Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.
Skip to main content
Skip to main content

Commodities & Energy Sector

Executive Summary The Fed will continue to hike rates at a time when global trade is contracting. Earlier this week, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell reiterated that the Fed will not hesitate to hike rates until core consumer price inflation gets closer to 2%. Given that US core consumer price inflation is currently at around 5-6%, a mere rollover in core inflation from current levels will not be enough for the Fed to tone down its hawkishness. Besides, according to Powell, US financial conditions are not yet at a level that is consistent with inflation coming down substantially. China will stick to its dynamic zero-COVID policy this year. The economy will continue to underwhelm as the magnitude and nature of stimulus measures announced thus far are not adequate to produce a recovery. Industrial metal prices and global material stocks are at risk of gapping down. Play these markets on the short side. Commodity Currencies Are Signaling Lower Commodity Prices Bottom Line: It is still dangerous to bottom fish in global equities and risk assets in general. The US dollar has more upside. Continue underweighting EM stocks and credit within global equity and credit portfolios, respectively. Feature The risks to global and EM risk assets are still skewed to the downside. Although investor sentiment on global equities has soured of late, we do not think global or EM equities have made a bottom, and the US dollar has not yet reached an apex. Consequently, absolute-return investors should stay defensive, and global equity portfolios should continue to underweight EM stocks. The Fed and Equities Are Still On A Collision Course Earlier this week, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell reiterated the Fed’s commitment to hiking interest rates until core consumer price inflation gets closer to 2%. Notably, in his speech at a WSJ event on May 17, Powell noted: “This is not a time for tremendously nuanced readings of inflation”… “We need to see inflation coming down in a convincing way. Until we do, we’ll keep going.” Given that US core consumer price inflation is currently at around 5-6%, a mere rollover in core inflation from current levels will not be enough for the Fed to tone down its hawkishness. Chart 1US Core Inflation Will Roll Over But Stay Above 3.5-4% For Now Chart 1 shows the average of core median CPI, core trimmed-mean CPI and core sticky CPI, which are better indicators of genuine inflationary pressures because they are less affected by outliers. Even though core CPI inflation ticked down in April, other core measures such as core median CPI, core trimmed-mean CPI and core sticky CPI continued to rise. These core inflation measures are not likely to ease back to 2% unless economic growth falls below its potential. In his same speech, Chairman Powell also asserted: “We will go until we feel like we are at a place where we can say, ‘Yes, financial conditions are at an appropriate place. We see inflation coming down.’ We will go to that point, and there will not be any hesitation about that.” This means that US financial conditions have not yet tightened enough for the Fed to back down on its hawkishness. Finally, we have been arguing that a wage-price spiral has developed in the US as the labor market has become very tight (Chart 2, top panel). Wages and unit labor costs have been surging. Unit labor costs are the most important driver of US core CPI (Chart 2, bottom panel). Therefore, it will be impossible for the Fed to bring down core inflation toward 2% without a retrenchment in the labor market, i.e., layoffs. Rising unemployment will in turn weigh on household income growth and consumption. Chart 2The US Labor Market Is Very Tight And Wage Growth Is Accelerating The cost of borrowing for companies is rising globally, and these periods often coincide with equity selloffs. Notably, surging US high-yield ex-energy corporate bond yields herald lower US share prices ahead (Chart 3, top panel). Similarly, rising EM corporate bond yields foreshadow a further decline in EM ex-TMT share prices (Chart 3, bottom panel). Chart 3Rising Corporate Bond Yields Are Bearish For Stocks On the whole, the Fed and many other central banks will be hiking interest rates at a time when global trade volumes are contracting in H2 2022. As discussed in our report A Whiff Of Stagflation? US and EU imports of consumer goods are set to shrink following the pandemic boom. Chart 4Global Export/Manufacturing Are Heading Into Contraction Meantime, rolling lockdowns and extremely weak income growth are depressing domestic demand in China. High food and energy prices as well as rising interest rates are weighing on EM ex-China consumption. The sharp underperformance of global cyclicals equities versus global defensive sectors corroborates our expectation that global manufacturing activity will contract (Chart 4). The trade-weighted US dollar typically benefits from both Fed hikes and a global trade slump. As long as the Fed is hawkish and global exports are contracting, the greenback will continue to appreciate. For now, the US dollar remains in a strong position for further appreciation, especially versus EM currencies (Chart 5). Consistently, the selloff in broad EM risk assets is not yet over.  Chart 5EM Currencies: More Downside A major reversal in the trade-weighted dollar will be a signal that the global macro backdrop is improving and that global share prices and EM risk assets are bottoming. Bottom Line: Although equities have become oversold and investor sentiment is depressed, any rebound will prove to be short lived. The Fed will continue to hike rates at a time when global trade is about to shrink. The global/EM equity selloff has further to run. China: Ordinary Stimulus Despite Extraordinary Conditions Only one thing is currently certain in China: authorities are committed to the dynamic zero-COVID policy. However, most experts outside China believe that it will be very difficult to wholly limit the spread of the easily transmissible Omicron variants, even with such stringent mainland containment policies. As a result, rolling lockdowns are the most likely scenario for China’s regions and cities in 2022. These lockdowns will depress household income, confidence and consumption. Private business investment and hiring will also tank. Have authorities provided enough stimulus to support a recovery in H2 2022? We do not think so. Chinese stimulus has so far been ordinary in nature and in magnitude. Policy easing will likely prove to be insufficient to lift the economy out of the current extraordinary slump. First, Chinese exports are set to shrink in H2 as US and EU consumption of consumer goods revert to their pre-pandemic trend. Demand from EM will remain weak. Second, rising unemployment and under-employment is hindering household income. Generous cash transfers are needed to offset this hit to income. Not only did aggregate retail sales collapse in April, but online sales of goods and service also plunged (Chart 6). It is hard to imagine that private businesses will be investing when consumer spending and exports are weak. Our proxies for the marginal propensity to spend for households and enterprises continue to fall (Chart 7). Chart 6China: Even Online Retail Sales Are Shrinking Chart 7China: Household And Enterprise Propensity To Spend Have Been Declining   Critically, China’s credit impulse, excluding government bond issuance, remains in negative territory (Chart 8). Third, China’s property market is frail. Despite modest policy easing for the real estate market, sentiment among home buyers and developers remains downbeat. Given that the housing sector faces structural headwinds, odds are that buyers and developers might not react to the modest property market easing that authorities have so far provided. It is worth noting that Chinese property stocks seem to have had a structural breakdown, and offshore corporate bonds of real estate developers remain in a bear market (Chart 9). These market patterns corroborate that China's housing market has experienced a structural breakdown. Chart 8Chinese Stimulus Has So Far Been Tame Chart 9Chinese Property Market Has Experienced A Structural Breakdown   Finally, even though infrastructure spending is being ramped up, it will prove to be insufficient for the economy to recover from a deep slump. Local governments are facing a major financing shortfall. Land sales – which make up about 40% of local government revenues – have dried up. This will hinder local governments’ ability to finance infrastructure projects. As to Chinese equities, internet/platform stocks have become oversold. However, their long-term outlook remains dismal. As we have been arguing since late 2020, the fundamental case for their de-rating remains intact. This week’s meeting between government officials and technology companies has not produced any positive news. Although the tone from authorities was more balanced, they did not offer any relief from already imposed regulations. Chart 10Implications Of China's Common Prosperity Policies Looking forward, implementing common prosperity policies will be the primary objective of the Communist Party in the coming years. These policies will assure that labor’s share of income will rise further at the expense of corporate profits. Chart 10 demonstrates that the share of labor in national income has been rising since 2011. Conversely, the share operating profits peaked in 2011 and has dropped to a 30-year low. These dynamics will persist as income will continue to be redistributed from shareholders to labor in the majority of industries/companies in China. This is an unfriendly outlook for shareholders, especially foreign ones. Bottom Line: Chinese policy stimulus has so far been insufficient. The economy is in a deep slump, and share prices remain at risk of further decline. Short Industrial Metals And Material Stocks Chart 11Chinese Imports Of Metals Was Shrinking In 2021 Industrial metals’ resilience last year in the face of shrinking Chinese import volumes was unusual (Chart 11). This resilience was probably due to robust DM demand for goods, supply bottlenecks and investors buying commodities as an inflation hedge. As we elaborated in the April 28 report, risks to industrial metals are skewed to the downside. This is despite the fact that agriculture prices will likely rise further, and energy prices will remain volatile due to the geopolitical situation. We continue to recommend investors underweight/short materials stocks and industrial metals for the following reasons: It is ill-advised to play the US inflation story by being long industrial metals and materials stocks. As shown in Chart 2 above, US unit labor costs are driving core inflation, not industrial metals. China accounts for 50-55% of global industrial metal consumption, and since early 2021 the key risk in China has been decelerating demand/deflation not inflation. In fact, commodities have become a crowded hedge against inflation and a global growth slowdown poses a substantial risk to industrial metals. Chart 12 demonstrates that Chinese materials stocks have plunged. We read this as a warning sign for global materials because China is by far the largest consumer of raw materials (excluding energy). Chart 12Chinese Material Stocks Are Signaling Trouble For Global Materials When share prices of customers are falling, equity prices of suppliers will likely follow. Chart 13 shows that over the past 200 years raw material prices in real US dollar terms (deflated by US headline CPI) have oscillated around a well-defined downtrend. The pandemic surge in commodity prices has pushed raw material prices to two standard deviations above this long-term trend. Chart 13Raw Material Prices (In Real Terms) Are At The Upper End Of A 200-Year Downtrend Historically, commodity rallies (and even their secular bull markets) ended when prices reached this threshold. Hence, odds are that industrial commodities might hit a soft spot. Energy prices remain a wild card due to geopolitics. It is critical to note that the raw materials price index shown in Chart 13 does not include energy, gold and semi-precious metals. Finally, shrinking global trade volumes are also negative for raw materials. The average of AUD, NZD and CAD points to lower industrial metal prices (Chart 14). Chart 14Commodity Currencies Are Signaling Lower Commodity Prices Chart 15Bearish Technical Patterns: BHP Share Price And Copper The share price of BHP, the world’s largest mining company, has put in a major top and is now gapping down (Chart 15, top panel). Copper prices have broken below their 200-day moving average that served as a support in the past 12 months (Chart 15, bottom panel). These market profiles point to more downside. We continue to recommend that investors play this theme in the following ways: Short copper or short copper / long gold; Short global materials / long global industrials; Short ZAR / long USD. Also, we downgraded Brazil early this week  partly due to expectations of lower iron ore prices and souring investor attitude toward commodity plays in general. Investment Conclusions Global and EM equities have entered a capitulation phase. It is still dangerous to bottom fish in global equities and risk assets in general. Continue underweighting EM stocks and credit within global equity and credit portfolios, respectively. The US dollar has more upside. Continue shorting the following EM currencies versus the USD: ZAR, PLN, HUF, COP, PEN, PHP and IDR. As we discussed in a recent report, we are approaching a major buying opportunity in EM local currency bonds. However, the US dollar needs to peak for that to transpire. Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com   Strategic Themes (18 Months And Beyond) Equities Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months)
Next Thursday May 26, we will hold the BCA Debate – High Inflation: Here To Stay,Or Soon In The Rear-View Mirror? – a Webcast in which I will debate my colleague, Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist, Bob Ryan on the outlook for inflation, and take the side that inflationary fears will soon recede. I do hope you can join us. As such, the debate will replace the weekly report, though we will renew the fractal trading watchlist on our website. Dhaval Joshi Executive Summary The second quarter’s synchronised sell-off in stocks, bonds, inflation protected bonds, industrial metals and gold is an extremely rare star alignment. The last time that the ‘everything sell-off’ star alignment happened was in early 1981 when the Paul Volcker Fed ‘broke the back’ of inflation and turned stagflation into an outright recession. In 2022, the Jay Powell Fed risks doing the same. If history repeats itself, then the template of 1981-82 could provide a useful guide for 2022-23. In which case, bond prices are now entering a bottoming process.  Stocks would bottom next. While the near term outlook is cloudy, we expect stock prices to be higher on a 12-month horizon, especially long-duration stocks that are most sensitive to bond yields. But just as in 1981-82, the biggest casualty will be industrial metals, which are likely to suffer at least double-digit losses over the coming year. Fractal trading watchlist: FTSE 100 versus Stoxx Europe 600, Czech Republic versus Poland, Food and Beverages, US REITS versus Utilities, CNY/USD. 2022-23 Could Be An Echo Of 1981-82 Bottom Line: The 1981-82 template for 2022-23 suggests that bonds will bottom first, followed by stocks. But steer clear of gold and industrial metals. Feature Investors have had a torrid time in the second quarter, with no place to hide.1  Stocks are down -10 percent. Bonds are down -6 percent. Inflation protected bonds are down -6 percent. Industrial metals are down -13 percent. Gold is down -6 percent. To add insult to injury, even cash is down in real terms, because the interest rate is well below the inflation rate! (Chart I-1) Chart I-1The 'Everything Sell-Off' In 2022 Last Happened In 1981, When Stagflation Morphed Into Recession Such a star alignment of asset returns, in which stocks, bonds, inflation protected bonds, industrial metals, and gold all sell off together, is unprecedented. In the eighty calendar quarters since the inflation protected bond market data became available in the early 2000s there has never been a quarter with an ‘everything sell-off’. Everything Has Sold Off, But Does That Make Sense? The rarity of an ‘everything sell-off’ is because there are virtually no economic or financial scenarios in which all five asset-classes should fall together (Chart I-2 and Chart I-3). Chart I-2An 'Everything Sell-Off' Is Extremely Rare Chart I-3An 'Everything Sell-Off' Is Extremely Rare A scenario dominated by rising inflation is bad for bonds, but good for inflation protected bonds, especially relative to conventional bonds. Yet inflation protected bonds have not outperformed either in absolute or relative terms. A scenario of rising inflation should also support the value of stocks, industrial metals and certainly gold, given that all three are, to varying degrees, ‘inflation hedges.’ Yet the prices of stocks, industrial metals, and gold have all plummeted. The rarity of an ‘everything sell-off’ is because there are virtually no economic or financial scenarios in which all asset classes should fall together. Conversely, a scenario dominated by slowing growth is bad for industrial metal prices, but good for conventional bond prices – as bond yields decline on diminished expectations for rate hikes. Yet conventional bonds have sold off. What about a scenario dominated by both rising inflation and slowing growth – which is to say, stagflation? In this case, we would expect inflation protected bonds to perform especially well. Meanwhile, with the economy still growing, the prices of industrial metals should not be collapsing, as they have been recently.  In a final scenario of an imminent recession we would expect stocks, industrial metals and even gold to sell off, but conventional bonds to perform especially well. The upshot is there are virtually no economic scenarios in which stocks, bonds, inflation protected bonds, industrial metals, and gold plummet together, as they have recently. So, what’s going on? To answer, we need to take a trip back to the 1980s. 1981 Was The Last Time We Had An ‘Everything Sell-Off’ Inflation protected bonds did not exist before the late 1990s. But considering the other four asset-classes – stocks, bonds, industrial metals, and gold – to find the last time that they all fell together we must travel back to 1981, the time of Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, and the Paul Volcker Fed. And suddenly, we discover spooky similarities with the current Zeitgeist. Just like today, the world’s central banks were obsessed with ‘breaking the back’ of inflation, which, like a monster in a horror movie, kept appearing to die before coming back with second and third winds (Chart I-4). Chart I-4In 1981, Just As In 2022, Central Banks Would 'Do Whatever It Takes' To Kill Inflation Just like today, the central banks were desperate to repair their badly damaged credibility in managing the economy. As the biography “Volcker: The Triumph of Persistence” puts it: “He restored credibility to the Federal Reserve at a time it had been greatly diminished.” And just like today, central bankers hoped that they could pilot the economy to a ‘soft landing’, though whether they genuinely believed that is another story. Asked at a press conference if higher interest rates would cause a recession, Volcker replied coyly “Well, you get varying opinions about that.” 2022 has spooky similarities with 1981. In fact, in its single-minded aim ‘to do whatever it takes’ to kill inflation, the Volcker Fed hiked the interest rate to near 20 percent, thereby triggering what was then the deepest economic recession since the Depression of the 1930s (Chart I-5 and Chart I-6). With hindsight, it was a price worth paying because the economy then began a quarter century of low inflation, steady growth, and mild recessions – a halcyon period for which the Volcker Fed’s aggressive tightening in the early 1980s have been lauded. Chart I-5In 1981, The Fed Hiked Rates To Near 20 Percent... Chart I-6...And Thereby Morphed Stagflation Into Recession Granted, the problems of 2022 are a much scaled down version of those in 1981, yet there are spooky similarities – a point which will not have gone unnoticed by the current crop of central bankers. It is no secret that Jay Powell is a big fan of Paul Volcker.   The Echoes Of 1981-82 In 2022-23 The answer to why everything sold off in early 1981 is that central banks took their economies from stagflation to outright recession, and the risk is that the same happens again in 2022-23 (Chart I-7). Chart I-7The Echoes Of 1981-82: Aggressive Rate Hikes In 2022-23 Will Morph Stagflation Into Recession In the transition from stagflation fears to recession fears, everything sells off because first the stagflation casualties get hammered, and then the recession plays get hammered. This leaves investors with no place to hide, as no mainstream asset is left unscathed. Just as in 1981, a transition from stagflation fears to recession fears likely explains the recent ‘everything sell-off’ because the sell-off in April was most painful for the stagflation casualties – bonds. Whereas, the sell-off in May has been most painful for the recession casualties – industrial metals and stocks.  In a stagflation that morphs to recession, everything sells off. What happens next? The template of 1981-82 could provide a useful guide. Bond prices bottomed first, in the late summer of 1981, as it became clear that the economy was entering a downturn which would exorcise inflation. Of the three other asset classes – all recession casualties – stocks continued to remain under pressure for the next few months but were higher 12 months later. Gold fell another 30 percent, though rebounded sharply in 1982. But the greatest pain was in the industrial metals, which fell another 30 percent and did not recover their highs for several years (Chart I-8). Chart I-82022-23 Could Be An Echo Of 1981-82 2022-23 could be an echo of 1981-82, with bond prices now entering a bottoming process.  Stocks would bottom next, with one difference being a quicker recovery than in 1981-82 because of their higher sensitivity to bond yields. While the near term outlook is cloudy, we expect stock prices to be higher on a 12 month horizon, especially long-duration stocks that are most sensitive to bond yields. But just as in 1981-82, the biggest casualty of a stagflation that morphs into a recession will be the overvalued industrial metals, which are likely to suffer at least double-digit losses over the coming year. Fractal Trading Watchlist This week’s new additions are Czech Republic versus Poland, and Food and Beverages versus the market, which appear overbought. And US REITS versus Utilities, and CNY/USD, which appear oversold. Finally, our new trade recommendation is to underweight the FTSE 100 versus the Stoxx Europe 600. The resource heavy FTSE 100 is especially vulnerable to our anticipated sell-off in commodities, and its recent outperformance is at a point of fragility that has marked previous turning points (Chart I-9). Set the profit target and symmetrical stop-loss at 5 percent. Chart I-9FTSE 100 Outperformance Is Near Exhaustion Fractal Trading Watchlist: New Additions Chart I-10Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Chart I-11Food And Beverage Outperformance Near Exhaustion CHART 1 Chart I-12US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities CHART 12 Chart I-13CNY/USD At A Support Level Chart 1The Strong Trend In The 18-Month-Out US Interest Rate Future Is Fragile Chart 2The Strong Trend In The 3 Year T-Bond Is Fragile Chart 3AUD/KRW Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 4Canada Versus Japan Is Reversing Chart 5Canada's TSX-60's Outperformance Might Be Over Chart 6US Healthcare Providers Vs. Software At Risk of Reversal Chart 7A Potential Switching Point From Tobacco Into Cannabis Chart 8Biotech Is A Major Buy Chart 9CAD/SEK Reversal Has Started Chart 10Financials Versus Industrials To Reverse Chart 11Norway's Outperformance Could End Chart 12Greece's Brief Outperformance To End Chart 13BRL/NZD At A Resistance Point Chart 14The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Healthcare Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 15The Outperformance Of Resources Versus Biotech Has Started To Reverse Chart 16Cotton's Outperformance Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 17Homebuilders Versus Healthcare Services Has Turned Chart 18Switzerland's Outperformance Vs. Germany Has Started To End Chart 19The Rally In USD/EUR Could End Chart 20The Outperformance Of MSCI Hong Kong Versus China Is Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 21A Potential New Entry Point Into Petcare Chart 22FTSE100 Outperformance Vs. Euro Stoxx 50 Vulnerable To Reversal Chart 23Netherlands Underperformance Vs. Switzerland Close To Exhaustion Chart 24The Sell-Off In The 30-Year T-Bond Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 25The Sell-Off In The NASDAQ Is Approaching Fractal Fragility Chart 26Czech Outperformance Near Exhaustion Chart 27Food And Beverage Outperformance Near Exhaustion CHART 1 Chart 28US REITS Are Oversold Versus Utilities CHART 12 Chart 29CNY/USD At A Support Level   Dhaval Joshi Chief Strategist dhaval@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1 The returns are based on the S&P 500, the 10-year T-bond, the 10-year Treasury Inflation Protected Security (TIPS), the LMEX index, and gold.   Fractal Trading System Fractal Trades 6-Month Recommendations Structural Recommendations Closed Fractal Trades Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields Chart II-1Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Euro Area Chart II-2Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Europe Ex Euro Area Chart II-3Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Asia Chart II-4Indicators To Watch - Bond Yields - Other Developed   Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-5Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-6Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-7Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations Chart II-8Indicators To Watch - Interest Rate Expectations  
Executive Summary   The surge in food prices following Russia's invasion of Ukraine will drive EM headline inflation higher, given more of individuals' incomes in these economies are spent on food. Economies in the MENA will remain at risk for higher food prices, given their reliance on wheat imports from Ukraine and Russia, which together comprise ~ 30% of global wheat exports.  Wheat is the most widely traded grain in the world; its production is second only to that of corn.  Higher shipping and input costs – especially for fertilizers – will exacerbate the upside price pressure on grains, particularly wheat. Tenuous social contracts raise the risk of social unrest in MENA reminiscent of the Arab Spring unrest of 2011, which was fueled by food scarcity, economic stagnation and popular anger at autocratic governments. A strong USD will continue to raise the local-currency cost of grains and food, which also will fuel EM inflation. The War Increased Food Prices… Bottom Line: Wheat prices will remain volatile with a bias to the upside for as long as the Russia-Ukraine war persists.  The uncertain evolution of this war means EM states will be more exposed to grain-price volatility and higher inflation.  This could prove to be destabilizing to MENA states in particular.  Separately, we update our recommendations below.  Feature High food prices will drive EM headline inflation, owing to the fact a higher proportion of individuals’ incomes in these economies are spent on food. These pressures are particularly acute for wheat following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyCopper Demand Will Ignore Recession Wheat is the most widely traded grain in the world, according to the World Population Review (WPR).1 In terms of global production, it is second only to corn, totaling 760mm tons in 2020. In order, the top three wheat producers in the world are China, India, and Russia, which account for 41% of global output. The US is the fourth-largest producer. The WPR notes that if the EU were to be counted as a single country, its wheat production would be second only to China (Chart 1). Within emerging markets, the Middle East and North African (MENA) nations will be worst hit by rising wheat prices.2 This is because the bulk of their wheat imports are sourced from Russia and Ukraine, and shipped from Black Sea ports, which are literally caught in the crosshairs of the Russia-Ukraine war. Many of these states do not have sufficient grain reserves to tide themselves over this crisis, and will be forced to import food at elevated prices. A strong USD, which this past week hit a 19-year high, will add to the price of USD-denominated commodity imports, particularly wheat. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will continue to exacerbate EM food scarcity and drive input costs – e.g., fertilizers – and shipping rates higher. This will keep food and wheat prices volatile with a strong bias to the upside (Chart 2). Chart 1Wheat Production Faces Concentration Risk Chart 2The War Increased Food Prices… In addition to the inflation risk from high food and energy prices, the tenuous social contracts in many states again raises the risk of social unrest in MENA, as occurred in the 2011 Arab Spring protests against food scarcity, economic stagnation and autocratic government.3 War Disruptions Will Continue Russia’s invasion of Ukraine jeopardized wheat supply from two countries which together constitute nearly 30% of total global wheat exports. The invasion will continue to keep wheat prices volatile and biased to the upside (Chart 3). The UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) forecasts Ukraine’s 2021/22 wheat output will drop below its 5-year average, since at least 20% of total arable land cannot be used due to the war. While nearly 60% lower than this time last year, Ukrainian wheat exports in March were not completely shut down. However, they were re-routed around the direct routes from the Black Sea.4 In March, Ukraine managed to export 309k tons of wheat. Chart 3...Particularly Wheat Ukraine will need to rely on these convoluted routes until port services are either restored or unblocked. Exports through more circuitous routes will delay distribution and increase transport costs. This, of course, also adds to the delivered cost of wheat that is being rerouted and slows the overall distribution of grains globally. Additionally, Ukrainian exports via other countries will be disrupted by those countries’ own trade slowdowns, since global bottlenecks affects all trade. Thus far, Russia has been able to maintain wheat exports. Russia continued to supply wheat to global markets in March and April. The USDA estimates that during the 2021/22 crop year, which ends in June, Russian wheat exports will total 33mm tons, which is just 2mm tons lower than the USDA's pre-crisis estimate.5 Because of high carryover stocks and record production, Russia's exports in the 2022/23 crop year are expected to be more than 40mm tons. Sourcing Alternative Wheat Supplies With a sizable portion of global wheat supply at risk – primarily from Ukraine – other exporting countries will need to increase output to fill this gap (Chart 4). This production, however, is not guaranteed, as it depends primarily on weather and fertilizer prices. New trade routes will also need to be created. This will tax existing export infrastructures as shipping dynamics are reconfigured. Particularly important will be how far the new-found sources of supply have to travel to deliver grain, shipping availability, and, of course, the incremental costs incurred to move supplies. As of 2021, the EU – the Black Sea states’ principle competitor in the wheat-export market – and 48% of total wheat exports to Middle East and African countries (Chart 5). The EU's ability to increase exports for the remainder of the 2021/22 crop year will depend on its production, since demand for exports will be guaranteed given the crisis in the Black Sea. Chart 4Other Exporters Will Need To Ramp Up Chart 5MENA Is EU’s Primary Wheat Export Market The European Commission expects the EU to export a record 40mm tons of wheat for the 2022/23 market year, 6mm tons higher than its expected 2021/22 exports. Based on past trade patterns, these excesses will go to the Middle East, Northern and Sub-Saharan Africa. Strong USD Favors LatAm Exports US wheat exports will not be competitive this year or next, given the strong USD and relatively high prices (Chart 6). Additionally, this year’s winter-wheat crop will be affected by current drought conditions in the key Hard Red Winter wheat growing regions of Western Kansas, Colorado, Oklahoma and Texas. Canada faces a similar issue to its North American neighbor. Compared to other major wheat exporting states, it exports wheat at the second highest price, after the US. Furthermore, in 2021/22 Canadian wheat output is expected to be the lowest in 14 years following a warm and dry summer. The USDA expects strong Argentinian and Brazilian wheat exports in 2021/22. Compared to exports from the EU, US, Australia and Canada, wheat from these two sources is cheaper and hence will attract price sensitive bids from the Middle East and Africa. Chart 6US Wheat Remains Non-Competitive A strong USD will incentivize the LatAm giants’ wheat exports since their input costs are in local-currency terms and their revenues are in USD. While some countries have taken advantage of high wheat and food prices to increase exports, others have imposed restrictions or outright bans on exports, which will continue to drive prices higher. Kazakhstan, which constitutes nearly 5% of global wheat exports, now has a quota on such exports, which will affect Central Asian import markets. India was expected to constitute an uncharacteristically large share of wheat exports this year and next. However, the country is experiencing its hottest March in 122 years, which most likely will reduce its harvest this year and incentivize it to keep wheat stocks at home. The world’s second largest wheat producing and consuming nation expects a 6% drop in production this year.6 Fertilizer Costs Will Remain High … Countries’ abilities to increase production will depend on fertilizer availability and costs. The USDA cited high fertilizer prices as one of the causes for lower expected Australian wheat output in 2022/23. Prices of natural gas – the primary feedstock for fertilizers – took off like a rocket following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. High natgas prices feed directly into fertilizer costs (Chart 7). The EU's proposal to ban Russian oil imports could see Russia embargo natgas supply in retaliation, which would further spike natgas and fertilizer costs. This will have knock-on effects on all ags markets. Fertilizer export bans announced by Russia and China are another factor driving fertilizer prices higher (Chart 8). High fertilizer costs most likely will dissuade farmers from using fertilizers in volumes associated with more normal market conditions, and likely will cause them to wait on planting and treating acreage, which will lower crop quality or delay planting. Both scenarios will lead to higher crop prices (Chart 9). Chart 7High Natgas Prices Feeds Right Into Fertilizers Chart 8Russia, China Are Big Fertilizer Exporters Chart 9Nitrogen Fertilizer Prices Continue To Rise …As Do Shipping Costs Redrawing trade routes – i.e., finding new supplies and new shippers to compensate for the loss of Ukrainian wheat exports – will be expensive. For example, US grain shipping costs soared to an 8-year high after countries, led by China, dramatically increased soybean imports from the US due to a drought in Brazil.7 In 2021, high shipping costs led directly to higher food prices (Chart 10).8 Shipping, like any other commodity, is a function of supply and demand for different types of vessels capable of carrying grain from one part of the world to another. On the supply-side, port closures in China and the Black Sea are increasing port congestion, and making ships available for moving grains scarce. The Ukraine war has stranded ships in the Black Sea and forced merchants to re-route their shipments. This increases sailing times, which has the effect of contributing to supply scarcity in shipping markets. Fewer available ships, coupled with high fuel prices are keeping freight rates elevated. A low orderbook of expected new-vessel additions to the global shipping fleet in 2022 and 2023, along with guidance for ships to reduce speeds to increase fuel efficiency, will exacerbate current ship supply scarcity.9 On the demand side, the major international economic organizations have reduced 2022 GDP estimates due to lower economic activity. Lower economic activity will translate into lower ship demand and hence reduce prices (Chart 11). Chart 10Shipping Prices Remain Elevated Chart 11Shipping Demand Driven By Economic Activity   Shipping prices will drop meaningfully once port congestion clears. This will depend on the duration of COVID-19 in China and the evolution of the Russia-Ukraine war. A recession – the probability of which will increase if the EU bans Russian oil imports and Russia retaliates with its own natgas ban – acts as a downside risk to shipping costs. Investment Implications The gap in Black Sea wheat exports produced by the Russia-Ukraine war will require a ramp-up in other countries’ supply. Higher production is contingent on weather conditions and input costs. Changing weather patterns, due to climate change, will increase food insecurity, and make it more difficult to predict how ag markets – particularly grain trading – will handle this shock and other shocks down the road. We remain neutral agricultural commodities but will follow wheat and food market developments closely.   Ashwin Shyam Research Analyst Commodity & Energy Strategy ashwin.shyam@bcaresearch.com Paula Struk Research Associate Commodity & Energy Strategy paula.struk@bcaresearch.com Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com   Commodity Round-Up Energy: Bullish Going into the Northern Hemisphere's summer driving season, US retail gasoline prices are trading at record levels -- $4.328/gal ($181.78/bbl) as of 9 May 2022, according to the US Energy Information Administration (Chart 12). Regular gasoline (RBOB specification traded on the NYMEX) for delivery in the NY Harbor settled at $144.27/bbl ($3.4349/gal) on Tuesday, giving refiners a rough wholesale margin (versus Brent crude oil) of $41.81/bbl. Retail diesel fuel prices also have been extremely well bid, posting record highs as well of $5.623/gal ($236.17/bbl) on 9 May 2022 (Chart 13). On the NYMEX, the ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel contract for July delivery settled at $3.6793/gal ($154.53/bbl). Jet fuel prices also are extremely well bid, as demand increases against a backdrop of lower refinery output pushed NY Harbor prices to $7.61/gal ($319.62/bbl) on 4 April 2022. NY Harbor jet-fuel prices have been much stronger than US Gulf prices and European prices seen in the Amsterdam-Rotterdam-Antwerp (ARA) markets, which were averaging ~ $3.60/gal, according to the EIA. This is accounted for by robust demand – evident since mid-2021, when it recovered pandemic-induced losses – and lower-than-normal output of jet by refiners. Assuming the US does not go into a profound recession, refined-product markets likely will remain tight during the summer-driving season and into the rest of this year, in our estimation. As is the case with the Exploration & Production companies, refiners also have been parsimonious with their capex, which translates into lower capacity to meet demand. Base Metals: Bullish Per the latest US CFTC data, we believe hedge funds and speculators investing in copper are dismissing bullish micro fundamentals and are focusing on bearish macroeconomic factors, such as the probability of an economic slow down increases. This would explain why funds’ short positions have exceeded long positions for the first time since end-May 2020. We have written about medium-to-long-term bullish micro fundamentals at length in previous reports.10 On micro fundamentals, the Chilean constitutional assembly passed articles expanding environmental protection from mining over the weekend. These will be added to the draft constitution to be voted on in September. The article expanding state control in Chilean mining activity did not pass and will be renegotiated before being sent back to the constitutional assembly for a second vote. Uncertain governance will affect mining investment in the state, as BHP recently highlighted. Chart 12 Chart 13           Footnotes 1     Please see Wheat Production by Country 2022, published by worldpopulationreview.com. 2     Awika (2011) notes, "… cereal grains are the single most important source of calories to a majority of the world population. Developing countries depend more on cereal grains for their nutritional needs than the developed world. Close to 60% of calories in developing countries are derived directly from cereals, with values exceeding 80% in the poorest countries." Please see Joseph M. Awika (2011), "Major Cereal Grains Production and Use around the World," published by the American Chemical Society. The three most important grains in this regard are rice, corn and wheat. 3    Please see Egypt's Arab Spring: The bleak reality 10 years after the uprising, published by dw.com on January 25, 2021. 4    Please see First Ukrainian corn cargo leaves Romanian Black Sea port, published by Reuters on April 29, 2022. 5    All USDA estimates mentioned in this report are taken from the USDA’s Grain and Feed Annual for each country. 6    Please refer to After five record crops, heat wave threatens India’s wheat output, export plans, published by Reuters on May 2, 2022. 7     Please refer to U.S. Grain Shipping Costs Soar With War and Drought Swinging Demand, published by Bloomberg on March 18, 2022. 8    For a more detailed discussion, please refer to Risk of Persistent Food-Price Inflation, which we published on November 11, 2021. 9    For estimates of orderbook vessels in 2022/23 please see Shipping market outlook 2022 Container vs Dry bulk, published by IHS Markit on November 30, 2021; slower speeds could reduce effective shipping capacity by 3-5%, according to S&P Global (see Shipping efficiency targets could prompt slower speeds and reduced capacity: market sources). 10   For the latest on this, please see Copper Demand Will Ignore Recession, which we published on April 14, 2022.   Investment Views and Themes Recommendations   Recommendations: We are re-establishing our positions in XME, PICK and XOP, which were stopped out APRIL 22, 2022 with gains of 42.42%, 9.77% and 20.91%, respectively, at tonight's close. We also will be adding the VanEck Oil Refiners ETF (CRAK) to our recommendations, given our bullish view of the global refining sector. Strategic Recommendations   Trades Closed in 2022  
Executive Summary Ingredients For A Policy Mistake The hawks on the European Central Bank Governing Council have become vocal about a July rate hike. Such a move would be a policy mistake because European growth is weak, while inflation is supply-driven and will soften meaningfully. July 2022 hike is not yet certain. A policy mistake suggests that the current interest rate pricing for June 23 is too aggressive. Buy June 2023 Euribor contract. The serious risk of a policy mistake and the uncertainty surrounding Europe’s energy security confirm that investors should maintain a defensive stance in European assets. The pronounced threats to UK growth warrant a negative view on the pound.   Recommendation INCEPTION DATE RETURN SINCE INCEPTION (%) COMMENT Buy June 2023 Euribor contract 05/09/2022     Bottom Line: Stay defensive in Europe. The risk of a policy mistake is high. Only when inflation peaks should investors move into cyclical stocks.   In recent weeks, a chorus of ECB hawks expressed the need to increase rates as early as July 2022. Inflation data is on their side; HICP stands at 7.5% and core CPI has reached 3.5%, levels never seen since the introduction of the euro. Markets are responding. The ESTR curve is pricing in a positive ECB deposit rate for the October 2022 Governing Council meeting. We need to examine the underlying European economic picture to address two key questions: Will the ECB lift rates as early as July? And will doing so constitute a policy mistake that would hurt European assets? Weaker Growth Let’s start with the growth outlook. European economic activity is rapidly deteriorating. Real GDP growth in the Eurozone has slowed markedly. In Q1, real GDP growth fell to 0.2% quarter-on-quarter or an annualized rate of 0.8%. Worrisomely, Italy’s GDP contracted by -0.2% over that time frame and the very economically sensitive Swedish activity contracted by -0.4%, which suggests that Europe’s deceleration is only starting. Soft data confirm the flagging economic outlook on the continent. Consumer confidence is plunging to levels that are consistent with a recession, led by the collapse in the willingness to make large purchases (Chart 1, top panel). The ZEW as well as the Ifo survey confirm that growth expectations point to a very large decline in output (Chart 1, bottom panel). The weakness is also evident in hard data. High inflation erodes real household income, which squeezes consumer spending. Retail sales across Europe are slowing sharply, only growing at an annual rate of 0.8% while contracting -0.4% on a monthly basis; on a level basis, they are lower today than they were in June 2021. Meanwhile, German retail sales volumes are falling at a -5.4% annual rate. The situation is even worse for new car registrations, which are collapsing at an annual rate of 20.2% (Chart 2). Chart 1Soft Data Point To Soft Growth... Chart 2...So Do Hard Data Industrial production has not been spared. Euro Area IP softened to 2% annually in February and contractions are now visible in Germany and France. Some of this weakness reflects supply difficulties, but the -3.1% annual fall in German factory orders indicates that demand is frail too and that industrial production will shrink further in the months ahead (Chart 2, bottom panel). The deterioration in the global outlook further hurts Europe economic prospects. Our global growth tax indicator, based on energy prices, the dollar, and global bond yields, points toward a further deceleration in the global and US manufacturing PMI, it suggests Euro Area PMIs could fall below 50 (Chart 3). China woes continue to reverberate throughout the global economy. Potential supply constraints will hurt industrial production, but, more importantly, the weakness in China’s marginal propensity to consume (as measured by the gap between the growth rate of M1 relative to M2) predicts a much greater deterioration in European industrial orders, which means that the demand for European capital goods will slow (Chart 3, bottom panel). Chart 3Risks To The Downside Chart 4Tightening Financial Conditions European financial conditions are also tightening significantly. The iTraxx Crossover Index is rising swiftly. European high-yield corporate spreads are now above 450bps, levels that coincide with past recessions in the Euro Area (Chart 4). Government bond markets are increasingly under duress too. Italian BTPs now yield close to 200bps above German Bunds (Chart 4, bottom panel), which accentuates the periphery’s pain. Bottom Line: The Eurozone economy is slowing sharply. While Q1 GDP avoided a contraction, soft and hard data indicators suggest that Q2 is likely to record an actual output contraction for the whole Euro bloc. High Inflation, But For How Long? At first glance, European inflation numbers scream for an ECB rate hike, preferably one yesterday. However, the picture is not that clear-cut. Supply factors predominantly drive the Eurozone’s inflation surge. Chart 5 highlights the role of energy, utilities, food, and transportation costs in the HICP and shows that these factors account for more than 80% of the 7.5% HICP rate. Moreover, the fluctuations in energy CPI continue to explain most of the gyration in headline CPI. The close relationship between energy CPI and core CPI highlights an elevated degree of pass-though, the result of higher electricity and transportation costs (Chart 6). Chart 5Energy, Food And Transport Dominate European CPI Chart 6All About Energy Chart 7No Demand Pull-Inflation In Europe Unlike those in the US, Euro Area underlying inflation drivers are weak and inconsistent with demand-pull inflation. Wage growth in Europe stands at a paltry 1.6% annual rate, while in the US, the Atlanta Fed Wage Tracker has jumped to 4.5% (Chart 7, top panel). Moreover, Eurozone rent inflation remains stable at 1.2%, while it is a very elevated 4.5% in the US (Chart 7, bottom panel). The bifurcation in demand-driven inflation reflects vastly different output gaps between the two regions. US nominal GDP stands 2.5% above its 2014-2019 trend, while that of the Eurozone is still 5.3% below it. In the consumer durable goods sector, where the US experienced the greatest demand-supply mismatch – and therefore, the greatest inflation pressures – purchases are 25% above their 2014-2019 trend, while in Europe, they are still 9.5% below that trend (Chart 8) Year-on-year inflation prints should roll over this summer, as highlighted by weakening sequential inflation. Even if it remains elevated, the monthly Trimmed Mean CPI peaked last year. Energy inflation, moreover, is already contracting on a month-to-month basis (Chart 9). Chart 8Mind The Output Gap Chart 9Weakening Sequential Inflation Chart 10A Naive Inflation Forecast Simple simulation exercises also confirm that annual inflation will peak this summer (Chart 10). Monthly headline inflation averaged 0.11% from 2010 to 2019, 0.31% in the first half of 2021, and 0.55% from mid-2021 to January 2022. If we assume that monthly inflation prints remain in line with its most recent average, annual inflation will peak by year-end at 9.1%, before falling to 6.8% by April 2023. However, if monthly inflation falls back to an historically elevated monthly average of 0.31%, annual headline inflation will peak in September and fall back to 3.8% by April 2023. Similarly, if monthly core CPI averages 0.28%, annual core CPI will peak in October before declining to 3.4% by April 2023, but it will fall to 2.1% by April 2023, if monthly core CPI averages an historically elevated 0.17%, or the average observed in the first half of 2021 (Chart 10, bottom two panels). Chart 11A Conditional Inflation Forecast A more sophisticated exercise based on energy prices and the EUR/USD exchange rate also underlines the downside for Euro Area headline inflation. Energy inflation, which drives headline CPI, closely tracks the evolution of brent prices in euro terms and Deutsch natural gas prices. Assuming that natural gas prices average the historically very high level of €100/MWh over the next twelve months, that Brent averages US$95/bbl over that time frame (consistent with BCA’s commodity and energy team forecasts), and that the euro progressively moves back to EUR/USD1.10 by April 2023 (a weaker expectation than BCA’s Foreign Exchange Strategy team  anticipates), then the Eurozone’s energy inflation will collapse to -10% by April 2023 (Chart 11). We can also assume that Russia enacts a full energy embargo on Western Europe if Sweden and Finland apply for NATO membership. In this case, Brent would spike quickly to $140/bbl and natural gas to €250/MWh. In our scenario, prices stay elevated for two months, before they ultimately normalize by early 2023. Under this scenario, energy inflation would experience a spike to 80% (!) in June 2022 before falling back sharply. In all cases, the collapse in energy inflation is consistent with a rapid decline in headline inflation toward 2% in 2023. Bottom Line: European inflation is elevated but remains mainly driven by supply factors, particularly the evolution of energy inflation. Demand-pull inflation is minimal, unlike that in the US. Additionally, both core and headline inflations are set to peak in the coming months based on the evolution of sequential monthly inflation as well as the behavior of the energy market. A July ECB rate hike would constitute a policy mistake for three reasons: (i) the ECB has no control over supply-driven inflation; (ii) Eurozone inflation is set to weaken; and (iii) economic growth will remain poor. Investment Implications Despite the noise made by the hawks, a large amount of uncertainty around the July 2022 meeting’s outcome remains. It is easy to forget that the ECB’s decisions are consensual. Influential members such as Vice-President Luis de Guindos continues to see a July 2022 hike as possible but unlikely. Others, such as Executive Board member Fabio Panetta, are very worried about the Eurozone’s economic slowdown. Moreover, ECB President Christine Lagarde has not endorsed the hawks. In the context of weak growth and a potential top in inflation, achieving consensus about an early summer hike could be difficult. Chart 12Patience Would Be Rewarded The great paradox is that, if the ECB waits before pushing interest rates up, it will have an opportunity to increase rates durably next year. Wage growth is anemic today, but the decline in the Eurozone unemployment rate is consistent with a pickup in salaries in 2023 (Chart 12). Moreover, if energy inflation slows, the relative price-shock that is hurting households and domestic demand will ebb, which will allow consumption to recover. Patience would give Europe strength and the ECB a very strong basis to lift rates sustainably. The hawks will sway the council to their views. Inflation has latency, which means that its inertia may cause HICP to remain elevated beyond this summer. Moreover, the EU’s proposed ban on Russian oil imports along with Sweden’s and Finland’s likely accession-demand to NATO in the upcoming weeks could provoke Russia to strike first by cutting all its energy export to the EU to zero immediately. This would lift inflation for somewhat longer, as we showed in Chart 9. Related Report  European Investment StrategyThe Three Forces Hurting European Earnings In response to the significant risk of a rate hike, we continue to recommend investors stay short cyclical stocks relative to defensive ones. Moreover, if the risk of a Russian energy cutoff increases, so does the threat of a severe recession in Europe, as a recent Bundesbank study posits (Chart 13). Capital preservation is paramount in today’s context; thus, we continue to lean on the side of prudence, especially considering Europe’s soft profit outlook. Once risks recede, we will abandon this strategy. This decision, however, would require clarification of Sweden and Finland’s decision about their membership in NATO as well as Russia’s response, a confirmation that the ECB is not hiking rates in July, and a pullback in inflation surprises, which would prove a powerful help for European equities and the cyclicals/defensive split (Chart 14). Chart 13The Russian Embargo Risk Chart 14Wait For Inflation To Turn In fact, our view that inflation will peak leads to direct implications for European markets. The periods that followed the previous four peaks in European core inflation were associated with an outperformance of small-cap stocks and cyclical stocks over the subsequent six and twelve months as well as declines in German yields and narrower credit spreads (Table 1A). The sectoral implications were not as clear, but industrials enjoyed an edge, while healthcare stocks suffered marked declines. Our conviction is strongest that energy CPI will fall. Again, this environment is associated with an outperformance of small-caps stocks and cyclicals over the following six months (Table 1B). Sector-wise, energy names suffer in this climate along with defensives, especially communication services equities. Table 1APeaks In Core CPI & Subsequent European Asset Performance Table 1BPeaks In Energy CPI & Subsequent European Asset Performance Looking at this period of disinflation more broadly rather than just following peaks in inflation, we find similar results. Declining core CPI is associated with an outperformance of cyclicals relative to defensives as well as strength in small-cap equities (Table 2A). This larger sample allows for a clearer view of sectors. Specifically, the performance of industrials and tech relative to the broad market improves markedly, while utilities suffer greatly. We reach roughly similar conclusions when energy CPI is contracting, except that, in this instance, energy stocks also underperform (Table 2B). Interestingly, so do financial companies. This is a surprising result, but previous instances of weaker energy CPI in the sample reflected weaker demand, not an evolving supply shock. Weaker aggregate demand always hurts financials.  Table 2ADisinflation & Subsequent European Asset Performance Table 2BEnergy Deflation & Subsequent European Asset Performance Bottom Line: The risk of a policy mistake at the July ECB meeting is elevated. A policy mistake suggests that the current interest rate pricing for June 23 is too aggressive. Buy June 2023 Euribor contract. Moreover, Russian energy exports are still under threat. Accordingly, we continue to emphasize capital preservation and favor defensives over cyclicals. However, a buying opportunity will emerge rapidly once inflation peaks, especially if the ECB follows our base case. At this point, investors should buy small-cap and cyclical stocks. Industrials will beat energy, while all the defensive sectors will suffer. The BoE’s Tough Choice The Bank of England is stuck between a rock and a hard place. UK inflation shares characteristics of that of both the Eurozone and the US. On the one hand, energy inflation is increasing and could push headline CPI into double-digit territory around October 2022, once fuel subsidies fully expire. On the other hand, wage growth is strong as labor supply elasticity declined after Brexit. Demand-pull inflation is also rampant, which has pushed core CPI to a 5.7% annual rate. The UK’s cost push inflation, along with the growth slowdown in Europe and increasing tax rates are likely to cause a recession in the UK over the coming twelve months. The demand-pull inflation, however, will force the BoE to hike interest rates. This accentuates the downside risk to UK economic activity. Chart 15BoE's First Victim: The Pound The obvious victim of this configuration is the pound. Weak growth will prevent the BoE from matching the pace of rate hikes of the Fed and poor economic growth will detract from investments in the UK. As a result, we see further downside in GBP/USD (Chart 15). BCA’s FX strategy team is also selling the pound versus the euro. This position is likely to generate further gains as investors will revise down their views for UK economic activity relative to the Euro Area, since they already hold much more dire expectations for the latter than the former. Bottom Line: EUR/GBP possesses more upside. The growth outlook for the Eurozone is poor, but investors currently overestimate the growth path of the UK relative to that of its southern neighbor.   Mathieu Savary, Chief European Strategist Mathieu@bcaresearch.com Tactical Recommendations Cyclical Recommendations Structural Recommendations
Special Report Executive Summary The US Still Dominates Economic Output While the Ukraine war has been positive for the greenback, there is a slow tectonic shift away from the dollar as China rethinks holding concentrated foreign currency reserves. In the near term, the dollar faces positive macro variables and still-rising geopolitical tensions. Longer term, as global trade slows and countries gravitate into regional trading blocs, the dollar will need to fall to narrow the US trade deficit. By the same token, the Chinese RMB could weaken in the near term but will stabilize longer term. China will promote its currency across Asia. Currency volatility will take a step-function higher in this new paradigm. Winners will be the currencies of small open economies, especially in resource-rich nations. Trade Recommendation Inception Date Return LONG GOLD 2019-12-06 27.7% Bottom Line: Cyclical forces continue to underpin the dollar, such as rising US interest rates, a slowdown in global growth, and a safe haven premium from still-high geopolitical tensions. That said, the dollar is overbought, expensive, and vulnerable to reserve diversification over the longer term. While tactical long positions make sense, strategic investors should not chase the dollar higher. Feature Currency market action this week focused on two key central bank meetings: the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England. The Fed raised rates by 50 basis points while the BoE raised by 25 points, yet the market expectation differs. In the US, markets imply that the Fed can keep real interest positive while engineering a soft landing in the economy. In the UK (and Euro Area), markets see more acute stagflationary risks and assign a higher probability to a policy error. This situation, together with rising geopolitical risk, has put a bid under the dollar. Related Report  Commodity & Energy StrategyDie Cast By EU: Inflation, Recession Risks Rise Brewing in the background is the prospect that the Ukraine war and US sanctions on Russia could have longer-term consequences on the dollar. Specifically, Russia and China are now locked into a geopolitical partnership to undermine US geopolitical dominance, including the dollar’s supremacy. While this discussion will inevitably come with some speculation about what will happen in the future, what does the evidence say so far? More importantly, what are some profitable investment opportunities that could arise from any shift? The Russo-Chinese Rebellion Chart 1The US Needs To Externally Finance Defense Spending From Russia’s and China’s point of view, the United States threatens to establish global hegemony. The US possesses the world’s largest economy and most sophisticated military. It has largely maintained its preponderance in these spheres despite the rise of China, the resurgence of Russia, and the formation of the European Union as a geopolitical entity (Chart 1). If the US succeeds in its current endeavor of crippling Russia’s economy and surrounding it with NATO military allies, the world will be even more imbalanced in terms of power, while China will be isolated and insecure. To illustrate this point, NATO’s military spending is much higher than that of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which is not nearly as developed a military alliance (Chart 2). Hence Russia and China believe they must take action to counter the US and establish a global balance of power. When Presidents Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping met on February 4 to declare that their strategic partnership will suffer “no limits,” which means no military limits, they declared a new multipolar era and warned against US domination under the guise of liberalism. If China allows Putin to fail in his conflict with the West, the Russian regime will eventually undergo a major leadership and policy change and China will become isolated. Whereas if China accepts Russia’s current strategic overture, China will be fortified. Russia can be immensely supportive of China’s Eurasian strategy to bypass US maritime dominance and improve supply security (Chart 3). Chart 2NATO Vs SCO: US Threat Of Dominance The consequence of this Russo-Chinese alliance will be to transact in a currency that falls outside sanctions by the US. This will be no easy feat. The US dollar still monopolizes the world’s monetary system, even though the US is likely to lose economic clout over time.  Chart 3China Cannot Reject Russia​​​​​ De-Dollarization And A Brewing USD Crisis? Fact Versus Fiction A reserve currency must serve the three basic functions of money on a global scale – providing a store of value, unit of account, and accepted medium of exchange. This status gives the dominant reserve currency an “exorbitant privilege,” a range of advantages including the ability to run persistent current account deficits and impose devastating sanctions on geopolitical rivals. Since the turn of the century, the US has struggled to maintain domestic political stability and has failed to deter challenges to its global leadership posed by Russia, China, and lesser powers. Lacking public support for foreign military adventures after Iraq and Afghanistan, Washington turned to economic sanctions to try to influence the behavior of other states. The results have been mixed in terms of geopolitics but cumulatively they have been neutral or positive for the trade-weighted dollar. The US adopted harsh sanctions against North Korea in 2005, Iran in 2010, Russia in 2012, Venezuela in 2015, and China in 2018. The primary trend in the dollar was never altered (Chart 4). Chart 4A Chronicle Of Sanctions And The Dollar Yet sweeping sanctions against Russia and China are qualitatively different from other sanctions– as they are among the world’s great powers. The extraordinary sanctions on Russia in 2022 – including cutting off its access to US dollar reserves – have proven deeply unsettling for China and other nations that fear they might someday end up on the wrong side of the US’s foreign policy. Russia’s own experience proves that diversification away from the dollar is likely to occur. From a peak of 47% in 2007, Russia reduced its dollar-denominated foreign exchange reserves to 16%. It cut its Treasury holdings from a peak of over 35% of international reserves to less than 1% today. Meanwhile Russia increased its gold holdings from 2% in 2008 to 20% (Chart 5). The Russians accelerated their diversification away from the dollar after invading Ukraine in 2014 to reduce the impact of sanctions. However, the world is familiar with Russian economic isolation. The West embargoed the USSR throughout the Cold War from 1949-1991. The dollar rose to prominence during this period, so it is not intuitive that Russia’s latest withdrawal from the global economy will enable other countries to abandon the dollar when they have failed in the past due to lack of alternatives. What is clear is that there is no clean or easy exit today from a dollar-denominated financial system. But there are a few lessons from Russia: The ruble has recouped all the losses since the implementation of sanctions. It runs a large current account surplus and has stemmed capital outflows. Another factor has been a sharp reduction in its dependence on the dollar. This will cushion the inflationary impact of US sanctions. Going forward, Russia will be much more insulated from the US dollar but at a terrible cost to potential economic growth (Chart 6). A dearth of US dollar capex into Russia will cripple productivity growth. The lesson for other US rivals will be to take economic stability into account when engaging in geopolitical rivalry.  Chart 5Russia Was Able To Dump Treasurys... The dollar has been unfazed by the Russian debacle. The victims have been other reserve currencies such as the euro, British pound, and Japanese yen, which are engulfed in an energy crisis from Russia’s actions.  Chart 6...But The Economic Impact Will Remain Severe​​​​​​ The key question that matters for investors will be what China will do. As one of the largest holders of US Treasurys, a destabilizing exit would have dramatic currency market impacts and could backfire on China. The trick will be to continue exiting this system without precipitating domestic instability. What Will China Do? China has learned two critical lessons from the Russo-Ukrainian conflict, with regard to raising the appeal of the RMB. First, the economic impact of US sanctions can still be devastating even when you have diversified out of dollars. Second, access to commodities is ever more important. As such, any strategy China chooses will need to mitigate these risks. China started diversifying away from the dollar in 2011 and today holds $1.05 trillion in US Treasurys. A little less than half of its foreign exchange reserves are denominated in dollars (Chart 7). This has been a gradual diversification that has not upended the current monetary regime. More importantly, China’s diversification accounts for the bulk of the shift by non-allies away from treasuries. Their share of foreign-held treasuries has fallen from 41% in 2009 to 23% today (Chart 8). Chart 7China Has Lowered USD Reserve Holdings​​​​​​ Chart 8US Allies Still Willing To Hold USDs...​​​​​​ China’s diversification has helped drive down the overall foreign share of US government debt holdings (excluding domestic central banks) from close to 50% in the middle of the last decade to 36% today (Chart 9). It has also weighed on the dollar. China can and will speed up its diversification from the dollar in the wake of the Ukraine war. While Americans will say that China only need fear such sanctions if it attacks Taiwan or other countries, China will not rest assured. Beijing must respond to US capability, not the Biden Administration’s stated intentions. A new Republican administration could arise as soon as January 2025 and take the offensive against China. The US and China are already engaged in great power rivalry and Beijing cannot afford to substitute hope for strategy. China ran a $224 billion current account surplus in 2021, so part of its strategy could be to reduce the pool of savings that need to be recycled every year into global assets. Since 2007 China has sent large amounts of outward direct investment into the world to acquire real assets and natural resources. The Xi administration tried to bring coherence to this outward investment by prioritizing different countries and investments adhere to China’s economic and strategic aims. The Belt and Road Initiative is the symbol of this process (Chart 10). Going forward, China will continue this process. It will also recycle more of its savings at home by increasing investment in critical industries such as energy security, semiconductors, and defense. Chart 9...But A Slow Diversification From US Debt Persists The key priorities will remain a Eurasian strategy of circumventing the US navy. Building natural gas pipelines and other infrastructure to link up with Russia is an obvious area of emphasis, although it will involve tough negotiations with Moscow. China will also prioritize Central Asia, the Middle East, South Asia, and mainland Southeast Asia as areas where its influence can grow with limited intervention by the US and its allies (Chart 11). Chart 10The Belt And Road Initiative In Progress​​​​​​   Chart 11China Outward Investment Will Need To Be Strategic Chart 12The RMB Could Dominate Intra-Regional Asean Trade As China invests more at home and in other countries, financing and invoicing deals in the renminbi will grow. While the dollar is the transactional currency globally, it is far less relevant when considering local trading blocs. The euro dominates intra-European trade, suggesting China can try to expand RMB invoicing for intra-Asian trade (Chart 12). Even then, however, the yuan faces serious obstacles from China’s inability or unwillingness to extend security guarantees to its partners, failure shift the economic model to consumerism, persistent currency controls, closed capital account, and geopolitical competition with the United States. Investors should pay close attention to shifts occurring at the margin. The number of bilateral swap lines offered to foreign central banks by the People’s Bank of China has grown (Chart 13), with a total amount of around 4 trillion yuan. This allows the PBoC to use its massive foreign exchange reserves, worth about US$3.2 trillion, to back yuan liabilities. As China continues to grow and increases the share of RMB trade within its sphere of influence, the yuan will rise as an invoicing currency (Chart 14). This could take years, even decades, but a shift is already underway. Chart 13The People's Bank Of Asia?​​​​​​ Chart 14China Is Growing In Economic Importance​​​​​​ In the near term, any US sanctions on China will hurt the RMB. Combined with hypo-globalization, China’s zero-Covid policy, narrowing interest rate differentials, and flight from Chinese assets, it is too soon to be positive on the RMB in the context of US-China confrontation (Chart 15). Longer term, China’s ability to ascend the reserve currency ladder will require a more radical change in Chinese policy to move the dollar. Chart 15CNY And US Sanctions Where Does The Euro Fit In? The biggest competitor to the US dollar is the euro, which took the largest chunk out of the US’s share of the global currency reserve basket in recent decades (Chart 16). Yet the EU could suffer a long-term loss of security, productivity, and stability from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the ensuing energy cutoff with Russia. Chart 16The Dollar Remains A Reserve Currency The EU will have to spend more on energy security and national defense. This will lead to an increase in debt securities that other countries could buy, which offers a way for countries to diversify from the dollar. However, Europe does not provide China or Russia with protection from US sanctions. The EU is allied with the US, it imposed sanctions on Russia along with the US, and like the US is pursuing extra-territorial law enforcement with its sanctions. When the US withdrew from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, the EU disagreed technically, but in practice it enforced the sanctions anyway. The euro is hardly a safer reserve currency than sterling or the yen for countries looking to quarrel with the United States. The fact is that all of these allied states are likely to cooperate together in the event that any other state attempts to revise the global order as Russia has done. Not necessarily because they are democracies and share similar values but because they derive their national security from the US and its alliance system. The takeaway is that the euro will become a buying opportunity if and when the security environment stabilizes. Then diversification into the euro will occur. But it will not become a landslide that unseats the dollar, since the euro will still have a higher geopolitical risk premium. Investment Takeaways The historical evidence suggests that US sanctions have not weighed on the dollar. In the case of the Russo-Ukrainian conflict, it has been positive for the greenback. That said, there is a slow tectonic shift from the dollar, as each economic powerhouse evaluates the merits of holding concentrated foreign currency reserves. In the near term, the dollar will continue to be driven by traditional economic variables – global growth, real interest rate differentials, and the resilience of the US economy. That remains a positive. Geopolitical tensions reinforce the dollar’s current rally. Longer term, as globalization deteriorates and countries gravitate into regional trading blocs, the dollar will need to adjust lower to narrow the US trade deficit. By the same token, the RMB could weaken in the near term but will need to stabilize longer term, if Beijing wants it to be considered an anchor and store of value for other Asian currencies. Chart 17Silver Demand Could Explode Higher As Currency Volatility Rises The key takeaway is that currency volatility will take a step-function higher in this new paradigm. The winners could be the currencies of small open economies, especially in resource-rich nations. A world in which economic powers increasingly pursue national interests is likely to be inflationary. These powers will deplete the external pool of global savings, as current account balances wind down in favor of national and strategic interests. They will also likely encourage the demand for anti-fiat assets as currency volatility takes a step-function higher. Gold is likely to do well is this environment, but silver could be on the cusp of an explosion higher. The metal has found some measure of support around $22-23 per ounce even as manufacturing bottlenecks have hammered industrial demand. Long-only investors should hold both gold and silver, but a short gold/silver position makes sense both economically and from a valuation standpoint (Chart 17). Geopolitical Housekeeping: We are closing our Long FTSE 100 / Short DM-ex-US Equities trade for a gain of 19.5%. We still favor this trade cyclically and will look to reinstate it at a future date. We are also booking gains on our short TWD-USD trade for a return of 5.8% — though we remain short Taiwanese equities and continue to expect a fourth Taiwan Strait geopolitical crisis.   Chester Ntonifor Foreign Exchange Strategist chestern@bcaresearch.com 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
Special Report Executive Summary Europe's Largest Import Bill: Oil The EU crossed the Rubicon this week, proposing to eliminate Russian oil imports within six months. The speed of putting the sanctions into effect, and Russia’s retaliation, will be critical to whether the world endures continued inflationary pressures or whether a global recession ensues. Russia indicated it will launch its own round of sanctions in the near future, which could profoundly affect not only global oil and gas markets, but once again induce input price shocks to electricity markets – which will hit firms and households again with higher prices – and agricultural markets. Turmoil in commodity markets has opened a policy debate over whether the world will be forced to migrate to a new monetary order based on access to commodities and control of commodity flows, which would replace the fiat-money architecture that succeeded the post-WWII Bretton Woods system. This debate draws together numerous trends – the centrality of commodities to price levels and inflation; central-bank policy; failed regulation at commodity exchanges; and commodity scarcity due to weak capex. Bottom Line: Commodity markets are changing rapidly as fundamentals adapt to supply tightness and an extremely erratic demand recovery.  However, this does not mark the beginning of a new Bretton Woods era.  Markets adapt quickly to changing fundamentals and that will continue. Feature With its proposal this week to ban the import of Russian oil, the EU crossed the Rubicon and now will prepare for an escalation of its economic war with Russia. Oil imports are, by far, the EU's largest energy import expense, and Russia is its largest supplier (Chart 1). Russian natural gas exports to Europe account for 74% of its total natgas exports, although natgas comprises a much smaller share of Russia’s revenue than oil (Chart 2). In a pecuniary sense, oil is far more important, but in an economic sense gas is more meaningful for Europe. Chart 1Europe's Largest Import Bill: Oil Chart 2Russia's Largest Market: Europe Russia produced 10.1mm b/d of crude and condensates in 2021. Of the 4.7mm b/d of this that Russia exported, OECD Europe was its largest customer, at 50% of total, according to the US EIA. If Russia's production is curtailed by roughly 1mm b/d this year and next year due to sanctions, we estimate Brent prices could reach $120/bbl. Losing 1.8mm this year and another 700k b/d next year could push Brent prices above $140/bbl (Chart 3). On the natgas side, one-third of the ~ 25 Tcf of Russian production last year was exported via pipeline or as LNG, based on 2021 data from the EIA. This amounted to almost 9 Tcf. Most of this – 74% – was exported via pipeline to the OECD Europe. These are dedicated volumes flowing through Russia's network into Europe. Until the Power of Siberia pipeline is expanded – likely over the next 2-3 years — this gas will not be available for export. Chart 3Losing Russian Oil Exports Will Push Prices Sharply Higher Oil and gas exports last year accounted for close to 40% of the Russian government's budget. Crude and product revenue last year came in at just under $180 billion, while pipeline and LNG shipments of natgas accounted for close to $62 billion of the Russian government's revenues. Clearly, the stakes are extremely high for Russia if Europe embargoes oil imports. Escalation Of Economic War Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak last month threatened to shut off Russian exports of natural gas if the EU cut off oil imports. Whether – or how quickly – that threat is acted upon will be critical for Europe. Speculation around the EU's proposal to embargo oil imports of all kinds from Russia centers on the ban becoming effective by the end of this week, with a six-month phase-down of imports.1 It is still possible that the sanctions will be vetoed and revised. But with Germany changing its position and now willing to embargo oil, it is only a matter of time before the majority of the EU cuts off Russian oil imports. In response, Russia will launch its own round of embargoes, which could profoundly affect not only global oil and gas markets, but once again induce input-price shocks to electricity markets – which will hit household budgets and base-metals smelters and refiners – and agricultural markets, given the large share of natgas in fertilizers (Chart 4). It is not difficult to imagine base-metals refining operations closing again in Europe, along with crop-planting delays rising.2 On the back of this collateral damage from the cut-off of Russian oil and gas exports, we would expect inflation and inflation expectations to take another leg up. This comes against a backdrop in which central banks led by the US Fed already have initiated a rate-hiking program to address inflation that is running far hotter than previously forecast. Chart 4Tight Natgas Markets Drive Fertilizer/Grain Prices Higher Power, Fertilizer, Base Metals Could Be Shocked By Russian Cut-Offs Policymakers Reassess Commodities This turmoil in commodity markets has ignited a policy debate over whether the world will be forced to migrate to a new monetary order. The new order, so the argument goes, would be based on access to commodities and control of commodity flows and would replace the fiat-money architecture that succeeded the post-WWII Bretton Woods system. This debate draws together numerous trends – the centrality of commodities to price levels and inflation; central-bank policy; failed regulation at commodity exchanges; non-USD invoicing and funding; and commodity scarcity – particularly in industrial commodities like oil, natgas and metals due to weak capex over almost a decade. The debates around these different crises are being framed around the heightened geopolitical awareness of the critical role of commodities in the language of financial markets. This is a novel innovation; however, it essentially is an argument by analogy and can obfuscate underlying causes and effects. Bretton Woods III In The Offing? Following WW II, the US and other advanced economies launched the Bretton Woods system, under which the US would operate and maintain a commodity-money regime – i.e., the gold standard – that maintained convertability of USD to gold upon demand. This post-World War II Bretton Woods (BW) system – call it BWI – remained in place until the early 1970s and made the USD the preeminent currency in the world during that period. Literally, the system, operated by the Fed, made the USD "as good as gold." That didn't last, as US domestic exigencies – the Vietnam War and the War on Poverty – forced the US to abandon gold-convertibility and adopt a fiat-money system to finance these multiple wars. Nevertheless the dollar retained its centrality to global markets. Call this fiat system BWII. As of 2022, the dollar remains the world’s dominant reserve currency, accounting for ~ 60% of the $12.25 trillion of foreign exchange reserves, according to IMF data (Chart 5).3 As a vehicle currency, it accounts for close to 90% of daily FX trading – amounting to ~ $6 trillion/day of turnover. The dollar also is the preeminent funding and invoice currency. Trade invoicing denominated in USD accounts for 93% of imports and 97% of exports worldwide. Chart 5USD Remains Dominant Reserve Currency According to the WTO, global trade in 2019 (just before the COVID-19 pandemic) was just shy of $19 trillion (Chart 6). This global dominance of the USD means the dollar’s funding-currency role “mediates the transmission of U.S. monetary policy to global financing conditions.”4 This has been the case for the 23 years since the creation of the euro, including the periods before and after the 2008 global financial crisis. Chart 6USD Dominates World Trade The dollar’s importance to the global economy has only grown since the BWI era.5 Obstfeld notes US gross external assets and liabilities relative to GDP “grow sharply (but roughly commensurately) up until the global financial crisis, reaching ratios to GDP in the neighborhood of 150 percent. Since then, assets have levelled off but liabilities have continued to grow.” The dollar faces a range of challenges, as we discuss below, but any discussion must begin with its resilience as the top currency – a resilience that spans the creation of the euro, the rise of China, vast US budget and trade deficits, multiple rounds of quantitative easing, and political instability in Washington. A Return To Commodity-Based Money? The full power of the Fed's role at the center of the global monetary system – as a reserve currency and as the preeminent medium for funding and invoicing trade – was revealed following the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. The US froze Russian foreign reserves, denied it access to the international SWIFT payments system, and imposed sanctions on Russian firms and individuals, and anyone trading with them. Following the US actions, Russia's economy was partially frozen out of global trade, banking and finance. Western partners abandoned their Russian investments, taking their capital and technology out of the country. Outside of the sanctions, individual firms such as refiners, shippers and trading companies “self-sanctioned” their dealings with Russia, and refused to handle inbound or outbound Russian commodities. Given the US capability revealed, and the threat posed to other countries should the US sanction them in a likely manner, new risks to the dollar system will emerge. The primacy of the USD, and the Fed's role in maintaining its central banking position to the world, are by no means assured. Indeed, other states – namely China – will try to insulate themselves from similar sanctions. India is apparently willing to trade with Russia in rubles. Saudi Arabia is exploring being paid in RMB for oil exports to China and a wide range of states could increase their acceptance of RMB at least to cover their growing trade with China. China has been pushing hard to have its RMB recognized and used as a global reserve currency, and a trade-invoicing and trade-funding currency. For this to happen, China also would have to allow its currency to become a vehicle currency – i.e., the anchor leg in FX trading. Zoltan Pozsar, a Credit Suisse analyst, recently penned an article exploring the new terrain exposed by the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the US and EU responses.6 For Pozsar, "Commodity reserves will be an essential part of Bretton Woods III, and historically wars are won by those who have more food and energy supplies – food to fuel horses and soldiers back in the day, and food to fuel soldiers and fuel to fuel tanks and planes today." Pozsar avers that his formulation of Bretton Woods III will reverse the disinflation created by globalization, and "serve up an inflationary impulse (de-globalization, autarky, just-in-case hoarding of commodities and duplication of supply chains, and more military spending to be able to protect whatever seaborne trade is left)." These conclusions are similar to conclusions we have reached over the course of the past few years, as it became increasingly apparent that the US was losing geopolitical clout relative to rising powers, mainly China, and that the international system was becoming multipolar and unstable. The Ukraine war confirmed the new environment of Great Power Rivalry. Nation-states will indeed amass and hoard commodities as they will need to gird for battle as this rivalry heats up. Preparation for war and war itself are historically inflationary (Chart 7). Chart 7War And Preparation For War Are Inflationary However, countries still have to pay for commodities in a currency that exporters are willing to receive. Yet the biggest global oil and food exporters depend on the US for their security, except Russia. Even in base metals the US wields extraordinary influence over the non-aligned exporters. These states could reduce their dollar invoicing to cover their share of trade with countries outside the West, but their national security alliances and partnerships imply a hard-to-change view on which economies and currencies will be most stable over the long run. The dollar is again preeminent. China unquestionably wants to diversify away from the dollar. But China’s trade partners will have a limit on how much yuan cash they are willing to hold. If they want to recycle this cash into China’s economy, China must open its capital account. But this would reduce the Communist Party’s control of the domestic economy due to the Impossible Trinity (the yuan would have to float freely). So until China makes this change, the world is stuck in today’s monetary system. By contrast, if China totally closes its system due to domestic or foreign political threats, then the world faces a recession and investors will not be rushing to sell the dollar. For now China is trying to have it both ways: maintaining large foreign exchange reserves while gradually diversifying away from the dollar (Chart 8). China selling off its Treasury holdings and dollar reserves, which began in the aftermath of the Great Recession, is the biggest monetary shift since 1999, when the euro emerged and China’s purchases of Treasuries began to surge due to trade surpluses on the back of its joining the WTO. But there is little basis for China or anyone else to abandon fiat currencies and return to the gold standard. Fiat currencies enable states to control the money supply and hence to try to control their economies and societies. The Chinese are the least likely to abandon fiat currency given their laser focus on employment, manufacturing, and social stability. China is a commodity importer, so that if it seeks to amass commodities as strategic reserves in the midst of a commodity boom, it will pay top price. This means the yuan would need to be kept strong. But in fact China is allowing the yuan to depreciate, as it would face higher unemployment and instability if domestic demand were further suppressed by a rising yuan. China is already undergoing a painful transition away from export orientation – and Beijing has already acknowledged that de-industrialization should slow down because it poses a sociopolitical threat (Chart 9). A monetary revolution that strengthens the yuan at the expense of the dollar would force an immediate conclusion to China’s transition away from export-manufacturing. That would be politically destabilizing. Chart 8China Diversifies from USD - But Closed Capital Account Prevents Global RMB Chart 9Stronger RMB Would De-Industrialize China At Great Political Risk If China or other countries attempt to create a commodity base for their currencies, but simultaneously try to prevent a fixed exchange rate that constrains their money supply, then there will be little difference from a fiat currency regime. Today’s major reserve currency issuers already possess reserves of physical wealth (e.g. commodities) beneath their flexible monetary policy regimes – this dynamic would not inherently change. Of course, Europe, Japan, and the United Kingdom are the leading providers of reserve currencies outside the US and yet they are relatively lacking in commodity reserves. If global investors begin chasing currencies primarily on the basis of commodity reserves, the USD will not suffer the most, as the United States is a resource-rich country. China’s policy and strategy may become clearer after the twentieth party congress this fall, but most likely the current contradictions will persist. China will want to prolong the period of economic engagmeent with the West for as long as possible even as it prepares for a time when engagement is utterly broken. While China knows that the US will pursue strategic containment, and US-China engagement is over, it also knows that European leaders have a different set of interests. They have enough difficulty dealing with Russia and are not eager to expand their sanctions to China. Yet switching from dollar to euro reserves offers China little protection against sanctions in any major confrontation in the coming years. A radical decision by China to buy high and sell low (realize big losses on Treasuries and buy high-priced commodities) would show that Beijing is expecting Russian-style confrontation with the West immediately, which would scare foreign investors away from China. Net foreign direct investment in China has surged since the downfall of the Trump presidency (Chart 10). But that process would reverse as companies saw China going down Russia’s path and disengaging from the global monetary system. In that context, western governments would also penalize their own companies for investing in a geopolitical rival that was apparently preparing for conflict (while buttressing Russia). In short, private capital will flee countries that abandon the global financial system because that would be an economically inefficient decision taken for reasons of state security, and hence it would imply higher odds of conflict. Wealthy nations see China’s and other emerging markets’ foreign exchange reserves as “collateral” against asset seizures and geopolitical risks: if China reduces the collateral, private capital will feel less secure flowing into China.7 Chart 10If China Abandonds USD To Prepare For Sanctions, FDI Will Reverse Ultimately China will try to wean itself off the dollar – but it will keep doing so gradually to avoid a catastrophic social and economic change at home and abroad. This is continuation of post-2008 status quo. An accelerated shift away from USD will be interpreted by global actors as preparation for war (just like Russia’s shift). This will drive investors to swap Chinese assets for American or other assets. History suggests that USD devaluations followed US wars and budget expansions. Investors should wait until the next US military adventure, in Iran or elsewhere, before expecting massive dollar depreciation. If the US pursues an offshore balancing strategy, as it appears to be doing today, then other countries will become less stable and the dollar will remain appealing as a safe haven. Bottom Line: Russia’s and China’s diversification away from the dollar over the past decade has not caused global flight from the dollar. International trust in the economy and government of Russia and China is not very high. The euro, the viable alternative to the dollar, is less attractive in the face of the Ukraine war and broader geopolitical instability. The path toward monetary revolution is for China to open up its capital account, make its currency convertible, and sell USD assets while appreciating the yuan. Yet China’s leaders have not embarked on this course for fear of domestic instability. In lieu of that, the current monetary regime continues.     Robert P. Ryan Chief Commodity & Energy Strategist rryan@bcaresearch.com Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com     Footnotes 1     Please see Brussels proposes EU import ban on all Russian oil published by ft.com on May 4, 2022 for summary of the EU's export-ban proposals. 2     Please see our report from March 31, 2022 entitled Germany Closer To Rationing Natgas for further discussion. It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 3    See Obstfeld, Maurice (2020), Global Dimensions of U.S. Monetary Policy, International Journal of Central Banking, 16:1, pp. 73-132. 4    Obstfeld (2020, p. 113). 5    Obstfeld (2020, p. 77-78). 6    Please see Pozsar, Zoltan (2022), "Money, Commodities, and Bretton Woods III," published by Credit Suisse Economics. 7     For the “collateral” interpretation of US dollar-denominated foreign exchange reserves, see Michael P. Dooley, David Folkerts-Landau, and Peter M. Garber, “US Sanctions Reinforce The Dollar’s Dominance,” NBER Working Paper Series 29943, April 2022, nber.org.  
Executive Summary German GeoRisk Indicator Russia and Germany have begun cutting off each other’s energy in a major escalation of strategic tensions. The odds of Finland and Sweden joining NATO have shot up. A halt to NATO enlargement, particularly on Russia’s borders, is Russia’s chief demand. Tensions will skyrocket. China’s reversion to autocracy and de facto alliance with Russia are reinforcing the historic confluence of internal and external risk, weighing on Chinese assets. Geopolitical risk is rising in South Korea and Hong Kong, rising in Spain and Italy, and flat in South Africa. France’s election will lower domestic political risk but the EU as a whole faces a higher risk premium. The Biden administration is doubling down on its defense of Ukraine, calling for $33 billion in additional aid and telling Russia that it will not dominate its neighbor. However, the Putin regime cannot afford to lose in Ukraine and will threaten to widen the conflict to intimidate and divide the West. Trade Recommendation Inception Date Return LONG GLOBAL DEFENSIVES / CYCLICALS EQUITIES 2022-01-20 14.2% Bottom Line: Stay long global defensives over cyclicals. Feature Chart 1Geopolitical Risk And Policy Uncertainty Drive Up Dollar The dollar (DXY) is breaking above the psychological threshold of 100 on the back of monetary tightening and safe-haven demand. Geopolitical risk does not always drive up the dollar – other macroeconomic factors may prevail. But in today’s situation macro and geopolitics are converging to boost the greenback (Chart 1). Global economic policy uncertainty is also rising sharply. It is highly correlated with the broader trade-weighted dollar. The latter is nowhere near 2020 peaks but could rise to that level if current trends hold. A strong dollar reflects slowing global growth and also tightens global financial conditions, with negative implications for cyclical and emerging market equities. Bottom Line: Tactically favor US equities and the US dollar to guard against greater energy shock, policy uncertainty, and risk-aversion. Energy Cutoff Points To European Recession Chart 2Escalation With Russia Weighs Further On EU Assets Russia is reducing natural gas flows to Poland and Bulgaria and threatening other countries, Germany is now embracing an oil embargo against Russia, while Finland and Sweden are considering joining NATO. These three factors are leading to a major escalation of strategic tensions on the continent that will get worse before they get better, driving up our European GeoRisk indicators and weighing on European assets (Chart 2). Russia’s ultimatum in December 2021 stressed that NATO enlargement should cease and that NATO forces and weapons should not be positioned east of the May 1997 status quo. Russia invaded Ukraine to ensure its military neutrality over the long run.1 Finland and Sweden, seeing Ukraine’s isolation amid Russian invasion, are now reviewing whether to change their historic neutrality and join NATO. Public opinion polls now show Finnish support for joining at 61% and Swedish support at 57%. The scheduling of a joint conference between the country’s leaders on May 13 looks like it could be a joint declaration of their intention to join. The US and other NATO members will have to provide mutual defense guarantees for the interim period if that is the case, lest Russia attack. The odds that Finland and Sweden remain neutral are higher than the consensus holds (given the 97% odds that they join NATO on Predictit.org). But the latest developments suggest they are moving toward applying for membership. They fear being left in the cold like Ukraine in the event of an attack. Russia’s response will be critical. If Russia deploys nuclear weapons to Kaliningrad, as former President Dmitri Medvedev warned, then Moscow will be making a menacing show but not necessarily changing the reality of Russia’s nuclear strike capabilities. That is equivalent to a pass and could mark the peak of the entire crisis. The geopolitical risk premium would begin to subside after that. Related Report  Geopolitical StrategyLe Pen And Other Hurdles (GeoRisk Update) However, Russia has also threatened “military-political repercussions” if the Nordics join NATO. Russia’s capabilities are manifestly limited, judging by Ukraine today and the Winter War of 1939, but a broader war cannot entirely be ruled out. Global financial markets will still need to adjust for a larger tail risk of a war in Finland/Sweden in the very near term. Most likely Russia will retaliate by cutting off Europe’s natural gas. Clearly this is the threat on the table, after the cutoff to Poland and Bulgaria and the warnings to other countries. In the near term, several companies are gratifying Russia and paying for gas in rubles. But these payments violate EU sanctions against Russia and the intention is to wean off Russian imports as soon as possible. Germany says it can reduce gas imports starting next year after inking a deal with Qatar. Hence Russia might take the initiative and start reducing the flow earlier. Bottom Line: If Europe plunges into recession as a result of an immediate natural gas cutoff, then strategic stability between Russia and the West will become less certain. The tail risk of a broader war goes up. Stay cyclically long US equities over global equities and tactically long US treasuries. Stay long defense stocks and gold. Stay Short CNY At the end of last year we argued that Beijing would double down on “Zero Covid” policy in 2022, at least until the twentieth national party congress this fall. Social restrictions serve a dual purpose of disease suppression and dissent repression. Now that the state is doubling down, what will happen next? The economy will deteriorate: imports are already contracting at a rate of 0.1% YoY. The manufacturing PMI has fallen to 48.1  and the service sector PMI to 42.0, indicating contraction. Furthermore, social unrest could emerge, as lockdowns serve as a catalyst to ignite underlying socioeconomic disparities. Hence the national party congress is less likely to go smoothly, implying that investors will catch a glimpse of political instability under the surface in China as the year progresses. The political risk premium will remain high (Chart 3). Chart 3China's Confluence Of Domestic And Foreign Risk Weighs On Stocks And Currency While Chairman Xi Jinping is still likely to clinch another ten years in power, it will not be auspicious amid an economic crash and any social unrest. Xi could be forced into some compromises on either Politburo personnel or policy adjustments. A notable indicator of compromise would be if he nominated a successor, though this would not provide any real long-term assurance to investors given the lack of formal mechanisms for power transfer. After the party congress we expect Xi to “let 100 flowers bloom,” meaning that he will ease fiscal, regulatory, and social policy so that today’s monetary and fiscal stimulus can work effectively. Right now monetary and fiscal easing has limited impact because private sector actors are averse to taking risk. Easing policy to boost the economy could also entail a diplomatic charm offensive to try to convince the US and EU to avoid imposing any significant sanctions on trade and investment flows, whether due to Russia or human rights violations. Such a diplomatic initiative would only succeed, if at all, in the short run. The US cannot allow a deep re-engagement with China since that would serve to strengthen the de facto Russo-Chinese strategic alliance. In other words, an eruption of instability threatens to weaken Xi’s hand and jeopardize his power retention. While it is extremely unlikely that Xi will fall from power, he could have his image of supremacy besmirched. It is likely that China will be forced to ease a range of policies, including lockdowns and regulations of key sectors, that will be marginally positive for economic growth. There may also be schemes to attract foreign investment. Bottom Line: If China expands the range of its policy easing the result could be received positively by global investors in 2023. But the short-term outlook is still negative and deteriorating due to China’s reversion to autocracy and confluence of political and geopolitical risk. Stay short CNY and neutral Chinese stocks. Stay Short KRW South Koreans went to the polls on March 9 to elect their new president for a five-year term. The two top candidates for the job were Yoon Suk-yeol and Lee Jae-myung. Yoon, a former public prosecutor, was the candidate for the People Power Party, a conservative party that can be traced back to the Saenuri and the Grand National Party, which was in power from 2007 to 2017 under President Lee Myung-bak and President Park Geun-hye. Lee, the governor of the largest province in Korea, was the candidate for the Democratic Party, the party of the incumbent President Moon Jae-in. Yoon won by a whisker, garnering 48.6% of the votes versus 47.8% for Lee. The margin of victory for Yoon is the lowest since Korea started directly electing its presidents. President-elect Yoon will be inaugurated in May. He will not have control of the National Assembly, as his party only holds 34% of the seats. The Democratic Party holds the majority, with 172 out of 300 seats. The next legislative election will be in 2024, which means that President Yoon will have to work with the opposition for a good two years before his party has a chance to pass laws on its own. President-elect Yoon was the more pro-business and fiscally restrained candidate. His nomination of Han Duck-soo as his prime minister suggests that, insofar as any domestic policy change is possible, he will be pragmatic, as Han served under two liberal administrations. Yoon’s lack of a majority and nomination of a left-leaning prime minister suggest that domestic policy will not be a source of uncertainty for investors through 2024. Foreign policy, by contrast, will be the biggest source of risk for investors. Yoon rejects the dovish “Moonshine” policy of his predecessor and favors a strong hand in dealing with North Korea. “War can be avoided only when we acquire an ability to launch pre-emptive strikes and show our willingness to use them,” he has argued. North Korea responded by expanding its nuclear doctrine and resuming tests of intercontinental ballistic missiles with the launch of the Hwasong-17 on March 24 – the first ICBM launch since 2017. In a significant upgrade of North Korea’s deterrence strategy, Kim Yo Jong, the sister of Kim Jong Un, warned on April 4 that North Korea would use nuclear weapons to “eliminate” South Korea if attacked (implying an overwhelming nuclear retaliation to any attack whatsoever). Kim Jong Un himself claimed on April 26 that North Korea’s nuclear weapons are no longer merely about deterrence but would be deployed if the country is attacked. President-elect Yoon welcomes the possibility of deploying of US strategic assets to strengthen deterrence against the North. The hawkish turn is not surprising considering that North-South relations failed to make any substantive improvements during President Moon’s five-year tenure as a pro-engagement president. South Koreans, especially Yoon’s supporters, are split on whether inter-Korean dialogue should be continued. They are becoming more interested in developing their own nuclear weapons or at the very least deploying US nuclear weapons in South Korea. Half of South Korean voters support security through alliance with the US, while a third support security through the development of independent nuclear weapons. The nuclear debate will raise tensions on the peninsula. An even bigger change in South Korea’s foreign policy is its policy towards China. President-elect Yoon has accused President Moon of succumbing to China’s economic extortion. Moon had established a policy of “three No’s,” meaning no to additional THAAD missiles in South Korea, no to hosting other US missile defense systems, and no to joining an alliance with Japan and the United States. By contrast, Yoon’s electoral promises include deploying more THAAD and joining the Quadrilateral Dialogue (US, Japan, Australia, India). Polls show that South Koreans hold a low opinion of all of their neighbors but that China has slipped slightly beneath Japan and North Korea in favorability. Even Democratic Party voters feel more negative towards China. While negative attitudes towards China are not unique to Korea, there is an important difference from other countries: the Korean youth dislike China the most, not the older generations. Negative sentiment is less tied to old wounds from the Korean war and more related to ideology and today’s grievances. Younger Koreans, growing up in a liberal democracy and proud of their economic and cultural success, have been involved in campus clashes against Chinese students over Korean support for Hong Kong democrats. Negative attitudes towards China among the youth should alarm investors, as young people provide the voting base for elections to come, and China is the largest trading partner for Korea. Korea’s foreign policy will hew to the American side, at risk to its economy (Chart 4). Chart 4South Korean Geopolitical Risk Rising Under The Radar President-elect Yoon’s policies towards North Korea and China will increase geopolitical risk in East Asia. The biggest beneficiary will be India. Both Korea and Japan need to find a substitute to Chinese markets and labor, which have become less reliable in recent years. South Korea’s newly elected president is aligned with the US and West and less friendly toward China and Russia. He faces a rampant North Korea that feels emboldened by its position of an arsenal of 40-50 deliverable nuclear weapons. The North Koreans now claim that they will respond to any military attack with nuclear force and are testing intercontinental ballistic missiles and possibly a nuclear weapon. The US currently has three aircraft carriers around Korea, despite its urgent foreign policy challenges in Europe and the Middle East. Bottom Line: Stay long JPY-KRW. South Korea’s geopolitical risk premium will remain high. But favor Korean stocks over Taiwanese stocks. Stay Neutral On Hong Kong Stocks Hong Kong’s leadership change will trigger a new bout of unrest (Chart 5). Chart 5Hong Kong: More Turbulence Ahead On April 4, Hong Kong’s incumbent Chief Executive, Carrie Lam, confirmed that she would not seek a second term but would step down on June 30. John Lee, the current chief secretary of Hong Kong, became the only candidate approved to run for election, which is scheduled to be held on May 8. With the backing of the pro-Beijing members in the Election Committee, Lee is expected to secure enough nominations to win the race. Lee served as security secretary from when Carrie Lam took office in 2017 until June 2021. He firmly supported the Hong Kong extradition bill in 2019 and National Security Law in 2020, which provoked historic social unrest in those years. He insisted on taking a tough security stance towards pro-democracy protests. With Lee in power, Hong Kong will face more unrest and tougher crackdowns in the coming years, which will likely bring more social instability. Lee will provoke pro-democracy activists with his policy stances and adherence to Beijing’s party line. For example, his various statements to the news media suggest a dogmatic approach to censorship and political dissent. With the adoption of the National Security Law, Hong Kong’s pro-democracy faction is already deeply disaffected. Carrie Lam was originally elected as a popular leader, with notable support from women, but her popularity fell sharply after the passage of the extradition bill and National Security Law, as well as her mishandling of the Covid-19 outbreak. Her failure to handle the clashes between the Hong Kong people and Beijing damaged public trust in government. Trust never fully recovered when it took another hit recently from the latest wave of the pandemic. Putting another pro-Beijing hardliner in power will exacerbate the trend. Hong Kong equities are vulnerable not merely because of social unrest. During the era of US-China engagement, Hong Kong benefited as the middleman and the symbol that the Communist Party could cooperate within a liberal, democratic, capitalist global order. Hence US-China power struggle removes this special status and causes Hong Kong financial assets to contract mainland Chinese geopolitical risk. As a result of the 2019-2020 crackdown, John Lee and Carrie Lam were among a list of Hong Kong officials sanctioned by the US Treasury Department and State Department in 2020. Now, after the Ukraine war, the US will be on the lookout for any Hong Kong role in helping Russia circumvent sanctions, as well as any other ways in which China might further its strategic aims by means of Hong Kong. Bottom Line: Stay neutral on Hong Kong equities. Favor France Within European Equities French political risk will fall after the presidential election, which recommits the country to geopolitical unity with the US and NATO and potentially pro-productivity structural reforms (Chart 6). France is already a geopolitically secure country so the reduction of domestic political risk should be doubly positive for French assets, though they have already outperformed. And the Russia-West conflict is fueling a risk premium regardless of France’s positive developments. Chart 6France's Domestic Political Risk Will Subside But Russian War Will Keep Geopolitical Risk Elevated The French election ended with a solid victory for the political establishment as we expected. President Emmanuel Macron gaining 58% of the vote to Marine Le Pen’s 42%. Macron beat his opinion polling by 4.5pp while Le Pen underperformed her polls by 4.5pp. A large number of voters abstained, at 28%, compared to 25.5% in 2017. The regional results showed a stark divergence between overseas or peripheral France (where Marine Le Pen even managed to get over half of the vote in several cases) and the core cities of France (where Macron won handily). Macron had won an outright majority in every region in 2017. Macron did best among the young and the old, while Le Pen did best among middle-aged voters. But Macron won every age group except the 50 year-olds, who want to retire early. Macron did well among business executives, managers, and retired people, but Le Pen won among the working classes, as expected. Le Pen won the lowest paid income group, while Macron’s margin of victory rises with each step up the income ladder. Macron’s performance was strong, especially considering the global context. The pandemic knocked several incumbent parties out of power (US, Germany) and required leadership changes in others (Japan, Italy). The subsequent inflation shock now threatens to cause another major political rotation in rapid succession, leaving various political leaders and parties vulnerable in the coming months and years (Australia, the UK, Spain). Only Canada and now France marked exceptions, where post-pandemic elections confirmed the country’s leader. The Ukraine war constitutes yet another shock but it helped Macron, as Le Pen had objective links and sympathies with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Macron’s timing was lucky but his message of structural reform for the sake of economic efficiency still resonates in contemporary France, where change is long overdue – at least compared with Le Pen’s proposal of doubling down on statism, protectionism, and fiscal largesse. The French middle class was never as susceptible to populism as the US, UK, and Italy because it had been better protected from the ravages of globalization. Populism is still a force to be reckoned with, especially if left-wing populists do well in the National Assembly, or if right-wing populists find a fresher face than the Le Pen dynasty. But the failure of populism in the context of pandemic, inflation, and war suggests that France’s political establishment remains well fortified by the economic structure and the electoral system. Whether Macron can sustain his structural reforms depends on legislative elections to be held on June 12-19. Early projections are positive for his party, which should keep a majority. Macron’s new mandate will help. Le Pen’s National Rally and its predecessors may perform better than in the past but that is not saying much as their presence in the National Assembly has been weak. Bottom Line: France is geopolitically secure and has seen a resounding public vote for structural reform that could improve productivity depending on legislative elections. French equities can continue to outperform their European peers over the long run. Our European Investment Strategy recommends French equities ex-consumer stocks, French small caps over large caps, and French aerospace and defense.   Favor Spanish Over Italian Stocks Chart 7Italian And Spanish Political Risk Will Rise But Favor Spanish Stocks What about Spain? It is still a “divided nation” susceptible to a rise in political risk ahead of the general election due by December 10, 2023 (Chart 7). In the past few months, a series of strategic mistakes and internal power struggles have led to a significant decline in the popularity of Spain’s largest opposition party, the People’s Party. Due to public infighting and power struggle, Pablo Casado was forced to step down as the leader of the People’s Party on February 23, as requested by 16 of the party’s 17 regional leaders. It is yet to be seen if the new party leader, Alberto Nunez Feijoo, can reboot People’s Party. The far-right VOX party will benefit from the People Party’s setback. The latter’s misstep in a regional election (Castile & Leon) gave VOX a chance to participate in a regional government for the very first time. Hence VOX’s influence will spread and it will receive greater recognition as an important political force. Meanwhile the ruling Socialist Worker’s Party (PSOE) faces anger from the public amid inflation and high energy prices. However, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez’s decision to send offensive military weapons to Ukraine is widely supported among major parties, including even his reluctant coalition partner, Unidas Podemos. The People’s Party’s recent infighting gives temporary relief to the ruling party. The Russia-Ukraine issue caused some minor divisions within the government but they are not yet leading to any major political crisis, as nationwide pro-Ukraine sentiment is largely unified. The Andalusia regional election, which is expected this November, will be a check point for Feijoo and a pre-test for next year’s general election. Andalusia is the most populous autonomous community in Spain, consisting about 17% of the seats in the congress (the lower house). The problem for Sanchez and the Socialists is that the stagflationary backdrop will weigh on their support over time. Bottom Line: Spanish political risk is likely to spike sooner rather than later, though Spanish domestic risk it is limited in nature. Madrid faces low geopolitical risk, low energy vulnerability, and is not susceptible to trying to leave the EU or Euro Area. Favor Spanish over Italian stocks. Stay Constructive On South Africa The political and economic status quo is largely unchanged in South Africa and will remain so going into the 2024 national elections. Fiscal discipline will weaken ahead of the election, which should be negative for the rand, but the global commodity shortage and geopolitical risks in Russia and China will probably overwhelm any negative effects from South Africa’s domestic policies. Rising commodity prices have propped up the local equity market and will bring in much-needed revenue into the local economy and government coffers. But structural issues persist. Low growth outcomes amid weak productivity and high unemployment levels will remain the norm. The median voter is increasingly constrained with fewer economic opportunities on the horizon. Pressure will mount on the ruling African National Congress (ANC), fueling civil unrest and adding to overall political risk (Chart 8). Chart 8South Africa's Political Status Quo Is Tactically Positive For Equities And Currency Almost a year has passed since the civil unrest episode of 2021. Covid-19 lockdowns have lifted and the national state of disaster has ended, reducing social tensions. This is evident in the decline of our South Africa GeoRisk indicator from 2021 highs. While we recently argued that fiscal austerity is under way in South Africa, we also noted that fiscal policy will reverse course in time for the 2024 election. In this year’s fiscal budget, the budget deficit is projected to narrow from -6% to -4.2% over the next two years. Government has increased tax revenue collection through structural reforms that are rooting out corruption and wasteful expenditure. But the ANC will have to tap into government spending to shore up lost support come 2024. Already, the ANC have committed to maintaining a special Covid-19 social-grant payment, first introduced in 2020, for another year. This grant, along with other government support, will feature in 2024 and possibly beyond. Unemployment is at 34.3%, its highest level ever recorded. The ANC cannot leave it unchecked. The most prevalent and immediate recourse is to increase social payments and transfers. Given the increasing number of social dependents that higher unemployment creates, government spending will have to increase to address rising unemployment. President Cyril Ramaphosa is still a positive figurehead for the ANC, but the 2021 local elections showed that the ANC cannot rely on the Ramaphosa effect alone. The ANC is also dealing with intra-party fighting. Ramaphosa has yet to assert total control over the party elites, distracting the ANC from achieving its policy objectives. To correct course, Ramaphosa will have to relax fiscal discipline. To this outcome, investors should expect our GeoRisk indicator to register steady increases in political risk moving into 2024. The only reason to be mildly optimistic is that South Africa is distant from geopolitical risk and can continue to benefit from the global bull market in metals. Bottom Line: Maintain a cyclically constructive outlook on South African currency and assets. Tight global commodity markets will support this emerging market, which stands to benefit from developments in Russia and China. Investment Takeaways Stay strategically long gold on geopolitical and inflation risk, despite the dollar rally. Stay long US equities relative to global and UK equities relative to DM-ex-US. Favor global defensives over cyclicals and large caps over small caps. Stay short CNY, TWD, and KRW-JPY. Stay short CZK-GBP. Favor Mexico within emerging markets. Stay long defense and cyber security stocks. We are booking a 5% stop loss on our long Canada / short Saudi Arabia equity trade. We still expect Middle Eastern tensions to escalate and trigger a Saudi selloff.   Matt Gertken Chief Geopolitical Strategist mattg@bcaresearch.com Jesse Anak Kuri Associate Editor Jesse.Kuri@bcaresearch.com Yushu Ma Research Analyst yushu.ma@bcaresearch.com Guy Russell Senior Analyst GuyR@bcaresearch.com Footnotes 1   The campaign in the south suggests that Ukraine will be partitioned, landlocked, and susceptible to blockade in the coming years. If Russia achieves its military objectives, then Ukraine will accept neutrality in a ceasefire to avoid losing more territory. If Russia fails, then it faces humiliation and its attempts to save face will become unpredictable and aggressive. Strategic Themes Open Tactical Positions (0-6 Months) Open Cyclical Recommendations (6-18 Months) Regional Geopolitical Risk Matrix Geopolitical Calendar
Special Report Dear Client, This week, we present our inaugural report on ESG investing and the global energy transition. Henceforth, we will be publishing this research on the last Thursday of every month. Our principal ESG focus will be on the Environmental aspects of climate change, and the policies and actions undertaken to arrest the rise in the Earth's temperature via decarbonization. To date, the goal of Environmental policy in many jurisdictions – e.g., the US and EU – has been to disincentivize exploration, production, refining and transportation investment in hydrocarbons. At the same time, it has strongly incentivized investment in renewable-power generation. This has produced volatile marginal effects, forcing commodity markets to allocate increasingly scarce energy and metals supplies against a backdrop of increasing demand. It is at this nexus where investment opportunities will emerge. ESG's Social and Governance pillars are slower-moving change agents, with long-duration effects. Human-rights failures can destroy lives and lead to social unrest. Failed corporate governance and national governance can sharply alter firms' abilities and willingness to invest in environmentally responsible resource development. Failure in both dimensions can profoundly affect commodity supply-demand balances, and imperil the energy transition. Much of what passes for ESG measurement and compliance is self-reported – when data are available – and differs little from PR or virtue signaling. This is starting to change. Over the next 2-3 years, we expect a continued increase in government involvement in standardizing ESG reporting – cf, the SEC's recent proposal for reporting Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions, and an increased focus on carbon pricing, which we believe will require a global carbon tax or carbon-price floor. This will be needed to incentivize investment in renewables and carbon-reduction and -capture technology, given the near-impossibility of harmonizing local and regional carbon-trading schemes. Otherwise climate clubs – i.e., trading blocs comprising states with shared ESG goals – will emerge, which will further fragment global trade. We are hopeful you will find this research useful in your decision making and investing. Bob Ryan Managing Editor, Commodity & ESG Strategy Executive Summary Fossil Fuels Dominate Global Energy Mix Whether or not the SEC's proposal to disclose Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions and other risk factors by firms it regulates will be adopted in whole or in part, we are confident it foreshadows deeper government involvement in the ESG arena in the near term in the US and EU. Carbon pricing will become increasingly important in global climate-change policy. We believe this will require a global carbon tax or carbon-price floor to incentivize investment in renewables and carbon-reduction and -capture technology. Failure to agree on at least a carbon price floor over the next 2-3 years almost surely will lead to the formation of climate clubs. In such clubs, like-minded states with similarly rigorous carbon-pricing and ESG disclosure requirements will allow trade among each other, but will levy tariffs against firms in states lacking such policies. Bottom Line: Governments are approaching a reckoning on their commitments to reduce or slow CO2 and greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions. These are meant to hold the rise in the Earth's temperature to less than 2° C, or to approach the 1.5° C goal of the Paris Agreement. Reporting mandates like the EU's and the SEC's proposed CO2/GHG reports will help, as will increased subsidies and tax support for carbon-capture and hydrogen technology. However, a global carbon tax or carbon-price floor will be required to incentivize the investment needed to meet climate-change goals. Feature Voluntary programs and self-reporting are not reducing the concentration of CO2 and other GHGs fast enough to stay on track to meet Paris Agreement targets of holding the rise in the Earth's temperature to less than 2° C vs, pre-industrial levels, or preferably to 1.5° C. Over the next couple of years, we believe states will have to mandate additional ESG reporting – particularly on CO2 and other GHG emissions – and will require audits of programs and reports connected to GHG emissions, given the scope of what they are trying to accomplish. The EU got the ball rolling on reporting emissions, and now the US SEC is proposing new regulations as well. These will require the firms it regulates to disclose Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions and other climate-related factors that constitute material risks to revenues and profits.1 Regardless of whether this proposal makes it through the legislative process, firms with operations in the EU will have to comply with similar reporting requirements if similar proposals are approved. Growing Energy Demand Fuels Higher CO2 Emissions World electricity demand – the principal focus of the global energy transition – grew 6% last year, on the back of strong GDP growth and weather-related demand. 2021 saw the highest electricity demand growth recorded by the IEA in the post-GFC recovery that began in 2010, amounting to 1,500 Twh year-on-year. Coal covered more than half of the growth in global electricity demand last year, and has constituted a major chunk of the electricity mix over a longer historical sample. Based on data starting in 2000, the world – primarily EM – has been net positive coal-fired power capacity (Chart 1) which reached an all-time high in 2021 as well, rising 9% y/y, while gas-fired generation grew 2%. The increase in fossil fuel generation pushed CO2 emissions globally up almost 6% to record highs. Renewable generation grew by 6% last year and is expected to meet most of the increase in electricity demand over the 2022-24 period with 8% p.a. growth, according to the IEA. Coal demand surged on the back of robust economic growth and weather-related factors, which helped propel global CO2 emissions to a record high at just over 36 billion MT in 2021, according to the IEA. This reversed the downturn in 2020 caused by the COVID-19 pandemic (Chart 2). Higher methane and nitrous oxide emissions, plus CO2 released by oil and gas flaring, lifted total energy-related GHG emissions to record levels last year as well. Chart 1Coal-Fired Power Has Been A Constant Chart 2Fossil Fuels Dominate Global Energy Mix We find evidence of a long-run relationship between real GDP and carbon dioxide emissions (Chart 3). This likely plays out through cointegration between oil consumption with real GDP, a relationship we exploit when estimating our monthly oil balances. While the income elasticity for emerging economies reliant on manufacturing – e.g., India and China – is positive, for the EU, a bloc of developed nations, that elasticity turns negative. This is consistent with the hypothesis of the Environmental Kuznets Curve, which states that initial increases in GDP per capita are associated with environmental degradation, however, beyond a point, income increases are associated with lower environmental damage.2 Interesting, as well, is the lack of any cointegration between GDP and US CO2 emissions. That may be due to the increased use of natgas vs. coal, and the fact that the energy intensity of US GDP continues to fall. Energy demand levels, including electricity, continues to exceed renewables supply. So even though renewable-energy generation growth is expected to meet 90% of energy demand growth from 2022 to 2024, the accumulation of CO2 and other GHGs will continue keeping the level of pollutants rising over that period. Chart 3CO2 Closely Tied To GDP   Recent research on global CO2 emissions growth for different countries based on historical values for population, GDP per capita and carbon intensity (measured as CO2 emissions per unit of GDP) projects median annual CO2 emissions in 2100 will be 34 Gigatons (Chart 4).3 This is significantly higher than the emissions required to keep temperature increases under 2° C by the end of the forecast period. The forecast is accompanied by four other CO2 emission scenarios provided by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Chart 4CO2 Projected Increases Overshoot Paris Agreement Targets Carbon Tax Needed One of our high-conviction views is governments worldwide need to agree a global carbon tax that can be applied directly to CO2 emissions.4 If a global carbon tax cannot be agreed, a global carbon-price floor also could be used to incentivize the investment needed to meet climate-change goals. An IMF analysis entitled "Five Things To Know About Carbon Pricing" published in September notes: "An international carbon price floor can be strikingly effective. A 2030 price floor of $75 a ton for advanced economies, $50 for high-income emerging market economies such as China, and $25 for lower-income emerging markets such as India would keep warming below 2°C with just six participants (Canada, China, European Union, India, United Kingdom, United States) and other G20 countries meeting their Paris pledges." There may be legitimate grounds for arguing over the point at which the tax is collected – i.e., at the production or consumption stages – but, in our view, this would be far superior (and quicker to implement) than trying to harmonize the different carbon-trading schemes worldwide. In addition, the revenues generated by the tax would allow governments to protect the interests of lower-income constituencies, which are most adversely affected by such regressive taxes. We also have maintained failure to agree a carbon tax of some form over the next 2-3 years almost surely will lead to the formation of climate clubs, a notion pioneered by William Nordhaus, the 2018 Nobel Laurate.5 In Nordhaus's clubs, like-minded states with similarly rigorous carbon-pricing and ESG disclosure requirements will allow trade among each other, but will levy tariffs against firms in states lacking such measures. There is some evidence China already is preparing for this eventuality by limiting the export of high-carbon products to consumer states with strong climate-protection laws. For example, the EU last year rolled out a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), which it describes as "a climate measure that should prevent the risk of carbon leakage and supports the EU's increased ambition on climate mitigation, while ensuring WTO compatibility."6 Investment Implications Governments are moving quickly to address shortcoming in existing CO2 and GHG reduction policies. Among other things, the EU and US are proposing mandatory reporting on these emissions covering Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. In addition, China is refining its five-year plan to limit high-carbon exports, so that it does not run afoul of the EU's CBAM. We expect more of such measures going forward, as CO2 and GHG emissions continue to accumulate in the atmosphere at a rate that cannot be offset by existing policy.   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     Footnotes 1     Scope 1 covers GHG emissions firms directly generate on their own; Scope 2 applies to emissions indirectly created a purchasing electricity and other forms of energy; and Scope 3 covers indirect emissions produced up and down the firms' supply chain.  These are deemed to be material risks that could impact firms' revenues and profitability, hence necessary information for investors and market participants generally.  Please see SEC Proposes Rules to Enhance and Standardize Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors, published by the SEC on March 21, 2022. 2     For more information on this, please see ScienceDirect’s page on the Environmental Kuznets Curve.  3    Please see Country-based rate of emissions reductions should increase by 80% beyond nationally determined contributions to meet the 2 degree Celsius target (Liu and Rafter, 2021), published in Nature. 4    Please see Surging Metals Prices And The Case For Carbon-Capture, which we published on May 13, 2021. It is available at ces.bcaresearch.com. 5    Please see Nordhaus, William (2015), "Climate Clubs: Overcoming Free-riding in International Climate Policy," American Economic Review 105:4, pp. 1339–1370. 6    Please see Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism: Questions and Answers, published by the European Commission on July 14, 2021. See also China issues guidelines under 14th 5-year plan to limit high-carbon product exports, published by S&P Global Platts on April 7, 2022. Platts notes this likely will be China's first FYP to include limits on "high-carbon products from the (refining and petrochemical) industry amid China's carbon neutrality journey. This comes amid expectations that foreign countries may levy tariffs like the EU's Cross Border Adjustment Mechanism, or CBAM, on such products in the future." Investment Views and Themes Recommendations Strategic Recommendations Trades Closed in 2022  
According to BCA Research’s Commodity & Energy Strategy service, a global carbon tax or carbon-price floor will be required to incentivize the investment needed to meet climate-change goals. There may be legitimate grounds for arguing over the point at…
Executive Summary China's Demand Was Very Weak before Lockdowns The selloff in risk assets is not over. Stay defensive. Stagflation fears will continue gripping financial markets. Global trade volumes are set to contract, but the Fed has little maneuvering room as US core inflation is well above its target. Commodity prices are at an important juncture. The plunge in Chinese material stock prices is a warning sign for global materials because China is by far the largest consumer of raw materials (excluding oil), accounting for about 50-55% of global industrial metal demand. The rally in EM commodity plays like Latin America and South Africa is at risk of a major reversal. Bottom Line: Global equity and credit portfolios should underweight EM equities and credit, respectively. The rally in the US dollar might be the final upleg before a major downtrend sets in. However, this final rally will be considerable, and the greenback will likely overshoot. A buying opportunity in EM local currency bonds will present itself after EM currencies hit a bottom versus the US dollar. Feature Global and EM risk assets will remain under selling pressure. This Charts That Matter report contains charts that will help investors navigate treacherous financial markets by shedding light on the following key issues: How much more downside in stocks? Chart 1 displays EM share prices in USD terms alongside their long-term moving averages. If EM equities break below the current technical support line, the next one implies that there is 20-25% further downside in EM stocks. For the S&P500, the next technical support is at 3650-3750. Our Equity Capitulation Indicators for both the S&P500 and EM stocks remain above their previous (2010-2020) lows (Charts 5 and 6 below). In addition, equity market breadth is deteriorating. Fundamental problems with financial markets are linked to mounting stagflation fears. Global trade volumes are set to contract in H2 due to a decline in US and European household spending on goods ex-autos and a delayed recovery in China as we discussed in last week’s report. In turn, US wage growth is accelerating, which will push up unit labor costs. US core inflation will likely drop due to base effects, but will remain above 3.5-4%, which far exceeds the Fed’s 2-2.25% target. Chart 1EM Share Prices: Their Long-Term Moving Averages Served As A Support In Bear Markets Chart 2 illustrates that stagflation fears have already gripped financial markets. Global defensive equity sectors have recently been outperforming global non-TMT stocks despite rising US and global bond yields (Chart 2). This is a major departure from the historical relationship between the two and likely foreshadows a period of continuous Fed tightening despite slower global growth. Global equity managers should favor defensive stocks as they will continue to outperform under the two most likely scenarios: (1) either these stagflation dynamics continue; or (2) a growth scare will dominate, during which US bond yields could drop. Chart 2Does This Divergence From A Historic Correlation Signify Stagflation? The US dollar continues to climb, and its strength has recently become very broad-based – extending to commodity currencies and Asian currencies. As we show in Charts 46-48 below, the US dollar has more upside.   Commodity prices are at an important juncture. On the one hand, supply shortages and risks to further supply disruptions could continue to support resource prices. On the other hand, demand will disappoint. Shrinking US and European consumer spending on goods ex-autos, contracting Chinese commodity intake and weakness in EM ex-China demand all suggest that global commodity consumption will decline in the months ahead. In our March 10 report, we noted that commodity prices would be volatile and this view has been validated: commodity prices swings have been extreme over the past two months. More recent evidence points to lower resource prices. Chart 3 shows that over the past 200 years raw material prices in real US dollar terms (deflated by US headline CPI) have oscillated around a well-defined downtrend. The pandemic surge in commodity prices has pushed them to two standard deviations above their time-trend. Historically, commodity rallies (and even their secular bull markets) ended when prices reached this threshold. Hence, odds are that industrial commodities might hit a soft spot. Energy prices remain a wild card due to geopolitics. It is critical to note that the raw materials price index shown in Chart 3 does not include energy, gold and semi-precious metals (the footnote of Chart 3 lists commodities included in this aggregate). Chart 3Raw Material Prices (In Real Terms) Are At The Upper End Of A 200-Year Downtrend Finally, Chart 4 demonstrates that Chinese materials stocks have plunged. We read this as a warning sign for global materials because China is by far the largest consumer of raw materials (excluding oil), accounting for about 50-55% of global industrial metal demand. Chart 4Chinese Material Stocks Are Signaling Trouble For Global Materials Investment Recommendations Stay defensive. Global equity and credit portfolios should underweight EM equities and credit, respectively. The rally in the US dollar might be the final upleg before a major downtrend sets in. However, this final rally will likely be considerable, i.e., the greenback will likely overshoot. The CNY has broken down versus the US dollar and our target is 6.70-6.75 for now. A depreciating yuan is bearish for Asian and EM currencies. We continue to recommend short positions in the following EM currencies versus the US dollar: ZAR, COP, PEN, HUF, IDR, PHP and PLN. A buying opportunity in EM local currency bonds will present itself when EM currencies hit a bottom versus the US dollar.   Arthur Budaghyan Chief Emerging Markets Strategist arthurb@bcaresearch.com   US And EM Equity Capitulation Indicators These indicators have not reached their lows of 2010, 2011, 2018 and 2020. The magnitude of the S&P500 selloffs in 2011 and 2018, were 19.5% and 19.8%, respectively. Hence, our best guess for the size of a S&P500 drawdown in this selloff is about 20%. This puts the potential S&P500 low at 3800-3850. The latter is consistent with the technical support (3-year moving average) that held up in 2011, 2016 and 2018 (Chart 5, top panel).  Chart 5 Chart 6 Components Of Our US Equity Capitulation Indicator Not all components of our US Equity Capitulation Indicator have reached their previous lows. Odds are that US share prices will drop further. US equity valuations are still expensive, geopolitical risks are elevated, and inflation and inflation expectations are extremely high, which will limit the Fed’s maneuvering room. Chart 7 Chart 8 Components Of Our EM Equity Capitulation Indicator Similarly, the components of our EM Equity Capitulation Indicator have not reached their previous lows. The share of industry groups above their 200-day moving average, analysts’ net EPS revisions as well as the momentum and equity sentiment indicators remain above prior troughs. Further downside in EM share prices is likely.  Chart 9 Chart 10 S&P500 Overlays With Previous Geopolitical Crises The most recent examples of geopolitical shocks include the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, the oil embargo of 1973 in response to the Yom Kippur War and the Gulf War of 1990. The magnitude of the S&P 500 selloff was 28% in 1962, 23% in 1973 and 20% in 1990. Today, the S&P 500 is down only 12.8% from its peak. Based on the above three profiles, the current selloff in US stocks has further to go. This also means that non-US equities, including EM, will continue to suffer.  Chart 11 Chart 12 Chart 13 Table 1 Various EM Equity Indexes: Deteriorating Breadth Various EM equity indexes have been in a bear market. The deterioration has been broadening as recent leaders such as commodity producers and Taiwanese stocks have been gapping down. Yet, not all bourses are very oversold. We published a Special Report on semiconductors on April 14 arguing that semi stocks face more downside. Share prices of commodity producers have recently corrected, and, as we argue above, odds of a further drop are non-trivial. What are the odds that the overall EM equity index undershoots? See the next section.  Chart 14 Chart 15 Chart 16 Chart 17 EM Undershoot Is Likely Sentiment towards EM equities has fallen significantly, but it is not yet at previous lows. Similarly, there is still room for EM net EPS revisions by bottom-up analysts to fall further. Finally, platinum prices point to more downside in EM non-TMT share prices.  Chart 18 Chart 19 Chart 20 EM Bond Yields And Share Prices Historically, rising EM corporate USD bond yields and EM local currency bond yields led to a selloff in EM share prices. Unless EM USD and local currency bond yields start falling on a sustainable basis, EM equities will continue to struggle. Chart 21 Chart 22 Rising US Corporate Bond Yields Are Bearish For US Stocks Rising US corporate borrowing costs point to lower US share prices. Corporate bond yields could increase because of either rising US Treasury yields or widening credit spreads. Furthermore, bearish US equity market technicals are presently reinforcing this downbeat outlook for US stocks.  Chart 23 Chart 24 Chart 25 The S&P500 EPS Can Contract Outside Of A Recession Let’s recall what happened in 2000-2001 in the US. Real GDP contracted only slightly, household spending in real terms did not contract at all, and the housing market was booming. Yet, the S&P 500 operating EPS plunged by 30% and the stock index was down by 50%. In 1966, even though real and nominal GDP did not contract, the S&P500 operating EPS shrank by about 5% and share prices fell by 22%. This episode is the best analogy for US economic and financial market dynamics over the near term.  Chart 26 Chart 27 US Stagflation Scare US wage growth is accelerating, and unit labor costs are surging. The latter will make inflation sticky and hurt corporate profit margins. Besides, US consumer demand for goods ex-autos will shrink following a two-year period of overspending. This combination will produce a stagflation scare – a period when corporate profits are weak, but the Fed has little maneuvering room as core inflation is well above its target.  Chart 28 Chart 29 Chart 30 Chart 31 Global Trade Volumes Will Shrink Taiwanese shipments to China – which lead global exports – have started to contract. Korea’s business survey of exporting companies reveals that business conditions deteriorated substantially in April. Global cyclicals have been underperforming global defensives. Finally, early cyclical stocks in the US have sold off and have substantially underperformed domestic defensives. This also points to a slowdown in US growth. Chart 32 Chart 33 Chart 34 Chart 35 China’s Economy Requires Much More Aggressive Stimulus In China, monetary and fiscal stimulus have so far been insufficient to produce a major economic recovery given the headwinds from the property sector and the harsh lockdowns. The enacted fiscal stimulus has mainly been for infrastructure spending, and it does not include direct fiscal transfers to households who are losing income due to the lockdown. On the monetary front, the credit impulse – excluding local government bond issuance (which is counted in our fiscal spending impulse) – has barely bottomed.  Chart 36 Chart 37 Chart 38 Chart 39 China Has Been A Drag On Global Trade Chinese domestic demand was extremely weak even prior to the recent lockdowns in Shanghai. Chinese import volumes of various commodities, machinery, industrials goods and semiconductors were contracting as of March. Lockdowns and associated income/profit losses will further depress domestic demand. Chart 40 Chart 41 Chinese Property Woes Are Worsening Housing floor space sold in April is down by 50% from a year ago. Households are reluctant to borrow and buy, and property developers’ financing has dried up. All these point to shrinking construction activity. Chart 42 Chart 43 Chart 44 Chart 45 The US Dollar Has More Upside Our view on the greenback has played out well, and more upside is likely. The CNY has broken down against the dollar and it will reach at least 6.70-6.75. One exception to a strong US dollar might be the yen, as the trade-weighted yen has fallen to its previous lows. However, a rebound in the yen from current levels requires  a stabilization of US bond yields.  Chart 46 Chart 47 Chart 48 Chart 49 EM Currencies: Do Not Catch A Falling Knife EM currencies remain at risk. They are not cheap, and the recent rebound has faltered with many EM exchange rates unable to break above their technical resistance vis-à-vis the USD. However, we expect the US dollar to top and EM currencies to bottom later this year. Stay tuned.  Chart 50 Chart 51 EM Credit Markets: More Spread Widening Ahead EM and US credit spreads are not particularly wide and will likely widen further. China’s corporate USD bonds remain in a bear market. The two key drivers of EM credit spreads are the business cycle and exchange rates. EM growth will continue to disappoint, and EM currencies will relapse versus the US dollar. Hence, investors should be patient before buying/overweighting EM credit.  Chart 52 Chart 53 Chart 54 Chart 55 EM Domestic Bonds: A Buying Opportunity Down The Road The EM GBI domestic bonds total return index in USD terms has broken down and near-term weakness is likely. Meanwhile, EM local currency bond yields have risen significantly, and they offer good value. That said, a buying opportunity in local currency bonds will transpire only after their currencies bottom. Chart 56 Chart 57 Footnotes