Commodities & Energy Sector

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

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

In lieu of next week’s report, I will host the monthly Counterpoint Webcast on Monday, July 25. Please mark the date in your calendar, and I do hope you can join. Executive Summary Central banks face a ‘Sophie’s choice’. Inflation at 2 percent, or full employment? If they choose inflation at 2 percent, they will have to take the economy into recession. To take the economy into recession, bond yields and energy prices do not need to move any higher. They just need to stay where they are. The stock market has not yet discounted a recession. With stocks and bonds having become equally ‘cheaper’ this year, but stocks now vulnerable to substantial downgrades to their profits, stocks are likely to underperform bonds over the coming 6-12 months. In the event of recession followed by plunging inflation, a valuation uplift for bonds will also underpin stock prices and limit further downside in absolute terms. The biggest loser will be commodities. On a 6-12 month horizon, the optimal asset allocation is: overweight bonds, neutral stocks, underweight commodities. Fractal trading watchlist: Ethereum. The Bear Market Is A Valuation Bear Market. Profits Are Not Discounting A Recession… Yet Stocks Caught Between Scylla And Charybdis Stocks Caught Between Scylla And Charybdis Bottom Line: On a 6-12 month horizon, overweight bonds, neutral stocks, underweight commodities. Feature The Greek mythological sea monsters, Scylla and Charybdis, sat on opposite sides of the narrow Strait of Messina, with one monster likened to a shoal of rocks, the other to a vortex. Avoiding the rocks meant getting too close to the vortex, and avoiding the vortex meant getting too close to the rocks. In today’s stock market, if Scylla is the monster of high bond yields, then Charybdis is the monster of falling profits. Whether the stock market can safely navigate these twin monsters without further damage depends on a sequence of questions. In today’s stock market, if Scylla is the monster of high bond yields, then Charybdis is the monster of falling profits. If the market can escape high bond yields, can it also escape falling profits? The answer to this depends on a second question. Can central banks guide inflation back to 2 percent without taking the economy into recession? The answer to this depends on a third question. Is 2 percent inflation still consistent with full employment? Central Banks Face A ‘Sophie’s Choice’ – Low Inflation, Or Full Employment? In the US, the main transmission mechanism from employment to inflation is through so-called ‘rent of shelter’. Because, to put it bluntly, you need a steady job to pay the rent. And rent comprises 41 percent of the core inflation basket. For the past couple of decades, the Fed could have its cake and eat it: full employment and inflation running close to 2 percent. This was because full employment was consistent with rent of shelter inflation running at 3.5 percent, which itself was consistent with core inflation running at 2 percent. The Fed faces a ‘Sophie’s choice’. Inflation at 2 percent, or full employment? If it chooses inflation at 2 percent, then the Fed will have to take the economy into recession. But recently, there has been a phase-shift between the employment market and rent of shelter inflation. The current state of full employment equates to rent of shelter inflation running not at 3.5 percent, but at 5.5 percent (Chart I-1). Chart I-1Central Banks Face A 'Sophie's Choice' - Low Inflation, Or Full Employment? Central Banks Face A 'Sophie's Choice' - Low Inflation, Or Full Employment? Central Banks Face A 'Sophie's Choice' - Low Inflation, Or Full Employment? Hence, the Fed faces a ‘Sophie’s choice’. Inflation at 2 percent, or full employment? If it chooses inflation at 2 percent, the unemployment rate will have to rise by 2 percent. Meaning, the Fed will have to take the economy into recession. The Economy Tries The ‘Cold Pressor Test’ To take the economy into recession, bond yields and energy prices do not need to move any higher – they just need to stay where they are. This is because the damage from elevated bond yields and energy prices doesn’t come just from their level. It comes from their level multiplied by the length of time that they stay elevated. Try putting your hand in a bucket of ice water. For the first few seconds, or even tens of seconds, you will not feel any discomfort. After a few minutes though, the pain becomes excruciating. This so-called ‘cold pressor test’ tells us that your discomfort results not just from the temperature level of the ice water, but equally from the length of time that you keep your hand in it. Likewise, a short-lived spike in the mortgage rate or in the price of natural gas, or a short-lived collapse in your stock market wealth will not cause any discomfort. But the longer the mortgage rate stays elevated, and more and more people are buying or refinancing a home at a much higher rate, the greater becomes the economic pain. In the same vein, most Europeans will not notice the sky-high prices of natural gas in the summer when the heating is off. But come the cold of October and November, many people will have to choose literally between physical or economic pain. Some commentators counter that the “war chest of savings” accumulated during the pandemic will buffer households against higher mortgage rates and energy prices. We strongly disagree. The savings accumulated during the pandemic just added to, and became indistinguishable from, other wealth. Yet now, in case you hadn’t noticed, wealth has been pummelled. In case you hadn’t noticed, wealth has been pummelled. The impact of wealth on spending is a huge topic which we will expand upon in a future report. In a nutshell, most spending comes from income and income proxies. Wealth generates income, but it also generates an income proxy via capital gain. So, to the extent that wealth can drive spending growth, the biggest contributor comes from the change in capital gain, also known as the ‘wealth impulse’. Unfortunately, the wealth impulse is now in deeply negative territory (Chart I-2). Chart I-2The Wealth Impulse Is In Deeply Negative Territory The Wealth Impulse Is In Deeply Negative Territory The Wealth Impulse Is In Deeply Negative Territory The Stock Market Has Not Yet Discounted A Recession Coming back to the stock market, does the 2022 bear market mean that it has already discounted a recession? No, this year’s bear market is entirely due to a collapse in valuations. Since the start of the year, US profit expectations have held up. If the bear market were front running profit downgrades, then it would be underperforming its valuation component, but it is not. The counterargument is that analysts are notoriously slow to downgrade their profit estimates. Isn’t the bear market the ‘real-time’ stock market ‘front running’ big downgrades to these profit estimates? Again, no. If the market were front running profit downgrades, then it would be underperforming its valuation component, but it is not (Chart I-3). Chart I-3The Bear Market Is A Valuation Bear Market. Profits Are Not Discounting A Recession...Yet The Bear Market Is A Valuation Bear Market. Profits Are Not Discounting A Recession...Yet The Bear Market Is A Valuation Bear Market. Profits Are Not Discounting A Recession...Yet The bear market in the S&P 500 has near-perfectly tracked the bear market in its valuation component, the 30-year T-bond price. The valuation component of the S&P 500 is the 30-year T-bond price because the duration of the S&P 500 equals the duration of the 30-year T-bond. Several clients have asked how to prove that the duration of the S&P 500 equals that of the 30-year T-bond. We can do it either a difficult theoretical way, or an easy empirical way. The difficult theoretical way is to take the projected cashflows, and calculate the weighted average time to those cashflows, where the weights are the discounted values of those cashflows. The much easier empirical way is to show that the S&P 500 tracks its profits multiplied by the 30-year T-bond price more faithfully than if we use a shorter maturity bond, such as the 10-year T-bond (Chart I-4 and Chart I-5) Chart I-4The S&P 500 Tracks Profits Multiplied By The 30-Year T-Bond Price More Faithfully... The S&P 500 Tracks Profits Multiplied By The 30-Year T-Bond Price More Faithfully... The S&P 500 Tracks Profits Multiplied By The 30-Year T-Bond Price More Faithfully... Chart I-5...Than Profits Multiplied By The 10-Year T-Bond Price ...Than Profits Multiplied By The 10-Year T-Bond Price ...Than Profits Multiplied By The 10-Year T-Bond Price One important upshot is that any valuation comparison of the S&P 500 with a bond other than the 30-year T-bond is a fundamental error of duration mismatch. Most strategists compare the S&P 500 with the 10-year T-bond because it is convenient. But the duration mismatch makes this ‘apples versus oranges’ valuation comparison one of the most common mistakes in finance. Overweight Bonds, Neutral Stocks, Underweight Commodities All of this is important to answer a crucial question about stock market valuations. With the stock market 20 percent down this year when expected profits have held up, it might appear that stocks have become much cheaper. The truth is more nuanced. Relative to expected profits over the next 12 months the US stock market is indeed much cheaper (Chart I-6). The caveat is that these expected profits are vulnerable to substantial downgrades in the event of a recession. Chart I-6The US Stock Market Is Cheaper Versus Expected Profits, But These Profits Are Too Optimistic The US Stock Market Is Cheaper Versus Expected Profits, But These Profits Are Too Optimistic The US Stock Market Is Cheaper Versus Expected Profits, But These Profits Are Too Optimistic Chart I-7The US Stock Market Is Not Cheaper Versus The 30-Year T-Bond The US Stock Market Is Not Cheaper Versus The 30-Year T-Bond The US Stock Market Is Not Cheaper Versus The 30-Year T-Bond But relative to the equal duration 30-year T-bond, the US stock market is not cheaper. Since, the start of the year, the uplift in the stock market’s (forward earnings) yield is precisely the same as the that on the 30-year T-bond yield (Chart I-7).  Relative to the equal duration 30-year T-bond, the US stock market has not become cheaper. With stocks and bonds having become equally ‘cheaper’ this year, but stocks now vulnerable to substantial downgrades to their profits, stocks are likely to underperform bonds over the coming 6-12 months. The good news is that a valuation uplift for bonds will also underpin stock prices, and limit further downside in absolute terms. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for commodities, whose real prices are still close to the upper end of their 40-year trading range (Chart I-8) Chart I-8The Real Price Of Metals Is Still At The Upper End Of Its 40-Year Trading Range The Real Price Of Metals Is Still At The Upper End Of Its 40-Year Trading Range The Real Price Of Metals Is Still At The Upper End Of Its 40-Year Trading Range In the event of recession followed by plunging inflation, the biggest winner will be bonds and the biggest loser will be commodities. Therefore, on a 6-12 horizon, the optimal asset allocation is: Overweight bonds. Neutral stocks. Underweight commodities. Fractal Trading Watchlist This week we are adding Ethereum to our watchlist, as its 130-day fractal structure is approaching the capitulation point that signalled previous major trend reversals in 2018 (a bottom) and 2021 (a top). The full watchlist of 27 investments that are approaching, or at, potential trend reversals is available on our website: cpt.bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading Watchlist: New Additions Chart I-9Fractal Trading Watch List Fractal Trading Watch List Fractal Trading Watch List Chart 1CNY/USD At A Potential Turning Point CNY/USD At A Potential Turning Point CNY/USD At A Potential Turning Point   Chart 2US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities Chart 3CAD/SEK Is Vulnerable To Reversal CAD/SEK Is Vulnerable To Reversal CAD/SEK Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 4Financials Versus Industrials Has Reversed Financials Versus Industrials Has Reversed Financials Versus Industrials Has Reversed Chart 5The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Ended The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Ended The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Ended Chart 6The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Has Ended The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Has Ended The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Has Ended Chart 7FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Vulnerable To Reversal FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Vulnerable To Reversal FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 8Netherlands' Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Is Ending Netherlands' Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Is Ending Netherlands' Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Is Ending Chart 9The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond At Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond At Fractal Fragility The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond At Fractal Fragility Chart 10The 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 11Food And Beverage Outperformance Is Exhausted Food And Beverage Outperformance Is Exhausted Food And Beverage Outperformance Is Exhausted Chart 12German Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal German Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal German Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 13Japanese Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Japanese Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Japanese Telecom Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 14ETH Is Approaching A Possible Capitulation ETH Is Approaching A Possible Capitulation ETH Is Approaching A Possible Capitulation Chart 15The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Has Ended The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Has Ended The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Has Ended Chart 16The Strong Downtrend In The 3 Year T-Bond Has Ended The Strong Downtrend In The 3 Year T-Bond Has Ended The Strong Downtrend In The 3 Year T-Bond Has Ended Chart 17A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 18Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 19Norway's Outperformance Has Ended Norway's Outperformance Has Ended Norway's Outperformance Has Ended Chart 20Cotton Versus Platinum Has Reversed Cotton Versus Platinum Has Reversed Cotton Versus Platinum Has Reversed Chart 21Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Ended Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Ended Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Ended Chart 22USD/EUR Is Vulnerable To Reversal USD/EUR Is Vulnerable To Reversal USD/EUR Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 23The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Has Ended The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Has Ended The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Has Ended Chart 24A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare Chart 25GBP/USD At A Potential Turning Point GBP/USD At A Potential Turning Point GBP/USD At A Potential Turning Point Chart 26US Utilities Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal US Utilities Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal US Utilities Outperformance Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 27The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Banks Is Exhausted The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Banks Is Exhausted The Outperformance Of Oil Versus Banks Is Exhausted Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades Stocks Caught Between Scylla And Charybdis Stocks Caught Between Scylla And Charybdis Stocks Caught Between Scylla And Charybdis Stocks Caught Between Scylla And Charybdis 6-12 Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed   Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations  

Executive Summary Caught In Risk-Off Selling Copper Testing Support Copper Testing Support Weak Chinese and European economies are suppressing copper demand and helping to temper prices in a market that remains fundamentally tight. Weaker US GDP growth could put the three largest economies in the world in or close to recession in 2H22/1H23, which would contribute to demand-side weakness in copper markets. The odds manufacturing and base-metals refining will be curtailed in Europe are rising. Although a strike in Norway has been averted by government intervention, maintenance on Russia’s Nord Stream 1 pipeline scheduled to begin next week likely will serve as a pretext for longer and deeper natgas supply cuts to the EU. Bottom Line: Despite fundamental tightness in global copper markets, prices are being restrained by fears weaker Chinese and European economic performance will lead to a global recession. Early reads of US GDP pointing to negative growth in 2Q22 stoke these fears. Heightened economic policy uncertainty globally exacerbates them. We remain fundamentally bullish copper and will re-establish our long SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF (XME) – down ~ 40% from its highs in April – at tonight’s close. In addition, we went long the XOP oil and gas ETF at Tuesday’s close, after prompt Brent breached the buy-trigger we set last week of $105/bbl during this week’s crude-oil sell-off.   Feature   Lower GDP growth expectations in China and the EU – along with a wobbly US economy being flagged by an Atlanta Fed GDPNow forecast pointing to negative growth in 2Q22 – are stoking fears of a global manufacturing and industrial recession. This prompted a rout in industrial commodities – base metals and oil – this week, which still has markets on edge. This slow-down in the world’s three largest economies – accounting for almost 50% of global GDP expressed in purchasing-power terms – is the only thing keeping the level of global copper demand close to supply at present (Chart 1).1 At least for the time being, this is keeping the threat of sharply higher copper prices, which would be more in line with the low levels of supplies and inventories globally, at bay (Chart 2). As of the week ended May 27th, global copper stocks stood at just above 562k tons, which is ~ 31% lower y/y. Chart 1World’s Biggest Economies Slowing Copper Prices Decouple From Fundamentals Copper Prices Decouple From Fundamentals Chart 2Copper Prices Disconnect From Fundamentals Copper Prices Disconnect From Fundamentals Copper Prices Disconnect From Fundamentals   Uncertainty Weakens Copper Prices Energy and metals markets remain extremely tight on a fundamental supply-demand basis.2 The sharp sell-off this week in oil and metals prices is, in our view, evidence industrial-commodity prices have decoupled from fundamentals.  This makes traders – hedgers and speculators – extremely risk-averse, which reduces liquidity and increases volatility. On the back of these concerns, markets exhibit the sort of volatility associated with economic collapse, despite still-strong underlying fundamentals. Chart 3Rising Global Policy Uncertainty Copper Prices Decouple From Fundamentals Copper Prices Decouple From Fundamentals Volatility is on the rise due to increasing economic uncertainty in these markets. This makes it extremely difficult to assign probabilities to different price outcomes (i.e., true uncertainty). The BBD Global Economic Policy Uncertainty is approaching levels seen during the early pandemic (Chart 3).  We put this rising uncertainty down to poor policy and communication from central banks and governments; a pig’s breakfast of energy policy globally that increasingly adds nothing but confusion to markets; and a muddled public-health policy in China, which produces random shut-downs in global supply chains as covid infections randomly crop up in important port cities.  Lastly, the East and West are moving toward a new Cold War, which already is having profound effects on all markets, trade flows and capital availability in the short- and medium-term. This keeps markets on edge and forces them to parse every geopolitical development that hits the tape.3 Re-forging supply chains, re-building basic industrial infrastructure as the West moves away from outsourcing to China and other EM states will be costly and volatile, especially as embargoes and sanctions increase between these blocs.    This political and economic evolution will require increased investment in base metals production and exploration, along with similar commitments to oil and gas. Low and volatile prices will not support this, as they disincentivize investment, and set markets up for continued shortage and scarcity going forward. In the metals markets, years of underinvestment by major mining companies will keep copper supplies and inventories tight going forward (Chart 4). This will hinder and delay the global renewable-energy transition, which cannot be realized without higher base-metals supplies.  Chart 4Structural Underinvestment In Mining Fundamentally Bullish Copper Copper Prices Decouple From Fundamentals Copper Prices Decouple From Fundamentals Recession Fears Haunt Metals Globally … The proximate causes of the persistent weakening of copper prices is the demand destruction arising from the lockdown in China, and an increasing concern over the economic prospects of the EU as it prepares for a possible shut-off of Russian natgas exports. Should Russian supplies be cut off, the EU will be pushed into recession as natural-gas rationing – and the attendant prioritization of human needs going into winter – will constrict economic activity, particularly in manufacturing.  This leaves two of the three largest economies in the world either in recession or not growing at all. Added to this is the fear of a wobbly US economy, which has been slowed by higher energy prices and the Fed’s hawkish tightening of monetary policy. The Atlanta Fed’s GDPNow forecast for 2Q22 estimates a 2.1% contraction in US GDP. This would be the second consecutive quarter of negative growth and would meet a widely held rule-of-thumb indicator or recession.4  In our modelling, we estimate the income elasticity of copper demand in DM economies like the EU and US (1.39) and EM-ex-China (0.87) states is higher than that of China (0.37). This means that a 1% contraction in p.a. Chinese real GDP would translate to a 0.37% p.a. fall in copper demand, all else equal. A contraction of real incomes – i.e., real GDP – in the EU and EM-ex-China will cause a larger relative adjustment in copper demand than in China, even though the level of copper demand in China is far greater in absolute terms (Chart 5).  A recession in the EU will reduce import demand for China’s manufactured output in these markets (Chart 6). As China’s trade volumes fall, Chinese manufacturing PMIs will contract. Similarly, exports to China from the EU will weaken as manufacturing weakens and real GDP moves lower. We believe this will put more pressure on the Chinese government to provide fiscal and monetary stimulus to counter such a downdraft.  Chart 5Copper Demand Sensitive to Real GDP (Income) Copper Demand Sensitive to Real GDP (Income) Copper Demand Sensitive to Real GDP (Income) Chart 6Trade Channel Effects Follow GDP Weakness Trade Channel Effects Follow GDP Weakness Trade Channel Effects Follow GDP Weakness … But China Worries Dominate The Chinese economy is showing signs of further slowing.5 Weakness in credit levels, infrastructure investment, manufacturing, the property sector, and exports all indicate the covid-policy lockdowns, high commodity prices, and parsimonious credit and fiscal policies have produced a dramatic slowing in economic activity. In our modelling, we find evidence that each of these components exhibits a long-run inverse relationship with Chinese copper inventories, which in turn exhibits a long-run inverse relationship with COMEX copper prices.  Roughly 10 days after the initial Shanghai lockdown, copper prices went into contango (Chart 7). This occurred despite continuous declines in Chinese copper inventories during the lockdown months (Chart 8). Such anomalous behavior – i.e., as inventories fall markets become more backwardated – makes it difficult to connect prices and supply-demand-inventory fundamentals. Chart 7Copper In Contango For Most Of China’s Lockdown Copper In Contango For Most Of Chinas Lockdown Copper In Contango For Most Of Chinas Lockdown Chart 8Chinese Copper Inventories Continue To Draw In Lockdown Chinese Copper Inventories Continue To Draw In Lockdown Chinese Copper Inventories Continue To Draw In Lockdown BCA’s China Investment Strategy expects a muted 2H22 recovery for the Chinese economy. Rolling lockdowns due to China’s COVID policy will reduce the potency of fiscal and monetary stimulus. The stop-start nature of economic activity will stymie growth in disposable income and job creation, which in turn will translate to weaker aggregate demand. The knock-on effect of weaker business activity due to the lockdown earlier this year has been a higher propensity to save by households (Chart 9). Household surveys conducted by the PBoC show that, since 2017, household savings have been increasing, suggesting a precautionary sentiment (Chart 10). Chart 9Chinese Economic Slowdown Reduced Credit Demand Chinese Economic Slowdown Reduced Credit Demand Chinese Economic Slowdown Reduced Credit Demand Chart 10Rising Precautionary Savings... Rising Precautionary Savings... Rising Precautionary Savings... Chart 11...Will Impact Domestic Property Market ...Will Impact Domestic Property Market ...Will Impact Domestic Property Market We do not expect the property market to recover in a manner similar to what occurred following China’s re-opening after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Depressed household purchasing power will keep housing demand subdued, while the “three red lines” policy, which limits the amount property developers can borrow, will keep supply low (Chart 11).6 Housing accounts for ~ 30% of copper consumption in China, which means weak property markets will remain a drag on copper demand. Investment Implications Continued weakness in China’s economy and a potentially deep recession in the EU will continue to restrain demand for copper globally. In addition, with the US economy looking wobbly, the third global pillar of economic strength also will be weakening going into 2H22. These fundamental demand-side effects will lower pressure on tight copper inventories and keep prices subdued, in our view. This does not, however, signal an all-clear for copper supply or inventory tightness. Weaker demand is the only thing keeping prices from rising sharply, given the tight supply and inventory position of global copper markets. On the supply side, governance issues in copper-rich Latin American states, which are in the process of revising their social contracts with copper producers and consumers, will increase mining costs for companies, disincentivizing long-term and large-scale investments in new mines.7 These costs ultimately will be borne by consumers as supply shortages mount and the need to increase capex grows. Ultimately, this will feed into longer-term inflation and inflation expectations. Chart 12Caught In Risk-Off Selling Copper Testing Support Copper Testing Support We remain long-term bullish copper, as fundamentals remain tight and will get tighter. That said, over the short term, aggregate-demand weakness in the three major economic pillars in the world makes us leery of getting long copper futures, particularly as prompt COMEX prices test support (Chart 12).  Persistently weak copper prices will disincentivize the needed investment in new supply the world will need to effect a transition to renewable energy in coming decades. For this reason, we are comfortable re-establishing our long XME metals and mining ETF at tonight’s close, as copper prices are down 40% from their April highs. 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   Commodity Round-Up Energy: Bullish. A strike by Norwegian energy-sector workers that would have hit the natural gas market in Europe particularly hard was averted earlier this week.8 This still leaves the EU and UK (Europe) at risk of additional losses of Russian natgas exports beginning next week when Nord Stream 1 (NS1) maintenance is due to start. These threats have pushed Dutch Title Transfer Facility (TTF) natural gas prices up close to 93% since 1 June, and close to 400% y/y as of Tuesday. For the first five months of this year, Europe’s been importing just under 15 Bcf/d of LNG, with ~ 8.5 Bcf/d of those volumes coming from the US, based on EIA data. The EIA expects US LNG exports to average ~ 11.9 Bcf/d this year and 12 Bcf/d in 2023. Europe accounted for just under 75% of US exports in January – April of this year, and we expect that to continue going forward. The IEA expects Russia to supply 25% of EU demand this year, the lowest in 20 years. Last year, Russian imports covered ~ 40% (~ 7 TCF) of EU demand. Base Metals: Zinc stocks are depleted but prices are dropping on recession fears (Chart 13). Smelting operations were hit last year following the power-supply crunches in China and Europe. While China has recovered its energy security, Europe, which accounts for ~15% of global refined zinc supply, has not. Reduced natgas supply from Russia will make the smelting shortage in Europe even more acute, especially if power and fuel rationing occur. In April, China was a net exporter of zinc for the first time since 2014, as low demand in the state and low European zinc supply incentivized Chinese smelters to ship metal to the West despite high outbound tariffs. Precious Metals: Markets switched from inflation to growth fears, as central banks, notably the Fed began hiking interest rates aggressively to curb inflation. Investors have been flocking to the USD, which hit a 20-year high on recession fears this week (Chart 14). This has happened at the expense of the yellow metal, which, since breaking through the USD 1800/oz mark last week, has continued to drop, hitting an 8-month low as of yesterday's close. Chart 13Global Copper Inventories Remain Tight Global Copper Inventories Remain Tight Global Copper Inventories Remain Tight Chart 14 Copper Prices Decouple From Fundamentals Copper Prices Decouple From Fundamentals   Footnotes 1     Please see China, US and EU are the largest economies in the world, which was published by Eurostat 19 May 2020. 2     For additional discussion of oil-market fundamentals, please see Recession Unlikely To Batter Oil Prices, which covers our expectation for global oil balances and prices. It was published 16 June 2022. 3    Please see Hypo-Globalization (A GeoRisk Update) published by BCA Research’s Geopolitical Strategy 30 July 2021. See also Commodities' Watershed Moment, which we published 22 March 2022.  4    Please see GDPNow, published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta 1 July 2022. 5    Please see Third Quarter Geopolitical Outlook: Thunder And Lightning, published by BCA’s Geopolitical Strategy 24 June 2022. This report notes, “China’s political crackdown, struggle with Covid-19, waning exports, and deflating property market have led to an abrupt slowdown this year. The government is responding by easing monetary, fiscal, and regulatory policy, though so far with limited effect … . Economic policy will not be decisive in the third quarter unless a crash forces the administration to stimulate aggressively.” 6    In August 2020, the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development and the People’s Bank of China proposed to implement a policy which kept a ceiling on companies’ asset to liability ratio at 70%, net debt to equity ratio at 100%, and cash to short-term borrowings ratio at 1. Developers whose liabilities are within these requirements may increase their liabilities by less than 15%. These were known as the “three red lines.” Per that policy, if one or more of these ceilings are surpassed, maximum liabilities growth is capped at a lower percentage. 7     Please see Add Local Politics To Copper Supply Risks, which we published 25 November 2021. It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. See also Chile sticks to plan for new mining profit tax up to 32% linked to copper price, published by reuters.com via mining.com 1 July 2022. 8    Please see Norway’s government halts oil and gas strike published by ft.com 5 July 2022. Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Trades Closed In 2022

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

Executive Summary Long-Term Contracts Needed To Increase LNG Supply EU Will Reverse Course On Fossil Fuels EU Will Reverse Course On Fossil Fuels The EU will have to reverse course and execute long-term contracts with natural gas producers, LNG shippers and pipeline operators to incentivize production of supplies needed to contain energy prices. Long-term contracting will offer the EU an opportunity to address political and economic fragmentation risks via joint taxation policies.  This would transform state-level risks via-a-vis energy and military security into joint-and-several obligations. The G7’s plan to cap Russian oil prices will be DOA.  The most oil import-dependent EM economies – China and India – will find deeply discounted crude irresistible. Hydrocarbon producers and refiners will increase investments in carbon-capture and storage technology, to maintain their new-found advantage as secure energy sources.  Additional subsidies and funding for this technology will be forthcoming. Bottom Line: The hard realities of military conflict and a lack of investment in production and refining will force governments to incentivize substantial investments in hydrocarbons – particularly natural gas and LNG infrastructure – to address global energy scarcity during a time of war.  We remain long oil and gas exposures via the COMT ETF, and long equity refining and services exposures via the CRAK and IEZ ETFs.  We will re-establish our producer-oriented XOP ETF position if prompt Brent futures trade down to $105/bbl in the front month.  We also remain tactically long Brent and eurozone natgas futures and options. Feature The G7 last opined on liquified natural gas (LNG) supply in May, and as was the case this week, it left even casual observers uncertain as to what it is seeking to achieve: It advocated for a halt to further investments in fossil-fuel projects and, at the same time, called for higher LNG supplies to be provided for the EU states.1  The EU faces daunting energy security and supply constraints.2 A deepening energy scarcity will, we expect, push the EU into recession later this year, as natural-gas rationing is invoked to ensure there are sufficient supplies to meet human needs this winter.  Natgas scarcity will force the EU to reverse course on its renewable-energy transition in the medium term and prioritize fossil-fuel investments, in our view.  Long-term contracting with LNG suppliers will be required to incentivize needed investment in production and transportation to replace Russian gas imports.  Such contracting is a necessity for hydrocarbon producers, given governments’ continued calls for no additional fossil-fuel investment.  Quicksilver shifts in policy are a continuing source of uncertainty for investors and energy-supply firms. Over time, the EU will have to replace close to 7 Tcf/yr of Russian gas imports (Chart 1, middle panel).  This will propel the EU into the ranks of the world’s largest LNG importers (Chart 2).  Chart 1EU Needs To Replace ~ 7 Tcf/yr Of LNG EU Will Reverse Course On Fossil Fuels EU Will Reverse Course On Fossil Fuels Chart 2EU Will Become A World-Class LNG Importer EU Will Become A World-Class LNG Importer EU Will Become A World-Class LNG Importer Chart 3Long-Term Contracts Needed To Increase LNG Supply EU Will Reverse Course On Fossil Fuels EU Will Reverse Course On Fossil Fuels Given the length of contracts typically executed with LNG exporters – in excess of 20-plus years – EU governments will be compelled to allow firms and member states to sign long-term contracts for these supplies.  EU governments also will be required to begin planning for and developing LNG importing infrastructure, as these supplies become available over the next 3-5 years. In the meantime, LNG prices will remain under pressure as competition heats up globally ahead of the coming winter (Chart 3). G7 Price-Cap Scheme Will Be DOA The G7’s scheme to impose a price cap on Russian oil exports will be DOA as soon as details are presented.  This is because the world’s largest oil import-dependent economies – China and India – not only have long trading histories with Russia, but they also operate their own oil-transport fleets that can circumvent insurance-related obstacles imposed by the US and the UK.  China and India already find discounted Russian oil irresistible, and are unlikely to acquiesce to US demands for a price cap.  China imports 75% of its 15.5mm b/d of oil consumption, while India imports ~ 85% of the 5mm b/d of oil it consumes.  Even if oil importers taking Russia's exports going to the EU were to sign on to a price-cap scheme, Russia could always unilaterally cut its oil and condensate production by 20-30% and force Brent prices sharply higher for remaining contract holders. This would almost surely lead to higher prices – above $140/bbl, based on our earlier estimates – and raise Russia’s net export proceeds in the process, since the G7 does not want all of Russia's oil taken off the market.3 Government Interventions Exacerbate Scarcity Governments of states with contestable elections increasingly are intervening – or attempting to do so – in global energy markets and imposing often-contradictory policies that nominally favor consumers at the expense of energy producers.  This almost always is counter-productive: Price caps intended to soften the blow of higher-cost electricity and hydrocarbons discourages the necessary conservation of scarce resources.  So-called windfall profits taxes discourage the investment required to address supply scarcity.  Higher demand and lower supply does not lead to lower prices.  Even grander schemes – e.g., the monopsony cartels floated by G7 member states like the US and EU, along with China – almost surely would reduce the profitability of developing and marketing new energy supplies, which also would exacerbate scarcity of supply by discouraging investment. These quick ad hoc fixes work at cross purposes in solving the problem of global energy scarcity.  While they are in keeping with a penchant of governments to demonstrate they are addressing voters’ concerns, such policies mistake a quick response for long-term solutions. Investment Implications The EU will, in our opinion, be forced to reverse course and sign long-term LNG supply contracts to replace Russian natural gas imports.  This will not derail its renewable-energy transition strategy, but it will significantly delay it.  We remain long oil and gas exposures via the S&P GSCI and COMT ETF, and long equity refining and services exposures via the CRAK and IEZ ETFs.  We will re-establish our producer-focused XOP ETF position if Brent trades down to $105/bbl in the front month.  We also remain tactically long Brent and eurozone natgas futures and options (see p. 7 below). Housekeeping Notes We were stopped out of our long S&P GSCI position with a gain of 64%.  We are getting long again at the close. We also were stopped out of our long 4Q22 $120/bbl Brent calls with a 16% return. Separately, there will be no Commodity Round-Up in this week’s publication.  We are broadcasting our Commodity Round-Up today at 9 a.m. EDT.    Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com   Footnotes 1     Please see The G7 wants to dump natural gas … but not yet published by politico.com 27 May 2022.  The report notes, “The G7 called for an end to international investments in fossil fuels by the end of this year and slammed private finance for continuing to back dirty energy — but left a big out for EU countries desperate to replace Russian gas.  ‘We acknowledge that investment in [the liquefied natural gas] sector is necessary in response to the current crisis, in a manner consistent with our climate objectives and without creating lock-in effects,’ the ministers said.” 2     Please see One Hot Mess: EU Energy Policy, published 26 May 2022.  This report delves into the EU’s post-Cold War foreign policy.  For three decades, EU foreign policy 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.  This policy is kaput. 3    Please see Higher Gasoline, Diesel Prices Ahead, which we published 2 June 2022.  It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. Investment Views and Themes Strategic Recommendations Tactical Trades Trades Closed in 2022

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