europe would gain any political leverage over Russia by adopting policies that push its own economy into a recession. It is worth noting that the price of the December 2022 European natural gas futures contract is down 39% from its peak at the start of the war (Chart 16). It is also noteworthy that European EPS estimates have been trending higher this year even as GDP growth estimates have been cut (Chart 17). This suggests that the analyst earnings projections were too conservative going into the year. Chart 16European Natural Gas Futures Are High But Below Their Peak European Natural Gas Futures Are High But Below Their Peak European Natural Gas Futures Are High But Below Their Peak Chart 17European And US EPS Estimates Have Been Trending Higher This Year European And US EPS Estimates Have Been Trending Higher This Year European And US EPS Estimates Have Been Trending Higher This Year Chart 18Chinese Property Sector: Signs Of Contraction Chinese Property Sector: Signs Of Contraction Chinese Property Sector: Signs Of Contraction Q: What about China? The lockdowns are crippling growth and the property market is in shambles. A: There is truth to both those claims. The government has all but said that it will not abandon its zero-Covid policy anytime soon, even going as far as to withdraw from hosting the 2023 AFC Asian Cup. While the number of new cases has declined sharply in Shanghai, future outbreaks are probable. On the bright side, China is likely to ramp up domestic production of Pfizer’s Paxlovid drug. Increased availability of the drug will reduce the burden of the disease once social distancing restrictions are relaxed. As far as the property market is concerned, sales, starts, completions, as well as home prices are all contracting (Chart 18). BCA’s China Investment Strategy expects accelerated policy easing to put the housing sector on a recovery path in the second half of this year. Nevertheless, they expect the “three red lines” policy to remain in place, suggesting that the rebound in housing activity will be more muted than in past recoveries.2  Ironically, the slowdown in the Chinese housing market may not be such a bad thing for the rest of the world. Remember, the main problem these days is inflation. To the extent that a sluggish Chinese housing market curbs the demand for commodities, this could provide some relief on the inflation front.   Q: So bad news is good news. Interesting take. Let’s turn to markets. You mentioned earlier that equity sentiment was very bearish. Fair enough, but I would note the very same American Association of Individual Investors survey that you cited also shows that investors’ allocation to stocks is near record highs (Chart 19). Shouldn’t we look at what investors are doing rather than what they’re saying? A: The discrepancy may not be as large as it seems. As Chart 20 illustrates, investors may not like stocks, but they like bonds even less. Chart 19Individual Investors Still Hold A Lot Of Stock Individual Investors Still Hold A Lot Of Stock Individual Investors Still Hold A Lot Of Stock   Image Chart 20B... But They Like Bonds Even Less ... But They Like Bonds Even Less ... But They Like Bonds Even Less Chart 21Global Equities Are More Attractively Valued After The Recent Sell-Off Global Equities Are More Attractively Valued After The Recent Sell-Off Global Equities Are More Attractively Valued After The Recent Sell-Off Global equities currently trade at 15.3-times forward earnings; a mere 12.5-times outside the US. The global forward earnings yield is 6.7 percentage points higher than the global real bond yield. In 2000, the spread between the earnings yield and the real bond yield was close to zero (Chart 21). It should also be mentioned that institutional data already show a sharp shift out of equities. The latest Bank of America survey revealed that fund managers cut equity allocations to a net 13% underweight in May from a 6% overweight in April and a net 55% overweight in January. Strikingly, fund managers were even more underweight bonds than stocks. Cash registered the biggest overweight in two decades.   Q: Your bullish equity bias notwithstanding, you were negative on tech stocks last year, arguing that the NASDAQ would turn into the NASDOG. Given that the NASDAQ Composite is down 29% from its highs, is it time to increase exposure to some beaten down tech names? A: Both the cyclical and structural headwinds facing tech stocks that we discussed in These Three High-Flying Equity Sectors Could Come Crashing Back Down To Earth and The Disruptor Delusion remain in place. Nevertheless, with the NASDAQ Composite now trading at 22.6-times forward earnings, down from 32.9 at its peak last year, an underweight in tech is no longer appropriate (Chart 22). A neutral stance is now preferable.   Chart 22Tech Stock Valuations Have Returned To Earth Tech Stock Valuations Have Returned To Earth Tech Stock Valuations Have Returned To Earth Q: I guess if bond yields come down a bit more, that would help tech stocks? A: Yes. Tech stocks tend to be growth-oriented. Falling bond yields raise the present value of expected cash flows more for growth companies than for other firms. While we do expect global bond yields to eventually rise above current levels, yields are likely to decline modestly over the next 12 months as inflation temporarily falls. We expect the US 10-year yield to end the year at around 2.5%.   Q: A decline in US bond yields would undermine the high-flying dollar, would it not? A: It depends on how bond yields abroad evolve. US Treasuries tend to be relatively high beta, implying that US yields usually fall more when global yields are declining (Chart 23). Thus, it would not surprise us if interest rate differentials moved against the dollar later this year. Chart 23US Treasuries Have A Higher Beta Than Most Other Government Bond Markets US Treasuries Have A Higher Beta Than Most Other Government Bond Markets US Treasuries Have A Higher Beta Than Most Other Government Bond Markets It is also important to remember that the US dollar is a countercyclical currency (Chart 24). If global growth picks up as pandemic dislocations fade and the Ukraine war winds down, the dollar is likely to weaken. Chart 24The Dollar Is A Countercyclical Currency The Dollar Is A Countercyclical Currency The Dollar Is A Countercyclical Currency Image A wider trade deficit could also imperil the greenback. The US trade deficit has increased from US$45 billion in December 2019 to US$110 billion. Equity inflows have helped finance the trade deficit, but net flows have turned negative of late (Chart 25). Finally, the dollar is quite expensive – 27% overvalued based on Purchasing Power Parity exchange rates.   Q: Let’s sum up. Please review your asset allocation recommendations both for the next 12 months and beyond. A: To summarize, global inflation has peaked. Growth should pick up later this year as supply-chain bottlenecks abate. The combination of falling inflation and supply-side led growth will provide a springboard for equities. We expect global stocks to rise 15%-to-20% over the next 12 months. Historically, non-US stocks have outperformed their US peers when the dollar has been weakening (Chart 26). EM stocks, in particular, have done well in a weak dollar environment Chart 26Non-US Stocks Will Benefit From A Weaker US Dollar Non-US Stocks Will Benefit From A Weaker US Dollar Non-US Stocks Will Benefit From A Weaker US Dollar Chart 27The Market Is Too Pessimistic On Default Risk The Market Is Too Pessimistic On Default Risk The Market Is Too Pessimistic On Default Risk Within fixed-income portfolios, we recommend a modest long duration stance over the next 12 months. We favor high-yield credit over safer government bonds. US high-yield spreads imply a default rate of 6.2% over the next 12 months compared to a trailing 12-month default rate of only 1.2% (Chart 27). Chart 28Falling Inflation Will Buoy Consumer Sentiment Falling Inflation Will Buoy Consumer Sentiment Falling Inflation Will Buoy Consumer Sentiment Our guess is that this Goldilocks environment will end towards the end of next year. As inflation comes down, real wage growth will turn positive. Consumer confidence, which is now quite depressed, will improve (Chart 28). Stronger demand will cause inflation to reaccelerate in 2024, setting the stage for another round of central bank rate hikes.   Peter Berezin Chief Global Strategist peterb@bcaresearch.com Follow me on           LinkedIn Twitter       Footnotes 1    The Federal Reserve targets an average inflation rate of 2% for the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index. Due to compositional differences between the two indices, CPI inflation has historically averaged 30-to-50 basis points higher than PCE inflation. This is why the Fed effectively targets a CPI inflation rate of 2.3%-to-2.5%. 2    The People’s Bank of China and the housing ministry issued a deleveraging framework for property developers in August 2020, consisting of a 70% ceiling on liabilities-to-assets, a net debt-to-equity ratio capped at 100%, and a limit on short-term borrowing that cannot exceed cash reserves. Developers breaching these “red lines” run the risk of being cut off from access to new loans from banks, while those who respect them can only increase their interest-bearing borrowing by 15% at most. Global Investment Strategy View Matrix Goldilocks: A Skeptical Q&A Goldilocks: A Skeptical Q&A Special Trade Recommendations Current MacroQuant Model Scores Goldilocks: A Skeptical Q&A Goldilocks: A Skeptical Q&A

Executive Summary The Fed will continue to hike rates at a time when global trade is contracting. Earlier this week, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell reiterated that the Fed will not hesitate to hike rates until core consumer price inflation gets closer to 2%. Given that US core consumer price inflation is currently at around 5-6%, a mere rollover in core inflation from current levels will not be enough for the Fed to tone down its hawkishness. Besides, according to Powell, US financial conditions are not yet at a level that is consistent with inflation coming down substantially. China will stick to its dynamic zero-COVID policy this year. The economy will continue to underwhelm as the magnitude and nature of stimulus measures announced thus far are not adequate to produce a recovery. Industrial metal prices and global material stocks are at risk of gapping down. Play these markets on the short side. Commodity Currencies Are Signaling Lower Commodity Prices Commodity Currencies Are Signaling Lower Commodity Prices Commodity Currencies Are Signaling Lower Commodity Prices Bottom Line: It is still dangerous to bottom fish in global equities and risk assets in general. The US dollar has more upside. Continue underweighting EM stocks and credit within global equity and credit portfolios, respectively. Feature The risks to global and EM risk assets are still skewed to the downside. Although investor sentiment on global equities has soured of late, we do not think global or EM equities have made a bottom, and the US dollar has not yet reached an apex. Consequently, absolute-return investors should stay defensive, and global equity portfolios should continue to underweight EM stocks. The Fed and Equities Are Still On A Collision Course Earlier this week, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell reiterated the Fed’s commitment to hiking interest rates until core consumer price inflation gets closer to 2%. Notably, in his speech at a WSJ event on May 17, Powell noted: “This is not a time for tremendously nuanced readings of inflation”… “We need to see inflation coming down in a convincing way. Until we do, we’ll keep going.” Given that US core consumer price inflation is currently at around 5-6%, a mere rollover in core inflation from current levels will not be enough for the Fed to tone down its hawkishness. Chart 1US Core Inflation Will Roll Over But Stay Above 3.5-4% For Now US Core Inflation Will Roll Over But Stay Above 3.5-4% For Now US Core Inflation Will Roll Over But Stay Above 3.5-4% For Now Chart 1 shows the average of core median CPI, core trimmed-mean CPI and core sticky CPI, which are better indicators of genuine inflationary pressures because they are less affected by outliers. Even though core CPI inflation ticked down in April, other core measures such as core median CPI, core trimmed-mean CPI and core sticky CPI continued to rise. These core inflation measures are not likely to ease back to 2% unless economic growth falls below its potential. In his same speech, Chairman Powell also asserted: “We will go until we feel like we are at a place where we can say, ‘Yes, financial conditions are at an appropriate place. We see inflation coming down.’ We will go to that point, and there will not be any hesitation about that.” This means that US financial conditions have not yet tightened enough for the Fed to back down on its hawkishness. Finally, we have been arguing that a wage-price spiral has developed in the US as the labor market has become very tight (Chart 2, top panel). Wages and unit labor costs have been surging. Unit labor costs are the most important driver of US core CPI (Chart 2, bottom panel). Therefore, it will be impossible for the Fed to bring down core inflation toward 2% without a retrenchment in the labor market, i.e., layoffs. Rising unemployment will in turn weigh on household income growth and consumption. Chart 2The US Labor Market Is Very Tight And Wage Growth Is Accelerating The US Labor Market Is Very Tight And Wage Growth Is Accelerating The US Labor Market Is Very Tight And Wage Growth Is Accelerating The cost of borrowing for companies is rising globally, and these periods often coincide with equity selloffs. Notably, surging US high-yield ex-energy corporate bond yields herald lower US share prices ahead (Chart 3, top panel). Similarly, rising EM corporate bond yields foreshadow a further decline in EM ex-TMT share prices (Chart 3, bottom panel). Chart 3Rising Corporate Bond Yields Are Bearish For Stocks Rising Corporate Bond Yields Are Bearish For Stocks Rising Corporate Bond Yields Are Bearish For Stocks On the whole, the Fed and many other central banks will be hiking interest rates at a time when global trade volumes are contracting in H2 2022. As discussed in our report A Whiff Of Stagflation? US and EU imports of consumer goods are set to shrink following the pandemic boom. Chart 4Global Export/Manufacturing Are Heading Into Contraction Global Export/Manufacturing Are Heading Into Contraction Global Export/Manufacturing Are Heading Into Contraction Meantime, rolling lockdowns and extremely weak income growth are depressing domestic demand in China. High food and energy prices as well as rising interest rates are weighing on EM ex-China consumption. The sharp underperformance of global cyclicals equities versus global defensive sectors corroborates our expectation that global manufacturing activity will contract (Chart 4). The trade-weighted US dollar typically benefits from both Fed hikes and a global trade slump. As long as the Fed is hawkish and global exports are contracting, the greenback will continue to appreciate. For now, the US dollar remains in a strong position for further appreciation, especially versus EM currencies (Chart 5). Consistently, the selloff in broad EM risk assets is not yet over.  Chart 5EM Currencies: More Downside EM Currencies: More Downside EM Currencies: More Downside A major reversal in the trade-weighted dollar will be a signal that the global macro backdrop is improving and that global share prices and EM risk assets are bottoming. Bottom Line: Although equities have become oversold and investor sentiment is depressed, any rebound will prove to be short lived. The Fed will continue to hike rates at a time when global trade is about to shrink. The global/EM equity selloff has further to run. China: Ordinary Stimulus Despite Extraordinary Conditions Only one thing is currently certain in China: authorities are committed to the dynamic zero-COVID policy. However, most experts outside China believe that it will be very difficult to wholly limit the spread of the easily transmissible Omicron variants, even with such stringent mainland containment policies. As a result, rolling lockdowns are the most likely scenario for China’s regions and cities in 2022. These lockdowns will depress household income, confidence and consumption. Private business investment and hiring will also tank. Have authorities provided enough stimulus to support a recovery in H2 2022? We do not think so. Chinese stimulus has so far been ordinary in nature and in magnitude. Policy easing will likely prove to be insufficient to lift the economy out of the current extraordinary slump. First, Chinese exports are set to shrink in H2 as US and EU consumption of consumer goods revert to their pre-pandemic trend. Demand from EM will remain weak. Second, rising unemployment and under-employment is hindering household income. Generous cash transfers are needed to offset this hit to income. Not only did aggregate retail sales collapse in April, but online sales of goods and service also plunged (Chart 6). It is hard to imagine that private businesses will be investing when consumer spending and exports are weak. Our proxies for the marginal propensity to spend for households and enterprises continue to fall (Chart 7). Chart 6China: Even Online Retail Sales Are Shrinking China: Even Online Retail Sales Are Shrinking China: Even Online Retail Sales Are Shrinking Chart 7China: Household And Enterprise Propensity To Spend Have Been Declining China: Household And Enterprise Propensity To Spend Have Been Declining China: Household And Enterprise Propensity To Spend Have Been Declining   Critically, China’s credit impulse, excluding government bond issuance, remains in negative territory (Chart 8). Third, China’s property market is frail. Despite modest policy easing for the real estate market, sentiment among home buyers and developers remains downbeat. Given that the housing sector faces structural headwinds, odds are that buyers and developers might not react to the modest property market easing that authorities have so far provided. It is worth noting that Chinese property stocks seem to have had a structural breakdown, and offshore corporate bonds of real estate developers remain in a bear market (Chart 9). These market patterns corroborate that China's housing market has experienced a structural breakdown. Chart 8Chinese Stimulus Has So Far Been Tame Chinese Stimulus Has So Far Been Tame Chinese Stimulus Has So Far Been Tame Chart 9Chinese Property Market Has Experienced A Structural Breakdown Chinese Property Market Has Experienced A Structural Breakdown Chinese Property Market Has Experienced A Structural Breakdown   Finally, even though infrastructure spending is being ramped up, it will prove to be insufficient for the economy to recover from a deep slump. Local governments are facing a major financing shortfall. Land sales – which make up about 40% of local government revenues – have dried up. This will hinder local governments’ ability to finance infrastructure projects. As to Chinese equities, internet/platform stocks have become oversold. However, their long-term outlook remains dismal. As we have been arguing since late 2020, the fundamental case for their de-rating remains intact. This week’s meeting between government officials and technology companies has not produced any positive news. Although the tone from authorities was more balanced, they did not offer any relief from already imposed regulations. Chart 10Implications Of China's Common Prosperity Policies Implications Of China's Common Prosperity Policies Implications Of China's Common Prosperity Policies Looking forward, implementing common prosperity policies will be the primary objective of the Communist Party in the coming years. These policies will assure that labor’s share of income will rise further at the expense of corporate profits. Chart 10 demonstrates that the share of labor in national income has been rising since 2011. Conversely, the share operating profits peaked in 2011 and has dropped to a 30-year low. These dynamics will persist as income will continue to be redistributed from shareholders to labor in the majority of industries/companies in China. This is an unfriendly outlook for shareholders, especially foreign ones. Bottom Line: Chinese policy stimulus has so far been insufficient. The economy is in a deep slump, and share prices remain at risk of further decline. Short Industrial Metals And Material Stocks Chart 11Chinese Imports Of Metals Was Shrinking In 2021 Chinese Imports Of Metals Was Shrinking In 2021 Chinese Imports Of Metals Was Shrinking In 2021 Industrial metals’ resilience last year in the face of shrinking Chinese import volumes was unusual (Chart 11). This resilience was probably due to robust DM demand for goods, supply bottlenecks and investors buying commodities as an inflation hedge. As we elaborated in the April 28 report, risks to industrial metals are skewed to the downside. This is despite the fact that agriculture prices will likely rise further, and energy prices will remain volatile due to the geopolitical situation. We continue to recommend investors underweight/short materials stocks and industrial metals for the following reasons: It is ill-advised to play the US inflation story by being long industrial metals and materials stocks. As shown in Chart 2 above, US unit labor costs are driving core inflation, not industrial metals. China accounts for 50-55% of global industrial metal consumption, and since early 2021 the key risk in China has been decelerating demand/deflation not inflation. In fact, commodities have become a crowded hedge against inflation and a global growth slowdown poses a substantial risk to industrial metals. Chart 12 demonstrates that Chinese materials stocks have plunged. We read this as a warning sign for global materials because China is by far the largest consumer of raw materials (excluding energy). Chart 12Chinese Material Stocks Are Signaling Trouble For Global Materials Chinese Material Stocks Are Signaling Trouble For Global Materials Chinese Material Stocks Are Signaling Trouble For Global Materials When share prices of customers are falling, equity prices of suppliers will likely follow. Chart 13 shows that over the past 200 years raw material prices in real US dollar terms (deflated by US headline CPI) have oscillated around a well-defined downtrend. The pandemic surge in commodity prices has pushed raw material prices to two standard deviations above this long-term trend. Chart 13Raw Material Prices (In Real Terms) Are At The Upper End Of A 200-Year Downtrend Raw Material Prices (In Real Terms) Are At The Upper End Of A 200-Year Downtrend Raw Material Prices (In Real Terms) Are At The Upper End Of A 200-Year Downtrend Historically, commodity rallies (and even their secular bull markets) ended when prices reached this threshold. Hence, odds are that industrial commodities might hit a soft spot. Energy prices remain a wild card due to geopolitics. It is critical to note that the raw materials price index shown in Chart 13 does not include energy, gold and semi-precious metals. Finally, shrinking global trade volumes are also negative for raw materials. The average of AUD, NZD and CAD points to lower industrial metal prices (Chart 14). Chart 14Commodity Currencies Are Signaling Lower Commodity Prices Commodity Currencies Are Signaling Lower Commodity Prices Commodity Currencies Are Signaling Lower Commodity Prices Chart 15Bearish Technical Patterns: BHP Share Price And Copper Bearish Technical Patterns: BHP Share Price And Copper Bearish Technical Patterns: BHP Share Price And Copper The share price of BHP, the world’s largest mining company, has put in a major top and is now gapping down (Chart 15, top panel). Copper prices have broken below their 200-day moving average that served as a support in the past 12 months (Chart 15, bottom panel). These market profiles point to more downside. We continue to recommend that investors play this theme in the following ways: Short copper or short copper / long gold; Short global materials / long global industrials; Short ZAR / long USD. Also, we downgraded Brazil early this week  partly due to expectations of lower iron ore prices and souring investor attitude toward commodity plays in general. Investment Conclusions Global and EM equities have entered a capitulation phase. It is still dangerous to bottom fish in global equities and risk assets in general. Continue underweighting EM stocks and credit within global equity and credit portfolios, respectively. The US dollar has more upside. Continue shorting the following EM currencies versus the USD: ZAR, PLN, HUF, COP, PEN, PHP and IDR. As we discussed in a recent report, we are approaching a major buying opportunity in EM local currency bonds. However, the US dollar needs to peak for that to transpire. Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com   Strategic Themes (18 Months And Beyond) Equities Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months)

Next Thursday May 26, we will hold the BCA Debate – High Inflation: Here To Stay,Or Soon In The Rear-View Mirror? – a Webcast in which I will debate my colleague, Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist, Bob Ryan on the outlook for inflation, and take the side that inflationary fears will soon recede. I do hope you can join us. As such, the debate will replace the weekly report, though we will renew the fractal trading watchlist on our website. Dhaval Joshi Executive Summary The second quarter’s synchronised sell-off in stocks, bonds, inflation protected bonds, industrial metals and gold is an extremely rare star alignment. The last time that the ‘everything sell-off’ star alignment happened was in early 1981 when the Paul Volcker Fed ‘broke the back’ of inflation and turned stagflation into an outright recession. In 2022, the Jay Powell Fed risks doing the same. If history repeats itself, then the template of 1981-82 could provide a useful guide for 2022-23. In which case, bond prices are now entering a bottoming process.  Stocks would bottom next. While the near term outlook is cloudy, we expect stock prices to be higher on a 12-month horizon, especially long-duration stocks that are most sensitive to bond yields. But just as in 1981-82, the biggest casualty will be industrial metals, which are likely to suffer at least double-digit losses over the coming year. Fractal trading watchlist: FTSE 100 versus Stoxx Europe 600, Czech Republic versus Poland, Food and Beverages, US REITS versus Utilities, CNY/USD. 2022-23 Could Be An Echo Of 1981-82 2022-23 Could Be An Echo Of 1981-82 2022-23 Could Be An Echo Of 1981-82 Bottom Line: The 1981-82 template for 2022-23 suggests that bonds will bottom first, followed by stocks. But steer clear of gold and industrial metals. Feature Investors have had a torrid time in the second quarter, with no place to hide.1  Stocks are down -10 percent. Bonds are down -6 percent. Inflation protected bonds are down -6 percent. Industrial metals are down -13 percent. Gold is down -6 percent. To add insult to injury, even cash is down in real terms, because the interest rate is well below the inflation rate! (Chart I-1) Chart I-1The 'Everything Sell-Off' In 2022 Last Happened In 1981, When Stagflation Morphed Into Recession The 'Everything Sell-Off' In 2022 Last Happened In 1981, When Stagflation Morphed Into Recession The 'Everything Sell-Off' In 2022 Last Happened In 1981, When Stagflation Morphed Into Recession Such a star alignment of asset returns, in which stocks, bonds, inflation protected bonds, industrial metals, and gold all sell off together, is unprecedented. In the eighty calendar quarters since the inflation protected bond market data became available in the early 2000s there has never been a quarter with an ‘everything sell-off’. Everything Has Sold Off, But Does That Make Sense? The rarity of an ‘everything sell-off’ is because there are virtually no economic or financial scenarios in which all five asset-classes should fall together (Chart I-2 and Chart I-3). Chart I-2An 'Everything Sell-Off' Is Extremely Rare An 'Everything Sell-Off' Is Extremely Rare An 'Everything Sell-Off' Is Extremely Rare Chart I-3An 'Everything Sell-Off' Is Extremely Rare An 'Everything Sell-Off' Is Extremely Rare An 'Everything Sell-Off' Is Extremely Rare A scenario dominated by rising inflation is bad for bonds, but good for inflation protected bonds, especially relative to conventional bonds. Yet inflation protected bonds have not outperformed either in absolute or relative terms. A scenario of rising inflation should also support the value of stocks, industrial metals and certainly gold, given that all three are, to varying degrees, ‘inflation hedges.’ Yet the prices of stocks, industrial metals, and gold have all plummeted. The rarity of an ‘everything sell-off’ is because there are virtually no economic or financial scenarios in which all asset classes should fall together. Conversely, a scenario dominated by slowing growth is bad for industrial metal prices, but good for conventional bond prices – as bond yields decline on diminished expectations for rate hikes. Yet conventional bonds have sold off. What about a scenario dominated by both rising inflation and slowing growth – which is to say, stagflation? In this case, we would expect inflation protected bonds to perform especially well. Meanwhile, with the economy still growing, the prices of industrial metals should not be collapsing, as they have been recently.  In a final scenario of an imminent recession we would expect stocks, industrial metals and even gold to sell off, but conventional bonds to perform especially well. The upshot is there are virtually no economic scenarios in which stocks, bonds, inflation protected bonds, industrial metals, and gold plummet together, as they have recently. So, what’s going on? To answer, we need to take a trip back to the 1980s. 1981 Was The Last Time We Had An ‘Everything Sell-Off’ Inflation protected bonds did not exist before the late 1990s. But considering the other four asset-classes – stocks, bonds, industrial metals, and gold – to find the last time that they all fell together we must travel back to 1981, the time of Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, and the Paul Volcker Fed. And suddenly, we discover spooky similarities with the current Zeitgeist. Just like today, the world’s central banks were obsessed with ‘breaking the back’ of inflation, which, like a monster in a horror movie, kept appearing to die before coming back with second and third winds (Chart I-4). Chart I-4In 1981, Just As In 2022, Central Banks Would 'Do Whatever It Takes' To Kill Inflation In 1981, Just As In 2022, Central Banks Would 'Do Whatever It Takes' To Kill Inflation In 1981, Just As In 2022, Central Banks Would 'Do Whatever It Takes' To Kill Inflation Just like today, the central banks were desperate to repair their badly damaged credibility in managing the economy. As the biography “Volcker: The Triumph of Persistence” puts it: “He restored credibility to the Federal Reserve at a time it had been greatly diminished.” And just like today, central bankers hoped that they could pilot the economy to a ‘soft landing’, though whether they genuinely believed that is another story. Asked at a press conference if higher interest rates would cause a recession, Volcker replied coyly “Well, you get varying opinions about that.” 2022 has spooky similarities with 1981. In fact, in its single-minded aim ‘to do whatever it takes’ to kill inflation, the Volcker Fed hiked the interest rate to near 20 percent, thereby triggering what was then the deepest economic recession since the Depression of the 1930s (Chart I-5 and Chart I-6). With hindsight, it was a price worth paying because the economy then began a quarter century of low inflation, steady growth, and mild recessions – a halcyon period for which the Volcker Fed’s aggressive tightening in the early 1980s have been lauded. Chart I-5In 1981, The Fed Hiked Rates To Near 20 Percent... In 1981, The Fed Hiked Rates To Near 20 Percent... In 1981, The Fed Hiked Rates To Near 20 Percent... Chart I-6...And Thereby Morphed Stagflation Into Recession ...And Thereby Morphed Stagflation Into Recession ...And Thereby Morphed Stagflation Into Recession Granted, the problems of 2022 are a much scaled down version of those in 1981, yet there are spooky similarities – a point which will not have gone unnoticed by the current crop of central bankers. It is no secret that Jay Powell is a big fan of Paul Volcker.   The Echoes Of 1981-82 In 2022-23 The answer to why everything sold off in early 1981 is that central banks took their economies from stagflation to outright recession, and the risk is that the same happens again in 2022-23 (Chart I-7). Chart I-7The Echoes Of 1981-82: Aggressive Rate Hikes In 2022-23 Will Morph Stagflation Into Recession The Echoes Of 1981-82: Aggressive Rate Hikes In 2022-23 Will Morph Stagflation Into Recession The Echoes Of 1981-82: Aggressive Rate Hikes In 2022-23 Will Morph Stagflation Into Recession In the transition from stagflation fears to recession fears, everything sells off because first the stagflation casualties get hammered, and then the recession plays get hammered. This leaves investors with no place to hide, as no mainstream asset is left unscathed. Just as in 1981, a transition from stagflation fears to recession fears likely explains the recent ‘everything sell-off’ because the sell-off in April was most painful for the stagflation casualties – bonds. Whereas, the sell-off in May has been most painful for the recession casualties – industrial metals and stocks.  In a stagflation that morphs to recession, everything sells off. What happens next? The template of 1981-82 could provide a useful guide. Bond prices bottomed first, in the late summer of 1981, as it became clear that the economy was entering a downturn which would exorcise inflation. Of the three other asset classes – all recession casualties – stocks continued to remain under pressure for the next few months but were higher 12 months later. Gold fell another 30 percent, though rebounded sharply in 1982. But the greatest pain was in the industrial metals, which fell another 30 percent and did not recover their highs for several years (Chart I-8). Chart I-82022-23 Could Be An Echo Of 1981-82 2022-23 Could Be An Echo Of 1981-82 2022-23 Could Be An Echo Of 1981-82 2022-23 could be an echo of 1981-82, with bond prices now entering a bottoming process.  Stocks would bottom next, with one difference being a quicker recovery than in 1981-82 because of their higher sensitivity to bond yields. While the near term outlook is cloudy, we expect stock prices to be higher on a 12 month horizon, especially long-duration stocks that are most sensitive to bond yields. But just as in 1981-82, the biggest casualty of a stagflation that morphs into a recession will be the overvalued industrial metals, which are likely to suffer at least double-digit losses over the coming year. Fractal Trading Watchlist This week’s new additions are Czech Republic versus Poland, and Food and Beverages versus the market, which appear overbought. And US REITS versus Utilities, and CNY/USD, which appear oversold. Finally, our new trade recommendation is to underweight the FTSE 100 versus the Stoxx Europe 600. The resource heavy FTSE 100 is especially vulnerable to our anticipated sell-off in commodities, and its recent outperformance is at a point of fragility that has marked previous turning points (Chart I-9). Set the profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 5 percent. Chart I-9FTSE 100 Outperformance Is Near Exhaustion FTSE 100 Outperformance Is Near Exhaustion FTSE 100 Outperformance Is Near Exhaustion Fractal Trading Watchlist: New Additions Chart I-10Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Chart I-11Food And Beverage Outperformance Near Exhaustion CHART 1 Food And Beverage Outperformance Near Exhaustion CHART 1 Food And Beverage Outperformance Near Exhaustion CHART 1 Chart I-12US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities CHART 12 US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities CHART 12 US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities CHART 12 Chart I-13CNY/USD At A Support Level CNY/USD At A Support Level CNY/USD At A Support Level Chart 1The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile Chart 2The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile Chart 3AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 4Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Chart 5Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Chart 6US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal Chart 7A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 8Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 9CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started Chart 10Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Chart 11Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Norway's Outperformance Could End Chart 12Greece's Brief Outperformance To End Greece's Brief Outperformance To End Greece's Brief Outperformance To End Chart 13BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point Chart 14The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 15The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse Chart 16Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 17Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Chart 18Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Chart 19The Rally In USD/EUR Could End The Rally In USD/EUR Could End The Rally In USD/EUR Could End Chart 20The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 21A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare Chart 22FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Vulnerable To Reversal FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Vulnerable To Reversal FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 23Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Close To Exhaustion Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Close To Exhaustion Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Close To Exhaustion Chart 24The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 25The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 26Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Chart 27Food And Beverage Outperformance Near Exhaustion CHART 1 Food And Beverage Outperformance Near Exhaustion CHART 1 Food And Beverage Outperformance Near Exhaustion CHART 1 Chart 28US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities CHART 12 US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities CHART 12 US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities CHART 12 Chart 29CNY/USD At A Support Level CNY/USD At A Support Level CNY/USD At A Support Level   Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 The returns are based on the S&P 500, the 10-year T-bond, the 10-year Treasury Inflation Protected Security (TIPS), the LMEX index, and gold.   Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades Markets Echo 1981, When Stagflation Morphed Into Recession Markets Echo 1981, When Stagflation Morphed Into Recession Markets Echo 1981, When Stagflation Morphed Into Recession Markets Echo 1981, When Stagflation Morphed Into Recession 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed   Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations  

Dear Client, This week, the US Bond Strategy service is hosting its Quarterly Webcast (May 17 at 9:00 AM EDT, 14:00 PM BST, 15:00 PM CEST and May 18 at 9:00 HKT, 11:00 AEST). In addition, we are sending this Quarterly Chartpack that provides a recap of our key recommendations and some charts related to those recommendations and other areas of interest for US bond investors. Please tune in to the Webcast and browse the Chartpack at your leisure, and do let us know if you have any questions or other feedback. To view the Quarterly Chartpack PDF please click here. Best regards, Ryan Swift, US Bond Strategist