Sectors

Overweight - High-Conviction The S&P asset management and custody banks (AMCB) index has outperformed both the S&P 500 and the broad financials index since we lifted it to a high-conviction overweight in mid-February. The tight correlation between Treasury yields and relative share prices explain a large part of the outperformance (top panel). Given BCA's underweight duration bond view, we still think the outperformance phase is in early days. Historically, the index has also been positively correlated with both the stock-to-bond ratio and the equity risk premium, but has deviated significantly from both in the last four years (second and third panels). The index has also diverged negatively from its own earnings profile, creating a persistent state of undervaluation since 2015. Even modest mean reversion in any of these measures implies substantial outperformance as animal spirits remain upbeat. Bottom Line: The undervalued S&P AMCB index has significant catch-up potential with earnings momentum pointing in the right direction. Stay overweight. The ticker symbols for the stocks in the S&P asset manager & custody banks index are: BLBG: S5AMGT-BK, BLK, STT, AMP, NTRS, TROW, BEN, IVZ, AMG.

The latest quarter has been positive for small caps which started regaining ground against their large cap peers. This size bias has been adding alpha to our portfolio since the mid-August 2016 inception (top panel). The NFIB small business survey, despite falling in the most recent release, remains very close to its decade-high and should continue to underpin small caps (second panel). Still, small business owner optimism stands in contrast to small business profitability which has lagged larger peers since the GFC (third panel). The growth in unfilled jobs and coincident rise in compensation is a likely culprit (fourth panel). The latest NFIB survey gives us cause to think margins may be set to turn up as planned price hikes relative to planned compensation increases have risen to a two-year high (bottom panel). Historically, this margin proxy has been positively correlated with small cap margins suggesting that the margin gap between small and large caps may soon narrow. Overall, normalizing profitability, combined with tax reform that should disproportionally benefit small firms, keeps us on the side of small versus large caps.

Highlights Tipping points tend to occur when too many long-term value investors are uncharacteristically behaving like short-term momentum traders. Long IBEX35 versus Eurostoxx50 constitutes a good tactical trade. The underperformance of Spanish equities appears excessively pessimistic. Euro/dollar is technically extended by about 4 cents. The near term event risk is the ECB meeting on October 26, when a taper of asset purchases which extends well beyond 12 months might be regarded as dovish. But in the medium term, euro/dollar will head well north of 1.30. Underweight Basic Materials equities relative to the market as a tactical trade. Feature Spain: Red Herring Or Red Flag? Long Spanish equities is an excellent tactical trade provided that the imbroglio in Catalonia turns out to be a red herring. The IBEX35 index is at a classic tipping point of excessive short-term (negative) groupthink and herding (Chart of the Week). Chart Of The WeekThe Underperformance Of Spanish Equities Seems Excessive But is the imbroglio in Catalonia a red herring? Most likely, yes. As my colleague Marko Papic, BCA Chief Geopolitical Strategist points out, any unilateral declaration of independence from Catalonia would be vacuous if it lacked international legitimacy, or the ability to enforce it with arms. German sociologist Max Weber famously defined a nation's sovereignty as a "monopoly over the use of legitimate force." Unlike the Basque separatists, Catalan separatists have never resorted to force. A descent into violence remains unlikely because the Catalan independence movement is mainly a bourgeois, middle and upper class intellectual vision. The majority of Catalonia's working class are neither Catalan, nor support independence. Any unilateral declaration of independence would also lack political credibility because the opponents of independence largely boycotted the recent referendum to avoid giving it legitimacy. The vote for independence comprised only 37% of the electorate, meaning that popular support for independence remains questionable. The real (and unspoken) reason for the independence referendum was that it was the only glue holding together the Junts Pel Si (Together For Yes) four party coalition forming Catalonia's regional government. Without this glue, the two nationalist parties from opposite sides of the ideological spectrum would not be in bed with each other. And it is unclear whether this unholy alliance can stay entwined. To sum up, Catalan independence is an intellectual vision which at the moment lacks political and implementation credibility. For the imbroglio to become a full-blown crisis, the Catalan government, or militant groups, or the Spanish government would have to escalate tensions with the use of force. We do not expect this to happen. So the underperformance of Spanish equities appears excessively pessimistic, and long IBEX35 versus Eurostoxx50 constitutes a good 3-month trade (Chart I-2 and Chart I-3). Chart I-2The IBEX 35 And Euro Stoxx 50 Have Parted Company Chart I-3The IBEX 35 Has Catch-Up Potential Identifying Tipping Points Of Price Trends Let's take this opportunity to review how we identify such tipping points of excessive groupthink and herding. Tipping points tend to occur when too many long-term value investors are uncharacteristically behaving like short-term momentum traders. Instead of dispassionately investing on the basis of value, long-term investors get sucked into chasing a price trend, and thereby amplify it. These price trends reach exhaustion when there are no more value investors left to suck in, and at the margin, someone wants to get out. The following analysis describes the tipping point of a price uptrend, but exactly the same analysis applies in reverse to the tipping point of a price downtrend. When a financial asset price starts to rise, the momentum trader's natural inclination is to chase the price rise, and buy. Conversely, the long-term value investor's natural inclination, ordinarily, is to lean against the price rise, and sell. The two investors interpret the same information in polar opposite ways because they have very different time horizons. Importantly, their different interpretations of the same information - stemming from their different time horizons - allow the momentum trader and the value investor to trade with one another in very large volume at the current price. This is what creates a healthy market with plentiful liquidity. Now consider what happens when a long-term value investor flips out of character and acts like a momentum trader. With the numerical balance shifting to the momentum traders, the price has to move up to balance buy and sell orders. As more and more value investors defect to momentum trading, the price uptrend gathers steam. This uptrend is exhausted when the long-term value investors have all joined the trend. Regular readers know that we identify these tipping points by comparing the behaviour of investors with 'short-term' 1-day horizons and investors with 'long-term' 65-day horizons. For any financial asset, a near term price reversal is likely to occur when its 65-day fractal dimension hits a lower limit of 1.25 (Chart I-4), which we have found to be the 'universal constant of finance'.1 Chart I-4When The Valuation Framework Changes, It Is More Difficult To Assess Tipping Points At this remarkably consistent limit, the long-term investor reverts back to character, realises the stock is now overvalued and wants to sell. The trouble is that everybody has already joined the trend. To sell, there needs to be a buyer. But who will buy at the current price? Usually, the answer is nobody. The marginal buyer will be a new category of investor: an 'ultra-long term' value investor - let's say, with a 130-day horizon - who stayed true to character and refused to join the uptrend. As this investor knows that the stock is overvalued at the current price, he will only provide liquidity at the 'correct' lower price. So this is the tipping point at which the price trend reverses. Occasionally, there is another possibility. The ultra-long term value investor could also join the trend at the current price. This might happen when the valuation framework for an investment is especially uncertain, leaving long-term value investors extremely disoriented and unable to assess the 'correct' price. An important conclusion is that when the valuation framework for an investment is undergoing a major change, it is much more difficult to assess the tipping point of a price trend. Which brings us to the euro. Is The Euro Overbought? Through the second half of 2014 and early 2015, the euro was in a major downtrend as the ECB first signalled and then implemented its QE program. On several occasions, the 65-day downtrend seemed technically exhausted but after only minor reversals, the downtrend continued (see Chart I-4 again). Even after the 130-day downtrend seemed exhausted at the start of 2015, it persisted into the spring (Chart I-5). The reason was that as the ECB moved into the uncharted territory of QE, ZIRP and NIRP, the valuation framework for the euro also moved into uncharted territory. Without a reliable valuation anchor, longer and longer term investors jumped on the euro bear bandwagon. Chart I-5The Euro Is Overbought, But The Reversal Might Be Minor Today, we face the mirror-image situation. The euro has been in a major uptrend for most of 2017 as the ECB has signalled a recalibration of its extraordinary monetary easing. But though the 65-day uptrend seemed exhausted in the early summer, the uptrend continued as longer term investors joined the trend. Just as in 2014-15, the question today is: at a major turning point in ECB policy, what is the most reliable valuation anchor? For us, the best explanatory model for euro/dollar is the expected difference in ECB versus Fed policy rates 5 years ahead. As this differential compressed from -230 bps to -160 bps, euro/dollar rallied in perfect lockstep from 1.03 to 1.15. However, the subsequent rally has deviated from the expected policy rate differential, suggesting that the euro's uptrend is indeed overdone by about 4 cents. But in the medium term, the much bigger question is: what will happen to the expected policy rate differential? As we explained in Positioning For A Sea-Change2 the differential must eventually compress to around -40 bps, because this is the mid-point of a very well established multi-decade cycle (Chart I-6 and Chart I-7). In which case, euro/dollar must eventually head well north of 1.30 (Chart I-8). Chart I-6The Euro Area - U.S. Average ##br##Interest Rate Differntial = -40 bps... Chart I-7...Because The Euro Area-U.S. ##br##Inflation Differential = -40 bps Chart I-8An Expected Interest Differential ##br##Of -40 bps Means EUR/USD Goes North Of 1.30 To be clear, north of 1.30 is the medium term direction of travel, and the journey will not be a straight line. The near term event risk is the ECB meeting on October 26, when the central bank will very likely announce a recalibration of its monetary policy. A taper of asset purchases which extends well beyond 12 months might be regarded as dovish, as it would delay the timing of policy rate normalisation. In which case, euro/dollar could retest 1.15. Finally, and very briefly, Chart I-9 shows the major equity sector most at risk of a price trend reversal is Basic Materials. Although global growth seems healthy and synchronized, materials equities seem to have run much too far ahead, especially relative to other cyclical equity sectors. We recommend tactically underweighting Basic Materials relative to the market. Chart I-9Tactically Underweight Basic Materials Dhaval Joshi, Senior Vice President Chief European Investment Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see the European Investment Strategy Special Report, "The Universal Constant Of Finance," September 25 2014, available at eis.bcaresearch.com. 2 Published on September 7 2017 and available at eis.bcaresearch.com. Fractal Trading Model* As decribed in the main body of this report, this week’s new trade recommendation is to go long Spain’s IBEX35 versus the Eurostoxx50 with a profit target/stop loss of 2.5%. For any investment, excessive trend following and groupthink can reach a natural point of instability, at which point the established trend is highly likely to break down with or without an external catalyst. An early warning sign is the investment’s fractal dimension approaching its natural lower bound. Encouragingly, this trigger has consistently identified countertrend moves of various magnitudes across all asset classes. Chart I-10 * For more details please see the European Investment Strategy Special Report “Fractals, Liquidity & A Trading Model,” dated December 11, 2014, available at eis.bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading Model The post-June 9, 2016 fractal trading model rules are: When the fractal dimension approaches the lower limit after an investment has been in an established trend it is a potential trigger for a liquidity-triggered trend reversal. Therefore, open a countertrend position. The profit target is a one-third reversal of the preceding 13-week move. Apply a symmetrical stop-loss. Close the position at the profit target or stop-loss. Otherwise close the position after 13 weeks. Use the position size multiple to control risk. The position size will be smaller for more risky positions. Recommendations Equities Bond & Interest Rates Currency & Other Positions Closed Fractal Trades Trades Closed Trades Asset Performance Currency & Bond Equity Sector Country Equity Indicators Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Interest Rate Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations

Underweight While we have turned positive on the broad industrials complex and remain constructive on most transports, we continue to recommend investors avoid the S&P airlines index. A costly price war between the low cost carriers and the largely-restructured legacy airlines means airfares are stuck in deflation. The industry has been here before, and recently too. 2015 was a tumultuous year that saw pricing collapse as the ultra-low cost carriers entered the traditional hubs, triggering a scramble for market share. As a result, airlines have not been able to make price increases stick, even in the face of soaring jet fuel costs that eat into profits (second panel). At the same time as cash generation appears most threatened, the industry is in the midst of an expensive fleet renewal. The result is predictable; the hard deleveraging work the industry put in over the course of this decade is being unwound (third panel). This should, in turn, raise risk premiums and reverse the recent upturn in valuation multiples (bottom panel). Bottom Line: With no end in sight to the price war and outsized capacity additions likely to throw fuel on the fire, we think investors should stay away from the S&P airlines index. Accordingly, we reiterate our underweight recommendation; please see Monday's Weekly Report for additional details. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5AIRL - DAL, LUV, AAL, UAL, ALK.

In the past few weeks, we have tweaked our cyclical portfolio exposure by downgrading early-cyclical consumer discretionary stocks to a benchmark allocation and lifting the late cyclical industrials complex to overweight. We recommend a new long S&P industrials/short S&P consumer discretionary sector pair trade to exploit the growing performance gap between the two. Four key drivers underpin our warming up to this late over early cyclical pair trade: interest rates, relative sentiment, relative demand and relative export backdrop. Higher interest rates represent a sizable hindrance to consumer spending (top panel) as rates on consumer credit rise in lockstep with fed hikes. While C&I loan pricing also suffers a setback, capital goods producers can bypass banks and raise debt in the bond markets. Relative sentiment readings also suggest that industrials manufacturers have the upper hand as the overall ISM manufacturing survey (second panel) is easily outpacing consumer confidence readings. These readings are echoed in relative demand in the form of a sustained capital expenditure upcycle, at a time when PCE growth is anemic at best (third and fourth panels). Finally, with foreign revenue exposure at 38% of revenues for industrials versus 24% for the consumer discretionary sector, the year-to-date breakdown in the greenback gives the edge to industrials. Adding up, all four key macro variables signal that the time is ripe for a new industrials versus discretionary pair trade; initiate a long S&P industrials/short S&P consumer discretionary sector pair trade, and please see yesterday’s Weekly Report for additional details.

Highlights Portfolio Strategy Go long industrials/short discretionary. Leading indicators of interest rates, relative sentiment, relative demand and relative exports all signal that industrials stocks will outperform their consumer discretionary peers. A price war is gripping airlines anew, and it will suck the air out of the industry. Recent Changes Long S&P Industrials/Short S&P Consumer Discretionary - Initiate this pair trade today. Table 1 Feature Tax relief euphoria propelled the S&P 500 to fresh all-time highs last week. While such exuberance has rekindled the "Trump trade" with small caps outshining mega caps and banks soaring (as a reminder we have a small cap size bias and are overweight financials/banks1), it will likely prove fleeting unless the tax bill becomes law. BCA's Geopolitical Strategy service believes that a tax bill passage is likely in Q1/2018.2 Were that to materialize, it would serve as a catalyst to further fuel the blow off phase in equities. Why? Empirical evidence suggests that easy fiscal policy outweighs the drag from Fed interest rate tightening. Filtering the post WWII era for periods of easing fiscal and tightening monetary policies during expansions is revealing. We define easy fiscal policy as increasing fiscal thrust (year-over-year change in cyclically-adjusted fiscal balance as a percentage of potential GDP, shown inverted, bottom panel, Chart 1) and tight monetary policy as a rising fed funds rate. Chart 1Easy Fiscal + Tight Money = Buy SPX While this is a rare occurrence, it has clearly happened seven times since the mid-1950s (shaded areas, Chart 1). As a clarification, we omitted the brief periods in the early-1960s, early-1970s and twice in the early-1980s as they were very close to the end of those recessions and positively skewed the results. All iterations resulted in positive stock returns with the SPX rising on average by over 16%. Table 2 details all seven periods that have an average duration of 16 months. There are high odds that a tax bill enactment coupled with a potential infrastructure spending bill will more than cushion the blow from the Fed's interest rate hikes in 2018, and sustain the overshoot phase in equities. As we recently showed in our equity market indicator White Paper, the business cycle stays intact during Fed tightening cycles, and historically a peak in the fed funds rate presages a recession.3 Importantly, the highly cyclical part of the U.S. economy is humming. The latest ISM manufacturing survey showed that new orders are running 20% higher than inventories, with the headline number soaring to a 13 year high (third panel, Chart 2). Prices paid also spiked to above 70, signaling that commodity inflation is looming. And, were the capex revival to gain steam as most of the leading indicators we track suggest (see Chart 8 from the October 2nd Weekly Report), then late cyclicals will continue to benefit from end-demand resurgence. Table 2SPX Returns During Periods Of Loose##br## Fiscal And Tight Monetary Policy Chart 2It's Deep##br## Cyclicals' Time As a result, we reiterate last week's upgrade of the S&P industrials sector to overweight, and this week we add more deep cyclical exposure to our portfolio by initiating a market-neutral pair trade to benefit from this enticing macro backdrop. Industrials Will Outmuscle Consumer Discretionary In the past few weeks, we have tweaked our cyclical portfolio exposure by downgrading early-cyclical consumer discretionary stocks to a benchmark allocation and lifting the late cyclical industrials complex to overweight. In fact, a once-in-a-generation opportunity to buy industrials at the expense of discretionary stocks has surfaced, and we recommend a new long S&P industrials/short S&P consumer discretionary sector pair trade to exploit this tradable opportunity. Chart 3 shows that relative share prices recently bounced near the early-1970s all-time lows and a mini V-shaped recovery is taking root. The industrials/discretionary price ratio has been in a downtrend for the better part of the past decade and the most recent peak-to-trough collapse has been a 4 standard deviation move (Chart 3). Even a modest relative performance renormalization near the historical mean would translate into impressive returns. Chart 3Compelling Entry Point Four key drivers underpin our warming up to this late over early cyclical pair trade: interest rates, relative sentiment, relative demand and relative export backdrop. The Fed embarked on a fresh tightening interest rate cycle almost two years ago and is on track to lift the fed funds rate another 100bps by the end of 2018 according to the FOMC's median dot forecast. Interest rate-sensitive stocks suffer when the Fed tightens monetary policy, whereas deep cyclicals disproportionately benefit from accelerating economic growth. Chart 4 confirms that over the past four decades a rising fed funds rate has been synonymous with an increase in the relative share price ratio and vice versa. Chart 4Tight Money Is Good For Industrials But Weighs On Discretionary The framework we use on the interest rate front is that higher interest rates represent a sizable hindrance to consumer spending (top and second panel Chart 5). Not only does the price of housing-related credit rise in lockstep with fed hikes, but also auto and credit card interest rates, two major consumer loan categories, increase on the back of the Fed's tighter monetary backdrop. True, C&I loan pricing also suffers a setback, but capital goods producers can bypass banks and raise debt in the bond markets. In fact, this cycle, the global hunt for yield and unconventional monetary policies have suppressed interest rates to the benefit of corporate borrowers. One final relative advantage industrials outfits have this cycle is rising pricing power in the form of firming commodity prices (third panel, Chart 5), while wage growth/median income (a proxy for consumer pricing power) has been subpar. Taken together, higher interest rates and rising commodity prices should continue to underpin relative share price momentum (Chart 5). Relative sentiment readings also suggest that industrials manufacturers have the upper hand versus consumer discretionary companies (Chart 6). The overall ISM manufacturing survey is easily outpacing consumer confidence readings. Importantly, the ISM survey and most of the subcomponents are making multi-year highs, while both the University of Michigan's consumer sentiment survey and The Conference Board's consumer confidence reading peaked in early 2017. Chart 5Commodity Inflation Is A Boon For##br## Industrials But Bane For Discretionary Chart 6Manufacturing Flexing ##br##Its Muscles With regard to the relative demand landscape, a sustained capital expenditure upcycle is promising for capital goods producers (second panel, Chart 7), at a time when personal consumption expenditures (PCE) are anemic at best. Notably, real capital outlays have been rising at a faster clip than real PCE, signaling that the upward trajectory in relative forward EPS estimates is sustainable (middle panel, Chart 7). Our relative pricing power gauge has recently come out of its funk reflecting this improving relative demand backdrop. The implication is that a rerating phase is likely in the coming months (bottom panel, Chart 7). Finally, the relative export backdrop suggests that industrials come out on top of discretionary stocks (top panel, Chart 8). According to FactSet the S&P consumer discretionary sector's foreign revenue exposure stands at 24% of total sales, and it is roughly 60% higher for the S&P industrials sector at 38% of revenues.4 While the year-to-date breakdown in the greenback is stimulative for industrials exporters, it is, at the margin, restrictive for the more domestically oriented consumer discretionary companies (trade-weighted dollar shown inverted, bottom panel, Chart 8). Our relative EPS growth models best capture all of these moving parts and suggest that the path of least resistance for relative profit growth is higher in the coming quarters (Chart 9). Chart 7Capex##br## Upcycle... Chart 8... And Export Markets Benefit Industrials##br## At The Expense Of Discretionary Chart 9Relative Profit Growth Models Also Say##br## Buy The Relative Share Price Ratio Adding up, all four key macro variables (interest rates, relative sentiment, relative demand and relative export exposure) signal that the time is ripe for a new industrials versus discretionary pair trade. Bottom Line: Initiate a long S&P industrials/short S&P consumer discretionary sector pair trade. Airlines Update: Mayday While we have turned positive on the broad industrials complex and remain constructive on most transports, we continue to recommend investors avoid the S&P airlines index. This decade has seen a huge recovery in consumer confidence, rising from the depths of the Great Recession. The consumer's revival has been matched by equally steep growth in airline passenger traffic (Chart 10). However, the resurgence in passenger demand has not had the expected uplift in pricing. Rather, the opposite has happened; consumers have not seen a sustainable price increase in years and airline pricing power has collapsed, even in the face of soaring jet fuel costs that eat into profits (Chart 11). The costly price war between the low cost carriers and the largely-restructured legacy airlines the industry is currently embroiled in explains deflating airfares (Chart 12). Chart 10More Passengers... Chart 11... But Higher Fuel Costs... Chart 12... And Price Concessions Crash Profits The industry has been here before, and recently too. 2015 was a tumultuous year that saw pricing collapse as the ultra-low cost carriers entered the traditional hubs, triggering a scramble for market share. Brave airline investors have been whipsawed as the industry recovered and then stumbled again earlier this year. From a profit perspective, airlines have been able to hide poor pricing with efficiency gains (Chart 13). Industry load factors have been steadily moving upward, though those gains appear to have plateaued at peak levels. The implication is that this current price war will hit profit margins and thus the bottom line worse than in the past (Chart 13). Expanding international air travel could provide some relief to the besieged legacy carriers as international airfares look to have pulled out of deflation (Chart 14). However, the sustainability of positive pricing is questionable as international no-frills carriers are gaining greater penetration and often have significantly lower cost structures. Once unheard of trans-Atlantic travel for below $200 is now widely available. Chart 13Masking Poor Pricing Backdrop Chart 14Analysts Ignore Positives At the same time as cash generation appears most threatened, the industry is in the midst of an expensive fleet renewal as airlines seek to replace declining prices and aging fleets with higher volume and more efficient aircraft. In fact, capex as a percentage of sales has nearly tripled since 2012. The result is predictable; the hard deleveraging work the industry put in over the course of this decade is being unwound (Chart 13). An increasingly geared balance sheet, combined with weakening margins should translate directly into a higher risk premium and lower valuation multiples. However, while multiples have fallen from the sky-high levels earlier this decade, they remain well above the lows of 2015-16 (Chart 14). This implies further downside risk should risk premiums expand as we expect. With sell-side analysts jumping on board the bear story, as evidenced by net forward earnings revisions falling off a cliff (Chart 14), this should probably happen sooner rather than later. Bottom Line: With no end in sight to the price war and outsized capacity additions likely to throw fuel on the fire, we think investors should stay away from the S&P airlines index. Accordingly, we reiterate our underweight recommendation. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5AIRL - DAL, LUV, AAL, UAL, ALK. Anastasios Avgeriou, Vice President U.S. Equity Strategy & Global Alpha Sector Strategy anastasios@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see BCA U.S. Equity Strategy Weekly Report,"Girding For A Breakout?" dated May 1, 2017, available at uses.bcaresearch.com. 2 Please see BCA Geopolitical Strategy Weekly Report,"Can Equities And Bonds Continue To Rally?" dated September 20, 2017, available at gps.bcaresearch.com. 3 Please see Chart 55 of BCA U.S. Equity Strategy Special Report, "White Paper: U.S. Equity Market Indicators (Part I)", dated August 7, 2017, available at uses.bcaresearch.com. 4 https://www.factset.com/earningsinsight Current Recommendations Current Trades Size And Style Views Favor small over large caps and stay neutral growth over value.

The S&P air freight & logistics group was buffeted this week on reports that Amazon was testing its own delivery service from third-party sellers. The company's interest in operating their own logistics is hardly new news; early last year, Amazon signed agreements to operate an air cargo network that could conceivably handle up to a third of its volume. The declines this week seem like overreactions for 3 reasons. First, Amazon represents approximately 3% of FDX' North American volume and 7% of UPS, according to Moody's, implying relatively small top line impacts from an Amazon shift. Second, those volumes come at extremely low margins and the companies may be able to replace them more profitably. Last, it is highly unlikely that Amazon could replace FDX and UPS completely, with their unmatched 'last mile' infrastructure, nor does this move signal that this is the intention. We think the very positive backdrop driven by surging global trade (second panel), combined with still-cheap valuations (bottom panel), makes any slide in the index an excellent buying opportunity. Anecdotally, staying overweight home improvement retailers when they were under siege from the retail giant has proven to be the right call.1 Net, we reiterate our high-conviction overweight recommendation for the S&P air freight & logistics group. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5AIRF - UPS, FDX, CHRW, EXPD. 1 Please see BCA U.S. Equity Strategy Insight Report, "The Amazon Curse", dated July 27, 2017, available at uses.bcaresearch.com.

Automotive components companies (as well as auto manufacturers) just finished their best month of the year in September (top panel), lifted by expectations of a spike in sales to replace the estimated 700,000 light vehicles destroyed by hurricanes Harvey and Irma. Yesterday's best monthly auto sales report since the end of the recession (second panel) validated this expectation. It is too soon to break out the party hats for three reasons. First, vehicle replacement does not translate one-for-one into new vehicle sales as the used vehicle market will likely take up the bulk of the demand. Second, August lost a week of normal sales in the southern states which were pushed into September, skewing the month. Lastly, and most importantly, manufacturer incentives reached their highest level ever (according to J.D. Power) in an effort to clear out the end-of-model-year inventory; neither this nor weak pricing (third panel) support the idea of a strong auto consumer and constrained supply. Bottom Line: Exceptionally strong September (and probably October as well) vehicle sales are masking still-weak core auto demand. Stay underweight. The ticker symbols for the stocks in this index are: BLBG: S5AUTC - DLPH, BWA, GT.

Special Report

Highlights China's growth momentum is unlikely to continue to accelerate, but the downside risk is low. Some more recent developments suggest economic momentum remains fairly robust. The heated debate on a "soft or hard landing" in recent years has disproportionally diverted investors' attention to China's cyclical growth fluctuations, while some larger picture changes have gone unnoticed. The Chinese economy will undoubtedly continue to experience cyclical swings; it is equally important to keep in mind some mega trends that hold the potential to reshape the world in profound ways. Feature The Chinese economy has likely ended the third quarter on a slightly higher note, according to "nowcast" types of models using high-frequency data (Chart 1). The latest PMI surveys, focusing on both the manufacturing and service sectors, accelerated in September from the prior month, and remain comfortably in expansionary territory, heralding positive surprises in the macro numbers to be released in the coming weeks. China's mini-cycle acceleration since early last year has been fairly modest by historical standards, but it has been a key component driving synchronized improvement in global growth. Moreover, the resilience of the Chinese economy has led to a quick repricing of risk assets that were deeply depressed in previous years due to China "hard landing" concerns. Stock prices of both Chinese investable equities and the emerging market benchmark have rallied massively since the 2016 bottom. Total returns of Chinese equities and EM stocks, price appreciation and dividend payments combined, have both broken out to all-time highs (Chart 2). Chart 1Chinese Q3 GDP Should Have Remained Strong Chart 2Breakout In China And EM Equities Looking forward, Chinese growth momentum is unlikely to continue to accelerate, but the downside risk remains low in the near term, as we have argued in recent months. In fact, some more recent developments suggest economic momentum remains fairly robust. More importantly, the heated debates among investors and analysts in recent years on China's macro stability have disguised some dramatic changes in the Chinese economy, which will have a profound and long-lasting impact on the global economy and financial markets from a big-picture standpoint. Given China's rising economic significance, getting China right will become all the more important for investors going forward. Near-Term Growth Outlook Remains Solid The Chinese economy will likely continue to surprise to the upside in the coming months. First, there is little risk of aggressive policy tightening that would prematurely choke off the economy, as economic growth is within the government's target, consumer price inflation is exceedingly low and financial excesses have been reined in.1 The latest decision of the People's Bank of China (PBoC) to lower reserve requirement ratios (RRR) for banks offering loans to small-sized enterprises should not be confused as a broad attempt to boost credit and growth. The move certainly reflects the authorities' preference for offering credit to smaller private borrowers, but it also reflects the PBoC's continued fine-tuning of its liquidity management.2 The PBoC has significantly ramped up direct lending to banks since 2015 to offset the liquidity drainage from capital outflows from the country's financial sector - the pace of PBoC direct lending has slowed since early this year (Chart 3, top panel). This means that the central bank will need to resort to other tools to manage interbank liquidity should stress increase - releasing required reserves being one of them. Taken together, the PBoC's liquidity injection has almost precisely matched the liquidity withdrawal due to capital outflows, as can be seen in the bottom panel of Chart 3. The key point here is that the PBoC's latest decision is not to encourage a lending spree, but it certainly does not indicate intentions of aggressive tightening. Second, some view China's lukewarm industrial activity as a sign of weak growth momentum, and argue for a pending relapse. In fact, some sectors have been under strict government scrutiny to cut capacity and production in recent years - a key reason behind the exceptional weakness in these industries despite massive improvement in their sales, pricing power and profits. In other words, these sectors have not been responding to market signals due to government restrictions of "supply side reforms" to cut excess capacity and reduce pollution. For example, some sectors that are subject to "supply side" constraints such as coal, base metals and cement producers have chronically underperformed in recent years, and have also hurt the overall performance of the industrial sector (Chart 4). Similarly, capital spending in the mining sector, historically highly sensitive to moves in global metals prices, have continued to contract, despite the sharp increase in metals prices since 2016. Without these regulations, the performance of the industrial sector should have been a lot stronger. In addition, without aggressive expansion in the "good times," the odds of another major relapse in these highly cyclical industries when the "bad times" do come are also lower. Chart 3The PBoC Liquidity Operation Chart 4Policy Constraints Weigh Heavy On Some Sectors Third, the Chinese authorities' tightening measures on the real estate sector pose a growth risk, and should continue to be monitored; the impact is unlikely to be significant, as discussed in detail in last week's report.3 Developers have also been subject to "supply side" constraints and have not increased construction in this cycle, despite rising home prices, increasing transactions and booming profits (Chart 5). Tighter policies imposed by local governments will probably keep developers in dormancy, but a major downturn is highly unlikely, simply because there is not much excess to begin with. Finally, while China has been a key component of the synchronized global growth improvement, the country has also benefited from a pickup in global demand.4 Korean exports, a harbinger of global trade, jumped by a whopping 35% in dollar terms in September versus a year ago. It is certainly unrealistic to expect such strong momentum to last, but the benign global demand situation is unlikely to immediately falter without some sort of extreme external shock. Similarly, our model expects Chinese export growth to moderate, but there are no signs of a sharp contraction anytime soon (Chart 6). Chart 5Real Estate Investment May Surprise To The Upside Chart 6Exports: Moderating, Not Relapsing Bottom Line: China's near-term growth outlook will remain resilient, providing a supportive macro backdrop for global risk assets. The China Debate: Seven Years On Ever since the Chinese economy recovered from the aftermath of the global financial crisis, with the help of a massive government stimulus package, investors' opinions on China's macro situation have been deeply divided.5 To be sure, sensational predictions of an imminent China collapse have always existed, ever since the country's economic reform, but they were mostly rooted in ideological bashing and were largely ignored by global investors. In recent years, however, predictions of a Chinese "hard landing" have been taken much more seriously by the mainstream media, as well as investors and policymakers. Amid mounting doubts about its long term sustainability, the Chinese economy has experienced some remarkable achievements and dramatic changes in the past several years. The Chinese economy continues to gain global significance, accounting for 16% of global economic output currently versus 9% in 2010. More importantly, its contribution to global economic growth is far larger, given its faster growth rate (Chart 7). China's nominal GDP currently stands at about US$11.5 trillion, a distant second to the mighty US$19.2 trillion U.S. economy. However, 7% of nominal growth in China feasibly amounts to an increase of US$800 billion in gross output, compared with US$770 billion for the U.S., assuming the latter is to grow by 4% in nominal terms. Although China's growth rate has downshifted since the global financial crisis, the increase in the country's total output in value terms has become even greater, given the economy's much larger size. China remains the dominant factor in driving global commodities demand, especially base metals. China's base metals consumption accounts for over 50% of the global total, higher than the rest of the world combined (Chart 8). More importantly, China's base metal consumption has continued to climb in recent years, while demand from the rest of the world has stagnated. In recent years, "sluggish" Chinese metals consumption has been blamed for commodities woes by some analysts; in reality, the country has been the only source of demand increase for base metals. China's role in driving the supply/demand balance of raw materials has increased significantly since the global financial crisis. Chart 7China's Growing Significance In World Economy Chart 8China And Base Metals The country's heavy investment on infrastructure has massively changed its urban landscape, leading to a significant improvement in the country's transportation system, with massive expansion in high-speed railway, urban metro and light-rail system, and further extensions of the highway network (Chart 9). This has significantly narrowed the country's infrastructure gap with more advanced countries, facilitating both international trade and domestic demand (Chart 10). Chinese car sales have jumped from about 10 million per year in 2010 to 25 million currently, by far the largest car market in the world. Without improvement in logistical infrastructure, there is little doubt the country's growth trajectory would have faced severe bottlenecks. Chart 9Massive Expansion Of ##br##Transportation Infrastructure... Chart 10...Has Narrowed The Gap ##br##With Developed Economies Finally, the impact of Chinese consumers has become all the more visible on the global stage. Even though China still ranks as a middle-income country with a per-capita GDP of about US$8000, a fraction of the US$57,000 in the U.S., the sheer size of the Chinese population, the rapid increase in household income and the country's very high savings rate have fundamentally shifted the wealth distribution of the global population. Currently, only about 20% of the world population has a per-capita GDP higher than China, a rapid change within a short period of time (Chart 11). This dramatic shift has profoundly redefined the global economic landscape, affecting the spectrum of essentially all businesses, from manufacturers' cost structures to luxury goods markets to tourism and education to financial services. Chart 11China's Rising Income In Perspective The list can easily be extended, but the point here is that the heated debate on a "soft or hard landing" in recent years has disproportionally diverted investors' attention to China's cyclical growth fluctuations, while some larger picture changes have gone unnoticed. Of course, financial markets are an emotional discounting mechanism, and stock prices always exaggerate any subtle changes in growth fundamentals, which can in turn impact economic reality through a complex web of reflexivity relationships. Chinese equities lagged significantly behind developed markets, particularly the U.S. bourses, between 2011 and 2015, which apparently validated the bears' views. In reality, however, multiples of Chinese equities, and emerging market in general, were deeply compressed compared with their developed market peers (Chart 12). In other words, it is largely multiples compression associated with heightened risk aversion and greater risk premium that was behind the woes of Chinese and EM markets before 2015. Since 2016, China's mini-cycle upturn has progressively raised investors' risk appetite towards China and EM, lifting their multiples and prices - essentially a positive re-rating of these markets. Chart 12Positive Rerating Of China ##br##And EM Has Further To Run The debate on China's growth sustainability will likely remain firmly in place in the coming years, which will continue to create cross-currents and outsized volatility. As an investor, it is futile to argue with "Mr. Market." Even with strong convictions on the fundamental case, investors should be nimble and avoid standing in front of an oncoming train - however ill-informed the market consensus could be. For now, Chinese and EM equities are still much more attractively valued compared with the developed world, and the train of the positive re-rating of these bourses will likely have further to run. It is too soon to bet on a trend reversal. Whither China: The Big Picture Fundamentally the China debate boils down to the country's growth model, which invests a much greater share of its output than most other major economies. The "bears" conclude this amounts to capital misallocation and propose a "rebalancing" towards consumption. Some even claim China's massive savings, essential for financing domestic capital spending, are byproducts of banks' "out of thin air" money printing - to me, if "thin air" money was indeed such a magical silver bullet, the world would have solved its poverty problems a long time ago. Over the years I have argued firmly against these assertions. In economics, it is well known that a country's income level is fundamentally determined by its productivity, which is in turn determined by the level and sophistication of its capital stock. Chart 13 shows a clear positive correlation between a country's per capita output, a measure of productivity, and its per capita capital stock. In general, industrialized countries enjoy much higher levels of per capita capital stock than developing economies, leading to much higher productivity, income as well as living standards. Therefore, the industrialization process, by definition, is the process of accumulation of capital stock through investment, which has been proven by many economies that have successfully industrialized. China's growth path in the past several decades is simply repeating these success stories. As shown in Chart 14, despite some remarkable achievements, the productivity level of the average Chinese worker is still just a fraction of the level in more advanced countries. If China remains on the path of accumulation of capital stock through savings and investment, the country will continue to progress on the productivity and income ladder. If, however, it abandons its current growth model and "rebalances" towards a consumption-driven one, odds are much higher that the country will stagnate and fail to advance beyond the "middle income trap." Chart 13Productivity Is Positively ##br##Correlated With Capital Stock Chart 14China's Catchup Process ##br##Has A Lot Further To Run In my 15 years of covering China for BCA, the country has dramatically shifted beyond recognition - the pace of changes are still accelerating. Looking forward, the Chinese economy will undoubtedly continue to experience cyclical swings; it is equally important to keep in mind some mega trends that hold the potential to reshape the world in profound ways. The following are a few worth highlighting. Chart 15China's Tech Boom The first mega trend is the explosive growth of the Chinese technology sector, which will increasingly challenge players in more advanced economies. The tech boom is reflected in the dramatic expansion of e-commerce and mobile payments, spectacular price gains in the BAT giants (Baidu, Alibaba and Tencent) and surging patent applications among the corporate sector (Chart 15). With a massive and homogenous domestic market and increasingly affluent consumers, China has rapidly become the testing ground of all new high-tech sectors - from big data and artificial intelligence to industrial robotics and additive manufacturing, to genetic analysis and quantum computing - with numerous startups and venture capitalists as well as government support on basic research and development. This is bound to create exciting investment opportunities with winners and losers far beyond Chinese borders. The second major development is the "Belt & Road Initiative" (BRI), also known as "One Belt One Road," or OBOR, that links China with some less developed nations. The project, initially proposed by President Xi Jinping in 2013 but met with heavy doubts, has been quietly gaining momentum. Some commentators have viewed the BRI as an attempt by the Chinese authorities to export excess domestic industrial capacity and have tried to quantify the impact, which is shortsighted and likely useless. China's vision of the BRI is an ambitious open-ended geo-strategic, economic and social undertaking to promote globalization with distinct "Chinese characteristics." There is no doubt that BRI will face tremendous challenges, and its ultimate destiny is simply an "unknowable unknown" at the moment. However, some solid progress has been made, and foreign authorities are increasingly taking the BRI seriously. Even with limited success, the BRI holds the promise of redefining the balance of geopolitics, global trade and international finance. The role of the RMB in international finance will inevitably grow at the expense of other majors, particularly the dollar. Investors will be well served to closely follow this mega development. Finally, how China's governance and political system will evolve remains a major question mark for investors, especially from a long-term perspective. Democracy has increasingly become the norm of world politics since the early 1990s, with over half of the global population currently living in democratic regimes, while China's political system is decisively foreign (Chart 16). Investors are ideologically skeptical on the long-term sustainability of China's essentially meritocratic authoritarian regime. Investors mostly see democracy as China's ultimate future, and expect the country to progressively move in this direction, along with rising economic prosperity. In reality, however, the ruling Communist Party has tightened its grip over the country in recent years, apparently reverting the trend of political liberalization that was underway in previous years. Chart 16Is Democracy China's Future? In essence, China, with over 20% of the world population, is conducting a mega-political experiment by searching for an alternative to open democracy, the prospect of which remains unknown. The majority of the Chinese population have been content with the existing system, and have been adapting to drastic social and economic changes with ease in the past several decades. Numerous previous predictions of an imminent collapse of the Chinese regime have repeatedly proven wrong, but the underlying anxiety will remain, especially when China's economic growth further downshifts. Political and social stability is crucial for the country's continued economic development. A major social upheaval, on the other hand, would have devastating consequences, not only for China but also for the entire world. Stay tuned. Yan Wang, Senior Vice President China Investment Strategy yanw@bcaresearch.com 1 Please see China Investment Strategy Weekly Report "Chinese Financial Tightening: Passing The Phase Of Maximum Strength," dated June 22, 2017, available at cis.bcaresearch.com 2 Please see China Investment Strategy Special Report "More On The Chinese Debt Debate," dated April 20, 2017, available at cis.bcaresearch.com 3 Please see China Investment Strategy Weekly Report "Chinese Real Estate: Which Way Will The Wind Blow?" dated April 20, 2017, available at cis.bcaresearch.com 4 Please see China Investment Strategy Weekly Report "China Outlook: A Mid-Year Revisit," dated July 13, 2017, available at cis.bcaresearch.com 5 Please see China Investment Strategy Weekly Report "The China Debate," dated April 14, 2010, and China Investment Strategy Weekly Report "The China Debate: Four Years On," dated April 30, 2014, available at cis.bcaresearch.com Cyclical Investment Stance Equity Sector Recommendations

Highlights Expect Spain's strong growth to fade somewhat as its credit impulse appears to have peaked. The Catalan independence debate is an inconvenience but not a long term tail-risk. Expect Italy's growth to pick up as the Italian banking system is repaired. Brave investors could go long Italian bonds versus Spanish bonds now. More cautious investors might wait until after the Italian election in the first half of next year. France's CAC40 is our preferred mainstream euro area equity market right now. Feature Recent history teaches us that to leave the European Union is inconvenient, but to leave the euro is disastrous. To leave the EU means redefining laws, institutions and trading relationships, but to leave the euro means redenominating the entire banking system's assets and liabilities into different currencies - leading to bank runs and chaotic insolvencies. For this reason, even tiny Greece chose to suffer an extended depression rather than to leave the euro. Chart of the WeekSpain Fixed Its Banks In 2013, Italy Is Fixing Its Banks Now Leaving The EU Is Inconvenient, Leaving The Euro Is Disastrous To leave the EU, there is a broadly defined process but the process is inconvenient and protracted, as the United Kingdom is now discovering. The U.K. will technically leave the EU on March 31 2019, but Prime Minister May has proposed a further transition period of "around two years." Therefore the U.K. will remain in the European single market and customs union - and fully subject to EU laws and regulations - until at least 2021, five years after the U.K. voted to leave the EU. This protraction of the exit process creates a tasty irony. Not long after the U.K. fully leaves in 2021, the Leave vote's 1.25 million majority will have disappeared - counting those who voted in 2016 who are still alive. This is because out of the 0.625 million deaths in the U.K. in each of the coming years, there is a very heavy skew to Leave's much older voters1 (Chart I-2). As the U.K is not in the euro there is no secondary issue of whether to leave the single currency. But this does raise an interesting hypothetical question. If a euro area country - or region like Catalonia - inconveniently left or was ejected from the EU, does it follow that it must also crash out of the euro? No. Several non-EU countries already use the euro. There are the European microstates of Andorra, Monaco, San Marino and Vatican City. More significantly, Montenegro and Kosovo have adopted the euro as their de facto currency. To be clear, we do not expect Catalonia to secede. Polls consistently show a significant majority in Catalonia do not want full independence (Chart I-3). The unionists mostly boycotted the independence referendum because Madrid deemed it illegal. Given the low turnout, the 89% vote for independence equalled just 37% of eligible voters. Chart I-2The Vote For Brexit Was ##br##Driven By Older Voters Chart I-3A Significant Minority In Catalonia##br## Do Not Want Full Independence But even if Catalonia did become independent, this hypothetical eventuality would not involve a catastrophic exit from the euro. Catalonia, in its economic interest, would want to keep the euro, and the EU would let it. The Spain/Italy Conundrum The much bigger threat would be if a major euro area country felt that the single currency was not in its economic interest, and decided to jettison the euro. In this regard, the problem - at first sight - appears to be Italy. Through the 19 years of the euro, Italy's real GDP per head has grown by just 6%, substantially less than any other major economy. If the single currency is to blame for the significant underperformance of its third largest economy with 60 million people, then the euro's long-term viability has to be in question. But it is hard to blame the euro per se for Italy's painful underperformance. For the first half of the euro's life, 1999-2007, Italian real GDP per head performed more or less in line with the United States, Canada and France (Chart I-4) - even without a substantial tailwind from a credit-fuelled boom which the other economies had. Then, in the post-2007 years, there was little to distinguish the economic performances of Italy and Spain until 2013 (Chart I-5). At which point, Spain took off, with real GDP per head subsequently expanding by 15%. Whereas Italy struggled to grow. The conundrum is: what explains this stark recent difference between Spain and Italy? Chart I-4Through 1999-2007, Italy Grew In Line ##br##With Other Major Economies Chart I-5Post-Crisis, There Was Little To Distinguish##br## Italy and Spain Until 2013 The start of Italy's underperformance in 2008 and the start of Spain's strong recovery in 2013 provide the solution to the conundrum. Following the global financial crisis in 2008, Italy has still to repair its banking system. Whereas Spain fixed its banks in 2013. Significantly, Spain ring-fenced bad assets within a bad bank while recapitalising good banks. In effect, it finally did what other economies - most notably the U.S., U.K. and Ireland - had done several years earlier in response to their own housing-related banking crises. Therefore in 2013, Spanish banks' aggressive deleveraging ended. The result was that Spain's credit impulse - which measures the change in bank credit flows - rebounded very sharply and has remained positive for four years. This explains Spain's remarkably strong recovery (Chart I-6). In contrast, Italy's still dysfunctional banking system means that its own credit impulse has been much more muted and barely positive over the past four years (Chart I-7). Begging the question: why has Italy been so slow to fix its dysfunctional banking system? One reason is that Italy's banking malaise has built up stealthily, generating frequent financial tremors but without an outright crisis. In contrast, the credit booms in the U.S., U.K., Ireland and Spain did eventually cause housing busts and full-blown banking crises, requiring urgent policymaker response. A second reason is that the Italian government is more highly indebted than other governments, making it more difficult to raise public funds to fix the banking system. The good news is that the Italian government, the EU and the ECB are now on the same page and finally progressing to repair the banking system. Italian banks' equity capital is rising (Chart I-8), their solvency is improving, and the share of non-performing loans has fallen sharply this year (Chart of the Week). Chart I-6Spain's Credit Impulse Rebounded Sharply Chart I-7Italy's Credit Impulse Has Been More Muted Chart I-8Italian Banks Are Raising Equity Capital Moreover, the recent smooth winding down of the failing Banca Popolare di Vicenza and Veneto Bank showed that the EU's new rules for resolving failing banks is working. Admittedly, the rules mean that institutional investors could still suffer losses. But a pragmatic solution will permit public funds to protect 'widows and orphans' retail investors. Some Investment Thoughts As the Italian banking system is repaired, there will be a pickup in Italy's growth just as there was in Spain. However, the strong tailwind to Spain's growth that started in 2013 is now fading given that Spain's credit impulse has peaked. This suggests that the yield spread between Italian BTPs and Spanish Bonos - which measures the extra risk premium in Italy - is at a cyclical peak from which it is likely to compress (Chart I-9). Brave investors could go long Italian bonds versus Spanish bonds now. More cautious investors might wait until after the Italian election in the first half of next year. On the face of it, a fading risk of euro breakup should also boost euro area equity relative performance. The trouble is that the relative performance of the broad Eurostoxx50 index is entirely at the mercy of its major sector skews - specifically, a huge underweighting to Technology and an overweighting to Banks (Chart I-10). The way around this dilemma - to like euro area equities but to dislike the overall sector skew - is to steer towards mainstream indexes which have less of a distorting skew. On this basis, the mainstream euro area equity market we would pick right now is France's CAC40 (Chart I-11). Chart I-9The Yield Spread Between Italian And ##br##Spanish Bonds Is At A Cyclical Peak Chart I-10Eurostoxx50 Relative Performance Is ##br##At The Mercy Of Its Sector Skews Chart I-11Prefer the CAC40 To##br## The Eurostoxx50 Dhaval Joshi, Senior Vice President Chief European Investment Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com 1 In the U.K. around 625,000 people die every year and the vast majority of these are aged over 65. But in this older age cohort, 64% voted Leave (source: YouGov). So we can infer that of the 625,000 deaths, about 400,000 voted Leave and 225,000 voted Remain, eroding the Leave majority who are still alive by 175,000 every year. Fractal Trading Model This week, we note that the Canadian 10-year government bond is oversold and due a trend reversal. We prefer to express this as a new relative trade: long Canadian 10-year bond / short 10-year German bund with a profit target / stop-loss of 1% and double position size. In other trades, long USD/CAD hit its 2.5% profit target - the second success in this specific trade in the last three months. We now have three open positions. For any investment, excessive trend following and groupthink can reach a natural point of instability, at which point the established trend is highly likely to break down with or without an external catalyst. An early warning sign is the investment's fractal dimension approaching its natural lower bound. Encouragingly, this trigger has consistently identified countertrend moves of various magnitudes across all asset classes. Chart I-12 The post-June 9, 2016 fractal trading model rules are: When the fractal dimension approaches the lower limit after an investment has been in an established trend it is a potential trigger for a liquidity-triggered trend reversal. Therefore, open a countertrend position. The profit target is a one-third reversal of the preceding 13-week move. Apply a symmetrical stop-loss. Close the position at the profit target or stop-loss. Otherwise close the position after 13 weeks. Use the position size multiple to control risk. The position size will be smaller for more risky positions. * For more details please see the European Investment Strategy Special Report "Fractals, Liquidity & A Trading Model," dated December 11, 2014, available at eis.bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading Model Recommendations Equities Bond & Interest Rates Currency & Other Positions Closed Fractal Trades Trades Closed Trades Asset Performance Currency & Bond Equity Sector Country Equity Indicators Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Interest Rate Chart II-5Indicators To Watch ##br##- Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch##br## - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch ##br##- Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch##br## - Interest Rate Expectations